COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          10g 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting     November 9, 2021 
DATE:     September 22, 2021 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Jon Sloan, Interim Director, Maritime Environment & Sustainability 
Arlyn Purcell, Director, Aviation Environment & Sustainability 
Kathy Bahnick, Sr. Mgr., Environmental Programs, Maritime Env. & Sustainability 
Megan King, Sr. Environmental Program Mgr., Aviation Environment & Sustainability 
SUBJECT:  2022  2026 Environmental Remediation Liability Program 
Amount of this request:              $16,000,000 

ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization  for the Executive Director to  (1) spend environmental 
remediation funds for 2022 in the amount of $16,000,000 and (2) approve a five-year spending
plan for $114,000,000 for the environmental remediation liability program for 2022-2026, of
which an amount estimated not-to-exceed $30,000,000 will be obligated during 2022 to be
spent in future years. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
As a major industrial and commercial landowner, the  Port has significant environmental
cleanup liabilities due to historic contamination of its properties.  The $16,000,000 requested
spending  authorization  for  2022  will  allow  continuation  of  ongoing  environmental
investigations, testing, analysis, design, cleanup, and monitoring for active sites and will initiate
similar activities for new sites to be noted in the Commission memorandum.  The spending
authorization and five-year plan will allow the Port to enter into contracts for work spanning
multiple years. Prior to actual spending of these future obligated funds, Commission budget
approval will be needed, likely through future annual Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL) 
authorizations.  The approval of the five-year plan gives greater visibility to our projected
upcoming environmental liability spending. 
Environmental remediation projects define and minimize, to acceptable levels, threats to the
environment caused by the effects of historic industrial activity on properties acquired by the
Port, prior Port operations, and prior tenant operations. Generally, the results of these efforts,
as well as the attendant compliance with regulatory mandates, management of Port liabilities,

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 2 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
and support of the local community, align with the goals and objectives of the Century Agenda,
Long Range Plan, and Maritime, Aviation, Economic Development Division and Storm Water
Utility Business Plans. 
JUSTIFICATION 
Consistent with past practices, the duration of the authorization continues to be an annual
spending authorization.  Since 2011, the authorization requests have also provided a rolling
five-year spending plan to reflect the level of resources expected to be required over the next
five years.  Executing contract obligations for a longer duration minimizes the need to rework
all  contract  amendments  and  service  directives  that  are  aligned  with  the  end-of-year
authorization. It also provides greater visibility of the environmental liability costs. 
The environmental investigation and remediation actions described below are generally
required under federal and/or state law; exceptions are noted. Remedial actions continue to
focus on cost-effective study, analysis, and implementation of cleanup actions; coordination
with capital planning, design, and construction; and negotiation with agencies, tenants, other
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) and insurance companies. 
(1)      Perform the remediation work at the various sites in accordance with the various state
or federal requirements. 
(2)      Manage and perform the work, with project controls and contract systems in place. 
(3)      Identify and consider community values and concerns as part of the various public
participation plans. 
(4)      Perform remediation investigations, designs and implementations that will be carried
out in a manner that considers current and potential uses for the sites. 
(5)      Perform initial investigations and scoping work to identify future actions. 
(6)      Maximize cost recovery. 
Diversity in Contracting 
Procurement for consultants to support this work is covered under separate Commission
actions.  Diversity in contracting will be included in any future procurement. Procurements
started in 2020 have included a minimum of 15% WMBE utilization commitment. 
DETAILS 
Maritime, Economic Development and NWSA Homeport Sites/Projects 
Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site  The Lower Duwamish Waterway (LDW) is a
federal Superfund site under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA).  The Lower Duwamish Waterway Group (LDWG), consisting of the Port,
the City of Seattle, King County and Boeing has completed a Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the LDW under order with the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). In November 2014, after

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 3 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
seeking concurrence from Ecology, EPA issued the Record of Decision for the LDW Site. LDWG
also began a carbon amendment pilot study at the end of 2014, which was completed in 2020.
In 2016, LDWG completed a Fisher Study identifying who is using the river for fishing in order to
aid EPA in development of appropriate institutional controls during and after cleanup.  LDWG
also began performing pre-design activities in 2016, including a baseline monitoring program
and a waterway user study. The pre-design work was completed in 2020. The LDWG parties
signed an order amendment in 2018 to begin cleanup design work of the upper third of the
river.  The design work began in mid-2019 and is expected to be complete in 3-4 years. The
LDWG parties signed another order amendment in 2021 to begin design work on the middle
third of the river.  Consultant procurement is currently underway for this new work. The Port
shares costs with the other LDWG parties on a preliminary basis for the current work being
performed on this site.  In addition to the in-water investigations, the Port is monitoring,
tracking and working on source control aimed at reducing recontamination after the in-water
cleanup is performed.  The Washington State Department of Ecology is the lead agency for
source control work. 
Terminal 117 Sediments, Bank and Uplands  As part of the LDW Superfund Site effort, EPA
identified the Port's Terminal 117 (T-117) in South Park as an Early Action Area (EAA).  This
work was performed by the Port with a cost sharing agreement with the City. EPA issued an
Action Memorandum in 2010 that included the EPA-selected cleanup plan. The Port completed
the T-117 upland soil and sediment cleanup in 2014 and constructed the final stormwater
controls at the site. The Port continues to perform long-term monitoring and maintenance to
verify the continued performance of the cleanup.  This site is now being turned into a habitat
site. 
South Park Marina  As part of the effort to control sources of contamination to the LDW,
Ecology has identified potential source sites that could require early cleanup action. One such
site is South Park Marina, which is adjacent to and north of Terminal 117.   Ecology has
identified the Port as a Potentially Liable Party (PLP) for the cleanup of this site under the state
Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), along with the City of Seattle and South Park Marina. In
March 2019, the three parties signed an Agreed Order to perform a Remedial Investigation. The
City, South Park Marina and the Port are sharing the costs to perform the investigation on a
preliminary basis and the City is managing the consultant on behalf of the three parties.  The
consultant procurement is complete, and the consultant is developing the required workplans 
and collecting the appropriate investigation data.
Terminal 108  Ecology has identified Terminal 108 as a potential source control site on the
LDW. In 2006 and 2007, at Ecology's request, the Port investigated groundwater at the site and 
determined that the groundwater is not a source of contaminants to the LDW. However,
additional upland contamination was discovered on the site that generated future investigation
requirements. In 2017, Ecology requested that EPA handle oversight of the Terminal 108 site
due to limited resources at Ecology and historic federal government involvement at the site.
The Port signed an order with EPA to prepare a preliminary assessment (PA) and data gaps

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 4 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
analysis for the site, which was completed in early 2019.  With the findings of the PA, EPA has
issued Potential Responsible Party (PRP) notices to seven entities, including the Port, City of
Seattle, and King County. Three of the PRPs (Port, City and County) entered into an order with
EPA in early 2020 to perform an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (similar to a remedial
investigation/feasibility study).  The joint consultant has been hired and is developing the
required work plans for site investigation. In 2020 a short section of bank line has begun
eroding into the LDW (a potential Source Control issue) and is planned for repair through bank 
line and habitat enhancement. 
Terminal 115 Plant 1 Site  The Port, along with Boeing, has been named by Ecology as a PLP
under MTCA at the Terminal 115 Plant 1 site, which is the location of the former Boeing Plant 1
facility. Boeing and the Port entered into an Ecology MTCA order in 2020 to perform a remedial
investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS). The joint consultant has been hired and is developing
the required work plans for site investigation. 
Terminal 115 North  In 2009, Ecology identified the Port as a PLP under MTCA for Terminal
115 North, located adjacent and to the south of Glacier Bay, one of the high priority sediment
sites within the LDW Superfund Site. The Port entered into an order with Ecology in 2010. Since
then, the fieldwork for the remedial investigation has been completed and the Port in summer
2020 submitted a final draft Remedial Investigation Report to Ecology. 
Terminal 5 Ecology State Cleanup Sites  In the past, as part of the Terminal 5 Southwest
Harbor redevelopment, the Port completed remediation at four sites under consent decrees
with Ecology. Current obligations related to those cleanups include on-going cap inspection and
maintenance of the cap areas. As part of the T-5 Southwest Harbor redevelopment, the Port
purchased the old West Seattle Landfill and installed an environmental cap and a methane
collection system.  These systems require long-term operation and maintenance, inspection,
and reporting, which are continuing.  The Port is currently evaluating the potential of
converting the active methane collection system to a passive system.  During recent T-5
construction activities soil was identified within the original footprint of Terminal 5 outside the
Southwest Harbor redevelopment footprint warranting additional investigation and cleanup.
Targeted cleanup was performed in 2021 in an area that is no longer accessible following
construction for new crane rails. Additional investigation is required to determine if additional
cleanup activities are required.
Terminal 5 Pacific Sound Resources (PSR) Superfund Site  This site was cleaned up under an
order with EPA as part of the Terminal 5 Southwest Harbor redevelopment project. Ongoing
obligations include continuing to perform required cap inspection and cap maintenance,
product recovery activities, and monitoring EPA activities related to the groundwater and the
offshore sediments.  The Port completed significant cap maintenance activities consisting of
major pavement repairs and reapplication of pavement seal coat in the summer of 2021.


Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 5 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
Lockheed West - As part of the South West Harbor Redevelopment Project, the Port purchased
aquatic and upland property on the north end of the current Terminal 5 from Lockheed Martin.
The upland portion of the property is part of the Terminal 5 Ecology State Cleanup Site
described above. The adjacent submerged portion is a Superfund cleanup site known as the
Lockheed West Seattle Site, and includes submerged land owned by both the Port and the state
Department of Natural Resources. Under its purchase and sale agreement with the Port,
Lockheed is obligated to investigate and cleanup the sediment within the site. On August 28,
2013, EPA issued the record of decision for the site. Lockheed Martin is the sole PRP
responsible to perform the cleanup work. Cleanup fieldwork started in October 2018 and was
completed in March 2020.
Harbor Island Superfund Site Soil and Groundwater Operable Unit  Cleanup of this Superfund
site was performed under a Consent Decree with EPA, and the PRP group consultant is
performing long-term groundwater monitoring under a PRP agreement.   Long-term cap
maintenance and inspections are ongoing as required under EPA's Record of Decision. Terminal
18 is located within this Superfund site.
Harbor Island Superfund Site East Waterway Sediments Operable Unit  In 2006, the Port
signed an order with EPA to conduct a final Supplemental Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (SRI/FS), and a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to
share costs and cooperate in the SRI/FS process. The PRPs have conducted the SRI/FS tasks
identified in the EPA order and subsequent work plans. EPA approved the final RI in January
2014 and the final Feasibility Study in June 2019. EPA is in the process of developing the
Proposed Plan for cleanup, which is expected to be published later this year or early 2022. 
Terminal 30 Cleanup    Terminal 30 is a former Chevron bulk storage site that is being
remediated under MTCA. Since the 1990s, the Port has removed significant amounts of free
product and conducted an extensive groundwater-monitoring program. The required public
comment period for the draft consent decree and cleanup action plan was completed and the
Port signed a final consent decree in early 2017. Implementation (cleanup construction) was
performed in 2019. The Port is currently operating the air sparging system, collecting product
and performing long-term monitoring of the site groundwater.  System operation and
maintenance is expected to occur for 10 years or less. 
Terminal 10 Lockheed  Lockheed Martin previously performed the upland and sediment
cleanup required at this Superfund site.  The Port has a continuing obligation to maintain the
upland cap and the habitat restoration area, manage any contaminated soil and groundwater
encountered or removed during redevelopment or maintenance activities, and protect
Lockheed's groundwater monitoring wells. Under the Terminal 10 Uplands capital project, the
Port completed stormwater drainage and upland cap improvements in early 2012. As a
condition of EPA approval, the Port initiated long-term stormwater solids sampling after the
capital project.

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 6 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
Terminals 103/104/105/107  These sites have been identified by Ecology as having source
control data gaps related to the Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site and will likely
require future investigation and possibly remediation.
Terminal 106 (West and Warehouse parcels)  These sites have been identified by Ecology as
having source control data gaps related to the Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site and
will likely require future investigation and possibly remediation. In 2020 the Port and Trammel
Crow signed a 60-year ground lease to develop a new, two-story warehouse building on the T-
106 Warehouse property. The developer has agreed to perform all necessary environmental
cleanup and management requirements as part of the development. 
Terminal 25 - Site soils were investigated during the conceptual planning of a potential future
habitat site at this location. This investigation discovered   contamination that warrants 
additional investigation and cleanup.  We are currently negotiating an Order to perform this
additional work. Authorization to enter into an Order for this work, as well as to begin design
for the habitat project, will be under a separate Commission action. 
Gateway Park North (Georgetown) - 8th Avenue South Street End Restoration  Several years
of community, industry, and inter-agency collaboration to create a large street-end park and
LDW river access. The Port's portion of the project is to enhance/improve the existing bankline 
and provide improved  riparian  habitat.   Ecology directed the Port to perform a site
characterization prior to constructing the project. The Port anticipates the project will generate 
contaminated soil and restoration of the bank will require significant engineered measures (i.e.,
soil cap and cover) to control risks to the public and source control. 
Natural Resource Damages (NRD) Habitat Restoration  The Port's Superfund liability for LDW
and Harbor Island sediments includes injury to natural resources from contamination. The Port
is negotiating with the Elliott Bay Trustee Council for settlement of this liability.
Terminal 91 Cleanup  Investigation and cleanup of this site is being administered by Ecology
under a State Dangerous Waste Permit and a MTCA order.  The bulk of the upland cleanup
work was completed in mid-2015 and long-term groundwater monitoring and maintenance has
begun. Investigation and cleanup of discrete units is ongoing as they are discovered. In 2016, 
pursuant to an amendment to the order the Port regraded a small in water shoal along the east
side of Pier 91 with oversight by Ecology. Ecology also required the Port to begin a preliminary
investigation into the site sediments, which was completed in 2018. The site is particularly
complicated due to the existence of discarded military munitions (DMM) from the Navy's use of
the site during the World War II era. The Port and Ecology have negotiated a MTCA order to
conduct a remedial investigation of the sediments, which was signed in early 2020.  We are
currently performing the investigation and completing the remedial investigation report. 
Fishermen's Terminal  The Port has removed some contaminated soils in the uplands, capped
a portion of the uplands, and has performed some investigation of groundwater monitoring at

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 7 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
and near the Fishing Vessel Owners (FVO) tenant site. Some dredging of contaminated
sediments occurred as part of the Docks 5-10 renewal and replacement and berth dredging
project. It is anticipated in 2022 or 2023 the FT Marine Innovation Center (MInC) will begin
construction and have some limited environmental cleanup activities. 
Aviation Sites/Projects 
Aircraft Fuel Farms and Fueling Systems  Five underground aircraft fueling systems were
constructed and operated by individual airlines beginning in the early 1960s. As of January
2007, each of these systems has been decommissioned.  Appropriate environmental cleanup
has been achieved for three of the systems and is in progress for two others. Remediation of an
area impacted by operations of the former United Airlines and Continental Airlines fuel farms is
complete as of 2017. Confirmation monitoring, closure negotiations with the Department of 
Ecology, and decommissioning of the remediation system remain, and is planned to be
complete in 2022. The Port is a member of the PLP group for this multiple-source site. 
Lora Lake Apartments  In 2009, the Port and Ecology executed a MTCA order that required the
Port to conduct a remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) for the cleanup of the Lora
Lake Apartments Property. The RI/FS was finalized in 2013. A Consent Decree, along with the
Cleanup Action Plan, was finalized in 2015. Remedial design, including extensive field sampling
and analysis, occurred in 2015 and 2016, and Commission authorized a major works contract to
implement the remediation in  September 2016. Remediation of the former Lora Lake
Apartments and the former Lora Lake sites has been completed. A minimum of 5 years of postremediation
monitoring work is required by the Consent Decree, and 1 year of monitoring has 
been completed for the former Lora Lake site, while 2 years of monitoring have been
completed at the Lora Lake Apartments property. Annual monitoring consists of ensuring cover
integrity, and groundwater quality monitoring. Environmental covenants will be placed on the
parcels where contaminated soil remains beneath engineered covers to maintain the integrity
of the covers, and to restrict extraction of groundwater. The soil cover constructed at the Lora
Lake Apartments parcel was designed as a temporary cover. The redeveloped surface of the
property will provide the final cover. Redevelopment of the property is expected to occur in the
2024  2026 timeframe.
SCHEDULE 
Schedules are outlined in the various legal agreements for individual sites. 




Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 8 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do not complete the work. 
Pros: 
(1)   Could save money in the short-term, until the regulator decided to enforce the already
signed agreements. 
Cons: 
(1)   Could  result  in  the  regulators,  including  Department  of  Ecology  or  the  U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, taking enforcement action that could lead to them
implementing the work. In this case, the Port would be liable for three times the costs
incurred by the regulator. 
(2)   The  Port  would  lose  the  opportunity  to  employ  the  flexibility  contained  in  the
controlling regulations, to define and direct the work, and to manage costs. 
(3)   Would not comply with Port's obligations to remediate the sites. 
(4)   Would not honor our cost sharing agreements for multiple sites. 
(5)   Would delay work previously agreed to under existing regulatory orders or under
voluntary programs. 
(6)   Would erode trust between the Port, regulators, and the public, and may affect other
projects and other agencies. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Complete the work using Port staff only. Port staff is already heavily involved in
project direction, legal analysis, and project management, and will continue to perform these
services. The nature and extent of the technical and legal work required to complete this work
is substantial and would require a large number of additional staff with additional expertise in a
number of highly technical specialty areas.
Pros: 
(1)   Provides the opportunity to employ what flexibility is contained in the controlling
regulations with respect to current and future uses of Port property under the
agreements. 
(2)   Provides trained workforce with specific technical expertise. 
(3)   Provides consistent reporting and documentation. 
(4)   Allows for technical development of Port staff. 
(5)   Keeps in-house historical knowledge of Port-owned sites. 
Cons: 
(1)   May not be able to meet the work schedules required by the orders using just staff. 
(2)   Servicing peak seasonal demand would require hiring additional full-time employees
resulting in un-utilized labor through much of the year. 
(3)   Would require purchase of substantial amount of specialized sampling equipment. 
(4)   Would still require some contracting for tasks staff would not be able to perform such
as laboratory analysis that are required to be certified by the state. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).


COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                                Page 9 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
(5)   Many of the sites are joint sites with multiple partners who may not agree to the Port
performing the work. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3    Complete the work using a combination of Port staff and outside consultants
and contractors that maximizes the ability for the Port to direct cleanup efforts and maximize
the effectiveness of staff. 
Pros: 
(1)   Meets our commitments under existing orders and cost sharing agreements. 
(2)   Provides the opportunity to employ what flexibility is contained in the controlling
regulations with respect to current and future uses of Port property under the
agreements. 
(3)   Provides contracted and Port work force that can increase or decrease service level of
effort as needed. 
(4)   Provides trained workforce with specific technical expertise. 
(5)   Provides consistent reporting and documentation. 
(6)   Allows for technical development of Port staff. 
(7)   Keeps in-house historical knowledge of Port-owned sites. 
Cons: 
(1)   Requires staff time 
(2)   Port fronts some of the upfront costs for legacy contamination on our properties until
future cost recovery occurs. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
The following table summarizes 2022 through 2026 forecasted spending for environmental
remediation projects. Forecasted spending reflects projects described in the Scope of Work.
Five-Year Spending Plan 
$s in Thousands       2022       2023        2024       2025       2026      2022-2026
Project Spending      $16,000     $12,000     $22,000   $37,000     $27,000     $114,000
Cash from 3rd        $(2,000)    $(2,000)     $(2,000)   $(1,000)        $(0)      $(7,000) 
Parties* 
Net Port Share         $14,000     $10,000     $20,000   $36,000     $27,000     $107,000 



Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                               Page 10 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
*Note: Forecasted amounts do not include estimates of possible recoveries from other parties
or insurance. 

Budget/Authorization Summary of Past and Current Year 
$s in Thousands         Spent           Budget              Recovery 
2016 - 2020          $51,044          $97,160              ($59,435) 
2021 thru 9/30/2021      $11,000          $33,100              ($1,200) 
*Note: The ERL Budget is an annual budget authorization and does not carry over to future
years. Recovery includes money from prior years.  The difference between budgeted and
spending for 2021 is due to COVID-19 delays, delays in regulatory negotiations or delay in
Agency review of deliverables, carrying the contract for other partners where we pay the
upfront costs and are then reimbursed by our cost sharing partners, and recognition the year is
not complete. Recovery sources include insurance, settlements, grants and PRP cost sharing. 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
Airport  Airport Development Fund 
Maritime, Economic Development, and homeport liabilities on Northwest Seaport Alliance
managed property  Tax Levy 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Environmental cleanup projects have multiple funding sources: (1) Maritime and Economic
Development non-operating projects are funded by the Port's Tax Levy; (2) Maritime and
Economic Development operating projects are funded by the General Fund; (3) Airport projects
are funded by the Airport Development Fund.  In addition, there are supplementary outside
sources of funding, including the following: 
Contributions from third parties (payment from cost-sharing or contribution agreements
with other potentially liable parties (PLPs), where the Port functions as a funding
conduit for the other PLPs and the Port holds contracts on behalf of these other PLPs); 
Settlements with other PLPs; 
Insurance recoveries from both the Port's insurers and other PLPs' insurers; and 
Department of Ecology grants. 
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND 
The Port has identified a number of contaminated sites on Maritime, Economic Development,
homeport liabilities on Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) and Aviation properties that must
be investigated and remediated in compliance with federal and state environmental laws and
regulations.  In some cases, the Port has been designated by the federal government as a

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                               Page 11 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
"Potentially Responsible Party" (PRP), and/or by the state government as a "Potentially Liable
Party" (PLP) for the investigation and cleanup of properties owned by the Port or where the
Port may have contributed to site contamination. 
Although the Port may not bear ultimate liability for the contamination, under federal and state
law, the Port is presumptively liable as the property owner, and it is often practically and
financially beneficial for the Port to take initial responsibility to manage and pay for the
cleanup. 
In many cases, the Port has successfully recovered and/or will seek recovery from other
responsible parties for Port-incurred investigation and cleanup costs. The Port's insurers have
funded some of these cost recovery efforts and, as such, some of the costs recovered are
subject to reimbursement. The Port also has been successful in receiving Model Toxics Control
Act (MTCA) grant funds to pay part of the cleanup costs. The Port's goals are to cost-effectively
complete this environmentally responsible work and to maximize work accomplished by or paid
for by the parties responsible for the conditions encountered (or others, such as insurance
companies, who represent them).
To manage such environmental expenditures, the Port also encourages, coordinates with, and
oversees the investigation and cleanup of sites by other responsible parties, to assure that legal
requirements are met and that Port liabilities are minimized. Regardless of whether the Port
conducts the investigation and remediation directly or oversees the proper performance of that
work by other responsible parties, the Port provides a valuable public benefit by acting as a
catalyst in expediting appropriate environmental management of these sites. 
Accounting rules require that the Port "book" or establish a liability on its balance sheet for
environmental remediation when the Port's obligation meets specified definitions of certainty
and the liability amount can be reasonably estimated.  When an environmental remediation
liability  is  booked,  an  expense  is  also  recorded  in  the  current  period  for  the  future
expenditures. The Port develops its environmental remediation liability forecasts in compliance
with Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 49 "Accounting and
Financial Reporting for Pollution Remediation Obligations." 
Environmental liability expenditures are authorized in one of two ways: 
1.       If the environmental costs are incurred during, or incidental to, a construction project,
the Commission authorization occurs as part of the authorization for the overall
construction project.  Examples of this include asbestos removal, off-site soil disposal
during construction, or upland dredge material disposal. 
2.       If  the  environmental  cost  is  not  associated  with  a  capital  construction  project  or
maintenance (including asbestos and lead), but is a stand-alone pollution remediation
project, the expenditure is authorized through one annual action. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                               Page 12 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 

Since 1993, the Commission has approved annual environmental expenditures.  In addition,
Commission authorization is obtained prior to entering legal commitments for investigation or
cleanup actions, such as an Agreed Order, Administrative Order on Consent  (AOC), or
Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (ASAOC) (collectively referred to
as "Orders"). Under the Orders, the Port is required to pay agency oversight costs. Further, to
the extent required by the General Delegation of Authority, Central Procurement Office
contract actions in support of approved environmental projects may require additional
Commission authorization. 
Since 1993, the Port has booked liabilities to recognize these obligations. While Port
environmental cleanup projects typically span several years, more complex projects have been
active for over 15 years or more. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1) Map of ERL Sites Aviation 
(2) Map of ERL Sites North Properties Maritime, Economic Development 
(3) Map of ERL Sites South Properties Maritime, Economic Development and NWSA 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
November 10, 2020    The Commission approved the 2021 (1) spend environmental 
remediation funds for 2021 in the amount of $33,100,000 and (2) approve a five-year
spending plan for $106,220,000 for the environmental remediation liability program for
2021-2025, of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will be obligated
during 2021 to be spent in future years. 
November 19, 2019  -  The Commission approved the 2020 (1) spend environmental 
remediation funds for 2020 in the amount of $28,730,000 and (2) approve a five-year
spending plan for $123,312,000 for the environmental remediation liability program for
2020-2024, of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will be obligated
during 2020 to be spent in future years. 
November 13, 2018   the Commission approved the 2019  (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2018 in the amount of $17,025,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $116,026,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for 2019 to 2023 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will
be obligated during 2019 to be spent in future years. 
November 6, 2017   the Commission approved the 2018  (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2018 in the amount of $19,800,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $88,800,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 10g                               Page 13 of 13 
Meeting Date: November 9, 2021 
Program for 2018 to 2022 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will
be obligated during 2018 to be spent in future years. 
November 8, 2016   the Commission approved the 2017 (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2017 in the amount of $17,700,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $85,800,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for 2017 to 2021 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $33,600,000 will
be obligated during 2017 to be spent in future years. 
December 8, 2015   the Commission approved the 2016 (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2016 in the amount of $13,900,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $71,700,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2016-2020. 
December 1, 2014  the Commission approved the 2015 project-wide authorization of (1) a
five-year spending plan of $36,804,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability
(ERL) Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2015-2019; and (2)
environmental remediation liabilities funds for 2015 in the amount of $36,804,00, of
which (a) $16,804,000 is forecasted to be spent in 2015 and (b) an amount estimated
not to exceed $20,000,000 of the remaining funds approved in the five-year plan will be
obligated during 2015 to be spent in future years. 
December 3, 2013  the Commission approved the project-wide authorization of (1) a fiveyear
spending plan of $106,740,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2014-2018; and (2)
environmental remediation liabilities funds for 2014 in the amount of $42,180,000, of
which (a) $22,180,000 is forecasted to be spent in 2014 and (b) an amount estimated
not to exceed $20,000,000 of the remaining funds approved in the five-year plan will be
obligated during 2014 to be spent in future years. 






Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).