uget Sound Estuary Program
BUDD INLET ACTION PLAN:

Initial Data Summaries
and Problem Identification
TC-3338-27
FINAL REPORT
April 1988

Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region  X - Office of Puget Sound
Seattle,  Washington


-------
Final Report
TC-3338-27
BUDD INLET ACTION PLAN:
INITIAL DATA SUMMARIES AND
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
by

Tetra Tech, Inc.
for

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region X - Office of Puget Sound
Seattle, Washington
April 1988
Tetra Tech, Inc.
11820 Northup Way, Suite 100
Bellevue, Washington  98005

-------
                                 CONTENTS


                                                                        Page

LIST OF FIGURES                                                          iv

LIST OF TABLES                                                           vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                      viii

     BUDD INLET ACTION PLAN                                            viii
     PHYSICAL SETTING                                                  viii
     DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK                                           ix
     CONTAMINANT SOURCES                                                 ix
     EUTROPHICATION                                                       x
     MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION                                             xi
     SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION OF SEDIMENTS AND BIOTA                      xii
     IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM AREAS                                   xiii
     IDENTIFICATION OF DATA GAPS                                        xiv

INTRODUCTION                                                              1

DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION     4

     OVERVIEW OF DECISION-MAKING PROCESS                                  4
     IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF POLLUTANT VARIABLES                 7
     INDICES OF CONTAMINATION                                            10
     PROBLEM AREA IDENTIFICATION                                         17

PHYSICAL SETTING                                                         20

     PROJECT LOCATION                                                    20
     PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY                                               20
     GEOLOGY                                                             22
     DRAINAGE PATTERNS                                                   23
     CLIMATE                                                             25
     LAND USE                                                            25
     BENEFICIAL USE                                                      26

DATA SUMMARIES                                                           28

     CONTAMINANT SOURCES                                                 28
     EUTROPHICATION                                                      54
     MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION                                             75
     CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION OF SEDIMENTS AND BIOTA                       82

-------
IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM AREAS                                         121

     EUTROPHICATION                                                     121
     MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION                                            122
     TOXIC CONTAMINATION                                                124

IDENTIFICATION OF DATA GAPS                                             127

     EUTROPHICATION                                                     127
     MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION                                            128
     TOXIC CONTAMINATION                                                129
     OTHER DATA GAPS                                                    133

REFERENCES                                                              134

APPENDIX A - DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY TABLES                             A-l

APPENDIX B - MONTHLY AVERAGES OF WATER QUALITY DATA AT ECOLOGY
             AMBIENT MONITORING STATIONS BUD002 AND BUD005              B-l

APPENDIX C - HISTORY OF SEDIMENT DREDGING IN BUDD INLET                 C-l

APPENDIX D - CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN BUDD INLET SEDIMENTS         D-l

APPENDIX E - BUDD INLET BIBLIOGRAPHY                                    E-l

-------
                                  FIGURES


Number                                                                  Page

   1    Budd Inlet study area                                             2

   2    Comprehensive decision-making framework for evaluation of
        environmental degradation                                         5

   3    Preponderance-of-evidence approach to evaluate eutrophication,
        microbial contamination, and toxic chemical contamination in
        Budd Inlet                                                        6

   4    Budd Inlet and Deschutes River drainage boundaries               24

   5    Locations of potential point and nonpoint discharges of
        contaminants to Budd  Inlet                                       29

   6    Locations of storm drain outfalls in Budd Inlet                  32

   7    Locations of water quality and fecal coliform bacteria
        sampling stations in  Budd Inlet                                  56

   8    Theoretical example of vertical profile of dissolved oxygen      57

   9    Annual variation in nitrogen and orthophosphate in surface
        waters at the WDNR Marine Station, 1981-1982                     60

  10    Temporal variation in nitrogen [sum of nitrate (N03) and
        ammonium (NH^)] at Ecology ambient water quality monitoring
        stations BUD002 and BUD005, 1982-1986                            61

  11    Temporal variation in phosphate at Ecology ambient water
        quality monitoring stations BUD002 and BUD005, 1982-1986         64

  12    Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the bottom waters of
        upper Budd Inlet, 17-18 August 1977                              67

  13    Monthly variation in  dissolved oxygen (DO) measured at the
        five LOTT WWTP monitoring stations in 1986                       68

  14    Temporal variation in dissolved oxygen (DO) at Ecology ambient
        water quality monitoring stations BUD002 and BUD005, 1982-1986   70

  15    Daily variation in dissolved oxygen (DO) in the surface,
        middle, and bottom waters near the East Bay Marina,
        summer 1986                                                      72

-------
16    EAR values for concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria
      in water samples from Budd Inlet                                 81

17    Percent total volatile solids (TVS) measured in sediments at
      stations in the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet                 83

18    Percent total volatile solids (TVS) and percent total organic
      carbon (TOC) measured in sediments at stations in the East and
      West Bays of Budd Inlet                                          84

19    Locations of sediment chemistry, water chemistry, shellfish
      bioaccumulation, and sediment toxicity sampling stations in
      the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet, 1982-1987                  86

20    Locations of sediment chemistry, water chemistry, and shellfish
      bioaccumulation sampling stations at the north end of the Port
      of Olympia peninsula                                             87

21    EAR values for concentrations of LPAH in sediments from the
      East and West Bays of Budd Inlet                                 99

22    EAR values for concentrations of HPAH in sediments from the
      East and West Bays of Budd Inlet                                100

23    EAR values for concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc in
      sediments from the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet             101

24    EAR values for concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc in
      sediments from the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet             102

25    EAR values for concentrations of cadmium in sediments from
      the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet                            103

26    EAR values for concentrations of arsenic in sediments from
      the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet                            104

-------
                                   TABLES
Number                                                                  Page
   1    Primary kinds of data used in problem area identification
        and priority ranking                                              9
   2    Preliminary list of contaminants and conventional variables
        of concern in Budd Inlet                                         11
   3    Criteria for prioritizing problem areas in Budd Inlet            19
   4    List of NPDES-permitted waste discharges to Budd Inlet           30
   5    Concentrations  (ug/L) of volatile and extractable organic
        compounds in product and groundwater seep samples collected in
        June 1987 from  Cascade Pole Company                              50
   6    Relative contribution of sources of nitrogen to Budd Inlet       63
   7    Fecal coliform  bacteria data and mean EAR values for Budd
        Inlet, 1982-1987                                                 79
   8    Data limitations of selected studies used in detailed analysis
        of sediment chemistry                                            91
   9    Summary of metal concentrations in sediments from Puget Sound
        reference areas                                                  93
  10    Summary of organic compound concentrations in sediments from
        Puget Sound reference areas                                      94
  11    Concentrations  and EAR values for selected chemical indicators
        in Budd Inlet                                                   105
  12    Comparisons of  contaminant concentrations in Budd Inlet
        sediments with  Puget Sound AET values                           107
  13    Summary of bioaccumulation data for Budd Inlet                  111
  14    Summary of EAR  values for amphipod and oyster larvae
        sediment bioassays                                              116
  15    List of primary and secondary problem areas in Budd Inlet       123
                                     VI

-------
A-l   Data evaluation summary for water quality studies               A-2

A-2   Data evaluation summary for contaminant source studies          A-3

A-3   Data evaluation summary for sediment contamination and
      bioaccumulation studies                                         A-4

A-4   Data evaluation summary for sediment toxicity studies           A-5

A-5   Summary of accepted water quality studies                       A-6

A-6   Summary of accepted contaminant source studies                  A-7

A-7   Summary of accepted sediment contamination and
      bioaccumulation studies                                         A-8

A-8   Summary of accepted sediment toxicity studies                   A-9

B-l   Monthly averages of water quality data collected from 1982
      to 1986 at Ecology ambient water quality monitoring Stations
      BUD002 and BUD005                                               B-l

C-l   List of dredging permits issued for Budd Inlet since 1980       C-2

D-l   Contaminant concentrations in Budd Inlet sediments              D-l
                                  Vll

-------
                             EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BUDD INLET ACTION PLAN

     The  Puget  Sound  Estuary  Program  (PSEP)  is  a  forum  for  interagency
cooperation to identify and recommend solutions to water quality problems in
Puget Sound.   Under this program, the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency
(EPA)  has  identified  Budd   Inlet  as  a  priority  area  for evaluation  of
environmental degradation.   The goals of the  Budd  Inlet  Action  Plan are to
protect the  marine and  estuarine ecosystem  of  Budd Inlet  against  further
degradation  from  anthropogenic  inputs of  contaminants,  to identify degraded
areas that  are  amenable to restorative action,  and  to  protect  recreational
uses from contamination.

     This  report   provides   a   synthesis  of  information  describing  the
geographic extent  and severity of environmental degradation  in  Budd Inlet.
Summaries  of existing  data   are  provided for the  following indicators  of
environmental  degradation:    contaminant  sources,  eutrophication,  microbial
contamination, and  chemical  contamination of sediment and  biota.   Data that
were  collected  from  1982  to 1987 are  presented  in  this  report.   The year
1982  is significant because  the Cities  of Lacey, Olympia,  and Tumwater, and
Thurston  County   (LOTT)  wastewater treatment  plant  (WWTP)  began  secondary
treatment  in August  1982.   Recent data are  also used  to represent present
conditions  in  Budd  Inlet,   and  to  ensure  that  data were collected  and
analyzed  using  current methods.   Occasionally, older  data were  used when
more  recent  data were unavailable  in  the same geographic area.

PHYSICAL SETTING

      Budd  Inlet  is a  shallow estuary at the  extreme southern  end of Puget
Sound.  It  includes the area south of a line joining Cooper Point and Dover
Point  (see  Figure  1  in "Introduction").   The Deschutes  River  is the major
freshwater  source  to Budd  Inlet.    Most urban  and industrial  activity is
                                    viii

-------
located  in  the Cities of  Olympia and Tumwater  at  the southern end  of the
inlet.   Although  Capitol  Lake  is a point  source  to Budd Inlet,  it  is not
included in the study area.

DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK

     A  decision-making   framework  was developed  to  evaluate  environmental
degradation  in  Budd  Inlet.    The decision-making  framework  includes  1)  a
review of available environmental  data,  2)  analyses of spatial  and temporal
trends of  eutrophication,  microbial contamination,  and  toxic  contamination
in Budd  Inlet, 3)  a  limited  ranking of problem areas for interim corrective
actions, and 4) identification  of data gaps.   The decision-making  framework
used in  this report  is based on the framework developed for the Elliott Bay
(Tetra Tech 1985b) and Everett Harbor  (Tetra Tech 1985c) Action Plans.

     Data were  compiled  and evaluated according  to the following  pollutant
categories:  contaminant sources (including groundwater and  surface water),
eutrophication,  microbial   contamination,  and  chemical  contamination  of
sediment  and biota,  including  sediment contamination,  bioaccumulation  in
shellfish,  sediment  and  water  toxicity bioassays,  benthic infaunal  com-
munities, and fish pathology.  These key variables were then used to develop
indices of contamination and biological effects that are based on comparisons
with  either  a  reference  site in  Budd  Inlet,  reference conditions  for Puget
Sound [i.e., elevation above reference (EAR)  values],  or regulatory standards
[e.g.,  apparent  effects  threshold  (AET) values]  and criteria.   Resultant
information was used to  identify  problem areas.

CONTAMINANT SOURCES

     The  following six  major  categories of  point  and nonpoint  sources  of
contaminants to  Budd Inlet  were identified and discussed:   WWTP, combined
sewer overflows  (CSO),  surface runoff, industrial sources, groundwater, and
accidental  spills.   The  LOTT,  Tamoshan, Beverly Beach,  and  Seashore Villa
WWTP  discharge to Budd  Inlet.   The City of Olympia  currently  has  one CSO
that  discharges  to West Bay and  one  CSO  that  discharges to  East  Bay via
Moxlie Creek.  These  CSOs are reported to flow infrequently.  The LOTT WWTP
                                     ix

-------
currently  has one  manually  operated  emergency  overflow that  enters  Budd
Inlet.   Over  50 City  of Olympia  storm  drain  outfalls  discharge  to  Budd
Inlet.  Except for  the  West  Bay drain  on  Port of Olympia property, CSOs and
storm drains have not been investigated for  annual flow estimates or chemical
composition.  In addition to the four WWTP,  two National  Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System  (NPDES)  permits are issued to Chevron  U.S.A.  and Delson
Lumber Company/Olympia  Forest  Products.   Based on  analyses  of sediment and
groundwater  data,   an  NPDES  permit may  be required for the  Cascade  Pole
Company  site.    Analytical   results  from   sediment  and  effluent  samples
collected at the Cascade  Pole Company former NPDES-permitted outfall and the
West  Bay  drain,  and groundwater  and product seep  samples  from the Cascade
Pole site indicate  that these areas are highly contaminated with polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH).

     Other ongoing  and historical  contaminant sources may  include unpermitted
waste  discharges,  a  former  metal plating  facility,   the   U.S.  Maritime
Mothball  Fleet,   plywood  fabricating  facilities,  five marinas,  historical
landfills,  bulk  petroleum storage facilities,  petroleum  spills, and surface
runoff.   Over 80 percent of the  surface runoff flows  into  Budd  Inlet via
natural drainage channels.    The  major pollutant sources  to  Budd  Inlet are
the Cascade Pole Company  and the LOTT WWTP.

EUTROPHICATION

     Water  quality  studies  were  reviewed  to   identify the relationship
between nutrient concentrations and dissolved oxygen  in Budd  Inlet.   Data
were compiled from  the  records  of  four WWTP, the Port of Olympia (i.e., East
Bay  Marina),   the  Ecology  ambient  water  quality  monitoring  program,  URS
(1986), and the Washington Department of Natural  Resources  Marine Station.
Spatial  and  temporal   trends  of   concentrations  of  dissolved oxygen  and
nutrients  were  analyzed,  and  dissolved   oxygen  data  were  compared  with
Washington  State  standards.  A  seasonal depletion in nitrogen  was evident at
stations  away from  the LOTT WWTP  outfall.   A seasonal  decline in dissolved
oxygen  was  observed at  all  sampling stations established  to monitor water
quality.    Oxygen  depletion occurred  to  levels  below  3.0 mg/L  at Ecology
Station BUD002 in West  Bay, at  the Capitol  Lake outfall,  and  in the  East Bay

-------
Marina.  The  Washington  State Class  B water quality standard (5.0 mg/L) was
violated at  each  of  the previously  mentioned  stations,  in  the Fiddlehead
Marina,  north of  the LOTT  30-in  diameter  outfall,  and  in  the navigation
channel northeast of the Cascade Pole Company.  The  distribution of dissolved
oxygen at the water-sediment  interface was not investigated, although oxygen
levels  may  be  lowest   at  this  interface  due  to  sediment oxygen  demand
(Rhoads, D.,  18 November 1987, personal communication).

MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION

     Microbial concentrations (i.e.,  fecal coliform bacteria)  in Budd  Inlet
have been  determined  primarily by a  comprehensive  study of circulation and
water  quality  in  Budd  Inlet  (URS  1986),  in  the  ambient water  quality
monitoring program  conducted  by  Ecology  (U.S.  EPA,  7 January 1988,  personal
communication),  by  the City of  Olympia   (Alan,  R.,   24  September   1987,
personal communication), and  by U.S.  EPA/Washington Department of Social and
Health  Services  (Armstrong,   J., 17  November 1987,  personal communication).
Results  of these  studies  indicate that  water  quality  standards  for  fecal
coliform bacteria,  as measured  by the geometric mean  concentrations,  were
violated  in   several  areas.    Moxlie Creek was  the only  site to  exceed
Washington  State  Class  B water   quality  standards.    High  geometric  mean
concentrations  were  also  calculated  for Ellis  Cove,   Butler  Cove,  Boston
Harbor, Priest Point, southern Tykle  Cove, and areas near  the Tamoshan  WWTP,
Beverly  Beach  WWTP,   Seashore Villa WWTP,  and  Athens  Beach.    Seasonal
variability  of fecal  coliform bacteria concentrations were not observed at
offshore stations,  but were  observed at  nearshore stations.  Data collected
by  URS  (1986)  indicated that  the major  sources of bacteria  loading  were
Moxlie Creek,  LOTT  WWTP, and  Capitol  Lake  (as determined at  the tidal gate).

     Nonpoint  sources  of microbial   contamination in  Budd  Inlet  include
contributions  from surface  runoff from  hobby  farms, live-aboards  in  five
Olympia marinas,  and  general  boating activity.   These sources have not been
qualitatively  or  quantitatively investigated.
                                     XI

-------
CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION OF SEDIMENTS AND BIOTA

Sediment Contamination

     Limited  data  on sediment  contamination  are available  for  Budd Inlet.
EAR values were  calculated  for  the available  data,  and these data were also
compared with  Puget Sound  AET  values.   Elevated concentrations  of organic
compounds  have been  detected  in  sediments  near the  Cascade  Pole Company
(Johnson, A., 22 July 1985, personal communication;  Norton, 5 February 1986,
personal communication).   Concentrations of PAH  in  sediments from this area
were higher  than concentrations of PAH observed  in  Commencement  Bay (Tetra
Tech 1985a),  Elliott  Bay  (Tetra Tech  19855),  and Everett Harbor (Tetra Tech
1985c).   Elevated  concentrations  of  organic  compounds were  also detected
near the West  Bay  drain,  which  is  adjacent to the Cascade Pole Company site
(Norton,  D.,  5  February  1986,  personal communication).   Concentrations  of
copper,  lead,  zinc,  and  cadmium appeared  to  be elevated near the Fiddlehead
Marina  (Alan, R., 24 September  1987a, personal communication).

Bioaccumulation

     Recent  bioaccumulation  data  for  marine  organisms  in  Budd  Inlet  are
limited  to  the concentrations  of  PAH  in clams  collected  near Cascade Pole
Company  and  Priest  Point  (Norton,  D.,  5  February  1986, personal  commun-
ication).    Concentrations  of   PAH  in  those  clams  were  similar  to  high
concentrations  reported  for  clams from  Eagle Harbor  (Yake et  al.  1984).
Concentrations of  PAH  in  clams  collected  near the West Bay storm drain were
similar  to  the  lower range of values found in other Puget Sound urban bays.
Mai ins  et  al. (1980) found that concentrations  of  certain non-toxic metals
in English  sole  were considerably higher  in  Budd Inlet than in other urban
areas,  while concentrations  of organic compounds  in  fish  from  Budd Inlet
were generally less  than  concentrations observed  in other  urban bays.
                                     XII

-------
Toxicity Bioassavs

     Bioassay tests using the amphipod Rhepoxvnius  abronius were conducted on
sediments collected from a station located north of the Cascade Pole Company
near  the  navigation  channel  (Schiewe,   M.,   19  November  1987,  personal
communication), and on sediments from near the Olympia Yacht Club [U.S. Army
COE, no date (c)].  Results of these bioassays indicate that neither site is
a potential problem  area.   Oyster  larvae  (Crassostrea gigas)  bioassays were
also conducted on sediments collected north of the  Cascade Pole Company.  Low
mortality rates were reported.

Benthic Infaunal Communities

     No  benthic community  data are available  from  1982 to  1987  in  Budd
Inlet.   An  earlier  study  (Evergreen  State  College  1974)  identified  an
apparently diverse  community in the upper  inlet.   However,  data collection
and laboratory  analysis  methods  used in this study were inadequate to allow
for characterization  of benthic infaunal  communities  and  identification of
problem areas.

Fish Pathology

     From 1982 to 1987,  no fish pathology data were collected in Budd Inlet.
Earlier  data  collected by  Mai ins  et  al.  (1980)  indicated  that  certain
pathological  abnormalities  were  present   in  English  sole  and rock  sole
collected within  Budd Inlet.   The incidence of these  abnormalities varied
between 0 and 30 percent.

IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM AREAS

     The selected data for indicators of eutrophication, microbial contamina-
tion,  and  chemical  contamination  in sediments  and biota  were integrated to
identify  and  prioritize  problem   areas   in  Budd  Inlet.    The  evaluation
included  comparisons with  regulatory standards,  sediment  quality  criteria
(i.e., AET values),  and  EAR  values.
                                    XTII

-------
     The  highest  priority  problem  areas for  eutrophication were  Ecology
Station  BUD002  in  West Bay,  the Capitol  Lake  outfall,  and the  East  Bay
Marina.   Dissolved  oxygen  levels at  these sites were  less than  3.0  mg/L
during  late  summer.   Secondary  priority  areas  for  eutrophication  were
located at the  Fiddlehead Marina,  north  of the LOTT 30-in diameter outfall,
and  in  the  navigation  channel  northeast of  Cascade  Pole  Company.    The
highest  priority  problem  areas   for  microbial  contamination  occurred  at
Moxlie Creek,  Boston Harbor,  Ellis Creek,  and  south  of Tykle Cove.  Concen-
trations  of  fecal  coliform  bacteria in  these  areas exceeded 10  times  the
Washington State water quality standard.   Secondary  priority problem  areas
for microbial  contamination  were  identified  at Tamoshan  WWTP, Beverly  Beach
WWTP,  Athens  Beach  WWTP,  Butler Cove,  and north  of  Priest  Point.    The
highest priority problem  areas  for sediment  chemistry were located near the
Cascade  Pole Company  and the  West  Bay  drain.   Concentrations  of organic
compounds  in sediments  exceeded   100  times  the  reference values  at  these
locations.    Secondary priority  problem  areas  were  located in  West  Bay
offshore  from  the  West Bay  drain,  and in  Fiddlehead  Marina.    No problem
areas were identified  using sediment toxicity tests.  Problem areas based on
benthic  infaunal  communities and  fish  pathology  indicators could not  be
identified because  data are unavailable.

IDENTIFICATION  OF  DATA GAPS

     Limited  data  are available for  each category of data reviewed for Budd
Inlet.  The  available  data confirm that  a  seasonal problem of low concentra-
tions  of  dissolved oxygen  occurs  in  East and  West Bays.   However,  the
geographic  extent  and short-term temporal  variability  of  the  problem are
unknown.   Dissolved  oxygen should  be monitored in the upper  inlet during the
seasonal  decline in  oxygen (i.e.,  July to September)  to enable the boundaries
of   low   dissolved   oxygen  concentrations  to  be  identified.    Microbial
contamination  problem areas  were identified using  the  available  data.   A
monitoring   program  of  fecal  coliform  bacteria  concentrations   at  known
sources would allow  an assessment of the magnitude of microbial contamination
under  varying  water  flow  conditions.    Sediment  contamination  has  been
identified near the Cascade Pole  Company.  Additional studies are  needed to
                                     xiv

-------
determine the  spatial  extent  of contamination.  Sediments  near  known  point
sources  (e.g.,  Moxlie  Creek)  should  also  be  investigated.    Except  for
bioaccumulation of  PAH in  clams  collected near  the Cascade  Pole  Company,
biological effects of sediment contamination remain uninvestigated.
                                     xv

-------
                                INTRODUCTION
     The  U.S.  Environmental   Protection  Agency  (EPA)  and  the  Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology), in cooperation with  other  federal,  state,
and local  agencies,  are  investigating  the  extent  and  severity  of environ-
mental degradation in Budd Inlet (Figure 1).  The identification of degraded
areas  may lead  to  remedial   action  to  correct  problems  associated  with
eutrophication, microbial  contamination,  and toxic contamination.   Remedial
actions  may   include  source   control  to  reduce  nutrient,  microbial,  and
toxicant  emissions;   and  cleanup of  contaminated  sediments.    This  report
provides  a synthesis  of  information describing  the  geographic extent  and
severity  of environmental  degradation  in Budd  Inlet.   Those  data  that were
collected  from 1982  to  1987  are presented in this  report.  The year 1982 is
significant because  the Lacey,  Olympia,  Tumwater and Thurston County (LOTT)
wastewater treatment  plant  (WWTP) began secondary  treatment  in August 1982.
Occasionally,  older data were used when more recent data were unavailable in
the same  geographic area.  The  evaluation focuses on the following questions
concerning the study  area:

      1.    Is  Budd  Inlet,  or parts  of  Budd  Inlet,  subject  to environ-
          mental  degradation  due to eutrophication,  microbial  contam-
           ination, or toxic contamination?

      2.    Does eutrophication  or toxic  contamination result in adverse
           biological  effects?

      3.    Is  there a  potential  threat to public health?

      4.    Can the sources of contamination be identified?

Answering these  questions involved  the synthesis  of  complex  information
including data on contaminant  sources,  fates, and effects, and resulted  in  a
preliminary   identification of  presently known  problem  areas  (e.g.,  areas

-------
ro
                                    PUGET
                                          SOUND
                                  BUDD

                                     INLET


                                                                  OLYMPIA
                                                                  CITY
                                                                  BOUNDARY
                                                     OLYMPIA
                    nautical mil**
               kilometers
Figure 1. Budd Inlet study area.

-------
with  high  concentrations  of  nutrients  and  fecal  coliform  bacteria,  low
levels  of   dissolved   oxygen,   contaminated   sediments,  and  contaminated
shellfish).   Gaps in  the  existing data are  summarized  and recommendations
are  made  for  additional  data  collection  to enable  a  more  comprehensive
assessment of the geographic extent and severity of problem areas.

     Environmental degradation  associated  with  eutrophication and microbial
contamination  was evaluated  by  comparing the  data  with  Washington  State
water  quality  standards.  Although  gaps  in the  available  information were
present on  both  temporal  and  spatial  scales,  sufficient  data were available
to identify  areas subject  to water quality degradation.  The decision-making
approach for toxic contamination  and biological  effects that was used in the
development  of  similar action plans for Elliott  Bay  (Tetra Tech 1985b)  and
Everett Harbor (Tetra Tech 1985c)  was adapted  to  evaluate toxic and microbial
contamination problems.

     The  report  is organized into five major sections.   The  first section
describes   the   decision-making  approaches  for  evaluating  environmental
problems  associated  with  eutrophication  and   toxic  contamination.    The
discussion  includes  the rationale for choosing  the water quality, chemical,
ecological,  and  toxicological indicators  used  for evaluating environmental
degradation.    The  second section  provides  descriptions  of the  physical
setting,   including   project   location,   physical   oceanography,  geology,
drainage patterns, climate, land  use, and beneficial use.  The third section
provides  summaries  of existing data  for  the  following  indicators  of
environmental  degradation:   1)  contaminant sources,  2)  eutrophication,  3)
microbial  contamination,  and  4) chemical  contamination  of sediment  and
biota.    The fourth  section  identifies   problem  areas  based  on  existing
information  for  the  environmental  indicators.   Although  other indicators
could  be  used  to  identify  problem  areas (e.g.,  fish  distribution,  fish
kills), the  selected variables  are  statistically  sensitive to a wide range
of  ecosystem  properties.    The  final  section  provides  a  description  of
existing  data  gaps  and additional information  required  for a more thorough
delineation  and  better  understanding of the problem areas.

-------
                DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF
                         ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
     Eutrophication, microbial  pathogens,  and toxic  chemical  contamination
are the three  areas of concern for evaluating environmental  degradation of
Budd  Inlet.    Information  on  the  geographic extent  and severity  of  these
pollution problems  was  compiled and used in  a decision-making  framework to
prioritize  areas  within  Budd  Inlet  for cleanup  or  source  control.    The
decision-making framework  is  a method  designed to  consolidate and integrate
detailed environmental  information  in a form that can  be  readily  used  and
evaluated by regulatory decision-makers and easily  revised as new information
becomes available  (Figure  2).  The  decision-making approach used  for  Budd
Inlet  was  adapted  from that  used  for the  Elliott  Bay and  Everett  Harbor
Action Plans (Tetra Tech 1985b,c)  to 1) include an  evaluation of eutrophica-
tion and microbial  contamination, and  2) accommodate  the use of qualitative
or  semiquantitative  information  because  of  the   lack  of synoptic  data.
Details of  the decision-making framework and its  application  in  Budd  Inlet
are provided below.

OVERVIEW OF DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK

     The decision-making  approach  developed  for the  Budd  Inlet Action  Plan
incorporates  a  "preponderance-of-evidence"   approach  to   identify  problem
areas  associated  with  pollution  problems  (Figure  3).   First,  information
concerning  sources  of  pollution  associated  with  eutrophication,  microbial
contamination,  and  toxic  chemical  contamination  were  reviewed  to  identify
potential problem  areas.   The  available physical,  chemical,  and biological
data  for  each  pollutant  category  were  then  reviewed.   Key  variables  that
could be used meaningfully in  a qualitative or quantitative characterization
of  the spatial and  temporal   extent  of  pollutant   impacts  were identified.
Quantitative relationships  and statistically significant associations among
these  key  variables were  also identified  where  possible.   The various  key
variables were  then  used to  develop  indices  of contamination and biological

-------
                                                 REVIEW AVAILABLE
                                                    INFORMATION
                                                     IDENTIFY
                                                  REFERENCE AREAS
                                                IDENTIFY SUBSTANCES
                                                    OFCONCERN
                     COMPARE BUDD INLET
                         SITES WITH
                       REFERENCE AREA
                      EVALUATE
                      DATA GAPS
           RANK BUDD INLET SITES BASED ON COMPARISONS
              WITH SEDIMENT QUALITY CRITERIA, WATER
              QUALITY STANDARDS, AND/OR EAR VALUES
             RANK SUBSTANCES BASED ON COMPARISONS
              WITH SEDIMENT QUALITY CRITERIA, WATER
              QUALfTY STANDARDS, AND/OR EAR VALUES
                                                                  DEVELOP SAMPLING
                                                                     PLAN DESIGN
                         RECOMMEND
                        PRELIMINARY
                    ACTION-LEVEL CRITERIA
                    EVALUATE NEW
                     INFORMATION
   IDENTIFY
PROBLEM AREAS
    RE-EVALUATE
ACTION-LEVEL CRITERIA
         Figure 2.   Comprehensive decision-making  framework for
                     evaluation of environmental degradation.

-------
                               POLLUTANT
                              CATEGORIES
                                      KEY
                               VARIABLES
    EUTROPHICATON
                                MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION
                                                              TOXIC CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION
    NUTRIENTS
    DISSOLVED OXYGEN
  FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA
   • WATER COLUMN
   • SHELLFISH
   TARGET CHEMICALS
   SEDIMENT CONCENTRATIONS
   SEDIMENT TOXICITY
   BOACCUMULATON
                               INDICES OF
                           CONTAMINATION
   DISSOLVED OXYGEN

         VS.

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
  FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA

          VS.

   REFERENCE CONDITION

(WATER QUALITY AND SHELLFISH
       STANDARDS)
SEDIMENT QUALITY
 • ELEVATION ABOVE REFERENCE
 • APPARENT EFFECTS THRESHOLD
SEDIMENT TOXIC me
 • OYSTER ABNORMALITY
  ELEVATION ABOVE REFERENCE
 • AMPHIPOD MORTALITY
  ELEVATION ABOVE REFERENCE
CONTAMINANT BIOACCUMULATION
 • ELEVATION ABOVE REFERENCE
 • HUMAN HEALTH RISK
en
                                     SITE
                          CATEGORIZATION
                                     SITE
                             RANKING AND
                           PRIORITIZATION
   HIGHEST PRIORITY
   SECONDARY PRIORITY
   NO IMMEDIATE ACTION
    HIGHEST PRIORITY
   • SECONDARY PRIORITY
    NO IMMEDIATE ACTION
    • HIGHEST PRIORITY
     SECONDARY PRIORITY
     NO IMMEDIATE ACTON
                                PROBLEM AREA DEFINITION
                                 • NUMBER OF HIGH
                                  PRIORITY INDICES
                                                                               IDENTIFICATION OF DATA GAPS
                        Figure 3.   Preponderance-of-evidence approach to evaluate  eutrophication, microbial
                                     contamination, and toxic chemical  contamination  in Budd Inlet.

-------
effects that  are  based on comparisons with  either  a  reference site in Budd
Inlet,  reference  conditions  for Puget  Sound,  or regulatory  standards  and
criteria.  These indices of contamination or biological effects were used to
rank  various  sites  within  Budd  Inlet,  identify  key  problem areas,  and
prioritize sites for further action.

IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF POLLUTANT VARIABLES

     The identification and evaluation of pollutant variables is a multi-step
process that  involves:

     •    An  overview  of the processes and kinds of physical,  chemical,
          and  biological   data  that  may   be  used   to  characterize
          eutrophication,  microbial  contamination,  and  toxic  chemical
          contamination

     •    An  evaluation of available site-specific information

     •    A  final  selection of variables and  site-specific  data  that
          can  be  used to characterize the spatial  and temporal extent
          of  impacts in Budd Inlet,  and to develop indices of contamina-
          tion or biological effects.

Key  variables used  in the  decision-making  framework to  characterize each
category of  pollution  are  briefly summarized below, and  described  in detail
in the section entitled "Data Summaries."

Eutrophication

     Nitrogen  is the  primary  nutrient of concern because it is the limiting
nutrient in  Budd  Inlet  (URS  1986).    Nitrogen  enters  the  inlet through  the
circulation  of Puget  Sound water, point  sources  such  as the  LOTT  WWTP,  and
nonpoint  sources.    Seasonal  fluctuations   of  nitrogen  result from  dense
nitrogen-consuming  phytoplankton  blooms during  the   summer   and  decreased
flushing  rates with  the  associated   reduction  in  nitrogen  renewal.    The
development  of dense  phytoplankton blooms in  a poorly flushed area such as

-------
upper  Budd  Inlet ultimately  leads  to  dissolved oxygen depletion  caused by
decomposition of the  phytoplankton.  The  magnitude of oxygen depletion is a
function of organic enrichment, temperature, and flushing.  Oxygen depletion
in the  bottom water may stress the  resident  biota and may cause widespread
mortality  if  low oxygen  levels are prolonged.   Although phosphate  is  not
limiting to  phytoplankton  in  Budd  Inlet,  it is discharged  into Budd Inlet
through the LOTT WWTP.

     Key variables  used in  the characterization of  eutrophication  in Budd
Inlet   were   nutrient  concentrations  (nitrate,   nitrite,   ammonium,  and
phosphate)  and  dissolved oxygen concentrations.   Note that  these variables
are  influenced by  other factors  such  as temperature, salinity,  rainfall,
tidal  exchange,  and  flushing rates.    Where  possible,  these  additional
factors were  considered qualitatively,  but were otherwise not  used  to rank
and prioritize  sites  on the basis of eutrophication.

Microbial Contamination

     The concentrations of fecal coliform  bacteria  in  the water column and in
shellfish  provide  an indication of  the presence of sewage-derived material
from  point and  nonpoint  sources,  and are  also indicative of  a  variety of
other  bacterial  and viral  pathogens that pose  a public health  risk.   Thus,
concentrations  of  fecal coliform bacteria in water and shellfish  were used
to evaluate  microbial  contamination of water and  shellfish  in  Budd  Inlet.
Data on concentrations  of  other microbial pathogens  were  not available  for
Budd Inlet.

Toxic Chemical  Contamination

     The primary kinds  of  data related  to toxic contamination that are used
in problem area identification and  priority ranking  are  shown  in Table 1.
Although many other  variables  are  evaluated throughout the  decision-making
approach,  those shown  in  Table 1  form the  basis  for the identification of
toxic problem areas.  The kinds of  data evaluated include chemical concentra-
tions   in  sediments,  and   biological  effects  potentially  associated with
chemically contaminated sediments and water.
                                       8

-------
              TABLE 1.  PRIMARY KINDS OF DATA USED IN PROBLEM
                  AREA IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITY RANKING
General Category
Data Type
Specific Indicator Variables
Habitat condition
Toxicity

Indigenous organisms
Sediment quality
Acute lethal
Sublethal
Bioaccumulation
                        Benthic community
                          structure
                        Fish pathology
   Contaminant concentrations
   Amphipod mortality
   Oyster larvae abnormality
   Contaminant concentrations
   in tissues of shellfish
   Total abundance
   Species richness
   Dominance
   Amphipod abundance
   Prevalence of liver
   lesions in English sole

-------
     A  preliminary  list  of  conventional  and  chemical  contaminants  of
concern  for  Budd  Inlet  is given  in  Table 2.   Chemical  substances  on  this
list are of concern  because  they may bioaccumulate or are potentially toxic
to marine organisms  and  humans.   U.S.  EPA priority pollutants that may have
been discharged  into the  study  area  in the past,  or are probably discharged
now,  are included  on  the list.   Compounds  not  on the  U.S. EPA  list  of
priority pollutants  also have been  considered  on the  basis  of  their local
potential  significance.    Conventional  sediment   quality  variables  (i.e.,
grain  size,   total  volatile  solids,  and total  organic  carbon)  are  also
evaluated because  they provide  a means  of  comparing  areas  with  different
bulk chemical or physical  properties.  The list of target chemicals was then
used to identify and select all  chemicals or chemical groups of concern from
the available data for Budd Inlet.

     Selection  of  individual  biological  and  toxicological   variables  was
based on the following considerations:

     •    Use of the variable in past or ongoing studies in Puget Sound

     •    Documented sensitivity of the variable to contaminant effects

     •    Ability to quantify the  variable within the resource and time
          constraints of  the program.

Biological  effects  variables  that  were  evaluated   included  a  variety  of
bioassays  used  to  measure  toxicity  of  receiving  waters   and  sediments;
bioaccumulation  of  contaminants  in  shellfish;  benthic  infaunal  community
structure; and pathological disorders  in fishes.

INDICES OF CONTAMINATION

     The foregoing environmental variables were used to develop a variety of
indices to assess  the  relative  magnitude of contamination in Budd Inlet, to
identify problem chemicals,  and to  rank and prioritize  sites for remedial
action.   The  various  indices   used  in  each  category  of  pollution  (i.e.,
                                      10

-------
        TABLE 2.  PRELIMINARY LIST OF CONTAMINANTS AND CONVENTIONAL
                     VARIABLES  OF CONCERN  IN  BUDD  INLET
Metals

  Silver
  Arsenic
  Cadmium
  Chromium
  Copper
  Mercury
  Nickel
  Lead
  Antimony
  Selenium
  Zinc

Volatiles

  Benzene
  Bromoforin
  Carbon tetrachloride
  Chloroform
  Chloroethane
  Chlorodibromomethane
  Dichloromethane
  Dichlorobromomethane
  Ethyl benzene
  Tetrachloroethane
  1,1,1-Trichloroethylene
  Toluene
  1,1-Dichloroethane
  1,1-Di ch1oroethylene
  1,2-trans-Dichloroethylene
  Xylene

Base/Neutrals (excluding PCBs)

  Halogenated Compounds
    Hexachloroethane
    1,2-Dichlorobenzene
    1,3-Dichlorobenzene
    1,4-Dichlorobenzene
    1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
    2-Chloronaphthalene
    Hexachlorobenzene
    Hexachlorobutadi ene
    Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
    N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Base/Neutrals (cont.)

  Low Molecular Weight Aromatic
  Hydrocarbons
    Azobenzene
    Naphthalene
    2-Methylnaphthalene
    1-Methylnaphthalene
    2,6-Dimethyl naphtha!ene
    1,3-Dimethyl naphthalene
    2,3-Dimethylnaphtha! ene
    2,3,6-Trimethyl naphthalene
    2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene
    Acenaphthene
    Acenaphthylene
    Fluorene
    Biphenyl
    1-Methylphenanthrene
    2-Methylphenanthrene
    3-Methylphenanthrene

  High  Molecular Weight Aromatic
  Hydrocarbons
    Fluoranthene
    Pyrene
    1-Methylpyrene
    Benzo(a)anthracene
    Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
    Benzofluoranthenes
    Benzo(e)pyrene
    Benzo(a)pyrene
    Indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene
    Benzo(g,h,i)perylene

  Phthalate Esters
    Diethyl phthalate
    Bis(2-ethylhexyl)  phthalate
    Butyl benzyl phthalate
    Di-n-butyl phthalate
    Dimethyl  phthalate
    Di-n-octyl phthalate
                                   11

-------
TABLE 2.  (Continued)
Acid Extractables

  Cresol
  Phenol
  2-Chlorophenol
  2,4-Dichlorophenol
  2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
  Pentachlorophenol
  p-Chloro-m-cresol
  4-Nitrophenol

Pesticides and PCBs

  Chlordane
  Aldrin
  Endosulfan
  alpha-Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH)
  beta-HCH
  delta-HCH
  gamma-HCH (lindane)
  4,4'-DDD
  4,4'-DDE
  4,4'-DDT
  PCB-1242
  PCB-1248
  PCB-1254
  PCB-1260

Hazardous Substance List Compounds

  Benzoic acid
  2-Methylphenol
  4-Methylphenol
  2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
  Aniline
  Benzyl alcohol
  4-Chloroaniline
  Dibenzofuran
  2-Nitroaniline
  3-Nitroaniline
  4-Nitroaniline
Miscellaneous Substances

  Manganese
  Iron
  Coprostanol
  alpha-Tocopherol acetate
  Carbazoles
  Retene
  Dibenzothiophene
  Ch1oromethy1 benzene
  Methylated benzenes
  1-Propenalbenzene
  2-Ethyl naphthalene
  3,4,5,6-Tetramethyl phenanthrene
  4H-Cyclopenta[DEF]phenanthrene
  HH-Benzo(a)fluorene
  Benzo(b)thiophene
  1-Ethylidene-lH-indene
  Dibenzofuran
  4-Methyldibenzofuran
  7-Methylbenzofuran
  [I1,l'-Biphenyl]-carboxy aldehyde
  2-Chloro-l,3,5-cycloheptatriene

Conventional Variables

  Grain size
  Oil and grease
  Sulfides
  Total organic carbon
  Total volatile solids
                                   12

-------
eutrophication,  microbial  contamination,  and  toxic  chemical  contamination)
are described  below,  and  further explained  in  the section "Data Summaries."
It should  be  noted that these  indices  are  not used  in  lieu  of the original
data  (e.g.,   contaminant  concentrations),  but  in  addition  to them.   The
original  data are  used  to  identify  and  characterize detectable  levels  of
contaminants  and  their effects  on the environment.   The indices are used to
reduce large  data  sets  into  interpretable numbers that  reflect the relative
magnitudes of the different  variables  among  areas,  and  thereby aid  in the
decision-making process.

Eutrophication

     Impacts  associated  with  eutrophication were evaluated  based  on  direct
comparisons of dissolved oxygen  concentrations in Budd Inlet with Washington
State  water  quality  standards  and  with  established   values  below  which
biological  communities  are  considered  stressed.    Dissolved  oxygen  was
selected  to  represent eutrophication because  oxygen  depletion  may directly
impact the biota.  Nutrient depletion is not know to results in environmental
degradation.

Microbial Contamination

     The  relative magnitude  of fecal coliform  bacteria  concentrations was
quantified  using  a  simple  index.   The index  is  the  ratio between  the
geometric mean  concentration  at  a  site and the  water  quality  standard for
fecal coliform  concentrations in that portion of Budd  Inlet.   The ratio is
structured so that the value of the index increases as  the deviation from
the water quality  standard increases.  The  index for fecal coliform bacteria
(FCBI) is expressed as:
where:

     FCBI-jj =  Index for medium i  (i.e., water or shellfish) in area j


                                      13

-------
            =  Geometric mean  concentration  in medium  i  at Budd Inlet study
               area j
         ij =  Concentration that is the water quality standard for medium i
               in Budd Inlet study area j.

Note  that  regulatory  standard  for  fecal  coliform  concentrations  vary
depending  on  the medium  (i.e.,  shellfish  vs. water)  and  the  state classi-
fication of local waters.

Toxic Chemical Contamination

     There  were   too   few  data  to  adequately  characterize  contaminant
concentrations  and  biological  effects  in  the water column.   Consequently,
contaminant and  biological  effects  indices  were  only developed for chemical
concentrations in sediments, sediment toxicity bioassays, and bioaccumulation
of chemicals in shellfish.

Sediment Chemistry Indices--

     Two  kinds  of  indices were  used  to  characterize  concentrations  of
chemical contaminants  in  sediments.   Chemical contaminants measured in Budd
Inlet  sediments were  compared with  Puget  Sound wide  reference  conditions
using EAR  values.  AET values  were used to determine the potential toxicity
of chemical concentrations  in  sediments,  and to  identify specific chemicals
or compound groups that are of major concern  in Budd Inlet.

     EAR  values  for  chemical   contaminants  measured  in   Budd  Inlet  were
calculated using the expression:

                             FAR  ••  - r •'ir •
                             trtKsij  ~ Lsij/Lsir

where:

     EARs-jj =  EAR for sediment concentration of chemical i  at  Budd Inlet
               study area j
                                      14

-------
     Csjj   =  Sediment concentration of chemical i at Budd Inlet study area
               j
     ^sir   =  Average  concentration  of chemical i  in  Carr Inlet reference
               sediments.

An EAR  value  that is greater than  1  indicates  that  the concentration for a
particular  chemical   and  study  area  in  Budd  Inlet  exceeded  the  average
reference concentration for that chemical in Carr Inlet sediments.  However,
because  sediment  chemistry  samples  are not  replicated,   statistical  com-
parisons between concentrations of chemicals in contaminated areas and those
in  the  Carr  Inlet  reference  area  was  not possible.    Consequently,  the
significance of  an EAR value for a given chemical  is determined by comparison
with  Puget  Sound  wide  reference  data.   If the concentration  of a  given
chemical in Budd Inlet  sediments is greater than the maximum concentration
for  that chemical  in all Puget  Sound reference areas,  the EAR  value  for
that chemical is judged  to  be  significantly elevated.  Thus,  it is possible
to  have EAR  values  greater than  1  (i.e.,  that  exceed average  Carr  Inlet
reference  conditions)  that  are  not  deemed to  be   significantly  elevated
because they fall with the range of all Puget Sound reference conditions.

     AET values  have been  developed for many  Puget Sound  contaminants  of
concern.   AET values are  based on sediment chemistry  data,  toxicity data,
and benthic infauna  abundance data for  wide number of contaminated sites and
reference areas  throughout Puget Sound.  For a given chemical and a specified
biological  indicator  (e.g.,  amphipod mortality),  the AET is  the concentration
above  which  statistically  significant biological effects  occurred  in  all
samples  of  sediments analyzed.   Thus,  comparison of contaminant concentra-
tions  for  individual  chemicals  measured in  Budd  Inlet  sediments  with their
corresponding AET values is a means of  determining the potential severity of
biological   effects   in  Budd   Inlet,   and  of  selecting  and  prioritizing
chemically contaminated areas for remedial action.

     Puget Sound AET values  are particularly relevant  to  the evaluation  of
sediment contaminant  concentrations and potential biological effects in Budd
Inlet.   Specifically, the AET database includes contaminant data from Eagle
Harbor that includes  a  suite of compounds with  high  concentrations that are
                                      15

-------
similar  to the  compounds  with  high  concentrations  in  Budd  Inlet.   This
similarity is probably due to the occurrence of wood treatment facilities on
the  shores of both  embayments.    The  AET database contains  information on
sediment toxicity  and biological effects  from  areas  of  low,  moderate,  and
high sediment contamination,  as  well as from areas with  different kinds of
contamination (e.g.,  metals and organic substances).   Thus,  the  AET values
integrate  a  wide   range of  chemical  contaminant and  biological  effects
information  from  other  Puget Sound studies that can be  used  to  predict
environmental effects and prioritize study areas in Budd  Inlet.

Biological Effects Indices--

     Biological   effects  indices  for chemical  bioaccumulation  in shellfish
and  for  sediment   toxicity  (i.e.,  amphipod  mortality  and  oyster  larval
abnormality bioassays) were developed using the  EAR approach described above.

     The analysis  of EAR values  for contaminant bioaccumulation was  limited
to  the  available  data for  clams.    Bioaccumulation data  were  not available
for  fish  or  other  kinds  of  shellfish  in  Budd Inlet.   The  EAR  index  for
bioaccumulation was  calculated using the expression:

                             EARtij  = ctij/ctir

where:

     EARtij =  EAR f°r  chemical  i   in  tissue  t  (i.e.,   shellfish)  at  Budd
               Inlet  study  area j

     Ctl-j   =  Concentration  of  chemical  i in  tissue  t at  a  Budd  Inlet
               study  area j

     Cfjr   =  Concentration of chemical i in tissue t at reference area j.

Determination of the significance  of EAR values for bioaccumulation  was not
possible because methods for such a  determination  have not been established.
However,  bioaccumulation  data  were also  used to  assess potential  human
                                       16

-------
health  risks  associated with ingestion of  contaminated  shellfish from Budd
Inlet.  Thus,  EAR  values may be judged significant for those substances and
areas that  pose an  unacceptably  high human health  risk  that is associated
with ingestion of chemically contaminated shellfish.

     EAR analysis for toxicity of Budd Inlet sediments was based on available
data for mortality  measured in  the amphipod (Rhepoxvnius abronius) sediment
bioassay,  and  for  developmental  abnormality measured in the oyster larval
(Crassostrea  qiqas)  sediment  bioassay.     The  EAR indices  for  sediment
toxicity are comparable  with those for sediment contamination and bioaccumu-
lation, and were calculated  using the expression:
                                  ij = Rij/Rir

where:

     EAR-jj =   EAR  for the toxicity response of bioassay  species  i  at Budd
               Inlet study area j

     R-JJ   =   Toxicity  response of  bioassay species  i  to  sediments  from
               Budd Inlet study area j

     R-jr   =   Toxicity  response of  bioassay species  i  to  sediments  from
               reference area  r.

Significance of  the EAR values was  determined by statistical comparisons of
individual bioassay responses  to  sediments from the study area with response
to sediments from an appropriate  reference area.

PROBLEM AREA IDENTIFICATION

     As  indicated  in the  foregoing  sections, the preponderance-of-evidence
approach used  in the  decision-making  framework  is  largely based on develop-
ment  of indices for  contamination  and  biological   effects relative  to a
reference  site or reference  condition.   In  the action plans developed  for
Elliott Bay and  Everett Harbor (Tetra Tech 1985b,c),  the various contaminant
                                       17

-------
and  biological  effects  indices  were  compiled  into  an  action  assessment
matrix that  could be used to  collectively  assess the magnitude and spatial
extent of  impacts relative to reference conditions.  In  the Elliott Bay and
Everett Harbor Action Plans, the number and magnitude of the various indices
were used to score and  rank potential problem areas.

     In  the  case  of Budd  Inlet,  the  development  of an  action  assessment
matrix and a systematic scoring procedure was  not  feasible because such an
approach  is  based  on  the  availability of  synoptic  data  for a number of
complementary variables  (i.e., chemistry, toxicity, fish histopathology, and
biological communities)  as measured  at  a  large  number of  sites.   The Budd
Inlet  data  are derived  from  a wide  number  of  studies  conducted  at various
times  during  the past 5-10  yr,  and  which varied  considerably  in  study
objectives,  study   design,  sampling   locations,  sampling  variables,  and
analytical methods.   Consequently,  problem area definition for  Budd  Inlet
was based on a more  general categorization of the contaminant and biological
effects indices.

     As  shown  in Table 3, three priority  levels were established depending
on the magnitude of the  various indices for each type of pollution problem
(i.e., eutrophication,  microbial contamination,  and toxic chemical contamin-
ation).  Each  study  area  in Budd Inlet was therefore prioritized in terms of
further  action,  if  any,  needed   to  remediate problems  associated  with
eutrophication, microbial contamination, and toxic chemical contamination.
                                       18

-------
                          TABLE 3.  CRITERIA FOR PRIORITIZING PROBLEM
                                     AREAS  IN  BUDD  INLET3
                                                                                 No
Data Category       Highest Priority         Secondary Priority          Immediate Action

Eutrophication       Minimum dissolved        Minimum dissolved          Minimum dissolved
                    oxygen <3.0 mg/L         oxygen 3.0-5.0° mg/L       oxygen >5.0" mg/L

Toxic
contamination0

  Sediment          Metals: EAR >50          Metals:  EAR 10-50         Metals:  EAR <10
  chemistry         Organics: EAR >100       Organics: EAR 10-100       Organics: EAR <10

  Bioassay          Amphipod >50% mortality  Amphipod 25-50% mortality  Amphipod <25% mortality
                    Oyster >50% mortality    Oyster 25-50% mortality    Oyster <25% mortality

Microbial            Fecal coliform bacteria  Fecal coliform bacteria    Fecal coliform bacteria
contamination       EAR >10                  EAR ld-10                  EAR 
-------
                              PHYSICAL SETTING
PROJECT LOCATION

     Budd  Inlet  is  a shallow estuary located at the extreme southern end of
Puget  Sound  (see Figure  1).   It includes the area south  of  a line joining
Cooper Point and Dover  Point.  The inlet is approximately  6.9 mi long with an
average width  of 1.15  mi,  and a maximum  width  of 1.61  mi.   The Deschutes
River  is  the major  freshwater source  to  Budd Inlet and enters the inlet at
its  southernmost point.   In 1951,  Capitol Lake was created when  a dam was
constructed  over the tidal  flats where the Deschutes River empties into Budd
Inlet.  Capitol  Lake is not considered part of the study area.  However, the
Capitol Lake outfall  is considered a point source to Budd Inlet.  Budd Inlet
is  the most  developed estuary  in  southern  Puget  Sound.   Most  urban  and
industrial activity  is  located in  the Cities of Tumwater and Olympia at the
southern  end of the  inlet.  Much of  the  remaining  shoreline  is  relatively
undisturbed.   Physical  oceanography,  geological  setting,  drainage patterns,
climate,  land use, and  beneficial use  are described below.

PHYSICAL  OCEANOGRAPHY

     Budd  Inlet  is  a partially mixed shallow estuary with muddy substrates.
The  average  depth of the  inlet is  27 ft at mean lower  low water (MLLW), and
maximum depth  near the mouth  is about 110 ft.  There  is  no  entrance sill.
The  shoreline  and intertidal  areas  are moderately steep.   The only inter-
tidal mud  flats  are  located at  the  southern  end  of the inlet.  They result
largely from sediment deposited by the Deschutes River.

     Puget  Sound enters  Budd  Inlet   through  the  Tacoma  Narrows  and  Dana
Passage,  and is  diluted  at the inlet  head  by the Deschutes  River.   Water
properties in  Budd   Inlet  reflect  these salt water  and freshwater sources.
Temperature  ranges  in Budd  Inlet (7-21°  C)  exceed  those in the Puget Sound
main  basin  (8-18°  C).    The  range  of salinity  in  Budd  Inlet  (11-31 ppt)
                                       20

-------
exceeds  that  of the  Puget Sound main  basin (23-30  ppt;  Oclay 1959).   At
times  of high  runoff,  a  surface  layer of  low  salinity water  is  observed
(Oclay 1959).

     The  circulation  pattern in  Budd Inlet  is  a weak  two-layered  system.
The  lower water column  flows  south toward the  head  of the  inlet,  and  the
upper  water  column flows  north out  of  the  inlet  (URS 1986).  URS (1986)
found  evidence  of  a counter-clockwise gyre off  Tykle  Cove  and the eastward
movement of surface water  from West Bay to East Bay.

     URS  (1986) used  a  field-calibrated  box  model  to  estimate the  residence
time of  water  parcels in  Budd  Inlet.   The study area was  extended approxi-
mately 1  mi  south  of  Cooper Point to  3/8 mi north of  the  Port of  Olympia
peninsula.   Estimates  of  residence  times  were not  made  for the  Olympia
Harbor area  including  East and  West Bays.   Although the box model  assumed a
steady-state  net  circulation  throughout the inlet,  those  portions of  the
inlet  most  influenced by  tidal exchange would  have proportionately  shorter
residence times.   The model estimated that  a parcel  of water would  require
approximately 4 days  to travel from  near  the head  of  the  inlet to near  the
mouth, and  that the  maximum  residence  time  of  a parcel entering  the  inlet
throughout  the  mouth would  be approximately 14 days.  The  mean  residence
time,  given   variability  in  circulation   and  flushing   characteristics
throughout the  inlet, was  estimated to be 8 days.

     Dissolved  oxygen  near the head  of Budd Inlet is depleted during  late
summer due  to  a  combination  of  factors  including stratification,  reduced
flushing  rate,  and  algal  blooms.   Oxygen values are commonly below the 5.0-
mg/L Washington State  Class  B  water quality criterion south of Priest Point
(Egge, E.,  25  January 1987, personal communication;  Alan,  R.,  24  September
1987,  personal  communication;  U.S.  EPA,  7  January 1988, personal  communica-
tion).  Near-bottom oxygen levels may be less than 3.0 mg/L in East and West
Bays.
                                      21

-------
GEOLOGY

     The  Budd  Inlet  region  is  geologically and topographically  similar to
other coastal  regions in southern Puget Sound,  reflecting  the  influence of
mountain  building and  glacial  activity.   The  steep  terrain of  the  upper
Deschutes basin was formed during periods of sediment deposition followed by
uplift and mountain building.   The  underlying  bedrock  is therefore volcanic
(basalt  and  andesite)  or sedimentary  (sandstone  and  siltstone).   Lowland
areas in  the basin  are composed of unconsolidated  glacio-fluvial  materials.
The  subsurface layer  of glacial  outwash mainly consists  of unconsolidated
sands and gravels (McNicholas 1984).  The porosity of these soils results in
poorly developed  drainage patterns in the basin.

     The  high  permeability  of  the  soils  also  allows  for rapid  uptake of
winter rainfall  thereby recharging  an  extensive aquifer.    Porous  soils in
much of the region overlay a shallow substructure of hard pan that is within
40 ft of  the surface  in  some places.   Because this  shallow hardpan results
in a  very shallow  aquifer,  groundwater is available at  relatively shallow
depths.   In over  80 percent of the wells, the water level is within 50 ft of
the surface (Arvid Grant and Associates 1973).

     The  subsurface  rock  bordering the  inlet  is  heavily fractured  and
elevations may  vary from 0 to 300 ft above sea  level in  as little as  2 mi.
These soils  consist  of a layer  of  Vashon  till  overlying  an  assortment of
glacial  deposits  (Arvid  Grant and Associates 1973).

     The  intertidal beaches of Budd  Inlet are moderately steep.   Much of the
subtidal   area  consists  of  recent bay  muds,  fine-grained  glacial  sand and
silt, and lake sediments.  The bay muds are recent deposits of silty organic
clays [U.S. Army  Corps of Engineers  (COE)  1980].  These are very soft, low
density,   and  possess  a  high  water  content.    Muds   are replenished  by
biodegradation and silts are deposited by the Deschutes River.

     The  annual sediment load of the Deschutes River is approximately 18,300
tons; 80  to 85  percent is transported  during November and  December.   The
                                       22

-------
majority of this sediment load originates from the erosion of streambeds and
banks along  the mainstem of  the  river (Moore and Anderson  1979).   Capitol
Lake acts as a settling basin for sediment transported by the river.  Between
1951 and 1976, Capitol Lake trapped 2 million tons of sands, silts, and clays
eroded  from  streambanks  and  slopes  in  the  watershed  (McNicholas  1984).
Sedimentation  is  also a problem  in  Budd Inlet at the  Capitol  Lake outfall
and in  East  Bay,  which require dredging  by  both  the  Olympia  Yacht Club and
the Port of Olympia.  The U.S. Army COE conducts maintenance dredging of the
shipping lanes, with  the average  dredging operation yielding  400,000 yd^ of
sediment, largely of  Deschutes River origin  (McNicholas 1984).

DRAINAGE PATTERNS

     The Budd Inlet drainage area encompasses primarily  undeveloped rural and
forest  lands  in   the Deschutes  River  drainage  basin  (Figure  4).    This
watershed is  bound on the east by the Nisqually  River  Watershed  and on the
west  by the  drainage  of  the  Black  River  and  western  Puget  Sound.    In
addition to  the  Deschutes  River,  the basin  includes  several  other  small
streams, including  Percival  and  Moxlie Creeks.   The  drainage  pattern of the
basin is not well developed due to the high groundwater storage capabilities
of  the  soil.   During periods  of heavy  precipitation, the permeability of
surface  soils  and  subsoils  results  in infiltration  and groundwater recharge
rather than overland  flow to surface water drainages.

     The  Deschutes  River  originates  in  the Bald  Hills  and  from  Cougar
Mountain, flows  northwest  for 57 mi,  and empties into the southern end of
Budd Inlet.   The  flow  regime is typical of  the  rainfed  streams  in western
Washington.    Peak  flows  occur  in  the winter months  and may  exceed  5,000
ft-Vsec/mo  (Arvid  Grant and  Associates  1973).   Minimum flow  occurs in the
late  fall,   typically 66-100  ft^/sec,  with average  annual   flows  of  409
ftVsec  (Moore and Anderson 1979).

     The Deschutes  drainage basin encompasses approximately  166  mi2 (McNi-
cholas 1984).  The upper portion of the watershed comprises heavily forested
land and rugged  terrain.   Rural  communities  and  agricultural  land dominate
the  lower  basin.   Less than 21 mi2 of  the Deschutes basin  is urbanized
                                      23

-------
ro
-F*
               BUDD INLET
          DRAINAGE  BASIN
DESCHUTES  RIVER
  DRAINAGE  BASIN
                                                                                       Pierce County
                                         10
                                           miles
                                       kilometers
                                                              Thurston County
                                                                 Lewis County
                               10
                                      15
        Note: Nisqually River marks the boundary between Thurston and Pierce Counties
                                                                                    Reference: McNicholas (1984).
                    Figure 4.  Budd Inlet and Deschutes River drainage boundaries.

-------
(Arvid Grant  and  Associates  1973).   An additional  59 mi^ drains directly to
Budd Inlet from surrounding slopes.

CLIMATE

     Climate  in the  Budd  Inlet  region  is characterized by mild, wet winters
and warm,  dry summers.   Daily  and  seasonal  variations  in  temperature  are
relatively small.  During  the summer,  daytime temperatures  range from about
70° to  upper 80° F  and  usually  ranges from 40°  to upper 50°  F  at  night.
Winter  temperatures  range  from about  30°  to  low 50°  F (Arvid  Grant  and
Associates 1973).  Freezing  seldom occurs  and snowmelt is rarely a signifi-
cant contributor  to  stream flow or runoff.  Severe storms are rare.

     Rainfall,  accompanied  by  prolonged  cloudy  periods,  is  the  dominant
feature during the winter months.   Eighty-five  percent  of  the total  annual
precipitation occurs from October through  April  (Arvid Grant and Associates
1973).  Most  of  the precipitation is  light  to  moderate rainfall,  occurring
continuously  for  long  periods of time.  The  summer  months  are usually dry..
occasionally  with no measurable rainfall for periods  up  to  30 days.   While
mean annual precipitation  at  the Olympia airport is  52 in/yr, precipitation
may be greater at  higher elevations  (McNicholas 1984).

LAND USE

     Historically., the  region surrounding  Budd  Inlet has been largely rural
or  undeveloped.    Industrial  and urban  activities are concentrated  at  the
southern end  of  the  inlet in the  Olympia  and Tumwater area.   Many areas in
this vicinity are sites  of  greatly  increased growth  and development.   For
example,  in   the  Percival  Creek  basin,  employment  increased  2,870 percent
from  1970 to 1980,  and  the  population  increased  255 percent   (Thurston
Regional  Planning Council  1985).    This urbanization  of the  watershed  is
cited as  the  probable  cause  of  increased  streamflow and runoff to Percival
Creek (McNicholas  1984).  Similarly, land use changes resulting in decreased
natural vegetation are expected to  increase  storm drainage  problems, while
population increases will result  in greater demands  on sewage  and  septic
systems.
                                        25

-------
     The  Cities  of  Lacey,  Olympia,  and  Tumwater possess  the only  formal
sewage collection  systems in the  basin.   All  of these cities  use  the LOTT
WWTP  for  final   treatment  and  discharge  into  Budd  Inlet.    The  central
business  district  and  older areas of Olympia  are  served  by both  a  sanitary
and storm  sewer  system.   The  sanitary sewer systems  feed  into the LOTT WWTP
and storm sewers  discharge  directly into  Budd  Inlet.   There  are  two CSOs
that  divert  peak  flows  past the  LOTT  WWTP and  directly  into Budd  Inlet.
Specific  information  on  the LOTT WWTP  is provided  in  the third  section
entitled Contaminant Sources.

       In  rural  and  less-developed areas of the basin, sewage  is generally
discharged into  septic tanks  and  leaching  fields.   The efficiency  of these
systems depends  to a  large degree on the  ability  of the  soil  to  absorb the
waste material.   Over two-thirds  of the area is  considered  to have  severe
soil  limitations due  to  poor drainage  (An/id  Grant and Associates  1973).
Much  of the  rural  area of  the basin  has  no problem  with  septic tank  usage,
but problems are apparent in localized areas due to both soil characteristics
and  population  densities  (e.g.,  Cooper  Point  and  Summit Lake).    If  the
present trend  of increased development and growth continues,  problems with
septic tank usage  are  expected to  increase.

BENEFICIAL USE

     Budd  Inlet  is  used  for a  variety  of purposes  ranging  from  marine
transportation to  salmon rearing,  and from  beach combing to boating.  In the
context of this  study, the term  "beneficial use"  refers  to activities that
depend on a  high  degree  of  environmental  quality  and  that  do  not,  as  a
direct consequence,  adversely affect that  quality.   Beneficial uses  can be
placed into  two categories:  1)  resource  using,  and 2)  nonresource  using.
Resource-using   activities    include  shellfish   harvesting  and  fishing.
Nonresource-using  activities  include  scuba  diving,  beach  combing,  and
recreational  boating.

     Fish and shellfish are important resources in Budd Inlet.  Five species
of  anadromous  fish spawn in  the Deschutes basin:   Chinook,  coho,  and chum

                                        26

-------
salmon;  sea-run  cutthroat;  and steelhead  trout  (U.S.  Army COE  1980).   The
Washington  Department  of Fisheries manages  an  extensive salmon  propagation
program  in  Capitol  Lake.   Other  fish  species harvested  recreationally in
Budd Inlet  include cod, surf perch, sole, flounder, and herring.   Surf smelt
spawn on the beaches around the inlet.

     In  1987,  Ecology  issued  an  advisory notice recommending  that shellfish
from lower  Budd  Inlet  not  be  consumed or harvested (Bradley,  D., 12 January
1987,  personal  communication).     That  recommendation  was  based  on  the
following factors:

     •    Concentrations  of polycyclic  aromatic  hydrocarbons  (PAH)  in
          clams  from  near  the Cascade  Pole Company in  southern Budd
          Inlet  are  significantly higher than  concentrations  in clams
          from  less-contaminated  areas  in  the Puget Sound region  and
          are  similar  to those reported  in clams from Eagle Harbor

     •    Based  on  procedures  developed for  the Puget  Sound  Estuary
          Program  (PSEP)  (Tetra  Tech  1986a), it appears that  long-term
          consumption  of shellfish with concentrations  of PAH similar
          to  those  reported   in  clams  from Budd  Inlet  represents  a
          significant  health risk.

Individual  lifetime  carcinogenic risks  associated  with  the ingestion  of
these  contaminated shellfish  range from l.SxlO"4  to  1.5x10    (Bradley,  D.,
12 January  1987,  personal  communication).   These levels  exceed  the 1x10"
lifetime  risk  level  that  is  often  used  as  a  reference  point   for  the
management  and  regulation of carcinogenic chemicals.    A   range  of  PAH
concentrations  in  shellfish (i.e.,  278-940 ug/kg  wet weight)  and additional
assumptions concerning exposure duration (35 yr) and seafood ingestion rates
were used to generate  risk  estimates  (Bradley, D.f 12 January 1987,  personal
communication).
                                       27

-------
                               DATA SUMMARIES
CONTAMINANT SOURCES

     Contaminant  sources  in the  study area  can  be divided  into  six  major
categories:   wastewater treatment  plants  (WWTP),   combined  sewer  overflows
(CSOs),   surface  runoff,   industrial  sources,  groundwater,   and  accidental
spills.   There are four WWTP in the study area:  Tamoshan Development/Thurs-
ton County Public Works, Beverly Beach Utilities Association, Seashore Villa
Mobile  Home  Park,  and  LOTT   (for  Lacey,  Olympia,  Tumwater, and  Thurston
County)   (Figure 5).   During  storm events,   untreated  wastewater  overflows
from city combined sewer lines through two CSO outfalls in Olympia.  Surface
runoff originates  from excess  precipitation  draining  from the land surface.
This runoff is  discharged  to  Budd  Inlet  from storm drains,  natural drainage
channels,  and direct  surface  runoff.   Groundwater includes  any  subsurface
transport  of  contaminants  into  the inlet.    Industrial  discharges comprise
permitted  discharges  of wastewater and storm water,  and  unpermitted (e.g.,
storm drains)  discharges  of  storm water from  individual  industrial  sites.
The accidental spills  category includes those contaminants that are released
to Budd Inlet from spills  in the study area.  A more detailed description of
these six categories of contaminant sources is provided below.

Wastewater Treatment Plants

     Effluent  limitations  are shown  in  Table 4 for  each of  the  four  WWTP
named above.   These WWTP  are  permitted  under the  Clean  Water Act,  Section
301(h) National  Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination  System  (NPDES).   Although
Shorewood Estates operates a treatment plant, this facility does not have an
NPDES permit because it discharges to a drainfield.
                                       28

-------
                                                      INDUSTRIAL
                                                      PETBOLEUM
                                                      DISTRBUTORS

                                                      OIL-CONTAMINATED SOLS
                                                      (EARTH CONSULTANTS.
                                                      7 AUGUST 1666, PERSONAL
                                                      COMMUNICATION]

                                                      PAST TEXACO BULK
                                                      PETROLEUM STORAGE
                                                      FACILITY

                                                      MC FAFLANOCASCADE

                                                      HARDEL
                                                      HISTORICAL LANDRLL
•
= UN1NVESTTGATED
POTE MTIAL SOURC ES
OF FECAL COLJFOHM
BACTERIA
= NPOES-PERMfTTED
DISCHARGES (SEE
TABLE 6)
= MARINA
                                              LOCATIONS OF AREAS WHERE
                                               CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS
                                                 WERE IDENTIFIED PRIOR
                                              	TO DREDGING	

                                              (T)  =  US. ARMY COE (NO DATE (C)]

                                              (2)  =  US ARMYCO£[NODATE(D})

                                              (3)  -  U.S ARMYCOEfNODATEfK)]
                                                       OLYMPIA
                                                       CITY
                                                       BOUNDARY
                                                  Ir-,
                               OLYMPIA
Figure 5.  Locations ol potential point and nonpolnt discharges
           of contaminants to Budd Inlet.

-------
                                                      TABLE 4.  LIST OF NPOES-PERHITTED WASTE DISCHARGES TO BUDD INLET
           Facility

    Cascade Pole Co.
    Chevron U.S.A.,  Inc.
    Oelson Limber,  Inc./
    Olympia Forest
    Products  Co.,  Inc.
    Beverly Beach
    Utilities Association
O  city of Olympia/LOTT
    Seashore Villa Mobile
    Home Park
    Tamoshan Development/
    Thurston County
    Public Works
   Facility Description

Wood treatment
Bulk petroleum storage
Lumber mill
Secondary WWTP
Regional secondary WWTP
Secondary WWTP
Secondary WWTP
  Effluent Limitations3

See Comments
15 mg/L 0 & GE
15 mg/L 0 & G
Minimum   contribution   of
solids  (e.g.,  chips,  wood
debris) from site

30 mg/L (1.25 Ib/day)  BOD
30 mg/L (1.25 Ib/day)  SS
20/100 mL fecal coliform
  bacteria

Outfalls 1-2:  16.3 MGD
30 mg/L (4,000 Ib/day)  BOD
30 mg/L (4,000 Ib/day)  SS
200/100 mL fecal coliform
  bacteria

0.015 MGD
30 mg/L (3.8 Ib/day) BOD
30 mg/L (3.8 Ib/day) SS
200/100 mL fecal coliform
  bacteria
0.035 MGD
30 mg/L (916 Ib/day) BOD
30 mg/L (916 Ib/day) SS
200/100 mL fecal coliform
  bacteria
                             Comments

Permit  for  stormwater runoff  discharge expired 7  November  1985.
Facility  closed  prior to 13 March  1987.   Ecology  maintains  that
product  is   currently discharging  from the  site,  and that  the
discharge  should  be  permitted  (Peeler,  M.,  12  January  1988,
personal communication).

Stormwater runoff from truck loading area and building roof drains
routed  to oil-water  separator.   Automatic  pump  from  separator
discharges effluent into storm drain.   Permit expires 25 June  1990
(Ecology 1985a).

Stormwater runoff.   Permit  is  in effect only when  facility  is  in
operation.  Permit expires 16 December 1990 (Ecology 1985b).
Average  flow  is  <3,000  gal/day.    Approximately  18  homes  are
connected  to  the WWTP.   Permit expires  28 August  1990  (Ecology
1980).
Existing design  capacity  limited to 22 MGD  (maximum average wet-
weather  flow).     WWTP  online August  1982.   Permit  expires  25
September 1992 (Ecology 1987).
Average flow is 3,600 gal/day.   Permit expires 25 May 1989 (Ecology
1979).
Seventy-four  residences   in  development.    Discharge  monitoring
reports from January 1982 to December  1985  indicate problems with
meeting effluent  limitations for  SS and  fecal  coliform bacteria.
Permit expires 20 October 1991  (Ecology 1986).
    a Effluent  limitations  are listed  as  monthly averages for  wastewater  treatment  plants (WWTPs) and  daily  averages  for other permits,  unless otherwise noted.  All
    discharges into Budd  Inlet  must  be within pH 6-9.  All WWTPs must also meet permit  requirements  for  residual chlorine.  OSG = oil and grease,  BOD = 5-day biochemical
    oxygen demand, SS = suspended solids.
    b Daily maximum efflu- nt limitation.

-------
LOTT WWTP--

     The LOTT  treatment  plant  is  located  on City of Olympia property in the
southern  portion  of  Budd  Inlet   (see  Figure  5).   This  regional  facility
services  portions  of  the   Cities  of  Lacey,   Olympia,   and  Tumwater,  and
Thurston County.    In  August 1982, the  LOTT plant was  upgraded  to provide
secondary  treatment  of  municipal  and  industrial  wastewater.     The  most
current information listed  the  average wet-weather flow as approximately 11
MGD (Parametrix  1987c).   Based  on effluent requirements in the NPDES permit
(Ecology 1987),  the monthly average  flow  is  limited  to 16.3 MGD,  and the
design  criteria  for  the plant  are 11.8  MGD  (monthly  average  dry-weather
flow),  16.3  MGD  (monthly average wet-weather  flow),  and  25.9 MGD  (maximum
daily flow).   Upon completion of certain  hydraulic  and other improvements,
the plant has  an existing design  capacity of 22 MGD (average daily flow), 27
MGD (maximum daily flow), and 35  MGD (peak flow) (Parametrix 1987b).

     The LOTT  plant currently  discharges  treated  effluent to  Budd Inlet via
a 30-in diameter principal  outfall  and a  48-in diameter backup outfall  (see
Figure  6).    The  30-in diameter principal  outfall line extends  past  the
northern tip  of Washington  Street with  an  additional  600 ft of submerged
line  and  a  300-ft diffuser section.   The 48-in diameter  backup outfall
discharges  through an  open-ended  pipe  into  the  Fiddlehead Marina  area.
Prior to  construction  of  the 30-in diameter  principal  outfall, LOTT  dis-
charged  primary-treated  effluent  via the  48-in  diameter outfall,  which
extended about 100 yd  offshore  (Alan, R.,  19 January  1988,  personal  com-
munication).   The  48-in diameter outfall currently serves  as a  backup line
to  handle  flows  that  exceed the capacity  of the 30-in  diameter principal
outfall   (i.e.,  flows  of >10-12  MGD;  Alan, R.(  19 January  1988,  personal
communication).  All  effluent is treated before  it  is  discharged from this
outfall. Because of plant  hydraulics  and  the need to  use the chlorination
units for  disinfection, the 48-in  diameter backup outfall is used several
times each  day  (Ecology 1987).   The  calculation of  the  actual volume of
effluent diverted  and  discharged through  the 48-in outfall  at any  given
tidal  height is not possible at this time  (URS  1986).  However, by overlaying
tidal   cycles  upon LOTT discharge  flows,  URS  determined  the  volume  of
effluent discharged during  two sampling periods.  During a 5-day period in
                                       31

-------
                               PRIEST
                           \ VPOINT
                                 30" CSO
                                 (WATER
                                -iSTREET)
              CAPITOL
                LAKE
                                                  ^30" SAN FRANCISCO
                                                ,      STORM  SEWER
  48" CSO
  (STATE AND
  CHESNUT"
  STREETS)
4 in TO 19 In STORM DRAIN OUTFALLS

24 In TO 29 In STORM DRAIN OUTFALLS

> 30 in STORM DRAIN OUTFALLS
Figure 6.  Locations of storm drain outfalls in Budd Inlet.
                            32

-------
September  1984,  four events of  7-8  MGD  and two events of 4-6 MGD occurred.
During  a 5-day period  in  May  1985,  two  events of 9-12 MGD,  three events of
7-8  MGD,  and two events  of  4-6  MGD occurred.  Mr.  R.  Alan  (25 March 1988,
personal communication)  stated that  there are  currently no annual or monthly
estimates  of  the  volume  of  effluent  that  is  discharged  via the  48-in
diameter outfall.   Mr.  R.  Alan estimated that  approximately 10-20 percent of
LOTT's  daily flow is  discharged  via  the 48-in  outfall.  Future plans include
the  elimination of  the  48-in diameter  backup outfall during the expansion of
i
the  LOTT facility  (Parametrix  1987a).  This  expansion  is  planned  to occur
within  the next 2-3  yr (Alan,   R.,  25 March 1988,  personal  communication).
According  to  Mr.   R.  Alan,  LOTT  plans to build  a second  30-in  diameter
outfall  parallel  to  the  existing  30-in diameter outfall.   Future  plans at
LOTT also  include  nutrient removal from the  effluent,  which is a  form of
advanced   or  tertiary  wastewater  treatment  (Colby,   T.,  28  March  1988,
personal communication).

      The LOTT  collection  system  is  largely  a separate sanitary sewer system.
However, a portion  of the downtown  Olympia  system is combined with the storm
sewer system and impacts  peak storm flows  to the WWTP.  Various commercial
and  small  industrial  flows also enter  the collection system.   URS (1980)
completed  an  industrial waste  survey for the City of Olympia, in which they
identified commercial industrial users that discharge or have the potential
to discharge liquid and solid wastes to the municipal sewer system.   Thirty-
four of the  37 industries  that  were contacted responded to URS's question-
naire.   Nineteen  of those  34  industries  discharged  process water  to  the
municipal  WWTP.   Prior  to  URS's  survey,   U.S.  EPA indicated that  in  1976
national categorical  pretreatment  standards would be issued  for 21  types of
industries that were potentially capable of discharging priority pollutants
to WWTP.   Those industries have been  referred to as primary industries.  In
the  URS (1980)  survey, seven of  the  19 industries that  discharged to the
municipal  WWTP were  primary industries.  Those seven  industries are Hardel
Mutual  Plywood Corporation,  D.G.  Parrott  &  Son,  Star  Cleaners  &   Foundry,
Ann's Car  Wash, Jerry's  Shell  Service,  Olympia  Auto  Detailing,  and Rich's
Auto Detailing.
                                       33

-------
     In  addition  to  those  seven  industries,  URS  (1980)  identified  other
industries  that   discharged  potentially  contaminated  wastewater  to  the
municipal WWTP.  Survey responses indicated that wastewater from the Olympia
Brewing  Company   may  have  exhibited  excessive  pH,  temperature,  5-day
biochemical oxygen demand  (8005),  and  suspended  solids, and  that  they may
have  contained  halomethanes.    According  to  Ecology  (1987),  the  Olympia
Brewery  is  the only  major  industrial  impact to the  LOTT  WWTP.   Currently..
the brewery discharges  up to 2 MGD  of effluent,  21,000 Ib/day of 6005, and
pH ranges  from 6 to  10.   Ecology  (1987)  data indicate that in recent years
the brewery  has  occasionally violated  the  pH limits,  which  substantiates
results  from  the  URS  (1980)  survey.   Olympia  Brewery's  permit  has expired
and a new permit application is under review by Ecology.

     Survey  responses  from  URS   (1980)  also  indicated  that  the  Olympia
Medical  Laboratory  process  wastes  may  have  contained concentrations  of
chromium,  nitrophenols,   and  cyanide.    Wastewater  discharged  to the  sewer
system from St. Peter Hospital  may  have contained mercury, benzene, chlorina-
ted naphthalenes,  chloroform, and phenols.  Process wastes from two radiator
shops  in the  survey area  may have  contained  concentrations  of  antimony,
lead,  zinc, and copper.

     Although  few  priority pollutants were  identified  from survey  results,
URS  (1980)  recommended   that  a general  scan  for priority   pollutants  in
influent  and  effluent  wastewater  at  the   treatment   facility  should  be
conducted  to  characterize  system  wastewater.   This  information  would also
be used to implement  an industrial  pretreatment program for the current LOTT
WWTP.   Currently,  the LOTT WWTP  does not have a pretreatment program.  Each
governmental   entity   regulates  discharges   into   their  portions   of  the
collection system.  Under the new NPDES permit  (Ecology  1987), a pretreatment
interjurisdictional  agreement  must be developed and  implemented by 1 April
1988,  and an industrial waste survey must be completed by 30 September 1988.

     Parametrix  (1987c)  has recently  prepared  a  draft environmental impact
statement  for  the  LOTT  Urban Area  Wastewater  Management Plan.   This plan
will   provide   a  comprehensive regional  program for  wastewater  collection,
treatment, disposal,  and  management,  and a discussion  on  the  protection of
                                      34

-------
the area's  aquifers.   The plan  addresses  the  development of an interceptor
system  for wastewater  collection,  and  improvements  to  the  treatment  and
disposal system at the existing  LOTT facility.

Tamoshan WWTP--

     The  Tamoshan WWTP  is  located  approximately  5 mi  north  of  downtown
Olympia on the Cooper Point peninsula  (see Figure 5).  The facility provides
secondary municipal  treatment for wastewater from the residential  community
of  Tamoshan.    This  development  consists  of  approximately  74 residences
(Ecology 1986) with a population of approximately 140 persons (Clark, D., 27
January 1986,  personal communication).  A review of  1980 discharge monitoring
reports (DMRs) showed an average discharge of 0.0134 + 0.0009 MGD (Determan,
T.,  19  February  1981,  personal  communication)  and  a  review of  1983  DMRs
showed a yearly average discharge  of 0.018 MGD (URS 1986).  According to the
NPDES  permit   (Ecology  1986),   the  monthly  average  quantity  of  effluent
discharged shall  not exceed 0.035  MGD.  Because the facility does not have a
flow meter, its  wastewater flows  are  estimated based  on  the number of sump
pump cycles/day and  sump  volume.  According  to DMRs for 1983, flow from the
Tamoshan facility account  for loadings of  3.0  Ib/day total  nitrogen and 0.8
Ib/day total phosphorous to Budd Inlet (URS  1986).

     At the Tamoshan facility,  chlorinated  effluent is collected  in  a  wet
well.  When the well becomes  full, effluent  is pumped into the outfall line.
As a result, the  discharges into Budd  Inlet  are intermittent  (Kendra, W.  and
T.  Determan,   6   November  1985,  personal  communication).     Effluent  is
reportedly  discharged to  Budd  Inlet  via  a  pipe with a  length of  738 ft
(Kendra,  W.   and   T.  Determan,  6 November  1985,  personal  communication).
Although conflicting  information  is presented by Mr. D. Clark  (27 January
1986,  personal   communication)   (i.e.,  a  1,500  ft  6-in  pipe)  and  Mr.  T.
Determan  (19  February 1981,  personal  communication)  (i.e.,  a 328-ft pipe),
Mr. D.  Anderson   (6 April  1988,  personal  communication)  indicated  that  the
pipe is  approximately 740  ft.   Based on  dye  studies,  the  high  density and
compact  nature  of  the  emergent  dye patch  suggests  lack  of  a  diffuser
(Kendra, W. and T. Determan,  6 November  1985, personal communication).
                                      35

-------
     Tamoshan  DMRs  from  November 1979  through  November 1980  showed fecal
coliform bacteria  arithmetic averages ranging from  43  to 67,000 counts/100
ml (Determan,  T., 19  February  1981,  personal  communication).   Seven of nine
DMRs  indicated that  fecal  coliform bacteria  levels  in samples  collected
inside the plant violated effluent limitations.  However, the expected fecal
coliform bacteria  levels  at the  actual  discharge point  or  in  the dilution
zone  adjacent  to  the diffuser  could not be  determined  due to  the  lack  of
data.  The DMRs from  January 1982 to December 1985 indicate that Tamoshan's
discharge  exceeded  effluent  limitations  for  suspended solids and  fecal
coliform bacteria.  During a limited Class II inspection of this facility in
1985,  two  fecal  coliform bacteria  samples  exceeded both  the  monthly  and
weekly average for  NPDES  permit  effluent limitations  (Clark,  D., 27 January
1986,  personal  communication).   High fecal  coliform bacteria  levels  were
also observed  in the nearshore areas of the facility.  The DMRs suggest that
fecal  coliform bacteria  contamination  of Tamoshan  nearshore waters  is  an
historic and  recurring  problem.    Ecology  initially suggested  that  broken
lines  or a small  stream  located  near the facility may  have  contributed  to
these  high concentrations  of  fecal  coliform bacteria  (Kendra,  W.  and  T.
Determan, 6 November 1985, personal  communication).  However,  the inadequate
disposal of  domestic wastes  by  shoreside residences  was  later identified  as
the  most likely  source.  Ecology concluded that  the Tamoshan WWTP does  not
appear to  be the source  of  the high counts  of fecal coliform  bacteria  and
that  it  has  little impact  on  receiving water quality  (Kendra, W.  and  T.
Determan,  6  November  1985,  personal   communication).    However,  because
effluent discharge  is  intermittent,  dilution  and  dispersion  of the effluent
plume may not  have  been fully characterized.

Beverly Beach WWTP--

     The Beverly  Beach  community,   which  is  located  approximately  0.4  mi
south  of  Tamoshan  (see  Figure  5)   and  comprises  approximately   18  homes
(Ecology  1980).     The  Beverly   Beach  WWTP  provides  secondary wastewater
treatment  for  approximately  50  persons   (Clark,   D.,   21   November  1985,
personal communication).    Although  the  plant is  designed  to  treat about
5,000  gal/day,  the flow  is  estimated at  less than 3,000  gal/day (Ecology
1980; URS 1986).  Because the facility does  not have  a flow meter, wastewater
                                      36

-------
flows  from the  facility  are  estimated  based on  the  resident  population
served.  Also, although effluent is discharged continuously from the Beverly
Beach  WWTP,  the  discharges are  characterized  by periodic  flow  surges that
coincide with plant  aeration cycles  (Kendra,  W.  and T. Determan,  6 November
1985,  personal communication).  According to 1983 DMRs,  average  loadings of
0.5  Ib/day  total nitrogen  and  0.13  Ib/day  total   phosphorous entered Budd
Inlet  from the  Beverly  Beach   WWTP  discharge  (URS   1986).   The  effluent
discharges through  a 6-in gravity-fed line approximately  2 m offshore at a
depth of 0.25 m at mean lower low water  (MLLW) (Clark, D.( 21 November 1985,
personal communication).   During low  tides,  the  treated effluent discharges
above MLLW and flows down the beach to the receiving water.

     During a limited Class  II  inspection of this facility  in  June  1985,
samples  analyzed for 6005  and  fecal  coliform bacteria exceeded  the  NPDES
weekly  and  monthly  average effluent  permit  limits  (Clark,  D.,  21  November
1985,  personal communication)-   Ecology  concluded that sanitary  problems at
the  Beverly Beach facility are  caused by sporadic  chlorination inefficiency
and  the shallow depth  of discharge.   Ecology determined  that  the Beverly
Beach discharge affects the receiving waters because the initial  dilution of
the  effluent  discharge  is minimal  due to shallow  discharge  depth,  and  the
chlorination  efficiency  of  the  WWTP  is   inadequate  during  flow  surges
(Kendra, W. and T. Determan, 6 November  1985, personal communication).

Seashore Villa WWTP--

     The Seashore Villa Mobile Home Park is located between Priest Point and
Gull Harbor  on  the  east  side  of Budd  Inlet  (see   Figure  5).   The Seashore
Villa WWTP services wastewater from over 50 mobile  homes and a population of
approximately 174 persons (Clark, D.,  25  March  1986, personal communication).
According  to  the NPDES  permit,  the  monthly  average quantity  of  effluent
discharged is not to exceed 0.015 MGD  (Ecology 1979),  which is equivalent to
the flow based on the design capacity of the plant.   In  1979, Ecology  (1979)
estimated  that the  average flow was  0.0036 MGD, and in  1986 the  flow  was
estimated  to  be  0.0115  MGD  (Clark,  D., 25  March  1986,  personal  communi-
cation).   According  to  DMRs from 1983,  the  Seashore  Villa WWTP contributed
                                       37

-------
loadings of  2.5 Ib/day total  nitrogen  and 0.6  Ib/day  total  phosphorous to
Budd Inlet (URS 1986).

     The Seashore  Villa WWTP  effluent  discharges  to  Budd Inlet  through  a
275-yd, 3-in diameter  pipe.   During  a Class II inspection in July 1985, the
depth  of  the  discharge was  2 m  at MLLW  (Kendra,  W.  and  T.  Determan,  6
November  1985,  personal  communication).    Measurements  of  6005  and  total
suspended solids in  effluent samples exceeded the  NPDES  permit  limits, and
Mr.  D.  Clark  (25  March  1986,  personal  communication)  concluded that the
facility did not appear to meet NPDES permit requirements.  However,  Ecology
also indicated that effluent discharged from Seashore Villa had little or no
effect  in the  discharge zone  (Kendra, W.  and  T.  Determan,  6 November 1985,
personal communication).  Fecal coliform bacteria were virtually absent from
surface waters  in  the  mixing  zone at Seashore Villa.   Seven  of 10  samples
collected had  fewer than 1  organism/100  ml.   However,  Ecology  stated that
the  presence  of an algal bloom during the survey  may  have  masked effluent
impacts.

     Areas  Not Serviced  by WWTP--For  many years,  the  Boston  Harbor area
(see Figure  5)  has been plagued by  failing septic  systems  due to poor soil
conditions.  Boston Harbor has  reportedly experienced septic system failures
at more than  three times the  second  highest  surveyed  septic system  failure
rate in Thurston  County,  and more than eight  times the  rate of failures in
other  similar  shoreline areas  (R.W. Beck  and Associates 1986).  In  April
1984,  the  Thurston  County   Public Works,  Planning, and  Health  Departments
conducted a survey of  the operational condition of the septic systems  in the
Boston  Harbor  area.   Over 68  percent of  the  septic systems were determined
questionable or failing.   Data collected  in  this study show that  failing
drainfield  systems are predominant,  and  that increasing  concentrations of
septic wastes are  discharged into the area's ditches and marine waters  (R.W.
Beck and Associates 1986).   The Boston Harbor Wastewater Facilities Planning
Study  for  Thurston County  (R.W.  Beck and  Associates  1986)  was  prepared to
assess  means  of handling  septic  wastes  discharged to Boston Harbor.  One
option will likely include the  construction of a secondary WWTP.
                                      38

-------
     The  Thurston  County Health  Department identified  the  following three
unconfirmed areas that may  have  onsite sewage  disposal  problems and thus be
sources of fecal coliform bacteria  to Budd Inlet:   Athens Beach, the French
Loop Road area, and the Olympic Country and Golf Club (Gibbs, T., 20 January
1988,  personal  communication).   The  Olympia  Country  and  Golf Club  has  a
drainfield  on  the  west  side  of  Cooper  Point  Road  that  services  their
facilities, and  possibly  some local  residences.   Wastewater flows downhill
to a collection site and is pumped uphill to the drainfield.   The wastewater
in the drainfield reportedly does not  flow  into Budd Inlet (Haggerty, K.( 18
January 1988,  personal communication).

Combined Sewer Overflows

     Flows  to CSOs  result  from  an  overflow  of  the combined  sanitary  and
storm  sewer system.   During a heavy  rain storm,  additional  flow from storm
runoff exceeds the hydraulic  capacity of the collection system.  The excess
flow,  a  mixture  of  storm  runoff and  raw sewage,  is  discharged  from  CSO
discharge  points  into  surrounding waters.  With the exception  of two known
CSO  discharge points, the City of Olympia has  separated all  storm and sewer
lines  in  the  study area  (Moore,  D.,   17  November  1987,  personal communica-
tion).   The  first CSO is a 48-in diameter outfall  that enters  a 72-in pipe
approximately 100 ft south of East Bay near State and Chestnut Streets (Alan,
R.,  25  March 1988,  personal  communication).    This  72-in diameter  pipe
subsequently  flows into an  84-in  diameter pipe that contains flow from both
Moxlie and Indian Creeks (Moore,  D.,  29 March 1988,  personal  communication).
The terminus of the 84-in diameter pipe discharges  into  East  Bay.  The second
CSO  is a  30-in  diameter  outfall  that  enters West Bay near Water Street (see
Figure 6)  (Moore,  D., 9  December 1987,  personal  communication).   The City
of Olympia  is currently  preparing a  CSO  reduction  plan, the draft of which
will be  submitted to Ecology  by  31 July  1988  (Moore,  D., 9 December 1987,
personal  communication).

     These CSOs have not been  monitored for flow or  chemical  composition, and
their flow frequency is unknown (Cunningham, J., 21  September 1987, personal
communication; Alan,  R.,  25 March  1988,  personal   communication).   The CSO
that enters East  Bay via Moxlie  Creek may not flow more than once per year
                                       39

-------
(O'Brien,  E.,  12 November  1987,  personal  communication).   Mr.  R.  Alan  (25
March  1988,  personal  communication)  stated that neither  CSO  discharged in
1987 or  1988.   Since  1987,  LOTT  employees  visually check the CSOs for flow
when high waters cause the  overflow alarms to sound.

     Prior to  March 1988,  untreated  sanitary sewage could  also  enter Budd
Inlet via emergency overflows  (EOF).  Discharges from EOF are not associated
with a storm event, but result from an equipment fai.lure or a power failure.
EOF are  generally  located  at  lift  stations  to  discharge excess flow if the
pump  fails.    Prior  to  March  1988,   the  LOTT  facility had  two  EOF  that
discharged into Budd Inlet:  the West Bay pump station (2200 West Bay Drive)
and  the  East  Bay  pump  station  (1621  East Bay  Drive).    The  Jasper and
Eastside  pump  station  (1208 Eastside  Street) discharged  into Mission Creek.
The locations  of these pumping stations are  shown in Figure 5.  According to
Mr. R.  Alan  (25 March  1988, personal communication), these  overflows  have
been  eliminated.    Two EOF  were  plugged,  and  a manual  valve  replaced the
existing  automatic overflow at the West Bay  pump station.

Surface Runoff

     Storm water runoff  has long been  suspected  as a  potential  source of
pollution  to  the   marine  environment.    Recently,  it   has  received  more
attention  as  the   problems of  toxic  input from  urban  runoff  have  been
recognized.   Because a large portion  of the study  area's drainage basin is
rural and agricultural, the City of Olympia  has the only storm drain system.
Over 80  percent  of  the  surface  runoff from the study area  flows into Budd
Inlet via natural drainage  channels (e.g.,  streams,  creeks).  Surface runoff
also enters Budd Inlet from the Deschutes River and Capitol Lake.

     Surface  storm  water  runoff  that occurs  within the  City  of Olympia
boundaries is  primarily  collected by  the   city storm  sewer system.   City
storm  drains  that  discharge directly to Budd  Inlet are shown in  Figure 6
(City  of Olympia  1987;   McCarthy,  B.,  15  January  1988,  personal  communi-
cation).   Within  City of  Olympia boundaries,  surface  runoff can  also be
collected  in  the municipal  combined sewer  system and then treated at  LOTT.
                                      40

-------
Storm water  can  also discharge to Budd  Inlet  via natural drainage channels
and as disperse surface runoff.

     Storm drain flow was not calculated because information on the size and
land use of the contributing area was not known for each storm drain.  There
are essentially  no  data  available  to characterize  storm drain  discharges.
Between  9  and  17  April  1985,  URS  (1986)  estimated  flows  from  34  pipes,
culverts,  and  storm drain  outfalls  that discharge  into Budd Inlet.   Flow
rates were measured  with  a  Pygmy  current meter,  and  estimates ranged from 0
to 0.284 cubic ft per second (cfs).  Flow from the San Francisco storm drain
was between 0.02 and 0.025 cfs.  On 10 September  1985,  flow estimates from 15
storm  water discharges  ranged from 0  to  1.203  cfs.    Flow from  the  San
Francisco  storm  drain  was estimated at  0.01 cfs.   URS (1986) also intended
to use data collected from the San Francisco storm drain outfall  (see Figure
6) to be representative of urban runoff for  determination  of  loadings to Budd
Inlet.   However,  because  the lack  of rainfall  during  the  source  survey
resulted in  very low  loadings  of 6005, fecal coliform  bacteria,  dissolved
oxygen,  and  algal   nutrients,  these  data  could  not be   extrapolated  to
represent  total  urban  runoff under  more normal  wet-weather  conditions (URS
1986).

     Private industries  along  the shore of Budd  Inlet may  also  have storm
drain  systems  that  discharge into Budd  Inlet.   These storm  drains were not
characterized  as part  of  this  study, but are discussed below in the section
on point discharges  to Budd  Inlet.

Industrial  Sources

     Industrial  sources  can be  divided into point and  nonpoint sources.
Point  sources  consist of discrete  discharges from  an  identifiable source.
They  are composed primarily of NPDES-permitted  discharges  and  unpermitted
industrial  storm drains.  The nonpoint sources include any offsite migration
of contaminants  resulting from contaminant  storage,  treatment, and handling
practices.    The potential contaminant  sources that were  identified  in the
project  area are shown in Figure 5.
                                      41

-------
Point Sources--

     Permitted D1scharQes--Eco1oQv is responsible for issuing NPDES permits.
Ecology statewide  policy  limits  industrial  discharges to noncontact cooling
water  and  storm water.   A  list  of  the six  existing NPDES-permitted waste
discharges to Budd  Inlet  is  presented  in Table 4.  Permits have been issued
to  four  WWTP  (i.e.,  Tamoshan,  LOTT,  Beverly  Beach,  and  Seashore Villa).
Permits for  storm  water  runoff have  been  issued to two  industries  (i.e.,
Chevron  and   Del son Lumber  Company/Olympia  Forest  Products).  Although  an
NPDES  permit  does  not  currently exist  for the Cascade Pole  Company site,
Ecology maintains  that organic  contaminants  are currently discharged  from
the  site  and that  the discharge requires  an NPDES permit  (Peeler,  M.,  12
January 1988,  personal  communication).  Information  on  discharges  from the
four  NPDES-permitted  WWTP  discharges  is provided  in the  previous section
entitled "Wastewater Treatment  Plants."   Information  on  discharges  from the
Chevron facility and Olympia Forest  Products  is provided below.  Discharges
from  the  Cascade  Pole  Company  are   discussed  in  the   section  entitled
"Unpemn'tted Discharges."

     Chevron U.S.A. operates a bulk petroleum storage facility near the Port
of  Olympia on  private  property.    As  identified  by Ecology  (1985a),  the
discharge from this facility consists of storm water collected from the truck
loading areas and building roof drains.  This discharge is  routed to an oil-
water separator that is located in a bermed area.  The oil   is drawn from the
separator  and discharged  into  an  adjacent  buried  tank.    Waste  oils  are
pumped from the tank yearly, and hauled  to Tacoma by the pumping contractor.
An  automatically operated  pump discharges effluent  into   the  storm  sewer.
Thus,  the  effluent consists  of an  irregular and  undetermined amount  of
storm water discharge.

     As identified  by  Ecology (1985b), Delson Lumber Company/Olympia Forest
Products owns and operates a saw mill and log storage pond  on the west shore
of Budd Inlet.   This  facility discharges undetermined quantities of accumu-
lated  storm   water and,  occasionally,  washdown  water  directly into  Budd
Inlet.
                                      42

-------
     Unpernritted  Discharges--Industries  along  the  shoreline of  Budd Inlet
are served  by unpermitted  private  storm drains that  discharge  directly to
marine waters.   Although  flows  from these  storm drains should be relatively
small,  the  potential  for  contamination due  to industrial  practices could
make private  storm drains  a  significant source of  contaminants.   U.S.  EPA
and  Ecology  are  currently  addressing  this  issue  by  including  industrial
storm drains  in the NPDES program.

     In the  Budd Inlet study area,  the locations  of  most industrial storm
drains  have  never been defined.   Within the study  boundaries,  the Port of
Olympia operates  the  largest area serviced by  a  private storm drain system
[see Port of  Olympia  (29  February 1988,  personal  communication)  for current
lessees].  The types of operations conducted by lessees and the locations of
the Port of Olympia private storm drains have not been identified.  However,
two  storm  drain outfalls  (i.e.,  West  Bay  drain  outfall  and   the  former
Cascade Pole  NPDES-permitted  outfall) on Port  of  Olympia property have been
identified  as potential contaminant  sources.   According to Ecology (Norton,
D.,  5   February  1986,  personal  communication),  the West  Bay drain  is  the
major  storm  water discharge  point  for  runoff from  the  northern  portion of
the Port of Olympia property.  This  drain also receives storm water collected
along Capitol Way in downtown Olympia.  Contaminated groundwater beneath the
Cascade Pole  Company facility,  located  east  of  the  West Bay drain, may also
flow  into this drainage system.  Recent studies  have  shown that the former
Cascade Pole  NPDES-permitted  outfall contributes contaminants to Budd Inlet.
Data on concentrations of contaminants in water and sediments collected near
the West Bay  drain and Cascade Pole  facility  are presented  below.  Additional
information on results  of chemical  analyses  on  sediments collected near the
Cascade  Pole  outfall   are  presented  in  the  section  entitled   "Sediment
Contamination."

     Available Data—On  13  February  1985,  Ecology  collected  water samples
from Cascade  Pole's former NPDES-permitted  outfall  and the West Bay drain
(Johnson, A.,  22 July  1985,  personal communication; Norton,  D.,  5 February
1986,  personal  communication).   The West  Bay drain  was resampled  on 14
August  1985.   In the sample collected from the Cascade Pole outfall,  10  ug/L
of total  PAH  and  1,700 ug/L of pentachlorophenol  (PCP) were  detected.   In
                                       43

-------
the sample  collected in  February  from the West Bay drain,  395  ug/L of PAH
and 17  ug/L of PCP  were  detected.   In the sample  collected in  August from
the West  Bay drain,  56 ug/L  of  PAH  and 11 ug/L of  PCP  were detected.  Low
molecular weight  PAH  (LPAH)  accounted for 80  and  85 percent of  the total
PAH in  the  February and August  1985  samples,  respectively.   High concen-
trations  of LPAH  is attributed  to  the predominance of  these  compounds  in
creosote,  and because  these  compounds are  more  water  soluble  than high
molecular weight  PAH  (HPAH).   Lower  concentrations  of  LPAH in  August may
have resulted  from tidal  influence at  the  sampling  location.   The specific
conductivity  of  the water  sample  was  15,500 umhos/cm,  suggesting that the
sample  was  primarily  seawater  (Norton,   D.,  5   February  1986,  personal
communication).   Ecology calculated  a 20  Ib/yr flux  of PCP to  Budd Inlet
from the  Cascade  Pole  Company outfall.  Ecology calculated a 300  Ib/yr flux
of  PCP  from the  West  Bay drain based  on  the February  1985  results  and  30
Ib/yr flux  based  on  the August 1985 results.  Ecology concluded that because
seawater was  present in  the sewer lines,  the actual loads to Budd Inlet may
be  lower than these  values.

     In  July 1985,  Applied  Geotechnology  (1986a)  collected surface  water
samples  from standing  water  in the  Port  Detention  Basin (PDB)  and from the
Cascade  Pole outfall.   Samples were analyzed for  PAH  and phenols.  Results
of  these  investigations  showed no detectable PAH  in  the PDB or the outfall
sample.   Phenols  were not detected in water from the PDB.  Concentrations of
PCP were detected  at 27 ug/L in the Cascade Pole outfall  sample.  Differences
between  results  from Ecology  and  Applied  Geotechnology  (1986a) may  be due
to  seasonal effects,  tidal  effects,  variations  in sampling or  analytical
laboratory  procedures,  or  a change  in discharge  quality  caused  by  plant
activities.   Applied  Geotechnology and  Ecology  concluded  that   additional
sampling efforts  should be  conducted to characterize the  storm-water system.
In  March  or April  1988,  Ecology  will  be sampling  and tracing  the West Bay
storm drain system  (Peeler,  M., 22  February  1988,  personal  communication).
Sediment samples  will  be  collected from eight manholes and six catch  basins
to  determine the  connection between the Cascade Pole  site and  the West Bay
drain outfall.
                                      44

-------
Nonpoint Sources--

     The  nonpoint  source  category  includes  all  other  potential  indirect
sources  of  pollution.   Offsite  migration  of  contaminants  can  occur  when
surface runoff picks  up  contaminants  as  it  moves across a contaminated area
of the property,  or when contaminants percolate into the groundwater system
where  they  can   be  transported  to  the waterways   via  groundwater  flow.
Groundwater data are presented in the  following  section.   Potential toxic and
microbial contamination  from other nonpoint sources is discussed below.

     Landfills—Historical landfills  may  also have contributed contaminants
to Budd  Inlet.    During  construction  of  the LOTT WWTP, an old landfill  was
observed  in  the  area  in which the secondary clarifiers  were  built (Oblas,
V., 29 February  1988,  personal  communication).   The  landfill  was used prior
to 1950  as a  general  municipal  dump and  apparently was operated by the City
of Olympia (Alan, R.,  14 March  1988,  personal  communication;  Oberlander,  J.,
24 February  1988, personal communication).   The material that  was removed
from the secondary clarifier  area was  disposed of at the  Thurston  County
Landfill  on  Margaret   Road (Oblas,  V.,  29 February  1988,  personal  communi-
cation).  According to Mr. R.  Alan (14 March  1988,  personal  communication),
landfill materials  remain on the  LOTT WWTP site  in the area northeast of the
secondary clarifiers.

     Commercial   and   Recreational   Marinas—The  following   five  marinas
currently  operate  in  Budd  Inlet:    West Bay  Marina,  Olympia  Yacht  Club,
Fiddlehead Marina,  East  Bay Marina, and Boston Harbor Marina (see Figure 5).
Although  boat painting  is  allowed  at all  but the  East Bay  Marina,  boat
repair facilities are only offered  at the  West  Bay  Marina.   Historically,
the One  Tree Island  Marina  existed near the Fiddlehead  Marina.   Sediments
contaminated with metals were  identified  in this area in  1985.  As mentioned
below,  a plating  facility was once located in this area.

     Nonpoint  sources  of microbial   contamination  in  Budd  Inlet include
contributions from  live-aboards in these Olympia marinas  and general boating
                                      45

-------
activity.  These contributions have not been qualitatively or quantitatively
identified.

     In addition to  these  marinas,  a  U.S.  Maritime Fleet ("Mothball Fleet")
was moored  in  eastern Budd Inlet near  Gull  Harbor (Jamison,  D.,  21 January
1988,  personal  communication;  Newall,  G.,  10  February  1988,  personal
communication).   This  Mothball  Fleet  may  have  comprised  over  100  boats
including merchant ships,  tankers, freighters, and troop transports (Newall,
G.,  10  February 1988, personal  communication).    Scrap  material,  which  may
have  included  waste  oils, solvents,  and  paints, was  reportedly discarded
from the  ships into  Budd  Inlet (Oberlander, J.,  29  January  1988, personal
communication).  Additional information is not available.

     Other  Nonpoint   Sources—Historical   industrial   practices   may  have
contributed  contaminants  to  Budd Inlet.   At one time, the  Hardel  Mutual
Plywood facility located on West Bay Drive (see Figure 5) discharged process
wastes  into  their onsite  septic system  (URS  1980).   These  process  wastes
included caustic substances, oil, and phenolic glue wastes (URS 1980).  Over
time,  these  wastes  may  have  leached   into  Budd  Inlet  (Oberlander,  J.,  29
January  1988,  personal  communication).   Also,  a  plating facility was  once
located in the area near One Tree Island Marina [see Figure 5; U.S. Army COE
no  date (d)].   This  operation may  have  contributed to  the  high  concen-
trations  of cadmium  detected  in  West  Bay  (Pierce,   R.,  20  January  1988,
personal communication).

Groundwater

     The impact  of  toxic contaminants  from  groundwater  flow  into the study
area is  difficult  to determine.  To  date,  no studies have defined regional
groundwater conditions  in  the  immediate area of Budd  Inlet.   The shallow
water table aquifers are most important when evaluating groundwater problems
because of their vulnerability to contamination from surface activities.

     The LOTT  Urban  Area Wastewater Management  Plan  (Parametrix  1987b)  has
addressed  groundwater movement  and  quality  in   Thurston  County,  including
identification of sensitive aquifer areas.   Much  of the area is characterized
                                      46

-------
by porous soils  that  allow rapid  infiltration  of water from onsite disposal
systems into groundwater.  According to this plan:

     "Approximately  65  percent  of  Thurston  County  is  underlain  by
     relatively permeable glacial deposits which overlay unprotected or
     shallow aquifers.   Nearly 100 percent  of  domestic water supplies
     are derived  from these sources.   Due to  the  generally permeable
     nature of  soils  in  the County and  the  location of these aquifers
     the entire  [study area] is  effectively an  aquifer recharge area.
     Approximately  80,000  people  currently  dispose of  domestic waste
     through on-site  disposal  systems  into the study  area's  aquifer
     recharge area.  .  ..  Recent  groundwater contamination  occurrences
     and lake  quality degradation that  is  occurring in the  Hicks  and
     Long Lakes  area  suggest  that the  regional  assimilation capacity
     for  on-site  disposal   systems  may  be  approaching  its limit  in
     selected areas.  .  ..  Due  to  the  sensitivity of County  aquifers to
     groundwater  contamination,  the  State  Department  of  Ecology  has
     adopted a  State  regulation  reserving approximately 41,000  gpm of
     the area's  groundwater resources  for future  public water  supply
     needs."
     Because the  region's  groundwater aquifers  are recharged primarily from
within  the LOTT  study  area,  the  continued  use  of  onsite waste  disposal
systems for existing  uses  and  new developments  without mitigation threatens
the public health in the urban area  (Parametrix 1987b).

Groundwater Contamination--

     Substantial  creosote  and  PCP  contamination of  groundwater  at  the
Cascade Pole  Company facility was  first  documented in 1983  (Norton,  D.,  5
February  1986,  personal   communication).    A  subsequent   investigation  by
Ecology in  February 1985 confirmed  the presence  of creosote and in ground-
water  onsite.    Ecology  determined that  contamination  extended to  marine
discharges and intertidal sediments in the  vicinity of the facility (Johnson,
A., 22  July  1985,  personal communication).   A  subsequent  remedial  investi-
gation  by  Applied Geotechnology  (1986a,b)  provided detailed information on
PAH and phenols in soils and groundwater near the  site.  High concentrations
of PAH  and  phenols  were present  in  surface soils in  the immediate vicinity
of the  pole-treating  plant  (up  to 40,000 mg/kg  PAH  and  up to  400  mg/kg
phenols).   Preservative fluid was found floating on the water table in three
wells immediately adjacent to  the plant.   Concentrations  of PAH and phenols
were highest in  subsurface soils  within  a  few feet above or below the water

                                      47

-------
table  at  sites  in  the southwestern portion  of the property  and  along the
southern  shoreline  of  the  plant.    Concentrations  of  PAH and  phenols  in
groundwater were highest  near the plant and  in the  southwestern portion of
the property.   Using three different methods, Applied Geotechnology  (1986a)
calculated  the  flux (i.e.,  transport)  of  PAH and  phenols  from  the fill
aquifer to  Budd  Inlet.    The flux  of  PAH and  phenols  to Budd  Inlet from
groundwater and  surface runoff was  estimated to range  between  143 and 190
Ib/yr  (Applied Geotechnology  1986a).  POP accounted for 12 percent  (or 17-23
Ib/yr)  of  the total  flux  of  PAH and phenols  to  Budd Inlet, and  about  23
percent of the total flux  of  phenols to Budd  Inlet.

     The only  shallow  groundwater seep  discharges  into Budd Inlet that have
been  characterized  were  sampled during  investigations  conducted  at  the
Cascade Pole  site.   On 13  February 1985, Ecology collected  water samples
from  a shoreline  seep  located off  the  Cascade Pole site  (Johnson,  A.,  22
July  1985,  personal  communication;  Norton,  D.,  5 February  1986,  personal
communication).   Concentrations of  PAH  and PCP in  the shoreline seep sample
were 2.3 ug/L and 8.6 ug/L, respectively.

     In July  1985,  Applied  Geotechnology  (1986a)  collected  surface water
samples  from  a   seep  that  discharged  beneath  the  riprap  on  the eastern
shoreline  of  the  Cascade  Pole  site.    Samples were  analyzed  for  PAH  and
phenols.   PAH  and phenols  were undetected  in the  seep samples.   On 24 June
1987,  Ecology observed "numerous  product seeps" along the shoreline adjacent
to the  Cascade  Pole  site  (White,  M., 30 July 1987, personal communication).
The  product seeps  were primarily  observed  east  of  Cascade  Pole's  NPDES-
permitted discharge  outfall  and  approximately  100  ft west of  the  East Bay
Marina  dock.   Groundwater  seeps  were also observed in  that  area.   Ecology
collected  a sample  from  a product  seep  (Sample CP1)  and  from  an  adjacent
groundwater seep (Sample CP2), which were  located  approximately 100-150 ft
northwest of  the East Bay Marina dock.   A water  sample  was  also  collected
from a  groundwater seep (Sample  CP3) located approximately 25 ft  southeast
of  Cascade  Pole's  NPDES-permitted  discharge  outfall.   Samples were also
collected from a product  seep (Sample CP4) and from an adjacent groundwater
seep  (Sample  CP5),   both   located   approximately  50  ft  northeast  of  the
outfall and 40  ft offshore from  the riprap.   Samples were analyzed for the
                                       48

-------
acid/base/neutral   extractable   organic  compounds   and   volatile  organic
compounds  on  the  U.S.  EPA priority  pollutant list.   Sample CP4  was also
analyzed for  tentatively identified  organic  compounds.   Analytical results
for  these   samples are  presented  in Table  5.    Groundwater seep samples
collected  southeast  of the outfall  and  from near the  East  Bay  Marina dock
did not  appear  to be contaminated.   In  the groundwater seep sample (Sample
CP5) collected northeast of the outfall, concentrations of volatile organics
compounds  ranged  from 30 to 270  ug/L.   Concentrations  of organic compounds
ranged  from  1,200 to  430,00  ug/L  in  the  product seep  sample  that  was
collected  adjacent to the  groundwater  seep sample.    In  the second product
seep  sample  (Sample  CP1),  elevated  concentrations   of  volatile  organic
compounds  and  PAH were  detected.   These  PAH  are  typical components  of
creosote.

     During this  investigation, Ecology also surveyed groundwater monitoring
wells for product.  Floating product  in the wells was estimated by measuring
the  distance  between  the  air-oil  interface  and  the  oil-water  interface.
Floating product  was  undetected  in two wells and  detected  at <0.01  ft  in
three  wells.    The  thickness  of  floating  product  in  the  remaining  three
wells, which  are  located 50  ft  south of the  Cascade  Pole  building,  ranged
from 4.11 to 7.49  ft.  Well N24B was  probed for sinking product and none was
encountered.

     On  9  March  1988,   Ecology   detected  1.5  ft  of  sinking  product  in
groundwater well  SP1  located  on the  Cascade  Pole  Company  site (Peeler,  M.(
15  March 1988,  personal  communication).  The  well was  installed by Applied
Geotechnology in  mid-July  1987  but was  never developed  or sampled.  Ecology
collected  samples  of  the sinking  product  and surface sheen  at this well  and
submitted  the  samples for  analysis.    Ecology also  collected seep samples
onsite on  8 March 1988.   Based  on these  results and  negotiations between
Ecology  and the  Cascade  Pole  Company,  an extensive  groundwater sampling
effort may be conducted  in  the near future.

     Although groundwater  contamination  beneath  other industrial  areas  is
also likely, it  has  not  been  investigated.   The only past petroleum storage
facilities on Port of Olympia property were operated by Olympia Oil and Wood
                                       49

-------
                TABLE  5.   CONCENTRATIONS  (ug/L) OF VOLATILE AND EXTRACTABLE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
           IN PRODUCT AND 6ROUNDWATER SEEP SAMPLES COLLECTED  IN  JUNE  1987  FROM CASCADE POLE COMPANY3
Product


Volatile Qrqanics0
Acetone

Benzene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Styrenes
Total xylenes
Aqueous
CP1

U
U
35
190
390E
130E
780E
Fraction
CP1L

430E
U
40
230
540E
190E
l.OOOE
Oil Fraction
CP1

U
U
1.500M
32,000
131,000
42,000
236,000

CP2



U
U
U
U
U
Groundwater
CP3



U
U
2.1
U
0.7M

CP5



30
100
130
U
270
Extractable Orqanics
CP1
CP4
                                                                          Groundwater
CP2
CP3
Naphthalene
2-methyl naphthal ene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Di benzof uran
Fl uorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzof a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
8enzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzo (g,h,i ) pyrelene
Tentatively Identified
1-Methyl naphthal ene
2-Ethanyl naphthal ene
2-Methyl anthracene
Benzoa ( b ) thi ophene
Dibenzothiophene
1-H Indene
2,3,-Dihydro-lH indene
Carbazol e
Tri methyl naphthal ene
2.06E
860,000
18,000
720,000
340,000
410,000
1.3E6
150,000
690,000
420,000
120,000
110,000
82,000
82,000
42,000
12.000J
12.000J
Orqanicsc'd









430,000
240,000
U
130,000
58,000
80,000
220,000
37,000
82,000
98,000
16,000
18,000
10,000
10,000
5.300J
1.200J
1,4000
CP4
490.000J
170.000J
46.000J
40, 000 J
180.000J
100.000J
67.000J
45.500J
360.000J
U
1J
U
5J
2J
3J
9J
U
9J
5J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U










11J
U
U
6J
U
0.7J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U










a Only chemicals with detected concentrations are included in this table.

  Duplicate sample.

c  Data  Qualifiers:     E=estimated  value;  J=estimated  value  is  less  than  the  specified  detection  limit;
M=estimated value  of analyte  found  and confirmed by analyst but with low spectral match  parameters; U=compound
was analyzed,  but not detected.

d Tentatively identified organic  compounds  for Samples CP1, CP2, and CP3 are not  listed  because concentrations
were estimated at <19 ug/L.

Reference:  Adapted from M. White (30 July 1987, personal conmunication).
                                                      50

-------
Company  and  Texaco  (Applied Geotechnology  1986a).    Applied  Geotechnology
(1986a) provided the following information:

     "The  Olympia  Oil   and  Wood  company,  opened  in  1931,  was located
     just west of the Georgia Pacific mill [on the southwestern portion
     of the peninsula],  Olympia Oil and Wood had a 250,000 gallon tank
     for  No.  6 oil, two  125,000 gallon tanks  for  No. 5  oil,  and two
     tanks of unknown capacity to store diesel fuel.  Sludge reportedly
     was cleaned from the tanks every two to  three years, containerized,
     and shipped to an  oil reclaimer.  The bulk storage facility,  which
     handled approximately  10 to 15  million gallons of  oil  per  year,
     was dismantled between  1972 and 1973.
     Texaco operated a  bulk  fuel  storage  facility west of CPC [Cascade
     Pole  Company]  from  1945  to 1965.   The facility  had one 105,000
     gallon, one 420,000  gallon,  and four 630,000  gallon storage  tanks
     used  for  kerosene and  two grades  of  gasoline.    Annual  volume
     through the facility was estimated at 25 to 30 million gallons."
     In  the  1970s,  a  groundwater investigation was  conducted  of petroleum
seeps  that were  observed  in an  area  that  was  occupied  by  Standard  Oil
(Pierce,  R.,  20  January  1988,  personal  communication; Oberlander,  J.,  29
January  1988,  personal communication).  The  petroleum  storage  tanks onsite
were  removed  (Oberlander, J.,  29  January  1988,   personal  communication).
Additional information on  this study was not available.

     During LOTT's construction of the Water Street Pump Station  (see Figure
6), gasoline-contaminated  sediments were observed  (Ecology 1984; Oberlander,
J., 29  January  1988, personal communication).   Groundwater  was found to be
"heavily  contaminated" by petroleum,  and  over 83 barrels  of  contaminated
groundwater were  removed  from the excavation  site  between  December 1977 and
May 1978  (Ecology 1984).   A  bulk  petroleum storage facility was reportedly
operated  in  this  area by the Mobil  Company.    However, attempts to finger
print the oil were inconclusive.  Ecology conducted a preliminary assessment
at  this site  and determined  that no  action  was   necessary  (Ecology 1984;
Spencer,  M.,   1  February  1988,  personal  communication).    Surface water
contamination  has not been  observed near  the pump  station, but is highly
probable given  the proximity  (<200  ft)  of the  contaminated  groundwater to
Budd Inlet  (Ecology 1984).   However,  because of  the  bulkheads  that exist
between  this  site and Budd  Inlet waters,  the  gasoline may  not be  leaching
into Budd Inlet (Oberlander, J., 29 January 1988,  personal communication).

                                       51

-------
     Oil-contaminated soils were also observed during the development of the
farmer's  market  area  of  Olympia   (Pierce,  R.,  20  January  1988,  personal
communication).    This  contamination  was reportedly  attributable to  bulk
petroleum storage and transfer facilities that had operated in the area.

     During  demolition  of  an  old   gasoline  station  at the  intersection  of
East Bay Drive and State Avenue,  oil-contaminated soils were also identified.
The gasoline  station  was reportedly constructed in  1956,  and prior to this
date the site was occupied  by a grocery store that also had underground fuel
storage facilities.   Earth  Consultants  (1985)  conducted  a study for ARCO at
this site and  installed  six monitoring  wells.   Groundwater was present at a
depth  of  9  ft  below the  surface, and  no  hydrocarbon  accumulations  were
noted on the surface of the groundwater.  Groundwater samples were collected
and analyzed  using gas chromatography.   All  concentrations  of hydrocarbons
were below  the 25 ppm detection limit.   This  value  is much  higher than the
generally accepted maximum detection  limits (e.g.,  0.001-5  mg/L).   Hydro-
carbon  levels  in  soils  were  also measured using  infrared  (IR)  spectro-
photometry  and  silica gel  separation.  Results  indicated  that the existing
and previous underground  tanks or distribution systems had leaked.  In soils
collected from  backhoe  trenches,  Earth  Consultants (7 August 1986, personal
communication)  reported  that  "2,500 ppm diesel  and 3,400  ppm motor oil were
detected."   Gasoline  was  not  detected.    In  July  1986,  Earth Consultants
conducted  additional  analyses  for  PCBs  and  metals  using  EP  toxicity
procedures.   Metals  were undetected, and  PCBs were  detected at 0.03  mg/kg.
This concentration  is below the 1  mg/kg  regulatory  action threshold, which
was set as  an  acceptable cleanup criteria by Ecology (Bradley, D., 30 March
1988,  personal  communication).   The  materials  removed from  this  site were
ultimately  disposed   at  the Thurston  County landfill, and  no contaminated
soils remain onsite (Pierce, R., 20 January  1988, personal communication).

     The Thurston  County Health Department  is currently  involved  in  a 3-yr
groundwater  management   study   (Pierce,  R.,  17  November   1987,  personal
communication).   Existing  groundwater  data are being collected,  including
information  on  aquifers  and recharge areas.   This groundwater plan will be
                                       52

-------
prepared to assess  management  alternatives  for protecting aquifers and will
be available in the near future.

Accidental  Spills

     Information on accidental spills in the region is contained in files of
complaints  reported to Ecology  by private  citizens.   The  spills  and com-
plaints reported  to Ecology since  1986  have been entered  into a database.
That  database  lists   the   following  information:    investigator,  date  of
investigation, alleged violator, material spilled, media code (e.g., surface
water), waterway  (e.g.,  Budd  Inlet),  and  comments.    In  most  cases,  the
alleged violator  is unknown and  there is not enough  detailed information to
determine  the  exact   location  of  the   spill  or  to  calculate  contaminant
loading.

     The  22  reports   listed  in  the  database  (Ecology,  9  December  1987,
personal communication) are summarized below:

     •    Nine oil  sheens were observed on waterway or beaches

     •    Five algal blooms were observed

     •    Fifty gallons of  oil were spilled  into Budd Inlet via a storm
          drain

     •    "Strip  and  wax"  materials  and emulsifiers were  dumped into
          storm drains that entered Budd Inlet

     •    Bark  and  wood wastes from  Dunlap  Towing,  cattle feed waste,
          and paint scrapings were discharged to Budd Inlet

     •    Two unidentified  spills were reported.

     The only  fully documented  petroleum spill  in  Budd  Inlet  occurred in
1987.   Industrial  Petroleum  Distributors  (IPD),   Inc.  stored  process waste
oil at  an  abandoned ARCO bulk petroleum  storage  facility on West Bay Drive
                                       53

-------
(Anderson, D.( 29 October 1987,  personal  communication;  Cloud, G., 30 October
1987,  personal  communication).   Waste  oil  was  spilled  onsite,  and  an
unspecified volume of oil entered Budd Inlet.  The oil slick spread at least
as far as Olympia Shoals, and at-sea recovery was attempted.  (Cloud, G., 30
October  1987,  personal   communication).    Ecology  brought an  enforcement
action against IDP.  Waste oils were tested for PCBs, and none were detected
(Cloud, G., 30 October 1987, personal communication).  Results of a bioassay
on the  "remaining contaminated soils"  at  the  IDP site  indicated  that  the
soils were  not  toxic,  and  thus  they  were not designated  hazardous wastes
(Anderson, D.,  22 December 1986, personal  communication).   However, onsite
cleanup of oil-contaminated  soils may have been  conducted  by  AIRO Services
(Cloud, G., 30 October 1987, personal communication).

EUTROPHICATION

     Eutrophic conditions in Budd Inlet have been documented since the 1950s
when  Col lias   et al.  (1962)  reported  oxygen values  below 2.0  mg/L on  4
September  1957  off   the Port  of  Olympia peninsula.    Since  then,  dense
phytoplankton  blooms  and low  dissolved  oxygen have been chronic problems in
the  southern  half of  the inlet.  Low dissolved oxygen concentrations in the
water  column   may stress fishes  and  benthic organisms,  and  may  regulate
benthic infauna  communities in the  sediments.   Therefore,  oxygen depletion
may  be equally important  as toxic contamination for the health of biological
resources.

     A total  of  six  data sets  were accepted for the review of water quality
in Budd  Inlet.   The following  reports  contain  data generated  since January
1982:  Mr. W.  Kendra and  Mr. T. Determan  (6 November 1985, personal communi-
cation),  URS   (1986),  Mr.  R.   Alan  (24  September  1987,   personal  communi-
cation),  Mr.   E.  Egge  (25  January  1987,  personal  communication), Mr.  T.
Mumford (25 September 1987,  personal communication), and the U.S. EPA STORET
data  files  for  Ecology  ambient  monitoring  data,   1982-1986  (U.S. EPA,  7
January 1988,  personal   communication).   Data contained  in these documents
have been  used  to determine  annual  fluctuations,  sources, and  budgets of
nutrients and dissolved oxygen, in addition to the effects  of WWTP discharges
                                       54

-------
on marine  receiving  water quality.  These  data  were collected at the water
quality stations shown in Figure 7.

Relationship Between Nutrients and Dissolved Oxygen Depletion

     Oxygen depletion typically occurs in the near-bottom water (0-2 m above
the sediment surface) when flushing is inadequate to renew bottom water, and
vertical mixing  is  reduced or eliminated due to a density-stratified water
column  (Yake, B., 6 July 1981,  personal communication; Welsh, B.( 18 November
1987,   personal  communication).    These  conditions  frequently  exist  in
shallow estuaries  with  an  established  thermocline during the  late summer.
Oxygen  depletion is  enhanced  by  the  addition of  organic  materials because
they provide  the necessary nutrients for algal  growth.   Dense algal  blooms
often result under such  conditions.  Algal production of oxygen in the near-
surface water  may  supersaturate it, but  as  these  organisms  die and sink to
the  sediment,   their  subsequent  decomposition   [in  addition  to  regular
sediment oxygen  demand (SOD)]  depletes available oxygen in the bottom water.
A  vertical  profile  of  dissolved  oxygen  in  a  water  column  experiencing
similar conditions might show  oxygen  concentrations  ranging  from  12 to over
15 mg/L near the water surface and concentrations of less than 3.0 mg/L near
the bottom.   A typical  vertical  profile  showing oxygen  depletion  in an area
similar to  Budd  Inlet  is depicted in  Figure 8.   The most rapid decreases in
oxygen  concentration with depth  usually  occur  in the photic  layer.   Under
conditions  of  poor flushing,  a rapid decline in dissolved oxygen caused by
SOD may also occur approximately 0-2 m  above the  sediment.   In the absence
of  vertical  mixing  or  flushing,  these  conditions would  persist  until  the
algal bloom became nutrient limited and growth subsided.

     Dinoflagellates, specifically  Cerative fusus. and Noctiluca scitallaus
(in  1977;  Kruger 1979),  and  Gvmorodinium spp.   and  Ceratium spp.  (in 1984;
URS 1986),  dominate  the  severe late summer algal blooms.  Because dinoflag-
ellates may  migrate  diurnally, they  may be net producers of  oxygen  in the
surface waters during the day, and consumers of oxygen in the bottom waters
at night.   URS  (1986)  suggested  that vertical  migration of dinoflagellates
was  a  major contributor to oxygen  depletion  of  near-bottom  water in Budd
                                       55

-------
                                       SAMPLING STATIONS


                                     A  WATER QUALITY

                                     A  WATER QUALITY - LOTT

                                     A  WATER QUALITY - URS (19B6)

                                     •  FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA
                                                 OLYMPIA
                                                 CITY
                                             |    BOUNDARY
Figure 7.  Locations of water quality and fecal coliform bacteria
          sampling stations in Budd Inlet.

-------
                   DISSOLVED  OXYGEN  (mg/L)

         0     2.0     4.0     6.0     8.0     10.0    12.0    14.0
             I   I   I    I    I   I    I   I    I   I    L   I   I    I   I
     1.0 -
     2.0 -
     3.0 -
     4.0 -
     5.0 -
 Q.
 UJ  6.0 H
 Q
     7.0 -
     8.0 -
     9.0 -
    10.0 -
    11.0 -"*;..:•:::,•.-.;.•:,:
                         SUBSURFACE
                         MAXIMUM
SEDIMENT
OXYGEN
DEMAND
Figure 8.  Theoretical example of vertical profile of dissolved oxygen.
                              57

-------
Inlet  during  the  late  summer.    Further  field  studies  are  required  to
substantiate this theory.

Nutrients

     Nutrients enter the Budd  Inlet  water column  through  tidal  exchange and
flushing from Puget Sound,  benthic flux, and nutrient loading from point and
nonpoint  sources  within the  inlet.   Each  of  these sources contributes  a
substantial  amount  of  nutrients,   and collectively  they  provide  enough
nutrients to sustain dense phytoplankton blooms.  URS (1986) determined that
the limiting nutrient for algal growth in Budd Inlet  is nitrogen.  Typically,
nitrogen  is  the  limiting nutrient  in marine systems, whereas  phosphate  is
the  limiting  nutrient  in   freshwater systems.     Nitrogen  and  phosphate
concentrations  in  Budd  Inlet  fluctuate  during  the  year  in  response  to
changes  in the  nutrient  concentration of Puget  Sound,  uptake by phytoplank-
ton, and source loadings.

     Water quality  data were  collected from  December 1981  to  October 1982
near the Washington Department of Natural   Resources  (WDNR)  Marine Station,
located  south  of Gull  Harbor (Mumford,  T.,  25  September 1987,  personal
communication).   This  sampling site  is adjacent  to  the  Seashore  Villa WWTP
discharge, and  may  be affected by the  discharge  of  sewage effluent.   These
are the  only Budd  Inlet nutrient  data collected  for a complete  year.   The
Ecology  ambient  monitoring  program  currently  requires  the collection  of
surface  and  bottom  water  quality  data at two  Budd Inlet  stations  [i.e.,
Station  BUD002  north  of  Fiddlehead  Marina  in  West  Bay  and Station  BUD005
south of Olympia  Shoals  (U.S. EPA, 7  January 1988, personal communication)].
Water  quality at Station  BUD002  is  influenced  by the LOTT 48-in diameter
outfall  at the  Fiddlehead  Marina,  the  LOTT 30-in diameter primary outfall,
and the  Capitol  Lake  outfall.   Analytical  results  of  samples  collected at
Station  BUD005  suggest minimal  anthropogenic  influences.   The water quality
at this  station should be similar to  that at the WDNR Marine Station.
                                       58

-------
Nitrogen--

     Nitrogen concentration  in water  is  presented  as  the sum of nitrate and
ammonium.  These are the forms of nitrogen that are most readily assimilated
by  phytoplankton,  and  therefore reflect  the  nitrogen  available  for algal
growth.  The maximum  concentration  at the WDNR Marine Station was 0.97 mg/L
in early December, while  the minimum  concentration was 0.01 mg/L at the end
of August  (Figure 9)   (Mumford,  T.,  25 September  1987,  personal  communica-
tion).   Nitrogen  appeared  to have been higher during  the spring and fall at
the WDNR Marine Station than at  Ecology Station BUD005, possibly in response
to  the  Seashore  Villa WWTP effluent  discharge.    Ecology  examined  water
quality  in  relation  to this  discharge and found  that some nutrient levels
inshore of the discharge were slightly elevated (Kendra, W. and T. Determan,
6 November 1985, personal communication).

     Normal  seasonal   variability  between 1982  and  1986  is  most  easily
reflected  in  the  monthly mean  nitrogen  concentrations at  Station  BUD005.
Maximum  nitrogen  concentrations  decreased from 0.18  mg/L  between  April  and
July to  0.09  mg/L between July  and mid-September.   In September,  the water
column generally  becomes  mixed due to strong  winds and the influx of Puget
Sound water, which contains  higher nutrient concentrations.  Nitrogen levels
increased  at  Station  BUD005  and were more variable  (range 0.01-0.12 mg/L)
during the fall.

     Average nitrogen values in  both  the surface water and bottom water were
lower at Station BUD005 than at  Station BUD002.  Nutrient concentrations may
be elevated at Station BUD002 because of its proximity to the  LOTT outfall at
the Fiddlehead Marina and to the Capitol Lake outfall   (Figure 10).  Effluent
released from  the LOTT WWTP at  Station  BUD002 results in higher concentra-
tions of nitrogen  at  Station BUD002 and  greater variability than at Station
BUD005.  The  lowest  nitrogen concentrations that  occurred  between 1982 and
1986 were during summer.

     Source  surveys  and  dynamic modeling were conducted  by URS  (1986) to
identify the  relative contributions  of  specific  sources to  the  Budd Inlet
                                      59

-------
                            WDNR MARINE STATION
        i
D>
on
o>
Q.
 0.9 -

 0.8 -

 0.7 -

 0.6 -

 0.5 -

 0.4 -

 0.3 -

 0.2 -

 0.1 -
         JAN   FEE   MAR   APR  MAY   JUN   JUL   AUO  SEPT   OCT   NOV  DEC
         1982                                                       1981
       0.3
0.28 -
0.26 -
0.24 -
0.22 -
 0.2 -
0.18 -
0.18 -
0.14 -
0.12 -
 0.1 -
0.08 -
0.06 -
0.04 -
0.02 -
         JAN   FEB   MAR   APR  MAY   JUN   JUL  AUG  SEPT   OCT   NOV  DEC
         1982                                                       1981
                                   MONTH
                Reference: Data from Mumford, T. (25 September 1987, personal communication).
    Figure 9.  Annual variation in nitrogen and phosphate in surface
               waters at the WDNR Marine Station, 1981-1982.
                                   60

-------
O>
Z
Z
o"
     0.35 -
     0.25 -
      0.2 -
     0.15 -
      o.i -
     0.05 -
            BUD002
         MAR   APR   MAY   MN   JUL   AUG   SEPT   OCT   NOV    DEC
     0.35 -
O>    0.3 -
 v>
X
     0.25 -
      0.2 -
     0.15 -
      0.1 -
     0.05 -
            BUD005
  D    SURFACE
      NITROGEN

  +    BOTTOM
      NITROGEN
MONTHLY AVERAGE,
SURFACE

MONTHLY AVERAGE,
BOTTOM
                a a
                         DD
        MAR   APR    MAY   JUN
JUL    AUG   SEPT    OCT    NOV    DEC


 MONTH
          Reference:  Data are provided in Appendix B.
  Figure 10.  Temporal variation in nitrogen [sum of nitrate (NO3)
              and ammonium (NHg)]  at Ecology ambient water quality
              monitoring  stations BUD002 and BUD005, 1982-1986.
                                 61

-------
nutrient budget.   A  two-dimensional  box model  for Budd Inlet included point
sources, flushing  rates,  and benthic release.   Puget  Sound water was found
to supply  approximately 60 percent of  all  the  nitrogenous nutrients to the
inlet.   Both  the  LOTT  WWTP and  bottom sediments  (i.e.,  benthic release)
supplied about 20  percent of  nitrogen each.   A  survey of  point  sources
provided a relative breakdown of inputs.  Nearly 100 percent of the nitrite,
and the  majority  of the nitrate,  originated  from  the  LOTT WWTP (URS 1986).
The relative contribution  of  major sources  of nitrogen to Budd Inlet and to
the upper  3 m  of  the water column is shown in Table 6.  Elevated concentra-
tions  of nitrogen  at  Station  BUD002 (compared with Station  BUD005)  result
from  nitrogenous  compounds discharged  from  the  LOTT WWTP  through  both  the
LOTT  outfall  and  the Fiddlehead Marina  outfall.   The  relative contribution
of specific sources exclusively to southern Budd Inlet were not determined.

Phosphate--

      Phosphate  is  reported as orthophosphate (PO/j-P),  the form most readily
assimilated by phytoplankton.  This  nutrient  is not  generally  limiting to
marine  phytoplankton  growth at any  time of the year.   Phosphate  data from
the WDNR Marine Station indicate that concentrations  were generally below 0.1
mg/L  (Mumford,  T.,  25 September 1987, personal  communication),  and seasonal
depletion was  not  evident  in  Budd  Inlet  (see Figure  9).

      The  primary  difference between phosphate  concentrations  at  Station
BUD005  and at Station  BUD002 is  that  Station  BUD002  occasionally exhibits
very  high  concentrations  of phosphate  (Figure  11).   It  is  doubtful  that
these  concentrations  are  the result  of natural  fluctuations.   The fluctu-
ations  probably result  from nutrient  inputs  by the  LOTT WWTP.   The Budd
Inlet  source   study  conducted  by URS  (1986)  revealed  that  the  LOTT WWTP
contributed over 90 percent of the phosphate from known point sources.

      The temporal  variability in  nitrogen  and  phosphorus concentrations at
Station  BUD002 from  1982  to 1986  were remarkably  similar,  most  likely in
response to nutrient  loadings from the  LOTT WWTP-    In most cases, very high
nitrogen values  corresponded to  very high  phosphate  values.   For example,
samples  collected  on  23   September  1985  contained  the  highest recorded
                                       62

-------
   TABLE  6.   RELATIVE  CONTRIBUTION  OF  SOURCES OF NITROGEN TO BUDD  INLET
                                 Nitrate and                Ammonium
Source                        Nitrite (Percent)             (Percent)

A)  Upper 3 m of water column

    Puget Sound                     78                         20
    LOTT WWTP                       22                         80
    Bottom sediments (i.e.,
      benthic release)

B)  Entire Water Column

    Puget Sound                     92                         20
    LOTT                             8                         36
    Bottom sediments (i.e.,         --                         44
      benthic release)
Reference:  URS  (1986).
                                      63

-------
0 "0
0.26 -
0.24 -
0.22 -
^-J» 0.2 -
~
O) 0.18 -
E
•C- 0.16 -
n
i 0.14 -i
O 0.12 -
Q.
0.1 -

0.08 -
0 06 -

0.04 -
A no — .
BUD002 D
D


•f


+


* ^
+ D / V
.A. n t -a? 0
+ / ID / A^\ /
D / ^\ "*" A" ./^*^\""~'A-. '
A* J1BB — " V^L*>- '' \ /*C
+ *B 	 •*•-""' + DfD * — tf + V C Is*
B + + B B D +
a a D B n +



















MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
n T
u.w
0.28 -
0.26 -

0.24 -

0.22 -
2* 0.2 -
0) 0-18 -
C 0.16 -
Q. 0.14 -
Vr 0.12 -
O
tL 0.1 -

0.08 -

0.06 -

0.04 -

0.02 -


O SURFACE 	 MONTHLY AVERAGE,
PHOSPHATE SURFACE

+ BOTTOM 	 MONTHLY AVERAGE,
PHOSPHATE BOTTOM



+


m
+ a-
a -t- D n o -A^~
•4- ^-^^^^^s.
0j- 5^-* ^t— — "*~~ — ^2^ *^ ^^^>_ * ^
B Afifr^ A't^*"^*^fh^fcg'^ D 45^*^r "^^J* ™W—FA
Q v^ ^** B3 ^^fr^"^^ ~ •(• B B +• B
+ B >K5 B a -t- B
™





















0_
T r i i i i i i i i
MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC
MONTH
Reference: Data are provided in Appendix B.
Figure 11. Temporal variation in phosphate at Ecology ambient
water quality monitoring stations BUD002 and BUD005,
1982-1986.
64

-------
surface and bottom water nitrogen, highest recorded surface water phosphate,
and second highest  recorded  bottom water phosphate.   The bottom water on 25
June  1984  contained  the  highest recorded  phosphate  and  second  highest
nitrogen.   Monthly  average  concentrations  of  nitrogen and  phosphate (see
Figures 10 and 11) followed  similar patterns.

     Water quality  investigations  at  the three  WWTP  in central  and northern
Budd  Inlet  also  demonstrated  the  effect of municipal  effluents on  water
quality.   Surveys  were conducted  at control,   mixing zone, and  nearshore
sites  at  Tamoshan WWTP and  Seashore  Villa WWTP, and  at control  and mixing
zone  sites  at Beverly  Beach WWTP  (Kendra,  W.  and T.  Determan,  6 November
1985,  personal  communication).   Nutrient  concentrations in  the  mixing zone
at  the Tamoshan  WWTP  were  less than at  the upcurrent control,  but  in  all
other  cases,  nutrient  concentrations were  greater  than at  control  sites.
Beverly Beach WWTP  exhibited the highest nitrate,  orthophosphate,  and total
phosphate concentrations, while Tamoshan WWTP exhibited the highest ammonium
concentrations.

Dissolved Oxygen

     Dissolved oxygen  is a sensitive  indicator of the health of a water body
because it is the  result  of  complex interactions among physical  and biolog-
ical  variables.    Oxygen  levels  vary  naturally  as   a  result  of  seasonal
changes  in  solar  radiation,   wind,  vertical   mixing,  flushing,  nutrient
levels, algal blooms, and sediment oxygen demand.  When oxygen concentrations
are less than 3  mg/L (termed hypoxia),  organisms become stressed due to the
lack  of oxygen   (Rhoads,  D.,   18  November  1987,  personal  communication).
Mobile  species  often  move  away  from  hypoxic  areas while  seeking  more
oxygenated  water  (Welsh,  B..  18  November  1987,  personal  communication).
Tolerant sedentary  species  will  survive  provided  that the  duration  of the
hypoxic event is  short  and the  oxygen concentrations  generally remain above
1.0 mg/L.  Anoxia, defined as 0.1  mg/L oxygen or less, results in widespread
mortality of vertebrates and invertebrates in the  affected area  (Welsh, B.,
18 November 1987, personal communication).
                                        65

-------
     Budd Inlet  experiences  large  fluctuations  in  oxygen concentration that
result  from  the  complex  interactions  between physical,  biological,  and
anthropogenic variables  (e.g.,  nutrient  loadings  from  municipal  effluents;
URS  1986).    It  is not unusual  for dissolved oxygen concentrations  in  the
southern portion of the  inlet  in late summer and early fall to be below the
Washington  Station Class B water  quality standard  5.0  mg/L.   During this
time  of  the  year  the water  column  is  frequently  well  stratified  due  to
lengthy  periods  of  calm  sunny  days  that  increase  the  near-surface water
temperature  and,  in  conjunction with  high  nutrient  loadings  from  the LOTT
WWTP,  provide  suitable  conditions  for dense  algal  blooms  (URS  1986).
Flushing is  reduced during this  time  of year and Puget Sound water contains
less  oxygen.   Also,  the discharge of  ammonia  from  the  WWTP  combined with
warmer water temperatures increase the  rate of nitrification  resulting  in
more localized oxygen depletion  near the WWTP outfalls.

     A total  of five  data sets,  including  the Ecology  ambient  monitoring
data, were  available  for the review  of  dissolved  oxygen  data  in  Budd Inlet
from  1982 to 1987  (see Appendix A, Table A-5).  These  reports,  in addition
to a number of older publications, indicate that oxygen depletion  has been a
severe problem  in  Budd  Inlet  for  several decades.  Although  the magnitude
and  geographic  extent of  oxygen depletion  vary  annually,  the most  severe
depletion usually  occurs south of Priest Point.  For example,  in August 1977
the  oxygen  concentrations were  below  the  5.0 mg/L Class  B  water quality
standard from Olympia  to nearly Tykle Cove,  with  the  lowest  values of less
than 1.0 mg/L in East and West Bays (Figure 12) (U.S. Army COE 1977).

Variability in Dissolved Oxygen--

     Dissolved oxygen  is  routinely monitored 1)  by the LOTT WWTP at five
locations (Stations  1-5)  (Alan,  R.,  24  September  1987,  personal  communica-
tion),  2)   by the Port  of  Olympia  in  the  East  Bay  Marina  (Egge,  E.,  1
February 1988, personal communication), and 3) by Ecology at Stations BUD002
and  BUD005  (U.S.  EPA,  7  January 1988, personal communication)  (see Figure
7).  The only data that were collected over an entire year are the  LOTT WWTP
data  in  1986  (Figure 13). The distribution  of  dissolved oxygen at the five
stations was  remarkably  similar, although the absolute concentrations often
                                      66

-------
                  A
                 6.85
             • 4.40
           BUDD
               INLET
     \\
 r..
2000
 500
         4000
           feet
          meters
        1000
                                             U.S. ARMY COE

                                             ECOLOGY

                                             ROUTINE MONITORING
                                          \

                             Reference: Adapted from U.S. Army COE (1977).
Figure 12.  Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the bottom waters
          of upper Budd Inlet, 17-18 August 1977.
                        67

-------
        FIDDLEHEAD MARINA
                                 OCT  MOV  DEC
O)
E
LU
o
>
X
o

D
LU
o
(/)
C/5

5
                              SEPT OCT  NOV DEC
                                                  -  LOTT OUTFALL (30 in)
                                                  JAN  FtB  M*fl  APR  MAY  JUN  JUL  AUG  SEPT OCT  NOV DEC
                                                    MID-CHANNEL
                                                     FCB  UAf)  APR  tUY  MH  JUL  AJJO  SEPT OCT  NOV  OCC
         SURFACE DO


         BOTTOM DO
                              CAPITOL  LAKE OUTFALL
                                                               CLASS B WATER

                                                               QUALITY STANDARD

                                                               HYPOXIA
                               FEB  UAA  APf)  UAY  JUN  JUL  AUO  SCPT  OCT  NOV  OCC
                                        MONTH
                         Reference: Data from Alan, R. (24 September 1987, personal communication).
         Figure 13.  Monthly variation in dissolved oxygen (DO) measured

                     at the five LOTT WWTP monitoring stations in 1986.
                                         68

-------
differed.   Oxygen  depletion was  most severe  at  the Capitol  Lake outfall
where  oxygen  levels  2.0 ft  above the  sediment were  less  than  4.0  mg/L.
Near-bottom oxygen  levels below the 5.0  mg/L Class B water quality standard
occurred consistently at the other  stations.

     Dissolved  oxygen  data collected  between  1982 and  1986  at Stations
BUD002  and  BUD005  followed a  similar pattern,  although  levels  at Station
BUD005 were generally higher than at Station BUD002 (Figure 14).  Mean oxygen
levels  in the  surface  water  were usually 1.0-3.0  mg/L  higher  than  mean
bottom water  concentrations.   In late summer,  the mean bottom water concen-
tration  over  the 5-yr  period  was  less than the 5.0  mg/L  Class  B dissolved
oxygen standard.  On two occasions, values below 3.0 mg/L were observed.

     The  remaining  dissolved   oxygen  data were  collected by  the Port  of
Olympia  at the  East  Bay Marina  (Egge,  E.,  25 January 1987,  personal communi-
cation).   These data were  collected using a  Leeds  and  Northrup model  7931
dissolved oxygen  probe or  by  Winkler titrations  of  water samples.   Values
generated  with  the Leeds  and  Northrup  probe  frequently  varied  by  30-50
percent  from  the Winkler values despite  the  probe's stated  accuracy  of + 1
percent.  Because data  generated with Winkler titrations are considered more
reliable  than data generate with  probes,  only  these data  were reviewed for
this report.

     The  East  Bay  Marina  maintains  an  aeration system  with  18 aerators
located  throughout the  marina docks  (Egge,  E.,  1  February  1988, personal
communication).    Operation  of this  system  is  supposed  to  be  based  on
dissolved oxygen  fluctuations.  When  dissolved oxygen  is  less  than  6 mg/L
for  over 6 h  (consecutive),  the  aerators are  turned  on.   They remain on
until  dissolved oxygen  levels  exceed  6 mg/L.   Because the oxygen probe was
not  reliable, other criteria  such as wind and  length  of  sunny periods are
often  used  in  conjunction  with oxygen concentration to determine operation
of  the  aerators   (Arden,   H.,  11   February  1988,  personal  communication).
Diver  observations  confirmed that  use of the aeration system does not cause
sediment  resuspension (Arden,  H.,  10 February  1988,  personal communication).
Dissolved oxygen measurements  are taken  at  two  locations in  the East Bay
Marina:   at the end  of the  transient moorage dock (Dock A;  minimum depth 4 m)
                                       69

-------
O)

Q
UJ
>
_J
O
CO
CO
      o
14
-*
                                                             CLASS B WATER
                                                             QUALITY
                                                             STANDARD

                                                             HYPOXIA
       MAR    APR    MAY   JUN   JUL    AUG   SEPT   OCT   NOV    DEC
                               D   SURFACE DO   ---
                                +   BOTTOM DO
MONTHLY AVERAGE,
SURFACE

MONTHLY AVERAGE,
BOTTOM
                                                             CLASS B WATER
                                                             QUALITY
                                                             STANDARD

                                                             HYPOXIA
       MAR    APR    MAY   JUN   JUL    AUG   SEPT    OCT   NOV   DEC
                               MONTH
                                                 Reference: Data are provided in Appendix B.
         Figure 14.  Temporal variation in dissolved oxygen  (DO) at
                     Ecology ambient water quality monitoring stations
                     BUD002 and BUD005, 1982-1986.
                                       70

-------
and at the base of Dock J (minimum depth 2.7 m).  The measurements are taken
almost daily from Monday to  Friday.   Dissolved  oxygen declines throughout the
summer, and  the  aeration system is  unable  to  prevent  dissolved oxygen from
declining  below the  5  mg/L  Class  B water quality  standard  (Figure 15).
Bottom water  dissolved  oxygen at Station J  is frequently hypoxic in August
and September  (i.e., less than 3.0 mg/L).

     It was  noted  by Port of Olympia personnel  that  the aeration system is
used less when oxygen levels are determined  with  Winkler  titrations than when
oxygen  is measured  with the probe  (Egge,  E.(  1  February  1988,  personal
communication).  Winkler titrations  are collected near the water surface, in
the  middle  of the  water  column,  and  at  the  bottom  where  the probe  is
situated.  Operation of the aeration  system is therefore not always based on
oxygen  levels in  the  bottom water  layer,  which are usually  lowest  due to
SOD.  Reoxygenation of the bottom water might  occur more readily if the data
used to  determine  use of the aeration  system  were  obtained from the bottom
of the water  column rather than the middle or  surface of the water column.

     Qualitative information  on  low dissolved  oxygen  levels was provided by
the  Salmon Culture  Division  of the  Department  of Fisheries  (Peck,  L.,  18
March  1988,   personal  communication).   During  the past  5 yr,  the  Salmon
Culture  Division  has  been  actively involved  with trapping  adult  chinook
salmon at the  Fourth Street bridge from mid-August to mid- or late-September.
During this operation, dissolved oxygen levels  have  been  measured  at 2.5 mg/L
and below.   The  most severe levels of dissolved oxygen  occurred during high
slack tides,  and it  was  observed that levels could vary dramatically within
any 24-h period.

Dynamics of Dissolved Oxygen  in Budd  Inlet--

     The  comprehensive  water quality study conducted  by URS (1986)  in Budd
Inlet  was  designed  to  determine  the cause  of oxygen depletion,   and to
identify measures that might alleviate the problem.  The  following discussion
summarizes some of their findings.
                                      71

-------
                        EAST BAY MARINA, DOCK J
0)
E
LJ
O
>
X
O

Q
HI
O
en
en
Q
                                           CLASS B WATER QUALITY STANDARD

                                           HYPOXIA
                     ---^	J—rW—r	CLASS B WATER QUALITY STANDARD
CLASS B WATER QUALITY STANDARD

HYPOXIA
                                DATE

                     SURFACE DO » MIDDLE DO  « BOTTOM DO
      Figure 15.  Daily variation in dissolved oxygen (DO) in the surface,
                 middle, and bottom waters near the East Bay Marina,
                 summer 1986.
                                   72

-------
     Data were generated  from two intensive surveys and from field-verified
steady-state and dynamic  models.   In  September 1984 and May 1985, dissolved
oxygen was measured  at  eight  stations distributed throughout the inlet (see
Figure  7).   These  data were  used  to calibrate  the models.   In September
1984, oxygen levels  were  extremely  high  near the water surface (18-20 mg/L)
and  low near  the  bottom  (<5 mg/L),  indicating  a  highly  stratified water
column.   A  dense dinoflagellate  bloom was observed  in  the surface waters.
During  this  intensive  survey, a  storm moved  through the study area and the
accompanying  winds  disrupted  the  vertical   stratification   of  the  water
column.   This  storm caused  a change  in oxygen  concentrations  in the water
column,  and  bottom concentration increased  from 4  to  5  mg/L  while surface
concentration  decreased  from 20  to  9  mg/L.    Oxygen  concentrations  the
following May 1985 ranged from a  near-surface high of approximately 15 mg/L,
to a near-bottom low of about 9 mg/L.  An algal  bloom composed of diatoms was
observed.

     Both a  steady-state  and  a dynamic water quality model  were fit to Budd
Inlet to determine the  combinations  of LOTT WWTP discharge  volume,  effluent
nutrient  removal,  and  outfall  location that would  minimize  the dissolved
oxygen  problem.   The biochemical  processes that  were incorporated  into the
dynamic  model   included  SOD,  8005,   chlorophyll   a.,  phaeopigments,  fecal
pellets,  organic  nitrogen,  ammonium,  nitrite,  and  nitrate.    Physical
processes that  were incorporated included wind;  waterbody geometry;  time-
varying  boundary condition  data;  source, sink, and  reaction rates  for each
of the  constituents  being simulated;  and  hydraulic  and physical  variables.
The  dissolved  oxygen simulations were limited  to use of the  May 1985 data
because  no  quantitative dynamic model of  the September 1984 dinoflagellate
bloom exists.  However, the  effect  of nutrient addition on  the strength and
duration of  the September 1984 dinoflagellate bloom may be  greater than the
effect of nutrient addition on the May 1985 diatom bloom.  Diatom blooms are
limited by available light, whereas dinoflagellates  have the ability to grow
at lower light levels and to  migrate to their optimum light level.  Because
dinoflagellates also  have the ability to  take up  nutrients during the day
and  night,   the  magnitude of the  bloom would  likely  be  nutrient-limited
rather than  light-limited.  Because of the readily available nutrient supply
from LOTT, dinoflagellate blooms may  exist for extended periods of time, and
                                       73

-------
may  result  in  severe oxygen  depletion.   The  duration  of these  blooms  is
probably  controlled  by  meterological  and  hydrodynamic  conditions  that
disrupt  the  vertical stratification  of the  water  column and  the vertical
migrations of the dinoflagellates.  The reader  is directed to URS  (1986) for
details of the model  and calibration procedures.

     Dynamic  modeling  results  showed  that  the   spring  diatom  bloom  is
enhanced  at  least  30 percent  in  the  inner  portions  of Budd  Inlet  by the
existing nutrient loadings from the LOTT WWTP.  However,  those model  results
were  not supported  by  data  collected  at the  WDNR  Marine  Station,  which
indicated that  the  concentration of nitrogen  is not  a limiting nutrient  in
the  spring.     The   model  indicated  that  aside  from elimination of  this
discharge, the best option to reduce the diatom blooms  is to remove nutrients
from  the effluent.   Relocation  of  the LOTT  discharge  pipe away from the
inner  inlet would reduce the strength  of the bloom.  But, regardless of the
discharge  location,  the  bloom  without   nutrient  removal   would  be  30-50
percent  stronger than the bloom  with  nutrient removal.    Predicted  SOD was
directly related to diatom production.  It was  predicted to be 10-15  percent
greater  in  the  inner  inlet  without  nutrient removal  than with  nutrient
removal.

Summary and Recommendations--

     Water quality  conditions in Puget Sound  in late  summer and early fall
aggravate the  oxygen depletion problem.   Flushing rates are lower  than  in
the spring,  as are  dissolved  oxygen concentrations  in the water that  flushes
Budd  Inlet.   Water  temperature and SOD  are  higher  in  late  summer and early
fall than in spring.   Coupled with blooms  of vertically migrating dinoflag-
ellates, oxygen depletion becomes a severe problem  at this time of the year.

     Recommendations  for changes to  the  LOTT  discharge configuration were
developed based on  the  conclusion  that  the  presence  and  persistence  of
dinoflage!late blooms in  late summer  and  early fall were the probable cause
of the low dissolved oxygen  problems.   Under state water quality standards,
natural  dissolved  oxygen  levels  may  be  degraded by  up  to  0.2 mg/L  by
anthropogenic  activities.    The results  of these modeling  efforts indicate
                                      74

-------
that  this  standard  is  frequently  exceeded.    Under  recommendations  from
Ecology,  URS  (1986)  concluded that a maximum  algal  bloom enhancement of 10
percent  above  the no-discharge  scenario  would be  acceptable,  and  would
reduce  the  potential  magnitude of  oxygen depletion during  the  late summer
and early fall  to  acceptable  levels.   To  achieve  these  levels, URS (1986)
recommended that  at the present  outfall  location,  the average  wet weather
flow  (AWWF) of  16.3 MGD  be maintained  in addition to removal of at least 90
percent  of the nutrients  from  April  through  October.    For  any outfall
location  within the inlet, or  for  a  flow increase of  up  to 22  MGD (AWWF).
URS (1986)  recommended at  least 90 percent nutrient removal.

MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION

General Overview

     Microbial  contamination of water and shellfish has long been considered
a  public  health risk.   Swimming in water  or consuming  shellfish  that  are
contaminated with enteric bacteria and  viruses  can result  in gastroenteritis,
nausea,  diarrhea,  typhoid  fever, cholera,  and  hepatitis.   Based  on  past
research, the bacteria of  primary concern are  enteric pathogens  excreted in
human  and  animal  feces,   such  as Salmonella  spp.,  Yersini  enterocolitica.
Campylobacter fetus.  Vibrio parahaemolyticus.  and Vibrio cholerae (Munger et
al. 1979).

     The  current   Washington  State  standards   for  commercial   shellfish
harvesting  and  recreational  use  are  based on  the concentration  of  fecal
coliform  bacteria  in  water and  shellfish tissue [Washington Administration
Code  (WAC)  173-201-045;  Lilja,   J., 6  June 1985,  personal  communication].
The Washington  State  fecal coliform bacteria  standard for  waters  used  for
harvesting  shellfish  is  the  same  as the standards adopted by the Interstate
Shellfish   Sanitation  Conference  (Lilja,   J.,   25  March  1988,  personal
communication).   Because  shell fish  feed on  small  particles  filtered from
the water,  these  standards  are  stricter than  the U.S.   EPA  standards  for
primary recreational waters.  Some free-living bacteria and  viruses that are
attached  to  particles  become  concentrated  in  the  gut  of filter-feeding
                                      75

-------
bivalves (Colwell and Listen 1960; Kelly et al. 1960; Mitchell et al. 1966).

     Because there  are  no documented cases of  human  illness  resulting from
eating  commercially harvested  shellfish  from the State  of  Washington,  the
standards  for  allowable  concentrations  of fecal  coliform bacteria  in  the
water column and  shellfish  tissue are considered  conservative (Lilja,  J.(  6
June 1985, personal communication).

Data Synthesis

Choice of  Indicators--

     Because fecal  coliform bacteria have  been widely used  as  a microbial
indicator  of water quality,  the following analysis  is  based  on available
data  for  fecal  coliform bacteria  concentrations  in  Budd  Inlet.   Data  on
microbial  indicators  other  than  fecal  coliform bacteria are not available
for the project area.  However, U.S.  EPA has proposed the use of enterococci
bacteria in  place of  fecal  coliform bacteria  because a close correspondence
in  the  distributions  of enterococci  bacteria  and pathogenic  microbes  has
been  found,  and  enterococci   are  associated  with   human   illness  (e.g.,
gastroenteritis).

Available  Data and  Station  Locations--

     Bacteriological  measurements in  Budd  Inlet have been made primarily in
a comprehensive  study of circulation and  water quality  in  Budd Inlet (URS
1986),  in  the  ambient water quality monitoring  program conducted by Ecology
(U.S.  EPA,  7  January  1988,  personal  communication),  and  by the  City  of
Olympia  (Alan,  R.,  24  September 1987,  personal   communication).   Sampling
stations  are depicted  in Figure  7.   Other  data  were supplied  for Boston
Harbor  (R.W. Beck and Associates  1986),  WWTP  (Kendra, W.  and T.  Determan,  6
November  1985,  personal  communication),  and the  East Bay  Marina (Pierce,
R.,  22  October  1987,  personal  communication).   Data were also available for
shellfish  collected  near Priest  Point  (Armstrong,  J.,  17  November  1987,
personal  communication).   Data  on  microbial  contamination  from nonpoint
                                      76

-------
sources  (e.g.,  live-aboards in Olympia  marinas,  general  boating activities
in Budd Inlet, hobby farms, failing septic systems) were not available.

Reference Data--

     Reference  data  are  based  on  Washington  State  standards for  fecal
coliform bacteria concentrations  in water [Ecology and Washington Department
of  Social  and  Health  Services  (DSHS)]  and  in  shellfish  (DSHS) .   Ecology
standards for fecal coliform bacteria for the waters of the project area are
listed below:

     •    Class A Marine - "...shall  not exceed  a geometric mean value
          of  14 organisms/100  ml  with  not  more than  10 percent  of
          samples  exceeding 43 organisms/100 mL"  [WAC 173-201-045(2)-
          Class  B  Marine  -  "...shall  not exceed a geometric mean value
          of  100 organisms/100  mL,  with not  more than 10  percent  of
          samples  exceeding  200 organisms/100 ml" [WAC 173-201-045(3)-
The maximum allowable fecal coliform bacteria levels  for commercial shellfish
harvesting areas certified by DSHS  are listed below:

     •    Shellfish  tissue - 230  organisms/100 g (U.S.  Food  and Drug
          Administration guidelines)

     •    Water - A median of 14 organisms/100 mL with not more than 10
          percent  of  the samples  exceeding  43  organisms/100 mL  (note:
          this is virtually identical to the standard for  Class A marine
          waters; see above) .
                                       77

-------
Elevation Above Reference (EAR) Analysis--

     The  geometric means  for fecal  coliform bacteria  concentrations  were
calculated from all available information.  Fecal coliform data from Ecology
Stations  BUD002  and  BUD005  were averaged  over  1982-1986.    Data  from  five
stations  sampled  by the City of Olympia  were averaged  over 1986.   Approxi-
mately  half  of  the  57  stations surveyed  for the  URS  (1986)  report  were
sampled once while  the  remaining stations were sampled  twice.  The data are
reported  as  averages when  possible.   All  data from  Boston  Harbor  were
averaged  because  specific  sampling   locations  were  unclear.   Data  from
individual sites  along  the shores of  Budd  Inlet  (URS  1986)  were grouped by
area to obtain a sufficient sample size for calculation of a geometric mean.

     EAR  values  were  calculated by  dividing the geometric  mean  bacterial
concentration  by  the appropriate  standard  stipulated  in  WAC  173-201-045
(Table 7).   For  example,  the geometric mean concentration  at Station BUD005
(located  near  Olympia Shoals in Class A  marine  waters)  was 2 organisms/100
mL and the calculated EAR is 0.14 based on the Class A marine water standard
(see Table 7).   In addition, none  of the samples exceeded  this  standard of
a maximum of 43  organisms/100 mL.   EAR  values were  calculated in  a similar
manner  for the remaining  data  (Figure 16, Table  7).   Note  that  the  water
quality standards differ between Class A and Class B marine waters.

     EAR values greater than 1 indicate that the geometric mean concentration
exceeded  the standard.   EAR values  below 1 indicate  that the geometric mean
concentration  was   below  the water  quality standard.   The  calculated  EAR
values (see Table 7)  indicate that water quality standards were not exceeded
at the Ecology Ambient Water Quality Monitoring Program stations (BUD002 and
BUD005),  nor were  they  exceeded off the LOTT WWTP  outfalls.   Moxlie Creek
was  the  only  site to  exceed Class  B water  quality  standards  (EAR=21.9).
Class A standards were exceeded  near the Tamoshan and Beverly Beach WWTP, in
Boston Harbor, in  Ellis Cove, south  of  the Seashore Villa  WWTP, off Athens
Beach, north of  Butler Cove, and  in  Butler Cove.   More than 10 percent of
the  samples  collected between  Priest Point  and  Seashore Villa,  in Boston
Harbor, and off the Tamoshan WWTP exceeded standards.
                                      78

-------
TABLE 7.  FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA DATA  AND MEAN  EAR VALUES
                FOR BUDD INLET,  1982-1987a
Fecal Col i form Bacteria/lOOmL
Number of
Number Samples Geo-
of per Minimum Maximum metric
Area Stations Station Value Value Mean EAR
West Bay offshore 1 36 3 70 16

Western shoreline, 6 1 0 25 4
West Bay
Capitol Lake outfall 1 14 2 60 13

Fiddlehead Marina 1 14 1 60 9

Near LOTT 30-in outfall 3 Varied 0 33 6


East Bay Marina 3 Varied 1 23 5



Moxlie Creek 1 2 2,000 2,400 2,190
Eastern shoreline, 5 1 or 2 2 870 59
East Bay

Ellis Cove 2 2 75 1,230 334
Priest Point 1 7 18 7,000 206

Priest Point to 8 1 or 2 0 2,000 34
Seashore Villa
Seashore Villa 7 1-3 0 920 9


Gull Harbor to 6 1 or 2 0 2,400 11
Dofflemeyer Point
Boston Harbor 28 1 or 2 23 2,400 151


Cooper Point to 3 1 0 1,020 10
Tamoshan
Tamoshan 6 1 or 2 0 2,000 28


Beverly Beach 2 1 or 4 0 1,141 19


0.16

0.04

0.13

0.09

0.06


0.05



21. 9d
0.59d


23. 9d
0.90e

2.5

0.7d


0.8d

10. 8e


0.72d

2.04e


1.36d


Marine
Water Use
Classifi-
cation Reference
Class B U.S. EPA
(7 January 1988)c
Class B URS (1986)

Class B Alan
(24 September 1987)°
Class B Alan
(24 September 1987)°
Class B URS (1986),
Alan
(24 September 1987)°
Class B Alan
(24 September 1987 )c,
Pierce
(22 October 1987)c
Class B URS (1986)
Class B URS (1986),
Pierce
(22 October 1987)c
Class A URS (1986)
Shellfish Armstrong
(17 November 1987)e
Class A URS (1986)

Class A URS (1986),
Kendra and Determan
(6 November 1985) c
Class A URS (1986)

Class A URS (1986)
R.W. Beck and
Assoc. (1986)
Class A URS (1986)

Class A URS (1986),
Kendra and Determan
(6 November 1985)°
Class A URS (1986),
Kendra and Determan
(6 November 1985) c
                            79

-------
TABLE 7.  (Continued)
Fecal Coliform Bacteria/lOOmL
Number of
Area
Athens Beach
Tykle Cove
Olyrnpia Shoals
Between Tykle and
Butler Coves
Butler Cove
Number
of
Stations
3 1
2
1
1
3
Samples
per
Station
or 2
1
36
2
2
Minimum
Value
0
0
1
310
0
Maximum
Value
2,400
0
26
370
800
Geo-
metric
Mean
19
0
2
339
15
Marine
Water Use
Classifi-
EAR cation"
1.35d Class A
Od Class A
0.15 Class A
24. 2C Class A
1.11° Class A

Reference
URS (1986)
URS (1986)
U.S. EPA
(7 January 1988)c
URS (1986)
URS (1986)
a  All  entries  are for  fecal  coliform  bacteria  concentrations  in water  samples  except  for the  Priest  Point
entry, which  is  for fecal  coliform  bacteria concentrations in shellfish.

  Washington  State standards  for  fecal  coliform bacteria in the water column are defined in the text.

c Personal conmunication.

  Inadequate  number of samples  to determine if 10 percent of the samples exceeded standard.

e More than  10  percent of  the samples  exceeded Washington State standards.
                                                       80

-------
 PUGET
          SOUND
m
*
*
- UNINVESTED TEO POTENTIAL
SCHJRCE OF FECAL COLJ FORM
BACTERIA
= NPDES-PERMfTTED DISCHARGES
[SEE TABLE 6)
= MARINA
•y
                                 I   I   NOT SIGNIFICANT


                                 • I   SfflNFCAMT. < 10 X REFERENCE


                                 •CD   SIGNIFICANT. 10 - 50 X REFERENCE


                                 ^H   SIGNIFICANT. > 50 X REFERENCE
                                            INDICATES POOLED DATA AREA.
Figure 16.  EAR values for concentrations of fecal coliform bacteria
          in water samples from Budd Inlet.

-------
     Additional fecal  coliform  bacteria  data  were summarized by URS (1986).
These data were collected  at  five point  sources on five occasions.  The San
Francisco  storm  drain  and  Ellis Creek  contributed  less than  3  percent of
the  fecal  coliform bacteria  loading to  Budd  Inlet over the  five sampling
periods.   Moxlie  Creek contributed the  majority  of  the bacteria loading in
September  1984,  April  1985,   and June  1985.    The major  source  of  fecal
coliform bacteria in February 1985 was Capitol Lake, and the major source in
May  1985 was the LOTT WWTP.

     Nonpoint  sources  of  microbial  contamination  in  Budd  Inlet  include
contributions from surface  runoff from hobby farms, live-aboards in the five
Olympia marinas, and general boating activity.  These contributions have not
been qualitatively or quantitatively identified.

CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION  OF SEDIMENTS AND  BIOTA

     Chemical  contamination of  sediments  and  biota  are  discussed in  the
following  sections.   The paucity of data  precludes  an overview of temporal
trends and detailed spatial trends.  For selected indicators (i.e., sediment
contamination, bioaccumulation),  data from recent studies were available to
help describe conditions.

Sediment Contamination

     The  physical  and  chemical  characteristics  of sediments  in  the  Budd
Inlet study area are reviewed in the following sections.

General Overview—

     Conventional   Variables—Data on sediment  total   volatile  solids  (TVS)
and  total  organic carbon  (TOC)  are summarized in  Figures  17  and  18.   The
data are  too  limited  to provide  detailed characterization of any  area in
Budd Inlet.  Recently  collected  information is  available only  near the Port
of Olympia peninsula (in East and West Bays).  Older data from Malins et al.
(1980)  were collected from three stations  in Budd Inlet (i.e.,  the south end
entrance channel,  Priest Point,  and Olympia  Shoals).    These  data indicate
                                        82

-------
03
OJ
                                                                                                   •   SAMPLING STATION

                                                                                                  |f;  |  <2%TVS

                                                                                                       2.1 TO 3% TVS

                                                                                                       3.1 TO5%TVS

                                                                                                       >5%TVS

                                                                                                     OLYMPIA
                                                                                                     CITY
                                                                                                     BOUNDARY
                                                                                                I,-
                                                                                           4TH AVE.
                                                                                 OLYMPIA
                  Figure 17.  Percent total volatile solids (TVS) measured in sediments at stations in the
                              East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.

-------
<2%TOC

2.1TO3%TOC

3.1TO5%TOC
>5%TVS

SAMPLING STATION
 Figure 18.  Percent total volatile solids (TVS) and percent total
            organic carbon (TOG) measured in sediments at
            stations in the  East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.
                              84

-------
that TOC  values  at  these stations have been similar to TOC values in recent
years.  The most recent  data on sediment grain size were collected by Mai ins
et  al.  (1980)  and Westley  et  al. (1975).   Data  from  Westley et al. (1975)
indicate  that  intertidal  and  subtidal  sediments  in the southern end of Budd
Inlet are largely  silts and clays  (approximately 91  percent).  TVS content
of  these  sediments  was  approximately  10 percent.  Data  from Mai ins et al.
(1980)  indicate  that  the  subtidal  sediments  are primarily  silt  and clay.
The  area  near Priest  Point appears  to have a higher  sand  content than the
two  other sampled  areas.   In general, the shallower  areas  are expected to
have  coarser  sediments  and   lower  TOC  than  sediments   in   deeper  areas.
Protected backwater  areas and slips along  the waterfront  would be expected
to  accumulate  fine-grained, TOC-enriched sediments,  but supporting data are
very  limited.  The  available  data indicate that  lower concentrations of TOC
exist in  intertidal sediments  than in  subtidal sediments, and  that sediments
near  the  northern  end  of  the Port of  Olympia  peninsula have  TOC  concen-
trations  similar  to   concentrations   in  other  areas  of  Puget Sound  (see
Figures  17 and 18).    No TOC  data are  available  for  any other areas  of Budd
Inlet.

     Toxic  Chemicals—Past studies of toxic  chemicals in  the sediments of
Budd  Inlet have been  limited.  Studies  conducted  prior  to  1982  are considered
as  historical  studies for several reasons.   First, the primary objective of
this  report  is to document current conditions  in Budd  Inlet.  Second, the
LOTT  WWTP began  operation  in  August 1982.   Changes  in outfall location and
treatment efficiency   could potentially  alter contaminant  loading.   Third,
the  precision  of analytical methods  has  increased in the last 5 yr and data
comparable  to data generated  today were  generally  not  available  prior to
1982.   Only  three  recent  studies  (Alan,  R.,  24 September  1987,  personal
communication; Johnson,  A.,  22  July  1985, personal  communication;  Norton,
D.,  5  February  1986,   personal  communication),  discussed  below,  were  of
acceptable quality to be used in the evaluation of sediment chemistry.  The
geographic coverage of these  studies  is  limited to the southern end of Budd
Inlet.   Most  areas  of Budd Inlet,  particularly  north  of Priest Point, have
not been  sampled for  sediment  chemistry  (Figures  19 and 20).
                                        85

-------
00
Ol
•
A
•
*
SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
WATER CHEMISTRY
SHELLFISH BIOACCUMULATION
SEDIMENT TOXICITY

                                                                                               OLYMPIA
                                                                                               CITY
                                                                                               BOUNDARY
                                                                                      4TH AVE.
                                                                            OLYMPIA
                 Figure 19.  Locations of sediment chemistry, water chemistry, shellfish bioaccumulation,
                           and sediment toxicity sampling stations in the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet,
                           1982-1987.

-------
                                                  •   SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY

                                                  A   WATER CHEMISTRY

                                                  •   SHEU.RSH BIOACCUMULATION
                                         NPDES OUTFALL
                                                 V      IP*
                                                 J\B
                                                            SEEP
                                                    0   100  200
                                                             IFEET
n
Figure 20.  Locations of sediment chemistry, water chemistry, and
            shellfish bioaccumulation sampling stations at the
            north end of the Port of Olympia peninsula.
                               87

-------
     Limited sampling for sediment chemistry was conducted at three stations
in  Budd  Inlet  by  Malins  et  al.   (1980)  as  part  of  a  larger  study  that
documented the  occurrence  and fluxes of contaminants  of  special  concern in
central and  southern  Puget Sound.    Budd  Inlet stations were located at the
entrance  channel   (southern   end  of  inlet;  Station  1),   off  Priest  Point
(Station 2),  and  at Olympia  Shoals  (Station 3).   Sediment samples at these
three  stations  were analyzed  for  petroleum  hydrocarbons,  PCBs, chlorinated
pesticides, other chlorinated  organic compounds, and metals.  Results of the
analyses  indicated that  Station  2  was  the  least impacted  of  the  three
stations and exhibited  low concentrations of most chemicals.  Stations 1 and
3 exhibited  higher concentrations  of most  chemicals,  particularly arsenic,
copper, and HPAH.  This was the only study that collected sediment chemistry
samples north of Priest Point  (Station 3).  Considerable additional sampling
is needed in this area to determine the  extent  of the chemical contamination.

     The most recent available data  indicate that the East Bay area near the
Cascade Pole  Company  facility, and  the area  near  the  West  Bay storm drain
have elevated chemical  concentrations in sediments.  The number of chemicals
for which analyses were conducted  in both of these  areas was fewer than that
in many other areas of  Puget  Sound  (e.g., Elliott and Commencement Bays), so
the  full  extent of any possible  contamination cannot  be  established using
only the  presently available data.   The  data  from both areas indicate that
the  problems  are   associated primarily  with   organic  chemicals,  and  that
concentrations  are  among  the highest observed  in  many other areas of Puget
Sound  (e.g.,  Commencement  and Elliott Bays)  (Tetra Tech 1985a,b).  From the
limited data available, it appears  that  concentrations  of metals in sediments
near East  and West Bays  are  similar to  other areas of  Puget  Sound (Tetra
Tech 1985a,b).   However,  the area  near the Fiddlehead Marina exhibited high
concentrations  of  cadmium  in 1986  (Alan,  R., 24  September  1987, personal
communication) which may indicate  a  potential  problem exists there.

     Available Data—A  detailed analysis of sediment conditions between 1985
and  1986  was  developed   primarily from  data  reported  in  the  following
documents:
                                       88

-------
     •    Mr. R.  Alan (24 September  1987,  personal  communication)  and
          Mr. F.  Kessler  (18  December 1987,  personal  communication)-
          data  from  the  LOTT  WWTP  Receiving  Water Sampling  Program
          performed in 1986

     •    Mr. A.  Johnson  (22  July  1985,  personal  communication)  -  a
          report on the nature  and  extent  of creosote and pentachloro-
          phenol  in  intertidal  areas near Cascade  Pole  wood-treating
          facility

     •    Mr. D.  Norton  (5 February  1986,  personal  communication)  -  a
          report  presenting results  of  U.S.  EPA  priority  pollutant
          analyses  on  water,  sediment,  and clam samples  collected in
          lower Budd Inlet near Cascade Pole wood-treating facility.

In addition to these  data,  11  U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers dredging permits
have been  issued  in the vicinity of  Budd  Inlet  since 1980.   Information on
these permits,  which  include identification  of  contaminated  sediments  that
were dredged from Budd Inlet, is summarized in Appendix C.

     These studies  represent all  recent data  that provide information on at
least one  of the  indicator chemicals.   Field collections of  the  selected
data were  conducted  in  1985.    In  general,  data from  these  studies  were
supported  by  quality  assurance/quality control  (QA/QC)  programs,  and  the
methods  used   to   measure  contaminant  concentrations   were  appropriate.
Results  of the  data  evaluations  for  all  studies,  and   a  summary  of  the
sampling intensity  and variables  measured  from these accepted documents are
shown in Appendix A, Tables A-3 and A-7.

Data Synthesis--

     Choice of  Indicators—About 50  organic  compounds and metals have been
measured in sediments collected in Budd Inlet.  These chemicals include many
of the trace metals that  are considered toxic, and  representative compounds
from nearly  all  the major types of  toxic  organic  substances  (see Table 2).
Many  of the  chemicals  were  detected  at  levels  near   the  limits  of  the
                                      89

-------
analytical  procedures,  and  were  found  in  relatively  few  of  the  sediment
samples.     Also,  in  some  of the  studies,   substances  were  not  measured
accurately  or  with  sufficient  sensitivity.    Therefore,  only  data  for
selected  chemicals  are  discussed below.  The  following chemical  indicators
were used to establish the level of sediment contamination:

     •    Sum of LPAH

     •    Sum of HPAH

     •    Sum of concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc

     •    Cadmium

     •    Arsenic.

     Concentrations  of  related substances  were summed when  the  individual
chemicals  were  found  to  strongly  covary  in  their  distributions  in  the
sediments.   The composite indicators  (i.e.,  LPAH,  HPAH, sum  of  copper,  of
lead, and of zinc)  were  found to be reasonable surrogates for a broad range
of  individual  substances with  similar distributions  in  the system.   They
also represent  a range of sources  and transport mechanisms.   Finally,  the
composite indicators  are  known to cause toxic  responses  in  organisms  under
laboratory conditions.

     Table 8  shows  the data  limitations  of the selected studies  discussed
above.  Not all composite indicator substances were measured at all  stations
sampled during these studies.

     Station Locations—Station locations for the selected studies are given
in  Figures  19  and  20.    A   nonuniform  allocation  of sampling efforts  is
obvious.   Most  areas  of Budd  Inlet have  received  almost  no  study,  while
other  areas  (e.g.,  East  and  West  Bays)  have been  sampled  with  greater
intensity.   Such  spatial  heterogeneity  makes  it  difficult  to distinguish
spatial trends in contaminant concentrations.
                                       90

-------
           TABLE 8.  DATA LIMITATIONS OF SELECTED STUDIES USED
                IN DETAILED ANALYSIS OF SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY

Conventi onals
Study TOC TVS
Alan
(24 September 1987)
Johnson
(22 July 1985)a
Norton
(5 February 1986) a
Nob
a
Yes
Yes
Yesc
No
No

LPAH
NAd
Ace
Ace

Chemicals
HPAH PCB
NA
Ace
Ace
NA
NA
NA
Analyzed
Cu+Pb+Zn
Acce
NA
(Copper)
NA

As
NA
Ace
NA

a Personal  communication.
b No = Not  sampled or analyzed.
c Yes = Sampled and analyzed.
d NA = Not  Analyzed.
e Ace = Acceptable data.
                                      91

-------
     Reference Area Data—The ranges of sediment  concentrations of metals and
organic compounds  for  up  to  nine Puget Sound reference areas are summarized
in Tables  9  and 10.   It  is  assumed that  this  range of reference concentra-
tions provides  a  reasonable  measure of the variability of concentrations in
relatively uncontaminated sediments  (Tetra Tech  1985b,c).  The full  range of
Puget Sound  reference  area  data (collected from  1979 to 1985) is  used to
determine whether EAR values  are significant  (i.e.,  whether the contamination
exceeds all  Puget Sound reference  conditions).  This  approach  was  success-
fully used  to evaluate EAR  significance  in Elliott Bay  and Everett Harbor
(Tetra Tech  1985b,c).

     The reference  area data used  to  calculate  EAR values were  a  subset of
the  full  Puget  Sound  reference  data.   Data  from  six Carr  Inlet  stations
sampled in  1984 were averaged  and  used to calculate EAR conditions  for the
following reasons:

     •    The  most complete  reference data  set is  available  for  Carr
          Inlet  and it includes synoptic  data  for  metals, organic  com-
          pounds,  grain size,  organic carbon,  and  other conventional
          variables

     •    The  lowest  reference  detection  limits  for most substances  of
          concern  in  Puget   Sound  embayments  are  available for  Carr
          Inlet

     •    EAR  values  for  other  urban  embayments   (e.g., Elliott  Bay,
          Everett  Harbor,  Commencement Bay)  have been  calculated using
          the data, and therefore,  will be directly comparable with EAR
          values  for Budd Inlet

     •    Chemical  concentrations for samples  analyzed from Carr Inlet
          were  comparable to  or  lower than  concentrations  in  other
          reference  areas,   and  therefore,   appear to   be  reasonably
          representative of  Puget Sound reference conditions.
                                        92

-------
               TABLE 9.   SUMMARY OF  METAL CONCENTRATIONS  IN
                SEDIMENTS  FROM  PUGET SOUND  REFERENCE  AREAS

Range

Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
(mg/kg
U O.lb
1.9
0.07
5.6
0.1
9.6
5
U 0.1
0.01
4
U 0.1
0.02
U 0.1
15
dry wt)
- 1.7
- 17
- 5.5
- 7.8
- 1.9
- 130
- 74
- 24
- 0.28
- 47
- 1.0
- 3.3
- 0.2
- 100
Mean
(mg/kg dry wt)
0.32C - 0.38d
7.2
2.3
6.9
0.67
54
32
9.8C - 9.8d
0.08
28
0.36C - 0.62d
1.2
0.05C - 0.12d
62
Detection
Frequency
12/32
34/34
26/26
4/4
24/24
38/38
28/28
21/28
38/38
26/26
16/24
26/26
8/22
26/26
Reference
Sites3
1,2,3,4,7,8,9
1,2,3,4,7,8,9
1,2,3,4,5,9
1
1,2,3,4,6,9
1-9
1,2,3,4,5,6,9
1,2,3,4,5,6,9
1-9
1,2,3,4,5,9
1,2,3,4,6,9
123459
1 , C. , ~> , ~t , 
-------
TABLE 10.   SUMMARY OF ORGANIC  COMPOUND CONCENTRATIONS
       IN  SEDIMENTS FROM PUGET SOUND  REFERENCE AREAS
Substance
Phenol s
65 Phenols
HSL
HSL
34
2-methyl phenol
4-methyl phenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
Range
(ug/kg dry wt)
U 10
62b
Mean
(ug/kg dry wt)
c
37d
U 10
U 10
U 1
32
U 10
14
—
20

Detection
Frequency
3/13
0/4
2/4
0/6
Reference
Sites3
1,2,3
--
1
1




Substituted Phenols
24
31
22
21
HSL
64
57
59
60
58
2-chlorophenol
2 , 4-di chl orophenol
4-chl oro-3-methyl phenol
2, 4, 6-tri chl orophenol
2,4, 5-tri chl orophenol
pentachl orophenol
2-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4 , 6-di ni tro-o-cresol
4-nitrophenol
U 0.5
U 0.5 •
U 0.5
U 0.5
U 5
- U 10
U 10
U 10
—
—
--
—




U 10
0.1
0.1
U 0
U 0.5
U 0.5 -
U 50
U 10
.5
U 100
U 100
0.02
—
—
—
—
33




0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/4
1/6
1/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1










Low Molecular Weight Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
55
77
1
80
81
78
HSL
High
39
84
72
76
74
75
73
83
82
79
naphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
fluorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
2-methyl naphthalene
Molecular Weight Polynuclear
fluoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzo ( b ) f 1 uoranthene
benzo (k) fl uoranthene
benzo (a) pyrene
i ndeno( 1 , 2 , 3-c , d) pyrene
di benzo (a, h) anthracene
benzo(g,h,i )perylene
U 0.5
U 0.1
U 0.1
U 0.1
5
U 0.5
1
U 40
U 40
U 40
40
170
U 40
20
5.6 -
0.08 -
0.48
3.0
19
2.7
7.5
22
• 17
17
19
35
22
9.5
10/20
1/20
4/20
7/21
11/17
7/17
6/10
1,2,3,4,5,
1,2,3,4,5,
1,2,3,4,5,
All
1,2,3,6,7
1,2.3,6,7
1,4,5,6
6
6
6




Aromatic Hydrocarbons
7
8
100
120
4 - U 40
U 5
U 5
U 5 -
U 0.37
U 0.37
0.4 -
3
U 40
94
- 94
40
30
U 5
20
32
30
3.7
6.4
17 -
17
9.3 -
7.4 -
0.08 -
3.8
41
41
23
26
33
33
10
9.2
4.1
7.2
17/22
16/22
8/17
8/17
12/21
12/21
10/14
6/12
1/5
2/6
All
All
1,2,3,6,7
1,2,3,6.7
All
All
1,3,4,5,6,
1,4,5,6,7
1
1,7






7



Chlorinated Aromatic Hydrocarbons
26
27
25
8
20
9
1 , 3-di chl orobenzene
1 , 4-di chl orobenzene
1 , 2-di chl orobenzene
1 , 2 , 4-t ri chl orobenzene
2-chl oronaphthal ene
hexachl orobenzene (HCB)
U 0.06
U 0.06
U 0.06
U 0.5
U 0.5
0.01
U 40
- U 40
U 40
- U 5
U 50
U 10
0.004
0.004
0.004
--
--
0.07
19
19
- 19


3.5
1/18
1/18
1/18
0/6
0/6
6/12
1,2.3,4,E

1,2,3,4,5
1,2,3,4,5
1
1
1,4,5,6




Chlorinated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons
12
XX
XX
XX
52
53
hexachl oroethane
trichlorobutadiene
tetrachlorobutadiene Isomers
pentachl orobutadi ene isomers
hexachl orobutadi ene
hexachl orocycl opentadi ene
U 0.5
U 0.03
U 0.04
0.03 -
U 0.03
U 50
U 25
- U 25
U 25
- U 25
—
0.27
1.6 -
0.15
0.07 -

7.9
9.2
7.7
8.5
0/6
5/12
5/12
5/12
5/12
1
1,4,5,6
1,4,5,6
1,4,5,6
1.4,5,6





not analyzed
                           94

-------
TABLE 10.   (Continued)
Halogenated Ethers
18 bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
42 bis(2-chloroisopropyl ) ether
43 bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
40 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
41 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Phthalate Esters
71 dimethyl phthalate
70 di ethyl phthalate
68 di-n-butyl phthalate
67 butyl benzyl phthalate
66 bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
69 di-n-octyl phthalate U 0,
Miscellaneous Oxygenated Compounds
54 i sophorone
HSL benzyl alcohol
HSL benzoic acid
129 2,3,7, 8-tetrachl orodi benzo-p-
dioxin
HSL dibenzofuran
Organonitrogen Compounds
HSL aniline
56 nitrobenzene
63 n-nitroso-di-n-propylamine
HSL 4-chloroaniline
HSL 2-nitroaniline
HSL 3-nitroaniline
HSL 4-nitroaniline
36 2,6-dinitrotoluene
35 2,4-dinitrotoluene
62 n-nitrosodi phenyl ami ne
37 1,2-di phenyl hydrazine
5 benzidine (4,4'-diamino-biphenyl)
28 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
Pesticides
93 p,p'-DDE
94 p.p'-DDD
92 p,p:-DDT
89 aldrin
90 dieldrin
91 chlordane
95 alpha-endosulfan
96 beta-endosulfan
97 endosulfan sulfate
98 endrin
99 endrin aldehyde
100 heptachlor
101 heptachlor epoxide
102 alpha-HCH
103 beta-HCH
104 delta-HCH
105 gamma-HCH (lindane)
113 toxaphene
PCBs
xx Total PCBs (primarily 1254/1260)

0.3 U 10
U 0.5 U 10
U 10
U 0.5 US
U 0.5 U 5

U 0.5 U 50
9.0 11
U 20 760
U 0.5 U 25
U 0.5 U 25
.5 U 25

U 0.5 U 130
U 10
U 25 - 430

not analyzed
U 5

U 1.0 U 20
U 0.5 U 5
U 0.5 U 10
U 50
U 50
U 50
U 50
U 0.5 U 10
U 0.5 U 5
U 0.5 US
U 0.5 U 5
U 0.5
U 0.5 U 100

U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 - U 25
U 10 - U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 - U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10 U 25
U 10

3.1 U 20

1/4
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6

0/5
4 8 4/5
160 170 3/5
0/5
0/5
0/5

0/5
0/4
210 216 3/4


0/4

0/6
0/5
0/5
0/4
0/4
0/4
0/4
0/5
0/5
0/5
0/6
0/2
0/6

0/5
0/6
0/5
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/5
0/5
0/5
0/6
0/5
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/6
0/2

1.8 12 7/19

1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1


1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1,2,3,4,6,7
                                                      95

-------
TABLE 10. (Continued)
Volatile Compounds
85
38
tetrachloroethene
ethyl benzene
U 4,
U 4,
,1 U 16
,1 U 16
0/8
0/8
2,3
2,3

a
Reference sites: 1. Carr Inlet
2. Samish Bay
3. Dabob Bay
4.
5.
6.
Carr Inlet
Port Madison
Port Susan
7. Nisqually Delta

" An anomalously  high phenol value  of 1800 ug/kg dry  weight was found at  one Carr Inlet station.  For  the
purpose of reference area comparisons, this value has been excluded.

c Mean  calculated using 0.00 for undetected values.

" Mean  calculated using the reported detection limit for undetected values.

Reference:

  (Site 1)  Tetra Tech (1985a);  Mowrer et al.  (1977).
  (Site 2)  Battelle Northwest (1983).
  (Site 3)  Battelle Northwest (1983); Prahl and Carpenter (1979).
  (Site 4)  Mai ins et al. (1980); Mowrer et al.  (1977).
  (Site 5)  Malins et al. (1980).
  (Site 6)  Malins (1981).
  (Site 7)  Barrick and Prahl (in review); Mowrer et al. (1977).
                                                        96

-------
     The Carr Inlet samples collected in 1984 provide the most comprehensive
reference data for Puget Sound.  These data include blank-corrected analyses
for 13  U.S.  EPA priority  pollutant  metals,  3  additional  metals (including
iron and manganese as  natural  indicators),  78  U.S.  EPA extractable priority
pollutant  compounds,  12  additional  U.S.  EPA  Hazardous  Substance  List
compounds,  and  selected  tentatively identified compounds.   Data for almost
all of  the  organic  compounds  were  corrected  for  potential  losses  during
sample  preparation  and   analysis  using  isotope  mass  spectroscopy.    The
comprehensive nature  of  these data is a major  reason  for their sole use in
calculating elevations above reference values.

     The most  commonly analyzed contaminants in  other reference areas (see
Tables  9 and  10)  were  metals  and  neutral  organic  compounds  (especially
hydrocarbons).   With  the  exception  of  selected  hydrocarbon data  from the
Nisqually  River delta and  Dabob  Bay,  analytical  recovery  data  were not
available  for  evaluation  of  the  organic  compound  data  from the  other
reference data  sets.   Phthalate  data  were available  for  some  of the other
reference  areas,  but  were rejected because  the data apparently  were not
corrected for potential laboratory contamination, a common problem with this
group of compounds.

     Detection  limits  for  some reference areas  exceeded 50 ug/kg dry weight
for several  organic  compounds.  Detection limits for  the recent Carr  Inlet
samples ranged from 0.5 to 50  ug/kg dry weight for almost all compounds.  To
provide  a  comparable  data  set, a maximum detection  limit of  50  ug/kg dry
weight  was  set for   the  acceptance  of data  from  other  reference   areas
included in  the ranges reported  in  Table 10.   For the  few reference data
sets  affected  by this cutoff, most of  the relevant  compounds  have either
been found at  levels  below 50  ug/kg dry weight,  or have been undetected at
low concentrations in  the  remaining  reference  areas.   This cutoff makes the
determination of the significance of Budd Inlet contamination less sensitive
to limitations of analytical methods and more sensitive to the actual levels
of compounds in reference areas.

     Elevations Above  Reference (EAR) Analysis—Dry weight concentrations of
selected chemical  indicators  in the  sediments  of Budd Inlet were divided by
                                       97

-------
the average concentration  for those indicators  measured in sediments of the
Carr Inlet reference area.  Detailed spatial distributions of the EAR values
for selected indicators are presented in Figures 21-26.

     The calculated  EAR values for the  selected indicators are presented by
station  in  Table  11.   Of the  selected  indicators,  the  organic compounds
(i.e., LPAH and  HPAH)  exhibited much higher EAR values than did the metals.
EAR values for  LPAH  and HPAH  exceeded 100 at most stations, while those for
metals rarely  exceeded 3.   Specific characteristics  of  East  and West Bays
are discussed below.

     The intertidal  area  in  East Bay near the Cascade Pole Company facility
exhibited the highest  elevations for all  indicator chemicals in the project
area.  EAR values for  both LPAH  and  HPAH exceeded 50 at all stations.  These
chemical  elevations  were  all  above  the  significance   level   (i.e.,  the
concentrations were  greater  than the highest concentrations observed in any
reference area  in  Puget Sound; Tetra Tech 1985a,b).   Concentrations of LPAH
and HPAH at Station 2 were much higher than those noted in other contaminated
areas of Puget Sound (Tetra Tech  1986b) (see Table 11).  EAR values for LPAH
and HPAH were highest  in  intertidal sediments at Stations 1-3 and tended to
decrease in subtidal areas (see  Table 11).  Possible sources of contaminants
that caused these  high concentrations  are multiple seeps  that occur in East
Bay (White, M.,  21 January 1988, personal  communication).  Arsenic concentra-
tions were fairly  typical  of  other nonreference areas in  Puget Sound (Tetra
Tech  1985a,b).   The associated  EAR  values  did  not exceed 3 (see Table 11).
Data for other indicator chemicals were not collected.

     Contaminant  concentrations in  sediment  and associated EAR values near
the West Bay storm drain,  which is in contact with  contaminated groundwater
beneath Cascade Pole Company site varied (Johnson,  A.,  22  July 1985, personal
communication).  EAR values for  LPAH and HPAH were highest at the intertidal
station  located  just south of  the  outfall,  while  the intertidal station to
the north  of  the outfall   had  the lowest  EAR values  for LPAH and HPAH.  The
subtidal station  exhibited intermediate  concentrations.   Actual concentra-
tions were much  lower  than the highest values reported for  stations in East
                                      98

-------
100
     200
                                                        SAMPLING STATION

                                                        NOT SIGNIFICANT

                                                        SIGNIFICANT, < 10 X REFERENCE

                                                        SIGNIFICANT, 10 -100 X REFERENCE

                                                        SIGNIFICANT, 100 -1000 X REFERENCE

                                                        SIGNIFICANT, > 1000 X REFERENCE
      Figure 21.   EAR values for concentrations of LPAH in sediments
                   from the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.
                                       99

-------
 •    SAMPLING STATION

I    I  NOT SIGNIFICANT

      SIGNIFICANT, < 10 X REFERENCE

      SIGNIFICANT, 10 -100 X REFERENCE

      SIGNIFICANT, 100-1000 X REFERENCE

      SIGNIFICANT, > 1000 X REFERENCE
       Figure 22.  EAR values for concentrations of HPAH in sediments
                    from the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.
                                        100

-------
                                                                               SAMPLING STATION

                                                                               NOT SIGNIFICANT

                                                                               SIGNIFICANT, < 10 X REFERENCE

                                                                               SIGNIFICANT. 10 - 50 X REFERENCE
                                                                                 --/i
                                                                                    -OLYMPIA
                                                                                     CITY
                                                                                     BOUNDARY
                                                                           4TH AVE.
                                                                 OLYMPIA
Figure 23.  EAR values for concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc in sediments from the
            East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.

-------
•cm
            SAMPLING STATION

            NOT SIGNIFICANT

            SIGNIFICANT. < 10 X REFERENCE

            SIGNIFICANT, 10 - 50 X REFERENCE
                                                                      100
                                                                          200
                                                                           I FEET
            Figure 24.   EAR values for concentrations of copper, lead, and
                         zinc in sediments from the East and West Bays of
                         Budd Inlet.
                                           102

-------
o
u>
                                                                                          •    SAMPLING STATION

                                                                                         |   |   NOT SIGNIFICANT

                                                                                               SIGNIFICANT, < 10 X REFERENCE

                                                                                                   OLYMPIA
                                                                                                   CITY
                                                                                                   BOUNDARY
                                                                                               I.-
                                                                                          4TH AVE
                                                                                OLYMPIA
                  Figure 25.  EAR values for concentrations of cadmium in sediments from the East and West
                             Bays of Budd Inlet.

-------
                                                                       • CZI
               POflT      //
               DETENTION
               BASIN
  •   SAMPLING STATION

I    I  NOT SIGNIFICANT

      SIGNIFICANT, < 10 X REFERENCE
                                                                  100
                                                                      200
                                                                       iFEET
       Figure 26.  EAR values for concentrations of arsenic in sediments
                   from the East and West Bays of Budd Inlet.
                                      104

-------
                                       TABLE 11.   CONCENTRATIONS AND EAR VALUES  FOR  SELECTED  CHEMICAL  INDICATORS  IN BUDD  INLET3

Area
East Bay
(Intertidal)
ii n
ii i

u i
n
East Bay
(Offshore)
n n
Area Average
West Bay
Outfall
(Intertidal)
i— > M n
o
tn
"

West Bay
Outfall
(Subtidal)
n n
Capitol Lake
Outfall

Fiddlehead
Marina
Area Average

Station
1

2
3

4
5
6

7

8


338035

338034

338036


3
1


2


LPAH
Conc.b
48,800 1

1,745,000 42
22,540

9,060
12,640
5,180

1,702
263,560 6
f


210

6,100

880


--
--


--

2,397

EAR
,198*
*
.833
553*

222
310*
127*

42
,469*
f


5
*
150

27


--
--


--

59*
HPAH
Conc.b
75,100

1,258,000 15
95,800 1

10,150
4,240
15,500

14,080
210,410 2
880


1,300

16,000

3,200



--


--

5,345
Cu+Pb+Zn As Cd
EAR Conc.c EAR Conc.c EAR Conc.c EAR
954* -d -- 8.0 2

,985 -- -- 5.7 2
,217* -- -- 10.7 3

129 -- -- 11.0 3
54* -- -- 5.5 2
197* -- -- 7.6 2

179 -- -- 7.3 2
,674* 8.0 2
11* -- -- 9.0 3


17
*
203

41


165.5 4.8 0 0
38.5 1.1 0 0


256.3 7.4 -- -- 5.6 5.9

68* 153.4 4.4 1.9 2.0

LPAH
2

1
3

5
4
6

7

f


3

1

2


--
--


--


EAR RANK3
HPAH Cu+Pb+Zn As
3 e

1
2

6
7
4

5

4


3

1

2


2
3


1



Cd
--

--
--

--
--
..

--

_-


--

--

--


e
e


(1)


a Asterisk  indicates  significant  EAR (i.e.,  chemical concentration in study area is greater  than  the maximum value observed  in all Puget Sound reference areas; Tetra
Tech 1986b).
  Concentration = ug/kg.
c Concentration = mg/kg.
d No data collected.
e Since none of the EAR values were significant, they were not ranked.
f All LPAH compounds were undetected with a detection limit of 100 ug/L at this station.

-------
Bay,  however, all EAR values were significant when compared with Puget Sound
reference areas.

     Other areas  in West Bay  were  only sampled for  metals.   The composite
indicator  for  copper,   lead,   and  zinc  exhibited  a  significant  EAR  for
sediments near the Fiddlehead Marina.   In addition, the cadmium concentration
in sediments from a station near Fiddlehead Marina exhibited significant EAR
values.  The  lack of  data in the remaining areas of West Bay and Budd Inlet
does not allow for a comprehensive discussion of sediment contamination.

     Comparison  to  Apparent Effects Threshold  (AET)  Values—The AET values
were used  to identify concentrations  of specific  contaminants  in sediments
above which  biological  concentrations  of specific  contaminants  in sediments
above which  biological  effects are  expected  to  occur.  AET values are based
on sediment chemistry data, toxicity data  (i.e., amphipod, oyster larva, and
Microtox bioassays),  and benthic infauna  abundance.   For  a  given  chemical
and  a  specified biological  indicator, the  AET is the  concentration  above
which  statistically significant biological  effects  occurred  in  all  samples
of  sediments  analyzed.    Because   of  limited biological   (e.g.,  benthic
infauna, bioassay)  data  in  Budd Inlet, contaminant  concentrations  in  budd
Inlet  sediments  have  been  compared  to  these  Puget Sound  AET values  to
predict  potentially  significant biological effects.   The  range  and  mean of
each chemical  detected  in  sediments  from  lower Budd  Inlet can  be compared
to AET values in Table  12.  Raw data are provided in Appendix D.
                                                     j
     The minimum concentrations of  all organic  and inorganic chemicals were
below the  lowest AET  (LAET)  values  in all  cases except the following:  2,4-
dimethylphenol,  2-methylphenol, 1-methylnaphthalene,  dibenzothiophene,  and
biphenyl.  The  maximum concentrations  of all organic compounds  exceeded the
LAET values except for  acenaphthylene, benzo(g,h,i)pyrelene, dibenzo(a,h)an-
thracene,  indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene,  4-methylphenol,  and  phenol.   The maximum
concentration of chromium exceeded  its LAET  value./  The maximum concentra-
tion of  cadmium  (5.6  mg/kg)  is similar to the  LAET for cadmium  (5.8 mg/kg).
Cascade Pole is  the most  likely source of these contaminants.
                                      106

-------
                             TABLE  12.  COMPARISONS OF CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS3  IN BUDD  INLET SEDIMENTS WITH PUGET SOUND AET VALUES
Budd Inlet Data
Class
LPAH





HPAH








TPAH
Phthalates
Phenol s




Miscellaneous Extractables




Volatile Organics

Metal s







Chemical
acenaphthene
acenaphthylene
anthracene
fluorene
naphthalene
phenanthrene
benzo (a ) anthracene
benzo(a)pyrene
benzo(g,h,i Jperylene
benzof 1 uoranthenes
chrysene
di benzo(a . h)anthracene
fluoranthene
i ndeno( 1,2, 3-cd)pyrene
pyrene
Total PAH
bis(2-ethy1hexyl )phthalate
2, 4-dimethyl phenol
2-methyl phenol
4 -methyl phenol
pentachl orophenol
phenol
1-methyl naphthal ene
2-methyl naphthal ene
biphenyl
dibenzofuran
dibenzothiophene
ethyl benzene
total xyl enes
arsenic
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
mercury
nickel
zinc
N
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
4
12
12
12
4
8
8
8
8
12
8
3
15
3
12
3
8
8
8
3
11
11
3
1
3
3
Mean
32,844
175
13.500
17,398
19,961
69,221
9.876
3,822
156
7,764
12,134
93
52,414
156
38,682
7,370
2,468
188
188
190
156
188
261,633
1.533
725
11,559
270,000
76
55
8.1
1.9
31.6
63.7
16.4
0.2
23.1
86.1
Min
20
20
20
20
39
100
20
20
20
50
20
20
220
20
450
880
100
100
100
100
20
100
2,100
20
540
20
270,000
5
5
5.5
0.0
3.7
0.0
6.5
0.2
2.7
29.3
Max
370,000
400
150,000
200,000
210,000
800,000
95,000
40,000
400
73,000
120,000
200
530,000
400
400,000
23,000
15,000
400
400
400
400
400
780,000
15,000
910
130,000
270,000
510
400
11.0
5.6
55.6
131.5
33.4
0.2
41.7
116.9
Puqet
Amphipod
980
560
1,900
1.800
2,400
5,400
3,000
2,400
960
3,700
5,000
510
9,800
880
11,000

> 3,100
> 72
63
1,200
> 140
670
310
670
260
540
240
> 50
> 160
93
6.7
> 130
800
700
2.10
> 120
870
Sound Aooarent Effects Threshold
Oyster
500
> 560
960
540
2.100
1,500
1,600
1.600
720
3,600
2,800
230
2.500
690
3,300

1,900
29
63
670
> 140
420
370
670
260
540
240
37
120
700
9.6
> 37
390
660
0.59
39
1,600
Benthic
500
640
1,300
640
2,100
3,200
4,500
6,800
5,400
8,000
6,700
1,200
6.300
- 5,200
> 7,300

1,900
29
> 72
670
> 140
1,200
370
670
270
540
250
37
120
85
5.8
59
310
300
0.88
49
260
Microtox
500
> 560
960
540
2,100
1,500
1,300
1,600
670
3.200
1,400
230
1.700
600
2,600

1,900
29
> 72
670
> 140
1,200
370
670
270
540
250
33
100
700
9.6
27
390
530
0.41
28
1.600
(AET) Valuesb
LAET
500
560
960
540
2,100
1,500
1,300
1.600
670
3.200
1,400
230
1,700
600
2,600

1,900
29
63
670

420
310
670
260
540
240
33
100
85
5.8
27
310
300
0.41
28
260
HAET
980
640
1,900
1,800
2,400
5,400
4,500
6,800
5,400
8,000
6,700
1,200
9,800
880
11.000

1,900
29
63
1,200

1,200
370
670
270
540
250
37
120
700
9.6
59
800
700
2.10
49
1,600
a Concentrations of organic contaminants expressed in units of ug/kg dry wt, and concentrations of trace metals expressed in units of mg/kg  dry wt.

b LAET=lowest AET; HAET=highest AET; >=actual AET value is greater than the value shown and threshold value has not been determined.

Reference:   Adapted  from:   Alan,  R. (24 September 1987,  personal  communication);  Norton,  D. (5 February 1986, personal conmunication); and Johnson,  A.  (22  July
1985, personal communication).

-------
Bloaccumulation

General Overview--

     Bioaccumulation data collected since December 1981 for marine organisms
in Budd  Inlet  are  limited  to  the concentration of PAH  in  tissues  of clams
from four stations  (see Figures 19 and 20).   In  the sample of clams collected
in East Bay near the Cascade Pole  Company  facility, the concentrations of PAH
were at the upper  end  of  concentrations  reported in  other Puget Sound urban
bays  (i.e.,  1,100  ug/kg  total   PAH),  and  were  similar to  concentrations
detected  in  Eagle Harbor  clams   (Norton,  D.,  5 February 1986,  personal
communication).   Concentrations  of  total PAH  (99  and 190 ug/kg)  in clams
from West Bay  were approximately  an order  of magnitude  lower  than those
observed  in  East  Bay.    PAH  were undetected  in  clams collected at  Priest
Point.

     In 1986 and  1987,  DSHS (1987) analyzed  clam  tissues  from Priest Point
Park for  heavy metals  and  selected  organic compounds.   Because  of quality
assurance  issues,  these data  were  not made available in time  to be  incor-
porated into this  report.

     Because of  the limited recent bioaccumulation data, older data  (i.e.,
Mai ins et  al.  1980)  are included  to provide an indication of the concentra-
tions of  contaminants detected in bottomfish.   In  1979,  elevated concentra-
tions of  some  metals were  found  in  liver tissues  of  English  sole collected
from Budd  Inlet  (Maiins et al. 1980).   However,  specific station locations
for  these data were  not  presented.   Concentrations  of  strontium  in liver
tissues of English sole  from Budd  Inlet were reportedly  39  times greater
than  concentrations  detected   in Sinclair  Inlet,  17  times   greater  than
concentrations detected along  the Elliott Bay waterfront, and 25 to 31 times
greater than concentrations detected  in  Hylebos Waterway.   Strontium  is not
considered toxic (Maiins et al. 1980).  However, these elevations in English
sole liver tissue  suggest  a source of strontium in Budd Inlet.  Calcium was
also elevated  by  over  an  order of magnitude  compared  to concentrations in
fish livers collected from Case and Sinclair Inlets,  Duwamish River, Seattle
                                      108

-------
Waterfront,  and  Hylebos and  Sitcum  Waterways.  Naphthalene,  acenaphthalene,
dichlorobenzene,  and  trichlorobutadiene  in  composite  samples  containing
English  sole livers  collected throughout  Budd  Inlet appeared  elevated in
comparison  with  Port  Madison, Case  Inlet,  and  Sinclair  Inlet.   However,
because  detection  limits  were not reported, these  results  should be inter-
preted with  caution.

Data Synthesis —

     An  analysis  of bioaccumulation data collected since  1982  will  be used
to  define  toxic contamination problems in  the  study area.   The following
analysis deviates  from the  traditional  action assessment approach  used in
other  urban  embayments (e.g., Elliott  Bay,  Everett Harbor),  because bioac-
cumulation  data  exists for clams only.  Although  one station  in Budd Inlet
was  considered  a   reference   station  by Mr.  D.  Norton  (5 February  1986,
personal communication), all  contaminants were undetected in the sample from
that station.   However,  the  detection limits in  that study were higher than
detection  limits used  in other recent bioaccumulation studies.

     Available  Data—Recent  data on  priority pollutant  concentrations  in
clam  tissues were  compiled  from Mr.  D. Norton   (5  February  1986,  personal
communication).   These were  the only  data available for the  study period
1982-1987.

     Choice  of  Indicators—Chemical   indicators   chosen  for  analysis  of
bioaccumulation  in  clam tissues were:

     •     Sum of LPAH

     •     Sum of HPAH.

These  indicators  represent   a subset  of   the chemicals  that  are  usually
investigated in tissue  samples.   Data on PCBs  and metals were not available,
and  are needed  to  identify  the  biological  effects that may  be induced by
these environmental contaminants.
                                      109

-------
     Station  Locations—Two  stations were  located  near the  West  Bay storm
drain  outfall  and  one station  was  located  near  the Cascade  Pole Company
facility (see Figure 20).  A reference station was located near Priest Point
(see Figure 19).

     Reference  Area  Data—Reference  concentrations  of  LPAH  and  HPAH  in
clams were obtained from the Puget Sound Environmental Atlas  (Evans-Hamilton
and D.R. Systems 1986).  These reference data use a compilation of data from
Mai ins  et  al.  (1980)  and Yake  et  al.  (1984).    The  database  from which
reference  values for  bioaccumulation of  contaminants  in clams is determined
is  limited since  bioaccumulation  is traditionally investigated  in bottom-
dwelling fish and  crabs.

     EAR Analvsis—Bioaccumulation  data for  clams are  summarized in Table
13.  Metals were not  included  in the analyses.  However, 10 organic priority
pollutants were  identified in  the clams that were collected from near the
Cascade  Pole Company.   A total  of six LPAH  and ten  HPAH  compounds were
analyzed.   Acenaphthylene was the  only  undetected LPAH compound.   Of the
HPAH,  benzo(a)pyrene,  dibenzo(a,h)anthracene,   indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene,  and
benzo(g,h,i)perylene  were  undetected.

     Bioaccumulation  of LPAH  and  HPAH was greatest  at  the station off the
Cascade  Pole facility in  East  Bay.   Concentrations  of LPAH and HPAH were
169  and 938  ug/kg wet weight,  respectively.   These  values fall  within the
range  of values observed  from Eagle Harbor.   EAR  values  were 5.0 for LPAH
and  12.3 for HPAH.   Bioaccumulation in  clams collected at the two  stations
near the West Bay drain were 27 and 83  ug/kg  (wet  wt)  for  total  LPAH  and 72
and  110 ug/kg  (wet wt)  for total HPAH.   These  values  are similar to  lower
values obtained from  other  urban embayments in  Puget  Sound  (Norton, D.,  5
February 1986,  personal  communication).

     The  limited  data  available  for  analysis  of bioaccumulation in  Budd
 Inlet  suggest that PAH  are  accumulating to abnormally  high  levels  in clams
 in the vicinity of Cascade Pole Company.   The  earlier  data by Mai ins et  al.
 (1980) suggest  the  bioaccumulation of  strontium  and calcium  in  abnormally
high concentrations.   Until further studies  are  conducted,  the significance
                                        110

-------
         TABLE 13.   SUMMARY OF BIOACCUMULATION DATA FOR BUDD INLET

Sample Type
Clamsc







Station
Priest
Point
East
Bay
West Bay
Drain-1
West Bay
Drain-2
na
31

11

27

27

LPAH HPAH
Concentration*3 EAR Concentration15


169 5.0 938

83 2.4 108

27 0.8 72


EAR


12.3

1.4

0.9


a n = number of clams composited into one sample.
b Concentration is expressed in ug/kg wet weight.
c Protothaca staminea. Tapes .iaponica. and Mva arenaria.
Reference:  D. Norton (5 February 1986, personal  communication).
                                     Ill

-------
of these elevations can not be ascertained.   Acenaphthylene was the only LPAH
undetected  in  all  tissue  samples.   Benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene,
indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene,  and  benzo(g,h,i)perylene  were  undetected   in  all
tissue samples.

Toxicity Bioassavs

     Bioassays are conducted to test organism response to bioavailable toxic
substances in contaminated effluent and sediments.   Presently, this cannot be
determined  by  routine chemical  analytical  techniques.   Therefore, bioassays
should  be  used  in  conjunction  with  chemical  data  when  characterizing
ecological  impacts  of contaminated sediments or water  on  organisms.   Three
types  of  bioassays  are  used  to  test  receiving  water  toxicity,  sediment
toxicity,  and  effluent toxicity.   Simultaneous  consideration   of  benthic
infaunal community, chemistry, and bioassay data is effective for conducting
site-specific  analysis of conditions  in the sedimentary  environment (Tetra
Tech 1985b,c;  Long and  Chapman 1985).

Overview--

     Receiving  water   bioassays  were  conducted  during   1973-1976  at  six
stations  in  Budd  Inlet.   Recent  data are  not  available.    Two types  of
sediment  bioassays  (i.e., amphipod  and  oyster  larva)  were performed  on
sediments  collected  in  March   1985  at a   single  station  in  Budd  Inlet.
Effluent bioassays are not a  component of  the NPDES permit requirements for
the LOTT WWTP  (Alan,  R., 9 February 1988, personal communication).

     Receiving Water  Toxicitv—Receiving water bioassays  were not conducted
in  Budd  Inlet during  the study  period for this report  (i.e.,   1982-1987).
However,  receiving  water  bioassays  were conducted during the  period 1973-
1976 at  six  stations   (Washington Department  of  Fisheries 1979).   The six
stations were  located  in  central  Budd  Inlet near Gull  Harbor, south of Gull
Harbor,  near  Butler  Cove, near Priest Point,  near  the old LOTT  outfall
(i.e.,   approximately   100  yd off Fiddlehead  Marina),  and  at  the  Port  of
Olympia  docks  near  the head of  West Bay.   No stations were  located in East
Bay.   Water samples  were  collected at  the  surface  and at various depths in
                                      112

-------
the water column.  Oyster larvae (Crassostrea qiqas) bioassays were conducted
on  each  of  the samples.   Sample  collection  methods and  laboratory QA/QC
procedures were  adequate and included the use of a reference toxicant.

     At  all   stations,   percent  abnormality  and  percent mortality  showed
considerable  variability.    Percent  mortality  was  generally   higher  than
percent  abnormality,  except near the  LOTT  outfall where these  values  were
approximately  equal.    Percent  abnormality  and  percent mortality  ranged
between 0 and 100 percent at stations located south of Gull  Harbor, and near
Butler Cove,  Priest Point, and the LOTT outfall.   Percent  abnormality and
percent mortality were  generally lower  at  the  Port of Olympia docks than at
other  stations   in  Budd  Inlet;  values  from the station near  the  Port  of
Olympia docks were  similar  to  those from stations sampled near Dana Passage
and Ketron Island.

     Sediment Toxicity—Two types of  sediment  bioassays  have been performed
in  Budd   Inlet.  The  Rhepoxynius abronius  sediment  bioassay, developed  by
Swartz et al.  (1985),  was used for bioassays  conducted on sediment from one
station  located north  of  the  Port of  Olympia  peninsula,  and  on sediment
collected  at the  Olympia  Yacht  Club  (see  Figure  19).   The oyster larvae
(Crassostrea  giqas)  bioassay  was  also conducted  using  sediment  from  the
station located  north of  the Port of Olympia peninsula.

     Sample  collection  methods  for the Olympia Yacht Club  sample deviated
from the  preferred  practice in Puget  Sound.  The PSEP protocols  (Tetra Tech
1986a) recommend the collection  of 2  cm of surface  sediments  for sediment
chemistry  and bioassay  analyses.   The  Olympia  Yacht Club  sample was  com-
posited from  a  4-ft vertical  core,  which integrates a much longer period of
potential contaminant  accumulation  time than does the 2-cm sample.  Because
additional data generated  from  samples  collected from the  surface 2 cm of
sediment  are  not available, the Olympia Yacht  Club samples will   be included
in  this analysis.
                                      113

-------
Data Synthesis--

     Recent sediment bioassay data are synthesized below for analysis of EAR
values.  State  reasons  for omitting  effluent and receiving water bioassays
and focus on sediment bioassays.

     Choice of  Indicators—Because  of the frequent use  of  the amphipod and
oyster  bioassays  and   the  existence  of  standardized  techniques  for  both
(Chapman and Morgan 1983; Swartz et al.  1985), these assays were selected as
indicators  of   sediment  toxicity.    An extensive discussion  comparing  data
generated with  amphipod  and  oyster  larvae  bioassays  is provided  in  Tetra
Tech (1985b).

     Available  Data  and Station Locations--The  available  amphipod bioassay
data were reviewed to  determine whether the bioassays  had been conducted on
previously  frozen sediments, or whether  a  minimum  of  four  replicates  had
been conducted.   Data  from Everett  Harbor suggest  that  toxicity is altered
by  freezing the  sediments  (Tetra  Tech  1985c).    Because the  ability of the
amphipod bioassay to distinguish differences  in survival  between control and
treatment  sediments  is  dependent  on  the number of  replicates and  on  the
number  of   individuals  per replicate  (see Table  1  in  Swartz  et  al. 1985),
only those  studies with  a minimum of four  replicates and  20 amphipods per
replicate were  accepted.  Based on the above criteria,  data  generated for the
U.S  Army COE  [no date (c)]f   and  data  collected  off the Port  of Olympia
peninsula   (Schiewe,   M.,  19 November  1987,  personal  communication)  were
accepted.   Each  of these  data sets was from  one station.

     Only  one  study   used  oyster  larvae bioassays.    Mr.  M.  Schiewe  (19
November 1987, personal communication) conducted one replicated oyster larvae
bioassay on sediments  collected off the Port of Olympia peninsula.  Quality
control was adequate and  the data were accepted.

     To  fully characterize sediment toxicity in Budd  Inlet, additional data
are  required from East and West Bays, the area north  of the  Port  of Olympia
peninsula,  and  in the  remainder of the  inlet.
                                       114

-------
     Reference  Area Data—Sediments  used  as  native  sand  controls  in  the
accepted amphipod studies were  used  as  reference sediments.   Mr. M. Schiewe
(19 November 1987,  personal  communication)  used  sediment from Bowman's Bay as
reference material, while the U.S. Army COE [no date (c)]  used sediment from
the  amphipod  collection site  off West Beach,  Whidbey Island  as  reference
material.   Mean survival off  the Port of  Olympia  peninsula was 99 percent
and  mean  survival  at the Port  of Olympia Yacht Club was 100  percent.   The
oyster larvae bioassay reference was a seawater control.  Mean oyster larvae
abnormality in  seawater  was 2 percent and  mean  mortality in  seawater was 0
percent.

     Elevation  Above  Reference (EAR) Analysis—Within  each  study,  mortality
or  abnormality  (as  appropriate)  was  compared  between  test  and  reference
conditions  using appropriate statistical  methods.   Test  sediment  means  for
each  station  were  divided  by the  reference  mean  to  yield  the EAR.   This
ratio  indicates the  relative  magnitude of sediment toxicity.  Results  of
these analyses  are provided  in Table 14.

     EAR values  for amphipod and  oyster mortality at the station off Cascade
Pole Company were 20 and 15, respectively.  These EAR values are significant-
ly  elevated according  to  the criteria established for the  Everett Harbor
Action  Plan (Tetra Tech 1985c).   The  mean reference mortality rate for the
amphipod  bioassay  off  the  Cascade  Pole  Company site was 1  percent,  which
was  comparable  to  the mean  reference  in  Everett Harbor (Tetra Tech 1985c).
The  mean  oyster larvae mortality  reference value was  also  1 percent.  This
value is 0.6 percent  lower  than  the  mean  reference  value obtained in Everett
Harbor  (Tetra Tech  1985c).

     The mean  EAR  for amphipod bioassays  at the Olympia Yacht Club was 4.5.
This  value  was obtained  using  an amphipod  control  mortality rate  of  1
percent.   Sediment toxicity  at  the Olympia Yacht  Club was  not significant
according  to  the  criteria  established for the  Everett  Harbor  Action Plan
(Tetra Tech 1985c).
                                       115

-------
                   TABLE  14.  SUMMARY OF  EAR  VALUES  FOR  AMPHIPOD
                        AND OYSTER  LARVAE SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS
Study
Station
Mean Amphipod  Amphipod   Mean Oyster   Oyster
Mortality (%)     EAR    Mortality (%)    EAR
Scheiwe               North of Port of
(19 November 1987)b  Olympia peninsula
                    20
                  20a
15
15a
U.S. Army COE
[no date(c)]
Olympia Yacht Club
composite 1/2
Olympia Yacht Club
composite 3/4
6
3
6C
3C

a EAR calculation  based  on amphipod control mortality  rate  of 1.0 percent and oyster
control  mortality rate of 1.0 percent.

b Personal  communication.

c Mortality rate for  amphipod control  was  0.0  percent,  however, to permit calculation
of EARs,  a  mortality rate of 1.0 percent was used.
                                           116

-------
     The lack  of  bioassay data for the  remainder  of Budd Inlet precludes a
comprehensive  understanding  of  possible  sediment  toxicity.    The  data
presented  in  Table  14  should  be  considered  preliminary,  and conclusions
regarding  sediment  toxicity  should   be  delayed   until   further  data  are
collected.

Benthic Infaunal Communities

     Acceptable  data that  describe benthic communities  in Budd  Inlet  are
lacking.   A single  study  (Evergreen  State  College 1974)  was  conducted  in
1974 at 37 stations  located in upper Budd Inlet.  However, sample collection
and  laboratory analytical  procedures  were inconsistent  with  accepted  PSEP
protocols.    A review  of  these  data  suggests that  a  relatively  diverse
assemblage of  benthic infauna exists  within  the study area.   However,  the
data are inadequate  to examine spatial  gradients,  and  define  and  interpret
benthic communities.

     Reliable  benthic infauna  data,   including  species  richness  and  total
abundances,  must be  generated  prior  to the  analysis  of  benthic  infaunal
communities  in Budd  Inlet.   Any  sampling effort  should  provide  adequate
spatial coverage,  including the  location of  stations in West Bay,  East Bay,
along the entrance channel, and in  outer Budd Inlet.

Fish Pathology

     Fish pathology  data  in Budd  Inlet are lacking for the period 1982-1987.
The  only available data were generated  from samples  collected by  Malins  et
al.  (1980)  in  the winter,  spring,  summer, and  fall  of  1979.   Data on liver
lesions  and  other  pathological   diseases  in  bottomfish,   crabs, and  shrimp
were collected and analyzed.

     Most  types  of  abnormalities were  not observed in  English sole,  rock
sole, crabs,  or shrimp  captured  in Budd  Inlet.   However, gill respiratory
epithelial  hyperplasia was  observed in 13 percent of the  English sole, which
is  a  lower frequency   than  that  observed  in  English  sole   from  Hylebos
Waterway and Browns  Point.  Also, hepatocellular necrosis  was observed in 11
                                      117

-------
percent of  the rock  sole  (ranked third behind the  frequency  of disease in
rock  sole  from  Duwamish  River  and  Case  Inlet)  and in  6 percent  of the
English sole  (ranked first with  frequency of disease  in  English sole from
Hylebos Waterway,  Case  Inlet,  and outer Elliott  Bay).  Because the raw data
were not  available,  the incidence of  individual  disorders cannot be linked
to particular  stations.   Summary information for English  sole,  rock sole,
and  Pacific tomcod  showed similar  prevalences  of  abnormalities  at Priest
Point  (9.5  percent)  and  Olympia Shoals  (13 percent).    Data  for samples
collected in West  Bay were not presented  independently.   Higher incidences
of abnormalities were observed  in crabs.

     Although the  cause of abnormalities in field-captured  specimens has not
been determined, morphologically  similar abnormalities have been induced in
laboratory  mammals and fishes  following exposure  to carcinogens (Malins et
al.  1984).  Thus,  it is possible that the presence  of such abnormalities in
organisms inhabiting Budd Inlet  represents the  effects  of toxic substances
with carcinogenic  characteristics.

     Additional  data are needed  to  provide  a statistically valid interpre-
tation  of  histopathological   abnormalities   in  bottomfish  inhabiting  Budd
Inlet.   Bottom  fish should be  analyzed from East  and West  Bays,  and the
central and northern  portions  of  the  inlet.

Fish Kills--

     Prior  to  1981,  two fish  kills  were reported in Budd  Inlet.  Anaerobic
waters  that entered  Budd  Inlet  from  Capitol Lake  were  determined  to have
caused  fish mortalities,  and  a  fish  kill  occurred  in  the Deschutes River
near the  Olympia Brewery  (Kittle, L.,  29  January 1988,  personal communica-
tion).   The most  recent  documented  fish  kill   in  Budd  Inlet  occurred in
September  1981  near the  4th  Avenue  and  5th Avenue Bridges  in  downtown
Olympia (Kittle, L.,  and H. Tracy, 19  January 1982,  personal communication).
A discharge of anaerobic  saltwater,  which  contained high concentrations of
hydrogen sulfide,  entered  Budd Inlet from Capitol Lake.  The total estimate
of  fish  mortality was  314,098 non-salmonid  fish and  100  salmonid fish of
which  50  were  adults.    Since  that  occurrence,  no  fish kills  have been
                                      118

-------
reported in Budd Inlet  (Kittle, L., 29 January 1988, personal communication;
Singleton,  L.,  29  January  1988,  personal  communication).   However,  Mr. L.
Kittle noted that when  Capitol  Lake is lowered by the Washington Department
of  Fisheries  to  release  salmon  fingerlings,   mortalities  may  occur  as
freshwater fish species enter the marine environment.

     The formation of the  anaerobic water  in Capitol Lake that entered Budd
Inlet  and  caused massive  fish  mortalities  was  discussed  in  a  memorandum
(Schmitten,  R.,  16  October  1981,  personal  communication)  to Governor J.
Spellman:

     "According  to  Ecology's findings,  a  deep hole  has  recently  been
     formed inside the  lake [south  of the  gate]  caused by backflushing
     the  lake  with  salt  water from  Budd  Inlet  for   a  variety  of
     operations.  It  is sometimes necessary  and  desirable to flush the
     lake  with  salt water for fish  releases,  scrap fish  control  and
     weed  control  in  the  spring.    Under  normal  conditions the  salt
     water  is  replaced  by  Deschutes  River  water  and  the   lake  is
     operated  as a  freshwater  body  for  fish rearing and  recreation.
     However, in the fall  when Deschutes River flows are naturally low,
     any salt water  entering  the lake on  extreme high tide through the
     fish  ladder or  small   leaks  at the dam  sinks  to the  bottom in the
     deep  hole  and  under  certain  conditions   can stagnate.    This
     stagnant water  which  forms  toxic hydrogen sulfide was  the primary
     cause of the September,  1981 fish kills in Budd Inlet."
     The  Washington  Department  of  General   Administration   (WDGA),  which
manages Capitol  Lake,  determined that it would  not  be plausible to fill  in
the hole.  Entrance Engineers  (1983) completed an historical data review and
recommended appropriate actions to remedy the problem.  In early 1987, a 12-
in diameter  line was  installed  which  operates  as a siphon between Capitol
Lake and Budd  Inlet.   The intake for the siphon is  located at a depth of 40
ft in the  hole  in  Capitol Lake,  and the siphon  discharges directly north of
the tidal  gate  at  a depth of  27 ft  in  Budd  Inlet.   Although the siphon can
be turned  off,  it  is  currently  operating at  all times  and thus constantly
drains waters  from within  the area of  the  hole (Helmlinger, J.,  23 March
1988,  personal  communication).  The  flow of water  through  the  pipe  is not
known (Sweet, B. 13 April 1988, personal communication).  The WDGA currently
monitors waters  from the  area  of the Capitol  Lake hole from July to October
(Helmlinger, J., 13 April  1988,  personal  communication).   Six water samples
                                      119

-------
are collected  at 2-m  intervals  from  the surface to the bottom  of the hole
and analyzed  for dissolved oxygen,  the  frequency  of  sampling is dependent
on tide levels,  algal blooms, and weather,  at a minimum monitoring occurs 2
times/mo.  According  to  Mr.  Butch  Sweet (23 March 1988, personal communica-
tion),  the  siphon  appears to  be  working  because  the levels  of dissolved
oxygen have never exceeded the limits established by Ecology (i.e., 2 mg/L).
These dissolved  oxygen data  have not  been summarized but  are available in a
daily field notebook  from  WDGA.
                                      120

-------
                      IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEM AREAS
     The  identification  of  problem  areas  is  limited  by  the  amount  of
available  data for  Budd  Inlet.    Large gaps  in  data  coverage exist  for
eutrophication  and  toxic  contamination,  and  an  understanding  of  temporal
variability  of microbial  concentrations  is  lacking.   Data  gaps for these
categories will be discussed  in  the following  section.   Known problem areas
based on the available data are identified in this section.

     Problem areas are ranked in this report at a level  that is more general
than the  numerical  ranking in the  decision-making  approach.   Therefore,  if
additional data are collected,  the  results  of  the ranking presented in this
report should  be  re-evaluated by implementing  the decision-making approach.
Criteria  are  established to  define problem  areas,  and  three  levels  of
problem  severity  are  defined  within  each  category:     highest  priority,
secondary priority, and no immediate action.  Highest priority problem areas
are recommended for  further source and  remedial  action  evaluation.   Secon-
dary  priority  problem  areas  should  be  thoroughly studied  to  define  the
extent  and  severity  of  the  problem.   Areas designated  for  no immediate
action are recommended for future monitoring.

EUTROPHICATION

     Nutrient and dissolved oxygen concentrations  were discussed in the "Data
Summaries"  section  for  eutrophication.    Elevated  or depressed  nutrient
concentrations  are  not  environmental   problems  by  themselves.    However,
elevated  nutrient  concentrations may provide  the essential  ingredients for
algal blooms  that contribute to  dissolved  oxygen depletion  in Budd Inlet.
Low oxygen  concentration is an environmental  problem because resident fish
and  invertebrates  cannot  support   normal metabolic activities  when oxygen
levels decline.   The  amount of oxygen  required  to support normal metabolic
rates varies  among species.   However,  oxygen concentrations  less  than 3.0
mg/L are  considered  detrimental  to both fish  and invertebrates  (Welsh, B.(
                                      121

-------
18  November 1987,  personal  communication).   The highest  priority problem
areas for  eutrophication  are defined as those  areas  experiencing less than
3.0 mg/L dissolved  oxygen at least  once during the  period 1982-1987  (Table
15).   Secondary  priority  problem  areas  are  defined  as  having dissolved
oxygen concentrations  of  3.0-5.0 mg/L during the  same  period.   The Class B
water quality  standard  of 5.0  mg/L was  used  as the  upper limit  for the
secondary priority  designation.   Areas  where oxygen  levels remain above 5.0
mg/L  throughout  the  year are  not  problem  areas  and  require  no immediate
action.   Class A water quality criteria (i.e.,  7 mg/L) should be the desired
endpoint of water quality  remediation programs.

     The  highest  priority problem  areas   for  eutrophication were  Ecology
Station BUD002 in West  Bay,  the City of Olympia station at the Capitol Lake
outfall  to Budd  Inlet,  and the  Port  of  Olympia  stations in the  East Bay
Marina (see  Table 3).  Dissolved  oxygen concentrations  in late summer were
less  than  3.0 mg/L at the  bottom of the water column  at  these stations.
Secondary  priority  areas  were  City of Olympia stations  at  the  Fiddlehead
Marina,  north  of  the LOTT  30-in diameter  outfall,  and  in  the  navigation
channel  northeast of  Cascade Pole  Company.   No  problem areas were identified
north of East  and West Bays, but  there was only one sampling station where
dissolved  oxygen  was  monitored   (i.e.,  Ecology  Station  BUD005 just  south  of
Olympia Shoals).

MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION

      Identification  of microbial  contamination problem  areas  is  based  on
departures  from  the  Washington  State  water  quality  standards  described  in
the microbial contamination section  of "Data Summaries."  The fecal coliform
bacteria EAR values were  derived from calculations of geometric means within
each  portion of  Budd Inlet depicted  in   Figure  16.    EAR  values for  areas
within  Class  A  waters  were calculated   using the   Class  A water quality
criteria of  14 organisms/100 mL as  reference.   EAR  values for areas within
Class  B  waters   incorporated  the  Class   B  water quality criteria  of 100
organisms/100 mL.
                                      122

-------
                  TABLE  15.   LIST  OF  PRIMARY  AND  SECONDARY
                        PROBLEM AREAS IN  BUDD INLET3
                                Primary
                               Secondary
Eutrophication
Toxic Contamination

  Sediment Chemistry




Microbial Contamination
                         Ecology Station BUD002

                         Capitol Lake outfall
                           to Budd Inlet

                         East Bay Marina
Cascade Pole Co.


West Bay drain



Moxlie Creek

Boston Harbor

Ellis Creek

South of Tykle Cove
                         Fiddlehead Marina

                         North of LOTT 30-in outfall
                         Northeast of Cascade  Pole  Co.
                         middle of channel
West Bay,  near the West Bay
drain

Fiddlehead Marina
                                                  Tamoshan

                                                  Beverly Beach

                                                  Athens Beach

                                                  Butler Cove

                                                  North of Priest Point
a  Criteria  for  prioritizing problem areas  are found  in  Table 3,  and are
discussed in the text.
                                     123

-------
     The criteria for identifying problem areas were based on the logarithmic
scale.   Fecal coliform  bacteria EAR  values  in  the  highest  priority areas
exceeded 10.   Secondary  priority areas  for fecal  coliform  bacteria had EAR
values  between 1  and  10.   Areas with  fecal  coliform bacteria  EAR values
below 1 were not considered for  immediate action.

     The highest priority  problem areas  for  fecal  coliform  bacteria in Budd
Inlet were  Moxlie  Creek,  Boston Harbor, Ellis Creek,  and  a  creek entering
Budd  Inlet  south  of Tykle Cove.   Secondary  priority  problem areas included
Tamoshan WWTP,  Beverly  Beach WWTP, Athens Beach,  Butler  Cove,  and north of
Priest  Point.  The  variability  inherent  in  the bacterial  counts at stations
sampled more  than  once  suggests  that  routine  sampling  at  these stations is
essential to  better assess the  spatial  extent and magnitude  of the problem
areas.   Fecal  coliform  bacteria samples have  not  been  collected  at  all
potential sources.   Point sources of  microbial  contamination  to  Budd Inlet
that  have  not been adequately  characterized,  include the  Tamoshan, Beverly
Beach,  and  Seashore Villa  WWTP.    Nonpoint  sources  that  have   not  been
characterized  include  the  contribution  of  microbial  contamination  from
failing septic systems,  local  hobby  farms,  live-aboards in  Olympia marinas,
and general boating activities  in Budd Inlet.

TOXIC CONTAMINATION

     The following six data categories were discussed  in the "Data Summaries"
section  for  toxic  contamination:    water  column contamination,  sediment
contamination,  bioaccumulation,  bioassay results, benthic  communities,  and
fish  pathology.   The  following  discussion  of toxic problem  areas will  be
limited to sediment chemistry and bioassay results.   Bioaccumulation of clam
tissues is not included because of the high detection  limits of the  reference
data.   Water column contamination, benthic  communities,  and  fish  pathology
are not included because of a lack of  data or a lack  of Budd Inlet  reference
criteria.

     Because  the  lack  of data  precluded following the guidelines  set forth
in  the  decision-making  approach, the  criteria  for  sediment  chemistry and
bioassays  are  derived   from  the  Everett Harbor  Action  Plan  (Tetra Tech
                                      124

-------
1985c).   The  highest priority problem areas  for  sediment chemistry in Budd
Inlet are defined  as  those  stations  where the EAR values for metals exceeds
50,   or  where  the  EAR  for  organic  compounds  exceeds  100  (see  Table 3).
These values correspond to  the  maximum EAR categories in the Everett Harbor
Action  Plan  (Tetra  Tech  1985c).    Secondary  priority  problem  areas  are
defined as  areas where  the  EAR  for sediment metals is between 10 and 50, or
where the  EAR for  organic  compounds is  between  10  and  100.   No immediate
action areas are those with EAR  values below  10.

     The highest priority sediment chemistry  problem areas in Budd Inlet are
near the Cascade  Pole Company site  and  at  the  West  Bay storm  drain.  These
are the only locations where sediment chemical analyses for organic compounds
were  conducted.    Additional sampling  and  analysis   is  required to  fully
describe the  geographic extent   of contamination  in these areas.   Secondary
priority problem  areas were  located in  West Bay off  of  the West Bay storm
drain (sediment  organic compounds),  and  in  the Fiddlehead  Marina (sediment
metals).  Sediment  metals were  investigated at  the Capitol  Lake outfall but
were  found  at levels that  required  no  immediate action.   The  remainder of
Budd Inlet  has not  been investigated for  sediment contamination.

     Problem  areas  for sediment  bioassay  results  were defined based  on
percent mortality  instead of  the EAR value because the EAR value is greatly
influenced  by percent mortality  in the control  bioassay test.   For example,
if the  mortality  in  the test sediment was  25 percent,  the  EAR  based on a 1
percent  control  mortality  would  be  25.    The  EAR  based  on  a  3  percent
control  mortality would be 8.3.  Conclusions  drawn from these two EAR values
could  be very  different.    Only  those data  having  less  than  5  percent
mortality in the control test were accepted for this review.

     Highest priority problem areas  are  defined as those areas where either
the  amphipod  bioassay  or  the oyster  bioassay  resulted  in  greater  than 50
percent mortality  (see  Table  3).  This mortality corresponds to  the maximum
value EAR in the Everett Harbor  and  the  Elliott Bay Action Plans  (Tetra Tech
1985b,c).   Secondary  priority  problem  areas  occur  where  either  of the
bioassay mortality  rates were between  25  and  50 percent.  Stations with  less
                                      125

-------
than 25 percent mortality  for  either  of  the  bioassays  requires  no immediate
action.

     Bioassays were  conducted  at only two stations in  Budd  Inlet.   Neither
the station off the Port of Olympia peninsula nor the station at the Olympia
Yacht Club require immediate action.
                                     126

-------
                        IDENTIFICATION OF DATA GAPS
     Intensive synoptic  sampling programs  have  not been conducted  in  Budd
Inlet.    As  discussed  in  "Identification  of  Problem  Areas,"  this  lack  of
synoptic data has greatly hindered the identification of problem areas.   All
appropriate  data  were used  to identify problem  areas caused  by  eutrophi-
cation,  toxic  contamination,  and  microbial  contamination.   More  complete
characterization of  Budd  Inlet will  require the collection  and  analysis  of
additional data.   The objective of  this final section is to  identify  data
gaps that, when filled, will enable full use of the decision-making approach
to characterize environmental conditions in Budd Inlet.

     The  following  discussion  provides  information  that  may  be used  to
design a preliminary field investigation.   A detailed sampling and analysis
plan for development of the  Budd  Inlet Action Program will  be prepared  at a
future date.

EUTROPHICATION

     The  problem  of  eutrophication   in  upper  Budd  Inlet  has  been  well
documented  (URS  1986).    However,  the  boundaries  of  the   geographic  area
impacted  by  high  nutrient  levels and low dissolved  oxygen have  not  been
delineated.   Existing  data were collected  to  monitor  specific  areas  (i.e.,
Fiddlehead Marina,   Capitol  Lake  outfall,  East  Bay  Marina).    Additional
sampling efforts should be  conducted  south  of Priest Point  to generate data
that  could  define  the spatial  extent  of  problem  areas  in  southern  Budd
Inlet.   Stations  located  north  of  Priest  Point  would provide  reference
conditions.

     Information on  dissolved oxygen  and  nutrients should  be  collected  to
fill  gaps in the   available  eutrophication  data  because  both  types  of
measurements are necessary to define the spatial extent and magnitude of the
eutrophication problem.   A detailed  dissolved oxygen data collection effort
                                      127

-------
coupled  with  a  smaller  nutrient  data  collection  effort  at  overlapping
stations would be a cost-effective method for obtaining the necessary infor-
mation.   Detailed  information on  dissolved  oxygen concentrations  is  most
important because of  the deleterious  effects  of low dissolved oxygen on the
resident  biota.   Oxygen measurements at  each  station should occur at the
sediment  surface and  in  the water  column  to  provide  information  on the
oxygen  levels  to which the plankton, nekton, benthic  epifauna,  and benthic
infauna are subjected.  Additionally,  nonpoint sources  of nitrogen (including
atmospheric deposition)  should be quantified.

     Oxygen depletion  is a seasonal  phenomenon.   Lowest  oxygen levels occur
in  late summer  and  early fall  in  the bottom  water.   An  intensive weekly
sampling  effort  from  July  through September  would  provide  the  necessary
information  to  understand  this  annual   event.   Sampling  stations  should
overlap  with  existing  monitoring stations.   Information  collected  at the
existing  monitoring  stations  between October  and June  would provide the
necessary data for the remainder of the year.

MICROBIAL CONTAMINATION

     Considerable data exists for  fecal  coliform  bacteria  contamination  in
Budd Inlet.   Data collected  from shoreline sources were  generally higher in
September 1985 than in April  1985 (URS 1986).  The cause of this variability
may have  been  differences in  the flow rates  of the freshwater sources  that
were sampled.    It  was  suggested that higher  flow rates may correspond  to
increased fecal  coliform bacteria concentrations (URS 1986).

     Information  from  offshore  monitoring  stations  indicated  that  fecal
coliform  concentrations   in  offshore  surface waters were  within  Washington
State standards  between  1982  and  1986.   Continuation  of these programs will
be  sufficient  to help understand fecal  coliform bacterial  distributions in
offshore areas.

     Routine data collection  for fecal coliform bacteria  and water flow at
selected  locations  would  help define the relationship between  these  vari-
ables.    Sampling  locations  might  include sites receiving storm  water
                                      128

-------
discharges from urban areas and sites receiving discharges from rural areas.
Moxlie Creek  should be  sampled  for the purpose  of  monitoring urban runoff
since it  is an  identified  problem area for microbial contamination.  Moxlie
Creek enters  East Bay  via  an  84-in diameter pipe and  enters  the pipe near
Plum and  Union  Streets  in  Olympia.   Approximately 100 ft before the outfall
terminus,  the  East  Bay CSO discharges  into Moxlie Creek  (see  the section
entitled  "Contamination Sources").   Sites such as  Ellis  Creek or the creek
entering  Budd Inlet  between Tykle Cove and Butler Cove might be suitable for
monitoring rural  runoff.  Both of these sites are also known problem areas.

     Fecal coliform bacteria monitoring in  marine waters  should  also occur
near  the  Tamoshan,  Beverly  Beach, and  Seashore Villa  WWTP-   Monitoring
stations  located  in  streams  or culverts  and  in marine waters  near Athens
Beach and  the French Hill Road would also be appropriate.

TOXIC CONTAMINATION

Sources of Contamination

     The  limited  sediment  chemistry data presently available for Budd Inlet
clearly  indicated that  the upper  inlet is  receiving  contaminated material
from the  Port of  Olympia peninsula.  The only point source of contamination
that has  been sampled is the West Bay storm  drain.  According to Mr. R. Alan
(25 March  1988, personal communication), LOTT has not conducted any sampling
off  the  CSOs.   Other  sources,  including  NPDES-permitted  discharges,  storm
drains carrying storm  runoff from urban areas,  and seeps and groundwater at
the Cascade Pole  Company site should also be investigated.  This information
is required to  identify contaminant sources  for remedial action.

Sediment  Chemistry

     At  the  present time,  Budd  Inlet  sediments  have  not  been analyzed for
all  of  the Budd  Inlet  contaminants of concern  (see Table  2).   Analyses of
sediments  near  the  Cascade  Pole  Company  have  been  limited   to organic
chemicals  present  in  creosote  and  the  suspected  breakdown  products  of
creosote.  Analyses of  sediment metals are limited to three City  of Olympia
                                      129

-------
stations, and seven  stations  near the Cascade Pole Company.  The full suite
of metals of concern were not investigated at these stations.

     A sampling program was proposed  by Tetra Tech (1987) for sediments near
the Cascade Pole Company.  If this plan is implemented, the chemical results
will  adequately  describe  sediment   contamination  in  the   immediate  area.
However, sampling efforts  in  East Bay are needed to document the geographic
extent  of  organic   contamination from  the  Cascade  Pole   Company.    This
sampling  would  also  indicate whether  sediments have been  contaminated  by
Moxlie  Creek,  by  any of  the East  Bay storm  drains,  or  by  the  East  Bay
Marina.

     Sampling in  West Bay  is  needed to gather  data  to determine potential
sediment  contamination  from  storm  drains,  CSOs,  the  LOTT 48-in  diameter
outfall  at  Fiddlehead  Marina,  and  from other industrial discharges  and
marinas.  Sediment  chemistry  information  from sampling  north of the Port of
Olympia  peninsula  will   provide  information  on the  geographic extent  of
sediment contamination north of the  industrial portions of Budd Inlet.

     Sediment  chemistry  information from  near  Gull  Harbor  is needed  to
determine  whether  environmental  degradation  resulted  from  the  extended
anchorage  of the Mothball  Fleet.   This  maritime fleet  contained  over  100
vessels between the  end  of World War  II and the  early to mid 1960s (Jamison,
D., 21  January  1988, personal communication; Newall, G.,  10 February 1988,
personal  communication).   Solvents, waste  oils,  and unknown  objects  were
reportedly dumped into the inlet  from the ships  and shore-based facilities.

Bioaccumulation

     The  bioaccumulation of  organic contaminants  in  Budd  Inlet  clams  was
investigated near the  Cascade Pole Company and the West Bay storm drain.  No
additional  data  are  available  for the study  period.   The  majority  of the
bioaccumulation  data  from  other urban  embayments  in  Puget Sound  are  for
English  sole muscle and  liver  tissues.   Information  on  bioaccumulation of
organic  compounds  and  metals in  English sole  is  needed  to  determine the
                                      130

-------
bioavailability  of contaminants  in  Budd  Inlet,  and to  enable comparisons
between conditions in Budd Inlet and conditions in other urban bays.

     Collection of English sole for bioaccumulation analysis should occur in
East and  West  Bays,  near the  Port of  Olympia peninsula,  near Priest Point,
near Gull  Harbor,  and  in  areas  of Budd  Inlet  that  could provide reference
data.  The  information  collected would enable  differences  between  East and
West Bays to  be  defined,  and would  provide information on  the geographic
extent of bioaccumulation north of the industrialized portions of the inlet.
The  sampling  area near Gull  Harbor  would provide  information  on bioavai1-
ability of sediment contaminants that may have come  from the Mothball Fleet.

Sediment  Toxicity

     Sediment  toxicity  was  investigated  north  of  the   Port  of  Olympia
peninsula and  at the Olympia Yacht Club.  No toxicity data are available for
the  sediments  near  the Cascade  Pole  Company that  are  known to be highly
contaminated  with  organic  chemicals.    Similarly,  no  toxicity data  are
available  for  sediments  near NPDES-permitted  discharges,  CSOs, and  storm
drains.

     Bioassay  tests  of  sediments  collected near known and suspected contam-
inant  sources  would  provide  important  information  about  the  magnitude of
environmental  degradation at those locations.  Bioassay tests are needed for
sediments in East  and West Bays,  north of the Port of  Olympia peninsula, near
Priest Point,  and near Gull Harbor.   Tests  using both  amphipods and oyster
larvae would  enable comparisons  to  be made with toxicity  information from
other  Puget  Sound urban bays.   Microtox tests might also  be considered to
determine the  relative  toxicity of sediment contaminants to bacteria.

Benthic Infaunal Communities

     As mentioned  in the "Data Summaries" section,  there are no acceptable
data  concerning  benthic  infaunal  communities   in   Budd  Inlet.    A   solid
understanding  of the composition of the  benthic  community  in Budd  Inlet  is
important  for  determining   the  effects  of   sediment contaminants  and  the
                                      131

-------
effects  of  low dissolved  oxygen on the  resident  biota.   The  selection of
sampling  locations for  benthic community  analyses  must be  carefully con-
sidered.  Stations  where sediments  are known to be contaminated (determined
by sediment chemistry analyses), and stations where sediments  are known to be
influenced by low dissolved oxygen (determined by water quality surveys) must
be sampled.   Stations should exhibit  similar grain  size distributions,  and
should be located  at  similar depths so that resulting data may be compared.
Under these conditions,  the  individual effects of  sediment contamination and
low dissolved oxygen  concentrations may be determined.

     A series of  stations  north of  the Port of Olympia should be sufficient
to identify  the extent  of benthic  degradation to the north.   Selection of
appropriate reference stations is very important because reference conditions
for  benthic  infauna  in  Budd  Inlet  may differ  from reference  conditions
established  in  other  parts of  Puget Sound.   Reference  data from areas such
as Carr  Inlet  (Tetra  Tech  1985a) may not be appropriate for comparison with
data from Budd  Inlet.

Fish Histopatholoqy

     Available  data for fish histopathology in Budd Inlet are  lacking  for
the study period  1982-1987.   Earlier data collected  by Mai ins et al.   (1980)
indicated that  the  incidence  of  certain pathological   lesions in English sole
and rock sole was  similar to the  incidence of these lesions  in other urban
bays.    A data  collection effort  is  needed  to determine the  incidence of
bottomfish  histopathological  disorders in Budd Inlet.   English sole   should
be used in  the collection  effort  so that  data  on   histopathology in Budd
Inlet may be compared with data  on  histopathology  in  other Puget Sound urban
bays.

     Histopathological  data  should be generated  at   the same  areas as were
described for bioaccumulation  studies.   Data  would  therefore  be collected
from  areas   suspected  to  have elevated  sediment  contaminants,   and from
reference areas that  are not  suspected to be contaminated.
                                      132

-------
OTHER DATA GAPS

     Data  on  motile  epifauna and  bottomfish  are  also  necessary  to  fully
define  the effects  of eutrophication  and  oxygen  depletion.   Considerable
data on  the  impact of oxygen  depletion  on  fish  distributions (Johnson,  M.,
18 November  1987,  personal  communication)  are  now being collected  on  the
Atlantic coast  in  Long Island Sound.   These data demonstrate that as oxygen
concentration  declines,   motile  epifauna  and bottomfish  move  out of  the
affected  area possibly  seeking  water  containing  higher  oxygen  concentra-
tions.   Bottom trawl  sampling could  help determine  the  composition  of the
fish  community  in  relation  to  dissolved  oxygen  concentration,  and  would
provide  valuable  information  on  the effects  of oxygen depletion.   Weekly or
semi-monthly  trawls in East and West Bays, and in one or two reference areas
would provide information to determine whether  oxygen  depletion was impacting
the motile fauna  in Budd  Inlet.
                                      133

-------
                                 REFERENCES


Alan, R.   24  September 1987.   Personal  Communication  (information  to Ms.
Karen L. Keeley;  Budd  Inlet  sample survey, Department of Public Works, City
of Olympia).  LOTT Sewage Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Alan, R.   19 January  1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley;   information  on  LOTT  outfalls).    LOTT Sewage  Treatment  Facility,
Olympia, WA.

Alan, R.  9  February  1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Betsy Day;
determination  that  effluent  bioassays  were not  conducted  by LOTT).   LOTT
Sewage Treatment  Facility, Olympia, WA.

Alan, R.    14  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley;   information   on  historical  landfill located  near LOTT facility).
LOTT Sewage Treatment  Facility, Olympia, WA.

Alan, R.   25  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  LOTT sewage  treatment facility,  Olympia, WA.

Anderson,  D.   22 December   1986.    Personal Communication   (letter  to Mr.
Dennis 0. Cole, Industrial Petroleum  Distributors, Inc., Tacoma, WA; Olympia
facility,  contaminated soils,  Ecology  Order No.  DE 86-S133).   Washington
Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.   2 pp.

Anderson, D.   29  October 1987.   Personal  Communication (phone  by Ms.  Karen
L.  Keeley;  Budd  Inlet).    Washington Department  of  Ecology..  Olympia, WA.
1 pp.

Anderson, D.   6 April 1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology..  Olympia, WA.

Applied Geotechnology.   1986a.  Volume  I.  Remedial  investigation, Cascade
Pole Company,  Olympia, Washington.   AGI  Job No.  14,825.104.  Prepared for
McFarland Cascade, Cascade Pole Company,  Olympia,  WA.  Applied Geotechnology,
Inc., Bellevue, WA.  103 pp.

Applied Geotechnology.   1986b.   Volume  II.  Remedial  investigation -  appen-
dices, Cascade  Pole  Company, Olympia, Washington.  AGI Job   No. 14,825.104.
Prepared for McFarland Cascade,  Cascade  Pole Company, Olympia,  WA.   Applied
Geotechnology.- Inc.,  Bellevue, WA.

Applied  Geotechnology.    1987.    Intertidal  sediment  study:    polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and phenols,  Cascade Pole  Company, Olympia, Washington.
AGI  Project  No.  14,825.107.   Prepared  for Cascade  Pole  Company,  Olympia,
WA.  Applied Geotechnology,  Inc.,  Bellevue,  WA.
                                      134

-------
Arden,  H.    10  February 1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms.  Betsy
Day;  information concerning  sediment  resuspension  by the  East  Bay Marina
aerators).   U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers, Seattle, WA.

Arden,  H.    11  February 1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms.  Betsy
Day; criteria for operation  of East Bay Marina aeration system).  U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Seattle, WA.

Armstrong, 0.  17 November 1987.   Personal Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley; microbiological  sample  results  for fecal coliforms/100 gm
shellfish tissue,  30  June 1987, Washington  Department  of  Social  and Health
Services and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study).   U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency Region X, Seattle, WA.  3  pp.

Arvid Grant  and Associates.   1973.  Water  pollution  control  and abatement
plan  for  Deschutes  River  basin.   State  of  Washington Water Resources
Inventory Area No.  13 in Thurston  and Lewis  Counties.  Prepared for Thurston
Regional  Planning  Council,  Olympia, WA.  Arvid  Grant  and  Associates,  Inc.,
Olympia, WA.  117 pp. + 15 figures and  appendix.

Barrick,  R.C.,  and F.G.  Prahl.    (In review).   Hydrocarbon geochemistry of
the Puget Sound  Region  III.  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in  sediment.

Battelle Northwest.   1983.  Draft  tables  of  chemical and biological analyses
of  selected  sediments  from  Puget  Sound.    U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency  Region X, Seattle, WA.   27  pp.

Bernhardt, J., and  B. Yake.  22 June 1983.   Personal Communication (memoran-
dum to  Mr.   Frank Monahan,  Washington Department of  Ecology;  LOTT Phase II
receiving water  considerations).   Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia,
WA.  15 pp.

Bradley, D.  12  January 1987.   Personal Communication  (letter to  Mr. Richard
Pierce,  Thurston County  Health Department, Environmental  Health Division,
Olympia, WA).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.   33 pp.

Bradley,  D.   30  March  1988.     Personal  Communication  (phone  by  Mr.  J.
Portele).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Calambokidis, J., J.  Peard, G.H. Steiger, and J.C. Cubbage.  1984.  Chemical
contaminants  in  marine  mammals  from  Washington  State.     NOAA Technical
Memorandum  NOS  QMS 6.   National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric Administration,
National Ocean Service, Rockville,  MD.  167  pp.  including  appendices.

Calambokidis, J.,  S.H.  Speich,  J. Peard, G.H.  Steiger, J.C.  Cubbage,  D.M.
Fry, and  L.J.  Lowenstine.   1985.   Biology of Puget  Sound  marine  mammals and
marine  birds:    population health  and evidence  of  pollution effects.  NOAA
Technical Memorandum  NOS  OMA 18.   National  Oceanic and Atmospheric Admini-
stration, National  Ocean  Service,   Rockville, MD.   159 pp. including appen-
dices.

Chapman,  P.M.,   and J.D.  Morgan.    1983.   Sediment  bioassays with oyster
larvae.  Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.  31:438-444.
                                      135

-------
Clark,  D.    21  November  1985.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to Mr.
Darrel  Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Southwest  Regional
Office; Beverly Beach wastewater treatment plant  limited Class  II inspection,
June 17-18, 1985).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Clark,  D.    27  January  1986.    Personal  Communication (memorandum  to  Mr.
Darrel  Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Southwest  Regional
Office;  Tamoshan  wastewater  treatment plant  limited  Class  II  inspection,
June 17-18, 1985).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  13 pp.

Clark, D.  25  March  1986.  Personal Communication (memorandum to Mr. Darrel
Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,   Southwest   Regional  Office;
Seashore Villa wastewater treatment plant limited Class II inspection, July
1-2, 1985).  Washington Department  of  Ecology, Olympia, WA.  11 pp.

Cloud, G.   30  October  1987.   Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  Budd  Inlet  Industrial   Petroleum  Distributors,   Inc.,  waste  oil
spill).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  1 pp.

Colby,  J.   28 March  1988.   Personal  Communication   (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  LOTT Sewage Treatment  Facility, Olympia, WA.

Col lias, E.,  et  al.   1962.   Physical and chemical  data for southern Puget
Sound, August  1957-October 1958.   Technical  Report  No. 67.   University of
Washington, Department  of Oceanography, Seattle, WA.

Colwell, R.R., and J.  Listen.  1960.  Microbiology of  shellfish.  Bacterio-
logical  study  of the natural  flora of Pacific  oysters (Crassostrea qigas.
Appl. Microbiol. 8:194-209.

Crecelius,   E.A.,  M.H.  Bothner,  and R.  Carpenter.    1975.   Geochemistry of
arsenic,  antimony,  mercury,  and  related  elements   in sediments  of Puget
Sound.   Environ. Sci. Technol. 9:325-333.

Cunningham,  J.   21  September 1987.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms.
Karen L. Keeley).  City of Olympia  Engineering Department, Olympia, WA.

Department of  Social  and  Health Services.   1987.   Chemicals and bacterio-
logical  organisms  in  non-commercial  shellfish.    Draft  Report.    DSHS,
Olympia, WA.

Determan, T.   19 February 1981.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr.
John  Bernhardt,  Washington Department of Ecology;  effects  of Tamoshan STP
outfall  on water quality  at Silver  Spit,  Budd  Inlet).   Washington  Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA.   10  pp.

Earth Consultants.  1985.  Supplemental soil hydrocarbon content evaluation,
proposed  Arco  station,  East Bay   Drive  and  State  Avenue,  Olympia,  WA.
Prepared  for  Barghausen  Consulting  Engineers,  Inc.,  Kent,  WA.    Earth
Consultants, Inc., Bellevue,  WA.  11 pp.  + tables.
                                      136

-------
Earth Consultants.  7 August  1986.  Personal Communication  (letter to Mr. Al
Kendall,  Barghausen Consulting  Engineers,  Kent,  WA;  supplemental  chemical
analysis  of  soils,  proposed Arco station,  East  Bay Drive and State Avenue,
Olympia, WA).  Earth Consultants, Inc., Bellevue,  WA.  2 pp.

Egge, E.  25 January 1987.  Personal Communication  (information to Ms. Karen
L.  Keeley;   Port  of Olympia   East  Bay Marina  dissolved  oxygen  monitoring
data).  Port of Olympia, Olympia, WA.

Egge, E.  1  February  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms. Betsy Day;
information  on operation  fo  East  Bay  marina  aeration  system).    Port  of
Olympia, Olympia, WA.

Entrance  Engineers.  1983.  Capitol Lake restoration analysis.  Prepared for
Washington   Department  of  General  Administration.    Entrance  Engineers,
Bellevue, WA.  128  pp. + appendices.

Evans-Hamilton and  D.R.  Systems.   1987.    Puget  Sound environmental  atlas.
Volume  2.    Prepared for  U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,  Puget Sound
Water Quality  Authority,  and  U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers.  Evans-Hamilton,
Inc., Seattle, WA,  and D.R. Systems, Inc.,  Seattle, WA.  46 maps.

Evergreen State College.   1974.   Environmental  assessment study of the Port
of  Olympia.    Final  Report.    Seacoast Management  Group  Contract.    The
Evergreen State  College,  Olympia,  WA.   28  pp.  + 4 figures,  7  tables,  and
appendix.

GeoEngineers.    1987.    Dredge  spoil   evaluation,  Berth  3  reconstruction,
Olympia,  Washington for  the   Port  of Olympia.    Prepared  for the  Port  of
Olympia,  Olympia,  WA.   GeoEngineers,  Incorporated,  Bellevue,  WA.   6 pp.  +
appendices.

Gibbs,  T.   20 January 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley; information on areas  in  Budd Inlet  with uninvestigated onsite sewage
disposal  problems).  Thurston  County Health  Department, Environmental Health
Division, Olympia,  WA.

Haggerty, K.   18 January 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Karen
L.  Keeley;  information on  Olympia  Golf and Country  Club  septic drainfield
and  surface  water  runoff retention pond).   Olympia  Golf and Country Club,
Olympia,  WA.

Helmlinger,  J.   23 March 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Karen
L.  Keeley;  information  on the Capitol  Lake siphon).  Washington Department
of General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Helmlinger,  J.   13 April  1988.   Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  Capitol  Lake siphon  system and water quality monitoring).
Washington Department of General Administration,  Olympia,  WA.

Jamison,  D.   21  January  1988.  Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley).   Washington  Department of Natural  Resources, Olympia, WA.
                                       137

-------
Johnson, A.   22  July  1985.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr.  Tom
Eaton,  Washington Department  of  Ecology;  receiving environment  survey  in
Budd  Inlet  at McFarland/Cascade,  13  February  1985).   Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  7 pp.

Johnson, M.   18 November 1987.   Personal  Communication (information to  Ms.
Betsy  Day;  distribution  of fish  in  relation  to oxygen  depletion  in  Long
Island  Sound).   Long  Island Sound Hypoxia-Modeling  Workshop, University  of
Connecticut, Groton, CT.

Kelley, C.B., W. Areisz, and M.W.  Pusnell.   1960.  Bacterial  accumulation  by
oyster  Crassostrea virqinica  on  the Gulf Coast.   Tech.  Report F60-4,  U.S.
Department of Public Health Services,  Washington, DC.

Kendra,  W.,   and  T.  Determan.   6  November 1985.    Personal Communication
(memorandum to  Mr. Tom Eaton, Washington  Department  of Ecology; effects  of
three  small  sewage  treatment  plants  on  Budd  Inlet receiving  waters).
Washington Department  of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.   22 pp.

Kessler, F.   18 December 1987.  Personal Communication (letter  to Ms. Karen
L.  Keeley;  LOTT wastewater treatment plant  receiving water sampling program
in  Budd Inlet).   LOTT Sewage  Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.   70  pp.  + 3
figures.

Kittle, L.  29  January 1988.   Personal Communication (phone  by  Ms. Karen  L.
Keeley).  Washington Department  of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.

Kittle,  L.,  and  H.  Tracy.     19 January  1982.    Personal  Communication
[memorandum  to  Mr.  Bruce  Cameron, Washington  Department  of Ecology;  lower
Budd  Inlet marine  resource  damage  assessment  (MRDA),  September 10,  1981].
Washington Department  of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.   23 pp.

Kruger, D.M.   1979.   Effects  of point-source discharges and  other inputs  on
water  quality  in  Budd  Inlet,  Washington.  DOE  79-11.   Washington Department
of  Ecology, Olympia, WA.  40 pp.  + appendices.

Lilja,  J.   6 June 1985.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Mr. Peter Nix).
Washington Department  of Social  and Health Services, Olympia, WA.

Lilja,  J.   25 March 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone  by  Ms. Betsy Day).
Washington Department  of Social  and Health Services, Olympia, WA.

Long,  E.R., and P.M. Chapman.  1985.   A sediment quality triad:  measures  of
sediment  contamination,  toxicity,  and infaunal  community  composition  in
Puget  Sound.  Mar.  Pollut. Bull.  16:405-415.

Mai in,  R.   25 November 1987.   Personal Communication (phone  by  Ms. Karen L.
Keeley; information  on dredging  permit 071-OYB-2-010937).  Port of Olympia,
Olympia, WA.
                                      138

-------
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins.   1980.
Chemical  contaminants  and biological  abnormalities  in central and southern
Puget  Sound.   NOAA  Technical  Memorandum OMPA-2.    National Oceanic and
Atmospheric  Administration,  Office of Marine Pollution Assessment, Boulder,
CO.  295 pp. including appendices.

Malins, D.C.  1981.  Data from sediments collected from central Puget Sound,
1979-1980.   National Marine  Fisheries  Service, Seattle, WA.  5 pp.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S.-L. Chan, M.S. Myers, J.T. Landahl,
P.G. Prohaska, A.J.  Friedman,  L.D. Rhodes, D.G.  Burrows,  W.D. Gronlund, and
H.O.  Hodgins.    1984.   Chemical  pollutants  in  sediments and diseases  of
bottom-dwelling  fish in  Puget Sound,  Washington.    Environ.  Sci. Technol.
18:705-713.

McCarthy,  B.   15 January 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms.  Lynne
M.  Kilpatrick-Howard).   City  of  Olympia,  Public  Works Department, Olympia,
WA.

McNicholas,  R.    1984.   Stream  corridor management  plan  for  the Deschutes
River,  Washington.    Project  No.  82-145A.   Prepared for  Washington  State
Department  of  General  Administration, Olympia,  WA.   Thurston County  Con-
servation  District, Olympia, WA.   65 pp. including appendices.

Mitchell,  J.R.,   M.W.  Presnell,  E.W.  Akin,  J.M. Cummins,  and O.C.  Lice.
1966.  Accumulation  and elimination of poliovirus by  the eastern oyster.  J.
Epidem. 84:40-50.

Moore, D.   17  November  1987.  Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  City  of  Olympia combined  sewer  overflow  locations).    City  of
Olympia, Engineering Department,  Olympia, WA.
Moore, D.   9  December 1987.  Personal Communication
Keeley;  City  of  Olympia  combined   sewer  overflow
Olympia, Engineering  Department, Olympia, WA.
(letter to Ms.
 locations).
Karen L.
City  of
Moore,  D.   29  March  1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  LOTT  Sewage Treatment  Facility, Olympia,  WA.

Moore, A., and  D. Anderson.   1979.   Deschutes River basin suspended sediment
transport  study.    Project Report No.  DOE-PR-7.    Washington  Department of
Ecology, Water  and Wastewater Monitoring Section, Olympia, WA.  21 pp.

Mowrer,  J.,  J. Calambokidis,  N. Musgrove,  B.  Drager, M.W.  Beug,  and  S.G.
Herman.   1977.   Polychlorinated biphenyls  in cottids,  mussels, and sediment
in  southern  Puget  Sound,  Washington.    Bull.  Environ.  Contam.  Toxicol.
18:588-594.

Mumford, T.F.,  Jr.   25  September 1987.  Personal Communication  (information
to Ms.  Karen  L. Keeley;  water quality data in Budd Inlet collected near the
Washington  Department of  Natural Resources  Marine Station  ).   Washington
Department  of  Natural   Resources,  Aquatic  Lands  Division,   Olympia,   WA.
17 figures and  tables.
                                     139

-------
Munger, S.F.,  A.A.  Heywood, R.T.  Dutton,  and  R.G.  Swartz.  1979.  A  survey
of  the  microbiological  quality  of   shellfish  on   King  County  beaches.
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA.

Newall, G.   10  February  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms. Betsy
Day; information on the moth-balled maritime fleet  in  Budd  Inlet).  Olympia,
WA.

Norton, D.   5  February 1986.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr. Tom
Eaton, Washington  Department  of Ecology,  Southwest Regional Office; results
of priority pollutant analyses on water, sediment,  and  clam  samples collected
in  lower  Budd  Inlet  near McFarland/Cascade,  Olympia,  WA,  14  August  1985).
Washington Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  16  pp.

Oberlander, J.  29 January  1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Oberlander,  J.   24  February  1988.    Personal  Communication  (phone  by  Ms.
Karen  L.   Keeley;   information   on historical  landfill   located near LOTT
facility).  Metro, Seattle, WA.

Obi as, V.   29 February  1988.    Personal   Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen
L.  Keeley;  information on  historical landfill  located near LOTT facility).
Metro, Seattle, WA.

O'Brien,  E.   12  November 1987.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Seattle, WA.

Oclay, N.   1959.  Oceanographic conditions  near  the head of southern Puget
Sound.  Master's Thesis,  University of  Washington,  Seattle, WA.

Olympia,  City  of.   1987.   Storm sewer maps  1"  = 100'.   City of Olympia,
Department of  Public  Works, Olympia, WA.

Parametrix.    1987a.    LOTT urban area wastewater management plan:   plan
summary.  Draft.  Prepared  for  Thurston County Planning Department, Olympia,
WA.   Parametrix,  Inc.,  Sumner, WA  and Economic  and  Engineering Services,
Inc., Olympia, WA.  7  pp. + figures, tables, and map.

Parametrix.    1987b.   LOTT urban  area  wastewater  management  plan.    Draft.
Prepared  for Thurston County Planning  Department,  Olympia, WA.   Parametrix,
Inc.,  Sumner,  WA and  Economic  and Engineering  Services,  Inc., Olympia, WA.
42 pp. +  appendices and map.

Parametrix.    1987c.   LOTT urban area wastewater management  plan.   Draft
Environmental  Impact  Statement.    Prepared  for  Thurston  County  Planning
Department,  Olympia,   WA.   Parametrix, Inc.,  Sumner,  WA  and  Economic and
Engineering  Services,  Inc., Olympia, WA.   64 pp. +  appendices  and map.

Peck,  L.   18 March 1988.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to T. Hooper,
Washington  Department of Fisheries; Budd  Inlet  water quality).  Washington
Department of  Fisheries,  Olympia,  WA.
                                     140

-------
Peeler, M.   12  January 1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley; status of Cascade Pole Company NPDES permit).  Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, VIA.

Peeler, M.   15 March  1988.   Personal Communication  (phone  by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Peeler, M.   22  February 1988.   Personal  Communication (letter to Ms. Karen
L. Keeley;  additional  information regarding intertidal sediment sampling at
the former  Cascade Pole Company  site).   Washington  Department  of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.

Pierce, R.   22  October 1987.   Personal Communication  (information  to Ms.
Karen  L.  Keeley; water bacteriological  analysis for the new Port of Olympia
marinas,  and shellfish  sampling  program conducted in  southern  Puget Sound
during  1985 and  1986).   Thurston  County  Health  Department,  Environmental
Health Division, Olympia, WA.  3 pp.

Pierce, R.   17 November 1987.  Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley; information on  groundwater management plan).   Thurston County Health
Department,  Environmental Health Division,  Olympia, WA.

Pierce, R.   20  January 1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  information  on disposal  of  sediments from  proposed  ARCO  site).
Thurston  County  Health  Department,  Environmental  Health  Division,  Olympia,
WA.

Port of Olympia.   29  February 1988.   Personal Communication (information to
Ms.  Karen  L.   Keeley;  map   showing  current  lessees  of  Port  of  Olympia
property).   Port of Olympia,  WA.

Prahl, F.G., and  R.  Carpenter.   1979.  Role of zooplankton fecal pellets in
the sedimentation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons  in Dabob Bay, Washing-
ton.   Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 43:1959-1972.

R.W.  Beck  and  Associates.    1986.    Boston  Harbor  wastewater  facilities
planning  study  for  Thurston  County.   R.W.  Beck and Associates, Seattle, WA.
60 pp. +  figures, tables, and appendices.

Rhoads, D.C.   18  November 1987.   Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Betsy  Day;  effects of  oxygen  depletion on benthic  communities).  Long Island
Sound  Hypoxia-Modeling  Workshop,  University of  Connecticut, Groton, CT.

Schiewe,  M.   19 November 1987.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley;  results  of  amphipod  and oyster larvae  bioassay samples from Budd
Inlet).    National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Administration,  Northwest  and
Alaska Fisheries Center, Seattle, WA.

Schmitten,  R.    16  October   1981.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum to
Governor John Spellman;  recent Budd Inlet fish kills).   Washington Department
of Fisheries, Olympia,  WA.

Singleton,  L.   29  January 1988.   Personal   Communication  (phone  by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.
                                     141

-------
Spencer, M.  1 February 1988.  Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen  L.
Keeley; information about Water Street pump station).  Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Swartz,  R.C.,  W.A.  DeBen,  O.K.P.  Jones,  J.O,   Lamberson,  and  F.A.  Cole.
1985.   Phoxocephalid  amphipod bioassay  for marine  sediment  toxicity.   pp.
284-307.  In:  Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment:  Seventh Symposium.
R.D.  Cardwell,  R. Purdy,  and  R.C.  Bahner  (eds).   ASTM STP  854.   American
Society of Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

Sweet,  B.   23 March  1988.  Personal  Communication (phone by  Ms.  Karen  L.
Keeley; information on  the Capitol  Lake  siphon).   Washington Department  of
General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Sweet,  B.   13 April  1988.  Personal  Communication (phone by  Ms.  Karen  L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of General Administration, Olympia,  WA.

Tetra  Tech.   1985a.   Commencement Bay nearshore/tideflats remedial  investi-
gation.  Final Report.  Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.

Tetra  Tech.  1985b.  Elliott Bay toxics action plan:   Initial data summaries
and   problem   identification.     Draft  Report,   EPA  contract  68-03-1977.
Prepared for U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency Region X,  Office  of Puget
Sound.  Tetra Tech, Inc.,  Bellevue, WA.

Tetra  Tech.    1985c.    Everett  Harbor toxics  action  plan:    initial  data
summaries  and  problem  identification.    Draft Report.   Prepared  for  U.S.
Enviornmental  Region  X,  Office  of Puget  Sound,  Seattle, WA.   Tetra Tech,
Inc.,  Bellevue, WA.

Tetra  Tech.   1986a.  Recommended protocols  for  measuring selected  environ-
mental variables  in Puget  Sound.  Prepared for U.S.  Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of  Puget Sound, Seattle, WA.  Tetra  Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.

Tetra  Tech.  1986b.  Users manual for pollutant of  concern matrix.  Prepared
for U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency  Region X,  Seattle, WA.

Tetra  Tech.  1987.  Sediment sampling and analysis  plan  for the Cascade Pole
Company, Olympia,  Washington.   Prepared  for Black & Veatch, Olympia, WA and
Washington Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue,
WA.   22 pp.

Thurston  County  Health  Department.    1985.    Southern  Puget  Sound  water
quality assessment  study:  bacteriological  survey of Budd  Inlet, April  1985.
Objective B, Tasks 1,2,  and  3  Interim Data Report.  Draft.  Thruston County
Health Department,  Environmental Health Division, Olympia, WA.   15 pp.

Thurston Regional  Planning Council.   1985.   Percival Creek corridor  plan.
Volume  I:   canyon and middle  reaches.   Thurston Regional Planning Council,
Olympia, WA.  116  pp. including  appendix  and 13 maps.

Turpin  and  Associates.   1985.   Dredging  plan,  One  Tree  Island  Marina.
Thurston County,  WA.  Turpin and Associates, Olympia,  WA.
                                      142

-------
U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (a).    Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  City  of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-010618.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (b).    Application  and associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Martin Marina, Reference
Number 071-OYB-2-008536.   U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Regulatory Functions
Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (c).    Application  and associated
materials  for Department  of  the  Army permit  for the Olympia  Yacht Club,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-010788.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (d).    Application  and associated
materials for Department  of  the  Army permit for the One Tree Island Marina,
Reference Number  071-OYB-2-009749-R.   U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers,  Regula-
tory  Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (e).    Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  Port   of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-1-006165.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (f).    Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  Port   of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-010937.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (g).    Application  and associated
materials  for Department  of  the Army  permit  for the  Tamoshan  Homeowners'
Association,  Reference  Number 071-OYB-2-007996.   U.S.  Army Corps  of  En-
gineers, Regulatory  Functions  Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (h).    Application  and associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington Department of
Fisheries, Reference Number 071-OYB-2-007306.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (i).    Application  and associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington Department of
Fisheries, Reference Number 071-OYB-2-007709.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (j).    Application  and associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington Department of
Fisheries, Reference Number 071-OYB-4-008715.   U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.
                                      143

-------
U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (k).    Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  Port  of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-006297.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps of  Engineers.   1977.   Results  of  Corps of Engineers water
quality  sampling  in East  Bay,  Olympia Harbor,  WA, 10 June 1977 through 13
October  1977.   U.S.  Army  Corps of Engineers, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   1980.   East Bay  Marina,  Olympia,  Thurston
County, Washington:  final detailed project report.  Section 107, 1960 river
and  harbor  act and  environmental  impact  statement.    U.S.  Army  Corps of
Engineers,  Seattle,  WA.   148  pp. + appendices and exhibits.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   27 October  1987.   Personal  Communication
(information to Ms.  Karen  L.  Keeley; computerized listing of U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers dredging permits  in Budd  Inlet since 1975).   U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers,  Regulatory Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.  1  pp.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency.   7  January 1988.   Personal Communica-
tion  (unpublished data from STORE!).   U.S. EPA Region X,  Seattle, WA.

URS.   1980.   State  of Washington  industrial  waste survey,  City of Olympia.
Prepared for Washington   Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.   URS  Company,
Seattle, WA.  32 pp. + appendices.

URS.   1986.   Southern Puget  Sound  water quality assessment  study.   Final
report:   comprehensive circulation and  water quality study  of  Budd Inlet.
Prepared for Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  URS Corporation,
Seattle, WA.  222 pp. + references and appendices.

Washington  Department of  Ecology.    1979.    National   pollutant  discharge
elimination  system  waste  discharge permit.  Seashore Villa Mobile Home Park.
Permit  No.   WA-003727-3.    Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.
9 pp.

Washington  Department of  Ecology.    1980.    National   pollutant  discharge
elimination  system  waste  discharge permit.  Beverly Beach Utilities Associa-
tion.  Permit No. WA-003806-7.  Effective date 16 September  1980.  Washington
Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  10 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.   1984.   Potential hazardous  waste  site
preliminary  assessment:   Water Street  pump station.  Site identification No.
WA D980835144.  Washington Department  of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  6 pp.

Washington  Department of Ecology.    1985a.    National  pollutant discharge
elimination  system  waste  discharge permit.  Chevron U.S.A., Inc.  Permit No.
WA-003871-7.    Effective  date 25  June  1985.    Washington   Department of
Ecology, Olympia, WA.  10  pp.
                                     144

-------
Washington  Department  of  Ecology.    1985b.   National  pollutant discharge
elimination  system  waste discharge permit.   Delson Lumber, Inc./DWS  Inter-
national, Inc.,  and  Olympia  Forest Products Company.  Permit No. WA-002154-
7.   Effective  date  16  December  1985.   Washington  Department  of  Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.    1986.   National  pollutant discharge
elimination  system  waste  discharge  permit.  Thurston  County  Public  Works,
Tamoshan Development.   Permit  No.  WA-003729-0.    Effective  date 20 October
1986.  Washington Department of  Ecology, Olympia,  WA.  14 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.    1987.   National  pollutant discharge
elimination  system  waste discharge permit.   Cities of  Tumwater and  Lacey,
Thurston County, and the City of Olympia.  Permit No. WA-003706-1.  Effective
date 25  September 1987.   Washington  Department  of Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  21
pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.   9  December 1987.  Personal  Communication
(information to  Ms.  Karen L. Keeley;  computer data listing from Washington
Department  of  Ecology for  reported   spills  and  complaints regarding Budd
Inlet, September 1986 to  November 1987).  Washington Department of  Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  1 p.

Washington  Department  of  Fisheries.   1979.   Marine water quality compendium
for Washington  State.   Volume  II Data.  Grant No. R805032010.    Prepared for
U.S.  Environmental   Protection   Agency,  Environmental  Research   Laboratory,
Corvallis,  OR.  Washington Department  of Fisheries, Research and  Development
Division, Olympia, WA.  528 pp.

Welsh,  B.    18  November 1987.   Personal Communication  (information to Ms.
Betsy  Day;  causes  and effects  of  oxygen  depletion in  Long Island Sound).
Long  Island  Sound   Hypoxia-Modeling   Workshop,   University   of   Connecticut,
Groton,  CT.

Westley, R.E.,  E. Finn,  M.E.  Carr, M.A. Tarr, A.J. Scholz,   L.  Goodwin, R.W.
Sternberg,  and  E.E.  Collins.    1975.   Evaluation of  effects  of  channel
maintenance dredging  and  disposal  on  the  marine environment  in   southern
Puget Sound, Washington.  Washington State  Department of Fisheries,  Olympia,
WA.  308 pp.

White, M.   30 July  1987.   Personal Communication  (memorandum to  Cascade Pole
Company  file; field  notes from  sampling  of  product seeps and survey  of wells
for product on 24 June 1987).  Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.

White,  M.    21  January  1988.    Personal Communication  (information to Ms.
Karen  L. Keeley; intertidal  seps from  Cascade   Pole  Company).   Washington
Department  of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.

Yake,  B.   6 July  1981.    Personal  Communication (memorandum  to  Mr. John
Bernhardt,  Washington Department of Ecology; interpretation of  June 3, 1981
Budd  Inlet  data with  particular respect to  oxygen  depletion).   Washington
Department  of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.
                                     145

-------
Yake, B., J. Joy, and A. Johnson.  1984.  Chemical contaminants in clams and
crabs  from Eagle  Harbor,   Washington  State, with  empahsis on  polynuclear
aromatic  hydrocarbons.    Segment  No.  25-00-01.   Washington  Department  of
Ecology, Olympia, WA.
                                     146

-------
          APPENDIX A



DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY TABLES

-------
                APPENDIX A:  DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY TABLES
     Data evaluations are summarized for water quality, contaminant sources,
sediment contamination,  bioaccumulation,  and sediment  toxicity  in Appendix
A.   Two summaries  are  provided  for each  type  of data.   The  first  table
(Tables A-l, 2, 3,  4)  lists  evaluation  summaries for documents reviewed for
Budd Inlet  during the 1982-1987  study  period.   The  adequacy  of procedures
for sample  collection,  sample  handling,  quality  assurance,  and analytical
methods are evaluated.  Analytical methods refers to statistical  analyses in
biological   studies  and  to  laboratory  analytical   techniques  in  all  other
studies.  The  decision to accept or  reject  each study is  based  on adequacy
of the procedures.   Full  references  for each study can be found  in the Budd
Inlet bibliography  (Appendix E).

     The second  table  (Tables  A-5,  6,  7,  8)  provides a  summary of  data
within the  accepted  studies.   Each summary  includes  author/year  citation,
period of study;  type of samples  collected,  variables measured or  analyzed,
number of stations, number of  replicates  per station,  and  number of times a
station was sampled during the  study period.
                                    A-l

-------
             TABLE A-l.  DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY FOR WATER QUALITY STUDIES3-5

Reference Acceptable
Alan (24 September 1987)c
Armstrong (17 November 1987) c
Bernhardt and Yake (22 June 1983) c

Egge (25 January 1987)c
Kendra and Determan
(6 November 1985) c
Kessler (18 December 1987)c

Mumford (25 September 1987) c
Pierce (22 October 1987) c

Pierce (22 October 1987)c

R.W. Beck and Associates (1986)

Thurston County Health Department
(1985)
URS (1986)

Yes
Yes
No

Yes
Yes

Yes

Yes
Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

SC
A
N


A
A

A

N
N

N

N

A

A

SH
N
N


N
N

N

N
N

N

N

A

A

QA
N
N


N
N

N

N
N

N

N

N

N

AM
A
N


A
A

A

N
N

N

A

A

A

Comments
LOTT WWTP
Priest Point
Review of data before LOTT
became a secondary WWTP
East Bay Marina
Tamoshan, Beverly Beach, and
Seashore Villa WWTPs
Provides methods for Alan
(24 September 1987a)c
WDNR Marine Station
Fecal col i form bacteria -
Budd Inlet
Fecal col i form bacteria -
Olympia Marina
Fecal col i form bacteria -
Boston Harbor
Fecal col i form bacteria -
Budd Inlet
Fecal col i form bacteria -
Budd Inlet

a Refer  to  summary of  accepted  water  quality  studies  (Table A-5)  for  variables
measured.

k A =  adequate,  N  =  not  available,  SC  =  sample collection, SH  = sample  handling,
QA = quality  assurance/quality control,  AM = analytical  methods.

c Personal  communication.
                                         A-2

-------
           TABLE A-2.   DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY FOR CONTAMINANT SOURCE STUDIES3-5
Reference
Acceptable   SC  SH  QA  AM  DL
      Comments
Applied  Geotechnology         Yes
  (1986a,b)

Johnson  (22  July 1985)°       Yes
Norton  (5  February 1986)c     Yes
             A   A   A   A   A
            A/I  N   N   N   N
             A   A  A/N  A   N
Soils, groundwater at
Cascade Pole Company

Storm drain, seep near
Cascade Pole Company

Storm drain, sediment near
Cascade Pole Company
a Refer to  summary of accepted  contaminant source studies  (Table  A-6)  for variables
measured.

b A = adequate,  I  = inadequate, N = not available, SC = sample collection, SH = sample
handling,  QA  =  quality  assurance/quality control,  AM  =  analytical  methods,   DL  =
detection  limits.

c Personal  communication.
                                          A-3

-------
             TABLE  A-3.   DATA EVALUATION SUMMARY FOR SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
                              AND BIOACCUMULATION STUDIES3'15

Reference Acceptable SC
Alan (24 September 1987)c-d
Applied Geotechnology (1987)
Calambokidis et al . (1984)
Calambokidis et al . (1985)
GeoEngineers (1987)
Johnson (22 July 1985)c
Norton (5 February 1986) c
Turpin and Associates (1985)
U.S. Army COE [no date (c)]
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
A
I
N
N
I
A/ 1
A
I
I
SH
N
A
N
N
A
N
A/ 1
N
N
QA
N
A
N
N
N
N
A
A
A
AM
A
A
A
A
A
N
A
A
N
DL
N
A
A
A
A
N
N
A
N
Comments
LOTT WWTP
Cascade
Southern
Southern
Port of
Cascade
Cascade
One Tree
Olympia
Pole Company
Puget Sound
Puget Sound
Olympia - Berth 3
Pole Company
Pole Company
Island Marina
Yacht Club

a Refer to  summary  of accepted  sediment contamination  and bioaccumulation  studies
(Table  A-7)  for  variables  measured.

b A  = adequate,  I  =  inadequate,  N =  not available,  SC = sample collection,  SH = sample
handling,  QA  =  quality  assurance/quality  control,  AM  =  analytical  methods,  DL  =
detection  limits.

c Personal communication.

d Field and laboratory methods  are  presented  in Kessler (18 December  1987,  personal
communication).
                                         A-4

-------
            TABLE A-4.  DATA  EVALUATION SUMMARY  FOR  SEDIMENT  TOXICITY  STUDIES3
Reference                   Acceptable   SC  SH  QA  AM  A/0          Comments
Schiewe  (19  November 1987)b   Yes       A   A   A   A   A/0       North of Port
                                                                  of Olympia
U.S.  Army  COE [no date (c)]   Yes       N   N   A   A    A        Olympia Yacht Club

a A = adequate,  I = inadequate,  N = not available, SC = sample collection, SH = sample
handling,  QA  =  quality  assurance/quality  control, AM  = analytical  methods, A/0  =
amphipod/oyster larvae bioassay.
b Personal  communication.
                                           A-5

-------
                                                        TABLE A-5.   SUMMARY OF ACCEPTED WATER QUALITY  STUDIES3

Reference
Alan (24 September 1987) b

Armstrong (17 November 1987 )b

Egge (25 January 1987)b

Kendra and Determan (6 November 1985 )b

Mumford (25 September 1987 )b

Pierce (22 October 1987 )b
j> Pierce (22 October 1987) b
i
°* R.W. Beck and Associates (1986)
Thurston County Health Department (1985)
URS (1986)
URS (1986)

URS (1986)
Sampl e
Type
we

Sh

we

we

we

Sh
we

we
we
we
we, so

we
Variables
Nu, FC, TSS,
BOD, pH, T, S, D
FC

T, C

Nu, FC, TSS,
pH, T, S, D
Nu, pH, T, S, D

FC
FC

FC
FC
FC
Nu, FC, BOD

T, S, D, CM
Survey Number of
Period Stations
1/15/86-
11/12/86
6/10/86-
6/22/87
7/9/85-
10/28/87
6/17/85-
7/2/85
12/1/81-
11/17/82
7/85-3/86
8/15/85

4/19/84
4/9,15,17/85
9/10,11/85
4/9,15,17/85,
9/10,11/85
9/84, 5/85
5

1

2

26

1

24
3

9
57
57
11

8
Number of
Repl icates
1

1

1

1

1

1
2

1
1
1
1

1
Number of
Times Sampled
Varied

5

Vari ed

1

44

1
1

1
1
1
2

2
Comments
LOTT WWTP

Priest Point

East Bay Marina

Tamoshan, Beverly Beach,
and Seashore Villa WWTPs
WDNR Marine Station

Budd Inlet
Port of Olympia Marina

Boston Harbor
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet

Budd Inlet
a WC  = water column,  Sh = shellfish, SD =  storm drain,  Nu = nutrients,  FC = fecal coliform bacteria, TSS  =  total  suspended solids,  BOD = 5-day biochemical  oxygen
demand, T = temperature, S = salinity, D = dissolved oxygen, CM = current meter.

  Personal communication.

-------
                                                     TABLE A-6.  SUMMARY OF ACCEPTED CONTAMINANT SOURCE STUDIES3

Reference
Applied Geotechnology (1986a,b)
Johnson (22 July 1985)b
Norton (5 February 1986) b
White (30 July 1987)b
Sample
Type Variables
6, SW Org
Water, G Org, Conv
Water Org, Conv
Water, product Org
Survey
Period
7/85
2/13/85
8/14/85
6/24/87
Number of
Stations
Varied
3
1
5
Number of
Repl icates
Varied
1
1
0
Number of
Times Sampled
Varied
1
1
1
Comments
Cascade Pole Company outfall,
groundwater seep
Cascade Pole Company outfall.
West Bay drain, groundwater
seep
West Bay drain
Cascade Pole Company ground-
water and product seeps
a 6 = groundwater, SW = surface water, SD = storm drain, Org = organics, Conv = conventionals (e.g.,  grain size,  total  organic  carbon).



  Personal communication.

-------
                                               TABLE A-7.   SUMMARY OF ACCEPTED SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION AND BIOACCUMULATION STUDIES3

Reference
Alan (24 September 1987)b
Johnson (22 July 1985)b
Norton (5 February 1986} b
Sample
Type
Sed
Sed
Sed, B
Variables
Me, Nu, TS, TVS
Me, Org
Org, Conv
Survey
Period
4/23/86
2/13/85
8/14/85
Number of
Stations
3
8
7
Number of
Replicates
1
1
1
Number of
Times Sampled
1
1
1
Comments
LOTT WWTP
Cascade Pole Company
Cascade Pole Company
      a Sed = sediment,  B = bioaccumulation.  Me = metals, Org = organics, Nu = nutrients, TS = total solids, TVS = total  volatile solids,  Conv = conventional  (e.g.,  grain
      size).

      " Personal communication.
I
00

-------
                                                           TABLE A-8.  SUMMARY OF ACCEPTED  SEDIMENT TOXICITY STUDIES3
      Reference
Sample
 Type
Variables
Survey
Period
Number of
 Stations
Number of
Replicates
 Number of
Times Sampled
Comments
      Schiewe (19 November 1987)b
      U.S.  Army COE [no date (c)]
Sed


Sed
   0, A
 3/85
                   NA
                                   North  of  Port  of  Olympia
                                   Peninsula

                                   Olympia  Yacht Club
        Sed = sediment,  0 = oyster,  A = amphipod,  NA = not available.

        Personal  communication.
UD

-------
                    APPENDIX  B

MONTHLY AVERAGES OF WATER QUALITY DATA AT ECOLOGY
  AMBIENT MONITORING STATIONS BUD002 AND BUD005

-------
                         TABLE B-1.  MONTHLY AVERAGES OF WATER QUALITY DATA COLLECTED
                              FROM 1982 TO 1986 AT ECOLOGY AMBIENT WATER QUALITY
                                    MONITORING STATIONS BUD002 AND BUD005a
Station
BUD002







BUD005







Month
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Apr i I
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Surface
D0b
10.2/0.5
10.7/0.7
10.2/1.0
9.0/1.9
9.0/2.4
6.1/0.7
6.9/0.9
8.2/1.0
11.4/1.1
11.5/1.1
11.3/0.5
11.9/1.1
10.8/2.0
9.8/2.7
8.7/0.7
8.4/1.0
Bottom
DO
9.9/0.7
9.6/1.2
8.7/2.4
6.6/1.4
6.1/1.9
4.1/1.9
6.9/1.3
6.9/0.67
10.4/0.7
11.2/0.9
10.0/2.2
8.8/2.9
7.4/1.5
7.0/1.1
7.5/0.6
7.4/1.4
Surface
NH3+NH4"C
0.5/0.1
0.12/0.07
0.11/0.04
0.05/0.04
0.09/0.08
0.20/0.05
0.11/0.06
0.11/0.01
0.09/0.06
0.03/0.03
0.05/0.06
0.02/0.01
0.02/0.01
0.06/0.05
0.02/0.01
0.06/0.02
Bottom
NH3+NH4~
0.12/0.06
0.09/0.03
0.16/0.07
0.06/0.06
0.05/0.07
0.22/0.11
0.07/0.05
0.06/0.02
0.09/0.07
0.06/0.04
0.08/0.03
0.03/0.04
0.03/0.04
0.09/0.08
0.03/0.01
0.02/0.0
Surface
0-P04d
0.05/0.02
0.05/0.02
0.06/0.03
0.07/0.02
0.06/0.04
0.12/0.09
0.05/0.01
0.10/0.12
0.06/0.02
0.03/0.02
0.05/0.03
0.06/0.02
0.06/0.02
0.07/0.03
0.05/0.01
0.05/0.01
Bottom
0-P04
0.06/0.02
0.06/0.03
0.10/0.06
0.06/0.01
0.05/0.02
0.09/0.04
0.08/0.05
0.05/0.01
0.05/0.02
0.05/0.03
0.06/0.03
0.04/0.01
0.05/0.01
0.08/0.04
0.05/0.01
0.05/0.01

a Values expressed as mean/one standard deviation (mg/L).

  DO   dissolved oxygen.

c NH-j+NH4~  - nitrate plus ammonium.

  0-P04   ortho-phosphate.
                                                     B-1

-------
                APPENDIX C



HISTORY OF SEDIMENT DREDGING IN BUDD INLET

-------
                                 APPENDIX  C
                 HISTORY  OF  SEDIMENT DREDGING  IN  BUDD  INLET
     The most  recent  maintenance  dredging  of  navigation channels  in  Budd
Inlet occurred in 1973 (Parker, B., 6 October 1987, personal  communication).
At this time, Washington  State evaluated  the effects  of channel  maintenance
dredging and disposal of sediments on the marine environment  (Westley, R.E.,
et al.  1975).   A computerized list of all  dredging  permits  issued  by  U.S.
Army COE since  January 1975 in Budd  Inlet,  Capitol  Lake,  and the Deschutes
River was obtained.  Since 1980, 11 permits  have been issued.  These permits
were  reviewed  and  are  summarized in  Table D-l.   In  some  cases,   it  was
determined  that  dredged materials  were contaminated, and the  locations  of
these  contaminated   soils  are  plotted  on  Figure 5.    If the  contaminated
sediments  are  disposed  offshore,  the disposal   process  is managed  by  U.S.
Army COE.   If the  soils  are deposited on an upland site, Ecology is respon-
sible for management.

     In early 1988, the U.S. Army COE (Babcock,  S., 6 October 1987,  personal
communication)  will  publish  a  reconnaissance  survey  document  entitled
"Olympia Harbor, Washington,  Navigation  Improvements."   The  purpose of  this
document  is to  conduct  a  preliminary  appraisal  of  a  plan  to  modify  the
deepwater Olympia channel  that enters West  Bay.   Although this report  will
not  summarize  environmental  data,  sediment  testing  may be  required if  the
channel is modified.
                                    C-l

-------
                                                      TABLE C-1.   LIST OF DREDGING PERMITS ISSUED FOR BUDD INLET SINCE 1980
           Permittee3
     Date
Permit  I saucer*
                                                                                               Purpose
         Reference
o
 i
ro
      City  of Olympia
      Fiddlehead Marina
     Martin Marina
     Olympia Yacht Club
     One Tree Island Marina
     Port of Olympia
     East Bay Marina

     Port of Olympia
     East Bay Marina
     Port of Olympia
29 January 1987          Provide  public access.,  bank  protection, and  replacement of  existing tide
                         grids; excavate 320 yd^ of bank material with upland disposal; place 190 yd
                         riprap and approximately 900 yd  additional fill.

16 April 1982            Improve  and  expand moorage  in commercial  marina;  4,000  yd   removed  and
                         barged  to  East Bay fill  site;  21,200 yd3 of  dredged  material deposited at
                         Dana Passage deep-water disposal site.

10 May 1983              Increase facility  for  commercial moorage;  dredge approximately 6,000 ycr of
                         sand  and  gravel  and dispose of on upland site;  place  approximately 150  yd
                         sand and gravel as  fill.

7 January 1987           Provide  additional  boat  moorage and adequate water depth;  dredge approxi-
                         mately  33,700 ycr  sand and^silt  and dispose  of at  Steilacoom deep-water
                         disposal site; dredge 500 ycr contaminated material and dispose of at upland
                         site; two 4-ft sediment cores collected and analyzed; data analysis indicated
                         high concentrations of  lead.

18 July 1986             Provide  additional  boat  moorage;  dredge 3,900  yd   contaminated sediments;
                         excavate containment basin  and  dispose contaminated  sedJments; cap contain-
                         ment  basin  with  ^4 ft  clean  material; dredge 9,400 yd   clean material  and
                         dispose  of  at  Steilacoom deep-water  disposal  site.   Results  of  sediment
                         chemistry analyses  are provided in Turpin and Associates (1985).

11 June 1981             Provide  recreational  boat moorage  and  launching facilities;  permit expired
                         11 June 1985 and 70 percent of work was completed.

15 May 1981              Provide  protection and  adequate depth  of  water  for  boat movement  within
                         marina, and to and  from an existing navigation channel; fill  to provide area
                         for  cargo  handling,   parking,  and  marina   support   facilities;  dredged
                         475,000 ydr  organic  silt and  sand  from  moorage  basin  and  place  behind
                         retaining berm.

12 May 1987              Upgrade existing cargo area; dredge approximately 4,250 yd  and dispose of on
                         upland  site;  place 8,000 tons riprap  and 500  ycr  backfill;  upland disposal
                         site has  not  been  identified yet,  and work has  not been completed (Malin
                         R., 25 November 1987,  personal conrnunication).
U.S. ACOEC  [No Date  (a)]



U.S. ACOE   [No Date (h)]



U.S. ACOE   [No Date (b)]



U.S. ACOE   [No Date (c)]





U.S. ACOE   [No Date (d)]





U.S. ACOE   [No Date (e)]


U.S. ACOE   [No Date (k)]





U.S. ACOE   [No Date (f)]

-------
     TABLE C-1.  (Continued)
           Permittee3
                                  Date
                             Permit  Issued
                                                                                              Purpose
                                                                                             Reference
      Tamoshan Homeowners
      Association
      Washington Department
      of  Fisheries

      Washington Department
      of  Fisheries
                             15 June 1982
                             1 March 1982
                             3 June 1983
Erosion prevention;  excavate  and place 200  yd   beach materials and  60 yd
coarse gravel  adjacent  to existing bulkhead  (the gravel  may not  have been
deposited on the beach to protect surf smelt spawning areas).

Maintenance  dredging in  Capitol  Lake;   1,500  ydr  sediments  deposited  on
state-owned upland disposal site.

Erosion  prevention  in  Deschutes River  (immediately downstream of  Capitol
Way).
U.S. ACOE  [No Date (g)]




U.S. ACOE  [No Date (i)]


U.S. ACOE  [No Date (j)]
o
 U.S. Army COE permit numbers are identified in the references.  Permit number 071-OYB-2-006974 (Olvmpia Yacht  Club)  was  not  available for review.

1 U.S. Army COE, 27 October 1987, personal communication.

 U.S. ACOE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

-------
                    APPENDIX D



CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN BUDD INLET SEDIMENTS

-------
TABLE D-1.  CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS IN BUDD INLET SEDIMENTS
Seq. Document Sample Sample
No. Number3 Number Date
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
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338035
338034
338034
338034
338034
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
4/23/86
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
Class
Number
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.1
8
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.1
8
7
8
1
1
1
1
Chemical Concentration
lead
copper
zinc
chromium
nickel
cadmium
lead
copper
zinc
chromium
nickel
cadmi urn
mercury
lead
copper
zinc
chromium
nickel
cadmium
acenaphthene
acenaphthylene
naphthalene
f luorene
anthracene
phenanthrene
f luoranthene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
pyrene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
Total PAH
dibenzofuran
pentachlorophenol
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthene
acenaphthylene
naphthalene
f luorene
anthracene
phenanthrene
f luoranthene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
pyrene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo ( g , h , i ) pery I ene
Total PAH
dibenzofuran
pentachlorophenol
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthene
acenaphthylene
naphthalene
f luorene
9.2
0.0
29.3
3.7
2.7
0.0
33.4
106.0
116.9
55.6
41.7
5.6
0.2
6.5
47.0
112.0
43.1
25.0
0.0
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
220
100u
100u
660
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
880
100u
100u
100u
20u
20u
94
20u
20u
120
330
20u
20u
630
330 j
20u
20u
20u
20u
1500
20u
20u
20u
2000
200u
170
730
                              D-1

-------
Seq. Document Sample Sannple
No. Number3 Nunber Date
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338034
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
338036
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
79016
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
8/14/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
Class
Number
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.1
8
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2.1
8
7
8
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
Chemical Concentration
anthracene
phenanthrene
f luoranthene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
pyrene
benzof luoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
Total PAH
dibenzofuran
pentach lorophenol
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthene
acenaphthylene
naphthalene
f luorene
anthracene
phenanthrene
f luoranthene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
pyrene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
Total PAH
dibenzofuran
pentach lorophenol
2-methylnaphthalene
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentach lorophenot
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
1200
2000
6300
1600
2000
4200
1500
810
200u
200u
200u
23000
880
200u
200u
140
50u
39j
69
50u
630
1300
390 j
540 j
980
50u
50u
50u
50u
50u
4100
50u
50u
50u
9u
18
9u
9u
5800
790
330
14000
5300
5200
20000
2700
32000
20000
8000
8300
6600
100u
100J
100J
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
760
9u
86.3
D-2

-------
Seq. Document Sample Sample Class
No. Number3 Number Date Number
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
79016
79016
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79017
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
79018
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
10
10
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
Chemical Concent rationb
chromium
arsenic
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof I uorant henes
benzo(a)pyrene
indenoC 1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
pheno I
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chtorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof 1 uo rant henes
benzo(a)pyrene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
chromium
38.8
8
4j
510
48
400
210000
15000
400u
370000
130000
200000
800000
150000
530000
400000
95000
120000
73000
40000
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
15000
8u
69.6
35
5.7
7u
7u
7u
7u
7200
640
400u
4800
1400
1300
2900
5700
42000
27000
7500
9700
6900
2700
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
400u
1100
7u
131.5
40.2
D-3

-------
Seq. Document Sample Sample Class
No. Number3 Number Date Number
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
79018
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79019
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
79020
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
10
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
Chemical Concentration
arsenic
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof luoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indenod ,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h,i )perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h, i )perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chtorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
10.7
5u
5u
5u
5u
3500
640
100j
1500
310
670
2000
650
3100
4300
670
740
880
360
100u
100u
100u
100u
120
100u
100u
100u
5u
37.4
20.5
11
5u
5u
5u
5u
9600
560
100j
620
250
300
1100
360
1300
1500
330
410
510
190
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
120
5u
32
20.2
5.5
D-4

-------
Seq. Document Sample Sanple Class
No. Number3 Number Date Number
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79021
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
79022
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
Chemical Concentration
benzene
ethyl benzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indenod ,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h,i)perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2, 4 -dimethyl phenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
benzene
ethylbenzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof luoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indenod, 2, 3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h,i)perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
7u
7u
7u
7u
2400
200u
200u
660
220
200u
1300
820
7300
450
3500
1900
1600
750
200u
200u
200u
200u
200u
200u
200u
640
7u
62.6
35.2
7.6
5u
5u
5u
5u
530
100J
100J
190
78j
82 j
400
300
4900
3800
1300
1800
1600
680
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
420
5u
71.5
35.2
7.3
D-5

-------
Seq. Document Sample Sample
No. Number3 Number Date
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79023
79017
79017
79017
79017
79019
79019
79019
79019
79020
79020
79020
79020
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
2/13/85
Class
Number
99
9
99
9
1
8
1
1
8
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
7
7
5
99
10
10
10
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Chemical Concentration
benzene
ethyl benzene
toluene
total xylenes
naphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
acenaphthylene
acenaphthene
dibenzofuran
f luorene
phenanthrene
anthracene
f luoranthene
pyrene
benzo(a)anthracene
chrysene
benzof I uoranthenes
benzo(a)pyrene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
benzo(g,h,i )perylene
phenol
2-methylphenol
4-methylphenol
2,4-ditnethylphenol
pentachlorophenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
chlorobenzene
copper
chromium
arsenic
1-methylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
dibenzothiophene
biphenyl
1-methylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
d i benzoth i ophene
biphenyl
1-methylnaphthalene
2-methylnaphthalene
dibenzothiophene
biphenyl
5u
54
5u
5u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
220
660
lOOu
100u
100u
100u
100u
100u
lOOu
100u
100u
100u
100u
1600
10
56.6
20.6
9
780000

270000

2800


540
2100


910
 Reference:   1.  Alan, R. (24 September 1987, personal communication).
              2.  Norton, D. (5 February 1986, personal communication).
              3.  Johnson, A. (22 July 1985, personal communication).

' Expressed in mg/kg dry wt for trace metals and ug/kg dry wt for organic substances.
                                           D-6

-------
      APPENDIX  E



BUDD INLET BIBLIOGRAPHY

-------
                           BUDD  INLET BIBLIOGRAPHY


Advanced Engineering.   6 June 1986.   Personal Communication (information to
Dunlap  Towing  Company,  Olympia,  WA;   chip  storage  pile  dust  analysis,
Appendix  1-2  through  1-7  to  Olympia   Staff/Committee  Report  for  Olympia
Planning  Department   file  number  SH-OLY-3-85).     Advanced  Engineering,
Olympia, WA.

Alan,  R.   24  September 1987a.    Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen  L. Keeley;  Budd Inlet sample survey, Department of Public Works, City
of Olympia).   LOTT Sewage  Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Alan,  R.   24  September 1987b.    Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen  L.  Keeley;  draft  1988  monitoring  program  of  the  LOTT  facility,
Olympia, WA).   LOTT Sewage  Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.  2 pp.

Alan,  R.   19  January 1988.  Personal Communication  (phone by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley;  information  on  LOTT's  outfalls).    LOTT Sewage Treatment Facility,
Olympia, WA.

Alan,  R.  9  February  1988.  Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Betsy Day;
information  on  effluent  bioassays  conducted by LOTT).  LOTT Sewage Treatment
Facility, Olympia, WA.

Alan,  R.   14  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley;  information  on historical  landfill  located  near LOTT  facility).
LOTT Sewage  Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.

Alan,  R.   25  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by  Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  LOTT  sewage treatment facility, Olympia,  WA.

Anderson,  D.   22  December  1986.   Personal  Communication  (letter  to Mr.
Dennis 0. Cole, Industrial  Petroleum Distributors,  Inc., Tacoma, WA; Olympia
facility, contaminated   soils,  Ecology   Order No.  DE 86-S133).   Washington
Department of  Ecology, Olympia, WA.  2 pp.

Anderson, D.   29  October  1987.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms.  Karen
L.  Keeley;   Budd  Inlet).   Washington  Department  of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.
1 pp.

Anderson, D.   6 April 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Applied Geotechnology.   1986a.    Volume  I.   Remedial investigation, Cascade
Pole Company,  Olympia,  Washington.   AGI Job  No.  14,825.104.   Prepared for
McFarland Cascade, Cascade Pole Company,  Olympia, WA.  Applied Geotechnology,
Inc., Bellevue, WA.   103 pp.
                                    E-l

-------
Applied  Geotechnology.     1986b.    Volume  II.    Remedial   investigation-
appendices,  Cascade   Pole  Company,  Olympia,  Washington.    AGI  Job   No.
14,825.104.  Prepared  for McFarland Cascade,  Cascade Pole Company, Olympia,
WA.  Applied Geotechnology, Inc., Bellevue, WA.

Applied  Geotechnology.    1987.     Intertidal  sediment  study:   polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and phenols, Cascade Pole Company,  Olympia, Washington.
AGI  Project  No.  14,825.107.   Prepared  for Cascade  Pole  Company,  Olympia,
WA.  Applied Geotechnology, Inc., Bellevue, WA.

Arden, H.   26  January 1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley).  U.S.  Army Corps of  Engineers,  Seattle, WA.

Arden,  H.    10  February 1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by  Ms. Betsy
Day;  information concerning  sediment  resuspension  by  the  East  Bay  Marina
aerators).  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, WA.

Arden,  H.    11  February 1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by  Ms. Betsy
Day; criteria for operation of East Bay Marina aeration system).  U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Seattle,  WA.

Armstrong, J.  17 November  1987.  Personal Communication (information to Ms.
Karen  L.  Keeley; microbiological sample results  for  fecal  coliforms/100 gm
shellfish tissue,  30  June  1987,  Washington Department  of  Social  and  Health
Services and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  study).  U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region X, Seattle, WA.  3 pp.

Arvid  Grant  and Associates.   1973.  Water  pollution control  and abatement
plan  for  Deschutes  River basin.    State  of Washington   Water  Resources
Inventory Area No.  13  in Thurston and Lewis Counties.  Prepared for Thurston
Regional  Planning  Council,  Olympia, WA.  Arvid Grant and  Associates, Inc.,
Olympia, WA.  117 pp. + 15  figures  and appendix.

Babcock, S.  6  October 1987.   Personal   Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley).  U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers,  Engineering Division, Seattle, WA.

Barghausen  Consulting  Engineers.  7  August 1986.    Personal  Communication
(letter to  Mr.  Gary Kato,  Thurston County  Health Department,  Environmental
Health Division, Olympia, WA; disposal of solid waste material/proposed ARCO
FAC  #5301,  State Street and  East Bay,  Olympia,  WA).   Barghausen Consulting
Engineers, Inc., Kent, WA.  6 pp.

Bauchman, J.W.   1974.  Saving a beautiful lake:  an overview of the economic
and  recreational  benefits of reclamation and proposed recreational profiles
for the future of Capitol Lake and  the visual basin.  Olympia, WA.  35 pp.

Bernhardt, J.    13  August  1981.   Personal  Communication (memorandum to  Mr.
Jim  Krull,  Washington  Department of   Ecology;  Budd  Inlet  fish   kill).
Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  19 pp.

Bernhardt, J.,  and B.  Yake.   22 June  1983.   Personal  Communication  (memo-
randum to Mr. Frank Monahan,  Washington  Department of Ecology; LOTT Phase II

                                     E-2

-------
receiving water considerations).
WA.  15 pp.
       Washington  Department of Ecology,  Olympia,
Black &  Veatch.    1987.   Cascade Pole Company  feasibility study work plan.
Prepared for Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  Black & Veatch,
Olympia, WA, and Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.  49 pp.
Bradley,  D.    12  January
Richard  Pierce,   Thurston
Division,  Olympia,  WA).
33 pp.
1987a.   Personal  Communication  (letter  to  Mr.
County  Health  Department,  Environmental   Health
Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.
Bradley,  D.    12  January  19875.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to
McFarland Cascade  file;  potential  health  risks  associated with consumption
of shellfish  from  Budd Inlet).  Washington  Department  of Ecology,  Olympia,
WA.  3 pp.

Bradley,  D.    30  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Mr.  J.
Portele).  Washington  Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Calambokidis, J., J. Peard, G.H. Steiger, and J.C. Cubbage.  1984.  Chemical
contaminants  in  marine  mammals  from  Washington  State.   NOAA  Technical
Memorandum  NOS  QMS  6.   National  Oceanic and  Atmospheric Administration,
National Ocean Service, Rockville, MD.  167 pp. including appendices.
Calambokidis,  J.,  S.H. Speich,  J.
Fry, and L.J.  Lowenstine.   1985.
marine birds:   population  health
Technical Memorandum  NOS  DMA 18.
stration, National  Ocean  Service,
dices.
        Peard,  G.H.  Steiger,  J.C. Cubbage,  D.M.
        Biology  of  Puget  Sound marine mammals  and
        and  evidence  of pollution effects.   NOAA
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric  Admini-
        Rockville,  MD.   159 pp.  including  appen-
Capitol  Lake  Restoration Committee.    1987.    Capitol
Capitol Lake Restoration  Committee, Olympia, WA.  57 pp.
                              Lake  action  plan.
                              +  appendices.
CH2M  Hill.    1978.   Water  quality in  Capitol  Lake,  Olympia,  Washington.
Prepared  for  Washington Department of  Ecology  and  Washington Department of
General Administration.  CH2M Hill, Bellevue, WA.  79 pp. + appendices.

CH2M.   1972.   Thurston  County:  a  comprehensive  water and  sewerage plan.
Volume III sewerage plan.  CH2M, Bellevue, WA.  57 pp. + appendices.

Clark,  D.    21  November  1985.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to Mr.
Darrel  Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Southwest  Regional
Office; Beverly Beach wastewater treatment plant limited Class II inspection,
June 17-18, 1985).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Clark,  D.    27  January 1986.   Personal  Communication (memorandum  to Mr.
Darrel  Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Southwest  Regional
Office; Tamoshan wastewater  treatment plant  limited Class  II  inspection,
June 17-18, 1985).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  13 pp.
                                     E-3

-------
Clark, D.   25  March  1986.   Personal  Communication (memorandum to Mr. Darrel
Anderson,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology,   Southwest  Regional  Office;
Seashore Villa wastewater  treatment  plant  limited Class  II inspection,  July
1-2, 1985).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  11 pp.

Cloud, G.   30  October 1987.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  Budd  Inlet  Industrial  Petroleum  Distributors,  Inc.,  waste  oil
spill).  Washington Department  of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  1 pp.

Colby, J.   28 March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).   LOTT Sewage Treatment  Facility, Olympia, WA.

Collias,  E.,  et  al.   1962.   Physical and chemical data  for southern Puget
Sound, August  1957-October  1958.   University of  Washington,  Department of
Oceanography Technical Report No. 67.

Cox, J.M.,  C.C.  Ebbesmeyer,  C.A.  Coomes,  L.R.  Hinchey,  J.M.  Helseth,  G.A.
Cannon,  and C.A.  Barnes.   1981.  Index to observations of currents in Puget
Sound,  Washington,  from  1908-1980.    NOAA Technical  Memorandum  OMPA-5.
National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric Administration,  Office  of Marine Pollution
Assessment, Boulder, CO.   51 pp. including appendices.

Cunningham, J.    21  September  1987.   Personal  Communication  (phone  by  Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley).  City of Olympia Engineering Department, Olympia, WA.

Dames  &  Moore.   1973.   Report of  soils  investigation,   proposed  East  Bay
development program,  Port of  Olympia,  Olympia,  Washington.   Prepared  for
Port of  Olympia,  Olympia,  WA.   Dames & Moore, Seattle, WA.  18 pp. + plates
and appendices.

Dames  &  Moore.   1974.   Report of  bottom sediment sampling  and analyses,
proposed East  Bay  dredging and  landfill,  Olympia, Washington.   Prepared for
Port of Olympia,  Olympia,  WA.   Dames & Moore, Seattle, WA.  11 pp. + tables.

Department  of  Social  and  Health Services.    1987.   Chemicals  and bacterio-
logical  organisms  in  non-commercial  shellfish.    Draft  Report.    DSHS,
Olympia,  WA.

Determan, T.   19 February 1981.   Personal  Communication   (memorandum to Mr.
John  Bernhardt,  Washington  Department  of Ecology; effects  of Tamoshan  STP
outfall on water quality at  Silver Spit, Budd Inlet).  Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA.   10 pp.

Determan, T.   5  March  1981.   Personal Communication (memorandum  to Mr. John
Bernhardt,  Washington Department of  Ecology;  effects of Tamoshan  STP outfall
on  water quality  at  Silver  Spit,   Budd  Inlet).   Washington  Department of
Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  8 pp.

Devitt,  R.C.   2 June  1983.   Personal Communication  (memorandum to Mr. Ron
Robinson, Mr.  Mike Pierce, and  Mr. Gene Asselstine, Washington Department of
                                    E-4

-------
Ecology;  Olympia  STP,  Budd  Inlet  dye  survey  and
Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Southwest  Regional
17 pp.
aerial  photographs).
Office, Olympia,  WA.
Dexter,  R.N.,  D.E.  Anderson,  E.A.  Quinlan, L.S. Goldstein, R.M.  Strickland,
S.P.  Pavlou,  J.R.  Clayton,  Jr.,   R.M.  Kocan,   and  M.  Landolt.    1981.    A
summary  of  knowledge  of Puget Sound related to chemical contaminants.   NOAA
Technical  Memorandum  OMPA-13.    National  Oceanic  and  Atmospheric  Admini-
stration, Office of Marine  Pollution Assessment, Boulder,  CO.  435  pp.

Dexter,  R.N.,  L.S.   Goldstein,  P.M.  Chapman,  and  E.A.   Quinlan.    1985.
Temporal  trends  in   selected  environmental  parameters  monitored  in  Puget
Sound.   NOAA Technical Memorandum  NOS OMA 19.   National Oceanic and Atoms-
pheric Administration,  National Ocean Service,  Rockville,  MD.  166  pp.

Duxbury,  A.C.,  M.A.  Freibertshauser,  and  E.P.  Richey.    1972.   Budd  Inlet
circulation  and  flushing study.   Appendix  A.   Submitted to Arvid Grant and
Associates,  Inc., Olympia,  WA.  12  pp.

Earth Consultants.  1985.   Supplemental soil  hydrocarbon content  evaluation,
proposed  Arco  station,  East Bay  Drive  and  State  Avenue,  Olympia,  WA.
Prepared  for  Barghausen  Consulting  Engineers,  Inc.,  Kent,  WA.     Earth
Consultants,  Inc., Bellevue, WA.  11 pp. + tables.

Earth Consultants.  7  August  1986.  Personal  Communication  (letter to Mr. Al
Kendall,  Barghausen   Consulting  Engineers,  Kent, WA;  supplemental  chemical
analysis  of soils,  proposed Arco station,  East Bay  Drive  and State Avenue,
Olympia, WA).  Earth  Consultants, Inc., Bellevue, WA.  2 pp.

Edison,  D.    21  January  1988.   Personal   Communication  (information  to Ms.
Karen L. Keeley; Port  of  Olympia properties).   Port of Olympia, WA.

Egge, E.  25  January  1987.  Personal Communication (information to Ms.  Karen
L.  Keeley;   Port  of  Olympia  East  Bay Marina  dissolved  oxygen  monitoring
data).   Port  of Olympia,  Olympia, WA.

Egge, E.   1 February  1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Betsy Day;
information  on operation of  East  Bay Marina  aeration system).   Port of
Olympia, WA.

Entrance Engineers.   1983.  Capitol Lake restoration analysis.  Prepared for
Washington   Department  of  General  Administration.     Entrance  Engineers,
Bellevue, WA.  128 pp.  +  appendices.

ERT.   1987a.   Risk  assessment  to accompany the  feasibility study  of the
Cascade  Pole  Company  site,  Olympia, Washington.  Draft Report.  Document No.
P-E464-200.   Prepared for Cascade  Pole Company, Olympia, WA.  ERT, Concord,
MA.  54 pp. + appendix.

ERT.  1987b.  Final risk assessment to accompany the  feasibility study of the
Cascade  Pole Company  site, Olympia,  Washington.   Document No.   P-E464-200.
                                    E-5

-------
Prepared  for  Cascade Pole Company, Olympia, WA.   ERT,  Concord, MA.  68  pp.
+ appendices.

ERT.  30 April 1987.  Personal Communication (letter to  Mr.  David A. Bradley,
Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia,   WA,   regarding  Cascade  Pole
Company site,  Olympia,  WA;  ERT Document  No.  E420-600-1).  ERT,  Concord,  MA.
13 pp.

Evans-Hamilton and  D.R. Systems.   1987.    Puget  Sound  environmental  atlas.
Volume 2.   Prepared  for  U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,  Puget  Sound
Water Quality  Authority,  and  U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers.   Evans-Hamilton,
Inc., Seattle, WA, and  D.R. Systems,  Inc.,  Seattle, WA.  46 maps.

Evergreen State College.   1974.   Environmental  assessment study of the Port
of  Olympia.   Final  Report.    Seacoast  Management  Group  Contract.    The
Evergreen State  College,  Olympia,  WA.   28  pp.  + 4 figures, 7  tables,  and
appendix.

Evergreen  State  College.    1975.    Distribution  and   biomagnification  of
polychlorinated  biphenyls in  the  benthic  community.    The  Evergreen State
College,  Olympia, WA.   40 pp.

Faigenblum,   J.   17   November 1987.   Personal  Communication (phone  by Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  Budd  Inlet  fecal  coliform data for shellfish  collected  in
Fall 1987).   Washington Department of Social and Health Services,  Shellfish
Protection Section, Olympia,  WA.   1 pp.

GeoEngineers.    1987.   Dredge  spoil  evaluation,  Berth  3  reconstruction,
Olympia,   Washington   for  the  Port  of  Olympia.   Prepared  for  the Port  of
Olympia,   Olympia,  WA.   GeoEngineers,  Incorporated,  Bellevue,  WA.   6 pp.
+ appendices.

Gibbs, T.   20 January  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by  Ms. Karen  L.
Keeley;  information on  areas  in Budd  Inlet  with uninvestigated onsite sewage
disposal  problems).   Thurston  County  Health  Department,   Environmental  Health
Division, Olympia, WA.

Haggerty, K.   18 January 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone  by  Ms. Karen
L.  Keeley;  information on Olympia Golf and Country Club  septic  drainfield
and  surface  water runoff  retention pond).   Olympia Golf  and Country Club,
Olympia,  WA.

Hanson,   N.    No  date.  Puget Sound water  quality  nonpoint program  update.
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority,  Seattle, WA.   1 pp.

Heggen,   D.    16  October  1987.   Personal  Communication  [information  to  Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  Washington  Department  of Natural Resources  photographic
survey  (single  frame  Super-8)  in  Budd  Inlet  during  1979].    Washington
Department of  Natural Resources, Aquatic Lands Division, Olympia, WA.  3  pp.
                                    E-6

-------
Helmlinger, J.   23 March 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley;  information  on the Capitol  Lake  siphon).   Washington Department
of General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Helmlinger, J.   13 April 1988.   Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  Capitol Lake siphon  system  and  water quality monitoring).
Washington Department of General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Hough, G.H.   1981.   Deschutes River  report.   Thurston County Conservation
District, Olympia, WA.   14 pp. + appendices.

Jamison,   D.   21  January 1988.  Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley).  Washington  Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA.

Johnson,   A.,  and S.  Prescott.    13   August  1981.    Personal  Communication
(memorandum to  Mr. John Bernhardt, Washington  Department  of Ecology; water
quality measurements  in  Budd  Inlet, July 2, 1981).  Washington Department of
Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  3 pp.

Johnson,   A.   22  July 1985.    Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to  Mr.  Tom
Eaton, Washington Department  of  Ecology;  receiving  environment survey  in
Budd  Inlet  at McFarland/Cascade,  February 13, 1985).   Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.  7 pp.

Joy,  J.    10  June 1981.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr.  John
Bernhardt,  Washington   Department  of  Ecology;  sulfide  concentrations  in
vicinity of LOTT  STP bypass  outfall,  Budd Inlet).  Washington Department of
Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  10 pp.

JRB Associates.   1984.   Water quality dependent  water uses in Puget Sound.
Final Report.  Prepared  for U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, Washington
DC.  JRB Associates,  Inc., Bellevue, WA. 158  pp. + appendices.

Kendra,   W.,  and   T.  Determan.   6 November  1985.    Personal  Communication
(memorandum to  Mr. Tom  Eaton, Washington  Department  of Ecology;  effects of
three  small  sewage  treatment  plants  on  Budd   Inlet receiving  waters).
Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  22 pp.

Kessler,  F.  18  December 1987.  Personal Communication (letter to Ms. Karen
L. Keeley;  LOTT  wastewater  treatment  plant receiving water sampling  program
in Budd  Inlet).    LOTT Sewage Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.   70  pp.  + 3
figures.

Kittle,  L.  29  January  1988.   Personal Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).   Washington  Department of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.

Kittle,  L., and  H. Tracy.   19 January 1982.    Personal Communication  [memo-
randum to  Mr.  Bruce  Cameron,  Washington Department  of Ecology;  lower Budd
Inlet  marine  resource  damage  assessment   (MRDA),   September   10,   1981].
Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  23 pp.
                                     E-7

-------
Konasewich,  D.E.,  P.M.  Chapman,  E. Gerencher,  G.  Vigers,  and  N. Treloar.
1982.    Effects,   pathways,  processes,  and  transformation  of  Puget Sound
contaminants  of  concern.    NOAA  Technical  Memorandum  OMPA-20.   National
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric Administration,  Office  of  Marine Pollution  Assess-
ment, Boulder, CO.  357  pp.

Kramer,  Chin  & Mayo.    1973.   An  engineering  study of  the Percival Creek
drainage basin.  Prepared for the City of Olympia, WA.  Kramer, Chin  & Mayo,
Inc., Seattle, WA.  46 pp. + appendices.

Kramer,  Chin  & Mayo.   1975.   Receiving-water quality objectives.  Prepared
for  Lacey,  Olympia, Tumwater,  and Thurston  County  (LOTT)  Complex Facility
Planning Study, Administrative Committee, Olympia, WA.  Kramer, Chin  & Mayo,
Inc., Seattle, WA.  28 pp. including appendix.

Kruger,  D.M.   1979.   Effects of point-source discharges and other inputs on
water quality  in  Budd  Inlet,  Washington.   DOE 79-11.  Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  40 pp. +  appendices.

Lilja, J.  25  March 1988.   Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Betsy Day).
Washington Department of Social and Health  Services, Olympia, WA.

Mai in,  D.   18  November 1987.   Personal Communication  (information  to  Ms.
Karen L. Keeley; Port of Olympia ownerships in Budd  Inlet).   Port of Olympia,
Olympia, WA.   1 pp.

Mai in, D.  25  November 1987.   Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  information on  dredging  permit 071-OYB-2-010937).   Port of Olympia,
Olympia, WA.

Malins,  D.C.,  B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins.   1980.
Chemical contaminants  and biological  abnormalities  in  central  and southern
Puget  Sound.    NOAA  Technical  Memorandum OMPA-2.    National  Oceanic  and
Atmospheric Administration,  Office of Marine Pollution Assessment, Boulder,
CO.  295 pp. including appendices.

Malins,  D.C.,  B.B. McCain,  D.W.  Brown,  A.K. Sparks,  H.O.  Hodgins,  and S.-
L. Chan.  1982.  Chemical contaminants and  abnormalities in  fish and  invert-
ebrates  from  Puget  Sound.    NOAA  Technical  Memorandum OMPA-19.   National
Oceanic  and  Atmospheric Administration,  Office  of  Marine Pollution  Assess-
ment, Boulder, CO.  168  pp. including  appendix.

McCallum, M.   1985.  Recreational  and subsistence  catch and consumption of
seafood  from  three  urban  industrial  bays of  Puget Sound:   Port Gardner,
Elliot Bay  and Sinclair Inlet.   Washington  State  Department  of Social and
Health  Services,   Division  of  Health,  Epidemiology  Section,   Olympia,  WA.
59 pp. including appendices.

McCarthy, B.   15  January 1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms. Lynne
M. Kilpatrick-Howard).   City of  Olympia,  Public Works Department, Olympia,
WA.
                                     E-8

-------
McNicholas,  R.    1984.   Stream  corridor management plan  for the Deschutes
River,  Washington.    Project No.  82-145A.    Prepared  for  Washington State
Department  of General  Administration,  Olympia,  WA.   Thurston  County Con-
servation District, Olympia, WA.  65 pp,
                                ,.j...r.-, WA.   Thurston
                                including appendices.
Mih,  W.C.    1976.    Supplemental  flow  and sediment
hydraulic  model.    Prepared  for  Washington  State
Administration,  Olympia,  WA.    Washington  State  University,   College
Engineering, Albrook Hydraulics Laboratory, Pullman, WA.  11 pp.
                                             tests  of  Capitol  Lake
                                             Department of  General
                                                                 of
Moore, A.   13 April  1982.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Ms.
Thomas, Washington  Department of Ecology;  outfall  sampling  to Capitol
during March 1982 drawdown).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia
6 pp.
                                                               Joan
                                                               Lake
                                                                WA.
Moore, D.   17  November 1987.   Personal Communication
Keeley;  City  of  Olympia  combined  sewer  overflow
Olympia, Engineering Department, Olympia, WA.

Moore, D.   9  December  1987.  Personal  Communication
Keeley;  City  of  Olympia  combined  sewer  overflow.
Olympia, Engineering Department, Olympia, WA.
                                             (phone by Ms. Karen L.
                                             locations).    City  of
                                            (letter to Ms.
                                             locations).
                                             Karen L.
                                             City  of
Moore,  D.   29  March  1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen  L.
Keeley).  LOTT  Sewage Treatment Facility, Olympia, WA.

Moore, A., and  D. Anderson.   1979.  Deschutes River basin suspended sediment
transport  study.    Project Report No.  DOE-PR-7.   Washington  Department  of
Ecology.. Water  and  Wastewater Monitoring Section, Olympia, WA.  21 pp.

Mowrer,  J.,  J. Calambokidis,  N.  Musgrove,  B.  Drager,  M.W.  Beug,  and S.G.
Herman.   1977.   Polychlorinated  biphenyls  in cottids,  mussels, and sediment
in  southern  Puget  Sound,  Washington.    Bull.  Environ.  Contam.  Toxicol.
18:588-594.

Mumford, T.F.,  Jr.   25  September 1987.  Personal Communication (information
to Ms.  Karen  L.  Keeley;  water quality data in Budd Inlet collected near the
Washington  Department of  Natural Resources  Marine  Station  ).   Washington
Department  of  Natural   Resources,   Aquatic  Lands  Division,  Olympia,  WA.
17 figures and  tables.

Newall,  G.   10 February  1988.    Personal Communication  (phone by Ms. Betsy
Day; information on the moth-balled maritime fleet in Budd Inlet).  Olympia,
WA.
Nortec.
southern
  No  date.
Puget Sound.
A  numerical  hydrodynamic,
Nortec, Redmond, WA.  1 pp.
water  quality model  for
Norton, D.   5  February 1986.   Personal Communication (memorandum to Mr. Tom
Eaton, Washington  Department  of Ecology,  Southwest Regional Office; results
of priority pollutant analyses on water,  sediment,  and clam  samples collected
                                    E-9

-------
in  lower  Budd Inlet near McFarland/Cascade, Olympia,  WA,  August 14, 1985).
Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  16 pp.

O'Brien,  E.   12 November 1987.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley).   Washington Department of Ecology.. Seattle, WA.

Oberlander, J.  29 January  1988.  Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen
L. Keeley).   Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Oberlander,  J.    24 February  1988.    Personal  Communication  (phone  by  Ms.
Karen  L.  Keeley;   information on  historical  landfill   located near  LOTT
facility).  Metro, Seattle, WA.

Oblas, V.  29 February  1988.   Personal  Communication (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley;  information  on  historical  landfill  located  near  LOTT facility).
Metro, Seattle, WA.

Delay, N.   1959.   Oceanographic  conditions near  the head  of southern Puget
Sound.  Master's Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

Orsborn,  J.F=,  J.E.  Ongerth,  G.C.  Bailey,  S.K.  Bhagat,  W.H.  Funk,  C.C.
Lomax, and  W.C.  Mih.   1975.   Hydraulic and water  quality research studies
and  analysis  of  Capitol  Lake  sediment  and restoration  problems,  Olympia,
Washington.   Prepared for  Washington  Department  of General Administration,
Olympia, WA.  Washington  State University,  Department of Civil and  Environ-
mental Engineering, Pullman, WA.  315 pp.

Olympia, City of.  1985.  Plan for parks and recreation facilities.   City of
Olympia,  Olympia  Parks  Advisory  Committee,  Olympia  Parks  and Recreation
Department, and Olympia  Planning  Department,  Olympia, WA.   44 pp.  + appen-
dices.

Olympia,  City of.    1987.   Storm sewer  maps  1"  =  100'.   City of  Olympia,
Department of Public Works, Olympia, WA.

Parametrix.   1984.  LOTT Phase II urban wastewater management plan.   Phase  I
report.   Prepared  for Lacey,  Olympia,  Tumwater and  Thurston  County,  Wash-
ington.    Parametrix,   Inc.,   Sumner,  WA,  with  Economic   and   Engineering
Services,   Inc.,  Olympia,  WA,  and J.W. Morrissette  and Associates,  Olympia,
WA.  37 pp.

Parametrix.   1985.   LOTT Phase II  urban  wastewater management plan.  Phase
II  report.    Prepared for  Lacey,  Olympia,  Tumwater  and  Thurston  County,
Washington.   Parametrix,  Inc.,  Sumner,  WA,  with Economic  and  Engineering
Services,   Inc., Olympia,  WA,  and J.W. Morrissette  and Associates,  Olympia,
WA.  13 pp. + 7 tables and 4 figures.

Parametrix.   1986.  Phase III report:  LOTT urban area wastewater management
plan.  Parametrix,  Inc.,  Sumner,  WA,  and  Economic and Engineering Services,
Inc., Olympia, WA.  56 pp. + appendices.
                                    E-10

-------
Parametrix.    1987a.    LOTT  urban  area wastewater  management  plan:    plan
summary.  Draft.   Prepared  for Thurston County  Planning  Department,  Olympia,
WA.   Parametrix,  Inc.,  Sumner,  WA  and Economic  and  Engineering  Services,
Inc., Olympia, WA.  7 pp. + figures, tables, and map.

Parametrix.   1987b.   LOTT  urban  area wastewater management  plan.   Draft.
Prepared  for  Thurston  County Planning  Department,  Olympia, WA.   Parametrix,
Inc., Sumner,  WA and Economic and  Engineering  Services, Inc.. Olympia, WA.
42 pp. +  appendices and map.

Parametrix.   1987c.   LOTT urban  area  wastewater management  plan.    Draft
Environmental  Impact  Statement.    Prepared  for  Thurston  County   Planning
Department,  Olympia,  WA.    Parametrix,  Inc.,   Sumner,  WA and  Economic and
Engineering Services, Inc.,  Olympia, WA.  64 pp. + appendices  and map.

Parker,  B.   10  October 1987.  Personal Communication (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).   U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers,  Navigation and  Planning  Section,
Seattle,  WA.

Peck, L.   18 March 1988.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to T. Hooper,
Washington  Department  of Fisheries; Budd  Inlet water  quality).  Washington
Department of Fisheries, Olympia, WA.

Peeler,  M.   12  January 1988.  Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;   status   of  Cascade  Pole  NPDES permit).   Washington  Department of
Ecology,  Olympia, WA.

Peeler,  M.   22  February 1988.   Personal  Communication  (letter to Ms. Karen
Keeley;  additional  information regarding intertidal sediment sampling at the
former  Cascade  Pole  Company site).    Washington  Department  of  Ecology,
Olympia,  WA.

Peeler,  M.   15  March  1988.  Personal  Communication (phone  by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Phillips, K.  10 September  1987.  Personal Communication  (information to Ms.
Karen  L.   Keeley;   draft  memo  entitled  "Assumptions   used   in  forecasting
dredging  volumes  and  conducting  cost  analysis").    U.S.   Army  Corps  of
Engineers, Seattle  District,  Seattle, WA.  19 pp.

Pierce,  R.   20 June 1983.   Personal Communication (memorandum to Mr.  Frank
Monahan,  Washington Department  of  Ecology,  District  Supervisor;  status of
LOTT as of May 1983).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  8 pp.

Pierce,  R.   15 September 1987.   Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  areas on  Budd  Inlet with   uninvestigated  onsite sewage
disposal  problems).  Thurston County Health Department,  Environmental Health
Division, Olympia,  WA.  1 pp.

Pierce,  R.   22  October  1987a.   Personal  Communication  (information to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley; Budd Inlet water samples from  Thurston  County  Public Health


                                    E-ll

-------
Department).    Thurston  County  Health  Department,  Environmental  Health
Division, Olympia, VIA.  3 pp.

Pierce,  R.   22 October  1987b.   Personal  Communication  (information  to Ms.
Karen  L. Keeley;  shellfish  sampling  program  conducted  in  southern  Puget
Sound  during  1985 and 1986).   Thurston County  Health  Department,  Environ-
mental Health Division, Olympia, WA.

Pierce,  R.   22 October  1987c.   Personal  Communication  (information  to Ms.
Karen  L. Keeley;  water bacteriological  analysis for the new Port of Olympia
marinas).  Thurston County Health Department, Environmental Health Division,
Olympia, WA.  3 pp.

Pierce,  R.  17 November 1987.   Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  information on groundwater management plan).  Thurston County Health
Department,  Environmental Health Division, Olympia, WA.

Pierce,  R.  20  January 1988.   Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
Keeley;  information  on  disposal  of  sediments from  proposed  ARCO  site).
Thurston County  Health Department,  Environmental  Health  Division,  Olympia,
WA.

Port of  Olympia.   29  February 1988.   Personal Communication (information to
Ms.  Karen  L.  Keeley; map   showing current  lessees  of  Port  of  Olympia
property).  Port  of Olympia, WA.

Port of  Olympia.   1988.  Comprehensive plan revision 1988.  Port of Olympia,
Olympia, WA.  27  pp.

Port  of  Olympia  Commission.   1974.   Comprehensive  plan  for utilization of
Olympia  Harbor,  Olympia,  Washington.   Port  of  Olympia Commission,  Olympia,
WA.  55  pp.  + 22  figures.

Prescott, S.  2 October 1981.  Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr. John
Bernhardt,  Washington Department  of Ecology;  Capitol  Lake  fecal  coliform
levels and  lake  flushing).   Washington Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia, WA.
5 pp.

Price, M.,  and  K. V.  Ladd.   1978.    The role of  south-central Puget Sound as
a public food source:   impact of heavy metals.   National Science Foundation
Student-Originated  Studies.   Grant  #SMI77-05257.   Evergreen State College,
Olympia, WA.  194  pp.  including appendices.

Puget  Sound Water Quality Authority.   1986.    The  state  of the sound  1986.
Puget  Sound Water Quality  Authority,  Seattle,   WA,  and Entrance Engineers,
Inc.,  Kirkland, WA.  84 pp. + glossary and references.

Puget  Sound Water Quality Authority.  1987.   Puget Sound ambient monitoring
program  detailed  design  considerations.  Draft.   Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority,  Seattle, WA.  55 pp.
                                    E-12

-------
Quinlan, E.A.,  P.M.  Chapman,  R.N.  Dexter,  D.E.  Konasewich,  C.C. Ebbesmeyer,
G.A. Erickson,  B.R.  Kowalski,  and  T.A.  Silver.   1985c.   Toxic chemicals and
biological   effects  in  Puget  Sound:    status  and scenarios  for the future.
Draft Report.  NOAA Contract #NA82RAC00162.  National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration,  National  Ocean Services,  Ocean  Assessment Division, Coastal
and Estuarine  Assessments  Branch,  Seattle  Project  Office,  Seattle,  WA.   334
pp. including  appendices.

R.W.  Beck   and  Associates.    1986.    Boston  Harbor wastewater  facilities
planning study  for  Thurston County.   R.W.  Beck  and Associates, Seattle, WA.
60 pp. + figures, tables,  and  appendices.

Rhoads, D.C.   18 November 1987.   Personal  Communication (information to Ms.
Betsy Day;  effects of oxygen depletion on benthic communities).  Long Island
Sound Hypoxia-Modeling Workshop, University of Connecticut, Groton,  CT.

Riley,  R.G.,  E.A.  Crecelius,  D.C. Mann,  K.H.  Abel, B.L.  Thomas,  and  R.M.
Bean.   1980.   Quantitation of pollutants  in suspended matter and water from
Puget Sound.   NOAA  Technical  Memorandum ERL MESA-49.  Prepared for National
Oceanic  and Atmospheric  Administration,   Marine Ecosystem  Analysis  (MESA)
Puget Sound  Project,  Seattle,  WA.   Battelle Pacific Northwest  Laboratories,
Richland, WA.   99 pp.

Riley,  R.G.,  E.A.  Crecelius,  R.E.  Fitzner, B.L. Thomas,  J.M.  Gurtisen, and
N.S. Bloom.   1983.   Organic  and inorganic toxicants in sediment and marine
birds  from  Puget  Sound.   Prepared  for  National  Oceanic  and Atmospheric
Administration,   National   Ocean   Services,   Ocean  Assessment   Division.
Battelle Pacific Northwest  Laboratories,  Richland,  WA.   125  pp.  including
appendices.

Schiewe, M.   19 November  1987.  Personal  Communication (phone by Ms.  Karen
L. Keeley;   results  of  amphipod and oyster larvae bioassay samples from Budd
Inlet).    National  Oceanic  and Atmospheric  Administration,  Northwest and
Alaska Fisheries Center, Seattle,  WA.

Schmitten,   R.    16  October 1981.     Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to
Governor John Spellman; recent Budd Inlet  fish kills).  Washington Department
of Fisheries, Olympia, WA.

Seiler, K.    4  December 1986.   Personal  Communication (memorandum to files;
information  on  inspection  and sampling  conducted at   the   Cascade  Pole
Company).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Singleton,   L.    1982.   Deschutes  River/Capitol  Lake water quality  assess-
ment.    Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Water  Quality  Investigations
Section, Olympia, WA.  26  pp.  + tables.

Singleton,   L.   29  January 1988.   Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen
L. Keeley).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.

Skidmore,  D.,   and  K.K.  Chew.   1985.   Mussel  aquaculture  in  Puget Sound.
University  of  Washington,  Washington Sea Grant Program, Seattle, WA.  57 pp.

                                    E-13

-------
Spencer, M.   1  February  1988.   Personal Communication  (phone  by  Ms.  Karen
L-  Keeley;  information  about  Water  Street   pump  station).    Washington
Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Swanson,
Keeley;
Inlet).
L.  13 January 1988.  Personal Communication (phone by Ms. Karen L.
information  on  Thurston  County's  stormwater  drainage   into  Budd
Thruston County Public Works Department, Olympia, WA.
Sweet,  B.   23 March  1988.    Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley; information  on  the  Capitol Lake siphon).   Washington  Department of
General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Sweet,  B.   13 April  1988.    Personal  Communication  (phone by Ms.  Karen L.
Keeley).  Washington Department of General Administration, Olympia, WA.

Tetra Tech.  1987.  Sediment  sampling and analysis plan for the Cascade Pole
Company, Olympia, Washington.   Prepared  for Black & Veatch,  Olympia,  WA and
Washington Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.   Tetra Tech,  Inc., Bellevue,
WA.  22 pp.

Thurston  County  Health  Department.    1985.    Southern  Puget Sound  water
quality assessment study:  bacteriological survey of Budd Inlet,  April 1985.
Objective B, Tasks  1,2,  and  3 Interim Data Report.  Draft.  Thurston County
Health Department, Environmental Health Division, Olympia, WA.  15 pp.
Thurston  County  Planning  Department.    1986.
Comprehensive  plan,  Thurston County, Washington.
Department, Olympia, WA.   1  pp.
                                          Map  of  drainage  basins.
                                           Thurston  County Planning
Thurston  Regional  Planning  Council.    1982.     Shoreline  adjacent  lands
analysis for the Thurston region.  Contract No. G83-046B.  Thurston Regional
Planning Council, Olympia, WA.  33 pp.

Thurston Regional Planning  Council.   1983a.   Stormwater management in north
Thurston County.   Volume  I:   recommendations.   Thurston  Regional Planning
Council, Olympia, WA.   19 pp. + map.

Thurston Regional Planning  Council.   1983b.   Stormwater management in north
Thurston  County.    Volume  II:    technical appendices.    Thurston Regional
Planning Council, Olympia, WA.  6 appendices.

Thurston Regional Planning  Council.   1985a.   An assessment of water-related
reports  for  Thurston  County,  Washington.    Thurston   Regional  Planning
Council, Olympia, WA.   29 pp. + appendices.

Thurston Regional  Planning  Council.    1985b.   Percival  Creek corridor plan.
Volume  1:    canyon  & middle  reaches.  Thurston  Regional  Planning Council,
Olympia, WA.  116 pp. including appendix + 13 maps.
                                    E-14

-------
Thurston  Regional  Planning Council.   1986.   Percival Creek  corridor plan.
Volume  2:   upper  reach.   Thurston Regional  Planning  Council,  Olympia,  WA.
82 pp.  including appendix + 12 figures.

Thurston  Regional  Planning  Council.     1987.    Deschutes  River  corridor
recreation plan.   Pamphlet.  Thurston County Planning Council, Olympia, WA.

Tracy,  H.   9  October 1981.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum to Mr. John
Spencer, Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia,  WA; mechanics of the ^S
releases  from  Capitol  Lake  into  Budd  Inlet).    Washington  Department  of
Ecology, Olympia,  WA.  8 pp.

Tracy,  H.   24  June 1982.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to  Mr. Mike
Palko  and  Mr.  Bruce  Cameron,  Washington  Department  of  Ecology;  Capitol
Lake).  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  3 pp.

Turpin  and Associates.    1985.   Dredging  plan,  One  Tree  Island  Marina.
Thurston County, WA.  Turpin and Associates, Olympia, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (a).   Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  City   of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-010618.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (b).   Application  and associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Martin Marina, Reference
Number  071-OYB-2-008536.   U.S.  Army Corp of Engineers, Regulatory Functions
Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (c).   Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army permit for  the Olympia  Yacht Club,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-010788.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (d).   Application  and associated
materials for Department  of  the  Army  permit for  the One Tree Island Marina,
Reference Number  071-OYB-2-009749-R.   U.S.  Army  Corps of Engineers, Regula-
tory Functions  Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (e).   Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  Port   of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-1-006165.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (f).   Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the  Army  permit  for  the  Port   of  Olympia,
Reference Number  071-OYB-2-010937.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch,  Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of Engineers.   No Date  (g).   Application  and associated
materials  for  Department  of the Army  permit for the Tamoshan  Homeowners'


                                    E-15

-------
Association,  Reference  Number  071-OYB-2-007996.    U.S. Army  Corps of  En-
gineers, Regulatory Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers.    No Date  (h).   Application and  associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington  Department of
Fisheries,  Reference Number 071-OYB-2-007306.  U.S. Army Corps  of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers.    No Date  (i).   Application and  associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington  Department of
Fisheries,  Reference Number 071-OYB-2-007709.  U.S. Army Corps  of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers.    No Date  (j).   Application and  associated
materials for Department of the Army permit for the Washington  Department of
Fisheries,  Reference Number 071-OYB-4-008715.  U.S. Army Corps  of Engineers,
Regulatory Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers.    No Date  (k).   Application and  associated
materials  for  Department  of  the  Army  permit  for  the  Port  of  Olympia,
Reference Number 071-OYB-2-006297.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Functions Branch, Seattle, WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps of Engineers.   1977.   Results of  Corps  of Engineers  water
quality  sampling  in  East  Bay,  Olympia  Harbor,  WA, 10  June 1977  through 13
October  1977.  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle,  WA.

U.S.  Army  Corps of  Engineers.    1980.   East Bay  Marina,  Olympia,  Thurston
County, Washington:  final detailed project report.  Section 107, 1960 river
and  harbor  act  and  environmental  impact  statement.    U.S.  Army  Corps of
Engineers,  Seattle, WA.  148 pp. + appendices and exhibits.

U.S.  Army  Corps  of  Engineers.    27 October 1987.   Personal  Communication
(information to Ms. Karen  L. Keeley; computerized listing of U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers dredging permits in Budd Inlet since 1975).  U.S.  Army Corps of
Engineers,  Regulatory Functions Branch,  Seattle,  WA.  1 pp.

U.S.  Department  of Agriculture.   1986.   Water quality planning and imple-
mentation  activities  of  the  USDA,  Soil  Conservation  Service,  Puget  Sound
area  Washington, January 31,  1986.  Prepared for  Puget Sound  Water Quality
Authority,   Seattle,   WA.    USDA,   Soil  Conservation  Service,  Olympia,  WA.
22 pp.

U.S.  Department  of the  Interior.   1974.   Sediment transport  by streams in
the Deschutes  and  Nisqually River basins,  Washington,  November  1971 - June
1973.  Open-File Report.   Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA, and
U.S.  Department of the Interior, Geological  Survey, Water Resources Division,
Tacoma,  WA.  33 pp.

U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.    7 January 1987.   Personal  Communi-
cation  (Unpublished data from STORE!).   U.S. EPA Region X,  Seattle,  WA.


                                    E-16

-------
URS.   1980.   State of Washington  industrial waste  survey,  City  of Olympia.
Prepared for  Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  URS  Company,
Seattle, WA.  32 pp. + appendices.

URS.   1985.   Southern Puget  Sound water quality assessment study.   Part  I
final  report:   discharge  zone  classification  system  for southern  Puget
Sound.   Prepared  for  Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.   URS
Corporation, Seattle, WA.  38 pp.  + appendices.

URS.   1986.    Southern Puget Sound water  quality  assessment study.   Final
report:  comprehensive circulation and  water  quality study of  Budd  Inlet.
Prepared for Washington Department of  Ecology,  Olympia, WA.  URS Corporation,
Seattle, WA.  222 pp. + references and appendices.

Warren  Consultants,  Inc.   1985.   Thurston County  coordinated water  system
plan:   area-wide  supplement.   Prepared for  Thurston County Water  Utility
Coordinating Committee, Olympia, WA.  Warren Consultants, Inc.,  Seattle, WA.
73 pp. + maps.

Washington   Department of  Ecology.    1978.    National   pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.   Olympia Brewing Company.   Permit
No. WA-000130-9.  Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.   10 pp.

Washington   Department of  Ecology.    1979.    National   pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.   Seashore Villa Mobile Home Park.
Permit  No.  WA-003727-3.   Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.
9 pp.

Washington  Department  of Ecology.  1980a.   Deschutes River basin instream
resources protection program including proposed administrative rules.   Water
Resources  Inventory  Area  13.    Washington  Department   of Ecology,  Water
Resource  Policy  Development  Section.    Washington  State  Department  of
Printing, Olympia, WA.  29 pp. + appendices.

Washington   Department of  Ecology.   1980b.   National   pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.   Beverly Beach Utilities Associa-
tion.  Permit No. WA-003806-7.  Effective date  16 September  1980.  Washington
Department  of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  10 pp.

Washington   Department of  Ecology.   1980c.   National   pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.   Cascade Pole  Company.   Permit
No. WA-000101-5.  Washington Department of Ecology,  Olympia, WA.   8 pp.

Washington  Department of  Ecology.   1980d.   National   pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.   City of Olympia.  Permit No. WA-
003706-1-  Effective  date  11  April  1980.  Washington Department of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  18 pp.

Washington  Department  of Ecology.  1984a.   Potential hazardous waste site
preliminary assessment:  Water Street Pump Station site investigation No. WA
D980835144.  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.  6 pp.


                                    E-17

-------
Washington  Department  of  Ecology.   1984b.   Shellfish  protection  strategy.
Washington  Department of  Ecology,  Shorelands Division,  Olympia,  WA.   38 pp.
+ appendices.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.   1985a.   National  pollutant  discharge
elimination system waste discharge permit.  Chevron U.S.A.,  Inc.   Permit No.
WA-003871-7.    Effective  date  25  June  1985.    Washington  Department  of
Ecology, Olympia, WA.  10 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.   1985b.   National  pollutant  discharge
elimination system  waste discharge permit.   Delson  Lumber,  Inc./DWS Inter-
national, Inc.,  and  Olympia  Forest  Products  Company.   Permit No. WA-002154-
7.   Effective  date 16  December  1985.   Washington  Department  of  Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  12 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.    1986.    National  pollutant  discharge
elimination system  waste  discharge  permit.   Thurston  County  Public Works,
Tamoshan Development.   Permit No.  WA-003729-0.   Effective  date 20  October
1986.  Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.  14 pp.

Washington  Department  of  Ecology.    1987.    National  pollutant  discharge
elimination system  waste discharge permit.   Cities  of Tumwater and Lacey,
Thurston County, and the City of  Olympia.  Permit No. WA-003706-1.  Effective
date 25  September 1987.   Washington  Department  of  Ecology,  Olympia,  WA.  21
pp.

Washington  Department of  Ecology.   9  December  1987.   Personal  Communication
(information to  Ms.  Karen L. Keeley; computer  data  listing  from Washington
Department  of   Ecology  for  reported  spills and  complaints regarding  Budd
Inlet, September 1986 to  November  1987).  Washington Department  of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  1 p.

Washington  Department of Fisheries.  1973.  Evaluation of effects of channel
maintenance  dredging and  disposal  on  the  marine  environment  in  Southern
Puget Sound, Washington.  Prepared for U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers,  Seattle
District, Seattle,  WA.   Washington Department  of  Fisheries,  Management and
Research Division, Olympia, WA.  308 pp. including appendices.

Washington  Department of  Fisheries.   1975.   Chemical and biological  factors
for  consideration  in the management  of  the Deschutes  River-Capitol  Lake.
Supplemental Progress Report,  Fish Farm Investigations.  Washington  Depart-
ment of  Fisheries,  Management and  Research  Division,  Olympia,  WA.   30 pp.
including appendices.

Washington  Department of  Fisheries.   1979.   Marine water quality compendium
for Washington  State.   Volume  II  Data.   Grant No.  R805032010.    Prepared for
U.S.  Environmental   Protection  Agency,  Environmental   Research  Laboratory,
Corvallis,  OR.   Washington Department of Fisheries, Research and Development
Division, Olympia, WA.  528 pp.

Washington  Department  of Fisheries.   1981.   Significant areas  for  certain
species  of  food  fish  and shellfish  in  Puget  Sound.   Technical  Report 59.

                                    E-18

-------
Washington  Department  of  Fisheries,   Research  and  Development  Division,
Olympia, WA.  46 pp.

Washington  Department  of General  Administration.    1983.   Capitol  Lake:
preliminary restoration  plan.   Washington  Department  of General  Administra-
tion, Olympia, WA.  10 pp.

Washington  Department of Natural  Resources.   1984.    Puget  trough  coastal
wetlands:   a summary report of  biologically  significant sites.   Contract
No. C-83061.   Prepared  for  Washington  Department  of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.
Washington  Department  of  Natural  Resources,  Natural  Heritage  Program,
Olympia, WA.  154 pp. including appendices.

Washington  Department of Social  and Health Services.    1980.   Preliminary
assessment  for  the greater Olympia  area.   Washington  Department  of Social
and Health  Services,  Water Supply  and  Waste Section,  Olympia, WA.   52 pp.
including appendices.

Welsh,  B.   18  November  1987.   Personal  Communication  (information  to Ms.
Betsy Day;  causes and  effects  of  oxygen  depletion in  Long  Island  Sound).
Long  Island  Sound  Hypoxia-Modeling  Workshop,  University of  Connecticut,
Groton,  CT.

Westley, R.E., E.  Finn,  M.E.  Carr,  M.A.  Tarr,  A.J.  Scholz, L. Goodwin, R.W.
Sternberg,  and   E.E.  Collins.    1975.    Evaluation of effects  of  channel
maintenance  dredging  and disposal  on  the  marine  environment  in  southern
Puget Sound, Washington.  Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia,
WA.  308 pp.

White, M.  30 July 1987.  Personal Communication (memorandum to Cascade Pole
Company file; field notes from sampling of product seeps and survey of wells
for product on 24 June 1987). Washington Department of  Ecology, Olympia, WA.

White,  M.   21  January  1988.    Personal  Communication   (information  to Ms.
Karen L.  Keeley;  intertidal  seeps  from  Cascade Pole Company).   Washington
Department of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.

Yake, B.    6  July  1981.   Personal  Communication  (memorandum  to Mr.  John
Bernhardt, Washington Department  of Ecology;  interpretation  of June  3, 1981
Budd  Inlet  data  with particular  respect  to oxygen depletion).   Washington
Department of Ecology, Olympia,  WA.  15 pp.

Yake, B.  22 December 1981.  Personal Communication (memorandum to Mr. Dick
Cunningham, Washington Department of Ecology; seasonal  nutrient depletion at
ambient  marine  stations  in Puget  Sound;  implications  for discharge  of
nutrients to embayments  like Budd  Inlet).  Washington Department  of Ecology,
Olympia, WA.  3 pp.

Yake, B., J. Joy, and A.  Johnson.  1984.  Chemical  contaminants in clams and
crabs  from Eagle  Harbor, Washington  State,  with  emphasis  on  polynuclear
aromatic  hydrocarbons.    Segment  No.  25-00-01.    Washington Department  of
Ecology. Olympia, WA.

                                    E-19

-------