EPA903-R-97-C11
CBP/TRS 172/97
April 1997
A Pilot Study for Ambient
Toxicity Testing in
Chesapeake Bay
Year 4 Report
EPA Report Collection
Regional Center for Environmental Information
U.S. EPA Region III
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Chesapeake Bay Program
PniutJ on rtncled paprr
-------
^°r%
1650 Arch St
-------
A Pilot Study for
Ambient Toxicity Testing
in Chesapeake Bay
Year 4 Report
University of Maryland System
Agricultural Experiment Station
Wye Research and Education Center
Old Dominion University
College of Sciences
Applied Marine Research Laboratory
Maryland Department of the Environment
Chesapeake Bay Program
410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109
Annapolis, Maryland 21403
1-800-YOUR-BAY
http://www.epa.gov/chesapeake
U.S. EPA Region III
Regional Center for Environmental
Information
1650 Arch Street (3PM52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Printed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
FOREWORD
This study was designed to evaluate ambient toxicity in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed by using a battery of water column and
sediment toxicity tests. A team of scientists from two
Chesapeake Bay research laboratories and Maryland Department of
the Environment worked jointly to complete this goal. Water
column toxicity studies and overall project management was
directed by the University of Maryland's Agricultural Experiment
Station. Sediment toxicity tests and selected sediment chemistry
was managed by Old Dominion University Applied Marine Research
Laboratory. Maryland Department of the Environment was
responsible for selected sediment chemistry. This report
summarizes data from the fourth year of a four-year ambient
toxicity testing program. The following government agencies were
responsible for supporting and/or managing this research: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and Maryland Department of the
Environment.
-------
ABSTRACT
Data presented in this report were collected during the fourth
year of a research program designed to assess ambient toxicity of
living resource habitats in Chesapeake Bay for the purpose of
identifying defined regions where ambient toxicity levels warrant
further investigation. The goals of this study were to identify
toxic ambient areas in the Chesapeake Bay watershed by using a
battery of standardized, directly modified, or recently developed
water column and sediment toxicity tests. The toxicity of ambient
estuarine water and sediment was evaluated during the fall of 1994
at six stations in Baltimore Harbor (Patapsco River) and two
stations each in the Sassafras, Magothy and Severn Rivers. The
toxicity of ambient estuarine water was assessed at all stations by
using the following estuarine tests: 8 day larval sheepshead
minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus, survival and growth test; 8 day
larval grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio, survival and growth test;
8 day Eurytemora affinis life cycle test and two different 48 hour
coot clam, Mulinia lateralis embryo/larval tests. Toxicity of
ambient estuarine sediment was determined by using the following
tests: 10 day sheepshead minnow embryo-larval test; 20 day
survival, growth and reburial test with the amphipods Leptacheirus
plumulosus and Lepidactylus dytiscus and 20 day polychaete worm,
Streblospio benedicti survival and growth test. Both inorganic and
organic contaminants were assessed in ambient sediment and
inorganic contaminants were measured in ambient water concurrently
with toxicity testing to assess "possible" causes of toxicity.
Both univariate and multivariate (using all endpoints)
statistical techniques were used to analyze the water column and
sediment toxicity data. Results from univariate water column tests
with sheepshead minnows, grass shrimp and Eurytemora showed that
survival was not significantly reduced at any of the stations when
compared with the controls. Growth of sheepshead minnows was
significantly reduced at the Sassafras-Betterton site but there
were no effects on growth at any of the other 11 stations. Growth
of grass shrimp and reproductive endpoints for Eurytemora were not
significantly reduced at any of the stations. Percent normal shell
development of the coot clam was significantly reduced at the
following stations during the first test: Sassafras River-
Betterton, Sassafras River-Turner Creek, Baltimore Harbor-Bear
Creek, Baltimore Harbor-Curtis Bay, Baltimore Harbor- Middle
Branch, Baltimore Harbor-Northwest Branch, Baltimore Harbor-Outer
Harbor, Magothy River-Gibson Island, Severn River-50\301 Bridge and
ii
-------
Severn River-Annapolis Sailing School. During test 2, percent
normal shell development was significantly reduced at only the
Magothy River-South Ferry station. Results from multivariate
analysis using endpoints (survival, growth and reproduction) for
all water column tests combined showed significant differences
between the control and test conditions at all sites except the
Magothy River-South Ferry and the Baltimore Harbor-Curtis Bay site.
In most cases, however, the toxicity at these ten sites was judged
to be low to moderate from an ecological perspective. Metals
measured at all stations were generally low; only a copper value
of 3.85 ug/L at Baltimore Harbor-Bear Creek exceeded the U. S. EPA
marine water quality criteria. The Maryland estuarine criteria of
6.1 ug/L was not exceeded.
Results from univariate analysis of sediment toxicity data
showed that sites within Baltimore Harbor (Patapsco River) produced
the greatest toxicological effects of the 1994 sites. All of the
Baltimore Harbor sediments exceeded the Effects Range-Median (ER-
Ms) for dibenzo (a,h) anthracene as well as the metals, lead, zinc
and chromium. Nearly 100 percent mortality occurred in some test
organisms at the Northwest Harbor and Bear Creek sites. The
Sassafras River sites showed moderate toxicity, with the Betterton
site sediments resulting in significant effects in both the L.
dytiscus and S. benedicti tests. The ER-Ms were exceeded at the
Betterton site for nickel and lead. In the Magothy River, moderate
toxic effects were observed at both sites, however Gibson Island
resulted in slightly greater mortality. Gibson Island sediment
also exceeded the ER-M for lead by nearly 25 times. South Ferry
also exceeded the Effects Range Low (ER-Ls) for several metals.
The Severn River sites showed toxicity at the Annapolis site in
two species, while only S. benedicti produced significant toxicity
at the Route 50 site. The Annapolis sediment exceeded the ER-M for
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene. The multivariate analysis of the 1994
sediment data indicated that the Sassafras River displayed no
significant overall toxic effect. The Magothy sites exhibited
slight to moderate toxicity, particularly at the South River site.
The Annapolis site on the Severn River also displayed significant
but moderately low toxicity. The Baltimore Harbor sites showed
various degrees of toxicity from slight (Outer Harbor) to quite
high (Bear Creek, Northwest Harbor), with moderate toxicity at
Sparrows Point, Middle Branch and Curtis Bay.
111
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Foreword
Abstract
Table of Contents ....................... iv
1. Introduction ...................... 1-1
2. Objectives ....................... 2-1
3. Methods ........................ 3-1
3.1 Study Areas .................... 3-1
3.2 Water Column Toxicity Tests ............ 3-4
3.2.1 Test Species .............. 3-4
3.2.2 Test Procedures ............. 3-5
3.2.3 Statistical Analysis .......... 3-5
3.2.4 Sample Collection, Handling and
Storage ................ 3-5
3.2.5 Quality Assurance ............ 3-6
3.2.6 Contaminant Analysis and Water
Quality Evaluations .......... 3-6
3.3 Sediment Toxicity Tests .............. 3-7
3.3.1 Test Species .............. 3-7
3.3.2 Test Procedures ............. 3-7
3.3.3 Statistical Analysis of Sediment
Data .................. 3-9
3.3.4 Sample Collection, Handling and
Storage ............... 3-12
3.3.5 Quality Assurance ........... 3-12
3.3.6 Contaminant and Sediment Quality
Evaluations ............. 3-13
3.4 Analysis of 4 Year Data Base .......... 3-16
4. Results ........................ 4-1
4.1 Water Column Toxicity Tests ............ 4-1
iv
-------
Table of Contents - continued Page
4.1.1 Toxicity Data - 4-1
4.1.2 Contaminants Data 4-1
4.1.3 Water Quality Data 4-9
4.1.4 Reference Toxicant Data 4-9
4.2 Sediment Tests 4-9
4.2.1 Toxicity Data 4-9
4.2.2 Contaminants Data 4-19
4.2.3 Pore Water Data 4-26
4.2.4 Reference Toxicant Data 4-28
5. Discussion 5-1
5.1 Patapsco River 5-1
5.2 Sassafras River 5-2
5.3 Magothy River 5-3
5.4 Severn River 5-4
6. Analysis of Four Year Data Base 6-1
6.1 Water Column Toxicity 6-1
6.2 Sedidment Toxicity 6-10
7. Recommendations 7-1
8. References 8-1
Appendices
Appendix A
Water quality conditions reported in test
chambers during all water column tests.
Test species were Cyprinodon variegatus
(Cv),Eurytemora affinis (Ea), Palaemonetes
pugio (Pp) and Mulinia lateralis (ML) .
Appendix B
Pesticides and semi-volatile compounds
data from sediment toxicity tests.
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The unique physical, chemical and biological characteristics
of the Chesapeake Bay watershed provides habitat for numerous
aquatic species. Decline of various living resources such as
submerged aquatic vegetation, anadromous fish and the American
oyster has been an area of concern in recent years (Majumdar et
al., 1987). Possible causes of these declining resources are
fishing pressure, nutrient enrichment, disease and pollution. The
link between contaminants (including adverse water quality such as
reduced dissolved oxygen) and biological effects has been of
concern in critical Chesapeake Bay habitat areas. Information
derived from the loading of toxic chemicals and/or chemical
monitoring studies are not adequate for assessing the biological
effects resulting from numerous sources such as multiple point
source effluents, nonpoint source runoff from agriculture,
silviculture and urban sites, atmospheric deposition, groundwater
contamination, and release of toxic chemicals from sediments. The
most realistic approach for evaluating the adverse effects of toxic
conditions on living resources is by direct measurement of
biological responses in the ambient environment. For the purposes
of this report, the ambient environment is defined as aquatic areas
located outside of mixing zones of point source discharges.
Research efforts designed to address the link between
contaminants and adverse effects on living aquatic resources have
been supported by various state and federal agencies in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. For example, the Chesapeake Bay
Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy has a commitment to develop and
implement a plan for Baywide assessment and monitoring of the
effects of toxic substances, within natural habitats, on selected
commercially, recreationally and ecologically important species of
living resources (CEC, 1989). This commitment is consistent with
the recommendations of the Chesapeake Bay Living Resource
Monitoring Plan (CEC, 1988).
The idea for an Ambient Toxicity Testing Program was discussed
at an Ambient Toxicity Assessment Workshop held in Annapolis,
Maryland in July of 1989 (Chesapeake Bay Program, 1990). The goals
of this workshop were to provide a forum on how to use biological
indicators to monitor the effects of toxic contaminants on living
resources in Chesapeake Bay. Recommendations from this workshop
were used to develop an ongoing ambient toxicity monitoring program
1-1
-------
(1990-1994). Objectives from the first three years of this effort
have been completed and reports have been published (Hall et al.,
1991; Hall et al., 1992; Hall et al., 1994).
Results from our first year of this study demonstrated that
ambient toxic conditions were present in the Elizabeth River and
Patapsco River based on water column, sediment and suborganismal
tests (Hall et al., 1991). Data from sediment and suborganismal
tests also suggested that toxic conditions were present at the
proposed reference site in the Wye River; water column tests did
not demonstrate the presence of toxic conditions at this reference
site. Several ambient stations in the Potomac River also had toxic
conditions based on water column and sediment tests. The need for
multispecies testing was supported by the water column tests as no
significant ranking of sensitivity among species was reported.
Results from the sediment tests showed that the amphipod test was
most sensitive, followed by the polychaete worm test and the grass
shrimp test. The need for integrated water column, sediment and
suborganismal testing was confirmed during our first year of
testing as a spectrum of tests was needed to maximize our ability
to identify toxic conditions in the ambient environment of the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. Suborganismal testing was not continued
after the frist two years.
Ambient toxicity tests were conducted twice in the following
locations during the second year of this study: Potomac River-
Morgantown, Potomac River-Dahlgren, Patapsco River and Wye River
(Hall et al., 1992). Significant biological effects (statistically
different from controls) were demonstrated from water column tests
during at least one sampling period for all stations except the
Patapsco River. The most persistent biological effects in the
water column were reported from the Wye River station as
significant mortality from two different test species was reported
from both the first and second test. Sediment tests demonstrated
significant biological effects for both tests at the Dahlgren,
Morgantown, and Patapsco River stations. Significant biological
effects were reported in sediment during the first Wye River test
but not the second.
Ambient toxicity tests for year three were conducted at the
following locations during the fall of 1992 and the spring of 1993:
Wye River - Manor House, Wye River - Quarter Creek, Nanticoke River
- Sandy Hill Beach, Nanticoke River - Bivalve Harbor, Middle River
- Frog Mortar and Middle River - Wilson Point. Results from water
column testing with the coot clam showed consistent toxicity at
both Middle River stations during the fall and spring tests.
1-2
-------
Concentrations of copper, lead, nickel and zinc were reported to
exceed the EPA recommended chronic marine water quality criteria at
one of the stations (Wilson Point). The concentration of copper at
Frog Mortar Creek was below Maryland's acute estuarine criteria but
exceeded EPA's recommended marine acute criteria. In addition, the
concentration of nickel at Frog Mortar Creek exceeded EPA's
recommended marine chronic criteria. The only other water column
test showing significant effects was the E. affinis test (reduced
survival) conducted at the Wye River (Quarter Creek) site during
the spring test. Potentially toxic concentrations of contaminants
were not reported concurrently with toxicity. Significant
biological effects likely related to either adverse water quality
or elevated contaminants were not reported at any of the other
sites with the water column tests.
Results from sediment toxicity testing during year three
showed a significant reduction in growth for L. plumulosus at the
Nanticoke - Sandy Hill Beach site during the fall of 1992. Three
times the Effects Range-Low (ER-L) for mercury was found at this
site. Although below sediment ER-Ls, several organics and
pesticides were also confirmed at this site. Elevated levels of
unionized ammonia were present at both Bivalve and Sandy Hill Beach
sites. Wye River Manor House produced significantly reduced
survival of L. dytiscus and Wye River Quarter Creek sediment
significantly reduced growth of L. plumulosus during the fall.
Concentrations of metals were low at both sites, however 4,4 -DDT
was detected at Manor House during the fall sampling. Spring
toxicity data revealed significant reduction in survival in L.
dytiscus at day 10 at the Manor House site when mortality was
adjusted for particle size effects. Organic data indicated the
presence of 4-methylphenol. Neither survival or growth effects
were observed at the Middle River sites for either sampling period.
Frog Mortar and Wilson Point showed elevated levels (above ER-Ls)
of some metals including lead, zinc, mercury, and copper during the
spring sampling. AVS/SEM (acid volitile sulfides/simultaneous
extractable metals)data indicated the lack of bioavailability of
these metals. The contaminant 4,4-DDE was also detected at the
Frog Mortar site during the fall sampling. The purpose of this
report is to present data from the fourth year of testing and
summarize all information collected over the four year period using
a composite index approach (multivariate analysis) based upon that
of the sediment quality triad (Alden, 1992) . Many of the test
procedures described in the first year report were used for the
fourth year of testing; therefore, the first year report by Hall et
1-3
-------
al. (1991) should be used to provide details on specific
procedures. One new water column test (coot clam, Mulinia
lateralis) and two new sediment tests (Cyprinodon variegatus,
sheepshead minnow embryo-larval and amphipod, Leptocheirus
plumulosus) were used in the third year. Descriptions of the
testing procedures are provided in detail in Hall et al. (1994).
The goals of this study were to conduct four water column and four
sediment toxicity tests on a broader spatial scale than the
previous efforts. Water column and sediment toxicity tests were
conducted at six stations in the Patapsco River and two stations
each in the Sassafras, Magothy and Severn Rivers. Inorganic
contaminants were evaluated in water and both organic and inorganic
contaminants were evaluated in sediment during these experiments.
1-4
-------
SECTION 2
OBJECTIVES
This ambient toxicity study was a continuation of a research
effort previously conducted for three years in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed. The major goal of this program was to assess and
determine the toxicity of ambient water and sediment in selected
areas of the Chesapeake Bay watershed by using a battery of
standardized, directly modified, or recently developed water column
and sediment toxicity tests.
The specific objectives of the fourth year of this study were
to:
assess the toxicity of ambient estuarine water and
sediment during the fall of 1994 at six stations in the
Patapsco River and two stations each in the Sassafras,
Magothy and Severn Rivers of the Chesapeake Bay;
determine the toxicity of ambient estuarine water
described in the first objective by using the following
estuarine tests: 8 day larval sheepshead minnow,
Cyprinodon variegatus survival and growth test; 8 day
larval grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio survival and
growth test, 8 day Eurytemora affinis life cycle test and
48 hour coot clam, Mulinia lateralis embryo-larval tests;
evaluate the toxicity of ambient sediment described in
the first objective by using the following estuarine
tests: 10 day sheepshead minnow embryo-larval test; 20
day amphipod, Lepidactylus dytiscus and Leptocheirus
plumulosus survival, growth and reburial test and 20 day
polychaete worm, Streblospio benedicti survival and
growth test;
measure inorganic contaminants in ambient water and
organic and inorganic contaminants in sediment
concurrently with toxicity testing to determine
"possible" causes of toxicity;
determine the relative sensitivity of test species for
each type of test and compare between test methods to
identify regions where ambient toxicity exists;
2-1
-------
identify longer term test methods development or follow
up survey design needs (if any) to support baywide
assessment of ambient toxicity; and
summarize water column and sediment toxicity data over
four years using a composite index approach for each
site.
2-2
-------
SECTION 3
METHODS
3.1 Study Areas
Study areas were selected to represent either historically
impacted locations, locations of unknown impact or ecologically
important areas (Figures 3.1 and 3.2). These figures show the
relationship of these 12 sites with other areas in the Chesapeake
Bay. The Sassafras River was selected because it is an
ecologically important environment (e.g. spawning area for striped
bass) with some documented potentially toxic organic conditions in
the sediments (Eskin et al., 1996). Specific sites selected were
Betterton (SASBT) (39° 22 27 N x 76° 03 01 W) and Turner Creek
(SASTC) (39° 21 47 N X 75° 59 03 W).
The Magothy River was selected to represent a highly urbanized
area with very few point sources. Potentially toxic organics have
also been reported in this river by Eskin et al. (1996). However,
due to limited background data the possible influence of
contaminants on this system is unknown. Specific locations were
near Gibson Island (MAGGI) (39° 03 36 N x 76° 26 06 W) and North of
South Ferry Point (MAGSF) (39° 04 36 N x 76° 30 05 W).
The Severn River was selected because it has a few point
sources and potentially toxic orgnic compounds have been reported
in the sediment of this river (Eskin et al. 1996). Limited
background data are available in this river to determine if
contaminant problems exist. Locations selected for ambient testing
in this river were near the 50/301 Bridge (SEV50)(39° 00 20 N x 76°
30 24 W) and near the Eastport sailing school in Annapolis (SEVAP)
(38° 58 01 N X 76° 28 18 W).
The six sites in the Patapsco River (Baltimore Harbor) were
selected due to previous contaminant problems reported during our
first and second year of ambient toxicity testing (Hall et al.
1991; Hall et al., 1992). Five of these sites were used by Maryland
Department of the Environment for their benthic monitoring program.
Therefore, our ambient data can be compared with the benthic
community data to provide an overall assessment of the ecological
status of these sites. Specific sites used for ambient toxicity
testing were as follows: Sparrows Point (BHSPT)(39° 12 29 N x 76°
30 27 W) , Outer Harbor (BHOTH) (39° 12 32 N x 76° 31 29 W) , Bear
Creek (BHBCR)(39° 14 09 N x 76° 29 46 W), Curtis Bay (BHCUB)(39° 12
23 N x 76° 34 49 W), Lower Middle Branch (BHMBR)(39° 15 10 N x 76°
35 18 W) and Northwest Branch (BHNWB)(39° 16 36 N x 76° 34 27 W).
3-1
-------
Figure 3.1
Sampling locations were Sassafras River-Betterton,
Sassafras River-Turner Creek/ Magothy River-South
Ferry, Magothy River-Gibson Island, Severn River-
Annapolis and Severn River-Route 50.
South Ferry
Junction Route 50
Annapolis
Betterton
Turner Creek
Gibson Island
Lynnhtvtn
'RFOLK'J
3-2
-------
Figure 3.2
Sampling locations in the Patapsco River (Baltimore
Harbor) were: Northwest Harbor, Bear Creek, Curtis
Bay, Sparrows Point, Middle Branch and Outer Habor.
Northwest Harbor
Curtis Bay
Middle Branch
^iteimsSyfezsK *
Bear Creek
Sparrows Point
Outer Harbor
3-3
-------
3.2 Water Column Toxicity Tests
The objectives of the water column toxicity tests were to
determine the toxicity of ambient water at the 12 stations
described above. The following tests were conducted at these
stations during the fall of 1994: 8 day larval sheepshead minnow
survival and growth test; 8 day larval grass shrimp survival and
growth test; 8 day E. affinis life cycle test and two 48 hour coot
clam embryo/larval tests. A suite of metals and organics was also
measured in ambient water used for these tests.
3.2.1 Test species
Larval sheepshead minnows, larval grass shrimp and the
copepoda E. affinis have been used in the previous three years of
ambient toxicity testing. These test species were selected because
they meet most of the following criteria: (1) resident Chesapeake
Bay species, (2) sensitive to contaminants in short time period
(less than 10 d) and (3) standard test organism that does not
require additional research. Both larval sheepshead minnows and
larval grass shrimp are highly abundant, resident Chesapeake Bay
organisms used extensively in standard tests. Sheepshead minnows
have demonstrated moderate sensitivity in subchronic tests.
Juvenile and adult grass shrimp are generally considered resistant
species, however, larvae have been used to report biological
effects in previous ambient tests (Hall et al. 1994). Both
sheepshead minnows and grass shrimp are commonly used in EPA's and
MDE's Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Program. E. affinis is an
extremely abundant, resident Chesapeake Bay zooplankton species
that is sensitive to contaminants. We recently developed a
Standard Operating Procedure for this species that was used for
these tests (Ziegenfuss and Hall, 1994).
The coot clam, M. lateralis, was a new species added to the
suite of test organisms during the third year of ambient toxicity
testing. This clam is a small (< 2 cm length) euryhaline bivalve.
It is a numerically dominant species in the mesohaline areas of the
Chesapeake Bay as well as numerous tributaries (Shaughnessy et al.,
1990). Embryo/larval development occurs in the water column in
approximately 6-8 days. It is, therefore, suitable for water
column testing because the sensitive life stage occurs in the water
column. The coot clam adds another dimension to the suite of test
organisms because it represents a class of organisms (bivalves) not
presently represented. This clam is not a standard test organism,
however, the U.S. EPA has written a draft test method for
estimating toxicity of effluents using Mulinia (Morrison and
3-4
-------
Petrocelli, 1990a; 1990b).
3.2.2 Test Procedures
Test procedures and culture methods previously described in
the year 1 report for the 8 day larval sheepshead minnow survival
and growth test, 8 day larval grass shrimp survival and growth test
and 8 day E. affinis life cycle test were used for this study (Hall
et al., 1991). The test procedures for the coot clam described in
the year 3 report were also used for these experiments (Hall et al.
1994) . The sources for the four species were as follows:
sheepshead minnows, Aquatic Biosystems, Denver, Colorado; grass
shrimp, S.P. Engineering and Technology, Salem, Massachusetts; E.
affinis, in-house cultures (orginally from University of Maryland -
Chesapeake Biological Laboratory) and coot clams (U. S. EPA
Laboratory in Narragansett, Rhode Island).
3.2.3 Statistical Analysis
Univariate statistical tests described in Fisher et al. (1988)
were used for each test species when appropriate. The goal of this
study was not to generate typical LC50 data with various dilutions
of ambient water. For each test species response, control and test
conditions (100 percent ambient water) were compared using a one-
way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). A statistical difference between
the response of a species exposed to a control condition and an
ambient condition was used to determine toxicity. Dunnett's
(parametric) or Dunn's (non-parametric) mean testing procedures
were used in cases where comparisons of a species response on a
spatial scale was necessary.
3.2.4 Sample Collection, Handling and Storage
Sample collection, handling and storage procedures used in the
previous pilot study were implemented (Hall et al., 1991). Ambient
water was collected from all study areas and taken to our toxicity
testing facility at the Wye Research and Education Center,
Queenstown, Maryland for testing.
Grab samples were used because they are easier to collect,
require minimum equipment (no composite samplers), instantaneous
toxicity is evaluated, and toxicity spikes are not masked by
dilution. Grab samples collected from each station represented a
composite, of the water column (top, mid-depth and bottom). A
metering pump with teflon line was used to collect samples in 13.25
L glass containers.
3-5
-------
The time lapsed from the collection of a grab sample and the
initiation of the test or renewal did not exceed 72 hours. Samples
were collected on days 0, 3 and 6 during the 8 day tests. All
samples were chilled after collection and maintained at 4°C until
used. The temperature of the ambient water used for testing was
25°C. Salinity adjustments (increase) were performed on samples
collected from less saline sites to obtain a standard test salinity
of 15 ppt.
3.2.5 Quality Assurance
A copy of our Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Manual was
submitted and approved by the sponsor prior to the study (Fisher et
al., 1988). Standard Quality Assurance (QA) procedures used in our
laboratory for The State of Maryland's Effluent Toxicity Testing
Program were followed (Fisher et al., 1988). These QA procedures
were used during the previous three years of ambient toxicity
testing study. The control water used for these experiments was
obtained from a pristine area of the Choptank River. The water was
autoclaved and filtered with a 1 um filter. Hawaiian (HW) Marine
sea salts were used to salinity adjust samples to 15 ppt. The pH
was also adjusted to 7.5 to 8.0 after salinity adjustment.
Acute reference toxicant tests with cadmium chloride were
conducted with the same stocks of species used for ambient toxicity
tests. Cadmium chloride was selected as the reference toxicant
because there is an established data base with this chemical for
all of the proposed tests. Reference toxicity tests were used to
establish the validity of ambient toxicity data generated from
toxicity tests by ensuring that the test species showed the
expected toxic response to cadmium chloride (Fisher et al., 1988).
The reference toxicant tests were conducted on each test species
and source (of species) once during this study using procedures
described in Hall et al., 1991.
3.2.6 Contaminant Analysis and Water Quality Evaluations
The contaminant analyses used for these studies provided
limited information on selected contaminants that may be present in
the study areas. It was not our intention to suggest that the
proposed analysis for inorganic contaminants would provide an
absolute "cause and effect relationship" between contaminants and
biological effects if effects were reported. Information on
suspected contaminants in the study areas may, however, provide
valuable insights if high potentially toxic concentrations of
inorganic contaminants were reported in conjunction with biological
3-6
-------
effects.
Aqueous samples for analysis of inorganic contaminants listed
in Table 3.1 were collected during the ambient toxicity tests.
These contaminants and methods for their measurement have been
evaluated in our previous ambient toxicity testing study (Hall et
al., 1991). Analytical procedures and references for analysis of
these samples are presented in Table 3.1. Total inorganic
contaminant analysis were conducted on filtered samples using 0.40
um polycarbonate membranes. The Applied Marine Research Laboratory
of Old Dominion University was responsible for inorganic analysis.
Standard water quality conditions of temperature, salinity,
dissolved oxygen, pH and conductivity was evaluated at each site
after sample collection. These conditions were evaluated every 24
hours at all test conditions during the tests.
3.3 Sediment Toxicity Tests
All tests and analyses were conducted according to the SOPs
and QA plans previously submitted to the sponsor. The methods
described in this report are general summaries of those protocols.
3.3.1 Test Species
Sediment samples (100 percent ambient sediment samples) from
twelve stations were tested using four organisms: eggs of the
sheepshead minnow Cyprinodon variegatus, the amphipods Lepidactylus
dytiscus and Leptocheirus plumulosus, and the polychaete worm
Streblospio benedicti.
3.3.2 Test Procedures
All tests were conducted for 10 days at 25°C and monitored
daily. Daily monitoring in the sheepshead test included the
assessment of egg and larval mortality, hatching success and water
quality parameters (Hall et al., 1991) until the end of the test.
On day 10 of the S. benedicti, L. plumulosus, and L. dytiscus
tests, mortalities were recorded, and the animals were returned to
the original test containers. The organisms were then monitored
daily for an additional 10 days. Numbers of live animals were
recorded on day 20. Any living organisms were preserved for length
and weight measurements.
The sediment samples were collected from six sites in the
Patapsco River (Bear Creek, Curtis Creek, Middle Branch, Northwest
Harbor, Outer Harbor and Sparrows Point), two sites in the
Sassafras River (Betterton, Turner Creek), two sites in the Magothy
3-7
-------
Table 3.1 Analytical methods used for inorganic analysis in water
samples. The following abbreviations are used: Atomic
Emission - ICP (AE-ICP), AA-H (Atomic Absorption -
Hydride), AA-F (Atomic Absorption - Furnace) and AA-DA
(Atomic Absorption - Direct Aspiration) and AA-CV
(Atomic Absorption - Cold Vapor).
Contaminant
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Method
AA-H
AA-F
AA-F
AA-F
AA-F
AA-CV
AA-F
AA-H
AA-DA
Method #
206
213
218
220
239
245
249
270
200
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.3
.7
Reference
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
U.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
EPA,
1979
1979
1979
1979
1979
1979
1979
1979
1979
3-8
-------
River (South Ferry, Gibson Island), and two sites from the Severn
River (Junction Route 50, Annapolis). Control sediments for each
species consisted of native sediments from the area in which the
test organisms were collected or naturally occur. Control and
reference sediments (see below) were tested with each set of test
samples. Reference sediments were employed to assist in
determining any possible naturally occurring geochemical and
physical conditions inherent to the sediment being tested which may
influence mortality.
Because of the large range in particle size between test
sites observed in past studies, two reference sediments were used
with each organism per test. These reference sediments bracketed
the sediment particle sizes found at the selected test sites. For
example, one reference sediment most closely matched the test site
with highest sand proportion and one reference most closely matched
the test site with highest silt/clay proportion. Reference and
control sediments were designated as follows: (1) Lynnhaven sand,
(2) Lynnhaven mud, and (3) Poropatank sediment. Lynnhaven mud was
used as the control sediment for S. benedict! and C. variegatus
eggs, Lynnhaven sand was used as the control for L. dytiscus, and
Poropatank sediment was used as the control for L. plumulosus.
Lynnhaven sand (97.55 percent sand) and Poropatank sediment (1.14
percent sand) bracket the particle size of all test samples and
were therefore considered suitable as reference sediments as well.
The test sediment samples were also analyzed for sand, silt, and
clay content, and the particle size/composition of the test
sediments (Table 3.2) were quite variable even between replicates
at the same site.
The culture and maintenance procedures used for the polychaete
S. benedicti the amphipod Lepidactylus dytiscus are described in
Hall et al. (1991). Leptocheirus plumulosus and the sheepshead
minnow egg tests are described in Hall et al. 1994.
3.3.3 Statistical Analysis of Sediment Data
The goal of this study was not to generate LC50 data from
dilution series tests. The main objective was to evaluate for each
test species, the response (mortality, growth, etc.) when tested in
100 percent ambient sediment, as compared to a control.
Statistical differences between the responses of species exposed
to control and ambient sediments were used to determine the
toxicity. Evaluations relative to particle size effects were made
based on the response seen in the reference sediments. Sheepshead
egg data were evaluated using ANOVA contrasts and compared to the
3-9
-------
Table 3.2 Particle size analysis of sediments from Twelve stations and
references and controls used in toxicity tests. Samples collected
10/6-10/7/94.
Station
Annapolis Rl
Annapolis R2
Annapolis R3
Annapolis R4
Annapolis R5
Betterton Rl
Betterton R2
Betterton R3
Betterton R4
Betterton R5
Bear Creek Rl
Bear Creek R2
Bear Creek R3
Bear Creek R4
Bear Creek R5
Curtis Bay Rl
Curtis Bay R2
Curtis Bay R3
Curtis Bay R4
Curtis Bay R5
Gibson Island Rl
Gibson Island R2
Gibson Island R3
Gibson Island R4
Gibson Island R5
Junction Rt 50 Rl
Junction Rt 50 R2
Junction Rt 50 R3
Junction Rt 50 R4
Junction Rt 50 R5
Outer Harbor Rl
Outer Harbor R2
Outer Harbor R3
Outer Harbor R4
Outer Harbor R5
Middle Branch Rl
Middle Branch R2
% Sand
42.80
26.74
18.56
38.64
21.62
9.16
4.74
8.85
7.70
4.18
81.66
23.06
10.99
8.66
2.59
16.53
33.21
3.02
8.46
2.06
94.61
94.34
30.95
24.75
15.72
45.57
10.02
8.22
5.93
6.69
2.90
2.32
7.03
1.67
2.85
7.33
6.98
% Silt
35.61
46.62
52.75
37.72
49.57
65.92
66.52
65.30
66.46
69.93
11.40
53.84
56.50
63.48
74.25
50.54
40.51
65.50
54.68
64.40
3.00
3.04
43.60
47.42
53.36
33.65
54.59
55.42
56.16
55.66
57.57
58.89
54.69
60.39
55.95
63.59
64.39
% Clay
21.60
26.63
28.69
23.63
28.81
24.91
28.72
25.85
25.84
25.89
6.93
23.10
32.52
27.86
23.17
32.92
26.27
31.48
36.86
33.54
2.39
2.62
25.45
27.83
30.93
20.78
35.38
36.35
37.90
37.65
39.53
38.79
38.28
37.94
41.20
29.08
28.62
3-10
-------
Table 3.2(con't) Particle size analysis of sediments from Twelve stations and
references and controls used in toxicity tests. Samples
collected 10/6-10/7/94.
Station
Middle Branch R3
Middle Branch R4
Middle Branch R5
Northwest Harbor Rl
Northwest Harbor R2
Northwest Harbor R3
Northwest Harbor R4
Northwest Harbor R5
South Ferry Rl
South Ferry R2
South Ferry R3
South Ferry R4
South Ferry R5
Sparrows Point Rl
Sparrows Point R2
Sparrows Point R3
Sparrows Point R4
Sparrows Point R5
Turner's Creek Rl
Turner's Creek R2
Turner ' s Creek R3
Turner's Creek R4
Turner's Creek R5
Poropatank
Lynnhaven Mud
Lynnhaven Sand
% Sand
7.73
0.14
3.47
70.04
40.71
9.97
12.82
1.37
74.34
13.50
11.49
8.59
13.77
0.77
2.19
3.36
2.90
0.55
74.79
43.96
37.93
39.51
44.92
1.14
37.86
97.55
% Silt
63.55
4.88
67.90
19.97
39.62
58.01
54.73
59.97
15.87
52.94
53.53
54.54
0.18
61.57
66.04
60.72
64.24
64.90
17.71
38.47
47.09
44.82
39.10
63.77
48.97
1.18
% Clay
28.72
94.98
28.63
9.99
19.67
32.02
32.45
38.66
9.79
33.56
34.98
36.87
86.05
37.67
31.77
35.92
32.86
34.55
7.50
17.57
14.98
15.67
15.98
35.09
13.17
1.27
3-11
-------
controls. Evaluation of total mortality was assessed by combining
egg mortality, larval mortality, and unhatched eggs remaining at
the termination of the test. Unhatched eggs were included as
mortality based upon previous observations and the assumption that
probability of hatching and thus survival decreases essentially to
zero by test termination.
For all other tests, the statistical approaches that were
employed in the first two years of the study (Hall et al., 1992)
were again utilized in the fourth year. Basically, the analyses
consisted of analysis of variance (ANOVA) models with a priori
tests of each treatment contrasted to the controls. Arcsine
transformations were used for the percent mortality data.
Mortality was corrected for particle size effects using the
regression equations presented in year 2 of the study. Length and
weight were expressed as percentage of change from the initial
length and weight measurements.
3.3.4 Sample Collection. Handling and Storage
The general sediment sample collection, handling, and storage
procedures described in Hall et al. 1991 were used in this study.
Sediment samples were collected at each site by Applied Marine
Research Laboratory (AMRL) personnel and returned to the laboratory
for testing. The sediments were collected October 7-8, 1994 by
petite ponar grab. True field replicates were maintained
separately for transport to the laboratory. Sediment was collected
at each site by first randomly identifying 5 grab sample locations
along a 100 meter square grid. At each site a discrete field
subsample was collected for bioassays and stored on ice. A
separate subset from the same ponar grab series was placed into a
handling container. Subsamples from all 5 sites within a station
were serially placed into the same handling container. When all 5
sites within the station had been sampled, the entire batch was
homogenized and distributed into the sample containers designated
for chemical analyses. All samples were transported on ice, out of
direct sunlight. Bioassay samples were held in refrigerators at
4°C until initiation of the toxicity tests. Samples for chemical
analysis were frozen and stored until tested. All samples were
analyzed within EPA recommended holding times.
3.3.5 Quality Assurance
All quality assurance procedures submitted previously to the
sponsoring agency were implemented following the testing protocols
and associated SOP's. Laboratory quality assurance procedures for
sediment and pore water and inorganic and organic chemical analyses
3-12
-------
followed standard EPA quality assurance guidelines.
Toxicity test sediment controls consisted of sediment from
sites where either the animals were collected, or the animals are
naturally resident. Reference sediments were used to compare the
effects non-toxicity related parameters such as sediment particle
size, ammonia, nitrate, and total organic carbon (TOC) had on the
test animals. Because of the apparent notable effect particle
size has upon survival, and the large heterogeneity of particle
size at the sites, two references sediments (high percent sand,
high percent silt/clay) were used for C. variegatus and S.
benedict! to bracket the particle sizes encountered at the test
sites. Only one reference was used for each of the amphipods. It
was necessary to use only one reference because the control
sediment for each animal represented one end of the particle size
scale in each case. The control for the L. dytiscus was at the
high end of the sand scale, while the control for L. plumulosus
represented the high end of the silt/clay scale. Other physico-
chemical parameters were measured for comparison, but not
controlled for in the references.
Static acute non-renewal water-only reference toxicant tests
were performed for each species during each sampling period.
Cadmium chloride was used as a reference toxicant for each animal
because the existing laboratory data base is available for this
chemical. Reference toxicant information was used to establish the
validity and sensitivity of the populations of animals used in the
sediment test. Seasonal changes in sensitivity have been observed
previously in L. dytiscus (Deaver and Adolphson, 1990), therefore
consideration of this QA reference data is paramount to proper
interpretation.
3.3.6 Contaminant and Sediment Quality Evaluations
Contaminants were evaluated concurrently with toxicity tests.
It was not our intention to suggest that the presence of inorganic
and organic contaminants provide an absolute "cause and effect"
relationship between contaminants and any observed biological
effects. Information on suspected contaminants does however,
provide valuable insights if high concentrations of potentially
toxic contaminants were reported in conjunction with biological
effects.
Sediment samples for organic contaminants analysis were
collected in conjunction with bioassay sediment samples. The
contaminants assayed are listed in Tables 3.3 and 3.4. Organic
analytical procedures used were in accordance with a modified AOAC
(Association Official Analytical Chemists) method 970.52M with EPA
3-13
-------
Table 3.3
Concentrations for "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan,
1990). NA=Not available.
Compound
ER-M Concentration (ua/a}
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
2.100
0.650
0.640
1.380
0.960
3,
2,
1.
2,
2,
.600
.200
,600
.800
.500
NA
0.260
NA
3-14
-------
Table 3.4 Pesticides analyzed, utilizing a user-created calibration library.
Sediment method detection limits (MDL) are reported in pg/kg dry
weight.
COMPOUND
SEDIMENT MDL
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3', 5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
3-15
-------
clean-up 3660A for sulphur. Organophosphorus compounds were
analyzed by GC/FPD; organochlorine compounds by GC/FCD using EPA
508 GC conditions. PAH's were analyzed using EPA method 550 HPLC
conditions.
All sediment samples were analyzed for acid volatile sulfides
(AVS) and Total Organic Carbon (TOC). Samples were frozen until
analysis, at which time they were thawed, then homogenized by
gently stirring. Sediment samples were analyzed for AVS using the
method of DiToro et al., (1990). Details of the analytical
procedures for both AVS and TOC are described in Hall et al., 1991.
Pore water samples were removed from all sediment samples by
squeezing with a nitrogen press. All pore water samples were
filtered then frozen until analyses of ammonia, nitrite and
sulfides were conducted. These analyses were conducted on all
samples. Details of the methods are described in Hall et al.,
1991.
All sediment samples were analyzed for the following bulk
metals: aluminum, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, tin and
zinc, using an ICP (inductively coupled plasma atomic emission
spectroscopy) following USEPA/SW-846, Method 6010 (see Hall et al.,
1991). In addition, a Simultaneously Extractable Metals (SEM)
analysis was conducted on all samples to use with the AVS data to
determine the potential toxicity of the sediment due to metals.
The sample for the SEM analysis was obtained from a step in the AVS
procedure. The AVS method was detailed in Hall et al. 1991. The
SEM sample was the sediment suspension remaining in the generation
flask after the cold acid extraction had been completed. The
sediment suspension was filtered through a 0.2 micron membrane
filter into a 250 ml volumetric flask. The sample was then diluted
to volume with deionized water. The concentrations of the SEM were
determined by EPA-600/4-79-020 Methods for Chemical Analysis of
Water and Wastes (U.S. EPA, 1979). Cadmium, lead, copper, nickel,
and zinc were determined by ICP following U.S.EPA method number
200.7. Mercury was determined by cold vapor generation following
USEPA method number 245.1. The concentrations were then converted
to micromoles per gram dry sediment and were added together to give
total SEM.
3.4 Analysis of Four Year Data Base
A series of summary statistical analyses were conducted in
order to provide environmental managers with summary information
concerning the relative toxicity of water and sediments from the
collection areas. These analyses also provide quantitative
indicators of the degree of confidence which may be given to
3-16
-------
differences between responses observed for "clean" ("reference")
conditions and those seen for test media (water or sediments) of
unknown quality. These analyses are based upon the summary
composite indices first developed for the toxicity axis of the
"sediment quality triad" (Long and Chapman, 1985; Chapman, 1986;
Chapman et al. 1987, Chapman 1990). This approach has been modified
to provide confidence limits on composite indices designated as
"ratio-to-reference mean" (RTRM) indices (Alden, 1992) . Details of
the calculation of the RTRM indices for the Ambient Toxicity
Program are presented in the Year 3 report (Hall et al., 1994).
In order to make the RTRM indices more meaningful to managers,
a method was developed to scale the values, so that they range
between a "best case" (uncontaminated) condition, represented by a
score of 0 and a "worst case" (highly contaminated and toxic)
condition, represented by a score of 100. A value of 0 would
represent the median response of a reference test of uncontaminated
water or sediment, while a value of 100 would represent a condition
producing the maximum detrimental responses in all of the endpoints
(e.g. no growth, reproduction, or survival of all test
populations). Not only does this sort of scaling provide a "frame
of reference" to address the question of "how bad is this site?",
but it allows scores of RTRM indices from different years (which
may have had different numbers of endpoints) to be evaluated on the
same scale. This well-defined scaling system is much more readily
interpreted than the sediment quality triad RTR values or the RTRM
indices, which have a reference value of 1, but have an open-ended
scale for toxic conditions, the maximum value of which depends upon
the number of endpoints, the magnitude of the test responses, and
the reference response values used in the calculations.
The scaled RTRM index, hereafter designated as "toxicity
index" or TOX-INDEX, was calculated as follows. The RTRM values
and confidence limits were calculated as in previous years (Hall et
al., 1994) . The reference median for any given site was subtracted
from all reference and test values (medians, lower and upper
confidence limits). This step scales the reference median to 0.
The values are then divided by a "worst case" constant for each
test data set. This "worst case" constant is calculated by taking
the test data set and setting the values to the maximum
detrimental responses for each endpoint (e.g. no survival, growth,
reproduction, hatching of eggs, etc.), calculating the RTRM values
for these "worst case" conditions by dividing by the appropriate
reference means (i.e.,for the sediment data set, each sample was
matched to the reference data set that most closely matched the
sediment characteristics) and calculating the "worst case" constant
3-17
-------
as the mean of RTRM values for all endpoints. The division by the
"worst case" constant makes all values (medians and confidence
limits) a fraction of the "worst case" condition. The TOX-INDEX
values are converted to a percentage scale by multiplying by 100.
The TOX-INDEX medians and confidence limits for test and reference
conditions of each site are plotted on maps of the Bay to indicate
the relative toxicity of various geographic locations. For
graphical purposes, the lower confidence limits of the reference
data are not shown, unless the test confidence limits overlap those
of the reference conditions (i.e. a portion of the confidence
limits for both the test and reference conditions are less than
zero).
In order to provide more information to the TOX-INDEX maps,
pie charts are included to indicate the relative percentage of
endpoints that were shown to be different between the test and
reference data sets in the RTRM simulations. Therefore, a highly
toxic site would not only be shown to have high TOX-INDEX values
which display a low degree of uncertainty (i.e., to have narrow
confidence bands that are well separated from reference
conditions), but it would also be shown to have a high percentage
of endpoints that were adversely affected by the toxic conditions.
This type of presentation should provide managers with a tool
to evaluate the relative ecological risk of the sites in comparison
to each other. A site with TOX-INDEX confidence limits that
overlap those of a reference site, and which displays few
statistically significant endpoints, would be expected to pose
little ecological risk with respect to ambient toxicity. On the
other hand, a site displaying a large TOX-INDEX value, with
confidence limits that are well separated for the reference
condition and with many significantly impacted endpoints would be
expected to pose a much greater ecological risk. The ecological
significance of toxicity at sites with intermediate TOX-INDEX
scores would have to be interpreted through the best professional
judgement of scientists and managers, although the relative
magnitude of the values does provide information on the relative
degree of toxicity with respect to other sites. Although absolute
ecological risk assessments would require much more intensive
biological evaluations of long-term population and community level
effects, TOX-INDEX provides a screening system that indicated the
relative ranking by which regions can be prioritized for management
actions related to toxicity. Thus, the maps provide quantitative
indications of the magnitude, certainty and consistency of toxic
effects.
The site location symbols in the TOX-INDEX maps indicate the
3-18
-------
degree to which water or sediment benchmarks (water quality
criteria or ER-M values, respectively) were exceeded. Thus, the
maps also display the qualitative degree of chemical contamination.
3-19
-------
SECTION 4
RESULTS
4.1 Water Column Tests
The following results from water column tests are presented
below: toxicity data, contaminants data, water quality data and
toxicity data from reference toxicant tests.
4.1.1 Toxicity Data
Survival, growth, reproduction and percent normal shell
development from the four estuarine tests conducted from 10/11/94
to 10/19/94 (or 10/12/94 to 10/20/94) are presented in Tables 4.1 -
4.6. Survival of sheepshead minnows, grass shrimp, and Eurytemora
in the controls was not significantly different after 8 days of
exposure when compared with the 12 ambient test conditions.
However, growth of sheepshead minnows was significantly lower at
the Sassafras River-Betterton station when compared with the
controls. There were no significant differences in growth of
sheepshead minnnows at the other 11 stations when compared with the
controls. Growth of grass shrimp was not significantly different in
ambient water from the 12 stations when compared with the controls.
Reproductive endpoints for Eurytemora (mean % gravid females and
mean % immatures) at all the ambient stations were not
significantly different than the controls.
Percent normal shell development for the coot clam was
significantly reduced at the following stations during the first
test: Sassafras River - Betterton, Sassafras River - Turner Creek,
Baltimore Harbor - Bear Creek, Baltimore Harbor - Curtis Bay,
Baltimore Harbor - Middle Branch, Baltimore Harbor - Northwest
Branch, Baltimore Harbor - Outer Harbor, Magothy River - Gibson
Island, Severn River - 50/301 Bridge and Severn River - Annapolis
Sailing School (Table 4.6). For test 2, percent normal shell
development was significantly reduced at the Magothy River - South
Ferry. There were no significant effects at any of the other
stations.
4.1.2 Contaminants Data
Inorganic contaminants data from the 12 sites are presented in
Table 4.7. Metals were generally low at all location based on the
one grab sample collected at each station during the study. Only
one metal (copper value of 3.85 ug/L at the Baltimore Harbor - Bear
Creek station) exceeded the U.S. EPA marine water quality
4-1
-------
Table 4.1 Survival data for sheepshead minnow larvae after 8 d
tests at 12 stations from 10/11/94 to 10/19/94.
Cumulative Percent Survival Per Day
Station 123456:
CONTROL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
SASBT(Sassafras-Betterton)100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
SASTC(Sassafras-Turner C.)100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHBCR(Bal Harb-Bear Cr.) 100 ICO 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHCUB(Bal Harb-Curtis B.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHMBR(Bal Harb-Middle B.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHNWB(Bal Harb-NW Br.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHOTH(Bal Harb-Outer H.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
BHSPT(Bal Harb-Sparrows P)100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
MAGGI(Magothy-Gibson I.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
MAGSF(Magothy-South F.) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
SEV50(Severn-Rt.50) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
SEVAP(Severn-Annapolis) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
4-2
-------
Table 4.2 Survival data for grass shrimp larvae after 8 d tests at
12 stations from 10/12/94 to 10/20/94.
Cumulative Percent Survival Per Day
Station 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 £
CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
100
100
100
100
100
96
96
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
96
96
100
100
96
96
100
100
96
100
100
100
96
96
96
100
100
96
96
100
100
96
100
100
100
96
96
96
100
100
96
96
100
100
96
100
100
100
92
96
92
100
100
96
96
100
96
96
100
100
100
92
96
92
100
100
96
96
100
96
96
100
100
100
92
92
92
100
96
96
96
100
96
92
100
96
100
88
92
92
96
84
92
96
96
96
88
100
96
100
4-3
-------
Table 4.3 Survival data for Eurytemora. after
stations from 10/12/94 to 10/20/94.
8 d tests at 12
Mean Percent Mean Percent
Station Survival ±S.E. Gravid Female ±S.E.
Mean Percent
Immature ±S.E.
CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
93.2
81.8
76.7
72.6
94.8
96.3
89.7
83.4
69.2
66.1
88.0
61.5
52.5
7.2
4.2
10.6
10.0
8.5
13.6
6.5
5.6
22.5
4.3
7.0
18.6
7.5
55.2
37.9
41.8
43.2
43.4
53.7
44.4
43.6
23.2
41.2
58.1
42.4
43.9
3.1
5.9
5.9
6.8
8.1
7.3
8.8
6.2
7.9
6.1
10.8
4.0
2.4
6.8
5.1
2.8 '
1.7
12.9
1.6
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.2
1.6
3.1
2.5
2.9
2.8
1.7
3.7
1.6
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.5
1.6
3.1
4-4
-------
Table 4.4 Growth data for sheepshead minnow larvae from the
10/11/94 to 10/19/94 experiment. Growth data are the
mean final weight per individual at day 8.
Sheepshead larvae dry weight (initial weight at day 0=0.16 mg)
Station
n
Mean Wt. (Mg)
±S.E.
CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
38
40
29
39
29
38
40
30
39
38
40
40
39
1.44
1.13a
1.36
1.42
1.39
1.59
1.33
1.52
1.18
1.48
1.47
1.34
1.37
0.064
0.036
0.038
0.092
0.064
0.046
0.154
0.056
0.076
0.068
0.044
0.024
0.024
"Significantly different at P<0.05 using Dunnett's test.
4-5
-------
Table 4.5 Growth data for grass shrimp larvae from the 10/12/94 to
10/20/94 experiment. Growth data are the mean final
weight per individual at day 8.
Sheepshead larvae dry weight (initial weight at day 0=0.14 rag)
Station n Mean Wt. (mg) ±S.E.
CONTROL 22 0.81 0.047
SASBT 23 0.80 0.025
SASTC 21 0.76 0.041
BHBCR 24 0.88 0.050
BHCUB 22 0.82 0.070
BHMBR 23 0.80 0.023
BHNWB 24 0.73 0.039
BHOTH 24 0.78 0.042
BHSPT 24 0.77 0.034
MAGGI 22 0.80 0.037
MAGSF 24 0.82 0.054
SEV50 14 0.81 0.046
SEVAP 25 0.76 0.039
4-6
-------
Table 4.6. Percent normal shell development from two 48 h coot clam
embyro/larval tests conducted from 10/14/94 (Test 1) and
from 10/17/94 to 10/19/94 (Test 2).
Station
CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
Test 1
Percent
Normal ±S.E.
98
87
89
91
92
91
92
89
94
90
95
91
93
.0
.2a
.Oa
.8a
.3a
.7a
.6a
.3a
.4
.3a
.7
. la
. Oa
0.
0.
3.
3.
1.
1.
2.
0.
1.
2.
1.
0.
0.
68
74
91
6±
57
34
00
54
18
03
13
86
95
Test 2
Percent
Normal ±S.E.
95.
92.
93.
96.
93.
94.
95.
96.
93.
93.
86.
95.
93.
2
5
7
5
5
3
7
7
3
6
9a
4
7
0.
1.
1.
1.
0.
1.
0.
1.
1.
1.
0.
1.
1.
94
72
26
01
68
87
82
45
74
22
28
20
03
asignificantly different at P<0.05 using Dunnett's test.
4-7
-------
"31 Q)
CTi ^
CTi rd
H
,,
"4H rj
o ex
rH ^
rH
t| 1 .
. rH
rH -P
P P
rd O
.p rd
U)
rtj
CM 0-i
H W
(1) .
XI CO
-p .
^
6
0 Q)
c
n i ,
^"^ -H
j_l
^d frt
P 2
rd
W '
-P '?
C
rd ^
rH ^
s ^
rd ~>
-P °
8 .
O -^r
H G\
c ^
rd rxj
CT1 rH
O 0
H ;^-
r-
.
**
Q)
rH
rd
EH
-o
0)
C
H
rH
(1)
T3
C
p
0)
rd
rd
rH
rH
Q)
-p
H
^_|
O
O
r{
1 i
tr
c
H
T3
0
a)
o
X
0)
w
0)
rH
rd
$>
H
rH
i^C
rH
rd
.p
Q)
e
r;
rj
rd
(1)
0)
T3
H
(/)
Q)
X!
'O
Q)
W
H
rH
O-l
H
CO
0
in
' ^
CO
fe
o
s
*
H
O
o
EH
C/3
K
CQ
ffi
EH
u) o
c »
0 «
H
4J
rd S
P ^
CO M
CQ
DH
CQ
S
CQ
CQ
D
U
K
CQ
e<
u
CQ
X
CQ
U
EH
<
CO
EH
CQ
CO
CO
,_,
18 J
^
w tn
rH 3.
rd
4-> U
a) a
C7»
^
H
in
(N
H
CTi
^i*
H
n
rH
f-»
n
H
CM
CM
O
0>
H
CTi
^*
H
in
in
H'
n
rH
%
H
rH
0
t
H
in
CM
H
, .
1
N_»"
U)
<
o
m
o
V
o
in
o
v
o
\r\
U }
V
0
in
o
v
o
in
o
v
0
in
0
V
o
in
o
V
Q
in
o
o
m
o
v
0
m
o
v
o
in
o
v
Q
in
v
CO
,
Ol
TJ
U
CM
n H
*
CM r\i
O
in
o
in
CM
t
O
V
in
CM
0
V
CTi
in
0
^~,
^f
in
* ^
O
CO
o
o
H
V
o
o
H
V
O
O
rH
V
O
0
H
V
O
0
rH
V
O
0
V
0
o
H
V
0
*
0
rH
V
O
O
rH
V
O
0
rH
V
o
o
rH
V
0
O
H
V
*-*.
-------
criteria.
4.1.3 Water Quality Data
Water quality parameters reported from grab samples collected
three times at all stations are presented in Table 4.8. The
temperature and salinity of ambient water collected from all sites
was adjusted to 25°C and 15 ppt before testing. Ambient water
quality conditions appeared adequate for survival of test species.
Water quality conditions reported in test containers during testing
are reported in Appendix A. All parameters appeared adequate for
survival of test species.
4.1.4 Reference Toxicant Data
Forty-eight hour LC or EC5C values for the four test species
exposed to cadmium chloride during reference toxicant tests are
presented in Table 4.9. These toxicity values were compared with
the values from the previous three years for all species except the
coot clam where only year 3 data were available. Toxicity values
for grass shrimp, sheepshead minnows and Eurytemora in this study
were similar to values reported during the first three years. In
all cases the fourth year values were between the low and high
values for the first three years (except for E. affinis) Data from
the reference toxicant tests indicate that test species from the
various sources are healthy and ambient toxicity data were valid.
4.2 Sediment Tests
The following results from sediment toxicity tests are
presented below: toxicity data, contaminants data, and data from
reference toxicant tests.
4.2.1 Toxicity Data
Survival results, from toxicity tests of the twelve estuarine
sediments from the Patapsco, Sassafras, Magothy, and Severn Rivers
for amphipods, worms and sheepshead minnow eggs are included in
Tables 4.10 through 4.16. Those stations that were significantly
different from the controls are so indicated. Growth data (mean
length and dry weight) for amphipods and worms after 20 day
exposure to sediments are included in Tables 4.14 through 4.16.
Survival in controls was greater than 84 percent and 74
percent at day 10 and day 20, respectively, for both amphipods and
the polychaete worm. Survival data are summarized in Tables 4.10-
4.13. Significant mortality was observed in all species compared
with controls. Both S. benedict! and L. dytiscus showed the
4-9
-------
Table 4.8 Water quality parameters reported in the field during
water sample collection for the Fall of 1994.
Date Station
10-11-94 SASTC
SASBT
MAGSF
MAGGI
SEVAP
SEV50
BHCUB
BHNWB
BHMBR
BHBCR
BHSPT
BHOTH
10-14-94 SASTC
SASBT
MAGSF
MAGGI
SEVAP
SEV50
BHCUB
BHNWB
BHMBR
BHBCR
BHSPT
BHOTH
10-17-94 SASTC
SASBT
MAGSF '
MAGGI
SEVAP
SEV50
BHCUB
BHNWB
BHMBR
BHBCR
BHSPT
BHOTH
Temp
(C)
16.0
16.0
17.0
17.0
18.0
17.5
17.0
18.5
18.0
17.5
18.0
16.0
16.3
16.5
17.0
17.0
16.5
17.0
16.0
16.5
16.0
16.0
16.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.0
15.0
15.0
16.0
14.0
15.5
14.5
16.0
15.5
14.0
Salinity
(ppt)
1.5
1.0
10.0
11.5
12.5
11.0
11.5
12.0
11.5
11.0
11.5
11.0
2.0
2.5
10.0
11.0
12.0
11.0
12.5
13.0
12.5
12.0
12.0
12.0
2.0
2.5
10.5
10.5
12.0
11.5
12.5
13.0
11.5
11.5
12.0
12.0
Cond
umhos/cm
2200
1750
13000
14500
15500
14000
15500
17000
16000
15000
16000
15000
2200
2750
13500
14000
15000
14000
15000
17500
16500
15000
15500
15500
14200
14000
16000
15000
15500
17000
14500
15000
15500
15000
DO
9.6
10.1
7.2
7.8
7.8
7.6
7.6
6.7
7.8
7.8
7.2
8.2
9.1
8.6
8.2
8.4
8.6
8.0
6.7
5.9
7.7
6.1
6.9
7.5
8.5
9.3
8.6
8.8
9.0
8.8
6.6
7.3
8.6
8.3
6.7
7.2
PH
7.23
8.23
7.42
7.74
7.93
7.80
7.81
7.62
7.93
7.98
7.88
7.80
7.37
7.76
7.68
7.80
7.95
7.88
7.81
7.62
8.02
7.60
7.86
7.84
7.40
7.67
7.55
7.76
8.05
7.94
7.61
7.44
8.01
7.97
7.63
7.65
4-10
-------
Table 4.9 Toxicity data (48 h LC50s or EC50s mg/L) from reference
toxicant tests conducted with cadmium chloride for the
four test species. Previous values from year 1, 2 and 3
are reported.
48 h Previous 48 h LC50 values
Date Species LC50 Yr.l Yr. 2 Yr. 3
(95% Conf Int)
09/23/94 Grass shrimp 0.723 0.502 0.230 1.340
(0.594-0.882)
09/29/94 Sheepshead minnow 0.710 0.510 1.540 1.180
(0.610-0.830)
09/09/94 E. affinis 0.143 0.021 0.095 0.120
(0.111-0.184)
11/10/94 Coot clam 0.008a 0.005a
(0.008-0.009)
a Value is an EC50 (percent normal shell development is the
endpoint).
4-11
-------
o
-p
(!)
rH
U
rH
O
O
a
0>
-P
u
73
§
+J
M
O
M
IH
U
rfl
73
CD fd
C -P
O W
H
-P II
n)
-p t
in w
Q)
>
rH
01
-P
0)
w
id ^
to ^f,
o :
CO
oT
o
c
0)
1-1
01
_
I
73 £
Cn
3 rH
W rH
CO
TJ
ID
4-1
10
3
r-i
O
in in r- r-
O
CN
rd
Q
ro o IN CN en
rH (N
rH O
rH O
rd
>
rl
>
1-1
3
W
O
0)
4->
(0
3
n
0
(d
a
*************
oooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooo
CN O Cn O 01 rH
O n
n n co
73
0)
4J
U
3
n
0
rt
0)
4->
W
3
n
O
(B
X!
rd
H
CO
(0
4-1
W
CN
ro
r-
CO
o
o
i£>
*
o
0
VO
ID
to
rl
i-H
o
ft
cd
c
c
*
ro
in
r-
r-
CO
,_,
*
O
0
rH
in
c
0
4-1
01
4-1
0)
m
*
t-
en
in
CN
CN
r-
*
o
0
0
CN
V
01
0)
o
J^
a
0)
m
*
-*
00
^
in
r~
ro
*
o
0
ro
ro
^
(d
ca
to
rl
4->
^
3
U
*
CO
CTl
CN
CO
O
rH
rH
*
O
o
0
r-
73
c
rd
i-H
CO
H
c
o
CO
X!
rl
0
ffi
rH
ro
CO
CO
r^-
vo
CN
*
o
o
CTi
in
O
in
4J
C
0
rl
4->
u
c
3
*
ro
r-
r~"
CN
in
V0
*
o
o
o
in
H
0
XI
1-1
cd
K
J_|
01
4J
3
O
*
CN
CN
CO
^
O
o
<*
*
o
o
rH
in
r;
0
C
10
i^i
m
01
rH
73
73
rl
S
*
r-
in
rH
O
o
rH
*
0
O
rH
0
X!
i-l
to
33
4J
CO
Q)
rj
4J
i-l
O
2
*
f^
CN
rH
*
0
o
ro
in
^
^_i
^i
0)
tc
r^
-P
3
0
M
*
<*
VO
r-
VD
ro
*
0
O
CTi
t
-P
C
>H
0
P!
CO
3
0
l-i
^i
cd
ft
w
o
ro
CO
CO
ro
cr.
O
O
r~
p-
^
01
0)
u
CO
^1
01
c
^
j3
H
*
in
r-
CN
to
CO
.
*
o
o
<*
in
*~*
K
* '
V^
C
td
4-1
(d
ft
o
Vj
0
PH
^
^r
CTi
en
o
Q
rH
O
O
cn
en
U
73
C
rd
W
C
01
^
rd
X*
C
c
r>1
J
in
o
o
ft
4-1
O
U
1-4
M-l
C
Q)
0)
M-l
73
>i
rH
4-1
10
u
H
4-1
rl
C
Dl
rl
M
H
H
O
Z,
rd
ft
73
0)
-P
O
-rl
73
01
>-l
ft
73
0)
4->
CO
D
n
73
1-1
3
CO
4J
0)
O
(-1
01
ft
CO
rl
J-l
3
CO
4J
tj
H
73
0)
C
CD
Q
CO
73
(0
CO
3
0
W
0)
73 >ri
Q) M-l
4J Q)
CO
3 Q)
n N
T3 -rl
CN
Cd
O
4-12
-------
0
-p
CTl
O
rH
S
O
o
Q)
-P
O
3
O
C
0
U
0)
IH
Q)
£ ci
01 W
Q) «
r j y
o
lH
rd
01 C
°3
" C/l
-P
CO s
0) W
rH '
3 ^
"^ 0
a) M
£ C
4J O
^ °
rd n
£
3 r?
to ~-
O =
3 ^
E Q)
3 o
Q. 0)
0)
^ *W
e «
o
in ||
<4H
rd X
P &
> rH
1-1 -^
3 rH
M rH
rH
"^
^
01
rH
i!
rd
H
O
CN
t>
rd
Q
rd
-H
3
W
CrP
O
r~
J>
rd
Q
in
i O
tncojrdcn
,-ivj4j(-i
4-> X 73
C Q) U C
Q) « rd
S-l W
c c
rH JJ 1H
O 1H O 01
0 ffi
C -rH
Q) tn 3 - 4-1 >
S O SH rd rd
in
o
CO
rH
0
o
1-1
-p
c
0)
01
tH
MH
-H
o
c
rd
o
c
en
H
W
K
o
"Z.
4-13
-------
Q)
N
-rH
01
0
4-1
cn
rH
O
S-l
d
0>
4->
CJ
3
n
o
u
OJ
rH
0)
03 0
B) M
OJ W
rd
. "0
,n C
co
rd
4-1
TO
0)
» c
5 o
P U
ti."
2 £
O :
*O ..
£ «>
R o
cu g
-Q Q)
co i2
Q)
O
-H ||
VH
rd ^
4J pr*
rd ^
T3 =
rd ^
> cn
H -^
> rH
Vi -^
3 rH
W rH
CN
rd
H
Cfl
d
0)
p
M
O
CN
rd
Q
rH
rd
r-|
>
VH
3
CO
dP
H
cn
-o
OJ
d
a
a
H
(0
O
0)
P
ia
H
CO
d
01
0
a
rd
Q
in
a
c
a
co
P
O
73
0)
CO
vD
O
in
rH
r-
vo
vo
CN
VD
O
in
vo
VD
CN
ro
VO
in
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
vo
in
1
ro
ro
ro
ro
in
rH
rH
O
ft
rd
C
C
CN
CO
CN
rH
r-
vo
vo
*
CN
CO
CN
rH
£
$
ro
CN
O
0
00
«*
VO
ro
CN
1
0
o
CO
*
C
o
4-1
0)
4-1
4-1
0)
m
in
*t
**
H
r-
VD
ro
a1
^
oo
0
rH
ro
ro
ro
vo
*t
t~H
00
ro
ro
in
ro
cn
CN
1
r-
vo
o
in
y
Q>
0)
U
VI
cd
cu
CQ
ro
cn
rH
rH
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
cn
rH
rH
ro
ro
ro
ro
VO
00
in
ro
ro
cn
*
VO
CO
in
i
ro
ro
cn
^
^
rd
CQ
cn
rH
4J
3
U
o
CN
*
rH
oo
vO
«*
^
CN
00
0
o
oo
CN
o
in
ro
vo
cn
oo
«*
<*
O
rH
o
0
rH
<*
13
C
rd
i-H
cn
H
c
0
cn
ja
H
o
o
o
rH
ro
ro
cn
CN
CN
O
0
rH
ro
ro
cn
CN
vo
31
vO
ro
ro
rH
""
vO
«*
vO
ro
ro
rH
'fr
O
in
4-1
CC
C
O
4-1
U
C
3
i-H
in
r-l
f-
VO
CN
VO
t
rH
in
H
VO
CN
VD
rH
*!
o
r^
VO
<*
^
rH
»*
O
VO
VO
^J,
f~
rH
0
J_l
(0
DM
^J
OJ
4J
3
0
o
o
00
r-
VO
*
rH
O
o
00
VO
i-H
o
in
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
O
in
ro
ro
ro
ro
ro
r]
U
c
rd
m
ci)
r-l
T3
a
rH
2
in
rH
ro
vD
t^
cn
3-
CN
o
o
00
rH
0
CN
rH
ro
ro
«*
*t
O
CN
f^
VO
CN
rH
O
^
rd
as
4J
cn
(U
r]
-P
i_i
o
z
0
rH
ro
rH
CN
0
VO
in
O
in
ro
rH
ro
ro
ro
in
in
oo
oo
cn
«*
t-H
VD
ro
*fr
00
O
0
0
vo
£>,
^
t-l
0)
fe
A
4-1
3
0
W
ro
CTi
CN
rH
ro
ro
r-
ro
ro
cn
CN
rH
ro
ro
ro
CN
00
CN
r-
vo
vo
*
CN
00
CN
t^
VO
VO
^
1 1
C
rH
0
cu
in
U
o
VH
VH
rd
ft
w
in CN in in
O <* oo in
r- r- r-i r-
rH H
O ro r- oo
O ro vo ro
CN rH CN in
ro vo oo r~
cn cn in cn
CN o co cn
in cn rH vo
rH rH
ro c°^ r^~ r^
ro VD vo vo
r~ CN CN vo
ro vo CO ^r
00 Ol O CN
CN O o in
cn cn o oo
ro vo O 'i'
ro vo O ro
CTl CN O t-
^r vo o r-
rH
CO CN O VD
CN ^ O 'I'
cn r~ o vo
n n o t~-
ro ro O vo
CTl rH O 00
^ VD o m
P?
O -^
«-
1^4 _,^ rr4
t-*i "^^ \J
Q) CU T3 C
CJ) 3 rd
H S W
U X
C C C
cn rd 0) Q)
» 4J ^ ^
VH rd rd rd
Q) ft J3 rC
C 0 C C
Vi VH C C
3 O >i >i
EH 04 J nJ
in
O
C3
V
ft
4-1
C
o
u
o
1-1
4-1
C
0)
rH
a
4J
C
rd
U
H
MH
W
*
O
rH
4-1
1-1
cd
ft
a
ai
Q)
M
ft
O
MH
a
0)
4-1
cn
3
-r~>
a
rd
rd
>
H
>
rH
3
cn
4-1
0)
u
M
0)
ft
cn
rH
rd
rH
rH
3
to
U
O
H
a
(D
a
rd
CO
O
CO
-H
T3
0) cn
4-1 4-1
cn u
3 0)
n MH
O VM
< Q>
H
EH
O
s
z
4-14
-------
Table 4.13 Survival data from C. variegatus at the twelve stations. Tests were
conducted from 10/11/94 to 11/1/94. "(R)" = Reference, "(C)"= Control.
Species Station
C. variegatus
Annapolis
Betterton
Bear Creek
Curtis Bay
Gibson Island
Junction Rt.50
Outer Harbor
Middle Banch
Northwest Harbor
South Ferry
Sparrows Point
Turner ' s Creek
Poropatank (R)
Lynnhaven Mud (C)
Lynnhaven Sand (R)
% Survival
40.00*
80.00
4.00*
16.00*
76.00
70.00
40.00*
38.00*
0.00*
50.00*
2.00*
70.00
88.00
94.00
100.00
%Hatched
42.00*
80.00
4.00*
26.00*
86.00
70.00
42.00*
42.00*
2.00*
64.00*
6.00*
72.00
90.00
94.00
100.00
%dead fish
6.66
0.00
0.00
48.61*
10.22
0.00
4.16
22.86
100.00*
37.94*
75.00*
3.13
2.22
0.00
0.00
%dead eggs
38.00*
10.00
14.00
24.00
10.00
12.00
18.00
22.00
18.00
22.00
28.00*
10.00
8.00
6.00
0.00
Note:
* indicates significantly different from control (a=0.05).
% Survival =!-[ (Dead fish + dead eggs at test termination)/(# eggs
exposed)]*100.
% Dead fish = (Dead fish)/(# hatched)*100
% Dead eggs = (Dead eggs)/(# exposed)*100
% Hatched = (# hatched)/(# eggs exposed)*100
4-15
-------
m
4->
rH 01
(d
01 in
4-> OJ
C -rl
fl) U
E fl)
"H ft
T! in
fl)
01 x:
o
0 (d
4-> fl)
fl) 0)
3 cd
01 E
O -H
ft C
X (d
0)
0
>i CN
cd
TD MH
1 O
o
CN 0)
0)
rl 4J
d) cd
4-) U
MH -H
Cd rH
ft
to fl)
J3 M
o
to in
"H
i-J '1 1
£°
H
w
r-3
T)
i-i C
O
c c
i -P
SH DI
o c
~ fl)
(d
4-1 T!
(d c
T) (d
x: 4J
4-> X!
3 en
0 -H
SH 0)
O 3
^?
(_j
.
^
(!)
rH
.Q
(d
fl)
^1
fl)
01
in
i)
EH
»
tt~]
U
cd
fl)
E
O
MH
in
rH
td
E
H
C
cd
Cn
c
rH
>
rl
>
^|
3
01
0)
4-1
MH
0
C
cd
at
E
0)
x:
4-1
01
-rH
0)
4->
cd
u
i-H
ft
0)
^j
x;
u
fl)
4-1
4-1
o
1 1
0
-P
c
o
u
II
E
, »,
u
aT
o
c
0)
0)
MH
0)
«
II
=
c?
'
^*
o^
- _
1 1
--K^
»H
1 1
x:
en
0
l_)
<~]
-P
^*
^
"-^
O
rH
-a
a)
0
3
a
c
o
u
,
K
W
^
E
c
x;
4J
D
c
0)
ni
K
W
0
E
JJ
+J
0
H
0)
3£
^
*
01
fl)
(d
MH O
O -H
i I
VH D
0) 0)
.Q «
3 0)
S, 3
EH
0)
4^
W
Cfl ^J1 rH O
r~* CT> ^ o
O «* m o
o o o o
o ** r» o
in CTV ro o
O rH 00 O
^* m ^ o
rH CTI in o
CN O O O
O H rH O
O 0 0 O
CN CT> CT» O
00 CTi vO O
CM in ^ o
0 O 0 0
in in in o
01
O 01 C 0)
10 -H 0 Q)
-H i-H rH 4-1 iH
4J rd O VH U
>, -H ft Q)
T3 4J cd 4J JH
H C 4-> cd
C C Q) 0)
t-5 H (f, 03 03
CTi
CN
*r
o
n
rH
00
in
^
rH
O
rH
CTl
in
0
in
r*1
cd
m
in
rl
4J
3
U
oo oo
n o
n CN
0 0
oo m
rH CTl
in *j-
ro rH
O «*
rH O
0 O
*3* ^D
o m
in 'i1
0 0
^r *
0
O in
C
td 4->
rH K
01
H C
0
C -rl
O 4-)
in o
.Q c
rl 3
O i-)
ID m
00 CN
<* in
O O
^ oo
r- oo
in in
in ^
rH O
rH CN
O 0
in ID
CN >t
0 0
*r ^
i-l .*"!
0 0
Q C
M td
td 03
K
0)
i> -a
4J T3
3 -rl
O S
O vD
O in
O fl
0 0
O fl
o oo
O ro
O in
O CN
O *!
O rH
O O
0 0
o r~
O VO
0 0
O in
iH
o
1-1
cd
ffi >1
1) ^1
01 fl)
D fe
x: x:
-p -P
H 3
o o
Z W
CN fl
fl i£i
fl rH
0 0
fl vD
fl fl
in o
oo oo
CTI in
o o
0 O
CN U3
IO CTl
rj" CO
0 0
in in
-P X
C 0)
rl 0)
O VH
pi, o
01 01
^ .
0 SH
VH 0)
VH C
id s-i
ft 3
W H
oo o
^i" m
CN O
0 0
^* rH
fl **
O fl
in ^
00 CN
fl O
*! rH
O O
O CN
iO ("^
'S' fl
0 O
^ in
^^
O
N«^
T3
V. C
cd
w
^
c n
(d D
P >
td (d
ft x:
o c
H C
0 >i
P-l rj
.
^^
in
o
O
V
ft
01
,-H
0
SH
4J
C
O
U
c
td
£Z
4J
01
01
fl)
rH
r*1
rH
JJ
C
td
u
rl
MH
iH
C
DI
-rl
W
*
4-16
-------
1-1
r-l (0
(fl 4-1 fl)
H CO M
4-1 0)
rl 0) 5
C X!
H 4-1 CD
4-1 CO
CO (fl Q)
C CD
01 fl)
£ -rl £
rl O U
D Q) (0
01 ft 0)
CO CO
£
0 .C 0
4-> O >H
(fl m
0) 0)
H CO
3 CO rH
CO i 1 {fl
o a g
ft £ -H
X -rl C rH
fl) C (fl O
m u
(fl O C C
O CN -rl O
1 > O
O MH -r|
CN 0 > II
>4 CO 3 ~*
fl) fl) CD O
MH cfl 0> =
(fl 0 .C
rl 4J »
CD rH 0)
3 a m o
Cfl 0) 0 C
OH 0)
-H C H
3 in (0 Q)
E fl) MH
3 MH £ 0)
"HO «
d 0)
Q X! II
W 4J
t-3 =
T) CD *
Vl C -H K
O (fl ^
MH 0) =
C 4J
^~ (fl (fl .
X! fl) O «*
4-1 £ -H CTi
C fl) ft rH
0) XI 0) ^
rH 4-> M rH
T) 4-1 Xi
C C 0 X!
(fl fl) (fl DI
CO 0) 3
4-> 0) 0
X! IH in H
a* ft o x;
rl fl) MH 4J
0) S-i
3 (fl <*
X! 4J CTi
>i 4-1 (0 -^
M O> Q rH
DC rH
^ 0) \
rH . O
(fl 4-1 rH
4J TJ CD
(fl C 0> T3
"O (fl 4-> fl)
x: 4-1 o) u
4J X! X! 3
3 tTi 4-1 T3
0 -rl C
JH 0) MH 0
O 5 0 U
in
rH
0)
8
W.
W
-~
a
fc
N
,£
4J
O
C
0)
»J
W
W
^
H
g
Jj
x;
D
-rH
0)
IS
K
*
CO
0)
4-1
(fl
IH 9
O '"J
rH
i, Q
fl) ^
X! ^
§ «
» 2
EH
1
CO
3
CO
O
-H
3
E
3
"H
[** kD
O rH
O O
o oo
O ro
O ro
* CN
O f
O 0
O 0
00 ro
i£> O
O ^*
O O
in in
CO
.,_!
r-l rH
(0 0
rl ft
4J (fl
rl C
C C
M (£
r~-
ro
^
o
rH
rH
U3
U3
CTi
O
O
O
CTi
ro
O
in
C
O
_p
^
0)
4J
4J
0)
pa
O ro
O in
O *3*
o o
^D ^*
O 00
o oo
O in
O rH
O <£>
0 O
o o
*
O CN
O <£>
O CN
o o
^D ^*
y ^1
fl) (0
at m
1-1
rj CD
.(-1
M 1 1
(fl S-l
fl) 3
pa u
CN CTi
O 00
CN rH
o o
t~- in
CN CTv
ro ro
0 rH
en vo
o o
0 0
CN rH
r- oo
^r in
o o
in in
o
0 in
C
(fl 4->
rH K
CO
M C
0
C -rl
0 4J
CO U
13 C
rl 3
O h>
CN
ro
o
in
O
H
O
^t
^-v
K
^
d
c
rfl
w
c
0)
^
(0
X!
C
C
K*1
j
in
o
o
V
ft
to
r ^
O
S-l
4J
c
o
o
c
(0
4-1
CD
CO
0)
rH
JX|
rH
4-1
C
(fl
U
-rl
MH
t-l
c
cn
rl
w
*
4-17
-------
-P
cfl
rH 4-1
CO 01
-r-|
4-1 11
C -P
H
4->
Cfl
01
4-1 01
C Q)
1) -H
E u
H D
O ft
11 01
01
£
0 U
4-1 Cfl
11
D
1-1 01
3 rH
01 cfl
0 E
ft -H
X C
1) cfl
>i in
Cfl rH
TJ
1 *4H
0 0
CN
01
H 0
0 4-1
4-1 Cfl
l(H U
Cfl -rl
rH
H ft
U 0
0 H
-rH.
t3 in
0)
C 4 I
Q) O
Q
W
M
to
T3
IH C
0 cfl
4-1
c
cfl
£ 0
Cn E
C 0
i) x;
rH 4-1
a 4J
c c
cfl 0
01
4-1 0
XI 1H
cn ft
-rl Q)
0 Vl
XI
>i 4->
Vi C"
T3 n
Q)
rH
cfl
4-1 "O
cfl C
O rt
X* 4-J
4J x;
S cn
O -rl
V-l 0
O S
i~H
0
rH
X3
EH
0
0
01
4J
01
0
.
x;
u
cfl
0
S
0
VI
01
rH
Cfl
E
H
C
cfl
Cn
C
>
rl
£>
^|
3
01
0
4-1
*4-4
o
c
cfl
0
0
4-1
01
-rl
0
4-1
cfl
O
-,-1
t-H
ft
0
>H
_£
U
cfl
0
^
O
cfl
4->
cfl
Q
4-1
01
0
-P
0
r]
4-1
M-l
O
,
rH
O
4-1
C
o
u
II
z
^-^
u
;
0
U
c
0
SH
0
0
II
K
r
^
CT.
tH
~^^
rH
1-1
XI
cn
3
0
Vi
-P
rH
rH
O
rH
a
0
4-1
o
3
a
c
o
u
w
w
_(-Ki
^^
-P
D
0
1
J
wl
0
4-1
0
0
»^
*
*
01
0
4-1
"I
Number
ue Repl
ji
H
0
.-y
w
oooooooooooooooo
*****
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooo
ooooodoooo'ddooo'cD
H
u
0
H
a
Q)
S
Initial
Annapolis
Betterton
Bear Creek
Curtis Bay
Gibson Island
Junction Rt.50
Outer" Harbor
Middle Banch
Northwest Harbor
South Ferry
Sparrows Point
Turner ' s Creek
Poropatank (R)
Lynnhaven Mud (C
Lynnhaven Sand (:
in
o
o
v
ft
4-1
C
O
U
C
cfl
a
4J
(0
Dl
Q)
C
cfl
U
-H
Cn
-.H
W
4-18
-------
greatest number of sites with significant mortality effects. Bear
Creek and Northwest Harbor (Patapsco River) sites showed the lowest
survival for both L. dytiscus and L. plumulosus on both day 10 and
day 20, while S. benedicti demonstrated the lowest survival at the
Middle Branch (Patapsco River) and Annapolis (Severn River) sites.
In the Cyprinodon variegatus egg tests, Bear Creek, Northwest
Harbor, Sparrows Point and Curtis Bay sites resulted in the lowest
survival (Table 4.13). On day 20, significantly reduced survival
in the L. dytiscus was only observed in the Baltimore Harbor
(Patapsco) sites with the exception of Betterton and Gibson Island
when adjusting for particle size effects. Taking into consideration
all potential significant survival effects after particle size
adjustment, Patapsco river sites had 83% "hits", Sassafras River
50%, Magothy River 66% and Severn 41%. Those sites with the least
number of "hits" were Turners Creek and Junction Route 50 with 2
hits each, both with S. benedicti.
Significant reduction in growth of L. plumulosus was reported
in the Curtis Bay sediment. It should be noted that there were no
survivors in the Bear Creek and Northwest Harbor sites: therefore,
no growth data could be analyzed for these sites. Lynnhaven sand
also caused decreased growth as compared with controls, however it
is suspected that this was caused by insufficient food as indicated
by the relatively low TOC (see Table 4.7) and not by toxicity.
Particle size in the Lynnhaven Sand reference is nearly 100% sand.
It is expected that food sources become limited during the test for
L. plumulosus. The natural control sediment for L. plumulosus is
only approximately 2% sand. For this reason it is expected that
survival in this reference would be low after 20 days of exposure
to uncontaminated but highly sand-laden sediments.
A number of sediments resulted in significantly reduced length
in S. benedicti (Table 4.16). Only four of the twelve sites failed
to demonstrate reduced lengths; Annapolis, Outer Harbor, Middle
Branch, and Turners Creek.
4.2.2 Contaminants Data
Toxicity of chemicals in sediments is determined by the extent
to which chemicals bind to the sediments. There are many factors
that influence the binding capabilities of a particular sediment.
The toxicity of non-ionic organic chemicals is related to the
organic content of the sediments, and it appears that the
bioavailability of many sediment-associated metals is related to
the concentration of Acid Volatile Sulfides (AVS) present in the
sediment (DiToro, 1990). Sediment samples from the' twelve stations
4-19
-------
and the controls were analyzed for Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and
Acid Volatile Sulfides (AVS). The results are shown in Tables 4.17
and 4.18. At present, there is no readily accessible data base for
comparison of TOC normalized data, therefore the TOC analysis from
this study was included to allow for future comparisons.
The AVS approach to sediment contaminants evaluation is still
developmental (DiToro, 1990) and has yet to be incorporated into a
standarized method for determining sediment quality criteria. To
appropriately interpret the AVS data, simultaneously extractable
metals (SEM) must also be analyzed. The data for SEM are presented
in Table 4.19. In evaluating the AVS values, a ratio of the sum of
the SEM to the total AVS is calculated. If the ratio is greater
than one (1) , toxicity is predicted, although if the total
concentration of metals is very low, toxic effects may not be
observed. If the SEM:AVS ratio produces a value less than one, it
is assumed that there is sufficient AVS present in the sediment to
bind with the metals, rendering them non-bioavailable and therefore
non-toxic. Evaluation of the SEM to AVS ratio is included in Table
4.18. All stations had ratios much less than one, therefore
toxicity due to metals would not normally be indicated. AVS in
both the Bear Creek and Curtis Bay sediments is greatly elevated,
therefore some consideration of the formation of sulfuric and other
acids in the anoxic zones must be considered as a potential natural
"toxicants", and may lead to mortality. Additionally, because the
SEM value in the Bear Creek sediments is relatively high when
compared to the other sites, the potential exists for toxicity to
occur when these sediments are exposed to oxidizing conditions,
whether in an aerated toxicity test or during winter storm events
in the field.
Inorganic contaminants data from the twelve stations are
presented in Table 4.20. All test sites had concentrations above
the detection limits for ten of the eleven metals analyzed. The
eleventh metal, tin, was below detection limit at several sites.
The Lynnhaven sand and Lynnhaven mud sites had concentrations below
detection limits for mercury, and tin, while the Poropotank
sediment was below the detection limit for mercury. Sediment-
sorbed contaminants have been extensively studied by Long and
Morgan (1990). They have established a table of concentrations at
which biological effects would be expected if these contaminants
were present in the sediment. The lower ten percentile of data for
which biological effects were observed was established as the
"Effects Range-Low" (ER-L); and median concentrations for which
biological effects were observed were identified as the "Effects
Range-Median" (ER-M). Long and Morgan (1990) indicate that the ER-L
4-20
-------
Table 4.17 Chemical data (TOC) for sediment samples from the six stations and the
controls. All data are on a dry weight basis.
Station Total Organic Carbon (%)
Annapolis 1.94
Betterton 2.89
Bear Creek 6.23
Curtis Bay 3.75
Gibson Island 1.07
Junction Rt.50 2.37
Outer Harbor 3.97
Middle Banch 2.97
Northwest Harbor 8.59
South Ferry 2.45
Sparrows Point 4.60
Turner's Creek 2.21
Poropatank (R) 3.53
Lynnhaven Mud (C) 1.39
Lynnhaven Sand (R)s <0.36
4-21
-------
Table 4.18 Average SEM and AVS values and the SEM:AVS ratio for sediment samples
tested in 1994.
Annapolis
Betterton
Bear Creek
Curtis Bay
Gibson Island
Junction Rt.50
Middle Banch
Northwest Harbor
Outer Harbor
South Ferry
Sparrows Point
Turner's Creek
Lynnhaven Sand
Lynnhaven Mud
Poropatank
Mean AVS
8.97
21.96
294.00
136.44
7.12
11.49
21.48
77.69
69.51
22.44
59.69
25.20
5.19
4.85
25.76
Mean SEM
4.476
3.249
39.872
8.213
2.258
4.057
5.682
7.837
11.441
2.771
15.412
2.657
0.000
0.947
1.189
Ratio
0.499
0.148
0.136
0.060
0.317
0.353
0.265
0.101
0.165
0.123
0.258
0.105
0.000
0.195
0.046
4-22
-------
rH
-P
Q)
£
U
id
Q)
M
0
MH
01
C
0
4->
id
4->
C
0)
CJ
C
0
U
en
00
o
rH
i
t-*
o
rH
o
0)
4-1
0
0)
rH
rH .
0 -P
U C
(U
01 g
4-> -rl
C "O
Q) Q)
6 01
C tH
Q) 0
01
g
vi id
O Vl
01 Vl
4-> Q)
C ft
Q)
e__)
1 1
rl 0
t3 g
Q) 3
01
C
Vl -rl
O
m 73
Q)
01 01
-rl 01
01 0)
>1 rl
rH O,
id x
C Q)
id
g Q)
w i-i
W «J
Ch
iH
^
0)
rH
JQ
id
EH
i|
col |
01 C
c id
"H 0)
N! g
,
0) C
0 Q)
H g
O C
id id
0) 0)
J g
Q) C
D id
0 0)
0 g
o
p*
3 C
p
o
a
4.
V
*D CT> £^
. t- t* £
^ CN
.. __ 0^
^* n ~^
rH rH JO
ro CN °j
n o! «
t-~ O rH
CN r- in
000
^* rH CN
rH o r~
CN CN 00
O . 0 O
VD O O
r^ o o
in o o
000
in CN oo
"3* in vo
O O CN
o o o
y
01 C CD
HOC!)
rH 4J Vl
O M U
ft 0)
j| id 4-> vi
J C 4J Id
H C Q) 0)
3| < 03 O
n co
rH in
CN CN
CO CN
n o
r*l O
VD 00
in rH
in r-
<£> 00
f~ rH
O o
r~ in
rH rH
CTl rH
o o
VD ID
a> in
VD rH
0 0
n o
0 0
CN O
o o
a
c
id
r-H
>l 01
id H
03
C
01 0
4-1 01
Vl Q
3 -H
U O
rH
**
*
^|
n
en
co
5
o
VD
ID
O
in
r-
rH
rH
*
in
rH
O
^_j
O
^1
id
K
J_j
0)
4->
3
O
r-
in
0
*
CN
«
C
O
-rl
-P
U
C
3
CN
00
in
en
0
CN
o
CN
rH
in
o
ID
r-
oo
0
O
o
o
o
rj
0
c
id
VI
m
Q)
rH
o
T3
rl
g
r-
ro
CD
r^
CN
00
in
in
CN
CN
O
00
O
1
J-)
Vl
0)
(-J
4J
3
0
co
CN
rH
in
rH
0
CN
rH
H
CN
0
in
n
rH
rH
00
en
rH
rH
in
rH
d
4J
C
-rl
0
CM
01
u
O
Vl
id
ft
CO
I
CN
>D
00
rH
id
in
ID o
§ 8
O o
o d
MH
o
tn
4J
rl
g
-rl
0 rH
I |
CU
4-1
0)
TD
^
O
rH
CU
m
0 CU
O Vl
O Q)
Q
01
0)
3
1
id
01 Vl
-P 3
^ U
g Vl
-r-l Q)
r-l g
C rH
0 rH
rl Hi
-P *
O
0) U
4-> H
0) O
Q S
4-23
-------
a
01
in
in
0)
iH
ft
X
01
01
tl
H
to
r-H
(0
4J
01
.c
o
(8
0)
.H
0
m
01
c
O
rH
4-1
(ti
!H
4-1
C
0)
U
C
o
u
.
<*
CTi
^^
CO
"*^
o
rH
1
r~
^»
O
rH
a
0)
4-1
u
0)
r-H
rH
O
0 JJ
tn Q)
P e
C -rl
0) T>
e a)
H in
a
01 MH
w o
n e
O (B
4H V4
Dl
in
"H >H
in oi
>i ft
rH
(ti rH
C O
(a e
3
2
we
- W -H
4-1
c
0
u
tyi .
rH
,
*t
0)
rH
X!
(ti
EH
3 cti
col OJ
2
01 C
C| (ti
H 0)
N| 2
,__)
0) C
.* (ti
U 0)
H 2
T3 C
(0 (0
0) 0)
i-l 2
Mean
Cadmium
Mean
o
0
0
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
d
a
c
(ti
co
c
0)
>
(ti
JS
c
c
>1
ij
r-
^1
Oi
0
o
H
00
o
o
o
0
o
r~-
«*
0
0
CTi
CO
0
C3
0
O
O
o
TI
3
2
C
0)
>
(0
£
C
C
>i
J
CTl
CO
rH
r-l
ro
t
i-H
rH
O
o
0
o
VD
*!
0
O
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
a
3
2
X
C
(ti
-P
O
ft
0
VI
o
14
PK
If)
O
0
O
o
r-H
^J
0
o
o
o
tf>
0
o
o
o
o
in
0
O
O
n
o
0
0
o
c
0
r|
4-1 tn
O 4-1
0) -H
4-1 E
0) -H
Q 1-5
sites
rH
rH
(0
(-1
0
MH
in
4-1
0)
in
J3
4-1
o
XI
c
rl
If)
O
o
0
o
0
MH
o
in
4J
rl
e
rl
rH
0
4-1
0
0)
4-1
0)
TD
3
O
rH
01
XI
01
r-l
OJ
in
0)
3
rH
(ti
>
>1
(-1
3
U
!H
0)
2
rH
rH
<
U
H
O
z
4-24
-------
0
l-l
-p
c
0
u
sco
O rd C
I 73 II
Q) 01
Cn 2 I
C I I
rd 0)
K Cn »
C 0)
r-H
(U
H
0)
£
4-1
0
tn
(U
rH
a
rd
tn
4-1
c
Q)
e
H
a
Q)
to
rd
rd
P «
U
0) CO
MH 4-> -H
iw O rd
W Q) >
r MH rd
MH
Cn H 4->
C = 0
-» C
a tn
01
0)
o -a <
X 0) S
01 a>
o
tn x
C 0) O
o en
H tn m
4-> C rH
rd O
1H -H v
4-1 4-) C
C rd rd
0) i4 en
U 4-1 V-l TD
C C O 01
0 0)
o o
C 73
2 -P
w
0 C rH
U rd
01
in 4J Cn in
0) C C O
VH 01 0 rC
a in j 4-1
01 01
VH M C C
a -rH rd
co fli £
0) M 73 4J
3 0)
rH in c cn
rd 01 -rH to
> 3 MH 0)
rH 0) rH
73 rd 73
01
c
.rH
rH
rH
01
T3
c
3
0)
rH
01
C
rH
tn
0)
4-1
0
z
>
TJ
0)
c
rH
rH
rH
0)
73
C
3
0)
rH
rQ
3
o
73
73
C
tn
rd
3
O
rH
0)
rQ
73
01
-P
cn
rH
rH
CO
rH
Q)
>
01
01
IH
0)
s
cn
0)
3
I-H
rd
>
II
V
*.
73
0)
4-1
cn
rH
o
CN
X!
rd
E-i
C
(
VH
0
0
"o
01
4-1
-rH
W
VC
c
f
OC
C
CC
C
O
H
rH
CO
CN
0
VO
CN
O
VO
in
in
VO
0
in
en
oo
rH
ro
00
O
CM
Oi
in
o
o
ro
CM
CM
tn
.rH
r-H
0
a
rd
c
c
o
II CN
Ur
II CM
t-
ro
in
en
rH
in
r
\«
t
0
CO
ro
O
vO
CN|
1
.1
10
*
1 ro
1
d
VOl
CM
in|
O
rH
CM
oo
y
Q)
0)
rH
U
J-l
rd
01
co.
oo
in
ro
CN
CO
CO
o
o
CO
rH
ro
ro
en
CN
O
CM
O
inl
r-
vo|
<*
Cn
in
0
'I1
vO
CN
in
rH
CMl
H
o
0
vO
ro
ro
C
O
-p
rH
01
4-1
0)
m
1 "-1
VO
1 *
ro
m
ro
O
rH
cn
CM
r-
ro
ro
O
VD
O
m
rs
S
CM
rH
CO
rH
^
«*
'CN
r^
CN
rH
O
O
r-
CO
rH
^
rd
m
in
.rH
4-1
3
U
»r-
r*i
M
o
CM
ro
O
O
CM
r-
o
ro
00
rH
CTi
m
o
o
oo
in
in
CN
in
rH
cn
VO
in
CN
o
ro
ro
CM
O
0
rH
0
rH
73
c
rd
rH
in
M
C
0
CD
X!
O
VC
t
CN
rH
0
ro
O
V
in
r-
CN
in
r^
*
<*
in
CN
o
H
VO
vO
rH
ro
in
CN
rH
en
0
rH
^
r-
in
o
o
in
in
CM
O
in
.
4-1
K
C
O
rH
-P
O
C
3
-3
01
ro
liro
VO
O
rH
O
rH
CN
ro
r-
O
II o-
o-
II r-
rH
O
P"
o
y
o
<*
rH
rH
ro
CM
rH
VC
rH
O
en
3
^
oo
ro
*
cn
CM
m
o
rH
ro
ro
O
CN
en
r^l
^)
^(
01
fe
r]
4->
3
O
W
9 in
m
v£
0
VC
rH
00
en
ro
o
vO
m
^
"d1
»*
o
1-
00
r-
rH
2
VO
O^
ro
cn
rH
CM
OI
O
o
o
ro
4->
C
-H
0
a,
in
^
0
rH
rd
a
w
«ro
«-j
rH
VO
VO
t
o
VO
CM
en
o
ro
^f
ro
in
cn
0
o
ro
in
ro
en
r-
rH
VO
CN
rH
ro
vO
O
en
cn;
o
o
CM
CO
rH
y
01
01
J_(
u
cn
fc
^i
01
c
SH
3
H
vO o
rH . r-
CN i-
CM t- r-
rH rH rr
O O r~
ro ro IT
O O
V V
CM <* C
* O OC
O CN VC
O O O
o
VO
ro CO O
O rH ro
rH CN
000
ro ro ro
O O O
O O O
V V V
O CO rH
CM
CM en
rH rH rH
0
in
rH r- ro
O CN 00
rH rH
rH
cn
vo CM r-
O CM rH
CM in
oo
^J1 O rH
rH 00 'tf
O rH O
O rH r-
rH ^T CN
rH CM *
00 O O
* 0 0
ro * O
rH 0
H ro
o
C 73
rfl 3
W 2
C C C
CD 01 rd
> > 4-1
rd rd rd
rC rC D.
CCO
C C rH
>i >i 0
ro
O
O
O
rH
O
ro
0
in
rH
0
o
VO
o
o
o
o
ro
o
O
ro
O
O
ro
O
O
o
ro
O
O
0
ro
O
O
in
rH
o
o
rH
O
ro
O
C
O
rH
-P 4->
O -rH
0) E
4-1 -H
01 J
Q
0)
CT
C
rd
in
4-1
u
01
IfH
IfH
W
O O
CM f-
rH CM
O O
ro in
rH ro
O rH
in o
ro rH
O O
r> en
ro
O in
CO <*
in cn
ro in
ro oo
ft!
M
D
2
4-25
-------
and ER-M values can be used for comparisons between sites. The
concentrations of toxicants in the sediments of the sites are
compared with the ER-L or ER-M values, which are used simply as
"benchmarks" for the relative degree of contamination. Those
contaminants with concentrations exceeding the ER-L fall into a
category that Long and Morgan (1990) consider to be the "possible"
effects range for toxic effects. Contaminant concentrations above
the ER-M fall in the category of "probable" toxic effects. Of
course, many biogeochemical factors influence biological
availability of contaminants in sediments, so comparisons of "bulk"
chemical concentrations against these benchmark values represent
rough attempts at ranking the relative potential of various
sediments for toxicity. These comparisons are believed to be
overly conservative in many cases, so theoretically-based
approaches such as the SEM/AVS method described above should be
given more weight in the interpretation of the data.
Inorganic analysis revealed one site (Bear Creek) exceeded the
ER-M values for cadmium. Lead and zinc were found to exceed either
the ER-L or ER-M at every test site, while chromium exceeded either
one or the other of these levels at all but Betterton, Gibson
Island and South Ferry. Similarly, mercury values exceeded either
ER-L or ER-Ms at all but Turner Creek and Gibson Island. Arsenic
exceeded these values at all but Gibson Island. Copper was not as
widespread, however concentrations measuring nearly 3 times the ER-
L were observed in Bear Creek sediments, and the Sparrows Point
and Outer Harbor sites had values approaching twice to three times
the ER-Ls.
The results of organic pesticides and semi-volatile compound
analyses in sediment samples are presented in Appendix B. No
pesticides exceeded either the ER-L or ER-M for these compounds
(Long and Morgan 1990). Contamination by semi-volatile organic
compounds was widespread, and exceeded the ER-Ms at a number of
Baltimore Harbor (Patapsco River) sites. Most notably were the
high concentration of both pyrene and dibenzo(a,h)anthracene. Some
of the values reached nearly five times the ER-M for pyrene and
over 22 times the ER-M for dibenzo(a,h)anthracene. Both of these
values were observed at the Northwest Harbor site in the Patapsco
River.
4.2.3 Pore Water Data
Sediment pore water was analyzed for sulfide, ammonia, and
nitrite for all stations and the controls. The pore water data are
shown in Table 4.21. Ammonia concentrations were converted to
percent unionized ammonia for comparison with EPA' criteria for
4-26
-------
Table 4.21 Chemical data for pore water samples from the twelve stations and the
references and controls.
Site:
Total
Ammonia
(ma/L)
Nitrite
(ma/L)
Sulfide
(ma/L)
Unionized
Ammonia
(ma/L)
Unionized
Toxicity
Limits
(ma/L)
Annapolis 4.34
Bear Creek 8.69
Betterton 3.98
Curtis Bay 17.55
Gibson Island 6.56
Junction Rt.50 3.12
Middle Banch 4.16
Northwest Harbor 14.78
Outer Harbor 4.13
South Ferry 12.16
Sparrows Point 5.65
Turner's Creek 6.52
Lynnhaven Sand 3.67
Lynnhaven Mud 6.10
Poropatank 2.51
0.0142
0.0029
0.0029
0.0110
0.0049
0.0055
0.0119
0.0006
0.0156
0.0032
,0119
.0090
0.0462
0.0225
0.0095
0.
0.
0.0043
0.0154
0.0056
0.0117
0.0043
0.0043
0.0105
0.0289
0.0056
0.0179
0.0056
0.0105
0.0400
0.0228
0.0092
0.0350
0.2724
0.0796
0.4398
0.0834
0.0397
0.0529
0.3704
0.0525
0.2433
0.0456
0.0526
0.0920
0.0311
0.0502
0.0130
0.0517
0.0326
0.0410
0.0206
0.0206
0.0206
0.0411
0.0411
0.0326
0.0130
0.0130
0.0082
0.0326
0.0326
4-27
-------
continuous concentrations for saltwater aquatic life. Values for
sediment exposure concentrations have not been determined.
Therefore these "comparison" values should be extremely
conservative, as it is suspected that sediment organisms have
developed either a greater tolerance for ammonia, or exhibit
behaviors or physiological responses which enable them to live in
high ammonia environments.
4.2.4 Reference Toxicant Data
The relative sensitivities of each set of test organisms was
evaluated with reference toxicant tests. The results of each
reference toxicant test conducted with each batch of amphipod,
worms and Sheepshead minnows are shown in Table 4.22. All
organisms were tested using cadmium chloride (CdCl2) . All test
LCSO's were within the range of the previous reference toxicant
tests conducted, with the exception of the L. plumulosus data which
exhibited higher sensitivity to cadmium than previous reference
tests. Because the survival in the control sediment was 84 percent
at day ten, the increased sensitivity was attributed to the slight
reduction in initial size of the animals used in the tests as
compared to the previous tests. This increased sensitivity in
reference tests did seem to decrease overall negative control
survival when compared with previous data.
4-28
-------
Table 4.22 Reference toxicant data results from 96-hr, water only, reference toxicant
tests for the fourth year of the ambient toxicity project. Cadmium chloride
(CdCl2) was used for all organisms.
Organism
Chemical LC50 S CIs lma/L}
Historical
Mean
L. plumulosus CdCl2 0.25 (0.128-0.494)
1.06
L. dytiscus
CdCl2 2.40 (1.78-3.23)
3.76
S. benedicti
CdCl2 2.07 (1.65-2.60)
4.26
CL. variegatus CdCl2 0.94 (0.730-1.21)
0.697
4-29
-------
SECTION 5
DISCUSSION
5.1 Patapsco River
The Patapsco River (Baltimore Harbor) area has historical
contaminant problems that have been documented during our previous
ambient toxicity testing programs (Hall et al., 1991; Hall et al.,
1992) and other studies (Eskin et al., 1994). Most of the
contaminant problems have been reported in sediment and not the
water column. Results from the 1994 effort were somewhat
consistent with this trend except for the toxicity observed with
the coot clam. During the first test with this bivalve species,
reduced shell development was reported at all Baltimore Harbor
sites (5 sites) except Sparrows Point. However, during the second
test no biological effects were reported at any of the 6 sites.
These results suggest that occasional toxicity can be observed in
the water column at the various Baltimore Harbor sites. Possible
causes of toxicity cannot be identified. The metals data available
from these tests do not generally suggest that high, potentially
toxic concentrations are available although copper did exceed the
marine water quality criteria at the Bear Creek station. Due to
the lack of organics data from this study, the role of organic
contaminants cannot be assessed.
The sediment data obtained from the fall 1994 sampling period
indicated significant decrease in survival in all of the Baltimore
Harbor sites. Streblospio benedicti and L. dytiscus tests
indicated significant differences in survival at day ten after
adjustment for particle size at all sites. At day 20, only Outer
Harbor failed to produce significant mortality for both species.
Leptocheirus plumulosus resulted in high significant mortality at
both the Bear Creek and Northwest Harbor sites. Growth reduction
was seen only at the Curtis Bay site in the L. plumulosus test,
however, S. benedicti revealed length reductions in all but Outer
Harbor and Middle Branch. Inorganic contaminants were particularly
high at Bear Creek, exceeding the ER-Ms for Cd, Cr, Pb, and Zn and
ER-Ls for As, Cu, Hg and Ni. All of these sites exceeded the ER-
Ms for Pb, Zn and Cr. Although the AVS/SEM values were all below
one, it is believed that because of the presence of excessive
metals concentrations in the sediment, sufficient oxidation takes
place at the sediment water interface to oxidize the sulfide-metal
complexes, produce bioavailable forms of these metals, and induce
toxicity. The TOC at several of these sites (Bear Creek, Curtis
Bay, Outer Harbor, Northwest Harbor, and Sparrows point) exceeded
5-1
-------
those found in the Poropotank control and reference sediment
suggesting much greater inputs of carbon sources than would occur
naturally. It is currently unclear if the major source of this
input is point-source or non-point urban run-off. Ammonia levels
were also elevated at the Bear Creek, Curtis Bay and Northwest
Harbor sites. The unionized ammonia toxicity limits were exceeded
at every Patapsco river site, sometimes by as much as 10 times
(Curtis Bay).
Pesticide analysis indicated the presence of metolachlor at
five of the six harbor sites. In addition, DDD, was found at the
Outer Harbor site, and the Bear Creek sediments contained alachlor,
methoxychlor and trichlorbiphenyls. None of these, however,
exceeded the ER-Ls. Every site in the Patapsco River exceeded the
ER-Ms of at least one semi-volatile compound. The most prevalent
of these was dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, which exceeded the ER-M at
every site. Pyrene was also present above the ER-Ms at multiple
sites. Naphthalene, phenanthrene, benzo(a)pyrene, fluoranthene
were also found above the ER-Ms in the Patapsco River (Appendix B).
The above sediment toxicity data can be compared with Long-
term benthic (LTB) monitoring data collected during the Maryland
Department of Environment Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Monitoring
Program. The LTB data for August 1994 from Ranasinghe et al.
(1995) showed that the benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI)
indicated either degraded or severely degraded conditions were
present in 5 of the Baltimore Harbor sites evaluated during our
ambient toxicity study (Outer Harbor, Bear Creek, Curtis Bay,
Middle River and Northwest Branch). The Sparrows Point ambient
toxicity site was not evaluated during the LTB sampling. The
results from LTB sampling are in general agreement with the data
from our ambient toxicity testing.
5.2 Sassafras River
The Sassafras River is an ecologically important ecosystem
(e.g., spawning area for striped bass) with some documented
contaminants present in the sediment (Eskin et al. 1994). Toxicity
data from ambient water column tests are not available from
previous studies for comparison. Results from water column tests at
the Betterton site, located at the mouth of the river, did suggest
the presence of toxicity from both the Eurytemora and coot clam
test. This was the most significant water column toxicity reported
from any of the 12 stations tested during 1994. Significant reduced
shell development from the coot clam test at Turner Creek (test 1)
also suggested the presence of water column toxicity. The limited
5-2
-------
contaminants data available (metals data only) did not provide any
insight on possible causes of toxicity.
Betterton and Turners Creek sediment resulted in fewer
significant toxicity results compared with those of the Baltimore
Harbor sites. While Betterton demonstrated toxic responses in both
L. dytiscus and S. benedicti, Turner Creek showed toxicity only in
the S. benedicti tests. Particle size results indicated that the
Turner Creek site was substantially more sandy than the Betterton
site, possibly affecting survival of the S. benedicti. There were
no growth effects in the Turners Creek sediment, however reduction
in the S. benedicti length was reduced in the Betterton sediment.
TOC was not notably increased compared with controls at either
site. The SEM data for both sites was low relative to most of the
other tests sites, but still elevated in comparison to reference
and control sites (Table 4.18). Bulk metals may have been partially
responsible for toxicity at both sites, as nickel and zinc were
greater than the Median Effect Range at the Betterton site, and
arsenic, lead and mercury were greater than the ER-L at Betterton.
(Long and Morgan, 1990). Turner Creek sediment also exceeded the
ER-Ls for arsenic, chromium, lead, nickel and zinc. Ammonia
concentrations were above the continuous water column toxicity
limits, -however they were relatively consistent with the control
and reference sediment concentrations. Pesticides were found only
in trace mounts at both sites. No semi-volatile organic compounds
exceeded the ER-M's in the Sassafras River sediments.
5.3 Magothy River
The Magothy River is located in a highly urbanized area with
very few point sources. Potentially toxic organic contaminants have
been reported in sediments of this river (Eskin et al., 1994).
This was the first year of ambient toxicity testing in this river;
therefore background data are not available for comparison. The
water column results from at least one coot clam test at both the
Gibson Island and South Ferry station suggested toxicity;
biological effects were not reported from any of the other water
column tests. Concentrations of metals in the water column were not
high or potentially toxic and organics data were not reported.
Therefore, potential causes of toxicity can not be identified
during the coot clam tests.
The South Ferry site exhibited sediment toxicity in all
species except L. plumulosus. At day 20 neither L. dytiscus or S.
benedicti demonstrated the same significance toxicological effects
compared with controls as they had at day 10 when adjusting for
particle size effects. The Gibson Island site showed a similar
5-3
-------
pattern, however mortality was still significant at day 20 in both
L. dytiscus and L. plumulosus. No statistically significant
mortality was observed in the C. variegatus egg tests. Reduction
in growth was observed at both sites in the S. benedicti tests,
while no other growth effects were observed. TOC was relatively
low in the Gibson Island sediment and is probably related to the
relatively high sand content at the site. Total SEM was also
relatively low at both Gibson Island and South Ferry test sites
when compared with the other tests sites, but was above those for
the reference and control sites. Bulk metals analyses revealed
lead concentration exceeding the ER-M by nearly 25 times at Gibson
Island. This elevated lead content was not observed when SEM was
measured, but could account for toxicity observed at the Gibson
Island site. The source of this contamination is currently
unknown. South Ferry was contaminated with levels of arsenic,
lead, mercury and zinc which exceeded the ER-Ls. South Ferry
sediments contained measurable levels of gamma-chlordane while
Gibson Island sediment had trace levels. No semi-volatile
organic compounds exceeded the ER-M's in the Magothy River
sediments.
5 . 4 Severn River
The Severn River is an ecologically important river (e.g. blue
crabs, key bay fish species) with few point sources. Eskin et al.
(1994) have reported the presence of toxic compounds in the
sediment of this river. Background water column toxicity data are
*not available for comparison with our data. Our results from the
first coot clam test suggest the presence of toxic conditions in
the water column from both the Annapolis and Route 50 stations. No
effects were reported during the second coot clam test or any of
the other water column tests. These results suggest that
occasional toxicity can occur in this river. Possible causes of
toxicity can not be identified although the metals that were
measured during this study can likely be eliminated due to the low
concentrations reported.
The Route 50 sediment caused significant mortality only in S.
benedicti at both day 10 and 20 when adjusting for particle size
effects. Lepidactylus dytiscus showed significant mortality only
prior to particle size adjustment. Cyprinodon variegatus and L.
plumulosus revealed no increased mortality over controls.
Annapolis sediment caused increased mortality in S. benedicti as
well as in C. variegatus tests. When adjusting for particle size,
no significant mortality was observed, in the L. dytiscus test, and
5-4
-------
L. plumulosus also did not indicate increased toxicity. The only
growth effects observed were for S. benedict! at the Route 50 site.
Total organic carbon at both sites was moderate with respect to the
other test sites, and was lower than that found at the Poropotank
reference/control site. Carbon loading was therefore not
considered a concern at these sites. The particle size at the
Annapolis site was shifted more toward the sand end of the spectrum
when compared with the other test sites. Only Gibson Island and
Turner Creek appeared to be more heavily sand-laden. Of all the
test sites, Annapolis had the highest SEM/AVS ratio value, 0.499
(Table 4.18). This may have resulted from the low AVS which may be
somewhat correlated to the high sand content of the sediment. The
Route 50 site had the second highest ratio of all the tests sites
at 0.353. The bulk metals at Annapolis show chromium and zinc
above the ER-M, and arsenic, lead, mercury and nickel above the ER-
L. Junction Route 50 resulted in a similar pattern, except that
only zinc was above the ER-M (Table 4.20). Pesticide analysis
showed the presence of trifluralin in the Annapolis sediment.
Additionally, the semi-volatile compound dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
was present above the ER-M at the Annapolis site(Appendix B).
5-5
-------
SECTION 6
ANALYSIS OF THE FOUR YEAR DATA BASE
6.1 Water Column Toxicity
The results of multivariate composite index calculations for
water column toxicity for the 1990, 1991, 1992-93, and 1994
experiments are summarized in Figures 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4a and 6.4b
respectively. The species tested and the number of endpoints used
varied slightly from year to year (i.e., five water column tests
for 1990, four tests for 1991, 1992-93 and 1994). Therefore,
comparisons of index values within the figures for same year are
more comparable than those of different years. The composite index
calculations generated for each station and year from concurrent
reference (control value) and test conditions, therefore, provide
interpretation on the relative magnitude of the toxic response of
the various sites. This analysis also provided a degree of
confidence that could be given to differences between reference and
test values. A summary of comparison of TOX-INDEX values for
control (or reference) and test sites is presented in Table 6.1.
The TOX-INDEX analysis for the 1990 data in Figure 6.1 showed
that the Elizabeth River was clearly the most toxic site tested, as
the median for the index of the test condition was clearly greater
than the reference (control). The confidence limits for the
reference and test condition did not overlap at this location.
Nearly half of the endpoints displayed significant differences
between the reference and test conditions. The results from the
Elizabeth River are not surprising since significant mortality was
observed in two of the three estuarine tests that were conducted.
The second most toxic area identified with the TOX-INDEX analysis
was the Patapsco River as significant mortality was reported in one
out of three tests. However, the confidence interval was fairly
wide (indicating variability) for this station and there was no
difference in the median values for the reference and test site.
The results from the Indian Head, Freestone Point, Possum Point,
Morgantown, Dahlgren and Wye River stations indicated no
significant difference with index values between the reference and
test conditions for the 1990 tests. Both Morgantown and Dahlgren
stations did show limited biological effects with one of the tests
(significant mortality with the sheepshead minnow test). However,
these results from the test condition were not significantly
different than the reference when all endpoints from all tests were
combined for the final index calculations.
The multivariate composite index calculations for the 1991
6-1
-------
Figure 6.1 TOX-INDEX results for the 1990 water column data.
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
50
Indian Head
!y 30-
20-
10-
i
-10
o
Reference
Test
Freestone Point
Reference
Test
Possum Point
50
40-1
20
-10
Reference
Test
50
Dahlgren
£40 1
i3l
£ 20}
' 0
-10
Reference
Test
Patapsco
£.40-
530
^20-
5 10
f o-
in .
o
ou
£- 40
° in
"X 30
- 20-
!'°
^ o-
.in.
O
Reference
Test
Wye River
Reference
Test
Morgantown
Reference
Test
Elizabeth
Reference
Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding WQC
O 0 1-2 03+
Test is significantly separated from reference
6-2
Test
-------
Figure 6.2 TOX-INDEX results for the 1991 water column data
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
50
£-40
£30-
& 20-
Potapsco
Z 0
-10
Reference
Test
50
£-40-
-§30-
*~ 20-
Dahlgren
0
I
10-
0
-10
Reference
Test
Wye River
o
Reference
Test
Morgantown
Reference
Test
Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding WQC
OO O 1-2 03+
6-3
-------
Figure 6.3 TOX-INDEX results for the 1992-3 water column data.
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
50
Wilson Point
Frog Mortar
g 30-
fc 20-
| 10-
o
Reference
Test
Quarter Creek
£40
o 30'
£ 20-
JB 10
I 0
-10
Manor House
Reference Test
Bivalve
ou-
40-
30-
20-
10-
0
in.
O
Test
Sandy Hill Beach
WJ
40
30"
20-
10
0
^_^
( ^)
V_^
Reference
Test
Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding WQC
O 0 O 1-2 03+
* Test is significantly separated from reference
6-4
-------
Figure 6.4a
TOX-INDEX results for the 1994 water column data
for the Severn, Magothy and sassafras Rivers. (See
Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
50
South Ferry
Junction Route 50
50
£40
o
Betterton
Reference
Test
Turner Creek
au-
1"
O 30'
5 10-
(3
*
Reference
Test
Reference
Test
Location Symbol Key
50
£"40-
^ 20-
0
O ID'
Gibson Island
Reference
Test
Concentrations Exceeding WQC
O 0 O 1-2 3+
Test is significantly separated from reference
6-5
-------
Figure 6.4b TOX-INDEX results for the 1994 water column data
for Baltimore Harbor sites. (See Section 3.4 for a
detailed description of presentation).
Northwest Harbor
50
*«
£30
s20
P 10
(3
*
Reference
Test
50
Curtis Bay
J3 30
520
5 10
o
Reference
Test
Middle Branch
o 40
JO 30
| 10
O
*
Bear Creek
Reference fesf
Sparrows Point
Reference
Test
Outer Harbor
"FOLK!
so
40
30
20
10
-^
(m
^-^
*
^* DafAr£»rw~a 7«ac+
Reference Test Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding WQC
O 0 1-2 03+
* Test is significantly separated from reference
6-6
-------
Table 6.1 Summary of comparisons of water column RTRM indices for reference and test sites presented in Figures 6.1 - 6.4.
Comparisons for which confidence limits overlap are indicated by "0", those for which the confidence limits do not overlap
are indicated by "X", while "--" indicates no data taken for the period
STATION
BALTIMORE HARBOR
BEAR CREEK
MTDDT P RRAMPH
NORTHWEST HARBOR
OUTER HARBOR
PATAPSCO RIVER
SPARROWS POINT
ELIZABETH RIVER
MAGOTHY
GIBSON ISLAND
SOUTH FERRY
vjinriT P RTVPT?
FROG MORTAR
WILSON POINT
NANTICOKE RIVER
BIVALVE
SANDY HILL BEACH
POTOMAC RIVER
DAHLGREN
FREESTONE POINT
INDIAN HEAD
MORGANTOWN
POSSUM POINT
SASSAFRAS
BETTERTON
TURNER'S CREEK
SEVERN
ANNAPOLIS
JUNCTION ROUTE 50
WYE RIVER
MANOR HOUSE
QTIARTFR TRFFK
1990
--
-
--
--
-
0
-
X
..
--
--
-
0
0
0
0
1
0
--
--
-
0
-
1991
-
--
--
-
--
0
-
..
--
--
-
o
-
--
0
--
--
--
--
0
-
1992-3
-
-
--
-
--
--
-
_.
-
x
X
0
o
--
--
-
-
--
--
--
0
0
1994
X
0
X
X
X
-
X
X
o
--
--
--
--
-
-
X
X
X
X
--
6-7
-------
experiments are presented in Figure 6.2. Four water column tests
with two endpoints for each test were used to determine the final
values for two testing periods (summer and fall). The Wye River
site showed the most significant effects as significant mortality
was reported for two different test species during different
testing periods. Although the median values from the reference and
test sites were different, there was overlap of confidence limits
with these two conditions. A comparison of reference and test
index values for the Patapsco River, Morgantown and Dahlgren sites
showed no significant differences. However, reduced growth of the
sheepshead minnow was reported at both the Morgantown and Dahlgren
sites during the summer experiments.
The results from the 1992-93 experiments presented in Figure
6.3 include experiments conducted during the fall (1992) and spring
(1993) at each of the 6 sites (2 sites per river). The most toxic
sites were reported at both Middle River stations (Wilson Point and
Frog Mortar Creek). Results from the coot clam toxicity tests (2
tests per experiment conducted in the fall and spring) showed
consistent toxicity at both sites. Although median values were
similar for both Middle River sites, the variability at Wilson
Point was greater than at Frog Mortar. Water quality criteria were
exceeded at both sites. The results from TOX-INDEX analysis at the
other 4 sites showed no difference between the reference and the
test condition. The only other biological effect reported at any
of these 4 sites was significant mortality of E. affinis at the Wye
River-Quarter Creek site during the spring experiments.
The results of the 1994 experiments are presented in Figure
6.4a and 6.4b. The TOX-INDEX values from the Severn, Magothy and
Sassafras Rivers were guite similar to those of the corresponding
reference sites (Figure 6.4a). However, the confidence limits for
all sites in these rivers except South Ferry (Magothy) did not
overlap the limits for the reference condition. Thus, the sites
displayed statistical differences but they were of questionable
ecological significance. In Baltimore Harbor, Sparrows Point site
displayed significant toxicity (Figure 6.4b) while Northwest
Harbor, Bear Creek, Middle Branch, and Outer Harbor showed
statistically significant but ecologically minimal toxicity. The
Curtis Bay exhibited no toxic effects.
A summary of the four year water column data base using the
TOX-INDEX analysis showed the following ranking of toxicity for the
various sites:
the Elizabeth River (1990), the Middle River (1992-93) ,
and Sparrows Point in Baltimore Harbor (1994) were the
6-8
-------
most toxic sites tested during the first four years of
the Ambient Toxicity Testing Program;
the Wye River-Manor House test site in 1991 had a median
value for the composite index greater than the control
value but there was an ovelap with the confidence
interval between the test and reference sites; Wye River-
Manor House site tested in 1990 and Wye River (Manor
House and Quarter Creek sites) tested in 1992-93
displayed no water column toxicity;
Baltimore Harbor showed variable toxicity:
in 1990, the Patapsco River site showed some
toxicity as evidenced by the wide confidence
interval; however, the test condition on the
average was not significantly different than the
control;
in 1991, the Patapsco River site displayed no
toxicity;
in 1994, Sparrows Point displayed significant water
column toxicity, while the other 5 sites displayed
little (Bear Creek, Middle Branch, Northwest
Harbor, Outer Harbor) or no (Curtis Bay) overall
toxic effects.
the (1994) TOX-INDEX values for the Severn, Sassafras,
and one of the Magothy River sites (Gibson Island)
displayed statistically significant differences from
those from the reference conditions, but the magnitude of
the water column toxicity appeared to be minimal for
these areas.
the five Potomac River sites (Indian Head, Freestone
Point, Possum Point, Morgantown and Dahlgren) tested in
1990 and two sites tested in 1991 (Morgantown and
Dahlgren) generally showed no significant water column
effects;
the composite index for the reference and test conditions
were similar at both Nanticoke River sites (1992-93),
thus suggesting no significant water column effects.
6-9
-------
6.2 Sediment Toxicity
The results of the multivariate composite index calculations
for sediment toxicity for the 1990, 1991, 1992-93, and 1994 studies
are summarized in Figures 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8a and 6. 8b
respectively. It should be noted that the species and the number
of endpoints tested varied slightly from year to year, so
comparisons of index values within the figures (within the same
year) are more comparable than those between figures. Nonetheless,
the comparisons of concurrent reference and test experiments
provide insight into the relative magnitude of the toxic responses
of the various sites. Table 6.2 summarizes the comparisons
presented in Figures 6.5 - 6.8.
During the 1990 study, the Elizabeth River was clearly the
most toxic of the sites, since all species displayed nearly
complete mortality during the first 10 days of the experiment
(i.e., the median for the index for the test data was greatly
separated from the median for the reference data, with little
variation; Figure 6.5). The Elizabeth River provides an example of
the worst case TOX-INDEX values. The confidence limits of the test
data index values were well separated from those of the
corresponding reference sites for a number of other sites: Patapsco
River; Wye River; and the Freestone Point, Possum Point and
Dahlgren sites on the Potomac River (although the latter two sites
displayed a considerable degree of variation in index values). The
Indian Head and Morgantown sites on the Potomac River displayed
only slight separation between the median multivariate index values
for the test and reference conditions. Thus, the magnitude of
potential toxicity appears to be less for the Indian Head and
Morgantown sites than for the others. It should be noted, however,
that all sites selected for the first year of the study were those
considered "suspect" due to the results of previous studies, so it
is not surprising that most displayed significant deviations from
the reference conditions.
The 1991 study involved an assessment of the effects of short-
term temporal variability (a summer versus a fall collection) on
the apparent toxicity of sediments from four sites. The separation
between test and reference treatments was greatest for the Patapsco
River site, with less separation being displayed for Dahlgren,
Morgantown, and the Wye (Figure 6.6). The results of the Patapsco
River index comparison were remarkably similar to those observed
for the 1990 study. The Dahlgren site index values, which were
quite variable in the 1990 study, were still separated from the
reference values in the 1991 study. The small degree of separation
6-10
-------
Figure 6.5 TOX-INDEX results for the 1990 sediment data.
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
Indian Head
50
Patapsco River
0401
20
10
Reference
Test
Freestone Point
50'
040"
lao-
s
m 20
=5 10-
(3
*
m^m
Reference
Test
Possum Point
50
|40l
§20
Reference
Test
Dahlgren
50
040'
£30-
§20'
=0 10
0
3
Reference
Test
O
Reference
Test
Wye River
Reference
Test
Morgantown
(3
Reference
Test
Elizabeth River
Location Symbol Key
Reference
Test
Concentrations Exceeding ER-M
OO 1-2 3+
* Test is significantly separated from reference
6-11
-------
Figure 6.6 TOX-INDEX results for the 1991 sediment data.
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
Wye River
50
Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding ER-M
O 0 1-2 03+
Test is significantly separated from reference
6-12
-------
Figure 6.7
TOX-INDEX results ofr the 1992-3 sediment data.
(See Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
Wilson Point
Frog Mortar
Hill Beach
Reference
**>
o40
'x
^30'
"E20
lio-
1 °"
Trt -1
Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding ER-M
O 0 1-2 03+
* Test is significantly separated from reference
6-13
-------
Figure 6.8a
TOX-INDEX results for the 1994 sediment data for
the Severn, Magothy and Sassafras Rivers. (See
Section 3.4 for a detailed description of
presentation).
South Ferry
50
o40
Betterton
Junction Route 50
Reference Test Location Symbol Key
Concentrations Exceeding ER-M
O 0 O 1-2 3+
Reference Test
Test is significantly separated from reference
6-14
-------
Figure 6.8b TOX-INDEX results for the 1994 sediment from the
Baltimore Harbor sites. (See Section 3.4 for a
detailed description of presentation).
Northwest Harbor
Bear Creek
100
Reference
Test
Test
Concentrations Exceeding ER-M
o-O -1-2 0
Test is significantly separated from reference
6-15
-------
Table 6.2 Summary of comparisons of sediment RTRM indices for reference and test sites presented in Figures 6.5 - 6 8
Comparisons for which confidence limits overlap are indicated by "0", those for which the confidence limits do not overlap
are indicated by "X", while "--" indicates no data taken for the period
STATION
BALTIMORE HARBOR
BEAR CREEK
CURTIS BAY
MIDDLE BRANCH
NORTHWEST HARBOR
OUTER HARBOR
PATAPSCO RIVER
SPARROWS POINT
ELIZABETH RIVER
MAGOTHY
GIBSON ISLAND
SOUTH FERRY
MIDDLE RIVER
FROG MORTAR
WILSON POINT
NANTICOKE RIVER
BIVALVE
SANDY HILL BEACH
POTOMAC RIVER
DAHLGREN
FREESTONE POINT
INDIAN HEAD
MORGANTOWN
POSSUM POINT
SASSAFRAS
BETTERTON
TURNER'S CREEK
ANNAPOLIS
JUNCTION ROUTE 50
WYE RIVER
MANOR HOUSE
QUARTER CREEK
1990
--
--
--
--
--
X
--
X
--
--
--
-
--
--
X
X
X
X
X
-
--
--
-
X
--
1991
--
--
--
-
--
X
--
--
-
--
--
--
--
X
--
-
X
--
-
-
--
--
X
--
1992-3
--
--
--
-
--
-
-
--
--
0
o
o
0
--
--
--
-
--
--
-
--
--
o
0
1994
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
-
-
--
-
-
-
-
--
--
0
0
X
0
--
6-16
-------
observed between the Morgantown index limits and reference limits
in 1990 was also observed for 1991. The Wye River index limits were
only slightly separated from the reference limits due to the fact
that only one of the two sets of experiments displayed significant
differences between test and control treatments. This slight
variability in responses could be due to temporal variation in
toxicity, but is more likely due to small scale spatial
heterogeneity (i.e., sediments were taken from the same general
station, but there may have been patchiness in sediment quality in
the grabs composited for the two sets of tests) . Overall, the
degree of variability observed in the TOX-INDEX limits for the
combination of the two sampling events was quite small for all four
sites. The patterns were remarkably consistent with those observed
at these same sites during the previous year.
The 1992-93 study also involved two sampling periods during
the Fall and Spring. The test and reference TOX-INDEX limits
overlapped for all of the sites selected for testing (Figure 6.7).
Thus, the sites in the Middle River (Frog Mortar and Wilson Point),
the Wye River (Quarter Creek and Manor House), and the Nanticoke
River (Sandy Hill Beach and Bivalve) appeared to contain sediment
displaying little or no overall toxicity compared to reference
conditions. It should be noted, however, that the Frog Mortar
sediments were quite heterogenous in character (Hall et al., 1994).
Furthermore, this site displayed somewhat elevated metals in the
composite samples (as evidenced by values of copper, mercury, lead,
and zinc which exceeded ER-L levels in the second set composite
sample; Hall et al., 1994). Therefore, there may be patches of
contaminated sediments at this site, which may have produced
responses in a few of the field replicates. The purpose of taking
true field replicates at two different times during the 1992-93
study was to produce confidence limits to indicate the probability
of observing the same sort of response if the site were sampled
again, so the observed variability provides insight into the
variation in sediment quality expected for this site.
The results of the 1992-3 studies on the two Wye River sites
(Quarter Creek and Manor House) displayed little difference from
the reference conditions, which is in contrast to the apparent
toxicity observed in 1990 and one of the sampling period of the
1991 study. The Wye River Manor House site was sampled during the
first three years of testing.
The 1994 studies focused upon the Sassafras, Severn, Magothy
Rivers and the Baltimore Harbor/Patapsco River (Figures 6.8a and
6.8b). The Sassafras River sites displayed little sediment toxicity
(Figure 6.8a). The Magothy River sites exhibited slight to
6-17
-------
moderate toxicity, particularly the South Ferry site, which was
highly variable (Figure 6.8a). The Annapolis site on the Severn
River also displayed significant but moderate to low toxicity. The
TOX-INDEX limits from the Severn River site at the Route 50 bridge
overlapped those of the reference site. The Baltimore Harbor sites
showed various degrees of toxicity from slight (Outer Harbor) to
quite high (Bear Creek and Northwest Harbor), with most displaying
moderate toxicity (Sparrows Point, Middle Branch and Curtis Bay;
Figure 6.8b). All Baltimore Harbor sites contained sediments that
exceeded ER-M values for 3 or more contaminants.
To summarize, an overview of the multivariate index results
produces a qualitative ranking of sediment quality of the sites
from most toxic to least toxic, as follows:
the Elizabeth River site contained sediments that were,
by far, the most toxic of those studied during the first
four years of the Ambient Toxicity Program;
the Baltimore Harbor (Patapsco River) site contained
sediments which were the second most consistently toxic
among the sites studied; Northwest Harbor sediments were
the most toxic, followed by Bear Creek, Curtis Bay and
Sparrows Point, Middle Branch and Outer Harbor;
the Possum Point, Freestone Point, and Dahlgren sites on
the Potomac River had sediments that produced the next
greatest separation between test and reference responses,
although the responses in the Dahlgren site experiments
displayed a large degree of variability in 1990 and a
diminished level of apparent toxicity in 1991, suggesting
spatial heterogeneity in sediment quality;
the Magothy River sites (Gibson Island and South Ferry)
contained the next most toxic sediments; followed by the
Severn River sites in the vicinity of Annapolis; the
toxicity of sediments in this region generally appears to
be statistically significant but of moderately low
overall magnitude;
the sediments from the Wye River Manor House collection
site exhibited some apparent toxicity in 1990 and in one
of the two experiments in 1991, but the Manor House and
Quarter Creek sites did not show toxicity in 1992-93.
6-18
-------
the Indian Head and Morgantown sites on the Potomac River
had sediments which produced responses which were only
slightly different from the reference conditions, but
these subtle toxic effects displayed a low degree of
variability and were observed to be consistent during
several sampling events for the latter site;
the Frog Mortar and Wilson Point sites on the Middle
River and the Sandy Hill Beach and Bivalve Harbor sites
on the Nanticoke River had sediments that produced
responses that were not significantly different from
those from the reference site experiments, although the
Frog Mortar site replicates did display a considerable
degree of variability in the responses, possibly due to
small scale heterogeneity in contaminant patterns for
certain heavy metals.
6-19
-------
SECTION 7
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are suggested after four years
of ambient toxicity tests in Chesapeake Bay:
The ambient toxicity testing approach (water column and
sediment tests) should be used to assess the status of
important living resource habitats (e.g., spawning areas
of anadromous fish). This approach could be added to an
array of multi-metric assessment tools that are currently
under development with the long term goal of targeting
tributaries and watersheds for nonpoint source monitoring
and remediation. The goals of such a targeting effort
would be to determine where management-based habitat
improvement programs should be focused, based on the
status of biological communities and other environmental
indicators.
Community metric approaches with fish, invertebrates, or
other trophic groups which assess "impact observed
responses" should be conducted concurrently with ambient
toxicity tests (first tier tests) which determine "impact
predicted" responses. The use of both test approaches
will provide a more complete strategy for assessing the
impact of contaminants on specific areas in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed and assessing ecological risk.
Water column and sediment ambient toxicity tests with
resident Chesapeake Bay plant species (submerged aquatic
vegetation and/or phytoplankton) should be conducted (or
developed if needed) in concert with the present battery
of animal tests. This would provide a plant indicator
that would be useful for identifying the presence of
herbicides in the Chesapeake Bay.
When selecting suspected contaminated regions for future
ambient toxicity testing, background data from chemical
monitoring, biological community status assessments and
toxicity tests (if available) should be used to provide
guidance.
7-1
-------
SECTION 8
REFERENCES
Alden, R.W. 1992. Uncertainty and sediment quality assessments:
I. Confidence limits for the triad. Environ. Toxicol. Chem.
11:645-651.
CEC (Chesapeake Executive Council). 1988. Chesapeake Bay living
resource monitoring plan. Chesapeake Bay Agreement Commitment
Report. Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office, Annapolis, MD.
CEC (Chesapeake Executive Council). 1989. Chesapeake Bay basinwide
reduction strategy. Chesapeake Bay Agreement Commitment
Report. Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office, Annapolis, MD.
Chapman, P.M. 1986. Sediment quality criteria from the sediment
quality Triad -an example. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 5: 957-964.
Chapman, P.M. 1990. The sediment quality Triad approach to
determining pollution-induced degradation. Sci. Tot. Envrion.
97-8: 815-825.
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.
Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 37: 75-96.
Chesapeake Bay Program. 1990. Chesapeake Bay ambient toxicity
assessment report. CBP/TRS 42/90, Annapolis, MD.
Deaver, E. and P.C. Adolphson. 1990. Evaluation of the amphipod
Lepidactylus dytiscus as a sediment toxicity test organism.
SETAC poster & manuscript (in review).
DiToro, D.M., J.D. Mahony, D.J. Hansen, K.J. Scott, M.B. Hicks,
S.M. Mayr and M.S. Redmond. 1990. Toxicity of cadmium in
sediment; the role of acid volatile sulfide. Environ.
Toxicol. Chem. 9:1487-1502.
Eskin, R.A., K.H. Rowland and D.Y. Alegre. 1996. Contaminants in
Chesapeake Bay Sediments: 1984-1991. CRP/TRS 145/96, U.S. EPA
Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Fisher, D.J., D:T. Burton, L.W. Hall Jr., R.L. Paulson and C.M.
Hersh. 1988. Standard operating procedures for short-term
chronic effluent toxicity tests with freshwater and saltwater
organisms. Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics
Laboratory, Aquatic Ecology Section, Shady Side, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, R.D. Anderson, W.D. Killen, R.W.
Alden, III and P. Adolphson. 1994. A pilot study for ambient
toxicity testing in Chesapeake Bay - Year 3 Report. CBP/TRS
116/94. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay
Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
8-1
-------
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.A. Fischer, R.W. Alden, III, E.
Deaver, J. Gooch and N. Debert-Hastings. 1991. A pilot study
for ambient toxicity testing in Chesapeake Bay. Volume 1 -
Year 1 Report CBP/TRS 64/91. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD.
Hall, L.W. Jr., M.C. Ziegenfuss, S.A. Fischer, R.D. Anderson, W.D.
Killen, R.W. Alden, III, E. Deaver, J. Gooch and N. Shaw.
1992. A pilot study for ambient toxicity testing in
Chesapeake Bay - Year 2 report. CBP/TRS 82/92. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program
Office, Annapolis, MD.
Long, E.R. and P.M. Chapman. 1985. A sediment quality Triad:
Measures of sediment contamination, toxicity and infaunal
community composition in Puget Sound. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 16:
105-115.
Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological
effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the national
status and trends program. National Technical Memorandum Nos.
OMA 52. Seattle, WA.
Majumdar, S.K., L.W. Hall Jr., and H.M. Austin. 1987. Contaminant
Problems and Management of Living Chesapeake Bay Resources.
Pennsylvania Academy of Science, Easton, PA.
Morrison, G. and E. Petrocelli. 1990a. Short-term methods for
estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving
waters to marine and estuarine organisms: supplement: Test
method for coot clam, Mulinia lateralis, embryo/larval test.
Draft report. U.S. EPA, Narragansett, R.I.
Morrison, G. and E. Petrocelli. 1990b. Mulinia lateralis -
Microscale marine toxicity test. Report. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI.
Ranasinghe, J.A., S.B. Weisberg and L.C. Scott. 1995. Chesapeake
Bay Water Quality Monitoring Program, Long-term Benthic
Monitoring and Assessment Component, Level 1 Comprehensive
Report, July 1984-December 1994. Prepared for the Maryland
Department of Natural Resources by Versar, Inc. Columbia, MD.
Shaughnessy, T.J., L.C. Scott, J.A. Ranasinghe, A.F. Holland and
T.A. Tornatore. 1990. Long-term benthic monitoring and
assessment program for the Maryland portion of Chesapeake Bay:
Data summary and progress report (July 1984-August 1990) .
Report Volume 1. Maryland Department of Natural Resources,
Chesapeake Bay Research and Monitoring Division, Annapolis,
MD.
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1979.
Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA 600/4-
8-2
-------
79-020. U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH.
Ziegenfuss, M.C. and L.W. Hall, Jr. 1994. Standard operating
procedures for conducting acute and chronic aquatic toxicity
tests with Eurytemora affinis, a calanoid copepod. Report.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chesapeake Bay Program
Office, Annapolis, MD.
8-3
-------
APPENDIX A
Water quality conditions reported in test chambers
during water column tests. Test species were
Cyprinodon variegatus (Cv), Eurytemora affinis (Ea),
Palaemonetes pugio (Pp) and Mulinia lateralis (ML)
-------
Water quality conditions reported during ambient toxicity tests.
Date Test Station
Species
10/11/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/12/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/12/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
T(C)
22.2
24.1
24.0
24.0
24.1
23.8
23.9
23.7
23.9
24.0
24.2
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.6
24.0
23.7
23.7
23.5
23.7
23.5
23.8
24.1
23.8
23.6
23.5
24.0
24.6
24.0
23.7
23.7
23.5
23.7
23.5
23.8
24.1
23.8
23.6
23.5
Sal (ppt)
15
14
15
16
14
14
14
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
14
14
14
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
14
14
14
15
14
14
14
14
14
DO (mg/L)
7.2
7.1
6.7
7.1
6.9
7.2
6.9
7.0
6.6
7.2
6.5
6.7
6.7
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.1
7.3
7.0
7.4
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.0
7.2
7.1
7.1
7.3
7.0
7.4
7.2
7.3
7.4
PH
7.93
7.85
8.11
7.85
7.94
7.78
7.90
7.85
7.80
7.91
7.81
7.76
7.76
7.82
7.85
8.08
7.71
7.85
7.70
7.82
7.70
7.71
7.82
7.87
7.69
7.69
7.82
7.85
8.08
7.71
7.85
7.70
7.82
7.70
7.71
7.82
7.87
7.69
7.69
A-l
-------
10/12/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/13/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/13/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
23.5
23.9
23.8
23.9
23.7
23.5
23.9
23.7
23.7
23.9
23.8
23.8
24.2
24.5
24.8
24.6
24.4
24.4
24.5
24.2
24.5
24.3
24.6
24.4
24.4
24.4
24.2
24.3
24.4
24.3
24.1
24.1
24.0
24.1
24.1
24.3
24.1
24.1
24.1
15
15
15
16
14
14
14
15
15
14
15
14
14
14
14
15
15
14
14
14
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
15
15
16
14
14
14
16
14
14
15
14
14
6.4
6.4
6.4
7.0
6.5
6.5
6.3
6.7
6.4
6.4
6.2
6.3
7.8
7.5
7.2 .
7-6
7.1
7.1
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.4
7.2
7.3
7.1
7.2
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.4
7.81
111
7.79
7.91
7.81
7.78
111
7.83
7.74
7.79
7.78
7.73
6.55
8.16
8.17
8.20
8.07
8.06
8.13
8.14
8.09
8.11
8.08
8.12
8.04
8.06
7.85
7.95
7.94
7.87
7.90
7.87
7.89
7.93
7.89
7.89
7.90
7.87
7.84
A-2
-------
10/13/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/14/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/14/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
24.8
25.0
24.8
24.7
24.7
24.7
25.1
24.5
25.0
25.0
24.7
24.6
24.8
24.8
24.5
24.5
24.3
23.8
24.8
24.4
24.0
24.0
24.2
24.2
24.4
24.2
24.2
24.1
24.1
23.9
23.5
23.8
24.2
23.9
23.9
24.1
24.1
23.9
24.2
15
15
16
16
15
15
14
15
14
14
15
14
14
15
15
15
16
15
14
14
15
14
14
15
14
14
15
15
16
17
15
15
14
16
15
15
15
15
14
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.7
6.5
6.6
6.5
6.4
6.6
6.5
6.3
6.4
7.6
7.5
8.0
7.3
7.3
6.9
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
6.9
7.4
6.5
6.5
6.2
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.5
6.7
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.6
6.4
7.87
7.92
7.91
7.94
7.88
7.89
7.88
7.87
7.90
7.90
7.88
7.84
7.82
8.14
8.24
8.27
8.09
8.10
7.99
8.13
8.08
8.10
8.10
8.13
8.01
8.10
7.85
7.94
7.90
7.91
7.95
7.93
7.95
7.95
7.90
7.93
7.95
7.88
7.88
A-3
-------
10/14/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
*1 0/1 4/94 ML CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/15/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
24.4
24.9
24.2
23.9
24.2
24.2
25.1
24.6
24.2
24.9
24.4
24.2
24.3
_
24.7
25.0
25.0
24.8
24.8
24.8
24.9
24.6
24.8
24.7
24.7
25.0
24.9
15
15
16
17
15
15
15
16
15
14
15
14
14
_
15
15
14
15
14
14
15
15
14
15
14
14
14
6.3
6.2
6.5
7.9
7.6
7.5
6.6
7.0
6.9
6.5
6.4
6.5
6.8
_
7.1
7.0
7.8
6.2
6.5
6.3
6.8
6.3
6.3
6.8
6.7
6.4
6.2
7.80
7.85
7.85
8.14
8.07
8.05
7.89
7.96
7.92
7.87
7.88
7.85
77Q
7.93
7.82
7.99
7.80
7.76
7.84
7.88
7.57
7.90
7.96
7.89
7.75
7.61
7.95
8.00
8.07
7.79
7.84
7.81
7.91
7.84
7.80
7.92
7.92
7.80
7.75
* Temperature (~25C), salinity (15ppt), D.O. (>5.0 mg/L) and pH (as written) were
measured in the renewal water after temperature, salinity and pH adjustment.
A-4
-------
10/15/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/15/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/16/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
23.8
23.9
23.9
23.6
23.7
23.6
23.7
23.7
23.5
23.9
23.7
23.4
23.7
24.5
24.8
24.6
24.4
24.5
24.5
25.1
24.6
24.5
24.7
24.5
24.4
24.6
25.0
25.0
25.1
25.1
25.1
24.6
24.4
25.0
24.3
25.3
24.8
24.4
24.8
15
16
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
14
15
14
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
15
14
15
14
14
64
6.4
6.4
6.3
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.1
6.2
6.2
6.9
6.7
6.8
6.2
6.5
6.3
6.2
6.1
6.1
6.2
7.0
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.1
6.7
7.0
6.4
6.8
6.8
6.5
6.7
6.7
7.80
7.90
7.83
7.85
7.84
7.85
7.89
7.85
7.86
7.85
7.85
7.83
7.81
7.74
7.81
111
7.98
7.87
7.92
7.82
7.81
7.81
7.78
111
7.72
7.71
8.01
8.12
8.13
7.97
7.90
7.95
8.03
7.96
7.94
7.96
7.90
7.91
7.91
A-5
-------
10/16/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/16/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/17/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
23.2
23.0
23.2
23.0
22.9
23.6
23.2
23.1
23.0
22.9
23.1
22.9
23.0
24.8
24.9
24.8
24.7
25.1
24.6-
24.7
24.8
25.1
24.8
24.8
24.8
24.9
25.0
25.4
25.8
25.7
24.8
25.2
25.4
25.7
25.3
25.2
25.5
25.4
25.0
15
15
15
15
15
16
15
15
15
16
15
15
15
15
15
14
15
14
15
15
14
14
14
15
14
15
14
15
14
14
14
14
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
6.6
6.8
6.6
6.8
6.7
6.6
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.4
6.4
6.7
8.5
8.1
7.0
6.6
7.0
6.7
6.2
6.5
6.5
6.5
7.2
7.5
7.0
6.6
6.8
7.1
6.9
6.9
6.7
6.8
6.8
6.7
6.9
7.86
8.01
7.88
7.94
7.90
7.93
7.97
7.92
7.97
7.91
7.92
7.90
7.86
7.85
7.90
7.95
8.39
8.27
8.02
7.90
7.96
7.97
7.81
7.88
7.87
7.87
7.96
8.13
7.96
7.86
7.89
7.94
7.93
7.87
7.87
7.90
7.92
7.87
7.87
A-6
-------
10/17/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/17/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
*1 0/1 7/94 ML CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
25.5
25.6
25.2
24.9
24.9
25.7
25.0
25.0
25.5
25.1
25.3
25.4
25.0
25.9
26.2
25.4
25.5
25.1
26.0
26.3
26.0
25.1
26.0
26.0
25.7
25.7
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.6
6.6
6.2
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.1
6.2
6.2
9.2
7.5
7.3
6.9
7.5
5.9
6.4
6.4
6.1
6.2
7.83
7.96
7.86
7.83
7.79
7.88
7.93
7.89
7.85
7.85
7.86
7.82
7.82
7.70
7.85
7.79
8.44
8.06
8.06
7.94
8.05
7.69
7.79
7.86
111
7.71
7.93
7.86
7.97
7.41
7.59
7.96
7.88
7.88
7.83
7.98
7.92
7.92
7.61
Temperature (~25C), salinity (15ppt), D.O. (>5.0 mg/L) and pH (as written) were
measured in the renewal water after temperature, salinity and pH adjustment.
A-7
-------
10/18/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/18/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/18/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
25.1
25.2
25.8
25.4
25.1
24.9
25.4
25.7
25.4
25.4
24.7
25.8
24.7
25.2
25.3
25.3
25.0
24.9
25.1
25.1
25.3
25.2
25.3
25.1
25.1
25.2
25.8
26.6
25.3
25.9
25.4
26.2
26.5
26.4
25.4
26.3
26.2
25.5
25.3
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
15
14
14
15
14
15
16
16
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
6.8
7.0
6.9
6.5
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.8
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.6
6.6
8.3
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.3
8.3
6.5
6.2
6.0
6.2
6.3
6.3
6.2
5.3
5.2
5.6
6.8
6.5
5.3
5.2
5.6
5.1
5.4
5.7
5,5
5.5
8.02
8.12
8.06
7.89
7.93
7.98
7.98
7.97
7.92
7.97
8.00
7.97
7.94
7.89
7.94
7.88
7.83
7.83
7.87
7.94
7.85
7.81
7.86
7.86
7.86
7.85
7.67
7.73
7.76
8.01
7.93
7.70
7.70
7.70
7.60
7.69
111
7.73
7.66
A-8
-------
10/19/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/19/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/19/94 Cv CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
25.8
25.1
24.6
24.3
25.6
26.0
25.6
24.1
25.6
25.7
24.9
24.8
25.1
24.9
25.0
24.8
25.4
25.5
24.7
24.6
25.6
25.0
25.1
24.8
24.7
25.1
25.9
26.2
27.0
26.3
26.9
25.4
26.4
25.9
26.6
26.5
25.9
26.0
26.5
15
15
15
14
15
15
14
15
14
15
15
14
15
16
16
15
15
16
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
6.6
7.0
6.8
6.3
6.5
6.6
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.5
6.4
6.3
5.9
6.3
6.2
6.0
6.3
5.9
6.5
6.0
5.8
6.0
6.1
6.0
6.1
6.5
5.5
5.8
7.1
6.7
6.0
5.4
5.7
6.1
6.3
7.6
6.6
6.5
8.10
8.27
8.16
7.96
8.02
8.02
8.07
8.11
8.03
8.07
8.10
8.08
8.04
7.96
8.04
7.96
7.86
7.86
7.95
8.05
7.89
7.89
7.97
7.96
7.95
7.86
7.95
7.79
7.79
8.06
7.96
7.83
7.69
7.73
7.78
7.82
8.14
7.91
7.85
A-9
-------
10/20/94 Ea CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
10/20/94 Pp CONTROL
SASBT
SASTC
BHBCR
BHCUB
BHMBR
BHNWB
BHOTH
BHSPT
MAGGI
MAGSF
SEV50
SEVAP
26.1
26.7
26.3
26.2
26.2
26.5
26.0
26.2
26.2
26.3
26.2
26.4
26.3
26.2
25.8
25.4
25.0
25.1
26.0
25.4
24.9
25.7
25.6
25.6
25.8
25.0
15
15
15
14
15
14
14
15
14
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
15
16
15
15
16
15
15
15
16
16
7.5
8.1
7.7
7.0
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.5
7.4
7.5
7.4
7.4
7.4
6.6
7.6
7.1
6.8
6.9
6.6
8.3
6.9
6.8
7.3
7.3
6.5
7.1
8.03
8.16
8.05
7.82
7.92
8.00
7.98
7.97
7.94
7.98
7.98
7.98
7.96
8.02
8.24
8.05
7.90
7.95
7.98
8.43
8.01
8.03
8.09
8.13
7.92
8.01
A-10
-------
APPENDIX B
Pesticides and semi-volatile compounds data
from sediment toxicity tests (ug/g)
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Turner Creek
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/al
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2 , 2' , 4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
tr.
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-l
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Betterton
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration lua/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-2
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Bear Creek
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/al
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
0.027
tr.
0.0258
0.0157
tr.
tr.
0.0261
0.0057
0.0032
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-3
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Curtis Bay
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
DDD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Cr.lorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
'ermethrin
1,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
.,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
. ,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
".ethoxychlor
tr.
tr.
0.01650
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-4
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Gibson Island
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Junction Rt 50
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
DDD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2' ,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
.0012
.0013
0,
0.
0.0026
B-6
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Outer Harbor
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
DDD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
0.0053
tr.
0.01340
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-7
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
nydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Middle Branch
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/al
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
-DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
0.00854
0..0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-8
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Northwest Harbor
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-9
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:South Ferry
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
DDD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin-
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2 ' ,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
tr.
0.005
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-10
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Sparrows Point
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3',5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2',4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
0.02770
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-ll
-------
Organics analysis data for pesticide compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Annapolis
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration lug/a)
Detection Limit
Hexachlorobenzene
Aldrin
Alpha-BHC
Beti-BHC
ODD
DDE
DDT
Dieldrin
Endrin
Heptachlor
Heptachlor Epoxide
Alpha-Chlordane
Gamma-Chlordane
Alachlor
Metolachlor
Trifluralin
Chlorpyrifos
Fenvalerate
Lindane
Permethrin
2,3', 5-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
2,2 ' ,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl
Methoxychlor
tr.
tr.
0.0017
tr.
0.0035
0.0041
0.0061
0.0058
0.0034
0.0027
0.0023
0.0093
0.0076
0.0030
0.0015
0.0007
0.0016
0.0050
0.0065
0.0038
0.0016
0.0017
0.0043
0.0077
0.0031
0.0012
0.0013
0.0026
B-12
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Curtis Bay
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
::ibenzo (a,h) anthracene
iienzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.27
0.04
0.59
0.719
0.162
0.78
0.987
0.846
0.661
0.0050
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.0004
0.0002
B-13
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Middle Branch
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/g]
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.135
0.029
0.269
0.044
1.5
1.25
0.283
0.966
2.63
1.82
0.0050
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0002
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-14
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
nydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Northwest Harbor
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.0050
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0003
0.0002
0.0002
0.0003
0.0001
B-15
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Outer Harbor
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluor anthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (!, 2, 3-cd) pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.05
0.909
0.058
0.701
2.2
0.34
0.501
2.14
2.31
1.12
1.58
0.0060
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0004
0.0002
0.0002
0.0004
0.0002
B-16
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Sparrows Point
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Betterton
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.126
0.024
0.215
0.031
0.395
0.237
0.063
0.103
0.121
0.339
0.246
0.204
0.0050
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0003
0.0002
0.0002
0.0003
0.0001
B-18
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
r.ydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Turner Creek
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/a)
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno ( 1, 2 , 3-cd) pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.254
0.046
0.318
0.047
0.26
0.384
0.064
0.101
0.18
0.063
0.152
0.0040
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0002
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-19
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:South Ferry
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration lua/a}
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.519
0.083
0.643
0.094
1.12
1.22
0.102
0.326
0.297
0.382
0.213
0.299
0.0040
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0002
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-20
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Gibson Island
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/cM
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.124
0.031
0.139
0.033
0.38b
0.283
0.064
0.056
0.051
0.147
0.0040
0.0020
0.0020
0.0010
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0002
0.0002
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-21
-------
Organics analysis data for semis-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
nydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Junction Rt 50
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ua/cn
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2 ,3-cd) pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.164
0.044
0.2
0.055
0.6
0.563
0.152
0.231
0.408
0.248
0.273
0.0040
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-22
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Annapolis
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Compound
Concentration (ug/cO
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
iBenzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.191
0.0040
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0003
0.0002
0.0001
0.0003
0.0001
B-23
-------
Organics analysis data for semi-volatile compounds (Note: underlined values represent
concentrations exceeding "Effects Range-Medium" levels for selected polynuclear aromatic
Hydrocarbons, as defined by Long and Morgan, 1990).
Sample Location:Bear Creek
Collection Dates:10/7/94-10/8/94
Concentration (ug/gl
Detection Limit
Naphthalene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Fluor ant hene
Pyrene
Benzo (a) anthracene
Chrysene
Benzo (a) pyrene
Indeno (1,2, 3-cd) pyrene
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene
0.21
0.98
0.052
1.82
6.94
0.784
3.81
3.24
3.55
2.35
0.0050
0.0020
0.0020
0.0020
0.0002
0.0030
0.0030
0.0003
0.0003
0.0002
0.0002
0.0003
0.0001
B-24
------- |