United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604
EPA-905-B02-001-A
December 2002
A Guidance Manual to Support
the Assessment of
Contaminated Sediments in
Freshwater Ecosystems
Volume I - An Ecosystem-Based Framework for
Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments
by:
Donald D. MacDonald
MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd.
#24 - 4800 Island Highway North
Nanaimo, British Columbia V9T 1W6
Christopher G. Ingersoll
United States Geological Survey
4200 New Haven Road
Columbia, Missouri 65201
Under Contract To:
Sustainable Fisheries Foundation
120 Avenue A - Suite D
Snohomish, Washington 98290
-------
A Guidance Manual to Support the
Assessment of Contaminated Sediments
in Freshwater Ecosystems
Volume I-An Ecosystem-Based Framework for
Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments
Submitted to:
Scott Cieniawski
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard (G-17J)
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Prepared - December 2002 - by:
Donald D. MacDonald1 and Christopher G. Ingersoll2
^acDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd. 2United States Geological Survey
#24 - 4800 Island Highway North 4200 New Haven Road
Nanaimo, British Columbia V9T 1W6 Columbia, Missouri 65201
Under Contract to:
Sustainable Fisheries Foundation
120 Avenue A, Suite D
Snohomish, Washington 98290
-------
DISCLAIMER - i
Disclaimer
This publication was developed by the Sustainable Fisheries Foundation under USEPA Grant
Number GL995632-01. The contents, views, and opinions expressed in this document are
those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of the USEPA,
the United States Government, or other organizations named in this report. Additionally, the
mention of trade names for products or software does not constitute their endorsement.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS - ii
Table of Contents
Disclaimer i
Table of Contents ii
List of Tables iv
List of Figures v
Executive Summary vi
List of Acronyms x
Glossary of Terms xv
Acknowledgments xxi
Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1.0 Background 1
1.1 Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns 2
1.2 Purpose of the Report 3
Chapter 2. An Overview of the Framework for Ecosystem-Based Sediment
Quality Assessment and Management 7
2.0 Introduction 7
2.1 Defining the Ecosystem Approach 7
2.2 Benefits of the Ecosystem Approach 9
2.3 A Framework for Implementing Ecosystem-Based
Management 11
Chapter 3. Identification of Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns 15
3.0 Introduction 15
3.1 Historic and Current Uses of the Site 16
3.2 Regional Land Use Patterns 17
3.3 Characteristics of Effluent and Stormwater Discharges 18
3.4 Identification of Sediment-Associated Chemicals of Potential
Concern 19
3.5 Identification of Areas of Potential Concern 20
3.6 Identification of Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns 21
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS - Hi
Chapter 4. Procedures for Establishing Ecosystem Goals and Sediment
Management Objectives for Assessing and Managing
Contaminated Sediments 22
4.0 Introduction 22
4.1 Defining the Ecosystem 23
4.2 Identifying Key Stakeholder Groups 25
4.3 Disseminating Information on the Ecosystem 25
4.4 Convening Multi-Stakeholder Workshops 27
4.5 Translating the Long-Term Vision into Ecosystem Goals and
Ecosystem Health Objectives 27
4.6 Establishing Sediment Management Objectives 30
Chapter 5. Selection of Ecosystem Health Indicators, Metrics and Targets
for Assessing the Effects of Contaminated Sediments on
Sediment-Dwelling Organisms, Aquatic-Dependent Wildlife, and
Human Health 32
5.0 Introduction 32
5.1 Identification of Candidate Ecosystem Health Indicators 33
5.2 Evaluation of Candidate Ecosystem Health Indicators 34
5.3 Selection of Ecosystem Health Indicators 38
5.4 Establishment of Metrics and Targets for Ecosystem Health
Indicators 41
Chapter 6. Summary 43
Chapter 7. References 45
Appendix 1. Role of Sediments in Aquatic Ecosystems 73
Al.O Introduction 73
Al.l Supporting Primary Productivity 73
A1.2 Providing Essential Habitats 74
Appendix 2. Bibliography of Relevant Publications 76
A2.0 Introduction 76
A2.1 Listing of Publications 77
Appendix 3. Designated Water Uses of Aquatic Ecosystems 123
A3.0 Introduction 123
A3.1 Aquatic Life 124
A3.2 Aquatic-Dependent Wildlife 124
A3.3 Human Health 125
A3.4 Recreation and Aesthetics 125
A3.5 Navigation and Shipping 126
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS - iv
List of Tables
Table 1 List of 42 areas of concern in the Great Lakes basin in which beneficial uses
are being adversely affected by contaminated sediments (from IJC 1988) . . 53
Table 2 A summary of use impairments potentially associated with contaminated
sediment and the numbers of Great Lakes areas of concern with such use
impairments (from IJC 1997) 54
Table 3 Selected definitions related to ecosystem management (from Environment
Canada 1996) 56
Table 4 Comparison of four approaches to resolving human-made ecosystem
problems (from Environment Canada 1996) 57
Table 5 Activities that have a high potential for releasing hazardous substances into
the environment (from BCE 1997) 58
Table 6 A selection of definitions of an ecosystem (from Environment Canada 1996)
61
Table 7 Ecosystem goals and objectives for Lake Ontario (as developed by the
Ecosystem Objectives Work Group; CCME 1996) 62
Table 8 Ecosystem obj ectives for Lake Superior (as developed by the Superior Work
Group; CCME 1996) 63
Table 9 Desirable characteristics of indicators for different purposes (from IJC 1991)
64
Table 10 Recommended metrics for various indicators of sediment quality conditions
for freshwater environments 65
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS - v
List of Figures
Figure 1 The shift from traditional to ecosystem-based decision making (from CCME
1996) 68
Figure 2 A framework for ecosystem-based management (from CCME 1996) 69
Figure 3 Relationship between ecosystem goals, objectives, indicators, metrics, and
targets 70
Figure 4 An overview of the implementation process for the ecosystem approach to
environmental management 71
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - vz
Executive Summary
Traditionally, concerns relative to the management of aquatic resources in freshwater
ecosystems have focused primarily on water quality. As such, early aquatic resource
management efforts were often directed at assuring the potability of surface water or
groundwater sources. Subsequently, the scope of these management initiatives expanded to
include protection of instream (i.e., fish and aquatic life), agricultural, industrial, and
recreational water uses. While initiatives undertaken in the past twenty years have
unquestionably improved water quality conditions, a growing body of evidence indicates that
management efforts directed solely at the attainment of surface water quality criteria may not
provide an adequate basis for protecting the designated uses of aquatic ecosystems.
In recent years, concerns relative to the health and vitality of aquatic ecosystems have begun
to reemerge in North America. One of the principal reasons for this is that many toxic and
bioaccumulative chemicals [such as metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
polychlorinatedbiphenyls (PCBs), chlorophenols, organochlorine pesticides (OC pesticides),
and polybrominated diphenyl ethers]; which are found in only trace amounts in water, can
accumulate to elevated levels in sediments. Some of these pollutants, such as OC pesticides
and PCBs, were released into the environment long ago. The use of many of these
substances has been banned in North America for more than 30 years; nevertheless, these
chemicals continue to persist in the environment. Other contaminants enter our waters every
day from industrial and municipal discharges, urban and agricultural runoff, and atmospheric
deposition from remote sources. Due to their physical and chemical properties, many of
these substances tend to accumulate in sediments. In addition to providing sinks for many
chemicals, sediments can also serve as potential sources of pollutants to the water column
when conditions change in the receiving water system (e.g., during periods of anoxia, after
severe storms).
Information from a variety of sources indicates that sediments in aquatic ecosystems
throughout North America are contaminated by a wide range of toxic and bioaccumulative
substances, including metals, PAHs, PCBs, OC pesticides, a variety of semi-volatile organic
chemicals (SVOCs), and polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and furans (PCDDs and
PCDFs). For example, contaminated sediments pose a major risk to the beneficial uses of
aquatic ecosystems throughout the Great Lakes basin, including the 43 areas of concern
(AOCs) identified by the International Joint Commission. The imposition of fish
consumption advisories has adversely affected commercial, sport, and food fisheries in many
areas. In addition, degradation of the benthic community and other factors have adversely
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - vii
affected fish and wildlife populations. Furthermore, fish in many of these areas often have
higher levels of tumors and other abnormalities than fish from reference areas.
Contaminated sediments have also threatened the viability of many commercial ports through
the imposition of restrictions on dredging of navigational channels and disposal of dredged
materials. Overall, contaminated sediments have been linked to 11 of the 14 beneficial use
impairments that have been documented at the Great Lakes AOCs. Such use impairments
have also been observed elsewhere in Canada and the United States.
In response to concerns raised regarding contaminated sediments, responsible authorities
throughout North America have launched programs to support the assessment, management,
and remediation of contaminated sediments. The information generated under these
programs provide important guidance for designing and implementing investigations at sites
with contaminated sediments. In addition, guidance has been developed under various
sediment-related programs to support the collection and interpretation of sediment quality
data. While such guidance has unquestionably advanced the field of sediment quality
assessments, the users of the individual guidance documents have expressed a need to
consolidate this information into an integrated ecosystem-based framework for assessing and
managing sediment quality in freshwater ecosystems (i.e., as specified under the Great Lakes
Water Quality Agreement). Practitioners in this field have also indicated the need for
additional guidance on the applications of the various tools that support sediment quality
assessments. Furthermore, the need for additional guidance on the design of sediment
quality monitoring programs and on the interpretation of the resultant data has been
identified.
This guidance manual, which comprises a three-volume series and was developed for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land
and Air Protection, and Florida Department of Environmental Protection, is not intended to
supplantthe existing guidance on sediment quality assessment. Rather, this guidance manual
is intended to further support the design and implementation of assessments of sediment
quality conditions by:
• Presenting an ecosystem-based framework for assessing and managing
contaminated sediments (Volume I);
• Describing the recommended procedures for designing and implementing
sediment quality investigations (Volume II); and,
• Describing the recommended procedures for interpreting the results of sediment
quality investigations (Volume III).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - viii
The first volume of the guidance manual, An Ecosystem-Based Framework for Assessing
and Managing Contaminated Sediments in the Freshwater Ecosystems., describes the five
step process that is recommended to support the assessment and management of sediment
quality conditions (i.e., relative to sediment-dwelling organisms, aquatic-dependent wildlife,
and human health). Importantly, the document provides an overview of the framework for
ecosystem-based sediment quality assessment and management (Chapter 2). In addition, the
recommended procedures for identifying sediment quality issues and concerns and compiling
the existing knowledge base are described (Chapter 3). Furthermore, the recommended
procedures for establishing ecosystem goals, ecosystem health objectives, and sediment
management objectives are presented (Chapter 4). Finally, methods for selecting ecosystem
health indicators, metrics, and targets for assessing contaminated sediments are described
(Chapter 5). Together, this guidance is intended to support planning activities related to
contaminated sediment assessments, such that the resultant data are likely to support
sediment management decisions at the site under investigation. More detailed information
on these and other topics related to the assessment and management of contaminated
sediments can be found in the publications that are listed in the Bibliography of Relevant
Publications (Appendix 2).
The second volume of the series, Design and Implementation of Sediment Quality
Investigations, describes the recommended procedures for designing and implementing
sediment quality assessment programs. More specifically, Volume II provides an overview
of the recommended framework for assessing and managing sediment quality conditions is
presented in this document (Chapter 2). In addition, Volume II describes the recommended
procedures for conducting preliminary and detailed site investigations to assess sediment
quality conditions (Chapters 3 and 4). Furthermore, the factors that need to be considered
in the development of sampling and analysis plans for assessing contaminated sediments are
described (Chapter 5). Supplemental guidance on the design of sediment sampling
programs, on the evaluation of sediment quality data, and on the management of
contaminated sediment is provided in the Appendices to Volume II. The appendices of this
document also describe the types and objectives of sediment quality assessments that are
commonly conducted in freshwater ecosystems.
The third volume in the series, Interpretation of the Results of Sediment Quality
Investigations, describes the four types of information that are commonly used to assess
contaminated sediments, including sediment- and pore-water chemistry data (Chapter 2),
sediment toxicity data (Chapter 3), benthic invertebrate community structure data (Chapter
4), and bioaccumulation data (Chapter 5). Some of the other tools that can be used to
support assessments of sediment quality conditions are also briefly described (e.g., fish
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - ix
health assessments; Chapter 6). The information compiled on each of the tools includes:
descriptions of its applications, advantages, and limitations; discussions on the availability
of standard methods, the evaluation of data quality, methodological uncertainty, and the
interpretation of associated data; and, recommendations to guide the use of each of these
individual indicators of sediment quality conditions. Furthermore, guidance is provided on
the interpretation of data on multiple indicators of sediment quality conditions (Chapter 7).
Together, the information provided in the three-volume series is intended to further support
the design and implementation of focused sediment quality assessment programs.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS - x
List of Acronyms
0,
0
ng
|imol/g
AET
AETA
Al
ANOVA
AOC
APHA
ARCS Program
ASTM
AVS
BCE
BCWMA
BEST
BSAF
CA
CAC
CCME
CCREM
CDF
CEPA
CERCLA
CERCLIS
CI
CLP
COC
COPC
CRLD
CSO
CSR
CWA
-d
DDT
DDTs
DELT
DL
percent
microgram
micrograms per kilogram
micrograms per liter
micromoles per gram
apparent effects threshold
Apparent Effects Threshold Approach
aluminum
analysis of variance
Area of Concern
American Public Health Association
Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments Program
American Society for Testing and Materials
acid volatile sulfides
British Columbia Environment
British Columbia Waste Management Act
biomonitoring of environmental status and trends
biota-sediment bioaccumulation factor
Consensus Approach
Citizens Advisory Committee
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
Canadian Council of Resource and Environment Ministers
confined disposal facility
Canadian Environmental Protection Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System
confidence interval
Contract Laboratory Program
contaminant of concern
chemical of potential concern
contract required detection limit
combined sewer overflow
Contaminated Sites Regulation
Clean Water Act
-days
di chl orodipheny 1-tri chl oroethane
/\p'-DDT, o,//-DDT,#//-DDE, o,//-DDE,/y/-DDD, o,p'-DDD, and any
metabolite or degradation product
deformities, fin erosion, lesions, and tumors
detection limit
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS - xi
DM dredged material
DO dissolved oxygen
DOE Department of the Environment
DOT Department of the Interior
DQO data quality objective
DSI detailed site investigation
DW dry weight
EC Environment Canada
EC50 median effective concentration affecting 50 percent of the test organisms
EEC European Economic Community
ELA Effects Level Approach
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
EPT Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (i.e., mayflies, stoneflies,
caddisflies)
EqPA Equilibrium Partitioning Approach
ERL effects range low
ERM effects range median
EROD ethoxyresorufm-0-deethylase
ESB equilibrium partitioning-derived sediment benchmarks
FCV final chronic values
FD factual determinations
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Rodenticide and Fungicide Act
gamma-BHC gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane (lindane)
GFAA graphite furnace atomic absorption
GIS geographic information system
-h - hours
H2S hydrogen sulfide
HC Health Canada
HC1 hydrochloric acid
IB I index of biotic integrity
IC50 median inhibition concentration affecting 50 percent of test organisms
ICP inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry
ID insufficient data
IDEM Indiana Department of Environmental Management
IJC International Joint Commission
IWB index of well-being
Koc organic carbon partition coefficients
Kow octanol-water partition coefficients
Kp sediment/water partition coefficients
LC50 median lethal concentration affecting 50 percent of the test organism
LCS/LCSDs laboratory control sample/laboratory control sample duplicates
Li lithium
LMP lakewide management plan
LOD limit of detection
LOEC lowest observed effect concentration
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS - xii
LRMA
mean PEC-Q
MESL
MET
mg/kg
mg/L
mlBI
-min
mm
MPRSA
MS/MSDs
MSD
n
NAWQA
NEPA
NG
NH3
NH4+
NOAA
NOEC
NPDES
NPL
NPO
NR
NRDAR
NSQS
NSTP
NT
NYSDEC
OC
OC pesticides
OECD
OEPA
OERR
OPA
OPTTS
OSW
OW
PAET
PAHs
PARCC
PCBs
PCDDs
PCDFs
PCS
Logistic Regression Modeling Approach
mean probable effect concentration quotient
MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd.
minimal effect threshold
milligrams per kilogram
milligrams per liter
macroinvertebrate index of biotic integrity
- minutes
millimeter
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
matrix spike/matrix spike duplicates
minimum significant difference
number of samples
National Water Quality Assessment
National Environmental Policy Act
no guideline available
unionized ammonia
ionized ammonia
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
no observed effect concentration
National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System
National Priorities List
nonpolar organics
not reported
natural resource damage assessment and restoration
National Sediment Quality Survey
National Status and Trends Program
not toxic
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
organic carbon
organochlorine pesticides
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
Oil Pollution Act
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
Office of Solid Waste
The Office of Water
probable apparent effects threshold
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability
polychlorinated biphenyls
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
polychlorinated dibenzofurans
permit compliance system
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS - xiii
PEC probable effect concentration (consensus-based)
PEC-Q probable effect concentration quotient
PEL probable effect level
PEL-HA28 probable effect level for Hyalella azteca; 28-day test
PQL protection quantification limit
PRGs preliminary remedial goals
PSDDA Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
PSEP Puget Sound Estuary Program
PSI preliminary site investigation
QA/QC quality assurance/quality control
QAPP quality assurance project plan
QHEI qualitative habitat evaluation index
RAP remedial action plan
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
REF reference sediment
RPD relative percent difference
RRH rapidly rendered harmless
RSD relative standard deviation
SAB Science Advisory Board
SAG Science Advisory Group
SAP sampling and analysis plan
SEC sediment effect concentration
SEL severe effect level
SEM simultaneously extracted metals
SEM - AVS simultaneously extracted metal minus acid volatile sulfides
SET AC Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
SLCA Screening Level Concentration Approach
SMS sediment management standards
SOD sediment oxygen demand
SPMD semipermeable membrane device
SQAL sediment quality advisory levels
SQC sediment quality criteria
SQG sediment quality guideline
SQRO sediment quality remediation objectives
SQS sediment quality standard
SSLC species screening level concentration
SSZ sediment sampling zone
STP sewage treatment plant
SVOC semi-volatile organic chemical
T toxic
TEC threshold effect concentration
TEL threshold effect level
TEL-HA28 threshold effect level for Hyalella azteca; 28 day test
TET toxic effect threshold
TIE toxicity identification evaluation
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS - xiv
TMDL
TOC
tPAH
TRA
TRG
TRY
TSCA
USAGE
USDOI
USEPA
USFWS
USGS
VOC
WDOE
WMA
WQC
WQS
WW
total maximum daily load
total organic carbon
total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Tissue Residue Approach
tissue residue guideline
toxicity reference values
Toxic Substances Control Act
United States Army Corps of Engineers
United States Department of the Interior
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
volatile organic compound
Washington Department of Ecology
Waste Management Act
water quality criteria
water quality standards
wet weight
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xv
Glossary of Terms
Acute toxicity - The response of an organism to short-term exposure to a chemical substance.
Lethality is the response that is most commonly measured in acute toxicity tests.
Acute toxicity threshold- The concentration of a substance above which adverse effects are
likely to be observed in short-term toxicity tests.
Altered benthic invertebrate community - An assemblage of benthic invertebrates that has
characteristics (i.e., mffil score, abundance of EPT taxa) that are outside the normal
range that has been observed at uncontaminated reference sites.
Aquatic ecosystem - All the living and nonliving material interacting within an aquatic
system (e.g., pond, lake, river, ocean).
Aquatic invertebrates - Animals without backbones that utilize habitats in freshwater,
estuaries, or marine systems.
Aquatic organisms - The species that utilize habitats within aquatic ecosystems (e.g., aquatic
plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians and reptiles).
Benthic invertebrate community-The assemblage of various species of sediment-dwelling
organisms that are found within an aquatic ecosystem.
Bioaccumulation - The net accumulation of a substance by an organism as a result of uptake
from all environmental sources.
Bioaccumulation-based sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) - Sediment quality guidelines
that are established to protect fish, aquatic-dependent wildlife, and human health against
effects that are associated with the bioaccumulation of contaminants in sediment-
dwelling organisms and subsequent food web transfer.
Bioaccumulative substances - The chemicals that tend to accumulate in the tissues of aquatic
and terrestrial organisms.
Bioavailability - Degree to which a chemical can be absorbed by and/or interact with an
organism.
Bioconcentration - The accumulation of a chemical in the tissues of an organism as a result
of direct exposure to the surrounding medium (e.g., water; i.e., it does not include food
web transfer).
Biomagnification - The accumulation of a chemical in the tissues of an organism as a result
of food web transfer.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xvi
Chemical benchmark - Guidelines for water or sediment quality which define the
concentration of contaminants that are associated with low or high probabilities of
observing harmful biological effects, depending on the narrative intent.
Chemical of potential concern - A substance that has the potential to adversely affect surface
water or biological resources.
Chronic toxicity - The response of an organism to long-term exposure to a chemical
substance. Among others, the responses that are often measured in chronic toxicity tests
include lethality, decreased growth, and impaired reproduction.
Chronic toxicity threshold- The concentration of a substance above which adverse effects
are likely to be observed in long-term toxicity tests.
Congener - A member of a group of chemicals with similar chemical structures (e.g.,
PCDDs generally refers to a group of 75 congeners that consist of two benzene rings
connected to each other by two oxygen bridges).
Consensus-based probable effect concentrations (PECs) - The PECs that were developed
from published sediment quality guidelines and identify contaminant concentrations
above which adverse biological effects are likely to occur.
Consensus-based threshold effect concentrations (TECs) - The TECs that were developed
from published sediment quality guidelines and identify contaminant concentrations
below which adverse biological effects are unlikely to occur.
Contaminants of concern (COC) - The substances that occur in environmental media at
levels that pose a risk to ecological receptors or human health.
Contaminatedsediment - Sediment that contains chemical substances at concentrations that
could potentially harm sediment-dwelling organisms, wildlife, or human health.
Conventional variables - A number of variables that are commonly measured in water
and/or sediment quality assessments, including water hardness, conductivity, total
organic carbon (TOC), sediment oxygen demand (SOD), unionized ammonia (NH3),
temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, alkalinity
Core sampler - A device that is used to collect both surficial and sub-surface sediment
samples by driving a hollow corer into the sediments.
Degradation - A breakdown of a molecule into smaller molecules or atoms.
DELT abnormalities - A number of variables that are measured to assess fish health,
including deformities, fin erosion, lesions, and tumors.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xvii
Diagenesis - The sum of the physical and chemical changes that take place in sediments
after its initial deposition (before they become consolidated into rocks, excluding all
metamorphic changes).
Discharge - Discharge of oil as defined in Section 31 l(a)(2) o f the Clean Water Act, and
includes, but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting,
emptying, or dumping of oil.
Ecosystem - All the living (e.g., plants, animals, and humans) and nonliving (rocks,
sediments, soil, water, and air) material interacting within a specified location in time and
space.
Ecosystem-based management - An approach that integrates the management of natural
landscapes, ecological processes, physical and biological components, and human
activities to maintain or enhance the integrity of an ecosystem. This approach places
equal emphasis on concerns related to the environment, the economy, and the community
(also called the ecosystem approach).
Ecosystem goals - Are broad management goals which describe the long-term vision that has
been established for the ecosystem.
Ecosystem metrics - Identify quantifiable attributes of the indicators and defines acceptable
ranges, or targets, for these variables.
Ecosystem objectives - Are developed for the various components of the ecosystem to clarify
the scope and intent of the ecosystem goals. These objectives should include target
schedules for being achieved.
Endpoint - A measured response of a receptor to a stressor. An endpoint can be measured
in a toxicity test or in a field survey.
Epibenthic organisms - The organisms that live on the surface of sediments.
Exposure - Co-occurrence of or contact between a stressor (e.g., chemical substance) and an
ecological component (e.g., aquatic organism).
Grab (Dredge) samplers - A device that is used to collect surficial sediments through a
scooping mechanism (e.g. petite ponar dredge).
Hazardous substance - Hazardous substance as defined in Section 101(14) of CERCLA.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xviii
Index of biotic integrity (IBI) - A parameter that is used to evaluate the status of fish
communities. The IBI integrates information on species composition (i.e., total number
of species, types of species, percent sensitive species, and percent tolerant species), on
trophic composition (i.e., percent omnivores, percent insectivores, and percent pioneer
species), and on fish condition.
Infaunal organisms - The organisms that live in sediments.
Injury - A measurable adverse change, either long or short-term, in the chemical or physical
quality or the viability of a natural resource resulting either directly or indirectly from
exposure to a discharge of oil or release of a hazardous substance, or exposure to a
product of reactions resulting from the discharge to oil or release of a hazardous
substance. As used in this part, injury encompasses the phrases "injury", "destruction",
and "loss". Injury definitions applicable to specific resources are provided in Section
11.62 of this part (this definition is from the Department of the Interior Natural Resource
Damage Assessment Regulations).
Macroinvertebrate index of biotic integrity (mlBI) - The mffil was used to provide
information on the overall structure of benthic invertebrate communities. The scoring
criteria for this metric includes such variables as number of taxa, percent dominant taxa,
relative abundance of EPT taxa, and abundance of chironomids.
Mean probable effect concentration-quotient (PEC-Q) - A measure of the overall level of
chemical contamination in a sediment, which is calculated by averaging the individual
quotients for select chemicals of interest.
Natural resources - Land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, drinking water
supplies, and other such resources belonging to, managed by, held in trust by,
appertaining to, or otherwise controlled by the federal government (including the
resources of the fishery conservation zone established by the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act of 1976), State or local government, or any foreign
government and Indian tribe. These natural resource have been categorized into the
following five groups: surface water resources, ground water resources, air resources,
geologic resources, and biological resources.
Natural resources damage assessment and restoration - The process of collecting,
compiling, and analyzing information, statistics, or data through prescribed
methodologies to determine damages for injuries to natural resources as set forth in this
part.
Neoplastic - Refers to abnormal new growth.
Oil- Oil as defined in Section 31 l(a)(l) of the Clean Water Act, of any kind or in any form,
including, but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with
wastes other that dredged spoil.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xix
Piscivorus wildlife species - The wildlife species that consume fish as part of all of their
diets (e.g., herons, kingfishers, otter, osprey, and mink).
Population - An aggregate of individual of a species within a specified location in time and
space.
Pore water - The water that occupies the spaces between sediment particles.
Probable effect concentration (PEC) - Concentration of a chemical in sediment above which
adverse biological effects are likely to occur.
Probable effect concentration-quotient (PEC-Q) - A PEC-Q is a measure of the level of
chemical contamination in sediment relative to a sediment quality guideline, and is
calculated by dividing the measured concentration of a substance in a sediment sample
by the corresponding PEC.
Receptor - A plant or animal that may be exposed to a stressor.
Release - A release of a hazardous substance as defined in Section 101(22) of CERCLA.
Sediment - Particulate material that usually lies below water.
Sediment-associated contaminants - Contaminants that are present in sediments, including
whole sediments or pore water.
Sediment chemistry data - Information on the concentrations of chemical substances in
whole sediments or pore water.
Sediment-dwelling organisms - The organisms that live in, on, or near bottom sediments,
including both epibenthic and infaunal species.
Sediment injury - The presence of conditions that have injured or are sufficient to injure
sediment-dwelling organisms, wildlife, or human health.
Sediment quality guideline - Chemical benchmark that is intended to define the
concentration of sediment-associated contaminants that is associated with a high or a low
probability of observing harmful biological effects or unacceptable levels of
bioaccumulation, depending on its purpose and narrative intent.
Sediment quality targets - Chemical or biological benchmarks for assessing the status of
each metric.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
GLOSSARY OF TERMS - xx
Simultaneously extracted metals (SEM) - Divalent metals - commonly cadmium, copper,
lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc - that form less soluble sulfides than does iron or
manganese and are solubilized during the acidification step (0.5m HC1 for 1 hour) used
in the determination of acid volatile sulfides in sediments.
Stressor - Physical, chemical, or biological entities that can induce adverse effects on
ecological receptors or human health.
Surface water resources - The waters of North America, including the sediments suspended
in water or lying on the bank, bed, or shoreline and sediments in or transported through
coastal and marine areas. This term does not include ground water or water or sediments
in ponds, lakes, or reservoirs designed for waste treatment under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6901-6987 or the Clean
Water Act, and applicable regulations.
Threshold effect concentration (TEC) - Concentration of a chemical in sediment below
which adverse biological effects are unlikely to occur.
Tissue - A group of cells, along with the associated intercellular substances, which perform
the same function within a multicellular organism.
Tissue residue guideline (TRG) - Chemical benchmark that is intended to define the
concentration of a substance in the tissues offish or invertebrates that will protect fish-
eating wildlife against effects that are associated with dietary exposure to hazardous
substances.
Trophic level - A portion of the food web at which groups of animals have similar feeding
strategies.
Trustee - Any Federal natural resources management agency designated in the National
Contingency Plan and any State agency designated by the Governor of each State,
pursuant to Section 107(f)(2)(B) of CERCLA, that may prosecute claims for damages
under Section 107(f) or 11 l(b) of CERCLA; or any Indian tribe, that may commence an
action under Section 126(d) of CERCLA.
Wildlife - The fish, reptiles, amphibians, birds, and mammals that are associated with aquatic
ecosystems.
Whole sediment - Sediment and associated pore water.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS - xxi
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the efforts of a number of individuals who contributed to the
preparation of 'A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in
Freshwater Ecosystems'. First, we would like to thank the members of the Science Advisory Group
on Sediment Quality Assessment for their insight and guidance on the need for and elements of this
Guidance Manual. We would also like to thank the instructors of the various short courses on
sediment quality assessment for providing access to instructional materials that provided a
conceptual basis for many of the sections included in the Guidance Manual. Furthermore, we would
like to express our sincerest appreciation to the members of the project Steering Committee for
providing oversight and excellent review comments on previous drafts of this report. The Steering
Committee consisted of the following individuals:
Tom Balduf (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency)
Walter Berry (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Kelly Burch (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection)
Scott Cieniawski (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Demaree Collier (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Judy Crane (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency)
William Creal (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality)
Bonnie Eleder (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Frank Estabrooks (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation)
John Estenik (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency)
Jay Field (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
Scott Ireland (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Roger Jones (Michigan Department of Environmental Quality)
Peter Landrum (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
Lee Liebenstein (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources)
Mike Macfarlane (British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection)
Jan Miller (United States Army Corps of Engineers)
T.J. Miller (United States Fish and Wildlife Service)
Dave Mount (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Gail Sloane (Florida Department of Environmental Protection Agency)
Eric Stern (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Marc Tuchman (United States Environmental Protection Agency)
Karen Woodfield (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation)
Finally, timely review comments on the final draft of the Guidance Manual were provided by Scott
Cieniawski, Demaree Collier, Marc Tuchman, Scott Ireland, Bonnie Eleder, Jay Field, Judy Crane,
and Mike Macfarlane. Development of this Guidance Manual was supported in part by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency's Great Lakes National Program Office through the grant
"Development of a Guidance Manual for Sediment Assessment", Grant Number GL995632-01,
awarded to the Sustainable Fisheries Foundation. Additional funding to support the preparation of
this report was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the British
Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. This report has been reviewed in accordance
with United States Environmental Protection Agency, United States Geological Survey, and
Sustainable Fisheries Foundation policies.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 1
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.0 Background
Traditionally, concerns relative to the management of aquatic resources in freshwater
ecosystems have focused primarily on water quality. As such, early aquatic resource
management efforts were often directed at assuring the potability of surface water or
groundwater sources. Subsequently, the scope of these management initiatives expanded to
include protection of instream (i.e., fish and aquatic life), agricultural, industrial, and
recreational water uses. While initiatives undertaken in the past twenty years have
unquestionably improved water quality conditions, a growing body of evidence indicates that
management efforts directed solely at the attainment of surface water quality criteria may not
provide an adequate basis for protecting the designated uses of aquatic ecosystems.
In recent years, concerns relative to the health and vitality of aquatic ecosystems have begun
to reemerge in North America. One of the principal reasons for this is that many toxic and
bioaccumulative chemicals [such as metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
polychlorinatedbiphenyls (PCBs), chlorophenols, organochlorine pesticides (OC pesticides),
and polybrominated diphenyl ethers], which are found in only trace amounts in water, can
accumulate to elevated levels in sediments. Some of these pollutants, such as OC pesticides
and PCBs, were released into the environment long ago. The use of many of these
substances has been banned in North America for 30 years or more; nevertheless, these
chemicals continue to persist in the environment. Other contaminants enter our waters every
day from industrial and municipal discharges, urban and agricultural runoff, and atmospheric
deposition from remote sources. Due to their physical and chemical properties, many of
these substances tend to accumulate in sediments. In addition to providing sinks for many
chemicals, sediments can also serve as potential sources of pollutants to the water column
when conditions change in the receiving water system (e.g., during periods of anoxia, after
severe storms).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 2
1.1 Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns
Sediments represent essential elements of freshwater ecosystems. Nevertheless, the available
information on sediment quality conditions indicates that sediments throughout North
America are contaminated by a wide range of toxic and bioaccumulative substances,
including metals, PAHs, PCBs, OC pesticides, a variety of semi-volatile organic chemicals
(SVOCs), andpolychlorinated dibenzo-/?-dioxins andfurans (PCDDs andPCDFs; IJC 1988;
USEPA 1997a; 2000a). Contaminated sediment has been identified as a source of ecological
impacts throughout North America. In the Great Lakes basin, for example, sediment quality
issues and concerns are apparent at 42 of the 43 areas of concern (AOCs) that have been
identified by the International Joint Commission (Table 1; IJC 1988). In British Columbia,
such issues and concerns have been identified in the lower Fraser and lower Columbia River
systems (Mah et al. 1989; MESL 1997; Macfarlane 1997). Such issues have also emerged
in Florida, in some cases raising concerns about human health and aquatic-dependent wildlife
(MacDonald 2000).
Contaminated sediments represent an important environmental concern for several reasons.
First, contaminated sediments have been demonstrated to be toxic to sediment-dwelling
organisms and fish. As such, exposure to contaminated sediments can result in decreased
survival, reduced growth, or impaired reproduction in benthic invertebrates and fish.
Additionally, certain sediment-associated contaminants (termed bioaccumulative substances)
are taken up by benthic organisms through a process called bioaccumulation. When larger
animals feed on these contaminated prey species, the pollutants are taken into their bodies
and are passed along to other animals in the food web in a process call biomagnification. As
a result, benthic organisms, fish, birds, and mammals can be adversely affected by
contaminated sediments. Contaminated sediments can also compromise human health due
to direct exposure when wading, swimming, or through the consumption of contaminated
fish and shellfish. Human uses of aquatic ecosystems can also be compromised by the
presence of contaminated sediments through reductions in the abundance of food or sportfish
species or due to the imposition of fish consumption advisories. As such, contaminated
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 3
sediments in freshwater ecosystems pose potential hazards to sediment-dwelling organisms
(i.e., epibenthic and infaunal invertebrate species), aquatic-dependent wildlife species (i.e.,
fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals), and human health.
While contaminated sediment does not represent a specific use impairment, a variety of
beneficial use impairments have been documented in association with contaminated
sediments. For example, the imposition offish consumption advisories (i.e., resulting from
the bioaccumulation of sediment-associated contaminants) has adversely affected
commercial, sport, and food fisheries in many areas. In addition, degradation of the benthic
community (i.e., resulting from direct exposure to contaminated sediments) and other factors
have contributed to the impairment offish and wildlife populations. Furthermore, fish from
areas with contaminated sediments have been observed to have higher incidences of tumors
and other abnormalities than fish from reference areas (i.e., due to exposure to carcinogenic
and teratogenic substances that accumulate in sediments). Contaminated sediments have also
threatened the viability of many commercial ports through the imposition of restrictions on
dredging of navigational channels and disposal of dredged materials (IJC 1997). A summary
of use impairments and how they can be affected by contaminated sediments is presented in
Table 2.
1.2 Purpose of the Report
In response to concerns that have been raised regarding sediment quality conditions, the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) launched the Assessment and
Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) Program in 1987 to support the assessment
and management of contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes basin. Likewise, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection and British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and
Air Protection spearheaded initiatives in the early 1990's to support sediment assessment and
management (MacDonald 1994a; MacDonald 1994b; BCE 1997; MacDonald and
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 4
Macfarlane 1999). The information generated under these programs provides important
guidance for designing and implementing investigations at sites with contaminated sediments
(e.g., USEPA 1994; MacDonald 1994b). In addition, guidance has been developed under
various other sediment-related programs to support the collection and interpretation of
sediment quality data (e.g., Reynoldson et al. 2000; Ingersoll et al. 1997; USEPA-USACE
1998; ASTM 2001a; USEPA 2000b; Krantzberg et al. 2001). While these guidance
documents have unquestionably advanced the field of sediment quality assessment, the users
of these individual guidance documents have expressed a need to consolidate this
information into an integrated ecosystem-based framework for assessing and managing
sediment quality in freshwater ecosystems.
This guidance manual, which comprises a three-volume series and was developed for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency, British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land
and Air Protection, and Florida Department of Environmental Protection, is not intended to
supplant the existing guidance documents on sediment quality assessment (e.g., USEPA
1994; Reynoldson et al. 2000; USEPA-USACE 1998; USEPA 2000b; ASTM 200la;
Krantzberg et al. 2001). Rather, this guidance manual is intended to further support the
design and implementation of assessments of sediment quality conditions by:
• Presenting an ecosystem-based framework for assessing and managing
contaminated sediments (Volume I);
• Describing the recommended procedures for designing and implementing
sediment quality investigations (Volume II); and,
• Describing the recommended procedures for interpreting the results of sediment
quality investigations (Volume III).
The first volume of the guidance manual, An Ecosystem-Based Framework for Assessing
and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems, describes the five step
process that is recommended to support the assessment and management of sediment quality
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 5
conditions (i.e., relative to sediment-dwelling organisms, aquatic-dependent wildlife, and
human health). Importantly, the document provides an overview of the framework for
ecosystem-based sediment quality assessment and management (Chapter 2). The
recommended procedures for identifying sediment quality issues and concerns and compiling
the existing knowledge base are also described (Chapter 3). Furthermore, the recommended
procedures for establishing ecosystem goals, ecosystem health objectives, and sediment
management objectives are presented (Chapter 4). Finally, methods for selecting ecosystem
health indicators, metrics, and targets for assessing contaminated sediments are described
(Chapter 5). Together, this guidance is intended to support planning activities related to
contaminated sediment assessments, such that the resultant data are likely to support
sediment management decisions at the site under investigation. More detailed information
on these and other topics related to the assessment and management of contaminated
sediments can be found in the publications that are listed in the Bibliography of Relevant
Publications (Appendix 2).
The second volume of the series, Design and Implementation of Sediment Quality
Investigations, describes the recommended procedures for designing and implementing
sediment quality assessment programs. More specifically, Volume II provides an overview
of the recommended framework for assessing and managing sediment quality conditions
(Chapter 2). In addition, Volume II describes the recommended procedures for conducting
preliminary and detailed site investigations to assess sediment quality conditions (Chapters
3 and 4). Furthermore, the factors that need to be considered in the development of sampling
and analysis plans for assessing contaminated sediments are described (Chapter 5).
Supplemental guidance on the design of sediment sampling programs, on the evaluation of
sediment quality data, and on the management of contaminated sediments is provided in the
appendices to Volume II. The types and obj ectives of sediment quality assessments that are
commonly conducted in freshwater ecosystems are also described in the appendices to
Volume II.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
INTRODUCTION - PAGE 6
The third volume in the series, Interpretation of the Results of Sediment Quality
Investigations, describes the four types of information that are commonly used to assess
contaminated sediments, including: whole-sediment and pore-water chemistry data (Chapter
2); whole-sediment and pore-water toxicity data (Chapter 3); benthic invertebrate community
structure data (Chapter 4); and, bioaccumulation data (Chapter 5). Some of the other tools
that can be used to support assessments of sediment quality conditions are also described
(e.g., fish health assessments; Chapter 6). The information compiled on each of the tools
includes: descriptions of its applications, advantages, and limitations; discussions on the
availability of standard methods, the evaluation of data quality, methodological uncertainty,
and the interpretation of associated data; and, recommendations to guide its use.
Furthermore, guidance is provided on the interpretation of data on multiple indicators of
sediment quality conditions (Chapter 7). Together, the information provided in the three-
volume series is intended to further support the design and implementation of focused
sediment quality assessment programs.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 7
Chapter 2. An Overview of the Framework for
Ecosystem-Based Sediment Quality
Assessment and Management
2.0 Introduction
Jurisdictions throughout North America are transitioning toward the implementation of
comprehensive ecosystem-based approaches to address concerns related to environmental
quality conditions (Allen et al. 1991; Environment Canada 1996; IJC 1997; MacDonald
1997; Crane et al. 2000). However, little guidance is currently available on how to assess
and manage contaminated sediments within the context of the ecosystem as a whole. The
following sections of Volume I are intended to provide an overview of the ecosystem
approach, to present a framework for implementing ecosystem-based management, and to
describe the steps that are involved in integrating sediment quality assessment and
management into the ecosystem management process.
2.1 Defining the Ecosystem Approach
The ecosystem approach to planning, research and management is the most recent phase in
an historical succession of approaches to environmental management. Previously, humans
were considered to be separate from the environment in which they lived. This egocentric
approach viewed the external environment only in terms of human uses. However,
overwhelming evidence from many sources indicates that human activities can have
significant and far-reaching impacts on the environment and on the humans who reside in
these systems. Therefore, there is a need for a more holistic approach to environmental
management, in which humans are considered as integral components of the ecosystem. The
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 8
ecosystem approach provides this progressive perspective by integrating the egocentric view
that characterized earlier management approaches, with an ecocentric view that considers the
broader implications of human activities.
The primary distinction between the environmental and ecosystem approaches is whether the
system under consideration is external to (in the environmental approach) or contains (in the
ecosystem approach) the human population in the study area (Vallentyne and Beeton 1988).
The conventional concept of the environment is like that of a house - external and detached;
in contrast, ecosystem implies home - something that we feel part of and see ourselves in,
even when we are not there (Christie et al. 1986). The change from the environmental
approach to the ecosystem approach necessitates a change in the view of the environment
from a political or people-oriented context to an ecosystem-oriented context (Vallentyne and
Beeton 1988). The essence of the ecosystem approach is that humans are considered to be
integral components of the ecosystem rather than being viewed as separate from their
environment (Christie et al. 1986).
The ecosystem approach is not a new concept and it does not hinge on any one program,
definition, or course of action. It is a way thinking and a way of doing things (RCFTW
1992). Adopting an ecosystem approach means viewing the basic components of an
ecosystem (i.e., air, water, land, and biota) and its functions in a broad context, which
effectively integrates environmental, social, and economic interests into a decision-making
framework that embraces the concept of sustainability (Figure 1; CCME 1996). Importantly,
the ecosystem approach recognizes human activities, rather than natural resources, need to
be managed if we are to achieve our long-term goal of sustainability. The identifying
characteristics of the ecosystem approach include (Vallentyne and Hamilton 1987):
• A synthesis of integrated knowledge on the ecosystem;
• A holistic perspective of interrelating systems at different levels of integration;
and,
• Actions that are ecological, anticipatory, and ethical.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 9
This expanded view then shapes the planning, research, and management decisions
pertaining to the ecosystem. Selected definitions of the ecosystem approach for managing
human activities are presented in Table 3.
2.2 Benefits of the Ecosystem Approach
The ecosystem approach is superior to the approaches to environmental management used
previously (i.e., ecosystemic, piecemeal, and environmental approaches) for a number of
reasons. First, the ecosystem approach provides a basis for the long-term protection of
natural resources, including threatened and endangered species. In the past, management
decisions were typically made with a short-term vision (i.e., within a single political
mandate). In contrast, the ecosystem approach necessitates a long-term view of the
ecosystem (i.e., evaluating the influence of decisions over a period of seven generations and
beyond), which necessarily considers the welfare of the non-human components of the
ecosystem. Hence, management decisions are more likely to be consistent with sustainable
development goals. A comparison of the four approaches to resolving anthropogenic
ecological challenges is presented in Table 4.
Second, the ecosystem approach provides an effective framework for evaluating the real
costs and benefits of developmental proposals and remedial alternatives. Previously,
decisions regarding the development of industrial and municipal projects were heavily
weighted toward financial benefits and job creation. Likewise, decisions regarding the
restoration of contaminated sites were made principally based on costs and political
considerations. Neither the long-term impacts of contamination and other stressors nor the
sustainability of the resources that can be affected by contamination were fully considered.
In contrast, implementation of the ecosystem approach encourages the consideration of the
long-term effects of human activities in the assessment process. Therefore, management
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 10
decisions are less likely to be made based solely on political considerations, such as near-
term job creation.
The ecosystem approach also enhances the multiple use of natural resources. In the past,
governments have often allocated natural resources for the exclusive use of single industrial
interests. Implementation of the ecosystem approach ensures that all stakeholders have an
opportunity to participate in the establishment of management goals for the ecosystem. This
process makes it more difficult for governments to make political decisions that benefit
special interest groups, at the expense of other beneficial uses of natural resources.
Research and monitoring activities are essential elements of any environmental management
program. The ecosystem approach provides a basis for focusing these activities by
establishing very clear management goals for the ecosystem. Therefore, research and
monitoring activities are driven by the needs of the program (to determine if the management
goals are being met), rather than by the interests of individual scientists or by political
expediency. In this way, the ecosystem approach provides an effective mechanism for
integrating science into the natural resource management process.
One of the most important benefits of the ecosystem approach is that it directly involves the
public in decision-making processes. Specifically, this approach provides a forum for public
input at a non-technical level (i.e., during the establishment of management goals and
ecosystem health objectives), which is both effective and non-threatening. The detailed
technical issues are then left to those who are charged with the management of these
ecosystems. The framework for implementing the approach also provides a means of
holding environmental managers accountable for the decisions that they make.
Traditionally, environmental impact assessments have not consistently provided reliable
information for evaluating the effects of anthropogenic developments on the ecosystem. In
the ecosystem approach; however, the functional relationships between human activities,
changes to the physical and chemical environment, and alterations in the biological
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 11
components of the ecosystem are established before making important management
decisions. Therefore, management decisions are more likely to be consistent with the long-
term goals established and subsequent monitoring activities can focus on the ecosystem
components that are most likely to be affected.
The ecosystem approach also facilitates the restoration of damaged and degraded natural
resources. By explicitly identifying the long-term impacts of degraded ecosystems on
designated land and water uses, this approach more clearly delineates the benefits of
restoration and remedial measures. Therefore, limited resources can be focused on
restoration projects that are likely to yield the greatest benefits to the ecosystem as a whole.
In recognition of the substantial benefits associated with its use, this holistic approach to the
management of human activities is being applied in a number of areas throughout North
America. For example, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program and its partners have adopted an
ecosystem-based approach to assessing and managing contaminated sediments in Tampa Bay
(MacDonald 1995; 1997; 1999). Likewise, the ecosystem approach has been adopted under
the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and is currently being applied in several Great
Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs), such as the St. Louis River AOC (Crane etal. 2000) and
the Indiana Harbor AOC (MacDonald and Ingersoll 2000; MacDonald et al. 2002a; 2002b).
2.3 A Framework for Implementing Ecosystem-Based
Management
Implementation of the ecosystem approach requires a framework in which to develop and
implement environmental assessment and management initiatives. This framework consists
of five main steps, including (Environment Canada 1996; CCME 1996; Figure 2):
Collate the existing ecosystem knowledge base and identify and assess the issues;
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 12
• Develop and articulate ecosystem health goals and objectives;
Select ecosystem health indicators;
• Conduct directed research and monitoring; and,
• Make informed decisions on the assessment, conservation, protection, and
restoration of natural resources.
The first step in the framework is intended to provide all participants in the process with a
common understanding of the key issues and the existing knowledge base for the ecosystem
under investigation. While various types of information are collected, reviewed, evaluated,
and collated at this stage of the process, emphasis is placed on assembling the available
information on historic land and resource use patterns, on the structure, function, and status
of the ecosystem, and on the socioeconomic factors that can influence environmental
management decisions. Both contemporary scientific data and traditional knowledge are
sought to provide as complete an understanding as possible on the ecosystem. The
information assembled at this stage of the process should be readily accessible to all
participants in the process (i.e., by completing and distributing a state of the knowledge
report summary report, preparing and making available a detailed technical report, and
disseminating the underlying data). Chapter 3 of Volume I provides guidance on the
identification of sediment quality issues and concerns.
In the second step of the process, participants cooperatively develop a series of broad
ecosystem goals and more specific ecosystem health objectives (e.g., sediment management
objectives) to articulate the long-term vision for the ecosystem. The ecosystem goals are
based on the participants' common understanding of the ecosystem knowledge base and
reflect the importance of the ecosystem to the community and to other stakeholder groups.
A set of ecosystem health objectives are also formulated at this stage of the process to clarify
the scope and intent of the ecosystem goals. Societal values are reflected in the goals and
objectives by ensuring that competing resource users are involved in their development. It
is important that each of the ecosystem health obj ectives includes a target schedule for being
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 13
achieved to help participants prioritize their programs and activities. Importantly, the
designated uses of the aquatic ecosystem that require protection and/or restoration emerge
directly from the goals and objectives that are established by stakeholders. The designated
uses of aquatic ecosystems that are relevant for assessing and managing contaminated
sediments are discussed in Appendix 3 of Volume I. Information on the establishment of
ecosystem goals, ecosystem health objectives, and sediment management objectives is
presented in Chapter 4 of Volume I.
The third step of the ecosystem management framework involves the selection of a suite of
ecosystem health indicators, which provide a basis for measuring the level of attainment of
the goals and objectives. Initially, a broad suite of candidate indicators of ecosystem health
are identified and evaluated to determine their applicability. Typically, selection criteria are
established and applied on a priori basis to provide a consistent means of identifying the
indicators that are most relevant to the assessment and/or management initiative. Each of
the selected ecosystem health indicators must be supported by specific metrics and targets,
which identify the acceptable range for each of the variables that will be measured in the
monitoring program (Figure 3). If all of the measured attributes or metrics fall within
acceptable ranges for all of the indicators, then the ecosystem as a whole is considered to be
healthy and vital. Guidance on the selection of ecosystem health indicators for assessing the
effects of contaminated sediments on sediment-dwelling organisms, aquatic-dependent
wildlife, and human health is provided in Chapters 5 of Volume I.
In the fourth step of the process, environmental monitoring and directed research are
undertaken to evaluate the status of the ecosystem and to fill any data gaps that have been
identified. In this application, the term monitoring is used to describe a wide range of
activities that are focused on assessing the health of the ecosystem under consideration. Such
monitoring could be implemented under a broad array of environmental assessment programs
(e.g., NOAA National Status and Trends Program, USEPA Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program) or conducted to address site-specific concerns regarding environmental
quality conditions (e.g., natural resource damage assessment and restoration, ecological risk
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
AN O VER VIEW OF FRAMEWORK FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED SQ ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT- PAGE 14
assessments, human health risk assessments; see Appendix 1 of Volume II). Directed
research activities may be needed to address priority data gaps for the ecosystem under
consideration. Evaluation of the adequacy of the knowledge base provides a basis for
identifying data gaps, including those associated with the application of the ecosystem health
indicators chosen (i.e., to establish baseline conditions) or with the existing knowledge base.
The results of monitoring activities (i.e., to assess the status of each indicator) provide the
information needed to determine if the ecosystem goals and objectives are being met, to
revise the metrics and targets, and to refine the monitoring program design.
Overall, the framework for implementing ecosystem-based management is intended to
support informed decision-making. That is, the ecosystem goals and ecosystem health
objectives establish the priorities that need to be reflected in decisions regarding the
conservation of natural resources, protection of the environment, and socioeconomic
development. As a final step in the process, the information on the status of the ecosystem
health indicators is used by decision-makers to evaluate the efficacy of their management
activities and to refine their approaches, if necessary (i.e., within an adaptive management
context; by systematically evaluating the efficacy of management decisions and using that
information to refine management strategies in the future). Successful adoption of this
framework requires a strong commitment from all stakeholders and a willingness to explore
new decision-making processes (Environment Canada 1996).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 15
Chapter 3. Identification of Sediment Quality Issues and
Concerns
3.0 Introduction
The first step in the ecosystem-based management process involves the collation of the
existing information on the ecosystem under investigation. In this step of the process, both
contemporary scientific data and traditional knowledge are compiled to obtain a detailed
understanding of the ecosystem as a whole. More specifically, information is compiled on:
The structure, function, and status of the ecosystem;
• Historic land and resource use patterns; and,
The socioeconomic characteristics of the study area.
This information provides stakeholders with an understanding of key ecosystem attributes
and, hence, a basis for developing a common vision for the future (which is articulated in
terms of ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives; see Chapter 4 of Volume I). In
addition to supporting the development of ecosystem goals and objectives, collation of the
existing knowledge base is essential for identifying the sediment quality issues and concerns
that need to be addressed in the ecosystem management process. Some of the questions that
are commonly raised during this stage of the process include:
• Are the sediments contaminated by toxic and/or bioaccumulative substances?
• Are contaminated sediments impairing the beneficial uses of the aquatic
ecosystem? If so, which uses are being impaired?
• Which substances are causing or substantially contributing to beneficial use
impairment?
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 16
• Who is responsible for the release of those substances?
• What is the areal extent of sediment contamination?
• Where are the hot spots located?
• What actions are needed to restore the beneficial uses of the aquatic ecosystem?
The identification and assessment of issues and concerns relative to contaminated sediments
requires detailed information on the site and the larger ecosystem under investigation. More
specifically, information is needed on historic and current uses of the site, on regional land
use patterns, on the characteristics of effluent and stormwater discharges in the vicinity of
the site, and local hydrological conditions. Subsequent integration of information provides
an informed basis for identifying sediment quality issues and concerns. In turn, such
information is essential for designing and implementing sediment quality assessments that
explicitly address proj ect obj ectives (see Chapter 2 of Volume II for more information on the
recommended framework for assessing and managing contaminated sediments).
3.1 Historic and Current Uses of the Site
The potential for sediment contamination is influenced by the historic and current uses of the
site under investigation. Because there is a low probability of release of toxic or
bioaccumulative substances from urban parks and residential lands, the potential for
sediment contamination is likely to be relatively low at such sites. In contrast, releases of
anthropogenically-derived substances are more likely to occur in the vicinity of agricultural
lands and those used for commercial activities. Industrial activities have the highest potential
to release toxic and/or bioaccumulative substances and, in so doing, result in the
contamination of sediments. A listing of the activities that have a relatively high potential
for releasing hazardous substances into the environment is provided in Table 5 (BCE 1997).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 17
The nature of the activities conducted at a site determines which substances may have been
released into the environment. For example, releases of metals into aquatic ecosystems are
commonly associated with mining, milling, and related activities. Likewise, metal smelting,
processing, or finishing industries can release metals into the environment. Oil and natural
gas drilling, production, processing, retailing, and distribution can result in the release of a
variety of petroleum hydrocarbons and related substances into the environment, such as
alkanes, alkenes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, phenols, metals, benzene, toluene,
ethylene, and xylene (MacDonald 1989). Wood preservation, pulp and paper, and related
industries can result in releases of chlorophenols, chloroguaiacols, chlorocatechols,
chlorovertatrols, chloroanisoles, PCDD, PCDF, resin acids, metals, and other substances
(MacDonald 1989). Chemical manufacturing and related activities can result in the release
of a wide variety of substances, depending on the nature of the operation (Curry etal. 1997).
Information on the uses of the site under investigation (including any spill data that are
available) provides a basis for developing a preliminary list of substances that have
potentially been released into the environment in the immediate vicinity of the site (i.e.,
chemicals of potential concern; COPCs; i.e., the substances that could pose a risk or hazard
to ecological receptors or human health).
3.2 Regional Land Use Patterns
In addition to information on historic and current uses of the site under investigation,
evaluation of sediment quality issues and concerns also requires information on regional land
patterns. More specifically, information is needed on the types of industries and businesses
that operate or have operated in the region (i.e., within the watershed of interest), on the
location of wastewater treatment plants, on land use patterns in upland areas, on stormwater
drainage systems, on residential developments, and on other historic, ongoing, and potential
activities within the area. These types of information can be obtained from a variety of
sources, including federal, state, and provincial regulatory agencies, municipal governments,
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 18
First Nations/Tribal organizations, planning commissions, public utility districts, watershed
councils, and other non-governmental organizations. These data provide a basis for
identifying potential sources of chemical substances to aquatic ecosystems. In turn,
information on potential sources provides a basis for identifying the substances that may
have been released into aquatic ecosystems nearby the site under investigation. These
substances can then be added to the preliminary list of COPCs.
3.3 Characteristics of Effluent and Stormwater Discharges
Information on the location, volumes, and chemical characteristics of effluent and
stormwater discharges that are located at and nearby the site under investigation provides
important data for validating the preliminary list of COPCs. In the United States, such
information is available from National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System
(NPDES) records [i.e., the Permit Compliance System (PCS) database]. Information on the
nature and location of facilities that are subject to regulation under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (i.e., facilities at which hazardous wastes are generated,
transported, stored, or disposed of) is also available from the PCS database. Likewise,
information on the location, volume, and chemical characteristics of municipal wastewater
treatment plant discharges is also available in the PCS database. This database can be
accessed from the USEPA web page: (http://www.epa.gov/r5water/npdestek/
npdpretreatmentpcs.htm). In Canada, the appropriate responsible authority within each
province or territory should be contacted for data on the characteristics of effluent and
stormwater discharges.
It is important to remember that the PCS and similar databases do not provide comprehensive
information on the characteristics of effluents that are discharged into receiving water
systems. For this reason, other information on the types of substances that are typically
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 19
released into the environment in association with specific land use activities should also be
used to identify COPCs at the site (see Section 3.1 of Volume I; Table 5).
3.4 Identification of Sediment-Associated Chemicals of
Potential Concern
When used together, the information on historic and current uses of the site, on regional land
use patterns, on the characteristics of effluent and stormwater discharges in the vicinity of
the site provides a basis for identifying the preliminary COPCs at a site. However, further
refinement of this list requires data on the physical/chemical properties of each of those
substances. More specifically, information should be compiled on the octanol-water partition
coefficients (Kow), organic carbon partition coefficients (Koc), and solubilities of the
preliminary COPCs. Substances with moderate to high log Kow or log Koc values (i.e., > 3.5)
and/or those that are sparingly soluble in water are the most likely to accumulate in
sediments. The preliminary COPCs that have a high potential for accumulating in sediments
should be identified as the sediment-associated COPCs at the site.
In addition to information on the sources and fate of chemical substances, historical sediment
chemistry data provide a basis for identifying sediment-associated COPCs. However,
evaluating the relevance and quality of historic data before using it in this application is
important. For example, historical data sets may include only a limited suite of chemical
analytes, which restricts their use for identifying COPCs. In addition, the applicability of the
sediment chemistry data may be further restricted by high analytical detection limits and/or
poor recoveries of target analytes from sediments. Furthermore, spatial coverage of the study
area may not include the areas that are most likely to have contaminated sediments. Due to
these potential limitations, historical data sets should be used with caution for eliminating
substances from the list of COPCs for a site. However, substances that have been measured
in sediments at concentrations in excess of threshold effect concentrations (TECs) or similar
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 20
sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) should be identified as COPCs (see Chapter 2 of Volume
III).
3.5 Identification of Areas of Potential Concern
The information that was assembled to support the identification of COPCs also provides a
relevant basis for identifying areas of potential concern within a study area. More
specifically, information on the historic and current uses of the site, on regional land use
patterns, on the locations of effluent and stormwater discharges provides a basis for
identifying the areas of potential concern at the site (i.e., areas that potentially have
contaminated sediments). In addition, information on local hydrological conditions should
be considered when evaluating the potential for sediment contamination at a site. For
example, accumulation of contaminated sediments is unlikely to be a concern in fast-moving
reaches of river systems with coarse-grained sediments (i.e., local sediment transport zones).
However, contaminated sediments are likely to accumulate in the slower moving reaches of
river systems, in lakes, in harbors, and near-shore coastal areas (i.e., local sediment
deposition zones with fine-grained sediments). The results of previous reconnaissance
surveys, historic dredging records, bathymetric charts, and site visits provide a basis for
determining if local sediment deposition zones are likely to occur in the vicinity of the site
under investigation.
Historical sediment chemistry data can also be used to identify areas of potential concern
relative to sediment contamination. However, the application of such data for this purpose
can be limited for a number of reasons (see Section 2.2 of Volume II for a description of the
potential limitations of historical sediment chemistry data). Therefore, such historical
sediment chemistry and related data should be used with care for identifying areas of
potential concern.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
IDENTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS - PAGE 21
3.6 Identification of Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns
Investigations of sediment quality conditions are frequently conducted to obtain the
information needed to support environmental management decisions related to a site or a
water body. Such investigations may be conducted to determine if sediments are
contaminated, if contaminated sediments are impairing beneficial uses, and management
actions are needed to restore the beneficial uses of the aquatic ecosystem. Sediment quality
investigations may also be undertaken to evaluate the areal extent of contamination, to
identify sediment hot spots, and to determine who is responsible for the cleaning-up the site,
if necessary.
Designing sediment quality assessment programs that provide the information needed to
resolve these questions requires an understanding of the sediment quality issues and concerns
at the site under consideration. More specifically, investigators need to know if sediments
are potentially contaminated and, if so, which substances are likely to be associated with
sediments. Classification of these substances in terms of their potential toxicity and their
potential for bioaccumulating provides a basis for identifying which groups of receptors are
most likely to be exposed to sediment-associated COPCs (e.g., sediment-dwelling organisms,
fish, aquatic-dependant wildlife, humans). Examination of the available information on the
fate and effects of the COPCs provides a means of further identifying receptors at risk at the
site. Integration of the information on COPCs, areas of potential concern, and receptors at
risk facilitates the identification of sediment quality issues and concerns for the site under
consideration. In turn, this information enables investigators to determine if further
investigations (i.e., preliminary and/or detailed site investigations) are needed to assess
sediment quality conditions (see Volume n for more information on the design of sediment
quality investigations). In addition, this information can be used to develop an assessment
plan that will provide the data needed to evaluate the risks associated with exposure to
contaminated sediments.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 22
Chapter 4. Procedures for Establishing Ecosystem Goals
and Sediment Management Objectives for
Assessing and Managing Contaminated
Sediments
4.0 Introduction
Ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives represent key elements of the framework
for implementing ecosystem-based management (see Chapter 2 of Volume I). Ecosystem
goals are broad narrative statements that describe the desired future state of the ecosystem
(Bertram and Reynoldson 1992). Ecosystem health objectives are narrative statements that
clarify the scope and intent of the ecosystem goals by defining the desired condition of the
ecosystem in terms of specific ecological characteristics and uses (CCME 1996). Ecosystem
goals and ecosystem health objectives are established to provide the guidance needed to
focus management decisions on the maintenance of important ecosystem functions
(Environment Canada 1996).
Ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives can be established using a variety of
approaches. However, the most effective ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives
are developed using a cooperative visioning process that includes all interested stakeholder
groups. In general, this process involves five main steps, including:
• Defining the ecosystem;
• Defining the human community (i.e., stakeholder groups) that needs to be
involved in the visioning process;
• Disseminating information on the ecosystem (i.e., issues and concerns; existing
ecosystem knowledge base) that was compiled during the first step of the
framework (see Chapter 3 of Volume I);
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 23
• Convening workshops to develop a long-term vision for the ecosystem; and,
Translating the long-term vision into ecosystem goals and ecosystem health
objectives (and associated sediment management objectives).
Each of these steps is briefly described in the following sections of this chapter.
4.1 Defining the Ecosystem
The term "ecosystem" has a number of definitions. For example, one of the earliest
definitions of ecosystem is "the community of living organisms and the physical factors
forming their environment, such as water, land, and air" (Stoddart 1965). Some of the other
early definitions of this term include: "a collection of all organisms and environments in a
single location" (McNaughton and Wolf 1979); "an organizational unit, including one or
more living entities, through which there is a transfer and processing of energy and matter"
(Evans 1956); and, "a collection of interacting components and their interactions, that
includes ecological or biological components" (Odum 1983). More recent definitions of the
term are generally consistent with the earlier definitions, except that the definitions include
specific reference to humans as integral components of the biological community and
emphasize the flexible nature of ecosystem spatial boundaries (Environment Canada 1996).
A selection of contemporary definitions of the term "ecosystem" is provided in Table 6
(Environment Canada 1996).
In evaluating the definitions of the term "ecosystem" that have been advanced by various
investigators and organizations, Environment Canada (1996) identified a number of key
insights that are relevant to defining the geographic scope of an ecosystem, as follows:
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 24
• Sustained life is a property of ecosystems, not species. Individual species cannot
survive indefinitely on their own. The smallest unit of the biosphere that can
support life over the long term is an ecosystem.
• Ecosystems are open systems of matter and energy (composition) in various
combinations (structures) that change over time (function). Ecosystems undergo
continuous change in response to pressures from component populations (human
or otherwise) and the changing physical environment.
• Everything in an ecosystem is related to everything else. These interrelationships
underline another important characteristic of an ecosystem - it is more than the
sum of its parts.
• Humans are an important part or ecosystems. As noted above, sustained life is
a property of systems, not individual species. This implies the necessity of
maintaining the health and integrity of natural systems to ensure our own
survival.
• Ecosystems can be defined in terms of various spatial and temporal scales. The
choice of scale depends on the problem to be addressed and/or the human
activities being managed.
• Any ecosystem is open to "outside" influences (Aliened/. 1991). Consideration
of outside influences complicates efforts to predict or model cause and effect
relationships and highlights the need for flexibility and adaptability in assessment
and management processes.
Defining the geographic scope of the ecosystem under consideration represents an essential
step in the development of ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives. However, this
step can be complicated because ecosystems do not have clearly defined boundaries. Air,
water, earth, plants, and animals, move and can affect several different ecosystems (Grant
1997). Nevertheless, ecosystems can be operationally defined by considering such factors
as the unifying ecological characteristics of the ecosystem, the practicality of ecosystem
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 25
boundaries relative to the issues and concerns that have been identified, and distribution of
human populations (Grant 1997). In many cases, ecosystem boundaries can be established
using watershed boundaries; this approach is particularly relevant for initiatives that are
primarily focused on the assessment and management of aquatic resources (e.g., sediments).
4.2 Identifying Key Stakeholder Groups
Identification of key stakeholder groups, which is often termed the human community of
interest, is of critical importance for developing ecosystem goals and ecosystem health
objectives. A community of interest can be defined as a group of individuals and
organizations that participate in common practices, depend on one another, make decisions
together, and commit themselves to the group's well-being over the long-term (Grant 1997).
It is important to identify the members of the human community of interest relative to the
ecosystem because these stakeholders need to participate in the development of ecosystem
goals and ecosystem health objectives, and in the subsequent steps in the ecosystem
management process. The members of the community of interest may be defined by
identifying who is likely to be affected by the health of the ecosystem and who is willing to
actively plan for and work toward a sustainable, healthy ecosystem. For example, Citizens
Advisory Committees (CACs) have been established at many Great Lakes AOCs to represent
the various stakeholder groups and to guide the management of aquatic resources, including
contaminated sediments.
4.3 Disseminating Information on the Ecosystem
The first step in the ecosystem management process is to define the issues and concerns and
to compile the existing knowledge base on the ecosystem. The existing knowledge base is
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 26
the collection of scientific, traditional, and folk knowledge about the ecosystem. To be
effective, the existing knowledge base should:
• Provide information on the current status of the ecosystem;
• Include information on the environment, economy, and society;
• Provide historical reference points for determining what can be achieved in the
ecosystem;
• Facilitate scientific predictions regarding future trends and state limits on
scientific certainty;
• Provide a mechanism for updating the knowledge base as new information
becomes available; and,
• Be updated regularly with new information.
The existing knowledge base needs to be broadly accessible to everyone with an interest in
the ecosystem. Accordingly, broad dissemination of the information contained with the
existing knowledge base is essential for ensuring that all participants in the ecosystem
management process have a common understanding of the original (i.e., prior to European
contact) and current state of the ecosystem. In this way, discussions regarding the possible
future state of the ecosystem can fully consider the benefits that the ecosystem has
historically delivered, as well as the benefits that the ecosystem is currently delivering.
Dissemination of this information can be undertaken in a number of ways, including
distribution of paper reports, videos, maps and fact sheets, development of interactive web
sites, delivery of slide shows, scientific papers, presentations at workshops and/or community
meetings, and releases of news stories in the media. One of the keys to effective
communication regarding the status of the ecosystem is to ensure that the language used is
understandable to all of the members of the community of interest (i.e., minimize the use of
technical jargon).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANA GING CONTAMINA TED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 27
4.4 Convening Multi-Stakeholder Workshops
Multi-stakeholder workshops and community meetings can provide participants with an
opportunity to describe the desired future state of the ecosystem (i.e., the long-term vision
for the future). It is of fundamental importance to the ecosystem management process
because it provides a mechanism for diverse interest groups to define their common interests
and, in so doing, lays the groundwork for working together to achieve their common goals.
Typically, these workshops and meetings are organized so as to enable participants to access
key elements of the existing knowledge base (i.e., through presentations and hand-outs).
Then, various workshop techniques (e.g., guided imagery, image recollection, small group
discussions, group presentations) can be used to identify the elements of their vision for the
future. Then, workshop participants are asked to identify the common elements of their
shared vision for a healthy ecosystem (i.e., the vision elements to which most or all
stakeholders can agree).
4.5 Translating the Long Term Vision into Ecosystem Goals and
Ecosystem Health Objectives
The final step in the process is to translate the long-term vision developed by workshop
participants into clearly stated ecosystem goals and ecosystem health obj ectives. In the Great
Lakes ecosystem, for example, stakeholders generally share a common vision for aquatic
habitats, which could be stated as follows (IJC 1991):
Self-maintenance or self-sustainability of the ecological systems;
• Sustained use of the ecosystem for economic or other societal purposes; and,
Sustained development to ensure human welfare.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 28
These broad vision elements provide a basis for developing ecosystem goals that provide
guidance for managing human activities in a manner that assures the long-term sustainability
of aquatic ecosystems. With these three concepts in mind, the Ecosystem Objectives Work
Group (1992) developed ecosystem goals and objectives for Lake Ontario (Table 7).
Similarly, the Lake Superior Working Group (1993) developed ecosystem objectives for
Lake Superior that defined the desired future state for the ecosystem (Table 8). These, and
other examples (e.g., MacDonald 1999; Crane et al. 2000), provide a relevant basis for
defining an ecosystem goal for managing aquatic ecosystems that applies broadly to
freshwater ecosystems and can be modified for use in specific areas, as follows:
To protect, sustain, and, where necessary, restore healthy, functioning aquatic
ecosystems that are capable of supporting current and future uses.
While this long-term management goal effectively articulates the long-term vision for the
management of aquatic ecosystems, it is too general to effectively guide management
decisions at sites with contaminated sediments. To be useful, ecosystem goals must be
further clarified and refined to establish ecosystem health objectives (Harris et al. 1987). In
turn, the ecosystem health obj ectives support the identification of indicators and metrics that
provide direct information for specifically assessing the health and integrity of the ecosystem.
Habitats that support the production offish and wildlife are of fundamental importance for
maintaining the uses of aquatic ecosystems. While sites with contaminated sediments
typically cover relatively small geographic areas within larger aquatic ecosystems (e.g.,
watersheds), they have the potential to substantially influence conditions within the larger
management unit. For this reason, it is essential that sediment management decisions
support the long-term goals that have been established for the ecosystem, as a whole. In
recognition of the importance of aquatic habitats, the following ecosystem health objectives
are recommended to provide guidance on the protection and restoration of aquatic
ecosystems:
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANAGING CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 29
Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that the health ofbenthic
communities is protected and, where necessary, restored.
Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that the health offish
populations is protected and, where necessary, restored.
Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that the health of aquatic-
dependent wildlife populations is protected and, where necessary, restored.
Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that human health is
protected and the human uses of the aquatic ecosystem are, where necessary,
restored.
These objectives explicitly recognize that there are multiple uses of aquatic ecosystems that
can be affected by sediment quality conditions and, hence, need to be considered in the
assessment, management, and remediation of contaminated sediments. Importantly, these
objectives also recognize that biotic receptors can be exposed to sediment-associated
contaminants in three ways, including direct exposure to in situ sediments and pore water
(including processing of sediments by sediment-dwelling organisms), through transfer of
sediment-associated contaminants into the water column, and through the consumption of
contaminated food organisms. Therefore, sediment management strategies must consider
these three exposure routes, if the designated uses of aquatic ecosystems are to be protected,
maintained, and restored.
A description of the designated water uses that could exist at sites with contaminated
sediments are identified in Appendix 3 of Volume I. Because various water bodies may have
different designated uses, the ecosystem health obj ectives may not apply uniformly at all sites
with contaminated sediments. In addition, different use designations may be applied to
specific areas within a single watershed, depending on the receptors that are present, ambient
environmental conditions, and several other factors. Therefore, some of the ecosystem health
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANA GING CONTAMINA TED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 30
objectives may apply to certain areas of the watershed, while others objectives may apply to
other areas. Because all of the subsequent steps in the ecosystem-based management process
flow directly from the ecosystem goals and objectives that have been established, the
importance of this step in the process cannot be over emphasized.
4.6 Establishing Sediment Management Objectives
The ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives developed in the previous stage of the
process describe the desired state of the ecosystem under consideration. Such goals and
obj ectives represent indispensable tools for managing human activities that have the potential
to affect the quality of aquatic ecosystems. However, more specific guidance is also needed
to support the management of sites with contaminated sediments. For this reason, it is
recommended that sediment management objectives be established for sites known or
suspected to have sediments that are contaminated with toxic and/or bioaccumulative
substances at levels that could adversely affect the beneficial uses of the aquatic ecosystem.
Sediment management objectives may be defined as narrative statements that describe the
desired future sediment quality conditions at a site (i.e., as opposed to the entire aquatic
ecosystem). To be useful, the sediment management objectives must reflect the ecosystem
health objectives and be expressed in terms of specific ecological functions. For example,
maintenance and/or restoration of sediment quality conditions to protect and/or restore
benthic communities has been recommended as an ecosystem health objective for aquatic
ecosystems. The corresponding sediment management objectives for a site with
contaminated sediments could be:
• Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that sediments do not
adversely affect the survival, growth, or reproduction of sediment-dwelling
organisms (as indicated by the results of long-term toxicity tests);
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHING ECOSYSTEM GOALS AND SMOs FOR ASSESSING AND MANA GING CONTAMINA TED SEDIMENTS - PAGE 31
• Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that sediments are not
contaminated at levels that would adversely affect the survival, growth, or
reproduction of sediment-dwelling organisms (as indicated by sediment
chemistry data);
• Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that sediments do not
adversely affect the structure of benthic macroinvertebrate communities (as
indicated by the results of benthic surveys); and,
• Maintain and/or restore sediment quality conditions such that sediments are not
contaminated at levels that would result in the accumulation of contaminants in
the tissues of aquatic organisms to levels that would adversely affect aquatic-
dependent wildlife or human health.
For sites that are being investigated under CERCLA, guidance for conducting ecological risk
assessments (USEPA 1997b; 1998; MacDonald et al. 2002c) and natural resource damage
assessment and restoration (DOT regulations; 43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 11;
MacDonald et al. 2002a; 2002b) provides an effective basis for establishing sediment
management obj ectives that are consistent with programmatic needs (Appendix 1 in Volume
II). Sediment management obj ectives have also been established for contaminated sites that
are being investigated under the CSR of the B.C. Waste Management Act (MacDonald et al.
2001). Establishment of such sediment management objectives on an a priori basis is
important because they can guide the development and evaluation of remedial alternatives
at sites that are found to have degraded sediment quality conditions.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 32
Chapter 5. Selection of Ecosystem Health Indicators,
Metrics and Targets for Assessing the Effects
of Contaminated Sediments on Sediment-
Dwelling Organisms, Aquatic-Dependent
Wildlife, and Human Health
5.0 Introduction
The ecosystem goals developed cooperatively by interested stakeholder groups describe the
desired future state of an ecosystem (Bertram and Reynoldson 1992). Ecosystem health
objectives further clarify these goals by expressing them in terms of the ecological
characteristics and human uses of the ecosystem. Such ecosystem goals and ecosystem
health objectives provide a basis for establishing sediment management objectives and
ecosystem health indicators that guide the assessment and management of contaminated
sediments in freshwater ecosystems. Adherence to this ecosystem-based approach enhances
the likelihood that any sediment management activities that are undertaken at sites with
contaminated sediments will be consistent with, and support, the broader management
initiatives that have been established for the ecosystem. This chapter provides guidance on
the selection of ecosystem health indicators, metrics, and targets to support the assessment
and management of contaminated sediments. Additional information on the selection of
indicators, metrics, and targets and on interpretation of data generated from these indicators
is provided in Volume III.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 33
5.1 Identification of Candidate Ecosystem Health Indicators
In the environment, a variety of plant and animal species (i.e., receptors) can be exposed to
physical, chemical, and/or biological stressors. Each of these stressors has the potential to
affect the status of the ecological receptors and, in so doing, influence the structure and/or
function of plant and animal communities in the ecosystem. In turn, such interactions
between stressors, particularly those that are anthropogenically induced, and receptors have
the potential to influence the health of the aquatic ecosystems, including the associated
beneficial uses by humans.
Ecosystem health, as defined by the ecosystem goals and ecosystem health obj ectives, cannot
be measured directly (Environment Canada 1996). For this reason, establishing a suite of
ecosystem health indicators to support the evaluation of the status and trends of the
ecosystem as a whole is necessary. An ecosystem health indicator is any characteristic of the
environment that, when measured, provides accurate and precise information on the status
of the ecosystem. For example, sediment toxicity may be selected as an indicator of the
extent to which sediments are likely to support healthy and self-sustaining populations of
benthic macroinvertebrates. Such indicators can provide a basis for measuring attainment
of the long-term goals and objectives for the ecosystem and for identifying any undesirable
changes that have occurred or are likely to occur to the ecosystem. To be effective, however,
ecosystem health indicators need to be accompanied by appropriate metrics and quantitative
targets. A metric may be defined as any measurable characteristic of an ecosystem health
indicator (e.g., survival of the amphipod, Hyalella azteca, in 28-day toxicity tests), while a
target defines the desirable range of a specific metric (e.g., not statistically different from the
control response; Volume HI). The relationship between ecosystem goals, ecosystem health
objectives, ecosystem health indicators, metrics, and targets, within the context of the
ecosystem approach to environmental management, is illustrated in Figures 3 and 4.
The identification of candidate ecosystem health indicators represents an important step in
the ecosystem-based management process. Candidate ecosystem health indicators
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 34
encompass all of the ecosystem components and functions that could be used to provide
information on the health of the ecosystem as a whole (i.e., to track progress toward the
ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives). The existing knowledge base that was
compiled as the first step of the process provides a summary of what is known about the
structure and function of the ecosystem under investigation. As such, the existing knowledge
base provides an effective basis for identifying candidate ecosystem health indicators for the
system under investigation. In cases where the existing knowledge basis is limited,
information on similar ecosystems may be useful for identifying candidate ecosystem health
indicators. The suite of indicators that are ultimately selected for assessing ecosystem health
will be drawn from the candidate ecosystem health indicators that are identified at this stage
of the process.
5.2 Evaluation of Candidate Ecosystem Health Indicators
While detailed information on the status of each of the physical, chemical, and biological
components of the environment would provide comprehensive information on ecosystem
structure and function, collecting such data on every component of the ecosystem is neither
practical nor feasible. For this reason, focusing assessment activities on the candidate
indicators that provide the most useful information for assessing ecosystem health is
necessary. In the case on contaminated sediment assessment, it is particularly important to
focus on those indicators that have been demonstrated to provide reliable information on the
effects of contaminated sediments on the structure and function of the aquatic ecosystem.
A number of approaches have been used to evaluate candidate ecosystem health indicators.
For example, the International Joint Commission has developed a framework for evaluating
and selecting biological indicators of ecosystem health (IJC 1991). This framework provides
detailed guidance on the development of ecosystem goals, on the identification of
physicochemical, biological, and sociological indicators of ecosystem health, and on the
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 35
establishment of monitoring programs to assess attainment of these goals. Likewise,
Environment Canada has proposed a national framework for developing biological indicators
for evaluating ecosystem health, as well as specific guidance on their application
(Environment Canada 1993; 1996; 1997; CCME 1996). Both of these frameworks indicate
that identification of the purpose of the resultant monitoring data is a central consideration
in the selection of ecosystem health indicators. The IJC (1991) recognized five distinct
purposes for which environmental data are collected, including:
• Assessment: evaluating the current status of the environment to determine its
adequacy for supporting specific uses (i.e., fish and aquatic life). That is,
monitoring the attainment of the ecosystem health objectives;
• Trends: documenting changes in environmental conditions over time. That is,
monitoring the degradation, maintenance, and/or rehabilitation of the ecosystem
under consideration;
• Early warning: providing an early warning that hazardous conditions exist before
they result in significant impacts on sensitive and/or important components of the
ecosystem;
• Diagnostic: identifying the nature of any hazardous conditions that may exist
(i.e., the specific causes of ecosystem degradation) in order to develop and
implement appropriate management actions to mitigate against adverse impacts;
and,
• Linkages: demonstrating the linkages between indicators to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of monitoring programs and to reinforce the need to
make environmentally sound management decisions.
Identification of the ultimate purpose of the monitoring data is important because no single
indicator will be universally applicable in every application. For this reason, selecting a suite
of indicators that most directly addresses the requirements of the monitoring program is
necessary. To support evaluations of the relevance of candidate ecosystem health indicators,
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 36
Ryder and Edwards (1985) and the IJC (1991) identified a number of desirable characteristics
of candidate indicators, including:
• Biologically-relevant: candidate indicators must be important for maintaining a
balanced community and indicative of other, unmeasured biological indicators;
Sensitive: candidate indicators should exhibit graded responses to environmental
stresses, should not be tolerant of environmental changes, and should not exhibit
high natural variability;
• Measurable: candidate indicators should have operational definitions and
determination of their status should be supported by procedures for which it is
possible to document the accuracy and precision of the measurements (easy to
measure);
Cost-effective: candidate indicators should be relatively inexpensive to measure
and provide the maximum amount of information per unit effort;
Supported by historical data: sufficient scientific data and/or traditional
knowledge should be available to support the determination of natural variability,
trends, and targets for the ecosystem metrics;
• Non-destructive: collection of the required data on the candidate indicators
should not result in changes in the structure and/or function of the ecosystem, or
on the status of individual species;
Of the appropriate scale: candidate indicators should be applicable for
determining the status to the ecosystem as a whole, not only to limited geographic
areas within the ecosystem;
• Non-redundant: candidate indicators should provide unique information on the
status of the ecosystem;
• Socially-relevant: candidate indicators should be of obvious value to, and be
observable by, stakeholders or be predictive of an indicator that has these
attributes;
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGES?
• Interpretable: candidate indicators should provide information that supports
evaluations of the status of the ecosystem and the associated human uses of the
ecosystem (acceptable ranges or targets should be definable);
• Anticipatory: candidate indicators should be capable of providing an indication
that environmental degradation is occurring before serious harm has occurred;
Timely: candidate indicators should provide information quickly enough to
support the initiation of effective management actions before significant and
lasting effects on the ecosystem have occurred;
• Broadly-applicable: candidate indicators should be responsive to many stressors
and be applicable to a broad range of sites;
• Diagnostic: candidate indicators should facilitate the identification of the
particular stressor that is causing the problem;
• Continuity: candidate indicators should facilitate assessments of environmental
conditions over time; and,
• Integrative: candidate indicators should provide information on the status of
many unmeasured indicators.
Application of this system for evaluating candidate indicators involves two main steps. First,
the reasons for collecting monitoring data need to be explicitly identified from the five
potential purposes listed earlier in Section 5.2 of Volume I (assessment, trends, early
warning, diagnostic, linkages). Next, the essential and important characteristics of ecosystem
health indicators for the selected monitoring purposes need to be identified using the
information in Table 9 (designated as * and 3, respectively; IJC 1991). Subsequently, each
of the candidate ecosystem health indicators should be scored relative to the essential and
important characteristics that were identified (e.g., 0 to 2 for each characteristic, depending
on the degree to which they reflect the essential and important characteristics). Finally, a
total evaluation score should be calculated (i.e., by summing the score for each characteristic)
and used to rank the utility of each candidate ecosystem health indicator relative to the
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 38
intended use of the monitoring data. A final suite of ecosystem health indicators can then
be selected based on the results of this ranking process, with consideration given to the extent
to which the highest ranking indicators compliment each other.
5.3 Selection of Ecosystem Health Indicators
Several factors need to be considered in the selection of ecosystem health indicators for
assessing sediment quality conditions. First, the indicators that are selected must be related
to the ecosystem goals and ecosystem health objectives established for the body of water
under investigation (Environment Canada 1996). Second, a suite of indicators should be
selected to reduce the potential for errors in decisions that are made based on the results of
sediment quality monitoring programs (Environment Canada 1996). Third, the selection of
ecosystem health indicators should be guided by selection criteria that reflect the stated
purpose of the monitoring program (as described in Section 5.2).
Relative to sediment contamination, COPCs can be classified into two general categories
based on their potential effects on ecological receptors, including toxic substances and
bioaccumulative substances. For toxic substances that partition into sediments, evaluation
of direct effects on sediment-dwelling organisms is likely to represent the primary focus of
sediment quality investigations. For bioaccumulative substances, sediment quality
assessments are likely to focus on evaluating effects on aquatic-dependent wildlife (i.e., fish,
amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) and on human health. In this way, such
investigations can provide the information needed to evaluate attainment of the sediment
management objectives for the site and the ecosystem health objectives that have been
recommended for soft-substrate habitats in freshwater ecosystems (see Section 4.5 of
Volume I).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE 39
There is a wide range of indicators that can be used to evaluate sediment quality conditions.
In the past, physical and chemical indicators have been primarily used to provide a means
of assessing environmental quality conditions. More recently, significant effort has also been
directed at the development of biological indicators of ecosystem integrity (which are often
termed biocriteria; OEPA 1988). These biological indicators may apply to one or more
levels of organization and encompass a large number of metrics ranging from biochemical
variables to community parameters (e.g., species richness). Ideally, environmental
monitoring programs would include each of the physical, chemical, and biological variables
that could, potentially, be affected by anthropogenic activities. However, limitations on
human and financial resources preclude this possibility. For this reason, identifying the most
relevant ecosystem health indicators for assessing sediment quality conditions is necessary.
The scoring system developed by the IJC (1991) provides a basis for evaluating candidate
indicators relative to the intended purpose of the resultant monitoring data (Table 9).
Application of the IJC (1991) criteria is dependent on identifying the most desirable
characteristics of the ecosystem health indicators and subsequently evaluating the candidate
indicators relative to these characteristics. Based on the information presented in Table 9,
it is essential that indicators for any monitoring purpose be sensitive, measurable, cost-
effective, supported by historical data, non-destructive, of appropriate scale, and non-
redundant (i.e., these are the essential characteristics of ecosystem health indicators). For
sediment quality evaluations that are focused on status and trends assessment, indicators that
are biologically relevant, socially relevant, interpretable, and provide continuity of
measurements over time are likely to be the most relevant (i.e., these are the important
characteristics of ecosystem health indicators for this monitoring application). Application
of the IJC (1991) evaluation criteria facilitates the identification of ecosystem health
indicators that are the most relevant for assessing sediment quality conditions. MacDonald
and Ingersoll (2000) and MacDonald etal. (2002a; 2002b) evaluated a variety of candidate
ecosystem health indicators and concluded that the following were particularly relevant for
assessing sediment quality conditions in freshwater ecosystems.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SELECTION OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH INDICATORS, METRICS AND TARGETS FOR ASSESSING EFFECTS - PAGE40
Receptors of Interest
Sediment-dwelling organisms
Wildlife resources
Human health
Indicator of Sediment Quality Conditions
Chemistry of whole sediments
Chemistry of pore water
Toxicity of sediments to invertebrates
Structure of benthic invertebrate communities
Toxicity of sediments to fish
Health of fish
Status offish communities
Chemistry of whole sediments
Chemistry offish and invertebrate tissues
Chemistry of whole sediments
Chemistry offish and invertebrate tissues
Presence offish and wildlife consumption advisories
Again, the selection of ecosystem health indicators must be guided by the sediment quality
issues and concerns that are identified at the site under investigation. Where sediments are
primarily contaminated by toxic substances, focusing sediment quality assessments on the
receptors that are most likely to be directly affected by contaminated sediments is reasonable
(i.e., sediment-dwelling organisms and fish). At sites contaminated by bioaccumulative
substances, sediment quality assessments need to have a broader focus, potentially including
sediment-dwelling organisms, wildlife resources, and human health. Importantly, the
significance of the decisions (i.e., size of the site, potential clean-up costs) that may be made
based on the results of the assessment should be a central consideration when developing a
suite of indicators for assessing contaminated sediments (see Chapter 7 of Volume III).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHMENT OF METRICS AND TARGETS - PAGE 41
5.4 Establishment of Metrics and Targets for Ecosystem Health
Indicators
By themselves, ecosystem health indicators do not provide a complete basis for designing
sediment quality monitoring programs. There is also a need to identify and prioritize metrics
for each of the ecosystem health indicators that are selected for assessing contaminated
sediments (Table 10; also see Chapters 2 to 6 of Volume III for recommended metrics for
each indicator of sediment quality conditions). Metrics may be defined as any measurable
characteristic of an ecosystem health indicator (e.g., the dry weight concentration of PAHs
in sediments might be identified as an important metric relative to sediment chemistry). As
such, the metrics define which variables are to be measured as part of the sediment quality
monitoring program.
The selection of appropriate metrics for assessing sediment quality conditions involves
several steps. The first step in this process involves the identification of candidate metrics
for each indicator (Table 10). Subsequently, the candidate metrics for each priority indicator
need to be evaluated in terms of the utility of the information that they are likely to generate.
This evaluation needs to reflect the sediment management objectives to ensure that the most
appropriate metrics are selected for each ecosystem health indicator. For example, the
concentrations of metals in sediment are likely to provide an appropriate metric for sediment
chemistry in the vicinity of a lead-zinc smelter. However, measurement of the levels of
organochlorine pesticides in sediment might be less appropriate at such a site. Therefore, the
metric evaluation process provides a basis for focusing limited sediment quality assessment
resources on priority sediment quality issues and concerns.
Numerical targets are also required for each metric to support interpretation of the data
generated on each ecosystem health indicator. Such targets define the desirable or acceptable
range of values for each metric. For example, a numerical sediment quality guideline (e.g.,
TEC) for total PAHs (tPAH) defines the range of IP AH concentrations that pose a low risk
to sediment-dwelling organisms (e.g., 0 to 1.6 mg/kg DW; MacDonald etal. 2000). Such
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
ESTABLISHMENT OF METRICS AND TARGETS - PAGE 42
targets may vary depending on the management goals that are established at a particular site.
For example, a target used to identify the need for further investigations at a potentially
contaminated site might be set at a relatively low level (e.g., TEC; MacDonald et al. 2000).
However, a target used to guide remedial actions (e.g., a preliminary remediation goal) after
the results of an ecological or human health risk assessment have confirmed that significant
risks exist at the site might be set at a higher level (e.g., PEC; MacDonald et al. 2000;
MacDonald et al. 2002a; 2002b; 2002c). In addition, targets for areas that are subjected to
periodic or frequent physical disturbances may differ from those that are established for areas
that are only infrequently disturbed (Crane etal. 2000). For this reason, multiple targets may
be set for many of the metrics (see Chapter 7 of Volume III).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SUMMARY - PAGE 43
Chapter 6. Summary
Information from many sources indicates that sediments throughout North America are
contaminated by a wide range of toxic and bioaccumulative substances, including metals,
PAHs, PCBs, OC pesticides, a variety of semi-volatile organic chemicals (SVOCs), and
PCDDs and PCDFs (UC 1988; USEPA 1997a; 2000a; 2001). Contaminated sediments pose
a major risk to the beneficial uses of freshwater ecosystems. For example, imposition offish
consumption advisories has adversely affected commercial, sport, and food fisheries in many
areas with contaminated sediments. In addition, degradation of the benthic community and
other factors associated with sediment contamination have contributed to the impairment of
fish and wildlife populations. Furthermore, fish in areas with contaminated sediments have
been observed to have higher frequencies of tumors and other abnormalities than fish from
reference areas. Contaminated sediments have also threatened the viability of many
commercial ports through the imposition of restrictions on dredging of navigational channels
and disposal of dredged materials (UC 1997).
This report describes an ecosystem-based framework for assessing and managing
contaminated sediments (Chapter 2 of Volume I) which consists of five basic elements,
including:
• Collation of the existing ecosystem knowledge base, and identification and
assessment of the issues (Chapter 3 of Volume I);
• Development and articulation of ecosystem goals and objectives (Chapter 4 of
Volume I);
Selection of ecosystem health indicators to gauge progress toward ecosystem
goals and objectives (Chapter 5 of Volume I and Chapters 2 to 6 of Volume III);
• Design and implementation of directed research and monitoring programs
(Volumes II and III); and,
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
SUMMARY - PAGE 44
• Make informed decisions on the assessment, conservation, protection, and
restoration of natural resources (Chapter 7 of Volume III).
The first three steps in the ecosystem-based framework provide a systematic basis for
planning assessments of sediment quality conditions. As such, the framework provides a
means of ensuring that assessment activities (i.e., research and monitoring) are focused on
the priority issues and concerns at the site under investigation and will provide the
information needed to make informed decisions regarding the management of contaminated
sediments. More information on the advantages, limitations, and application of the various
tools for assessing sediment quality conditions (e.g., sediment chemistry data and sediment
toxicity data) is provided in Volume HI. Guidance on the collection of sediment quality data
is provided in Volume II, while information on the interpretation of such data is presented
in Volume IE. When used together with other appropriate guidance documents (e.g.,USEPA
1994; 2000b; ASTM 200la; 200Ib; 200Ic; 200Id), this guidance manual provides a basis
for designing and implementing scientifically-defensible assessments of sediment quality
conditions in freshwater ecosystems.
GUIDANCE ANNUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 45
Chapter 7. References
Allen, T.F.H., B.L. Bandurski, and A.W. King. 1991. The ecosystem approach: Theory and
ecosystem integrity. Report to the Great Lakes Science Advisory Board. International
Joint Commission. United States and Canada.
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 200la. Standard test methods for
measuring the toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants with freshwater
invertebrates. E1706-00. ASTM2001 AnnualBook of Standards Volume 11.05. West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2001b. Standard guide for designing
biological tests with sediments. E1525-94a. In: ASTM2001 Annual Book of Standards
Volume 11.05. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2001 c. Standard guide for collection,
storage, characterization, and manipulation of sediments for toxicological testing.
E1391-94. In: ASTM 2001 Annual Book of Standards Volume 11.05. West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 200Id. Standard guide for
determination of the bioaccumulation of sediment-associated contaminants by benthic
invertebrates. E1688-00a. In: ASTM 2001 Annual Book of Standards Volume 11.05.
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
BCE (British Columbia Environment). 1997. Waste Management Act: Contaminated Sites
Regulation. B.C. Reg. 375/96. Schedule 2. Victoria, British Columbia.
Bertram, P.E. and T.B. Reynoldson. 1992. Developing ecosystem objectives for the Great
Lakes: Policy, progress and public participation. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health
1:89-95.
CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1996. A framework for
developing ecosystem health goals, objectives, and indicators: Tools for ecosystem-based
management. Prepared by the Water Quality Guidelines Task Group of the Canadian
Council of Ministers of the Environment. Winnipeg, Manitoba. 24 pp.
Christie, W.J., M. Becker, J.W. Cowden and J.R. Vallentyne. 1986. Managing the Great
Lakes Basin as a home. Journal of Great Lakes Research 12(1):2-17.
Crane, J.L. 1996. Carcinogenic human health risks associated with consuming
contaminated fish from five Great Lakes Areas of Concern. Journal of Great Lakes
Research 22:653-668.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 46
Crane, J.L., D.D. MacDonald, C.G. Ingersoll, D.E. Smorong, R. A. Lindskoog, C.G. Severn,
T.A. Berger, L. J. Field. 2000. Development of a framework for evaluating numerical
sediment quality targets and sediment contamination in the St. Louis Area of Concern.
EPA 905-R-00-008. Great Lakes National Program Office. Chicago, Illinois.
Curry, M.S., M.T. Huguenin, AJ. Martin, and T.R. Lookingbill. 1997. Contamination
extent report and preliminary injury evaluation for the Calcasieu Estuary. Prepared by
Industrial Economics, Incorporated. Prepared for National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Silver Spring, Maryland.
Ecosystem Objectives Work Group. 1992. Ecosystem objectives and their environmental
indicators for Lake Ontario. Prepared for the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
International Joint Commission. Windsor, Ontario. 26 pp.
Environment Canada, Parks Service. 1992. Toward sustainable ecosystems: A Canadian
Parks Service strategy, Western region strategy to enhance ecological integrity. Final
report of the Ecosystem Management Task Force. Calgary, Alberta. (As cited in
Environment Canada 1996).
Environment Canada. 1993. A proposed national framework for evaluating and reporting
ecosystem health: A discussion paper. Prepared by Eco-Health Branch. Ecosystem
Science and Evaluation Directorate. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.
Environment Canada. 1994a. Reviewing Canadian Environmental Protection Act - The
issues #3 - The ecosystem approach. Prepared for the Canadian Environmental
Protection Act Office. Hull, Quebec. (As cited in Environment Canada 1996).
Environment Canada. 1994b. An ecosystem planning framework. Produced by the Prairie
and Northern Region. 26 July 1994. Edmonton, Alberta. (As cited in Environment
Canada 1996).
Environment Canada. 1996. The ecosystem approach: Getting beyond the rhetoric.
Prepared by the Task Force on Ecosystem Approach and Ecosystem Science at
Environment Canada. Prepared for the Environment Canada Long Term Strategic Plan
for Ecosystem Initiatives. Ottawa, Ontario.
Environment Canada. 1997. The Salmon River Watershed: An evaluation of the
collaboration towards ecosystem objectives and a watershed vision: Summary report,
February 1997. Fraser River Action Plan, Environment Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.
Evans, F.C. 1956. Ecosystems as the basic unit in ecology. Science 123:1127-1128.
Grant, K. 1997. Reaching new heights: A handbook for developing community-based
ecosystem health goals, objectives, and indicators. DOEFRAP 1996-16. Environment
Canada, Fraser River Action Plan. Vancouver, British Columbia.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 47
Harris, H.J., P.E. Sager, S. Richman, V.A. Harris and CJ. Yarbrough. 1987. Coupling
ecosystem science with management: A Great Lakes perspective from Green Bay, Lake
Michigan, USA. Environmental Management ll(5):619-625.
IJC (International Joint Commission). 1988. Procedures for the assessment of contaminated
sediment problems in the Great Lakes. Prepared by the Sediment Subcommittee and its
Assessment Work Group. Great Lakes Regional Office. Windsor, Ontario. 140pp.
IJC (International Joint Commission). 1991. A proposed framework for developing
indicators of ecosystem health for the Great Lakes region. Council of Great Lakes
Research Managers. Windsor, Ontario. 47 pp.
IJC (International Joint Commission). 1994. Ecosystem charter for the Great Lakes - St.
Lawrence Basin. Produced by the Council of Great Lakes Research Managers for the
IJC. April 1994 Draft. (As cited in Environment Canada 1996).
IJC (International Joint Commission). 1997. Overcoming obstacles to sediment remediation
in the Great Lakes Basin. White Paper by the Sediment Priority Action Committee.
Great Lakes Water Quality Board. Windsor, Ontario.
Ingersoll, C.G., T. Dillon, and R.G. Biddinger (Eds.). 1997. Methodological uncertainty in
sediment ecological risk assessment. In: Ecological Risk Assessments of Contaminated
Sediment. SETAC Press. Pensacola, Florida. 389pp.
Krantzberg, G., M.A. Zarull, and J.H. Hartig. 2001. Sediment management: Ecological and
ecotoxicological effects must direct actions. Water Quality Research Journal of Canada
36(3):367-376.
Lackey, R. 1994. The seven pillars of ecosystem management. Draft document modified
from a presentation given at the Symposium: Ecosystem Health and Medicine:
Integrating Science, Policy and Management. June 19-23, 1994. Ottawa, Ontario. (As
cited in Environment Canada 1996).
Lake Superior Work Group. 1993. Ecosystem principles and objectives for Lake Superior.
Discussion paper. State of the Lake Superior Basin Reporting Series, Vol. IV. Lake
Superior Binational Program.
MacDonald, D.D. 1989. An assessment of ambient water quality conditions in the Slave
River basin, NWT. Prepared for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Yellowknife,
Northwest Territories.
MacDonald, D.D. 1994a. Approach to the assessment of sediment quality in Florida coastal
waters. Volume 1: Development and evaluation of sediment quality assessment
guidelines. Report prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
Tallahassee, Florida.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 48
MacDonald, D.D. 1994b. Approach to the assessment of sediment quality in Florida coastal
waters. Volume 2: Applications of the sediment quality assessment guidelines. Report
prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Tallahassee, Florida.
MacDonald, D.D. 1995. Science Advisory Group on sediment assessment in Tampa Bay:
Summary report. Technical Publication #06-95. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program.
St. Petersburg, Florida.
MacDonald, D.D. 1997. Tampa Bay sediment quality workshop: Setting targets and
defining management strategies - Final summary report. Prepared for the Tampa Bay
National Estuary Program. St. Petersburg, Florida.
MacDonald, D.D. 1999. TampaBay sediment quality workshop: Establishing impact levels
and setting sediment quality targets - Workshop summary report. Prepared for the
Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. St. Petersburg, Florida.
MacDonald, D.D. 2000. Interests and needs related to the development of freshwater
sediment quality guidelines for the State of Florida: Workshop summary report.
Prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Tallahassee, Florida.
MacDonald, D.D. and M. Macfarlane. 1999. Criteria for managing contaminated sediment
in British Columbia. Prepared pursuant to Section 26(a) of the Waste Management Act.
Prepared for British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks. Victoria,
British Columbia.
MacDonald, D.D. and C.G. Ingersoll. 2000. An assessment of sediment injury in the Grand
Calumet River, Indiana Harbor Canal, Indiana Harbor, and the nearshore areas of Lake
Michigan. Volume I. Prepared for United States Fish and Wildlife Services.
Bloomington Indiana. 238 pp.
MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, and T.A. Berger. 2000. Development and evaluation of
consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:20-31.
MacDonald, D.D., D.E. Smorong, andR. A. Lindskoog. 2001. Development and evaluation
of numerical sediment quality criteria for sediment contaminated sites in British
Columbia: A retrospective. Prepared for British Columbia Ministry of Environment,
Lands, and Parks. Victoria, British Columbia. 26 pp.
MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, D.E. Smorong, R.A. Lindskoog, D.W. Sparks, J.R. Smith,
T.P, Simon, and M.A. Hanacek. 2002a. Assessment of injury to fish and wildlife
resources in the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor area of concern. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 43:130-140.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 49
MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, D.E. Smorong, R. A. Lindskoog, D.W. Sparks, J.R. Smith,
T.P, Simon, and M.A. Hanacek. 2002b. An assessment of injury to sediments and
sediment-dwelling organisms in the Grand Calumet River and Indiana Harbor area of
concern. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 43:141-155.
MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, D.R.J. Moore, M. Bonnell, R.L. Breton, R.A. Lindskoog,
D.B. MacDonald, Y.K. Muirhead, A.V. Pawlitz, D.E. Sims, D.E. Smorong, R.S. Teed,
R.P. Thompson, and N. Wang. 2002c. Calcasieu Estuary remedial
investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS): Baseline ecological risk assessment (BERA).
Technical Report plus appendices. Prepared for COM Federal Programs Corporation.
Contract No. 68-W5-0022. Dallas, Texas.
Macfarlane, M. 1997. Investigation and remediation of sediments. File26050-01/General.
British Columbia Environment and Resource Management. British Columbia Ministry
of Environment, Lands, and Parks. Victoria, British Columbia.
Mah, F.T.S., D.D. MacDonald, S.W. Sheehan, T.N. Tuominen, and D. Valiela. 1989.
Dioxins and furans in sediments and fish from the vicinity often inland pulp mills in
British Columbia. Water Quality Branch. Environment Canada. Vancouver, British
Columbia. 77 pp.
Marmorek, D.R., T.M. Berry, P. Bunnell, D.P. Bernard, W. A. Kurz, C.L. Murray, K. Paulig,
and L. Sully. 1993. Towards an ecosystem approach in British Columbia: Results of a
workshop on ecosystem goals and objectives. December 7-9, 1992. Prepared by ESS A
Environmental and Social System Analysts Ltd. Vancouver, British Columbia. Prepared
for Environment Canada, British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks,
and British Columbia Ministry of Forests. Fraser River Action PI an. Vancouver, British
Columbia. (As cited in Environment Canada 1996).
McNaughton, S.J. and L.L. Wolf. 1979. General Ecology. 2nd ed. Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston. New York, New York.
MESL (MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd). 1997. Lower Columbia River from
Birchbank to the International Boundary: Water quality and quantity assessment and
objectives technical report. Prepared for Environment Canada, Vancouver, British
Columbia and the British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria,
British Columbia.
Odum, H.T. 1983. Systems Ecology: An Introduction. John Wiley and Sons. New York,
New York.
OEP A (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency). 1988. Biological criteria for the protection
of aquatic life: Volume II: Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface
waters. Ecological Assessment Section. Division of Water Quality Planning and
Assessment. Columbus, Ohio.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 50
RCFTW (Royal Commission on the Future of the Toronto Waterfront). 1992. Regeneration.
Toronto's waterfront and the sustainable city: Final report. Toronto, Ontario.
Reynoldson, T. B., L. Grapentine, M. Zarull, T. Pascoe, L. Richman, C. DeBarros, S. Painter,
and J. Anderson. 2000. A support system for decision making using chemical and
biological measures. National Water Research Institute. Environment Canada.
Burlington, Ontario.
Royal Society of Canada. 1995. Looking ahead: Long-term ecological research and
monitoring in Canada. Final report of the long-term ecological research and monitoring
panel of the Canadian Global Change Program. Canadian Global Change Program
Technical Report No. 95-1. (As cited in Environment Canada 1996).
Ryder, R.A. and CJ. Edwards (Eds.). 1985. A conceptual approach for the application of
biological indicators of ecosystem quality in the Great Lakes Basin. Report to the Great
Lakes Science Advisory Board. International Joint Commission and The Great Lakes
Fishery Commission. Windsor, Ontario.
Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. 1995. It's about our
health! Towards pollution prevention. House of Commons Standing Committee on
Environment and Sustainable Development. June 1995. Ottawa, Ontario. (As cited in
Environment Canada 1996).
Stoddart, D.R. 1965. Geography and the ecological approach. Geography 50:242-251.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1994. Assessment and
remediation of contaminated sediments (ARCS) program. Great Lakes National Program
Office. EPA 905/B-94/002. Chicago, Illinois.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997a. The incidence and
severity of sediment contamination in surface waters of the United States: Volume 1:
National Sediment Quality Survey. EPA/823/R-97/006. Washington, District of
Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997b. Ecological risk
assessment guidance for Superfund: Process for designing and conducting ecological risk
assessments. Environmental Response Team. Edison, New Jersey.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. Guidelines for ecological
risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Washington, District
of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000a. Draft implementation
framework for the use of equilibrium partitioning sediment quality guidelines. Office of
Water of Science and Technology. Washington, District of Columbia.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
REFERENCES - PAGE 51
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000b. Methods for measuring
the toxicity and bioaccumulation of sediment-associated contaminants with freshwater
invertebrates, second edition. EPA/600/R-99/064. Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Fact sheet: Draft report
on the incidence and severity of sediment contamination in surface waters of the United
States, National Sediment Quality Survey. EPA/823/F-01-031. Office of Water.
Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA and USAGE (United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States
Army Corps of Engineers). 1998. Evaluation of dredged material proposed for discharge
in water of the US. Testing Manual. EPA 823-B-98-004. United States Environmental
Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia.
Vallentyne, J.R. and A.L. Hamilton. 1987. Managing the human uses and abuses of aquatic
resources in the Canadian ecosystem. In: M.C. Healey and R.R. Wallace (Eds.).
Canadian Aquatic Resources. Canadian Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Bulletin
215:513-533. (As cited in Vallentyne and Beeton 1988).
Vallentyne, J.R. and A.M. Beeton. 1988. The "ecosystem" approach to managing human
uses and abuses of natural resources in the Great Lakes Basin. Environmental
Conservation 15(l):58-62.
Wrona, F. 1994. Ecosystem science - Now and in the future. Backgrounder for Science and
Technology Review. National Hydrology Research Institute. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
(As cited in Environment Canada 1996).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
Tables
-------
Table 1. List of the 42 areas of concern in the Great Lakes basin in which beneficial uses
are being adversely affected by contaminated sediments (from IJC 1988).
Lake Superior
Peninsula Harbor
Jackfish Basin
Nipigon Basin
Thunder Basin
St. Louis River and Basin
Torch Lake
Deer Lake - Carp Creek
Lake Michigan
Manistique River
Menominee River
Fox River & Green Basin
Sheboygan
Milwaukee Harbor
Waukegan Harbor
Grand Calumet River
Kalamazoo River
Muskegon Lake
White Lake
Lake Huron
Saginaw River and Basin
Collingwood Harbor
Penatang-Sturgeon Basin
Spanish River
St. Marys River
St. Clair River
Detroit River
Lake Erie
Clinton River
Rouge River
Raisin River
Maumee River
Black River
Cuyahoga River
Ashtabula River
Wheatley Harbor
Lake Ontario
Buffalo River
18 Mile Creek
Rochester Basin
Oswego River
Bay of Quinte
Port Hope
Toronto Harbor
Hamilton Harbor
Niagra River
St. Lawrence River
Page 53
-------
Table 2. A summary of use impairments potentially associated with contaminated sediment and the numbers of Great Lakes
areas of concern with such use impairments (from IJC 1997).
Use impairment
How contaminated sediment may affect use impairment
*Number of Areas of
Concern with the
impaired use (%)
Restrictions on fish and wildlife
consumption
Degradation offish and wildlife
populations
Fish tumors or other deformities
Bird or animal deformities or
reproduction problems
Degradation of benthos
Restrictions on dredging activities
* Contaminant uptake via contact with sediment or through the 36 (86%)
food web
* Contaminant degradation of habitat 30(71%)
* Contaminant impacts through direct sediment contact
* Food web uptake
* Contaminant transfer via contact with sediment or through the
food web 20 (48%)
* Possible metabolism to carcinogenic or more carcinogenic
compounds
* Contaminant degradation of habitat 14(33%)
* Contaminant impacts through direct sediment contact
* Food web uptake
* Contact 35 (83%)
* Ingestion of toxic contaminants
* Nutrient enrichment leading to a shift in species composition and
structure due to oxygen depletion
* Restrictions on disposal in open water due to contaminants and nutrients 36 (86%)
and their potential impacts on biota
Page 54
-------
Table 2. A summary of use impairments potentially associated with contaminated sediment and the numbers of Great Lakes
areas of concern with such use impairments (from IJC 1997).
Use impairment
How contaminated sediment may affect use impairment
*Number of Areas of
Concern with the
impaired use (%)
Eutrophication or undesirable algae
Degradation of aesthetics
Added costs to agriculture or industry
Degradation of phytoplankton or
zooplankton populations
Loss of fish and wildlife habitat
Nutrient recycling from temporary sediment sink
Resuspension of solids and increased turbidity
Odors associated with anoxia
Resuspended solids
Presence of toxic substances and nutrients
Toxic contaminant release
Resuspension of solids and absorbed contaminants and
subsequent ingestion
Toxicity to critical life history stages
Degradation of spawning and nursery grounds due to siltation
21 (50%)
25 (60%)
7(17%)
10 (24%)
34(81%)
Page 55
-------
Table 3. Selected definitions related to ecosystem management (from Environment Canada 1996).
Source
Definition
Definitions of the ecosystem approach
IJC (1994) "... an approach to perceiving, managing and otherwise living in an ecosystem that
recognizes the need to preserve the ecosystem's biochemical pathways upon which
the welfare of all life depends in the context of multifaceted relationships
(biological, social, economic, etc.) that distinguishes that particular ecosystem."
Environment Canada (1994a) "... means looking at the basic components (air, water, and biota, including
humans) and ructions of the ecosystem not in isolation, but in broad and integrated
environmental, social and economic context."
CCME(1996)
"... a geographically comprehensive approach to environmental planning and
management which recognizes the interrelated nature of environmental media, and
that humans are a key component of ecological systems; it places equal emphasis
on concerns related to the environment, the economy, and the community."
Definitions of an ecosystem approach to management
Environment Canada, "... requires a broad perspective. It includes knowledge of heritage resources,
Parks Service (1992) ecological processes and socio-economic activities..." "... ecosystem-based
management must, above all, be sensitive and responsive to the unique status of
each ecosystem and its spheres of influence."
IJC (1994)
"...is an active process that emphasizes the maintenance of biological diversity, of
natural relationships among species, an dynamic processes that make ecosystems
sustainable."
Lackev 1994
Wrona(1994)
"The application of biophysical and social information, options, and constraints to
achieve desired social benefits within a defined geographic area and over a
specified time period."
"... recognizes there are ecological, social, and economic considerations to be made
when assessing and predicting the impacts of human activities on natural systems
and practicing the 'ecosystem approach' means that all stakeholders understand the
implications of, and are accountable for their actions."
Standing Committee on
Environment and
Sustainable Development
(1995)
"... implies a balanced approach toward managing human activities to ensure that
the living and non-living elements that shape ecosystems continue to function and
so maintain the integrity of the whole."
Page 56
-------
Table 4. Comparison of four approaches to resolving human-made ecosystem problems (from Environment Canada 1996).
Problem
Approach
Egosystemic
Piecemeal
Environmental
Ecosystemic
Organic waste
Eutrophication
Acid rain
Toxic chemicals
Greenhouse effects
Hold your nose
Mysterious causes
Unaware
Unaware
Unaware
Discharge downstream
Discharge downstream
Not yet a problem
Not yet a problem
Not yet a problem
Reduce BOD
Phosphorus removal
Taller smoke stacks
Discharge permits
Sceptical analysis
Energy recovery
Nutrient recycling
Recycle sulphur
Design with nature
Carbon recycling
Pests
Attitude to nature
Run for your life
Indifferent
Broad spectrum
insecticides
Dominate
Selective degradable
poisons
Cost/benefit
Integrated pest
management
Respect
Page 57
-------
Table 5. Activities that have a high potential for releasing hazardous substances into the
environment (from BCE 1997).
Industry
Associated Activity
Chemical industries
and activities
Adhesives manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Chemical manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Explosives or ammunition manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Fire retardant manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Fertilizer manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Ink or dye manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
Leather or hides tanning
Paint, lacquer or varnish manufacturing, formulation, recycling or wholesale
bulk storage
Pharmaceutical products manufacturing
Plastic products (foam or expanded plastic products) manufacturing
Textile dying
Pesticide manufacturing, formulation or wholesale bulk storage
Resin or plastic monomer manufacturing, formulation or wholesale bulk
storage
Electrical equipment
industries and activities
* Battery (lead acid or other) manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
* Communications station using or storing equipment that contains PCBs
* Electrical equipment manufacturing refurbishing or wholesale bulk storage
* Electrical transmission or distribution substations
* Electronic equipment manufacturing
* Transformer oil manufacture, processing or wholesale bulk storage
Metal smelting, processing
or finishing industries and
activities
* Foundries or scrap metal smelting
* Galvanizing
* Metal plating or finishing
* Metal salvage operations
* Nonferrous metal smelting or refining
* Welding or machine shops (repair or fabrication)
Mining, milling, or related
industries and activities
* Asbestos mining, milling, wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Coal coke manufacture, wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Coal or lignite mining, milling, wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Milling reagent manufacture, wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Nonferrous metal concentrate wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Nonferrous metal mining or milling
Page 58
-------
Table 5. Activities that have a high potential for releasing hazardous substances into the
environment (from BCE 1997).
Industry
Associated Activity
Miscellaneous industries,
operations or activities
Petroleum and natural gas
drilling, production,
processing, retailing and
distribution
Transportation industries,
operations and related
activities
* Appliance, equipment or engine repair, reconditioning, cleaning or salvage
* Ash deposit from boilers, incinerators, or other thermal facilities
* Asphalt tar roofing manufacture, wholesale storage and distribution
* Coal gasification (manufactured gas production)
* Medical, chemical, radiological or biological laboratories
* Rifle or pistol firing ranges
* Road salt storage facilities
* Measuring instruments (containing mercury) manufacture, repair or wholesale
bulk storage
* Petroleum or natural gas drilling
* Petroleum or natural gas production facilities
* Natural gas processing
* Petroleum coke manufacture, wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Petroleum product dispensing facilities, including service stations
and cardlots
* Petroleum, natural gas or sulphur pipeline rights of way excluding
rights of way for pipelines used to distribute natural gas to consumers
in a community
* Petroleum or natural gas product or produced water storage in above ground
or underground tanks
* Petroleum product wholesale bulk storage or distribution
* Petroleum refining wholesale bulk storage or shipping
* Solvent manufacturing or wholesale bulk storage
* Sulphur handling, processing or wholesale bulk storage and distribution
* Aircraft maintenance, cleaning or salvage
* Automotive, truck, bus, subway or other motor vehicle repair, salvage or
wrecking
* Bulk commodity storage or shipping (e.g., coal)
* Dry docks, ship building or boat repair
* Marine equipment salvage
* Rail car or locomotive maintenance, cleaning, salvage or related uses,
including railyards
* Truck, rail or marine bulk freight handling
Page 59
-------
Table 5. Activities that have a high potential for releasing hazardous substances into the
environment (from BCE 1997).
Industry
Associated Activity
Waste disposal and recycling
operations and activities
Wood, pulp and paper
products and related
industries and activities
Agricultural activities
* Antifreeze bulk storage or recycling
* Barrel, drum or tank reconditioning or salvage
* Battery (lead acid or other) recycling
* Biomedical waste disposal
* Bulk manure stockpiling and high rate land application or disposal (nonfarm
applications only)
* Construction demolition material landfilling
* Contaminated soil storage, treatment or disposal
* Dredged waste disposal
* Dry-cleaning waste disposal
* Electrical equipment recycling
* Industrial waste lagoons or impoundments
* Industrial waste storage, recycling or landfilling
* Industrial woodwaste (log yard waste, hogfuel) disposal
* Mine tailings waste disposal
* Municipal waste storage, recycling, composting or landfilling
* Organic or petroleum material landspreading (landfarming)
* Sandblasting waste disposal
* Septic tank pumpage storage or disposal
* Sewage lagoons or impoundments
* Special (hazardous) waste storage, treatment or disposal
* Sludge drying or composting
* Street or yard snow removal dumping
* Waste oil reprocessing, recycling or bulk storage
* Wire reclaiming operations
* Particle board manufacturing
* Pulp mill operations
* Pulp and paper manufacturing
* Treated wood storage at the site of treatment
* Veneer or plywood manufacturing
* Wafer board manufacturing
* Wood treatment (antisapstain or preservation)
* Wood treatment chemical manufacturing, wholesale bulk storage
* Insecticide, herbicide, fungicide application
* Other pesticide application
Page 60
-------
Table 6. A selection of definitions of an ecosystem (from Environment Canada 1996).
Source
Definition
Environment Canada, Parks
Service (1992)
"... a community of organisms and their non-living environment. Fundamental to the system is the flow of
energy via food chains and the cycling of nutrients."
Marmorek et al. (1993)
"...subdivisions of the global ecosphere, vertical chunks which include air, soil, or sediments, and organisms
(including humans). Ecosystems occur at various scales, from the global ecosphere to continents and oceans, to
ecoregions, to forest, farms and ponds."
Environment Canada (1994b)
"... an assemblage of biological communities (including people) in a shared environment. Air, land, water and
the living organisms among them interact to form an ecosystem."
Royal Society of Canada (1995) "... a community of organisms including humans, interacting with one another, plus the environment in which
they live and with which they interact. Ecosystems are often embedded within other ecosystems of larger
scale."
Page 61
-------
Table 7. Ecosystem goals and objectives for Lake Ontario (as developed by the Ecosystem Objectives Work Group; CCME 1996).
Ecosystem Goals
Ecosystem Objectives
The Lake Ontario ecosystem should be maintained and as
necessary restored or enhanced to support self-reproducing
diverse biological communities
The waters of Lake Ontario shall support diverse, healthy, reproducing and self-sustaining
communities in dynamic equilibrium with an emphasis on native species.
The presence of contaminants shall not limit the use offish,
wildlife and waters of the Lake Ontario basin by humans and
shall not cause adverse health effects in plants and animals.
The perpetuation of a healthy, diverse and self-sustaining wildlife community that utilizes the
lake for habitat and/or food shall be ensured by attaining and sustaining the waters, coastal
wetlands and upland habitats of the Lake Ontario basin in sufficient quality and quantity.
We as a society shall recognize our capacity to cause great
changes in the ecosystem and we shall conduct our activities
with responsible stewardship for the Lake Ontario basin.
The waters, plants and animals of Lake Ontario shall be free from contaminants and
organisms resulting from human activities at levels that affect human health or aesthetic
factors such as tainting, odor and turbidity.
Lake Ontario offshore and nearshore zones and surrounding tributary, wetland and
upland habitats shall be of sufficient quality and quantity to support ecosystem
objectives for health, productivity and distribution of plants and animals in and
adjacent to Lake Ontario.
Human activities and decisions shall embrace environmental ethics and a commitment to
responsible stewardship.
Page 62
-------
Table 8. Ecosystem objectives for Lake Superior (as developed by the Superior Work Group; CCME 1996).
Objective Category Objective Narrative
General
Human activity in the Lake Superior basin should be consistent with "A Vision for Lake Superior"... Future development
of the basin should protect and restore the 14 uses identified in Annex 2 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
Aquatic Communities
Lake Superior should sustain diverse, healthy, reproducing and self-regulating aquatic communities closely representative
of historical conditions.
Terrestrial Wildlife
Objective
The Lake Superior ecosystem should support a diverse, healthy, reproducing and self-regulating wildlife community
closely representative of historical (i.e., pre-1885) conditions.
Habitat Objective
Extensive natural environments such as forests, wetlands, lakes and watercourses are necessary to sustain healthy native
animal and plant populations in the Lake Superior ecosystem and have inherent spiritual, aesthetic and educational value.
Land and water uses should be designed and located in harmony with the protective and productive ecosystem functions
provided by these natural landscape features. Degraded features should be rehabilitated or restored where this is
beneficial to the Lake Superior ecosystem.
Human Health Objective The health of humans in the Lake Superior ecosystem should not be at risk from contaminants of human origin. The
appearance, taste and odour of water and food supplied by the Lake Superior ecosystem should not be degraded by human
activity.
Developing
Sustainability
Human use of the Lake Superior ecosystem should be consistent with the highest ethical and scientific standards for
sustainable use. Land, water and air use in the Lake Superior ecosystem should not degrade it nor any adjacent
ecosystems. Use of the basin's natural resources should not impair the natural capability of the basin ecosystem to sustain
its natural identity and ecological functions, nor should it deny current and future generations the benefits of a healthy,
natural Lake Superior ecosystem. Technologies and development plans that preserve natural ecosystems and their
biodiversity should be encouraged.
Page 63
-------
Table 9. Desirable characteristics of indicators for different purposes (from IJC 1991).
Purpose of Indicator
Characteristic of Indicator Assessment Trends Early Warning Diagnostic Linkages
Biologically relevant
Socially Relevant
Sensitive
Broadly applicable
Diagnostic
Measurable
Interpretable
Cost-effective
Integrative
Historical data
Anticipatory
Nondestructive
Continuity
Appropriate scale
Lack of redundance
Timeliness
3
3
*
2
1
*
3
*
2
*
1
*
2
*
*
2
3
3
*
2
1
*
3
*
2
*
1
*
3
*
*
2
2
2
*
2
1
*
2
*
1
*
3
*
1
*
*
3
2
2
*
1
3
*
1
*
1
*
1
*
1
*
*
3
2
2
*
1
1
*
1
*
2
*
2
*
1
*
*
2
Table entries are on a scale of importance from one to three, where one indicates lower importance and three
indicates an essential attribute. Characteristics that are universally desirable and do not differ between purposes
are marked with an asterisk (*).
Page 64
-------
Table 10. Recommended metrics for various indicators of sediment quality conditions
for freshwater environments.
Ecosystem Health
Indicators
Candidate Metrics
Relative Priority
Sediment Quality Tetrad * Tetrad evaluation
Sediment Chemistry
Sediment Toxicity
* Concentration of COPCs
* Mean PEC quotient
* Total organic carbon
* SEM minus AVS
* Pore water chemistry
* 10-day Hyalella azteca survival and growth
* 10-day Chironomus tentans survival and growth
* 28-day Hyalella azteca survival and growth
* Life-cycle Chironomid test
* In situ toxicity tests
* Microtox®/Mutatox®
High
High
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Low
Low
Benthic Invertebrate
Community Structure
* Total abundance
* Abundance of key taxa/groups
* Diversity
* Evenness
* Presence/absence of indicator species
* Biomass
* Macroinvertebrate index of biotic integrity
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Low
High
Physical Characteristics
Water Chemistry
* Particle size
* Sedimentation rate
* % Depositional area
* Concentrations of COPCs in pore water
* Concentrations of COPCs in overlying water
* Dissolved oxygen in overlying water
* Dissolved oxygen in pore water
* Ammonia in pore water
* Hydrogen sulfide in pore water
* Biological oxygen in demand in pore water
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Low
Page 65
-------
Table 10. Recommended metrics for various indicators of sediment quality conditions
for freshwater environments.
Ecosystem Health
Indicators
Candidate Metrics
Relative Priority
Tissue Chemistry (including
bioaccumulation studies)
Pore water toxicity
Concentrations of COPCs in macroinvertebrate,
fish, and wildlife tissues
* 28-day Lumbriculus variegatus bioaccumulation
* Number offish and wildlife advisories
* Hazard quotients
* 48-hour Daphnia magna survival
* 7-day Ceriodaphnia dubia survival and growth
* 7-day fathead minnow (larval) survival and growth
* Microtox®
* Number of preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in
fish livers
* Presence of external tumors
* P450 activity
* Internal parasite loads in fish
* External parasite loads in fish
Water Column and Elutriate * 96-hour Selenastrum capricorntum cell yield and
Biomarkers in Fish
Toxicity
cell density
* 4 8-hour Daphnia magna survival
* 7-day Ceriodaphnia dubia survival and growth
* 7-day fathead minnow (larval) survival and growth
* 96-hour rainbow trout (juvenile) or fathead minnow
(juvenile) survival
High
High
High
High
Low
Moderate
Low
Low
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
PEC - probable effect concentration; SEM - simultaneously extractable metals; AVS - acid volatile sulfides.
Page 66
-------
Figures
-------
Figure 1. The shift from traditional to ecosystem-based decision making (from CCME 1996).
Traditional Approach
Ecosystem Approach
Relationships within ecosystems can best be visualized as three interlocking circles: environment, economy, and community. Traditionally most
decision making separates these three components, with little understanding (or even heed), for example, of the effects of economic decisions on
community needs or the environment. The challenge now is two-fold: to understand the links between these components and to redress the balance
among them. The ecosystem approach requires an equal and integrated consideration of these elements.
Page 68
-------
Figure 2. A framework for ecosystem-based management (from CCME 1996).
Conduct
targeted
research and
monitoring
Identify and assess
the issues and
collate
the ecosystem
knowledge base
Develop and
articulate
ecosystem
health goals
and objectives
Develop or select
ecosystem health
indicators
Informed decision
making for ecosystem-
based management
- conservation
- protection
- remediation
- assessment
Reapply indicators to assess
effectiveness of decisions
Community and scientific involvement
Page 69
-------
Figure 3. Relationship between ecosystem goals, objectives, indicators, metrics, and targets.
Physical Indicators
(e.g., sediment grain
size)
Metrics
(e.g., percent silt and
clay)
Targets
(e.g., <20% silt and
clay)
Ecosystem
Goals
Ecosystem
Objectives
Biological Indicators
(e.g., sediment toxicity)
Metrics
(e.g., amphipod
survival)
Targets
(e.g., >80% survival)
1
Chemical Indicators
(e.g., sediment
chemistry)
Metrics
(e.g., concentration of
total PAHs)
Targets
(e.g., <22.8 mg/kg DW)
Page 70
-------
Figure 4. An overview of the implementation process for the ecosystem approach
to environmental management.
Assess the Knowledge Base and
Identify Key Issues and
Concerns
l
r
Develop Broad Management
(Ecosystem) Goals
i
r
Develop Ecosystem Objectives
i
r
Identify Ecosystem Health
Indicators
i
r
Establish Ecosystem Metrics and
Targets
i
r
Implement Environmental
Monitoring Programs
K
r
Identify 1
l
i
\
r
k
r
Use Results of Monitoring
Programs to Develop and Refine
Management Strategies and
Programs
Page 71
-------
Appendices
-------
APPENDIX 1 -ROLE OF SEDIMENTS IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 73
Appendix 1. Role of Sediments in Aquatic Ecosystems
Al.O Introduction
The particulate materials that lie below the water in ponds, lakes, stream, rivers, and other
aquatic systems are called sediments (ASTM 2001 a). Sediments represent essential elements
of aquatic ecosystems because they support both autotrophic and heterotrophic organisms.
Autotrophic (which means self-nourishing) organisms are those that are able to synthesize
food from simple inorganic substances (e.g., carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and phosphorus) and
the sun's energy. Green plants, such as algae, bryophytes (e.g., mosses and liverworts), and
aquatic macrophytes (e.g., sedges, reeds, and pond weed), are the main autotrophic
organisms in freshwater ecosystems. In contrast, heterotrophic (which means
other-nourishing) organisms utilize, transform, and decompose the materials that are
synthesized by autotrophic organisms (i.e., by consuming or decomposing autotrophic and
other heterotrophic organisms). Some of the important heterotrophic organisms that can be
present in aquatic ecosystems include bacteria, epibenthic, and infaunal invertebrates, fish,
amphibians, and reptiles. Birds and mammals can also represent important heterotrophic
components of aquatic food webs (i.e., through the consumption of aquatic organisms).
Al.l Supporting Primary Productivity
Sediments support the production of food organisms in several ways. For example, hard-
bottom sediments, which are characteristic of faster-flowing streams and are comprised
largely of gravels, cobbles, and boulders, provide stable substrates to which periphyton (i.e.,
the algae that grows on rocks) can attach and grow. Soft sediments, which are common in
ponds, lakes, estuaries, and slower-flowing sections of rivers and streams, are comprised
largely of sand, silt, and clay. Such sediments provide substrates in which aquatic
macrophytes can root and grow. The nutrients that are present in such sediments can also
nourish aquatic macrophytes. By providing habitats and nutrients for aquatic plants,
sediments support autotrophic production (i.e., the production of green plants) in aquatic
systems. Sediments can also support prolific bacterial and meiobenthic communities, the
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 1 -ROLE OF SEDIMENTS IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 74
latter including protozoans, nematodes, rotifers, benthic cladocerans, copepods, and other
organisms. Bacteria represent important elements of aquatic ecosystems because they
decompose organic matter (e.g., the organisms that die and accumulate on the surface of the
sediment, and anthropogenic organic chemicals) and, in so doing, release nutrients to the
water column and increase bacterial biomass. Bacteria represent the primary heterotrophic
producers in aquatic ecosystems, upon which many meiobenthic organisms depend. The role
that sediments play in supporting primary productivity (both autotrophic and heterotrophic)
is essential because green plants and bacteria represent the foundation of food webs upon
which all other aquatic organisms depend (i.e., they are consumed by many other aquatic
species).
A1.2 Providing Essential Habitats
In addition to their role in supporting primary productivity, sediments also provide essential
habitats for many sediment-dwelling invertebrates and benthic fish. Some of these
invertebrate species live on the sediments (termed epibenthic species), while others live in
the sediments (termed infaunal species). Both epibenthic and infaunal invertebrate species
consume plants, bacteria, and other organisms that are associated with the sediments.
Invertebrates represent important elements of aquatic ecosystems because they are consumed
by a wide range of wildlife species, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.
For example, virtually all fish species consume aquatic invertebrates during all or a portion
of their life cycle. In addition, many birds (e.g., dippers, sand pipers, and swallows) consume
aquatic invertebrates. Similarly, aquatic invertebrates represent important food sources for
both amphibians (e.g., frogs and salamanders) and reptiles (e.g., turtles and snakes).
Therefore, sediments are of critical importance to many wildlife species due to the role that
they play in terms of the production of aquatic invertebrates.
Importantly, sediments can also provide habitats for many wildlife species during portions
of their life cycle. For example, a variety offish species utilize sediments for spawning and
incubati on of their eggs and alevins (e.g., trout, salmon, and whitefish). In addition, juvenile
fish often find refuge from predators in sediments and/or in the aquatic vegetation that is
supported by the sediments. Furthermore, many amphibian species burrow into the
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 1 -ROLE OF SEDIMENTS IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 75
sediments in the fall and remain there throughout the winter months, such that sediments
provide important overwintering habitats. Therefore, sediments play a variety of essential
roles in terms of maintaining the structure (i.e., assemblage of organisms in the system) and
function (i.e., the processes that occur in the system) of aquatic ecosystems.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 76
Appendix 2. Bibliography of Relevant Publications
A2.0 Introduction
This appendix provides a bibliography of publications that are relevant to the assessment of
contaminated sediments in freshwater ecosystems. The references are sorted in alphabetic
order by first author. To assist readers in accessing key documents, each reference was
classified according to the primary topic or topics that it addresses, as follows:
Classification
Number Topic
1. Sediment Chemistry
2. Toxicity Testing
3. Benthic Invertebrate Community Assessment
4. Sediment Quality Triad
5. Bioaccumulation/Tissue Chemistry
6. Bioavailability
7. Sediment Quality Guidelines
8. Toxicity Identification Evaluation
9. Sample Collection and Handling
10. Sediment Quality Assessment
11. Sediment Spiking Studies
12. Fish Health and Community Assessment
13. Environmental Fate
14. Regulations
15. Ecosystem-Based Management
16. Sediment Management
17. Ecological Human Health Risk Assessment
18. Quality Assurance
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 77
A2.1 Listing of Publications
2 Adams, W.J., R.A. Kimerle, and R.G. Mosher. 1985. An approach for
assessing the environmental safety of chemicals sorbed to sediments. In:
Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Evaluation: Seventh Symposium. R.D.
Cardwell, R. Purdy, and R.C. Bahner, (Eds.). ASTM STP 854.
American Society for Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania, pp. 429-453.
6 Adams, WJ. 1987. Bioavailability of neutral lipophilic organic chemicals
contained in sediments. In: Fate and Effects of Sediment-bound
Chemicals in Aquatic Systems. K.L. Dickson, A.W. Maki, and W.A.
Brungs, (Eds.). Proceedings of the Sixth Pell ston Workshop. Florissant,
Colarodo. August 12-17, 1984. Pergamon Press, New York. pp. 219-
244.
7 Ankley, G.T. 1996. Evaluation of metal acid volatile sulfide relationships in
the prediction of metal bioaccumulation by benthic macroinvertebrates.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15(12):2138-2146.
8 Ankley, G.T. and N. Thomas. 1992. Interstitial water toxicity identification
evaluation approach. In: Sediment Classification Methods
Compendium. EPA-823-R-92-006. United States Environmental
Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia, pp. 5-1 to 5-14.
9 Ankley, G.T. and M.K. Schubauer-Berigan. 1994. Comparison of techniques
for the isolation of pore water for sediment toxi city testing. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 27:507-512.
8 Ankley, G.T. and M.K. Schubauer-Berigan. 1995. Background and overview
of current sediment toxi city identification procedures. Journal of Aquatic
Ecosystem Health 4:133-149.
10 Ankley, G.T., A. Katko, and J.W. Arthur. 1990. Identification of ammonia as
an important sediment-associated toxicant in the lower Fox River and
Green Bay, Wisconsin. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9:313-
322.
7 Ankley, G.T., G.L. Phipps, E.N. Leonard, D.A. Benoit, V.R. Mattson, P.A.
Kosian, A.M. Cotter, J.R. Dierkes, DJ. Hansen, and J.D. Mahony.
199la. Acid-volatile sulfide as a factor mediating cadmium and nickel
bioavailability in contaminated sediment. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 10:1299-1307.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 78
2 Ankley, G.T., M.K. Schubauer-Berigan, and J.R. Dierkes. 1991b. Predicting
the toxicity of bulk sediments to aquatic organisms using aqueous test
fractions: Pore water versus elutriate. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 10:1359:1366.
5 Ankley, G.T., P.M. Cook, A.R. Carlson, DJ. Call, J.A. Swenson, H.F.
Corcoran, and R.A. Hoke. 1992. Bioaccumulation of PCBs from
sediments by oligochaetes and fishes: Comparison of laboratory and field
studies. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49:2080-
2085.
7 Ankley, G.T., V.R. Mattson, E.N. Leonard, C.W.West, and J.L. Bennett. 1993a.
Predicting the acute toxicity of copper in freshwater sediments:
Evaluation of the role of acid volatile sulfide. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 12:315-320.
2 Ankley, G.T., D.A. Benoit, R.A. Hoke, E.N. Leonard, C.W. West, GL. Phipps,
V.R. Mattson, and L.A. Anderson. 1993b. Development and evaluation
of test methods for benthic invertebrates and sediments: Effects of flow
rate and feeding on water quality and exposure conditions. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 25:12-19.
5 Ankley, G.T., E.N. Leonard, and V.R. Mattson. 1994a. Prediction of
bioaccumulation of metals from contaminated sediments by the
oligochaete Lumbriculus variegatus. Water Research 28:1071-1076.
11 Ankley, G.T., DJ. Call, J.S. Cox, M.D. Kahl, R.A. Hoke, and P.A. Kosian.
1994b. Organic carbon partitioning as a basis for predicting the toxicity
of chlorpyrifos in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
13(4):621-626.
2 Ankley, G.T., D.A. Benoit, J.C. Balough, T.B. Reynoldson, K.E. Day, and R.A.
Hoke. 1994c. Evaluation of potential confounding factors in sediment
toxicity tests with three freshwater benthic invertebrates. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 13:637-635.
6 Ankley, G.T., N.A. Thomas, D.M. Di Toro, DJ. Hansen, J.D. Mahony, WJ.
Berry, R.C. Swartz, R.A. Hoke, A.W. Garrison, H.E. Allen, and C.S.
Zarba. 1994c. Assessing potential bioavailability of metals in sediments:
A proposed approach. Environmental Management 18(3):331-337.
2 Ankley, G.T., M.K. Schubauer-Berigan, and P.D. Monson. 1995. Influence of
pH and hardness on the toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod Hyalella
azteca. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
52(10):2078-2083.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 79
1 Ankley, G.T., D.M. Di Toro, DJ. Hansen, and WJ. Berry. 1996a. Assessing
the ecological risk of metals in sediments. Editorial. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 15(12):2053-2055.
10 Ankley, G.T., K. Liber, DJ. Call, T.P. Markee, T.J. Canfield, and C.G.
Ingersoll. 1996b. A field investigation of the relationship between zinc
and acid volatile sulfide concentrations in freshwater sediments. Journal
of Aquatic Ecosystem Health 5:255-264.
2 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000a. Standard test
methods for measuring the toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants
with freshwater invertebrates: E1706-95b. In: Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
9 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000b. Standard guide
for collection, storage, characterization, and manipulation of sediments
for toxicological testing: E1391-94. In: Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
5 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000c. Standard guide
for the determination of bioaccumulation of sediment-associated
contaminants by benthic invertebrates: E1688-97a. In: Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
2 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000d. Standard guide
for designing biological tests with sediments: E1525-01a. In: Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania.
2 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000e. Standard guide
for conducting acute toxicity tests with fishes, macroinvertebrate, and
amphipods: E729-96. In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 1105.
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
2 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000f. Standard guide for
conducting early life-stage toxicity tests with fishes: E1241-98. In:
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania.
2 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000g. Standard guide
for the use of lighting in laboratory testing: E1733-95. In: Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGESO
13 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000h. Standard
terminology relating to biological effects and environmental fate: E943-
97a. In: Annual Book of ASTM Standard, Vol. 11.05. West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
5 ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials). 2000i. Standard practice
for conducting bioconcentration tests with fishes and saltwater bivalve
mollusks: E1022-94. In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05.
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
10 Baker, I.E., SJ. Eisenreich, and BJ. Eadie. 1991. Sediment trap fluxes and
benthic recycling of organic carbon, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,
and polychlorobiphenyl congeners in Lake Superior. Environmental
Science and Technology 25(3):500-509.
7 Barrick, R., S. Becker, L. Brown, H. Seller, and R. Pastorok. 1988. Sediment
quality values refinement: 1988 update and evaluation of Puget Sound
AET. Volume I. PTI Contract C717-01. PTI Environmental Services.
Bellevue, Washington.
7 Batts, D. And J. Cubbage. 1995. Summary of guidelines for contaminated
freshwater sediments. Publication Number 95-308. Washington State
Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington.
12 Baumann, P.C. 1998. Epizootics of cancer in fish associated with genotoxins
in sediment and water. Mutation Research 411:227-233.
7 BCMOE (British Columbia Ministry of the Environment). 1995a. Summary of
the CSST protocol for the derivation of soil quality matrix numbers for
contaminated sites. Draft 2.0. Industrial Wastes and Hazardous
Contaminants Branch. Victoria, British Columbia. 24 pp.
13 BCMOE (British Columbia Ministry of the Environment). 1995b. A chemical
transport model for the development of chemical criteria in soil protective
of groundwater. Industrial Wastes and Hazardous Contaminants Branch.
Victoria, British Columbia. 24 pp.
7 Beak Consultants Ltd. 1987. Development of sediment quality objectives:
Phase I - Options: Final Report. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of
Environment. Mississauga, Ontario.
7 Beak Consultants Ltd. 1988. Development of sediment quality objectives:
Phase I - guidelines development. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of
Environment. Mississauga, Ontario.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGESI
1 Becker, D.S., R.C. Barrick, and L.B. Read. 1989. Evaluation of the AET
approach for assessing contamination in sediments in California. PTI
Contract C739-01. PTI Environmental Services. Bellevue, Washington.
2 Becker, D.S., C.D. Rose, and G.N. Bigham. 1995. Comparison of the 10-d
freshwater sediment toxicity tests using Hyalella azteca and Chironomus
tentans. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14(12):2089-2094.
2 Bennett, J. and J. Cubbage. 1992a. Evaluation of bioassay organisms for
freshwater sediment toxicity testing. Prepared for the Freshwater
Sediment Criteria Development Project. Washington State Department
of Ecology. Olympi a, Washington. 34pp.
2 Bennett, J. and J. Cubbage. 1992b. Review and evaluation of Microtox test for
freshwater sediments. Prepared for the Sediment Management Unit.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington. 28pp.
2 Benoit, D.A., G.A. Phipps, and G.T. Ankley. 1993. A sediment testing
intermittent renewal system for the automated renewal of overlying water
in toxicity tests with contaminated sediments. Water Research 27:1403-
1412.
2 Benoit, D.A., P.K. Sibley, J.L. Jueneman, and G.T. Ankley. 1997. Chironomus
tentans life-cycle test: Design and evaluation for use in assessing toxicity
of contaminated sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
16(6):1165-1176.
7 Berry, W.J., DJ. Hansen, J.D. Mahony, D.L. Robson, D.M. DiToro, B.P.
Shipley, B.Rogers, J.M. Corbin, and W.S. Boothman. 1996. Predicting
the toxicity of metals-spiked laboratory sediments using acid volatile
sulfide and interstitial water normalizations. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 15(12):2067-2079.
7 Berry, W.J., M. Cantwell, P. Edwards, J. Serbst, and DJ. Hansen. 1999.
Predicting the toxicity of sediments spiked with silver in the laboratory.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:40-48.
6, 12 Besser, J.M., J.A. Kubitz, C.G. Ingersoll, W.E. Braselton, and J.P. Giesy. 1995.
Influences on copper bioaccumulati on, growth, and survival of the midge,
Chironomus tentans, in metal-contaminated sediments. Journal of
Aquatic Ecosystem Health 4:157-168.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE82
6 Besser, J.M., C.G. Ingersoll, and J.P. Giesy. 1996. Effects of spatial and
temporal variation of acid-volatile sulfide on the bioavailability of copper
and zinc in freshwater sediments. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 15(3):286-293.
2 Besser, J.M., C.G. Ingersoll, E. Leonard, and D.R. Mount. 1998. Effect of
zeolite on toxicity of ammonia in freshwater sediments: Implications for
sediment toxicity identification evaluation procedures. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 17:2310-2317.
5 Bligh, E.G. and WJ. Dyer. 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and
purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemical Physiology 37:911-917.
5 Boese, B.L., H.Lee, D.T. Specht, R.C. Randall, and M.H. Windsor. 1990.
Comparison of aqueous and solid-phase uptake for hexachlorobenzene
in the tellinid clam Macoma nasuta (Conrad): A mass balance approach.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9:221-231.
1 Boothman, W.S. and A. Helmsetter. 1992. Vertical and seasonal variability of
acid volatile sulfides in marine sediments. Research Report. United
States Environmental Protection Agency. Narragansett, Rhode Island.
2 Borgmann, U. 1994. Chronic toxicity of ammonia to the amphipod Hyalella
azteca: Importance of ammonium ion and water hardness. Environmental
Polution 86:329-335.
2 Borgmann, U. 1996. Systematic analysis of aqueous ion requirements of
Hyalella azteca: A standard artificial medium including the essential
bromide ion. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
30:356-363.
2 Borgmann, U. and M. Munawar. 1989. A new standardized bioassay protocol
using the amphipod Hyalella azteca. Hydrobiologia 188/189:425-531.
10 Borgmann, U. and W.P. Norwood. 1993. Spatial and temporal variability in
toxicity of Hamilton Harbour sediments: Evaluation of the Hyalella
azteca 4-week chronic toxicity test. Journal of Great Lakes Research
19(l):72-82.
2 Borgmann, U. and A.I. Borgmann. 1997'a. The control of ammonia toxicity to
Hyalellaaztecaby sodium, potassium, and pH. Environmental Pollution
95:325-331.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE83
2, 5, 11 Borgmann, U. and W.P. Norwood. 1997b. Toxicity and accumulation of zinc
and copper in Hyalella azteca exposed to metal-spiked sediments.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54:1046-1054.
2 Borgmann, U. and W.P. Norwood. 1999. Sediment toxicity testing using large
water-sediment ratios: An alternative to water renewal. Environmental
Pollution 106: 333-339.
2,11 Borgmann, U., K.M. Ralph, and W.P. Norwood. 1989. Toxicity test procedures
for Hyalella azteca., and chronic toxi city of cadmium and
pentachlorophenol to H. azteca, Gammarus fasciatus, and Daphnia
magna. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
18:756-764.
2, 5, 11 Borgmann, U., W.P. Norwood, and K.M. Ralph. 1990. Chronic toxi city and
bioaccumulation of 2,5,2',5'- and 3,4,3',4'- Tetrachlorobiphenyl and
Aroclor 1242 in the amphipod Hyalella azteca. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 19:558-564.
2, 5, 11 Borgmann, U., W.P. Norwood, and I.M. Babirad. 1991. Relationship between
chronic toxicity and bioaccumulation of cadmium in Hyalella azteca.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48:1055-1060.
6,2 Borgmann, U., R. Neron, and W.P. Norwood. 2001. Quantification of
bioavailable nickel in sediments and toxic thresholds to Hyalella azteca.
Environmental Pollution 111:189-198.
5 Bridges, T.S., D.W. Moore, P.F.Landrum, J.Neff, and J.Cura. 1996. Summary
of a workshop on interpreting bioaccumulation data collected during
regulatory evaluations of dredged material. Jiscellaneous Paper D-96-1.
Waterways Experiment Station. United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
5 Brooke, L.T., G.T. Ankley, D.J. Call, and P.M. Cook. 1996. Gut content
weight and clearance rate for three species of freshwater invertebrates.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15(2):223-228.
2 Brouwer, H. and T. Murphy. 1995. Volatile Sulfides and their toxicity in
freshwater sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:203-
208.
2, 10 Brumbaugh, W.G., E.L. Brunson, F.J. Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll, D.P. Monda, and
D.F. Woodward. 1994. Toxicity of metal-contaminated sediments form
the Upper Clark Fork River, MT, to aquatic invertebrates in laboratory
exposures. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:1985-1997.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE84
2, 5, 10 Brunson, E.L., T.J. Canfield, F.J. Dwyer, N.E. Kemble, and C.G. Ingersoll.
Assessing the bioaccumulation with sediments from the Upper
Mississippi River using field-collected oligochaetes and laboratory-
exposed Lumbriculus variegatus. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 35:191-201.
5 Burkhard, L.P. 1998. Comparison of two models for predicting
bioaccumulation of hydrophobic organic chemicals in a great lakes food
web. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17(3):383-393.
5 Burkhard, L.P., B.R. Sheedy, DJ. McCauley, and G.M. DeGraeve.
Bioaccumulation factors for chlorinated benzenes, chlorinated butadienes
and hexachloroethane. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
16(8):1677-1686.
2, 11 Burton, G.A., Jr., B.L. Stemmer, K.L. Winks, P.E. Ross, and L.C. Burnett.
1989. A multitrophic level evaluation of sediment toxicity in Waukegan
and Indiana Harbors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:1057-
1066.
2 Burton, G.A., Jr. 1991. Assessment of freshwater sediment toxicity.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 10:1585-1627.
9 Burton, G.A., Jr. 1992. Sediment collection and processing factors affecting
realism. In: Sediment Toxicity Assessment. G.A. Burton, Jr.(Ed.).
Lewis Publishers. Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 37-66.
2 Burton, G. A., Jr. M.K. Nelson, and C.G. Ingersoll. 1992. Freshwater benthic
toxicity tests. In: Sediment Toxicity Assessment. G.A. Burton (Ed.).
Lewis Publishers. Chelsea, Michigan, pp. 213-240.
2 Burton, G.A., Jr., T.J. Norberg-King, C.G. Ingersoll, D.A. Benoit, G.T. Ankley,
P.V. Winger, J. Kubitz, J.M. Lazorchak, M.E. Smith, E. Greer, F.J.
Dwyer, D.J. Call, K.E. Day, P. Kennedy, and M. Stinson. 1996.
Interlaboratory study of precision: Hyalella azteca and Chironomus
tentans freshwater sediment toxicity assay. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 15(8):1335-1343.
11 Call, D.J., M.D. Balcer, L.T. Brooke, S.J. Lozano, and D.D. Vaishnav. 1991.
Sediment quality evaluation in the lower Fox River and southern Green
Bay of Lake Michigan. Cooperative Agreement Final Report. Prepared
for United States Environmental Protection Agency. Superior,
Wisconsin.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGESS
2 Call, D.J., K.Liber, L.T. Brooke, T.D. Dawson, and F.W. Whiteman. 1993.
The Chironomus tentans survival and growth bioassay: A study of the
effect of reduced larval growth upon the following generation and an
application of the bioassay in evaluating sediment quality. Final Project
Report to the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways
Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
2 Call, D.J., L.T. Brooke, G.T. Ankley, D.A. Benoit, and R.A. Hoke. 1994.
Appendix G: Biological effects testing procedures. In: Great Lakes
Dredged Material Testing and Evaluation Manual: July Draft. United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Regions II, III, V, Great Lakes
National Program Office, and United States Army Corps of Engineers,
North Central Division. Chicago, Illinois.
3, 4, 11 Canfield, T.J., N.E. Kemble, W.G. Brumbaugh, F.J. Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll, and
J.F. Fairchild. 1994. Use of benthic invertebrate community structure
and the sediment quality triad to evaluate metal-contaminated sediment
in upper Clark Fork River, MT. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 13:1999-2012.
3, 4, 11 Canfield, T.J., F.J. Dwyer, J.F. Fairchild, P.S. Haverland, C.G. Ingersoll, N.E.
Kemble, D.R. Mount, T.W. LaPoint, G.A. Burton, M.C. Swift. 1996.
Assessing contamination in Great Lakes sediments using benthic
invertebrate communities and the sediment quality triad approach.
Journal of Great Lakes Research 22:565-583.
3, 4, 11 Canfield, T.J., E.L. Brunson, F.J.Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll, and N.E. Kemble.
1998. Assessing upper Mississippi river sediments using benthic
invertebrates and the sediment quality triad. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 35:202-212.
6,11 Carlson, A.R., GL. Phipps, V.R. Mattson, P. A. Kosian, and A.M. Cotter. 1991.
The role of acid-volatile sulfide in determining cadmium bioavailability
and toxicity in freshwater sediments. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 14:1309-1319.
2 Carr, R.S. and D.C. Chapman. 1992. Comparison of solid-phase and pore-
water approaches for assessing the quality of estuarine sediments.
Chemistry and Ecology 7:19-30.
2, 9 Carr, R.S. and D.C. Chapman. 1995. Comparison of methods for conducting
marine and estuarine sediment pore water toxicity tests, extraction,
storage, and handling techniques. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 28:69-77.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE86
11 Carr, R.S., E.R. Long, H.L. Winsdom, D.C. Chapman, Glen Thurby, G.M.
Sloane, and D.A. Wolfe. 1996. Sediment quality assessment studies of
Tampa Bay. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15(7): 1218-1231.
7 CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1994. Guidance
manual for developing site-specific soil quality remediation obj ectives for
contaminated sites in Canada: Final Report. Ottawa, Ontario. 88 pp.
7 CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1995a. A
protocol for the derivation of environmental and human health soil
quality guidelines. CCME-EPC-101E. The National Contaminated Sites
Remediation Program. Ottawa, Ontario. 167pp.
7 CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1995b. Protocol
for the derivation of Canadian sediment quality guidelines for the
protection of aquatic life. CCME EPC-98E. Canadian Council of
Ministers of the Environment Task Group on water quality guidelines.
Ottawa, Ontario.
7 CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1996a. Guidance
manual for developing site-specific soil quality remediation objectives for
contaminated sites in Canada. The National Contaminated Sites
Remediation Program. Ottawa, Ontario.
15 CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1996b. A
framework for developing ecosystem health goals, objectives, and
indicators: Tools for ecosystem-based management. Canadian Council
of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Guidelines Task Group.
Ottawa, Ontario.
7 Chapman, P.M. 1989. Current approaches to developing sediment quality
criteria. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:589-599.
7 Chapman, P.M. and G.S. Mann. 1999. Sediment quality values (SQVs) and
ecological risk assessment (ERA). Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(5):339-
344.
2 Chapman, P.M., M. A. Farrell, and R.O.Brinkhurst. 1982a. Relative tolerances
of selected aquatic oligochaetes to combinations of pollutants and
environmental factors. Aquatic Toxicology 2:69-78.
2 Chapman, P.M., M.A. Farrell, and R.O. Brinkhurst. 1982b. Relative tolerances
of selected aquatic oligochaetes to individual pollutants and
environmental factors. Aquatic Toxicology 2:47-67.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGES?
4 Chapman, P.M., R.N. Dexter, and E.R. Long. 1987. Synoptic measures of
sediment contamination, toxicity, and infaunal community composition
(the sediment quality triad) in San Francisco Bay. Marine Ecology
Progress Series 37: 75-96.
2,7 Chapman, P.M., H.B. Dexter, H.B. Anderson, and E.A. Power. 1991.
Evaluation of effects associated with an oil platform using sediment
quality criteria. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 10:407-424.
4 Chapman, P.M., E.A. Power, and G.A. Burton Jr. 1992. Integrative
assessments in aquatic ecosystems. In: Sediment Toxicity Assessment.
G.A. Burton, Jr. (Ed.). Lewis Publishers. Chelsea, Michigan, pp. 313-
340.
4 Chapman, P.M., B. Anderson, S. Carr, V. Engle, R. Green, J. Hameedi, M.
Harmon, P. Haverland, J. Hyland, C. Ingersoll, E. Long, J. Rodgers, M.
Salazar, P.K. Sibley, P.J. Smith, R.C. Swartz, B. Thompson, and H.
Windom. 1997. General guidelines for using the sediment quality triad.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 34:368-372.
7 Chapman, P.M., P.J. Allard and G.A. Vigers. 1999. Development of sediment
quality values for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region: A possible
model for other jurisdictions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(3): 161-169.
2 Chappie, D.J. and G.A. Burton, Jr. Optimization of in situ bioassays with
Hyalellaazteca and Chironomus tentans. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 16(3):559-564.
13 Chapra, S.C. 1982. Long-term models of interactions between solids and
contaminants in lakes. Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Michigan.
Ann Arbor, Michigan. 190 pp.
13 Chin, Y.-P, W.J. Weber, and B.J. Eadie. 1990. Estimating the effects of
dispersed organic polymers on the sorption of contaminants by natural
solids. 2. Sorption in the presence of humic and other natural
macromolecules. Environmental Science and Technology 24(6):837-842.
3 Clements, W.H., D.S. Cherry, and J.H. Van Hassel. 1992. Assessment of the
impact of heavy metals on benthic communities at the Clinch River
(Virginia): Evaluation of an index of community sensitivity. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49:1686-1694.
3 Clifford, H. 1991. Aquatic Invertebrates of Canada. The University of Alberta
Press. University of Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE88
11 Collyard, S.A., G.T. Ankley, R.A. Hoke, and T. Goldenstein. 1994. Influence
of age on the relative sensitivity of Hyalella azteca to diazinon,
alkylphenol ethoxylate, copper, cadmium, and zinc. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:110-113.
16 Connolly, J., J. Rhea, and J. Benaman. 1999. Effective decision-making
models for evaluating sediment management options. Quantitative
Environmental Analysis, LLC. 26 pp.
3 Cook, S.E.K. 1976. Quest for an index of community structure sensitive to
water pollution. Environmental Pollution 11:269-288.
5 Craig, A. L. Hare, and A. Tessier. 1999. Experimental evidence for cadmium
uptake via calcium channels in the aquatic insect, Chironomus staegeri.
Aquatic Toxicology 44:255-262.
17 Crane, J.L. 1996. Carcinogenic human health risks associated with consuming
contaminated fish from five great lakes areas of concern. Journal of
Great Lakes Research 22(3):653-668.
1 Crecelius, E., B. Lasora, L. Lefkovits, P.P. Landrum, and B. Barrick. 1994.
Chapter 5: Chemical Analyses. In: Assessment and Remediation of
Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) Program: Assessment Guidance
Document. EPA 905-B94-002. Great Lakes National Program Office.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Chicago, Illinois, pp.
69-85.
2 Curry, L.L. 1962. A survey of environmental requirements for the midge
(Diptera: Tendipedidae). In: Biological Problems in Water Pollution, 3rd
seminar. C.M. Tarzwell (Ed.). 999-WP-25. United States Public Health
Service Publication, pp. 127-141.
16 Gushing, B.S. 1999. State of current contaminated sediment management
practices. Applied Environmental Management, Inc. 32 pp.
3 Cushman, R.M. 1984. Chironomid deformities as indicators of pollution from
a synthetic, coal-derived oil. Freshwater Biology 14:179-182.
2,10 Davenport, R. and A. Spacie. 1991. Acute phototoxicity of harbor and tributary
sediments from lower Lake Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research
17:51-56.
2 Davis, R.B., Bailer, A. J., and J.T. Oris. 1998. Effects of organism allocation
on toxicity test results. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
17:928-931.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE89
2 Day, K.E., R.S. Kirby, and T.B. Reynoldson. 1995a. The effect of
manipulations of freshwater sediments on responses of benthic
invertebrates in whole-sediment toxicity tests. Environmental Toxicity
and Chemistry 14(8):1333-1343.
2,3 Day, K.E., BJ. Dutka, K.K. Kwan, N. Batista, T.B. Reynoldson, and J.L.
Metcalfe-Smith. 1995b. Correlations between solid-phase microbial
screening assays, whole-sediment toxicity tests with macroinvertebrates
and in situ benthic community structure. Journal of Great Lakes
Research 21:192-206.
2 DeFoe, D.L and G.T. Ankley. 1998. Influence of storage time on toxicity of
freshwater sediments to benthic macroinvertebrates. Environmental
Pollution 99:123-131.
2 DeWitt, T.H., G.R. Ditsworth, and R.C. Swartz. 1988. Effects of natural
sediment features on the phoxocephalid amphipod, Rhepoxynius
abronius: Implications for sediment toxicity bioassays. Marine
Environment Research 25:99-124.
2 DeWitt, T.H., R.C. Swartz, and J.O. Lamberson. 1989. Measuring the acute
toxicity of estuarine sediments. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 8:1035-1048.
2, 6 DeWitt, T.H., R.C. Swartz, DJ.Hansen, D. McGovern and WJ. Berry. 1996.
Interstitial metal and acid sulfide indicate the bioavailability of cadmium
during an amphipod life cycle sediment toxicity test. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2095-2101.
2, 7 Di Toro, D.M., J. Mahony, D. J. Hansen, K. J. Scott, M.B. Hicks, S.M. Mayr, and
M.Redmond. 1990. Toxicity of cadmium in sediments: The role of acid
volatile sulfides. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9:1487-1502.
2, 7 Di Toro, D.M., J. Mahony, DJ. Hansen, KJ. Scott, A.R. Carlson, and G.T.
Ankley. 199la. Acid volatile sulfide predicts the acute toxicity of
cadmium and nickel in sediments. Environmental Science and
Technology 26:96-101.
7 Di Toro, D.M., C.S. Zarba, DJ. Hansen, WJ. Berry, R.C. Swartz, C.E. Cowan,
S.P. Pavlou, H.E. Allen, N.A. Thomas, and P.R. Paquin. 1991b.
Technical basis for establishing sediment quality criteria for nonionic
organic chemicals using equilibrium partitioning. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 10:1541-1583.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE90
1,7 Di Toro, D.M., J. Mahony, D. J. Hansen, and W. J. Berry. 1996. A model of the
oxidation of iron and cadmium sulfide in sediments. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2168-2186.
3 Dickman, M. I. Brindle, and M. Benson. 1992. Evidence of teratogens in
sediments of the Niagara River watershed as reflected by Chironomid
(Diptera: Chironomidae) deformities. Journal of Great Lakes Research
18:467-480.
12 Dickson, K.L., Maki, A.W., and W.A. Brungs. 1987. Fate and effects of
sediment -bound chemicals in aquatic systems. Pergamon Press. New
York, New York.
3 Diggins, T.P.,and K.M. Stewart. 1993. Deformities of aquatic larval midges
(Chironomidae: Diptera) in the sediments of the Buffalo River, New
York. Journal of Great Lakes Research 19:648-659.
2, 3 Dillon, T.M. and A.B. Gibson. 1990. Review and synthesis of bioassessment
methodologies for freshwater contaminated sediments: Final Report.
Miscellaneous Paper EL-90-2. United States Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
2 Ditsworth, G.R., D.W. Schults, and J.K.P. Jones. 1990. Preparation of benthic
substrates for sediment toxicity testing. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 9:1523-1529.
16 Doody, P. 1999. Advantages and disadvantages of remediation technologies for
contaminated sediments. Blasland, Bouck and Lee. Syracuse, New
York. 10pp.
10 Dwyer, F.J., E.L. Brunson, T.J. Canfield, C.G. Ingersoll, and N.E. Kemble.
1997. An assessment of sediments from the Upper Mississippi river.
EPA/823/R-97/005. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Washington, District of Columbia.
1 Eadie, B.J. 1984. Chapter 9: Distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
in the Great Lakes. In: Toxic Contaminants in the Great Lakes, Volume
14. J.O. Nriagu and M.S. Simmons (Eds.). John Wiley and Sons. New
York. pp. 195-211.
13 Eadie, B.J. and J.A. Robbins. 1987. The role of particulate matter in the
movement of contaminants in the Great Lakes. In: Advances in
Chemistry Series No. 216: Sources and Fates of Aquatic Pollutants, pp.
319-364.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE91
1,5 Eadie, B.J., P.P. Landrum, and W.R. Faust. 1982. Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons in sediments, pore water, and the amphipod Pontoporeia
hoyi from Lake Michigan. Chemosphere 11:847-858.
1, 13 Eadie, B.J., R.L. Chambers, W.S. Gardner, and G.L. Bell. 1984. Sediment trap
studies in Lake Michigan: Resuspension and chemical fluxes in the
southern basin. Journal of Great Lakes Research 10(3):307-321.
1, 2, 13 Eadie, B.J., T.F. Nalepa, and P.P. Landrum. 1988. Toxic contaminants and
benthic organisms in the Great Lakes: Cycling, fate and effects. In:
Toxic Contamination in Large Lakes, Volume I. Chronic Effects of
Toxic Contaminants in Large Lakes. N.W. Schmidtke (Ed.). Lewis
Publishers. Chelsea, Michigan, pp. 161-178.
1 Eadie, B.J., J.A. Robbins, W.R. Faust, and P.F. Landrum. 1991. Chapter 9:
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediments and pore waters of the
lower Great Lakes: Reconstruction of a regional benzo(a)pyrene source
function. In: Organic Substances and Sediment in Water: Volume 2,
Processes and Analytical. R. Baker (Ed.). Lewis Publishers. Chelsea,
Michigan, pp. 171-189.
13 Eisenreich, S.J., P.D. Capel, J.A. Robbins, and R. Bourbonniere. 1989.
Accumulation and diagenesis of chlorinated hydrocarbons in lacustrine
sediments. Environmental Science and Technology 23(9): 1116-1126.
2 Emery, V.L., Jr., D.W. Moore, B.R. Gray, B.M. Duke, A.B. Gibson, R.B.
Wright, and J.D. Farrar. 1997. Development of a chronic sublethal
sediment bioassay using the estuarine amphipodLeptocheirusplumulosus
(shoemaker). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(9): 1912-
1920.
2 Environment Canada. 1997b. Biological test method: Test for growth and
survival in sediment using larvae of freshwater midges (Chironomus
tentans or Chironomus riparius). EPSRN32. Ottawa, Ontario.
2 Environment Canada. 1997a. Biological test method: Test for growth and
survival in sediment using the freshwater amphipod Hyalella azteca.
EPSRN33. Ottawa, Ontario.
2 Ewell, W.S., J.W. Gorsuch, R.O. Kringle, K.A. Robillard, R.C. Spiegel. 1986.
Simultaneous evaluation of the acute effects of chemicals on seven
aquatic species. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 5:831-
840.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE92
5 Fahnenstiel, G. L., A. E. Krause, M. J. McCormick, H. J. Carrick, and C. L.
Schelske. 1998. The structure of the planktonic food-web in the St.
Lawrence Great Lakes. Journal of Great Lakes Research 24(3):531-554.
7 Field, L.J., D.D. MacDonald, S.B. Norton, C.G. Severn, and C.G. Ingersoll.
1999. Evaluating sediment chemistry and toxicity data using logistic
regression modeling. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
18(6):1311-1322.
7 Field, L.J., D.D. MacDonald, S.B. Norton, C.G. Ingersoll, C.G. Severn, D.E.
Smorong, andR.A. Lindskoog. 2002. Predicting amphipod toxicity from
sediment chemistry using logistic regression models. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 21(9): 1993-2005.
2 Fisher, S.W., MJ. Lydy, J. Barger, and P.F. Landrum. 1993. Quantitative
structure-activity relationships for predicting the toxicity of pesticides in
aquatic systems with sediment. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 12:1307-1318.
9 Flannagan, J.F. 1970. Efficiencies of various grabs and corers in sampling
freshwater benthos. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada
27:1691-1970.
1, 2, 3, 9 Fox, R., P.F. Landrum, and L. McCrone. 1994. Chapter 1: Introduction. In:
Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS)
Program: Assessment Guidance Document. EPA 905-B94-002. Great
Lakes National Program Office. United States Environmental Protection
Agency. Chicago, Illinois, pp. 1-9.
1 Gardner, W.S., W.A. Frez, E.A. Chichocki, and C.C. Parrish. 1985.
Micromethods for lipids in aquatic invertebrates. Limnology and
Oceanography 30:1099-1105.
15 George, J. 1999. Measuring effectiveness of remedial actions against remedial
action objectives at contaminated sediment sites. Presented at
Contaminated Sediments - A Scientific Framework for their Evaluation
and Management 16th Annual Conference on Contaminated Soils,
Sediments, Water. University of Massachusetts, Amherst. ALCOA, Inc.
9pp.
2 Giesy, J.P. andR.A. Hoke. 1989. Freshwater sediment toxi city bioassessment:
Rationale for species selection and test design. Journal of Great Lakes
Research 15(4):539-569.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE93
2 Giesy, J.P., R.L. Graney, J.L. Newsted, CJ. Rosiu, A. Brenda, R.G. Kreis, Jr.,
andFJ. Horvath. 1988. Comparison of three sediment bioassay methods
using Detroit River sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
7:483-498.
2 Giesy, J.P. CJ. Rosiu, R.L. Graney, and M.G. Henry. 1990. Benthic
invertebrate bioassays with toxic sediment and pore water.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9:233-248.
5 Gobas, F.A.P.C., D.C. Bedard, J.J.H. Ciborowski, and GD. Haffner. 1989.
Bioaccumulation of chlorinated hydrocarbons by the mayfly (Hexagenia
limbata) in Lake St. Clair. Journal of Great Lakes Research 15:581-588.
7 Gries, T.H. and K.H. Waldow. 1996. 1994 Amphipod and echinoderm larval
AETs. In: Progress Re-evaluating Puget Sound Apparent Effects
Thresholds (AETs). Volume I. Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
(PSDDA) agencies, United States Army Corps of Engineers - Seattle
District, United States Environmental Protection Agency - Region 10,
and Washington Departments of Ecology and Natural Resources. 82 pp.
+ appendices.
6 Hamelink, J.L., P.P. Landrum, H.L. Bergmann, and W.H. Benson. 1994.
Bioavailability: Physical, chemical and biological interactions. Lewis
Publishers. Boca Ration, Florida.
3 Hamilton, A.L. and O.A. Saether. 1971. The occurrence of characteristic
deformities in the Chironomid larvae of several Canadian lakes.
Canadian Entomologist. 103:363-368.
2,7 Hansen, D.J., W.J. Berry, J.D. Mahony, W.S. Boothman, D.M. DiToro, D.L.
Robson, G.T. Ankley, D.Ma, D. Yan, and C.E. Pesch. 1996a. Predicting
the toxicity of metal-contaminated field sediments using interstitial
concentration of metal and acid volatile sulfide normalizations.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15(12):2080-2094.
2, 6, 7, 11 Hansen, D.J., J.D. Mahony, W.J. Berry, S.J. Benyi, J.M. Corbin, S.D. Pratt, and
M.B. Abel. 1996b. Chronic effect of cadmium in sediments on
colonization by benthic marine organisms: An evaluation of the role of
interstitial cadmium and acid volatile sulfide in biological availability.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2126-2137.
3 Hare, L. and J.C.H. Carter. 1976. The distribution of Chironomus cucini
(salinarius group) larvae (Diptera: Chironomidae) in Parry Sound,
Georgian Bay, with particular reference to structural deformities.
Canadian Journal of Zoology 54:2129-2134.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE94
5 Hare, L. and A. Tessier. 1996. Predicting animal cadmium concentrations in
lakes. Nature 380: 430-431.
3 Hare, L. and A. Tessier. 1998. The aquatic insect Chaoborus as a biomonitor
of trace metals in lakes. Limnology and Oceanography 43(8): 1850-1859.
2, 5, 7 Hare, L., R. Carignan, andM.A. Huerta-Diaz. 1994. An experimental study of
metal toxicity and accumulation by benthic invertebrates: Implications
for the acid volatile sulfide (AVS) model. Limnology and Oceanography.
39:1653-1668. (April 4, 1996)
2 Harkey, G.A., P.P. Landrum, and SJ. Klaine. 1994a. Comparison of whole-
sediment, elutriate and pore water exposures for use in assessing
sediment-associated organic contaminants in bioassays. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 13:1315-1329.
2 Harkey, G.A., P.P. Landrum, and SJ. Klaine. 1994b. Preliminary studies on
the effect of feeding during whole sediment bioassays using Chironomus
riparius larvae. Chemosphere 28(3):597-606.
5 Harkey, G.A., S. Kane Driscoll, and P.P. Landrum. 1997. Effect of feeding in
30-day bioaccumulation assays using Hyalella azteca in fluoranthene-
dosed sediment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16:762-769.
2, 5 Harrahy, E.A. and W.H. Clements. 1997. Toxicity and bioaccumulation of a
mixture of heavy metals in Chironomus tentans (Diptera: Chironomidae)
in synthetic sediment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
16(2):317-327.
2, 5 Hart, B.A. andB.D. Scaife. 1977. Toxicity and bioaccumulation of cadmium
in Chlorellapyrenoidosa. Environmental Research 14:401-413.
3 Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1982. Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality in
streams. Technical Bulletin No. 132. Department of Natural Resources.
Madison, Wisconsin.
3 Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1987. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution.
Great Lakes Entomology 20:31-39.
10 Hoke, R.A., J.P. Giesy, G.T. Ankley, J.L. Newsted, and RJ. Adams. 1990.
Toxicity of sediments from western Lake Erie and the Maumee River at
Toledo, Ohio, 1987: Implications for current dredged material disposal
practices. Journal of Great Lakes Research 16:457-470.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGERS
2, 7 Hoke, R.A., G.T. Ankley, A.M. Cotter, T. Goldenstein, P.A. Kosian, G.L.
Phipps, and P.M. VanderMeiden. 1994. Evaluation of equilibrium
partitioning theory for predicting acute toxicity of field-collected
sediments contaminated with DDT, DDE and ODD to the amphipod
Hyalellaazteca. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:157-166.
7 Hoke, R.A., P.A. Kosian, G.T. Ankley, A.M. Cotter, P.M. Vandermeiden, G.L.
Phipps, and EJ. Durhan. 1995a. Studies with Hyalella azteca and
Chironomus tentans in support of the development of a sediment quality
criterion for dieldrin. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:435-
443.
7 Hoke, R. A., G.T. Ankley and J.F. Peters. 1995b. Use of a freshwater sediment
quality database in an evaluation of sediment quality criteria based on
equilibrium partitioning and screening-level concentrations.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:451-459.
7 Hoke, R.A., G.T. Ankley, P.A. Kosian, A.M. Cotter, P.M. VanderMeiden, M.
Balcer, G.L. Phipps, C.W. West, and J.S. Cox. 1997. Equilibrium
partitioning as the basis for an integrated laboratory and field assessment
of the impacts of DDT, DDE and DDD in sediments. Ecotoxicology
6:101-125.
9 Howmiller, R.P. 1971. A comparison of the effectiveness of Eckman and ponar
grabs. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 100:560-564.
3,10 Howmiller, R.P., A.M. Beeton. 1971. Biological evaluation of environmental
quality, Green Bay, Lake Michigan. Journal of Water Pollution Control
Federation 43:123-133.
2 Ingersoll, C.G., and M.K. Nelson. 1990. Testing sediment toxicity with
Hyalella azteca (Amphipoda) and Chironomus riparius (Diptera). In:
Aquatic Toxicology and Risk Assessment, 13th Volume. ASTM STP
1096. W.G Landis and W.H. van der Schalie (Eds.). West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, pp. 93-109.
2 Ingersoll, C.G., FJ. Dwyer, and T.W. May. 1990. Toxicity of inorganic and
organic selenium to Daphnia magna (Cladocera) and Chironomus
riparius (Diptera). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9:1171-
1181.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE96
2,3 Ingersoll, C.G., D.R. Buckler, E.A. Crecelius, and T.W. LaPoint. 1993.
Assessment and remediation of contaminated sediment (ARCS) project:
Biological assessment of contaminated Great Lakes sediment. Battelle
final Report. EPA-905-R93-006. Prepared by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service. Prepared for the Great Lakes National Program Office.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Chicago, Illinois.
2, 5 Ingersoll, C.G., G.T. Ankley, D.A. Benoit, E.L. Brunson, G.A. Burton, FJ.
Dwyer, R. A. Hoke, P.P. Landrum, T. J. Norberg-King, and P. V. Winger.
1995. Toxicity and bioaccumulation of sediment-associated
contaminants using freshwater invertebrates: A review of methods and
applications. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistryl4(ll):1885-
1894.
2, 7 Ingersoll, C.G., P.S. Haverland, E.L. Brunson, T.J. Canfield, FJ. Dwyer, C.E.
Henke, and N.E. Kemble. 1996. Calculation and evaluation of sediment
effect concentrations for the amphipod Hyalella azteca and the midge
Chironomus riparius. Journal Great Lakes Research 22:602-623.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Ingersoll, C.G., T.Dillon, and G.R. Biddinger (Eds.). 1997. Ecological risk
assessment of contaminated sediments. SETAC Special Publications
Series. SETAC Press. Pensacola, Florida.
2 Ingersoll, C.G., E.L. Brunson, FJ. Dwyer, O.K. Hardesty, and N.E. Kemble.
1998. Use of sublethal endpoints in sediment toxicity tests with the
amphipod Hyalella azteca. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
17(8):1508-1523.
7 Ingersoll C.G., D.D. MacDonald, N. Wang, J.L. Crane, LJ. Field, P.S.
Haverland, N.E. Kemble, R.A. Lindskoog, C.G. Severn, and D.E.
Smorong. 2001. Predictions of sediment toxicity using consensus-based
freshwater sediment quality guidelines. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology. 41:8-21.
1,2,3,9 International Joint Commission. 1988. Procedures for the assessment of
contaminated sediment problems in the Great Lakes. Report to the Great
Lakes Water Quality Board. Sediment Subcommittee and its Assessment
Work Group. Great Lakes Regional Office. Windsor, Ontario.
7 Jaagumagi, R. 1992a. Development of the Ontario provincial sediment quality
guidelines for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead,
manganese, mercury, nickel, and zinc. Ontario Ministry of Environment.
Toronto, Ontario. 46 pp.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE97
1 Jaagumagi, R. 1992b. Development of the Ontario provincial sediment quality
guidelines for PCBs and the organochlorine pesticides. Ontario Ministry
of Environment. Toronto, Ontario. 82pp.
7 Jaagumagi, R. 1993. Development of the Ontario provincial sediment quality
guidelines for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Ontario
Ministry of Environment. Toronto, Ontario. 79 pp.
5 Jarvinen, A.W. and G.T. Ankley. 1999. Linkage of effects to tissue residues:
Development of a comprehensive database for aquatic organisms exposed
to inorganic and organic chemicals. SETAC Press. Pensacola, Florida.
13 Jeremiason, J. D., S. J. Eisenreich, J. E. Baker, and B. J. Eadie. 1998. PCB
decline in settling particles and benthic recycling of PCBs and PAHs in
Lake Superior. Environmental Science and Technology 32:3249-3256.
2 Johnson, B.T. and E.R. Long. 1998. Rapid toxicology assessment of sediments
from estuarine ecosystems: A new tandem in vitro testing approach.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17(6): 1099-1106.
2, 10 Jones, R.A. and G.F. Lee. 1988. Toxicity of U.S. waterway sediments with
particular reference to the New York Harbor area. In: Chemical and
Biological Characterization of Sludges, Sediments, Dredge Spoils, and
Drilling Muds. J.J. Lichtenburg, F.A. Winter, C.I. Weber, and L.
Fradkin, (Eds.). STP 976. American Society for Testing and Materials.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 403-417.
5 Kaag, N.H., E.M.. Foekema, M.C. Scholten, and N.M. van Straalen. 1997.
Comparison of contaminant accumulation in three species of marine
invertebrates with different feeding habits. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 16(5):837-842.
2, 5, 11 Kane Driscoll, S. and P.F. Landrum. 1997. A comparison of equilibrium
partitioning and critical body residue approaches for predicting toxicity
of sediment-associated fluoranthene to freshwater amphipods.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(10):2179-2186.
2, 5, 11 Kane Driscoll, S., G.A. Harkey, and P.F. Landrum. 1997a. Accumulation and
toxicokinetics of fluoranthene in sediment bioassays with freshwater
amphipods. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(4):742-753.
2, 5, 11 Kane Driscoll, S., P.F. Landrum and E. Tigue. 1997b. Accumulation and
toxicokinetics of fluoranthene in water-only exposures with freshwater
amphipods. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(4):754-761.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE98
1 Kates, M. 1986. Techniques of Lipidology (Isolation, Analysis, and
Identification of Lipids). 2nd revised edition. Elsevier Science Publishing
Company. New York. 464 pp.
15 Keenan, R.E., P.O. Anderson, W.R. Alsop, and J.H. Samuelian. 1999. Risk-
based management principles for evaluating sediment management
options. 23 pp.
2 Kemble, N.E., E.L. Brunson, TJ. Canfield, FJ. Dwyer, and C.G. Ingersoll.
1998. Assessing sediment toxicity from navigational pools of the upper
Mississippi River using a 28-d Hyalella azteca test. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 35:181-190.
2,11 Kemble,N.E., F.J. Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll, T.D. Dawson, andT.J. Norberg-King.
1999. Tolerance of freshwater test organisms to formulated sediments for
use as control materials in whole-sediment toxicity tests. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 18(2):222-230.
3 Kennedy, C.R. 1965. The distribution and habitat ofLimnodrilus claparede and
its adaptive significance. Oikos 16:26-28.
2,11 Kielty, T.J., D.S White, and P.F. Landrum. 1988a. Short-term lethality and
sediment avoidance assays with endrin-contaminated sediment and two
oligochaetes from Lake Michigan. Archives of Environmental
Contamination and Toxicology 17:95-101.
2, 10 Kreis, R.G. 1988. Integrated study of exposure and biological effects ofin-
place sediment pollutants in the Detroit River, Michigan: An upper Great
Lakes connecting channel. Final Report. Office of Research and
Development. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Environmental Research Laboratory - Duluth, Minnesota, and LLRS-
Grosse He, Michigan. 153 pp.
2, 11 Kubitz, J.A., E.C. Lewek, J.M. Besser, J.B. Drake III, and J.P. Giesy. 1995.
Effects of copper-contaminated sediments on Hyalella azteca, Daphnia
magna, and Ceriodaphnia dubia: Survival, growth, and enzyme
inhibition. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
29:97-103.
2 Kubitz, J.A., J.M. Besser, and J.P. Giesy. 1996. A two-step experimental
design for a sediment bioassay using growth of amphipod//ya/e//a azteca
for the test endpoint. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
15(10):1783-1792.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE99
2,6,13 Kukkonen, J. and P.P. Landrum. 1994a. Effects of sediment-bound
polydimethylsiloxane on the bioavailability and distribution of
benzo(a)pyrene in lake sediment to Lumbriculus variegatus.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:523-531.
2, 5, 11 Kukkonen, J. and P.P. Landrum. 1994b. Toxicokinetics and toxicity of
sediment bound pyrene in Lumbriculus variegatus (Oligochaeta).
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:1457-1468.
2,6, 11 Kukkonen, J.V.K. and P.P. Landrum. 1998. Effect of particle-xenobiotic
contact time on bioavailability of sediment-associated benzo(a)pyrene by
benthic amphipod, Diporeia spp. Aquatic Toxicology 42:229-242.
2 Lacey, R, M.C. Watzin, and A.W. Mclntosh. 1998. Sediment organic matter
content as a confounding factor in toxicity tests with Chironomus tentans.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18(2):231-236.
6, 7 Lake, J.L., N.I. Rubinstein, H. Lee n, C.A. Lake, J. Heltshe, and S. Pavignano.
1990. Equilibrium partitioning and bioaccumulation of sediment-
associated contaminants by infaunal organisms. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 9:1095-1106.
11 Lamberson, J.O. and R.C. Swartz. 1992a. Spiked-sediment toxicity test
approach. In: Sediment Classification Methods Compendium. EPA-
823-R-92-006. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Washington, District of Columbia, pp. 4-1 to 4-10.
2,11 Lamberson, J.O. and R.C. Swartz. 1992b. Use of bioassays in determining the
toxicity of sediment to benthic organisms. In: Toxic Contaminants and
Ecosystem Health: A Great Lakes Focus. M.S. Evans (Ed.). John Wiley
and Sons. New York, New York. pp. 257-279.
17 Landis, W.G., A.J. Markiewicz, and V.Wilson. 1997. Recommended guidance
and checklist for Tier 1 ecological risk assessment for contaminated sites
in the Great Lakes. Prepared for British Columbia. Ministry of
Environment, Lands and Parks. Victoria, British Columbia.
2, 5, 6 Landrum, P.P. 1989. Bioavailability and toxicokinetics of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons sorbed to sediments for the amphipod, Pontoporeia hoyi.
Environmental Science and Technology 23:588-595.
7 Landrum, P.P. 1995. How should numerical sediment quality criteria be used?
Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 1(1): 13-17.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 100
5 Landrum, P.P. 1998. Kinetic models for assessing bioaccumulation.
Proceedings of the National Sediment Bioaccumulation Conference.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, District
of Columbia, pp. 47-50.
5, 6 Landrum, P.P. and D. Scavia. 1983. Influence of sediment on anthracene
uptake, depuration, and biotransformation by the amphipod, Hyalella
azteca. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 40:298-305.
6 Landrum, P.P. and J.A. Robbins. 1990. Chapter 8: Bioavailability of
sediment-associated contaminants to benthic invertebrates. In:
Sediments: Chemistry and Toxicity of In-PlacePollutants. R. Baudo, J.P.
Giesy, and H. Muntau (Eds.). Lewis Publishers. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
6, 11 Landrum, P.P. and W.R. Faust. 1994. The role of sediment composition on the
bioavailability of laboratory-dosed sediment-associated organic
contaminants to the amphipod, Diporeia (spp.). Chemical Speciation and
Bioavailability 6:85-92.
5 Landrum, P.P. and S.W. Fisher. 1998. Influence of lipids on the
bioaccumulation and trophic transfer of organic contaminants in aquatic
organisms. In: The Ecological Role of Lipids in Freshwater Ecosystems.
M.T. Arts and B.C. Wainman (Eds). Springer-Verlang, New York. pp.
203-234.
6 Landrum, P.F., S.R. Nihart, BJ. Eadie, and L.R. Herche. 1987. Reduction in
bioavailability of organic contaminants to the amphipod Pontoporeiahoyi
by dissolved organic matter of sediment interstitial waters.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 6:11-20.
2, 6, 11 Landrum, P.F., W.R. Faust, and BJ. Eadie. 1989. Bioavailability and toxicity
of a mixture of sediment associated chlorinated hydrocarbons to the
amphipod, Pontoporeia hoyi. In: Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard
Assessment: Twelfth Symposium. U.M. Cowgill and L.R. Williams
(Eds.). ASTMSTP1027. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, pp. 315-
329.
6 Landrum, P.F., BJ. Eadie, and W.R. Faust. 1992. Variation in the
bioavailability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons to the amphipod
Diporeia (spp.) with sediment aging. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 11:1197-1208.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 101
2,6, 11 Landrum, P.P., W.S. Dupuis and J. Kukkonen. 1994. Toxicokinetics and
toxicity of sediment-associated pyrene and phenanthrene in Diporeia
spp.: Examination of equilibrium partitioning theory and residue based
effects for assessing hazard. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
13:1769-1780.
5 Landrum, P.P., G.A. Harkey, and J. Kukkonen. 1996. Evaluation of organic
contaminant exposure in aquatic organisms: The significance of
bioconcentrationandbioaccumulation. In: Ecotoxicology: AHierarchial
Treatment. M.C. Newman and C. H. Jogoe (Eds.). CRC Press. Lewis
Publishers. Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 85-131.
6 Landrum, P.P., D.C. Gossiaux, and J. Kukkonen. 1997. Sediment
characteristics influencing the bioavailability of nonpolar organic
contaminants to Diporeia spp. Chemical Speciation and Bioavailability
9:43-55.
13 Lang, G.A. and T.D. Fontaine. 1990. Modeling the fate and transport of
organic contaminants in Lake St. Clair. Journal of Great Lakes Research
16(2):216-232.
3 Lauritsen, D.D., S.C. Mozley, and D.S. White. 1985. Distribution of
oligochaetes in Lake Michigan and comments on their use as indices of
pollution. Journal of Great Lakes Research 11:67-76.
5 Lee, H. II. 1992. Models, muddles, and mud: Predicting bioaccumulation of
sediment-associated pollutants. In: Sediment Toxicity Assessment.
G.A. Burton Jr. (Ed.). Lewis publishers, pp. 267-293.
5 Lee, H. II, B.L. Boese, J. Pelletier, M. Windsor, D.T. Specht, and R.C. Randall.
1989. Guidance manual: Bedded sediment bioaccumulation tests.
600/X-89/302. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Newport, Oregon.
3 Lenat, D.R. 1993. A biotic index for the southeastern United States derivation
and list of tolerance values, with criteria for assigning water-quality
ratings. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12:279-
290.
1 Leonard, E.N., A.M. Cotter, and G.T. Ankley. 1996. Modified diffusion
method for analysis of acid volatile sulfides and simultaneously extracted
metals in freshwater sediment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
15(9):1479-1481.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 102
2 Liber, K., DJ. Call, T.D. Dawson, F.W. Whiteman, and T.M. Dillon. 1996.
Effects of Chironomus tentans larval growth retardation on adult
emergence and ovipositing success: Implications for interpreting
freshwater sediment bioassays. Hydrobiologia 323:155-167.
13 Lick, W. 1980. The transport of contaminants in the Great Lakes. GLERL
Open File Report. Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory.
Ann Arbor, Michigan. 48 pp.
2,3 Long, E.R. 1997. The use of biological measures in assessments of toxicants
in the coastal zone. Sustainable Development in the Southeastern Coastal
Zone. FJ. Vernberg, W.B. Vernberg, T. Siewicki (Eds.). University of
South Carolina Press. Columbia, South Carolina pp. 187-219.
2, 3 Long, E.R. 1997. The use of biological measures in assessments of toxicants
in the coastal zone. Sustainable Development in the Southeastern Coastal
Zone. FJ. Vernberg, W.B. Vernberg, T. Siewicki (Eds.). University of
South Carolina Press. Columbia, South Carolina pp. 187-219.
1,2 Long, E.R. 1998. Sediment quality assessments: Selected issues and results
from the NOAA's National Status and Trends Program. In: Ecological
Risk Assessment: A Meeting of Policy and Science. A. dePeyster and
K. Day (Eds.). SETAC Press. Pensacola, Florida, pp. 111-132.
1,2 Long, E.R. 2000. Degraded sediment quality in U.S. estuaries: A review of
magnitude and ecological implications. Ecological Applications 10(2):
338-349.
2 Long, E.R. 2000. Spatial extent of sediment toxicity in US estuaries and marine
bays. Environmental Monitoring 64:391-407.
4 Long, E.R. and P.M. Chapman. 1985. A sediment quality triad: Measures of
sediment contamination, toxicity and infaunal community composition
in Puget Sound. Marine Pollution Bulletin 16:405-415.
1, 2 Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1991. The potential for biological effects of
sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the national status and trends
program. NOS OMA 52. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. Technical Memorandum. Seattle, Washington.
4 Long, E.R. and CJ. Wilson. 1997. On the identification of toxic hot spots
using measures of the sediment quality triad. Marine Pollution Bulletin
34:373-374.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 103
2,10 Long, E.R and K.A. Dzinbal. 1998. Toxicity of sediments in Northern Puget
Sound: A national perspective. In: Puget Sound Research '98
Proceedings, Washington State Convention and Trade Center. Seattle,
Washington. March 12 and 13,1998. Puget Sound Water Quality Action
Team. Olympia, Washington. 302-311.
7 Long, E.R. and D.D. MacDonald. 1998. Perspective: Recommended uses of
empirically derived, sediment quality guidelines for marine and estuarine
ecosystems. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 4(5): 1019-1039.
2 Long, E.R., M.F. Buchman, S.M. Bay, RJ. Breteler, R.S. Carr, P.M. Chapman,
I.E. Hose, A.L. Lissner, J. Scott, and D.A. Wolfe. 1990. Comparative
evaluation of five toxicity tests with sediments from San Francisco Bay
and Tomales Bay, California. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
9:1193-1214.
7 Long, E.R., D.D. MacDonald, S.L. Smith, andF.D. Calder. 1995. Incidence of
adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in
marine and estuarine sediments. Environmental Management 19(1 ):81-
97.
2 Long, E.R., A. Robertson, D.A. Wolfe, J. Hameedi, and G.M. Sloane. 1997.
Estimates of the spatial extent of sediment toxicity in major U.S.
estuaries. Environmental Science and Technology 30: 3585-3592.
7 Long, E.R., LJ. Field, and D.D. MacDonald. 1998a. Predicting toxicity in
marine sediments with numerical sediment quality guidelines.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17(4):714-727.
7 Long, E.R., D.D. MacDonald, J.C. Cubbage, and C.I. Ingersoll. 1998b.
Predicting the toxicity of sediment-associated trace metals with
simultaneously extracted trace metal: Acid volatile sulfide concentrations
and dry weight-normalized concentrations: A critical comparison.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17:972-974.
10 Lorenzato, S.G., AJ. Gunther, and J.M. O'Conner (Eds.). 1991. Summary of a
workshop concerning sediment quality assessment and development of
sediment quality objectives. California State Water Resources Control
Board, Sacramento, California. 32 pp. + appendices.
13 Lou, J., D. J. Schwab, and D. Beletsky. 1999. Suspended sediment transport
modeling in Lake Michigan. Canadian Coastal Conference 1999.
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. May 19-22, 1999. pp. 391-405.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 104
9 Lubin, A.N., M.H. Williams, and J.C.Lin. 1995. Statistical techniques applied
to sediment sampling (STASS). United States Environmental Protection
Agency. Region V. Chicago, Illinois.
7 MacDonald, D.D. 1994a. Canadian sediment quality guidelines for polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons. Prepared for Evaluation and Interpretation
Branch. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Canada. 195pp.
7 MacDonald, D.D. 1994b. Approach to the assessment of sediment quality in
Florida coastal waters. Volume 2 - Application of the sediment quality
assessment guidelines. Prepared for Florida Department of
Environmental Protection. Tallahassee, Florida.
1,2,3,7 MacDonald, D.D. 1995. Science advisory group workshop on sediment
assessment in Tampa Bay: Summary Report. Prepared for the Tampa
Bay National Estuary Program. St. Petersburg, Florida.
7 MacDonald, D.D. and A. Sobolewski. 1993. Recommended procedures for
developing site-specific environmental quality remediation objectives for
contaminated sites in Canada. National Contaminated Sites Remediation
Program. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Ottawa,
Ontario. 199 pp.
7 MacDonald, D.D., S.L. Smith, M.P. Wong, and P. Mudroch. 1992. The
development of Canadian marine environmental quality guidelines.
Ecosystem Sciences and Evaluation Directorate. Conservation and
Protection. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Ontario. 32 pp. + appendices
7 MacDonald, D.D., A. White, B. Charlish, M.L. Haines, and T. Wong. 1993.
Compilation of toxicological information on sediment-associated
contaminants and the development of freshwater sediment quality
guidelines. Prepared for Environment Canada. 24 pp.
7 MacDonald, D.D., R.S. Carr, F.D. Calder, E.R. Long, and C.G. Ingersoll. 1996.
Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida
coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5:253-278.
7 MacDonald, D.D., C.G. Ingersoll, and T.A. Berger. 2000a. Development and
evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater
ecosystems. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
39:20-31
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 105
1 MacDonald, D.D., L.M. DiPinto, J. Field, C.G. Ingersoll, E.R. Long, and R.C.
Swartz. 2000b. Development and evaluation of consensus-based
sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19(5): 1403-1413.
6, 7 Mahony, J.D., D.M. DiToro, R. Koch, WJ. Berry, and DJ. Hansen. 1993.
Vertical distribution of AVS and SEM in bedded sediments: Biological
implications and the role of metal sulfide oxidation kinetics. Abstracts:
14th Annual Meeting. Society of Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry. Houston, Texas. November 14-18. p. 46.
13 Matisoff, G. and J.A. Robbins. 1987. A model for biological mixing of
sediments. Journal of Geological Education 35(3): 144-149.
7 Maund, S., I. Barber, J. Dulka, J. Gonzalez-Valero, M. Hamer, F. Heimbach, M.
Marshall, P. McCahon, H. Staudenmaier, and D. Wustner. 1997.
Development and evaluation of triggers for sediment toxicity testing of
pesticides with benthic macroinvertebrates. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 16(12):2590-2596.
2, 5, 6 McCarty, L.S. and D. MacKay. 1993. Enhancing ecotoxicological modeling
and assessment: Body residues and modes of toxic action. Environmental
Science and Technology 27:1719-1728.
17 McCarty, LS and M. Power. 1997. Letter to the Editor: Environmental Risk
Assessment within a decision-making framework. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 16(2): 122-123.
2 McNulty, E.W., F. J. Dwyer, M.R. Ellersieck, E.I. Greer, C.G. Ingersoll and C.F.
Rabeni. 1999. Evaluation of ability of reference toxicity tests to identify
stress in laboratory populations of the amphipod Hyalella azteca.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18(3):544-548.
5 Means, J.C. and A.E. McElroy. 1997. Bioaccumulationoftetrachlorobiphenyl
and hexachlorobiphenyl by Yoldia limatula and Nephtys incisa from
bedded sediments: Effects of sediment- and animal- related parameters.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16: 1277-1286.
2 Mearns, A.J., R.C. Swartz, J.M. Cummins, P.A. Dinnel, P. Plesha, and P.M.
Chapman. 1986. Inter-laboratory comparison of a sediment toxicity test
using the marine amphipod, Rhepoxynius abronius. Marine Environment
Research 19: 13-37.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 106
3 Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins (Eds.). 1984. An introduction to the aquatic
insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co. Dubuque, Iowa.
722pp.
1, 13 Meyers, P.A., MJ. Leenheer, BJ. Eadie, and S.J. Maule. 1984. Organic
geochemistry of suspended and settling paniculate matter in Lake
Michigan. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48:443-452.
2 Milani, D., K.E. Day, DJ. McLeary, andR.S. Kirby. 1996. Recent intra-and
inteiiaboratory studies related to the development and standardization of
Environment Canada's biological test methods for measuring sediment
toxicity using freshwater amphipods (Hyalella azteca) or midge larvae
(Chironomus riparius). Environment Canada. Burlington, Ontario.
9 Milbrink, G. and T. Wiederholm. 1973. Sampling efficiency of four types of
mud bottom samplers. Oikos 24:479-482.
2 Moore, D.W. and T.M. Dillon. 1993. The relationship between growth and
reproduction in the marine polychaete Nereis (Neanthes) arenaceodentata
(Moore): Implications for chronic sublethal sediment bioassays. Journal
of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 173:231-246.
2 Moore, D.W. and J.D. Farrar. 1996. Effect of growth on reproduction in the
freshwater amphipod, Hyalella azteca. Hydrobiologia 328:127-134.
2, 9 Moore, D.W., T.M. Dillon and E.W. Gamble. 1996. Long-term storage of
sediments: Implications for sediment toxicity testing. Environmental
Pollution 89:341-342.
5 Munger, C. and L. Hare. 1997. Relative importance of water and food as
cadmium sources to an aquatic insect (Chaoborus punctipennis):
Implications for predicting Cd bioaccumulation in Nature.
Environmental Science and Technology 31: 891-895.
5 Munger, C. and L. Hare. 2000. Influence of ingestion rate and food types on
cadmium accumulation by the aquatic insect Chaoborus. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 57:327-332.
1, 3, 13 Nalepa, T.F. and P.F. Landrum. 1988. Benthic invertebrates and contaminant
levels in the Great Lakes: Effects, fates, and role in cycling. In: Toxic
Contaminants and Ecosystem Health; A Great Lakes Focus. M.S. Evans
(Ed.). Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, New York. pp. 77-102.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 107
Nebeker, A.V. and C.E. Miller. 1988. Use of the amphipod crustacean
Hyalella azteca in freshwater and estuarine sediment toxicity tests.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 7:1027-1033.
Nebeker, A.V. M.A. Cairns, J.H. Gakstatter, K.W. Malueg, G.S. Schuytema,
andD.F. Krawczyk. 1984. Biological methods for determining toxicity
of contaminated freshwater sediments to invertebrates. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 3:617-630.
Nebeker, A.V., S.T. Onjukka, and M.A. Cairns. 1988. Chronic effects of
contaminated sediment on Daphnia magna and Chironomus tentans.
Bulletin on Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 41:574-581.
Nelson, M.K., P.P. Landrum, G.A. Burton, SJ. Klaine, E.A. Crecelius, T.D.
Byl, D.C. Gossiaux, V.N. Tsymbal, L. Cleveland, C.G. Ingersoll, and
G.Sasson-Brickson. 1993. Toxicity of contaminated sediments in
dilution series with control sediments. Chemosphere 27(9): 1789-1812.
Neumann, P.T.M., U. Borgmann, and W. Norwood. 1999. Effect of gut
clearance on metal body concentrations in Hyalella azteca.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18(5):976-984.
Newman, M.C. 1995. Quantitative methods in aquatic toxicology. In:
Advances in trace substances research. Lewis Publisher. Boca Raton,
Florida, pp. 196-200
O'Connor, T.P., K.D. Daskalakis, J.L. Hyland, J.F. Paul, and J.K. Summers.
1998. Comparisons of sediment toxicity with predictions based on
chemical guidelines. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
17(3):468-471.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. Biological criteria for the
protection of aquatic life: Volume n. Users manual for biological field
assessment of Ohio surface waters. Division of Water Quality Monitoring
and Assessment. Columbus, Ohio.
Pennak, R.W. 1989. Freshwater invertebrates of the United States: Protozoa
to Mollusca. 3rd edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, New
York. 628pp.
Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi, and A. Hayton. 1989. Development of provincial
sediment quality guidelines. Water Resources Branch. Ontario Ministry
of the Environment. Toronto, Ontario. 19pp.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 108
6 Pesch, C.E., DJ. Hansen, W.S. Boothman, WJ. Berry, and J.D. Mahony. 1995.
The role of acid-volatile sulfide and interstitial water metal
concentrations in determining bioavailability of cadmium and nickel from
contaminated sediments to the marine polychaete Neanthes
arenaceodentata. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:129-141.
1, 13 Peterson, G.S., G.T. Ankley, and E.N. Leonard. 1996. Effect of bioturbation
of metal-sulfide oxidation in surficial freshwater sediments.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2147-2155.
16 Peterson, G., J. Wolfe, and J. DePinto. 1999. Decision tree for sediment
management alternatives (printed version). Limno-Tech, Inc; The
Sediment Management Work Group. 37 pp.
2, 5 Phipps, G.L., G.T. Ankley, D.A. Benoit, and V.R. Mattson. 1993. Use of the
aquatic oligochaQteLumbriculus variegatus for assessing the toxicity and
bioaccumulation of sediment-associated contaminants. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 12:269-274.
2 Phipps, G.L., V.R. Mattson, and G.T. Ankley. 1995. Relative sensitivity of
three freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates to ten contaminants.
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 28:281-286.
1, 9 Plumb, Jr., R.H. 1981. Procedures for handling and chemical analysis of
sediment and water samples. Technical committee on criteria for dredged
and fill material. USEPA-USACE. EPA-4805572010. Great Lakes
Laboratory. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Grosselle,
Michigan.
1, 2, 7, 16 Porebski, L.M. and J.M. Osburne. 1998. The application of a tiered testing
approach to the management of dredged sediments for disposal at sea in
Canada. Chemistry and Ecology 14:197-214.
17 Power, M. and L.S. McCarty. 1998a. A comparative analysis of environmental
risk assessment/risk management frameworks. Environmental Science
and Technology Magazine, pp. 224A-231 A.
17 Power, M. and L.S. McCarty. 1998b. Fallacies in ecological risk assessment
practices. Environmental Science and Technology Magazine, pp. 370A-
375A.
1 PTI Environmental Services. 1989a. Data validation guidance manual for
selected sediment variables (QA-2). PTI Contract C901-02. Bellevue,
Washington. 178 pp.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 109
1,2 PTI Environmental Services. 1989b. Puget Sound dredged disposal analysis
guidance manual: Data quality evaluation for proposed dredged material
disposal projects (QA-1). PTI Contract C901-01. Bellevue, Washington.
112pp.
1 Randall, R.C., H. Lee II, RJ. Ozretich, LJ. Lake, and RJ. Pruell. 1991.
Evaluation of selected lipid methods for normalizing pollutant
bioaccumulation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 10:1431-
1436.
1 Randall, R.C., D.R. Young, H.Lee II, and S.F. Echols. 1998. Lipid
methodology and pollutant normalization relationships for neutral
nonpolar organic pollutants. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
17:788-791.
13
Reible, D.D. and LJ. Thibodeaux. 1999. Using natural processes to define
exposure from sediments. 29 pp.
2 Reynoldson, T.B., K.E. Day, C. Clarke, and D.Milani. 1994. Effect of
indigenous animals on chronic endpoints in freshwater sediment toxicity
tests. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 13:973-977.
2, 3, 7 Reynoldson, T.B., K.E. Day, R.C. Bailey, andN.H. Norris. 1995. Methods for
establishing biologically based sediment guidelines for freshwater quality
management using benthic assessment of sediment. Australian Journal
of Ecology 20:198-219.
1 Rice, K. C. 1999. Trace-element concentrations in streambed sediment across
the conterminous United States. Environmental Science and Technology
33:2499-2504.
1,3, 5 Robbins, J.A., T.J. Kielty, D.S. White, and D.N. Edgington. 1989.
Relationships among tubificid abundances, sediment composition and
accumulation rates in Lake Erie. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Science 46:223-231.
1, 2, 3 Ross, P.E., G.A. Burton, Jr., E.A. Crecelius, J.C. Filkins, J.P. Giesy Jr., C.G.
Ingersoll, P.F. Landrum, M.J. Mac, T.J. Murphy, J.E. Rathbun, V.E.
Smith, H. Tatem, and R.W. Taylor. 1992. Assessment of sediment
contamination at Great Lakes areas of concern: The ARCS program.
Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health 1:193-200.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 110
2 Ross, P., G.A. Burton, Jr., M. Greene, K. Ho, P. Meier, L. Sweet, A. Auwarter,
A. Bispo, K. Doe, K. Erstfeld, S. Goudey, M. Goyvaerts, D. Henderson,
M. Jourdain, M. Lenon, P. Pandard, A. Qureshi, C. Rowland, C.
Schipper, W. Schreurs, S. Trottier, and G. Van Aggelen. 1999.
Interlaboratory precision study of a whole sediment toxicity test with the
bioluminescent bacterium Vibriofischeri. In: Bioluminescence. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey, pp. 339-345.
3, 5 Roy, I. and L. Hare. 1998. Eastward range extension in Canada of the alderfly
Sialis Velata (Megaloptera:Sialidae), and the potential of genus as a
contaminant monitor. Entomological News 109(4):285-287.
5,6 Roy, I. and L. Hare. 1999. Relative importance of water and food as cadmium
sources to the predatory insect Sialis velata (Megaloptera). Canadian
Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 56:1143-1149.
5 Rubinstein, N.I., J.L. Lake, R.J. Pruell, H. Lee II, B. Taplin, J. Heltshe, R.
Bowen, and S. Pavignano. 1987. Predicting bioaccumulation of
sediment-associated organic contaminants: Development of a regulatory
tool for dredged material evaluation. EPA-600/X-87/368. United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Narragansett, Rhode Island. 54 p. +
appendices
3 Saether, O.A. 1970. A survey of the bottom fauna in lakes of the Okanagan
Valley, British Columbia. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Technical
Report 3 42:1-27.
9 Schaeffer, D.J. and K.G. Janardan. 1978. Theoretical comparison of grab and
composite sampling programs. Biometrics Journal 20:215-227.
2 Schlekat, C.E., B.L. McGee, and E. Reinharz. 1991. Testing sediment toxicity
in Chesapeake Bay using the amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus: An
evaluation. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11:225-236.
2, 3,10 Schlekat, C.E., B.L. McGee, D.M. Boward, E. Reinharz, D.J. Velinsky, and T.L.
Wade. 1994. Tidal river sediments in the Washington, D.C. area. III.
Biological effects associated with sediment contamination. Estuaries
17:334-344.
2,10 Schubauer-Berigan, M.K. and G.T. Ankley. 1991. The contribution of
ammonia, metals, and nonpolar organic compounds to the toxicity of
sediment interstitial water from an Illinois River tributary.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 10:925-939.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 111
2 Schubauer-Berigan, M.K., J.R. Dierkes, P.O. Monson, and G.T. Ankley. 1993.
The pH-dependent toxicity of Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn to Ceriodaphnia
dubia, Pimephales promelas, Hyalella azteca, and Lumbriculus
variegatus. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 12:1261-1266.
2 Schubauer-Berigan, M.K., P.O. Monson, C.W. West, and G.T. Ankley. 1995.
Influence of pH on the toxicity of ammonia to Chironomus tentans and
Lumbriculus variegatus. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
14(4):713-717.
7 Science Advisory Group. 1997. Use of sediment quality guidelines in the
assessment and management of contaminated sediments. 1997 Short
Course. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. San
Francisco, California.
2 Scott, KJ. and M.S. Redmond. 1989. The effects of a contaminated dredged
material on laboratory populations of the tubicolous amphipod,
Ampelisca abdita. In: Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment:
Twelfth Symposium. U.M. Cowgill and L.R. Williams (Eds.). ASTM
STP 1027. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, pp. 289-303.
7 Sediment Criteria Subcommittee. 1989. Review of the apparent effects
threshold approach to setting sediment criteria. Report of the Science
Advisory Board. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Washington, District of Columbia. 18 pp.
1,2,3,7 Sediment Criteria Subcommittee. 1990. Evaluation of the sediment
classification methods compendium. Report of the Science Advisory
Board. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Washington,
District of Columbia. 18 pp.
16 Sediment Priority Action Committee. 1999. Deciding when to intervene: Data
interpretation tools for making management decisions beyond source
control. Based on a Workshop to Evaluate Data Interpretation Tools used
to Make Sediment Management Decisions. University of Windsor.
Windsor, Ontario.
2, 10 Sferra, J.C., P.C. Fuchsman, RJ. Wenning, and T.R. Barber. 1999. A site-
specific evaluation of mercury toxicity in sediment. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 37:488-495.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 112
2, 7 Sibley, P.K., G.T. Ankley, A.M. Cotter, and E.N. Leonard. 1996. Predicting
chronic toxicity of sediments spiked with zinc: An evaluation of the acid
volatile sulfide (AVS) model using a life-cycle test with the midge
Chironomustentans. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2102-
2112.
2 Sibley, P.K., P.D. Monson, and G.T. Ankley. 1997. The effect of gut contents
on dry weight estimates of Chironomus tentans larvae: Implications for
interpreting toxicity in freshwater sediment toxicity tests. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 16(8): 1721-1726.
2 Sibley, P.K., D.A. Benoit, and G.T. Ankley. 1997. The significance of growth
in Chironomus tentans sediment toxicity tests: Relationship to
reproduction and demographic endpoints. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 16(2):336-345.
2 Smith, M.E., J.M. Lazorchak, L.E. Herrin, S. Brewer-Swartz, and W.T. Thoeny.
1997. A reformulated, reconstituted water for testing the freshwater
amphipod, Hyalella azteca. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
16(6): 1229-1233.
7 Smith, S.L., D.D. MacDonald, K. A. Keenleyside, C.G. Ingersoll, and L.J. Field.
1996a. A preliminary evaluation of sediment quality assessment values
for freshwater ecosystems. Journal of Great Lakes Research 22(3):624-
638.
7 Smith, S.L., D.D. MacDonald, K.A. Keenleyside, and C.L. Gaudet. 1996b. The
development and implementation of Canadian sediment quality
guidelines. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health.
1 Sonzogni, W.C. and M.S. Simmons. 1981. Notes on Great Lakes trace metal
and toxic organic contaminants. GLERL Open File Report. Great Lakes
Environmental Research Laboratory. Ann Arbor, Michigan.
16 Sonzogni, W.C., A. Robertson, and A.M. Beeton. 1981. The importance of
ecological factors in Great Lakes management. Report 52. Great Lakes
Basin Commission. Great Lakes Environmental Planning Study. Ann
Arbor, Michigan. 28 pp.
16 Southerland, E., M. Kravitz, and T.Wall. 1992. Management framework for
contaminated sediments (the U.S. EPA sediment management strategy).
In: Sediment Toxicity Assessment. G.A. Burton, Jr. (Ed.). Lewis
Publishers. Chelsea, Michigan, pp. 341-370.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 113
2 Steevens, J.A. and W.H. Benson. 1998. Hyalella azteca 10-day sediment
toxicity test: Comparison of growth measurement endpoints.
Environmental Toxicology 13:243-248.
2 Suedel, B.C. and J.H. Rodgers, Jr. 1994. Development of formulated reference
sediments for freshwater and estuarine sediment toxicity testing.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:1163-1176.
2,6 Suedel, B.C., J. Rodgers Jr., and P.A. Clifford. 1993. Bioavailability of
fluoranthene in freshwater sediment toxicity tests. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 12:155-165.
2 Swartz, R.C. 1984. Toxicological methods for determining the effects of
contaminated sediment on marine organisms. In: Fate and Effects of
Sediment-Bound Chemicals in Aquatic Systems. K.L. Dickson, A.W.
Maki, W.A. Brungs (Eds.). Pergamon Press. New York, New York. pp.
183-198.
2 Swartz, R.C. 1989. Marine sediment toxicity tests. In: Contaminated Marine
Sediments-Assessment and Remediation. National Research Council.
Washington, District of Columbia: National Academy Press, pp. 115-
129.
7 Swartz, R.C. 1999. Consensus sediment quality guidelines for PAH mixtures.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:780-787.
2, 3 Swartz, R.C., W.A. DeBen, K.A. Sercu, and J.O. Lamberson. 1982. Sediment
toxicity and the distribution of amphipods in Commencement Bay,
Washington, USA. Marine Pollution Bulletin 13:359-364.
2 Swartz, R.C., D.W. Schults, G.R. Ditsworth, and W.A. DeBen. 1984. Toxicity
of sewage sludge ioRhepoxynius abronius, a marine amphipod. Archives
of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 13:359-364.
2 Swartz,R.C., W.A. DeBen, J.K.P. Jones, J.O. Lamberson, andF.A. Cole. 1985.
Phoxocephalid amphipod bioassay for marine sediment toxicity. In:
Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment: Seventh Symposium. R.D.
Cardwell, R. Purdy, and R.C. Banner (Eds.). ASTMSTP854. American
Society for Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
pp. 284-307.
2, 11 Swartz, R.C., P.P. Kemp, D.W. Schultz, and J.O. Lamberson. 1988. Effects of
mixtures of sediment contaminants on the marine infaunal amphipod,
Rhepoxynius abronius. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
7:1013-1020.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 114
1, 2, 3, 10 Swartz, R.C., F.A. Cole, J.O. Lamberson, S.P. Ferraro, D.W. Schults, W.A.
DeBen, H.Lee II, and J.R. Ozretich. 1994. Sediment toxicity,
contamination, and amphipod abundance at a DDT and dieldrin-
contaminated site in San Francisco Bay. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 13:949-962.
7 Swartz, R.C., D.W. Schults, R.J. Ozretich, J.O. Lamberson, F.A. Cole, T.H.
DeWitt, M.S. Redmond, and S.P. Ferraro. 1995. 'PAH: A model to
predict the toxicity of polyaromatic nuclear hydrocarbon mixtures in
field-collected sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
14(11):1977-1987.
3 Tennessen, KJ. and P.K. Gottfried. 1983. Variation in structure of ligula of
Tanypodinae larvae (Diptera: Chironomidae). Entomological News
94:109-116.
3 Thorp, J.H. and P. Alan. 1991. Ecology and classification of North American
freshwater invertebrates. Academic Press Inc. United Kingdom. 911pp.
2 Thursby, G.B., J. Heltshe, and KJ. Scott. 1997. Revised approach to toxicity
test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(6): 1322-1329.
2 Tomasovic, M., FJ. Dwyer, I.E. Greer, and C.G. Ingersoll. 1995. Recovery of
known-age Hyalella azteca (amphipoda) from sediment toxicity tests.
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 14:1177-1180.
5 Tracey, G.A. and DJ. Hansen 1996. Use of biota-sediment accumulation
factors to assess similarity of non-ionic organic chemical exposure to
benthically-coupled organisms of differing trophic mode. Archives of
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 30:467-475.
2,3 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1973. Biological
field and laboratory methods for measuring the quality of surface waters
and effluents. EPA-670/4-73/001. Cincinnati, Ohio.
1,18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1979a. Handbook
for analytical quality assurance in water and wastewater laboratories.
EPA-600/4-79-019. Cincinnati, Ohio.
1 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1979b. Methodsfor
chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA-600/4-79-020. Cincinnati,
Ohio.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 115
1, 2, 18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1980a. Physical,
chemical, persistence, and ecological effects testing: Good laboratory
practice standards (proposed rule). 40 CFR 772. Federal Register
45:77353-77365.
2,18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1980b. Proposed
good laboratory practice guidelines for toxicity testing. Paragraph
163.60-6. Federal Register 45:26377-26382.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. Methods for
measuring the acute toxicity of effluents to freshwater and marine
organism. 3rd Edition. EPA-600/4-85/013. Cincinnati, Ohio.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1986a.
Occupational Health and safety manual. Office of Administration.
Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1986b. Quality
criteria for water. EPA-440/5-86-001. Washington, District of
Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1988. Interim
sediment criteria values for nonpolar hydrophobic organic contaminants.
Criteria and Standards Division. Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1989a. Briefing
report to the EPA Science Advisory Board on the equilibrium partitioning
approach to generating sediment quality criteria. EPA/440/5-89-002.
Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1989b. Evaluation
of the apparent effects threshold (AET) approach for assessing sediment
quality. Report of the sediment criteria subcommittee. SAB-EETFC-89-
027. Washington, District of Columbia.
5 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1989c. Guidance
manual: Bedded sediment bioaccumulation tests. EPA-600/X-89/302.
Pacific Ecosystems Branch. Environmental Research Laboratory.
Newport, Oregon.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1989d. Short-term
methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving
waters to freshwater organisms. EPA-600/4-89/001. Cincinnati, Ohio.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 116
1,18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1990a. Analytical
procedures and quality assurance plan for determination of PCDD/PCDF
in fish. EPA-600/3-90/022. Duluth, Minnesota.
1,18 USEP A (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1990b. Analytical
procedures and quality assurance plan for determination of xenobiotic
chemical contaminants in fish. EPA-600/3-90/023. Duluth, Minnesota.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1990c. Evaluation
of the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) approach for assessing sediment
quality. Report of the sediment criteria subcommittee of the ecological
processes and effects committee. EPA-SAB-EPEC-990-006.
Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1990d. Evaluation
of the sediment classification methods compendium. Report of the
sediment criteria subcommittee of the ecological processes and effects
committee. EPA-SAB-EPEC-90-018. Washington, District of
Columbia.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1991 a. Methods for
measuring the acute toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to
freshwater and marine organisms. Fourth Edition. EPA-600/4-90/027F.
Cincinnati, Ohio.
8 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1991b. Sediment
toxicity identification evaluation: Phase I (Characterization), Phase II
(Identification) and Phase HI (Confirmation). Modifications of effluent
procedures. EPA-600/6-91/007. Duluth, Minnesota.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1992a. An SAB
report: Review of sediment criteria development methodology for
nonionic organic contaminants. Report of the sediment criteria
subcommittee of the ecological processes and effects committee. EPA-
SAB-EPEC-93-002. Washington, District of Columbia.
2,16 USEP A (United States Environmental Protect! on Agency). 1992b. Proceedings
from workshop on tiered testing issues for freshwater and marine
sediments. September 16-18, 1992. Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1992c. Sediment
classification methods compendium. EPA 823-R-92-006. Office of
Water. Washington, District of Columbia. 222pp.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 117
1 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1993a. Sediment
quality criteria for the protection of benthic organisms: Endrin. EPA
822-R-93-016. Office of Water. Washington, District of Columbia.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1993b. Standard
operating procedures for culturing Hyalella azteca (ERL-D-SOP-CTI-
015) and Lumbriculus variegatus (ERL-D-SOP-CTI-017).
Environmental Research Laboratory. Duluth, Minnesota.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1993c. Test
methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical methods (SW-
846). Third Edition. Washington, District of Columbia.
18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1994a. EPA
requirements for quality assurance project plans for environmental data
operations. Draft interim final. EPAQA/R-5. Office of Research and
Development. Washington, District of Columbia.
16 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1994b. EPA's
contaminated sediment management strategy. EPA 823-R-94-001.
Washington, District of Columbia.
2, 5 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1994c. Methods for
measuring the toxicity and bioaccumulation of sediment-associated
contaminants with freshwater invertebrates. First Edition. EPA/600/R-
94/024. Duluth, Minnesota.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protect on Agency). 1994d. Methods for
measuring the toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants with
estuarine and marine amphipods. EPA-600/R-94/025. Narragansett,
Rhode Island.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1994e. Short-term
methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving
waters to marine and estuarine organisms. Second Edition. EPA-600/4-
91/003. Cincinnati, Ohio.
1, 9, 18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. QA/QC
guidance for sampling and analysis of sediments, water and tissues for
dredged material evaluations-chemical evaluations. EPA 823-B-95-001.
Office of Water. Washington, District of Columbia.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 118
1 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1996a. Calculation
and evaluation of sediment effect concentrations for the amphipod
Hyalella azteca and the midge Chironomus riparius. EPA 905-R96-008.
Chicago, Illinois.
8 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1996b. Marine
Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE). Phase I Guidance Document.
EPA/600/R-96/054. R.M. Burgess, K.T. Ho, G.E. Morrison, G.
Chapman, D.L. Denton (Eds.). National Health and Environmental
Effects Research Laboratory. Narragansett, Rhode Island.
10 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997'a. The
incidence and severity of sediment contamination in surface waters of the
United States. Volume 1: National sediment quality survey. EPA 823-
R-97-006. Office of Science and Technology. Washington, District of
Columbia.
16 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997b. The
incidence and severity of sediment contamination in surface waters of the
United States. Volume 2: Data summaries for areas of probable concern.
EPA 823-R-97-007. Office of Science and Technology. Washington,
District of Columbia.
10 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997c. The
incidence and severity of sediment contamination in surface waters of the
United States. Volume 3: National sediment contaminant point source
inventory. EPA 823-R-97-008. Office of Science and Technology.
Washington, District of Columbia.
16 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1998a.
Contaminated sediment management strategy. EPA 823-R-98-001.
Office of Water. Washington, District of Columbia.
18 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1998b. EPA
guidance for quality assurance project plans. EPA/600/R-98/018. Office
of Research and Development. Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1999. A short
course on collection, analysis, and interpretation of sediment quality data:
Applications of sediment quality guidelines and companion tools. State
Botanical Garden. Athens, Georgia.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 119
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000a.
Bioaccumulation testing and interpretation for the purpose of sediment
quality assessment: Status and needs. EPA/823-R-00-001. Office of
Water. Office of Solid Waste. Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000b.
Bioaccumulation testing and interpretation for the purpose of sediment
quality assessment: Status and needs. Chemical-specific summary
tables. EPA/823-R-00-002. Office of Water. Office of Solid Waste.
Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000c. Draft
equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of
benthic organisms: Dieldrin. EPA-822-R-00-001. Washington, District
of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000d. Draft
equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of
benthic organisms: Endrin. EPA-822-R-00-004. Office of Science and
Technology and Office of Research and Development. Washington,
District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000e. Draft
equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of
benthic organisms: Metals mixtures: (Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Nickel,
Silver, and Zinc). EPA-822-R-00-005. Washington, District of
Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000f. Draft
equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of
benthic organisms: Nonionics compendium. EPA-822-R-00-006. Office
of Science and Technology and Office of Research and Development.
Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000g. Draft
equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of
benthic organisms: PAH mixtures. Washington, District of Columbia.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000h. Methods for
measuring the toxicity and bioaccumulation of sediment-associated
contaminants with freshwater invertebrates. 2nd Edition. EPA-600/R-
99/064. Washington, District of Columbia.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 120
1 USEP A (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000i. Methods for
the derivation of site-specific equilibrium partitioning sediment
guidelines (ESGs) for the protection of benthic organisms: Nonionic
organics. EPA 822-R-00-002. Washington, District of Columbia.
7 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2000J. Technical
basis for the derivation of equilibrium partitioning sediment guidelines
(ESGs) for the protection of benthic organisms: Nonionic organics. EPA-
822-R-00-001. Washington, District of Columbia.
2, 9 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Methods for
collection, storage and manipulation of sediments for chemical and
toxicological analyses: Technical manual. EPA-823-B-01-002.
Washington, District of Columbia.
2,16 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) and US ACE (United
States Army Corps of Engineers). 1998. Evaluation of dredged material
proposed for discharge in water of the US. Testing Manual. EPA823-B-
98-004. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Washington,
District of Columbia.
2 USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) and USAGE (United
States Army Corps of Engineers). 2001. Method for assessing the
chronic toxicity of marine and estuarine sediment-associated
contaminants with the amphipodLeptocheimsplumulosus: EPA 600/R-
01/020. Office of Research and Development. Newport, Oregon.
7 Van Derveer, W.D. and S.P. Canton. 1997. Selenium sediment toxicity
thresholds and derivation of water quality criteria for freshwater biota of
western streams. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 16(6): 1260-
1268.
2,8 Van Sprang, P. A. and C.R. Janssen. 1997. Identification and confirmation of
ammonia toxicity in contaminated sediments using a modified toxicity
identification evaluation approach. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 16(12):2501-2507.
5 Vassilaro, D.L., P.W. Stoker, G.M. Booth, and M.L. Lee. 1982. Capillary gas
chromatographic determination of polycyclic aromatic compounds in
vertebrate tissue. Journal of Analytical Chemistry 54:106-112.
17 Vigerstad, TJ. and L.S. McCarty. 2000. The ecosystem paradigm and
environmental risk management. Human and Ecological Risk
Assessment 6(3):369-381.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 121
2 Wall, V.D., J. London, I.E. Warren, R. Gossett, M.D. Wenholz, and S. J. Klaine.
1998. Development of a continuous-flow renewal system for sediment
toxicity testing. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 17(6): 1159-
1164.
7 Wang, F., P.M. Chapman, and H.E. Allen. 1999. Misapplication of equilibrium
partitioning coefficients to derive metals sediment quality values. Marine
Pollution Bulletin 38(5):423-425.
5 Warren, L.A., A. Tessier, and L. Hare. 1998. Modelling cadmium
accumulation by benthic invertebrates in situ: The relative contributions
of sediment and overlying water reservoirs to organism cadmium
concentrations. Limnology and Oceanography 43(7): 1442-1454.
3 Warwick, W.F. 1985. Morphological abnormalities in Chironomidae (Diptera)
larvae as measures of toxic stress in freshwater ecosystems: indexing
antennal deformities in Chironomus meigan. Canadian Journal of Fish
and Aquatic Science 42:1881-1941.
3 Warwick, W.F. 1988. Morphological deformities in Chironomidae (Diptera)
larvae as biological indicators of toxic stress. In: Toxic contaminants
and ecosystem health: A Great Lakes focus. M.S. Evans (Ed.). John
Wiley and Sons. New York, New York. pp. 281-320.
7 Washington State Department of Ecology. 1995. Sediment management
standards. Chapter 173-204 WAC. Olympia, Washington.
2 Wentsel, R., A. Mclntosh, and G. Atchison. 1977. Sublethal effects of heavy
metal contaminated sediment on midge larvae (Chironomus tentans).
Hydrobiologia 56:53-156.
1, 3, 10 Wentsel, R., A. Mclntosh, and V. Anderson. 1977. Sediment contamination
and benthic macroinvertebrate distribution in a metal-impacted lake.
Environmental Pollution 14:187-193.
2 Wentsel, R., A. Mclntosh, and P.C. McCafferty. 1978. Emergence of the
midge Chironomus tentans when exposed to heavy metal contaminated
sediments. Hydrobiologia 57:195-196.
2,10 West, C.W., V.R. Mattson, E.N. Leonard, G.L. Phipps, and G.T. Ankley. 1993.
Comparison of the relative sensitivity of three benthic invertebrates to
copper contaminated sediments from the Keweenaw Waterway.
Hydrobiologia 262:57-63.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX 2-BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS - PAGE 122
1, 2, 9 West, C.W., G.L. Phipps, R.A. Hoke, T.A. Goldenstein, P.M. VanderMeiden,
P.A. Kosian, and G.T. Ankley. 1994. Sediment core versus grab
samples: Evaluation of contamination and toxicity at a DDT-
contaminated site. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 28:208-220.
2, 5 West, C.W., G.T. Ankley, J.W. Nichols, GE. Elonen, and D.E. Nessa. 1997.
Toxicity and bioaccumulation of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in
long-term tests with the freshwater benthic invertebrates Chironomus
tentans and Lumbriculus variegatus. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 16(6): 1287-1294.
2 Whiteman, F.W., G.T. Ankley, M.D. Dahl, D.M. Rau, and M.D. Balcer. 1996.
Evaluation of interstitial water as a route of exposure to ammonia in
sediment tests with benthic macroinvertebrates. Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry 15(5):794-801.
2 Winger, P.V. andPJ. Lasier. 1994. Sediment toxicity testing: Comparison of
methods and evaluation of influencing factors. In: Environmental
toxicology and risk assessment: Second volume. ASTM STP 1216. J.W.
Gorsuch, FJ. Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll, T.W. La Point (Eds.). American
Society for Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
pp. 640-662.
2, 10 Wolfe, D.A., E.R. Long, and GB. Thursby. 1996. Sediment toxicity in the
Hudson-Raritan Estuary: Distribution and correlations with chemical
contamination. Estuaries 19:901-912.
2 Yu, Q., Y. Chaisuksant, and D.Connell. 1999. A model for non-specific
toxicity with aquatic organisms over relatively long periods of exposure
time. Chemosphere 38:909-918.
13 Ziegler, C.K. 1999. Sediment stability at contaminated sediment sites.
Quantitative Environmental Analysis, LLC. Montvale, New Jersey 32
pp.
2 Zumwalt, D.C., F.J. Dwyer, I.E. Greer, and C.G. Ingersoll. 1994. A water-
renewal system that accurately delivers small volumes of water to
exposure chambers. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:1311-
1314.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX3 - DESIGNATED WATER USES OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 123
Appendix 3. Designated Water Uses of Aquatic
Ecosystems
A3.0 Introduction
Freshwater ecosystems are comprised of biotic (producers, consumers, and decomposers) and
abiotic (physical and chemical) components, which are linked together by a complicated
array of interactions. The nature of these interactions determines how the ecosystem
functions, while the type of aquatic organisms that are present dictates the ecosystem's
structure. Human activities, such as those that result in releases of toxic and/or
bioaccumulative substances, have the potential to adversely affect the biotic components of
the ecosystem. In particular, anthropogenic activities that result in elevated levels of
sediment-associated contaminants have the potential to adversely affect sediment-dwelling
organisms, aquatic-dependent wildlife, or human health. In so doing, such activities can alter
the structure and/or the functioning of the ecosystem.
Effective management of sediment quality conditions requires an understanding of the
linkages between sediment quality conditions and the designated uses of the aquatic
ecosystem. In general there are five designated uses of aquatic ecosystems that have the
potential to be adversely affected by sediment contamination, including:
• Aquatic life;
• Aquatic-dependent wildlife;
• Human health;
• Recreation and aesthetics; and,
• Navigation and shipping.
For sites that have been adversely affected by contaminated sediments, restoration of
designated water uses that have been impaired by historical contamination and protect those
uses that have not been impaired should be identified as high priority goals. For this reason,
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX3 - DESIGNATED WATER USES OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 124
each of the designated uses of aquatic ecosystems that can be impaired by contaminate
sediments are described in the following sections.
A3.1 Aquatic Life
Aquatic life represents an important water use as freshwater ecosystems support a wide
variety offish and aquatic organisms. In addition to their importance in terms of maintaining
a healthy ecosystem, many aquatic organisms also support a variety of human uses, including
traditional, sport, and commercial fisheries. As many aquatic organisms utilize soft-bottom
habitats throughout portions of their life histories, maintenance of acceptable sediment
quality conditions is essential for sustaining healthy populations of sediment-dwelling
organisms (including infaunal and epibenthic invertebrate species) and associated fish
species. Importantly, protection of aquatic life is probably the most sensitive water use
relative to the effects of sediment-associated contaminants. Aquatic organisms can be
adversely affected by contaminated sediments in several ways, including through direct
exposure to contaminated sediments (both invertebrate and fish species), through exposure
to degraded water quality as a result of desorption from sediments, and through accumulation
of toxic substances in the food web.
A3.2 Aquatic-Dependent Wildlife
While the protection of aquatic organisms is a primary consideration in assessments of
aquatic environmental quality, aquatic ecosystems also support a diversity of wildlife species.
Aquatic-dependent wildlife species include a wide variety of shorebirds (e.g., avocets,
dippers, sandpipers), waterfowl (e.g., scoters, ducks, geese), wading birds, (e.g., cranes,
herons), raptors (e.g., eagles, ospreys), mammals (e.g., muskrats, river otters, seals),
amphibians (frogs, salamanders), reptiles (e.g., turtles), and fish. Such wildlife species
represent integral elements of aquatic food webs and, as such, can be exposed to sediment-
associated contaminants through direct exposure to aquatic sediments or through dietary
exposure to bioaccumulative contaminants (i.e., through the consumption of contaminated
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX3 - DESIGNATED WATER USES OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 125
fish and other aquatic organisms). Therefore, protection of wildlife is of greatest concern for
those contaminants known to bioaccumulate in aquatic food webs, including mercury, PCBs,
certain PAHs, OC pesticides, and PCDDs/PCDFs.
A3.3 Human Health
Protection of human health has typically been a major focus of the water quality criteria and
standards. With respect to sediment quality conditions, human health can be adversely
affected by direct exposure to contaminated sediments (e.g., swimming or wading) and
through the consumption of contaminated fish and waterfowl tissues. Long-term exposure
to sediment-associated contaminants can result in both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic
effects in humans (Crane 1996). Numerical sediment quality guidelines (residue-based) and
numerical tissue residue guidelines can be used to assess the potential dietary effects of
contaminated sediments and tissues on human health.
A3.4 Recreation and Aesthetics
Recreation and aesthetics are emerging water uses, which are likely to become even more
important in the future. Recreational water uses include both contact recreation, such as
swimming and wading, and non-contact recreation, such as boating and fishing. Recreational
activities that involve direct contact with water and sediments can be impaired when
sediment-associated contaminant concentrations reach levels that cause skin irritation,
respiratory problems, or necessitate beach closures. In contrast, non-contact recreation can
be impaired when fish populations are degraded, when fish advisories are issued, when fish
have an increased incidence of tumors and other deformities, or when environmental
conditions adversely affect the boating experience (i.e., through noxious odors or visual
impairments - oil sheens). In addition to the influence of environmental conditions, aesthetic
water uses can be impaired through the loss of fish and wildlife habitats or through
degradation of wildlife populations (i.e., reduction in opportunities for wildlife viewing).
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
-------
APPENDIX3 - DESIGNATED WATER USES OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS - PAGE 126
Protection of human health is the primary consideration for those areas designated for
recreational and aesthetic water uses. Therefore, this water use tends to be less sensitive to
the effects of sediment-associated contaminants than the other water uses. Nevertheless,
aquatic organisms and wildlife species should be afforded at least the level of protection
required under federal and state legislation at sites designated for recreational and aesthetic
water uses.
A3.5 Navigation and Shipping
Navigation and shipping are important water uses throughout North America. To maintain
the water depths necessary to support this water use, periodic dredging is required in many
harbors. This water use can be adversely affected when the concentrations of sediment-
associated contaminants exceed the levels specified for open water disposal of dredged
materials (i.e., in those states that permit open water disposal) or for beneficial use of
dredged materials (e.g., beach nourishment). In such cases, the dredged materials must be
transported to confined disposal facilities (CDFs) for disposal. The need for confined
disposal of dredged material can increase the costs associated with dredging projects, delay
the implementation of dredging projects, or preclude dredging altogether (i.e., if sufficient
space is not available in the CDFs). In any of these cases, the use of the affected water body
for navigation and shipping is likely to be impaired. Numerical sediment quality guidelines,
toxicity testing, and bioaccumulation assessments represent important tools for assessing the
effects of contaminated sediments relative to navigation and shipping.
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO SUPPORT THE ASSESSMENT OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS-VOLUME I
------- |