COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8g 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting     November 10, 2020 
DATE:     September 2, 2020 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Sandra Kilroy, Director, Maritime Environment & Sustainability 
Arlyn Purcell, Director, Aviation Environment & Sustainability 
Kathy Bahnick, Sr. Mgr., Environmental Programs 
Don Robbins, Sr. Environmental Program Mgr. 
SUBJECT:  2021  2025 Environmental Remediation Liability Program 
Amount of this request:              $33,100,000 

ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to (1) spend environmental 
remediation funds for 2021 in the amount of $33,100,000 and (2) approve a five-year spending
plan for $106,220,000 for the environmental remediation liability program for 2021-2025, of
which an amount estimated not-to-exceed $30,000,000 will be obligated during 2021 to be
spent in future years. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
As a major industrial and commercial landowner, the  Port has significant environmental
cleanup liabilities due to historic contamination of its properties. The $33,100,000 requested
spending  authorization  for  2021  will  allow  continuation  of  ongoing  environmental
investigations, testing, analysis, design, cleanup, and monitoring for active sites and will initiate
similar activities for new sites to be noted in the Commission memorandum.  The spending
authorization and five-year plan will allow the Port to enter into contracts for work spanning
multiple years. Prior to actual spending of these future obligated funds, Commission budget
approval will be needed, likely through future annual Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL) 
authorizations.  The approval of the five-year plan gives greater visibility to our projected
upcoming environmental liability spending. 
Environmental remediation projects define and minimize, to acceptable levels, threats to the
environment caused by the effects of historic industrial activity on properties acquired by the
Port, prior Port operations, and prior tenant operations. Generally, the results of these efforts,
as well as the attendant compliance with regulatory mandates, management of Port liabilities,
and support of the local community, align with the goals and objectives of the Century Agenda,

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 2 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
Long Range Plan, and Maritime, Aviation, Economic Development Division and Storm Water
Utility Business Plans. 
JUSTIFICATION 
Consistent with past practices, the duration of the authorization continues to be an annual
spending authorization.  Since 2011, the authorization requests have also provided a rolling
five-year spending plan to reflect the level of resources expected to be required over the next
five years.  Executing contract obligations for a longer duration minimizes the need to rework
all  contract  amendments  and  service  directives  that  are  aligned  with  the  end-of-year
authorization. It also provides greater visibility of the environmental liability costs. 
The environmental investigation and remediation actions described below are generally
required under federal and/or state law; exceptions are noted. Remedial actions continue to
focus on cost-effective study, analysis, and implementation of cleanup actions; coordination
with capital planning, design, and construction; and negotiation with agencies, tenants, other
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) and insurance companies. 
(1)      Perform the remediation work at the various sites in accordance with the various state
or federal requirements. 
(2)      Manage and perform the work, with project controls and contract systems in place. 
(3)      Identify and consider community values and concerns as part of the various public
participation plans. 
(4)      Perform remediation investigations, designs and implementations that will be carried
out in a manner that considers current and potential uses for the sites. 
(6)      Perform initial investigations and scoping work to identify future actions. 
(5)      Maximize cost recovery. 
Diversity in Contracting 
Procurement for consultants to support this work is covered under separate Commission
actions.  Diversity in contracting will be included in any future procurement. Procurements
started in 2020 have included a minimum of 15% WMBE. 
DETAILS 
Maritime, Economic Development and NWSA Homeport Sites/Projects 
Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site  The Lower Duwamish Waterway (LDW) is a
federal Superfund site under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA).  The Lower Duwamish Waterway Group (LDWG), consisting of the Port,
the City of Seattle, King County and Boeing has completed a Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the LDW under order with the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). In November 2014, after
seeking concurrence from Ecology, EPA issued the Record of Decision for the LDW Site. LDWG

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 3 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
also began a carbon amendment pilot study at the end of 2014, which was completed in 2020.
In 2016, LDWG completed a Fisher Study identifying who is using the river for fishing in order to
aid EPA in development of appropriate institutional controls during and after cleanup.   LDWG
also began performing pre-design activities in 2016, including a baseline monitoring program
and a waterway user study. The pre-design work was completed in 2020. The LDWG parties
signed an order amendment in 2018 to begin cleanup design work of the upper third of the
river. The design work began in mid-2019 and is expected to be complete in 3-4 years. The Port
shares costs with the other LDWG parties on a preliminary basis for the current work being
performed on this site.  In addition to the in-water investigations, the Port is monitoring,
tracking and working on source control aimed at reducing recontamination after the in-water
cleanup is performed.  The Washington State Department of Ecology is the lead agency for
source control work. 
Terminal 117 Sediments, Bank and Uplands  As part of the LDW Superfund Site effort, EPA
identified the Port's Terminal 117 (T-117)in South Park as an Early Action Area (EAA).  This
work was performed by the Port with a cost sharing agreement with the City. EPA issued an
Action Memorandum in 2010 that included the EPA-selected cleanup plan. The Port completed
the T-117 upland soil and sediment cleanup in 2014 and constructed the final stormwater
controls at the site. The Port  continues to perform long-term monitoring and maintenance to
verify the continued performance of the cleanup. 
South Park Marina  As part of the effort to control sources of contamination to the LDW,
Ecology has identified potential source sites that could require early cleanup action. One such
site is South Park Marina, which is adjacent to and north of Terminal 117.   Ecology has
identified the Port as a Potentially Liable Party (PLP) for the cleanup of this site under the state
Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), along with the City of Seattle and South Park Marina. In
March 2019, the three parties signed an Agreed Order to perform a Remedial Investigation. The 
City, South Park Marina and the Port are sharing the costs to perform the investigation on a
preliminary basis and the City is managing the consultant on behalf of the three parties. The
consultant procurement is complete, and the consultant is developing the required workplans.
Terminal 108  Ecology has also identified Terminal 108 as a potential source control site. In
2006 and 2007, at Ecology's request, the Port investigated groundwater at the site  and 
determined that the groundwater is not a source of contaminants to the LDW. However,
additional upland contamination was discovered on the site that generated future investigation
requirements. As part of an Interagency Agreement (IAA) with Ecology, in 2015 the Port
completed a bank stabilization project along 350 feet of shoreline and cleanout of stormwater
conveyance lines. In 2017, Ecology requested that EPA handle oversight of the Terminal 108 site
due to limited resources at Ecology and historic federal government involvement at the site.
The Port signed an order with EPA to prepare a preliminary assessment (PA) and data gaps
analysis for the site, which was completed in early 2019.  With the findings of the PA, EPA has
issued Potential Responsible Party (PRP) notices to seven entities, including the Port, City of
Seattle and King County. Three of the PRPs (Port, City and County) entered into an order with

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 4 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
EPA  to  perform  an  Engineering  Evaluation/Cost  Analysis  (similar  to  a  remedial
investigation/feasibility study) in early 2020 and are in the process of procuring a consultant to
perform the investigation. 
Terminal 115 Plant 1 Site  The Port, along with Boeing, has been named by Ecology as a PLP
under MTCA at the Terminal 115 Plant 1 site, which is the location of the former Boeing Plant 1
facility. Boeing and the Port entered into an Ecology MTCA order to perform a remedial
investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS)  in 2020 and are  in the  process of procuring a
consultant to perform the investigation. 
Terminal 115 North  In 2009, Ecology identified the Port as a PLP under MTCA for Terminal
115 North, located adjacent and to the south of Glacier Bay, one of the high priority sediment
sites within the LDW Superfund Site. The Port entered into an order with Ecology in 2010. Since
then, the fieldwork for the remedial investigation has been completed and the Port expects to
submit a final Remedial Investigation Report to Ecology in the first quarter of 2021 followed by
the feasibility study. 
Terminal 5 Ecology State Cleanup Sites  In the past, as part of the Terminal 5 Southwest
Harbor redevelopment, the Port completed remediation at four sites under consent decrees
with Ecology. Current obligations related to those cleanups include on-going cap inspection and
maintenance of the cap areas. As part of the T-5 Southwest Harbor redevelopment, the Port
purchased the old West Seattle Landfill and installed an environmental cap and a methane
collection system.  These systems require long-term operation and maintenance, inspection,
and reporting, which are continuing.  The Port is currently evaluating the potential of
converting the active methane collection system to a passive system.  During recent T-5
construction activities soil was identified warranting additional investigation to determine if
cleanup activities are required.
Terminal 5 Pacific Sound Resources (PSR) Superfund Site  This site was cleaned up under an
order with EPA as part of the Terminal 5 Southwest Harbor redevelopment project. Ongoing
obligations include continuing to perform required cap inspection and cap maintenance,
product recovery activities, and monitoring EPA activities related to the groundwater and the
off-shore sediments.  The Port completed significant cap maintenance activities consisting of
major pavement repairs and reapplication of pavement seal coat in the summer of 2020.
Lockheed West - As part of the South West Harbor Redevelopment Project, the Port purchased
aquatic and upland property on the north end of the current Terminal 5 from Lockheed Martin.
The upland portion of the property is part of the Terminal 5 Ecology State Cleanup Site
described above. The adjacent submerged portion is a Superfund cleanup site known as the
Lockheed West Seattle Site, and includes submerged land owned by both the Port and the state
Department of Natural Resources. Under its purchase and sale agreement with the Port,
Lockheed is obligated to investigate and cleanup the sediment within the site. On August 28,
2013, EPA issued  the record of decision for the site. Lockheed Martin is the sole PRP

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 5 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
responsible to perform the cleanup work. Cleanup fieldwork started in October 2018 and was
completed in March 2020.  A final Cleanup report is expected by the end of 2020.
Harbor Island Superfund Site Soil and Groundwater Operable Unit  Cleanup of this Superfund
site was performed under a Consent Decree with EPA, and the PRP group consultant is
performing long-term groundwater monitoring under a PRP agreement.  Long-term cap
maintenance and inspections are ongoing as required under EPA's Record of Decision. Terminal
18 is located within this Superfund site.
Harbor Island Superfund Site East Waterway Sediments Operable Unit  In 2006, the Port
signed an order with EPA to conduct a final Supplemental Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (SRI/FS), and a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to
share costs and cooperate in the SRI/FS process. The PRPs have conducted the SRI/FS tasks
identified in the EPA order and subsequent work plans. EPA approved the final RI in January
2014 and the final Feasibility Study in June 2019. EPA is in the process of developing the
Proposed Plan for cleanup, which is expected to be published later this year or early 2021. 
Terminal 30 Cleanup  Terminal 30 is a former Chevron bulk storage site that is being
remediated under MTCA. Since the 1990s, the Port has removed significant amounts of free
product and conducted an extensive groundwater-monitoring program. The required public
comment period for the draft consent decree and cleanup action plan was completed and the
Port signed a final consent decree in early 2017. Implementation (cleanup construction) was
performed in 2019. The Port is currently operating the air sparging system, collecting product
and long-term monitoring of the site groundwater. 
Terminal 10 Lockheed  Lockheed Martin previously performed the upland and sediment
cleanup required at this Superfund site. The Port has a continuing obligation to maintain the
upland cap and the habitat restoration area, manage any contaminated soil and groundwater
encountered or removed during redevelopment or maintenance activities, and protect
Lockheed's groundwater monitoring wells. Under the Terminal 10 Uplands capital project, the
Port completed stormwater drainage and upland cap improvements in early 2012. As a
condition of EPA approval, the Port initiated long-term stormwater solids sampling after the
capital project.
Terminals 103/104/105/107  These sites have been identified by Ecology as having source
control data gaps related to the Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site and will likely
require future investigation and possibly remediation.
Terminal 106 (West and Warehouse parcels)  These sites have been identified by Ecology as
having source control data gaps related to the Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site and 
will likely require future investigation and possibly remediation.


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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 6 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
Natural Resource Damages (NRD) Habitat Restoration  The Port's Superfund liability for LDW
and Harbor Island sediments includes injury to natural resources from contamination. The Port
is negotiating with the Elliott Bay Trustee Council (Trustees) for a settlement of this liability.
The Terminal 117 Habitat Restoration Project includes restoration of 14 acres of critical
estuarine fish and wildlife habitat; (2) establishing an innovative mitigation bank, for use in
habitat credit transactions. Establishing a 14-acre mitigation bank will generate marketable
credits that can be reserved and/or sold to liable parties for purposes of resolving natural
resource damage liabilities. 
Terminal 91 Cleanup  Investigation and cleanup of this site is being administered by Ecology
under a State Dangerous Waste Permit and a MTCA order. The bulk of the uplands cleanup
work was completed in mid-2015 and long-term groundwater monitoring and maintenance has
begun. Investigation and cleanup of discrete units is ongoing as they are discovered. In 2016, 
pursuant to an amendment to the order the Port regraded a small shoal along the east side of
Pier 91 with oversight by Ecology. Ecology also  required the Port to begin a preliminary
investigation into the site sediments, which was completed in 2018. The site is particularly
complicated due to the existence of discarded military munitions (DMM) from the Navy's use of
the site during the World War II era. The Port and Ecology have negotiated a MTCA order to
conduct a remedial investigation of the sediments, which was signed in early 2020.  We are
currently developing workplans to perform the investigation. 
Fishermen's Terminal  The Port has removed some contaminated soils in the uplands, capped
a portion of the uplands, and has performed some investigation of groundwater monitoring at
and near the Fishing Vessel Owners (FVO) tenant site.  Some dredging of contaminated
sediments occurred as part of the Docks 5-10 renewal and replacement and berth dredging
project.
Aviation Sites/Projects 
Aircraft Fuel Farms and Fueling Systems  Five underground aircraft fueling systems were
constructed and operated by individual airlines beginning in the early 1960s. As of January
2007, each of these systems has been decommissioned.  Appropriate environmental cleanup
has been achieved for three of the systems and is in progress for two others. Remediation of an
area impacted by operations of the former United Airlines and Continental Airlines fuel farms is
complete as of 2017. Confirmation monitoring, closure negotiations with the Department of
Ecology, and decommissioning of the remediation system remain. The Port is a member of the
PLP group for this multiple-source site. 
Lora Lake Apartments  In 2009, the Port and Ecology executed a MTCA order that required the
Port to conduct a remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) for the cleanup of the Lora
Lake Apartment Property. The RI/FS was finalized in 2013. A Consent Decree, along with the
Cleanup Action Plan, was finalized in 2015. Remedial design, including extensive field sampling

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 7 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
and analysis, occurred in 2015 and 2016, and Commission authorized a major works contract to
implement the remediation in  September 2016. Remediation of the former Lora Lake
Apartments and the former Lora Lake sites has been completed.  Up to 5 years of postremediation
monitoring work remains. This consists of ensuring cover integrity, and quarterly
groundwater quality monitoring.
Schedule 
Schedules are outlined in the various legal agreements for individual sites. 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do not complete the work. 
Pros: 
(1)   Could save money in the short-term, until the regulator decided to enforce the already
signed agreements. 
Cons: 
(1)   Could  result  in  the  regulators,  including  Department  of  Ecology  or  the  U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, taking enforcement action that could lead to them
implementing the work. In this case, the Port would be liable for three times the costs
incurred by the regulator. 
(2)   The  Port  would  lose  the  opportunity  to  employ  the  flexibility  contained  in  the
controlling regulations, to define and direct the work, and to manage costs. 
(3) Would not comply with Port's obligations to remediate the sites. 
(4)   Would not honor our cost sharing agreements for multiple sites. 
(5)   Would delay work previously agreed to under existing regulatory orders or under
voluntary programs. 
(6)   Would erode trust between the Port, regulators, and the public, and may affect other
projects and other agencies. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Complete the work using Port staff only. Port staff is already heavily involved in
project direction, legal analysis, and project management, and will continue to perform these
services. The nature and extent of the technical and legal work required to complete this work
is substantial and would require a large number of additional staff with additional expertise in a
number of highly technical specialty areas.
Pros: 
(1)   Provides the opportunity to employ what flexibility is contained in the controlling
regulations with respect to current and future uses of Port property under the
agreements. 
(2)   Provides trained workforce with specific technical expertise. 
(3)   Provides consistent reporting and documentation. 
(4)   Allows for technical development of Port staff. 

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


COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 8 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
(5)   Keeps in-house historical knowledge of Port-owned sites. 
Cons: 
(1)   May not be able to meet the work schedules required by the orders using just staff. 
(2)   Servicing peak seasonal demand would require hiring additional full-time employees
resulting in un-utilized labor through the majority of the year. 
(3)   Would require purchase of substantial amount of specialized sampling equipment. 
(4)   Would still require some contracting for tasks staff would not be able to perform such
as laboratory analysis that are required to be certified by the state. 
(5)   Many of the sites are joint sites with multiple partners who may not agree to the Port
performing the work. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3    Complete the work using a combination of Port staff and outside consultants
and contractors that maximizes the ability for the Port to direct cleanup efforts and maximize
the effectiveness of staff. 
Pros: 
(1)   Meets our commitments under existing orders and cost sharing agreements. 
(2)   Provides the opportunity to employ what flexibility is contained in the controlling
regulations with respect to current and future uses of Port property under the
agreements. 
(3)   Provides contracted and Port work force that can increase or decrease service level of
effort as needed. 
(4)   Provides trained workforce with specific technical expertise. 
(5)   Provides consistent reporting and documentation. 
(6)   Allows for technical development of Port staff. 
(7)   Keeps in-house historical knowledge of Port-owned sites. 
Cons: 
(1)   Port fronts some of the upfront costs for legacy contamination on our properties until
future cost recovery occurs. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
The following table summarizes 2021 through 2025 forecasted spending for environmental
remediation projects. Forecasted spending reflects projects described in the Scope of Work.

Five-Year Spending Plan 
$s in Thousands       2021       2022        2023       2024       2025      2021-2025

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                  Page 9 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
Project Spending       $33,100     $19,300     $15,200   $25,800    $14,500     $106,200 
Cash from 3rd        $(3,100)     $(3,500)    $(2,200)    $(500)      $(106)      $(9,406) 
Parties* 
Net Port Share         $30,000     $15,800     $13,000   $25,300    $14,394       $96,794 
*Note: Forecasted amounts do not include estimates of possible recoveries from other parties
or insurance. 
Budget/Authorization Summary of Past and Current Year 
$s in Thousands         Spent           Budget              Recovery 
2015 - 2019           $48,613          $85,230              $(34,467) 
2020 thru 9/30/2020      $5,912          $28,730             $(27,432) 
*Note: The ERL Budget is an annual budget authorization and does not carry over to future
years. Recovery includes money from prior years.  The difference between budgeted and
spending for 2020 is due to COVID-19 delays,  delays in regulatory negotiations or delay in
Agency review of deliverables, carrying the contract for other partners where we pay the
upfront costs and are then reimbursed by our cost sharing partners, and recognition the year is
not complete. Recovery sources include insurance, settlements, grants and PRP cost sharing. 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
Airport  Airport Development Fund 
Maritime, Economic Development, and homeport liabilities on Northwest Seaport Alliance
managed property  Tax Levy 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Environmental cleanup projects have multiple funding sources: (1) Maritime and Economic
Development non-operating projects are funded by the Port's Tax Levy; (2) Maritime and
Economic Development operating projects are funded by the General Fund; (3) Airport projects
are funded by the Airport Development Fund.  In addition, there are supplementary outside
sources of funding, including the following: 
Cash from third parties (payment from cost-sharing or contribution agreements with
other potentially liable parties (PLPs), where the Port functions as a funding conduit for
the other PLPs and the Port holds contracts on behalf of these other PLPs); 
Settlements with other PLPs; 
Insurance recoveries from both the Port's insurers and other PLPs' insurers; and 
Department of Ecology grants. 


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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                Page 10 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND 
The Port has identified a number of contaminated sites on Maritime, Economic Development,
homeport liabilities on Northwest Seaport Alliance (NWSA) and Aviation properties that must
be investigated and remediated in compliance with federal and state environmental laws and
regulations.  In some cases, the Port has been designated by the federal government as a
"Potentially Responsible Party" (PRP), and/or by the state government as a "Potentially Liable
Party" (PLP) for the investigation and cleanup of properties owned by the Port or where the
Port may have contributed to site contamination. 
Although the Port may not bear ultimate liability for the contamination, under federal and state
law, the Port is presumptively liable as the property owner, and it is often practically and
financially beneficial for the Port to take initial responsibility to manage and pay for the
cleanup. 
In many cases, the Port has successfully recovered and/or will seek recovery from other
responsible parties for Port-incurred investigation and cleanup costs. The Port also has been
successful in receiving Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) grant funds to pay part of the cleanup
costs. The Port's goals are to cost-effectivelycomplete this environmentally responsible work
and to maximize work accomplished by or paid for by the parties responsible for the conditions
encountered (or others, such as insurance companies, who represent them).
To manage such environmental expenditures, the Port also encourages, coordinates with, and
oversees the investigation and cleanup of sites by other responsible parties, to assure that legal
requirements are met and that Port liabilities are minimized. Regardless of whether the Port
conducts the investigation and remediation directly or oversees the proper performance of that
work by other responsible parties, the Port provides a valuable public benefit by acting as a
catalyst in expediting appropriate environmental management of these sites. 
Accounting rules require that the Port "book" or establish a liability on its balance sheet for
environmental remediation when the Port's obligation meets specified definitions of certainty
and the liability amount can be reasonably estimated. When an environmental remediation
liability  is  booked,  an  expense  is  also  recorded  in  the  current  period  for  the  future
expenditures. The Port develops its environmental remediation liability forecasts in compliance
with Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 49 "Accounting and
Financial Reporting for Pollution Remediation Obligations." 
Environmental liability expenditures are authorized in one of two ways: 
1.       If the environmental costs are incurred in the course of, or incidental to, a construction
project, the Commission authorization occurs as part of the authorization for the overall
construction project.  Examples of this include asbestos removal, off-site soil disposal
during construction, or upland dredge material disposal. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                Page 11 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
2.       If  the  environmental  cost  is  not  associated  with  a  capital  construction  project  or
maintenance (including asbestos and lead), but is a stand-alone pollution remediation 
project, the expenditure is authorized through one annual action. 
Since 1993, the Commission has approved annual environmental expenditures.  In addition,
Commission  authorization  is  obtained  prior  to  entering  into  legal  commitments  for
investigation or cleanup actions, such as an Agreed Order, Administrative Order on Consent
(AOC), or Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (ASAOC) (collectively
referred to as "Orders"). Under the Orders, the Port is required to pay agency oversight costs.
Further, to the extent required by the General Delegation of Authority, Central Procurement
Office contract actions in support of approved environmental projects may require additional
Commission authorization. 
Since 1993, the Port has booked liabilities to recognize these obligations. While Port
environmental cleanup projects typically span several years, more complex projects have been
active for over 15 years or more. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1) Map of ERL Sites Aviation 
(2) Map of ERL Sites North Properties Maritime, Economic Development 
(3) Map of ERL Sites South Properties Maritime, Economic Development and NWSA 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
November 19, 2019 The Commission approved the  2020 (1) spend environmental 
remediation funds for 2020 in the amount of $28,730,000 and (2) approve a five-year
spending plan for $123,312,000 for the environmental remediation liability program for
2020-2024, of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will be obligated
during 2020 to be spent in future years. 
November 13, 2018   the Commission approved the 2019  (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2018 in the amount of $17,025,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $116,026,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for 2019 to 2023 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will
be obligated during 2019 to be spent in future years. 
November 6, 2017   the Commission approved the 2018  (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2018 in the amount of $19,800,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $88,800,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for 2018 to 2022 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $30,000,000 will
be obligated during 2018 to be spent in future years. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8g                                Page 12 of 12 
Meeting Date: November 10, 2020 
November 8, 2016   the Commission approved the 2017 (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2017 in the amount of $17,700,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $85,800,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for 2017 to 2021 of which an amount estimated not to exceed $33,600,000 will
be obligated during 2017 to be spent in future years. 
December 8, 2015   the Commission approved the 2016 (1) spend environmental
remediation liabilities funds for 2016 in the amount of $13,900,000; (2) approving a fiveyear
spending plan of $71,700,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2016-2020. 
December 1, 2014  the Commission approved the 2015 project-wide authorization of (1) a
five-year spending plan of $36,804,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability
(ERL) Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2015-2019; and (2)
environmental remediation liabilities funds for 2015 in the amount of $36,804,00, of
which (a) $16,804,000 is forecasted to be spent in 2015 and (b) an amount estimated
not to exceed $20,000,000 of the remaining funds approved in the five-year plan will be
obligated during 2015 to be spent in future years. 
December 3, 2013  the Commission approved the project-wide authorization of (1) a fiveyear
spending plan of $106,740,000 for the Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL)
Program for the Seaport, Real Estate, and Aviation Divisions for 2014-2018; and (2)
environmental remediation liabilities funds for 2014 in the amount of $42,180,000, of
which (a) $22,180,000 is forecasted to be spent in 2014 and (b) an amount estimated
not to exceed $20,000,000 of the remaining funds approved in the five-year plan will be
obligated during 2014 to be spent in future years. 








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