DOCSLIB.ORG

Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (Pfass) in San Francisco Bay: Synthesis and Strategy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (Pfass) in San Francisco Bay: Synthesis and Strategy CONTRIBUTION NO. 867 JUNE 2018 Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in San Francisco Bay: Synthesis and Strategy Prepared by Meg Sedlak, Rebecca Sutton, Adam Wong, and Diana Lin San Francisco Estuary Institute SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE • CLEAN WATER PROGRAM/RMP • 4911 CENTRAL AVE., RICHMOND, CA • WWW.SFEI.ORG Suggested citation: Sedlak, M., Sutton R., Wong A., Lin, Diana. 2018. Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in San Francisco Bay: Synthesis and Strategy. RMP Contribution No. 867. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond CA. 130 pages. FINAL JUNE 2018 Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction and Overview of PFAS Chemistry, Uses, Concerns and Management ........................ 4 1.1 Objectives of this Report............................................................................................................... 4 1.2 PFASs: Structure and Uses ............................................................................................................ 4 1.2.1 Perfluoroalkyl Substances ..................................................................................................... 5 1.2.2 Polyfluoroalkyl Substances ................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Uses of PFASs ................................................................................................................................ 7 1.4 Growing Concerns: Ubiquitous Contamination, Hot Spots, and Toxicity Studies ........................ 8 1.4.1 Widely Detected Contaminants with Uniquely High Bay Biota Concentrations................... 8 1.4.2 Toxicity .................................................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Fate in the Environment and Degradation Products .................................................................. 10 1.6 Management Actions .................................................................................................................. 11 1.6.1 International ....................................................................................................................... 11 1.6.2 Federal ................................................................................................................................ 12 1.6.3 California ............................................................................................................................. 13 2.0 Summary of PFAS Occurrence and Trends in San Francisco Bay .................................................... 14 2.1 PFASs in San Francisco Bay: Abiotic Environment ...................................................................... 14 2.1.1 Water .................................................................................................................................. 14 2.1.2 Sediment ............................................................................................................................. 17 2.2 PFASs in San Francisco Bay Bivalves ........................................................................................... 21 2.3 PFASs in San Francisco Bay Fish .................................................................................................. 21 2.3.1 Prey Fish .............................................................................................................................. 22 2.3.2 Sport Fish ............................................................................................................................ 25 2.4 PFASs in San Francisco Bay Double-crested Cormorant Eggs ..................................................... 27 2.5 PFASs in San Francisco Bay Harbor Seals .................................................................................... 31 3.0 PFAS Contamination and Potential Risks ........................................................................................ 34 3.1 Risks to Humans: PFAS Levels in Fish Pose Possible Risk for Human Consumption ................... 34 3.2 Risks to Wildlife ........................................................................................................................... 34 3.2.1 PFASs Are Unlikely to Pose Risks to Bivalves ...................................................................... 34 3.2.2 PFASs Are Unlikely to Pose Risks to Fish ............................................................................. 34 3.2.3 PFASs May Pose Risks to Birds ............................................................................................ 35 3.2.4 PFASs May Pose Risks to Harbor Seals ................................................................................ 36 ii FINAL JUNE 2018 3.3 Potential for Risks: Summary ...................................................................................................... 37 4.0 PFAS Pathways and Loads to San Francisco Bay ............................................................................. 38 4.1 Pathways of PFASs to the Bay: Stormwater and Large Tributaries ............................................ 38 4.2 Pathways of PFASs to Bay: Wastewater Effluent ....................................................................... 41 4.3 Other Pathways to the Bay: Groundwater, Spills and Releases, and Air Deposition ................. 43 4.4 Loadings of PFASs to the Bay: Modeling Inputs and Ambient Concentrations .......................... 45 5.0 Past and Future Trends in Contamination ...................................................................................... 49 5.1 Trends of PFASs in Abiotic Media ............................................................................................... 49 5.1.1 Wastewater ......................................................................................................................... 49 5.2 Trends of PFASs in San Francisco Bay Biota ................................................................................ 50 5.2.1 Declining PFOS Concentrations in Cormorant Eggs ............................................................ 50 5.2.2 Declining PFOS Concentrations in Seals .............................................................................. 52 5.3 Anticipated Future Trends .......................................................................................................... 52 5.3.1 Continued Detection of Perfluoroalkyl Carboxylates and Sulfonates ................................ 52 5.3.2 Expanding Number of Unknown Alternatives .................................................................... 54 6.0 CEC Strategy: Classification of PFASs in the Tiered Risk Framework ............................................. 55 6.1 Recommendation for PFOS (maintain as moderate concern) .................................................... 56 6.2 Recommendation for long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylates (moderate concern) .................. 56 6.3 Recommendation for other PFASs (possible concern) ............................................................... 57 7.0 PFAS Monitoring and Management Strategy ................................................................................. 58 7.1 Monitoring Strategy .................................................................................................................... 58 References .................................................................................................................................................. 61 iii FINAL JUNE 2018 List of Figures Figure 1 Structures of Several Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Figure 2 Concentrations of PFOA in Water Figure 3 Location of Sediment Sites Analyzed for PFASs Figure 4 PFAS Concentrations in Sediment Figure 5 PFOS Concentrations in Prey Fish Figure 6 Location of Sampling Sites for Sport Fish Figure 7 Concentrations of PFOS in Sport Fish Figure 8 Location of Bird and Seal Sampling Sites Figure 9 Concentrations of PFASs in Cormorant Eggs Figure 10 Concentrations of PFASs in Seal Blood Figure 11 Location of Stormwater Sampling Sites for PFASs Figure 12 Trends in Averages of Select PFASs in Effluent Figure 13 Trends of PFOS in Cormorants Eggs Appendix List of Tables Table 1 Half-lives of Select PFASs Table 2a Open Water PFAS Concentrations Table 2b Open Water PFAS Precursors Concentrations Table 3a Bay Sediment PFAS Concentrations Table 3b Bay Sediment PFAS Precursor Concentrations Table 4 Bivalve PFAS Concentrations Table 5 Prey Fish PFAS Concentrations Table 6 PFASs in Sport Fish Table 7 PFASs in Cormorant Eggs Table 8 PFASs in Harbor Seals Table 9a PFASs in Stormwater iv FINAL JUNE 2018 Table 9b PFAS Precursors in Stormwater Table 10a PFASs in Effluent Table 10b PFAS Precursors in Effluent Table 11 Comparison of Model versus Monitored Concentrations for Water in Bay Area Subembayments v FINAL JUNE 2018 Glossary of Acronyms of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) Chain Subclass Chemicals length Acronym Perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCAs) Perfluorobutanoic acid C4 PFBA Perfluoropentanoic acid C5 PFPeA Perfluorohexanoic acid C6 PFHxA Perfluoroheptanoic acid C7 PFHpA Perfluorooctanoic acid* C8 PFOA Perfluorononanoic acid* C9 PFNA Perfluorodecanoic acid* C10 PFDA Perfluorundecanoic acid* C11 PFUnDA Perfluorododecanoic acid* C12 PFDoA Perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acids Perfluorobutane sulfonic (PFSAs) acid C4 PFBS Perfluoropentane sulfonic acid C5 PFPeS Perfluorohexane
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Effectiveness of Larger-Area Exclusion Booming to Protect Sensitive Sites in San Francisco Bay
    Effectiveness of Larger-Area Exclusion Booming to Protect Sensitive Sites in San Francisco Bay Final Report Prepared for California Department of Fish & Game Oil Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) 425 G Executive Court North Fairfield, CA 94534-4019 Prepared by Dagmar Schmidt Etkin, PhD Environmental Research Consulting 41 Croft Lane Cortlandt Manor, NY 10567-1160 SSEP Contract No. P0775013 30 September 2009 Effectiveness of Larger-Area Exclusion Booming to Protect Sensitive Sites in San Francisco Bay Final Report Prepared by Dagmar Schmidt Etkin, PhD Environmental Research Consulting 41 Croft Lane Cortlandt Manor, NY 10567-1160 USA Prepared at the Request of Carl Jochums California Department of Fish & Game Oil Spill Prevention and Response (OSPR) 425 G Executive Court North Fairfield, CA 94534-4019 Submitted to Bruce Joab, SSEP Coordinator and Contract Manager Office of Spill Prevention and Response CA Department of Fish and Game 1700 K Street, Suite 250 Sacramento, CA 95811 Phone 916-322-7561 SSEP Contract No. PO775013 Note: This study was conducted in collaboration with Applied Science Associates (ASA), Inc., of South Kingston, RI, under SSEP Contract No. PO775010. ASA submitted a separate Final Report entitled Transport and Impacts of Oil Spills in San Francisco Bay – Implications for Response. i Effectiveness of Larger-Area Exclusion Booming to Protect Sensitive Sites in San Francisco Bay Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Marsh Creek State Park
    John Marsh Historic Trust presents STONE HOUSE HERITAGE DAY Marsh Creek State Park 21789 Marsh Creek Road @ Vintage Parkway th Saturday, October 17 10 am – 4 pm Get an up-close look, inside and out, at Marsh’s 159-year-old mansion The John Marsh Story Scheduled Presentations Hear the story of the remarkable life of John Marsh, pioneer who blazed a trail across 10:00 Opening Welcome America and was the first American to settle in 11:00 Presenting Dr. John Marsh Contra Costa County. 11:00 Guided hike begins GUIDED HIKE ($5 donation suggested) Enjoy an easy, guided hike through 3 miles of 11:30 Stone House history Marsh Creek State Park. 12:00 Ancient archaeology of MCSP Archaeological Discoveries 12:00-1:30 Brentwood Concert Band View important archeological finds dating 12:30 Marsh Creek State Park plans 7,000 to 3,000 years old, including items associated with an ancient village. 1:30 Professional ropers/Vaqueros Native American Life 2:30 Presenting Dr. John Marsh See members of the Ohlone tribe making brushes, rope, jewelry and acorn meal. Enjoy Kids’ Activities All Day Rancho Los Meganos Experience the work of the Vaquero, who Rope a worked John Marsh’s rancho. ‘steer’ Period Music Hear music presented by the Brentwood Concert Band. Take a ‘Pioneer family’ Westward Movement picture how Marsh triggered the pre-Gold Rush Learn migration to California, which established the historic California Trail. Co-hosted by Support preservation of the John Marsh House with your tax deductible contribution today at www.johnmarshhouse.com at www.razoo.com/john -marsh-historic-trust, or by check to Sponsored by John Marsh Historic Trust, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Alameda, a Geographical History, by Imelda Merlin
    Alameda A Geographical History by Imelda Merlin Friends of the Alameda Free Library Alameda Museum Alameda, California 1 Copyright, 1977 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 77-73071 Cover picture: Fernside Oaks, Cohen Estate, ca. 1900. 2 FOREWORD My initial purpose in writing this book was to satisfy a partial requirement for a Master’s Degree in Geography from the University of California in Berkeley. But, fortunate is the student who enjoys the subject of his research. This slim volume is essentially the original manuscript, except for minor changes in the interest of greater accuracy, which was approved in 1964 by Drs. James Parsons, Gunther Barth and the late Carl Sauer. That it is being published now, perhaps as a response to a new awareness of and interest in our past, is due to the efforts of the “Friends of the Alameda Free Library” who have made a project of getting my thesis into print. I wish to thank the members of this organization and all others, whose continued interest and perseverance have made this publication possible. Imelda Merlin April, 1977 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge her indebtedness to the many individuals and institutions who gave substantial assistance in assembling much of the material treated in this thesis. Particular thanks are due to Dr. Clarence J. Glacken for suggesting the topic. The writer also greatly appreciates the interest and support rendered by the staff of the Alameda Free Library, especially Mrs. Hendrine Kleinjan, reference librarian, and Mrs. Myrtle Richards, curator of the Alameda Historical Society. The Engineers’ and other departments at the Alameda City Hall supplied valuable maps an information on the historical development of the city.
    [Show full text]
  • The Third Crossing
    The Third Crossing A Megaproject in a Megaregion www.thirdcrossing.org Final Report, February 2017 Transportation Planning Studio Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the Department of City and Regional Planning (DCRP) at the College of Environmental Design (CED) at UC Berkeley, the University of California Transportation Center and Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS), UC Berkeley for support. A special thanks also goes to the helpful feedback from studio instructor Karen Trapenberg Frick and UC Berkeley faculty and researchers including Jesus Barajas and Jason Corburn. We also acknowledge the tremendous support and insights from colleagues at numerous public agencies and non-profit organizations throughout California. A very special thanks goes to David Ory, Michael Reilly, and Fletcher Foti of MTC for their gracious support in running regional travel and land use models, and to Professor Paul Waddell and Sam Blanchard of UrbanSim, Inc. for lending their resources and expertise in land use modeling. We also thank our classmates Joseph Poirier and Lee Reis; as well as David Eifler, Teresa Caldeira, Jennifer Wolch, Robert Cervero, Elizabeth Deakin, Malla Hadley, Leslie Huang and other colleagues at CED; and, Alexandre Bayen, Laura Melendy and Jeanne Marie Acceturo of ITS Berkeley. About Us We are a team of 15 graduate students in City Planning, Transportation Engineering, and Public Health. This project aims to facilitate a conversation about the future of transportation between the East Bay and San Francisco and in the larger Northern California megaregion. We are part of the Department of City and Regional Planning in the UC Berkeley College of Environmental Design, with support from the University of California Transportation Center and The Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Desilva Island
    SUISUN BAY 139 SUISUN BAY 140 SUISUN BAY SUISUN BAY Located immediately downstream of the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, Suisun Bay is the largest contiguous wetland area in the San Francisco Bay region. Suisun Bay is a dynamic, transitional zone between the freshwater input of the Central Valley rivers and the tidal influence of the upper San Francisco Estuary. This area supports a substantial number of nesting herons and egrets, including three of the largest colonies in the region. Although suburban development is rampant along the nearby Interstate 80 corridor to the north, most of the Suisun Bay area is protected from heavy development by the California Department of Fish and Game and a number of private duck clubs. Black- Active Great crowned or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret County active Page 501 Bohannon Solano Active 142 502 Campbell Ranch Solano Active 143 503 Cordelia Road Solano 1998 145 504 Gold Hill Solano Active 146 505 Green Valley Road Solano Active 148 506 Hidden Cove Solano Active 149 507 Joice Island Solano 1994 150 508 Joice Island Annex Solano Active 151 509 Sherman Lake Sacramento Active 152 510 Simmons Island Solano 1994 153 511 Spoonbill Solano Active 154 512 Tree Slough Solano Active 155 513 Volanti Solano Active 156 514 Wheeler Island Solano Active 157 SUISUN BAY 141 142 SUISUN BAY Bohannon Great Blue Herons and Great Egrets nest in a grove of eucalyptus trees on a levee in Cross Slough, about 1.8 km east of Beldons Landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Break and Marsh Creek Water Quality and Habitat Restoration Program
    Big Break and Marsh Creek Water Quality and Habitat Restoration Program Project Information 1. Proposal Title: Big Break and Marsh Creek Water Quality and Habitat Restoration Program 2. Proposal applicants: Mary Small, California State Coastal Conservancy John Elam, City of Brentwood Nancy Thomas, Contra Costa Resource Conservation District Chris Kitting, California State University at Hayward Joy Andrews, California State University at Hayward Steve Barbata, Delta Science Center John Cain, Natural Heritage Institute 3. Corresponding Contact Person: Mary Small State Coastal Conservancy 1330 Broadway 1100 Oakland, CA 94612 510 286-4181 [email protected] 4. Project Keywords: At-risk species, fish Habitat Restoration, Wetland Water Quality Assessment & Monitoring 5. Type of project: Implementation_Pilot 6. Does the project involve land acquisition, either in fee or through a conservation easement? No 7. Topic Area: Shallow Water, Tidal and Marsh Habitat 8. Type of applicant: State Agency 9. Location - GIS coordinates: Latitude: 38.003 Longitude: -121.693 Datum: NAD83 Describe project location using information such as water bodies, river miles, road intersections, landmarks, and size in acres. The Marsh Creek watershed drains from Mt. Diablo into the Delta at Big Break. The proposed lower Marsh Creek restoration site is approximately 30 acres adjacent to the creek to the west, extending north from the Contra Costa Canal to the bridge on the East Bay Regional Park District’s bicycle path. The proposed riparian restoration sites are adjacent to Marsh Creek in the City of Brentwood. 10. Location - Ecozone: 1.4 Central and West Delta 11. Location - County: Contra Costa 12. Location - City: Does your project fall within a city jurisdiction? Yes If yes, please list the city: Brentwood and Oakley 13.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: an Overview
    Marine Geology 345 (2013) 3–17 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo Sediment transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: An overview Patrick L. Barnard a,⁎, David H. Schoellhamer b,c, Bruce E. Jaffe a, Lester J. McKee d a U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA, USA b U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center, Sacramento, CA, USA c University of California, Davis, USA d San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA, USA article info abstract Article history: The papers in this special issue feature state-of-the-art approaches to understanding the physical processes Received 29 March 2012 related to sediment transport and geomorphology of complex coastal–estuarine systems. Here we focus on Received in revised form 9 April 2013 the San Francisco Bay Coastal System, extending from the lower San Joaquin–Sacramento Delta, through the Accepted 13 April 2013 Bay, and along the adjacent outer Pacific Coast. San Francisco Bay is an urbanized estuary that is impacted by Available online 20 April 2013 numerous anthropogenic activities common to many large estuaries, including a mining legacy, channel dredging, aggregate mining, reservoirs, freshwater diversion, watershed modifications, urban run-off, ship traffic, exotic Keywords: sediment transport species introductions, land reclamation, and wetland restoration. The Golden Gate strait is the sole inlet 9 3 estuaries connecting the Bay to the Pacific Ocean, and serves as the conduit for a tidal flow of ~8 × 10 m /day, in addition circulation to the transport of mud, sand, biogenic material, nutrients, and pollutants.
    [Show full text]
  • 255 Subpart B—First Coast Guard District
    SUBCHAPTER G—REGATTAS AND MARINE PARADES PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 100.703 Special Local Regulations; Recur- ring Marine Events, Sector St. Peters- NAVIGABLE WATERS burg. 100.704 Special Local Regulations; Marine Subpart A—General Events within the Captain of the Port Charleston. Sec. 100.01 Purpose and intent. 100.713 Annual Harborwalk Boat Race; 100.05 Definition of terms used in this part. Sampit River, Georgetown, SC. 100.10 Coast Guard-State agreements. 100.721 Special Local Regulations; Clear- 100.15 Submission of application. water Super Boat National Champion- 100.20 Action on application for event as- ship, Gulf of Mexico; Clearwater Beach, signed to State regulation by Coast FL. Guard-State agreement. 100.724 Annual Augusta Invitational Rowing 100.25 Action on application for event not Regatta; Savannah River, Augusta, GA. assigned to State regulation by Coast 100.732 Annual River Race Augusta; Savan- Guard-State agreement. nah River, Augusta, GA. 100.30 Approval required for holding event. 100.750–100.799 [Reserved] 100.35 Special local regulations. 100.40 Patrol of the regatta or marine pa- Subpart E—Eighth Coast Guard District rade. 100.45 Establishment of aids to navigation. 100.800 [Reserved] 100.50–100.99 [Reserved] 100.801 Annual Marine Events in the Eighth Coast Guard District. Subpart B—First Coast Guard District 100.850–100.899 [Reserved] 100.100 Special Local Regulations; Regattas and Boat Races in the Coast Guard Sec- Subpart F—Ninth Coast Guard District tor Long Island Sound Captain of the 100.900 [Reserved] Port Zone. 100.901 Great Lakes annual marine events.
    [Show full text]
  • Battle on Many Fronts
    RISING REALITY The Risk The Embarcadero The Future The Shorelines Resources Battle on many fronts The Bay Area faces a common threat along its shores, but must meet it with an array of ambitious and creative responses By John King November 2016 Boardwalks along the edge of the Alviso Salt Marsh restoration project allow visitors to enjoy the surrounding area on the edge of San Francisco Bay in Alviso. Michael Macor, The Chronicle The levee that rings Oakland International Airport seemingly has nothing in common with the salt­crusted stretch of flat land alongside Menlo Park’s Bayfront Park. One is a 7­foot­high line of boulders, an engineered barrier between the tidal flows that surge in through the Golden Gate twice daily and the runways used by 10,000 commercial flights every month. The other is quiet desolation, a white void dotted with stagnant pools of water. Both, though, are examples of the Bay Area shoreline at risk from the long­term effects of sea level rise — and reminders that there’s no single way to prepare for what might lie ahead. RISINGThe REALITY correct remed yThe in someRisk areas The of Embarcadero shoreline will in vTheolv eFuture forms of naThetural Shorelines healing, wi thResources restored and managed marshes that provide habitat for wildlife and trails for people. But when major public investments or large residential communities are at risk, barriers might be needed to keep out water that wants to come in. It’s a future where now­isolated salt ponds near Silicon Valley would be reunited with the larger bay, while North Bay farmland is turned back into marshes.
    [Show full text]
  • Funding the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District
    Contact: Jim Mellander Foreperson 925-608-2621 Contra Costa County Grand Jury Report 17XX Funding the East Contra Costa Fire Protection District TO: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, East Contra Costa Fire Protection District, Brentwood City Council, Oakley City Council SUMMARY The East Contra Costa Fire Protection District (ECCFPD) was formed in 2002 and serves the communities of Brentwood, Oakley, Knightsen, Byron, Discovery Bay, Bethel Island, and the Marsh Creek area. In 2009, ECCFPD closed five of its eight fire stations because it lacked the funds to operate them. ECCFPD receives the lowest allocation of ad valorem property taxes of any fire district in Contra Costa County, 7% of the 1% ad valorem property tax levied on properties. ECCFPD and the cities of Brentwood and Oakley have placed initiatives on the ballot to fund the reopening of closed stations. However, property owners have rejected parcel tax assessments, and the residents of Brentwood and Oakley similarly have rejected utility taxes. Three fire stations are insufficient to provide adequate urban and suburban fire protection coverage in a fire district with a population of 110,000 and an area of 249 square miles. Response times have increased since the closure of stations. ECCFPD should continue its efforts to reopen fire stations by seeking the necessary funding to do so through tax ballot measures and reallocation opportunities. Additionally, the City of Brentwood, the City of Oakley, and the County should collect impact fees for ECCFPD capital improvements,
    [Show full text]
  • Contra Costa County
    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Marsh Creek Watershed Marsh Creek flows approximately 30 miles from the eastern slopes of Mt. Diablo to Suisun Bay in the northern San Francisco Estuary. Its watershed consists of about 100 square miles. The headwaters of Marsh Creek consist of numerous small, intermittent and perennial tributaries within the Black Hills. The creek drains to the northwest before abruptly turning east near Marsh Creek Springs. From Marsh Creek Springs, Marsh Creek flows in an easterly direction entering Marsh Creek Reservoir, constructed in the 1960s. The creek is largely channelized in the lower watershed, and includes a drop structure near the city of Brentwood that appears to be a complete passage barrier. Marsh Creek enters the Big Break area of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta northeast of the city of Oakley. Marsh Creek No salmonids were observed by DFG during an April 1942 visual survey of Marsh Creek at two locations: 0.25 miles upstream from the mouth in a tidal reach, and in close proximity to a bridge four miles east of Byron (Curtis 1942).
    [Show full text]