TC-3752
FINAL REPORT
E RA-910/9-85-134a
SUMMARY REPORT
FOR THE
COMMENCEMENT BAY
NEARSHORE / TIDEFLATS
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
AUGUST, 1985
PREPARED FOR:
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
AND U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Mr. James D. Krull, Project Manager
Washington State Department of Ecology
Olympia, Washington

-------
TC-3752
Final Report
SUMMARY REPORT FOR THE COMMENCEMENT
BAY NEARSHORE/TIDEFLATS REMEDIAL
INVESTIGATION
by
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Property of U.S. Environmental
Protection Annncy Library OMP-1H4

JUL - 5 20I6

1200 Si"th (
01
for
Washington State Department of Ecology and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mr. James D. Krull, Project Manager
Washington State Department of Ecology
Olympia, Washington
August, 1985
Tetra Tech, Inc.
11820 Northup Way, Suite 100
Bellevue, Washington 98005

-------
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES	iv
LIST OF TABLES	v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS	v1
1.	INTRODUCTION	1
1.1	BACKGROUND	1
1.2	SITE DESCRIPTION	1
1.3	NATURE AND EXTENT OF PROBLEM	4
1.4	COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT	6
1.5	REPORT OVERVIEW	7
2.	APPROACH AND METHODS	8
2.1	MANAGEMENT	8
2.1.1	PROGRAM MANAGEMENT	8
2.1.2	COMMUNITY RELATIONS	11
2.2	TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC	16
2.2.1	DECISION-MAKING APPROACH	16
2.2.2	DATA MANAGEMENT	19
2.2.3	DATA REVIEW AND EVALUATION	20
2.2.4	FIELD SAMPLING DESIGN	21
2.2.5	SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS	23
2.2.6	ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT	25
2.2.7	IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL REMEDIAL
TECHNOLOGIES	26
2.2.8	QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)	28
2.2.9	HEALTH AND SAFETY	28
3.	RESULTS	29
3.1	ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS	29
3.1.1	CONTAMINATION	29
3.1.2	BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS	34
3.1.3	SEDIMENT TOXICITY	42
3.1.4	CONTAMINANT, TOXICITY, AND BIOLOGICAL
EFFECTS RELATIONSHIPS	43
3.2	PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT	49
3.3	PRIORITIZATION OF PROBLEM AREAS AND CONTAMINANTS	52
1i

-------
3.4 SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS
64
3.4.1	HYLEBOS WATERWAY	64
3.4.2	ST. PAUL WATERWAY	65
3.4.3	MIDDLE WATERWAY	66
3.4.4	CITY WATERWAY	66
3.4.5	RUSTON-PT. DEFIANCE SHORELINE	67
3.4.6	SITCUM WATERWAY	68
3.5 POTENTIAL REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGIES	69
4.	RECOMMENDATIONS OF AREAS AND SOURCES FOR POTENTIAL
REMEDIAL ACTIONS	75
4.1	INTRODUCTION	75
4.2	RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REMEDIAL ACTION	78
4.2.1	HYLEBOS WATERWAY	78
4.2.2	SITCUM WATERWAY	79
4.2.3	ST. PAUL WATERWAY	79
4.2.4	MIDDLE WATERWAY	80
4.2.5	CITY WATERWAY	80
4.2.6	RUSTON-PT. DEFIANCE SHORELINE	80
4.3	GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS	81
5.	OVERVIEW OF CONTAMINATION AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS IN
COMMENCEMENT BAY	82
6.	STUDY DESIGN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FUTURE STUDIES	85
6.1	SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY	85
6.2	BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS	86
6.3	DECISION-MAKING APPROACH	88
6.4	SOURCE IDENTIFICATION	89
7.	REFERENCES	91
HI

-------
FIGURES
Number	Page
1	General location of study area in Puget Sound	2
2	South and southcentral Puget Sound showing locations of
Commencement Bay	3
3	Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats study area	5
4	Decision-making approach for the Commencement Bay
Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation	17
5	Area segments defined for Commencement Bay Superfund
data analysis	30
6	Summary of spatial patterns of benthic depressions	36
7	Summary of areas having significantly elevated prevalences
of one or more hepatic lesions in English sole	41
8	Summary of spatial patterns of significant bioassay
responses	44
9	Example use of synoptic benthic effects and sediment
toxicity data to determine apparent chemical effect
thresholds	47
10	Relative ranking of study area segments by average and
maximum observed contamination, toxicity, and biological
effects	57
11	Definition and prioritization of Commencement Bay problem
areas	58
1 v

-------
TABLES
Number	Page
1	Agency and contractor responsibilities	9
2	Technical Oversight Committe members and affiliation	12
3	Citizens Advisory Committee Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Remedial Investigation	13
4	Summary of general study design	22
5	Relative abundances of fishes captured in Commencement
Bay and Carr Inlet	38
6	Apparent effect thresholds (AET) for sediment contaminants
and conventional variables	48
7	Action assessment matrix of sediment contamination, sediment
toxicity, and biological effects indices for Commencement Bay
study areas	53
8	Ranking of study areas based on magnitude and number of
significant contaminants, sediment toxicity, and biological
effects	56
9	Potential problem chemicals in problem areas	61
10	Summary of potential contaminant sources, problem contaminants,
potential remedial technologies, and data needs for the ten
priority problem areas in Commencement Bay	71
11	Final ranking of problem areas	76
V

-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was compiled by Tetra Tech, Inc., under the direction
of Dr. Thomas C. Ginn, for the State of Washington Department of Ecology
(WDOE) in partial fulfillment of Contract No. C-84031 for the Commencement
Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Area Superfund Project. Mr. James D. Krull of
the WDOE was the Project Manager. Ms. Mary Ruckelshaus of WDOE provided
project assistance. Mr. Larry Marx provided project coordination for Tetra
Tech. Mr. Charles Kleeburg and Mr. Robert Kievit were the U.S. EPA Region X
project officers. The work was conducted under a U.S. EPA/State Cooperative
Agreement (No. CX810926-01-0).
The primary authors of this report were Mr. Robert Barrick, Dr. Scott
Becker, Dr. Donald Weston, and Dr. Thomas Ginn. Individuals contributing
to the sampling, data analysis, and report writing efforts are listed below.
Tetra Tech, Inc. Technical Staff
Ms. Ann K. Bailey
Mr. Robert C. Barrick
Dr. D. Scott Becker
Dr. Gordon R. Bilyard
Ms. Marcy B. Brooks-McAuliffe
Ms. Roberta P. Feins
Dr. Thomas C. Ginn
Mr. Thomas Grieb
Mr. Thomas L. Johnson
Dr. Marc W. Lorenzen
Mr. Larry Marx
Ms. Nancy A. Musgrove
Dr. Robert A. Pastorok
Ms. Glynda J. Steiner
Mr. Jeff Stern
Dr. Michael Swayne
Mr. Gary Weins, P.E.
Ms. Julia F. Wilcox
Dr. Les G. Williams
Production Staff
Mr. A. Brian Carr
Ms. Betty Dowd
Ms. Lisa M. Fosse
Ms. Gretchen Hargrave
Chemistry Quality Assurance
Chemistry Quality Assurance
Field Sampling, Data Analysis,
Decision-Making Approach
Field Sampling, Fish and Shellfish,
Data Analysis
Benthic Infauna, Data Analysis
Technical Editor
Database Management
Management, Data Analysis, Endanger-
ment Assessment, Decision-Making
Approach
Data Analysis, Statistics
Remedial Technologies
Management, Quality Control, Review
Health and Safety, Project Coordination
Database Management
Study Design, Field Sampling
Preliminary Remedial Technologies,
Source Identification
Field Sampling, Data Analysis
Database Management
Source Evaluations
Chemistry Quality Assurance, Data
Analysis
Bioassays, Data Analysis
Graphics
Graphics
Word Processing
Word Processing
v1

-------
Ms. Sharon L. Hinton
Ms. Karen L. Keeley
Ms.	Gail Singer
Ms.	Gestin K. Suttle
Ms.	Stephanie Turco
Word Processing
Graphics
Word Processing
Word Processing
Reproduction
University of Washington/Evans Hamilton, Inc.
Mr. Jack Q. Word
Mr.	Keven Li
Mr.	Jeff Ward
Ms. Karen L. Keeley
Ms.	Julia L. Schroeder
EVS Consultants
Dr. Robert N. Dexter
Dr. Peter Chapman
Benthic Sampling Supervision, Benthic
Data Interpretation
Benthic Taxonomy
Benthic Taxonomy
Benthic Taxonomy
Benthic Taxonomy
Field Supervision, Data Interpretation
Bioassays
Raven Systems and Research Inc.
Mr. John Dermody
Mr. Michael Healey
Fish and Wildlife Health Consultants
Dr. Marsha Landolt
Dr. Richard Kocan
Mr. Dave Powell
JRB Associates (SAIC)
Dr. Don Weston
Mr. Richard Greiling
Ms. Barbara Morson
Ms. Patricia O'Flaherty
AB Consultants
Ms. Ann K. Bailey
Versar, Inc.
Mr. Douglas A. Dixon
Ms. Gena Dixon
Mr. Walt Palmer
Tacoma Pierce County Health Department
Mr. Douglas Pierce
Field Mobilization, Geophysics
Field Mobilization, Geophysics
Fish Pathology
Fish Pathology
Fish Pathology
Source Identification
Source Identification
Source Identification
Source Identification
Quality Assurance
Endangerment Assessment
Endangerment Assessment
Endangerment Assessment
Community Relations, Drainage Map
and Survey
vii

-------
Mr. James Mitchell	Drainage Maps
Mr. Thomas Rogers	Drainage Survey
Washington Department of Ecology-Water Quality Investigations Section
Mr. William Yake	Source Investigation
Mr. Art Johnson	Source Investigation
Mr. Dale Norton	Source Investigation
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District and Waterways Experiment
Station (WES)
Mr. Keith Phillips (Seattle District)
Dr. Charles Lee (WES)
Dr. Richard Peddicord (WES)
Dr. Michael Palermo (WES)
Mr. Norman Francinques (WES)
Others
Alternative Dredging Methods, Disposal
Treatment
Decision Making Framework for Management
of Dredged Material
Decision Making Framework for Managanent
of Dredged Material
Decision Making Framework for Management
of Dredged Material
Decision Making Framework for Management
of Dredged Material
Mr. Wayne Palsson
Ms. Ruth Mandapat
Dr. Richard Branchflower
Dr. John Hedges
Field Sampling
Fish Aging
Toxicology, Risk Assessment
Chemical Analyses, Suspended Particu-
lates
Appreciation is also extended to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) Superfund Contract Laboratory Program for analytical support,
to the U.S. EPA Region X/WDOE Manchester Laboratory for analytical support,
and to U.S. EPA Region X for quality assurance support. We also appreciate
the assistance of Mr. Charles Eaton, Skipper of the R/V Kittiwake, in conducting
the field sampling for benthos and fishes, and Mr. Benjamin Huntley, Skipper
of the M/V Readout and the M/V Cathlamet Bay, in conducting the field sampling
for sediment cores and suspended solids.
Preparation of this report was aided greatly by the support and construc-
tive contributions of many WDOE and U.S. EPA staff.
Special appreciation is extended to the members of the Technical Oversight
Committee for their constructive guidance throughout the project, and to
the Citizens Advisory Committee who volunteered their time to contribute
to the project.
viii

-------
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1	BACKGROUND
On October 23, 1981 , the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
announced an "interim priority list" of 115 top-priority hazardous waste
sites targeted for action under Superfund as authorized under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Commencement
Bay, located in the southern Puget Sound region, was listed as the top
priority site in the state of Washington, and was grouped within the 10
highest priority sites in the nation under consideration for federal funding
of necessary remedial action under CERCLA. At that time the Commencement
Bay site was divided into four areas: the Deepwater, the Nearshore, the
Tideflats Industrial, and the South Tacoma channel. On December 30, 1982,
the U.S. EPA proposed additions to the national priority list. These additions
increased the list to 418 hazardous waste sites ranked by their potential
threat to public health and the environment. On this subsequent Superfund
list, the Nearshore and the Tideflats Industrial areas of Commencement
Bay were designated as a separate project, as was the South Tacoma channel,
while the Deepwater area was eliminated as a priority site because water
quality studies indicated less contamination in that area than was initially
suspected. On September 6, 1983, U.S. EPA published and promulgated the
first official National Priority List (NPL) of 406 hazardous waste sites,
including the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats area.
On April 13, 1983, the U.S. EPA announced that an agreement had been
reached with the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) to conduct a remedial
investigation of the hazardous substance contamination in the Nearshore/
Tideflats Industrial areas of Commencement Bay. Under the Cooperative
Agreement, the WDOE was delegated the lead role in the investigation.
The project consisted of two distinct parts: chemical contamination
(metals) of the upland environment near the ASARCO smelter (Ruston/Vashon
tasks), and chemical contamination and its effects in the marine environment
(Waterways/Shoreline tasks). This report deals with the Waterways/Shoreline
tasks.
1.2	SITE DESCRIPTION
Commencement Bay is an embayment of approximately 9 square miles in
southern Puget Sound, Washington (Figures 1 and 2). The bay opens to Puget
Sound to the northwest, with the city of Tacoma situated on the south and
southeast shores. Residential portions of northeast Tacoma and the Browns
Point section of Pierce County occupy the north shore of the bay. Ownership
of the shoreline is vested in the Port of Tacoma, the city of Tacoma, Pierce
County, the state of Washington, the Puyallup Indian Tribe, and numerous
private parties. Much of the publicly owned land is leased to private
industrial and commercial enterprises.
1

-------
Figure 1. General location of study area in Puget Sound.
2

-------
u»
VASHON
ISLAND
Pt. Defiance
Commencement
RUSTON
TACOMA
NAUTICAL MILES
| J | | KILOMETERS
0 12 3
Figure 2. South and southcentral Puget Sound showing locations of Commencement Bay
and Carr Inlet.

-------
The project area has been defined as the area along the Ruston Way
shoreline from the head of City Waterway to Point Defiance, and the waterways
including Hylebos Waterway, Blair Waterway, Sitcum Waterway, Milwaukee
Waterway, St. Paul Waterway, Middle Waterway, City Waterway, and the Puyallup
River as far upstream as the Interstate-5 highway bridge (Figure 3). The
waterward boundary of the project was established at the 60-ft water depth
contour. The project boundaries are shown in Figure 3.
1.3 NATURE AND EXTENT OF PROBLEM
Urbanization and industrial development of the Commencement Bay area
began in the late 1800s. At that time, the south end of the bay was primarily
tideflats formed by the Puyallup River delta. Since their inception in
the 1920s, dredge and fill activities have significantly altered the estuarine
nature of the bay. The intertidal areas were covered and the meandering
streams and rivers were channelized. Numerous industrial and commercial
operations were located in the newly filled areas of the bay, including
pulp and lumber mills, shipbuilding, shipping, marinas, chlorine and chemical
production, concrete production, aluminum smelting, oil refineries, food
processing, automotive repair services, railroad operations, and a number
of other storage, transportation, and chemical manufacturing companies.
The documented waste management practices of these operations included
direct and indirect discharges, landfills, open dumps, chemical recycling
and reclamation, and on-site storage and treatment facilities. A smelter
(ASARCO) has been located in the Nearshore area close to Ruston since the
late 1800s. The plant, operational until March, 1985, generated substantial
amounts of slag containing various metals. This slag has been deposited
along the shoreline near the plant and has been used as fill, riprap, and
ballast material in the Tideflats area. The slag has also been used to
produce commercial sandblasting material used widely in the study area.
Since initial industrialization of the Commencement Bay area, hazardous
substances and waste material have been released into the terrestrial,
freshwater, groundwater, and marine environments. Discharges and dumping
of solid, liquid, organic, and inorganic waste materials, and contamination
from airborne wastes entering via surface and groundwaters have modified
the chemical quality of the waters and sediments in many portions of the
area. These pollutants include metals (e.g., arsenic, lead, zinc, copper,
and mercury) and organic compounds [e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
dibenzofurans, chlorinated pesticides, plasticizers (phthalates), and products
of incomplete combustion of fuels (PAH)].
Investigations initiated by NOAA in 1978 and subsequent investigations
by others raised concerns over chemical contamination and possible biological
effects of this contamination in the area. The pollutant loadings in Commence-
ment Bay originate from both point and nonpoint sources. Point sources
include wastes from approximately 27 NPDES-permitted discharges (including
two sewage treatment plants). Nonpoint sources include two creeks; the
Puyallup River; over 300 storm drains, seeps, and open channels; groundwater
seepage, atmospheric fallout, and spills or releases to the environment.
The most recent information indicates that there are over 425 potential
pollutant sources within the study area.
4

-------
POINT
DEFIANCE
BROWN S POINT
RUSTON
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
TACOMA
J NAUTICAL MILES
Figure 3. Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats study area.

-------
Previous investigations of the nearshore waters of Commencement Bay
have indicated that the highest concentrations of certain metals (arsenic,
copper, lead, and mercury) are found in sediments from the waterways and
along the southwest shore near the ASARCO smelter. Sediment contamination
by persistent organic compounds (e.g., PCBs) has been detected in the heavily
industrialized waterways and along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
Commencement Bay, like much of Puget Sound, supports important fishery
resources, especially anadromous salmonid populations. Although occupying
Commencement Bay for only part of their life cycle, these species have
critical estuarine migratory and rearing habitat requirements. The Comnencement
Bay area also supports recreational fisheries including pollock, hake,
rockfish, and cod. In addition, many other important fishes and invertebrates
(e.g., English sole and crab) live in contact with the bottom sediments,
resulting in a high potential for uptake of sediment-associated contaminants.
Concern has existed over the potential hunan health impacts from the consumption
of local seafood organisms that contain chemical contaminants. The Tacoma-
Pierce County Health Department issued an advisory on fish consumption
in January, 1983 advising against any consumption of bottom fish from Hylebos
Waterway and against regular consumption of bottom fish from the other
waterways.
1.4 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
Under the U.S. EPA/WDOE Cooperative Agreement, the general objective
of the work was to identify the worst problems and to provide a database
and framework for future activities. The ultimate goal of the Superfund
project was to define the extent of contamination and to remedy public
health or environmental threats in a prioritized manner. The remedial
investigation concentrated on sediment contamination, effects on biota,
and the sources of contamination. The overall scope of work for the renedial
investigation included the following tasks:
Task 1. Investigative Support
Task 2. Develop preliminary remedial objectives (Approach
to Decision Criteria)
Task 3. Determine the type and extent of contamination and
exposure pathways
Task 4. Determine the sources of contamination and characterize
as current or historical
Task 5. Endangerment assessment support
Task 6. Identify potential remedial technologies
Task 7. Safety plan; quality assurance/quality control plan.
The following objectives were set for the remedial investigation:
•	Define a problem sediment
•	Apply definition of problem sediment to delineate problem
areas
•	For problem areas, determine problem chemicals
•	For problem chemicals, determine problem sources
6

-------
•	Prioritize problem areas, problem chemicals, and problem
sources
•	Assess impacts of fish and crab consumption on human health
•	Document alternative methods of dredging, handling, and
disposing of contaminated sediments
•	Initiate a decision-making framework for managing the disposal
of contaminated sediments
•	Identify potential remedial alternatives.
1.5 REPORT OVERVIEW
This report summarizes work completed under the U.S. EPA/WDOE Cooperative
Agreement for the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation
of the Waterways/Shoreline area. The Commencement Bay Superfund investigation
includes various integrated program management and technical components.
These include assessments of chemical contamination, biological effects,
toxicity, and public health concerns; identification of sources; and identi-
fication of potential remedial actions and technologies. Methods and approaches
used to conduct the investigation are included in Section 2 of this summary
report. Results are presented and discussed in Section 3. These sections
include an assessment of environmental factors (i.e., sediment contamination,
toxicity, biological effects), an assessment of public health risks from
consumption of contaminated seafood, identification and prioritization
of problem areas and contaminants, evaluations of contaminant sources,
and identification of potential remedial actions and technologies. In
Section 4, high-priority areas are identified and potential remedial actions
are recommended. An overview of contamination and biological effects in
the entire study area is presented in Section 5. A retrospective evaluation
of the study design and reconmendations for future studies are presented
in Section 6. References are listed in Section 7.
7

-------
2. APPROACH AND METHODS
2.1 MANAGEMENT
2.1.1 Program Management
2.1.1.1	Introduction--
The Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) is responsible for
implementing the U.S. EPA/WDOE Cooperative Agreement for the Commencement
Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund site. WDOE is responsible for the execution,
administration, and management of the agreement and for the performance
of remedial investigation activities. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region X provides oversight of activities conducted under
tne Cooperative Agreement.
2.1.1.2	WDOE Management--
In order to carry out its responsibilities under the Cooperative Agreement,
the WDOE appointed a project manager, Mr. James D. Krull, to administer
and provide WDOE technical oversight for the remedial investigation. WDOE's
management approach included contractual agreements with other agencies
and with consulting firms, use of internal WDOE resources, and support
from headquarters and Region X of the U.S. EPA.
Respective agency/contractor roles and responsibilities for each of
the seven tasks conducted under the cooperative agreement are listed in
Table 1. WDOE recognized that effective project management was crucial
to complete this multi-task, multidisciplinary investigation and contracted
with Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, Washington for overall technical and program
management support. Tetra Tech's management approach was based upon continuous
communication and effective quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC).
This approach ensured that contractors understood the WDOE program objectives
and fully recognized the goals, resources, schedules, and legal and regulatory
constraints of the program.
2.1.1.3	Management Tools--
WDOE and Tetra Tech recognized that multidiscipiInary, politically
sensitive, and relatively short-duration programs, such as the Commencement
Bay remedial investigation, require technical coordination and open communi-
cation among all project participants to ensure that all work is technically
sound, legally defensible, on time, and within budget. Major management
tools included use of a Technical Oversight Committee (TOC), use of an
Internal Oversight Committee within WDOE, contractor monthly progress reports,
quarterly progress reports to U.S. EPA, and frequent project review meetings.
The TOC was established to recognize the involvement of many local
agencies and authorities and the existence of many other ongoing studies
in Commencement Bay Superfund activities. The TOC provided a mechanism
8

-------
TABLE 1. AGENCY AND CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER
THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
Cooperative
Agreement Task
Agency/Contractor
Responsibility
Task 1 - Investigative
Support
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Task 2 - Preliminary
Remedial Objectives
Task 3 - Determine Type
and Extent of Contam-
ination and Exposure
Pathways
Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Brown and Caldwell/
E.V.S. Consultants
E.V.S. Consultants
U.S. EPA Contract
Laboratory Program
U.S. EPA Region X/WDOE
Manchester Laboratory
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Project management
Data management
Community relations support
Contract procurement
Quality control
Technical oversight
Health and safety program plan
Implementation of community relations
plan
Development of decision-making criteria
for establishing the existence of a
signficant threat to public health,
welfare, and the environment
Data evaluation
design
and preliminary study
Subcontractors:
E.V.S. Consultants
Raven Systems Research
AB Consulting
Evans Hamilton
University of Wash-
ington
FWHC
Final sampling and analysis plan
Final quality assurance project plan
Preliminary sediment quality survey
Geophysical survey
Laboratory support
Laboratory support
Conduct of final field sampling program
Data evaluation
Quality assurance
Report production
Bioassays, cruise support
Logistics support
Quality assurance
Benthic investigations, cruise support
Taxonomic sorting and identification
Fish pathology
Port of Tacoma
Blair Waterway investigation
9

-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Task 4 - Determine
Sources of Contami-
nation and Characterize
as a Current or
Historical Source
Task 5 - Endangerment
Assessment
Task 6 - Identify
Potential Remedial
Technologies
Task 7 - Additional
Requirements
Washington State
Department of Ecology ¦
Water Quality Investi-
gations Section
U.S. EPA Contract
Laboratory Program
U.S. EPA Region X/WDOE
Manchester Laboratory
Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department
Tetra Tech, Inc.
JRB Associates (SAIC)
U.S. EPA Headquarters
Contract Support -
Versar, Inc.
Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Seattle
District and Vicksburg
Waterways Experiment
Station
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Point and nonpoint source investigations
Quality assurance
Laboratory support
Laboratory support
Drainage survey and mapping
Data evaluation, technical oversight,
report production
Source Investigations, prioritization
of sources, potential responsible parties
Assessment of human health risk from
ingestion of fishes and crabs
Human Toxicology support, community
relations
Dredging techniques, treatment and disposal
alternatives for contaminated sediments
Decision-making framework for disposal
of dredged materials
Identification of potential remedial
technologies and specific remedial actions
Feasibility study work plan
Quality assurance program plan
Health and safety guidelines
Audits and reporting for quality assurance,
and health and safety.
10

-------
for transfering information related to Commencement Bay, and acted as a
scientific review and advisory panel. TOC members and their affiliations
are listed in Table 2. "me TOC met on an as-needed basis with at least
one meeting every three months. All major project reports were reviewed
by the TOC.
2.1.1.4 Major Management Decisions-
Two management decisions made early in the project by WDOE in conjunction
with U.S. EPA had a large impact on the direction and scope of the project.
The first was to rely on existing groundwater contamination data in the
project area rather than using limited project funds to install networks
of monitoring wells and conduct the associated analyses. This decision
allowed resources to be focused on defining and prioritizing problem areas
in and sources of contaminants to waterways. If potential groundwater
sources were identified, resources to further investigate these sources
could then be focused on areas of need. The second decision was to use
the U.S. EPA Superfund Contract Laboratory system for the majority of the
chemical analyses needed for the project. This service was provided outside
of the existing project budget and allowed a dramatic increase in the areal
coverage of the project and sampling station density.
2.1.2 Community Relations
2.1.2.1 Introduction--
Community relations are an important aspect of all Superfund projects.
It was especially important for the Commencement Bay project, where local
authorities, citizen groups, and the community-at-large expressed an intense
interest in the project. WDOE implemented and expanded the community relations
task in the U.S. EPA/WDOE Cooperative Agreement.
The Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department (TPCHD), by interagency
agreement with WDOE, was delegated to lead local implemention of the community
relations program beginning in April, 1983. In response to input at a
public meeting, the TPCHD formulated a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
to help implement the plan. Members of the CAC and their affiliations
are listed in Table 3. In addition to the CAC and the general public,
other interested groups included elected officials, the Port of Tacoma,
the city of Tacoma, local industries, and the Puyallup Nation. Representatives
from the Puyallup Nation, the Port of Tacoma, and the city of Tacoma also
served on the TOC and regularly attended TOC meetings. The TOC also included
representatives from involved federal, state, and local agencies. Bwirormental
groups, businesses, and local residents were kept informed through their
representatives on the CAC, the news media, press releases, and project
update mailings. Citizens with questions about reported stories usually
contacted the local health department or WDOE for clarification. Project
libraries were also open to the public at TPCHD and WDOE.
A key goal in the initial community relations planning was the assurance
that all concerned parties were accurately informed about the ongoing progress
and findings, and that they had opportunities to provide inputs concerning
the remedial investigation.
11

-------
TABLE 2. TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND AFFILIATION
Member
Affi1i at ion
John Armstrong
Dick Bauer
Clifford Bosley
Dick Cunningham
Curtis Dahlgren
Tom Deming
Jim Ebbert
David Jamison
Bob Kievit
Jim Krul1
Gary Kucinski
Ed Long
Steve Martin
Merley McCal1
Frank Monahan
Dan Petke
Doug Pierce
Rick Pierce
Michael Price
Derek Sandison
Roger Stanley
David Stout
John Underwood
Bill Yake
U.S. EPA, Region X
U.S. EPA, Region X
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WDOE, Southwest Regional Office
Washington Department of Fisheries
Puyallup Tribe
U.S. Geological Survey
Washington Department of Natural Resources
U.S. EPA, Washington Operations Office
WDOE, Chairman
Port of Tacoma
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District
WDOE, Southwest Regional Office
WDOE, Southwest Regional Office
U.S. EPA/WDOE Northwest Regional Office
Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department
WDOE, Southwest Regional Office
City of Tacoma, Department of Public Works
Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department
WDOE, Industrial Section
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. EPA, Region X
WDOE, Water Quality Investigations Section
12

-------
TABLE 3. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE,
COMMENCEMENT BAY NEARSHORE/TIDEFLATS REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
Ci tizen
Affiliation
Nona Adams
League of Women Voters
Walt Adams
Tahoma Audubon Society
Peter Ariessohn
Pierce County Citizen
Mike Bradley
Vashon Island Citizen
Donald M. Carmichael
University of Puget Sound Law School
Mike Cooney
Tacoma Citizen
Mike Elenko
Tacoma Community House (Asian-American)
Dr. Biff Fouke
Pierce County Medical Society
Robert Gordon
Tahomans for a Healthy Environment
Douglas Jackman
Pierce County Medical Society
Frank Jackson
Vashon Island Community Council
Diane Robbins
Citizen
Beth Preslar
Citizen
Gary Preston
Epidemiologist, Vashon Island Citizen
Linda Tanz
League of Women Voters
Sheri Tonn, Ph.D.
Sierra Club
Rich McCurdy
City Club of Tacoma
To be named
Tacoma-Pierce County Chamber of Commerce
Agency/Consultant Representat
ive
Debbie Flood
U.S. EPA Region X
Bob Kiev it
U.S. EPA Region X/WOO
James Krull
WDOE
Larry Marx
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Doug Pierce
Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department
13

-------
Specific community concerns included:
•	Potential health problems caused by consumption of contam-
inated fish and shellfish
•	Potential impacts on recreational fisheries
•	Communication of potential dangers to residents with language
or cultural differences
•	The effects of Commencement Bay contamination on local environ-
mental quality and recreational values.
2.1.2.2 Objectives--
The general objective of the community relations program was to ensure
that information was exchanged between the government agencies and consultants
trying to understand and solve the nearshore/tideflats contamination problems
and members of the community who are either affected by the problem or
have information and perspectives that will help the agencies reach solutions.
Through this information exchange, the public and local government agencies
had ample opportunity to keep up with the project status and to review
and contribute to project direction and findings.
Specific objectives included:
•	Briefing the Tacoma-Pierce County Board of Health, Tacoma
City Council, and other local officials on project status
and progress
•	Holding public meetings and distributing periodic project
update sheets to inform local citizens about project status
and direction in an understandable manner
¦ Utilizing the CAC to disseminate information to representative
groups and for review of project presentations and documents
•	Holding meetings as requested with interested citizens and
groups to discuss findings, alternative remedies, and concerns
•	Holding site tours by boat and bus to give visual perspectives
and to disseminate site-specific Information
•	Using the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department 1ibrary
and WDOE project office as central depositories of technical
studies and other information concerning the nearshore/tideflats
area
•	Making results of the remedial investigation available through
public workshops and documents at local public libraries,
and at TPCHD, WDOE, U.S. EPA Region X, and Tetra Tech.
14

-------
2.1.2.3 Implementation--
Several techniques were used during the remedial investigation to
satisfy the objectives of the community relations program. Forming the
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was a major factor in implementing the
program. Committee members represented professions and civic groups listed
in Table 3. The CAC members viewed their roles and activities as educational,
political, and critical, and felt that the community relations program
should educate the public and elected officials on the complexities of
the Superfund program and the remedial investigation. They also felt it
was important to track reactions to Superfund activities.
Different techniques and activities used to meet the objectives of
the community relations program are listed below:
Routine Activities
1.	Meetings:	Citizens Advisory Committee
Tacoma-Pierce County Board of Health
2.	Press releases
3.	Periodic updates - mailed to local community, state, and local
agencies and concerned citizens.
Special Activities
1.	Presentations to special groups:
Local schools
Tacoma Community College
League of Women Voters
Tacoma City Club
Tacoma City Council
Tacoma Chamber of Commerce
Seattle City Club
Pierce Subregional Council of Puget Sound
Council of Governments
Water Resources Council
2.	Special flier to the Asian community concerning fishing
and public health concerns
3.	Industrial forum meeting (all industries within study area
invited)
4.	Local radio talk show
5.	Bus tours of site:
Press/media
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Tacoma Community College
15

-------
6.	Boat tour of site:
Press
Tacoma City Club
Citizens Advisory Committee
Water Resources Council
7.	Public Meetings.
It is planned that findings of the remedial investigation will be
presented through the following activities:
Presentations/meetinqs:
Citizens Advisory Committee
Public meeting
Governmental agencies (federal, state, and local)
Press/media
Local schools and colleges
Documents made available at local libraries
Chamber of Commerce - business/industrial community.
Because the level of concern remains high, community relations support
will be maintained during both presentation of findings and execution of
the remedial action feasibility study, if it is funded.
2.2 TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC
2.2.1 Decision-Making Approach
The decision-making approach developed for the Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Investigation is described in detail in Tetra Tech (1984a) and
is summarized below. Major elements of the Commencement Bay decision-making
approach are presented in Figure 4.
The first step in the process was to determine the types of information
needed to best meet the objectives of the project (i.e., the determination
of problem areas, problem chemicals, problem sources, and a means of ranking
these in priority order). Because cause-effect information did not exist
for relating contaminant concentrations in the sediments to actual effects
in the marine environment, it was necessary to collect information on both
chemistry and biological effects. The Indicators chosen were chemical
contamination in the sediments, sediment toxicity as determined by laboratory
tests of field-collected sediments (i.e., amphlpod bioassays as a lethal
indicator and oyster larvae bioassays as a sublethal indicator), bioaccumu-
lation of contaminants in English sole and cancrid crabs, and biological
effects (i.e., alterations of benthic invertebrate assemblages and liver
lesions in English sole). Other ancillary kinds of Information determined
necessary were the physical characteristics of the sediments (I.e., grain
size), the organic content of the sediments, and a measure of the oxidation
state of the sediments. Chemical analysis of water column particulates
was also determined to be useful in making judgments on contaminant movement
in the project area.
The next step in the process was to review and evaluate the existing
database. A sampling and analysis plan was then developed. Stations were
16

-------

CHARACTERIZE:
CHEMICAL CONTAMINATION

SEDIMENT TOXICITY
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
1

DETERMINE ELEVATION ABOVE
REFERENCE (EAR)


ASSEMBLE ACTION ASSESSMENT
MATRICES



APPLY ACTION LEVEL GUIDELINES



IDENTIFY STUOY AREAS AND
SEGMENTS OF CONCERN
i ±
k
DEFINE EXTENT OF
PROBLEM AREAS WITHIN
STUOY AREAS ANO SEGMENTS
1 f
i
i
i
*
i
i
i
RANK PROBLEM AREAS
(WORST CONDITIONS)
i
l
+
¦ k
IOENTIFY POTENTIAL
PROBLEM CHEMICALS IN
PROBLEM AREAS
I w
1
1
J
RANK PROBLEM CHEMICALS
!—I
4-
H
I
S
T
0
R
1
C
A
I
0
A
T
A
LJ
CONDUCT SOURCE EWLUATIONS
FINAL PRIORITIZATION OF
PROBLEM AREAS FOR
REMEDIAL ACTION
Figure 4. Decision-making approach for the Commencement Bay
Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation.
17

-------
located to fill gaps in the historical database, to define more precisely
areas of known contamination, and to evaluate gradients of contamination
and effects relative to suspected sources of contamination.
A reference area (Carr Inlet) was selected so that Commencement Bay
data could be compared with data from an embayment judged to have relatively
uncontaminated sediments. Carr Inlet is located away from the industrialized
areas of Puget Sound. Concentrations of chemicals in the sediments sampled
from Carr Inlet were comparable or lower than those in other Puget Sound
reference areas.
The sampling plan was implemented by an intensive field survey conducted
from January to August, 1984 (summarized in Section 2.2.4). Results of
the field survey were used to characterize the project area on several
degrees of spatial resolution:
•	Overall Project Area
•	Study Areas (the eight waterways and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline)
•	Segments (the larger study areas were divided into segments)
•	Problem Areas (areas within segments determined to be a
problem).
Characterization with respect to degree of sediment contamination,
toxicity, bioaccimulation, and biological effects was achieved by establishing
an index for each environmental variable or indicator investigated, calculating
"elevations above reference" (EAR) for each indicator, and testing each
EAR for significance. For toxicity, bioaccumulation, and biological effects,
a significant EAR was one that was statistically different (P<0.05) from
Carr Inlet (except for benthic alterations within the waterways, where
Blair Waterway was used in lieu of Carr Inlet). For sediment chemistry
the EAR (elevation above reference in Carr Inlet) was determined to be
significant if the contaminant value exceeded the maximum value in any
of several reference areas throughout Puget Sound. The Puget Sound reference
areas used are named in Volume 1, page 3.34 for organic compounds, and
in Volume 1, page 3.18 for metals.
In addition to characterization of the project area as described above,
results of the field survey were also used to develop quantitative relationships
among sediment contamination, toxicity, and biological effects. These
analyses were conducted primarily to determine levels of sediment contamination
above which significant toxicity or biological effects would be expected
to occur, and to identify contaminants suspected of causing the observed
effects. Results of the quantitative relationships analyses were used
to help define boundaries of problem areas and to identify potential problem
chemicals.
EAR for study areas and segments were assembled into action assessment
matrices. These matrices display the Indices (EAR) for each environmental
variable or indicator for each study area or segment under consideration.
Also displayed is whether the EAR is significant or not significant and
18

-------
the reference value from which the EAR was determined. An example of an
Action Assessment Matrix is shown in Table 7, Section 3.3. Action-level
guidelines were then applied to the matrices to identify study areas and
segments of concern. Each study area or segment of concern included either
a problem area that extended over most of the study area or segment, or
a "hot spot" of major significance within the study area or segment. The
action-level guidelines defined the minimum levels and specific combinations
of environmental indicators required before problem area definition could
proceed. This threshold for action was always exceeded if at least three
of the five indicators of sediment contamination, toxicity, and biological
effects were determined to be significantly elevated above reference conditions
in an area. More stringent requirements were applied if less than three
indicators were significantly elevated in an area.
After areas of concern were defined, problem areas were identified
and their spatial extents were determined. Problem area definition incorporated
all available data, including historical data and use of results of the
quantitative relationships among indicators developed as part of the present
study. Problem areas were then ranked according to their most extreme
levels of contamination, toxicity, and biological effects. Priority for
evaluation of potential sources of contamination was based on this ranking.
Potential problem chemicals were also identified and ranked at this point.
After problem areas and potential problem chemicals were identified
and ranked, potential sources of contamination were evaluated. Final prior-
itization of problem areas recommended for remedial action was then determined
on the basis of the relative magnitude of problems in each area, the spatial
extent of each area, and the level of confidence that sources of potential
problem chemicals were accurately identified.
2.2.2 Data Management
The data management system developed for the Commencement Bay project
consisted of a central database, additional data analysis packages, and
a library. The system was developed using an IBM microcomputer and the
Knowledge Manager relational database software package published by Micro
Data Base Systems, Inc.
The Commencement Bay database consists of 23 data files, each storing
a different kind of data. Data of different kinds are linked together
by common identifiers (e.g., survey, station, drainage). At present, the
database contains over 25,000 records, each consisting of 15-150 separate
variables. There are descriptions of over 50 surveys, 500 sampling stations,
and 2,000 samples of water, solids, and biota. Over 400 components of
the Commencement Bay drainage system have been Identified. Included are
data on sediment and water column chemistry, bioassays, benthic Invertebrates,
fish pathology, and bioaccumulation. All data were subjected to rigorous
quality assurance procedures before entering the database.
Within the data management system, data are manipulated using a menu-
driven system, which allows access to all files. Data retrieved by the
menu-driven system can be written to a file and then included 1n word-processed
reports, used with various data analysis programs, or transferred to other
computers via modem. For the Commencement Bay projects, extensive use
19

-------
was made of spreadsheets (particularly LOTUS 1-2-3 published by Lotus Develop-
ment Corporation) and SPSS statistical software (published by SPSS, Inc.).
A project library was developed to hold over 500 documents (e.g.,
reports, correspondence, and maps) relevant to the Commencement Bay project.
Each document is filed under an accession number. This information is
linked to the database to facilitate retrieval of original sources of infor-
mation. A complete copy of the library is located at the WDOE project
office in Olympia and at Tetra Tech, Inc. in Bellevue.
2.2.3 Data Review and Evaluation
One of the first components of the Commencement Bay Superfund project
was a detailed review and evaluation of all historical data relevant to
the project area. Information was compiled from the WDOE library, the
U.S. EPA Region X library, the University of Washington library system,
the Tetra Tech library, WDOE files (Headquarters and Southwest Regional
Office), Port of Tacoma files, files of the Tacoma-Pierce County Health
Department, files of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency, and
personal contacts with scientific investigators (WDOE, COE, EPA, NOAA,
UW).
A detailed description of the data review and evaluation process is
presented in Tetra Tech (1983). Briefly, data were evaluated according
to the following criteria:
•	Type of data (e.g., sources, contamination, environmental
effects)
•	Location(s) and time(s) of sampling
•	Sampling methods (e.g., collection, handling, storage, and
replication)
•	Analytical methods (e.g., accuracy, precision, and detection
limits)
•	Quality assurance/quality control procedures (e.g., spikes,
blanks).
Data considered unacceptable for the needs of the Commencement Bay
project were not considered beyond the evaluation step. Acceptable data
were summarized in a matrix format and entered into the Commencement Bay
database. In addition, station locations for all acceptable data were
plotted on maps of project study areas.
The acceptable data screened by the review and evaluation process
were used to 1) identify known sources of contamination, 2) identify known
areas of contamination and effects, and 3) identify data gaps in the historical
database. This information was then used to help design the preliminary
and main field studies.
20

-------
2.2.4 Field Sampling Design
Field studies for the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial
Investigation were designed to determine the degree and spatial extent
of chemical contamination, adverse biological effects, and potential threats
to public health. This information was used in conjunction with historical
data to formulate decision criteria which, in turn, were used to identify
problem areas and to prioritize these areas for possible source control
and/or sediment remedial action (Section 2.2.1). This decision-making
approach is described in detail in Tetra Tech (1984a).
The general sampling design for the Commencement Bay project is presented
in Table 4. Chemical contamination was measured in three media: bottom
sediments (surface and subsurface), water column particulates, and animal
tissues. Four kinds of biological effects of chemical contamination were
also measured: alteration of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages, toxicity
of sediments to bioassay organisms (amphipods and oyster larvae), prevalence
of histopathological disorders in English sole livers, and bioaccumulation
(English sole and cancrid crab muscle tissue). In addition to the data
collected as part of the main Commencement Bay project, contaminant and
effects information was collected in Blair Waterway as part of the Blair
Waterway Dredging Survey, a combined effort between the Port of Tacoma
and the Conmencement Bay Superfund project. Because these samples were
collected using methods identical to those of the Commencement Bay project,
the resulting data were included in the analyses in the present report.
Final selection of sampling stations was based on historical data
and on the results of a preliminary survey conducted in January, 1984.
Stations were selected to fill data gaps, to define more precisely known
areas of contamination, and to determine gradients of contamination in
relation to suspected sources.
The extent and magnitude of chemical contamination of sediments was
determined by comparing chemical concentrations in Commencement Bay study
areas with reference conditions in Carr Inlet. Known and blind replicate
samples prepared from homogenized sediments were analyzed as part of the
quality assurance program to establish precision of laboratory methods.
Within-station variability was not evaluated. Therefore, tests for statisti-
cally significant differences between Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet that
use within-station variability were not conducted. Sediment contamination
was defined instead as "significant" 1f the concentrations in Commencement
Bay sediments exceeded all reported values (or detection limits) in any
of nine Puget Sound reference areas, Including Carr Inlet.
Pearson linear correlation analyses and factor analyses were performed
for subsets of chemical data. Results were used to establish relationships
among the distributions of chemicals 1n Commencement Bay study areas, and
among sediment contamination, sediment toxicity, and benthic infaunal abun-
dances. "Apparent effect thresholds" (AET) for different chemicals were
established by comparing the range of concentrations for each chemical
in each of two groups of stations: 1) stations where no significant toxicity
or depression in benthic infaunal abundances was observed, and 2) stations
where some toxic or benthic effect was observed. The toxicity AET is the
concentration of a chemical above which significant sediment toxicity would
21

-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF GENERAL STUDY DESIGN
Number of Stations
Commencement	Carr	Study Areas®	Time of
Variable	Bay	Inlet	Sampled	Sampling^5
Sediment Chemistry
Surface
Subsurface
15
111
12
18
17
4C HY,BL,MI,MD,CI,RS,CR	January
4	All	March
BL	July
HY,SI,SP,MD,CI,RS	May
BL	July
Water Column Chemistry
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Sediment Bioassays
Fish Histopathology
Bioaccumulation
44
6
46
6
15
15
HY,BL,SI,MI,MD,CI
4	All
BL
4	All
BL
2	All
2	All
April
August
March
July
March
July
June
June
a The nine study areas include Hylebos (HY), Blair (BL), Sitcum (SI), Milwaukee (MI),
St. Paul (SP), Middle (MD) and City (CI) Waterways, the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline
(RS), and Carr Inlet (CR).
b All sampling was conducted in 1984. The stations sampled in January were part of
the preliminary survey and the stations sampled in July were part of the Blair Waterway
Dredging Survey.
c At two of these stations, only conventional sediment variables were measured.
22

-------
always be expected. Similarly, the benthic effects AET is the concentration
of a chemical above which significant benthic effects would always be expected.
The toxicity AET and the benthic effects AET may or may not occur at the
same concentration of a chemical.
To determine the potential biological effects of the observed chemical
contamination, each of four biological indicators (i.e., benthic macro-
invertebrates, sediment bioassays, fish histopathology, and bioaccumulation)
were compared between Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet. Although some compar-
isons were qualitative (i.e., descriptive), most were based on statistical
criteria. Use of such criteria ensured that impacts were judged objectively.
If possible, comparisons were made using parametric statistical methods.
Where the assumption of parametric tests could not be met using either
untransformed or transformed (e.g., logarithmic) data, nonparametric methods
were used with untransformed data.
2.2.5 Source Investigations
The main objective of the source investigations was to identify and
prioritize the major sources of contaminants in Commencement Bay sediments.
Because of the complexity of the study area, the numerous contaminants
present, and the extensive industrial development of the area, the conduct
of source identifications represented a complex assessment requiring evaluation
of many data types.
The Water Quality Investigations section of the Washington State Department
of Ecology (WDOE) was given responsibility for five projects to be completed
under Task 4 (Determine Sources of Contamination and Characterize as a
Current or Historical Source) of the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tidef 1 ats
Remedial Investigation. The five projects included:
•	Assessment of log sorting yards as metals sources to the
Commencement Bay waterways
•	Metals in Hylebos Creek drainage as a metals source to Hylebos
Waterway
•	Routine monitoring of major point sources (other than NPDES)
to Corrmencement Bay waterways
•	Source identification of metals 1n Sitcum Waterway sediments
•	Sources of metals and organic priority pollutants to City
Waterway sediments.
The Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department conducted an investigation
to identify all drains, seeps, and channels that discharge into the waterways
and bay in the tidef 1 ats area; to identify the drainage network Into the
Fife area (Hylebos Creek and Wapato Creek); and to Identify outfalls and
drainage systems along the Ruston Way shoreline. The investigation was
comprehensive, incorporating information gathered from the numerous case
studies and identifications previously performed in the area. It provided
a permanent record of outfall locations and drainage systems 1n place at
the time of the study. Chemical analysis was performed on effluents from
23

-------
selected outfalls and points within the drainage systems to determine whether
pollutants were entering the aquatic ecosystem and to identify significant
sources of pollution not already recognized through previous case studies.
Extensive shoreline investigations were performed at low tide by boat and
on foot. Contributing drainage systems were evaluated by walking along
open channel systems, surveying, some dye testing, and verification of
manhole and catch basin locations for closed storm systems on record.
Maps and records of the storm systems for the political entities in the
area were obtained and verified.
The efforts of source identification integrated a large database on
potential contaminant sources, observed contaminant levels in water and
sediment, and ancillary information. Some of the most valuable information
utilized in source identification included:
t Spatial gradients of contamination 1n surficial sediments
•	Vertical gradients of contamination in sediment cores
•	Analyses for the contaminant(s) in discharges
•	Dredging history
•	Environmental fate processes
•	Industrial activities.
Evaluation of spatial gradients of contamination in surficial sediments
was the most important component of the source identification process.
Spatial gradients were evaluated both on a one-dimensional (along the length
of the waterway) and on a two-dimensional basis. These evaluations were
conducted using contaminant concentrations expressed as a dry weight concen-
tration in sediment. Organic contaminant concentrations normalized to
organic carbon were also used to aid in determination of spatial gradients.
Evaluation of spatial gradients was used to establish the probable location
of contaminant sources, with the implicit assumption that the most contaminated
sediments were in closest proximity to the sources.
Evaluation of vertical gradients of contamination in sediment cores
was used to assess the historical pattern of contaminant Input. For example,
greatest contaminant concentrations in the uppermost sediments Indicated
ongoing or recent input or past input exposed by dredging, ship scour,
etc. Alternatively, subsurface contaminant maxima suggested that greatest
inputs occurred in the past, or that the area had been covered recently
by clean material. Uniform contaminant concentrations with depth suggested
long-term input, groundwater contamination, or interstitial water mobility
of the contaminant.
The contribution of contaminants by point sources and runoff was assessed
by use of loading estimates (the quantity of material expressed 1n lb/day
released to the water). These loading estimates were calculated from all
available measurements of discharge flow rates and contaminant concentrations
in the Commencement Bay database. The majority of discharge flow and concen-
tration measurements in the database came from WDOE Investigations (e.g.,
24

-------
Class II surveys) and Commencement Bay nearshore/tideflats remedial surveys
conducted by U.S. EPA, Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department, and specific
industries. For each contaminant of concern, an average loading was calculated
for each discharge into the defined problem area for which flow and concen-
tration data were available.
There is evidence of groundwater contamination within many portions
of the nearshore/tideflats area because of past spills, use of unlined
industrial waste ponds, and 1 and filli ng of hazardous materials. Local,
state, and federal agencies were contacted to obtain all available data
for information on groundwater flow and contamination. These agencies
included the Port of Tacoma, Tacoma Public Utilities Department, Pierce
County Department of Public Works, State Department of Highways, WDOE,
and the U.S. Geological Survey. The existing data were very limited.
In general , existing data were inadequate to determine the magnitude of
groundwater contamination, to predict the route of groundwater flow from
a contaminated area, and to determine the loading of contaminants to the
waterways via groundwater.
Files of both the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and WDOE were reviewed to
obtain information on past spills of hazardous materials in the nearshore/
tideflats area. The USCG files were not useful because spill locations
were imprecise (i.e., reported only to the nearest minute latitude and
longitude) and little information on chemical constituents of spilled material
exists. For example, a spill at 47° 16' N latitude and 122° 26' W longitude
could have occurred in the Puyallup River; St. Paul, Middle, or City Waterways;
or southeast Commencement Bay. WDOE files for 1979 to 1985 contained reports
of approximately 30 hazardous material spills with potential effects on
water quality in the study area. About 35 petroleum spills in excess of
50 gallons were also documented during the same period.
The dredging history of the nearshore/tideflats area was reviewed
to help interpret horizontal and vertical contamination gradients observed
in the sediment core samples. Information on maintenance dredging activities
and private dredging activities within the nearshore/tideflats area was
obtained by a WDOE review of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and U.S. EPA
files. All dredge and fill applications submitted to the COE from 1972
to the present were reviewed to identify the industrial applicant, the
spatial extent of dredging activities, and the volume of material intended
for removal.
2.2.6 Endangerment Assessment
The objective of the endangerment assessment for the Commencement
Bay Investigation was to evaluate public health risks associated with consump-
tion of contaminated seafood from the study area. This assessment considered
three routes of contaminant exposure: consumption of fish muscle tissue,
crab muscle tissue, and fish livers. The overall assessment consisted
of an exposure evaluation and a prediction of health effects (I.e., risks).
The first step in the exposure assessment was to calculate the exposed
population (i.e., individuals consuming fish or shellfish from Commencement
Bay). Estimates of the exposed population were obtained from a survey
conducted by the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department (TPCHD, Pierce
25

-------
et al. 1981). Based on results of that survey, 4,070 shore and boat anglers
were estimated for Commencement Bay. The average family size was 3.74
persons, resulting in a predicted exposed population of 15,200 persons.
The second step in the exposure evaluation was to calculate the amount
of fish consumed by the exposed population. This was accomplished by using
the information provided in the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department's
Catch Consumption Survey to estimate the frequency of fishing and multiplying
that value by the average catch per trip of nonsalmonid fishes intended
for consumption. These calculations indicated that a small proportion
of the exposed population (i.e., 30 of 15,220 or 0.2 percent) consumed
fish at the highest estimated rate of 1 lb/day. These calculations also
indicated that 82 percent of the exposed population consumed less than
1 lb/month and that over half the population (57 percent) consumed Commencement
Bay fish at the lowest rate of 1 lb/year. No data were available on shellfish
consumption rates. Consumption of crabs was therefore assumed to follow
a distribution equal to fish consumption.
The final step in the exposure evaluation was to multiply the estimated
seafood consumption rates by the concentrations of contaminants in fish
and crab tissue. Tissue contaminant data collected as part of the present
study were used for this analysis.
No data were available on consumption rates of fish livers. Therefore,
it was assumed that all persons who eat fish livers eat them from all the
fish they catch. It was also assumed that the liver mass was proportional
to the liver-to-muscle ratio (12 percent) of Commencement Bay fishes.
Therefore, at the maximum estimated fish consumption rate of 1 lb/day,
the corresponding maximum liver consumption rate would be 0.12 lb/day.
Exposure calculations were used to predict carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic
risks to public health. Carcinogens in this assessment were substances
that the U.S. EPA considers possible cancer-causing agents. Public health
risks from ingestion of carcinogens was estimated using the U.S. EPA's
Carcinogen Assessment Group methodology (U.S. EPA 1984). Estimated individual
lifetime risks were calculated by multiplying the exposure for each of
the contaminants by U.S. EPA's unit risk scores.
Noncarcinogens were assumed to have threshold toxic responses (i.e.,
to cause some ill effect only after a certain dose is exceeded). Therefore,
calculated exposures for these substances were compared with published
Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs). Effects were predicted in the exposed
population if exposure exceeded the ADI.
2.2.7 Identification of Potential Remedial Technologies
The four major objectives in this part of the investigation were:
1) to describe and evaluate alternative dredging methods and equipment,
disposal methods and sites, and site control and treatment practices for
contaminated sediments; 2) to develop a preliminary decision-making framework
for the management of dredged material; 3) to prioritize sources of problem
chemicals within each problem area; and 4) to delineate the remedial tech-
nologies applicable to each hot spot or problem area.
26

-------
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) conducted an assessment of
alternative dredging methods and equipment, disposal methods and sites,
and site control and treatment practices for contaminated sediments derived
from Commencement Bay. These alternatives were evaluated based on:
•	Cost of each alternative
¦ Degree of confinement and release of volatile, soluble,
and sediment-bound contaminants resulting with each alternative
•	Considerations and limitations specific to each alternative
(e.g., equipment and site availability, method efficiency,
equipment depth limitations, sociopolitical concerns, and
other indicators of practicability).
The COE also developed a decision-making framework for dredged material
management. The decision-making framework is based on the results of tech-
nically sound test protocols, and considers sediment chemistry, the physi-
cochemical nature of disposal site environments, and the biological effects
of sediment contaminants. Test results from sediments to be dredged are
compared with test results from reference sediments and with established
criteria. Test protocols are discussed that consider the physicochemical
conditions posed by open-water disposal environments and by confined nearshore
and upland disposal environments. Descriptions of the physicochemical
conditions at each disposal environment are provided as well as descriptions
and citations of the test methods to be conducted. In addition, examples
of test results obtained from recent test applications at other COE dredging
projects are discussed. Test results are used to formulate management
strategies for placing dredged material in specific physicochemical disposal
environments and to determine treatment and control methods for disposing
of contaminated sediments in an environmentally acceptable manner.
To define remedial technologies, two aspects of sediment contamination
in Commencement Bay were considered: the type and magnitude of contaminated
sediments, and the mechanisms by which contaminants enter the bay. Technologies
were classified according to the problem they addressed. Management tech-
nologies for sediments were aimed at reducing or mitigating the environmental
and public health threats associated with contaminated sediments. Control
technologies for sources were aimed at reducing or preventing contaminants
from entering the marine environment. Sediment management technologies
were classified as removal or in situ methods, and source control methods
were classified as point or nonpoint technologies. A list of all potential
remedial technologies was generated, including a description of their applica-
tions, limitations, cost estimates, advantages, and disadvantages. Remedial
technologies were not further screened or ranked, as these evaluations
will be performed in the feasibility study.
Prioritization of sources for remedial action was based on the priority
of the observed contaminants, degree of confidence in source identification,
magnitude of relative loading (if known), and method of remedial action
implementation. For each problem area where contamination sources were
identified, a list of potential remedial technologies was developed for
those sources. Additional source identification methods were recommended
for those contaminants with unknown and potential sources.
27

-------
2.2.8 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
QA/QC procedures for the Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund
Investigation were applied to cover interdisciplinary field sampling, laboratory
analyses, data validation, and data analysis. These procedures covered
collection and analysis of water, fishes, crabs, surface sediments, subsurface
sediments, and suspended particulate material. Field samples were analyzed
for organic and inorganic chemistry, benthic ecology, sediment toxicology,
and fish pathology. Field tasks were integrated by establishing common
sampling sites, sampling methods, and sampling times for related disciplines,
as specified in the project sampling and analysis plan (Tetra Tech 1984b).
Specific procedures used in each area are summarized in a QA/QC plan approved
by the U.S. EPA and WDOE (Brown and Caldwell and E.V.S. Consultants 1984).
In addition, for chemical analyses, a method validation study was
conducted to evaluate chemical protocols used for the determination of
trace organic compounds in sediments by four analytical laboratories.
Results from analytical laboratories were reviewed by Tetra Tech for conformance
with QA/QC requirements. Detection limits, accuracy, precision, completeness,
and conformance with the specified protocol were verified during data review.
Ten to twenty percent of the data was examined in a complete verification
effort. The remainder of the data was evaluated for outliers and completeness
prior to database entry. All of the spectral data for the tentatively
identified organic compounds were manually examined. When possible, QA
audits included the use of known geochemical trends in environmental data
to evaluate the reliability of the data returned for interpretation.
2.2.9 Health and Safety
Because soils, sediments, water, and waste material associated with
contaminated areas may present significant health hazards, personnel who
came into direct contact with contaminated materials were provided with
personal, dermal, and respiratory protection.
Safety plan guidelines developed for the Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Remedial Investigation (Tetra Tech 1983) covered field procedures
to collect and process samples of water, sediment, fishes, and crabs.
These guidelines also covered other activities that might be associated
with future Superfund activities (e.g., surveying, dredging, excavation
and dewatering of sediment, and waste hauling).
The site-specific safety plan for the investigation (Brown and Caldwell
and E.V.S. Consultants 1983) ensured safe conduct of field operations and
collection of data. The plan specifically called for a modified Level D
protection, with the substitution of marine rubber work boots with non-
slip soles for steel-toed boots. Monitoring equipment included an HNu
photo ionization detector and personnel organic monitoring badges. Collection
of certain deep core and sediment samples required the use of respirators
with GMC-H combination cartridges for acids, gases, and organic vapors
(MSA 464046).
The site safety plan guidelines and site-specific safety plan were
approved by the WDOE Project Manager and the U.S. EPA Region X Safety Officer.
28

-------
3. RESULTS
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
3.1.1 Contamination
The evaluation of contamination in Commencement Bay focused on surface
and subsurface subtidal sediments. General objectives of the sediment
contamination studies were to:
•	Determine the magnitude of contamination relative to the
project reference area (Carr Inlet)
•	Develop a condensed list of chemicals of concern (i.e.,
concentrations exceeding maximum Puget Sound reference levels)
from the numerous chemicals analyzed in Commencement Bay
sediments
•	Develop a list of Commencement Bay areas with highest levels
of each chemical of concern.
Commencement Bay study areas were divided into 20 segments as shown
in Figure 5. The major reason for defining segments was to provide a means
of reporting major chemical, sediment toxicity, and biological gradients
within areas that sometimes contained dozens of stations in various arrays.
Hence, small areas such as Sitcum, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Middle Waterwavs
were not subdivided. Boundaries of segments within large areas were generally
established to define major zones of varying chemical contamination. Contam-
ination from one group of chemicals sometimes extended well past a segment
boundary defined according to a zone of contamination for other chemicals.
At a minimum, each segment was required to contain at least three
stations (except Segment CIS2 which consisted of the isolated Wheeler-Osgood
branch of City Waterway). Segments were also required to contain at least
one station for which complementary biological and sediment toxicity data
were available (except Segment BLS4 located in deeper water outside of
Blair Waterway). Average concentrations of chemicals within segments are
used in later discussions to evaluate trends in chemical concentrations
along areas. "Hotspots" of chemical contamination are evaluated at individual
stations when chemical gradients are apparent within segments.
3.1.1.1 Metal s--
3.1.1.1.1 Surface Chemistry--Metals were detected over a wide range
of concentrations in Commencement Bay surface sediments (i.e., <1 to >30,000
mg/kg dry weight). Highest concentrations of most metals were measured
along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline near the ASARC0 smelter. Comparisons
with the range of Puget Sound reference levels indicated that concentrations
of beryllinn, chromium, and silver were not significantly elevated in Commence-
ment Bay sediments. There was no evidence of elevated selenium or thallium
29

-------
HYS6
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
CIS3
HYS5
HYS4
HYS3
HYS2

HYS1
4000
I METERS
1000
Figure 5. Area segments defined for Commencement Bay
Superfund data analysis.
VtoTEfVMMT

-------
RUSTON
COMMENCEMENT
BAY

:::::::::::::
TACOMA
Figure 5. (Continued)

-------
concentrations outside the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline area. The remaining
eight metals (antimony, arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel,
and zinc) were elevated above maximum Puget Sound reference levels at one
or more sites in Commencement Bay, and were therefore identified as inorganic
contaminants of concern.
For the Commencement Bay waterways, average elevations above Carr
Inlet values (EAR) (by waterway) were typically less than a factor of 20
for sediment metals (i.e., metals concentrations in waterway sediments
were less than 20 times those of Carr Inlet reference sediments). Individual
sampling stations within the waterways had higher metals concentrations.
The highest levels of metals contamination exceeded 1,000 times Carr Inlet
levels for antimony and arsenic only at three stations near the ASARC0
outfalls on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline (Segment RSS2). Cadmium,
copper, lead, mercury, and zinc were elevated above 100 times Carr Inlet
concentrations in this area. Sediment metals concentrations decreased
sharply both alongshore and offshore from the ASARC0 plant vicinity. High
metals concentrations also were observed in the Pt. Defiance area (Segment
RSS3), and appeared to be associated directly with the presence of ASARC0
slag.
Within the waterways, several localized areas of significant sediment
contamination by metals were found. Upper Hylebos Waterway (Segments HYS1
and HYS2) was highly contaminated by metals, especially arsenic and copper.
High concentrations of metals (including mercury) have also been reported
in intertidal sediments from the south shore of Hylebos Waterway. Sitcum
Waterway was distinguished from neighboring waterways by high EAR of most
metals. Even higher metals concentrations were previously reported in
nearshore sediments from Sitcum Waterway. The highest concentrations were
found in the northeast corner of the waterway. Sediment concentrations
of copper and mercury in Middle Waterway were among the highest observed
in the waterways. Maximum levels were measured near the mouth of that
waterway. City Waterway was distinguished by having some of the highest
sediment lead concentrations found in the waterways. Lead concentrations
decreased consistently from the head to the mouth of that waterway. Intertidal
sediments along the eastern shoreline of City Waterway (south of Wheeler-Osgood)
have high concentrations of copper, zinc, and, near the head of the waterway,
nickel.
3.1.1.1.2 Subsurface Chemistry--Twenty-three sediment cores were
collected in 13 areas of Commencement Bay containing contaminated surface
sediments. The areas sampled were located in Hylebos, Sitcum, St. Paul,
Middle, and City Waterways, and along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
Maximum subsurface concentrations of metals were observed in cores from
the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline and were typically 1.5 to 3 times higher
than maximum concentrations in surface sediments from the same area. Concentra-
tions of priority pollutant metals (e.g., lead and copper) also did not
vary substantially with depth in cores from Wheel er-Osgood Waterway, the
middle of the main channel of City Waterway, and St. Paul Waterway. Concentra-
tions of these metals in cores from other locations showed more variable
patterns. Metals concentrations equal to Puget Sound reference conditions
were found in the deepest interval of cores from Blair and Hylebos Waterway
(except near the mouth of the waterway). Concentrations of metals in the
deepest interval of cores from St. Paul Waterway and the head of City Waterway
32

-------
exceeded Puget Sound reference conditions by less than a factor of two.
Concentrations of at least one metal in the bottom of cores from Sitcum,
Middle, Wheeler-Osgood, and the mouths of City and Hylebos Waterways exceeded
the range of Puget Sound reference conditions by more than a factor of
two.
3.1.1.2 Organic Substances--
3.1.1.2.1 Surface Chemistry--Qf the 133 U.S. EPA organic priority
pollutants and hazardous substance list organic compounds analyzed in Commence-
ment Bay sediments, 53 were undetected in surface sediments. For these
compounds, analytical detection limits typically were in the low parts
per billion range. Undetected compounds included 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-
dioxin, and most organonitrogen compounds (bases), pesticides, and volatile
compounds. Rarely detected organic substances included several substituted
phenols and halogenated ethers. Of special note was the absence of pesticides
such as aldrin, lindane, and DDT that were previously identified at relatively
high concentrations in some areas of Commencement Bay. The highest historical
pesticide values were found in subtidal and intertidal sediments from Hylebos
Waterway. Intertidal sediments were not resampled in the current investiga-
tion .
Nineteen organic compounds or compound groups (representing 42 of
the 133 organic priority pollutants and hazardous substance list organic
compounds) were of concern because their concentrations in Commencement
Bay sediments exceeded maximum concentrations in Puget Sound reference
sediments. Six organic compounds were found at especially high concentrations
(>1,000 times EAR) at individual stations: benzo(a)pyrene, 4-methylphenol ,
2-methoxyphenol, phenanthrene, trichlorobutadienes, and tetrachlorobutadienes.
Similarly high concentrations of hexachlorobenzene and hexachlorobutadiene
were also reported in past studies of subtidal sediments from Hylebos Waterway.
Additional compounds or compound groups with EAR from 100 to 1,000 at Commence-
ment Bay stations included: low and high molecular weight aromatic hydrocarbons
(LPAH and HPAH), dibenzofuran, 1,2-dichlorobenzene, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate,
PCBs, and 2-methylnaphthalene.
Hylebos Waterway displayed high sediment concentrations for several
groups of organic compounds. Subtidal and intertidal sediments in that
waterway contained the highest levels of chlorinated organic compounds
(e.g., PCBs; chlorinated ethenes, benzenes, and butadienes; as well as
a complex mixture of unidentified chlorinated compounds) 1n the project
area. Highest levels of chlorinated butadienes and chlorinated benzenes
occurred toward the waterway mouth. Chlorinated ethenes have been found
in high concentrations in intertidal sediments in two areas along the south
shore of Hylebos Waterway, The distribution of PCBs was patchy, with elevated
levels occurring throughout subtidal sediments of the waterway. The entire
upper reach of Hylebos Waterway was highly contaminated by HPAH. Blair,
Sitcum, and Milwaukee Waterways generally had low concentrations of organic
compounds compared with other areas of Commencement Bay. An area adjacent
to the Champion International pulp mill near the mouth of St. Paul Waterway
was characterized by organic contamination from methylated phenols and
LPAH. Several parts of City Waterway were characterized by high levels
of LPAH, HPAH, and chlorinated benzenes. High PCB concentrations reported
at a single station near the mouth of City Waterway in an earlier study
33

-------
were not evident in the more recent sampling. Along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline, the area adjacent to the ASARCO smelter was highly contaminated
by several organic compounds, including PAH, PCBs, and 1,4-dichlorobenzene.
With some of the exceptions noted, comparable or higher concentrations
of most organic compounds were found in the current sampling of subtidal
sediments as compared with past studies.
3.1.1.2.2 Subsurface Chemistry--Many organic compounds were measured
at concentrations that were considerably higher in subsurface sediments
than in surface sediments. Examples (with ratios of maximum subsurface
to surface concentrations) include: 2-methylphenol (19), pyrene (22),
1,4-dichlorobenzene (41), hexachlorobutadiene (61), hexachlorobenzene (13).
Highest concentrations of organic compounds were found in subsurface sediments
from Hylebos and City Waterways. Concentrations of one major class of
compounds, hydrocarbons, typically exceeded Puget Sound reference conditions
by a factor of 2-10 at the bottom of all cores except those drilled in
Blair Waterway. This was true even in the eight cores where the bottom
intervals had no evidence of metals contamination.
3.1.2 Biological Effects
3.1.2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrates--
Bottom-dwelling organisms are an integral part of marine and estuarine
ecosystems. They consume organic materials, bioturbate sediments, promote
nutrient regeneration from sediments, and are prey of fishes, birds, and
marine mammals. Because benthic organisms are relatively sedentary, they
cannot avoid organic materials and chemical contaminants deposited on the
bottom. They are also sensitive to environmental disturbance, organic
enrichment, and chemical contamination of the sediments. These characteristics
make them an excellent indicator group for assessing the areal extents
and magnitudes of environmental stresses.
In the present study, 119,095 benthic macroinvertebrates belonging
to 407 species were collected at 56 stations. Total macroinvertebrate
abundances at most stations in Commencement Bay ranged from 2,500 to 15,000/m2.
The most abundant taxonomic groups were Polychaeta (worms), Bivalvia (clams),
Nematoda (worms), and Crustacea (e.g., amphipods). The polychaetes were
represented primarily by Tharyx multifilis, and the bivalve molluscs were
represented primarily by ftxinopsiaa serrTcata. These two species accounted
for 70,084 individuals, or 59 percent of all benthic organisms collected.
Among the nine study areas, numbers of species tended to be higher
along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline and in Carr Inlet than in the water-
ways. Conversely, total abundances tended to be higher within the waterways
than along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline or in Carr Inlet, because
populations of some polychaete and mollusc species and populations of nematodes
(at certain stations were enhanced. The lower numbers of species, higher
numbers of individua s, and enhanced abundances of a few species that typically
occurred within the waterways resulted in communities dominated by a few
species. Such "high dominance" communities are generally indicative of
environmentally stressed areas, because less tolerant species are eliminated
and opportunistic species tend to achieve higher abundances in stressed
areas compared to unstressed areas.
34

-------
The most adversely affected benthic assemblages in Commencement Bay
were found off ASARCO, off Champion International, and at the head of City
Waterway. The station closest to ASARCO (RS-18) was nearly devoid of benthic
invertebrates. Of the four grab samples collected at this site, only two
contained any macroinvertebrates (i.e., a total of seven organisms). The
station closest to Champion International (SP-14) also was nearly abiotic,
with only 32 organisms collected in four grab samples. This compares with
an average of approximately 2,300 organisms collected in all four grab
samples from each station within the Commencement Bay study area. The
depressed abundances at Stations RS-18 and SP-14 indicate severe stress.
Benthic invertebrate assemblages at stations off Champion International
(SP-15) and at the head of City Waterway (CI-11) were numerically dominated
(82.7 percent and 98.6 percent, respectively) by nematodes and by the polychaete
Capitella capitata. Dominance by these taxa indicates organic enrichment
of the sediments.
To develop indices of benthic effects, abundances of major benthic
taxa (i.e., total taxa, Polychaeta, Mollusca, and Crustacea) at potentially
impacted sites were compared statistically with their respective abundances
at reference sites. A significant decrease (P<0.05) in the abundance of an
indicator taxon was considered a benthic impact (i.e., a benthic depression).
Because sediment grain size characteristics at the stations in Carr Inlet
differed considerably from those at most waterway stations, Blair Waterway
was used as a reference area for benthic determinations for the waterways.
Blair Waterway was a relatively clean waterway with respect to sediment
chemistry and toxicity. Carr Inlet was retained as the reference area
for the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline and for Station HY-44 because sediment
grain size characteristics were similar in these areas.
Results of the statistical comparisons (Figure 6) showed that no benthic
depressions were found in Middle and Milwaukee Waterways. In Sitcum Waterway,
single depressions (Crustacea) were found at two of three stations (SI-11
and SI-12). The remaining four study areas (Hylebos, St. Paul, and City
Waterways, and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline) included stations with
multiple benthic depressions. Locations with multiple depressions included
the head of Hylebos Waterway (HY-17, HY-22, and HY-23), the middle of Hylebos
Waterway (HY-32), the stations closest to Champion International (SP-14
and SP-15), the head of City Waterway (CI-13), the Wheeler-Osaood branch
of City Waterway (CI-16), and the station closest to ASARCO (RS-18).
Compared with the results of a study conducted in 1950 (Orlob et al. 1950),
benthic conditions in the vicinity of Station RS-18 (near ASARCO) do not
appear to have improved. Some improvement in benthic conditions does appear
to have occurred in upper Hylebos and upper City Waterways, as these areas
are no longer devoid of benthic macroinvertebrates, as the limited historical
data indicate.
3.1.2.2 Fish Ecology--
English sole (Parophrys vetulus) was selected as the representative
fish species for several reasons. First, this species is abundant and
widespread throughout Commencement Bay, enhancing the probability that
adequate sample sizes could be obtained at all study sites. Second, English
35

-------
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
NO DEPRESSION
1 DEPRESSION
> 1 DEPRESSION

/y
Figure 6. Summary of spatial patterns of benthic depressions.
A depression represents a significantly reduced
abundance (P^0.05) of a major taxonomic group.

-------
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 (Malins et al. 1980, 1982). It is therefore
likely that this species is being influenced by contamination of bottom
sediments. Finally, because English sole is frequently caught and consumed
by recreational fishermen, this speies is part of a pathway through which
contaminants can move from sediments to humans.
General characteristics of the total bottom-dwelling fish assemblages
and the English sole populations sampled at 17 trawl transects in Commencement
Bay and Carr Inlet were examined qualitatively to determine if large differences
existed between the two embayments. The total assemblages in Commencement
Bay and Carr Inlet were compared with respect to species composition, number
of species, species diversity, and total abundance. English sole populations
in Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet were compared with respect to median
length, abundance, and condition.
A total of 6,686 fishes, representing 17 families and 40 species,
was collected in this study (Table 5). Commencement Bay study areas yielded
4,951 individuals and 38 species, whereas 1,735 fishes and 13 species were
collected in Carr Inlet. Much of this discrepancy in species richness
resulted primarily from the larger sampling effort expended in Commencement
Bay (15 transects) compared to Carr Inlet (2 transects), but may also have
been partly due to increased habitat complexity (e.g., pilings, rocks,
debris) in Corrmencement Bay. The fish assemblages sampled in both Commencement
Bay and Carr Inlet were dominated by pieuronectids (i.e., flatfishes).
The most abundant pleuronectids were English sole (Parophrys vetulus) and
rock sole (Lepidopsetta bilineata).
For six of the eight Commencement Bay study areas, total fish abundance
(as catch per unit effort) was over twice as large as that in Carr Inlet.
Only Hylebos Waterway and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline had fish abundances
similar to that in Carr Inlet. Total numbers of fish species in individual
Commencement Bay study areas (e.g., waterways) were relatively similar
to that in Carr Inlet. Diversity indices of fish assemblages in Commence-
ment Bay study areas were greater than that in Carr Inlet. Diversity indices
in four of the eight study areas (Hylebos, Milwaukee, and City Waterways,
and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline) exceeded that in Carr Inlet by a
factor of 1.5 or more. These results indicate that the distribution of
individuals among species is more even in Commencement Bay waterways than
in Carr Inlet. In summary, fish assemblages in Commencement Bay study
areas generally were more abundant and more diverse than those 1n Carr
Inlet, whereas total numbers of species were similar among all areas.
Although these comparisons are largely descriptive, they show no indication
that the gross characteristics of fish assemblages in Commencement Bay
were negatively affected by chemical contamination.
Although relative abundances of English sole were similar between
the two embayments, length distributions of captured f1sh were significantly
different (P<0.001). Median length of English sole in Carr Inlet (14.9 cm)
was substantially lower than that in Commencement Bay (25.2 cm) because
populations in the former embayment were dominated by young fish. This
size discrepancy probably arises from the fact that juvenile English sole
prefer shallow sandy habitats as nursery areas. Thus, the muddy nature
37

-------
TABLE 5. RELATIVE ABUNDANCES OF FISHES CAPTURED IN
COMMENCEMENT BAY AND CARR INLET
Relative Abundance (i)
Fami1y	Species	Common Name Commencement Carr
Bay	Inlet
Squalidae
Rajidae
Chimaeridae
Clupeidae
EngraulIdae
Batrachoididae
Gad idae
Zoarcidae
Embiotocidae
Bathymasteridae
Stichaeidae
Scorpaenidae
Hexagrammidae
Cottidae
Agonidae
Bothioae
Pleuronectidae
Squalus acanthias
Raja rhina
Hydro! aqus colliei
Clupea harenqus
paliasi
Engraul1s mprdax
mordax
Porichthys notatus
Gad us macrocephalus
Herluccius productus
Hicroqadus" prpximus
Lycodopsis pacifica
Cymatoqaster aggregate
Embiotoca lateralis
Rhacochifus vacca
Rpnguilus jprdani
lumpenus saqitta
Sebastes auriculatus
Sebastes caurinm
Sebastes waiiqer
Sebastes melanops
Hexaqrammos stelleri
OpModon elonqatus
Chitonotus puqetensis
EnophrysTison
Leptocottus annatus
Scorpaenichthys
|"»'1wor»tus
Aqonopsis emmelane
Aqonus aclpenserjnus
Citharlchthys sordidus
titharichTKys stiqmaeus
Eopsetta jprdani
Glyptocepnalus zachirus
Hippoqlossoides
elassodon
Inopsetta ischyra
lepidopsetta bii ineata
Lyopsetta"exilis
mcrostomus pacfficus
ParpphrysTetuim
atlehchys steilatus
Pleuronlcnthys coenosus
Psettichthys
melanostictus
spiny dogfish	0.1
longnose skate
spotted ratflsh	2.3
Pacific herring	2.1
northern anchovy	a
plainfin midshipman	0.1
Pacific cod	a
Pacific hake	0.1
Pacific tomcod	4.3
blackbelly eelpout	1.5
shiner perch	0.6
striped seaperch	0.1
pile perch	0.1
northern ronqull	0.3
snake prickleback	0.3
brown rockfish	0.1
copper rockfish	a
quillback rockfish	0.6
black rockfish	a
whitespotted
greenllng	0.2
lingcod	0.1
roughback sculpin	0.6
buffalo sculpin	0.1
Pacific staghorn
sculpin	1.1
cabezon	a
northern spearnose
poacher
0.1
0.2
5.6
0.3
0.1
sturgeon poacher
a
0.2
Pacific sanddab
2.7

speckled sanddab
0.4
1.7
petrale sole
a

r«x sole
a

flathead sole
3.9

hybrid sole
a

rock sole
13.B
25.0
slender sole
0.2
0.4
Dover sole
7.6

English sole
55.6
65.8
Starry flounder
0.4
0.3
C-0 sole
0.1
0.2
sand sole
0.4
0.1
total CATCH
4,951
1,735
8 <0.1 percent.
38

-------
and altered benthos of most areas sampled in Commencement Bay may be suitable
for adult English sole, but largely unacceptable for younger individuals.
At five of the eight Commencement Bay study areas (Blair, Sitcum,
St. Paul, Middle, and City Waterways), English sole abundance was more
than twice that in Carr Inlet. The Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline was the
only study area in which English sole abundance was lower than that in
Carr Inlet. These data indicate that, except for the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline, the Coonencement Bay study areas generally attracted consid-
erably more English sole than did the reference area. A possible explanation
for this pattern is that most of the Commencement Bay study areas support
considerably higher standing crops of English sole prey (i.e., benthic
invertebrates) than does Carr Inlet. Studies of English sole in Commencement
Bay (Becker 1984) have shown that they prefer as food items the polychaete
worms and clams that are enhanced in abundance in the waterways.
The condition (i.e., weight-at-length) of all 1,007 English sole of
known sex subsampled for histopathological analysis was compared between
Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet using regression analysis. Results showed
that the condition of most fish in Commencement Bay exceeded that of fish
from Carr Inlet, suggesting that English sole from Commencement Bay were
able to obtain and store more energy than were fish from Carr Inlet. Thus,
there is no evidence that chemical contamination in Commencement Bay is
substantially affecting the condition of resident English sole.
3.1.2.3 Fish Histopathology--
The liver is singled out for pathological and contaminant analyses
because it is the organ most closely associated with regulation and storage
of many toxic chemicals (Fowler 1982). Also, for English sole in Puget
Sound, the liver is the organ most heavily afflicted with pathological
disorders (Mai ins et al. 1980, 1982).
Histopathological analyses were conducted on 1,020 English sole subsampled
from 17 trawl transects. Four kinds of liver lesion (i.e., altered tissue)
were evaluated microscopically: hepatic neoplasms, preneoplastic nodules,
megalocytic hepatosis, and nuclear pieomorphisms. Hepatic neoplasms are
tumors that are either benign (adenoma) or malignant (carcinoma). Preneoplastic
nodules are lesions thought to irreversibly progress to neoplasms. Megalocytic
hepatosis (enlarged cells and nuclei) and nuclear pleomorphisms (enlarged
nuclei) are degenerative conditions, but are not known to progress to neo-
plasms. The causes of the four kinds of liver lesion are unknown. It
is possible that they are induced by chemical contaminants in the environ-
ment. Morphologically similar lesions have been induced in laboratory
mammals and fishes by exposure to toxic and/or carcinogenic chemicals (Maiins
et al. 1984).
Hepatic neoplasms were found in English sole from every study area
except the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline and Carr Inlet. The highest preva-
lences of neoplasms were found in Middle (8.3 percent) and Sitcum (5.1
percent) Waterways. Preneoplastic nodules were found in fish from every
study area, including Carr Inlet (5.8 percent). As with neoplasms, the
highest prevalences of preneoplastic nodules were in Middle (26.7 percent)
and Sitcum (18.6 percent) Waterways. Megalocytic hepatosis was found in
39

-------
English sole from every study area, with Carr Inlet having the lowest prevalence
(0.8 percent). Highest prevalences of this condition were in Hylebos (18.3
percent) and Milwaukee (16.7 percent) Waterways. Nuclear pleomorphisms
were found in fish from every study area except Milwaukee Waterway and
Carr Inlet. Highest prevalences of this disorder were found in Middle
(10 percent) and Hylebos (5.6 percent) Waterways.
Fish data were age-corrected because the prevalence of several major
lesion types correlated with age of fish and because age composition varied
among study areas. Therefore, fish were grouped to allow for comparisons
to be made without dependence on fish age. Agecorrected data indicated
that, on an embayment basis, prevalences of preneoplastic nodules, megalocytic
hepatosis, and nuclear pleomorphisms were significantly higher (P<0.05)
in Commencement Bay than in Carr Inlet. Hepatic neoplasms were not signifi-
cantly higher in Commencement Bay than in Carr Inlet. Among the eight
Commencement Bay study areas, prevalences of preneoplastic nodules and
nuclear pleomorphisms were significantly elevated (P<0.05) only in Middle
Waterway. Prevalences of megalocytic hepatosis were significantly elevated
(P<0.05) in Hylebos, Blair, Milwaukee, and Middle Waterways. Based on
individual trawl transects within the larger study areas (Hylebos, Blair,
and City Waterways and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline), prevalences
of megalocytic hepatosis were significantly elevated (P<0.05) at all three
transects in Hylebos Waterway (HY70, HY71, and HY72), at the two inner
transects in Blair Waterway (BL70 and HY71), and at the inner transect
along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline (RS70).
Spatial patterns of English sole having significantly elevated (P<0.05)
prevalences of one or more of the four kinds of liver lesion are summarized
in Figure 7. Significant elevations (P<0.05) in lesion prevalences were
found in Hylebos, Blair, Sitcum, Milwaukee, and Middle Waterways (based
on study areas) and at HY71, HY72, BL71, BL72, and RS70 (based on transects
within the larger study areas).
Results of the present study were compared with historical data collected
by Malins et al. (1984). Absolute values of the prevalences of hepatic
neoplasms, preneoplastic nodules, and megalocytic hepatosis in the present
study were generally larger than those found by Malins et al. (1984).
However, this discrepancy may largely be the result of different age distribu-
tions of English sole sampled by the two studies. In contrast with the
absolute values, the relative magnitudes of lesion prevalences across areas
were very similar between the two studies. In both studies, prevalences
were lowest at reference sites, highest in the Commencement Bay waterways,
and intermediate in magnitude along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
3.1.2.4 Bioaccumulation--
Bioaccumulation studies were conducted to determine if sediment or
water contaminants were accumulated in the muscle tissues of fish or shellfish
living in Commencement Bay. These data were used as an indicator of biological
effects and as the database for predicting possible human health effects
from consumption of contaminated seafood. Bioaccumulation studies were
conducted on two resident organisms living in close contact with the sediments:
English sole (Parophrys vetulus) and cancrid crabs (Cancer spp.).
40

-------
(P < .05) SIGNIFICANT LESION PREVELANCE
O C > °5) NO SIGNIFICANT LESION PREVELANCE
COMUCICCMCNT
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
MtTEMWr
4000
I FEET
1 METERS
Figure 7
Summary of areas having significantly elevated
prevalences of one or more hepatic lesions in
English sole.

-------
Concentrations of metals in English sole muscle tissue were relatively
homogeneous among study areas, and there were few cases in which Commencement
Bay fish displayed elevated concentrations relative to those in the Carr
Inlet reference area. Copper was statistically elevated (3-9 times reference
levels) in English sole from Sitcum and St. Paul Waterways and the Ruston-
Pt. Defiance Shoreline. The only metals displaying elevated concentrations
in Commencement Bay crab muscle tissue were lead and mercury. Maximum
lead and mercury concentrations in Commencement Bay crabs were found in
Sitcum and Hylebos Waterways, respectively, and were about five times the
reference levels. Although arsenic was highly elevated in some Commencement
Bay sediments, there was no evidence of excess arsenic accumulation in
English sole or crab muscle tissue.
Most of the organic compounds analyzed in this study were not detected
in any of the English sole or crab muscle samples. Several compounds,
such as some phthalates and volatile substances, were detected at very
low concentrations in only a few samples. Eleven organic compounds occurred
at sufficient frequency or concentrations to be evaluated for differences
in spatial distribution: tetrachloroethene, ethylbenzene, hexachlorobenzene,
1,3-dichlorobenzene, hexachlorobutadiene, naphthalene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate, di-n-butyl phthalate, di-n-octyl phthalate, DDE, ana PCBs.
Hexachlorobenzene and hexachlorobutadiene (both chlorinated compounds)
were detected only in English sole from Hylebos Waterway and at concentrations
near the method detection limits. Highest concentrations of tetrachloro-
ethene and ethylbenzene (both volatile compounds) also occurred in English
sole from Hylebos Waterway. Although the waterway sediments displayed
highly elevated concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons, naphthalene was
the only aromatic hydrocarbon detected in fish muscle tissue. These results
are consistent with the high rate of metabolism of aromatic hydrocarbons
documented for fishes.
PCBs were consistently detected in English sole and crabs from the
study area. The maximum concentration of 1,300 ug/kg wet weight was measured
in the muscle tissue of English sole from Hylebos Waterway. Highest average
concentrations of PCBs exceeded 300 ug/kg wet weight (about 10 times reference
levels) and were measured in English sole from Hylebos and City Waterways.
Statistically significant PCB elevations in fish muscle tissue were found
in Hylebos, City, Sitcum, and Blair Waterways. In the heavily fished Pt.
Defiance area, concentrations of PCBs, as well as other organic compounds,
were close to reference levels.
3.1.3 Sediment Toxicity
Two separate toxicity tests were used to evaluate the relative toxicity
of Coirmencement Bay sediments: the amphlpod mortality bloassay and the
oyster larvae abnormality bioassay. The toxicity of Commencement Bay sediments
was compared statistically to the toxicity of Carr Inlet sediments. The
amphipod bioassay was used to measure a direct lethal response, while the
oyster larvae bioassay was used primarily to measure induction of abnormal
development in embryos.
Sediments from 18 of the 52 sampling stations were toxic (statistically
greater than Carr Inlet, P<0.05) to amphipods. Toxic sediments occurrea
42

-------
at one or more stations in all study areas except Middle Waterway. Exposure
to sediments from 15 of the 52 sites caused significant oyster larvae abnor-
mality (P<0.05). Significant oyster larvae abnormality was measured only
in Hylebos, St. Paul, and City Waterways, and along the Ruston shore.
Overall, 24 of the 52 stations displayed significant responses (P<0.05)
from one or both of the bioassays (Figure 8).
Ten stations were significantly toxic (P<0.05) using both bioassays.
Several of these sites also displayed very high (>50 percent) toxicities.
These highly toxic sites were concentrated in the following areas: upper
Hylebos Waterway, City Waterway, off Champion International near the mouth
of St. Paul Waterway, off ASARCO on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline,
and at a single site off Old Tacoma.
The most toxic sediments tested as part of this study were collected
from locations near two industrial sites: the Champion International pulpmill
and the ASARCO smelter. It should be noted that the sediments at both
of these sites were organically enriched and that the observed toxicities
were probably due in part to low dissolved oxygen in the test containers.
In both the amphipod and ouster larvae bioassays, dilution of Commencement
Bay test sediments with clean sediment reduced the toxicity. For the amphipod
bioassays, a 50-75 percent dilution with control sediment generally was
sufficient to reduce mortality to control levels. However, the sediment
stations off ASARCO were still highly toxic at a 90 percent dilution.
For the oyster larvae bioassay, greater than 75 percent dilutions were
required to reduce abnormalities to control levels.
A lower percent of toxic sediments was found in the present study
than in past studies. This apparent relationship may be due to one or
more of the following factors:
•	Overall decline in toxicity over the 5-yr period between
surveys
•	Lack of sample replication for most historical data
•	Differences in sampling station locations: some historical
sites were intertidal, while current sites were mainly midchannel
(i.e., subtidal).
In several areas, however, there was good agreement between historical
and present data. Areas with significantly toxic sediments during both
past and present surveys included upper Hylebos Waterway, the head of City
Waterway, the area off Champion International near the mouth of St. Paul
Waterway, and lower Sitcum Waterway.
3.1.4 Contaminant, Toxicity, and Biological Effects Relationships
Quantitative relationships among the independent contaminant, toxicity,
and biological effects variables were evaluated to meet two objectives:
1. To determine levels of sediment contamination above which
significant toxicity or biological effects would be expected
43

-------
•	NO RESPONSE	#
#	AMPHIPOD OR OYSTER RESPONSE
AMPHIPOO AND OYSTER RESPONSE
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
COMMCNCCMIMf

Figure 8.
OTV
Summary spatial patterns of significant
bioassay responses.

-------
2. To identify contaminants of concern from the numerous con-
taminants detected in Commencement Bay sediments.
Both statistical and nonstatistical approaches were used to evaluate
whether toxicity or adverse biological effects increased with increasing
sediment contaminant concentrations. In this study, it was assumed that
contaminants displaying monotonically increasing relationships with toxic
or biological effects have a higher relative priority (i.e., a higher potential
for being a causative agent) than do contaminants displaying no discernible
relationship with effects.
Where synoptic biological and chemical data were collected, significant
toxicity in both the amphipod mortality and oyster larvae abnormality bioassays
as well as benthic effects (i.e., depressions of abundance of total taxa,
Polychaeta, Mollusca, or Crustacea) were observed at all but one station
where the dry-weight concentration of at least one contaminant exceeded
1,000 times reference conditions. The exception was Station HY-43, where
trichlorinated butadiene concentrations were nearly 2,000 times reference
conditions, but neither bioassay nor any benthic effect was significant.
In other sediments without significant toxic responses or benthic effects,
concentrations of organic compounds (other than chlorinated butadienes)
ranged from 1 to <400 times reference conditions, and concentrations of
metals were <50 times reference conditions.
Sediment toxicity and the number of significant benthic effects were
highest in the most chemically contaminated study areas. Typically, toxicity
increased and abundances of major taxa decreased with increasing concentrations
of some contaminants over the entire study area. A common characteristic
of these relationships was that at lower chemical concentrations, there
was considerable scatter in the magnitude of sediment toxicity and taxon
abundances. When trends were observed, the minimum toxicity observed at
a given concentration of a chemical increased and the maximum abundances
decreased at higher contaminant concentrations. When data from all study
areas were plotted together for a given contaminant, there was no clear
trend in the values of maximum toxicity or minimum abundances over the
concentration range of the contaminant. Thus it is concluded that no one
contaminant or contaminant group correlated with the effects observed in
all areas.
In some cases, there was random scatter in the values up to a certain
contaminant concentration. Above that concentration, there was a rapid
change to uniformly high toxicity or low abundances at the few most contami-
nanted sites. If the high contaminant levels were associated with the
effects observed, the abrupt change in the scatter suggested an "effect
threshold" for the contaminant.
The synoptic chemical , toxicity, and benthic infaunal data for 52
Corrmencement Bay stations were examined for each contaminant of concern
to evaluate effect thresholds. An example of this approach using lead
data is shown in Figure 9. In this case, the available data indicated
that significant toxicity or benthic effects did not occur when sediment
lead concentrations were below 11 mg/kg dry weight (EAR=1.2). This level
defined a "potential effect threshold". This threshold was termed "potential"
45

-------
because toxicity or benthic effects were found at some, but not all, of
the stations with higher lead concentrations. The effects observed at
these stations could have resulted from other contaminants or conditions.
Toxicity "apparent effect threshold" (AET) was defined as the lowest
contaminant concentration above which significant toxicity was observed
at all stations. An analogous benthic AET was defined as the lowest contaminant
concentration above which significant benthic effects occurred at all stations.
For lead, the toxicity AET was 660 mg/kg dry weight (EAR=72) and the benthic
AET was 300 mg/kg dry weight (EAR=33) (Figure 9). The effect thresholds
were termed "apparent" because significant toxicity or benthic effects
were not found at some stations with equal or lower lead concentrations,
while significant sediment toxicity or benthic effects were found at all
stations with higher concentrations. These empirical relationships do
not prove that contaminants found above an AET were responsible for the
observed toxicity or benthic effects. However, within the limits of this
data set, chemicals present above these concentrations were associated
exclusively with problem sediments having significant toxicity or depressed
benthic infaunal abundances (or both). Because of this association, all
chemicals present above toxicity or benthic AET were defined as problem
chemicals requiring further evaluation.
The approach shown in Figure 9 was used to identify toxicity and benthic
AET for all chemicals of concern. The AET expressed on a dry-weight basis
are summarized for metals, organic compounds, and conventional sediment
variables in Table 6.
AET were exceeded by a number of chemicals at most of the 29 stations
exhibiting statistically significant biological effects. All six of the
29 stations where neither AET was exceeded were unusual in that only one
of the biological indicators showed a response. Most of these six stations
exhibited toxicity by the amphipod bioassay only, and the toxicity may
have been related to the high percentage of fine-grained material (>80
percent) at each station. The difference in thresholds for toxicity and
benthic effects for several chemicals suggests that both bioassays were
more sensitive to organic compound contamination, and that benthic depressions
were more sensitive to metals contamination.
AET were also calculated for normalizations to organic carbon and
percent fine-grained material. For most sediments with multiple toxicity
and benthic effects, chemicals exceeded an AET regardless of normalization.
Gradients of effects were analyzed for study areas having a sufficient
number of stations with biological measurements to allow such analysis.
Five such areas were analyzed. Strong relationships were observed for
a few chemicals that were present at concentrations above an AET. Exposure-
response relationships were found for:
•	PCB concentrations, sediment toxicity, and mollusc abundance
along a Hylebos Waterway transect
•	4-Methylphenol concentrations, sediment toxicity, and crustacean
abundance along a St. Paul Waterway transect
46

-------
LEAD
(32 SITES)
(29 SITES)
ELEVATION ABOVE REFERENCE
IX - 9.2 mg/kg DW
10X
100X
1000X
		NO BENTHIC DEPRESSIONS	
72X
680X
33X
-NO SEDIMENT TOXICITY	1
(28 SITES),
i
i	!
-BENTHIC DEPRESSIONS AND/OR SEDIMENT TOXICITY OBSERVED-

I
I
I
11ppm
r
10
I
300ppm
I
I
660ppm
T
T
T
T-n
POTENTIAL
EFFECT
THRESHOLD
CONCENTRATION
(mg/Vg DW)
SCALE
100
APPARENT
BENTHIC
EFFECT
THRESHOLD
I I I I |—
1000
APPARENT
TOXICITY
THRESHOLD
6300ppm
"I	1 I I I I |
10000
MAXIMUM
OBSERVED
LEVEL AT A
BIOLOGICAL
STATION
Figure 9. Example use of synoptic benthic effects and sediment toxicity data to
determine apparent chemical effect thresholds.

-------
TABLE 6. APPARENT EFFECT THRESHOLDS (AET) FOR SEDIMENT
CONTAMINANTS AND CONVENTIONAL VARIABLES

Toxicity
Benthic Effects
Metals
AET (mg/kg DW)
AET (mg/kg DW)
Antimony
5.3
3.1
Arsenic
93
85
Cadmium
5.8
5.8
Copper
310
310
Lead
660
300
Mercury
0.59
0.52
Nickel
39
39
Zinc
490
260

Toxicity
Benthic Effects
Organic Compounds
AET (ug/kg DW)
AET (ug/kg DW)
Phenol
420
1,200
2-methyl phenol
63
72
4-methylphenol
670
670
LMW aromatic hydroarbons
5,200
5,200
HMW aromatic hydrocarbons
12,000
17,000
Chlorinated benzenes
270
400
Chlorinated butadienes9
47,000
47,000
Total phthalates
3,400
5,200
Total PCBs
420
1,100
Benzyl alcohol
130
130
Dibenzofuran
540
540
n-Nitrosodiphenyl amine
28
28
Tetrachlorethene
140
140
Ethyl benzene
37
37
Total xylenes
120
120
2-Methoxyphenol
930
930
1,1'-Biphenyl
260
270
Dibenzothiophene
240
250
Pentachlorocyclopentane3
72
72
Isopimaradiene
1,500
1,500
Kaur-16-ene (possible id)
2,000
2,000
Retene
1,200
2,000
Conventional Variables
Toxicity AET
Benthic AET
Total volatile solids (*)
22.2
22.2
Total organic carbon (%)
15.1
15.1
Nitrogen
0.28
0.28
Oil and grease (mg/kg)
2,200
4,300
a No station exhibiting toxicity or benthic effects had concentrations
exceeding these levels
48

-------
•	Organic enrichment (and selected metal concentrations),
sediment toxicity, mollusc abundance, and crustacean abundance
along a City Waterway transect
•	Mercury concentrations and polychaete abundance along the
same City Waterway transect noted above
•	Mercury, LPAH concentrations, and sediment toxicity along
an onshore-offshore Ruston-Pt. Defiance transect
t Most metal and organic compound concentrations with mollusc
and polychaete abundances along the same Ruston-Pt. Defiance
transect noted above.
These four transects included stations with the most extensive toxicity
and benthic effects observed in Commencement Bay. Sediment toxicity tended
to correlate better with contaminant concentrations than did benthic effects.
3.2 PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
Results of this study and previous investigations have shown that
various inorganic and organic contaminants are bioaccumulated by Commencement
Bay fishes. Hie objective of the public health assessment was to determine
if there are significant health risks associated with consumption of fish
and shellfish from Commencement Bay. This assessment considered only one
exposure route (i.e., eating non-salmonid fish, fish livers, and crabs)
from Commencement Bay. Other possible exposure routes (drinking water,
inhalation) were not included in this assessment.
English sole and cancrid crabs were selected for these analyses because
of their availability in the project area and because they live in close
association with contaminated bottom sediments. Although English sole
are not commonly caught by local fishermen, they were used in the present
study to provide a conservative estimate of the maximum contaminant levels
that would be expected in edible tissues of any fish species captured in
Commencement Bay. Data from a previous study (Gahler et al. 1982) have
shown that concentrations of PCBs and arsenic are two to three times higher
in English sole than in commonly caught fish such as walleye pollock, Pacific
hake, and Pacific cod.
Available data from a catch/consumption survey Indicated that 15,220
persons may consume fish from Commencement Bay. Of this total exposed
population, only 30 persons were estimated to eat 1 lb of fish per day.
This was the highest estimated consumption rate in the survey. Approximately
82 percent of the exposed population (12,500 persons) consumes less than
1 lb of fish per month. For the risk assessment, maximum Individual risks
of contracting cancer were calculated for the maximum consumption rate,
as well as for the more commonly experienced lower consumption rates.
Individual risks are expressed mathematically as negative exponents. In
such expressions, 10"6 would represent a one in one million chance of
contracting cancer during a lifetime exposure (i.e., 70 years) to the
contaminated fish flesh.
49

-------
The Commencement Bay public health assessment is highly conservative
in that it tends to overestimate any effects of seafood consumption. The
following conservative factors are incorporated into the approach:
•	U.S. EPA1s method estimates upper bounds of carcinogenic
risk
•	Esposure is assumed to occur continuously for a lifetime
(70 years)
•	English sole are generally more contaminated than commonly
caught sport fish
•	The maximum consumption rate of 1 lb/day is probably an
overestimate. This rate would require the consumption of
two or more meals of Commencement Bay fish every day for
a lifetime.
This conservative approach is used because of the overall importance of
public health concerns and because of the many uncertainties in the method-
ology. Given these factors, it is prudent to use such a conservative approach,
recognizing that the predicted public health effects are most likely over-
estimated .
At the maximum estimated consumption rate of 1 lb/day of fish from
Commencement Bay, the estimated individual lifetime risks would exceed
one in one million (10~6) for six carcinogens: PCBs, arsenic, hexachloro-
benzene, hexachlorobutadiene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and tetrachloro-
ethene. At a fish consumption rate of 1 lb/month, only PCBs and arsenic
would exceed the one in one million (10"6) risk level. For a given consunption
rate, estimated individual risks from consuming Commencement Bay fish muscle
would exceed those for consuming Carr Inlet (reference area) fish for three
of the above six carcinogens: PCBs, bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, and
tetrachloroethene. For PCBs, individual risks from consuming Commencement
Bay fish would be about five times higher than those from consuming Carr
Inlet fish. For arsenic, estimated individual risks from consuming Commencement
Bay fish and Carr Inlet fish would be similar, although Carr Inlet risks
would be slightly higher.
Fish tissue concentrations, and hence the associated risk for consuming
fish, varied somewhat among the Commencement Bay waterways. For PCBs,
the suspected carcinogen representing the greatest individual risk, fish
consumed from City and Hylebos Waterways represent the greatest risk.
Based on PCB contamination, risks associated with eating f1sh from Hylebos
and City Waterways are about 10 times higher than for fish from Carr Inlet.
Much of the shore fishing in Commencement Bay occurs on piers along
the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. Therefore, contamination of fish in
this area is of special concern relative to possible public health impacts.
The available data indicate that risks associated with PCB contamination
of fish tissues decrease with distance from City Waterway towards Pt. Defiance.
Moreover, estimated Individual risks for all chemicals in the Pt. Defiance
area are similar to those 1n the Carr Inlet reference area.
50

-------
A primary objective of the Commencement Bay project was to determine
if the levels of fish tissue contamination resulted in the prediction of
one or more excess cancer cases in the exposed population over a 70-year
period due to ingested tissue. This assessment was accomplished by applying
the individual risks for each carcinogen to the exposed population estimated
from the catch/consumption survey. The highest estimated incidence of
cancer in the exposed population of 15,220 persons is between one and two
cases in 70 years, and is attributable to PCBs causing cancer of the liver.
All available data indicate that the chemical group associated with the
highest individual lifetime cancer risk is PCBs. The next highest risk
is attributable to arsenic. Only for PCBs, however, does the estimated
number of cancer cases in the exposed population exceed one, even with
the conservative approach taken in this assessment (e.g., continuous exposure
for 70 years). Arsenic exposure is estimated to result in fewer than one
case over 70 years, and it is the second highest in individual risk. Therefore,
aside from PCBs, no other chemical is estimated to produce cancer in the
exposed population under the circumstances presented in this assessment.
The risk assessment was also conducted for consumption of crabs in
Conmencement Bay. For PCBs and arsenic, estimated individual risks for
eating crabs were approximately the same as those for eating fish. Only
PCBs, however, resulted in a higher risk (about three times higher) for
eating Commencement Bay crabs when compared with Carr Inlet crabs.
Three noncarcinogens were present in fish muscle at levels that would
cause exposure to exceed the U.S. EPA Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) at
the 1 lb/day consumption rate: antimony, lead, and mercury. Tissue concen-
trations of these chemicals were very similar among project areas and at
the Carr Inlet reference site. Therefore, the ADIs would be exceeded at
both Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet for the 1 lb/day consumption rate.
Limiting consumption of fish to one-half pound per day would result in
an exposure below the ADI for all of these chemicals. However, health
risks at this consumption rate would still exist due to the presence of
carcinogens in these fishes.
For consumption of crab muscle at the maximum rate of 1 lb/day, calculated
exposures exceeded the ADI for the following contaminants: antimony, lead,
silver, zinc, and mercury. For these metals, the ADIs were exceeded for
crabs from both Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet. For most of the metals,
the differences between Commencement Bay and Carr Inlet were slight. By
limiting consumption of crabs from either Commencement Bay or Carr Inlet
to I lb/week, all noncarcinogenic exposures would be below the ADI.
Twenty-one chemicals were detected in at least one fish liver composite
sample from Commencement Bay. Four of the detected chemicals are considered
to Se carcinogens: PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, hexachlorobutadiene, and arsenic.
At the maximum consumption rate of 0.12 lb/day, consumption of PCBs in
fish liver would result in a predicted individual lifetime risk of two
in one hundred (2xl0~2), This risk is higher than the corresponding risk
associated with consumption of PCBs in fish muscle tissue, six in one thousand
(6x10-3)t because of the much higher PCB concentrations in fish livers.
The predicted risk level for PCBs in Commencement Bay fish livers is about
15 times higher than the corresponding risk for fish livers from Carr Inlet.
51

-------
Maximum estimated carcinogenic risks for hexachlorobenzene and hexachloro-
butadiene in fish liver were about the same as the corresponding risks
for fish muscle [i.e., one in ten thousand (10"4) and one in one hundred
thousand (10-5^ respectively]. All other estimated carcinogenic risks
were much lower than these levels.
All calculated exposures for the noncarcinogens present in fish livers
from Commencement Bay were less than 10 percent of the corresponding ADIs.
Therefore, even at the maximum consumption rate of 0.12 lb/day, no human
health effects attributable to these noncarcinogens would be expected.
Of the chemicals detected in fish livers from Commencement Bay, PCBs
pose the greatest potential risk to public health. Although the maximum
estimated risk of one in one hundred (10~2) is associated with a high consunp-
tion rate, even much less frequent consumption of fish livers would result
in a substantial predicted risk.
As a result of the public health assessment, the Tacoma-Pierce County
Health Department, in conjunction with the Department of Social and Health
Services, issued a revised health advisory. The advisory recommended against
the consumption of fish from the Commencement Bay waterways. The advisory
also recommended that consumption of fish caught from the southwest shore
of Corrmencement Bay and in Carr Inlet be limited.
3.3 PRIORITIZATION OF PROBLEM AREAS AND CONTAMINANTS
The objective of this part of the Commencement Bay Remedial Investigation
was to identify and prioritize problem areas and problem contaminants.
This prioritization resulted from the decision-making approach described
in Section 2.2.1.
An important part of the decision-making process was the development
of action assessment matrices for study areas and segments. The action
assessment matrix for the eight Commencement Bay study areas is shown in
Table 7. This matrix represents a characterization of the largest scale
of contamination and effects considered in this study. Variables are averaged
across all stations within each study area. Similar matrices without fish
pathology and bioaccumulation results were constructed for waterway segments
shown in Figure 5 (Section 3.1.1). Values listed 1n the matrix represent
elevations above reference (EAR), and those enclosed by a box were significant.
Chemical significance was defined as an exceedance of the maximum concentration
observed in any Puget Sound reference area. Biological significance was
based on statistical criteria and an experimentwise error rate of 0.05.
Based on average values over each study area (e.g., Hylebos Waterway)
the following conclusions are evident:
•	Several organic compounds were significant In all study
areas.
•	Metals contamination was significant in all areas except
St. Paul Waterway.
52

-------
TABLE 7. ACTION ASSESSMENT MATRIX OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION, SEDIMENT TOXICITY,
AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS INDICES FOR COMMENCEMENT BAY STUDY AREAS
STUDY AREA ELEVATIONS8
VARIABLE
Hylebos Blair Sltcum Milwaukee St. Paul Middle City Ruston
REFERENCE
VALUEb
SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
Sb
As
Cd
Cu+Pb+Zn
Hg
N1
4.0
rm
1.9
4.8
< 3.7
0.7
4-Methylphenol
Benzyl alcohol
Benzoic acid
Dlbenzofuran
N1trosodlphenyl amine
Tetrachloroethene
SEOIMENT TOXICITY
AmpMpod bloassay
Oyster bloassay
INFAUKAC
Total benthos
Polychaetes
Molluscs
Crustaceans
FISH PATHOLOGY
Lesion prevalence
FISH BIOACCUHULATION
Copper
Mercury
2.1
2.2
< 0.6
1.9
1.2
_AL
rxr
TT
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Phenol
< 6.4

< 5.2

4.3
Pentachlorophenol
1.7

< 2.3

< 2.1
LPAH
<45.

<28.

<68.
HPAH
<120.

<42,

<65.
Chlor. benzenes
9.9
< 4.4
2.6
Chlor. butadienes
130.
l< i.l 1
< 2.4
Phthalates
4.0
< l.i
< 6.56
PC 8s
<48.
l< f.JI
7.6
<12.

10.
< 2.2

2.4
< 3.2
< 0.5
25.

73.
< 2.4

< 7.3
2.9
XT
3.6
3.6
1.7
HTT
3.8
0.8
l< 2.1 ,
~or
<	2.5
<	1.2
<	0.66
rm
3L.
u 1.0
3 C
0.7
0.4
1.4
"Q~l
2.4
TT
0.8
0.7
1.1
0.4
4.2
2.2
1.7
5.5
5.1
0.8
-Hi.
U 1.9
<60.

<73.
<68.

<27,
< 0.56
13.

1300.
3.4

< 6.7
EE
AL_
U 1.2
U 1.0
TT
TT
1.9
1.5
JT
TT
5.6
mr
t!t7
1.0
0.93
0.41
Phthalates
21.

11.
PCBs*
9.2

7.0
ODE
3.8

5,1
4.0 I
X80
0.33
0.53
T51
TT
2.3
1.6
TT~
3.6
TT
3.4
9.1
U77T
0.19
0.41
1.1
1.7
<110.
&
1.4
1.8
1.5
0.7
TT
4.6
1.0
1.3
0.19
0.41
4.7
1.7
TT
2.6
0.7
0.8
I 3.6 I | 2.51 I 3.5 I I 3.7 I 2.7 I 5.7 I
1.7
3.8
0.82
4.1
6.7
TF
3.9
TT
J3J
TTF
0.6
0.5
1.2
0.7
2.1
6,2
2.5
"06
0.19
5.6
1.9
2.9
110.	ppb
3370.	ppb
950.	ppb
35000.	ppb
40.	ppb
1740.	ppb
<	33
U	33.
<	41.
<	79.
U	21.
U	62.
<	280.
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
ppb
6.0	ppb
13. ppb
10. ppb
140. ppb
3.7 ppb
4.1	ppb
10. ppb
9.3 X
13.0 I
6.7 X
U	38.
U	55.
<	54.
<	74.
ppb
Ppb
ppb
ppb
36. ppb
l.B ppb
* Boxed numbers represent elevations of chemical concentrations that exceed all Puget Sound reference area values,
and statistically significant toxicity and biological effects at the P<0.05 significance level compared with reference
conditions. The "U" qualifier indicates the chemical was undetected and the detection limit is shown. The ¦<" qualifier
Indicates the chemical was undetected at one or more stations. The detection limit 1s used 1n the calculations.
b Elevation above reference (EAR) values shown for each area are based on Carr Inlet reference values for each variable
except for benthos (see footnote d).
e Infauna EAR are based on the elevation 1n biological effects represented by reductions In Infauna) abundances
relative to reference conditions. EAR for all other variables reflect an Increase in the value of the variable at
Commencement Bay compared with reference conditions.
d Different benthic reference values were used depending on sediment grain size.
e locations where PCB concentrations are significantly elevated also pose a significant health risk to the exposed
population (see Table 6.8 guidelines).
53

-------
•	Blair and Milwaukee Waterways had the least chemical contami-
nation based on number and magnitude of significantly elevated
chemical indices.
•	Sediment toxicity was statistically elevated (P<0.05) in
all areas except Middle Waterway, as indicated by one or
both bioassays.
•	Sediment toxicity as indicated by both bioassays was statis-
tically elevated only in Hylebos and City Waterways.
•	Benthic effects as indicated by depressions in infaunal
abundances were statistically significant (P<0.05) in Hylebos,
Sitcum, St. Paul, Middle, and City Waterways.
•	Liver lesions were significantly elevated (P<0.05) in all
study areas except St. Paul and City Waterways and the Ruston-
Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
•	Bioaccumulation of at least one chemical in English sole
muscle tissue was significantly elevated (P<0.05) in all
study areas except Middle Waterway.
Evaluation of waterway segments defined in Section 3.1.1 indicated
that contamination, toxicity, and benthic effects were heterogeneous within
the large study areas (i.e., those areas containing more than one segment).
For example, although Hylebos Waterway as a whole exhibited the largest
number of significant indicators, and chemical contamination was evident
throughout the waterway, there was no significant toxicity in Segments
HYS3 or HYS4, and no significant benthic effects in Segments HYS3 or HYS6.
In general, chemical contamination in Hylebos Waterway was most extensive
at the head of the waterway, with additional high values for selected chemicals
in Segment HYS5 near the mouth of the waterway. Relatively low levels
of chemical contamination were observed in Blair Waterway as compared to
the other areas. These lower contaminant levels corresponded to a lack
of significant toxicity or benthic effects indicators when averaged over
any segment. Within City Waterway, contamination, toxicity, and benthic
effects were highest near the head (Segment CIS1) and within the Wheeler-
Osgood branch of the waterway (Segment CIS2). The mouth of City Waterway
(Segment CIS3) was comparable in number and magnitude of significant indicators
to Secpient RSS1 along the eastern Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. The extreme
metals contamination and high level of organic compound contamination within
Segment RSS2 corresponded to the largest number and highest average magnitude
of toxicity and benthic effects indicators along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline.
Action-level guidelines specified in the decision-making approach
were applied to the action assessment matrices to determine problem areas.
One of the guidelines specified that if significant elevation in any three
of the five indicators (sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity, infauna,
fish pathology, bioaccumulation) occurred, then a problem area was indicated.
Use of this guideline resulted in the designation of problem areas in all
Commencement Bay study areas and segments. Several of the segments within
the larger study areas met this criterion only when study-area wide values
54

-------
for fish pathology and bioaccumulation were considered. According to the
guidelines, significant bioaccumulation of PCBs in Hylebos, Blair, Sitcum,
and City Waterways warrants source identification based solely on the prediction
of possible significant health effects.
Among the large study areas (i.e., Hylebos, Blair, and City Waterways,
and the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline) six segments within these areas
had significant EAR for all three of the site-specific indicators (contam-
ination, sediment toxicity, and benthic effects), including:
•	Segments HYS1, HYS2, and HYS5 in Hylebos Waterway
•	Segments CIS1 and CIS2 in City Waterway
•	Segment RSS2 along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
Of the small study areas, Sitcum and St. Paul Waterways had significant
EAR for these indicators.
A problem area was also indicated in Segment HYS4 of Hylebos Waterway,
because mollusc abundances were depressed more than 95 percent relative
to reference conditions (i.e., EAR >20). According to the guidelines, this
condition indicated a problem area regardless of the values for other indi-
cators.
Because all study areas and segments exceeded the action-level guidelines
for further definition of problem areas for source evaluation, an independent
ranking procedure was applied to the data to prioritize study areas and
segments. Results of the ranking procedure are presented for study areas
in Table 8 (for explanation of ranking procedures, see Volume 1). F50 percent mortality) were also used, where
available, to define problem area boundaries. The interpolation of chemical
concentrations was attempted between stations because of the often patchy
distribution of problem sediments. However, when no data were available
for nearshore subtidal and intertidal sediments, the problem areas were
assumed to extend to the shore.
The spatial extent and general priority for source evaluation of all
problem areas identified in Commencement Bay are summarized in Figure 11.
At the highest priority sites, all three site-specific indicators were
significant. Of the 21 problem areas, eight received the highest priority
55

-------
TABLE 8. RANKING OF STUDY AREAS BASEO ON MAGNITUDE AND
NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT CONTAMINANTS, SEDIMENT TOXICITY,
AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Sediment Contamination	Toxicity/Biological Effects
Ruston	(Highest) Sitcum
Hylebos	Hylebos
City	City
Middle	Blair
Sitcum	Middle
St. Paul	Milwaukee
Blair	St. Paul
Milwaukee	(Lowest) Ruston
56

-------
SCORE"
SEGMENT
SCORE*
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
e
7
6

SEGMENT
HYS2
SIS1, CIS2
HYS5, RSS2
HYS4, CIS1, HYS1
SPS1
MDS1, CIS3
HYS6
HYS3, BLS1, RSS3
BLS2, BLS3
MIS1
RSS1, BLS4

HYS2, CIS2

RSS2, SIS1, HYS1
1: V ft*
14
13
12
11
10
9
8


»g;i;
ilttllilllll

llii
fiiiillii
CIS3
MDS1, HYS3, BLS1
RSS3, RSS1, MIS1, HYS6
BLS2, BLS4
AVERAGE
RANK
METHOD
MAXIMUM
RANK
METHOD
•SCORES ARE SUMS FOR CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL INDICATORS
FROM TABLES 610 AND 6.11
"SCORES ARE SUMMARIZED IN TABLE 6.12
Figure 10. Relative ranking of study area segments by average
and maximum observed contamination toxicity, and
biological effects.
57

-------
in
00
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
mi HIGHEST priority problem areas
IHH! SECOND PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS
POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS
(NO CONFIRMING BIOLOGICAL
DAIA AVAILABLE)
POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREA BY
HISTORICAL DATA ONLY
• CHEMICALS EXCEED APPARENT
EFFECTS THRESHOLD
CHEMICALS BELOW APPARENT
EFFECTS THRESHOLD
1
KaiMr Wen
4000
I FEET
1000
Figure 11. Definition and prioritization of Commencement Bay
problem areas.

-------
HIGHEST PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS
§111 SECOND PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS
POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS
(NO CONFIRMING BIOLOGICAL
DATA AVAILABLE)
POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREA BY
HISTORICAL DATA ONLY
CHEMICALS EXCEED APPARENT
EFFECTS THRESHOLD
RUSTON
COMMENCEMENT
BAY
CHEMICALS BELOW APPARENT
EFFECTS THRESHOLD
4000
J	I FEET
	| METERS
tooo
TACOMA
Figure 11. (Continued).

-------
for source evaluation, including three within Hylebos Waterway, two within
City Waterway, and one within Sitcum Waterway, one within St. Paul Waterway,
and one along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. The second priority sites
are "hot spots" where chemical contaminants exceeded an AET, and both bioassays
were significant ^r multiple benthic depressions were observed within the
problem area. Four problem areas received second priority for source eval-
uation, including one within each of Hylebos, Middle, and City Waterways,
and at Station RS-13 along along the eastern Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline.
Third priority sites include those where chemical contaminants exceeded
an AET, and one of the bioassays was significant or. a single benthic taxon
was significantly depressed. The lowest priority sites for source evaluation
include those areas where no sediment toxicity or benthic effects were
observed but where AETs applied to available chemical data suggested that
toxicity or benthic effects would have been found had biological data been
collected.
Chemicals of concern were defined in Section 3.1.1 as chemicals with
concentrations exceeding all Puget Sound reference conditions. These chemicals
were not necessarily considered problem chemicals because most sediments
in Commencement Bay were contaminated above reference conditions and only
some of these sediments exhibited toxicity or benthic effects. Although
source evaluations may be conducted on all chemicals of concern, it is
important to further evaluate these contaminants to identify chemicals
posing the greatest environmental hazard. This further prioritization
of chemicals is based on the toxicity and benthic AET identified in Section
3.1.4. Because these AET were defined as the contaminant concentrations
above which toxicity or benthic effects were always observed, chemicals
present above these thresholds were considered problem chemicals.
Problem chemicals were further prioritized into three categories:
•	Priority 1: Present above an AET with distribution corresponding
to observed toxicity or benthic effects gradients
•	Priority 2: Present above an AET at more than one station
in the problem area with no apparent relationship to toxicity
or benthic effects gradients, or insufficient effects data
were available for evaluation of gradients
t Priority 3: Present above an AET at only one station within
the problem area.
Priority 1 chemicals for each of the segments containing the eight highest
priority problem areas are listed in Table 9. Six of the eight problem
areas contained Priority 1 problem chemicals. Within the Priority 1 groups
for each problem area, chemicals are listed 1n descending order of their
"toxicity significance factors." These factors represent a combined index
of the literature values of the potential mammalian toxicity and the potential
for contaminant uptake by marine organisms. All Priority 1 chemicals are
recommended for source evaluation. No Priority 1 chemicals were identified
for the remaining 12 problem areas. For 10 of these areas, there were
not enough stations to establish correspondence between toxicity or benthic
effects and sediment contamination.
60

-------
TABLE 9. POTENTIAL PROBLEM CHEMICALS IN PROBLEM AREAS
Segment
Containing
Problem Area®
(in rank order)	Potential Problem Chemicals*1
CIS1
HYS2
CIS2
Priority 1: Hg, Zn, Pb [T0C
-------
TABLE 9. (Continued)
HYS5
Priority 1: PCBs
Priority 2: HCBD, chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated ethenes
[pentachlorocyclopentane isomer]Cf Pb
Priority 3: Hg, HPAHBf Cue. Zne, LPAHe, phenol [benzyl
alcohol, biphenyl]C
HYS4
(hotspot)
BLS2
(no action)
CIS3
(hotspot)
MDS1
HYS3
(no action)
BLS1
(no action)
RSS3
(hot spot)
RSS1
(hot spots)
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1:
Priority 2:
Priority 3:
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
none
none
HPAHe, PCBse, HCBD, LPAHe, N-nitrosodiphenylamine
[benzyl alcohol, dibenzofurane, pentachloro-
cyclopentane isomer, methypyrenes]c
none
dichlorobenzenes, N-nitrosodiphenylamine, 4-methyl-
phenol, phenol
As, HCBD, pentachlorophenol, 2-methyl phenol,
oil & grease
none
HPAH, LPAH
PCBse, Zne, phenol [biphenyl, dibenzothiophene]C
none
Hg, Cu
HPAH, As, Zn, dichlorobenzenes, LPAH, pentachloro-
phenol, Pb, 4-methylphenol, phenol [dibenzo-
thiophene, diterpenoid hydrocarbons, methylpyrenes]c
none
PCBs, As, Zn
n-Nitrosodiphenyl amine
no toxiclty/effects observed at stations tested
none
HPAH, phenol
none
As, Cd, Cu, Zn, Pb, N-nitrosodiphenylamine, Sb
none
none
none
Station RS-13 hotspot: HPAH, dichlorobenzenes,
LPAH, 2-methyl phenol, 4-methylphenol [dibenzofuran,
biphenyl, methylphenanthrenes, retene, methyl-
pyrenes]c
Station RS-15 hotspot: As, HCBD, Cd, Ni, Cu,
Zn, phenol (these chemicals exceed AET at RS-15
only after normalization to percent fine-grained
material or to organic carbon content)
62
-------
TABLE 9.
(Continued)
MIS1	No chemicals found above apparent effect levels at stations
(no action) sampled in Milwaukee Waterway
HYS6
(no action)
BLS3
(no action)
BL54
(no action)
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
no toxicity/effects observed at station tested
none
phthalate esters
no toxicity/effects observed at stations tested
none
pentachlorophenol, 2-methylphenol, 4-methylphenol
no biological data available
none
phthalate esters
Problem areas encompass all stations sampled in 1984 only in Segments HY
SI, SIS1, CIS1, RSS2, RSS3, and possibly MDS1 (Station MD-12 in this segment
was close to apparent effect thresholds for several chemicals).
b Concentrations of these chemicals exceeded an apparent effect threshold
(by various normalizations) in sediment from at least one station in the
defined problem area. Chemicals are listed in each priority group in descending
order of their calculated toxicity significance factor, if available.
Stations with and without biological data area included. Priority 1 chemicals
showed a concentration gradient with toxicity or biological effects gradients.
Priority 2 chemicals were above apparent effect thresholds at more than
one station within the problem area, but either no gradient corresponding
to that for toxicity/effects was observed, or no biological data were available
to assess gradients. Priority 3 chemicals were above apparent effect thresholds
at one station only within the problem area.
c Toxicity significant factors were not available for the chemicals listed
in brackets. These chemicals have not been prioritized relative to other
chemicals in the same priority group.
d TOC concentrations did not exceed an AET 1n the problem area defined
in Segnent CIS1 but the TOC concentration gradient corresponded with observed
changes in effects (e.g., sediment toxicity). This correspondence may
result from the covarying distribution of TOC with other contaminants,
Including lead and zinc.
e Chemical elevated above an AET 1n the defined problem area only on the
basis of historical data.
63
-------
Priority 2 chemicals were identified in all eight of the highest priority
problem areas. Priority 2 chemicals were also identified in three of the
lower priority problem areas. Priority 2 chemicals include:
•	Cadmium, nickel, and antimony
•	Hexachlorobutadiene, chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated ethenes,
phenol, 2-methylphenol, n-nitrosodiphenylamine, dibenzofuran,
and selected phthalate esters
t Selected tentatively identified compounds.
Priority 2 chemicals are recommended for source evaluation where sufficient
spatial data are available to indicate sources.
Priority 3 chemicals not already identified in the Priority 2 group
included pentachlorophenol, aniline, and selected tentatively identified
compounds. These chemicals are not recommended for source evaluations
unless their occurrence at a single station in a problem area is associated
with a potential source that is not necessarily indicated by other problem
chemicals.
3.4 SOURCE INVESTIGATIONS
Source investigations were conducted for all of the highest priority
and second priority problem areas identified in Figure 11. These 12 problem
areas are located in Hylebos (4 areas), St. Paul (1 area), Middle (1 area),
City (3 areas), and Sitcum Waterways (1 area) and along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline (2 areas). Some of these problem areas are adjacent to each
other and are not distinguished in Figure 11 (e.g., two high priority problem
areas near the head of Hylebos Waterway). Each area is discussed in the
following section. Detailed source investigations have not been conducted
for the remaining lower priority problem areas shown in Figure 11 and these
areas are not discussed.
The contaminants of concern subjected to source evaluations were specific
to each problem area. Potential sources that have been evaluated for the
contaminants of concern include contaminated groundwater, surface water
runoff, spills, and industrial discharges. It should be noted that most
of the contaminants of concern discussed in this report are not typically
regulated under existing NPDES permits.
3.4.1 Hylebos Waterway
Source identifications were conducted for nine contaminants or contaminant
groups for the four problem areas identified in Hylebos Waterway. Of these,
one or more sources could be identified for chlorinated hydrocarbons, aromatic
hydrocarbons, and metals. The source or sources of PCBs in Hylebos Waterway
could not be clearly identified as historical or ongoing. There is evidence
that exposure of historically contaminated sediments may be contributing
to the patchy distribution of PCBs in Hylebos Waterway.
Occidental Chemical Corporation is implicated as the major source
of chlorinated hydrocarbons (chlorinated benzenes, butadienes, and ethenes)
64
-------
to Hylebos Waterway. Historically, the chlorinated organic compounds have
entered the waterway via direct discharge from the chlorine production
facilities and the solvents plant. They have also entered the waterway
via groundwater as a consequence of spills and on-site waste disposal.
At present, the chlorinated ethenes, benzenes and butadienes are entering
the waterway principally through groundwater and, to a lesser extent, through
the main outfal1.
Pennwalt Corporation appears to be a current source of chlorinated
ethenes, arsenic, copper, lead, and zinc. The chlorinated ethenes are
presently being discharged to the waterway through the main plant outfall
and through groundwater that has become contaminated as a result of past
on-site waste disposal. Arsenic is presently entering the waterway via
the main outfall and through groundwater that has become contaminated as
a result of on-site disposal of a sodium arsenite pesticide.
Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical has historically been a major source
of high molecular weight PAH to Hylebos Waterway, principally via discharge
through Kaiser Ditch. Discharge of PAH through this ditch has historically
been much greater than it is at present, but there is evidence that some
release of PAH continues. Kaiser Ditch is also a source of arsenic and
metals. The relative contributions of Kaiser Aluminum and other properties
bordering the ditch are unknown.
Hylebos Creek is an ongoing source of arsenic, copper, lead, and zinc. The
U.S. Gypsum landfill and the B&L Landfill are major contributors to the
arsenic load in Hylebos Creek, although the arsenic contribution from the
U.S. Gypsim landfill should decrease with time as a result of recent remedial
action. Fife Ditch is the major contributor of zinc to Hylebos Creek.
The six unpaved or partially paved log sort yards bordering Hylebos
Waterway are sources of arsenic, copper, lead, and zinc because of the
use of ASARCO slag as ballast. High concentrations of these metals were
present in the runoff from the yards. As a group, these log sort yards
contribute approximately 11 lb/day of arsenic and 11 lb/day of metals (copper,
lead, and zinc) via surface runoff (contribution of Dunlap Towing not quantified
nor included in total loading). Additional loading from the log sort yards
via groundwater could be significant but is unquantified. U.S. EPA acute
water quality criteria were exceeded for zinc and copper in Hylebos Waterway
near two of the log sort yards.
3.4.2 St. Paul Waterway
Evaluation of contaminant sources for the problem area identified
off the mouth of St. Paul Waterway indicates that Champion International
(formerly St. Regis Paper Company) is the major source of the contaminants
of concern, including alkylated phenols, methoxyphenols, copper, and organic
enrichment. Levels of copper measured in the water column in this area
have been reported to sometimes exceed water quality criteria. The toxicity
and benthic effects AET for copper concentrations in sediment samples was
not exceeded. The proximity of the most contaminated sediments to the
firm's main outfall indicates that this discharge is the route of contaminant
input. The source of these contaminants is ongoing and none of the contaminants
of concern resulted strictly from historical discharges.
65
-------
3.4.3 Middle Waterway
Of the six contaminants or contaminant groups of concern in Middle
Waterway, possible sources for three (pentachlorophenol, copper, mercury)
have been identified. It is possible that the dichlorobenzenes and PAH
are entering the waterway via the storm sewer system or possibly one of
the other discharges at the head of the waterway, but the ultimate source
or sources within the drainage area could not be identified.
Five industries have been identified as possible sources based on
their possible use of products containing the contaminants of concern and
their potential discharge to areas of the waterway showing the highest
sediment contaminant concentrations. These industries include:
•	Champion International (formerly St. Regis Paper Company) -
potential unconfirmed source of pentachlorophenol via the
storm sewer system (may account for high sediment concentrations
near the drain at the head of the waterway)
•	Coast Craft - potential unconfirmed source of pentachlorophenol
(used as a wood preservative) by spillage or other unauthorized
discharge
•	Cook's Marine Specialties (formerly Peterson Boat), Foss
Tug, and Marine Industries Northwest - potential sources
of copper and mercury by release of antifouling paints,
sandblasting material, or other products used in ship repair
•	Paxport Mills - potential source of metals and organic compounds
from a wood waste and ASARCO slag mixture used as fill in
a salmon enhancement area near the waterway mouth.
3.4.4 City Waterway
Source investigations were conducted for three problem areas and nine
contaminants or contaminant groups of concern in City Waterway. Several
industries and storm drains have been identified as probable contributors
of metals, PAH, or total organic carbon (TOC) to City Waterway. Sources
of dibenzofuran are presumed to be the same as those for PAH. No sources
were conclusively identified for PCBs, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, or 1,2-dichloro-
benzene.
The Nalley Valley and south Tacoma drains are the major contributors
of many of the contaminants of concern to City Waterway. They are ongoing
sources of all metals of concern in the waterway, contributing 87, 88,
and 81 percent of the quantified loading of lead, copper, and zinc, respec-
tively. One or both of these drains is also the major historical and poten-
tially ongoing source of organic material to the waterway. Finally, the
two drains are probably also a major ongoing source of PAH to City Waterway.
Discharge from the 15th Street drain contributes metals and PAH to
the waterway, but in much lower amounts than the two storm drains at the
66
-------
head of the waterway because of its much smaller drainage basin and lower
average flows.
Hygrade Foods and/or its predecessor, Carsten's Packing Company, appear
to be responsible for historical organic enrichment in Wheeler-Osgood Waterway.
Both were major dischargers of organic material. The potential of continuing
periodic discharges from Hygrade Foods is possible, as is natural decay
of accumulated organic debris in the anoxic basin. Storm drains to Wheeler-
Osgood Waterway are sources of copper, lead, and zinc. There may be other
sources of metals to the waterway as well. Possible sources of 4-methylphenol
to the Wheel er-Osgood Waterway are groundwater from the Tar Pits, and degrada-
tion of wood chip debris in the sediments.
Martinac Shipbuilding is a probable source of copper and zinc to City
Waterway. Sandblasting and antifouling paints are suspected contributors
to the contamination. North Pacific Plywood, Puget Sound Plywood, the
Tar Pits, and the 23rd and A Street coal gasification site are all possible
sources of 4-methylphenol to City Waterway. Input from North Pacific Plywood
may have occurred via groundwater or from spills of phenolic glues which
entered the storm sewer leading to the 15th Street drain. Glue wastes
from Puget Sound Plywood may be contributing to elevated sediment levels
of 4-methylphenol found near the mouth of City Waterway. The 23rd and
A Street site and possibly the Tar Pits are potential ongoing sources of
4-methylphenol and LPAH through groundwater.
D Street petroleum facilities contribute low molecular weight aromatic
hydrocarbons to City Waterway via shallow groundwater that seeps out of
the bank near that facility. It is apparent that the problem has been
ongoing for at least 12 years. Sediments near the D Street site are contam-
inated by PAH characteristic of combustion sources, while the groundwater
is contaminated mainly by petroleum compounds. Therefore, no relationship
could be established between the chemical contamination of groundwater
and contamination of sediments in the area. The D Street facilities do
not appear to be a source of sediment HPAH contamination near the waterway
mouth, although the actual source or sources of these compounds have not
been identified.
3.4.5 Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline
Source investigations were conducted at two problem areas along the
Ruston-Pt. Defiance shoreline: a single-station hot spot and a larger
area adjacent to the ASARCO smelter. Eleven contaminants or contaminant
groups were subjected to source evaluations.
At the hot spot, no sources (including nearby properties and drains)
were identified for the contaminants identified in sediments. It is possible
that historical discharges from a local drain may have contributed to the
contamination.
With the possible exception of PCBs, sediment contamination near the
ASARCO facility can be attributed to the ASARCO property. The firm has
been documented to be a major source of arsenic and metals, with the plant's
three NPDES-permitted outfalls alone contributing 780 lb/day of arsenic
and metals to Commencement Bay. There have also been many docunented releases
67
-------
of fuels that have contributed to the PAH contamination now observed in
sediments of the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. Transformers containing
PCBs have been used on the ASARCO property. While there have been no documented
spills from these transformers, the spatial gradient of PCB contamination
in the bay sediments suggests that releases have occurred. Tacoma City
Light maintains an electrical substation near the ASARCO property. Any
past spills from this facility could also potentially be responsible for
the contamination of bay sediments observed, particularly near the ASARCO
north outfal1.
Although ASARCO is the major source of contaminants to the problem
area, for most of the contaminants it is difficult to determine if the
major input has occurred through any one route. There are several routes
by which contaminants may migrate from the ASARCO property into the bay:
•	Outfalls - There are four outfalls which serve the ASARCO
property, three of which are NPDES-permitted. Their effluents
originate from a variety of sources, including stormwater
runoff, groundwater seepage, noncontact cooling water, contact
cooling water (pre-1976), and spills. The three discharges
that have been sampled have all been found to be major sources
of arsenic and metals.
•	Groundwater - Much of the ASARCO property has been created
by the dunping of molten slag into Commencement Bay. Movement
of groundwater through this slag, promoted by tidal action,
may be a significant source of arsenic and metals to the
bay. Chronic discharge of acidic wastewater may have enhanced
leaching of metals from the slag. The historical practice
of spreading out molten slag on the ground surface and irrigating
it to promote cooling may also have contributed to arsenic
and metal contamination via groundwater.
•	Atmospheric Emissions - In-plant emissions may contribute
to stormwater runoff or groundwater contamination.
With the recent closure of the copper smelting operations at ASARCO,
a decrease in contaminant release can be expected, particularly in atmospheric
emissions. However, groundwater and discharge of storm water and/or cooling
water through the four outfalls can be expected to continue, introducing
contaminants to the bay for many years to come.
3.4.6 Sitcum Waterway
The Sitcum Waterway source evaluations were conducted on six contaminants
or contaminant groups. Four sources of copper, lead, zinc, and arsenic
to Sitcum Waterway have been identified, all of which are ongoing:
•	The North Corner storm drain (SI-172) is the major source
of arsenic to the Sitcum Waterway, contributing 93 percent
of the total quantified loading. It is also a significant
source of copper, lead, and zinc.
68
-------
•	The elevated metal concentrations along the north shore
are believed to be a result of ore spillage from the Port
of Tacoma ore docks. Copper, lead, and zinc ores are off-
loaded at the facility and spillage is traditionally washed
into the waterway.
•	Drain SI-717, which discharges along the north shore near
the head of the waterway, is a source of copper, lead, and
zinc. The sources of metals to this drain have not been
determined, but may be associated with the Port's ore handling
facilities.
•	Drain SI-176, which discharges on the south shore of the
waterway, is a source of copper, lead, and zinc. The source
of metals to this drain is unknown.
No definite sources could be identified for aromatic hydrocarbons
and dibenzofurans. The area of highest concentrations near the waterway
mouth may have been caused by exposure by dredging of historically contaminated
sediments.
3.5 POTENTIAL REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGIES
Eleven problem areas in five waterways and along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline have been recommended for evaluation of potential remedial action.
Potential sources and corresponding problem contaminants associated with
each source are simnarized in Table 10 for each problem area. Classifications
of potential source control remedial technologies (i.e., direct waste discharge
controls, surface water controls) are identified for each potential source.
Specific source control technologies and their applicability to each problem
area are identified in detail as part of the Commencement Bay Remedial
Investigation (Task 6).
In general, there are three basic sediment management technologies:
removal (dredging), capping, and in situ treatment. In no case is sediment
remedial action recommended until the sources of contamination are effectively
controlled.
Dredging methods are classified as mechanical, hydraulic, or pneumatic.
As part of the Commencement Bay Remedial Investigation the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers prepared an evaluation of alternative dredging methods and
equipment. According to their evaluation, hydraulic dredging is the most
efficient method for removing sediments contaminated with particle-bound
or soluble contaminants, and mechanical dredging is the most efficient
method for removing sediments contaminated with volatile contaminants.
Capping and in situ treatment may have limited applicability within
the Commencement Bay waterways due to the frequent dredging activities
required to maintain adequate water depths for deep draft shipping vessels.
In addition, most in situ treatment/ stabilization methods are new or emerging
technologies whose effectiveness may be unproven. The National Contingency
Plan (NCP) criteria encourage the evaluation of these innovative or advanced
technologies. However, there must be some degree of certainty regarding
the effectiveness of these technologies or they will likely be eliminated
69
-------
by the criteria established for the initial screening process. The feasibility
of dredging, capping, and in situ technologies will be evaluated in the
Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Feasibility Study.
70
-------
TABLE 10. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES, PROBLEM
CONTAMINANTS, POTENTIAL REMEDIAL TECHNOLOGIES, AND DATA NEEDS
FOR THE TEN PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS IN COMMENCEMENT BAY
Segment Containing
Problem Areaa and	Potential Source Control
Potential Sources	Remedial Technologies	Potential Problem Contaminants	Data Needs
e Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline, Sclent 2
- ASARCO
Oirect Mite discharge
controls
Atmospheric release controls
Surface water controls
Contaminated soils managmnent'
Surface Hater treataent
Groundwater controls'
Groundwater treatment'
Priority 1: 1$, As, 1PM
Priority 2: HPAH, PCk, Cd, 11, Cti.
Id, 3b [d1beniofuraii]<
Priority ): dlchlorobenienes,
N>nltrotod1phonylam1ne, 2-«ethyl-
phenol, »-«ethylphenol, phthelate
esters, [l-eiethyl-(2-eiethylethyl)-
bentene, blphenyl, dibonzothlopheno,
¦tthy1phenanthrenes, retene, mathyl-
pyrenes]C
Additional source Identification
for probla chemicals with
unkMMi sources
Priority I: IP*H
Priority 2: HPAH, PCIs [dlbenio-
furan]c
Priority J: dtchlorobenzenes,
N-nltrosodlpfcenylamlne, 2-
methjlphenol, «-«ethylphenol,
phthilate esters, [1-mathyl
(2-methylethyl(benzene, blphenyl,
dlbefttothlophene, methylphenan-
threnes, retene, and methylpyrenes]C
Define contaminant transport
mechanisms and quantify
relative loadings from ASARCO
Determine teachability of
metals In ilag
Determine vertical extent
of cont«1nat1on
o St. Paul Waterway
- Champion International
Direct waste discharge
controls
Surface water controlsf
Surface water treetmentf
Priority l:«-methylphe«ol
Priority 2:[fceniy1 alcohol, I-methyl-
(J-methylethyl)beniene, 2-methoiy-
phenoljc
Priority J:N1, LPAM, Jnaethylphenol,
phenol [blphenyl, d(terpenoid
hydrocarbons, retene, TVS, T0C]c
Additional characterization
of effluent from Chatplon
International for problem
chmetcils and their pro*
cursors
Priority 1: *40thyl phenol
Priority 2: [benzyl alcohol,
l^nethyl ({Hoethylethyl (benieno,
2-otthoxyplwnol]'
Priority J: *1, tP*H,
2-methylphenol, phenol, [blphenyl,
dlterpenoid hydrocarbons, retene]c
Determine spatial and vertical
eitent of contamination
Determine potential recovery
rate for contaminants 1n
problem arte
71
-------
Table 10. (Continued)
e City Waterway Se^eent 1
- Storm drains
CW-2J7, CS-237. end CI-230
Olrect tfste discharge
controls
Surface water controls
Storm lewrr Inspection
end maintenance
Stonweter treatment
Discharge to POTW
Priority 1: Mg, Zn, Pb [TOCOjc
Priority I; HPAH, Cd. HI, Cu. LMH.
24Mthylptienel, »-mtthjlpn*nol,
phthelate esters [otent of
contamination
Industrlal/camerclal source Investi-
gation for PCIs
Mdltlonal source Identification
fer problam contalnants with
unknown sources
Priority 3: IM»1tro(od1phenyl-
»lne. [dlbeniofuran, Inaethyl
(Z-aethylethyljbeiilone, dlterpenold
hydrocarbons]' Lp»H. HPAM
Source Identification within
drainage areas
Determine vertical eitent of
contaelnetlon
72
-------
TABLE 10. (Continued)
• MylebOl Waterway
mt 1
Log tort yard, (unpaved
that used ASARCO llag
it ballast)
Surface water controll
Surface water treatpent
Contaminated soil! managanentf
firoundwater control i'
troundwater treatment'
Priority 1: IMH, *s, to (limited
¦vidence Of a gradient for each
¦1th one or more toilclty/effectl
indicator)
Priority 2: ((wool, Jb
Priority 3: phthalate eiters,
ethylbeniene, tetrachloroethene,
[lylenei, I-awthy 1 -(21)-
benzene, methylpyrenei, TVS]'
Additional source identlf1cat1on
for prooln chmalcals with
unknown wurcot
Priority 1: HPAH
Priority 2: phenol
Priority }: phthalate esters,
ethylbenzene, tetrachloroethene,
[¦ylenes, l-«ethyl(2-methylethyl)
IMKitt, methylpyrenesjc
Hylebos Creole
• Kaiser Ditch
Surface water control!
Surface voter treatment
Contaminated lolll and
londfllled autertali
management
Direct Mite discharge
Surface water control!
Surface water treatment
Contaminated lolll managment
Source Identification wltMn
drainage areai
Determine vertical eitent of
contamination
Conduct Induitrlal/connerclal
source Investigations for PCS!
Additional sediment tempi1ng
for PCS! to determine temporal
trendi ond gradients
Investigate ongoing release
of PAHs from Killer Ditch
i HyleOoi Waterway Segment 2
¦ Ptnnwalt Chemical Corp.
Direct «ite discharge
controli
Surface water control!
Surface water treatment
Contaminated will management
troundwater controlt
troundwater treatment
Priority 1: PCIt
Priority 2: HPAH, *1, As, tetra-
chloroethene [Hgt _ (ue> j„t ne
(intortldal ledlment! only)]
Priority 3: HCBO, chlorinated
Dontenes, phthalite uteri, phenol
[benzyl alcohol, dlbeniothlophene,
¦ethylphenanthrenes, methylpyreneijc
Additional source Identification
for problma chamlcali with
unknown sources
Priority 1: PCIi
Priority 2: HPAH, *1, [Hg«, Cu«
In*. Pb«]
Priority 3: HCID, chlorinated
benienei, phthalate eiteri,
phenol, (beniyl alcohol, dlbenjo-
thlophene, methylphenanthrenes,
methylpyreneijc
- Morntngilde 01tch
Direct waste dticharge
controHf
Surface water controls
Surface water treatment
Contaminated will'
Source Identification within
drainage area
Determine vertical eitent of
contamination
Addition ledlment sampling
for PCIi to determine temporal
trends and gradients
Conduct Industrial /cownercial
source investigation for PCts
o City Waterway Segment 2
(Wheeler-Oigoed)
- Storm drain
CW-2W
Surface weter controlI
Surface water treatment
Storm sewer inspection
and repair
Groundwater controls'
troundwater treatment'
discharge to P01V
Priority 1: none
Priority I: HPAH. Cd, Cu«, Zn,
dichlorobentenei, IPAH*,
N-nltroiodiphenylamine, 4-methylphenol,
phenol [blphenyl, TVS, TDC, oil t
greaie]<
Additional source identification
for problem chonlcali with
unknot* sources
Priority 2: HPAH, Cd, Cu«, Zn.
dlchlorobenzenei, IPAH, It,
H-nUrosodlphenylamtne, a-metnyl-
phonol, [blphenyl
Determine sedimentation rate
Determine vertical entont of
contamination
Conduct storm and sanitary
surveyi to identify cron
connection! ond wauthorlted
connections
Imeitlgate groundwater from
the Tar Pits as a source of
awthylpHtnols to Wheeler-Osgood
Additional sampling to
tstabllsh contaainant gradients
within the waterway
73
-------
TABLE 10. (Continued)
• Mddlt ttottrwiy
• Merltiae Industries
(Fon Launch and Tug,
Marine Industries
ttorthwest, Casks Marine
Specialties)
Direct waste discharge
controls
Atawspheric reltuf
controls'
Priority 1: none
Priority 2: Mg, Cu
Priority ]: HPAH, At, Zn, dichloro-
bnimi, I WW, pentachlorophonol,
Pb, a-aethylphenol, phenol [dibenzo-
thlophene, d(terpenoid hydrocarbons,
aethylpyr enesjc
Additional source identlfIcatlon
for those chaalcals with
unknown sources
Priority 2: Hg, Cu
Priority 3: HPAH, As, 2n. d1-
chlorobenzenes, LPAH, pentscMoro-
phenol, n>, «-aethy1phenol, phenol,
[dtbenzothlophene, dlterpenold hydro-
carbons, aethylpyrenes]'
Additional sadlmnt tanpUng
to define spatial extent and
contaialnant gradients
Ottenalne vertical etent of
contamination
Characterize storm water from
drains at the head of the
waterway
Investigate the release of con-
taminants by the aaritiae
Industries along Middle Waterway
Investigate wood products
Industries (Champion International,
Coast Craft, Paiport) as potential
sources of wood wattes and
wood treating wastes
• Auston-^t. OefUnce
Shoreline S*9>ent 3
- A&ARCO (slag In tadl-
¦tnt)
Stabilize or ramove slag
along shore
Priority !: none
Priority 2: At, Cd, Cu, Zn, K,
*-nltrotod1phenylaalne, S>
Priority 3: none
Additional source Identification
for those chealcalt with «iknot«i
sources
Priority 2: H-Mtrotodiphtnyl-
aaine
Determine vertical extent of con-
taalnation
Analyze tedlaents off ASAKCO for
M-d1iMthylan1ltne (¦«); review
tentatively Identified compounds
1n past taaplts for MA
a City Waterway
t ]
*0* Street Petroleun
storage facilities
bproved product handling
Inspection of storage and
distribution tyttaa, and
Vapleaentatlon of appropriate
corrective measures
firoundwater controls
Sroundweter treatment
Priority t:
Priority 2:
•one
KPAH, LPAH
Priority 3: Kit*, In*, phenol
(blphenyl, diboniothlophenejc
Additional source Wtntlficatlon
for those chaalcalt with
unknown sources
Priority 2: HPAN, LPAH
Priority 3: PCIt*, In*, phenol,
[blphenyl, d1b*nzothiophene]c
Detenu1ne vortical eitent of
contain 1nat ion
Identify tourcot and transport
aochanlimt for PAH
* Problea areas encompass all ttatlom stapled in 1M4 only in Segments
MTS1, SIS1, CIS2, ISS2, RSS3, and poulblr M0S1 (StttlorW-12 in this
segment was dote to apparent effect thresholds for several chaalcalt).
fe Concentrations of these chaaicals eaceoded an apparent effect threshold
(by various nonul1iat1ont) 1n sediment froa at Wast one station in the
defined problaa aria. Chaalcalt are liitad in oach priority group in detcandlng
order of their calculated toalclty significance factor, If available.
Stations with and without biological data area included. Priority 1 chaaicals
ahowad a concentretIon gradient with toiicity or biological effects gradients.
Priority 2 chemicals were above apparent effect thresholds at aore than
one station within the problon area, but either no gradient corresponding
to that for to«1c Ity/ef fectt was observed, or no biological data were available
to assess gradients. Priority 1 chemicals were above apparent effect thresholds
at one station only within the problaa area.
' Toxicity significant factors wart not available for the chaaicals listed
In brackets, These chaalcalt have not been priorltittd relative to other
chaalcalt la the tame priority group.
' TOC concentrations did not aicoad an AET in the problea area defined
in Soynt CIS! but tho TOC conctntration gradient corresponded with observed
Changes in offoctt (e.g., tadiaont toaidty). Hilt corratpondence »ay
rttult froa the covarying distribution of TOC with other contaalnants,
including lead and tine.
• Chemical elevated above an AET 1n the defined probloa area onl£ on the
basil of historical data.
' May not be applicable, additional (valuation it necetury to conflra.
74
-------
4. RECOMMENDATIONS OF AREAS AND SOURCES
FOR POTENTIAL REMEDIAL ACTIONS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The final prioritization of problem areas for potential remedial actions
is presented in this section. Recommendations of areas and sources for
these remedial actions are based on evaluations of:
•	The environmental hazard indicated by the problem area con-
tamination, toxicity, and biological effects
•	The spatial extent of each problem area
•	The confidence that sources of potential problem chemicals
in each problem area have been accurately identified.
A prioritization of the 21 problem areas and all identified problem
chemicals was made in Section 3.3. Eight problem areas were given the
highest priority for source evaluation. Four problem areas were given
the next highest priority for source evaluation. The remaining nine problem
areas were not included for priority source evaluation because of their
relatively low environmental hazard ranking. The spatial extent of each
problem area was also defined in Section 3.3, but was not considered in
the development of recommendations of problem areas for source identifica-
tion. In this section, the relative spatial extent of each problem area
is considered, along with the magnitude of contamination, toxicity, and
biological effects. For example, large areas with a high degree of environ-
mental hazard are ranked higher than are isolated hot spots posing a similar
hazard. Source evaluations for each problem area are also rated according
to the level of confidence that the problem sources have been accurately
identified. Thus, the highest ranking problem area for potential remedial
action is large, poses a substantial environmental hazard, and has well-
characterized sources. In this ranking method, a small "hot spot" exhibiting
substantial effects that have been traced confidently to a contaminant
source may be ranked at the same, or even higher, priority than a much
larger problem area with unknown sources. To allocate resources efficiently,
"hot spots" with known sources would be recommended for potential remedial
action before the larger area with unknown sources.
Potential remedial actions include source control and/or sediment
remedial action (see Tetra Tech 1984a). Potential remedial technologies
have been discussed in Section 3.5.
A final prioritization of Commencement Bay problem areas is presented
in Table 11. Scores for each problem area in three categories (environmental
significance, spatial extent, and confidence of source identification)
were summed to estimate the relative priority for potential remedial action.
Environmental significance was scored from 1 to 4 according to the magnitude
of observed contamination, toxicity, and biological effects. The eight
75
-------
TABLE 11. FINAL RANKING OF PROBLEM AREAS
Segment


Confidence


Containing
Environmental
Spatial
of Source
Total

Problem Area®
Significance
Extent
Identification
Score

RSS2
4
4
4
12

SPS1
4
3
4
11

CIS1
4
3
4
11

HYS5
4
3
4
11

SIS1
4
4
3
11

HYS1
4
4
3
11

HYS2
4
2
4
10

CIS2
4
1
3
8

MDS1
3
3
2
8

RSS3
1
3
4
8

CIS3
3
2
2
7
- b
HYS4
3
2
1
6

RSSla (RS-13)
3
1
1
5

BLS2
2
1
1
4

MIS1
2
1
1
4

RSSlb (RS-15)
1
1
1
3

HYS3
1
1
1
3

BLS1
1
1
1
3

HYS6
1
1
1
3

BLS3
1
1
1
3

BLS4
1
1
1
3

a Problem areas did not always encompass an entire segment. Problem areas
1n the segments Indicated are listed 1n order of their total score for
environmental significance, spatial extent, and confidence of source Identi-
fication.
b Identification of potential remedial technologies was conducted for prob-
lem areas with a total score greater than or equal to 7.
76
-------
highest-priority areas identified in Section 3.3 were given a score of
4 for environmental significance. The four second-priority sites (Section
3.3) were given a score of 3, and the two third-priority sites (plus Milwaukee
Waterway) were given a score of 2. All remaining lower-priority problem
areas were given scores of 1.
The spatial extent (surface sediments only) of each problem area was
estimated by planimetry. Scores were assigned on the basis of size of
each problem area as follows:
•	>50 acres; score = 4
•	30-50 acres; score = 3
t 10-30 acres; score = 2
•	<10 acres; score = 1.
The confidence of source identification was scored according to the
following qualitative criteria:
•	Ongoing sources were well-identified by spatial patterns
of contamination (and effects), and chemical characteristics
of the sources matched chemical characteristics of the receiving
water environment; score=4. Or, contamination was clearly
established as historical, although sources may not have
been well-identified; score=4
•	Potential sources were identified, but their relative contri-
butions compared with historical deposits were not clear;
score=3
•	Adjacent sources were suggested by land use or drainage
patterns, but spatial patterns of contamination were ambiguous;
score=2
•	Source unidentified; score=l.
All problem areas with clearly identified sources (i.e., score=4)
exhibited major environmental effects, with the exception of the problem
area within Segment RSS3 on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline, where the
source of metals contamination is believed to be ASARC0 slag or ores in
the sediments. No benthic data directly comparable to those in other areas
(i.e., 0.06-m2 grab samples) were collected from this problem area because
of sampling difficulties. Qualitative evaluation of replicate 0.1-m2 grab
samples indicated a general similarity to Carr Inlet reference conditions.
The differences in numbers of species and abundances of the major taxonomic
groups were not large, and probably reflected natural differences in benthic
community structure between the Segment RSS3 site and Carr Inlet. Therefore,
major impacts to benthic communities did not appear to be occurring in
the potential problem area. Based on this qualitative analysis, the score
for environmental significance was reduced from 2 to 1 (Table 11). This
area will still be evaluated for potential remedial action.
77
-------
All of the problem areas in Table 11 with a total score <6 have a
low priority for evaluation of potential remedial action. These ten problem
areas had largely unidentified sources and were not extensive. Potential
"hot spots" in Segments HYS4 (Hylebos Waterway) and RSS1 (Station RS-13;
Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline) are included in this group. Ship scour
or some unidentified activity could have resulted in the multiple significant
benthic depressions observed at a single station (HY-37) in the Segment
HYS4 hot spot. Further characterization of potential contaminant sources
is required for the Station RS-13 hot spot within Segment RSS1. Further
source identification of problem chemicals is recommended for each of these
low priority problem areas before the feasibility of any remedial action
is evaluated.
Recommendations for the remaining problem areas with scores >7 in
Table 11 are presented below.
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POTENTIAL REMEDIAL ACTION
Potential remedial actions include source control and sediment actions
such as removal, capping, or in situ treatment. All problem areas discussed
below have ongoing, potentially ongoing, or unknown sources of problem
chemicals. Remedial action with respect to the contaminated sediments
is recommended for all areas only after the sources have been identified
and effectively controlled.
4.2.1 Hylebos Waterway
Hylebos Problem Area In Segment HYS1--
Potential sources of HPAH, arsenic, copper, lead, and zinc were identified
for the problem area in Segment HYS1 of Hylebos Waterway. Source control
measures are recommended to reduce HPAH discharge from Kaiser Ditch. Source
control evaluation is also recommended to reduce metals discharge (especially
arsenic and zinc) from unpaved log sort yards (Wasser Winter, Cascade Timber
yard #2, Dunlap Towing, Louisiana Pacific), and from Hylebos Creek (B&L
Landfill and Fife Ditch).
Hylebos Problem Area In Segment HYS2--
PCBs were the highest priority chemicals found in the problem area
defined within Hylebos Segment HYS2. Exposure of historical accumulations
of PCBs [and other chemicals (e.g., hexachlorobutadiene)] by dredging was
identified as the most probable source of this contamination. There was
little evidence of an ongoing source of PCBs in this area. A PCB source
reconnaissance survey is recommended prior to evaluation of sediment remedial
action. Potential source control should also be evaluated for other problem
chemicals discussed below that have significant ongoing sources in this
problem area. The extent of subsurface PCB contamination was not well
characterized, but is probably broad. This problem should be considered
when dredging projects are planned in Hylebos Waterway.
Elevated HPAH concentrations were found in subtidal sediments of the
problem area in Segment HYS2 near the boundary between Segments HYS1 and
HYS2. These sediments do not appear to be within the dredged area discussed
78
-------
for PCBs. The HPAH contamination is likely an extension of the contamination
found in the problem area within Segment HYS1. As discussed previously,
source control evaluation for HPAH has been recommended for the Kaiser
Ditch, the major HPAH source to Hylebos Waterway.
Pennwalt Chemical Corporation was identified as an ongoing source
of chlorinated ethenes, chlorinated butadienes, arsenic, copper, lead,
and zinc to intertidal sediments of the Segment HYS2 problem area. Tetra-
chloroethene is also elevated in some of the subtidal sediments. Source
control evaluation is recommended for these chemicals in the main plant
outfall, surface drains, groundwater seeps, and groundwater in shallow
and intermediate aquifers.
Hylebos Problem Area In Segment HYS5--
Source control evaluation for chlorinated compounds, including chlorinated
ethenes and chlorinated butadienes, from Occidental Chemical Co. is recom-
mended. Although chlorinated butadienes (with the exception of hexachloro-
butadiene) did not exceed apparent effect thresholds for sediment toxicity
or benthic community structure, source control for these substances is
still recommended for the Occidental Chemical Co. main outfall based on
their extreme concentrations in this area. Very high concentrations of
chlorinated ethenes in this area were restricted to the immediate vicinity
of the Occidental Chemical Co. docks. Because of the localized nature
of this contamination, clear response gradients could not be established.
However, because of the magnitude of chlorinated ethene contamination,
these substances warrant a high priority for source control. The source
of PCB contamination in this area was not established. A PCB reconnaissance
in this area is recommended. PCB contamination in this area should be
considered when dredging is planned.
4.2.2	Sitcum Waterway
Ore unloading operations at the Port of Tacoma docks are a potential
source of metals contamination to the north shore of the waterway. Although
the contribution of this source to overall sediment metals contamination
cannot be established with available data, it is recommended that evaluations
be conducted on possible control technologies for minimizing release of
ore into the waterway.
Three storm drains (i.e., SI-172, SI-176, SI-717) are also major con-
tributors of metals to Sitcum Waterway. Source identification within the
drainage areas of these storm drains is necessary before source controls
can be implemented.
4.2.3	St. Paul Waterway
The main outfall from the Champion International pulp mill located
at the mouth of St. Paul Waterway, is an ongoing source of alkylated phenols
(or their precursors) , methoxyphenols, copper, organic enrichment, and
chloroform. Source control evaluation for alkylated phenols (or their
precursors) is recommended at Champion International pulp mill. Source
control for copper and chloroform is also recommended because these contaminants
79
-------
were measured at elevated concentrations in plant effluent or, in the case
of copper, exceeded applicable water quality criteria.
4.2.4	Middle Waterway
Ship repair operations were identified as potential sources of mercury
and copper in Middle Waterway. No definite sources of pentachlorophenol,
dichlorobenzenes, and PAH have been identified. Evaluation of source control
at the ship repair operations is recommended. Source investigations for
pentachlorophenol, dichlorobenzenes, and PAH are recommended before evaluating
source controls.
4.2.5	City Waterway
City Problem Area In Segment CIS1--
The south Tacoma and Nalley Valley drains (CS-237 and CN-237) at the
head of City Waterway are the largest ongoing sources of metals (especially
lead) and organic material. The specific sources of metals and organic
matter within these drainage areas have not been identified. Therefore,
source investigations are recommended within these drainage areas. Source
control alternatives should be evaluated following identification of specific
sources. Source investigations and source control evaluations should also
be conducted for the 15th Street drain, which also contributes metals and
PAH to the waterway. Source control evaluation is recommended for Martinac
Shipbuilding, which is a probable source of copper and zinc to City Waterway.
The wood products industries, the Tar Pits site, and the 23rd and A Street
coal gasification site are possible sources of 4-methylphenol to City Waterway.
The contributions of 4-methylphenol from these sources should be investigated.
City Problem Area In Segment CIS2—
Ongoing sources of the contaminants of concern in Wheeler-Osgood Waterway
could not be identified. Source investigations are therefore recommended
for 4-methyl phenol , 1,2-dichlorobenzene, organic material, lead, and zinc.
Source investigations should include evaluation of specific sources of
these contaminants within the drainage area served by CW-254. The potential
for groundwater transport of 4-methylphenol from the Tar Pits site also
requires further investigation.
City Problem Area In Segment CIS3--
Sources of the problem contaminants in City Waterway Segment 3, including
LPAH and HPAH, could not be identified with existing information. Therefore,
remedial action for this problem area is not recommended until contaminant
sources and transport mechanisms have been established. Further source
investigation is recommended for PAH.
4.2.6	Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline
The ASARCO facility was identified as the source of metals (including
high-priority mercury and arsenic) and PAH to the adjacent problem area.
Although ASARCO is the major source of contaminants to the problem area,
for most of the contaminants it is difficult to determine if the major
80
-------
loading has occurred through any one route (i.e., process effluent, surface
water runoff, groundwater). Because the facility has closed recently,
a characterization and source control evaluation of the residual discharge
of contaminants from site runoff and groundwater is recommended. A recon-
naissance survey is recommended to determine possible sources of PCBs to
this problem area.
4.3 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
There were several PCB hot spots in the project area where PCBs concen-
trations exceeded apparent effects thresholds. In addition, general PCB
contamination within the waterways is sufficient to be the apparent cause
of elevated PCBs in fish muscle, fish liver, and crab muscle tissue. PCBs
are the chemicals that are responsible for the highest predicted risk to
human health from fish consumption. The sources of PCBs are unknown.
A general reconnaissance survey of the area for PCB sources is recommended.
Other chemicals for which general reconnaissance surveys are recommended
include aromatic hydrocarbons and dibenzofuran.
81
-------
5. OVERVIEW OF CONTAMINATION AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
IN COMMENCEMENT BAY
The Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation included
a comprehensive assessment of sediment contamination and associated biological
effects. Results of this assessment were used to identify and prioritize
problem areas. An overview of these conditions in Commencement Bay is
provided in this section.
During this and previous studies, several hundred chemicals have been
tentatively identified in Commencement Bay sediment samples. Routine analyses
have been conducted for about 150 chemical variables. Chemicals detected
in over two-thirds of the surface sediments analyzed in the Superfund study
included phenol, 4-methylphenol, PAH, 1,4-dichlorobenzene, PCBs, dibenzofuran,
and most U.S. EPA priority pollutant metals. Most of these chemicals had
already been reported in many areas of Commencement Bay. Chemicals detected
only rarely or not at all in the present study included pesticides, most
organonitrogen compounds, most chloro- and nitrophenols, halogenated ethers,
2,3,7,8-dibenzodioxin (never detected), selenium, and thallium. High concen-
trations of some of the pesticides in this group had been found in past
studies, but the findings had not been confirmed by mass spectroscopy.
Sediment contamination throughout the Commencement Bay study area
is variable both in concentration and composition. The highest PAH concen-
trations were found near the head of Hylebos Waterway. Benzo(a)pyrene
was found at over 1,000 times reference conditions at one Hylebos Waterway
station. In this study and in others, Hylebos Waterway sediments contained
a complex mixture of chlorinated compounds, many of which were unidentified.
Tri- and tetrachlorinated butadienes were found at well over 1,000 times
reference conditions near the mouth of the waterway. Other chemicals measured
at over 1,000 times reference concentrations were 4-methyl phenol and 2-methoxy-
phenol (guaiacol) in sediments adjacent to the main outfall of the Champion
International pulp and paper mill in St. Paul Waterway, and four metals
(antimony, arsenic, copper, and mercury) in sediments adjacent to the main
outfalls of the now closed ASARC0 copper smelter on the Ruston-Pt. Defiance
Shoreline. With some exceptions, concentrations of most chemicals measured
in the current investigation of subtidal sediments were comparable to or
higher than those in subtidal and intertidal sediments collected in previous
studies. Chlorinated ethene concentrations in intertidal sediments from
Hylebos Waterway were higher in other studies than those in subtidal sediments
in the present study. Metal concentrations in sediments near drains at
the head of Sitcum Waterway were also higher in other studies.
In the present study, Blair and Milwaukee Waterways contained the
least contaminated subtidal sediments. Additional sampling was not conducted
in the Puyallup River, but historical sediment concentrations were low.
The most extreme contamination in the remaining areas was typically located
in small areas near point source discharges. Pronounced gradients in chemical
concentrations were observed in several waterways (e.g., Hylebos, St. Paul,
and City Waterways) and along the Ruston-Pt. Defiance Shoreline. Concentra-
82
-------
tions of contaminants in sediments collected well outside of Hylebos and
Blair Waterways were low, approaching reference conditions in most cases.
For most substances, the range of concentrations was greater in subsurface
sediments than in surface sediments. The depth of penetration in the sediments
was often limited by textural characteristics. Concentrations approaching
reference area conditions for all chemicals were reached at the bottom
of only some cores. Many chemicals present at elevated concentration at
depth in cores were still below apparent effect thresholds for toxicity
and benthic effects. Consistently low concentrations of chemicals were
reached at the bottom of all cores collected in a special drilling program
in Blair Waterway.
Studies of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages and laboratory bioassays
of sediments were used as site-specific indicators of biological effects
and toxicity in Commencement Bay. Tliese studies demonstrated that areas
of high toxicity and effects on benthos were generally isolated near known
pollutant sources. The most severe effects were observed at single sampling
stations near two industrial facilities: Champion International pulp mill
and the ASARCO smelter. In these areas of extreme adverse effects, very
few animals lived in the sediments or survived a 10-day laboratory exposure
to the sediments. These areas were also characterized by very high sediment
contamination in which concentrations of several chemicals were over 1,000
times higher than reference concentrations. In these two areas, there
was noticeable improvement in benthic conditions at the next closest transect
stations (250-400 ft away), indicating that the are as of maximum effects
were of limited spatial extent. Biological conditions varied considerably
from station to station in the waterways. For example, in Hylebos Waterway,
areas of high toxicity and altered benthic communities were interspersed
among areas of low toxicity and benthic effects. Some waterways displayed
well-defined areas of high toxicity and benthic effects (e.g., Hylebos
and City Waterways) and others displayed little evidence of such effects
(e.g., Milwaukee and Middle Waterways).
In general, the waterway sediments supported higher abundances of
benthic macroinvertebrates than were found in Carr Inlet or along the Ruston-
Pt. Defiance Shoreline. The waterway sediments supported fewer species
than other areas sampled, indicating possible generalized effects from
contamination, sediment disturbance, or presence of fine-grained sediments.
Typical benthic assemblages in the waterways were dominated by polychaete
worms and small clams. These organisms are important food items for many
bottom-feeding fishes.
Demersal fish assemblages in the waterways were dominated by flatfishes
such as English sole. Fish assemblages in the waterways were over twice
as abundant as those in Carr Inlet. These fishes may be attracted by the
abundant food resources in the waterways or by the increased habitat complexity
in the harbor environment. English sole in several waterways had significantly
elevated prevalences of one or more liver lesions. The highest overall
lesion prevalence was measured in Middle Waterway, where 40 percent of
English sole sampled had one or more serious lesions. The causes of these
lesions are unknown, but the lesions are similar to those induced in laboratory
animals exposed to toxic chemicals. The effects of these lesions on the
fish are also unknown. In this study, however, fish with serious liver
83
-------
lesions did not exhibit reduced condition (as expressed by weight at a
given length) when compared to fish without lesions.
Although many chemicals were highly elevated in Commencanent Bay sediments,
relatively few were detected in the tissues of English sole and crabs.
The only metals that were accumulated above reference levels were copper
in English sole and lead and mercury in crabs. PCBs were the most consistently
detected organic compounds and were measured at concentrations about 10
times reference levels in Hylebos and City Waterways. In the heavily fished
Pt. Defiance area, concentrations of PCBs in English sole were close to
reference levels.
In summary, the Commencement Bay study area presents a mixed picture
relative to contamination and biological effects. The bay is not an ecological
disaster area with overall high contamination and pervasive biological
effects. Commencement Bay is a complex estuarine environment in which
the levels of contamination and effects vary considerably. While there
are definite indications of stress to local biological communities (e.g.,
altered benthic assemblages, accumulation of contaminants in fish and shellfish,
and liver lesions in flatfish), most of the area is characterized by high
abundances of benthic organisms and demersal fishes, and the fish do not
appear to be severely stressed by liver lesions or accumulations of toxic
substances.
84
-------
6. STUDY DESIGN EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR FUTURE STUDIES
The Commencment Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation involved
the collection of extensive data and the implementation of a complex decision-
making process. Because of the unique nature of the study area and the
complexity of potential sources, contaminants, and biological effects,
many of the investigative techniques and decision criteria were developed
specifically for this project. This section provides a retrospective evaluation
of the innovative study approach and presents recommendations for future
studies of sediment contamination in the marine environment.
6.1 SEDIMENT CHEMISTRY
1.	The addition of multiple (>50) isotopically labeled recovery
standards to every sample increased confidence in the validity
of detection limits for undetected target compounds. By
forcing a search for each recovery standard, this recovery
technique also increased the efficiency and reporting of
target compounds that otherwise may have been overlooked
in the complex extracts.
2.	Use of a defined list of tentatively identified compounds
to search for in each sample analyzed greatly improved the
value of these data in spatial characterizations of contami-
nation.
3.	Low detection limits for organic compounds in the range
of 5 to 50 ppb (dry weight sediment or wet weight tissue)
were useful in defining conditions in the reference area,
extent of problem areas, and interrelationships among chemical
and biological indicators, and in estimating human health
risks. Because major sample interferences were removed
to attain these limits, improved precision was possible
in the quantification of compounds present at high concen-
tration .
4.	Historical problems with potential misidentification of
pesticides in sediments was successfully avoided by using
mass spectroscopy instead of electron capture detection.
This advantage outweighed the increase in detection limits
by mass spectroscopy, but electron capture analyses are
still recommended for tissue samples (with mass spectral
confirmation of any high values) to obtain low enough detection
limits for use in health risk assessments.
5.	Sampling of suspended solids in the water column for toxic
chemicals at two depths and at two times during the study
made possible only a limited qualitative estimate of the
ambient levels or apparent transport of chemicals. Even
85
-------
with filtering 100 L of water, detection limits for most
organic compounds other than PAH were too high to be useful.
Water column studies are recommended only for metals, PAH
(by GC/MS), or selected chlorinated compounds amenable to
sensitive GC/ECD analysis. The organic analyses should
be conducted with a minimum of 0.5 g of material.
6.	PCB concentrations reported as total PCBs enabled an adequate
characterization of the PCB distribution. This reporting
format is recommended because PCB mixtures in the environment
are rarely representative of original Aroclor components.
7.	A two-phase coring program is recommended to determine the
extent of contamination in historical sediments and to overcome
penetration problems caused by textural characteristics
of the sediments. The first phase (lower cost) should use
a coring device (box, Kasten, wide-diameter gravity core)
that can recover intact surface and near-surface sediments;
the second phase (higher cost) should incorporate drilling
techniques to recover deeper sediments if analysis of the
bottom of the phase I core shows elevated contamination.
8.	A sampling interval of up to 1 ft in sediment cores was
adequate when the primary goal was focused on potential
required dredging depths for contaminated sediments. However,
the bottom 2 cm of each core should be analyzed in future
studies of this type to reduce uncertainty as to whether
a significant decline in concentration toward the bottom
of the core was masked by compositing over large depth
intervals.
9.	Sampling intervals of 1-5 cm thickness should be used in
sediment cores to estimate the chronology of deposition.
This chronology can be critical in determining whether
contamination is historical or ongoing.
10.	Substantial quality assurance review and laboratory oversight
were required in a study of this complexity. This review
and oversight were based on an integration of analytical
chemistry techniques with environmental trend analysis.
Such an integration should be required in future studies
and should always include a laboratory site visit before
samples are processed.
6.2 BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
1. The collection of four replicate 0.06-m2 van yeen grab samples
enabled an adequate assessment of benthic community structure
in Commencement Bay. Use of a 0.06-m2 grab iS recommended
for future studies because of substantial cost savings (per
sample) over a standard 0.1-m2 grab.
2. Statistical analyses of the abundances of major groups of
benthic macroinvertebrates (i.e., total abundance, Poly-
86
-------
chaeta, Mollusca, and Crustacea) enabled areas of toxic
effects to be identified. Evaluation of community structure
based on species-level identification was useful in assessing
differences among areas and in identifying probable causes
(e.g., toxicity vs. organic enrichment) of modified benthic
assemblages.
3.	Selection of an adequate reference area is critical to evaluation
of effects on benthic macroinvertebrates because of the
overriding influence of sediment particle size on these
assemblages. If detailed information on the sediment charac-
teristics of the study area and candidate reference sites
is not available, a reconnaissance survey should be conducted
to ensure that adequate reference sites are available for
the range of sediment characteristics in the study area.
4.	The current study design enabled detection of statistically
significant differences in fish hepatic lesion prevalences
at the waterway level. Therefore, the use of demersal fish
histopathology as an effects variable can provide a relatively
localized assessment of biological effects.
5.	Fish histopathology is an important independent indicator
of biological effects because it does not correlate with
effects on benthic macroinvertebrates or sediment toxicity.
6.	Analyses of contaminants in English sole muscle tissue enabled
assessment of spatial differences in bioaccumulation on
a waterway basis, and in some cases within a waterway.
The site-specific co-occurrence of several compounds in
sediments and fish muscle tissue indicates that these studies
provide a reliable assessment of bioavailability of sediment
contaminants.
7.	Use of five fish tissue samples per area results in a relatively
poor statistical power in detecting spatial differences
in tissue contaminant levels. However, for important compounds
such as PCBs, the current study design enabled detection
of statistically significant elevations in tissue concentrations
on a waterway basis that were <5 times the reference concen-
tration .
8.	Larger English sole (e.g., >300 mm total length) should
be used for bioaccumulation studies to ensure that sufficient
muscle tissue is available for full-scan priority pollutant
analyses.
9.	Full-scan priority pollutant analyses of fish livers are
not reconmended because of small sample sizes and the consider-
able sample processing required to reduce interferences
from high lipid content. Analyses of fish livers may be
useful, however, for specific substances such as PCBs or
selected metals (e.g., mercury).
87
-------
10.	Volatile organic compounds were bioaccumulated by English
sole in several areas of Commencement Bay. These compounds
(especially tetrachloroethene) should be analyzed for in
fish tissues if there is evidence of high sediment or water
contamination.
11.	The oyster larvae bioassay is not recommended for future
studies of sediment contamination because of response similarity
with the amphipod bioassay, confounding problems with high
mortalities, and effects of low dissolved oxygen. To a
lesser degree, the amphipod bioassay may also be subject
to interpretive difficulties because of oxygen depletion
during exposure to highly organically enriched sediments.
12.	Amphipod bioassay mortalities may result from particle size
effects where the sediments are >80 percent fine-grained
materials (i.e., silt plus clay). In those cases, sediment
chemistry data should be carefully reviewed, and the influence
of particle size should be evaluated before concluding that
observed mortalities are caused by toxic contamination.
13.	Conducting sediment bioassays and benthic infaunal analyses
at each sediment chemistry station would have enabled a
much better determination of quantitative relationships
[toxicity and benthic apparent effect thresholds (AET)].
14.	Four kinds of hepatic lesions (neoplasms, preneoplasms,
megalocytic hepatosis, and nuclear pieomorphism) should
be used in assessing histopathology in English sole.
15.	For liver histopathology studies, 60 fish per area is the
minimum number required to obtain reasonable statistical
discrimination (i.e., to detect differences in lesion prevalence
of 10-15 percent) among areas.
16.	English sole used for liver histopathology studies should
be >225 mm total length and >3 years of age. All samples
should also be age-corrected prior to statistical evaluation
of spatial or temporal differences in lesion prevalence.
6.3 DECISION-MAKING APPROACH
1. The defined decision-making approach, incorporating five
independent measures of contamination, toxicity, and biological
effects (i.e., sediment chemistry, sediment bioassays, benthic
macroinvertebrates, fish bioaccumulation, and fish liver
histopathology), enabled an objective and defensible identifi-
cation and prioritization of problem areas associated with
toxic chemical contamination. For this purpose, the latter
two measures were used only as average values at the waterway
level. The first three measures were also used as site-specific
indicators to define the spatial extent of problems areas.
The use of this assessment approach ("pentad approach")
is recommended in other studies of sediment contamination.
88
-------
2. Using toxicity and benthic AET, the extent of problem areas
could be defined and potential problem chemicals at each
site could be identified. Although AET are first approximations
and not proof of cause-effect relationships, the AET provide
empirical evidence that helps define and narrow the "gray
zone" between a clear no-effects level and an apparent effect
level for different chemicals. Identifying chemicals above
AET values allowed source identification efforts to focus
on those problem chemicals.
6.4 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION
1.	Normalization of chemical concentrations to organic carbon
or percent fine-grained material was sometimes useful in
giving additional source information not conveyed by dry-
weight concentrations in sediments. At the most severely
contaminated sites, however, gradients in dry-weight concentra-
tions were sufficient to indicate potential sources. Normaliza-
tion of chemical concentrations enabled a better definition
of groups of chemicals with similar environmental distribu-
tions and potentially similar sources. Because organic
carbon and grain size probably affect the bioavailability
of chemicals, the continued evaluation of normalized data
in developing quantitative relationships is also recommended.
2.	Contaminant loading data were limited for most potential
sources, and for many others, no loading data existed.
This data gap impaired source evaluation and allowed prioriti-
zation of potential sources on a relative basis only. Collection
of additional source data is recommended in all problem
areas. These data should cover at least critical problem
chemicals, with detection limits that reflect representative
flow conditions and suspended solid loadings from each source
(i.e., consider the detection limits of the resulting loading
for each chemical). Additional measurements of flow rates
are needed to establish reliable estimates of the relative
magnitude of sources.
Estimates of historical contaminant loadings are even more
uncertain than those for ongoing sources. Contaminant loadings
in a problem area may have changed over time because different
industries occupied the site or because changes in industrial
activities altered the contaminant loadings in the discharges.
Therefore, additional review of historical Industrial and
land use practices are recommended, with a focus on the
problem chemicals and products that contain these chemicals.
3.	In several of the problem areas it was difficult, or ¦fenpossible,
to determine whether the contamination observed in the sediments
was from historical or ongoing sources. Data gaps that
prevented this determination Included inadequate or missing
source loading data for the problem chemicals, and inadequate
sedimentation rate estimates for the individual waterways.
89
-------
Additionally, disturbance from dredging activities within
the problem areas complicated the assessment of relative
depositional periods of the problem chemicals. This was
the case for PCBs in Hylebos Waterway Segment 2. Source
investigations have revealed little about whether PCBs are
from historical or ongoing sources.
4. Sediment accumulation rates in major problem areas in waterways
such as City and Hylebos obviously differ substantially
from one another, but are needed to address remedial alterna-
tives. Representative rates are unknown. While conditions
in these waterways present problems in applying dating tech-
niques, dating of selected cores (e.g., by the Pb-210 technique)
is recommended to determine if gross estimates of sediment
accumulation rates (mg•kg'l-yr"*) may be possible in these
areas.
90
-------
7. REFERENCES
Becker, D.S. 1984. Resource partioning by small-mouthed flatfishes (Pleuro-
nectidae) in Puget Sound, Washington. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Washington
School of Fisheries, Seattle, WA. 138 pp.
Brown and Caldwell, and E.V.S. Consultants. 1983. Site safety plan, tasks
3 and 4. Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Cooperative Agreement.
Brown and Caldwell, Seattle, WA 32 pp.
BRCA0050
Brown and Caldwell, and E.V.S. Consultants. 1984. Quality assurance project
plan for Commencement Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Remedial Investigation, Task
3. Prepared for Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Brown and Caldwell, and E.V.S. Consultants, Seattle, WA. 59 pp.
Fowler, S.W. 1982. Biological transfer and transport processes. In:
Pollutant Transfer and Transport in the Sea, Volume II. G. Kullenberg
(ed). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. 65 pp.
Gahler, A.R., J.M. Cummins, J.N. Blazevich, R.H. Rieck, R.L. Arp, C.E. Gangmark,
S.V.W. Pope, and S. Filip. 1982. Chemical contaminants in edible, non-salmonid
fish and crabs from Commencement Bay, Washington. EPA-910/9-82-093. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA. 118 pp.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins.
1980. Chemical contaminants and biological abnormalities in central and
southern Puget Sound. NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA-2. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO. 295 pp.
MALI002F.
Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, H.O. Hodgins, and S.L.
Chan. 1982. Chemical contaminants and abnormalities 1n fish and invertebrates
from Puget Sound. NOAA Technical Memorandum OMPA-19. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, CO. 168 pp.
MALI003F
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. Techno!. 18:705-713.
Orlob, G.T., D.R. Peterson, and K.R. Jones. 1950. An investigation of
pollution in Commencement Bay and the Puyallup River System. State of
Washinton Pollution Control Commission. Technical Report No. 8. 26 pp.
plus appendices.
Pierce, D., D. Noviello, and S. Rogers. 1981. Commencement Bay seafood
consumption study-preliminary report. Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department,
Tacoma, WA.
91
-------
Tetra Tech. 1983. Site safety plan guidelines for Commencement Bay Nearshore/
Tideflats Remedial Investigation. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1984a. A decision making approach for the Commencement Bay
Nearshore/Tideflat Superfund project. Prepared for the Washington State
Department of Ecology. Tetra Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 64 pp.
Tetra Tech 1984b. Sampling and analysis plan report prepared and modified
by Brown and Caldwell and E.V.S. Consultants for the Commencement Bay Superfund
Project, Washington Department of Ecology. 43 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1984. Health assessment document
for tetrachloroethylene. External review draft report. U.S. EPA Office
of Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C.
92
-------