5f Atach 2
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION X
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
IN THE MATTER OF: NN
10 Lower Duwamish Waterway
1 Port of Seattle, King County,
12 City of Seattle, The Boeing Company, NN
13 RESPONDENTS NN
14 NN
Proceeding Under Sections 104, 122(a), Ne U.S. EPA, Region 10
15
122(d)(3) of the Comprehensive Docket No. CERCLA-
16 Environmental Response, Compensation, NN 10-2001-0055
and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, Na
17 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604, 9622(a), 9622(d)(3) and Under the Ne Ecology Docket No.
Washington State Model Toxics Control Act 00TCPNR-1895
18 Na
(MTCA), ch. 70.105D RCW. Na
19 =
20
21
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT
FOR REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY
22
23 I. INTRODUCTION
24 1. This Administrative Order on Consent (Consent Order) is entered into voluntarily
25 by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Washington State Department
26
ofEcology (Ecology) as regulatory agencies and the Port of Seattle, King County, City of Seattle,
27
and The Boeing Company, as Respondents. This order is both an Administrative Order on
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 1
Consent under CERCLA and an Agreed Order under MTCA. Unless otherwise specified, the
terms “Consent Order” and “Order” as used herein refers to orders issued under both authorities.
This Consent Order concerns the preparation of and performance of, and reimbursement of costs
incurred by EPA and Ecology in connection with a river-wide Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study (RUFS) for the Lower Duwamish Waterway Site in Seattle, Washington.
II. JURISDICTION
1. This Consent Order is issued under the authority vested in the President of
the United States by Sections 104, 122(a), and 122(d)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental
11
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604, 9622(a), and
12
9622(d)(3) (CERCLA). This authority was delegated to the Administrator ofEPA on January
13
23, 1987, by Executive Order 12580, 52 Fed. Reg. 2926 (1987), and further delegated to
14
15 Regional Administrators on September 13, 1987, by EPA Delegation No. 14-14-C. This
16 authority has been redelegated by the Regional Administrator to the Region X Director,
17
Environmental Cleanup Division (ECL), and further delegated to ECL Unit Managers
18
thereunder. This order is also issued by Ecology under the authority ofRCW 70.105D.050(1).
19
2. Respondents agree to undertake the actions required by the terms and
20
conditions of this Consent Order. In any action by EPA, the United States, or Ecology to enforce
21
22 the terms of this Consent Order,Respondents consent to and agree not to contest the authority or
23 jurisdiction of EPA or Ecology to issueorenforce this Consent Order, and agree not to contest
24
the validity ofthis Order or its terms.
25
26
III. PARTIES BOUND
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT -2
1. This Consent Order shall apply to and be binding upon EPA and Ecology,
and shall be binding upon Respondents, their agents, successors, assigns, officers, directors, and
principals. Respondents are jointly and severally responsible for carrying out the actions required
ofthem by this Consent Order. The signatories to this Consent Order certify that they are
authorized to execute and legally bind the parties they represent to this Consent Order. No
change in the ownership or corporate status of any Respondent or of any facility or the Site shall
alter Respondents’ responsibilities under this Consent Order.
2. Respondents shall provide a copy of this Consent Order to any subsequent
10
owners or successors before ownership rights or stock or assets in a corporate acquisition are
11
transferred.
12 Respondents shall provide a copy of this Consent Order to all contractors,
13 subcontractors, laboratories, and consultants which are retained to conduct any work performed
14 under this Consent Order, within fourteen (14) days after theeffective date of this Consent Order
15
or the date ofretaining their services, whichever is later. Respondents shall condition any such
16
contracts upon satisfactory compliance with this Consent Order. Notwithstanding the terms of
17
any contract, Respondents are responsible for compliance with thisConsent Order and for
18
19 ensuring that their subsidiaries, employees, contractors, consultants, subcontractors, agents, and
20 attorneys comply with this Consent Order.
21 3. Novoluntary conveyance or relinquishment of title, easement, leasehold,
22
or other interest in any portion of the Site shall be consummated by Respondents without
23
provision for continued implementation of all requirements of this Order and implementation of
24
Prior to transfer of any legal
25 any remedial actions found to be necessary as a result of this Order.
26 or equitable interest Respondents may have in the Site or any portions thereof, Respondents shall
27
serve a copy of this Order upon any prospective purchaser, lessee, transferee, assignee, or other
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 3
successor in such interest. At least thirty (30) days prior to finalization of any transfer,
HOWN Respondents shall notify EPA and Ecology ofthe contemplated transfer.
IV. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Wn
1. In entering into this ConsentOrder, the objectives ofEPA, Ecology and
A
0 Respondents are: (a) to determine the nature and extent of contamination and any threat to the
00
public health, welfare, or the environment caused by the releaseor threatened release of
OO
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants at or from the Site, by conducting an RI,
10
including the assembly and evaluation of existing data and identification of possible early
11
actions, and conduct a river-wide FS, in accordance with the Statement ofWork (SOW) attached
12
13 as Attachment A; the FS will determine and evaluate alternatives for remedial action to prevent,
14 mitigate, or otherwise respond to or remedy any release or threatened release of hazardous.
15
substances, pollutants, or contaminants at or from the Site; and (b) to recover costs incurred by
16
EPA and Ecology with respect to this Consent Order.
17
2. The activities conducted under this Consent Order are subject to approval
18
19 by EPA and Ecology. Respondents shall provide all appropriate necessary information for the
20 RI/FS, in accordance with the SOW, for a CERCLA Record ofDecision (ROD) and MTCA
21
Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) that is consistent with CERCLA and the National Oil and Hazardous
22
Substance Pollution Contingency Plan(NCP), 40 C.F.R. Part 300, MTCA and regulations’
23
promulgated thereunder, chapters 173-340 and 173-204 WAC, as now orhereafter amended.
24
The activities conducted under this Consent Order shall be conducted in compliance with all
25
26 applicable EPA and Ecology guidance, policies, and procedures.
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 4
V. FINDINGS OF FACT
EPA and Ecology find the following facts which Respondents neither admit nor
|
deny.
1. The Lower Duwamish WaterwaySite (Site) consists of the areal extent of
contamination in the Lower Duwamish Waterway. It has served as Seattle’s major industrial
corridor since it was first created by a widening and straightening of the Lower Duwamish River
(and formation of Harbor Island) by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, completed in
1911. Industrial uses of and along the Waterway have been extensive over nearly ninety years.
10
The Waterway is also habitat to numerous fish and other aquatic species, and is a migratory
11
corridor for endangered, threatened, and other anadromous fish.
12
13 2. Contaminants found in the waterway include, but are not limited to,
14 polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), poly-aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), mercury and other
15
metals, and phthalates. The Lower Duwamish Waterway has been the subject of numerous
16
studies by various governmental and private entities which Respondents have agreed to
17
assemble, integrate and evaluate during Phase 1 of the RI process, as set forth in the attached
18
19 SOW. Many contaminant releases may have pre-dated the 1970s. Sources of releases include
20 industrial releases, sewer system outfalls and urban run-off from Respondents’ facilities.
21
3. On December 1, 2000, EPA proposed the site for the National Priorities
22
List pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9605.
23
4. The Port of Seattle, is a Washington PortDistrict, duly created under
24
RCW Chap. 53.
25 King County is the most populous county in the state of Washington. The City
26 of Seattle is the most populous municipality in the state of Washington. The Boeing Company is
27
a Delaware Corporation doing business in the state of Washington, primarily engaged in aircraft
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
"ON CONSENT - 5
manufacture and aerospace technology. The site encompasses property owned and/or operated ®
by the Port of Seattle, King County and the City of Seattle, and property managed by the Port
pursuant to a Port Management Agreement with the Washington Department ofNatural
Resources.
5. EPA has not performed a Potentially Responsible Party search for the Site.
Additional parties may be potentially liable for releases and contamination at the Site.
V1. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DETERMINATIONS
10
EPA and Ecology make the following conclusions ofLaw and Determinations
11
which Respondents neither admit or deny:
12
13 1. The Site is a "facility" as defined in Section 101(9) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.
14 § 9601(9), and in RCW 70.105D.020(4). ®
15
2. Wastes and constituents thereof at the Site, as identified in the preceding
16
Section are "hazardous substances" as defined in Section 101( 14) ofCERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §
17
9601(14), and in RCW 70.105D.020(7), or constitute "any pollutant or contaminant" that may
18
19 present an imminent and substantial danger to public health or welfare under Section 104(a)(1) of
20 CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9604(a)(1).
21 3. The presence ofhazardous substances at the Site or the past, present, or
22
potential migration of hazardous substances currently located at or emanating from the Site,
23
constitute actual and/or threatened "releases" as defined in Section 101(22) of CERCLA, 42
24
U.S.C. § 9601(22), and RCW 70.105D.020(20).
25
26 4. Each Respondent is a "person" as defined in Section 101(21) ofCERCLA,
27 42 U.S.C. § 9601(21), and RCW 70.105D.020(14).
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 6
5. Each Respondent is a responsible party under Sections 104, 107, and 122
of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604, 9607, and 9622. By letter dated August 2, 2000, Ecology
notified each Respondent of its status as a “potentially liable person” under RCW 70.105D.040,
after notice and opportunity for comment.
6. The actions required by this Consent Order are necessary to protect the
public health or welfare or the environment, are in the public interest, RCW 70.105D.050( 1), are
consistentwith CERCLA and the NCP, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9604(a)(1), and will expedite effective
remedial action and minimize litigation, 42 U.S.C. § 9622(a). Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.080
and WAC 173-340-550(5), compliance with this Order in the Department of Ecology’s view is
the substantial equivalent of a Department supervised remedial action.
VII. ROLE OF REGULATORY AGENCIES
1. This Order is issued jointly by EPA and Ecology pursuant to their
respective CERCLA and MTCA authorities, and will be jointly managed and overseen by both
agencies. The agencies have agreed that written approval from an authorized representative of
either agency shall be approval from both agencies, and that such approval shall not be given
without the other agency’s pre-authorization or consent.
VIII. WORK TO BE PERFORMED
1. For purposes of this Order, an RI/FS also means a Cleanup Study Plan
under Chapter 173-204 WAC. - All work performed under this Consent Order shall be under the
direction and supervision of qualified personnel. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of
this Order, and before the work outlined below begins, Respondents shall notify EPA and
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 7
® ®
Ecology, in writing, of the names, titles, and qualifications of the personnel, including
”®
contractors, subcontractors, consultants, and laboratories to be used in carrying out such work.
The qualifications of the persons undertaking the work for Respondents shall be subject to EPA
and Ecology's review, for verification that such persons meet minimum technical background
and experience requirements. ThisOrder is contingent on Respondents' demonstration to EPA
and Ecology’s satisfaction that Respondents are qualified to perform properly and promptly the
actions set forth in this Consent Order. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove, in writing, of any
person(s)’ technical qualifications, Respondents shall notify EPA and Ecology ofthe identityand
qualifications of the replacement(s) within thirty (30) days of the written notice. IfEPA and
Ecology subsequently disapprove of the replacement(s), EPA and Ecology reserve the right to
terminate this Order and to conduct a complete RI/FS, and to seek reimbursement for costs and
penalties from Respondents. Respondents reserve the right to dispute EPA or Ecology’s attempt 9
|
to recover such costs. During the course of the RFS, Respondents shall notify EPA and
Ecology, in writing, of any changes or additions in the personnel used to carry out such work,
providing their names, titles, and qualifications. EPA and Ecology shall have the same right to
approve changes and additions to personnel as they have hereunder regarding the initial
notification.
2. Respondents shall conduct activities and submit deliverables as provided
in theattached SOW. All such work shall be conducted in accordance with CERCLA, the NCP,
MTCA and chapters 173-340 and 173-204 ofthe Washington Administrative Code (WAC), as
now or hereafter amended, and shall be consistent with EPA and Ecology guidance including, but
not limited to, the "Interim Final Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and
|C
Feasibility Studies under CERCLA" (OSWER Directive # 9355.3-01), "Guidance for Data
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 8
Usability in Risk Assessment" (OSWER Directive # 9285.7-05) and guidance referenced therein,
as maybe amended or modified by EPA and Ecology. The general activities that Respondents
are required to perform are identified below, followed by a list of deliverables. The tasks that
Respondents must perform are described more fully in the SOW and guidance. Respondents
City of Seattle & The Boeing Company shall each have at two points in the RUFS process a
unilateral right to withdraw unilaterally from this Consent Order and decline participating in
further work and have no further obligations under this ConsentOrder. This right to withdraw by
each of these Respondents shall occur: 1) at the conclusion ofPhase 1 of the RI as defined in the
10
SOW; and 2) at the conclusion of the Rl, including EPA and Ecology's approval of the FS Work
11
Plan. All work performed under this Order shall be in accordance with the schedules herein, and
12
13 in full accordance with the standards, specifications, and other requirements detailed in the
14 attached SOW and deliverables thereunder, as initially approved or modified by EPA and
15
Ecology, and as may be amended by EPA and Ecology from time to time. For the purposes of
16
this Order, day means calendar day unless otherwise noted in the Order. All Tasks set forth in
17
this Section refer. to the SOW.
18
A. PhaselRL
19 Respondents shall perform the Phase 1 R1 as set forth
20 in the SOW. Within ten (10) months of the effective date of this Order, Respondents shall
21 submit to EPA and Ecology a Phase I RI Report. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require
22
revisions to the Phase I RI Report, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a
23
revised Phase I RI Report to EPA and Ecology that is responsive to the directions in all joint
24
EPA and Ecology comments, within sixty (60) days of receiving EPA's and Ecology's joint
25
26 comments.
27 B. Scoping For Phase 11 RI. EPA and Ecology determine the Site-
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 9
specific objectives of the RUFS and devise a general management approach for the Site, as stated
in the SOW. Respondents shall conduct the scoping activities as described in the attached SOW
and referenced guidance, Respondents shall provide EPA and Ecology with the following
deliverables:
1. Phase II RI Work Plan. Within ninety (90) days after EPA and Ecology’s
oo approval of the Phase 1 RI Report, Respondents shall submit a Phase II RI Work Plan to EPA and
Ecology. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions to the Phase II RI Work Plan, in
Oo
whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a revised Work Plan to EPA and Ecology
10
which is responsive to the directions in all joint EPA and Ecology comments, within thirty (30)
11
days ofreceiving EPA and Ecology’s joint comments.
12
13 2. Sampling and Analysis Plan. Within sixty (60) days after EPA and Ecology’s
14 approval of the Phase II Work Plan, Respondents shall submit the Sampling.and Analysis Plan to ®
|
15
EPA and Ecology. This plan shall consist of a Field Sampling Plan (FSP) and a Quality
16
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), as described in the SOW and guidance. IfEPA and Ecology
17
disapprove of or require revisions to the Sampling and Analysis Plan, in whole or in part,
18
19 Respondents shall amend and submit a revised Sampling and Analysis Plan to EPA and Ecology
20 which is responsive to the directions in all joint EPA and Ecology comments, within fifteen (15)
21 days of receiving EPA and Ecology's joint comments.
22
3. Site Health and Safety Plan. Within sixty (60) days afier EPA and Ecology’s
23
approval of the Phase IT Work Plan, Respondents shall submit the Site Health and Safety Plan to
24
EPA and Ecology.
25
26 4. Following approval or modification by EPA or Ecology, the Phase II RI Work
27 Plan and the Sampling andAnalysis Plan are incorporated by reference herein. ®
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 10
(ON Community Relations Plan. EPA and Ecology will prepare a Community
Relations/Public Participation Plan, in accordance with EPA guidance, the NCP, and WAC 173-
340-600(8). Respondents shall provide information supporting EPA and Ecology’s community
relations programs.
D. Site Characterization. Following EPA and Ecology’s approval or
ooa
modification of the Phase II RI Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan, Respondents shall
0 implement the provisions of these plans to characterize the Site. Respondents shall complete Site
©
characterization within twelve (12) months ofEPA and Ecology approval or modification ofthe
10
Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan. Respondents shall provide EPA and Ecology with
11
“12 quality-assured analytical datawithin five (5) days after such data are available, in an electronic
13 format showing the location, medium, and results. Respondents shall provideallanalytical data
14 to EPA and Ecology upon request within five (5) days of such request or such othertime as EPA
15
and Ecology may agree to. Within seven (7) days of completion of field activities, Respondents
16
shall notify EPA and Ecology, in writing. During Site characterization, Respondents shall
17
provide EPA and Ecology with the following deliverables, as described in the SOW or Work
18
|
19 Plan:
20 1. Technical Memorandum on Modeling of Site Characteristics. Where
21 Respondents propose that modeling is appropriate, Respondents shall submit a technical
22
memorandum on modeling of Site characteristics, as described in the SOW. IfEPA and Ecology
23 |
disapprove of or require revisions to the technical memorandum on modeling of Site
24
characteristics, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a revised technical
25
26 memorandum on modelingof Site characteristics to EPA andEcology which is responsive to the
27
.. directions in all joint EPA and Ecology comments, within thirty (30) days of receiving EPA and
.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 11
Ecology’s joint comments.
2. Preliminary Site Characterization Summary. Within sixty (60) days of completion ®
of the field sampling and analysis, as specified in the SOW, Respondents shall submit a
Preliminary Site Characterization Summary to EPA and Ecology.
E. FS Work Plan. As set forth in the SOW, an FS Work Plan shall be
developed during the Phase II RI for the performance ofthe FS. Respondents shall submit a draft
FS Work Plan as described in the SOW to EPA and Ecology. If EPA and Ecology disapprove of
or require revisions to the FS Work Plan, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and
submit a revised FS Work Plan to EPA and Ecology which is responsive to the directions in all
EPA and Ecology joint comments, within thirty (30) days of receiving EPA and Ecology’s
comments
F. Draft Remedial Investigation Report . Within sixty (60) days after EPA
and Ecology approval of the Preliminary Site Characterization Summary, Respondents shall
submit a Draft Phase II RI Report consistent with the SOW, Phase 11 RI Work Plan, and
Sampling and Analysis Plan. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions to the Phase -
II RI report, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a revised Phase II RI report
to EPA and Ecology which is responsive to the directions in all EPA and Ecology joint
comments, within sixty (60) days of receiving EPA and Ecology’s comments.
-G Treatability Studies. If required by the FS Work plan, Respondents shall
conduct treatability studies. Major components of the treatability studies include determination
of the need for, and scope of, studies, the design of the studies, and the completion of the studies,
as described in the SOW and FS Work Plan. During treatability studies, Respondents shall
provide EPA and Ecology with the following deliverables: ®
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 12
1. Identification of Candidate Technologies Memorandum. This memorandum shall
be submitted within thirty (30) days after EPA and Ecology approval of the FS Work Plan. If
EPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions to the technical memorandum identifying
candidate technologies, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a revised
technical memorandum identifying candidate technologies to EPA and Ecology which is
on
responsive to the directions in EPA and Ecology’s comments, within fifteen (15) days of
au
0 receiving EPA and Ecology's comments.
© 2. Treatability Testing Statement ofWork. IfEPA and Ecology determine that
10 treatability testing is required, as set forth in the FS Work Plan, Respondents shall submit a:
11
Treatability Testing Statement ofWork.
12
3. Treatability Testing Work Plan. Within thirty (30) days after submission ofthe
13
Treatability Testing Statement ofWork, Respondents shall submit a Treatability Testing Work
14
15 Plan, including a schedule. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions to the
16 Treatability Testing Work Plan, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a
17
revised Treatability Testing Work Plan to EPA and Ecology whichis responsive to the directions
18
in all EPA or Ecology comments, within fifteen (15) days ofreceiving EPA or Ecology's
19
comments.
20
4
21 Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan. Within thirty (30) days after the
22 identification of the need for a separate or revised QAPP or FSP, Respondents shall submit a
23
Treatability Study Sampling andAnalysis Plan. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require
24
revisions to the Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan, in whole or in part, Respondents
25
shall amend and submit a revised Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis Plan to EPAand
26
27 Ecology which is responsive to the directions in all EPA or Ecology comments, within fifteen
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 13
(15) days of receiving EPA or Ecology's comments.
—
5. Treatability Study Site Health and Safety Plan. Within thirty (30) days after the ®
identification of the need for a revised Health and Safety Plan, Respondents shall submit a
Treatability Study Site Health and Safety Plan.
6. Treatability Study Evaluation Report. Within thirty (30) days after completion of
any treatability testing, Respondents shall submit a Treatability Study Evaluation Report as
“provided in the SOW and/or Work Plan. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions
to the Treatability Study Report, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a
Revised Treatability Study Report to EPA and Ecology which is responsive to the directions in
11
all EPA or Ecology comments, within fifteen (15) days of receiving EPA or Ecology's comments.
12
H. Development and Screening of Alternatives. Respondents shall develop
13
an appropriate range of waste management options that will be evaluated through the
14
15 development and screening of alternatives, as provided in the SOW and FS Work Plan
16 thereunder requiring an FS. During the development and screening of alternatives, Respondents
17
shall provide EPA and Ecology with the following deliverables, as set forth in the FS Work Plan:
18
1. |
Memorandum on Remedial Action Objectives.
19
2. Memorandum on Development and Preliminary Screening ofAlternatives,
20
21 Assembled Alternatives Screening Results and Final Screening. Within thirty (30) days of
22 submittal of the memorandum on remedial action objectives, Respondents shall submit a
23 memorandum summarizing the development and screening ofremedial alternatives, including an
24
alternatives array document as described in the FS Work Plan.
25
I Detailed AnalysisofAlternatives. Respondents shall conduct a detailed
26
27 analysis ofremedial alternatives, as described in the FS Work Plan. During the detailed analysis ®
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 14
® o
of alternatives, Respondents shall provide EPA and Ecology with the following deliverables and
presentation:
1. Report on Comparative Analysis and Presentation to EPAand Ecology. Within
sixty (60) days of submission of a memorandum on the development and screening of remedial
alternatives, Respondents shall submit a report on comparative analysis to EPA and Ecology
NS summarizing the results of the comparative analysis performed between the remedial alternatives.
IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require revisions to the report on comparative analysis,
0
Respondents shall amend and submit a revised report on comparative analysis to EPA and
10 Ecology which is responsive to the directions in all joint EPA and Ecology comments, within
11
fifteen (15) days of receiving EPA and Ecology's joint comments. Within two (2) weeks of
12
submitting the original report on comparative analysis, Respondents shall make apresentation to
13
EPA and Ecology during which Respondents shall summarize the findings of the RI and remedial
14
15 action objectives, and present the results of the remedy selection criteria evaluation and
16 comparative analysis, as described in the FS Work Plan.
17
2. Draft Feasibility Study Report. Withinninety (90) days of the presentation to
18
EPA and Ecology, Respondents shall submit a Draft FS Report which reflects the findings in the
19
Baseline Risk Assessment. Respondents shall refer to Table 6-5 of the RI/FS Guidance and
20
21 Ecology guidance for report content and format. IfEPA and Ecology disapprove of or require
22 revisions to the Draft FS Report, in whole or in part, Respondents shall amend and submit a
23
Revised FS Report to EPA and Ecology which is responsive to the directions in all EPA and
24
Ecology comments, within fifteen (15) days of receiving EPA and Ecology's comments. The
25
report, as amended, and the administrative record, shallprovide the basis for the Proposed Plan
26
27 under CERCLA §§ 113(k) and 117(a)/Proposed CAP by EPA and Ecology, and shall document
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 15
the development and analysis of remedial alternatives.
3. EPA and Ecology reserve the right to comment on, modify, and direct changes for ®
all deliverables in writing, and will meet with Respondents in an effort to resolve any significant
disputes. At EPA and Ecology's discretion, Respondents must fully correct all deficiencies and
incorporate and integrate all information and comments supplied by EPA or Ecology either in
subsequent or resubmitted deliverables.
4. Respondents shall not proceed further with any subsequent activities or tasks until
receiving EPA and Ecology approval for the following deliverables: Phase II R1 Work Plan,
10 Sampling and Analysis Plan, Draft Phase 1 RI Report, TreatabilityTesting Work Plan, and
11
Sampling and Analysis Plan, Draft Phase II RI Report, FS Work Plan and Draft FS Report.
12
While awaiting EPA and Ecology approval on these deliverables, Respondents shallproceed
13
with all other tasksand.activities which may be conducted independently of these deliverables, in
14 ®
15 accordance with the schedule set forth in this Consent Order.
16 5. Upon receipt of the Draft FS Report, EPA and Ecology will evaluate, as
17
necessary, the estimates of therisk to the public and environment that are expected to remain
18
after a particular remedial alternative has been completed.
19
6. For all remaining deliverables not requiring EPA and Ecology approval,
20
21 Respondents shall proceed with all subsequent tasks, activities, and deliverables without awaiting
22 EPA and Ecology approval on the submitted deliverable. EPA and Ecology reserve the right to
23
stop Respondents from proceeding further,either temporarily or permanently, on any task,
24
. activity, or deliverable at any point during the RFS. If EPA and Ecology suspend work on any
25
task, activity or deliverable, the deadline for completion of the suspended task, activity or
26
deliverable shall be extended for the length of the suspension:
27 ®
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 16
® @
7. IfRespondents amend or revise a report, plan, or other submittal upon receipt of
EPA and Ecology comments, and EPA and Ecology subsequently disapprove ofthe revised
submittal, or if subsequent submittals do not fully reflect EPA and Ecology's directions for
changes, EPA and Ecology retain the right to seek penalties,perform their own studies, complete
the RI/FS (or any portion of the RI/FS) under CERCLA and the NCP, and MTCA and the WAC,
and seek reimbursement from Respondents for costs, and/or seek any other appropriate relief.
0 Respondents reserve all rights consistent with this Order to defend against any such action by
OV EPA or Ecology.
10 8. IfEPA and/or Ecology take over some ofthe tasks, but not the preparation ofthe
3
RUFS, Respondents shall incorporate and integrate information supplied by EPA or Ecology into
12
the Final RI and/or FS Report.
13
9. Neither failure ofEPA and Ecology to expressly approve ordisapprove of
14
15 Respondents’ submissions within any specified time period(s), nor the absence of comments,
16 shall be construed as approval by EPA and Ecology. Regardless of whether EPAand Ecology
17
gives express approval for Respondents’ deliverables,Respondentsare responsible forpreparing
18
deliverables acceptable to EPA and Ecology. All EPA and Ecology approvals and disapprovals
19
of deliverables shall be in writing.
20
21 10. Respondents shall, prior to any off-Site shipment of hazardous substances from
22 the Site to an out-of-state waste management facility, provide written notification to the
23
appropriate state environmental official in the receiving state and to EPA and Ecology's
24
Designated ProjectCoordinators of such shipment ofhazardous substances. However, the
25
26 notification of shipments shall not apply to any such off-Site shipments when the total volume of
such shipments will not exceed ten (10) cubic yards. The notification shall be in writing, and
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER |
ON CONSENT - 17
shall include the following information, where available: (1) the name and location of the
facility to which the hazardous substances are to be shipped; (2) the type and quantity of the 9
hazardous substances to be shipped; (3) the expected schedule for the shipment of the hazardous
nH
substances; and (4) the method of transportation. Respondents shall notify the receiving state of
WnNON
major changes in the shipment plan, such as a decision to ship the hazardous substances to
another facility within the same state, or to a facility in another state.
IX. BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT
10 1. Respondents shall perform the baseline risk assessment in accordancewith EPA and
11
Ecology guidance. The major components ofthe Baseline Risk Assessment include but may not
12
be limited 10 contaminant identification, exposure assessment, toxicity assessment, and human
13
health and ecological risk characterization.
14
15
16 X. MODIFICATION OF THE WORK PLAN
17
1. If at any time during the RUFS process, Respondents identify a need for additional
18
data, a memorandum documenting the need for additional data shall be submitted to the EPA and
19
Ecology Project Coordinators within twenty (20) days of identification. EPA and Ecology, in
20
21 their discretion, will determine whether the additional data will be collected by Respondents and
22 whether it will be incorporated into reports and deliverables.
23
2. In the event of conditions posing an immediate threat to human health or welfare
24
or the environment, Respondents shall notify EPA and Ecology immediately. In the event of
25
unanticipated or changed circumstances at the Site, Respondents shall notify the EPA and
26
27 Ecology Project Coordinators by telephone within twenty-four (24) hours of discovery ofthe
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 18
unanticipated or changed circumstances.
3. EPA and Ecology ay determine that in addition to tasks defined in the initially
approved Work Plan, other additional work may be necessary to accomplish the objectives ofthe
oNNN RI/FS as set forth in the SOW and Work Plans. Respondents shall perform these response
wn»
actions in addition to those required by the SOW or any approved Work Plan. Except where
necessary to abate an emergency, Respondents shall not perform any remedial activities at the
Site inconsistent with this Order unless EPA andEcology concur in writing with such additional
[>]
activities. Respondents shall confirm their willingness to perform the additional work, in
10 writing, to EPA and Ecology within seven (7) days of receipt of the EPA and Ecology request, or
11
Respondents shall invoke dispute resolution. Subject to EPA/Ecology resolution of any dispute,
12
Respondents shall implement the additional tasks which EPA and Ecology determine are
13
necessary. The additional work shall be completed according to the standards, specifications,
14
15 and schedule set forth or approved by EPA and Ecology in a written modification to the Work
16 Plan or written Work Plan Supplement. EPA and Ecology reserve the right to conduct the work
17
themselves at any point, to seek reimbursement from Respondents, and/or toseek any other .
18
appropriate relief. If EPA and Ecology determine that conditions at the Site are creating or have
19
the potential to create a danger to human health or welfare on-site or in the surroundingarea or to
20
21 the environment, EPA and Ecology may order Respondents to stop further implementation of
22 this Order for such period of time in the judgment ofEPA and Ecology is needed to abate the
23
danger.
24
25
XI. QUALITY ASSURANCE
26
1.
27 Respondents shall assure that work performed, samples taken, and analyses
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 19
conducted conform to the requirements of any SOW, the QAPP and guidance identified therein.
Respondents will assure that field personnel used by Respondents are properly trained in the use
of field equipment and in chain-of-custody procedures.
X11. FINAL RUFS, PROPOSED PLAN, PUBLIC COMMENT, RECORD OF DECISION/
o
CLEANUP ACTION PLAN,AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
9
1. EPA and Ecology retain the responsibility for the release to the public of the
©
RI/FS Report. EPA and Ecology retain responsibility for the preparation and release to the
10 public of the Proposed Plan and the Record ofDecision/Cleanup Action Plan in accordance with
11
CERCLA, the NCP, MTCA and chapters 173-340 and 173-204 WAC. oo
12
2. EPA and Ecology shall provide Respondents with the Proposed Plan, and Record
13
of Decision/Cleanup Action Plan.
14
15 3. EPA will determine the contents of its administrative record file for selection of
16 the remedial action. Respondents must submit to EPA and Ecology documents developed during
17
the course ofthe RI/FS upon which selection of the response action may be based. Respondents
18
shall provide copies of plans, task memoranda, including documentation of field modifications,
19
recommendations for further action, quality assurance memoranda and audits, raw data, field
20
21 notes, laboratory analytical reports, and other reports concerning the implementation of this
22 Consent Order. Respondents must additionally submit any previous non-privileged studies
23
conducted privately by the Respondents or other previous studies conducted under state; local, or
24
federal authorities relating to selection of the response action, and all communications between
25
Respondents and state, local, or other federal authorities concerning selection of the response
26
action. At EPA and Ecology’s discretion, Respondents may establish a community information ®
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 20
repository at or near the Site, to house one copy of the administrative record.
XIII. PROGRESS REPORTS AND MEETINGS
1. Respondents shall make presentations at, and participate in, meetings at the
request ofEPA and Ecology during the initiation, conduct, and completion ofthe RI/FS. In
oa
addition to discussion ofthe technical aspects of the RUFS, topics will include anticipated
9
0 problems or new issues. Meetings will be scheduled at EPA and Ecology’s discretion.
© 2. In addition to the deliverables set forth in this Order, Respondents shall provide to
10 EPA and Ecology monthly progress reports by the tenth (10th) day ofthe following month. Ata
11
minimum, with respect to the preceding month, these progress reports shall: (1) describe the
12
actions which have been taken to comply with this Consent Order during that month; (2) include
13
all results of sampling and tests and all other data received by Respondents; (3) describe work
14
15 = planned for the next two (2) months with schedules relating such work to the overall project
16 schedule for RIFS completion; and (4) describe all problems encountered and any anticipated
17
problems, any actual or anticipated delays, and solutions developed and implemented to address
18
any actual or anticipated problems or delays.
19
20
XIV.
21 SAMPLING, ACCESS, AND DATA AVAILABILITY/ADMISSIBILITY
22 1. All results of sampling, tests, modeling, or other data (including raw data)
generated by Respondents, or on Respondents’ behalf, for the implementation of this Consent
24
Order, shall be submitted to EPA and Ecology in the subsequent Monthly Progress Report as
25
described in the preceding Section of this Order. EPA and Ecology will each make availableto
26
the Respondents validated data generated by that agency unless it is exempt from disclosure by
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 21
any federal or state law or regulation.
2. Respondents will verbally notify EPA and Ecology at least fifteen (15) days prior ®
to conducting significant field events as described in the SOW, Work, Work Plan, or Sampling
on and Analysis Plan. At EPA and Ecology’s verbal or written request, or the request of EPA's
nw
oversight assistant, Respondents shall allow split or duplicate samples to be taken by EPA and
OO
NN Ecology (and their authorized representatives) of any samples collected by Respondents in
All split samples ofRespondents shall be analyzed by the
0 implementing this Consent Order.
\O methods identified in the QAPP.
10 3. At all reasonable times, EPA, Ecology, and their authorized representatives shall
11
have the authority to enter and freely move about all property over which the Respondents have
12
possession or control at the Site and off-Site areas where work, if any, is being performed, for the
13
14 purposes of inspecting conditions, activities, the results of activities, records, operating logs, and
15 contracts related to the Site pursuant to this Order; reviewing the progress ofthe Respondents in
16 carrying out the terms of this Consent Order; conducting tests as EPA, Ecology or their
17
authorized representatives deem necessary; using a camera, sound recording device, or other
18 documentary type equipment; and verifying the data submitted to EPA and Ecology by the
19
Respondents.
20 Respondents shall allow these persons to inspect and copy all non-privileged:
21 records, files, photographs, documents, sampling and monitoring data, and other non-privileged
22 writings related to work undertaken in carrying out this Consent Order. Nothing herein shall be
23 interpreted as limiting or affecting EPA's and Ecology’s right of entry or inspection authority
24
under federal or state law. All parties with access to the Site under this paragraph shall comply
25
with all approved Health and Safety Plans required by the SOW. By signing this Consent Order
26
27 Respondents agree that this Order constitutes reasonable notice-of access, and agree to allow
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 22
access to the Site at all reasonable times for purposes of overseeing work performed under this
Order. If EPAand Ecology desire to obtain access to any manufacturing or process areas which
HW RespondentThe Boeing Company has appropriately designated for conducting activities utilizing
|
secrets associated with U.S. Department ofDefense (DOD) projects, The Boeing Company may
request a reasonable delay to providing such access so that i may confer with EPA's and Ecology
NN representatives regarding the purpose of the inspection in the area and appropriate precautions for
0 protecting DOD secrets.
4. Respondents may assert a claim of business confidentiality covering part or all of
10 the information submitted to EPA pursuantto the terms of this Consent Order under 40 C.FR.
11
§ 2.203, provided such claim is allowed by Section 104(e)(7) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §
12
9604(e)(7). This claim shall be asserted in the manner described by 40 C.F.R.§ 2.203(b), and
13
substantiated at the time the claim is made. Information determined to be confidential by EPA
14
15 will be given the protection specified in 40 C.F.R. Part 2. Ifno such claim accompanies the
16 information when it is submitted to EPA, it may be made available to the public by EPA or the
17 -
state without further notice to the Respondents. Respondents agree not to assert confidentiality
18
or privilege claims with respect to any data related to Site conditions, sampling, or monitoring.
19
This paragraph does not affect any obligation ofEcology to disclose records under state law.
20
21 5. In entering into this Order, Respondents waive anyobjections to the release of any
22 data gathered, generated, or evaluated by EPA, Ecology or Respondents in the performance or
23.
oversight of the work that has been verified according to the quality assurance/quality control
24
(QA/QC) procedures required by the Consent Order or any EPA or Ecology-approved Work
25
Plans or Sampling and Analysis Plans. If Respondents object to the release of any other data
26
relating to the RI/FS, Respondents shall submit to EPA and Ecology a report that identifies and
"
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 23
explains its objections, describes the acceptable uses of the data, if any, and identifies any
‘
/
limitations to the use ofthe data. The report must be submitted toEPA and Ecology within
fifteen (15) days of the monthly progress report containing the data,
Nn
6. If the Site, or the off-Site area that is to be used for access or is within the scope of
wnNA
the RI/FS, is owned in whole or in part by parties other than those bound by this Consent Order,
Respondents will use best efforts to obtain Site access agreements from the present owner(s)
within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date the EPA or Ecology determines that access .
is needed. Such agreements shall provide access for EPA and Ecology, their contractors and
10 oversightofficials, or their authorized representatives, and such agreements shall specify that
11
Respondents are not EPA or Ecology's representative with respect to liability associated with Site
12 activities. Such agreements shall not limit the authorities of EPA or Ecology to obtain access in
13
Copies of such agreements shall be provided to EPA and Ecology prior to
14 any way.
o
15 Respondents’ initiation of field activities. Respondents’ best efforts shall include providing
16 reasonable compensation to any off-Site property owner. If access agreements are not obtained
17
within the time referenced above, Respondents shall immediately notify EPA and Ecology of its
18
failure to obtain access. EPA and/or Ecology may obtain access for Respondents, perform those
19
tasks or activities themselves, or terminate the Consent Order in the event that Respondents
20
cannot obtain access agreements. In the event that EPA and/or Ecology performs those tasks or
21
22 activities with EPA or Ecology contractors and does not terminate the Consent Order,
23 Respondents shall perform all other activities not requiring access to that Site, and shall
24
reimburse EPA for all EPA costs incurred which are not inconsistent with the NCP and shall
25
reimburse Ecology for all Ecology costs incurred in performing such activities. Respondents
26
shall integrate the results of any such tasks undertaken by EPA or Ecology into its reports and ®
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 24
deliverables. Respondents also agree to indemnify the United States and State ofWashington as
specified in Section XXV of this Order.
Hn
XV. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS
Wn
I. Documents including reports, approvals, disapprovals, and other correspondence
On
which must be submitted under this Consent Order, shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt
ON
0 requested, to the following addressees or to any other addressees which Respondents, EPA, and
© Ecology designate in writing. When documents are sent to Respondents’ Project Coordinator,
10 EPA and Ecology shall send electronic notification to each Respondent.
11
(a) Five copies of documents submitted to EPA :
C12
Allison Hiltner
13 EPA Project Coordinator,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
14 1200 Sixth Avenue, M/S ECL-111
Seattle, WA 98101
15
(b) Four copies of documents submitted to Ecology:
16 Rick Huey
17 Ecology Project Coordinator
Department ofEcology
3190 160th Avenue S.E.
18
Bellevue, WA 98008
19
(c) Documents submitted to Respondents:
20
D. Michael Johns
Wind Ward Environmental, LLC
21
200 West Mercer Street, Suite 401
Seattle, WA 98119
22
23 2. On or before the effective date of this Consent Order, EPA, Ecology, and
24 Respondents shall each designate their own Project Coordinator. Each Project Coordinator shall
25 be responsible for overseeing the implementation of this Consent Order. To the maximum extent
26 possible, communications between Respondents and EPA and Ecology shall be directed to the
27 Project Coordinator by mail or electronic mail, with copies to such other persons as EPA,
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 25
Ecology, andRespondents may respectively designate. Communications include, but are not
®
limited to, all documents, reports, approvals, and other correspondence submitted under this
Consent Order.
3. EPA, Ecology, and Respondents all have the right to change their
respective Project Coordinator. All parties must be notified, in writing, at least ten (10) days
prior to the change.
4. EPA's Project Coordinator shall have the authority lawfully vested in a
Remedial Project Manager (RPM) and On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) by the NCP. EPA’s Project
Coordinator shall have the authority consistent with the NCP, and Ecology’s Project Coordinator
10 shall have the authority under MTCA to halt any work required by this ConsentOrder, and to
11 take any necessary response when he or she determines that conditions at the Site may present an
12 immediate endangerment to public health or welfare or the environment. The absence ofthe
13 EPA or Ecology Project Coordinator from the area under study pursuant to this Consent Order
14 shall not be cause for the stoppage or delay ofwork. : ®|
15 5. EPA shall arrange for a qualified person to assist in its oversight and
16 review of the conduct ofthe RI/FS, as required by Section 104(a) ofCERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §
17 9604(a). The oversight assistant may observe work and make inquiries in the absence ofEPA,
18 but is not authorized to modify the Work Plan.
19
20 XVI. OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS
21 1. Respondents shall comply with all laws that are applicable when
performing work pursuant to this Order. No local, state, or federal permit shall be required for
22
23 any portion of any action conducted entirely on-site, including studies, where such action is
24 selected and carried out in compliance with Section 121 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9621.
25
XVII. RECORD PRESERVATION
26
1. All records and documents in Respondents’ possession that concern the ®
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 26
® @®
implementation of this Order shall be preserved during the conduct of this Consent Order and for
a minimum of ten (10) years after completion of the work performed under this Consent Order.
Respondents shall acquire and retain copies ofall documents that relate to the Site and are in the
possession of its employees, agents, contractors and consultants. After this 10-year period,
Respondents shall notify EPA and Ecology at least ninety (90) days before the documents are
scheduled to be destroyed. IfEPA and Ecology request that the documents be saved,
Respondents shall, at no cost to EPA and Ecology, give the requesting agency all non-privileged
documents or copies ofthe non-privileged documents.
XVIII.
10 DISPUTE RESOLUTION
11 1. Any disputes concerning activities or deliverables required under this
Order, shall be resolved as follows: If any Respondent objects to any EPA and Ecology notice of
12
13 disapproval or requirement made pursuant to this Consent Order, theRespondent shall notify
EPA's and Ecology’s Project Coordinators, in writing, of its objections within fourteen (14) days
14
ofreceipt ofthe disapproval notice or requirement. Respondent’s written objections shall define
15
the dispute, state the basis of Respondent’s objections, and be sent certified mail, return receipt
16
requested. EPA, Ecology and Respondent then have an additional fourteen (14) days from the
17
Respondent’s receipt of the return receipt to reach agreement. If an agreement is not reached
18
within fourteen (14) days, the Respondent may request a determination by EPA's Environmental
19
Cleanup Division (ECL) Director and Ecology’s Toxics Cleanup Program (TCP) Manager, or
20
his/her successor(s). The ECL Director and TCP Manager’s determination is EPA and Ecology’s
21
final decision. Respondent shall proceed in accordance with EPA and Ecology's final decision
. 22
regarding the matter in dispute, regardless ofwhether Respondent agrees with the decision. If
23
any Respondent does not agree to perform or does not actually perform the work in accordance
24
with EPA and Ecology's final decision, EPA and Ecology each reserve the right in their sole
25
discretion to conduct the work itself, to seek reimbursement from the Respondent(s), to seek
26
enforcement of the decision, to seek penalties, and/or to seek any other appropriate relief.
27
2. No Respondent is relieved of its obligations to perform and conduct
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 27
activities and submit deliverables on the schedule set forth in the SOW or any Work Plan, while
a matter is pending in dispute resolution. The invocation of dispute resolution does not stay ®
stipulated penalties under this Order.
Mn
wn XIX. DELAY IN PERFORMANCE, EPA STIPULATED PENALTIES, ENFORCEMENT
oO 1. Unless there is Force Majeure as defined in Section XX below, if
NN Respondents fail to complete a deliverable in a timely manner or fail to produce a
© deliverable of acceptable quality, or otherwise fail to perform in accordance with the
0 requirements of this Order, Respondents shall be liable to EPA for stipulated penalties.
10 Penalties begin to accrue on the day that performance is due or a violation occurs, and
11 extend through the period of correction. Where a revised submission by Respondents is
12 required, stipulated penalties shall continue to accrue until a satisfactory deliverable is
13 produced. EPA will provide written notice for violations that are not based on timeliness;
14 nevertheless, penalties shall accrue from the day a violation commences. EPA and
15 Ecology may, in their discretion, waive imposition of stipulated penalties if they
16 determine that Respondents have attempted in good faith to comply with thisOrder or in
17 the event oftimely cure of defects in initial submissions. If assessed, payment shall be
18 ~ due within thirty (30) days of receipt of a demand letter from EPA.
19 2. Respondents shall pay interest on the unpaid balance, which shall begin to
20 accrue at the end of the 30-day period, at the rate established by the Department of
21 Treasury pursuant to 30 U.S.C. § 3717. Respondents shall further pay a handling charge
22 of one percent (1%), to be assessed at the end of each thirty-one (31) day period, and a six
23 percent (6%) per annum penalty charge, to be assessed if the penalty is not paid in full
24 within ninety (90) days after it is due.
|
25 3. Respondents shall make all payments by forwarding a check, made
26 payable to the Hazardous Substance Superfund, to: Mellon Bank, EPA Region 10-
27 Superfund Accounting, P.O. Box 360903M, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15251.
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 28
Checks should identify the name ofthe Site, the Site identification number 10XX, and the
title of this Order. A copy of the check and/or transmittal letter shall be forwarded to the
|
HOW EPA and Ecology Project Coordinators.
4. For the following major deliverables, stipulated penalties shall accrue in
the amount of $500 per day, per violation, for the first seven days of noncompliance;
oO $1,000 per day, per violation, for the 8th through 14th day of noncompliance; $2,500 per
0 day, per violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day; and $5,000 per day per violation
oo
Oe for the 31st day through the 90th day
1) An original and any revised Work Plan.
10 2) An original and any revised Sampling and Analysis Plan.
11 3) An original and any revised RI Report.
12 4) An original and any revised Treatability Testing Work Plan.
13 5) An original and any revised Treatability Study Sampling and Analysis
14 Plan.
15 6) An original and any revised FSReport.
16 5. For the following interim deliverables, stipulated penaltiesshall accrue in the
17 amount of $250 per day, per violation, for the first week of noncompliance; $500 per day,
18 per violation, for the 8th through 14th day ofnoncompliance; $1,500 per day, per
19 violation, for the 15th day through the 30th day of noncompliance; and $2,500 per day per
20 violation for the 31st through the 90th day.
21 1) Technical memorandum on modeling of Site characteristics.
22 2) Preliminary Site Characterization Summary.
23 3) Summary ofRI data.
24 4) Identification of candidate technologies memorandum.
25 5) Treatability Testing Statement ofWork.
26 6) Treatability Study Evaluation Report.
27 7) Memorandum on remedial action objectives.
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 29
8) Memoranda on development and preliminary screening of alternatives,
®
assembled alternatives screening results, and final screening.
9) Comparative analysis report.
6. For the Monthly Progress Reports, stipulated penalties shall accrue in the amount
of $200 per day, per violation, for the first week of noncompliance; $500 per day, per
violation, for the 8th through 14th day ofnoncompliance; $1,000 per day, per violation,
for the 15th day through the 30th day; and $2,000 per day, per violation, for the 31st
through the 90th day.
9 7. Respondents may dispute EPA's right to the stated amount ofpenalties by
10 invoking the dispute resolution procedures under Section XVII herein. Penalties shall
11 accrue, but need not be paid, during the dispute resolution period. If Respondents do not
12 prevail upon resolution, all penalties shall be due to EPA within thirty (30) days of
13 resolution ofthe dispute. If Respondents prevails upon resolution, no penaltiesshall be
|
|
14 paid. ®
15 8 In the event that EPA provides for corrections to be reflected in the next
16 deliverable and does not require resubmission of that deliverable, stipulated penalties for
17 that interim deliverable shall cease to accrue on the date of such decision by EPA.
18 9. The stipulated penalties provisions do not preclude EPA from pursuing
19 any other remedies or sanctions which are available to EPA because ofRespondents’
20 failure to comply with this Consent Order, including, but not limited to, conduct of all or
21. part ofthe RFS. Payment of stipulated penalties does not alter Respondents’ obligation
22 to complete performance under this Consent Order.Nothing in this Section on EPA’s
23 imposition of stipulated penalties in any way limits Ecology’s authority or capacity to
24 enforce this Order.
25 10. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.050, the State may enforce this Order as
26 follows:
27 (a) The Attorney General may bring an action to enforce this Order in a ®
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 30
state or federal court.
wn (b) The Attorney General may seek, by filing an action if necessary, to
recover amounts spent by Ecology for investigative and remedial actions and orders
IN related to the Site.
wn (c) In the event Respondents refuse, without sufficient cause, to comply
aN with any term of this Order, Respondents will be liable for up to three times the amount
~J of any costs incurred by the State ofWashington as a result of its refusal to comply, and
oo civil penalties ofup to $25,000 per day for each day it refuses to comply.
(d) This Order is not appealable to the Washington Pollution Control
10 Hearings Board. This Order may be reviewed only as provided under RCW
11 70.105D.060.
12 11. Respondents are each jointly and severally liable to comply with this
13 Order. Failure to comply by one Respondent does not excuse performance by the other
14 Respondents.
15
16
XX. FORCE MAJEURE
17
1. "Force Majeure", for purposes of this Consent Order, is defined as any
18
event arising from causes beyond the control of Respondents and of any entity controlled by
19
Respondents, including their contractors and subcontractors, that delays the timely performance
20
of any obligation under this Consent Order notwithstanding Respondents' best efforts to avoid
21
the delay. The requirement that the Respondents exercise "best efforts to avoid the delay"
22
includes using best efforts to anticipate any potential Force Majeure event and best efforts to
23
address the effects of any potential Force Majeure event (1) as it is occurring, and (2) following
24
the potential Force Majeure event, such that the delay is minimized to the greatest extent
25
26 practicable. Examples of events that are not Force Majeure events include, but are not limited to,
increased costs or expenses of any work to be performed under this Order or the financial
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 31
difficulty of Respondents to perform such work.
2. If any event occurs or has occurred that may delay the performance of any ®
|
obligation under this Order, whether or not caused by a ForceMajeure event, Respondents shall
notify, by telephone, the EPA Remedial Project Manager or, in his or her absence, the ECL
Director, and Ecology’s Project Coordinator within forty-eight (48) hours ofwhen Respondents
knew or should have known that the event might cause a delay. Withinfive (5) business days
thereafier, Respondents shall provide, in writing, the reasons for the delay, the anticipated
duration ofthe delay, all actions taken or to be taken to prevent or minimize the delay, a schedule
for implementation of any measures to be taken to mitigate the effect ofthe delay, and a
statement as towhether, in the opinion ofRespondents, such event may cause or contribute to an
endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment. Respondents shall exercise best
efforts to avoidorminimize any delay and any effects of a delay. Failure to comply with the
above requirements shall preclude Respondents from asserting any claim ofForce Majeure:
3. IfEPA and Ecology agree that the delay or anticipated delay is attributable
to Force Majeure, the time for performance of the obligations under this Order that are directly
affected by the Force Majeure event shall be extended by agreement of the parties, pursuant to
Section XXVI of this Order, for a period oftime not to exceed the actual duration of the delay
caused by the Force Majeure event. An extension of the time for performance of the obligation
directly affected by the Force Majeure event shall not, of itself, extend the time for performance
of any subsequent obligation.
4. If EPA and Ecology do not agree that the delay or anticipated delay has
been or will be caused by a Force Majeure event, or do not agree with Respondents on the length
ofthe extension, the issue shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures set forth in
Section XVII of this Order. In any such proceeding, to qualify for a Force Majeure defense,
Respondents shall have the burden of demonstrating by a preponderance ofthe evidence that the
delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by a Force Majeure event, that the duration
of the delay was or will be warranted under the circumstances, that Respondents did exercise or 9
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 32
are exercising due diligence by using its best efforts to avoid and mitigate the effects of the delay,
and that Respondents complied with the requirements of this Section.
5. Should Respondents carry the burden set forth in the preceding Paragraph
the delay at issue shall be deemed not to be a violation of the affected obligation of this Consent
Order. -
on
au XX1. RESERVATIONS OF RIGHTS AND REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS
0 1. Subject to the terms and conditions of any applicable consent decrees,
vw EPA reserves the right to bring an action against Respondents under Section 107 ofCERCLA, 42
© US.C. § 9607, for recovery of all response costs including oversight costs, incurred by the
11 United States at the Site that are not reimbursed by Respondents, any costs incurred in the event
12 that EPA performs the RUFS or any part thereof, and any future costs incurred by the United
13 States in connection with response activities conducted under CERCLA at this Site. -
14 2. EPA reserves the right to bring an action against Respondents to enforce
15 the cost reimbursement requirements of this Consent Order, to collect stipulated penalties
16 assessed pursuant to this Consent Order, and to seek penalties pursuant to Section 109 of
17 CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9609.
18 - 3. Except as expressly provided in this Order, each party reserves allrights
19 and defenses it may have. Nothing in this Consent Order shall affect EPA's removal authority or
20 EPA's response or enforcement authorities including, but not limited to, the right to seek
21 injunctive relief, stipulated penalties, statutory penalties, and/or punitive damages.
22 4. Following satisfaction ofthe requirements of this Consent Order,
23 Respondents shall have resolved their liability to EPA for the work performed by Respondents
24 pursuant to this Consent Order. Respondents are not released from liability, if any, for any
25 response actions taken beyond the scope of this Order regarding removals, other operable units,
26 remedial design/remedial action, or activities arising pursuant to Section 121(c) of CERCLA, 42
27 U.S.C. § 9621(c).
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 33
5. EPA and Ecology recognize that Respondents are entering into this
®
Consent Order notwithstanding that contamination at the Site may have been caused by entities
other than Respondents. In actions concerning the Site, EPA agrees to apply the EPA Orphan
Bn Policy, attached as Attachment B.
Ww 6. Respondents shall pay to Ecology costs incurred by Ecology after the
a effective date of this Order for the implementation of this Order. These costs shall include work
3 performed by Ecology or its contractors for investigations, remedial actions, oversight and
0 administration. Ecology costs shall include costs of direct activities and support costs of direct
0 activities as defined in WAC 173-340-550(2). Respondents shall pay the required amount within
10 90 days ofreceiving from Ecology an itemized statement of costs that includes a summary of
11 costs incurred, an identification of involved staff, and the amount of time spent by involved staff
12 members on the project. A general description of work performed will be provided upon request.
13 Itemized statements shall be prepared quarterly. Respondents also may review underlying
14 Ecology oversight cost documentation, including personnel time sheets, travel authorizations,
15 vouchers, and all applicable laboratory and other costs. Failure to pay Ecology’s costs within 90-
16 days ofreceipt ofthe itemized statement of costs will result in interest charges.
17 7. This Consent Order is not a settlement of liability under RCW 70.105D.
18 Ecology’s signature on this Consent Order in no way constitutes a covenant not to sue or a
19 20 | compromise of any Ecology rights or authority. Ecology will not, however, bring an action
against Respondents to recover remedial action costs paid to and received by Ecology under this
21° Consent Order. In addition, Ecology will not take additional enforcement actions against
22 Respondents to require those remedial actions required by this Consent Order, provided
23 Respondents comply with this Consent Order. Ecology reserves the right, however, to require
24 additional remedial actions at the site should it deem such actions necessary. Ecology also
25 reserves all rights regarding theinjury to, destruction of] or loss of natural resources resulting
26 from the releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances from the site.
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 34
XXII. PAYMENT OF EPA OVERSIGHT COSTS
1. Following the issuance of this Consent Order, EPA shall submit to
Respondents on a periodic basis an accounting of all response and oversight costs incurred by the
United States after the effective date of this Order for the implementation of this Order. Such
response costs may include, but are not limited to, costs incurred by the United States in
overseeing Respondents’ implementation ofthe requirements of this Consent Order and activities
performed by the United States as part of this RI/FS, including any costs incurred to obtain
access for Respondents pursuant to this Consent Order, and for community relations activities for
this RI/FS. Costs shall include all direct and indirect costs, including, but not limited to, time
10 and travel costs ofEPA personnel and associated indirect costs, contractor costs, cooperative
11 agreement costs, compliance monitoring, including the collection and analysis of split samples,
12 inspection of RI/FS activities, site visits, discussions regarding disputes that may arise as a result
13 of this Consent Order, review and approval or disapproval of reports, and costs of redoing any of
14 Respondents’ tasks. Any necessary summaries, including, but not limited to EPA's certified
15 Agency Financial Management System summary data (SCORES Reports), or such other
16 summary as certified by EPA, shall serve as basis for payment demands. However, Respondents
17 may review the following underlying EPA oversight cost documentation: EPA personnel time
18 sheets, travel authorizations and vouchers; EPA contractor monthly invoices; and all applicable
19 contract laboratory program (CLP) invoices.
|
20 2. Respondents shall, within 30 days of receipt of each accounting, remit a
21 certified or cashier's check for the amount of the costs set forth in the accounting. If not paid
22 within 30 days of receipt of the accounting, interest shall accrue from the date of receipt of the
23 accounting through the date of payment. The interest rate is the rate of interest on investments
24 for the Hazardous Substances Superfund in section 107(a) of CERCLA, compounded annually
|
25 on October 1.
26 3. © Checks shall be made payable to the Hazardous Substances Superfund and
27 should include the name of the site, the site identification number 10XX, and the title of this
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 35
Consent Order. Checks shall be forwarded to: Mellon Bank, EPA Region 10-Superfund ®
Accounting, P.O. Box 360903M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.
4. Copies ofthe transmittal letter and check should be sent simultaneously to
the EPA Project Coordinator.
5. Respondents agree to limit any disputes concerning costs to accounting
errors and the inclusion of costs outside the scope of this Consent Order, including, but not
limited to, costs for work which is inconsistent with this Order. Respondents shall identify any
contested costs and the basis of its objection. All undisputed costs shall be remitted by
Respondents in accordance with the schedule set forth above. Disputed costs shall be paid by
10 Respondents into an interest bearing escrow account while the dispute is pending. Respondents
11 bear theburden of establishing an EPA accounting error or the inclusion of costs outside the
12 scope of this Consent Order.
13
14 XX111. DISCLAIMER
15 1. Respondents deny liability for most of the hazardous substances at the
16 Site, and by entering into this Consent Order, Respondents do not necessarily agree with EPA
17 and Ecology’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions ofLaw. Furthermore, the participation of
18 Respondents in this Order shall not be considered an admission of liability in any judicial or
19 administrative proceeding other than a proceeding by the United States or the State, including
20 EPA and Ecology, to enforce this Consent Order or a judgment relating to it. Respondents retain
2] all of their defenses consistent with this Order to any actions taken by EPA and/or Ecology and
22 otherwise reserve all of their rights to assert claims against other potentially responsible parties
23 and potentially liable persons at the Site. However,Respondents agree not to contest the validity
24 or terms of this Order, or the procedures underlying or relating to it in any action brought by the
25 United States, including EPA, or the state of Washington, including Ecology, to enforce its
26 terms.
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 36
XXIV. OTHER CLAIMS
1. In entering into this Order, Respondents waive any right to seek
reimbursement under Section 106(b) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9606(b). Respondents also waive
any right to present a claim under Section 111 or 112 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9611 or 9612.
This Order does not constitute any decision on preauthorization of funds under Section 111(a)(2)
Nh of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9611(a)(2). Respondents further waive all other statutory and common
law claims against EPA and Ecology, including, but not limited to, contribution and
oo counterclaims, relating to or arising out of conduct of the RI/FS.
2. Nothing in this Order shall constitute or be construed as a release from any
10 claim, cause of action, or demand in law or equity against any person, firm, partnership,
11 subsidiary, or corporation not a signatory to this ConsentOrder for any liability it may have
12 arising out of, or relating in any way to, the generation, storage, treatment, handling,
13 transportation, release, or disposal of any hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants
14 found at, taken to, or taken from the Site.
15
16
17 XXV. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE, INSURANCE, AND INDEMNIFICATION
18 1. Respondents shall separately establish and maintain a financial instrument
19
or trust account or other financial mechanism acceptable to EPA and Ecology, including a
20 demonstration that one or more ofthe Respondents satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR. Part
21 264.143(f), sufficient to assure the work and any other obligations required under this Consent
22
Order, including a margin for cost overruns. Within fifieen (15) days after the effective date of
23
this Consent Order, Respondents shall fund the financial instrument or trust account sufficiently
24
to perform the work required under this Consent Order projected for the period beginning with
25
the effective date of the Order through 2002. Beginning January 1, 2003, and on or before the
26
15th calendar day of each calendar year quarter thereafter, Respondentsshall fund the financial
27
instrument or trust account sufficiently to perform the work and other activities required under
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 37
this Orderprojected for the succeeding calendar year quarter.
2. If at any time the net worth of the financial instrument or trust account is ®
insufficient to perform the work and other obligations under the Order for the upcoming quarter,
Respondents shall provide written notice to EPA within seven (7) days after the net worth of the
financial instrument or trust account becomes insufficient. The written notice shall describe why
ona the financial instrument or trust account is funded insufficiently and explain what actions have
been or will be taken to fund the financial instrument or trust account adequately.
0 3. (a) Prior to commencement of any work under thisOrder, Respondents
\O shall secure, and shall maintain in force for the duration of this Order, and for two (2) years after
10 the completion of all activities required by this Consent Order, Comprehensive General Liability
11 (CGL) and automobile insurance, with limits of § five (5) million dollars, combined single limit,
12 naming the United States as additional insured. The CGL insurance shall include Contractual
13 Liability Insurance in the amount of $ 1 million per occurrence, and Umbrella Liability Insurance
14 in the amount of $ 2 million per occurrence. ®
15 ®) Respondents shall also secure, and maintain in force for the
16 duration of this Order and for two (2) years after the completion of all activities required by this
17 Consent Order the following:
18
1. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance in the amount of
19
$1,000,000.00 per occurrence.
20
ii. Pollution Liability Insurance in the amount of $ 1,000,000.00 per
21
occurrence, covering as appropriate both general liability and professional liability arising from
22
pollution conditions.
23
(c) For the duration of this Order, Respondents shall satisfy, or shall
24
ensure that their contractors or subcontractors satisfy, all applicable laws and regulations
25
regarding the provision of employer's liability insurance and workmen's compensation insurance
26
for all persons performing work on behalf of the Respondents, in furtherance of this Order.
27
@d) IfRespondents demonstrates by evidence satisfactory to EPA that ®
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 38
any contractor or subcontractor maintains insurance equivalent to that described above, or
insurance covering the same risks but in a lesser amount, then with respect to that contractor or
subcontractor Respondents need provide only that portion of the insurance described above
which is not maintained by the contractor or subcontractor.
(e) Prorto commencement of any work under this Order, and
annually thereafter on the anniversary of the effective date of this Order, Respondents shall
9 provide to EPA certificates of such insurance and a copy of each insurance policy.
0 4. At least seven (7) days prior to commencing any work under this Consent
Order, Respondents shall certify to EPA that the required insurance has been obtained by that
10 contractor.
11 5. Respondents agree to indemnify and hold the United States and the State
12 ofWashington, their agencies, departments, agents, and employees harmless from any and all
13 claims or causes of action arising from or on account of acts or omissions of Respondents, their
14 employees, agents, servants, receivers, successors, assignees, or any persons including, but not
15 limited to, firms, corporations, subsidiaries, and contractors, in carrying out activities under this
16 Consent Order. The United States and the State of Washington or any agency or authorized
17 representative of those governments shall not be held as a party to any contract entered into by
18 Respondents in carrying out activities under this Consent Order.
19
20 XXVI1. EFFECTIVE DATE AND SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATION
21 1. The effective date of this Consent Order shall be the date it is signed by
22 the later of EPA and Ecology.
23 2. This Consent Order may be amended by mutual agreement ofEPA,
24 Ecology and Respondents. Amendments shall be in writing and shall be effective when signed
25 by Respondents, EPA and Ecology. EPA and Ecology Project Coordinators do not have the
26 authority to sign amendments to the Consent Order.
3. No informal advice, guidance, suggestions, or comments by EPA or
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 39
Ecology regarding reports, plans, specifications, schedules, and any other writing submitted by
|
Respondents will be construed as relieving Respondents of their obligation to obtain such formal
|
hw approval as may be required by this Order. Any deliverables, plans, technical memoranda,
reports (other than progress reports), specifications, schedules, and attachments required by this
Consent Order are, upon approval by EPA and Ecology incorporated into this Order.
oO
ON XXVIL TERMINATION AND SATISFACTION
0 1. This Consent Order shall terminatewhen Respondents demonstrate, in
Oo writing, and certify to the satisfaction ofEPA and Ecology that all activities required under this
10 Consent Order, as amended by any modifications, including any additional work, payment of
11 oversight costs, and any stipulated penalties demanded by EPA and Ecology, have been
12 performed and EPA and Ecology have approved the certification. This approval shall not,
13 however, terminate Respondents’ obligation to comply with Sections XVII, XX, and XXII of
14 this Consent Order. o
15 2. The certification shall be signed by a responsible official representing each
16 Respondent. Each representative shall make the following attestation: "I certify that the
17 information contained in or accompanying this certification is true, accurate, and complete." For
18 purposes of this Consent Order, a responsible official is a corporate official who is in charge of a
19 principal business function.
20
21 XXVIII. PUBLIC NOTICE OF ORDER
22 1. WAC 173-340-600(10)(c) requires a thirty (30) day public comment
23 period before this Agreed Order for a RI/FS becomes effective. Any substantial changes to the
24 Order agreed to by the parties, such as future SOWs, shall also be subject to public notice and
25 opportunity to comment. Ecology and EPA shall be responsible for providing such public notice
26 and reserve the right to modify or withdraw any provisions of thisOrder or any substantial
27 changes to the Order should public comment disclose facts or considerations which indicate to o
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT -40
it are inadequate or improper in any
1 Ecology and EPA that the Order or proposed changes to
2 respect.
3
4 Respondent Port of Seattle:
OO2
py. (Sy DATE: &/~A207)
00 M.R. Dinsmore, Executive Director
©
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 41
Respondent King County: ®
|
SH oe PAE, DATE: % - 19-02
Wn. Ron Sims, King Couny Executive
3
<3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
"18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVEORDER
ON CONSENT - 42
Respondent City of Seattle:
~ o my SUL]
w Paul Schell, Mayor
on
49
0
©
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 43
Respondent The Boeing Company:
Av
Nn BY: K_.~/< J
Wn rkJ./Thomson, Director ofEnergy & Environmental Affairs
NN
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 44
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Cleanup
[= J DATE: A/C)
Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Associate Director
NN
0
VO
SS
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24.
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT -45
State ofWashington, Department ofEcology, Toxics Cleanup Program
WwLN EA(GTSe
James J. Pendowski, Program Manager
OO
N
o0
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ON CONSENT - 46
@ Lower Duwamish Waterway
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
STATEMENT OF WORK
® Prepared for
Lower Duwamish Waterway Group
Port of Seattle
City of Seattle
King County
The Boeing Company
For submittal to
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10, Seattle, WA
Washington Department of Ecology
Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue, WA
December 2000
ATT ACHME RT A
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION 1
TASK 1 COMMUNICATION 2
Task 2 HISTORICAL REVIEW, SITE CHARACTERIZATION, AND DATA COMPILATION 2
TAsK3 ~~ STUDY DESIGN FOR SCOPING-PHASE RISK ASSESSMENTS 3
SCOPING-PHASE HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT 4
SCOPING-PHASE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT 5
PRIORITIZATION METHODOLOGY FOR POTENTIAL EARLY ACTION AREAS 6
Task 4 RISK CHARACTERIZATION AND PRIORITY AREA IDENTIFICATION 7
TASK 5 IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE AREAS FOR EARLY ACTIONS 8
PHASE |
TASK 6 | RI REPORT PRODUCTION 8
TASK 7 IDENTIFICATION OF DATA NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE RI 9
Task 8 PREPARE PHASE Il RI WORK PLANS 9
TASK9 PREPARATION OF PROJECT PLANS FOR CONDUCTING ADDITIONAL STUDIES 9
TAsK 10 IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL STUDIES 9
Task 11 CONDUCT BASELINE AND RESIDUAL RISK ASSESSMENTS 10
Task 12 PHASE Il RI REPORT PRODUCTION 1
TASK 13 RIVER-WIDE FEASIBILITY STUDY WORK PLAN 1
Figure 1. Lower Duwamish Waterway (LDW) 12
Figure 2. Flowchart of tasks for the Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS 13
Figure 3. Anticipated schedule for the Lower Duwamish Waterway Phase | RI14
Table 1. Remedial Investigation objectives 14
Table 2. List of deliverables 15
REFERENCES 17
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 ii.
INTRODUCTION
This Statement of Work (SOW) is attached to the Lower Duwamish Waterway joint
Ecology/EPA Administrative Order on Consent (AOC). The respondents to the AOC are
the City of Seattle, King County, The Boeing Company, and the Port of Seattle. The
purpose of this SOW is to identify the tasks required to complete a river-wide remedial
investigation (RI) and prepare a feasibility study (FS) work plan for the Lower
Duwamish Waterway (LDW; see map, Figure 1) (figures and tables are located following
the text). To maximize the utility of existing data, the RI will be conducted in two phases.
The first phase of the RI will use existing data to provide a framework and process in
which to identify locations within the LDW that may be candidates for early action. Early
actions may be taken following Phase 1. The second phase of the RI will consist of
investigations to fill data gaps for the completion of the RIL
A proposed overall process for an LDW Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
is presented in Figure 2. The LDW has been the target of extensive environmental
sampling. Over the last 5 years, more than 1,000 sediment samples have been collected
from the LDW by multiple entities, including the EPA, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), The Boeing Company, King County, the Port of
Seattle, the Elliott Bay/Duwamish River Restoration Program (EB/DRP), and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
This SOWdescribes the specific objectives of the Phase 1 RI, the general objectives of
the Phase II RI, and deliverables to be provided for the RI by the respondents. The
objectives of the RI are summarized in Table 1.
A proposed schedule for completion of the Phase I R1 is presented in Figure 3. This
figure also shows the estimated time allotted for agency review of each deliverable. Due
to the uncertainty in the specific elements of the Phase II RI, no schedule is shown for
this phase in Figure 3. It is anticipated that the Phase II RI could be completed within 18
months following approval of the Phase I RI report. The study objectives for both phases
of the RI are identified in Table 1. The RI is broken down into 12 discrete tasks; each is
described in a separate section below. Work described in Task 1 will be ongoing
throughout the RI process; Tasks 2 to 7 will be completed during Phase I of the RI; Tasks
8 to 13 will be completed during Phase II of the RI. Table 2 gives the list of proposed
deliverables for both phases of the RI and the anticipated scheduled agency review time
for each Phase I deliverable.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
TAasK 1 COMMUNICATION
It is anticipated that regularly scheduled meetings of the respondents and the regulatory
agencies will be held to review progress during the RI. As appropriate, natural resource
trustees and the Lower Duwamish Waterway Community Advisory Group’s technical
consultant will be included in technical meetings. Following each meeting, email will be
sent to all participating parties summarizing the topics discussed.
Task 2 HISTORICAL REVIEW, SITE CHARACTERIZATION,AND DATA
COMPILATION
Prior to beginning data analysis, a comprehensive review of site history, previous and
ongoing environmental investigations, physiographic and oceanographic features,
biological resources, and demographic characteristics will be conducted for the LDW.
This review has several objectives:
+ Identify studies in which data usable for the RI were collected
+ Document investigations of potential chemical sources, source control, and -
chemical fate and transport
Provide a basis for developing the site conceptual model for the ecological risk
assessment (ERA) and human health risk assessment (HHRA)
The Phase 1 RI will use existing chemistry and biological effects data to initially evaluate
the nature and extent of contamination in the LDW and to identify potential early action
areas. It is anticipated that sufficient data exist to complete the Phase I RI.
At a minimum, the following types of data will be assembled from relevant studies and
databases and evaluated for possible inclusion in the RI:
+ Sediment chemistry (both bulk and porewater)
+ Summary of pertinent Quality Assurance/Quality Control information from each
study
+ Sediment toxicity bioassays
+ Benthic community analyses
+ Salmon life history data
+ Abundance and distribution of biological resources
+ Sensitive and special habitat areas
+ Fish and marine invertebrate home range data/projections
+ Demographic data including socio-economic and ethnicity information
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
Site use information (i.e., public access, commercial, recreational, fish and
shellfish consumption, etc.)
Potential sources of contamination, including a summary of individual outfalls,
surface water, groundwater, stormwater, CSO discharges, and identification of
contaminated shoreline fill :
+ Tissue chemistry
+ Fish histopathology and biomarker data
Many of the relevant environmental data for the LDW are readily available in electronic
format from the Sediment Quality Information System database (SEDQUAL), the
Dredge Analysis Information System database (DAIS), and from the electronic archives
of the respondents. Data records from these sources will be combined into a single
relational database. For this task, the respondents will: 1) develop and submit for agency
approval a list of reports to be reviewed for data relevant to the purposes of this RI/FS, 2)
develop and submit for agency approval a conceptual design for the database, 3) develop
and submit for agency approval criteria for evaluating-and accepting data sets, and 4)
select data sets to be included in the final database. Electronic copies of the final
database, compatible with agency software, will be submitted once a thorough quality
assurance review is complete. A memorandum will be prepared and submitted that
summarizes the environmental data in the database. This memorandum will also include
a list of the datasets excluded from the final database and the reasons for their exclusion.
Geographical information system (GIS) tools will be extensively utilized for data
analysis; therefore, all data to be included in the final database must be associated with
accurate geographical coordinates. GIS-based maps of station locations and chemical
distributions will be prepared as deliverables. The results of the historical review, initial
site characterization, and identification of potential early action areas will be included in
the Phase I RI report (Task 6). The data file, GIS shapefiles, and meta data will also be
provided to the agencies as deliverables.
TAsK 3 STUDY DESIGN FOR SCOPING-PHASE RISK ASSESSMENTS
The primary goals of the Phase IRI are to: 1) summarize the existing information
concerning the nature and extent of contamination within the LDW, 2) use the existing
data, to the extent practical, to identify high priority areas (Task 4), and 3) identify
candidate areas for early action (Task 5). These priorities will be established within a
framework based on scoping-phase risk assessments for human and ecological health.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
The first step in the risk assessments will be to create site conceptual models. Separate
models will be created for human and ecological health, although they will be based on
similar assumptions. The models will graphically portray the relationships among
sources, chemicals, transport mechanisms, and receptors.
The conceptual site model for the ERA will include many different organisms that could
potentially be impacted by sediment contamination and shows the relationships among
species and potential exposure pathways. The conceptual site model for the HHRA will
include all potential exposure pathways.
The scoping-phase HHRA and ERA will be conducted in parallel. Study design
considerations for each risk assessment are presented in separate sections below.
Scoping-phase human health risk assessment
The scoping-phase HHRA will determine whether chemicals of potential concern found
in sediments in the LDW pose unacceptable health risks throughfish and shellfish
consumption, dermal contact with sediment, and/or direct ingestion of sediment. A key
objective will be to develop an exposure assessment that is reasonable, yet protective of
the potentially exposed population. At the scoping-phase of the HHRA, site-specific
values for many exposure variables may be difficult to determine without additional data
collection. For example, exposure parameters used for the fish consumption pathway,
such as exposure frequency, exposure duration, and ingestion rates, have not been
quantified specifically for the LDW. The scoping-phase assessment will use previously
conducted risk assessments from the vicinity of the LDW (Environmental Solutions
Group 1999; King County DNR 1999; Weston 1994, 1998) as starting points in assessing
risk for the LDW.
Exposure scenarios for adults and children will be evaluated. The representative
population groups within each scenario will be those whose potential exposure to site-
related chemicals is greatest. For the LDW, these groups are those who consume above-
average amounts of fish and shellfish (e.g., members of the Muckleshoot and Suquamish
tribes, and Asian and Pacific Islanders) or who fish in the LDW (i.e., Native Americans).
In the absence of site-specific data collection, conservative values will be selected for the
exposure assessment. Within the exposure assessment, exposure point concentrations
(EPCs) will be developed for each exposure pathway evaluated. In general, the area over
which EPCs are averaged will reflect spatial use by potential receptors. PCBs and other
contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) will be addressed in the scoping-phase
HHRA. PCBs in sediments from the LDW have been measured as Aroclors and selected
congeners. While the congener data will be used to the extent possible, the primary focus
of the scoping-phase risk assessment will be total PCB data as measured by Aroclors.
1 In risk assessment language, receptors refer to the potentially exposed humans, animals, or plants
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
The conceptual site model, the exposure assessment, and the toxicity values will be
submitted to the agencies as an interim deliverable before the completion of the scoping-
phase risk assessment. The exposure assessment will include values for all exposure
parameters, including EPCs for chemicals of potential concern.
Scoping-phase ecological risk assessment
Traditionally, the objective of a scoping-phase ERA is to use existing data and
conservative assumptions to determine if resident species may be subject to adverse
effects from stressors at the site. The ERA, which includes a problem formulation? an
analysis phase?, and a risk characterization and uncertainty analysis, provides the basis
for focusing further analysis, ifjustified; on a subset of species, stressors, and pathways
by eliminating those that do not appear to be subject to unacceptable risk. Based on the
ecological site model, representative species inhabiting the LDW will be selected from
each of the key exposure pathways. The process for selecting representative species and
endpoints will follow EPA (1998) and other relevant guidance. EPA (1998) outlines three
principal criteria for selecting resident species: 1) their ecological relevance, 2) their
potential susceptibility to the known or potential stressors, and 3) whether they represent-
management goals. At a minimum, one or more individual species from each of the
following major taxonomic groups will be selected: fish, birds, benthic
macroinvertebrates, and mammals.
For each representative species, measures of effect and exposure will be proposed for
chemicals of potential concern. For benthic invertebrates, measures of effect and
exposure for the scoping phase will be the numerical chemical criteria of the Washington
Sediment Management Standards (SMS)* and all relevant benthic tissue effects data. For
fish, appropriate technical studies will be reviewed to determine potential associations of
chemical concentrations with effects and to assess measures of exposure. For birds and
mammals, a simple food-web model will be constructed to calculate potential doses. The
model will be based on previous efforts conducted by King County DNR (1999). These
doses will be compared to toxicity reference values (TRVs) to estimate risk.
Measures of exposure refer to how exposure is occurring, and are related to chemical fate
and transport and life history characteristics of the particular species. Where existing data
are insufficient to provide accurate site-specific measures of exposure, conservative
assumptions will be made. The measures of exposure are likely to be different for each
2 The problem formulation includes the development of assessment endpoints,
a conceptual model, and
an analysis plan
3 The analysis phase consists of characterizing both ecological
exposure and effects
4 Chapter 173-204 Washington Administrative Code
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
representative species. For relatively immobile species such as benthic invertebrates,
point estimates of exposure equivalent to a single station location may be appropriate. For
mobile species, such as fish and birds, larger spatially averaged concentrations or site
usage considerations may be appropriate.
Measures of effect refer to potential adverse impacts to receptor species associated with
stressors. Agency databases, peer-reviewed literature, and other relevant toxicological
data with appropriate QA/QC documentation will be considered for each of the
receptor/stressor combinations. Selected TRVs obtained from secondary sources will be
checked using the original primary literature.
PCBs and other COPCs will be addressed in the scoping-phase assessment,particularly
for birds and mammals. Total PCBs measured as Aroclors will be used in the scoping-
phase assessment, although existing PCB congener data will be used to the extent
possible.
The problem formulation for the scoping-phase ecological risk assessment will be
submitted to the agencies as an interim deliverable. The problem formulation will consist
of a conceptual site model, assessment endpoints, receptors of concern, COPCs and any
other stressors under consideration, and the analysis plan for measures of effect and
exposure for each representative species. Subsequent to the completion of the problem
formulation, draft effect and exposure assessments will be submitted, with proposed
exposure concentrations and toxicity data ranges for each receptor species.
Prioritization Methodology for Potential Early Action Areas
A technical memorandum describing the risk-based sediment site prioritization
methodology will be submitted to the agencies for review and approval. In identifying
high priority areas, the respondents will review sediment site prioritization methodologies
that have been used in other similar applications, and will develop a prioritization scheme
that adequately represents the range of conditions associated with the potential current
risks to human health and the environment. It is anticipated that the selected prioritization
methodology will rely on existing environmental data and the results of the scoping-
phase risk assessments. Models for prioritizing sediment areas to be evaluated include,
among others, those developed by Ecology, EB/DRP, King County, and the Bellingham
Bay Pilot Project. The respondents will summarize these approaches and may
recommend alternative approaches.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
Task 4 RISK CHARACTERIZATION AND PRIORITY AREA IDENTIFICATION
Following agency approval of the interim deliverables described in Task 3, the scoping-
phase risk assessments will be conducted. For each receptor evaluated, the manner in
which risks will be characterized and presented is dependent on the specific measures of
exposure. The following approaches will be considered, as will other appropriate
approaches:
+ For human health; risk estimates will be calculated for both non-carcinogenic and
carcinogenic endpoints, depending on the chemical. Separate estimates will be
made for each exposure pathway and exposure scenario. In addition, cumulative
risk will be evaluated.
+ Risk estimates for human health from the fish and shellfish consumption
pathway will be based on chemical concentrations in muscle or whole-
body tissue, as appropriate.
+ For ecological health, the hazard quotient approach’ will be used to evaluate
potential risk to benthic organisms, fish, birds, and mammals.
+ For benthic invertebrates, hazard quotients will be calculated using Sediment
Quality Standards’ and tissue-based risk analysis, as appropriate.
+ For fish, risk may be characterized based largely on tissue residue values for
many of the chemicals of potential concern. Other measures, such as the
potential association between chemical concentrations in other
environmental media and effects and biological indicators of chemical
exposure, may also be considered.
+ For birds and mammals, risks will be calculated based on predicted doses
of chemicals of potential concern compared to TRVs.
The results of the risk characterizations will be used with other risk-based information to
make recommendations of high priority areas following the risk-based sediment site
prioritization methodology. An uncertainty analysis for each scoping-phase risk
assessment will also be conducted.
Priority areas based on the scoping-phase risk assessments will not necessarily be
identical for each receptor type, but they are likely to converge on the areas with highest
bulk sediment chemical concentrations. The GIS will be used to portray high-priority
areas for each receptor simultaneously. Risk-based high priority areas will be considered
for potential early action pursuant to Task 5. The scoping-phase risk assessment reports
will be finalized within the Phase I RI report (Task 6).
5 Hazard quotients are calculated by dividing the measure of exposure by the measure of effect; both
must be in the same units
6 Chapter 173-204 Washington Administrative Code
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
® TASKS IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE AREAS FOR EARLY ACTIONS
Following completion of the sediment prioritization process described in Task 4,
management criteria for identifying high priority areas as candidate areas for early action
will be developed. Selection criteria will include, but not be limited to, factors such as the
priority relative to areas with lower potential ecological and human health risks, the
degree of uncertainty in prioritization, the potential for recontamination, and the potential
qualitative impact on LDW-wide risks if the area were remediated. Impediments to early
action, including habitat alteration issues and landowner constraints, will also be
considered. Two technical memoranda will be submitted to the agencies for review and
comment: 1) description of selection criteria and 2) data analysis and identification of
candidate areas for early action.
TAsk 6. PHASE | RI REPORT PRODUCTION
A Phase 1 RI report will be finalized following completion of all data analyses and the
identification of potential areas for early action. The Phase 1 RI report will:
+ Summarize the characteristics and history of the LDW
+ Summarize previous environmental investigations, including studies related to
) groundwater and source control
+ Summarize the nature, extent, and sources of contamination affecting the LDW,
"to the extent possible using existing data
+ Summarize the quantity and quality of data collected and reviewed
+ Present the results of the scoping-phase HHRA and ERA
+ Summarize the process and methods used to determine high priority areas within
the LDW based on sediment quality and the scoping-phase HHRA and ERA
+ Identify areas classified as high priority and candidate areas for early action
+ Present an initial identification of ARARs
Deliverables for Task 6 include a draft Phase I RI Report, which will be submitted to the
agencies for review and comment, and a final version of the report, once all comments
have been addressed.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
TASK 7 IDENTIFICATION OF DATA NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE RI
Upon completion of the Phase 1 R1 report and approval of the report by EPA and
Ecology, the respondents will identify additional data that may be required to complete
~ the RI. Data gaps will be identified based on an analysis of the uncertainties associated
with summarizing the nature and extent of contamination, HHRA exposure parameters,
and the results of the scoping-phase risk assessments. In addition, the scoping-phase risk
assessments will be used to assess residual risks at the completion of proposed early
actions. Data gaps related to addressing risk characterization uncertainties and data that
may be needed for management decisions will be prioritized. Costs for collecting these
data will also be a consideration. A technical memorandumwill be prepared that will
identify data gaps in detail, and discuss whether the data gaps should be further
investigated. The memorandum will be submitted to the agencies for review and
comment.
TASK 8 PREPARE PHASE Il RI WORK PLANS
After receiving comments from the agencies on the technical memorandum addressing
data gaps, the respondents will prepare draft and final Work Plans describing the studies
to be conducted as part of the Phase II RI. One component of these studies will be high-
resolution analysis for dioxin-like PCB congeners on a subset of environmental samples
that will be required to make final risk-based management decisions.
TASK 9 PREPARATION OF PROJECT PLANS FOR CONDUCTING ADDITIONAL
STUDIES
Study designs and methods for additional data collection efforts will be documented in
project plans, including Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAPs), Quality Assurance Project
Plans (QAPPs), and Health and Safety Plans (HSPs), as appropriate. These plans will be
submitted for agency review and approval. Preparation of these plans will follow
guidance produced by EPA (1999) and Ecology (1991, 1995).
TASK 10 IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL STUDIES
Once the appropriate project plans are approved by the agencies, the studies will be
conducted. Following the completion of each study, a report will be completed and
submitted to the agencies, which describes the specific activities accomplished, noting
any deviation from the project plans. All deviations from project plans must be approved
by EPA and Ecology in advance. Once the data are reviewed and validated, a data report
for each study will be prepared and submitted to the agencies.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000
TASK 11 CONDUCT BASELINE AND RESIDUAL RISK ASSESSMENTS
Baseline and residual HHRAs and baseline and residual ERAs will be conducted once the
needed data identified in Task 7 have been collected. The risk assessments will be
conducted for two exposure regimes: 1) baseline sediment conditions as they exist at the
time the RI assessments are done and 2) residual sediment conditions accounting for the
effects of the planned early action projects. The latter assessment will be conducted by
using characteristics that the sediments will have following planned early actions, as well
as characteristics of sediments in unremediated areas, for the exposure assessment. This
assessment will provide an estimate of residual risks following early actions,and will be
used to determine whether remedial actions, beyond the early actions, are warranted.
Because some of the early actions may not be completed when the residual risk
assessment is conducted, some uncertainty will remain regarding associated ecological
and human health risk reduction. An interim deliverable will be submitted to the agencies
to outline an approach for predicting exposures in the post-early action exposure regime. -
These risk assessments will refine risk estimates made during the scoping-phase risk
assessments through a variety of techniques, including:
o increased sample size for estimating exposure
oo direct, rather than estimated, measurements of exposure and effect
© additional exposure scenarios
© more sophisticated food web modeling
* probabilistic risk characterization and uncertainty analysis
The fundamental study design will be similar to the scoping-phase risk assessments, but
there will be added complexity in some areas. Accordingly, the deliverables specified in
Task 3 (conceptual site models, exposure assessments, and problem formulation) will be
revised and submitted to the agencies for review.
Draft baseline and residual HHRA and ERA reports will be submitted to the agenciesfor
review and comment. The final baseline and residual risk assessment reports will be
included in the Phase II RI report (Task 12).
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 10
Task 12 PHASE Il Rl REPORT PRODUCTION
The Phase II RI report will include a presentation of all data collected during Phase II and
a complete evaluation of the nature and extent of contamination. The final baseline and
* residual risk assessments for human and ecological health will also be included. The
report will describe a process for identifying potential ARARs and remedial actions
beyond the early actions identified in the Phase 1 RI. In addition, the report will specify
the risk-based ARARs and other ARARs directly related to the completion of the RI. The
draft Phase II RI report will be submitted to the agencies for review and comment. A
final version of the report will be submitted once all comments have been addressed.
TASK 13 RIVER-WIDE FEASIBILITY STUDY WORK PLAN
As part of the RI, respondents will prepare a work plan to conduct a river-wide FS. The
work plan will be based on the appropriate EPA and Ecology guidance documents for
conducting a FS. The FS will include identifying and screening remedial alternatives
based on the general range of Duwamish Waterway sediment characteristics (e.g.,
sediment grain size and TOC), waterway conditions (e.g., water depth, range of flow, and
salinity range), and contaminants of concern. The FS work plan will also include a task to
develop a detailed comparative analysis of the alternatives to identify those that might be
candidates for remedial activities that might be undertaken at the site.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 11
Elliott =
Bay ovr A
~~
N
kilometers
East
Harbor Waterway
West Island
Waterway
Lowsr
Duwamish.
Turning
Basin
LowerDuwamish Waterway
Figure 1. Lower Duwamish Waterway (LDW)
Lower DuwamishWaterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 12
ellLL
' © Sediment chemistry © Nature and extent of contamination . ;
e Biological o Scoping phase risk assessment
‘e Tissue residue
' FY elLl-y 1
,
oc :
® )
0 :
© . l
£
a | :
: | :
;
. Remaining areas High priority :
, : i
:
,
'
1
'
' :
: © Data acquisition '
. ® Baselinerisk assessment 1
oc ;
® :
on :
@ ; -
a : [TT Project B
1 ' Data collection Data collection [EY
and design and design
Project A Project B
Acquire permits [aCe HICRCEN o oo
(as needed) (as needed)
No further River-wide Project A Project B
action report feasibility study
to identify remedial Construction Construction}
alternatives
Figure 2. Flowchart of tasks for the Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 13
Lower Duwamish Waterway
oo Remedial Investigation
Phase I Timeline
Months from Project Inception
Page 10f1 }
TASK PROJECT STEP Caz lsfals|el7]8]o|w0]u]iz]in]u
1 Communication 9 : - C0
2 Historical review,sitech ization, and data ilati . 0
Conceptual design for the database
Criteris snd QA procedures for evaluating and accepting datasets
Summary| [ I of environmental data Inthe database
GIS maps of stations and chemical distributions within the study srea
Electronic copy of the final database and GIS files 0
3 Study design for scoping-phase risk anessmens Pee
}
C I site model, and toxicity for scoping-phase HHRA
exposure
Problem formulation for scoping-phase ERA
Effects and exposure assessment for scoping-phase ERA
Risk-based sediment site prioritization methodology
4 Risk characterization and priority area identification 0
Scopingphase risk assessment report & Ox
5 + Identification of candidate sites for early remedial action ol OD
’
Technical memorandum on selection criteria for identification of candidate sices A
Technical | on data analysis snd identification of candidate sites O==C
6 Phase I Ri report production Q ck
7 Identification of dats needed to complete the RI Q oa
®Str ® End ©Deliverable #Estimated agency review
and approval timeframe
®
Figure 3. Anticipated schedule for the Lower Duwamish Waterway Phase |
Ri
[timeline edited and reinserted]
Table 1. Remedial Investigation objectives
Phase |
e Summarize and compile existing data concerning historical environmental
investigations and the source, nature, and extent of contamination within the LDW
e Use existing data to conduct scoping-phase ERA and HHRA
* Identify areas potentially suitable for early actions
e Identify additional data necessary to complete the river-wide RI
e Prepare Work Plans as needed to complete the river-wide RI
Phase ll e Prepare documentation (SAP, QAPP, HSP) for any additional studies
¢ Implement additional studies to fill data gaps
Use data from additional studies to determine baseline risk in the absence of any
early actions, and to determine residual risks assuming all early actions have been
conducted
’
Identify areas where residual risks are above acceptable levels
C e Prepare Work Plan for river-wide FS
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 14
Table 2. List of deliverables’
TAsK 1: COMMUNICATION
No work products are anticipated for this task
PHASE IRI
TAsK 2: HisTORICAL REVIEW, SITE CHARACTERIZATION, AND DATA COMPILATION
Conceptual design for database - 10 working days for agency review
Criteria for evaluating and accepting data sets - 10 working days for agency review
List of reports for historical site characterization - 10 working days for agency review
Summary information of environmental data in the database
GIS-based maps of stations and chemical distributions within the LDW
Electronic copy of the final database and GIS files
Task 3: STUDY DESIGN FOR SCOPING-PHASE RISK ASSESSMENTS
Draft conceptual site model, exposure assessment, and toxicity values for scoping-phase HHRA -
10 working days for agency review
Draft problem formulation for scoping-phase ERA - 20 working days for agency review
Draft effects and exposure assessments for scoping-phase ERA - 10 working days for agency review
Risk-based sediment prioritization methodology - 10 working days for agency review
TASK 4; Risk CHARACTERIZATION AND PRIORITY AREAS IDENTIFICATION
Draft scoping-phase risk assessment report - 30 working days for agency review
TASK 5 IDENTIFICATION OF CANDIDATE AREAS FOR EARLY ACTION
Technical memorandum on selection criteria for identification of candidate areas- 10 working
days for agency review
Technical memorandum on data analysis and identification of candidate areas - 10 working days
for agency review
TASK 6 PHASE | RI REPORT PRODUCTION
Draft and final Phase | Ri report - 45 working days for agency review
TASK 7 IDENTIFICATION OF DATA NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE RI
Draft technical memorandum identifying additional data needs for RI
TAsk 8 PREPARATION OF PHASE Il RI WORK PLANS|
Draft and final Phase Il RI Work Plans describing additional studies to be conducted
PHASE II RI
"
TASK 9 PREPARATION OF PROJECT PLANS FOR CONDUCTING ADDITIONAL STUDIES
Draft and final project plans, as necessary (SAPs, QAPPs, HSPs)
TASK 10 IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL STUDIES
Field report for each study
Data report for each study
[continues overleaf]
7 Anticipated agency review time for planning purposes only
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 15
Table 2, continued
TASK 11 CONDUCT BASELINE AND RESIDUAL RISK ASSESSMENTS
Approach for estimating post early action exposure regime
Conceptual site model and exposure assessment for baseline and residual HHRA
Problem formulation for baseline and residual ERA
Baseline and residual risk assessment reports
Task 12 PHASE Il Rl REPORT PRODUCTION
Draft and final Phase Il Rl report
Task 13 RIVER-WIDE FS WORK PLAN
Draft and final river-wide FS work plan
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 16
REFERENCES
Ecology. 1991. Guidelines and specifications for preparing Quality Assurance Project
Plans. Washington State Department of Ecology, Environmental Investigations
and Laboratory Services Program, Quality Assurance Section, Manchester, WA.
May 1991. 91-16.
Ecology. 1995. Sediment sampling and analysis plan appendix. Washington State
Department of Ecology, Sediment Management Unit, Lacey, WA. Prepared by.
PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA. December 1995.
Environmental Solutions Group. 1999. Waterway Sediment Operable Unit, Harbor Island
Superfund Site. Assessing human health risks from the consumption of seafood:
human health risk assessment report. Prepared for Port of Seattle, Lockheed
Martin, Todd Pacific Shipyards. Environmental Solutions Group, Seattle, WA.
EPA. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002-F. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, D.C.
EPA. 1999. EPA requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans. EPA QA/R-5.
Interim final, November 1999. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality
Staff, Washington, D.C.
King County DNR. 1999. King County combined sewer overflow water quality
assessment for the Duwamish River and Elliott Bay. Prepared by King County
Department of Natural Resources Wastewater Treatment Division and Water and
Weston. 1994. Remedial investigation report, Harbor Island (Part 2 — Sediment). Volume
1. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle,
WA. Roy F. Weston, Seattle, WA.
Weston. 1998. Remedial investigation report, Pacific Sound Resources, Marine
Sediments Unit, Seattle, Washington. Volume 1. Prepared for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA. Roy F. Weston,
Seattle, WA.
Lower Duwamish Waterway RI/FS Statement of Work
December 2000 17
® I ATA Ga MET B
INTERIM GUIDANCE ONORPHAN SHARE COMPENSATION
|
FOR SETTLORS OF REMEDIAL DESIGN/ REMEDIALACTION AND
'NON-TIME-CRITICAL REMOVALS
+ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M Street, SW.
D.C. 20460
. Washington,
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.