9._ketchikan_area_bacteria_management_plan_2021.pdf

Ketchikan Area Watersheds Plan:

Bacteria Management Strategy

September 2021

Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition Funded by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Alaska Clean

Water Actions Grant

Cover page photo credit Walter Robles, Sept 17, 2020

This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States EPA under assistance agreement number 00J84604 to the Department of Environmental Conservation through the Alaska Clean Water Actions (ACWA) program. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial product mentioned in this document.

Table of Contents Acronyms

Units of Measurement

List of Figures

List of Tables

I. Introduction

Background

Location

Goals

Water Quality Standards

Current Conditions

Beaches

Marine waters

Ketchikan Creek

II. Causes and Sources of Pollution

Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) outfalls

Charcoal Point WWTF

Mountain Point WWTF

Onsite wastewater treatment systems

Systems connected to marine outfalls

Septic systems with soil absorption systems

Private boats

Cruise ships

Ferries and small cruise ships

Pets and wildlife

Human waste on land

Sewer system deficiencies

Stormwater runoff in Ketchikan

III. Load Reductions

Beaches

Ketchikan Creek

IV. Management Measures

Increase sewage treatment effectiveness

Charcoal Point sewer system and WWTF

Mountain Point sewer system and WWTF

Other Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems with marine outfalls

Onsite wastewater treatment systems with soil absorption systems

Decrease direct inputs of untreated bacteria to the landscape

Pet Waste

Human Waste

Implement stormwater control measures

Reduce bacteria from boats and ships

Smaller boats and ferries in harbors and at sea

Large cruise ships

Increase flushing and dilution

Information gaps/needs to help prioritize management strategies:

Management Strategies by Site

V. Implementation Schedule

VI. Milestones

VII. Criteria to assess Progress

VIII. Monitoring

IX. Education and Outreach

X. Technical and Financial Resources Needed

Citations

Appendix A. Alaska Water Quality Standards

Appendix B. Beach water quality data summary

Appendix C: Ketchikan Creek Bacteria Data

Appendix D. Edge of Mixing Zone Data

Appendix E. Downtown Public Restrooms Proposal

Appendix F. General Permit AKG575000 FAQ

Acronyms ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation AMHS Alaska Marine Highway System AWTS Advanced wastewater treatment system BMP Best Management Practices ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Online MSD Marine sanitation device MST Molecular Source Tracking OWTS Onsite wastewater treatment system PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon PEL Probable effects level STH South Tongass Highway TEL Threshold effects level US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency WWTF Wastewater treatment facility

Units of Measurement CFU Colony forming units km Kilometer ml milliliter MPN Most probable number

List of Figures Figure 1. Ketchikan area map, including streams and some of the coastal watershed boundaries. The location is shown in red in the inset map of Alaska

Figure 2. Beach sampling sites, with colors indicating in which years one or more water quality criteria were exceeded

Figure 3. Sources of fecal bacteria detected at the beach monitoring sites along the northern shore (left) and southern shore (right). Samples were tested for human, dog, and gull. Results reflect sources detected in any of the four sampling years (2017, 2018, 2019, 2020)

Figure 4. Ambient marine water quality sampling locations for 2018 and 2019 (Figures 1 and 2 in ARRI, 2020a)

Figure 5. Ambient marine water quality sampling locations for 2020 (Figure 35 in ARRI, 2020b)

Figure 6. Distribution of some potential sources in the Ketchikan area. Note that the septic system layer was developed in 2014, and likely does not reflect the most up-to-date data, but provides a good overview of where septic systems are generally used

Figure 7. Charcoal Point WWTF discharge point (star), zone of initial dilution (red circle) and permitted mixing zone (yellow rectangle)

Figure 8. General direction of currents during Tongass Narrows flood (left) and ebb (right) tides.

(Schematic courtesy of Steven Corporon, former Director of the Harbormaster’s Office in Ketchikan, Alaska.)

Figure 9. Mountain Point WWTF Service Area

Figure 10. Mountain Point WWTF discharge point and permitted mixing zone

Figure 11. Dog feces on the bridge at Thomas Basin

Figure 12. Distribution of fecal coliform concentrations in stormwater outfalls, catch basins, and tributaries to Ketchikan Creek (collected by the City of Ketchikan in 2018). The dotted line indicates 40 CFU/100ml, which not more than 10% of samples may exceed in 30 days to meet the drinking water quality standard. The thick line in the middle of the box represents the median value, the upper and lower ends of the box represent the middle 50% of the data, whiskers extend either the minimum and maximum or 1.5 times the interquartile range. Points plotted individually fall outside of 1.5 times the interquartile range. Note that Ketchikan Lake, KC01, KC02, and KC03 are all lake/creek sites (Figure 13).

Figure 13. Locations of stormwater monitoring in Ketchikan Creek (City of Ketchikan Public Works Department). Some of the locations with the highest fecal coliform concentrations are highlighted with pink circles

List of Tables Table 1. Fecal coliform concentrations in marine locations near Ketchikan. Values for the Tongass Narrows in 2018 and 2019 represent the average of multiple samples taken within that area (n = 3 for 2018, n = 7 for 2019), individual sample results are reported for Thomas Basin, AMHS Dock, and City Outfall area in 2018 and 2019. The geomean of five samples taken over 30 days is reported for each sampling location in 2020 (ARRI 2020a, ARRI 2020b)

Table 2. Potential point and nonpoint sources of bacteria present in waters near each monitoring location

Table 3. Instances of numeric exceedances reported for effluent from the Charcoal Point WWTF from 2016 to present

Table 4. Instances of numeric exceedances reported for effluent from the Mountain Point WWTF from 2016 to March 2021 (ECHO database)

Table 5. Permitted common collectors and private WWTFs, and summaries of fecal coliform concentrations in effluent from monitoring events from 2016 through March 2021 (data obtained from the ECHO database March 2021)

Table 6. Large cruise ship compliance sampling results for fecal coliform, both underway and stationary (https://dec.alaska.gov/water/cruise-ships/cruise-reports/). For 2016-2018, the summary statistics reflect samples of both mixed wastewater and graywater. One sample was taken in Ketchikan 2016; no samples were taken in Ketchikan in 2017 or 2018; 3 samples were taken in Ketchikan in 2019. No cruise ships visited Southeast Alaska in 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, so there is no wastewater data from that year. All values are in units of CFU/100 ml

Table 7. Small cruise ship and ferry compliance sampling results for fecal coliform for all of Alaska. No small cruise ships were sampled in Ketchikan during 2016-2019. Only 1 small cruise ship operated a partial itinerary in Southeast Alaska in 2020, and no samples were collected that year. All values are in units of CFU/100 ml

Table 8. Maximum observed concentrations of fecal coliform and enterococci, and max seasonal geometric means of fecal coliform and 30-day geometric means of enterococci at each of the beach locations across 2017-2020 sampling seasons, and corresponding % reduction needed to meet water quality standards

Table 9. Management strategies most important to water quality improvement at each site

Table 10. Implementation Schedule. Some management options are one-time actions (although there may be continuing maintenance). Others are ongoing programs or activities, which is noted in the “Type of Action” column

Table 11. Milestones provide a timeline for measurable progress on management strategies and water quality goals

Table 12. Criteria to assess progress towards milestones

Table 13. Monitoring for milestones

Table 14. Management measures and associated lead organization, cost estimate, and technical and financial resources. Estimated cost categories: $ - < $5,000; $$ - $5,000-$25,000; $$$ - $25,000 - $100,000, $$$$ - >$100,000

I. Introduction

Background The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) began funding the development of a watershed plan for the Ketchikan area in 2019 through the Alaska Clean Water Actions grant program.

The Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition led this effort and reached out to representatives of relevant departments of the City of Ketchikan, Ketchikan Gateway Borough, City of Saxman, Ketchikan Indian Community, and Alaska Department of Natural Resources to provide input on the plan. Ultimately, staff at the City’s Public Works and Port and Harbors Departments, the Borough’s Public Works Department, and Ketchikan Indian Community’s Cultural Resources Department offered the most insights and input to this plan during in-person meetings, phone calls and over email; however, this plan has not been officially approved or endorsed by any organization. The Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition compiled and released the final draft of this plan. Importantly, this is a living, working document that is meant to be updated at least annually as additional information becomes available and more stakeholders engage with the process of improving water quality in the Ketchikan area.

Location Ketchikan Gateway Borough is the second-most populous borough in southeast Alaska, with most of the residents (13,918) living in southwest Revillagigedo Island (Figure 1). The urbanized area is largely confined to the coast along the Tongass Narrows and includes the cities of Ketchikan (population 8,289) and Saxman (population 384). This area includes many small coastal watersheds and a few larger drainage basins, including Ketchikan Creek watershed (37 km2), the lower portion of which includes part of the city of Ketchikan (Figure 1). Residents of the community of Ketchikan, including the cities of Ketchikan and Saxman and outlying borough areas, are intimately connected to the area’s fresh- and marine waters. People depend on healthy waters for harvesting fish and other seafood, recreating, and attracting hundreds of thousands of tourists a year.

Figure 1. Ketchikan area map, including streams and some of the coastal watershed boundaries. The location is shown in red in the inset map of Alaska.

Goals Various water quality data, including bacteria, metals, nutrients, and other physical and biological data have been collected in Ketchikan, Hoadley and Carlanna Creeks, and 13 recreational beaches in the Ketchikan area. Multiple years of high-quality fecal bacteria data exist for the beaches. Many of these locations experience elevated concentrations of fecal bacteria that are indicative of an increased health risk with exposure to the water. In contrast to the extensive fecal bacteria data, other water quality data, such as metals, nutrients, and pH are more limited and are still being collected and screened to understand the extent to which water quality (particularly in urban streams) might be polluted with respect to these constituents.

Based on the data that currently exists and community concerns about bacteria concentrations at many beaches, the participating stakeholders agreed that this iteration of the watersheds plan should focus primarily on fecal bacteria. As more information about urban pollutants or other water quality issues becomes available and indicates a need for action, future iterations of this plan (or a new plan) can address those issues. A summary of the creeks sampling is provided starting on page 13 of this report.

While there are many potential sources of fecal bacteria, including wildlife, analyses have shown that human waste contributes to bacteria loads at every beach location that was sampled, and dog waste contributes at nearly every location. This information suggests that proactive management of human and pet waste can lead to improved water quality in the Ketchikan area.

The goal of this area-wide watersheds management plan is to identify and prioritize strategies and set a timeline for reducing bacteria concentrations in Ketchikan’s waters. Ultimately, this plan is meant to provide a roadmap for the community to pursue cost-effective bacteria management strategies that will have measurable impacts on water quality. It is recognized that the strategies and timelines presented here are subject to change along with relevant information, finances, regulations, etc. This document includes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (US EPA) 9 steps that are crucial for watershed management plans. Briefly, these include:

1. Addressing the causes and sources of pollution

2. Calculating needed load reductions to achieve water quality standards

3. Identifying management measure to achieve load reduction measures

4. Implementation schedule

5. Milestones

6. Criteria to assess progress

7. Monitoring plan

8. Education and outreach plan

9. Technical and financial resources needed

Water Quality Standards Fecal coliform and enterococci are two groups of bacteria that are associated with the guts of warm-blooded animals – humans, other mammals, and birds. Most bacteria in these groups are not harmful themselves; however, they are commonly used to indicate when water has been contaminated by fecal material, which can contain other pathogens that are more difficult to test for. Higher concentrations of fecal coliform and enterococci indicate a greater likelihood that pathogens that present a health risk may also be present.

In marine waters, to protect the health of those harvesting shellfish and other organisms for raw consumption, not more than 10% of samples may have fecal coliform concentrations that exceed 31 colony forming units (CFU) per 100 ml, and the geometric mean of samples may not exceed 14 CFU/100

ml. Additionally, to protect the health of those who come into direct contact with the water (contact recreation), not more than 10% of samples may have enterococci concentrations greater than 130 CFU/100 ml within a 30-day period, and the geometric mean of samples within a 30-day period may not be greater than 35 CFU/100 ml (18 AAC 70 (14), Appendix A. Alaska Water Quality Standards).

In freshwater, to protect water for drinking, not more than 10% of samples may have fecal coliform concentrations exceeding 40 CFU/100 ml over a 30-day period, and the geometric mean of concentrations in samples may not exceed 20 CFU/100 ml over a 30-day period. To protect the health of people who come into direct contact with water (contact recreation), not more than 10% of samples may have E. coli concentrations greater than 410 CFU/100 ml in a 30-day period, and the geometric mean of samples may not exceed 126 CFU/100 ml in a 30 day period (18 AAC 70 (2), Appendix A. Alaska Water Quality Standards).

Current Conditions

Beaches Ketchikan’s beaches were sampled for fecal bacteria during the recreational seasons of 2017 through 2020 (Jul-Sep 2017; May-Sep 2018 through 2020), and during the non-recreational season in 2020-2021 (March, April, May, October, November, December 2020, and January 2021), and data indicate that all beaches exceeded one or more of Alaska’s relevant water quality criteria at some point (Figure 2); many experienced chronic exceedances during the summer and across years (See Section III. Load Reductions:

Beaches and Appendix B. Beach water quality data summary). The non-recreational season data showed slightly lower bacteria levels but 8 of the 12 beaches sampled failed to meet both the recreation and harvest standards (Appendix B. Beach water quality data summary).

Genetic analyses (Molecular Source Tracking (MST)) of bacteria samples indicated that human and gull waste were a source of bacteria at all locations, while dog waste was detected at all but Mountain Point Surprise Beach (Figure 3). More detailed information about sampling results can be found in Section III.

Load Reductions: Beaches, Appendix B. Beach water quality data summary, and the 2017-2020 Ketchikan Beach Monitoring Comprehensive Report (Ketchikan Beaches (alaska.gov).

https://dec.alaska.gov/media/1046/18-aac-70.pdf https://dec.alaska.gov/media/1046/18-aac-70.pdf https://dec.alaska.gov/water/water-quality/beach-program/ketchikan/

Figure 3. Sources of fecal bacteria detected at the beach monitoring sites along the northern shore (left) and southern shore (right). Samples were tested for human, dog, and gull. Results reflect sources detected in any of the four sampling years (2017, 2018, 2019, 2020).

Figure 2. Beach sampling sites, with colors indicating in which years one or more water quality criteria were exceeded.

Marine waters ADEC has monitored ambient water quality in the Tongass Narrows from 2018-2020, including at sites near the cruise ship berth, ferry dock, city outfall, and Thomas Basin (Figure 4, Figure 5). Because the sampling was targeting “ambient” conditions, times when cruise ships with discharge permits were in port were avoided. In 2018, samples were collected on 4 dates – once each in April, June, August, and October. In 2019, samples were collected once in June. In 2020, samples were collected five times in July, in the absence of a cruise ship season. In 2018, the highest concentrations of fecal coliform were observed near Thomas Basin and the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS) dock (Table 1). In 2020, the locations with the highest concentrations were Thomas Basin and one sampling location (KE04) near the cruise ship berth area.

Table 1. Fecal coliform concentrations in marine locations near Ketchikan. Values for the Tongass Narrows in 2018 and 2019 represent the average of multiple samples taken within that area (n = 3 for 2018, n = 7 for 2019), individual sample results are reported for Thomas Basin, AMHS Dock, and City Outfall area in 2018 and 2019. The geomean of five samples taken over 30 days is reported for each sampling location in 2020 (ARRI 2020a, ARRI 2020b).

Date

Location Tongass Narrows

(cruise ship berth area) Thomas

Basin AMHS Dock City Outfall (KT AIR) 4/9/2018 6 11 6 6/5/2018 18 19 22 8/9/2018 76 315 166 10/17/2018 7 58 28 6/25/2019 11 5 6 11

Cruise Ship Berth area Thomas

Basin South

Channel Mid-channel North Channel

(near City Outfall)

(KE04) (KE05) (KE08) (KE01) (KE07) (KE02) (KE03) (KE06) (KE09)

July 9, 13, 16, 20, 23, 2020 16.6 8.2 10.9 44.1 7.7 10.2 12.0 10.8 3.6

Figure 4. Ambient marine water quality sampling locations for 2018 and 2019 (Figures 1 and 2 in ARRI, 2020a).

Figure 5. Ambient marine water quality sampling locations for 2020 (Figure 35 in ARRI, 2020b).

Ketchikan Creek Baseline sampling for physical, chemical, and biotic community characteristics occurred in three urban streams – Carlanna, Hoadley, and Ketchikan Creeks – in 2013 and 2014 to assess the potential impacts of urban development and stormwater runoff (Jensen et al., 2014).

Water samples were taken across a range of flow conditions, including summer base flow and one fall storm event in 2013, and 2014 spring runoff. Samples were collected at upstream reference sites and downstream urban locations during all sampling events, and samples also were collected from one storm drain outfall in each watershed during spring 2014. Water samples were analyzed for alkalinity, hardness, ammonia, nitrate + nitrite, total and total dissolved phosphorus, dissolved organic carbon, settleable solids, and dissolved copper, lead, and zinc. Additionally, water samples for total fecal coliform bacteria were collected during August through September and in May as screening data. Field water quality measurements were taken at each sampling site/location and included turbidity, specific conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Stream discharge was measured on each water quality sampling date (except bacteria) and at each wadable sampling site.

Stream sediment samples were collected at each sampling site during base flow and spring flow, and sediment samples at outfall sites were collected during the spring flow sampling event. All sediments were analyzed for metals, and the most downstream sediment sample in each stream was analyzed once for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

Qualitative habitat assessments and substrate size measurements were conducted once at each sampling site. Juvenile salmonids and resident fish were sampled from one location in each stream in September 2013 and benthic macroinvertebrates were collected at each site in May 2014.

Findings

Alkalinity and hardness were generally low at all sampling sites, increasing the toxicity of metals in these streams. Dissolved metal concentrations were generally highest during summer base flow conditions. Copper concentrations exceeded acute and chronic toxicity levels in both the reference and urban Carlanna Creek sites during baseflow, and at most of the downstream urban Ketchikan Creek sites during all sampling periods. Dissolved lead concentrations exceeded acute and/or chronic toxicities during base flow at the reference site in Carlanna Creek and all Ketchikan Creek sites. No dissolved metals that were measured were above acute or chronic toxicity levels during any sampling event in Hoadley Creek.

Specific conductivity increased downstream in Carlanna and Hoadley Creeks, with highest values observed during base flow, but specific conductivity in Ketchikan Creek was always highest at the most upstream sampling location, with the highest values observed during the storm event. Water clarity was high during all sampling events, with turbidities less than 5 NTU and no detectable settleable solids at any sampling site. Dissolved oxygen was near saturation during all sampling events in Carlanna and Hoadley Creeks (>90%) but slightly lower on average in Ketchikan Creek (85.6%). Concentrations of ammonia and nitrate + nitrite tended to be higher in Ketchikan Creek as compared to Carlanna and Hoadley Creeks, with daily flux greatest during the storm event. Some unexpected longitudinal water chemistry trends in Ketchikan Creek may be related to the large diversion of stream water near the outlet of Ketchikan Lake, which is re-introduced below the most upstream sampling site.

Water samples collected from the stormwater outfalls had lower dissolved oxygen saturation, higher conductivity, turbidity, nutrients, and metals than stream samples. Both dissolved copper and dissolved zinc concentrations were much higher in the outfall samples than in their corresponding stream samples.

Water samples were collected in August and September 2013 and May 2014 as screening data to evaluate total fecal coliform concentrations. In 2013, between 50-67% of the individual samples from each site were greater than 40 CFU/100 ml. However, during the spring flow sampling period, all the sites were within the allowable limits.

Concentrations of metals in streambed sediments were generally below values that might result in adverse effects on biota, with a few notable exceptions. The most downstream Ketchikan Creek site had copper and arsenic concentrations above threshold effects levels (TEL)1. Additionally, all stream sites except upper Hoadley had cadmium concentrations above the TEL. Copper and zinc concentrations increased in the downstream direction in all streams, consistent with urban inputs; concentrations of both metals were much higher in outfall sediment samples than most stream sediment samples, with

1 Threshold Effects Level (TEL) refers to an empirically derived concentration below which adverse effects on biota are thought to be unlikely to occur.

copper concentrations exceeding the TEL. Outfall samples also had arsenic concentrations above the TEL and sometimes above the Probable Effect Level (PEL)2. Finally, sediment PAHs were above the TEL in the Carlanna and Ketchikan Creek outfalls but were below the TEL or not detected in all the stream sediment samples and the Hoadley Creek outfall.

Biotic sampling indicated decreasing stream health between the upstream and downstream sampling locations in Hoadley and Ketchikan creeks. Macroinvertebrate abundance and richness was generally highest at the upstream sites, except for Carlanna Creek, where the upstream site had a lower biotic index score than the downstream site. Minnow trapping could not be completed at all sites due to high water velocities, so only one site on each stream was sampled for fish. Atypical morphology was observed for several juvenile Coho salmon in both Ketchikan and Carlanna Creeks, with irregular parr marks and increased height to length ratios.

Additional Sampling

Both Ketchikan Indian Community (in conjunction with ADEC) and the City of Ketchikan performed additional screening sampling for metals and bacteria in Ketchikan, Carlanna and Hoadley Creeks and their tributaries and stormwater outfalls during 2018. Their findings largely correspond to earlier results.

Bacteria were not a persistent or acute issue in Carlanna Creek, although higher concentrations were observed in samples from the outfall and downstream site. Cadmium in sediment was elevated above TEL in a few samples, including the reference site, and copper and zinc concentrations in stream water exceeded acute criteria once in both the reference and downstream sites. In Hoadley Creek, E. coli was not elevated, but there were a few high fecal coliform concentrations in the downstream site. One sediment sample at the downstream site had a cadmium concentration above the TEL. In contrast to Carlanna and Hoadley Creeks, Ketchikan Creek exhibited more water and sediment quality issues. Fecal coliform concentrations were elevated in all urban stream samples, including the sampling site above the Powerhouse, before any significant urban inputs, although extensive outfall and tributary sampling in the Ketchikan Creek watershed found high fecal coliform concentrations in many outfalls, indicating important urban contributions. E. coli concentrations were occasionally elevated across the stream sampling sites, with outfall samples indicating urban inputs.

More sampling details and results can be found in Jensen et al. (2014), Section II. Causes and Sources of Pollution: Stormwater runoff in Ketchikan, and in Appendix C: Ketchikan Creek Bacteria Data.

II. Causes and Sources of Pollution Bacteria in freshwater and marine waters can come from many sources. In the Ketchikan area, there are potential point and nonpoint sources that originate on land and in water. These include public and private sewer treatment system outfalls; waste from private boats at launches, in harbors and at sea;

deficient onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS); sewer line deficiencies; wildlife, pet, and human

2 Probable Effects Level (PEL) refers to an empirically derived concentration above which adverse effects on biota are thought to be likely to occur. TELs and PELs referred to here are from NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables (SQuiRTs).

https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/SQuiRTs.pdf https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/SQuiRTs.pdf feces deposited on land or in the water; and cruise ships and ferries. Figure 6 shows the spatial distribution of some of these potential sources, and Table 2 shows potential sources at each of the water quality monitoring locations. These bacteria sources and the areas where they are potentially important are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Figure 6. Distribution of some potential sources in the Ketchikan area. Note that the septic system layer was developed in 2014, and likely does not reflect the most up-to-date data, but provides a good overview of where septic systems are generally used.

Table 2. Potential point and nonpoint sources of bacteria present in waters near each monitoring location

*Private sewer treatment systems in this area were connected to the Mountain Point Wastewater Treatment Plant in 2018.

Site ID Individual septic tanks

Private sewer treatment system outfall(s)

Wildlife Pet feces

Private watercraft

Cruise ships, Ferries

Mountain Point sewer treatment system outfall(s)

Sewer collection system deficiencies

Charcoal Point sewer treatment system emergency bypass discharge

Boats at boat launches & in harbor areas

Knudson Cove Beacon Hill

South Point Higgins Shull

Sunset South Refuge Cove

Thomas Basin Seaport

Rotary Beach Rotary Pool

Mt Point Surprise Beach* Mt Point Cultural Food*

Herring Cove

Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) outfalls Public sewer treatment outfalls include the City’s Charcoal Point WWTF and the Borough’s Mountain Point, Point Higgins, Waterfall South and Waterfall North WWTFs. There are many other private sewer treatment outfalls along the coast. Permitted facilities’ outfalls are generally geolocated, but private outfalls from individual homes and common collectors that serve groups of homes, which are not currently required to have permits, have not been exhaustively mapped.

Charcoal Point WWTF The Charcoal Point WWTF (Permit No. AK0021440) serves the residents (~8,300) of the City of Ketchikan and can also accept waste from ferries and cruise ships. Under the Clean Water Act, municipal WWTFs are required to implement primary treatment (separate solids from liquids) and secondary treatment (biologically remove organic material) before wastewater is discharged. However, Charcoal Point, like many other WWTFs that discharge to marine waters, has received a waiver under the US EPA 301(h) program and is currently only required to have primary treatment. The US EPA, not ADEC, is responsible for enforcement and compliance in this case. Currently Charcoal Point WWTF is permitted to discharge effluent with up to 1.5 million CFU/100 ml, with a monthly average of 1 million CFU/100 ml. The discharge point is offshore 110 feet below the surface (Figure 7). The permit allows for a mixing zone (Figure 7), where effluent mixes with ambient water; outside of the mixing zone, water quality standards must be met.

There has been only one reported fecal coliform exceedance in effluent in the past four years (Table 3).

Edge of mixing zone data from 2017, 2018, and 2020 were obtained from ADEC. The median and mean fecal coliform concentrations were 1 and 4.2 CFU/100 ml, respectively, with maximum concentration of 76 CFU/100 ml (n = 138); only 6 samples exceeded 14 CFU/100 ml (Appendix D. Edge of Mixing Zone Data).

Ambient marine water sampling by ADEC in 2019 and 2020 near the outfall showed low fecal coliform concentrations at the surface (See Section 1. Current Conditions: Marine waters).

No direct evidence ties effluent from the Charcoal Point WWTF to beach bacteria, and edge of mixing zone samples have generally shown low fecal coliform concentrations. However, effluent mixing dynamics are not well understood, although tidal flow patterns suggest that most of the effluent would be carried south rather than north (Figure 8), and it is possible that poorly mixed effluent could reach the shoreline and contribute to bacteria at beaches. Current bacteria sampling techniques can neither confirm nor rule out any contribution from Charcoal WWTF.

Table 3. Instances of numeric exceedances reported for effluent from the Charcoal Point WWTF from 2016 to present.

Monitoring Period

Parameter Permit Limit Value

8/3/2018 Fecal coliform, weekly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 1.25 million 1.4 million

Figure 7. Charcoal Point WWTF discharge point (star), zone of initial dilution (red circle) and permitted mixing zone (yellow rectangle).

Figure 8. General direction of currents during Tongass Narrows flood (left) and ebb (right) tides.

(Schematic courtesy of Steven Corporon, former Director of the Harbormaster’s Office in Ketchikan, Alaska.)

Sites Potentially Affected: Thomas Basin, Seaport Beach, Rotary Beach, Mountain Point Surprise Beach and Cultural Food

Mountain Point WWTF The Mountain Point WWTF serves Borough residents from the 2100 block of South Tongass Highway (STH) to Mile 7 of the STH (Permit No. AKG572028). This includes all the Forest Park Subdivision (formerly served by the Forest Park WWTF), the City of Saxman, and all points in between (Figure 9). It is a secondary treatment facility with disinfection of wastewater prior to discharge from a pipe approximately 100 m from shore (Figure 10). Currently, the facility is permitted to discharge effluent with up to 800 CFU/100 ml per day, with a 30-day average of 200 CFU/100 ml. The permit allows for a 100 m radius mixing zone (Figure 10), where effluent is allowed to mix with ambient water; beyond the permitted mixing zone, water quality standards must be met. Monthly monitoring of effluent over the past four years identified nine instances of bacteria concentrations exceeding permit limits (Table 4).

Table 4. Instances of numeric exceedances reported for effluent from the Mountain Point WWTF from 2016 to March 2021 (ECHO database).

Monitoring Period Parameter Permit Limit Value 8/31/2017 Fecal coliform, monthly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 200 396 5/31/2019 Fecal coliform, monthly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 200 880 5/31/2019 Fecal coliform, daily maximum (CFU/100 ml) 800 2,600 12/31/2019 Fecal coliform, monthly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 200 1,355 12/31/2019 Fecal coliform, daily maximum (CFU/100 ml) 800 2,700 7/31/2020 Fecal coliform, monthly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 200 10,180 7/31/2020 Fecal coliform, daily maximum (CFU/100 ml) 800 20,000 11/30/2020 Fecal coliform, monthly geometric mean (CFU/100 ml) 200 30,005 11/30/2020 Fecal coliform, daily maximum (CFU/100 ml) 800 60,000

The permit stipulates twice per year sampling of the edge of the mixing zone and the shoreline in the mixing zone. ADEC provided these data from two sampling events in 2016 and one sampling event in 2017, 2018 and 2020 (Appendix D. Edge of Mixing Zone Data). No water quality exceedances were reported (mixing zone edge fecal coliform concentration (CFU/100 ml) minimum = 1, max = 11, mean = 6; shoreline in mixing zone minimum = 1, max = 17, mean = 5.8).

Figure 9. Mountain Point WWTF Service Area

Figure 10. Mountain Point WWTF discharge point and permitted mixing zone.

Sites Potentially Affected: Mountain Point Surprise Beach and Cultural Food

Onsite wastewater treatment systems Residences and businesses (~2,000) outside of areas served by City and Borough WWTFs have OWTSs. In some cases, wastewater from multiple OWTSs is combined into a single “common collector” pipe and marine outfall. In the Ketchikan area, soil and water conditions are not conducive to soil absorption systems from either septic tanks or secondary treatment units. Advanced treatment units with either an onsite soil absorption system or marine outfall are the most common types of wastewater systems installed. Advance treatment systems generally employ aeration systems to achieve higher quality effluent prior to discharge to a soil absorption system or to an outfall. Current construction standards require disinfection (usually UV) of the wastewater prior to discharge to a marine outfall. Inspections have found that failed aerators are not uncommon, greatly increasing fecal coliform concentrations.

Systems connected to marine outfalls Many residences and business outside of the areas served by the City’s and Borough’s WWTFs have an OWTS that is connected to a marine outfall. No private residential marine outfalls (serving single- or two-family residences on one lot) and few common collectors (serving multiple lots or residences with different ownership) are eligible for discharge permit coverage, and these have not been thoroughly spatially inventoried. Although these systems are required to meet performance standards of secondary treatment with disinfection to achieve mean fecal coliform concentrations of less than 400 CFU/100 ml in seven days, and 200 CFU/100 ml in 30 days, no monitoring is required so it is unclear the extent to which these outfalls may be contributing to bacteria loading at beaches. Legacy systems without disinfection likely still exist and are of particular concern, but these are not easily identified from existing records.

Outfalls from small publicly owned treatment works and outfalls and privately owned treatment plants used at businesses like lodges are permitted and monitored (Table 5, ECHO database). From 2016 through March 2021, over one third of the reported samples resulted in numeric exceedances of end-of-pipe permitted effluent limits for fecal coliform, with overall median and average concentrations of 30,000 and 398,157 CFU/100 ml, respectively. No information was available in the Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database on whether edge-of-mixing zone limits were met. If effluent quality in permitted systems is representative of all marine outfalls, which are pervasive along the coast outside of City and Borough sewer service areas, these systems may be an important source of fecal bacteria contamination at many beach sites.

Table 5. Permitted common collectors and private WWTFs, and summaries of fecal coliform concentrations in effluent from monitoring events from 2016 through March 2021 (data obtained from the ECHO database March 2021).

Permitted Outfall (Permit No.)

Fecal coliform concentration (CFU/100 ml) Number of samples

Data Date range

Permit Information

Median Mean Max daily fecal coliform (CFU/100 ml) Max daily discharge

(gal per day) Sampling

Frequency Clover Pass Resort (AKG572010) 2,000,000 3,824,375 16 May 2017 -

Sep 2020 800 6,000 Monthly

Clover Subdivision (AKG571025) 17,723 91,844 57 Jan 2016 -

Jan 2021 150,000 11,000 Monthly

Edgewater Inn (AKG572030) 50,000 50,000 1 Dec 2016 -

Dec 2016 800 5,000 Quarterly

Eichner Subdivision (AKG571003) 50,000 215,480 15 Mar 2016 -

Nov 2017 150,000 15,000 Monthly

Gena Road Subdivision (AKG571047) 60,000 164,876 19 Apr 2016 -

Dec 2020 150,000 5,000 Quarterly

Herring Bay (common collector) (AKG571043) 90,000 218,237 12 Jan 2018 -

Sep 2020 150,000 5,000 Quarterly

Salmon Falls Resort (AKG572038) 20 20 1 Jun 2018 -

Jun 2018 800 7,400 Monthly

Vallenar View (AKG572047) 45 222,660 52 Jul 2016 -

Jan 2021 800 20,000 Monthly

Victorson Court (AKG571026) 130,000 464,470 22 Jan 2016 -

Jan 2021 150,000 5,000 Quarterly

Ward Cove Industrial Site WWTF (AK0053384) 10 41 28 Apr 2016 -

Feb 2021 43 Report Monthly

Waterfall Creek North Outfall #1 (AKG571038) 110,000 396,985 59 Jan 2016 -

Feb 2021 150,000* 17,000 Monthly

Waterfall Creek South Outfall #2 (AKG571038) 30,000 247,308 59 Jan 2016 -

Feb 2021 150,000* 22,000 Monthly

*The Waterfall Creek permit requires monitoring at the edge of the mixing zone twice per year, with a daily limit of 43 FC/100 ml. No mixing zone data was available in the ECHO database.

The Borough currently provides the following services for various marine outfalls authorized to discharge under general permits through the APDES program:

• Mountain Point WWTF (AKG572028): The Borough owns and operates this community secondary wastewater treatment plant. This system is a sequencing batch reactor that provides service to nearly all residents of Miles 2 – 7 S. Tongass Highway, including all residents of the City of Saxman.

• Clover Island View Subdivision WW Treatment Facility (AKG571025): Sampling services for this privately owned community collector outfall. All connected residents utilize onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) for secondary treatment prior to their effluent being discharged through the collective outfall.

• Victorson Court Sewer Outfall (AKG 571026): Sampling services for this privately owned community collector outfall. All connected residents utilize onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) for secondary treatment prior to their effluent being discharged through the collective outfall.

• Point Higgins (2003DB0092-1027): Sampling services for this Borough-owned community collector outfall. All connected residents and Point Higgins Elementary School utilize onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) for secondary treatment prior to their effluent being discharged through the collective outfall.

• Waterfall Creek Subdivision Sewer Outfalls – South & North (AKG571038): Sampling services and operations for these two Borough-owned community collector outfall. All connected residents utilize onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) for secondary treatment prior to their effluent being discharged through the collective outfall.

In general, those properties for which the Borough provides sampling services that remain under General Permit AKG571000 are common collector outfalls accumulating secondary treated effluent from onsite wastewater treatment systems. General Permit AKG572000 generally covers single plants which treat a community of properties (e.g., Mountain Point, Clover Island View) or lodges or other commercial endeavors.

Sites potentially affected: Knudson Cove, Beacon Hill, South Point Higgins, Shull Beach, Sunset Beach, South Refuge Cove, Herring Cove. Sites especially close to marine outfalls are likely to be the most severely affected by wastewater discharge.

Septic systems with soil absorption systems Many residences outside of the City and Borough utility service areas have wastewater systems with onsite disposal to a soil absorption system, especially those farther from the coast. When properly installed and maintained, septic systems with soil absorption systems can be effective at removing bacteria. However, there is no known data that provides information about the efficacy of these systems at removing bacteria in the Ketchikan area. Bacteria removal can be less effective when soils are coarser, wetter, or cooler, when preferential water flowpaths develop and “short-circuit” treatment (Wang et al., 2021), as well as when the distance from the soil absorption system to groundwater and surface water is shorter. The Borough has identified only three systems that required maintenance during the past three years, including two on the waterfront; however, the detrimental conditions described above can be present without obvious symptoms of septic system failure. Additionally, watershed-scale studies from other regions have found that the density of septic systems is correlated with fecal bacteria contamination of surface water (Verhougstraete et al., 2015; Sowah et al., 2018).

In the Ketchikan area, disposal to a conventional soil absorption system is not common due to the soils and terrain; special design considerations, such as sand liner, blasting of bedrock, above ground mound, etc. are nearly always required. Waivers are occasionally requested to build wastewater systems with soil absorption systems within 100 feet of surface water. Additional disinfection treatment, such as ultraviolet light, can be installed in these instances, but ADEC does not have information about the frequency that these waivers are granted or how often additional treatment is required.

Sites Potentially Affected: Sites outside the municipal WWTF service areas; notably Knudson Cove, Beacon Hill, South Point Higgins, Shull Beach, Sunset Beach, South Refuge Cove, and Herring Cove.

Private boats Human waste that is dumped from private boats in harbors or at sea can contribute to elevated bacteria concentrations at beaches. Live-aboard boats are required to have US Coast Guard-approved marine sanitation devices (MSD) (Type I, II, or III) and pump out their waste at pump-out stations to prevent direct discharges of untreated waste into the water. However, anecdotally, the pump-out station at Thomas Basin gets limited use, and harbor residents have been observed dumping “honey buckets” of raw human waste directly into the water. Reports of direct dumping are investigated, and violators can and have been evicted from the harbor.

Sites potentially affected: All beach sites. Sites at/near harbors, especially those with many live-aboard vessels (Thomas Basin), are likely to be the most severely affected by waste from private boats.

Cruise ships Large cruise ships discharging into Alaskan waters must have an installed and operational Advanced Wastewater Treatment System (AWTS), or a system that achieves a quality of effluent that is comparable to that achieved by vessels employing an AWTS (AS 46.03.462). These systems are capable of treating water so that it meets stringent water quality standards before it leaves the ship. Not all cruise ships that operate in Alaska discharge while in State waters.

Cruise ships must sample their wastewater discharges according to ADEC-approved sampling plans and submit results to ADEC. Large cruise ships must meet General Permit requirements at the end of pipe;

no mixing zone is provided for bacteria. Permit limits for fecal coliform are a monthly geometric mean of 14 FC/100 ml and a daily maximum of 40 FC/100 ml with a frequency of twice per month.

Fecal coliform concentrations were below detection limits in most samples from 2016 through 2019;

there were only 18 instances (of 876 samples total) when ships exceeded their permit limits for fecal coliform across all samples taken in Alaskan waters (Table 6). No compliance samples were taken in Ketchikan in 2017 or 2018, and only three samples were taken in 2019. However, if the ships’ treatment systems are consistently functional, they are unlikely to be a dominant source of bacteria in Ketchikan’s waters.

Monitoring results:

Table 6. Large cruise ship compliance sampling results for fecal coliform, both underway and stationary (https://dec.alaska.gov/water/cruise-ships/cruise-reports/). For 2016-2018, the summary statistics reflect samples of both mixed wastewater and graywater. One sample was taken in Ketchikan 2016; no samples were taken in Ketchikan in 2017 or 2018; 3 samples were taken in Ketchikan in 2019. No cruise ships visited Southeast Alaska in 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, so there is no wastewater data from that year. All values are in units of CFU/100 ml.

2016 2017 2018

Mixed wastewater Graywater Number of exceedances of daily max 4 1 4 9 0

Average 9.97 1.26 2.68 16 0.31 Median Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Min Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect Max 840 48 130 >600 15 Number of samples 196 194 230 202 54

Sites potentially affected: South Point Higgins, Shull Beach, Sunset Beach, South Refuge Cove, Seaport Beach, Rotary Park Beach and Pool, Mountain Point Surprise Beach and Cultural Food.

Ferries and small cruise ships Small cruise ships and ferries (between 50 and 250 overnight passengers) must have an ADEC-approved Best Management Practices plan (BMP) to discharge in State waters. The BMP must include efforts to minimize impacts to the environment and human health. Blackwater must be treated through a MSD II system, and ADEC generally requires that discharges are minimized in port. Most vessels discharge only while the vessel is underway at speeds of greater than 6 knots and 1 nautical mile from shore. Vessels that discharge within 1 nautical mile or at speeds less than 6 knots must take measures to protect the environment to the maximum extent feasible (18 AAC 69.046(c)(5)(B)). Discharge in protected spawning areas and within areas designated under AS 16.20 as refuges, sanctuaries and critical habitat areas is prohibited. Vessels operating in Alaska are subject to seasonal sampling to demonstrate that their wastewater treatment system is operating correctly, ideally at the beginning of the cruise season. If treated wastewater has elevated bacteria concentrations, actions must be taken to improve treatment system performance, and re-sampling is required to confirm improvement. Vessels that operate in the Ketchikan area may opt to voluntarily hold or minimize wastewater discharges. Notably, some smaller cruise vessels do not have graywater treatment systems installed on board.

Sampling results from small cruise ships and ferries across Alaska during the past three years indicate that, despite the implementation of BMPs, effluent from on board treatment systems is not consistently meeting water quality standards (Table 7), suggesting some of these ships could contribute to local elevated bacterial levels.

https://dec.alaska.gov/water/cruise-ships/cruise-reports/

Monitoring Results:

Table 7. Small cruise ship and ferry compliance sampling results for fecal coliform for all of Alaska. No small cruise ships were sampled in Ketchikan during 2016-2019. Only 1 small cruise ship operated a partial itinerary in Southeast Alaska in 2020, and no samples were collected that year. All values are in units of CFU/100 ml.

(mixed wastewater and blackwater)

(mixed wastewater and graywater)

(mixed wastewater and graywater)

(mixed wastewater) (graywater) Number of instances results exceeded AK water quality standards for Type II MSDs

6 5 7 10 4

Average 137,185 1,574,701 1,376,634 321,805 80,801 Median 10 129 81 18 310 Min Non-detect Non-detect Non-detect <2.0 Non-detect Max 2,100,000 16,000,000 19,000,000 3,500,000 520,000 Number of samples 17 12 18 25 7

Sites potentially affected: South Point Higgins, Shull Beach, Sunset Beach, South Refuge Cove, Seaport Beach, Rotary Park Beach and Pool, Mountain Point Surprise Beach and Cultural Food.

Pets and wildlife Feces from pets and wildlife that are deposited onto the landscape can be washed into streams and the marine environment in rainwater and snowmelt runoff. A study found that a single average sized dog “fecal event” can contain enough bacteria to contaminate an Olympic-sized swimming pool, and that bacteria were much more concentrated in dog feces than bird feces (Wright et al., 2009).

Although pet waste bags and receptacles are supplied at Borough parks, City docks and harbors, and along the downtown promenade, dog feces are regularly observed on beaches, city sidewalks and docks (Figure 11). Dogs have been observed defecating directly into the water off docks.