EPA 910/9-90-025
Puget Sound Estuary Program
RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF
CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION AND
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS IN
SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
April 1991
-------
PTI
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
15375 SE 30th Place
Suite 250
Bellevue, Washington 98007
RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF
CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
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 C744-27
April 1991
-------
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF ACRONYMS ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY x
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xxi
INTRODUCTION 1
STUDY OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN 1
METHODS 3
FIELD COLLECTION 3
LABORATORY ANALYSIS 8
Chemical Analysis 8
Sediment Toxicity 11
Fish Histopathology 12
DATA EVALUATION 12
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 16
SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY 16
Conventional Variables 16
Chemical Contaminants 19
CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN TISSUE 40
Fish 40
Clams 52
-------
Page
SEDIMENT TOXICITY 59
FISH ASSEMBLAGES 63
FISH HISTOPATHOLOGY 66
CONCLUSIONS 72
REFERENCES 73
APPENDIX A - Puget Sound Sediment Quality Values
APPENDIX B - Tissue Chemical Concentrations
APPENDIX C - Sediment Bioassay Data
APPENDIX D - Histopathology Data
APPENDK E - Sample Codes and Station Locations and Depths
in
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Station locations in southern Puget Sound 4
Figure 2. Station locations in inner Budd Inlet 5
IV
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Summary of samples collected during the southern Puget
Sound reconnaissance survey 17
Table 2. Concentrations of conventional sediment variables at
stations sampled during the southern Puget Sound re-
connaissance survey 18
Table 3. Concentrations of metals in sediment samples from Budd
Inlet 20
Table 4. Concentrations of metals in sediment samples from
outside Budd Inlet 21
Table 5. Comparisons of metals concentrations found in this study
with the interim performance standards proposed for
reference areas in Puget Sound 23
Table 6. Comparisons of sediment concentrations of selected
chemicals in various locations in Puget Sound 24
Table 7. Concentrations of organic compounds in sediment sam-
ples from Budd Inlet based on dry weight normaliza-
tion 28
Table 8. Concentrations of organic compounds in sediment sam-
ples from areas outside Budd Inlet based on dry weight
normalization 30
Table 9. Concentrations of nonionic organic compounds in sedi-
ment samples from Budd Inlet based on organic carbon
normalization 32
Table 10. Comparison of nonionic organic compounds in sediment
samples from areas outside Budd Inlet based on organic
carbon normalization 34
Table 11. Concentrations of tributyltin in sediment samples from
Budd Inlet 36
-------
Page
Table 12. Chemical concentrations in tissue samples of English
sole and starry flounder from southern Puget Sound 41
Table 13. Comparisons of tissue concentrations of selected chemi-
cals in fishes collected from various locations in Puget
Sound 48
Table 14. Chemical concentrations in tissue samples of littleneck
clams from Budd Inlet 53
Table IS. Comparisons of tissue concentrations of selected metals
in littleneck clams from various locations in Puget
Sound 58
Table 16. Amphipod mortality in southern Puget Sound 60
Table 17. Relative abundances of fishes captured in southern Puget
Sound 64
Table 18. Abundances of megainvertebrates captured in southern
Puget Sound 67
Table 19. Prevalences of hepatic lesions in English sole from
Totten and Carr inlets 69
Table 20. Comparisons of prevalences of hepatic lesions in English
sole collected from various locations in Puget Sound 70
APPENDIX TABLES
Table A-l. Summary of various sediment quality values for chemi-
cal contaminants in Puget Sound based on dry weight
normalization A-l
Table A-2. Summary of various sediment quality values for nonionic
organic compounds in Puget Sound based on organic
carbon normalization A-3
Table B-l. Summary of chemical concentrations in tissue samples
collected from southern Puget Sound B-l
Table B-2. Summary of lengths and ages of fish used for bioac-
cumulation analyses B-12
VI
-------
Table C-l. Characteristics of sediments collected at stations 1-12 in
southern Puget Sound C-l
Table C-2. Responses of Rhepoxynius abronius to test sediments
from stations 1-12 C-2
Table C-3. Observations of amphipod emergence during testing of
sediments from stations 1-12 C-4
Table C-4. Selected water quality characteristics measured at the
beginning (day 0) and end (day 10) of testing for stations
1-12 C-6
Table C-5. Characteristics of sediments collected at stations 13-24
in southern Puget Sound C-7
Table C-6. Responses of Rhepoxynius abronius to test sediments
from stations 13-24 C-8
Table C-7. Observations of amphipod emergence during testing of
sediments from stations 13-24 C-10
Table C-8. Selected water quality characteristics measured at the
beginning (day 0) and end (day 10) of testing for stations
13-24 C-12
Table C-9. Responses of Rhepoxynius abronius to the reference
toxicant CdCl2 C-13
Table D-l. Summary of shipboard observations made on English
sole sampled for histopathological analysis from Totten
Inlet D-l
Table D-2. Summary of shipboard observations made on English
sole sampled for histopathological analysis from Can-
Inlet D-2
Table D-3. Summary of laboratory observations made on livers from
English sole from Totten Inlet D-3
Table D-4. Summary of laboratory observations made on livers of
English sole from Carr Inlet D-5
Table D-5. Summary of lesion codes used in tables D-3 and D-4 D-7
VII
-------
Page
Table D-6. Summary of lengths and ages of English sole used for
histopathological analyses D-8
Table E-l. Station, sample, and fish identification codes for south
sound reconnaissance survey E-l
Table E-2. Locations and depths of stations sampled for sediment
chemistry, sediment toxicity, and benthic macroinver-
tebrate assemblages E-2
Table E-3. Locations and depths of transects sampled for evalu-
ations of tissue contamination and histopathological
abnormalities in fishes E-3
VIII
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABN acid/base/neutral
AET apparent effects threshold
CLP Contract Laboratory Program
DO dissolved oxygen
Ecology Washington Department of Ecology
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HAET highest apparent effects threshold
HPAH high molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
LAET lowest apparent effects threshold
LC50 concentration lethal to 50 percent of the organisms
LPAH low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
ML maximum level
MMC melanin macrophage center
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PSAMP Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
PSDDA Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
PSEP Puget Sound Estuary Program
QA/QC quality assurance and quality control
SL screening level
IX
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10, through the
Office of Coastal Waters, has been responsible for the development and imple-
mentation of an estuary program for Puget Sound. The present study is a
reconnaissance survey of chemical contamination (i.e., of sediments and biota)
and associated adverse biological effects in southern Puget Sound. Although
several recent studies have provided comprehensive evaluations of chemical
contamination and biological effects in central and northern Puget Sound, a
similar evaluation has been lacking for southern Puget Sound. The present study
serves to fill this gap in the soundwide database.
In the present study, a reconnaissance survey was conducted throughout the
embayments of southern Puget Sound using several of the indicators of chemical
contamination and biological effects employed in recent surveys conducted in
central and northern Puget Sound. Environmental conditions were evaluated in
two urban embayments (i.e., Budd Inlet and Oakland Bay), eight nonurban
embayments (i.e., Hammersley Inlet, Totten Inlet, Eld Inlet, Henderson Inlet,
Case Inlet, Filucy Bay, Carr Inlet, and Wollochet Bay), and three areas off the
main channel of the southern sound (i.e., two areas near Steilacoom and one area
in Cormorant Passage). In each study area, stations were located in depositional
areas where chemical contaminants would be expected to accumulate in sedi-
ments. To provide integrative assessments of contamination over relatively large
areas, all stations were located away from known contaminant sources.
The indicators used to assess chemical contamination and biological effects
were a subset of those used in the recent surveys conducted in central and
northern Puget Sound. Chemical contamination was evaluated in the sediments
-------
of Budd Inlet and in five areas outside Budd Inlet (i.e., Eld Inlet, Henderson
Inlet, Cormorant Passage, Carr Inlet, and Wollochet Bay). Additional sediment
samples were collected for chemical analysis in the other five areas of southern
Puget Sound, but were not analyzed because the results of the sediment toxicity
tests indicated that the sediments were not toxic. Bioaccumulation of chemical
contaminants was evaluated by measuring the concentrations of chemicals in the
edible muscle tissue of fish [i.e., English sole (Parophrys vetulus) or starry
flounder (Platichthys stellatus)] throughout the southern sound and in the whole
bodies of littleneck clams (Protothaca staminea) from Budd Inlet. The primary
indicators of biological effects throughout the southern sound were the amphipod
mortality toxicity test (using Rhepoxynius abronius) and histopathological
abnormalities in the livers of English sole. Benthic macroinvertebrate assem-
blages were sampled in Budd Inlet, but those samples were not analyzed because
the results of the sediment toxicity tests indicated that the sediments were not
toxic. Although not used explicitly as indicators of chemical contamination, the
characteristics of demersal fish and megainvertebrate assemblages captured at all
transects were described and compared. Megainvertebrates include large
organisms such as crabs, starfish, and sea cucumbers that are collected using an
otter trawl.
Field sampling was conducted from 3 to 12 April 1990. Sediment samples
for chemical and bioassay analyses were collected at 12 stations in Budd Inlet.
Sediment samples were also collected for chemical analysis in 12 areas outside
Budd Inlet. Chemical analyses were subsequently conducted for five of these 12
areas (i.e., Eld Inlet, Henderson Inlet, Cormorant Passage, Carr Inlet, and
Wollochet Bay). The five areas were selected because they were located in areas
that have the potential of being contaminated (i.e., near the heads of embayments
or, for Cormorant Passage, near a shoreline discharge). Sediment samples were
also collected for bioassay analysis at 12 additional stations outside Budd Inlet.
Demersal fish assemblages were sampled for histopathological and bioaccumula-
XI
-------
tion analyses along seven transects throughout southern Puget Sound. Clams
were collected for bioaccumulation analysis at two intertidal stations in Budd
Inlet.
Because the present study was a reconnaissance survey, the data evaluation
focused on comparisons with the results of previous studies in Puget Sound. A
limited number of site-specific comparisons were possible by evaluating the
historical data collected at stations close to those sampled in the present study.
Many of the site-specific comparisons were made with data collected in southern
Puget Sound as part of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (Tetra
Tech 1990). In addition, all results of the present study were placed in the larger
context of Puget Sound as a whole by making comparisons with the results
obtained for other parts of the sound or with benchmark values based on previous
studies throughout the sound. The benchmark values are values derived from
information collected throughout the sound for various purposes (e.g., develop-
ment of sediment quality values, identification of potential health risks). Because
they are based on soundwide databases, they can be used to place the results of
area-specific studies (such as the present study) in a soundwide perspective.
For sediment contamination, the benchmark values included various sediment
quality values such as apparent effects threshold (AET) values (Barrick et al.
1988), the maximum level (ML) and screening level (SL) values developed by the
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA), and numerical sediment
quality standards for Puget Sound issued by the Washington Department of
Ecology. All of these values are described in the text of this report. Specific
AET values used for comparison were the lowest AET (LAET) and highest AET
(HAET) values for the four biological indicators having AET values for Puget
Sound (i.e., the amphipod mortality, bivalve larvae abnormality, and Microtox*
toxicity tests and alterations of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages). The
benchmark values for sediment contamination also included the interim perfor-
mance standards proposed for reference areas in Puget Sound (Pastorok et al.
XII
-------
1989). For bioaccumulation, the benchmark values included the tissue chemical
concentrations of concern in Puget Sound identified by Tetra Tech (1988). For
the amphipod mortality toxicity test, the benchmark values included the interim
performance standards for Puget Sound reference areas (Pastorok et al. 1989).
Although no benchmark values were available for histopathological abnormalities
in fishes, the results of the present study were placed in a soundwide context by
comparing them with the results obtained in previous studies from a variety of
environments throughout the sound.
The remainder of this section summarizes the major results for each of the
indicators of chemical contamination and biological effects evaluated in this study.
SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
Metals
Concentrations of metals in sediments sampled at the 17 stations in southern
Puget Sound were relatively low, and few of the existing sediment quality values
for the sound were exceeded. No metal concentration exceeded a LAET or
HAET value, a numerical sediment quality standard, or a PSDDA ML value.
However, several exceedances of PSDDA SL values were found. The SL value
for cadmium was exceeded at seven stations in Budd Inlet and at the single
stations sampled in Eld Inlet and Carr Inlet. The SL value for mercury was
exceeded at two stations in Budd Inlet. The SL values for silver and lead were
exceeded at single stations in Budd Inlet. Although several exceedances of
PSDDA SL values were found, exceedances of the interim performance standards
for metals in reference areas of Puget Sound were relatively small for the nine
metals that have interim standards. These results suggest that metals contami-
nation at the 17 stations was not substantial. However, sediments from stations
XIII
-------
where SL values were exceeded would require biological testing before they could
be dredged and disposed of at unconfmed, open-water disposal sites in Puget
Sound.
Organic Compounds
All organic compounds were evaluated on the basis of dry-weight normal-
ization, which is the traditional method of expressing concentrations for these
compounds. In addition, nonionic organic compounds were evaluated on the
basis of organic-carbon normalization, which more accurately assesses the
potential bioavailability of these compounds.
The concentrations of most organic compounds in sediments sampled at the
17 stations evaluated in southern Puget Sound were either undetected or relatively
low. However, high concentrations of phenol and 4-methylphenol were found at
numerous stations in Budd Inlet, and an unusually high concentration of tributyltin
(62 jtg/kg) was found at a single station in that embayment. Concentrations of
four of the organic compounds detected in sediment samples from Budd Inlet
exceeded various sediment quality values for Puget Sound. Those compounds
included phenol, 4-methylphenol, p,p'-DDD, and indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene.
On the basis of dry weight normalization, concentrations of phenol exceeded
the HAET value at five stations and exceeded the LAET value at six additional
stations. Concentrations of 4-methylphenol at two stations exceeded the LAET
value, and concentrations of p,p'-DDD exceeded the HAET value at a single
station. On the basis of organic carbon normalization, concentrations of
p,p'-DDD exceeded the LAET value at a single station.
The numerical sediment quality standards were exceeded for phenol at 11
stations and for 4-methylphenol at 2 stations.
XIV
-------
PSDDA ML values were exceeded for phenol at five stations and for
4-methylphenol at two stations. PSDDA SL values were exceeded for phenol at
six stations and for 4-methylphenol at three stations. In addition, the SL value
for indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene was exceeded at a single station.
Interim performance standards for organic compounds in reference areas in
Puget Sound have been developed only for total low molecular weight polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbon (LPAH) compounds, total high molecular weight polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbon (HPAH) compounds, and total polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs). In the present study, comparisons were made only for total PCBs.
Comparisons were not made for total LPAH and total HPAH compounds because
most of the individual LPAH and HPAH compounds were not detected in the
present study. Although the interim performance standard for total PCBs was
exceeded at two stations (i.e., one in Budd Inlet and one in Henderson Inlet),
both values were considerably lower than the LAET value (i.e., the concentration
at which adverse biological effects would be expected).
The results of the analysis of organic compounds in sediments from the 17
stations evaluated in southern Puget Sound suggest that although the observed
concentrations of most compounds were relatively low, phenol and 4-methyl-
phenol were present at concentrations that may be associated with adverse
biological effects at numerous stations in Budd Inlet. In addition, p,p'-DDD was
present at a single station in Budd Inlet at concentrations that may be associated
with adverse biological effects.
xv
-------
CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN TISSUE
Fish
Of the total of 94 chemicals evaluated in muscle tissue of English sole and
starry flounder, only four metals (i.e, arsenic, copper, lead, and mercury) and
four organic compounds (i.e., total PCBs, di-n-butyl phthalate, isophorone, and
benzoic acid) were detected. The concentrations of all of these detected chemi-
cals, except di-/i-butyl phthalate, were relatively low. Four of these eight
chemicals were identified by Tetra Tech (1988) as having a medium to high
priority with respect to potential concerns for health risks to humans through
seafood consumption. Those chemicals include two carcinogens (i.e., arsenic and
total PCBs) and two noncarcinogens (i.e., lead and mercury).
Although a formal health risk assessment was beyond the scope of the
present study, the health implications of the observed tissue concentrations of the
four priority chemicals were evaluated qualitatively by comparing them with the
results of the risk assessments conducted previously by Tetra Tech (1988). Based
on this comparative analysis, the plausible upper limit estimates of excess lifetime
cancer risk for the maximum tissue concentrations of arsenic and total PCBs
observed in the present study were probably in the range of 10~4 to 10~5. The
noncarcinogenic risk index values for the maximum tissue concentrations of lead
and mercury observed in the present study were probably less than 1.0. To place
these risk values in a regulatory perspective, they all were consistent with EPA's
Superfund site remediation goals, as contained in the National Contingency Plan,
of < 10~4 for carcinogens and < 1.0 for noncarcinogens (U.S. EPA 1989). This
consistency indicates that the observed concentrations of chemical contaminants
in fish muscle tissue from the seven transects in southern Puget Sound did not
appear to pose an unacceptable health risk to consumers of these organisms.
XVI
-------
Clams
Of the total of 94 chemicals evaluated in the whole bodies of littleneck
clams, only four metals (i.e, arsenic, copper, lead, and mercury) and no organic
compounds were detected at the two stations evaluated in Budd Inlet. The
concentrations of all four of the detected metals were relatively low. Three of
these four metals were considered by Tetra Tech (1988) to have a medium to high
priority with respect to concerns for potential health risks to humans through
seafood consumption. Those chemicals included the carcinogen arsenic and the
noncarcinogens lead and mercury.
The health implications of the observed tissue concentrations of the three
priority metals were evaluated qualitatively by comparing them with the results
of the risk assessments conducted previously by Tetra Tech (1988). Based on this
comparative analysis, the plausible upper limit estimate of lifetime cancer risk
based on the maximum tissue concentrations of arsenic observed in the present
study was probably in the range of 10~6 to 10~7. The noncarcinogenic risk index
values associated with the maximum tissue concentrations of lead and mercury
observed in the present study were each probably less than 1.0. These results
were consistent with EPA's Superfund site remediation goals, as contained in the
National Contingency Plan, of < 10"4 for carcinogens and < 1.0 for noncarcino-
gens (U.S. EPA 1989) and indicate that the observed concentrations of chemical
contaminants in the whole bodies of littleneck clams from Budd Inlet did not
appear to pose an unacceptable health risk to consumers of these organisms.
SEDIMENT TOXICITY
Amphipod mortality at the 24 stations sampled in this study ranged from 1
to 18 percent. All of these values were less than the interim performance
standard of 25 percent proposed for Puget Sound reference areas (Pastorok et al.
XVII
-------
1989). In addition, all but one mortality value (18 percent, Station 8) were less
than the median value of 16.2 percent observed by Pastorok et al. (1989) for 60
samples from Puget Sound reference areas. These results indicate that the
toxicity of sediments from all 24 stations sampled in this study was well within
the range of conditions found in Puget Sound reference areas, and that elevated
sediment toxicity did not appear to be a problem at any of the sites evaluated.
However, neither sublethal nor chronic effects of sediment toxicity were evaluated
in this study.
FISH ASSEMBLAGES
A total of 9,496 fishes, representing IS families and 28 species, was sampled
in this study. The most abundant family of fishes throughout southern Puget
Sound was Pleuronectidae (i.e., righteye flounders), which accounted for
50 percent of the total catch. The most abundant pleuronectids were English sole
and starry flounder, the two species selected for histopathological and bioaccumu-
lation analyses.
Although English sole and starry flounder were abundant in southern Puget
Sound as a whole, considerable differences were found among individual
transects. In general, English sole was most abundant at the two transects located
near the mouths of embayments, whereas starry flounder was most abundant at
the five transects located at the heads of embayments. The total numbers of
species and individuals also showed large differences between transects located
in the mouths or heads of embayments, with both variables being considerably
lower in the latter environments. The results of this study suggest that habitat
differences within the embayments exerted a considerable influence on the charac-
teristics of the resident demersal fish assemblages. Because English sole was
relatively rare or absent at the heads of embayments, starry flounder was used for
bioaccumulation analysis at those five transects, and histopathological evaluations
XVIII
-------
were not conducted at those locations. Starry flounder was not used for histo-
pathological evaluations because the historical database for this species is limited.
FISH HISTOPATHOLOGY
Sufficient sample sizes of English sole for histopathological analysis were
obtained at only two of the seven transects (i.e., those in Totten and Carr inlets)
at which demersal fishes were sampled. The only kinds of liver lesions found at
those two transects were nonspecific responses to injury. These lesions generally
are not indicative of major adverse biological effects. The three kinds of serious
liver lesions found in previous studies of English sole from contaminated
environments in Puget Sound (i.e., neoplasms, foci of cellular alteration, and
megalocytic hepatosis) were not found in any of the fish collected in this study.
In general, the prevalences of nonspecific responses to injury were relatively low
(all <17 percent), and only three of these conditions (i.e., hepatocellular
regeneration, mononuclear infiltrates, and parenchyma! inflammation) were found
in more than 10 percent of the fish from either study area.
The absence of neoplasms, foci of cellular alteration, and megalocytic
hepatosis in English sole from Totten and Carr inlets suggests that any potential
chemical contamination in those two areas was not high enough to cause serious
liver lesions in fishes. Compared with historical data collected in a variety of
environments elsewhere in Puget Sound, the absence of serious liver lesions in
English sole from Totten and Carr inlets suggests that those two areas were
similar to the reference areas used in previous studies in Puget Sound.
XIX
-------
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study suggest that most of the areas sampled in southern
Puget Sound were not characterized by substantial levels of chemical contamina-
tion or adverse biological effects. However, the concentrations of several organic
compounds in one or more sediment samples from Budd Inlet were high enough
to potentially result in adverse biological effects. Despite these elevated chemical
concentrations, sediment toxicity was not elevated above Puget Sound reference
levels at any of the Budd Inlet stations, according to the results of the amphipod
mortality toxicity test. Sediment toxicity also was not elevated above reference
levels at any of the other stations sampled throughout southern Puget Sound.
However, neither sublethal nor chronic effects of sediment toxicity were evaluated
in this study. The limited amount of information collected on fish disease
suggests that fish evaluated from Totten and Carr inlets were not affected by
chemical contamination, as serious histopathological abnormalities were not found
in the livers of any of these individuals. However, information on fish disease
in Budd Inlet (i.e., the major urban embayment in southern Puget Sound) could
not be evaluated because the target species (i.e., English sole) was not found in
sufficient abundance there. Finally, the observed concentrations of chemical
contaminants in tissue samples from fishes and clams did not appear to pose an
unacceptable health risk to consumers of these organisms.
xx
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared by PTI Environmental Services under the
direction of Dr. Scott Becker. The document was prepared for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in partial fulfillment of Contract No. 68-
D8-0085. Dr. Thomas Ginn of PTI Environmental Services was the Program
Manager. Dr. John Armstrong of EPA was the Project Monitor. Mr. Joe
Cummins of EPA conducted the amphipod mortality toxicity tests. Dr. Marsha
Landolt of Landolt, Busch & Associates conducted the histopathological analyses
of fish livers. Ms. Ruth Mandapat made the age determinations for the fishes
selected for histopathological analysis.
XXI
-------
INTRODUCTION
The national program for estuarine studies and pollution abatement (i.e., the
National Estuary Program) is implemented through the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) regional offices under the guidance of the EPA Office
of Marine and Estuarine Protection. EPA Region 10, through the Office of
Coastal Waters, has been responsible for the development and implementation of
an estuary program for Puget Sound. A component of the program is this recon-
naissance survey to evaluate chemical contamination and associated adverse
biological effects in southern Puget Sound. Although several recent studies have
provided comprehensive evaluations of chemical contamination and biological
effects in central and northern Puget Sound (Tetra Tech 1985; PTI and Tetra
Tech 1988a,b; Crecelius et al. 1989), a similar evaluation has been lacking for
southern Puget Sound. The present study serves to fill this data gap.
STUDY OBJECTIVES AND DESIGN
In the present study, a reconnaissance survey was conducted throughout the
embayments of southern Puget Sound using several of the indicators of chemical
contamination and biological effects employed in recent surveys conducted in
central and northern Puget Sound. The primary objective was to characterize
current environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound and compare those
conditions with conditions found in other parts of the sound.
Environmental conditions were evaluated in two urban embayments (i.e.,
Budd Inlet and Oakland Bay), eight nonurban embayments (i.e., Hammersley
Inlet, Totten Inlet, Eld Inlet, Henderson Inlet, Case Inlet, Filucy Bay, Carr Inlet,
-------
and Wollochet Bay), and three areas off the main channel of the southern sound
(i.e., two areas near Steilacoom and one area in Cormorant Passage). In each
study area, stations were located in depositional areas where chemical contami-
nants would be expected to accumulate in the sediments. To provide integrative
assessments of contamination over relatively large areas, all stations were located
away from known contaminant sources. The results of this study therefore do not
represent the worst-case conditions that may exist in the immediate vicinity of
contaminant sources.
A subset of the indicators used to assess chemical contamination and
biological effects in the recent surveys conducted in central and northern Puget
Sound was selected for the southern Puget Sound survey. Chemical contamina-
tion was evaluated in both bottom sediments and animal tissue. However, all
sediment samples for chemical analysis outside of Budd Inlet were archived for
future analysis, depending on the results of the sediment toxicity tests. Bioaccu-
mulation was evaluated in the edible muscle tissue of English sole (Parophrys
vetulus) and starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus) and in the whole bodies of
littleneck clams (Protothaca stamined). The primary indicators of biological
effects were results of the amphipod mortality toxicity test (using Rhepoxynius
abronius) and histopathological abnormalities found in the livers of English sole.
Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages were also sampled in Budd Inlet and
archived for future analysis, depending on the results of the sediment toxicity
tests. Although not used explicitly as indicators of chemical contamination, the
characteristics of demersal fish and megainvertebrate assemblages captured at all
transects were described and compared. Megainvertebrates include large
organisms such as crabs, starfish, and sea cucumbers that are collected using an
otter trawl.
-------
METHODS
FIELD COLLECTION
Sampling was conducted from 3 to 12 April 1990 aboard the RV Kittiwake.
Sediment samples for chemical analysis and sediment toxicity evaluations were
collected at 24 stations throughout southern Puget Sound (Figures 1 and 2).
Twelve of the 24 stations were located in Budd Inlet, and the remaining 12
stations were distributed throughout southern Puget Sound. Benthic macroinver-
tebrate assemblages were sampled at each of the 12 stations in Budd Inlet and
were archived for possible future analysis. Demersal fish assemblages were
sampled for histopathological and bioaccumulation analyses along seven transects
(Figures 1 and 2). Two transects were located in each of Budd and Carr inlets,
and single transects were located in Oakland Bay, Totten Inlet, and Case Inlet.
Clams were collected for bioaccumulation analysis at two intertidal stations in
Budd Inlet (Figure 2). All sampling was conducted following the procedures
recommended by the Puget Sound Estuary Program (PSEP) (PSEP 1986; 1987;
1989a,b; 1991). Information on the depths and geographic locations of all
stations and transects is presented in Appendix E.
Sediment samples for analysis of chemical contaminants, sediment toxicity,
and benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages were collected using a 0.1-m2 stainless
steel van Veen bottom grab sampler. For chemical and toxicity analyses, the
overlying water of each acceptable grab sample was siphoned off and the top
2 cm of sediment was removed using stainless steel utensils and placed in a
stainless steel bowl. The sediment was then homogenized by stirring with a
stainless steel spoon until the color and texture were visually uniform. Subsam-
ples for toxicity evaluations were placed in precleaned glass containers and stored
-------
Figure 1. Station locations in southern Puget Sound
-------
s Creek
LEGEND
• Sediment Station
O Clam Collection Site
—i Trawl Transect
kilometers
Figure 2. Station locations in inner Budd Inlet
-------
at 4°C until laboratory analysis. Subsamples for chemical analysis were placed
in precleaned jars with Teflon* cap liners, stored on ice in the field, and frozen
upon return to shore. To prevent cross-station contamination, the grab sampler
and all subsampling utensils were rinsed with seawater, acetone, and methylene
chloride at the start of sampling at each station. Toxicity tests were conducted
on the sediment samples collected from all 24 stations. Chemical analyses were
conducted on the 12 samples from Budd Inlet and on 5 samples collected from
other areas (i.e., Eld Inlet, Henderson Inlet, Cormorant Passage, Carr Inlet, and
Wollochet Bay). The remaining seven samples collected in other parts of
southern Puget Sound were not analyzed, because the sediment toxicity tests did
not indicate that those sediments were toxic.
For analysis of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages, five replicate grab
samples were collected at each station in Budd Inlet. Each sample was passed
through a stainless steel sieve having a mesh size of 1.0 mm. Retained material
was transferred to polyethylene jars, fixed with a 10-percent solution of buffered
formalin, and stained with rose bengal. In the laboratory, all benthic macro-
invertebrate samples were transferred to isopropyl alcohol for long-term storage.
These samples were not analyzed as part of the present study, because the results
of the sediment toxicity tests indicated that none of the sediments collected from
Budd Inlet were toxic.
Demersal fish assemblages were sampled using a 7.6-meter (headrope)
Marinovich otter trawl having a body mesh size of 3.2 cm (stretched) and a cod-
end liner mesh size of 0.8 cm (stretched). Trawling was conducted along
isobaths at a constant vessel speed of approximately 2.5 knots during daylight
hours (0730-1900). Transect lengths ranged from 0.2 to 2.0 km, depending on
catch size. After each sample was brought on board the vessel, the target species
were placed in plastic tubs and the remaining species (both fish and megainver-
tebrates) were identified, counted, and returned to the sound.
-------
The primary target species for both the histopathological and bioaccumulation
analyses in fish was English sole. If adequate sample sizes of English sole were
not available at a location, starry flounder was used as an alternate target species
for bioaccumulation analysis. Starry flounder was not used for histopathological
analysis because the historical database for this species is limited. A target
sample size of 60 English sole larger than 23 cm total length was used for
histopathological analysis at each transect. A target sample size of IS English
sole or starry flounder greater than 23 cm total length was used for bioac-
cumulation analysis at each transect. If English sole was used for bioaccumu-
lation analysis, individuals were randomly selected from the individuals used for
histopathological analysis. Prior to laboratory analysis, the 15 fish selected for
bioaccumulation analysis from each transect were randomly assigned to three
groups of five individuals for analysis of tissue composites. For both the
histopathological and bioaccumulation analyses, a minimum size limit was
specified because prevalences of liver abnormalities and tissue chemical concen-
trations were expected to be higher in older individuals. This study therefore
focused on those fish most likely to be affected by liver abnormalities or
bioaccumulation.
For histopathological analysis, each selected fish was killed by a blow to the
head, measured to the nearest millimeter total length, and transferred to the
shipboard laboratory for liver removal. In the laboratory, the liver of each fish
was removed in its entirety, cut into multiple sections, and examined for the
presence of grossly visible lesions. If lesions or discontinuities were noted, a
subsample was taken from the affected area for histopathological analysis. If the
liver appeared normal, a subsample was taken from the center of the organ at its
broadest point. Each subsample was fixed in 10-percent buffered formalin. After
the liver was removed from each individual, the sex of the fish was noted and the
head was removed and stored frozen. On shore, the otoliths (sagittae) were
removed from each head and delivered to the laboratory for age determination.
-------
For bioaccumulation analysis, each selected fish was decapitated and
eviscerated. The body was then tightly wrapped in precleaned aluminum foil
(i.e., rinsed with acetone and methylene chloride), placed in a plastic bag, stored
on ice in the field, and frozen upon return to the laboratory. The head of each
fish was stored frozen. On shore, the otoliths were removed and delivered to the
laboratory for age determination.
The target species for bioaccumulation analysis in clams was the littleneck
clam. At each collection site, approximately 30 clams were removed from the
sediment by hand, placed on ice in a cooler, and shipped to the analytical
laboratory.
LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Chemical Analysis
Concentrations of metals and organic compounds (except guaiacols and
tributyltin) were determined following modified EPA Contract Laboratory
Program (CLP) protocols, as specified by PSEP (1989a,b). Different suites of
chemicals were measured for sediment and tissue samples (see Results section).
Analysis of all conventional sediment variables followed the PSEP protocols
(PSEP 1986).
Prior to chemical analysis, tissue samples were resected and composited from
fish and clams using decontaminated stainless steel scalpels. Prior to tissue
resection, the 15 fish sampled at each transect were randomly assigned to three
groups of five individuals so that the mean length of fish did not differ signifi-
cantly (P > 0.05; analysis of variance) among the three groups. The group assign-
ment was reiterated, if necessary, until the length criterion was achieved. Within
8
-------
each group of fish, an equal weight of tissue was resected from the dorsal muscle
of each individual, composited with the tissue samples from the other fish in the
group, homogenized mechanically, and subsampled for chemical analysis. For
clam samples, all individuals from each station were considered a single group
for chemical analysis. The whole bodies of all individuals were removed from
the shells, composited, homogenized mechanically, and subsampled for chemical
analysis.
Analyses of semivolatile compounds, including acid/base/neutral (ABN)
extractable compounds, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mixtures, and pesticides,
followed modified CLP protocols that are consistent with PSEP recommendations
for analyses with low detection limits. Modifications included a larger sample
size (typically 50-100 grams dry weight for sediment and 50 grams for tissue),
a smaller final extract volume (e.g., 0.5 mL) for gas chromatography/mass
spectrometry analyses, and an adjusted calibration curve. Stable-isotope labeled
surrogates specified by the CLP were used to monitor, but not correct for,
recovery of ABN compounds. Separate sediment subsamples were used for ABN
and pesticide/PCB extractions. Ultrasonic extractions were conducted according
to the CLP procedure (analogous to EPA Method 3550). Gel permeation
chromatography, an optional step under the CLP analogous to EPA Method 3640,
was performed for sediment ABN extracts as necessary to reduce interferences
and attain project detection limits. Care was taken by the laboratory to minimize
mechanical losses during gel permeation chromatography cleanup. Gas chroma-
tography/mass spectrometry was used to measure semivolatile compounds using
the CLP procedure, which is analogous to EPA Method 8270.
Pesticide/PCB analyses were conducted using a slightly modified version of
the CLP method. These analyses include extract cleanup by alumina column
chromatography (EPA Method 3610) and, when necessary, elemental sulfur
cleanup (EPA Method 3660), followed by gas chromatography/electron capture
detection analysis. The CLP method for gas chromatography/electron capture
-------
detection is analogous to EPA Method 8080; however, quantification and
confirmation analyses were conducted with megabore capillary columns rather
than the packed columns used in the CLP. Calibration procedures were consistent
with the CLP.
Guaiacol analyses were conducted using the same technique applied to
samples from the Everett Harbor Action Program (PTI and Tetra Tech 1988b).
Sediment samples were initially acidified and then extracted using acetone and
methylene chloride. The extracts were then quantified with selective-ion
monitoring. Guaiacol analyses were conducted only at the five stations in Budd
Inlet most likely to be affected by pulp-mill wastes.
Protocols for tributyltin used in this study were based on procedures and
recommendations discussed in the methods memorandum from EPA Region 10
that resulted from a meeting of the Subcommittee on Organotin Analysis Methods
held on 25 September 1987. Sediment samples for tributyltin analyses were
frozen at -18°C within 24 hours of collection. Samples were acidified and mixed
with Na^C^ prior to extraction with tropolone/dichloromethane. The extracts
were concentrated, exchanged into hexane, and treated with a Grignard reagent
to form hexyl derivatives. Derivatized extracts were subjected to Florisil column
chromatography cleanup and analyzed by gas chromatography/mass selective
detector. A standard reference material spiked with roughly 100 jig/kg dry
weight tributyltin was also analyzed. Tripropyl tin chloride was spiked in all
samples as a surrogate to monitor recovery. Tributyltin analyses were conducted
only at the 12 stations in Budd Inlet, because boating activities are greatest in that
embayment.
For all metals analyses except those for aluminum, antimony, chromium, and
zinc, sediments were subjected to the modified strong-acid digestion described in
detail by PSEP (1989a). The strong-acid technique uses nitric and hydrochloric
acids and hydrogen peroxide. Puget Sound studies have shown that this modified
10
-------
CLP procedure yields results for most metals that are comparable with the
alternative total metals procedure described by PSEP (1989a). Aluminum,
antimony, chromium, and zinc were analyzed by total acid digestion with nitric,
hydrochloric, and hydrofluoric acids (PSEP 1989a). Antimony, which is difficult
to analyze by any of the recommended techniques (PSEP 1989a), was analyzed
using the modified strong-acid digestion. Mercury analyses were conducted
according to CLP cold vapor procedures. Metals concentrations in sediment and
tissue digestates (except mercury) were determined by graphite furnace atomic
absorption spectrometry or flame atomic absorption, as appropriate, to attain the
desired detection limits. Cold vapor atomic absorption was used for determina-
tion of mercury concentrations.
The grain-size distribution of sediment samples was determined on oxidized
samples (using hydrogen peroxide) by standard sieve and pipet techniques (PSEP
1986). After initial wet sieving through a 63-/tm mesh, the gravel and sand
fractions were separated by dry sieving techniques, and the silt and clay fractions
were separated using pipet analysis. The total organic carbon content of each
sediment sample was determined by combustion in an elemental analyzer.
Sediment Toxicity
The amphipod mortality toxicity test was conducted according to the
protocols described by Swartz et al. (1985) and PSEP (1991). This test measures
mortality in adult amphipods exposed for 10 days to bedded test sediment. All
testing was conducted within 14 days of field collection of test sediments.
Amphipods were collected in the field and acclimated to the test temperature and
salinity for 3-4 days prior to testing. Five replicate tests were conducted for each
field sample. For each replicate, 20 amphipods were exposed to a 2-cm layer of
bedded test sediment in a 1-liter chamber filled with clean seawater. After the
10-day exposure period, the surviving amphipods in each test chamber were
11
-------
sieved from the sediment and counted. Percent mortality was determined relative
to the total of 20 individuals added to each chamber at the beginning of the test.
Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures included the use of
positive controls (cadmium chloride), negative controls (i.e., sediment from West
Beach on Whidbey Island), and measurements of water quality conditions (i.e.,
temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen) in each test chamber at the beginning
and end of the 10-day exposure period.
Fish Histopathology
Histopathological evaluations of the English sole livers were conducted
according to the protocols described by PSEP (1987). Each formalin-fixed liver
was dehydrated in a graded ethanol series, cleared in xylene, and embedded in
paraffin. Embedded livers were sectioned at 5 /xm using a rotary microtome and
were stained using hematoxylin and eosin. Prepared slides were examined using
conventional light microscopy. Each slide was coded, so the pathologist did not
know where the corresponding fish was captured. Each slide was first scanned
at low magnification (40 x) for general form and contour. The entire section was
then examined at high magnification (430x) for the presence of pathological
abnormalities. A description of each abnormality was recorded on the data sheet,
and the identity and severity of each abnormality was coded according to the
system used by the National Oceanographic Data Center.
DATA EVALUATION
Because the present study was a reconnaissance survey, data evaluation
focused on comparisons with the results of previous studies in Puget Sound. A
limited number of site-specific comparisons were possible by evaluating the
historical data collected at stations close to those sampled in the present study.
12
-------
Many of the site-specific comparisons were made with data collected in southern
Puget Sound as part of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP)
(Tetra Tech 1990). In addition, all results of the present study were placed in the
larger context of Puget Sound as a whole by making comparisons with the results
obtained in previous studies in other parts of the sound or with benchmark values
based on previous studies throughout the sound. The benchmark values are
derived from information collected throughout the sound for various purposes
(e.g., development of sediment quality values, identification of potential health
risks). Because they are based on soundwide databases, they can be used to place
the results of area-specific studies (such as the present study) in a soundwide
perspective.
For sediment contamination, the benchmark values included various sediment
quality values such as apparent effects threshold (AET) values (Barrick et al.
1988), the maximum level (ML) and screening level (SL) values developed by the
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) (PSDDA 1989), and numerical
sediment quality standards for Puget Sound issued by the Washington Department
of Ecology (Ecology) [Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 173-
204]. The benchmark values also included the interim performance standards
proposed for reference areas in Puget Sound (Pastorok et al. 1989). Each of
these benchmark values is described below:
• AET values—These values are the chemical-specific concentrations
above which adverse biological effects are always predicted in the
database used to generate the AET values. For Puget Sound, AET
values have been developed for three sediment toxicity tests (i.e.,
amphipod mortality, bivalve larvae abnormality, and Microtox®
toxicity tests) and for alterations of in situ benthic macroinver-
tebrate assemblages. The AET values used for comparisons in the
present study included the lowest AET (LAET) and the highest
AET (HAET) values for the four biological indicators that have
AET values for Puget Sound.
13
-------
• PSDDA SL and ML values—These values were derived for use in
regulatory decisionmaking regarding dredged material disposal in
Puget Sound. SL values are the chemical-specific concentrations
below which there is no reason to believe that unconfmed open-
water disposal of dredged material would result in unacceptable
adverse effects. SL values are used as guidelines for requiring
biological testing (i.e., testing may be required if SL values are
exceeded for a particular sediment). ML values are the chemical-
specific concentrations above which there is reason to believe that
sediments would be unacceptable for unconfmed open-water
disposal. The ML values set the upper limits of chemical concen-
trations for which biological testing provides a sufficient basis for
regulatory decisionmaking.
• Numerical sediment quality standards—These standards are the
chemical-specific concentrations used by Ecology to identify
sediments that have no adverse effects on biological resources and
are determined using available standard techniques.
• Interim performance standards—These standards are the chemical-
specific concentrations used by Ecology to evaluate the suitability
of candidate reference areas in Puget Sound. At present, interim
performance standards are available for nine metals (i.e., arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, and
zinc) and three groups of organic compounds [i.e., low molecular
weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (LPAH), high molecular
weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (HPAH), and total PCBs].
For bioaccumulation, the benchmark values included the tissue chemical
concentrations of concern in Puget Sound identified by Tetra Tech (1988). These
concentrations of concern were based on a human health risk assessment for
14
-------
seafood consumption in the sound. For the amphipod mortality toxicity test, the
benchmark values included the interim performance standards for Puget Sound
reference areas (Pastorok et al. 1989). Although no benchmark values were
available for histopathological abnormalities in fishes, the results of the present
study were placed in a soundwide context by comparing them with the results
obtained in previous studies from a variety of environments throughout the sound.
15
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A summary of the kinds of data collected at each station and transect is
presented in Table 1. Prior to analysis, all data were subjected to a QA/QC
review. The results of that review are described in PTI (1990). The relation-
ships between sampling stations and sample identification numbers are presented
in Appendix E. This information can be used to relate the sample codes used in
the QA/QC review to the sampling stations identified in the present report. All
data generated during this study are acceptable for characterizing environmental
conditions in southern Puget Sound, including those data values that were
qualified during QA/QC review. The qualifiers added to specific data values are
explained in the text and tables of this report. The remainder of this section
presents the results of the study and a discussion of the implications of those
results with respect to chemical contamination and biological effects in southern
Puget Sound.
SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
Conventional Variables
Most sediments sampled at the 17 stations evaluated in southern Puget Sound
were fine-grained (Table 2). Percent fine-grained sediment (i.e., combined silt
and clay fractions) ranged from 26 percent at Station 23 in Carr Inlet to 99 per-
cent at Station 7 in Budd Inlet. The fine-grained character of most of the
sediment samples was expected, because stations were located primarily in
depositional areas.
16
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING
THE SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY
Station/
Transect
Stations
1-12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
C1
C2
Transects
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
Location
Budd Inlet
Oakland Bay
Totten Inlet
Hammersley Inlet
Eld Inlet
Henderson Inlet
Case Inlet
Filucy Bay
Cormorant Passage
Steilacoom Area
Steilacoom Area
Carr Inlet
Wollochet Bay
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Oakland Bay
Totten Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Chemical
Sediment Amphipod Benthic Contaminants
Chemistry* Bioassay Macroinvertebrates in Tissue Histopathology
X*" X *c
* X
X
• x
X X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X X
xd
xd
x«
x«
X6
xf xf
x«
X*
xf xf
• Samples from Budd inlet were analyzed separately from samples from the other areas in southern Puget Sound. The suites
of organic compounds analyzed and many of the detection limits differed between the two sets of samples.
b X - samples analyzed.
c * - samples archived, but not analyzed because sediments were not toxic at the respective stations.
d Species - littleneck clams.
• Species - starry flounder.
f Species - English sole.
17
-------
TABLE 2. CONCENTRATIONS OF CONVENTIONAL SEDIMENT
VARIABLES AT STATIONS SAMPLED DURING THE
SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY
Grain-Size Fractions
Station11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
16
17
20
23
24
Gravel
0.40
0.40
0
0.30
2.3
0
0
0
0.40
0.60
0.30
13
0.20
0.20
0
1.0
0
Sand
37
11
3.3
9.9
17
1.9
1.1
2.6
24
29
8.9
8.8
20
64
21
73
21
Silt
41
56
61
53
48
58
63
62
56
56
59
53
63
22
66
23
71
Clay
21
33
36
37
33
40
36
36
20
15
32
25
17
14
14
3.7
8.6
Fines6
62
89
97
90
81
98
99
97
75
71
91
78
80
36
80
26
79
• rciODiil
TOCd
4.4
3.4
2.6
3.2
5.7
2.6
3.2
3.0
3.6
2.0
3.4
2.9
3.0
3.1
1.0
1.5
1.1
a Values are based on dry weight.
b Stations 1-12 were located in Budd Inlet. Stations 16, 17, 20, 23, and 24 were located in Eld Inlet,
Henderson Inlet, Cormorant Passage, Carr Inlet, and Wollochet Bay, respectively.
c Fines - fine-grained fraction (i.e., silt plus clay)
d TOC - total organic carbon.
18
-------
Percent total organic carbon at the 17 stations ranged from 1.0 percent at
Station 20 in Cormorant Passage to 5.7 percent at Station 5 in Budd Inlet.
Although percent total organic carbon and percent fine-grained sediment are
usually closely related in marine environments, the correlation between these two
variables in the present study (Spearman rs = 0.10) was not significant
(P>0.05). The relatively high value of percent total organic carbon at Station 5
may be partly related to the presence of wood debris in the sample, because this
station was located in a log-rafting area.
Chemical Contaminants
Metals —The concentrations of metals in the sediments sampled at the 17
stations in southern Puget Sound were relatively low (Tables 3 and 4). The
highest concentrations of most metals were found in Budd Inlet at Station 12
(copper, lead, and zinc), Station 6 (aluminum and iron), Station 11 (arsenic and
mercury), and Station 10 (silver). The highest concentrations of cadmium,
chromium, and nickel were found at Station 16. The highest concentrations of
antimony and manganese were found at Stations 17 and 20, respectively. The
relatively high concentrations of metals at Stations 11 and 12 in Budd Inlet and
Station 16 in Eld Inlet were unexpected, as these stations were located at
considerable distances from likely sources of contamination (see Figure 2).
No metal concentration exceeded an HAET or LAET value, a numerical
sediment quality standard, or a ML value. However, several exceedances of SL
values were found. The SL value for cadmium was exceeded at seven stations
in Budd Inlet (Stations 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 11) and at the single stations located
in Eld Inlet (Station 16) and Carr Inlet (Station 23). The SL value for mercury
was exceeded at two stations in Budd Inlet (Stations 11 and 12). The SL values
for silver and lead were exceeded at single stations in Budd Inlet (i.e., Stations
19
-------
ro
o
TABLE 3. CONCENTRATIONS OF METALS IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES FROM BUDD INLET
(mg/kg dry weight)
Station*
Aluminum
Antimony
Areanic
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Copper
Iron
Laad
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
1
69.100 E
0.390 U
7.80
0.590
53.6
45.8
28.900
28.8
480
0.160
25.3
0.45O
78.2 E
2
82.600 E
0.4OO U
8.60
0.680
55.7
63.8
40.300
19.7
515
0.120
29.9
O.48O
93.0 E
3
78.300 E
0.390 U
9.20
1.00
54.9
67.7
42.200
21.3
536
0.160
30.3
0.690
93.7 E
4
73.100 E
0.390 U
8.90
1.00
54.3
66.3
41,400
19.7
528
0.15O
31.2
0.650 T
95.5 E
5
77.900 E
0.400 U
8.70
0.990
51.2
58.4
38.000
19.6
404
0.160
27.3
O.530
83.4 E
6
83.406 E
0.390 U
7.60
0.610
51.7
68.6
44.400
16.5
554
0.110
33.4
O.540
84.3 E
7
74,300 E
0.400 U
9.40
1.60
54.9
67.3
41.800
20.6
6O4
0.170
32.6
0.630 T
95.4 E
8
71.000 E
0.390 U
11.4
1.60
58.5
61.4
35.600
26.5
427
0.200
32.2
0.850
94.5 E
9
63.400
0.390
9.90
1.50
58.6
49.9
32.100
39.4
376
0.170
27.1
1.00
1O2
10
E 64.500 E
U 0.4OO U
8.80
LM 0.860
61.2
40.0
29,500
53.2
393
0.1 30
29.9
1.4O
E 93.5 E
11
65,400
0.710
16.0
1.10
57.3
62.5
37.200
38.2
447
0.37O
32.1
0.72O
1O9
12
E 57,900 E
ZU 1.30ZU
15.7
0.870
54.7
69.1
33,700
78.1
580
0.330
31.7
0.580 T
E 114 E
'All of the chemical concentration* presented in thii table pati PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and are considered acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound.
The following qualifiers provide additional Information for specific values:
E - Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are generally assigned £ qualifiers when one quality assurance and quality control result
(i.e., matrix spike, matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
L - Value is less than the maximum shown.
M - Value is a mean.
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit shown. These values are acceptable as estimates.
U - Undetected at detection limit shown.
ZU - Value is less than the related detection limit shown because blank contamination was present.
-------
TABLE 4. CONCENTRATIONS OF METALS IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES
FROM AREAS OUTSIDE BUDD INLET
(mg/kg dry weight)
Metal
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
16
64,300 M
0.5607
9.00/Vf
1.70/W
75.3/W
47. 6M
34, 600 M
17.5/M
498 M
0.100 M
40.1/W
0.290 M
B5.2M
17
62,400
0.9607
9.80
0.770
62.7
39.2
30,400
22.7
510
0.110
36.3
0.300
92.5
Station8-5
20
67,800
0.930 7
6.30
0.160 7
48.3
28.7
28,600
25.3
807
0.120
24.8
0.2307
74.9
23
59,400
0.470 UW
7.30
1.60
70.3
24.0
24,000
14.4
416
0.070
32.1
0.2207
61.4
24
51,300
0.7507
5.90
0.330
38.8
13.5
16,200
18.1
355
0.050
20.5
0.1107
42.9
a Station 16 - Eld Inlet
Station 17 - Henderson Inlet
Station 20 - Cormorant Passage
Station 23 - Carr Inlet
Station 24 - Wollochet Bay.
bAII of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and
are considered acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound.
The following qualifiers provide additional information for specific values:
M - Value is a mean
7- Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit; these values are
acceptable as estimates
U - Undetected at detection limit shown
W - Graphite furnace atomic absorption analytical spike recovery > 115 percent.
21
-------
10 and 12, respectively). Although several exceedances of SL values were found,
exceedances of the interim performance standards for metals in reference areas
of Puget Sound were relatively small for the nine metals that have interim
standards (Table 5).
The only metal concentrations found by Tetra Tech (1990) to be elevated in
southern Puget Sound relative to other PSAMP stations located throughout the
sound were those observed for cadmium at two stations in Budd Inlet, where
concentrations were 1.2 mg/kg and 1.8 mg/kg. The concentration of 1.8 mg/kg
was the highest value found for cadmium at any of the 50 PSAMP stations. The
concentrations of cadmium found at the 17 stations sampled in the present study
ranged from 0.16 mg/kg to 1.7 mg/kg, with the highest value found at Station 16
in Eld Inlet and the next highest concentration (i.e., 1.6 mg/kg) found at
Stations 7 and 8 in Budd Inlet and Station 23 in Carr Inlet. Tetra Tech (1990)
suggested that the apparently elevated levels of cadmium in Budd Inlet were
consistent with results of historical studies and may have been the result of
operations of a former metal-plating facility located on the western shoreline of
the inlet.
In Table 6, the metals concentrations found in the present study are com-
pared with the values found in numerous areas throughout Puget Sound during
recent surveys of sediment contamination. In general, the maximum concentra-
tions found in the present study were considerably lower than the values found
in the major urban bays, but were within the range of values found in the
transitional and reference areas. The apparently elevated levels of cadmium
found in Eld, Budd, and Carr inlets (i.e., maximum values = 1.7, 1.6, and
1.6 mg/kg, respectively) were 1-2 orders of magnitude lower than the maximum
values found in the major urban bays (7.9-180 mg/kg), and within the range of
concentrations found in the transitional areas (0.37-4.6 mg/kg).
22
-------
TABLE 5. COMPARISONS OF METALS CONCENTRATIONS FOUND
IN THIS STUDY WITH THE INTERIM PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS PROPOSED FOR REFERENCE AREAS IN PUGET SOUND
Metal
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Interim Performance
Standard"
(mg/kg dry weight)
19
1.4
150
58
30
0.19
65
0.78
110
Stations at Which
Sediment Samples
Exceeded Standard
None
7,8,9,16,23
None
2,3,4,5,6,7,8,11,12
9,10,11,12
8,11,12
None
8,9,10
12
Range of
Exceedancesb
..
1.07-1.21
~
1.01-1.19
1.27-2.60
1.05-1.95
-
1.09-1.79
1.04
3 From Pastorok et al. (1989).
b Exceedances are based on ratios to the interim performance standards.
23
-------
TABLE 6. COMPARISONS OF SEDIMENT
CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED CHEMICALS
IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN PUGET SOUND*
Major Urban Bays
Chemical Commencement Bay
Metals (mg/kg dry weight)
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Organic Compounds (//g/kg
LPAH
HPAH
Total PCBs
Phenol
4-Methylphenol
p.p'-DDE
p,p'-DDD
Tributyltin
0.06-420
5.4-12,000
0.095-180
5.4-62
11-14,000
8.3-6,200
0.036-52
6.9-350
0.02-2.4
21-4,200
dry weight)0
45-23.000
79-36,000
3-2,000
1.0 L/-2,100
1 .0 U-96,000
0.01 U-50 U
0.03 U-50 U
__d
Elliott Bay
0.29 L/b-1,400
2.4-580
0.067-17
33-1,100
9.6-2,100
7.2-71,000
0.012-29
19-370
0.022-8.3
32-6,000
7-630,000
24-3,200,000
59-5,800
0.9-1,200
2.0-2,600
1.1 C/-62
1.7 L/-140
~
Everett Harbor
1 .2-200
2.6-690
0.038-7.9
50-270
11-1,000
4.4-520
0.006-0.78
24-69
0.007-1.0
38-5,900
36-28,000
36-23,000
1 (X-9,600
11-2,900
3-98,000
1 .0 U-200 U
1 .0 U-200 U
-
24
-------
TABLE 6. (Continued)
Transitional Areas6
Chemical
Metals (mg/kg dry weight)
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Organic Compounds (/ig/kg
LPAH
HPAH
Total PCBs
Phenol
4-Methylphenol
p,p'-DDE
p',p'-DDD
Tributyltin
Dyes Inlet
0.27-1.3
4.1-19
0.93-1.4
100-160
19-90
21-79
0.15-0.79
22-62
0.13-1.2
47-170
dry weight)
150-500
790-2,200
0.6-9.0
75 U
12-73 U
0.5 U-0.7
0.5 U
3-6
Gig Harbor
0.54-1.2
6.9-15
0.22-0.37
89-130
31-69
21-58
0.13-0.37
26-38
0.20-0.67
57-93
330-9,500
1,900-36,000
4.0-97
75 U
4-47
0.5 L/-1.3
0.5 4/-1.5
10-15
Oak Harbor
0.07-0.28
7.5-11
0.44-0.74
76-160
32-48
12-21
0.067-0.29
27-79
0.13-0.32
74-110
210-1,900
210-3,300
0.1 U-8.8
75 U
12-73 U
0.5 U
0.5 U
0.002 U-7
Port Angeles
0.07-0.47
5.7-15
0.02 L/-4.6
66-96
17-55
8.0-37
0.043-1.3
22-37
0.02-0.17
49-480
55-140
1 90-450
0.1 L/-8.4
75 U
8-240
0.5 U
0.5 U-4.9
0.002 U-22
25
-------
TABLE 6. (Continued)
Chemical
Reference
Carr Inlet
Areas
Port Susan
Present
Budd Inlet
Study
Other Areas
Metals (mg/kg dry weight)
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Organic Compounds
LPAH
HPAH
Total PCBs
Phenol
4-Methylphenol
p.p'-DDE
p',p'-DDD
Tributyltin
0.1 CM). 14
2.4-3.8
0.29-1.5
9.6-24
4.9-8
4.4-13
0.01-0.098
11-28
0.1 (/-0.12
15-24
U/g/kg dry weight)
2-45
22-78
4-7 U
10 £/-1,800
10 U-32
10 U-25 U
10 U-25 U
-
0.92-2.9
4.6-12
0.047-0.16
89-260
14-50
5.6-12
0.012-0.13
41-140
0.02 CM). 13
39-100
6-19
26-74
50 U-22Q U
3.3 C/-400
2-290
1 L/-10 U
1 C/-33 U
-
39 I/-1.3 U
7.6-16
0.59-1.6
51-61
40-69
17-78
0.11-0.37
25-33
0.45-1.4
78-110
220-480
380-2,000
5 t/-43
83-3,300
39 U- 1,600
4.0 C/-7.1
4.0 £/-65
3.1-62
0.47 f-0.96
5.9-9.8
0.16-1.7
39-75
14-48
14-25
0.05-0.12
21-40
0.11-0.30
43-95
24-78
60-260
13-79
7.4-21
2.9-10
1 .0 U-2.0 U
2.0 U-5.0 U
»
a Data Sources:
Tetra Tech (1985) - Commencement Bay, Carr Inlet
PTI and Tetra Tech (1988a) - Elliott Bay, Port Susan
PTI and Tetra Tech (1988b) - Everett Harbor, Port Susan
Crecelius et al. (1989) - Dyes Inlet, Gig Harbor, Oak Harbor, Port Angeles
Present Study - Budd Inlet, other areas (i.e., Eld Inlet, Henderson Inlet, Cormorant Passage, Carr Inlet,
Wollochet Bay).
b U - undectected at detection limit shown.
0 LPAH - low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
HPAH - high molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB - polychlorinated biphenyl.
d - indicates no data.
6 Transitional areas are located away from major urban areas, but may be influenced by chemical
contamination.
26
-------
In summary, the results of this study suggest that metals contamination at the
stations sampled in southern Puget Sound was not substantial. However,
sediments from many of the stations in Budd Inlet would require biological testing
before they could be dredged and disposed of at unconfmed open-water disposal
sites in Puget Sound.
Organic Compounds—The concentrations of most organic compounds in
the sediments sampled at the 17 stations in southern Puget Sound were either
undetected or relatively low (Tables 7-10). However, relatively high concen-
trations of phenol and 4-methylphenol were found at numerous stations in Budd
Inlet. Because sediments from the Budd Inlet stations (i.e., Stations 1-12) were
analyzed separately from sediments from the other areas in southern Puget Sound,
the suites of organic compounds and many of the detection limits differed between
the two sets of samples. The suite of compounds for the Budd Inlet samples was
larger because the laboratory opted to report the results for chemicals that were
not included in the statement of work. Lower detection limits were achieved for
the samples outside Budd Inlet because the analytical laboratory opted to use more
rigorous techniques for those samples. Specifically, the laboratory used a smaller
extract volume, demonstrated instrument sensitivity using smaller amounts of
standard concentrations, and did not dilute samples.
Tributyltin was detected at all 12 stations in Budd Inlet (Table 11). The
concentrations of this compound were generally relatively low, ranging from 3.1
to 16 Mg/kg at all stations except Station 4, where an unusually high value of
62 fig/kg was found. A major source of tributyltin to coastal waters is the use
of organotin antifouling paint on boat hulls. It is likely that Stations 1-10 in the
inner part of Budd Inlet were influenced substantially by boating activities,
whereas Stations 11 and 12 in the outer part of Budd Inlet were less affected by
these activities. The concentrations of tributyltin observed in this study reflected
27
-------
TABLE 7. CONCENTRATIONS OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES
FROM BUDD INLET BASED ON DRY WEIGHT NORMALIZATION (pg/kg dry weight)
00
Station*
Low Molecular Weight PAHb
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrytene
Total benzofluoranthene* (B + K|
Benzo(a)pyrene
lndeno(1.2.3-cd)pyrem
Dibenzoa.hlanthracene
Benzo(g.h.i)perylene
Total PCBi"
Phenols and Guaiacols
Phenol
2-Methylphenol
2.4-Dimethylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Pentachlorophenol
Guaiacol
4.5-Dichloroguaiacol
3.4.5-Trichk>roguaiacol
4.5,6-Trichloroguaiacol
Tetrachloroguaiacol
Phthalate Eiteri
BitU-ethylhexyDphthalate
1
220 L
34 U
34 U
34 U
34 U
34 U
51 T
34 U
590 L
130
100
47 T
79 T
90 T
40 T
34 U
34 U
34 U
5 U
3,300
20 U
21 U
1.600
70 U
13 U
26 U
26 U
26 U
26 U
160 ZU
2
340 L
41 U
41 U
41 U
41 U
41 U
130
41 U
69O L
170
140
49 T
85 T
84 L
41 U
41 U
41 U
41 U
5 U
1.200
32 U
30 U
360
100 U
13 U
25 U
25 U
25 U
25 U
670 ZU
3
230 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
480 I
92 T
82 T
39 U
61 T
51 T
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
5 U
560
30 U
30 U
39 U
90 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
400 ZU
4
390 L
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
190
39 U
1.000 L
270
240
86 T
130
120
44 T
39 U
39 U
39 U
5 U
660
30 U
30 U
39 U
9O U
14 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
800 ZU
5
240 I
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
46 T
39 U
440 L
79 T
75 T
39 U
50 T
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
5 U
650
30 U
30 U
1.400
90 U
13 U
25 U
25 U
25 U
25 U
770 ZU
6
230 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
380 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
76 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
38 U
5 U
83 E
23 U
20 U
38 U
80 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
180 ZU
7
240 L
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
49 T
39 U
510 L
94 T
90 T
39 U
60 T
66 T
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
5 U
910
30 U
30 U
43 T
90 U
14 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
28 U
700 ZU
a
280 L
40 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
56 T
47 U
740 L
15O
130
59 T
75 T
140
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
18 T
3.000
38 U
40 U
600
150 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
120 ZU
9
320 L
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
39 U
120
39 U
990 L
240
19O
96 T
120
170
54 T
39 U
39 U
39 U
5 U
1.500
30 U
30 U
530
90 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.100 ZU
10
480 G
36 UG
36 UG
36 UG
36 UG
36 G
290 G
49 G
2.0OO G
47O G
410 G
160 G
240 G
350 G
17O G
100 G
36 UG
73 G
43
1.1OO G
27 UG
30 UG
650 G
80 UG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
670 ZU
11
280 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
480 U
47 U
47 U
64 U
47 U
94 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
47 U
5 U
2.OOO
28 U
30 U
120
1OO U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
58 ZU
12
290 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
490 U
48 U
48 U
56 U
48 U
96 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
48 U
5 U
1.300
29 U
29 U
81
100 U
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
48 U
-------
TABLE 7. (Continued)
rO
CO
Station*
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1.2-Dichk>robenzene
1.3-Dichlorobenzene
1.4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2.4-Trichlorobanzena
Haxachlorobanzana
Haxachlorbutadiana
Chlorinated Pesticides
p.p'-DDT
p.p'-DOE
p.p'-DDD
Heptachlor
Haptachlor epoxide
o-ChlonJana
f-Chlordane
Methoxychlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Endrin ketone
Toxaphene
Endotulfan sulfate
ff-Endosulfan
K-Endotulfan
o-Hexachlorocyclohexane
&-Hexachlorocyclohexane
K-Haxachlorocyclohexane
£-Hexachlorocyclohexane
1
19 U
34 U
18 U
22 U
39 U
50 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
23 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.O U
8.0 U
2.O U
4.0 U
4.0 U
6.0 U
300 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.O U
3.0 U
2
30 U
41 U
28 U
34 U
60 U
70 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
13 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.O U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
3
28 U
39 U
26 U
32 U
56 U
60 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.O U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.O U
2.O U
3.0 U
4
28 U
39 U
26 U
32 U
57 U
70 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
14 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.O U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.0 U
2.O U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
6
28 U
39 U
26 U
32 U
56 U
6O U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
8.0 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.O U
2.0 U
4.O U
4.0 U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.O U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.O U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
6
21 U
38 U
20 U
25 U
43 U
50 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
13 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.O U
4.O U
4.0 U
6.0 U
300 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
7
28 U
39 U
26 U
32 U
57 U
70 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
12 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
6.0 U
300 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
8
34 U
47 U
30 U
40 U
68 U
80 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.O U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
9
28 U
39 U
26 U
32 U
66 U
80 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.O U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.O U
4.0 U
4.0 U
6.0 U
300 U
8.O U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
10
26 UG
36 UG
24 UG
29 UG
52 UG
60 UG
3.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
15 UE
2.O U
3.O U
3.0 U
8.O U
2.0 U
4.0 U
4.O U
6.0 U
3OO U
8.O U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.O U
11
27 U
47 U
25 U
31 U
54 U
70 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
4.0 U
20 UE
2.0 U
3.0 U
3.0 U
8.0 U
2.O U
4.O U
4.0 U
6.0 U
30O U
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
2.0 U
3.0 U
12
27 U
48 U
26 U
32 U
58 U
67 U
4.0 U
7.1 T
65
20 UE
2.0 U
10 T
11 T
8.0 U
2.0 U
4.O U
4.O U
6.0 U
300 U
B.O U
2.O U
4.0 U
2.0 U
2.O U
2.0 U
3.O U
'All of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b| guidelines and are considered acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound.
The following qualifiers provide additional information for specific values:
E - Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are generally assigned £ qualifiers when one quality assurance/quality control result (i.e..
matrix spike, matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
G - Estimate is greater than value shown.
L - Value is less than the maximum shown.
NA - Not analyzed.
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit at the concentration shown. These values are acceptable as estimates.
U - Undetected at detection limit shown.
ZU - Value is less than the related detection limit because blank contamination was present.
b Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
° Polychlorinated biphenyls.
-------
TABLE 8. CONCENTRATIONS OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN
SEDIMENT SAMPLES FROM AREAS OUTSIDE BUDD INLET
BASED ON DRY WEIGHT NORMALIZATION
(pg/kg dry weight)
Station'-6
Low
High
Molecular Weight PAH°
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Total PCBsd
16
78
6.4
3.3
15
15
35
6.2
120
32
25
13
6.9
15
15
15
16
L
E
N
U
U
T
E
L
N
T
N
N
N
U
U
17
65
8.3
4.5
3.6
3.9
37
12
260
100
74
26
17
15
13
13
79
20
E
E
N
E
E
T
E
L
T
T
N
N
U
U
48
8.3
4.8
1.7
7.8
24
6
140
41
31
22
13
13
7.8
7.8
22
L
T
N
N
U
N
E
L
T
T
NT
N
N
U
U
23
57
4.6
2.7
1.5
10
38
2.7
80
23
16
10
5.7
8.8
5.4
10
21
L
E
N
N
U
T
E
L
T
T
U
E
N
N
U
24
24
3.4
6.8
0.8
1.6
14
3.9
60
17
13
7.3
4.1
5.4
6.8
6.8
13
L
N
U
N
N
T
E
L
N
T
N
E
N
U
U
Phenols
Phenol
2-Methylphenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Pentachlorophenol
17
5
5.8
2.9
73
N
U
U
N
U
21
4.6
5.3
13
67
N
U
U
U
U
7.4
2.7
3.1
7.8
39
N
U
U
U
U
12
3.5
4
10
50
N
U
U
U
U
7.7
2.4
2.7
6.8
34
E
U
U
U
U
Phthalate Esters
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
18
ZU
18
ZU
41
ZU
10
U
9.6
ZU
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
15
15
15
6.1
15
11
U
U
U
U
U
U
13
13
13
5.6
13
10
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.2
7.8
3.8
3.2
7.8
5.8
N
U
N
U
U
U
10
10
10
4.2
10
8
U
U
U
U
U
U
6.8
6.8
6.8
2.9
6.8
5.1
U
U
U
U
U
U
30
-------
TABLES. (Continued)
Station"-6
Chlorinated Pesticides
p.p'-DDT
p,p'-DDE
p.p'-DDD
Heptachlor
o-Chlordane
Aldrin
Dieldrin
K-Hexachlorocyclohexane
16
2.0
1.0
2.0
0.50
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
17
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.50
1.0
3.0
1.0
0.50
20
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.50
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
23
2.0
2.0
5.0
0.50
1.0
1.5
5.0
0.50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
24
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.50
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
• Station 16 = Eld Inlet
Station 17 = Henderson Inlet
Station 20 = Cormorant Passage
Station 23 = Carr Inlet
Station 24 = Wollochet Bay.
b All of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and are considered
acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound. The following qualifiers provide
additional information for specific values:
E - Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are
generally assigned f qualifiers when one quality assurance and quality control result (i.e., matrix spike,
matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
L Value is less than the maximum shown.
N - Reported analytical results based upon presumptive evidence (i.e., all criteria for compound identification
as specified by Contract Laboratory Program protocols were not met).
T Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit. These values are acceptable as
estimates.
U Undetected at detection limit shown.
ZU - Value is less than the related detection limit because blank contamination was present.
c PAH - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.
d PCBs - polychlorinated biphenyls.
31
-------
TABLE 9. CONCENTRATIONS OF NONIONIC ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES
FROM BUDD INLET BASED ON ORGANIC CARBON NORMALIZATION (//g/kg organic carbon)
W
10
Station*
Low Molecular Weight PAHb
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthylena
Acenaphthene
Fluorane
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz|a)anthracene
Chryserw
Total benzof luoranthenes (B -I- K)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2.3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzla.hlanthracene
Benzo(g,h.i)perylene
1
5,000 L
770 U
770 U
770 U
770 U
770 U
1.200 T
770 U
13.000 I
3.000
2.300
1.100 T
1.8OO T
2.000 T
910 T
770 U
770 U
770 U
2
10.000 I
1.210 U
1.210 U
1.210 U
1.210 U
1.210 U
3.820
1.210 U
20.000 L
5.0OO
4.1OO
1.400 T
2.500 T
2.500 I
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
3
B.BOO U
1.600 U
1.500 U
1,500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
18.000 L
3.500 T
3.2OO T
1.500 U
2.300 T
2.OOO T
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
4
12.000 L
1,200 U
1,200 U
1.200 U
1,200 U
1.200 U
5.9OO
1.200 U
31.0OO L
8.400
7,500
2.7OO T
4.100
3.800
1.400 T
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
5
4,200 L
680 U
680 U
680 U
680 U
680 U
800 T
680 U
7.700 I
1.400 T
1.300 T
680 U
870 T
680 U
680 U
680 U
680 U
680 U
6
8,800 U
1.500 U
1,500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
570,000 U
1,500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
2.900 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
1.500 U
7
7.500 L
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.500 T
1.200 U
16.000 I
2.900 T
2.800 T
1,200 u
1.9OO T
2,100 T
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
1.200 U
8
9.400 L
1.300 U
1.600 U
1,600 U
1,600 U
1.600 U
1,900 T
1,600 U
25.000 L
5.100
4.400
2.000 T
2,500 T
4.7OO
1.600 U
1.60O U
1.6OO U
1.600 U
9
8.900 L
1.100 U
1.100 U
1.100 U
1.100 U
1.100 U
3.300
1.100 U
28,000 L
6,700
6.300
2.700 T
3.300
4.700
1.500 T
1.100 U
1.100 U
1,100 U
10
24.000 Q
1,800 UQ
1,800 UG
1.800 UQ
1.800 UQ
1.800 G
15.000 G
2,500 G
100,000 G
24.000 G
21.000 G
8.000 G
12.000 G
18.000 G
8.500 G
5.000 G
1.800 UG
3.700 G
11
8.200 U
1.4OO U
1.400 U
1.4OO U
1.400 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
14.000 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
1.600 U
1.400 U
2.800 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
1.400 U
12
10.000 U
1,700 U
1,700 U
1.700 U
1.700 U
1.700 U
1,700 U
1,700 U
17,000 U
1.700 U
1,700 U
1.900 U
1.700 U
3.300 U
1.700 U
1.700 U
1.700 U
1.700 U
Total PCBs"
110 U
150 U
190 U
160 U
87 U
190 U
160 U
610 T
140 U
2.200
150 U
170 U
Phthalate Ertert
Bi*(2-ethylhexvl)phthalate
3.600 ZU 20.OOO ZU 15.000 ZU 25,000 ZU 13.000 ZU 6.900 ZU 22.000 ZU 4.000 ZU 31.000 ZU 34,000 ZU 1.70O ZU 1.700 U
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon*
1,2-Dichlorobanzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
1,2.4-Trichlorobenzene
430 U 880 U 1.100 U 880 U
770 U 1,200 U 1.500 U 1.200 U
410 U 820 U 1.000 U 810 U
500 U I.OOO U 1.200 U 1.OOO U
490 U 810 U 880 U 1.100 U 780 U
680 U 1.500 U 1.2OO U 1.600 U 1.100 U
450 U 770 U 810 U 1.000 U 72O U
560 U 960 U 1.OOO U 1,300 U 890 U
1.300 UG 790 U 93O U
1.800 UG 1.400 U 1.700 U
1.200 UG 740 U 900 U
1.5OO UG 91O U 1.100 U
-------
TABLE 9. (Continued)
Station*
10
11
12
W
W
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadlana
Chlorinstod Pesticides
p.p'-DDT
p.p'-DDE
p.p'-DDD
Heptachlor
Haptachlor epoxMe
o-Chlordane
K-Chlordane
Mathoxychlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Endrin ketona
Toxaphane
Endotulfan sulfate
rocyclohexane
B-Hexachlorocyclohexane
r-Hexachlorocyclohexane
4-Hexachlorocyclohexane
890 U
1.100 U
91 U
91 U
91 U
520 UE
45 U
68 U
68 U
180 U
45 U
91 U
91 U
140 U
6.8OO U
18O U
45 U
91 U
45 U
45 U
45 U
68 U
1.800 U
2.100 U
120 U
120 U
120 U
380 UE
59 U
88 U
88 U
240 U
59 U
12O U
120 U
180 U
8.800 U
240 U
59 U
120 U
59 U
59 U
59 U
88 U
2.200 U
2,300 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
77 U
77 U
120 U
120 U
31O U
77 U
150 U
150 U
23O U
12.000 U
310 U
77 U
150 U
77 U
77 U
77 U
120 U
1.800 U
2,200 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
440 UE
63 U
94 U
94 U
250 U
63 U
130 U
130 U
190 U
9.400 U
250 U
63 U
130 U
63 U
63 U
63 U
94 U
980 U
1.000 U
70 U
70 U
70 U
140 UE
35 U
52 U
52 U
140 U
35 U
70 U
70 U
100 U
5.2OO U
140 U
35 U
70 U
35 U
35 U
35 U
52 U
1.700 U
1.900 U
150 U
150 U
150 U
500 UE
77 U
120 U
120 U
310 U
77 U
150 U
150 U
23O U
12.000 U
31O U
77 U
150 U
77 U
77 U
77 U
120 U
1,800 U
2,200 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
380 UE
63 U
94 U
94 U
250 U
63 U
130 U
130 U
190 U
9.400 U
250 U
63 U
130 U
63 U
63 U
63 U
94 U
2.300 U
2.700 U
130 U
130 U
130 U
67 U
67 U
100 U
100 U
270 U
67 U
130 U
130 U
200 U
10.OOO U
270 U
67 U
130 U
67 U
67 U
67 U
100 U
1,600 U
2.200 U
110 U
110 U
110 U
56 U
56 U
83 U
83 U
220 U
56 U
110 U
110 U
170 U
8,300 U
220 U
56 U
110 U
56 U
56 U
56 U
83 U
2.600 UO
3,000 UO
150 U
200 U
200 U
750 UE
100 U
ISO U
150 U
400 U
100 U
200 U
200 U
300 U
16,000 U
400 U
100 U
2OO U
100 U
1OO U
100 U
150 U
1,600 U
2.100 U
120 U
120 U
120 U
690 UE
69 U
88 U
88 U
240 U
59 U
120 U
12O U
180 U
8.800 U
240 U
59 U
120 U
59 U
59 U
59 U
88 U
2.000 U
2.300 U
140 U
240 T
2.200
690 UE
69 U
340 T
380 T
280 U
69 U
140 U
140 U
210 U
10.0OO U
280 U
69 U
14O U
69 U
69 U
69 U
100 U
* All of the chemical concentration* presented in thii table pat* PSEP (1989a.b) guideline* and are considered acceptable for characterizing environmental condition* in southern Puget Sound.
The following qualifier* provide additional information for (pacific value*:
E - Estimated value. These value* have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are generally a**igned £ qualifier* whan one quality anuranca and quality control result
(i.e., matrix spike, matrix duplicate, etc.) fall* outside of the control limit*.
G - Estimate is greater than value shown.
L - Value is less than the maximum shown. These value* are acceptable a* estimates.
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit at the concentration shown.
U - Undetected at detection limit shown.
ZU - Value is less than the related detection limit because blank contamination was present.
b Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
° Polychlorinated biphenyls.
-------
TABLE 10. CONCENTRATIONS OF NONIONIC ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN
SEDIMENT SAMPLES FROM AREAS OUTSIDE BUDD INLET
BASED ON ORGANIC CARBON NORMALIZATION
(//g/kg organic carbon)
Station'-"
Low
High
Molecular Weight PAH°
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Total PCBsd
16
2,600
210
110
500
500
1,200
210
4,100
1,100
830
430
230
500
500
500
530
L
E
N
U
U
T
E
L
N
T
N
N
N
U
U
17
2,100
270
150
120
130
1,200
390
8,000
3,200
2,400
840
230
480
420
420
2,500
£
E
N
E
E
T
E
L
T
T
N
N
U
U
20
4,800
830
480
170
780
2,400
600
14,000
4,100
3,100
2,200
1,300
1,300
780
780
2,200
L
T
N
N
U
N
E
L
T
T
NT
N
N
U
U
23
3,800
310
180
100
670
2,500
180
5,300
1,500
1,100
670
380
590
360
670
1,400
L
E
N
N
U
T
E
L
T
T
U
E
N
N
U
24
2,200
310
620
73
150
1,300
350
5,500
1,500
1,200
660
370
490
620
620
1,200
L
N
U
N
N
T
E
L
N
T
N
E
N
U
U
Phthalate Esters
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
600
ZU
580
ZU
4,100
ZU
670
U
870
ZU
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
500
500
500
200
500
370
U
U
U
U
U
U
420
420
420
180
420
320
U
U
U
U
U
U
220
780
380
320
780
580
N
U
N
U
U
U
670
670
670
280
670
530
U
U
U
U
U
U
620
620
620
260
620
460
U
U
U
U
U
U
Chlorinated Pesticides
p,p'-DDT
p,p'-DDE
p,p'-DDD
Heptachlor
o-Chlordane
Aldrin
Dieldrin
K-Hexachlorocyclohexane
67
33
67
17
33
33
33
17
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
65
65
65
16
32
97
32
16
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
200
200
200
50
100
100
100
50
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
130
130
330
33
67
100
330
33
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
180
180
180
45
91
91
91
45
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
34
-------
TABLE 10. (Continued)
• Station 16 = Eld Inlet
Station 17 = Henderson Inlet
Station 20 = Cormorant Passage
Station 23 = Carr Inlet
Station 24 = Wollochet Bay.
6 All of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and are considered
acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound. The following qualifiers provide
additional information for specific values:
E - Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are
generally assigned E qualifiers when one quality assurance and quality control result (i.e., matrix spike,
matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
L - Value is less than the maximum shown.
N Reported analytical results based upon presumptive evidence (i.e., all criteria for compound identification
as specified by Contract Laboratory Program protocols were not met).
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit. These values are acceptable as
estimates.
U Undetected at detection limit shown.
ZU Value is less than the related detection limit because blank contamination was present.
c PAH - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.
d PCBs - polychlorinated biphenyls.
35
-------
TABLE 11. CONCENTRATIONS OF
TRIBUTYLTIN IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES
FROM BUDD INLET
Tributyltin
Station U/g/kg dry weight)
1 16
2 15
3 12
4 62
5 11
6 7.3
7 15
8 21
9 8.4
10 5.9
11 4.9
12 3.1
36
-------
those patterns. Tributyltin was not evaluated in samples outside Budd Inlet,
because boating activities are not as extensive outside that embayment.
The highest concentrations of LPAH and HPAH compounds were found at
Station 10 in Budd Inlet. The highest concentration of total PCBs was found at
Station 17 in Henderson Inlet. As noted above, phenol and 4-methylphenol were
detected at numerous stations. The highest concentrations of both compounds
were found at Station 1 in Budd Inlet. Guaiacols (evaluated at 5 of the 12
stations in Budd Inlet most likely to be affected by pulp-mill wastes) were not
detected at any station. Chlorinated hydrocarbons were detected only at very low
concentrations at Station 20 in Cormorant Passage. The only chlorinated
pesticides detected were p,p'-DDE, p,p'-DDD, a-chlordane, and 7-chlordane at
Station 12 in Budd Inlet.
Concentrations of four of the organic compounds detected in sediment
samples from Budd Inlet exceeded various sediment quality values for Puget
Sound. Those compounds included phenol, 4-methylphenol, p,p'-DDD, and
indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene.
On the basis of dry weight normalization, LAET values were exceeded for
phenol, 4-methylphenol, and p,p'-DDD. Concentrations of phenol exceeded the
HAET value at five stations (Stations 1, 8, 9, 11, and 12), and exceeded the
LAET value at six additional stations (Stations 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10). Concen-
trations of 4-methylphenol exceeded the LAET value at two stations (Stations 1
and 5). Concentrations of p,p'-DDD exceeded the HAET value at Station 12.
On the basis of organic carbon normalization, concentrations of p,p'-DDD
exceeded the LAET value at Station 12.
The numerical sediment quality standards were exceeded for phenol at 11
stations and for 4-methylphenol at 2 stations.
37
-------
ML values were exceeded for phenol at Stations 1, 8, 9, 11, and 12 and for
4-methylphenol at Stations 1 and 5. SL values were exceeded for phenol at
Stations 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 10 and for 4-methylphenol at Stations 8, 9, and 10.
In addition, SL values were exceeded for indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene at Station 10.
The concentrations of LPAH and HPAH found in the present study were not
compared with the interim performance standards for reference areas in Puget
Sound, because most of the individual compounds included in those total values
were not detected in the present study. The interim performance standard for
total PCBs (30 /xg/kg) was exceeded at two stations (Station 10 in Budd Inlet and
Station 17 in Henderson Inlet). Although the value observed at Station 10
(43 /ig/kg) exceeded the interim performance standard by a relatively small
amount, the value observed at Station 17 (79 /*g/kg) was over 2.5 times higher
than the interim standard. However, the value observed at Station 17 was a little
over half the LAET value of 130 /xg/kg, suggesting that although the observed
concentration was higher than the level expected in a reference area, it was
considerably lower than the level at which adverse biological effects might be
expected.
Concentrations of LPAH and HPAH compounds were relatively low at the
two PSAMP stations sampled in Budd Inlet, as well as the other six PSAMP
stations sampled in southern Puget Sound (Tetra Tech 1990). For example, all
concentrations of total LPAH and HPAH compounds were less than 100 /ig/kg
and 500 fig/kg (respectively) at the eight PSAMP stations sampled in southern
Puget Sound. Malins et al. (1982) also found relatively low concentrations of
total LPAH (54-210 /tg/kg) and HPAH (350-690 jig/kg) compounds in sediments
from three stations in Budd Inlet.
In Table 6, the concentrations of the primary organic compounds detected in
the present study are compared with the values found in numerous areas through-
out Puget Sound during other recent surveys of sediment contamination. In many
38
-------
cases, the maximum concentrations found in the present study were considerably
lower than the values found in the major urban bays, but were within the range
of values found in the transitional or reference areas. However, major exceptions
to this pattern were apparent for the maximum concentrations of phenol,
4-methylphenol, p,p'-DDD, and tributyltin found in Budd Inlet. Each of these
exceptions is described below:
• The maximum concentration of phenol in Budd Inlet (3,300 /tg/kg)
was greater than the range of maximum values found in the major
urban bays (1,200-2,900 /*g/kg).
• The maximum concentration of 4-methylphenol in Budd Inlet
(1,600 fig/kg) was less than the range of maximum values found in
the major urban bays (2,600-98,000 Mg/kg), but considerably
greater than the range of maximum values found in the transitional
areas (47-240 /ig/kg) and reference areas (32-290 /ig/kg).
• The maximum concentration of p,p'-DDD in Budd Inlet (65 /*g/kg)
was within the range of maximum values found in the major urban
bays (50 U-140 /xg/kg), and considerably greater than the range of
maximum values found in the transitional areas (0.517-4.9 jxg/kg)
and the reference areas (2517-3317).
• The maximum concentration of tributyltin in Budd Inlet (62 /ig/kg)
was considerably greater than the range of maximum values found
in the transitional areas (6-22 /*g/kg). No information on tributyl-
tin concentrations was available for the major urban bays or
reference areas.
In summary, the results of this study suggest that although the observed
concentrations of most organic compounds in sediments were relatively low at the
17 stations evaluated in southern Puget Sound, phenol and 4-methylphenol were
39
-------
present at multiple locations in Budd Inlet at concentrations that may be associ-
ated with adverse biological effects (although sediments from these stations were
not considered toxic based on the results of the amphipod mortality toxicity tests).
In addition, p,p'-DDD was present at a single station in Budd Inlet at concen-
trations that may be associated with adverse biological effects.
CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN TISSUE
Fish
Of the total of 94 chemicals evaluated in muscle tissue samples from English
sole (Transects T4 and T6) and starry flounder (Transects Tl, T2, T3, T5,
and T7), only four metals (i.e, arsenic, copper, lead, and mercury) and four
organic compounds (i.e., total PCBs, di-n-butyl phthalate, isophorone, and
benzoic acid) were detected (Table 12). However, the concentrations of all of
these detected chemicals, except di-/i-butyl phthalate, were relatively low.
The four metals were found in fish from all seven transects. The highest
concentrations of arsenic were found in English sole from Transects T4
(6.3 mg/kg; Totten Inlet) and T6 (9.8 mg/kg; Carr Inlet). The highest concentra-
tions of mercury were found in English sole from Transect T4 (0.12 mg/kg), and
in starry flounder from Transects T2 (0.13 mg/kg; outer Budd Inlet) and T7
(0.10 mg/kg; Carr Inlet). Concentrations of copper and lead were generally
similar among all transects, with overall ranges of 0.20-0.31 and 0.02-0.04
mg/kg, respectively.
One or more of the four organic compounds were detected in fish from all
seven transects. PCBs were detected in fish from five of the seven transects.
The highest concentrations of total PCBs were found in starry flounder from
40
-------
TABLE 12. CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN TISSUE SAMPLES
OF ENGLISH SOLE AND STARRY FLOUNDER FROM SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
Metals (mg/kg, wet weight)
Arsenic
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Organic Compounds (//g/kg.
Low Molecular Weight PAH*1
Naphthalene
2-Methlynaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Total benzofluoranthenes
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzla, htanthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Total PCBs"
T1
0.53TE -
0.21
0.02T -
0.04T
wet weight)
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
31U
(B + K) 62U
31U
31UE-
31U
31U
24T
1.10S
-0.28
0.03T
-0.05
-32U
-32U
-32U
- 32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
- 64U
-32U
32UE
-32U
-32U
-34T
T2
0.51 TE-0
0.22M
0.02U -
0.07 - 0
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
64U
32U
32UE-
32U
32U
15T
.75TM
-0.31
0.04T
.13EM
-40U
-4OU
- 4OU
- 40U
-40U
-40U
-40U
-40U
-40U
-40U
- 4OU
- SOU
-40U
40UE
-4OU
-40U
-45T
T3
1.4T- 1.8
0.22 - 0.29
0.02U
0.02TE - 0.07E
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
86U - SOU
43U - 45U
43UE - 45UE
43U, 45U
43U, 45U
5U- 18E
Transect ••b>c
T4
3.9 - 6.3
0.25 - 0.29
0.02T - 0.04T
0.02T-0.12
45U - 62U
45U - 310U
45U-310U
45U - 310U
45U - 310U
45U-310U
45U-310U
45U-310U
45U- 310U
45U - 310U
45U - 310U
SOU- 120U
45U-310U
45UE - 62UE
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
5U
T5
1.1T
0.21
- 1.3T
-0.26
0.02UE
0.02TE -
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
33U
32U
32U
32U
32U
64U
32U
32UE-
32U
32U
0.04E
-33U
-32U
-33U
-33U
-33U
-33U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-66U
-33U
33UE
-33U
-33U
5U
T6
1.70M-
0.25-
9.80
0.28
0.02T - O.O4T
0.05-
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
36U
72U
36U
36UE-
36U
36U
5U
0.06
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-41U
-82U
-41U
41 UE
-41U
-41U
-28T
T7
2.8E-3.1
0.20 - 0.23
0.02UE
0.07E-0.1OE
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
66U
33U
33UE
33U
33U
5U-40
-------
TABLE 12. (Continued)
Phenols and Substituted Phenols
Phenol
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2-Chlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-methytphenol
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
2-Methyl-4.6-dinitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phthalate Esters
Dimethyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-/)-buty) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Di-/?-octyl phthalate
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2-Chloronaphthalene
T1
63U
31U
56U
31U
90U-
63U
310U-
310U-
90U -
31U
31U
31U
31U
-65U
19U
-32U
-58U
-32U
100U
-65U
160U
160U
160U
320U
160U
320U
100U
-32U
-32U
-32U
-32U
31U-220UZ
31U
31U
31U
-32U
18U
-32U
17U
21U
-32U
T2
64U
18U
32U
19U
32U
97U-
64U
160U-
160U-
160U-
320U-
160U-
320U-
100U -
32U
32U
33U-
33U-
32U
32U
18U
32U
16U
21U
32U
-SOU
-26U
-4OU
-64U
-40U
120U
- SOU
200U
200U
200U
400U
200U
400U
130U
-40U
- 40U
160U
160U
- 40U
-40U
-25U
-40U
-22U
-26U
-40U
T3
86U-91U
24U - 25U
43U - 45U
25U - 26U
43U - 45U
130U- 14OU
86U-91U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
430U - 450U
220U - 230U
430U - 450U
130U- 140U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
23U - 24U
43U - 45U
21U-22U
27U - 29U
43U - 45U
Transect
T4
90U-
27U
45U
80U-
450U
14OU-
90U-
230U-
230U-
230U-
450U-
230U-
450U-
140U-
45U
45U
45U
45U
»,b,c
120U
-37U
-62U
110U
-62U
190U
120U
310U
310U
310U
620U
310U
620U
190U
-62U
-62U
-890
-62U
45U - 310UZ
45U
26U
45U
24U
30U
45U
-62U
-35U
-62U
-33U
-41U
-62U
T5
64
32U
32U
97U-
64U
16OU-
160U-
160U-
320U-
160U-
320U-
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
32U
17U
32U
20U
32U
-66U
18U
-33U
19U
-33U
100U
-66U
170U
170U
170U
33OU
170U
330U
100U
-33U
-33U
-33U
-33U
-33U
-33U
- 18U
-33U
16U
-21U
-33U
T6
70U - SOU
21U-25U
36U - 41 U
6OU - 70U
36U-41U
110U- 12OU
7OU - SOU
180U-21OU
180U-210U
180U-21OU
360U - 41OU
180U-210U
36OU - 41 OU
110U- 12OU
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
2OU - 24U
36U-41U
19U-22U
24U - 27U
36U-41U
T7
66U
18U-26U
33U
19U-28U
33U
99U - 100U
66U
16OU- 170U
160U-170U
160U- 170U
330U
16OU- 17OU
330U
10OU
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
18U-25U
33U
1 6U - 23U
21U-28U
33U
-------
TABLE 12. (Continued)
GO
Transact ••blC
Hexachlorobenzene
Haxachlorobutadiane
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Halogenated Ethers
Bis(2-chloroethyllether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
Miscellaneous Oxygenated Compounds
Benzyl alcohol
Benzoic acid
Dibenzofuran
Organonitrogen Compounds
Aniline
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
1 ,2-Diphenylhydrazine
Carbazole
4-Chloroaniline
2-Nitroaniline
3-Nitroaniline
4-Nitroaniline
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
T1
36U - 37U
44U - 45U
63U - 65U
16OU
31U-32U
31U-32U
31U-32U
31U-32U
31U-32U
40U
1 60U - 1 90T
31U-32U
160U
31U-32U
31U-32U
160U
31U-32U
31U-32U
94U - 97U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
16U- 17U
T2
39U - S6U
46U - 56U
64U - SOU
1 60U - 20OU
32U - 40U
32U - 4OU
32U - 40U
32U - 4OU
32U - 4OU
40U - SOU
1 60U - 200U
32U - 40U
1 60U - 200U
32U - 4OU
32U - 4OU
1 60U - 200U
32U - 40U
32U - 4OU
97U - 1 20U
1 60U - 20OU
1 60U - 200U
1 60U - 200U
160U-200U
1 60U - 200U
16U- 23U
T3
60U - 63U
60U - 63U
86U-91U
220U - 230U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
SOU - 60U
220U - 320
43U - 45U
220U - 230U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
220U - 230U
43U - 45U
43U - 45U
130U - 140U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
220U - 230U
25U - 26U
T4
51U-70U
60U - 90U
90U - 1 20U
230U-310U
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
SOU - 70U
230U - 310U
45U - 62U
230U - 310U
46U - 62U
46U - 62U
230U - 310U
45U - 62U
45U - 62U
14OU - 190U
230U-310U
230U-310U
230U - 310U
230U - 310U
230U-310U
23U - 32U
T5
45U - 47U
45U - 47U
64U - 66U
16OU- 170U
32U - 33U
32U - 33U
33U - 33U
33U - 33U
33U - 33U
40U - 42U
160U- 180
32U - 33U
160U- 170U
32U - 33U
32U - 33U
16OU- 170U
32U - 33U
32U - 33U
96U- 100U
160U- 170U
160U- 17OU
160U- 170U
16OU- 170U
160U- 170U
19U
T6
41U-47U
5OU-6OU
70U - SOU
180U-210U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
36U-41U
40U-50U
190-26O
36U-41U
180U-21OU
36U-41U
36U-41U
18OU-21OU
36U-41U
36U-41U
110U- 120U
180U-210U
180U-210U
180U- 210U
180U-210U
180U-210U
18U-21U
T7
46U - 47U
46U - 57U
66U
16OU- 170U
33U
33U
33U
33U
33U
41U-48U
170
33U
160U- 170U
33U
33U
16OU- 170U
33U
33U
99U- 1OOU
160U- 170U
160U- 170U
16OU- 170U
160U- 170U
160U- 170U
19U
-------
TABLE 12. (Continued)
Benzidine
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
Chlorinated Pesticides
p,p'-DDT
p.p'-DDD
p,p'-DDE
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
o-Chlordane
K-Chlordane
Methoxychlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Endrin ketone
Isophorone
Toxaphene
Endosulfan sulfate
o-Endosulfan
B-Endosulfan
a-Hexachlorocyclohexane
B-Hexachlorocyclohexane
T1
1.6OOU
16OU
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
150- 170
30OU
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
T2
1 .600U - 2.0OOU
32U - 200U
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
32U- 180
300U
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
T3
2.200U - 2.300U
220U - 230U
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
110- 300
300U
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
Transect ••b>e
T4
2,3OOU-3,1OOU
230U - 310U
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
62U - 83T
300U
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
T5
160U- 1.70OU
16OU- 170U
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
71T- 120
3OOU
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
T6
1,800U-2,100U
180U-2.100U
4U
4U
4U
2U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
36U-41U
3OOU
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
T7
1.600U-1.700U
16OU- 170U
4U
4U
4U
2U- 14U
2U
3U
3U
8U
2U
4U
4U
6U
73T - 200
300U
8U
2U
4U
2U
2U
-------
TABLE 12. (Continued)
Transect ••b>e
T1 T2 T3 T4
K-HexacWorocyclohexane 2U 2U 2U 2U
J-Hexachlorocyclohexane 3U 3U 3U 3U
Lipid Content (percent) 0.23 - 0.27 0.24 - 0.41 0.39 - 0.65 0.32 - 0.51
T5 T6 T7
2U 2U 2U
3U 3U 3U
0.33 - 0.47 0.28 - 0.35 0.30 - 0.37
' Transect locations and species evaluated are:
T1 - Inner Budd Inlet - starry flounder
T2 - Outer Budd Inlet - starry flounder
T3 - Oakland Bay - starry flounder
T4 - Totten Inlet - English sole
T5 - Case Inlet - starry flounder
T6 - McNeil Island - English sole
T7 - Carr Inlet - starry flounder.
b Concentrations are presented as the range of values found for the three replicate composite samples at each transect. If all values are equal for the three samples, a single
concentration is presented in the table. Mean values were not calculated because most chemicals were not detected. Values for each composite sample at each transect are
presented in Appendix B.
CAII of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and are considered acceptable for characterizing environmental conditions in southern
Puget Sound. The following qualifiers provide additional information for specific values:
E Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are generally assigned £ qualifiers when one quality assurance and
quality control result (i.e., matrix spike, matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
M - Value is a mean.
S - Value determined by method of standard additions; the value is reliable and should not be considered an estimate.
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit at the concentration shown. These values are acceptable as estimates.
U - Undetected at detection limit shown.
d Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.
" Polychlorinated biphenyls.
-------
Transects T2 (45 Mg/kg) and T7 (40 /xg/kg). Di-n-butyl phthalate was found only
in fish from Transect T4 at a maximum concentration of 890 /ig/kg. Benzole
acid was found in fish from five transects, with the highest concentration
observed in starry flounder from Transect T3 (320 Mg/kg). Isophorone was found
in fish from all transects except Transect T6, with the highest concentration found
in starry founder from Transect T3 (300 /*g/kg).
Four of the eight chemicals found in fish tissue during the present study were
considered in Tetra Tech (1988) to have a medium to high priority with respect
to concerns for potential health risks to humans through seafood consumption.
Those chemicals include two carcinogens (i.e., arsenic and total PCBs) and two
noncarcinogens (i.e., lead and mercury).
Although a formal health risk assessment was beyond the scope of the
present study, the health implications of the observed tissue concentrations of the
four priority chemicals were evaluated qualitatively by comparing them with the
results of the risk assessments conducted previously by Tetra Tech (1988). To
place the risk values in a regulatory perspective, values < 10~4 for carcinogens
and risk index values <1.0 for noncarcinogens were consistent with EPA's
Superfund site remediation goals, as contained in the National Contingency Plan
(U.S. EPA 1989). Therefore, the values were indicative of the absence of
unacceptable risks to human health. Based on those criteria, it is unlikely that
any of the four priority chemicals posed an unacceptable health risk at the tissue
concentrations measured in the present study.
For the carcinogens, the maximum concentration of arsenic observed in the
present study (9.8 mg/kg) was comparable to the mean value of 6.4 mg/kg found
for fish in Commencement Bay by Tetra Tech (1988). The plausible upper limit
estimate of excess lifetime cancer risk associated with the Commencement Bay
value was estimated as 2 x 10"5 for the average fish consumption rate assumed for
Puget Sound (12.3 grams/day) (Tetra Tech 1988). The maximum value of total
46
-------
PCBs found in the present study (i.e., 45 /ig/kg) was comparable to the mean
value of 51 /ig/kg found for fish at Point No Point (located off the central basin
in northern Puget Sound) by Tetra Tech (1988). The plausible upper limit
estimate of excess lifetime cancer risk associated with the value found at Point No
Point was estimated as 7x 10~5 for the average fish consumption rate (Tetra Tech
1988).
For the noncarcinogens, the maximum value of lead observed in the present
study (0.04 mg/kg) was comparable to the mean value of 0.03 mg/kg found for
fish in Elliott Bay by Tetra Tech (1988). The noncarcinogenic risk index
associated with the Elliott Bay value was estimated as 3 x 10~3 for the average
consumption rate (Tetra Tech 1988). The maximum value of mercury found in
the present study (0.13 mg/kg) was comparable to the mean value of 0.15 mg/kg
found for fish from Anacortes by Tetra Tech (1988). The noncarcinogenic risk
index associated with the value found at Anacortes was estimated as 9 x 10~2 for
the average fish consumption rate (Tetra Tech 1988).
In Table 13, the tissue concentrations of metals and total PCBs found in the
present study are compared with the values found in the muscle tissue of flatfishes
collected from numerous areas throughout Puget Sound during other recent
surveys of tissue contamination in fishes. The following chemical-specific
patterns were apparent:
• Arsenic—In most cases, the concentrations of arsenic found in the
present study were below or within the range of mean values found
for reference areas. An exception was the maximum value of
9.8 mg/kg observed off McNeil Island, which was within the range
of mean values found in transitional areas.
• Copper—In most cases, the concentrations of copper found in
the present study were within the range of mean values found
for reference areas. An exception was the maximum value of
47
-------
00
TABLE 13. COMPARISONS OF TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS OF
SELECTED CHEMICALS IN VARIOUS FLATFISHES COLLECTED FROM
VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN PUGET SOUND
Embayment
Major Urban Bays
Bellingham Bay
Commencement Bay
Elliott Bay
Everett Harbor
Sinclair Inlet
Transitional Areas0
Dyes Inlet
Gig Harbor
Lake Washington
Ship Canal
Liberty Bay
Oak Harbor
Port Angeles
Port Gamble
Port Townsend
Quartermaster Harbor
Data
Source0
1
2
1.3
1.4
1,5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.5
5
Speciesd
ES
ES
ES
ES
ES, ES
ES
ES
ES
RS
SF
SD
ES
ES, ES
ES
Arsenic
3.8
3.3
--, 6.4
-, 4.5
8.7, 6.7
5.2
10
3.4
4.5
2.5
3.5
3.2
5.0, 3.1
9.4
Copper
0.23
0.14
-, 0.22
-, 0.22
0.27, 0.29
0.20
0.17
0.32
0.14
0.29
0.15
0.43
0.19,0.22
0.35
Chemicala'b
Lead
0.04 If
0.20
-. 0.05
--. 0.05
0.07, 0.55
0.29
0.63
0.35
0.14
0.25
0.18
0.18
0.06,0.18
0.23
Mercury
_f
0.059
0.07, 0.065
0.05, 0.042
0.07, 0.09
0.004 U
0.072
0.038
0.082
0.12
0.19
0.036
--, 0.004 U
0.12
Total
PCBs
13(/
210
39, 260
23, 26
102, 32
24
56
36
16
16
12
28
9.1 U, 15
23
-------
TABLE 13. (Continued)
Embayment
Reference Areas
Carr Inlet
Discovery Bay
Hood Canal
Port Susan
Richmond Beach
Skagit Bay
Strait of Georgia
Present Study
Budd Inlet
Carr inlet
Case inlet
McNeil Island
Oakland Bay
Totten Inlet
Data
Source0
2
1
1
4,5
5
5
1
6
6
6
6
6
6
Species'1
ES
ES
ES
ES, ES
ES
SF
ES
SF
SF
SF
ES
SF
ES
Arsenic
7.9
6.7
4.7
-, 3.0
3.6
2.0
3.4
0.51-1.1
2.8-3.1
1.1-1.3
1.7-9.8
1.4-1.8
3.9-6.3
Copper
0.038 U
0.22
0.21
--, 0.25
0.18
0.29
0.23
0.21-0.31
0.20-0.23
0.21-0.26
0.25-0.28
0.22-0.29
0.25-0.29
Chemical'-"
Lead
0.22
0.07
0.04 U
-, 0.21
0.13
0.20
0.05
0.02 {/-0.04
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.02-0.04
0.02 U
0.02-0.04
Mercury
0.055
—
0.06
0.067, 0.052
0.046
0.038
0.06
0.04-0.13
0.07-0.10
0.02-0.04
0.05-0.06
0.02-0.07
0.02-0.12
Total
PCBs
36
12 U
6.7 U
8.3, 16
14
10
8.4 U
15-45
5 1/-40
5U
SU-28
5 (/-18
SU
a Concentrations for metals - mg/kg (wet weight)
Concentrations for total PCBs - //g/kg (wet weight).
b Concentrations for all studies other than the present study are mean values. Where data are presented from two sources, species
names and mean concentrations are presented in the same order as the two sources. Concentrations for the present study are ranges
unless all values at a station were the same.
-------
TABLE 13. (Continued)
en
o
0 Sources:
1 - O'Neill and Schmitt (1991).
2 - Tetra Tech (1985).
3 - PTI and Tetra Tech (1988a).
4 - PTI and Tetra Tech (1988b).
5 - Crecelius et al. (1989). Concentrations for this study were originally reported on a dry weight basis. Conversion of
concentrations to a wet-weight basis were made by dividing each dry-weight concentration by 5.0 (i.e., it was
assumed that each tissue was 20 percent dry weight).
6 - Present study.
d ES - English sole (Parophrys vetulus).
SF - Starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus)
RS - Rock sole (Lepidopsetta bilineata).
SD - Sanddab (Citharichthys sp.).
8 U - undetected at detection limit shown.
f — indicates no data.
9 Transitional areas are located away from major urban areas, but may be influenced by chemical contamination.
-------
0.31 mg/kg observed in Budd Inlet, which was within the range of
mean values found in transitional areas.
• Lead—The concentrations of lead found in the present study were
at the lower end of the range of values found in reference areas.
• Mercury—In many cases, the concentrations of mercury found in
the present study were within the range of mean values found for
reference areas. Major exceptions to that pattern were the maxi-
mum concentrations observed in Carr Inlet (0.10 mg/kg), Totten
Inlet (0.12 mg/kg), and Budd Inlet (0.13 mg/kg), which were
within the range of mean values found in transitional areas.
• Total PCBs—In most cases, the concentrations of total PCBs found
in the present study were within the range of mean values found
for reference areas. Exceptions to that pattern were the maximum
concentrations observed in Carr Inlet (40 jig/kg) and Budd Inlet
(45 Mg/kg), which were within the range of mean values found in
transitional areas.
Tetra Tech (1985) measured the concentrations of di-n-butyl phthalate and
isophorone in the muscle tissue of English sole from Carr Inlet and Commence-
ment Bay. The ranges of concentrations of di-n-butyl phthalate in Carr Inlet and
Commencement Bay were 1017-120 /*g/kg and 1017-4,000 /xg/kg, respectively.
Isophorone was not detected in any fish from either Carr Inlet or Commencement
Bay at a detection limit of 10 /xg/kg.
In summary, concentrations of the 94 chemical contaminants evaluated in fish
muscle tissue were relatively low at all of the seven transects sampled in the
present study. Although several chemicals capable of posing a human health risk
were detected at all seven transects, it is unlikely that any of the tissue concentra-
51
-------
tions observed in the present study were high enough to pose an unacceptable
health risk through seafood consumption.
Clams
Of the total of 94 chemicals evaluated in the whole bodies of littleneck
clams, only four metals (i.e, arsenic, copper, lead, and mercury) and no organic
compounds were detected at the two stations evaluated in Budd Inlet (Table 14).
However, the concentrations of all four metals were relatively low.
All four metals were detected in clams from Station Cl, and all but lead
were detected in clams from Station C2. The concentrations of arsenic, copper,
and mercury were similar between the two stations, whereas the concentration of
lead was higher at Station Cl (0.08 mg/kg) than at Station C2 (undetected at a
detection limit of 0.02 mg/kg).
Three of the four metals found in clam tissue during the present study were
considered in Tetra Tech (1988) to have a medium to high priority with respect
to concerns for potential health risks to humans through seafood consumption.
Those chemicals included the carcinogen arsenic and the noncarcinogens lead and
mercury. Although a formal health risk assessment was beyond the scope of the
present study, the health implications of the observed tissue concentrations of the
three priority metals were evaluated qualitatively by comparing them with the
results of the risk assessments conducted previously by Tetra Tech (1988). To
place the risk values in a regulatory perspective, values < 10~4 for carcinogens
and risk index values <1.0 for noncarcinogens were consistent with EPA's
Superfund site remediation goals, as contained in the National Contingency Plan
(U.S. EPA 1989). Therefore, the values were indicative of the absence of
unacceptable risks to human health. Based on those criteria, it is unlikely that
52
-------
TABLE 14. CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN TISSUE SAMPLES
OF LITTLENECK CLAMS FROM BUDD INLET
Station"-"
Metals (mg/kg wet weight)
Arsenic
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Organic Compounds (//g/kg, wet weight)
Low Molecular Weight PAHC
Naphthalene
2-Methlynaphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High Molecular Weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Total benzofluoranthenes (B + K)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Total PCBsd
C1
2.1 OS
1.40
0.08S
0.01TE
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
320U
160U
160UE
160U
160U
5U
C2
1.90S
1.30
0.02U
0.02TE
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
320U
160U
160UE
160U
160U
5U
53
-------
TABLE 14. (Continued)
Phenols and Substituted Phenols
Phenol
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2-Chlorophenol
2,4-Dichlorophenol
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
2,4, 5-Trichlorophenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
2-Nitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrophenol
4-Nitrophenol
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phthalate Esters
Dimethyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-/?-butyl phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
2-Chloronaphthalene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachloroethane
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Station
C1
320U
130U
160U
130U
160U
490U
320U
810U
810U
810U
1600U
81 OU
1.600U
490U
160U
160U
160U
160U
360ZU
160U
120U
160U
110U
140U
160U
230U
280U
320U
810U
8,b
C2
320U
130U
160U
130U
160U
480U
320U
810U
810U
810U
1600U
81 OU
1.600U
480U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
120U
160U
110U
140U
160U
230U
280U
320U
810U
54
-------
TABLE 14. (Continued)
Station8'5
Halogenated Ethers
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether
Miscellaneous Oxygenated Compounds
Benzyl alcohol
Benzoic acid
Dibenzofuran
Organonitrogen Compounds
Aniline
Nitrobenzene
N-nitroso-di-/7-propylamine
N-nitroso-dimethylamine
1 ,2-Diphenylhydrazine
Carbazole
4-Chloroaniline
2-Nitroaniline
3-Nitroaniline
4-Nitroaniline
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
Benzidine
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
Pesticides
p,p'-DDT
p,p'-DDD
p.p'-DDE
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
C1
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
230U
810U
160U
810U
160U
160U
81 OU
160U
160U
480U
81 OU
810U
810U
810U
810U
SOU
8.100U
810U
4U
4U
4U
14U
2U
C2
160U
160U
160U
160U
160U
230U
810U
160U
810U
160U
160U
810U
160U
160U
490U
81 OU
810U
810U
810U
81 OU
90U
8.100U
81 OU
4U
4U
4U
14U
2U
55
-------
TABLE 14. (Continued)
a-Chlordane
X-Chlordane
Methoxychlor
Aldrin
Dieldrin
Endrin
Endrin ketone
Isophorone
Toxaphene
Endosulfan sulfate
o-Endosulfan
S-Endosulfan
o-Hexachlorocyclohexane
B-Hexachlorocyclohexane
y-Hexachlorocyclohexane
-------
any of the three priority chemicals posed an unacceptable health risk at the tissue
concentrations measured in the present study.
For the carcinogen arsenic, the maximum concentration observed in the
present study (2.1 mg/kg) was comparable to the mean value of 2.3 mg/kg found
for shellfish in Birch Bay (i.e., a nonurban bay near the U.S./Canada border) by
Tetra Tech (1988). The plausible upper limit estimate of excess lifetime cancer
risk associated with the Birch Bay value is estimated as 5 x 10~7 for the average
shellfish consumption rate assumed for Puget Sound (1.1 grams/day) (Tetra Tech
1988).
For the noncarcinogens, the maximum value of lead observed in the present
study (0.08 mg/kg) was identical to the mean value found in shellfish off
Mukilteo by Tetra Tech (1988). The noncarcinogenic risk index associated with
the Mukilteo value was estimated as 9 x 10~4 for the average shellfish consump-
tion rate (Tetra Tech 1988). The maximum value of mercury found in the
present study (0.02 mg/kg) was identical to the mean value found in shellfish
from Quartermaster Harbor (on Vashon Island) by Tetra Tech (1988). The
noncarcinogenic risk index associated with the value found at Quartermaster
Harbor was estimated as 1 x 10~3 for the average shellfish consumption rate (Tetra
Tech 1988).
In Table 15, the tissue concentrations of arsenic, copper, lead, and mercury
found in the present study are compared with the values found in littleneck clams
collected from numerous locations in Puget Sound during a recent survey
conducted by EPA and the Washington Department of Social and Health Services
(Faigenblum 1988). One station sampled during that survey was located near
Station C2 off Priest Point in Budd Inlet.
For all four metals, the ranges of concentrations found in the present study
were similar to the ranges found in the reference areas by Faigenblum (1988).
57
-------
TABLE 15. COMPARISONS OF TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS OF
SELECTED METALS IN LITTLENECK CLAMS FROM
VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN PUGET SOUND'
Chemical6
Location
Major Urban Bays
Everett Harbor
Sinclair Inlet
Budd Inlet
Transitional Areas'1
Alki Point
Quartermaster Harbor
Reference Areas
Birch Bay
Dash Point
Present Study
Arsenic
1.3-2.4
2.0-3.6
2.1-4.1
2.1-3.5
2.8-4.0
2.1-3.2
1.9-3.7
1.9-2.1
Copper
1.0-2.2
1.3-2.4
0.6(7-1.6
0.6(7-2.3
0.8-1.5
0.6(7-1.6
0.9-1.8
1.3-1.4
Lead
0.04(/c-0.05
0.12-0.18
0.04(7-0.10
0.4(7-0.12
0.04(7-0.14
0.04(7
0.09-0.10
0.02-0.08
Mercury
0.02U
0.03
0.02(7
0.02U
0.02U-0.03
0.02U
0.02(7
0.01-0.02
8 All data, except those from the present study, are from Faigenblum (1988).
b Concentrations are mg/kg dry weight; concentrations are ranges, unless all values at a location
were the same.
c U - undetected at detection limit shown.
d Transitional areas are located away from major urban areas, but may be influenced by chemical
contamination.
58
-------
The concentrations of copper, lead, and mercury found at Station C2 were similar
to the ranges of concentrations found off Priest Point in Budd Inlet by Faigenblum
(1988). The concentration of arsenic found at Station C2 was slightly lower than
the range of values found off Priest Point by Faigenblum (1988).
In summary, bioaccumulation of chemical contaminants in the whole bodies
of littleneck clams was not substantial at either of the two stations sampled in
Budd Inlet. Although several chemicals capable of posing a human health risk
were detected at both stations, it is unlikely that any of the tissue concentrations
observed in the present study were high enough to pose an unacceptable health
risk through seafood consumption.
SEDIMENT TOXICITY
The detailed results for individual bioassay samples are presented in
Appendix C. Amphipod mortality at the 24 stations sampled in this study ranged
from 1 to 18 percent (Table 16). All of these values are less than the interim
performance standard of 25 percent proposed for Puget Sound reference areas
(Pastorok et al. 1989). In addition, all values but one (18 percent at Station 8)
are less than the median value of 16.2 percent observed for 60 samples from
Puget Sound reference areas by Pastorok et al. (1989). These results indicate that
1) the toxicity of sediments from all 24 stations sampled in this study is well
within the range of conditions found in Puget Sound reference areas, and 2)
elevated sediment toxicity does not appear to be a problem at any of the sites
evaluated. However, neither sublethal nor chronic effects of sediment toxicity
were evaluated in this study.
The AET values specific to the amphipod mortality test (Barrick et al. 1988)
were exceeded for phenol (amphipod AET = 1,200 /xg/kg) at five stations and
for p,p'-DDD (amphipod AET = 43 ^g/kg) at a single station. These results
59
-------
TABLE 16. AMPHIPOD MORTALITY IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
Station
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Oakland Bay
Totten Inlet
Hammersley Inlet
Eld Inlet
Henderson Inlet
Case Inlet
Filucy Bay
Cormorant Passage
Steilacoom Area
Steilacoom Area
Carr Inlet
Wollochet Bay
Percent
15
7
1
5
6
13
12
18
5
10
9
13
5
4
9
10
11
4
5
10
5
5
4
6
Mortalitya-b
(6.1)
(2.7)
(2.2)
(5.0)
(6.5)
(7.6)
(9.1)
(5.7)
(3.5)
(9.4)
(2.2)
(2.7)
(5.0)
(4.2)
(9.6)
(7.9)
(5.5)
(4.2)
(8.7)
(11.7)
(3.5)
(6.1)
(2.2)
(6.5)
" Each value represents the mean of 5 replicates. The standard deviation of
each mean is given in parentheses.
b Mean percent mortality in the negative controls was 3 percent for Stations
1-12 (i.e., first sample batch), and 1 percent for Stations 13-24 (i.e., second
._ _l_ !__._•_*
sample batch).
60
-------
suggest that the amphipod AET may be increased for those two compounds if the
results of this study are included in the AET database.
Although sediment toxicity was not a problem at any of the 24 stations
evaluated in this study, the values of mortality at stations in Budd Inlet (i.e.,
range = 1-18 percent, mean = 9.5 percent) were generally higher than the values
observed at stations in the other parts of southern Puget Sound (i.e., range =
4-11 percent, mean = 6.5 percent). The somewhat elevated values of mortality
in parts of Budd Inlet may have been related to increased levels of chemical
contamination in the sediments of that embayment, because the results of
chemical analyses showed that several chemicals exceeded HAET or LAET
values at stations in Budd Inlet. Alternatively, the somewhat elevated values of
mortality in parts of Budd Inlet could have been related to the relatively high
percentage of fine-grained material that characterized many of the sites (i.e.,
values >85 percent were found at 7 of the 12 stations). DeWitt et al. (1988)
found that amphipod mortality can increase in reference sediments in response to
increasing percentages of fine-grained sediment. Two of the five values of
percent fine-grained sediment at the five stations evaluated outside Budd Inlet
(i.e., 26 and 36 percent) were lower than the range of values found in Budd Inlet
(i.e., 71-99 percent) suggesting that sediment grain-size distribution may have
been partly responsible for the small differences in amphipod mortality between
the two sets of samples. A third possibility is that the amphipods used to test the
12 samples from Budd Inlet (which were tested as a single batch) were more
sensitive to chemical toxicity than the amphipods used to test the remaining 12
samples (which were tested as a separate batch). This third possibility is feasible
because the amphipods used to test the samples from Budd Inlet exhibited an
LC50 value of 0.85 mg/L in the positive controls, compared to the LC50 value of
1.4 mg/L exhibited by the amphipods used to test the remaining samples. The
lower LCSO value for the Budd Inlet samples indicates that the test organisms
were more sensitive to the reference toxicant (and potentially chemical toxicity
61
-------
in general) than were the test organisms used to evaluate the samples from outside
Budd Inlet.
Previous studies of amphipod mortality have been conducted in Budd Inlet
(Tetra Tech 1990), Oakland Bay (Tetra Tech 1990), Case Inlet (Battelle 1986;
Tetra Tech 1990), and Carr Inlet (Tetra Tech 1985, 1990; PTI 1988, 1989),
although station locations differed from those used in the present study. In Budd
Inlet, the 4-5 percent values of mortality found at two stations sampled in the
previous studies were within the range of values (i.e., 1-18 percent) found in the
present study. In Oakland Bay, the value of 4 percent mortality at one station
sampled in the previous studies was nearly identical to the value of 5 percent
found in the present study. In Carr Inlet, values of mortality ranged from 2 to
16 percent at six stations sampled in the previous studies, and were consistent
with the value of 4 percent observed in the present study. In Case Inlet,
mortality ranged from 2 to 43 percent at five stations sampled in the previous
studies. The single value of 2 percent found in Case Inlet by Tetra Tech (1990)
was similar to the value of 4 percent observed in the present study. However,
the values of 28 to 43 percent found at four stations by Battelle (1986) were
considerably higher than the values found by Tetra Tech (1990) and the present
study. Because the water depths of the stations sampled in Case Inlet by Battelle
(i.e., 21-40 meters) were greater than the depth of 11 meters sampled in the
present study, it is possible that the sediments collected previously were more
fine-grained than those collected in the present study. If that is the case,
differences in sediment grain-size distribution may partially account for the
observed differences in mortality values between the two studies. An additional
factor that may have contributed to the differences observed between the two
studies is that the results found by Battelle were based on a sediment sample
composited over the top 10 cm of sediment, whereas the results found by Tetra
Tech (1990) and the present study were based on samples composited over the top
2 cm of sediment.
62
-------
FISH ASSEMBLAGES
A total of 9,496 fishes, representing 15 families and 28 species, were
sampled in this study (Table 17). The most abundant family of fishes collected
by otter trawl throughout southern Puget Sound was Pleuronectidae, which
accounted for 50 percent of the total catch. The most abundant pleuronectids
were English sole and starry flounder, the two species selected for histopathologi-
cal and bioaccumulation analyses.
Although English sole and starry flounder were abundant in southern Puget
Sound as a whole, considerable differences were found among the areas sampled.
In general, English sole was most abundant at the two transects located near the
mouths of embayments (i.e., the transects in Totten and Carr inlets), whereas
starry flounder was most abundant at the five transects located at the heads of
embayments (i.e., the transects in Budd Inlet, Oakland Bay, Case Inlet, and Can-
Inlet). The total numbers of species and individuals also showed large differences
between the transects located in the mouths and the heads of embayments; both
variables were considerably lower in the latter environments. Total number of
species ranged from 5 to 10 at the heads of embayments, whereas 23 species were
collected at each of the transects located in the mouth of an embayment. Total
number of individuals ranged from 36 to 63 fish/km at the heads of embayments,
compared to a range of 316 to 1,590 fish/km in the mouths of embayments.
The results of this study suggest that habitat differences within the embay-
ments exerted a considerable influence on the characteristics of the resident
demersal fish assemblages. Because English sole was relatively rare or absent at
the heads of embayments, starry flounder was used for bioaccumulation analyses
at those five transects. Histopathological evaluations were not conducted on
starry flounder from those locations because the historical database for this
species is limited.
63
-------
TABLE 17. RELATIVE ABUNDANCES OF FISHES
CAPTURED IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
o>
-p.
Relative Abundance at Each Transect (percent)
Family
Rajidae
Clupeidae
Batrachoididae
Gadidae
Zoarcidae
Gasterosteidae
Embiotocidae
Bathymasteridae
Stichaeidae
Scorpaenidae
Hexagrammidae
Cottidae
Agonidae
Species
Raja binoculata
Clupea harengus pallasi
Porichthys notatus
Microgadus proximus
Lycodopsis pacif/cus
Aulorhynchus flavidus
Cymatogaster aggregata
Embiotoca lateralis
Rhacochilus vacca
Ronquilus jordani
Lumpenus sagitta
Sebastes caurinus
Zaniolepis latipinnis
Chitonotus pugetensis
Enophrys bison
Leptocottus armatus
Myxocephalus
polyacanthocephalus
Agonus aciperserinus
Odontopyxis trispinosa
Common Name T1 T2
big skate 2.1 --*
Pacific herring 42.7
plainfin midshipman
Pacific tomcod
blackbelly eelpout
tube-snout
shiner perch 2.1
striped seaperch
pile perch
northern ronquil
snake prickleback 1 .0
copper rockfish
longspine combfish
roughback sculpin
buffalo sculpin - 1.5
Pacific staghorn 2.1 4.6
sculpin
great sculpin
sturgeon poacher
pygmy poacher
T3 T4 T5 T6
2.9 b
4.3 2.8 21.0 b
b b
9.8 2.0 6.1
4.6
0.1
4.7 4.0 3.5
0.3
- 2.3 -
b b
1.4 3.4 - 0.9
b
b
b
- 8.1 -
15.9 1.0 23.9
b
1.1 -- 1.2
1.1 -- 1.2
T7
1.0
1.0
—
~
-
—
—
--
--
—
~
~
—
~
~
1.0
—
~
-
-------
TABLE 17. (Continued)
o>
en
Relative Abundance at Each Transect (percent)
Family
Bothidae
Pleuronectidae
Species
Citharichthys sordidus
C/tharichthys stigmaeus
Lepidopsetta bilineata
Lyopsetta exil/s
Microstomus pacificus
Parophrys veto/us
Platichthys stellatus
Pleuronichthys coenosus
Psettichthys melanostictus
Common Name
Pacific sanddab
speckled sanddab
rock sole
slender sole
Dover sole
English sole
starry flounder
C-O sole
sand sole
Total catch (per km)
T1 T2 T3 T4
1.1
0.9
1.0 1.5 1.4 13.8
„
..
19.4
37.5 66.7 84.3 13.6
b
11.5 25.8 5.7 1.7
38 36 38 316
T5
1.0
3.0
~
—
—
4.0
41.4
—
22.0
63
T6
b
11.4
6.2
b
b
40.5
b
~
-
1,590
T7
~
33.3
2.9
—
-
1.0
53.9
—
5.6
55
a — = species not captured at this transect.
b <0.1 percent of catch.
-------
The otter trawl used to sample demersal fishes in this study is not a quantita-
tive sampling device for megainvertebrates (i.e., the relatively large invertebrates
collected using an otter trawl). However, the megainvertebrates collected
incidentally in the trawl samples were counted to provide a qualitative estimate
of their abundances at the various transects (Table 18). Megainvertebrates were
collected at all transects except Transect T7. The absence of megainvertebrates
at Transect T7 may have been an accurate estimate of their abundance or an
artifact of the unreliable sampling efficiency of an otter trawl for those organisms.
The most abundant megainvertebrates were the sea anemone Memdium senile and
the graceful crab Cancer gracilis.
FISH HISTOPATHOLOGY
A total of 119 English sole was evaluated for histopathological abnormalities
in liver tissue. Fifty-nine individuals were collected at Transect T4 in Totten
Inlet, and 60 individuals were sampled at Transect T6 off McNeil Island in Carr
Inlet. English sole was not sufficiently numerous at the remaining five transects
to provide adequate sample sizes for histopathological evaluation. Detailed
descriptions of the field and laboratory observations made for each fish are
presented in Appendix D.
The histopathological evaluations focused on idiopathic liver lesions (i.e.,
those having no apparent association with an infectious agent) to identify the
lesions potentially related to chemical contamination. Four kinds of idiopathic
lesions were evaluated: neoplasms, foci of cellular alteration, megalocytic
hepatosis, and nonspecific responses to injury. The first three kinds of lesions,
which are considered serious abnormalities, have been found in English sole
collected from many contaminated areas of Puget Sound (e.g., Malins et al. 1984;
Becker et al. 1987; Myers et al. 1987). Briefly, neoplasms include both benign
and malignant tumors. Foci of cellular alteration are discrete clusters of altered
66
-------
TABLE 18. ABUNDANCES OF MEGAINVERTEBRATES
CAPTURED IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
Abundance at Each Transect (individuals/km)
Taxon
Metridium senile
(sea anemone)
Nudibranchia
(sea slug)
Cancer gracilis
(graceful crab)
Asteroidea
(starfish)
Parastichopus californicus
(sea cucumber)
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5
4.8 13.5 0 0.5 19.7
00000
3.2 3.8 1.1 0.5 0.6
0 0.5 0 0 0
0 1.6 0 1.6 0
T6 T7
1.4 0
0.5 0
0 0
9.0 0
0 0
67
-------
cells that have specific staining characteristics and are suspected of being
preneoplastic. Megalocytic hepatosis is a specific degenerative condition
characterized by a marked increase in both nuclear and cellular diameters in the
absence of cellular inflammatory responses. Myers et al. (1987) suggested that
megalocytic hepatosis, foci of cellular alteration, and neoplasms are sequentially
related in the progression toward neoplasia in English sole. By contrast with the
three kinds of serious liver lesions, nonspecific responses to injury generally are
not associated with major adverse biological effects but may be indicative of
exposure to toxic chemicals.
The only kinds of liver lesions found in English sole in Totten and Can-
inlets were nonspecific responses to injury (Table 19). Neoplasms, foci of
cellular alteration, and megalocytic hepatosis were not found in any of the fish
collected in this study. In general, the prevalences of nonspecific responses to
injury were relatively low (i.e., all were < 17 percent), and only three of these
conditions (i.e., hepatocellular regeneration, mononuclear infiltrates, and
parenchymal inflammation) were found in more than 10 percent of the fish from
either study area.
The mean ages of fish evaluated for liver lesions did not differ significantly
(P>0.05; r-test) between the two study areas. The mean age of the fish from
Totten Inlet was 3.6 years (standard deviation = 0.98), compared with the mean
age of 3.7 years (standard deviation = 0.84) for the fish from Carr Inlet. It
therefore is unlikely that fish age contributed substantially to any differences in
the prevalences of liver lesions between the two study areas.
In Table 20, the prevalences of serious liver lesions (i.e., neoplasms, foci of
cellular alteration, and megalocytic hepatosis) found in previous studies in Puget
Sound are compared with the values of zero percent found in the present study.
In general, the highest prevalences of all three conditions have been found in
major urban bays that are substantially influenced by chemical contamination.
68
-------
TABLE 19. PREVALANCES OF HEPATIC LESIONS IN ENGLISH SOLE
FROM TOTTEN AND CARR INLETS*
Hepatic Lesions
Hepatocellular necrosis
Hepatocellular pyknosis
Hepatocellular regeneration
Spongiosis hepatis
Nonuniforn vaculolation
Hyperpigmented MMCb
Mononuclear infiltrates
Parenchyma! fibrosis
Parenchyma) inflammation
Pancreatic necrosis
Totten Inlet
(n = 59)
10.2
0
1.7
0
1.7
8.5
11.9
0
0
1.7
Carr Inlet
(n = 60)
3.3
5.0
0
1.7
3.3
3.3
16.7
1.7
15.0
0
a Values are percentages of the total number of fish collected at each site.
b MMC - melanin macrophage centers.
69
-------
TABLE 20. COMPARISONS OF PREVALENCES OF HEPATIC LESIONS
IN ENGLISH SOLE COLLECTED FROM VARIOUS
LOCATIONS IN PUGET SOUND
Prevalence (percent)
Embayment
Major Urban Bays
Commencement Bay
Elliott Bay
Everett Harbor
Sinclair Inlet
Transitional Areas1*
Lake Washington
Ship Canal
Gig Harbor
Dyes Inlet
Reference Areas
Carr Inlet
Case Inlet
Nisqually Delta
Point Pulley
Port Susan
Eliza Island
Present Study
Totten Inlet
Carr Inlet
a 1 - TetraTech (1985)
2 - PTI and Tetra Tech
3 - PTI and Tetra Tech
4 - Battelle (1986)
Data
Source*
1
2
3
4
5
5
5
1
4
6
2
3
4
7
7
(1988a)
(1988b)
Sample
Size
853
637
538
60
60
31
60
120
30
88
60
56
28
59
60
Neoplasms
2
6
2
0
8
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
Foci of
Cellular
Alteration
13
25
11
10
13
3
2
6
3
2
7
7
0
0
0
Megalocytic
Hepatosis
11
33
2
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
5 - Crecelius et al. (1989)
6 - Myers (8 April 1991, personal
7 - Present study
communication)
b Transitional areas are located away from major urban areas, but may be influenced by chemical
contamination.
70
-------
Prevalences of the three types of lesions have also been relatively high in selected
transitional areas. By contrast, prevalences of all three types of lesion have been
very low in Puget Sound reference areas. The only area having a complete
absence of the three lesions (other than the areas sampled in the present study)
was the area near Eliza Island in northern Puget Sound.
The absence of neoplasms, foci of cellular alteration, and megalocytic
hepatosis in English sole from Totten and Carr inlets suggests that any potential
chemical contamination in those two areas was not high enough to cause serious
liver lesions in fishes. Compared with the data presented in Table 20, the
absence of serious liver lesions in English sole from Totten and Carr inlets
suggests that those two areas were similar to the reference areas used in previous
studies in Puget Sound.
71
-------
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study suggest that most of the areas sampled in southern
Puget Sound were not characterized by substantial levels of chemical contami-
nation or adverse biological effects. However, the concentrations of several
organic compounds in one or more sediment samples from Budd Inlet were high
enough to potentially result in adverse biological effects. Despite these elevated
chemical concentrations, sediment toxicity was not elevated above Puget Sound
reference levels at any of the Budd Inlet stations based on the results of the
amphipod mortality toxicity test. Sediment toxicity also was not elevated at any
of the other stations sampled throughout southern Puget Sound. However, neither
sublethal nor chronic effects of sediment toxicity were evaluated in this study.
The limited amount of information collected on fish disease suggests that the fish
evaluated from Totten and Carr inlets were not affected by chemical contami-
nation, as serious histopathological abnormalities were not found in the livers of
any of these individuals. However, information on fish disease in Budd Inlet
(i.e., the major urban embayment in southern Puget Sound) could not be
evaluated because the target species (i.e., English sole) was not sufficiently
abundant there. Finally, the observed concentrations of chemical contaminants
in tissue samples from fishes and clams did not appear to pose an unacceptable
health risk to consumers of these organisms.
72
-------
REFERENCES
Barrick, R.C., D.S. Becker, L.B. Brown, et al. 1988. Sediment quality values
refinement: 1988 update and evaluation of Puget Sound AET. Volume I. Final
Report. Prepared for Tetra Tech, Inc. and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.
Battelle. 1986. Reconnaissance survey of eight bays in Puget Sound. Final
Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Battelle Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Sequim, WA.
Becker, D.S., T.C. Ginn, M.L. Landolt, et al. 1987. Hepatic lesions in English
sole (Parophrys vetulus) from Commencement Bay, Washington (USA). Mar.
Environ. Res. 23:153-173.
Crecelius, E.A., D.L. Woodruff, and M.S. Myers. 1989. 1988 reconnaissance
survey of environmental conditions in 13 Puget Sound locations. Final Report.
Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Battelle Ocean Sciences,
Duxbury, MA.
DeWitt, T.H., G.R. Ditsworth, and R.C. Swartz. 1988. Effects of natural
sediment features on survival of the phoxocephalid amphipod, Rhepoxynius
abronius. Mar. Environ. Res. 25:99-124.
Faigenblum, J. 1988. Chemicals and bacteriological organisms in recreational
shellfish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget
Sound, Seattle, WA.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, et al. 1982. Chemical contaminants
and abnormalities in fish and invertebrates from Puget Sound. NOAA Technical
Memorandum OMPA-19. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Rockville, MD.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, et al. 1984. Chemical pollutants in
sediments and diseases of bottom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, WA. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 18:705-713.
Myers, M.S. 8 April 1991. Personal Communication (telephone conversation
with D.S. Becker, PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA). National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA.
73
-------
Myers, M.S., L.D. Rhodes, and B.B. McCain. 1987. Pathologic anatomy and
patterns of occurrence of hepatic neoplasms, putative preneoplastic lesions, and
other idiopathic hepatic conditions in English sole (Parophrys vetulus) from Puget
Sound, Washington. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 78:333-363.
O'Neill, S.M. and C.C. Schmitt. 1991. What contaminants are in our fish.
Paper presented at Puget Sound Research '91, 4-5 January 1991, Washington
Department of Fisheries, Olympia, WA.
Pastorok, R.A., R. Sonnerup, J.J. Greene, et al. 1989. Interim performance
standards for Puget Sound reference areas. Final Report. Prepared for Washing-
ton Department of Ecology. PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.
PSDDA. 1989. Draft management plan report (DMPR) - unconfined, open-
water disposal of dredged material, Phase II (north and south Puget Sound).
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis. Seattle, WA.
PSEP. 1986. Recommended protocols for measuring conventional sediment
variables in Puget Sound. Final Report. Prepared by U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
PSEP. 1987. Recommended protocols for fish pathology studies in Puget Sound.
Final Report. Prepared by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
PSEP. 1989a. Recommended protocols for measuring metals in Puget Sound
water, sediment and tissue samples. Final Report. Prepared by U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
PSEP. 1989b. Recommended guidelines for measuring organic compounds in
Puget Sound sediment and tissue samples. Final Report. Prepared by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
PSEP. 1991. Recommended guidelines for conducting laboratory bioassays on
Puget Sound sediments. Final Report. Prepared by U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.
PTI. 1990. South Puget Sound reconnaissance survey quality assurance reports
for chemical analyses. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency. PTI Environmental Services, Bellevue, WA.
PTI and Tetra Tech 1988a. Elliott Bay Action Program: analysis of toxic
problem areas. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. PTI Environmental Services and Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
PTI and Tetra Tech 1988b. Everett Harbor Action Program: analysis of toxic
problem areas. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. PTI Environmental Services and Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
74
-------
Swartz, R.C., W.A. DeBen, J.K. Phillips, et al. 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.
Banner (eds). ASTM STP 854. American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA.
Tetra Tech. 1985. Commencement Bay nearshore/tideflats remedial investiga-
tion. Prepared for Washington Department of Ecology. Tetra Tech, Inc.,
Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1988. Health risk assessment of chemical contamination in Puget
Sound seafood. Final Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1990. Puget Sound ambient monitoring program 1989: marine
sediment monitoring. Final Report. Prepared for Washington Department of
Ecology. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
U.S. EPA. 1989. Risk assessment guidance for Superfund, Volume I: human
health evaluation manual. Interim final report. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC.
75
-------
Appendix A
Puget Sound Sediment Quality Values
-------
TABLE A-1. SUMMARY OF VARIOUS SEDIMENT QUALITY VALUES
FOR CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS IN PUGET SOUND BASED ON
DRY WEIGHT NORMALIZATION
Chemical
Metals
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Organic Compounds
U/g/kg dry weight; ppb)
Low molecular weight PAH*
Naphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High molecular weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Benzofluoranthenes
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Chlorinated benzenes
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
Total PCBsb
LAET
150
57
5.1
260
390
450
0.41
--
6.1
410
5,200
2,100
1,300
500
540
1,500
960
12,000
1,700
2,600
1,300
1,400
3,200
1,600
600
230
670
35
170
110
31
22
130
Numerical Sediment
HAET Quality Standard
200
700 57
9.6 5.1
270 260
1,300 390
660 450
2.1 0.41
140
6.1 6.1
1,600 410
24,000
2,700
1,300
2,000
3,600
6,900
13,000
69,000
30,000
16,000
5,100
9,200
9,900
3,600
2,600
970
2,600
110
170
120
64
230
3,100
PSDDA
SL
20
57
0.96
--
81
66
0.21
140
1.2
160
610
210
64
63
64
320
130
1,800
630
430
450
670
800
680
69
120
540
19
170
26
6.4
23
130
PSDDA
ML
200
700
9.6
--
810
660
2.1
--
6.1
1,600
6,100
2,100
640
6,300
6,400
3,200
1,300
51,000
6,300
7,300
4,500
6,700
8,000
6,800
5,200
1,200
5,400
350
-
260
64
230
2,500
A-1
-------
TABLE A-1. (Continued)
Chemical
Phthalates
Dimethyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Phenols
Phenol
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Pentachlorophenol
Miscellaneous extractables
2-Methylnaphthalene
Benzyl alcohol
Benzoic acid
Dibenzofuran
Hexachlorobutadiene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Volatile Organics
Tetrachloroethene
Ethylbenzene
Total xylenes
Pesticides
p,p'-DDE
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDT
LAET
71
200
1,400
63
1,300
25
420
63
670
29
360
670
57
650
540
11
28
57
10
40
9.0
16
34
Numerical Sediment
HAET Quality Standard
1,400
1 ,200
5,100
900
3,100
6,200
1,200 420
72 63
3,600 670
210 29
690 360
1 ,900
870
760
1,700
270
130
210
50
160
15
43
270
PSDDA
SL
160
97
1,400
470
3,100
6,200
120
10
120
10
69
67
10
216
54
29
22
14
10
12
--
--
--
PSDDA
ML
--
--
--
--
--
--
1,200
72
1,200
50
690
670
73
690
540
290
220
210
50
160
--
--
-
8 PAH - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.
b PCB - polychlorinated biphenyl.
A-2
-------
TABLE A-2. SUMMARY OF VARIOUS SEDIMENT QUALITY VALUES
FOR NONIONIC ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN PUGET SOUND
BASED ON ORGANIC CARBON NORMALIZATION
Chemical
Nonionic Organic Compounds
(mg/kg organic carbon; ppm)
Low molecular weight PAH"
Naphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
High molecular weight PAH
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene
Benzofluoranthenes
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indenod ,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Chlorinated benzenes
1 ,2-Oichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
Total PCBsb
Phthalates
Dimethyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
LAET
370
99
66
16
23
120
220
960
160
1,000
110
110
230
99
34
12
31
2.3
--
3.1
0.81
0.38
12
53
61
220
HAET
2,200
220
66
200
360
690
1,200
7,600
3,000
1,400
650
850
1,500
210
900
89
78
2.3
--
16
2.7
9.6
190
53
61
1,700
Numerical Sediment
Quality Standard
370
99
66
16
23
100
220
960
160
1,000
110
110
230
99
34
12
31
2.3
--
3.1
0.81
0.38
12
53
61
220
A-3
-------
TABLE A-2. (Continued)
Chemical
Phthalates (continued)
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Miscellaneous extractables
2-Methylnaphthalene
Dibenzofuran
Hexachlorobutadiene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pesticides
p,p'-DDD
p,p'-DDE
p.p'-DDT
LAET
4.9
47
58
38
15
3.9
11
0.31
0.81
3.7
HAET
64
78
4,500
64
58
11
11
2.2
2.2
3.7
Numerical Sediment
Quality Standard
4.9
47
58
38
15
3.9
11
--
--
--
8 PAH - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon.
b PCB - polychlorinated biphenyl.
A-4
-------
Appendix B
Bioaccumulation Data
-------
TABLE B-1. SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN TISSUE SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND'
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
_ Case Inlet
CD
_^ Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
1,2-Dichloro-
benzene
120 U
120 U
18 U
18 U
18 U
25 U
22 U
18 U
24 U
23 U
24 U
35 U
26 U
26 U
18 U
17 U
18 U
20 U
23 U
24 U
18 U
18 U
25 U
1,2-Diphenyl-
hydrazine
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 a
45 U
33 U
32 U
32 I/
36 U
41 U
41 17
33 U
33 I/
33 17
1.2,4-Trl-
chlorobenzene
140 U
140 U
21 17
21 I/
21 U
26 17
25 U
21 17
28 17
27 I/
29 I/
41 U
30 17
30 17
21 U
20 17
20 U
24 I/
27 17
27 U
21 I/
21 U
28 (/
1,3-Dichloro-
benzene
160 U
160 17
31 U
32 I/
32 17
32 U
40 I/
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 (/
46 U
45 I/
33 17
32 U
32 U
36 U
41 (7
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 U
1.4-Dichloro-
benzene
110 U
110 U
17 17
17 U
17 I/
22 I/
20 U
16 I/
21 U
21 17
22 I/
33 U
24 17
24 U
16 17
16 (/
16 U
19 I/
22 U
22 17
16 I/
16 U
23 I/
2-Chloro-
naphthalene
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 a
32 U
32 (7
40 L/
33 U
44 17
43 U
45 (7
62 (7
46 U
45 17
33 U
32 U
32 17
36 U
41 17
41 U
33 (7
33 I/
33 U
2-Chloro- 2-Methyl-
phenol naphthalene
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 (7
32 U
32 (7
40 17
33 U
44 (7
43 U
45 17
62 (7
46 U
45 17
33 U
32 (7
32 I/
36 U
41 £7
41 U
33 (7
33 17
33 U
160 {7
160 U
31 17
32 I/
32 U
32 17
40 17
33 17
44 17
43 U
45 17
62 17
46 U
45 U
33 17
32 17
32 17
36 17
41 17
41 17
33 17
33 17
33 17
2-Methyl-
phenol
130 17
130 17
19 17
19 17
19 17
26 17
22 U
18 17
24 U
24 17
25 17
37 17
28 17
27 17
18 17
18 17
18 17
21 17
25 17
25 17
18 17
18 17
26 17
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
oo Case Inlet
ro Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
2-Nltro- 2-Nitro- 2.4-Dlchloro- 2.4-Dlmethyl- 2.4-Dinitro- 2.4-Dinltro- 2.4,5-Trl- 2.4,6-Tri- 2.6-Dinitro- Dibenzo(a,h)
aniline phenol phenol phenol phenol toluene chlorophenol chlorophenol toluene anthracene
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 U
170 U
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 U
230 U
230 U
170 U
160 U
160 U
180 U
200 U
210 U
160 U
170 U
170 U
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 U
170 I/
220 U
220 I/
230 U
310 U
230 I/
230 U
170 I/
160 U
160 I/
180 I/
200 U
210 I/
160 U
170 t/
170 I/
490 U
480 I/
90 U
100 I/
90 a
97 U
120 (7
99 U
131 I/
129 I/
136 U
190 t7
140 U
135 I/
100 a
96 U
97 If
110 U
120 a
120 I/
99 U
99 U
100 U
130 C/
130 (7
56 U
58 (7
57 U
64 a
23 (7
19 U
25 I/
25 U
26 (/
110 a
83 U
80 I/
19 U
19 17
19 I/
60 U
70 I/
70 U
19 I/
19 (7
28 U
1600 a
1600 U
310 a
320 a
310 U
320 (7
400 U
330 L/
440 I/
430 U
450 (7
620 U
460 17
450 I/
330 U
320 U
320 U
360 17
410 U
410 U
330 (7
330 U
330 a
810 (/
810 U
160 t/
160 U
160 (7
160 t/
200 U
170 (7
220 U
220 (7
230 I/
310 U
230 (7
230 U
170 <7
160 I/
160 U
180 17
200 U
210 I/
160 t7
170 U
170 I/
810 U
810 17
160 I/
160 U
160 {/
160 U
200 (7
170 (7
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 17
230 (7
230 U
170 (7
160 U
160 (7
180 (7
200 U
210 t/
160 U
170 t/
170 (7
810 U
810 t7
160 U
160 t7
160 t/
160 U
200 £7
170 U
220 (7
220 i7
230 U
310 (7
230 U
230 (7
170 I/
160 U
160 t/
180 U
200 17
210 17
160 U
170 17
170 U
810 (7
810 I/
160 (7
160 (7
160 U
160 (7
200 t/
170 U
220 (7
220 U
230 (7
310 17
230 U
230 17
170 U
160 (7
160 (7
180 U
200 (7
210 U
160 (7
170 <7
170 U
160 (7
160 U
31 (7
32 17
32 U
32 (7
40 U
33 t7
44 (7
43 U
45 (7
62 U
46 I/
45 (7
33 U
32 (7
32 U
36 (7
41 17
41 U
33 (7
33 U
33 (7
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
CD Case Inlet
w Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
2-Methyl-
4.6-Dinltrophenol
1600 U
1600 U
310 U
320 U
310 U
320 U
400 U
330 U
440 U
430 U
450 U
620 U
460 U
450 U
330 U
320 U
320 U
360 U
410 U
410 U
330 U
330 U
330 U
Di-n-octyl-
phthalate
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 U
45 U
33 (7
32 U
32 (/
36 I/
41 U
41 I/
33 U
33 I/
33 t/
3-Nltro- 3,3'-Dichloro- 4-Bromophenyl- 4-Chloro- 4-Chloro- 4-Chlorophenyl
aniline benzidine phenyl ether 3-methylphenol aniline phenyl ether
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 I/
170 (7
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 L/
230 t/
230 U
170 t/
160 U
160 17
180 I/
200 U
210 17
160 U
170 I/
170 t7
810 U
810 17
160 U
160 I/
160 17
32 U
200 17
170 U
220 U
220 I/
230 U
310 17
230 U
230 17
170 17
160 U
160 U
180 U
200 I/
2100 W
160 U
170 I/
170 U
160 17
160 I/
31 U
32 17
32 U
32 I/
40 IS
33 U
44 17
43 U
45 17
62 17
46 U
45 I/
33 U
32 t/
32 17
36 U
41 I/
41 U
33 17
33 I/
33 U
320 17
320 U
63 17
65 I/
63 U
64 I/
80 U
66 I/
88 I/
86 U
91 17
120 U
92 I/
90 (7
66 U
64 17
65 U
70 17
80 17
80 U
66 t/
66 U
66 I/
490 I/
480 U
94 17
97 U
95 17
97 I/
120 U
99 (7
131 U
129 17
136 17
190 U
138 17
140 U
100 I/
96 I/
97 U
110 I/
120 U
120 t/
99 17
99 U
100 17
160 U
160 I/
31 17
32 U
32 17
32 U
40 17
33 (7
44 U
43 (7
45 U
62 £7
46 £7
45 U
33 17
32 U
32 17
36 17
41 U
41 (7
33 U
33 (7
33 (7
4-Methyl-
phenol
160 U
160 U
31 £7
32 17
32 U
32 17
40 U
33 (7
44 (7
43 U
45 I/
62 U
46 17
45 (7
33 U
32 17
32 U
36 £7
41 47
41 U
33 (7
33 U
33 (7
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
DO Case Inlet
•k Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
4-Nitro- 4-Nitro- Pentachloro- Hexachlorocyclo- Hexachlorocyclo- Hexachlorocyclo- Hexachlorocyclo-
anlllne phenol phenol hexane -alpha hexane - Beta hexane - delta hexane - gamma
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 U
170 U
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 U
230 U
230 U
170 U
160 U
160 U
180 U
200 U
210 U
160 U
170 U
170 U
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 U
170 U
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 U
230 U
230 U
170 U
160 U
160 U
180 U
200 a
210 U
160 6/
170 U
170 U
490 ^
480 U
94 t/
100 t/
90 U
130 a
120 U
100 (7
130 I/
130 U
140 ^
190 U
140 I/
140 I/
100 U
100 47
100 U
110 u
120 t/
120 U
100 <7
100 U
100 U
2 <7
2 y
2 (7
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 UE
3 U
3 UE
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
Hexachloro- Hexachloro-
benzene butadiene
230 U
230 U
36 U
37 U
36 U
39 U
56 U
46 U
61 U
60 U
63 U
70 U
52 U
51 U
47 U
45 U
45 U
41 U
47 U
47 U
46 U
46 U
47 U
280 U
280 U
44 (7
45 t/
44 U
53 U
56 U
46 (7
61 (7
60 U
63 (/
90 U
64 (7
60 <7
47 U
45 t7
45 U
50 (7
60 (7
60 U
46 a
46 U
57 W
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
DO Case Inlet
en Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Hexachlorocyclo-
Composite pentadlene
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
810
810
160
160
160
160
200
170
220
220
230
310
230
230
170
160
160
180
200
210
160
170
170
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Hexachloro-
ethane Acenapthene Acenaphthylene Aldrin Aniline Anthracene
320 U
320 U
63 U
65 U
63 U
64 U
80 U
66 U
88 U
86 U
91 U
120 U
92 U
90 U
66 U
64 U
65 U
70 U
80 U
80 U
66 U
66 U
66 U
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 U
45 U
33 U
32 U
32 U
36 U
41 U
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 U
160 (/
160 I/
31 U
32 I/
32 U
32 t/
40 t/
33 U
44 I/
43 U
45 I/
62 (/
46 U
45 L/
33 U
32 L/
32 U
36 U
41 (/
41 U
33 L/
33 L/
33 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
810 U
810 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
160 U
200 U
170 U
220 U
220 U
230 U
310 U
230 U
230 U
170 U
160 U
160 U
180 U
200 U
210 I/
160 a
170 U
170 t/
160 U
160 t/
31 I/
32 U
32 I/
32 U
40 C/
33 L/
44 U
43 L/
45 U
62 I/
46 a
45 U
33 t/
32 U
32 L/
36 L/
41 U
41 a
33 U
33 I/
33 L/
Bis(2-chloro- Bis(2-chloro-
Arsenic ethyl) ether isopropyl) ether
2.10
1.90
0.530
0.560
1.10
0.510
0.740
0.750
1.60
1.80
1.40
6.30
5.70
3.90
1.10
0.880
1.30
10.7
9.80
8.00
3.10
2.90
2.80
TE
TE
TE
T
TM
T
T
T
T
T
M
E
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 U
45 I/
33 U
32 L/
32 U
36 a
41 I/
41 U
33 (/
33 U
33 L/
160 I/
160 U
31 I/
32 U
32 O
32 L/
40 U
33 I/
44 U
43 U
45 t/
62 U
46 L/
45 U
33 L/
32
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
oj Case Inlet
o>Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Benz(a)- Benzo(a)- Bis(2-chloro- Benzole
Composite phthalate anthracene pyrene ethoxy) methane Acid
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
360 UZ
160 U
31 U
220 UZ
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
310 UZ
240 UZ
45 U
33 U
32 U
32 U
36 U
41 U
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 U
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 I/
44 U
43 I/
45 U
62 17
46 17
45 U
33 a
32 U
32 a
36 U
41 U
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 I/
160 U
160 I/
31 U
32 17
32 I/
32 U
40 17
33 U
44 I/
43 I/
45 U
62 t/
46 U
45 I/
33 C/
32 U
32 (7
36 U
41 17
41 I/
33 U
33 I/
33 U
160 17
160 I/
31 U
32 (7
32 U
32 I/
40 17
33 U
44 a
43 U
45 0
62 (/
46 U
45 I/
33 U
32 I/
32 17
36 U
41 17
41 U
33 17
33 I/
33 U
810 17
610 U
160 <7
160 17
190
160 U
200 17
180
320
220 U
230 U
310 17
230 (7
230 U
180
160 U
170
190
200 U
260
170
170 U
170 47
Benzyl Benzo(g.h,i) Butyl benzyl
Alcohol perylene phthalate Benzidlne Carbazole
230 (7
230 {7
40 t/
40 U
40 (7
50 U
50 I/
40 (7
60 U
50 (7
60 U
70 17
50 (7
50 U
42 (7
40 U
41 (7
40 (7
50 U
50 (7
41 U
42 (7
48 (7
160 U
160 (7
31 U
32 (7
32 (7
32 U
40 (7
33 U
44 17
43 (7
45 U
62 t/
46 U
45 17
33 (7
32 (7
32 (7
36 U
41 (7
41 £/
33 U
33 (7
33 U
160 17
160 (7
31 U
32 I/
32 U
160 I/
40 (7
33 (7
44 (7
43 U
45 (/
62 (7
46 U
45 (/
33 (7
32 t/
32 t/
36 U
41 t/
41 U
33 17
33 t/
33 U
8100 17
8100 U
1600 (7
1600 (7
1600 U
1600 17
2000 17
1700 17
2200 17
2200 17
2300 17
3100 17
2300 17
2300 17
1700 17
1600 17
1600 17
1800 17
2000 17
2100 17
1600 17
1700 17
1700 17
160 17
160 17
31 U
32 17
32 U
32 17
40 17
33 17
44 17
43 17
45 17
62 17
46 17
45 17
33 17
32 17
32 17
36 17
41 17
41 17
33 17
33 17
33 17
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
Alpha Gamma
Chlordane Chlordane Chrysene
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
UE
U
UE
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 UE
3 U
3 UE
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
3 U
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 U
45 U
33 U
32 U
32 U
36 U
41 U
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 U
Diethyl Di-n-butyl- Dimethyl Alpha Beta
Copper phthalate Dlbenzofuran Dieldrin phthalate phthalate Endosulfan Endosulfan
1.40
1.30
0.260
0.280
0.210
0.310
0.290
0.215 M
0.220
0.240
0.290
0.290
0.250
0.260
0.260
0.210
0.230
0.245 M
0.280
0.250
0.200
0.220
0.230
160
160
31
32
32
32
40
33
44
43
45
62
46
45
33
32
32
36
41
41
33
33
33
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
160
160
31
32
32
32
40
33
44
43
45
62
46
45
33
32
32
36
41
41
33
33
33
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 UE
4 U
4 UE
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
160 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
890
45 U
33 U
32 U
32 U
36 U
41 U
41 U
33 U
33 U
33 U
160
160
31
32
32
32
40
33
44
43
45
62
46
45
33
32
32
36
41
41
33
33
33
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 UE
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
2 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 UE
4 U
4 UE
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
4 U
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
00
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
Endosulfan Endrln Heptachlor lndeno(1 ,2,3-cd)
Sulfate Endrin Ketone Fluoranthene Fluorene Epoxlde Heptachlor pyrene
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17E
8 17
8 17E
8 17
B 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
8 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17E
4 17
4 17E
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
4 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17E
6 17
6 17E
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
6 17
160 17
160 17
31 17
32 17
32 17
32 17
40 17
33 17
44 17
43 17
45 17
62 17
46 17
45 17
33 17
32 17
32 17
36 17
41 17
41 17
33 U
33 17
33 17
160 17
160 17
31 17
32 17
32 U
32 17
40 17
33 17
44 17
43 17
45 17
62 17
46 17
45 17
33 17
32 17
32 17
36 17
41 17
41 17
33 17
33 17
33 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17E
2 17
2 17E
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
14 17
14 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17E
2 17
2 17E
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
2 17
14 17
3 17
2 17
160 UE
160 17E
31 17E
32 17E
32 17E
32 17E
40 17E
33 17E
44 17E
43 17E
45 17E
62 17E
46 17E
45 17E
33 17E
32 UE
32 17E
36 17E
41 17E
41 17E
33 17E
33 17E
33 17E
Isophorone
170
160 17
170
150
150
32 17
90 r
180
300
120
110
62 17
72 T
83 7
71 r
120
79 T
36 17
41 17
41 17
200
78 T
73 7
Lead
0.080
0.020 17
0.020 r
0.030 T
0.030 T
0.040 T
0.020 17
0.018 UM
0.020 17E
0.020 17E
0.020 17
0.040 T
0.020 T
0.040 T
0.020 17E
0.020 17E
0.020 17E
0.018 UM
0.020 r
0.040 r
0.020 UE
0.020 17E
0.020 17E
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Case Inlet
™ Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
N-nitroso- N-nitroso- N-nitroso-
Composlte Mercury Methoxychlor Naphthalene Nitrobenzene dimethylamine di-n-propylamine diphenylamine PCB-1221 PCB-1232 PCB-1248
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
0.010 TE
0.020 TE
0.050
0.060
0.040 7
0.070
0.075 E
0.130 EM
0.020 7E
0.070 E
0.050 E
0.120
0.040 T
0.020 T
0.040 E
0.020 TE
0.030 TE
0.056 M
0.050
0.060
0.080 E
0.070 E
0.100 E
8 ty
8 ty
a ty
s ty
8 ty
8 ty
e ty
8 ty
8 ty
8 tyE
a ty
8 tyE
s ty
s ty
a ty
8 ty
s ty
8 ty
s ty
8 U
s ty
8 ty
s ty
160 ty
160 ty
31 ty
32 ty
32 ty
32 ty
40 ty
33 ty
44 ty
43 ty
45 ty
62 ty
46 ty
45 ty
33 ty
32 ty
32 ty
36 ty
41 ty
41 ty
33 ty
33 ty
33 ty
160 ty
160 ty
31 ty
32 ty
32 ty
32 ty
40 ty
33 ty
44 ty
43 ty
45 ty
62 ty
46 ty
45 ty
33 ty
32 ty
32 ty
36 ty
41 ty
41 ty
33 ty
33 ty
33 ty
810 ty
810 ty
160 ty
160 ty
160 ty
160 ty
200 ty
170 ty
220 ty
220 ty
230 ty
310 ty
230 ty
230 ty
170 ty
160 ty
160 ty
180 ty
200 ty
210 ty
160 ty
170 ty
170 ty
160 ty
160 ty
31 ty
32 ty
32 ty
32 ty
40 ty
33 ty
44 ty
43 ty
45 ty
62 ty
46 ty
45 ty
33 ty
32 ty
32 ty
36 ty
41 ty
41 ty
33 ty
33 ty
33 ty
90 ty
90 ty
16 ty
17 ty
16 ty
16 ty
23 ty
19 ty
25 ty
25 ty
26 ty
32 ty
23 ty
23 ty
19 ty
19 ty
19 ty
is ty
21 ty
21 ty
19 ty
19 ty
19 ty
5 ty
s ty
s ty
s ty
5 ty
s ty
5 U
5 U
5 ty
5 tyE
s ty
5 tyE
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
s ty
5 ty
s ty
s ty
s ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
s tyE
s ty
5 WE
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
s ty
s ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
s tyE
s ty
5 tyE
s ty
s ty
s ty
s ty
5 ty
5 ty
5 ty
s ty
5 ty
5 U
5 U
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Location
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
oo Case Inlet
-!» Case Inlet
° Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Site/
Transect
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
Composite
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
PCB-1016/
PCB-1254 PCB-1260 PCB-1242 Phenanthrene
5 U
5 U
13 r
18 T
13 r
27 T
5 U
15 T
5 U
5 UE
5 U
5 UE
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
14 7
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
13 T
16 T
11 T
18 T
15 T
17 T
5 U
18 E
5 U
5 UE
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
14 T
5 U
15 T
40
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 UE
5 U
5 UE
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
5 U
160 U
160 U
31 U
32 U
32 U
32 U
40 U
33 U
44 U
43 U
45 U
62 U
46 U
45 t;
33 U
32 a
32 U
36 (/
41 I/
41 U
33 I/
33 U
33 (/
Phenol P.P'-DDD P,
320 U
320 t/
63 U
65 t/
63 U
64 t/
80 I/
66 U
88 (/
86 U
91 I/
120 I/
92 a
90 a
66 U
64 t/
65 L/
70 U
80 L/
80 U
66 i/
66 I/
66 U
4 I/
4 U
4 t/
4 t/
4 I/
4 I/
4 U
4 I/
4 I/
4 l/E
4 I/
4 UE
4 U
4 t/
4 U
4 L/
4 U
4 L/
4 i/
4 U
4 L/
4 U
4 (/
Total
,P'-DDE P.P'-DDT Pyrene Benzofluoranthene Toxaphene
4 U
4 I/
4 I/
4 I/
4 I/
4 U
4 L/
4 L/
4 t/
4 l/E
4 U
4 t/E
4 (/
4 U
4 (/
4 U
4 t/
4 £/
4 L/
4 U
4 U
4 £/
4 I/
4 f/
4 t/
4 U
4 t/
4 (/
4 I/
4 t/
4 U
4 I/
4 t/E
4 U
4 t/E
4 U
4 L/
4 (/
4 t/
4 t/
4 U
4 I/
4 I/
4 L/
4 L/
4 U
160 t/
160 I/
31 U
32 (/
32 U
32 t/
40 (/
33 U
44 I/
43 U
45 (7
62 L/
46 U
45 £/
33 U
32 t/
32 W
36 U
41 t/
41 U
33 U
33 t/
33 U
320 I/
320 U
62 {/
64 t/
64 U
64 I/
80 U
66 L/
88 L/
86 U
90 t/
124 U
92 I/
90 I/
66 U
64 I/
64 U
72 U
82 I/
82 U
66 (S
66 U
66 a
300 L/
300 U
300 I/
300 U
300 L/
300 t/
300 U
300 I/
300 U
300 l/E
300 t/
300 UE
300 I/
300 U
300 L/
300 L/
300 U
300 t/
300 U
300 I/
300 L/
300 U
300 L/
-------
TABLE B-1. (Continued)
Site/ Percent
Location Transect Composite Llpld
Budd Inlet
Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
oo Case Inlet
^ Case Inlet
~* Case Inlet
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
C1
C2
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
A
A
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
0.92
0.80
0.23
0.27
0.25
0.41
0.31
0.24
0.43
0.65
0.39
0.51
0.32
0.44
0.47
0.37
0.33
0.28
0.29
0.35
0.33
0.30
0.37
1 Tissues used were littleneck clams (sites C1 and C2), English sole (Transects T4 and T6), and starry flounder (Transects T1. T2, T3, T5, and T7).
2 All of the chemical concentrations presented in this table pass PSEP (1989a,b) guidelines and are considered acceptable for characterizing
environmental conditions in southern Puget Sound. The following qualifiers provide additional information for specific values:
E •= Estimated value. These values have a greater degree of uncertainty than unqualified data. Data are generally assigned
E qualifiers when one QA/QC result (i.e., matrix spike, matrix duplicate, etc.) falls outside of the control limits.
M = Value is a mean.
T - Detected between the limit of detection and the quantification limit at the detection limit shown. These values are acceptable as estimates.
U = Undetected at detection limit shown.
Z = Value is above the detection limit shown after blank correction.
-------
TABLE B-2. SUMMARY OF LENGTHS AND AGES OF FISH USED FOR BIOACCUMULATION ANALYSES
Location
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Inner Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Outer Budd Inlet
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Shelton
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Transect Date Composite
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T1
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T2
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T3
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
B
A
B
C
A
A
A
C
B
C
C
B
B
C
A
B
B
C
C
C
A
A
B
B
C
A
C
A
B
A
C
C
C
A
B
A
B
A
B
C
A
B
B
C
A
C
C
A
A
C
C
A
B
C
Fish
Number Species
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
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
Length Age
(mm) (years)
490
378
368
386
340
346
374
365
433
347
340
333
297
274
298
310
330
320
310
335
375
350
345
335
340
330
315
315
320
310
440
405
420
350
425
400
400
370
340
350
330
410
400
415
390
280
255
260
255
230
230
240
240
230
9
5
12
14
6
11
12
12
10
12
8
11
7
5
6
9
15
13
7
10
7
5
8
14
14
10
7
8
8
7
10
8
9
6
8
7
7
6
10
6
8
9
7
6
7
4
2
4
4
3
2
4
3
3
-------
TABLE B-2. (Continued)
Location
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
Case Inlet
McNeil Island1
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Carr Inlet
Transect
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T5
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
T7
Date
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
Composite
B
A
B
A
B
B
B
B
A
A
C
C
A
C
B
C
A
B
B
C
A
C
B
C
A
C
C
B
A
B
C
A
A
B
A
B
A
B
C
B
B
A
A
C
C
A
C
B
B
A
C
Fish
Number
10
11
12
13
14
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Species
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
English Sole
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Starry flounder
Length
(mm)
265
295
265
320
265
300
280
315
310
310
320
310
305
300
340
300
320
365
340
335
380
340
270
275
230
250
260
245
240
250
240
260
260
240
245
235
400
315
340
390
300
300
320
345
320
295
305
230
325
330
310
Age
(years)
4
5
4
5
3
5
4
8
5
5
5
5
8
5
7
14
8
10
8
5
11
5
4
4
3
4
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
8
9
7
8
6
6
7
12
8
9
10
7
10
13
5
1 Located off of McNeil Island in Carr Inlet.
B-13
-------
Appendix C
Sediment Bioassay Data
-------
TABLE C-1. CHARACTERISTICS OF SEDIMENTS COLLECTED AT
STATIONS 1-12 IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
Sampling Station
West Beach Control
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Interstitial
Water Salinity
,0/00,
28
25
28
27.5
26
27.5
28
27.5
28
28
25
28
28
PH
7.02
7.03
7.01
7.03
7.10
7.07
7.04
7.11
7.17
7.39
7.15
7.22
7.44
Wet Weight (grams)
per 2-cm Sediment
Layer Tested
253
214
191
189
192
190
190
190
190
199
204
197
197
General Observations
Fine, beige, clean sand.
Fine, light brown sediment
with thick consistency and
slight fishy odor.
Fine, light brown sediment
with watery consistency
and "dirt" odor.
Same as Station 2.
Same as Station 2.
Same as Station 2.
Same as Station 2.
Same as Station 2.
Same as Station 2.
Brown sediment with thick
consistency and sweet
odor.
Brown sediment with thick
consistency and "dirt"
odor.
Same as Station 10.
Light brown sediment with
thick consistency and "dirt"
odor.
C-1
-------
TABLE C-2. RESPONSES OF RHEPOXYNIUS ABRONIUS TO
TEST SEDIMENTS FROM STATIONS 1-12
Replicate
Sampling Station Number
1
2
West Beach Control 3
4
5
1
2
1 3
4
5
1
2
2 3
4
5
1
2
3 3
4
5
1
2
4 3
4
5
1
2
5 3
4
5
1
2
6 3
4
5
1 0-Day
Amphipod Emergence
5
1
6 X = 4.0
4 Sx = 1.9
4
14
8
4 X = 6.0
1 Sx = 5.1
3
1
2
8 7 = 3.4
5 Sx = 3.0
1
2
0
1 x = 1.2
2 Sx = 0.8
1
5
2
3 x = 2.6
1 Sx = 1.5
2
6
4
2 X = 2.4
0 Sx = 2.6
0
2
0
6 X = 3.0
3 Sx = 2.2
4
Amphipod Response
10-Day Amphipod Survival
No. of Survivors Mean %
19
20
20 X = 19.4 97.0
19 Sx = 0.55
19
17
15
18 X = 17.0 85.0
18 Sx = 1.2
17
19
18
19 X = 18.6 93.0
18 Sx = 0.55
19
20
20
20 X = 19.8 99.0
20 Sx = 0.45
19
18
18
20 X = 19.0 95.0
20 Sx = 1.0
19
19
17
18 X = 18.8 94.0
20 Sx = 1.3
20
18
17
18 X = 17.4 87.0
15 Sx = 1.5
19
Survivors Not
Reburying
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
o x = o.o
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
1
0 X = 0.2
0 Sx =0.4
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
C-2
-------
TABLE C-2. (Continued)
Replicate
Sampling Station Number
1
2
7 3
4
5
1
2
8 3
4
5
1
2
9 3
4
5
1
2
10 3
4
5
1
2
11 3
4
5
1
2
12 3
4
5
1 0-Day
Amphipod Emergence
6
8
1 X = 4.4
3 Sx = 2.7
4
2
2
0 X = 1.0
1 Sx = 1.0
0
5
4
3 X = 4.6
9 Sx = 2.7
2
5
8
0 X = 4.0
4 Sx = 2.9
3
0
0
1 X = 0.8
3 Sx = 1.3
0
2
0
0 X = 0.6
0 Sx = 0.9
1
Amphipod Response
1 0-Day Amphipod Survival
No. of Survivors Mean %
16
17
20 X = 17.6 88.0
16 Sx - 1.8
19
16
17
15 X = 16.4 82.0
18 Sx = 1.1
16
19
18
20 X = 19.0 95.0
19 Sx = 0.71
19
19
18
20 X = 18.0 90.0
15 Sx = 1.9
18
18
19
18 X = 18.2 91.0
18 Sx = 0.45
18
17
18
17 X = 17.4 87.0
17 Sx = 0.55
18
Survivors Not
Reburying
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = O.JO
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.2
1 Sx = 0.45
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
C-3
-------
TABLE C-3. OBSERVATIONS OF AMPHIPOD EMERGENCE DURING TESTING
OF SEDIMENTS FROM STATIONS 1-12
No. of Amphipods Out of Sediment
Floating, Swimming, or on Sediment Surface
Replicate
Treatment Number
1
2
West Beach Control 3
4
5
1
2
1 3
4
5
1
2
2 3
4
5
1
2
3 3
4
5
1
2
4 3
4
5
1
2
5 3
4
5
1
2
6 3
4
5
Days
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
3
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
4
0
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
5
1
0
1
0
0
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
1
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
Total
Emergence
5
1
6
4
4
14
8
4
1
3
1
2
8
5
1
2
0
1
2
1
5
2
3
1
2
6
4
2
0
0
2
0
6
3
4
1 0-Day
Treatment Summary
X = 4.0
Sx = 1.9
X = 6.0
Sx = 5.1
x = 3.4
Sx = 3.0
x = 1.2
Sx = 0.8
x = 2.6
Sx = 1.5
X = 2.4
Sx = 2.6
X = 3.0
Sx = 2.2
C-4
-------
TABLE C-3. (Continued)
No. of Amphipods Out of Sediment
Floating, Swimming, or on Sediment Surface
Replicate
Treatment Number
1
2
7 3
4
5
1
2
8 3
4
5
1
2
9 3
4
5
1
2
10 3
4
5
1
2
11 3
4
5
1
2
12 3
4
5
Days
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Total
Emergence
6
8
1
3
4
2
2
0
1
0
5
4
3
9
2
5
8
0
4
3
0
0
1
3
0
2
0
0
0
1
1 0-Day
Treatment Summary
X = 4.4
Sx = 2.7
x = 1.0
Sx = 1.0
x = 4.6
Sx = 2.7
x = 4.0
Sx = 2.9
x = 0.8
Sx = 1.3
X = 0.6
Sx = 0.9
C-5
-------
TABLE C-4. SELECTED WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS MEASURED AT THE
BEGINNING (DAY 0) AND END (DAY 10) OF TESTING FOR STATIONS 1-12
Sampling Station
West Beach Control
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
pH
7.97
7.87
7.84
7.89
7.88
7.87
7.87
7.86
7.92
7.88
7.92
7.94
7.97
D0a
(mg/L)
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.3
Day 0
Temperature
(°C)
15.3
15.2
15.3
15.3
15.2
15.3
15.2
15.3
15.3
15.3
15.3
15.3
15.3
Salinity
(0/00)
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
PH
7.94
8.01
8.11
8.08
8.04
7.94
7.99
7.92
7.89
7.93
7.94
7.93
NDa
D0a
(mg/L)
7.7
7.6
8.1
7.8
8.1
7.8
8.1
8.0
7.8
7.8
8.2
8.0
7.8
Day 10
Temperature
(°C)
15.0
15.4
15.2
15.3
15.0
15.2
15.0
15.2
15.0
15.1
15.0
15.0
14.8
Salinity
(0/00)
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
3 DO - dissolved oxygen
b ND - no data
C-6
-------
TABLE C-5. CHARACTERISTICS OF SEDIMENTS COLLECTED AT
STATIONS 13-24 IN SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND
Sampling Station
West Beach Control
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Interstitial
Water Salinity
(0/00)
28
25.5
27
28
28
28
28
30
28
30
30
30
30
PH
6.86
7.66
7.43
7.64
7.32
7.27
7.36
7.20
7.46
7.66
7.15
7.25
7.21
Wet Weight (grams)
per 2-cm Sediment
Layer Tested
267
194
195
251
199
193
273
204
219
297
296
194
213
General Observations
Fine, beige, clean sand.
Fine, charcoal brown sedi-
ment with pourable consis-
tency, "dirt" odor.
Same as Station 13.
Coarse, brown sediment with
rotten oyster odor.
Same as Station 13.
Same as Station 13.
Same as Station 1 5, but less
rotten odor.
Same as Station 13, but
thicker.
Same as Station 13, but
thicker.
Same as Station 15, but less
rotten odor.
Same as Station 15, but
sandier with less rotten odor.
Same as Station 13.
Medium-grained, charcoal
brown sediment, with a slight
rotten odor.
C-7
-------
TABLE C-6. RESPONSES OF RHEPOXYNIUS ABRONIUS TO
TEST SEDIMENTS FROM STATIONS 13-24
Replicate
Sampling Station Number
1
2
West Beach Control 3
4
5
1
2
13 3
4
5
1
2
14 3
4
5
1
2
15 3
4
5
1
2
16 3
4
5
1
2
17 3
4
5
1
2
18 3
4
5
10-Day
Amphipod Emergence
1
0
0 X = 2.2
0 Sx = 4.4
10
3
0
0 X = 0.6
0 Sx = 1.3
0
0
0
2 X = 0.6
0 Sx = 0.9
1
1
2
1 X = 2.8
4 Sx = 2.2
6
1
0
1 X = 0.6
0 Sx = 0.5
1
9
1
0 X = 2.0
0 Sx = 3.9
0
12
0
1 X = 2.6
0 Sx = 5.3
0
Amphipod Response
1 0-Day Amphipod Survival
No. of Survivors Mean %
20
20
20 X = 19.8 99.0
20 Sx = 0.4
19
20
18
19 X = 19.0 95.0
20 Sx = 1.0
18
19
20
20 X = 19.2 96.0
19 Sx = 0.8
18
20
19
18 X = 18.2 91.0
19 Sx = 1.9
15
16
20
19 X = 18.0 90.0
18 Sx = 1.6
17
18
16
19 X = 17.8 89.0
18 Sx = 1.1
18
18
20
19 X = 19.2 96.0
19 Sx = 0.8
20
Survivors Not
Reburying
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.2
0 Sx =0.4
1
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
C-8
-------
TABLE C-6. (Continued)
Replicate
Sampling Station Number
1
2
19 3
4
5
1
2
20 3
4
5
1
2
21 3
4
5
1
2
22 3
4
5
1
2
23 3
4
5
1
2
24 3
4
5
10-Day
Amphipod Emergence
14
0
1 X = 3.6
1 Sx = 5.9
2
0
1
0 X = 0.8
0 Sx = 1.3
3
0
0
1 X = 0.4
1 Sx = 0.5
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.6
0 Sx = 1.3
3
3
1
0 X = 0.8
0 Sx = 1.3
0
Amphipod Response
10-Day Amphipod Survival
No. of Survivors Mean %
19
16
20 X = 19.0 95.0
20 Sx = 1 .7
20
20
16
19 X = 18.0 90.0
20 Sx = 2.3
15
19
19
18 X = 19.0 95.0
19 Sx = 0.7
20
20
17
19 X = 19.0 95.0
19 Sx = 1.2
20
20
19
19 X = 19.2 96.0
19 Sx = 0.4
19
18
19
17 X = 18.8 94.0
20 Sx = 1 .3
20
Survivors Not
Reburying
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
0 Sx = 0
0
0
0
0 X = 0.0
OSx = 0
0
C-9
-------
TABLE C-7. OBSERVATIONS OF AMPHIPOD EMERGENCE DURING TESTING
OF SEDIMENTS FROM STATIONS 13-24
No. of Amphipods
Floating, Swimming, or
Replicate
Treatment Number
1
2
West Beach Control 3
4
5
1
2
13 3
4
5
1
2
14 3
4
5
1
2
15 3
4
5
1
2
16 3
4
5
1
2
17 3
4
5
1
2
18 3
4
5
Out of Sediment
on Sediment Surface
Days
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
3
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
Total
Emergence
1
0
0
0
10
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
1
4
6
1
0
1
0
1
9
1
0
0
0
12
0
1
0
0
1 0-Day
Treatment Summary
x = 2.2
Sx = 4.4
x = 0.6
Sx = 1.3
x = 0.6
Sx = 0.9
x = 2.8
Sx = 2.2
X = 0.6
Sx = 0.5
x = 2.0
Sx = 3.9
X = 2.6
Sx = 5.3
C-10
-------
TABLE C-7. (Continued)
No. of Amphipods Out of Sediment
Floating, Swimming, or on Sediment Surface
Replicate
Treatment Number
1
2
19 3
4
5
1
2
20 3
4
5
1
2
21 3
4
5
1
2
22 3
4
5
1
2
23 3
4
5
1
2
24 3
4
5
Days
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
2
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
9
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
10
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Total
Emergence
14
0
1
1
2
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
1
0
0
0
1 0-Day
Treatment Summary
x = 3.6
Sx = 5.9
x = 0.8
Sx = 1.3
x = 0.4
Sx = 0.5
x = 0.0
Sx = 0
x = 0.6
Sx = 1.3
x = 0.8
Sx = 1.3
C-11
-------
TABLE C-8. SELECTED WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS MEASURED AT THE
BEGINNING (DAY 0) AND END (DAY 10) OF TESTING FOR STATIONS 13-24
Sampling Station
West Beach Control
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
PH
7.98
7.97
7.99
7.98
8.01
8.00
7.99
7.95
7.96
7.97
8.04
7.98
8.04
DO*
(mg/L)
7.6
7.8
7.5
7.5
7.8
7.4
7.8
7.5
7.6
7.1
7.4
7.5
7.5
Day 0
Temperature
(°C)
14.7
14.7
14.7
14.7
14.6
15.0
15.2
14.8
15.0
14.7
14.8
14.8
15.0
Salinity
(0/00,
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
PH
7.97
7.95
7.96
7.97
7.95
7.97
8.08
8.03
8.02
8.04
8.15
8.03
8.15
DO"
(mg/L)
8.3
8.6
8.7
8.4
8.6
8.0
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.3
7.8
Day 10
Temperature
(°C)
14.8
14.9
14.8
14.8
14.8
14.8
14.9
15.0
15.0
15.0
14.8
15.3
15.0
Salin
(0/0
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
DO - dissolved oxygen
C-12
-------
TABLE C-9. RESPONSES OF RHEPOXYNIUS ABRONIUS
TO THE REFERENCE TOXICANT CdCI2a
Controls for Stations 1-12: 96-hour Cadmium LC50b Determination
Amphipod Survival
(percent)
Nominal Cadmium
Replicates
concentration
(mg/U
0.0
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.0
1
100
100
100
30
0
0
2
100
90
80
40
0
0
3
100
80
70
70
0
0
4
90
100
80
10
0
0
Mean Percent
Survival
97.5
92.5
82.5
37.5
0
0
Controls for Stations 13-24: 96-hour Cadmium LC50C Determination
Amphipod Survival
(percent)
Nominal Cadmium
Replicates
Concentration
(mg/L)
0.0
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.0
1
100
100
90
70
20
0
2
100
80
100
60
30
0
3
100
90
100
90
50
0
4
100
100
100
90
50
0
Mean rercent
Survival
100
92.5
97.5
77.5
37.5
0
a EPA, EMSL-Cinn #784.
b 96-hour LC50 = 0.85 mg Cd/L, (95 percent confidence limits, 0.71-0.98 mg Cd/L).
0 96-hour LC50 = 1.4 mg Cd/L (significant heterogeneity).
C-13
-------
Appendix D
Histopathology Data
-------
TABLE D-1. SUMMARY OF SHIPBOARD OBSERVATIONS
MADE ON ENGLISH SOLE SAMPLED FOR
HISTOPATHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
FROM TOTTEN INLET
LBA ACC. STATION SPECIES LENGTH SEX GROSS EXTERNAL LESIONS LIVER GROSS LIVER LESIONS
NUMBER (1) CODE CODE (2) (MM) (3) (DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS) COLOR (4XOESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
1 T-4
2 T-4
3 T-4
4 T-4
5 T-4
6 T-4
7 T-4
8 T-4
9 T-4
10 T-4
11 T-4
12 T-4
13 T-4
14 T-4
15 T-4
16 T-4
17 T-4
18 T-4
19 T-4
20 T-4
21 T-4
22 T-4
23 T-4
24 T-4
25 T-4
26 T-4
27 T-4
28 T-4
29 T-4
30 T-4
31 T-4
32 T-4
33 T-4
34 T-4
35 T-4
36 T-4
37 T-4
38 T-4
39 T-4
40 T-4
41 T-4
42 T-4
43 T-4
44 T-4
45 T-4
46 T-4
47 T-4
48 T-4
49 T-4
50 T-4
51 T-4
52 T-4
53 T-4
54 T-4
55 T-4
56 T-4
57 T-4
58 T-4
59 T-4
60
1 280
1 255
1 260
1 255
1 230
1 230
1 240
1 240
1 230
1 265
1 295
1 265
1 320
1 265
1 300
1 280
1 260
1 250
230
255
230
250
320
280
240
230
265
260
270
245
230
280
230
250
280
250
260
330
260
240
240
230
235
245
265
260
250
290
315
310
370
295
270
255
295
230
1 260
1 250
1 230
No Sains te
2 Philonetra
2 PapiUomas (2) 4 PhUonetra
2 Philonetra
2 Scar on Blind Sidt
2 PhUonetra
2 NVL
2 PhUonatra
2 Phllomatra
2 Philomatra
2 PhUonetra
2 Philometra
2 Philonetre
2 PhUonatra
2 Philonetre
2 Philonetre & Fin Eroaion
2 PhUonatra
2 Phitonetra
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUonatra
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUowtra
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUonatra
1 PhUonetra
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUonetra
1 PhUonetra
2 PhUonetra
2 Parasitea Between Fin Rays
2 Philanetre
2 Philonetre 4 Scolioais
2 PhUonatre
2 PhUonetra
2 PhUonatre
2 PhUonetra
2 Philanetre
2 Philonetra
2 Philonetre
2 Philonetre
2 PhUonetra
2 Philonetre
2 Philanetre
2 PhUonetra
2 Phtlanetre
2 Philanetra
2 Philonatra
2 Philanetra
2 Philanetra I Fin Eroaion
2 PhUonatra
2 Philoontra
2 Philanetra
2 PhiloMtre
2 Philonetra
2 Philanetra
1 PhUowtra
2 Philonttra
2 Philometra
2 Philometra
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 Parasite on Surface
1 Bile Staining
1 NVL
1 Parasite on Surface
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 White Cysts on Surface
1 NVL
1 White Cyst on Surface
1 Parasite on Surface
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 Parasite on Surface
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 Parasite on Surface
1 NVL
1 Parasite on Surface
2 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 Bile Staining
2 NVL
1 Large Parasite Cysts
2 NVL
1 Extensive Paraaites
1 One White Cyst
2 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 Bile Staining
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 White Cyst
1 Perasites
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 NVL
D-1
-------
TABLE D-2. SUMMARY OF SHIPBOARD OBSERVATIONS
MADE ON ENGLISH SOLE SAMPLED FOR
HISTOPATHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
FROM CARR INLET
LBA ACC. STATION SPECIES LENGTH SEX GROSS EXTERNAL LESIONS LIVER GROSS LIVER LESIONS
NUMBER (1) CODE CODE (2) (MM) (3) (DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS) COLOR (4)(OESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
61 T-6
62 T-6
63 T-6
64 T-6
65 T-6
66 T-6
67 T-6
68 T-6
69 T-6
70 T-6
71 T-6
72 T-6
73 T-6
74 T-6
75 T-6
76 T-6
77 T-6
78 T-6
79 T-6
80 T-6
81 T-6
82 T-6
83 T-6
84 T-6
85 T-6
86 T-6
87 T-6
88 T-6
89 T-6
90 T-6
91 T-6
92 T-6
93 T-6
94 T-6
95 T-6
96 T-6
97 T-6
98 T-6
99 T-6
100 T-6
101 T-6
102 T-6
103 T-6
104 T-6
105 T-6
106 T-6
107 T-6
108 T-6
109 T-6
110 T-6
111 T-6
112 T-6
113 T-6
114 T-6
115 T-6
116 T-6
117 T-6
118 T-6
119 T-6
120 T-6
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
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
340
270
275
230
250
260
245
240
250
240
260
260
240
245
235
275
260
255
230
235
230
230
230
230
270
255
240
245
280
235
240
235
270
230
230
230
270
300
270
260
230
250
235
240
260
230
230
240
240
230
230
260
260
240
230
255
245
235
240
230
2 Phitometra A Fin Erosion
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra
1 Phiicmtra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
1 Phitometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitomatra
1 Phitometra
2 Phitomatra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitomatra
2 Phitomatra
1 Phitometra
2 Philometra
1 Phitemetre
2 Phitomatra
1 Phitometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 NVL
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra
2 Philometra
1 Philometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
1 Philometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
1 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra
2 Philometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra
1 Philometra
1 Phitometra ft Fin Erosion
1 NVL
2 Philometra ft Fin Base Hemorrhage
1 Philometra ft Fin Erosion
2 Philometra
1 Fin Erosion
2 NVL
2 Philometra
2 Philometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra ft Fin Erosion
2 Phitometra
2 Phitometra
2 Philometra
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 White Cyst
1 NVL
2 Extensive Parasites
1 Parasites
1 NVL
2 Parasites
1 Parasites
1 Parasite
2 Extensive Parasites
2 NVL
2 NVL
1 White Spots
2 NVL
3 NVL
3 Parasite
1 NVL
2 White Cyst
2 NVL
2 White Cyst
1 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 Yellow Cyst
2 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 White Parasites
2 NVL
3 Large White Parasites
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 Yellow Cysts
1 Long Yellow Parasites
1 Yellow Cysts
2 Short Yellow worm
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 Long Parasite
3 NVL
2 NVL
3 NVL
1 NVL
2 NVL
2 NVL
2 Yellow Cysts
2 White Cyst
1 NVL
3 NVL
3 Yellow Parasite
2 NVL
2 NVL
1 White worm
3 White Cyst
2 NVL
1 NVL
1 White & Yellow Parasites
D-2
-------
TABLE D-3. SUMMARY OF LABORATORY OBSERVATIONS MADE ON LIVERS
OF ENGLISH SOLE FROM TOTTEN INLET
LBA ACC.
NUMBER (1)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
H
15
16
17
18
i 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
HISTOLOGICAL LIVER LESIONS and SEVERITY
(ABBREVIATED DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
Vac-2/Serosltls-l/Paren NeM-1/
Vac-1/Nyx-1
Vnc-l/Myx-1
Vac-1/Ser NcM-l/Coccidfa-1
Vac-3/Nyx-1/Ser NeM-1
Vac-3/Non-Unl Vac-1
Vac-1/Coccldla-1
Vac-2/Seroiltls-2/MMC'«-1/Mono lnfil-1/Ser NeM-2
Vac-2/Nyx-1
Vac-1/Serositis 2/Ser Nou-2/Coccidia-l/Nono lnfii-1
Vac-1/SerositU-l/Ser NcM-1/NNC's-l/Regen-l
Vac-1/Nyx-1/Seroiitfs-1
Vac-l/Serositls-2/HNC's-l/Nyx-l/Ser Nema-2
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Nyx-1/Foc Nee -1 /Mono lnfil-1
Vac-1/Serocltit 2/Ser NeM-2/Paren Nyx-1
vac-1
Vac-1/Nyx-1/Serositis-2
Vac-2/Nyx-l/Serosltit-l
Vac -2
Vac-1
Vac-1/Hyx-1
Vac-1/Serotttt«-2/Ser Nena-1/Paren Cran-1
Vac-1/Coccidfa-1/SerosftU-1
Vac-1/Paren NcM-1/Myx-l/Ser NeM-2/Serositis-l
Vac-2/Nyx-1/Foc Nec-1
Vac-1/Nono lnfil-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Seros
-------
TABLE D-3. (Continued)
IB A ACC.
NUMBER (1)
46
47
48
49
50
SI
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
HISTOLOGICAL LIVER LESIONS Mid SEVERITY
(ABBREVIATED DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
Vac-1
Vac-2/Coccidia-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Ser Neaa-1
Vac-2/Ser Gran-1/Paren Nema-1/Coccidia-1/Paren Gran-1/Foc Nec-1
Vac-1/Nyx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Ser Gran-1
Vac-1/Coccldla-1/Hyx-1
Vac-1/Foc Pyk- I/Foe Nec-1/Myx-1
Vac- 1/Myx- I/Mono lnfll-1
Vac-1/Myx-2/Duc lnflaa-2
Vac-1/HNC't-l/Hyx-l/Foc Pyk-1
Vac-1/Serositi«-2/Ser Ne«a-1
(NO SPECIMEN)
NODC HISTOLOGICAL
LESION CODE
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 - SB
18 - 68
18 - 68
12 -219
18 - 68
18 - 68
12 -219
14 - 58
14 -404
18 - 68
18 - 68
103 -726
12 -200
12 -116
14 -116 14-58 73 -219 14 -308
18 - 68
14 -308 18 68
14 -234
18 -200
18-68 14 -404
12 116
-------
TABLE D-4. SUMMARY OF LABORATORY OBSERVATIONS
MADE ON LIVERS OF ENGLISH SOLE
FROM CARR INLET
LBA ACC.
NUMBER (1)
1
2
3
It
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
O 19
01 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
HISTOLOCICAL LIVER LESIONS and SEVERITY
(ABBREVIATED DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
Vac-1
VK-1/Foc lnflw-1
Vac-1/Serotitla-l/Myx-l
Vac -1 /Mono lnfll-l/Nyx-1
vac-1/Nyx-1/Ser MaM-1
Vac -1 /Mono lnfil-1/Myx-1/Foc Nec-1
Vac-1/Serositls-1
Vac-l/Serositla-2/Ser Nema-2/Mono lnfil-1
Vac-1/Foc InflM-l
Vac-1/Myx-l/Coccidia 1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Foc lnfla*-1/Ser Nena-1
Vac-2/Myx 1
Vac-1/Myx-l/Hono lnfil-1
Vac-1/Spong Hep- 1/HyM-1 /Mono Inf tl-1/Serosi tls-1
Vac-l/Nyx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/CoccldU 1/Myx-1/Ser Nema-1/Mono lnfil-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/MMC'*-1/Ser Nema-1/Non-Uni Vac-1
Vac-1/SeroiitU-1/Nyx-1/Coccidia-1/Fibrosis-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Foc lnflam-1/Foc Pyk-1
Vac-1/Coccldia-1/Myx-1
Vac-1
Vac-1 /Mono lnfil-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Serosltlt-1
Vac-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Coccldia-1
Vac-1/Coccldia-1
Vac-1/Nyx-t/Paren Nema-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/foc Pyk-1 /Mono lnfil-1/Foc Inflara 1/Paren Gran-1/Serositls-1/Ser Hen
Vac-1
Vac-1
Vac- 1/Serosi tis-1
Vac-1/Ser Nema-2/Serositis-l
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Foc Inf lam- 1
Vac-1
Vac-1/Foc lnfla*-1/Myx-2/Foc Nec-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Foc lnflaa-1/Paren Neaa-1
Vac-1/Myx-1/Ser Ne«a-1
Vac-1/Hyx-t
Vac-1/HMC's-3
NOOC HISIOLOGICAL
LESION CODE
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
na-1 14 -482
14 -482
14 482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -482
14 -200
12 -200
14 -234
18 - 68
14 -234
12 -200
12 -200
14 -200
18 - 68
18 - 68
18 - 68
18 - 68
14 -720
18 - 68
18 - 68
14 - 58
18 - 68
103 -726
12 -200
IB - 68
14 - 58
14 -234
12 -200
18 - 68
14 - 58
14 - 58
18 - 68
18 - 68
18 - 68
18 - 68
12 -200
12 -200
12 -116
18 - 68
18 - 68
14 -200
18 - 68
18 - 68
18 - 68
103 -726
18 - 68
18 - 68
12 -116
18-68 14 -308
12 -116 14 -234
14 - 58
14 -200 12 -116
14 -234
18-68 14 -234 12 -200
18-68 12-116 14 234
12 -116 14 -483
18-68 14-58 14 -261
14 -200 14 -404
IB - 68
18 - 68
IB -116
14 -«04 14 -234 K -200 73 -219
12 -116
12 -200
14 -200
18-68 14 -308
14 -200 12 -116
12 -116
-------
TABLE D 4. (Continued)
LBA ACC.
NUMBER (1)
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
S3
54
55
56
5?
58
59
60
HISTOLOCICAL LIVER LESIONS and SEVERITY
(ABBREVIATED DESCRIPTIVE OBSERVATIONS)
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vtc-l
V«c-1/Nyx-1
Vic-1
Vac-1/Ser NeM-1/Foc Pyk-1
VK-1/Ser NeM-1/SeroaltU-l/Myx-l
Vac-2/Nyx-Woc Inflw-l/Sporozoan-l
Vac-1/SerofttU-l/Coccldia-l/Mono Infll 1/Myx-1
Vac-1/Hyx-1
Vac-1/Nono Infil 1/Myx-l/Coccidia-l
Vac-1/Ser Noaa-1
Vac-1/Non Unl Vac-l/Hyx-1
Vac-1/Myx-1
Vac-1
Vac-1/Ser Nema-1
NODC HISTOLOCICAL
LESION CODE
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
-482
18
18
12
12
18
12
18
14
12
14
18
12
- 68
- 68
-116
-116
- 68
-200
- 68
-234
-116
-483
- 68
-116
14
12
14
14
18
18
-404
-200
-200
- 58
- 68
- 68
IB
IB
14
14
- 68
- 75
-234 18
- 58
68
O
O>
-------
TABLE D-5. SUMMARY OF LESION CODES USED IN
TABLES D-3 AND D-4
LESION SEVERITY CODES
Mild(l)
Moderate (2)
Severe(3)
LESION CODES
12-116
12-200
14-58
14-68
14-116
14-200
14-234
14-261
14-308
14-404
14-482
14-483
14-720
14-734
18-68
18-75
18-116
73-219
74-308
103-726
Serosal nematodes
Scrosai inflammation
Coccidian parasite
Myxidium in parenchymal tissue
Parenchyma! nematodes
Parenchyrnal influr MM^Mtion
Mononuclear ceil jnfiltr^nQn into parenchymal tissue
Parenchyma! fibrosis
Focal hepatoceilular necrosis
Hepatocellular pyknosis
Degree of hepatoceilular vacupiation (coded as nrinimai=l,
moderate^ heavy»3). This is not a lesion, but rather a variation
in physiological condition.
Non-uniform hepatcellular vacuolation
Spongiosis hepatis
Hepacocellular regeneration
Myxidium in bile ducts
Unidentified sporozoan parasite in bile duct
Nematodes in bile ducts
Parenchyma! granuloma
Pancreatic necrosis
Increase in size, number or pigmentation of mff
centers
hage
D-7
-------
TABLE D-6. SUMMARY OF LENGTHS AND AGES OF ENGLISH SOLE USED FOR HISTOPATHOLOGICAL ANALYSES
Location
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Transect
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
Date
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
Fish
Number
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
Length
(mm)
280
255
260
255
230
230
240
240
230
265
295
265
320
265
300
280
260
250
230
255
230
250
320
280
240
230
265
260
270
245
230
280
230
250
280
250
260
330
260
240
240
230
235
245
265
260
250
290
315
310
370
295
Age
(years)
4
2
4
4
3
2
4
3
3
4
5
4
5
3
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
4
6
4
6
3
4
7
5
3
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
4
D-8
-------
TABLE D-6. (Continued)
Location
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
Totten Inlet
McNeil Island1
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Transect
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T4
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
Date
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/1 1/90
04/1 1/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
Fish
Number
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
61
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
Length
(mm)
270
255
295
230
260
250
230
340
270
275
230
250
260
245
240
250
240
260
260
240
245
235
275
260
255
230
235
230
230
230
230
270
255
240
245
280
235
240
235
270
230
230
230
270
300
270
260
230
250
235
240
260
Age
(years)
4
3
4
3
3
3
3
5
4
4
3
4
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
4
4
7
3
3
5
3
2
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
3
5
3
3
4
4
5
4
4
3
4
3
4
5
D-9
-------
TABLE D-6. (Continued)
Location
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
McNeil Island
Transect
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
T6
Date
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/1 1/90
Fish
Number
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
Length
(mm)
230
230
240
240
230
230
260
260
240
230
255
245
235
240
230
Age
(years)
3
4
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
5
3
4
3
4
1 Station located off of McNeil Island in Carr Inlet.
D-10
-------
APPENDIX E
Sample Codes and
Station Locations and Depths
-------
TABLE E-1. STATION, SAMPLE AND FISH IDENTIFICATION CODES FOR SOUTH SOUND RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY
SURVEY
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
SSRECON
STATION
BUD-1
BUD-2
BUD-3
BUD-4
BUD-5
BUD-6
BUD-7
BUD-8
BUD-9
BUD- 10
BUD- 11
BUD- 12
ELD- 16
HEND-17
CORM-20
CR-23
WOLL-24
C-1
C-2
IBUD-T1
IBUD-T1
IBUD-T1
OBUD-T2
OBUD-T2
OBUD-T2
SHEL-T3
SHEL-T3
SHEL-T3
TOT-T4
TOT-T4
TOT-T4
CASE-T5
CASE-T5
CASE-T5
GERT-T6
GERT-T6
GERT-T6
CARR-T7
CARR-T7
CARR-T7
SAMPLING
DATE
04/04/90
04/04/90
04/04/90
04/03/90
04/04/90
04/04/90
04/04/90
04/03/90
04/03/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
04/05/90
05/02/90
05/01/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/09/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/10/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
04/11/90
SAMPLE ID
C00010
C00007
C00008
C00004
C00006
C00009
C00005
C00003
C00001
C00002
C00011
C00012
C00013
C00014
C00024
C00029
C00021
BIWBABC
BIGHABC
T1-A
T1-B
T1-C
T2-A
T2-B
T2-C
T3-A
T3-B
T3-C
T4-A
T4-B
T4-C
T5-A
T5-B
T5-C
T6-A
T6-B
T6-C
T7-A
T7-B
T7-C
FISH ID
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BIWB-A.-B.-C
BIGH-A.-B.-C
F00039,42,43.44,52
F00038.40,46,49,50
F00041, 45.47,48,51
F00036.37.71, 73,75
F00031, 32,68,69,74
F00033,34,35.70,72
F0001 9,21 ,23,26,30
F00020,22,24,27,28
F00016,17,18,25.29
F00003,4,7,11,13
F00008.10.12.14.15
F00001, 2,5,6,9
F00078,79,82,86,65
F00076,77,84,87,88
F00080.81, 83,85,89
F00093,97,100,101,103
F00091, 96,98,102,104
F00090,92,94,95,99
F00105, 110,111. 114,118
F00106,108,109.116,117
F00107,112,113,115,119
SAMPLE
TYPE
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
SEDIMENT
CLAM
CLAM
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
FISH
DATA TYPE
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
SEDCHEM
BIOACCM .
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
BIOACCM
E-1
-------
TABLE E-2. LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF STATIONS
SAMPLED FOR SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY, SEDIMENT TOXICITY,
AND BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE ASSEMBLAGES
Station*
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Loran C Coordinates
27898.2,42149.7
27897.9,42150.3
27899.4,42150.5
27901.4,42149.9
27902.7,42150.9
21903.5,42150.3
27904.1,42152.0
27898.8,42152.5
27896.2,42152.2
27916.2,42153.3
27919.5,42154.6
28000.7.42131.5
27959.9,42139.7
27968.3,42154.0
27930.7,42137.2
27913.2,42169.1
28004.4,42192.6
27922.4,42190.2
27867.0, 42203.8
27872.8,42212.1
27874.0,42216.9
27961 .1 , 42223.4
27916.0,42223.4
North
Longitude
47 02.69'
47 02.76'
47 02.99'
4703.14'
47 03.47'
47 03.48'
47 03.85'
47 03.26'
47 02.87'
4705.61'
47 06.25'
4712.58'
47 08.81 '
47 ~b
47 04.71 '
4707.91'
47 22.29'
4712.47'
4708.16'
47 10.25'
4711.18'
4721.99'
4717.00'
West
Latitude
12254.47'
12254.31'
12254.33'
12254.60'
12254.44'
12254.64'
12254.21'
12253.77'
12253.70'
12254.54'
12254.38'
12305.03'
12200.63'
122 --
12259.69'
12250.20'
12249.21'
12245.20'
12238.32'
12236.49'
12235.31'
12238.83'
12236.16'
DEPTH
(m)
11
8
15
4
12
5
6
6
3
10
11
8
9
6
8
7
11
9
10
9
7
19
11
a Station 1 was an intertidal station, and geographic coordinates were not determined.
b -- indicates no information.
E-2
-------
TABLE E-3. LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF STATIONS
SAMPLED FOR EVALUATIONS OF TISSUE CONTAMINATION
AND HISTOPATHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITIES IN FISHES
Transect*
T1-1
T1-2
T1-3
T2-1
T2-2
T3-1
T3-2
T3-3
T3-4
T4-1
T4-2
T4-3
T4-4
T4-5
T4-6
T4-7
T5-1
T5-2
T5-3
T5-4
T6-1
T6-2
T6-3
T6-4
T6-5
T7-1
T7-2
T7-3
T7-4
T7-5
Loran C Coordinates
Start Trawl
27900.5,42150.6
27900.6,42150.4
27900.4,42150.6
27916.3,42153.1
27915.7,42152.9
27997.8,42132.9
28001.6,42133.3
28000.8,42135.1
27999.0,42134.0
27959.9,42153.1
27954.4,42150.7
27954.2,42149.9
27953.8,42151.5
27957.8,42152.7
27955.0,42151.7
27953.5, 42147.9
28000.1,42192.2
27991.3,42191.8
27982.6,42191.2
27978.8,42184.1
27905.0, 42207.3
27901 .4, 42208.4
27907.5, 42207.2
27907.1,42207.2
27907.9, 42207.2
27961.5,42219.3
27959.3,42216.0
27960.4,42211.7
27963.9,42210.8
27962.8, 42224.3
Loran C Coordinates
End Trawl
27903.6,42150.9
27903.2,42150.8
27903.7,42151.0
27913.9,42152.1
27913.5,42151.6
__b
28001.9,42134.7
27998.8,42133.7
27999.9,42135.8
..
27954.9, 42148.9
27954.9,42151.4
27954.2,42150.0
27955.5,42151.2
27955.7.42148.6
27952.6,42149.7
27997.3,42191.9
27987.4,42191.4
27980.0,42189.9
27976.6,42182.7
27900.5, 42208.6
27910.2,42206.1
27911.8,42205.9
27910.6,42206.1
27910.5,42206.3
27959.3,42217.8
27956.6,42215.0
27960.6, 42209.5
27963.9,42212.1
27964.6,42221.9
Heading
330 C
330 C
330 C
175 C
170 C
120 C
025 C
190 C
010 C
155 C
210 C
020 C
210 C
175 C
190 C
045 C
150 C
150 C
170 C
175 C
115C
275 C
275 C
280 C
280 C
185 C
170 C
200 C
030 C
220 C
Distance
(nm)
0.45
0.40
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.30
0.35
0.50
0.50
0.60
0.40
0.40
0.35
0.55
0.70
0.40
0.35
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
1.00
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.50
0.45
0.50
0.25
0.50
Depth
(m)
14- 14
13-14
12-12
07-09
07-08
12-22
12-15
05-06
05-06
18-25
18-25
18-24
24-28
20-36
23-25
13-20
24-24
30-30
35-44
22-40
30-55
50-53
38-42
50-52
25-27
35-43
53-54
40-40
15- 17
8 Numerals following transect numbers are replicate-haul numbers.
b •• indicates no information.
E-3
------- |