2013 sinclair inlet marine monitoring data report

Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command Engineering Field Activity, Northwest 19917 Seventh Avenue NE Poulsbo, WA 98370-7570

Bremerton Naval Complex Bremerton, Washington

Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest 1101 Tautog Circle Silverdale, WA 98315

Bremerton Naval Complex Bremerton, Washington

Final 23 February 2015

2013 Sinclair Inlet Marine Monitoring Data Report PSNS Superfund Site

FINAL 2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT

PSNS SUPERFUND SITE BREMERTON NAVAL COMPLEX

BREMERTON, WASHINGTON

Prepared by URS Group, Inc.

Seattle, Washington

Prepared for Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest

Silverdale, Washington

U.S. Navy Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

February 23, 2015

2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT Document ID OU B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex Date: 02/23/15 U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Page iii Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxiii

DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION

Document Title: Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet Marine Monitoring Data Report

Site Name/Location: PSNS Superfund Site, Bremerton Naval Complex, Bremerton, Washington

Delivery Order No.: 0051

Document Control No.: 0215.501 33762092.R-3

Report Coverage: This document presents marine sediment and tissue data resulting from sampling activities conducted in 2013 primarily in Sinclair Inlet adjacent to the Bremerton Naval Complex. It was prepared under U.S. Navy Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 for Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest. These services were provided by URS Group, Inc. (URS).

Organization Title: Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Address: 1101 Tautog Circle Silverdale, Washington 98315 (360) 396-0016

Prime Contractor: URS Group, Inc. Address: 1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1400 Seattle, Washington 98101-1616 (206) 438-2700

Navy Remedial Project Manager: Ellen Brown, P.E.

URS Program Manager: William L. Rohrer, C.P.G., P.G.

URS Project Manager: Paul A. Johanson, P.E.

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT Document ID OU B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex Date: 02/23/15 U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Page v Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxv

CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................... vii

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 SUMMARY OF 2013 SEDIMENT AND TISSUE SAMPLING ........................................ 3-1 SHALLOW SEDIMENTS FOR MAPPING OF TOTAL MERCURY AND METHYL

MERCURY .......................................................................................................... 3-2 SHALLOW SEDIMENTS FROM CLAM AND CRAB SAMPLING LOCATIONS ... 3-2 LITTLENECK, MANILA, AND BUTTER CLAMS ..................................................... 3-2 GRACEFUL AND DUNGENESS CRABS .................................................................... 3-2 3.5 SHINER PERCH ................................................................................................. 3-3 3.6 STAGHORN SCULPIN ...................................................................................... 3-3

4.0 RESULTS OF 2013 SEDIMENT AND TISSUE SAMPLING ........................................... 4-1 4.1 MARINE SEDIMENTS ...................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 CLAM SAMPLES ............................................................................................... 4-2 4.3 CRAB SAMPLES ................................................................................................ 4-2 4.4 SHINER PERCH SAMPLES .............................................................................. 4-3 4.5 STAGHORN SCULPIN SAMPLES ................................................................... 4-3

5.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 5-1

APPENDICES

A Summary of Physical Parameters for 2013 Marine Tissue Samples B Data Usability Assessment 2013 Tissue and Sediment Sampling, OU B Marine C Responses to Comments on 2013 Sinclair Inlet Marine Monitoring Data Report

2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT Contents OU B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex Date: 02/23/15 U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Page vi Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

CONTENTS (Continued)

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxvi

FIGURES

1-1 Bremerton Naval Complex Vicinity Map ........................................................................ 1-2 3-1 Reference Locations for 2013 Sampling.......................................................................... 3-4 4-1 2013 Total Mercury and Methyl Mercury in OU B Marine Sediments .......................... 4-5 4-2 2013 Total Mercury and Methyl Mercury in Outer Sinclair Inlet Sediments .................. 4-7 4-3 Total Mercury in 0-3 Cm Sinclair Inlet Sediments .......................................................... 4-9 4-4 Methyl Mercury in 0-3 Cm Sinclair Inlet Sediments ..................................................... 4-10 4-5 Total Mercury in Clams from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations .......................... 4-11 4-6 Methyl Mercury in Clams from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations ....................... 4-12 4-7 Total Mercury in Crab from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations ............................ 4-13 4-8 Methyl Mercury in Crab from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations ......................... 4-14 4-9 Total Mercury in Shiner Perch from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations ............... 4-15 4-10 Total Mercury in Staghorn Sculpin from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations ........ 4-16

TABLES

4-1 2013 Sinclair Inlet 0-3 Cm Sediments for Mapping of Methyl Mercury ...................... 4-17 4-2 Statistical Summary of 0-3 Cm Sediments for Methyl Mercury Mapping .................... 4-18 4-3 2013 0-10 Cm Sediments Co-Located With Tissue Samples ........................................ 4-19 4-4 Comparison of Co-located 0-3 Cm and 0-10 Cm Sediment Samples ........................... 4-20 4-5 2013 Clam Tissue Samples ............................................................................................ 4-21 4-6 Statistical Summary of Clam Tissues ............................................................................ 4-25 4-7 2013 Crab Tissue Samples ............................................................................................. 4-28 4-8 Statistical Summary of Crab Tissues ............................................................................. 4-33 4-9 Statistical Summary of Sediments Co-located with Crab Tissues ................................. 4-34 4-10 2013 Shiner Perch Tissue Samples ................................................................................ 4-35 4-11 Statistical Summary of Shiner Surfperch ....................................................................... 4-38 4-12 2013 Staghorn Sculpin Tissue Samples ......................................................................... 4-39 4-13 Statistical Summary of Staghorn Sculpin ...................................................................... 4-40

2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT Abbreviations and Acronyms OU B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex Date: 02/23/15 U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Page vii Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxvii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BNC Bremerton Naval Complex CAD confined aquatic disposal Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FS feasibility study FFS focused feasibility study MDL method detection limit NAVFAC NW Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Navy U.S. Navy NBK at Bremerton Naval Base Kitsap at Bremerton NSB Naval Station Bremerton OU operable unit PCB polychlorinated biphenyl PQL practical quantitation limit PSEMP Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program PSNS & IMF Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility RI remedial investigation ROD record of decision SAP sampling and analysis plan TOC total organic carbon USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

2013 SINCLAIR INLET MARINE MONITORING DATA REPORT Section 1.0 OU B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex Date: 02/23/15 U.S. Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest Page 1-1 Contract No. N44255-09-D-4001 Delivery Order 0051

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxi

1.0 INTRODUCTION

U.S. Navy facilities adjacent to Sinclair Inlet involve two separate Navy commands: Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility (PSNS & IMF), Bremerton Site, and Naval Base Kitsap at Bremerton (NBK at Bremerton). These commands are collectively referred to in this report as the Bremerton naval complex (BNC). The site is designated the PSNS Superfund Site in the National Priorities List.

Operable Unit B Marine, the marine component of the BNC, was the subject of a Superfund cleanup action that was completed in 2004. This action primarily involved dredging of contaminated sediments and disposal of these sediments in an excavated seafloor containment facility.

Since the completion of the OU B Marine record of decision, new information regarding potential risks associated with mercury in Sinclair Inlet sediments and seafood has suggested there is a need to collect additional information regarding the distribution and movement of mercury in the inlet. This has led to initiatives to evaluate site-related sources of mercury, to better delineate the extent of mercury contamination in Sinclair Inlet relative to background or reference areas, and to assess correlations between total mercury, methyl mercury, and other parameters such as total organic carbon and sediment grain size. The findings are expected to be valuable in developing a conceptual model describing how mercury may be transported and bioaccumulate within the aquatic food web.

As detailed in the 2013 Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP: U.S. Navy 2013), the results presented in this report are intended as one major component of a data set intended to define current conditions regarding the concentration and speciation of mercury in sediment and the marine food web in Sinclair Inlet. Together with other information on mercury in the inlet, these data will be used to support the development of a focused feasibility study (FFS) regarding risks associated with mercury.

This report summarizes the sediment and tissue sampling performed in 2013 in accordance with the 2013 Sampling and Analysis Plan and presents and summarizes the results of that sampling. This report was prepared by URS Group, Inc., for the Navy’s Naval Facilities Engineering Command Northwest (NAVFAC NW) under Contract N44255-09-D-4001.

Figure 1-1Bremerton Naval Complex Vicinity Map

Sinclair Inlet

Port O

rchard

Narro

ws

Rich Passage

PUGETSOUND

Dyes Inlet

KitsapLake Oyster

Bay

OstrichBay

Port Washington Narrows

Phinney Bay

ChicoBay

Bremerton

Port Orchard

Bainbridge IslandCamp WesleyHarris NavalReservation

ManchesterFuel Depot

3

316

160

303

33762092_03.ai

BremertonNaval Complex

304

Tacoma

Olympia

Shelton

Everett

Hood Cana

l

Puge

t Sou

ndKitsapPeninsula

SeattleBainbridge

Island

Port Townsend

OlympicPeninsula

Carr I

nlet

WhidbeyIsland

BremertonNaval Complex

1

LEGEND:

0

NORT

H 1/2

= Bremerton Naval Complex

Scale in Miles

NORT

H

303

304

Delivery Order 0051Bremerton Naval Complex

2013 MARINE MONITORING

FOR OU B MARINE



2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND

The Navy’s remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) for OU B Marine identified polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) as the primary human health risk driver, as documented in the Record of Decision for OU B Marine (U.S. Navy, Ecology, and USEPA 2000). Consequently, the Navy’s remedial action for OU B Marine was configured to address PCBs in marine sediment. However, new information that became available subsequent to the OU B Marine risk assessment led to increased concern on the part of the Navy and other stakeholders that mercury in sediment might also pose significant risk to subsistence-level seafood consumers.

Prompted by these concerns, the Navy initiated a study of human health risks associated with mercury in Sinclair Inlet sediment and tissues. This study included an extensive compilation of existing data on mercury levels in sediment and marine species, both in Sinclair Inlet and in background and reference areas. These data were then used in performing a “market basket” style analysis of the potential risks involved in collecting and consuming seafood from Sinclair Inlet. This was not a formal risk assessment but rather a more focused risk evaluation, guided by the EPA framework for assessment of tribal seafood risks and using Suquamish Tribe seafood consumption rates.

The overall conclusion of the risk evaluation was that the incremental risk from mercury to a subsistence-level consumer relying entirely on Sinclair Inlet as a seafood source exceeds the target health goals (U.S. Navy 2010). The technical memorandum documenting these findings recommended that mercury be designated a chemical of concern for BNC. The memorandum also recommended that additional tissue data be collected to reduce significant uncertainty due to limitations in the historical data, particularly very limited quantities of data for some species and old data collected prior to the remedy for OU B Marine.

Based on the recommendations of the Navy’s mercury risk evaluation, the OU B Marine stakeholder group developed a concept for a phased program of field work to fill data gaps related to mercury in marine sediment and tissues. The first phase of sampling was defined in the 2013 SAP. The scope of this first sampling phase included collection of tissue samples from multiple species representing different trophic levels, namely clams, crab, and two species of demersal fish. A primary focus in planning this sampling was to collect information on the methylated form of mercury (methyl mercury). Methyl mercury is both more toxic and more bioavailable than inorganic mercury. Comparatively little analysis has been performed for methyl mercury on sediment and tissue samples previously collected from Sinclair Inlet. In addition to marine tissues, the sampling also included collection of marine sediments to map the distribution of methyl mercury within Sinclair Inlet and to document sediment mercury concentrations at locations where clams and crab were collected.


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxii

A first phase of tissue and sediment sampling was performed between April and August in 2013. This report is intended to disseminate the data from that sampling and briefly summarize the results of a few basic analyses of the results. However, this report does not go beyond comparatively basic statistical parameters. It is anticipated that more complex analyses of the data could be undertaken by technical teams assembled from the OU B Marine stakeholder group.

The results of the 2013 sampling represent a substantial addition to the information available to characterize the distribution of mercury in the Sinclair Inlet ecosystem. Other information and data regarding mercury distribution and movement within Sinclair Inlet has been recently assembled through other Navy investigations, including several studies performed on behalf of the Navy by the U.S. Geological Survey. Collectively, this information on mercury distribution and movement is expected to be an important resource in developing the planned FFS.



3.0 SUMMARY OF 2013 SEDIMENT AND TISSUE SAMPLING

The Navy’s 2013 OU B Marine sampling involved collecting and analyzing samples of both marine sediment and marine tissues, guided by a sampling plan prepared by the Navy (U.S. Navy 2013). The collected samples were organized in six categories:

shallow sediments for mapping of total mercury and methyl mercury shallow sediments from tissue collection locations littleneck, Manila, and butter clams graceful and Dungeness crab shiner perch, a demersal fish species staghorn sculpin, another demersal fish species

For each of the tissue categories, samples were collected from three areas: OU B Marine, the remainder of Sinclair Inlet outside of OU B Marine (“outer Sinclair Inlet”), and a reference location. Nisqually Reach was used as the reference location for crab, staghorn sculpin, and shiner perch (Figure 3-1). Prior to the reference collection at Nisqually Reach, five staghorn sculpin were collected in the vicinity of Vendovi Island. These fish were archived for potential analysis pending the results of the remainder of the reference sampling. Because the subsequent sampling at Nisqually Reach yielded the full target quantity of sculpin, no lab analysis was performed on the Vendovi sculpin samples. Carr Inlet was used as the reference location for the clam sampling. Each tissue sample was made up from a single individual; there was no compositing of samples.

With only a few exceptions the 2013 investigation achieved the stated sampling goals and complied with sampling protocols. The targeted number of samples was collected for sediments, clams, crabs, and shiner perch. As noted below, only in the case of staghorn sculpin were fewer samples collected than had been planned. The sampling plan called for up to 8 sediment samples co-located with clam collection to be analyzed. Only single sediment samples were collected from the 6 clam collection locations. The plan called for a good-faith effort to match the distribution of clams collected within OU B Marine when collecting clams in outer Sinclair Inlet and in Carr Inlet. This goal was approximately achieved except that there were 3 butter clams collected and analyzed from OU B Marine but no butter clams were found in the sampled locations in outer Sinclair Inlet or Carr Inlet.



3.1 SHALLOW SEDIMENTS FOR MAPPING OF TOTAL MERCURY AND METHYL MERCURY

The Navy’s sampling team used a van Veen grab sampler to collect sediment samples from the targeted total of 31 locations, 20 within OU B Marine and 11 in outer Sinclair Inlet. Individual sediment samples were prepared as a composite of the upper 3 centimeters (cm) of sediment. The Navy analyzed these samples for total mercury, methyl mercury, grain size, and total organic carbon (TOC).

3.2 SHALLOW SEDIMENTS FROM CLAM AND CRAB SAMPLING LOCATIONS

Individual samples were collected as a composite of the upper 10 cm of sediment from 12 locations where clams and crab were collected within OU B Marine and in 2 locations where clams were collected in outer Sinclair Inlet. One 0-10 cm sample was also collected from the reference location in Carr Inlet where clams were collected. These samples were collected using hand tools in intertidal locations and a van Veen sampler in subtidal locations. The Navy analyzed these samples for total mercury, methyl mercury, grain size, and TOC.

3.3 LITTLENECK, MANILA, AND BUTTER CLAMS

The target sample count of 24 individual clams was achieved for all three sampling areas. The Navy collected a total of 72 individual clams using hand tools, 24 each from three intertidal collection areas: within OU B Marine, in outer Sinclair Inlet, and at a reference location in Carr Inlet. The species collected within OU B Marine included the Pacific littleneck (Leukoma staminea), Manila (Venerupis philippinarum), and butter clam (Saxidomus gigantea). In outer Sinclair Inlet and Carr Inlet only littleneck and Manila clams were found. The clams were individually analyzed for methyl mercury and stable isotopes. Half of the clams were also analyzed for total mercury.

3.4 GRACEFUL AND DUNGENESS CRABS

The target sample count of 24 graceful crab was met for all three sampling areas. The Puget Sound Ecosystem Monitoring Program (PSEMP) sampling team provided the Navy with 24 graceful crab (Cancer gracilis) as well as 9 Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) collected using a trawl net in outer Sinclair Inlet. The PSEMP team also supplied the Navy with 24 graceful crab netted from a reference location, the Nisqually Reach. The Navy’s sampling team collected 24 graceful crab within OU B Marine using baited traps. The Navy team prepared a total of 81 crab samples, made up as individual whole-body samples from each graceful crab and edible tissue from the large claws of each individual Dungeness crab. Each of the crab samples was analyzed



for methyl mercury and stable isotopes. Half of the samples were also analyzed for total mercury.

3.5 SHINER PERCH

The target number of 24 shiner perch each from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and Nisqually Reach was achieved. The Navy team prepared samples of shiner perch (Cymatogaster aggregata) collected by PSEMP using a trawl net in both outer Sinclair Inlet and Nisqually Reach. The Navy team collected shiner perch for OU B Marine using hand lines from Pier 7, a location corresponding to Zone 4 as defined in the 2013 SAP and cell 69 of the long-term 500’ monitoring grid for OU B Marine. The Navy team submitted the total of 72 perch for individual whole-body analysis for total mercury and stable isotopes. These perch samples were not analyzed for methyl mercury because it is commonly assumed that all mercury in fin fish tissues is in the form of methyl mercury.

3.6 STAGHORN SCULPIN

The target number of 24 staghorn sculpin was only achieved for Nisqually Reach. The Navy team prepared samples of staghorn sculpin (Leptocottus armatus) collected by PSEMP using a trawl net in outer Sinclair Inlet and Nisqually Reach and from a separate collection performed by the Navy using hand lines within OU B Marine. The PSEMP team collected a total of 7 sculpin from outer Sinclair Inlet and 24 from Nisqually Reach. The Navy team collected an additional 3 sculpin from outer Sinclair Inlet and a single sculpin from OU B Marine. The Navy submitted the combined total of 35 sculpin in whole- body form for individual analysis for total mercury and stable isotopes. The sculpin samples were not analyzed for methyl mercury because it was assumed that all mercury in fish tissues is in the form of methyl mercury.

The results of the laboratory analysis of these sediment and tissue samples are presented in the next section.

HoodCanal

Carr Inlet

Sinclair Inlet

Nisqually Reach

(Clams)(Sediment)

(Shiner Surfperch)(Staghorn Sculpin)(Crabs)

0 52.5

Miles

Figure 3-1Reference

Sampling Locations

Delivery Order 0051Bremerton Naval Complex

2013 Marine Tissue SamplingOU B Marine

LegendStudy Area

Selected Reference Stations

Canada

Washington

Oregon

Pa

th:

J:\G

IS\P

roje

cts\

NA

VY

\PS

NS

\ID

IQ\D

O 2

8\F

ish

Stu

dy\

Fig

3-1

Ref

ere

nce

Sam

plin

g L

oca

tion

s.m

xd

Da

te S

aved

: 3/

19/

201

4 1

:34

:52

PM

U.S. NAVY

(Species/Matrix)



4.0 RESULTS OF 2013 SEDIMENT AND TISSUE SAMPLING

This section presents the data resulting from the 2013 sampling of marine sediments and tissues in both graphical and tabular forms. Basic statistics are provided for the data, broken out by medium, species, and sampling area. However, no elaborate data analysis or interpretation is presented in this report. The data are expected to be used in the short term to support the process of identifying additional needed data and scoping potential additional field work. A future monitoring report will document further analyses expected to be performed on the data.

4.1 MARINE SEDIMENTS

The results of the laboratory analysis of 0-3 cm sediments collected to map methyl mercury concentrations in 31 locations within Sinclair Inlet, including 2 field duplicates, are presented in Table 4-1. Note that because methyl mercury concentrations are typically much lower than total mercury concentrations, different units are used with these parameters for ease of presentation. Table 4-2 presents some basic summary statistics for TOC, fines, total mercury, methyl mercury, and the ratio of methyl mercury to total mercury. The total mercury and methyl mercury results for the locations within OU B Marine (500’ grid) are mapped on Figure 4-1, and the results for the locations in outer Sinclair Inlet (1,500’ grid) are shown in Figure 4-2. The sediment total mercury and methyl mercury data are also shown in the form of box-whiskers plots in Figures 4-3 and 4-4.

The statistical summary in Table 4-2 is helpful for making some basic comparisons between the results for the samples from OU B Marine and those from outer Sinclair Inlet. The average percent fines for OU B Marine locations is 73 percent and for the outer Sinclair Inlet locations is 63 percent. The average TOC value is 2.6 percent for both areas. The average total mercury concentrations for OU B Marine and outer Sinclair Inlet are 0.71 and 0.53 mg/kg. For methyl mercury, the pattern is reversed, with average concentrations of 2.1 µg/kg for OU B Marine and 3.0 µg/kg for Outer Sinclair Inlet. The average ratio of measured methyl mercury to total mercury for the samples from OU B Marine is 0.34 percent compared to 0.61 percent for the Outer Sinclair Inlet locations. This suggests that conditions in the sampled outer Sinclair Inlet locations may be more conducive to mercury methylation processes than the locations sampled in OU B Marine.

Table 4-3 presents the results of analyzing a limited number of 0-10 cm sediment samples collected in the vicinity of clam and crab tissue sampling locations. A single co-located sediment sample was analyzed for each location where clams were collected within OU B Marine, in outer Sinclair Inlet, and at the reference location in Carr Inlet. Two or more co-located sediment samples were collected in each of four zones within OU B Marine where crabs



were collected, but no co-located sediment samples were collected for the crabs collected by trawl net in outer Sinclair Inlet and in Nisqually Reach.

Four of the 0-10 cm co-located sediment samples were collected from locations in OU B Marine where a 0-3 cm sample was also collected for mapping of methyl mercury. Table 4-4 presents the results for these four pairs of samples. The 0-3 cm horizon was selected for mapping of methyl mercury based on the hypothesis that the highest methyl mercury concentrations are likely to be found in quite shallow sediments. This table allows a limited test of this hypothesis. For all four sample pairs the methyl mercury concentration is higher in the shallower 0-3 cm sample, supporting the hypothesis.

4.2 CLAM SAMPLES

The results of lab analysis of a total of 72 single-clam samples, 24 each collected from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and the selected reference location of Penrose Point State Park in Carr Inlet are presented in Table 4-5. All of the clam samples were analyzed for methyl mercury and half of the samples were also analyzed for total mercury. The clam results are also depicted in the form of box-whiskers plots in Figures 4-5 and 4-6. Basic statistics for the clam results are presented in Table 4-6. The statistics are compiled for all clams collected at OU B Marine, in outer Sinclair Inlet, and in Carr Inlet, and also by species and subarea sampled at OU B Marine and outer Sinclair Inlet.

Table 4-6 shows that for all clams collected from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and Carr Inlet, the average total mercury concentrations are 0.021, 0.017, and 0.011 mg/kg, respectively. The average methyl mercury concentrations for the three areas are 7.1, 7.6, and 3.8 µg/kg. The average ratios of methyl mercury to total mercury for the clams from these three collection areas are 32, 44, and 36 percent.

The results of analysis of sediment samples collected in the vicinity of the clam collection areas are included in Table 4-3. Since only single sediment samples were collected from clam collection locations, no statistics were calculated for these samples.

4.3 CRAB SAMPLES

The lab results for the 72 individual graceful crab whole-body samples and 9 Dungeness crab claw tissue samples are presented in Table 4-7. A total of 24 graceful crab each were collected from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and Nisqually Reach. The Dungeness crab were collected in outer Sinclair Inlet. All of the graceful crab samples were analyzed for methyl mercury and half were also analyzed for total mercury. The Dungeness crab samples were all analyzed for both methyl mercury and total mercury. The crab results are presented in the form



of box whiskers plots in Figures 4-7 and 4-8. Table 4-8 presents summary statistics for the crab data for the three collections areas as well as a breakdown of statistics for four sub-areas within OU B Marine where graceful crab were collected.

Table 4-8 shows that the average total mercury measured in graceful crab from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and Nisqually Reach, respectively is 0.064, 0.053, and 0.040 mg/kg. The average methyl mercury level is 26, 18, and 12 µg/kg. The average ratio of methyl mercury to total mercury is 41, 33, and 36 percent.

For the Dungeness crab, the average total mercury and methyl mercury levels are 0.15 mg/kg and 56 µg/kg. The average ratio of methyl mercury to total mercury is 42 percent.

The results of analysis of sediment samples collected in the vicinity of the crab collection in OU B Marine are included in Table 4-3. A statistical summary of these sediment results is presented in Table 4-9.

Box whiskers plots of the crab data are included in Figures 4-5 and 4-6.

4.4 SHINER PERCH SAMPLES

The results of analysis of 72 shiner perch, 24 each from OU B Marine, outer Sinclair Inlet, and Nisqually Reach, are shown in Table 4-10. All of the perch samples were analyzed for total mercury. The results are shown in the form of box whiskers plots on Figure 4-9. A statistical summary by area is shown in Table 4-11. The average total mercury values for the three areas are 0.080, 0.069, and 0.054 mg/kg, respectively.

4.5 STAGHORN SCULPIN SAMPLES

Table 4-12 presents the results of analysis of 35 individual staghorn sculpin samples, 1 collected from OU B Marine, 10 collected in outer Sinclair Inlet, and 24 collected from Nisqually Reach. All of the sculpin samples were analyzed for total mercury. The results are presented as box whiskers plots in Figure 4-10. Summary statistics for the sculpin data for the three areas, including a breakout of two subareas in outer Sinclair Inlet, are shown in Table 4-13. The table shows that the average total mercury level for the sculpin for the three collection areas are 0.011, 0.065, and 0.063 mg/kg.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

500' Grid n=20 1,500' Grid n=11

Tota

l Mer

cury

, mg/

kg

Figure 4-3 Total Mercury in 0-3 Cm Sinclair Inlet Sediments

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

500' Grid n=20 1,500' Grid n=11

Met

hyl M

ercu

ry, μ

g/kg

Figure 4-4 Methyl Mercury in 0-3 Cm Sinclair Inlet Sediments

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

Clams-OUBM n=12 Clams-Sinclair n=12 Clams-Carr n=12

Tota

l Mer

cury

, mg/

kg

Figure 4-5 Total Mercury in Clams from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Clams-OUBM n=24 Clams-Sinclair n=24 Clams-Carr n=24

Met

hyl M

ercu

ry, μ

g/kg

Figure 4-6 Methyl Mercury in Clams from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Graceful Crab-OUBM n=12 Graceful Crab-Sinclair n=12 Dungeness Crab-Sinclair n=9 Graceful Crab-Nisqually n=24

Tota

l Mer

cury

, mg/

kg

Figure 4-7 Total Mercury in Crab from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Graceful Crab-OUBM n=24 Graceful Crab-Sinclair n=24 Dungeness Crab-Sinclair n=9 Graceful Crab-Nisqually n=24

Met

hyl M

ercu

ry, µ

g/kg

Figure 4-8 Methyl Mercury in Crab from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Shiner Perch-OUBM n=24 Shiner Perch-Sinclair n=24 Shiner Perch-Nisqually n=24

Tota

l Mer

cury

, mg/

kg

Figure 4-9 Total Mercury in Shiner Perch from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

Staghorn Sculpin-Sinclair n=10 Staghorn Sculpin-Nisqually n=24

Tota

l Mer

cury

, mg/

kg

Figure 4-10 Total Mercury in Staghorn Sculpin from Sinclair Inlet and Reference Locations


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxvii

Table 4-1 2013 Sinclair Inlet 0-3 Cm Sediments for Mapping of Methyl Mercury

Grid Location Sample Name

Fines (clay + silt)

(%) TOC (%)

Total Mercury (mg/kg)

Methyl Mercury (μg/kg)

Methyl/ Total Mercury

(%) 500' Grid - OU B Marine 500-08 SD-18 90 2.6 0.87 2.6 0.30 500-11 SD-19 83 2.2 0.48 1.9 0.40 500-11 (FD) SD-20 78 2.2 0.51 1.7 0.33 500-18 SD-21 45 0.86 0.29 3.0 1.03 500-19 SD-22 90 2.6 0.82 0.16 J 0.020 500-29 SD-23 60 3.3 0.76 0.20 J 0.026 500-30 SD-24 66 2.8 0.88 2.9 0.33 500-32 SD-25 86 2.6 0.86 1.5 0.17 500-37 SD-26 68 2.2 1.3 2.3 0.18 500-38 SD-27 56 2.0 0.58 0.98 0.17 500-39 SD-28 79 3.8 1.2 3.9 0.33 500-44 SD-29 64 2.6 0.47 3.5 0.74 500-46 SD-30 28 1.0 0.26 1.5 0.58 500-47 SD-31 71 2.3 1.0 1.7 0.17 500-49 SD-32 92 3.1 0.52 1.2 0.23 500-52 SD-33 84 3.6 0.67 4.4 0.66 500-53 SD-34 88 3.0 0.72 0.30 U 0.021 500-57 SD-35 82 3.1 0.73 3.8 0.52 500-61 SD-36 87 3.1 0.64 2.3 0.36 500-65 SD-37 82 3.3 0.67 2.8 0.42 500-70 SD-38 69 2.7 0.51 0.43 J 0.084 1,500' Grid - Outer Sinclair Inlet 1,500-04 SD-39 22 0.62 0.078 0.75 0.96 1,500-05 SD-40 76 3.3 0.48 5.9 1.23 1,500-05 (FD) SD-41 77 3.3 0.45 6.2 1.38 1,500-08 SD-42 59 3.3 0.84 4.4 0.52 1,500-12 SD-43 32 0.80 0.088 0.64 0.73 1,500-13 SD-44 90 3.3 0.84 7.4 0.88 1,500-16 SD-45 76 4.1 0.64 2.7 0.42 1,500-18 SD-46 79 3.6 0.62 3.1 0.50 1,500-21 SD-47 92 3.5 1.1 3.2 0.29 1,500-25 SD-48 21 0.86 0.19 0.56 J 0.29 1,500-31 SD-49 73 2.6 0.49 1.5 0.31 1,500-32 SD-50 71 2.4 0.46 2.5 0.54

Notes: FD - field duplicate U - not detected J - estimated value


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxviii

Table 4-2 Statistical Summary of 0-3 Cm Sediments for Methyl Mercury Mapping

Parameter # of

Analyses # of

Detections Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Deviation

OU B Marine Methyl Mercury Mapping

Fines (%) 20 20 28 92 73 17

TOC (%) 20 20 0.86 3.8 2.6 0.75

Total Mercury (mg/kg) 20 20 0.26 1.3 0.71 0.27

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 20 19 0.15 4.4 2.1 1.3

Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 0.020 1.0 0.34 0.27

Outer Sinclair Inlet Methyl Mercury Mapping

Fines (%) 11 11 21 92 63 26

TOC (%) 11 11 0.62 4.1 2.6 1.3





J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxix

Table 4-3 2013 0-10 Cm Sediments Co-Located With Tissue Samples

Location Sample Name

Fines (clay + silt)

(%) TOC (%)

Total Mercury(mg/kg)



(%) Description Sediments Co-Located with Clam Samples in OU B Marine 500-18 SD-10 2.7 0.19 0.051 0.060 J 0.12 OU B Marine Zone 1 clam collection 500-39 SD-11-Clam 25 4.9 0.44 4.0 0.91 OU B Marine Zone 2 clam collection 500-69 SD-12 5.2 0.85 0.076 0.53 0.70 OU B Marine Zone 4 clam collection 500-69 SD-13 (FD) 5.8 0.60 0.15 0.24 J 0.16 OU B Marine Zone 4 clam collection Sediments Co-Located with Clam Samples in Outer Sinclair Inlet 1,500-12 SD-15 5.0 0.18 0.018 0.10 U 0.56 Ross Point clam collection 1,500-26 SD-16 28 0.67 0.062 0.53 0.85 Blackjack Creek estuary clam collection Sediments Co-Located with Clam Samples in Carr Inlet Carr Inlet SD-17 5.7 0.31 0.011 0.12 J 1.1 Penrose Point State Park clam collection Sediments Co-Located with Crab Samples in OU B Marine 500-11 SD-01 45 1.2 0.26 1.5 0.58 OU B Marine Zone 1 crab collection 500-24 SD-02 84 3.4 3.1 1.9 0.061 OU B Marine Zone 1 crab collection 500-31 SD-03 59 2.2 0.64 2.9 0.45 OU B Marine Zone 2 crab collection 500-31 SD-04 (FD) 55 2.5 0.74 1.8 0.24 OU B Marine Zone 2 crab collection 500-39 SD-11 79 3.7 1.6 1.8 0.11 OU B Marine Zone 2 crab collection 500-45 SD-05 89 3.2 0.84 1.9 0.23 OU B Marine Zone 2 crab collection 500-44 SD-06 47 1.5 0.31 1.9 0.61 OU B Marine Zone 3 crab collection 500-55 SD-07 54 1.8 1.2 2.5 0.21 OU B Marine Zone 3 crab collection 500-59 SD-08 84 3.4 0.85 1.2 0.14 OU B Marine Zone 4 crab collection 500-61 SD-09 77 2.9 0.62 1.2 0.19 OU B Marine Zone 4 crab collection

Notes: FD - field duplicate J - estimated value U - not detected


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxx

Table 4-4 Comparison of Co-located 0-3 Cm and 0-10 Cm Sediment Samples

Grid Location

Sample Name (0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)

Fines (clay + silt - %)

(0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)

TOC (%)

(0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)


(0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)


(0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)


(%) (0-3 Cm//0-10 Cm)

500-11* SD-19&20//SD-01 80//45 2.2//1.2 0.50//0.26 1.8//1.5 0.36//0.58

500-39 SD-28//SD-11 79//79 3.8//3.7 1.2//1.6 3.9//1.8 0.33//0.11

500-44 SD-29//SD-06 64//47 2.6//1.5 0.47//0.31 3.5//1.9 0.74//0.61

500-61 SD-36//SD-09 87//77 3.1//2.9 0.64//0.62 2.3//1.2 0.36//0.19

Note: * 0-3 cm values are averages of primary sample and field duplicate.


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxi

Table 4-5 2013 Clam Tissue Samples

Sample Name



Methyl/Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio

Stable Isotope Carbon Ratio Description

Co-located Sediment Sample

Clams from OU B Marine OUBCL-01 0.031 9.8 32 12.01 -15.64 Single Manilla clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10

OUBCL-02 --- 15 --- 10.88 -16.29 Single Manilla clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10

OUBCL-03 0.018 6.3 35 11.61 -15.51 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10

OUBCL-04 --- 7.1 --- 13.08 -14.54 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10

OUBCL-05 0.022 12 55 10.61 -16.04 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10


OUBCL-07 0.020 3.4 17 11.11 -15.90 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 1 cell 500-18 (Charleston Beach) SD-10


OUBCL-09 0.028 2.9 10 12.04 -14.87 Single Manilla clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-10 --- 1.5 --- 12.26 -14.81 Single Manilla clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-11 0.015 0.80 J 5.3 11.16 -15.59 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-12 --- 7.0 --- 10.84 -15.55 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-13 0.036 14 39 11.23 -15.66 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-14 --- 15 --- 11.03 -15.62 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-15 0.021 7.5 36 10.20 -15.65 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-16 --- 9.9 --- 11.17 -15.64 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 2 cell 500-39 SD-11-Clam

OUBCL-17 0.021 5.5 26 11.25 -15.21 Single Manilla clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-18 --- 6.1 --- 10.98 -15.44 Single Manilla clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-19 0.015 3.5 23 10.48 -15.79 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)


Table 4-5 (Continued) 2013 Clam Tissue Samples

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxii

Sample Name



Methyl/Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio



OUBCL-20 --- 6.6 --- 10.76 -15.48 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-21 0.013 8.9 68 13.78 -14.98 Single Littleneck clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-22 --- 8.9 --- 10.69 -15.37 Single Butter clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-23 0.015 5.9 39 10.33 -15.48 Single Butter clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)

OUBCL-24 --- 3.4 --- 10.30 -15.53 Single Butter clam, Zone 4 cell 500-69 SD-12, SD-13 (FD)Clams from Outer Sinclair Inlet SICL-01 --- 5.1 --- 10.76 -17.09 Single Manilla clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-02 0.018 1.1 J 6.1 9.70 -16.99 Single Manilla clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-03 --- 1.8 U --- 10.63 -16.70 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-04 0.021 2.0 U 9.5 11.32 -16.25 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-05 --- 6.1 --- 10.41 -16.14 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-26 (Blackjack Creek Estuary) SD-16

SICL-06 0.014 6.3 45 10.61 -15.86 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-26 (Blackjack Creek Estuary) SD-16



SICL-09 --- 10 --- 11.01 -15.95 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-10 0.021 9.9 47 10.99 -16.17 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-11 --- 9.8 --- 10.54 -16.25 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15

SICL-12 0.024 14 58 10.87 -17.09 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-12 (Ross Point) SD-15





J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxiii

Sample Name



Methyl/Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio












SICL-24 0.012 6.9 58 10.44 -15.99 Single Littleneck clam, cell 1,500-26 (Blackjack Creek Estuary) SD-16Clams from Carr Inlet (Penrose Point State Park) CICL-01 0.015 3.5 23 10.34 -16.39 Single Manilla clam SD-17

CICL-02 --- 1.0 --- 10.36 -16.13 Single Manilla clam SD-17

CICL-03 0.015 3.3 U 22 10.46 -15.99 Single Manilla clam SD-17

CICL-04 --- 6.6 --- 9.90 -16.46 Single Manilla clam SD-17

CICL-05 0.0066 3.3 50 11.65 -15.86 Single Littleneck clam SD-17

CICL-06 --- 4.8 --- 11.62 -16.04 Single Littleneck clam SD-17






J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxiv

Sample Name



Methyl/Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio
















CICL-23 0.012 0.70 J 5.8 11.48 -15.87 Single Littleneck clam SD-17


Notes: J - estimated value U - not detected


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxv

Table 4-6 Statistical Summary of Clam Tissues

Parameter # of

Analyses # of


ALL OU B MARINE CLAMS Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.013 0.036 0.021 0.0071

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 24 24 0.80 15 7.1 4.0

Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 5.3 68 32 18

OU B Marine Zone 1 Littleneck Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 3 3 0.018 0.022 0.020 0.0020


Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 17 55 36 19

OU B Marine Zone 1 Manila Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.031 --- Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 9.8 15 12 3.7

Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- --- --- 32 ---




OU B Marine Zone 2 Manila Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.028 --- Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 1.5 2.9 2.2 0.99



Table 4-6 (Continued) Statistical Summary of Clam Tissues

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxvi

Parameter # of

Analyses # of





OU B Marine Zone 4 Manila Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.021 --- Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 5.5 6.1 5.8 0.42


OU B Marine Zone 4 Butter Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.015 --- Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 3 3 3.4 8.9 6.1 2.8


ALL OUTER SINCLAIR INLET CLAMS Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.012 0.024 0.017 0.0040



Outer Sinclair Inlet - Ross Point Littleneck Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 5 5 0.015 0.024 0.020 0.0033

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 10 8 1.8 19 10 5.2



Table 4-6 (Continued) Statistical Summary of Clam Tissues

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxvii

Parameter # of

Analyses # of


Outer Sinclair Inlet - Ross Point Manila Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.018 --- Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 1.1 5.1 3.1 2.8

Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- --- --- 6.1 ---

Outer Sinclair Inlet - Blackjack Creek Estuary Littleneck Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 6 6 0.012 0.017 0.014 0.0019


Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 29 58 44 9.3

ALL CARR INLET CLAMS Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.0054 0.015 0.011 0.0035



Carr Inlet - Penrose Point State Park Littleneck Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 10 10 0.0054 0.015 0.010 0.0031



Carr Inlet - Penrose Point State Park Manila Clams Total Mercury (mg/kg) 2 2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.0



Note - Non-detects included in statistics at reporting limit


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxviii

Table 4-7 2013 Crab Tissue Samples

Sample Name



Methyl/ Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio



Graceful Crab from OU B Marine OUBCG-01 --- 18 --- 11.84 -12.94 Whole graceful crab, Zone 1 cell 500-11 SD-01

OUBCG-02 0.095 46 48 11.58 -13.84 Whole graceful crab, Zone 1 cell 500-11 SD-01

OUBCG-03 --- 17 --- 12.16 -14.57 Whole graceful crab, Zone 1 cell 500-24 SD-02


OUBCG-05 --- 33 --- 10.58 -13.67 Whole graceful crab, Zone 1 cell 500-26 None

OUBCG-06 0.054 36 67 12.04 -13.76 Whole graceful crab, Zone 1 cell 500-26 None

OUBCG-07 --- 36 --- 11.41 -14.98 Whole graceful crab, Zone 2 cell 500-31 SD-03, SD-04 (FD)

OUBCG-08 0.033 12 36 11.40 -13.99 Whole graceful crab, Zone 2 cell 500-31 SD-03, SD-04 (FD)


OUBCG-10 0.055 9.7 18 12.23 -13.26 Whole graceful crab, Zone 2 cell 500-45 SD-05





OUBCG-15 --- 26 --- 11.32 -14.83 Whole graceful crab, Zone 3 cell 500-53 None

OUBCG-16 0.045 15 33 11.51 -14.19 Whole graceful crab, Zone 3 cell 500-53 None





Table 4-7 (Continued) 2013 Crab Tissue Samples

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxix

Sample Name



Methyl/ Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio





OUBCG-22 --- 3.7 --- 11.96 -14.13 Whole graceful crab, Zone 4 cell 500-61 SD-09

OUBCG-23 0.024 3.4 U 7.1 10.71 -13.29 Whole graceful crab, Zone 4 cell 500-66 None

OUBCG-24 --- 29 --- 10.11 -14.61 Whole graceful crab, Zone 4 cell 500-66 None Graceful Crab from Outer Sinclair Inlet (PSEMP Collection) SICG-01 --- 16 --- 11.86 -14.69 Whole graceful crab None

SICG-02 0.049 14 29 11.64 -14.97 Whole graceful crab None

SICG-03 --- 14 --- 11.51 -14.59 Whole graceful crab None

SICG-04 0.023 4.0 17 10.49 -11.64 Whole graceful crab None



SICG-07 --- 4.6 --- 10.08 -14.40 Whole graceful crab None



SICG-10 0.070 6.1 8.7 12.12 -14.37 Whole graceful crab None







J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxx

Sample Name



Methyl/ Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio












SICG-24 0.058 22 38 10.97 -12.51 Whole graceful crab None Dungeness Crab from Outer Sinclair Inlet (PSEMP Collection) SICM-01 0.13 24 18 12.73 -14.42 Claws of Single Dungeness crab None

SICM-02 0.27 68 25 14.63 -13.54 Claws of Single Dungeness crab None










J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxi

Sample Name



Methyl/ Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio



Graceful Crab from Nisqually Reach (PSEMP Collection) NICG-01 --- 11 --- 12.45 -14.56 Whole graceful crab None

NICG-02 0.035 19 54 13.15 -14.65 Whole graceful crab None

NICG-03 --- 12 --- 12.11 -15.12 Whole graceful crab None







NICG-10 0.025 6.2 25 12.50 -12.87 Whole graceful crab None

NICG-11 --- 7.4 --- 11.58 -13.64 Whole graceful crab None



NICG-14 0.044 7.2 16 12.10 -15.19 Whole graceful crab None




NICG-18 0.058 3.2 5.5 13.09 -13.79 Whole graceful crab None




J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxii

Sample Name



Methyl/ Total

Mercury (%)

Stable Isotope

Nitrogen Ratio









J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxiii

Table 4-8 Statistical Summary of Crab Tissues

Parameter # of

Analyses # of


ALL OU B MARINE CRAB Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.024 0.12 0.064 0.029

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 24 23 1.7 89 26 18


OU B Marine Zone 1 Graceful Crab Total Mercury (mg/kg) 3 3 0.054 0.095 0.072 0.021

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 6 6 17 46 29 11







Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 33 39 35 3.3




OUTER SINCLAIR INLET - PSEMP COLLECTION OF GRACEFUL CRAB Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.015 0.10 0.053 0.024


Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 8.7 59 33 18OUTER SINCLAIR INLET - PSEMP COLLECTION OF DUNGENESS CRAB Total Mercury (mg/kg) 9 9 0.066 0.27 0.15 0.074



NISQUALLY REACH - PSEMP COLLECTION OF GRACEFUL CRAB Total Mercury (mg/kg) 12 12 0.025 0.059 0.040 0.013

Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 24 24 3.2 25 12 5.1



J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxiv

Table 4-9 Statistical Summary of Sediments Co-located with Crab Tissues

Parameter # of

Analyses # of


OU B Marine Zone 1 Sediment Co-located with Crab Fines (%) 2 2 45 84 64 28 TOC (%) 2 2 1.2 3.4 2.3 1.6 Total Mercury (mg/kg) 2 2 0.26 3.1 1.7 2.0 Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 1.5 1.9 1.7 0.28 Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 0.061 0.58 0.32 0.36OU B Marine Zone 2 Sediment Co-located with Crab Fines (%) 3 3 57 89 75 16 TOC (%) 3 3 2.4 3.7 3.1 0.66 Total Mercury (mg/kg) 3 3 0.69 1.6 1.0 0.49 Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 3 3 1.8 2.4 2.0 0.32 Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 0.11 0.35 0.23 0.12OU B Marine Zone 3 Sediment Co-located with Crab Fines (%) 2 2 47 54 50 4.9 TOC (%) 2 2 1.5 1.8 1.6 0.21 Total Mercury (mg/kg) 2 2 0.31 1.2 0.76 0.63 Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 1.9 2.5 2.2 0.42 Methyl/Total Mercury (%) --- --- 0.21 0.61 0.41 0.29OU B Marine Zone 4 Sediment Co-located with Crab Fines (%) 2 2 77 84 80 4.9 TOC (%) 2 2 2.9 3.4 3.2 0.35 Total Mercury (mg/kg) 2 2 0.62 0.85 0.74 0.16 Methyl Mercury (µg/kg) 2 2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.0



J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxv

Table 4-10 2013 Shiner Perch Tissue Samples

Sample Name


Stable Isotope Nitrogen

Ratio Stable Isotope Carbon Ratio Description

Shiner Perch from OU B Marine OUBSSP-01 0.073 13.55 -16.75 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-02 0.060 12.66 -16.42 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-03 0.072 13.26 -16.68 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-04 0.10 13.46 -17.02 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-05 0.21 13.54 -17.57 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-06 0.10 14.22 -15.93 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-07 0.073 13.85 -16.09 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-08 0.060 13.18 -16.18 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-09 0.15 13.99 -17.35 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-10 0.057 13.58 -16.41 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-11 0.084 13.45 -16.79 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-12 0.023 12.97 -17.18 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-13 0.14 14.01 -15.82 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-14 0.066 13.31 -16.34 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-15 0.075 13.15 -16.42 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-16 0.038 12.49 -16.59 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-17 0.088 12.82 -16.86 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-18 0.086 13.84 -16.27 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-19 0.060 13.49 -15.90 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-20 0.059 13.71 -12.89 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-21 0.059 12.95 -16.44 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-22 0.048 13.82 -16.37 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-23 0.060 13.15 -16.26 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 OUBSSP-24 0.080 13.41 -16.60 Whole body perch, Zone 4 cell 500-69 Shiner Perch from Outer Sinclair Inlet (PSEMP Collection) SISSP-01 0.033 14.77 -17.56 Whole body perch SISSP-02 0.060 14.08 -16.80 Whole body perch SISSP-03 0.10 14.02 -15.72 Whole body perch SISSP-04 0.14 13.77 -15.71 Whole body perch SISSP-05 0.016 12.71 -15.66 Whole body perch SISSP-06 0.079 14.35 -15.48 Whole body perch SISSP-07 0.030 13.56 -12.68 Whole body perch SISSP-08 0.025 12.65 -16.24 Whole body perch SISSP-09 0.052 14.29 -15.16 Whole body perch


Table 4-10 (Continued) 2013 Shiner Perch Tissue Samples

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxvi

Sample Name




SISSP-10 0.062 13.25 -14.88 Whole body perch SISSP-11 0.069 13.69 -14.72 Whole body perch SISSP-12 0.060 14.55 -17.55 Whole body perch SISSP-13 0.066 13.32 -14.79 Whole body perch SISSP-14 0.082 14.22 -14.62 Whole body perch SISSP-15 0.070 13.94 -15.32 Whole body perch SISSP-16 0.10 14.04 -14.17 Whole body perch SISSP-17 0.064 13.34 -15.27 Whole body perch SISSP-18 0.093 14.17 -14.86 Whole body perch SISSP-19 0.082 14.38 -14.87 Whole body perch SISSP-20 0.056 14.46 -13.74 Whole body perch SISSP-21 0.068 13.58 -12.50 Whole body perch SISSP-22 0.089 14.35 -14.73 Whole body perch SISSP-23 0.049 12.41 -15.45 Whole body perch SISSP-24 0.11 13.94 -14.19 Whole body perch Shiner Perch from Nisqually Reach (PSEMP Collection) NISSP-01 0.088 14.29 -17.74 Whole body perch NISSP-02 0.058 13.81 -15.56 Whole body perch NISSP-03 0.036 12.63 -15.81 Whole body perch NISSP-04 0.061 14.85 -16.63 Whole body perch NISSP-05 0.043 13.66 -16.68 Whole body perch NISSP-06 0.042 14.04 -16.26 Whole body perch NISSP-07 0.050 14.23 -15.58 Whole body perch NISSP-08 0.057 14.57 -15.87 Whole body perch NISSP-09 0.079 14.66 -17.29 Whole body perch NISSP-10 0.021 13.96 -18.44 Whole body perch NISSP-11 0.026 14.26 -15.94 Whole body perch NISSP-12 0.061 14.86 -13.66 Whole body perch NISSP-13 0.066 14.77 -16.94 Whole body perch NISSP-14 0.067 15.01 -16.12 Whole body perch NISSP-15 0.033 14.23 -15.36 Whole body perch NISSP-16 0.038 14.44 -16.20 Whole body perch NISSP-17 0.057 15.26 -17.24 Whole body perch NISSP-18 0.054 14.52 -16.77 Whole body perch


Table 4-10 (Continued) 2013 Shiner Perch Tissue Samples

J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxvii

Sample Name




NISSP-19 0.073 14.40 -15.34 Whole body perch NISSP-20 0.063 15.32 -17.04 Whole body perch NISSP-21 0.058 15.07 -15.91 Whole body perch NISSP-22 0.050 13.37 -13.19 Whole body perch NISSP-23 0.059 14.63 -15.16 Whole body perch

NISSP-24 0.048 14.60 -16.88 Whole body perch


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxviii

Table 4-11 Statistical Summary of Shiner Surfperch

Parameter # of Analyses # of Detections Minimum Maximum Mean Standard Deviation

OU B Marine Zone 4 Surfperch Total Mercury (mg/kg) 24 24 0.023 0.21 0.080 0.039Outer Sinclair Inlet - PSEMP Collection of Surfperch Total Mercury (mg/kg) 24 24 0.016 0.14 0.069 0.029Nisqually Reach - PSEMP Collection of Surfperch



J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxxxix

Table 4-12 2013 Staghorn Sculpin Tissue Samples

Sample Name


Stable Isotope Nitrogen Ratio


Staghorn Sculpin from OU B Marine OUBSTS-07 0.11 16.22 -13.38 Whole body sculpin, Zone 2 cell 500-39 Staghorn Sculpin from Outer Sinclair Inlet SISTS-01 0.11 16.29 -15.90 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-02 0.054 14.75 -14.12 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-03 0.082 14.31 -15.12 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-04 0.11 14.89 -14.34 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-05 0.055 14.13 -13.34 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-06 0.059 15.19 -13.70 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-07 0.017 14.23 -16.33 Whole body sculpin (PSEMP Collection) SISTS-08 0.040 15.04 -14.21 Whole body sculpin, Ross Point SISTS-09 0.069 14.42 -14.63 Whole body sculpin, Ross Point SISTS-10 0.054 14.51 -14.45 Whole body sculpin, Ross Point Staghorn Sculpin from Nisqually Reach (PSEMP Collection) NISTS-01 0.046 17.39 -14.21 Whole body sculpin NISTS-02 0.052 17.22 -13.69 Whole body sculpin NISTS-03 0.052 16.83 -13.23 Whole body sculpin NISTS-04 0.050 17.29 -13.20 Whole body sculpin NISTS-05 0.030 16.57 -13.39 Whole body sculpin NISTS-06 0.051 16.72 -14.29 Whole body sculpin NISTS-07 0.10 17.53 -13.36 Whole body sculpin NISTS-08 0.040 16.64 -13.44 Whole body sculpin NISTS-09 0.16 15.83 -13.27 Whole body sculpin NISTS-10 0.042 16.77 -13.71 Whole body sculpin NISTS-11 0.078 16.46 -13.55 Whole body sculpin NISTS-12 0.047 16.69 -14.57 Whole body sculpin NISTS-13 0.056 16.63 -13.32 Whole body sculpin NISTS-14 0.092 16.26 -12.76 Whole body sculpin NISTS-15 0.062 16.61 -12.71 Whole body sculpin NISTS-16 0.073 16.35 -13.87 Whole body sculpin NISTS-17 0.061 15.84 -14.19 Whole body sculpin NISTS-18 0.080 16.29 -13.64 Whole body sculpin NISTS-19 0.061 15.94 -14.56 Whole body sculpin NISTS-20 0.052 15.86 -14.04 Whole body sculpin NISTS-21 0.042 16.11 -13.30 Whole body sculpin NISTS-22 0.040 16.44 -13.11 Whole body sculpin NISTS-23 0.024 15.74 -15.25 Whole body sculpin NISTS-24 0.11 16.28 -13.91 Whole body sculpin


J:\Resources\Secure\WP-Data\09205\1502.002\Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet - Text.docxxl

Table 4-13 Statistical Summary of Staghorn Sculpin

Parameter # of

Analyses # of


OU B Marine Zone 2 Sculpin Total Mercury (mg/kg) 1 1 --- --- 0.011 --- All Outer Sinclair Inlet Sculpin Total Mercury (mg/kg) 10 10 0.017 0.11 0.065 0.029 Outer Sinclair Inlet - PSEMP Collection of Sculpin Total Mercury (mg/kg) 7 7 0.017 0.11 0.070 0.034 Outer Sinclair Inlet - Ross Point Sculpin Total Mercury (mg/kg) 3 3 0.040 0.069 0.054 0.015Nisqually Reach - PSEMP Collection of Sculpin




5.0 REFERENCES

U.S. Navy. 2013. Final 2013 Sinclair Inlet Marine Monitoring Sampling and Analysis Plan, Bremerton Naval Complex, Bremerton, Washington. Prepared by URS for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Northwest, under Contract N44255-09-D-4001. June 24, 2013.

———. 2010. Final Technical Memorandum: Human Health Risk Evaluation of Mercury in Sinclair Inlet Seafood, Operable Unit B Marine, Bremerton Naval Complex, Bremerton, Washington. Prepared by URS for Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Northwest, under Contract N44255-05-D-5100. August 12, 2010.

U.S. Navy, Washington State Department of Ecology, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Navy, Ecology, and USEPA). 2000. Final Record of Decision, BNC OU B Marine. June 6, 2000.

Appendix A

Summary of Physical Parameters for 2013 Marine Tissue Samples

SAMPLE ID AREA STATION SPECIES LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)OUBCL-01 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Manilla 72 63OUBCL-02 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Manilla 70 51OUBCL-03 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 58 38OUBCL-04 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 74 69OUBCL-05 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 54 43OUBCL-06 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 48 22OUBCL-07 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 51 33OUBCL-08 OU B Charleston Beach 500-18 Clam, Littleneck 44 21OUBCL-09 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Manilla 52 46OUBCL-10 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Manilla 47 33OUBCL-11 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 55 36OUBCL-12 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 48 25OUBCL-13 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 50 27OUBCL-14 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 41 17OUBCL-15 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 38 12OUBCL-16 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Clam, Littleneck 38 10OUBCL-17 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Manilla 65 102OUBCL-18 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Manilla 51 44OUBCL-19 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Littleneck 56 49OUBCL-20 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Littleneck 46 29OUBCL-21 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Littleneck 38 19OUBCL-22 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Butter 91 210OUBCL-23 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Butter 68 98OUBCL-24 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Clam, Butter 73 96SICL-01 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Manilla 56 54SICL-02 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Manilla 36 11SICL-03 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 56 59SICL-04 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 57 67SICL-05 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 53 48SICL-06 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 64 80SICL-07 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 50 42SICL-08 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 56 53SICL-09 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 55 59SICL-10 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 60 70SICL-11 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 58 59SICL-12 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 60 61SICL-13 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 60 57SICL-14 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 49 35SICL-15 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 54 45SICL-16 Ross Point 1500-12 Clam, Littleneck 49 38SICL-17 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 61 72SICL-18 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 49 39SICL-19 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 47 32SICL-20 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 50 37SICL-21 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 53 46SICL-22 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 49 44SICL-23 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 46 30SICL-24 Black Jack Creek 1500-26 Clam, Littleneck 48 35CICL-01 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Manilla 60 49CICL-02 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Manilla 56 45CICL-03 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Manilla 57 51CICL-04 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Manilla 58 49CICL-05 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 53 45CICL-06 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 48 33CICL-07 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 48 30CICL-08 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 48 28CICL-09 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 47 34CICL-10 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 51 38CICL-11 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 46 30CICL-12 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 46 29CICL-13 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 48 36CICL-14 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 52 42CICL-15 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 60 72CICL-16 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 46 28CICL-17 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 46 27CICL-18 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 52 39CICL-19 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 44 25CICL-20 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 46 27CICL-21 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 47 26CICL-22 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 45 31CICL-23 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 48 30CICL-24 Carr Inlet Penrose Pt Clam, Littleneck 45 24

2013 OU B Marine Sample Collection Parameters, Clams

SAMPLE ID AREA STATION SPECIES LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) GENDEROUBCG-01 OU B Zone 1 500-11 Graceful Crab 107 274 MOUBCG-02 OU B Zone 1 500-11 Graceful Crab 85 103 FOUBCG-03 OU B Zone 1 500-24 Graceful Crab 108 215 MOUBCG-04 OU B Zone 1 500-24 Graceful Crab 84 102 FOUBCG-05 OU B Zone 1 500-26 Graceful Crab 85 101 FOUBCG-06 OU B Zone 1 500-26 Graceful Crab 107 234 MOUBCG-07 OU B Zone 2 500-31 Graceful Crab 82 93 FOUBCG-08 OU B Zone 2 500-31 Graceful Crab 92 120 MOUBCG-09 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Graceful Crab 81 73 MOUBCG-10 OU B Zone 2 500-45 Graceful Crab 87 112 MOUBCG-11 OU B Zone 2 500-45 Graceful Crab 94 140 MOUBCG-12 OU B Zone 2 500-45 Graceful Crab 71 49 FOUBCG-13 OU B Zone 3 500-43 Graceful Crab 169 97 MOUBCG-14 OU B Zone 3 500-43 Graceful Crab 130 86 FGOUBCG-15 OU B Zone 3 500-53 Graceful Crab 123 88 FOUBCG-16 OU B Zone 3 500-53 Graceful Crab 198 107 MOUBCG-17 OU B Zone 3 500-55 Graceful Crab 81 80 FOUBCG-18 OU B Zone 3 500-55 Graceful Crab 74 63 FGOUBCG-19 OU B Zone 4 500-59 Graceful Crab 199 104 MOUBCG-20 OU B Zone 4 500-59 Graceful Crab 101 89 FOUBCG-21 OU B Zone 4 500-61 Graceful Crab 80 80 FOUBCG-22 OU B Zone 4 500-61 Graceful Crab 232 107 MOUBCG-23 OU B Zone 4 500-66 Graceful Crab 161 99 MOUBCG-24 OU B Zone 4 500-66 Graceful Crab 125 88 F

SICG-01 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 71 91 FGSICG-02 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 77 99 FGSICG-03 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 75 103 FGSICG-04 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 56 39 FGSICG-05 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 82 127 FGSICG-06 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 90 174 FGSICG-07 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 78 116 FGSICG-08 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 81 124 FGSICG-09 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 85 114 FSICG-10 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 82 104 FSICG-11 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 68 58 FSICG-12 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 64 51 FSICG-13 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 70 65 FSICG-14 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 60 49 FSICG-15 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 65 53 FSICG-16 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 64 36 FSICG-17 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 80 92 MSICG-18 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 100 187 MSICG-19 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 102 211 MSICG-20 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 108 237 MSICG-21 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 96 184 MSICG-22 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 101 205 MSICG-23 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 99 207 MSICG-24 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 103 235 MNICG-01 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 69 75 FGNICG-02 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 92 178 FGNICG-03 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 74 96 FGNICG-04 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 69 77 FGNICG-05 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 85 109 FGNICG-06 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 83 145 FGNICG-07 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 70 77 FGNICG-08 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 69 86 FGNICG-09 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 79 89 FNICG-10 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 60 43 FNICG-11 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 56 34 FNICG-12 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 59 42 FNICG-13 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 68 58 FNICG-14 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 71 74 FNICG-15 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 65 52 FNICG-16 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 72 75 FNICG-17 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 96 155 MNICG-18 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 102 210 MNICG-19 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 94 146 MNICG-20 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 78 92 MNICG-21 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 80 95 MNICG-22 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 79 91 MNICG-23 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 101 194 MNICG-24 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Graceful Crab 93 154 M

2013 OU B Marine Sample Collection Parameters, Graceful Crab

SAMPLE ID AREA STATION SPECIES LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g) GENDERSICM-01 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 162 748 FSICM-02 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 199 1356 FSICM-03 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 176 944 FSICM-04 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 174 860 FSICM-05 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 130 367 FSICM-06 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 155 588 FSICM-07 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 149 530 FSICM-08 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 119 264 FSICM-09 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Dungeness Crab 183 931 F

2013 OU B Marine Sample Collection Parameters, Dungeness Crab

SAMPLE ID AREA STATION SPECIES LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)OUBSSP-01 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 23OUBSSP-02 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 25OUBSSP-03 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 100 18OUBSSP-04 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 125 33OUBSSP-05 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 135 41OUBSSP-06 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 23OUBSSP-07 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 95 15OUBSSP-08 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 115 30OUBSSP-09 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 27OUBSSP-10 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 95 17OUBSSP-11 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 105 22OUBSSP-12 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 105 15OUBSSP-13 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 115 29OUBSSP-14 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 105 18OUBSSP-15 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 24OUBSSP-16 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 115 23OUBSSP-17 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 105 19OUBSSP-18 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 105 23OUBSSP-19 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 23OUBSSP-20 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 100 15OUBSSP-21 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 110 20OUBSSP-22 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 95 15OUBSSP-23 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 100 17OUBSSP-24 OU B Zone 4 500-69 Shiner Surfperch 115 27

SISSP-01 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 95 12SISSP-02 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 80 8SISSP-03 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 111 16SISSP-04 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 110 18SISSP-05 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 85 9SISSP-06 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 83 9SISSP-07 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 107 16SISSP-08 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 87 11SISSP-09 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 75 5SISSP-10 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 85 9SISSP-11 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 97 15SISSP-12 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 83 10SISSP-13 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 90 12SISSP-14 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 80 6SISSP-15 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 95 14SISSP-16 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 83 8SISSP-17 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 108 17SISSP-18 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 95 11SISSP-19 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 87 9SISSP-20 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 77 6SISSP-21 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 105 17SISSP-22 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 75 6SISSP-23 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 87 9SISSP-24 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 85 9NISSP-01 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 140 38NISSP-02 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 125 27NISSP-03 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 110 17NISSP-04 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 130 29NISSP-05 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 100 13NISSP-06 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 118 26NISSP-07 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 108 18NISSP-08 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 135 37NISSP-09 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 118 27NISSP-10 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 105 16NISSP-11 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 115 23NISSP-12 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 93 12NISSP-13 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 120 26NISSP-14 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 115 23NISSP-15 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 95 11NISSP-16 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 110 17NISSP-17 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 120 29NISSP-18 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 115 23NISSP-19 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 100 15NISSP-20 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 112 23NISSP-21 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 115 27NISSP-22 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 102 16NISSP-23 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 115 22NISSP-24 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Shiner Surfperch 112 23

2013 OU B Marine Sample Collection Parameters, Shiner Surfperch

SAMPLE ID AREA STATION SPECIES LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (g)OUBSTS-07 OU B Zone 2 500-39 Staghorn Sculpin 300 309

SISTS-01 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 300 381SISTS-02 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 199 87SISTS-03 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 203 91SISTS-04 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 187 78SISTS-05 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 172 63SISTS-06 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 160 44SISTS-07 Sinclair Inlet PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 87 8SISTS-08 Ross Point 1500-12 Staghorn Sculpin 175 65SISTS-09 Ross Point 1500-12 Staghorn Sculpin 195 86SISTS-10 Ross Point 1500-12 Staghorn Sculpin 180 73NISTS-01 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 200 129NISTS-02 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 210 140NISTS-03 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 180 92NISTS-04 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 225 145NISTS-05 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 175 76NISTS-06 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 205 105NISTS-07 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 250 210NISTS-08 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 180 76NISTS-09 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 205 93NISTS-10 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 200 114NISTS-11 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 220 116NISTS-12 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 195 81NISTS-13 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 185 91NISTS-14 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 235 155NISTS-15 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 220 150NISTS-16 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 195 98NISTS-17 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 185 75NISTS-18 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 210 111NISTS-19 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 170 70NISTS-20 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 210 113NISTS-21 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 165 52NISTS-22 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 175 67NISTS-23 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 150 43NISTS-24 Nisqually Reach PSEMP Trawl Staghorn Sculpin 170 58

2013 OU B Marine Sample Collection Parameters, Staghorn Sculpin

Appendix B

Data Usability Assessment 2013 Tissue and Sediment Sampling, OU B Marine

1.0 DATA USABILITY ASSESSMENT: LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND DATA

VALIDATION

Sediment and tissue samples and equipment rinsate blanks were analyzed by ALS Laboratories, Inc. of Kelso, Washington for total mercury by EPA Method 1631E, methyl mercury by EPA Method 1630 (modified for sediment and tissue analysis), and/or total organic carbon by the Puget Sound Estuary Program (PSEP) method. A full independent data validation (formerly known as EPA Level IV) was performed by Quality by Design of Hilo, Hawaii. Quantitative data quality was evaluated against the data quality objectives established in the project-specific SAP, the data quality criteria of the Department of Defense (DoD) Quality Systems Manual v4.2, and the analytical method requirements. Data validation was performed following the National

Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Superfund Data Review Guidance (USEPA 2010). The stable isotope data for nitrogen and carbon were not evaluated by the independent validator.

Hard copies of the laboratory data packages and data validation reports will be submitted to the NAVFAC Northwest records manager for archival with the National Archives and Records Administration. Electronic data will be loaded to the Navy’s NIRIS environmental data repository.

The following laboratory quality control parameters were evaluated by the independent validator:

COC documentation Preservation and holding times Initial and continuing calibrations Laboratory blanks Equipment rinsate blanks (applicable for total mercury only) Precision and accuracy (laboratory control sample/laboratory control sample

duplicate [LCS/LCSD] and matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate [MS/MSD]) Second source calibration verification Laboratory duplicates Compound quantitation and reported detection limits

The independent validator noted that several chain-of-custody records (COCs) do not provide proper chain of custody for evidentiary purposes. The samples remained in URS custody on ice from the time of collection until the samples were relinquished to the transportation carrier in sealed coolers. The independent validator determined that the data are acceptable for use. A summary of the data validation results by method is included in the following sections.

1.1 TOTAL MERCURY ANALYSIS BY COLD VAPOR ATOMIC FLUORESCENCE

The independent validator identified the following data quality issues for total mercury analysis:

Tissue samples collected in April 2013 were held frozen until preparation in September 2013. Various guidance and holding time studies have demonstrated that freezing sediment and tissue samples may increase the holding time for mercury analysis from 28 days up to six months; therefore, no data qualifiers were recommended.

Mercury was detected in several method blanks, but since the sample results associated with these method blanks were greater than five times the blank concentrations, no data qualifier flags were recommended.

The percent recoveries for mercury were out of criteria for several MS/MSD pairs associated with these samples due to high concentrations of target analyte in the original sample. No data qualifier flags were recommended.

The laboratory analyzed several post-digestion spikes for mercury, which are not required by the method but were within laboratory control limits.

The total mercury data were determined to be acceptable for use without qualification.

1.2 METHYL MERCURY ANALYSIS BY COLD VAPOR ATOMIC

FLUORESCENCE

The independent validator identified the following data quality issues for methyl mercury analysis:

Tissue samples collected in April 2013 were held frozen until preparation in September 2013. Various guidance and holding time studies have demonstrated that freezing sediment and tissue samples may increase the holding time for methyl mercury analysis from 28 days up to six months; therefore, no data qualifiers were recommended.

The methyl mercury results for samples SD-22, SD23, SD-38, SD-10, SD-13, OUBCL-11, SD17, SICL-02, CICL-23, and SD-48 were qualified by the laboratory with a “J” flag, indicating that reported values fell between the limit of detection (LOD) and the limit of quantitation (LOQ) and should be considered estimates. The independent validator also applied a “J” qualifier to the same results for the samples listed above to indicate estimated values.

No other qualifications were applied by the independent validator, and the methyl mercury data were determined to be acceptable for use as qualified.

1.3 TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON

No total organic carbon (TOC) data quality issues were identified by the independent validator, and the TOC data were determined to be acceptable for use without qualification.

1.4 FIELD DUPLICATES

Field duplicate precision was not assessed by the independent validator. Table 1 compares the results for the four primary sediment sample and field duplicate pairs collected. The relative percent differences (RPDs) did not exceed the measurement performance criteria of 100 percent established in Worksheet #12 of the SAP. One of the RPDs for the calculated ratio of methyl mercury to total mercury exceeds 100 percent.

Table 1

Summary of Field Duplicates from 2013 Marine Mercury Investigations

Grid

Location

Sample

Type

Fines

(clay+silt)

TOC Total Mercury

Methyl

Mercury

Methyl/Total

Mercury

(%)

RPD

(%) (%)

RPD

(%) (mg/kg)

RPD

(%) (µg/kg)

RPD

(%) (%)

RPD

(%)

500-11 ES (0-3 cm) 83

6.2 2.2

0.0 0.48

6.1 1.9

11 0.40

17 FD (0-3 cm) 78 2.2 0.51 1.7 0.33

500-31

ES (0-10 cm) 59 7.0 2.2 13 0.64 14 2.9 47 0.45 60 FD (0-10 cm) 55 2.5 0.74 1.8 0.24

500-69

ES (0-10 cm) 5.2 11 0.85 34 0.076 65 0.53 75 0.70 130 FD (0-10 cm) 5.8 0.60 0.15 0.24 0.16

1,500-05 ES (0-3 cm) 76 1.3 3.3 0.0 0.48 6.5 5.9 5.0 1.2 11 FD (0-3 cm) 77 3.3 0.45 6.2 1.4

ES = primary environmental sample

FD = field duplicate RPD = relative percent difference

1.5 DATA USABILITY SUMMARY

No significant data quality issues were identified by the independent validator. The precision and accuracy of all laboratory data were determined to be acceptable and no analytical data were rejected yielding a completeness of 100 percent for the analytical data. All planned samples were collected except that the target number of staghorn sculpin samples was not collected at all sampling areas as described in Section 3.6. The data are representative of the site conditions as defined in the project work plan. The SAP indicated that total mercury in sediment would be analyzed by EPA Method 7471B; however, EPA Method 1631E was used instead. Because EPA Method 1631E was also used to

analyze total mercury in the tissue samples, the total mercury data for sediment and tissue samples is comparable. Comparability of data is determined to be acceptable based on the participation of the laboratory in the DoD Environmental Laboratory Approval Program and Ecology certification program. As total mercury was detected above the LOQ in all the samples collected, the total mercury reporting limits were sufficient to meet the sensitivity requirements of this project. Six methyl mercury results were reported by the laboratory as not detected. Methyl mercury was not detected in the following samples:

Sample ID Matrix Sample LOD

SAP LOD

Sample LOQ

SAP LOQ

SD-15 Sediment 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 SD-34 Sediment 0.3 0.1 1.3 0.4 SICL-03 Tissue 1.8 4.0 1.8 10 SICL-04 Tissue 2.0 4.0 2.0 10 CICL-03 Tissue 3.3 4.0 3.3 10 OUBCG-23 Tissue 3.4 4.0 3.4 10 Units: ug/kg

Qualitative rather than quantitative comparison is possible with the methyl mercury results reported as not detected, and the objectives of the project were met by the methyl mercury reporting limits. Based on this data usability assessment, the overall data quality objectives were met, and all the data are acceptable for the intended purposes of the project.

Appendix C

Responses to Comments on 2013 Sinclair Inlet Marine Monitoring Data Report

Responses to Comments on Oct. 31, 2014 Phase I Data Report Suquamish Comments General Comment We need to address data quality and usability. SAP worksheets 33-36 detail the data validation and reporting requirements. While the entire validation report doesn’t need to be included, there should probably be some discussion of what was done (level IV validation) and where to find the documentation. SAP worksheet 37, however, specifies that a data usability assessment will be included in the project report. Suggest that a separate section or subsection be added to the report to address data usability. If this is to be deferred until the overall Phase 1 and 2 report is prepared, suggest providing a preliminary summary and documenting that decision. Response: A data usability assessment is included in Appendix B. Sections 3.5 and 3.6 It might be helpful to add a note to explain why perch and sculpin were not analyzed for methyl mercury. I believe it is because we can assume that all mercury in fish tissue is methyl, but I couldn’t find any specific statements to that effect in the SAP CSM or sampling rationale sections. Response: Notes were added explaining that it was assumed that all mercury measured in higher trophic level fish is in the form of methyl mercury. Page 4-2 Can we take a look at that first full paragraph and untangle it a little? I read it a couple of times and think I finally got that in all four sample pairs, methyl concentrations are higher in all the 0-3 cm intervals than in the 0-10 cm intervals. Total mercury concentrations were more variable between the two different intervals. These results seem to support the hypothesis that the highest methyl mercury concentrations are likely to be found in the shallower, 0-3 cm, interval. I’m still not sure what is being said about the ratios. Also, the RPD note in the following paragraph seems incomplete and/or out of context. Response: The wording of the subject paragraph was simplified to be clearer. The discussion of the field duplicates was moved to the data usability assessment in Appendix B. EPA Comments Lon Kissinger Comment 5 and RTC Response 5. Comment: 3.4: The 2013 SAP indicated 5 sculpin were taken from the Vendovi area and would be retained for analysis. What happened to these samples? Response: Subsequent to the collection at Vendovi the decision was made to test Nisqually Reach as an alternative reference location. Staghorn sculpin, shiner perch, and graceful crab were found to be

comparatively abundant at that location, meeting the project sampling needs. The sculpin from Vendovi were not analyzed. EPA (Keeley) Response to RTC: Please revise the report (possibly paragraph 3 of Section 3.0) to include the information that you presented in your RTC. Currently, the report does not clarify that Vendovi were not analyzed. Since the SAP indicated that they would be analyzed, and there isn’t a modification to the SAP, then the report needs to describe the deviation from the SAP. - SAP: Because Nisqually Reach was the only reference area that yielded the target number of organisms for all target species, the organisms collected from Nisqually Reach were retained for analysis to evaluate reference area tissue concentrations. However, the Vendovi Island sculpin were also retained for analysis. The Vendovi Island sculpin data could potentially provide useful information on mercury tissue concentrations in the higher trophic level finfish from the reference area with sediment characteristics most similar to Sinclair Inlet. Response: A brief explanation that the Vendovi samples were not analyzed was added to the text. Lon Kissinger Comment 6 and RTC: 6. Comment: 3.5: Is there any spatial information available on where the shiner surf perch samples were collected. Response: Shiner perch were collected from outer Sinclair Inlet and Nisqually Reach during the PSEMP field work using a trawl net. Shiner perch from OU B Marine were collected by the Navy team with hand lines from Pier 7. This OU B Marine location is in Zone 4 and corresponds to 500’ grid cell 69. EPA (Keeley) Response to RTC: Please include the underlined information in Section 3.5 of the report. Future readers of the report are unlikely to read the RTC. Response: The text was revised to clarify where the shiner perch were collected. Keeley Comments: Comment: As we have discussed, the report needs to have some sort of summary of data quality assessment. I think we are waiting to hear from Paul tomorrow, and then will decide what needs to be added to this 2013 report. Response: A data usability assessment is included in Appendix B.

Navy Responses to EPA Comments on 2013 OU B Marine Data Usability Assessment 1. Comment p. 1: Discuss Data Quality Assessment v Data Usability Assessment - if this document is a 'template' for future LTM reports, then it seems that the assessment should use the term (DQA) and provide the information described in the bullets from the 2014 plan [see attached pages from your 2014 plan.] Response: We titled the document Usability Assessment based on the term used in the 2013 sampling plan prepared in collaboration with the technical team to guide the sampling. That terminology originates in the Uniform Federal Policy guidance. The sampling plan language germane to these data and assessment is presented in Worksheet #37 of the 2013 SAP. The 2014 LTM plan referenced by EPA does not apply to this investigation. 2. Comment p. 1 (Don Matheny): In comparing the URS and CH2 data assessments and looking at the URS SAP section, the biggest difference between the two assessments is that URS didn’t show their work. And in not doing so, the reader cannot reach the same conclusions without digging further into the data. In the CH data assessment, the reader (or data users) can go into those QC tables that are appended to the assessment and see just exactly how the lab data performed. Response: As discussed during technical team meetings prior to initiating this data assessment, our intent in preparing this material to be included with the 2013 Data Report was to emphasize a succinct document briefly summarizing the results of the assessment but not incorporating the full contents of the data validation reports (approximately 500 pages). No data were qualified by the independent validator. The Navy can make copies of the validation reports available if so requested. 3. Comment p. 2: Part of DQA is to do this: Data quality objectives have been prescribed in the QAPP in terms of precision, accuracy, representativeness, comparability, and completeness (PARCC) parameters. The following is a description of the QA assessment for each parameter. Where will the information below be discussed - will it be in the main report? a separate appendix? - Sample and parameter-specific data validation reports are in... -Data Storage Backup information for the data evaluation and validation findings includes the following: • Laboratory hardcopy packages (electronic PDF) are assembled in sample delivery group (SDG) units and include all QC data. Data are stored where? Subcontractor laboratory data are stored in project files along with the project electronic database? • The project electronic database includes all sample analyte concentrations, laboratory data flags, data validation flags, and a subset of laboratory QC data. • Chain-of-custody (COC) forms and tracking records are in a xxx database.... (Don Matheny): Append to the assessment: provide the plan required QC limits for precision, accuracy and sensitivity (LOQ & LOD) along with the tabulated QC results (Blanks, LCS, Matrix Spikes, Duplicates). The readers could not only see that the QC criteria were met but would also tell how well the lab data performed. Response: The project limits are available in the 2013 SAP and were used the data validator to assess the data. The UFP SAP guidance and the 2013 SAP prepared in accordance with that guidance do not call for reporting at this level of detail. We will modify the text to clarify where the data and validation reports will be stored. 4. Comment p. 2: Is this ALS Environmental, or a different lab? Please specify city, state where samples were analyzed (Kelso?). Response: We will revise the wording to ALS Environmental, Kelso, WA. 5. Comment p. 2: I searched "Quality by Design Seattle data validation" and nothing showed up in the browser. Can you provide a City, State for this firm. Thanks.

Response: We will revise the wording to Quality by Design, Hilo, HA 6. Comment p. 2: Summary data on lab blanks, rinsate blanks, lab dupes, MS/MSD should be summarized in tables as part of this assessment. See CH2 example of DQA. Response: The Navy can make copies of the validation reports available if so requested. 7. Comment p. 2: The URS 2014 Plan states: "Summary of the individual data validation reports for all sample delivery groups by analytical method." If this is a template for future reports, then this information should be included in this 2013 assessment. Response: The 2013 SAP does not include a requirement that a summary of the validation reports be prepared and distributed. The Navy can make copies of the validation reports available if so requested. 8. Comment p. 4: The “Methyl Mercury” column contains both mg/kg and ug/kg as the units of measurement (which is it?). Response: We will modify the table to show µg/kg as the units for methyl mercury. 9. Comment p. 5: Overall it looks like a fairly reasonable assessment. They didn’t identify any rejected data so it doesn’t sound like the lab had any issues with the analysis. The Table on the last page seems to have a discrepancy. For the four tissue samples, the sample Limit of Detection (LOD) and Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) have the same values which should not be the case. We should ask them to clarify and confirm those values. Otherwise, it looks pretty good. Response: The laboratory LOD study that was applicable at the time these samples were analyzed in 2013 was run at a level of 10 ng/g in order to be more than 2x the DL of 4 ng/g. Because the existing LOQ level, which was also 10 ng/g was not considered when the LOD level was chosen, the laboratory LOQ and LOD were the same at that time, with the LOQ and the LOD studies both having been run at a level of 10 ng/g. The laboratory has since taken corrective action, and their current DQOs for methyl mercury are LOQ 10 ng/g, LOD 9 ng/g, and MDL 3 ng/g. All DQOs are expressed here on a dry wt. basis.

2013 sinclair inlet marine monitoring data report

Documents