-------
DATA COLLECTION
DATA EVALUATION
k
r
DATA
GAPS
HAZARD EVALUATION
FIELD STUDY
DESIGN
I
POLLUTION SOURCE
EVALUATION
REMEDIAL ACTION
PLAN
Figure 2. General approach to development of Elliott Bay
Toxics Action Plan.
-------
GENERAL APPROACH
Implementation of the recommended study design will fill major data
gaps and provide input to the decision-making process to achieve the following
objectives:
t Prioritize toxic problem areas based on sediment contamination,
bioaccumulation, sediment toxicity to amphipods, benthic
community structure, and fish liver pathology
• Prioritize toxic pollutant sources based on contamination
of sediments within storm-drain and combined sewer overflow
(CSO) systems.
The approach used to design the recommended studies involved: 1) evaluation
of existing data for each study component (e.g., pollutant sources, sediment
chemistry, benthic infauna); 2) mapping of station locations with acceptable
historical data; 3) preliminary assessment of problem areas based on spatial
and temporal distribution of pollutant sources, contamination of various
media, and biological effects; 4) identification of data gaps in terms
of spatial and temporal coverage of existing data; and 5) selection of
recommended study components, conceptual approach, specific variables to
be measured, and station locations. Sampling stations for each recommended
study component were positioned to fill gaps in spatial coverage of previous
studies, to ensure adequate characterization of known pollutant sources,
and to confirm problem areas identified in previous studies.
STUDY TYPES AND INTEGRATION
Components of the recommended study design are shown in Figure 3.
Each study component will provide data for a specific environmental indicator
(e.g., sediment chemistry, benthic infauna) relevant to the problem identifi-
2
-------
ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS
ACTION PLAN SURVEY
SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION
• CSOt
• Stem Drains
CONTAMINATION AND
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
SEDIMENT QUALITY
• Suffice Sedlnnt
Meal stry
• Grain-Size
• Subtldal and
Intertldal
SEDIMENT BIOASSAVS
• Anphlped Survival
• Subtldal and Intertldal
BENTHIC INFAUNA
• Community Structure
• Subtldal
BIOACCUMULATION
• Fish Muscle
Figure 3. Components of recommended study design.
-------
cation process. The rationale for the choice of indicators, their inter-
relationships, and action-level criteria that define problem areas are
described in the Initial Data Summaries and Problem Identification report
(Tetra Tech 1985b). Sampling and analysis of pollutant sources are also
recommended. These new data in conjunction with existing data will be
used to evaluate the relative importance of different sources of pollution
in terms of a mass-loading indicator for individual contaminants (or chemical
classes). When possible, source data will also be used to correlate environ-
mental contamination and effects with specific sources.
Scheduling the individual studies can help ensure timely completion
of the project, efficiency of cruise resources, and collection of appropriate
data. The general timing of the field work is outlined below:
• August/September -- Sediment Quality
Benthic Infauna
Bioassays
t September -- Bioaccumulation
Pathology
• September/October -- Pollutant Sources
Timing of individual surveys is justified later in the discussion of detailed
study designs. In general, the comprehensive benthic survey coincides
with a time of relative stability of benthic infaunal assemblages and ensures
that English sole will have resided in shallow-water sampling locations
for several months before sampling.
Discrimination of spatial patterns in contaminant distributions and
biological responses is a major objective of this project. To facilitate
spatial analysis, Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River Estuary have been
divided into 12 areas based on geographic features and locations of major
storm drains and CSOs (Figure 1). The nearshore area of Elliott Bay (i.e.,
less than 150 ft deep) and the lower Duwamish River includes nine areas.
-------
The remainder of Elliott Bay includes three deep-water areas: the inner
bay, the outer bay, and the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site. Area boundaries
and major features are as follows:
1. Magnolia -- West Point, south to Smith Cove; residential
and public park.
2. Seattle Waterfront North -- Terminal 90/91 to Pier 70; Interbay
CSO at T90/91, Denny Way CSO, Myrtle Edwards public fishing
pier.
3. Seattle Waterfront South -- Pier 70 to Terminal 37; main
Seattle waterfront, ferry terminals, King Street and Connecticut
Street CSOs, Seattle Aquarium, public fishing pier.
4. North Harbor Island -- Southern end of Elliott Bay from
T37 west to Harbor Avenue/West Seattle; northern Harbor
Island, Longfellow Creek.
5. East Waterway -- Mouth to Spokane Street bridge; Hanford
and Lander CSOs.
6. West Waterway — Mouth to Spokane Street bridge; S.W. Lander
and S.W. Florida CSOs.
7. Kellogg Island -- Spokane Street bridge to Kellogg Island/Slip
1; Hanford-1 CSO.
8. Upper Duwamish Estuary -- Kellogg Island/Slip 1 to head
of navigation; Michigan Street CSO, Georgetown flume.
9. Duwamish Head/Alki Beach -- Eastern shoreline of Duwamish
Head, north of Fairmount Avenue S.W., to Alki Point; primarily
residential, public park.
-------
10. Four-mile Rock Disposal Site -- The designated disposal site
and surrounding areas that showed elevated contaminant concen-
trations in the Toxicant Pretreatment Planning Study (Romberg
et al. 1984).
11. Inner Elliott Bay — All areas east of a north/south transect
from Ouwamish Head to T90/91 not included in other subareas.
12. Outer Elliott Bay -- All areas west of a line from Duwamish
Head to T90/91 boundary not included in other subareas.
During the data analysis phase, some of the above areas may be further
divided based on actual distributions of contamination and effects.
Spatial analysis of the data will be conducted in several ways: 1)
assessment of contamination/response at individual stations for detection
of "hot spots" (i.e., relatively localized areas of contamination and biological
effects); 2) gradient analysis; 3) comparisons of averages for areas as
input to the priority ranking procedure; and 4) comparisons of individual
stations and area averages with data from external reference sites. Each
approach will be important for assessing the distribution of contamination
in the project area. This information can also be used to determine the
extent of contamination associated with individual sources. If major sites
of contamination are found beyond the influence of all known sources, then
other causes must be investigated (e.g., historical contamination, unidentified
local source, or undefined transport process).
Sampling locations have been positioned to characterize gradients
of contamination at different scales. First, gradients may exist at the
level of an individual waterway or project area. Examples of possible
contamination patterns in the East and West Waterways are shown in Figure 4.
Concentrations of many toxic contaminants in sediments may reach their
peak near the mouth of the lower Duwamish River and decline upstream (Dexter
et al. 1981; Harper-Owes 1983). Gradients at the scale of a waterway or
area can be longitudinal or transverse. Similar gradients in contaminant
5
-------
GRADIENTS
WATERWAY LEVEL
POINT SOURCE RELATED
LONGITUDIrvJ. 5
s
,
TRANSVERSE
i
1
1
3
£
/
1
V
X
^\,''\
l(
/ \
^x
\
_^''
NONOVERLAPPING SOURCE FIELDS
s
i
X
/'
1
\
X
f ^\
\ /
X /
MODERATE OVERLAP
V /'
\ /
V S
STRONG OVERLAP
\
/
X
\
1
_^''
i
i
1
HOT SPOTS
RANDOM
SOURCE RELATED
o
O
^r
LO O-
Notes: Each ton Is a schematic representation of a
waterway. Arrows indicate direction of in-
creasing contamination or effects. Gradients
may exist away from hot spots.
• - point source.
Figure 4. Hypothetical spatial patterns of contamination
and effects In Elliott Bay/Duwamish River subareas.
-------
concentrations may also exist at a finer scale around individual point
sources. Although other patterns of contamination are possible (e.g.,
random or uniform distribution), available data suggest that some gradients
in contaminant concentrations probably exist, at least in the heavily contami-
nated areas.
Gradient analysis provides the framework to test hypotheses about
spatial patterns regardless of the actual pattern. Several gradients may
co-exist, obscuring individual source-related contamination, patterns.
Moreover, a pattern of localized hot spots may be superimposed on a more
general spatial pattern in many areas, especially in the lower Duwamish
River where large-scale contamination may be the result of upstream sources.
REFERENCE AREAS
Three potential reference areas are suggested for the Elliott Bay
studies: upper Port Susan, Blakely Harbor (Bainbridge Island), and the
Seahurst area. The ideal reference area exhibits physical characteristics
(e.g., sediment type, water depth, wave exposure, freshwater influence)
that are similar to those of the study area, but is without significant
human influence.
Two of the suggested reference areas may be appropriate for inner
Elliott Bay sites. The physical characteristics of Port Susan appear to
be most similar to those of inner Elliott Bay. Port Susan has muddy sediments
at shallow depths, is a partially enclosed embayment, and is influenced
by freshwater from a major river, the Stillaguamish. Blakely Harbor is
also a partially enclosed embayment and has muddy sediments at shallow
depths. However, it lacks a major freshwater influence and the exposure
is different. The third referenc* area, Seahurst, has habitats similar
to those found in outer Elliott Bay, although exposure and some physical
characteristics differ (e.g., Seahurst is not an embayment). This area
has similar depth range, with coarse sediments occurring at shallow depths
and finer sediments at deep-water sites.
-------
Data on sediment chemistry and the biota (i.e., fishes, benthos) of
Blakely Harbor are not presently available, precluding further evaluation
of this potential reference area. Such data will become available soon,
since Blakely Harbor was sampled in Junp, 1985. A more informed evaluation
of this potential reference area may be made at that time. At present,
however, there is no a priori reason to dismiss Blakely Harbor as a control
area, since there are no major industrial discharges into its waters.
Data on the biota (i.e., fishes, benthos) of upper Port Susan are also
not available at present. Limited data on sediment chemistry indicate
that contaminant levels for total aromatic hydrocarbons, polychlorinated
biphenyls, chlorinated butadienes, hexachlorobutadienes, and most metals
are low (Malins et al. 1982). Sediment concentrations of mercury are elevated
slightly, however. Additional data on sediment chemistry (e.g., pesticides,
acids, bases, volatile solids) are not available. A large data set for
the Seahurst area is presently available (Dinnell et al. 1984; Word et
al. 1984). Preliminary evaluation of the benthic infauna and bioassay
results indicates that the Seahurst area is an adequate reference site
for deep-water stations in outer Elliott Bay.
It is apparent that an optimal control area does not exist for the
lower Duwamish River and nearshore Elliott Bay. Nevertheless, stations
at 30-ft depth in upper Port Susan and/or Blakely Harbor should yield reasonable
control data. Other sites in Puget Sound were also considered as potential
reference areas for Elliott Bay (i.e., Skagit Bay, Padilla Bay, and the
Nisqually Delta). However, none offered an appropriate combination of
depth, sediment type, exposure, and proximity to the study area. Confir-
mation of the suitability of Port Susan and Blakely Harbor as reference
areas will be made during this study. Exact locations of the sampling
stations will be determined during the cruise by qualitative analysis of
sediment characteristics and benthic infauna.
CRUISE PROCEDURES
Special precautions will be taken to prevent contamination of samples
during collection and initial processing onboard the vessel. Cleaning
7
-------
of samples, working areas, and instruments before collection of each sample
for chemical analyses is essential. Work areas of the ship will be arranged
to avoid contamination of samples by engine exhaust, oil, and other interfering
substances. Details of QA/QC procedures are provided in the Quality Assurance
Project Plan.
STATION LOCATION METHODS
Because of the many sources and documented spatial heterogeneity of
contamination in the Elliott Bay and Duwamish River system, precise positioning
of sampling stations is essential. The intent of the navigational control
effort is to clearly determine and precisely document where all of the
samples were collected. In the Duwamish River and waterways, this is
complicated because routine electronic navigation equipment (e.g., microwave
units or Loran C) will not function accurately. At the same time, horizontal
distances to fixed shore objects are short, and there are many fixed points
available for referencing station locations. During the cruises, the available
visual reference points in the Duwamish River and the East and West Waterways
will be photographically recorded (i.e., corners of buildings and piers,
spires, towers, smoke stacks, and other readily distinguishable, permanent
objects). The water-surface photos will be compared to aerial photographs
and USGS quadrangle maps for the area. Objects which can be clearly recognized
on the aerial photograph or map, and hence can be accurately located, will
be selected and numbered as allowable reference points. The series of
surface photos, with the reference points identified and numbered, will
provide the primary station location tool in the waterways.
In practice, stations will be located by establishing ranges between
two reference points, if possible, and/or by establishing long-channel
and cross-channel distances to shore objects. All station locations will
be documented by photographs taken at the time samples are collected and
by written descriptions of relationships to the reference points. Station
positioning methods will be accurate enough to define locations within
approximately a 10-ft radius. Standardized procedures will be used throughout
8
-------
the project. In Elliott Bay and in the reference area, Loran C will be
used for primary positioning, with line-of-site and photographic confirmation.
The boat will be anchored at the stations whenever possible ar,j sampling
positions determined by reference to the shore-object fixes. Station locations
will be verified just before each sample is taken. The plotted station
locations will be converted to state plane coordinates for entry into the
data base.
OTHER STUDIES
This study has been designed to recognize and incorporate information
from other simultaneous studies, including:
t EPA pollutant loading study
• EPA contaminant transport study
t National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) pathology, bioaccumu-
lation, and sediment contamination study
• National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Status and Trends Program
0 NOAA urban anglers study
0 Corps of Engineers (COE) Duwamish Capping project
0 COE Duwamish Turning Basin Studies
0 WDOE Harbor Island Superfund Project
0 METRO Alki Sewage Treatment Plan Facilities planning studies
0 METRO combined sewer overflow (CSO) studies
9
-------
• METRO Duwamish head baseline studies
• METRO sewage effluent monitoring studies
0 Port of Seattle dredging studies.
Data from these studies are expected to add valuable information for
the final evaluation of problem areas, and will be incorporated into the
project data base. To the extent possible, expertise and information will
be exchanged freely among investigators.
10
-------
CONTAMINANT SOURCES
This study is designed to provide additional data on sources of toxic
contaminants to the project area. Other ongoing studies by METRO, NOAA,
and EPA will provide substantial data on mass loading and transport of
toxic contaminants. The sampling design recommended below will support
and enhance these other studies. In turn, results of the other investigations
may be used in the data analysis and interpretation phase of this study.
DATA GAPS
Thirty-four combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and approximately 60 city
storm drains have been identified in the project area (Map 1). Only the
larger METRO CSOs (i.e., Denny Way, Hanford Street, Lander Street, and
Michigan Street) have been sampled for analyses of toxic contaminants.
They were analyzed for priority pollutants as part of the Toxicant Pretreatment
Planning Study (TPPS). Relatively little is known about the quality of
discharges from the remaining CSOs and drains. Sediment samples from 12
storm drains have been analyzed for metals and PCBs. Additionally, the
wastewater collection system has been sampled at various locations to charac-
terize inflows to the West Point wastewater treatment plant. However,
storm events and overflow were not monitored. Deficiencies in pollutant
source data are detailed below:
t Information on the local groundwater system is unavailable,
particularly with respect to contamination beneath industrial
sites. The extent of migration of pollutant plumes into
Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River is unknown. Sweet Edwards
and Associates is currently Investigating groundwater conditions
in the area and will be proposing a monitoring scheme to
identify and characterize aquifers in the area.
11
-------
• Industrial storm drains along the waterfront may be a significant
source of pollutants. Individual industrial sites are served
by private storm drains that discharge directly in the
waterways. Little 1s known about the flow, composition,
or even location of most of these discharges. METRO conducted
a survey of 34 industrial sites in the Harbor Island/Ouwamish
River area to identify problem areas and found several Instances
of illegal dumping of industrial wastes via storm drains.
• Many Port of Seattle facilities drain directly to the waterways.
Although data on discharge quality are unavailable, these
storm drains serve only the port property and therefore
would not have a large contributing area. Annual discharge
is expected to be relatively small.
• Flow and water chemistry information on the city storm drains
is not available. METRO sampling of sediments in the 12
storm drains in the study area was intended to identify
hot spots, and did not attempt to characterize the discharge.
Monitoring of both wet- and dry-season discharge is required
to estimate pollutant loadings. Sampling locations could
be selected on the basis of size and characteristics of
the area served and METRO'S sampling results.
• The city of Seattle CSOs have not been sampled. Total discharge
from these sources has been estimated at approximately 240
million gal/yr. Because many city CSOs serve as emergency
overflows and would overflow only in the event of an equipment
failure, sampling could be confined to the few major CSOs.
Monitoring would be conducted during the overflow event
in both wet and dry seasons.
0 Three abandoned landfills are located within the study area--
Interbay, West Seattle, and South Park. Both South Park
and West Seattle have been recommended for further study
12
-------
by the King County Health Department. At this time, little
is known about the impact of these sites on groundwater.
• Four of METRO'S 17 CSOs have been analyzed for priority
pollutants. These four (I.e., Denny Way, Lander Street,
Hanford Street, and Michigan Street) account for 50-85 percent
of the total METRO CSO discharge. However, no overflow
samples were taken during the dry season, and three of the
four samples at each site were taken within a 4-day period.
The available dry-season samples were taken from within
the collection system over a 1-yr period (12/80-11/81),
but did not coincide with overflows. Further monitoring
of the major METRO CSOs is required to adequately estimate
loadings to Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River.
• Several seeps have been identified along the Duwamish River,
but there is no information on volume or composition of
flow.
GENERAL STUDY DESIGN
Because of the number and complexity of pollutant sources in the lower
Duwamish River system, an accurate model of contaminant inputs and outputs
based on mass balances would be difficult and expensive to construct.
Prioritization of sources can be accomplished for a large number of sources
in a cost-effective way by analyzing sediments within drainage systems.
Thus, the primary indicators used to rank sources will be based on contaminant
concentrations in sediments collected from within storm drains or CSO conduits.
The multiple of contaminant concentration and annual flow (estimated from
basin area and land use) will serve as a ranking index to prioritize sources.
Analyses of priority pollutants and hazardous substances in source sediments
are proposed for 55 storm drains and CSOs. These constitute a major known
source of contaminants to the bay/river system.
13
-------
A secondary objective of the source study will be to verify the sediment-
ranking technique by sampling stormwater discharges at two selected sites
and correlating pollutant concentrations in the discharge with corresponding
concentrations in drain sediments. Contaminant concentrations in both
the bulk stormwater sample and the suspended solids fraction will be analyzed
in a composite of at least four grab samples taken during a storm event.
Data on the four major CSO discharges are already available and additional
data will be gathered as part of METRO NPDES monitoring. These data can
be used to further evaluate the relationship between contamination of source
discharges and sediment composition within the drain system.
METRO'S TPPS study identified a list of frequently detected contaminants
in the major CSOs and collection system, including:
Inorganic Substances
Organic Compounds
aluminum
antimony
arsenic
beryl Hum
cadmium
chromium
copper
lead
manganese
mercury
nickel
selenium
silver
tnallium
zinc
cyanide
phenol
1,4 dichlorobenzene
naphthalene
phenanthrene
dimethyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
butyl-benzyl phthalate
di-octyl phthalate
PCB-1254, 1260
methylene chloride
chloroform
trichloroethylene
tetrachloroethylene
benzene
ethyl benzene
toluene
14
-------
Because these contaminants represent the major analytical groups (i.e.,
volatiles, acid extractables, bases, neutrals, etc.), full-scan analyses
for priority pollutants will be conducted on several selected source samples.
Additional target chemicals (e.g., carbazoles) will be specified for analysis,
in consultation with U.S. EPA, after the analytical laboratory has been
selected and the results of comprehensive analyses of selected samples
are available. A reduced list of target chemicals will be developed in
consultation with U.S. EPA after the results of the initial comprehensive
analyses are available.
In summary, the variables to be measured during the pollutant source
study are:
Target Chemicals
t Sediments in drain and CSO systems
• Bulk water sample (two storm drains)
• Particulate fraction (two storm drains)
Conventional Pollutants
t Total suspended solids (two storm drains)
• Particulate organic carbon
For stormwater analyses, the particulate fraction should also be analyzed
because: 1) Information on the partitioning of pollutants between water
and particulate phases indicates their biological availability, 2) contaminants
bound to suspended matter represent the major form of contamination in
the water column for most priority pollutants, and 3) the composition of
suspended matter can be compared with sediment contamination data to infer
transport pathways between water and bottom sediments. Since volatile
organic compounds are not expected to associate strongly with suspended
matter, volatile contaminants need not be measured in the particulate fraction.
15
-------
Measurements of participate organic carbon allow contaminant concentrations
to be normalized to the organic carbon content of a sample. During data
analysis and interpretation, this normalization procedure is useful for
linking sediment contamination to pollutant sources. Measurement of total
suspended solids allows calculation of the fraction of contaminants associated
with suspended particulate matter in the discharges from the two storm
drains.
STATION LOCATIONS
Forty-one stations have been selected for sampling (Table 1). Seven
sites are METRO CSOs, the remainder are city CSOs and storm drains (SO).
Storm drain locations were selected on the basis of size and characteristics
of the contributing area, as well as results from METRO storm drain sediment
analyses. CSO locations were based on overflow volume—any CSO with an
estimated discharge greater than 30 million gal/yr was selected. A breakdown
of source sampling locations by subarea is listed below:
Magnolia:
1. 32nd Avenue W. SO -- 48-in storm drain that drains a large
part of Magnolia between Thorndyke Avenue W. and 37th Avenue W.
2. Magnolia CSO (W006)l — Located at 32nd Avenue W. with average
annual flows estimated between 40 and 100 million gal/yr.
Seattle Waterfront North:
1. Interbay CSO/SD (068) -- Located at Pier 90. Annual CSO
flows estimated at 60 million gal.'yr. Also provides storm
drainage for industrial area in Interbay.
^Numbers in parentheses are NPDES permit number.
16
-------
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SOURCE SAMPLING SITES
Project Subarea
Magnolia
Seattle Waterfront North
Seattle Waterfront South
North Harbor Island
West Waterway
East Waterway
Duwamish Head/Alki Beach
Kellogg Island
Upper Duwamish Estuary
No. CSO
1
1
3
0
1
2
0
0
1
No. CSO/ SO
0
1
0
2
6
2
0
1
3
No. SO
1
1
•0
1
1
2
1
2
8
TOTALS Q 15 17
-------
2. Denny Way CSO (W027) -- Annual discharge ranges between
80 and 600 million gal/yr.
3. Pier 91 SO -- Drains industrial area north of Pier 90/91.
Seattle Waterfront South:
1. King Street CSO (W028) -- Annual discharge ranges between
10 and 60 million gal/yr.
2. Connecticut Street CSO (W029) -- Annual discharge ranges
between 30 and 100 million gal/yr.
3. Vine Street CSO (069) -- Annual discharge averages 35 million
gal/yr.
North Harbor Island:
1. llth Avenue S.W. CSO/SD (077) -- 30-in CSO/storm drain that
drains northeast corner of Harbor Island.
2. Longfellow Creek -- Historically carried flow from 3 city
CSOs (120 million gal/yr). The CSOs are now controlled
and can handle up to a 10-yr storm without overflowing.
Longfellow Creek currently discharges only non-contact cooling
water from Seattle Steel (formerly Bethlehem Steel) and
storm drainage from areas along Delridge Way during large
storm events.
3. S.W. Fairmont SO -- Drains 180 ac in West Seattle.
Duwamish Head/Alki Beach:
1. 56th Avenue S.W. storm drain -- 72-in storm drain that drains
most of central portion of Alki/West Seattle.
17
-------
West Waterway:
1. S.W. Florida CSO/SD (106) -- 36-in CSO/storm drain that
drains the northwest corner of Harbor Island.
2. S.W. Lander CSO/SO (105) -- 48-in CSO/storm drain that drains
central area of Harbor Island around the old lead smelter.
Was a significant source of lead and other metals. Sediments
have since been removed and parking lots in the area paved.
Sampling will show effectiveness of cleanup.
3. S.W. Lander SO -- 21-in private line. Source of oil to
West Waterway.
4. S.W. Florida CSO/SD (098) -- 54-in CSO/storm drain that
drains area along S.W. Florida Street and 26th Avenue S.W.
Known source of PCBs, PAHs, and metals. In March, 1985,
Wyckoff Company was found guilty of illegally discharging
wastes into both the Florida drainage system and Elliott
Bay and was fined one million dollars. U.S. EPA is currently
installing monitoring wells to evaluate groundwater conditions
beneath the site. PCBs believed to originate upstream of
Wyckoff at Purdy Scrap yard.
5. Spokane Street CSO/SD (102) -- 27-in CSO/storm drain that
drains southwest corner of Harbor Island. Reports of milky
white plume in vicinity of discharge.
6. S.W. Hind Street CSO/SD (099) -- 96-in CSO/storm drain with
annual CSO discharge estimated at 40 million gal/yr. Drains
area along 26th Avenue S.W. and Delridge Way. Longfellow
Creek discharges through this drain except during large
storms.
18
-------
7. Chelan CSO (W036) -- Annual discharge ranges between 1 and
50 million gal/yr.
8. SW 16th CSO/SD (104) -- Drains 12 ac in southwest corner
of Harbor Island.
East Waterway:
1. Hanford CSO (W032) -- Annual overflow ranges between 0 and
700 million gal/yr.
2. Lander CSO (W030) -- Annual overflow ranges between 20 and
300 million gal/yr.
3. S.W. Hanford CSO/SD (162) -- 42-in CSO/storm drain that
drains entire southeast corner of Harbor Island.
4. S.W. Florida SO (36 in) -- Located on east side of Harbor
Island. Drains part of east side of island around fuel
storage tanks.
5. S. Hinds Street CSO/SD (107) -- 54-in CSO/storm drain that
drains area along Alaska Way and South Spokane Street.
6. S.W. Lander SO (15 in) -- Drains 8 ac on east side of Harbor
Island.
Kellogg Island:
1. Diagonal Way CSO/SD (111) -- !44-1n CSO/storm drain that
receives overflow from METRO'S Hanford regulator and drains
Rainier Avenue area.
2. S.W. Dakota Street SD -- 30-in storm drain that discharges
to an open ditch. Drains area around Seattle Steel.
19
-------
3. S.W. Idaho Street SO -- Drains 390 ac along W. Marginal
Way S.
Upper Duwamish Estuary:
1. S.W. Michigan Street SO -- 72-in storm drain that drains
area along West Marginal Way and Highlands Park.
2. Fox Street CSO/SD (116) -- 30-in CSO/storm drain that drains
industrial area along East Marginal Way. Source of heavy
metals.
3. Michigan Street CSO (W039) -- Annual overflows range between
90 and 200 million gal/yr.
4. 2nd Avenue South SO -- 30-in storm drain that drains industrial
area along West Marginal Way.
5. Georgetown flume -- 66-in pipe that discharges to Slip 4.
Known source of PCBs.
6. 1-5 storm drain -- 60-in storm drain that discharges to
Slip 4. Elevated metals.
7. Boeing SO -- 60-in storm drain that discharges to Slip 4.
Drains Boeing Field. Elevated metals.
8. Boeing CSO/SD (117) -- 30-in CSO/storm drain that discharges
to Slip 4. Drains Boeing. Elevated metals.
9. Isaacson CSO/SD (156) -- Drains 290-ac industrial area at
Boeing Field.
20
-------
10. Slip 6 SD -- Drains 120 ac of industrial land in southern
end of Boeing Field.
11. S.W. Graham SD -- Drains 170 ac along West Marginal Way S.
12. 2nd Avenue S. SD -- Drains 240 ac along West Marginal Way
S. near South Park.
SAMPLING METHODS, PROCESSING, AND ANALYSES
Sediment
Samples of the 0-2 cm sediment layer will be collected from within
storm-drain and CSO systems using a stainless steel "cookie-cutter" and
spatulas. Samples of the upper 2 cm wi 11 be taken because it is assumed
that the surface layer represents the most recent sediments deposited within
a drain system. Access to a drainage system will be gained at the "end
of the pipe" or through a manhole. The preferred approach will be to sample
from a sedimentation basin whenever possible. Processing and analyses
of sediment samples will follow procedures in Tetra Tech (1985a) or comparable
methods.
Storm Drain Discharges
Composite samples are necessary to estimate mean concentrations of
contaminants and sediment in the discharge from a storm drain throughout
a storm event. Samples will be collected by an automatic sampler, composi-
ted in proportion to flow, and the flow rate measured throughout the sample
collection period. Beginning and ending times must be noted, and rainfall
data for the same time period recorded. If flow-proportional sampling
is not feasible, automatic sampling at fixed time intervals is an alternative.
Sample collection at 30-min intervals for the duration of the storm event,
or a minimum of 24 h, is recommended. Because contaminant concentrations
are highest during the beginning of the storm event, sampling of the initial
21
-------
flow is critical. A grab sample of the initial flow should also be collected
and analyzed for the volatile organic priority pollutants.
Processing and analyses of stormwater samples are summarized in Figure 5.
Analytical techniques will follow procedures in Tetra Tech (1985a) or comparable
methods.
22
-------
SOURCE WATER SAMPLE
SUBSAMPLE
80 nl
ARCHIVE
45 nl
PURGABLE
ORGANIC
SUBSTANCES
35 ml
i
FILTER 1 1 HATER
0.45 u NUCLEOPORE FILTER
FILTER 1-4 1 WATER
0.45 u GLASS-FIBER FILTER
ANALYZE
PARTICIPATE FRACTION
i
ANALYZE 0.5-2 g
PARTICULATE FRACTION
TOTAL SUSPENDED
HATTER
BASE NEUTRALS
ACID EXTRACTABLES
PCBs PESTICIDES
BASE/NEUTRALS
ACID EXTRACTABLES
PCBs PESTICIDES
Figure 5. Sample processing scheme for pollutant source study.
-------
SEDIMENT QUALITY SURVEY
The detailed study design for the sediment quality survey Is presented
In this section, following a brief summary of data gaps.
DATA GAPS
Most of the available information on toxic contamination of the Elliott
Bay and lower Duwamish River is related to sediment quality. Station locations
for the acceptable data sets derived from previous studies are shown in
Map 2. The data are sufficient for defining broad areas of contamination
(e.g., Seattle waterfront, lower Duwamish River) but are not suitable for
clear delineation of problem areas in relation to sources. The major gaps
in the existing sediment contamination data are the following:
Magnolia:
• There is very limited information frcm this area, with virtually
no recent chemical data from the shallower sediments. While
extreme contamination is not expected because of the distance
from known major sources, the area is a site of frequent
human contact and shellfish harvesting. For this reason,
the present lack of data should be remedied.
Seattle Waterfront:
t The sampling density has been so minimal along the waterfront
that few general characteristics of the area can be determined.
In light of the potential for major unidentified sources
(both historical and ongoing), the scarcity of information
on sediment contamination along the waterfront represents
one of the largest data gaps.
23
-------
t Virtually no intertidal data are available from this portion
of Elliott Bay, in part because there is little intertidal
sediment in this heavily developed area. Nonetheless, some
information would be useful to establish relationships with
sources (e.g., Denny Way CSO) and to make comparisons with
concentraions in other intertidal sediments.
Duwamish River, Waterways, and North Harbor Island:
0 Data on intertidal sediment chemistry in the East and West
Waterways and the remainder of the lower Duwamish River
are not available.
• There is a lack of subtidal sediment contamination data
near several sources (especially drains and CSO/drain combi-
nations) in the East and West Waterways. Available data
are limited in their ability to clearly define the complex
gradients that may be present in the system, and to delineate
relationships between sediment concentrations and many of
the identified sources.
• In comparison to the lower river, the upriver sections south
of Kellogg Island have received such limited sampling in
recent studies that the full extent of identified "hot spots"
is not known, nor is there assurance that additional areas
of high concentrations of toxic contaminants do not exist.
Duwamish Head/Alki Beach:
• Data for shallow waters (less than 100 ft), including areas
near several drains and CSOs, are missing. Because of the
primarily residential nature of the watershed, this data
gap is not considered major.
24
-------
Four-mile Rock Disposal Site:
t Only limited samples have been obtained from the designated
disposal site and the surrounding sediments. The data are
presently too limited to determine with any accuracy the
maximum elevations in sediments or the extent to which
contaminated dredged-material extends beyond the designated
disposal site.
Deep-water Elliott Bay:
• Given the lack of immediate sources and the relatively low
levels observed consistently throughout this area, the available
data seem sufficient to determine the status of most deepwater
sediments.
GENERAL STUDY DESIGN
The objectives of the sediment quality survey are to:
• Determine the kind and extent of toxic contamination in
intertidal and subtidal sediments
• Characterize the physical properties of sediments related
to contaminant availability, transport pathways, and engineering
aspects of remedial action (e.g., dredging)
0 Relate the kinds and magnitudes of toxic contamination to
biological effects.
Relationships among physical and chemical properties of sediments, toxicity
measured in the sediment bioassays, and benthic infaunal communities will
be examined, using results of this survey and the related benthic biological
studies described later. Data on sediment concentrations of pollutants
can also be used to relate specific sources to environmental contamination.
25
-------
The sediment quality survey consists of the sampling of surface sediments
(0-2 cm) throughout the nearshore region of Elliott Bay, in the East and
West Waterways, in other areas of the lower Duwamish River, and at the
Four-mile Rock subarea. The variables to be measured include the following:
Target Chemicals
t Bulk sediment concentrations
Ancillary Parameters
t Total organic carbon and nitrogen
• Total sulfide
• Percent solids
• Grain-size analysis
• Oi1 and grease
For the first 10 samples to be analyzed, the list of target chemicals
will be comprehensive [complete scan of priority pollutant, hazardous substance
list compounds, and miscellaneous substances specified by Tetra Tech (1985b)].
Based on existing data and the results of this first phase of analyses,
a list of important contaminants to be analyzed in the remaining samples
will be finalized and submitted to EPA for review and approval. Results
of the METRO TPPS and the Commencement Bay Superfund Project showed that
the following 25 organic compounds were either undetected or were detected
infrequently in sediment samples from Puget Sound: nitrophenols (4);
halogenated ethers (5); hexachlorocyclopentadiene; aniline; chloro- and
nitroanilines (4); benzidines (2); endosulfans (3); endrins (2); heptachlors
(2); and toxaphene.
Ancillary parameters will be analyzed for every surface sediment sample.
Concentrations of organic contaminants can then be normalized to total
organic carbon values of each sediment sample to account for varying ratios
of organic to inorganic substances among samples. Nitrogen content data
26
-------
will be useful for interpreting the origin of organic material. Data on
sulfide content will indicate the potential toxicity of bottom sediments
due to conventional pollutants and processes (e.g., deoxygenation of surficial
sediments, high BOD, and release of toxic forms of sulfur). Grain-size
analyses are necessary to establish the physical characteristics of the
samples and to distinguish effects of pollutants from physical influences
of the habitat on benthic infauna-1 communities. Procedures of Buchanan
and Kain (1971) will be followed for grain-size analyses.
In the sediment quality survey, only the top 2-cm layer of each sediment
sample is to be collected and analyzed. At undisturbed sites, the surface
sediments are expected to represent the most recent contaminant profiles.
In the study area, the surface sediment layer is the most biologically
active zone of the sediments. Hence, contaminant concentrations in surface
sediments are of most interest from the standpoint of relating contamination
to biological uptake, bioaccumulation, and effects.
Because the Duwamish River is a dynamic system with extensive sediment
transport, resuspension, and deposition, the sediments at any specific
location may be a mixture of materials from local sources as well as other
areas (e.g., upstream influences). Existing data are not adequate to describe
vertical profiles of contamination in the river sediments. Moreover, a
detailed study of sediment cores is beyond the scope of this study. The
study of the 0-2 cm layer represents the best approach for both Elliott
Bay and the Duwamish River because: (1) analysis of a more extensive surface
layer (e.g., 0-10 cm) would preclude comparison of the results of this
study with the results of previous studies, most of which have analyzed
the 0-2 cm layer; (2) sampling will be conducted during the dry season,
i.e., the time of year when bottom conditions are expected to be most stable;
and (3) sampling of the 0-2 cm surface layer is appropriate for characterizing
the most recent conditions. In any case, it is recognized that collection
and analysis of sediment cores may be necessary to define the depth of
problem sediments before an area is subjected to sediment remedial action.
27
-------
If sediments contaminated by an ongoing source were recently covered
by a layer of clean sediments transported from upstream, then analysis
of the 0-2 cm layer could miss the contamination. However, this is not
expected to be ? widespread occurrence, especially during the dry season.
Also, in the East and West Waterways and in the Kellogg Island segment,
analyses of benthic infauna may detect subsurface peaks in contamination
because many infauna are expected to'burrow into the deeper sediments (greater
than 0-2 cm). To evaluate the alternative approach of sampling an extensive
surface layer, the 0-10 cm layer will be sampled and analyzed at two selected
locations in the Duwamish River. Comparisons will be made between the
results from the 0-2 cm layer and those from the 0-10 cm layer.
STATION LOCATIONS
Ninety-two subtidal stations and 13 intertidal stations will be sampled
for analyses of sediment chemistry, bioassay, and benthic infauna (Map 6),
including two reference-area stations. Station locations reflect the following
objectives of the sampling plan: fill data gaps, confirm suspected toxic
"hot spots", and analyze gradients near major sources. The majority of
proposed stations occur along the 30-ft contour in Elliott Bay, and in
the Duwamish waterways.
An evaluation of recent studies in Elliott Bay showed a major data
gap for the nearshore environment. Most pollutant sources discharge directly
to nearshore areas. The nearshore environment has the highest incidence
of human contact with toxicants entering Elliott Bay, and the greatest
probable effects. Previous studies at the Denny Way CSO showed that this
major source of contaminants has the greatest impact at depths less than
100 ft (Armstrong et al. 1978; Romberg et al. 1984). For many fish and
invertebrate species, the nearshore environment is prime habitat for foraging,
reproduction, and juvenile development (nursery grounds). Feasible remedial
actions are most effective in the nearshore environment. These reasons
provided the main rationale for placing the majority of subtidal stations
within nearshore areas.
28
-------
The breakdown of stations by subarea is listed below:
Subtidal Intertidal
Magnolia 4 0
Seattle Waterfront North 6 2
Seattle Waterfront South 12 0
North Harbor Island 8 2
East Waterway 17 3
West Waterway 15 1
Kellogg Island 8 3
Upper Duwamish Estuary 16 1
Duwamish Head/Alki 4 0
Reference Area 2 1
Magnolia—Four stations are located along the 30-ft contour to establish
presence or absence of contaminants (potentially from Fourmile Rock Disposal
Site material) in the nearshore environment. Two of the stations are also
near CSOs. METRO will be analyzing toxic contaminants in clams at two
stations and in sediments at one station along Magnolia Beach. These results
can be used in conjunction with results from the present study to perform
an initial assessment of the impact of toxic chemicals in the Magnolia
area.
Seattle Waterfront North—Four stations are located along the 30-ft contour.
Two other stations are placed within the east and west slips at Terminal
90/91. The rationale for station placement at T90/91 is to assess contamination
potentially originating from the CSO and storm drains at the terminal.
The remaining stations were established to determine toxicant levels and
effects near a public fishing pier and to determine longshore gradients
away from the Denny Way CSO. Because the subtidal areas near Denny Way
CSO has been extensively sampled in previous studies, it is not proposed
for sampling during this survey. Intertidal sites at the public fishing
pier and the Denny Way CSO are recommended to determine contaminant levels
in intertidal sediments.
29
-------
Seattle Waterfront South—The main Seattle waterfront has been poorly sampled
in all previous studies. To fill in this data gap, 12 stations are proposed
at the 30-ft contour along the waterfr'- it (or at shallower depths within
the slips).
North Harbor Island—Eight stations are positioned along the 30-ft contour
north of Harbor Island and in southeast Elliott Bay. The rationale for
placement of these stations is to determine the areal extent of the effects
of materials originating in the Duwamish waterways and to determine gradients
away from known sources along northern Harbor Island (e.g., shipyards and
fuel-pier facilities). Two intertidal sites are also recommended in this
area.
East Waterway—Five stations are placed along the center of the channel
to assess longitudinal gradients in the waterway. One station is positioned
at the head of each of the two major slips. At each of eight CSOs or storm
drains, an additional station is located near the source. One intertidal
site is located at the head of the East Waterway.
West Waterway--The rationale for station placement in the West Waterway
is similar to that in the East Waterway, except that sites near 10 drains
or CSOs will be sampled in the West Waterway. One station is located at
Terminal 5 and one station is located in a slip north of SW Florida Street.
Five stations are placed along the center of the channel. Three intertidal
sites are proposed in this waterway.
Kellogg Island—Three stations are placed along the center channel, with
four additional stations at major drains or CSOs in this segment. One
station is located in Slip 1. An additional three intertidal sites are
proposed in this segment of the river.
Upper Duwamish Estuary—Seventeen stations are proposed for this segment
of the river (16 subtidal; 1 intertidal). Two sampling strategies were
combined. First, to provide a broad-scale survey to characterize the general
30
-------
distributions of contaminants, and confirm that the upper estuary is less
contaminated than other areas, five stations are placed along the center
channel of the river. Second, specific areas near potential sources were
designated for sampling (e.g., 1n Slips 2-5, at the Mi-higan Street CSO,
and at six other drains or CSOs). One intertidal station was also selected
for sampling in a public-access area of concern.
Duwamish Head/Alki Beach—Because of the quantity of available information
in this area and indications that it is largely uncontaminated, tlie density
of stations is low relative to other areas. Four stations are placed along
the 30-ft contour from Alki Point to the eastern side of Duwamish Head.
One of these stations is near a 72-in storm drain at Alki Beach. These
sites will be sampled to ensure data comparability with past studies and
to provide data from a relatively clean area for comparative impact analyses.
Reference Area—Two stations are located at a reference site. Both stations
will be placed at a depth of 30 ft. Only fine-grained habitats will be
sampled because data on benthic infauna in other habitat types are available.
SAMPLING METHODS, PROCESSING, AND ANALYSES
Subtidal sediment samples for chemical analyses and bioassays will
be collected with a chain-rigged 0.1-m2 van Veen grab. Each station will
be located using navigation techniques discussed earlier. Before each
sample is taken, vessel position will be visually rechecked (range alignments)
and necessary adjustments will be made. The benthic grab will be deployed
upon arrival on station, as directed by the field supervisor. Following
deployment, and as the grab is recovered onboard the sampling vessel, it
will be placed in a sampling tray with the grab remaining in the closed
position. The hinged lids of the van Veen sampler will be opened for
observation of the sample. Following judgment of the penetration depth
and subsequent sample acceptability by the field supervisor, qualitative
observations of sediment color, odor, texture, and the presence of recognizable,
living organisms will be recorded on the log sheets.
31
-------
Care will be taken to ensure recovery of an intact surface sediment
layer, with four major criteria for rejection of a sample:
0 Overfilling, with sediment touching the top of the close''
cover
• Water leaking from sides or bottom, or visible scour of
the surface near the edges of the van Veen sampler when
opened.
• Turbid water overlying the sediments
• Insufficient sampler penetration.
If, through visual check of the substrate surface contained in the
grab, it is determined that the grab has either misfired, been disturbed,
or lost a significant portion of the substrate, the field supervisor will
direct discarding the sample and resetting of the gear. In response to
variability of substrates in the study area, the field supervisor may use
a series of grabs at the same station to obtain an acceptable depth of
grab penetration. In medium to coarse sand, a minimum of 4-5 cm is an
acceptable penetration depth. In fine sand and sandy silt, a penetration
depth of 7-10 cm is the minimum acceptable depth, and in silt, a penetration
depth of at least 10 on is the minimum acceptable depth. If two attempts
to sample a station are unsuccessful, another nearby station meeting similar
sampling needs will be selected and documented. Standardized data (i.e.,
collection date, time, station location, depth, and replicate number) will
be recorded along with the qualitative features discussed above.
Once onboard, the sample will be held in a vertical position by blocks
and the overlying water carefully drained off by an aspirator hooked to
the ship's hose. The subsamples for volatile organic analyses will be
taken first by placing 40-cm3 glass vials (duplicates) at the undisturbed
sediment surface and filling them using a stainless steel spatula. No
air space will remain in the vials. For the remainder of the subsamples,
32
-------
allquots will be taken from a composite sample. The upper 2 on of sediment
away from the edge of the grab will be carefully removed with a glass plate,
transferred to a clean glass beaker, and homogenized by stirring with a
glass rod. Aliquots will be collected as follows:
• 500 cm3 win be transferred to precleaned glass jars with
teflon cap liners (for organic chemical analyses)
• 125 cm3 wiii be transferred to precleaned glass jars (for
metals analyses)
• 100 cm3 W1'il be transferred to freon-rinsed glass jars (for
oil and grease analyses)
• 100 cm3 will be transferred to Whirl-pak bags (for grain-size
analyses)
t 1,500 cm3 W1'il be transferred to precleaned glass jars (for
bioassays)
t 500 cm3 win be transferred to precleaned glass jars with
teflon cap liners (for archival).
Precleaned (solvent-rinsed and muffle-furnaced) beakers will be brought
onboard together with replicate (solvent-washed) spatulas to provide spares
for loss or breakage. Beakers should be of adequate size for compositing
of samples. Between samples, the beakers will be washed with site water
to remove all residual particulates, washed with pesticide-grade methanol
and pesticide-grade dichloromethane, and then covered with aluminum foil.
Also between stations, the spatulas and glass rods will be rinsed with
site water, rinsed with solvent, and wrapped in aluminum foil.
The van Veen sampler will be emptied over the side and rinsed of all
residual particulate matter. Between stations, the sampler will be stored
closed on the sampling tray.
33
-------
Intertldal samples will be collected from shore using a stainless
steel "cookie-cutter" and spatula. Otherwise intertidal and subtidal sediment
samples will be processed and analyzed in similar fashion.
In the laboratory, analytical chemistry methods will follow procedures
of Tetra Tech (1985b) or comparable methods (see the Quality Assurance
Project Plan).
-------
SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS AND BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES
The study design includes analysis of sediment toxicity (bioassays)
and benthic macroinvertebrate communities at the majority of subtidal sites
chosen for sediment chemistry (Map 6). Sediment bioassays are also planned
•
for the remaining subtidal chemistry stations, which are located in the
lower Duwamish River south of Kellogg Island, and at intertidal sites throughout
the project area. Station locations for acceptable data sets from previous
studies are shown in Maps 3 and 4 to allow comparisons with proposed sampling
stations shown in Map 6.
DATA GAPS
The available information on sediment toxicity and benthic infauna
for deep-water (greater than 100 ft deep) areas of Elliott Bay is adequate
for characterization of toxic effects at those sites, although the number
of replicate deep-water samples is small. However, major data gaps exist
for the shallow nearshore environment and much of the lower Duwamish River
system. The sections below address data gaps for subtidal benthic infauna
and sediment bioassays.
Benthic Infauna
• Along Magnolia Bluff, the Discovery Park area, and the eastern
side of Duwamish Head, benthic Infaunal communities in shallow
waters (less than 100 ft deep) have not been characterized.
• Except for the Denny Way CSO area, the Seattle waterfront
has not been sampled adequately for benthic infauna.
35
-------
t Limited data are available for the Duwamish Estuary. Except
for several sites near Kellogg Island, the benthic infauna
have not been adequately characterized.
• Qualitative estimates of infaunal abundance and community
structure are available for the Duwamish Head/Alki Beach
area, but the data are insufficient for detailed quantitative
analyses because of limited replication of samples.
t Reference data for benthic infaunal communities in shallow
waters with fine sediments are unavailable.
Sediment Bioassays
• Spatial coverage of the subtidal shoreline along Elliott
Bay from West Point to Alki Point is mostly limited to intensive
sampling at the Denny Way CSO and Pier 56.
t Spatial coverage of the entire Duwamish River system is
limited to repeated sampling of several stations around
Harbor Island plus one site (14th Street bridge) between
Kellogg Island and the head of navigation.
• There is limited characterization of sediment toxicity in
the area between the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site and the
beach to the north.
• Data from the Duwamish River estuary are based on bioassays
using marine organisms that may be inadequate to characterize
toxicity of sediments from potentially brackish environments.
Appropriate procedures to test sediments having reduced
interstitial salinity with these organisms have not yet
been developed.
36
-------
GENERAL STUDY DESIGN
The benthic ecology study consists of an assessment of benthic infaunal
communities and sediment toxicity as determined through bioassays. The
main objectives of this study are to:
• Determine the abundance and distribution of biota in the
sediments
• Relate sediment contamination to biological effects (i.e.,
community structure of benthic infauna and toxic responses
to sediments)
t Rank areas and contaminants with respect to environmental
impacts.
The amphipod sediment bioassay measures short-term response to bioavailable
contaminants and provides an index to estimate effects on indigenous organisms
by integrating physical, chemical, and biological aspects of environmental
contamination. The benthic infaunal assessment indicates the ultimate,
long-term effects of sediment contamination at the community level. In
addition, benthic infauna data and bioassays in selected nearshore areas
of Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River will fill a major data gap relative
to prioritizing problem areas.
Benthic Infauna
The variables recommended for the benthic infaunal study are the following:
a Total abundance
• Abundances of higher taxa, e.g.,
Polychaeta
Mollusca
Amphipoda
37
-------
• Species abundances
t Species richne'3
t Species composition/similarity.
Using these parameters, spatial patterns in biological responses to pollution
can be defined and the relative degree of response at each site can be
estimated. Comparisons of community characteristics among project areas
based on analyses of higher taxa will provide input to site ranking for
the Decision Criteria. Statistical comparisons of data from each area,
study area segment, or individual station with reference conditions will
establish a quantitative basis for describing the presence, magnitude,
and spatial extent of biological responses to contamination.
At 20 selected stations, species richness, dominance, and the abundances
of indicator species will be used to analyze community properties and define
conditions in problem areas more precisely. Based on the initial analyses
of data on higher taxa, these 20 stations will be selected (in consultation
with U.S. EPA) to represent conditions in and near the worst problem areas.
Using numerical clustering techniques, the entire data set on species abundances
can be reduced to an interpretable form, whereby groups of stations are
identified on the basis of similarities in their species composition and
relative species abundances (Boesch 1977). Multiple regression, rank
correlation, discriminant analysis, and other multivariate techniques may
be used to relate station-group membership (defined by infaunal community
characteristics) to site characteristics, such as grain size composition,
depth, conventional pollutant concentrations, organic carbon content, and
priority pollutant concentrations. Discrimination among the potential
causes of observed alterations in infaunal communities will address the
importance of conventional physical-chemical parameters relative to con-
tamination levels.
38
-------
Because of the high degree of spatial variability in benthic community
characteristics, it is necessary to analyze a sufficient number of replicate
samples. Based on previous studies in Puget Sound and elsewhere, a minimum
of four to six replicate O.l-m2 van "sen grabs has been recommended (Holme
and Mclntyre 1971; Lie 1968; Malins et al . 1982). A total of five 0.1-m2
replicate samples is usually adequate for most impact assessment work.
Lie's analysis of species-area curves showed 75-85 percent of the total
species at a site could be found in five replicates (Lie 1968). Fewer
replicate samples were adequate to characterize the composition of the
dominant species assemblages.
Although most previous studies of benthic infauna in Pug.et--Sound have . [J
used>-a^0. 1 -m2 van Veen sampler, a smaller sampler of^sjmi'liar design (0.06-m2 ^
van VeenjWi-lJ^be used in this study. The^sma'lTer sampler has several {f^f^ff^
advantages. First^more precise estimates of organism abundances can be
obtained with the smaller samplers-Michael et al. 1981). Statistical tests
of differences between study's ites and reference sites based on the 0.06-m2
samples will be more powerful than those based on 0.1-m2 samples. (Examples
of statistical p,ower analyses are provided below). Finally, smaller samples wsf
require le-s's effort for sorting and identification of organisms^ thereby
reduc-ing laboratory processing costs.
educ-i
^
To establish the comparability of results from the 0.1-m2 and 0.06-m2
samplers, a limited number of 0.1-m2 samples will be analyzed during this
study. Using a 0.1-m2 van Veen grab, five additional replicates will be ^ *~
-
collected at each of two stations sampled concurrently with the 0.06-mZ
sampler. One station will be located in the Duwamish River, and the other
will be located in Elliott Bay. The results will be used to compare the
two sampling devices in terms of statistical precision of infaunal variable
estimates, representativeness of samples {i.e., characterization of species
composition), and statistical power to discriminate among station means,
f*
A power analysis of replicate infaunal samples from outer Elliott J
Bay and the Seahurst area was performed using total abundance, total number
of taxa, echinoderm abundance, and amphipod abundance (data from METRO
39
,.\
/
-------
Seahurst Baseline Study). For these analyses, power (1-beta) was set equal
to 0.8 and the significance level (alpha) of the test was set equal to
0.05. The resultant power relationships are presented in Figures 6 and 7.
The mean value for each variable over all sites is marked by a solid horizontal
line. Because these analyses were based on data from 0.1-n? van Veen samples,
they are conservative indicators of results expected for 0.06-m2 (i.e., tests
based on smaller samples will exhibit greater power).
Total number of taxa proved to be the most powerful variable for detecting
differences among stations (e.g., using an ANOVA design). For example,
differences of about 20-25 species among stations could be statistically
detected with five replicates at each of 7-16 stations (Figure 6). Differences
equal to the mean value could be detected using only two replicate samples.
That is, use of two replicates would detect close to a 100 percent reduction
in total number of species at a study site relative to a reference site
with a number of species equal to the grand mean for the data used in these
power analyses. Reference site values are expected to range from about
30 to about 80 taxa.
For total abundance and amphipod abundance, five replicates are adequate
to detect statistically a difference of about 250 individuals and about
15 individuals, respectively. Reference site values are expected to range
from about 200 to about 700 for total abundance and from about 5 to 35
for amphipod abundance.
Echinoderms are relatively rare and patchy in their distribution.
Because of the variability in the echinoderm abundance data, no significant
differences of a magnitude equal to the grand mean could be detected using
as many as 15 0.1-m? replicate samples.
In conclusion, the power analyses indicate that five replicate 0.1-m2
samples are adequate for statistically detecting differences in total number
of taxa (and possibly total abundance and amphipod abundance) among sites.
At this level of replication, species-level identifications are desirable
at selected stations for characterizing species richness as well as for
40
-------
performing numerical classification analyses. However, use of five replicates
probably has limited value for detecting differences in individual species
abundances (or abundances of rare higher taxa) among sites. Increasing
the number of replicates so as to increase statistical sensitivity would
not be warranted, since the power relationships in Figures 6 and 7 begin
to level off at about 5 replicates. Thus, for present purposes, five replicates
were accepted as sufficient to characterize benthic communities in the
project area and at reference sites.
Sediment Bioassays
The variables to be measured during the sediment toxicity bioassays
are:
• Acute mortality of amphipods (Rhepoxynius abronius)
0 Sublethal effects on ]?. abronius (moribund, emergence)
• Temperature
• pH of sediment
• Salinity (interstitial and overlying seawater)
• Dissolved oxygen.
Measurement of physical and chemical variables during the bioassays provides
QA/QC and ancillary data for interpretation of results.
STATION LOCATIONS
The locations of proposed sampling stations for benthic infauna and
bioassays in Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River system are shown on Map 6.
In the project area, sediment for toxicity bioassays will be collected
at all intertidal and subtidal sites designated for sediment chemistry
41
-------
UJ
LJ
LU
U.
i—i §
O
LU
^r
CE
!••
UJ
o
. I-
\
It
I
12
I
1M
1
16
NUMBER OF REPLICRTES
A
D
7 STATIONS
IE STRTIONS
ESTinflTED riERN MO. OF 1M01VIOURLS
ELLIOTT BflY POWER RNflLYSIS
5-1
LU
9-
CD
CE
LU
O
A
0
1 B B II 12 1M 1
NUMBER OF REPLICRTES
ELLIOTT BflY POWER flhJflLYSIS
7 StflTlOWS
16 STRUOtfi
ESTlnRTEO tCRN HO. Of Tfttfi
Figure 6. Elliott Bay Power Analyses.
-------
• l
UJ
LJ
UJ «
a: •
LU
l-
a
CD -
a:
t—
LJ
UJ 5
I
12
NUMBER OF REPLICRTES
IB
A 7 STATIONS
O 16 STATIONS
• ESTJMflTED rtEflN WO. OF (VtPHIPOOS
ELLIOTT BRY PDUER RNRLYSIS
LU
LJ
LJ
Ll_
u_
^—1
O
LJ
LJ
LJ ~
T~
1C
NUMBER OF REPLICflTES
~T
it
"1
IB
A 7 STATIONS
O 16 STATIONS
ELLIOTT BRY POWER RNRLYSIS
EST1WTED tfPN «3. OF ECHlMDOERnS
Figure 7. Elliott Bay Power Analyses.
-------
(13 intertidal and 92 subtidal sites). Benthic infauna will be characterized
at 76 subtidal sites in Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River. Sampling and
analysis of benthic infauna at intertidal sites is not recommended for
several reasons. First, an intertidal infaunal survey would require a
major effort because of the diversity of substrate types within the study
area. Second, comparisons among study areas would require a substantial
sampling effort at a reference site'to characterize "background" conditions
for a variety of substrate types. Third, relatively few impact assessment
studies have included intertidal Infauna in the past. Because knowledge
about individual species responses is limited, interpretation of the results
would be difficult. In addition, characterization of subtidal benthic
infauna upriver of the Kellogg Island area is not recommended. Benthic
communities are exposed to frequent physical perturbations, due to a combination
of dredging, resuspension of sediments by vessel traffic, and natural
disturbance. Discrimination of effects of toxic contaminants from those
of physical disturbance would be difficult.
The rationale for placement of benthic ecology stations is related
to that of the sediment quality studies discussed earlier. In particular,
most of the benthic ecology stations are positioned within the nearshore
areas to allow analysis of longshore gradients in response to different
contamination levels.
Benthic infauna will be analyzed and bioassays conducted at the same
two reference sites used for sediment chemistry analyses. Because of the
natural variability of biological communities and the variation in background
sediment contamination among reference sites, use of more than one reference
site is recommended. The sediment bioassay will also be conducted at the
intertidal reference station chosen for chemistry analyses.
SAMPLING METHODS AND SAMPLE PROCESSING
The 0.06-m2 modified van Veen grab will be used for the benthic infauna
survey. A 0.1-m2 modified van Veen grab will be used for collection of
sediment for chemical analyses and bioassay. At each station, replicate
42
-------
samples will be taken for analysis of benthic infauna, sediment chemistry,
and bioassays. To avoid disturbance and loss of benthic organisms, samples
for benthic analyses will not be subsampled. Eight to ten sequential grabs
will be made, with alternate grabs for benthos (0.06-n£) and chemistry/bioassays
(0.1-m2)t respectively. Aliquots of the upper 2 cm from all replicate
chemistry/bioassay grabs will be composited to form a single sample per
station. Chemical and physical properties of the sediments and bioassay
responses will thus be measured from a single composite of all replicate
samples collected at a given station.
Since the high cost of chemical analyses and bioassays limits these
measurements in replicate samples to the QA/QC program, analyses of replicate
grabs is not desirable. It is preferable to perform bioassays and chemical
analyses on composite sediment samples to characterize average toxicity
at a site, not the variability associated with that site. The alternation
of separate replicate grabs for benthic infauna and composite grabs for
the chemistry/bioassay provides the best assurance that measurements made
on the composite sample correspond to the habitat conditions experienced
by the benthic community.
After a benthic sample is collected, the sample will be washed on
a 1.0-rim screen. Mesh of this size ensures that representative population
samples of most species are obtained. Samples will be transferred to a
container and preserved with 10 percent buffered formalin.
Sediment samples obtained for bioassays will be placed in clean poly-
ethylene bags following the homogenizing procedure. The bag will be sealed
following expulsion of air. Samples will be immediately stored in the
dark on ice, transported to the laboratory, refrigerated (4° C), and then
assayed within 5 days of collection.
43
-------
LABORATORY PROCEDURES
Benthic Infauna
After sitting at least 24 h in fixative, infaunal samples will be
washed, transferred to glass jars, and covered with 70 percent ethanol.
Using a dissecting microscope, organisms will be removed from the sediment
and sorted in to major taxonomic categories (e.g., Polychaeta, Oligochaeta,
Pelecypoda, Gastropoda, Amphipoda, Isopoda). Specimens from a given sample
and taxonomic group will be placed in separate vials. At twenty selected
stations, all benthic organisms will be identified to species, if possible,
or to lowest practical taxon.
The present study design includes sampling benthic macroinvertebrate
communities at the majority of the subtidal sites chosen for sediment
chemistry. Benthic samples will be analyzed sequentially according to
salinity of the habitat in the Duwamish River estuary. Samples from the
most saline areas will be analyzed before samples from the less saline
environments. Benthic community structure will not be analyzed for samples
taken upstream from stations where the results indicate a freshwater benthic
community.
Details of procedures for identification and enumeration of specimens
are given by Holme and Mclntyre (1971) and Swartz (1978). QA/QC procedures
will follow the Quality Assurance Plan for this project. A reference collection
of species identified during the study will be compiled and archived at
U.S. EPA Region X.
Sediment Bioassays
Rhepoxynius abronius will be collected from West Beach and Whidbey
Island, transported to the laboratory, and incubated in their native sediments
for a week prior to use in the assay. During this period of acclimation,
44
-------
temperature and salinity will be gradually changed at rates no greater
than 10 c and 2 ppt per day until the bioassay conditions of 15° C and
25 ppt are attained.
The amphipod bioassay originally designed by Swartz et al. (1979,
1984) has been used and modified by several investigators (Chapman et al. 1984;
Ott et al. in preparation; Pierson et al. 1983). For the purposes of this
study, the bioassays will be conducted following the protocol of Swartz
et al. (1984). Five replicate assays will be performed in 1-1 beakers
containing 2 cm (weighted) of test sediment. Power analyses of sediment
toxicity bioassay data have been conducted by Rick Swartz of EPA Environmental
Research Lab in Newport, Oregon. The results show that the common procedure
of using five replicate trials with 20 amphipods per trial gives an appropriate
level of statistical sensitivity (i.e., a minimum detectable difference
of about 15 percent mortality).
Prior to initiation of the bioassay, sediment samples will be mixed
within their storage containers as described by Swartz et al. (1985). Pore
water will be included in the final assay of bulk sediments. Once sediment
samples are placed in the beakers, 750 ml of filtered 25 ppt seawater (1 ug,
nominal filter diameter) will be layered onto the sediments and the resultant
suspended particulate matter allowed to settle. Twenty amphipods will
then be added to each replicate beaker and the water overlying the sediments
agitated by gentle bubbling with scrubbed (oil-free), water-saturated air.
Bioassays will be conducted under continuous illumination.
Following 10-day exposure to the test sediments, bioassays will be
terminated by sieving beaker contents through a 1.0-mm screen. Numbers
of surviving amphipods will be counted as those capable of discernable
movement (i.e., pleopod streaming) under a light microscope. At this time,
moribund animals will be identified in a separate assay of burial response
(Swartz et al. 1984).
Appropriate positive (clean sediments) and negative (spiked sediments)
controls will be performed in addition to assays of sediment samples from
45
-------
the study area. Both organic and inorganic contaminants will be used in
separate series of control experiments.
Of the 105 subtidal and in ertidal stations proposed in the Elliott
Bay area, 64 are in the Duwamish River system. Sediments from these stations
may be subjected to wide ranges in salinity depending on the river discharge
and tidal pumping. Bioassay results have demonstrated that the marine
amphipod R. abronius is sensitive to salinities <2Q ppt (Swartz et al. 1985).
Thus, it was decided that, conservatively, a standard bioassay salinity
of 25 ppt in both overlying and interstitial seawater would eliminate effects
due to salinity. This effectively limits the use of amphipod bioassays
to field sediments meeting this restriction. As interstitial salinity
was not a parameter commonly measured in earlier sampling programs conducted
in this estuary, there is no information on the upstream extent of sediments
appropriate to amphipod assays (i.e., with an interstitial salinity _25 ppt).
However, saltwater intrusions have been observed as far upstream as 16 km
(10 mi) (Santos and Stoner 1972), which greatly exceeds the 9.6 km (6 mi)
upstream limit of proposed Elliott Bay sample collection area.
Recently, the salinity limitation of the amphipod assay was addressed
at a bioassay meeting sponsored by the Seattle district of the Army Corps
of Engineers (COE). Under the current dredged material disposal guidelines
(EPA interim criteria), there is no alternative bioassay to the amphipod
test for brackish water sediments. Since much of the COE's proposed dredging
programs involve sediments collected within the Duwamish River system,
it is imperative to COE that modifications of or alternatives for the amphipod
bioassay be established to encompass low salinity sediments.
Based on the outcome of the COE meeting, the following flow-chart
is proposed for bioassays with Elliott Bay area sediments (Figure 8).
The interstitial salinity of all sediments from the Duwamish River system
will be determined by centrifuging a small subsample. Standard amphipod
bioassays will be conducted on all sediments with an interstitial salinity
^25 ppt and on all Elliott Bay sediments. The remaining Duwamish River
46
-------
COLLECT ALL
BIOASSAY AND CHEMISTRY
SAMPLES
ELLIOTT BAY AREA ?
YES
NO
DUWAMISH RIVER
SEDIMENTS
CONDUCT STANDARD
AMPHIPOD BIOASSAY
INTERSTITIAL SALINITY
>. 25 ppt ?
I
NO
YES
SALINITY ADJUSTMENT
TEST DEVELOPED ?
NO
YES
CONDUCT
STANDARD AMPHIPOD
BIOASSAY WITH
SALINITY ADJUSTMENT
DO NOT ASSAY
SEDIMENT
Figure 8. Flow chart depicting decision criteria for conduct-
ing sediment bioassays.
-------
sediments either will not be assayed or will be assayed with the standard
bloassay test preceded with a salinity adjustment, if the latter procedure
proves successful.
47
-------
BIOACCUMULATION AND PATHOLOGY
Because of the potential relationship between bioaccumulation of toxic
substances and prevalence of pathological conditions, these aspects of
the study design are discussed together in this section. Tissue concentrations
of target chemicals provide a measure of contamination of biota, while
pathological analyses indicate sublethal responses of organisms to chronic
toxic exposures.
English sole (Parophrys vetulus) was selected as the target fish species
for bioaccumulation and pathology analyses for several reasons. First,
this species is abundant and widespread throughout Elliott Bay and the
lower Duwamish River, enhancing the probability that adequate sample sizes
can be obtained at all study sites. Second, English sole live in close
contact with bottom sediments, prey mainly on small benthic infauna, and
exhibit high levels of tissue contamination and disease in urbanized areas
of Puget Sound (e.g., Mai ins et al. 1984). It is therefore likely that
this species is being influenced by contamination of bottom sediments.
Finally, because English sole is captured and consumed by at least some
recreational fishermen, this species is part of a food-web pathway through
which contaminants can move from sediments to humans. English sole also
serves as a conservative indicator of potential health effects because
it is expected to have higher concentrations of contaminants in edible
portions than are other recreatonally caught species (see discussion in
Tetra Tech 1985b).
DATA GAPS
Station locations for the accepted data sets compiled from previous
studies of bioaccumulation and pathology are shown in Map 5.
48
-------
Bioaccumulation
Recent data on bioaccumulation of toxic substances in English sole
from specific locations in the project area are limited to two reports
(Mai ins et al. 1980; Romberg et al. 1984). Because of the limited nature
of previous surveys, the lack of comprehensive data on toxic contaminant
concentrations in biota of Elliott Bay represents a major data gap. In
particular, data on metals, chlorinated compounds, and PAH in edible muscle
tissue of English sole throughout the nearshore environment-of Elliott
Bay and the lower Ouwamish River are needed. Recent data are available
only at Denny Way CSO, Alki Point, and West Point (Romberg et al. 1984).
Pathology
Although several investigations of pathological conditions in fishes
have been conducted in the project area (e.g., Mai ins et al. 1980, 1982,
1984; McCain et al. 1982; see Map 5), the data can not be used to establish
existing conditions or to delineate specific problem areas. First, analysis
of data from multiyear studies suggests that the prevalence of certain
liver disorders in English sole may be increasing over time (McCain et al. 1983;
Figure 9). Second, past studies have generally pooled samples taken from
different stations (Map 5) and from different seasons without controlling
for differences in sample size among sites and among times. Small sample
sizes at individual trawl sites probably motivated this approach. Third,
previous studies have failed to correct data for differences in age composition
of fishes among sites. Because the prevalence of several liver disorders
is related to fish age, comparison of samples with different age distributions
can greatly bias the results (Tetra Tech, 1985a).
In addition to the above limitations, past studies do not characterize
the pathology of English Sole at the following sites:
• Directly inshore of Fourmile Rock Disposal Site
• Public fishing pier near Myrtle Edwards Park
49
-------
-• DENNY WAY CSO
• — —O WATERFRONT
30 -
20 -
10 -
D— D 1« AYE. BRIDGE
NEOPLASMS
PRENEOPLASMS
60 -n
40 -
20 —
1979 1980
1981 1982 1983
YEAR
MEGALOCYTIC
HEPATOSIS
NOTE: SUHtfR SAMPLES
ALL POINTS BASED ON 10 OK MORE FISH
SOUKCE: OATA FHOM McCAIN ET AL. 1M3
Figure 9. Temporal trends in selected liver disorders of
English Sole from Elliott Bay and the Lower
Duwamish River.
-------
• Southern waterfront outside of East Waterway
• Michigan Street CSO in Duwamish River
0 West Seattle between Alki Point and Duwamish Head.
GENERAL STUDY DESIGN
The primary objectives of this study are to: 1) determine levels
of tissue contamination and frequencies of pathological disorders in rep-
resentative fish in areas of Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River;
2) compare the level of tissue contamination and prevalence of disorders
among areas; and 3) relate contamination and disease of organisms to sediment
contamination. Emphasis is placed on obtaining data suitable for statistical
analysis. Results of this study will allow ranking of areas based on degree
of tissue contamination and disease, identification of disease "hot spots,"
and evaluation of risk to public health from consumption of contaminated
organisms.
The variables to be measured during the bioaccumulation and pathology study
are:
Chemical analyses in English sole muscle tissue:
t Pesticides and PCBs
0 Mercury
0 Total extractable lipid material
Pathology:
0 External abnormalities for all biota (e.g., lesions, epidermal
papillomas, fin erosion, parasites)
50
-------
• Internal abnormalities for English sole
t Selected liver lesions for English sole, primarily:
- Neoplasms
- Preneoplasms
- Megalocytic hepatosis
- Nuclear pleomorphisms
- Hepatocellular regeneration
- Melanin macrophage centers
Ancillary parameters:
t Individual English sole
- Length of all English sole
- Weight, sex, and age of those fish subsampled for histo-
pathological analysis
• Species composition (numerical) of trawl samples.
Chemical analysis of edible portions of target species will allow estimation
of potential human health hazard. These analyses will focus on PCBs because
this group of compounds was identified as a problem during the initial
data review (Tetra Tech 1985b). Although pesticides are not expected to
accumulate in large amounts in fish from the project area, they will also
be analyzed because the data are easily obtained along with the PCB data.
Most metals do not accumulate to abnormally high levels in fish muscle
tissue (Tetra Tech 1985a,b). However, mercury is of potential concern
and therefore will be analyzed in this program. More extensive analyses
of toxic chemicals in fish tissue are not being proposed here because other
studies by U.S. EPA and NOAA will be conducted in the project area soon.
51
-------
Analyses of contaminants in fish livers is not recommended for this
study because: 1) Compounds such as PAH that have been implicated as one
potential caus' of liver lesions are not detected in liver samples using
standard techniques; 2) For PCBs, there is little relationship between
contaminant concentration in the liver and the prevalence of liver lesions
(Tetra Tech 1985a); 3) The total mass of a contaminant in the liver is
generally less than the total mass of that contaminant in edible muscle
tissue (Tetra Tech 1985b). Even for human subpopulations that consume
fish livers, the health hazard associated with liver ingestion is generally
less than that associated with muscle (fillet) ingestion; 4) Because of
the small mass of liver tissue (typically less than 2 g), compositing of
individual samples is necessary for chemical analyses. Thus, statistical
estimates of population variability cannot be obtained for full-scan chemical
analyses; and 5) Detection limits are generally high even when samples
are composited because of the high lipid content of livers. Liver samples
will be archived in the event that financial resources for contaminant
analyses become available in the future.
The liver is singled out for histopathological analyses because it
is the organ most heavily afflicted with pathological disorders (Malins
et al. 1980, 1982). To enhance study efficiency, pathological analysis
of livers will be restricted to six types of idiopathic lesions. These
include hepatic neoplasms, preneoplastic nodules, megalocytic hepatosis,
nuclear pleomorphisms, hepatocellular regeneration, and melanin macrophage
centers. These disorders are well-defined lesions that are likely to be
prevalent enough in the study area to ensure adequate statistical power
of the data analyses. Although the causes of these lesions in field-caught
specimens have not been definitely determined, morphologically similar
lesions have been induced in laboratory mammals and fishes by exposure
to toxic chemicals (Malins et al. 1984).
Pathological and contaminant analyses will be biased toward larger
English sole (i.e., larger than 230 mm total length, or greater than 2 years
old) for two reasons. First, larger fish are the ones most likely to be
retained and consumed by recreational fishermen and therefore pose the
52
-------
greatest threat to public health if their edible tissue is contaminated.
Second, prevalence of several pathological disorders in English sole livers
increases with age (Tetra Tech 1985a; Malins et al. 1982; McCain et al. 1982).
Biasing samples toward larger (i.e., older) fish will ensure that the study
focuses on that portion of the English sole population most likely to show
signs of stress (i.e., lesions). If adequate sample sizes can be obtained
with reasonable effort (e.g., two trawls per station), an upper size limit
(e.g., 300 mm) will be set for English sole used in the histopathological
study.
Ancillary data (weight, length, sex) will be collected for those English
sole subsampled for histopathological analysis. Weight-length relationships
for each sex can serve as "condition" indices (e.g., for comparisons among
sites). Length of all remaining English sole will also be measured. Species
composition of each catch will be determined and these data will be used
to characterize and compare fish assemblages.
Sample Sizes
To determine the desirable sample sizes for pathological analyses
of English sole livers, 2x2 contingency analysis was conducted on three
sets of data (Table 2). The question asked was: "Given a certain background
level of disease (i.e., 0, 5, and 10 percent), at what point does an increase
in sample size lead to a negligible improvement (i.e.,<2.0 percent) in
the ability to statistically discriminate an elevated level of disease?"
Results showed that for all three background levels, improvement in dis-
criminatory ability dropped below 2.0 percent when sample size exceeded
60. Based on experience in Commencement Bay, a minimum sample size of
60 English sole per station will allow reasonable discriminatory ability
after comparison- wise error rates are adjusted to compensate for multiple
comparisons with the reference area. Sixty fish will therefore be used
for pathological analysis at each trawl station.
For contaminant analysis of edible tissues, a minimum of five individual
fish from each study site will be used. This sample size is a balance
53
-------
TABLE 2 . DETERMINATION OF MINIMUM DETECTION LEVELS FOR ELEVATED
INCIDENCE OF DISEASE GIVEN 10 SAMPLE SIZES AND THREE BACKGROUND
LEVELS OF DISEASE*
Sample
Size
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Background Levels of Disease
0 Percent
*b Dc
20.0
10.0
6.7
5.0
4.0
3.3
2.9
2.5
2.2
2.0
10.0
3.3
1.7
1.0
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
5 Percent
% D
30.0
20.0
16.7
15.0
13.0
12.5
12.1
11.3
10.6
10.5
10.0
3.3
1.7
2.0
0.5
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.1
10 Percent
* D
40 .-0
27.5
23.3
21.3
20.0
19.2
18.6
18.1
17.2
17.0
12.5
4.2
2.0
1.3
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.2
a Comparisons were made using a 2x2 contingency formulation and the chl-
square criterion.
b Minimum level of disease that Is significantly different (P<0.05) from
background levels.
c Difference In minimum detection levels between two consecutive sample
sizes (I.e.. Improvement of discriminatory ability).
-------
between analytical costs and even representation across all stations.
Gahler et al. (1983) and Tetra Tech (1985a) used the same sample size to
compare contaminant levels in muscles of English sole between Hylebos and
City Waterways in Commencement Bay and Discovery Bay reference sites.
Tissue levels of PCBs were relatively high in the waterways and could be
discriminated from those at the reference site (P<0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test).
However, levels of DDT were only slightly elevated in the waterways and
could be discriminated from background levels only at City Waterway. These
results suggest that a sample size of five may be adequate for discriminating
large differences between contaminated and reference sites, but may be
insufficient for discriminating smaller differences.
Sampling Times
To maximize sample sizes and thereby enhance the ability to discriminate
spatial patterns of contamination and disease, all sampling will be conducted
during a single week during early September. Sampling efficiency can be
maximized by sampling between July and September. Because larger fish
migrate into the nearshore zone to feed during this period, catch rates
of fish larger than 230 mm reach an annual peak, and fewer trawl samples
should be needed to obtain required sample sizes.
A second reason to sample English sole between July and September
is that fish are rapidly replenishing lipid reserves following winter fasting
and subsequent spawning (review in Roff 1982). Tissue concentrations of
lipophilic contaminants (e.g., chlorinated hydrocarbons) may therefore
reach an annual peak (i.e., worst-case scenario) during this period. Finally,
because most recreational fishing presumably occurs during spring and summer,
determination of contaminant levels in edible tissue during this period
is probably the most meaningful method of assessing risk to public health
from consumption of contaminated organisms.
54
-------
STATION LOCATIONS
Eleven trawl stations are proposed for the project area (Map 6), with
one additional transect near Pt. Pully for characterizing reference conditions.
Within Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River, trawl locations were selected
to fill data gaps, and to sample more intensively major areas of contamination
or recreational fishing that have'been sampled previously by Malins et
al. (1984) and McCain et al. (1982). As much as possible, trawl locations
were chosen to correspond with areas to be sampled for sediment-chemistry,
benthos, and bioassays. In the East and West Waterways and the Duwamish
River, transects will run parallel to the longitudinal axis of each water
body and will be positioned at mid-channel. Transects along the Elliott
Bay shoreline and in the reference area will be positioned along the 30-ft
isobath to coincide with the sampling depth for sediment chemistry and
benthic infauna.
Trawl locations are described below with respect to the 10 areas delineated
for sediment sampling.
Magnolia Bluff—One trawl station to fill the data gap in the area directly
inshore from the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site.
Seattle Waterfront North—One trawl station to fill the data gap off the
public fishing area.
Seattle Waterfront South—One trawl station to sample near the Pier 70
public fishing area and one station to sample the central waterfront area.
North Harbor Island—Two trawl stations to sample the areas off northern
Harbor Island and Longfellow Creek.
East Waterway--One trawl station to sample East Waterway.
West Waterway--One trawl station to sample West Waterway.
55
-------
Kellogg Island—One trawl station to sample the area off the Diagonal Way
CSO/SD.
Upper Duwamish Estuary--0ne trawl station to fill the data gap off the Michigan
Street CSO.
Duwamish Head/Alki Beach—One trawl station to fill the data gap just east
of Duwamish Head and to provide data from an area expected to be relatively
uncontaminated.
Reference Area—Point Pully, one trawl station.
The relative proximity of trawl sites along the shoreline from the
lower Duwamish Estuary to the Denny Way CSO will allow testing of the null
hypothesis that the prevalences of pathological conditions in English sole
are equal among sites (i.e., that pathological conditions are not site-specific
indicators). Moreover, if the hypothesis is rejected, the selected trawl
locations will allow analysis of gradients in tissue contamination and
pathological conditions from the lower Duwamish River north to the Seattle
Waterfront and west to the Duwamish Head area. Also, the results from
trawls at the Magnolia site and the reference site will be compared to
assess effects of dredged-material dumping practices on nearshore biota.
SAMPLING METHODS
English sole will be sampled using a 7.6-m (headrope) otter trawl
having a body mesh size of 3.2 cm (stretched) and a cod-end liner mesh
size of 0.8 cm. As this net has been used by other researchers in Puget
Sound (e.g., University of Washington, National Marine Fisheries Services,
Tetra Tech), data collected in the present study will be directly comparable
with results of most past studies. Mearns and Allen (1978) describe the
sampling device and its operation.
Trawls will be made at a constant vessel speed of approximately 1.3
m/sec (2.5 knots) and each transect will extend approximately 400 m (0.25 mi).
56
-------
Generally, a 5-mln haul will cover the required distance, but this may
vary depending upon strength and direction of currents. Transects based
on distance rather than time are recommended to ensure that sampling effort
is standardized. A minimum of one haul will be made at each site. Additional
hauls may be necessary to obtain required sample sizes.
Because trawling in Elliott Bay and the Duwamish waterways is often
complicated by snags and capture of bottom debris, the trawl will include
a polypropylene (i.e., floatable) retrieval line attached to' a float at
one end and to the cod end (by shackle) at the other end. This line allows
the net to be pulled in a reverse direction, and generally frees it from
snags and bottom debris without tearing it. Two complete trawl assemblies
will be onboard, including otter boards, bridles, and nets.
SAMPLE PROCESSING
The recommended sample processing scheme is illustrated in Figure 10.
After each trawl sample is brought onboard, the catch will be sorted
into two categories: 1) English sole, and 2) miscellaneous fishes and
invertebrates. All organisms will be examined for grossly visible external
abnormalities while being processed.
All English sole will be measured (nearest mm, total length). Sixty
fish larger than 230 mm will be selected randomly, and weighed (nearest gm,
wet weight). The body cavity of each individual will then be opened and
the sex will be determined. These fish will then be examined for grossly
visible internal abnormalities, and the liver and otoliths (sagitta) of
each specimen removed. If 60 fish cannot be obtained from the initial
trawl sample, additional hauls will be made until the required sample size
is obtained. Otoliths will be stored for later age determination.
After livers and otoliths have been removed, five of the 60 fish larger
than 230 mm will be randomly selected and stored on ice. The whole fish
will be returned to the laboratory where fillets of dorsal muscle will
57
-------
TRAWL SAMPLE
JL
ENGLISH SOLE
COLLECT
ANCILLARY
DATA
MISCELLANEOUS FISHES
AND INVERTEBRATES
SELECT 5 LARGE
FISH AFTER
LIVER REMOVAL
DETERMINE CONTAMINANT
LEVELS IN EDIBLE
TISSUE OF 5 FISH
I
SELECT 60 FISH
LARGER THAN
230 MM TL
FILLET
±
IDENTIFY. COUNT
AND RELEASE
REfOVE AND
SPLIT LIVER
REMOVE AND
STORE OTOLITHS
FIX a 1-CM3
SUBSAMPLEin 10X
FORMALIN
I
FREEZE REMAINDER
OF LIVER (ARCHIVE)
I
DETERMINE AGES
EXAMINE FOR
PATHOLOGICAL
DISORDERS
FigurelO. Sample processing scheme for pathology and bioaccumulation study in
subtidal areas.
-------
be removed with stainless steel scapulas. The fillets will be divided
and stored frozen in glass jars for volatile, organic, and metals analysis.
From each of the 60 livers, a l-ai)3 subsample will be excised, placed
in 10 percent buffered formalin, and retained for histopathological analysis.
If a liver contains grossly visible abnormalities, the subsample will be
taken at the border between the normal and abnormal tissue and will include
both types of tissue. If no abnormalities are visible, the subsample will
be taken from the center of the liver at its broadest point.
58
-------
OPTIONAL TIERED STUDY DESIGN
The study design described in earlier sections specifies additional
analysis of samples determined to meet stated program needs after consideration
of the deficiencies in available information. The advantage of this approach
is that a complete and synoptic data set will be available to define the
extent of problems and to establish quantitative relationships among contami-
nation, bioassay responses, and community structure of benthic infauna.
Existing data (approximately 1979 to present) will be used to further delineate
the boundaries of identified problem areas. Moreover, existing data will
be used to delineate problem areas in deep-water portions of Elliott Bay.
EPA has requested an analysis of elements of the study design in which
total cost could be reduced. The following discussion is a review of an
optional tiered approach to laboratory processing and analyses that could
result in program cost savings at the expense of a reduced pool of information
for decision-making. Tiered approaches imply that processing and detailed
analyses of some samples would be contingent upon initial results derived
from analysis of selected samples.
Tiering options may be applied to sediment chemistry, benthic infauna,
and bioassays. Because of the gaps in bioaccumulation and pathology data,
and the relatively small numbers of samples specified for these efforts
in the comprehensive study design, a tiered approach to bioaccumulation
and pathology studies will not be used. Because sediment bioassays must
be conducted on fre'ih (not frozen) sediment, it is impossible to delay
bioassay analysis of samples while other analyses are being conducted.
Also, elimination of bioassay samples is not desirable because: 1) bioassays
are cost-effective in terms of amount of information gained for the expense;
2) consistency of bioassay results depends strongly on consistent techniques;
and 3) quantitative relationships between bioassays and sediment chemistry
are possible only if both tests are conducted on the same sample.
59
-------
The following tiered approach may be implemented during this study:
o If survival of amphipods in the sediment toxicity bioassay
is not significantly different from control survival, then
benthic infauna and sediment chemistry may not be analyzed.
In this case, the station would not be considered a problem
area, and it would not be prioritized for remedial action
o If survival of amphipods in the sediment toxicity bioassay
is very low (e.g., less than 50 percent) and significantly
different th?n control survival, then only sediment chemistry
may be analyzed.
Regardless of the choice of tiering options, all samples specified
in the comprehensive study design should be collected. Adoption of a tiering
approach will require archival of some samples until the results from other
samples are available.
60
-------
DATA MANAGEMENT
All data for the project. Including field observations, will be entered
onto pre-formatted data log sheets. The completed sheets will be entered
into the project Data Management System (DMS) in National Oceanographic
Data Center (NODC) formats.
Upon entry of a data set, or segment thereof, the scientist who generated
the data will be provided with hard copies of the computer data file, together
with basic data quality analyses (e.g., means, standard deviations, and
ranges) of each parameter. Appropriate tests for each data set will be
provided. These outputs will be reviewed to ensure that accurate data
have been entered into the data files.
61
-------
SUMMARY
ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS ACTION PLAN
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS DESIGN
The objectives of this sampling and analysis design are to: 1) determine
the relative priority ranking of known sources of toxic contaminants to
Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River, and 2) identify and rank problem
areas in the receiving environment based on chemical contamination and
biological effects. The information gathered during this survey will be
used with other available data to develop the 1986 Elliott Bay Toxics Action
Plan.
The focus of this sampling design is the nearshore area of Elliott
Bay and the lower Duwamish River. An evaluation of recent studies in Elliott
Bay showed a major data gap for the nearshore environment. This is the
area of initial contamination from shoreline sources, the area most frequently
used by humans, and the area of highest biological productivity. Moreover,
feasible remedial actions are most effective in the nearshore environment.
A summary of spatial coverage and sampling effort for each component
of the study design is provided in Tables 3 and 4. Most portions of this
survey will be implemented during September-October 1985. Some stormwater
sampling may be postponed to later in the year depending on weather conditions.
SOURCE STUDIES
Because of the number and complexity of pollutant sources in the lower
Duwamish River system, an accurate model of contaminant inputs and outputs
based on mass balances would be difficult and expensive to construct.
Prioritization of sources can be accomplished for a large number of sources
in a cost-effective way by analyzing sediments within drainage systems.
Thus, the primary indicators used to rank sources will be based on contaminant
62
-------
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF BASIC STUDY DESIGN*
Pollutant Sources Sediment Quality and Bloassaysd Benthlc Inf aimed
Project Subarea CSO/SO Sediments* Sub tidal Intertldal Subtldal
Magnolia 2
Seattle Waterfront-North 3
Seattle Waterfront-South 3
North Harbor Island 3
West Waterway 8
East Waterway 6
Kellogg Island 3
Upper OuwMlih Estuary 12
OuMMlsh Head/AlM 1
Reference
Total Number of Stations 55
Total Number of Samples' 55
4 0
6 2
12 0
8 2
17 3
IS 1
8 3
16 1
4 0
2 1
92 13
941 13
4
6
12
8
17
IS
8
0
4
2
76
390f
Bloaccumulatlon*
Subtldal
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
I
1
1
12
600
Fish Pathology*
Subtldal
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
12
720"
1 Numbers of stations may change with Implementation of tiered study-design options.
b Discharge will also be sampled at five selected drains.
Includes 14 sites to be selected during the study.
c Does not Include QA/QC samples for chemical analyses.
Total numbers of stations and samples
* Stations for bent hk Infaunal community structure and sediment bloassays coincide with those
for sediment quality. At two stations, additional samples will be taken with a 0.1 m* sampler
for a grab Intercomparlson study.
• Subtldal bloaccuaulatlon and pathology samples to be taken from the same trawls.
' Five replicate 0.06-m2 van Veen samples per station for benthlc Infauna. Five replicate
0.1-mZ van Veen samples at two stations.
V Edible muscle tissue fro* five English sole at each station.
" Sixty English sole livers for hlstopathologlcal analyses at each station.
1 At two stations In the Ouwamlsh River, samples of the 0-10 cm sediment layer will also be
analyied for chemical variables.
-------
TABLE 4. SOURCE SAMPLING SITES FOR ELLIOTT BAY
TOXICS ACTION PLAN
Magnolia
Magnolia CSO
32nd Ave W SO
Seattle Waterfront-North
Pier 91 SO
Interbay CSO/SD
Denny Way CSO
Seattle Waterfront-South
Vine St. CSO (072)
King St. CSO
Connecticut CSO
North Harbor Island
llth Ave SW CSO/SD (077)
Longfellow Creek
SW Fair-mount SO
West Waterway
SW Florida CSO/SD (098)
SW Florida CSO/SD (106)
SW Lander SD (21")
SW Lander CSO/SD (105)
SW Hinds CSO/SO(099)
Chelan CSO
SW 16th CSO/SD (104)
SW Spokane CSO/SD (102)
East Waterway
(36")
SW Florida SD
Lander CSO
Hanford CSO
SW Hanford CSO/SD (162)
S Hinds CSO/SD (107)
SW Lander SD (15'}
Kellogg Island
SW Dakota SD
SW Idaho SD
Diagonal Way CSO/SD (111)
Upper Duwamish Estuary
Brandon CSO (W041)
SW Graham SD
SW Michigan SD
Michigan CSO
S Fox CSO/SD (116)
2nd Ave S CSO
Georgetown flume
1-5 SD
Slip 4 SD
Slip 4 CSO/SD (117)
Isaacson CSO/SD (156)
Slip 6 SD
Alki Beach/Duwatnish Head
56th Ave SW SD
-------
concentrations in sediments collected from within storm drains or CSO conduits.
The multiple of contaminant concentration and annual flow (estimated from
basin area and land use) will serve as a ranking index to prioritize sources.
Analyses of priority pollutants and hazardous substances in source sediments
are proposed for 55 storm drains and CSOs. These constitute a major known
source of contaminants to the bay/river system.
A secondary objective of the source study will be to verify the sediment-
ranking technique by sampling stormwater discharges at two selected sites
and correlating pollutant concentrations in the discharge with corresponding
concentrations in drain sediments. Contaminant concentrations in both
the bulk stormwater sample and the suspended solids fraction will be analyzed
in a composite of four grab samples taken during a storm event. Data on
the four major CSO discharges are already available and additional data
will be gathered as part of METRO NPOES monitoring. These data can be
used to further evaluate the relationship between contamination of source
discharges and sediment composition within the drain system.
The results of this survey will be used to prioritize sources for
implementing source control. The information will also be valuable for
determining locations where further characterization of actual discharges
may be needed during future surveys.
BENTHIC STUDIES
Each of the analyses for benthic studies will be conducted using samples
taken at the same stations during the same sampling period. At each site,
chemical analyses and amp hi pod bioassays will be conducted on subsamples
of the same homogenized composite sample consisting of several grab samples.
Benthic infauna analyses will be conducted on separate replicate grabs
taken at the same time as the other benthic samples. The total numbers
of stations quoted in the sections below Include two stations located in
a reference area (e.g.. Port Susan, Blakely Harbor, or Samish Bay). The
final reference stations will be selected during the cruise after qualitative
analyses of sediment characteristics and benthic infauna are collected
63
-------
from several candidate sites. The objective will be to choose a shallow,
clean habitat with fine-grained sediments.
Benthic Infauna
Subtidal infauna will be sampled at 76 stations during late summer
using a 0.06 m2 van Veen grab (five replicates per station) and a 1-mm
screen. In Elliott Bay, samples will be collected along the 30-ft contour
(or the shallowest depth possible where bulkheads prevent sampling at 30 ft).
In the Duwamish River, most samples will be collected from 30-ft deep areas,
but other depths may be sampled depending on bathymetry in the vicinity
of pollutant sources. However, the upper Duwamish Estuary will not be
sampled because of problems with interpreting the data (dredging and normal
vessel impacts versus toxic impacts). At most stations, benthic infauna
will be identified to higher level taxa (e.g., Gastropoda, Amphipoda,
Asteroidea). Full species-level taxonomy is planned for 20 stations to
be selected after initial analyses of data for higher level taxa.
Using a 0.1-m2 van Veen grab, five additional replicates will be collected
at each of two stations sampled concurrently with the 0.06-m2 sampler.
One station will be located in the Duwamish River, and the other will be
located in Elliott Bay. The results will be used to compare the two sampling
devices in terms of statistical precision of infaunal variable estimates,
representativeness of samples (i.e., characterization of species composition),
and statistical power to discriminate among station means.
Amphipod Sediment Bioassays
Sediment samples will be assayed for toxicity at a total of 105 sites
using the standard acute lethal amphipod bioassay (Rhepoxynius abronius).
Problems of interpreting the meaning of bioassay response (i.e., contaminant
concentrations vs. response), as encountered in previous surveys, can be
minimized by conducting bioassays on the same samples used for sediment
chemical analyses. Both sediment chemistry and bioassays will be conducted
64
-------
at 16 sites in the Upper Duwamish Estuary and at 13 intertidal sites where
benthic infaunal analyses will not be done.
Sediment Chemistry
Bulk sediment samples of the 0-2 cm layer will be collected from a
total of 105 sites. For the first 10 samples to be analyzed, the list
of target chemicals will be comprehensive [i.e., priority pollutants, hazardous
substances, and miscellaneous chemicals specified by Tetra Tech (1985b)].
Based on existing data and the results of the 10 comprehensive analyses,
a reduced list of target chemicals will be developed in consultation with
U.S. EPA. At two stations in the Duwamish River, the 0-10 cm layer of
sediment will also be sampled and analyzed. Comparison of the results
from the 0-10 cm samples with those from the 0-2 cm samples will allow
an evaluation of the latter approach for the Duwamish River system.
Tiered Approach
All bioassay samples will be analyzed within 96 h after collection
to avoid freezing of samples. Initially, benthic infauna and sediment
chemistry samples will be archived. Based on the results of the bioassay
tests, it may not be necessary to analyze the benthic infauna and chemistry
samples at selected stations. For example, extremely high mortality (i.e.,
greater than 50 percent of the test population) in the amphipod bioassay
may be considered sufficient for classification of a site as a "high priority
problan area." In such cases, further benthic analyses might not be conducted.
Final decisions regarding elimination of sample analyses will be made by
U.S. EPA.
BIOACCUMULATION
Bioaccumulation will be assessed by measuring concentrations of selected
priority pollutants (PCBs, pesticides, mercury) in edible muscle tissue
of English sole. Five replicate samples will be collected with an otter
trawl at each of 12 sites, including one reference area station. Fish
65
-------
samples used for bioaccumulation analyses will be selected from those used
for pathological studies.
FISH PATHOLOGY
Pathological conditions (especially neoplasms, preneoplasms, megalocytic
hepatosis, and nuclear pleomorphisms) will be assessed in livers of 60 English
sole at each of 12 sites. External abnormalities will be noted as appropriate. -
Existing data on fish pathology in the study area have major 1'imitations
because of small sample sizes, tendency of investigators to pool samples
across widely-separated trawl sites and across seasons (with different
sample sizes within-site and within-season), and failure to correct for
age-related effects among sites. Because of suspected increases in disease
prevalence over time in the study area, historical data may not reflect
existing conditions.
66
-------
REFERENCES
Armstrong, J.W., R.H. Thorn, K.K. Chew, et al. 1978. The Impact of the
Denny Way combined sewer overflow on the adjacent flora and fauna in Elliott
Bay, Puget Sound, Washington. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle,
Seattle, WA. 102 pp. MET0056F
Boesch, D.F. 1977. Application of numerical classification 1n-ecological
Investigations of water pollution. EPA-600/3-77-033. U.S. EPA Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR. 125 pp. BOES001F
Buchanan, J.B., and J.M. Ka1n. 1971. Measurement of the physical and
chemical environment, pp. 30-58. In: Methods for the Study of Marine
Benthos. N.A. Holme and A.D. Mclntyre (eds). IBP Handbook No. 16.
Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK. HOLM001F
Chapman, P.M., and R.M. Kocan. 1984. Survey of biological effects of
toxicants upon Puget Sound biota. Ill: Tests in Everett Harbor, Samish,
and Bellingham Bays. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMS 2. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, Rockvilie, MD. CHAP008F
Chapman, P.M., M.A. Farrel, and R.O. Brinkhurst. 1982. Effects of species
interactions on the survival and respiration of Limnodrllus hoffmeisteri
and Tubifex tubifex (Oligochaeta, Tubificidae) exposed to various pollutants
and environmental factors. Water Res. 16:1405-1408. CHAP005F
Dexter, R.N., D.E. Andersen, and E.A. Quinlan. 1981. A summary of know-
ledge of Puget Sound related to chemical contaminants. NOAA Technical
Memorandum OMPA-13. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Boulder, CO. 435 pp. DEXT001F
Dlnnell, P.A., F.S. Ott, and Q.J. Stober. 1984. Renton sewage treatment
plant project. Seahurst baseline study. Volume X. Section 12. Marine
toxicology. University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute, Seattle,
WA. 192 pp. UWFR019F
Gahler, A.R., R.L. Arp, and J.M. Cummins. 1982. Chemical contaminants
in edible non-salmonid fish and crabs from Commencement Bay, Washington.
U..S. EPA Environmental Services Division, Seattle, WA. 117 pp. GAHL001F
Harper-Owes Company. 1983. Water quality assessment of the Duwamlsh
Estuary, Washington. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Seattle, WA.
MET0026F
Holme, N.A., and A.D. Mclntyre. 1971. Methods for the study of marine
benthos. IBP Handbook No. 16. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford,
UK. 334 pp. HOLM001F
67
-------
Lie, U. 1968. A quantitative study of benthic infauna in Puget Sound,
Washington, U.S.A. in 1963-1964. Fisk. Skr., Ser. Hav. 14:229-556.
LIE 001F
Long, E.R. 1984. Sediment bioassays: a summary of their use in Puget
Sound. NOAA Ocean Assessments Division, Seattle, WA. 30 pp. LONG004F
Mai ins, D.C. 1984. Chemical pollutants in sediments and diseases of
bottom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol.
18:705-713. MALI009F
Mai ins, D.C., B.B. McCain, and D.W. Brown. 1982. Chemical contaminants
and abnormalities in fish and invertebrates from Puget Sound. NOAA Techni-
cal Memorandum OMPA-19. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Boulder, CO. 168 pp. MALI003F
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, and D.W. Brown. 1980. Chemical contaminants
and biological abnormalities in central and southern Puget Sound. NOAA
Technical Memorandum OMPA-2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
tion, Boulder, CO. 295 pp. MALI002F
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S.L. Chan, M.S. Myers, J.T. Landahl.
1984. Chemical pollutants in sediments and diseases of bottom-dwelling fish
in Puget Sound, Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18:705-713.
McCain, B.B., D.C. Malins. and S.-L. Chan. 1983. A multiyear (1979-1983)
comparison of disease prevalence in English sole and Rock sole from eight
selected sites in Puget Sound. NOAA Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center,
Seattle, WA. 38 pp. MCCA002F
McCain, B.B., M.S. Myers, and U. Varanasi. 1982. Pathology of two species
of flatfish from urban estuaries in Puget Sound. NOAA Northwest and Alaska
Fisheries Center, Seattle, WA. 100 pp. MCCA001F
Michael, A.D., R.A. McGrath, and C.D. Long. 1981. Benthic grab compara-
bility study. Final Report. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management. Prepared by Taxon, Inc., Salem, MA. 32 pp. + Appendices.
Ott, F.S., P.O. Plesha, R.D. Bates, C. Smith, and B.B. McCain. (In prepa-
ration). An evaluation of an amphipod bioassay using sediments from Puget
Sound. 36 pp. OTT 001D
Pierson, K.B., B.D. Ross, and C.L. Melby. 1983. Biological testing of
solid phase and suspended phase dredge material from Commencement Bay,
Tacoma, WA. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, WA. 59 pp. PIER001D
Roff, D. 1982. Reproductive strategies 1n flatfish: a first synthesis.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39:1686-1698. ROFF001F
68
-------
COUWNCD S£W€fl OVENFLOW (UAJOR)
COMOMCD SEWER QVEflFlOW (MINOR*
• COMBINED SEWER OVfRFLOWSTOflM DRAIN
•*! STOAW DRAIN (f 10 34')
STORM DRAIN (25* 10 *•}
•«C STORU DRAW | > 4f'}
0 TPWTMiNT PtAMT
® OTHM POTENTIAU SOURCES
Contamin; ources and sel«xted industry locations
in Elliott Ba >d the lower Duwamish River
MAPI
-------
COMBINED SEWER OVlftRXW (MAXWl
COMBINED SCWE* OVERFLOW {MINOR)
COMBINED SCWEA OvtRFLOWSTORM DAMN
STORM DRAIN (I* w 24')
STORM DRAW («• 10 «T)
STORM DRAM (> «']
M_*NT OUTFALL
(?) OTMCB POTENTIAL SOURCES
Sediment Chemistry: Sampling stations for selected
data sets in Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
MAP 2
-------
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MAJOR)
COMtMEO «WER WIRfLD* (MHOfl)
COMBINED SOrtR OVERFLOW'STORM DRAIN
KOMI
STORM DRAM («• 10 41'}
-« STORM DRAM (> 4T)
O TRCATMEWT PLANT OUTFALI
OTHER POTFNT.AL SOURCfS
Benthic Infauna: Subtidal and intertidal sampling
stations for selected data sets in Elliott Bay and the
lower Duwamish River
MAPS
• SUBTItMl
-------
* COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MAJOR:
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MINOR)
» COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOwrSTORM DRAIN
^. STORM DRAIN (i- w 2«-j
4$ STORM DRAIN («• ic 40-}
•«$ STORM OfUUN (>•«•}
O TRCATweNT PUUT OUTFALL
OTMffl POTENTIAL SOURCES
Sediment Bioassays: Sampling stations for selected
data sets in Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
MAP 4
-------
•* COMBINED SEWER OVERF
* CQUWNED SEWER OVEWUJW (UMOR)
* COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW/STORM DRAW
STORM DRAIN (•• to 24-|
STOAM DRAIN (»• ID 4«-|
Bioaccumulation and Fish Pathology: Subtidal and
intertidal sampling stations for selected data sets in
Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River MAp 5
FISH TRAWUMTHOLOGY
BIOCCUMULATION
O»TA WERE POOLED
-------
* COUMMCO SCWCR OVERaOW (UUOA)
• COM0MCD SeWCM WW*UJW
DRAM
4$ STORM DRAIN (•' to 24')
STORM OAAM (»' ID *•')
STORM OftUN (>4C*)
OUTWU.
Sampling locations for field studies in
Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
MAP 6
NTBTOM. BOWS*/CHO«TWr
• SU8T1QM. BlOASSW/CHEMlSTW
• SUBTIDW. BKHSSAY/CHEUISTBY/IN
Tb
-------