Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Misc 2
_ � t DRAFT Engineering Design Report Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility - North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 October 2006 • The RETEG Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, WA 98134-1162 �RETEC (206) 624-9349 Phone (206) 624-2839 Fax www.retec.com October 10, 2006 Ms. Sunny Unhao Becker, P.E. Department of Ecology NWRO 3190 16Uh Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 RE: Transmittal of Draft EDR — Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility North and South Baxter Properties — Renton, WA Dear Ms. Becker: Enclosed please find three (3) copies of the Draft Engineering Design Report (EDR) for the remaining cleanup work pursuant to the Consent Decrees at the Baxter North and South Properties in Renton, Washington. The identified remediation work will be performed as the initial steps of the Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility development planned for the properties. We believe that it may be advantageous to have a technical meeting in the next week or two with you (including others from Ecology as you deem necessary) and WDFW to preview portions of the document and discuss any initial observations that you may have. No attorneys need to attend this meeting. We would also like to discuss coordination with the City of Renton as your work proceeds. We hope that this Draft EDR provides sufficient detail for all reviewers and that we will be able to obtain conditional approval from Ecology to commence site work by mid -November. We appreciate your attendance at previous meetings to discuss the project and your continued coordination with the City of Renton and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) to address substantive requirement and permitting issues. Please feel free to call or e-mail me regarding any comment or questions you have regarding this document. Ms. Sunny Linhao Becker October 10, 2006 Page 2 Sincerely, The RETEC Group, Inc. Grant Hainsworth, P.E. Project Manager CC" REIEC Project No. VULC1-19589 Stewart Reinbold — WDFW (via Ecology) Melissa Rourke — Attorney General Elizabeth Higgins -- City of Renton (via Vulcan) Elaine Wine — Vulcan Lance Lopes — Football NW Chuck Wolfe — CR Wolfe Law Andy Kindig — AC Kindig David Murphy — Crawford Steven Haluschak — MKA Eric Gold — DA Hogan Dan Suver — Bayley Construction: DRAFT Engineering Design Report Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility - North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 October 2006 DRAFT Engineering Design Report Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility - North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 Prepared b Shashi Muttig Oct -En' 4PN" � .•� Y q .t.► Neeraj Reviewed by: 4 Grant Hainswa%Lh, R% project Manager October 2006 F:\PROJECTW\Scabawks\EDR4Seahawks EDR FinalDraft.doe Professional Certification Engineering Design Report Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington RETEC Project Number: VULCl-19589-510 October 2006 This report has been prepared by the staff of The RETEC Group, Inc., under the professional supervision of the person whose seal and signature appear hereon. Grad%Wsworth, P.E. Regis red Professional Engineer Washington State #33192 Table of Contents 1 Introduction................................................................•................................... 1-1 1.1 Site History ........................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Background........................................................................................ 1-3 1.3 Purpose...............................................................................................1-3 1.4 Overview of Cleanup Actions....•....................................................... 1-3 I.4.1 South Baxter Property............................................................ 1-4 1.4.2 North Baxter Property .............................................. ....1-5 2 Regulatory Framework ....... ............................................ ............................... 2-1 2.1 Model Toxics Control Act Design Requirements ............. 2.2 Other Regulatory Requirements........................................................ 2-1 2.2.1 Health and Safety................................................................... 2-1 2.2.2 Stonnwater Management....................................................... 2-1 2.2.3 Shoreline Master Use Permit ................................................. 2-2 2.2.4 Fugitive Dust Emissions........................................................ 2-2 2.2.5 Noise Control......................................................................... 2-2 2.2.6 Grading and Filling................................................................ 2-2 2.2.7 Solid Waste Management...................................................... 2-3 2.2.8 Working in Utility Easement ................................................. 2-3 2.2.9 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement, andCapping....................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.10 King County/METRO Discharge Permit ............................... 2-3 3 Design Criteria............................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Wetland Mitigation............................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Wood Waste Area.............................................................................. 3-1 3.3 Building Foundation Spoils............................................................... 3-1 3.4 Site Development Cut and Fill........................................................... 3-2 3.5 Import Fill............................................................................ ....... 3-2 3.6 Stormwater Management................................................................... 3-3 3.6.1 Synthetic Turf Field and Building Roof Areas ...................... 3-3 3.6.2 Natural Turf Fields................................................................. 3-3 3.6.3 Paved Parking and Driveways ............................................... 3-3 3.7 Environmental Cap............................................................................ 3-4 3.8 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement acid Capping.......................................................................................................... 3-8 4 Scope of Work............................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Construction Drawings...................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Mobilization and Site Preparation..................................................... 4-1 4.3 Spoils from Building Foundation....................................................... 4-2 4.4 Site Development Cut and Fill........................................................... 4-3 4.5 Site Development Grading................................................................. 4-3 4.6 Import Fill Testing............................................................................. 4-3 4.7 Environmental Cap Construction....................................................... 4-4 VULCI-19589-510 i Table of Contents 4.8 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement and Capping.......................................................................................................... 4-5 5 Construction Quality Assurance.................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Quality Assurance Monitoring Structure ........................................... 5-1 5.2 Construction Quality Requirements................................................... 5-1 5.2.1 Health and Safety................................................................... 5-1 5.2.2 Performance Standards.......................................................... 5-2 5.2.3 Record Keeping and Reporting .............................................. 5-4 6 Long -Term Monitoring... ............................................ .................................. 6-1 6.1 Compliance Groundwater Monitoring ............................................... 6-1 6.2 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Form ............................................. 6-2 6.2.1 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Plan ................. ... ........... 6-2 6.2.2 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Requirements .................... 6-2 6.2.3 Cap Maintenance................................................................... 6-3 6.2.4 Asphalt Pavement, Artificial Turf Field, and Concrete Stab Cap Maintenance....................................................................... 6-4 6.2.5 Natural Turf Field, Membrane Cap and Landscaping Cap Maintenance....................................................................................... 6-5 6.2.6 Documentation and Reporting ............................................... 6-5 6.2.7 Inspection and Maintenance Summary .................................. 6-5 6.3 Soil Management Plan....................................................................... 6-6 7 References......................................................................................................7-1 VULCI-19589-51 D ;} List of Tables Table 5-1 Performance Standards for Remedial Activities during Redevelopment........................................................................................ 5-6 Table 6-1 Cap Conditions--... ..... __ ........................ ................... .............................. 6-7 Table 6-2 Summary of Inspection and Maintenance Requirements ........................ 6-8 List of Figures Figure1-1 Site Map................................................................................................ 1-6 Figure 2-1 Utility Location Map.............................................................................. 2-4 Figure 3-1 Wood Waste Area Test Pit Location .................................................... 3-9 Figure3-2 Cap Location ..................... ......... ............................ I............................ 3-10 Figure 3-3 Field Cap Section................................................................................ 3-11 Figure 3-4 Asphalt Pavement Cap Section........................................................... 3-12 Figure 3-5 Concrete Slab Cap Section.................................................................. 3-13 Figure 3-6 Landscape Cap Section....................................................................... 3-14 Figure 3-7 Membrane Cap Section........................................................................ 3-15 Figure 4-1 EDR and Construction Schedule.......................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-2 Sections and Details.............................................................................. 4-7 Figure 4-3 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan ........................... 4-8 Figure 4-4 Site Demolition Plan............................................................................. 4-9 Figure 4-5 Wells to be Decommissioned.............................................................. 4-10 Figure 4-6 Building Foundation Location............................................................ 4-11 Figure 4-7 Site Cut and Fill Contours................................................................... 4-12 Figure 4-8 Early Grading Plan ............................. Figure 4-9 Utility Trench Construction Details.................... ................................ 4-14 Figure 4-10 Gypsy Subbasin Storm Drain Relocation Plan ................................... 4-15 Figure 4-11 Gypsy Subbasin Storm Drain Relocation Profile ............................... 4-16 Figure 5-1 Quality Control Organization Chart .................................................... 5-10 Figure6-1 I&M Plan Area...................................................................................... 6-9 Figure 6-2 Sample Cap Inspection Log................................................................ 6-10 VULC1-19589-510 iii List of Appendices Appendix A Consent Decrees Appendix B Partial Certificate of Completion Appendix C Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Appendix D City of Renton Substantive Requirement Letter Appendix E Wetland Documents Appendix F Stormwater Technical Information Appendix G Integrated Pesticide Management Plan Appendix H Gypsy Hydraulic Project Approval Submittal Appendix I City of Renton Early Site Package Drawings Appendix J Soil Management Plan VULCI-19589-510 iv I Introduction This document presents the Engineering Design Report (EDR) for the J_H. Baxter Company (Baxter) North Property, and an Addendum to the EDR for the Baxter South Property ("Sites') in Renton, Washington. The EDR was prepared by The RETEC Group, Inc. for Football Northwest LLC (Football NW). The properties are currently owned by Port Quendall Company (PQC). The EDR is one in a series of documents required under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA; RCW 70.1051); WAC 173-340) cleanup process. Several documents required under MTCA have already been completed during this cleanup process: the Draft Remedial Investigation (RI; Woodward - Clyde, 1990) and the Feasibility Stud[ies/ (FS) (ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation [ThermoRetec], 2000a and ThermoRetec, 2000c) presented the results of investigations of the nature and extent of contamination at the sites. The FS (ThermoRetec, 2000a and ThermoRetec, 2000c) further evaluated the extent of impacts and the feasibility of remedial alternatives for the sites. The Cleanup Action Rlan(s/ (CAP) (ThermoRetec, 2000b and ThermoRetec, 2000c) describes the cleanup action for the sites. The Engineering Design Report (RETEC, 2002) was completed for the South Baxter Property to document the engineering concepts and design criteria used for the design of the cleanup action and associated mitigation and enhancement in the South Baxter CAP (ThermoRetec, 2000b). The Construction Completion Report (RETEC, 2005) documented completion of previous remedial actions for the South Baxter Property. The North and South Baxter Properties were determined to be separate facilities based on historical operations, previous studies, and previous correspondence and agreements between J. H. Baxter and Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), which defined a "Line of Demarcation" between the two Properties. The line of Demarcation was originally defined in the Renton -Baxter Remediation Security Interest Agreement dated May G, 1992 and subsequent Ecology correspondence. In 2000, the City of Renton approved a lot line adjustment application to formally segregate the North and South Baxter Properties. Ecology and PQC negotiated separate Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees (CD) (Appendix A) for the North Baxter Property and South Baxter Property, which were entered in Kiang County Superior Court on May 18, 2000- The CDs require implementation of a cleanup action, restrictive covenants, and associated restoration and enhancement at each site. Form Restrictive Covenants are also included in Appendix A. Restrictive Covenants for the sites will be executed once cleanup actions have been completed. The purpose of the Restrictive Covenants is to ensure that any activities that occur at the sites following implementation of the cleanup action, such as excavation beneath the environmental cap to install a new utility line, will occur in a VULCI-19589-510 1-1 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington manner that is protective of human health and the environment, will include appropriate management of contaminated soil, and will replace the environmental cap. In 2002 and 2004, PQC completed remediation work on the South Baxter Property to satisfy capital portions of the South Baxter CD_ The capital portions that were completed include source remediation (DNAPL removal, soil excavation and disposal, and in situ stabilization) and wetland mitigation. This remediation work is documented in the Ecology -approved Construction Completion Report (RETEC, 2005). A Partial Certificate of Completion for the Capital Portion of work completed at the site was issued by Ecology on April 10, 2006 (Appendix B). The OAPs for the South Baxter Property and North Baxter Property also require placement of an environmental cap over most of the site area and associated institutional controls. As discussed in the initial South Baxter Property EDR (RETEC, 2002), the environmental cap and institutional controls were to be implemented at a later date once future redevelopment plans for at the sites were finalized. As part of development activities for the sites, Football NW will be redeveloping the North and South Baxter properties for use as the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training facility located in Renton, Washington. As a result, the remaining cleanup activities (capping and institutional controls) are required to be addressed in accordance with the Consent Decrees and consistent with the April 10, 2006 Partial Certificate of Completion. This EDR addresses these remaining cleanup activities for this site. 1.1 Site History The PQC currently owns the North and South Baxter properties (Figure I A), The North Baxter Property, known as the North J. H. Baxter Property/Renton ("North Baxter Property"), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton, in King County, Washington. The North Baxter Property occupies approximately 12 acres, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The North Baxter Property is relatively flat and is situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline. The Misty Cove Condominiums are located directly to the north of the Property. The South Baxter Property is located directly to the south of the North Baxter Property. The South Baxter Property occupies approximately 7 acres. The South Baxter Property is relatively flat and is bound by the mitigation wetland and Lake Washington to the west. The Quendall Terminals Property is located directly to the south of the Property. Further to the south is the property VULCI-19589-510 1-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington currently occupied by Barbee Mill. Interstate 405 is located approximately 500 feet to the east. An existing BNSF Railway Company railroad line is still partially active serving a tourist dinner train and freight deliveries on a periodic basis. The maximum number of trips per day is four or less. Direct access to the sites is currently provided via two at grade crossings. 1.2 Background The Baxter properties were essentially undeveloped until the mid-1950s, when a wood treating facility was constructed on site. All property histories indicate that both creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) treating solutions were used at the site until wood -treating operations ceased in 1981. Creosote was used to treat railroad ties and pilings, and PCP solutions were used to treat utility poles. Wood was treated and stored on the Baxter South Property and was distributed to purchasers by rail or truck. Historically, the North Baxter Property was used as a storage facility for untreated wood and a de -barker was operated. Former drip tracks were reportedly present on the North Property. Based upon historical usage of chemicals at the sites as well as analytical data available from site investigation activities described in the FS, the compounds of concern at the Baxter South Property are PCP and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These compounds are known to exist in soil at the North Baxter Property and in both soil and groundwater at the South Baxter Property. The most significant soil, sediment, and groundwater impacts were addressed during cleanup actions on the South Baxter Property in 2002 and 2004. 1.3 Purpose The purpose of this EDR is to document the engineering concepts and design criteria used for the design of the environmental cap that will complete environmental cleanup actions specified in the South Baxter Property CAP (ThermoRetec, 2000b) and North Baxter Property CAP (ThermoRetec, 2000c) and referenced in the Partial Certificate of Completion dated April 10, 2006. This EDR satisfies the requirements of WAC 173-340-400 (a) through (c) and has been prepared under the direct supervision of a registered Professional Engineer. 1.4 Overview of Cleanup Actions This section provides an overview of the approved cleanup action remedies for the South Baxter Property and North Baxter Property. VULCI-19589-510 1-3 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 1.4.1 South Baxter Property The cleanup action, as described in the South Baxter CAP (ThermoRetec, 2000b) is comprised of the following activities: 1) Removal and off -site disposal of impacted sediment above the action level of 100 mg/kg total PAH from Baxter Cove 2) Re-creation of wetlands adjacent to Lake Washington and buffer restoration and enhancement; impact avoidance to species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act through hydraulic isolation of the project work and the timing of in -water work 3) Dense non -aqueous phase liquid removal (DNAPL) from source monitoring well BAX-14 4) Excavation of light non -aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) impacted soil in the tank farm area based on an action level of 1,000 mg/kg total PAH and off -site disposal of soil to remove long-term source of groundwater impacts 5) Excavation and off -site disposal of K001 listed hazardous waste from Baxter Lagoon area 6) In situ stabilization (ISS) of impacted soil near the Butt Tank and Baxter Lagoon area based on an action level of 1,000 mg/kg total PAH to remove long term source of groundwater impacts 7) Capping of residual soil impacts during development to prevent direct contact by humans and engineering controls, including cap inspection and maintenance program, to ensure cap integrity into the future; monitoring of groundwater and implementation of a compliance monitoring program to ensure that groundwater discharging to Lake Washington is protective S) Implementation of institutional controls to prevent future groundwater extraction and to ensure that any future breaching of the environmental cap is performed in accordance with the Restrictive Covenant and the Soil Management Plan. Components 1 thru 6 have been completed and described in detail in the Ecology -approved Construction Completion Report (RETEC, 2005) and approved by the April 10, 2006 Partial Certificate of Completion. Components 7 and 8 will be addressed in Sections 3 and 4 of this report. VULCI-19589-51 Q 14 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 1,4.2 North Baxter Property The cleanup action, as described in the North Baxter CAP (ThermoRetec, 2000c) is comprised of the following activities: 1) Capping of residual soil impacts during development to prevent direct contact by humans and habitat 2) Provide engineering controls, including cap inspection and maintenance program, to ensure cap integrity into the future 3) Implementation of institutional controls to prevent future groundwater extraction and to ensure that any future breaching of the environmental cap is performed in accordance with the Restrictive Covenant. As part of the North Baxter Property cleanup action, fill of an approximately 125-foot section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and realignment of the culvert under the site will occur. Fill of the existing Gypsy Subbasin Drainage ditch will be completed pursuant to substantive provisions of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Hydraulic Code, WAC 220-110- 030 and consistent with the Lakes and Streams Report, Appendix H. The work will be completed under the administration of Ecology pursuant to the substantive preemption provisions of MTCA, RCW 70.105D.090(1), and Section XIX of the North Baxter Consent Decree. Each component of the cleanup action is described in detail in Sections 3 and 4 of this report. VULCI-19589-510 1-5 2 Regulatory Framework This section provides a discussion of Ecology and other regulatory requirements that have been applied to this remedial design. 2.1 Model Toxics Control Act Design Requirements In accordance with the FS and CAP, MTCA Method B cleanup levels are applicable to the Sites. These criteria define the extent of remediation required to prevent public exposure to impacted areas of the sites. Soil cleanup levels are based on human exposure via direct contact. Capping the entire sites with soil or other development features will satisfy these cleanup criteria. The groundwater cleanup level is based on protection of surface water. Cleanup standards for the site groundwater are MTCA Method B surface water levels with the point of compliance at the shoreline. The selected remedy, including previous cleanup actions, focused on actions that included extensive source removal and stabilization to eliminate the need for groundwater remedial actions for the dissolved phase of the groundwater plume. 2.2 Other Regulatory Requirements 2.2.1 Health and Safety Washington Administrative Code (WAC 292-188) specifies Safety Standards for Construction. This code specifies health and safety standards for responding to releases or substantial threats of releases of hazardous substances at hazardous waste sites. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) specifies health and safety requirements for hazardous waste sites (29 CFR 1910.120). Details regarding the use of 40- hour trained contractor personnel and requirements for the contractor's health and safety plan are provided in Section 5. 2.2.2 Stormwater Management Because the area to be disturbed during remedial activities exceeds one acre, remedial action and construction activities must adhere to substantive requirements of the General Permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activities. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been prepared (Appendix C) that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) for managing stormwater during remedial activities. These BMPs are outlined in the King County (2005) Surface Water Design Manual. Due to the presence of contaminated surface soil throughout most of the sites, stormwater collected during constructionn activities from areas of the sites subject to environmental capping will be discharged to the sanitary sewer. Construction VULCI-19589-510 2-1 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington activity will occur in the shoreline area, outside of the area requiring environmental capping. This activity will include placement of stormwater discharges and riparian planting. BMPs for the shoreline area are addressed in the SWPPP. 2.2.3 Shoreline Master Use Permit Remedial actions and construction activities within shoreline jurisdictional areas must adhere to substantive requirements of the Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58, and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit regulations (WAC 173-14) as applied through RMC 4-3-090; however, a permit is not required due to MTCA's procedural preemption. This preemption applies to cleanup activities only and a separate Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required for development activities, and will be administered by the City of Renton. Erosion and sedimentation controls are addressed in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, in accordance with BMPs for managing stormwater during remedial activities. Appendix D includes a letter from the City of Renton outlining the substantive requirements associated with shoreline regulations which will apply to cleanup activities. 2.2.4 Fugitive Dust Emissions The Puget Sound. Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) provides air emissions criteria for the site. Section 9.15 of Regulation I discusses the requirements regarding visible emissions of fugitive dust. Measures will be provided to suppress any fugitive dust generated during site grading that exceeds Regulation I criteria. 2.2.5 Noise Control The Washington Noise Control Act (RCW 70.107; WAC 173-60) and the Renton Municipal Code (RMC, Title 4-4-060) provides maximum permissible decibel (dB) levels for all site activities, construction equipment, and portable powered equipment in temporary locations. Work will most likely be conducted during daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.), such that excessive noise will not be generated. 2.2.6 Grading and Filling The Renton Municipal Code (RMC, Title 4-4-060) provides requirements for grading and filling activities. Site grading includes unsuitable geotechnical material removal and excavation of utility trenches and site filling includes backfilling low areas at the site to specified elevations and preloading existing soil surface for geotechnical purposes. A grading permit is not required because of MTCA's procedural preemption; however, all grading and filling activities will comply with the requirements in the RMC. Appendix D includes a letter from the City of Renton outlining the substantive requirements associated with grading. VULCI-19589-51 D 2-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 2.2.7 Solid Waste Management Requirements for solid waste management are applicable to the non- hazardous waste generated during remedial activities that is to be disposed of off site. WAC 173-304 details the requirements that will be followed for the proper handling of all solid waste materials. 2.2.8 Working in Utility Easement Representatives from both King County/Metro and Puget Sound Energy shall be notified of work in the area and may be on site during activities. Figure 2-1 shows the location of all utility lines on the property. Design of the capping remedy will be finalized after consulting with the utilities. 2.2.9 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement, and Capping Substantive provisions of a Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA Permit) are required for fill of an approximately 125-foot section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and realignment of the culvert under the site. The project is exempt from procedural requirements of the HPA permit from WDFW. The work will be completed under the administration of Ecology. WDFW will review the package to ensure the substantive requirements are satisfied. The HPA submittal package, including the Lakes and Streams Report, is provided in Appendix H. 2.2.10 King County/METRO Discharge Permit The rules and regulations for the disposal of industrial waste into the metropolitan sewerage system are established in Section 28.84.060 of the King County Code. As the water generated during construction activities is to be disposed of into the public sewer, a written discharge authorization will be obtained. The conditions and discharge standards detailed in the authorization will be followed. The permit will be obtained from King County Industrial Waste Program prior to initiating site activities. A copy of the completed Discharge Authorization application is provided in Appendix C. VULCI-19559-510 2-3 N37'46 4fi _ 10 . o $ 8 LgIr 1 IWA SN/NG T oN L—, GENII UGH POLE HYDRANT/WATER VALVE a UTILITY/ELEC POLE - - ELECTRICAL GAS - - SANITARY SEWER STORM SEWER I TELEPHONE WATER — - - — - - — PROPERTY LINE l � 1 GRAVEL RCAO s 1 BAX'.E7 PARCEL SWTH - �/- BAR1-ER PARCEL NORTH 0. i I I. I I N36'56'1VE l 1aai.51' I K � SOURCE: SITE DRAWINGS FROM MKA & C,RAWFORD - - 50 0 100 RETEC 1"-10p' -- -- -- -- SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND PRACTICE FACILITY VULC1-195fl9-570 10/5/06 DR- E.M./SEA R �n � N \ m = o * Yam• �, c J fTl s z 'y 5' N 0 z 0 r r I X m a N A � � a TO�M� L K"N1O1O 133.79' UTILITY LOCATION MAP 3 Design Criteria This section presents the design criteria, or basis of design, for the remedial action requirements as presented in the CD. Design criteria for each component of the remedy are described in the following sections. 3.1 Wetland Mitigation Based on the J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI, 2000), no remediation impacts to shoreline or wetland resources would occur on the North Baxter Property. Consequently, the proposed capping of the North Baxter property will not require wetland mitigation. Wetland restoration and enhancement of the buffer at the Lake Washington shoreline located on the South Baxter property was completed in 2002 as described in the Construction Completion Report (RETEC,, 2005)_ There is a 50-foot averaged shoreline buffer zone surrounding the restored wetland that is to be protected from redevelopment activities. Encroachment of this buffer zone is anticipated during redevelopment activities at the site but only to the extent that the required minimum buffer width of 40 feet will be adhered. Any disturbance to this buffer zone and wetland areas during construction activities will require wetland mitigation as specified in the CD. Football NW is proposing to increase the wetland buffer width in other areas to maintain a 50- foot averaged buffer. Improvements to the wetland buffer will be designed in accordance with the J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI, 2000). Documents related to the wetland are presented in Appendix E. 3.2 Wood Waste Area Previous geotechnical evaluations characterized conditions on the North Baxter property. More information about the investigation is contained in the Geotechnical Report (Shannon and Wilson, 2006). Results from the geotechnical investigation indicate the presence of decomposed wood chips to be present at two locations on the North Baxter property (Figure 3-1). The wood waste will be temporarily stockpiled at the site (North Baxter Property) upon removal during site construction activities. Samples will be collected from the wood waste stockpile to characterize the material. Based on sampling results, the wood waste material will be either used as on -site fill material (capped if necessary) as deemed necessary by the onsite geotechnical engineer or transported off site to an approved recycling or disposal facility. 3.3 Building Foundation Spoils The proposed site development work includes construction of an indoor practice facility and a three-story office building. A foundation permit from the City of Renton is required to complete this work. Based on the VULCI-19589-510 3-1 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility —North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Geotechnical Report (Shannon & Wilson, 2006) completed for the site, drilled shaft foundations are recommended for supporting the planned buildings - Drilled shaft foundations are cylindrical, cast -in -place concrete shafts installed by large -diameter auger drilling equipment. Spoils resulting from drilling activities during installation of the drilled shaft foundation will be managed as part of the environmental cleanup portion of this project. The soil will be temporarily stockpiled at the site (North Baxter Property) upon removal during site construction activities. Samples will be collected from the soil stockpile to characterize the material. Based on sampling results, the soil will be either used as on -site fill material (capped if necessary) or transported off site to an approved recycling or disposal facility. 3.4 Site Development Gut and Fill The environmental cap will be constructed utilizing suitable imported fill material. Existing site soil will be graded prior to placing the environmental cap. Soil will be cut from certain areas of the site that exceed the final design cap elevation and reused on other portions of the site to fill in low lying areas. Specifically, soil from cut areas will be excavated, amended with Portland cement and used to fill in the natural turf field area. Based on the Geotechnical Report (Shannon and Wilson, 2006), 4 to 6 percent cement (based on dry weight of soil) is recommended as an additive per cubic yard of soil. Imported fill material may also be used as described in the following section. Any soil that is cut and reused on site, will be placed under a suitable environmental cap." 3.5 Import Fill Clean soil used for the environmental cap as required by the CD shall be imported from a commercial gravel pit or from a generic construction site (location to be determined at a later date). For import fill that originates at a generic construction site, fill material will be tested for some or all of the following constituents: priority pollutant metals (Method 6020), total petroleum hydrocarbons (NWTPH-HCID Ecology Method), total petroleum hydrocarbons gasoline range (Ecology Method NWTPH-D), total petroleum hydrocarbons diesel and heavy oil range (Ecology Method NWTPH-Dx), volatile organic compounds by USEPA Method 8260, BTEX by USEPA Method 8021, PCBs by USEPA Method 8080, and PAHs by USEPA Method 8270 SIM. These chemical tests will be used to verify that no hazardous substances are present in the soil that exceed MTCA Method A or MTCA Method B cleanup levels for unrestricted site use as specified in WAC 173-340-200. VULCI-19589-510 3-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility -- North and Routh Baxter Properties Renton, Washington For fill material that originates at a commercial gravel pit, written certification including chemical test results will be obtained from the material supplier to ensure that the import material meets the requirements. 3.6 Stormwater Management Stormwater management during construction activities at the site is specified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan provided as Appendix C. The technical approach for managing stormwater at the site after completion of Site construction activities is provided in the following sections. The stormwater management approach is based on King County's (2005) Surface Water Design Manual. Stormwater generated at the site will be subject to enhanced water quality treatment and discharged to Lake Washington. Discharge will occur via five new drainage system outlets. The new pipe outlets will be constructed as rock -lined channels to provide energy dissipation and protect against erosion and will release water above the ordinary high-water mark of Lake Washington. Native willow stakes will be inserted into the energy dissipation areas to re -vegetate. Stormwater technical information is provided as Appendix F. 3.6.1 Synthetic Turf Field and Building Roof Areas Stormwater runoff from the synthetic turf field and building roofs will be drained to Lake Washington as direct discharge. Precipitation that lands on the field will drain vertically through sand and gravel and will discharge to Lake Washington via the storm drain system. 3.6.2 Natural Turf Fields Precipitation that lands on the field will drain vertically through the sand layer that functions as a sand filter for enhanced stormwater treatment and will discharge to Lake Washington via the storm drain system. An Integrated Pest Management Plan has been prepared (Appendix G) to address pesticide and turf management practices as it relates to protection of stormwater. 3.6.3 Paved Parking and Driveways Stormwater runoff from paved parking and driveway areas will be collected and directed to large sand filter areas covered with either grass or an additional layer of sand. The grass cover or the additional sand layer will intercept fines and provide pretreatment. Low Impact Development elements such as porous pavers or Grasspave"' may be utilized in small areas (fire lanes) to reduce stormwater peak flows from non -treatment surfaces to the sand filter areas. Stormwater collected in the large sand filters will be discharged to Lake Washington via the storm drain system. VULCI-19589-510 3-3 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and .South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 3.7 Environmental Cap As discussed in Section 1, the North and South Baxter properties require an environmental cap over most of the sites. Construction of a final cap can be summarized into five different types of caps. The five types of caps to be constructed are: • Field Cap: This cap consists of the three outdoor natural turf practice fields and one outdoor and one indoor artificial turf practice fields. • Concrete Slab Cap: This cap consists of the concrete structural slab of the office building, other on -grade, concrete slabs, and concrete sidewalks • Asphalt Pavement Cap: This cap consists of areas that include pedestrian access, surface parking and roadways. * Landscape Cap: This cap consists of areas used for planting beds, sand filters, bioretention swales and hardscape areas. • Membrane Cap: This cap consists of utility easement area and other areas along the eastern edge of the property boundary. Cap Iocation areas discussed above are shown on Figure 3-2. Utility trench construction related to installation of all the utilities (stormwater, sanitary, gas, and electric) at the sites will be considered as part of the environmental capping portion of this project administered by Ecology. Utility trench construction and backfill will be completed in conjunction with environmental cap for the site. Figures 3-3 through 3-7 show the typical environmental cap cross sections that will be constructed. A discussion of these various cap sections is provided below. Field Cap For the Natural Turf Field Section: • The 3-foot-thick clean soil cap consists of three layers. The base course consists of 14 inches of clean import soil overlain by a 4- inch-thick gravel capillary break layer and 18 inches of clean sand. • The soil layer will be a free -draining sandy Ioam that supports the vegetation layer. The 18-inch-thick sand layer will meet the requirements of the large sand filter in King County's (2005) V ULCI-19589-510 34 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Surface Water Design Manual. The free -draining nature of the soil and vegetation will prevent surface erosion. • The cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain an indicator fabric layer at the interface between cement -treated on -site soil and imported cover soil. The identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the new soil cover. For the Artificial Turf Field Section: • The cap will consist of five layers. This section is typical for the outdoor artificial turf field. The base course will be at least 12 inches thick and will consist of imported clean crushed rock overlain by at least 1.5 inches of porous asphalt. A fiber - punched polyurethane coated woven fabric will be installed over the porous asphalt pavement_ An energy absorbing layer consisting of granular rubber and binder (approximately 5/8-inch thick) will be installed over the woven fabric. The top layer will consist of 1.5-inch to 1.75-inch thick granular rubber and washed sand mix overlain by synthetic turf material. • For the indoor artificial turf field, the cap consists of four layers. The subbase course will be at least 4 inches thick and will consist of crushed rock liner bedding material. A 30-mil geomembrane liner will be placed over the subbase course with a 1 percent slope for drainage. The base course, consisting of at least 12 inches imported clean crushed rock, will be placed over the geomembrane liner. A fiber -punched polyurethane coated woven fabric will be installed over the base course. The top layer will consist of 1.5-inch to 1.75-inch thick granular rubber and washed sand mix overlain by synthetic turf material. Alternatively, the indoor artificial turf field may be constructed similar to the outdoor artificial turf field as specified above. • The cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain an indicator fabric at the interface between native soil and imported crushed rock base. The identifier layer will be placed over the existing surficial soil before placement of the crushed rock base. The identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the crushed rock base. VULCI-19589-51 D 3-5 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, ,Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Concrete Slab Cap There are three different types of concrete slab caps and each will consist of two layers. • For the structural concrete slab section, the base course will be at least 4 inches thick with a vapor barrier (6 mil plastic) and will consist of imported clean crushed rock overlain by at least 8 inches of structural concrete. • For the concrete slab section, the base course will be at least 4 inches thick consisting of clean import crushed rock overlain by at least 6 inches of concrete. • For the sidewalk section, the base course will be at least 4 inches thick consisting of clean import crushed rock overlain by at least 4 inches of concrete. The concrete section cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain an indicator fabric layer at the interface between native soil and imported crushed rock base. The identifier layer will be placed over the existing surficial soil before placement of the crushed rock base. The identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the crushed rock base. Asphalt Pavement Cap There are three different types of asphalt pavement caps and each will consist of three layers. • For the light duty asphalt pavement section, the sub -base course will be at least 4 inches thick and will consist of imported clean crushed rock overlain by at least 4 inches of clean import crushed rock base course and at least 2.5 inches of CIass B asphalt pavement. • For the heavy duty asphalt pavement section, the sub -base course will be at least 4 inches thick and will consist of imported clean crushed rock overlain by at least 6 inches of clean import crushed rock base course and at least 4.5 inches of Class B or porous asphalt pavement. For the pedestrian access pavement section, the sub -base course will be at least 4 inches thick and will consist of imported clean crushed rock overlain by at least 4 inches of clean import crushed rock base course and at least I.5 inches of Class B asphalt pavement. VULCI-19589-510 3-6 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington The asphalt pavement cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain an indicator fabric layer at the interface between native soil and imported crushed rock base. The identifier layer will be placed over the existing surficial soil before placement of the crushed rock base. The identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the crashed rock base. Landscape Cap There are four different types of landscape areas. 0 The general landscape cap consists of two layers. The base course consists of imported clean soil of varied thickness overlain by 4 inches of clean import topsoil. The cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain visual indicator layer at the interface between native soil and imported soil. The 30 mil geomembrane may be replaced with soil indicator fabric if the thickness of the import soil fill and topsoil is at least 36 inches. • For landscape areas that involve planting of trees, the cap section will contain at least 36 inches of clean import soil underlain by an open aperture geogrid material to facilitate structural root development. The geogrid material will also serve as an indicator layer. a The Grasspave"m section consists of three layers. The base course consists of clean import fill at least 20 inches thick overlain by compacted sandy gravel base at least 12 inches thick overlain by GrasspaveTm rings filled with clears import concrete sand overlain by grass. Clean fill soil will be placed beneath the base course. The cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain a soil indicator fabric at the interface between native soil and imported fill. Alternatively, a gavel cap may be built as a substitute for the GrasspaveTM section. The base course for the gravel cap consists of clean import fill at least 20 inches thick overlain by compacted gravel base at least 16 inches thick. The gravel cap will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will contain a soil indicator fabric at the interface between native soil and imported fill. • The sand filter section consists of two layers. The base course consists of clean import soil at least 18 inches thick overlain by clean import sand at least 18 inches thick. The cap will contain VULC1-19589-510 3-7 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington an indicator fabric layer at the interface between native soil and imported soil. The side slope of the sand filter will be 3H to IV. Membrane Cap For the membrane section, the cap will consist of 12 inches of clean import soil underlain by a barrier (30 mil geomembrane) at the interface between native soil and import soil. The barrier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the import soil cap. 3.8 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement and Capping An approximately 125-foot open existing stormwater ditch regulated as a Class 2 stream by Renton is located toward the northeast corner of the site will be backfilled as part of the environmental cap. The remainder of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is in a culvert under the site. The Gypsy Subbasin drainage enters the property from the east via a 24-inch culvert that extends 46 feet under a former dirt haul road from a drainage ditch running parallel to the west side of the railroad tracks. The culvert opens to a drainage ditch with highly confined, steep walls that extends approximately 125 feet to the north. At the north end of this ditch, a 24-inch culvert extends 490 feet under the majority of the North Baxter property into Lake Washington. As part of environmental cap construction, the 125-foot drainage ditch will be filled and a larger diameter stormwater pipeline will be installed to reroute the existing culvert location that extends to Lake Washington. From the eastern property boundary, a 54-inch culvert will connect to a 60-inch culvert and the 60-inch culvert will connect to a 72-inch culvert and the 72-inch culvert will connect to the existing 24-inch culvert from the railroad drainage ditch and reconnect to the original 490-foot 24-inch culvert just before it empties into Lake Washington. Any potential fish passage to Lake Washington from the drainage ditch is currently inhibited due to size of the pipeline and elevation. Installing a larger diameter stormwater pipeline helps increase the potential for fish passage and reduces potential for silting in the pipeline. Details of the current Gypsy Hydraulic Project Approval submittal, which includes a Stream and Lake Study, are included as Appendix H. Improvements to the stormwater drainage system may occur in the future. The City of Renton is considering a capital improvement involving construction of a new outfall along the shoreline of Lake Washington as part of a basin -wide undertaking separate from the Seahawks project. No further details are available at this time. VULCI-19589-510 3-8 fr/c' H'; ly 9',�n�haMks V•CC;;'re ft7nliiy 10051 sompGng I Co ti r , Jsc,-rml5,^Ch rr. GC.! 55, //✓'JL - �. i-%nn Z _ A , i I F Ili. !1 r' ,r l GYPSY I SUBBASIN DRAINAGE } I'.' i� T\ NORTH } BAXTER 41 4 11 I V C \ I I J - ! i lal_ TOPERTY LINE i ROCK SEAWALL DINARY NIGH WATER MARK Q CD CD N 58'13'14" W } Ld '- SOUTH BAXTER BUFFER i 1r-�-50' t v PSE �, 1 A I LEGEND — — PROPERTY BOUNDARY —'� CHAIN LINK FENCE - � ESTIMATED WOOD —WASTE LOCATION TEST PIT LOCATIONS TEST PIT LOCATION -- WOOD WASTF IDENTIFIED A.VRETEC SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND PRACTICE FACILITY VULAN-16756-100 N� 60 Q 120 1'=120' WOOD WASTE AREA TEST PIT LOCATION DRWN: E.M. FIGURE 3-1 z nF. F1 i '.9599', 19.': 9X51 `.riwq ;'�yo,�i.' 1iG7,1J�; .S-S Uses erracs.'�a!` Y:�lled' Ciro !lb. ' JV06 - 11,'J/om Xrer's 'RErEc 1.5" TO 1.75" NDDOR ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD SECTION NOT TO SCALE SYNTHETIC TURF GRANULAR RUBBER AND WASHED SAND MIX GRANULAR RUBBER AND BINDER FIBER —PUNCHED POLYURETHANE COATED WOVEN FABRIC ROOTZONE SAND BASE SAND CAPILLARY BREAK (GRAVEL) IMPORTED FILL SOIL, OR PERFORATED DRAIN PIPES IN PEA GRAVEL LOCATED WITHIN THIS LAYER SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC CEMENT TREATED ON SITE SOIL (WITH GECGRID OR SIMILAR, AS SPECIFIED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. THICKNESS VARIES) NATURAL TURF FIELD SECTION 3' S" 10" 4.. 14" i " 12" 11 ', ', 1.9,5h'9 i C_ .. ,'wq i a/o,!(. 11(,•'U1:',`J 4 L`ser.' errors:+ilr,' Plplly J 0c-1 Or, J006 — 91.aar. ? Xsel s. LICHT DUTY PAVEMENT SECTION CLASS B ASPI IALT j CRUSHED SURFACE BASE COURSE SUBBASE COURSE INDICATOR FABRIC CLASS B ASPHALT / CRUSHED SURFACE BASE COURSE SUBBASE COURSE y INDICATOR FABRfC HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENT SECTION PEDESTRIAN ACCESS PAVEMENT SECTION �Al&RUEC NOT To SCALE i ilE'.- i j 19589i dwg ! 7,i)4 J `• 1./rpf. Dc/ G'6; i5'05 - : ?saw Xrel s. i_- - — STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SLAB VAPOR BARRIER —T (6 MIL GEOMEMBRANE) —� CRUSHM GRAVEL EARTH �_ INDICATOR FABRIC STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SLAB SECTION CONCRETE SLAB SECTION SIDEWALK SECTION SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND +Zl TRAINING FACILITY CONCRETE SLAB CAP SECTION kRETFXN0� TO SCALE VULC1-lMMl0 DATE_ 10/5/06 DRWN: E.m./SEA FIGURE 3-5 !lG'00 .5 f Ls�r e.�,�rs'„��l r'loller OcJE, J.70 ;ONCRETE CURB ISPHALT PAVEMENT OR :CNCRETE SLAB FILL RTURE GEOGRID MATERIAL (INDICATOR FABRIC) TREE PLANTER SECTION I A. �++ VARIES 30—MIL GECMEMBRANE LANDSCAPE SECTION I NOTE. 30 MIL GEOMEMBRANE MAY BE REPLACED BY INDICATOR FABRIC IF IMPCRT FILL AND TOPSOIL THICKNESS IS AT LEAST 36 INCHES. I ftTEC NOS TO SCALE 1411 I ..................... CRASS _���i"� GRASSPAVE RINGS FILLED WITH CONCRETE SAND (CLEW. SHARP SAND) 12 I I COMPACTED SANDY GRAVEL SASE 20' MIN, �- CLEAN FILL INDICATOR TABRIC GRASSPAVE SECTION ,..... .. -w.--J SAND j 1 1 B" ti~m i1 h [ 4 r rch IAePCRTT�O FILL SOIL, - 7B --o�,,h _ 'i 4r ice. i.a yr,. PERFORATED DRAIN PIPES LOCATED W17HIN THIS SOIL LAYER EARTH SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC ' IMPGRIED LAYER MAY BE REDUCED IF SOIL CAP LINER IS USED IN :IEU OF FABRIC SAND FILTER SECTION /- fi 1 r - COMPACTED GRAVEL 20' MIN. .. - �— CLEW FILL GRAVEL. SECTION INDICATOR FABRIC IMPORTFD 12 FILL SOIL" EARTH MEMBRANE CAP SECTION V*RETEc NOT TO SCALE 30-MIL CF0VFMF3RANF 4 Scope of Work This section presents a general scope of work for remedial activities at the sites. Construction quality assurance and technical performance criteria in support of this work are provided in Section 5. A schedule detailing design, remediation, and monitoring activities at the Property is provided on Figure 4- 1. Remedial activities at the sites includes site development cut and fill, utility trench and utility installation, well abandonment, water management, import fill testing, soil capping, site grading, stormwater sewer pipeline abandonment and replacement, and long term monitoring of groundwater and assurance of soil cap integrity. Scope of work activities discussed briefly below include: • Construction specifications and drawings • Mobilization and site preparation • Site development cut and fill • Water management • Building foundation spoils • Import fill testing • Environmental cap construction • Site development grading • Gypsy Subbasin Drainage abandonment replacement and capping • Long-term monitoring of groundwater and soil cap integrity after recording of Restrictive Covenants for the sites. 4.1 Construction Drawings An early submittal construction drawing package has been provided for Ecology review (Appendix I). The drawing package consists of plans and specifications that specify the scope of work and includes Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, Site Demolition Plan, Early Grading Plan, Conceptual Utility and Drainage Control Plan, Gypsy Subbasin Storm Drain Relocation Plan, and Sections/Details Sheet. 4.2 Mobilization and Site Preparation The contractor shall mobilize to the site all the necessary equipment, labor, and materials to perform the work described in the following sections. Site preparation shall include the following activities: • Utility locate. Prior to commencing any on -site activities, all underground public and private lines will be located and marked with paint. Figure 2-1 shows the location of all known utility lines on the property. • Temporary Facilities and Access Controls. The Contractor shall install all required temporary facilities, including worker VULCI-19589-5IO 4-1 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington facilities and staging areas such as stockpiles and storage areas. The Contractor shall establish work zones including perimeter work zone security and barricades and exclusion zones. Entry points to the site shall be upgraded with crushed rock or quarry spalls. Details are shown on Figure 4-2. 0 Erosion and Sedimentation Controls. Temporary erosion and sediment controls will include best management practices (BMPs) for construction activities as shown on Figure 4-3. Details are shown on Figure 4-2. Stormwater surface runoff during construction will be controlled by interceptor swales and sediment traps and/or ponds. No construction site stormwater runoff shall drain as untreated surface runoff to Lake Washington. Stormwater resulting from construction activities will be discharged to the permitted King County Metro sewer discharge location adjacent to the sites. Other stormwater and erosion and sedimentation controls are discussed in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Appendix C). « Health and Safety Plan. The Contractor shall have a health and safety plan reviewed by the Engineer prior to commencing on - site activities. • Site Clearing. The Contractor shall clear and grub the area to remove unsuitable materials from the site. • Site Demolition. The Contractor shall perform site demolition work as specified on Figure 4-4. • Well Abandonment. Four monitoring wells (BAX-5, BAX-10, NBMW-1 and NBMW--2) on the North Baxter Property identified on Figure 4-5 will be decommissioned by a licensed well driller. The monitoring wells will be decommissioned in accordance with WAC 173-160-381. 4.3 Spoils from Building Foundation Location of the building foundation is depicted on Figure 4-6. Based on the assumption that the drilled shaft foundations have a diameter of 30 inches and average depth of 47 feet, the resulting spoils from drilling activities is estimated to be 2,400 cubic yards. Spoils resulting from construction of drilled shaft foundations shall be temporarily stockpiled at the site (North Baxter Property) by the Contractor. The Contractor shall line the stockpile area with plastic of sufficient thickness to prevent puncturing during placement of soils. The spoils will be temporarily stockpiled at the site (North Baxter Property) upon removal during site construction activities. Samples will be collected VULCI-19589-51 D 4-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington from the spoils stockpile to characterize the material. Based on sampling results, the spoils will be either used as on -site fill material (capped if necessary) or transported off site to an approved recycling or disposal facility. 4.4 Site Development Cut and Fill The contractor shall use the necessary materials, labor and earthmoving equipment necessary to move existing fill for reuse, where possible, based the final design cap elevation. As a result, there will be areas of the site where soil will be .cut and reused on other portions of the site to fill in low lying areas. The contractor shall develop the site to maximize the amount of existing soils on site that is suitable for construction. Any soils deemed unsuitable for reuse will be transported off site for disposable to an approved off -site facility. The unsuitable wood material removed from the wood waste area is the only anticipated material that may require off -site disposal. Approximately 5,500 cubic yards of wood is anticipated to be removed from the wood waste area. Approximately 29,600 cubic yards of soil is estimated to be cut from the site. Approximately 52,900 cubic yards of soil is estimated as fill required for the site. Areas of cut and fill are identified on Figure 4-7. 4.5 Site Development Grading The Contractor shall grade the site to the lines and grades as shown on Figure 4-8. The existing site topography and the final site elevation upon construction of the environmental cap are depicted on these Plans. A 25-foot buffer along the shoreline will be maintained to the maximum extent possible during grading activities. Minor grading and filling will occur in this buffer associated with landscape and riparian planting. 4.6 Import Fill Testing As mentioned in Section 3.3, import fill will be obtained from a commercial gravel pit or a generic construction site. Approximately 23,300 cubic yards of material is estimated to the required import fill material. Import fill obtained from a generic construction site will be temporarily stockpiled at the sites. RETEC personnel will collect soil samples from the soil stockpile and submit the samples to a certified analytical laboratory in the Seattle Metro area for analysis. The samples will be analyzed for some or all of the following parameters: priority pollutant metals (Method 6020), total petroleum hydrocarbons (NWTPH-HCID Ecology Method), total petroleum hydrocarbons gasoline range (Ecology Method NWTPH-G), total petroleum hydrocarbons diesel and heavy oil range (Ecology Method NWTPH-Dx), BTEX by Method 8021, volatile organic compounds (including MTBE) by USEPA Method 8260, PCBs by USEPA Method 8080 and PAHs by Method 8270 SIM. RETEC recommends collecting 1 soil sample for every 2,000 tons of excavated soil up to the first 10,000 tons of excavated soil from the generic construction site. For the remainder of the project beyond the first 10,000 tons VULCI-19589-510 4-3 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington of soil excavated, RETEC recommends a sampling frequency of 1 sample for every 5,000 tons of excavated soil. This recommendation is based on the assumption that the laboratory analytical results for the soil samples collected for the first 10,000 tons of soil excavated indicate that the material is below MTCA Method A or Method B cleanup levels for unrestricted site use. In the event sample exceedances are observed at any point in time after the first I0,000 tons of excavated material, RETEC recommends analyzing the failed parameter at a sampling frequency of 1 sample for every 2,000 tons of excavated soil for the duration of the project. Additional samples may be required based on visual or olfactory field observations at the site. Soil samples from stockpiles will be collected as composite samples. Samples will be collected by compositing soils from at least four locations within the stockpile, or more frequently as necessary. The locations used to composite will include a mix of different heights and lateral locations on the stockpile. At each location to be composited, the top 6 inches of soil will be removed, and the soil for compositing collected from the underlying soils. At the completion of import soil delivery to the site, RETEC will prepare a report to document that the fill is acceptable for use at the site. For import fill from a commercial gravel pit, the Contractor shall submit written certification for proposed fill material, signed by the material supplier, stating that the material meets or exceeds the specified requirements along with material gradation specifications and chemical analysis test results. The Contractor shall submit at Ieast one set of test results for the import fill material per borrow source. If the submitted sample does not meet the project specifications, additional testing may be required by the Contractor and material supplier. 4.7 Environmental Cap Construction The extent of the environmental cap to be constructed at the sites is shown on Figure 3-2. A 25-foot vegetative buffer shall be left between the cap and the shoreline to the maximum extent possible. As discussed in Section 3.4, five types of environmental caps will be constructed at the site based on the site development. The different types of environmental caps include field cap, concrete slab cap, asphalt pavement cap, landscape cap, and membrane cap. Examples of these environmental caps are shown on Figures 3-3 through 3-7. This approach to capping is consistent with the CD and CAP. Utility trench construction related to all utilities planned for the project (stormwater, water, electric and gas) will be considered as part of the environmental capping portion of this project and administered by Ecology. Trench construction and backfill for installation of the utilities will be completed in conjunction with environmental cap for the site. Trench construction details are shown on Figure 4-9. VULCI-19589-51 D 44 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington The Contractor shall scarify existing surf cial soil in the environmental cap area as necessary. An identifier layer shall be placed over the native soil in the environmental cap area and shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. The identifier layer may be colored to contrast with the native soil and provide a visual barrier that will alert maintenance workers or others if the cap has been compromised. The environmental cap shall be built to lines and grades as discussed in Section 4.4. The final grade shall be surveyed to ensure that the compacted import fill thickness meets the required specifications. Topsoil used in landscape areas shall be a gravelly silt loam to a silt loam, mixed with an organic amendment comprised of a well -decomposed, humus -like material. Topsoil shall have an organic content of at least 30 percent and be clean of debris and rocks larger than 2 inches in diameter. 4.8 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Abandonment, Replacement and Capping The existing drainage pond located on the northeast corner of the site of the North Baxter Property will be backfilled and environmental cap will be installed_ The location of the drainage pond and the stormwater pipeline is shown on Figure 2-1 _ A new 54-inch culvert will connect to a 60-inch culvert and the 60-inch culvert will connect to a 72-inch culvert and the 72-inch culvert will connect to the existing 24-inch culvert from the railroad drainage ditch and reconnect to the original 490-foot 24-inch culvert just before it empties into Lake Washington. Plan view of the new stormwater pipeline is depicted on Figure 4-10 and profile is shown on Figure 4-11. VULCI-19589-510 4-5 Figure 4-1 EDR and Construction Schedule ID Task Name Qtr 3 20D6 Qtr 4 2006 _ _Jul Se Od, Nov Dec Qtr 1 2007 Jan Feb Qtr 2 2007 Mar A r Mauer Jun Qtr 3 2007 Qtr 4 2007 Jul I Aurl Sep J Qct Nav Dec Qtr 1 2008 Jan Feb Mar Qtr 2 2008 I A r Ma Jun Qtr 3 LJul 1 Draft EDR Internal Draft Internal Review Ecology Review Conditional Approval of Earlycapping A SWPPP Submit N01 Public Notice 1 Public Notice 2 Site Grading1F1118egins Final EDR Internal Draft Intemai Review Ecology Approval __ ......... construction, Install TESL Rough Grading Site Utilities .. Piling and Foundations Concrete Building Slab New Gypsy Culvert Final Grading _ Turf Fields Drainage and Subgrade Turf System Concrete Sidewalks- Asphalt Paving - 1 St Lift . ... . ._.- ....... ..... Landscaping ......_. Asphalt Paving - Wearing Course W ". 1312E 9126 1014 10/S 11M 11li *? 9,21 1125 I 1112 ; 6 =1112 11122' 1112 1129 .; 1212D 1113 11123 1112 1112 «0.. 11124' ? ' ; 3129 5110 616 7119 4126 4127 6fi _.. 16 618 7119 7120 ' 9126 9127 & ,; „;;fie try' 9113 9124 °' = 11176 ; a 6126 :its 6125 6120 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 _ 25 26 27 28 29 Task Rolled Up Task External Tasks Project•. EDRSched Progress Rolled Up Milestone O Project Summary Dale: Mon 1=106 Milestone , Rolled Up Progress Group By Summary Summary Split ..„„..I Deadline r n LU G10 M �-aI w LL 7 � o i os g u LLI 'Al, -j Wa� LLIm r�7 ti � Jy �3 i ❑ Z a o d m m C3 U- W G N€ Y o R@ g x 8 a S VI dSS383 a UJ V W O 31M1'v R 3MIG1 Fj Z �so cn t x W = a cr U m am f.9k i�j.ei l V1 k 7 �^ Ln m a o �.9 Nw"a z Q` W Q E QyVp93l cLL- W '# z Erv3 t Z Il v� Of Q z �w6 LL- 1 W Q �n Lo w= o Z o LLJ W U O p�f/s_/nwo Bsr 0 1 l I I NEW RE WETLANI 1 250 SF PROPERTY��,<"�^ LINE % " J� LIMITS OF WORK- f ' NOTE: LOCATIONS OF 'NTERCEPTOR SWALE AND 17S ASSOCIATED STORMWATER CONTROL FACILITIES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE APPROXIMATE. SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS MAY BE REQUIRED TO FACILITATE FIELD CONDITIONS. 1 SWALE 1 RDINARY HIGH FILTER FABRIC WATER MARK FENCE 7 -_ CL201 CEwx II ■■■■ EDIMENT 4 l CATCHMFNT ARLA 1 LIMITS OF WORK CExoI eewl CONNECT 7p BAKER TANK OR DIRECT PUMP -�- TO SEDIMENT POND ` SWALE,EPTOA�-- 1 I} 5WALE, TYP 1 ROCK CHECK N rEzo+ cEw, DAM TYP , CE301 CE+01 , I CONNECT TO BAKER TANK `I OR DIRECT PUMP TO ` ISEDIMENT POND fJr r ;e]aS�cE�a+ SEDIMENT ROCK CHECK CATCHMENT AREAFIL:�► t � + DAM TYP CE2C3 CE�1 � flf INTERCEPTOR ' SWALE, TYP ' y CE2 CCE40, y 1 1 I I I J CONIC TRUCK & WHEEL 11j wAsr+ouT AREA 5 CE202 GEw'. �rCONCRETE TRUCK & WHEEL SEDIMENT POND CONNECT TO BAKER TANK ROCK CHECK ,CO40, WASHOUT AREA OR DIRECT EDIMENU PDAM. TYP CE202 ONE 2 FILTER FABRIC FENOE� NEW REPLACEME ��- WETLAND SUFFE I 970 SF EOIMENT CATCHMC�JT_ J AREA 1 7 - �- 25 OFFEt7� �^?�,.;x:, / 1 CE2o� cew� _ CONNECT TO BAKER TANK OR DIRECT PUMP TO SEDIMENT POND f _SEOIMENT CATCHMENT Q - AREA CE2a CE-1 CONNECT TO BAKER TANK OR DIRECT PUMP WORK IN EXISTING TO SEDIMENT POND WETLAND BUFFER 1220 SF t I ROCK CHECK 6AM, TYP CE2w "'l --- INTERCEPTOR SWALE, TYP CE2N CONSFl2U ] ---��--- _ ENTRANCEI ,=�2 cDw1 4x INTERCEPTOR '-�' SE014�EU;' f ,�-CONSTRRUCTION cE2C3 C��m CATCHMENT" SWALE, TYP 4 / �kTRANCL CE2w cow, I���� 1 CE303�CE101 PROPERTY LINE ------------- DISCHARGE OF CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OF WORK - ---. - - --- STORMWATER THROUGH MM LID. - . _._-.... INSTALL TEMPORARY METER PRIOR- '- - TO INSTALLATION OF MH. SOURCE- SITE DIRAW:'NGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD RETEC I J 4 0 SOURCE: T AN.RETEC a h CEMOLITION _FI_ ( NOTES IrEms ro RFMAIN l; TOISRIEM INvFRI -AD m.rPI onE!POWER LINE AND POLES UTILT" DLMC-I I FI-N O -. Ut _RPMOVE EXISTING STRRM DRAIN PIPING, CATCH BASNS, EXISTING BUILDING TO REMA!n �{ MANHOLES, SLCULU DRAINS AND TRENCH DRAINS. lD2 REMOVE OVERHEAD TELEPHONE/POWER LINES AND POLES. EXISTING DOCK TO REMAIN. INCLUDING POLE FOUNDA.-IONS. O4 EXISTING LOG SEAWA( L TO Rf V.A N. EXISTfNG SANITARY SEWER PIPIN; AND MANHOLES TO SURFACE ELEMENT DEVOLITION ` �� �/ REMAIN. 4 ST REYOEXISTING FENCE, POSTS, FCUNDA-IONS AND ` ^� EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIEING TO REMAIN. GAT 52 REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING, rOJNDATION, BASEMENT O7 EXISTING FENCE TO R-%4Aln. na!n c:! nw r_cni i�!n 11711 rrlrc v &TE DRAWINGS FROM MKA 8c CRAWFORD 50 0 100 "= t 00' ci 0 ISOURCE: SITE DRAWINGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD a, �r RETEC FIRST LEVEL / FOUNDATION PLAN rNN f' - 5. 0. NOTE: PII._E LOCATIONS AND BRACED FRAME LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS DETAILED DESIGN PROGRESSES. Z-UMITS OF SOURCE: SITE DRAWINGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD 50 0 1 RETEC 00 000� SOURCE: S7E DRAWINGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD RETEC 50 0 100 1'=100' 000vu Tw ew TYP O.D O.D. 0"D 1�0.D._ O.D. O.D 3' MAX 3' MAX 3' MAX 3' MAX 3' MAX 3' MAX BACKFILL BACKFILL MATERIAL -- -� MATERIAL INDICATOR �—� „ INDICATOR INDICATOR � LAYE R GEOTEXTILE GEOTEXTILE LA`'ER LAYER BEDDING MATERIAL__ O.D. OF C FOR FLEXIBLE PIDE O.D. OF B CONCRETE O.D. OF C BEDDING MATERIAL PIPE PIPE CLASS C PIPE �.OR RIGID PIPE B NATIVE _ B NATIVE NATIVE MATERIAL A MATERIAL A MATERIAL A (CLASS A DESIGN) (CLASS B,C,D DESIGN) (CLASS F DESIGN) BEDDING FOR RIGID PIPE BEDDING FOR FLEXIBLE PIPE NOTTO SCALE IVRETEC P. CD-)ING C LA�;S DESIGN DIN_7 NSJGN C LASS A C =ASS 6 C LASS C C _ASS i7 C LASS F A 6" N N "2 NAX 6" FAIN. 6 M N. ZERO F)" NI\. 1/4 O.D. ',/2 .,,,D. 1/Fs (? C. ZC4O 6,D. 1/8 0.[.). 0.11. CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS STANDARD PLANS LST DATE. 1 f 05 GAP �Dc E1 SDMH, #GB5 48"— N 198,614.15 E 1,303,104,93 RIM = 22.30' IE 24" = 17.77' (SW) IF 24" = 17.7� (NW) EXIST I i i SDMH #GB4 108"— N 198,423.61 E 1,302,970.01 RN = 26-37' IE 72" = 17.74' (5 IF 24" = 18.34' (NE 24' Vp - -------------------------- f SDMH #GB3 108"—' N 198,374.26 E 1,302,977.91 �G 9) RIM = 27.0' IF 60" = 17.79' SE) IF 72" = 17.79' N) f / SOURCE: SITE DRAWINGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD RETEC 30 0 50 1 "=60' I I 24.,Clvlp r� • I 00 I SDMH #CB1 9 N 198,164 18 - -� — -� E 1,303,450 08 y-'' _ RIM w 26. 0'\� 24"CP IF 24" = 18;31 (SE:) EXIST IE 54' = 18.35 W) a SDMH F�PE 3 PER WSDOT STD PLAN B-23C, TYP SDMH #.,B2 961' N 198, 139.29 E 1,303,302,47 RIM = 27.0' IF 54" = 18,20 E) IE 60" = 18,2D' NW} .3NIlH�1VY1 — .. — .. II II _ ---�N3 (MN) IL'LL = 31 +- 599 HW05 MS LL'LL = 31 w oz 3 OZBL a 31 LS iL = j1 as .zL 3,9z = WItJ (M) 6£'gL 31 o N30 HW05 3 3S £'9L 31 0+ I J u� O N � 1 £V'Z=31 C=D(IS .eL 1£'94 = W1H (MN) Wgl = 31 S iL'Ll = 31 i $_ ',so HWOS 00'LZ = WIN {NJ 6L'LL = 3i 3S 6CLL = 31 COOP HWOS n ., r � � : - your, su I �U . u✓tivlr,' lhysauu,�� .l�s%f ?! -� 7r'//,1,7,'� 'jnO�D] buP �7,rf��udi'V/%d�(i i 58S�6L '; 5 Construction Quality Assurance This section discusses construction quality assurance for the project, including the quality assurance structure, responsibilities, and requirements. Quality assurance includes compliance with health and safety requirements and performance standards outlined herein and within the specifications. 5.1 Quality Assurance Monitoring Structure Figure 5-1 provides an organization chart. for quality assurance implementation environmental capping and monitoring activities_ An Engineer will be on site throughout construction and will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the performance standards outlined in Section 5.2.2. Upon completion of remedial activities, the Engineer will submit a final completion report. The report will include as -built drawings, work accomplished, materials used, inspections and tests conducted, results of inspections and tests, nature of defects found (if any), and corrective actions taken. 5.2 Construction Quality Requirements 5.2.1 Health and Safety All Contractors and subcontractors are required to use workers trained for hazardous waste work. It is the remedial contractor's responsibility to meet all the requirements of WAC 296-155, Safety Standards for Construction, and the applicable provisions of the hazardous waste operations regulations, WAC 296-62, Part P and 29 CFR 1910.120. The Contractor shall also have a site health and safety (H&S) officer who will ensure that all contractor personnel adhere to H&S regulations. Prior to starting work, the Contractor shall submit a H&S plan to the Engineer for review. The' plan shall include written documentation of employee training and medical certifications as required under WAC 296-62, Part P. Documentation of the following items is required for each site worker where work falls under the requirements of WAC 296-62, Part P: • Initial 40-hour health and safety training and annual 8-hour refresher training • Eight -hour supervisory training, required for the field supervisor • Medical clearance from a licensed physician certifying that the worker is fit to participate in field activities and use personal protective equipment • Current respirator fit test certification VULCI-19589-510 5-1 DRIFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Current CPR and first aid certification for at least one member of each crew • Provision of personal protective equipment for each worker at the highest level of protection for this site (Level D). 5.2.2 Performance Standards Performance standards address environmental and public health issues, such as emission control, and compliance with environmental regulations. Monitoring efforts of the Engineer will be conducted to ensure compliance with performance standards. The following sections identify performance standards for activities at the site. Table 5-1 lists the performance standards and testing requirements that will be applicable during the environmental capping that will be performed in conjunction with Site activities. Discharge to the Sanitary Sewer During construction stormwater will be discharged to the sanitary sewer under the discharge criteria of the King County Sewer Discharge Permit provided in Appendix C. Any stormwater discharging to Lake Washington during construction will be incidental. Each week or within 24 hours following a rain event, during construction, the BMPs will be inspected and the stormwater will be sampled for settleable solids, arsenic, copper, m-cresol, o-creosol, p- cresol, pentachlorophenoI, and naphthalene. In addition the maximum discharge rate will be monitored, as well as the daily (24-hour) flow. The inspection and sampling activities will be conducted as outlined in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan included as Appendix C. Emission Controls Excavation, grading, and capping activities will be carried out in a manner that minimizes emissions of odors and dust (fugitive emissions). The Contractor shall provide measures to suppress fugitive dust generated during site grading that the Engineer deems excessive based on visual criteria. The Engineer will monitor the on -site activities to ensure compliance with these standards and regulations. Stockpiles will be covered to the extent practicable to further minimize dust during construction. Water trucks will be used to control site dust. Off -Site Shipment of Impacted Material The Contractor shall coordinate with the waste disposal facility selected for the project and meet the requirements for loading and transporting the impacted materials from the site. The Contractor shall prepare and load all the trucks and containers for transport to the approved disposal facility in accordance with all the applicable local, state and federal regulations. The VULCI-I9S89-510 5-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Contractor shall inspect and decontaminate all the trucks prior to leaving the site and prevent tracking of materials on public nights -of -way. The load weight shall be documented by the off -site disposal facility scale weight ticket and a copy of the weight ticket shall be submitted to the Site Engineer or Owner (Football NW). Material Specifications Import structural fill shall consist of a reasonably well -graded mixture of sand and gravel that is free of organics, debris, rubbish, and other deleterious material. Structural fill material shall not contain more than 15 percent fines (material passing the No. 200 mesh sieve, based on the minus '/4-inch fraction); the fines should be non -plastic; and the moisture content of the soil within plus or minus 2 percent of its optimum at the time of compaction. All structural fill shall have a maximum particle size of 3 inches. Gravel for the capillary break layer shall consist of washed rounded or angular gravel, uniformly graded and have a maximum size of 3/a inch and less than 3 percent fines passing the No. 200 sieve. The base course and granular subbase for exterior concrete slabs and asphalt pavement shall be non -frost -susceptible and contain not more than 7 percent fines (material finer than a No. 200 U.S standard sieve). Subbase material shall meet the gradation requirements of WSDOT Standard Specification 9- 03.14(1), Gravel Borrow. Base course under pavement shall consist of clean, pit -run sand and gravel; well -graded crushed rock; or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to the WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3). Class B asphalt for pavement shall meet the requirements described in the WSDOT 2006 Standard Specifications (Section 9-02.1 and 9-02.4). The base course sand for natural turf field shall consist of granular pit run or screened material and shall meet the following specifications. Sieve Size Percent Passing No. 318" 100 No. 4 75 — 100 No. 100 0 — 10 No. 200 wet sieve 0-5 No. 270 wet sieve 0-2 Note: All percentages are by weight. The root zone sand layer for natural turf field shall consist of 90 percent sand and 10 percent compost with the following gradation requirement. Sieve Size Percent Passing No. 4 100 No. 16 85 — 100 No. 30 50 — 70 VULCI-19589-510 5-3 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Sieve Size Percent Passing No. 100 3 —10 No. 200 wet sieve 0-2 No. 270 wet sieve 0-1 Note: All percentages are by weight. Seed bed or rooting medium sand shall consist of free -draining sand that meets or exceeds the requirements for either root zone sand specifications mentioned above or USGA specification for top dressing sand. Seed used shall be a blend of approved perennial ryegrass varieties and Kentucky bluegrass. Seed certification shall include no more than 0.5 percent weed seed. For Synthetic turf fields, the base course shall consist of well -graded crushed rock or a blend of commercial rock products conforming to the WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-039(3). Only coarser fraction of this material retained on U.S. No. 40 sieve size shall be used for the base course. If there is a requirement for top course to be used in addition to the base course, the specifications of the material will be similar to the base course material with the exception the top course will comprise of 5/8 inch minus material instead of 1 1/4 inch minus material used for base course. Asphalt layer for the synthetic turf fields shall meet the requirements of WSDOT 2006 Standard Specifications Section 9-03.8(6). Aggregates shall meet the following requirements for grading: Sieve Size Percent Passing 3/4 in square 100 1/2 in square 90 -100 3/8 in square 75 -90 114 in square 55 -75 U.S. No. 10 30 - 42 U.S. No. 40 11 - 24 U.S. No. 200 3.0 - 7.0 Percent Asphalt Cement of the total mixture shall be 2.5 to 4.5. All percentages are by weight. 5.2.3 Record Keeping and Reporting The Engineer will maintain records to document the work performed. These records include, but are not limited to, the following: • Daily Activity Log. A daily activity log will be completed to describe general site activity and personnel working on site. The records may be used to substantiate invoices as related to measurement and payment of site work. H&S levels will also be noted in the daily logs as well as field H&S monitoring. VULCI-19589-510 5-4 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Material Testing Results. All material testing results will be maintained. Material testing logs will, at a minimum, include the date and time of testing, testing site and location, identification of tester and company, test results, and any relevant comments. VULCI-19589-5IO 5-5 DRAFT Engineering Design Report - Seahawks dquarters and Practice Facility — North and South Baxter Properties, Re _ i, Washington Table 5-1 Performance Standards for Remedial Activities during Redevelopment Standards Parameter Level of Performance Testing Method or Specification Frequency of Testing Comments Preconstruction Testing Import Soil Fill Soil Reasonably well -graded ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit soil Classification/Gradation mixture of sand and gravel free sample for approval of organics, debris, rubbish and other deleterious material, consisting no more than 15 percent fines (material passing the No. 200 mesh sieve, based on the minus'/, -inch fraction); the fines should be non -plastic; and the moisture content of the soil within plus or minus 2 percent of its optimum at the time of compaction. All structural fill shall have a maximum particle size of 3 inches. Import Base and Gradation Subbase material shall meet ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit Subbase Material for the gradation requirements of subbase and base course asphalt pavement and WSDOT Standard sample for approval Concrete Slab Specification 9-03.94(1), Gravel Borrow. Base course material shall conform to the WSDOT specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3). VULCI-19589-510 5-6 DRAF_ __gineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South __ Xter Properties Renton, Washington Standards Parameter Level of Performance Testing Method Frequency of Comments or Specification Testing Base Course Sand for Gradation Sieve Size % Passing ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit sample Natural Turf Field for approval No. 3l8" 100 No. 4 75 — 100 No. 100 0 —10 No. 200 0-5 No. 270 0-2 Root Zone Sand for Gradation Sieve Size % Passing ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit sample Natural Turf Field for approval No. 4 100 No. 16 85 — 100 No. 30 50 — 70 No. 100 3 --10 No. 200 0-2 No. 270 0-1 Capillary Break Layer Gradation Uniformly graded, washed ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit sample rounded or angular gravel, for approval max size '/, inches with less than 3 percent fines passing No. 200 sieve. Base course for Gradation Base course material shall ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit sample Synthetic Field conform to the WSDOT for approval specifications for Crushed Surfacing, Specification 9-03.9(3), VULCI-19589-510 5-7 DkAF _ineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility —North and South ter Properties Renton, Washington Standards Parameter Level of Performance Testing Method Frequency of Comments or Specification Testing Aggregate for Gradation Sieve Size % Passim ASTM D-422 For each source Contractor to submit sample Synthetic Field Asphalt for approval Pavement % in square 100 "/2 in square 90 — 100 318 in square 75 — 90 % in square 55 — 75 No. 10 30 — 40 No. 40 11 — 24 No. 200 3.0 -- 7.0 Asphalt Cement Mix: 2.5 percent to 4.5 percent Construction Testing Final Grading As -built Survey Within 1 inch Field Surveying Continuous Contractor to submit final Industry as -built survey Standards Monitor Discharge to Turbidity No excessive turbidity SM 2130 or EPA At least once Contractor responsible for Metro Sewer 180.10 per week testing Asphalt Pavement Compaction Base course layer and Modified Proctor At least 1 per Minimum impacts to Lake subbase course layer Compaction Test 10,000 SF expected. Contractor compacted to at least 95 (ASTM D 1557) responsible for testing. percent of max dry density Capillary Break Layer Compaction Compact to dense unyielding Visual Continuous condition with at least 3 passes of vibrating plate compactor or smooth -drum roller Base Course Granular Compaction Base course layer compacted Modified Proctor At least 1 per Contractor responsible for Material for Natural to at least 95 percent of max Compaction Test 10,000 SF testing Fields dry density (ASTM D 1557) VULCI-19589-510 g-g DRAFT _ineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South . ter Properties Renton, Washington Standards Parameter Level of Performance Testing Method or Specification Frequency of Testing Comments Base course for Compaction Base course layer compacted Modified Proctor At least 1 per Contractor responsible for Synthetic Field to at least 95 percent of max Compaction Test 10,000 SF testing dry density (ASTM D 1557) Emission Controls Dust No excessive emissions Visual Continuous Contractor shall provide dust suppression measures VULCI-19589-510 5-9 DRAFT Engineering Design Report - Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility - North and South Baxter Properties, Renton, Washington Figure 5-1 Quality Control Organization Chart RETEC MKA Shannon & Wilson Environmental Consultant Civil Engineer Geotech Engineer Project Manager I I Project Manager I I Project Manager RETEC I MKA i Shannon & Wilson Construction Manager Construction Manager I Construction Manager Bayley General Contractor Work Crews I Surveyors I I Quality Control Testing Subcontractor VULCI-19589-510 5-10 6 Long -Term Monitoring 6.1 Compliance Groundwater Monitoring The compliance groundwater monitoring program was initiated in 2005 upon completion of uplands remediation at the South Baxter Property. Compliance monitoring is required under WAC 173-340-410 to confirm the long-term effectiveness of the remedial action completed at the South Baxter Site. Four quarterly sampling events have been completed to date that indicates groundwater complies with cleanup standards. Compliance groundwater monitoring will continue to be implemented at the site as specified in the CAP. The groundwater compliance monitoring requirements, as described in the CAP consist of a monitoring network of five monitoring wells: BAX-8A, BAX-8B, BAX-6S, BAX-61) and BAX-15. The wells allow for monitoring of groundwater quality along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The monitoring schedule requires a total of 30 years of monitoring if there are no exceedances in the wells. The schedule includes the following: • One year of quarterly monitoring (completed) • Two years of semi-annual monitoring (2006 and 2007) • Two years of annual sampling (2008 and 2009) • Twenty-five years of sampling at a frequency of I event every 5 years (2014, 2019, 2024, 2029, 2034). At any time during the monitoring, if an exceedance of cleanup level is observed in a shoreline well, confirmation sampling is required to be performed within 60 days of the original sampling. If the concentrations decrease below cleanup levels, the original monitoring schedule is resumed. If, after the first year of monitoring, the confirmation sampling confirms the exceedance, a contingent remedy is required to be implemented based on consultations with Ecology. During each groundwater sampling event, the five compliance monitoring wells will be sampled for total PAH and PCP, as analyzed by EPA Method 8270 SIM. Groundwater sampling will be performed using low -flow sampling techniques and field samples will be filtered as required in the CAP. All wells will also be gauged to determine the groundwater level. The samples will be submitted to a certified analytical laboratory for analysis. A summary report will be prepared for each groundwater sampling event and submitted to Ecology. Data will be evaluated to ascertain trends in groundwater concentrations, determine whether cleanup levels are continuing to be met, and whether modifications to the monitoring schedule are necessary. VULCI-19589-510 6-1 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 6.2 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Form 6.2.1 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Plan This plan details the inspection and maintenance (1&M) requirements for environmental caps at the Football NW North and South Baxter properties. Construction of a final cap can he categorized as five different types of caps. The five types of caps to be constructed are: • Field Cap: This cap consists of the three outdoor natural turf practice fields and one outdoor and one indoor artificial turf practice fields is Concrete Slab Cap: This cap consists of the concrete structural slab of the office building, concrete slab and concrete sidewalk • Asphalt Pavement Cap: This cap consists of areas that include pedestrian access, surface parking and roadways • Landscape Cap: This cap consists of areas used for planting beds, sand filters, bioretention swales and handscape areas • Membrane Cap: This cap consists of utility easement area and other areas along the eastern edge of the property boundary The area covered by this I&M plan is shown on Figure 6-1. The purpose of this I&M plan is to ensure future maintenance of the cap in a manner that complies with all of the objectives of the cap. 6.2.2 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Requirements 1&M requirements for each cap type include cap inspections and cap maintenance consistent with the form Restrictive Covenants required by the CD based upon inspection results, each of which is discussed below. Cap Inspections The various caps will be visually inspected by Football NW_ Surface conditions and conditions along structures are the two main components of the cap that will be visually inspected. The surface will be inspected for cracking, damage, settlement, and standing water. It will be assumed that if the top surface of the cap is in acceptable condition, then the underlying Iayers of pavement are also in acceptable condition. From these visual inspections, the integrity of the cap can be determined, and any areas where maintenance is required can be identified. VULCI-19589-510 6-2 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility —North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Cap inspections examine how various site activities affect the integrity of the cap. Inspected areas and associated information will be noted on the cap inspection log provided in Figure 6-2. Field Cap, Membrane Cap and Landscaping Cap Inspection The soil cover will be visually inspected by Football NW maintenance staff weekly, or following any activities that disturb the cover. Any indication of soil disturbance or settlement such that ponding occurs will be further investigated. Any indication of soil erosion such that the indicator fabric being exposed will also be investigated. Inspected areas and associated information will be noted on the inspection log provided on Figure 6-2. Visual inspection of the soil cover will also be preformed annually by an environmental professional. Asphalt Pavement Cap and Concrete Cap Inspection Cap inspections examine how various activities affect the integrity of the cap. Each cap will be visually inspected by Football NW annually and following any site construction activities that require removal and replacement of the cap consistent with the form Restrictive Covenants required by the CD. Following the maintenance and repairs on the cap, inspections of the repaired areas will also be performed annually. Conditions that may develop include settlement of sections of the cap, water ponding on the cap surface, cracking, or potholes that develop in the cap, or any damage reported by the property owner. A minimum of every five years, Football NW will individually evaluate the need to resurface the asphalt cap consistent with Restrictive Covenant requirements. Any resurfacing activities deemed necessary would be implemented as appropriate pursuant to the form Restrictive Covenants required by the CD based on the results of the five year evaluation. 6.2.3 Cap Maintenance The caps will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil, and will either contain a physical barrier layer (30-mil geomembrane) or indicator fabric at the interface between native soil and imported crushed rock base. The identifier layer will be placed over the existing surficial soil before placement of the crushed rock base. The identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the crushed rock base. Based upon inspection results, any potential damage, settling, or separation will be evaluated to determine if the item can be addressed by performing maintenance or repair to the cap consistent with form Restrictive Covenant VULCI-19589-510 6-3 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington requirements. The results of the inspection will be documented and a field sketch prepared identifying any areas of concern. Table 6-1 presents the types of cap conditions that may develop over time and the maintenance or repair required. Conditions that may develop include settlement of the cap, water ponding on the capped surfaces, potholes that develop in the asphalt, cracks developing in the concrete building section cap, or erosion of the landscape and natural turf field topsoil, or any other damage noted by the Football NW_ 6.2.4 Asphalt Pavement, Artificial Turf Field, and Concrete Slab Cap Maintenance Surface Patching In accordance with the form Restrictive Covenant requirements, pavement, artificial turf field and building section cap maintenance will be performed. Areas of settlement less than 3 inches deep will be patched. Surface patching will include brushing the area clean and placing standard asphalt or concrete to restore the settled area back to original grade. Standard asphalt or concrete patching will be placed in accordance with current WSDQT standard specifications_ In addition the Synthetic Turf Field Section Cap will need replacement of the synthetic surfacing following any surface patching repair. Removal/Replacement of Subgrade and Asphalt Areas with settlement greater than 3 inches deep over short distances will require removal/replacement of asphalt or concrete and base course. Removal/ replacement will include removing the existing asphalt cap and removing the base course to a depth of 7 inches below existing grade. Base course and asphalt cap will then be replaced to meet original contract specifications. Asphalt or concrete repair will be performed by identifying the extent of the failed area. The asphalt or concrete will be saw -cut 2 feet beyond the failed area perimeter and the full depth of asphalt and base course will be removed. The subgrade will be inspected by proof rolling for deflection and recompacted and/or replaced if necessary. The existing edges will be cleaned and tacking agent applied. Crushed Stone Base Coarse (CSBC) will be placed and compacted with a mechanical hand tamper, as necessary. Existing CSBC may provide a suitable base course. WSDQT Class B asphalt pavement will be placed in a minimum 3-inch lift to match the thickness of the surrounding pavement and will be VULCI-19589-510 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington compacted in accordance with current WSDOT specifications. PCCP will be placed in a minimum 3-inch lift. In addition the Synthetic Turf Field Section Cap will need replacement of the synthetic surfacing following any removal or repair of the subgrade and asphalt. 6.2.5 Natural Turf Field, Membrane Cap and Landscaping Cap Maintenance Replacement of Topsoil Pursuant to the form Restrictive Covenant requirements, maintenance of the natural turf field section and landscape section cap will be performed. Based upon inspection results, areas of damage will be evaluated to determine proper repair. Areas where erosion has occurred or where the geomembrane or indicator fabric is exposed may require replacement of the soil cover_ Replacement will include placement of additional soil to the required cover thickness above the geomembrane or indicator fabric, and seeding and/or revegetating the affected area. Material specifications are provided in this EDR. Areas with settlement greater than 3 inches deep will require replacement of topsoil to achieve the full depth as described in this EDR. Repair will be performed and materials supplied in accordance with the contract specifications. 6.2.6 Documentation and Reporting Football NW will document cap conditions and relevant observations noted during each inspection. At a minimum, each inspection event will require that a log be completed (Figure 6-2). Reports documenting cap inspections, maintenance, and repair will be submitted to Ecology annually for those instances where Ecology pre -approval is not required. Annual reports will consist of inspection forms and any documentation of maintenance and/or repair. Cap repair or maintenance reports based on a specific inspection event will be filed together as a packet with the inspection forms themselves. Documentation regarding all cap inspections and cap maintenance activities performed will be maintained by the Football NW. 6.2.7 Inspection and Maintenance Summary A summary of inspection and maintenance requirements is provided in Table 6-2. VULCI-19589-510 6-5 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 6.3 Soil Management Plan The Soil Management Plan (SMP) addresses procedures associated with post - site -development penetration of the environmental cap and excavation of contaminated soil located below the environmental cap and the indicator layer. These SMP procedures include health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options at the Site as specified in the CAPs and form Restrictive Covenants (April 4, 2000). In accordance with these documents, soil must be handled and managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. Site maintenance staff and contractors shall follow the procedures outlined in this document during maintenance and construction activities at the Sites. The Soil Management Plan is included as Appendix J. VULCI-19589-510 6-6 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawlrs Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Table 6-1 Cap Conditions Cap Type Potential Cap Conditions Maintenance or Repair Required Natural Turf Field, Surface Erosion Placement of additional soil, replacement of Landscape and and geomembrane or soil indicator fabric, seeding or Membrane Cap Settlement revegetating the affected area_ Artificial Turf Field Pot Holes, Areas of settlement less than 3 inches deep will be and Settlement, and surface patched to restore the settled area to Asphalt Pavement Water Ponding original grade. Areas with settlement greater than 3 inches deep will require removal/replacement of asphalt and base course. The synthetic turf field will require replacement of the synthetic surfacing following any removal or repair of subgrade and asphalt. Concrete Slab Settlement Areas of settlement less than 3 inches deep will be surface patched to restore the settled area to original grade. Areas with settlement greater than 3 inches deep will require removal/replacement of concrete slab and base course. VULCI-19589-510 6-7 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Table 6-2 Summary of Inspection and Maintenance Requirements Item Requirement Due Routine Activities: Routine Inspection Inspect Cap Surface Annually Routine Notification Notify Ecology of Completed I/M Annually Activities Routine Resurface Evaluation Evaluate Need to Resurface Cap Every 5 Years Construction Related Activities: Post -Maintenance or Inspect Cap Surface Following Cap As Required Repair Inspection Repair Post -Construction Inspection Inspect Cap Surface Following Cap As Required Construction Activities Site Improvement Notification Notify Ecology Prior to Cap -Affected As Required Site Improvements Soil Handling/Disposal Obtain Ecology Approval Prior to As Required Handling/Disposal of Cap -Related Contaminated Soils Cap Repair Repair Cap as Needed Based on As Required Inspection Cap Resurfacing Resurface Cap as Needed Based on As Required 5-Year Review VULCI-19589-510 6-8 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, 5eahawks Training Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Figure 6-2 Sample Cap Inspection Log Date of Inspection: Name of Inspector: Time of Inspection: Weather Conditions: Overall Cap Inspection Cap Damage — Location and Description l) Asphalt Pavement and Concrete Slab Cap Surface Conditions Are cracks greater than '/4 inch wide visible? - Width of cracks - Depth of cracks - Length of cracks - Spacing of cracks Location of cracks Is Settlement Visible? Is settlement greater or less then 3 inches? - Dimension of settlement area - Depth of settlement - Location of cracks Notes: 2) Natural and Artificial Turf Field Surface Conditions Cap Damage — Location and Description Notes: VULCI-19589-510 6-10 DRAFT Engineering Design Report, Seahawks Training Facility —North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington 3) Landscape and Membrane Cap Surface Conditions Are there signs of surface erosion? Cap Damage — Location and Description Notes: Follow-up Instructions of Repaired Areas Location Notes: VULCI-19589-510 6-11 7 References King County, 2005. Surface Water Design Manual, King County, Washington. Department of Natural Resources and Parks. January 24. Shannon and Wilson, 2006. Geotechnical Report, Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Football Northwest, LLC. September 13. The RETEC Group, Inc. (RETEC), 2002. Engineering Design Report: JH. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, May 2002. RETEC, 2005. Construction Completion Report: J.H. Baxter South Property_ Prepared for Port Quendall Company, March 2005. ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation (ThermoRetec), 2000a. Feasibility Study: J.H. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000, ThermoRetec, 2000b. Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000. ThermoRetec, 2000c. Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter North Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000. Woodward-CIyde Consultants, 1990. Draft Remedial Investigation Report, J.H. Baxter, Renton, Washington. Prepared for J.H. Baxter Company. December 1990, VULCI-19589-510 7-1 Appendix A Consent Decree 1 2 3' 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RECEIVED In King County Superlar Court C1erk'� Oter MAY 18 2000 Cashier Section hNT Superior CourtCferk EXr04 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, � Plaintiff, V. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington corporation, PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North ' Baxter Defendant, 1W.UJ 2--1177S •ftN1 PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE RE: NORTH J.H. BAXTER PROPERTY/RENTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504.0117 FAX (30) 438-7743 8 2' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. ................ I I. AUTHORITY, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE ........................................................................3 11. DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................................................4 III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS..............................................................................5 IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT..................................................................................7 V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED......................................................................... ............................8 VI. ECOLOGY COSTS.........................................................................................................................9 VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS.............................................................................9 V1II. PERFORMANCE.............................................................................................................10 IX. CERTIFICATIONS .................................... ................................................................................... I I X.'PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY................................................................I I XI. AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE; ADDING NEW PARTIES TO DECREE .............12 XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION............................................................................................................13 XIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION.........................................................................................14 XIV. COVENANT NOT TO SUE; REOPENERS.............................................................................15 XV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS.....................................................................................................16 XVI. DISCLAIMER ........................................................................................................................16 XVII. RETENTION OF RECORDS...................................................................................................16 XVIII. PROPERTY ACCESS.............................................................................................................17 XIX. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS............................................................17 XX. SAMPLING, DATA REPORTING, AND AVAILABILITY.....................................................18 XXI. PROGRESS REPORTS'..............................................................................................................19 XXII. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE.................................................................................................20 XXIII. ENDANGERMENT.................................................................................................................21 PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER ATFORNEY GENERAL OF WASMNGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division PO Sox 40.117 North fl3XEet Olympia, WA 48504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 XXIV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTING....................................................22 XXV. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS ................................................ ................ -.22 XXVI. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE..........................................................................................23 XXVII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION...................................................................................................23 XXVIII. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF]URISDICTION.................................23 XXIX. PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT....................................................24 XXX. SEVERABILITY.....................................................................................................................24 XXXI. EFFECTIVE DATE..............................................................................................................24 ATTACHMENT A — Description of Property ATTACHMENT B — Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan ATTACHMENT C — Restrictive Covenant ATTACHMENT D — Site Map.of Property to be Acquired by Port Quendall Company ATTACHMENT E — Form Notice of Proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns ATTACHMENT F — Form Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns ATTACHMENT G — Public Participation Plan ATTACHMENT H — SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance and Environmental Checklist PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 3 i ATCORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 INTRODUCTION This Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree ("Decree") is made and entered into by and between the Washington State Department of Ecology ("Ecology") and Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation ("PQC"). Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties to this Decree as provided in Section XI. 1. WHEREAS, the purpose of this Decree is to: (1) resolve the potential liability of Defendant for the present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility, including the contamination associated with the "North Baxter Property" described in Section III and Attachment A herein, and has thereafter been deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise come to be located within the Facility; (2) promote the public interest by expediting cleanup activities at the Facility; and (3) facilitate the reuse of a currently vacant parcel of land. 2. WHEREAS, the North Baxter Property currently is owned by J. H. Baxter &, Co., a California limited partnership ("J. H. Baxter"). 3. WHEREAS, the Facility will be listed on the Washington_ Hazardous Sites List. 4. WHEREAS, PQC has entered into a Property Purchase Agreement with J. H. Baxter to purchase the North Baxter Property which is comprised of one parcel totaling approximately 12 acres and is described on Attachment A. 5. WHEREAS, final entry of this Consent Decree is a condition of the Property Purchase Agreement necessary in order for the purchase to close. 6. WHEREAS, Defendant proposes to facilitate construction of mixed commercial, residential, and/or retail development on the North Baxter Property by performing remedial actions as more fully described in Attachment B (Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan). 7. WHEREAS, Defendant is simultaneously entering into a Consent Decree with respect to the purchase of property inunediately south of the Facility (the "South Baxter Property"). The South Baxter Property is also owned by J.H. Baxter and has in the past operated in conjunction with PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHMTON Ecology Division. PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438.7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 . 12 13 14 15 16' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 the Facility. Ecology has determined that the South Baxter Property is a separate facility and is thus addressed in a separate Consent Decree, 8. WHEREAS, in the absence of this Decree, at the time it acquires the North Baxter Property, PQC would incur potential liability at the Facility to the state of Washington and/or third parties under the Model Toxics Control Act ("MTCA), Chapter 70.105D RCW, as an- owner/operator due to releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances, Pollutants, or Contaminants at the Facility. 9. WHEREAS, Ecology does not intend to provide a defense to Defendant to any liability for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances caused or contributed to by Defendant. 10. WHEREAS, this Decree promotes the public interest by facilitating use of the North Baxter Property. 11. WHEREAS, Defendant has offered to further certain Ecology goals as provided in this Decree in exchange for a covenant not to sue and protection from contribution for contamination at the Facility. 12. WHEREAS, Defendant has certified that its plans for the. North Baxter Property are not likely to aggravate or contribute to contamination at the Facility, interfere with remedial actions that may be needed at the Facility, or increase human health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of the Facility. 13. WHEREAS, this Decree will provide a substantial public benefit by promoting reuse of a currently vacant parcel of land, providing substantial economic, community, and transportation benefits to the area, and yielding substantial resources for environmental remediation. 14. WHEREAS, the Court is fully advised of the reasons for entry of this Decree and good cause having been shown: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 2 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympik WA 99504-0117 FAX (360)439-7743 � 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 i5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 I. AUTHORITY JURISDICTION AND VENUE 15. This Courtt has authority to resolve the liability of the parties to this Decree. 16. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the parties pursuant to MTCA. Venue is proper in King County pursuant to RCW 70.105D.050(5)(b). 17. Authority for entry of this Decree is conferred by RCW 70.105D.040(4) and 70.105D.040(5), which authorize the Washington State Attorney General to agree to a settlement with a prospective purchaser of a facility if, after public notice and. hearing, Ecology finds the proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances in compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW 70.105D.030(2)(d). RCW 70.105D.040(4) and 70.105D.040(5) require that such a settlement be entered as a Consent Decree issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. 18. Ecology finds that the proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances in compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW 70.105D.030(2)(d) and that there are no `unique circumstances" as that terra is defined in RCW 70.105D.040(4)(e)(ii). 19. Ecology will list the Facility on the Washington Hazardous Sites List. Ecology has not made a determination that PQC is a Potentially Liable Person ("PLP'� for the Facility. However, if PQC was to acquire an interest in the Facility without this Decree, it would become a PLP under RCW 70.105D.040(1)(a). This Decree is entered before PQC acquires the North Baxter Property to resolve PQC's potential liability at the Facility to the state of Washington and/or third parties for the present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility, including the contamination associated with activities at the Facility that has been deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise come to be located within the Facility and to facilitate a more comprehensive and expeditious cleanup than otherwise would occur. 20. By entering into this Decree, Defendant agrees not to challenge Ecology's jurisdiction in any proceeding to enforce this Decree. Defendant consents to the issuance of this Decree and has PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 3 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WASHINGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology POt1 Bo Division Box 40117 North Baxter Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 439-7741 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 agreed to perform the terms of the Decree, including remediation, monitoring, and payment of oversight costs as specified in this Decree. II. DEFINITIONS 21. Whenever terms listed below are used in this Decree or in the attachments hereto, the following definitions shall apply: a. The "North Baxter Property" is described in Attachment A attached hereto. b. "Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Flan" shall mean the combined Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan, including other attachments thereto, dated 4/4/00, attached to this Decree as Attachment B. Q. "Decree" shall mean this Decree and all attachments hereto. In the event of a conflict between this Decree and any attachment, this Decree shall control. d. "Defendant" shall mean Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation. e. "Facility" shall mean the North Baxter Property, as described on Attachment A, and shown on Attachment D. f. "Hazardous Substance" shall have the meaning defined in MICA, RCW 70.105D.020(6). g. "Paragraph" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by an Arabic numeral. h. "Section" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by a Roman numeral and including one or more Paragraphs. i. "Successors in Interest and Assigns" shall mean any person who acquires an interest in the Property through purchase, lease, transfer, assignment, or otherwise, including those who become a party to this Decree pursuant to Section ICI. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 4 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASH[NGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA. 98504-01 17 FAX (360) 4384743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 F 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23j 24; 25 26 III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS 22. The North Baxter Property, known as the North J. H. Baxter Property/Renton ("North Baxter Property"), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton, in King County, Washington, as set forth in Attachment A. The.North Baxter Property occupies approximately 12 acres, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The North Baxter Property is relatively flat and is situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline. The Misty Cove Condominiums are located directly to the no of the Property. The South Baxter Property is located directly to the south of the Property. Further to the south is the Quendall Terminals property. Interstate 405 is approximately 500 feet to the east. 23. The North Baxter Property is bordered to the south by the South Baxter Property. The North and South Baxter Properties have been determined to be separate facilities based on historic operations, previous studies and previous correspondence and agreements between J. H. Baxter and Ecology, which defined a "Line of Demarcation" between the two Properties. The line of Demarcation was originally defined in the Renton -Baxter Remediation Security Interest Agreement dated May 6, 1992 and subsequent Ecology correspondence. PQC and J.H. Baxter have submitted a lot line adjustment application to formally segregate the North and South Baxter Properties. This Consent Decree addresses the North Baxter Property. A separate Consent Decree, entered simultaneously with this Consent Decree, addresses the South Baxter Property. 24. In 1873, Jeremiah Sullivan obtained all properties on the May Creek Delta (Baxter, Quendall Terminals, Pan Abode, Barbee Mill) from the U.S. government and sold them in 1875 to James M. Colman. In 1902, the timber on the subject parcels was sold, and in 1903, a right-of-way was deeded to Northern Pacific. The Northern Pacific rail line later became the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line which currently,abuts the Baxter Property. 25. ' The four properties remained within the Colman family through at least 1908, when ownership of the subject parcels began to diverge. Peter Reilly took title to most of the waterfront PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 5 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHNGTON Ecology Division PO Boa 40117 Olympia, WA 96504-0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 parcels in March of 1916. Between July and October of 1916, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed the Lake Washington Ship canal, which lowered the level of Lake Washington by approximately 8 feet (U.S. Geological Survey, 1983). This increased the land area of the waterfront parcels, by exposing formerly submerged portions of the May Creek Delta. 26. The J. H. Baxter wood treating plant was built in 1955 upon the deltaic deposits of May Creek exposed by the lowering of Lake Washington. Wood treating operations were discontinued in 1981. Prior to 1955 there is no known record of industrial or commercial activity on the site. Currently, all of the former wood treating equipment has been removed. 27. During the years of operation, the J. H. Baxter plant operation on the South Baxter Property primarily used the Boulton process to treat wood. Although butt tanks were used for some preservative applications, the plant principally used single pressure vessels (retorts) to treat wood. Generally, pentachlorophenoi was used to treat poles and creosote was used to treat pilings. 28. The North Baxter Property was used principally for storage of untreated poles and pilings. Wood was stored on site as part of inventory and to facilitate drying prior to treatment, 29. Based upon historical usage of chemicals at the site as well as analytical data available from site investigation activities, the compounds of concern at the Facility are pentachlorophenol (PCP) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These compounds are known to exist in limited quantities in soil at the site. 30. Several investigations of potential contamination have been performed on the North and South Baxter Facilities beginning in 1983 with an offshore sediment investigation of potential hazardous substances and a subsurface hazardous waste investigation. In November, 1988, a Consent Decree was entered into by J. H. Baxter and Ecology for the purpose of conducting a preliminary Remedial Investigation (RI) under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) (No. 88-2- 21599-5). The Consent Decree led to a Renton -Baxter Security Interest Agreement dated May 6, 1992, which provided that the North Baxter Property would act as security for certain South Baxter PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 6 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 l� 21 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 141 15 16 17 18- 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of this Consent Decree, Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded and of no further force and effect, and the May 6, 1992 Renton -Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of no further force and effect. Comprehensive summaries of project area historical information, records and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report (Woodward Clyde, 1990) conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree, and in multiple documents prepared by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present. IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 31. Defendant proposes to acquire the North Baxter Property (along with the South Baxter Property) to facilitate eventual commercial, urban residential, and/or retail development, either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development Project ("Project"), including adjacent properties, which could ultimately result in between approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of developmi ent at the north end of Renton. The North Baxter Property, along with the South Baxter Property is anticipated to include approximately 400,000 sq. ft. of development. 32. In 1989, the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993, extensive public hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the general public concerning Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and propos6d Renton Zoning Code amendments. 33. In addition, in 1996 and 1997, an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS') scoping process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping process involved significant public participation, including mailings, formal continent, and public meetings. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Banter 7 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2' 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25I 26 34. Any property development will be completed in accordance with the Renton Comprehensive Plan and area -wide zoning Center Office Residential designation. 35. Development of the North Baxter Property and the South Baxter Property is expected to create a significant number of well -paying jobs and spur development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington. 36. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Determination ofNonsignificance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H. V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED 37. Upon the Effective Date of this Decree, Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action Plan described in Attachment B, including all attachments thereto, according to the schedule provided therein. Cleanup activities include placement of gravel and a clean soil layer or other development features to allow residential development. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize disruption to the surrounding community. As such, the actual schedule for the site cleanup may vary to facilitate this coordination. 38. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions for the release of Hazardous Substances covered by this Decree, other than those required by this Decree, unless the parties agree to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B). 39. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant (Attachment C) with the Office of the King County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Feasibility Study/Cleanup PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE NOrtb BWer 8 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 93504-01 l7 FAX (360) 4384743 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Action Plan and shall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty (30) days of recording. VI. ECOLOGY COSTS 40. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this Decree. This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996. The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology or its contractors for, or on, the Facility under Chapter 70.105D RCW, both before and -after the issuance of this Decree, for Decree preparation, negotiations, and administration. Ecology oversight costs shall be calculated pursuant to WAC 173-340-550(2) and shall include direct staff costs, an agency support cost multiplier, and a program support cost multiplier for all oversight costs. 41. Defendant agrees to pay Ecology oversight costs within ninety (90) days of receiving from Ecology an itemized statement of costs that includes a summary of costs incurred, an identification of involved staff, and the amount of time spent by involved staff members on the project. Ecology shall, upon request, provide Defendant with a general statement of work performed. Ecology shall prepare itemized statements of its oversight costs quarterly. Failure to pay Ecology's costs within ninety (90) days of receipt of the itemized statement will result in interest charges at the rate of twelve (12) percent per annum. 42. In the event Defendant disputes expenditures or the adequacy of documentation for which feimbursement is sought, the parties agree to be bound by the dispute resolution process set forth in Section XII. VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS 43. The project coordinator for Ecology is: PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 9 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 9004-0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Gail Colburn Toxics Cleanup Program Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office 3190 — 160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 (206) 649-7265 The project coordinator for Defendant is: Grant Hainsworth ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation 1011 SW Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, WA 98134 44. Each project coordinator shall be responsible for overseeing the implementation of this Decree. The Ecology project coordinator will be Ecology's designated representative at the Property. To the maximum extent possible, communications between Ecology and Defendant and all documents, including reports, approvals, and other correspondence concerning the activities performed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Decree, shall be directed through the project coordinators. The project coordinators may designate, in writing, working -level staff contacts for all or portions of the implementation of Section V of this Decree, including the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan, incorporated in this Decree as Attachment B. The project coordinators may agree to minor modifications to the work to be performed without formal amendments to this Decree. Minor modifications will be documented in writing by Defendant and approved by Ecology. 45. Any party may change its respective project coordinator. Written notification shall be given to the other party at least ten (10) days prior to the change. VIII. PERFORMANCE 46. All work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under the direction and supervision, as necessary, of a professional engineer or hydrogeologist, or equivalent. Any construction work must be under the supervision of a professional engineer. Defendant shall notify Ecology in writing as to the identity of such engineer(s) or hydrogeologist(s) or others and of any contractor(s) and subcontractor(s), including the contractor responsible for installation of required PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter to ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHrNGTON Ecology Division P4 Box 40117 Olympia, WA 99504-0117 FAX (36.0) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 mitigation actions, to be used in carrying out the terms of this Decree in advance of their involvement at the Facility. IX. CERTIFICATIONS 47. Defendant certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, it has fully and accurately disclosed to Ecology the information currently in its possession that relates to the environmental conditions at the Facility, or to Defendant's right and title thereto. 48. Defendant represents and certifies that, to the best of its knowledge, it is not aware of any facts that would give rise to liability to it under RCW 70.105D.040 prior to acquisition of the Baxter Property. 49. Defendant represents and certifies its belief that redevelopment of the North Baxter Property is not likely to contribute to the existing release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances from the Facility, interfere with future remedial actions that may be needed at the Facility, or increase health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of the Facility. 50. If any certification provided by Defendant pursuant to this Section is not true, the Covenant Not To Sue in Section XIV shall not be effective with respect to.Defendant, and Ecology reserves all rights it may have against Defendant. X. PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY 51. The restrictions, obligations, and rights set forth in this Decree shall be binding upon the parties to this Decree. Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties to this Decree at the option of Defendant, by following the amendment procedures set forth in Section XL 52. Defendant shall implement contractual provisions that require all Successors in Interest and Assigns to this Decree to comply with the applicable provisions of this Decree. 53. If proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns wish to become a party to this Decree, Defendant and the proposed transferees) shall notify Ecology and the Attorney General's office of the proposed transfer, the name of the proposed transferee(s), and the proposed transferee(s) intended PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter I I ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASH1NGTON EcoioU Division Po Box 40117 Olympia, WA 99504-0117 FAk (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 use of the North Baxter Property. The notification required by this Paragraph shall occur at least 30 days before the date of a proposed transfer of interests. Such notification shall be in the form of I Attachment E to this Decree. 54. In the event Defendant assigns all of its fee interest to a Successor in Interest or Assign, and that Successor in Interest or Assign becomes a party to this Decree, at Ecology's sole discretion and with its concurrence, Ecology shall thereafter look first to such successor for performance of the requirements of this Decree, including, but not limited to, performance of the work as described in Section V, and payments of Ecology costs described in Section VI. 55. Defendant shall further provide 30 days advance written notice to Ecology of Defendant's intent to convey any fee interest in a substantial portion of the North Baxter Property. No conveyance of title in the North Baxter Property shall be consummated by Defendant without adequate provision for continued monitoring, operation and maintenance of the remedial actions called for in this Decree. Failure of the Defendant or the proposed transferee to timely comply with this Section's notification requirements does not in any way alter the rights and obligations of such party as set forth in this Decree. XI. AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE-, ADDING NEW PARTIES TO DECREE 56. This Decree may only be amended by a written stipulation among the parties to this Decree that is thereafter entered and approved by order of the Court. Such amendment shall become effective upon entry by the Court, or upon a later date if such date is expressly stated in the parties' written stipulation or the Court so orders. 57. Amendments may cover any subject or be for any purpose agreed to by the parties to this Decree. If Ecology determines that the subject of an amendment requires public input, Ecology shall provide thirty (30) days' public notice prior to seeking entry of the amendment by the Court. 58. Whenever the Defendant contemplates conveying an interest in the Property to a proposed Successor in Interest and Assign, the proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns may PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 12 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WASHINGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division PO Box40117 North Baxter Olympia, WA 9850"117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 request that the Decree be amended as provided for in this paragraph. The amendment to the Decree shall be in the form of Attachment F, "Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns." Ecology may withhold consent to an amendment making proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns a party to this Decree only if Defendant or its Successors in Interest and Assigns is in violation or will be in violation of a material term of this Decree. 59. The parties contemplate that various interests in the North Baxter Property may be granted to parties who will be "Successors in Interest and Assigns", but may choose not to become parties to this decree. Examples include tenants leasing space in completed buildings, lenders taking a security interest in all or a portion of the North Baxter Property and persons obtaining limited possessory rights in the North Baxter Property. Nonetheless, such parties will be entitled to the protections, if any, afforded by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(e) and (f). XIL DISPUTE RESOLUTION 60. In the event a dispute arises as to an approval, disapproval, proposed modification, or other decision or action by Ecology's project coordinator pertaining to implementation of the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan, the parties shall use the dispute resolution procedure set forth below. a. Upon receipt of the Ecology project coordinator's written decision, Defendant has fourteen (14) days within which to notify Ecology's project coordinator of any objection to the decision. b. The parties' project coordinators shall then confer in an effort to resolve the dispute. If the project coordinators cannot resolve the dispute within fourteen (14) days following the conference, Ecology's project coordinator shall issue a written decision. C. Defendant may then request.Ecology management review of the decision. This request shall be submitted in writing to the Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager within seven (7) days of receipt of Ecology's project coordinator's written decision. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 13 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHtNGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1� 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 d. Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager shall conduct a review of the dispute and shall issue a written decision regarding the dispute within thirty (30) days of the Defendant's request for review. The Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager's decision shall be Ecology's final decision on the disputed matter. 61. If Ecology's final written decision is unacceptable to Defendant, Defendant has the right to submit the dispute to the Court for resolution. The parties agree that one judge should retain jurisdiction over this case and shall, as necessary, resolve any dispute arising under this Decree. For disputes concerning Ecology's investigative and remedial decisions that arise under this Decree, the Court shall review the actions or decisions of Ecology under an arbitrary and capricious standard. 62. The parties may mutually agree to substitute an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process, such as mediation, for the formal dispute resolution process set forth in this Section. 63. The parties agree to use the dispute resolution process in good faith and agree to expedite, to the extent possible, the dispute resolution process whenever it is used. When either party uses the dispute resolution process in bad faith or for purposes of delay, the other party may seek sanctions. 64. The implementation of these dispute resolution procedures shall not provide a basis for delay of any activities required in this Decree, unless Ecology agrees in writing to a schedule extension or the Court so orders. 65. The parties agree that this Decree is not intended to alter any evidentiary burdens of either party in any proceeding by Ecology for costs or claims involving the North Baxter Property. XIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION 66. With regard to claims for contribution against Defendant, the parties intend that Defendant will obtain the protection against claims for contribution for matters addressed in this Decree pursuant to MTCA, RCW 70. 1 05D. 040(4)(d). PROSPECTYVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 14 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF W ASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Hoar 40117 Olympia. WA 95504-0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1� 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18. 19 20 2.1. 22 23 24 25 26 !OV- COVENANT NOT TO SUE; REOPENERS 67. In consideration of Defendant's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Decree, Ecology agrees that compliance with this Decree shall stand in lieu of any and all administrative, legal, and equitable remedies and enforcement actions ("Actions") available to the state against Defendant or Successors in Interest for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances at the Facility, provided such Actions pertain to Hazardous Substances which Ecology knows or believes to be located at the Facility as of the date of this Decree. This covenant is strictly limited to the Facility as defined in Section II of this Decree and shown on Attachment D. 68. Reoneners: In the following circumstances, Ecology may exercise its full legal authority to address releases of Hazardous Substances at the Facility, notwithstanding. the Covenant Not To Sue set forth above: a. In the event Defendant fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this Decree, including all attachments, and after written notice of noncompliance, such failure is not cured by such Defendant within sixty (60) days of receipt of notice of noncompliance. b. In the event factors not known at the time of entry of this Agreement and not disclosed to Ecology are discovered and such factors present a previously unknown threat to human health or the environment and are not addressed by the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action PIan (Attachment B). If such factors are discovered, Ecology shall give written notice to Defendant. Defendant will have sixty (60) days from receipt of notice to propose a cure to the condition giving rise to the threat. If such cure is acceptable to Ecology, Defendant and Ecology will negotiate an appropriate timetable for implementation. C. Upon Ecology's determination that actions beyond the terms of this Decree are necessary to abate an emergency situation which threatens public health, welfare, or the environment. 69. Applicability: The Covenant Not to Sue set forth above shall have no applicability whatsoever to: PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGrON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Oiymp* WA 98304-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4i 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 l 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 241 251 261 a. Criminal liability. b. Actions against PLPs not party to this Decree. C. Liability for damages for injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural resources. 70. Ecology retains all of its legal and equitable rights against all persons, except as otherwise provided in this Decree. XV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 71, Defendant reserves all rights and defenses which it may have and which are not otherwise addressed in this Decree, including the right to seek contribution or cost recovery for funds expended pursuant to this Decree, subject to the limitations in Section XXVI. 72. Except as provided herein for the parties, this Decree does not grant any rights or affect any liabilities of any person, firm, or corporation or subdivision or division. of state, federal, or local government. XVI. DISCLAIMER 73. This Decree does not constitute a representation by Ecology that the Property is fit for any particular purpose, XVII. RETENTION OF RECORDS 74. Defendant shall preserve, during the pendency of this Decree and for ten (10) years from the date this Decree is no longer in effect as provided in Section XXVIII, all records, reports, documents, and underlying data in its possession relevant to the implementation of this Decree and shall insert in contracts with project contractors and subcontractors a similar record retention requirement. Defendant shall retain all monitoring data so long as monitoring is ongoing as provided in the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B). In the event the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B) is modified to terminate monitoring, Defendant shall retain all monitoring data until ten (10) years after monitoring is completed. Upon request of PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 16 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHTNGTON Ecology Divlshm PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (350) 43&7743 1I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I's 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ecology, Defendant shall make all nonarchived records available to Ecology and allow access for review. All archived records shall be made available to Ecology within a reasonable period of time. XVH1. PROPERTY ACCESS 75. Defendant grants to Ecology, its employees, agents, contractors, and authorized representatives an irrevocable right to enter upon the Property with reasonable notice and at any reasonable time for purposes of allowing Ecology to monitor or enforce compliance with this Decree. The right of entry granted in this Section is in addition to any right Ecology may have to enter onto the Property pursuant to specific statutory or regulatory authority. Consistent with Ecology's responsibilities under state and federal law, Ecology, and any persons acting for it, shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable effort not to interfere with the operations of Defendant or Successors in Interest by any such entry. In the event Ecology enters the Property for reasons other than emergency response, Ecology agrees that it shall provide reasonable notice to Defendant of any planned entry, as well as schedules and locations of activity on the Property. Ecology further agrees to accommodate reasonable requests that it modify its scheduled entry or activities at the Property. Notwithstanding any provision of the Decree, Ecology retains all of its access authorities and access rights, including enforcement authorities related thereto, under MICA and any other applicable state statute or regulation. XIX. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS 76. All actions carried out by Defendant or Successors in Interest pursuant to this Decree shall be done in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including applicable permitting requirements. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(1), the known and applicable substantive requirements of Chapters 70.94, 70.95, 70.105, 75.20, 90.48, and 90.58 RCW, and any laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for remedial action, have been included in the R1 and the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan and are incorporated by reference here as binding requirements in this Decree. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 99504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Defendant has a continuing obligation to determine whether additional permits or approvals addressed in RCW 70.I05D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this Decree. In the event either Defendant or Ecology determines that additional permits or approvals addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this Decree, it shall promptly notify the other party of this determination. Ecology shall determine whether Ecology or Defendant shall be responsible to contact the appropriate state and/or local agencies. If Ecology so requires, Defendant shall promptly consult with the appropriate state and/or local agencies and provide Ecology with written documentation from those agencies of the substantive requirements those agencies believe are applicable to the remedial action. Ecology shall make the determination on the additional substantive requirements that must be met by Defendant and on how Defendant must meet those requirements. Ecology shall inform Defendant in writing of these requirements. Once established by Ecology, the additional requirements shall be enforceable requirements of this Decree. Defendant shall not begin or continue the remedial action potentially subject to the additional requirements until Ecology makes its final determination. Ecology shall ensure that notice and opportunity for comment are provided to the public and appropriate agencies prior to establishing the substantive requirements under this Section. 77. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(2), in the event that Ecology determines that the exemption from complying with the procedural requirements of the laws referenced in RCW 70.105D,090(1) would result in the loss of approval from a federal agency necessary for the state to administer any federal law, such exemption shall not apply, and Defendant or Successors in Interest shall comply with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the laws referenced in RCW 70.105D,090(1). X]X. SAMPLING3DATA REPORTING, AND AVAILABILITY 78. With respect to the implementation of this Decree, Defendant shall make the results of all sampling, laboratory reports, and/or test results generated by it, or on its behalf, available to PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 18 ATTORNEY GENERAL of wAsHrNGTON Ecology Division Po Sox 40117 Olympia, WA 9M4-01 t7 FAX (360) 438.7743 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. 26 Ecology in hard copy and on electronic disk. Data submitted on disk shall be in a format acceptable to Ecology for importation for use as a relational database into databases and/or spreadsheet software commonly available. 79. If requested by Ecology, Defendant shall allow Ecology and/or its authorized representatives to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Defendant pursuant to the implementation of this Decree. Defendant shall notify Ecology seven (7) days in advance of any sample collection or work activity at the Property. Ecology shall, upon request, allow Defendant or its authorized representatives to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Ecology pursuant to the implementation of this Decree provided Defendant does not'interfere with Ecology's sampling. Ecology shall endeavor to notify Defendant prior to any sample collection activity. XXI. PROGRESS REPORTS 80. Defendant shall submit to Ecology written monthly progress reports beginning thirty (30) days prior to initiation of the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B) and continuing until completion of the Work to Be Performed as described in Section V. After that time, progress reports shall be submitted quarterly, or at other intervals as approved by Ecology. The progress reports shall describe the actions taken during the reporting period to implement the requirements of this Decree. The progress report shall include the following: a. A list of on -site activities that have taken place during the reporting period. b. A detailed description of any deviations from required tasks not otherwise documented in project plans or amendment requests. C. A description of all deviations from the schedule during the current reporting period and any planned deviations in the upcoming reporting period. d. For any deviations in schedule, a plan for recovering lost time and maintaining compliance with the schedule. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WASH NGTON Ecology Division Po Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-01l7 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5' 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141 151 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 e. A list of deliverables for the upcoming reporting period if different from the I schedule. 81. All progress reports shall be submitted by the tenth day of the month in which they are due after the Effective Date of this Decree. XXIL EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE 82. An extension of schedule shall be granted only when a request for an extension is submitted in a timely fashion, generally at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the deadline for which the extension is requested, and good cause exists for granting the extension. All extensions shall be requested in writing. The request shall specify the reason(s) the extension is needed. 83. An extension shall be granted only for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. A requested extension shall not be effective until approved by Ecology or the Court. Ecology shall act upon any written request for extension in a timely fashion. It shall not be necessary to formally amend this Decree pursuant to Section X1 when a schedule extension is granted. 84. The burden shall fall on Defendant to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Ecology that the request for such an extension has been submitted in a timely fashion and that good cause exists for granting the extension. Good cause includes, but is not limited to, the following: a. Circumstances beyond the reasonable control and despite the due diligence of Defendant, including delays in obtaining necessary permits, delays caused by unrelated third parties or Ecology, such as (but not limited to) delays by Ecology in reviewing, approving, or modifying documents submitted by Defendant. b. Acts of God, including fire, flood, blizzard, extreme temperatures, storm, or other unavoidable casualty. C. Endangerment as described in Section XXIII. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division Po Box 40117 Olympia, WA 96504-01 I7 FAX (360) 4384743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ecology -may extend the schedule for a period not to exceed ninety.(90) days, except where a Ionger extension is needed as a result of: manner. a. Delays in the issuance of a necessary permit which was applied for in a timely b. Other circumstances deemed exceptional or extraordinary by Ecology. However, neither increased costs of performance of the terms of the Decree nor changed economic circumstances shall be considered circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Defendant. Ecology shall give Defendant written notification in a timely fashion of any extensions granted pursuant to this Decree. XXIII. ENDANGERMENT 85. If, during implementation of this Decree, Ecology determines that there is an actual or imminent danger to human health or to -the environment, Ecology may order Defendant to stop further implementation of this Decree for such period of time as needed to abate the danger or may petition the Court for an order as appropriate. During any stoppage of work under this Section, the obligations of Defendant shall be suspended, and the time period for performance of that work, as well as the time period for any other work dependent upon the work which is stopped, shall be extended, pursuant to Section XXII of this Decree, for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. 86. In the event Defendant determines that activities undertaken in furtherance of this Decree or any other circumstances or activities are creating an imminent danger to human health or to the environment, Defendant may stop implementation of this Decree for such period of time necessary for Ecology to evaluate the situation and determine whether Defendant should proceed with implementation of the Decree or whether thework stoppage should be continued until the danger is abated. Defendant shall notify Ecology's project coordinator as soon as possible, but no PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WAS14INGTON Eoolosy Division PO Banc 40117 Olympia, WA 985D4.0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 141 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 later than twenty-four (24) hours after stoppage of work, and thereafter provide Ecology with documentation of the basis for the work stoppage. If Ecology disagrees with Defendant, Ecology may order Defendant to resume implementation of this Decree. If Ecology concurs with the work stoppage, Defendant's obligations shall be suspended, and the time period for performance of that work, as well as the time period for any other work dependent on the work which was stopped, shall be extended, pursuant to Section. XXI1 of this Decree, for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. Any disagreements pursuant to this Section shall be resolved through the dispute resolution procedures in Section XII. XXIV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTING 87. In order to facilitate the redevelopment of the North Baxter Property, upon completion of the remedial actions specified in the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B), Ecology shall issue a Certificate of Completion. Unless Ecology becomes aware of circumstances at the Facility that present a previously unknown threat to human health or the environment, Ecology shall, within thirty (30) days of issuance of the Certificate of Completion, propose to remove the Facility from the Hazard Ranking List, pursuant to WAC 173-340-330(4). XXV. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS 88.. To the extent allowed by law, Defendant and its Successors in Interest (hereinafter collectively the "Indemnitors") agree to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the state of Washington, its employees, and agents from any and all claims or causes of action for death or injuries to persons or for loss or damage to property arising from or on account of acts or omissions of Indemnitors, their officers, employees, agents, or contractors in entering into and implementing this Decree. However, Indemnitors shall not indemnify the state of Washington nor save nor hold its employees and agents harmless from any claims or causes of action arising out of the negligent acts or omissions of the state of Washington; or the employees or agents of the state, in implementing the activities pursuant to this Decree. In any claims against the state by any employee of the PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 22 AMRNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 . 4lyMP* WA 48504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Indemnitors, the indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by the limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the Indemnitors under workmen's compensation acts, disability benefit acts,.or other employee benefits acts. XXVI. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE 89. Defendant hereby agrees that it will not seek to recover any costs accrued in implementing the remedial action required by this Decree from the state of Washington or any of its agencies other than loans or grants from the State Toxics Control Account or any Local Toxics Control Account for any costs incurred in implementing this Decree. Except as provided above, however, Defendant expressly reserves its right to seek to recover any costs incurred in implementing this Decree from any other potentially liable person. XXVII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 90. Public participation shall be accomplished by implementing the Public Participation Plan attached as Attachment G. Ecology shall maintain the responsibility for public participation in accordance with WAC 173-340-600(8)(g). Defendant shall help coordinate and implement public participation for the Property, as required by Ecology. XXVIII. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION 91. This Decree shall remain in effect and this Court shall retain jurisdiction over both the subject matter of this Decree and the parties for the duration of the performance of the terms and provision of this Decree for the purpose of enabling any of the parties to apply to the Court, as provided in the dispute resolution process set forth in Section XH, and the amendment process set forth in Section XI, at any time for such further order, direction, and relief as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure that obligations of the parties have been satisfied. The Decree shall remain in effect until the parties agree otherwise or until Defendant has been notified by Ecology in writing that the requirements of this Decree have been satisfactorily completed. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 23 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF W ASHINGTON Ecology Division PO sox 40117 Olympik WA 48504-01 17 FAX (360) 438.7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 XXIX. PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT 92. This Decree has been the subject of public notice and comment as required by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(a). As a result of this process, Ecology has found that this Decree will lead to a more expeditious cleanup of Hazardous Substances at the Property, in compliance with applicable cleanup standards, and is in the public interest. 93. If the Court withdraws its consent, this Decree shall be null and void at the option of any party, and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs and without prejudice. In such an event, no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree. XXX. SEVERABILM 94. If any section, subsection, sentence, or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, such illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability will not affect the legality, validity, or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any other section, subsection, sentence, or clause. XXXI. EFFECTIVE DATE 95. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been entered by the Court and the closing of the property purchase is completed as defined in the Property Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J. H. Baxter & Co. SO ORDERED this _ZL_I' day of 2000. PROSPtMVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE North Baxter fudge, King Counp�erior Court 24 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WAS IINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504.0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21i 22 23 24 25 26 The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date . specified below. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE Washington corporation B lf` / By: y Pn ed Name: '' Printed Nam : Date: Date: DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY B Y• Printed Name - Date: PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER. CONSENT DECREE North Baxter 25 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology division PO Box 40117 Olympi4 WA 98504-01E 7 FAX (360) 438.7743 ATTACHMENT C DRAFT April 4, 2000 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT �_... NORTH BAXTER [Correct Recording Format To Be Added] - This Declaration of Restrictive Covenant is made ga�6 70.105D.030(l)(f) and (g) and WAC 173-340-44�—- Quen—MaEompan-g--- - Washington corporation, its successors .and agg�, aEUNFe Statashin Department af.its successci-s�a�ssi��he�logy� at t�operty that is the Hof this eve ent. The , &fi conducted at the property is dSUER in the Ong d�erats: 1) Prospeeti-ve Purchaser Consent Decree, dated mid 2) Q� Actium, dated These documents are on file at Ecaf� �orff&-�z--sf-Regional-Office (NWRO). dive Covenant is required because the Remedial Action resulted in resiconcentrations of certain hazardous substances which exceed the Model Toxics Control Act Method B Residential Cleanup Levels for soil established under WAC 173- 340-740. These cleanup levels are described in the Final Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan for North J. H. Baxter Property, Renton, Washington, dated The undersigned, Port Quendall Company, is the fee owner of real property (hereafter "Property") in the County of King, State of Washington, that is subject to this 50163349 03 Restrictive Covenant. The Property is legally described as set forth in Exhibit attached. Port Quendall Company makes the following declaration a-§tc�lixt-it a restrictions, and uses to which the Property may be put and UMFs7 declarations shall constitute covenants to run with the lafid- as`provided..b�-Eaw and stria � _ be binding on all parties and all persons claimini tHi�-cludi�L_current future owners�rtion of or.-i;dFer th;-:F—Fope�r "O pri g conseni=OMFolo pt agffvided below, follaplemef tnup Ac er shall not reduce, or reme-soil cad bleanup A�i�'lan in a manner that may result in the r—r expo the eaMmiunent of contaminated soil or create a new exposure pathw�'-rrequired by the Cleanup Action Plan is described in the attached Exh cap maintenance is permitted without notice to Ecology so long as appre�iHate health and safety protocols are followed. A Soil Management Plan will be prepared for Ecology approval that outlines specific protocols associated with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. In accord with the Soil Management Plan, limited excavation, utility placement or repair, minor site grading, or other pre -approved activities connected with site development and construction are permitted so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed and a soil cap that provides 2 50163348 03 protection from direct contact as required by the Cleanup Action Plan i-pWvidcgf!—!! following development. Section 2. Any activity on the Property that may interfere with Remedial Action and continued protection of human health and provided for in the Cleanup Action Plan is prohibited. -A�hupMM-B-HEMan pe and contemplates development of the Egopert Ise ial, re commercial) pro !�— _ auty the C Amman ohs Restrictive Co t may or exposure to the that r Es— on the Property, or create a new expthway.lean�n Plan permits and contemplates development and use ova mixed vse (residential, retail, commercial) property. nless authorized by the Cleanup Action Plan, the Owner will not wither or allow others to withdraw, groundwater from the Property. Section 5. Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, access shall be restricted to prevent swimming or direct contact with contaminated sediments at the south border of the Property. Section 6. Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, residential use on the Property is permitted so long as a soil cap (as described in the Cleanup Action plan) is present that prevents direct contact with all soil that exceeds Method B Cleanup Levels. 3 50163348.03 Section 7. The Owner of the property must give thirty (30) day advanc2=svritte> notice to Ecology of the Owner's intent to convey a fee interest in a subsu rtiorr�r..��__.��.�. the Property. No conveyance of fee title in the Property shall be consmeriated Owner without adequate and complete provision for continu I g maintenance of the Remedial Action. Fee interests in-1�=a sFAb-§5 M portiot�r the Property may be conveyed without notice to Rdafog— y Sectio�wner musaeseric leases �o us ctivities= istent with the d n...,otentialacte�s of restrictions on the use Proper �on 99. Tq-i'�er m�otify and @L�-approval from Ecology prior to any use rope�is irx� ent with the terms of this Restrictive Covenant. Ecolc�gmay..apprmv�arty inconsistent use only after public notice and comment. The Owner shall allow authorized representatives of Ecology the righffo—renter the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of evaluating the Remedial Action; to take samples, to inspect remedial actions conducted at the property, and to inspect records that are related to the Remedial Action. Ecology shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable efforts not to interfere with the operations of the Property occupancy. Section 11. The Owner of the Property reserves the right under WAC 173-340- 440 to record an instrument that provides that this Restrictive Covenant shall no longer limit use of the Property or be of any further force or effect. However, such an 4 56163$4E.01 instrument may be recorded only if Ecology, after public notice and opporiuttity fay comment, concurs. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a = Washington corporation — By: Its: Dated this 5 50163340 03 STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactoryne _ is the person who appeared before rli.� pe. acknowledged that he/she was authorized to execute the -instrument ffFdHdclrnowledgedy�" as of Port Quendall. Compan)Flo b free �;Yciluntary _aC = and deed of suc a . or the useE�i&r.�oses nention {J7 gTld cure l)l 1`IVu11 Y1 (Legibly Prim or Stamp Name or Notary) Notary public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires 6 50163149 03 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 R E rt IV E D to King County SUPMOF COUn C VVI 0"it: Cashier Soction KNT Superior Court Clerk GXPICA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR KING COUNTY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF I ECOLOGY, Plaintiff, V. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington corporation, PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter Defendant. N4j0-4- 1J�i t to "a KN PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE RE: SOUTH J.H. BAXTER PROPERTY/RENTON EXHIBIT B ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHlNGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 93504-0117 FA7t(360)439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 TABLE OF CONTENTS .PaSe 1NTRODUCTION............................................................................................. ..................................... L 1. AUTHORITY, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE...........................................................................3 11. DEFINITIONS......................................................................................................... ............4 11I. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS..............................................................................5 IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT..................................................................................9 V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED.........................................................................:...............I..............I I VI. ECOLOGY COSTS.......................................................................................................................I I VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS...........................................................................12 VilI. PERFORMANCE.......................................................................................................................13 IX. CERTIFICATIONS.......................................................................................................................13 X. PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY................................................................14 XL AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE; ADDING NEW PARTIES TO DECREE... .......... 15 XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION............................................................................................................16 XIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION.............................................................................................17 XIV. COVENANT NOT TO SUE; REOPENERS .......................................... ...................................17 XV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS....................................................................................................19 XVI. DISCLAIMER............................................................................................................................19 XVII. RETENTION OF RECORDS...................................................................................................19 XVIII. PROPERTY ACCESS...........................................................................................................19 XIX. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS............................................................20 XX. SAMPLING, DATA REPORTING, AND AVAILABILITY.....................................................21 XXI. PROGRESS REPORTS.............................................................................................................22 XXII. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE...............................................................................................22 XXIT[. ENDANGERMENT................................................................................................. ..............24 PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 ATFOMEYGENUALOFWASWNGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division eoBOX ea17 South Baxter Otympi; WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 439.7743 21 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 XXIV. PERIODIC REVIEW ................................................................ ........................................... -.25 XXV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTTNG .....................................................25 XXVI. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS ....................................................... ..........25 XXVII. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE .............................................. ....................................... -.26 XXVIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ..................... ......................................... — .................. — ........... 26 XXIX. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION ...................................26 XXX PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT....................................................26 XXXI. SEVERABILITY ....................................................................................... ......................... ......27 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE............................................................................................................ ... 27 ATTACHMENT A — Description of Property ATTACHMENT B — Cleanup Action Plan ATTACHMENT C — Restrictive Covenant ATTACHMENT D — Site Map of Property to be Acquired by Port QuendalI Company ATTACHMENT E — Form Notice of Proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns ATTACHMENT F — Form Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns ATTACHMENT G — Public Participation Plan ATTACHMENT H — SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance, and Environmental Checklist PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter it ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Divifian PO Box 401 il Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 2 31 41 51 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26i INTRODUCTION This Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree ("Decree") is made and entered into by and between the Washington State Department of Ecology ("Ecology") and Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation ("PQC"). Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties to this Decree as provided in Section XI. I . WHEREAS, the purpose of this Decree is to: (1) resolve the potential liability of Defendant for the present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility, including the contamination associated with the "South Baxter Property" described in Section III. and Attachment A herein, and has thereafter been deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise come to be located within the Facility; (2) promote the public interest by expediting cleanup activities at the Facility; and (3) facilitate the reuse of a currently vacant parcel of land. 2. WHEREAS, the South Baxter Property currently is owned by J. H. Baxter & Co., a California limited partnership ("J. H. Baxter"). 3. WHEREAS, the Facility is listed on the Washington Hazardous Sites List with a site hazard ranking of 1. 4. WHEREAS, PQC has entered into a Property Purchase Agreement with J. H. Baxter to purchase the South Baxter Property which is comprised of one parcel totaling approximately 7 acres and is describes! on Attachment A. 5. WHEREAS, final entry of this Consent Decree is a condition of the Property Purchase Agreement necessary in order for the purchase to close. 6. WHEREAS, Defendant proposes to facilitate construction of mixed commercial, residential, and/or retail development on the South Baxter Property by performing remedial actions as more fully described in Attachment B (Cleanup Action Plan). 7. WHEREAS, Defendant is simultaneously entering into a Consent Decree with respect to the purchase of property immediately north of the Facility (the "North Baxter Property"). The PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 A17ORNEYGENERAL OFWASIUNGTON EcokW Division CONSENT DECREE PO Box 40117 South Baxter Olympia, WA 98504-01 17 FAX (360) 419.7741 1 2 3 4 5. 6 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 North Baxter Property is also owned by J.H. Baxter and has in the past operated in conjunction with. the Facility. Ecology has detennined that the North Baxter Property is a separate facility and is thus addressed in a separate Consent Decree. 8. WHEREAS, in the absence of this Decree, at the time it acquires the South Baxter Property, PQC would incur potential liability at the Facility to the state of Washington and/or third parties under the Model Toxics Control Act ("MTCA' }, Chapter 70.105D RC W, as an owner/operator due to releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances, Pollutants, or Contaminants at the Facility. 9. WHEREAS, Ecology does not intend to provide a defense to Defendant to any liability for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances caused or contributed to by Defendant, 10. WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR"} owns submerged lands offshore of the South Baxter Property, including lands which were leased to prior operators of the Property and which were allegedly contaminated by prior activities at the Baxter Property. 1 t . WHEREAS, the DNR has received notice of this Consent Decree. 12. WHEREAS, this Decree promotes the public interest by facilitating use of the South Baxter Property. 13. WHEREAS, Defendant has offered to further certain Ecology goals as provided in this Decree in exchange for a covenant not to sue and protection from contribution for contamination at the Facility. 14. WHEREAS, Defendant has certified that its plans for the South Baxter Property are not likely to aggravate or contribute to contamination at the Facility, interfere with remedial actions that may be needed at the Facility, or increase human health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of the Facility. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 2 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHB4GTON Ecology Division PO Box40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (340) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26' 15- WHEREAS, this Decree will provide a substantial public benefit by promoting reuse of a currently vacant parcel of land, providing substantial economic, community, and transportation benefits to the area, and yielding substantial resources for environmental remediation. 16. WHEREAS, the Court is fully advised of the reasons for entry of this Decree and good cause having been shown: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: I. AUTHORITY, JURISDICTION, AND -VENUE 17. This Court has authority to resolve the liability of the parties to this Decree. 18. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the parties pursuant to MTCA. Venue is proper in Ding County pursuant to RCW 70.105D.050(5Xb). 19. Authority for entry of this Decree is conferred by RCW 70.105D.040(4) and 70.105D.040(5), which authorize the Washington State Attorney General to agree to a settlement with a prospective purchaser of a facility if, after public notice and hearing, Ecology finds the proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances in compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW 70.105D.030(2)(d). RCW 70.105D.040(4) and 70.105D.040(5) require that such a settlement be entered as a Consent Decree issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. 20. Ecology finds that the proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances in compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW 70.105D.030(2)(d) and that there are no "unique circumstances" as that term is defined in RCW 70.105D.040(4)(exii). 21. Ecology has. listed the Facility on the Washington Hazardous Sites List. Ecology has not made a determination that PQC is a Potentially Liable Person ("PLP") for the Facility. However, if PQC was to acquire an interest in the Facility without this Decree, it would become a PLP under RCW 70.105D.040(l)(a). This Decree is entered before PQC acquires the South Baxter Property to PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 3 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINMON EColoo Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 99504-0117 FAX (360) 43$-7743 �l 2 3 4 5 6. 7 8 9 to it 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 resolve PAC's potential liability at the Facility to the state of Washington and/or third parties for the present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility, including the contamination associated with activities at the Facility that has been deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise come to be located within the Facility and to facilitate a more comprehensive and expeditious cleanup than otherwise would occur. 22. By entering into this Decree, Defendant agrees not to challenge Ecology's jurisdiction in any proceeding to enforce this Decree. Defendant consents to the issuance of this Decree and has agreed to perform the terms of the Decree, including remediation, monitoring, and payment of oversight costs as specified in this Decree. II. DEFINITIONS 23. Whenever terms listed below are used in this Decree or in the attachments hereto, the following definitions shall apply: a. "Baxter Cove" shall mean the shallow cove or inlet portion of Lake Washington that received discharges from Baxter Lagoon, as generally depicted on Attachment D. b. `Baxter Lagoon" shall mean the depression on the South Baxter Property that was formerly used for skimming and settling of process and stormwater prior to discharge to Lake Washington, as generally depicted on Attachment D. C. The "South Baxter Property" is described in Attachment A attached hereto. d. "Cleanup Action Plan" shalt mean the Cleanup Action Plan, including the final Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum and other attachments thereto, dated 4 / 4 /0 0 attached to this Decree as Attachment B. e. "Decree" shall mean this Decree and all attachments hereto. In the event of a conflict between this Decree and any attachment, this Decree shall control. E "Defendant" shall mean Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 4 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WASHINGTON Ecology division PO Box 40117 Olympia. WA 485N-01 17 FAX (340) 439.7743 1 2 3 4 5 6'' 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 g. "Facility" shall mean the South Baxter Property, as described on Attachment A, including the portion of the DNR-owned submerged lands shown on Attachment D. h. "Hazardous Substance" shall have the meaning defined in MTCA, RCW 70.105D.020(6). i. "Paragraph" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by an Arabic numeral. j. "Section" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by a Roman numeral and including one or more Paragraphs. k. "Successors in Interest and Assigns" shall mean any person who acquires an interest in the Property through purchase, lease, transfer, assignment, or otherwise, including those who become a party to this Decree pursuant to Section XI. III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS 24. The South Baxter Property, known as the South J. H. Baxter PropertyfRenton ("South Baxter Property'), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton, in King County, Washington, as set forth in Attachment A. The South Baxter Property occupies approximately 7 acres, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The South Baxter Property is relatively flat and is situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline. The Quendall Terminals property is located directly to the south of the Property. Further to the south is property currently occupied by the Barbee Mill. Interstate 405 is approximately 500 feet to the east. 25. The South Baxter Property is bordered to the north by the North Baxter Property. The North and South Baxter Properties have been determined to be separate facilities based on historic operations, previous studies and previous correspondence and agmennents between J. H. Baxter and Ecology, which defined a "Line of Demarcation" between the two Properties. The line of PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 5 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Boa 40117 Olympia. WA 98504701 t7 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Demarcation was originally defined in the Renton -Baxter Remediation Security Interest Agreement dated May 6, 1992 and subsequent Ecology correspondence. PQC and J.H. Baxter have submitted a lot line adjustment application to formally segregate the North and South Baxter Properties. This Consent Decree addresses the South Baxter Property. A separate Consent Decree, entered simultaneously with this Consent Decree, addresses the North Baxter Property. 26. In 1873, Jeremiah Sullivan obtained all properties on the May Creek Delta (Baxter, Quendal) Terminals, Pan Abode, Barbee Mill) from the U.S. government and sold them in 1875 to James M. Colman. In 1902, the timber on the subject parcels was sold, and in 1903, a right-of-way was deeded to Northern Pacific. The Northern Pacific rail line later became the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail line which currently abuts the Banter Property. 27, The four properties remained within the Colman family through at least 1908, when ownership of the subject parcels began to diverge. Peter Reilly took title to most of the waterfront parcels in March of 1916. Between July and October of 1916, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers completed the Lake Washington Ship canal, which lowered the level of Lake Washington by approximately 8 feet (U.S. Geological Survey, 1983). This increased the land area of the waterfront parcels, by exposing formerly submerged portions of the May Creek Delta. 28. The J. H. Baxter wood treating plant was built in 1955 upon the deltaic deposits of May Creek exposed by the lowering of Lake Washington. Wood treating operations were discontinued in 1981. Prior to 1955 there is no known record of industrial or commercial activity on the site. Currently, all of the former wood treating equipment has been removed. 29. During the years of operation, the J. H. Baxter plant primarily used the Boulton process to treat wood. Although butt tanks were used for some preservative applications, the plant principally used single pressure vessels (retorts) to treat wood. Generally, pentachlorophenol was used to treat poles and creosote was used to treat pilings. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 6 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASR44CTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 49504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 I8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 30. The North Baxter Property was used principally for storage of untreated poles and pilings. Wood was stored on site as part of inventory and to facilitate drying prior to treatment. Treated wood was routinely produced upon demand and was temporarily stored on the South Baxter Property prior to shipment by truck or rail, 31. The majority of the waste produced by I H. Baxter between 1955 and 081 was process water sludges contaminated by pentachlorophenol and creosote. This process water was generated from condensates and blowdown, and was evaporated in a cooling tower. Sludges were produced as a result, and these were disposed of by J. H. Baxter in a class-1 landfill in Oregon. 32. The Baxter facility maintained a waste discharge permit (1965) and NPDES permit (1971) for surface water discharge to Lake Washington. Surface water was collected in a depression (`Baxter Lagoon"), on the southern portion of the site prior to discharge. A separating tank and a skimming and settling pond were established to remove potential oil components prior to discharge. A drainage line from the benned tankage area was occasionally opened to release storm water which accumulated in the containment area. 33. -During the course of plant operation, five to 11 aboveground storage tanks of varying capacities were located near the operations buildings in the tank farm. The tank farm was contained with a concrete slab and berm. Wood preserving chemicals stored in the tank farm included crystalline PCP, aromatic carrier oils, 5 percent PCP in solution, and creosote. 34. Based upon historical usage of chemicals at the site as well as analyticai'data available from site investigation activities, the compounds of concern at the Facility are pentachlorophenol (PCP) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These compounds are known to exist in both soil and groundwater at the site as well as in sediments of Baxter Cove. 35. While dioxinlfuran isomers were detected, in general, only more chlorinated, less toxic compounds were encountered at this site (Woodward Clyde, 1990). Removal of source area PAH and PCP, capping of residual soil impacts, and implementation of purchaser's development PROSPECTWE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 7 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASH1 OTON Ecology Division PO Boat 40117 Olympia, WA 98304-0117 FAX (360) 439.7743 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 controls (clean soil cover and/or development features) are expected to sufficiently address any concerns related to dioxins. 36. The areas of highest soil impacts coincide with the approximate locations of former operations. In sampling locations in the former operation areas, concentrations tend to decrease with depth. However, in locations downgradient of the former operation areas (e.g., BAX-6), soil impacts are generally associated with the water table. 37. fast activities at the Facility have also resulted in impacts to groundwater quality. Chemical compounds detected in groundwater include PAHs and PCP, which appear to be associated with former operation areas. Carcinogenic PAHs (CPAHs) were detected in several wells prior to 1990, but were only detected in wells BAX-1 and BAX-14 in 1990. These wells are located in areas associated with former operations. No carcinogenic PAHs were detected in wells located near the shore (BAX-6, BAX-8A or BAX-813), the only wells sampled in the most recent sampling events in October 1998 and January 2000. 38. Areas of non -aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) are present at the Facility. The NAPL areas are generally located its the vicinity of former operations on the Facility. 39. Former activities at the Facility have resulted in impacts to the adjacent sediments pr.-dominantly on the fee -owned aquatic lands that are part of the Facility. Sediment samples collected in Lake Washington near the Facility confirm that PAH and PCP contamination is restricted to the interior of Baxter Cove. 40. Several investigations of potential contamination have been performed on the Facility beginning in 1983 with an offshore sediment investigation of potential hazardous substances and a subsurface hazardous waste investigation. In November, 1988, a Consent Decree was entered into - by J. H. Baxter and Ecology .for the purpose of conducting a preliminary Remedial Investigation (RI) under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) (No. 88-2-21599-5). The Consent Decree led to a Renton -Baxter Security Interest Agreement dated May 6, 1992, which provided that the North Baader PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 8 ATTORNEY GENERALOF WASHINGTON Eco4ogy Division Po BOX 40117 Olympia, WA 99SN-0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9'I 10 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Property would act as security for certain South Baxter Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of this Consent Decree, Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded and of no further force and effect, and the May 6, 1992 Renton -Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of no further force and effect. Comprehensive Summaries of project area historical information, records and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Repoft (Woodward Clyde, 1990) conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree, and in multiple documents prepared by TherrnoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present. IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 41. Defendant proposes to acquire the South Baxter Property (along with the North Baxter Property) to facilitate eventual commercial, urban residential, and/or retail development, either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development Project ("Project"), including adjacent properties, which could ultimately result in between approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development at the north end of Renton. The. South Baxter Property, along with the North Baxter Property is anticipated to include approximately 400,000 sq. ft. of development. 42. In 1989, the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993, extensive public hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the general public concerning Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning Code amendments. 43. In addition, in 1996 and 1997, an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") scoping process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping process involved significant public participation, including mailings, formal comment, and public meetings. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 9 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASH1NGTON Ecology Division Po Box 40117 01ymqs� WA 98504-0117 FAX (3b0)478.7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 44. Any property development will be completed in accordance with the Renton Comprehensive flan and area -wide zoning Center Office Residential designation. Subject to the requirements of the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, such development will include permanent public access to shoreline at the Baxter Property. 45. Any residential townhomes or condominiums on the South Baxter Property will be built over structural concrete parking or other structures, placing the first occupied Boor at least one � level above the soil. 46. Two office buildings (approximately 200,000 square feet each) and associated parking may be located on the South Baxter Property. Thy proposed buildings are anticipated to be five stories, or approximately 68 feet tall. Parking may be located as the first floor of the office building or as separate structures. 47. The development would be designed to take advantage of the desirable location of the South Baxter Property and will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Redevelopment will facilitate permanent public access to the shoreline (through a gravel walking trail on the inland edge of shoreline enhancements and observation stations), create a connection to existing recreational use trails, and create transportation and parking improvements. 48. Development of the South Banter Property is expected to create a significant number of well -paying jobs and spur development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington. 49. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsigniiicance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 10 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHTNGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 OhMP* WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438.7143 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24! i 25 26 V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED 50. Upon the Effective Date of this Decree, Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action Plan described in Attachment B, including all attachments thereto, according to the schedule provided therein. Defendant shall submit as -built documentation to Ecology to verify construction of the cleanup and mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan. Cleanup activities include source remediation, site grading to facilitate site redevelopment, soil capping, wetland mitigation, and confirmational groundwater monitoring. Source remediation includes removal of NAPL from wells (BAX-14), sediment and soil excavation and off -site treatment or disposal, and in situ soil mixing (stabilization). Source remediation activities will occur at prescribed locations according to the Cleanup Action Plan. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize disruption to the surrounding community. As such, the actual schedule for site cleanup may vary to facilitate this coordination. 51. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions for the release of Hazardous Substances covered by this Decree, other than those required by this Decree, unless the parties agree to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in_ accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B). 52. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant (Attachment C) with the Office of the King County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Cleanup Action Plan and shall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty (30) days of recording. VI. ECOLOGY COSTS 53. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this Decree. This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996. The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 l ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON EcolCONSENT DECREE PO Bu Division PO Box 40117 South Baxter Olympia, WA 99504-0117 FAX (350) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 or its contractors for, or on, the Facility under Chapter 70.105D RCW, both before and after the issuance of this Decree, for Decree preparation, negotiations, and administration. Ecology oversight costs shall be calculated pursuant to WAC 173-340-550(2) and shall include direct staff costs, an agency support cost multiplier, and a program support cost multiplier for all oversight costs. 54. Defendant agrees to pay Ecology oversight costs within ninety (90) days of receiving from Ecology an itemized statement of costs that includes a summary of costs incurred, an identification of involved staff, and the amount of time spent by involved staff members on the project. Ecology shall, upon request, provide Defendant with a general statement of work performed. Ecology shall prepare itemized statements of its oversight costs quarterly. Failure to pay Ecology's costs within ninety (90) days of receipt of the itemized statement will result in interest charges at the rate of twelve (12) percent per annum. 55. In the event Defendant disputes expenditures or the adequacy of documentation for which reimbursement is sought, the parties agree to be bound by the dispute resolution process set forth in Section XII. VIL DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS 56- The project coordinator for Ecology is: Gail Colburn Toxics Cleanup Program Department of Ecology Northwest Regional .Office 3190--160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 (206) 649-7265 The project coordinator for Defendant is: Grant Hainsworth Thermolketec Consulting Corporation 1011 SW Klickitat Wary, Suite 207 Seattle, WA 98134 57. Each project coordinator shall be responsible for overseeing the implementation of this Decree. The Ecology project coordinator will be Ecology's designated representative at the PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 12 ATTORNEY GENERAL OFWASHINGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology 0Bo 40117 PO Box 48T l7 South Baxter Olympia, WA 48504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7747 7 8 ►i 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Property. To the maximum extent possible, communications between Ecology and Defendant and all documents, including reports, approvals, and other correspondence concerning the activities performed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Decree, shall be directed through the project coordinators. The project coordinators may designate, in writing, working -level staff contacts for all or portions of the implementation of Section V of this Decree, including the Cleanup Action Plan, incorporated in this Decree as Attachment B. The project coordinators may agree to minor modifications to the work to be performed without formal amendments to this Decree. Minor modifications will be documented in writing by Defendant and approved by Ecology. 58. Any party may change its respective project coordinator. Written notification shall be given to the other party at least ten (10) days prior to the change. VIII. PERFORMANCE 59. All work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under the direction and supervision, as necessary, of a professional engineer or hydrogeologist, or equivalent. Any construction work must be under the supervision of a professional engineer. Defendant shall notify Ecology in writing as to the identity of such engineer(s) or hydrogeologist(s) or -others and of any. contractor(s) and subcontractor(s), including the contractor responsible for installation of required mitigation actions, to be used in carrying out the terms of this Decree in advance of their involvement at the Facility. IX. CERTIFICATIONS 60. Defendant certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and belief, it has fully and accurately disclosed to Ecology the information currently in its possession that relates to the environmental conditions at the Facility, or to Defendant's right and title thereto. 61. Defendant represents and certifies that, to the best of its knowledge, it is not aware of any facts'that would give rise to liability to it under RCW 70.1 D5D.040 prior to acquisition of the Baxter Property. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 13 ATTORNEY GENERA.OF-WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 96504.0117 FAX (360) 439.7743 2 3 4 5 6 7 . 8' 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 62. Defendant represents and certifies its belief that redevelopment of the South Baxter Property is not likely to contribute to the existing release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances from the Facility, interfere with future remedial actions that may be needed at the Facility, or increase health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of the Facility. 63. If any certification provided by Defendant pursuant to this Section is not true, the Covenant Not To Sue in Section XIV shall not be effective with respect to Defendant, and Ecology reserves all rights it may have against Defendant. 0 X. PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY 64. The restrictions, obligations, and rights set forth in this Decree shall be binding upon the parties to this Decree. Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties to this Decree at the option of Defendant, by following the amendment procedures set forth in Section X3. 65. Defendant shall implement contractual provisions that require all Successors in Interest and Assigns to this Decree to comply with the applicable provisions of this Decree. 66. If proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns wish to become a party to this Decree, Defendant and the proposed transferee(s) shall notify Ecology and the Attorney General's office of the proposed transfer, the name of the proposed transferee(s), and the proposed transferee(s) intended use of the South Baxter Property. The notification required by this Paragraph shal l occur at least 30 days before the date of a proposed transfer of interests. Such notification shall be in the form of Attachment E to this Decree. 67. In the event Defendant assigns all of its fee interest to a Successor in Interest or Assign, and that Successor in Interest or Assign becomes a party to this Decree, at Ecology's sole discretion and with its concurrence, Ecology shall thereafter look first to such successor for performance of the requirements of this Decree, including, but not limited to, performance of the work as described in Section V, and payments of Ecology costs described in Section VI. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 14 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division Po Box 40117 Oipnpia, WA 985D4.01 t7 FAX (36d)438-7 743 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 070 68. Defendant shalt further provide 30 days advance written notice to Ecology of Defendant's intent to convey any fee interest in a substantial portion of the South Baxter Property. No conveyance of title in the South Baxter Property shall be consummated by Defendant without adequate provision.for continued monitoring, operation and maintenance of the remedial actions called for in this Decree. Failure of the Defendant or the proposed transferee to timely comply with this Section's notification requirements does not in any way alter the rights and obligations of such party as set forth in this Decree_ XI. AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE; ADDING N-FW PARTIES TO DECREE 69. This Decree may only be amended by a written stipulation among the parties to this Decree that is thereafter entered and approved by order of the Court. Such amendment shall become effective upon entry by the Court, or upon a later date if such date is expressly stated in the parties' written stipulation or the Court so orders. 70. Amendments may cover any subject or be for any purpose agreed to by the parties to this Decree. If Ecology determines that the subject of an amendment requires public input, Ecology shall provide thirty (30) days' public notice prior to seeking entry of the amendment by the Court. 71. Whenever the Defendant contemplates conveying an interest in the Property to a proposed Successor in Interest and Assign, the proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns may request that the Decree be amended as provided for in this paragraph. The amendment to the Decree shall be in the form of Attachment F, "Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns." Ecology may withhold consent to an amendment making proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns a party to this Decree only if Defendant or its Successors in Interest and Assigns is in violation or will be in violation of a material term of this Decree. 72. The parties contemplate that various interests in the South Baxter Property may be granted to parties who will became "Successors in Interest and Assigns", but who choose not to become parties to this Decree. Examples include tenants leasing space in completed buildings, PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 15 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASWNGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division PO Box 40117 South Baxter Olympia, WA 99504-01 17 FAX (360) 439.7743 1 2 3. 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 M 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ienders taking a security interest in all or a portion of the South Baxter Property and persons obtaining limited possessory rights in the South Baxter Property. Nonetheless, such parties will be entitled to the protections, if any, afforded by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(e) and (t). XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 73, In the event a dispute arises as to an approval, disapproval, proposed modification, or other decision or action by Ecology's project coordinator pertaining to implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, the parties shall use the dispute resolution procedure set forth below. a. Upon receipt of the Ecology project coordinator's written decision, Defendant has fourteen (14) days within which to notify Ecology's project coordinator of any objection to the decision. b. The parties' project coordinators shall then confer in an effort to resolve the dispute. If the project coordinators cannot resolve the dispute within fourteen (14) days following the conference, Ecology's project coordinator shall issue a written decision. C. Defendant may then request Ecology management review of the decision. This request shall be submitted in writing to the Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager within seven (7) days of receipt of Ecology's project coordinator's written decision. d. Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager shall conduct a review of the dispute and shall issue a written decision regarding the dispute within thirty (30) days of the Defendant's request for review. The Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager's decision shall be Ecology's final decision on the disputed chatter. 74. If Ecology's final written decision is unacceptable to Defendant, Defendant has the right to submit the dispute to the Court for resolution. The parties agree that one judge should retain jurisdiction over this case and shall, as necessary, resolve any dispute arising under this Decree. For disputes concerning Ecology's investigative and remedial decisions that arise under this Decree, the Court shall review the actions or decisions of Ecology under an arbitrary and capricious standard. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 16 ATTORNEY GENERALOF WAS}{INGTON Ecology Division po Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504.W 17 FAX {360} 439.7743 1 2 3 4 5 1 71 81 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 75. The parties may mutually agree to substitute an Altemative Dispute Resolution (ADR) process, such as mediation, for the formal dispute resolution process set forth in this Section, 76. The parties agree to use the dispute resolution process in good faith and agree to expedite, to the extent possible, the dispute resolution process whenever it is used. When either party uses the dispute resolution process in bad faith or for purposes of delay, the other party may seek sanctions. 77. The implementation of these dispute resolution procedures shall not provide a basis for delay of any activities required in this Decree, unless Ecology agrees in writing to a schedule extension or the Court so orders. 78. The parties agree that this Decree is not intended to alter any evidentiary burdens of either party in any proceeding by Ecology for costs or claims involving the South Baxter Property. X111. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION 79. With regard to claims for contribution against Defendant, the parties intend that Defendant will obtain the protection against claims for contribution for matters addressed in this Decree pursuant to MTCA, RCW 70.105D.040(4)(d). XIV. COVENANT NOT TO SUE; REOPENERS 80. In consideration of Defendant's compliance with the terms and conditions of this Decree, Ecology agrees that compliance with this Decree shall stand in lieu of any and all administrative, legal, and equitable remedies and enforcement actions ("Actions') available to the state against Defendant or Successors in Interest for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances at the Facility, provided such Actions pertain to Hazardous Substances which Ecology knows or believes to be located at the Facility as of the date of this Decree. This covenant is strictly limited to the Facility as defined in Section 11 of this Decree and shown on Attachment D. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 17 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WAstUNGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-01 17 FAX (360) 438-7743 4 6 7' 8� 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 181 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 81, Reopeners: In the following circumstances, Ecology may exercise its full legal authority to address releases of Hazardous Substances at the Facility, notwithstanding the Covenant Not To Sue set forth above: a. In the event Defendant fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this Decree, including all attachments, and after written notice of noncompliance, such failure is not cured by such Defendant within sixty (60) days of receipt of notice of noncompliance. b. In the event factors not known at the time of entry of this Agreement and not disclosed to Ecology are discovered and such factors present a previously unknown threat to human health or the environment and are not addressed by the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B). If such factors are discovered, Ecology shall give written notice to Defendant. Defendant will have sixty (60) days from receipt of notice to propose a cure to the condition giving rise to the threat. if such cure is acceptable to Ecology, Defendant and Ecology will negotiate an appropriate timetable for implementation. C. Upon Ecology's determination that actions beyond the terms of this Decree are necessary to abate an emergency situation which threatens public health, welfare, or the environment. 82. Applicabili : The Covenant Not to Sue set forth above shall have no applicability whatsoever to: a. Criminal liability. b. Actions against PLPs not party to this Decree. C. Liability for damages for injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural resources. 83. Ecology retains all of its legal and equitable rights against all persons, except as otherwise provided in this Decree. PROSPECTNE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE Sowh Baxter 18 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASWNGTON Ecotogy Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 93504 -0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 21 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24' 25 26 XV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 84. Defendant reserves all rights and defenses which it may have and which are not otherwise addressed in this Decree, including the right to seek contribution or cost recovery for funds expended pursuant to this Decree, subject to the limitations in Section XXVII. 85. Except as provided herein for the parties, this Decree does not grant any rights or affect any liabilities of any person, firm, or corporation or subdivision or division of state, federal, or local government. XVI. DISCLAIMER 86. This Decree does not constitute a representation by Ecology that the Property is fit for any particular purpose. XVIL RETENTION OF RECORDS 87. Defendant shall preserve, during the -pendency of this Decree and for ten (10) years from the date this Decree is no longer in effect as provided in Section XXIX, all records, reports, documents, and underlying data in its possession relevant to the implementation of this Decree and shall insert in contracts with project contractors and subcontractors a similar record retention requirement. Defendant shall retain all monitoring data so long as monitoring is ongoing as provided in the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B). In the event the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B) is modified to terminate monitoring, Defendant shall retain all monitoring data until ten (10) years after monitoring is completed. Upon request of Ecology, Defendant shall make all nonarchived records available to Ecology and allow access for review. All archived records shall be made available to Ecology within a reasonable period of time. XVHL PROPERTY ACCESS 89. Defendant grants to Ecology, its employees, agents, contractors, and authorized representatives an irrevocable right to enter upon the Property with reasonable notice and at any reasonable time for purposes of allowing Ecology to monitor or enforce compliance with this Decree. The right of entry granted in this Section is in addition to any right Ecology may have to PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON CONSENT DECREE �e Division South Baxter Olympia. WA 9M4-0117 PAX (350) 438.7743 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 l8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26' enter onto the Property pursuant to specific statutory or regulatory authority. Consistent with Ecology's responsibilities under state and federal law, Ecology, and any persons acting for it, shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable effort not to interfere with the operations of Defendant or Successors in Interest by any such entry. In the event Ecology enters the Property for reasons other than emergency response, Ecology agrees that it shall provide reasonable notice to Defendant of any planned entry, as well as schedules and locations of activity on the Property. Ecology further agrees to accommodate reasonable requests that it modify its scheduled entry or activities at the Property. Notwithstanding any provision of the Decree, Ecology retains all of its access authorities and access rights, including enforcement authorities related thereto, under MTCA and any other applicable state statute or regulation. XIX. COMPLLANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS 89. All actions carried out by Defendant or Successors in In€erest pursuant to this Decree shall be done in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including applicable permitting requirements. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(1), the known and applicable substantive requirements of Chapters 70.94, 70.95, 70.105, 75.20, 90.48, and 90.58 RCW, and any laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for remedial action, have been included in the Cleanup Action Plan and the RI and FS and are incorporated by reference here as binding requirements in this Decree. Defendant has a continuing Obligation to determine whether additional permits or approvals addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this Decree. In the event either Defendant or Ecology determines that additional permits or approvals addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this Decree, it shall promptly notify the other party of this determination. Ecology shall determine whether Ecology or Defendant shall be responsible to contact the appropriate state and/or local agencies. If Ecology so requires, Defendant shall promptly consult with the appropriate state and/or PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL of WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO BOX 40117 Olympik WA 98594-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 local agencies and provide Ecology with written documentation from those agencies of the substantive requirements those agencies believe are applicable to the remedial action. Ecology shall make the determination on the additional substantive requirements that must be met by Defendant and on how Defendant must meet those requirements. Ecology shall inform Defendant in writing of these requirements. Once established by Ecology, the additional requirements shall be enforceable requirements of this Decree. Defendant shall not begin or continue the remedial action potentially subject to the additional requirements until Ecology makes its final. determination. Ecology shall ensure that notice and opportunity for comment are provided to the public and appropriate agencies prior to establishing the substantive requirements under this Section. 90. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(2), in the event that Ecology determines that the exemption from complying with the procedural requirements of the laws referenced in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would result in the loss of approval from a federal agency necessary for the state to administer any federal law, such exemption shall not apply, and Defendant or Successors in Interest shall comply with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the laws referenced in RCW 70.105D.090(1), XX. SAMPLING, DATA REPORTING, AND AVAILABILITY 91. With respect to the implementation of this Decree, Defendant shall make the results of all sampling, laboratory reports, and/or test results generated by it, or on its behalf, available to Ecology in hard copy and on electronic disk. Data submitted on disk shall be in a format acceptable to Ecology for importation for use as a relational database into databases and/or spreadsheet software commonly available. 92. If requested by Ecology, Defendant shall allow Ecology and/or its authorized representatives to tape split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Defendant pursuant to the implementation of this Decree. Defendant shall notify Ecology seven (7) days in advance of any sample collection or work activity at the Property. Ecology shall, upon request, allow Defendant or PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHMMM on CONSENT DECREE ECOBox40117 131 Po B SDmh Baxter Olpmpia.WA 48504-0117 FAX (36Q)438-7743 1 2 3 4 S 6 7' 8 i 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 its authorized representatives to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Ecology pursuant to the implementation of this Decree provided Defendant does not interfere with Ecology's sampling. Ecology shall endeavor to notify Defendant prior to any sample collection activity. XXL PROGRESS REPORTS 93. Defendant shall submit to Ecology written monthly progress reports beginning thirty (30) days prior to initiation of the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B) and continuing until initiation, of performance monitoring. After that time, progress reports shall be submitted quarterly, or at other intervals as approved by Ecology. The progress reports shall describe the actions taken during the reporting period to implement the requirements of this Decree. The progress report shall include the following: a. A list of on -site activities that have taken place during the reporting period. b. A detailed description of any deviations from required tasks not otherwise documented in project plans or amendment requests. C. A description of all deviations from the schedule during the current reporting period and any planned deviations in the upcoming reporting period. d. For any deviations in schedule, a plan for recovering lost time and maintaining compliance with the schedule. e. A list of deliverables for the upcoming reporting period if different from the schedule. 94. All progress reports shall be submitted by the tenth day of the month in which they are due after the Effective Date of this Decree. XXII. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE 95. An extension of schedule shall be granted only when a request for an extension is submitted in a timely fashion, generally at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the deadline for PROSPECTNE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 22 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASTI NGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 48504-0117 FAX (360) 438.7743 1' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 _ l5Y 16 17 I8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 which the extension is requested, and good cause exists for granting the extension. All extensions shall be requested in writing. The request shall specify the reason(s) the extension is needed. 96.. An extension shall be granted only for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. A requested extension shall not be effective until approved by Ecology or the Court. Ecology shall act upon any written request for extension in a timely fashion. It shall not be necessary to formally amend this Decree pursuant to Section Xl when a schedule extension is granted. 97. The burden shall fall on Defendant to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Ecology that the request for such an extension has been submitted in a timely fashion and that good cause exists for granting the extension. Good cause includes, but is not limited to, the following: a. Circumstances beyond the reasonable control and despite the due diligence of Defendant, including delays in obtaining necessary permits, delays caused by unrelated third parties or Ecology, such as (but not limited to) delays by Ecology in reviewing, approving, or modifying documents submitted by Defendant. b. Acts of God, including fire, flood, blizzard, extreme temperatures, storm, or other unavoidable casualty. C. Endangerment as described in Section 3DUII. Ecology may extend the schedule for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days, except where a longer extension is needed as a result of: manner. a. Delays in the issuance of a necessary permit which was applied for in a timely i b. Other circumstances deemed exceptional or extraordinary by Ecology. However, neither increased costs of performance of the terms of the Decree nor changed economic circumstances shall be considered circumstances beyond the reasonable control of Defendant. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 23 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WAS HINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Otympia. WA 98504-0117 FAX(360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ecology shall give Defendant written notification in a timely fashion of any extensions granted pursuant to this Decree. XXIII. ENDANGERMENT 98. If, during implementation of this Decree, Ecology determines that there is an actual or imminent danger to human health or to the environment, Ecology may order Defendant to stop further implementation of this Decree for such period of time as.needed to abate the danger or may petition the Court for an order as appropriate. During any stoppage of work under this Section, the obligations of Defendant shall be suspended, and the time period for performance of that work, as well as the time period for any other work dependent upon the work which is stopped, shall be extended, pursuant to Section XXII of this Decree, for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. 99. In the event Defendant determines that activities undertaken in furtherance of this Decree or any other circumstances or activities are creating an imminent danger to human health or to the environment, Defendant may stop implementation of this Decree for such period of time necessary for Ecology to evaluate the situation and determine whether Defendant should proceed with implementation of the Decree or whether the work stoppage should be continued until the danger is abated. Defendant shall notify Ecology's project coordinator as soon as possible, but no later than twenty-four (24) hours after stoppage of work, and thereafter provide Ecology with documentation of the basis for the work stoppage. If Ecology disagrees with Defendant, Ecology may order Defendant to resume implementation of this Decree. If Ecology concurs with the work stoppage, Defendant's obligations shall be suspended, and the time period for performance of that work, as well as the time period for any other work dependent on the work which was stopped, shall be extended, pursuant to Section X)M of this ,Decree, for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the circumstances. Any disagreements pursuant to this Section shall be resolved through the dispute resolution procedures in Section XIL PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 24 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASH[NGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 FAX (360) 438-7743 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11', 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22' 23 24 25 26 XXIV. PERIODIC REVIEW 100. As remedial Actions, including long term monitoring, continue at the site, the parties agree to review the progress of remedial actions at the site, and to review the data accumulated as a result of site monitoring pursuant to WAC 170-340-420. XXV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTING 101. Upon completion of the capital portion of remedial actions specified in the Cleanup Action Plan (Attachment B), Ecology shall issue a Partial Certificate of Completion for the capital portion of the remedial actions. Upon completion of the remaining remedial actions as described in Attachment B, except any necessary long term monitoring, and, upon conf r nation that cleanup standards have been met, Ecology will issue a Certificate of Completion. Unless Ecology becomes aware of circumstances at the Facility that present a previously unknown threat to human health or the environment, Ecology shall, within thirty (30) days of issuance of the Certificate of Completion, propose to remove the Facility from the Hazard Ranking List, pursuant to WAC 173-340-330(4). XXVI. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS 102. To the extent allowed by law, Defendant and its Successors in Interest (hereinafter collectively the "Indemnitors") agree to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the state of Washington, its employees, and agents from any and all claims or causes of action for death or injuries to persons or for loss or damage to property arising from or on account of acts or omissions of Indemnitors, their officers, employees, agents, or contractors in entering into and implementing this Decree. However, IndemWtors shall not indemnify the state of Washington nor save nor hold its employees and agents harmless from any claims or causes of action arising out of the negligent acts or omissions of the state of Washington, or the employees or agents of the state, in implementing the activities pursuant to this Decree. In any claims against the state by any employee of the Indemnitors, the indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by the limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the Indemnitors under workmen's compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefits acts. PROSPECTNE PURCHASER 25 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division Po Box aol 17 yrn South Baxter of pi6 WA 4&504-01 17 FAX (360) 439-7743 1 2 3 4 5: 61 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 XXVIL CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE 103. Defendant hereby agrees that it will not seek to recover any costs accrued in implementing the remedial action required by this Decree from the state of Washington or any of its agencies other than loans or grants from the State Toxics Control Account or any Local Toxic$ Control Account for any costs incurred in implementing this Decree. Except as provided above, however, Defendant expressly reserves its right to seek to recover any costs incurred in implementing this Decree from any other potentially liable person. XXVIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 104. Public participation shall be accomplished by implementing the Public Participation Plan attached as Attachment G. Ecology shall maintain the responsibility for public participation in accordance with WAC 173-340-600(8)(g). Defendant shall help coordinate and implement public participation for the Property as required by Ecology. XXIX. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION 105. This Decree shall remain in effect and this Court shall retain jurisdiction over both the subject matter of this Decree and the parties for the duration of the performance of the terms and provision of this Decree for the purpose of enabling any of the parties to apply to the Court, as provided in the dispute resolution process set forth in Section XH, and the amendment process set forth in Section X1, at any time for such further order, direction, and relief as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure that obligations of the parties have been satisfied. The Decree shall remain in effect until the parties agree otherwise or until Defendant has been notified by Ecology in writing that the requirements of this Decree have been satisfactorily completed. XXX. PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT 106. This Decree has been the subject of public notice and comment as required by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(a). As a result of this process, Ecology has found that this Decree will lead to a more expeditious cleanup of Hazardous Substances at the Property, in compliance with applicable cleanup standards, and is in the public interest. PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT DECREE South Baxter 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASMNGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98%4-0117 FAX (360) 439-7743 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 107. If the Court withdraws its consent, this Decree shall be null and void at the option: of any party, and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs and without prejudice. In such an event, no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree. XXXI. SEVERABILITY 108. If any section, subsection, sentence, or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, such illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability will not affect the legality, validity, or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any other section, subsection, sentence, or clause. XXXIL EFFECTIVE DATE 109. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been entered by the Court and the closing of the property purchase is completed as defined in the Property Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J. H. Baxter & Co. SO ORDERED this _I & -day of 2000. Judge, King County Superior Court 4911111 p C-0 T 10 -- The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date specified below. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington corporation ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE Pri-aN4ame! /11 C. M4 &Z�d Printed Name: e--"] a �" e� c e 6 DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY By:4�<ctw* L4�� Printed Name: Date: PROSPECTIVE PLIRCHAgER 27 ATTORNEY GENEILAL OF WASHrNGTON CONSENT DECREE may DivPO ?O Box 40l 17 South Baxter Oiympik WA 985o41-011 7 FAX (36D)438-7]43 DRAFT April 4, 2000 ATTACHMENT C RESTRICTIVE COVENANT SOUTH BAXTER JCorrect Recording Format To Be Added] This Declaration of Restrictive Covenant is made pursuant-- R(,' 70,105D.030(1)(0 and (g) and WAC 173-340-440 _ by —=i'bgj, uendall-Company�E� Washington corporation, its successors and ass= ail---: li&--: Stat&_EE&f—:_:Wash1ngtt3t Department of-Eco3o� r3�-its successors and sign liereaf%� `'Ecology" rd3 here����— emedial AZt—imn) oc eRid at theproperty that is the s .gc - f this eve Wit_ The erred gE&c1i_w conducted at the property is desenbZi&in the fo g doc- tUinents: 1) Prdspe— t! ve Purchaser Consent Decree, dated Viand 2) C1Acticat3 dated _ These documents are on file at Ecola=gy �orlh`w—&-§Qgional Office (NWRO). ctive Covenant is required because the Remedial Action resulted in residua-Honcentrations of certain hazardous substances which exceed the Model Toxics Control Act Method B Residential Cleanup Levels for soil and groundwater established under WAC 173-340-740. These cleanup levels are described in the Final Feasibility Study for South J. H. Baxter Property, Renton, Washington, dated The undersigned, Port Quendall Company, is the fee owner of real property thereafter "Property") in the County of Ring, State of Washington, that is subject to this Restrictive Covenant. The Property is legally described as set forth in Exhibit A, attached. }D15gMo 1u Port Quendall Company makes the following declaration as to limitations restrictions, and uses to which the Property may be put and spe�hat such declarations shall constitute covenants to run with the land, as provide�l�- be binding on all parties and all persons claiming under them, incl ,t - �rrent future owners of any portion of or interest in the Property heraler "� : Section I. Without prior written consent3a = a og ��x_ept a - rm-ded----- following implernenzon of the GleamsctioirPl"an,xhe-wneshalIier, modify, or rem�rni Faf H$tlaiztiiYEnpr ca -ed by th nup�i3 n PlarEh-M manner that may_esun the rem expx�so the enylonmeniminated soil or create a new ure pathv e struaU15--s and cafi quired by the Cleanup Action Plan are desc� the att�i -a�xhil3 Structure or cap maintenance is permitted without noticolog�o- ong as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed. A Soil Man F ill be prepared for Ecology approval that outlines specific protocols asso�ated with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. In accord with the Soil Management Plan, limited excavation, utility placement or repair, minor site grading, or other pre -approved activities connected with site development and construction are permitted so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed and a structure or cap that provides protection from direct contact as required by the Cleanup Action Plan is provided following development. 2 Section 2. Any activity on the Property that may interfere with the integriwof the Remedial Action and continued protection of human health and the -enW onmen provided for in the Cleanup Action Plan is prohibited_ The Cleanup Adtt rr�ffl � and contemplates development of the Property as a mixed use=r_e�;�ti, rem commercial) property. ---- Section 3. Unless authorized by the an oRestricttr�tT Covenant, no_acTtut�s permitte- = hay r-nsuTt in=f -i+- ease oiE osure to the envirotim nCof tR su`�s — that rem�on t�erty-W-'create a new expci§-Vj:g,-pathway. M Q]eanup—=A— tion Plan Re Ofconmplates development and use oie Eropertyrruxed use=(residential, rat`l ommercial) property. �ection 4.s;3 auth- by the Cleanup Action Plan, the Owner will not with rad titi;�r allaNao hers to withdraw, groundwater from the Property. eRion�Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, access shall be restr?r- a to prevent swimming or direct contact with contaminated sediments at the Property. Mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan shall be maintained as set forth in the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, which is an enforceable provision of the Cleanup Action Plan. Section 6. Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, residential use on the Property is permitted so long as a building, or other structure (as described in the Cleanup Action plan) is present such that the residential use is located over structural 3 sn i sq�,,4 ns parking or other structures, placing the first occupied floor at least one level ahn-ve tlt� soil and prevents direct contact with all soil that exceeds Method B Cleat-u v s. Section 7. The Owner of the property must give thirty (30) dae notice to Ecology of the Owner's intent to convey a fee interest in a �u stortio�= the Property. No conveyance of fee title in a substantial--porfionrof tHEP. _roperty sha1L12 consummated by the Owner without adequate :�ini -- p e rovIstox fa—l- continue monitoring, opefaftaon=dnd maintenanceofthe Remedial=Actaon;jincludihe mitigation meastue�=_F tnt�re t in lenaharr a substantt�l`=poru9r�t the Pr qerty may be canue���thout n�Eco�gT-`r3T Orion 8. T-he Wner iii�restrict le s�s�o uses and activities consistent with the motive Coy-enmt�and ri . l potentially impacted lessees of the restrictions on the use ofl�e )roa� ert e Owner must notify and obtain approval from Ecology prior to any use the Property that is inconsistent with the terms of this Restrictive Covenant. Ecology may approve any inconsistent use only after public notice and comment. Section 10. The Owner shall allow authorized representatives of Ecology the tight to enter the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of evaluating the Remedial Action; to take samples, to inspect remedial actions conducted at the property, and to inspect records that are related to the Remedial Action. Ecology shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable efforts not to interfere with the operations of the Property occupancy 4 kll �'I �f.V lU Section 1 1. The Owner of the Property reserves the right under WAC_L-73-34�_ 440 to record an instrument that provides that this Restrictive Covenant:�sfia7—loner limit use of the Property or be of any further force or effect. HQig�r=sge EMrs -- instrument may be recorded only if Ecology, after public notice ;6F5 hiTyai�— comment, concurs. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a - Washington corporationIts: DatiThi� da}� _., 2000. S STATE OF WASHINGTON } } SS. COUNTY OF } I certify that I know or have satisfactory �ridene6 is the person who appeared before me�id=sajd pers:o5i. acknowledged that he/she was authorized to execute the_ins[iufrient dhd7-dckriowledged-.if_�_- as of Port Quendall Cotn.any-totTe freer Voluntary=ac.t== and deed of such pa �r__'or the uses -and purposes' mention d-ij i`s=instrurne�:= (Signature of Notary) (Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary) Notary public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires G Appendix B Partial Certificate of Completion '�';r?[r.l i!'1 ;i'er�•;t:,.,.'F..3i�,.. 3F'. .1 iii;li :i:•tP: irfr•;r- !'r•�fr•:•Lr••;•�'.1��_ _s;tlpl 't!efi[%i•-i-i.'.. 05)��.; - rn April 10, 2006 Mr. Clint Chase Port Quendall Company c/o Vulcan Inc. 505 5th Ave. S., Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Mr. Chase: Re: Partial Certificate ol'the Completion for the Capital Portion of the Cleanup at the J.H. Baxter South Parcel, Menton, WA Ecology certifiers that the capital portion of the cleanup required under the Consent Decree; and Cleanup Action flan (CAP) dated April 4, 2000, has been completed at ;f.H. Baxter South Parcel, Renton, WA, in accordance with applicable environmental laws. The capital p,)rtion of the cleanup consists of the following cleanup activities: + Removal and off -site disposal of impacted sediment above the cleanup level of 100 mg/kg; total PAH Isom Baxter Cove; * Re-creation of wetlands adjacent to Lake Washington and buffer restoration and enhancement; impact avoidance to species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act through hydraulic isolation of the project work and the tinting; of in -water work; Dense non -aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) removal front source monitoring well BAX-14; • Excavation oflight iron -aqueous liquid (LNAPI.) impacted soil in the tank farin area based on an action level of 1,000 mg/kg total PAH and off -site disposal of soil to remove the long-term source of groundwater impacts; • Excavation and off -site disposal of listed hazardous waste Bona the Baxter Lagoon area; rvlr. Clint Chase .March 28, 2006 March 28, 2006 Page 2 • .In -situ soil stabilization of impacted soil near the Butt Tank and Baxter Lagoon area based on an action level of 1,000 nag/kg total PAK to remove the long-term source of groundwater impacts. The above remedial actions were defined as the capital portion of the remedial action -in the CAP. which includes source remediation (DNAPL removal, soil excavation and disposal or treatment, in -situ stabilization) and wetland mitigation. Ecology received and reviewed three quarterly groundwater monitoring reports by RETEC, dated November 10, 2005, December 22, 2005 and March 31, 2006. The groundwater data collected to date have met the Model Toxics Control Act (iv1TCA) cleanup levels. Port Quendall Company (PQC) will continue the groundwater monitoring according; to the schedule specified in the CAP. .Ecology also received and reviewed the "Baxter Cove Wetland Monitoring Report, Year 1, Year 2 and Year 3" by RE'1TEC, dated October 14, 2003, November 3, 2004, Lind December 22, 2005. Ecology recognizes that PQC is meeting the requirements of Corps of Engineers Wetland Permit Number 2000-2-00512, and PQC will continue the wetland monitoring; prograrn according, to the schedule specified in the CAP However, die following remedial actions have not been completed: • Capping; of.residual soil impacts to prevent direct contact by humans and institutional controls to ensure cap integrity into the future on both South and North Parcel: • Implementation of institutional controls to prevent future groundwater extraction and provide for the continued integrity of the cap Ecology understands that the capping of residual soil impacts may be dependent on the site redevelopment schedule since landscaping, parking; lots, and building foundations used are all projected to comprise portions of the cap. If you have any questions, please call me at (425) 649-718T Sincerely, Sunny Lin ker, P.E. Toxics Cleanup Prog7rain Appendix C Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington, 98104 October 2006 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Mickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington, 98104 Prepared by: Shashi Munige, Winston Chen, PAFii%nentai Engineer Reviewed A:Z! Grant Hainsworth, P.LWIRroject Manager October 2006 F:IPROJECTWIScahawkslIDR\Appc"css\App C SWPF'r3WPPP DRAFT 10-6-06.doc Table of Contents 1 Introduction ....................................... •............................................................ 1-1 1.1 Site Location ....... ......... ................ ................................................... —1-1 1.2 Objectives........................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Organization .......... ............................................................................. 1-2 2 Site Description..............................................................................................2-I 2.1 Existing. Conditions............................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Proposed Construction Activities...................................................... 2-1 3 Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices .................................. 3-1 3.1 The 12 Best Management Practices Elements ................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Element #1 — Mark Clearing Limits ...................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Element #2 — Establish Construction Access ......................... 3-1 3.1.3 Element 43 — Control Flow Rates .... ................................. ..... 3-1 3.1.4 Element #4 — Install Sediment Controls ................................ 3-2 3.1.5 Element #5 — Stabilize Soils .................................................. 3-3 3.1.6 Element 46 — Protect Slopes .................................................. 3-3 3.1.7 Element #7 — Protect Drain Inlets .......................................... 3-3 3.1.8 Element #8 — Stabilize Channels and Outlets ........................ 3-4 3.1.9 Element #9 — Control Pollutants ............................................ 3-4 3.1.10 Element #10 — Control Dewatering....................................... 3-6 3.1.11 Element #11 — Maintain Best Management Practices ........... 3-7 3.1.12 Element #12 - Manage the Project ........................................ 3-7 3.2 Site Specific Best Management Practices .......................................... 3-9 3.2.1 Upland Area........................................................................... 3-9 3.2.2 Shoreline Area..................................................................... 3-10 3.3 Additional Advanced Best Management Practices .......................... 3-10 4 Pollution Prevention Team .... ........................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Roles and Responsibilities ................. ............................ .................... 4-1 4.2 Team Members.................................................................................. 4-1 5 Site Inspections and Monitoring.................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Site Inspection.................................................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Site Inspection Frequency...................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Site Inspection Documentation .............................................. 5-2 5.2 Stormwater Quality Monitoring........................................................ 5-2 5.2.1 Sanitary Sewer Discharge...................................................... 5-2 5.2.2 Shoreline Area Stormwater Sampling ................................... 5-2 6 Reporting and Recordkeeping....................................................................... 6-1 6.I Recordkeeping................................................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Site Log Book........................................................................ 6-1 6.1.2 Records Retention............................................................... 6-1 6.1.3 Access to Plans and Records .................................................. 6-1 VULC1-19589-510 Table of Contents 6.1.4 Updating the SWPPP............................................. --- ......... 6-1 6.2 Reporting ................................. ....... .................................................... 6-2 6.21 Discharge Monitoring Reports ...................... 6.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance .............................................. 6-2 6.2.3 Permit Application and Changes ........................................— 6-2 7 References .... ......... ......................................................................................... 7-3 VULCI-19589-510 ti List of Figures Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Existing Site Map Figure 3 Existing Site Topographical Map Figure 4 Site Demolition Plan Figure 5 Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Figure 6 TESC Details List of Attachments Attachment A King County Metro Sewer Discharge Permit Attachment B Hydrologic Analysis Attachment C Site Construction BMPs Attachment D Site Inspection Forms Attachment E Construction Stormwater General Permit Attachment F Notice of Intent Application Form WLCI-19589-51 Q iii 1 Introduction This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been prepared for the proposed construction of the Seahawks Training Facility and Headquarters (facility) located on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in Renton, Washington. Environmental remediation activities have been conducted on the properties proposed for the Seahawks training facility. The Cleanup Action Plans (CAPS) pursuant to the approved Consent Decrees (2000) for the properties require an environmental cap and institutional controls to be placed over most of the properties. As part of development activities for this site, the remaining cleanup activities (capping and institutional controls) will be conducted_ Development activities, beyond those required for environmental capping, include construction of an office building and an indoor practice facility structure. This SWPPP was prepared using the Ecology SWPPP Template downloaded from the Ecology Web site on August 2, 2006. This SWPPP was prepared based on the requirements set forth in the Construction Stormwater General Permit, Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SWMMWW) (Ecology, 2005) and in the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (SWMMEW) (Ecology, 2004). The goal of the SWPPP is to improve water quality by reducing pollutants in sormwater discharges. The overall objective of the SWPPP is to prevent migration of storm water from construction areas, which is consistent with the remaining work - to be performed under the Consent Decrees. Where prevention of sormwater migration is not possible, erosion will be controlled by measures specified herein. 1.1 Site Location The site for the proposed Seahawks facility consists of two properties known as North Baxter Property and South Baxter Property. The North Baxter Property, known as the North J. H. Baxter Property/Renton ("North Baxter Property"), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North, on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in Renton, King County, Washington (Figure 1). The North Baxter Property occupies approximately 12 acres, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The North Baxter Property is relatively flat and is situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline. The Misty Cove Condominiums are located directly to the north of the site. The South Baxter Property is located in the southern part of the site. Further to the south is the Quendall Terminals property. Interstate 405 is approximately 500 feet to the east. The North Baxter Property is bordered to the south by the South Baxter Property. VULCI-19589-510 1-1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington 1.2 Objectives The objectives of the SWPPP are to: 1) Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and sedimentation, and to identify, reduce, eliminate or prevent stormwater contamination and water pollution from construction activity. 2) Prevent violations of surface water quality, ground water quality, . or sediment management standards. 3) Prevent, during the construction phase, adverse water quality impacts including impacts on beneficial uses of the receiving water by controlling peak flow rates and volumes of stormwater runoff at the Permittee's outfalls and downstream of the outfalls. 1.3 Organization The report is divided into seven main sections with several attachments that include stormwater related reference materials. The topics presented in the each of the main sections are: • Section i — Introduction. This section provides a summary description of the project, and the organization of the SWPPP document. • Section 2 — Site Description. This section provides a detailed description of the existing site conditions, proposed construction activities, and calculated stormwater flow rates for existing conditions and during construction conditions. • Section 3 — Construction 13MPs. This section provides a detailed description of the BMPs to be implemented based on the 12 required elements of the SWPPP (SWMIVIEW 2004). Section 4 — Pollution Prevention Team. This section identifies the appropriate contact names (emergency and non -emergency), monitoring personnel, and the on -site temporary erosion and sedimentation control inspector • Section 5 — Inspection and Monitoring. This section provides a description of the inspection and monitoring requirements such as the parameters of concern to be monitored, sample locations, sample frequencies, and sampling methods for all stormwater discharge locations from the site VULCI-19589-510 1-2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington • Section 6 — Recordkeeping. This section describes the requirements for documentation of the BMP implementation, site inspections, monitoring results, and changes to the implementation of certain BMPs due to site factors experienced during construction. Supporting documentation and standard forms are provided in the following attachments: • Attachment A — King County Metro Sewer Permit • Attachment B — Hydrologic Analysis • Attachment C — Site Construction BMPs • Attachment D — Site Inspection Forms • Attachment E - Construction Stormwater General Permit • Attachment F -- Notice of Intent Application Form. Construction activities will include demolition, excavation, grading, a permanent indoor practice field structure, office building, four outdoor practice fields, parking and landscaping. This SWPPP presents the proposed construction activities and all temporary erosion and sediment control (TESL) measures, pollution prevention measures, inspection/monitoring activities, and recordkeeping that will be implemented during the proposed construction project. VULCI-19589-510 1-3 2 Site Description 2.1 Existing Conditions The proposed site of the Seahawks training facility and headquarters is at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton in King County, Washington. The site occupies approximately 20 acres, three miles south of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The site is relatively flat and is situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake Washington shoreline. A site vicinity map based on USES topographic map is provided in Figure 2. The existing site is currently flat topographically with weedy brush cover. Based on the geotechnical report conducted for the proposed facility construction (Shannon & Wilson, 2006), the north side of the Baxter site is underlain by a surface crust of man-made fills followed by very soft to stiff, fine-grained, depression fill sediments (silt, clay and organic peat) and loose to medium dense, coarse -grained, alluvial sediments (sands and gravels) to depth ranging from 17 feet to 58 feet. Additionally, a stormwater technical report for the site (Magnusson Klemencic, 2006) describes the surficial soils as likely fill materials due to past operations at the site. Native soils at the site are mostly under the fill materials. For drainage analysis purposes, the soils were treated as Hydrologic Soil Group C, moderate runoff soils. As indicated on the site topographical map (Figure 2), runoff from the site generally drains from east to west to an existing quarry lined pond located on the northeast corner of the site, toward Lake Washington. Based on information from the Class 2 stream mapping for the site, the Gypsy Creek Sub -basin drainage is conveyed on -site via a 24-inch culvert underneath the Burlington Northern railroad tracks near the northeast corner of the site. Upon entering the site, the drainage is discharged to a quarry -lined pond. Beyond the pond, the drainage appears to be piped underground until being discharged along the shoreline of Lake Washington. There are no critical areas on the site such as high erosion risk areas or steep slopes (potential landslide area). There is a wetland along the shoreline of Lake Washington of the site which was established in its current configuration as a mitigation requirement of the South Baxter Consent Decree. 2.2 Proposed Construction Activities The proposed development includes construction of four outdoor practice fields, an indoor practice field building, parking lots, and landscaping. Construction activities will include site preparation, grading, paving, TESC installation, demolition, construction of three outdoor (natural grass) practice fields, an outdoor artificial turf practice field, an indoor practice building field WLCI-19589-510 2-1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington structure, office building, parking lots, and landscape features. New sanitary, electric, gas, and storm drain utilities will also be constructed. In addition, the existing stormwater pipe at the quarry lined pond will be rerouted by installing a large diameter stormwater pipeline connecting the existing outfall at the shoreline of Lake Washington. Details of the proposed construction activities are provided in the Engineering Design Report (RETEC, 2006). Stormwater runoff generated during the proposed construction activities from the environmental capping footprint will be discharged to an existing sanitary sewer under the discharge criteria of the Ding County Sewer discharge permit provided in Attachment A. Any stormwater discharged to Lake Washington during construction activities will be incidental and will occur from a narrow 25-foot buffer along the shoreline that is not included in the environmental capping footprint. Activity within this buffer area will include placement of stormwater discharge structures and riparian plantings. Stormwater runoff volumes generated during 2-year and 10-year, 24-hour storm events were calculated and provided in Attachment B of this SWPPP. This report documents the stormwater and drainage discharge design approach for the facility during construction activities. The following summarizes details regarding site areas: Total site area: Acres Percent impervious area before construction: 6.7% Percent impervious area during construction: <0.1% Disturbed area during construction: 19.4 acres Disturbed area that is characterized as impervious 1.3 acres (i.e., access roads, staging, parking): 2-year stormwater runoff peak flow prior to 0.4 cfs construction (existing): 10-year stormwater runoff peak flow prior to 1.23 cfs construction (existing): 2-year stormwater runoff peak flow during 0.35 efs construction: 10-year stormwater runoff peak flow during 0.91 cfs construction: All stormwater flow calculations are provided in Attachment B. VULCI-19589-510 2-2 3 Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices 3.1 The 12 Best Management Practices Elements 3.1.1 Element #1 - Mark Clearing Limits The limits of construction will be clearly marked before land -disturbing activities begin. Trees that are to be preserved, as well as all sensitive areas and their buffers, will be clearly delineated, both in the field and on the plans. In general, natural vegetation and native topsoil will be retained in an undisturbed state to the maximum extent possible. The BMPs relevant to marking the clearing limits that will be applied for this project include: • Buffer zones (BMP C 102) • High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C103). 3.1.2 Element #2 - Establish Construction Access Construction access or activities occurring on unpaved areas will be minimized, yet where necessary, access points will be stabilized to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public roads, and wheel washing, street sweeping, and street cleaning will be employed to prevent sediment from entering state waters. All wash wastewater will be controlled on site. The specific BMPs related to establishing construction access that will be used as necessary on this project include: • Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C105) • Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization (BMP C107). 3.1.3 Element #3 - Control Flow Rates In order to protect the properties and waterways downstream of the project site, stormwater discharges from the site will be controlled. The specific BMPs for flow control that will be used as necessary on this project include: • Sediment Trap (BMP C240) • Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241). The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, the project must comply with Minimum Requirenient 7 (Ecology, 2005). In general, discharge rates of stormwater from the site will be controlled where increases in impervious area or soil compaction during construction could lead to downstream erosion, or where necessary to meet local agency VULCI-19589-510 3-1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and ?'raining Facility, Renton, Washington stormwater discharge requirements (e.g. discharge to combined sewer systems). 3.1.4 Element #4 — Install Sediment Controls All stormwater runoff from disturbed areas will pass through an appropriate sediment removal BMP before leaving the construction site or prior to being discharged to an infiltration facility. The specific BMPs that may be used for controlling sediment on this project include: • Straw Bale Barrier (BAP C230) • Silt Fence (BMP C233) • Sediment Trap (BMP C240) • Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) • Portable Water Storage Tanks (e.g., Baker Tank) for Sedimentation. In addition, sediment will'be removed from paved areas in and adjacent to construction work areas manually or using mechanical sweepers, as needed, to minimize tracking of sediments on vehicle tires away from the site and to minimize washoff of sediments from adjacent streets in runoff. Whenever possible, sediment laden water will be discharged into onsite, relatively level, vegetated areas-(BMP C240 paragraph S, page 4-102). In some cases, sediment discharge in concentrated runoff can be controlled using permanent stormwater BMPs (e.g., infiltration swales, ponds, trenches). Sediment loads can limit the effectiveness of some permanent stormwater BMPs; such as those used for infiltration or biofiltration; however, those BMPs designed to remove solids by settling (wet ponds- or detention ponds) can be used during the construction phase. When permanent stormwater BMPs will be used to control sediment discharge during construction, the structure will be protected from excessive sedimentation with adequate erosion and sediment control BMPs. Any accumulated sediment will.be removed after construction is complete and the permanent stormwater BMP will be restabilized with vegetation per applicable design requirements once the remainder of the site has been stabilized The following BMPs will be implemented as end -of -pipe sediment controls as required to meet permitted turbidity limits in the site discharge(s). Prior to the implementation of these technologies, sediment sources and erosion control and soil stabilization BAP efforts will be maximized to reduce the need for end -of -pipe sedimentation controls, including the following: • Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241) VULCI-19589-510 3-2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, .Benton, Washington • Construction Stormwater Filtration (BMP C251) • Construction Stormwater Chemical Treatment (BMP C 250) (implemented only with prior written approval from Ecology): 3.1.5 Element #5 -- Stabilize Soils Exposed and unworked soils will be stabilized with the application of effective BMPs to prevent erosion throughout the life of the project. The specific BMPs for soil stabilization that may be used as necessary on this project include: • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120) • Sodding (BMP C124) • Topsoiling (BMP C125) • Dust Control (BMP C140) • Early application of gravel base on areas to be paved. The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, no soils will remain exposed and unworked for more than 7 days during the dry season (May 1 to September 30) and 2 days during the wet season (October I to April 30). Regardless of the time of year, all soils will be stabilized at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on weather forecasts. 1n general, cut and fill slopes will be stabilized as soon as possible and soil stockpiles will be temporarily covered with plastic sheeting. All stockpiled soils will be stabilized to avoid erosion, protected with sediment trapping measures, and where possible, be located away from storm drain inlets, waterways, and drainage channels. 3.1.6 Element #6 --- Protect Slopes All cut and fill slopes will be designed, constructed, and protected in a manner than minimizes erosion. The following specific BMPs may be used as necessary to protect slopes for this project: • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120) • Interceptor Dike and Swale (BMP C200) • Pipe Slope Drains (BMP C204). 3.1.7 Element #7 -r- Protect Drain inlets All storm drain inlets and culverts made operable during construction will be protected to prevent unfiltered or untreated water from entering the drainage conveyance system. However, the first priority is to keep all access roads clean of sediment and keep street runoff separate from entering storm drains until treatment can be provided. Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220) VULCI-19589-510 3-3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington will be implemented for all storm drain inlets that could potentially be impacted by sediment -laden runoff on and near the project site. The following inlet protection measures that may be used on this project include: • Drop Inlet Protection Excavated Drop Inlet Protection } Block and Gravel Drop Inlet Protection Gravel and Wire Drop Inlet Protection Catch Basin Filters Alternative BMP not included in the SWMMWW (2005) or SWMMEW (2004) • Culvert Inlet Sediment Trap • Alternative BMP not included in the SWMMWW (2005) or SWMMEW (2004). 3.1.8 Element #8 — Stabilize Channels and Outlets Where site runoff is to be conveyed in channels, or discharged to a stream or some other natural drainage point, efforts will be taken to prevent downstream erosion. The specific BMPs for channel and outlet stabilization that will be used on this project include: • Check Darns (BMP C207). Since the project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest, all temporary on -site conveyance channels will be designed, constructed, and stabilized to prevent erosion from the expected peak 10 minute velocity of flow from a Type 1A, 10-year, 24-hour recurrence interval storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, 1-hour peak flow rate indicated by an approved continuous runoff simulation model, increased by a factor of 1.6, will be used. Stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent streambanks, slopes, and downstream reaches will be provided at the outlets of all conveyance systems. 3.1.9 Element #9 — Control Pollutants All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur on site will be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. Good housekeeping and preventative measures will be taken to ensure that the site will be kept clean, well organized, and free of debris. If required, BMPs to be implemented to control specific sources of pollutants are discussed below. VULCI-19589-510 3-4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington Vehicles, construction equipment, and/or petroleum product storage/dispensing: • All vehicles, equipment, and petroleum product storage/dispensing areas will be inspected regularly to detect any leaks or spills, and to identify maintenance needs to prevent leaks or spills. • On -site fueling tanks and petroleum product storage containers will include secondary containment. • Spill prevention measures, such as drip pans, will be used when conducting maintenance and repair of vehicles or equipment. • In order to perform emergency repairs on site, temporary plastic liner will be placed beneath and, if raining, over the vehicle. • Contaminated surfaces will be cleaned immediately following any discharge or spill incident. Chemical storage: Any chemicals stored in the construction areas will conform to the appropriate source control BMPs listed in Volume IV of the Ecology stormwater manual. All chemicals will have cover, containment, and protection provided on site, per BMP C153 for Material Delivery, Storage and Containment in the SVIMMWW. Application of agricultural chemicals, including fertilizers and pesticides, will be conducted in a manner and at application rates that will not result in loss of chemical to stormwater runoff. Manufacturers' recommendations for application procedures and rates will be followed. Excavation and tunneling spoils dewatering waste: • Dewatering BMPs and BMPs specific to the excavation and tunneling (including handling of contaminated soils) are discussed under Element 10. Demolition: • Dust released from demolished sidewalks, buildings, or structures will be controlled using Dust Control measures (BMP C140). Storm drain inlets vulnerable to stormwater discharge carrying dust, soil, or debris will be protected using Storm Drain Inlet Protection (BMP C220 as described above for Element 7). • Process water and slurry resulting from sawcutting and surfacing operations will be prevented from entering the waters of the State VULCI-19589-510 3-5 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington by implementing Sawcutting and Surfacing Pollution Prevention measures (BMP C152). Concrete and grout: Process water and slurry resulting from concrete work will be prevented from entering the waters of the State by implementing Concrete Handling measures (BMP C151). Sanitary wastewater: Portable sanitation facilities will be firmly secured; regularly maintained, and emptied when necessary. - Wheel wash or tire bath wastewater will be discharged to a separate on -site treatment system or to the sanitary sewer as part of Wheel Wash implementation (BMP C106). Solid Waste: • Solid waste will be stored in secure, clearly marked containers. The facility does not require a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan under the federal regulations of the Clean Water Act (CWA). 3.1.10 Element #10 —Control Dewatering All dewatering water from open cut excavation, tunneling, foundation work, trench, or underground vaults will be discharged into a controlled conveyance system prior to discharge to a sediment trap or sediment pond. Channels will be stabilized, per Element #S. Clean, non -turbid dewatering water will not be routed through stormwater sediment ponds; instead, it will be discharged to systems tributary to the receiving waters of the State in a manner that does not cause erosion, flooding, or a violation of State water quality standards in the receiving water. Highly turbid dewatering water from soils known or suspected to be contaminated, or from use of construction equipment, will require additional monitoring and treatment as required for the specific pollutants based on the receiving waters into which the discharge is occurring. Such monitoring is the responsibility of the contractor. However, the dewatering of soils known to be free of contamination will trigger BMPs to trap sediment and reduce turbidity. At a minimum, geotextile fabric socks/bags/cells will be used to filter this material. Other BMPs to be used for sediment trapping and turbidity reduction may include the following: • Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241) • Construction Stonmwater Chemical Treatment (BMP.C250). VULCI-19589-510 3-6 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington 3.1.11 Element #11 — Maintain Best Management Practices All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs will be maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Maintenance and repair will be conducted in accordance the specifications of each particular BMP. Visual monitoring of the BMPs will be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours of any rainfall event that causes a discharge from the site, if the site becomes inactive, and is temporarily stabilized, the inspection frequency will be reduced to once every month. All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs will be removed within 30 days after the final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Trapped sediment will be removed or stabilized on site. Disturbed soil resulting from removal of BMPs or vegetation will be permanently stabilized. 3.1.12 Element #12 — Manage the Project Erosion and sediment control BMPs for this project have been designed based on the following principles: • Design the project to fit the existing topography, soils, and drainage patterns 0 Emphasize erosion control rather than sediment control • Minimize the extent and duration of the area exposed • Keep runoff velocities low • Retain sediment on site + Thoroughly monitor site and maintain all ESC measures. In addition, the project will be managed according to the following key project components: Seasonal Work Limitations • From October l through April 30, clearing, grading, and other soil disturbing activities will only be permitted if shown to the satisfaction of the local permitting authority that silt -laden runoff will be prevented from leaving the site through a combination of the following: VULCI-19589-51 a 3-7 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington Site conditions including existing vegetative coverage, slope, soil type, and proximity to receiving waters Limitations on activities and the extent of disturbed areas P. Proposed erosion and sediment control measures. • Based on the information provided and/or local weather conditions, the local permitting authority may expand or restrict the seasonal limitation on site disturbance. • The following activities are exempt from the seasonal clearing and grading limitations: Routine maintenance and necessary repair of erosion and sediment control BMPs Routine maintenance of public facilities or existing utility strictures that do not expose the soil or result in the removal. of the vegetative cover to soil Activities where there is 100 percent infiltration of surface water runoff within the site in approved and installed erosion and sediment control facilities. Coordination with Utilities and Other Jurisdictions • Care has been taken to coordinate with utilities, other construction projects, and the local jurisdiction in preparing this SWPPP and scheduling the construction work. Inspection and Monitoring • All BMPs will be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed' to assure continued performance of their intended function. Site inspections will be conducted by a person who is knowledgeable in the principles and practices of erosion and sediment control This person has the necessary skills to: Assess the site conditions and construction activities that could impact the quality of stormwater, and 10 Assess the 'effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures used to control the quality of stormwater discharges. • A Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead_ will be on site or on -call at all times. VULCI-19589-510 3-8 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington + Whenever inspection and/or monitoring reveals that the BMPs identified in this SWPPP are inadequate, due to the actual discharge of or potential to discharge a significant amount of any pollutant, appropriate BMPs, or design changes will be implemented as soon as possible_ Maintaining an Updated Construction SWPPP + This SWPPP will be retained on site or within reasonable access to the site. + The SWPPP will be modified whenever there is a change in the design, construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has, or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters of the state. The SWPPP will be modified if, during inspections or investigations conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site. The SWPPP will be modified as necessary to include additional or modified BMPs designed to correct problems identified. Revisions to the SWPPP will be completed within seven (7) days following the inspection. 3.2 Site Specific Best Management Practices 3.2.1 Upland Area Site -specific BMPs are shown on the TESC Plan Sheets and Details in Figures 5 and 6. These site specific plan sheets will be updated annually. A list of the construction BMPs to be implemented at the site is provided in Attachment C for reference. Figure 5 shows the proposed temporary erosion and sedimentation controls during construction. Interceptor swales will be installed at the approximate locations indicated on Figure 5. Typical TESC construction details are shown on Figure 6. The swales will be positioned at the downgradient side of the construction areas to intercept runoff that occurs during rain. periods. Drainage flow directions of the swales are depicted on the drawing. Sediment catchment areas will be installed at the end of the swales to collect sediments prior to discharge the runoff into Baker tanks or pump directly to the on -site temporary sediment pond. As shown, the proposed temporary sediment pond will be located in the southwestern comer of the site, adjacent to the sanitary sewer. The sediment pond will be constructed below existing grade and will be lined. The pond will be designed to provide a maximum storage for runoff occur at the site based on 10-year, 24-hour storm event, i.e., 2.9 inches. VULC1-19589-510 3_9 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington The pond water level will be maintained at a minimum by pumping the water into the sanitary sewer as indicated on the drawing. A copy of the authorization for the discharge to the sanitary sewer is provided in Attachment A. The hydrologic calculations of peak runoff under pre -construction and during construction conditions are provided in Attachment B. Based on the hydrologic calculations, a pond with bottom widths of 150 feet by 150-feet by 2 feet deep, and a side slope of 2:1 (H:V), will provide approximately 47,400 cubic feet of storage, greater than 45,600 cubic feet of 10-year, 24-hour runoff volume. 3.2.2 Shoreline Area A 25-foot buffer along the lake shoreline will be established- during construction, as indicated on Figure 5. The site grading will provide a hydraulic divide at the 25-foot buffer line, i.e., runoff from the area east of the 25-foot line will be collected by the interceptor swales in the upland areas. Within the 25-foot buffer zone, a swale will be constructed to collect runoff that occurs in the 25-foot area. The swale bottom will be at least 6 inches above the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark, and the swale will extend along the entire shoreline of the site. Runoff collected in the swale will be discharge via seepage into the lake, or overflows into the lake. 3.3 Additional Advanced Best Management Practices The BW implementation schedule will be driven by the construction schedule. The BW implementation schedule will be keyed to proposed phases of the construction project, and reflects differences in BUT installations and inspections that relate to wet season construction. The construction schedule will be provided at a later date. The project site is located west of the Cascade Mountain Crest. As such, the dry season is considered to be from May 1 to September 30 and the wet season is considered to be from October 1 to April 30. VULCI-19589-51 Q 3-10 4 Pollution Prevention Team 4.1 Roles and Responsibilities The pollution prevention team consists of personnel responsible for implementation of the SWPPP, including the following: + Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) - Primary contractor contact, responsible for site inspections (BMPs, visual monitoring, sampling, etc.); to be called upon in case of failure of any ESC measures • Civil Engineer — Site representative for the owner that is the project's supervising engineer responsible for inspections and issuing instructions and drawings to the contractor's site supervisor or representative. • Emergency Ecology Contact - Individual to be contacted at Ecology in case of emergency • Emergency owner Contact - Individual that is the site owner or representative of the site owner to be contacted in the case of an emergency + Non -Emergency Ecology Contact - Individual that is the site owner or representative of the site owner than can be contacted if required • Monitoring Personnel - Personnel responsible for conducting sanitary sewer discharge monitoring. 4.2 Team Members Names and contact information for those identified as members of the pollution prevention team are provided in the following table. Title Name(s) Phone Number Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) John Weller, Bayley Construction (206) 621-8884 Civil Engineer Steven Haluschak, MKA (206) 624-9349 Emergency Ecology Contact Regional Office 24-hour Main Line (425) 649-7000 Emergency Owner Contact Ray Colliver (206) 342-2000 Non -Emergency Ecology Contact Sunny Becker (425) 649-7187 Monitoring Personnel Shashi Muttige, RETEC (206) 624-9349 VULCI-19589-510 4-1 5 Site Inspections and Monitoring Site inspection and monitoring include visual inspection of BMPs, and monitoring of sanitary sewer discharge and documentation of the inspection and monitoring findings in a site log book. A site log book will be maintained for all on -site construction activities and will include. • A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements 9 Site inspections • Stormwater quality monitoring. For convenience, the inspection forms are provided in Attachment D of this SWPPP_ The inspection forms will be included in the site log book and maintained on site or within reasonable access to the site and be made available upon request by Ecology or the local jurisdiction. 5.1 Site inspection All BMPs will be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. The inspector will be a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) per BMP C160. The name and contact information for the CESCL is provided in Section 4.2 of this SWPPP. Site inspection will occur in all areas disturbed by construction activities and at the sanitary sewer discharge point. It is anticipated that the sanitary sewer discharge will be monitored for settleable solids, metals (copper, arsenic), base neutral acid organics (cresol, pentachlorophenol, naphthalene), and daily (24-hour) flow. The site inspector will evaluate and document the effectiveness of the installed BMPs and determine if it is necessary to repair or replace any of the BMPs to improve the quality of stormwater discharges. All maintenance and repairs will be documented in the site log book or forms provided in this document. - All new BMPs or design changes will be documented in the SWPPP as soon as possible. 5.1.1 Site Inspection Frequency Site inspections will be conducted at least once a week and within 24 hours following any rainfall event which causes a discharge of stormwater from the site. For sites with temporary stabilization measures, the site inspection frequency can be reduced to once every month. YULCI-19589-510 5-1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington 5.1.2 Site Inspection Documentation The site inspector will record each site inspection using the site log inspection forms provided in Attachment D. The site inspection log forms may be separated from this SWPPP document, but will be maintained on site or within reasonable access to the site and be made available upon request by Ecology or the local jurisdiction. 5.2 Stormwater Quality Monitoring 5.2.1 Sanitary Sewer Discharge Based on the previous project performed on the South Baxter Property, the stormwater discharge to the King County sanitary sewer system was monitored in accordance with the following discharge limitations. The discharge parameters and limitations will be updated after the permit is issued by King County. Parameter Limit Settleable Solids 7 mill Arsenic 1.0 mg/L Copper 3.0 mg/L m-cresol 2DO mg1L o-creosol 20o mg/L p-cresol 200 mg/L Pentachlorophenol 4.57 mg/L Naphthalene 2.54 mg1L Maximum Discharge Rate 250 gpm Daily (24-hour) Flow TBD 5.2.2 Shoreline Area Stormwater Sampling Monitoring requirements for the shoreline area will include either turbidity or water transparency sampling to monitor site discharges for water quality compliance with the 2005 Construction Stormwater General Permit (Attachment E). Sampling will be conducted at the swale at least once per calendar week when there is a discharge. The sampling locations will be determined after the Swale is constructed within the 25-foot shoreline buffer zone. Turbidity Sampling Turbidity or transparency monitoring will follow the analytical methodologies described in Section S4 of the 2005 Construction Stormwater General Permit (Attachment E). The key benchmark values that require action are 25 NTU for VULC1-19589-510 5-2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington turbidity (equivalent to 32 cm transparency) and 250 NTU for turbidity (equivalent to 6 cm transparency). If the 25 NTU benchmark for turbidity (equivalent to 32 cm transparency) is exceeded, the following steps will be conducted: 1) Ensure all BMPs specified in this SWPPP are installed and functioning as intended. 2) Assess whether additional BMPs should be implemented, and document revisions to the SWPPP as necessary. 3) Sample discharge location daily until the analysis results are less than 25 NTU (turbidity) or greater than 32 cm (transparency). If the turbidity is greater than 25 NTU (or transparency is less than 32 cm) but less than 250 NTU (transparency greater than 6 cm) for more than 3 days, additional treatment BMPs will be implemented within 24 hours of the third consecutive sample that exceeded the benchmark value. Additional treatment BMPs to be considered will include, but are not limited to, off -site treatment, infiltration, filtration, and chemical treatment. If the 250 NTU benchmark for turbidity (or less than 6 cm transparency) is exceeded at any time, the following steps will be conducted: 4) Notify Ecology by phone within 24 hours of analysis (see Section 4.0 of this SWPPP for contact information). 5) Continue daily sampling until the turbidity is less than 25 NTU (or transparency is greater than 32 cm). 6) Initiate additional treatment BMPs such as off -site treatment, infiltration, filtration, and chemical treatment within 24 hours of the first 250 NTU exceedance. 7) Implement additional treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 7 days of the first 250 NTU exceedance. 8) Describe inspection results and remedial actions taken in the site log book and in monthly discharge monitoring reports as described in Section 7.0 of this SWPPP. pH Sampling The 25-foot shoreline buffer along Lake Washington will be hydraulically separated from the upland construction activities. Runoff associated with the construction activities in the upland areas will be collected by interceptor swales and transferred to an on -site sediment pond and eventually discharges VULCI-19589-510 5-3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington to the sanitary sewer. Therefore, storrnwater runoff in the 25-foot shoreline buffer will be monitored for pH weekly. Stormwater samples will be collected from the Swale within the 25-foot shoreline buffer and measured for pH using a calibrated pH meter, pH test kit, or wide range pH indicator paper. if the measured pH is 8.5 or greater, the following steps will be conducted: 1) Prevent the high pH water from entering the buffer area. 2) Adjust or neutralize the high pH water if necessary using appropriate technology such as CO2 sparging (liquid or dry ice). 3) Contact Ecology if chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging is planned. YULCI-19589-51 d 5-4 6 Reporting and Recordkeeping 6.1 Recordkeeping 6.1.1 Site Log Book A site log book will be maintained for all on -site construction activities and will include: * A record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements 0 Site inspections + Sanitary sewer discharge monitoring_ The inspection form and sanitary discharge forms will be included in the site log book. 6.1.2 Records Retention Records of all monitoring information (site log book, inspection reports/checklists, etc.), this Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and any other documentation of compliance with permit requirements will be retained during the life of the construction project and for a minimum of three years following the termination of permit coverage in accordance with Special Condition S5.0 of Ecology's Construction Stormwater General Permit (General Permit). A copy of Ecology's General Permit and Notice of Intent (NOT) Application Form are included in Attachments E and F, respectively. 6.1.3 Access to Plans and Records The SWPPP, General Permit, Notice of Authorization letter, and Site Log Book will be retained on site or within reasonable access to the site and will be made immediately available upon request to Ecology or the local jurisdiction. A copy of this SWPPP will be provided to Ecology within 14 days of receipt of a written request for the SWPPP from Ecology. Any other information requested by Ecology will be submitted within a reasonable time. A copy of the SWPPP or access to the SWPPP will be provided to the public when requested in writing in accordance with General Permit Special Condition SS.G. 6.1.4 Updating the SWPPP In accordance with Special Conditions S3, S4.B, and S93.3 of the General Permit, this SWPPP will be modified if the SWPPP is ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site or there has been a change in design, construction, operation, or VULCI-19589--510 6-1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington maintenance at the site that has a significant effect on the discharge, or potential for discharge, of pollutants to the waters of the State. The SWPPP will be modified within seven days of determination based on inspection(s) that additional or modified BMPs are necessary to correct problems identified, and an updated timeline for BMP implementation will be prepared. 6.2 Reporting 6.2.1 Discharge Monitoring Reports Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms will not be submitted to Ecology because water quality sampling will not be conducted at the site. 6.2.2 Notification of Noncompliance If any of -the terns and conditions of the permit are not met, and it causes a threat to human health or the environment, the following steps will be taken in accordance with General Permit Special Condition S5.F: 1) Ecology will be immediately notified of the failure to comply. 2) Immediate action will be taken to control the noncompliance issue and to correct the problem. If applicable, sampling and analysis of any noncompliance will be repeated immediately and the results submitted to Ecology within five (5) days of becoming aware of the violation. 3) A detailed written report describing the noncompliance will be submitted to Ecology within five (5) days, unless requested earlier by Ecology. 6.2.3 Permit Application and Changes In accordance with General Permit Special Condition S2.A, a complete application form will be submitted to Ecology and the appropriate local jurisdiction (if applicable) to be covered by the General Permit. VULCI-19589-510 6-2 7 Refe re n ces Magnusson Kleinencic, 2006. Stormwater Technical Information — Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington. August 24. Shannon & Wilson, 2006. Geotechnical Report Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington. September 13. VULCI-19589-51 D , 7-1 �} P19aso sir ti. e y r f i Por�yr: F f akJalandcrest # r I park 4 sch I I fi; I ,�• � � 5 :\ 54' Hex • 1 WDDd i • � _ _ JPION �S.•' r�i t � Iry � +";r� - 8N1 1 1 •�_ � tat -on Cener u vm sr Ha b I 11 i f y s 3,- Z pol r i` a� Jm YVT KO ale ' c` 7 -j T 23iN Pitt, `^*� i ti ti lz ` 1000 0 2000 1 "=2000' SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY SITE VICINITY MAP RET E j VULC1.19589-510 L DATE, 10/05/06 1 6RWN: E.M./UKN = FE: -VICI N IT 2AYOUT: FIGURE 1 FIGURE 1 a r so �VWETEC m f{4 n D-MOI_'TION LAG NOTES 1 I LVS TO REMAIN - � JT! I f y GEMOLI?I'JN 1 E-XIS71KC OVERNEAr TELEFHGVE/PowER _INE AND ]'ODES REMAIN /.0 • U1 REMOVE EXISTING STRRM DRAIN PIPING. CATCH BASINS. < p� �/ EXISTING BUILD':NG TO REh.A:N. -MANHOLES, SLOTTED DRAINS AND TRENCH DRAINS. EXISTING COCK TO REMAIN. U2 REMOVE OVERHEAD TELEPHONE/POWER LINES AND POLES, INCLUDING POLE FDUNCA710NS- < 4 } EXISIINC LOG SLAWAL' TO REMAIN. y 511F2FACF ELEMENT pEiOLIT QNN �� 5 EXISTING SANITARY SF'NER PIPING AND MANHQ_ES To kEMAIN. ` 1 SI REMOVE EXISTING FENCE, PDS7S, FOUNCATONS AND EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPING TO REMAIN. GATES. 52 REMOVE EX STING BUILDING. FOUNDATION, BASEMENT < J? EXISTING FENCE 10 REMAIN, ANU BELOW GROUND UTiLIT'ES. 53 REMOVE EXISTING LUMINAIRE AND FOUNDATION, 6 3 S4 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE WALL. _ 55 RFN)GVE EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB. �_ S6 REVCJE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT. <S> �j//�� < g 7 10 EXISTING LFT STATION TO REMAIN. EXISTING ELFCTRICAL CONDUIT TO REMAIN. Ex'.STING WELL TO REMAIN (ApJdST TO GRADE). 1 50 0 100 1 "= 100' r I I I I F-7 Fyi PROPERTY LINE II �- LIMITS OF WORKA FILTER FABRIC FENCE NEW REPLACEMEN WETLAND DUFFE 970 5F EDIMENT CATCHMENT. \ AREA ^ - 2' ��, CONNECT TO BAKER TANK OR DIRECT PUMP i TO SEDIMENT POND �i ,/'�' DCK CHECK may' DAM. TYP _ CE194 SEDIMENT CATCHMENT INTERCEPTOR --�--� AREA cEzo. cEw, SWALE, TYP 4 CONNECT TO BAKER cEzw cE.c1 TANK OR DIRECT PUMP WORK IN EXISTING TO SEDIMENT POND ` WETLAND BUFFER /1r 1220 SF f f T ROCK CHECK DAM, CH cE203 CEwI INTERCEPTOR SWALE, TYP Caoalliwl ,""—CONCRETE TRUCK do WHEEL WASHOUT AREA 2 tf203 CEi01 `-CONSTRIIC'T1ON RdNCE cEzo3 tE401 1� CONNECT TO RAKER TANK OR DIRECT PUMP TO SEDIMENT POND 3 SEDIMENT .E m cum CATCHMENT j NOTE: LOCATIONS OF NTERCEPTOR SWALE AND ITS ASSOCIATED STORMWATER CONTROL FACILIT ES SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE APPROXIMATE. SLIGHT MODIFICATIONS MAY HE REQUIRED TO FACILITATE FIELD CONDITIONS. 1 yy� SWALE RDINARY HICH 4 T�� FILTER FABRIC WATER MARK - FENCE -� c m cE�m 1 4 ` �• J- EDIMENT� CATCHMENT AREA c a1 cE.ai iJ �- LIMITS OF WORK r CONNECT TO BAKER`" TANK OR DIRECT PUMP TO SEDIMENT POND SEDIMENT POND CONNECT TO BAKER TANK 1 OR DIRECT PUMP TO SEDIMENT POND a SmPEW cEzm ceu,1 CATCHNENT AREA . I1ERCEPT0R SWALE. TYP ROCK CHECK c a1+.o'� DAM, TYP 1 CE201 *01 1 j �y 1 I 1 1 1 i 1 [Fi � 1 1 J CONC TRUCK h WhIEEt WASHOUT AREA • 5 Ilr CE2o2 - } ROCK CHECK 'OAM, TYP cEzaz cowl _-q INTERCEPTOR _ "�� qqq .UN ENTRIWCCONSTRuEcE2Jz 2 cowl SWALE. TYP CE202 C 1 PROPERTY UNE - DISCHARGE OF CONSTRUCTION /7 STORMWATER THROUGH NH UD. - LIMITS OF _- - INSTALL TEMPORARY METER PRIOR - rJ . TO INSTALLATION OF MH,- a / a SOURCE: SITE DRAWINCS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD �r RETEC 50 0 100 1 "= 100' A j F s� w�w w" 6� RY �a x; s r LJ LJ z_ �W z Lno m xV r U � � N i 3� pU� U $ w FLL o, a0 � n� H w a LL 3 U - - cn a a LN < eo N ' sa - w a� # - N - _ CK o w - Q o (if 0 crNIN 030M3 ,B zA Nld3a w r r e a g o U z w Is o�� oo �F 4 m� z� oo seP JF9 io zgYs = L1 V a W a Q PH W a m ofy WN O Z Fl- m z 0 F- U E LLJ W W C Ln 0- Attachment A King County Metro Sewer Discharge Permit Industrial Waste Program Wastewater Discharge Permit Application King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division i� You will find detailed instructions for completing each section of this application and each required exhibit in the enclosed packet, "Wastewater Discharge Permit Application Instructions and Guidelines." Review the entire application and instruction packet carefully before completing any part of the application. • Submit one application for each site. ■ King County Industrial Waste (KCIW) does not require an application fee. Once KCIW determines that you require a permit, KCIW will bill you prior to issuing you a draft permit. ■ Answer all questions and include the required exhibits. Incomplete applications will be returned to you. ■ If you do not have an answer for the requested information, indicate so and explain why. ■ Indicate "N/A" if a section does not apply to your operations. ■ Use additional pages, if needed. ■ Send three copies of the completed application and exhibits to: King County Industrial Waste 130 Nickerson Street, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98109-1658 APPLICANT BUSINESS AND/OR PROJECT NAME: Sealli Headquarters and Practice Facility ADDRESS OF SITE DISCHARGING WASTEWATER: BUSINESS MAILING ADDRESS: (If no address, indicate cross streets.) 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. N.E. 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900 Site Address Mailing Address Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 City, State Zip Code City, State Zip Code PRIMARY PERSON TO BE CONTACTED ABOUT THIS APPLICATION: Shashi Mutti e Project Engineer Name Title (e.g., President Consultant, On -Site Manager) 1011 SW Kliekitat Way, Suite 207 206 624-9349 Mailing Address Telephone No. Seattle, WA 98134 - City, State Zip Code 24-Hour Emergency Phone No. smuttige@retec.com 206 624-2839 F-Moil Address FAX No. SECONDARY PERSON TO BE CONTACTED ABOUT THIS APPLICATION: Grant Hainsworth Project Manager Name Title (e.g., President, Consultant On -Site Manager) 1011 SW Klickitat Way, Suite 207 206 624-9349 Mailing Address Telephone No. Seattle, WA 98134 - City. State Zip Code 24-Hour Emergency Phone No. hainsworth@retec.corn 206 624-2839 E-Mail Address 1 FAX No. King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application 1. NATURE OF BUSINESS Briefly describe your business and the main activities producing wastewater at the applicant site (type of processing manufacturing, service, remediation). The site is a former woad treating facility that released wood -treating preservatives to the subsurface. As part of development activities, the Site will be developed for use as the future site of the Seattle Seahawks Headquarters and Training facility. The remaining cleanup activities ( environmental capping and institutional controls) as required will be completed in conjunction with Site development activities. 2. PERTINENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS AND PERMITS Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) I Environmental Control Permits Issued for EPA WAD No. Applicant Site: Water/Sewer Agency City of Renton and Account No. NA Water Meter No(s). NA Current King County Permit No. NA Date Business Started at this Site Remedial and Site DAILY AND SEASONAL VARIATIONS Number Circle Days You Generally Discharge and Provide Number of of Number of Hours Disc har in on Those Pas Employees/Shift Operating Days/Year Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun Holiday Day Night Swing Average 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 NA NA NA Maximum 10 10 10 10 10 0 0 NA NA NA 2. BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND PRODUCTS Business activities include manufacturing, processing and remediation activities. Business Activity Type of Product or Brand Name Daily Q antifies Average Maximum Site Remediation Stormwater 55,000 gal 130,000 gal Site Remediation Decon Water 500 gal 10,000 gal King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application 3❑ 3. RAW MATERIALS AND CHEMICALS USED IN THE PROCESS Brand Name Chemical or Actuat Name Purpose Daily Quantities Used Tank Volume Working Concen- tration Average Maximum Various Creosote (PAHs) Wood preservative mixture NA NA NA NA Various Pentachlorophenol (PCP) Wood preservative mixture NA NA NA NA 4. INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS DISCHARGED TO KING COUNTY SEWERS (1) Enter a brief description and assign a number for each process (add more lines if necessary). Also show these process numbers in Exhibits A and B. (2) Indicate frequency of discharge; either continuously discharged when generated, or stored and discharged in batches. Process Process That Substances Type of Frequency of Daily Quantity Number Generates Discharged to Pretreatment Discharge Discharged in Gallons Average Maximum Wastewater the Sewer (continuous or batch) Site Stormwater none batch Remediation possibly containing PAHs and PCP Equipment Decon water none batch 2 Decontamination possibly containing PAHs and PCP 5. LIQUID WASTES AND SLUDGES REMOVED BY MEANS OTHER THAN KING COUNTY SEWERS Enter annual, monthly, or daily volume, or volume of each removal. Indicate unit of measurement. Type of Waste/Substance Means of Removal Frequency Volume King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application 6. PROPOSED DURATION OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGE: November 1, 2006 to June 30, 2008 King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application 4 SECTION D - WATER BALANCE 1. WATER BALANCE TABLE (1) Enter the appropriate letter for the water source: a.) City Service b.) Private Well c.) Reclaimed Water d.) Raw Materials e,) Industrial Storm Water f.) Groundwater (2) Enter the appropriate letter for the discharge point a.) Sewer W Storm Drain c.) Receiving Water d.) Waste Hauler e.) Evaporation f.) Product If the discharge is entering the sewer, also indicate the side sewer (ss) number, if available. (3) You must provide documentation of the water balance calculations provided in this table. (See directions for Exhibit 1.) Type of Consumption/Discharge Water In: Water Out: Water Use Water Discharge or Loss Water Source (1) Average (gars/day) Maximum (gals/day) Discharge Point (2) Average (gals/day) Maximum (gars/doy) Industrial processing water/wastewater a 500 10,000 a 500 10,000 Contact cooling water Non -contact cooling water Boiler and cooling tower feed/blowdown Water incorporated into product Sanitary water/wastewater Industrid storm water e 55,000 130,000 a 55,000 130,000 Plant washing water/wastewater Construction dewatering Groundwater remediation Site Irrigation Evaporation — — --- Other: (please indfcote) TOTALS: — 55,500 140,000 F — 55,500 140,000 King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application Pieme see instructions for information on how to complete the following exhibits: Exhibit A: Schematic Flow Diagram (recquired) Exhibit 8: Site Layout (required) Exhibit C: Planned Changes in Pretreatment or Waste Disposal Practices Exhibit D: Analytical or Historical Data Exhibit E: Spill Prevention and Containment Plan Exhibit E: Tank Capacities and Concentrations Exhibit G: Hydrogeologic Reports for Groundwater Remediation Exhibit H: Engineering Report (Required only it you have wastewater pretreatment systems or are intending to install sucti systems.) Exhibit I: Documentation of Water Balance Calculations I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted, Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. i am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information. including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Grant Hainsworth Printed Name Proiect Manager title Signature Date This information is available in alternative formats for people with disabilities on request at 206-263-3000 (voice) or 711 (TTY). King County Wastewater Discharge Permit Application INSERTS FOR APPLICATION Section C 1. Discharge days and shifts are unknown. 4. Pretreatment is not expected to be implemented, however dependent on initial sampling results the water may be treated with granular activated carbon and retested. If analysis after granular activated carbon treatment shows the water does not exceed permit limitations, the water will be discharged into the sewer. Any water failing to meet the limitations set forth in the permit will be transported offsite for disposal at an appropriate facility. EXHIBITS Exhibit A Schematic Flow Diagram See attached Figure 1. Exhibit B Site Layout See attached Figure 2. Exhibit C Planned Changes in Pretreatment or Waste Disposal Practices This exhibit is not applicable for this project. Pretreament of the water to be discharged to the sewer system is not expected. It is expected the water will not exceed limitations since significant portion of the water to be discharged is rainwater_ However, sampling will be conducted prior to discharging the water in batches to the sewer. If the concentrations exceed the limitations the water will be treated with granular activated carbon, retested and discharged to sewer or transported offsite for disposal at an appropriate facility or treated using granular activated carbon prior to discharge. Exhibit D Analytical Data Analytical data is not available. However, sampling will be completed while the water is in temporary storage on -site. Pending the results of this analysis the water will either be batch discharged into the sewer system or transported offsite for disposal at an appropriate facility. Exhibit E Spill Prevention and Containment Program Workers will be required to have 40-hour health and safety training in accordance with 29 CFR 1910 and Washington State Industrial Health Act (WISHA). In addition, site workers will be briefed daily on the hazards posed by the site and during the initial project safety meeting procedures for spill response will be addressed. The wastewater will be temporarily pumped to onsite storage facility prior to discharge. If a spill or leak should occur measures will be taken immediately to stop the flow of wastewater and intercept any flow. The contained water will then be pumped back into the storage facility. Exhibit F Tank Capacities and Concentrations AH wastewater to be disposed of into the sewer system will be collected and temporarily stored onsite. The Contractor will determine the number and size of temporary portable above ground storage tanks and temporary sedimentation ponds_ Contaminant concentrations in each wastewater stream wi I I be determined by sampling and testing prior to discharge. Exhibit G Hydrogeologic Reports for Groundwater Remediation This exhibit is not applicable since the project does not involve discharges from a long-term groundwater remediation project. Exhibit H Engineering Report This exhibit is not applicable since there is no pretreatment system. Exhibit I Documentation of Water Balance Calculations The water sources for the proposed discharge consist of: (1) stormwater runoff from the Site, and (2) water generated from decontamination area. 1. The volume of stormwater to be collected and discharged was calculated based on the total catchment area as shown on Figure 3. The total catchment area was calculated to be approximately 843,645 sq. ft. The historical precipitation data at a nearby climatic station were obtained from the Western Regional Climate Center's Internet site: http://www.wrec.dri.edu/climsum.htrnl. The average and maximum precipitation data between January and December at the Seattle Tacoma WSCMP AP Station are presented in Table - 1. Considering the worst -case scenario, the stormwater runoff was calculated assuming no water loses after the precipitation occurs in the catchment area, i.e., precipitation equals stormwater runoff. The calculated monthly average and maximum stormwater runoff volumes are presented in Table 1. The average monthly maximum monthly stormwater runoffs were determined to be approximately 55,000 gpd and 130,000 gpd, respectively. 2_ The volume of water from the decontamination area is estimated based on past experience with projects of the similar type and duration. The average and maximum water volumes from these areas were estimated to be 500 and 10,000 gpd, respectively. File., H., � 195� 5S009 dwg Layout.• FIGURE A User emn sh20 Plotted.• Oct 04, 2006 -- 2. 05p,. , (s: WASTEWATER STREAMS STORMWATER DEBRIS/EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION- DECON WATER FRAC TANK / SAMPLING SEDIMENTATION AND POND TESTING DR NOTE: PASS INDICATES THE WATER DOES NOT EXCEED ANY PERM) DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS. �RETEC FAI SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY VULCI-19589-510 DATE: 16/4/06 oRWN: E.W./SEA CITY OF RENTON SEWER LINE GRANULAR SAMPLING PASS ACTIVATED AND TESTING FAlL CARBON OFF -SITE DISPOSAL SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM FIGURE 1 I � 17g 9,0 �Zl_ • i RIPLEY LANE +.'*RETEC SOUTH BAXTER PROPERTY �e• earmrncaos WETLAND /ti kE Ra�'ba NGTp N r NORTH BAXTER PROPERTY 0 0 0 {"ID v°0y "b eaui GYPSY SUBBASIN 0 0 0 LEGEND i' ASPHALT / CONCRETE 0C:w TREES BUILDING �- CHAIN LINK FENCE ---- PROPERTY LINE — — — PROPERTY BOUNDARY 0 r roa•w lxG w .n a �7 a- oacwars cursroe ro it F'-'Ise ro a t Mar1 - N,CL - J& r m u• Kunc _ 1 ' comox+�oms T ro N• NTlUIYR[OS LAKE WASHINGTON ^ BLVD 50 0 100 1"=100' SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY VULC1-19589-510 DATE:10/4/06 DRww: E.M./SEA EXISTING SITE MAP FIGURE u W H W 0 s�aay wdZOT - 9001 SO 700 Pa7101d 11vgV0cua :.1a517 1YW -3d 417OX07 bapllli4�IddI1/rud�d�ddh1515856l ; 5 a/.� Attachment B Hydrologic Analysis Hydrologic Analysis Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility This hydrologic analysis narrative presents calculations of runoff at the site under the existing condition and during construction activities. Two-year and 10-year, 24-hour storm events were analyzed. The hydrologic analyses were performed in accordance with the procedures described in the "Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington", published by Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), in 2005. The following paragraphs summarize the calculations. Catchment Area: The catchment area consists of impervious area, wetlands, and pervious area. These sub -areas were measured from the site topographic map. The complete breakdowns of the sub -areas are shown in the attached calculation sheets. The total property area is approximately 19.4 acres. Impervious areas under existing conditions include asphalt/concrete pad, buildings and roads. During construction, although the above -mentioned impervious areas will be demolished, it was assumed 0.2 acres of impervious area. 2. Curve Number: Runoff curve number of each soil cover was estimated using Table 2.2c of TR551. Curve numbers for impervious area (buildings and paved roads), brush/grass area are 98 and 70, respectively. 3. Time of Concentration. Calculation of time of concentration is included. Sheet flow Manning's effective roughness coefficients (ns) and time of concentration velocity factor (k) were obtained from Table 2.4. 4. Hydro rg aph: The Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) method was used to calculate runoff hydrographs. Calculations were performed using an Excel spreadsheet prepared by Ecology. A 10-year, 247hour rainfall event was used for the calculations. Hydrographs for existing and during construction conditions are also included. 5. Results: Results of the SBUH calculations showed decrease of runoff volume during construction due to removal of impervious areas. Pre -Development During Construction 2-Yr 10-Yr 2-Yr 10-Yr Total Runoff 22,700 53,500 16,700 45,600 (cf) Peak Runoff 0.40 1.23 0.35 0.91 (cfs) 6. Proposed Runoff Control Measure: Interceptor swales will be installed to collect runoff from construction areas. Sedimentation catehment areas will be constructed at the end of ' Technical Release 55 — Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, by US Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Conservation Engineering Division, June 1986. 1 each interceptor swale to collect and remove sediment carried by the runoff. Details of the interceptor swales and associates stormwater control measures are provided in the drawings of the SWPPP. The runoff will be pumped from the catchment areas to on -site Baker tanks or pumped directly to a temporary on -site sediment pond. The pond will be sized to provide a maximum storage of runoff generated from a 10-year, 24-hour storm at the site, as presented in this analysis. The water stored in the tank or the sediment will be sampled and analyzed prior to discharge to City sanitary sewer adjacent to the site. A permit will be obtained from the City of Seattle. 7. Sediment Pond Sizing: Based on the SBUH analysis, the runoff from 10-year, 24-hour storm is calculated approximately 45,600 cubic feet. To accommodate the maximum runoff for the 10-year storm event, a sediment pond will be constructed at the site to temporarily store the runoff and eventually discharge to the City sanitary sewer. A pond stage -volume calculation is attached. As shown, a pond with bottom dimensions of 150 feet square, a side slope of 2:1 (H:V), and 2 feet deep, will provide approximately 47,400 cubic feet of runoff storage volume, exceeding the 10-year storm runoff volume. A minimum of six (6) inches of freeboard is recommended to provide additional volume that may be replaced by the sediment at the pond bottom. The sediment pond shall be routinely maintained to remove any sediment settled in the pond bottom. 2 Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) Analysis Pre -Construction Condition Based on 2-Year, 24-Hour Storm Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility SBUH Hydrograph - EXISTING CONDITION_ (2-YR, 24-HR RAINFALL) - - - - _ Area - Pt = dt 'fc = 19-37 !; -r toes1 _ _ Time to peak hrs. 0 3i Pei_ ( 1 I __ N7ax Q (cfs) = U 40 } - - Vol (cu-FQ = 1 22.700.76 1.99 -_--1-- inches (Total rsinf ll fora 24-hour stonn even[) min. I I 10 1 51 min, (Developed site Conditions) PERVIOUS Parcel Area = 18.07 - --C?ti = 70 - 0 2S = 0 96 Column ( I) = Time Increment Column (2) = Time (min) IMPERVIOUS - Parcel- j acres Area = 1.3 acres g - i Cn S - 0,'_S =! 0.20 I D.O4 Column (3) = Incremental Precipitation Fraction Column (4) = Column (3) * P, Column (5) = Accumulated sum of Column (4) Column (6) = If (P K 0.2S) = 0. If (P > O'S) = (Column (5) - 0.2S)"2/(Column (5) + D.BS), where the PERVIOUS AREA S value is used Column (7) = Column (6) of the present step - Column (6) of the previous Column (8) =Same as Column (6) except use IMPERVIOUS AREA S value Column (9) = Column i8) of the presem step - Column (8) of the previous step Column t 10) = (PERVIOUS AREATIOTAL AREA)*Column (7)+(IMPERVIOUS AREAIf_O_ TAL AREA)*Column (9) Columa (1 1) = (50,5*Column { 10)'Totul Area}ldt, where dt = 10 or 60 minuted I i Column f l2) = Column (12) of previous time Step + w * I (Column (11) of previous time step + Column (1 1) of present time step) - (2 * Column (12) of previous time step) I where w = routing constant = dU(2Tc + dt) = 0.0641 (I} (2) i (3) i (4) (5) (6) (7) (B) (9) 1 (10) (II) (12.)--- Time Time ! Precip. 1ncre. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA - Total Instant Design -- Increment _ (hrs-) Distrib. Rainfall (fraction) ,(inches) Rainfall (inches) Accurn Runoff Incre. Runoff Accum. Runoff mere. Runoff Runoff (inches) Flowrate (cfs) Flowrate ;cfs) (inches) € (inches) (inches) (inches) I 0-DUO 0 0.0000 7WUO 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0" D.0000 0.0 0.11 2 0-167 1 0.004 0.0080 0-0080 0.0"O.00t70 4 0000 j D.0000 0.0000 0.0 0.0 0.0 44 0.0080 0.0159 0.0000 0.0000 a0000 0.0000 0.0000 00 0.0 4 U.SW 0.004 O.D080 0.0239 0.0000 0.0006 4.0(W omoo D.ODOo -- 0.0000 00 0.0- ��-- 5 O.6G7 6 0.833 0 004 00080 0.0318 0.00W 0,0000 ; 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0 i O.0 _ 0.0 i 0.004 0 W80 0.0398 0.0000 D-UOUD o.o(w 0.0000 0.0 - 7 ---1.000 j 0-004 0.0080 0.0478 0.0000 R0000 ! OM02 0.0002 O.000D 0.0 I 0.0 - 8 1,167 9 1, 333 0.004 0.0080 - 0.0557 0-00W I.0o00 0.0010 0-0008 0.0001 0.0 0.0 0.004 0.0080 - 0.0637 O.00DO 0.0004 0,0023 0.0013 0.0001 0.0 �0.0 00 14 1,500 0.004 0.5D80T 0.0716 0-(xM 0.0000 0,0040 U.0017 0.0001 0-0 II I.G(r7 0.004 0.0080 0.0796 0.0000 0.0000 ❑.0U6z 0.0021 0.0001 0.0 0.0 12 1833 0.005 6.0I00 0.0896 O.OWO 0.0000 0.0094 0.0032 0.0002 0.0 0.0 13 2{)00 0.005 0.0100 0.0995 O.0000 0.0000 0.0131 D.OU37 0-0002 0.0 0.0 14 2,1 G7 4.005 0.0100 0,1095 0.0000 0.0000 0,0173 0.0042 O.DD03 00 0.0 I5 2.333 0.005 0.0100 0.1194 0.000D 0.0000 j 0.0218 0.0046 0.0003 0.0 0.0 I6 2.500 0.405 0.0100 0.1294 OAODO 0.0000 I. 0.0268 0.0049 0.0003 0.0 0.0 17 2,667 _ 0.005 0.0100 0.1393 O.WW 0-01M 0.0321 0.0053 0,0004 0-0 0.0_ 18 2,833 0.006 0-0119 0.1512 0.0000 0.00W 1 0,0388 0.0067 0.0005 0-1 1 0.0-. _ 19 3,000 20 3 107 -0.006 0.006 0-0119 00119 0,1632 0,1751 0.0000 -O.0000 0-0000 i 0,0459 0 (XM 0,0533 0.0071 _ 0.()074 0.0077 0,0005 0,0005 01 0.1 0.0 0.0 21 - .�33 ._..._._.� 500 0.0DG 1 D.D119 0-000J 0.0119 0.1871 _ �0.1990 T0.0000 0-0000 0.000o 0,0610 0.0000 0,0691 0.0001, 0.1 0.0 0.0080 0-DD05 0.1 0.0 2.1 3607 O.Dl0�4.2104 0.0000 6.D000 i 6A773 0.0093 O.DOM 0.1 0.0 24 -3.833 0.007 0.0139 0.2249 00000 0.0000 1 0.0873 0.0099 O.W07 0._1 0.1 _ 25� 4 000 0.007 0.0139- 0.2388 O.00DO 0.0000 0.0975 0,0102 0.0007 0.1 0.1 _ _ 26 i 4-167 0.007 0.0139 02527 0.0000 0.0000 0.1080 0.0105 0.0007 0.1 0.1 - 27 4-333 0A07 0.0139- 0,2667 0.00W 0.0040 0,1186 O.0]07 O-DW7 0.1- 01 26 4-500 0.007 0.0139 0,2806 0.0(w 0.0000 0.1295 O.U109 6-O-M7 0.1 01 29 4.6G7 0.007 0.0139 02945 0.0000 0.0000 j 0, (406 0.0111 0AM7 0.1 0 1 .104.833 D.0082 0.01113 0.3108 0.0000 0.0000 0,1538 0.0132 0.0009 0.1 0.1 31 5." 0.0082 0.0163 0.3272 0.0000 0,0000 0,1672 0.0134 0.0009 0-) 32 j 5A67 0.0082 0.0163 0.3435 O.WW 0.0000 0.1808 0.0136 0.0W9 0-1 0.1 33 5a 3 0.0682 0.0163 b.3598 0.0000 O.DWO 0.1945 0.0138 0.0009 0.1 O.I 3.1 5.500 0.0083 0.0163 - b.3761 0.0000 O.D000 � 4.2084 0.0139 04W9 0.1 0.1 _ 35 5.667 0-0082 0.D1.63 1 0-3924 0.0000 1 O.DDDO 0.2225 0.0141 0.0009 0.1 _ 0.1 --3G 5 833 O.W45 O.O189,m 0.4113 O.WW 0.0000 0.2389 0.0164 0.0011 0.1- ; 0-1 - 37 G.000 O.W95 t 0.0189 0A302 O.00W 0.0000 0.2553 0.0166 0.0011 0.1 1 0.1 38 ! 6.167 0.0095 0.0189 0.449 t 0.0000 0.0000 02723 0.0167 D.0011 0.1 0.1 39 6.333 O.OD95 0.0189 0.4680 O.ODDO 0-0000 0.2991 4.0169 0.0011 0.1 0.1 1O 6.500 _ 0.0095 0.0189 0.487D 0.0000 0-0000 0.3061 0,0170 0.0011 0.1 0.1 4l 6.667 0.0095 0.0189 0.5059 O.ODOO 0.0000 0.3232 0.0171 0.0011 0.1 0.1 42 6.833 0.0134 0.0267 0.5325 0.0000 0.0000 0.3475 0.0243 0.0016 0.2 0.l 43 7.000 0.0134 0.0267 0.5592 0-0000 0.0000 0.3719 0.0245 0.0016 0.2 0- I 44 7.167 0.0134 0.0267 0.5859 0.0000 0.0000 0.3966 0.0246 0.0017 0.2 D. t 45 7.333 O.DIS 0.0359 0.6217 0.0000 0.0000 0.4298 0.0333 1 0.0022 0.3 O.2 Pre-D Runoff-10YR.XLS 10/4/2006 3:41 PM (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6} (7) _. rum Time Precip Incre, ACcumul. PE.RVIOUS AREA Incre�ne:nt (hrs.) Dis(rih. Rainfall... - Rainfall Accum. '. Incre _.__ i j ches) ichesW (inches) (inches) ' (8) L (9) 00) 1 - - IMPERVIOUS AREA `: Tidal ! ]nstarn Design Accum. Incre- RunoK Flowrae pnches) icf_s)(fraclion) Flowrrte Runoff Runoff 'i lets) (inches) (inches) 46 7.500 0.018 ` 0.0359 0.6575 0-OWO 0.0000 0.4633 0.5271 0.6295 0.6811 0.0335 0-0022 0.3 0 2 47 7.667 0.034 00677 0.7252 0,D0W j 0.0DW 0.0638 0,0043 0.5 02 -18 7.833 1 - - -11 - S.cxx) 04_54 0027 7 01475 0.8326 D,DOW 0.(W0 - 0.1024 4-W49 0.8 I 03 0.U537 0.8863 0OW2 0.W02 0.0516 O.0036 0.4 04 8,167 -- - 0.018 51 �Y 8333 0.0134 0 0358 0.922'- 00010 0.0008 0.7156 0.0345 0-0030 0.4 0.3 04. 0.0267 0.9488 60019 D.00D9 _0.7414 1 0.0257 0-0026 0.4 5 � 8.500 0.0134 0.0267 0.9755 0- W32 0.0013 0.7672 D D258 0.0029 ---0.3 03 53 8.667 4.)134 O.D267 1.0022 0.0047 __ 0.0016 0.7931 00258 O.W32 0.4 0.3 0.4 54 8,833 00088 0.0175 D.0175 1_0197 0, W59 0.0012 0.81 W D D 170 0.0023 0.002_4 0.1 D. 55 9660 0-WSB I.0372 O.W73 0.0013 0.8270 R0170 0.3 j SG rt 9167 0-ODSR 0.0175 1-0547 O.W87 0.0014 D-844(1 0.0170 D.0025 i O.0026 0.3 -- 0.3 57 9,333 0.oD88 - 0.0175 1.0722 0.0103 DA016 0.8610 0.0170_ D.3 j 58 9 500 0.0088 0.0175 1.0897 0.0120 0-0017 0.8781 0.0170 O.W27 j 0.3 0.3 _ 59 9-607 0.0088 0.0575 1.1072 0.0138 0-0018 0.8951 -�-- 0.0171 0.0028 0.3 0.3 0.3 --0.3 0.3 0.3 GO 9-833 0.0088 0.0175 1.1247 0.0157 0-0019 09122 0.0171 - O.O171 0.0030 0.3 ! - 6_1 10.000 0.0088 0-0175 1.1423 0.0178 0.0021 0.9293 0.0331 0.4 ---62 1 10.167 63 _Y 10,333 G4 10 5W 0.0088 0.0175 1.1598 0.0200 0.0022 0.9464 0.0171 0.0171 O.D171 0.0032 O.4 0,0088 4.0175 1.1773 - OA223 0,0023 0.9635 0.W33 D-4 O.W88 4.U175 1.1948 0.0247 0.0024 0.%06 0.0034 0.4 G5 10.667 0.0088 T 0.0175 L2123 0.0272 0.0025 0.9977 0.0171 0.0035 0.4 _0.4 6G 10 833 0.0072 0.0143 L2266 OA021 1.0117 0.0140 0.0029 0.3 _0.4 67 II.OW 0.0072 00143 1.2410 _0.0293 0.0315 1 O.W22 1.0257 0.0140 0.0030 0.4 0.4 68 1I.167 40072 0.0143 1,2553 0.0339 0.0023 1.0398 0.0140 0.0031 0.4 0-4 69 11.333 0,W72 0.0143 1.2096 0-0362 0.0024 1.0538 0.0140 0.0032 0.4 0.4 70 11.500 E 0.0072 0.0143 1,2839 D.0387 0.0024 1.0678 0.0140 0.0032 0.4 0.4 71 IL 67 0-0077 0.0143 1, 2963 0.04t2 D.0025 0 0026 1.0819 0.0140 0.0033 0.4 0.4 - 72 _ _ 73 11.933 0-0072 1.3136 0.0439 10959 0.0141 _ 0.0034 0-4 DA_ DA - 0.4 12.000 0.0072 __0.0143 40143 1-3269 _ 0.0464 0,OD27 1.1100 0.0141 0.0034 0.4 740.0143 75 1-3413 0.0491 0,0027 1. 1240 0.0141 -- - 0.0035 0.4 12-333 0.0072 i 0,0143 1.3556 0.0519 0 W28 1.1381 0.0141 0.0036 0.4 -0.4 7G 12-50(1 0.W72 -1 0,0143 1.3699 0.0548 0.W29 1 1,1522 0.0141 0.0036 0.4 _0.4 77 12-667 0.0072 1 0,0143 1.3842 0.0577 0 W29 1.1663 0.0141 0.0037 D.4 0.4 78 12833 0.0057 I 0.0113 1.3956 0.0601 0,W24 L1774 0.0111 0.0030 D.3 0.4 79 13 DOD D.W57 1 0.0113 1.4069 0.0625 0,0024 1.1886 0.0111 0.0030 0.4 0.4 80 13.167 _ 6.0057 0.0113 1.4183 D.D65D 4,W25 11997 0.0112 0.0030 0.4 1 0.4 81 13-333 0.0057 0.0113 1.4296 0.0675 00025 1.2109 _0.0112 0.0031 0.4 f 0.4 82 13.50D 0.0057 0.0113 1.4410 0.0700 O.WZ5 1.2220 0.0112 0.0112 0.0031 0.4 0,4 83 13.667 0.0057 1 0-01i3 1.4523� 0.0726 0-W26 1.2332 0-0032 0.4 0.4 84 1 13.933 0.0D57 0-0113 1.4636 0.0752 O.W26 1.2443 0.0112 0.0032 0.A 0-4 85 14.D00 0.0057 0.0113 1.4750 0.0778 0.W27 12555 0-0112 0.0032 0.4 0.4 8G �1G7 000 7 0.0113 1.4863 0.0803 00027 1,2667 0-0112 0.0033 _ O.W33 F 0.4 0.4 87 14.333 D.W57 _ D.0113 1.4977 0.0833 0.0027 1,2779 0.0112 1 0.4 0.4 _ 68 14.500 0.0057 0.0113 1-5090 D.086I OXON L2890 0.01I2 0.0033 - T0.0034 i 0.4 0.4 -89 14-667 O.0057 0.0113 1.5204 0.0889 O.W28 1.3002 0.01 I2 0.4 0.4 90 14 833 0.005 0.01 W 1.5303 0.0914 O.W25 1.3100 0.0098 0.0030 j U.4 0.4 9I___{ 15-WO -- 0.005_ � 4DIW 1.5403 0.0939 0-WZ5 1,319E 4.0098 0.0030 0.4 -- 0.4 4^- 15-167 0.005 �, 00100 1.5502 0.0965 - 0-W 26 1, 3290 0.0098 0.0030 0.4 -0.4 9 - 15333 0.005 0.0100 1.5602 0.099t 00026 1,3394 0.0099 0.0031 0.4 0.4 94 15.500 0.005 0.010015701 0.1017 0-0026 1.3492 0.0098 0.0031 0.4 0.4 95 15.667 O.WS D.OIW 1.5801 0.1043 0.0027 1.3591 0.0099 0.0031 0.4 0.4 96 15.833 0.005 0.0100 1.59W 0.1070 O.W27 1.36R9 0.0098 0.0032 0.4 0.4 �W 16-000 0.005 0.0100 1.60W 0.1097 O.W27 1.3797 0.0098 0.0032 0.4 0.4 98 16.167 0.005 0.0100 1.6099 0.1125 0.W27 1.1985 0.OD98 0.0032 0.4 0.4 99 16.333 0.005 0.0100 1 1.6199 0.1152 0.0028 L3983 0.0099 0-0032 0.4 04 iW 16.500 0.W5 0.0100 I.6298 0.1180 0.0029 1.4081 0.0098 0.0033 0.4 0.4 ]01 16.6G7 Q.W5 0.0100 1.6398 0.1208 0.0028 1-4180 0.0098 0.0033 0.4 0.4 102 16.833 0.004 0.0080 1.6477 0.1231 0.0023 1.425R 4.0079 0.0027 03 0.4 103 17.OW 0.004 0.0080 1.6557 0.1254 0.0023 1.4337 0.0079 0.0027 03 0.4 104 17.167 0 W4 0.0080 1.6636 0,1277 0.0023 1.4415 0.0079 0,0027 0.3T 4 4 105 17.333 0004 0.0080 L6716 0-1301 O.0023 I.b494 0-0079 0.0027 0.3 0-3 106 17.500 0 004 0.0080 1.6796 0,1324 0.0023 1 4573 i 00079 0.0027 0, 3 0, 3 _ 107 Y 17.667 0-004 0.0080 I.6875 0,1348 0.0024 14651 1 0,0079 O.OD27 03 0.3-- 108 17.833 0-0044 UAW 1.6955 0.1372 0.0024 1.4730 0,0079 4.0028 0-3 0.3 109 18.000 0-004 0.0080 1.7034 0.1396 0.0024 1.4809 0.0079 0.0028 0.3 0.3 110 11.167 D.004 0.4080 1.7114 0.1420 0.0024 i.4887 0.00 0.0028 0.3 0.3 Ill 18.333 D.004 D.OD80 1.7194 0.1444 0.0024 1.4966 0.0079 0.0028 0.3 0.3 II2 19.500 O.OD4 0.0090 L7273 0.1469 0.0025 1.5045 0.0079 0.0028 0.3 1 0.3 113 18.667 0.004 OAK 1.7353 r 0.1493 0.0025 1.5123 0.0079 0.0028 0.3 0-3 k 14 18.833 0.004 O.W80 1.7432 0.1518 0.0025 1.52D2 0.0079 O.W2R 0.3 D-3 115 19-OW 0.004 0-0080 1.7512 0.1543 0.0025 1.3281 O.W79 O.W29 0.3 0.3 Pre-C Runoff-10YR-SGS 10i4/2006 3141 PM (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (9) (9) (10) (I I) 13} Total __ Instam Design Runoff Flowrate Flowrate (inches) {cfs) (cfs) Time Precip- Incre. A_ccumul. PERVIOUSARU-AtMPERVIOUSAREA Accum. Incre lrwrement {hrs.) Distrih. I Rainfall Rainfall Accum- Incre. (fr<iclion) (inches) (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff j (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) 1 1 G 19.167 19.333 0 004 0.0080 0.0080 0.0080 1.7552 0.1569 0.0025 1.5359 0.0079 0.0029 0.3 0.3 _ 117 0004 1.7671 0.1594 0.0025 1.5438 0.0079 60029 0.3 0.3 118 19.500 19 19.667 - 120 19.833 -121 - 20.000 -I" 20.107 0004 1.7751 0-1619 0.0026 - 1.5517 0,0079 0.0029 0-3 0.3 D0 D,4 _ j 00080 0.0080 1.7830 01G45 0.0026 1.5595 D.OD79 0.0029 0-3 0.3 [1.3 0,3 0.3 0,3 � 0.3 0.004 0004 1-7910 0.1671 0.0026 0.0026 1.5674 O.OD79 0.0029 1 0.0080 1.799D 0.1697 1-5753 0.0079 0.0030 0.004 00080 1.8069 0.1723 00026 1.5832 0.0079 0.0030 323 124 20-333 0.004 0.004 0.0030 1.8149 0.1749 D.0026 1591n 0.0079 0.0030 0 3 0.3 0.3 20-SW 00080 1.8229 0.1776 0.0027 11989 0.009 d.0030 0,4 0.4 0.4 125 -- 126 20.067 0.004 0-0080 1.8308 0.1803 0.0027 1,6068 0.0079 I 0.0030 0-3 20.933 0.004 0.0080 1.8398 6.I829 0.0027 1.6147 0,0079 00030 0 3 _ f127�167 0.004 0-0080 1.9467 0.185G 0.0027 1,6225 00079 0-003U 0,4 0 3 1280.004 0-0080 1.9547 0.1883 0,0027 1.6304 0.0079 0,0031 0_4 0-4 129 J 0-0080 1.8626 0.1911 0-0027 1,6383 0,0079 00031 04 0-4 130_ .0.004 2 L 500 0.004 0.0080 1.870G 0.1938 0.0027 1.6462 0 W79 0.0031 04 0.4 131 21.GG7 4.404 O.DO80 1.8796 0.1966 0.0028 16541 0,W79 0.0031 04 0.4 I32 21.833 0.004 1 0.0080 1,8865 1,8945 0.1994 0.0028 1.6619 0,0079 D.0031 ❑ 4 DA _ _ 133 T 22.000 0.0 44 0.0080 - 0 2023 0.0028 1,6698 00079 0.0031 0-4 - 134 22,167 0.004 0.0080 1.9024 0 2050 0.0029 _ 1.6777 0.0U79 0,0031 04 0.4 ITT _2.333 0.004 0.0080 1.9104 0.0029 _ 1?6856 00079 0.0032 0-4 0.4 136 22, 500 0.004 0.0080 0-004 0.0080 1, 9184 0.0029 1.6935 O W79 0.0032 04 0.4 04139 137 22,667 1,9263 0.0029 17014 0.0079 _0.0032 0.4 22.833 0.004 0.0080 L9343 F0�2135 0.0029 17092 0.0079 0.0032 0.4 0.4 139E 23000 0.004 00090 19422 0.0029 1.7171 0.0079 0.0032 0.404 140 23,167 O.OD4 0.0080 1,9502 0.0029 1-7250 0.0079 0.0032 0.4 04 141 23.333 0.004 0.0090 1.9582 0.0029 1-7329 0.0079 0.0032 0.4 0,4 142 23.500 D.DD4 0.0080 1-966l D.2280 0.0029 [.7408 O.DD79 0.0033 0.4 04 143 23.667 0.004 0,0090 1,9741 0,2309 _ 0.0029 1-7497 0.0079 0.0033 0.4 0,4 0,4 144 2-833 0.004 ! 0.0080 1.9620 0.2339 0.0030 1-7566 0.0079 0.0033 0.4_ 145 44.000 _ 0.004 0,D080 1.9900 0,2368 0.0030 1-76" 0.0079 0.0033 0.4 0,4 Pre-0 RunnfE-lOYR.XLS 1014/2006 3:41 PM Worksheet: Time of concentration (T,) or Travel time (Tt) Project By Date Location Checked Date Circle one: Present Developed Circle one: T, T, through subarea NOTES: Include a map, schematic, or description of flow segments. Sheet flow (Applicable to T, only) Segment ID I. Surface description (table 3-t).................................. 2. Manning's roughness coeff., ns (table 3-1) ................. 3. Flow length, L (total L< 300 ft.) ............................. ft. 4. Two-yr 24-hr rainfall, P2........................................ in_ 5. Land slope, s,....................................................... ft/ft 6. T, = 0.42(nSL)" ° Compute T,... ............ min. P17 s 6d— Shallow concentrated flow Segment ID 7. Flow length, L....................................................... ft_ 8. Watercourse slope, so ................................................ ft/ft 9. Manning value for shallow concentrated flow, ks ....... 10. Avg. Velocity, V = kJso)" Compute V ................ ft/s IL T, = I Compute T. ............... min. 60V Channel flow Segment ID 12. Cross sectional flow area, a .................................... ft2 13. Wetted perimeter, p.............................................. ft. 14. Hydraulic radius, r = a/p, Compute r ................ ft. 15_ Channel slope, so .......................... I ................... .... ft/ft 16, Manning's roughness coeff., n................................ 17. V = 1.49r""s,,"` Compute V ............... ft/s n 18. Flow length. L...................................................... ft. 19. T — Compute T ..... c — L p , ..._.._... min_ 60V 20. Watershed or subarea T, or T, (add T, in steps 6, 11, and 19)..................................... -- n = 32.11 = 4.94 = 0.00 min. 37 YUU6 su J-V •YoJIVId IlPysluwa S 3,Y17512 .7n0vfz'7 boogTod01-X�.9St91 `ddhfS}6856! �.h :a/y Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) Analysis During -Construction Condition Based on 2-Year, 24-Hour Storm Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility SSUH Hydogograph - DURING CONSTRUCTION CONDITION (2-YR, 24-HR RAINFALL) _ Area = 19, 37 ;acres j Time to peak (hrs.) = 0.40 _.. ---- - ? MaxQ {cfs) 0.35 = PI =inches (Total rainfall fora _4�hour storm cvenq _ I --- di - 10:.min. c11-fl)=1 16.702.51 Tc = 51 min. (Developed site conditions) i - - - -r -- PERVIOU: PJr�cl 1A4PURVIOUS Purcel I I Area = 19.17 Jacres Area = 0.2 acres CN = 70 CN 98 1_ T --_ S - 4 29 _ S = 0.20 0,2S =} 0 86 D.25 = 0 44 ro- 0.0893 Column (i} =Time increment Column (2) = Time (min) _ Column (3) = Incremental Precipitation Fraction Column 14) = Column (3) * P. Column (5) = .Accumulated sum of Column (4) Column (6) = If (P < 0.2S) = 0. If (P > 0.2S) = (Cu)umn (5) - 0.2S)^2!(Column (5) + 0.8S), where the PERVIOUS AREA S value is used Colman (7) = Column (6) of the presew step - column (0) of the previous step COum1- --..---n.. (G) ezcpi use I vPF:RVEOUS AREA'S value Column (1) Columm !S) of the presoin step - Column (8) of the previous step Column t 10) - (PERVIOUS AREArl'OTAL AREA)*Column (7)+{IMPERVIOUS AREAFr(7TAL AREA)*Column (9) - �- Column I I I) = SG0.5*Calunur (10)*"rota I Area)ldl, where dt = 10 or 60 minutes Column (12) - Column (12) of previous lime Step + w * I(Column ( 11) of pTvious time step + Column (11) of present time step) - (2 * Column (12) of previous lime step) where w = routin constant = dV(2Tc + dt) = 0.0641 (1) j (2) (3) 1 (4) 1 (5) 1 (6) (7) _ (8) (9) 00) (tl) (12) Time Time Precip, Incre. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVEOUSAREA - Total Instant Desipn Increment (hrs.) Distrib. Rainfall Rainfall Accum. Incre. Accum, Incre. Runoff Rowrate Howrate (fraction) {inches) (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (cfs) [cfs) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) I 0.000 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,0000 0.0000 0.0 0.0 O.1G7 0-004 I 0.0080 0,0080 0-D000 0.0000 ODOM 0.0000 0.0000 0.0 0.0 -0.333 4 O.SDO 0.667 � G 0.833 1 000 0-0W ! D.o04 0 004 - i 0.0090 - _ 0.0080 i 0.0090 O.O159 0.0000 0.0000 O.DOM 0 0000 0.0000 0.0 D.D 0 0239 O.DOM O,0" 0.4000-� O.DODO 0-DOOR 0.0000 0-0 0.0 _ - 0.0 0,0318 0.DOOD - O.D000 00000 0.0000 0.0 OA04 0.004 0.0080 00398 0.0000 4.0000 O.000D 0.0000 0.0000 0-0 0.0090 O.D478 0.0000 0.0000 O.0002 0.0002 0.0000 0.0 -0.0 - 9 1 1-167 0.004 0.0090 0.0557 0.0000 0.0000 0-DOW 0.0008 0.0000 0.0 0.0 9 1.333 0.004 0-0090 0.0637 0.0000 0,0000 O.D023 0.0013 0.0000 0.0 0.0 10 1.500 0.004 O.OQSO 0.0716 0.0000 0,0" 0.0040 4.0017 0.0000 0.0 00 11 1.667 0.004 0.0080 0.0796 0.0000 OMDO 0.0062 0.0021 0.DD00 0.0 0.0 12 1.833 0.005 0A100 0.0896 O.ODDO 0-0000 0.0094 0.0032 0.00OD 0.0 0-0 13 2.000 0.005 0.0100 0.0995 0.0000 0.0000 0.0131 0.0037 0.0000 0.0 0.0 14 2.167 0.005 0.0100 0,1095 0.0000 0.0000 0.0113 0.0042 0.0000 0.0 0-0 15 1 2.333 0.005 0.0100 0.1 [94 0.0000 0,0000 0.0218 O.0046 0.0000 0.0 0-0 16 1 2.500 0.005 0.0100 01294 O.OD00 0.0000 0.0268 - ODD49 0.0001 0.0 0-0 17 7 2-667 - . - -- 18 2-833 19 3-OUD 20 3.167 6.01)5 0.0m _._.. __; O.00G 0._006 0.0100 0.1393 O.DD00 0.0000 0.032t 00053 0.0001 - 0.0 0.0 - D.ol l) 0 1512 0.0000 OD060 0.0388 0-0067 0.0001 0-0 0.0_- O.U119 D 1632 D.DIM 00000 0D459 00071 0.0001 0.4 0.0 - 0.0119 0.1751 0.0" 00000 0-0533 0AW4 0.0001 O.0 0.0 _ 21 3.333 O.00G 0.0119 0.1871 O.00DO OQ400 0061D 0.11077 D.OD01 D.O 0- �22 3.500 1 0.0_06 0.0119 0.1990 0000 .0 0.0000 0,0691 0-0080 0.0001 0-0 0.( 23 1 3.667 0.406 0.01l9 0-2109 0.0000 0,0000 0,0773 0.0083 ODD01 0.0 0.0 24 3.833 0.007 0.0139 0-2249 0.0000 0,0000 0A873 0.00" 0.0001 0.0 0.0 25 4.000 0.007 0.0139 0.2388 0.0000 0,0000 0.0975 0.0102 0.01D01 0.0 0.0 26 4.167 0.007 0.0139 0.2527 .00 000 0,0000 0.1080 0.0105 0.0001 0.0 0.0 27 4.333 0 007 0.0139 0.2067 00000 0,0000 0.1186 0.0107 0.0001 0.13 0.0 28 4.500 0.007 0.0139 0.2906 0.0000 0.000(1 0-1295 0.0109 0.0001 0.0 0.0 29 4.667 0.007 0.0139 0.2945 OA000 0.01)00 O.I406 0,0111 00001 D.0 0,0 30 4-833 0.0082 0.0163 0-3108 OA000 0.0D00 0,1538 0,0132 0.0001 0.0 0.0 31 5 000 32-- _ - 5-167 33 5.333 0.0082 0.0163 0.0082 4.0163 0.0c>8 -00163 0,3272 0.0000 0,0000 0,1672 O.O134 0.0001 0.0 0-0 0-3435 O.D000 O.OD00 0.1808 00136 0.0001 0.0 0-0 0-3598 0.0000 4.0000 4.19A5 0,0138 0.D001 0.0 00 _ 34� 5.500 00082 0-0163 0.3701 0.0000 0,0000 0,7A84 0.0139 O.ODO1 0-0 0,0 35 5.667 0.0082 0.0163 0.3924 0.0000 0,0000 0.2225 0.0141 0,DD01 0.0 0.0 36 5.833 OA095 0.0189 0.4113 0.0000 0.0000 0.2389 0.0164 0-D002 0.0 0.0 37 _ _ 6.000 0AM5 0.0189 0,4302 0.0000 0.0000 0.2555 0.0166 O.DD02 0.0 0-0 38 6.167 0.0095 0.0189 0,4491 0.0000 0.(Kw 0.2723 0.0167 0.0002 0.0 0.0 6.333 00095 D.0189 0A680 O.DDDO 0.0000 4.2891 60169 0.0002 0.0 0.0 6500 6.0095 0.0189 0A970 0.0000 0.0000 0.3061 0.0170 0.0002 00 0.0 6-6G7 OD095 0.0189 0.5059 0.000D D,0000 03232 0.0171 0.0002 0.0 00 M-45 6.833 0.0134 0,0267 0.5325 O.00DD 0.01M 0.3475 0.0243 0.0003 0.0 0.0 7.000 00134 0.0267 0.5592 0.0000 0.0000 0.3719 0.0245 0.0003 0.0 0.0 7,167 0-0134 0.0267 0.5959 0.0000 0.0000 0.3966 0.0246 0.0003 0.0 0 7.333 0.018 0.0358 1 0.6217 1 0.0000 0.0000 0.4298 0.0333 0.0003 0.0 0.0 Construction Runoff-14YR.XL5 10/4/2006 3:41 PM (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) _ (II) (12) Time Time Precip. here. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA Total Instant Design Increment Ors-) Distrib. Rainfuli Rainfall Accum. Incre, Accum- Incre. Runoff Flowrute m0wrate (fraction)(inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff {inches_) (efs)� (cfs) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) 46 7 500 0 DIS 0.0358 47 7.667 0.03.1 ...0.0677 - 48 7.831 0.05- 01075 -19 8.000 00537 0.6575 0.7252 0.0000 0.0000 04633 0.0335 0.0003 0.0 0.0 --- -- - 0.] 0.0 0,0000 - 0-COW 0-5271 0.063$ 0.0007 D.832G 0.ONO I 0-0000 O.G295 0.W02 0-0002 0.6911 0.1024 O.Q011 0.0007 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 _ _0.027 50 8.167 0 018 00358 _0.8863 09222 ().DU I O 0-0008 0.7156 _0.0516_ 0.0345 0.0011 0.1 0 1 51 8333 0.013a 0.0267 0-9488 CM19 0.0009 0,7414 0.0257 0.0012 0.1 1 01 52 8.500 0.013-1 0.0267 0.9755 0.0032 0.0013 0.7672 0.0258 0.0015 0.2 i 01 53 9.667 __ 0.0134 0.0267 1.0022 0.0047 0.0016 { 0.7930 0.0259 0.0018 -0.0014 0.2 01 54 8.833 0.0088 0.0175 LO197 0.0059 0.0012 O.8100 0.0170 0.2 01 55 9.0D0 0.0088 0.0175 1.0372 0.0073 0.0013 0.8270 0.0170 0.0015 0.2 0.l 56 9._167 0.0088 00175 1.0547 0,0087 0.0014 0.8440 0.0170 0.0016 0.2 Dl 57 9 333 0.0088 0-0175 I .0722 0.0103 0.0016 0.9610 0.0170 0,0017 0.2 0 ? 58 9.500 O DOSS 0-0175 1-0897 1 0.0120 0.0017 0.8781 0.0170 0,0019 0-2 0-2 59 9.G67 OADB$ 0.UE75 L1072 0.6138 0.0018 0.91)5F 0.0171 0,0020 0-2 0.2 GO 9 533 [} lN)SR I O,D f 75 L 1247 0.0157 0.0019 0.9122 i 0.0171 0-0021 Q.2 0.2 {,1 10-000 + O DUBS 0, D 175 02 - 10.167 �00088 0,0175 I l 423 0.0178 - 0.0200 0.0_2'_3 0.4247 0.002 t 00022 00023 09293 0-0171 0-0022 O3 0, 2 1,1598 0,9464 0.0171 0-0023 0.3 0.2 63 10-333 O.DOR3 0,0175 1,17_73_ 0,9635 00171 U.0024 0.3 0? 64-� 1D.SOO D.0088 001751,1948 0.0011a.0175 0,OW 0.0143 _ O.OD24 0-9806 O.D171 O.OD2G 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 65 10.667 1,2123 0.6272 0.0025 0,9977 0.0171 0.0027 0.3 66 10.833 1,2260 0.0293 0.0021 1.0117 O.0140 0.0023 0.3 67 11.000 _ 0.0072 0A143 1.2410 4.0315 0.0022 1.0257 0.0140 0.0023 6.3 0,3 68 1E.167 0.0072 0.0143 1.2553 0.0338 0.0023 1.0398 0.0140 0.0024 0.3 0.3 - 69 11 333 0,0072 0.0143 1.2696 0.0362 0.0024 1.0538 0,0140 0.0025 0.3 0.3 70 11-500 0,0072 0.0143 1.2839 0.0397 0.0024 1.0678 0.0140 0.0026 0.3 0.3 71 11.667 0.0072 0.0143 1.2993 0.0412 0.0025 1.0819 0.0140 0.0026 0.3 0.3 72 II-833 0.0072 0.0143 1.1126 0.0438 0.0026 1.0959 0.0141 0.0027 0.3 0.3 73 1 12.000 0.0072 0.0143 1.3269 0.0464 0.0027 1.1100 0.0141 0.0028 0.3 0.3_ 74 12.167 j O.U07^- ----- - -- 1 0.007- O.007' - 0.0072 13.b143 ------- --- 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 1.3413� -- 1.3556 0.0491 0.0027 1.1240 0.0141 0.0028 0.3 4. 3 _ -_ 0.3 ..�..W--= 75 12.333 7G _ I2.500 77 12.667 0.0519 0.0028 1.1381 0.0141 0.0029 0.3 1.3699 1.3842 0.0548 0-0577 0,0029 0,0029 1.1522 1.1663 O.QI41 0.0141 0.0030 0.0030 0.3 0.4- 0.3 0.3 78 12.933 1 00057 00113 t .395G 0-0601 O.IXI24 1.1774 0.0111 0.0025 0.3 0-3 79 13 000 0-0057 0.0113 1.4069 0.0625 0.0024 1.1886 0.011 k 0.0025 0.3 0.3 80 13-167 0.0057 0.0113 1.4183 0.0650 0.0025 k.1997 0.0112 0.0025 03 0.3 81 13.333 0.0057 0.0113 1.4296 O.D675 0.0025 L2109 0.0112 0.0026 0-3 0.3 82 13.500 0.0057 0.0113 1.4410 0.0700 0.0025 1.2220 0.0112 0-0026 0-3 0.3 83 13.667 0.0057 0.0113 1.4523 0.0726 0.0026 1.2332 0.0112 0.0027 0-3 0.3 84 13.833 0.0057 0.0113 1.406 0.0752 0.0026 1.2443 0.0112 0,0027 0.3 0.3 85 14.000 0.0057 0.0113 1.4750 0.0779 0.0027 1.2555 0.0112 0,0027 0.3 0.3 86 14,167 0.0057 0.0113 1.4963 0.0805 0.0027 1.2667 0.0112 0.0028 03 0.3 87 14.333 0.0057 0.0113 1.4977 0.0833 0.0027 1.2779 0.0112 0,0028 0.3 0.3 86 14.500 0.0057 6.0k 13 1.5090 0.0861 0.0028 1.2890 0.0112 0.0029 0.3 0.3 89 14.667 0.0057 - 0.005 O, O 113 1.5204 0.0889 0.0028 1, 3002 0.0 t 12 0.OD29 0.3 0.3 0.3 - 90 14.813 0 Ok00 1.5303 0.0914 0.0025 1,3100 1 0.0098 0.0026 0.3 91 15.000 0.005 00100 1.5403 0.0939 0.0025 1.3198 O.DO98 0.0026 0.3 0.3 _ 92 15.167 0.005 0.0100 1.5502 0.0965 0.0026 L3296 0.0098 0.0026 0.3 0.3 9 - f 15.333 0.005 0.0100 1.5602 0.0991 0-0026 L3394 W)098 0.0027 0.3 03 94 r t5.500 0.005 0.0100 1.5701 0-1017 00026 1.3492 0.0098 0.0027 0.3 0,3 95 15.667 0-005 0.0100 L5501 0.1043 0.0027 1.3591 0.0098 0.0027 0.3 0.3 96 15.811 0.005 0-0100 L5900 0.1070 0.0027 1.3699 0.0098 0.0028 0.3 03 97 16.000 0.005 0.0100 1.6000 0.1097 0.0027 1.3787 0.0098 0.0028 0.3 0.3 _ 98 l G. E 67 0-005 0.0100 L6099 0.1175 O.DO27 1.3895 0.0098 0.0028 0.3 0.3- 99 16.333 0.005 0-0100 1.6199 0.1152 O.DO28 1.3983 0.0098 0.0028 0.3 0.3 100 16.500 0-005 0.0100 1.6298 0.1190 0.0028 1.4091 0.0098 0.0029 0.3 0.3 w1 16.667 0.005 0.0100 1.6398 0.1208 0.0028 1.4180 0.0098 0.0029 0.3 0.3 W2 16.833 0.004 0.0080 1.6477 0.1231 0.0023 1.4258 0.0079 0.0023 0.3 0.3 103 17 000 0.004 0.0080 1.6557 0.1254 0.0023 1.4337 0.0079 0.0024 03 0.3 I o4 17 167 105_-----_17LI33 U 004 _ 0,004 0.0080 0.0080 1.6636 1.6716 0.1277 0.1301 0.0023 0,0023 1.4415 1.4494 0.0079 0.0079 0 W24 O.DO24 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 QG I _ 17 500 107 17 G67 + _O aOJ Q OOa 0.0080 0.0084 t6796 1.6875 0.1324 0.1348 0,0023 0.0024 1-4573 1.4651 0.0079 0.0079 0.0024 0.0024 0.3 _0.3 0.3 mm 0.3 l & 17.833 0 004 00080 L6955 0-1372 O.0024 1.4730 0.0079 0.0024 0.3 0.3 109 18.400 0-004 0.0080 1.7034 0.1396 0.0024 1.4909 0.0079 0.0025 0.3 0.3 110 I 18.167 0 W4 0.0080 1.7114 0.1420 0.0024 1.4987 0.0079 0-0025 D.3 0.3 lli 18.333 0,004 0.0080 k.7i94 0.1444 0.0024 I.4966 0.0079 O.D025 0.3 0.3 112 18.500 0.004 0.0080 1.7273 OA469 0.0025 1.5045 0.0079 0.0025 0.3 0.3 113 18.667 0.004 0.0080 1.7353 O.[493 0DO25 1.5123 0.0079 0.0025 0.3 0.3 114 ] .833 0.004 0.0080 1.7432 0.t518 0.0(125 t.5202 0.0079 0.0025 0.3 0.3 115 19.000 0.004 0.0080 1.7512 0.1543 0.0025 L5281 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 Construction Runoff-10YR.XLS 10/4/2006 3:41 PM (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1 (9) (10) (ll) (12) Time Time Preci . Incre. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA Total Instant Design Increment (hrs.) Disrrib Rainfall Rainfall Accum- Incre. Accum. Incre. Runoff F3owrale Flownue (fraction) (inches) h (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (efs) {efs) _ (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) ._. 16 19.167 1 17 19.333 18 19 500 _ 119 19.667 0.004 0 004 I 0.004 0.004 0.0080 1 1.7592 0.008_O 1.7671 0.0080 1.7751 00 0080 1.7830 0.1568 0.0025 1-5359 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 0.1594 0.0025 1-5438 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 0.1619 0.0026 1 5517 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 0.1645 0.0026 1.5595 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 120 19.833 121 20.040 0.064 0.004 Own 1.7910 0.1671 00026 1-5674 0.0079 0.0026 0.3 0.3 O DO80 1.7490 0.1697 0-0026 1.5753 D.0079 0.0027 0.3 0.3 122 20.167 0.004 00080 1.8069 0-17Z3 0-0026 1.3832 0.0079 0.0027 0.3 0.3 123 20.333 0.004 0,0080 1.8149 0-1749 O.0026 1.5910 0.0079 j 0.D027 0.3 0.3 124 20 500 0.004 00080 1.8229 0.1770 1 0.0027 1.5989 0.0079 ; 0.0027 6.3 0.3 125 20-667 0-004 0.0080 1.8308 0.1803 0.0027 L.6068 0.0079 0.0027 0.3 0.3 126 20.833 0.004 0.0080 1.8399 0.1929 �� 0^0027 1.6147 0.0Q79 0.0027 0.3 0.3 127 21.00p 0.004 (1.0080 1.8467 1).11156_ 0.0027 ; 1.6225 0.0079 0-0028 0.3 0.3 128 71.167 0.004 0.0090 1.8547 0.1883 0,0027 L6304 00079 0-0028 0.3 0.3 129 i 21.333 I 0.004 0.0080 L8626 0.1911 0.0027 1.6383 0.0079 0.0028 0.3 0.3 130 21 %D 0.004 0.0080 _ 1.8706 1.8786 0.1938 0.0027 1.6462 00079 0-0028 Q.3 0.3 -111 ---21,667 i 0.004 0.0080 0.1966 0.0028 1.6541 0-0079 0-0028 0-3 0.3 -13, 21, 833 0.004 0.0080 1.8865 0.1994 0,2422 0.0028 1.6619 00079 0.0028 0.3 0.3 133 22.00D 0.004 0.0080 1.8945 0.0028 1.6698 0.0079 OD028 0.3 0.3 - 134 22.167 0.004 0.0080 LW24 01050� 0.0028 1.6777 0-0079 0-D029 0.3 0.3 IM 22.333 0.004 0.0080 1.9k04 0.2078 0.0028 1.6856 0-0079 O.0029 0.3 0.3 136 22.500 0.004 0.0080 I.9 k 84 0.2106 0.0028 1.6935 OLOO79 0.0029 0.3 0.3 137 22.667 0.004 4.0080 1.9263 0.2135 0.4029 1.7014 0.0079 00)29 0.3 0.3 m 136- T22.633 0.004 0.0080 1.9343 0.2163 0.0029 1.7092 OD079 0.0029 0.3 0.3 139 23.000 0,004 0.0080 19422 0.2192 D.0029 1.7171 0.0079 0.0029 0.3 03 140 23.1 011 O.DO80 1.9502 0.2221 0.0029 1.7250 0.0079 0.0030� 0.3 0,3 ]41 367 23.33 0-004 D.D080 1.9592 0.2250 0.0029 1.7329 0.0079 0.0030 0.3 0.3 )42 23.500 0 D04 0.0080 1.%61 0.2280 0.0029 1.7408 0.0079 0.0030 0.3 Q.3 143 23.667 RON 0.0090 1.9741 0.2309-+ 0.0029 1.7497 0.0079 0.0030 0.4 O.3 144 23.833 0,004 0.0080 I 1.9820 0.2339 0.0030 1.7566 0.0079 0.0030 0.4 0.3 _ 145 24.000 0.004 0.0080 ; 1 M)00-1 0.2369 0.0030 1.7644 1 0.0079 1 0.0030 0.4 0.3 Construction Runoff-10YR-ALS 10/4/2006 3:41 PM Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) Analysis Pre -Construction Condition Based on 10-Year, 24-Hour Storm Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility SBUH Hydrograph - EXISTING CONDITION (10-YiR, 24-HR RAINFALL) Area = 9,37 acres Time to Peak (hrs.) = 1 0-14 P1 = 2.9 inches (Total rainfall fora 24-hour storm event) Max Q (cfs) = L23 - d1 10 min- Vol (cu-h) = 53.503.80 Tc 51 min. {Develuped site conditions) PERVIOUS Parcel Area 18.07 acres CV = 10 S = 4,291 0.2S 0.86 ' 0.0893 Column (1) = Time lncrernem Column (2) = Time (mm)-- Column 13) = Incremental Ptenpilation Fracuon Culunm (4) = Column (3) * P, Cplunua (57 = Accumul.11ed sum of Column (4) IMPERVIOUS Ares = CN = S = 0.25 =0.04 - Parcel 1.3 98 acres 0.20 -- - - --- - - - Column (6) = 11 (P < 0, 2S) = 0, If (P > 0.2S) _ (Column (5) - 0.2S)^'!(Column (5) + 0.8S), where the PERV IOUS AREA S value is used _ Colunvn (7) = Ca lumn (6) of [Ile pre SCnt Slep Column (6) of the previous Ste _ Column (9) = Satre as Colunvl (6) except use IMPERVIOUS AREA S value Column {9) = Column (9) of the present step - Column (8) of the previous step -- i Column { 10) = (PERVIOUS AREAlTOTAL AREA)*Column (7)+(IMPERVIOUS ARENTOTAL AREA)•Colu[nn (9) Column { 11) = (60.5•CoWmn (10)*Total Area)/dt, where dt = 10 or 60 rninuies Column { 12) = Column ( 12) of previous time step + w * {(Column (I 1) of revious time step+ Column (11) o€ resent lime step) - (2 * Column (12) ofprevious time step)] where w = routing constant = dt/(2Tc + dt) = 0.0641 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) 01) O2) Tint: Time Precip. Incre. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA I IMPERVIOUS AREA Total Instant Desi Increment (has) Disirlb. Rainfall Rainfall Accum Incre, Accum. Incre. Runoff Flowrate Flowrate (fraction) (inches) (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (cfs) (cfs) (inches) (inches) _ (inches) (inches) _ 1- 0.000 0 4.0000 O.00DO 0.0000 0.0000 O.DQ00 0.0000 4.OD00 O.D D.0 2 0.167 0,004 0,0116 0.0116 0.0000 0.00W 0.WN 0.0000 4.0000 0,0 0.0 3 0-333 O.UQ4 0.0116 0.0232 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0,00W 0.0 0.0 4 0.500 0.004 0.0116 0.0348 0.00W 0.000G 0.0000 O.ODDQ 0.0000 0.0 0.0 5 0.667 0.004 0.0116 D.0464 0.0000 0.0000 0-OOOI 0.000] 0.0000 0.0 0.0 6 0.933 _ 0.004 0.0116 0.0380 0.0000 0.0000 0.0013 0.0012 0.0DO] 0.0 0.0 7 1.006 0.004 0.0116 0.0696 _ 0.0000 0.00D0 0.0036 0.0022 0.0WI 0.0 0.0 8 1.167 0.004 0.0116 0.0812 0.0000 0.0000 0.0067 0.0031 0.0002 0.0 0.0 9 1.333 0.004 0.0116 0.0928 0.0000 - 0.WW 0.0106 0.0039 0.0W3 0.0 0.0 10 1.500 0.004 0.0116 0.1044 0.0000 (7.0006 0.0151 0.0046 0.0003 O.D 4.0 II i.GG7 0.004 0.01)6 0.1160 0.0000 0.0000 0.0202 0.005I O.00D3 0.0 0.0 I'_ 1833 13 2000 0.005 0.0145 01305 0.0000 0.00W 0.0000 0.0274 0.0071 O.W05 0.1 - 0.0 0.0 0.005 0O345 0.1450 0.0000 0.0352 0.0079 i 0.0005 0.1 14 2 167 0.005 0.0145 1 0I59.5 0.0000 O.D000 1 0.0436 0.0084 0."6 6.1 - ( 15 2 333 0.005 0.0145 0. 1740 1 0,0000 0.0000 0.0526 U.0090 O.OD06 0.1 0.0 16 2 500 0,005 Q,0145 0.1885 0.0000 0.0000 0.0620 0.0094 0.0006 0A 0.0 17 i 2.667 0005 0,0145 0.2030 0.0000 O.ODOO 0.0718 0.009E 0.0007 O. t� 0.1 18 2-833 0,006 0.0174 0.2204 0.00W 0.00W 0.0941 0.Ot22. 0.0008 0.1 0.1 19 3-000 0.006 0.0174 0-2379 0-0000 0,0000 0.0967 0.0127 0.0009 0.1 0.1 21) 3.167 0.W6 0.0174 0.2552 0.0000 0.0OW 0,1098 0.0131 0.OD09 0.1 0-1 21 3.333 0.006 0.0174 0.2726 0.0000 0.0000 0,1233 0.0134 0.0009 0.1 0A 22 3.500 0.006 0.0174 0.29W 0.0000 0.0000 0,1370 0.0137 0.0009 0.1 0.1 - 23 3.667 0.006 0.0174 0.3074 0.00W 0.00W 0.1510 0.0140 0.O009 0.1 0.1 24- 3.833 0.007 0.0203_ 0.3277 0.00W 0.000 0.1676 0.0166 0,0011 0.1 0, l _ 25 26 _ 27 4.0_00 4.167 4.333 0.007 0.007 4.007 0.0_203 0.3480 0.0000 0.00W 0.1846 0.0169 0.0011 0.1 0.1 0.0203 0.3683 0.WW 0.DOW 0.2018 00172 0.0012 0.1 0.1 0.0203 0.3896 0.D000 D.D000 D.2192 Q.0174 0-W 12 0.1 1 0.1 18- 29 4.500- 4. C67 - 0.007 0.007�1 L0.0203 0.0203 0,4089 0,4292 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.D000 0.0000 0.2368 0.2546 0.2757 0,0176 Q.0178 0.0211 0-W12 0.0012 0.0014 0-1 0A 0.2 0-1 0.1 0A 30 4 833 b.0082 0-0238 0,4530 31 5000 0-0082 0.0238 0,4768 0.0000 O.DDOO 0.2969 - 0.0213 0.0014 0.2 0.1 32 5.167 0.0082 0,0238 0.5005 0.0000 0.0000 0.3184 0.0214 0.0014 0.2 0.1 33 5.333 0.0082 0.0238 0.5243 0.0000 0.0000 0.3400 0.0216 0.0015 0.2 0.1 34 356G7 5.500 O.0082 0.0082 ��0.0238 0.0239 0.5481 0.5719 0.00(i0 0.0000 0.000Q O.pODQ 0.3618 0.3636 0.0218 0.0219 0,0015 Q.DOIS 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 36 5.833 0.0095 0.0276 0.5994 0.0000 0.0000 0.4091 0.0233 0.0017 0.2 0.2 37 6.(100 0.0095 0.0276 0.6270 0.0000 0,0000 0.4348 0.0256 0.0017 0.2 0.2 38 6.167 0.0095 0.0276 0.0545 0.0000 0.0000 0.4606 0.0258 0.0017 0.2 0-2 39 6.333 0.0095 0.0276 0.6821- 0.0000 0.0000 R4865 0.0259 0.0017 0.2 0-2 40 6.500 0.0095 0.0276 0.7096 0.0000 0.0000 0 5124 0.0260 0.0017 0.2 O.2 41 f 4.0095 0.0276 0.7372 0.0000 0.0(M ; 0.5385 0.0261 0.0018 0.2 0.2 42 6.833 i 0.0134 1 0.0389 0.7760 0.00OO 0.0000 0-5755 0.0369 0.0025 0.3 0.2 4? 7,000 O.OI34 0.4389 - 0.8149 0.0000 0.0000 0.6126 0.0371 0.0025 0.3 0.2 44 45 -� 7.167 0.0134 7.333 10.018 0.03- 89,- 0.0522 1 0.8538 0.9060 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0005 0.6498 0.7000 1 0.0372 0.0502 0.0025 0.0039 0.3 0.5 0,2 0.3 Pre-D Runoff-10YR-XIS 10f312006 6:10 PH (I} (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (II) (12) Time 1 Time Incre- Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPF.RV€OUS AREA Total Instant Design Inc: re men[ F (his.} Distrib- Rainfall Rainfall Accum lucre. Accum €Here. Runoff Flowrute Flowra[e (fraction) (inches) (inches) �- - - Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff- {inches) (cfs) (cfs) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) 4G 7.500 0.018 00522 0,9582 0.O023 0.0016 0.7504 0.0504 0.0050 0.6 0-3 47 7.6G7 0.034 0.098G 1 �5G8 0.0089 - 0.0066 0.8460 0.0956 0.0I25 3.5 0-4 _�_ 48- 333 49 8.000 50 S. 167 0.054 0156G 0.027 0 078� 0.018 D 0522 1,2134 7 1.3439 0.0273 0.0400 0.0496 00185 0.0127 0.0096 09987 1.0754 L [266 0.1527 0.0767 0.05 t 2 0.0275 0.0170 0.0124 3.2 2.0 0-8 L I 1.5 I -? 51 8 333 _ 00134 D (1389 1.38?? 1 0.0�574 �- `0.0078 11648 0.0392 0.0098 1.2 L2 -- 5 - - 6 500 00134 0.0389 ! 1.42 t G i 0.0657 0.0083 1.2030 0.0382 -O.O 103 1-2 L2 53 i 8 667 00134 0.0389 1.4604 0.0744 O 0088 1 1.2412 0.0382 0.0107 1.3 L2 54 ! 8 833 0-0088 0.025.5 1.4860 0.0805 0,0060 1.2663 0.0251 0.0073 0.9 L2 55 4 000 0-0088 0.0255 1.5115 0.0867 0,0062 1.2915 0.0251 0.0075 0.9 1,1 56 9167 57 j 9 333 0.0068 j 0.6255 1.5370 0.0931 0.(1064 [.3166 0.0251 0.0077 0.9 1.1 j 01)088 1 0.02m T1.5625 0.0997 0.0066 [.3418 0.0252 0,0079 0.9 1.1 58 _ 9500 59 i 9,667 0-DO88 ; 0.0255 0-0088 i 0.0255 -- L5880 1.6136 0.1065 0.1135 0_DO69 0.0070 1.3669 1.3921 0.0252 0.0080 0.9 1,0 - 0.0252 0.0082 1.0 1.0 GO 1 9,831 0-D088 i 0.0255 11G 91 0.1207 0.0072 1.4173 _ 0.0252 0.0084 1.0 1.0 GI i 10.000 0.0088 0.0255 1.6646 0.1280 0.0074 1.4425 0.0252 0.0086 1.0 IA 62 10-167 G3 1D.333 64� 10-5D0 65 11667 0-0088 0.0255 1.6901 0.1356 0.0075 E.4677 0.0252 0.0087 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 0.0088 0.0255 0.0089 0.0255 17156 1.7412 0.1433 0.1512 0O077 0-0079 1.4929 1.5181 0.0252 0.0252 0,0089 0.0091 1.0 1.1 0.0088 0.0255 1.7667 0.1592 0-0081 1.5434� 0,0252 awn 1.1 L0 GG ID-833 (1.0072 0.0209 1.7876 0.1660 0-0067 1 1.5640 0.0206 00077 0.9 I0 67 j I) -ON 0.0072 0.0209 - [.8084 0.1728 0-0068 1.5947 - 0.0207 0.0078 D.9 1.0 - G8 I L167 0.0072 0.0209 1.8293 0.1798 0.0070 1.6053 0.0207 0.0079 0.9 1.0 69 1 11.333 D.D072 0.0209 1-8502 0.1868 0.0071 1.6200 0.0207 0.0080 0.9 1.0 70 11.500 0.0072 0.0209 1.8711 0.1940 0.0072 1.6467 0.0207 0.0081 0.9 I'D 71 11.667 0.0072 0.0209 1.8920 0.20t3 0.0073 1.6673 0.0207 D.0082 1.0 1.0 72 11.833 0.0072 0-0209 1.9128 0.2087 0.0074 1.6880 0.0207 0.0083 1.0 1-0 73 12.000 0.0072 0.0209 1.9337 0.2€61 0.0075 1.7097 0.0207 0.0084 1.0 1-0 74 J2.167 0.0072 0.0209 1.9546 0.2237 0.0076 L7294 0.0207 0.0085 1.0 1.0 75 12.333 0.0072 0.0209 1.9755 0.2314 0.171 l.7511 1.1207 0.0086 1.0 LD 7G TI2.500 0-0072 0.0209 1.9964 0.2392 O.D078 1.7707 0.0207 d.0097 1.0 I.0 77 - 12.667 0-0072 0.0209 2.0172 0.2471 0.0079 1.7914 0.0207 0.0088 1.0 1 1.0 78 12.833 0.0057 0.0165 2.03;8 0.2535 0.0063 1.8078 0.01G4 0.0070 0.9 LD 79 13-000 O.OD57 0.0165 _ 2.0503 0.2598 0-0464 3.8242 0.0164 0.0071 0.9 0.9 64 13-I67 0.0057 0.0165 2.0668 4.2663 0-04G4 1.8406 0.0164 - 0.0071 0.9 0.9 - 81 13-333 1 0.0057 -- j 0.0163 ) Y 2.0834 0.2728 0.0065 1.8570 0.0164 0.0072 0.9 0.9 _82 13.500 0.0057 0.0165 2.0999 0.2794 0.0066 1.8734 0.0164 0.0 - 89 11.667 I 0.0057 0.0165 2.1164 0.2900 0.0066 1.8898 0.0164 0.0073 0.9 0.9 84 13.833T--00. 0057 0.0165 21330 0.2927 0.0067 I.9062 0.0164 0.0073 0.9 0,9 85 14.0000057 0.0165 2-1495 0.2994 0.0061 1.9226 0.0164 0.0074 0.9 0,9 86 14.1 G70057 0.0165 2-1660 0.3062 0.0069 1.9390 0.0164 0.0074 6.9 0, 9 87 14.333 0.0057 0.0165 2.1825 0.3131 0.0069 1.9554 0.0164 0.0075 0.9 0.9 88 14.500 0.0057 0.0165 2.1991 0.3200 0.0069 1.9718 0.0164 0.0076 0.9 0,9 89 14.667 0.0057 0.0165 2.2156 0.3270 0.0070 t.9882 0.0164 0.00% 0.9 0,9 90 14.833 0.005 0.0145 j 2-2301 0.3331 0.0062 2.0026 0,014,4 0.0067 0.8 0,9 91 15.MO- 0.005 0-0145 2.2446 0.3393 0.0062 2.0170 0.0144 0.0068 0.8 0.9 92 15.167 0.005 0.0145 2.2591 0.3456 0.0062 2.0314 0,0144 0.0069 0.8 0.6 93 15.333 0.005 0-0145 2.2736 0.3519 0.0063 2.0458 0.0144 0.0069 0.8 0.8 94 15.500 0.005 D.0145 2.2981 0.3592 0.0063 2.0602 0.0144 0.0069 0.8 0.8 95 15.6671 0.005 0.0145 2.3026 0.3646 0.0064 2.0746 0.0144 0.0069 0.8 0.8 96 J5.833 0-005 0.0145 2.3171 0.3710 0.0064 2.0890 0.01" 0.0069 0.9 0.8 97 16-000 0.005 j 0.0145 2.3M6 0.3774 0.0065 2.1034 0.0144 0.0070 0.9 0.8 98 1 G.167 0.005 0.0145 2.3461 0.3839 00065 2.1178 0.01" 0.0070 0.8 0.9 99 16.333 0.005 0.0145 _ 2.3606 0.3905 0.0065 2.1322 6.0144 0.0071 0.8 0.8 100 1 16.500 0.005 0.0145 11 2.3751 0.3970 0.0066 2.1466 0.0144 0.0071 0.8 0.8 101 16.667 0.005 Q0111 2.3996 0.4036 0.0066 2.1610 0.01" 0.0071 0.8 0.8 102 16.833 O.OD4 0.0116 2-4012 0.4090 0.0053 2.1725 GA0.0057 0.7 0.8 103 17.000 0.004 0.0116 2.4128 0.4143 0.0053 2.1341 0.0058 0.7 0.8 104 17.167 0.004 0.0116 2.4244 0.4E97 0.0054 2.1956 0.0058 0.7 R.8 105 17.333 0.004 O.OII6 2.4360 0.4251 0.0454 2.2D71 106 17-SDO 1-14 0.0116 2.4476 0.4305 0.0054 2.2197 0.0058 0.7 0.7 1D717.6G70.004 0.0116 2.4592 04359 0.0054 2.2302 0.0059 0.7 0.7 108 17.833 0004 0.0116 2.4708 0.4414 0.0055 2.2417 O.D059 0.7 0.7 109 1B.000 0.004 0.0116 2-4874 0.4469 0.0055 2.2532 0.0115 0.0059 0.7- 0.7 110 18.167 0,004 0.0116 2.4940 0.4524 0.0055 2.2648 0.0115 0.0059 0.7 0.7 I11 18.333 0-DD4 0.0116 2.5056 0.4579 0.0055 ?-Z763 O.DI15 O.Od59 0.7 0.7 112 18.500 O.DO4 0.0116 2.5172 0.4635 0.0056 2.2878 0.0115 0.0060 0.7 0.7 -- j I I3 18 667 0.004 0.0116 2.5289 0.4691 0.0056 2.2994 0.0115 0.0060 1.7 0.7 114 18.833 0.004 0.0116 2.5404 4.4747 D.0056 2.31D9 O.D115 O.OD6R 0.7 0.7 115 19.000 0.004 6.0116 2-5520 OA803 0.0056 i 2.3224 0.0115 0.0060 0.7 0.7 Pre-D Runoff-10YR.XLS 10/3/2006 6:10 PM (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (l0) U 1) 112) 'time increment Time Preci Inc re. Accumul._ Rainfall_ PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA T Total ]nstan[ Design Dislrib. Rainfall Accum Incre. Aecum lucre. Runoff Flowrare ! _fl_owrate _Ihrs.) (fraction) ! (inches) _ (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (cfs)_ (efs) (inches) (inches) _Ru_n-0 (inches) (inches) 116 19.161 0,004 0-0116 2.5636 0,4860 D.0(157 2.3340 0.0115 00060 0.7 0.7 117 19.333 O W4 0.0116 2.5752 0,4916 0.0057 2.3455 0.0115 O.D061 6.7 _ 0.7 118 19.500 0,004 0.0116 2.5868 0,4973 0,0057 2.3570 0.0115 0.0061 0.7 0,7 119 19.667 120 - 19 833 0.004 0.0116 2.5984 j 0.5031 4.0057 0,0051 2.3686 0.0115 O.DDbi 0.7 0,7 0.0(14 0.0116 a 2.6100 0-5089 2.3801 0.0115 0.0061 0.7 0.7 !21 20,000 122 20,167 0.(K14 0.0116 2.0216 0.5146 0.005B T 2.3917 0.0115 0.0062 0.7 0,7 0,4XD4 O.OIIG 0.0116 2.6332 0-5204 0.0058 2.4032 0.0115 0.0062 0.7 0,7 1231 20-333 0,004 2.6448 0.5262 0.005E 2.4147 0.0115 0.0062 0.7 0-7 124 2050D OA04 0.0116 2.6564 0.5320 0.0058 2.4263 0.0115 0.0062 0.7 07 125 7A.667 0.004 0.0116 2.6680 0.5379 0.0059 2.4378 0.0115 0.0062 0.7 0.7 126 20.633 0,004 0.0116 2-6796 0.5438 0.0059 2,4494 0.0115 0.0063 0-7 0.7 127 21,000 OAA 0.0116 2-6912 0.5497 0.0059 2.4609 0.0115 0.0063, 0-7 0.7 129 21,167 0.004 O O l l 6 2.7028 0.5556 00059 2.4724 0.0115 0.0063 0.7 0.7 129 f 1333 0.004 00116 2.7144 0.5615 0-0059 2.4840 0.01 I S 0-W63 0.7 0.7 130 21.500 0,004 0.0116 2.7260 0.5675 0-0060 2.4955 0.01IS 0.0063 0.7 4.7 _ 13 3 21.667 0 ON 0.0116 2.7376 0.5735 00(w 2.507 i 0.0115 0.0064 0.7 0.7 132 21,833 0-D04 0.0116 2.7492 0.5795 0.0060 2.5186 0.0115 0.0064 0.7 0.7 133 22,000 0.004 0.0116 2.7608 0.5955 0.0060 2,5301 0.0115 0.0064 0.7 0.7 134 22 167 O.DO4 0.0116 2.772A 0.5916 0.0060 2.5417 0.0115 0.0064 0.8 0.7 135 22 333 4.D04 0.0116 T 2.7840 0.5976 0.0061 2.5532 0.0115 0.0064 0.8 0.7 _ 136 ! 22,500 0.D04 0.0116 2,7956 0.6037 0.0061 2.5648 0.0115 0.0065 0.8 0.7 _ 137 T 22,677 0.004 0.0116 2,8072 0.6098 0.0061 2.5763 0.0115 0.0065 0.8 0.7 138 22 833 O.D04 0.0116 2,8188 0.6160 0.0061 2.5879 0.0115 0.0065 0.8 0.7 139 23 O00 0.004 0.6116 2,8304 0.6221 0.0062 2,5994 0.0115 0.0065 0.8 0.8 140 23,167 O.D04 0.0116 2,9420 0.6283 0.0062 2.6110 0.0115 0.0065 0.8 0.8 141 23-333 O.PO4 0.0116 2.8536 0.6345 0.0062 2.6225 0.0115 0.0066 0.8 0-8 142 23-500 0.004 0.011G 2.8652 0.6407 0.0062 2.6341 0.0115 0.0066 0.8 0-8 143 73.667 0.004 0.0116 2,8768 0.6469 0.0062 2.6456 0.0115 0.0066 0.8 0.8 144 23.833 0.004 0.0116 2.8884 0.6532 0.0063 2.6572 0.0115 0.0066 0.8 0.8 145 24.(W 0.004 0.0116 2.9000 0.6594 0.0063 2.6687 0.0113 0.0066 0.8 0.8 Pre-D Runoff-10YR.XLS 10/3/2006 6:10 PM Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) Analysis During -Construction Condition Based on 10-Year, 24-Hour Storm Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility SBUH Fiydrograph • DURING CONSTRUCTION_ CONDITION (10-YR, 24-HFI RAINFALL) Area =j 19-37 acres �j - -__ Pt- = 29 inches (Total rainfall for a 24-hour storm event) 1 dt - 10 rrvn. ) Te = 51 Imin. (Developed site conditions) PERVIOUS Parcel IMP1 RVIOLS Parcel Are = 19.17 acres Area .0.2 jacres Time to peak (hrs,) = 0.14 - Max Q (cfs) - 0.91 Vol {cu-ft) 45,590_14 - C^ 70 CN = 98 5 4.29 S = 0.20 - J 02S = 0,86 0.2S = 0.D4 i w= 0.0893 Caiumn (I) =Tune ]ncrenrent i i _ _ __ Column I_) Tune (mm) Column i 31 = [ncren eniul Precipitation Fraction i - _ _ - _ -- - - --}- Column ta) =Column (3) * P, ( - ' -- - ------ -- Column (5) = Accumulated sum of Column (4) i ----- ------ _-_ Column (6) = If (P < 0.2S) = 0, If (P > 0-2S) = (Column 0) - 0.2S)^`)(Column (5) + 0.8S), where the PERVIOUS AREA S value is used Column (7) = Column (6) of the present step - Colurrnt (6) of the previous step Column (8) = Same as Column (6) except use IMPERVIOUS AREA S value Column (9) = Column (9) of the present step - Column (8) of the previous step Column (1 U) _ (PERVIOUS AREAITOTAL ARF..A)*C:ulurm (7)+(IMPERVIOUS AREAfTOTAL AREA)*Column (9) Column f 1 1) _ (60.5*Calunul (10)*Total Aren)Jdt, where dt = LO or 60 minutes Column (12) = Column (L 2) of previous time step + w * ((Column (1 1) of previous time step + Column (1 1) of present tine step) - ! (2 * Column (12) of previous time step where w = routing constant = dV(ZTc + d) = 0.0641 I. _ {I) (3) jinx I ime j 43) (4) 15) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (]l) (1Z) Precip [ncre. Accumul. PERVIOUS AREA IMPERVIOUS AREA Total Instant I?esi m Incremen� (hrs.) Disuib, Rainfa11 Rainfa0 Accum. Incre. Aecum Inere. Runoff Flowrate Flowrale (fraction) (inches) (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (cfs) (cfs) (inches) (inches) (Inches) (imhes) 1 0.000 0 D.D000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 00 0.0 Z 0.1 G7 0 004 D.0 I l GG T r a.41 16 o.ODOD O.o000 0.0000 0.4000 o.0D00 0 0 0.0 3 0.333 0-004 O.U110 1 0.0232 ❑.0000 4.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.000D 0-0 0.0 4 { U.500 0.004 0.0116 0.0348 OOOOD 4.00OD 0-0000 OA000 0.00DO 0.0 0.0 - 5 4.667 0.004 ; 0.0116 0.0464 0.0000 00000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0000 0.0 0.0 G 0.833 0.004 0.0116 i 0-0580 0.4000 0.0000 0.0013 0.0012 0.0000 0.0 0.0 7 1.000 0.004 0.0116 0.0696 0.0000 0-DOW 0.0036 0.0022 0.0D00 0.0 0-0 8 1-1 67 0.004 �- 0.0116 0-08 t 2 0.4044 0.0000 0.0067 0.0031 0.0OOD 0.0 0.0 9 1.333 0.004 0.0116 0.0929 0.0000 O.O(W 0.0106 0.0039 0.00D0 0.0 0.0 10 1-%0 _ 0.004 0.0116 0.10" 0.4000 0.0000 0.0151 0.0046 0.0000 0.0 D.D II 1.07 0.004 0.0116 0.1160 O.ODOO 0.0000 0.0202 0.0051 0.0001 0.0 0.0 I'_ I,R13 0.15 0.0145 0.0000 0.0000 DA274 0.0071 0.0001 0.0 D0 13 2000, 0.005 0.0145 _-0.1305 0.1450 O.O(W 0.0000 r 0.0352 0.0078 0.0001 _ 0.0 0.0 - -;.-.._ l4 2,IG7 0.005 0.0145_ 0.1595 0-IX}40 D.DDDO -t 1 0.0436 40084 4).DOD1 0.4 ) r D.0 15 2, 333 O.U05 0.4145 0.1740 0 0(m 0.0000 0.0526 0 OM 0.0001 00 D.0 1G 2,500 0.005 0.0145 0.1885 0.0000 O.OD00 0.0040 0.0 0.0094 0.0001 0.0 0_.0 L7 2G67 U.005 0.0145 0.203U 0.0600 0.0718 O.O620 098 0.UOD1 0.0 0.0 19 '_.833 0.006 0.0174 0-2204 0.0(m 0.0000 0.0841 0.0122 0.0001 0.0 1 0.0 ___ 19 3 OOD 0.006 D O 174 0.2378 0.0000 0.0000 0.0967 0.0127 0.0001 0.0 0.0 20 3,167 1 0.046 0,0174 0.2552 O.ODOO 0.0000 0.1098 0-OBI 0.0001 0.0 0.0 2! 3 333 0.006 ` 00174 0.2726 0.0000 0.0000 0.1233 0.0 L 34 D.0001 0.0 0.0 22 3500 0XV6 VV174 0.2900 O.ODOO 0.0000 0.13'70 0.0137 0.0001 0.0 0.0 23 3-GG7 0.446 00174 0.3074 �0.0DOO 0.0000 0.1310 0.0140 0.0001 0.0 0.0 24 3-833 0.007 00203 0.3277 0.0000 0.0000 0.1676 0.0166 0.0007, 0.0 0.0 25 4000 0.007 0,0203 D.3480 0.NM 0.0400 0.1K46 0.0169 0.0002 0.0 0.0 26 I 4 167 0 007 0,0203 0.3691 0.0000 0.0000 0.2018 0.0172 0.0002 0.0 0.0 - 27 4 333 0. 007__, 0,0203 0.3886 0.0OOo 0.0000 1 0.2192 0.0174 0.0402 0.0 0.0 _ 29 _ r 4.500 O,D07 0,0203 0.4089 0.000_O 1 0.0000 0.2368 0.017G 0.0002 0.0 0.0 29 .... 4.007 4.D203 0.4292 0.0000 0.000D 4.2546 0.0178 0.0002 0.0 0.0 30 4.833 0.0082 0.0238 0.4530 0.0000 0.0000 0.2751 0.0211 0.0002 0.0 0.0 I 5.Wo 0.0082 0.0238 D.47G8 0.0000 0.0040 0.2969 0.0213 0.(W2 0.0 0.0 32 5.IG7 O.IX}82 0.0238 0.5005 0.0000 0.0000 0.3184 0.0214 O.WO2 0.0 0.4 33 5.333 0.0082 1 0.0238 0.5243 D.0000 0.0000 0.3400 0.0216 0.0002 0.0 0.0 34 S.5U0 0.0482 I 0.0239 0.5481 0.0000 0.0000 1 03618 0.0218 0.0002 0.0 0.0 - 35 5.667 0.0082 O.OZ38 D.3719 0.0000 0.0000 0-3836 0.0219 0.0002 0.0 0.0 36 5.833 0.0095 0.0276 0.5994 O.00D4 0.0000 1 0.4091 0.0255 0.0003 0.0 00 37 6.ODO 0,0095 0.0276 0.6270 0.0000 0.0"0.4348 0.0256 0.W03 0,0 (W 38 ; 6.167 O0095 0.0276 0.6545 0.00DO 0,0000 0.4606 0.0258 0.D003 0.0 0.0 39 G.333 0.0095 0.4276 0,6821 0.0000 0.0000 0.4965 0A259 0.0003 0.0 O.0 40 6.500 0.D093 0.0276 6.7096 0-000D 0.0000 0.5124 0.0260 0.0003 0.0 0.0 41 6.667 0.0095 I 0.0276 0.7372 0.0000 0.0000 0.5385 0.0261 O.D003 0.0 0.0 42 6,833 0.0134 4.0389 0.7760 0.0000 0.0000 0.5755 0.0369 0.0004 0.0 0.0 43 7,ODU 0.01341 0.0389 0.8149 0.0000 0.4000 0.6126 0.0371 0.0004 0.0 0.0 44 7,167 0.0134 0.0389 0.9539 0.0000 0.0000 0.6498 0-0372 0.0004 0.0 0.0 45 7-333 0.018 0.0522 1 0.9000 1 0.0005 O.DD05 0.7000 0.0502 0.0011 0.1 D.0 Construction Runoff-10YR-XL$ 10/3/2006 6:10 PM Tinx• Time Precip lucre. Accunwl. I acre men[ (hrs.} DistriU. Rairi4sll Rainfall (framon) (inches) (inches) (7) (8) {9) (301 (11) f!2) PERVIOUS AREA Acc u:n. lucre_ Runoff Runaff (inches) (inches) TMPERVIDUS AREA _`. Total lnstunl Design Accum, Inc:re- _ Runoff 1-lowrate-4 (inches) (cfs) Flowrate Runoff Runoff {cfs) {inches) (inches) ! 46 7.500 0.018 0.0522 0.9582 00023 0.0018 0.7504 0.0504 0.0023 0-3 0.1 47 7.667 4.d34 ! O.Q96G 1.0568 OM89 0.00h6 0.8460 4.495G 0.0075 0.9 0.2 48 1 7.833 0.054 0.1566 1.2134 00273 0.D185 0.9987 1.0754 0.1527 0.0198 2.3 0.4 49 081�. 0000 0.027 0.0783 ! 1-2917 Q.0400 6.D127 0.0767 0-0133 L6 -.0.7 8. 50 167 _ 0.018 0.0522 1.3439 0, 0496 0.0096 1.1266 0.0512 0.01 D 1 1.2 0.8 51 5.3 3 5'- 8.500 0.0134 0-0389 1.3827 0A574 0.0018 0.0083 1.1648 0.0382 0.0091 0.9 0.9 0-0134 0.0389 1.4216 1.4604 T 0.0657- 0,07441 1.2030 0.0382 0.0086 _ 1.0 0.9 53 8.667 0-0134 0.0389 0.0088 1.2412 0.0382 0.0091 1.1 0.9 54 8-833 0.008R 0.0255- t. L4860 - 53 9-000 D.00SS 0.02_55 1.5115 56 9 167 1 D.0488 0.0255 1.5370 57 9-333 0.0088 0.0255 1.5625 58 9.500 0 0088 0.0255 1.5880 59 9-667 0,0088 0.0255 1.6136 0.0805 O.D000 1-2663 0.0251 0,7 0.9 0,0867 00062 1 2915 0.0251 -_0.0_062 0.0064 08 0.9 0 0931 0-0064 1.3166 _ 0.0251 0.0066 a 0.9 0 Q997 0-0066 1.3418 0.0252 0.0068 0.8 0.8 0 1065 0 W68 1.3669 0.0252 0.0070 0.8 0.9 0.1135 00070 1.3921 0.0252 - 0.0072 0-8 0.8 - 60 9-833 0.0088 0.0255 1.6391 0.1207 0.0072 1.4173 0.0252 0.0074 0-9 0.8 61 10-OOQ 0.0085 0.0255 1.664G O,1280 O D074 1.4425 0.0252 0.0075 0.9 0.8 G2 10-167 O.D08S 0.0_255_f 1.6901 0.1356 0.0075 1.4G77 0.0252 0.0077 0.9 0.9 63 10.333 0.0099 0.0255 1.7156 0.1433 0.0077 1.4929 0.0252 0.0079 0.9 0.9 64 10.500 0.0088 0.0255 1.7412 0-1512 0.0079 1.5191 0.0252 0.0081 0-9 0.9 65 10.667 0.4088 0.0255 1.7667 0.1392 0.0081 1.5434 0.0252 0.0082 1.0 1 0.9 66 10.833 0.0072 0.0209 1,7876 0,1660 0.0067 1.5640 0.0206 0.0069 0.8 0.9 67 _ 11.000 1 0,0072 0.0209 1.8084 0.1728 0.0068 1.5847 0.0207 0.OD70 0.8 0.9 68 11_167 0,0072 69_ 11.333 0 W72 70 11 500 WM2 71- 11667 O,D072 -- 72 t11 833 O,D072 0.0209 1.8293 0.1798 0.007_0_ 1.6053 1.6260 0.0207 0.OD71 0.8 0.9 j 0.0209 1 1.8502 0.1868 0 1940 0.2013 0.2087 0.0207 0.0072 0.8 0.9 0.0209 _ 1.9711 1.892D 1.9128 __0.0071 0.2 007 1.6467 0 0207 0.0073 1 0.9 0.9 0.0209 0.0073 1.6673 00207 Q.DD74 4.9 0.9 0.0209 0.0074 1.6880 00207 0.0075 _ 0.9 0.9 73 12-000 00072 0.0209 1.933_7 0.2161 0.0075 1 1.7087 0.0207 0.0076 0.9 0.9 74 12-167 0,0072 0.0209_ T1.9546 0.2237 0.0076 1.7294 0.0207 0.0077 0.9 0.9 _ 75 12-333 0.0072 0.0209 1.9755 0.2314 0.0077 j 1.7501 0.0207 0.0079 0.9 0.9 16 12.500 0,0072 0.0209 1.9964 0.2392 O.D078 1.7707 0.0207 0.0079 0.9 0.9 77 i 2b67 WM72 0.0209 _ 2.0172 0.2471 O OD79 1.7914 0-0207 0.0080 0.9 0.9 18 12-833 0.0057 0.0165 2.0338 0.2535 0.0063 1.8079 0.0164 0.0064 0.8 0.9 79 13.0(X) 0.0057 0.0165 2.0503 0.2598 0,0064 1.8242 0.0164 0.0065 0.8 0.9 80 11.167 D.0057 0.0165 2.0668 0.2663 00064 1.8406 0.0164 6.00G5 0.8 0.8 81 13.333 0.0057 0.4165 2.0834 0.2728 0-0065 1.8570 0.0164 0.0066 0.8 0.8 82 11.500 0.0057 0.0165 2.0999 0.2794 0.0066 1.8734 0.0164 0.0067 0.8 0.8 83 13 b67 � 00057 0.0165 2.1164 0.2860 O.D066 1 AM 0.0164 0.0067 0.8 0.8 - 94 13.833 0.0057 0.0165 2.1330 0.2927 Od1067 1.9062 0.0164 0-0069 0.9 0.8 85 14 OW0-0057 0.9165 2.1495 1.2994 .00 067 1.9226 0,0164 0-0069 0.9 0.8 86 14167 0.0057 0.D165 2.1660 0.3062 d.0069 1.9390 0.0164 O.DO69 0.8 0.9 67 1 14-333 0.0057 0.0165 2.1825 0.3131 0.0069 1.9554 0.0164 0.0070 0.8 _ 88 1 14.500 0.0057 0.0165 2.1991 0.3260 0.0069 1.9718 0.0164 0.0070 0.9 0.8 89 14667 0.0057 0.0165 2.2156 0.3270 0.0070 1,9882 0.0164 0.0071 0.8 0.8 _ 90 14833 0.005 0.0245 2.2301 0.3331 0.0062 2,0026 0.0144 0.0062 0.7 0.8 91 15 ow 0.005 0.0145� 2.2446 0.3393 0.0062 2.0170 0,0144 0.0063 _ 0.7 0.8 92 15,167 0.005 0.0145 2.2591 0.3456 0.0062 2.0314 0.0144 0.0063 0.7 0.8 93 15.333 0.005 O.Ot45 2.2736 0.3519 0.0063 2.0458 0.0t44 0.0064 0.1 0.8 94 15 500 0.005 0.0145 2.2981 1 0.3582 0.0063 2.0602 0.0144 0.0064 0.8 0.8 95 15.667 0.005 0.0145 2.3026 0.3646 0.0064 2.0746 0.0144 0.0065 0.9 0,8 96 15,833 0.005 0.0145 2.3171 0.3710 0.0064 1 2.0890 0.0144 0.0065 0.9 0,8 97 16,000 0.005 0.0145 2.3316 0.3774 0.0065 2.1034 0.0144 0.0065 0,8 0-8 98 I 16,167 1 0.005 0A145 2.3461 0.3839 0.0065 2.1178 0.0144 0.0066 0.9 0,8 99 16,333 0.005 0.0145 2-3600 0.3905 0.0065 2.1322 0.0144 0.0066 0-8 0.8 1DO 16500 0-005 00145 2375 1 0.397D 0.0066 0.0066 2.1466 0.0144 O.0%7 0.8 0.8 101 16.667 O.D05 0.0145 2.3896 0.4036 2.1610 0.0144 0.0067 0.8 0.8 102 16.933 0.004 O.D116 2.4012 0.4090 0.0053 2.1725 0.0115 0.0054 0.6 08 103 17,000 0.004 0,0116 2.4128 0-4143 0.0053 2.1841 0.0115 0.0054 0,6 M 104 17.167 T 0,004 0.0116 2.4244 0.4197 0.0054 2.1956 0.0115 0.0054 0,6 0-7 105 _ 17.333 0004 0.0116 2.4300 0.4251 0.0054 2.2071 0.0115 6.0055 0.6 0.7 106 17.500 0-D04 0.0116 2.4470 0.4305 0.0054 2.2187 0.0115 0.0055 0.6 0.7 107 17,667 O.OD4 0.0116 2.4592 0.4359 0.0054 2.2302 0.0115 0.0055 0.6 0.7 108 17,833 0.004 0.0116 2.4709 0.4414 0.0055 2.2417 0.0115 DA055 0,6 0.7 109 18,DDO 0.004 0.0116 2.4824 0.4469 6.0055 2.2532 0.0115 0.0056 0.7 0.7 110 18.167 O.DO4 0.0116 2.4940 0.4524 0.0055 2.2648 0.0115 Q.0056 0.7 0.7 I11 18,333 0.0D4 D.O116 2.5056 0.4579 O.Od55 2.2763 D.OlIS 0.0056 0.7 0.7 _ lit 18-500 0.004 0.0116 2.5172 0.4635 4.0056 2.2878 0.0115 0.0056 0.7 0,7 I l 3 18 667 0.004 0.0116 2.5288 0.4691 0,0056 2.2994 0.0115 0.0456 0.7 4-7 114 18-833 0.004 0.0116 2.5404 0.4747 0.045G 2.3109 D.OIlS 0.0057 0.7 0.7 115 19.000 0.004 00116 2.5520 0.4803 0.0056 2.3224 0.0 t 15 0,0057 07 0.7 Construction Runoff-10YR.SGS 10l3l2006 6110 PM (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1_0)- (I1) (12) lurk _ I Time I Precip- Incre- Accunml. PERVIOUS AREA rMPERVIOUS AREA Total T Instant Design lneremeis nl Th 1 Distrib- Rainfall Rainfall Accum. here. Accum Incre. Runoff F)owrate Flowrate (fraction) (inches) (inches) Runoff Runoff Runoff Runoff (inches) (cfs) (cfs) (inches) Finches) (inches} (inches) i 16 19.167 0.004 0.0116 2.5636 0.4860 0.0057 2,3340 O-Dl l5 O.W57 D.7 0.7 ! l7 19.333 0 004 0.01 16 2.5752 D.4916 ; 0.0057 2.3455 0.0115 0.0057 _ 0.7 0.7 1 18 19 500 ❑ 004 am 16 2.5969 0.4973 0.0057 2, 3570 0.01 15 0.0058 0.7 0.7 119 19-667 1 0-004 0.0116 2.5984 2.6100 00057 2-3686 0.0115 0.0059 0.7 0-7 120 19-833 0.004 (10116 _0.5031 0.5088 00057 2.38D1 O.DI [5 0.0058 % 00 4.7 0-7 121 20.(M 0.004 0.01 16 2.6216 0.5146 0-0058 2.39 t 7 0.O l l5 0.0058 0.7 0.7 i 22 70.167 0.004 0.0116 _ 2.6332 0.5204 i 0-0058 2.4032 0.01 15 0.0058 0.7 0.7 123 20.333 O.Df14 0.0116 2.6449 0.5262 0-0058 2.4147 0.0115 0.0059 0.7 0.7 I?4 2D.SD0 0.004 00116 2.6564 0.5320 0-0058 2.4263 0.0l15 0.0059 0.7 0.7 125 30_1,G7 0.004 0,0116 2.6680 0.5379 0-0059 2,4378 0.0115_ 0.0059 0.7 0.7 _ 136 j f 7 -T 20.913 31 000 01104 ; 0.D04 0,0116 _ 0.0116 2.6796 2.6912 0.5438 0.5497 0-W59 00059 2.4494 2.4609 0.0 115 0.01 l5 � 0.0059 0.0060 0.7 0.7 0.7 0-7 128 1-167 0-004 (.0E 16 2.7028 2.7144 0.5556 0-0059 2.4724 0.01 IS 0.0060 0.7 0-7 129 21.333 0.004 0,0116 0.5615 00059 2.4840 0.0115 0.0060T 0.7 0-7 130 21.5W 0.004 0.0116 2.7260 0.5675 0-0060 2.4955 0.0115_ 0.0060 0.7 0.7 131 21.667 0.004 0.0116 _ 2.7376 0.5735 0-W60 2.5071 0.0115 0.0060 0.7 0.7 J 32 21.833 0.004 0.0116 2.7492 0.5795 0-0060 2.5186 0.0115_ 0.0061 0.7 0.7 133 22.000 0.004_ 0.0116 2.7608 05855 00060 2.5 30 1 0.01 15 0.0061 0.7 0.7 134 22.167 0.004 0.0116 2.7724 0-5916 0 )060 2.5417 0.0115 0.0061 0.7 0.7 135 22.333 0.004 ^ 0.011G 2.7840 0-5976 0.0061 2.5532 0.0115 0.0061 0.7 0.7 IN 22.500 0.004 0.0116 2.7956 0-6037 0.0061 2.5648 0.0115 0.0061 0.7 0.7 l37 22.667 0.004 0.0116 2.8072 0.6098 0,D061 2.5763 0.0115 O.Ot)62 0.7 0.7 138 22.833 0.004 0.0116 2.8199 0.6160 0.0061 2.5879 00115 0.0062 0.7 0.7 139 r ?3000 0.004 0.0116 2-8304 0.622t 0.0062 2.5994 0,0115 0.0062 0.7 0.7 140 23.167 0.004 0.0116 2.842() Q.G2$3 0,0062 2.6110 0,0115 0-0%2 0.7 0.7 141 23_333 0.004 0.0116 2.8536 0,6345 O.W62 2.6225 0,0115 0.0062 0.7 0.7 142 23.500 0.004 0.0116 2.8652 06407 0.0062 2.6341 0,0115 O.W63 0.7 0.7 143 23.667 0.004 0.0116 2.8768 Q.6469 0.0062 2.0456 0.0115 O.OD63 0.7 0.7 144 C24.000 23.833 0.004 0.0116 2.8894 0.6532 0.0063 2.6572 0.0115 0.0063 0.7 0.7 145 _ 0.004 0-0116 2.9000 0.6594 0.0063 2.6687 0.0115 O.D063 0.7 0.7 Construction Runoff-10YR.%LS 10/3/2006 6c10 Fm Runoff Curve Numbers for Urban Areas TR 55 Chapter 2 Estimating Runoff Technical Release 55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-2a Runoff curve numbers for urban areas I/ Cover description Cover type and hydrologic condition Fully developed urban areas (vegetation established) Curve numbers for hydrologic soil group Average percent impervious area?( A B C D Open space (lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, etc.) Y- Poor condition (grass cover < 5096).......................................... Fair condition (grass cover 50% to 76%).................................. Good condition (grass cover > 7596)......................................... Impervious areas: Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways, etc. (excluding right-of-way)............................................................. Streets and roads: Paved; curbs and storm sewers (excluding right -of --way) ................................... I............. Paved; open ditches ('including right-of-way) .......................... Gravel (including right -of -way) ................................................. Dirt (including right -of -way) ...................................................... Western desert urban areas. Natural desert landscaping (pervious areas only) -V ..................... Artificial desert landscaping (impervious weed barrier, desert shrub with 1- to 2-inch sand or gravel mulch and basin borders)...................................................................... Urban districts: Commercial and business................................................................. Industrial.................--.......................................................................... Residential districts by average lot size: 118 acre or less (town houses).......................................................... 1/4 acre................................................................................................ W acre .. ................. ............................................ --- ..................... .... 112 acre................................................................................................ 1 acre................................................................................................... 2 acres.................................................................................................. Developing urban areas Newly graded areas (pervious areas only, no vegetation) W........... ............................„...................... Idle lands (CN's are determined using cover types similar to those in table 2-2c). 68 79 86 89 49 69 79 84 39 61 74 80 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 83 89 92 93 76 85 89 91 72 82 87 89 63 77 85 88 96 96 96 96 85 89 92 94 95 72 81 88 91 93 65 77 85 90 92 38 61 75 83 87 30 57 72 81 86 25 54 70 80 85 20 51 68 79 84 12 46 65 77 82 77 86 91 94 1 Average runoff condition, and 1, = 0.2S. 2 The average percent impervious area shown was used to develop the composite CN's. Other assurnpdons are as follows: impervious areas are directly connected to the drainage system, impervious areas have a CN of 98, and pervious areas are considered equivalent to open space in good hydrologic condition. CNs for other combinations of conditions may be computed using figure 2.3 or 24. 3 CN's shown are equivalent to those of pasture. Composite CN's may be computed for other combinations of open space covertype. 6 Composite CN's for natural desert landscaping should be computed using figures 2-3 or 24 based on the impervious area percentage (CN = 98) and the pervious area CN. The pervious area CN's are assumed equivalent to desert shrub in poor hydrologic condition. 6 Composite CNs to use for the design of temporary measures during grading and construction should be computed using figure 2-3 or 24 based on the degree of development (impervious area percentage) and the CWs for the newly graded pervious areas. (210-VI-TR-55, Second Fd, June 1986) 2-5 Chapter 2 Estimating Runoff Technical Release 55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-2b Runoff curve numbers for cultivated agricultural lands 1/ Curve numbers for Cover description hydrologic soil group Hydrologic Cover type Treatment v condition 3f A B C- D Fallow Bare soil -- 77 86 91 94 Crop residue cover (CR) Poor 76 85 90 93 Good 74 83 88 90 Row crops Straight row (SR) Poor 72 81 88 91 Good 67 78 85 89 SR + CR Poor 71 80 87 90 Good 64 75 82 85 Contoured (C) Poor 70 79 84 88 Good 65 75 82 86 C + CR Poor 69 78 83 87 Good 64 74 81 85 Contoured & terraced (CM) Poor 66 74 80 82 Good fit 71 78 81 C&T+ CR Poor 65 73 79 81 Good 61 70 77 80 Small grain SR Poor 65 76 84 88 Good 63 75 83 87 SR + CR Poor 64 75 83 86 Good 60 72 80 84 C Poor 63 74 82 85 Good 61 73 81 84 C + CR Poor 62 73 81 84 Good 60 72 80 83 C&T Poor 61 72 79 82 Good 59 70 78 81 C&T+ CR Poor 60 71 78 81 Good 58 69 77 80 Close -seeded SR Poor 66 77 85 89 or broadcast Good 58 72 81 85 legumes or C Poor 64 75 83 85 rotation Good 55 69 78 83 meadow C&T Poor 63 73 80 83 Good 51 67 76 80 I Average runoff condition, and 1.=0.2S 2 Crop residue cover applies only if residue is on at least 6% of the surface throughout the year. 3 Hydraulic condition is teased on combination factors that affect infiltration and runoff, including (a) density and canopy of vegetative areas, (b) amount of year-round cover, (c) amount of grass or clove -seeded legumes, (d) percent of residue cover on the land surface (good >_ 20%)1 and (e) degree of surface roughness. Poor: Factors impair infiltration and tend to increase runoff. Good: Factors encourage average and better than average infiltration and tend to decrease runoff. 2-6 (210-V1-TR-56, Second Ed., June 19M Chapter 2 Estimating Runoff Technical Release 55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-2c Runoff curve numbers for other agricultural lands y Curve numbers for Cover description hydrologic soil group Hydrologic Cover type condition A B C D Pasture, grassland, or range --continuous forage for grazing.?) Meadow —continuous grass, protected from grazing and generally mowed for hay. Brush —brush -weed -grass mixture with brush. the major element. a' Woods —grass combination (orchard or tree farm). Y Woods. 61 Poor 68 79 86 89 Fair 49 69 79 84 Good 39 61 74 80 — 30 58 71 78 Poor 48 67 77 83 Fair 35 56 70 77 Good 30 Y 48 65 73 Poor 57 73 82 86 Fair 43 65 76 82 Good 32 58 72 79 Poor 45 66 77 83 Farmsteads —buildings, lanes, driveways, — 59 74 82 86 and surrounding lots. t Average runoff condition, and I, = 0.28. Z Poor. <50%) ground cover or heavily grazed with no mulch. Fair: 50 to 75% ground cover and not heavily graved_ Good: > 75% ground cover and lightly or only occasionally grazed. 3 Poor. <50% ground cover. Fair: 50 to 75% ground cover. Cood: >75%ground cover. 4 Actual curve number is less than 30; use CN = 30 for runoff computations. 5 CYs shown were computed for areas with 60% woods and W% gram (pasture) cover. Other combinations of conditions may be computed from the CFs for woods and pasture. 6 Poor: Forest litter, small trees, and brush are destroyed by heavy gazing or regular burning. Fair- Woods are grazed but not burned, and some forest litter covers the soil. Good: Woods are protected from grazing, and litter and brush adequately cover the soil_ (210-VI-TR-66, Second Ed., June 1986) 2-7 Chapter 2 Estimating Runoff Technical Release 55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-2d Runoff curve numbers for and and semiarid rangelands v Cover description — Hydrologic Cover type condition v A 21 Curve numbers for hydrologic soil group S C- D Herbaceous —mixture of grass, weeds, and Poor 80 87 93 low -growing brush, with brush the Fair 71 81 89 minor element. Good 62 74 85 Oak -aspen --mountain brush mixture of oak brush, Poor 66 74 79 aspen, mountain mahogany, bitter brush, maple, Fair 48 57 63 and other brush. Good 30 41 48 Pinyon -juniper —pinyon, juniper, or both; Poor 75 85 89 grass understory. Fair 58 73 80 Good 41 61 71 Sagebrush with grass understory. Poor 67 80 85 Fair 51 63 70 Good 35 47 55 A shrub —major plants include saltbush, Poor 63 77 85 88 greasewood, creosotebush, blackbrush, bursage, Fair 55 72 81 86 palo verde, mesquite, and cactus. Good 49 68 79 84 I Average runoff condition, and 1„ = 0.25. For range in hurnid regions, use table 2 2c 2 Poor. <30% ground cover (litter, grass, and brush overstory). Fair: 30 to 70% ground cover. Good: > 70% round cover. 3 Curve numbers for group A have been developed only for desert shrub. 2--8 (210-VI-7R-66, Second Ed., June 1986) Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Sediment Pond Stage -Volume Calculation (SWPPP) Water Depth Slope Pond Bottom Length* Pond Volume (ft) (HorNer) (ft) (Cf) 0 2 150 0 0.5 2 150 11,400 1 2 150 23,100 1.5 2 150 35,100 2 2 150 47,400 2.5 2 150 60,000 3 2 150 72,900 " Assuming a square pond Attachment C List of Site Construction BMPs Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan -- Attachment C Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington The following includes a list of the BMPs to be implemented on the site. • Buffer Zones (BMP C 102) • High Visibility Plastic or Metal Fence (BMP C 103) • Stabilized Construction Entrance (BMP C105) • Construction Road/Parking Area Stabilization (BMP C107) • Sediment Trap (BMP C240) • Temporary Sediment Pond (BMP C241) • Straw Bale Barrier (BMP C230) • Silt Fence (BMP C233) • Sediment Trap (BMP C240) • Storm Drain inlet Protection (BMP C220) • Portable Water Storage Tanks (e.g., Baker Tank) for Sedimentation. • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C 120) • Sodding (BMP C124) • Topsoiling (BMP C 125) • Dust Control (BMP C140) • Early application of gravel base on areas to be paved • Temporary and Permanent Seeding (BMP C120) • Interceptor Dike and Swale (BMP C200) • Pipe Slope Drains (BMP C204) • Check Dams (BMP C207) VULCI-19589-510 C-1 Attachment D Inspection Forms RETEC Site Inspection Form General Information Project Fume: Inspector Name: Title: CESCL # : Date: Time: Inspection Type: ❑ After a Rain Event ❑ Weekly ❑ Turbidity/transparency benchmark exceedance ❑ Other Weather Precipitation Since last inspection? ❑ Yes ❑ No In last 24 hours? ❑Yes ❑ No Description of General Site Conditions: Inspection of BMPs Element is Mark Clearing Limits BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Element 2: Establish Construction Access BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 9P2712006 0.IDOCUME-1l YOWLOCALS-11Tempinwes8B07201Appendix F SWPP.)ds RETEC Site Inspection Form General Information Project Name: Inspection of BMPs Element 3: Control Flow Rates BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Element 4: Install Sediment Controls BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning ProblemlCorrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ j ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 9)27/2WD6 C:10OCUME-11-Achen\LOCALS-INTempYnotea8B0720Wppendfx F SW PP.bs RETEC Site Inspection Form General Information Project Name: Inspection of BMPs Element 5: Stabilize Solis BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Element &: Protect Slopes BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inse ted Funcltiion ng Problem/Corrective Action NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 912712006 C.DOC UME-1 \mhen%LOCALS-117empkwfes$B0720L4ppendix F SW PP.3ds RETEC Site Inspection Form General Information Project Name- Inspection of BMPs Element 7: Protect Drain Inlets BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Element 8: Stabilize Channels and Outlets BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning_Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 9127/2006 C:IDOCUME-1lwchenlLOCALS-1\TerWlnotes8B0720'Appendix F SWPP.x1s RETEC Site inspection Form General Information Project Name: Inspection of BMPs Element 9: Control Pollutants BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Element 10: Control Dewatering BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ BMP: Location Inspected Functioning Problem/Corrective Action Y N Y N NIP ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 8f2712OD6 C,1DOCUME- llmhen%LOCALS-1,Tempinoles860720VAppendix F SW PP.lds RETEC Site Inspection Form General information Project Name: 5tormwater Discharges From the Site Observed Problem/Corrective Action Y N Location: Turbidity ❑ ❑ Discoloration ❑ ❑ Sheen ❑ ❑ Location: Turbidity ❑ ❑ Discolorationj ❑ ❑ Sheen 1 ❑ ❑ Water Quality Monitoring Was any water quality monitoring conducted? ❑ Yes ❑ No If water quality monitoring was conducted, record results here: If water quality monitoring indicated turbidity 250 NTU or greater; or transparency B cm or less, was Ecology notified by phone within 24 hrs? ❑ Yes ❑ No If Ecology was notified, indicate the date, time, contact name and phone number below: -Date.- Time: Contact !Name: Phone #: General Comments and Notes Include BMP repairs, maintenance, or installations made as a result of the inspection. Were Photos Taken? ❑Yes ❑No If photos taken, describe photos below: 9l2712006 C.IDaCUME-llwchon\LC)CALS-11Tempinotes8B0720'Appendix F 5W PP.xls Attachment E Construction Stormwater General Permit Issuance Date. November 16, 2005 Effective Date. December 16, 2005 Expiration Date: December 16, 2010 CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste Discharge General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated With Construction Activity State of Washington Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 In compliance with the provisions of The State of Washington Water Pollution Control Law Chapter 90.48 Revised Code of Washington and The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (The Clean Water Act) Title 33 United States Code, Section 1251 et seq. Until this permit expires, is modified or revoked, Permittees that have properly obtained coverage under this general permit are authorized to discharge in accordance with the special and general conditions which follow. 50---�C4,2' Water Quality Program Washington State Department of Ecology Page 2 of 46 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY OF PERMIT REPORT SUBMITTALS.....................................................................3 SUMMARY OF REQUIRED ON SITE DOCUMENTATION.....................................................3 SPECIAL CONDITIONS S1. PERMIT COVERAGE.........................................................................................................4 S3. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS...............................................................................9 S4. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS..................................................................................10 S5. REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS.........................................15 S6. PERMIT FEES...................................................................................................................18 ST SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE DISPOSAL.....................................................................18 S8. DISCHARGES TO 303(d) OR TMDL WATERBODIES................................................18 S9. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN...................................................21 S 10. NOTICE OF TERMINATION..........................................................................................29 GENERAL CONDITIONS..........................................................................................................30 G1. DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS...........................................................................................30 G2. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................30 G3. RIGHT OF INSPECTION AND ENTRY.........................................................................31 G4. GENERAL PERMIT MODIFICATION AND REVOCATION ......................................31 G5. REVOCATION OF COVERAGE UNDER THE PERMIT.............................................31 G6. REPORTING A CAUSE FOR MODIFICATION............................................................32 G7. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND STATUTES.............................................32 G8. DUTY TO REAPPLY......................................................................................................32 G9. TRANSFER OF GENERAL PERMIT COVERAGE.......................................................32 G10. REMOVED SUBSTANCES.............................................................................................33 GI1.. DUTY TO PROVIDE INFORMATION...........................................................................33 G12. OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR.................................................... ...................33 G 13. ADDITIONAL MONITORING........................................................................................33 G14. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING PERMIT CONDITIONS .................. ..33 G15. UPSET..............................................................................................................................34 G 16. PROPERTY RIGHTS........................................................................................................34 G17. DUTY TO COMPLY......................................................................:.............................34 G18. TOXIC POLLUTANTS.....................................................................................................34 G19. PENALTIES FOR TAMPERING......................................................................................35 G20. REPORTING PLANNED CHANGES..........................................................................35 G21. REPORTING OTHER INFORMATION..........................................................................35 Page 3 of 46 G22. REPORTING ANTICIPATED NON-COMPLIANCE.....................................................35 G23. REQUESTS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE UNDER THE PERMIT ..-.. _-36 624. APPEALS............................................................................................................ .......36 G25. SEVERABILITY........................................................................................... ...................36 G26. BYPASS PROHIBITED... ................................................................................................ 36 APPENDIX A — DEFINITIONS..................................................................................---..............39 APPENDIX B --- ACRONYMS.....................................................................................................46 SUMMARY OF PERMIT REPORT SUBMITTALS Refer to the Special and General Conditions for additional submittal requirements. Permit Submittal Frequency First Submittal Date Section S5.A High Turbidity/Transparency Phone As Necessary Within 24 hours Reporting S5.B Discharge Monitoring Report Monthly Within 15 days after the applicable monitoring period S5.F Noncompliance Notification As necessary Immediately S5.F Noncompliance Notification — Written As necessary Within 5 Days of non - Report compliance G2. Notice of Change in Authorization As necessary G6. Permit Application for Substantive As necessary Changes to the Discharge G8. Application for Permit Renewal 1/permit cycle No later than 180 days before expiration G9. Notice of Permit Transfer As necessary G20. Notice of Planned Changes As necessary G22. Reporting Anticipated Non-compliance As necessary SUMMARY OF REQUIRED ON SITE DOCUMENTATION Permit Conditions Document Title Conditions S2 SS Permit Coverage Letter Conditions S2 S5 Construction Stormwater General Permit Conditions S4, S5 Site Log Book Conditions S9, S5 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP Page 4 of 46 SPECIAL CONDITIONS S1. PERMIT COVERAGE A. Permit Area This general permit covers all areas of Washington State, except for federal and tribal lands specified in S 1.D.3. B. Operators Required to Seek Coverage Under this General Permit: I. Operators of the following construction activities are required to seek coverage under this permit: a. Clearing, grading and/or excavation which results in the disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state; and clearing, grading and/or excavation on sites smaller than one acre which are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, if the common plan of development or sale will ultimately disturb one acre or more, and discharges stormwater to surface waters of the state. This includes forest practices that are part of a 'construction activity that will result in the disturbance of one or more acres, and discharges to surface waters of the state (i.e., forest practices which are preparing a site for construction activities); and b. Any size construction activity discharging stormwater to waters of the state which the Department of Ecology (Ecology): i. Determines to be a significant contributor ofpollutants to waters of the state of Washington, or ii. Reasonably expects to cause a violation of any water quality standard. 2. Operators of the following activities are not required to seek coverage under this permit, unless specifically required under Condition SI.B.I.b. (Significant Contributor): a. Construction activities which discharge all stormwater and non-stormwater to ground water, and have no point source discharge to surface water or a storm sewer system that drains to surface waters of the state; b. Construction activities covered under an Erosivity Waiver (Condition S2.C); c. Routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of a facility. Page 5 of 46 C. Authorized Discharges: 1. Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity_ Subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit, Permittees are authorized to discharge stormwater associated with construction activity to surface waters of the state or to a storm sewer system that drains to surface waters of the state. 2. Stormwater Associated with Construction Su ort Activity. This permit also authorizes stormwater discharges from support activities related to the permitted construction site (e.g_, off -site equipment staging yards, material storage areas, borrow areas, etc.) provided: a. The support activity is directly related to the permitted construction site that is required to have an NPDES permit; and b. The support activity is not a commercial operation serving multiple unrelated construction projects, and does not operate beyond the completion of the construction activity; and c. Appropriate controls and measures are identified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)for the discharges from the support activity areas. 3. Non-Stormwater Discharges. The categories and sources of non-stormwater discharges identified below are conditionally authorized, provided the discharge is consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit: a. Discharges from fire fighting activities; b. Fire hydrant system flushing; c. Potable water including uncontaminated water line flushing (de -chlorinated); d.. Pipeline hydrostatic test water; e. Uncontaminated air conditioning or compressor condensate; f Uncontaminated ground water or spring water; g. Uncontaminated excavation de -watering (in accordance with S9.D.10) h. Uncontaminated discharges from foundation or footing drains; i. Water used to control dust; j. Routine external building wash down that does not use detergents; and k. Landscape irrigation. Page 6 of 46 All authorized non-stormwater discharges, except for discharges from fire fighting activities, shall be adequately addressed in the SWPPP and comply with Special Condition S3. D. Limitations on Coverage The Director may require any discharger to apply for and obtain coverage under an individual permit or another more specific general pen -nit. Such alternative coverage will be required when Ecology determines that this general permit does not provide adequate assurance that water quality will be protected; or there is a reasonable potential for the project to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. The following storrwater discharges are not covered by this permit: 1. Post -construction stormwater discharges that originate from the site after construction activities have been completed and the site has undergone final stabilization. 2. Nonpoint source silvicultural activities such as nursery operations, site preparation, reforestation and subsequent cultural treatment, thinning, prescribed burning, pest and fire control, harvesting operations, surface drainage, or road construction and maintenance from which there is natural runoff as excluded in 40 CFR Subpart 122.27. 3. Stormwater from any federal project or project on federal land or land within an Indian Reservation except for the Puyallup Reservation. Within the Puyallup Reservation, any project that discharges to surface water on land held in trust by the federal government may be covered by this permit. 4. Stormwater from any site covered under an existing NPDES individual permit in which stormwater management and/or treatment requirements are included for all stormwater discharges associated with construction activity. 5. Where an applicable Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) specifically precludes or prohibits discharges from construction activity, the operator is not eligible for coverage under this permit. S2. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS A. Permit Application Forms 1. Notice of Intent FonniTimeline a. Operators of new or previously unpermitted construction activities shall submit a complete and accurate permit application form [Notice of Intent (NOI)] to Ecology. Applicants are encouraged to use Ecology's internet=based electronic NOI to apply for permit coverage. b. The NOI shall be submitted on or before the date of the first public notice (see Condition S2.13 below) and at least 60 days prior to the discharge of stormwater Page 7 of 46 from construction activities. The 30-day public comment period required by WAC 173-226-130(5) begins on the publication date of the second public notice. Unless Ecology responds to the complete application in writing, based on public comments, or any other relevant factors, coverage under the general permit will automatically commence on the thirty-first day following receipt by Ecology of a completed NOI, or the issuance date of this permit, whichever is later; unless a later date is specified by Ecology in writing_ c. Applicants that discharge to a storm sewer system operated by Seattle, King County, Snohomish County, Tacoma, Pierce County, or Clark County shall also submit a copy of the NOI to the appropriate jurisdiction. 2. Transfer of Coverage Farm Current coverage under this permit may be transferred to one or more new operators, including operators of sites within a Common Plan of Development, by submitting a Transfer of Coverage Form in accordance with Condition G9. Transfers do not require public notice. B. Public Notice For new or previously unpermitted sites, the applicant shall publish a public notice at least one time each week for two consecutive weeks, with a 7-day time span between dates, in a newspaper that has general circulation in the county in which the construction is to take place. The notice shall contain the following: 1 _ A statement that "The applicant is seeking coverage under the Washington State Department of Ecology's Construction Stormwater NPDES and State Waste Discharge General Permit"; 2. The name, address and location of the construction site; 3. The name and address of the applicant; 4. The type of construction activity that will result in a discharge, (e.g., residential construction, commercial construction, etc.) and the number of acres to be disturbed; 5. The name of the receiving water(s) (i.e., the surface water(s) that the site will discharge to), or if the discharge is through a storm sewer system, the name of the operator of the storm sewer; and 6. The statement: "Any person desiring to present their views to the Department of Ecology regarding this application, or interested in the Department's action on this application may notify the Department of Ecology in writing within 30 days of the last date of publication of this notice. Comments can be submitted to: Department of Ecology, P_O. Box 47696, Olympia, WA 98504-7696, Attn: Water Quality Program, Construction Stormwater". Page S of 46 C. Erosivity Waiver Operators may qualify for a waiver from the permit if the following conditions are met: The site will result in the disturbance of less than 5 acres; and the site is not a portion of a common plan of development or sale that will disturb 5 acres or greater. 2. Calculation of Erosivity "R" Factor and Regional Timeframe: a. The project's rainfall erosivity factor (" R" Factor) must be less than 5 during the period of construction activity, as calculated using the Texas A&M University online rainfall erosivity calculator at: http:Ilei.tamu.edu/. The period of construction activity begins at initial earth disturbance and ends with final stabilization; and, in addition: b. The entire period of construction activity must fall within the following timeframes: i. For sites west of the Cascades Crest: June 15 — September 15; or ii. For sites east of the Cascades Crest, excluding the Central Basin: June 15 — October 15; or iii. For sites east of the Cascades Crest, within the Central Basin*: no additional timeframe restrictions apply. *Note: The Central Basin is defined as the portions of Eastern Washington with mean annual precipitation of less than 12 inches. 3. Operators must submit a complete Erosivity Waiver Certification Form at least one week prior to commencing land disturbing activities. Certification must include: a. A statement that the operator will comply with applicable local stormwater requirements; and b. A statement that the operator will implement appropriate erosion and sediment control BMWs to prevent violations of water quality standards. 4. This waiver is not available for facilities declared a significant contributor of pollutants as defined in Condition S I.B. Lb. 5. This waiver does not apply to construction activity which includes non-stormwater discharges listed in S1.C.3. 6. If construction activity extends beyond the certified waiver period for any reason, the operator shall either: Page 9 of 46 a. Recalculate the rainfall erosivity "R" factor using the original start date and anew projected ending date and, if the "R" factor is still under 5 and the entire project falls within the applicable regional timeframe in S2.C.2.b, complete and submit an amended waiver certification form before the original waiver expires; or b. Submit a complete permit application to Ecology in accordance with Condition S2.A and B before the end of the certified waiver period. S3. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS A. Discharges shall not cause or contribute to a violation of surface water quality standards (Chapter 173-201 A WAC), ground water quality standards (Chapter 173-200 WAC), sediment management standards (Chapter 173-204 WAC), and human health -based criteria in the National Toxics Rule (40 CFR Part 131.36). Discharges that are not in compliance with these standards are not authorized- B. Prior to the discharge of stormwater and non-stormwater to waters of the state, the Permittee shall apply all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control, and treatment (AKART). This includes the preparation and implementation of an adequate Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), with all appropriate best management practices (BMPs) installed and maintained in accordance with the SWPPP and the terms and conditions of this permit. C. Compliance with water quality standards shall be presumed, unless discharge monitoring data or other site specific information demonstrates that a discharge causes or contributes to a violation of water quality standards, when the Permittee is: 1. In full compliance with all permit conditions, including planning, sampling, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping conditions; and Fully implementing stormwater BMPs contained in stormwater management manuals published or approved by Ecology, or BMPs that are demonstrably equivalent to BMPs contained in stormwater technical manuals published or approved by Ecology, including the proper selection, implementation, and maintenance of all applicable and appropriate BMPs for on -site pollution control. D. For sites that discharge to both surface water and ground water, all ground water discharges are also subject to the terms and conditions of this permit. Permittees who discharge to ground water through an injection well shall comply with any applicable requirements of the Underground Injection Control (UIC) regulations, Chapter 173-218 WAC. Page 10 of 46 S4. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS The primary monitoring requirements are summarized in Table 3 (below): Table 3. Summary of Monitoring Requemes Size of Soil Disturbance7 Weekly Weekly. �� Wed ly Site Sampling wf' vi�1 pH Itispeetions 'urbidit + Muter s pl, 3 Sites which disturb less than 1 Required Not Required Not Required Not acre Required Sites which disturb 1 acre or Required Sampling Required — either Required q more, but less than 5 acres method Sites which disturb 5 acres or Required Required Not Required$ Required more A. Site Log Book The Permittee shall maintain a site log book that contains a record of the implementation of the SWPPP and other permit requirements including the installation and maintenance of BMPs, site inspections, and stormwater monitoring. B. Site Inspections 1. Site inspections shall include all areas disturbed by construction activities, all BMPs, and all stormwater discharge points. Stormwater shall be visually examined for the ' Additional monitoring requirements may apply for. 1) discharges to 303(d) listed waterbodies and waterbodies with applicable TMDLs for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus - see Condition S8; and 2) sites required to perform additional monitoring by Ecology order — see Condition G 13. 2 Soil disturbance is calculated by adding together all areas affected by construction activity: Construction Activity means clearing, grading, excavation, and any other activity which disturbs the surface of the land, including ingress/egress from the site. 3 Beginning October 1, 2006, if construction activity involves significant concrete work or the use of engineered soils, and stormwater from the affected area drains to a stormwater collection system or other surface water, the Permittee shall conduct pH sampling in accordance with Condition S4.D. 4 Beginning October 1, 2008, sites with one or more acres, but less than 5 acres of soil disturbance, shall conduct turbidity or transparency sampling in accordance with Condition S4.C. S Beginning October 1, 2006, sites greater than or equal to 5 acres of soil disturbance shall conduct turbidity sampling using a turbidity meter in accordance with Condition S4.C. Page 11 of 46 presence of suspended sediment, turbidity, discoloration, and oil sheen. Inspectors shall evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs and determine if it is necessary to install, maintain, or repair BMPs to improve the quality of stormwater discharges. Based on the results of the inspection, the Permittee shall correct the problems identified as follows: a_ Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the inspection; and b. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment EMPs as soon as possible, but no later than 10 days of the inspection; and c. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book. 2. The site inspections shall be conducted at least once every calendar week and within 24 hours of any discharge from the site_ The inspection frequency for temporarily stabilized, inactive sites may be reduced to once every calendar month. 3. Site inspections shall be conducted by a person who is knowledgeable in the principles and practices of erosion and sediment control. The inspector shall have the skills to: a. Assess the site conditions and construction activities that could impact the quality of stormwater, and b. Assess the effectiveness of erosion and sediment control measures used to control the quality of stormwater discharges. 4. Beginning October 1, 2006, construction sites one acre or larger that discharge stormwater to surface waters of the state, shall have site inspections conducted by a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL). The CESCL shall be identified in the SWPPP and shall be present on -site or on -call at all times. Certification shall be obtained through an approved erosion and sediment control training program that meets the minimum training standards established by Ecology (see BMP C160 in the Manual). 5. The inspector shall summarize the results of each inspection in an inspection report or checklist and be entered into, or attached to, the site log book. At a minimum, each inspection report or checklist shall include: a. Inspection date and time. b. Weather information; general conditions during inspection and approximate amount of precipitation since the last inspection, and within.the last 24 hours_ c. A summary or list of all BMPs which have been implemented, including observations of all erosion/sediment control structures or practices. d. The following shall be noted: i. locations of BMPs inspected, Page 12 of 46 ii. locations of BMPs that need maintenance, Ili. the reason maintenance is needed, iv. locations of BMPs that failed to operate as designed or intended, and v. locations where additional or different BMPs are needed, and the reason(s) why. e. A description of stormwater discharged from the site. The inspector shall note the presence of suspended sediment, turbid water, discoloration, and/or oil sheen, as applicable. f. Any water quality monitoring performed during inspection. g. General comments and notes, including a brief description of any BMP repairs, maintenance or installations made as a result of the inspection. h. A statement that, in the judgment of the person conducting the site inspection, the site is either in compliance or out of compliance with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and the permit. If the site inspection indicates that the site is out of compliance, the inspection report shall include a summary of the remedial actions required to bring the site back into compliance, as well as a schedule of implementation. i. Name, title, and signature of the person conducting site inspection; and the following statement: "I certify that this report is true, accurate, and complete, to the best of my knowledge and belief'. C. TurbidibL/IranMarengy Sampling Requirements 1. Sampling Methods/Effective Dates a. Beginning October 1, 2006, if construction activity will involve the disturbance of 5 acres or more, the Permittee shall conduct turbidity sampling per Condition S4.C. b. Beginning October 1, 2008, if construction activity will involve greater than or equal to 1 acre, but less than 5 acres of soil disturbance, the Permittee shall conduct transparency sampling or turbidity sampling per Condition S4.C. 2. Sampling Frequency a. Sampling shall be conducted at least once every calendar week, when there is a discharge of stormwater (or authorized non-stormwater) from the.site. Samples shall be representative of the flow and characteristics of the discharge- b. When there is no discharge during a calendar week, sampling is not required. c. Sampling is not required outside of normal working hours or during unsafe conditions. If a Permittee is unable to sample during a monitoring period, the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) shall include a brief explanation. Page 13 of 46 3. Sampling Locations a. Sampling is required at all discharge points where stormwater (or authorized non- stormwater) is discharged off -site. b. All sampling point(s) shall be identified on the SWPPP site map and be clearly marked in the field with a flag, tape, stake or other visible marker. 4. Sampling and Analysis Methods a. Turbidity analysis shall be performed with a calibrated turbidity meter (turbidimeter), either on -site or at an accredited lab. The results shall be recorded in the site log book in Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU). b. Transparency analysis shall be performed on -site with a 1 % inch diameter, 60 centimeter (cm) long Transparency Tube. The results shall be recorded in the site log book in centimeters (cm). Transparency Tubes are available from: hqp://watermonitoringequip.conm/yap-eslstream.html Weekly, if Turbidity NTU SM2130 or 25 NTU EPA180.1 discharging Transparency cm Manufacturer Weekly, if 31 cm instructions, or discharging Ecology Guidance 5. Turbidity/Transparency Benchmark Values The benchmark value for turbidity is 25 NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity Units); and the benchmark value for transparency is 31 cm. a. Turbidity 26 -- 249 NTU, or Transparency 30 T 7 cm: If discharge turbidity is greater than 25 NTU, but less than 250 NTU; or if discharge transparency is less than 31 cm, but greater than 6 cm, the CESCL shall: i. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the discharge that exceeded the benchmark; and ii. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 10 days of the discharge that exceeded the benchmark; and iii. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book. b. - Turbidity 250 NTU or greater, or Transparency 6 cm or less: Page 14 of 46 If discharge turbidity is greater than or equal to 250 NTU; or if discharge transparency is less than or equal to 6 cm, the CESCL shall: i. Notify Ecology by phone in accordance with Condition SS.A.; and ii. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the discharge that exceeded the benchmark; and iii. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 10 days of the discharge that exceeded the benchmark; iv. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book; and v. Continue to sample discharges daily until: 1. turbidity is 25 NTU (or lower); or 2. transparency is 31 cm (or greater); or 3. the CESCL has demonstrated compliance with the water quality standard for turbidity: a. no more than 5 NTU over background turbidity, if background is less than 50 NTU, or b. no more than 10% over background turbidity, if background is 50 NTU or greater; or 4. the discharge stops or is eliminated. D. PH Monitoring: Sites with Significant Concrete Work or Engineered Soils . Beginning October 1, 2006, if construction activity will result in the disturbance of 1 acre or more, and involves significant concrete work or the use of engineered soils, and stormwater from the affected area drains to surface waters of the state or to a storm sewer system that drains to surface waters of the state, the Permittee shall conduct pH monitoring as set forth below: 1. For sites with significant concrete work, the pH monitoring period shall commence when the concrete is first exposed to precipitation and continue weekly until stormwater pH is 8.5 or less. a. "Significant concrete work" means greater than 1000 cubic yards poured concrete or recycled concrete. 2. For sites with engineered soils, the pH monitoring period shall commence when the soil amendments are first exposed to precipitation and shall continue until the area of engineered soils is dully stabilized. Page 15 of 46 a. "Engineered soils" means soil amendments including, but not limited, to Portland cement treated base (CTB), cement kiln dust (CKD), or fly ash. 3. During the pH monitoring period, the Permittee shall obtain a representative sample of stormwater and conduct pH analysis at least once per week. 4. The Permittee shall monitor pH in the sediment trap/pond(s) or other locations that receive stormwater runoff from the area of significant concrete work or engineered soils prior to discharge to surface waters. 5. The benchmark value for pH is 8.5 standard units. Any time sampling indicates that pH is 8.5 or greater, the Permittee shall: a. Prevent the high pH water (9.5 or above) from entering storm sewer systems or surface waters; and b. If necessary, adjust or neutralize the high pH water using an appropriate treatment BMP such as CO2 sparging or dry ice. The Permittee shall obtain written approval from Ecology prior to using any form of chemical treatment other than CC z sparging or dry ice. 6. The Permittee shall perform pH analysis on -site with a calibrated pH meter, pH test kit, or wide range pH indicator paper. The Permittee shall record pH monitoring results in the site log book. S5. - REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS A. High Turbidity Phone Reporting Any time sampling performed in accordance with Special Condition S4.0 indicates turbidity is 250 NTU or greater (or transparency is 6 cm or less) the Permittee shall notify the appropriate Ecology regional office by phone within 24 hours of analysis. B. Discharge Monitoring Reports 1. Permittees required to conduct water quality sampling in accordance with Special Conditions SAC (Turbidity/Transparency), S4.D (pH) and/or S8 [303(d)/TMDL sampling] shall submit the results to Ecology monthly on Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) forms provided by Ecology. Permittees are authorized and encouraged to submit electronic DMRs using the "E- DMR Form" on Ecology's Construction Stormwater web site: htW://www.egy.wa.ggy/progMMs/wq/stormwater/construction/. 2. The Permittee shall submit DMR forms electronically or by mail to be received by Ecology within 15 days following the end of each month. If there was no discharge during a given monitoring period, the Permittee shall submit the form as required with the words "no discharge" entered in place of the monitoring results. If the Permittee is unable to submit discharge monitoring reports electronically, the Permittee may mail reports to the address listed below: Page 16 of 46 Department of Ecology Water Quality Program - Construction Stormwater PO Box 47696 Olympia, Washington 98504-7696 C. Records Retention The Permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information (site log book, sampling results, inspection reports/checklists, etc.), Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and any other documentation of compliance with permit requirements during the life of the construction project and for a minimum of three years following the termination of permit coverage. Such information shall include all calibration and maintenance records, and records of all data used to complete the application for this permit. This period of retention shall be extended during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding the discharge of pollutants by the Permittee or when requested by Ecology. D. Recording of Results For each measurement or sample taken, the Permittee shall record the following information: 1. Date, place, method, and time of sampling or measurement; 2. The individual who performed the sampling or measurement; 3. The dates the analyses were performed; 4. The individual who performed the analyses; 5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and 6. The results of all analyses. E. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit using test procedures specified by Condition S4 of this permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the Permittee's DMR. F. Noncompliance Notification In the event the Permittee is unable to comply with any of the terms and conditions of this permit which may cause a threat to human health or the environment, the Permittee shall: 1. Immediately notify Ecology of the failure to comply. 2. Immediately take action to prevent the discharge/pollution, or otherwise stop or correct the noncompliance, and, if applicable, repeat sampling and analysis of any noncompliance immediately and submit the results to Ecology within five (5) days after becoming aware of the violation. Page 17 of 46 3. Submit a detailed written report to Ecology within five (5) days, unless requested earlier by Ecology. The report shall contain a description of the noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and the steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. Compliance with these requirements does not relieve the Permittee from responsibility to maintain continuous compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit or the resulting liability for failure to comply. G. Access to Plans and Records 1. The Permittee shall retain the following permit documentation (plans and records) on - site, or within reasonable access to the site, for use by the operator; or on -site review by Ecology or the local jurisdiction: a. General Permit; b. Permit Coverage Letter; c. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); and d. Site Log Book 2. The Permittee(s) shall address written requests for plans and records listed above (Condition S5.G.1) as follows: a. A copy of plans and records shall be provided to Ecology within 14 days of receipt of a written request from Ecology- b. A copy of plans and records shall be provided to the public when requested in writing. Upon receiving a written request from the public for the Permittee's plans and records, the Permittee shall either: i. Provide a copy of the plans and records to the requestor within 14 days of a receipt of the written request; or ii. Notify the requestor within 10 days of receipt of the written request of the location and times within normal business hours when the plans and records may be viewed, and provide access to the plans and records within 14 days of receipt of the written request; or iii. Within 14 days of receipt of the written request, the Permittee may submit a copy of the plans and records to Ecology for viewing and/or copying by the requestor at an Ecology office, or a mutually agreed upon location. If plans and records are viewed and/or copied at a location other than at an Ecology office, the Permittee will provide reasonable access to copying services for which a reasonable fee may be charged. The Permittee shall notify the Page 18 of 46 requestor within 10 days of receipt of the request where the plans and records may be viewed and/or copied. S6. PERMIT FEES The Permittee shall pay permit fees assessed by Ecology. Fees for stormwater discharges covered under this permit shall be established by Chapter 173-224 WAC. Permit fees will continue to be assessed until the permit is terminated in accordance with Special Condition S10 or revoked in accordance with General Condition G5. S7. SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE DISPOSAL Solid and liquid wastes generated by construction activity such as demolition debris, construction materials, contaminated materials, and waste materials from maintenance activities, including liquids and solids from cleaning catch basins and other stormwater facilities, shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with: 1. Special Condition S3, Compliance with Standards, and 2. WAC 173-216-110, and other applicable regulations. SS. DISCHARGES TO 303(D) OR TMDL WATERBODIES A. Sampling and Numeric Effluent Limitations For Discharges to 303(d)-listed Waterbodies 1. 1.Permittees that discharge to water bodies listed as impaired by the State of Washington under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus, shall conduct water quality sampling according to the requirements of this section. 2. AlI references and requirements associated with Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act mean the most current listing by Ecology of impaired waters that exists on November 16, 2005, or the date when the operator's complete permit application is received by Ecology, whichever is later. B. Discharges to 303(d)-Listed Waterbodies (Turbidity. Fine Sediment. or Phosphorus) 1. Permittees which discharge to waterbodies on the 303(d) list for turbidity, fine sediment, or phosphorus shall conduct turbidity sampling at the following locations to evaluate compliance with the water quality standard for turbidity: a. Background turbidity shall be measured in the 303(d)-fisted receiving water immediately upstream (upgradient) or outside the area of influence of the discharge; and b. Discharge turbidity shall be measured at the point of discharge into the 303(d) listed receiving waterbody, inside the area of influence of the discharge; or Page 19 of 46 Alternatively, discharge turbidity may be measured at the point where the discharge leaves the construction site, rather than in the receiving waterbody. 2. Based on sampling, if the discharge turbidity exceeds the water quality standard for turbidity (more than 5 NTU over background turbidity when the background turbidity is 50 NTU or less, or more than a 10% increase in turbidity when the background turbidity is more than 50 NTU), all future discharges shall comply with a numeric effluent limit which is equal to the water quality standard for turbidity. 3. If a future discharge exceeds the water quality standard for turbidity, the Pennittee shall: a. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the discharge that exceeded the standard; b. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 10 days of the discharge that exceeded the standard; c. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book; d. Notify the appropriate Ecology Regional Office by phone within 24 hours of analysis; e. Continue to sample daily until discharge turbidity meets the water quality standard for turbidity. C. Dischar es to waterbodies on the 303(d) list for High RH 1. Permittees which discharge to waterbodies on the 303(d) list for high pH shall conduct sampling at one of the following locations to evaluate compliance with the water quality standard for pH (in the range of 6.5 — 8.5): a. pH shall be measured at the point of discharge into the 303(d) listed waterbody, inside the area of influence of the discharge; or b. Alternatively, pH may be measured at the point where the discharge leaves the construction site, rather than in the receiving water. 2. Based on the sampling set forth above, if the pH exceeds the water quality standard for pH (in the range of 6.5 — 8.5), all future discharges shall comply with a numeric effluent limit which is equal to the water quality standard for pH. 3. If a future discharge exceeds the water quality standard for pH, the Pernuttee shall: a. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the discharge that exceeded the water quality standard; Page 20 of 46 b. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but within 10 days of the discharge that exceeded the standards; c. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book; d. Notify the appropriate Ecology Regional Office by phone within 24 hours of analysis; and e. Continue to sample daily until discharge meets the water quality standard for pH (in the range of 6.5 — 8.5) or the discharge stops or is eliminated. L y t- b Standard Turbidity Turbidity/NTU SM2130 or Weekly, if If background is 50 Fine Sediment EPA180.1 discharging NTU or less: 5 NTU Phosphorus over background; or If background is more than 50 NTU: 10% over background High pH pH/Standard pH meter Weekly, if In the range of Units discharging 6.5 -- 8.5 D. Sampling and Limitations For Sites Dischar igfng to Applicable TMDLs 1. Discharges to a waterbodies subject to an applicable Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus, shall be consistent with the assumptions and requirements of the TMDL. a. Where an applicable TMDL sets specific waste load allocations or requirements for discharges covered by this permit, discharges shall be consistent with any specific waste load allocations or requirements established by the applicable TMDL. ii. The Permittee shall sample discharges weekly, or as otherwise specified by the TMDL, to evaluate compliance with the specific waste load allocations or requirements. iii. Analytical methods used to meet the monitoring requirements shall conform to the latest revision of the Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants contained in 40 CFR Part 136. Turbidity and pH methods Page 21 of 46 need not be accredited or registered unless conducted at a laboratory which must otherwise be accredited or registered. b. Where an applicable TMDL has established a general waste load allocation for construction stormwater discharges, but no specific requirements have been identified, compliance with Conditions S4 (Monitoring) and S9 (SWPPPs) will be assumed to be consistent with the approved TMDL. e. Where an applicable TMDL has not specified a waste load allocation for construction stormwater discharges, but has not excluded these discharges, compliance with Conditions S4 (Monitoring) and S9 (SWPPPs) will be assumed to be consistent with the approved TMDL. d. Where an applicable TMDL specifically precludes or prohibits discharges from construction activity, the operator is not eligible for coverage under this permit. 2. Applicable TMDL means a TMDL for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus, which has been completed and approved by EPA prior to November 16, 2005, or prior to the date the operator's complete permit application is received by Ecology, whichever is later. TMDLs completed after the operator's complete permit application is received by Ecology become applicable to the Permittee only if they are imposed through an administrative order by Ecology, or through a modification of permit coverage. S9. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN An adequate Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction activity shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with the requirements of this permit beginning with initial soil disturbance and until final stabilization. A. The SWPPP shall meet the following,_ objectives: 1. To implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and sedimentation, and to identify, reduce, eliminate or prevent stormwater contamination and water pollution from construction activity. 2. To prevent violations of surface water quality, ground water quality, or sediment management standards. 3. To control peak volumetric flow rates and velocities of stormwater discharges. B. General Requirements 1. The SWPPP shall include a narrative and drawings. All BMPs shall be clearly referenced in the narrative and marked on the drawings. The SWPPP narrative shall include documentation to explain and justify the pollution prevention decisions made for the project. Documentation shall include: a. Information about existing site conditions (topography, drainage_ , soils, vegetation, etc.); Page 22 of 46 b. Potential erosion problem areas; c. The 12 elements of a SWPPP in S9.D.1-12, including BMPs used to address each element; d. Construction phasing/sequence and general BMP implementation schedule; e. The actions to be taken if BMP performance goals are not achieved; and f. Engineering calculations for ponds and any other designed structures. 2. The Permittee shall modify the SWPPP if, during inspections or investigations conducted by the owner/operator, or the applicable local or state regulatory authority, it is determined that the SWPPP is, or would be, ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharges from the site. The Permittee shall take the following actions: a. Review the SWPPP for compliance with Condition S9 and make appropriate revisions within 7 days of the inspection or investigation; b. Fully implement and maintain appropriate source control and/or treatment BMPs as soon as possible, but no later than 14 days from the inspection or investigation; and c. Document BMP implementation and maintenance in the site log book. 3. The Permittee shall modify the SWPPP whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance at the construction site that has, or could have, a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to waters of the state. C. Stormwater Best Mana ement Practices (BMPs BMPs shall be consistent with: 1. Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (most recent edition), for sites west of the crest of the Cascade Mountains; 2. Storrnwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (most recent edition), for sites east of the crest of the Cascade Mountains; or 3. Other stormwater management guidance documents or manuals which provide an equivalent level of pollution prevention and are approved by Ecology; or 4. Documentation in the SWPPP that the BMPs selected provides an equivalent level of pollution prevention, compared to the applicable Stormwater Management Manuals, including: Page 23 of 46 a. The technical basis for the selection of all stormwater BMPs (scientific, technical studies, and/or modeling) which support the performance claims for the BMPs being selected; and b. An assessment of how the selected BMP will satisfy AKART requirements and the applicable federal technology -based treatment requirements under 40 CFR part 125.3. D. SWPPP — Narrative Contents and Requirements The Permittee shall include each of the 12 elements below in S9.D.1-12 in the narrative of the SWPPP and ensure that they are implemented unless site conditions render the element unnecessary and the exemption from that element is clearly justified in the SWPPP. 1. Preserve Vegetation/Mark Clearing Limits a. Prior to beginning land disturbing activities, including clearing and grading, clearly mark all clearing limits, sensitive areas and their buffers, and trees that are to be preserved within the construction area. b. The duff layer, native top soil, and natural vegetation shall be retained in an undisturbed state to the maximum degree practicable. 2. Establish Construction Access a. Construction vehicle access and exit shall be limited to one route, if possible. b. Access points shall be stabilized with a pad of quarry spalls, crushed rock, or other equivalent BAP, to minimize the tracking of sediment onto public roads. c. Wheel wash or tire baths shall be located on site, if the stabilized construction entrance is not effective in preventing sediment from being tracked onto public roads. d. If sediment is tracked off site, public roads shall be cleaned thoroughly at the end of each day, or more frequently during wet weather. Sediment shall be removed from roads by shoveling or pickup sweeping and shall be transported to a controlled sediment disposal area. e. Street washing is allowed only after sediment is removed in accordance with S9.D.2.d. Street wash wastewater shall be controlled by pumping back on site or otherwise be prevented from discharging into systems tributary to waters of the state. 3. Control Flow Rates a. Properties and waterways downstream from development sites shall be protected from erosion due to increases in the velocity and peak volumetric flow rate of stormwater runoff from the project site, as required by local plan approval authority. Page 24 of 46 b. Where necessary to comply with S9.D.3.a., stormwater retention or detention facilities shall be constructed as one of the first steps in grading. Detention facilities shall be functional prior to construction of site improvements (e.g., impervious surfaces). c. If permanent infiltration ponds are used for flow control during construction, these facilities shall be protected from siltation during the construction phase. 4. install Sediment Controls a. Stormwater runoff from disturbed areas shall pass through a sediment pond or other appropriate sediment removal BMP, prior to leaving a construction site or prior to discharge to an infiltration facility. Runoff from fully stabilized areas may be discharged without a sediment removal BMP, but shall meet the flow control performance standard of S9.D.3.a. b. Sediment control BMPs (sediment ponds, traps, filters, etc.) shall be constructed as one of the first steps in grading. These BMPs shall be functional before other land disturbing activities take place. c. BMPs intended to trap sediment on site shall be located in a manner to avoid interference with the movement of juvenile salmonids attempting to enter off - channel areas or drainages. 5. Stabilize Soils a. Exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized by application of effective BMPs that prevent erosion. Applicable BMWs include, but are not limited to: temporary and permanent seeding, sodding, mulching, plastic covering, erosion control fabrics and matting, soil application of polyacrylamide (PAM), the early application of gravel base on areas to be paved, and dust control. b. Depending on the geographic location of the project, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than the time periods set forth below to prevent erosion: West of the Cascade Mountains Crest During the dry season (May 1 - Sept. 30): 7 days During the wet season (October 1- April 30): 2 days East of the Cascade Mountains Crest, except for Central Basin* During the dry season (July 1 - September 30): 10 days During the wet season (October 1 - June 30): S days The Central Basin*, East of the Cascade Mountains Crest During the dry Season (July 1 - September 30): 30 days During the wet season (October I - June 30): 15 days *Note: The Central Basin is defined as the portions of Eastern Washington with mean annual precipitation of less than 12 inches. Page 25 of 46 The time period may be adjusted by a local jurisdiction, if the jurisdiction can show that local precipitation data justify a different standard. c. Soils shall be stabilized at the end of the shift before a holiday or weekend if needed based on the weather forecast. d. Soil stockpiles shall be stabilized from erosion, protected with sediment trapping measures, and where possible, be located away from storm drain inlets, waterways, and drainage channels. 6. Protect Slopes a. Design and construct cut and fill slopes in a manner that will minimize erosion. Applicable practices include, but are not limited to, reducing continuous length of slope with terracing and diversions, reducing slope steepness, and roughening slope surfaces (e.g., track walking). b. Off --site stormwater (run-on) or groundwater shall be diverted away from slopes and disturbed areas with interceptor dikes, pipes, and/or swales. Off -site stormwater should be managed separately from stormwater generated on the site. c. At the top of slopes, collect drainage in pipe slope drains or protected channels to prevent erosion. i. West of the Cascade Mountains Crest. Temporary pipe slope drains shall handle the peak 10-minute velocity of flow from a Type IA, 10-year, 24-hour frequency storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, 1- hour flow rate predicted by an approved continuous runoff model, increased by a factor of 1.6, may be used. The hydrologic analysis shall use the existing land cover condition for predicting flow rates from tributary areas outside the. project limits. For tributary areas on the project site, the analysis shall use the temporary or permanent project land cover condition, whichever will produce the highest flow rates. If using the WWHM to predict flows, bare soil areas should be modeled as "landscaped area." ii. East of the Cascade Mountains Crest: Temporary pipe slope drains shall handle the expected peak flow velocity from a 6-month, 3-hour storm for the developed condition, referred to as the short duration storm. d. Excavated material shall be placed on the uphill side of trenches, consistent with safety and space considerations. e. Check dams shall be placed at regular intervals within constructed channels that are cut down a slope. . 7. Protect Drain Inlets a. All storm drain inlets made operable during construction shall be protected so that stormwater runoff does not enter the conveyance system without first being filtered or treated to remove sediment. Page 26 of 46 b. Inlet protection devices shall be cleaned or removed and replaced when sediment has filled one-third of the available storage (unless a different standard is specified by the product manufacturer). S. Stabilize Channels and Outlets a. All temporary on -site conveyance channels shall be designed, constructed, and stabilized to prevent erosion from the following expected peak flows: i. West of the Cascade Mountains Crest: Channels shall handle the peak 10 minute velocity of flow from a Type 1A, 10-year, 24-hour frequency storm for the developed condition. Alternatively, the 10-year, I -hour flow rate indicated by an approved continuous nmoffmodel, increased by a factor of 1.6, may be used. The hydrologic analysis shall use the existing land cover condition for predicting flow rates from tributary areas outside the project limits. For tributary areas on the project site, the analysis shall use the temporary or permanent project land cover condition, whichever will produce the highest flow rates. If using the WWHM to predict flows, bare soil areas should be modeled as "landscaped area." ii. East of the Cascade Mountains Crest: Channels shall handle the expected peak flow velocity from a 6-month, 3-hour storm for the developed condition, referred to as the short duration storm. b. Stabilization, including armoring material, adequate to prevent erosion of outlets, adjacent stream banks, slopes, and downstream reaches shall be provided at the outlets of all conveyance systems. 9. Control Pollutants a. All pollutants, including waste materials and demolition debris, that occur onsite shall be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not cause contamination of stormwater. b. Cover, containment, and protection from vandalism shall be provided for all chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products, and other materials that have the potential to pose a threat to human health or the environment. On -site fueling tanks shall include secondary containment. c. Maintenance, fueling, and repair of heavy equipment and vehicles shall be conducted using spill prevention and control measures. Contaminated surfaces shall be cleaned immediately following any spill incident. d. Wheel wash or tire bath wastewater shall be discharged to a separate on -site treatment system or to the sanitary sewer with local sewer district approval. e. Application of fertilizers and pesticides, shall be conducted in a manner and at application rates that will not result in loss of chemical to stormwater runoff. Manufacturers' label requirements for application rates and procedures shall be followed. Page 27 of 46 f. BMPs shall be used to prevent or treat contamination of stormwater runoff by pH modifying sources. These sources include, but are not limited to: bulk cement, cement kiln dust, fly ash, new concrete washing and curing waters, waste streams generated from concrete grinding and sawing, exposed aggregate processes, dewatering concrete vaults, concrete pumping and mixer washout waters. Perrnittees shall adjust the pH of stormwater if necessary to prevent violations of water duality standards. g. Permittees shall obtain written approval from Ecology prior to using chemical treatment, other than CO2 or dry ice to adjust pH. 10. Control De -Watering a. Foundation, vault, and trench de -watering water, which have similar characteristics to stormwater runoff at the site, shall be discharged into a controlled conveyance system prior to discharge to a sediment trap or sediment pond. b. Clean, non -turbid de -watering water, such as well -point ground water, can be discharged to systems tributary to, or directly into surface waters of the state, as specified in S9.13.8, provided the de -watering flow does not cause erosion or flooding of receiving waters. Clean de -watering water should not be routed through stormwater sediment ponds. c. Other de -watering disposal options may include: i. infiltration ii. transport offsite in a vehicle, such as a vacuum flush truck, for legal disposal in a manner that does not pollute state waters, iii. Ecology -approved on -site chemical treatment or other suitable treatment technologies, iv. sanitary sewer discharge with local sewer district approval, if there is no other option, or v. use of a sedimentation bag with outfall to a ditch or swale for small volumes of localized de -watering. d. Highly turbid or contaminated dewatering water shall be handled separately from stormwater. 11. Maintain BMPs a. All temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be maintained and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function in accordance with BMP specifications. b. All temporary erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be removed within 30 days after final site stabilization is achieved or after the temporary BMPs are no longer needed. Page 28 of 46 12. Manage the Project a. Development projects shall be phased to the maximum degree practicable and shall take into account seasonal work limitations. b. Inspection and Monitoring All BMPs shall be inspected, maintained, and repaired as needed to assure continued performance of their intended function. Site inspections and monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with S4. c. Maintaining an Updated Construction SWPPP The SWPPP shall be maintained, updated, and implemented in accordance with Conditions S3, S4 and S9. E. SWPPP — Man Contents and Requirements The SWPPP shall also include a vicinity map or general location map (e.g. USGS Quadrangle map, a portion of a county or city map, or other appropriate map) with enough detail to identify the location of the construction site and receiving waters within one mile of the site. The SWPPP shall also include a legible site map (or maps) showing the entire construction site. The following features shall be identified, unless not applicable due to site conditions: 1. The direction of north, property lines, and existing structures and roads; 2. Cut and fill slopes indicating the top and bottom of slope catch lines; 3. Approximate slopes, contours, and direction of stormwater flow before and after major grading activities; 4. Areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed; S. Locations of structural and nonstructural controls (BMPs) identified in the SWPPP 6. Locations of off -site material, stockpiles, waste storage, borrow areas, and vehicle/equipment storage areas; 7. Locations of all surface water bodies, including wetlands; 8. Locations where stormwater or non-stormwater discharges off -site and/or to a surface water body, including wetlands; 9. Location of water quality sampling station(s), if sampling is required by state or local permitting authority; and Page 29 of 46 10. Areas where final stabilization has been accomplished and no further construction - phase permit requirements apply. 510. NOTICE OF TERMINATION A. The site is eligible for termination when either of the following conditions have been met: I . The site has undergone final stabilization, all temporary BMPs have been removed, and all stormwater discharges associated with construction activity have been eliminated; or 2. All portions of the site which have not undergone final stabilization per S10.A.1 have been sold and/or transferred (per Condition G9), and the Permittee no longer has operational control of the construction activity. B. When the site is eligible for termination, the Permittee shall submit a complete and accurate Notice of Termination (NOT) form, signed in accordance with General Condition G2, to: Department of Ecology Water Quality Program - Construction Stormwater PO Box 47696 Olympia, Washington 98504-7696 C. The termination is effective on the date the NOT form was received by Ecology, unless the Permittee is notified by Ecology within 30 days that termination request is denied because the eligibility requirements in Condition S I O.A have not been met. Page 30 of 46 GENERAL CONDITIONS G1. DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS All discharges and activities authorized by this general permit shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this general permit. Any discharge of any pollutant more frequent than or at a level in excess of that identified and authorized by the general permit shall constitute a violation of the terms and conditions of this permit. G2. SIGNATORY REQUIREMENTS A_ All permit applications shall bear a certification of correctness to be signed: 1. In the case of corporations, by a responsible corporate officer of at least the level of vice president of a corporation; 2. In the case of a partnership, by a general partner of a partnership; 3. In the case of sole proprietorship, by the proprietor; or 4. In the case of a municipal, state, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. B. AlI reports required by this permit and other information requested by Ecology shall be , signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: 1. The authorization is made in writing by a person described above and submitted to the Ecology. 2. The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility, such as the position of plant manager,_ superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters. C. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph G2.13.2 above is no longer accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph G2.B.2 above shall be submitted to Ecology prior to or together with any reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative. D. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section shall make the following certification: "I certify under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated Page 31 of 46 the information submitted_ Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations." G3. RIGHT OF INSPECTION AND ENTRY The Permittee shall allow an authorized representative of Ecology, upon the presentation of credentials and such other documents as may be required by law: A. To enter upon the premises where a discharge is located or where any records shall be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit. B. To have access to and copy - at reasonable times and at reasonable cost - any records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit. C. To inspect - at reasonable times - any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, methods, or operations regulated or required under this permit. D. To sample or monitor - at reasonable times - any substances or parameters at any location for purposes of assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act. G4. GENERAL PERMIT MODIFICATION AND REVOCATION This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 173-226 WAC. Grounds for modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination include, but are not limited to, the following: A. When a change which occurs in the technology or practices for control or abatement of pollutants applicable to the category of dischargers covered under this permit; B. When effluent limitation guidelines or standards are promulgated pursuant to the CWA or Chapter 90.48 RCW, for the category of dischargers covered under this permit; C. When a water quality management plan containing requirements applicable to the category of dischargers covered under this permit is approved; or D. When information is obtained which indicates that cumulative effects on the environment from dischargers covered under this permit are unacceptable. G5. REVOCATION OF COVERAGE UNDER THE PERMIT Pursuant with Chapter 43.21 B RCW and Chapter 173-226 WAC, the Director may terminate coverage for any discharger under this permit for cause. Cases where coverage may be terminated include, but are not limited to, the following: Page 32 of 46 A. Violation of any term or condition of this permit; B. Obtaining coverage under this permit by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant facts; C. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the permitted discharge; D. Failure or refusal of the Permittee to allow entry as required in RCW 90.48.090; E. A determination that the permitted activity endangers human health or the environment, or contributes to water quality standards violations; F. Nonpayment of permit fees or penalties assessed pursuant to RCW 90.48.465 and Chapter 173-224 WAC; G. Failure of the Permittee to satisfy the public notice requirements of WAC 173-226- 130(5), when applicable. The Director may require any discharger under this permit to apply for and obtain coverage under an individual permit or another nnore specific general permit. Permittees who have their coverage revoked for cause according to WAC 173-226-240 may request temporary coverage under this permit during the time an individual permit is being developed, provided the request is made within ninety (90) days from the time of revocation and is submitted along with a complete individual permit application form. G6. REPORTING A CAUSE FOR MODIFICATION The Permittee shall submit a new application, or a supplement to the previous application, whenever a material change to the construction activity or in the quantity or type of discharge is anticipated which is not specifically authorized by this permit. This application shall be submitted at least sixty (60) days prior to any proposed changes. The filing of a request by the Permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not relieve the Permittee of the duty to comply with the existing permit until it is modified or reissued. G7. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS AND STATUTES Nothing in this permit shall be construed as excusing the Permittee from compliance with any applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations. G8. DUTY TO REAPPLY The Permittee shall apply for permit renewal at least 180 days prior to the specified expiration date of this permit. G9. TRANSFER OF GENERAL PERNUT COVERAGE Coverage under this general permit is automatically transferred to a new discharger, including operators of lots/parcels within a common plan of development or sale, if: Page 33 of 46 A. A written, signed agreement (Transfer of Coverage Form) between the current discharger (Permittee) and new discharger containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility, coverage, and liability is submitted to•the Director; and B. The Director does not notify the current discharger and new discharger of the Director's intent to revoke coverage under the general permit. If this notice is not given, the transfer is effective on the date specified in the written agreement. When a current discharger (Permittee) transfers a portion of a permitted site, the current discharger shall also submit an updated application form (NOI) to the Director indicating the remaining permitted acreage after the transfer. When a current discharger (Permittee) transfers all portions of a permitted site to one or more new dischargers, the current discharger shall also submit a notice of termination (NOT) form to the Director. G10. REMOVED SUBSTANCES Collected screenings, grit, solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of stormwater shall not be resuspended or reintroduced to the final effluent stream for discharge to state waters. G11. DUTY TO PROVIDE INFORMATION The Penmttee shall submit to Ecology, within a reasonable time, all information which Ecology may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit or to determine compliance with this permit. The Permittee shall also submit to Ecology upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit [40 CFR 122.41(h)]. G12.OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF 40 CFR All other requirements of 40 CFR 122.41 and 122.42 are incorporated in this permit by reference. G13. ADDITIONAL MONITORING Ecology may establish specific monitoring requirements in addition to those contained in this permit by administrative order or permit modification. G14. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING PERMIT CONDITIONS Any person who is found guilty of willfully violating the terms and conditions of this permit shall be deemed guilty of a crime, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of up to ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and costs of prosecution, or by imprisonment in the discretion of the court. Each day upon which a willful violation occurs may be deemed a separate and additional violation. Any person who violates the terms and conditions of a waste discharge permit shall incur, in addition to any other penalty as provided by law, a civil penalty in the amount of up to ten Page 34 of 46 thousand dollars ($10,000) for every such violation_ Each and every such violation shall be a separate and distinct offense, and in case of a continuing violation, every day's continuance shall be deemed to be a separate and distinct violation. G15. UPSET Definition — "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology -based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the Permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack -of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such technology -based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of the following paragraph are met. A Permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs or other relevant evidence that: 1) . an upset occurred and that the Permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset; 2) the permitted facility was being properly operated'at the time of the upset; 3) the Permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in condition S5.F; and 4) the Permittee complied with any remedial measures required under this permit. In any enforcement proceeding, the Permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof. G16. PROPERTY RIGHTS This permit does not convey any property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privilege. G17. DUTY TO COMPLY The Permittee shall comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of a permit renewal application. G18. TOXIC POLLUTANTS The Permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under Section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish those standards or prohibitions, even if this permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement. Page 35 of 46 G19. PENALTIES FOR TAMPERING The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation, or by both. if a conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person under this Condition, punishment shall be a fine of not more than $20,000 per day of violation, or imprisonment of not more than four (4) years, or both. G20. REPORTING PLANNED CHANGES The Permittee shall, as soon as possible, give notice to Ecology of planned physical alterations, modifications or additions to the permitted construction activity, which will result in: A. The permitted facility being determined to be a new source pursuant to 40 CFR 122.29(b); B. A significant change in the nature or an increase in quantity of pollutants discharged, including but not limited to: for sites 5 acres or larger, a 20% or greater increase in acreage disturbed by construction activity; C. A change in or addition of surface water(s) receiving stormwater or non-stormwater from the construction activity; or D. A change in the construction plans and/or activity that affects the Permittee's monitoring requirements in Special Condition S4. Following such notice, permit coverage may be modified, or revoked and reissued pursuant to 40 CFR 122.62(a) to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited. Until such modification is effective, any new or increased discharge in excess of permit limits or not specifically authorized by this permit constitutes a violation. G2I. REPORTING OTHER INFORMATION Where the Permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to Ecology, it shall promptly submit such facts or information. G22. REPORTING ANTICIPATED NON-COMPLIANCE The Permittee shall give advance notice to Ecology by submission of a new application or supplement thereto at least forty-five (45) days prior to commencement of such discharges, of any facility expansions, production increases, or other planned changes, such as process modifications, in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit limits or. conditions. Any maintenance of facilities, which night necessitate Page 36 of 46 unavoidable interruption of operation and degradation of effluent quality, shall be scheduled during non -critical water quality periods and carried out in a manner approved by Ecology. G23. REQUESTS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM COVERAGE UNDER THE PERMIT Any discharger authorized by this permit may request to be excluded from coverage under the general permit by applying for an individual permit. The discharger shall submit to the Director an application as described in WAC 173-220-040 or WAC 173-216-070, whichever is applicable, with reasons supporting the request. These reasons shall fully document how an individual permit will apply to the applicant in a way that the general permit cannot. Ecology may make specific requests for information to support the request. The Director shall either issue an individual permit or deny the request with a statement explaining the reason for the denial. When an individual permit is issued to a discharger otherwise subject to the construction stormwater general permit, the applicability of the construction stormwater general permit to that Permittee is automatically terminated on the effective date of the individual permit. G24. APPEALS A. The terms and conditions of this general permit, as they apply to the appropriate class of dischargers, are subject to appeal by any person within 30 days of issuance of this general permit, in accordance with Chapter 43.21B RCW, and Chapter 173-226 WAC. B. The terms and conditions of this general permit, as they apply to an individual discharger, are appealable in accordance with Chapter 43.21B RCW within 30 days of the effective date of coverage of that discharger. Consideration of an appeal of general permit coverage of an individual discharger is limited to the general permit's applicability or nonapplicability to that individual'discharger. C. The appeal of general permit coverage of an individual discharger does not affect any other disclargers covered under this general permit. If the terms and conditions of this general permit are found to be inapplicable to any individual dischargers), the matter shall be remanded to Ecology for consideration of issuance of an individual permit or permits. G25. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected thereby. G26. BYPASS PROHIBITED A. Bwass Procedures Bypass, which is the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility, is prohibited for stormwater events below the design criteria for Page 37 of 46 stormwater management. Ecology may take enforcement action against a Permittee for bypass unless one of the following circumstances (1, 2, 3 or 4) is applicable. 1. Bypass of stormwater is consistent with the design criteria and part of an approved management practice in the applicable stormwater management manual. 2. Bypass for essential maintenance without the potential to cause violation of permit limits or conditions. Bypass is authorized if it is for essential maintenance and does not have the potential to cause violations of limitations or other conditions of this permit, or adversely impact public health. 3. Bypass of stormwater is unavoidable, unanticipated, and results in noncompliance of this permit. This bypass is permitted only if: a. Bypass is unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or severe property damage. "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage to . property, damage to the treatment facilities which would cause them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass; b. There are no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime (but not if adequate backup equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventative maintenance), or transport of untreated wastes to another treatment facility; and c. Ecology is properly notified of the bypass as required in Special Condition S5.F of this permit. 4. A planned action that would cause bypass of stormwater and has the potential to result in noncompliance of this permit during a storm event. The Permittee shall notify Ecology at least thirty (30) days before the planned date of bypass. The notice shall contain: a_ a description of the bypass and its cause; b. an analysis of all known alternatives which would eliminate, reduce, or mitigate the need for bypassing; c. a cost-effectiveness analysis of alternatives including comparative resource damage assessment; d. the minimum and maximum duration of bypass under each alternative; e. a recommendation as to the preferred alternative for conducting the bypass; Page 38 of 46 f, the projected date of bypass initiation; g. a statement of compliance with SEPA; h. a request for modification of water quality standards as provided for in WAC 173- 201A-110, if an exceedance of any water quality standard is anticipated; and i. steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the bypass. 5. For probable construction bypasses, the need to bypass is to be identified as early in the planning process as possible. The analysis required above shall be considered during preparation of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and shall be included to the extent practical. In cases where the probable need to bypass is determined early, continued analysis is necessary up to and including the construction period in an effort to minimize or eliminate the bypass. Ecology will consider the following prior to issuing an administrative order for this type bypass: a. If the bypass is necessary to perform construction or maintenance -related activities essential to meet the requirements of this permit. b. If there are feasible alternatives to bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, stopping production, maintenance during normal periods of equipment down time, or transport of untreated wastes to another treatment facility. c. If the bypass is planned and scheduled to minimize adverse effects on the public and the environment. After consideration of the above and the adverse effects of the proposed bypass and any other relevant factors, Ecology will approve, conditionally approve, or deny the request. The public shall be notified and given an opportunity to comment on bypass incidents of significant duration, to the extent feasible. Approval of a request to bypass will be by administrative order issued by Ecology under RCW 90.48.120. B. Duty to Mitigate The Permittee is required to take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or disposal in violation of this permit that has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment. Page 39 of 46 APPENDIX A — DEFINITIONS AKART is an acronym for "all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control, and treatment." AKART represents the most current methodology that can be reasonably required for preventing, controlling, or abating the pollutants and controlling pollution associated with a discharge. Applicable TMDL means a TMDL for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus, which has been completed and approved by EPA prior to November 16, 2005, or prior to the date the operator's complete permit application is received by Ecology, whichever is later_ Rlicant means an operator seeking coverage under this permit. _Best Management Practices (BMPs) means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other physical, structural and/or managerial practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the state. BMPs include treatment systems, operating procedures, and practices to control: stormwater associated with construction activity, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material storage. Bu er means an area designated by a local jurisdiction that is contiguous to and intended to protect a sensitive area Bypass means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility. Calendar Week (same as Week) means a period of seven consecutive days starting on Sunday. Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) means a person who has current certification through an approved erosion and sediment control training program that meets the minimum training standards established by Ecology (see BMP C 160 in the SWMM). Clean Water Act (CWA) means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act enacted by Public Law 92-500, as amended by Public Laws 95-217, 95-576, 96-483, and 97-117; USC 1251 et seq. Combined Sewer means a sewer which has been designed to serve as a sanitary sewer and a storm sewer, and into which inflow is allowed by local ordinance. Common plan of development or sale means a site where multiple separate and distinct construction activities may be taking place at different times on different schedules, but still under a single plan. Examples include: 1) phased projects and projects with multiple filings or lots, even if the separate phases or filings/lots will be constructed under separate contract or by separate owners (e.g., a development where lots are sold to separate builders); 2) a development plan that may be phased over multiple years, but is still under a consistent plan for long-term development; and 3) projects in a contiguous area that may be unrelated but still under the same contract, such as construction of a building extension and a new parking lot at the same facility. Page 40 of 46 If the project is part of a common plan of development or sale, the disturbed area of the entire plan shall be used in determining permit requirements. Com osite Sam ixture of grab samples collected at the same sampling point at different le A m times, formed either by continuous sampling or by mixing discrete samples. May be "time - composite" (collected at constant time intervals) or "flow -proportional" (collected either as a constant sample volume at time intervals proportional to stream flow, or collected by increasing the volume of each aliquot as the flow increases while maintaining a constant time interval between the aliquots. Construction Activitv means land disturbing operations including clearing, grading or excavation which disturbs the surface of the land. Such activities may include road construction, construction of residential houses, office buildings, or industrial buildings, and demolition activity - Demonstrably Equivalent means that the technical basis for the selection of all stormwater BMPs is documented within a SWPPP, including: 1. The method and reasons for choosing .the stormwater BMPs selected; 2. The pollutant removal performance expected from the BMPs selected; 3. The technical basis supporting the performance claims for the BMPs selected, including any available data concerning field performance of the BMPs selected; 4. An assessment of how the selected BMPs will comply with state water quality standards; and 5. An assessment of how the selected BMPs will satisfy both applicable federal technology -based treatment requirements and state requirements to use all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control, and treatment (AKART). Department means the Washington State Department of Ecology. Detention means the temporary storage of stormwater to improve quality and/or to reduce the mass flow rate of discharge. De -watering means the act of pumping ground water or stormwater away from an active construction site. Director means the Director of the Washington Department of Ecology or his/her authorized representative. Dischar er means an owner or operator of any facility or activity subject to regulation under Chapter 90.45 RCW or the Federal Clean Water Act. Domestic Wastewater means water carrying human wastes, including kitchen, bath, and laundry wastes from residences, buildings, industrial establishments, or other places, together with such ground water infiltration or surface waters as may be present. Page 41 of 46 Engineered soils The use of soil amendments including, but not limited, to Portland -cement treated base (CTB), cement kiln dust (CKD), or fly ash to achieve certain desirable soil characteristics. Equivalent BMPs means operational, source control, treatment, or innovative BMPs which result in equal or better quality of stormwater discharge to surface water or to ground water than BMPs selected from the SWMM. Erosion means the wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geological agents, including such processes as gravitational creep. Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs means BMPs that are intended to prevent erosion and sedimentation, such as preserving natural vegetation, seeding, mulching and matting, plastic covering, filter fences, sediment traps, and ponds. Erosion and sediment control BMPs are synonymous with stabilization and structural BMPs. Final Stabilization (same as fully stabilized or full stabilization) means the establishment of a permanent vegetative cover, or equivalent permanent stabilization measures (such as riprap, gabions or geotextiles) which prevents erosion. Ground Water means water in a saturated zone or stratum beneath the land surface or a surface water body. Infection well means a "well" that is used for the subsurface emplacement of fluids. (see Well) Jurisdiction means a political unit such as a city, town or county; incorporated for local self- government. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) means the national program for issuing, modifying, revoking and reissuing, terminating, monitoring, and enforcing permits, and imposing and enforcing pretreatment requirements, under sections 307, 402, 318, and 405 of the Federal Clean Water Act, for the discharge of pollutants to surface waters of the state from point sources. These permits are referred to as NPDES permits and, in Washington State, are administered by the Washington Department of Ecology. Notice oflntent (NOI) means the application for, or a request for coverage under this general permit pursuant to WAC 173-226-200. Notice of Termination (NOT) means a request for termination of coverage under this general permit as specified by Special Condition S10 of this permit. O� means any party associated with a construction project that meets either of the following two criteria. 1. The party has operational control over construction plans and specifications, including the ability to make modifications to those plans and specifications; or Page 42 of 46 2. The party has day-to-day operational control of those activities at a project which are necessary to ensure compliance with a SWPPP for the site or other permit conditions (e.g., they are authorized to direct workers at a site to carry out activities required by the SWPPP or comply with other permit conditions). 4utfall means the location where stormwater leaves the site. It also includes the location where stormwater is discharged to a surface waterbody within a site, but does not include discharges to on -site stormwater treatment/infiltration devices or storm sewer systems. Permittee means individual or entity that receives notice of coverage under this general permit. pH means a liquid's acidity or alkalinity. A pH of 7 is defined as neutral. Large variations above or below this value are considered harmful to most aquatic life. pH Monitoriqg Period means the time period in which the pH of stormwater runoff from a site shall be tested a minimum of once every seven days to determine if stormwater is above pH $.5. Point Source means any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, and container from which pollutants are or may be discharged to surface waters of the state. This term does not include return flows from irrigated agriculture. (See Fact Sheet for further explanation.) Pollutant means dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash, sewage, garbage, domestic sewage sludge (biosolids), munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, -, radioactive materials, heat, wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste. This term does not include sewage from vessels within the meaning of section 312 of the CWA, nor does it include dredged or fill material discharged in accordance with a permit issued under section 404 of the CWA. Pollution means contamination or other alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological properties of waters of the state; including change in temperature, taste, color, turbidity, or odor of the waters; or such discharge of any liquid, gaseous, solid, radioactive or other substance into any waters of the state as will or is likely to create a nuisance or render such waters harmful, detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety or welfare; or to domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, or other legitimate beneficial uses; or to livestock, wild animals, birds, fish or other aquatic life. Receiving Water means the waterbody at the point of discharge. If the discharge is to a storm sewer system, either surface or subsurface, the receiving water is the waterbody that the storm sewer system discharges to. Systems designed primarily for other purposes such as for ground water drainage, redirecting stream natural flows, or for conveyance of irrigation water/return flows that coincidentally convey stormwater are considered the receiving water. Representative means a stormwater or wastewater sample which represents the flow and characteristics of the discharge. Representative samples may be a grab sample, a time - proportionate composite sample, or a flow proportionate sample. Ecology's Construction Stormwater Monitoring Manual provides guidance on representative sampling. Page 43 of 46 Sanitary Sewer means a sewer which is designed to convey domestic wastewater. Sediment means the fragmented material that originates from the weathering and erosion of rocks or unconsolidated deposits, and is transported by, suspended in, or deposited by water. Sedimentation means the depositing or formation of sediment. Sensitive area means a waterbody, wetland, stream, aquifer recharge area, or channel migration zone. SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) means the Washington State Law, RCW 43.21 C.020, intended to prevent or eliminate damage to the environment. Signif cant Amount means an amount of a pollutant in a discharge that is amenable to available and reasonable methods of prevention or treatment; or an amount of a pollutant that has a reasonable potential to cause a violation of surface or ground water quality or sediment management standards. Si ni zcant Concrete Work means greater than 1000 cubic yards poured concrete or recycled concrete. Significant Contributor of Pollutants means a facility determined by Ecology to be a contributor of a significant amount(s) of a pollutant(s) to waters of the state of Washington. Site means the land or water area where any "facility or activity" is physically located or conducted. Source Control BMPs means physical, structural or mechanical devices or facilities that are intended to prevent pollutants from entering stormwater. A few examples of source control BMPs are erosion control practices, maintenance of stormwater facilities, constructing roofs over storage and working areas, and directing wash water and similar discharges to the sanitary sewer or a dead end sump. Stabilization means the application of appropriate BMPs to prevent the erosion of soils, such as, temporary and permanent seeding, vegetative covers, mulching and matting, plastic covering and sodding. See also the definition of Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs. Storm Drain means any drain which drains directly into a storm sewer system, usually found along roadways or in parking lots. Storm Sewer System means a means a conveyance, or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater. This does not include systems which are part of a combined sewer or Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) as defined at 40 CFR 122.2. Page 44 of 46 Stormwater means that portion of precipitation that does not naturally percolate into -the ground or evaporate, but flows via overland flow, interflow, pipes, and other features of a stormwater drainage system into a defined surface water body, or a constructed infiltration facility. Stormwater Management Manual (SLYMM or Manual means the technical manual published by Ecology for use by local governments that contain descriptions of and design criteria for BMPs to prevent, control, or treat pollutants in stormwater. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP means a documented plan to implement measures to identify, prevent, and control the contamination of point source discharges of stormwater. Surface Waters of the State includes lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and water courses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington. Total Maximum Daily Load ffA LJ means a calculation of the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can receive and still meet state water quality standards. Percentages of the total maximum daily load are allocated to the various pollutant sources. A TMDL is the sum of the allowable loads of a single pollutant from all contributing point and nonpoint sources. The TMDL calculations shall include a "margin of safety" to ensure that the waterbody can be protected in case there are unforeseen events or unknown sources of the pollutant. The calculation shall also account for seasonable variation in water quality. Treatment BMPs means BMPs that are intended to remove pollutants from stormwater. A few examples of treatment BMPs are detention ponds, oil/water separators, biofiltration, and constructed wetlands. Transparency means a measurement of water clarity in centimeters (cm), using a 60 cm. transparency tube. The transparency tube is used to estimate the relative clarity or transparency of water by noting the depth at which a black and white Secchi disc becomes visible when water is released from a value in the bottom of the tube. A transparency tube is sometimes referred to . as a "turbidity tube". Turbidi The clarity of water expressed as nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) and measured with a calibrated turbidimeter. Waste Load Allocation f U) means the portion of a receiving water's loading capacity that is allocated to one of its existing or future point sources of pollution. WLAs constitute a type of water quality based effluent limitation (40 CFR 130.2(h)). WaterQual W means the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water, usually with respect to its suitability for a particular purpose. Waters of the State includes those waters as defined as "waters of the United States" in 40 CFR Subpart 122.2 within the geographic boundaries of Washington State and "waters of the state" as Page 45 of 46 defined in Chapter 90.48 RCW which include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and water courses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington. Well means a bored, drilled or driven shaft, or dug hole whose depth is greater than the largest surface dimension. (see Injection Well) Page 46 of 46 APPENDIX B — ACRONYMS - AKART All Known, Available, and Reasonable Methods of Prevention, Control, and Treatment BMP Best Management Practice CESCL Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead CFR Code of Federal Regulations CKD Cement Kiln Dust cm Centimeters CTB Cement Treated Base CWA Clean Water Act DMR Discharge Monitoring Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESC Erosion and Sediment Control NOI Notice of intent NOT Notice of Termination NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit RCW Revised Code of Washington SEPA State Environmental Policy Act SWMM Stormwater Management Manual SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load UIC Underground Injection Control USC United States Code USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency WAC Washington Administrative Code WQ Water Quality WWHM Western Washington Hydrology Model I Attachment F Notice of Intent Application Form NOTICE OF INTENT (NO[) APPLICATION PORI�I [e ris�ia��on T I oeri�ti�1 x C 0 L 0 G t` Construction Storlrwater General Permit Please print or type legibly all swtloas of this appllcatlon. Check if applicable: Ghan*lJpdate Permit Information ❑ Modification of Permit Coverage Permit #WAR 1. OperatorlPerrnittee 11, Site Owner Operator: Person who has operational control aver plans and specifications andlor has day -today (lf different than Operator/Permittee) operational control of activities which ensure compliance with permit conditions. Name Name Mike Kempolanen Ray Colliver Company Company Bayley Construction Port Quendall Company c/o Football Northwest LLG Unified Business Identifier (UBI) Unified Business Identifier (UBI) 501 772 B79 601 660 705 individuals wlthaut a U81, Enter crone or non-appikipble. Ind iMuals without a U81, enter. none or non-appliaable. Mailing Address Mailing Address 8005 SE 2e Street 505 Fft Avenue, Suite 900 PC] Box (Optional) r PO Box (Option4 9D04 City State Ip City State Zip Mercer Island WA 98040 Beattie WA 9B104 Phone No. Business 206-621-BB84 Ext. Phone No. Business 206-342 2000 Ext Cell Call E-mail (Optional) E-mail (Optional) Fax No. (Optional) Fax No. (Optional) 11 On -site Contact Person IV. Billing Information Same as Certified Erosion & Sediment Control Lead Name Name John Weller Dan Suver Title Tide Pro'ect Superintendent Construction Manager Company Company Bayiey Construcidon Bak Construction Mailing Address Maiking Address 8005 SE 28'4 Street B005 S.E_ 28' Street PO Sox (Optional) PO Box (Optional) M4 P.O. Box 9004 City State Zip city State Zip Mercer Island WA 98040 Mercer Island WA 98040-9D04 Phone No. Business 2D6•621-8884 Ext. Phone No. Business 206-342-2397 Ext. Cell Cell E-mail (Optional) E-mail (Optional) Fax No. (Option Q Fax No. O tionai ECY 02M5 (rev I WO) Page 11 V. Site Location lit. Site Information SitelProject Name Saahawks Headquarters and Training Facifl Total size of siW.19.5 acres Total area of soil disturbance i9 acres (Enterthe Streat Address or Location Description (If the project or Jacks a street address, Jn the general location of site (e.g.,WaIn f Highways of of Highways 6f and 34)) estimated total area to be dis@rrlred durkrg the life of the 15 glop Blvd 5g95 Lake INashington Blvd N Including rubbing, excavation, grading, utJrties and proms � g intrastructure installation. Nate: f acre = 43,560 112 Type of project (Road, utilities, subdivision, private commercial, etc.) home, piling Hovel man cubic yards of concrete Wil be poured? 7.54D da y y y fbr Site capping far environmental protection How many cubic yards of_recycled concrete will be used? N it [-low many cubic yards of engineered soils (CTI3, CKD, etc.) will be used? 33,DOD yds City (or nearest city) Zip Estimated project start-up date: November 3, 2DD8 Renton 98M County King County Estimated project completion date: June 20DO Record the latitude and longltude of the site, ` Reoorrl the latitude and longituda of main entrance to pile S#a. For projects without a main entrance fplpefines, roads, eta), record approximate center of s#a. degrees, minutes, seconds degrees, minutes, seconds Latitude 47' 32' - 1 V N Longitude 1220 11' 46' W *For assisleave with latitude and longitude refer to. http.11cfpubi.epa.govinpdWstomrwaterlladong.cfm or ueww.iDpozon6.corn orhtfpVAvww.ape.govAVreport/slitng..foolrindex.hfm. VII. DfscharnelReceiving Water Information Discharga: Does your constrxdon ske"s storm watar•discharge to: X A. stormwater Infittra5on structure with discharge to groundwater? (e.g., ir►fsltratlon pond, dry well, regional detention basin, eta.) Infiltretlan will be Incidents) during oollectlon ofstormwaterfor discharge to sanitary sewer ❑irectly or indirectly to a surface water body/water bodies (e-g., via stnrrn drain system?, roadside ditch, pipe, etc.)? Provide locations below or attach separate sheet, ii necessary. Does your project Include dewater ng? ❑ Yes X No Dewaterh'rg plena and discharge kx ations must be included in the Stonnivater Pollutlon Prevention Plan. Some large constrLiaffon projects (subdfWainns, roads, pipellnes, etv.) may discharge to several water bodies. If the map does not provide a name of a crask or tributary, use a format such as 'unnamed tributary to Bud Run Creek. Please Wicate Me name of the mcelviog water body. (Attach a separate lrsf for multiple wafer bodies.) Are any of the water bodies designated as water quality Impairedr (i.e., is the water body 303(d) listed or have a iMDL for fu_ rbll, fine sedi rent, phosphorus or per?. ❑ Yes X No *For information on impaired water bodies, http.lAovww.ec)i,wa.goy42Mgramstc>rniwaterlConstmcffonlaon,st ma s.htrrl ECY 420-55 freu 1=5) Page 2 Location of Discharge to Receiving Water Enter the water body name, latitudellongitude* of the points) where the site discharges to the receiving water body (enter a ll looatipns). Latitude Longitude RecstAng Water Body degrees, minutes, seconds degrees, minutes, seconds o N * w e t3 a W N W Forassisfarics with latitude and longlfude refer to: http:llcfpub7.epa govinpdes/sformwater!latlong.efm (or w► w.topozone.corn) orhttp:,t vww,epa.govlt;Vreportlshing_toolffndex.htm Vila. Storrawater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP Hasa SWPPP been developed that Includes a narrative and drawings? ❑ Yes X No if No, the swppp m us>` be cnrnpleted prior to start of construction. IX. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) $EPA requimrments must be complied with prior to submittal of the stormwater permit application. If exempt, provide documentation thatJusfifies SEPA exemption. Has SEPA been complied \0th? X Yes ❑ No ❑ Exempt Date of SEPA compliance April 5, 200O X. Public Notice The public notice must be published at least once each week for two oDnsecutfve weeks, in a single newspaper of general circulation in the county in which the construction is to take place. See the NOI Instructions for the public notice language requirements. Permit coverage will not be granted sooner than 31 days after the dale of the second public notice - Note: Submit the NO[ and public notice to Ecology before the date of the first public notice. You may fax the N01 and publlo notice to (360) 407-6426- You can also attach a copy of the public notice to this form. Provide the exec dates (mmiddlyy) that the first and second public notices will appear in the newspaper. Date of the first notice 0912572005 Date of second notice 1 OM2006 Name of the newspaper thatwill run the public notices: icing County Journal Ecology does not require the submkYal of the affidavit or pubilcation. Complete the above public notice information or provide a copy of the notice to be published. ECY 020-o"5 (rev IV05) Page 3 PUBLIC NOTICE TEMPLATE (Name of operatorlpermittee) (Address of owner or % represantative) is seeking coverage under the Washington Department of Ecology's. NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. The proposed (total acres) project,_ known as (project name) is located at (street address, intersection, crossroads, or other descriptive site location) in (name of nearest city). Approximately (number of disturbed acres) will be disturbed for construction of (project type). (List all construction activity, e.g., clearing, grading, stockpiling (approx yd'. and location), importinglexporting materiais (yds), demolition, grading, stormwater facilities, roads, utilities, number buildingslhomes and type, sidewalks, landscaping,) Stormwater will be (Brief description of how the sfomawater will be cleaned and controlled) prior to discharging (Deseribe the direction of the storm►+vater flows; include distance to receiving waters. List wetlands, unnamed and named receiving waters and storm drains; clearly identify buffer location and widths used to protect sensitive water bodies.) Any persons desiring to present their views to the Department of Ecology concerning this application may notify Ecology in writing within 30 days from the last date of pub[ication of this notice. Comments may be submitted to: Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Stormwater Unit - Construction PO Box 47696 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Xi. Certification of Permittees "I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under -my direction or r supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted B ed on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those directly responsible for gathering the formation, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and co la ete. am ware that there are sign loam penalties for submitting false information, including the possib f f n ad imprisonment for knowing violations. " Printed Vim President of Esiimsting Title October 4.2006 Date " Federal regulatidfis require this application to be signed as follows: A. For a corporation, by a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice president; . B. For a partnership or sole proprietorship, by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively; or C. For a municipality, state, federal, or other public facility, by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. Please sign and return this document to the following address: Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Construction Stormwater Unit PO Box 47696 Olympla, WA 98504-7696 If you have any questions, please call: o (360) 407-7451 Charles Gilman for city of Seattle or counties: Kitsap, Pierce, Thurston o (360) 407-7229 Tarnmie McClure for counties: Xing Island, San Juan a (380) 407-6437 Linda Matlock for counties: Whatcom, Skagit Snohomish, Ferri; Stevens, Pend Oreille, Lincoln, Spokane, Grant, Adams, Whitman, Franklin, Walla Walla, Columbia, Garfield, Asotin o (360) 407-6858 Joyce SmM for countles: Okanogan, Chelan, Douglas, Kittrtas, Yakima, Benton, Kikkitat, Skamania, Clark, Cowlitz, Wahkiskum, Lewis, Pacific, Grays Harbor, Mason, Jefferson, Clallam if you require this document in on aJternadve fomrat please conlad fha Watar QuatiTy Program at (380)-407-6401. ff you area person Alma spasch or hearing impeimnant call 711 for relay service or 1-600-833-6388 tar T3Y. Ecology is an Equal Opporfunity Agency. ECY 42"5 (rev 12105) Page 4 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE •J.H. Baxter South Property Proposed Cleanup Action Flan Description of proposal: The proposed cleanup action will be conducted under the Model Toxies Control Act (MICA) Chapter 173-340 WAC with a Prospective Purchaser Agreement Consent Decree, between Port Quendall Company (PQC), the prospective purchaser, and Ecology, The Consent Decree is the legal agreement to conduct the cleanup and will resolve the potential liability of PQC for known contamination at the South Baxter Site. The cleanup includes the following: + DNAPL removal from source areas prior to soil stabilization (BAX-14); + In -situ soil stabilization of NAPL-impacted soil near the butt tanks and Baxter Lagoon based on an action level of 1,000 to 5,000 mg/kc, TPAH to remove a long- term source of groundwater impacts; + Excavation of LNAPL-impacted soil near (lie former lank faun based on an action level of 1,000 to 5,000 mg/kg TPAH followed by thermal treatment or off -site disposal of soil to provide a reduction in contaminant volume and to remove a long- term source of groundwater impacts; + Removal and incineration of Listed Hazardous Wastes from Baxter Lagoon; + Capping of residual soil impacts to prevent direct contact by humans and institutional controls to ensure cap integrity into the future; + Removal and thennal treatment or off site disposal of impacted sediment above the action level of 100 mg/kg TPAH from Baxter Cove to prevent exposure of aquatic organisms; # Dredging of the Gray Zone if bioassay testing indicates remedial action is required; + Restoration and enhancement of wetlands and shoreline; + Monitoring of groundwater and implementation of a compliance monitoring program to ensure that groundwater discharging to Lake Washington is protective; and + Implementation of institutional controls to prevent future groundwater extraction. Miti¢ation is also included for this cleanup as follows: Wildlife habitat will be expanded and enhanced in a 50-foot buffer zone along the shoreline, in which plants and habitat features will be placed. The wetlands impacts (Baxter Cove and Baxter Lagoon) will be mitigated by replacement at a t to 1.5 ratio (removed to restored). In addition to restoring Baxter Cove, an additional wetlands area north of (lie cove will be constructed. A 100- SEPA— MitigatedDetermination ofNon-Significance (DNS) J.H. Bawer South ProperryProposed Cleanup Action Plnn April 5, 2000 • Page 2 of 2 foot buffer zone will be placed along the shoreline south of Baxter Cove. In addition, in -water Work will be performed at a time during the year to mininuze impacts to migrating species. Proponent: Port QuendalI Company Location of proposal, including „street address, if any: J. H. Baxter South Property, 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, Washington. Lead agency: Washington State Department of Ecology. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43-21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. _ This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. X This DNS is issued under WAC 197-1 I-340(2), the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 30 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by May 8, 2000, F,esponsi le official: Gail Colbum. Position/title phone: Site Manager, Toxics Cleanup Program (425) 649-7058. Address: Washington Department of Ecology, 3190 - 160i4 Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2000. Signature, Send comments on the Cleanup Action to Gail Colbum, Site Manager, Washington Department of Ecology, 3190 - 160" Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. For more Information, contact Susan Lee, Public Involvement Specialist, Washington Department of Ecology, 3190 - 160" Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. This information is available for special accommodation needs or language translation assistance, call 425-649-7259 (voice) or 425-649-4259 (TDD). DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE J.H. Baxter North Property Proposed Cleanup Action Plan Description of proposal: The proposed elcanup action will be conducted under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA.) Chapter 173-340 WAC with a Prospective Purchaser Agreement Consent Decree between Part Quendall Company (PQC), the prospective purchaser, and Ecology. The Consent Decree is the legal agreement to conduct the cleanup and will resolve the potential liability of PQC for known contamination at the North Baxter Site. The cleanup includes capping residual soil impacts with a three-foot crushed rock/soil cover or development features to prevent direct contact with soil exceeding MICA Method B cleanup levels for direct contact. Institutional controls, including a restrictive covenant, will be implemented to ensure cap integrity and provide for periodic inspection and maintenance of the cap. Proponent: Port Quendall Company Location of proposal, including street address. ,if any: J. 11. Baxter North Property, 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, Washington. Lead aFencv: Washington State Department of Ecology. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DIMS. _ This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355_ There is no further comment period on the DNS. X This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will notact on this proposal for 30 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by May 8, 2000. Responsible ofl'tcial: Gail Colburn. Position/title phone: Site Manager, Toxics Cleanup Program (425) 649-705$. Address: Washington Department of Ecology, 3190 - 160°r Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. SEPA— Dalerminalion of Non -Significance (DNS) J.H. Baxter North Property Proposed Cleanup Action Plan April 5, 2000 Page 2of2 Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2000. � Signature: Send comments on the Cleanup Action to Gail Colbum, Site Manager, Washington Deparhvlent of Ecology, 3190 - 160" Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. For more information, contact Susan Lee, Public Involvement Specialist, Washington Department of Ecology, 3190 - 1 G0" Avenue S.E:, Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452. This information i-s available for special accommodation needs or language translation assistanee, call 425-649-7259 (voice) or 425-649-4259 (TDD). Bayley Construction at 8005 SE 28 h St, Mercer Island, Washington 98040 is seeking coverage under the Washington Department of Ecology's NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities. The proposed 20-acre project, known as Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North in Renton. Approximately 19 acres will be disturbed for site capping for environmental protection as required under Consent Decrees with the Department of Ecology. Construction activities will consist of: 1) demolition of a building and some asphalt pavement; 2) site clearing and grading; 3) importing of 44,000 yd3 of clean soil; 4) exporting 24,000 yd3 of unsuitable soil and woodwaste material; 5) geotechnical improvements using drilled -shaft pilings and cement treated soil; 6) construction of natural and artificial turf fields; 7) placement of asphalt parking areas; 8) installation of a structural concrete slab; and 9) utility installation. Stormwater will be collected in a basin or temporary storage tanks for settling and testing, as necessary, prior to discharging to the sanitary sewer. Any discharge to surface or ground water would be incidental to stormwater collection. Storm water flow is generally toward the adjacent Lake Washington. Environmental capping of contaminated soil is required to within 25 feet of the Lake. A wetland mitigation area is present on the site and an unnamed drainage of the Gypsy subbasin crosses the site but does not collect stormwater from the site. A new culvert for this drainage is proposed to be installed as part of this project. Riparian plantings for habitat enhancement will be added to the Lake Washington shoreline. Any persons desiring to present their views to the Department of Ecology concerning this application may notify Ecology in writing within 30 days from the last date of publication of this notice. Comments may be submitted to: Washington Department of Ecology Water Quality Program Stormwater Unit — Construction PO Box 47696 Olympia, WA 98504-7696 Appendix D City of Renton Substantive Requirement Letter JUN-13-2W2 17:31 CITY OF RENTON 425 430 7300 P.02/02 41R CXT'V OF R ENTON P14n1iA9'Suildin&ublic'Works Department 3csse TanRar, Ma nr Gregg Timmerman P.E., A ndnistrater May 30, 2002 Ms. Gail CoIbum Washington Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office 3190 1600' Ave, SE . Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 SIMSECT; BAXTER CLEAN-UP AMON PLAN— CITY OF 1R.ENTON SUBSTANIM iREQtMMMENTS Dear Ms: Colbum; We have reviewed the-Fngft=ing Design Report far the J.H. Baxter South Property, prepared by RETEC Group, Inc: (May 28, 2002) for remediation of site contamination. The eleamp action is being accomplished under the Modgl Tokics Control Act, and as such, Washington Department of Ecology preempts local permit -authority. However, per RCW 70,105D.090 the remedial action must comply with the submlantivc provisions of any laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or. approvals. The proposal to renmliate contwnination on,the-l3axterpropetty meets substantive permit requirements of the City of Renton including Shoreline.SUbstantW Development Permit (RMC 4-9-190), Special Permit for ode and Fill {,Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-06b), Routine Vegetation Mmagement Permit (Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC 4-4-130). The City has been kept apprised of the status of the design of the cl=nW action, proposed mitigation and enhancement; and we -have comwentcd as necessary during the collaborative process. Should you have any questions mgmdh*'this oorrespondence, please contact Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner, at (425) 4307286.. - Sincerely, Neil Watts, Director Development Services Division ec: Jc mifdt He Tobs Chuck ►Volk. Poser Pepper, & Shetelmdn l 0S South red +Way + RENTON Renton, Washngton 98055 - TfITAI P. 90 Jl1N-13-2002 17:31 CITY OF RFNTON 425 430 7300 P.01/02 ON of Renton + P1B/PW Department ♦ ♦ Development Services Division 1055 South Grady �Q Renton, WA 98055Way TO. Chuck Wolfe Foster Pepper & Shefelman Phone: (200) 447-2901 Fax Phone: (206) 749-2035 Date: 08i13/02 FROM: Jennifer Henning Phone. (425) 430-7286 Fax Phone: (425) 430-7300 SUBJECT: Baxter Letter to DOE Number of pages Including cover shoat 2 REMARKS: ❑ On'ginal to ❑ urgent ❑ Repty ❑ Please [ For your be maded ASAP Comment review R-ENTO Amulu) op THIS CURVE Appendix E Wetland Documents Wetland Mitigation Plan Drawings (AESI, July 2001) J. H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI, February 17, 2000) MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM UENDALL AND BARTER PROPERTIES CORPORATE OFFICE 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 1425) 827-7701 FAX 1425) 827-5424 BAINUIDGE MAND OFFICE 179 Madrane lane 11" Boin"ge Island, WA 98110 {206] 780.9370 FAX (2061780.9438 RENTON, WASHINGTON PREPARED FOR Vulcan Northwest City of Renton PROJECT NO. KB99142A .February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED IAW &I, EARTH SCIENCES, INC PORT QULNDALL MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM Prepared for: Vulcan Northwest 110 110'h Avenue NE, Fifth Floor Bellevue, WA 98004 and The City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, WA 99055 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 Fifth Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 February 17, 2000 Project No. KB99142A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum TABLE OF CONTENTS Pw.e 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......... ..................................................................................................... _.. 1 1.1 Objectives..........................................................................................1 1.2 Disclaimer............................................................................................1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED RESOURCES.................................................................... 2 2.1 Water Quality... .............. ......... ....................................... .................. 2 2.1.1 South Lake Washington..................................................................2 2.1.2 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage,...............................................................9 2.2 Plants and Animals.............................................................................. 12 2.3 Fisheries Affected Environment.. .......................................................... 16 2.3.1 Introduction...............................................................................16 2.3.2 Lake Washington Biology ...... ....................................................... 17 PelagicSpecies .......................................................................... 17 BenthicSpecies................................................................ • .. • ......... 21 2.3.3 Lake Washington Shoreline.......................................................... 21 SurveyMethodology...................................................................... 21 On -Site Habitat and Valuation........................................................... 21 Off -Site Habitat...................................................................... . . . ... 27 2.3.4 Lake Washington Open Water ........................................................ 29 Benthic...................................................................................... 29 WaterColumn.............................................................................. 30 Surface.................................................................... ................... 30 2.3.5 Habitat Valuation........................................................................ 30 2.4 Recreational.......................................................................................31 2.5 Cultural............................................................................................31 2.6 Economic..........................................................................................31 3.0 IMPACTS.............................................................................................................................. 32 3.1 Plants and Animals.............................................................................. 32 3.1.1 Disturbance to Shoreline............................................................... 32 3.1.2 Dredge Offshore Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) ................... 32 3.1.3 In -Water One -Foot Sediment Cap .................................................... 37 3.1.4 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips........... 37 3.1.5 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping ................................................ 37 3.2 Fisheries Impacts............................................................................... 37 3.2.1 Shoreline Disturbance.................................................................. 37 3.2.2 Dredge Offshore(PAH)................................................................ 38 3.2.3 Dredge Offshore (Wood Chips).......................................................38 3.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping ................................................ 40 4.0 MITIGATION........................................................................................................................41 4.1 Plants and Animals.............................................................................. 43 4.1.1 Disturbance to Quendall Shoreline and Loss of Wetland C...................... 43 4.1.2 Excavation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E) and Loss of Wetland D............... 49 February 1 Z 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. AC IVU - KMI42A57 - LD-D: NAI2-00 - W2K Page i Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.1.3 Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips........... 49 4.1.4 Dredge Offshore PAH Areas.......................................................... 50 4.1.5 Upland Soil and Excavation and Capping ........................................... 50 4.2 Fisheries Mitigation............................................................................. 50 4.2.1 In -Water Work Timing.................................................................. 50 4.22 Shoreline Disturbance..................................................... . ......... 51 4.2.3 Dredge Offshore (PAH and Wood Chips) .......................................... 51 4.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping ................................................ 51 4.3 Water Quality........................................................... .................. ........ 53 4.4 Mitigation Implementation Schedule......................................................... 53 4.4.1 Baxter Property........................................................................... 53 4.4.2 Quendall Property., ....... _ ....................................................... 53 4.5 Monitoring and Contingency................................................................... 55 4.5.1 Performance Standards ............................................................... 55 4.5.2 Maintenance............................................................................... 56 4.5.3 Monitoring................................................................................. 56 4.5.4 Monitoring Schedule.................................:................................... 57 4.5.5 Monitoring Reporting.................................................................. 57 4.5.6 Contingency Plans....................................................................... 58 5.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 59 LISTOF FIGURES ......... .................................................................................. I............................ ii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 2-1. Metro Water Quality Sampling Stations in Lake Washington ............................... 3 Figure 2-2. Wetlands and Shoreline Vegetation...................................................................... 13 Figure 2-3. Aerial Overview of Port Quendall Remediation Site ........................................... 14 Figure 24. 1994 beach seining results at Kennydale Park ............................. Figure 2-5. Wetlands and Shoreline Structure......................................................................... 24 Figure 2-6. Wetlands and Shoreline Substrate and Depth...... ................................................. 25 Figure 2-7. Lake Washington Shoreline Composition along a 14-Mile Reach of Lakeshore on Both Sides of Quendall and Baxter in September 1995.............................................................. 28 Figure 3-1. Wetlands and Shoreline Vegetation with Remediation Overlay .......................... 34 Figure 3-2. Wetlands and Shoreline Structure with Remediation Overlay ............................. 35 Figure 3-3. Wetlands and Shoreline Substrate and Depth with Remediation Overlay ........... 36 Figure 4-1. Conceptual Shoreline and Wetland Mitigation Plan......................................... 42 Figure 4-2. Shoreline Enhancement Concept (shrub -dominated cross-section) ..................... 46 Figure 4-3. Shoreline Enhancement Concept (tree -dominated cross-section) ........................ 47 Figure 4-4. Conceptual Wetland Design for Lake Washington Shoreline .............................. 48 LIST OF TABLES P.� February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. AWhJtd.K899142A37-LAD:Wd12-M-w2K Page ii Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-1. Nearshore Lake Washington Total Metals Concentrations for a Water Sample Collected South of the Gypsy Subbasin Culvert Outfall on the Baxter Parcel ............................................ 4 Table 2-2. Lake Washington Surface Water Quality near the Port Quendall Property........................................................................................... 5 Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected nearthe May Creek Mouth..................................................................................... 6 Table 2-4. Water Quality Measured in the Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Outfall to Lake Washington.................................................................. 10 Table 2-5. Results of Metals Screen for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage at the Culvert Outlet to Lake Washington ............................................. 11 Table 2-6. Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Port Quendall Remediation Actions............................................................ ..... 15 Table 2-7. Fish Species in Lake Washington......................................................................... 19 Table 2-8. Benthic Biota Present in Lake Washington.......................................................... 22 Table 2-9. Lake Washington shoreline characteristics for the Quendall and Baxter Properties............................................................................ 26 Table 2-10. Comparison of Shoreline Conditions within the Remediation Area and the Surrounding Shoreline ............................................... 27 Table 2-11. Comparison of Overwater Pier Coverage within the Remediation Area (1997) and. the Surrounding Shoreline (1989)........................ 28 Table 3-1. Shoreline Vegetation Disturbance Resulting from Upland Excavation and/or Capping...................................................................... 32 Table 3-2. Impacts to Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Quendall and Baxter Remediation Actions (Refer to Figure 3-1) ........................ 33 Table 3-3. Valuation of Physical Shoreline Characteristics as Fish Habitat. and Mitigated Condition Following Remediation (3,130 feet surveyed April 11, 1997).................................................................. - 39 Table 4-1. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers............................................................................. 45 Table 4-2. Mitigated Lake Washington Shoreline Characteristics (3,130 ft. surveyed April 11 1997)........................................................................ 52 Table 4-3. Mitigation of Short -Term Impacts Related to Site Cleanup ................................. 54 February 17, 2OW ASSOCIATED EARTH SG7ENCES, INC. ACxilttlln - x69914V57- t n-D:W12-vo - w2x Page iii Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 1.0 INTRODUCTION I.1 Objectives Mitigation analysis has been prepared for remediation of the Quendall Terminals (Quendall) and Baxter sites under Prospective Purchases Consent Decrees as provided for under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). The remediation areas include the Quendall and Baxter properi ties, as well as areas offshore of the Quendall property. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is a landowner offshore of the Quendall and Baxter properties. Use authorization will be obtained from DNR prior to remediation activities on its property. Under a Consent Decree in conformance with MTCA (RCW 70.105D), remediation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of permits under RCW Chapters 70.94 [Air], 70.95 [Solid Waste], 70.105 [Hazardous Waste], 75.20 [Hydraulic Permit], 90.48 [Water Quality], and 90.58 [Shorelands], and the procedural requirements of 'any laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for the remedial action (RCW 70.105D.090). For the mitigation action, this would include such procedural requirements as Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issuance, and City of Renton wetland mitigation requirements and shorelands permits under the Renton zoning regulations. The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) will ensure compliance with the substantive provisions of these laws and regulations through issuance of the Consent Decrees for the Quendall and Baxter rernediation projects, and will make the final decision regarding which substantive provisions are applicable. The substantive requirements will be incorporated into the Consent Decrees as Ecology deems appropriate, or into other remedial action documents. The.Consent Decrees would provide assurance that the mitigation proposed in this document will be performed. The Consent Decrees would also require that the mitigation installation, oversight, and monitoring contractor be identified in advance to Ecology. In this document, references to City. of Renton wetland buffer requirements, buffer widths, and shoreline setbacks are made for the purpose of comparing substantive elements of the proposed remediation under MTCA with the local procedural requirements for the Quendall and Baxter properties. Resources potentially impacted by the site remediation plans are described in Section 2.0, and impacts to those resources from remediation are described in Section 3.0. Conceptual mitigation plans are provided in Section 4.0. 1.2 Disclaimer The City of Renton has an interest in the Quendall property, and Vulcan Northwest, Inc. has an interest in the Baxter property. The DNR is a landowner of record for areas offshore of both properties that would be affected by some of the proposed remediation work. The City of Renton, and Vulcan Northwest, Inc. are submitting this document with the understanding that no independent liabilities shall be assumed by any party under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) or any comparable federal or state environmental laws should any party elect not to complete purchase of the subject properties; nor shall the current owners of the Quendall or Baxter project areas be in any way obligated to undertake any mitigation approach or recommendation contained herein. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED ,EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKlMd - KM142.07- Lb O VtMW- w2K Page 1 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 2.0 - DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED RESOURCES 2.1 Water Quality Lake Washington is the largest lake in King County with. a drainage area of 472 square miles and an area of 21,500 acres. The lake has a volume of2.35 trillion acre-feet, a mean depth of 108 feet, and a maximum depth of 214 feet. The Lake Washington watershed is urban, and approximately 63 percent of its area was developed by 1989 (Metro 1989). The basin is much more urbanized today. The main inflows to the lake are the Cedar River in the south end (57 %) and the Sammamish River in the north end (27 %). The Cedar River contributes 25 percent and the Sammamish River contributes 41 percent of the phosphorus load to the lake, respectively. The lake outlet is the ship canal, which flows through Portage Bay and Lake Union to Puget Sound near Shilshole. Metro has established numerous water quality monitoring stations for nutrients and conventional parameters throughout Lake Washington (Figure 2-1). Most of the historic water quality data available for Lake Washington are from 5 nearshore stations established in Juanita Bay, Yarrow Bay, Newport, Meydenbauer Bay and Kenmore, which are all north of the remediation site. However, additional nearshore and offshore stations were added to the monitoring effort beginning in 1992, which included three near the Port Quendall remediation site. These three lake stations are located at the mouth of May Creek (stations 0839 [shallow) and 0840 [deep)), and near Renton (station 0831). Lake Washington is listed as water quality limited for sediment under the 1972 Clean Water Act (Section 303(d) Segment No. 08-9350). Six sediment bioassay studies are cited as the basis for the listing. Three of the six bioassays were conducted on sediment collected near the Port Quendall site (Norton 1991; Norton 1992; Bennett and Cubbage 1992). Lake Washington (Waterbody Segment Number WA-08-9350) is listed as impaired for wildlife habitat as a result of industrial point source pollution. Contamination of the Quendall and Baxter properties, and cleanup standards agreed under Consent Decrees for each, are not the subject of this water quality section. Conventional water quality parameters are described, mainly from existing literature, to allow evaluation of habitat suitability following remediation. 2.1.1 South Lake Washinton Beak Consultants Incorporated collected one on -site shoreline water sample on March 21, 1997 from Lake Washington approximately 200 feet south of the lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall to augment the Metro data, which lacked information on heavy metals. This sample was analyzed for metals (e.g., cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc) and hardness (Table 2-1). Cadmium and zinc exceeded the acute State water quality standards, and lead exceeded the chronic water quality standard. The exceedences were based on State standards (WAC 173-201A) for metals at the ambient hardness of 32 mg CaCO,/L. ,February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK610d - x89914Z457 - LD-D, WU-M - wsx Page 2 N Y 5 JMiS .1 s c w Larc �r . ! Union K $Y A 3; �l i; y#Isfllin - xQ 5 •S' Yob :l,Z`=(7 I V7�40 t t Lake N. r Washington p..urn Al "s: {A it y r�i� '� F�F 'r`b ��` ify']EY'h,y�/'�a�L/y+•1G/� f"•�FY+'ij�'lG v �M„ R h3 J.t n7' : `' I in � ; r U NDALLIBAXTER 3' r PROJECT SITE A lYla1`f. Creek g Cedar .diver LEGEND ;] Historic water quality stations Shallow station NORTH .. Deep station NO SCALE METRO WATER QUALITY SAMPLING. FIGURE 2-1 ASSOCIATED STATIONS IN LAKE WASHINGTON EARTH QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9124199 SCIENCES, INC REMEDIATION MITIGATION PROJECT a - - - RENTON. WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. iC699142A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-1 . Nearshore Lake Washington Total Metals Concentrations for a Water Sample Collected South of the Gypsy Subbasin Culvert Gutfall on the Baxter Parcel. Metal' Res�►It (mglL) aakeClassCnlena (WAC 173 201A)tandaa d Met? Cadmium: 0.0010 Acute 0.0009 NO Chronic 0.ONA NO Copper: 0.002 Acute 0.0052 YES Chronic 0.0038 YES Lead: 0.001 Acute 0.0132 YES Chronic 0.0005 NO Zinc: 0.054 Acute 0.0397 NO Chronic 0.0360 NO Water sample collected from Baxter parcel shoreline by Beak Consultants on March 21, 1997. Metals standards shown for hardness of 32 mg/L as CaCO3 in the sample. Metro has monitored two Lake Washington stations near the mouth of May Creek and an offshore station near Kennydale Park in Renton (Table 2-2). The sampling frequency varied, but was from approximately 1992 to the present, with samples collected bimonthly. Parameters monitored were temperature, D.Q., pH, conductivity, transparency, turbidity, alkalinity, nitrate+nitrite-nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, total nitrogen, orthophosphate, total phosphate, chlorophyll -a, phaeophytin, fecal coliform, and enterococcus. The lake water quality near the Quendall and Baxter sites can be described as moderate for a mesotrophic urban lake. The remediation actions are expected to improve sediment quality and decrease risk of exposure of aquatic organisms to contaminants originating on the two sites. Water quality for the whole lake is rated by Metro as good, except for algal blooms in periods of warm weather. Average transparency for the south lake stations was 3.8 m. Fecal coliforms were high at the May Creek nearshore station (average of 128 MPN), as was chlorophyll -a (9.6 mg/rn5 in 1996). Nutrients were low at the Kennydale Park and May Creek lake stations, with the average nitrate + nitrate nitrogen value less than 0.25 mg/L and the average orthophosphate was less than 0.010 mg/L. Transparency, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll -a trends for METRO station 0839 during water years 1992 through 1994 indicate decreased transparency, slightly increased phosphorus, and slightly decreased chlorophyll -a (Table 2-3). Chlorophyll -a peaked annually from 1992 through 1994 in April or May offshore of May Creek, which may be reflective of nutrient loading from the February 17, 2000 ASSOCMTED EARTHSCIENCES, INC. ,ICK4V&-x099142As7-cD-D.-W12-00.WK Page 4 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorartdum creek coincident with increased sunlight in the spring. Table 2-2. Lake Washington Surface Water Quality near the Port Quendall. Property. Water 'Water' Year Temp #:* p ranspareacy ** I�rblrlity A11t (r1lgjJ1,) Ente1`� lStallon ��} '{mg/L} pohms7, cmz Secchl �) {1�f1'[Jj �s CaCUj 1V1tPI� 1992- 13.68 10.43 7.86 96 4.2 1.2 36.4 10 1996 / 0831 1992- 15.55 11.1I 7.83 97 4A 1.3 36.0 54 1996 / 0839 1995I 14.24 11.34 9.29 97 3.5 0.9 38.0 l 0840 1996 / 13.72 10.23 7.79 97 3.2 1.4 36.0 10 0840 1997* / 12.44 9.40 7.54 94 3.7 0.6 38.1 19 0840 Watcr Am1t1n�ala Totalx reel Y�arTitr6elt PION J�ltratt: 4rth6P r y Taut1� ' Ghldroplx 11-a ikltar6piryt�t tihtarm` JStatrGn {��') NS n (mg/L) {tngl�) =' � r . irig/m= f t tnglm3 � W. MIPN! {mgli.) X 1992- 0.157 0,022 0,296 0,009 0A22 4.4 1.5 25 1996 / 0831 1992- 0.117 0.029 0.31 0.008 0.017 4.2 3.4 128 I996 / 0839 19951 0.190 nin 0.32 0.006 0.020 9.6 1.0 2 0840 1996 / 0.181 0.031 0.324 0.007 0.020 nln nm 25 0840 1997* / 0.226 0.021 0.289 0.008 0.017 nm ttm 52 0840 Notes: Lake Washington water quality data collected near Renton from 1992 to 1996 (Metro station t1811) Lake Washington water quality data collected from 1992 to 1995 offshore of May Creek mouth (Source Metro station 0939). Lake Washington water quality data collected near May Creek mouth (Metro station OW - Deep Lake Station). Monthly average of water quality data collected at a depth of 1 meter. run = not monitored • 1997 data inchrdt:s only October, November and December ** Feld measurement February 17, 2000 ASSOCLlTED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKOU - KB99142457 - LD-Z). WV-X - W2K Page 5 Quendall and Baxter Propenies Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Mouth. IYdte : 'Seedu Disc (i rarisparency) (ueter) o#aC Pllbsphate (mg/L) Chlorophyl[ -a (1m') May 1192 5.0 nm 21.0 May 18 92 3.4 0.011 1.5 May 26 92 4.6 nm nm June 0192 6.0 0.006 1.6 June 15 92 5.7 0.001 nm June 22 92 5.8 0.023 nm July 06 92 5.5 0.0009 2.1 July 20 92 4.4 0.010 nm Aug 03 92 4.7 0.010 0.9 Aug 10 92 4.4 0.008 nm Aug 17 92 4.1 0.017 nm Aug 24 92 4.5 0.028 run Aug 3192 4.3 0.020 nm Sep 08 92 3.6 0,029 2.9 Average: 4.7 0.014 5.0 nm = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES INC. ACKljhlU-nB"1c2A57-Lo-D:M2-oo-wzx Page 6 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. sake Washington Water Quality Data Collected near the May Creek Mouth. (Continued) Date; $ecclaV 1=: (Tran9pat'ency) (meter) 661 PhospLate (rng7L); Ghlorophyil-a (raglm3) Oct 05 92 5.0 0.014 2.5 Oct 20 92 4.2 0.015 nm Nov 02 92 6.5 0.017 1.8 Nov 17 92 4.6 0.022 2.3 Dec 01 92 4.5 0.027 2.8 Jan 04 93 6.0 0.035 3.2 Feb 01 93 3.3 0.012 2.7 Mar 0193 3.3 0.025 7.6 Mar 16 93 2.4 0.021 0.7 Apr 15 93 2.1 0.024 21.0 Apr 19 93 2.1 0.019 11.0 May 03 93 3.0 0.009 4.0 May 25 93 3.3 0.036 4.5 Jun 07 93 5.0 0.014 2.0 Jul 06 93 4.0 0.019 0.5 Aug 02 93 3.0 0.059 0.1 Sep 07 93 4.2 0.009 0.4 Average. 3.9 0.022 4.2 nm = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACX#Afd-,KB9914W7- LD-D: W12-W - W2K Page 7 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis MemoraWwn Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Month. (Continued) Dec 08 93 5.5 0,018 0.5 Jan 05 94 5.0 0.081 0.4 Feb 15 94 3.8 0.011 4.1 Mar 07 N 3.2 0.023 4.5 Mar 2194 2.5 0.020 6.1 Apr 04 94 2.8 0.045 18.0 Apr 18 94 3.0 0.012 7.7 May 02 94 3.8 0.020 6.3 May 23 94 2.7 0.017 6.9 Jun 06 94 3.5 0,013 7.7 Jul 05 94 4.0 0.018 3.6 Aug 04 94 5.0 0.031 2.0 Sep 06 94 4.5 0-017 2.0 Average: 4.1 0.023 4.8 nm = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) February 17, 2000 ASSOCfATED EARTH SCIENCES INC. Acxrnne - xs"142AR - ib-D: UA2-M - WK Page 8 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-3. Lake Washington Water Quality Data Collected Near the May Creek Mouth. (Continued) = Secchl Disc. Date (Tra�isparency} ;Tofat:Pos►haie �mglly} Chlorophyll- (ariglm�. (riielEr} Oct 03 94 6.0 0.011 2.5 Nov 02 94 5.0 0.027 2.4 Dec 05 95 4.0 0.028 2.3 Jan 2195 5.5 0.027 5:0 Average: 4.8 0.028 3.7 nm = not monitored Source: Metro Station 0839 (shallow) 2.1.2 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage No historic water quality data were available for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. The Lower Gypsy subbasin flows from the east side of 1-405 through an approximately 125-foot open channel before entering a culvert in the northern area of the project site that discharges directly to Lake Washington. Lower Gypsy subbasin water discharges via tightline directly to Lake Washington and is thus classified as Class A (extraordinary) by WAC 173-201A. This drainage is distinct from Gypsy Creek, which joins May Creek at RM 1.15. Limited water quality monitoring of the Lower Gypsy subbasin occurred on March 28, 1997 by Beak Consultants, Inc. (Table 24). The results were consistent with an urban stream and show some influence of upstream wetlands. Waters were neutral, cool, with low dissolved oxygen, high conductivity, and high total dissolved solids relative to most regional waters. Oil and grease were below detection, fecal coliforrns were moderate (41 CFU/100 mL) and hardness was moderate. Nutrients were moderately elevated: nitrate and nitrite oxygen was 1.0 mg/L and total phosphorus was .038 mg/L. All metals met the chronic toxicity standard (WAC 173-201A) adjusted for the ambient hardness (Tables 2-4 and 2-5); however, while cadmium, lead, mercury, and silver were all below detection, the detection levels for these metals were above their respective standard. Based on the limited water quality data (one sampling event), dissolved oxygen was below the Class AA standard (> 9.5 mg/L). Turbidity may not meet the standard, but compliance was not determined because of lack of baseline data. It is likely that temperature would not meet the standard (C 16°C) during the summer months due to the low elevation and the wetland component of the stream system. During some site visits, a strong sewer odor was noticed where Gypsy February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES INC ACK#tire - KBWr4xns7 • t.A-n_ W-00 - V4K Page 9 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum subbasin enters the site from the east; however, this odor was not apparent during the single monitoring event reported here. Origin of this odor is not obvious. Table 2-4. Water Quality Measured in the Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Outfall to Lake Washington. Total. osp6riu6i' Nitrogen Nitrite ' i�n N itrogicn; 0.028 1.0 0.5 0.038 0.025 41 0 me, Hardness''9':' TijrbiditjO �' U D -T S' g.: 110 5 6.3 <0.02 <0.002 0.06 74 <0,02 (dissolved) <0.002 (dissolved) 0.0105 - I (dissolved) Monitoring Date- Mardi 28. 1997 24-hour rainfall recorded at Sea-Tac was 0.10" on March 27, 1997. * See Table 2-5 for a complete listing of the metals screening analysis. February 17, 2000 ASSOCfATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK#Itl)d.XB"14Z457-LD-D.-lidl2-OD-V,7K Page 10 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-5. Results of MetalsScreen for Lower Gypsy Subbasin Drainage at the Culvert Outlet to Lake Washington P:thatiicter :; ;March28licst�)t;, Detection Limit Aluminum 0.26 0-01 Antimony <0.02 0.02 Arsenic <0"03 0.03 Boron <0.1 0.1 Barium 0.015 0.ow Beryllium <0.005 0.005 Calcium 18.0 0.1 Cadmium < 0.002 0.002 Cobalt < 0.003 0"003 Chromium <0.006 0.006 Copper <0,002 0.002 Iron 1.6 0.01 Mercury < o_ 01 0.01 Potassium 2.2 1.0 Lithium < 0.02 0.02 Magnesium 7.2 0.1 Manganese 0.320 0.002 Molybdenum <0.01 0.01 Sodium 8.9 0.1 Nickel <0"01 0.01 Phosphorus 0.08 0.05 Lead <0.02 0.02 Sulfur 3.3 0.1 Selenium <0.03 0.03 Silicon 1.0 0.10 Silver <&01 0.01 Tin 0.02 0.02 Strontium 0.120 0-003 Titanium <0.01 0.01 Thallium <0.03 0.03 Vanadium <0.002 0.002 Yttrium <0.001 0.001 Zinc 0.060 0.002 Samples collected on March 29, 1997, Lower Gypsy Creek subhasin outfall at Lake Washington. Note: Total metals. All values are in mg/L. EPA Method 200.7. Italics indicate results which exceed or may exceed the WAC 173-201A surface water standard (chronic); the ambiguity occurs when the standard is lower than the detection limit and the result is below detection. Sold italics indicate a result which may exceed the acute standard (silver). February 17. 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACxrh4d-KB991,fW7-12)-D: M2-W- w2K Page 11 Quendall and Baiter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 2.2 Plants and Animals The Port Quendall and Baxter parcels are sparsely vegetated. Five wetland areas were delineated within the Quendall/Baxter remediation area (David Evans and Associates 1997, Figure 2-2). The Port Quendall parcel is currently an active log yard; vegetation on the site is primarily limited to the shoreline (Figure 2-3, Table 2-6). Two of the wetlands (Wetlands A and B) are found along the Quendall shoreline. Wetland A is a palustrine forested wetland dominated by immature red alder (Alnus rubra) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), with a sparse herbaceous layer of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), buttercup (Ranunculus repents) and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). Wetland B is a palustrine forested wetland comprised of red alder with a hardhack (Spiraea douglarii) and Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra) shrub layer. Hydrology in Wetlands A and B is controlled by the lake level. Only minor surface discharge enters these areas. Vegetation and embedded logs help stabilize the shoreline. These wetlands provide little flood control, base flow support or water quality improvement, because they lie along the shoreline and receive little surface discharge. A third wetland (Wetland C) located on the Quendall parcel is a remnant of an old industrial lagoon which currently supports a permanent open water component, emergent vegetation dominated by cattails (Typha latifolia) and a black cottonwood (Popuhz balsamifera) sapling shrub layer. Wetland C detains some drainage from the adjacent log yards and therefore provides some water quality function by diverting this runoff from the lake. However, no outlet was observed and the area appears to be isolated from ground water, therefore, no base flow support is provided by this wetland. The remaining vegetated shoreline along the Quendall parcel is dominated by red alder, willow and Himalayan blackberry. Industrial activities on the Baxter parcel ended in the early 1980s; a portion of the site is currently used to store bark mulch. The compacted Ell soils on the Baxter parcel support sparse stands of non-native grasses and patches of sapling- and seedling -size black cottonwood and soft rush (Juncus efjWw). Baxter Cove (Wetland E) is found along the southern Baxter shoreline and appears to have been created by shoreline fill or fill and dredge activities. Baxter Cove supports an open water component, cattails and a shrub layer comprised of Himalayan blackberry, red alder saplings and red -osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera) and a few willow (Salix spp.) and Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesit). The second wetland area (Wetland D) on Baxter is an old industrial pond isolated from Lake. Washington that is dominated by cattail, Pacific willow and red -osier dogwood. The floodwater control, base flow support and water quality functions provided by Baxter Cove and Wetland D are limited due to the small area that drains each wetland area. A narrow band of vegetation, approximately 25 feet wide, along the remaining Baxter shoreline is comprised of Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) (also frequently referred to as Scott's broom) and Himalayan blackberry. A short open channel section of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is also located on the Baxter parcel. The Baxter site was cleared in 1990. Sapling red alder and willow are present on the steep banks of the charnel. However, only extremely limited habitat value is currently provided by this vegetation. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Acxdh«- x89s142As7- La.a:012-00- WK Page 12 N, rn, ot, jop. i �0 GYPSY SUBBASIN DRP.INAGE (UNAFFECTED BY RENILDIATION) WETLA411`I;t WETLAND D E WETLAND C f- i NO-t E: ALL HABITAT, WETLAND, AND PROJECT FEATURE LOWkT€ONS AND QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. Aki., NORTH e ,00 zoo 9OO 4W APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET JWASSOCIATED WETLANDS AND SHORELINE VEGETATION FIGURE 2-2 EARTH QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES BATE 9/24199 SCIENCES' INC REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. KB99142A Quendalt and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memoran&un Table 2-6. Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Port Quendall Rernediation Actions ytrlhd Area.: tysical $to]ogtealoridttfoirand Cltaraciern ICs = Ha�rte' A 0.20 Wetland along fake Washington PFO - immature red alder with a Himalayan shoreline, minor surface discharge from blackberry understory and a sparse herbaceous project site; some shoreline protection cover of cattail, reed canarygrass, buttercup provided by vegetation and logs and flag iris; habitat value is moderate due to embedded nearshore; little flood control, adjacency to the lake; provides potential base flow support or water quality habitat for amphibians, passerine birds and improvement is provided. limited waterfowl nesting - observed wildlife use includes Canada goose, beaver, several species of passerine birds. B 0.37 Wetland along Lake Washington PFO - red alder with a hardback and Pacific shoreline, minor surface discharge from willow shrub layer; habitat value is moderate project site; some shoreline protection due to adjacency to the lake; provides provided by vegetation and logs potential habitat for amphibians, passerine embedded nearshore; little flood control, birds and limited waterfowl nesting; observed base flow support or water quality wildlife use includes Canada goose, beaver, improvement is provided. several species of passerine birds. C 0,17 The wetland resulted from excavation in PSS/PEM/POW - black cottonwood saplings, fill material; detains drainage from log cattails and soft rush; perennial open water; yards; no outlet was observed and the low habitat value due to low vegetative area appears to be isolated from ground diversity and isolated nature of area; observed water, therefore no base flow support is wildlife use includes Canada goose, mallard$, provided by this wetland; water quality and green heron. improvement provided by detention of log yard runoff. D 0.08 Old industrial settling pond isolated from PSS - small wetland within former industrial Lake Washington little flood control or area dominated by cattail, Pacific willow and base flow support is provided; no water red -osier dogwood; overall habitat value is quality improvements provided, low; observed wildlife use includes red - winged blackbird, snipe. E 0.23 Cove created by fill along the lake PEMlPOWIPSS - cattail, Himalayan (Baxter Cove) shoreline; some shoreline protection blackberry, red -osier dogwood and red alder provided by vegetation and logs sapling; emergent vegetation established after embedded nearshore; flood control, base 1990; habitat value is moderate due to flow support and water quality adjacency to the lake; provides potential improvement are limited due to the habitat for amphibians, passerine birds and small area that drains into the cove. water fowl, observed wildlife use includes turtles (painted and sliders); beaver, red -wing blackbird, mallards. PFO . Pslustrian Forestod Wetland PSS s Palustrian Scrub -Scrub Wetland PEM = Ndustrian Emergent Wetland POW Palustrian Open Water February 17, 2" ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC A cxrrotit - xe9974zA57- LD•D: MU-M • W2K Page 15 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum In general, the habitat value of the remediation area is low due to the disturbed nature of the former and active industrial areas which support limited vegetation. Oily sheens were observed on the surface of the open water wetland areas and areas along the lake shoreline. The shoreline areas provide the highest habitat value in the remediation project area, -but the habitat value of these areas are limited due to the dominance of non-native invasive plant species, lack of vegetative diversity and structure, and lack of special habitat features such as snags and woody debris. Most of the wildlife use observed on the site occurs along the Quendall and southern Baxter shoreline. Canada geese (Branta canadensis) were observed in both the vegetated and hardscape shoreline areas. The geese were observed nesting along the vegetated shoreline and in the osprey nest located on the Quendall Cable Station nesting platform. Puget Sound Energy moved an osprey nest from a retired distribution pole on the Baxter site to a new nest pole platform erected on the south side of the cable station in 1993. Puget Sound Energy also placed a perch on top of the first transmission pole leading away from the station to provide a safe place for the birds to perch. The osprey (Pandion haliaetus) have successfully nested on the platform since the transfer of the nest in 1993 until 1997, when the osprey built a new nest at the top of the wood chip elevator located on the Barbee Mill site to the south of the Quendall property. The osprey are present in the area from mid -March through August. Osprey have been observed hunting small mammals (likely mice) on the north Baxter site as well as fishing the lake. Canada geese and bald eagles (Haliaeelus leacophalus) have occasionally been observed perching on the nest platform during the winter months. It is assumed the bald eagles used the perch site to forage for fish and waterfowl along the lake shoreline. The closest known bald eagle nest site is located approximately 0.75 mile west of the remediation area (WDFW, May 1997 PHS database). Numerous duck species also use the Baxter offshore area. Beaver (Castor canadensis) have been observed in the wetland habitat along the lake shoreline. Pond sliders (,Pseudemys scripta) are present in Baxter Cove and have been observed on floating logs off of the southern Baxter and northern Quendall shoreline. Red -winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) were observed using cattail habitat along the shoreline and isolated patches of cattails away from the shoreline (Wetland D). Snipe (Capella gallinago) were observed in the Wetland D area and in the cottonwood sapling -dominated areas on the Baxter parcel. Other species of passerine birds and amphibians could be supported by the shoreline wetlands and the narrow red alder -dominated upland shoreline area. 2.3 Fisheries Affected Environment 2.3.1 Introduction This section describes existing fish habitat conditions within the area that would be impacted by remediation activities, and provides an assessment of the various components that make up this. habitat. A description of known fish use of the habitat is also provided. February 17, 2000 ASSOCUTED EARTH SGIENCES. INC. AMjh/!d - KB99IM57- LD-D.102.00 - W2K Page 16 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum The remediation activities are being implemented with a primary intent of enhancing sediment and water quality in Lake Washington. Improving the uplands portion of the sites is also a critical component of the remediation project. This will benefit all species rearing and migrating along the project shoreline. Existing conditions for the shoreline and nearshore areas are described in the following text. 2.3.2 Lake Washington Biology Pelagic Species Lake Washington supports a variety of anadromous salmonids, including chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (O. kisutch), and sockeye salmon (D, nerka), and steelhead (O. mykiss) and cutthroat trout (O. clarki'). Runs of non-anadromous kokanee (O. nerka) salmon are also present (King County, 1993). Lake Washington contains a wide variety of non-salmonid species, some of which are considered "warm water" species. These include both native and non-native species such as speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), three -spine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), northern sgvawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomiew), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williarnsom), largescale sucker (Catostomus macrocheilus), longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), and prickly sculpin (Cottus asper) among other species (Pfeifer and Weinheimer 1992, King County 1993, Wydoski and Whitney, 1979). A more complete list of fish species potentially found near the project is provided in Table 2-7. Of particular importance to the project is the presence of chinook salmon in Lake Washington. On March 16, 1999, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) listed the Puget Sound evolutionarily significant unit of chinook salmon as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Adult chinook salmon migrate past the site on their way to the Cedar River each summer. Juvenile chinook pass the site on their trip back out to the Puget Sound and may spend some time rearing in the site vicinity. Beach seining surveys by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in Kennydale Park found chinook fry rearing nearshore from March through June (Figure 2-4). February 17, 2000 ASSOCUTED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKQA11d - K399142A57 - LD-D:1IMM - w2K Page 17 Quendadl and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Figure 2-4. 1994 beach seining results at KennydAe Park. 70 60 50 w O 40 a 30 20 10 0 Feb 50 x 40 x 30 w ca 20 10 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun 1994 Mar Apr May Jun 1994 SOCXEYE FRY --N SOCKEYE PRESMOLTS At COMO —X CHINOOK -CIE—YELLOW PERCH —0 i M BASS —i—SQUAWPiSH SM SASS February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACxbnfid - KMI42A57 • t o-n: 02-an - WIK Page 18 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 2-7. Fish Species in Lake Washington attt artirlNi - ..,: r.. Y:Tra Comm+iatit r' �`�,`� Sctctt�i�Nai�e rs F Petromyzontidae Western brook lamprey Lampetra richardsoni Lampreys Pacific lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus River lamprey Lwnpetm ayresi Adpenseridae White sturgeon Acipenser iransmmaatucr Sturgeons Clupeidne American shad Alosa sapidissiina Herrings Salmonidae Mountain whitefish Prosopium wiluwnsoni Trouts Cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus Ckwki Rainbow trout (steelbead) Oncorhynchus mykiss Brook trout SalveUnus fontinalls Lake trout Salvelmur rrmnayCush Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus ishatvytSdw Chum salmon Oncorhynchus keta Pink salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Sockeye salmon (kokanee) Oncorhynchus nerka Osmerldae Longfin smelt Spirindzus thaleichthys Smelts Cyprinidae Carp Cyprinus carpio Minnows Peamouth Myloch"ifus caurinus Northern squawtish Prychoceilus oregonensis Speckled dace Rhinichrhys osculus Redside shiner Richardsonius Wlealus Tench Tinca tinca Catostomidae Largescale sucker Catostomus macrocheilus Suckers Tctaluridae Brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosus Catfishes Channel catfish Ictaturus puiwtatus Gasterosteidae Threespine stickleback Gaslerosteus aculearus Stickleback Centrarchidae Smallmouth bass Mieroplerus dolomieut Sunfishes L argemoutb bass Microptems salmoides Slack crappie PoxnMus ttigrornaculatus Percidae Yellow perch Perca fiavescew Perches Cottidae Coastrange sculpin Coitus aieudcus Sculpins Shorthead sculpin Coitus confusus Torrent sculpin Coitus rhotheas Prickly sculpin Coitus asper Riffle sculpin coitus gulosus Pacific staghorn sculpin Leptocotnts mnatus source.- Shepard and Hoeman 1979. Also of importance to the project is the population of sockeye salmon juveniles which rear in Lake Washington. These fish may utilize the shoreline and offshore habitat along the project for rearing. The majority of sockeye outmigrate from the Cedar River, although a smaller number February 17, 2OX AS30ClATED EARTH SCIENCES, !NC ear#srtd-KMlsW7-W-n:udU-oa-V4K Page 19 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum may be the result of beach spawners. The Cedar River sockeye is a non-native species originating predominately from. Baker River stock and introduced in 1935 (WDFW et al. 1994). The stock is currently believed to be depressed based on a long-term negative escapement trend (WDFW et al. 1994). Sockeye are not known to have spawned historically along the Quendall and Baxter project sites (Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, 1997). Areas of suitable substrate were looked for during diver and video surveys for this project. It was assumed that any area with large sand to medium sized gravels and evidence of upwelling may be used for sockeye spawning; however, little suitable habitat was found and there was not any evidence of redds. One small upwelling site was noted by divers in about 30 feet of water off the mouth of May Creek. Similar small upwellings may exist off the Quendall and Baxter shorelines that were not observed by divers, however geohydrology studies and modeling do not suggest concentrated points of upwelling should be expected to occur. Naturally spawned fry begin leaving the Cedar River each year starting in late December. Millions more hatchery fry are released into the river starting in March. The fry migrate downstream to Lake Washington where they may spend from one to two years before emigrating to the sea. Recent studies in southern Lake Washington found the majority of sockeye fry migrate into deep water soon after reaching the lake and head north (Burgher, 1991; UW, 1996). A few fry were found in the nearshore environment for up to one month after emerging. By late summer, sockeye densities are higbest at the north end of the lake (Burgher, 1991). Predation of sockeye fry in Lake Washington is believed to be a major cause of low recruitment (University of Washington, 1996). A considerable amount of research is currently being undertaken by the Muckleshoot Tribe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), University of Washington (UW), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and King County to better understand the early life history of sockeye in Lake Washington and the various factors influencing predation. Currently northern squawfish and cutthroat trout are believed to be the major predators of fry,(UW, 1996). Estimates of sockeye consumption by squawfish in Lake Washington range between 3,000,000 and 11,000,000 fry per year (UW, 1996). Smallrnouth and largemouth bass, prickly sculpin, yellow perch, rainbow trout and coho salmon also consume sockeye juveniles but in much fewer numbers. Although bass were once believed to be major sockeye predators, recent evidence indicates this is not entirely true (UW, 1996). Life history studies of the two bass species and sockeye in Lake Washington show few opportunities for the three species to interact. Gut analysis confirmed the studies (UW, 1996). Each spring when juvenile salmon are most abundant, less than 10 percent of the diet of smallmouth bass is made up of this prey item. Most sockeye consumed by largemouth bass are takers in the ship canal where they are concentrated during the outmigration period. Total bass consumption of sockeye fry is estimated at less than 100,000 fish per year (UW, 1996). Ten beach seining surveys at Kennydale Park, approximately 0.7 miles south of the remediation site, were conducted by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe between February and June, 1994 (Muckleshoot, 1997). One survey was completed during the February 17, 2000 ASSMATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Ac 10d- xa9914W7- tp•t?: udnz-W - W2X Page 20 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum day and one survey at night each month. Relatively high numbers of sockeye fry, chinook fry, coho fry, and yellow perch were captured (Figure 2-4). Lesser numbers of sockeye presmolts, smallmouth bass, and squawfish were caught. Most sockeye were observed in May during the daytime surveys. A high number of yellow perch were also captured during the same survey. Fewer sockeye fry were captured in June but a higher number of chinook were netted. Again, an abundant yellow perch population was also netted. The coho population peaked in April. Benthic Species Crayfish (Pacifasticus spp.) and freshwater shrimp (Ostracods and Mysids) are relatively abundant benthic biota in the vicinity of the project. Numerous individuals were observed in diver and video surveys within the outer harbor line. Most crayfish were associated with larger pieces of wood where many were noted protecting the entrance to dens under logs. Freshwater clams (Pelecypods) were also noted in several places on the lake bed. Other benthic species potentially found in Lake Washington, within and around the remediation bounds are listed in Table 2-8. No site specific benthic studies were completed as part of the assessment for this project. 2.3.3 Lake Washington Shoreline Survey Methodology Physical surveys of the Lake Washington shoreline along the project boundary were undertaken to characterize existing conditions affecting fish habitat. A total of 3,130 feet of shoreline was walked from the northern edge of the Baxter property to the southern edge of the Quendall parcel. A hip -chairs was pulled to measure distances. Five variables (riparian vegetation, bank type, bank protection, substrate, and water depth) were assessed at roughly five-foot intervals. The dominant characteristic in each five-foot interval was noted on a spreadsheet. Substrate and water depth were measured approximately five feet from shore. Overwater structures were also noted and measured. Existing literature was reviewed to describe shoreline characteristics in the immediate vicinity of the project. This information is provided for comparison with project site conditions. On -Site Habitat and Valuation Project shoreline characteristics are shown in Figures 2-2, 2-5 and 2-6. Features within the remediation area are summarized in. Table 2-9. February 17, 2000 AS54CIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACK1h4d - K89914W7 - t a-D. M2.0 - W2K Page 21 Quendall and Eaxler Properties Muigadon Analysis Memorandum Table 2-8. Benthic Biota Present in Labe Washington. ;f .31 Chironomidae Macropelopia, Eukieferiella, Helerorrissocladius, parakieffereriella, Chironomus, Cladopehna, Tanylarsus Cryprochironomous, Dicrolendipes, Einrfeldia, Phaenopsectra, Potypedilum Midges Ceratopogonidae biting midges Oligochaeta Tuhificidae, Naididae aquatic earthworms Nernatoda roundworms Ostracoda seed shrimp Pelecypoda Pisidium freshwater clams Tricoptera caddisflies Copepoda mainly harpacticoids Hydiracarina Pima water mites Gastropoda Ptanorbetla Snails Amphipoda Hyatetla azteca scuds and sideswitnmers Ephemeroptera Mayflies Plecoptera Perlodidae stoneflies Collembola springtails Mysidacea Taphromysis seed shrimp Hirudinea leeches Tardigrada water bears Porifera sponges Brachiopoda daphnia lsopoda Caecidarea aquatic sowbugs Coeoptera Psepherues beetles Sources: Shepard and Hoeman, 1979, Bennet and Cubbage, 1992. The shoreline riparian vegetation is dominated by Himalayan blackberry (46%) which grows up to, and in places, over the lake. The remaining area is split about evenly between shrubs (primarily Scotch broom) and an unvegetated condition (Table 2-9). Approximately 25 percent of the shoreline is also overhung with a sparse tree canopy layer. Most trees are young alder (to about 4 inches diameter at breast height [DBH]). The trees are typically set back from the shoreline five to ten feet and associated with the four lakeshore wetlands (Figure 2-2). No trees large enough to provide large woody debris (LWD) were noted. Wetland habitat influences approximately 17 percent of the shoreline. February 17, 20M ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC ACK011d - KS9914W7- LD-DAWII-W - W2K Page 22 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigarion Analysis Memorandwn The existing shoreline vegetation provides little visual refuge for fish, bank stability, insect habitat, or shading, because the lack of diversity and non-native characteristics of the existing vegetation are not well suited for these purposes- The young, sparse hardwood stand currently growing along the banks do not provide any of the above functions or serve as a source of large woody debris or bank refuge beneath undercut rootballs. The majority of the bank (56%) is unsupported and consists of steep dirt banks from one to four feet high (30%), or relatively low gradient "beach" like shoreline (26%) (Figure 2-5). Manmade structures and protection features (rip -rap, log bollards, piers, buildings, log skids) cover 33 percent of the shoreline (Table 2-9). Eleven percent of the bank could not be surveyed due to heavy blackberry coverage. Four percent of the bank (110 feet) is undercut by wave action. Large logs floating or sitting on the lake bottom near the shore protect 81 percent of the shoreline. These logs not only shelter the banks from wave action, they provide excellent rearing and shelter habitat for fish and macroinvertebrates. Historically the lake shoreline was primarily low -gradient beach habitat formed as the delta of May Creek. Over time, erosion caused by industrial landfilling, riparian vegetation removal, and wave action has created oversteepened banks. Other banks are artificially protected with rip -rap and log bollards. Neither condition is conducive to habitat formation. Cull logs and stringers from the mill effectively provide many of the habitat functions and diversity normally associated with large woody debris (LWD). Various manmade structures provide some diversity and overhead cover, and may be used by juvenile salmonids (Ratte and ,Salo, 1985; Heiser and Finn, 1970). Inlets, or coves make up approximately 26 percent of the shoreline. Most have a few pieces of LWD floating or sitting on the bottom. These areas of meandering shoreline add diversity to the relatively straight shore elsewhere. Shallow coves filled with LWD could provide nursery areas for many species of fish and benthic organisms. Surficial substrate along the shoreline is dominated by sands (54%) with relatively equal proportions of mud/silt and gravel in other areas. None of the substrates are free of silts; a muddy layer underlies most areas. A large amount of woody debris including wood chips covered the substrate in several areas (Figure 2-6). Clean gravels can provide spawning habitat for sockeye as well as macroinvertebrate habitat. Finer materials anchor vegetation and are preferentially inhabited by other aquatic species. Dense wood chip coverage leads to anaerobic conditions and a relatively sterile environment. No benefit is derived from the wood chip coverage. Water depths five feet from shore are typically less than one foot (57%). Only 15 percent of the shoreline has a slope greater than about 3.1. These areas are usually heavily disturbed by nearshore activities and may have resulted from past filling of the lake- FeBrrtary 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. . Mjklra-xb"NZ07-W-D.-M2-M- IVM Page 23 G`rPSY SuaBASIl%' rRA�NACL (UNAFFECTED BY r<!/r,1Eni,i'ia 1j,. 4011, �. LF(4FND V 0 1 iE =,! cin i ` -rap t )I idel cut Log bollafci a Loys ifi lake ALL 1-IALI 11q' WE I LAND. AND PROJEC 1- FLAI LJRL I()NS AND QUANT iTIFS ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH c E e APPRO:Ot:IAE SCALE IN FEET rr---- — AMASSOCIATED WETLANDS AND SHORELINE STRUCTURE FIGURE 2-5 EARTH QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9,124199 SCIENCES, INC REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT o RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ, NO. KB99142A GYPSY SUBBASIN [)Et NAGE (UNAFFECTED BY REMIEDLIJI0I4) 50' ' LEGEND S_UB STRATE Mud silt Sand Gravel >50% wood chips DEPTH 0-1 foot 1-2 feet >2 feet NO'l 1-. All H/- SIIA-I, WETLAND, AND PROJECT FEA URF L0(1,0IONS AND QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH . 1, APPHOMMATE SCALE IN FEET h i WETLANDS AND SHORELINE SUBSTRATE AND DEPTH FIGURE 2-6 ASSOCIATED EARTH QUENDAL.L.AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9124r99 SCIENCES, INC R1=MEDIATION FOOTPRINT RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ, NO. KB99142A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigalion Analysis Memorandum Table 2-9. Lake Washington shoreline characteristics for the Quendall and Baxter Properties. 2 f�" C4�Y Y�.`Yyi �keV�yf its r$} Mai 4N ?�'.�,. gn,.., `t, RPM.i 5 Ny�'�c x. T'}?yImm��4f cA �-4 �� x'o��yyf�}�."s.v'•;,s S� f[.y -IYL }3 i�yiEs1<,.'?�.y}h m:l�." YC..,:-}F."I. 1F-_� £"+, �"!t?_.k5, .�.k`� \rV •erV�e `1QJ,�r� .is �,:i;v,� ; I '':'+ Vegetation none Soo 26 % blackbefg 1,425 46 % shrubs 905 29 % trees 770 25 % wetland 535 17 % Bank type/Protection beach 805 26% vertical dirt 930 30% rip -rap 415 13 % bulkhead 0 0 % loz bollard 515 16`Yc pier 55 2 % building 35 1 % log skid 35 1 % undercut 110 4 % inlet 820 26 % logs 2,350 81 % Substrates mud/silt 755 24 % sand 1,685 54% ravel 690 22% woodwasteb 500 16% Depth- 0-1 ft. 1,775 57176 1-2 ft. 870 28 % > 2 ft. 485 15 % 3,130 feet, surveyed 11 April 1997 Measured or sampled approximately five feet out from shoreline. b Woodwaste = areas where chips and bark exceed 50% surface coverage. Anthropogenic structures are found in several areas along the shoreline. Two boat sheds (one sunken), half a dozen docks, a barge, three boats, two log skids and several other. smaller structures impact approximately 5 percent of the shoreline. All of these structures overhang shallow water habitat in Lake Washington. No floating log rafts were present offshore of Baxter or Quendall the day of the survey, although aerial photographs indicate this practice was historically common. The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage enters the Baxter property via a 24-inch concrete culvert beneath the Burlington Northern railroad tracks (Entranco, 1995). The culvert is 55 feet long, has a gradient of approximately 2 percent, and is likely a barrier to upstream fish passage. Upon entering the property, the drainage is discharged to a small (approximately 10 foot diameter), quarry-spall lined pond. From the pond, the drainage enters a 24-inch, 46-foot long concrete culvert beneath a dirt haul road before daylighting again to an open channel. The open channel is February 1 Z 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK6;knd - xe9gtsztsr. t.t3.o:Vd12-DO - atx Page 26 Quendall and Sailer Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum a highly confined, steep -walled trough, approximately 10 to 15 feet below the surrounding ground elevation and 3 to 10 feet wide at the bottom. The substrate consists primarily of a deep anaerobic mud except where bank sloughing and rocks spilled into the channel have replaced the mud with a firmer bed material. The banks are heavily vegetated with a narrow strip of young hardwoods, Scot's broom, and Himalayan blackberry. Total length of the open channel is approximately 125 feet. The drainage next enters a 490-foot, 24-inch CMP which discharges directly to Lake Washington. The 490-foot CMP drops approximately 0.5 foot (0.1 % gradient) and at low lake elevation is perched about a foot above the lake water surface. During high lake elevations, the culvert is partially backwatered and upstream passage is possible, though not known to occur. Off -Site Habitat A considerable amount of fisheries habitat information in South Lake Washington has been collected by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Some of the data are summarized here to provide a comparison of on -site conditions with those found along the adjacent shoreline off -site. Shoreline composition was surveyed in September 1995 (Muckleshoot, 1997). Percent bulkhead, sloped bank (beach), and vegetated distance was assessed between river mile (RM) 32 and RM 46. The Port Quendall remediation site (RM 37.9 - 38.5) was not surveyed due to access problems associated with the log booms. The data are plotted in Figure 2-7 with the 1997 remediation site information inserted in its appropriate location for comparison. Overall, the remediation site shoreline is in a much more natural condition than the surrounding shoreline (Table 2-10). Eighty-three percent of the shoreline surveyed by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe has been bulkheaded while 33 percent of the remediation site has received similar bank protection treatment. Only 15 percent of the surrounding shoreline has low gradient banks and only two percent is vegetated (not including vegetated bulkheads). This compares with 26 percent low gradient bank and 60 percent vegetated bank for the remediation area. Table 2-10. Comparison of Shoreline Conditions within the Rmmediation Area and the Surrounding ,Shoreline. ME 33 83 Bulkhead/other bank protection (%) Sloped bank/beach (°10) 26 15 Vegetated' t9'o} 60 2 'Vegetated distance does not include vegetated bulkheads. Source reference: Muekleshoot 1995 February 17, 2000 ASSOCIA T&D EARTH SCIENCES INC. ACK#hlld - KB99142457 - t.b.D. LIM-8D - wax Page 27 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Figure 2-7. Lake Washington Shoreline Composition along a 14-Mile Reach of Lakeshore on Both Sides of Quendall and Baxter in September 1995. 10D% T 90% * • a • 80% .I- z 70% • 60% c s 0 +a 5D% T Remediatioz area 0 40% v 30% E #El tLu 20% a 10%. ❑ 4 ❑ p 0% 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 LAKE MILE + 96 BULKHEAD ❑ % SLOPED e % VEWATED� source reference: Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 1995 Pier coverage of the water surface within 100 feet of the shoreline was estimated from 1989 aerial photographs and a review of environmental documents published between September 1991 and July 1995 (Muckleshoot, 1997). The values are believed to underestimate the real coverage due to an incomplete database and unauthorized development. For the eleven mile reach surveyed (which includes the remediation reach) a total of 517 piers were counted (47 piers/mile). This compares with 4 piers, or 7 piers/mile within the remediation reach (Table 2-11). Overall surface coverage averages 4.2 percent of the first 100 feet of lake for the eleven mile reach. Within the remediation area, only 0.6 percent of the lake surface is covered with piers. Table 2-11. Comparison of Overwater Pier Coverage within the Rernediation Area (1997) and the Surrounding Shoreline (1989). °fi`. •S� �ff� to ` 5 - �. �: ,;� � •� • ��_ _k_- \" .� � ' fan ea ra �r' � _ 1 - `�av - etrt; n � � ne`� k {:W3 � �i�a��1. ��AG'.. �v • '1- � ir'%i`. MS C� ., r7.. � :lt: .r- .ilk .. Y��» Number of Piers/mile 7 47 Estimated Coverage (0mile) 3,008 22,368 Estimated Coverage (%) 0.6 4.2 1989 data supplied by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Muckleshoot, 1997). February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACVjh1W - KM142A57-W-D.Vd12-W - W2K Page 28 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation: Analysis ,Memorandum 2.3.4 Lake Washington Open Water Benthic In general, the Quendall and Baxter offshore lake bottom drops off gently at slopes between approximately 20:1 and 9:1. Small localized areas with slopes in excess of 3:1 are present. After dropping relatively quickly to 15 to 20 foot depths within 250 feet from shore, the gradient flattens into a broad plateau sloping gently for another 400 to 600 feet offshore. Approximately 5 to 10 additional feet in depth, are gained over this plateau. Additional topographylbathymetry information and a map is provided in the Sediment Quality Memorandum, Section 4.1 (RETEC, 1997). The vast majority of remediation activities will take place in 10 or less feet of water, although dredging near the old T-dock would occur in about 30 feet of water. The surface of the lake bottom substrate was characterized in terms of particle size and organic material (e.g., wood chips). The subsurface composition was examined via sediment -profile imaging (SPI). The surficial layer was surveyed with video by both towed and diver operated cameras, and during the SPI surveys. In general the lake bottom consists of very fine particles. Occasional sandy areas were also noted. No graveled areas were noted. A more complete description is provided in Section 4.2 (RETEC, 1997). . SPI images provide a measurement of the substrate depth in which aerobic activity is occurring (RETEC, 1997). These data are useful in assessing the quality of habitat for epifauna and infauna. A thin redox potential discontinuity (RPD) is indicative of a stressed environment. Stress can occur physically (e.g., prop wash) or chemically (e.g., high biological oxygen demand or chemical contamination). RPD depths of less than 0.4 cm are indicative of an anaerobic condition:. The shallowest RPD depths in the remediation area (t0.2 cm) were measured off the southern end of the Port Quendall parcel and were associated with areas with high wood waste (RETEC, 1997, Figure 6-2). Intermediate RPD levels (0.2 to 0.8 cm) were observed over much of the rest of the lake bottom off Port Quendall. These Levels are indicative of a disturbed environment where benthic stress is present but likely varies. Both scattered wood debris and chemical contamination are likely present. The rest of the remediation area has RPD depths over 0.8 cm, which is considered to be a relatively undisturbed benthic condition in terms of overall animal -sediment interactions for nearshore environs in this portion of Lake Washington (RETEC, 1997). A complete description of the SPI process, wood and chemical contamination extents, and associated maps are provided in the Sediment Quality Memorandum, Section 6 (RETEC, 1997). Sunken logs are present throughout the remediation area with the highest densities (3 to 5 logs/acre) snapped along the Quendall shoreline. Much of the aquatic organisms observed during video surveys (e.g., crayfish, sculpin, perch) were associated with the logs. Milfoii was noted during the side -scan sonar and video surveys (RETEC, 1997). Areas of dense milfoil are mapped in Figure 2-2. Milfoil is common throughout most of the remediation area at water depths from about 4 to approximately 15 feet. Only in the dense woodwaste area at the south end of the remediation area was milfoil relatively absent. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIAM .SA,RTH SCIENCES, INC. ACOhnd - KBOUZ957- t..o-0 W2-X • ,pax Page 29 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Water Column Pilings and dolphins {tied piling cluster) are scattered throughout the remediation area with 64 percent located off the Port Quendall parcel. A total of 73 vertical structures, mainly dolphins, have been mapped to date. These structures provide vertical habitat which many species utilize, including some salmonid predators, (e.g., bass). Several hundred individual upright pilings, many not rising above the water surface, also likely exist but have not been mapped. The pilings also provide attachment and focal points for aquatic organisms such as freshwater mussels. Several sunken structures along the Quendall shoreline are also present in the water column including the old boat house and several partially sunken pier sections. Surface A number of anthropogenic structures and objects exist on the surface of Lake Washington which have an influence on aquatic habitat quality. A varying quantity of logs have been stored as log rafts off the shoreline of Barbee Mill, Baxter and Quendall. Vessels including tugs, barges and recreational boats have been anchored in the area. Numerous docks are present in either a permanent (i.e., mounted on pilings) or temporary (i.e., floating) basis. Structures on the lake surface provide overhead refuge cover for numerous aquatic species as well as their predators. Salmonids in particular prefer overhead cover, especially when near shore. A number of small oily slicks have been observed nearshore and are believed to be coming from old creosote deposits (Figure 4-6 in RETEC, 1997). These slicks impact aquatic habitat via both chemical and physical processes. Chemically, various components of the creosote are toxic to aquatic life. Physically, the slicks present a barrier at the airlwater interface. Fish feeding at the surface can become contaminated. Prey items stuck in the sheen are not consumable. 2.3.5 Habitat Valuation Numerous protected alcoves, abundant woody debris, overhanging trees, and relatively low human disturbance along the shoreline offer good potential rearing and migrating structure for fish, especially when compared to the adjacent Lake Washington shoreline. Although a number of beneficial habitat features exist, they are compromised by the constant seepage of chemicals and oily residues. Under existing conditions, therefore, habitat value of the remediation site for fish is low. Offshore habitat in the remediation area ranges from good to poor. Those areas contaminated with chemicals and wood chips offer poor to negligible benthic habitat. The majority of the lake bottom is relatively clean, however, and the numerous sunken logs provide good structural diversity for a number of aquatic species. The vertical and floating structures benefit some species (e.g., smallmouth bass) to the possible detriment of others (e.g., juvenile sahxronids). February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES. INC. AcxyUrd-xs➢9142As7-t.a-D.102-W-MIK Page 30 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Fish habitat value of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage within the project boundary is minimal. The two short open stretches offer some potential rearing habitat, however, shallow depths, a muddy substrate, no instream structure, and little instream cover limits the overall habitat value. With little protection from high velocities, winter storm events likely flush many fish from the system. Summer conditions produce extremely low flows which may also limit the habitat quality. 2.4 Rerxeational There is one private dock and boathouse located over Lake Washington at the extreme northern boundary of the Baxter parcel. No other recreational opportunities and no public access are currently provided on the site. Recreational resources are not discussed further. 2.5 Cultural See Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services, 1997, for a cultural resource assessment of the Quendall and Baxter sites, as well as for recommendations for cultural monitoring based on the assessment findings. 2.6 Economic A portion of the Baxter parcel is used for storage of "beauty back." The southern portion of the Quendall parcel is used for log sorting. Both of these uses would be curtailed by rernediation. A utility right-of-way separates the Baxter and Quendall parcels, however use of this right-of-way is not affected by remediation. Economic resources are not discussed further. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATRD EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACXljs/!d . wzx Page 31 Quendall and Barter Properties Mitigoeion Analysis Memorandum 3.0 IMPACTS 3.1 Plants and Animals 3.1.1 Disturbance to Shoreline Land -based remediation will result in the excavation and/or capping of 1,150 feet of the Quendall shoreline (Figures 3-1 through 3-3). Approximately 660 linear feet of vegetated shoreline, including Wetlands A and B, will be impacted (Table 3-1 and Table 3-2). The capping activities on the Baxter Parcel are not expected to directly impact shoreline vegetation. All wildlife use of the shoreline areas will be eliminated where vegetation is removed, or severely curtailed where it remains, during active remediation. Remediation is likely to require an 18-month period. Nesting waterfowl and passerine bird use will be the greatest wildlife use impacted during shoreline remediation activities. Table 3-1. Shoreline Vegetation Disturbance Resulting from Upland Excavation and/or Capping Share line'liractei istic L' near Aisance. Meet} Total shoreline impacted 1,150 feet Non -vegetated shoreline 490 feet Vegetated: shoreline 660 feet Blackberry 475 feet Upland shrubs (non -blackberry) 235 feet Upland trees 345 feet Wetland 280 feet 3.1.2 Dredge Offshore Poi c clic Aromatic Hydrocarbons PAH Wetland E (Baxter Cove) will be dredged to remove polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) sediments, which will remove all vegetation and woody debris in the wetland and most of the adjacent vegetated area. Turtles will be displaced from this shoreline area during the dredging activities. Red -wing blackbird nesting habitat will be eliminated. PAH dredging offshore of the Quendall parcel will remove 106,200 fe of milfoil, which is considered to be a positive impact. The positive impact will likely be short-lived, as the milfoil would be expected to recolonize. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. A cxrI,IU - KB99142+s7 - La.: M2-00 - w2x Page 32 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 3-2. Impacts to Wetlands to be Dredged or Filled by the Quendall and Banter Remediation Actions (Refer to Figure 3-1) `�r°"['^1iv �k h 'i fllr {I�SI� �r���Cy{iOl�W�t ''t3 I17�V�d���� �U�F �. i f `� � k ll�i�L 5 5y x', - ■T Gild�tl� . A,. AW _ °�)-..YSa is2 { .i- {_k{� } 2 i Y S y1i l �,l .•�. 'F.'a�.�.6'� r.! �r-�."f A 0.20 Wetland along lake PFO - immature red alder with a A portion to be Washington shoreline, minor Himalayan blackberry understory and excavated and surface discharge from project a sparse herbaceous cover of cattail, replaced'witlt clean site; some shoreline protection reed canarygrass, buttercup, and flag material; remainder to provided by vegetation and iris; habitat value is moderate due to be capped with 3 feet logs embedded nearshore; little adjacency to the lake; provides of clean material. flood control, base flow potential habitat for amphibians, support or water quality passerine birds and limited waterfowl improvement is provided. nesting - observed wildlife use includes Canada goose, beaver, several species of passerine birds, 3 0.37 Wetland along Lake PFO - red alder with a hardback and A portion to be Washington shoreline, minor Pacific willow shrub layer; habitat excavated and surface discharge from project value is moderate due to adjacency to replaced with clean site; some shoreline protection the lake; provides potential habitat for material; remainder to provided by vegetation and ampbibians, passerine birds and be capped with 3 feet logs embedded nearshore; little limited waterfowl nesting, observed of clean material. flood control, base flow wildlife use includes Canada goose, support or water quality beaver, several species of passerine improvement is provided. birds. C 0.I7 Excavation in fill material; PSS/PEM/POW - black cottonwood Excavated and detains drainage from log saplings, cattails and soft rush; replaced with clean yards; no outlet was observed perennial open water; low habitat material. and the area appears to be value due to low vegetative diversity isolated from ground water, and isolated nature of area; observed therefore no base flow support wildlife use includes Canada goose, is provided by this wetland; and mallards. water quality improvement provided by detention of lag and runoff. D 0.08 Old industrial senling pond PSS - small wetland within former A portion to be isolated from Lake industrial area dominated by cattail, excavated and Washington; little flood Pacific willow and red -osier replaced with clean control or base flow support is dogwood; overall habitat value is low; material; remainder to provided; no water quality observed wildlife use includes red- be capped with 3 feet improvements provided. winged- blackbird, sni e. of clean material. E 0,23 Cove created by All along the PEb4/POW/PSS -cattail, Himalayan Most to be excavated (Baxter lake shoreline; some shoreline blackberry, red -osier dogwood and 3 to 6 feet and Cove) protection provided by red alder sapling; emergent vegetation replaced with clean vegetation and logs embedded established after 1990, habitat value is material; remainder nearshore; flood control, base moderate due to adjacency to the lake; excavated to 3 feet now support and water quality provides potential habitat for and replaced with improvement are limited due amphibians, passerine birds and water clean material. Minor to the small area that drains fowl; observed wildlife use includes portion to south along into the cove. turtles (painted and sliders); beaver, shoreline may be reid-wing blackbird, mallards. retained. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACx#W-xss9rsW7-ra-D.W12.oa-wiK Page 33 }4 C of GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAiNAGC (UNAFFECTED BY RLAIE.01,41'10 I) <) 0� WETLAND 1 - D:. CC/ ' 'WETLAND _B f1: WETLAND WETLAND _- A LEGEND s'/'-1 ' Area of remedia[ton impact alring the shoreline Wand wasto >501'A rernoved with dredgmg I Potential 1-toot sedimew cep Dredge to 6' and replaced with ciearn material to original grade Dredge to 3' and replac:edwith clean Mate, ial I_ to original grade 3' cap with clean material or cap with redevelopment Excavated to required depth to r erroove contaminants and replaced will) clean material In rapped grade r�w�www� Blackberry Shn ibs 1' ree s NOTL. ALI. HABITA-I, WET[ AND AND PROJt C-t FEATURE LOCAl10NS AND QUAN CITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. '04� NORTH o zoo 2M aoo 4x0 APPROXIMNrE SCALE IN FEET JEMASSOCIATED WETLANDS AND SHORELINE VEGETATION FIGURE 3-1 EARTH QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9.<4/99 SCIENCES, INC REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT PROJ. NO. KBI99142A RENTON, WASHINGTON now 4SMASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCE113,11NIC GYPSY SUSBASIN DRAINAGE " "— (UNAFFECTED BY REW-DIATION)s _71 _(• f+ J i /fit• f 1 WETLANDS AND SHORELINE STRUCTURE QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT RENTON, WASHINGTON LEGEND Area of remediation impact along the shoreline ? Wood waste >50% removed with dredging Potential 1-foot sediment cap Dredge to 6' and replaced with clean material to original grade Dredge to 3' and replaced with clean material to original grade - 3' cap with clean material ar cap with redevelopment Excavated to required depth to remove contaminants and replaced with clean material to capped grade = Beach Vertical dirt Rip -rap Undercut Lag bollard .>x.<. Logs in lake NOTE: ALL HABITAT, WETLAND, AND PROJECT FEATURE LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE. '4110� NORTH o M 2D3 3X noo APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 3-2 DATE 9124199 PROJ. NO. KB99142A LNG GYPSY SUBBASIN,'NYLINAGE (UNAFFECTED` BY Fl-i!FDOMN) v --WETLAIVE D. 40 WETLAND v �-,,-'WETLAND B -I WETLAND C L WETLAND A L. E (A�-, N i ) AF ef.- Of I Wlp�,'Ct 2101 Kj shol ehe >501% mmoved wifli diodging Pole.,Iiiiaj 1400t sedimem C.dl:) - Dredge to 6 and with material to 0c iginal gracie; Dredge to 3 and replaced wit[ i clean material to original grade 3: cap with clean mazer ial or cap w4h redevelopment Excavated to reClUired depth to remove contaminants and replaced with clean rnateriii to capped grade SUBST-RATL fVILId Silt Sand Grav(-,t >50% wood chips DEPTH 0-1 foot 1 -2 feet >2 feet N01 E. AIA HABITAT WETLAND, AND PROJECT FEATURE LO(',/Vi IONS AND QUANTITIES ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH IC() 2:0 M ky- APPROXTf-0,0-Ti7 'CAI F IN FFF1 WETLANDS AND SHORELINE SUBSTRATE AND DEPTH FIGURE 3-3 ismASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, QUENDALL AND BAXTER PROPERTIES REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT DATE 9/24M L INC 8— RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJ. NO. KB99142A Quelulall and &aver Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 3.1.3 In -Water One -Foot Sedirpent Cap If Ecology determines that less than 50 percent woodwaste areas require remediation, these areas would be capped with one foot of clean sand. These areas are indicated as a "potential" one -foot cap in Figure 3-1. No impact to nearshore, partially submerged logs that provide resting platforms for waterfowl and turtles, or to other features along the shoreline and water interface, are expected due to this potential action, other than the staging areas within the impact zones shown in Figure 3- 1. 3.1 A Dredge Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chips No impact to plants or animals will result from the removal of material with greater than 50 percent wood chips. Although approximately 7,666 square feet of milfoil will be removed, this is considered to be a positive impact. 3.1.5 Upland Soil Excavation and Capping In addition to the removal of shoreline vegetation shown in Figures 3-1 through 3-3, all upland vegetated areas on the Quendall and Baxter parcels, including Wetlands C and D, will be eliminated with this action (Table 3-2 and Figures 3-1 through 3-3). The narrow band of existing shoreline vegetation on the Baxter site that is excluded from the shoreline impact zones in Figures 3-1 through 3-3 will be retained. The upland vegetation removal will eliminate all current wildlife use of the Quendall and Baxter parcels upland of the shoreline areas. Snipes, Canada geese, and some passerine birds have been observed using these sparsely vegetated areas. Osprey nesting in the area could be impacted by the remediation activities. However, the osprey successfully nested on the adjacent active mill site in 1997, indicating that high levels of activity and construction -level noise would not necessarily impact osprey nesting in this area. The occasional use of the osprey nest platform on the Puget Sound Energy cable station pole by bald eagles during the winter could be eliminated during remediation activities. As a result of this very limited use, remediation should not affect bald eagle foraging. The closest known bald eagle nest site is approximately 3a mile west of the site; therefore, the project will not impact nesting bald eagles. Capping over the piped section of Gypsy subbasin drainage on the Baxter site would not preclude any mitigation potential the drainage may represent to future development after remediation. Gypsy subbasin drainage is.not included or needed to reasonably mitigate remediation as proposed in Section 4.0. 3.2 Fisheries Impacts 3.2.1 Shoreline Disturbance Shoreline disturbances affecting fish habitat include complete removal of all vegetation along 660 feet of shoreline, removal of all nearshore woody debris along 1,045 feet of shoreline, 100 percent filling of Wetlands A and B, the two wetlands adjacent to the lake, and dredging of "Baxter Cove". Onshore capping activities are not expected to impact shoreline vegetation. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK#IPHd - XB99142457 - LAD:11dt2-00 - W2x Page 37 QueWdU and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorarsdum Existing shoreline vegetation provides little habitat value for fish. Removal of all vegetation however, would further reduce nutrient input to the nearshore, decrease primary productivity for the area, and decrease the already minimal overhanging vegetation (i.e., refuge) component. Removal of the two wetlands A and B would result in lost Lakeshore habitat complexity including small patches of emergent vegetation, shallow nursery areas, and overhanging trees. Approximately 280 linear feet of shoreline wetland would be lost. Approximately 120 feet of wetland at Baxter Cove would be severely impacted. Resulting shoreline vegetation conditions are shown in Table 3-3. Shoreline disturbances would be expected to discourage fish use of the area and possibly impact near -shore salmon migration habits. Both macro- and microinvertebrate populations would be impacted by loss of productivity from nearshore vegetation. 3.2.2 Dredge Offshore (PAH) Offshore dredging of contaminated materials would result in immediate and severe direct impacts to benthic fauna during dredging activities. Work along the Lake Washington shoreline below the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) could affect juvenile salmonids. Salrnonid eggs began hatching in the rivers and streams draining to southern Lake Washington in January and February. The resultant fry outmigrate and begin reaching the lake in early February. Their northern migration towards the ship canal and eventually the Puget Sound begins soon thereafter. Most juvenile fish are gone from the southern end of the lake by early June. Dredging would avoid critical salmonid periods as advised by the WDFW. Resident fish use of the area would be curtailed during dredging, and for a short time thereafter as the disturbed sediments settle after dredging equipment withdraws from the site. Little beneficial habitat exists in the dredging areas, thus no long-term negative impact is expected from the activity. Overall, dredging of these most highly contaminated sediments are expected to have a net long-term benefit on fish habitat in the area. Once the dredged areas are refilled to their original contours with clean sediments, sized similar to the original material, the areas are expected to be rapidly recolonized with benthic invertebrates and flora, and shortly thereafter the larger species which prey on these organisms. Contaminant exposure risk to the fishery should cease as a result of dredging, increasing the habitat value to aquatic species. 3.2.3 Dredge Offshore(Wood ChiRs) Dredging of wood waste would result in immediate and direct impacts to the minor benthic population present within locations exceeding 50 percent wood coverage. Fish use of the area would also be curtailed during dredging, and for a short time thereafter as the disturbed sediments settle and dredging equipment withdraws from the site. Timing of dredging activities would affect expected impacts as the area receives higher use during certain times of the year (e.g., sockeye migration periods); however, dredging would avoid critical periods as advised by WDFW. February 17, 2M "OCIA M EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACMI tut - A7%142A51- t.b.n:,reiz-(V - W2K 'Page 38 Quendall wid Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Tattle 3-3. Valuation of Physical Shoreline Characteristics as Fish Habitat and Mitigated Condition Following Remediation (3,130 feet surveyed April 11, 1997). Ghaxactetrsfic Current Condtlan > ' Fish Habitat Value Ntifigaed' Cortcitiurt " Vegetation Shrubs dominated by Low growing vegetation including Non -vegetated and non-native Scotch grasses and shrubs provide blackberry covered broom and Himalayan overhanging visual refuge for fish, shoreline would be blackberry to the bank stability, insect habitat (prey reduced by 23 percent exclusion of native item), and shading; trees provide and 28 percent species; small similar functions plus source of respectively; native trees hardwoods; relatively large woody debris, and planted along 50 percent homogeneous structure. overhanging banks when rootball of the remediated is undercut. landscape; native shrubs planted along 50 percent of the remediated landscape. Bank Type Beach type shoreline Historically the lake shoreline was All artificial structures dominates. primarily low -gradient beach removed from the Anthropogenic features habitat formed as the delta of May remediation area; (e.g., piers, bollards, Creek; large woody debris (LWD) wetland mitigation along etc.) are also common near beach may provide juvenile shoreline fronted with (33 percent). Eroding salmon refuge. Alternative beach type habitat dirt along shoreline at shoreline types (e.g., bollards, (Figure 4-4); beach southeast. riprap) provide some diversity and habitat increased by 10 rearing habitat far juvenile percent; non -wetland salmonids. graded more steeply (Fi res 4-2 and 4-3). Bank Protection Approximately 33 Fallen trees along the shoreline Anthropogenic structure percent anthropogenic provide bank stabilization as well reduced to 22 percent; structures; floating logs as quiet backwater rearing habitat percent log coverage along 81 percent of for juveniles. Logs enhance remains the same. shoreline and in shallow primary productivity in nursery nearshore lake areas. Rocks and rootwads environment. provide refuge and habitat diversity. Substrate Dominated by fine Clean gravels provide potential Substrate returned to materials including sand spawning habitat for salmonids as original grain size and and silts (79 percent); well as macroinvertebrate. habitat; grade; wood waste graveled substrate finer materials anchor vegetation eliminated in most around 12 percent of and are preferentially inhabited by areas. shoreline; abundant other aquatic species; dense wood wood chips in areas (15 chips provide no benefit. percent). Depth Mostly (57 percent) Juvenile salmonids prefer No change in depth very shallow nearshore nearshore shallow habitat at night; characteristics from environment ([ I foot deeper areas provide adult holding existing conditions. within 5 feet offshore). and refuge especially when Occasional deeper combined with overhanging banks areas. or other complex structures. Intermediate depths for vegetation. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK01H . KS9PUN3 r- W.o: WU-W - WX Page 3 9 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandunj Areas to be dredged of wood chips are con-unonly associated with highly anaerobic conditions (RETEC, 1997), thus little beneficial habitat currently exists in the dredging areas. No long-term negative impact is expected from the activity. Dredging of the wood chips is expected, to have a net long-term benefit on fish habitat in the area. The areas are expected to be rapidly recolonized with benthic invertebrates and flora, and shortly thereafter with the larger species which prey on these organisms. Ecology specifications for cleanup standards should prevent sublethal impacts to the fishery from the wood leachates and anaerobic chemical processes after remediation. 3-2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Caggin Upland soil excavation and capping activities have the potential to introduce sediment to Lake Washington. Excessive sediment introduction can result in reduction of nearshore habitat availability. Excessive fine sediments can elevate turbidity which can have a detrimental effect on fish communities. High turbidity can impact fish directly through changes in behavior and physiology, or indirectly by decreasing food supply and habitat availability. Behavioral modifications include cessation of feeding and outmigration. Physical reactions include excessive mucus secretion, excretory interference, and respiratory complications resulting in possible suffocation (Redding et al., 1987). An erosion and sediment control plan would be developed and implemented to contain all significant sediment sources, thus no significant impacts to fish resources should be expected from the upland activities. February 17, 2000 ASSRCTATED EARTH SQENCES, INC: AC #hM-KBW14Zasz.zo.A:vd+z-as-wzx Page 40 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.0 MITIGATION The wildlife habitat within the remediation area is primarily found along the shoreline. The goal of the wildlife mitigation is to expand and enhance the plant communities and other habitat features (e.g., down woody debris) along the Quendall and Baxter shorelines. All wetlands on the Quendall and Baxter parcels are Class 3 wetlands (per City of Renton categorization) that require replacement at a 1:1.5 (impact: restoration) ratio by the City of Renton. Wetland communities would be replaced with higher value Class 2 forested wetlands in two areas. The northern area would include the present Iocation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E). The southern wetland mitigation site would be a large complex along the southern Quendall shoreline. Wetland hydrology would be primarily controlled by Lake Washington. Vegetation and logs would provide shoreline protection as found under current conditions. Water quality functions would be limited in these wetland systems due to the limited area that would drain into these wetlands, similar to existing wetland'conditions. The biological support provided by the wetland mitigation areas is expected to be greater than currently provided by the five wetland areas (A through E) that would be impacted by the remediation because two large and enhanced wetland areas would be linked by a restored 100-foot vegetated shoreline. The resultinghabitat would also support greater vegetative diversity and structure than current conditions, including an overstory conifer component. Conceptual mitigation actions are summarized in Figure 4-1 and discussed below for each remediation action. 'Wetland mitigation is not proposed along intact portions of the shoreline unaffected by remediation (for example, northern Baxter) or in areas of Quendall with extensive monitoring requirements under the cleanup action plan. Shoreline enhancement and restoration has been placed where the shoreline will be impacted by the remediation (Quendall shoreline north to Baxter cove). A trail north to south with perpendicular extensions to controlled outlooks landward of the OHWM is expected with subsequent development of the site. A trail is not proposed as part of the remediation mitigation. Nonetheless, mitigation enhancement for the remediation is considered to constrain any future trail and public access as follows: 1. The main north to south trail would be landward of the buffer. 2. Perpendicular trail extensions to controlled Lake Washington outlooks would be allowed to extend into the buffer, with buffer widths extended to make up the area lost to the trail. 3. All access would be controlled to within the trail and outlook system, using some combination of dense or thorny native vegetation or fencing. Signs would be posted indicating the wildlife value of the buffer, indicating ownership, and restricting access. 4. The buffer perimeter may be averaged. February 17, 2000 ASSOCMTM EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ,, Cx#htra • KMI42,t37-1A-DAhM-M - wax Page 41 LAKE 014 r; ,�;HING TUN z 4 C1 4? "�191 0 1D0 200 300 400 APPROX I MA7 SCALE IN FEET 4 V= ASSOCIATED CONCEPTUAL SHORELINE AND WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN FIGURE 4-1 EARTH QUENDAL.1_ AND BAXTER PROPERTIES DATE 9124/99 SCIENCES, INC REMEDIATION FOOTPRINT n RENTON. WASHINGTON PROJ- NO. KB99142A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.1 Plants and Animals 4.1.1 Disturbance to Qugndall Shoreline and Loss of Wetland C The goal of the Quendall shoreline mitigation is to replace existing vegetated shoreline areas (including Wetlands A & B) and Wetland C with similar or enhanced vegetated/habitat conditions. The following actions will be conducted to mitigate for shoreline wildlife habitat impacts: Establishment of an averaged 140-foot-wide zone of native plant communities along the impacted shoreline that is currently only poorly vegetated or lacking vegetation. Shrub species will be established along most of the revegetated shoreline (Figure 4- 2). Trees will be established along at least 50 percent of the shoreline and cover at least 50% of the wetland restoration areas (Figure 4-3). PIant diversity will be increased from current conditions. A list of plants proposed for the restoration plantings are provided in Table 4-1. Wetlands A, B, and C will be replaced with enhanced functions on a 1:1.5 area (impact: restoration) in one wetland complex associated with Lake Washington in the current location of Wetland A, totaling approximately 1.11 acres (Figure 4-4). The length of the wetland complex along the shoreline will at least equal current shoreline wetland area (approximately 395 feet). The creation of one larger system comprised of more diverse communities (e.g.; conifers) will increase wetland value. Wetland hydrology will be controlled by lake level during the summer and stormwater release from the developed project during the winter, and is thus guaranteed. Vegetation species composition and diversity will be increased in the wetland buffer from the current condition. The wetland buffer will be expanded from 25 feet to 50 feet because the newly created, wetlands associated with the Iake would be classified by the City as Class 2 wetlands, rather than having the existing Class 3 status. The increase in buffer width reflects Renton's requirements for the improved wetland values. Woody debris will be placed in all re-created shoreline habitats, including replacement of logs as necessary along the shoreline. Wetland and buffer slopes would average 4:1 or less in most areas, although some banks may rise more steeply to provide diversity in limited areas so long as erosion risk can be avoided. If contaminated material removal coincides with wetland placement, one or two snags could be installed where clean fill is placed. February I Z 20bD ASSOCIATED EAR71Y SCIENCES, INC. ACxghlU-xa99142A57-rD-D:VdU.m.rr2 Page 43 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-1. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers SC�t�'Ik�CIVAi� :, COIVIlI�ONNAl1�E; Shallow Emergent Wetland Carer obnupta slough sedge Carex stipata saw -beaked sedge l leocharis ovara ovid spike-rush Juncus oxymeris pointed rush Sagittana latifolia broadleaf arrowhead Scirpus rnicrocarpus small -fruited bulrush Veronica Americana amerkan brookl me, Deep Emergent Wetland Alisma pkwago-aquatics water plantain scirpus acutus hardstem bulrush Scirpus validus softstem bulrush Semb-Shrub Weiland Corpus sericea red -osier dogwood Lonicera involucrare black twinberry Physacarpus caphatus Pacific ninebark ,Pyrus fusca western crabapple Rhamnus purshiana cascara Ribes lac ustre swamp gooseberry Rosa rurtkana Nutka rose Rosa pisocarpa pea -fruit ruse Rubus spec rabiils salmonberry Salix fucida var. lasiandra Pacific willow Salix sitchensls Sitka willow February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED E,l RTH SCIENCES, 1NC. ACxrrtre- res99142A57- to-D. unt2-aa - w2.K Page 44 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-1. Plant Species Proposed for Planting within the Wetland and Shoreline Buffers (continued). SGM tlFl€GNAh f COM14[QN,1ti1AM Forested Wetland Fraxinus lafifolia Oregon ash Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce Populus trichocarpa black cottonwood TWa piicata western redeedar Upland Forest (trees and shrubs) Acer Jrcinatum vine maple Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple Arbutus trterrziesii Pacific madrone Berberis 1Mahoida] spp. Oregon grape Cornus nullaIN Pacife dogwood Gaullheria shaUon salal Gemleria ceiwiformis Indian plum Pinus contorta shorepine Populus trerrruloides quaking aspen Pruaus emarginata bitter cherry Pseudotsuga tnenziesii Douglas -fir 77rula plicara western redcedar Tsuga heterophylla western hemlock Upland Shrub Acer circinatum Vine maple Amelanchier alrWolia serviceberry Corylus cornuta hazelnut Rosa spp. rose Rubus parviflorus thimbleberry Salix spp. willow Syngrhoricarpos albus snowberry February 17 2000 ASSOCIAYED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Aexghttd. KBW14 ts7- td-n: utu-oo - wzx Page 45 a NORTH -SOUTH TRAIL (Outside Outer Edge of Buffer) 100-Foot Averaged Shoreline Buffet Shrub plaating� interspersed with grassy openings & occosional upright deaducus tree (Le. quaking aspen). woody debris placement Overhang at shoreline edge with red osier dogwaod develop shallow & deep emergent plarr =munities as lake level fluctuation allows FIGURE 4-2 ASSOCIATED SHORELINE ENUNCEMENT CONCEPT EAPTH DATE 9 0199 SCIENCES, INC (SHRUB-00MMATED CROSS SECTIOM)PRo.c. NueaoEa Ka99742,a , , , 100-Foot Averaged Shoreline Buffer s Plant native species near the share ine and transition to horticultural/non-native species as needed to blend into the overall site landscape plan LLJ z, r_ r� r� , r , , Provide overhang at shoreline edge with native willows and red osier dogwood i r r Ak -1 1 ` r r Develop area of emergent vegetation (i.e. bulrush, arrowroot) as r WN NORTH -SOUTH 1, TRAIL F "r (Outside Outer Edge of Huffer) AL OBSERVATIONIAREA VIEWP0INT (Typical, Reached By Perpendicular Extensions From faint hail) Selectively place woody debris within the near shore native species planting area to provide additional wildlife habitat structure using both detiduous and coniferous logs ranging from 4" to 36' dbh. Snags could also be installed. all"�ed by lane level fluctuation. Ar MAssocwrim SHORELINEL'�lI�CEA�E�`T CONCEPT�rcuRe 4-3 EARTH SC ENDS INC(TREE-DOMINATED �`O�Tr io�sa X PROJ. NUMBER KB99142A JaMASSOCIATED ML' m= WULAND DESIGN EARTH DATE 10/99 SCIENCES, INC FOR LUE Wiff)VINGTON SHOREUME PRO,i, NO, K893942A Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.1.2 Excavation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E) and Loss of Wetland D The following actions will restore wetland habitat in an area centered around Baxter Cove: Turtles currently existing in Baxter Cove will be live -trapped and removed to nearby areas in Lake Washington containing suitable habitat. Dispersal areas will be identified in conjunction with County and WDFW wildlife biologists. When remediation has been completed and Baxter Cove has been replanted, attempts will be trade to capture turtles from the dispersion areas and return a small population (6-12 individuals) to Baxter Cove. • Dredged areas will be filled with clean material of a similar grain size and to elevations similar to current conditions. This will recreate a hydrologic regime that supports open water and emergent vegetation components. The area_ will be replaced with suitable clean fill material. • The Baxter Cove wetland area will be expanded by excavating additional areas (to a total of approximately 0.46 acre) to provide a 1:1.5 forested wetland replacement for the Baxter Cove wetland (Wetland E) and Wetland D. • Logs will be partially buried and/or anchored along the lake shoreline at the mouth of Baxter Cove to stabilize the shoreline and provide resting platforms for turtles and waterfowl. • Logs will be floated across the open water mouth of Baxter Cove. Large down logs will be placed in the wetland perimeter. • Shallow and deep emergent wetland species will be planted to establish an emergent plant corniiaunity with greater diversity than is currently found in Baxter Cove; a bench to appropriate depth for shallow emergents will be constructed during regrading with clean fill after the excavation is complete. • Obligate and facultative wetland tree and shrub species will be planted at the wetland perimeter. A 50-foot forested and shrub upland buffer will be planted, with a slope of 4:1 or less throughout most of the buffer. Trees will comprise at least 50 percent of native canopy cover in areas where tree and shrub communities are established. An osprey nest platform will be erected in the buffer if the cable station crest platform is removed during remediation. 4.1.3 D ed a Offshore Areas with Greater Than 50 Percent Wood Chi s No mitigation action required. The remediation will improve the existing condition and restore the lake bottom to its original contours. February 1 Z 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Acfirklyd- xa99142A57- uD-o.•vcu-m- WK Page 49 Quendall and &titer Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4._1.4 Dredge Offshore_PAH Areas No mitigation action required, other than replacement to original contours with clean material of a similar grain size. 4.1.5..Upland _Soil and Excavation and Canpin Wildlife habitat impacts will be compensated by habitat created along the shoreline. This will include: Replacement of Wetlands C and D on a 1:1.5 area basis in the two wetland complexes associated with the shoreline restoration (as discussed above); ' Enhancement of the vegetation species composition and diversity of the wetland and wetland buffer from the current condition (Table 4-1 and as discussed above); Placement of woody debris in wetland and associated buffers. As a result of these mitigations, the following improvements would result: 1.05 acres of existing degraded Class 3 wetland replaced by 1.58 acres of replaced Class 2 forested wetland hydrologically supported by Lake Washington; Approximately 53,500 fe of degraded shoreline vegetation (including wetlands and buffers replaced/enhanced by approximately 115,000 fe of shoreline vegetation and buffers; an average 100-foot Lake Washington enhanced shoreline buffer, in excess of the Renton minimum code requirements of 50 feet (commercial) or 25 feet (residential). 4.2 Fisheries Ntigation Fish habitat mitigation for remediation impacts would take place along the shoreline and is closely integrated with wetland mitigation activities. Mitigation planning was directed towards creating a high quality nearshore rearing environment as the first priority. Physical shoreline characteristics and the final mitigated condition are shown in Table 4-2. 4.2.1 In -Water Work Timinu To minimize impacts to sensitive fisheries resources, the timing of work in Lake Washington and along the shoreline below the ordinary high water mark will avoid the annual migration of juvenile salmonids (see Section 3.2.2). To protect the juvenile runs from physical disturbance and short- term turbidity, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife recommends no in -water work in southern Lake Washington during the period from February 1 through June 15. Therefore, February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK#kfld - xesvtazAsr • LD-D &U-0o - W2x Page 50 Quendail and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandums dredging and clean sediment replacement on the lake bottom and all work below the OHWM along the shoreline, including Baxter Cove, would be conducted between June 16 and January 31. Water quality protection measures are described in Section 4.3. Additional details required to protect species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act will be provided as necessary during the biological review process for those species. 4.2.2 Shoreline Disturbance Vegetation removal resulting from the remediation activities would be mitigated by replanting the nearshore environment as described in Section 4.1. The riparian width would vary, but would average 100 feet. A minimum of 50 percent of the remediation shoreline buffer would be planted with low growing native groundcovers and shrubs. Together with the existing shrubbery remaining outside the remediation area, the total linear distance of shrubs would include 1,490 feet of shoreline. Plants along the shore would be selected to maximize overhanging vegetation and provide bank stability. Compatible species would be planted in those areas converted to wetland from the existing conditions. A minimum of 50 percent of the remediation shoreline would be replanted with trees for a total of 1,135 feet (tree planting would be concurrent with other shrub and groundcover vegetation). Trees close to the waterline would be selected to provide similar functions to those described for the shrubs. Mitigation for loss of nearshore wetlands was described in Section 4.1 _ Enhanced wetland habitat along the Baxter shoreline will replace areas with relatively poor fish habitat conditions (e.g., vertical dirt banks, abandoned structures, rip -rap) with a vegetated gently sloped shoreline. Wetland replacement would result in increased low -gradient shoreline and a more diverse shoreline structure. Reductions in the extent of vertical dirt bank, rip -rap, log bollards, and several industrial structures would be accomplished (Table 4-2). 4.2.3 Dredge Offshore {PAH and Wood Chins) No direct habitat mitigation is proposed for offshore dredging undertaken to remove PAH and wood chip contamination except for re-establishing and enhancing the Baxter Cove shoreline. 4.2.4 Upland Soil Excavation and Canning Potential upland soil excavation and capping impacts would be mitigated to the greatest extent practicable with implementation of an erosion and sediment control plan. No other mitigation is proposed. February 17, 2000 ASSOMTED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. AC #hN - KB49142A57. W-D.102-00 - MK Page 51 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-2. Mitigated Lake Washington Shoreline Characteristics (3,130 ft. surveyed April 11, 1997) r Ex�stm ' Coll � �,oal U' tj6d -7 Dtsiitnte (96) E Linear Instance Coverage- L'Iran�a- Linear att},Nsr from d e rang; £rout E 7; XM Vegetation none 800 26% 1460 47% +83% 75 2% -931A -91% blackberry 1 425 46% IWO 32% -309b 540 17% 46% -62% shrubs 905 29% 670 21% E-76% 6 + 1490 48% +122% +65% trees 170 2:5%. 425 14% -45% + 1135. 36% +167% +47% - wetland 535 17% 255 8% -52% -14 1070 34% +320% +100%1 Bank Protection beach 8W 26% 495 15% 40% + 1120 36% +131% +39% vertical dirt 930 .10% 730 24% -19% 4560 21%: -12% -29% riprap 415 13% 335 1196 -"% 335 Ili +0% -19% huftead 1 0 0% 0 - 0% +0% 0 0% +0% +0% log bollard 515 16% 435 14% -16% 283 9% 40: 45% pier 55 2% 35 1 -36% 35 1% +0% -M% building 35 1% 35 1% +0%. 35. 1% +0% +0% log skid 35 1%. 20 1% 431.1 01 0% -100% -100% undercut 110 4% 110 4% +0% —f- 80 3% -27% -27% inlet 820 26% 690 22% -16% -/+ 820 26% +19% +0% less 2550 81% 1505 48% 41% + 2550 91% +0% +0% .Subs1Mje2 mud/slit 755 24% 325 10% -57% 325 10% +0% -67%1 sand 1685 501 1080 35% -36% =I- 1030 35% +0% -36% gravel 690 22%1 1725 MS. +150% =/+ 172.5 55% +011 +150% wood waste 500 16%1 0. 0% -100% - 0 0% +0% -100% Depth' 0-1- 1775 57%1 17751 57%. +0% —f+ 1775 57% +0% +0% 1-21 870 28% 870 28% +0% _j+ 870 28% +0% +0% >21 485 15% 485 15% 1 +0%1 =I- 485 15%1 +0% Bank env assumes capping does not affW existing bank. Measured or sampled approxinuttely five feet out from shoreline. Woodwaste — areas whom cops and bark exceed 50% surface coverage. Rernediated condition assumes lake bed capped to original elevation with nmterialsized. similar to existing conditions. Mitigated condition assurnes 50% of drodged shoreline would be replanted with trees, 50% with shrubs, and wetland arm would be recreated as beach. February 17, 2OW ASSOCIATED FARM SCIENCES.INC. AC9,pfld - KM14Z437- W.D. WdQ-M - W29 Page 52 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 4.3 Water Quality Water quality impacts will not accrue from the proposed remediation and mitigation in the long term. These combined actions are expected to improve water quality over the existing condition. However, impacts in the short-term from implementation of the remediation action could occur if proper temporary erosion and sediment control (TESL) measures are not taken. A synopsis of likely TESC measures that would be proposed as part of the Consent Decree under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) is provided in Table 4-3. 4.4 Mitigation Implementation Schedule 4.4. 1 Baxter Property Based on the current projected schedule, the remediation activities could start on the Baxter property sometime in the fourth quarter of 2000. Upland excavation activities, including soil treatment, are projected to be completed within an 80-day period. Baxter Cove remediation activities are estimated to take approximately one month. Capping activities on the Baxter site should be completed within a 90-day period. Under a start date of the fourth quarter of 2000, the Baxter Cove excavation and fill activities would need to be completed prior to January 31, 2001 to accommodate the recommended fisheries window for in -water work of June 16 i to January 31"'. This would allow for completion of remediation activities on the Baxter site to be completed by the first quarter of 2001. The wetland restoration I mitigation activities in Baxter Cove would begin with the excavation of the areas adjacent to Baxter Cove that would be converted to wetland habitat. This excavation would at least include over -excavation of the planned grade for topsoil placement or whatever depth may be necessary to accommodate remediation excavation. Backfill of Baxter Cover and -the adjacent wetland expansion area would include a least 12 inches of topsoils. if remediation is initiated in the last quarter of 2000, the wetland mitigation area and shoreline areas disturbed by remediation activities on the Baxter parcel would be planted in the spring of 2001. if the remediation is conducted under an alternative schedule the area should be planted late fall, winter, or early spring, if possible. Temporary watering of the plantings would be conducted as necessary to establish the plants. Long-term watering would not be required for these plantings. 4.4.2__Quendall Property Remediation activities on the Quendall property would likely begin after .Tune 16, 2000. Rernediation of the Quendall site involves much more extensive in -water dredging than the Baxter site, where in -water dredging is limited to Baxter Cove. Upland excavation activities are also more extensive on the Quendall site than the Baxter site. The materials dredged from Lake Washington would be transported to the upland areas of the Quendall property to be treated on -site or off -site. These materials would likely be brought onto the site just south of Wetland A. February l % 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACVjhRd.KW91# 57•t.D-D:v U4109.1V2x Page 53 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Table 4-3. Mitigation of Short -Term Impacts Related to Site Cleanup `.Cleanup Activity :. Possible M'itigatlon A oacih General Site Controls Where possible a vegetative buffer will he left between upland activities and the lake, In all places, silt fencing will be installed to prevent sediment from entering the lake. In addition, the site will be graded, as necessary, to prevent stomiwater discharge to the lake (Chapter 173-201A WAC establish water quality criteria). Measures recommended in the 1999 draft Volume 11 Stormwater Management in Washing n State will be considered representative of "typical" best management practices (BMPs) for much of the upland site work. Excavation and Dewatering Excavations will bedewatered, as necessary, to prevent handling ofsaturated soil excavated from below the water table. Water will be treated and preferentially discharged to the local sanitary sewer with prior permission. If lake discharge is necessary, specific testing regimes and criteria for lake discharge would be agreed with. the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). Sorge capacity will be provided by the use of rented storage tanks. Excavated soil will be stockpiled and provided with appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls_ Dredging - Baxter Cove Baxter Cove will be hydraulically isolated from the lake using steel sheet piles or similar. Free water will be pumped off for discharge to the sanitary sewer. Excavation will be performed. using land -based equipment. Dredging - Quendall Silt curtains or screens will be used to control the spread of turbidity from dredging. Turbidity criteria under WAC 173-201A-030 can be modified to allow a temporary mixing zone during dredging of lake bottom sediments, however the point of compliance would not be further than t5O feet from the dredging activity pursuant to WAC 173-201A-110(3)(d). Dredging will be perfamttd using specialized equipment (e.g., CableArm'"), techniques, and dredge rates that limit the potential for generating turbidity and that do not cause excecdances of surface water quality criteria outside the work area. Most chemicals present on -site will be strongly associated with sediment particles. Surface water qualiry monitoring will be performed during dredging to ensure no impacts are occurring beyond the work area. This plan would be developed as a part of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE errnittin . Sediment Transport and Haul barges for mechanically dredged sediment would be welded water tight to prevent discharge of free Offloading - Mechanical water back into the lake. Offloading will occur by placing the haul barge as near to sbore as possible. (Spillage Prevention) Offloading will occur with a clamshell or similar. A spill apron barge may be used under the cruse swing area to oollect any incidental spillage - Sediment Transport and Any sedimem dredged hydraulically will be pumped directly to the upland portions of the site using a Offloading - Hydraulic pipeline. (Spillage Prevention) Sediment Staging and Dredged sediment will be contained in barges or upland dewatering cells or ponds. Free water will be Dewatering collected and treated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Dewatering from hydraulic dredging would require discharge to Lake Washington after treatment due to the large volumes it would generate. Upland cells or ponds will be fined, will have a water collection system, and will be constructed with berths to prevent run-on or run-off. Off -Site or On -Site Hauling Entry points to the site will be upgraded with crushed rock or quarry spalls, All trucks leaving the site will proceed through a wheel wash and any soil tracked onto public roads will be addressed through occasional street washing. Process waste water could be controlled and kM separate from storm water. Soil Capping A clean sail cap will be placed over large portions of the site. The soil will consist of imported clean or treated soil. As for general site activities, a vegetative buffer will be left between the soil cap and shoreline to the maximum extent practicable. Other erosion and sedimentation controls, noted above under general site controls, will remain ut place until redevtlo t activities commence. Water Treatment Any water collected from soil or sediment dewatering will be treated using some combination of equalization, free -phase hydrocarbon separation, coagulation/flocculation (for example, polymer treatment), or filtration. Discharge water would Conform to standards required by its receiving location. If discharged to lake Washington, Chapter 173-201A WAC would apply. lfdischarged to the sanitary sewer, King County/Metro standards would a 1 . Permitting Treated dewatering water and stormwater discharge will be permitted under a Consent Degree in conformance with MTCA (Chapter 70-105D WAG). Under RCW 90.48.039, remediation actions do not require a separate National Pollutant Discharge E it iinatiom System (NPDES) construction -phase permit; however, there mast be compliance with substantive requirements of an NPDES permit. A detailed Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed prior to implementation of the final cleanup, plan. February 17, 2000 ASSOCb1TED EAR TH SCIENCES, INC. Acx/1h/td - KBi+ I f2A57 - L": Vd12-W - N7K Page 54 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum If all of the remediation activities on the Quendall site are completed within a single fish window opening (June 16, 2000 to January 31, 2001), the wetland mitigation and shoreline plantings could be conducted in the second quarter of 2001 (assuming a June 16, 2000 start date). If the remediation dredging activities cannot be completed within a single fish window period, the dredging activities would be halted from February I" through June 15' and be completed in the following Fish window opening. Wetland mitigation could not be completed until the dredging activities are completed since the materials would be brought onto the site in the proposed wetland mitigation area (southern QuendalI shoreline). If the remediation activities in the northern portion of Quendall are completed in the first season, the shoreline mitigation plantings, north of the wetland mitigation area, could be implemented in the first or early second quarter of 2001, and the wetland mitigation implemented after the dredging is completed the second year (project first second quarter of 2002. If not, all wetland and shoreline mitigation activities would be initiated when all remediation activities are completed. Again, plantings would be irrigated on a temporary basis as needed to successfully establish the plants. 4.5 Monitoring and Contingency This section outlines post -construction performance standards, a monitoring schedule, maintenance requirements, and contingencies for the proposed buffer and wetland enhancement project. As proposed, monitoring to document plant survival would occur five times over a 10-year period. Each monitoring survey would be conducted by a qualified biologist. 4.5.1 Performance Standards The success of the remediation mitigation effort would be based on the following standards: Survival of 90 percent of the tree and shrub species plantings and 10 to 15 percent cover for emergent wetland plantings after one growing season. Percent survivorship would be calculated through a direct count of all dead rooted and severely stressed stock plantings within permanent sample plots. If necessary, the reason for the failure of plantings would be determined (i.e., soil conditions, herbivory, moisture conditions, etc.), and recommendations to rectify the problem(s) provided. Survival of SO percent of the tree and shrub plantings and 30 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings after two growing seasons within the representative permanent sample plots. Fifteen percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 60 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after three growing seasons. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK%hlfd-K894r42Asr.c,n-D.Udk2-W-wrx Page 55 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Thirty to 40 percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 75 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after five growing seasons. Forty to 55 percent cover for the tree and shrub plantings and 75 percent cover of emergent wetland plantings within the representative sample plots after 7 and 10 years. For all years less than or equal to 5 percent cover of non-native, invasive herbaceous species. 4.5.2 Maintenance A goal of this plan is to establish communities of native plant species that require little planned scheduled maintenance to become established, and require no routine maintenance after the plants have become successfully established, The planting contractor would be responsible for maintaining all plantings for a one-year period after installation before the final project acceptance is issued to the contractor. A temporary irrigation system would be used as needed during plant establishment. No permanent irrigation system would be required once the plants have successfully become established. 4.5.3 Monitorin During the first monitoring survey, randomly selected 5-meter radius plots would be permanently established within the restored habitats to provide a representative sampling of the tree and shrub plantings. One -meter square plots would be established to monitor the emergent wetland plantings. The entire area would be visually inspected at the time of sample plot establishment to ensure that the plots are representative of site conditions. Information on survivorship and percent cover would be collected from inside the permanent sample plots to judge the success of the restoration plantings. Information collected during each monitoring survey would not be of sufficient quantity or complexity to provide a statistical analysis for the project. However, it would be sufficient to adequately assess the success of the restoration efforts. Photo documentation stations would be permanently established either at the center of the permanent sampling plots, or at other Iocations that provide representative views of the mitigation areas. Photographs taken at these photo stations would be Used to document the establishment of planted materials and to illustrate plant community changes within the restored areas. Percent survivorship for the project would be calculated through a direct count of -all dead and severely stressed plantings within the permanent sample plots. Plant vigor would be evaluated using the following categories: live; stressed; tip die -back; and dead. Live plants would be judged to be those with healthy, vigorous stems, and adequate succulent foliage. Plants having sparse or desiccated foliage, significantly damaged twigs, sunburn or sunscald, etc. would be assigned to the stressed category. Plants suffering from significant stem mortality, especially the leader and/or February 17. 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC- ACK#Mld - K899142AS7 - iD-D.-VdU-00 - N'2X Page 56 Quendali and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum main stem, would be placed within the tip die -back category. Plants found to support no foliage or live stems would be assigned to the dead category. Severely stressed plants and plants with tip die -back and no healthy basal sprouts or side branches would be considered dead for that monitoring period. During the first year following restoration, monitoring would occur during early spring before lake water levels rise and late summer before lake water levels are lowered. The focus of the initial spring monitoring survey would be to assess the suitability of the planting location selected for a particular plant species in relation to the lake water levels during the early growing season. Additionally, general observations of wildlife use of the enhanced habitat would also be noted. Photographs would be taken at each of the permanent photo stations during each monitoring survey, and current photographs from these photo stations would be included in the report prepared for that particular monitoring survey. 4.5.4 Monitoring Schedule All monitoring surveys would be conducted by a qualified biologist. Monitoring and reporting would be conducted over a 10-year period as follows: 1) Immediately after plant installation to provide an as -built plan. The as -built review would include the establishment of the photo stations and documentation of the distribution of plant materials. 2) Early spring (i.e., March, April) and late summer (e.g., September) of the first growing season. 3) Late summer of the second growing season. 4) Late summer of the fifth growing season. 5) Late summer of the seventh growing season. 6) Late summer of the tenth growing season. 4.5.5 Monitoring Reporting The as -built report for the restored habitats would be submitted to the reviewing agency when completed, and all subsequent written reports would be submitted to the reviewing agency no later than October 15t' of the monitoring year for review and approval. The written reports would include: Condition of plants, including survivorship, percent cover, health, and vigor. Rationale for poor condition of plants, if present, would be determined and" recommendations to rectify these conditions would be provided in the report. A February 17, 2000 ASSOCUTED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. AM)hfid - JrM142A5? - rD-o_ uais-X - wzx Page 57 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation analysis Memorandum discussion of the natural establishment of species not included in the planting plants (desirable and weedy species) would also be provided. Observations .of wildlife use. Photo documentation from the permanently established photo stations. Overall condition of the restored habitats and nearshore habitat, including indications of erosion, human disturbance, etc. 4.5.6 Contingency flans Appropriate, contingency plans would be developed as necessary to correct problems identified during the monitoring (i.e., planting failures, shoreline erosion, etc.). 1f plant survivorship does not meet the established criteria, replanting would be conducted only after the reason for failure has been identified (e.g., poor planting stock,. incorrect moisture regime, herbivory, disease, shade/sun conditions, hydrologic conditions, vandalism,. plant competition, etc.). Any replanting effort required would occur between October 15°" and March 15°i, or the following spring. All contingency plans would be submitted to the reviewing agencies for their approval prior to implementation. Therefore, timing of implementation would be dependent upon agency staff availability and scheduling. A report would also be submitted to the reviewing agencies following the implementation of any contingency plans. February 17, 2000 ASSWA ED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. dcx"nd - AB99142A57- r n-D 102-ao - MK Page 58 Quendali and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum 5.0 REFERENCES Bennett, J. and Cubbage, J. 1992. Effects of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from Lake Washington on freshwater bioassay organisms and benthic macroinvertebrates. Ecology Report, 28 p. plus appendices. Burgner, R.L. 1991. Life history of sockeye salmon (Omorhynchus nerka). Pages 3-117 in: Groot, C. and L_ Margolis, eds. 1991. Pacific salmon life histories. UBC Press, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Entranco. 1995. Gypsy subbasin analysis, technical memorandum No. 2. Prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1997. Wetland determination report on the JAG Development Property, Renton, Washington. Prepared for CNA Architecture Group, Bellevue, WA. Fisher, L,, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Personal communication to Andy Kindig (Beak), June G, 1997. Heiser, D. W. and E. L. Finn, Jr. 1970.- Observations of juvenile chum and pink salmon in marina and bulkheaded areas. Supplemental progress report, Washington State Department of Fisheries. September 1970. 28 p. King County. 1993. Sammamish River corridor conditions and enhancement opportunities. King County Surface Water Management, Seattle, WA. 54 p. plus appendices. Larson Anthropological/Archeological Services, 1997. Cultural Resonance Assessment JAG Development, King County, Washington. Technical Report 97-7, March 27, 1997. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. 1997. Draft summary of Lake Washington studies completed by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in the vicinity of the Port Quendall project. Provided by Rod Malcom, habitat biologist. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Environmental Division, Auburn, WA. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro). 1989. Quality of local lakes and streams 1987- 1988 status report. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Water Resources Section, Water Pollution Control Department, Seattle, WA. Norton, 1991. Distribution and Significance of Poiycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Lake Washington Sediments Adjacent to Quendall Terminals/ J.H. Baxter site. Ecology Report, 73 p. Norton, 1992. Results of Sediment Sampling in the J.H. Baxter Cove, Lake Washington - June 1991. Ecology Technical Document, 18 p. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CKdhlyd-xa99tsz,sr-Lb.u:ue1z-W-xnx Page 59 Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Aw6uis Memorandum Pfeifer, B. and J. Weinheimer. 1992. Fisheries investigations of Lakes Washington and Sammamish, 1980-1990. VI Warmwater fish in Lakes Washington and Sammamish (draft report). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. Ratte, L, D_ and E. O. Salo. 1985. Under -pier ecology of juvenile pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in Commencement Bay, Washington. Final report prepared by the University of Washington, Fisheries Research Institute for the Port of Tacoma. FRI-UW-8508. December 1985. Shepard, M.F. and J.C. Hoeman. 1979. Some comparisons of benthis biota in control areas and areas affected by sewage effluent in Lake Washington, 1977 - 1978. U.W. College of Fisheries, Wa. Coop. Fish. Res. Unit, Seattle, WA. citation from EVS Consultants, 1990. Aquatic Resources of Lake Washington. Report prepared for Woodward -Clyde Consultants, Seattle, WA. November 19, 1990. Thermoretec (RETEC). 1997. Sediment quality memorandum. Consultant report prepared for Port puendall Company. April 29, 1997. Remediation Technologies, Inc., Seattle, Washington. University of Washington. 1996. U.W. Lake Washington Sockeye Workshop. Notes from presentations by Roger Tabor (USFWS), Roland Viera (U.W.) and Tom Sibley (U.W.) at U.W. conference held November 19, 1996. Washington Department of Ecology. 1995. 1994 Washington state water quality assessment, [305(b)] report companion document. Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Ecology. 1996. 303(d) Department of Ecology draft decision matrix for surface waters listed under section 303(d) included in 305b Report of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western Washington Treaty Indian Tribes. 1994. 1992 Washington State salmon and steelhead stock inventory, Appendix 1, Puget Sound stocks, South Puget Sound volume. WDFW, Olympia, Washington. Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 220 p. February 17, 2000 ASSOCIATED EAR771 SCIENCES, INC. AMjhItd-KB99142A57-ID-D:Udt2-00- W2K Page 60 J.H. BAXTER PROPERTY MITIGATION ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, dated February 17, 2000 Prepared for.• Vulcan Northwest 110 110" Avenue NE, Fifth Floor Bellevue, Washington 98004 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 5' Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fax: 425-827-5424 October 2. 2000 Project No. KB99142B An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties J. U. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Analysis Memorandum Dated February 17, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................1 2.0 REMEDIATION IMPACTS TO THE BAXTER NORTH PARCEL ..........................2 3.0 REMEDIATION IMPACTS TO THE BAXTER SOUTH PARCEL ........ ......... :........ 2 3.1 Disturbance to Shoreline..........................................................................2 3.2 Dredge Offshore Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH) ..............................2 3.3 In -Water 50 Percent or Less Wood Waste....................................................2 3.4 Upland Soil Remediation and Capping. . ....................................................... 3 4.0 SOUTH BAXTER MITIGATION....................................................................3 4.1 Wetlands D and E..................................................................................3 4.2 Offshore Grey Zone Alternative Actions......................................................4 4.3 Timing of In -Water Work ......................................................................4 4.4 Water Quality........................................................................................5 4.5 Mitigation Implementation Schedule ........................ . ......... ..........................5 4.6 Monitoring and Contingency.....................................................................5 4.7 Mitigation Assurance ................................ . ..... ..........5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Remediation Activities and Wetlands and Shoreline Vegetation on the South J.H. Baxter Property......................................................6 Figure 2. South J.H. Baxter Property Remediation Mitigation.....................................7 October Z 2000 ASSOCUTED EARTH SCIENCES INC. ACxftd . KS"142Bf • tn-o: u 1040 . w2K Page i An Adderndum to the Quendall and Barter Properties J.N. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Anal sis Memorandum Dated Februa 17, 2000 1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this addendum is to define mitigation incumbent on the prospective purchaser of the J.H. Baxter property as an element of the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) approval of a Consent Decree and Cleanup Action Plan for the North and South Parcels of the J.H. Baxter property. The mitigation obligation would result from the impacts of remediation of the South Parcel of the J.H. Baxter property ("Baxter South Parcel") under a Consent Decree with Ecology. The Mitigation Analysis Memorandum for the combined Quendall Terminals and J.H. Baxter properties collectively described mitigation agreed for remediation of both the Quendall Terminals and Baxter South Parcel properties, without specifically separating the two', This addendum was prepared consistent with the aforementioned memorandum to clarify mitigation for the South Baxter Parcel alone, in the event remediation of that parcel proceeds independently or on a different timescale from remediation on the Quendall Terminals Parcel. Quendall Terminals will move forward under different ownership and their obligations will be addressed pursuant to the Quendall Terminals Consent Decree and Cleanup Action Plan, which will be negotiated with Ecology by the City of Renton, All mitigation in the Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (AESI, 2000) not specifically defined as an obligation for the Baxter South Parcel in this addendum is an obligation for remediation on the Quendall Terminals property. A reference site on Lake Washington will be used to develop the final mitigation plan that will detail the plant communities, structural habitat elements (e.g. woody debris), site grades/hydrology, and construction maintenance specifications. The reference site will be used only to refine the design concepts identified in the February 17, 2000 Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. All referenced site information will be included in the final mitigation plan, as well as hydrology "performance" standards that will be based on conditions documented at the reference site. The final mitigation plan will be submitted for review and approval to Ecology and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). No elements of the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum will be changed by the final plan. The final plan will simply provide the design, construction, and maintenance details of the concepts agreed to in the February 17, 2000 Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. This addendum is not a stand-alone document, and requires the reader to refer to the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Quendall and Baxter Pro rties (AESI, 2000). ' Associated Earth Sciences, Inc, (AESI), 2000, Mijg, tia on Analysis Memorandum. _Quendall and Baxter Properties: Prepared for Vulcan Northwest and the City of Renton, dated February 17, 2000. October 2, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKIM- K09914295 • L.D.D;W%J0-00. W2K Page 1 An Addendwn to the Quendall and Baxter Properties J.N. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Ana! sis Memorandum Dated Februa 17, 2000 2.0 REMEDIATION IMPACTS TO THE BARTER NORTH PARCEL There are no remediation impacts to shoreline or wetland resources which would occur on the North Parcel of Baxter. Consequently, no mitigation is proposed on the Baxter North Parcel. 3.0 REMEDIATION IMPACTS TO THE BARTER SOUTH PARCEL Remediation activity planned for the Baxter South Parcel is shown in Figure 1. This figure was adapted from Figure 3-1 in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. 3.1 Disturbance to Shoreline Land -based shoreline remediation on the Baxter South Parcel will consist of capping, which is not expected to directly impact the existing Baxter South Parcel shoreline or its vegetation (refer to Section 3.1.1, AESI 2000). 3.2 Dredge Offshore Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAID Wetland E (Baxter Cove) will be dredged to remove polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) impacted sediments, which will remove all vegetation and woody debris in the wetland and most of the adjacent vegetated area. Please refer to Table 3-2 in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum for a summary of wetland impacts to the 0.23-acre Wetland E. Turtles will be displaced from this shoreline area during the dredging activities. Red -wing blackbird nesting habitat will be eliminated. 3.3 in -Water 50 Percent or Less Wood Waste An offshore "grey zone" area with less than 50 percent wood waste is present in Lake Washington off the southern shore of the Baxter South Parcel (Figure 1). Bioassay testing of sediments in this grey zone is underway, and the results of those tests will be used to determine which of the following remediation responses would occur in the grey zone: (1) If determined to be clean, no action would be required. (2) Complete dredging of the area to remove the less than 50 percent wood waste could be required- The grey zone area is approximately 10,000 square yards in area. October 2, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKRd WZK Page 2 Air Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties J. H. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum ,Analysis Memorandum Dated Februag 17, 20M 3.4 Upland Soil Remediation and Capping Wetland D (0.08 acre), and all upland vegetated areas on the Baxter South Parcel, would be eliminated by upland soil excavation and capping, with the exception of a narrow band of existing shoreline vegetation to the south and north of Wetland E (a.k.a. Baxter Cove) along the Baxter South Parcel shore (Figure 1). Please refer to Table 3-2 in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum for a summary of impacts to Wetland D and to Section 3.1.5 in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum for a more detailed description of vegetation habitat affected by -upland remediation and capping. 4.0 SOUTH BAXTER MITIGATION 4.1 Wetlands D and E Wetlands D and E would be eliminated as a result of remediation of the Baxter South Parcel. Under a Consent Decree in conformance with the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) (RCW 70.105D), remediation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for the remediation action, which would include City of Renton wetland mitigation requirements (please refer to Section 1.1 in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum for greater detail). However, compliance with the substantive requirements of these laws and regulations are ensured by Ecology through issuance of the Consent Decree for the Baxter South Parcel. Both wetlands are Class 3 wetlands per the City of Renton's categorization, that would require replacement at a I.A .5 (impact: restoration) ratio by the City of Renton. Ecology has agreed to the 1:1.5 restoration ratio as one element of the mitigation package for the Baxter South Parcel. Wetlands D (0.05 acre) and E (0.23 acre) would be replaced with one higher value Class 2 forested wetland (0.46 acre) in the present location of Baxter Cove (Wetland E). A 50-foot (possibly buffer - averaged) vegetated and enhanced buffer referenced in the February 17, 2000 memorandum would be placed around the restored wetland (Figure 2). The 50-foot averaged wetland buffers will meet the following criteria: • Remediation monitoring facilities (i.e., monitoring wells) and necessary access will be allowed within the wetland buffers. The buffer area displaced by such facilities will be added in another portion of the same wetland buffer. Outside of remediation monitoring facilities and the Puget Sound Energy exception parcel, the averaged wetland buffer areas cannot be reduced to widths less than 40 feet. October 2, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACK114 - K89914035 • LD-0: vdtlap0 - W2K Page 3 An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Analysis Memorandum Dated February I7, 2000 + The final configuration of the averaged wetland buffers is subject to approval by Ecalogy. Wetland hydrology will be .controlled by lake level. Storrnwater from any future developed project may be released to the wetlands. Any stormwater released to the wetlands would be treated prior to its release, if such treatment were required. Vegetation and logs would provide shoreline protection as found under current conditions. Water quality functions would be limited due to the limited area draining to the restored and enlarged Baxter Cove wetland, similar to existing conditions in Wetlands D and E. The biological support provided by the wetland mitigation area at Baxter Cove is expected to be greater than is currently provided by Wetlands D and E. if and when remediation and mitigation along the Quendall Terminals properties occurs, the remediated wetland on the Baxter South Parcel would be connected to another wetland at the south end of the Quendall Terminals shoreline by a restored 100-foot vegetated shoreline along Quendall Terminals. Specific wetland habitat restoration activities to replace the excavation of Baxter Cove (Wetland E) and the loss of Wetland D are detailed in Section 4.1.2 of the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. Those details include live -trapping and replacement of turtles in Wetland E, among other elements of wetland creation and enhancement. Plant species proposed for planting within the wetland buffers are listed in Table 4-1 (AESI, 2000). [The note referencing the inclusion of horticultural or non-native species in a transition zone within the buffer should have been deleted. No horticultural or non-native species will be planted in the shoreline buffer, wetlands, or wetland buffers. 4.2 Offshore Grey Zone -Alternative Actions No mitigation action is required. The remediation, no matter which alternative is determined necessary, will improve the existing condition. If in -water dredging is required in the grey zone, then the timing of work in Lake Washington below the ordinary high water marls (OHWM) will avoid the annual migration of juvenile salmonids (see Sections 3.2.2 and 4.2.1 in AESI 2000). 4.3 Timing of In -Water Work The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends no in -water work in southern Lake Washington during the period from February 1 through June 15 to protect juvenile salmonid runs .From physical disturbance and short-term turbidity. Therefore, any grey zone work and all work in Baxter Cove would be conducted between June 16 and January 31. Additional details required to protect species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) will be provided as necessary during the biological review process for those species. October Z 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKRQ- xa.rt428s - LD P. a►taou. wax Page 4 An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties J. H. Baxter Property Mitigation Mitigation Analysis Memorandum Analysis Memorandum Dated February 17, 2000 4.4 Water Quality No long-term impacts will accrue from the proposed remediation and mitigation, except for the obvious improvement gained through the removal or sequestering of listed contaminants under the Consent Decree. However, short-term impacts from implementation of the remediation activities could occur without proper temporary erosion and sediment control (TESL) measures. A synopsis of likely TESL measures would be proposed as part of .the Engineering Design Report for the Baxter South Parcel. These measures would consist of all applicable portions of 'fable 4 (in AESI 2000). 4.5 Mitigation implementation Schedule Scheduling for the Baxter South Parcel mitigation is described in Section 4.4.1 (in AESI 2000). 4.6 Monitoring and Contingency Post -construction performance standards, a 10-year monitoring schedule, maintenance requirements, reporting, and contingencies for the proposed buffer and wetland enhancement on the Baxter South Parcel are described in Section 4.5 (in AESI 2000). 4.7 Mitigation Assurance The Consent Decree for the Baxter South Parcel would provide assurance that the mitigation proposed in this document and in the Mitigation Analysis Memorandum will be performed. The Consent Decree will also require that the mitigation installation, oversight, and monitoring contractor be identified in advance to Ecology. October 2, 2000 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. ACKna - Ke991+2B5 - t.o-a:,tduaoa - wrK Page 5 r. LEGEND 00 vvw1+ Area of rgnmaiation impact along ma snorelme ,peg CVP4v Su2Wd1N CFW WAGE / �.� Lass than 50%wood waste jno aciron. cappng. partial 00pinq, partial dredge. or pomplele (Irecge. .`� to OB dalBrrtdnBd) Dredge tp 6' and replaced will) Wean material E¢ to original grade 0 !/ , Dredgeto 3' and replaced wIln dean material yyQO I..�f L, � to Original grade o� reWm Gcap with clean matenaE or P M redevelopment WETLAND NORTH , :1�0 J.H. BAXTER fj i ,t Excavated 1p rep01red depth to ramova 4 f , � � contaminants or sludge: in situ slatxli;ed to I& below ground surface or replaced w M dean - - — -- material to tapped grade (See Note 2) ,{� \ f�`-�'F w—a Stackberry ' Trees WETLAND ! :�•. p_ f NOTE: t ALL HABITAT. WETLAND. AND PROJECT FEATURE r! LOCATIONSAND QUANTMES ARE APPROXIMATE. `f .` • - 2 SEE FmAL CLEANUP ACTION PLAN FOR ACCURATE CLEANUP OETAILS. QUENDALL a TERMINAL$ NORTK fir � � .� l •�1 ,� ; 1� o�wu - !r. fff; � � � wana4iwwfE SCK!«r,Er /1!�lIOG�A►TEG R81NED{ATIONACTIY3TYAND T WETWNOPARCEL SHORELINE VEGETATION FIGURE 1 tiFtE*EC ATMFH. GTPFUNEL GarE usroa �isil"1 REMEWATION f00T►R1MT mac"INC845, INC 014TOH.wnaHINWON PROJ Ho rce99142e Lake Washington Wetland Reference Site Memorandum (AESI, July 31, 2001) Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. EN im REMEDIATION WETLAND MITIGATION LAKE WASHINGTON WETLAND REFERENCES SITES J.H. BAXTER SOUTH PARCEL Renton, Washington Prepared for: The Port Quendall Company Project No. KB99142A July 31, 2001 911 MM AVENUE • SUITE 100 • KIRKLAND, WA 99033 • P:4231827-770I • F:425M7-3424 0 t 1 N ! l a 100 200 MCI I EVISED LOT 15i � I I k 3 itr rr � a r�r � - �rr � r°r LJJPROPO ED NEW PARC LINE BAXTER SOUTH PARCEL � +*ado 0 W AVERAGE BUFFER G} o► 3 ovo 4 4 I �~ �- O O� i of �� O O t , 4 0.46 AC. a APPROXIMATE AREA OF ` ' 00 o MITIGATION WETLAND I m A BAXTER SOUTH PARCEL MITIGATION FIGURE ASSOCIATED EARTH SOUTH BAXTER PARCEL SCIEt+1OM INC RENTON. WASHINGTON J.N. Barter South Parcel Remediation Wetland Uitigation Renton. Washin ton Lake Washin ton Welland Re erences Sites INTRODUCTION The proposed remediation action on the J. H. Baxter South Parcel site involves capping, excavation, and in situ immobilization of contaminated areas (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAH], pentachlorophenol [PCP], and non -aqueous phase liquid (NAPLJ). Contaminants in Baxter Lagoon (Wetland D) and Baxter Cove (Wetland E) will be removed or stabilized in place. Wetland habitat will be restored in Baxter Cove to mitigate the wetland impacts resulting from the approved rernediation action. The restored Baxter Cove will replicate current inundated and saturated soil conditions over a broader area than currently exists. Cattail (Typha latifolia), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and rush (Juncos spp.) currently dominate the vegetated wetland areas of Baxter Cove. Open water conditions also exist. As agreed with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), reference sites on Lake Washington were reviewed to develop the plant communities proposed within the final wetland mitigation plan. Since relatively undisturbed, pristine wetland habitats do not occur along the Lake Washington shoreline, information on wetland and wetland buffer plant community composition and structure was collected at Mercer Slough, Luther Burbank Park, Juanita Bay, and St. Edwards Park. This information, upon which the wetland mitigation plan for the J.H. Baxter South Property site was prepared, is summarized below. REFERENCE SITES Mercer Slough Information collected at the Mercer Slough site consists primarily of data on the wetland plant community as much of the buffer supports residential, commercial, and municipal uses. Areas within the Mercer Slough wetland that are permanently inundated and seasonally inundated predominantly support Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasit), cattail, Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), Sitka willow (Salix scouleriana), red osier dogwood (Corpus stoloniferia), hardstern bulrush (Scirpus aculus), and small -fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus). Slough sedge (Carex obnupta) was noted in several areas of seasonally inundated I permanently saturated areas; however, this species is not dominant. Common species noted in the seasonally saturated areas include black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), red alder (Alnus rubra), Sitka willow, salmonberry (Rubes speclabdis), lady fern (Athyrium frlix femina), soft rush (Juncos e,,itstu), horsetail (Equisetum spp.), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens). Gooseberry (gibes spp.) was also observed in this habitat, but this species is uncommon. In drier areas (e.g., raised hummocks), mountain ash (Sorbus sitchensis), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), and bedstraw (Gallum spp.) are common. Hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) was also observed in upland areas adjacent to the boardwalk trail system that is located throughout the wetland. July 31, 2001 ASSOCUTM EARTIf SCIENCES, INC JAVop- - »ix Page l J.H. Baxter South Parcel Renmediation Wetland Mitigation Renton, Washin ton Lake Washin tort Wetland Re erences Sites Luther Burbank Park The non -maintained portions of the Lake Washington shoreline within Luther Burbank Park primarily support willows and cattails. However, Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) is also common within park -area wetland habitats. The buffer of the Luther Burbank Park wetlands consists primarily of invasive species (e.g., Scotch broom [Cytisus scoparius], reed canarygrass, etc.) and maintained park areas. Juanita Bay Wetland habitats within the greater Juanita Bay wetland complex include palustrine forested, palustrine scrub -shrub, palustrine emergent, palustrine unconsolidated bottom, and lacustrine littoral aquatic bed wetland habitats. However, within the vicinity of the Lake Washington shoreline, palustr`ine scrub -shrub -and palustrine emergent wetland habitats are dominant. Dominant woody vegetation within the vicinity of the Lake Washington shoreline consists primarily of Pacific willow and Sitka willow. However, black cottonwood, red alder, Oregon ash, red osier dogwood, twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), Douglas spiraea, and Himalayan blackberry are also locally abundant. Dominant herbaceous plant species within the vicinity of the Lake Washington shoreline include reed canarygrass, creeping buttercup, skunk cabbage, and lady fern. Other herbaceous species occurring within the general vicinity include small -fruited bulrush, soft rush, horsetail, curly dock (Rumex crispus), Cooley's nettle (Stachys cooleyae), common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus), brooklime (Veronica sp.), water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa), and stinging nettle (Urtica dioicq). Common plant species in the relatively undisturbed buffer of this wetland located approximately 500 feet upgradient of the Lake Washington shoreline include bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder, black cottonwood, western redcedar (Thuja plicata), salmonberry, red elderberry, hazelnut, and stinging nettle. Conifers such as Douglas -fir (Rseudotsuga menziesir) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) occur, but are currently relatively uncommon. However, these tree species were likely common prior to development of the local area. St. Edward State Park Upland forest habitats along the shoreline of Lake Washington in the vicinity of St. Edward State Park are .relatively undisturbed. Dependent upon the local moisture regime, plant species common to these habitats include Douglas -fir, western hemlock, western redcedar, bigleaf maple, red alder, vine maple, salmonberry, thimbleberry, hazelnut,, Oregon grape, salal, and sword fern. July 31, 2001 .ISSOC14 M EARTH SCIENCa INC JWhp - KWUMM - DOWP1gpMOt -, Mr Page 2 J.N. B=IerSouth Parcel Remediation Wetland Mitigation Renton, Washington Lake Wmhington Weiland References Sires SUMMARY As noted above, relatively undisturbed, pristine wetland habitats do not occur along the Lake Washington shoreline. However, in those instances where native vegetation was observed within the vicinity of the reference sites, these species were incorporated into the wetland mitigation planning for the J.H. Banter South Property site as practical. Judy 31. 2001 ASSOCUTED EARTH SCIENCESa INC. fav�-ttJsarts-viw•or-a�K Page 3 Attachment 3 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan South Baxter Property Renton, Washington Attachment 3 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan J.H. Baxter South Property Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 SW Klickitat Way, Suite #207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Number: JAGCO-02438-895 Prepared for: Port Quendall Company 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 May 13, 2002 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan J.H. Baxter South Property Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 SW Ktickitat Way, Suite #207 Seattle, Washington 98134 RETEC Project Humber: JAGCO-02438-895 Prepared for: Port Quendall Company 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 Prepared by; Kristin T. Hendrickson, Environmental Engineer JenrAfer P. ToKel, P.E., Environmental Engineer Reviewed by: G��A �e� L'-X� Grant Hainsworth, P.E., Project Manager May 13, 2002 P;IDOCS%243 Eil&95TinaMBaxl&MPIM.doe Table of Contents 1 Introduction.. ....................... ........ ............................ .......... ......................... 1-1 1.1 Background ............................................ ............................................ 1-1 1.2 Purpose ................................................ ........ .................................. -...1-1 2 Environmental Cap Inspections and Maintenance ......................... I ............ ...2-1 2.1 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Requirements..... ....... ................... 2-1 2.1.1 Inspections......--....................................................... ..... 2-1 2.1.2 Maintenance...... .................................... .......................... —... 2-1 2.2 Documentation and Reporting... ................ ................................ ...... 2-2 3 Soil Management Plan................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Ecology Notification.......................................................................... 3-2 3.2 Health and Safety.............................................................................. 3-1 3.3 Soil Stockpiling. ............................... ................................................. 3-1 3.4 Analytical Testing.............................................................................. 3-2 3.5 Backfill............................. ............ ...................................................... 3-2 4 Groundwater Monitoring Plan....................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Monitoring Plan ......................................................... ........................ 4-1 4.2 Schedule.............................................................................................4-2 4.3 Data Evaluation and Reporting.......................................................... 4-2 5 Long Term Wetland Monitoring.................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Monitoring .... .................................... ................................................. 5-1 5.2 Monitoring Schedule.......................................................................... 5-2 5.3 Monitoring Reporting......................................................... ............. 5-2 5.4 Contingency Plans............................................................................. 5-3 Appendix A Sampling and Analysis Plan Appendix B Groundwater Sample Filtering Rationale JAGCO-02438-895 i List of Tables Table 4.1 Potential Cleanup Levels for Groundwater... ... ........................................ 4-3 JAGCG-02438-845 List of Figures Figure 1-1 Baxter Property Location ............................ Figure 2-1 Extent of Environmental Cap ....................... Figure 3-1 Typical Environmental Cap Cross Sections. Figure 4-1 Compliance Monitoring Network ................ Figure 4-2 Groundwater Monitoring Flow Chart ......... ............. .............. ,.............. 1-2 .................................... 2-3 ... ......... I ........ I ............... 3-3 ............ ................... I .... 4-4 ............................ 4-5 JAGC"2438-895 iii 1 Introduction 1.1 Background The Baxter South Property is located on the eastern shore of Lake Washington on the former delta of May Creek (Figure 1-1). The property was essentially undeveloped until the mid-1950s, when a wood treating facility- was constructed on site. All property histories indicate that both creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) treating solutions were used at the site until wood - treating operations ceased in 1981. Creosote was used to treat railroad ties and pilings, and PCP solutions were used to treat utility poles. Wood was treated and stored on the Baxter South Property and was distributed to purchasers by rail or truck. Based upon historical usage of chemicals at the site as well as analytical data available from investigation activities described in the FS, the compounds of concern at the Baxter South Property are PCP and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). These compounds are known to exist in both soil and groundwater at the site as well as in sediment in Baxter Cove. 1.2 Purpose The purpose of this Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan is to detail the activities required upon completion of remedial activities. Maintenance, monitoring, and contingency plans are outlined in this report. JAGCa02438-895 t _ t r} h ONM Dort Hill! S1v72T1d $C \{ :SITE c..k 1 Kcnnyd.k,-- oPFi nier &adfi f ' � 0 >s, �` NORTH / PROPERTY / SOUTH PROPERTY BAXTER COVE ' O ' r BAXTER t% 04N r , 0 I O / to , OQ / 79A� F Ac 0 100 200 400 SCALE IN FEET J.H. BAXTER J.H. BAXTER I&RETEC JAGCO-02438-845 PROPERTY LOCATION DATE: 5/10/01 1 DRWN: A-S./SEA I nLE: 24385361 LAYOUT: L4youtl FIGURE 14 2 Environmental Cap Inspections and Maintenance This section details the inspection and maintenance (I&M) requirements for the environmental cap at the Baxter South Property_ This plan will guide future maintenance (if necessary) of the cover. Figure 2-1 provides a -plan view of the soil cover area. 2.1 Cap Inspection and Maintenance Requirements 2.1.1 Tenant Notification Facility tenants will be informed about the existence of the environmental cap. Specific items for notification and information exchange include: Informing all on -site and temporary workers of site environmental conditions, including environmental conditions below the cap; • Restricting penetrations of the cap; and Informing all on -site and temporary workers of the need and mechanism for reporting damage to the cap or construction that may affect the cap. 2.1.2 Inspections Visual inspections of the environmental cap will be conducted quarterly during the first year following cap installation. After the first year, PQC will verify for Ecology that no significant issues were apparent and inspections will be performed annually thereafter. Additional inspections will be performed when any damage to the cap is reported. Any indication of soil disturbance or settlement such that ponding occurs will be further investigated. Any indication of soil erosion such that the identifier layer is being exposed will also be investigated. The inspection will also include examining the development features for cracks or other damage. 2.1.3 Maintenance Based upon inspection results, areas of damage will be evaluated to determine proper repair. Areas where erosion has occurred or where the identifier layer is exposed may require replacement of the soil cover. Replacement may include placing additional soil so that the thickness is as least 3 feet above the identifier layer, and ensuring that adequate erosion control measures are in place in the affected area; For areas capped by development features, crack repair will occur only in those areas where development users are potentially JAGCO-02438-895 2-1 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan, J.H. Baxter South exposed to hazardous vapors (i.e. methane). Other repair or replacement of cap areas will occur where the cap is sufficiently breached to allow potential dermal contact. 2.2 Documentation and Reporting Environmental cap conditions and relevant observations will be noted during each inspection. At a minimum, each inspection event will require that a log be completed. All field logs associated with each inspection event will be compiled into an inspection report. Documentation regarding all cap inspection and maintenance activities will be maintained. Relevant summary information related to soil cover inspection and repair will be included in reports to Ecology. Ecology will be notified of any non -trivial inspection report (i.e., a report that indicates damage or unusual conditions). Structure or cap maintenance is permitted without notice to Ecology so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are .followed. A Soil Management Plan (Section 3) outlines specific protocols associated with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. JAGCO-02938-895 2_2 o�Ty 'y i '' apRoo_ 1 LEGEN� ENVIRONMENTAL CAP RETEc J.H. BAXTER JAGCO.0243M50 I I DRWW: As./SEA I nLE: k N A 0 60 120 240 SCALE IN FEET EXTENT OF SOUTH BAXTE:R ENVIRONMENTAL CAP 3 Soil Management Plan Section 1 of the restrictive covenant states: "Without prior written consent of Ecology, except as provided below, the Owner shall not alter, modify, or remove any structures or caps as required by the Cleanup Action Plan in a manner that may result in the release or exposure to the environment of contaminated soil or create a new exposure pathway without prior consent from Ecology. Structure or cap maintenance is permitted without notice to Ecology as long as appropriate health and safety protocol are followed." .The restrictive covenant further states: "A Soil Management Plan will be prepared for Ecology approval that outlines specific protocols associated with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. In accord with the Soil Management Plan, limited excavation, utility placement or repair, minor site grading, or other pre -approved activities connected with site development are permitted so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed and a structure or cap that provides protection from direct contact as required by the Cleanup Action Plan is provided following development." An environmental cap shall be installed during remedial activities that will separate site users from the chemicals of concern present in surficial soil. The cap includes an identifier layer at the interface between the native soil and the imported cover soil. This identifier layer will serve as a visual indicator to alert future site maintenance workers of their proximity to native soil, and it will physically separate the existing native soil from the new soil cover. This Soil Management Plan outlines the protocols associated with any future soil excavations that breach the identifier layer. 3.1 Health and Safety Workers handling native material shall have HAZWOPER training and be required to wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). Air monitoring shall be conducted to determine possible hazardous conditions and to determine the appropriate level of PPE. Appropriate decontamination procedures of personnel and equipment shall be employed before leaving the site. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) specifies additional health and safety requirements for hazardous waste sites (29 CFR 1910.120). 3.2 Soil Stockpiling If stockpiling of the soil is necessary, it shall be held in a lined cell with appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls. 'These erosion and sedimentation controls include, but are not limited to, berms to prevent run-on and run-off and placement of an impermeable cover over the stockpile. The stockpile cover shall be held in place with sand bags or similar material. JAGCG-02438-895 3-1 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan, J11, Baxter South Property 3.3 Analytical Testing The stockpile of native material shall be visually inspected for contamination. If staining or sheening is present, the soil shall be deemed contaminated and it shall be transported off -site for disposal. If there is no visual evidence of contamination, samples shall be taken for PAH and BTEX analysis. If concentrations exceed cleanup levels the soil shall be transported off -site for disposal. 3.4 Backfill Clean, imported fill material shall be used to backfill the excavation if contaminant concentrations in the native material are found to be in exceedance of cleanup levels. Once backfill is complete, the identifier layer and the environmental cap shall be reinstalled. This cap will be at least 3 feet thick and will consist of imported clean or treated soil or other appropriate development features (Figure 3-1). 3.5 Notification In accordance with the restrictive covenant, Ecology will be notified of any activity not covered by this Plan. Ecology shall be notified 30 days prior to planned activities and within 30 days after unplanned emergency access JACCO-02438-895 3-2 0 5' CONCRETE CLEAN SOIL 3' SLAB CRUSHED ROCK ° ° ° ° INDICATOR DICA OR LAYER OR \ \ 1' INDICATOR LAYER / (GEOTEXTILE OR \ / \ \ SIMILAR) / \ SIMILAR) / / NATIVE MATERIAL �\ NATIVE MATERIAL TYPICAL ENVIRONMENTAL RETEC CAP SECTIONS dAGCaR2438-895 DATE: 5/10/01 OMM: A.S./SEA ME: 2438g054 LOW. Layout]FIGURE 3•i 4 Groundwater Monitoring Plan The selected remedial action for groundwater includes monitoring at a conditional point of compliance and institution of deed restrictions to prohibit use of site groundwater as a source of drinking water. Groundwater quality will also be addressed by substantial source removal and stabilization, described in the EDR. The groundwater remedial action will also include a compliance monitoring plan, described below. Based on shoreline groundwater samples collected in October 1998 and January 2000, groundwater discharges to the lake currently meet cleanup levels. Additional source area rernediation (excavation and stabilization) will further improve groundwater quality, so the future need for contingent remedies is not anticipated. 4.1 Monitoring Plan Monitoring is one of the threshold requirements for cleanup actions under MTCA (WAC-173-340-360(2)). Compliance monitoring, as defined in WAC 173-340-410(I)(c), is described in this section. This monitoring is intended to confirm the long -terra effectiveness of remedial actions. The point of compliance is the shoreline. Compliance monitoring will consist of monitoring shoreline wells to ensure protection of surface water. Existing wells BAX-8A, BAX-813, BAX-6S, BAX-6D and BAX-15 will comprise the compliance monitoring network. The compliance monitoring network is shown in Figure 4-I. Samples will be collected following the protocols outlined in the Sampling and Analysis flan, (Appendix A). Groundwater will be collected utilizing a low -flow sampling method. Samples will be field filtered. A rationale for field filtering has been prepared in accordance with WAC 173-340-720 and is included in Appendix B. The wells allow for monitoring of groundwater quality within the silty peat zone and the lower sand zone. These well pairs are located at lateral spacings of approximately 100 feet along the shoreline, and groundwater will be analyzed for PAH and PCP by EPA Method 8270 SIM. The data will be used to establish trends in groundwater quality over time and determine whether groundwater discharges to the lake meet cleanup levels. Cleanup levels for groundwater were selected as the minimum of the applicable cleanup standards. In the event that this value was below the practical quantitation limits (PQLs), the PQL was selected as the cleanup level as specified in WAC 173-340-700(6). Table 4-1 provides a list of the cleanup levels for groundwater. JAGCO-02438-895 4-1 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan, .1If. Baxter South Property 4.2 Schedule Figure 4-2 presents a flow chart outlining the compliance monitoring plan and contingent action implementation and also provides the sampling schedule. Because samples from shoreline wells currently meet cleanup criteria, the need. for implementation of contingent remedies is not anticipated. The compliance monitoring plan does, however, provide provisions for contingent remedial action; the specific actions will be evaluated as needed. The compliance monitoring plan consists of quarterly confirmation monitoring of shoreline wells until four consecutive sampling events show no .exceedances of cleanup levels. Semiannual sampling is then initiated until two consecutive years of sampling result in no exceedances of cleanup levels. Annual sampling is then initiated until two additional consecutive years of sampling show no cleanup level exceedances. Thereafter, sampling will be performed every 5 years until monitoring has been performed for a total of 30 years. At any time during the monitoring schedule, if an exceedance is observed in a shoreline well, confirmation sampling will be performed within 60 days of the original sampling. if the concentrations decrease below cleanup levels, the original monitoring schedule is resumed. If, after the first year of monitoring, the confirmation sampling confirms the exceedance, PQC will consult with Ecology regarding implementation of a contingent remedy. 4.3 Data Evaluation and Reporting Compliance monitoring data will be reviewed as collected and a summary report will be prepared for each groundwater sampling event. Data will be evaluated to ascertain trends in groundwater concentrations, determine whether cleanup levels are continuing to be met, and whether modifications to the monitoring schedule are necessary, as outlined above and shown in Figure 4-2. Provisions for periodic review and Ecology oversight payment are included in the Consent Decree. JAGCO-02438-895 4-2 Table 4-1 Potential Cleanup Levels for Groundwater (g/L) Contaminant of Concern MCL (EPA, 1996) MTCA Method A Groundwater (WAC 173-340) MTCA Method B Groundwater (WAC 173-340) MICA Method B Surface Water" Fresh Water Quality Criteria/Standards 40 CFR 131 ° Estimated Quantitation Limit (SW-846, Practical Quantitation Limitd Selected Cleanup Level Acute] Human (WAC 173- Chronic Consumption Nov. 1992) 340) of Or anisms Naphthalene - - 320 9,880 - - 10 0.3 9,880 Acensphthyiene - - - - -- - 10 0.1 - Acenaphthene - - 960 643 - - 10 0A 643 Fluorene - - 640 3,460 - 14,000 10 0.1 3,460 Phenanthrene - - - - -- - 10 0,1 - Anthracene -- - 4,800 25,900 -- 110,000 10 0.1 25,900 Fluoranthene -- - 640 90.2 - 370 10 0.3 90.2 Pyrene - - 480 2,590 - 11,000 10 0.3 2,590 Benzo(a)anthracene - 0,12 0.012 0.0296 - 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Chrysene - 0.1 a 0.012 0,0296 - 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Benzo(b)fluoranthene - 0.1 ° 0.012 0,0296 - 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Benzo(k)fluoranthene -- 0.12 0.012 0.0296 - 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 0.18 0,012 0,0296 -» 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene - 0.14 0.012 0.0296 - 0.031 10 0.1 0.1 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene --- - - - - - 10 0.1 - Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene - 0.1' 0.012 0.0296 - 0.031 id 0.1 0.1 Pentachlorophenol - - 0.729 4.91 20fT9 ° 8.2 50 - 4.91 NOTES: ' Value for carcinogenic PAHs. b Values obtained from MTCA Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC ll) update. ° AWQC, EPA, 1997. Human health (10'6risk for carcinogens) for consumption of organisms only. d PQL estimated based on a survey of local laboratories using EPA Method 8270 SIM. ° Pentachlorophenol chronic criteria based on pH -dependent formula (exp(1.005(pH)-5.290)) at pH 7.8. JAOCO-42438-V5 4-3 \ tER �p,RK BAX-6© 92' BAx-6S BAX-8A 76 ` anc 92' \ \ i LEGEND COMPLIANCE MONITORING WELL 13AXTER COVE k N 0 50 100 200 SCALE IN FEET COMPLIANCE MONITORING NETWORK DISCONTINUE MONITORING AT THIS LOCATION INSTALL APPROPRIATE SHORELINE WELLS QUARTERLY SAMPLING AT SHORELINE MEASURED GROUNDWATER CONCENTRATIONS < NO GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEYiwtS? YES CONFIRMATION SAMPLING < 60 DAYS NO ZFOUR OUARTERS WITHOUT EXCEEDANCES? YES SEMI—ANNUAL SAMPLING Al SHORELINE MEASURED GROUNDWATER NO CONCENTRATIONS [ GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS? YES CONFIRMATION ISAMPLING r 60 DAYS NO Two CONSECUTIVE - YEARS WITHOUT EXCEEDANCES? YES ANNUAL SAMPLING AT SHORELINE MEASURED GROUNDWATER CONCENTRATIONS < NO GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS? YES CONFIRMATION SAMPLING < s0 DAYS TWO NO CONSECUTIVE YEARS WITHOUT EXCEEDANCES? YES SAMPLING EVERY 5 YEARS AT SHORELINE MEASURED GROUNDWATER CONCENTRATIONS < NO GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS? YES CONFIRMATION SAMPLING < 60 DAYS NO / 30 YEARS OF MONITORING? CONFIRMATION MONITORING YES CRITERIA YES IN 3st YEAR NO CONFER WITH EXCEEDANCE OF MONITORING? ECOLOGY RE�,ARDINC CONFMmED� POTENT�gL CONTINGENT t#EMEDIES CRITERIA -'4,-_ YES CRITERIA YES EXGEEDANCE CRITERIA YES CXCEEDANCE NOTES: 1. GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS AS DEFINED IN THE CLEANUP ACTION PLAN. WAC 173-3400(8)(e)(sy) GROUNDWATER COMPLIANCE wAC 113-340-36-360(8)(h) MONITORING FLOWCHART SAGCO-02438.895 DATE: 5/10/01 DRWM; A.S./SEA I Fat: 2438f012 LAYOUT_ LayoutI IFIGURE432 5 Long Term Wetland Monitoring The long term monitoring of the wetlands are detailed in this section. The goal of the wetland mitigation is to establish communities of native plant species that require no routine maintenance after the plants have become successfully established. The planting contractor would be responsible for maintaining all plantings for a one-year period after installation before the final project acceptance is issued to the contractor. 5.1 Monitoring During the first monitoring survey, randomly selected 5-meter radius plots would be permanently established within the restored habitats to provide a representative sampling of the tree and shrub plantings. One -meter square plots would be established to monitor the emergent wetland plantings. The entire area would be visually inspected at the time of sample plot establishment to ensure that the plots are representative of site conditions. Information on survivorship and percent cover would be collected from inside the permanent sample plots to judge the success of the restoration plantings. Information collected during each monitoring survey would not be of sufficient quantity or complexity to provide a statistical analysis for the project. However, it would be sufficient to adequately assess the success of the restoration efforts. Photo documentation stations would be permanently established either at the center of the permanent sampling plots, or at other locations that provide representative views of the mitigation areas. Photographs taken at these photo stations would be used to document the establishment of planted materials and to illustrate plant community changes within the restored areas. Percent survivorship for the project would be calculated through a direct count of all dead and severely stressed plantings within the permanent sample plots. Plant vigor would be evaluated using the following categories: live; stressed; tip die -back; and dead. Live plants would be judged to be those with healthy, vigorous stems, and adequate succulent foliage. Plants having sparse or desiccated foliage, significantly damaged twigs, sunburn or sunscald, etc. would be assigned to the stressed category. Plants suffering from significant stem mortality, especially the leader and/or main stern, would be placed within the tip die -back category. Plants found to support no foliage or live stems would be assigned to the dead category. Severely stressed plants and plants with tip die -back and no healthy basal sprouts or side branches would be considered dead for that monitoring period, During the first year following restoration, monitoring would occur during early spring before lake water levels rise and late summer before lake water levels are lowered. The focus of the initial spring monitoring survey would be to assess the suitability of the planting location selected for a particular plant JAGCO-02438-895 5-1 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan, J.H. Better South Property species in relation to the lake water levels during the early growing season. Additionally, general observations of wildlife use of the enhanced habitat would also be noted. Photographs would be taken at each of the permanent photo stations during each monitoring survey, and current photographs from these photo stations would be included in the report prepared for that particular monitoring survey. The initial spring monitoring survey would be to assess the suitability of the planting location selected for a particular plant species in relation to the lake water levels. 5.2 Monitoring Schedule -A qualified biologist would conduct all monitoring surveys. Monitoring and reporting would be conducted over a I0-year period as follows: 1) Immediately after plant installation to provide an as -built plan. The as - built review would include the establishment of the photo stations and documentation of the distribution of plant materials; 2) Early spring (i.e., March, April) and late summer (e.g., September) of the first growing season; 3) Late summer of the second growing season; 4) Late summer of the fifth growing season; 5) Date summer of the seventh growing season; and G) Late summer of the tenth growing season. 5.3 Monitoring Reporting The as -built report for the restored habitats would be submitted to the reviewing agency when completed, and all subsequent written reports would be submitted to the reviewing agency no later than October 15th of the monitoring year for review and approval. The written reports would include: Condition of plants, including survivorship, percent cover, health, and vigor. Rationale for poor condition of plants, if present, would be determined and recommendations to rectify these conditions would be provided in the report. A discussion of the natural establishment of species not included in the planting plants (desirable and weedy species) would also be provided. • Observations of wildlife use. * Photo documentation from the permanently established photo stations. Overall condition of the restored habitats and nearshore habitat, including indications of erosion, human disturbance, etc. JAGCO-02438495 5-2 Inspection, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan, J.N. ilaxter South Properly 5.4 Contingency Plans Appropriate contingency plans would be developed as necessary to correct problems identified during the monitoring (i.e., planting failures, shoreline - erosion, etc.). If plant survivorship does not meet the established criteria, replanting would be conducted only after the reason for failure has been identified (e.g., poor planting stock, incorrect moisture regime, herbivory, disease, shadetsun conditions, hydrologic conditions, vandalism, plant competition, etc.). Any replanting effort required would occur between October 15th and March 15th, or the following spring. All contingency plans would be submitted to the reviewing agencies for their approval prior to implementation. Therefore, timing of implementation would be dependent upon agency staff availability and scheduling. A report would also be submitted to the reviewing agencies following the implementation of any contingency plans. J.4GCO-02438-895 5-3 Appendix A Sampling and Analysis Plan Appendix A Sampling Analysis Procedures South Baxter Prepared by: The RETEG Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite #207 Seattle, WA 98134 Retec Project Number: JAGCO-02438-895 Prepared for: Port Quendall Company 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, WA 98104 April 5, 2002 Appendix A Sampling Analysis Procedures South Baxter Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Suite #207 Seattle, WA 98134 Retec Project Number: JAGCO-02438-895 Prepared for: Port Quendall Company 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, WA 98104 . Prepa ed y: 7 K In T. H ndrickson; Environmental Engineer Reviewed by: Grant Hainsworth, P.E., Project Manager April 5, 2002 P,OOCSU43W51FinaMAP AppA 1M Plan.doc Table of Contents A.1 Introduction ................................. A.2 Groundwater Sample Collection.................................................................... 2-1 A.2.1 Purpose and Applicability...............................................................2-1 A.2.2 Responsibilities ...................... ....................................... .......... ........... 2-1 A.23 Supporting Materials.......................................................................... 2-1 A.2.4 Fluid Level Measurement...... . ..................................... ..................... 2-1 A.2.5 Well Purging Procedures................................................................... 2-2 A.2.6 Low -Flow Purging Method ....... ........................ ................................. 2-2 A.2.7 Groundwater Sample Collection..................................................... 2-3 A.2.8 Documentation...................................................................................2-6 A.3 Groundwater.................................................................................................. 3-1 A.3.1 Purpose and Applicability...... ............ _ ..................... ....................... 3-1 A.3.2 Responsibilities..................................................................................3-1 A.3.3 Supporting Materials.......................................................................... 3-1 A.3.4 Water LeveI........................................................................................ 3-1 A.3.5 Documentation ................................................ ................................... 3-2 AA Decontamination................................................. A.4.1 Purpose and Applicability ....................... A.4.2 Responsibilities., ...................................... A-4.3 Supporting Materials ............................... AAAMethods ................................................... ..... ........ ....... - .................... 4-1 ....................................... 4-1 ................................. 4-1 A.5 Sample Preservation, Handling, and Analysis ............................................... 5-1 A.5.1 Purpose and Applicability.................................................................. 5-1 A.5.2 Responsibilities ...................... ............................................................ 5-1 A.5.3 Supporting Materials... ....................................................................... 5-1 A.5A Sample Containers and Preservatives ................................................ 5-1 A.5.5 Sample Handling Procedures............................................................ 5-2 A.5.6 Chain of Custody Procedures ............................................. ............ 5-2 A.5.7 Analytical Methods ......................... ................... ................................ 5-3 A.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures ............................................. 6-1 A.6.1 Purpose and Applicability ............. ........ ........................................... ..6-1 A.6.2 Responsibilities..............................................................................6-1 A.6.3 Training ............................... ...................................... ......................... 6-2 A.6.4 Field Procedures and Sample Handling for Quality Assurance/Quality Control 6-2 A.6.5 Collection of Field Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples ...... 6-2 A.6.6 Field Measurement Equipment..........................................................6-3 A.6.7 Project Documentation..................................................................... 6-4 A.6.8 Internal Quality Control................................................................... 6-4 A.6.9 Corrective Action... ....................................................................... 6-4 JAGCO-02438-89J i Table of Contents A.7 Data Validation and Reporting..................................................................... 7-5 A.7.I Data Validation................................................._................................ 7-5 A.7.2 Reporting .......... ............ ............................. ......................................... 7-8 A.8 References ................................................. ................................. .................... 8-1 JAGCO-02438-895 ii List of Fables 'Fable A-1 Analytical Methods, Sample Containers, Preservation and Holding Times.............................................................. 2-6 Table A-2 Reporting Limits for Specified Methods ................................................. 5-3 JAGCaO2438-895 ; i List of Raures Figure A-t Groundwater Sampling Lag.......... Figure A-2 Well Gauging Lag ........................ ... 2-5 ... 4-3 JAGCO-02438-895 g v A.1 Introduction The purpose of the Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) is to provide consistent and defensible procedures that will be followed during groundwater compliance and performance monitoring at the Baxter North and South Properties. The SAP discusses field sampling procedures and quality assurance measures. This SAP describes procedures for: • Groundwater sample collection; • Groundwater elevation monitoring; • Equipment and personnel decontamination; • Sample preservation, handling, and analysis; • Quality assurance/quality control procedures; and • Data management, assessment, and analysis. The SAP was prepared following WAC 173-340-820 guidelines. The project schedule and identification and justification of sampling locations are included in the Groundwater Compliance Monitoring PIan. J.4GCO-01438-895 AIGroundwater Sample Collection A.2.1 Purpose and Applicability Monitoring wells will be sampled to characterize the quality of groundwater being discharged to Lake Washington. During the sampling events, wells will be purged and groundwater sampled using a low -flow sampling method- A.2.2 Responsibilities The project scientist will have the responsibility of overseeing sampling and ensuring that all groundwater sampling is performed in accordance with this plan. A.2.3 Supporting Materials The list below identifies the types of equipment for groundwater sampling of monitoring wells: • .Low -flow rate pump (peristaltic pump or dedicated bladder pump); • Meters appropriate for pH, specific conductance, temperature, dissolved oxygen, redox potential, and turbidity measurements; • Water level measurement equipment; • Decontamination solutions; • Field data sheets and log book; • Pressure filtration equipment; • Sample containers; • Personal protection equipment; • Buckets and intermediate containers; and • Coolers. A.2.4 Fluid Level Measurement After unlocking and opening a monitoring well, the first task is to obtain a water level measurement. Water level measurements will be made using the procedures described in Section A.3. Water level measuring instruments must be decontaminated before and immediately after use in a monitoring well using the procedures described in Section A.4. JAGCO-02438-895 2-1 Appendix A -,Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Barter A.2.5 Well Purging Procedures Purging must be performed for all groundwater monitoring wells before sample collection. Wells will be purged by pumping. For new wells, purging and sampling will be delayed a minimum of 24 hours after well development. Any non -dedicated equipment that is placed in the well must be thoroughly decontaminated before and after use. A.2.6 Low -Flow Purging Method Previous sampling activities conducted at the adjacent site demonstrated effective low -flow purging and sampling at rates less than 0.3 liters per minute. Purging and sampling will be conducted during groundwater compliance monitoring using low -flow rates from 0.2 to 0.3 liters per minute. Low -flow sampling methods will limit suspension of sediment that may accumulate at the bottom of the monitoring well and introduce representative groundwater into the well screen. The pump intake will be set near the midpoint of the well screen, and the level of the water table in the monitoring well will be measured to determine the maximum sustainable pumping rate. The maximum sustainable pumping rate will be defined as the rate which does not lower the water table by more than six inches. This method ensures that the water that is being pumped from the well is flowing through the well screen and not from within the well. Purge water will be monitored for pH, conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, redox potential, and turbidity. All parameters except turbidity will be measured using an in -line flow cell. Turbidity will be measured with a nephelometer immediately prior to sample collection. Meters will be calibrated prior to beginning sampling each day. Field parameter values will be entered on the Groundwater Sample Collection Record along with the corresponding purge volume. Liquid removed from the well will be pumped into a portable water tank or drums for temporary storage, then moved into a vacuum truck for disposal at an approved facility. Monitoring wells will be purged and sampled using a peristaltic pump with clean tubing. Peristaltic pump tubing will be decontaminated or replaced between wells. Field parameter measurements will be obtained throughout the purge period to assure that groundwater entering the well is representative of the aquifer. The well will be sampled after at least two consecutive parameter measurements made 3 minutes apart are within 10 percent of each other. Monitoring wells will be purged according to the following procedures: 1) Check and record the condition of the well for damage or evidence of tampering. 2) Unlock the wellhead and remove the casing cap. JAGCO-02438495 2-2 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter 3) Measure and record the depth to water with an electronic water level device. Do not measure the depth to the bottom of the well at this time to avoid disturbing sediment that may have accumulated. 4) Recheck and record the depth to water after approximately 5 minutes. if the measurement has changed more than 0.02 feet, check and record the measurement again. 5) Attach the tubing to the pump and slowly lower the pump or hose into the well. Place the inlet at the midpoint of the screen b) Start pumping the well at a rate of 0.2 to 0.3 liters per minute and maintain a steady flow rate. 7) Monitor the water level in the well at frequent intervals. Ideally, the pump rate would equal the well recharge rate with little or no water level drawdown in the well. S) Record the pumping rate, approximate volume pumped, and depths to water in the logbook. If the recharge rate of the well is very low and the water ievel drops below the level of the inlet, then the sampler must wait until the well recharges to a sufficient level and then collect the appropriate volume of sample. 9) Monitor dissolved oxygen and redox potential during purging. Monitor turbidity prior to sample collection. Dissolved oxygen and redox potential will be measured using an in -line meter. The parameters should be monitored for every sample tube volume (tubing from the pump outlet to the point of discharge). Once at least two successive readings of the parameters agree within 10 percent, then the purge water is considered stabilized and sampling may begin. A.2.7 Groundwater Sample Collection Samples will be placed directly into the proper sample containers. Sample bottles will be prepared by the analytical laboratory. The laboratory=s preparation will include addition of the appropriate preservatives to the sample bottles according to the EPA document Handbook for Sampling and Sample Preservation of Water and Wastewater (EPA-600/4-82-029). All samples will be handled according to the procedures described in Section A.S. Groundwater samples will be collected using a low -flow method in order to minimize the disturbance of particulate material that has settled at the bottom of wells. The samples will be collected directly from the pump in laboratory - provided sample containers. Groundwater samples for PAHs and PCPs will be field -filtered due to contribution of suspended solids to PAH concentrations in previous investigations. ASampling results, combined with leachability data described in Section 3.5 indicate that carcinogenic PAHs are JACCO-02438-845 2-3 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter not dissolved in groundwater, Low-level concentrations are thought to be associated with suspended solids in groundwater samples@ (EPR1, Section 3.3.2, 1999). In -line filtration is preferred whenever practical because it provides better consistency through less sample handling, and minimizes sample exposure to the atmosphere. Wells will be sampled according to the following procedures: After purging the monitoring well as described above and after the parameters have stabilized, fill the sample bottles. Samples collected for PAH and PCP analysis will be filtered using an in -line disposable 0,45-micron filter when possible. Samples should be filled directly from the tubing unless filtering must be conducted using an off-line filter, 2. When all the sample containers have been filled and before turning the pump off, measure and record the turbidity, dissolved oxygen, redox potential, pH, conductivity, and temperature. Record these readings in the logbook. 3. Remove equipment from the well, 4. Close and lock the well, 5. Between sampling locations, all nondedicated sampling equipment must be disposed of or decontaminated At least one duplicate sample shall be collected for each round of sampling. Duplicate water samples will be collected by filling two containers (or sets of containers) simultaneously from the sampler. Duplicate samples will be analyzed for the full set of constituents being tested. A set of field blanks will also be collected and analyzed for the full set of constituents being tested. Field blanks are collected by transferring deionized water into the appropriate sample container at the sampling site. Field blank and field duplicate samples will not be labeled as blanks or duplicates on the sample labels or chain of custody forms, but will be identified as such in the field logbook and on the groundwater sampling logs (Figure M ). Table A-1 outlines analytical methods, sample containers, preservation, and holding times for sampling parameters. JAGCO-02438-895 2-4 Figure A-1 Groundwater Sampling Log PROJECT NAME ffATF- DEPTH TO WATER (TOC-R) (wl.prot.-tt) DEPTH OF WELL (R WELL DIAMETER (inches) FEET OF WATER CASING VOLUME' (gaq PURGE VOLUME WD PRODUCT THICK (ft) WELL CONDITION WEATHER WELL NO. SAMPLED BY -XI 'E. ' : i t.£d°.-°' ✓ t `Jl`.r. ti *` ..d.1 ^E;C°.. START PURGE TIME: VOL PURGED TIME FLOW RATE (units) CONDUCTIVITY mhos/cm) TEMP. (C WATER COLOR PURGE AND SAMPLE EQUIPT: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION- TOC=Top of well casing wl.proL=top of well protector `casing volurna= u*(ft)x7-489a1103 Appendix A -Sampling Analysis Procedures, ,South Baxter Table A-1 Analytical Methods, Sample Containers, Preservation and Holding Times Holding Parameter Matrix EPA Method Container Preservative Time semivolatile Water 8270 (SIM) 4-liter 40C 7 days' Organics Amber (Field Filter) Glass Notes: ' Holding time for extraction z Ferrous Iron analyzed by Standard Methods a Parameters listed together to be sampled in same container If preserved sample bottles were not supplied by the laboratory, groundwater samples will be preserved in the field prior to packaging and shipment to the laboratory. Sample preservation requirements are discussed in Section A.S, Sample Containers and Preservatives. Sample bottles will be labeled, sealed in separate Ziploc plastic bags to assess leakage, and placed on ice to obtain and maintain a maximum temperature of VC. Samples will be shipped overnight to the Iaboratory or dropped off at the laboratory at the end of the day. It should be noted that if sample temperatures are above VC and are quickly transported to the laboratory, they may not reach a temperature of 40C prior to arriving at the laboratory, A,2.8 Documentation Documents will be completed and maintained to provide a summary of the sample collection procedures and conditions, shipment method, the analyses requested, and the custody history. The documents are: • Field- logbook; Groundwater sampling log; • Sample labels; • Chain of custody; and • Shipping receipts. ,me groundwater sampling log will include the following information: + Description of sample location; • Date and time of sampling; JAGCO-02438-895 2-6 Appendix A - Sampling Analysts Procedures, South ,Baxter • Name of samplers; • Weather conditions; • Description of sampling equipment; • Sample numbers and analyses; and • Any different and unusual observations. A groundwater sample collection record is included as Figure A-1, In addition, the labels affixed to the sample bottles will document the following information: • Sampler's name or initials; • Date and time of sample collection; • Sample location; and • Unique sample number. JACCO-02438-895 2-7 A.3 Groundwater A.3.1 Purpose and Applicability Groundwater levels will be measured during water sampling; to characterize groundwater flow directions at the Site. A.3.2 Responsibilities The project scientist will have the responsibility of overseeing groundwater elevation monitoring and ensuring that all monitoring is performed in accordance with this plan. A.3.3 Supporting Materials The list below identifies the types of equipment for water level elevation in the monitoring wells: • Water level measurement device; • Decontamination solutions; • Logbook;and Well gauging forms. A.3.4 Water Level Water level measurements will be made using either an electronic water level meter or an intrinsically safe electronic oil/water interface gauging probe if light nonaqueous-phase liquid (LNAPL) or dense nonaqueous-phase liquid (DNAPL) are suspected or known to be present. Water level measurements will be made in selected wells as outlined in Table 3-2 of the Groundwater Compliance Monitoring Plan. The measuring point location for the well should be clearly marked on the well casing or identified in previous sample collection records. If no measuring point can be determined, the northern edge of the casing should be the measuring point. Typically the top of the protective or outermost well casing will be used as the measuring point. The measuring point Iocation should be described on the Well Gauging Log (Figure A-2). To obtain fluid level measurements, lower the decontaminated electronic sounding unit into the monitoring well until the water surface is detected. The precise measurement should be determined by repeatedly raising and lowering the tape or cable to converge on the exact measurement. The water level should be entered on the Well Gauging Log. The sounding unit shall be decontaminated immediately after use. JAGCO-02438-895 3-1 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter A.3,5 Documentation The documents which will be completed and maintained to provide a summary of the water level measurement procedures include: • Field logbook; and • Well gauging log. J.4GC4-02438-895 3-2 AA Decontamination A.4.1 Purpose and Applicability Decontamination is performed as a quality assurance measure and a safety precaution. It prevents cross contamination between samples and also helps to maintain a clean working environment. The purpose of decontamination is to remove contaminated materials clinging to gloves, boots, equipment and sample containers prior to their removal from the work area. Decontamination also includes the removal and disposal of any contaminated clothing, gloves and respirator cartridges. Decontamination is achieved mainly by rinsing with liquids which include: soap and or detergent solutions, tap water, and deionized water. Equipment will be allowed to air dry after being cleaned. Decontamination will be accomplished between each sample collection point. Waste products produced by the decontamination` procedures such as waste liquids, solids, rags, gloves, etc. will be collected and disposed of properly based on the nature of contamination. A.4.2 Responsibilities The project scientist is responsible for assuring that the proper decontamination procedures are followed and that all waste materials produced by decontamination are properly containerized and labeled. The project scientist is responsible for enforcing safety measures which provide the best protection for all persons involved directly with sampling and or decontamination. Subcontractors (e.g., drilling contractors) will be responsible for following the proper, designated decontamination procedures that are stated in their contracts and outlined in the Project Health and Safety Plan. All personnel involved with sample collection or decontamination are responsible for maintaining a clean working environment and ensuring that any contaminants are not negligently introduced to the environment. A.4.3 Supporting Materials • Cleaning liquids and dispensers: soap and/or detergent solutions, tap water, deionized water, methanol or acetone; + Waste storage containers: drums, boxes, plastic bags; • Cleaning containers: plastic, galvanized steel and/or stainless steel pans and buckets; and • Cleaning brushes. JAGCO-02438-893 4-1 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter AAA Methods This section describes the methods to be used for the decontamination of all non -disposable field equipment which becomes potentially contaminated during a sample collection task. The extent of known contamination will determine the degree of decontamination required. If the extent of contamination cannot be readily determined, cleaning should be done according to the assumption that the equipment is highly contaminated. The standard procedures listed below can be considered the procedure for full field decontamination. If different or more elaborate procedures are required for an unexpected situation, they will be determined by the project scientist. Such variations in decontamination may include expanding the scope of the decontamination procedure stated herein. 1) Remove gross contamination from the equipment by brushing- 2) Rinse with tap water. 3) Wash with soap or detergent solution. 4) Rinse with tap water. S) Double rinse with deionized water. 6) Repeat entire procedure or any parts of the procedure as necessary. JAGCO-02438-895 4-2 Figure A-2 Well Gauging Log PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NO: RECORDED BY: DATE: REFERENCE POINT DEPTH OF DEPTH TO NAPL WELL DATE TIME FOP WATER COMMENTS MEASUREMENT CASING LNAPL DNAPL A.SSample Preservation, Handling, and Analysis A.5.9 Purpose and Applicability This section discusses sample preservation and analysis methods which will be used to assess groundwater quality at the site. Proper packaging and shipment procedures for environmental samples collected during the sampling to minimize the potential for sample breakage, leakage or cross contamination. Chain of custody procedures are followed to provide a clear record of sample custody from collection to analysis. Sample handling and chain of custody procedures are also discussed. A.5.2 Responsibilities The project scientist shall be responsible for the enactment and completion of the sample preservation, chain of custody and the packaging and shipping requirements outlined here. The laboratory project manager will be responsible for ensuring that samples are analyzed according to the specified EPA method protocol. A.5.3 Supporting Materials • Chain of custody forms; • Sturdy, insulated coolers; • Packaging tape; • Ziploc-type bags; • Protective wrapping and packaging materials; and • Ice or blue ice. A.5.4 Sample Containers and Preservatives The required sample containers and preservation procedures are in accordance with the requirements of EPA protocols outlined in OSWER Directive #9240.0-05 (1990). Sample containers and preservatives to be used in the sampling program are summarized in Table A-1. All samples will be kept on ice or refrigerated from the time of collection until analysis. Once cooled down after collection, samples will be maintained at a maximum temperature of 4EC. JAGCaO2438-845 5-1 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter A,5.5 Sample Handling Procedures All samples must be packaged so that they do not leak, break or vaporize. All samples must be properly identified and each shipment or transfer must be accompanied by a chain of custody record. All samples are to be clearly identified immediately upon collection. Each sample bottle should include the following information. • Client or project name; • Monitoring well identification; • Sample numberPidentification; • Sample location; • Sample collection date and time; and • Sampler's name or initials. The data shall be similarly recorded on the sample log sheets or field logbook. After samples are collected, identified and preserved in the field, they are placed in a cooler and chilled to 4°C using ice or blue ice. The EPA RCRA regulations (40 CFR Section 261.4 (d)) specify that samples of solid waste, water, soil, or air collected for the purpose of testing are exempt from regulation when the following conditions apply: • Samples are being transported to a laboratory for analysis; • Samples are being transported to the collector from the laboratory after analysis; and • Samples are being stored: 1) by the collector prior to shipment for analyses, 2) by the analytical laboratory prior to analyses, and 3) by the analytical laboratory after testing, but prior to return of sample to the collector or pending the conclusion of a court case. Samples to be collected during sampling are qualified for these exemptions. This plan deals only with these sample types. A.5.6 Chain of Custody Procedures All samples are maintained under chain of custody procedures. A sample is in custody if it is in your possession, in view or in a designated secure area. Sample custody transfers must be documented by chain of custody forms. Chain of custody forms are generally provided by the analytical laboratory. The following information must be included on chain of custody records: JAGCO-02438-895 5-2 A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South ,Baxter a Sample collector's name, mailing address and telephone number; a Analytical laboratory's name, mailing address and telephone number; • Description of each sample, including sample number and matrix; • Quantity of each sample and type of analysis required; and • Date of collection and of shipment. When transferring the custody of samples, the individuals relinquishing and receiving will sign, date and note the time on the form. A.5.7 Analytical Methods Samples will be collected, preserved and analyzed by standard U.S. EPA analytical methods (Table A-1). Consistency in analytical method allows for comparison of previous and subsequent data - Samples will be analyzed by the methods summarized listed in Table A-2. The reporting limit for a givens parameter is determined by procedures specified in the method and will be evaluated as a part of data validation. Table A-2 summarizes the appropriate methods of analysis and the method reporting limits. These reporting limits will be observed for all laboratory analyses performed during this project, except where matrix interferences and high concentrations of target and non -target compounds increase the reporting limits. Table A-2 Reporting Limits for Specified Methods Parameter Methods Reporting Limits Polyaromatk Hydrocarbons EPA 8270 SIM t1t (gWL) Naphthalene 0.1 M Benzo(a)anthraaene 0.1 M Chrysene 0.1(2) Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.1 P) Benzo(k)lluoranthene 0.1(2) 1ndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.1° Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.1(21 JACCO-02438-845 5-3 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter Parameter Methods Reporting Limits Benzo(g,h,i)peryiene 0.1 Vj Pentachlorophenol EPA 8270 SIM Notes: 9) will use alternative methods as appropriate per WAC 173-340-707. 2) Laboratory reporting limits may be higher due to the presence of co - contamination at elevated concentrations. RLs do not need to be tower- than clean-up levels to fulfill compliance -monitoring requirements. JACCO-02438-895 5-4 A.6Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures This section describes the quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures and documentation for the compliance monitoring program. QA/QC procedures for groundwater sampling and laboratory practices are discussed. A detailed discussion of data validation is discussed in Section A.7. Further detail on the purpose, scope and methodology of the proposed monitoring program is provided in the Groundwater Compliance Monitoring Plan. A.691 Purpose and Applicability Data quality objectives (DQOs) have been established to ensure that data generated during compliance monitoring are adequate to support the decisions and conclusions of the evaluation. Analytical data will be reviewed relative to QA/QC objectives to ensure defensible data of acceptable quality are provided for the intended use. The specific objectives of the quality assurance program are to: Provide an, estimate of analytical precision and accuracy of laboratory test results, and Provide verification of the occurrence of contaminants in groundwater. Methods utilized to produce quality chemical data include, but are not limited to, field blanks, duplicate samples, laboratory QA/QC procedures, instrument calibration, equipment decontamination, sample preservation, chain of custody procedures, and data validation procedures. A.6.2 Responsibilities The field team is responsible for familiarizing themselves with the sampling program and following the detailed field procedures that are needed to maintain QA/QC. The project hydrogeologist or engineer is responsible for insuring that field team members follow strict equipment calibration, sample collection, sample handling, and decontamination procedures, and for reviewing field logs for completeness and accuracy. The project manager is responsible for the quality of work performed on this project. The project manager will review, or appoint a QA/QC officer to review, the field products and analytical products and deliverables for conformance to established limits and agreed to structures. JAGCO-02438-895 6-1 Appendix A Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Barter A.6.3 Training All personnel collecting samples on the Baxter North and South Properties will be properly trained in accordance with the most recent OSHA hazardous materials and safety training requirements. Prior to commencement of work, personnel will be given instruction specific to this project, covering the following areas: • Organization and lines of communication and authority; • Overview of the Sampling Plan; • Decontamination requirements, and • Overview of Health and Safety considerations. This training, which is specific to the Site, will be conducted by the project manager. A.6- 4 Field Procedures and Sample Handling for Quality Assurance/Quality Control The achievement of data quality and quality assurance objectives depends on the capability to produce valid data and to demonstrate such validity. Proper sample collection, identification, preservation, storage and handling procedures, and chain of custody records are necessary to help support the validity of the data. Procedures for these steps are discussed in previous sections of this sampling plan as follows: • Proper collection of groundwater samples are discussed in Section A.2 Proper sample identification, preservation, storage, handling and chain of custody procedures are discussed in Section A.5. In addition to sample labels and chain of custody forms, a bound field logbook will be maintained by the field sampling coordinator and each sampling team member to provide a daily record of significant events. All entries will be signed and dated. The logbook will be kept as a permanent record. 1tETEC has specific forms to be used to record the collection of groundwater samples. A.6.5 Collection of Field Quality . Assurance/Quality Control Samples Groundwater samples will be collected in accordance with Section A.2 of this plan. Field blanks and duplicate samples will be collected as described below. JACCO-02438-895 6-2 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter Field blank and Held duplicate samples will not be labeled as blanks or duplicates on the sample labels or chain of custody forms, but will be identified as such in the field notebook and on the sample logs. Field blanks are collected by transferring deionized water into the appropriate sample container at a sampling site, and then sealing, labeling and shipping it with the samples. The deionized water is carried to the field in a sealed airtight container. The source of deionized water should be documented; and preferably be from the laboratory that will analyze the samples. Field blanks will be analyzed for the full set of constituents being tested. At least one duplicate sample shall be collected for each round of sampling. Duplicate water samples will be collected by filling two containers (or sets of containers) simultaneously from the sampler. Duplicate samples will be analyzed for the full set of constituents being tested. Sample containers will not be pre -rinsed with sample. Sample containers for volatile constituents will be filled to capacity, with no air bubbles. All sample collection apparatus will be fully decontaminated, in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section A.4 before sampling and between sampling points, A.6.6 Field Measurement Equipment Measurements of dissolved oxygen, redox potential, temperature, pH and specific conductance of well purge water will be performed using in -line flow cells. Turbidity measurements will be performed with a nephelometer. This equipment will be calibrated each day of field activities and operated in accordance with manufacturers specifications. Quality control procedures for field instruments will be limited to checking the reproducibility of measurement to within 10 percent by taking multiple reading and periodic instrument calibration. If the variability among multiple readings at a single site is greater than 10 percent, the instrument will be recalibrated, if appropriate, and the measurement repeated. Equipment that fails calibration or becomes inoperable during use will be removed from service, tagged to indicate that it is out of calibration, and segregated to prevent inadvertent use. Such equipment will be repaired and recalibrated or replaced as appropriate. Results of activities performed using equipment that has failed recalibration will be evaluated by the project scientist." If the activity results are adversely affected, the results of the evaluation will be documented, and the appropriate personnel notified. If pH, conductivity, or temperature meters fail recalibradon, the data will be reviewed to determine whether alternate parameter data are sufficient to accept the groundwater sampling results. For instance, if the conductivity meter fails recalibration, pH and temperature JACCO-02438-895 6-3 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South &aver readings will be used to verify that the purge water has stabilized. Since these parameters are calibrated prior to each use, it is unlikely that the data will be unacceptable. All field measurement equipment will be controlled to ensure that measurements obtained are accurate and defensible and will be operated by trained personnel, in accordance with manufacturers recommendations. - All field record sheets, instrument outputs, and worksheets for calculating results will be retained. Summarized raw data will be appropriately identified and included in a separate appendix to the final report. A.61 Project Documentation All documentation for the project will be recorded in non -erasable ink. All documents will be signed by the person completing them. No erasures or white outs will be made; entry errors will be crossed out with a single line and initialed by the person making the correction. A.6.8 Internal Quality Control Project quality rests with every person involved; however, primary responsibility for project quality rests with the project manager. Overall project quality and consistency is achievable when all parties follow this plan, and other appropriate guidance. Field blanks and sample duplicates will be collected and submitted to the laboratory for analysis to determine if sample contamination is introduced during sampling activities and to check field precision. All numerical analysis, mapping, computer modeling and reports will be subject to peer review. All analytical calculations will be legible and complete enough to permit logical reconstruction by a qualified individual other than the originator. Informal peer review is strongly encouraged during all phases of work. Formal peer review will occur prior to presentation or submittal of any data or conclusions. At the completion of a formal peer review, the reviewer will provide written documentation of the review and of any recommended revisions. A.8.9 Corrective Action In the event that quality is not met, action will be taken to correct the problem,. If the problem is laboratory related, corrective action responsibility lies with the laboratory. The project manager and/or the QA reviewer are responsible for all other corrective action. If the problem is associated with Interpretations, the project manager is responsible. Any corrective action taken will be documented and the impact of the problem(s) on data quality and interpretation will be summarized in corrective action memorandum(s). Corrective action measures could include: JAGCO-02438-895 64 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter • Reanalyzing samples if holding time criteria permit; • Resampling and analyzing; or • Evaluating and amending sampling and analytical procedures. A.7Data Validation and Reporting A.7.1 Data Validation Data validation will be conducted on all analytical laboratory results. The laboratory generating the analytical data has the prime responsibility for the correctness and completeness of the data. Evaluation of data quality will be conducted based on both the results of the QC data and the professional judgment of the reviewer. The objective of the data validation is to identify any qualitative, unreliable, or invalid laboratory measurements. If quality `control audits result in the detection of unacceptable data, the project manager will be responsible for initiating corrective action, which may include: • Reanalyzing samples if holding time criteria permit; • Resampling and analyzing; • Evaluating and amending sampling and analytical procedures; and • Accepting data and acknowledging the level of uncertainty. EPA level III data validation will be used to evaluate laboratory data. Level III data validation is defined as assessing data quality using the quality control results submitted by the laboratory. Data validation entails a review of the laboratory -provided QC data to verify that the laboratory is properly performing the QC program and is operating within the required control limits. Any out -of -control data without appropriate corrective action may be cause to qualify or reject the affected measurement data. Laboratory data will be screened for inclusion of and frequency of the necessary QC supporting information such as reporting limit verification, duplicates, spikes, and reagent blanks. Missing or infrequent QC information will be cause to contact the laboratory concerning affected measurement data and to request additional QC supporting information or reanalysis. Data validation will review analytical data with respect to the following criteria: JAGCO-02438-895 7-5 Appendix - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter • Completeness; • Comparability; • Representativeness; • Accuracy; and • Precision. Completeness Completeness is defined as the percentage of measurements made which are judged to be valid measurements compared to the total number of measurements planned. The results will be calculated following data validation and reduction and will be used in planning subsequent sampling rounds. A completeness goal of 90 percent has been established for the Baxter North. and South Properties compliance monitoring program. Additional sampling may be conducted to maintain project completeness goals. Comparability Comparability is an expression of the confidence with which one data set can be compared to another. The comparability objective for the monitoring program is to establish a database upon which decisions can be based and monitoring requirements can be modified, and to ensure that collected data is comparable to data obtained in subsequent sampling episodes. In the laboratory, standard analytical methods have been specified to allow comparison of data and to evaluate the effectiveness of remedial technologies. In the field, standard sampling techniques will be used to provide consistency between sampling episodes. The sampling techniques presented in the previous sections of this plan are consistent with the current standards of practice for similar monitoring programs. Representativeness Representativeness is a measure of the degree to which sample data represent selected site characteristics. Representativeness will be assessed for field activities, laboratory analysis, and the project as a whole. Field Representativeness. The objective in addressing field representativeness is to assess whether the information obtained during this monitoring program accurately represents the actual site conditions. The groundwater sampling program will provide information concerning water quality in the aquifers. The sampling procedures and field procedures in the previous sections of this plan describe proper sample collection techniques (containers, packing, etc.) JAGCO-02438-895 7-6 A - Sampfing Analysis Procedures, Sourh Bailer and equipment decontamination procedures for obtaining representative samples. The representative nature of groundwater data is also assessed by collecting QA samples. Contamination introduced into samples through held sampling and site conditions will be evaluated through the collection of field blanks. Field blanks consist of deionized water sampled in the field, handled throughout the field activities, and submitted to the laboratory as if it were an analytical sample. The analytical results of the field blank samples will be compared to the results of the field samples to determine if the level of contamination is significant. The following criteria will be used to determine the effect of contamination on the usefulness of analytical results. Blank Contaminant Concentration Effect on Data Use NO percent of parameter value in field sample Insignificant 10050 percent of parameter value in field sample Results will be considered qualitative >50 percent of parameter value in field sample Results will be considered invalid Laboratory Representativeness. The objective of laboratory representativeness is to assure that the contamination levels determined in the laboratory accurately represent contamination levels present in the samples. Laboratory representativeness is assessed through QA samples including laboratory blanks, laboratory control and matrix control spikes, and good standard laboratory procedures. Field blanks and field duplicates will also serve as a measure of QA in the laboratory. QA samples are incorporated into the sampling program to provide information on external and cross contamination, sample representativeness, and laboratory analytical performance. Project Representativeness. The overall site data representativeness will be assessed through data interpretations. This involves a qualitative interpretation of whether the data seem reasonable considering the site conditions. Only representative data will be used in subsequent data reduction, validation activities, and site characterization. Invalidated data will be submitted to Ecology with the basis for invalidation. The evaluation of the project representativeness will be performed during preparation of monitoring reports. Accuracy Accuracy of analytical laboratory measurements will be assessed by analyzing standard reference materials or by spiking samples with known standards. Quality control samples used to assess accuracy including surrogates, JAGM02438-895 7-7 Appendix A - ,Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxley laboratory control samples, and/or matrix spikes. The accuracy will be determined as follows: • Computing percent recoveries for spiked samples; Calculating the standard deviation in the overall average recovery value; and Determining the range of uncertainty at a given level of confidence. The accuracy of the data will be used to determine any bias in the analytical methods. Sample results will not be adjusted for bias, but the bias will be considered in the interpretation of the data. Precision Precision examines the distribution of reported values about their mean. The distribution of reported values measures the reproducibility of measurements under a given set of conditions, Precision may be affected by variation of the matrix, contamination within the matrix, or errors made during sampling or analysis. Analytical precision will be evaluated through the analysis of matrix spike and matrix spike duplicates, laboratory duplicates, and field duplicates. Matrix spike and matrix spike duplicates, and laboratory duplicates precision acceptance criteria are statistically determined by the laboratory and will be used to evaluate precision. Specific precision targets cannot be formulated for field duplicates without baseline precision data. However, the precision data will be summarized into the following categories. For each compound or element, the number of field duplicates with variance in the following ranges will be evaluated: Less than 10 percent; + 10 to 25 percent; • 25 to 50 percent; and • Greater than 50 percent. This will provide qualitative information to the individuals interpreting the data as to the range of variances, and will also allow the proper planning for QC samples in future sampling episodes. A.7.2 Reporting The monitoring reports will include a summary of data reduction results and a discussion of any inconsistencies that exist from a data use standpoint. From JAGCO-02438-895 7-8 Appendix A - Sampling Analysis Procedures, South Baxter these data results, the performance of cleanup action and the existence and magnitude of groundwater impacts will be determined. All field data sheets and worksheets for calculating results will be included as an appendix in the final report. All raw data will be appropriately identified in reports and included in a separate appendix of the final report. JAGCO-02438-895 7-9 A.8 References OSWER, 1990, Revision of OSWER Directive #9240.0-05,. Specifications and Guidance for Obtaining Contaminant free Sample Containers. Standard Methods, 1995, Standard Methods far the Examination of Water -and Wastewater, 19th Edition, JAGCO-42438-895 8-1 MEMORANDUM TO: Gail Colburn - Ecolog FROM: Grant ffainsworth DATE: May 16, 2002 The R€TEC Group, Inc. 1011 SW Ockitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, WA 98134.1162 *,#'.+RETEC 206.624.9349 Phone 206.624.2839 Fax wwareiec.corn CLIENT: Port Quendall Company TASK: J.H. Baxter Property RE: Basis for Filtering of Groundwater Samples for Compliance Monitoring This memorandum presents the technical rationale for filtering of groundwater samples for compliance monitoring at the J.H. Baxter Property in Renton, Washington. The purpose of this memorandum is to demonstrate that filtered samples provide a more representative measure of groundwater duality. This demonstration satisfies the requirements of WAC 173-340-720 in order for the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to allow filtering of groundwater compliance samples. Theory Turbidity - Turbidity occurs in monitoring wells due to the presence of silts and clays in the native soil formation that are not adequately filtered by the sand pack placed in the annulus surrounding a groundwater monitoring well. Soil -Water Partitioning - Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are the primary constituents of concern at the Baxter Property and it is known that these compounds preferentially adhere to soil particles rather than solubilize in the water column. This affinity is incorporated into a parameter known as the organic carbon partitioning coefficient (Ka), where a high Ka indicates that a compound preferentially adheres soil particles. FAH compounds are known to have high K, values. Contaminant Transport — In general, we can assume that soluble compounds and total dissolved solids (TDS) would be transported in groundwater in accordance with standard contaminant transport theory (contaminant flux equals groundwater flux divided by the contaminant retardation coefficient). Total suspended solids (TSS) are not transported in accordance with standard contaminant transport theory, are present in wells due to turbidity from local soil rather that groundwater transport, and TSS artificially elevate constituent concentrations in groundwater due to the contaminants affinity for soil particles. TDS are considered to be particles smaller that 10-3 um (Wastewater Engineering, Metcalfe & Eddy, 2 d Edition), therefore, using a 0.45um filter we are only removing the TSS and providing a sample that is more representative of groundwater constituents that will be transported between the compliance well and the surface water body. Evidence of this theory can be demonstrated through: 1) side -by -side comparisons of filtered versus unfiltered samples where it is demonstrated that TSS are artificially increasing 5116/2002 AORETEC Page 2 groundwater sample concentrations; and 2) documentation of solubility exceedances in unfiltered groundwater samples that demonstrate TSS must be contributing to elevated concentrations in groundwater samples. When both these pieces of evidence are present at a site, the weight of evidence suggests that field filtering is necessary to generate representative groundwater samples. Baxter Site Conditions Turbidity in Monitoring Wells — Unfiltered groundwater samples from the Baxter South -Property were previously collected and analyzed for TSS (by EPA Method 160.2). These samples were collected from wells that will be used as compliance wells or that are in the vicinity of compliance wells. TSS measurements ranged from 1.8 mg/L to 58 mg/L indicating the presence of turbidity in shoreline compliance wells (MW6, 8A, and 8B - See Table 1). South Baxter Compliance Monitoring Data - Unfiltered versus filtered groundwater sample data are available for three shoreline compliance wells (BAX-6, 8A, and 8B — See Table 1). The sample events were separated by 16 months but an additional data point from 1990 indicates that the unfiltered 'concentrations have been relatively stable over time. Since these wells are shoreline compliance wells, the concentrations were low and only BAX-6 had detected concentrations. These data indicate that filtering of samples reduces the PAH concentrations by filtering out the TSS using a 0.45um filter. The unfiltered sample concentrations ranged from 4.6 to 8 times greater than the filtered sample concentrations when comparing the 1998 to 2000 data and from 1.8 to 9.8 times greater when comparing 1990 to 2000 data. Treatability Study Data - Side -by -side filtered versus unfiltered data is also available from the treatability study (RE"TEC, 1997) performed for the neighboring Quendall Terminals property. The purpose of these data (See Table 3-2 attached) was to evaluate leaching of BTEX and PAHs from a nearshore disposal facility for dredged sediment. These data indicate that PAH groundwater concentrations were reduced by filtering out the TSS using a 0.45um filter. These data also illustrate that losses of volatile constituents (BTEX) do not occur during filtering, therefore, we would expect that virtually all losses of semi -volatile PAHs during filtering occurs due to the adherence of constituents to TSS. Exceedances of Contaminant Solubility — The Baxter groundwater database was queried for contaminant data from unfiltered samples where a constituent concentrations exceeded the solubility limit. These data indicate that solids were causing elevated constituent concentrations since dissolved groundwater concentrations cannot exceed the theoretical solubility limit, particularly where a mixture of contaminants is present such that actual solubility would likely be well below the theoretical solubility. Table 2 presents 46 instances where a constituent concentration exceeded its' theoretical solubility limit. 002 Page *.IrRETEC Page 3 Conclusions The presence of TSS in samples from groundwater monitoring wells results in analytical data that are not representative of constituent concentrations that will be transported in groundwater. TSS is present in shoreline groundwater compliance wells at the Baxter site. Groundwater analytical data from shoreline compliance wells at the Baxter site indicate that the presence of TSS creates artificially elevated constituent concentrations in groundwater. Analytical data from the Quendall. Terminals treatability study indicate that these losses are not the result of volatilization and must be due to the filtering of TSS. Several measurements of constituent concentrations in excess of solubility limits from unfiltered groundwater samples on the Baxter Property also indicate that TSS create artificially elevated groundwater concentrations, Field filtering of groundwater samples using a 0.45um filter, as specified in the Cleanup Action Plan (RETEC, 2000) for the Baxter site, will provide the most representative measurement of constituent concentrations in groundwater at shoreline groundwater compliance monitoring wells. Table 1 Comparison of Filtered verses Unfiltered Groundwater Samples J.H. Baxter South Property - Renton, WA well ID BAX-6 BAX-SA BAX-86 Date Sampled 3112J1990 10/20/1998 2/17/2000 10/20/1998 2/17/2000 10/20/1998 2/17/2000 Law Flow, Low Flow, Low Flow, Bailer, No Low Flow, Field Low Flow, Field Low Flow, Field Sampling Method Filtering No Filtering Filtered No Filtering Filtered No Filtering Filtered EPA Method 8270 8270 8270-SIM 8270 8270-SIM 8270 8270-SIM Reporting Limit 1 ug/L 1 ug/L 0.1 ug/L 1 ug/L 0.1 ug/L 1 ug/L 0.1 ug/L Results (ugIL) Naphthalene 440 240 45 NO NO NO NO 2-Methytnaphthalene 13 13 2.8 ND NO ND ND Acenaphthene 6.9 17 3.8 ND NO ND NO Dibenzofuran 0.4 1.6 0.2 ND ND ND ND Fluorene 0.6 1.7 0.29 NO NO ND ND Anthracene NO ND 0.11 NO ND ND NO EPA Method 160.2 160.2 160.2 Reporting Limit 1.1 rng/L 1.1 rng/L 1.1 mg/L Results (mg&) Total Suspended Solids 1.8 NA 58 NA 6.1 NA Filtered.As Page 1 of 1 5/16/2002 Table 2 Exceedances of Solubility in Groundwater Samples J. H. Baxter Property - Renton, WA Location Sample ID Sample Date Method Analyte Result Qualifier Units SAX-1 BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Anthracene 822 J u /L BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Benzo a anthracene 542 i u /L BAX-1-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Benza(a)anthracene 47 - u /L BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Benzo a ene 3881 J u BAX-1-01/11189 01/11/89 EPA8270 Benzo a rene 23 u /L BAX-1-03111/90 03/11/90 EPA8270 Benzo a ene 2 u /L BAX-1-08186 08/01/86 EPA8270 i8enzoNfluoranthene 230 J u /L BAX-1-01111/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Ben za b,1c fluoranthene 46 a IL BAX-1-11/19/89 11/19/89 EPA8270 Benza b,lc fluoranthene 3 ug& BAX-1-03/11/90 03/11/90 EPA8270 Benzo b,l< fluoranthene 3 u /L BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Benzo hi lene 132 J u /L BAX-1-11119/89 11/19/89 EPA8270 Benzo(gh!)perylene 0.8 J u IL BAX-1-08186 08/01/86 EPA8270 Benzo k fuoranthene 256 J u BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Ch ene 580 J u L BAX- 1 -01 /11189 01/11/89 EPA8270 Ch ene 45 u /L BAX-1-06111/89 06/11/89 EPA8270 Ch sene 2 BAX-1-11/19189 11/19/89 EPA8270 Ch ene 2.5 u /L BAX-1-03111/90 03/11/90 EPA8270 Ch ene 5 u /L BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 66 J u /t. BAX-1-01111/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenz a,h anthracene 3 u /L BAX-1-01/11189 01/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 23 u /L BAX-1-06/11/89 06/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 3 u BAX-1-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Fluoranthene 1824 J u /L BAX-1-08186 08/01/86 EPA8270 Indeno 1,2,3-cd ene 158 J u /L BAX-1-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Indeno 1,2,3-cd ene 8 u /L BAX-i-08/86 08/01/86 EPA8270 Phenanthrene 3258 J u /L BAX-1-08/86 08/01186 EPA8270 rene 1300 J u /L BAX-1-01/11/89 01/11/89 JEPA8270 I P rene 140 u /L 13AX-1A BAX-1A-01/11189 01/11/89 IEPA8270 Benzo b,k fluoranthene 2 u /L BAX-1A-01111/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 2 u SAX-2 BAX-2-08186 08/01/86 EPA8270 Benzo hi lene 2 J u /L BAR-6 BAX-6-1098 10/20/98 SW8270 Dibenzofuran 1.6 u /L BAX-8A BABA-01/11/89 X- 01/11/89 EPA8270 Ch sene 2 u IL BAX-9 BAX-9-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Arena hth lene 3 u /L BAX-9-01117/96 01/17/96 EPA8270 Acena hth lene 8.6 L BAX-9-01111/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Benzo a rene 4 u /L BAX-9-01111/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Benzo b,k fluoranthene 6 u /L BAX-9-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Ch ene 4 u /L BAX-9-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 3 u /L BAX-10 BAX-10-01/11/89 01/11/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 5 u BAX-10-06/01/89 ISAX- 06/01/89 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 2 u /L 10-03/12/90 03/12/90 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 2 u /L BAX-14 BAX-14-09119/90 09/19/90 EPA8270 Benzo a anthracene 14 u IL BAX-14-0919190 09119/90 EPAS270 Benzo ,k fluoranthene 7.3 J URI BAX-14-09I19/90 09/19/90 EPA8270 Chrysene 11 u 1L BAX- 4-09119/90 09/19/90 EPA8270 Dibenzofuran 130 ug/L BaxSolExcaed.xls Page 1 of 1 5115/2002 Report for TmatabiftV Tesanj aliments and Groundwater II s 1 M:",a Table 3-2 Results for the Impacted Sediment Leachate Test Analyte Equilibrium Sediment Concentration (mglkg) unfiltered Leachate Concentration (mglL) Filtered Leachate Concentration (mg1L) Unfiltered Kd IL/kg) Unfiltered Koc (Llkg TOC) Flitered Kd (LWkg) Filtered Koc (LWkg TOC) A Method 8020 Benzene 3.2 I.45 1.5 2.21 64 2.13 62 Toluene 0.415 0.1 0.08 4.15 120 5.19 150 Ethyli>enzene 9,65 1.15 1.045 8.39 243 9.23 268 rn,p-Xylene 4.15 0.475 0,435 8.74 253 9.54 277 o-Xylene 1.2 0,145 0.14 8.28 240 8.57 248 Total BTEX 18.62 3.32 MO NC NC NC NC EPA Method $270 Naphthalene 56.5 7.35 2.6 7.7 223 22 630 2-Methylnaphthalene 9.35 0,283 0.064 29 849 130 3,782 Acenaphthylene 0,255 < 0.001 < 0,001 255 > 7,391 > 255 > 7.391 Acenaphthene 2.8 0.064 0.015 44 1,268 187 5.411 Dibenzofuran 0.45 0.008 < 0.001 56 1,630 > 450 > 13,043 Fluorene 0.665 0.01. < 0.001 67 1,928 > 665 > I9.275 Phenanduene 1.7 0.012 < 0.001 142 4.106 > 1700 > 49,275 Anthracene 0.585 0.003 < 0.001 I95 5,652 > 585 > 16,957 Fluoranthene 2.3 0.01 <: 0:001 230 6,667 > 2300 > 66,667 pyrene 3.15 0.012 < 0.001 263 7,609 > 3150 > 91.304 Benz(a)anthracene 4.45 0.01 < 0.001 445 12,899 > 4450 > 128,986 Chrysene 10.2 0,016 < 0.001 638 18,478 > 10200 > 295,652 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 12 0.025 < 0.001 480 13,913 > 12000 > 347,826 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 7.4 0.018 < 0.001 411 11,916 > 7400 > 214.493 Benao(a)pyrene 11.5 0.025 < 0.001 460 13,333 > 11500 > 333.333 Ladeno(1,2,3-cd) pyrene 5.65 0.009 < 0,001 628 18,196 > 5650 > 163,768 Dibenz(a.h)anthracene 2.55 0.003 < 0.001 850 24,638 > 2550 3 73,913 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 7.1 0,012 < 0.001 592 17,150 > 7100 > 205,797 Total PAH 137.61 7.87 1 2.69 NC NC NC NC NOTES. NC -Not Cakulated Laahah Tating Appendix F Stormwater Technical Information STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington E};F"R�S 1 Qji1/ iV August 24, 2006 MAGNUSSON KLEMENCiC ASSOCIATES Sttv~01 + Owd EnOnfm 1301 RUh A"", Swift 3200 StoM*, 1*%tNr91on 98101-2699 T. 206 292 1200 F: 206 292 1201 MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC A SSOC3 A7E5 ■ STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMAT1CyN Section I: Project Overview ......................................... ........................... 1 Section II. Preliminary Conditions Summary ..................................................... 3 Section III: Offsite Analysis....................................................................... S Section IV. flaw Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design, ........ ............... 7 Section V: Conveyance System Analysis and Design ............. ............ .......... ....:...... 9 Section VI: Special Reports and Studies........................................................... 9 Section V11: Other Permits........................................................................ 10 Section V111; Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Analysis and Resign ............ 1 0 Section IX: Bond Quantities Worksheel, Retenlion/Detention Facility Summary Sheet, and Declaration of Covenant .................. .... — - .- . I t Section X: Operations and Maintenance Manual ................................................. 1 1 References.................................................. 12 Figure 1-1: Technical Information Report Worksheet Figure 1-2: Site Location Figure 1-3: Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics Figure 1-4: Soils Figure II -l: 2-year, 24-hour Precipitation Figure I1-2. 25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Figure II-3: 100-year, 24-hour Precipitation Figure III-1: Offsite Flow Conveyance Figure 111-2: Gypsy Subbasin Figure IV-1- Water Quality Treatment Areas Figure V-l; Conveyance System Overview Figure VII-1: Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans APPFNDIC'_ES Appendix A: Sand Filter Siring Appendix B: Onsite Conveyance Calculations Appendix C. Offsite Conveyance (Gypsy Subbasin) Calculations Stormwater Technical Information Table of Contents 8 Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington STORMWATER TECHNICAL INFORMATION MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOC IA'ES _._.._. INTRODUCTION This report documents the stormwater and drainage design approach and proposal for the Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility project. The report has been prepared concurrently with the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Submittal using the guidelines for the Stormwater Technical Information Report (TIR) from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Figure 1-1 consists of the standard TIR worksheet, completed for the project_ The project is located between Lake Washington and Ripley Lane, northwest of the Northeast 44th Street and Interstate 405 interchange in Renton, Washington (see Figure 1-2). The east side of the site abuts the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way. The site is located in the Gypsy Subbasin. The proposed project includes construction of a new headquarters and sports training facility on a vacated brown -field industrial site. EXISTING DRAINAGE The existing site is currently vacant land with weedy brush cover. The existing site runoff sheet flows from east to west, toward Lake Washington. There is an existing degraded storm drain crossing the site that conveys offsite stormwater from the Gypsy Subbasin, from the east side of the site to Lake Washington. A created mitigation wetland exists at the southwestern corner of the site. The wetland is predominantly a loke-fed wetland. PROPOSED DRAINAGE The project stormwater management approach is based on the 2005 KCSWDM. Enhanced water quality treatment is proposed for site stormwater runoff. As with the existing site conditions, all drainage from the site will discharge directly to Lake Washington, a direct discharge receiving water. No flow control is proposed or required. Several stormwater management treatments are proposed to serve different developed zones of the site. The treatment areas and systems are as follows: Synthetic Turf Field, Pedestrian Hardscape, and Building/Roof Areas These areas are non -pollution -generating surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the synthetic turf field, pedestrian hardscope, and building roofs will drain to Lake Washington as direct discharge. Precipitation that lands on the field will drain vertically through sand and gravel to subdrains that will convey the stormwater to a site storm drain system discharging to Lake Washington. Natural Turf Field(s) Similar to the synthetic turf field, precipitation that lands on the natural turf fields will drain vertically through sand to subdrains. The natural turf fields, with an 18-inch layer of sand, will function as a very large sand filter. An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan will be prepared that describes turf management practices for these practice fields. One -hundred percent of the storm runoff from these fields will pass through the underlying sand, which exceeds the requirements for large sand filter treatment. Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOC�ATB a Mitigated Constructed Wetlond The Baxter Cove Mitigation Wetland is located on the Lake Washington shoreline at the southwest corner of the site and is hydraulically connected to the lake. The site drainage is collected, conveyed, and managed in onsite drainage systems that are not hydraulically connected to the wetland. Paved Parking and Driveways Stormwater runoff from paved parking and driveway areas will be collected and/or directed to four large sand filters. Three of the sand filters will be covered with grass, which will intercept fines and provide pre-treatment and also is expected to help maintain the surface permeability of the filter; pretreatment in the fourth sand filter will be provided by on additional layer of sand. The extra layer of sand will be used for football practice activities. As a result, the top layer of sand will be maintained by removing pollutants on an annual basis (and sometimes more than once per year) to ensure the health and safety of the team's players. The large sand filters have been sized per the 2005 KCSWDM. Subdrains from the large sand filter will convey water to the site drainage system. Discharge to Lake Washington Stormwater from the site will be collected and discharged to Lake Washington. Discharge will occur through five new constructed drainage system outfolls. The new pipe outfalls will release water above the ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) of Lake Washington and will drain over rock -lined channels to the OHWM of Lake Washington. Outlets of rock -lined channels constructed to provide energy dissipation and protection against erosion have been located at areas where existing shoreline materials are non - erosive, to prevent impacts when the Army Corps lowers the lake's water level below the OHWM. Gypsy Subbasin Conveyance Relocation and Upgrade Improvements also will be made to relocate and increase the capacity of the existing storm drain that conveys the offsite flow from the Gypsy Subbasin. The relocation is required because the proposed building will be located over the existing pipe. Earlier studies by the City of Renton determined that increased capacity is required to convey the current and future flows from the Gypsy Subbasin. LIST OF FIGURES ■ Figure I-1: TIR Worksheet ■ Figure 1-2: Site Location ■ Figure 1-3: Drainage Basins, Subbasins, and Site Characteristics ■ Figure 1-4: Soils Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES ��- il► �: as ►_: •►f •► ,.■. SITE CONDITIONS The project will create approximately 8.3 acres of sports fields, 3.3 acres of building(s), and 3.7 acres of new vehicular impervious surface. The total project area will be slightly under 20 acres. SOILS Figure 1-4 shows the soils map for the area that was prepared by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) in the 1970s. The SCS hydrologic soil group designation has little relevance for the project, however. Past site activities generated large amounts of organic materials (bark and mulch) that worked into the native soils. Fill also likely was placed over native soils to facilitate the operations at the site: Most significantly, because of the impacts of past operations on the site soils, the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) has established a Consent Decree that mandates the placement of fill to "cap" the in - situ soils; the runoff potential of the developed site will depend on the characteristics of the "cap" material rather than the native soil. For the purposes of the drainage analysis, all of the soils were treated as belonging to Hydrologic Soil Group C, moderate runoff soils (till). RAINFALL Design storms for the project location are shown in Table II-1 and Figures II-1 to II-3. Table II-1. 24-hour Precipitation at Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Rainfall Storm Recurrence (inches] 6-month 1.27 2-year 1.99 10-year 2.90 25-year 3.43 100-year 3.89 CORE REQUIREMENTS A pre -application meeting was attended by the Owners, Design Team, and City staff on May 3, 2006, and conditions for the project were identified. A subsequent meeting was held on July 19, 2006, at which time it was determined that Ecology would be the permitting agency for most of the site work and that the design would need to conform to City standards. The drainage manual officially adopted by Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC _ ASSOCIATES ■ the City of Renton is the 1990 KCSWDM; however, for this project the stormwater management and drainage design will meet the 2005 KCSWDM criteria to the extent practicable. Core Requirement 1: Discharge at the Natural Location The drainage from the improved areas will continue to drain to Lake Washington- New pipe- outlets/outfalls will be located above the OHWM. The receiving body for this system will not be. changed. The onsite flows will be kept separate from the offsite Gypsy Subbasin flows. The proposed Gypsy Subbasin pipeline relocation maintains the final segment of existing 24-inch corrugated metal pipe that outfalls to the lake - Core Requirement 2. Offsite Analysis An offsite analysis was conducted for the Gypsy Subbasin drainage that crosses the site. Core Requirement 3: Flow Control Peak rate runoff control is not required or provided for the project because the site discharges directly to Lake Washington, a major receiving water body. Core Requirement 4: Conveyance System New conveyances have been designed to accommodate the 25-year design storm. The conveyance pipe for the offsite Gypsy Subbasin flow has been sized for the 100-year design storm for future basin conditions. Core Requirement 5: Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) plan has been prepared for the project and is included in this report as Figure VIII-1. Core Requirement 6: Maintenance and Operation Maintenance and operation requirements will be identified when the stormwater management and storm drain system design has been completed and permitted. This information will be added to this report as an addendum. SPECIAL REOUIREMENTS Special Requirement l: Other Adopted Area -specific Requirements The Seahawks headquarters and training facility include the North Baxter Property and the South Baxter Property, which are covered under Ecology Consent Decrees #00-2-11778-7KNT and #00-2-11779- 5KNT, respectively. The Consent Decrees require that the conditions of the Cleanup Action Plan approved in 2000 be applied to the site. The Cleanup Action Plan for this site does not have specific requirements for the permanent stormwater controls for the site, but addresses management of existing site soils during construction. The plan requires that existing soils be capped to prevent incidental contact upon completion of the project. The Capping materials include pavements, building foundation pads, the Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSS©N KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES -�)• athletic field section, and imported fill. Where the capping materials are pervious, a warning barrier will be buried (for example, a geogrid buried 3-feet beneath the pervious ground surface. The special requirements for the project's construction have been implemented in the grading plans and TESL plan. Special Requirement 2: Flood Hazard Area Delineation Does not apply. Special Requirement 3: Flood Protection Facilities Does not apply, Special Requirement 4: Source Controls Source control requirements will be identified when the stormwater management and storm drain system design has been completed and permitted. This information will be added to this report as an addendum. Special Requirement 5. Oil Control Does not apply; project is not a high -use site. LIST OF FIGURES ■ Figure I]- I: 2-year, 24-hour Precipitation ■ Figure II.2: 25-year, 24-hour Precipitation ■ Figure II-3: 100-year, 24-hour Precipitation A down -stream analysis is not required for this project because the site is adjacent to Lake Washington and improvements on site will not impact downstream drainage conditions. A review of offsite, upstream conditions was conducted for the Gypsy Subbasin. The Seahawks Training Facility will be constructed near the final, piped segment of the Gypsy Subbasin. Because of historic flooding within the Gypsy Subbasin area (the flooding occurred on the east side of 1-405), the City of Renton retained a consultant to conduct engineering studies in the 1990s to study and prepare engineering design concepts to reduce the flooding potential. Hydrologic/hydraulic simulations estimated peak flow rates within the Gypsy Subbasin and included preliminary engineering conceptual designs for capital improvements to reduce flooding occurrences. Investigations showed that some flooding relief could be attained by increasing the hydraulic capacity of the piped Gypsy Subbasin in the area between the Burlington Northern Railroad and the Lake Washington outfall. The existing and proposed Gypsy Subbasin drainage at the site is shown in Figure II1-1. The extent of the Gypsy Subbasin is shown in Figure 111-2. Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES The offsite analysis for the Seahawks project considered if the 1997 analyses of the Gypsy Subbasin adequately reflect the current and projected future basin conditions and assess whether the earlier engineering alternatives appear valid with today's understanding of the basin conditions. Four points are considered: the modeling method; the modeled future land use; the basin extents; and the assumptions about implementation of stormwater detention as the basin develops. MODELING METHOD Earlier analyses used the Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph (SBUH) method with the projected future build -out conditions to compute flow rates associated with the typical design storm recurrence intervals While there have been advances in hydrologic modeling, the SBUH method is still valid for estimating peak runoff rates from basins of this size and relative imperviousness/development (the known shortcomings of the SBUH model are primarily related to long -duration storms and to modeling runoff from forests, neither of which are vital to the Gypsy Subbasin flow analyses). The design flow from the SBUH analysis of the 100-year, 24-hour storm is 162 cubic feet per second (cfs), which does not include flow from the expanded 1-405 tributary area, discussed below. FUTURE LAND USE The land use modeled in 1995/1997 was based on Renton and King County zoning maps. MKA has compared the modeled future land use to the current City of Renton and City of Newcastle Zoning maps and has determined that all of the current zoning densities are less than or equal to the densities used in the 1997 analysis; there is no need to update the assumed future land uses considered in the 1995/1997 analysis. BASIN EXTENTS The basin extents are projected to expand because of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) plan to widen 1-405, which will create new lanes and shoulders from which drainage will be collected and conveyed to the NE 44th Street interchange for water quality treatment and release to Lake Washington, The 1997 Gypsy Subbasin study estimated that 1-405 improvements would increase the basin extent by 75 acres to a total of approximately 94 acres, increasing the 100-year flow in the system by approximately 9 cfs. The study also noted that if WSDOT released water into the Gypsy Subbasin conveyance system, then the City of Renton flow control standards would apply. Based on MKA's cursory review of the 2006 Environmental Assessment for the project, WSDOT is planning a new storm drainage collection system and conveyance trunkline to collect, treat, and convey freeway runoff to the lake, aligned across the property to the south of the site. Considering the extent of the planned improvements, and assuming that WSDOTs hydraulic design will comply with the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual and Hydraulic Design Manual requirements, we believe that the previously computed 9 cfs allowance for WSDOT's 100-year runoff is reasonable. STORMWATER DETENTION The earlier study assumed that 85% of new commercial development and 50% of forest -to -residential conversions would provide new stormwater flow control facilities sized to maintain predeveloped runoff rates, the level of control established by the current King County stormwater management code. These assumptions appear reasonable and may even be conservative considering that 100% of new commercial development will likely have to follow the drainage code and that changes in thresholds that Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCiC nssac�nres W i trigger flow control requirements will likely ensure that at least 50% of forest -to -residential conversions will apply flow control practices. CONCLUSION Based on these specific hydrological elements (model method, future land use, basin extents, -and detention assumptions), which have not changed significantly between 1995/1997 and the present, it appears that re -computing the basin hydrologic conditions would not yield substantially different results than what was obtained in the previous studies. The estimated 100-year, 24-hour flow rate for the offsite flow entering the Seahawks Training Facility site from the Gypsy Subbasin is 171 cfs. The design of the relocated Gypsy Subbasin storm drain pipeline is discussed in Section V. LIST OF FIGURES ■ Figure III-1 : Mite Flow Conveyance ■ Figure III-2: Gypsy Subbasin SECTION IV: FLOW CONTROL AND WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSTS AND DESIGN Peak rate runoff control is not required or provided for the project because the site discharges directly to Lake Washington, a major receiving water body. Therefore, retention/detention analysis and design is not included in this report. WATER QUALITY TREATMENT The 2005 KCSWDM designates areas draining to Lake Washington as subject to the requirements of "Basic Treatment." Because the Seahawks desire to demonstrate environmental stewardship, this project is sizing the water quality treatment facilities in accordance with the "Enhanced Basic" water quality menu of the manual. The Enhanced Basic water quality criteria requires treatment of 95% of the total runoff from the site to achieve 50% total zinc removal and achieve greater than 80% total suspended solids removal. Using the large sand filters that are proposed will also achieve compliance with the "Sensitive Lake Protection" water quality menu because large sand filters are expected to provide at least 50% reduction in total phosphorus from the site's runoff. The water quality treatment for the site falls into three categories (Figure IV-1): ■ Stormwater runoff from the natural turf fields will be collected through a subdroinage system. The depth of the sand substrate in the field (18 inches) effectively provides treatment for the stormwater generated from the field, and no further treatment is proposed. Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENC1C ASSOCIATES ■ Stormwater runoff from the roof areas, sidewalk and plaza areas, synthetic turf fields, non -field landscaped areas on the south and west sides of the site will be collected and conveyed to the lake. The roof designs do not incorporate unpainted metal, so no treatment of roof runoff is proposed. ■ Stormwater runoff from the vehicular impervious surfaces will be collected and treated in Large Sand Filters sized in accordance with the 2005 KCSWDM. Sand Filter Design The sand filter sizing computations are included in Appendix A. Table IV-1 summarizes the sand filters designed for the project. A total of 6,592 square feet (sf of sand filter area will provide treatment for 3.85 acres of tributary area that is 14% impervious. The typical depth of the filter sand layer is 18 inches. Table IV-1: Sand Filters Design Summary Tributary Tributary Filter Ponding Filter Surface Filter Area (acre) Imperviousness Filter Surface Depth (ft) area (sf) SF-1 1.49 92.0% Sand 2.0 2,195 SF-2 1.72 80.2% Turf 1.0 2,886 SF-3 0.40 85.0% Turf 1.0 1,045 SF-4 0.24 95.8% Turf 1.0 467 Additional requirements for large sand filters are addressed below. ■ Pretreatment: Piped conveyances include a catch basin with a sump and tee to provide settling and spill control before runoff enters the sand filter. Turf grass established on three of the sand filter surfaces will act as a filter strip to provide pretreatment of runoff. The root structure of the turf will help prevent the sand surface from clogging. Sand Filter 1 will be used for team training exercises (e.g., running in sand). To support this function, the depth of the sand bed will be 24 inches instead of the typical 18 inches. The surficial sand layers will be loosened or replaced once or twice annually to maintain the quality of the sand for the training exercises. This maintenance also will prevent "blinding" of the sand surface and remove fine particles that accumulate in the upper horizon of the sand filter. The proposed pretreatment regimen for Sand Filter 1 therefore consists of the intensive sand surface maintenance regime in conjunction with the spill control tee located upstream of the facility. ■ On-line versus off-line: Sand Filters 2, 3, and 4 will be constructed on-line, which is to say without an upstream flow splitter. Flows exceeding the design capacity of the filter will overtop a grated overflow structure and be conveyed to the storm drain system outlet. Sand Filter 1 will have on upstream bypass structure that diverts water when the sand filter pool exceeds the maximum design water surface. Stormwater Technical Information Seahowks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES ■ Spill control: A spill control tee will be provided within the storm drain system for upstream of Sand Filter 1. ■ Flow spreading: Flow spreaders are provided at each filter to disperse stormwater across the filter surface, and where site surface runoff is not collected, the site will be graded so that the runoff enters the filter as dispersed sheet flow. ■ Overflow; In addition to a primary overflow structure consisting of a grated catch basin riser, the sand filters proximate to Lake Washington use a rack -stabilized emergency overflow. The sand filters proximate to the athletic fields are graded so that overflow will enter the athletic fields and eventually be collected and discharged through the field drainage system. LIST OF FIGURES Figure IV-1 ; Water Quality Treatment Areas There ore in essence four differenct stormwater collection/conveyance systems on the project site: the Gypsy Subbasin offsite "bypass" pipeline, the parking lot and driveway storm drainage system, the roof drain/landscape/pedestrian drainage system, and the field drainage system (Figure V-1). The onsite drainage system sizing is documented in Appendix B. Hydrologic analyses have been conducted for the conveyance and water quality treatment sizing and design. The basins used in these analyses are shown in Figure 1-3 and the major storm drains are shown in Figure V-1. The Rational Method was used in sizing pipes that convey surface runoff. The 25-year rainfall intensity used for the design is 2.7 inches per hour. The offsite Gypsy Subbasin bypass pipe sizing computations are provided in Appendix C. The design flow for this system is 171 cfs, which is provided by the proposed design, with the future outfoll by others. Analyses showed that the existing system can convey approximately 13 cfs before overtopping the existing railroad ditch. The proposed design, which uses the existing 24-inch corrugated metal pipe to outfall, has capacity for 30 cfs. LIST OF FIGURES Figure V-1 : Conveyance System Overview The Gypsy Subbasin analyses from 1995 and 1997 were reviewed and considered in the preparation of the proposed drainage design. Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC A 550CIAT E 5 The WSDOT Environmental Assessment for the 1-405 Renton -to -Bellevue Project was cursorily reviewed to assess WSDOT's intended stormwater management plans for the upcoming highway widening that drains in -part to the Gypsy Subbasin. See Section II, Special Requirement 1, for discussion about the Ecology Consent Decree and Cleanup Action Plan requirements for the site. SECTION Vllb OTHER PERMITS The following permits/approvals also apply to this project: ■ Hydraulic Project Approval ■ Ecology Consent Decree Compliance Approval SECTION Vllt: CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A TESL plan has been prepared for the project and is included in this report as Figure VIII-1. The plan will meet the minimum TESC requirements as discussed below. TESC REQUIREMENTS TESC Requirement 1. Clearing Limits Clearing limits will be shown on the plans. TESC Requirement 2: Cover Measures Cover measures will be addressed in the TESC Plan Notes. TESC Requirement 3: Perimeter Protection A sediment retention barrier will be shown on the plans. TESC Requirement 4: Traffic Area Stabilization The stabilized construction entrance will be shown on the plans. The TESC Plan Notes will indicate that State water quality standards are applicable to construction site runoff. TESC Requirement 5: Sediment Retention A sediment retention system will be shown on the plans. TESC Requirement 6: Surface Water Control Interceptor swales will be shown on the plans. Stormwater Technical Information -gym Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMTNOC ASSOCIATES is TESL Requirement l: Dust Control Air quality will be addressed in the TESC Plan Notes. TESC Requirement 8: Wet Season Construction Wet season construction will be addressed in the TESC Plan Notes, TESC Requirement 4: Construction within Sensitive Areas and Buffers Construction within sensitive areas and buffers will be shown on the plans and addressed in the TESC Plan Notes. TESC Requirement 10. Maintenance Maintenance will be addressed in the TESC Plan Notes. TESC Requirement 11: Final Stabilization Final stabilization will be in accordance with the landscape plans for the project. LIST OF FIGURES Figure VIII-1 : TESC Plans SECTION IX: BOND QUANTITIES WORKSHEET, RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITY SUMMARY SHEET AND DECLARATION OF COYENANT _ None. OPERATIONS The project provides stormwater treatment facilities to treat runoff from the new vehicular impervious surfaces. The stormwater will be treated primarily by settling and/or filtering suspended pollutants from the runoff. The operation of the treatment facilities will be passive and controlled by gravity. There are no actions required on the part of the Owner aside from maintaining the facilities. MAINTENANCE The stormwater treatment facilities will require periodic inspection and cleaning to function properly. At a minimum, the facilities should be inspected each year. When the depth of sediment accumulated in the bottom of conventional facilities exceeds d inches, the facilities should be cleaned by removing the stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC R556CIATE5 ■ accumulated sediment_ Natural systems should be scarified and replenished on an annual basis to ensure proper function. Catch basins and manholes also require periodic cleaning. This typically consists of using a vactor truck to remove accumulated sediments. Drainage structures should be cleaned when sediment accumulation reaches within 12 inches of the outlet pipe invert or when pollutants are observed. FIELD TURF MANAGEMENT A landscape management and IPM plan will be prepared for the athletic fields. This plan will address the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides and will identify the procedures to be used when applying and handling these substances so the quality of runoff from the field subsurface drainage system meets applicable water quality standards - REFERENCES Surface Water Design Manual, King County Surface Water Management, 2005. Pre -Application Meeting with City of Renton Staff, May 3, 2006. Pre -Application Meeting with Washington State Department of Ecology and City of Renton Staff, July 19, 2006_ Port Quenclail Company, Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter North Property, April 5, 2000. City of Newcastle, Comprehensive Plan, Figure LU-5 Zoning Map, amended July 5, 2005. City of Renton, Gypsy Subbasin Analysis Technical Memorandum No. 2, April 1995. City of Renton, Gypsy Subbosin Drainage Improvements Design Memorandum, September 1997. City of Renton, Zoning Map, updated January 10, 2006. Washington Department of Transportation, 1-405 Renton to Bellevue Project Environmental Assessment, March 2006. Washington State Department of Ecology, Consent Decree #00-2-11778-7KNT and #00-2-11779- 5KNT. Stormwater Technical Information Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility, Renton, Washington FIGURES MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Project Owner . Poe-rXAtg t- t4qg-WW1q Phone b06) 3A2 - Zoop Address 5d5 - F;f A e-:5 . 54e gp Project Engineer Company AayavS44/1 KIeA,,! e:c� -A $06. Phone t-AVO Z 4 Z- 1Z ob ❑ Landuse Services Subdivison / Short Subd. / UPD ❑ Building Services M/F / Commerical / SFR ❑ Clearing and Grading ❑ Right -of -Way Use Ef Other Type of Drainage Review (circle): Date (include revision dates): of Final: nation Report Parge / Targeted I Site %72at76 Project Name Scaha.►ks /}Q DDES Permit # Location Township Z N Range 5 jg Section 29 Site Address tU DFW HPA U Shoreline ❑ COE 404 Management ❑ ❑ ❑ DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands ❑ Structural Rockery/Vault/ � ESA Section 7 ❑ Other Site Improve Type (circle one): Date (include revision dates): Date of Final: Plant (Engr. Plans) (L3)1 Modified / Small Site 0l7-?IaV0'C Type (circle one): Standard 1 Complex / Preapplication / Experimental I Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 111105 rave KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Community Plan : Special District Overlays: _ Drainage Basin: _y7P. Stormwater Requirements: ❑ iver/Stream ;-W12eltlands - ey.s}, ❑ Closed Depression ❑ Floodplain r'le-v 46P, #plan ❑ Steep Slope ❑ Erosion Hazard ❑ Landslide Hazard ❑ Coal Mine Hazard ❑ Seismic Hazard ❑ Habitat Protection El Soil Type < (t Slopes ❑ High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) ❑ Sole Source Aquifer ❑ Other ❑ Seeps/Springs ❑ Additional Shoots Attached 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 111105 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Wore RENCE LIMITATION / SITE CONSTRAINT 2 — Off site Analysis g rm ��� s'i��s%" r% ❑ Sensitive/Critical Areas -SEPA ❑ Other ❑ Additional Sheets Attached I Threshold Discharge Area: name or descri tion Core Requirements (all S apply) Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 12 / 3 dated: a Flow Control Level: t / 2 1 3 or ExeirnDtlon Number Incl. facility summary sheet Small Site BMPs N — 71. �• Conveyance System Spill containment located at: 5 Erasion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: -Jr3D Contact Phone: After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: riv / Public If Private Maintenance Log Required: Yes 1 No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes / No Liabil' Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake 1 hanced Basic / Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Management Plan: Ja / No Special Requirements as applicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA I SDO / MDP / BP I LMP 1 Shared Fac. I on Requirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption I o 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: Source Control Describe landuse: (commAndustrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: 2005 Surface Water Design Manual �,(� 1-1-3 —3 111105 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High -use Site: Yes / !(�Vc! Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes / with whom? Other MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION Clearing Limits L:1 Cover Measures Perimeter Protection Traffic Area Stabilization , ediment Retention urface Water Control ust Control MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS AFTER CONSTRUCTION tabilize Exposed Surfaces L' Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities ( 'eration an and Remove All Silt and Debris Ensure of Permanent Facilities Flag Limits of SAO and open space preservation areas ❑ Other Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description ❑ Detention ❑ Infiltration ❑ Regional Facility ❑ Shared Facility ❑ Small Site BMPs ❑ Other ❑ Biofiltration ❑ Wetpool Media Filtration ❑ Oil Control ❑ Spill Control ❑ Small site BMPs ❑ Other - G C.-vd �- # Pis 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 4 1/1/45 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET L:I Drainage Easement ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Access Easement ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Native Growth Protection Covenant ❑ Rockery, 4- High ❑ Tract ❑ Structural on Steep Slope ❑ Other ❑ Other I, or a civil ngineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorpor nto is worksheet and the attached Technical information Report. To the best of my knowle ormation provided here is accurate. 2005 Surface Water Design Manual 1/II05 *iM• y! lea � •�i�II�Rd �+ � } �� qH3���#W om .w tl 95+1i® p!.;1 I FtE06 1I t I iW" t+aifir•* .■ f j{ 1 }! ,i,,,'� ." 7±` - 'A O- a .� +'ss ■ ' [i �' t 1 to 9R RINM�.e !'1@t1 d� � •F' e � ' 'L.. � ?tl! �1 � a : r 'U�¢•_ �,°.�'? �v+� f1duck gf ii �'I �i! 7i q,i'� rRRC �114tiF:-}b-p��f�fll'. LIli .r.�9 I I p f9'�'I,Erkapk a'a�` if 1A ►# f r, u'smwr i` Ml� ,5.:/� i m�:4 9r K ' Fb - L� rJ - �� PFr�8!®Ailti[lIla kL'!r4' Ft 'aal4cAl t ao�'��`,�(�`lg�1 �g�y'� ty{L dory, II�����1 e ep�f���F� m3�k .�861�t:�a �ii�99�1i17 i.._�.. Va. ..i�a -`D Isilali 0 11K Wl Mew s�+►x�rrl�,d9 # r 5L ,..wia��Vt�.y .��_ R r��'.. t1S1■ F . .,.5 �., �fF .. ,� ��S' A�LRc ...."-az6. ..... . . . . . . . .......... kOZL ZU90r:4 Qoz[ Z67 9a.i 669Z-iO 196 UOIU-NM 'MR-3 GOZC ;gS 'an—), 44!3 doe I .G.W113MR I!Ala 4 I*Jntl-15 ■ SgivID(Mv # HIONS S:)fjslJ@jD1)JON:) 91!3 PUD I�N3W Ili AU "Mwo ISUISDqqnS Isulsoo a6tauip-j(] -C-1 ainBij 31111 NOSsnNDV-W IjululD.A.L pun tDH S)IAA'3400S DIfONd 'el Uj LA_ dx > in CC C> 4.r1' cn Ui 04 LLI Ln . ..f -.-` �ZI5t �71 T o IMM 5F -k IMF. w 0 0 :J� .1111111�11 .!7!� - a 0 r r 0 ll IL IL L $ •� m i 3> /> m 3> rm m G-) L2 <D Q rn iol. CAP t To BE ABAND.—" ONED W P(PEL(NE CONST IWSHEt' NERUCTE D m rn rn L2 m X q3 rn f. PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Facility DATE MAGNUSSON TITLE Figure 111-1. Off -site Flow Conveyance DRAWN BY KLEMENCIC SKETCH # ASSOCIATES m simcl.ml f CIA Engineers 1 301 Firth Avenue, 5,4b 3200 Seamlo, WeAhl)l.n 98101 .2699 T-. M 292 1200 F: 206 292 1201 -ka com �—A OUTF�- _ G ; oa : J 5w IN FW N SE 72nd St. ....... NE 48�-' t. j 76th St • Q ire �.._.�. SE tf1' 80tf S 0. Nf' 40th St t SE E : A: ........ ..:.' ' I ...... ..... StE~= 88t St low I S# 91St- St °, dne LU a ts N Q z 0 tu I Lu z LLI LLJ CL z 2 m c� a D 0 PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Facility DATE MAGNUSSON ' TITLE Figure 1II-2: Gypsy Subbasin DRAWN BY KLEMENCIC SKETCH # ASSOCIATES ■ serau.ul + s�xi,. w�y� selm-2694 - T: 206 292 f 20a F 206 2421201 a rQ m r- z A PROJECT Seahawks HQ and Training Facility DATE TITLE Figure IV-1 : Water Qua I ity T'reatmentAreas DRAWN BY SKETCH # i i 5 �z �F yam• �<� r /�T m D CJ� Z Z ' —i z' 1 >r ' MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC AssoCIATes shvc[urpl + Civil Engimers 1301 Fihh A.en^&ile3200 SmO6, Washinglon 9B 101.2699 T; 206 292 1200 F: 206 292 1201 —.mka.c m m0] 01.4'xvex WO I W 90Z A 0061 L6Z 90L'3 6697' 101 Q6 volOulysoM'o!poaS OOZfenns'enua^'e'41I'd Imi -0-Oul 1!"!] + I—P-Is ■ sDIviDOS sv # "Alms DIDNI1 ITI A8 NA�tl30 �na1 uanp wads S e5uu 8nuo� : -n aan i� 311f1 N�SSf1N1JHW 31ba !Ipaq uiuiD.a.L pun bH slmDgDDS D O& r r 1 1 i� r J r LU � r I • {f Y 1 � r 1— LLJ J �f H rr � W F— ' Q T LLJ c f) /. LLJ J G W U i . T LLL I•� 4lJ Ni • � r � v • Z� N r 1LLJ —• 1 u.. © — LLI y j � a W a C �� L.LiW �f ••� W a- 4 � i n r M-� Q f 4 M.1 LL. rLLI ,� 1 �I 1 CL wvr M— loz1 &r, 9oz:4 wzl z6z 5%,1 66n- to I R4 ugBu!ysoM'elpuas 0=el!n5'enu-,v4N.!j I08I sv9eu!0u3 I!m] ♦ 19Unpn45 1 m s� a��assv # HJNINS UDId IOJIuOD :)IDNIW91N 18 NMtlSQ UOII04uaw'PaS Pua uoisaa3 Aictiodwal -V- t'IIIA aan !d 31111 NOSS1iNDYW Rva 1P:34 uiuival Pup OH SIM0 t)OS D3f0Xd z Wuanaswo uoij iw " � •� � jam*' lei;, v r %� � \r r. {+ i 1 �, lktf 4 .r _- - -1 -1 •- � _ �. I I I I I�r- � _ 1 wo3 qw-� IMA MZ; 90Z =d OOi4 Z6Z 40Z .� _ --_`-- -- _ 664L-10196uolaw42°M'aI4DRS ONE ay^S Manua^V 441A l4E l a uomg I!%a r pwnp gS — q — INI0 CUONImzwz1 664Z- 11)1 V6—Z,!4soly,'e ms OGLE eery `.... "V opj toe[ of—IB.3 p! a + Jbimpn4s ■_ s11VIaOssv # Wilms uOld JOJJUOD DIDNaWI TN A9 Nmima u6pluawipaS puo uoisoa3 Djo wal ::)- I-111A aan !� 31111 NOSSfINOVW 3ma !jpi34 uiuinal pun t)H s)JnnnynaS I)IMSd Coll) I I i J..-.-_.- r i M UNUY�)VN TITLE Figure V111-1-D. Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation DRAWN BY KLEMENCIC -_ Control Plan SKETCH # ASSOCIATES ■ Strudv-1 + Cin't Engineers 1301 Fikh Aye ^Soil. 3200 S.nle, Wo,hinglon 90101-2699 L 206 292 1200 f:2062921201 wHw.m4v.com APPENDICES MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES Appendix A Sand Filter Sizing 060818 Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Sand Filter Design A,l = 0.7C,(f,A� + TV% f TEA,) A,f = Sand filter area (ft2) C, = Regional scale factor = 1 T; = Tributary area per soil/cover type (acres) A sps = Filter area per soil/cover type (sf/acre) from table where i = impervious area tg = till gross og = outwash grass Tributary Area (ft 2) Tributary Area (acre) A,f, Filter Area Required (ft 2) Proposed Filter Area (ft 2) Magnusson Klemencic Associates 060724Seahawks WF sandfiller Calcs,xls 8/24/2006 Sand Filter 1 59,464 5,037 1.37 0.12 2,156 2,195 Sand Filter 2 T L, 60,006 14,874 1.38 0.34 2,710 2,886 Sand Filter Area Increments From KCSWDM Table 6.5.2.A Storage Aj,ts,Og Depth ft &. A% 1 2,654 629 Sand Filter 3 7 TT" 14,874 2,716 0,34 0.06 662 1,045 2 2,212 524 3 1,769 419 4 1,572 372 5 1,376 326 6 1,179 279 Sand Filter 4 T 14 10,213 504 0.23 0.01 550 460 370 330 290 250 Total Filter Area 441 5,968 467 6,592 Page 1 of 1 Appendix B Onsite Conveyance Calculations (This information will be provided in a future addendum.) Appendix C Offsite Conveyance (Gypsy Subbasin) Calculations Scenario: Existing °P a Existing Outfall 1-1 1A..Aengln"nAajv%gypsy bypass proposed.stm MICA StormCAD v&6 [05.06.005.00] OB41 M 02.33:33 PM ¢D Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT OVOS USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Calculation Results Summary w asaassas::sass`-essacsaaaaamT=a=aasssaam=Taxaaamaaaa-;=aa===c==ew Scenario: Existing » >> Info: Subsurface Network Rooted by: Existing Outfall » » Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1 » » Info: Convergence was achieved. CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS j babel f Inlet i Inlet I Total I Total j Capture I Gutter ( Gutter E E i Type E J Intercepted i Bypassed j Efficiency I Spread I Depth I I I i I Flow J Flow I {$) i (ft) I (ft) I 1 I I (cfs) I (cfs) I I I -------1--------------- J---------------------- I------------- I---------- j------------ I-------- J--------I I-1 i Generic Inlet i Generic Default 100% J 0.00 i 0.00 i 100.0 i 0.00 j 0.00 j -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSURFACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: Existing Outfall i Label I Number i Section i Section f Length I Total J Average i hydraulic J Hydraulic j of i size Shape I (ft) I System I velocity I Grade J Grade j J sections I I I I Flo 1 (ft/9) I Upstream j Downstream I 1 I I ( I [ (cfs) J E (ft) i (ft) j i-------j----------j---------I------- I--------i--------i----------I------------I------------i I j 1 1 24 inch j Circular i 495.00 j 13.00 I 4.14 i 24,77 I 1a.91 J n 0- D Z 4 i Label Total i Ground i Hydraulic i Hydraulic i I System I Elevation J Grade j Grade j J Flow I (ft) i Line In I Line Out I E (cfs) I I (ft) j (ft) ------------------ i-------- i----------- i----------- i-----------I i Existing Outfall I 13.00 j 22.00 E 18.80 I 18.80 I-1 i 13.00 i 25.00 I 24.77 i 24.77 i ----------------------------------------------------------------- =maacaaanxsaas=====man=--aaa=====,-see=ass======a=��asa__ox=o==ave Completed: 08/23/2006 02:33:37 PM (:1..Aengineerela)+rlpypsy bypass pmposed.strn MKA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.006.00] 08/23MS 02*33:41 PM m BenUey Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solutlon Center Watertown. CT D6795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Wage 1 of 1 , rofiie Scenario: Existing Profile: Profile -1 gig So®nado: Existing .-iagt FJM�M (ffl a�ao ltoo 24M 3400 „w — ftkn (e) 1A...lenglneerslaj.Igyp6y bypaw PrOPosed.Stm MKA StormCAd v5.6 (06.06.005.001 0&23/06 02:33:51 PM * Sentley Systems. Ina. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of i Scenario: Existing Combined PipeXNode Report Label pstrea Downstream l-ength Section Full Average pstre wnstre ns Hydraul Hydraulk Total wnstraam !Node Node (ft) Size Capacity Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade Systern Ground (cfs) (ftla) Elevation Elevation (ft/ft) Line In Line Out Flow Elevation (ft) (ft) (tt) (ft) (cfs) (ft) P-8 1-1 Existing OU11 485.00 24 in 4.34 4.14 18.23 17.81 0.001263 24.77 18.91 13.00 22.00 i:1...lsngineersls]+Agypsy bypass proposed.stm MKA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00] Oa=06 02:34:00 PM 08entley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Ce vW Watertown. CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-leas Page 1 of 1 Scenario: Proposed [--j1 NC-) �urFAtIL J-4 I:1..\englneers\sjv\gypsy byva86 tuture.stm MICA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.006.001 08/23/06 42:28:05 PM 0 Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-756-1666 Page 1 of 1 Calculation Results Summary _====-a.ca.eavcca=s3sav=.�szc...as.cc.==oaec-o=ae=-===ace=xan5oc3 scenario: Proposed c,,X,��,,1� }> Info: Subsurface Network Rooted by: _. >>>> Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1 >>>> Info: Convergence was achieved. CALCULATION SLRWARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS J Label J Inlet I Inlet I Total [ Total ! Capture ( Gutter J Gutter 1 1 1 Type I I Intercepted ( Bypassed [ Efficiency ( Spread 1 Depth 1 I I I Flow I Flow I (%) J (ft) I (ft) I I I I I (cfs) I (cfs) I I I I-------1--------------- I---------------------- I------------- I---------- J------------ I I 1 t3B1 [ Generic Inlet I Generic Default 100% I 0.00 I 0.00 1 100.0 I 0.00-J 0.00 [ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CALCULATION 3UMARY FOR SUSSURFACB NETWORK WITH ROOT: Fut,"ure Outlet Label Number I Section [ Section I Length J Total I Average 1 Hydraulic I Hydraulic 1 1 of [ size I Shape 1 (ft) I System [ Velocity I Grade I Grade I I Sections [ [ I I Flow ( (ft/s) [ Upstream I Downstream I [ I [ I [ I (cfs) J ( (ft) I (ft) IE---------- ( I---------- I-------- -------- [---------- J----------- 1------------ I n ' J P-8 ( 1 [ 24 inch I Circular J 15.00 [ 30.00 1 9.55 ( 20.46 ( 19.47 1 1 P-7 1 1 1 24 inch ( Circular 1 233.47 1 30.00 J 9.55 [ 25.9D [ 21.80 Jh = O.0 P-4 1 1 1 72 inch ( Circular I 49.98 I 30.00 1 1.06 J 25.97 [ 25.97 In§, 0,6r J P-6 1 1 ( 60 inch I Circular 1 400.69 J 30.00 [ 1.53 [ 26.04 I 25.98 I 0,01 I P-1 I 1 [ 54 inch I Circular 1 149.69 1 30.00 1 1.89 [ 26.10 J 26.07 1 _ p•0%I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Label. J Total I Ground [ Hydraulic 1 Hydraulic System I Elevation I Grade I Grade I Flow 1 (ft) [ Line In I Line Out (cfs) --1-----------I ( I -- ( -- 1 I ! 30.00 I 22.00 I 18.80 I 18.80 [ 1 .T-4 1 30.00 ! 22.30 1 21.80 [ 20.46 [ GB4 I 30.00 [ 26.37 ( 25.97 ( 25.90 J 1 GB3 I 30.00 I 27.00 1 25.98 [ 25.97 [ I GB2 J 30.00 I 27.00 1 26.07 [ 26.04 [ [ GB1 --------------------------------------------------------------- 1 30.00 1 26.80 [ 26.10 1 26.10 1 0,..lengineerslalvlgypsy bypass future.stm MKA 5tom►CAD v5.6105.0$.005.001 08/23/06 02:27:58 PM *Bentley Systems, lnc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 2 See. - . o: Proposed Combined PipeWode Report Label Upatrea Oownstre Length Section Full Average pstres wnstre struct HydraulicHydraulicTotal ownstrea rn Nods Node (ft) Size Capa Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade Syatem [around (cfs) (fVs) Elevation Elevation (tVft) Line In Line Out Flow Elevation (ft) (ft) (h) (11) (s) I (ft) P-4 GB3 G134 1 49.98 72 Inch 133.94 1.06 17.79 17,74 0,001000 25.97 25.97 30.00 26.37 P-1 G131 GB2 149.611 54 in 62,25 1.89 18.35 18.20 0.001042 26.10 26.07 30.00 27.00 P-6 GB2 GB3 400.69 80 in 83.31 1,53 18.20 17.79 0.001023 26.04 25.98 30.00 27.00 P-7 G84 J-4 233.47 24 i 3.92 9.55 17.74 17.67 OA00300 25.94 21.80 30.00 22.30 P-0 J-4 - 15.D0 24 incl 7.75 9.55 17.67 17.61 0.004000 20.46 19.47 30.00 22.00 i:1...1englneerslaNAgypsy bypass future.stm MKA Sto mCAO v5.6 [05.06.005.001 08/2=6 02:28:26 PM 0 Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution center Watertown. OT 06796 USA +1-203-755-1666 Page i of f Profile Scenarlo: Proposed Profile: Profile - I I Soemmm Prqxgmd J-.\..Aenqlneers\aOAzyM bypass future Am MKA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.00I OSM3/06 02.28:15 PM 0 Bentley Systems, Inc- Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT0679SUSA +1-203-765-166e page I of 1 Scenario: Proposed Future a 4� GB3 GB2 GB1 Fut lire Outlet 1:V..1w&eerslajv\wPsY braaas future.stm NKA stormCAD ws.s [05.06.005,00] 08/23 os 02: f 0:08 E Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Sofuttnn center watertam. CT C)67% USA +1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 Calculation Results Summary Scenario: Proposed Future >>>> Info: subsurface Network Rooted by: Future Outlet >>>> Info: Subsurface Analysis iterations: 1 >>>> Info: Convergence was achieved. CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SURFACE NETWORKS Label Inlet I Inlet I Total I Total I capture I Gutter Gutter I Type I I Intercepted I Bypassed I Efficiency I Spread I Depth ] I I { J Flow I Flour J M [ (ft) I (ft) I I I ] I (cfs) J (cfs) I ! I I -------I---------------I----------------------I-------------I----------I------------]--------I----' { GB1 I Generic Inlet I Generic Default 100% ] 0.00 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 I 100.0 I 0.00 { { 0.00 J CALCULATION SUMMARY FOR SUBSURFACE NETWORK WITH ROOT: Futrure Outlet Label J Number ] section I I of J size { Sections ] J I -------J----------I--------- P-5 ] 1 172 inch I F-4 I 1 ] 72 inch I P-6 I 1 ] 60 inch I P-1 ----------------------------- 1 ] 54 inch section I Length I Total ] Average Shape I (ft) j System I velocity Flow I (ft/s) I J (cfs) J ---------- Circular I-------- I-------- I 40.00 1172.00 I I ---------- 6.08 Circular J 49.98 J 172.00 ] 6.08 Circular 1400.69 1172.00 ( 8.76 Circular --------------------------------- 1149.69 1172.00 I 10.81 ] Label I Total I Ground I Hydraulic Hydraulic { System I Elevation I Grade ] Grade I I Flow I (ft) ] Line In I Line Out I I I (cfs) I I (ft) I (ft) ] ]---------------- Futrure Outlet I-------- I----------- 1172.00 I 1----------- 22.00 ( 18.60 -----------I I 18.80 I ] GB4 1172.00 I 26.37 I 22.12 I 21.74 I GB3 1172.00 I 27.00 J 22.73 I 22.27 I GB2 1172.00 { 27.00 I 25.28 I 24.47 I Gel --------------------------------------------------------------- 1172.00 I 26.80 J 26.43 ] 26.43 ] Completed: 08/23/2006 02:10:12 PM Hydraulic I Hydraulic I Grade I Grade ] Upstream I Downstream I (ft) I (ft) I ----------- I------------i _ Q.fll3 22.74 I 21.27 T 22.27 I 22.12 I (3. 1) 24.47 I 22.73 n , J 26.43 ] -------------------------- 25.28 L�..lengineers18Jv1gypsy bypass k tm.atnt MKA StomICAD v5.6 {05.06.005.001. 08I23J08 02:10:18 ENBentley Systems, Eric. Hasstad Methods Soktion Center Watertown, CT 06796 USA +1-203755-1688 Page 1 of 1 Scenan--. Proposed Future Combined PipeWode Report Label Upstream Downstream Length Section Full Average Upstream )ownstre rwtruclec[Une ydraul" Hydraui Total wnstreNode Node (ft) Size ac Velocity Invert Invert Slope Grade Grade ystam Ground (cfs) (ftla) Elevation Elevation (ft/ft) In Line Out Row Elevation (ft) (ft) I (ft) (ft) (oft) (ft) P-1 G81 GB2 149.69 54 inch 62.25 10.81 18.35 18.20 0.001002 26.43 25.28 172.00 27.00 P-6 GB2 GB3 400. Inch 83.3i 8,76 18.20 17.79 0.001023 24.47 22.73 172.00 27.00 P-4 G133 GB4 j40.00 49.98 72 inc 133.94 6.08 17.79 17.74 0.001000 22.27 22.12 172.00 26,37 P-5 0154 Futr are O 72 Incil133.92 6.08 17.74 17,70 0.001000 21,74 21,27 172.00 22.00 I_\..%engineerslaMgypsy bypass luture.6tm MKA StomnCAU v5.6 [05,06.005.001 08l23U 02.16.20 PM 0 Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Watertown, CT 06795 USA *1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1 MP w Profile Scenario: Proposed Future Profile: Profile -1 Sconaft PmpoaedFuture iW /M M MII wr.A raw 1Y pr 1A..1ang1neeralatAgym bypass future stm MKA StormCAD v5.6 [05.06.005.001 08=06 02,27.01 PM 0 Bentley Systems. Inc. Haestad Methods SoUdon Center Watertown. CT 06795 USA +1,203-755-1W6 Page 1 at 1 Appendix G Integrated Pesticide Management Plan A.C. Kindig & Co. SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS and TRAINING FACILITY TURF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN (IPM) Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 Prepared by. A.C. Kindig & Co. 12501 Bellevue -Redmond Road, Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98005 425-638-0358 Fax: 425-455-8365 September 20, 2006 Project No. 283 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (Ing TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................1 2.0 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT.................................................................................2 2.1 Components and Strategy................................................................................ .............2 2.2 Turf Seeding Species and Varieties..................................................................................3 2.3 Turf Fertilization...............................................................................................................3 2.4 Turfgrass Pest Control Under IPM...................................................................................6 3.0 PRACTICE FIELD STAFF....................................................................................................15 4.0 MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT.....................................15 4.1 State Requirements for On -Site Chemical Storage and Chemical Handling..................15 4.2 State Requirements for Maintenance Area Drainage Control........................................19 5.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................20 LIST OF TABLES Table I Typical maintenance fertilization program.......................................................................4 Table 2 Summary of pest control measures................................................................................... 7 Table 3 Pest Tolerance Thresholds................................................................................................ S Table 4 Pesticide application rates and intervals.........................................................................10 Table 5 Pesticide chemical characteristics summary...................................................................12 APPENDIX A Pesticide Assessments Chipco 26GT Heritage Primo Maxx Prograss September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page i Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPAI) SEATTLE SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY TURF INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PLAN (IPM) 1.0 INTRODUCTION This IPM addresses management techniques and anticipated chemical uses on the Seahawks Headquarters turf practice fields. While the management of the practice fields is described according to current plans, modification of the management techniques described in this IPM should be anticipated to address site -specific turf needs that develop, new and perhaps superior turf management chemicals that may be developed and approved for turf use in Washington State, or new IPM approaches as they develop. Seahawks turf management will allow for the use of new or alternative products that are shown to be more effective, exhibit greater target specificity, are less mobile, and/or can otherwise reduce environmental risk in the future. Management techniques covered by this IPM include the following practices: a Turf Practice Field Management Techniques IPM Strategy and Chemicals • Maintenance Chemical Use, Storage, and Disposal • Accidental Spill and Response An IPM program is key to modern turf sports field durability and maintenance and for achieving environmental objectives. IPM focuses on the use of best management practices (BMPs) to create healthy and disease -resistant sports field turf by use of durable and disease resistant turf species and varieties, physical control of drainage and light, adaptive fertilization and watering regimes, and cultural control of soils. Healthy turf minimizes disease which reduces the use of fungicides and herbicides when proper application methods, judicious chemical selection, and proper irrigation methods are employed (Petrovic 1995). In addition, pest damage threshold levels are established under IPM, and chemical treatment occurs on an as -needed basis, if at all, for weed or insect pests as a backup control treatment only cultural controls fail to prevent their outbreaks. Fungus diseases are more ubiquitous and form the exception, requiring routine seasonal prevention treatment to prevent outbreaks that would increase need for higher curative fungicide doses and could render the sports fields unsuitable for the stress of Seahawks practice requirements. Pest damage levels and comparison to response thresholds will be determined through on -site monitoring of the turf by the practice field manager and staff. September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page I Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan aPMj 2.0 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT 2.1 Components and Strategy Chapter 17.15.010 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) defines IPM as "a coordinated action process that uses the most appropriate pest control methods and strategy in an environmentally and economically sound manner to meet... programmatic pest management objectives. " IPM is achieved through the use of combined and balanced strategies of cultural, biological, physical or mechanical, chemical, and other control technologies (King County 1993; King County 1999). IPM turf management strategies stress turf disease resistance, turf health, pest tolerance limits, and alternatives to pesticides to minimize their use. For example, the Seahawks IPM seeks to control all. insect pests by cultural methods; no insecticides are expected to be necessary. Likewise, IPM is designed to be flexible by including adaptive modifications to optimize turf health and disease resistance while reducing impacts to the surrounding environment. Healthy turf is less susceptible to disease and pests, and in the long-term, requires less fertilizer and pesticide treatment. By its nature, IPM avoids and/or minimizes off -site transport of pesticides and fertilizers. The following approach and steps define the IPM process that will be employed at the Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Fields (Washington State University [WSU] 1980; Berndt 1992; King County 1999; Chapter 17.15.10 RCW): (1) Information Gathering Regional pests expected to require management on the practice fields have been, to the extent possible, identified and anticipated in this IPM. Pests include insects, plants, and plant pathogens, including fungi, bacteria, viruses, and nematodes. (2) wing: The practice field manager will assess the type, timing, and extent of any observed pest problems on a near -daily basis. These observations will indicate when and what pest control measures are required given pre -defined pest tolerance levels. (3) Determine Economic hJuEy and Action ThresholdS.- The relationship between pest populations, the amount of damage, and the cost effectiveness of various pest control options have been assessed by the practice field manager to establish pest tolerance thresholds below which treatment is not initiated. Cultural, physical or mechanical practices will be employed in preference to chemical control measures to the extent practicable. Chemical controls will be used when they are determined by the practice field manager to be the most environmentally responsible control method, the safest method to address the pest problem, and where other control tactics cannot be relied upon to meet pest tolerance levels. September 20, 2006 A. C. KIND16 & Co. Page 2 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) (4) Record Keeping: Records describing the process and methods employed to address pest problems are kept by the practice field manager. (5) Treatment Evaluation Evaluations of the strategies employed and their effectiveness in controlling pest problems are part of adaptive management by the practice field manager. 2.2 Turf Seeding Species and Varieties Turf varieties were selected based on their growth habit, vigor, disease resistance, and resistance to weed encroachment. The practice fields will be comprised on three varieties (8011/6) Kentucky Bluegrass and three varieties (20%) of Perennial Rye. All the varieties selected have been shown to be resistant to fungus diseases (primarily using Leaf Spot as an indicator for resistance), and for superior shear strength to be durable to the turf stresses from Seahawks practice. Use of this turf blend will give resilient turf reducing weeds and turf diseases needing treatment, and minimizing fertilizer losses from the actively growing root zone. 2.3 Turf Fertilization During fertilizer applications, field maintenance personnel will adhere to all applicable Washington State Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. The three main nutrients in turf fertilizer are phosphorus, potassium, and nitrogen. The potential for adverse impacts to water quality from the delivery of phosphorus and nitrogen to Lake Washington has been considered by the practice field manager. This concern is mitigated by IPM as a source control measure, and by increasing sand depth under the practice fields to 18 inches to equal sand filter treatment for water quality for 100% of the turf drainage. This level of water quality treatment will be superior to that usually employed for phosphorus -sensitive lakes (Lake Washington is not determined to be phosphorus sensitive) and for sensitive fish habitat under the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology as ensuring compliance with state surface water quality standards under WAG 173-201A. The fertilization program includes nutrients and trace minerals (Table 1) to maximize turf health and vigor to minimize pesticide need. Off -site nutrient transport will be avoided through reliance on granular slow release fertilizer for most applications, application rates and application frequencies, and through course irrigation and drainage control. Trace minerals and organics will be used to ensure the turf have all requirements necessary to make use of the fertilizer nutrients during the growing season, which minimizes nutrient loss from the turf rooted zone. From time to time, soil chemistry analysis may be conducted by the practice field. manager to determine turf growth requirements if warranted. September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 3 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plant (IPM) Table 1 Typical Maintenance Fertilization Program Product Soluble % or Slow Release % Application Month Nitrogen (N) lbsl1 000 ftZ! ear Phosphorus (P) Ibsl1 000 ftz! ear Potassium (K) Ibs11 000 O ear % Li uid % Granular 1 Roots -2-3 Its 1 Fertilizer 100% Slow-100% Soluble — 100% March 1.0 0.25 1.0 April 1.0 0.25 1.0 May 1.0 0.25 1.0 June 1.0 0.25 1.0 July 1.0 0.25 1.0 August 1.0 0.25 1.0 September 1.0 0.25 1.0 October Every 28 days March through December er 1.0 025 1.0 Trace minerals and organics' at 5.87 oz11,000 ft Speedy Green 100% Soluble - 1Q0>a o Soluble nitrogen (15%), iron (6%), and magnesium (0.5%1 in natural organic acid chelate solution at 5.87 oz11 000 fftt` `liquid humics, seaweed extracts, iron, manganese, zinc, magnesium phosphate -citrate, organic surfactant September 20, 2006 A,C. KINDIG & CO - Page 4 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IP* Nitrogen (N) Turfgrass requires nitrogen in the largest amount in terms of physiological functioning relative to other essential nutrients with the exception of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen (Beard 1973). Nitrogen is required for plant tissue growth, enzyme production, and carbohydrate utilization, and is also an essential component of chlorophyll, amino acids, proteins, and protoplasm (Brady 1984). Nitrogen occurs naturally in soils in four major forms: organic nitrogen, ammonium nitrate (NfIQNOA soluble inorganic ammonium, and nitrate compounds (N43). Surface soils are mostly comprised of nitrogen sources associated with the decomposition of organic matter. Some clays have the ability to fix nitrogen between their layers. There are many types of synthetic inorganic and organic nitrogen fertilizers that have slow release forms. Slow release nutrients are insoluble and generally take 4 to 12 weeks to become completely liberated and available for turf utilization. Several types of slow release nitrogen include: urea formaldehyde, isobutylidene diurea (IBDU), sulfur -coated urea, and mixtures using natural organic sources. Nitrate -nitrogen added to soils, either naturally by plants and animals or by fertilizers, may follow four pathways (Brady 1984): (1) incorporation into microorganisms; (2) assimilation into higher plants; (3) loss to subsurface drainage (ground water); or (4) escape to the atmosphere in gaseous form. The rate and frequency of fertilizer application and the type of applied fertilizer are significant factors that affect the potential for applied nitrogen losses from turf and are therefore adjusted to minimize water quality impact (Cohen et al. 1990). Fertilization guidelines will be followed as described in this IPM, thereby allowing for the proper allocation in the amount, distribution, and timing of nitrogen fertilizers to maximize nitrogen utilization by the course turf and, therefore, minimizing the potential for runoff into the drainage system. Phosphorus(P) Phosphorus is an essential macronutrient found in all living cells (Beard 1973). Phosphorus is involved in many physiological functions within trfgrass including: (1) energy transformations in the form of adenosine triphosphate (ATP); (2) incorporation into the genetic material of the cell nucleus; and (3) carbohydrate transformations, such as the conversion of starch to sugar, The probability of phosphorus escaping from the practice field soils and environs is low because of the chemical characteristics of phosphorus and the irrigation system controls to prevent overwatering. Phosphorus is readily mineralized and immobilized (attracted and adsorbed by ionic reactions with cations) by iron, aluminum, and calcium which naturally exist in sand that September 20, 2006 _ _ A.0 KINDIG & CO. Page 5 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPAI) will be placed to 18-inch depth under the practice fields. Plant available phosphorus will only be applied in amounts necessary to provide adequate nutrient levels for optimal turf growth. Overfertilization and overwatering are contributing factors to phosphorus leaching and will be avoided through IPM. Potassium (K) Potassium is essential for normal turfgrass growth and development processes (Beard 1973). Physiological functions of potassium within turfgrass include: (1) carbohydrate synthesis and translocation; (2) amino acid and protein synthesis; (3) regulating transpiration; (4) controlling the uptake of certain nutrients; and (5) regulating transpiration. A common form of potassium in fertilizers is potash (K.2CO3), which is soluble and readily available to turf. Different forms of potassium fertilizer include: potassium chloride (KCI); potassium sulfate (K2SO4); potassium magnesium sulfate; manure salts (mainly KCI); kainit (mainly KCI); and potassium nitrate (KNO3). The application of potassium fertilizers has little probability of locally altering water quality. In its available form, potassium is not prone to leach from soils. Most potassium fertilizers do not alter soil pH and are held in the soil by cation exchange processes. Once in the soil, potassium (K) replaces other soil elements such as calcium (Ca) and hydrogen (H). There are abundant anion binding sites in soils for the single charge cations such as Ce, K+, and H+. While K+ additions would compete with Ca+ and H+ for binding sites, there is no reasonable expectation that this displacement would alter soil chemistry away from the immediate point of application. 2.4 Turfgrass Pest Control Under IPM erview Turfgrass pests and diseases requiring control on the Seahawks practice fields are identified in Table 2, as are the management methods (i.e. cultural, physical/mechanical, biological, etc.) that will be employed to minimize chemical control methods. Turfgrass pests and diseases not listed in Table 2 are either not expected to occur, or not expected to require chemical control measures on the practice fields. September 20, 2006 — A.C_ KINDIG & CO. Page 6 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPAI) Table 2 Summary of Pest Control Measures to be used for the Seahawks Practice Fields Physical 1 Disease or Pest Cultural Control Mechanical Chemical Control Control Turfgrass Control Prieto Maxx Turf growth suppressant Overseeding with (Trinexapac-ethyl) and Annual Bluegrass desirable during growing Poa annua control turlgrass; Promote vigorous season Prograss turf root growth to (ethofumesate) for with soil nutrient curative post - Weeds and irrigation emergence control Annual Bluegrass control, to out- of annual compete Poa bluegrass in fall annua. and in spring if warranted. Fungus Diseases Brown Patch (Rhizoctonia solani; R. blight) Corticum Red Thread (Laetisada fuciformis) Dollar Spot (Lama spp. And Moellerodiscus spp.) Fusarium Blight Chipco 26GT (Fusarium spp) (iprodione) Fusarium Patch (Microduchium nivale) Good air as preventative GraySnow Mold Promote vigorous circulation; Goad drainage; method of control fall ands spring (Typhula spp_) Helminthosponum turf root growth to Avoid shading; (Dreschlera spp.) with soil nutrient and irrigation Avoid irrigating in Necrotic Ring Spot late afternoon; (Leptosphaena korrae) control, to out- Limit thatch; Pink Snow Mold compete weeds. Maintain soil pH (Fusarium nivale) <7 Rust Puccinia coronata Fungus Diseases Brown Patch (Rhizoctonia solani; R. blight) Heritage Fusarium Patch (azoxystrobin) (Microduchium nivale) as preventative Rust method of control (Puccinia coronats) in fall and winter Take -all Patch Gaeumannom s ramintq September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 7 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) Table 3 Pest Tolerance Thresholds Pest Tolerance Threshold Fungus Diseases Zero tolerance Broadleaf Weeds Five weeds per 1,000 ft Na pesticide management proposed Annual Bluegrass One square foot patches Insects No pesticide management proposed Turf pest or disease tolerance thresholds are established by this IPM plan to determine when curative action is warranted, which may require chemical management (Table 3). With the exception of fungus diseases, pests are not managed for total eradication at al] times. Under IPM, cultural control methods (Table 2), in combination with disease and pest tolerance thresholds (Table 3), take priority over chemical control methods to minimize the use of chemicals to manage turfgrass weeds. No chemical control is proposed for insects or broadleaf weeds. Cultural methods include all management activities that prevent pests from developing due to the enhancement of desirable vegetation which out -competes or otherwise resists pests and disease, including but not limited to irrigation, seeding, and fertilizing. Periodic soil testing as warranted, addition of soil amendments (i.e., trace minerals) as indicated, and fertilization at rates that match turf growth requirements are cultural methods whereby the practice field manager will provide for vigorous turf root growth and disease resistance. Vigorous root growth allows turf to crowd out broadleaf weeds and self -repair damage from common turf pests such as European cranefly (Tipula paludosa). Avoidance of phosphorus and potassium deficiencies can prevent or minimize the occurrence of take -all patch (Gaeumannomyces graminis) fungus disease. Irrigation control and avoidance of overwatering, as well as control of the irrigation timing, are other means used by the practice field manager to prevent excessive soil and grass moisture conditions that can otherwise lead to fungus diseases, leaching of nutrients from the rooted zone and invasion of annual bluegrass (Poa annua). Physical, mechanical, or management methods are also used to control pests. For example, avoiding aerifier holes during the annual period of egg laying by armyworm (Pseudaletia unipuncta) or black cutworm (Agrotis ipsilon) moths prevents the females from depositing their eggs in the turf rooted zone. Taking this precaution eliminates any need for further control of September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO_ Page 8 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMj these pests to prevent turf damage that would interfere with practice field resilience and use. Even allowance for good air circulation through surrounding plantings can help minimize conditions leading to fungus disease, which is one reason some understory trimming (but not of the canopy) of native trees along the Lake Washington shoreline is proposed. Chemical Control of Turf ass Diseases and Weeds Despite the emphasis on cultural and physical/mechanical control practices and pest tolerance thresholds, annual bluegrass that cannot be hand eradicated and diseases are expected to occur on the practice fields, which will require the use of pesticides. A list of pesticides that will be used on the practice fields is provided in Table 4, indicating application rates and preventative or curative strategies employed for each. Preventative applications are those made over the entire practice fields to prevent a disease from occurring. Curative applications are spot -applied only with hand pressure sprayers to diseased areas (fungus) or to broadleaf weeds that cannot be hand pulled because they re -sprout from roots left behind or are too high in number to otherwise control due to invasion by offshe seed stock. This pesticide list may change over time as new chemical products with lower toxicity, greater specificity, less persistence, or less mobility became available. Pesticide Selection Process The pesticides that will be used were selected using the following hierarchy: 1. Can cultural controls or alternative control methods be expected to adequately control any diseases or pests without pesticides? a. YES for insects; No insecticides proposed. b. YES for rodents and burrowing animals; No rodenticides proposed. c. YES for most weeds; No broadleaf pesticides proposed. d. NO for annual bluegrass (Poa annua). e. NO for fungus diseases. 2. What are the fungus diseases and weed pests expected for the practice fields? a. These are identified in Table 2. b. Tolerance thresholds are identified in Table 3. September 20, 2006 -- — A.0 KINDIG & CO. Page 9 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management flan (IPMf) Table 4 Pesticide Application Rates and Intervals Product Category Application Rate Application Season & Curative or FrequencyComments Fre uenc Preventative 4.0 fl. oz./1,000 fe Not more than 35 ft, oz.t1000 fe t yr Fall through Spring; Preventative applications Chipco 26GT Fungicide Once per 2 to 3 weeks for Preventative when conditions favor or 6 applications per year preventative control disease development Spring and fall; Two Used in rotation with other Heritage Fungicide 0.4 ft. oz./1,000 ff applications 28 days apart (4 Preventative fungicides to prevent applications total) disease resistance Herbicide Through the growing season Enhances establishment of desirable grasses by Primo Maxx (growth 0.25 fl. oz.11,000 fe (March to October); about Curative suppression of Poa annua inhibitor) once every 4 weeks growth. Fall; 2-3 applications at 21- Post -emergence control of Prograss Herbicide 1.5 fl. oz./1,000 fe 2$ day intervals; One spring application if Curative Poa annua (annual needed bluegrass) 2 Curative use means spot applicators (hand sprayers) after disease or weed problem is detected. 3 Preventative use means application to practice fields to prevent diseases when conditions are prone to their occurrence. September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 10 Seattle Senhawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM c. The need to treat in advance of a disease known to readily occur, or the ability to only respond with curative treatments to diseased areas after the disease occurs is identified in Table 4. For those pests expected to occur and requiring pesticides to adequately control, what are the appropriate pesticides? a. Only Washington State and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved management chemicals for specific diseases or weeds on turf are legal to use. b. Among the products legal for a specific disease or weed and for turf application, products with the lowest persistence, lowest mobility, and lowest toxicity to non -target, off -site species such as fish, other aquatic species, birds, and bees were preferred for any specific disease or weed problem (Table 5). Lowest mobility is generally ranked with the most importance if all other factors are near equal between choices, because if the product stays where applied, longer persistence is not a problem and toxicity is not a problem. Indeed, longer persistence plus low mobility would mean that a small amount of product will have a lasting intended effect on the turf disease. In some cases, depending on season of expected use (low rainfall periods), low persistence can similarly offset higher mobility, particularly if the aquatic toxicity is very low. iii. For preventative chemicals with broadscale application, low mobility, and/or very low aquatic toxicity were always important criteria. iv. For curative chemicals with spot application only to diseased areas or weeds, moderate to low toxicity was sought in combination with either low to moderate persistence or low to moderate mobility, to the extent possible. See also the discussions and references provided for each proposed product in Appendix A. V. For fungus diseases, rotational use of two or more fungicides is usually required to prevent or respond to disease resistance to any one treatment. September 20, 2006 Q.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 11 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM} Table 5 Pesticide Chemical Characteristics Summary Product/Active Category SPA Registration a Mobility d Persistence Pesticide Movement Toxicity Ingredient No Ratingfi Chi co 26GT Fun icide 432-888 Low Short-lived Low Slight Heritage azox strobin Fungicide 10182-408 Low Short-lived Low$ High Primo Maxx Trinexa o-eth l Turf Growth Su ressant 100-937 High Very short to short lived n/a Slight Prograss Herbicide for (ethofumesate) Poa annua 45639-00062 High Moderately short-lived Moderate Slight control 4 Ranking criteria from King County (1993) 5 Ranking criteria from Vogue et at. (1994); derived from Groundwater Ubiquity Score (GUS) relating pesticide persistence (half-life) and soil sorption coefficients (K.). GUS = log1a(half--life) x (4-logjOK j. 6 Koc data not available for GUS computation, however EPA Pesticide Fact Sheet reports "...freld dissipation studies indicate... moderately immobile and relatively non -persistent under actual use conditions. " September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 12 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan {IPM 1~unizus Diseases The diseases listed in Table 2 are common fungi on Pacific Northwest turf that are expected to require chemical control. There are no effective alternatives to fungicide control for these diseases once they take hold, although careful turf culture will increase turf resistance. If allowed to occur, small patches of fungus disease on the practice fields would be spread by the heavy practice foot traffic and by mowers to all areas of the fields. Because of the intense use of these fields and the need for the turf to stand up to considerable stress from football practice, fungus disease that weakens the turf must be avoided and there is zero tolerance for their occurrence. On the rare occasions when fungus infestations are not readily identifiable by the practice field manager, samples will be sent to Washington State University's Puyallup turf extension service for analysis. Laboratory results are usually available within 48 to 72 hours to guide control measures on the fields. The fungus disease chemicals proposed for preventative use on the practice fields are listed and evaluated in Appendix A. The list of fungicides may change over time as new products become available that meet the environmental objectives of the Lake Washington setting and the practice fields. Weeds Cultural controls or manual removal are expected to be sufficient to control broadleaf weeds. If threshold levels for broadleaf weeds are exceeded and cultural/hand control measures are not effective, use of broadleaf pesticides may need to be considered; however experience with the practice fields in Kirkland indicates this is very unlikely. Over time, annual bluegrass is expected to invade the practice fields from off -site seed stock sources. Because this annual turfgrass species lacks the resistance characteristics necessary for practice field durability but would tend to dominate the turf over time, it will be controlled by curative treatments to kill new seedlings in the fall and if warranted spring, and by use of a turf growth suppressant to impede the ability of annual bluegrass that does establish each year to dominate the desirable turf species and varieties. Insects The European cranefly is the most common Pacific Northwest turf pest (OSU 2006b). The European cranefly Iarvae feed on grass roots during warmer periods from fall to spring, causing the turf to brown and die. Cultural control measures (Table 2) are expected to control insects below tolerance thresholds (Table 3), and consequently no insecticide use is proposed. Application Guidelines Manufacturer application guidelines and directions will be adhered to during all pesticide applications, and all pesticides will be applied by Washington State licensed applicators. See Table 4 for summaries of the pesticides that would be used See Appendix A for detailed September 20, 2006 -- - A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 13 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM environmental assessments based on the best available science for each pesticide. Weather forecasts will be used when undertaking any pesticide applications. Application Equipment Sprayers and spreaders would be used according to application rates, intervals, and seasonal applications guidelines noted in Table 4 and Appendix A. Sprayers Two common forms of sprayers exist, tractor -drawn or mounted, and hand sprayers. Tractor - drawn sprayers are only used for large area applications. Maintenance personnel will adhere to all applicable WISHA and OSHA regulations during all management chemical applications. Tractor -drawn or mounted sprayers have a series of down -aimed nozzles that spray directly onto the turf. Tractor -drawn or mounted spray equipment use will only occur on non -windy days to prevent wind -throw off of the turf. Hand Pressured Sprayers Two types of hand pressure sprayers may be used: backpack or hand carried. Hand sprayers are used for curative spot treatments. Due to their target site specificity, application of management chemicals via hand sprayers allow for controlled pesticide applications regardless of wind conditions. Spreaders Spreaders are generally used for application of fertilizers and seed. Tractor units and/or smaller walking spreaders or truckster-mounted spreaders may be used. Identification of Chemical Hazards to Staff and Public Pesticide and fertilizer container labeling will be in accordance with Chapter 16-201-170 Washington Administrative Code (WAC) and Chapter 16-229-180 WAC. Persons applying management chemicals will comply with use regulations described in Chapter 16 228-185 WAC. The practice field manager will keep appropriate chemical information on file for inspection (Chapter 16-228-190 WAC). Oeanun Cleanup of all spraying equipment will adhere to Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA) regulations. Tanks of spray equipment and spreaders will be filled with water three times and sprayed over the turf after pesticide application (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; Chapter 16-229-400 WAC), before being returned to the wash drain pad. Only as much pesticide as will September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 14 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) be used in a single application would be placed in the application equipment. Should excess mixed pesticide occur, the surplus will be immediately collected for reuse (Chapter 16-201-230 WAC; Chapter 16-229-250 WAC), or if not reusable, will be disposed of in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Hazardous Waste Management Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water Pollution Control Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW), and King County Code 9.12 (see also the King County Stormwater Pollution Control Manual BMP discussion in Section 6.3). 3.0 PRACTICE FIELD STAFF A qualified turf manager selected by the Seahawks will be responsible for implementation of this IPM. The manager's background may include education or experience in turfgrass management current with industry standards and science, certification(s) in pesticide application, and awareness of pertinent environmental issues and concerns related to turf management. The practice field manager will be responsible for training permanent and/or seasonal assistants in the pest management strategies and specific maintenance standards implemented under the IPM program. All persons who apply pesticides will be licensed per requirements of the Washington Pesticide Control Act (RCW 15.58), Washington Pesticide Application Action (RCW 17.21) and regulations in 16.201 WAC and 16.228 WAC. Such licensing does not apply to grounds maintenance staff using only general use pesticides on an occasional basis not amounting to a regular occupation. Pesticide applicators must undergo 40 hours of continuing education every 5 years to maintain licensing. Applications of products in Appendix A would be the job of licensed applicators. 4.0 MAINTENANCE/OPERATIONS CHEMICAL MANAGEMENT A permanent operations structure for storage of course equipment and management chemicals will be constructed in accordance with all applicable state and local requirements. 4.1 State Requirements for On -Site Chemical Storage and Chemical Handling; Secondary Containment of Management Chemicals Spill Prevention Turfgrass management chemicals will be stored in a maintenance building in accordance with WSDA's Rules Relating to Secondary and Operational Area Containment for Bulk Pesticide (Chapter 16-229 WAC) and Fertilizer Bulk Storage and Operation Area Containment (Chapter 16 201 WAC). A separate area roofed will be used for the mixing and loading of management chemicals. The area used for such operations, at a minimum, will be a roofed area adjoining the September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 15 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) chemical storage facility. Spill prevention measures will be employed to prevent environmental and human health risks through inappropriate use of management chemicals or accidental spills. Key elements in spill prevention for the maintenance building include the following: + Fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers will be stored in a maintenance building designed to prevent the release of chemicals (Chapter 16-201-020 WAC; Chapter 16-229-020 WAC). The floor of the building will be lined to- prevent leakage and sloped to a liquid -tight collection point or sump that allows easy removal of spilled or deposited material (Chapter 16-201-030 WAG; Chapter 16- 229-040 WAC). The facility will also be constructed with a watertight ceiling and walls that prevent chemicals leaking from the building (Chapter 16-201-028 WAC; Chapter 16-229-030 WAC). Within the secondary storage facility, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers will be secured in storage containers resistant to corrosion, puncture, or cracking (Chapter 16-201-100 WAC; Chapter 16-229-100 WAC). The storage containers will be labeled (Chapter 16-201-170 WAC; Chapter 16-229-180 WAC) and ventilated (Chapter 16-229-160 WAC) in accordance with state regulations. Within the storage facility, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers will be stored in their original containers with labels intact. Copies of the product labels and MSDS will be inserted in a logbook. The maintenance building will not have discharge outlets or valves (Chapter 16- 201-050 WAC; Chapter 16-229-060 WAC). Fungicide, herbicide, insecticide, and fertilizer mixing will be completed in a site constructed to contain 125 percent the capacity of the Iargest storage container. The mixing/loading site will use concrete curbs or other means for spill containment (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; .Chapter 16-229-210 WAC). The floor of the mixing/loading site will be constructed of concrete or other material with similar permeability. The floor will be sloped to a liquid -tight collection point or sump that allows spilled or deposited material to be easily recovered (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; Chapter 16-229-210 WAC). Discharges of fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers occurring within the maintenance building will be immediately recovered (Chapter 16-201-080 WAC; Chapter 16-229-090 WAC) and reused per product label if possible, or otherwise disposed in an approved off -site location consistent with the Hazardous Waste Management Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water Pollution Control Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW). September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 16 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) No other commodity except pesticides (including fungicides, herbicides, and insecticides), pesticide rinsate, or recovered pesticide discharges will be stored within the pesticide secondary containment facility (Chapter 16-229-070 WAC). The pesticide secondary containment facility may share an impermeable wall or portion of a wall with the fertilizer secondary containment facility. Fertilizer rinsate will be stored in the fertilizer secondary containment facility. • All management chemical storage areas will be secured by a locked door to provide reasonable protection against vandalism or unauthorized access (Chapter 16 201-160 WAC; Chapter 16-229-170 WAC). • Precise records of chemical applications will be maintained on Form AGR 4253 as required by the WSDA. Pesticides will be applied according to regulations specified in Chapter 17.21 RCW, Washington Pesticide Application Act and Rules Relating to General Pesticide Use (Chapter 16-228-190 WAC). • Fungicide, herbicide, and insecticide mixing and application will be performed according to the manufacturer's instructions and under the direct supervision of a licensed applicator. Cleaning and maintenance of chemical application equipment that comes in direct contact with any pesticide or fertilizer will be performed in a site constructed to contain 125 percent the capacity of the largest storage container. The site will use concrete curbs for rinsate containment (Chapter 16-201-190 WAC; Chapter 16- 229-210 WAC). The equipment wash pad located adjacent to the maintenance building will be roofed and drain to the sanitary sewer, not the stormwater system. A spill response plan will be activated for spills or leaks of management chemicals that occur despite prevention measures listed above. This plan would comply with applicable federal, state (Chapter 16-201-260 WAC; Chapter 16-229-280 WAC), and city laws. Major provisions of the proposed accidental spill response plan are the following: Accidental Spill Response Procedure The following items must be in place and an inventory of these items posted in the chemical storage area: (1) Telephone numbers for emergency assistance, including the City of Renton law enforcement and fire departments. September 20, 2006 I.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 17 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) (2) Sturdy gloves, footwear, and apron that are chemical resistant to most pesticides, such as foil -laminate gear and protective eyewear. (3) An appropriate respirator, if any of the spilled materials require such during handling activities or for spill cleanup (reference MSDS on file for each product used). (4) Containment "snakes", or booms, to confine the leak or spill to a small area. (5) Absorbent materials, such a spill pillows, absorbent clay, dry peat moss, or sawdust to soak up liquid spills. (6) Seeping compound to keep dry spills from drifting or wafting during cleanup. (7) A shovel, broom, and dustpan made from nonsparking and nonreactive material. (8) Heavy-duty detergent. (9) A fire extinguisher rated for all fire types. (10) Any other spill cleanup items specified on the labels of any products used. (11) A sturdy plastic container with a tightly closing lid that will hold the quantity of spilled material from the largest pesticide container being handled. Spill Responding Employees will be required to have proficiency in spill response procedures. (1) Reporting the Spill As soon as possible after a spill has been identified, the practice field manager will be notified and have responsibility for reporting all spills to the list of responsible parties, the city Emergency Agency responsible for rapid response, and Ecology's Hazardous Substance Information Office. The following will be reported: (a) Name and phone number of reporting party September 20, 2006 - A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 18 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turflnlegrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) (b) Time and location of spill (c) Identity and quantity of material released (d) Status of cleanup and containment. (2) Controlling the Spill On -site responders will: (a) protect themselves with appropriate protective clothing and eyewear; (b) stop the source of the spill; (c) protect others by warning them of the spill; and (d) stay at the site until the spill is cleaned up. (3) Containing the Spill On -site responders shall: (a) confine the spill as quickly as possible; (b) protect water sources and water resources; (c) absorb liquids with absorbent material; and (d) cover dry materials to prevent them from becoming airborne or solubilized. (4) Cleaning up the Spill On -site responders shall: (a) cleanup the spill; (b) decontaminate the spill site; (c) neutralize the spill site; (d) decontaminate equipment; and (e) decontaminate themselves. 4.2 State Requirements for Maintenance Area Drainage Control A large capacity, curbed concrete basin will be used for pesticide and fertilizer mixing and be sloped to drain to a sump system to prevent management chemicals and rinsate from escaping the area if a spill occurs. Spill response measures and supplies will be defined and available (Chapter 16-201-260 WAC; Chapter 16-229-450 WAC). Any sump contents will be recovered by manually activated pumps (Chapter 16-229-400 WAC) and properly reused, or if reuse is not possible, disposed in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Hazardous Waste Management Act (Chapter 70.105 RCW) and the Water Pollution Control Act (Chapter 90.48 RCW). Fueling and equipment maintenance areas will be constructed so that outside drainage will be excluded from entering such areas. Fuel storage tank(s) will meet all design, maintenance, and inspection provisions required by Ecology (Chapter 173-360 WAC). An approximately 250- gallon tank of biodiesel with an electric pump for field tractors and vehicles will be located in the maintenance area, along with an approximately 100-gallon gasoline tank and pump for equipment field vehicles. Activities in the equipment garage will include routine equipment maintenance, which may include the changing of oil, brake fluid, batteries, and antifreeze/coolant, and motor or undercarriage cleaning. Closed sump drainage will be provided September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 19 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) and any sump contents will be pumped out manually and disposed in an approved off -site location. Washing the exteriors of sprayers, mowers, and paint machines will occur in a roofed bay with a concrete floor, draining to the sanitary sewer. Sprayers will undergo three rinses over the turf before washing in the roofed bay. This equipment will not be washed outside of the wash bay. Wastewater from the wash -down bay will not discharge into stormwater drainage facilities. 5.0 REFERENCES Personal Communications Heintzelman, D. 1998. Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer Goldsmith (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), July 1, 1998. Ortego, L. 1998. Rhone-Poulenc Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer Goldsmith (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), July 7, 1998. Shultz, M. 1998. Zeneca Ag Company. Personal communication with Jennifer Goldsmith (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), August 18, 1998. References Cited Abrams, R. 1991. Toxic fairways: risking ground water contamination from pesticides on Long Island golf courses. New York Environmental Protection Bureau, New York State Department of Law, July 1991. Balogh, J.C. and W.J. Walker. 1992. Golf course management and construction: environmental issues. Lewis Publishers, 951 pp. Beard, J.B. 1973. Turfgrass: science and culture. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Berndt, W.W. 1992. A best management practices development manual, turfgrass maintenance section. Prepared for Beak Consultants Incorporated, September 16, 1992. Brady, N.C. 1984. The nature and property of soils, 7th edition. MacMillan Press, New York, New York. September 20, 2006 A.C. K17VDIG & CO. Page 20 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) Cohen, S.Z., S. Nickerson, R. Maxey, A. Dupay, and J.A. Senita. 1990. A groundwater monitoring study for pesticides and nitrates associated with golf courses on Cape Cod. Groundwater Monitoring Review 10:160-173. Federal Register. July 10, 2000A. 65(132): 42472, Gustafson, D.I. 1989. Groundwater ubiquity score: a simple method for assessing pesticide leachability. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:339-357. Horsley, S. and J.A. Moser. 1990. Monitoring ground water for pesticides at a golf course — a case study on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Groundwater Management Research, Winter 1990. King County. 1993. Best management practices for golf course development and operation. Prepared by the King County Environmental Division. Bellevue, Washington. King County. 1999. Tri-County integrated pest and vegetation management: Guidelines. http://www.metrokc.gov/hazwaste/ipm/ipmguide.htm. Oregon State University. 1996. EXTOXNET Extension toxicology network pesticide information profiles. Oregon State University OSU). 2006a. Pacific Northwest plant disease management handbook. Extension Service. Oregon State University (OSU). 2006b. Pacific Northwest weed control handbook. Extension Service. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 15.58 RCW. Washington pesticide control act. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 17.15 RCW. Integrated pest management. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 17.21 RCW. Washington pesticide application act. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 70.105 RCW. Hazardous waste management. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Revised Code of Washington (RCW). Chapter 90.48 RCW. Water pollution control. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington, September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page 21 Sealde Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPA Sygenta. 2000. Material Safety Data Sheet and Label for Primo Maxx. EPA Reg. No. 100-937. Sygenta. 2006. Material Safety Data Sheet and Label for Heritage Fungicide. EPA Reg. No. 100-1093. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. Pesticide fact sheet for Heritage fungicide. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs. Vogue, P.A., E.A. Kerle, and J.J. Jenkins. 1994. Extension properties database. Oregon State University, Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-201 WAC. Fertilizer bulk storage and operational areas containment rules. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-228 WAC. Pesticide Regulations. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 16-229 WAC. Secondary and operational area containment for bulk pesticide. Washington State Department of Agriculture, Olympia, Washington. Washington Administrative Code (WAC). Chapter 173-360 WAC. Underground storage tank regulations. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. Washington State University (WSU). 1980. Revised 1991. Concepts of integrated pest management: Extension Bulletin 0753. Cooperative Extension. College of Agriculture. Watershed Company, The. 1993. Fish habitat assessment and anticipated fisheries -related impacts of the proposed Blakely Ridge master plan development. Prepared for Blackhawk/Port Blakely Communities. Wauchope, R.D., T.M. Buttler, A.G. Hornsby, P.W.M. Augustijn-Beckers, and J.P. Burt. 1992. The SCS/ARS/CES pesticide properties database for environmental decision -making. Review of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 123:1-171. September 20, 2006 R.C. KINDIG & CD_ Page 22 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan {IPAV APPENDIX A PESTICIDE ASSESSMENTS September 20, 2006 A.C. KIIVDIG & CO. Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT — Chipco 26GT Category Fungicide. Active ingredient is Iprodione (23.3% Application Target: Preventative foliar treatment fungicide recommended for the control of a large number of fungus diseases on turf. Label Recommended Application Frequency: Chipco 26GT should be applied when conditions favor disease development, or when the disease is first noted. Applications are recommended at label instructed rates as long as required. Label Recommended Application Rate: Application rate is dependent on the fungus disease. The application rate varies between 3 and 8 fl. oz per 1,000 ff. See the label application rates for the fungus disease to be targeted. Do not apply more than 35 fl. oz per 1,000 ft per year or more than 6 applications per year. Mobil i Using the ground water ubiquity score (GUS) method of Gustafson (1989), iprodione has a "low" pesticide movement rating (Vogue et al. 1994). The GUS score includes soil half life, water solubility, and sorption coefficients as factors, and has correlated well with monitoring data once point sources of contamination are ruled out. Other investigators, the U.S. EPA and the USDA Soil Conservation Service have also attributed low mobility potential of 1prodione (Horsley and Moser 1990, Abrams 1991). A ground water monitoring study for pesticides from golf courses over sandy deposits on Cape Cod included iprodione, but it was never detected in any of the monitoring wells (Cohen et al. 1990). Persist ce: 1prodione has a soil half-life of 14 to 30 days and an aquatic half life of 3 to 7 days (Heintzelman, D., personal communication, July 1, 1998). These range from "very short lived" to "moderately short lived" in classification (King County 1993). Vogue el al. (1994) and Wauchope et al. (1992) both list a soil half-life of 14 days for iprodione. Toxicity The LC5096 for rainbow trout is 92.2 mg/L (Ortego, L. personal communication, July 7, 1998), which is classified as only "slightly toxic" by King County (1993) and Balogh and Walker (1992). Based on (1) low mobility and movement ratings, (2) short-lived persistence, and (3) slight toxicity to rainbow trout, Chipco 26GT is an excellent fungicide for preventative and curative control of some of the most ubiquitous turf fungus diseases without risk of unintended environmental impact. September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & CO. Page A -I Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT - Heritage Category Fungicide. Active Ingredient: azoxystrobin (50%). Application Target Preventative treatment fungicide with systemic and curative properties on turf. Label Recommended Application Frequency Heritage should be applied prior to -disease development. Applications are recommended at label instructed rates as long as required. Label Recommended Application Rate Application rate is dependent on the fungus disease. The application rate varies between 0.2 and 0.7 fl. oz per 1,000 1- . See the label application rates for the fungus disease to be targeted, Do not apply more than 3.7 fl. oz per 1,000 fl per year. Mobility The chemical structure of azoxystrobin would suggest moderate mobility in sand and loamy sand soils. The potential mobility and persistence of some of its degradates, based on laboratory and some held studies, are similar to pesticides with known potential to leach into ground water under some conditions. For this reason the EPA placed a ground water advisory on the label. However, the EPA (1998) also notes that "upgradable, supplemental field dissipation studies indicate that Azoxystrobin was moderately immobile and relatively non persistent under actual use conditions." Azoxystrobin has relatively low binding affinities on coarse, textured soils (loamy sand and sand), but approximately five times higher binding affinity on finer - textured soils (EPA 1998). Data supplied by the manufacturer lists the Koc as 1,690 (Schultz, M., personal communication, 1998), which ranks as low mobility using the King County (1993) system. Using the GUS index method of Gustafson (1989), azoxystrobin has a low pesticide movement rating. The GUS score is an empirically derived value that relates sorption in soil based on the sorption coefficient (Koc) and pesticide persistence (half-life). Persistence: Azoxystrobin is stable to hydrolysis, but does photo -degrade with a half-life of 11 to 17 days in aquatic environments (EPA 1998). Photo -degradation on soil results in a half-life of 11 days, Both of these degradation rates in the presence of sunlight are characterized as short lived (King County 1993). The dissipation of azoxystrobin is mainly dependent on sunlight (photo -degradation), and secondarily dependent on microbial metabolism. In the absence of light, degradates, but not the azoxystrobin itself, could be more persistent and mobile. However, these degradates prove to be nearly nontoxic. IgXipY Azoxystrobin is considered highly toxic to rainbow trout (LC5O9b of 0.47 mg1L) (EPA 1998; Syngenta (2006). The EPA (1998) notes that azoxystrobin is of low acute and chronic toxicity to humans, birds, mammals, and bees, but is highly toxic to freshwater fish and invertebrates. However, its degradate products are practically nontoxic to only slightly toxic to rainbow trout and daphnids. Degradate R234886 has an LC5N6 of greater than 150 ppm for rainbow trout and greater than 190 ppm for daphnids. Degradates R401553 and R402173 have LC5096 values of greater than 50 ppm to daphnids. September 20, 2006 A.C. MDIG & CO. Page A-2 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training ,Facility Turflntegrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) Evaluation SuMmma Based on the relative immobility of the parent compound azoxystrobin, and the relative non -toxicity of its degradates, Heritage is environmentally safe for use on the practice fields. Restrictions to Use: • The label recommends Heritage be restricted to two applications, 28 days apart in the spring and fall for curative/preventative treatment on turf. The label recommends that application be restricted to a 48-hour forecast of dry weather. September 20, 2006 A.C, KINDIG & CO. Page A-3 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPAI) PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT — Primo Maxx Category Turf growth suppressant. Active ingredient is Trinexapac-ethyl (Cyclopropyl) (11.3%). Slow the rate of turf growth and aid suppression of invasive Poa annua Label Recommended Application Frequency. Multiple applications can be made as needed by local conditions of grass growth rates, but should not exceed the maximum described below. Label Recommendtd, Application Rates& Approximately 50% growth suppression is likely to occur without grass yellowing for 4 weeks at rates of about 0.25 to 0.50 fl. oz. 11,000 W per 4 weeks. Applications at half these rates are recommended where Poa annual control is a primary objective in order to prevent yellowing, and can be made at higher rates for brief periods durin periods of very rapid grass growth. Multiple applications should not exceed 7.0 fl. oz. / 1,000 ft per year. Mobili : Cyclopropyl mobility is rated as "high" with Koc values that range from 59 (sandy loam) to 629 (clay) based on data supplied by the manufacturer, Syngenta (2000). Persistence: The soil half-life for cyclopropyl at between pH 5 and 7 is 8 days in the dark and about 4 days in the light These half-lives rate as "very short-lived" to "short-lived" persistence (King County 1993). T xici The manufacturer reports an LC5096 for rainbow trout as 68 mg/L and greater than 142.5 mg/L for water fleas (Daphnia magna) (Syngenta 2000) . This toxicity rates as "slightly toxic" to "practically nontoxic", respectively (King County 1993). Evaluation Summary. Although highly mobile, the use of Primo MAXX for routine treatment as a growth inhibitor is an environmentally safe product for use on the practice fields due to its low persistence and slight- to non -toxicity. September 20, 2006 A.C. KINDIG & Co. Page A-4 Seattle Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Turf Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPM) PESTICIDE ASSESSMENT: Prograss Cate Herbicide. Active ingredient ehofumesate (19%). Application Target Curative post -emergence control of annual bluegrass Label Recommended Application Frequency: Maximum of four applications per year; two to three in the fall at 21 to 28 day intervals, and one subsequent application in the spring if needed. Label Recommended Application Rate 1.5 fl. oz per 1,000 W per application, to a maximum of four applications per treated area. Mobili Ethofumesate has Koc values ranging from 210 for sand up to 160 for silt clay loam (U.S. EPA 1995). These would be classified as "high mobility" (King County 1993). Ethofumesate has a "moderate" pesticide movement rating using the GUS index method of Gustafson (1989) reported by Vogue et al. (1994). Persistence: Ethofumesate has a reported field dissipation half life of 21 days (Balogh and Walker 1992). Microbial and chemical degradation accounts for 66 percent of the dissipation, and leaching accounts for 31.2 percent. Half life in sandy load soils is reported to range from 122 days to 285 days, which is highly persistent. However, Vogue et al. (1994) report a soil half life of 30 days for this product, which is more consistent with the moderately short-lived ranking from field dissipation studies. Toxicitv Ethofumesate has a rainbow trout LC506 of 17.5 mg/L, which is classified as "slightly toxic" (King County 1993). Evaluation Summa Although highly to moderately mobile, and moderately persistent, the slight toxicity of this product combined with the proposal to limit applications to greens on a curative basis combines to make it an environmentally safe element of the IPM. September 20, 2006 R.C. KINDIG & CO. Page A-5 Appendix H Gypsy Hydraulic Project Approval Submittal CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. Environmental Consulting A.C. Kindig & Co. I N 'IRONtii.:..N At_II I1NG STREAM AND LAKE STUDY SUPPLEMENTAL STREAM AND LAKE STUDY STREAM MITIGATION PLAN SEAHAWKS CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY Renton, Washington Prepared far: Football Northwest, LLC 505 Fifth Ave South, Suite 900 Seattle, Washington 98104 Prepared by: Cedarock Consultants, Inc. 19609 244th Avenue NE Woodinville, Washington 98077 and A.C. Kindig & Co. 12501 Bellevue -Redmond Road, Suite 110 Bellevue, Washington 98005 September 20, 2006 19609 244" AVENUE NE, WOODINVILEE, WA 98077 - P:425/788-0961 - F:425/788-5562 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu& Mitigalion Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 PURPOSE...............................................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION.........................................................................................................1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................. 2 3.1 Description of Proposed Action....................................................................................2 3.2 Alternatives Analysis....................................................................................................3 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Routing and Flow...............................................................4 4.2 Stream Classification....................................................................................................6 4.3 Physical Condition.............................................................................4..........................6 4.4 Vegetative Cover..........................................................................................................7 4.5 Ecological Functions.....................................................................................................7 4.6 Fish Use......................................................................................................................11 4.7 Wildlife Use................................................................................................................11 5.0 SHORELINE PLANTINGIMITIGATION PLAN...........................................................12 5.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Mitigation.........................................................................12 5.2 Lake Washington Shoreline Planting.........................................................................13 5.3 Maintenance and Monitoring.....................................................................................14 6.0 RESOURCE VALUES TO BE RESTORED, CREATED, OR ENHANCED ..............16 6.1 Habitat Improvement Opportunity..............................................................................16 6,2 Function and Value Comparison................................................................................16 63 Summary.................................................................................................................19 7.0 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES.............................................................19 8.0 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE........................................................................................ 21 9.0 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE................................................................. 21 10.0 ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ...................... 21 11.0 MONITORING..................................................................................................................22 11.1 Sampling Methodology.............................................................................................22 11.2 Standards Of Success................................................................................................24 12.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN................................................................................................... 24 13.0 COST ESTIMATE............................................................................................................. 25 14.0 COMPLIANCE WITH THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE ..................................... 25 14.1 Planting Location......................................................................................................26 14.2 Planting Type............................................................................................................26 14.3 Contiguous Corridors................................................................................................26 14.4 Non -Indigenous Species...........................................................................................26 14.5 Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions.............................................................26 September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTAM INC. and A.C. KINDIG tea CO. SeahuwhvV9-20-06 Lakes Stream Repondoc Page i Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan 14.6 Minimum Planting Plan Performance Standards......................................................26 14.7 Based on Best Available Science..............................................................................27 15.0 COMPLIANCE WITH BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE ............................................... 28 15.1 Review -of the Best Available Science Supporting the Proposed Request................28 15.2 Report Authors Experience.......................................................................................32 15.3 Analysis of the Likelihood of Success of the Compensation Project .......................32 16.0 VEGETATION PROTECTION....................................................................................... 32 16.1 Design Considerations..............................................................................................32 16.2 Significant Tree Protection during Construction......................................................33 17.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................34 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Plant species selected for Lake Washington shoreline....................................................15 Table 2. Cost Estimate Worksheet.................................................................................................25 Table 3. Riparian Habitat Functions Comparison, Existing versus Proposed Conditions.............29 LIST OF FIGURES Figure1. Vicinity Map.....................................................................................................................2 Figure 2. Details from City of Renton Water Class Map................................................................5 Figure 3. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on -site looking upstream at beaver dam................................5 Figure 4. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall at Lake Washington....................................................6 Figure 5. Vegetation and woody debris along the Lake Washington shoreline ..............................8 Figure 6. Upland vegetation looking to the west across the site from the railroad tracks...............8 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Plan Sets Sheet 1 Sheet L 100 Sheets CE301-302 Sheets CE201-202 Sheets CE221-224 Sheet CE245 Site Map (source: RETEC) Conceptual Landscape Plan (source: EDAW) Gypsy Subbasin Plan and Profile (Source: Crawford) TESC Plans (source: Crawford) Grading Plans (source: Crawford) Conceptual Utility & Drainage Control Plan (source: Crawford) Appendix 2 Resumes of Key Personnel Appendix 3 Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) Form September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSULTANT'S, INC. and A. C. KINDIG & CO. Swhawk"9-2"6ZakvStream Rrpandoc Page ii Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Wash tn on Stream and Lake Stu /MR ation Plan 1.0 PURPOSE Capping and institutional control remedial actions on the North and South Baxter site will occur under Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees approved by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) in April 2000. Remedial activities will be implemented with a goal of achieving enhanced water quality in Lake Washington. Capping of the entire site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline requires eliminating an about 125-foot open section of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage that is otherwise conveyed by culvert through the site. The aging and degraded culvert carrying the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage under the site will be replaced and upgraded to accommodate capacity requirements of the upstream and offsite contributing basin at buildout. To accommodate placement of the Seahawks Headquarters building (which will serve as part of the remedial cap on the site), the replacement culvert will be realigned around the building foundation. This placement will require lengthening of the pipe from the existing 490 feet to approximately 860 feet. The culvert upgrade and realignment does not include replacement of the existing outfall pipeline to Lake Washington, which will be retained in its current condition. Aside from capping required under the Consent Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plans to within 25 feet of the lakeshore, project features proposed under a Master Plan approval for the site and within the Renton Shoreline Master Program jurisdiction include public access, practice fields, a building, parking, sand filters for water quality treatment, and some roadway area (see Appendix 1, Conceptual Landscape and Hardscape Plan, Sheet L 100). All features are allowed under the Urban Environment designation afforded the project site under Renton's Shoreline Master Program. Shoreline planting will include replacement of exotic plant species with a diverse native shrub and tree riparian zone. The proposed development triggers the need for both a Standard and Supplemental Stream Study under requirements of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC) because: The proposal will alter a waterbody (Gypsy Subbasin Drainage), and The proposed development site contains a Shoreline of the State and associated management area. Requirements for the studies provided in this report are described in RMC 4-8-120(D). 2.0 PROJECT LOCATION The proposed project is located on approximately 19 acres at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North, adjacent to Lake Washington in the City of Renton, King County (Figure 1). The two properties that underlie the project site are formally known as South Baxter and North Baxter. The project is located in the SW'/. of Section 29, 724N, R05E, W.M. The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage crosses the site from east to west before discharging to Lake Washington. May Creek located off -site to the south is unrelated to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and will not be affected. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCKCONSULTAN7S INC. and A.0 KINDIG & CO. S Lm9-2o-0c Laka Sftm irepo,Ldbc Page 1 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin >t� on Stream and Lake Stu r%IM'ligation Plan I; TJ Q _ Lake Wd.!hin;tor f V rn PROJECT M SITE 1' A uC ; rTII u SL L'o I I Y i T `y Figure 1. Vicinity Map 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Description of Proposed Action Sails across the site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline will be capped with up to three feet of clean soil as part of the remediation action. As part of that capping, the remaining open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the project site will be placed in a culvert. This action will have a direct benefit of protecting and enhancing water quality in Lake Washington. The existing Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert under the site is in poor condition and undersized based on a history of flooding upstream (Entranco 1995, 1997). The culvert will be replaced with a larger pipe prior to capping of the site. Portions of the pipe will be rerouted to accommodate future building and facility locations (see Appendix 1, Plan Sheets CE301 and CE302), The final culvert length will be 370 feet longer than what currently exists (Magnusson Klemencic Associates, 2006). Septemher 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. Seuliuirks:/09-20-11I Luker Slrenm Repart.dar Page 2 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miff ation Ilan The Lake Washington shoreline area will be replanted to improve functions and values and mitigate for the lost habitat value adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage (see Appendix 1, Conceptual Landscape and Hardscape Plan, Sheet 1,100). Where native plants and large trees currently exist, they will for the most part be preserved. The dense stands of exotic blackberry and Scotch broom will be removed and replaced with native riparian species. Included within this document is the Stream Mitigation Plan. A description is provided in Section 5 and the draft plan is shown in the attached Conceptual Landscape and Hardscape Plan, (Appendix 1, Sheet 1.100). Native plantings along the Lake Washington shoreline will increase functions and values of the riparian area over existing conditions and will improve the shoreline role in protecting aquatic habitat values important to Lake Washington. Net improvements in water quality, production of organic matter including insect and vegetative material, large woody debris frequency, bank stability, and wildlife habitat are predicted. More detail on the proposed riparian planting program is provided in Section 5.0. The functions and values comparison analysis is provided in Section 6. The proposed monitoring plan is provided in Section 11. The Site Map required under RMC 4-8-120(D)(19)(a) and Grading Plan required under RMC 4- 8-120(D)(7) are attached (Appendix 1, Site Map Sheet 1; and Grading Plan Sheets CE221 through CE224). 3.2 Alternatives Analysis Three alternative project layouts were evaluated to avoid and minimize impacts to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. These included; Daylighting the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage into an open channel across the site. Maintaining the existing open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage in an open channel. • Passing all of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage through the site in a culvert The only available alternative to satisfy the capping requirements under the Consent Decrees is also best suited to protect fish and Lake Washington habitat. The selected alternative places all of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage passing through the property into a culvert. This conclusion is based on the following rationale: • The capping requirement under the Consent Decrees is premised on avoidance of direct contact with residual soil contamination on the property. The cap will also serve to protect water quality in the drainage and Lake Washington from potential effects due to erosion of surface soils. The capping and culvert completely isolate Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington from the site soils. • The on -site open section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is a manmade ditch well below the grade of the site with steep sideslopes. This ditch provides minimal fish habitat. Riparian function is limited by the steep rocked channel banks. Elimination of the open ditch will have water quality benefits and will not adversely affect fish habitat. • The minor loss of riparian function can be mitigated by additional planting adjacent to Lake Washington. Planting at this location will also enhance wildlife habitat by providing September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO Seahawk V9-?M6 takes Stream Report doc Page 3 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington s Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan a larger block of contiguous habitat, particularly along the southern shoreline where it will abut a restored wetland and buffer adjacent to Baxter Cove. Flow can be diverted out of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel which means all culvert construction can be conducted "in the dry" after the flow is bypassed. This reduces the potential for adverse construction impacts. Because of the low quality of existing onsite habitat (described further in Section 4.0) and soils subject to required capping and institutional controls under the Consent Decrees, the proposed action will result in a net improvement in fish habitat quality in the Lake Washington Drainage. 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This section provides a description of existing habitat conditions of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel on the property, the associated riparian buffer, and the Lake Washington shoreline area. Known fish and wildlife uses are also described. 4.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Routing and Flow The various waterways known collectively as the Gypsy Subbasin Drainages consist of a series of largely man-made pipes, ditches, ponds, and open water habitat draining an area of approximately 320 acres north of and independent of May Creek (except by flood overflow east of I-405). The drainage collects at a single point just west of the BNSF railroad tracks west of I- 405 before discharging to the property (Entranco 1995). The culvert under the tracks is 55 feet long, has a gradient of approximately 2 percent, and is likely a barrier to upstream fish passage. Near the property boundary but still offsite, drainage is discharged to a small (approximately 10 foot diameter), quarry-spall lined pond. From the offsite pond, flow enters a 24-inch, 46-foot long concrete culvert extending on -site and beneath a dirt haul road before daylighting again to the open channel section located on -site. The open channel is a highly confined, steep -walled ditch/trough, with a channel bed approximately 10 to 15 feet below the surrounding ground elevation and 3 to 10 feet wide at the bottom. Substrate consists primarily of a deep anaerobic mud except where bank sloughing and rocks spilled into the channel have replaced the mud with a firmer bed material. The banks are heavily vegetated with a narrow strip of young hardwoods, Scotch broom, and Himalayan blackberry. Total length of the open channel is approximately 125 feet. An approximately 4-foot high beaver dam located near the downstream end of the open channel currently backs up water upstream to the railroad tracks (Figure 3). The drainage next enters a 490-foot, 24-inch CMP which discharges directly to Lake Washington. The 490-foot CMP drops approximately 0.5 foot (0.1% gradient) and at low lake elevation is perched about a foot above the lake water surface (Figure 4). During high lake elevations, the culvert is partially backwatered and upstream passage is possible, though not known to occur. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A_C. KINDIG & CO. S kO9-2"6lakesStreamRepondoc Page Seahawks Corporate Headgttarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Luke StudvVMitigation Plan S{ Figure 2 .. ,.. s you • :. a... ew. r a-va :vr�a.. ..raw ,t•'y :m a „ , a. t..4 :� y •�HHnY 4N S.,.Y. T� 1 ♦ 91 ietiYl .,r= SITE GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAINAGE CRF LL611 D: 4 Clt�ss ? o, Class 3 Class a -- Pipal or cuhcrted (dol~) Details from City of Renton Water Class Map. Figure 3. Gypsy 5ubbasin Drainage on -site looking upstream at beaver dam. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. Saalram-)4/09-20-06 Lakes Strewn Rep wt.db, Page 5 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Studv/Mitigation Plan 4 t Figure 4. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage outfall at Lake Washington 4.2 Stream Classification The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property is shown on the City of Renton's draft Water Class Map (Figure 2) as a Class 2 water. Class 2 waters are salmonid-bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall. Lake Washington is a Class 1 water. Class 1 waters are salmonid-bearing perennial waters also classified as Shorelines of Statewide Significance, 4.3 Physical Condition In general, upland and aquatic habitat value of the site is low due to the disturbed nature of the former industrial areas which currently support only limited vegetation and contain residual contamination. The shoreline areas provide the highest habitat value in the project area, but the habitat value of these areas are limited due to the dominance of non-native invasive plant species, lack of vegetative diversity and structure, and lack of special habitat features such as snags. The portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property provides virtually no value to fish with 80 percent of the total length in a small culvert and the rest encompassed in a narrow ditch some 10 to 15 feet below ground surface. The short open stretch offers some potential rearing habitat, however, habitat quality is entirely dependent on the existing beaver dam. Without the recently constructed dam, shallow depths, a muddy substrate, no instream structure, and little instream cover limits the overall habitat value. With little protection from high velocities, winter September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.G. KINDIG & CO. Seahairi 09- e0-06 Luker Strearn Rvpn-l-dnc Page 6 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Was hin on Stream and Lake St ion Plan storm events would likely flush any fish from the system if they were present. Summer conditions produce extremely low flows which also severely limit habitat quality. 4.4 Vegetative Cover The project site is periodically cleared of vegetation and was last cleared in 1990. Young red alder,. black cottonwood, willow, Himalayan blackberry, and Scotch broom are present on the steep banks of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel. The vegetation provides good shading and a fair source of allocthonous material to the watercourse. However, water quality, bank stabilization, large woody debris input, and other functions are minimal due to the steep eroding banks, young and exotic vegetation, and a narrow functional riparian zone, because the ditch is so far below grade elevation. Lake Washington shoreline vegetation within about 20-feet of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) is dominated by Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom, red alder, black cottonwood, and various willow species which grow up to water's edge (Figure 5). Beyond this narrow vegetated buffer, on -site vegetation consists mainly of various grasses interspersed with small islands of trees and shrubs (Figure 6). The upland trees and shrubs are similar in character to the immediate shoreline vegetation. 4.5 Ecological Functions Ecological functions for the two areas impacted by the proposed action: the open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage on the property, and the Lake Washington shoreline, are described below along with a description of existing conditions for each function. Water Quality Vegetation adjacent to streams and lakes can improve water quality by filtering pollutants, removing nutrients, and preventing sediment introduction. Native planted areas of approximately 100 feet in depth are normally required to preserve riparian water quality function where natural routing of water through buffers is preserved and relied upon for water quality protection. However, source control and water quality best management practices are recognized as more important for urban settings where storm -water runoff is not reliant on riparian conditions for treatment before discharge. Because water quality treatment function is provided by the proposed developments in these cases, and not by the riparian areas, riparian depths can be much narrower. Water quality function of the existing on -site riparian areas is poor. The only vegetation adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington is relatively young (10-15 years old) and primarily exotic. There are also steep slopes adjacent to both watercourses so the normal water quality treatment process is virtually absent. Surface water runs directly across the narrow riparian areas and receives very little natural treatment. In addition, residual contamination in soils on the property can degrade water quality so flow running through the riparian buffer over such soils is not a benefit and presents a risk to aquatic species habitat. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. SeahavkI09-20-06LakaSrreamRepondac Page 7 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin 4on Stream and Lake Stud /Mill ation Plan Figure 5. Vegetation and woody debris along the Lake Washington shoreline. Figure 6. Upland vegetation looking to the west across the site from the railroad tracks. September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. cond A.C. KINDIG & CO. Seaha , 6/09-20-06 Lakes Shrum Report.dur Page 8 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /1Llifi anion Plan Organic Material Overhanging vegetation contributes leaves, vegetative litter, and small woody debris directly to the channel. This material forms the source of food for aquatic invertebrates, which are in turn eaten by fish. Terrestrial insects, another food source, also utilize riparian vegetation as habitat. The majority of material comes from directly over the stream. Function diminishes rapidly after about 25 feet from channels edge though some benefit is still realized up to about 50 feet away. Vegetation overhanging the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage provides a small amount of -organic material to the watercourse. The material is carried downstream and deposited in Lake Washington where it provides some benefit to aquatic species located there as well. The young, sparse, and partially exotic composition of the buffer significantly reduces the overall value. Vegetation adjacent to Lake Washington consists predominately of exotic shrub species which overhang the water in some locations. The volume of leaf litter is minor as is the contribution of woody debris. Because many of the species are non-native and the overall shoreline area lacks diversity, the nutrient contribution and value as insect habitat is poor. Overall, the value of the existing riparian vegetation is low relative to its ability to contribute food and nutrients. Microclimate Riparian vegetation protects streams from climate changes caused by widespread development away from the stream, including soil and air temperature, humidity, and wind. There is no direct link between microclimate and the condition of salmonid habitat, however, it has been suggested that microclimate needs protection to maintain desirable assemblages of plants and animal species, including insects, beneficial to fish. It is estimated that a riparian zone between approximately 58 and 345 feet in the Renton area is necessary to entirely preserve natural mature forest riparian microclimates. The lack of any significant vegetation adjacent to either the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage or Lake Washington provides almost no microclimate function under existing conditions. Temperature & Shade Overhanging vegetation shades streams, until the channels become so broad that, like Lake Washington, most of the water surface is exposed to the sun. By intercepting solar radiation, vegetation prevents heat energy from reaching streams, maintaining cooler water. Vegetation also shades soil, cooling water introduced to streams through the hyporheic zone. Cool water is an essential habitat feature for salmonids, and increases the amount of atmospheric oxygen that will dissolve into the water, which also improves salmon habitat conditions and is essential for salmon spawning. Under existing conditions, 80 percent of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel across the site is contained within a culvert where riparian shade has no effect on stream temperature. The open portion of the channel has a narrow riparian corridor that combined with the slope aspect of the entrenched channel, provides fair shading of the small channel. September 20, 2006 CRDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C. KFNDIG & CO. SwhawbM9-20-06t4kessrtamRepondoe Page 9 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miti anon Plan Riparian shading of Lake Washington has no effect on water temperature due to the large size of the lake. Human Access Control One function of protected riparian zones in populated watersheds can be reducing the direct encroachment of humans including refuse dumping, trampling of vegetation, bank erosion, and noise. These function most effectively when the adjacent land use consists of low intensity development; when the riparian areas are greater than 50 feet wide and planted with high quality mixed species of native vegetation that discourages entry; and where there was a high degree of resident education on the value of the protected riparian zones. The blackberry covered slopes adjacent to the open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Position of the channel on fenced and signed private property prohibits human access. - The steep, densely vegetated Lake Washington shoreline is not conducive to human use under existing conditions. The property is currently fenced with locked gates so vegetation has no role in access control. Large Woody Debris Large woody debris (LWD) consists of downed tree stems and branches and is a functionally important structural component of stream channels in the Pacific Northwest. In non -fish -bearing stream channels such as on this project property, LWD acts as a surface for biological activity which contributes to the productivity of a stream system. In a mature coniferous forest, the majority (70 to 90 percent) of LWD in a stream comes from within 50 feet of the stream. The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel contains no LWD either on- or off -site. The channel is located in a relatively urban environment and intercepted repeatedly by culverts, including passage through the drainage system of the adjacent I-405 interchange to the east of the site. Any large woody debris entering the system is removed once it works downstream and blocks a culvert. So LWD recruitment has no practical potential in this drainage. The Lake Washington shoreline contains an abundant supply of LWD that has washed up over the years. The logs come mainly from old timber log booms and escapement from milling operations rather than recruitment from along the shoreline. However, the existing shoreline on the property contains no trees large enough to provide LWD recruitment for scores of years. Channel Migration The Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel is highly confined by culverts upstream and downstream of the property, and within a steeply sloped below -grade channel on -site. Channel migration is not possible at this location. Bank Stability Roots from vegetation growing along the streambank help stabilize soils and reduce erosion. Root strength benefits are normally low beyond 40 feet from the channel. September 20, 2006 CKDAROCK CONSULTANTS, EVC and A.C. KINDIG & CO. Seahawb*9-20-06 Lakea Srr' m Repondoc Rage 10 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake StudylHitigation Plan The existing steep banks adjacent to both sides of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel on the property have poor bank stability because the channel is so far below grade, and are constantly eroding. An old road near the top of bank along the channel contributes additional sediment. The Lake Washington shoreline is slowly eroding due in part to the lack of stabilizing vegetation. Other factors such as the changing lake levels (winter and summer) managed by the Army Corps, boat wakes, and the relatively young shoreline (due to lowering of the Lake Washington water level in 1917) also influence erosion rates. Wildlife Habitat The cleared and graded property provides little wildlife habitat though the area immediately adjacent to Lake Washington has moderate value due in part to the proximity of the lake (see Section 4.7). The lack of a mature native canopy limits nesting and foraging habitat for most species. 4.6 Fish Use Fish use of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage by resident salmonids is assumed. There is anecdotal evidence of fish sightings by a City of Renton street maintenance crew (Larry Fisher, personal communication, March 17, 1997). No use of the basin by anadromous salmonids is known to occur and presumed use is unlikely because of the lack of suitable habitat on the property and poor upstream passage conditions beneath the BNSF tracks and through the I-405 interchange and roadway stormwater systems to the east. Lake Washington supports a variety of anadromous salmonids, including Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho (O. kisutch), and sockeye salmon (O. nerka), and steelhead (O. mykiss) and cutthroat trout (O. clarki). Runs of non-anadromous kokanee (O. nerka) salmon are also present (King County, 1993). Lake Washington contains a wide variety of non-salmonid species, some of which are considered "warm water" species. These include both native and non- native species such as speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), three -spine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), northern squawfish (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), yellow perch (Percy flavescens), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmondes), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomiew), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), largescaie sucker (Catostomus macrocheilus), iongfn smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), and prickly sculpin (Cottus asper) among other species (Pfeifer and Weinheimer 1992, King County 1993, Wydoski and Whitney, 1979). 4.7 Wildlife Use Canada geese (Branta canadensis) were observed in both the vegetated and hardscape shoreline areas. The geese were observed nesting along the vegetated shoreline and in the osprey (Pandion haliaetus) nest located near the PSE substation nesting platform. Puget Sound Energy moved an osprey nest from a retired distribution pole on the Baxter site to a new nest pole platform erected on the south side of the substation in 1993. Puget Sound Energy also placed a crossbar on top of the first transmission pole leading away from the station to provide a safe place for the birds to perch. The osprey successfully nested on the new platform from 1993 until 1997 when the September 20, 20Q6 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KTNDIG & CO. SeahawM9-20-06 Lakes Stream Reportdoc Page 11 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin tan Stream and Lake Stu /Midi ation Plan osprey built a new nest at the top of the wood chip elevator located on the Barbee Mill site to the south of the property. This nest was eliminated when the mill was torn down. Osprey are present in the area from mid -March through August. Osprey have been observed hunting small mammals (likely mice) on the North Baxter site as well as fishing the lake. Canada geese and bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucophalus) have occasionally been observed perching on the nest platform during the winter months. It is assumed the bald eagles used the perch site to forage for fish and waterfowl along the lake shoreline. Three bald eagle nest sites have been historically reported between 0.8 and 0.9 miles west and northwest of the site on Mercer Island (WDFW 2006). Two of the nest sites are not known to have been used for the last several years. The third nest was reported active in 2006. Beaver (Castor canadensis) have been observed in wetland habitat along the lake shoreline and in Gypsy Subbasin Drainage east of the site. Pond sliders (Pseudemys scripta) ' have been observed on floating logs. Red -winged blackbirds, (Agelaius phoeniceus) were observed using cattail habitat in the project vicinity. Snipe (Capella gallinago) were observed in the cottonwood sapling -dominated areas. Other species of passerine birds and amphibians could be supported along the shoreline and the narrow red alder -dominated upland shoreline area. Numerous duck species also use the offshore area adjacent to the site. 5.0 SHORELINE PLANTING/MITIGATION PLAN Project actions that will affect aquatic features and adjacent shoreline vegetation include: 1) Filling of the on -site portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and elimination of existing riparian vegetation on the open channel portion, 2) Lengthening of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert under the site, 3) Removal of structures and roadways on the site. 4) Capping of the site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline pursuant to Consent Decree requirements, 5) Alterations to vegetation along the Lake Washington shoreline area, and 6) Construction -of stormwater sand filters, five stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington, parking, fire lane, building, practice fields, and public access within the shoreline. 5.1 Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Mitigation Consent Decree requirements that include capping of the site and filling of the open portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage are mitigation designed specifically to avoid human and habitat contact with surface contaminants and will improve water quality by eliminating ground/water contact in this area. This action will directly improve fish habitat in Lake Washington. No additional mitigation for the loss of 125-feet of stream channel for water quality function is warranted or proposed. Lost riparian functions from removal of vegetation adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage channel will be mitigated by new plantings near Lake Washington contiguous with the Baxter Cove wetland protected riparian buffer. It is estimated that vegetation within approximately 15- feet of the steep ditch in which the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is located currently provides some functional value to the watercourse in terms of leaf litter and other organic material. To mitigate September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C KINDIG & CO. Seahawka/09-20-NLakr3 Sermm Report&c Page 12 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan for the loss of function of 0.09 acres of primarily exotic vegetation, approximately 0.21 acres of area adjacent to the Baxter Cover wetland mitigation site located within the 200-foot Lake Washington shoreline area will be planted with a high density tree and shrub cover. This area is currently dominated by lower -value grasses and exotic vegetation. While the culvert carrying Gypsy Subbasin Drainage is being lengthened, much of it is also being enlarged (see Magnusson Klemencic Associates 2006 for details). Because there is a fish passage barrier immediately upstream of the project site, the culvert does not currently function as an upstream fish passage conduit. If the off -site barrier is removed in the future, the longer but larger culvert under the project site is expected to provide the same or better fish passage conditions as currently found on the property. 5.2 Lake Washington Shoreline Planting The Lake Washington shoreline planting plan (see Appendix 1, Sheet L 100) is being developed to enhance functions and values along the shoreline. Under existing conditions, approximately 1.23 acres of the area within 100-feet of the Lake Washington shoreline is vegetated with exotics, upland shrubs and trees (this excludes the 0.36 acres of Baxter Cove wetland and its regulatory buffer). This area of coverage will be maintained or extended under the planting plan. In addition, virtually all existing shrubs are non-native and will be removed and replaced with native species. The area of tree canopy coverage, (0.82 acres under existing conditions) will also be matched or exceeded under the planting plan. The planting plan contains the following features important to improving habitat quality on the site: • Existing non-native and invasive vegetation will be removed from the entire site. • Existing large trees 10 inches or larger in diameter at breast height (dbh) within 100-feet of Lake Washington have been mapped (see Appendix 1, Site Map, Sheet 1) and will be preserved wherever possible consistent with site remediation and the land -use plan. • An area located within 100-feet of Lake Washington will be replanted as needed to meet or exceed existing vegetation coverage (approximately 1.23 acres) along the shoreline. • Tree canopy coverage within 100-feet of Lake Washington (approximately 0.82 acres) will be matched or exceeded. • Planting soils will be amended if necessary to provide suitable growing conditions for new plantings. • Plantings along the shoreline will consist of a multi -layered approach consisting of groundcovers, forbs, shrubs, and tree canopy layers. • Shoreline plantings will consist entirely of native species typically found adjacent to lakes and streams within the Pacific Northwest. All plants will be selected to provide a combination of moderate to high shoreline protection and wildlife function. • Landscaping plantings selected for the project will be dominated by native species that provide moderate to high wildlife function. • All plantings will be established at a density that can reasonably be expected to thrive under the growing conditions present on the site and achieve the cover objectives within 5 to 10 years. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. cued A. C KINDIG & CO. Seah"kd04-20-06 Luker Stream Report, dar Page 13 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miti anon Plan Supplemental watering will be provided along the shoreline until plantings are well established and can survive on their own. Because of the high visibility of the project, all planting, both shoreline and landscaping, will be maintained indefinitely. On -going maintenance will occur throughout the year. Dead and dying plants will be replaced as needed. Non-native species will be removed by hand. Some pruning of larger hardwood trees (rather than plant removal), particularly lower branches, may occur to facilitate shrub and groundcover growth and provide lake views from some portions of the Headquarters Building, while retaining tree canopy. The shoreline zone planting will take place on a declining slope, some of which will be graded to accommodate capping of the site, training fields, and building development upslope (see Appendix 1, Sheet L 100). A typical topsoil profile (whether existing in the non -graded area or imported in the graded fill area) will be between 12 and 18 inches. Vegetation in shoreline area will consist of native riparian species that will be selected from the list provided in Table 1. Landscaping for the planting beds, parking lots, and perimeter screening will also be based almost entirely on the use of high value native vegetation and will include many of the species noted above. 5.3 Maintenance and Monitoring Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the Lake Washington shoreline area is provided in Section 9 of this document. Monitoring is described in Section 11. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C. KINDIG & CO. SeahawlU109-2M6 cafes Srr = RTort.doc Page 14 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miti ation Plan Table 1 Plant species selected for Lake Washington shoreline. Dry Zone (upland) Herbaceous Species — hydroseeded a. Deer Fern b. Pearly Everlasting C. Trailing Snowberry d. Dewey's Sedge C. Thick-headed Sedge Blechnum spicant Anaphalis margaritacea Symphoricarpos mollis Carex deweyana Carex pachystachya Woody Shrubs — 5' O.C. in groups of 3 to 9 a. Bald Hip Rose Rosa gymnocarpa b. Evergreen Huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum C. Low Oregon Grape Mahonia nevinii d. Mock Orange Philadelphus lewisii e. Red -Flowering Currant Ribes sanguineum f Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus Trees— 12' O.C. a. Pacific Dogwood Cornus nuttallii b. Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii C. Madrona Arbutus menziesii d. Big -leaf Maple Acer macrophyllum Wet Zone (adjacent to the shoreline) Herbaceous Species — hydroseeded a. Shortawn Foxtail Alopecurus aequalis b. Water FoxtaiI Alopecurus geniculatus C. Slough Sedge Carex obnupta d. Sawbreak Sedge Carex stipata e. Hardstem Bulrush Scirpus acutus f. Small -fruited Bulrush Scirpus microcarpus g. Slender Rush Juncus tennis h. Spike Bent Grass Agrostis exarata Woody Shrubs — 5' O.C. in groups of 3 to 9 a. Black Gooseberry Ribes lacustre b. Bog Laurel Kalmia microphylla C. Bog Rosemary Andromedapolifolia d. Hardhack Spirea Spiraea douglosii e. Red Osier Dogwood Corpus stolonifera Trees — 12' O.C. a. Red AIder Alnus rubra b. Black Cottonwood Populus trichocarpa c. Sitka Willow Salix sitchensis (adapted from the King County Native Plant Guide and the King County, Washington — Surface Water Design Manual). September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO, 5eahaw&0-70-06 Lakes Sfrem Reporr.doc Page 15 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Wask fan Stream and Lake Sfu /Mhi ation Plan 6.0 RESOURCE AND FUNCTIONAL VALUES TO BE RESTORED, CREATED, OR ENHANCED Aquatic and wildlife habitat on the site consist of a Class 1 lake, a Class 2 stream, and associated riparian zones. All three features have been heavily impacted by the long history of industrial land use and associated contamination at the site. To avoid direct contact to humans and preserve and protect water quality in the lake and stream, the approximately 125-foot remaining open portion of the watercourse will be culverted so that the entire Class 2 watercourse will be culverted through the site. No further enhancements are proposed to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. No stormwater from the developed site after capping will discharge to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. The Lake Washington shoreline riparian planting plan focuses on restoring habitat function to a degraded area. Aquatic functions described in Section 4.5 are targeted for enhancement with the primary purpose ofimproving nutrient contribution to fisheries resources in Lake Washington and providing a higher quality wildlife habitat corridor along the shoreline. This will benefit small wildlife species including birds, amphibians, rodents, and mammals. 6.1 Habitat Improvement Opportunity Key to the restoration value of the riparian planting plan is the existing degraded condition of the Lake Washington shoreline (see description in Section 4.4). The project will not disturb or remove any significant functional benefit of the shoreline as the existing condition provides minimal value. The net change provided by the project along the shoreline will increase habitat value for both fish and wildlife. The City of Renton has designated the shoreline an Urban Environment. Urban Environments have the objective of providing for water dependent uses, including human access, along water's edge. Under the new City Shoreline Ordinance, protected riparian zones in Urban Environments are a function of how the shoreline is used and can range from 0 to 100 feet in width. The proposed action will match or exceed the total area of existing trees and shrubs within 100- feet of water's edge and will create much higher habitat quality by removing exotic species and replacing them with native plants. Because much of the shoreline area currently consists of asphalt, bare dirt, and patches of exotic grass, development of various project features that will occur within the shoreline area (practice fields, building, pavement) can be completed without adversely affecting existing habitat quality. 6.2 Function and Value Comparison This section provides a description of riparian functions and values to be provided under the proposed project action and compares each function to the existing condition described in Section 4.5. Function and value determinations are based on best available science as described in A.C. Kindig & Co and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. (2003).. September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.0 KMIG & CO. s kO9-20-06 Lakes Swam Reportdoc Page 16 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stud /Mtigation Plan Water Quality The Consent Decree remediation requirements will benefit water quality because capping and development of the site will protect rainfall from conveying soil into Gypsy Subbasin Drainage or Lake Washington. The project stormwater management approach is based on the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Enhanced water quality treatment is proposed for site stormwater runoff (Magnusson Klemancic Associates 2006). Six stormwater management treatments are proposed to serve different developed portions of the site. The six treatment areas and systems consist of the following: Synthetic Turf Field and Building/Roof Areas (one system) - These areas are non -pollution generating surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the synthetic turf field and building roofs will be drained to Lake Washington as direct discharge. Precipitation landing on the field will drain vertically through sand and gravel to subdrains that will convey the stormwater to a site storm drain system discharging to Lake Washington. Natural Turf Fields (one system) - Similar to the synthetic turf field, precipitation that lands on the natural turf fields will drain vertically through sand to subdrains. The natural turf fields, with an 18-inch layer of sand, will function as a large sand filter. An Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan will be prepared that describes turf management practices for these practice fields. One -hundred percent of storm runoff from these fields will pass through the underlying sand, which exceeds the 2005 King County Manual enhanced treatment requirement for treatment of 95 percent of storm runoff. Paved Parking and Driveways (four systems) - Stormwater runoff from paved parking and driveway areas will be treated in four large sand filters. Three of the sand filters will be covered with grass, which will intercept fines and provide pre-treatment and to help maintain the surface permeability of the filter as shown by research data (A.C. Kindig 1999). Pretreatment in the fourth large sand filter will be provided by an additional six inch top layer of sand, which will be removed and replaced once or twice annually. The large sand filters have been designed per the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. Overall, the net effect of remediation and development on the property will be improvement of water quality in Lake Washington. Food The enhanced Lake Washington shoreline area is expected to provide significantly better nutrient contribution than under existing conditions due primarily to the increased presence of native species along the shoreline and the more diverse source of leaf litter and insect habitat this provides. The existing 20-foot wide swath of Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom interspersed with a relatively sparse native tree canopy layer provides little of the normal year- round organic nutrient contribution or supply of small woody debris contributed by a native species buffer. The insect population and benthic invertebrate community is different than native fish evolved to require. Because most organic material falls vertically or is carried a short distance by wind, the region providing the greatest nutrient benefit to the aquatic environment is September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG dr CO. Seahawks,09-20-06Lakes Srrea Reportdoc Page 17 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan directly over and within 50-feet of a waterbody. Therefore, the enhanced shoreline area ranging from between 20-feet to about 200-feet and averaging about 50-feet will provide an important new nutrient source and will improve habitat quality along the lakeshore. The loss of the narrow riparian buffer adjacent to the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will slightly reduce the amount of nutrients contributed by this drainage to Lake Washington. However, the primarily exotic and relatively sparse nature of the buffer is not a significant source of material and the loss will more than be made up by proposed planting adjacent to Lake Washington. Microclimate Microclimate is a big picture climate control issue extending for up to many hundreds of feet from the lake. Neither the existing buffer nor the proposed buffer will have much effect on this habitat variable. Temperature and Shade With large lakes such as Lake Washington, shade is not a significant variable influencing water temperature. The proposed shoreline enhancements with some overhanging vegetation will provide localized shading along the shoreline and should benefit temperatures in shallow areas immediately adjacent to the shore, but the overall effect will be negligible. Placing the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage into the culvert essentially provides 100 percent shading for this creek though the difference in water temperature being delivered to Lake Washington will be negligible. Human Access Control Urban Environment designated shoreline areas are intended to encourage human access to water's edge, though in this case access will be controlled by walkways, fencing, and perhaps some thorny native vegetation, rather than solely reliant on vegetation. The proposed shoreline area will have little function in limiting human access control in this situation. This is comparable to the existing condition where fencing rather than vegetation is used to limit access along the shoreline. Lar eg_ Woody Debris Large woody debris contribution is not a significant function of riparian buffers in the urban environment due to the liability of allowing large old trees to fall randomly near densely populated areas. However, smaller woody debris can function as substrate for macroinvertebrates and as an organic nutrient source. Under the proposed enhanced shoreline area, both coniferous and deciduous trees will be planted as future sources of organic debris. Neither of these benefits would occur under the existing condition where the site is periodically graded. Channel Migration Channel migration zones are not associated with managed ditches and large managed lakes as are found on or adjacent to the property. The proposal will have no effect on channel migration. September 20, 2006 CEDARDCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A.0 KINDIG & CO- Sc ahaw&09-14-06 Lairs Sm� Repandoc Page 18 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stud /Miti ation Plan Bank Stability The immediate shoreline will remain relatively unchanged. With the types of plants proposed for the enhanced shoreline area arrangement, and the relatively low energy lakeshore environment (relative to flowing channels), root strength in the enhanced area is expected to provide good protection of the shoreline from wind -induced waves and boat wakes. The proposal. will have little effect on bank stability. Wildlife Habitat Wildlife habitat for most species will improve significantly under the proposed condition as the relatively sparse and exotic shoreline vegetation is replaced with a diverse native planting regime. Native plantings in a multi -story canopy provide a much higher wildlife habitat value especially when they are planted in large contiguous groupings and are associated with aquatic habitat as is proposed in the southwest corner of the site. Native species provide superior feeding, roosting, and nesting opportunities for birds. The resultant woody debris and herbivorous ground cover is better for amphibians, reptiles, and small rodents. The loss of riverine habitat associated with filling the 125-foot stretch of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will result in less habitat opportunity for species preferring moving water. But other than the beaver that has established a small dam in this system, the rip -rap lined banks and exotic species dominated shoreline does not provide good quality habitat. The proposed shoreline enhancement area along Lake Washington will improve the overall quality of habitat for most wildlife. Wetland The only wetland on the project site is in the Baxter Cove area which will remain untouched under the proposed development action. The buffer of the wetland will be altered to no less than a 40 foot width, and averaging will be used to maintain an average buffer width of 50 feet as allowed under the J.H. Baxter Property Mitigation Analysis Memorandum (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 2000). Uplands contiguous with the protected wetland buffer will be planted with high density tree and shrub habitat (see Appendix 1, Sheet L100). 6.3 Summary Value for all habitat functions under the proposed development is expected to be equal to or greater than under existing conditions. This is primarily due to the relatively sparse and non- native dominated vegetation along the shoreline, and the low value of the remaining portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage currently existing on the property. The quality of vegetation will increase greatly as native groundcovers, shrubs, and trees are planted and maintained. 7.0 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES Ecology is the lead agency under the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) for all cleanup actions under the Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees between the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the Port Quendall Company dated April 2000. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on April 2000 for the capping and institutional control remedial actions to be performed under the April 2000 Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan for the J.H. Baxter North Property and the April 2000 Cleanup September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C. KINDIG & CO. SeahawkwV9-i0-Q6LabuStream Reportdoc Page 19 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake SlEtkIMiligation Plan Action Plan for the J.H. Baxter South Property as required by the Consent Decrees. The Consent Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plans require capping of the entire site to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline. An Engineering Design Report (EDR) for the North Baxter property and an amended EDR for the South Baxter property are under preparation for Ecology review and approval to implement the Feasibility Studies/Cleanup Action Plans. Ecology's approval of the EDR will include its determination that substantive requirements of state and local permits and approvals . are met under the Consent Decrees, although implementation of Consent Decree requirements procedurally exempts these permits and approvals. These include a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and site grading, filling, utility trenching, and building approvals from the City of Renton. A Notice of Intent to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for discharge of construction runoff and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for construction will be submitted to Ecology, however all stormwater runoff during site construction will discharge to the sanitary sewer under a Sanitary Discharge Permit from King County Industrial Waste as required by the Consent Decrees. Discussions with the Army Corps began with a pre -application meeting on January 15, 1997 for remediation of the combined Quendall and North and South Baxter properties. During subsequent consultation, the Army Corps indicated they would decline jurisdiction over filling of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. Consultation to confirm the Army Corps continues to decline jurisdiction over Gypsy Subbasin Drainage alterations is being sought by the proponent. No other actions require federal approval. Ecology's approval of the EDR documents will procedurally exempt WDFW requirements for an HPA. However, the applicant met with WDFW, Ecology, and the City of Renton on August 9, 2006 to discuss preliminary plans for fill of a 125 foot section of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage pursuant to capping requirements of the Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan, realigning the culvert and providing for conveyance of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage flows through the property at full buildout of the basin upstream of the North Baxter property, construction of new stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington, and substantive mitigation requirements for the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage fill. It was agreed for the purposes of complying with WDFW's substantive requirements that a Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) for the various improvements will be submitted as part of this Lakes and Streams Report for the City of Renton. This Lakes and Streams Report is a requirement of the City of Renton under its Critical Areas Ordinance for the development planned for the North and South Baxter properties. Renton must issue a Shoreline Substantial Development permit, perform SEPA review, issue a Master Plan approval, and issue other building permits for construction elements of the proposed Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility that are not requirements of the Consent Decrees with Ecology. This Lakes and Streams Report is required to assess impacts and riparian functions and values for alterations to the Lake Washington Shoreline, and includes functional impacts and mitigation for the alteration to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage required by capping under the Consent Decrees. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A_C. KIMJIG & CO. Seahaw"V9-2"6 Lake, Stream Aepvndac Page 20 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mrtigation Plan 8.0 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Construction is expected to begin in November of 2006 with demolition of existing structures, clearing and grubbing. Capping and grading will begin soon thereafter and be complete by June 2007. The new Gypsy Subbasin Drainage culvert will be constructed and placed into operation during the fall/early winter of 2006 and the existing open portion of channel will be filled once the new culvert is active. Building construction will begin in January 2007 and be complete by July 2008. 9.0 SITE PROTECTION AND MAINTENANCE Riparian plantings in the shoreline enhancement area and throughout the site will be monitored and maintained continuously after construction under a landscaping contract the project owner will maintain. Maintenance will proceed consistent with Ecology restrictive covenants in place after completion of cleanup activities under the Consent Decrees and will include replacement of dead and dying plants, removal of exotic plant species, watering as necessary, and trash collection. Riparian planting maintenance and monitoring will occur for 5 years after construction, but on -going maintenance will continue indefinitely as the site is maintained for the new Seahawks headquarters. 10.0 ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The overall environmental goal for the Stream Mitigation/Riparian Planting Plan will be to provide a viable riparian plant community adjacent to Lake Washington that increases habitat functions and values for regional fish and wildlife. Specific functions are described in Section 4.0. More specific objectives include: • Create 53,453 square feet of vegetated shoreline area consisting almost exclusively of native plants. • Remove and control invasive and exotic plants from the site. • Eliminate water contact with surface soils. • Additional important features for the riparian planting plan are listed in Section 5.2 Monitoring will be conducted for the purpose of ensuring the plant community as designed and planted complies with these objectives. Monitoring and performance standards are described in Section 11. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. SeahawkxM9-20-06 Laken Stream Repondoc Page 21 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and .Lake Stu&ZMIIigatian Plan 11.0 MONITORING The purposes of the habitat monitoring program are: (1) to ensure that design goals and objectives along with applicable permit specifications are met; (2) to document physical and biological characteristics of the newly planted riparian shoreline area, and (3) to ensure consistency with Ecology restrictive covenants in place after the completion of cleanup activities under the Consent Decrees. The monitoring process will consist of three distinct phases: (1) construction monitoring; (2) compliance monitoring; and (3) long-term monitoring. The following sections describe elements of the monitoring program. 11.1 Sampling Methodology Monitoring of shoreline vegetation will be conducted using the techniques and procedures described below to quantify the survival, relative health and growth of plant material as well as the successful creation of an area meeting goals described in Section 14. An annual monitoring report submitted following each year of monitoring will describe and quantify the status of the riparian planting at that time. Construction Monitoring Compliance success is increased with early and frequent coordination and communication between the appropriate parties. Coordination meetings could include the fisheries biologist, landscape architect, project engineers, regulatory agency representatives, and contractors. A pre -construction meeting of personnel responsible for the design and those responsible for establishment of the riparian planting and construction along the shoreline is recommended. The purpose of the meeting will be to review the intent of the riparian planting plan, establish a pathway of communication during construction, agree upon the construction sequence, and address and resolve any questions. The landscape architect and project biologists should be present on -site as necessary to review project implementation. Duties will include: (1) assist in identifying and marking the limits of clearing and grading, where applicable; (2) inspect the plant materials and recommend their final placement before planting; (3) determine the correct type and application rate of amendments to the soil, if needed; (4) make adjustments in planting plans, as needed, in response to field conditions; (5) ensure that aquatic related construction activities are conducted per the approved plan and permits; and (6) resolve problems that arise during restoration, thus lessening problems that might occur later during the long-term monitoring phase. Compliance Monitoring Compliance monitoring consists of evaluating work areas immediately after planting and restoration work is completed along the shoreline. Objectives are to verify all design features September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C KINDIG & CO. Seahawk V9-7"6 Lakes Stream Agwtdw Page 22 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Wash in on Stream and Lake Stu !Mill ation Flan have been correctly and fully implemented, and that any changes made in the field are consistent with the intent of the design. Evaluation of the planting areas will be done by the landscape architect using evaluation standards and criteria discussed below. After grading and planting of the shoreline area is complete, a walk-through survey will be completed to ensure species selection, plant location, and planting methods met all requirements of the landscape plan and any additional permitting conditions. A quantitative assessment of the plants established in the shoreline area (including plant counts and cover -abundance, as appropriate) will be recorded in representative sample plots for baseline data. This information will be used to document "time -zero' conditions from which the long- term monitoring period will begin. At each point, fixed-point photos will be takenduring during monitoring visits to provide physical documentation of the condition of the riparian planting areas. Photographs will be taken from all sample plot locations established during the first monitoring site visit (compliance) and thereafter each visit of the monitoring period from the established location points. The compliance monitoring phase will conclude with preparation of a compliance report from the landscape architect and project biologists. The report will verify that all design features have been correctly, fully, and successfully incorporated. Substantive changes made in the planting plans will be noted in the compliance report and on the drawings for use during the long-term monitoring phase. Information on changes should include details describing what was done, where, why, at whose request, and the result of the change. Locations of monitoring stations established for the compliance monitoring will be identified on the as -built plans. The planting plans, with the compliance report, will document "as -built" conditions at the time of construction compliance. The compliance report and as -built drawings will be submitted to the City of Renton and Ecology. Long-term Monitoring Long-term monitoring will begin after acceptance of the compliance report by the City of Renton and will be conducted for five growing seasons. Monitoring will evaluate establishment and maintenance of plants in the shoreline area to determine if goals and objectives of the mitigation/riparian planting plan have been met. Monitoring will be conducted annually each year during the five-year monitoring period. A final site check and summary report will be prepared in the fifth year of monitoring. At each sample station, plant species will be identified, individual shrubs and trees counted (where appropriate) to document survival, and an estimate of cover and abundance made using commonly accepted methods. The plantings will be examined to document survival rate of each species planted, signs of stress, damage, or disease as well as signs of vigor, and rates of colonization by other plants. Special attention will be paid to species considered to be exotic or invasive (e.g., reed canarygrass, Himalayan blackberry, Scotch broom). September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.0 KINDIG & CO. seaHawUV9-2"6LakaSwam Reporidoc Page 23 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin ton Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Flan All wildlife observed during the monitoring will be recorded, with notes made regarding habitat use patterns and activities. Any evidence of breeding or nesting activities will be noted. Monitoring reports will be prepared for submittal to the City of Renton and Ecology at the end of each monitoring year. The monitoring report will document the changes occurring within the mitigation/riparian planting areas and make recommendations for improving the degree of success or correcting any problems noted during monitoring. Monitoring reports will document how the riparian planting is meeting the goals and objectives of the plan. 11.2 Standards Of Success Success standards for the Lake Washington riparian shoreline area are relatively simple and straightforward due to the absence of complicated hydrologic regimes. Of primary concern is ensuring the establishment and viability of a functional plant community dominated by native species. As such, mitigation/riparian planting success will be determined if the following goals are met: • A total of 53,453 square feet of mitigation/riparian planting is present within 100-feet of the Lake Washington shoreline and 9,005 square feet of mitigation planting is present between 100 and 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline. • Within the mitigation/riparian planting area there is.ninety-five (95) percent survival after Year 1, ninety (90) percent survival after Year 3, and eighty (80) percent survival for all planted woody vegetation (shrubs and trees) at the end of Year 5. • Within the mitigation/riparian area there is not more than 2 percent cover of non-native invasive species at the end of each year. • No significant areas of erosion (defined as shoreline material loss of greater than one cubic yard) will occur along the Lake Washington shoreline. Volunteer native, non-invasive .species will be included as acceptable components of the mitigation if they are thriving at the end of Year 5. 12.0 CONTINGENCY PLAN If monitoring results indicate any performance standards are not being met, it may be necessary to implement all or part of a contingency plan. Such plans are prepared on a case -by -case basis to reflect failed mitigation characteristics. A contingency plan would be developed based on a specific failure to meet success standards described in Section 11.2 of this plan. The contingency plan could include recommendations for additional plant installation, erosion control, modifications to the watering regime, and plant substitutions including type, size, and location, consistent with Ecology restrictive covenants in place after the completion of cleanup activities under the Consent Decrees. City and Ecology approval would be requested before implementation of the plan. September 20, 2006 CEDWROCKCONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. 8euh"W9-2"6 Lake Stream Reportdoc Page 24 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation .Plan Contingency/maintenance activities may include: • Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary. • Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate with a similar species approved by the City. • Irrigating certain areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too dry, with a minimal quantity of water. • Reseeding the shoreline riparian planting area with an approved grass mixture as necessary if erosion/sedimentation occurs. • Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the wetland and planting areas as necessary. 13.0 MITIGATIONAUTARIAN PLANTING COST ESTIMATE Table 2 Cost Estimate Worksheet' Trees 134 $50 ea $6,700 Large shrubs 1,274 $30 ea $38,211 Small shrubs 1,330 $17.50 ea $23,275 Native grass 26,144 $1.25 sq.ft. $32,680 Irrigation 52,289 $1 foot $52,289 Fine grading 52,289 $0.25 sq.f3. $13,072 Topsoil 1,292 $26 cu.yd $33,592 Mobilization 1 $24,768 ea $24,768 Landscape architect oversight 100 $100/hr $10,000 Maintenance 5 $3,000 year $15,000 Monitoring 5 $2,000 year $10,000 Base Cost - $259,587 30% Contingency - $77,876 Total Cost - $337,463 0a acptumuci o, auuv puunuig pjan prepared oy EDA w . September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A. C KINDIG & CO. SeahawkO9-2"6 Lakm Smeam Reportdoc Page 25 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin on Stream and Lake Stu /Miti atian Plan 14.0 COMPLIANCE WITH THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE RMC 4-3-050 L(3)(c)(ii) provides criteria for approval of a Stream and Lake Mitigation/Riparian Planting Plan. This section discusses how the conceptual plan meets those requirements. 14.1 Mitigation Location Mitigation for all proposed environmental impacts will take place on -site as recommended as the preferred mitigation location under the RMC. 14.2 Mitigation Type Proposed mitigation/riparin planting consists of several of the preferred options under subsection Wc(ii)(b). These include a net reduction in impervious surface from the Lake Washington shoreline area, improving biological functions of the shoreline, increasing native planting along the shoreline (which is a recommended watershed improvement), and improving water quality in Lake Washington. There are no options to daylight streams or remove manmade salmonid migration barriers within the project site, however, the larger culvert being provided under the site may improve fish migration characteristics somewhat. As demonstrated in Section 6.2 of this report, the riparian planting provides for equivalent or greater biological functions of the Lake Washington shoreline. 14.3 Contiguous Corridors All riparian planting has been located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian and wildlife corridors to the greatest extent practicable along the Lake Washington shoreline. All proposed riparian planting consists of one contiguous habitat corridor along the shoreline. 14.4 Non -Indigenous Species No non -indigenous plant, wildlife, or fish species shall be introduced. All species to be utilized for riparian planting are native species selected to provide a combination of moderate to high aquatic protection and wildlife function. 14.5 Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions Existing and proposed ecological functions of on -site riparian habitat is discussed in Section 6.2 of this report. Compliance with best available science is discussed in Section 15.0. The evaluation of functions and values found a net gain in riparian habitat quality. 14.6 Minimum Mitigation/Riparian Planting Plan Performance Standards RMC 4-3-050 F(8) contains additional mitigation requirements which the applicant must meet. The applicant shall: • Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the su erviso eggabilily, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project. To this end the applicant has contracted with EDAW Seattle to provide the riparian planting landscape design. The plan was reviewed for functional benefit to the aquatic environment by Cedarock Consultants, Inc. Both firms have ,September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. 3eahawkd09.20.06lakes Stmam Reportd" Page 26 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin ton Stream and Lake Stu /Miti ation Ilan extensive experience designing, supervising construction, and monitoring results of riparian planting projects. Resumes of key personnel are provided in Appendix 4. The applicant, Football Northwest, LLC, is a large established company with substantial financial resources. Demonstrate the cqpabiliiy for monitoring the site and to make corrections durin2 the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet Frojected goals. Monitoring for this project is relatively simple. No complicated wetland, hydrologic, or fish surveys are required. All corrections will consist of replacement of dead and dying plants as necessary and possible minor repairs to infrastructure (fences, signs, etc.) and the shoreline along Lake Washington. Protect and manse or provide for the rotection and management, of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to rovide for long-term persistence of the mitigation area. The applicant is developing the project as their future headquarters and will be located on -site. They have a vested interest in maintaining the vegetation in excellent condition as it will be visible from the headquarters building and practice facilities. • Provide for i2roject monitoring and allow City inspections. The applicant will contract with a consultant to monitor all the shoreline planted areas. City inspections will be allowed. Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or re ulato requirements for adjacent properties, unless it is a result of a code requirement, or no other option is feasible or practical. The proposed riparian planting does not move the location of any natural feature towards adjacent properties. Thus no off -site property owners will be affected. • For on -site or off -site mitigation ro osals abutting or adjacent gropeM owners shall be notified when wetland creation or restoration stream relocation critical area buffer increases flood hazard mitigation, habitat conservation miti ation or geologic hazard mitigation have the potential to considerably decrease the development potential of abutting or adjacent properties. For exam le if a created wetland on a proppm would now result in a wetland buffer intruding onto a neighboring roe the neighboring roe owner would be notified. The development potential of abutting or adjacent property owners will not be affected in any way by the proposed shoreline planting plan for this project. 14.7 Based on Best Available Science Compliance with best available science is described in Section 15.0. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCKCONSULTANTS INC and A,C. KINDIG & CD. seakawk A09-zo-06 Lakes S:ream Repandoc Page 27 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin on Stream and Lake Stu /Miti anon Plan 15.0 COMPLIANCE WITH BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE 15.1 Review of the Best Available Science Supporting the Proposed Request Mitigation plantings proposed for the Lake Washington shoreline are both wider and better vegetated than under existing conditions. Functions and values of both aquatic and upland riparian habitat will be improved over existing conditions based on wider buffers, native species plantings, and water quality improvements. A summary of proposed riparian functions in comparison to existing riparian functions is provided in Table 3. Riparian areas are generally recognized as having four major elements necessary to' protect the aquatic environment: • Maintenance of stream baseflows; • Maintenance of water quality; • Contribution to in -stream structural diversity; and • Contribution of biotic input including insects and organic matter. Best Available Science (BAS) is unanimous in its recognition that wider riparian areas provide increasing value to aquatic habitat (Pollock and Kennard 1998). Since the relationship between riparian width and riparian function is exponential, the incremental functional benefits of increasing riparian width decreases as buffers become wider. Under proposed conditions for Lake Washington, the riparian planting area will range from a minimum of about 20 feet to a maximum of about 200 feet (horizontal distance). Because the planted area will be wider than under current conditions, and because species quality, quantity, and diversity along the shoreline will be improved over existing conditions, the proposal is consistent with the RMC requirement to utilize BAS to improve water quality, fish, and wildlife habitat. As described below using BAS, the proposal will create a functional riparian corridor fully capable of protecting the major habitat elements. Baseflow The proposed shoreline area will have no effect on baseflow because of the size of Lake Washington and its position at the downstream end of the watershed. Water levels in Lake Washington are not controlled within the immediate riparian zone of the lake. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSUL TAWS, INC. andA.O KINDIG & CO. Seah wkov-2o-"LakaS,emnRqwnaa Page 28 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin ton Stream and Lake Stu IMiti aiion Plan Table 3 Riparian Habitat Functions and Values, Comparison of Existing versus Proposed Conditions Function Habitat Potential Function for Class I Lakes Existino Shoreline Conditions Proposed Shoreline Conditions I labitat Value Comparison Water Quality Low to Existing condition lacks Future development is not EEquivalent Moderate width, plant density, and plant dependant on riparian function under diversity. Lack of native function for water quality both conditions vegetation also a minus. because it employs the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual, so width for water quality treatment is not required. Native, vegetation is a plus. Food Low Sparse non-native vegetation Vegetation optimized with Proposed action provides little beneficial leaf a diverse mix of native will have higher Iitter and small organic species. High habitat value value debris. near lake. Microclimate Low to Existing shoreline area has Proposed shoreline area Equivalent Moderate little effect on microclimate. will have little effect on function under microclimate, both conditions Temperature Low to Not a significant issue for Not a significant issue for Equivalent & Shade none large Class 1 waterbodies. large Class 1 waterbodies. function under both conditions Human Low Lake Washington is a public Lake Washington is a E Uivvalent Access access area so access control public access area so access function under not a habitat function issue control not a habitat both conditions function issue Large Woody Low Site periodically cleared so Planting that will contribute Proposed action Debris unlikely to have any some minor woody debris will have higher significant future LWD in the future. value contribution. Channel Low Controlled Iake level and no Controlled lake level and Equivalent Migration surface channels on -site. No no surface channels on -site. function under potential for channel No potential for channel both conditions migration migration Bank Stability Low to Exotic species dominated Root strength increased Posed action Moderate shoreline. Banks partially with native shrubs and will have higher protected by large logs. trees. Banks partially value protected by large logs. Wildlife Not Rated Patchy exotic species Native plantings in a dense proposed action Habitat dominated riparian vegetation multi -story contiguous will have highest of relatively low value as canopy will provide high value bird, amphibian, reptile, and wildlife habitat value. rodent habitat. Aaaptea trGM- A.U. Mudig & Co and C'edarock Consultants, Inc, 2003, September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTAA7S, INC, and A, C. KINDIG & CO, SeahawkO9-20-06 Lakes Sfream Repon doc Page 29 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake StuE Mwgation Plan Water Qudjity Water quality as it relates to aquatic habitat consists of various components including chemistry (pH, D.O., metals, etc.) and temperature (the beneficial dissolved and particulate organic nutrients that are also a component of water quality are discussed in the Biotic Input section). Water Chemistry Riparian widths ranging from 30 to 100 feet are described in the literature as satisfactory for removing the majority of sediment and pollutants from surface water (summarized in Knutson and Naef 1997). However, under the current conditions, on -site natural pathways to the stream are largely absent due to the flat nature of the site and the isolated steely banked below -grade channel. Under the proposal, the site will continue to avoid discharge to. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage because the hydrologic flow path through the site will be a piped drainage systems that will bypass the riparian area and convey offsite discharge directly to Lake Washington. For Lake Washington, sheet flow drainage that occurred in the past will be intercepted and treated as required by the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual before discharge at outfalls constructed to Lake Washington. Much of the natural riparian functions for hydrologic and water quality functions (peak flow attenuation, base flow releases, and water quality treatment) will be removed from riparian area control by the storm drain system. Storm water detention and water quality treatment requirements are regulated for new development and redevelopment within the City without reliance on riparian buffer function. The proposed riparian zones will provide equivalent water chemistry protection as existing riparian areas, and remediation including site capping and fill of the remaining portion of the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will result in overall water quality improvements. Temperature and Shade Stream riparian zones provide shade and absorb solar radiation that would otherwise reach streams and increase water temperatures. For these reasons, shade provided by riparian zones can be important to maintaining water temperatures that are favorable for salmonids. However, research on the effects of shade on stream water temperatures shows a considerable amount of variability based on topographic elevation, adjacent land uses, vegetation type, and numerous other factors (Pollack and Kennard 1998). Sullivan et al (1990) concluded that once streams traveled 25 miles from their watershed divides, they were generally too wide for trees to shade their surfaces or exercise control over water temperature. This is particularly true in large, deep lakes like Lake Washington. The proposed shoreline area will provide equivalent water temperature protection as the existing riparian zone. Instream Structural Diversi In -stream structural diversity is provided by large pieces of wood falling into the waterbody. . Large woody debris (I") consists of downed tree stems and branches and is a functionally important structural component of stream channels and lakes in the Pacific Northwest (Bisson et al. 1987, Beschta et al. 1987, Sullivan et al. 1987, Bilby and Ward 1991, >+etherston et al. 1995, Naiman and Beechie 1992). September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, WC. and A,C. KINDIG & CO. SeahawbV9-20-o6 Loka St gam Repon dog Page 30 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washi ton Stream and Lake StLdylMitigation Plan The existing riparian zone contains no trees that would potentially contribute LWD to the lake, in part because the site is periodically cleared. Under the proposed shoreline area, conifers capable of reaching the size necessary to function as LWD will eventually grow to maturity and senesce. Some of these trees will fall into Lake Washington and increase structural diversity. To help protect the shoreline from erosion, the applicant has proposed adding a few pieces of LWD to the shoreline. This will contribute to LWD accumulation in the area and provide some immediate benefit. The proposed shoreline area will improve habitat quality provided by LWD over existing conditions. Biotic Input Vegetation and insects falling into the creek form an important component of the aquatic ecosystem food chain, especially in 'smaller stream channels. The majority of material comes from directly over, or within a very short distance of the stream. FEMAT (1993) suggests most leaf material is contributed by trees located within approximately 50 feet of the channel edge. Under existing conditions there is very little biotic input to the creek. Vegetation is generally sparse and non-native. With the proposed future riparian shoreline area being wider, more diverse, and consisting almost entirely of native species, the contribution of vegetative litter and insect population abundance should increase significantly. The proposed shoreline area will increase biotic input over existing conditions. Noise and Visual Disturbance Riparian zones protect sensitive areas from direct human impact by limiting easy access to the stream and by blocking the transmittal of human and mechanical noise. Riparian zones provide visual separation between streams and the developed environment, blocking glare and human movement from fish species (Young 1989). Riparian zones function most effectively when the adjacent land use consists of low intensity development; when riparian areas were greater than 50 feet wide, and planted with high quality mixed species of native vegetation that discourage intrusion (Cooke 1992). Other authors recommend controlled human activity within riparian zones, such as restricting human disturbance to footpaths, or roadway crossings within 25 feet of the stream, and allowing active recreation and bike paths within 25 to 50 feet of the stream (Schueler 1995). However, the City of Renton has designated the portion of Lake Washington in which the project is located as an Urban Environment under its Shoreline Master Program where human recreational activities are to be encouraged. Therefore, the shoreline area is not being designed to function as a division between the lake environment and controlled human use. The proposed shoreline area will provide equivalent disturbance protection as existing riparian areas. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.0 KINDIG & CO. Seahawks/09-20•06 Lakes Stream Report*c Page 31 Seaha►vks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin on ,Stream and Lake Stu IMiti ation Plan 15.2 Report Authors Experience The applicant has contracted with EDAW to provide riparian planting design and with A.C. Kindig & Co., which included Cedarock Consultants in the biological analysis for the project. These firms have extensive experience with riparian planting design, construction supervision, and long term project success monitoring. Resumes of key personnel are provided in' Appendix 4. 15.3 Analysis of the Likelihood of Success of the Compensation Project The proposed mitigation/riparian planting project is relatively straightforward and will benefit from having the applicant situate their headquarters on the site. The development is a high profile project expected to receive extensive and ongoing media coverage. With the. Seahawk's headquarters on -site and the playing fields and players lounge immediately adjacent to the mitigation/riparian planting area, it is in the applicant's best interest to provide long term maintenance of the riparian plantings beyond what might normally be provided for a similar project where the site is sold and the developer leaves. There are no fish habitat or high quality wetlands involved in the riparian planting project. Riparian planting consists primarily of planting native species in good quality riparian soils: The area is watered naturally throughout most of the year and supplemental watering will be provided as necessary. Upland plants will be selected that have adapted to the normal Pacific Northwest wet winter and dry summer seasons. The mitigation/riparian planting site will be monitored for five years to ensure plant species selected and utilized for the project are thriving. Those that are not in satisfactory condition during this period will be replaced. After five years, all healthy plants are expected to continue growing without additional maintenance. However, maintenance will continue as needed to remove debris and replace dead specimens, and manage understory branches of selected hardwood trees. Overall, the likelihood of success for the riparian planting project is considered to be high. 16.0 VEGETATION PROTECTION 16.1 Design Considerations The Consent Decrees and Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plans require capping of the North and South Baxter properties to within 25 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline. This will necessitate removal of all existing vegetation under the capped area. The site was last cleared in 1990, so existing vegetation consists predominately of grass, shrubs, and young trees. The largest existing trees consist of S to 10-inch diameter cottonwood which are found within 25-feet of the shoreline. These trees will for the most part be preserved except where slopes necessary for grading will bury the rootballs. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. seata«ka9-ao-"Lakes Stream >uv?.&c Page 32 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake StudylMitigafion Plan 16.2 Significant Tree Protection during Construction As noted previously, all existing trees will be removed from the site as necessary for capping except those found within approximately 15 to 25-feet of the shoreline. Within this area, Himalayan blackberry and Scotch broom form dense thickets which have to be removed to accommodate conversion to a native landscape under the shoreline riparian planting plan. The following measures will be implemented during construction to protect significant trees found along the shoreline while all other vegetation is removed: • All significant trees on the project site within 100 feet of the shoreline will be identified and located (see Appendix 1, Site Map (Sheet 1), for 10 inch and larger trees). • Prior to clearing, all trees to be retained shall be flagged. • Prior to grading and throughout construction, a temporary plastic net fence shall be used to identify the protected area of any significant tree designed for retention. The height of such fencing shall be adjusted according to the topographic and vegetative conditions of the site to provide clear visual delineation of the protected area. The size of the protected area around the tree shall be equal to one foot diameter for each inch of tree trunk diameter measured four feet above the ground. • At no time during construction shall the following be permitted within the significant tree protection area: (a) impervious surfaces, fill, excavation, or storage of construction materials; (b) grade level changes, except in limited circumstances where proposed improvements are determined by an arborist to be non -detrimental to the tree root systems. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS INC. andA.0 KINDIG & CO Seahaw, .0.24-Ob Lakes Stream Repor4doc Page 33 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miti ation Plan 17.0 REFERENCES A.C. Kindig 1999. Sand Filter Turf Cover Testing, in Chapter 5, MountainStar Master Planned Resort EIS Water Quality and Fisheries (Associated Earth Sciences, Inc.), June 30, 1999, A.C. Kindig & Co and Cedarock Consultants, Inc. 2003. Best available science literature review and stream buffer recommendations. Consultant report prepared for the City of -Renton. February 27, 2003. Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 2000. An Addendum to the Quendall and Baxter Properties Mitigation Analysis Memorandum dated February 17, 2000. J.H. Baxter Propety Mitigation Analysis Memorandum. October 2, 2000. Beschta, R.L., Bilby, R.E., Brown, G.W., Holtby, L.B., and T.D. Hofstra. 1987. Stream temperature and aquatic habitat: Fisheries and forestry interactions. In Salo, E.0 and T.W. Cundy [eds.] Strea aside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 471p. Bilby, R.E. and J. W. Ward. 1991. Characteristics and function of large woody debris in streams draining old growth, clear-cut, and second growth forests of southwestern Washington. Can. J. of Fish. Aquat. Sci., 48:1-10. Bisson, P.A. Bilby, R.E. Bryant, M.D. Dolloff, C.A., Grette, G.B., House, R.A. Murphy, M.L., Koski, K.V. and J.R. Sedell. 1987, p. 87-94. In Salo, E.0 and T.W. Cundy [eds.] Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 471p. Cooke, S.S. 1992. Wetland buffers -a field evaluation of buffer effectiveness in Puget Sound. Pentec Environmental, Inc. Prepared for Washington Department of Ecology Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program, Olympia Washington. Entranco. 1995. Gypsy Subbasin Analysis. Technical Memorandum No. 2. City of Renton. April 1995. Entranco. 1997. Gypsy Subbasin Drainage Improvements Design Memorandum. City of Renton, September 1997. Federal Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) 1993. Aquatic ecosystem assessment, Volume 5. Fetherston, K.L., R.J. Naiman, and R.E. Bilby. 1995. Large woody debris, physical process, and riparian forest development in montane river networks of the Pacific Northwest. Geomorphology I3:133-144. King County. 1993. Sammamish River corridor conditions and enhancement opportunities. King County Surface Water Management, Seattle, WA. 54 p. plus appendices. Knutson, K. L. and V. L. Naef. 1997. Management recommendations for Washington's priority habitats: riparian. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. 181p. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. S�hawhra9-20.06 makes S,rwm xepurcaec Page 34 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan Magnusson Klemancie Associates, 2006. Stormwater Technical Information. Seahawks Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington. August 24, 2006. Naiman, R.J., T.J. Beechie, et al. 1992. Fundamental elements of ecologically healthy watersheds in the Pacific Northwest coastal ecoregion. Pages 127-188 In R.J. Naiman, editor. Watershed management: balancing sustainability and environmental change. Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 127-188_ Pfeifer, B. and J. Weinheimer. 1992. Fisheries investigations of Lakes Washington and Sammamish, 1980-1990, VI Warmwater fish in Lakes Washington and Sammamish (draft report). Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, WA. Pollock, M. and P.M. Kennard. 1998. A low -risk strategy for preserving riparian buffers needed to protect and restore salmonid habitat in forested watersheds of Washington State: Version 1.1. 10,000 Years Institute: Bainbridge Island, Washington. Schueler, Y. 1995. Site planning for urban stream protection, Washington D.C., Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments and the Center for Watershed Protection. Sullivan, K. J. Tooley, K. Doughty, J.E. Caldwell, P. Knudsen. 1990. Evaluation of prediction models and characterization of stream temperature regimes in Washington. Timber/Fish/Wildlife Report TFW-WQ3-90-006, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington. Sullivan, K., Lisle, T.E., Dolloff, C.A., Grant, G.E. and L.M. Reid. 1987. Stream channels: The link between forests and fishes, p. 143-190. In Salo, E.0 and T.W. Cundy [eds.] Streamside Management: Forestry and Fishery Interactions. University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Seattle, Washington. 47I p. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2006. Priority habitats and species database search (T24N, R05E, S29). August 18, 2006. Olympia, Washington, Wydoski, R.S. and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 220 p. Young, M.J. 1989. Buffer delineation method for urban palustrine wetlands in the Puget Sound Region. M.S. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle. September 20, 2006 CEDA ROCK CONSUL TANTS, INC andA_C KINDIG & CO. SeahawkVVX20-06 Lakes Stream tie wadae Page 35 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Stu /Miti ation Plan • Sheet 1 + Sheet L 100 • Sheet Sheets CE201-202 + Sheets CE221-224 • Sheet CE245 • Sheets CE301-302 APPENDIX I PLAN SETS Site Map (source: RETEC) Conceptual Landscape Plan (source: EDA W) TESC Plans (source: Crawford) Grading Plans (source: Crawford) Conceptual Utility & Drainage Control Plan (source: Crawford) Gypsy Subbasin Plan and Profile (source: Crawford) September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. Seahawk09-2"6 Lakes Stream Report doc Page 36 Seahmvks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin tan Stream and Lake 51u /Miti ation Plan APPENDIX 2 RESUMES FOR KEY PLANTING PLAN DESIGN AND AQUATICIWILDLIFE FUNCTION ANALYSIS CONSULTANTS September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. andAC KINDIG & Co. Seahawk"9-10-06 Lakes Stream Repondoc Page 37 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin tan Stream and Lake Stu 1Miti anon Plan CARL G. HADLEY Principal Fisheries Biologist — Cedarock Consultants, Inc. EDUCATION B.A., Ecology University of California at San Diego MS Graduate Studies; Fisheries University of California at Davis PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS Washington Department of Natural Resources Watershed Analysis Analyst/Specialist Fisheries, Channel and Water Quality Modules SUMMARY Mr. Hadley provides over 15 years of experience in assessing and mitigating land development project impacts on aquatic habitat. Mr. Hadley has been the principal fisheries scientist on several dozen Environmental Impact Studies under SEPA/NEPA. Much of Mr. Hadley's current practice specializes in working with clients with exposure to fisheries resources impacted by the Federal and - State threatened and endangered species programs. Past experience has included field analysis and authorship of fisheries modules for over a dozen Washington State DNR level 2 watershed analyses, a half dozen Habitat Conservation Plans for incidental take permits under Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), and several dozen Biological Evaluations and Biological Assessments for consultation under Section 7 of the ESA. Mr. Hadley has also provided design, permitting„ and construction oversight on several dozen urban and rural stream enhancement and restoration programs. REPRESENTATIVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT City of Renton Hired by the City of Renton to provide fisheries biology expertise to the City during development of their new Critical Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Program regulations. Developed best management practices for stream, lake and riparian habitat based on Best Available Science review. Worked with Department of Ecology and City to ensure new regulations met Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements. WATERCOURSE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS Instream Flow Physical Skagit County Department of Public Works, Washington Habitat Simulation Provided permitting and mitigation design assistance in support of various projects (PHABS1Mj Modeling designed to alleviate flooding and enhance fisheries use of farm -related watercourses Course in Skagit Valley. Designed stream habitat restoration features, fish passage structures, and riparian planting schemes. Prepared permit applications and supporting NAUI and PAD1, Open documents (3ARPAs, Biological Assessments, etc.) as needed for local, state, and Water Scuba federal permits. SNOQUALMIE RIDGE PROJECT PROFESSIONAL Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Company ASSOCIATIONS Prepared fisheries sections for the Master Drainage Plan and multiple EISs. Assessed salmonid fisheries habitat in 21 drainage basins on the 2,000-acre development site. American Fisheries Evaluated project impacts on each stream and provided design input for fisheries Society mitigation. Conducted long-term monitoring studies to evaluate construction and land -use change impacts and develop appropriate responses based on adaptive American Fisheries management concepts. Society - Bioengineering Group TREEMONT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Port Blakely Communities, Prepared fisheries sections for Environmental Impact Statement. Developed and implemented fisheries study plan to support a King County EIS and Master Development Plan. Assessed impacts to fisheries and developed appropriate September 20, 2006 CEDAR OCK CONSULTANTS: INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. seatawko9_20-N carer sum Rrpandm Page 38 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin ton Stream and Lake StudylMitigation Plan MOUNTAINSTAR/SUNCADIA RESORT Trendwest Resorts Inc. Authored aquatic affected environment and impacts sections for this 5,000 acre residential and resort development. Developed conceptual mitigation options for potential effects to resident and anadromous salmonids. Worked with WDFW, WDOE, NMFS, USFWS, and local Tribes to establish fisheries protection measures for new bridges, water intakes, stream crossings, plats, and golf courses. REDMOND RIDGE DEVELOPMENT Quadrant Corporation Redmond, Washington Evaluated existing conditions and developed aquatic habitat protection measures for this 460-acre land development in western Washington. Authored fisheries sections of EIS. Worked with County staff to identify fish -bearing stream reaches. based on site -specific protocol. SKAGIT HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT Mount Vernon, Washington Provided fisheries support during the EIS and ESA consultation process for this 209- acre project in the City of Mount Vernon. Conducted field reconnaissance, developed mitigation plans, prepared SEPA and BE documents, negotiated permits with city, state, and federal agencies, and testified at public hearings. CLEARVIEW WATER SUPPLY PROJECT - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Snohomish County, Washington Prepared a biological assessment for bull trout and Chinook salmon in support of a 8.2-mile water supply pipeline near the town of Snohomish, Washington. The pipeline route crossed numerous fish -bearing streams including the Snohomish River, a major salmon bearing water course. Potential impacts to bull trout and Chinook salmon were assessed. MATS MATS QUARRY EIS AND BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Mats Mats Bay, Washington Prepared DEIS fisheries sections and a biological assessment to address potential impacts of expanded hard rock quarry operations on aquatic species. Puget Sound runs of chinook salmon, chum salmon, and bull trout were addressed in the BA. PALMER-MONROE SAND AND GRAVEL MINE Snohomish County, Washington Completed fisheries analysis of existing conditions and potential impacts of proposed gravel quarry in the Snohomish River floodplain. A fisheries restoration plan was developed for the conversion of an agricultural ditch into a stream section as mitigation for the removal of another ditch during gravel excavation. LONE STAR GRAVEL MINE — SEPA CHECKLIST Maury Island, Washington Completed fisheries technical report as part of expanded SEPA checklist. The document analyzed potential project impacts to regional fisheries resources from the applicant's proposal to reopen an historic gravel quarry on Maury Island. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONS UL TAWS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. SeahawkO9.70-06 Lakes Stream Report.doc Page 39 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin on .Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan JEFFREY K. BOUMA Landscape Architect EDAW Inc. EDUCATION M.L.A., University of Washington, 2000 B.A., Natural Sciences, emphasis in Mr. Bouma is a Iandscape architect with over six years of experience in Biology, Westmont College; 1991 landscape planning and design. He holds a Masters degree in Landscape AFFILIATIONS Architecture and his professional experience includes landscape analysis, American Society of Landscape Architects conceptual design at various scales, design and construction document production, construction administration, public meeting facilitation, recreation PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS planning and design, and project management for park, college campus, civic Landscape Architect, Washington, 2004 . campus, rest area, and other public and private projects. He is interested in ways to integrate natural systems with the meaningful design of space, HONORS t AWARDScreative Honor Award, Physical Plans Category, particularly in the context of urbanizing settings- thus providing unique, American Planning Association, functional, and sustainable places for people to live, play and learn. Washington State Chapter,-roligate Farm Central Meadow Master Plan; 2005 Merit Award in Research, American Society PROJECT EXPERIENCE of Landscape Architects, 'Residential Impacts to Water Quality and Aquatic Habitats," 2004 Seattle Seahawks Football Training Complex, Renton, WA Merit Award, American Society of Project ManagertLandscape Architect Landscape Architects, 'Academic Award CLIENT: Vulcan/Seattle Seahawks 200a' EDAW is currently providing landscape and hardscape services as part of the Design Award, American Society of Landscape Architects, Washington consultant team led b Crawford Architects for a new headquarters and Y q Chapter, "Lewis & Clark Memorial at training facility in Renton, WA. Station Camp" 2000 Design Award, American Society of Landscape Architects, Washington y , Poison Creak Da Use Area Lake Cascade ID � Chapter, 'Reduction of Impervious Project ManagerlLandscape Architect Surfaces in New Development for Snohomish County,' 1999 CLIENTS Tamarack Resort Design Award, American Society of EDAW is currently providing conceptual master planning and design services Landscape Architects, Washington for the proposed redevelopment of an existing State Park campground and boat Chapter, 'Vision Plan for Pathfinder launch located on the west side of Lake Cascade 90 miles north of Boise, Idaho. Elementary School-Stormwater Management Opportunities,' 1999 Design Award, American Society of East Capitol Campus, Phases IV and V, Olympia, Washington Landscape Architects, Washington Landscape Architect Chapter, "Green Wall Park," IM CLIENT: State of Washington Department of General Administration Mr. Bouma assisted in the preparation and organization of construction documents and construction administration of a 12-acre landscaped plaza that sits above two massive parking garages and a bisecting street that lie beneath a main portion of the Washington State East Capitol campus. September 20 2006 SealrawAj109-2"6 Lakw Stream Repartdac Shoreline Community College Pagoda Union Building; Washington Landscape Architect CLIENT: State of Washington Department of General Administration Mr. Bouma is currently working with a design team led by Opsis Architects to renovate the student Pagoda Union Building (PUB) and the surrounding site. Wanapum Turbine Interpretive Paris; Washington Landscape Designer CLIENT: Grant Public Utilities District Mr. Botuna managed the developed of concept plan, section, elevation, and detail drawings for this park where the centerpiece turbine, a 128-ton steel monolith, will be set upright on its nose, allowing visitors to walk beneath it and its large blades. CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC and A. C KINDIG & CO. Page 40 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washington Stream and Lake Study/Mitigation Plan Clark"s Dismal Nitch- Lewis & Clark National Historic Park; Washington Project Manager/Landscape Architect CLIENT: State of Washington Department of General Administration, Washington State Department of Transportation, Washington State Historical Society, National Park Service Mr. Bouma is currently working with the design team of Perkins + Will Architecture on a Master Plan for the redesign of a WSDOT safety rest stop and interpretive park near the mouth of the Columbia River along SR 401. Tollgate Farm- Central Meadow Master Plan Project Manager/Landscape Designer CLIENT: City of North Bend Mr. Bouma was responsible for the development of a long range management plan that complies with City policy, meets a broad range of community needs, and balances priorities for open space, active recreation, trails, wildlife, agriculture and historic preservation. Pit 3, 4, and 5 Hydroelectric Project: Recreation Site Concepts and Interpretation Plan; California Project Manager/Landscape Architect CLIENT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) Mr. Bouma was responsible for developing site concept plans for improvements to more than twenty recreation facilities, including campgrounds, day use areas, boat launches, and trails in the Pit River basin in northern California_ Marvin Alexander Beach Parl , Lake Alminor, California Project ManagerlLandscape Architect CLIENT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) Mr. Bouma was responsible for the design and construction document development for a 5-acre day use area on the south shore of Lake Alminor in northern California_ An ecologically sensitive design of the park minimized site disturbance, grading, and tree removal while providing parking for 30 vehicles, a restroom, and ADA trail to the 1-acre beach area. Valley West Subdivision Park, Phase 11; Bozeman, Montana Project ManagerlLandscape Designer CLIENT: Aspen Enterprises Mr. Bouma was responsible for the development of construction documents, including a site plan, planting plan, and irrigation plan, for a 10-acre park containing a new 2.5-acre lake, wetlands, and an eAsting stream. Dillon Readiness Center, Dillon, Montana Project Manager/Landscape Designer CLIENT, United States National Guard As project manager, Mr. Bouma developed construction documents and specifications for planting and irrigation in coordination with the architectural prime consultant. A palette of native plants, supplied with irrigation from a drip system, was used to provide viability and reduce long-term landscape maintenance and replacement cost. September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C. KINDIG & CO. Seahawkr/09.20.06 Lakes Stream Repandac Page 41 Seahawks Corporate Headquarters and Training Facility Renton, Washin on Stream and Lake 31u /Miti ation Plan APPENDIX 3 JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION (DARPA) September 20, 2006 CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. and A.C, KINDIG & CO. Sea►,m.,r/09-20-06 Lakes Stream Report. doe Page 42 AGNGI IISE.ONLY , Agency Referenoe #: Date Received: Circulated by: 0.0cal govL or agency) JOINT AQUATIC RESOURCES PERMIT APPLICATION FORM (JARPA) (for use In Washington State) PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN BLACK INK M ❑ Application for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Project per requirements of RCW 77.56.290. You must submit a copy of this completed JARPA application form and the (Fish Habitat Enhancement JARPA Addition) to your local Government Planning Department and Washington Department of Fish S Wildlife Area Habitat Biologist on the same day. Based on the instructions provided, I am sending copies of this application to the following: (check all that apply) ❑ Local Government for shoreline: ❑ Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use [JVariance ❑ Exemption E] Revision ❑ Floodplain Management ❑ Critical Areas Ordinance ® Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for HPA (Submit 3 copies to WDFW Region) Project is exempt from procedural refits ofHPA ❑ Washington Department of Ecology for 401 Water Quality Certification (to Regional Office -Federal Permit Unit) ❑ Washington Department of Natural Resources for Aquatic Resources Use Authorization Notification ❑ Corps of Engineers for: ❑ Section 404 ❑ Section 10 permit ❑ Coast Guard for General Bridge Act Permit ❑ For Department of Transportation projects only: This project will be designed to meet conditions of the most current Ecology/Department of Transportation Water Quality Implementing Agreement SECTION A - Use for all permits covered by this application. Be sure to ALSO complete Section C (Signature Block) for all permit applications. 1. APPLICANT FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC, ATTN: MR. RAY COLLIVER (Purchaser of the property) MAILING ADDRESS 505 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 900, SEATTLE, WA 98104 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE FAX ■ 206 342 2000 206 342 3554 N an agent is acting for the applicant during the permit process, complete #2. Be sure agent signs Sectlar C (Signature Block) for all permit applications 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT CARL HADLEY, CEDAROCK CONSULTANTS, INC. MAILING ADDRESS 19609 240 AVENUE NE, WOODINVILLE, WA 98077 WORK PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS HOME PHONE 1FAX# 425-788-0961 CARL.HADLEY@VERIZON.NET 25-788-5562 3. RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY: 0 OWNER 0 PURCHASER Cl LESSEE 0 OTHER: 4. NAME, ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER OF PROPERTY OWNER(Sj IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT: PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, 505 FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE 900 SEATTLE, WA 98104 342-2000 5. LOCATION (STREET ADDRESS, INCLUDING CITY, COUNTY AND ZIP CODE, WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY EXISTS OR WILL OCCUR) 5015 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N, CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY. LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JURISDICTION ICITY OR COUNTY): CITY OF RENTON WATERBWY YOU ARE WORIONGIN-GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAINAGE & LAKE TRIBUTARYOF WRIA# WASHINGTON LAKE WASHINGTON 08-UNNUMBERED IS THIS WATERBODY ON THE 303(d) LIST? YES D NO IF YES, WHATPARANUrMS)7 http://www.eev.wa.ggyjXroggoaLvQ/tinks/impLtired wtu.htrill 3U3dLISTwEBsrrE X SECTION SECTION I TOWNSHIP RANGE GOVERNMENT LOT SHORELINE DESIGNATION SW 9 4 05 I URBAN LATITUDE & LONGITUDE: N47.536 W122.199 MGS 84) ZONING DESIGNATION TAX PARCEL NO: DNR STREAM TYPE, IF KNOWN PARCEL #S 292459001 AND #2924059015 GYPSY: 3 — FISH BEARING; LAKE WASHINGTON: i -SHORELINE JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 43 16. DESCRIBE THE CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY, AND STRUCTURES EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY. HAVE YOU COMPLETED ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ON THIS ROPERTY? ❑ YES 0 NO FOR ANY PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY ALREADY COMPLETED ON THIS PROPERTY, INDICATE MONTH AND YEAR OF COMPLETION. E PROPERTY CURRENTLY CONSISTS OF VACANT LAND COVERED IN PART WITH OLD ASPHALT, SCRUB SHRUBS AND TREES GROWING 41NCE THE PROPERTY WAS LAST GRADED IN 1990 COVER PORTIONS OF THE LOT, IS THE PROPERTY AGRICULTURAL LAND? 0 YES ® NO ARE YOU A USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANT? ❑ YES is NO 7a. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED WORK THAT NEEDS AQUATIC PERMITS: COMPLETE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ALL WORK WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE, INCLUDING TYPES OF EQUIPMENT TO BE USED. IF APPLYING FOR A SHORELINE PERMIT, DESCRIBE 6" WORK WITHIN AND BEYOND 20D FEET OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK. IF YOU HAVE PROVIDED ATTACHED MATERIALS TO DESCRIBE YOUR PROJECT, YOU STILL MUST SUMMARIZE THE PROPOSED WORK HERE. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. • APPROXIMATELY 125 FEET OF THE GYPSY SUBBASIN DRAINAGE ON THE PROJECT SITE (ALL REMAINING OPEN CHANNEL ON THE SITE) WILL BE PLACED IN A CULVERT- • THE EXISTING CULVERT UNDER THE SITE WILL BE REPLACED WITH A LARGER PIPE AND THE ALIGNMENT WILL BE MOVED SLIGHTLY (SEE APPENDIX 1, SHEETS CE301-302). • FIVE NEW STORMWATER OUTFALLS TO LAKE WASHINGTON WILL BE BUILT (SEE APPENDIX 1, SHEET CE245). PREPARATION OF DRAWINGS: SEE SAMPLE DRAWINGS ANO GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE DRAWINGS. ONE SET OF ORIGWAL OR GOOD QUALITY REPRODUCIBLE DRA WINGS NUST BE ATTACHED. NOTE: APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROJECT SITE, BUT THESE DO NOT SUBSTITUTE FOR DRAWINGS. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND COAST GUARD REQUIRE DRAWINGS ON 8-1/2 X 11 INCH SHEETS. LARGER DRA WINGS MAYBE REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES, 7b. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED WORK AND WHY YOU WANT OR NEED TO PERFORM IT AT THE SITE. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY SPECIFIC NEEDS THAT HAVE INFLUENCED THE DESIGN. • SOILS ACROSS THE SITE WILL BE CAPPED WITH UP TO THREE FEET OF CLEAN SOIL AS PART OF THE REMEDIATION ACTION. TO ELIMINATE ONGOING EROSION OF THIS MATERIAL, AND REDUCE GROUNDWATER FLOW THROUGH THE SOILS, THE REMAINING OPEN PORTION OF THE GYPSY SUSBASIN DRAINAGE ON THE PROJECT SITE WILL BE CULVERTED AND FILLED. • THE REVISED ALIGNMENT WILL ALLOW THE NEW CULVERT TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE DRY WHILE CREEK FLOW REMAINS IN THE EXISTING PIPE. THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT HAS BEEN SELECTED TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FEATURES. • STORMWATER FROM THE SITE WILL BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY TO LAKE WASHINGTON AFTER TREATMENT. TO PREVENT LARGE QUANTITIES OF WATER FROM BEING RELEASED AT ANYONE LOCATION, AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE FLAT SITE, STORMWATER WILL BE DISCHARGED AT UP TO FIVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS ALONG THE SHORELINE- . DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS. IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OFFISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. SEE ATTACHMENT 7C. 7d, FOR IN WATER CONSTRUCTION WORK, WILL YOUR PROJECT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR TURBIDITY WAC 173.201A-11D9 19 YES ❑ NO (SEE 11IffVL DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCIIQN5) 8. WILL THE PROJECT BE CONSTRUCTED IN STAGES? ❑ YES ® NO PROPOSED STARTING DATE: November 1, 2006 (FILLING THE OPEN CHANNEL, CONSTRUCTING THE NEW CULVERT, AND CHANGEOVER FROM THE OLD CULVERT WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE WINTER PER THE ATTACHED CULVERT CONSTRUCTION PLAN DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT 7C) ESTIMATED DURATION OF ACTIVITY: TWO YEARS ending June 2008 9. CHECK IF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES WILL BE PLACED: ❑ WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH OR TIDAL WATERS: AND/OR ❑WATERWARD OF MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER LINE IN TIDAL WATERS 10. WILL FILL MATERIAL (ROCK, FILL, BULKHEAD, OR OTHER MATERIAL) BE PLACED. ® WATERWARD OF THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK OR LINE FOR FRESH WATERS? Gypsy Subbasin Drainage IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) 105 /AREA OA3 (ACRES ❑ WATERWARD OF THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER FOR TIDAL WATERS? IF YES, VOLUME (CUBIC YARDS) AREA (ACRES) JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 3601407-7037 or 800/917-0043 44 11. WILL MATERIAL BE PLACED IN WETLANDS? ❑ YES ® NO IF YES: A. IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES: B. HAS A DELINEATION BEEN COMPLETED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. Cl YES 0 NO C. HAS A WETLAND REPORT BEEN PREPARED? IF YES, PLEASE SUBMIT WITH APPLICATION. C3 YES ❑ NO D. TYPE AND COMPOSITION OF FILL MATERIAL (E.G.. SAND. ETC.): E_ MATERIAL SOURCE- F. LIST ALL SOIL SERIES (TYPE OF SOIL) LOCATED AT THE PROJECT SITE, S INDICATE IF THEY ARE ON THE COUNTY'S LIST OF HYDRIC SOILS, SOILS INFORMATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE (MRCS): G. WILL PROPOSED ACTIVITY CAUSE FLOODING OR DRAINING OF WETLANDS? E3 YES W NO IF YES, IMPACTED AREA IS _ ACRES OF DRAINED WETLANDS. NOTE: tr your propel will impad greater than % of an acre of wetland, submit a mitigation plan to the Corps and Ecology for approval slang with Um JARPA form , .NOTE. a 401 eater qualify cerkkaffon MO be requNed from Ecology in add`fion to en approved m6getkn plan if your pppd impacts w i ftarlds that am. a) greater than X acrek size, or b) tidal wedands or we0ands adjacent to 0dat water. Please submR fha JARPA form and mib'gaf fort pfen to Ecoogy for an individaat 401 Coe GOcafien if a) orb) applies. 12. STORMWATER COMPLIANCE FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS ONLY: THIS PROJECT IS (OR WILL 8E) DESIGNED TO MEET ECOLOGY S MOST CURRENT STORMWA TER MANUAL, OR AN ECOLOGY APPROVED LOCAL STORMWATER MANUAL ❑ YES ❑ NO IF YES — WHICH MANUAL WILL YOUR PROJECT BE DESIGNED TO MEET If NO —FOR CLEAN WATER ACT SEC77ON 401 AND 404 PERMITS ONLY— PLEASE SUBMIT TO ECOLOGY FOR APPROVAL, ALONG WITH TNtS DARPA APPLICATION, DOCUMENTATION THAT DEMONSTRATES THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM YOUR PROJECT OR ACTIVITY WILL COMPLY WITH THE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS, WAC f 73.20f (A) 13. WILL EXCAVATION OR DREDGING BE REQUIRED IN WATER OR WETLANDS? t3 YES ONO IF YES: A,VOLUME: (CUBIC YARDS)1AREA (ACRES) B. COMPOSITION OF MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED: C. DISPOSAL SITE FOR EXCAVATED MATERIAL D. METHOD OF DREDGING: 14. HAS THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) BEEN COMPLETED7 19 YES C3 NO SEPA LEAD AGENCY: Dept of Ecology SEPA DECISION: DNS for North Baxter MDNS for South Baxter DECISION DATE (END OF COMMENT PERIOD): April 5.2000 SUBMIT A COPY OF YOUR SEPA DECISION LETTER TO WDFW AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE APPLICATION 15. LIST OTHER APPLICATIONS, APPROVALS, OR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL AGENCIES FOR ANY STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION, DISCHARGES, OR OTHER ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION (I.E.. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, HEALTH DISTRICT APPROVAL, BUILDING PERMIT, SEPA REVIEW, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSE (FERC), FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION, ETC.) ALSO INDICATE WHETHER WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND INDICATE ALL EXISTING WORK ON DRAWINGS. NOTE: FOR USE WITH CORPS NATIONWIDE PERMITS, IDENTIFY WHETHER YOUR PROJECT HAS OR WILL NEED AN NPDES PERMIT FOR DISCHARGING WASTEWATER AND/OR STORMWATER. PE OF APPROVAL SSUING AGENCY IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION DATE APPROVED OMPLETED? O. (TARGET DATES) Engineering Design Report Department of Ecology September 22, 2006 slo Foundation Permit ity, of Renton November 24, 2006 140 Building Permit ity of Renton April S, 2007 140 Site Master Plan ity of Renton September 20, 2006 o 16. HAS ANY AGENCY DENIED APPROVAL FOR THE ACTIVITY YOURS APPLYING FOR OR FOR ANY ACTIVITY DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE ACTIVITY DESCRIBED HEREIN? ❑ YES O ND IF YES, EXPLAIN: JARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 45 4 CTION B - Use for Shoreline and Corps of Engineers permits ¢nly,� . TOTAL COST OF PROJECT. THIS MEANS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING MATERIALS, LABOR, MACHINE RENTALS, ETC. 7b. IF A PROJECT OR ANY PORTION OF A PROJECT RECEIVES FUNDING FROM A FEDERAL AGENCY, THAT AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ESA CONSULTATION. PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU ILL RECEIVE FEDERAL FUNDS AND WHAT FEDERAL AGENCY IS PROVIDING THOSE FUNDS. SEE INSTRUCTIONS FOR INFORMATION ON ESA" FEDERAL FUNDING EI YES CINO IF YES, PLEASE LIST THE FEDERAL AGENCY - 8. LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH JUR*DICTION: 19. FOR CORPS, COAST GUARD, AND DNR PERMITS, PROVIDE NAMES, ADDRESSES, AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, ETC... PLEASE NOTE: SHORELINE MANAGEMENT COMPUANCE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NOTICE — CONSULT YOUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT. _ NAME ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER SECTION C -This section MUST be completed for any permit covered by this auolication D. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR A PERMIT OR PERMITS TO AUTHORIZE THE ACTIVITIES DESCRIBED HEREIN. I CERTIFY THAT I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE NFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION, AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, SUCH INFORMATION IS TRUE, COMPLETE, AND CCURATE. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I POSSESS THE AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES. I HEREBY GRANT TO THE AGENCIES TO WHICH HIS APPLICATION IS MADE, THE RIGHT TO ENTER THE ABOVE -DESCRIBED LOCATION TO INSPECT THE PROPOSED, IN -PROGRESS OR COMPLETED WORK. I AGREE TO START WORK ONLY AFTER ALL NECESSARY PERMITS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED AGENT DATE DATE I HEREBY DESIGNATE TO ACT AS MY AGENT IN MATTERS RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION FOR PERMIT(S). I UNDERSTAND THAT IF A FEDERAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, I MUST SIGN THE PERMIT. IGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE IGNATURE OF LANDOWNER (EXCEPT PUBLIC ENTITY LANDOWNERS, E.G. DNR) THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT, IF AN AUTHORIZED AGENT IS DESIGNATED, 18 U. SO §1001 provides that Whoever, in any manner wathin the jurisdictton of any department or agency of tfa United States knowingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, ordevlce a material fact or makes any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement- or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious, orfraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $1D,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL A. Nature of the existing shoreline. (Describe type of shoreline, such. as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bag; swamp, flood plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank; low bank, or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent.. an6 type of,bulkheading;.if any)' B.-In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures wllFexoeed a helght cf thirty five_feet above the average:grade , level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existih and potential, that wHI have M obstructed vie*, C. If the application involves a conditional use or variance,, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a.vanance from: which the:variance.is being sought: These Agencies are Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action employers. For special accommodation needs, please contact the appropriate agency it the instructions. )ARPA, Revised 7/02 Contact the State of Washington Office of Permit Assistance for latest version, 360/407-7037 or 800/917-0043 46 Attachment %c. DESCRIBE THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO CHARACTERISTIC USES OF THE WATER BODY. THESE USES MAY INCLUDE FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE, WATER QUALITY, WATER SUPPLY, RECREATION, and AESTHETICS_ IDENTIFY PROPOSED ACTIONS TO AVOID, MINIMIZE, AND MITIGATE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS, AND PROVIDE PROPER PROTECTION OF FISH AND AQUATIC LIFE. IDENTIFY WHICH GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS YOU HAVE USED. ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF ADDITIONAL SPACE IS NEEDED. The proposed action will eliminate approximately 125 feet of open channel, will result in a slightly longer culvert across the project site, will affect existing riparian vegetation along the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington, and will result in some disturbance to the shoreline of Lake Washington above and below the ordinary high water mark. The remediation action is designed to improve water quality in Lake Washington and is funded by the proposed development. Culverting of the on -site open channel is a remediation measure required under the Consent Decrees with Ecology to eliminate erosion of soil into Gypsy Subbasin Drainage and Lake Washington by capping and institutional controls on the North and South Baxter Properties. While resident salmonids are reported through anecdotal reports upstream of the project site, the short piece of open channel on the site is not known to contain fish. Anadromous fish are prevented from moving upstream past the project site by blockages within the railroad right-of-way. So the small increase in culvert length will not affect upstream fish passage. In addition to the increase in culvert length, the culvert diameter will also be increased to accommodate higher peak flows and reduce upstream flooding which occasionally floods parking lots and roads east of I405 which leads to further water quality impacts. During construction, Gypsy Subbasin Drainage will remain intact until construction of the new culvert is complete (refer to the Gypsy Creek Culvert Replacement section which follows). Perimeter barriers to sheet flow and other construction Best Management Practices from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual will be employed as warranted to prevent unintended sediment discharge to Lake Washington or beyond any of the site boundaries (see Appendix 1, CE201-204). All stormwater from the site will be collected in a temporary sediment trap and discharged to the sanitary sewer per the Consent Decrees. No construction stormwater will discharge to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage or to Lake Washington. Post construction, no stormwater will be discharged to Gypsy Subbasin Drainage from the project. Treated stormwater will be discharged to Lake Washington after treatment meeting the Enhanced Water Quality treatment from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. To enhance riparian function along the Lake Washington shoreline, all exotic species will be removed and buffers meeting City of Renton critical area requirements will be replanted with native trees and shrubs (see Appendix 1, Sheet L100). Gypsy Creek Culvert Replacement To protect water quality and any fish in the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage, the following conceptual culvert replacement scenario is proposed. Final design will result in refinement of this proposal with the overall goal of avoiding environmental impacts. a. Install all new structures and pipe with the exception of connections to the existing system. The existing system will continue to function normally while construction of the new facilities are underway (3-4 weeks). b. Remove fish from the Gypsy Subbasin Drainage. c. Dam up the culvert at the east property line (or east of the railroad tracks if an access agreement from the railroad can be obtained) and pump flow to Lake Washington (will run bypass line through existing culvert or over tracks, depending on train schedule). Pump intake will be screened to provide appropriate intake velocities and avoid entraining fish. d. Install structures connecting new pipe to existing pipe (3 to 4 days). e. Remove dam and bypass/pump. f Fill open portion of Gypsy Subbasin Drainage once new system has been shown to function appropriately. RE: LIDO (FIGURE 9.1) FOR LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE INFORMATION J ------ 'PSE Il D ELECT. Z_ T I STATION JF K-1 EXISTING POWER POLE LOCATION SOUTH PROPERTY m Z FENCE LINE PSE EASEMENT 2 LINE (TBD) 80—YARD �IELD t NATURAL Gi PRACIICE EXISTING POWER POLE LOCATION III CURB ------------- b�� 72'- NEW I— STORY MAINTENANCE SHED COVERED CAR WASH PAD — EXISTING POWER POLE LOCATION — I LAKE WASHINGTON • NCTF: OHW=18.8' (NAVD68) OR 15.2' (NCVD29) 10C YEAR FLOCRDPLAIN AT LAKE WA. O.H.W.M. • A A + I Aa • LIMIT OF PUBLIC ACCESS A A6 N A' I OTTA7-- rRm Sclq FIRELANE ", C ACCESS SGRASS—CRETE) 11 27.7' '12 1 72 20V PRACTICE FACILITY F- '\' I , I , I `I I I I I V V I I I I I "� -�_ MAINT. PARKING SAND FILTER & II II I f I 11 4 STALLS WORKOUT AREA SECURITY GATE Su ACE PERKING 4 N IN�JJNFJ IL ------------------------------------ ------------- PROPOSED RAILWAY CROSSING STRIEM CL6S LAKE WASHNGTON - CLASS I GYPSY SUB BASIN DRAINAGE - CLASS 2 (RE: FIGURE 8.3) Ai El 7 � WPLA IN EXISTING BUILDING STRUCTURE TO HE 10' PUBLIC ACCESS EXISTING 4ACCESS WALK DOCK SECURITY FENCE 16' SERVICE ROAD ml TY C DOM11 I M omp —SECURITY GATE FENCE EI PARKING COUNT GENERAL SURFACE PARKING 195 STALLS SECURE TEAM PARKING 104 STALLS TOTAL 299 STALLS �,j F -- 4 05 0 T E R S <Y KCD" CMWFORD 1:5D SITE PLAN Appendix I Plans and Specifications Zip � � NOIJNIHS1iM 'NO1N3i� "' 90/42/BD I 11Mtl3d NI13 3115 i1tlY3 - 13JYIgYd F �E 4 Ozo 3 O-n 1S3MHIMON 11VG100J j W w4 sJapenbpeaH S)inneyEaS z t� �t Wiio iSNOO dOJ lON �a"".. �"' "SS�S °����u�� w a� i az 11 . X ��" Y� � �- o "' m ,:!d :o o ; Eli:Eli_ =� gyp ~ ��TIGin"I h a 4 a10 �wm = M a = w = E ME c8 y _ jy !I! N Yw $ �� !By, milli NA: Y 71 1; gai`ga ll s�1art 1021 mh �`�� pag gem s: - ry mN � � ¢g ink 8 1QU a as �� 1002 M9hgQJ% Ell 10 u xW mat w Ej E A An �m �rv�&��w -� g� �� ti 3a �LL ���' m���� $��� oY�r a �� ������ � ��mo���� ��� Jai 0 m�� s ` o 101—:0111 �� -- y m4 _� � � � s �� a � aigoWy Joa g W�� s". o��m �� 01 $ � % w}� y� ;a� V R a �� o w W =o � -w� �6w� LLs€J = _ � � ~s nw-wi-a=s WW1 Q g 11 m= e� maws M"� xa �oa��� a s WWI m} se��y~_� �� _ - as�� o OUR PilI 0 m �w w�� ��� mm�ma��m � �� �� � _� �� ��� �wy� ����� ��������� �� &� �w ���wg$��w ���irLL��a�� ��U Mr o�Z A 91� Z 1 most ow _F I WRIA A MS 11H 1 CK 17 Am -I4 110 lid &gig to 1 g<��o��uo ��o w o� � H�om ��; �w a�� roe ������ �� �� =LL m � �s� x�� � �` 1�� w����ag � � ��y�`} ��� a a ��; ��- <€ s= w711 to 441 wfl� lot J� m �� � � �_ € : Q .1$111Q� 1 ill y- - �Y 4� "��� HIE a9 � _�_ -� �w z, mm � g s d IN I ,, S yss `� sw w�� soa�� g � � s �o u-_ _ - mss114 3 "�� _ 1 1a 91 hhim_ � q � FF �� m21; - 2 1 2- g 5 !Q! 1 0 N K PRIME M E Sy 506 121 01ii ! g1Vj151!W1 YJ soli u"� :Q 1a_ i aLL a �a _ �� wey; �A, a-amlxtella u =x ��HIF � ��� � ��� ��� � ._W_ � or € � � -� is � y- LL w � ��s >e � � q "� g s ff o !q Boy" r���1ms 4 J K S I� �� _=� �� ���� s ������� � � �� ������� s q g= -� 4� � ��xw a y �i6 Ulu m= �� Td_ t � _ 1!= HP1 J �� B €_wstay 4 =W�� = � sg3o s 4 � ?y n o � �_ � $x g � � w �o¢ o a � � ASKS ti m � $ b =u&� 010 it; o&al �aoaa m ffgx 4WD _ e 10 6 win In ' a w wit a a 0-m ai it NMI'' ItW1 WIX 8 -- W 1,0 W 9 o s »LLB �j_ L-A" 790�6 '6 �! 5 421 W,N T� OUR w ! x 1211 w � XiON �- � �� I d4i A flu UM &s unit .o I lox', o MR A 11 WX mown M �ccr3 Z y HIM is ch tilt! =a �i� � "U_a „. Q1 1 J! %TWIN Wg z w is 19RAIG qH!! N AQJ gj! =�� AIR Q,,; �� psi to a- pailLL ppz:= , 2amtiaw m €1 oil h H 0% goals, up Iti �8 q I J P poll. 19M q 1 'a ig gilt; -vim X111. �a 1110 T m mill; ly%, =s ZVI 3W 1=0 Old gl Sol PRO 101 Rwn didi SANS WIN 10111 Js11sg!g 10391! N 11 QUEEN a ; �� an qw, hill s - s gu"P any a 1 _ 11 d Nix Firm 3, :11 gill � tin ! c� W1 1:11og SI i 0 J ��l��l_ H. min no, �w � a � Mum �� o s � �ti1 ���l 1o1���y�w� on!� B N��� �a � $Ih a_� a� yt ��� 1r KI_ o2 s a� a _ � t5 g0h r w-� ����4 Q; jig 11 _� a P11s01 �a�-N-� �a N NI e$ = �g� m 1 Big �w� rs�= 4 i _� ��� �� `�h U�mm 4 g a �� �" -,_�� �o gym.. Y 11 �o � � J pill~ I u op Wo a log AFF P s� 5 HIN 111100MIN 6� �=� ,,% �� kg s g �- z a~� n - ~ ¢ fir � - ff =�= H. oil Q Hwy ��w � � � w Wi� ��� ��M_ I III; I§ ��� �� w�<��a"<ag �Q6o to oil w sx1�ws w1i psi ug sim x w z io 1ooS 5 ay gill A Ja* "'111yalon TiQj fin Wilt w jis9g me-tm:n Q YMM~I i J r M�oJ o -ate is pia H 1 �� � J x c__ s -=1,o�a 1� 1 a� yU w LL n E 291 HM " 1 wr os Y=wJm n x� _�t �w �r � � - = i .�W o � :1 h s r - _ _ a ill a 019 ��A Naq Tsagy 1111MIgly Q1 go! AS=€,012IM:41RE. �Qjig a s a" N� �� 9 o o � - 101"m j1;- 1!!Q Q a "SN 4" ��a � m lit 5 w psi ;"Is pal iswm o �- _ a � � a � � t p w" gam DLLs � �o _ HAS �Kv���a�s���m4� � 0$��6� = W � -5' low x s 1:1g, YEE Z !1! 1100 mill will. 111a �w�o � � "g � mw � a�g4y _ �o �d !its a WW rya o Via, a � J � r>: �� y � ciao is; 11=10 g Mgt g J� g � = =i._ s �_ w � � boa �, ��1 g � w�- I s w wr J _ 510 MAHUMQUI - dGlan m -o; 1 ING 1 �W-w m ww :- � o W h SME ���� ass�� ThAk MH ��_��� Ins— -1 smog BAN A_ � g�M� y BAN Riga, Al NO Z "�" _� =y slF� Iwo � � � � _ _� qQ1 AT QW S INS ITH i �4 �ti � " � S WRA �20 VIA ���H�.mr�����er�� Q! R z nEw 9IR Q N6 SPY wa 10 all Hs k HN m mg all III NAM91 8 PRO � sit 1115 AM TOW ANN Old MIRIM 10ip 39 10i HIM Ili 12111 -gigslgillowtill 313M ST I w o I I I 1 91 w �o� 4¢ _ n s h Sy phi sz5��G3!Kg1 -off$ �� s s N �� s gRiz aK M allow _ =I=Wa wey a did _�op�����W�.��._I�IN t MINOR g gag - alli _ $ g aa$ da61dgdailala HUM �s�INO R 1 10 0 11=11sr- ��� ` aJ1 Eve =sot 3 AS Egg 11's,gfig SO: Q z I�s a s� mm ��s��$s s� gas ww �wwwwwW LL��e�LL����LL u �� r �� ___= J,xdJ M911WHIN O i-REwillHE m O a Q \ w x - - t— — _..-------------------- i1 I I � I - ak - 1. �\ im m rr� �i N N N p N p I��._ j j 4 Ij } I ! I � , } -- 1 1 --- --- �- ---- - a T � � i, � 'I i r � � I � it i p � '� •� � I 'fil _ j f I r f , I f I I I ----------- --- i ! t -- ---- -- - -- -- 1 p. i Jri ti + ,�I I i--�••� -I ,� �� m m m m; I i I rr _ - ' . _ - Y ' I f � '+ ++ i ` �I ram`-_--T - •-_ ..I r O I � - l � +-I .r •mod + v •', � � ' .;�V�T FOR-\ ° CONST# TK N C) x Seahawks Headquarters & ! Fit rn Training Facility FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC _ !! , I PACKAGE 1 EARLY SITE FOR PERAfIi mr)z ■ia.�n �.� RENTON, WASHINGTON . .... .... .... ... .... .. . .... .... .... .... _... 1� ZV NO-LONIHSVM�NOlN3?! w 9o-rezrsa �oiiinens]Lis xiar3 x el Ou ` 011 1S3MHIHON llbelOO=l g a�< AI!Iiae-J buiuiejj 'y sja:penbpeaH sNmBgBa y rvoumISNOO �JoJ low } r s s_ o 1 �aa O 0z N ��� w a �U DV V NOlJNHSVM'NOlN32i azr� i I i j i, I _ ! -60 llnHM W.J 311S A-Wil - 1 3011I 1 � �� N all IS3MHIUON 11V9100� } as p AI!I!De j 6uiuiea1 2zo c� { - o�� w 'y sialienbpeaH smmeyeaS WNU U W W a Z_ NOlJNIHSVM `NOIN38 Old .LS3MH1L10N II'd8100J 9W52/50 1Y11MS 3115 X'WY3 - l 39MYd l - Aliiiaej Buium -8 sje:penbpeaH s1meyeas Nbuon'�I1GNOO �JOJ 10 i I 1 I I i ' � I I I . it i W W�F3 WW8 j NOIJNIHSVM'NOIN3?3 p r 1 J w`".` ■ z U w 90AZIO I WWII °IS 3116 /. WVJ - l 3 VXVd I } I ICI >p4 V J �e ate` 011 1SWHI1ION 11VI3100J - -.- - - 5 p fiuiuieil ! S°� w asp ig sje:penbpeaH s nneyea WN v NQIl0 1SNOO WA iON —.._.._.._.._.._.._........ _ _.._ _.._.._.._.._ r � ! I � F� I ~ f O � l o i � 4 - f i j o J ! U I . r J i f i 1 NOlJNIHSVM `NO1N3'8 I i .�.,•_:. ■ zilW 903ziao JMtl3d 90J 3115 AIUV3 L 3SVr-Vp l- Oil 153MH12iON ll4'8100Jr— a r _ = Hill, r ig sjai�enbWOH s)lmeyeaS U NOii:DnJlSNOO WJ ions y� ■ zu f g € 0 Z) �o N0lJNIHSHM'N01N3b i 9MU90 JIMU3d NO3 3115 4103 - l 30MYd l 311 1S3MHJ-80N 11V8100-J buiuieil V saa}jenbpe9H sNm8geas NOilomiSNOO �I0J ION O O a z �- w r CV LV tLtU� ............ ...... ............... .......... .. ... . . ... ....................... 0 1 f � IYATtliLIiE -SEE SFEET Gi212 •� _ NOT FOR CO&§TRUCTION <> W m Seahawks Headquarters & N of Training Facility i m FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC v 1 PACKASE 1 - EARLY SlE FOR PENIT aB121XS IW ;, 1 i 1 If E ; I. RENTON, WASHINGTQN .:....... _...._ ........ ynz ■1,- - J� 4 ..:.-::! �::. --------------------------------------- NOT FOR GON TRUCTIQN m Seahawks Headquarters & C7 0 z Training Facility � PArxack ene0 sne FOR �flN r z4ix FOOTBALL NORTHWEST LLC t z i` i i RENTON, WASHINGTON r r� i i i MA7CHU E - SEE SKET CE211 �..�.: 1 1 7 FIN ton y -Do .; � " zu, OUP zs f N0iE)NlHSVM'N0lNBH IvENM US ilW L MOM L 311 IS3MHJ-80N llVSi00zJ saib2iw �!1!DeA Bululej-L ly sjo:penbPeOH SIME!qeos NOuomiSNOO �0� ION 0 E z z CN LU L) �z NOiE)NIHSVM'NOiNgH 011 iS3MHiWN TV9i003 Lw Al!l!oej Bululeii �x 3 r V sje:penbPEBH S�m8qB9S Wiion�USNOO �0� iON N t Ir w ■ NOiONJHSVM `NOlN9U —.. �I " i 1 1 1 1 E � � Q I , l I g 011 153MHI'60N IIVGI00;J N Appej 6uluieal _ z w R Sir V siapenbpeaH gmeyea U i I' . ' $; I Ed23� 133F6 336 - 'JII�{OlYN i j r j s � j j ja 0 j z I r I i I � N$ I i I I i i I I I I I I I i i � a i - c i E 1 i g i � I N u _________________I -----------89 ____ _- �c -21 -------- - % dpl �I �.: 0 i■ zu W NOI0NIHSVM `NO1N32i 'M 011 iS3MHINON IIVSIOO� 9016Lfi4 lv1111160 A7llv3 - L.39MY4 t _ aJ 0. N 1 c �gpej buiuleal , o w z V sja}penbpeaH SN' m8geas 1 r r --� iti3a 13�r' 335 - 3v]l�1Ve J/ i LL � ti �r bi I � c N L/2u/?CDn 5:05:2': PM User:[pG pe MK 4-CI VTL al tc i PLF[CG:vIL CO I n3] FS A753ACN0.°LtIg: rcodel:PLC'SA"I —si—ve MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES L�.a.r + G.0 Fgimx. V/ U Cc' o w c9 cr U �: z ccLLU) _ tM .�¢ O m Z cc F— ww o LL a� 4 �I CONCEPTUAL L1TlLIiS' AND DRAINAGE CONTROL PLAN CE245-_ j NOiJNIHSVM `NOIN3H Z CJ W I i SOMIen ima3e Hot ails A703 - i 39007d L 011 1SDMHi. JON IIVSi00: Z V A4t1iee j buiuieil l g 'Q sa0}penbpeOH s�m2g896 Wiio iSNOO �JOJ lON mp0 Ned w W R NM W U NOIJNIHSV `NO1N3L1 - .. I ' {, I i z j M M � L 0-111S3MHINON lIV10100J m � a p € lipQc�` ' Aj!j!3eA buluiejl tp�pq°a w _.._ o z __ a � W s�a�enb ea s 1 '8 P H � u S 47 U � NOuomiSNDO god iON 1 a- 2 2 I I NOi0NiHSVM`NOlN3'd '+°^�"°^" !, 1 i i ❑v [ ! F "'"'�" Z V W € 901621A0 III NUJ 311S AlUV3 l 35VXDVd L.. Z N T l O U u ill 1S3MH12iON 1Td91OOJ (n C) ' i z Al!l!ae j 6uiuiejl LLo � w x� r -Q SialienbpeaH sNmeyeaS No U Wiio iSNOO IdaJ 14N an ` Ifll W� =O Q �2- Hlw .s LO $ W H %V Q Ig, 03SM3 JLu U �a r vn�ten. ui 15 a. Llj W wai W d ti M dZ y U i _x r �� w a W p w. CC IE � 1 ;p o J J co r I m Ir W 31V6'7 9 8rM..i=`��' f117 X 9iC W W Hs Z �a a� NI11 9E i Q W >" Y cl: - i E ,J 0 : m 1 EIi I } r S xvw s � ~ v � � o si d 0 � z i } ig w N �ry 5 a`g' 9 Q F E4s� z J wc,I, co w w .sg'a W - Y o Q� z� W I 3 .fs I - NATURAL TURF FIELD SECTION INCLtAES 1O' OF SAND AND 4' OF CAPILLARY BREAK / - IMPORTED FILL 501E PERFORATED DRAIN PIPES % LOCATED WITHIN THIS SOIL LAYER T'— I SCIL LAP INDICATOR FABRIC 4- 1 /�--- CEMENT TREATED ON -SITE SOIL NI � GEOGRID CEMENT TREATED ON -SITE SOIL '//,G -l/I �/-•3; �/r:.iPi=-,tdY/ �:/ /..%//'.. jiS' ";l•1/ -6' - SUBGRADE AT NATURAL TURF FIELDS I NTS CE221, CE223,CE224 CE402 `i----- SAND FILTER SECTION .1 IMPORTED FILL SOIL, PERFORAILU DRAIN PIPES LOCATED WITHIN THIS SOIL LAYER m� IMPORTED LAYER MAY BE REDUCED IF SOIL CAP LIFER IS USED IN LIEU OF FABRIC ` - - - SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC SUBGRADE AT SAND FILTER r5-,\ NTS CE2217CE22�E402 TAACEO SLOPE r- HATllRAL TURF FIELD SECTION0N-SITE FIL LSOIL, / AND IMPORTED FILL SOIL FIELD COLLECTOR PIPES LOCATED WITHIN THIS SOIL LAYER -3- Li11 r -� LOCATE LINE 2" SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC {/ %- BELOW COLLEGOR PIPES -, .. 4" ICUT OEDGRID AT EDGE { / - - - - -- CEMENT 7RREATED ON -SITE SOIL -GEOCRID J �L to' SECTION A N75 SUBGRADE AT NATURAL TURF FIELD COLLECTOR PIPES r2 "\ Cf224 CF'02 NTS -- SYNTHETIC TURF FIELD, PAVEMENT SIDEWALK OR RJLDJhG SLAB SECTION L -- SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC SUBGRADE AT SYNTHETIC TURF FIELD, HARDSCAPE, AND BUILDING SLAB rT_� NTS tE22t, CE222, LE223 CL402 GRASSPAVL, INDOOR TURF FIELD OR LANDSCAPE SECTION + B° AT INDOOR PRACTICE FACILITY ` A 6" AT LANDSCAPE AREAS AT SOUTH AND WEST EDGES OF SITE �- - SOIL CAP LINER {INOTCATDR) 4 3fi" AT LANDSCAPE AREAS W17H NEW TREES, USE INDICATOR FABRIC IN LIEU OF LINER Bile FINISH OR FxISTTNG GRADE ,. - - W FER p_dN 26" 3 FLOW LINE ELEVATION VARIES FROM ELEVATION 3 1 li 19.1 AT EDGE OF LA%` 1 WASHINIGTO: TO INVERT 0- PIP- ON STORM DRAIN _ I KAN I - c - SUBGRADE AT GRASSPAVE, INDOOR FIELD, AND LANDSCAPE 4 OUTLETIOUTFALL LE22% CE222, CF223, CE224 GEd02 NTS LE221,LE22' 402 NT$ 5/26/20CF 9:05:41 F0 user. EPG pet: NKA-CIVIL Ritafg: PDE KI vll CO 103.FS A75 MONG.P-T file:.1:SF AHAWKSl'FCI VIE A RL Y_PK G%CL402-DGN matlol: FLOT SHLET Ve 1-133 PAINTFD - T-PO57 c 4' D.L. FILTER FABRIC MI \ i p CAREA TO BE CLEARED %iRF FABRIC - A STAPLE OR WIRE F. 2xe° 18 GA MELDED ITYPiCALI WIRE FABRIC F:LILR FABRIC MATERIAL ?i ExIST. GRADE--,\ BACIffILL WITH COMPACTED NATIVE MATERIAL y -BURY Fit. TER FABRIC ITYPYI 1 SECTION FILTER FABRIC FENCE N75 CE201,CT204�402 2-7 0 L M:Z) 1rn V / z a= 0 w 0 LL..' F_ 0 z v+w"sKno 4RGfICG18. uc im, niWn v..c.r �m aww.. y. �HIAe A�e1aeR�aao MAGNUSSON KLEMENCIC ASSOCIATES L �.A J z C6 Z.-F-- O .0 CU � z cu LL (1) c z Q = C a o ?� m z co ~ 0 cu 1L IJ J SECTIONS AND DETAILS CE402__ Appendix J Soil Management Plan Soil Management Plan Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility — North and South Baxter Properties Renton, Washington Prepared by: The RETEC Group, Inc. 1011 SW Klickitat Way, Suite 207 Seattle, Washington 98134-1162 RETEC Project Number: VULC1-19589-510 Prepared for: Football Northwest LLC 505 Fifth Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98104 October 2006 Table of Contents 1 Plan Scope and Purpose.....................................................................................1 2 Location of Contaminated Soil..........................................................................1 3 Environmental Caps...........................................................................................2 4 Notification Requirements.................................................................................2 5 Soil Handling Procedures..................................................................................3 5.1 Prior to Completing Work Activities... .... ............................................. 3 5.2 During Work Activities..........................................................................3 6 Decontamination................................................................................................4 6.1 Equipment..............................................................................................4 6.2 Personnel................................................................................................5 6.3 Water Management................................................................................5 7 Health and Safety...............................................................................................6 SReferences..........................................................................................................1 VULCI-19589-51 D i 1 Plan Scope and Purpose Soil at the J. H Baxter North and South Properties (Sites) located in Renton, Washington (Figure 1) was the subject of remediation activities in conjunction with development work at the Sites. The remediation work was conducted to satisfy the requirements specified in the Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees (between Washington State Department of Ecology [Ecology] and Port Quendall Company), form Restrictive Covenants, and Cleanup Action Plans (CAPs) (ThermoRetec, 2000b and ThermoRetec, 2000c)_ As part of development activities for the Sites, Football Northwest LLC (Owner), successor owner to the Port of Quendall Company, redeveloped the North and South Baxter properties as the location of the Seattle Scahawks Headquarters and Training Facility. The remaining cleanup activities (environmental capping and institutional controls) were outlined in the Engineering Design Report (EDR; RETEC, 2006) and were required to complete cleanup obligations in accordance with the Consent Decrees. Earlier cleanup activities were performed on the South Baxter property in 2002 and 2004 and certified as completed by a Partial Certificate of Completion letter issued by Ecology on April 10, 2006. This Soil Management Plan (SMP) addresses procedures associated with post - site -development penetration of the environmental cap and excavation of contaminated soil located below the environmental cap and the indicator layer. These SMP procedures include health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options at the Site as specified in the CAPs and form Restrictive Covenants (April 4, 2000), as approved in the attached letter from Ecology (Attachment A). to accordance with these documents, soil must be handled and managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. Site maintenance staff and contractors shall follow the procedures outlined in this document during maintenance and construction activities at the Sites. 2 Location of Contaminated Soil The Sites were undeveloped until the mid-1950s, when a wood treating facility was constructed on the Sites. Both creosote and pentachlorophenol (PCP) treating solutions were used. Creosote was used to treat railroad ties and pilings and PCP solutions were used to treat utility poles. Wood was treated and stored predominantly on the South Property; although some treated wood storage may have occurred on the North Property. Wood treating operations ceased in 1981. The North Property was then used on a limited basis for bark mulch storage. Contamination is present within pre -development site soil throughout the Sites. The extent of contamination was described in the Feasibility Studies and CAPs prepared for the Sites, copies of which are maintained by the VULCI-19589-510 Soil Management Plan - Se ahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility — North and South Baxter Properties, Renton, Washington the spread of contaminated soils to uncontaminated areas, if necessary; and 5) materials and methods for replacing the environmental capping system. 5 Soil Handling Procedures The following minimum procedures shall be followed for handling any soil associated with future planning and construction activities at the Sites. 5.1 Prior to Completing Work Activities 1) Determine location, nature, and anticipated depth of work activities and include the details on project specific figures. 2) Identify stockpile locations for temporary storage of soil material_ The location of these stockpiles may be determined based on field activities, and should take into consideration proximity to receptors (including the Lake Washington, storm drains, site traffic, and ecological receptors). All stockpiling of soil at the site shall follow sediment erosion and control best management practices including runoff control and catch basin protection. Stockpiles shall be managed to minimize groundwater infiltration. Stockpile locations shall be protective of sensitive areas (wetlands, storm drains and the Lake Washington). 5.2 During Work Activities Soil handled during construction shall be managed in accordance with the following procedures: 1) Follow appropriate health and safety procedures. Work in these areas shall require that workers are appropriately trained in accordance with OSHA standards for worker protection. 2) If import fill is used for backfilling operations, the fill material shall be obtained from an approved source and meet the requirements specified in the project specifications. 3) Soil removed from site areas as part of construction activities that penetrate the environmental cap shall be temporarily placed in the stockpile area (see 4, below, for stockpiling procedures). a. This soil may be reused on site as long as it is placed beneath an environmental cap. b. Soil that cannot be reused on site beneath an environmental cap shall be characterized for shipment and disposal at an approved offsite facility. At a minimum, samples collected from the VULCI-19589--510 3 Soil Management Plan - Se ahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility — Nortla and South Boxier Properties, Renton, Washington Approved methods for containment of decontaminated soil and water are: 1) Holding the portion of the equipment that contacted contaminated soil (such as an excavator bucket or drill augers) over an area of contaminated soil, either in the excavation or in a truck, and brushing or rinsing that portion of the equipment so that the water and soil fall onto the contaminated soil below (this method applies primarily to heavy equipment). 2) Establishment of a decontamination area at the boundary between contaminated and uncontaminated sail, consisting of an area graded to drain into water collection system, a minimum of two layers of 5-mil or greater continuous plastic sheeting, and plywood placed on equipment travel areas to prevent equipment from tearing the plastic sheeting; or 3) Pressure washing within equipment or a structure specifically designed to contain the washed materials and waters and operated to prevent inadvertent release of these materials. 6.2 Personnel Personnel walking on contaminated soil and working with contaminated water should be protected through the use of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and according to the procedures in the contractor health and safety plan. To prevent spreading of contaminated materials, personnel shall be decontaminated after walking on or working in contaminated soil, and prior to working with uncontaminated materials or leaving the facility. Work is typically anticipated to occur in Level D PPE, which normally consists of long pants, steel -toed boots, hard hat, safety glasses, and gloves when necessary. For decontamination of this level of PPE, visible soil or waters shall be removed from PPE. This may be accomplished by brushing or washing in an equipment decontamination area, or establishment of a separate personnel wash. An approved personnel wash consists of a plastic tub containing clean water and a boot brush in which the water is changed daily. Higher level of PPE may be required depending on site construction activities. 6.3 Water Management Water resulting from decontamination shall be containerized in labeled 55- gallon drums or other appropriate containers. At a minimum, water samples will be collected and analyzed for PAH and PCP by EPA Method 8270. Water shall be handled in accordance with state and federal regulations based on the concentrations of contaminants found in the decontamination water. Likely disposal options, depending on concentrations include permitted discharge to a metro sanitary sewer or treatment at a licensed treatment facility. VULC1-19589-51 D 5 8 References Shannon and Wilson, 2006. Geotechnical Report, Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility, Renton, Washington. Prepared for Football Northwest, LLC. September 13. The RETEC Group, Inc. (RETEC), 2002. Engineering Design Report: JH. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, May 2002. RETEC, 2005. Construction Completion Report: JH. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, March 2005. RETEC, 2006. Engineering Design Report: Seahawks Headquarters and Practice Facility -- North and South Baxter Properties. Prepared for Football Northwest LLC, October 2006. ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation (ThermoRetec), 2000a. Feasibility Study: J.H. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000. ThermoRetec, 2000b. Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter South Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000. ThennoRetec, 2000c. Feasibility Study and Cleanup Action Plan: J.H. Baxter North Property. Prepared for Port Quendall Company, April 2000. Woodward -Clyde Consultants, 1990. Draft Remedial Investigation Report, J.H. Baxter, Renton, Washington. Prepared for J.H. Baxter Company. December 1990. VULC1-19589-510 1 r1� � �4' ! i �� 1 i�1 � , �Ofrie `1 1, 5' •'��1 :slatW Cres; r • 3I�� `ti' � fr .1 Pa I ♦+� .r• e i I4�� � �'� .}:�" sth 7� �i If - - - � — �� .� ll�9a= �,r�. sr •bar _sr � .,-,.Hazelwood �ti f - G_ +Il is '-1 � r-"-`--r-r.Y� �� -, - '� I� t •' a fP16NEE ^ + e Panesqr l Cation �"C>KCfY!.�] I k I `+ , - 1 li�it'w,n''1• i'�1. a b� AL May Creek f } 1 t t 1 .�. 1Ak9.9 `.� �"- _ � -tip` I ��, � �` � !� •�` — . - I�� _ �� 4 v;�• ✓ aa- ■ PRO,T. SITE'. � ` • \' ', 1 � bra; a al j', . 1 ` . \`� }`'�\`+ - �� � /.. +�>;+lr . ''�' � i,r �y'r' i r, r• _.�1� 4 t... :... ^4_-i • Alp x, so r 71 ak } � �ISPOrSA� r — ~ r , _� �• ppc� ' � l�' .:Lap � B � i t ti` - _ - I r t ;AA%i'I- Coleman ' nydaI L rrF I. --- "�ti, /� `tit ����u �_ � -y t• :'t Perk �� 6, Pit AV 1 "=24Cr SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND TRAINING FACILITY SITE VICINITY MAP r� - VULC1-19589-510 -ATE 10/05/OE DRwN. E.M./UKN FILE SITE_VICINI PAVDUT: FIGURE 1 FIGURE 'I LEGEND WETLAND BUFFER EXISTING RESTORATION PLANTINGS.. . o n 01-m I t SAND �= FILTER � THICKER ASPHAL-_�- --T_10*1 _ � L Qy` SOURCE: DRAW NGS FROM MKA & CRAWFORD r�RETEC �) NATURAL TURF FIELD CAP ; a e a CONCRETE SLAB CAI' 0 0 ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD CAP RUBBERIZED MAT OVER CONCRETE ® STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SLAB CAP LANDSCAPE CAP ASPHALT PAVEMENT CAP 0 MEMBRANE CAP — — — 50 FEET SETBACK ® GRASSCREIE/GRASSPAVE SAND FILTER 1 - A a R . i fin f.11_1 .ITI-I I-IT-I-Irl-1-1-1-1-] f I 1 IT1-1-1 [_H- kI I I I I I I I I I I 1 O SAND FILTER 50 p SEAHAWKS HEADQUARTERS AND PRACTICE FACILITY i - L VULC1-19589-510 SAND FILTER PUBLIC -JACCESS PAVEMENT CAP LOCATIONS I4: J/.1"zeg}'syPI1,9.hH9X.5'!C .5r1wq loyoul: .5YP LlGU11f 4 Uer- emorsholl PloNed OcI O6. 7006 - 11:45om Xrel SYNTHETIC TURF 11I111111I11ld 11 hill 11 11111111111wltiluilli1 � GRANULAR RUBBER AND WASHED SAND MIX 1.5• TQ 1.75" "'—----- -'--' GRANULAR RUBBER AND BINDER FIBER -PUNCHED POLYURETHANE COATED .. y WOVEN FABRIC POROUS PAVING (ASPHALT) CRUSHED GRAVEL EARTH OUTDOOR ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELD SECTION INDICATOR FABRIC SYNTHETIC TURF GRANULAR RUBBER AND WASHED SAND MIX --FIBER-PUNCHED POLYURETHANE COATED WOVEN FABRIC CRUSHED GRAVEL Cl-� CRUSHED ROCK LINER BEDDING 30-MIL GEOMEMBRANE (117 GRADED SLOPE FOR DRAINAGE) EARTH INDOOR ARTIFICkAL TURF FIELD SECTION ROOTZONE SAND BASE SAND r . CAPILLARY BREAK (GRAVEL) _ f> IMPORTED FILL SOIL, OR Ril PERFORATED DRAIN PIPES IN PEA GRAVEL LOCATED WITHIN THIS LAYER SOIL CAP INDICATOR FABRIC °- CEMENT TREATED ON SITE $CIL (WITH GEOGRID OR SIMILAR, AS SPECIFIED BY GEOTLCHNICAL ENGINEER. THICKNESS VARIES) NATURAL TURF FIELD SECTION IAWRETEC NOT TO SCALE File: HI 195H9, 195H9XS1-C 5.dwg Loyaul. SMP PCURf 5 User. emorsholl PloNd Ocl 05, 9006 — 4.Zpm Zw/l .- File: H,-} 19589I 19589XSEC 5.dwa IGYOUI: SUP FIGURE 6 User, emorsholl Plotfed- 00 05. 2006 - 4.25Dm Xr fl - STRUCTURAL CONCRETE a.. r �� SLAB " VAPOR BARRIER 4" (B MIL GEOMEMBRANE) T T CRUSHED GRAVEL MR11,51ttNOICATOR EARTH FABRIC STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SLAB SECTION CONCRETE SLAB • f ar ar �r :w CRUSHED 11� Irli�li�lL .kL LL�I1.�Ii�LL: 1`L�!LLF-711!�LL�LL�'�tC1l I .Il�l�.I�-1-11 11-11=III=�1=11. II�I1�lII�U II�IIE=II—� EARTH INDICATOR FABRIC CONCRETE SLAB SECTION �y 4„ SIDEWALK SECTION �r�RETEC NOT TO SCALE CONCRETE SIDEWALK CRUSHED GRAVEL EARTH ATOP FARRI(` File; H:I1958915NP119589X.5E5 5dwq Loyoul':.5MP FIGURE 7 User. emorshall Plofled: Oct 05, 2006 - 4•41pm XWk TREE PLANTER SECTION PAVEMENT .ONCRETE CURB SPHALT PAVEMENT OR .ONCRETE SLAB Fi LL L 20' KII I RTURE GEOGRID MATERIAL l (INUfCATOR FABRIC) VARIES 30—MIL CEOMEMBR,NIE LANDSCAPE SECTION NOTE; 30 MIL GEOMEMBRANE MAY BE REPLACED BY INDICATOR FABRIC IF IMPORT FILL AND TOPSOIL THICKNESS IS AT LEAST 36 INCHES. I V+ RETEc NOT TO SCALE CRASS GRA.SSPAVE RINGS FILLED WITH CONCRETE SAND (CLEAN. SHARP SAND) COMPACTED SANDY GRAVEL BASE CLEAN FILL GRASSPAVE SECTION SAND ORTED FILL SOIL, iF'ORATEO DRAIN PIPES :ATED WITHIN THIS SOIL LAVER FARRV IMPORTED LAYER MAY BE REDUCED IF SOIL CAP LINER IS USED IN LIEU OF FABRIC SAND FILTER SECTION 18" COMPACTED GRAVEL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NAME 20' FAIN. CLEAN FILL o T- GRAVEL o SECTION o INDICATOR FABRIC Z. e}z »7 #'5 6 1.9 69 C- 5.+7 117Y) 2 SUP f-l('mf a u mar�s6Zz wf «« 6 2906 - ¥m= X !y � 12' t "t'+RETEc /\ KdM 3w z\`\\ NOT TO SCALE MEMBRANE CA/ SECTION IMPORTED E L\2/ 30- wL GEONE BRA NE Attachment A Letter from Ecology Note: Attachment A will be provided in the final version. Attachment B Geotextile Note: Attachment B will be provided in the final version. Attachment C Geomembrane Note: Attachment C will be provided in the final version Attachment D Drawing Attachment E Restrictive Covenants Ol ATTACHMENT C DRAFT April 4, 2000 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT = NORTH BAXTER [Correct Recording Format To Be Added] This Declaration of Restrictive Covenant is made -7 30 70.105D.030(1)(f) and (g) and WAC 173-340-44 - Qr, Que�ompan T Washington corporation, its successors .and aff Sta�ashin Department of its successsuassi;��he�logy':� (her�emedial i") at t operty that is the Hof this eve ant. The; giFc_onducted at the property is d§ i in the g dints: 1) Pr5SDeEIT ,e Purchaser Consent Decree, dated mid 2) (2 Actin, dated These documents are on file at Eca15g-T�.:NorSWUNWegional"Office (NWRO). �KEERMhctive Covenant is required because the Remedial Action resulted in resipiil7concentrations of certain hazardous substances which exceed the Model Toxics Control Act Method B Residential Cleanup Levels for soil established under WAC 173- 340-740. These cleanup levels are described in the Final Feasibility Study/Cleanup Action Plan for North J. H. Baxter Property, Renton, Washington, dated The undersigned, Port Quendall Company, is the fee owner of real property (hereafter "Property") in the County of King, State of Washington, that is subject to this 1 30163348.0) - Restrictive Covenant. The Property is legally described as set forth in Exhibit attached. Port Quendall Company makes the following declaration a3�i�irr�it restrictions, and uses to which the Property may be put and t s declarations shall constitute covenants to run with the land provid—cam-bylaw and sh�1F—= be binding on all parties and all persons claimi _ t 'cludit—Lcurrent i - future owners _s portion of or_infezEfi� th;FF lropegy—Eg�r "O� ---Y prime consenEMEFolo pt ag �ided below, foIlc iplemef t nup AcUM er shall not reduce, or remom —soil ca�ed b leanup A7a Ian in a manner that may result in the Ir expothe egnent of contaminated soil or create a new exposure path�. h�-required by the Cleanup Action PIan is described in the attached Exhi Iffi Rpilcap maintenance is permitted without notice to Ecology so long as appr4fii to health and safety protocols are followed. A Soil Management Plan will be prepared for Ecology approval that outlines specific protocols associated with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. In accord with the Soil Management Plan, limited excavation, utility placement or repair, minor site grading, or other pre -approved activities connected with site development and construction are permitted so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed and a soil cap that provides 2 "163342 03 protection from direct contact as required by the Cleanup Action Plan i�videE� following development. Section 2. Any activity on the Property that may interfere with t�rey Remedial Action and continued protection of human health and n6hd provided for in the Cleanup Action Plan is prohibited. _TJIff=up3Rb-6H-:MIan perrrrt� and contemplates development of the Pwpe� se (E-093—mtial, re� commercial)2__`__^__��--� autlEy the QMMM Amman cLNTs Restrictive Cov o activ errra-MgOiat may ase or exposure to the envies of a ha�obs s e that rdmaihs— on the Property, or create a new expc thway.�can n Plan permits and contemplates development and use ap�mixed use (residential, retail, commercial) property. mess authorized by the Cleanup Action Plan, the Owner will not withW, or allow others to withdraw, groundwater from the Property. Section 5. Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, access shall be restricted to prevent swimming or direct contact with contaminated sediments at the south border of the Property. Section 6. FolIowing implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, residential use on the Property is permitted so long as a soil cap (as described in the Cleanup Action plan) is present that prevents direct contact with all soil that exceeds Method B Cleanup Levels. 3 30163341.03 Section 7. The Owner of the property must give thirty (30) day advance=Yvritter3E=--= notice to Ecology of the Owner's intent to convey a fee interest in a subs�ortior the Property. No conveyance of fee title in the Property shall be con'g�m�i "rated � Owner without adequate and complete provision for continu g maintenance of the Remedial Action. Fee interests ir► les�3 subs portio the Property may be conveyed without notice to �y Sectio�wner musfE�es� iU leases To �otivitiEsi sistent with the d n- otentialWRM—ctedff�—s of OTestrictions on the e Propel �on 99. 'Fier Wit=notify and ob pproval from Ecology prior to any use rope�is iraMn=ent with the terms of this Restrictive Covenant_ Eeoro— inconsistent use only after public notice and comment, The Owner shall allow authorized representatives of Ecology the right�nter the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of evaluating the Remedial Action; to take samples, to inspect remedial actions conducted at the property, and to inspect records that are related to the Remedial Action. Ecology shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable efforts not to interfere with the operations of the Property occupancy. Section 11. The Owner of the Property reserves the right under WAC 173-340- 440 to record an instrument that provides that this Restrictive Covenant shall no longer limit use of the Property or be of any further force or effect. However, such an 4 301&334E 03 instrument may be recorded only if Ecology, after public notice and opportunity fad comment, concurs. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington corporation By: - Its: - — — Dated this --Z�( 5 5016334803 STATE OF WASHTNGTON COUNTY OF I certify that ) ss. I know or have satisfactoryne is the person who appeared before pef acknowledged that he/she was authorized to execute the_insff anent and-5-6ffbwiedged!-F-7-- as of Port Quendall Co�xt an� ow l free �-Dzoluntaryzw and deed of suctEpr the usesdur�oses mentiom�inst (Signature of Notary) (Legibly Print or Stamp Name of Notary) Notary public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires 6 5016334903 DRAFT April 4, 2000 ATTACHMENT C RESTRICTIVE COVENANT SOUTH BARTER --- [Correct Recording Format To Be Added] This Declaration of Restrictive Covenant is made pursuant= a7 72 � 70.105D.030(l)(0 and (g) and WAC 173-340-440—bby=:_Eo�t: _Quendall-Company;=a__ Washington corporation, its successors and assrgnan =rth StateWasl7in-- Department of-Ecofo . is successors and_-�ssign�liereaffe—r—"Ei✓a3ogy" T —� FO beret —`remedial Att�1") aW--LUHe3 at tlj-L--property that is the s ec - f this eve C . t. The m dial=Ac�rw-conducted at the property is desenlieddin the fo-I doe��s: 1) Prospeetive Purchaser Consent Decree, dated attd 2) CXActiQ-i�Fan, dated These documents are on file at Ecol©_ 7orlh gional Office (NWRO). rtive Covenant is required because the Remedial Action resulted in residuoncentrations of certain hazardous substances which exceed the Model Toxics Control Act Method B Residential Cleanup Levels for soil and groundwater established under WAC 173-340-740. These cleanup Ievels are described in the Final Feasibility Study for South J. H. Baxter Property, Renton, Washington, dated The undersigned, Port Quendall Company, is the fee owner of real property (hereafter "Property") in the County of King, State of Washington, that is subject to this Restrictive Covenant. The Property is legally described as set forth in Exhibit A, attached_ 501 to i694u Port Quendall Company maces the following declaration as to liuutations restrictions, and uses to which the Property may be put and specc �e - hat sum declarations shall constitute covenants to run with the land, as providedld� be binding on all parties and all persons claiming under them, incl Ha_ - 7-rer�t— future owners of any portion of or interest in the Pro peryYEVTereafter `.GWnerY' Section 1. Without prior written coszsent3�(5log�,..� -ept a�Ey-ded bel��' following implem-e-n-fai"on of the Offn ctioirPlan, zhe~ vne shallmo%a11er, modify, or re tttfiiit> r carted by thec__Clmnup Plar TFa manner that rnay=t�ffjn the re— ex p�o the enyyp rn`Faminated soil or create a new osure pathvgj�e str-UUUies and cap E uired by the Cleanup Action Plan are dese the atta xhiStructure or cap maintenance is permitted without noticol0Qong as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed. A Soil. Ma MEMnEFkarwill be prepared for Ecology approval that outlines specific protocols associa ea with future soil excavations, including health and safety standards, soil stockpiling, analytical testing, and soil reuse or disposal options. In accord with the Soil Management Plan, limited excavation, utility placement or repair, minor site grading, or other pre -approved activities connected with site development and construction are permitted so long as appropriate health and safety protocols are followed and a structure or cap that provides protection from direct contact as required by the Cleanup Action Plan is provided following development. 2 Section 2. Any activity on the Property that may interfere with the inteui} of tli� Remedial Action and continued protection of human health and the �nv�ronrrtens- provided for in the Cleanup Action Plan is prohibited. The Cleanup A&JWRtNan p and contemplates development of the Property as a mixed use- r-e , rem commercial) property- _ Section 3. Unless authorized by the a�Restrictw_��' Covenant, no-ac'TTy1fly-=vs permitted= h-5"- r ay-r-esuTt ir�he=reEease or*_ex.120sure to the envirdiiiie.IIL-"O1` ar ors sttag that renITMEbri tfif ertyE-MT-create a new exposurerpathway. � Ieanu�nn Plan Reim= xO:s n plates development and use o7Rtiie ]Iroperty s��nt`xed use= residential, fl! it `:commercial) property_ eGt3 E on 4. ANTQK9 autN_o=___T by the Cleanup Action Plan, the Owner will not with ra«Yor allo-tio hers to wifhdraw, groundwater from the Property. �I3O�oilowing implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, access shall be restricFed to prevent swimming or direct contact with contaminated sediments at the Property. Mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan shall be maintained as set forth in the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, which is an enforceable provision of the Cleanup Action Plan. Section 6. Following implementation of the Cleanup Action Plan, residential use oil the Property is permitted so long as a building, or other structure (as described in the Cleanup Action plan) is present such that the residential use is located over structural 3 parking or other structures, placing the first occupied floor at least one level abave the soil and prevents direct contact with all soil that exceeds Method B Cleanu ve s. Section 7. The Owner of the property must give thirty (30) da i he notice to Ecology of the Owner's intent to convey a fee interest in a - rtio the Property. No conveyance of fee title in a substantial_portiorrf th�P_roperty shalk-� consummated by the Owner without adequate_ —mp rovistoi—L=fBr contin �— monitoring, oper ion dnd maintenance afthe Remedial~Ac-�ffon: j-ncludjgj mitigation measttre � zrz .� t in l� a substajKu�ff7pa � the if erty may be conv_thout n¢ c Eco�g — eetjon 8. Th`e: aw—ner restrict leas uses and activities consistent with the motive Cov_ei wit:and nl potentially impacted lessees of the restrictions on the use oli�e,Pmp }►e Owner must notify and obtain approval from Ecology prior to any use 91fhe Property that is inconsistent with the terms of this Restrictive Covenant. Ecology may approve any inconsistent use only after public notice and comment. Section 10. The Owner shall allow authorized representatives of Ecology the right to enter the Property at reasonable times for the purpose of evaluating the Remedial Action; to take samples, to inspect remedial actions conducted at the property, and to inspect records that are related to the Remedial Action. Ecology shall use reasonable efforts to minimize any interference and use reasonable efforts not to interfere with the operations of the Property occupancy 4 <fll �V 11.V W Section l 1. The Owner of the Property reserves the right under WAC193- -340: 440 to record an instrument that provides that this Restrictive Covenants =no- lon e--- limit use of the Property or be of any further force or effect. instrument may may be recorded only if Ecology, after public notice a i t�uInjTy comment, concurs. PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington corporation By: Its: 5 w STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory �dzna- —rl is the person who appeared before rrie�d�aad- per-zic acknowledged that he/she was authorized to execute the_insfrufnent :uid:ack""no�vled e�i-ice as of Port Quendall Cotot ,free andyolvntary_act�` and deed of stich=pa- or the uses and purposes.mentionez-1hJuisinstrame-n��-.- (Signature of Notary) 6 (Ugibly Prim or Sta rnp Name of Notary) Notary public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires 1001. I A;X, 2. . COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAM DF Douglas -fir Pseudotsugfa rnenziesii Douglas -fir Pseudotsugra rnentiesii wH westem hemlock Tsuga heterophylla wR western redcedar Thu1a plicata SS Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis �M bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum BC black cottonwood Populus trichoc(,3rpa black cottonwood Populus trichocarpa o� Oregon ash 1=raxinus latifolia red alder Alnus rubra Pacific willow Salix lasiandra ca cascara Rhamnus purshiana Pn Pacific dogwood Gomus nuttalli 21 — O U I-O'LANT SIZE QUANTITY 1-- to 2-gallon 20 4' to 5' ball and burlap 15 1- to 2-gallon 17 I- to 2-gallon 20 1- to 2-gallon 9 1- to 2-gallon 15 4' to 8' ball and burlap 10 1- to 2-gallon 28 4' to 5' ball and burlap 25 1- to 2-gal Ion 52 1 W- to 2-gallon 25 1- to 2-gallon 52 1- to 2-gallon 5 1- to 2-gallon 4 vine maple Acer circinatum 1- to 2-gallon 43 red osier dogwood Gornus stolonifera 1- to 2-gallon 96 hawthorn Grataegrus douglasii 1- to 2-gallon 10 western crabapple Pyrus fusca 1- to 2-gallon 11 itka willow salix sitchensis 1- to 2-gallon 117 hazelnut Corylus.cornuta.�w.. m_ __. 1- to 2-gallon 51 salmonberry Rubus spectabilis 1- to 2-gallon 189 Nootka rose Rosa nut%ana 1- to 2-gallon 48 Oregon grape Mahonia nervosa 1- to 2-gallon 95 sword fern.. i°ol stichum muniturr 1- anon 106 snowberry Syrnphoricarpos albus 1-gallon 85 twinberry Lonicera involucrata 1-gallon 14 salal Gaultheria shallon 1-gallon 105 Athyriurn flix femina 1-gallon 8`8. Carex obnupta 5-inch plug 850 scirpus acutus 6-inch plug 1350 cirpus microcarpus .5-inch plug 475 Oenanthe sarrnentosa tuber or bareroot 800 Glyceria elata bareroot 350 3" (COMPACTED DEPTH) SPECIFIED MULCH, KEEP 3"-6" AWAY FROM BASE OF TRUNK i DOTE: SEE SPEC FOR MULCH REQUIREMENTS. 12" MIN. A. 1 N s, MIN. 2X NO SCALE 311 WATERING RING FINISH GRADE NATIVE BACKFILL 3" (COMPACTED DEPTH) —.. SPECIFIED MULCH, KEEP T'4' AWAY FROM BASE OF TRUNK NOTE: SEE SPEC FOR MULCH REQUIREMENTS. `e 3rr WATERING RING GRADE 1 T F NATIVE BACKFILL MIN {. r�t y l MIN. 2X ROOT BALL NATIVE BACKFILL - - NO SCALE MIN. TYPICAL CONTAINERIZED 4; SCALENO ca U FINISH GRADE TOP OF ROOT MASS TO BE LEVEL WITH FINISH GRADE COMPACT SOIL AROUND PLANT WITHOUT CRUSHING OR DAMAGING ROOTS MAKE PLANTING HOLE LARGE ENOUGH ONLY TO ACCOMMODATE ROOTS. DO NOT OVEREXCAVATE FOR PLANTING NATIVE BACKFILL GRADE AT WHICH TREE GREW IN NURSERY 31' (COMPACTED DEPTH) SPECIFIED MULCH, KEEP 5" AWAY FROM BASE OF TRUNK NOTE: SEE SPEC FOR MULCH REQUIREMENTS. REMOVE ALL BURLAP, TWINE & WIRE FROM TOP 112 OF ROOTBALL AFTER TREE IS SET IN POSITION SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANTING PIT PROVIDE 2 (MIN.) SPARE LINKS TO ADJUST TENSIO fir` ��♦♦�� ���%��``�♦`��% 3X DIAMETER OF ROOTBALL v d- #5 r"CHAINLOCK" PLASTIC TREE TIES, ADJUST HEIGHT AS DIRECTED (SEE INSET PLAN) 2" DIAMETER FIR STAKES STAKLING PLAN POSITION TIE WITH 112" CLEAR ON ALL SIDES OF TRUNK NOTE: STAKING REQUIRED FOR 5'-•01' HT. AND TALLER TREES ONLY. ALTERNATE STAKING METHODS MAY BE ACCEPTABLE WITH THEAPPROV.AL OF THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST. 3�+--STAKES MAY BE REQUIRED FOR TREES TYPICAL BALL AND BURLAP TREE -PLANTING (CONIFEROUS AND DECIDUOUS) NO SCALE LOG �1 `.n' tip' NARROW TRENCH FOR LOGS; BACKFILLWITH LARGE ROCKS (2 MAN TO 4 MAN)AS DIRECTED BY PROJECT BIOLOGISTAND BACKFILLWITH TOPSOIL 5/16" GALVANIZED CHAIN (2,0009 MINIMUM STRENGTH); SECURE CHAIN TO ROCK WITH 1/2" X 8" GALVANIZED ANCHOR BOLT EPDXIED 6" DEEP INTO DRILLED HOLES IN ROCK; SCORE LOG AND WRAP CHAIN 2X AROUND LOG AND PULL TIGHT; SECURE CHAIN WITH 6/16" GALVANIZED ANCHOR SHACKLE. 2-MAN TO 4-MAN ROCK NO SCALE TRENCH THROUGH LOWER SOILS AS DIRECTED BY PROJECT BIOLOGIST TO PLACE LOGS INTO OPEN WATER NO SCALE PLANT V O.C. NOTE: THIS IS ACONtEPTUAL REPRESENTATION ONLY. ML / \,�,\ \4� \�/\\ NO SCALE 15' MIN. FINISH GRADE 8" MINr MAXIMUM ONE-THIRD LOG DIAMETER BELOW GRADE NO SCALE ANCHOR WITH 2—MAN TO 4-MAN ROCKS AND CABLE AS DIRECTED BY PROJECT BIOLOGIST AND - BACKFILL WITH TOPSOIL CONCEPTUAL LOG PLACEMENT CROSS SECTION (FOR LOGS PLACEDTHE MOUTHT ) NO SCALE NOTE: THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL REPRESENTATION ONLY, CD cc Q L TURTLE TRAPPING Prior to remediation activities, turtles currently existing in Baxter Cove will be live -- trapped and removed to nearby areas in Lake Washington containing suitable habitat. Dispersal areas will be identified in conjunction with icing County and Washington Department of Fish and wildlife (WDFW) biologists. When remediation has been completed and Baxter Cave has been replanted, attempts will be made to capture turtles from the dispersion areas and return a small population (6-12 individuals) to Baxter Cove. TOPSOILS Imported topsoils should be a gravelly silt loam t.o a silt loam, mixed with an organic amendment comprised of a well decomposed,, humus -like material derived from the decomposition of grass clippings, leaves, branches, wood, or other organic materials. Soils shall have an organic content of at least 30%. The organic amendment shall be produced at a permitted solid waste composting facility. The topsoil and organic amendment mixture shall be clean of debris and rocks larger than two (2) inches in diameter. LOG INSTALLATION Following remediation, large, downed logs will be placed within the perimeter of the created wetland that will be planted under this m' itigation plan. Additionally, logs will be partially buried and anchored along the shoreline of Lake Washington and at the mouth of Baxter Cove. Lastly, logs will also be floated across the mouth of Baxter Cove. Logs to be placed within the created wetland will have an average diameter of 12 inches at the small end and be at least 15 feet in length. Approximately one-half of the logs to be installed should be partially buried (see Sheet L-2 for typical installation) and the other half of the logs should be placed directly on the ground. The final locations for log placement will be field located by the project wetland biologist and/or eng inser. Logs to be placed along the Lake Washington and/or Baxter Cave shoreline will be partially buried and/or anchored within the shoreline itself (see Sheet L--2 fortypical installation). These logs will have an average diameter of 20 inches at the large end and will be approximately 25 to 30 feet in length. Logs to be floated across the mouth of Baxter Cove will be of similar dimensions (see Sheet L-2 for typical installation). The final locations for all log placements will be field located by the project wetland biologist, fisheries biologist, and/or engineer. MULCH Cedar grove medium grade compost mix, or approved equal, uniform in color, free from weed seed, sawdust, and splinters. Mulch shall not contain resin, tannin, wood fiber, or compounds detrimental to plant growth. Source shall be from freshwater mill. and shrubs of a size reduced from those specified will not be permitted unless approved by project wetland biologist. Plant delivery shall be as close to plant installation as possible to avoid extended storage of live materials on -site. Plant materials shall be packaged with care for transit to the mitigation area. Branches shall be tied back, and bark shall be protected with burlap bags to prevent damage from chafing by ropes and wires. Plants in storage shall be protected from weather and packed to provide protection against climate and breakage during transit. Do not drag plant material without proper root and branch protection. Lift containerized plants by container. Do not drop any plant materials or damage root system. PLANT MATERIAL SOURCE The following are acceptable sources for each particular type of plant material: Emergent Stack Propagated and grown within a local nursery (western Washington lowland Puget Sound region). Collected (or harvested) within land owned or leased by a nursery, if such land is used for the purpose of plant propagation and/or storage. Collected (or salvaged) from sites that are going to be destroyed by legally permissible construction, and only when a permit has been approved and issued by the local jurisdiction forsuch construction. Obtained from sources within the lowland Puget Sound region Trees and Shrubs Local nursery grown plants will be accepted. Plants are to be derived from stock acclimated to western Washington environmental conditions, having been consistently cultivated and grown under similar conditions. Trees and Shrubs General: Plants shall have all leaders and buds intact. Trees shall not have sunscalds, disfiguring knots, fresh cuts of limbs, damaged leader, or deformed trunk. Container Stock: Provide container stock grown in container long enough to provide a root system that reaches the edges of the container in which it has grown. Shrubs shall bewell rooted and shall have sufficient root mass to hold together the soil, in which it is growing, when removed from thepot. Plants that cannot be planted within one (1) day after arrival at mitigation site shall be "heeled -in" or otherwise stored temporarily in accordance with accepted horticultural practice in a manner that does not compromise the health of the plant material. Plants stored under temporary conditions shall be kept moist and protected from extreme weather conditions. Plant stock shall remain securely wrapped and protected; shall be stored in moist sawdust; and shall be kept cool, using cold storage if necessary. All plant pits shall be excavated with vertical sides. Weeds, if any, within the vicinity of the planting pit shall be scraped out and disposed of appropriately. The bottom of all excavated planting pits shall be scarified to a depth of 4 inches and the sides of the pit shall be roughened. The planting contractor shall form 3- to 4-inch high, hand compacted earth berm around each plant for use as a watering basin. The radius of the watering basin,is to be equal to at least the height of the plant. after plant installation, place a minimum 3 inches of an organic mulch within the basin around each plant. All plants are to be watered within 24 hours after planting. Containerized Plants The rootball of all containerized plants is to be thoroughly soaked prior to planting. Excavate a planting hole twice as large as rootball. as necessary to keep the plants healthy, to prevent plant wilting, and to promote deep plant root structure (i.e. 1 inch waterper week). The planting contractor shall submit a watering schedule for approval by project biologist before the irrigation system installation is approved. All permits and inspections necessary for the irrigation system shall be Obtained by the planting contractor. The planting contractor will be responsible for securing a source of irrigation water PERFORMANCE STANDARDSIGUARANTEE PLANTING CONTRACTOR Plants shall be guaranteed for one year against defects of materials and workmanship. The Guarantee period begins after the date of the provisional acceptance of plantings. Final acceptance will be certified in writing. The planting contractor has the right during the entire warranty period to enter upon the property for inspection and curative treatment of any material needing such and which are still under warranty. The project owner shall be notified in advance of any corrective treatment measures so as to arrange for convenient access to the area. A 100 percent survivorship of newly installed plant material, after the first growing season, is required under this guarantee. Specified plants shall be replaced with plants or species and size as indicated in plant schedule, and according to planting details on plans unless otherwise directed in writing by the project wetland biologist. during everyweed control visit. - Irrigate using the temporary irrigation system as necessary after Year 1 to establish new or replaced plantings. MITIGATION PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Please refer to the May 14, 2001 Engineering Design Report prepared by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation for the mitigation performance standards and monitoring schedule information forthis project. CONTINGENCY Appropriate contingency plans will be developed as necessary during the 'I0-year monitoring period to correct problems identified during monitoring. If plant survivorship does not meet the established criteria, replanting will be conducted after the reason for failure has been determined (e.g., poor planting stock, moisture regime, herbivory, disease, shade/sun conditions, hydrologic conditions, vandalism, plant competition, etc.). g a satisfactory growing condition as determined by project wetland biologist for the duration of the uarantee period Re lacerrs _ _-_ 0 p p ents shall be made within seven (7 ry.pno�r.t p anting using ashrp �nstrurnent, days of notfcat�on from project wetland bolog�t, ur�ess otherwise approved by the project wetland biologist. teen y we rg s a y rosee a roug ou a created/gradedareas. Fake a "V-shaped planting hole in the soil of a sufficient size for root system and This seed mixture should be a applied at a. rate of 20 pounds per acre, Emergent Stock insert plant so that root collar is at finished raid The presence of waterfowl and aquatic mammals within the project vicinity, and the Remove plant from container with rootball completely intact. Insert rootball into potential for foraging damage to planted emergent species, may make the 100 planting hole without bending or damaging the roots, and place root collar at percent survivorship guarantee difficult to achieve. Relief from this guarantee will finished grade. be provided by the owner if forage damage cannot be reasonably controlled. If container stock appears to be rootbound, slash roots vertically with a sharp knife The contractor will be expected tore -set settled plants to proper grade and position along the outside of rootball in three (3)places minimum before planting. during the guarantee period. Restore raised soil water basin (if any) and adjacent materials. Remove dead material. The contractor should correct defective work as Use moist, pulverized, native soil for backfilling, ensuring that good contact with soon as possible after deficiencies become apparent and weather and season rootball is made. Frozen or muddy mixtures shall not be used for bcackfilling. permit. Midway through the backfill process, water thoroughly to settle soil Tree and shrub material that is greater than or equal to 25 percent dead or disfigured will be considered dead and must be replaced at no additional charge. A Complete backfill at finished grade and ensure the plant is at proper alignment. tree will be considered dead when the main leader has died back or when a Water again to settle soil and add additional backfill as necessary if roots become minimum of 25 percent of the crown leader is dead. Any emergent rhizome, tuber, exposed, or plug that fails to support the growth of at least one plant during the guarantee period will be considered dead. Plants will be considered disfigured when Construct a circular, 3- to 4-inch high, hand compacted earth berm around each excessive dead wood has been removed or when the symmetry or typical habit of plant for use as a watering basin. growth has been impaired by the removal of the dead wood. Place 3 inches of or Mulch within watering basin. _ The planting contractor shall replace trees and shrubs when plants are no lon er in SEEDING In addition to the planting of native plant species, a seerj mixture comprised of Bare Root Stock. All bare root stock shall have head► fibrous root `stt � ar - �_ .,�..______--_ .�_.----------.--�._______ _��_.- .m.A �_ ._ ..�_�.� -,,� _ .__._ . _,.._..�_ s���ems Unless �� drop �rner�er�t plants ere � �: _,�� _ _.� �_��._ . _..�,_ - e n r d s slu a r0 - - - p g e fire cue (Fe c a) (55 percent by weigh , blue onf reed rasa otorw�se a roved r t w _ ! 0 o ec eti nd bolo tsf and/or Idhd' e r hat ._�__- pp y p 1 a c ect all Prune r k b o en rooms g as needs � ,. p - sa (Galamagro,sfis canadensis) (30 percent by weight), and redtop (A rosfis alba) (1 b bare root plants must be dormant at the time of planting. pe t b fit) h II b a d d d th fi t th As directed by project biologist, areas of wetland creation may also be hand seeded with species such as salmonberry following the planting of other plant materials. General All plant material shall be of accepted size standards as specified in American Standard Nursery Stock (latest edition). All plants shall be of normal habitat of growth, and shall be healthy, vigorous, and free of disease, insect eggs, and larvae. Scientific nomenclature shall conform with Standard Plant Dames, latest edition. Names not present in this listing shall conform to accepted scientific nomenclature in the nursery trade. For trees and shrubs, no less than 10 percent of each variety or species shall be accurately labeled. For emergents, each container or bag shall be accurately labeled. Plant materials shall have durable, legible labels stating the correct scientific plant name. Size, quality, and quantity requirements shall meet the standards listed in the Specifications and Drawings. All plants shall be at least equal to size specified on the mitigation plant schedule. Oversize plants are acceptable, but without an increase in the contract price. Trees f-: •: ��. i -. �'.' ' : Fes'., �'..'< General: Emergent stock shall support a section of rhizome or tuber of sufficient dimensions to support the growth of at least one plant within the first growing season. Only personnel experienced in the installation of native plant materials shall perform planting and all planting shall occur under the direct supervision of a qualified supervisor. Adjust plant locations as necessary to best meet post -grading conditions. Planting locations will be checked by the project biologist prior to and/or during planting. A biologist from the design team shall be on -site for the planting. All plants will be planted during the dormant season (i.e., November 15 through March 1) unless approved by the project biologist. Planting of woody plant materials shall not take place during freezing weather or when the ground is frozen or excessively wet. Planting of emergent plant materials shall not take place during freezing weather orwhen the ground is frozen. Once accepted on -site, all plants shall be protected at all times from animal damage, vandalism, drought damage, frost damage, and wind damage. 0 Foots of bareroot plants shall be spread and arranged in their natural position. Roots shall not be matted together as the pit is backfilled. Avoid "J-rooting", Rhizomes and Tubers Rhizomes and tubers shall be firm and free of rot. At least one shoot for each rhizome should be aligned at the surface, with the bottom of the rhizome covered by at least four (4) inches of soil planted 1' (1 foot) on center. The planting area must be very moist to wet. Prior to plant installation, the planting contractor shall install a temporary irrigation system. The planting contractor shall design and construct a temporary system, including heads, valves, backflow preventor, and controller. The irrigation system shall be maintained by the planting contractor for one growing season. Additionally, costs incurred for water during the irrigation period shall be borne by the planting contractor. Planted rnaterialswill be irrigated 1 year after installation by planting contractor. All planted materials shall be watered during the dry season (dune 15 to October 15) After each replacement period, if any, the planting contractor shall submit a marked planting plan showing the location of each item replaced at that time. Replacement plants shall be marked with colored survey tape, and shall be guaranteed for one full year following planting. { The Owner will be responsible for the following maintenance to be performed during the 10-year monitoring period in addition to the planting contractor requirements: - All woody material roust be weeded to dripline every spring during the monitoring period. - All invasive plants must be removed twice every year within the created wetland during the monitoring period. - All weed control work is to be performed by hand whenever possible, and with the lightest possible equipment where use of equipment is imperative. - Pioneer species (e.g., red alder) must also be controlled as necessary to avoid unwanted competition with plants installed in the mitigation area. All debris and removed invasive plant material must be removed from the site 4 `'. c 1. t_r : 1.0 S t` v. f f _ r } SHEET L-3 1 1.1 1 1 14 1 1.7 .1 0 © 20M CR WORD ARCHITECTS, LLC L .►r R I A 12 11 10 9 O8 O7 O O O O O O J I VIVG LLHUUIIVV, OR METAL PANEL �L 0 0 c\I ...... -TOP OF ROOF + — 137 v —11 01 TOP OF ROOF\��'001, 79 — 5 \\W\\ 1►1 [WTI LEVEL 3 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\N 59 —5 LEVEL 2 oPN ................ 0 LEVEL 1 Alk 27 —5 NEW JJ \\\\\A�\\\\\\�� H XIMM\\\\\\92000, WEST ELEVATION G1scale: 1/16 - V-011 PRACTICE FIELDS A [.3 0 CRAWFORD ARCHITECTS, LLC 1901 main street, suite 200 kansas city, mo 64108 tel: 816.421.2640 fax: 816.421.2650 %P 15 SEP 2006 consultants key plan drawn by: issue date: [A riv scale: 1 /16" = V-0" © 2006 CMWFM ARCHITEMS, LLC scale: r 1 1 14- 16 IJ 1 IN 19 0 0 F 0 0 0 RE: L100 (FIGURE 9.1) FOR LANDSCAPE & HARDSCAPE INFORMATION NOTE: STREAM CLASS LAKE WASHINGTON - CLASS 1 GYPSY SUB BASIN DRAINAGE - CLASS 2 (RE.- FIGURE 8,3) PARKING COUNT GENERAL SURFACE PARKING SECURE TEAM PARKING TOTAL 195 STALLS 104 STALLS 299 STALLS I r- I\Uf- U,-DLL) I-\/-IILVV/-A I L.r\UJJIINlj INT ERS T 405 --- r r 0 50' 100' P CRAWFORD ARCHITECTS, LLC 1901 main street, suite 200 kansas city, mo 64108 tel: 816.421.2640 fax: 816.421.2650 consultants � o 0 0 J IL [L W z Q eo 0 E IL z � Q � J a-C 0 W F__ '> U r U C key plan EVELOPI EWr CITY OF RE�ti bi-ilG P 2 2 200 RECEIV,ti) KC045-05 CRAWFORD 15 NOV 2006 1.50 seal: project no: drawn by: issue date: scale: .qlTl= P1A Al „- , scale.. 1 - 50 -0„ 0 2006 CRAWFORD ARCHITECTS. LLC SITE PLAN drawing title: 1 1.1 1 E ME r 1 16 17 q 10. !7" 1-1 -M 11 N 14 2 i 0 LZI r1 A B C D E F G H 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 1 If i 1f • I1 7 71 ` 1 ` 1� 7f • �L 301 —0 301 —071 301 —0 ' 301 —01f 301 —0 -- 30 —0 f 30 —017 307 —01 301 —0 30'-0" — 30'-01' 1 ± y 1 y 1 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 ...... ..... IN I L.l, V 1 V L.L. G1 r scale: 1/1611 = 1 1-011 SOUTH ELEVATION 500NE CLADDING, OR METAL PANEL OR METAL PANEL P I TOP OF ROOF +-137-11 `7 $� 40�11 TOP OF ROOF 1 LEVEL 3���\����� 59 —5 o p, \\gr \ LEVEL 2 45 — 5 ������\�\NNN, 0 00 LEVEL 1 27 —5 \,mAL--mmo��,- H \\\\\�\\\\\maw \\\\\�MM�M� \2100 N�- K J H G F E D G. 7 RN 30'-0„ 301-011 ..._. 30'-0ff 30f-0„ 30'-0ff ff ,— 3 0f— 0 ---- 3 pf— 07 3 p7_ p11 -- — 3 p' 0".,. ,.. 301— 0 If 3 0 7— 011 3 0 f— 0,1 0 I A13 \ A407 ; 5 5 5 � • , 1 5 11\11�\\�\\AL\\\\\\X\ 1 , • 1 � i. TOP OF ROOF u.._� ................ ...... TOP F R , + -- 137 —11 � 3 DEG. R00 PITCH - ...... ...... .............:............ ...... ...... .......................... ...... ...... .......................... ...... ...... ........ _..._.----- 0 0 ROOF TRANSLUCENT DAYLIGHTING � C OPTIONAL ROOF PROFILE + — 137 —11 PANELS OR EQUIVALENT OF INDOOR PRACTICE FACILITY , \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 1 5 FIBER CEMENT BOARD 1 1 OR EQUIVALENT SHINGLE PATT. PAINTED STEEL OUTRIGGER (D 71 00 CORRUGATED METAL FRAMING SYSTEM PROFILE A4021011 PANEL OR -EQUIVALENT 1 � 1 P �R I P F SU BCO NTRATO R 5 FRAMING SYSTEM PROFILE\\\\\0 PER IPF SUBCONTRACTOR — Al� _ T0���\ ' A705 5 5 + + 1 401 1 ll ............ ..... ..... ..... ... ...................... ..... ....... .. _._ ..... .............. , 5 ... .............. ......-- . .--_. ..... .......... ..... ........................ ..... .. _.. .......... ..... ..... ..... .- ..... ..... ............ ........... .. ..... .................... _. ' SEAHAWKS LOGO TOP OF ROO 79 5 \ 00 J J f i CANOPY (TO BE DETERMINED) =1F-1 F� z SPANDREL -4- N \pnmn %\% I • ........................ . ......... .......... .... ... ..... „GLASS ENTRY "Lmm\�\\\\\\\\\\ 59 —5 COVERED WOOD FIBERT PERGOLA CEMENT BOARD o C OR EQUIVALENT _ 1 5 1 MAIN DOOR ..... ..... ......................... ..... ..... .............. ......................... ..... ..... ------------------ ...... ... 5 .... ...._ .. ......................... ........ .... .... ..... ._._.. __._....... ..... .. ......................... ..... ...... ...... .. .. ... .. .... .. .... LEVEL 2 .. ..... ..... ..... ... • ................ ..... ... 11 ........... ..... ..... .... ....... .. ............ ..... ..... ..... MASONRY CLADDING OR GRADE 45 —5 1 i ........... ...... ... __. ............ ........_.... ...... ...... ..... ... ... , VARIES O.H. ' � EQUIVALENT AT PIER - I COILING FIBER CEMENT BOARD OR o 0 DOOR EQUIVALENT SHINGLE PATTERN 00 , N rr.% .w_r... ,,,,�. 11 n r LUD FF77f--]F-IrA FFF71- NORTH ELEVATION Al scale: ,/,s„=,,-o„ METAL CABLE LATTICE SYSTEM FOR VEGETATION 160'-0" (FOOTBALL FIELD) 204'-0" CLEAR (INSIDE) WUN I Y NU SECURITY LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE FOR IVY WALL tiUNLLNINU A55LMHLT LEVEL 1 C E CRAWFORD ARCHITECTS, LLC 1901 main street, suite 200 kansas city, mo 64108 tel: 816.421.2640 fax: 816.421.2650 �7 consultants 0 C key plan