EPA 910/9-90-009
Puget Sound Estuary Program
EFFECTS OF SEDIMENT
HOLDING TIME ON
SEDIMENT TOXICITY
June 1990

-------
PTI Environmental Services
15375 SE 30th Place
Suite 250
Bellevue, Washington  98007
EFFECTS  OF SEDIMENT HOLDING TIME
ON SEDIMENT TOXICITY
By

D. Scott Becker and Thomas C. Ginn
Prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10, Office of Puget Sound
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
EPA Contract 68-D8-0085
PTI Contract C744-11
June 1990

-------
                              CONTENTS


                                                                  Page

LIST OF FIGURES                                                     iii

LIST OF TABLES                                                      iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS                                                  v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                 1

INTRODUCTION                                                      3

    BACKGROUND                                                    3

    STUDY OBJECTIVE                                                3

METHODS                                                           5

    FIELD COLLECTION                                                5

    LABORATORY ANALYSIS                                           5

       Sample Homogenization and Storage                               5
       Chemical Analyses                                             8
       Bioassay Analyses                                             8

    DATA ANALYSIS                                                  12

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION                                            14

    CHEMICAL ANALYSES                                             14

    SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS                                             14

       Amphipod Mortality Test                                         14
       Neanthes Biomass Test                                          22
       Microtox Test                                                 26
       Echinoderm Embryo Abnormality Test                               30

REFERENCES                                                        33

APPENDIX A - Detailed Results of Chemical Analyses and Bioassay Evaluations

-------
                               LIST OF FIGURES


                                                                            Page

Figure 1.   Location of sediment collection sites                                   6

Figure 2.   Comparisons of mean percent mortality and holding time for the
          amphipod mortality bioassay                                         16

Figure 3.   Comparisons of mean percent total effective mortality and
          holding time for the amphipod mortality bioassay                       18

Figure 4.   Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the
          mortality and total effective mortality endpoints of the amphipod
          mortality bioassay                                                   19

Figure 5.   Comparisons of LC^ values and holding time for the positive control
          samples (reference toxicant =  NaPCP) evaluated for the amphipod
          mortality test                                                       20

Figure 6.   Comparisons of mean total biomass and holding time for the Neanthes
          biomass test                                                       23

Figure 7.   Comparisons of mean average biomass and holding time for the
          Neanthes biomass test                                              24

Figure 8.   Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the
          total and average biomass endpoints of the Neanthes biomass test        25

Figure 9.   Comparisons of mean decrease in luminescence and holding time for
          the Microtox bioassay                                               28

Figure 10. Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the
          luminescence endpoint of the Microtox bioassay                        29

Figure 11. Comparison of LC^ values and holding time for the positive control
          samples (reference toxicant =  phenol) evaluated for the Microtox bioassay 31

-------
                               LIST OF TABLES

                                                                          Page
Table 1.  Bioassay and chemical sample holding conditions                        7
Table 2.  Chemicals analyzed in test sediments                                  9
Table 3.  Sediment holding times evaluated for the four sediment bioassays         13
Table 4.  Chemical contaminants in Elliott Bay sediment exceeding 1988
         bioassay AET values                                                15
Table 5.  Comparisons of observed responses of the amphipod mortality test
         between Stations CR and EB                                         21
Table 6.  Comparisons of observed responses of the Neanthes bioassay between
         Stations CR and EB                                                 27
Table 7.  Comparisons of observed responses of the Microtox bioassay between
         Stations CR and EB                                                 32
                                      IV

-------
                       LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABN                    acid/base/neutral
AET                    apparent effects threshold
CLP                    Contract Laboratory Program
EPA                    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GC/ECD                 gas chromatography/electron capture detection
PAH                    polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
PCB                    polychlorinated biphenyl
PSDDA                  Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
PSEP                   Puget Sound Estuary Program
TOC                    total organic carbon

-------
                              EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    Four of the sediment bioassays commonly used to assess the toxicity of Puget Sound
sediments were used to evaluate the influence of sample holding time on the toxicity of
sediment samples collected from a highly contaminated site (i.e., Station EB) and a reference
area (Station CR) in the sound. Sediments were initially homogenized in the laboratory and
distributed for bioassay testing within 3-5 days after field collection. All subsequent holding
times were evaluated relative to the time elapsed from initial sample homogenization. The
initial holding time for each bioassay ranged from 1 to 2 weeks and was used as the basis
of comparison for all longer holding times (maximum = 16 weeks for  all bioassays). Two
kinds of evaluations were made.  In the first evaluation, the influence of holding time on  the
absolute bioassay responses at each station was determined. In the second evaluation,  the
influence of holding time on the relative differences of bioassay responses between the two
stations was determined. The four sediment bioassays evaluated included the following:
    •  10-day amphipod mortality test

    •  20-day Neanthes biomass test

    •  15-minute Microtox test  (saline extract)

    •  48-hour echinoderm  embryo abnormality test.

    The results of the echinoderm embryo abnormality test were not evaluated because  the
results for the initial sediment holding period did not satisfy quality assurance and quality
control specifications. Larval abnormality in the negative seawater control was 15.9 percent,
which exceeded the maximum allowable value of 10 percent.

    The results of the 10-day amphipod mortality test for both Stations CR and EB suggest
that sediment holding times  longer than 6 weeks may result in bioassay responses at
individual stations that are substantially different from those observed after a 2-week holding
time.  The results for Station CR  suggest that holding times of 5.5 and 6 weeks may also
influence sediment toxicity, compared to the results obtained after a 2-week holding time.
The differences observed among the various holding times were not substantially influenced
by  changes in  the sensitivity of  the test organisms or changes in the variability of  the
bioassay responses.  Patterns based on between-station differences  in the results of  the
amphipod test suggest that holding times of 5.5 weeks or longer may  influence the results
of such comparisons.

    The results of the 20-day  Neanthes biomass test suggest that sediment holding times
of 6 weeks or longer may result in bioassay responses at individual stations that are different
from those observed after a 1-week holding time.  The  differences observed among  the
various holding times were not substantially affected by  changes in the variability of  the
bioassay responses. Biomass changes with increasing holding  time were  relatively small
compared with the differences observed between the two stations. Therefore, the observed
biomass differences  between Stations  CR and  EB were relatively consistent  among all
holding times (i.e., differences between  Stations CR and EB were significant for all holding

-------
times).  This consistency between stations was likely the result  of the relatively high
sensitivity and precision of the Neanthes biomass test.

    The results of the Microtox test suggest that sediment holding times of 4 weeks or longer
may result in bioassay responses at individual stations that are substantially different from
those observed after a 2-week holding time.  The differences observed among the various
holding times were not substantially influenced by changes in the sensitivity  of the test
organisms or variability of the bioassay responses.  Patterns based on between-station
differences for various holding times exhibited a high degree of inconsistency and suggest
that holding times of 4 weeks or longer may influence the results of such comparisons.

    In summary, the results of this study suggest that sediment holding time can influence
the results of at least three of the sediment bioassays commonly used to assess sediment
toxicity in Puget Sound.

-------
                                INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
    In  most studies of contaminated  sediments in Puget Sound, sediment samples are
stored for various periods of time after field collection and prior to laboratory toxicity testing.
This storage period is termed holding time, and its influence on sediment toxicity is largely
unknown.  To provide accurate estimates of the toxicity of field-collected sediments, it is
essential that toxicity not be substantially altered while samples are stored prior to laboratory
analysis. If the toxicity of the sediments changes during storage, erroneous conclusions
could be reached regarding the toxicity of those sediments in the environment.

    At  present, the Puget Sound Estuary  Program (PSEP) recommends that sediment
holding time not exceed 2 weeks for sediments that are stored at 4°C.  Sediments for most
of the bioassays conducted in Puget Sound are stored at that temperature.  The PSEP
maximum holding time represents the consensus of regional experts (PSEP 1986a) and is
based largely on best professional judgment rather than conclusive empirical data.

    To meet program-specific needs, Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) has
specified that sediments can  be  held at 4°C for as long as 6 weeks  prior to bioassay
evaluations (PSDDA 1989). The PSDDA recommendation is based largely on the use of a
tiered toxicity evaluation approach, which calls for initial chemical analyses, and, if necessary
or desired, subsequent bioassay evaluations. The PSDDA maximum holding time of 6 weeks
is also  not based on conclusive empirical data.
STUDY OBJECTIVE

    The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effects of sediment holding time
on sediment toxicity, as estimated by four of the sediment bioassays commonly used in
Puget Sound. The evaluation was conducted using sediments from a highly contaminated
area and from a reference area to bracket the approximate range of sediment contamination
found in the sound.  The initial holding time evaluated for each bioassay (i.e., 1-2 weeks) was
used as the basis for comparison with all longer holding times.

    The relationship between sediment toxicity and sediment holding time was evaluated for
each bioassay by testing the following two null hypotheses:

    •   The mean response of each bioassay did not differ between the initial holding
        time and each longer holding time

    •   The outcome of statistical comparisons of each bioassay response between the
        contaminated and reference stations did not differ between the initial holding
        time and each longer holding time.

-------
The first hypothesis addressed whether variable  holding times influenced the absolute
response  of each bioassay,  and considered each station  independently.  The second
hypothesis evaluated whether variable holding times affected the relative responses of each
bioassay between the contaminated and reference stations.

-------
                                   METHODS
FIELD COLLECTION
    Sediment samples were collected at two stations in Puget Sound in May 1989 aboard
the RV Kittiwake (Figure 1).  The two stations  represented a contaminated area and a
reference area. Bioassay responses were evaluated independently for each station and were
also compared between the two stations.

    Station CR was sampled at a depth of 50 meters in Carr Inlet on 5 May 1989 and was
used to represent a Puget Sound reference area. This station has been used previously by
PSDDA as a Puget Sound reference station (PTI 1988, 1989). Station EB was sampled at a
depth of 10 meters in Elliott Bay on 8 May 1989 and was used to represent a highly
contaminated area.  This station is located off a major industrialized area on Harbor Island,
which has been sampled during several previous studies (Gamponia et. al. 1986; Seller et.
al. 1988; Johns 1988; Pastorok and Becker 1989).

    At each station, approximately 20 liters of sediment was collected using a 0.1-m2 van
Veen bottom grab.  After any overlying water was drained from each grab sample, the entire
sediment sample was transferred  to  a  20-liter  plastic  bucket.   Sediments were later
homogenized in the laboratory. Samples were rejected if they were greatly disturbed or
winnowed during collection. After the required amount of sediment was collected at each
station, the 20-liter  bucket was sealed tightly, transferred to the laboratory, and held at 4°C
in the dark.
LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Sample Homogenization and Storage

    Sediments were homogenized on 10 May  1989.  For each station, all of the field-
collected sediment was combined and thoroughly mixed in plastic buckets using plastic
utensils.   Mixing was considered complete when the sediment  exhibited no visible
heterogeneity in color or texture.

    After the sediment from each station was thoroughly mixed, aliquots were taken at
random, distributed to containers, and stored for chemical, physical, and bioassay analyses
as described in Table 1.  For each bioassay, sediments were stored in multiple containers,
so that a separate container could be opened for the evaluation of each holding time. Any
remaining sediment was then discarded.  This procedure ensured that the results of each
evaluation were not affected by sample disturbance caused by an earlier evaluation.

      After  sediment homogenization,  every  effort  was  made to minimize  sample
contamination.   All subsequent  chemical  and  bioassay analyses should therefore be
considered  representative of the sediment samples at the time of homogenization, rather

-------
                                                 ^
                                            •'jf^OLYMPI*
Figure 1.  Location of sediment collection sites
                                       6

-------
     TABLE 1.  BIOASSAY AND CHEMICAL SAMPLE HOLDING CONDITIONS
Analysis
Bioassays
Semivolatile organic compounds
Metals
Grain size
Total organic carbon
Container*
Q
G
G
P
G
Preservative
4° C in nitrogen atmosphere6
Freeze
Freeze
4°C
Freeze
a G - chemically cleaned glass; P - plastic.

b Each jar was filled to within 1 cm of the top, and the remaining headspace was filled with nitrogen gas
before the jar was capped.

-------
 than at the time of field collection.  May 10 should therefore be considered the starting time
 for all  of the holding time experiments, and all references to sediment holding time in this
 report relate to the time elapsed from this initial sediment homogenization. This starting time
 was 5 days after sample collection at Station OR and 2 days after sample collection at
 Station EB. This approach was similar to that used for the PSEP bioassay comparison study
 (Pastorok and Becker 1989).


 Chemical  Analyses

    Chemical analyses of sediments from Stations CR and EB were conducted for the metals
 and organic compounds listed in Table 2.  The particle-size distribution and total  organic
 carbon (TOC) content of the sediments were also evaluated.

    Concentrations of organic compounds were determined using protocols modified from
 those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Contract Laboratory Program (CLP)
 (U.S. EPA 1986).  The analyses of semivolatile compounds  [including acid/base/neutral
 (ABN) extractables, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides] followed modified EPA
 CLP procedures that were consistent  with the relatively low detection limits recommended
 by PSEP (1986b). Separate sediment subsamples were  used for ABN and pesticide/PCB
 extraction.  Ultrasonic  extraction was conducted using CLP procedures.  Gel permeation
 chromatography was conducted for all ABN extracts to reduce interference  and attain the
^recommended detection limits.  Pesticide/PCB analyses  were conducted using a modified
 version of  the EPA CLP procedure.  These analyses included extract cleanup by alumina
 column chromatography and, when necessary, elemental sulfur cleanup, followed by gas
 chromatography/electron capture detection (GC/ECD) analysis. GC/ECD quantification and
 confirmation analyses were conducted with fused silica  capillary columns rather than the
 packed columns commonly used in CLP procedures.

    Concentrations of metals were determined by initial digestion of sediment samples using
 the strong-acid  technique specified  in  EPA CLP procedures  (U.S. EPA 1986).  Metals
 concentrations in the digestates were then determined by graphite furnace atomic absorption
 or by direct-flame atomic  absorption  spectrometry (except for  mercury,  which was
 determined using cold  vapor atomic absorption spectrometry).

    Sediment particle-size  distribution  and TOC content  were  determined using  the
 procedures recommended by PSEP (1986c).  Particle-size distribution was determined using
 standard sieve and pipette techniques.  TOC was determined by an elemental analyzer
 following sample combustion.


 Bioassay Analyses

    Four of the sediment bioassays commonly used in Puget Sound were used to evaluate
 sediment toxicity.  They included the following tests:

    •    Amphipod mortality test

    •    Neanthes biomass test
                                        8

-------
          TABLE 2. CHEMICALS ANALYZED
                 IN TEST SEDIMENTS
                          MGtdlS

  antimony                copper                nickel
  arsenic                 lead                   silver
  cadmium                mercury                zinc
              Phenols and Substituted Phenols

  phenol                       2,4-dimethylphenol
  2-methylphenol               pentachlorophenol
  4-methylphenol
Low Molecular Weight Pdycycfic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (LPAH)

   naphthalene                  phenanthrene
   acenaphthylene               anthracene
   acenaphthene                2-methylnaphthalene
   fluorene
High Molecular Weight Pdycycfic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HPAH)

  fluoranthene                  benzo(a)pyrene
  pyrene                       indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene
  benz(a)anthracene            dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  chrysene                     benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  benzofluoranthenes
             Chlorinated Aromatic Hydrocarbons

   1,2-dichlorobenzene           1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
   1,3-dichlorobenzene           hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
   1,4-dichlorobenzene
                  Polycnkxinated Biphenyts

  total PCB (mono- through decachlorobiphenyls)


             Chlorinated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons

  hexachlorobutadiene          hexachloroethane


                      Phthalate Esters

  dimethyl phthalate             butyl benzyl phthalate
  diethyl phthalate              bis(2-ethylhexyO phthalate
  di-n-butyl phthalate	di-n-octyl phthalate	
                            9

-------
TABLE 2.  (Continued)
             Miscellaneous Oxygenated Compounds

     benzyl alcohol                benzole acid
     dibenzofuran
                  Organonfrogen Compounds

     N-nitrosodiphenylamine


                          Pesticides

     total DDT (p,p')               aldrin
     heptachlor                   dieldrin
     o-chlordane                  y-HCH (lindane)
                             10

-------
    •   Microtox test (saline extract)

    •   Echinoderm embryo abnormality test.

    The amphipod mortality test evaluated  mortality of adult  amphipods (Rhepoxynius
abronius) following a 10-day exposure to bedded test sediments. The primary endpoints
were percent  mortality  and percent total  effective mortality.  The  latter endpoint was
represented by the number of amphipods that died combined with the number of survivors
that failed to rebury in clean sediment after the 10-day exposure period. It was assumed that
failure to rebury represented effective mortality, as the affected individuals would  have been
rapidly consumed by predators in the environment.  The methods for this test are described
by Swartz et al. (1985) and PSEP (1986a). Five replicate laboratory analyses were conducted
for each field sample.  The sensitivity of the  test organisms was evaluated using sodium
pentachlorophenate (NaPCP) as the reference toxicant for positive control samples.

    The Neanthes biomass test evaluated  growth of juvenile polychaetes  (Neanthes
arenaceodentata) following a 20-day exposure to bedded test sediments.  The primary
endpoints were total and average biomass. Total biomass represented the pooled dry weight
of surviving individuals, and thereby incorporated mortality.  Average biomass represented
the mean dry weight of individual survivors and did not incorporate mortality. The methods
for this test  are described in Johns et al. (1989). Five replicate laboratory analyses were
conducted for  each field sample. Positive controls were not analyzed for all holding times
because this test was in the developmental stage and a separate experiment was conducted
to develop appropriate positive control conditions.  Therefore, potential differences among
the various holding times in the sensitivity of the test organisms could not be evaluated for
this test.

    The Microtox test evaluated luminescence of bioluminescent bacteria (Photobacterium
phosphoreum) following a 15-minute exposure to a saline sediment extract.  The primary
endpoint was  percent decrease  in luminescence,  which represented changes  in cellular
metabolic state.  The methods  for this test are described by Beckman Instruments (1982),
PSEP (1986a), and Williams et al. (1986). In the present study, two kinds of analyses were
conducted for the Microtox test.  In the first  analysis, samples were evaluated using the
dilution series  recommended by Williams et al. (1986). In the second analysis, evaluations
were made  using  four replicate samples of the highest sample dilution used in the first
analysis (i.e., the 50 percent dilution). The second analysis was  implemented for sediment
holding times longer than 2 weeks when it was found that the test organisms were respond-
ing weakly to extracts from Station EB, and the maximum extract dilution resulted in  only a
15-16 percent  reduction in luminescence. It  was therefore not possible to calculate EC^
values for statistical comparisons. The second analysis was conducted at the same time and
using the same sample extract as  the first analysis.  For the 2-week holding period, the
results based on the 50 percent dilution (n=2) for the first analysis were used as the basis
for comparison with the results of the second analysis for all longer holding times. For each
sediment holding time, the sensitivity of the test organisms was determined using phenol as
the reference toxicant for positive control samples.

    The echinoderm embryo abnormality test evaluated mortality and abnormality in larval
sand dollars (Dendraster excentricus) following a 48-hour exposure to bedded test sediment.
The primary endpoints were percent mortality  and percent abnormality. Larval abnormality
was defined as failure to develop to the normal pluteus stage after the 48-hour exposure

                                        11

-------
period. The methods for this test are described by Dinnel and Stober (1985). Five replicate
laboratory analyses were conducted for each field sample.  For each holding time, the
sensitivity of the test organisms was determined using sodium dodecyl sulfate as the
reference toxicant for positive control samples.

    The sediment holding times evaluated for each of the four bioassays are presented in
Table 3. For each test, the maximum holding time recommended by PSDDA (i.e., 6 weeks)
was evaluated.  The maximum holding time recommended by PSEP (i.e., 2 weeks) was
evaluated  for all of the bioassays except the Neanthes  biomass test.  That bioassay was
evaluated  after a holding time of 1 week, which is within the PSEP guidelines and therefore
is considered appropriate as the basis for evaluating the longer holding times.


DATA ANALYSIS

    To test the first null hypothesis regarding the influence of variable sediment holding time
on the absolute response of each bioassay, the  mean response observed for each initial
holding time was compared with the mean response for each longer holding time. Pairwise
comparisons were made between the results for the initial holding time and each additional
holding time using the Student's Mest and a comparisonwise, two-tailed error rate of 0.05.
Corrections to the  error rate for multiple comparisons were not made because each pairwise
comparison was considered a test of an independent null hypothesis. Before each Mest was
made, heterogeneity of variances was tested using the F^ test (Sokal and Rohlf 1981).  If
heterogeneous variances were found, the pairwise comparison was made using the approxi-
mate Mest (Sokal and Rohlf 1981). For the Microtox test, pairwise comparisons were made
using replicated data (n=2 for the 2-week holding time,  n=4 for holding times longer than
2 weeks) for the maximum sample dilutions.  Statistical comparisons were not made using
the information on dilution series because EC^ values could not be calculated.  For some
samples, results of all replicates of the Microtox test were zero percent, so no standard
deviation  could be determined and a Mest  could not be conducted.   In  such cases,
comparisons between samples were made using  the nonparametric Mann-Whitney LMest.

    To test the second null hypothesis regarding the influence of variable sediment holding
time on the relative responses  of each bioassay  between Stations CR and EB, the mean
responses observed at the two stations for each holding time were compared using the same
statistical  techniques described for testing the first  null hypothesis.  The results of the
pairwise comparisons were then examined to determine if the statistical outcome of between-
station comparisons varied as a result of different holding times.

    The variability of the responses of each  bioassay for  the various holding  times was
evaluated  to determine whether response variability was affected by sediment holding time
to the extent that it could influence the statistical comparisons.  Response variability was
estimated using the coefficient of variation  [i.e., [(standard deviation + mean) x 100].

    Potential variability among the  various holding times in the sensitivity of the  test
organisms was evaluated by examining the LCX values observed for the positive control
samples.
                                        12

-------
                TABLE 3. SEDIMENT HOLDING TIMES EVALUATED
                      FOR THE FOUR SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS
     Bioassay
             Holding Times
(Weeks from Initial Sediment Homogenization)8
Amphipod mortality test

Neanthes biomass test

Microtox test

Echinoderm embryo abnormality test
 2.0, 5.5, 6.0, 11.0, 12.5, 16.0

 1.0, 6.0, 11.0, 16.0

 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 8.0, 10.0, 12.0, 14.0, 16.0

 2.0, 6.0, 11.0, 16.0
8 Initial sediment homogenization occurred on 10 May 1989.  This date was 5 days after sample
collection at Station CR and 2 days after sample collection at Station EB.
                                         13

-------
                           RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CHEMICAL ANALYSES
    Results of all chemical analyses are presented in Appendix A (Table A-1).  In this
section, chemical concentrations are discussed relative to the 1988 Puget Sound apparent
effects threshold (AET) values for bioassays (Barrick et al. 1988).  These AET values are
based on three sediment bioassays [i.e., the amphipod mortality, oyster larvae abnormality,
and Microtox (saline extract) tests]. AET values provide an estimate of the concentration of
each chemical above which adverse biological effects are always predicted in Puget Sound.

    Sediment from  Station CR was  relatively fine-grained (i.e., 52.8 percent fine-grained
material), with a moderate level of TOO content (i.e., 1.3 percent). Sediment from Station EB
was coarser than sediment from Station CR (i.e., 47.2 percent fine-grained sediment), but
had a higher TOC content (i.e., 2.1 percent).

    Sediment from Station CR was relatively uncontaminated.  No  metal or organic
compound exceeded any of its 1988 Puget Sound bioassay AET values.  Although several
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were detected (i.e., phenanthrene, anthracene, and
chrysene), concentrations of these compounds were all less than 100 parts per billion (ppb).
Sediment from Station EB was highly contaminated with both metals and organic compounds
(Table 4).  Four metals exceeded at least one 1988 Puget Sound bioassay AET value, and
copper and mercury exceeded all three bioassay AET values.  Nineteen organic compounds
exceeded  at least one bioassay AET value, and six of these compounds exceeded all three
values.  The six organic compounds exceeding all three bioassay AET values included four
PAH compounds [i.e., benzofluoranthenes, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, and
benzo(g,h,i)perylene] and two phenols (2-methylphenol and pentachlorophenol).


SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS

    Detailed results of all four sediment bioassays are presented in Appendix A (Tables A-2
to A-8).   This section  summarizes  and  discusses those results relative  to  the various
sediment holding times.  The results for each kind of bioassay are discussed separately.


Amphipod Mortality Test
    Wrthin-Station Comparisons—For Station CR, 10-day amphipod mortality for the 2-week
sediment holding time was 3 percent (Figure 2). Mortality then increased to 12 percent after
a 5.5-week holding time, but was not significantly different (P>0.05) from the value observed
for the 2-week holding time. The elevated mortality and relatively high variability observed
for the 5.5-week holding time was due primarily to a single replicate exhibiting a mortality of
40 percent, whereas mortality in the remaining four replicates ranged from 0 to 10 percent.
After a 6-week holding time, mortality was 11 percent and was significantly different (PsO.05)


                                        14

-------
       TABLE 4.  CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN ELLIOTT BAY
        SEDIMENT EXCEEDING 1988 BIOASSAY AET VALUES
     Chemical
Concentration
at Station EB*
    AET
Exceedancesb
Metals

  Arsenic
  Copper
  Mercury
  Zinc

Organic Compounds

  Low molecular weight polycylic
  aromatic hydrocarbons (LPAH)
     112
    1,490
     3.5
    1,010
     A
   A,M,O
   A.M.O
     A
Total LPAH
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High molecular weight polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (HPAH)
Total HPAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Benzofluoranthenes
Benzo(a)pyrene
lndeno(1 ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Ben2o(g,h,i)perylene
Phthalates
Dimethyl phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyOphthalate
Phenols
2-methylphenol
Pentachlorophenol
Total PCBs
9,400
780
790
4,800
1,900


52,000
8,100
12,000
4,000
3,300
10,000
8,900
1,600
710
3,600

110
320
6,100

78
1,900
1,460
A,M,O
M,O
M,O
M,O
M.O


A.M.O
M,O
M.O
M,O
M,O
A.M.O
A.M.O
M,O
A.M.O
A.M.O

M
M
M,O

A.M.O
A.M.O
M.O
* Metals concentrations are reported in mg/kg dry weight.  Concentrations of organic
compounds are reported in |ig/kg dry weight.

b A - amphipod mortality test
  M - Microtox test (saline extract)
  O - oyster larvae abnormality.
                                  15

-------
                          100
                           80
                           60-
                           40-
                             Percent Mortality
                           20
                              Station CR
                               2.0   5.5   6.0   11.0  12.5  16.0

                             Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                          100
                              Percent Mortality
                           80-
                           60
                           40
                           20
                              Station EB
                               2.0   5.5   6.0   11.0  12.5   16.0

                             Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
    * Significantly different (P<0.05) from the value observed for 2.0 weeks.
Figure 2.  Comparisons of mean percent mortality and holding time for the amphipod mortality
          bioassay (bars represent standard deviations)
                                            16

-------
from the value observed for the 2-week holding time.  Unlike the results for the 5.5-week
holding time, the results for the 6-week holding time exhibited relatively low variability, as
mortality in all five replicates ranged from 10 to 15 percent.  For holding times of 11, 12.5,
and 16 weeks, mortality increased to 16 and 32 percent, and then declined to 19 percent.
All three of these values were significantly different (PsO.05) from the value observed for the
2-week holding time.

    For Station EB, amphipod mortality for the 2-week sediment holding time was 14 percent
(Figure 2). Mortality remained relatively constant at 13 and 14 percent for holding times of
5.5 and 6 weeks, respectively.  Both of these values were not  significantly different (P>0.05)
from the value observed for the 2-week holding time.  Mortality peaked at 54 percent for the
11-week holding time, and then declined to 40 and 37 percent for holding times of 12.5 and
16 weeks.  The values observed for holding times of 11 and 12.5  weeks were significantly
different (PsO.05) from the value observed for the 2-week holding time, whereas the value
observed for the  16-week holding time was not significantly different (P>0.05) from the value
observed for the 2-week holding time.

    For both Stations CR and EB, total effective mortality of  amphipods exhibited patterns
identical to those described for mortality (Figure 3).

    Although the coefficients of variation differed among the various sediment holding times
for both bioassay endpoints at both Stations CR and EB (Figure 4), there did  not appear to
be a consistent relationship between response variability and holding time.

    The results of the  positive controls for the various sediment holding times are presented
in Figure 5.  As indicated by the observed LC^ values, the sensitivity of the test organisms
was  relatively consistent for all holding times  except 12.5  weeks.  Organism sensitivity
appeared to be considerably lower for the 12.5-week holding time. However, this apparent
reduced sensitivity did not prevent the observed bioassay response from being among the
highest observed during the study. This pattern suggests that variations in  organism
sensitivity did not substantially influence the differences in bioassay responses observed
among the various holding times.


    Between-Station Comparisons—The results of comparisons of mortality and total
effective mortality between Stations CR and EB for each sediment holding time are presented
in Table 5.  For  both endpoints, differences between the  two  stations were significant
(PsO.05) for holding times of 2 and 11 weeks and were not significant (P>0.05) for holding
times of 5.5, 6, 12.5, and 16 weeks.
    Summary—The results of the amphipod mortality test suggest that sediment holding
times longer than 6 weeks may result in bioassay responses that are substantially different
from those observed  after a  2-week holding time.  For both Stations CR and EB, most
bioassay responses for holding times greater than 6  weeks were significantly different
(PsO.05) from the responses  observed after the 2-week holding time.  Patterns based on
between-station differences for holding times longer than 6 weeks were not as consistent as
absolute bioassay responses. For both bioassay endpoints, between-station differences
were significant (PiO.05) for the 2-week holding time, but not significant (P>0.05) for two of
the three holding times greater than 6 weeks.


                                        17

-------
                      100
                       80
                       60 H
                          Percent Total Effective Mortality
                           Station  CR
                            2.0   5.5   6.0   11.0   12.5  16.0
                         Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                      100
                       80
                       60
                       40
                       20
                          Percent Total Effective Mortality
                           Station EB
                           2.0   5.5   6.0   11.0   12.5  16.0
                         Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
  * Significantly different (P<0.05) from the value observed for 2.0 weeks.
Figure 3. Comparisons of mean percent total effective mortality and holding time for the
          amphipod mortality bioassay (bars represent standard deviations)
                                         18

-------
                            180
                               Coefficient of Variation (%)
                            140-



                            120-



                            100-



                             80-



                             60



                             40



                             20-
                                   2.0   6.5   6.0   11.0  12.6  16.0

                               Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                            160
                               Coefficient of Variation (%)
                            140-


                            120-


                            100-


                             80


                             60-


                             40-



                             20-
                                    2.0    6.6    6.0  11.0  12.6  16.0

                               Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                                         Station CR
                                                      Station EB
Figure 4. Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the mortality (above)
          and total effective mortality (below) endpoints of the amphipod mortality bioassay
                                               19

-------
          1200
          1000
           800
           600
           400
           200
                Concentration (ppb v/v)
                  2.0    5.5   6.0    11.0   12.5   16.0

              Weeks From initial Sample  Homogenization
 Figure 5. Comparison of LC^ values and holding time for the positive control samples
        (reference toxicant = NaPCP) evaluated for the amphipod mortality test
	(bars represent 95 percent confidence limits)	

                                 20

-------
TABLE 5.  COMPARISONS OF OBSERVED RESPONSES OF THE
AMPHIPOD MORTALITY TEST BETWEEN STATIONS CR and EB"
Difference Between Stations CR and EBC
Date6
May 24
June 16
July 20
June 25
August 5
August 30
Weeks from
Initial Sediment Homogenization
2.0
5.5
6.0
11.0
12.5
16.0
Percent
Mortality
11*
1 ns
4 ns
38*
8 ns
18ns
Percent Total
Effective Mortality
17*
0 ns
5 ns
40*
7 ns
20ns
* Comparisons were made using a f-test.
b Date bioassay
0 * - PsO.05
ns - P>0.05.
was initiated. All tests were conducted

in 1989.



                       21

-------
    For sediment holding times of 5.5 and 6 weeks, the absolute bioassay responses for
Station EB differed little from those found after the 2-week holding time. By contrast, the 5.5-
and 6-week responses for Station CR increased by approximately 10 percent above the
relatively low mortality found for the 2-week holding time.  However, only the responses
observed for the 6-week holding time were significantly different (P*0.05) from the value
observed for the 2-week holding time.

    Patterns based on between-station differences for sediment holding times of 5.5 and
6 weeks were consistently different from the results found for the 2-week holding time. For
both endpoints, differences between stations were significant (PsO.05) for the 2-week holding
time, but not significant (P>0.05) for holding times of 5.5 and 6 weeks. However, it should
be noted that the difference between stations observed for the mortality endpoint after the
2-week holding time (i.e., 11  percent) was relatively small.


Neanthes Biomass Test
    Within-Station Comparisons—Neither initial total biomass nor initial average biomass
exhibited significant differences (P>0.05; analysis of variance) among the four sediment
holding times evaluated for the Neanthes test. Comparisons of final biomass values among
the different holding times were therefore not biased by different initial biomass values.

    After the 20-day exposure period, total biomass for Station CR for the 1-week sediment
holding time was 79.9 mg (Figure 6).  Total biomass peaked at a value of 112.5 mg for the
6-week holding time, and then steadily declined to 105.8 and 67.8 mg for holding times of
11 and 16  weeks. Only the values observed for holding times of 6 and 11 weeks were
significantly different (PsO.05) from the value observed for the 1-week holding time.

    For Station EB, total biomass exhibited a pattern similar to that found for Station CR.
Total biomass for the 1-week sediment holding time was 17.7 mg (Figure 6). Total biomass
peaked at a value of 18.1 mg for the 6-week holding time, and then  steadily declined to 11.1
and 4.5 mg for holding times of 11 and 16 weeks.  Only the value observed for the 16-week
holding time was significantly different  (P*0.05) from the value observed for the  1-week
holding time.

    For both Stations CR and EB, average biomass exhibited patterns identical to those
described for total biomass (Figure 7). This similarity between endpoints was partly the result
of the relatively low mortality observed for most sediment holding times.  For Station CR,
mortality values for holding times of 1,  6, 11, and 16 weeks were 4, 4, 0, and 0 percent,
respectively.  For Station EB, mortality values for the four holding times were 0, 24, 8, and
16 percent, respectively.

    The coefficients of variation exhibited relatively  small differences  among the  various
sediment holding times for both bioassay endpoints at both Stations CR and EB (Figure 8).
However, a general negative relationship between response variability and holding time was
evident.
                                        22

-------
       175
            Total Biomass  (mg dry  weight)
       150 H


       125


       100


        75-


        50-


        25
            0         5         10         15        20
           Weeks From  Initial Sample Homogenization
                    Station CR
Station EB
 * Significantly different (P<0.05) from the value observed for 1.0 week.
Figure 6.  Comparisons of mean total biomass and holding time for the Neanthes
        biomasstest (bars represent standard deviations)
                               23

-------
         35
             Average Biomass (mg dry weight)
         30-


         25-


         20-


         15-


         10
             0          5         10         15         20
             Weeks From initial Sample Homogenization
                      Station CR
Station EB
* Significantly different (P<0.05) from the value observed for 1.0 week.
Figure 7. Comparisons of mean average biomass and holding time for the Neanthes
        biomasstest (bars represent standard deviations)
                                24

-------
                         60
                            Coefficient of Variation (%)
                         50-
                         40
                         30-
                          20
                          10
                                   i       e      11      16
                            Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenlzation
                          60
                            Coefficient of Variation (%)
                          50-
                          40
                          30-
                          20-
                          10-
                                   1       6      11      16

                            Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                                      Station CR
Station EB
Figure 8.  Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the mortality (above)
          and average (below) biomass endpoints of the Neanthes biomass test
                                           25

-------
    Between-Station Comparisons—The results of comparisons of total and average
biomass between Stations CR and EB for each sediment holding time are presented in
Table 6.  For both endpoints, differences between the two stations were significant (PiO.05)
for all holding times.


    Summary—The results of the 20-day Neanthes biomass test  suggest that sediment
holding times of 6 weeks or longer may result in bioassay responses at individual stations
that are different from those observed after a 1 -week holding time. For Station CR, Neanthes
biomass for holding times of 6 and 11 weeks was significantly different (PiO.05) from the
biomass observed after the 1-week holding time. For Station EB, Neanthes biomass for the
16-week holding time was significantly different (PiO.05) from the biomass observed for the
1-week holding time.

    Patterns based on between-station differences in Neanthes biomass were consistent for
all of the sediment holding times evaluated. In all cases, differences between stations were
significant (PsO.05). This consistency is likely the result of both the high sensitivity (i.e., large
differences between responses for Stations CR and EB) and the precision (i.e., relatively low
standard deviations)  of the test.  These results suggest that although absolute bioassay
responses may vary with holding times, between-station differences may not be affected if
the magnitude of bioassay responses at the test site is considerably higher than the magni-
tude of responses found at the reference site. However, if response magnitudes do not differ
substantially between test and reference sites  (as was the case for the amphipod mortality
test), variability of absolute responses as a result of different holding times could influence
the statistical significance of between-station differences in sediment toxicity.
Microtox Test
    Wrthin-Station Comparisons—After the 15-minute exposure period, decrease in lumines-
cence for Station CR for the 2-week sediment holding time was 9.3 percent (Figure 9). The
bioassay response declined to 0.7 percent for the 4-week holding time and then increased
steadily to 10.7, 12.8,  and 13.6 percent  for holding times of 6, 8, and 10 weeks. The
response then declined to 1.5, 0, and 0 percent for holding times of 12,14, and 16 weeks.
The responses for holding times of 4 weeks and 10-16 weeks were significantly different
(P*0.05) from the response observed for the 2-week holding period.

    For Station EB, decrease in luminescence for the 2-week sediment holding time was
15.9 percent (Figure 9). The bioassay response then exhibited a somewhat erratic pattern.
Relatively high values of 30.1 and 42.8 percent were found for holding times of 4 and 10
weeks, respectively, whereas moderate values of 12.1,16.0, and 13.4 percent were found for
holding times of 6, 8, and  12 weeks, respectively.  Finally, low values of 0 and 0.8 percent
were found for holding times of 14 and 16 weeks, respectively.   The values observed for
holding times of 4-6 weeks and 10-16 weeks were significantly different (PsO.05) from the
value observed for the 2-week holding time.

    Although the coefficients of variation differed among the various sediment holding times
for both Stations CR and EB (Figure 10), there did not appear to be a consistent relationship
between response variability and holding time.


                                        26

-------
         TABLE 6. COMPARISONS OF OBSERVED RESPONSES OF
        THE NEANTHES BIOASSAY BETWEEN STATIONS CR AND EB*
Date*
May 18
June 23
July 28
August 29
Weeks from
Initial Sediment Homogenization
1.0
6.0
11.0
16.0
Difference Between
Total Biomass
(mg dry weight)
62.2*
94.4*
94.7*
63.3*
Stations CR and EB°
Average Biomass
(mg dry weight)
13.2*
18.4*
18.7*
15.5*
* Comparisons were made using a f-test.
b Date bioassay was initiated. All tests were conducted in 1989.
c * - P*0.05.
                                 27

-------
                      50
                        Percent Luminescence Decrease
                      40
                      30
                      20
                      10-
                         Station CR
                          2   4    6   8   10   12   14  16

                        Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
                         Percent Luminescence Decrease
                          2    4   6   8   10   12  14  16

                        Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
  r Significantly different (P<0.05) from the value observed for 2.0 weeks.
Figure 9.  Comparisons of mean decrease in luminescence and holding time for the
          Neanthes biomass test (bars represent standard deviations)
                                         28

-------
           140
                Coefficient of  Variation (%)
            40
            20-
                     2    4     6     8    10    12   14    16

               Weeks From Initial  Sample Homogenization
                             Station CR
Station EB
Note: Coefficients of variation could not be determined
for weeks 14 and 16 at Station CRand for week 14 at
Station EB because the standard deviation was zero.
 Figure 10. Comparisons of coefficient of variation and holding time for the luminescence
           endpoint of the Microtox bioassay
                                      29

-------
    The results of the positive controls for the various sediment holding times are presented
in Figure 11. As indicated by the observed LC^ values, the sensitivity of the test organisms
was relatively  consistent for all holding times.  This pattern suggests that variations in
organism sensitivity did not substantially influence the differences in bioassay responses
observed among the various holding times.


    Between-Station Comparisons—Results of comparisons of decrease in luminescence
between  Stations CR  and EB for each sediment holding time  are presented in Table 7.
Differences between the two stations were significant (P*0.05) for holding times of 4,10,12,
and 16 weeks, and were not significant (P>0.05) for holding times of 2, 6, 8, and 14 weeks.


    Summary—The results of the Microtox test suggest that sediment holding times of
4 weeks or longer may result in bioassay responses that are substantially different from those
observed after a 2-week holding time.  For both Stations CR and EB, bioassay responses for
most (i.e., 11 of 14 cases) holding times of 4-12 weeks were significantly different (PsO.05)
from the  response observed for the 2-week holding time.

    Patterns based on between-station differences for various sediment holding times exhi-
bited a high degree of inconsistency. Differences between Stations CR and EB were not sig-
nificant (P>0.05) for the 2-week holding time. By contrast, differences between stations were
significant (PsO.05) for holding times of 4,10,12, and 16 weeks. These results suggest that
holding times of *4 weeks may influence between-station differences in sediment toxicity.


Echinoderm Embryo Abnormality Test

    The results of the echinoderm embryo abnormality test were not considered appropriate
for  statistical analysis.  Larval abnormality in the negative seawater control for the 2-week
sediment holding  time was 15.9 percent, which exceeded the maximum allowable level of
10 percent.  Therefore, results  for that  holding time could not be considered reliable.
Because the 2-week holding time was the basis of comparison for all  longer holding times,
quantitative evaluations of the longer holding times could not be made.

    A qualitative evaluation of the results of the echinoderm embryo abnormality test showed
that embryo mortality for Station CR was considerably higher after a 6-week sediment holding
time (76.0 percent) than the value observed for the 2-week holding time (18.8 percent; Table
A-8). By  contrast, abnormality for Station CR was similar  between holding times of 2 weeks
(14.1 percent)  and 6 weeks (10.3 percent).

    For Station EB, embryo mortality was at or close to 100 percent for all sediment holding
times evaluated (i.e., 2-16 weeks).  Because of the low number of  surviving  embryos at
Station EB, the abnormality endpoint could only be evaluated for the 16-week holding time.

    Between-station differences could only be evaluated for the mortality endpoint because
the  number of surviving embryos was too low to estimate percent abnormality at Station EB
during the 2- and 6-week sediment holding times.  For the  2-week  holding time, embryo mor-
tality at Station EB exceeded the value at Station CR by 81.2 percent. For the 6-week hold-
ing time,  mortality at Station EB exceeded the value observed at Station CR by 20.8 percent.


                                        30

-------
         30
             Concentration (ppm v/v)
         25-
         20
         15
         10
               2    4    6    8    10   12    14   16

            Weeks From Initial Sample Homogenization
Figure 11. Comparison of LC^ values and holding time for the positive control samples
        (reference toxicant = phenol) evaluated for the Microtox bioassay
                                31

-------
          TABLE 7.  COMPARISONS OF OBSERVED RESPONSES OF
        THE MICROTOX BIOASSAY BETWEEN STATIONS CR AND EB*
Dateb
May 26
June 8
June 21
July 6
July 20
August 3
August 18
August 31
Weeks from
Initial Sediment Homogenization
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
Percent Decrease
in Luminescence0
6.6 ns
29.4*
1.4 ns
3.2ns
29.2*
11.9*
0 ns
0.8*
8 Comparisons were made using a f-test.

b Date bioassay was initiated.  All tests were conducted in 1989.

0 * - PsO.05
 ns - P>0.05.
                                  32

-------
                                  REFERENCES
Barrick, R.B., S. Becker, L Brown, H. Seller, and R.A. Pastorok. 1988.  Sediment quality
values refinement:   1988 update and evaluation of Puget Sound AET.  Volume 1. Final
Report. Prepared for Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA, and U.S. Environmental  Protection
Agency Region 10, Office of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA.   PTI Environmental Services,
Bellevue, WA.  74 pp. + appendices.

Beckman Instruments. 1982. Microtox system operating manual.  Beckman Publication No.
015-555879. Beckman Instruments, Inc., Carlsbad, CA.

Seller, H.R., R.A. Pastorok, D.S. Becker, G. Braun, Q. Bilyard, and P. Chapman. 1988. Elliott
Bay Action Program:  analysis of toxic problem areas. Final Report.  Prepared for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA.  Tetra
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA, and PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.

Dinnel, P.A., and Q.J. Stober.  1985.  Methodology and analysis  of sea urchin  embryo
bioassays. Circular No. 85-3. University of Washington, Fisheries Research Institute, Seattle,
WA.  19pp.

Gamponia, V., T. Hubbard, P. Romberg, T. Sample, and R.  Swartz.  1986.  Identifying hot
spots in the lower Duwamish River  using sediment chemistry  and distribution patterns.
Municipality of Metropolitan  Seattle, Seattle, WA.

Johns, D.M. 1988.  Puget Sound dredged disposal analysis sublethal test demonstration.
Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. PTI Environmental Services,
Bellevue, WA.  94 pp. + appendix.

Johns, D.M., T.C. Ginn, and  D.J. Reish.  1989.  Interim protocol for  juvenile Neanthes
bioassay.  Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget
Sound, Seattle, WA.  PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.

Pastorok, R.A., and D.S. Becker.  1989. Comparison of bioassays for assessing toxicity in
Puget Sound. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget
Sound, Seattle, WA.  PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.  85 pp. + appendices.

PSDDA.  1989.  Management plan  report—unconfined open-water disposal of dredged
material, Phase II (north and south Puget Sound). Draft Report. Puget Sound Dredged
Disposal Analysis, Seattle, WA.

PSEP.  1986a.  Recommended protocols for conducting laboratory bioassays on Puget
Sound sediments. Final Report.  Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Tetra
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA, and E.V.S. Consultants Ltd., Bellevue, WA. 55 pp.
                                       33

-------
PSEP.  1986b. Recommended protocols for measuring organic compounds in Puget Sound
sediments and tissue samples. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Tetra
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 65 pp.  + appendices.

PSEP.  1986C.  Recommended protocols for measuring sediment conventional variables in
Puget Sound. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10,
Office of Puget Sound. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 46 pp.

PTI.  1988. Baseline survey of phase I disposal sites. Prepared for Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA. PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue,  WA.

PTI.  1989. Baseline survey of phase II disposal sites. Prepared for Washington Department
of Ecology, Olympia, WA. PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue,  WA.

Sokal,  R.R.,  and F.J. Rohlf.  1981.  Biometry.  2nd ed.  W.H. Freeman and Co., San
Francisco, CA. 859 pp.

Swartz, R.C.,  W.A.  DeBen, J.K.  Phillips,  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.
Bahner (eds). ASTM STP 854. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

U.S. EPA. 1986. Test methods for evaluating solid waste.  U.S.  Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.

Williams, L.G., P.M. Chapman, and T.C. Ginn. 1986. A comparative evaluation of sediment
toxicity using bacterial luminescence, oyster embryo, and amphipod sediment bioassays.
Mar. Environ. Res. 19:225-249.
                                       34

-------
              APPENDIX A






DETAILED RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES



       AND BIOASSAY EVALUATIONS

-------
TABLE A-1. CONCENTRATIONS OF CHEMICALS OF CONCERN
      IN CARR INLET AND ELLIOTT BAY SEDIMENTS
Compound
METALS (mg/kg dry weight; ppm)
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
ORGANICS (ug/kg dry weight; ppb)
1 d^u ll«->l«->fM Aftm- llfiiJiaJ J n«-»fc ««-• «<-Jmr>
LOW Molecular weight Porycycnc
Naphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
2-Methylnaphthalene
High Molecular Weight Porycydc
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzofluoranthenes
Benzo(a)pyrene
lndeno(1 ,2,3,-c,d)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,0perylene
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Carr Inlet
(Station CR)a

1.4G
18.1
0.8E
62.3
37.5
0.14
36.7
0.39E
111

Aromatic nyarocaroons (LPAH)
14U
14U
14U
14U
100
38
14U
Aromatic Hydrocarbons (HPAH)
170E
170E
83E
100
150E
90E
50E
14U
56E

14U
14U
14U
14U
Elliott Bay
(Station EB)a

10.3G
112
1.4E
1,490
384
3.5
50.5
1.2E
1,010

390
440
780
790
4,800
1,900
260

8,100
12,000
4.000E
3,300
10,000
8,900
1,600
910
3,600

13U
14U
13U
13U
                      A-1

-------
TABLE A-1.  (Continued)
                                                  Carr Inlet                Elliott Bay
Compound                                      (Station CR)*             (Station EB)a

     Phthalates

         Dimethyl phthalate                           14U                      110
         Diethyl phthalate                             14U                      13U
         Di-n-butyl phthalate                          14U                      140
         Butyl benzyl phthalate                        14U                     320E
         Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate                      64                     6100
         Di-n-octyl phthalate                          14U                     130U

     Polychlorinated Biphenyts

         Total PCBs                                 8.2K                     1460

     Phenols

         Phenol                                      27U                      170
         2-Methylphenol                              14U                      78E
         4-Methylphend                              14U                     180E
         2,4-Dimethylphenol                           33U                      31U
         Pentachlorophenol                           22U                     1,900

     Misceflaneous Extractabtes

         Benzyl alcohol                               68U                      64U
         Benzoic  acid                               140U                     128U
         Dibenzofuran                                14U                      110
         Hexachloroethane                            41U                      39U
         Hexachlorobutadiene                         14U                      13U
         N-Nitrosodiphenylamine                       14U                      13U

     Pesticides
Total DDT
Aldrin
Chlordane
Dieldrin
Heptachlor
LJndane
2U
1U
1.5U
2U
1U
1U
34
1U
1.5U
2U
1U
1U
a Qualifier codes used:

     U - Undetected at detection limit shown
     E - Estimate
     G - Estimate is greater than value shown
     K - Detected at less than detection limit shown.
                                            A-2

-------
              TABLE A-2. RESULTS OF THE AMPHIPOD MORTALITY
                   BIOASSAY FOR THE MORTALITY ENDPOINT
Weeks from
Dateb Start Date
May 24 2.0




June 16 5.5




June 20 6.0




July 25 11.0




August 5 12.5




August 30 16.0




Replicate
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Station CR
Number Percent
Dead Mortality6
0 3.0 ± 4.5
0
0
1
2
2 12.0 ± 16.0
0
1
8
1
2 11.0 ± 2.2
3
2
2
2
4 16.0 ± 8.2
5
2
1
4
10 32.0 ± 14.4
2
6
7
7
5 19.0 ± 9.6
6
3
1
4
Station
Number
Dead
3
2
3
4
2
1
2
5
2
3
4
3
5
3
0
12
10
13
15
4
6
9
8
9
8
12
2
6
11
6
EB
Percent
Mortality6
14.0 ± 4.2




13.0 ± 7.6




15.0 ± 9.4




54.0 ± 21JO




40.0 ± 6.1




37.0 ± 205




a Values of mean mortality in the negative controls for tests run on May 23, June 16, June 20, July 25,
August 5, and August 30 were 3, 4, 5, 1, 8, and 3 percent, respectively. All of these values are less
than the maximum allowable value of 10 percent (PSEP 1986).

b Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.

0 Mean mortality for the five replicates ± standard deviation.
                                        A-3

-------
             TABLE A-3. RESULTS OF THE AMPHIPOD MORTALITY
              BIOASSAY FOR THE ENDPOINT BASED ON TOTAL
                          EFFECTIVE MORTALITY"
Weeks from
Date* Start Date
May 24 2.0




June 16 5.5




June 20 6.0




July 25 11.0




August 5 12.5




August 30 16.0




Replicate
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Station CR
Number Percent Total
Not Effective
Reburying Mortality0
0 3.0 ± 4.5
0
0
1
2
2 14.0 ± 17.8
0
1
9
2
2 11.0 ± 2.2
3
2
2
2
4 16.0 ± 8.2
5
2
1
4
10 33.0 ± 12.5
3
6
7
7
5 19.0 ± 9.6
6
3
1
4
Station EB
Number
Not
Reburying
5 20.0
2
5
4
4
1
2
6
2
3
4
4
5
3
0
12
11
13
15
5
6
9
8
9
8
13
2
7
11
6
Percent Total
Effective
Mortality0
± 6.1




14.0 ± 9.6




16.0 ± 9.6




56.0 ± 18.8




40.0 ± 6.1




39.0 ± 21.6




a Total effective mortality = number dead + number of survivors that fail to rebury.

b Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.

0 Mean value for the five replicates ± standard deviation.

                                    A-4

-------
          TABLE A-4. RESULTS OF THE NEANTHES BIOASSAY FOR
                THE ENDPOINT BASED ON TOTAL BIOMASS
Weeks from
Date* Start Date
May 18 1.0




June 23 6.0




July 28 11.0




August 29 16.0




Replicate
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Total Biomass
Station CR
Replicate Mean6
70.2 79.9 ± 13.7
103.5
74.4
71.8
79.6
124.0 112.5 ± 24.4
137.4
118.7
109.6
72.6
110.6 105.8 ± 15.2
128.5
106.1
93.4
90.4
56.1 67.8 ± 10.7
80.4
75.7
57.7
69.0
(gm dry wt)
Station
Replicate
22.1
11.8
32.2
6.5
15.9
21.0
22.9
27.0
6.5
13.2
12.7
16.6
10.9
5.8
9.4
3.5
4.8
3.3
7.6
3.1

EB
Meanb
17.7 ± 9.9




18.1 ± 8.2




11.1 ± 4.0




4.5 ± 1.9




8 Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.

b Mean biomass for the five replicates ± standard deviation.
                                   A-5

-------
        TABLE A-5. RESULTS OF THE NEANTHES BIOASSAY FOR THE
                 ENDPOINT BASED ON AVERAGE BIOMASS
Weeks from
Date8 Stan Date
May 18 1.0




June 23 6.0




July 28 11.0




August 29 16.0




Replicate
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Average Biomass
Station CR
Replicate Mean*
14.0 16.7 ± 2.7
20.7
14.9
18.0
15.9
24.8 23.2 ± 3.5
27.5
23.7
21.9
18.2
22.1 21.2 ± 3.0
25.7
21.2
18.7
18.1
15.2 16.6 ± 1.2
17.4
17.8
15.3
17.2
(gm dry wt)
Station
Replicate
4.4
2.4
6.4
1.3
3.2
5.3
4.6
5.4
2.2
6.6
3.2
3.3
2.7
1.2
1.9
0.9
1.2
0.7
1.5
1.0

EB
Meanb
3.5 ± 20




4.8 ± 1.6




2.5 ± 0.9




1.1 ± 0.3




a Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.

b Mean biomass for the five replicates ± standard deviation.
                                  A-6

-------
              TABLE A-6. RESULTS FOR THE MICROTOX BIOASSAY
                         BASED ON DILUTION SERIES
Weeks
from
Start
Date8 Date
May 23 2.0



June 8 4.0



June 21 6.0



July 6 8.0



July 20 10.0



August 3 12.0



August 18 14.0



August 31 16.0



Percent Decrease in Luminescence
Concen-
tration
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00
6.25
12.50
25.00
50.00

Replicate 1
6.6
8.3
11.5
10.9
1.9
1.5
0
0
19.1
19.7
20.4
19.6
4.1
8.0
11.0
14.4
11.9
14.1
9.5
8.6
11.7
10.5
9.9
12.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.1
0.8
Station CR
Replicate 2
3.5
7.6
10.7
7.6
1.4
3.2
3.1
0
15.6
19.2
21.6
20.5
9.5
10.4
12.7
15.0
11.3
12.4
7.9
9.4
6.3
8.6
7.3
7.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.9
2.9

Mean"
5.1
8.0
11.1
9.3
1.7
2.4
1.6
0
17.4
19.5
21.0
20.0
6.8
9.2
11.9
14.7
11.6
13.3
8.7
9.0
9.0
9.6
8.6
9.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.0
1.9

Replicate 1
0
0
5.1
15.4
3.4
5.7
11.9
24.0
0
0
2.9
10.7
0
0
0
12.4
1.5
9.9
24.3
39.4
0
0
0
12.7
7.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Station EB
Replicate 2
0
0
2.2
16.3
5.5
5.1
10.9
23.9
0.3
0
2.4
15.4
0
0
0
13.3
4.1
13.7
27.3
40.9
0
0
0
15.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.5

Mean6
0
0
3.7
15.9
4.5
5.4
11.4
24.0
0.2
0
2.7
13.1
0
0
0
12.9
2.8
11.8
25.8
40.2
0
0
0
13.9
3.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3
a Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.
b Mean of the two replicate values.
                                     A-7

-------
            TABLE A-7.  RESULTS FOR THE MICROTOX BIOASSAY
               BASED ON REPLICATE EVALUATIONS OF THE
                     50 PERCENT SAMPLE DILUTION
Weeks from
Date' Start Date
June 8 4.0



June 21 6.0



July 6 8.0



July 20 10.0



August 3 12.0



August 18 14.0



August 31 16.0



Replicate
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
Percent Decrease
Station CR
Replicate Mean"
0.5 0.70 ± 0.4
1.0
0.2
1.1
12.2 10.7 ± 1.4
11.1
10.8
8.8
1Z3 12.8 ± 2.2
12.9
15.6
10.2
12.9 13.6 ± 1.7
13.6
11.9
15.9
0.3 1.5 ± 0.9
2.0
1.5
2.3
0 0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
in Luminescence
Station
Replicate
27.8
29.2
31.5
32.0
15.7
12.4
10.7
9.7
20.0
14.3
14.3
15.5
43.1
4.25
42.7
42.8
13.6
14.0
12.5
13.5
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.1
0.0
2.2

EB
Mean5
30.1 ± 2.0



12.1 ± 2.6



16.0 ± 27



42.8 ± 0.3



13.4 ± 0.6



0



0.8 ± 1.0



* Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.

b Mean value for the four replicates ± standard deviation.
                                  A-8

-------
                            TABLE A-8. RESULTS OF THE ECHINODERM EMBRYO BIOASSAY

tA^ALtt
ViroOKB
from
Start Repli-
Date* Date cate
May 23 2.0 1
2
3
4
5
June 20 6.0 1
2
3
4
> 5
(0
July 24 11.0 1
2
3
4
5
August 29 16.0 1
2
3
4
5
Station CR
Total Peroam Abnormality Mean
Larvae Replicate Mean0 Mortality
14 14.3 14.1*14.6 16.6
13 23.1
1 0
1 0
3 33.3
34 5.9 10.3±4.6 76.0
27 7.4
35 17.0
24 6.3
23 13.0

Station CR
was not tested



Station CR
was not tested




Total
Larvae
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
3
6
1

0
1
0
0
0
23
5
22
18
3
Station EB
Percent Abnormality Mean
Replicate Mean6 Mortality
100.0
-
-
.
-
66.9 76.4t29.5 96.8
-
33.3
83.3
100.0

99.9
0
-
-
•
91.3 83.1 1 12.9 99.9
80.0
77.3
100.0
66.7
Control Seawater" Control Sediment
Percent Percent Percent Percent
Abnormality Mortality Abnormality Mortality
153d 9.6 8.3 1.6




4.7 0 8.4 0





1.9 19.8 1.9 0




7.9 9.2 8.3 0




8 Date bioassay was initiated in 1989.



b Maximum allowable abnormality - 10 percent, maximum allowable mortality « 30 percent



c Mean of the five replicates t standard deviation.



d Exceeds maximum allowable control value.

-------