United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Research and Development
Office of Energy, Minerals, and
Industry
Washington DC 20460
EPA 600 7-78-196
October 1978
Proceedings of the
National Response
Team Oil Spill
Scientific Response
Workshop,
New England
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
i
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional 'grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
OIL SPILL
WORKSHOP
Results of the Region I
Workshop on Oil Spill
Ecological Damage Assessment
Edited by:
Dr. William G. Conner
Dr. Philip U. Alkon
July 1978
Contract Sponsor: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Contract No.: 68-01-3188
Project Mp.: 155&P
Dept.: W54
COVER PHOTO: In December, 1976 the Argo Merchant ran aground off Nantucket Island
spilling 7.5 million gallons of oil. The Argo Merchant incident demonstrated the need for
coordinated scientific response to major oil spills and was a key factor in precipitating the
Oil Spill Workshops. Cover photo courtesy of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
ABSTRACT
This document presents the final results of a Workshop on oil
spill ecological damage assessment held at Hartford, Connecticut,
during 28-31 August 1977. The principal aim of the Workshop was to
identify scientific needs and capabilities to be incorporated into a
regional response plan for assessing the ecological damage due to
major oil spills. Results are organized in terms of Workshop plenary
sessions, meetings of 10 scientific and technical panels, and meetings
of the Workshop executive committee. A draft of this document has
been reviewed and revised according to comments from Workshop coordin-
ators and attendees.
ii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Workshop Coordinator expresses sincere thanks to each
participant whose dedicated effort made the Region I Workshop an
exceptional success. Because the Hartford meeting was the first
in a series of Workshops aimed at developing regional response
plans for ecological damage assessment, its achievements are parti-
cularly noteworthy. The Workshop brought together outstanding
experts in relevant scientific and operational disciplines repre-
senting Federal and State agencies, the academic community and
private and commercial groups. All participants contributed their
expertise and labor voluntarily.
I also wish to thank specifically: Bill Adams, EPA Region I
Administrator, for hosting the meeting; the Panel Chairpersons and
Executive Committee members, for their contributions above and
beyond the call of duty; Carole J. O'Toole, for handling Workshop
arrangements; the management and staff of the Hartford Sheraton
Hotel, for their helpful cooperation; and Mary Kraus (MITRE Corpora-
tion), Robin Lind (EPA Region I) and Sandy Karasuk (EPA, Narragansett,
ERL) for expertly handling the difficult secretarial burden of the
Workshop.
Paul Lefcourt, Ph.D.
Workshop Coordinator
ill
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
PLENARY SESSIONS
Overview
Summary of Proceedings
PANEL MEETINGS
Overview
Benthic Biology Panel
Microbiology and Biodegradation Panel
Birds and Marine Mammals Panel
Chemical Analysis and Fate Panel
Physical Processes Panel
Water Column Biology Panel
Histopathology Panel
Laboratory Toxicity Panel
Socioeconomic and Legal Aspects Panel
Facilities and Data Management
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Overview
Summary Review
Recommendation to the National Response Team
NRT Response to Workshop Recommendations
APPENDIX A WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
APPENDIX B PROJECT DESCRIPTION FORMAT
APPENDIX C PANEL CHAIRPERSONS
APPENDIX D WORKSHOP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
APPENDIX E LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
APPENDIX F US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE OFFICES
APPENDIX G RESPONSE OF THE NRT TO HARTFORD WORKSHOP
RECOMMENDATIONS
gage
1
3
3
3
7
7
9
45
75
130
177
206
301
308
343
379
439
439
439
443
444
445
449
453
455
458
465
467
iv
-------
INTRODUCTION
Oil spills pose a recognized threat to natural and cultural
features in U.S. coastal ecosystems. Up to now, societal resources
have largely been directed towards minimizing the exposure of environ-
mental systems to spilled oil and other hazardous materials. The
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, for
example, establishes a quick response interagency capability for
identification, containment, dispersal and restoration operations in
the event of accidental discharges. Unfortunately, no such capability
exists with respect to the evaluation of the ecological consequences
of oil spills.
' The Region I Workshop on Ecological Damage Assessment represents
an initial attempt to meet this need. The Workshop concept arose
from recommendations made to the National Response Team-the body
charged with oversight of the National Contingency Plan-by a Task
Force on Ecological Damage Assessment. The Task Force noted that
existing scientific capabilities are not presently organized to
provide effective advisory assistance on ecological matters to opera-
tional authorities nor to undertake comprehensive and coordinated
scientific projects in contingency situations. The Task Force
recommended a series of regional workshops as a step in the develop-
ment of regional and national response plans for ecological damage
assessment.
Approximately 135 invited experts participated in the Region
I Workshop held at Hartford during the last week of August, 1977.
They represented a broad range of scientific and operational expertise
from Federal and State agencies, the academic community and the
private sector (See Appendix E). The program sought and realized a
substantial effort by all participants. It was a workshop in the
real sense of the term. The results are evident from this report.
The aim of the Workshop was to identify scientific needs and
resources that might be incorporated in a New England regional
response plan for ecological damage assessment. Within this
context, the Workshop addressed three principal goals:
(1) Provide highly qualified and coordinated scientific
support to Regional Response Teams and On-Scene
Coordinators during major spill incidents.
(2) Upgrade our capability to assess environmental
' damage associated with these spills.
-------
(3) Capitalize on the unique research opportunities that are
often afforded by major spills and thus improve our
ability to support future cleanup and damage assessment
activities.
The program consisted of panels dealing with 10 scientific and
technical subject areas. Plenary sessions and meetings of the
Workshop Executive Committee provided forums for guidance, inter-
action, and the development of recommendations to the National
Response Team. Work is proceeding now on the development of a New
England Response Plan that will incorporate results of the Hartford
program.
The Hartford Workshop dealt specifically with coastal ecosystems.
The achievements at Hartford will be followed by workshops in other
U.S. coastal regions. They may also serve as a stimulus for addressing
ecological damage response needs in freshwater and terrestrial eco-
systems.
-------
PLENARY SESSIONS
Overview
All participants were invited to attend plenary sessions.
These meetings were intended to provide overall guidance on Workshop
objectives and procedures, to keep participants abreast of Workshop
progress, and to facilitate the exchange of ideas among panels and
between panels and the Executive Committee. Two plenary sessions
were held, one at the start of the Workshop on the morning of
August 29, and the second on the morning of August 30. A third
session originally scheduled was cancelled to permit participants
to devote more time to panel meetings and other Workshop activities.
Summary of Proceedings
The first plenary session (August 29), included the following
presentations:
* Introduction to the Workshop
Paul Lefcourt (EPA)
Workshop Chairman
A review of the origins of the Workshop program. The impact of
the Argo Merchant incident on the recognition of the need for more
effective application of scientific capabilities for assessing the
ecological consequences of coastal oil spills. The report of the
Task Force on Ecological Damage Assessment to the National Response
Team was reviewed including the recommendation for a Workshop program
to develop ecological assessment response plans. Changes in the
Workshop schedule were also announced.
• Welcoming Address
Bill Adams
Administrator, EPA Region I
Participants were welcomed. A need was indicated for a national
plan to deal with ecological aspects of coastal oil spills that would
establish mechanisms for Federal, state and local coordination* The
important issues are: 1) the present Federal inability to rapidly
draw on substantial existing scientific resources; 2) the present
limited capability for quantifying ecological damage; and 3) the need
-------
for effectively matching scientific specialties to the particular
characteristics of individual spills. The need for clear Federal
guidance on responsibilities and authorities for damage assessment,
and for resources to support the effort, was emphasized.
• Background on Federal Involvement in Oil Spill Programs
Henry Van Cleave
Chief, Spill Prevention and Control Branch
EPA
A review of the history and authorities of Federal oil spill
programs. Section 311 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(PL 92-500) addressed notification response, removal and other aspects
of oil spills. A National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (40 CFR 1510), published by the Council on Environ-
mental Quality, authorized national, regional and subregional opera-
tional plans for dealing with oil spills, including the designation
of Federal On-Scene Coordinators (OSC). A Federal revolving fund
supports cleanup operations, and claims may be made against dis-
chargers. Executive Order 11735 gave primary operational responsi-
bility to the U.S. Coast Guard for spills in coastal waters and
on the Great Lakes, and to EPA for inland waters. The EPA is
responsible for assessing dispersants, and the Office of Spill
Prevention and Control is sponsoring damage documentation studies.
The operational contingency plans have been generally effective.
Scientific support is needed in: 1) developing acceptable methods
for measuring ecological damage; 2) clarifying subtle and long-term
ecological effects; and 3) developing improved cleanup methods and
criteria for terminating cleanup operations. The Workshop effort
should eventually lead to augmentation of the National Contingency
Plan.
• Background on the National Response Team (NRT)
Capt. John Kirkland
Chief, Environmental Protection Division
U.S.C.G.
Review of NRT organization and functions. The NRT is an
interagency standing committee for monitoring oil spill response
capabilities. Primary agencies represented are the Departments of
Commerce, Defense, Interior, Transportation, and EPA. Advisory
agencies are the Energy Research and Development Administration and
the Departments of State; Justice; Health, Education, and Welfare;
and Housing and Urban Development. The National Contingency Plan
-------
deals with ecological damage assessment under 40 CFR 1510.32 -
(a), (b), and (c). State involvement and representation, an impor-
tant aspect of the Plan, are addressed in 1510.34 (c). The present
Workshop Executive Committee is an ad hoc body of the NRT. Research
activities should not interfere with cleanup operations, which
are the principal responsibility of the OSC. The OSC does require
expert scientific advice to support operational decisions.
• Description of the NOAA/USCG Spilled Oil Research
Team (SORT)
David Kennedy
NOAA Environmental Research Laboratory
Boulder, Colorado
The NOAA/USCG SORT is headquartered at Boulder. It deals
primarily with physical aspects of spills and is presently refining
oil spill trajectory models utilizing field data. The SORT is
structured around a group of volunteer teams with facilities located
at various points around the country. Spills of opportunity are
investigated by the nearest available team utilizing nationally
available resources as needed. The concept has been tested at
natural oil seeps near Santa Barbara, and SORT served as a primary
coordinator for scientific activities carried out in connection
with the Argo Merchant incident. SORT is part of the NOAA Outer
Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program funded by the
Bureau of Land Management, Department of Interior.
• Socioeconomic and Legal Considerations
Jan Praeger
EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, Rhode Island
The relevance of economic and legal aspects to ecological
damage assessment was summarized. In the pontext of damage assess-
ment, scientific efforts should be aimed at estimating costs in
economic terms and in developing information that can be used as
testimony in legal proceedings. The Socioeconomic and Legal Panel
will attempt to develop guidelines for scientists on the legal
requirements for ecological information. The scientific and tech-
nical panels must consider the legal and economic framework in
developing recommended scientific programs.
-------
* Plan for the Workshop
Paul Lefcourt
Workshop Chairman
Review of Workshop schedule (Appendix A), performance guidelines
and goals. Role and membership of the Executive Committee were
discussed and Panel Chairpersons were introduced. Mention was also
made of pending legislation that would include a $200M "superfund."
One application of this fund may be for damage assessment.
The Plenary Session of 30 August involved a progress review by
Panel Chairpersons and notification of changes in the Workshop schedule.
-------
PANEL MEETINGS
Overview
The major scientific effort of the Workshop was carried out in
panels organized according to the following subject areas:
• Benthic Biology
• Microbiology and Biodegradation
• Birds and Marine Mammals
• Chemical Analysis and Fate
• Physical Processes
• Water Column Biology
• Histopathology
• Laboratory Toxicity
• Socioeconomic and Legal Aspects
* Facilities and Data Management
The overall charge of the panels was to produce recommendations to
the Executive Committee on scientific and technical requirements and
resources for application in an oil spill response plan for ecological
damage assessment. To the greatest possible extent, each recommended
project was described according to a 14-point format that addressed
cost, facility and personnel requirements, and feasibility, as well
as scientific aspects (see Appendix B).
Panel meetings were chaired by authorities in the respective
subject areas (see Appendix C). Panel Chairpersons attended an
orientation meeting held at Narragansett during August. At the
Workshop, Chairpersons provided panel members with written guidance
on objectives and procedures, attended two joint meetings with the
Workshop Executive Committee, and met jointly with the Workshop
Chairperson. The latter session, held on August 30, addressed several
topics including: interactive needs among the various scientific
disciplines; lead agency responsibilities for ecological damage
assessment; procedures for review of the Workshop report; plans for
-------
the development of the regional response plan; and the formation of
a national scientific review panel for oversight of ecological damage
assessment programs.
Results of the individual panels are presented in following
sections.
-------
BENTHIC BIOLOGY PANEL
Participants
D.A. Wolfe, Chairperson
A. Carr
F.R. C ante lino
W.R. Davis
R. Estabrook
C. Fredette
C. Gifford
G.R. Hampson
E.B. Hatfield
J.
G,
R,
J,
P,
S,
A.N.
J.M.
Hyland
LaRoche
McGrath
Morris
M. Nolan
D. Pratt
Sastry
Teal
-------
BENTHIC BIOLOGY PANEL
General Information and Guidance
• Objectives of Panel
• Issues and Approaches Pertinent to Damage
Assessment
• Research Considerations
OBJECTIVES OF PANEL
• To identify and define those studies or projects (in accordance
with the 14-point "Panel Guidance Format") relevant and use-
ful for ecological damage assessment in reference to benthos.
- Area of interest extends from high tide line out to shelf
break (or reasonable operational depth limit).
- Damage assessment should consider not only effects of
spilled oil per se, but also effects of cleanup or miti-
gation procedures employed.
- Need to identify expected interfaces with other panels in
terms of information and sample needs.
• To specify fundamental research projects which can be con-
ducted under unique spill conditions to improve future damage
assessment or spill response capability.
• To identify regional expertise on benthic biomes for potential
USCG support.
ISSUES AND APPROACHES PERTINENT TO DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
A. Pre-spill Ecological Characterizations
1. Select sites based on:
- representativeness of habitats
- probable vulnerability to spills (analysis of probable
sources and trajectories)
- economic values
10
-------
2. Focus on key species (commercial/indicator, life stage)
- standing crop
- biological productivity
- catch statistics
- reproductive cycles
- feeding relationships/dependencies
- behavioral parameters
- disease types and incidence, tumors
There is a need to select key species at the start, based on currently
available information, and then to pursue the base line measurements.
Ecosystems cannot be studied to determine key species.
3. Determine infaunal community structure
- relative abundances
- diversity
- trophies
- succession
4. Abiotic factors
- sediment types/composition
- current regimes
- nutrient cycles/flux
5. Death assemblages
- mollusc shells (population and size frequency)
- polychaete jaws
- amphipod eyes
6. Shoreline characteristics
- salt-marsh distribution, species composition
- Zostera, algal beds
- erosion/deposition rates
(potential applicability of satellite imagery)
B. When Spill Occurs
1. Survey Measurements
a. Need to base final details of study designs on
specific characteristics of spill in real time:
11
-------
- availability of relevant base line measurements
- extent of spill
- timing of spill
- oil type
- how much oil reaches bottom
The Panel emphasized the need for flexibility at prerogative of
on-the-scene scientists.
b. Study Parameters
Based on specific characteristics of spill, lead
time, availability of relevant base line, measure any
or all of parameters outlined in Al through A6, com-
pared to:
- long-term base line in impact area, if available
from literature or recent studies
- instantaneous pre-spill base line in impact area
(one or more samples collected immediately before
spill impacts the study site)
- simultaneous measurement in adjacent "control"
areas
2. Diagnostic Experiments
a. In-situ cage experiments for selected key species
- mortality
- growth/respiration
- behavior
b. Microcosm experiments
- invasion/recruitment/succession in sediment trays
- invasion/recruitment/succession in fouling plates
c. Bioassays
- bell jar experiments at unimpacted sites using
spill oil
- lab experiments using spill oil or impacted
sediments/key species
- mutagenesis in microorganisms/cell cultures
d. Mollusc shell microstructure and chemical composition
12
-------
3. Interfaces
- chemical analyses (especially polynuclear aromatics)
- histopathology
- microbiology
RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS
A. Research Problems
1. Determine effects of cleanup/mitigation alternatives
(burning, bulldozing, steam cleaning, dispefsants)
2. Determine effects of nutrient additions on biodegradation
rates (see Microbiology and Biodegradation Panel Section)
3. Define food chain transport of petroleum
- study specific known trophic links
- compare fluxes for different compounds/classes
4. Define role of animals in transport of oil into sediments
In summing up the research needs, the Panel strongly emphasized the
continuing need for long-term ecological studies to determine recovery
rates and potentials.
s
B. Habitat Considerations
The Panel decided to structure the ecological damage assessment re-
search around four distinct benthic habitat types which would require
different bases of .logistic support or different sampling approaches.
These were: ^
• Rocky Intertidal
• Sand-mud Intertidal (including salt marshes)
• Shallow Subtidal
• Offshore
In many cases, the scientists most qualified to address ecological
problems differ from one habitat to the next, and the distinction by
13
-------
habitat would also be useful from a contracting point of view. It
should be understood, however, that for a given spill any one or all
of the habitats may require study, depending upon the size and loca-
tion of the accident.
The Panel further decided that the survey approach (see Sections
IIA1-IIA6, and IIB1, above) held the greatest promise for damage
assessment. The diagnostic approaches (see IIB2) might provide in-
sight on survey design, but none of the diagnostic tools has been
developed to a stage of providing a quantitative measure of damage
without backup survey information. The contractor selected for the
survey work might use any or all of the diagnostic approaches in his
final damage assessment.
14
-------
BENTHIC BIOLOGY PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. Oil spill damage assessment of onshore rocky intertidal environ-
ments.
.'.
2. Oil spill damage assessment of onshore intertidal environments:
sand and soft bottom types.
3. Oil spill damage assessment for the benthic community in shallow
subtidal environments.
4. Initial assessment of damage to benthic environment following a
medium to large offshore spill.
*5. Effects of petroleum hydrocarbons and/or dispersants on e^tuarine
communities under flow-through laboratory conditions.
*6. Effects of oil pollution on species interactions: caging experi-
ments.
*Projects 5 and 6 were identified in the panel report as Appendices I
and II, respectively. Both are considered to be diagnostic approaches
for use at the discretion of the benthic survey contractor.
15
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Oil Spill Damage Assessment of Onshore Rocky
Intertidal Environments
2. Project Description:
A. Objectives:
(1) Using grid and transect analyses, determine the short-
term effect of the oil on the benthic community by com-
paring the spill area to an unimpacted area and/or base-
line data. Triplicate samples recommended.
Determine: (a) Biomass
(b) Relative species abundance
(c) Diversity
(2) Determine long-term effects by looking at repopulation
of the impacted area.
Look at: (a) Species succession
(b) Settlement and development of larval
forms
(3) Detailed visual observations are recorded.
B. A good reference list on the effects of oil on the rocky
shore benthos (both plant and animal) should be compiled and
made available.
C. See Projects 5 and 6 for possible diagnostic experiments.
(1) See Dale Straughan et_ a^U for many references on Santa
Barbara spill.
3. Performing Organization:
A. Limited state and Federal capability
B. Definite capability
16
-------
(1) Normandeau Associates, Inc.
(2) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute - Marine Biological
Laboratory
(3) URI - Graduate School of Oceanography
(4) EG&G - Dr. Charles Menzie
(5) Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
C. Possible capability
(1) Dr. Mathieson - Dept. of Botany, University of New
Hampshire - macrophyte community
4. Applicable Habitats:
Rocky shoreline - most of shore from northern Maine coast, south
to New Hampshire and northern Massachusetts, isolated area from
Cape southward including:
A. Exposed rocks
\
B. Rocky intertidal pools
C. (mussel reefs?)
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. Sufficient oil should reach the rocky shoreline to produce
the expected significant petroleum hydrocarbon damage to a
viable benthic community.
B. Good base line data is desirable.
C. Uncontaminated control site is desirable.
D. Season/weather must be considered to evaluate effects of
winter icing, storm damage, etc., in addition to oil effects.
E. Site should be accessible by land vehicle (or boat for off-
shore islands reef).
F. Relative position of impacted area to other pollution sources
such as power plant discharge, habor, sewage effluent, etc.
should be considered.
17
-------
G. Presence of commercially harvestable crop (mussels, seaweeds)
will affect study.
H. Adequate funding for project completion must be committed to
specific research organization prior to project implementation.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types.
7. Time Frame:
Intensive study initially with the continued duration and fre-
quency of sampling dependent upon season, weathering of oil, and
responses of community structure.
Within 1 year a presentation of the acute impact of the spill
will be available.
8. Costs:
Dependent on duration and frequency of sampling and location of
spill. Possible scenario:
Field Days - Daily for 2 weeks = 10 days
Weekly for 3 months = 12 days
Seasonally for 1 yr = 3 days
25 days
5-man team = 5 x 25 = 125 man-days in field
Lab days - 5 lab day/field days = 5 x 125 = 650 man-days in lab
Total man-days = 125 + 650 = 750
Cost - $125/day/scientist = $125 x 750 = $95,000
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A. One per field sampling team
(1) Portable 1 ft2 grid
(2) Scraper (putty knife)
(3) Wash bucket
(4) Brush
(5) Sieve
(6) Dip net
(7) Spade
18
-------
(8) Waders (1 per person)
(9) Camera
B. Other field equipment
(1) Bags, jars, formalin - number depends on number of
samples taken
(2) Field and lab data cards - number depends on number of
samples taken
(3) Glass bottles for hydrocarbon analysis - number depends
on number of samples taken .,
(4) Meter stick
(5) Visible, durable markers to mark sampling site - stakes,
fluorescent paint, etc.
C. Lab equipment
(1) Wash bottles, tweezers
(2) Microscope
(3) Dissecting equipment
(4) Keys for identification of organisms.
Organizations listed in item (3) generally have above equipment
available.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
A. Open boat (16'-20') - trailerable
B. 4-wheel drive land vehicle
C. Helicopter for shoals and islands
D. Living accommodations at sampling site
i
E. Lab space
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available: A list consisting of 3 to
8 people should be compiled of experts in New England.
A. Marine botanist
B. Marine invertebrate taxonotnist
C. Invertebrate early larval development specialist
19
-------
D. Knowledge of physical oceanography in the area
12. Support Services:
A. Hydrocarbon analysis
- tissue analysis
- ambient water concentration analysis
- follow weathering processes
B. Resource analysis - how important is area?
(1) Commercial fishery
(2) Harvestable seaweed
(3) Recreation
(4) Considered for future development
(5) Unique species present
C. Histological analysis
D. Spore settlement of algae
E. Chemical (lipid) analysis of tissue
13. Payoff:
A. Initial mortality and long-term loss in productivity of
economic and/or food species will be determined.
B. Scientific interest - there is scant documentation of effects
of oil spill on the rocky coast.
C. There are harvestable economic resources within the rocky
shore; e.g., Irish moss, mussels, etc.
f
D. Information will help to manage fisheries forecast and
cleanup operation.
14. Limitations:
A. Manpower - get most out of limited funds and manpower
available
B. Weather
C. Season
D. Taxonomic expert availability
20
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 2
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Title; Oil Spill Damage Assessment of Onshore Intertidal Environ-
ments: Sand and Soft Bottom Types
2. Project Description:
The impact of an oil spill on the structure and function of
benthic communities will be accomplished by a two-phase program
composed of a survey effort coupled in the second year to a
research program. The first phase will be a short and long-term
quantitative and qualitative sampling program to determine the
immediate mortality arid long-term disruptions of the intertidal
system. Special focus will be on the populations and physio-
logical changes of key species which will include economically
important organisms. The macrofauna, meiofauna and microfauna
will be considered. This survey will result in determining the
spacial and temporal extent of oil exposure effects and will
serve as a basis for assessment of environmental damage and
economic loss.
The second phase, to begin the end of the first year and then run
concurrently with the limited survey, will utilize both research
and experimental techniques. Such research and diagnostic experi-
ments as suggested and outlined in the Appendices (Projects 5 and
6) will deal with productivity, respiration, death assemblage,
changes of sediment profiles due to the impact of oil, cage ex-
periments, etc. These would be employed as a useful tool if
appropriate in a given habitat to provide further definitive data
relating to damage assessment.
References: a. Sanders et^ al^ (West Falmouth oil spill; in
manuscript)
b. Krebs and Burn 1977
c. Michaels et al 1975
3. Performing Organization:
Marine Biological Laboratory - Woods Hole
Jackson Estuarine Laboratory - University of New Hampshire
University of Rhode Island ,
21
-------
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
EG&G - Dr. Charles Menzie
Bigelow Lab - Booth Bay, Maine
EPA Lab, Lexington
EPA Lab, Narragansett
Ira Darling Lab, University of Maine
Marine Research Inc., Falmouth, Massachusetts
Massachusetts State Marine Fisheries, Sandwich, Massachusetts
4. Applicable Habitats:
Onshore intertidal systems: sandy beaches, mud bottom and salt
marshes.
5. Applicable Conditions:
This study can be carried out under the most extreme conditions.
Sampling techniques and work schedules may be modified to fit the
given conditions and circumstances. This project should be put
into action whenever a viable benthic community is significantly
damaged by oil. Adequate funds for project completion must be
committed to the research organization prior to the implementa-
tion of the project.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types.
7. Time Frame:
The survey phase requires an immediate intense study period of
about a month, followed by a period of intermediate intensity up
to one year duration, and then a study period of low intensity,
i.e., seasonal or annual sampling, for as long as the spilled
oil is present in the sediments. The second phase, i.e., re-
search and experimental, should commence during the first year
and run concurrently for the duration of the project.
A series of times should be established for preliminary reports
with a comprehensive presentation of the data at the end of each
sampling year.
22
-------
8.
Costs:
A. Sandy intertidal
(1) 1-mile stretch
(a) Survey work
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
(b) Research work
Years 2-6
(2) 5-mile stretch
(a) Survey work
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
(b) Research work
Years 2-6
(3) 20-mile stretch
(a) Survey
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
(b) Research
Years 2-6
B. Muddy intertidal
(1) 1-mile stretch
(a) Survey
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
$ 50,000
30,000
10,000/yr
40,000/yr
$ 96,000
50,000
20,000
60,000/yr
$180,000
75,000
37,500/yr
' 90,000/yr
$ 80,000
50,000
20,000/yr
23
-------
(b) Research work
Years 2-6
(2) 5-mile stretch
(a) Survey
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
(b) Research
Years 2-6
(3) 20-mile stretch
(a) Survey
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
$ 50,000/yr
$160,000
100,000
40,000/yr
70,000/yr
$300,000
150,000
75,000/yr
(b) Research work
Years 2-6 100,000/yr
C. Salt marsh
(1) 1 hectare
(a) Survey - excluded meiofauna
Year 1
Year 2
Years 3-6
(b) Research work
Years 2-5
(c) Survey to include
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Years 4-6
$ 60,000
40,000
20,000/yr
100,000/yr
good meiofauna work
120,000
100,000
80,000
50,000/yr
24
-------
(d) Research work
Years 2-5 $150,000/yr
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Field equipment - cameras, quadrats, corers, dredges, sieves,
sample containers, etc., and items commonly used for such studies
and readily available in all the above listed laboratories.
Lab equipment - microscopes, identification keys, glassware,
sorting trays, etc.
Special items of equipment for the experimental and research
phase may include respirometers, spectrophotometers, oxygen
probes, light meters, thermometers, etc.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Land vehicles, small boat (under 20 feet with trailer), labora-
tory space and storage space.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Personnel should be knowledgeable of New England intertidal
systems and familiar with working and sampling the benthic com-
munity. Estimated personnel required would range from 5 to 12
individuals depending on size of oil spill. Individuals must
also be willing and able to accept the work on short notice.
Some suggested individuals who might be available and willing:
Howard Sanders
George Hampson
Fred Grassle , Woods Hole Oceanographic
John Teal
George Wpodwell
John Robbie
Bruce Peterson Marine Biological Lab - Woods Hole
Cameron Gifford
Ivan Valier MBL - BUMP
George Matthuessen Falmouth Marine Res. Inst.
Robert Croker Jackson Estuarine Lab, UNH
Ned Hatfield) Jackson Estuarine Lab, UNH
Les Watling Ira Darling Lab
25
-------
A.N. Sastry
Scott Nixon
Candace Oviatt
Nelson Marshall University of Rhode Island
H.P. Jeffries
Sheldon Pratt
Lee Doggett Bigelow Lab
Peter Larsen Bigelow Lab
Joe Graham State of Mass., Dept. of Marine Res.
Paul Godfrey Univ. of Mass.
Frank Cantelmo City College, NY
Allan Michaels Taxon Inc., Salem, Mass.
12. Support Services:
A. Hydrocarbon analysis
(1) Rapid technique survey, i.e., ultraviolet fluorescence
to determine extent of oil in sediments.
(2) Detailed analysis (complete fingerprinting) of spilled
oil with a time sequence of weathering of the oil, a
vertical and temporal distribution in the sediments and
a detailed analysis of hydrocarbons in selected key
species.
B. Sediment particle size frequency analysis
C. Chemical analysis
(1) Analysis of the vertical distribution of chemicals in
sediments, i.e., organic carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous,
etc.
(2) Lipid analysis of selected organism tissues.
D. Histopathological analysis of selected organisms which play a
significant role in the structure and function of the community
and form the basis of community productivity both biological
and economic.
13. Payoff;
This project would determine initial mortality and long-term loss
in productivity of economically important species and/or food
species in various trophic levels, and should also contribute to
26
-------
our understanding and ability to predict the impact of.oil on the
structure and function of the intertidal benthic communities.
Information generated by this work would also help to manage fin
fisheries or shell fisheries which have been impacted and help
direct cleanup as well as manage recovery of the site.
14. Limitations:
Availability of competent individuals who are willing to do the
work on short notice or do the work at all. For example, there is
one person in the Northeast competent to identify soil arthropods
from salt marshes. He may not have time or be willing to work on
this type of project at the time a spill occurs.
27
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Title: Oil Spill Damage Assessment for the Benthic Community in
Shallow Subtidal Environments
I
2« Project Description:
The benthos is a prime area of concern when considering the
potential impact of petroleum hydrocarbons on aquatic communities.
This is based upon 1) documented proof that marine and estuarine
bottom sediments provide natural sinks for the accumulation of
toxic petroleum hydrocarbons; 2) the potential vulnerability of
many benthic communities to oil impact as a result of the broad
taxonomic representation of constituent species and in many
cases their seemingly apparent longevity, immobility, sensitivity,
and ability to concentrate toxic substances; and 3) realization
of the significant functional roles that benthic communities
play, including recirculation of vital nutrients to pelagic
phases and the production of both primary and secondary sources
of food that are commercially important to man.
Consequently, it is imperative that we study the effect of oil
spills on benthic communities in order to assess the overall
impact on the health of coastal marine ecosystems.
In response to a spill, samples will be collected at designated
control and impacted sites employing appropriate quantitative
sampling methodology and will be processed by standard analytical
and data reduction techniques which are generally available.
Temporal and spatial changes in species abundance and distribu-
tion will provide the data base necessary to properly assess the
impact of the spill on benthic community structure.
3. Performing Organization:
Recognized local groups with demonstrated capability in the design
and execution of benthic programs include the following:
Bigelow Laboratory, West Boothbay, ME
Normandeau Associates, Manchester, NH v
University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH
Taxon, Inc., Salem, MA
28
-------
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, MA
Marine Biological Lab., Woods Hole, MA
University of Rhode Island, RI
Marine Research Incorporated, Falmouth, MA
National Marine Fisheries Service, Woods Hole, MA
Yale University, New Haven, CT
CUNY, New York, NY
Lamont-Doherty, Palisades, NY
Texas Instruments, Inc., Buchanan, NY
New England Aquarium, Boston, MA
EG&G - Dr. Charles Menzie
4. Applicable Habitats:
A. Offshore bottom
B. Worm-clam flat
5. Applicable Conditions
Conditions which must be satisfied in order to successfully
complete this project include the following:
A. Base line data or appropriate control sites must be avail-
able.
B. Oil is incorporated into the sediments.
C. Weather conditions permit sampling - in this case the
weather conditions which would preclude sampling are inter-
mediate between those for onshore studies and those for
offshore studies.
D. The presence of a viable benthic community in the potential
impact area(s).
29
-------
E. Funding adequate to ensure successful completion of the
project must be committed prior to its inception.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All oils and related petrochemicals.
7. Time Frame:
This project requires frequent sampling from day 0 through
approximately day 30, although the actual extent of this in-
tensive sampling period will vary for each spill and should be
left to the discretion of the study team and OSC. From approxi-
mately day 30 to 1 year, the intensity of sampling may be
gradually reduced, again at the discretion of the study team.
Long-term monitoring on a seasonal basis should be conducted
until such time as the oil is no longer present in the sediments
or the benthic communities regain a "normal" stability. There
is no time frame which may be applied universally.
8. Cost:
A wide variety of site-specific variables preclude an accurate
ji priori assessment of costs for a benthic program. Sample
processing times are dependent upon the nature of the sediment
can easily vary by over two orders of magnitude. The costs
quoted here must be considered as "ballpark" estimates and
should be used with caution.
A typical benthic program designed to develop the information
needed to assess damage for a moderate spill in a semi-enclosed
bay of shallow depth would include approximately 20 to 25 sta-
tions. At least three, and preferably five, replicate samples
should be taken at each station at each sampling event. Assum-
ing no unusual conditions, such a study, for a period of six
years, would cost approximately $600,000 complete with 30% of
the costs being incurred in the first year. This estimate is
based on an estimated sample volume, after sieving, of two
quarts which may be considered typical for inshore samples.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Field equipment for this project includes:
A. Sampling device (Smith-Mclntyre, or equivalent) and support-
ing stand
30
-------
B. Assorted buckets, jars, etc.
C. Sieves of appropriate mesh size
D. Formalin
E. Various and sundry minor items which are widely obtainable
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Facilities required for benthic work are not extensive but
include the following:
A. Appropriate vessel - 65' boat appropriate if there is
enough depth, otherwise a smaller craft may be adapted.
B. Laboratory with large amount of counter space and storage
space which may also be used for staging:.
C. Adequate microscopes.
D. Assorted dishes, jars and reference materials.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Proper personnel are critical to the successful completion of
this project. Taxonomic specialists are always in demand because
there are so few of them. Personnel with proven expertise in
benthic studies include the following:
Howard Sanders
George Hampson
Fred Grassle Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
John Teal
George Woodwell
John Hobbie
Bruce Peterson Marine Biological Lab - Woods Hole
Cameron Gifford
Ivan Valier MBL - BUMP
George Matthiessen Falmouth Marine Res. Insti.
Robert Croker Jackson Estuarine Lab, UNH
Ned Hatfield J,ackson Estuarine Lab, UNH
Les Watling Ira Darling Lab
Lee Doggett Bigelow Lab
Peter Larsen Bigelow Lab
Joe Graham State of Maine, Department of Marine
Resources
31
-------
A.N. Sastry
Scott Nixon
Candace Oviatt URI - Graduate School of Oceanography
Sheldon Pratt
Paul Godfrey University of Massachusetts
Frank Cantelmo City College, NY
Allan Michaels Taxon Inc., Salem, MA
12. Support Services:
Additional data inputs which may be of critical value in the in-
terpretation of the faunal data include:
A. Hydrocarbon content of sediment.
B. Sediment grain size.
C. Histopathological analysis of selected species.
13. Payoff:
Important knowledge gained through this type of study includes:
A. Assessment of the ecological damage and economic loss due to
impact of spilled oil on a major ecosystem component.
B. Long-term data at control or unimpacted sites will provide
presently unavailable information about long-term benthic
community variability.
C. The program will provide specimens for potential use by
other groups.
D. Accurate information on the status of commercial benthic
species will be made available to local agencies.
E. Immediate guidance will be provided to assist in the direc-
tion of cleanup efforts.
14. Limitations:
A. Sufficient taxonomic expertise may be unavailable and con-
siderable delay may result.
B. Costs for developing a good statistical study are often
prohibitive and the compromise study which results is of
limited value.
32
-------
C. Even with sufficient personnel and funds there is always a
lag between collection of samples and availability of data.
This is typically longer for benthos than for most other
areas.
33
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 4
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Title: Initial Assessment of Damage to Benthic Environment
Following a Medium to Large Offshore Spill
2. Project Description:
To determine the impact of an oil spill on the structure and
function of offshore benthic communities, the project will
emphasize the initial impact, and is designed to accomplish the
following objectives:
A. Identify dead or moribund organisms.
B. Take samples for quantitative community analysis.
C. Map the extent of the impacted area and provide a basis
for recognizing spill-caused impact by sampling stations at
control sites and spill sites for community characteristics
and for death assemblages.
3. Performing Organization:
A. URI
B. Coast Guard
C. Commercial fishing boats
D. NUS (Naval Underwater Sys. Lab)
E. WHOI - Densmore
F. NMFS - Dr. George Kelly
G. EG&G - Dr. Charles Menzie
If ships are to be provided, benthic biologists at several
other institutions may be interested in conducting these studies.
See the institutional list for shallow-subtidal environments.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Offshore bottom
34
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. Hard funding must be available to the performing organization
prior to inception of the study.
*
B. Experienced coordinated team must be available and committed
to project.
C. Physical, chemical and biological inventory of site under
investigation is rapidly accessible (quantitative baseline is
desirable).
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types
7. Time Frame:
Minimum of two trips to define problem and the extent of area
. affected.
A. Detection of initial mortality, changes in death assemblage,
and oil presence should be done during first 3-4 days.
B. Survey to determine the limits of area affected and estimate
initial impact will require 1-2 weeks.
If severe impact is indicated by the preliminary cruises, addi-
tional sampling may be required to determine the duration of the
effects.
8. Cost:
Note 1 - Consult with WHOI for "Oceanus" costs and URI for
"Endeavor". The costs for cruises responding to the Argo
Merchant spill are a good example.
Note 2 - Costs do not reflect sample workup or data handling
(drafting and computer costs).
3-4 day initial cruise
Ship @ 2-5k/day = $ 6,000 - $ 20,000
Personnel = 12,500 - 15,000
Standby, etc. - 20,000 - 40,000
35
-------
Second cruise
Ship - 10-14 days = $20,000 - 70,000
Personnel = 26,000 - 40,000
Standby, et». = 50,000 - 120,000
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
2
A. Quantitative grabs (4) - 1/25 m area - 2 Smith-Mclntyre
2
1/25 m area - 2 Van Veen
Openable top for access
Tight seal for covers
B. Box core - quantitative grab
C. Dredges
(1) Epibenthic sled
(2) Modified scallop dredge (with smaller mesh insert
removable)
(3) Small rocking chair dredge
D. Gravity corer
Storage depot advisable to store equipment. Mandatory to have
person in charge to keep equipment in working order and keep
track of same.
E. Sampling and storage containers of various sizes should
be available at same location.
F. Formalin and ethyl alcohol, 55 gal drums, plastic bags,
containers for approximately 200 samples - 1/2 pts, pts,
quarts, gallon jugs, 3 gal jugs.
The research organizations mentioned in Item 3 will have most
of these equipment needs on hand.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Only involved with medium to large spills.
Ships - A. Should have adequate winches (hydro and main trawl)
36
-------
B. At least minimum speed of 1 knot capability
C. Requirements and facilities for a minimum of 3
continuous days of operation:
(1) Minimum size 65 feet; preferred size 100 feet
plus (North Atlantic)
(2) Adequate storage facilities for gear and speci-
mens alive, i.e., refrigeration, operation
pumps.
D. Loran C or satellite navigation. Fathometer, meter
wheel.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Availability of personnel dependent on previous commitments
and with adequate contingency fund available. Support of two
teams would assure availability of a crew within a 3-day prepara-
tion time. Suggested sources of staff - Southern New England:
WHOI, NMFS (WH), URI, MBL, etc. Northern New England: Taxon,
Inc.; Bigelow Lab; University of Maine; UNH; North Eastern
University, etc. (personnel - see inshore benthic personnel
list).
12. Support Services:
A. Hydrocarbon analysis (UV-fluorescent-HCs from our benthic
grabs) dissolved and particulate matter, if possible stomach
analysis of various marine animals.
B. Mechanical sediment analysis.
C. Histological examination of selected organisms. See Histo-
chemistry Panel Report. Resources will be emphasized in the
offshore area and physiology will be de-emphasized.
13. Payoff:
Information generated by this project would:
A. Define impacted area.
B. Define initial impact severity.
C. Determine communities and species involved.
37
-------
D. Determine impact on commercial species and habitat thereof:
i.e., destruction of food sources and identification of
possible routes of petroleum transfer.
E. Describe physical habitat destruction and describe changes
to natural habitat of selected invertebrates.
14. Limitations:
Weather - icing.
Ship availability.
Availability sampling gear and ship board gear.
Personnel.
This survey defines the impacted area and the impacted species.
Complete processing of all samples has not been planned or
costed. The design of such work would depend on the results of
the survey. Rocky bottom benthos is almost impossible to quantify.
38
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
1* Title: Effects of Petroleum Hydrocarbons and/or Dispersants
on Estuarine Communities under Flow-Through Laboratory
Conditions
2. Project Description:
The objective of this project would be to determine the effect
of hydrocarbons and/or dispersants on developing macrofauna and
meiofauna populations from local estuarine areas. Seawater
pumped in from the estuary would be supplied to the control and
experimental aquaria. The experimental aquaria would be supplied
with metered amounts of the petroleum and hydrocarbons and/or
dispersants from a local spill. Each appartus described
-------
The Graduate School of Oceanography - URI.
EG&G - Dr. Charles Menzie
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
4. Applicable Habitats:
System is best used in sand or sand/mud.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Need sufficient pumping facilities to maintain a flow rate
of 200 ml/min to each aquarium. Intake pumping facilities should
be located approximately one meter off the bottom. Pumping
facilities cannot operate under conditions of severe icing; It
would be advantageous to locate the intake in at least 5-10
meters of water.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Cannot use oil that cannot be readily pumped into the aquaria.
This may apply to some crudes and some No. 6 oils.
7. Time Frame:
The entire experiment would require 6-10 weeks and an additional
2-3 months to work up samples and analyze findings.
8. and 9. Cost and Equipment Needs:
Depending on availability, laboratory space would cost a maximum
of $6,000/year.
Total Cost
4 - Metering pumps (2,500 each) $ 10,000
1 - Compound Microscope 5,000
2 - Dissecting microscope 4,000
Sieves, cores, glass, tubing 1,000
Estimate total cost for equipment to be: 25,000
1 - Full-time technician 10,000
40
-------
2 - Part-time professionals (30 working days
for each experiment - this includes setting
up system, identifying organisms, analyzing
data)
Total Cost
4 - Part-time technicians (sorters of benthic 6,200
samples, hired for two months)
Total cost of personnel and equipment per spill $50,000 - $60,000
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Laboratory supplied with flowing seawater system and ample
laboratory bench space (20-30').
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
List of possible workers in benthic ecology available from
other infaunal projects.
12. Support Services:
Need adequate amounts of petroleum hydrocarbons to be taken
at spill area and transported back to laboratory. For the
alternate design sediment has to be secured from grab samples.
This necessitates taking 1 or 2 extra grabs/station.
13. Payoff:
The greatest payoff would be to get a relatively rapid estimation
of the effect of hydrocarbons from the spill area on developing
and established benthic communities. Studies conducted under
controlled laboratory conditions may make it easier to assess or
determine the economic costs of damage to commercially important
species. In addition, flow-through bioassays of the type described
will enable greater cooperation by chemists, biologists and
geologists in assessing oil spills. The same system used by the
biologist can be monitored by the chemist for hydrocarbon levels,
metals, etc., and also analyzed by the geologist for sedimentary
parameters.
14. Limitations;
Limitations include icing conditions that would interfere with
the seawater pumping facilities as well as the inability to
41
-------
exactly simulate the weathering conditions of oil in the natural
environment.
42
-------
PANEL: BENTHIC BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 6
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Title: Effects of Oil Pollution on Species Interactions:
Caging Experiments
2. Project Description:
The objectives of these experiments are to analyze the cause and
effect relationship between spilled oil and the fauna or flora
present. The results would allow separation of the effects of
oil from those of other factors such as predation and competi-
tion on the abundance of fauna and flora.
Experiments would be carried out by enclosing known abundances
of organisms in contaminated and uncontaniinated sediments in
nylon mesh containers. Sediments with different amounts of oil
could be used. The effects of the oil on biological interactions,
such as predator-prey and competition, could be tested by using
the appropriate experimental design. The results of these
experiments would indicate numbers of individuals surviving under
the different conditions of the experiment. Some references or
persons to contact for experimental design are:
Woodin, S.A. (1971, Ecol. Monogr.) - The Johns Hopkins
University
Disalvo (75 or 76) Env. Sci» and Tech.
John Lee and John Tietjen - CCNY
Bruce Coull - University of South Carolina
John Gary - Marine Research, Inc.
It might be of particular importance, regarding the problem
of availability of personnel to study the effect of oil spills,
to note that these experiments would require only a short time to
set up and could be performed by persons otherwise involved in
their own research.
3. - 6. Performing Organization; Applicable Habitats; Applicable
Conditions; and Applicable Oil Type:
These experiments are applicable to all benthic habitats and
could be performed by persons present at the institutions listed
43
-------
in other sections of this report. These experiments would vary
in design in conjunction with the habitat, season, and animals or
plants being studied. The effects of all types of oils could be
analyzed in this manner.
7. Time Frame:
Studies of this nature could run over periods of days to months.
8. Cost:
The cost of caging studies would be relatively minor compared to
that of survey work, possibly 10-25 percent.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Availability:
Equipment required in addition to that of the survey work would
be that used in the construction of cages and the location of cages
in the field (possibly electronic homing devices).
10. & 11. Facility Needs and Personnel Needs
See Benthic Projects 1 through 4.
12. Support Services:
Detailed analysis of the amount and kind of oil present in the
experimental cages would be necessary.
13. Payoff:
The results of these experiments would provide insight into
some aspects of the effect of oil on interactions between species
and on the structure and function of benthic communities. It is
this insight which is essential to the understanding of the
effects of oil on the dynamics of communities and on the relation-
ships between species of particular ecological or economic
importance.
14. Limitations:
Experimental field apparatus must not be disturbed by people.
Winter ice conditions might prevent the placement of cages in the
field and these conditions or storms could cause their destruction.
44
-------
MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION PANEL
Participants
A. Bourquin, Chairperson
C. Carty
C. Fredette
M. Griffin
F. Passman
R. Traxler
45
-------
MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION PANEL
General Information
BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS
A. Areas of Interest
The panel listed research projects which the members considered
important in the study of the fate of petroleum in the marine environ-
ment. After some discussion of each topic, the panel prioritized and
grouped various projects. The summarized priority list in order
of importance or benefit follows:
1. Biodegradation potential studies in surface films and
sediments.
a. Water column potential would become important only
when dispersants are used.
b. Baseline information is important and should be
gathered as much as possible by current projects.
c. Sampling techniques need evaluation or development.
d. Heterotrophic potential - effects on
degradation potential.
e. Biomass determinations are important relative to
hydrocarbon degrading microorganisms.
2. Physio-chemical degradation vs. microbial transforma-
tion and/or degradation.
a. Methods for determining rates of degradation by
physio-chemical and microbial degradation.
b. Determine relationship of the two processes to a
given oil in a given environment.
c. Role of photochemical oxidation in further degrada-
tion by microorganisms.
d. Role each process plays in anaerobic vs. aerobic
systems (long-term fate).
46
-------
3. Use of dispersants.
a. Toxicity to hydrocarbon degrading microorganisms.
b. Increased toxicity to other organisms and decreased
degradation in water column.
c. Microbial degradation of dispersants.
4. Increased pathogenicity to other organisms caused by
selection of HC-degrading microbes.
a. HC-degrading microbe is pathogenic.
b. Increased susceptability due to stress on other
organisms.
5. Formation of toxic metabolic intermediates.
a. Toxicity to HC-degrading microbes.
b. Toxicity to other organisms.
B. Other Subject Areas
The following areas of research were considered and either rejected
for reasons given or reserved for later discussion:
1. "Seeding" of oil slicks is not a feasible method for de-
grading oil for the following reasons:
a. Range of HC-utilizers in laboratory available for
seeding is limited (no "super-bacteria").
b. Cost of nutrient enrichment.
\
c. Abundance of HC-degrading microbes in most environ-
ments.
d. Low viability of freeze-dried populations.
2. Nutrient enrichment of natural populations for HC-
degradation.
a. Easy-to-degrade fractions are probably gone prior
to fertilizing.
b. Lower cost of mechanical techniques.
47
-------
c. Nutrients may not be limiting in surface micro-
layers or selected environments.
3. Baseline information - not enough information is
available for New England in-shore areas.
a. Improve and incorporate into current studies.
b. Develop needed baseline information by sampling
prior to spill coming ashore in a given area
(expanded in topic discussion).
4. Anaerobic metabolism - incorporated into other
projects.
Discussion on the benefits of assessing ecological damage or predict-
ing the fate within a given environment follows:
C. Relevance of Biodegradation Studies
Biodegradation studies will provide:
• An index for predicting potential for hydrocarbon metabo-
lism in a given environment (sediments and surface
films).
• Monitoring tool for tracing biodegradation once a spill
has occurred (sediments and surface).
• An index for effects on heterotrophic potential (metab-
olism of amino acids and carbohydrates).
• Prediction of toxic hydrocarbon fractions reaching the
water column.
• Monitor changes in biogeoehemical processes caused
by oil intrusion into sediments or surface films.
Biodegradation studies are considered important on the following
basis:
1. Microbial degradation is important in the fate of
hydrocarbons from oil.
2. Evidence indicates that amino acid degradation potential
can be correlated with hydrocarbon degradation whereas
other heterotrophic potentials (carbohydrate) do not show
this correlation. \
48
-------
3. Rapid analysis and relatively low cost.
4. Host oil fractions will be found in surface films or
in sediments, with relatively little residence time in
water column.
49
-------
MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. Effect of petroleum hydrocarbons on biodegradation potential and
heterotrophic potential of marine and estuarine surface films and
sediments.
2. Hydrocarbon assimilating yeasts as potential bioindicators of
hydrocarbon pollution of marine and estuarine waters.
3. Dispersants toxicity to bacterial populations, particularly hydro-
carbon degrading bacteria.*
4. Degradation in anaerobic sediments*.
5. Nutrient enrichment.
*This project is currently in progress at URI,
50
-------
PANEL: MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION
PROJECT NO. 1
PRIORITY RANK: 1
1- Project Title: Effect of Petroleum Hydrocarbons on Biodegradation
Potential and Heterotrophic Potential of Marine
and Estuarine Surface Films and Sediments
2. Project Description:
A. General
?" - ''
Information on the potential for a group of microbes ,in a .given
environment to degrade petroleum hydrocarbons could be used to
predict the persistance of hydrocarbon films, and the availability
of hydrocarbons to the water column and/or sediments. If the oil
has a deleterious effect on the physiological functions of the
microbial groups found in sediments or in the surface waters,
changes in the indices (numbers performing metabolic function,
total biomass) can be used to show this effect quantitatively.
Additionally, data which correlates some "easy to measure" response
in microbial populations to hydrocarbon potential can be used to
help in predicting the fate of oil. The objectives of the study
are twofold: 1) effect on hydrocarbon degrading potential, and 2)
effects on heterotrophic potential. A somewhat detailed approach
is included in order to standardize many techniques so that data
can be better used in the final analysis.
B. Hydrocarbon-degrading potential
Some measures of the total heterotrophic bacterial population must
be made. We suggest total viable counts on marine agar (Ig
peptone, Ig yeast extract) and a back-up method using LPS. In
order to obtain an index of potential hydrocarbon degraders to
total biomass, selected agar plates (containing 75-200 CPU's) will
be replica-plated onto aged filtered sea water made with washed
agar and various HC-substrates added:
1. Synthetic crude oil mixture containing representative
aliphatics, aromatics, and eye lies - for total HC de-
graders.
2. Aromatic HC degraders - methyl-napthalene, + (another
aromatic).
51
-------
3. Cyclic degraders - incorporate a persisting cyclic hydro-
carbon if possible, or t-decalin.
Confirmation of the hydrocarbon degraders and rates of oxidation
can be obtained by l^C-HC oxidation studies. Unaltered water and
sediment samples are inoculated into:
14
1. sea water + crude oil (appropriate to spill) + C - syn-
thetic crude mixture - effects of crude oil on specific
degradation.
2. C-synthetic crude mixture +• seawater - degradation
rates of .these three compounds.
14 14
Rates of CO evolution from the C-HC can be obtained relative
to the total biomass showing correlation between the two experi-
mental systems.
Samples should be obtained from surface microlayers (or slicks) by
the Nucleopore method (Bourquin) whenever possible or by the
alternate screen method if needed because of climatic conditions.
Sediment samples should be obtained by aseptically subcoring from
a Smith-Mclntyre grab or box core. Care should be taken to reduce
the disturbance of the sediment/water interface. (See heterotrophic
potential description for sampling time.) These studies will
provide a working index of hydrocarbon degrading potential and the
changes occurring as oil resides in these environments. Coupled
with some information on rates of oxidation, environmental condi-
tions, oil type, and environmental nutrient levels, one should be
able to predict with reasonable assurance the length of time a
slick may survive or if toxic fractions will persist in surface
layers, water column, or sediments.
C. Heterotrpphic Potential
14
1. C-labeled substrates
glutamate, U-^C acetate and either
or l^C phenylalanine (labeled in ring position).
2. Substrate mineralization rates will be determined from
scintillation data. 1^C02 evolved will be trapped and
counted. Counts will then be converted to the units
g substrate C/m^/h.
3. Rates of glutamate, proline (or phenylalanine), and ace-
tate mineralization will be compared with:
52
-------
a. Mineralization rates for aliphatic, aromatic and
- cyclic hydrocarbons (determined during hydrocarbon
degradation potential project).
b. Total and selective viable counts (determined during
HC degradation potential project).
c. Bacterial biomass (LPS; determined during HC degra-
dation potential project.
d. Sampling:
1) Surface:
i. calm seas (state <_ 2) - Nucleopore membranes
placed on surface from inflatable boat.
ii. rough seas - Niskin bag sampler will be used
to obtain new surface water sample.
2) Sediment: Smith-Mclntyre grab sample equipped
with shroud to prevent contamination from oil
slick at surface.
3) Frequency:
i. Surface: 1. one set of 3 samples before
oil intrudes.
2. one set of 3 samples + 2 con-
trols within 24 hours after
intrusion.
3. set of 3 samples + 2 controls
once each week until slick is
no longer visible.
ii. Sediment: 1. and 2., as for surface.
Note: The following points 3-14 deal with heterotrophic potential
while point 15 treats aspects of the biodegradation study.
3. Performing Organizations:
A. Energy Resources Company, Inc.: Fred Passmand and Tom
Novitsky (617/661-3111) capabilities summarized in Items 9
and 10 below.
53
-------
B. URI - Richard Traxler: capabilities appear on another pro-
jects report.
C. UNH - Galen Jones (607/862-2250) probably interested; doesn't
have facilities to respond at present.
D. EG&G - Mr. William Galen
4. Applicable Habitat:
Project applies to all marine and estuarine habitats.
The study can be modified to include most habitats except rocky or
shell sediments. Surface layers and sediments will be the only
areas considered because of a high probability for hydrocarbon
contamination and degradation.
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. Numerous samples should be taken whenever possible to pro-
vide adequate statistical information for correlation with HC
fate. The methods and techniques can be modified to meet
most conditions and environments, i.e., dip surface samples
in rough seas vs. membrane filters in calm seas.
B. Need sufficient notice to get to area for baseline observa-
tions before oil intrudes.
C. Heavy seas will preclude surface sampling, but new surface
contingency plan is just as useful.
D. Due to elegant simplicity of protocol, experiments can be
performed under wide variety of geographical and ecological
conditions.
6. Applicable Oil Type;
Any type oil except very soluble fractions should be considered.
7. Time Frame:
A. Time required to collect complete set of surface and sedi-
ment samples (2-4 hours) depending on weather conditions and
spill area.
B. Processing samples: 24 hours per set.
54
-------
C. Interpretation: 2 weeks to a month after processing food
samples.
D. Total time per spill: sampling - 100 mh
processing - 500 mh
interpretation - 100 mh.
(Computer technician/statistician and a microbiologist)
E. Size of spill will not appreciably affect these figures.
F. Additional information for proper correlation is needed when-
ever a spill occurs and can be assessed to have a high
probability to move into a given area. We would need about
24 hours notice if possible.
8. Cost:
Does not depend on size of spill; however, it does depend on loca-
tion of spill as ship time will comprise major fraction of total
cost (estimated at $5000-6000 per day for ship time).
Costs for heterotrophic potential (exclude ship costs):
A. Isotopes - $10,000
B. Sampling - $ 3,000
C. Processing - $8,000 for isotope experiments
$2,000 for bacterial biomass
$5,000 for viable plate count of replicate
experiments
(labor and supplies)
D. Interpretation and computer time - $3000
E. Total $31,000 Note: $10,000 estimate for radio labled hydro-
carbons may be high or low depending on availability of
labeled substrates.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A. Needs
No major equipment is needed to carry out the project. Radio-
isotopes can be purchased locally on short notice if not a
special synthesis.
55
-------
A good benthic sampler should be developed which would pre-
vent contamination or disturbance of the sediment-water
interface. A messenger shroud for the Smith-Mclntyre grab
sampler was proposed to prevent contamination of sediment
samples with surface oil.
B. Available
1. Complete microbiology laboratory including epifluorescent
microscope, scintillation counts, plus all standard
laboratory equipment.
2. Field capability: inflatable boat equipped with 24 v
outboard motor; 2 Smith-Mclntyre grab samplers, a 1
m3 box corer, 2 dozen Niskin bag samplers.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
An open ocean spill would require ship time and some laboratory
time on board ship. Most work would be carried out in analytical
labs on land. No special facilities needed.
ERCO's microbiology laboratory is complemented by an organic
chemistry laboratory and trace metal laboratory. Gas chromato-
graphs and a mass spectrometer are interfaced into a computer
system. ERCO's team includes data management specialists,
biostatisticians and computer programmers as well as industrial
engineers with in-house capability of designing and manufacturing
specialized equipment. The company has ready access to a small
airplane, but does not have a sea going platform or mobile
laboratory facility. As principle contractor for BLM's George's
Bank DCS Benchmark, ERCO is accumulating a broad data base and
expertise on the mid-north Atlantic region.
Facilities needed include: ship to transport investigators to
off-shore areas and to provide a platform for sediment grabs.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Galen Jones - University of New Hampshire
Holger Jannash - Woods Hole Ocean. Inst. (He should be contacted
concerning in situ benthic sampling and heterotrophic activities.)
Richard Traxler - University of Rhode Island
56
-------
Fred Passman - Energy Resources Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts
02138 617/661-3111
Most people can respond within 24 hours if radioisotopes are
available.
12. Support Services;
Concurrent hydrocarbon chemical analysis of sediments and surface
films are necessary for good correlation of microbial potential
data with HC disappearance.
Physical data on water temperature, wind and current movements
and Eh of sediments are required.
Micronutrient levels (N & P) are essential in predicting ultimate
degradation levels. Toxicity data on pelagic fauna and in-shore
benthic organisms would aid in ultimate predictions of hydrocarbons
entering water or sediments.
13. Payoff:
This investigation has the same payoff as the hydrocarbon bio-
degradation project, with two added advantages: 1) radioactively
labeled amino acids are considerably less expensive than radio-
actively labeled hydrocarbons, and 2) incubation periods required
for amino acid experiments are on the order of 4 hours as compared
with several days for hydrocarbons. Once the correlation between
amino acid mineralization and hydrocarbon mineralization has been
shown, we will have a tool for rapidly assessing the natural,
standing bacterial populations potential for degrading hydrocarbons
in the spilled oil.
14. Limitations:
The project does not answer the questions of ecological damage
assessment directly. However, it does allow the predictions of
recovery if enough information is gathered initially. It also
helps the OSC in making decisions about cleanup operations
because some information on rates and extent of degradation can
be obtained within 24 hours after a spill.
15. Biodegradation Potential: s
(3) Performing Organizations:
University of Rhode Island Oil Spill Research Team supported by
an ERDA contract. Dr. -Mason Wilson, Jr., Project Leader, Dr. R. W.
57
-------
Traxler, Principal Investigator Biology and Dr. C. Ordzie,
Research Associate for macro-biology systems. Dr. Chris Brown,
P.I. Chemistry, Dr. T. Kim, droplet size distribution, Dr. Roger
Dowdell, wind-wave interactions, Dr. M. Spaulding - modeling
Principal Investigator.
(4) Applicable Habitat;
Various habitats, salt ponds, clam flats, offshore bottoms. Also
spill sites of opportunity as a response function of the existing
project.
(5) Applicable Conditions:
(6) Applicable Oil Type:
Crudes, No. 6, can do any petroleum.
(7) Time Frame:
Projected 3 year period.
(8) Cost:
(9) Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
BOD capability about 300 determinations at any one time with
increasing incubation over temperature range 0°C - 100°C.
respiration system with air sweep and traps. Capability 24
samples/run. Run times up to 24 hours. Full spectrum of carbo-
hydrates analysis.
Replicate plating capability - genus and predomance estimation
capability by photographic means.
Amino acid and representative hydrocarbons by classes. Full
capability for detection plate counts and membrance plate counts
(up to 300 samples in triplicate, over a 3 log dilution range.
MPN for about 300 samples. Limited capability for ATP analysis
currently (estimate about 50 determination on a noncontinuing
basis).
Sampling gear - in development phase - surface slick by two
techniques are under consideration, water column by vacuum bag
method. No satisfactory sediment system has been identified.
May have to use typical samples.
58
-------
Currently developing a liquid nitrogen sampling holding system so
definitions analysis can be done at base lab rather than ship
board.
(10) Facility Needs/Facilities Available
Three tanks at meso-scale size with 1 foot interval water column
sampling - sediment trap.
Complete micro biology laboratory capability including aerobic
and anaerobic systems, TEM and SEM support, general bacterial
physiology methods.
Chemistry back up consists of GC-MS as well as special analysis.
(11) Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Full team capability represents 20 people. Contact Dr. Mason
Wilson, Jr., 401/792-2330.
Microbiology team 4 persons contact Dr. Richard Traxler 401/
792-2481. Biology Principal Investigator.
Biology (macro) Team includes two additional persons. A post-
doctoral Research Associate, Dr. C. Ordzie and a technician
available October 1, 1977.
(12) Support Services:
Chemical analyses (available)
Histological examination (probably available)
Modeling group (available)
Droplet size distribution (available)
Physical effects group (available)
Wind-wave indicator (available)
(13) Payoff:
This entire project provides biodegradation potential under
controlled conditions and in situ for oil studies at surface,
water column and sediment with various crude oil and petroleum
products untreated and also treated with chemical dispersants.
Dispersant treatment must respond to all three zones.
Can provide instant response for biodegradation determination by
January 1, 1977, at a level of 25 samples - can expand on short
notice to 100 sample capability.
(14) Limitations: (See Limitations for Biodegradation Potential.)
59
-------
PANEL: MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION
PROJECT NO. 2
PRIORITY RANK: 2
1. Project Title: Hydrocarbon-Assimilating Yeasts as Potential
Bioindicators of Hydrocarbon Pollution of Marine
and Estuarine Waters.
2. Project Description:
A. Rationale
Reported oil spills in Connecticut alone during 1976 totalled
over 200,000 gallons. This figure, while significant to the
State, is small in comparison with areas such as the Gulf of
Mexico, California, and regions subject to occasional major
accidents (e.g., Torrey Canyon, Argo Merchant). Most concern
has centered on the possible biological effects (toxicity,
biodegradability) of oil in natural waters once the event has
occurred. We have, in fact, been locking the barn door after the
horse has gotten out; our assessment of the ability of natural,
indigenous biopopulations to handle hydrocarbon spills is meager
at best and these communities may be inadequate in numbers and/or
degradative potential. Artificial "seeding" with known hydrocar-
bonolytic organisms may not be feasible. Rather, we should
perhaps investigate the possibility of microorganisms with
degradative activity to serve as indicators only of hydrocarbon
presence instead of expecting them to totally biodegrade the
spilled material. In this manner, the extent of a spill could be
assessed and dealt with in an appropriate fashion (if one exists).
While bacteria have received the most attention with regard
to natural degradation of oil spills in marine waters, a number of
problems have been noted. Bacteria which are active in marine
waters are usually stenohaline and are thus not efficient in
estuarine or fresh waters. Also, certain hydrocarbons possess
bactericidal or bacteriostatic components which require removal by
natural or artificial means before the bacteria can biodegrade.
Certain species of filamentous fungi have been reported to degrade
hydrocarbons; however, their relatively slow growth rates and
restriction to certain salinities renders their biodegradation or
bioindication potential questionable.
In fact, the yeasts may well provide a better potential than
bacteria or other fungi. Long-term pollution of soil, freshwater,
60
-------
and marine habitats have produced unique yeasts capable of serving
as indicators of petroleum addition. Also yeasts are tolerant of
a wide range of salinity and temperature. It has been suggested
that the ability of some yeasts to assimilate hydrocarbons could
be useful in taxonomic studies.
Comparatively little attention has been applied to the matter
of small, chronic, almost "accepted" petroleum spills in marinas,
private dockages, and small fuel depots along coastal areas. For
outboard motors, up to 55 percent of the original fuel can be
discharged into receiving waters, although an average value is
closer to 10-20 percent. The small scale addition of diesel fuel,
gasoline, kerosene, motor oil, and other hydrocarbon containing
materials at marinas, etc. through spillage, leaks, discarded
containers, and run off renders the receiving waters subject to
constant, low level influx of a variety of hydrocarbons, thus
producing an environment conducive to the development of relatively
high levels of hydrocarbonolytic yeasts.
Unfortunately, little information is available on the yeast
microflora indigenous to Long Island Sound; our laboratory is the
only active one in the area doing yeast research.
The project rationale may be summarized as follows:
1. Use areas of small-scale "chronic" petroleum introduc-
tion (marinas, etc.) as a source of yeasts characterized
by hydrocarbon-assimilating ability. The assumption to be
studied is that the presence of low (non-obvious) levels
of hydrocarbons will stimulate populations of various
hydrocarbon-assimilating yeasts in these waters.
2. Establish this relationship by surveying "clean" areas
for the absence of these organisms in large numbers yet
present at low densities.
3. Use techniques below and additional ones depending upon
the genera and/or species found to recover them in marine
and estuarine areas "unknown" with respect to hydrocarbon
content; e.g., adjacent to a spill.
4. Application is made to classify waters adjacent to and
well away from "known" sources of hydrocarbon introduc-
tion; waters not clearly polluted due to obvious spills.
Hopefully, we will show gradients of hydrocarbon occurrence
and areas not previously suspected of containing certain
hydrocarbons.
61
-------
5. Emphasis is placed not on biodegradation as such but
rather on the hydrocarbon-assimilating ability of
the yeasts to indicate the presence of hydrocarbon-
containing waters and sediments - the development of a
microbiological indicator of hydrocarbon pollution.
B. Objectives
To study the feasibility of utilizing hydrocarbon-assimilating
yeasts as indicators of the presence of hydrocarbons in marine
and estuarine areas. Since these organisms are not subject to
extreme environmental stresses of varying temperature and salinity
and are not particularly "territorial" in distribution, their
presence, both quantitatively and qualitatively, in different
coastal (and perhaps offshore as well) locales may be indicative
of the occurrence of a variety of hydrocarbon-containing products
(kerosene, diesel fuel, heating oil, etc.). Our approach is not
to seek yeasts for potential large scale use as biodegraders per
se but to use their ability to assimilate hydrocarbons as a tag
for water masses containing the hydrocarbon substrate. Or put
differently, we will attempt to show that it is possible to
identify a pollutant in water by assaying the water for micro-
organisms associated with the utilization of the specific pollutant,
or class of pollutants. In this way, a relatively uncomplicated
microbiological monitoring system might be developed to allow
for classification of coastal waters based on kind and amount
of hydrocarbon present.
C. Procedures
A number of medium to large sized marinas will be selected for
study in the Stonington-Groton-New London (Long Island Sound)
area. In addition, we will attempt to gain sampling access to
several small fuel depots located in the area. Several different
types of materials will be sampled, depending on each individual
site; e.g., oil-soaked soils in the vicinity of tanks, pumps,
hoses; surface waters as close as possible to dock dispensing
facilities; pilings and rocks. These areas, through a long
history of constant hydrocarbon introduction, could be expected
to select for microbial populations with hydrocarbon-assimilating
characteristics. Samples of the various petroleum products
available or stored at each site will be obtained for laboratory
use. Water samples, solid substrata scrapings, soil, sediment,
etc. will be cultured directly or diluted as appropriate on
antibiotic-containing media selective for the growth of fungi.
Both hydrocarbon-supplemented and unsupplemented liquid and solid
media will be employed; in the latter case, the membrane filter
62
-------
technique will be used to concentrate yeast cells from water or
other samples. Both broth and agar cultures will be incubated at
or near ambient conditions. Colonies will be picked directly
from solid media; liquid enrichment media will be streaked for
colony isolation.
Several techniques will be used for the j.n vitro establishment
of petroleum assimulating activity:
1. Basal medium (synthetic) containing artificial seawater,
trace elements, and salts will be surface-inoculated
with yeast isolates. Plates will be placed in sealed
containers containing an open source of various volatile
hydrocarbons (gasoline, etc.). Growth of yeast cultures
will indicate a stimulation by petroleum products since
fumes constitute the only available carbon source.
2. Certain hydrocarbons are not readily volatilized at
low (laboratory) temperatures; these compounds will be
assayed using the basal medium above inoculated prior to
solidification (i.e., pour plates). Sterile filter paper
discs, saturated with the petroleum product, will be
placed on the surface of the plates. Colony growth near
or around the disc is indicative of utilization of the
product as a carbon source.
3. A more quantitative estimation of petroleum degradation
can be obtained in liquid media. As above, an enrichment
broth will be prepared with no carbon source. The
petroleum product in question will be added aseptically
in various concentrations. Growth (turbidity) of a yeast
isolate will be measured spectro-photometrically.
4. In all cases, appropriate controls will be included.
Also, microscopic examination of cultures will be routine
since others have shown that, in some cases, yeast cells
actively accumulate on the surface of, or even in, oil
globules. This is an important point since it is essential,
from an environmental standpoint, to differentiate ,
between actual degradation and just emulsification.
All cultures isolated with petroleum-assimilating characteristics
will be identified according to accepted procedures, allowing the
determination of particular genera and/or species active in the
presence of petroleum products. Also, petroleumphilic cultures
will be cross-checked for the ability to grow in the presence of
a. variety of products; i.e., an isolate from diseal fuel soaked
coastal mud will be examined for its ability to assimilate fuel
oil, gasoline, keroscene, etc.
63
-------
To establish clearly the association of petroleum-assimilating
yeasts with the hydrocarbon substrate, we will examine suitable
"control" areas; e.g., rocks, pilings, sediments, water, etc.
at considerable distances from any known source of hydrocarbon
contamination, by comparison of microbial responses from the
different areas, we will seek to detect a distinct hydrocarbon-
assimilating population of yeast association with the presence of
the chemical substrate.
Having delineated this population, a set of microbiological
tests will be evaluated for specific detection of these yeasts in
"unknown" areas; i.e., waters contiguous with and at varying
distances from known sources of hydrocarbon pollution (fuel
depots, tander docks, etc.). Eventually, natural waters subject
to spills may be "hydrocarbon-classified" by the presence of
absence of the yeasts sought in this study.
3- Performing Organizations:
University of Connecticut, Marine Sciences Institute, Marine
Research Laboratory - Dr. John D. Buck, Associate Professor of
Biology (Microbiology).
4. Applicable Habitats:
Initial work involves shoreline and near-shore habitats. Subse-
quent application may be made to off-shore locales.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Probably not a significant factor.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Probably any type hydrocarbon.
7. Time Frame:
The project would require probably two years to establish the
assumptions herein.
8. Cost:
Salaries & Wages $14,000
Direct & Indirect Costs 10,000
Equipment (1st yr only) 10,000
Supplies 2,000
Other 1,500
Approx. $37,500 (first year)
64
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A. Needs:
Initially, a large variable temperature incubator will
be required.
In addition, several roller drums are needed for culture
incubation.
B. Available:
Complete microbiology laboratory with standard equipment;
skiffs and motors for coastal sampling.
10.] Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
All covered with present facilities
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
A. Needs:
Graduate student—Research Assistant; should be covered by
an incoming student in the fall (September) semester.
Hourly help-usually available from pool of undergraduate
or graduate students without additional financial support.
B. Available:
Dr. John D. Buck (Principal Investigator) - available
for full time work June-August; 30-35 percent of time
September-May.
12. Support Services:
Not applicable
13. Payoff:
The possibility of assessing the geographical extent of any
spilled hydrocarbon in a variety of waters (estuarine, marine).
Hopefully, the ability to map the vertical and horizontal scope
of a spill will be enhanced. Other than obvious indications
(slicks, dead organisms, etc.) the real limits of an accident
are unknown. Dilution, wave action, currents, tides, etc. may
65
-------
well disperse a hydrocarbon beyond (or below) the limits of
visual (or even chemical) detection. This project may offer an
alternative of greater sensitivity.
At the very least, we will obtain information on the micro-
biological aspects of chronic hydrocarbon degradation will be
expanded, particularly with respect to "cross-reaction" with a
variety of pollutants. In addition, we will increase our
knowledge of the abundance and distribution of hydrocarbonolytic
yeasts in a variety of individual habitats characterized by the
presence of a broad scope of petroleum substrates acting as
selective and enrichment nutrients for particular groups or
species.
14. Limitations:
The project could be considered as gathering baseline or back-
ground information and may thus be rejected or reserved on this
basis. Nonetheless, "before" preceeds "after" and the data
generated are planned to be applicable once a spill has occurred.
66
-------
PANEL: MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION
PROJECT NO. 3*
PRIORITY RANK: 3
1. Project Title; Dispersants Toxicity to Bacterial Populations,
Particularly Hydrocarbon Degrading Bacteria.
2. Project Description;
A. To determine whether dispersants promote or inhibit biodegra-
dation of hydrocarbons, the project will monitor in situ
microbial activity and biomass before impact, after impact,
before treatment with dispersant, and after treatment.
Sampling in an untreated region of the spill will provide
control data if possible. Otherwise, data from similar
spills for which dispersants were not used will serve as
"control".
B. Parameters to be monitored are:
1. Heterotrophic potential as determined by mineralization
of C-labeled substates.
2. Bacterial biomass as determined by LPS concentration.
3. Total and hydrocarbonoclastic (viable count as deter-
mined by membrane filter and replicate plating techniques),
4. Change in lipid:carbohydrate:protein:nucleic acid (RNA)
ratios as a function of impacting oil or dispersant.
5. Presence of exo-enzymes or metabolites induced by dis-
persants.
C. Sampling:
1. Surface film
2. Near surface water column-using Niskin bag samplers
3. Bottom sediments
*This project is currently in progress at URI.
67
-------
D. More detailed descriptions of methods for monitoring the
listed parameters and sampling have been provided in other
projects proposed by the group, and are not elaborated
here. Support from organic chemists will be required for
parameters 4 and 5.
3. Performing Organizations:
Energy Resources Company - The multi-disciplinary scientific and
managerial support team at ERCO is described in Project No. 1.
Key personnel are Fred Passman and Tom Novitsky at (617) 661-3111.
Galin Jones (UNH) is doing soine work on siderochrome production
by marine bacteria. This project might be of interest to his
group. 607-862-2250
Richard Traxter (URI) - His group's capabilities have been
described elsewhere.
4. Applicable Habitat:
As with the other microbiology projects, minor modifications in
the sampling protocol make the project applicable to all New
England aquatic habitats.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Mechanical dispersion of the oil slick by heavy seas would
seriously impair the chances of getting meaningful results. If
there is no chance of obtaining control data from previous spills
or an untreated fraction of the current spill, interpretation of
the results would be tenuous at best. Accordingly, seas <2,
spill area of sufficient size that a region of the spill could be
left untreated, and a pre-spill period during which laboratory
experiments would be performed on candidate dispersants are all
important to the success of the investigation.
6. Applicable Oil Types:
Heavier oils, crude oils would be the best suited for this type
of study since use of dispersants is probably best justified for
such spills.
7. Time Frame:
A. Sampling: 16mh/sample set (6 surface, 6 water column and 6
sediment samples/set).
68
-------
B. Sample Processing
1. Radio-nucleides experiments 4mh/set 16mh
2. LPS assay Imh/set & setup 5mh
3. Viable count & replicas 18mh/set & prep 80mh
Total lOOmh
4. & 5. Organic Chemistry Support ? 200mh
C. Interpretation 80mh
D. Summary: Sampling will be completed during the first 2 weeks
of the spill/treatment event. Processing will require about
3 months exclusive of the organic chemistry which may take as
long as 6 months. Final report should be prepared within 9
months of start of investigation.
8. Cost:
A. Materials: Isotopes + Media + Membranes + $2,000
Reagents
B. Processing: $2,000-5,000
C. Interpretation & Computer Times: $2,000-2,500
D. Transportation, platform costs-
depends on location and geography of
spill site $1,000-30,000
9., 10., and 11. Equipment, Facilities, Personnel:
Equipment, facilities, and personnel have been described in
detail in Project No. 1.
12. Support Services:
Biochemical assays described above. Physical data on dynamics,
of air-ocean interface and slick migration. Data on vertical
migration of micelles formed due to treatment is important.
Also needed is information from organic chemists on rates of
hydrocarbon speciation change in micelles.
13. Payoff:
As with the other microbiology projects, the primary benefit of
this study is to*provide a means for rationally selecting the
optimum technique for minimizing the ecological and socioeconomic
69
-------
impacts of an oil spill. If it can be demonstrated that dis-
persants enhance biodegradation of oil by increasing surface
area, etc., then use of dispersants would be indicated for at
least some oil spills. If dispersants are toxic, cause produc-
tion of toxic metabolites, or cause no enhancement in biodegrada-
tion rates, then other recovery techniques are preferred.
In terms of damage assessment, once the initial studies are
completed, metabolic rate studies will provide a relatively
rapid, inexpensive and statistically significant means of
assessing the efficiency of cleanup efforts, as well as long-
term impact on affected environments.
14. Limitations
The most serious limitations have been suggested:
A. A background of information from laboratory experiments is
needed to ensure success of a field study.
B. Dispersants are not routinely used in the U.S. If disper-
sants were used to treat an oil spill, some means would have
to be devised to preserve an untreated portion of the spill
for control studies.
70
-------
PANEL: MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION
PROJECT NO. 4*
PRIORITY RANK: 4
1. Project Title: Degradation in Anaerobic Sediments
2. Projection Description: >
To determine if hydrocarbon degradation does occur in anaerobic
sediments, and if so, at what rate. Using standard petroleum
crude oils (API reference Kuwait, South Louisiana and Bunker C)
determine which components are degraded. Physical-chemical ••
degradation must be identified as compared to biodegradation.
The study should also determine if oils in anaerobic sediments
have a negative, positive or no effect on physiological processes
in anaerobic sediments such as sulfate reduction or nitrate '
reduction.
3. Performing Organization:
University of Rhode Island, Department of Plant" Pathology -
Entomology and Department of Microbiology, Dr. R. W. Traxler in
cooperation with Dr. C. Brown of the Department of Chemistry,
EG&G - Mr. William Galen.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Offshore bottoms, sand shores; worm-clam flats; salt ponds.
5. Applicable conditions:
Uncontaminated sediment which can be oiled by standard reference
oils. There are no weather or climatic conditions which would
prevent the study. Oiled sediments from Argo Merchant or other
spill sites, with similar unoiled sites for reference. Weather
limitation associated with sediment sampling, such as sea state.
6. Applicable Oil Types:
Standard reference oils would be preferred due to existing
analyses but any product could be used.
*This project is currently in progress at URI.
71
-------
7. Time Frame:
The study would require a 3-year time frame to ensure that low
degradation rates are not missed in the analysis scheme. Repli-
cate samples would require 1-week testing periods each month for
up to 24 months, unless rates are established in shorter time
frames. Chemical analyses would represent 3 days per month.
8. Cost
In this project there is no relation between cost and spill size.
Cost would be calculated at personnel, supply, and equipment base
of about
2-part time personnel $12,000
Overhead and fringe 6,000
Initial equipment 10,000
Expendable support 4,000
Total $32,000
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
14. Limitations
72
-------
PANEL: MICROBIOLOGY AND BIODEGRADATION
PROJECT NO. 5
PRIORITY RANK: 4
1. Project Title: Nutrient Enrichment.
2. Project Description:
To determine 1) if nutrient enrichment has a significant stimula-
tory effect upon hydrocarbon oxidation rate and percentage of
hydrocarbon oxidation by microbial populations as compared to
non-nutrient enriched systems, and 2) if nutrient enrichment has
potential adverse environmental effects such as over production
of microbial or other biomass.
The experiment can be carried out in meso-scale environmental
systems utilizing a natural seawater control tank, an oil treated
tank and an oil treated tank supplemented with oleophilic nitrogen
and phosporus nutrient supplements. Biodegradation potential can
be determined using biomass and rate determinations and correlated
via chemical analyses for rate of component degradation.
It is anticipated that degradation rates will be increased but
that the increase in biomass will result in other problems of
environmental significance. More degradation products will
appear in the water column than in nonsupplemented systems.
3. Performing Organizations:
The University of Rhode Island Oil Research Group supported by an
ERDA contract to study treated vs. untreated oil spills has the
capability to respond to this problem. The MERLE project group
at URI/GSO also has the capability from a facility standpoint, as
well as EG&G through Mr. William Galen. Dr. Richard Bartha,
Rutgers, is an expert in the field of nutrient enrichment, and
may be consulted on questions in this area.
4« Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
73
-------
8. Cost:
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
12, Support Services:
13. Payoff:
14. Limitations:
74
-------
BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS PANEL
Participants
J.L. Dunn, Chairperson
B. Baxter T. Hoehn
B. Blodget A.M. Julin
J. Cardoza C.L. Knapp
J. Harris K. Powers
F. Heppner J.H. Prescott
R.F. Randall
75
-------
BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS PANEL
General Considerations and Guidelines
• Background Information on Birds
• Preliminary Panel Considerations
• Recommendations to the Workshop
Executive Committee
• Laws Concerning Marine Mammals and
Birds in EPA Region I
• Recommended Procedures for Processing
Specimens
• General Procedures for Assessing
Damage to Birds
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON BIRDS, MAMMALS AND REPTILES
A. Population and Inventories
Populations of coastal and marine birds in EPA Region I have been
addressed in Drury (1973-1974), Nisbet (1973), Brown et al (1975),
Brown (1977), and Powers (manuscript being developed for U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service based on an 18-month Georges Bank study by Manomet
Bird Observatory). Most of the above work deals with breeding
populations on the New England and eastern Canadian seaboard, and to
a lesser extent on pelagic distributions. The Fish and Wildlife
Service also is presently cataloguing all colonies of coastal and
marine birds from Maine to the Carolinas, and developing estimates of
total breeding pairs.
Temporal and spatial distributions of species have been described
in the above-listed publications.
B. Critical Habitats
Coastal critical habitats are far better understood than critical
pelagic habitats. W. Drury (College of The Atlantic), I.C.T. Nisbet
(Mass. Audubon Society), Brian Harringon (Manomet Bird Observatory),
Michael Erwin (U. of Mass., Coop. Wild Res. Unit) are the authorities
on coastal critical habitats in EPA Region I. Kevin Powers (Manomet
Bird Observatory) and R.G.B. Brown (Canadian Wildlife Service) are
the present authorities on pelagic distributions of marine birds in
76
-------
EPA Region 1. The previously mentioned publications deal with
critical habitats to some extent, but communication with above
persons will provide specific unpublished information on certain
families of birds and areas in the Region.
C. Facilities, Personnel and Areas of Expertise
Massachusetts Audubon Society - I.C.T. Nisbet (Terns and gulls),
R. Foster
Manomet Bird Observatory - Brian Harrington (Shorebirds), U. Powers,
R. Veit
Boston University/Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard University)
Tim Rumage (Seabirds and Avian Pathology)
University of Massachusetts Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit -
Michael Erwin (Waders and coastal birds)
College of the Atlantic - William Drury (Gulls and seabirds)
Massachusetts Division of Fish and Wildlife - Brad Blodgett,
H.W. Heusmann
/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Office (see Appendix F)
State Conservation Agencies in Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut
and Rhode Island
Pelagic birds
Manomet Bird Observatory - Kevin Powers (seabirds)
College of the Atlantic - William Drury (seabirds)
University of Rhode Island - Frank Heppner (Trigom report compiler)
D. Available Impact Information
Substantial information exists on past impact on bird populations of
certain spills throughout the world. The most important accidents
are summarized in a chapter by W.R.P. Bourne on Seabirds and Pollu-
tion in Marine Pollution, ed. R. Johnston, Academic Press (1976).
However, most information on ecological impacts deals with abundance
and species diversity from birds that have been picked up on "beached
bird surveys" of affected coastlines. Quite a bit of information
deals with methods of cleaning and rehabilitating oil contaminated
plumages. Long-term effects on bird populations have not been dealt
with. Both short-term and chronic studies of the dietary effects of
oil on waterfowl are underway at the Patuxent Wildlife Research
77
-------
Center, Laurel, Maryland. Information from the Argo Merchant
incident dealing with beached bird surveys and pelagic surveys of
oil contaminated birds will be dealt with in a publication by K.
Powers (MBO) by January 1978.
Likely effects of future spills on coastal and pelagic birds include:
f
(1) Direct mortality due to physical oiling of plumages.
(2) Indirect mortality by ingestion of oil, either directly or
indirectly through food chains.
(3) Effects of external and internal oiling on reproductive
success, during applicable seasons.
(4) Effects on wintering or breeding habitats of oil reaching
shoreline habitats. Breeding, feeding, loafing habitats
may be altered.
E. Background Reports
1. A Socio-Economic and Environmental Inventory of the North
Atlantic Region (Including the Outer Continental Shelf
and Adjacent Waters from Sandy Hook, New Jersey to the
Bay of Fundy). Vol. 1, Book 4. Submitted to the Bureau of
Land Management, Marine Mammals Division, November, 1974.
TRIGOM/PARC, Public Affairs Research Center.
Available From:
TRIGOM
Box 2320
So. Portland, ME
2. Oil Spill Prevention and Response. Report to the Massachusetts
Interagency Task Force on Oil Spills. Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs, Publication No. 9705-185-30-5-77-CR.
April, 1977.
3. Massachusetts Breeding Bird Atlas. Five year project (1974-1978)
to determine distribution of breeding birds in Massachusetts.
Joint project of Mass. Audubon Society and Mass. Division of
Fisheries and Wildlife. In preparation for eventual publi-
cation.
Contact: B. Blodget (MDFW), R. Forster (Mass. Audubon).
4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Colonial Seabird Nesting Survey. Three
year project (1975-1977) to furnish baseline data on colony
occupancy and distribution in Coastal North America. To be
published.
78
-------
Contact: Dr. Wendell E. Dodge and R. Michael Erwin, Mass. Coop.
Wildlife Research unit, 204 Holdsworth Hall, University of
Mass., Amherst, MA 01002
5. Winter Waterfowl Surveys (for Massachusetts). Job progress reports
published under Pittman-Robertson Projects W-35-R, W-42-R,
and other State and PR projects. Coverage-ca. 1950 to date.
Contact: H.W. Heusmann, Mass. Division of Fish and Wildlife,
Field Headquarters, Westboro, MA 01581
Regional compilation by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
6. Nisbet, I.C.T., 1973. Terns in Massachusetts: Present numbers
and historical changes.
Bird-banding 44(1):27-55.
7. Drury, W.H. 1973. Population changes in New England Seabirds.
Bird-banding 44(4):267-313.
1974. Population changes in New England Seabirds.
Bird-banding 45(1):1-15.
F. Wildlife Inventories
Birds:
1. Griscom, L. and D.E. Snyder, 1955. Birds of Massachusetts.
Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass. 295 pp. Discussion of history
and annotated list of species.
2. Barley, W., 1955. Birds in Massachusetts, PP for Mass. Audubon
Society.
3. Barley, W. , 1968. Birds of Cape Cod National Seashore. Mass.
Audubon Society. Annotated list.
4. Hill, N.P., 1965. Birds of Cape Cod. W. Morrow and Co., New York,
364 pp.
5. Griscom, L. and E.V. Floger, 1948. Birds of Nantucket. Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, 156 pp. Information local, but
largely dated.
6. Griscom, L. and G. Emerson, 1959- Birds and Martha's Vineyard.
Privately Printed, Martha's Vineyard, Mass., 164 pp. Informa-
tion local but largely dated.
7. Blodget, B. Annotated list of birds of Massachusetts. With
Seasonal Abundance and Distribution. In prep.
79
-------
8. Resource Management Plan. Phase 1 RBI. For Cape Cod National
Seashore (1976).
Contact: P. Godfrey, Dept. of Botany, Morrill Hall, University
of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003
Mammals:
1. Cordoza, James E., 1976. Preliminary List of Mammals of Massa-
chusetts. Mass. Division of Fish and Wildlife. Mimeo.
Unannotated list of mammals of the state. Distribution
and abundance of land mammals.
2. Godin, A.J., 1977. Wild mammals of New England. Johns Hopkins
Press, Baltimore, 304 pp. Detailed description, by species,
of distribution and natural history of regional mammals.
3. Leatherwood, S., D.U. Caldwell and H.E. Winn. 1976. Whales,
dolphins and porpoises of the western North Atlantic. A
guide to their identification. NOAA (NMFS), NOAA Tech.
Rept. NMFS Circ-396, 176 pp.
Reptiles:
1. Lazell, J.D., Jr., 1974. Reptiles and Amphibians of Massachusetts,
(2nd ed.) Mass. Audubon Society, Lincoln, 34 pp. Annotated
with brief comments on distribution and abundance.
2. Lazell, J.D., Jr., 1976. This broken archipelago. Quadrangle
Press, New York, 260 pp. Distribution, abundance and
history of reptiles and amphibians in Barns table, Dukes,
and Nantucket Counties, Mass.
3. Bleakney, J.S., 1965. Reports of marine turtles from New England
and Canadian waters. Canadian Field Nat. 79(2):120-128.
4. Frair, W. 1972. Leatherback: northward, ho! Aquasphere, New
England Aquarium 6(3):12-15.
PRELIMINARY PANEL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Critical Habitats and Species Inventories
It became apparent to the panel that time limitations would not
permit a cataloguing of critical habitats and a species inventory.
Panel members were asked to suggest available published reports which
would provide this information. Several such reports were on hand
80
-------
and several others were suggested. Of special interest were the
Manomet Bird Observatory's Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service on the spatial and temporal distribution of marine birds at
Georges Bank and adjacent waters, and a recent Trigom Report which
attempted to describe the distribution of marine mammals in New
England Outer Continental Shelf. It was the consensus of the panel
that identification of habitats critical to birds and marine mammals
is one area of baseline information which is sorely lacking. There
is a substantial lack of confidence in currently available data.
Throughout the panel's discussions, a consistent theme was the lack
of baseline data. These gaps in our knowledge cast doubts upon the
validity of any studies aimed at assessing the damage to marine
mammals and bird populations in the area of oil spills. The panel
was unanimous in its recommendation that EPA should undertake major
efforts to support research designed to fill these gaps. In areas
outside its normal purview, EPA should attempt to make certain that
appropriate agencies are aware of the requirements for research in
such areas. [An area not encompassed by the Workshop is the impact
of oil spills on marine and estuarine reptiles. The Panel feels
this is an unfortunate oversight and has attempted to make repara-
tions by including references on marine reptiles and a project
dealing with effects of oil pollution on marine reptiles.
B. Project Areas
1. Recommended Projects
The panel identified several projects which it feels will aid in
assessment of oil damage to marine mammals and bird population in its
region. These projects include:
• Survey of birds and marine mammals in the area of an offshore
oil spill.
j
• Near-shore survey of birds and mammals.
• Collection, classification and salvage of suspected oil
impacted wildlife, (includes histopathology, toxicology,
physiology, and causes of mortality.)
• A study to develop methods to determine actual mortality
from post-spill mortality observation.
• Behavioral observations on wildlife in and around an oil
impacted area, (includes observations on both impacted and
.non-impacted animals.)
81
-------
• Long-term follow-up of the impact of an oil spill on birds
and marine mammals.
• Determination of the impact of cleanup operations on birds
and mammals.
• Development of methods to minimize adverse impact of cleanup
operations.
The panel initially considered one project in depth, a survey of birds
and marine mammals in the area of an oil spill. After completing this
exercise, our initial impression—that projects involving high cost
platforms must be piggybacked with other projects—was strengthened.
2. Other Subject Areas
Other areas that are not suitable for development as projects but that
require further investigation are:
• Identification of Federal, state and local agencies which
may have jurisdiction over a particular species in order to
avoid conflict between these agencies or between these and
other agencies.
• Identification of current Federal, state or local laws which
may delay or prevent execution of required studies.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE WORKSHOP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
The following formal recommendations are made to the Executive
Committee:
1. In a field as esoteric as marine mammology, the numbers of in-
dividuals in a given EPA region attending an oil spill workshop may
not be adequate to provide the required expertise to produce the
information requested of the panel. We feel that EPA should consider
funding a national workshop designed to produce the required informa-
tion. In December there will be a meeting in San Diego dealing with
marine mammals. This meeting will be attended by most of the nation's
marine mammologists. One additional day at such a meeting could be
devoted to assessing oil spill damage in marine mammals. By piggy-
backing on this meeting, the cost of assembling the required informa-
tion would be extremely low whereas the information acquired would be
maximized.
82
-------
2. In future workshops birds and marine mammals should not be lumped
together. The only common ground between these two groups is the
fact that they are homeotherms and may exist in the same areas.
Close coordination of projects developed by separate panels is of
course highly desirable.
3. The panel suggests the creation of a permanent advisory body to
assist the agencies in development of data collection and analysis
methods.
4. The requirement for rapid response to an oil spill makes it un-
likely that equipment needed for proposed studies will be either
immediately available from an institution or immediately available
for purchase. For these reasons, the panel suggests the Executive
Committee consider the establishment of two or more sites where
equipment pertinent to routine oil spill studies can be stored ready
for immediate shipment to the scene of a spill. A coordinated nation-
wide scientific program suggests that certain equipment will be neces-
sary no matter where the spill occurs. Establishment of equipment
depots on each coast is a more cost-effective mechanism than funding
such equipment purchases for a dozen researchers nationwide.
LAWS CONCERNING MARINE MAMMALS AND BIRDS IN EPA'REGION I
A. Massachusetts
Subject to the provisions of existing Federal statutes, the Massa-
chusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MDFW) of the Department
of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Recreational Vehicles has jurisdiction
over wild birds, mammals, and inland fish within the bounds of the
State Legislation to extend jurisdiction to include reptiles and
amphibians is pending* The Division of Marine Fisheries has juris-
diction over marine fish and shellfish, and, equally with the Division
of Fisheries and Wildlife^ over marine mammals. In addition to any
Federally required permits, individuals or agencies wishing to conduct
investigations involving collection, capture, harassment, marking,
etc. of state-protected species should request a permit for that
purpose from: MDFW, Leverett Saltonstall Building, Government Center,
100 Cambridge Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02202; 617-727-3151.
The Division of Marine Fisheries customarily waives their permit
requirement for bona-fide investigators holding valid Federal
permits. They may be reached at the above address, telephone >
617-727-3196.
The MDFW also has legal authority to conduct investigations on wild-
life within the above classes of vertebrates. Whether or not such
researches are conducted, and to what extent, is dependent on policy,
funding, and training and availability of personnel and equipment.
83
-------
Statutory authority for the above is contained in Chapter 130, Sections
1, 17, and 101A (Marine Fish and Chapter 131, Sections 4 and 5
(Fisheries and Wildlife) of the Massachusetts General Laws, and
related laws and regulations.
B. Connecticut
Under state law it is illegal to take birds without permit. Statute
26.60 provides for scientific and educational permits. Statute 26.54
states that it is illegal to possess live birds without a custodian
permit. Migratory birds and marine mammals require Federal permits
from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine
Fisheries Service.
It is recommended that:
1. Researchers work with existing permit holders, e.g.,
wildlife biologists, universities, etc.
2. Permit requests be addressed to: Connecticut Department
of Environmental Protection, Wildlife Unit, State Office
Bldg., Hartford, CT. The request should explain species,
times, purpose of collection.
C. Federal
Laws governing Federal responsibility for migratory birds include:
• Migratory Bird Treaty of 1918, as amended.
• National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan, issued in the Federal Register by the Council on
Environmental Quality on February 10, 1975, as amended in
1976 and 1977.
The Migratory Bird Treaty gives responsibility for managing migrator.y
birds to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and states. This includes
issuance of Federal and state collection and possession permits. The
regional contact for Federal permits is:
Wayne Sanders
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Newton Corner, Mass.
617-965-5100 ,
Federal permits may be approved by phone for those competent to col-
lect, possess and handle birds.
84
-------
The "National Contingency Plan" (1510.22) provides that DOI will pro-
vide (f) "expertise to OSC and RRT with respect to land, fish, wild-
life resources under its jurisdiction"; (m) "making resources avail-
able for Federal pollution response operations"; and under 1510.46
(b) "arrange for and coordinate actions of professional and volunteer
groups that wish to establish bird collection, cleaning and recovery
centers", and "to the extent practicable, identify organizations or
institutions that are willing to operate such facilities."
GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING DAMAGE TO BIRDS
A. Immediate Direct Damage to Individual Organisms and Popula-
tions
(1) Assess total populations (density estimates) of each
species in area of spill and monitor on at least ,a weekly
basis (daily during spring or fall migratory periods) to
measure possible movement of specific populations to and
from the affected area.
(2) Estimate damage to specific populations by determining per-
centages of each species that show visible oiling on their
plumage and by beached bird surveys.
(3) Utilizing density estimates in area and percent of specific
populations that were contaminated, estimates of immediate
direct damage to specific bird populations may be developed.
B. Indirect, Delayed or Chronic Damage to Bird Populations
These assessments require accurate information on the composition and
characteristics of the spilled fuel. These needs are discussed under
specific recommended projects.
(1) Determine the source or origin (e.g., breeding colony) of
contaminated bird species (includes direct and indirect
mortality) to enable assessment of population losses at
selected breeding locations. Birds from both the Northern
and Southern Hemispheres are involved.
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING SPECIMENS*
1. Dead Animals
a. Advanced autolysis - place animal in freezer
*Specimens should be handled according to EPA chain of custody pro-
cedures.
85
-------
b. Recently dead
- tissue samples in 10% buffered formalin for histological
purposes; Vol. of the formalin must exceed 10X vol. of
tissue.
- tissues for hydrocarbon analysis* (e.g., blubber, muscle,
liver, brain, gut). Sample size depends on precision
desired. Tissue must be packaged according to appropriate
CF. FR 40(28) Pt.ll pp. 62-97 guidelines. Volume of tissue
should be lOOg or better.
- necropsy of animals to determine cause of death.
c. Frozen specimens, not decomposed
- handle hydrocarbon analysis as in b above.
2. Moribund Animals
a. Liver samples - lOg or more should be obtained. If mixed
function oxidase levels are desired, must go into liquid
nitrogen ASAP.
b. Blood samples - 5 cc of blood in EDTA and 20cc of blood, no
anticoagulant. Refrigerate and centrifuge to separate serum.
Remove serum from packed cells. Serum can be frozen for
future analysis.
Make 2 thin smears from EDTA sample; air dry.
Reference for sampling tissues
Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD
USFW Service National Wildlife Health Labs, Madison, WI
3. Gut Contents - remove for analysis of ingested hydrocarbons, food
items, or empty. Many collected specimens may be emaciated and
starved.
*Techniques for analysis of hydrocarbons in warm blooded animals,
although still under development, are currently useful in deter-
mining if an organism has been exposed to oil pollution.
86
-------
BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. Assessment of immediate impact on bird populations in area of
offshore oil spill.
2. Breeding bird population studies.
3. Collection, classification and salvage of suspected oil impacted
birds.
4. Effects of oil spills on bird reproduction.
5. Determination of spill associated bird mortality from post-spill
body counts.
6. Assessment of the impact of an oil spill on marine mammals.
7. Summary of birds and marine mammals for offshore oil spills.
8. Assessment of oil spill damage to New England marine turtle
populations.
87
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK: 1
1. Project Title: Assessment of Immediate Impact on Bird Populations
in Area of Offshore Oil Spill
2. Description of Project:
A. Objective - Determine species composition, density, and
distribution of bird populations in area of oil spill, and
the proportion of each bird species which is visibly con-
taminated with oil.
B. Procedure
(1) By aerial surveillance the species composition, density,
and distribution of bird populations in the area of the
spill will be estimated using a fixed-wing aircraft
flown over a pre-selected grid to randomly sample bird
populations present on contaminated and adjacent areas.
This technique involves using 2 observers and one re-
corder (in addition to the pilot) in a twin-engine hi-
wing aircraft flown at 100 feet above sea level at 100
mph. All birds within a 300m transect will be counted
by species for 10-minute periods. Densities (birds/km2)
will be extrapolated using species abundances per area
sampled [300m wide x (10 min x air speed)]. This tech-
nique is being utilized by the USFWS - OBS/CE, 800 A St.,
Suite 110, Anchorage, AK 99501 - Project Leader -
Calvin Lens ink.
(2) Determine percent of each species visibly contaminated
with oil from shipboard surveys by using 10-minute
counts of total numbers of each bird species within
sight of the ship (Brown et al. 1975 - Atlas of eastern
Canadian seabirds, and Manomet Bird Observatory unpub-
lished cruise reports). Specific formats for sampling
and compilation of data on computerized data sheets are
discussed in the references above. Behavioral observa-
tions and notes on the degrees (i.e., light, medium, or
heavily oiled) of plumage contamination and areas of
body affected (i.e. nape of neck, breast, belly, etc.)
will be recorded in the 10-minute count format.
88
-------
(3) Utilizing density estimates determined from aerial
surveillance and percents of specific populations
visibly contaminated from concurrent shipboard surveys,,
estimates of immediate direct damage to bird popula-
tions can be made.
3. Performing Organization:
A. Offshore spills - Manomet Bird Observatory 617/224-3559 -
Kevin Powers or Brian Harrington. This organization
presently has the capability and available manpower to
perform such a study.
B. Possible performing organizations suggested: College of the
Atlantic - 207/288-5015 - William Drury; University of Rhode
Island - 401/792-2372 - Frank Heppner.
4. Applicable Habitats;
All offshore habitats in EPA Region I (i.e., Gulf of Maine,
Georges Bank, shelf waters South Cape Cod, and Rhode Island, OCS
slope waters).
5. Applicable Conditions:
Presence of bird populations in area of spill. The only condi-
tions necessary for completion of study are the use of aircraft
and surface vessels able to contend with weather/climate and
geographical conditions. Ecological conditions with the bird
component of the ecosystem are strictly limited to ocean surface
and air strata. An organization like Manomet Bird Observatory
can presently supply trained manpower to meet study requirements
with internal funds for one week. Equipment such as aircraft
and surface vessels must be supplied.
6. Applicable Oil Type;
Any oil type or group of oils.
7. Time Frame;
Inclusive period of short-term assessment requires period from
oil spill to one month after spill has visibly dissipated and
can no longer be traced by air. Daily to weekly surveillance
flights depending on season of year will be necessary. One-week
sampling periods per month from shipboard surveys will be neces-
sary. Depending upon size of spill more than one survey ship
89
-------
may be necessary. Sample work-up and data analysis requires
an additional 2 months per year. Note: This time frame does
not consider any long-term effects.
8. Cost:
A. Aircraft - $100 per hour.
B. Surface vessels - range $500 - $3000 per day, 7-10 days on
study area per vessel desired.
C. Personnel
(1) Aircraft - 2 observers and 1 recorder per flight.
(2) Surface vessels - 1 observer.
Extra cost of Manomet Bird Observatory observer = $100
per day (includes salary ($12K/year) and 57% overhead) -
does not include travel and per diem costs.
D. Equipment - (may sometimes be provided by certain institu-
tions or agencies, but for this project proposal it is assumed
that the NRT will provide necessary equipment).
(1) Photographic - $2000 per kit. One kit includes: SLR
35-mm camera with motor drive and data back; 200-400 mm
zoom lens with gunstock mount; 10 rolls @ 36 exp Tri-X
film; 10 rolls @ 36 exp. Plus-X film. (One kit per
aircraft and surface vessel needed.)
(2) Cassette tape recorders @ $75 (one recorder per aircraft
and surface vessel needed).
(3) Optics - 1 pair 8 x 40 WA binoculars @ $75. (1 pair per
observer needed).
(4) Film processing - grossly estimated at $1000.
E. Automatic data processing, if necessary. Key punch and
statistician's time grossly estimated at $1500 for a spill
of similar size and duration as Argo Merchant incident.
F. Phone, Xerox, etc., costs (if University-based study) grossly
estimated at $500.
90
-------
G. Principal investigator - salary range, $15 - $25K per year.
Mean - $20K per year. Daily consultant rates based on USFWS
scale = salary per year Daily pay rate = $77 per day.
260
Based on one month duration spill and three months' data
analysis and report writing - 4 months with 20 working days
per month = 80 days.
$77 x 80 = $6160 total P.I. salary.
P.I. at 33% of time for 4 months = $2033.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A. As this project is largely observation orientated, little
equipment will be required beyond optical and recording
materials. One kit with the following materials will be
required for each crew (aircraft or ship):
(1) single lens reflex camera with data back and motor
drive unit
(2) 200-400m 200m lens w/gunstock attachment
(3) cassette tape recorder with tapes
(4) 8X40 binoculars
B. All these materials are potentially available through the
appointed institutions, but are not guaranteed to be access-
ible at the moment of a spill. Therefore, kits should be
prepared in advance.
10- Facility Needs/Facilities Available;
Facility needs involve aircraft and ship transport:
A. Aircraft - hi-wing, 2 engine, float equipped preferred,
VFR/IFR, deicing, communications, and navigational capability
appropriate to pelagic survey, room for two observers,
recorder, and pilot.
B, Surface Vessels - from 1-3 vessels of similar design or
observational capability, range and construction suitable to
open ocean work in poor sea conditions for 10-day minimum
(port to port); location electronics equal to Loran A or
better; VHF radio with sea-air, sea-sea, sea-land capability;
91
-------
lifeboat or skiff with capability in cabin to moderate seas;
berth for 1-2 observers.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Discussed in parts 3 and 8(C).
The principal investigator and associates chosen from list of
performing organizations will delegate staff for the project.
12. Support Services:
A. Relevant long-term and cause-and-effeet studies can be assoc-
iated with and after this study. Base line data necessary
for background and more accurate ecological assessments are
discussed in part #14 (Limitations).
The following studies should be considered in priority listed:
(1) Recovery, rehabilitation and salvage operations during
spill.
(2) Indirect mortality by ingestion of oil, either directly
by preening or indirectly through food chain. What are
the chances of survival for a lightly oiled bird? Can
we assume any bird that ingests oil will die? What are
external and internal toxicity levels?
(3) Effects of external and internal oiling on reproductive
success (long term and short term).
(4) Effects of habitat degradation or alteration (wintering,
breeding, or migratory stopover habitats; whichever is
applicable to bird species in question). Habitat
aspects to be considered are feeding, loafing, nesting,
etc.
13. Payoff:
A. The study will provide capability to clearly respond to
public sentiment regarding impact on bird populations. More
specifically, it addresses:
(1) estimates of direct mortality per bird species at spill
site
(2) probable estimates of indirect mortality due to spill
92
-------
(3) limitations in estimating long-term or more accurate
assessments are discussed in part #14 (Limitations).
14. Limitations:
A. Our capability to assess environmental damage to marine
bird populations associated with these spills is dependent
on necessary base line information.
B. These populations are highly mobile. Even with the best base
line data present capabilities can provide, statistically
significant measurements (P<.05) may not be possible.
C. Weather and sea state may severely disrupt the effectiveness
of the project.
D. Initial counts of direct mortality at spill site may be
misleading. Oiled birds may die many miles away, may sink
before being counted, may float out to sea unobserved
(opposed to washing ashore). They also may be more likely
to be counted because of behavioral factors (flight and
feeding characteristics; spending more time on water). All
oiled birds may not be contaminated from same source.
E. Cost predictions listed for this study may not be considered
feasible (e.g., aircraft and vessel costs) with available
funds. Most of these high-cost facilities necessary, may
be dove tailed with USCG operations and other research
groups. However, the quality of data collected may be
reduced. To what extent data quality will be impaired is
unknown.
93
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 2
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Breeding Bird Population Studies to Monitor
Population Fluctuation at Breeding Colonies and
to Study the Relationship of Such Fluctuations
to Oil at Sea
2. Project Description:
This project takes a long-term approach to monitoring changes and
trends in sea populations. It provides invaluable base line
data, material that ideally should have been generated 20 years
ago. Only in seabird rookeries are the populations concentrated
in space and time to the extent that accurate and meaningful
population estimates can be made. Therefore, this approach
should provide a most sensitive measure of population fluctuations-
some of which may be attributable to oil spills. The Torrey
Canyon disaster demonstrated the value of this approach in the
British Isles where considerable surveys of the seabird resources
have gone on for many years. Actual percentage drops in the
populations could be measured by noting declines at the rookeries.
This proposed project would be international in scope and would
be quite expensive. Some data are already available (cf.
Canadian F. & W. Survey of the Seabirds colonies in eastern
Canada; USFWS, Seabird Survey; U. of Maine Coop. Res. Unit and
U. of Mass. Coop. Res. Unit, Dr. R. Michael Erwin and Wendell
Dodge, P.I.)
3» Performing Organizations:
The enormous scope of this project makes it essential to utilize
all available observers and cooperators. These would probably
represent various organizations contracting with a lead-coordi-
nating agency - e.g., USFWS or The Seabird Group. Dr. William
Drury, College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor, Maine, has consider-
able expertise in the Region I seabird population. The only
known reference for Canada is the Canadian Wildlife Service.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Offshore islands, sandy beaches and bare cliffs, stacks, ledges,
and wherever seabirds are found to be nesting.
94
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
Successful completion would depend on availability of necessary
manpower, operation platforms and equipment. The huge scope of
the project means that these factors might, in fact, be limiting.
Necessary men and equipment would need to be highly coordinated
to correspond/coincide with the seabird meeting chronologies.
Accuracy of data generated would be limited by weather, sea
conditions, difficulties associated with landing on offshore
islands, etc.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Not directly applicable.
7. Time Frame:
A. Total scope of project:- minimum 10 years.
B. Annual scope of project:
(1) Field Operation May - July.
(2) Equipment Preparation/Data Processing August - April.
8. Cost*:
A. Personnel
Principal Investigator (1) $ 6,875**
@ $250-300/week for 25 weeks
Field Observers (12) 13,000**
@ 80-100/week for 12 weeks
*For this section, cost estimates are based on survey and observation
of all seabird colonies in Massachusetts. Cost for total NE Maritime
Region would be expanded Province by Province, with highly variable
costs expected due to different colony access problems and require-
ments. For example, Newfoundland would require large boat and much
off-shore work, while in Massachusetts, small boats and vehicle work
would be adequate.
**This figure reflects all staffed, agency-filled positions and
doesn't take into account the probability that some personnel
are volunteers or personnel already on the job, e.g., P.I.
95
-------
B. Operating Platforms
16' Boston Whaler, rented or chartered 5,600
@ $100/day, boat trailer included, for
8 weeks, fully-equipped
2 4x4 Scout International Jeeps at $50/day 4,200
for 12 weeks
C. Equipment
(a) Binoculars (6 pairs) 8x40 Swift 720
@ $120 each
(b) Spotting telescope and tripod 200
@ $200
D. Contingencies (e.g., telephone calls, beach 350
permits, notebooks, etc.)
$30,570
or $32,000
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
A. Binoculars, Swift 8x40 or 7x50
(about 6 should be available for use)
B. Telescope, Bausch & Lamb Bolscope Sr. 20 power, 300MM (1)
C. Tripod (1)
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
A. Boat (1) Boston Whaler, 16" fully equipped and C.G. inspected
ideal.
B. Trailer for Boat (1)
C. Trucks (2) 4x4 Scout International equipped with 7.50 x 15
tires with psi = 17, low-pressure tire gauge, air-tank (capy
200 Ibs.), hydraulic jack, tire iron, several boards, shovel,
spare tire, come-along; 25 feet 1/2" nylon rope or equivalent
strength cable.
D. Garaging for vehicles assumed to be covered by owning
agencies, e.g., MDFW, Wbo. hdqtrs or SE District Office, etc.
No additional cost involved.
96
-------
E. Docking/launching facilities for boat. Arrangements in
advance at appropriate points of departure. Possibly some
cost involved here not shown in Paragraph 8 above.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
A. For Massachusetts, possible Principal Investigators:
Dr. R. M. Erwin, U. MA. Coop Res. Unit, Holdsworth Hall,
Amherst, MA 01003 (presently USFEW Coordinator or on MA
Coast for Seabird Survey).
Bradford G. Blodget, State Ornithologist, Mass. Div.
F. & W., 100 Cambridge Street, Boston, 02202. Tel. (617)
727-3151. Home No: (617) 853-5474 at 74 Hillcroft Ave.,
Worcester. Currently co-coordinator of Division activity on
tern project.
Richard Forster, c/o Mass. Aud. Soc., leader of MA tern
project.
B. Current additional observer personnel furnished by other
agencies, e.g., Trustees of Res., Parker R. NWR, MAS, Cape
Cod Nat. Seashore, Barnstable Conserv. Comm., and, volunteers
too lengthy a list to give here.
C. Adequate personnel are available on short notice. Names and
details available from any of above individuals or agencies
listed (for MA only). Personnel would have to be lined up
and coordinated state by state or province with a state or
provincial coordinator. '
12. Support Services:
A. Aerial reconnaissance of study area helpful in surveying
for locations of colonies to be censused. All actual census
work to be carried out from land and water-based platforms.
Aerial data are useful only in locating breeding colonies.
B. Studies on census techniques might help refine methods
of obtaining accurate numerical estimates.
13. Payoff
Payoff would be in long range build-up of data to be used as a
barometer of change in seabird numbers. Immediate use for
determining damage due to spills would be minimal, but the study
97
-------
could yield excellent general population data after sufficient
; time (probably at least 10 years). Yields current information
on sea-bird numbers in total population that cannot be obtained
in any other fashion and therefore potentially very useful in
assessing long range trends—some trends in part possibly due to
oil contamination at sea. The long term oil related mortality
in seabirds may be greater than the spectacular one-shot mortality
immediately associated with spills.
Figure 1. Two schemes showing seabird mortality due to oil. In
Model A, mortality is scattered over a wide area, as birds
encounter oil at many small spills, or individual globs of oil
and die. In model B, there is spectacular loss at a spill site.
However, over the long range, actual mortality under scheme A
may be much greater than that associated with B. The proposed
project would give a much better assessment of the seabird
resource picture at control concentration points, where birds
congregate from the oceans of the world. Over time, these two
types of mortality might appear thus:
Scheme A
Scheme B
JFMAMJnJlAgSOND
Scheme B takes into account only concentrated, visible oil
mortality; scheme A takes into account continuous, non-point oil
mortality.
This discussion gives the major payoff, which may be the only
long term solution to assessment of damage being done.
14. Limitations;
A. Financial limitations would probably be most severe. Hence,
the project could be broken down into state or provincial
programs that would capitalize on local experts familiar
with their areas to minimize the associated costs.
98
-------
B. Project does not give a direct cause-effect relationship
between oil at sea and impact on seabird numbers. Rather
the proposed project shows fluctuation in seabird numbers
resulting from a large assemblage of factors.
C. Project has little or no value in short-term assessment
of damage at the site of an oil spill. Benefits are entirely
based on long-term development.
D. Project may be limited severely in some states or provinces
by any or all of the following factors:
(1) difficulty of access to remote colonies,
(2) lack of competent observers, and
(3) impossibility of documenting number of birds in colon-
ies due to difficulties in obtaining accurate number
estimates.
E. Projects would apply only to colonial nesters (see point 15).
15. Species Affected;
A. The following colonial nesters would be most easily assessed
by this project:
(1) Dovekie
(2-3) Murres (2 spp)
(4) Razorbill
(5) Black Guillemot
(6) Gannet
(7) Black-legged Kittiwake
(8) Puffin
(9-10) Cormorants (2 spp)
B. The following species may all be assessed, but may be less
critical as they might be more affected by other factors
than oil.
99
-------
(1) Tern spp. (NE and north, 4 spp)
(2) Gulls (NE and north, 6+ spp)
C. The following species are highly colonial, but colonies
are geographically very remote from our area:
Cory's Shearwater (Azores, the closest)
Greater Shearwater (Tristan Archipelago)
Sooty Shearwater (sub-Antarctic islands)
Wilson's Storm Petrel (sub-Antarctic islands)
Atlantic Fulmar (Northeast Atlantic)
D. The following pelagic species are non-colonial and would
require different censusing techniques:
Oldsquaw, Scoters (3 spp), Eiders (2 spp) Loons (2 spp),
Grebes (2 spp).
Addendum to Project No. 2:
The spatial and temporal distribution of the marine bird-
populations in DCS New England waters is only superficially under-
stood. Only one 18-month study (USFWS-Manomet Bird Observatory) has
examined pelagic distributions of birds in this area. Yearly trends
have not been investigated. A viable census technique for counting
birds at sea has been developed, and a format for automatic data
processing of such information is available. A prototype ADP program
is currently being developed and tested by U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Migratory Bird and Habitat Laboratory at Laurel, Maryland.
Data processed in this format was collected at the site of the Argo
Merchant spill and will be analyzed by January 1978. We have capi-
talized on a unique offshore research opportunity. The existence of
a spatial and temporal distribution data will allow more accurate
estimates of probable import of future spills. The mobility of sea-
bird populations makes this data base necessary for valid damage
assessments.
The seabird populations that utilize U.S. Northwest Atlantic OCS
waters involve species from Tristan De Cunha, Antarctic Peninsula,
and South Shetland Islands in the Southern Hemisphere; and species
from northwest Africa, the Canaries, Azores, Shetland and Faroe
Islands, Iceland, Canadian Arctic islands, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia,
100
-------
and New England in the northern Hemisphere. A spill may have a
devastating effect on a particular breeding population or may involve
a small percentage of several breeding populations. We simply do not
know this information and therefore cannot really assess the actual
damage because it may not be apparent until the birds are thousands
of miles away. We can obtain better information with collecting and
banding operations on an international scale.
We do not know, but may only conjecture from the literature, what
food resources the seabird populations utilize in these waters.
Studies in the literature are few and were investigated in other
countries mainly during the breeding seasons. Damage (i.e. resource
reductions) or contamination of prey items may seriously affect bird
populations. A depleted prey species may act as a severe stress on
bird populations, or hydrocarbon accumulations in prey species may
result in a detrimental build-up of hydrocarbons which may kill
individual birds when otherwise stressed; or when toxic tissue levels
are reached from contaminated prey items (i.e., fish in Mississippi
River drainage resulted in extermination of all breeding populations
of this species along coastal Louisiana in the early 1960's).
In conclusion, we may well be able to assess mortality at the site
of the spill with a comprehensive effort as stated in this project,
at a phenomenal cost, but we cannot make any meaningful statements
concerning an ecological assessment of damage until we have a data
base with which to compare results obtained during damage assessments
studies.
101
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Collection, Classification and Salvage of
Suspected Oil Impacted Birds
2. Project Description;
A. Objectives
(1) Collect distressed and dead birds in and around an
oil spill, including adjacent on-shore areas.
(2) Transport collected specimens to a control processing
point.
(3) Classify specimens into categories of living vs.
dead, oiled vs. non-oiled.
(4) Record appropriate site and specimen data, including
species, sex and age, condition, date, time, location.
(5) Coordinate disposition of specimens for treatment under
allied projects.
(6) Necropsy of dead animals.
B. Techniques
(1) Land-based collection: regionalize shoreline and
associated inland areas. Assign a regional coordinator
(and assistants if necessary) to each region. (Refer-
ence: Cardoza, J.E., 1977. Oiled bird recovery
program for the "Argo Merchant" Spill. Typescript
memorandum to the Director of the Mass. Div. Fisheries
and Wildlife. 10pp. Provide a central coordinator.
Regional collectors would be responsible for patrolling
their area, collecting the specimens, and transporting
them to a central point. Based on Argo Merchant
experience, regions may be 3-5 miles in length (depend-
ing on numbers of birds involved and accessibility of
terrain). Patrolling at least twice a day, but capable
of expansion. Nightlighting as applicable.
(2) Water-based collection: regionalize coastal (up
to 1/4 mile off-shore) areas. Assign regional coordi-
nator and assistants. Same central coordinator as (i)
102
-------
above. Patrol daily (capable of expansion). Provide
at least one off-shore/on-spill collection crew, as
necessity requires and conditions permit.
(3) Classification: central coordinator and assistants
examine specimens collected by regional crews, make
status determination, record applicable data, package
specimens for distribution.
(4) Salvage: central coordinator liaisons with allied
investigators to provide for transportation and distri-
bution of specimens. Follow recommended EPA chain of
custody procedures. Procedures for handling specimens
apply.
3. Performing Organizations:
A. Lead: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (name & address of
coordinator) and state fish and wildlife department(s) of
state(s) in area of spill (for Mass., contact Matthew B.
Connolly, Jr., Director, Mass. Div. Fish & Wildlife, 100
Cambridge St., Boston, Mass.' 02202, 617-727-3151).
B. Secondary: local conservation and humane organizations;
local scientific and educational institutions; municipal
conservation commissions/civil defense departments.
4, Applicable Habitats:
Pelagic; rocky shore; sandy shore; salt marsh; and salt pond.
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. .Physical accessibility of on-shore terrain.
B. Permissible accessibility of area (e.g., bombing ranges,
hazardous area).
C. Sea state _<4 ft. for water-based collection.
D. Presence or immediate potential presence of birds in subject
area.
E. Availability of collection personnel and associated transport,
F. Requirement for specimen disposition.
/
103
-------
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types or groups of oils.
7. Time Frame
Duration of spill, plus period during which capturable/collect-
ible oiled birds continue to appear.
8. Cost:
A. Equipment:
Vehicle, 4x4 - .20 per mile
ATV - $1.00/hr of*
operation
Vessel/boat - $100 per day
Shipping boxes- $1.75 per box
Burlap bag - .15 per bag
Plastic bag - .20 per bag
B. Personnel:
Nets - $5-$8 per net
Goggles - $5.00 per pair
Gloves - $5.00 per pair
Spotlight - $10.00 each
Scale - $50.00 each
Expendables- $50.00 each
Utilities - $250-$500/mo.
for facilities
PI-$100/day salary, plus $35 per diem
Others-$75/day, plus $35 per diem.
C. Operating Cost for One Month Operation
1. P.I. Salary + cost (1)
Other personnel (20)
2. Vehicles (based on about 6 vehicles,
travelling 5,000 mi. at .20/mi O.C.)
Boats (2) (based on $100/day/boat)
ATV's (1) (based on $1.00/hr of
operation, at 4 hrs/day)
3. Equipment:
Shipping boxes 500x1.75 e
Bags, burlap 500x.l5 e
Bags, plastic 500x.20 e
$ 4,050,00
45,000.00*
1,000.00
6,000.00
120.00 J
875.00
75.00
100.00
7,120
*Based on assumption all personnel are brought in by agency involved.
It is likely the breakdown of personnel would include volunteers.
104
-------
Nets, 12x$5 or $8 60.00 to 96.00
Goggles, 12x$5 60.00
Gloves, 25x2 = 50x$5 250.00
Spotlights (on trik) 6x$10 60.00
Scale 50.00
Expendables 100.00
4. Utilities (heat, tele., elec.) 200.00 to 500.00*
Rental of collection center 300.00 to 500.00
(if necessary)
58,500.00
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A. Truck or utility vehicle, 1/2 to 3/4 ton, 4x4. One per 3-5
mi. shoreline plus one 2x4 or 4x4 truck for central coordi-
nator.
B. ATV/ACV. One per 3-5 mi. shoreline inaccessible by vehicles
in (A) above.
C. Collapsible waxed cardboard pheasant shipping boxes, or
equivalent. One per bird.
D. Burlap sacks, new or washed. One per bird.
E. Landing net, 8 ft., nylon bag, wooden or aluminum handle.
One per collection crew plus reserve supply.
F. Goggles, work gloves, elbow-length rubber gloves. One
set goggles per collection crew and 2 gloves per man plus
reserve supply.
G. Spotlight (narrow beam, candlepower). Vehicle-mounted
or hand-held. One per truck.
H. Scale, suspension, dial-reading, with pan, 15Kg capacity.
One.
I. Plastic bags, heavy-duty, approximately 36x18 in. One
per bird.
J. Expendables: labels, markers, writing materials, twine,
etc.
*Variable, due to season.
105
-------
10. Facilities Needed:
A. Collection point. Enclosed building, seasonally usable,
with adjacent parking area, and ample space for processing
and temporary storage of live and dead specimens in warm
weather. Land line and CB/RT Commo.
B. Surface vessels: One per shoreline or sq. mi. surface
area. Length 18-25 feet, deck working space, enclosed cabin.
Smaller craft (whaler) availability as substitution or
supplement for equivalent shoal/shallow water/harbor areas.
11. Personnel;
Principal investigator and associates selected from list of
performing organizations (see #3) will delegate staff or requi-
sition volunteers from secondary organizations.
A. Central coordinator (Pi) 1
B. Assistants 1-3
C. Regional Coordinators 1 per vehicle/boat
D. Assistants 1-2 per coordinator
12. Support Services
A. Necropsy, histopathological, chemical analyses of impacted
or suspected impacted dead specimens. Includes superficial,
ingested, and absorbed contaminants.
B. Rehabilitation of potentially recoverable live specimens.
C. Coordination of collection efforts with on-shore and close
in-shore surveys of distressed birds.
D. Coordination of collection efforts with on-shore and close
in-shore surveys of distressed birds.
13. Payoff;
A. Distressed birds are one of the most, if not the most,
visible indicators of disaster in an oil spill. The re-
sultant surge of emotional public response demands equally
visible recovery efforts - despite the frequently question-
able biological grounds for such efforts. Public support or
106
-------
resistance for all phases of spill studies may be keyed to
the favorable or adverse publicity generated by recovery
operations.
B. Collection of impacted specimens will provide a known
(albeit minimal) tally of bird losses from a spill.
C. Collection of impacted (and control) specimens will provide
samples for initiating determination of the physical and
physiological effects of ail on birds.
14. Limitations
A. Weather, sea state, and terrain may limit the effectiveness
of collection efforts.
B. Collection of live specimens dependent on mobility of
live birds, skill of collectors, terrain accessibility,
extent of holding facilities, extent of interference by
unsolicited help, and degree of predation on distressed
birds.
C. Collection of dead specimens is dependent on at sea flota-
tion time, terrain accessibility, and degree of scavenging
by predators.
D. Utility of specimens is dependent on preservation facilities
for dead specimens, and holding facilities and transport for
live specimens.
E. It should be recognized that this method does not neces-
sarily provide an estimate of total loss, but only a tally
Of known collected losses.
COMMENT ON PRIORITY
Allied projects will depend on this project for the collection
and distribution of specimens, e.g., tissue analysis, blood sample
collection, etc. Hence, this should be ranked high. This is not to
mention the high public relations importance of this type of project.
107
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 4
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Effects of Accidental Oil Spills on Bird
Reproduction
2. Project Description;
Effects of contamination on yolk formation, localized in the
ring structure of avian egg yolks, are easily distinguishable
from other environmental variables and would provide a good
diagnostic index of an oiling effect during egg formation. If
this can be taken as an exposure index, other data on ovarian
and testicular structure and function, embryonic development,
hatchability, clutch size, and subsequent growth and survival of
young can be related quantitatively to oil exposure. Yolk
variation with respect to oil contamination can be quantified in
lab experiments and this information later could be applied to
field samples to determine the level of exposure. Field samples
of birds and eggs, and other data, will be collected during and
after the spill throughout the breeding season.
References:
Grau, C. R. 1975. Ring structure of avian egg yolks. Department
of Avian Sciences, University of California,
Davis.
Grau, C. R. 1977. Altered egg structure and reduced hatchability
of eggs from birds fed single doses of
petroleum oils. Science (in press).
3. Performing Organization:
C. R. Grau and T. E. Roudybush
University of California, Davis
Department of Avian Sciences
4. Applicable Habitats;
Depends on species impacted.
5. Applicable Conditions;
A. Oil spills impacting on seabirds, waders, or waterfowl.
B. During breeding season.
108
-------
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types.
7. Time Frame:
Two months after the end of the breeding season—roughly 3-8
months.
8. Cost;
Salaries - $4,600
Travel and Per Diem - $9,000
Lab, and Equipment - $4,000
Total $17,600
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
The majority of the equipment is lab equipment in the UC Davis
Lab.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Possible fixed wing aircraft or helicopter and quarters for
field personnel. These could easily piggy-back with other
projects and facilities.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
A. Requirements
3 field biologists
1 lab biologist
part time Principal Investigator
B. Persons to Contact
C. R. Grau 916/752-3535 office
916/752-1300 dept.
916/753-4349 home
T. E. Roudybush 916/752-1300 dept.
916/758-2626 home
109
-------
Alice Berkner
International Bird Rescue Research Center
Aquatic Park
Berkley, California
12. Support Services;
A. Continued laboratory studies of effects of oil on yolk
structure
B. Baseline data on bird reproduction
13. Payoff;
A. Quantification of exposure
B. Impact on reproduction related to exposure.
14. Limitations:
A. Only few investigators/labs capable of doing this.
B. Does not in itself yield total effect on a population.
C. Can be done only during the breeding season.
D. Proven only on geese and laboratory animals—may not
work with wild birds.
110
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Determination of Spill Associated Bird Mortality
from Post-Spill Body Counts
2. Project Description;
For assessment of liability and determination of damages in an
offshore spill incident, it will be important to know actual
spill associated bird mortality. This information cannot be
obtained directly by counting dead birds in the spill area,
because some bodies will sink or drift away from the spill area.
Knowledge of the fate of dead oiled birds and actuarial techniques
based on knowledge of currents could provide a means of predicting
actual mortality, if current data were available in the spill
area.
A. Project Objectives:
(1) Determine floating times for various seabirds oiled
with the major oil types, and;
(2) Develop a model and actuarial tables for calculating
the mortality given the time of body count, character-
istics of the sampling techniques, and basic oceano-
graphic data.
B. Basic Experimental Design:
(1) Floating times of oiled birds
Mallard ducks will be sacrificed, and their feathers
oiled with a standard quantity of each of the test
oils. The bodies will be placed in a temperature
controlled seawater wave tank and tested under the
following conditions:
winter temperature and summer temperature
calm, 1 ft. sea and 2 ft. sea
Observations will be made by photographing the tank
every 2 hours. When a bird is 1 ft. below the surface,
it will be counted as "sunk" and 10 birds/condition
will be used.
Ill
-------
(2) The statistician and oceanographer will cooperate
in developing a computer model which will predict
mortality when the following factors are known:
a. area of spill e. number of live birds counted
b. current on transects
c. tides f. number of dead birds counted
d. wind on transects
g. sink rate of dead birds
h. other factors to be determined
(3) Verification of the model and sink times will be
provided by taking sacrificed, oiled birds on ships
of opportunity, placing them in a floating "trap" which
will be easily visible, and recording rate of sinking
over several days. «
3. Performing Organization:
Any organization which has in-house expertise in ornithology,
statistics, and machine processing of data, and physical ocean-
ography should be able to handle this project. WHOI, URI-GSO
immediately come to mind. Expertise in ornithology is the least
important aspect.
4. Applicable Habitat:
Primarily offshore
5. Applicable Conditions:
This is primarily a laboratory simulation, so completion is
largely a matter of funding and facilities rather than environ-
mental factors. Verification and validation of the actuarial
model can be made on ships of opportunity.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Each of the common offshore cargoes; Crude, #2, #4, #6,
Bunker C, would be tested.
112
-------
7. Time Frame:
Month
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
8. Cost:
Floater Experiments
organization, construction
of apparatus, securing of
specimens
start of exp.
exp.
exp.
exp.
field confirmation of model
exp. field confirmation of
model
reduction of data
writing
writing
Simulation Model
1&2 construction of
model
3—no work
4—no work
5—no work
6—no work
7—incorporation of
floater data writing
This estimate assumes a university contract. Industry will
be higher.
A. Personnel
P.I. (20k/year) summer salary
Oceanographer-engineer summer
salary
Statistician-summer
Technician (full time 9 mos.)
Lab helper (full time 9 mos.)
Overhead
B. Capital Equipment
tank
"trap"
C. Supplies
livestock
chemicals
glassware
misc.
*would not be needed if existing one available
113
$4,200
$4,200
$4,200
$7,200
$5,000
$24,800
$14,000
$5,000*
500
$5,500
-------
D. Computational Time $1,500
E. Travel-Per Diem for
Ship Trials $400
F. Publication expenses,
secretarial, telephone,
postage . $500
TOTAL $48,200
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
The primary piece of equiment is a wave tank. Various university
mechanical and ocean engineering departments have such tanks, but
their availability depends on time of the year, other projects,
etc. A tank could be constructed using standard techniques if
none were available at the time of the project. A floating
"trap" to hold dead birds for the field trials would have to be
constructed. Small amounts of glassware, lab supplies, etc.,
would be needed.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available;
See 9 and 2 above.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available;
P.I. full time summer, 1/4 time for 9 months
Actuary-statistician 1/4 time for 6 months
Ocean engineer-physical oceanographer 1/4 time six months
Technician-full time for 9 months
Lab helper-full time for 9 months
12. Support Services;
This project is in support of other project.
13. Payoff:
This project has an immediate payoff in determining much more
accurately than now, the possible number of birds killed in a
spill. Since it is likely that liability judgments will be
based on $/bird, this data will be essential in the adjudication
process. From a scientific standpoint, knowledge of the fate of
dead birds, and an assessment of mortality will help to determine
the short and long term impact on populations.
114
-------
14. Limitations
Limitations include the fact that not all sea and weather
states can or will be simulated in the laboratory. The study
also will not include considerations of those birds which ingest
oil, fly elsewhere and die. What it will do is narrow the
confidence limits of mortality predictions.
115
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 6
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Assessments of the Impact of an Oil Spill
on Marine Mammals
2. Project Description;
A. Data Gathering Techniques
(1) Aerial surveys to identify local populations, distribu-
tions and relative abundance of marine mammals in the
area of a spill.
(2) Shipboard and/or shore surveys as above to confirm
involvement of marine mammals and oil
(3) Collection of obviously fouled marine mammals for
necropsy or physiological sampling and debilitated
animals for rehabilitation and release.
(4) Tagging of affected but otherwise healthy appearing
animals (includes use of radio tags and tracking and
photographic identification of individual animals.
B. Cleaning of Oiled Marine Mammals
(1) Initiation of clean-up operations
As oiled marine mammals are identified, efforts should
be made to clean affected individuals. As yet, there is no
established method for removing oil from various impacted
animals. A methodology should be delivered and recommended
for implementation in the event of a spill which affects
marine mammals populations.
(2) Monitoring of cleanup acitivities
Since cleanup operations have never been conducted on
N.E. marine mammal populations in connection with an oil
spill, effects of the cleanup operation itself should be
carefully monitored. This involves investigating:
(a) the effect of cleaning and no cleaning agent on
individuals and;
(b) effect of overall cleanup activities on population
and community structure, and
116
-------
(c) habitat utilization.
With respect to the effects on the individuals, cleaned
animals should be tagged so that subsequent monitoring
phases can lead to,the determination of the apparent success
of employed cleaning operations in terms of the survival of
cleaned individuals.
In the case of the cleaning operation's effects on the
community as a whole, inter and intra-population associations
should be observed to investigate any behavioral modifica-
tions associated with human intervention.
The redistribution of populations associated with oiled
habitat should also be observed and changes in habitat
utilization noted.
C. Anticipated Results
(1) Can or do cetaceans avoid spills?
(2) Acute and chronic impact of oil contact and/or
ingestion on marine mammals
(3) Behavioral modifications of impacted cetaceans
with respect to:
(a) Mother/pup interaction
(b) Selection of haul-out sites and rookeries
(c) Are there adverse thermoregulatory effects
on neonatal seals?
(d) Demonstrations of physiologic or histologic
changes in oil impacted marine mammals.
Without long-term control studies on the effects of oil on
marine mammals, oil spills will provide the only source of
data on such effects.
3. Performing Organizations:
College of the Atlantic, S. Katona-Census and behavioral
Aspects
NEA, Prescott-All Aspects
URI, Winn/Dunn-Physiology, behavior, census, tagging
WHOI, Watkins-Tagging/census
117
-------
NMFS, Woods Hole, John Nichols
ERGO, Boehm-Hydrocarbon analysis
Univ. of Maine, Gilbert-Census/tagging/behavior
4. Habitats Applicable:
All but benthic. Because of mobility and species specific
behavior, temporal requirements must be considered.
5. Applicable Conditions;
6. Applicable Oil Type;
7. Time Frame;
8. Cost:
9* Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available;
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available;
12. Support Services;
13. Payoff:
14. Limitations:
118
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 7
PRIORITY RANK:
1- Project Title: Summary of Birds and Marine Mammals for Offshore
" Oil Spills
2. Project Description:
Objectives: Attempt to determine species composition, relative
abundance, distribution, and proportion of each species of bird
and marine mammal that is visibly contaminated with oil in the
area of the spill.
A. Birds
(1) Determine species composition, abundance, and distri-
bution of birds in area of spill using a fixed-winged
aircraft flown over a pre-selected grid, so as to
randomly sample bird populations present on the con-
taminated and adjacent areas. Technique involves using
2 observers and 1 recorder in a fixed-winged twin
engine hi-wing aircraft flown at 100 feet above sea
level at 100 mph. All birds within a 300m transect
will be counted by species for 10 minutes.
(2) Determine percent of each species that is visibly
contaminated with oil, using 10-minute counts of the
total number of each species within sight of the ship
(Brown et al., 1975-Atlas of eastern Canadian seabirds,
and MBO cruise reports—unpublished data). The ship
must be moving at least 4 knots and on a fixed course.
(3) Determine by bird species the degrees (i.e., light,
medium, or heavily oiled) of plumage oiling and areas
of body affected (i.e., nape of neck, breast, belly,
etc.)
B. Mammals
(1) Using a fixed-winged aircraft (probably that used for
Coast Guard surveillance flights) marine mammal sight-
ings will be made at 500-1000 feet to make species
counts (techniques used in Tropical E. Pacific Tuna
and Porpoise study of NMFS and California Bight Study
by BLM).
119
-------
(2) Sightings from surface vessels will be made to
determine:
(a) evidence of direct contact and coating of oil
(b) interference with normal swimming or feeding
behavior
(c) obvious avoidance or attraction to spill area
3. Performing Organization:
A. Birds
(1) Manomet Bird Observatory
Kevin Powers
Brian Harrington
617/224-3559
(2) University of Rhode Island
Dr. Frank Heppner
401/792-2372
(3) College of the Atlantic
Dr. William Drury
207/288-5015
B. Marine Mammals
(1) College of the Atlantic
Dr. Steve Katona
207/288-5015
(2) New England Aquarium
John Prescott
617/742-8830
(3) University of Rhode Island
Dr. Howard Winn
401/792-6251
(4) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
William Watkins
617/548-1400
(5) National Marine Fisheries Service (Woods Hole)
John Nicholas
617/548-5123
120
-------
4. Applicable Habitats;
Offshore only.
5. Applicable Conditions;
A. Aircraft - VFR marine mammals
Sea state _£ 6 ft-birds
- additional base line data helpful (i.e., prior surveys or
assessments of species composition and relative abundance
in past years within the study area).
- Accessible air space, i.e., not restricted areas
- rapid response before spill, if possible.
B. Surface vessels
- platform availability (i.e., will appropriate vessels be
available?)
- oil detectable from air or will be if uncontained
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All oils or groups of oils.
7. Time Frame;
A. Duration of spill, plus 2 weeks after spill is no longer
detectable by aircraft.
B. Data analysis within 3 months.
*
8. Cost;
A. Aircraft-Marine mammals - may be USCG aircraft
Birds-$1000 per day (based on 10 hour day and 1 day needed
to cover study area)
1 surveillance flight per week desired
B. Surface Vessels - range $500-$3000 per day
mean-$1750 per day
(10 days on study area per month desired)
*
C. Personnel
(1) Aircraft-marine mammals - 1 observers per flight
birds - 2 observers and 1 recorder
per flight
121
-------
(2) Surface vessels-marine mammals and bird observers
should equal 2 people per ship.
(3) Exact cost of Manomet Bird Observatory observer=$100
per day (includes salary, ($12k/yr) and 57% overhead) -
does not include travel expenses, food, per diem, etc.
D. Equipment (may sometimes be provided by certain institutions
or agencies, but for this project proposal it is assumed
that the NET will provide necessary equipment).
(1) Photographic - $2000 per kit
1 kit includes: SLR 35-mm camera with motor drive and
data back; 200-400mm zoom lens with gunstock attachment;
10 rolls @ 36-exp Tri-X film; 10 rolls p 36-exp Plus-X
film)
(one kit needed per aircraft and surface vessel)
(2) Tape recorders-cassette @ $75
(3) Optics-1 pair 8x40 Swift W.A. binoculars or comparable
item per observer.
(4) Expendables-$1000 for film processing
E. Automatic Data Processing of Bird Information
(l) Key punch and statistician's time grossly estimated at
$1500
F. Phone, Xerox, etc. (if University-based study) costs grossly
estimated at $500.
G. Principal Investigator
Salary range: $15,000-$25,000 per year, Mean: $20,000 per
year
Consulting rates based on USFWS Scale = salary per annum =
$77.00 per day 260
Based on one month duration oil spill and three months' data
analysis and report writing—4 months (20 working days per
month) x $77.00 = $1,540 + P.I. at 25% of time for 3 addi-
tional months = $1,155.00.
Total Principal Investigator Cost: $2,695 per spill
122
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
As this project is largely observation oriented, little equip-
ment will be required beyond optical and recording materials.
One kit with the following materials will be required for each
crew (aircraft or ship):
- single lens reflex camera back w/motor drive
- 200-400mm zoom lens w/gunstock attachment
- cassette tape recorder w/tapes
- 8 x 40 wide angle binoculars.
All these materials are potentially available through the
appointed institutions, but are not guaranteed to be accessible
at the moment of a spill. Kits should therefore be prepared in
advance.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Facility needs amount to aircraft and ship transport. The
marine mammals aerial survey may dovetail with Coast Guard over-
flights and IR studies of the spill or operate on a timesharing
basis with the bird surveys.
i,
A. Aircraft- (1) highwing, > 2 engines, auxphilions preferred,
VFR/IFR, deicing, communications, and navigational capa-
bility appropriate to pelagic survey, room for two observers,
recorder, and pilot.
B. Surface Vessels - (3) ships of similar design or observa-
tional capability, range and construction suitable to open
ocean work in poor sea conditions for 10 day minimum,
hoists and nets for salvage and tagging capability, berths
for at least two observers.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
The principal investigator(s) and associates chosen from the
list of performing organizations (See 3) will delegate staff
for the project.
12. Support Services;
Relevant studies would include tagging programs, additional base
line population research and any work pertaining to clarification
of impacts on lower units of food chain supporting these top
carnivores. These studies could be undertaken concurrently
and/or outside the time frame of the spill.
123
-------
13. Payoff;
This study provides the capability to clearly respond to public
sentiment regarding impacts on wildlife. More specifically it
addresses:
A. Short-term impact on wildlife at the spill site.
B. Behavioral alteration of a gross nature, i.e., avoidance of,
or attraction to a slick, flight or swimming difficulties as
a result of fouling.
C. Valuable supplement to the available population assessments—
collect specimens under stress conditions.
14. Limitations;
A. Lack of base line data. The strongest recommendation made
by this panel is for more hard data on the 'normal1 popula-
tions in the U.S. Northeast Atlantic. This requires expen-
sive and long-term studies.
B. These populations are highly mobile. Even with the best
base line data in hand, a reduced population cannot be re-
garded as a certain response to stress.
C. Weather and sea state may severely disrupt the effectiveness
of the project.
D. The extrapolation of observed species counts (or numbers of
animals impacted) to population estimates may be inadvisable
in some cases—especially with regard to population of great
whales for which diving times and repeat sightings still
constitute difficult statistical complications.
E. Initial counts of impacted birds may be extremely misleading.
Oiled birds may die and sink before being counted or may
retreat from the area following fouling or infection only to
die outside the observation area (note Project No. 5, Birds
and Marine Mammals).
Cost predictions for this project should be considered unreliable in
light of the fact that most if not all of the equipment and facilities
required can be "piggybacked" with other work by Coast Guard and re-
search groups.
124
-------
PANEL: BIRDS AND MARINE MAMMALS
PROJECT NO: 8
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Assessment of Oil Spill Damage to New England
Marine Turtle Populations
2. Project Description:
Two New England species of marine turtles are presently listed
as endangered (Fed. Reg. 41 (208), p. 47195, 1976): the leather-
back and the grey ridley. These species are migratory, and
reach higher population densities in New England waters during
summer and autumn than they do anywhere else within their known
ranges (Lazell, 1976. This Broken Archipelago, Quadrangle, New
York, and works cited therein).
Green, loggerhead, and hawksbill turtles, all listed as threat-
ened or endangered, also occur in New England waters, the two
former regularly and abundantly.
To date, baseline data are anecdotal, unsystematic, and
scattered. We need a definitive pre-spill survey based on at
least weekly overflights of Georges Bank, Cape Cod and Buzzards
Bays, and Nantucket and Vineyard Sounds, from 1 June through
1 January.
Every marine turtle washed up dead along our coasts should be
autopsied. It is believed that swallowing tar balls is a direct
cause of death for at least leatherbacks. Because the various
species feed on jellyfishes (especially Cyanea and Aurelia),
they are apt to swallow blobs of petroleum (as well as other
jellyfish mimics such as plastic bags and pot buoys). Direct
toxicity to the turtles also must be expected whenever they
surface within a spill.
3. Performing Organization:
Massachusetts Audubon Society, Lincoln, Mass. 01773 (Dr. J. D.
Lazell, Jr., Staff Herpetologist).
4. Applicable Habitats:
All U.S. waters out 200 miles, north of Cape Hatteras, but
especially Georges Bank, Cape Cod and Buzzards Bays, and
Nantucket and Vineyard Sounds.
125
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
Marine turtles are active—both travelling and feeding—in waters
above 7°C (about 45°F). Leatherbacks, being warm-blooded
homeotherms, enter even colder waters.x Certain types of spills,
especially of crude oil, are dangerous even in weather and water
too cold for the turtles, because the spilled material may sink,
remain in the area, and rise again during warmer periods.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types must be considered potentially toxic to all marine
turtles. Crude oil, however, because of its densities and
blobbing characteristics, poses special threats in mimicking
jellyfishes (see Lazell, op. cit. , pp. 185-192, for descriptive
and anatomical analysis of the problem).
7. Time Frame:
Pre-spill survey should begin ASAP, preferably 1 June 1978 and
continue through 1 January 1979- Dead, stranded specimens
should be autopsied, and preserved, for the foreseeable future.
On the occasion of a spill between June and January, an immedi-
ate survey should be made.
8. Cost:
The .major expenses are for travel. Estimated terrestrial travel
would be about one thousand miles year. A weekly, one-day
overflight is called for. A couple of shipboard days can be
anticipated. A reward (say of $5.00) for live individuals
inadvertently caught (e.g., in pound nets by commercial fisher-
men) should be offered, so that tagging and recapture may begin.
Some chemicals will be expended in preservation and preparation
of specimens found dead. A reasonable wage should be offered
for student assistant(s).
Terrestrial travel at $0«15/mile $ 150.00
Air travel at $100.00/day 2,800.00
Ship travel at $1000.00/day 2,000.00
Rewards and tagging 1,000.00
Chemicals 500.00
Assistant (one full time for 7 mos. at
$3.00/hour) 5,360.00
TOTAL $11,810.00
126
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
MAS can provide a half-ton, four-wheel drive truck with electric
winch. This has been used regularly in the past to salvage and
transport dead specimens. We have the necessary dissection and
preparation equipment.
Airplane and ship will have to be arranged with other organiza-
tions and workers on a shared basis.
Tagging equipment can be obtained from Archie Carr or Nicholas
Mrosovsky as soon as we can demonstrate the financial ability to
follow through on its use.
MAS keeps some chemicals on hand, but this limited supply requires
constant replenishment (pickling even a small marine turtle
uses a lot of fluid).
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
MAS has an adequate lab at the Endicott Sanctuary, Wenham, Mass.,
for autopsies, specimen and tissue preparation, and forzen stor-
age.
The Museum of Comparative: Zoology, Harvard University could serve
as a repository for collected specimens.
Histologic preparations can be done at several area institutions,
probably most reasonably dependent on the academic affiliation of
of the student assistant.
Identification of petroleum products would have to be arranged
with other workers on other oil spill assessment projects, pre-
sumably on a shared basis at a central facility (Marine Pathology
Laboratory, URI, for example).
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Lazell, MAS, is a full-time employee available on call for mar-
ine turtle work.
At least one student assistant will be needed on a basis equiva-
lent to full-time for seven months (work will, in fact, tend to
be less than 40 hours/week, but will surely spread out over the
full year).
127
-------
12. Support Services:
Lazell has been studying New England marine turtles, their
abundance, distributions, ecologies, and anatomical specializa-
tions, for six years—whenever an opportunity arose (Lazell, op.
cit., pp. 120-192 and 244-246, and works cited therein). Dr.
Robert Shoop, URI, Kingston, is also involved in local marine
turtle studies. Lazell and Shoop can work well cooperatively.
The Cape Cod Museum of Natural History, Brewster, The New England
Aquarium, Boston, and the National Marine Fisheries Service,
Gloucester, all work cooperatively with us on salvaging and
investigating marine turtles. However, no organization or
institution in this area can presently underwrite the proposed
study financially.
Lazell and Shoop are both in close contact with Carr, Mrosovsky,
Pritchard, and the other marine turtle experts nationally and
int erna t ionally.
13. Payoff:
Because of their status as endangered and threatened species,
protected by Federal law, and because of their great seasonal
concentrations in our waters, various marine turtles require
ecological and biological understanding. This is especially
true for leatherback and grey ridley; green and loggerhead are
also likely to be severely impacted by human activities such as
oil spills in New England waters.
Lazell is in the process of requesting a critical habitat desig-
nation for the leatherback that would include New England waters.
It is imperative for marine turtle biologists, petroleum scientists
and geologists, and other relevant personnel to work closely to-
gether for the benefit of these legally protected species if con-
frontation and tragedy are to be avoided.
14. Limitations :
Because marine turtles swim the Ocean of the Earth, our efforts
in New England are only a part of a much larger whole. We can-
not lose sight of that. Because the animals are concentrated
here, close to scientists and institutions optimally suited to
their study, our opportunities are tremendous and unique.
128
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
•>
MAS can provide a half-ton, four-wheel drive truck with electric
winch. This has been used regularly in the past to salvage and
transport dead specimens. We have the necessary dissection and
preparation equipment.
Airplane and ship will have to be arranged with other organiza-
tions and workers on a shared basis.
Tagging equipment can be obtained from Archie Carr or Nicholas
Mrosovsky as soon as we can demonstrate the financial ability to
follow through on its use.
MAS keeps some chemicals on hand, but this limited supply requires
constant replenishment (pickling even a small marine turtle
uses a lot of fluid).
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
MAS has an adequate lab at the Endicott Sanctuary, Wenham, Mass.,
for autopsies, specimen and tissue preparation, and forzen stor-
age.
The Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University could serve
as a repository for collected specimens.
Histologic preparations can be done at several area institutions,
probably most reasonably dependent on the academic affiliation of
of the student assistant.
Identification of petroleum products would have to be arranged
with other workers on other oil spill assessment projects, pre-
sumably on a shared basis at a central facility (Marine Pathology
Laboratory, URI, for example).
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Lazell, MAS, is a full-time employee available on call for mar-
ine turtle work.
At least one student assistant will be needed on a basis equiva-
lent to full-time for seven months (work will, in fact, tend to
be less than 40 hours/week, but will surely spread out over the
full year).
129
-------
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE PANEL
Participants
W.D. MacLeod, Jr., Chairperson
W. Andrade E.J. Hoffman
P. Boehm G. Kleineberg
R. Ceurvels J. Lake
P. Gearing G. McLeod
R. Hiltabrand P. Rogerson
T. Spittler
M. Wilson
130
-------
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE PANEL
General Considerations and Recommendations
• General Discussions
• Panel Results
• References
GENERAL DISCUSSIONS
A. Findings
The Panel made the following initial findings and recommendations:
1. The Panel accepted the current analytical chemical
methodology as practiced throughout New England.
2. Sufficient laboratory capabilities are available through-
out New England to meet the needs of any likely, combina-
tion of oil spill damage assessments. ERGO (Cambridge,
MA) appears to be in the best position to offer prompt
large sample processing capacity (100's). EG&G (Waltham,
MA) also appears well prepared to contribute expertise
and analyses. Others such as EPA and URI (Narragansett,
RI) and NOAA's National Analytical Facility (Seattle, WA)
may be able to respond similarly depending on the circum-
stances, whereas the EPA (Lexington, MA) and New England
Aquarium (Boston, MA) probably could handle only 10-20
samples. The Coast Guard Center (Groton, CT) may be too
occupied with their own chemical analyses to participate
except in an advisory role.
3. Initial chemical analytical surveying of the oil spill
affected area should be done, if possible, by the Coast
Guard's UV fluorescence method. The panel recommends
that a mobile field analysis capability (lab-van, research
vessel) be established and maintained in New England for
rapid response to oil spills.
4. Preliminary sample analysis cost estimates:
a) UV fluorescent screening: $50/sample
b) Extraction, chromatography, gas chromatographic
analysis, GC/MS backup: $350-500/sample.
131
-------
5. The Panel recommends establishment of a committee of
regional oil spill chemists who can be immediately
consulted in the event of an oil spill. One committee
member should represent these chemists on an inter-
disciplinary Technical Advisory Committee to the RRT/OSC.
This chemist/representative should be accessible to the
RRT/OSC to assist in immediate judgments on initial
actions following an oil spill.
A significant point remained somewhat unresolved throughout our proceed-
ings: the concept that during this workhop, realistic cost-effective,
detailed chemical analysis projects could be devised collectively to
assess ecological damages resulting from oil spills according to size,
oil type, habitatj weather, season, climate, etc. [Only one panel
member attempted to address this issue.] Instead, this panel has
devoted its efforts to elaborating information on the capabilities of
key analytical laboratories, the prompt availability of chemical
consultants, the preferred analytical methodology, and some general
advance preparations to be made, such as acquisition of field analysis
and sampling equipment. Additional information and specifications can
be introduced during review of the draft report. Successful synthesis
of these materials into an overall program will be a most important
factor.
B. Assignments
The following individual assignments were made to individual panel
members for further development at the workshop:
1. Preliminary assessment of chemical analyses needed by
other panels.
2. Special research opportunities afforded by oil spills.
3. Delineation of likely demands on chemical analyses
with regard to:
a) immediate emergency response to determine initial
nature and extent of spill
b) environmental damage assessment, intermediate and
long term.
4. Elaboration of the role of a proposed "on^-scene chemist,"
as part of an interdisciplinary Technical Advisory
Committee available to the OSC.
132
-------
5. Description of sample preservation and distribution
procedures.
6. Design questionnaire to inventory chemical analysis
and research capability applicable to New England oil
spills.
7. Description of limitations of chemical analyses, i.e.,
what consequences could be expected of chemical analyses,
what should not be expected; discuss some aspects of
sampling strategy.
RESULTS
A. Chemical Analysis Needs of Other Panels
Table 1 gives the results of needed chemical analytical capabilities
of other disciplines represented at the Hartford Workshop.
B. Identification of Existing Capabilities
An inventory of all organizations having equipment and personnel
capable of petroleum hydrocarbon analyses has been made and oil spill
research teams and ongoing oil spill research of these organizations
will be identified. This survey was conducted by Dr. Mason P.
Wilson of URI. The survey results are included in the Addendum to
the Chemical Analysis and Fate Panel.
It is recommended that an advisory panel consisting of representatives
from major oil spill research teams and organizations in Region I be
formed. This team will help coordinate the scientific investigation
of the spill and serve as an advisory panel at the request of the OSC.
It is important to use Regional personnel whenever possible because
of their expertise of the area. Compensations and per diem could be
used as an incentive for continued participation of individuals not
employed by the Federal government.
C. Recommended On-Scene and Advisory Support
1. Interdisciplinary On-Scene Committee
These are scientists who respond immediately to a spill. They are "on
call" and respond when someone in authority activates the plan. As a
minimum a chemist and a biologist might be called, but for a large
spill more disciplines should be involved. These people are will
advise the on-scene coordinator and coordinate and integrate any of
133
-------
TABLE 1
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY NEEDED IN SUPPORT OF
BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL PROGRAMS
REQUESTED TASK
(UV-FLUORESCENCE OR IR)
PANEL REQUESTING
THIS ANALYSIS
ESTIMATED
NUMBER OF
ANALYSES0
Determination of areal extent
of sediment contamination through
screening (UV fluorescence) of
sediments collected in potentially
impacted areas
Benthic biology
Lab toxicity
Microbiology
200
Determination of concentration
of HC's in the water column as
a function of depth location and
time by screening (UV-f luorescence)
Determination of concentrations of
HC's in tissue samples by screening
(UV-f luorescence)
Water column
Lab toxicity
Water column
20003 (50b)
ioooa (ioob)
UV fluorescence or I.R. monitoring
of HC levels in tanks used in lab
toxicity experiments (UV-fluorescence
or IR)
Lab toxicity
50 /tank
(est a = 5 tanks)
Chemist estimate.
Biologist estimate.
This obviously depends highly upon habitat, size of spill, etc.
134
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
REQUESTED TASK
(GC AND MS)
Changes of oil chemistry as a
function of time in the
sediment
Vertical distribution of oil
in the sediments - chemical
variations with depth
HC composition (quant. & qual.)
in tissues of selected key
organisms
Polynuclear aromatics in water
column esp. if spill in
subtidal area
HC composition of oil in gut
contents and on feathers of
oiled birds
PANEL REQUESTING
THIS ANALYSIS
Microbiology
Benthic biology
Benthic biology
Benthic biology
Lab toxic ity
Hi s topa tho 1 ogy
Water column
Marine mammals
Benthic biology
Marine mammals
and birds
ESTIMATED
NUMBER OF
ANALYSES
50
50
20
20
20
100 (20 )
20
5-10
400 (20 )
HC levels in bird tissues
Marine mammals
and birds
20
GC monitoring of HC composition
in lab toxicity experiments
Lab toxicity
5 /tank
(est = 5 tanks)
HC levels in tissues of lab
experiment organisms
Lab toxicity
100
HC compositional changes as a
function of time in sea slicks
Microbiology
20
HC compositional changes as a
function of time in benthic
infauna _____
Microbiology
50
135
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
REQUESTED TASK
(GC AND MS)
PANEL REQUESTING
THIS ANALYSIS
ESTIMATED
NUMBER OF
ANALYSES
Cargo oil
complete analysis
All
Dissolved and particulate
HC's in seawater
Benthic Biology
40
HC content in sediments and
water of cages as a function
oft ime
Benthic Biology
20 /cage
HC content as a function of
size of plankton
Water column
15
HC content of fish flesh
Water column
30
Compositional changes of slick
water column during use of
dispersants
Physical group
20
Quality assurance analyses
10% of total
Blanks 10% of total
All
60
60
136
-------
TABLE 1 (Continued)
REQUESTED TASK
(NON-HYDROCARBON ANALYSES)
Dissolved 0,, S /OO
nutrients
Mixed function oxidases
Blood chemistry parameters
Analysis of sediment for OC,
N, P
Analysis of lipids in tissues
of selected organisms
Eh of sediments
Biochemical assays
lipids, carbohydrates, proteins,
RNA, LPS, exoenzymes, metabolites
PANEL REQUESTING
THIS ANALYSIS
Water column
Bird and mammal
Bird and mammal
Microbiology
Benthic biology
Benthic biology
Microbiology
Microbiology
ESTIMATED
NUMBER OF
, ANALYSES
50 each
20
20
20
20
20
20 /parameter
Analysis of phytoplankton for
C, N, ATP, chlorophyll, biomass,
POC
Water column
20 /parameter
REQUESTED TASK
(PHYSICAL PARAMETERS)
PANEL REQUESTING
THIS ANALYSIS
ESTIMATED
NUMBER OF
ANALYSES
Cargo oil
pour point
density as function of weathering
surface tensions
composition of emulsion forming
oils versus non-emulsion forming oils
Physical group
2
10
20
5
137
-------
TABLE 1A
TOTALS OF REQUIRED ANALYSES IF THE ENTIRE REGIONAL RESPONSE
PLAN HEREIN DESCRIBED WERE IMPLEMENTED.*
Chemist Biologist
Analysis type estimate estimate**
HC analysis:
UV-fluorescence 350 3200
Infra-red 250 250
GLC 775 1255
GLC-M.S. (10% of GLC) 75 125
Non Hydrocarbon:
Routine oceanographic
parameters - water 250 250
Sediment analyses -
nutrients, etc.
Biochemical assays
Plankton parameters
Physical measurements
Trace metal analyses
TOTAL
80
260
120
37
100
2297
80
260
120
37
100
5677
*Chemistry panel projects 2 and 3 overlap with biology projects.
Project 1 requires air analyses (20 GLC). Project 4 requires
80-100 bioenzyme assays of fish. Project 5 requires -100
trace metal analyses. These values have been added in to the
biology-physical analytical requests to arrive at a complete
estimate of analytical support required.
**The chemist estimate is used when the biologists did not specify.
138
-------
the specific scientific studies that become activated. There should
be a mobile laboratory (the old EPA trailer?) stocked with sampling
gear, containers and the other items necessary for the field support
effort. It should also be equipped with enough instrumentation
(e.g., UV-fluorescence and/or IE) so that samples could be analyzed
in the field. This will give the On-Scene Coordinator and the
biologists the knowledge of where the oil is and where it is not.
2. Advisory Groups
In support of each discipline activated in the on-scene committee,
there should be a regional group of experts on whom the committee
members could call on for help and advice. For example, the hydro-
carbon chemists in New England would organize into a committee which
would meet periodically. They would be available to the responding
chemist to help him with whatever problems come up. This same mecha-
nism can be set up for the biologists, physical process people, and
whomever else it would be appropriate for. This gives a mechanism
whereby almost everyone in the area working with oil pollution could
be called onto a spill site, if needed.
D. Sampling Considerations
The sample strategy to be utilized for sampling oil-impacted environ-
ments is adequately covered in "An Oil Spill Sampling Strategy" by
Woollcott Smith (WHOl). While that note outlined the best procedure
to be utilized in an oil-spill event, several comments on its content
arose in our panel discussions. The group appears to be in general
agreement with Smith's conclusions that a grid pattern of sampling
covering the entire area is best, that ancillary information should
be obtained, and that the size of the grid survey should be determined
by the cost and manpower available rather than by the cost of analy-
zing the samples. However, several considerations were not addressed
by Smith and he raises several interesting questions which seem best
handled by pragmatic decisions by an on-scene chemist:
1. If numerous samples are taken, how will they be trans-
ported and where will they be stored to avoid decom-
position and/or degradation?
2. Smith's last paragraph speaks to the inability of oil-
spill surveys to assign a direct or indirect causal
relationship between the oil spill and differences
observed in the survey. He then states that "One must
turn to scientific results from controlled experiments
on the effects of oil to show the probable relationship
between the impact of oil on the survey area and the
139
-------
results of the survey analysis." It seems, then, that
without the necessary back-up of data from controlled
laboratory tests on effects of oil on organisms (which
do not presently exist), oil-spill surveys have very
limited value.
3. Experience in oil-spill situations has shown that oil
often distributes in a patchy manner; large differences
in the concentration of oil are seen on both the large
scale and the small scale. It seems that in order to
survey the extent and concentration ranges of an oil
spill-impacted environment, tremendous numbers of samples
(a far finer grid sampling pattern) must be taken, stored,
and analyzed.
4. Smith states that "the control area should include
sediment and water depths similar to the affected area."
Oil spills may be extensive and it may be difficult to
find suitable control areas within many miles (e.g.,
Chesapeake Bay Spill). Do the control areas then,
contain similar sediment and environmental characteristics
as the impacted areas?
These are four points that emphasize the need to preserve the freedom
of action of the on-scene chemist to direct the field sampling opera-
tion. Unfortunately, this may mean that a statistically valid program
is not possible. However, it is apparent that legal action must
commence without the necessary back-up of a direct or indirect causal
relationship between the oil spill and differences observed in the
survey. Therefore, our best and most practical effort (as directed by
the on-scene chemist) to survey oil-impacted areas must suffice.
E. Sample Preparation and Chain Custody
Sediment, biological, and water samples collected at a spill site
should be distributed by a central regional laboratory and the trans-
fer of these samples should be accompanied by a chain of custody
record similar to the one recommended by the Coast Guard.
Preparations should be made in advance to store sampling equipment
where it can readily be available during an emergency. All samples
collected should be preserved or extracted immediately upon collection.
Mobile facilities should be available for this.
REFERENCES
The following reports were submitted with the panel report or other-
wise identified:
140
-------
1. Research by NOAA National Analytical Facility, Environmental
Conservation Division, Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center.
2. A Pilot Study on the Design of a Petroleum Hydrocarbon
Baseline Investigation for Northern Riget Sound and Strait of
Juan de Fuca. W.D. MacLeod, D.W. Brown, E.G. Jenkins, L.S.
Ramos and V.D. Henry. NOAA Technical Memorandum ERL MESA-8.
November 1977.
3. Energy Resources Company, Inc. Oil Spill Response Capabilities,
ERCO, Cambridge, MA.
4. Bowdoin College Hydrocarbon Contamination Research Center.
5. Techniques and Proposals/USGS Contributions to Overall
Ecological Damage Assessment. Compiled by F.T. Manheim.
August 1977.
6. U.S. Coast Guard: The U.S. Coast Guard Oil Spill Identifi-
cation System (1977) is now available from NTIS (CG-D-52-77).
Documents may also be available on "Sampling, Sample Handling
and Chain of Custody Procedures" as soon as published.
Manuals on "Field Thin-Layer Chromatography Method for Oil
Identification" and "Field UV Fluorescence Spectroscopy
Method for Oil Identification" can be made available, from:
U.S. Coast Guard R&D Center, Groton, CT.
141
-------
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. The physical-chemical weathering of oil at sea.
2. The physical-chemical weathering of beached or stranded oil.
3. The chemical fate of biologically assimilated oil.
4. The monitoring of the aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase enzyme system
in sessile teleost fish and selected benthic infauna.
5. Feasibility of using trace metal ratios to identify oil and/or
tarball sources after weathering.
142
-------
PANEL: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK: NOT ASSIGNED
1. Project Title: The Physical and Chemical Weathering of Oil at Sea
2. Project Description:
This project will study the changes in hydrocarbon and non-
hydrocarbon (NSO compounds*) composition of (1) the spilled oil,
(2) of the adjacent water, and (3) of the air mass.
We do not know how spilled oils partition and are altered immedi-
ately following a spill. Weathering studies have never addressed
the combined questions relating to hydrocarbon as well as metabo-
lite (i.e., phthalates, fatty acids, phenols) chemistry. The
bacterial metabolites and photo-oxidation products are more
soluble and potentially more toxic than are the hydrocarbon
compounds.
The study will be carried out by continually sampling a given
patch of oil, monitoring the water below and air above the patch,
thereby establishing a realistic mass balance.
This information, in addition to being fundamental to our chemical
understanding of oil spills, is essential for toxicological
investigations and links to microbiological degradation studies
and physical processes.
3. Performing Organizations;
Woods Hole
URI
ERCO
EG&G
Probably these groups will have to interact closely to provide
seagoing oceanographers and sampling capability. ERCO seems
well equipped to handle large sample numbers. However, URI
probably has more experience in air sampling (C. Brown, J.
Quinn).
4. Applicable Habitats:
Pelagic, salt pond, estuarine
*Non-hydrocarbon (nitrogen, sulfur and oxygen containing) compounds
are also referred to as NSO compounds.
143
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. All spilled oil conditions.
B. Weather conditions must permit accurate sampling as far
as depth under oil slick.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All, although fuel oils and light crudes are more apt to result
in good data sets due to more rapid dissolution and evaporation
rates.
7. Time Frame:
Start immediately and continue as long as oil mass can be traced;
probably on the order of a week to several weeks. Sample every
hour, perhaps.
8. Cost:
Analytical s $25,000
Ship Time =$15,000 (time shared with other groups)
Total Cost 3^ $50,000 (open ocean)
^$30,000 (near shore)
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
A. Sampling bottles (Bodman, Niskin)
B. Air sampling gear
C. On-board sample extraction capability
D. Sample containers
E. GC and GC/MS; IR capability
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
A. Ship or small boat
B. Analytical lab
144
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
A. Presently available to ERCO, URI, WHOI
B. Immediate response needed
ERCO can respond immediately, others later
12. Support Services;
Physical process group must interact.
13. Payoff;
Our knowledge of chemical alterations of spilled oil is meager.
•-••- This knowledge is fundamental to any ecological assessment.
14. Limitations;
A. Good sampling weather is needed.
B. Good analytical schemes in identifying especially non-
hydrocarbon secondary products is essential.
145
-------
PANEL: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE
PROJECT N0:: 2
PRIORITY RANK: NONE ASSIGNED
1. Project Title: The Physical-Chemical Weathering of Beached
or Stranded Oil
2. Project Description:
An immediate and long-term study following the chemical changes
in stranded oil and the chemical recovery of a given environment.
It is carried out by sampling polluted shoreline substrate as
well as tarry residues from beached oil. Also, short cores
should be taken.
This includes hydrocarbon as well as NSO compounds.
Ref: Blumer: The Environmental Fate of Stranded Crude Oil
(Deep Sea Research?)
3. Performing Organizations:
ERCO
WHO I
URI
Bowdoin
EPA/Narragansett
NOAA NAF
EG&G
4. Applicable Habitats:
Applies to any habitat where oil has reached the bottom or
shoreline, excludes pelagic habitats.
5. Applicable Conditions:
All conditions applicable although offshore bottom would pose
problems in rough weather.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any oil type applicable.
146
-------
7. Time Frame:
Start immediately. Sample daily for 2 weeks; then weekly for
6 months; then monthly for 5 years.
8. Cost:
= 100 samples x $500 = $50,000
onshore sampling = $ 5,000
offshore sampling = $50,000
Total = $55,000 - $100,000
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
- GC, GC/MS
- Grab sampler on hand-held beach corers
- Available soon after spill; however, immediate analyses not
needed
- Jars needed
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
A. Onshore: sampling and analytical equipment and instrumenta-
tion
B. Offshore: small or large boat depending on distance offshore
C. Facilities are available on short notice
11. Personnel Weeds/Personnel Available:
Personnel are available on short notice from universities,
from private contractors (ERGO) and NOAA-NAF.
12. Support Services:
Must interface with microbiology program and benthic biologists.
13. Payoff:
A. Short and long-term weathering of stranded oil, from both
the hydrocarbon and non-hydrocarbon perspective, is sorely
needed using glass capillary GC.
147
-------
B. Can relate chemical changes directly to changes in micro-
bial and faunal populations.
14. Limitations:
Must carefully select sampling areas and preserve them from
disturbance (i.e., cleanup operations).
Offshore station revisitation may be tricky and sediment
resuspension and physical disruption of study may occur.
148
-------
PANEL: rCHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK: NOT ASSIGNED
1. Project Title: The Chemical Fate of Biologically Assimilated Oil
2. Project Description:
This project is designed to trace the chemical changes that
occur in biologically assimilated oil over a long period of time.
Clean organisms, shellfish (Mytilus or Mercenaria), are kept in a
controlled area (lab or field) and are completely characterized
chemically. After a spill, and as oil approaches land, these
organisms are either marked or are put in cages and deployed near
shore before the oil landfall.
The initial chemical uptake of oil is monitored by sampling
this deployed population; subsequent samples reveal further
uptake, degradation or depuration for the months following the
landfall of oil. Individual tissues should be monitored chemically
and histopathologically throughout the study.
Ref: D. Salvo et al: Environmental Science and Technology (1975?)
3. Performing Organizations:
A. Biological Deployment
MBL
Taxon
URI
E6&G
B. Chemical Analysis
ERGO and/or NOAA NAF
URI
EG&G
4. Applicable Habitats:
Oyster-Mussel Reef
Rocky Shore
Salt Marsh
Salt Pond
Clam Flat
149
-------
5. Applicable Conditions;
A. All conditions applicable. In fact, this experiment is
designed for massive dosing (direct) or indirect contamina-
tion via the water column.
B. Need controlled, chemically-characterized organisms.
6. Applicable Oil Types:
All types of oil could be studied.
7. Time Frame:
Starts immediately before landfall and can continue for several
years. Should sample immediately and continue weekly for 2
months, then monthly for 5 years.
8. Cost;
A. Modest total cost = $50,000 - $75,000
B. Analyses, deployment and maintenance of test animals
Analyses = $50,000
Maintenance deployment = $10,000
Test animal maintenance = $10,000
9., 10., and 11. Equipment, Facility, Personnel Needs/Availability:
A. Need facility for storing animals prior to deployment;
flow-through tanks, etc. (New England Aquarium; URl).
Personnel for deployment (URl); perhaps small boat for
deployment (URl).
B. Analytical equipment (GC, GC/MS) and large facility (ERGO,
URl, Bowdoin).
12. Support Services;
Must interface with histopathologists. Individual tissue
analyses essential.
150
-------
13. Payoff:
This is a very critical type of study. Chemical impacts and
histopathological studies for the first time can be interfaced
and cause-and-effeet relationships established under careful
monitoring of these deployed animals. Behavioral and biochemical
responses of adjacent communities then can be more fully under-
stood.
14. Limitations;
Animals may not react naturally in cages; therefore, marking
organisms and deploying them in a marked area may be necessary.
151
-------
PANEL: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE .
PROJECT NO: 4
PRIORITY RANK: NOT ASSIGNED
1. Project Title; The Monitoring of the Aryl Hydrocarbon Hydroxylase
(AHH) Enzyme System in Sessile Teleost Fish and
Selected Benthic Infauna (e.g., Nephtys)
2. Project Description:
The AHH system has been studied recently by Gruger et al (Bull.
of Environ. Cont. and Toxicol.) and Payne (Science, 1977). AHH
activity is induced by exposure to polynuclear aromatic hydro-
carbons (PNA's). Assaying for AHH can be of great importance in
assessing subtle impacts of spilled oil and may precede more
important and obvious effects.
3. Performing Organizations;
A. Chemical Analysis: Environmental Conservation Division,
NMFS/Seattle
B. Sampling: NMFS/Woods Hole
4. Applicable Habitats:
All habitats where appropriate species are available.
5. Applicable Conditions:
All conditions; this may be a good indication of spilled oil
dispersion and the extent of impact of a certain spill event.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Better for large quantities of aromatic hydrocarbons (e.g., fuel
oil, Venezuelan crude), but can apply to all spill events.
7. Time Frame:
Days to several weeks; the exact time frame is unkown. Research
has not yet indicated the response lag of the enzyme system to
PNA stress.
8. Cost:
$25,000 - $30,000 (80-100 assays at $300 apiece)
152
-------
9. and 10. Equipment, Facility Needs/Availability:
•
A. Needs:
Trawling and dredging for fish and invertebrates.
Ship for trawl/dredge operations.
Analytical facilities - enzyme assay system.
B. Facilities that may assist:
NOAA/Seattle - E. Gruger
ERGO - P. Boehm
EPA/Narragansett - G. Jackem
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Availability:
Shipboard for sampling and lab technician. Required personnel
should be readily available.
12. Support:
Should correlate with chemical analyses of PNA and histopathology.
13. Payoff:
May be the pollution monitoring mechanism that we need to spot
early biochemical changes in marine systems exposed to oil
(PNA).
14. Limitations:
Enzyme may be activated by PCB's and other aromatic compounds as
well. More lab research is needed to complement field studies.
153
-------
PANEL: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND.FATE
PROJECT NO: 5
PRIORITY RANK: NOT ASSIGNED
1. Project Title: Feasibility of Using Trace Metal Ratios to Iden-
tify Oil and/or Tarball Sources after Weathering
2. Project Description:
, This project will study changes in trace metal ratios in petro-
leum products (especially crude, #6) as a function of time in the
environment, and examine applicability of such measurements to
fingerprint oils even after substantial weathering.
Very little is known about what happens to trace metals (i.e.,
Ni, V, Mo, Fe) in petroleum when the hydrocarbons begin to
weather and/or degrade. Although there is interest in conducting
weathering experiments with various crude oils, it will be neces-
sary to verify these results under actual environmental conditions.
Sampling of the oil should proceed as described in Project 1 so
that the samples for organic and inorganic analyses can be
collected simultaneously. Thus hydrocarbon weathering data can
be directly compared to the progress of inorganic weathering.
3. Performing Organizations:
Places where the capability presently exists, all have neutron
activation and atomic absorption expertise.
EPA-Narragansett
ERCO
WHOI
URI
4. Applicable Habitats:
All habitats.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Routine monitoring of the surface oil and oil in the sediments
on a long-term basis will be necessary.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Crude oils and heavy fractions (i.e., #6).
154
-------
7. Time Frame:
Start immediately and continue as long as oil mass can be traced.
8. Cost:
Analytical - $5,000
Ship time (shared with other groups) - $15,000
Total cost - $10,000 nearshore
$30,000 off-shore
9. Equipment Needs: -
a. Sample containers
b. Slick collection device
c. Grab samplers
d. Analytical instrumentation (neutron activation, atomic
absorption, etc.).
10. Facilities Needed:
a. Ship/small boat
b. Analytical facilities
11. Personnel needs:
Presently available to EPA-Narragansett, URI, WHOI, ERGO.
12. Support Services:
Physical process group must interact, tracking of oil necessary.
13. Payoff:
a. Knowledge of chemical alterations of spilled oil is meager.
Influence of trace metals-hydrocarbon synergistic effects
is unknown as well.
b. Possibility of identifying the oil source long after it has
been in the environment makes the study attractive from an
enforcement/legal point of view.
14. Limitations:
See Project No. 1 from this Panel.
155
-------
ADDENDUM TO
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND FATE PANEL
156
-------
TABLE 1
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted, and
P*. WiZtum J. Ancfoade _ address: Etco
60 ItosAwM Sfacc* 60 ^tuw Stx-e.it
Lexington, MA 02f73 Lexington, MA 02? 73
Bus. Phone: (611) 861-6700 ext 277 Bus. Phone: (677) 861-6700 ext 277
Home Phone: (6/7) 275-7809 Home Phone: ( 6/7) 444-5316
Sponsoring Agencies: U.S. EPA P-qiia>i(m So/tiiiel&ince and
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make Re.CA.cman IR-20A _
Gas Chromatography:
packed column 2 glass capillary _ Mass spec
UV Fluourscence:
Type _
Microbalance
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES: Aqueooa 15% mvtkyte.ne.
feexane; 2) Sedunewt Aoxhtyt zxtftaction to&ie.ne./m&th.a.nol; 3) T/cMae m&thanol
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment t/e& Tissue j/e6 Seawater t/g^
Tarballs _ Cargo y&> Other _ __
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment.
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples _
(b) to analyze samples *
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes ^ No Recommended _
157
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes No X
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list:
(5) Can the whole team response? Yes No Not applicable
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organization
that can respond? Yes No . If yes please list names
and addresses.
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
UUL we. need >CA doteetcve
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research _ Impact
assessment _ Other, please explain Mo 4pec£^cc int&ML&t
but to ke£p vok&ie. po&&-lb£e.. MoAt o nft expfc^cence hou> been
158
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted; and
Dr. Paul Boehm address: Mm 1am Ste1nhauer
ERCO. 185 Alewife Brook Pkwy ERGO. 185 Alewife Brook Pkwv.
Cambridge. HA 02138 ^ Cambridge. MA 02138
Bus. Phone: ( ) 617-661-3111 Bus. Phone: ( ) 617-661-3111
Home Phone: ( ) 617-369-7791 Home Phone: { ) 617-354-01Q4
Sponsoring Agencies: BLM. EPA
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT:If,more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( 1) Make Perkin Elmer 283
Gas Chromatography:
packed column T .glass capillary 5 Mass spec 1 (GC/MS)
(HP 5840) (HP System)
UV Fluourscence:
Type Forrand Mk-1
Microbalance Cahn 4100
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES: Standard Farrington, Quinn and
BLM methodologies.
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment yes Tissue yes Scawater yes (90 liter
, capacity)
Tarballs yes Cargo yes Other surface fi1m/air_samp1es
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, droplet size and
distribution, etc., please list filed equipment. (Experience in all phases of
oceanographic sampling equipment, see attached list.)
I
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples 4
(b) to analyze samples 4
(2) Do you need sponsoring agonry approval? yes no recommended
*yes for use of BLM field equipment
*no for analytical and personnel requirements
159
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? yes no X
.(4) If so, what Is the expertise of the team and Individual members?
Please list:
(5) Can the whole team respond? yes no not applicable X
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organization that
can respond? yes X no . If yes please list names and
addresses. Dr. Tom Novitsky - Marine Microbiology
Dr. Steve Piotrowicz - Trace Metal Chemistry
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
Can respond under most conditions; our group is at sea 4 times per
year, so spills during our field activities may pose problems of
timing.
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research X impact
assessment x Other, please explain Methodology improvement
and development
Please return to:
Dr. Mason P. Wilson, Jr.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
and Applied Mechanics
Wales Hall Room 101
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, Rhode Island 02881
160
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted, and
"Bfi. Ch/uA 0). Bftotm _ address; Motfe khmadjian ___
oft ChwiA&ui _ _ Ve.pcvitme.nt, g& Chemit>&iy
06 Rhode. Inland _ _ UyiivesiAity ofi Rfoocte Inland
Bus. Phone: (40?) 792-2369 _ Bus.. Phone: ( 4QJ) 792-2369
Home Phone: (40?) 294-2029 _ Home Phone: ( ) _
Sponsoring Agencies: ERPA, API and RI CooAtat Rfc6oa/tc.eA Management Connect
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT:If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make Becfemcm 4260, PeAfcoi EfmeA 521
Gas Chromatography:
packed column X glass capillary X Mass spec _X
UV Fluourscence:
Type
Microbalance
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES:
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue X Seawater X
Tarballs X Cargo X Other ^^ .
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment.
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples 6
(b) to analyze samples &
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes No Recommended X
161
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes X No
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list: CkwiA&itj, micAobAMJOQij, VQind/lMve.
, cfo0p.5-C.Ze
(5) Can the whole team response? Yes _X No Not applicable
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organization
that can respond? Yes _2 No . If yes please list names
and. addresses.
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
Am/
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research X Impact
assessment Other, please explain
162
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted; and
A. Russel I Ceurvels address: John Per Hovanesjan
Cat Cove Marine Laboratory Cat Cove Marine
92 Fort Avenue 92 Fort Avenue
Salem, MA 01970 Salem. MA 01970
Bus. Phone: (617) 745-3107 _ Bus. Phone:
745-3107
Home Phone: (617) 526-1906 Home Phone: fci?) 483-6515
Sponsoring Agencies:
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red (X) Make B & L 250
Gas Chromatography:
packed column x glass capillary _____ Mass spec
UV Fluourscence:
Type P & E MPF-3
Microbalance
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES: Varies-Farrington method
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue x Seawater _
Tarballs Cargo x. Other
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, droplet size and
distribution, etc., please list filed equipment.
RESPONSE CAPABILITY;
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples A
(b) to analyze samples __j>
(2) Do you nood sponsoring agency approval? yes no _x._ recommended „
Not for Inwodlate emergency
163
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? yes no x
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list:
(5) Can the whole team respond? yes no not applicable
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organization that
can respond? yes no . If yes please list names and
addresses.
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research .x Impact
assessment x Other, please explain .
Please return to:
Dr. Mason P. Wilson, Or.
Department of Mechanical Engineering
and Applied Mechanics
Wales Hall Room 101
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, Rhode Island 02881
164
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted, and
Dn. Jokn W. fcwUngton M*. 8/tuce 01. TtUpp
A&AocJjate. ScAe.ntit>£ - address: — R
Chemi&ttui Ve.paAtm&nt _ _ ChemU&iy Vepowtmewt ___ _
Wood* Hole. Qc.eanoguipkic. In&t. Woodi Hate Oaeanog'iapfu.c. In&t.
Wood* ffo£e, Maid. — 0£543 - - Woods, Hole., MOM. — 0254J —
Bus. Phone: (677) S4B-1400 ex*. 316 Bus. Phone: (&11 ) 548-1400 ZXt 353
Home Phone: (517) 540-2S7S _ Home Phone: (6? 7 ) 548-6999 _
Sponsoring Agencies; EPA, CA/R, NSF, ERPA _
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make Petfe/cn E£meA 337 _
Gas Chromatography: (6) 1/o/u.otU mode£& 0(J VtVuan and HeMt&tt PacfefVid,
packed column * glass capillary * Mass spec * _
UV Fluourscence:
Type PeAfcot ££meA MPF-3
Microbalance 2 Cq/in Bo£ancfca
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES:
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment * Tissue Seawater
Tarballs _ Cargo _ Other ___
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc. kvcuiabte, an long
toad time, notice., e.g., znvlnoumw&Lt &g&tm.i, lab. .
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment. Sediffient, MttteA coiumn
, .,
with. Qfunb&t box. c.oti, lahQe. vo-Citme mtoJi zmplte, potL&tbte.
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours? 3
(a) to obtain samples 3
(b) to analyze samples 3
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes * No _ Recommended _
Ofi approval to expend institution tfunck, uui.
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes No
PejoenoA on de.6
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH 'AND LABORATORY . QUESTIONNAIRE
Alternate person to be contacted, and
. JoaitX&t Geanng _ address: _ '_ _
Ec.o&y&tem ReAeaAch Lab
- GSO - - - - --
Klna&ton. RI 02887
Bus. Phone: (40? ~)J92-6140 Qfi 6133 Bus. Phone: ( )_
Home Phone: (407) 423-2045 Home Phone:( )_
Sponsoring Agencies; EPA
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make P.E. 267
Gas Chromatography:
packed column PE3920B glass capillary 'Mass spec
UV Fluourscence:
" Type .._ ,
Microbalance CaJiyl 4100
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES: SapOnifccatLon - zWlO-Vtion by
.', AoM&t; homoge.nizeA - de.pe.wiing on sample, type..
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue X Seawater
Tarballs X Cargo _ Other ______
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks* weathering, etc
* bat not applicable. depwLi.ng on cJAC.um&tanc.eA
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes X No _ Recommended _
(^ only cL6teA.-the.-ia.ct)
167
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes _X No
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list: *>
-------
Principal Investigators, Marine Ecosystems Research Laboratory (MERL)
Dr. John W. Farrington
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Biogeochemistry of petroleum compounds, fuel oils and crude oils in
experimental ecosystems
Dr. Richard F. Lee
Skidaway Institute of Oceanography
Fate of petroleum components in a coastal marine ecosystem
Dr. James G. Quinn
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Distribution and fate of petroleum hydrocarbons in coastal marine
ecosystems
Dr. Wallace S. Broecker
Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory
Experiments with radioactive tracers in the facility for the experi-
mental analysis of coastal marine ecosystems
Dr. David L. Johnson
State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and
Forestry \
Environmental perturbation and chemical speciation
Dr. Michael E. Q. Pilson
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Cycling of certain trace constituents: sediment gradients and ex-
change with the water column
Dr. Donald R. Heinle, Dr. Sandra L. Vargo
University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies
Effects of petroleum hydrocarbons on the physiology, feeding behavior
and population dynamics of copepods
Dr.Scott W. Nixon, Dr. Gandace A. Oviatt
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Effects of petroleum and other energy-related stresses on the rates
and mechanisms of nutrient regeneration by coastal marine bottom
communities
169
-------
Principal Investigators, (MERL) (continued)
Dr. Candace A. Oviatt
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Multivariate analysis of hydrocarbon stressed microcosms
Dr. Akella N. Sastry
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Physiological responses of benthic organisms in experimental eco-
systems and the effects of petroleum hydrocarbon stress
Dr. Theodroe J. Smavda
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Responses of marine phytoplankton to petroleum hydrocarbon stresses
Dr. J. Frederick Grassle, Dr. Judith P. Grassle
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and the Marine Biological Labor-
atory
Benthic community structure in experimental ecosystems and the
effects of petroleum hydrocarbons
Dr. John Sieburth, Dr. Paul Hargraves
Graduate School of Oceanography, URI
Bacterial and protozoan components
170
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted, and
E. S. G.ifcj{-cllan _______ __ address: V. S. Page.
College Motine Rea. Lab. _ Chemu&uj Ve.paJtfme.nt
ME 04077 _ _ Bouxloin Co-fc&ge
Bus. Phone: (207) 725-8731 ex*. 604 Bus. Phone: (207 ) 725-8737 ejit 602
Home Phone: (207) 633-2590 _ Home Phone: (207 ) 729-4264
Sponsoring Agencies: NSF, State, ofi Uauunf. PEP
ANALYT ICAL EQU IPMENT : If more than one/ insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make PeAkoi E&n&l 621
packed column _ glass capillary 3920B Mass spec __
UV Fluourscence:
Type PeAkLn Elme*. M204
Microbalance PgAtcn E-gmeA AP-2
GENERAL DESCRIPTION' OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES: Se.cLune.nti> -pewtane./ be.nze.ne.
e.x&ta.c£ion 4& ku. T4A&de£-Me.oH/KoH 2
column ckfiomatogMiphy - 6.C.
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue X Seawater X
Tarballs X Cargo X Other _
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment. T-tMue
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples 4-6 _
(b) to analyze samples J^____
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes No Recommended X
171
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes X No _
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list: E. S. GU.je.veSL, theAe. mm be.
we. cannot teaponrf.
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research X Impact
assessment _ Other, please explain ___
172
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address:
Jome6 Lafee
Alternate person to be contacted, and
address: Pete RobeA&on
ERL-M, South. Fevu/ Road 4ame
NaMagan&vtt, RI
Bus. Phone: (401) 789-1077
Home Phone: (407 ) 783-5046
Bus.. Phone: ( )
Home Phone: ( )
Sponsoring Agencies: EPA
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( ) Make 627 PeJikin Elme/t
Gas Chromatography:
packed column j/e6 glass capillary 2 Mass spec
UV Fluourscence:
Type —
Microbalance
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES:
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue X Seawater X
Tarballs Cargo X Other
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment.
RESPONSE CAPABILITY:
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples 1-2 ?
(b) to analyze samples 2
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes No Recommended
Need Lab. mawQWWt approval..
173
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes No X
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list:
(5) Can the whole team response? Yes No Not applicable _X_
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organizatipn
that can respond? Yes No . If yes please list names
and addresses. ?
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research X Impact
assessment Other, please explain
174
-------
OIL SPILL RESEARCH AND LABORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name and Address: Alternate person to be contacted, and
P. MacLeod address; pona£rf
NOAA National knatyti-caJi Faeit6ty _ &ame.
2725 Monttafee BEvd., Eau>t
Sea£t£e, WA 93H2
Bus. Phone: (2(76) 442-424$ Bus. Phone: ( ) &ame.
Home Phone: ( ) Home Phone: ( )
Sponsoring Agencies: WM/Wa£t.ona£ Mat/cne fJJ!>h&rU.eA SeA.V4.ce.; att>o
EPA, ELM, etc.
ANALYTICAL EQUIPMENT: If more than one, insert number.
Infra-red ( / ) Make
Gas Chromatography:
packed column 7 glass capillary 3 Mass spec 2
UV Fluourscence: 1
Type dual oU&et Acan. 6uMy Q.oM.e.c*te.d
Microbalance 2
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXTRACTION TECHNIQUES:
See Appenicx A o£ NOAA TecfuUco£ MemoAancium ERL MESA-&
TYPES OF SAMPLES ANALYZED: Sediment X Tissue X Seawater
Tarballs X Cargo X Other
OTHER LAB CAPABILITIES: Ecosystem tanks, weathering, etc.
High petrfotmance -Uquu-d c.womeutog/ua.phy: 2 j.m>&uMeyit&, one. automated
UV ((-euoieaeence HPLC dnte.ct.on. „ ^ ,
FIELD WORK CAPABILITIES: Sediment, water column, surface, doplet size
and distribution, etc., please list filed equipment.
Can p£ace 1-2 experienced {,-LeZd c.hemu>tt> at the. oltzd &ite. uitihin
a Xew da£0
RESPONSE CAPABILITY;
(1) How many people can you muster in 24 hours?
(a) to obtain samples Po^-cMy T-2 England NMFS cfiem^iii o/i bioloaUt*
(b) to analyze samples 4 c.hemit>t&
(2) Do you need sponsoring agency approval?
Yes X* No Recommended
175
-------
(3) Are you part of an oil spill research team? Yes X No
(4) If so, what is the expertise of the team and individual members?
Please list: State. o& the. Atit analifAeA oft marine. env-uiomwtaJt
box, tn&ce. contamination by oJJL. Emplot/ qloaa capiZ-
GC, GC/MS. HPLC and UV.
(5) Can the whole team respond? Yes No X Not Applicable
(6) Are there other people or laboratories in your organization
that can respond? Yes X No _ . If yes please list names
and addresses. RobeAt C. ClaSik _
Chemical.
(7) Under what conditions can you respond? (or cannot respond)
We can and uiitt n.&>pond to aJUL U.S. jusuAdictionat majosi
t,pWti>, un£ea.i the. NflAA WAF Ata^ JUt> &ul£.y comntiZtzd to oth&i
px.oje.ct!>.
(8) What is your primary interest? Oil spill research _ Impact
assessment _ Other, please explain _ _____
176
-------
PHYSICAL PROCESSES PANEL
Participants
J.A. Gait, Chairperson
R. Beauchamp C.E. Parker
P. Cornillon A. Pollack
W. Grant J. Ripp
C. Griscom M. Spaulding
Capt. K.M. Palfrey
R. Wright
177
-------
PHYSICAL PROCESSES PANEL
General Information
• Background Considerations
• Specific Subject Areas
BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS
A. Role of Physical Processes Research
Initial discussion centered on the role of physical processes studies
in the general assessment problem and for the tactical support of the
on-scene-coordinator. It was agreed that physical processes studies
should be thought of as supportive and carried out as a sequence,
passing on distribution data to aid in cleanup, operational planning,
and selection of sites for detailed biological study.
Spill Description
Physical movement and dispersion
> *
Populations at risk Tactical support to OSC
Effects and damage
Cost and evaluation of alternatives
B. Products of Physical Processes Research
Information needed as products from the physical processes studies
will be descriptions of the oil distribution in time and space
including: 1) form the oil is in, 2) composition of the oil, and 3)
concentrations. These data will establish appropriate areas to study
impact as well as control sites. They should also result in environ-
mental forecasts and estimates of the effects on distribution of
possible cleanup actions (burning, emulsification, etc.). A ques-
tion was raised with regard to physical forecasts for models of
biological distributions (mixed layer depth and compensation depths
for example?)
178
-------
C. Pertinent Physical Processes
Dominant physical processes were discussed in terms of four general
areas:
1. Advection
® geostrophic flow
® Ekman flow
» wind drift/wave drift
• tides
® 'shelf waves/eddies
• longshore drift
© sediment transport by waves
® estuarine flow
® river flow
2. Mixing
« spreading
« mixed layer dynamics
- wave compression
Langmuir cells
- turbulence
e waves
« chemical dispersion
3. Sources and Sinks
• spill definition
e> evaporation
« sinking
« incorporation with sediments
» oxidation
- burning
photo
- biological
« cleanup
9 ice
0 biological, transport
4. Oil Associated With Sediment
© residence times and transport descriptions
• sediment fluxes and oil particle interactions
* bioturbation
9 biodegradation
179
-------
It was agreed that these processes largely covered the subject and
that for any particular area and source, a fraction of these may be
dominant. Basically these represent the framework in which the
projects can be developed.
D. Initial Project Areas
An initial list of projects to be considered was as follows:
(1) Meteorological observations
(2) Mapping of oil spills
(3) Trajectory forecasting/hindcasting
(4) Thickness, distribution and form forecasting
(5) Vertical distribution and accommodation description
(6) Particle and oil interactions
(7) Biological interactions
(8) Lagrangian measurements
(9) Current meter mooring experiments
(10) Bottom boundary layer studies
(11) Characterization of oil in sediment resident times
SPECIFIC SUBJECT AREAS
A. Catalogue of Embayments and Development of Current Algorithms
Particular publications have been completed, or are near completion,
which address a catalogue of embayments. The following publications
specifically address the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf and the
associated near-shore areas. Funds for these literature summaries
have been provided by BLM.
Update of the Institute of the Gulf of Maine's (TRIGOM) report on
environmental information from the U.S./Canadian Border to Cape
Hatteras, N.C. The study is being conducted by the Center for
Natural Areas (CNA) presently located in Washington, B.C. Principal
contact for this study is Mr. Ned Shenton. Expected completion date
is October 1977. Approximately 50 copies of the report will be
available at the BLM New York OCS Office at the World Trade Center,
New York City. BLM contact is Dr. Arthur Horowitz (212/264-2401).
The Institute of the Gulf of Maine (TRIGOM) completed a Socio-economic
and Environmental study from the U.S./Canadian Border to Sandy Hook,
New Jersey, in June 1974. This 8 volume report is also available at
the BLM New York OCS Office. BLM contact is the same as above.
180
-------
B. Development of Regional Reference Document
In addition to the studies described above, the following BLM spon-
sored study programs will also have input to the development of a
regional reference document:
• U.S. Geological Survey ongoing program dealing with chatterer
sediment mobility and suspended sediment flux on the Georges
Bank region. This program also includes water column hydrog-
raphy (surface, subsurface and bottom current studies).
Report is expected to be .completed in April 1978. Principal
contact is Dr. David Folger of USGS, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
(FTS-837-4155).
• Raytheon Company of Portsmouth, Rhode Island, and EG&G of
Waltham, Massachusetts, are conducting a physical oceanography
program for BLM on Georges Bank.
Specific inputs to this physical oceanography study will
include Lagrangien measurements, Eulerian measurements
(surface and subsurface current meter moorings) and support
hydrography. Principal objective is trajectory forecasting.
A report of the first year program will be available in
August 1978. An additional 2 years of data collection and
interpretation is planned. Specific contact is Dr. Richard
Scarlett of EG&G and Dr. David Cook of Raytheon Co. BLM
contact is Mr. Ken Berger of the New York OSC Office.
• At the present time, BLM and EDS/NOAA are discussing advan-
tages of having a historical summerization and interpretation
of meteorological and physical oceanographic information for
the Georges Bank region. A study could begin by December
1977, and expected time of completion would be April 1979.
BLM contact on progress of this possible study is Mr. Ken
Berger - New York DCS Office.
C. Additional Needs
The following additional needs for ecological damage assessment were
identified:
1. An inventory to include:
- selected bibliography
- names, addresses, phone numbers
facilities (including charter)
- equipment, large and small, including sources of
rental items (like ENDECO current meters)
181
-------
2. Simple, unambiguous, clear and complete instructions for
field observers and collectors, to include "chain of
custody" requirements as well as sampling techniques.
3. Reliable, accessible, informed Public Information
Officer to get accurate information out as fast as
possible and to reduce the pressure on those doing the
work.
4. Provision of SOR Team training to selected local indi-
viduals or groups and of SOR Team equipment kits on hand
- especially hard to get materials and equipment.
5. Arrangements with NSF to free academic types for oil
spill work (no-cost extension, etc.).
6. Quick way to put people on Federal payroll for short-
term emergency.
7. Assurance that costs incurred by non-Federal organiza-
tion will be promptly reimbursed.
8. Compilation of existing information on what happens when
oil hits the shoreline.
9. Appropriate descriptors for oil, i.e., what should be
the basic independent variables used as environmental
descriptors for oil or, more generally, hydrocarbons?
D. Equipment Requirements
The following equipment was recommended for stockpiling by the OSC or
otherwise immediately available:
1. Satellite tracked drogues
2. 1000 bottom drifters and 1000 surface drift cards,
appropriately labeled and ready for deployment (total
cost $5K)
3. Minirangers for accurate navigation
4. Chart library
5. Typewriters, Xeroxes, CB radios
182
-------
PHYSICAL PROCESSES PANEL
Recommended Projects*
1. Meteorological observations and analysis
2. Surface mapping
3. .Trajectory forecasting/hindcasting
5. Bottom boundary layer and sediment (oil) residence time
7. Longshore and rip current dynamics
8. Coastal current studies
*Projects 4 and 6 were not submitted at the time of this report.
183
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 1
PRIORITY RANK: 1
1. Project Title: Meteorological Observations and Analysis
2. Project Description:
A. Objective - To provide accurate observations and useful
forecasts of wind speed and direction, sea state, precipi-
tation, visibility and other weather conditions that could
affect cleanup efforts or that could be entered into trajec-
tory predictions.
B. Method - Establishment of an on-scene meteorological office
with equipment and personnel dedicated to the job of produc-
ing local forecasts at least four times daily based on all
available data.
C. Results - Basic data for tactical decisions by on-scene
coordinator; basic data for trajectory models and predic-
tions of areas likely to be affected by oil or suitable for
controls; and data base for after the fact verification of
models and development of new hypotheses.
3. Performing Organization:
Principally National Weather Service, with help from ships on the
scene and satellite observations. Also EG&G, through Dr. Wm.
Bendel has this capability.
4. Applicable Habitats:
All.
5. Applicable Conditions:
All.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All.
7. Time Frame:
As long as the on-scene coordinator is responsible for the spill
probably several days to a few weeks.
184
-------
8. Cost;
$20-$30K
(Equipment approximately $15 to $20K for weatherfare, radio,
teletype, etc.)
(Personnel approximately $10-$15K for three meteorologists,
wages and living expenses for up to 3 weeks).
9. Equipment Needs;
Van or office with desk, weatherfare, radio, teletype, telephone,
and typewriter. NWS should be responsible for having portable
equipment available.
10. Facility Needs;
No special needs other than described in item (9) for small
near-shore spill. For larger offshore spills, ships on the
scene can provide information and a weather data buoy may be
useful. Satellite observations should be obtained routinely, as
well as small-scale weather phenomenon and local weather from
existing weather radar facilities.
11. Personnel Needs:
We understand NSW is training a group of marine meteorologists.
Arrangements should be made to make two or three of these avail-
able as needed. Alternatively, Joseph Chase of Falmouth, a
retired WHOI Meteorologist/Oceanographer, could be retained as
consultant.
12. Support Services;
Good communication for rapid reporting of data and dissemination
of forecasts.
13. Payoff;
A. Principally, the On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) decides where,
how and when to deploy his resources.
B. Provide input for trajectory modelers, both for direct use
by OSC and to identify sites of probable impact and poten-
tial control areas where experiments should be conducted.
185
-------
C. Improve ability to forecast distribution of oil if substan-
tial quantities become airborne as a result of evaporation
or either accidental or deliberate burning.
D. Provide data for after-the-fact studies of oil weathering,
interaction with biological communities, mixing in water
column, etc.
14. Limitations:
New England weather is difficult to predict. Wind speed error
of 5 knots and direction error of 30° are considered excellent
(Argo report). Shortage of offshore data will be a problem for
some spills.
186
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 2
PRIORITY RANK: I
1. Project Title: Surface Mapping
2. Project Description;
The objective of this project is to provide accurate surface
maps at meaningful time intervals to show the progress and
extent of an oil spill to the Regional Response Team and the
On-Scene Coordinator (OSC).
The time interval between maps will be primarily dictated by
the strength of the tide in the area. Near-shore and energetic
areas require one map each 3 hours; while in off-shore areas of
low current speed, one each day is sufficient.
Observations less than about 5 miles from shore will be taken
from locally leased light aircraft and boats. Farther off-shore,
longer ranged (usually Federally operated) aircraft capable of
safer overwater operation with a heavier payload should be used.
Both types of aircraft should be capable of accurate navigation
(mini-rangers for light aircraft). Photographic and deice
recording of observations supplemented by sea surface tempera-
tures (infrared thermometer) are needed to show the presence of
thermal fronts, eddies, shoals and major currents that may
affect the oil movement. Local flight weather conditions -are
also noted.
All data gathered for the time period should be incorporated
in schematic form on a single chart accompanied by a brief
description of the results given to the OSC within 1 to 3
hours after the flight.
In addition to the observational aspects of this program, a
research component is needed. This facet of the program will be
directed at developing remote sensing techniques that can
accurately detect and map oil on the ocean surface under all
weather conditions. This remote mapping capability is a long
range and continuing need for operational and assessment aspects
of spills.
Reference: The Argo Report and SOR Team
187
-------
3. Performing Organizations:
SOR Teams
ERDA
Coast Guard and non-government labs such as Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution
EG&G
University of Rhode Island
Chesapeake Bay Institute
NASA
4. Applicable Habitats:
All.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Mapping efforts are weather limited, but conditions and proce-
dures for safe operation of aircraft are well documented.
Conditions not covered are those encountered when making aerial
observations of oil in ice fields, fog and snow. These areas
need special research to develop new techniques. The important
fact is that marine disasters often occur under these conditions.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All except gasoline whose half-life is usually too short to
mount an aerial program for more than a day.
7. Time Frame;
Mapping should continue until the oil either goes ashore and
stays there or moves out to sea and is either operationally
difficult to follow or is lost.
8. Cost:
AC time, 2 weeks, 3 to 4 hours/day $20,000
6 people, time, expenses, travel, 28,000
Equipment, 2 satellite buoys 10,000
Navigator 10,000
Support services (photo, etc.) 5,000
Communications 2,000
$75,000
188
-------
R&D contracts for remote sensing
techniques $75,000
9. Equipment Needs:
1) Mini-rangers for light aircraft navigation
2) Infra-red radiation thermometers
3) Cameras—two for each aircraft film: color and infra-red
light meters
4) Binoculars
5) Smoke bombs or other wind indicators
6) At least one satellite tracked buoy/spill
7) Charts and drafting equipment
8) Telefax - Xerox machine
9) Radio
Stock pile items with Marine Safety Officer at Coast Guard
bases.
10. Facility Needs:
a. Coastal near-shore with a small spill requires < 20 ft.
boats, small aircraft or 4-wheel drive vehicles for beach
work. Radio type communication, small building or shop with
drafting space and telecommunication available.
b. Off-shore large spills require the use of major dockside
facilities for large ships and equipment.
11. Personnel Needs:
It is suggested that a SOR type of educational program be
started. A cadre of regional people would familiarize trainees
with the methods, procedures and local experts in order to
enhance rapid response capability.
12. Support Services:
Access to: photolab with quick turn around, drafting equipment,
teleprinter or telefax machine, Xerox, typewriters,
and a stock pile of charts of the area.
189
-------
13. Payoff:
Information to OSC
Information to sampling teams
Information to assessment of damage (legal)
14. Limitations:
a. Surface mapping from aircraft is nonqualitative
b. Coordination with other disciplines is poor.
c. Adverse weather severely limits effectiveness.
d. Data gathered is not precise enough to advance modeling
techniques for forecasts.
e. Coast Guard in-house capabilities should be improved to
provide an operational system to be used with others.
190
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 3
PRIORITY RANK: HIGH
1. Project Title: Trajectory Forecasting/Hindcasting
2. Project Description:
Trajectory models to describe the distribution of spilled hydro-
carbons will be developed and exercised. This will include time
and space dependent estimates of where the oil is, where it will
go and in some cases where it has come from. It will be neces-
sary to provide information products that describe the form of
the oil (pancakes, windrows, etc.) and its distribution through-
out the water column. This project will have both observational
facets supported by field studies and theoretical components.
Oil movement forecasting techniques have been developed to the
point where the general movement of a surface slick can be pre-
dicted, if adequate supporting environmental background data is
available. Unfortunately, little more than the center of mass
of the slick can now be provided reliably using state-of-the-
art methods. Key questions that still cannot be answered, and
which must be supported with additional research, relate to what
form the oil is in, i.e., patch spreading, thickness distribu-
tion and extent of mixing within the water column. It is clear
from a study of the assessment problem that virtually all the
environmental interactions with oil (biological uptake, floccu-
lation, photo-oxidation, etc.) and most cleanup activity will be
more dependent on the surface area and form of the oil than its
actual mass. Such forecasts and predictors then must be devel-
oped and made available during oil spill incidents for support
of cleanup and assessment activities.
3. Performing Organizations:
Major responsibility for forecasting should go to NOAA (NWS-
Dr. Celso Barrientos-ERL Dr. J. A. Gait) with research support
from academic institutions, USGS and states, and Ocean Engineer-
ing Dept. - University of Rhode Island, Dr. Malcolm Spaulding -
URI, Dr. Richard Scarlet - EG&G.
4. Applicable Habitat:
All.
191
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
Any time the oil is spilled into an active circulation system.
In the absence of supporting environmental data that already has
supplied sufficient information to develop the needed trajectory
algorithms, the studies should be initiated.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types of oils with a sufficient observation base are estab-
lished to permit reliable forecasting.
7. Time Frame:
These observational studies and tactical support of OSC should
be continued while oil forecasts are needed in cleanup activity.
8. Cost:
On-scene support (per spill)
2
Small spill 10km 1 man-month $4K
2
Medium spill 50km 2 man-months $8K
2
Big spill 100km 6 man-months $24K
Computer development $3 to $6K
and support per spill
Research/analysis of spill data (not dependent on number of spills)
Computer software development $30K
Algorithm research $50K per year for 3 years
Depends on scope
9. Equipment Needs:
a. Phone lines
b. Telefax
c. Computer terminals
d. Access to computing facilities
e. Drafting equipment
192
-------
10. Facility Needs:
On-scene room, typically a motel room, could be a van or camper
with communication hook-up.
11. Personnel Needs; „,
Trained oil trajectory forecasters on-scene (NWS-Marine Ser-
vices Program — NSW-Tech. Dev. Lab. Dr. Gelso Barrientos;
ER1-PMEL Dr. Jerry Gait). Also, Ocean Engineering - URI, Dr.
Malcolm Spaulding, Dr. Peter Cornillan.
12. Support Services:
Mapping of oil.
SOR Team measurements of differential oil/water movement.
Detailed weather forecasts.
Local circulation data for currents.
13. Payoff;
Forecasts and hindcasts of oil movement and concentrations
will be the payoffs of this project.
14. Limitations;
To work, this project will need appropriate background environ-
mental data (currents, weather, etc.) plus an access to observa-
tional data as would be obtained from a mapping and SOR team
type project.
To fully support assessment studies additional research will
have to be carried out to develop algorithms to describe oil
thickness distributions and large scale spreading.
193
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Bottom Boundary Layer and Sediment (Oil)
Residence Time
2. Project Description:
Sediment residence time provides information on:
a. Duration of oil impact, e.g., oil impregnation of bottom
sediment, which is a multiplier for damage evaluation.
b. Direction and dynamics of movement of oil and sediments
along bottom. This subject should be identified as a future
research project.
The investigation incorporates detailed mapping of shallow
structure, e.gs, by high-resolution seismic, backed by sediment
coring, coupled with bottom instrument packages capable of
continuous measuring of dynamic properties, includes both wave
and current measurements, temperature, turbidity and pressure
(interpretation of bottom shear should be achievable from
presently available models). The studies should yield maps
of sediment (potential oil) residence time, plus a realistic
assessment of conditions affecting transport of oil or treatment
materials.
3. Performing Organizations:
a. USGS Atlantic-Gulf of Mexico Branch. Office of Marine
Geology* offers immediate response on completion of new
coastal workboat (anticipated Spring 1978), or partial
assistance prior to that time. Assistance includes bottom
instrument emplacement. See draft.proposal submitted to
workshop. Background (pre-spill) study highly recommended.
b. WHOI Ocean Engineering - W. D. Grant
c. MIT - Prof. Ole S. Madsen - Civil Engineering
d. U. Conn. Prof. Frank Bohlen
*Woods Hole Mass: D. Folger 837-4155.
194
-------
e. Corps of Engineers has extensive basic data (cores, seismic
profiles).
f. URI - Dr. Mason Wilson
g. NOAA sediment dynamics group (expertise in N.Y.'Bight
area).*
h. Partial data in Massachusetts Bay available as a result
of preliminary experiments in NOMES program. ERL-BOULDER.
i. Partial data in Block Island-Rhode Island Sound from bottom
mounted E/M meter for spoil disposal and power plant cooling
system surveys. URI-DMR-Griscom.
j. Bottom turbulence monitoring system - USN-UWS-Shontig.
k. EG&G - Dr. Richard Scarlet.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Off-shore bottoms.
5. Applicable Conditions: '
Can (should) be determined as baseline study in High Risk,
Marine Traffic Corridors before spill; pinpointing afterward.
(See p. 16-17; Fig. 2 in USGS proposal for key profiles).
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any oil type.
7. Time Frame:
Key coastal areas should be systematically mapped and reinvesti-
gated at multiple yearly intervals until a comprehensive inven-
tory is obtained. Each investigation of a given interval
requires about 1 month field survey time. Bottom instrument
packages may be retained longer in given spill site if necessary.
Sample workshop requires additional 1 month workup time for each
field survey (preliminary study). Some data available to OSC
immediately on return of field gear.
*D. J. Swift, NOAA-AOML-Miami.
195
-------
8. Cost:
Per one month, area investigation for field deployment, inclu-
ding personnel; not including data workup: $30K.
One bottom instrument package can be supplied at present for
emergency use without personnel or equipment changes.
Bare Boat with operator - $177/day.
Additional cost for transport, truck rental, three support
personnel, expendables as indicated in "Yellow boat project"
report obtainable from R. Would, USGS Woods Hole, 02536.
9. Equipment Needs:
Coring equipment, high resolution seismic equipment, bottom
instrument package (e.g., USGS "TRIPODS" for long-term deployment.
Location equipment.
10. Facility Needs:
Coastal work boat, truck rental, normal temporary coastal accommo-
dations, computer facilities for seismic data manipulation and
interpretation.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
URI - C.A. Griscom, F. Middleton, V. Narci
USGS - Yes: immediate response
USN - D. Shontig, Newport, R.I.
After Spring 1978
Present - bottom instrument only
See R. Wold or D. Folger 837-4155, FTS, USGS Woods Hole
Item No. 3 C-F availability subject to change.
12. Support Services: '
Background (sequential) on bottom sediment.
Configuration and Dynamit Properties, highly desirable.
196
-------
13. Payoff:
/
Map of Bottom Dynamic conditions of immediate use to OSC; use-
ful to predict oil impact duration and "multiplier effect" on
damage assessment (residence time). Aids estimate of time
involved in bottom movement, discrimination of highest priority
areas in event of limited cleanup or deterrence capacity.
Prediction of particle erosion of bottoms and presence in water
column.
14. Limitations:
A. The project is most useful in in-shore areas having high
risk potential and where sedimentation-erosion patterns show
reasonable continuity. The effect of extreme events such as
storms and hurricanes is not well predicted by bottom
instrument packages emplaced under normal conditions; this
area is partly covered by acoustic surveying-coring. Also
predictive models for sediment transport and bottom shear
stress on the continental shelf still are in the develop-
mental stages. All three elements, geophysical profiling,
coring and dynamic measurement, are needed for maximum
effectiveness. Even though areas of potential sediment
transport are identified, our present knowledge is not
adequate to give quantitative numbers except under very
specialized conditions.
B. Availability of personnel.
197
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 7
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Longshore and Rip Current Dynamics
2. Project Description:
A. Objectives:
(1) Prediction of magnitudes and directions of longshore
currents and rip currents.
(2) Identification of research needs for the development
of adequate models of longshore currents and rip current
models.
B. Procedure:
(1) Information to modelers and on-site coordinators provided
by:
(a) Empirical current and wave measurements - current
meters, wave sensors, sediment size
(b) Regional reference document
(c) Simple analytical models.
C. Anticipated Results
(1) Longshore currents in the surf zone and immediate
vicinity.
(2) Description of rip currents and coastal cells.
3. Performing Organization:
A. Organization with Capability
(1) Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Dr. Ole S.
Madsen, Civil Engineering
(2) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution - Dr. William D.
Grant, Ocean Engineering
(3) University of Massachusetts - Dr. Allen Niedoroda
193
-------
(4) University of Rhode Island - Dr. Malcolm Spaulding,
Dr. Peter Cornillon, ocean engineering modeling; Dr.
C.A. Griscom, Dr. R. McMaster, GSO, measurement; Dr. J.
Fisher, Dr. J. Boothroyd, Geology, measurement
(5) Boston College - Dr. Benno Brenninkmeyer
(6) EG&G - Dr. Richard Scarlet
B. Possible Performing Organizations
All of the above - possibly in cooperative project
4. Available Habitat:
New England - surf zone
5. Applicable Conditions:
Spill heading toward coastline
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All.
7. Time Frame:
a. Predictions needed over tidal cycles to get directions.
b. Empirical measurements will provide immediate results.
c. Longer term research is needed into Longshore current
models — possibly provided by National Sediment Transport
Study.
8. Cost:
$30K (for observational program in the event of a spill - does
not include research costs).
i
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
a. Current meters capable of resolving both wave and current
flows.
(1) E/M current meters
(2) Acoustic current meters
199
-------
(3) Wave measuring devices
(4) Sediment sampling.
V
b. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
}
MIT
University of Massachusetts
University of Rhode Island
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
a. Small boats available
Computer for our current models
Four-wheel drive vehicles
b. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
MIT
University of Massachusetts
University of Rhode Island
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
a. See item 3a.
b. Volunteers to make beach observations.
12. Support Services:
a. Mapping of spill
b. Meteorological data
c. Beach observations - beach slope, wave direction, tides,
winds, breaker type, water depth, wave height, and wave
period.
13. Payoff;
a. Contribution to assessment of Ecological Impact:
(1) Trajectory of oil down coast to try to determine
where to center cleanup.
(2) Support service to determine ultimate fate of
spill.
200
-------
(3) Major consideration is that once oil is inside surf
zone it is too late to prevent spill damage on shore.
Thus, it is necessary to make the current predictions a
significant period of time ahead.
b. Scientific Interest:
(1) Forcing function contributing to longshore current
(currently under study).
(2) Longshore current distribution.
14. Limitations:
/
a. Availability of equipment/personnel
b. Weather conditions
c. Present model of wind devices, longshore currents, etc.
201
-------
PANEL: PHYSICAL PROCESSES
PROJECT: 8
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Coastal Current Studies
2. Project Description:
A. Objectives:
(1) Prediction of magnitudes and directions of coastal
currents throughout water column to assist trajectory
modeling predictions and on-site coordinator.
(2) Identification of research needs for the development
of adequate models of coastal currents and baseline
current data.
B. Procedure:
(1) Information to modelers and on-site coordinator pro-
vided by
(a) Emperical current measurements - current meter
array, bottom observations (topography) and
drifters.
(b) Regional reference document.
(c) Simple analytical current models and for tabu-
lated current tables.
C. Anticipated Result: Surface, mid-depth and bottom velocities
due to:
(a) Tide
(b) Wind driven currents
(c) Density currents
(d) Wave-current interaction.
202
-------
3. Performing Organization:
A. Organization with capability:
(1) Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
(a) Dr. Robert Beardsly Physical Oceanography
Dr. Gabriel Csanady
(b) Dr. William D. Grant Ocean Engineering
Dr. Albert J. Williams
(2) Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Dr. Ole S.
Madsen, Civil Engineering.
(3) USGS-Woods Hole - Dr. Brad Butman.
(4) NMFS - Woods Hole.
(5) Univ. of R.I., Dr. Malcolm Spaulding, Dr. Peter
Cornillon, Dr. C. Griscom, Dr. R. McMaster, Dr. J.
Fisher, Dr. J. Boothroyd.
(6) Univ. of Conn. - Dr. Frank Bohlen.
(7) EG&G - Dr. Richard Scarlet.
B. Possible performing organization - all of the above.
4* Applicable Habitat:
Coastal Zone, i.e., region where frictional influence of bottom
is felt through water column. 30 to 40m depth contour*
5. Applicable Conditions:
a. Oil spill occurs in shallow coastal region.
b. Trajectory predictions show likely impingement in coastal
region.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All
7. Time Frame;
a. Predictions for on-site use could be provided almost
immediately by empirical methods.
203
-------
b. Longer term research is needed to develop adequate models
of wind-driven currents, wave-current interaction models, and
adequate descriptions of the forcing involved.
c. In the event that oil reaches bottom sediments, longer
term monitoring of the currents will be needed to determine
direction of potential oil laden sediment transport.
8. Cost:
$30K (only for immediate monitoring - no research cost included).
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
a. Current meters capable of resolving both wave and current
flows:
(1) E/M Current Meter
(2) Accoustic Current Meters
(3) CTD measurements
(4) Bottom observations, i.e., bottom camera or divers.
b. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, if available
University of Rhode Island
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
NMFS Woods Hole
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
a. Ships to deploy current meters; computer to run simple
current models.
b. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (ship & comp.)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (ship & comp.)
URI. NMFS Woods Hole.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
See item 3a.
204
-------
12. Support Services:
a. Mapping of spill.
b. Meteorological data.
13. Payoff:
a. Contribution of assessment of ecological impact:
(1) Necessary input to trajectory model
(2) Support service to determine ultimate fate
of spill.
b. Scientific Interest:
Research into: wind-driven currents, wave-current inter-
action, and partitioning of wind stress into currents/waves.
These topics are of interest for a wide range of pollution
studies besides oil.
14. Limitations:
a. Availability of current meters/personnel
b. Weather conditions for deployment
c. Present models of wind-driven currents and wave-current
interactions are crude but possibly adequate for initial
trajectory predictions when backed up by empirical measure-
ments. Future predictions over longer time periods requires
a better knowledge of these; i.e., depth average current
models are not adequate.
205
-------
WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY PANEL
Participants
F.G. Lowraan, Chairperson
O.T. Edstrom H. Mulligan
R. Gerber C.L. Rogers
P.E. Hargraves C. Ross
D.L. Harvey J. Snider
G. LaRoche G.A. Vargo
206
-------
WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY PANEL
General Considerations
The information on the subject of water column biology is presented
in several major sections, according to the source of the informa-
tion. The major components of the Water Column Biology Panel report
are as follows:
• Projects recommended at Hartford.
• Comprehensive package submitted by the NMFS Northeast
Fisheries Center submitted after the Workshop, including
substantial background information and ten proposed projects.
• Addendum to the Panel report giving general considerations
on pertinent methods.
Numbering of the projects is continuous through the Panel report.
Thus projects 1-3 were proposed at Hartford and projects 4-13 were
submitted by NMFS after the Workshop.
207
-------
WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY PANEL
Recommended Projects*
1. Possible responses to oil spills: analysis of plankton.
2. Effects of oil spills on resident fish communities.
3. The effects of oil spills on icthyoplankton: eggs and larval
stages.
4. Ichthyoplankton survey - MARMAP Survey I.
5. Bottom trawl survey operations - MARMAP Survey II.
6. Demersal food chain investigations.
7. Physiological and biochemical effects of an oil spill
on selected fish and shellfish.
8. Histopathological effects of an oil spill on marine organisms.
9. Hydrocarbon analyses of fish, shellfish, zooplankton.
10. The genetic effects of an oil spill on developing fish embryos.
11. Toxicity studies: The effects of oil on developing fish embryos
and larvae.
12. Phytoplankton and other microorganisms.
13. Fishery oceanography: Environmental studies.
Addendum: General Methodology Considerations
*Projects 1-3 proposed at Hartford, projects 4-13 submitted by
NMFS Northeast Fisheries Center after the Workshop.
208
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Possible Responses to Oil Spills: Analysis of
Plankton
*
2. Project Description:
Objective: Determination of short-term effects of oil spills on
plankton populations.
A. Unquestionable need for a data base - centralization of
existing literature and the means to acquire and update
additional data. See also Project No. 3, Effects of Oil
Spills on Ichthyoplankton 2.D Baseline Data.
B. Interactions and coordinations with laboratory experimenta-
tion; standardization of experimental techniques, e.g.,
bioassay studies - standardization of simple rapid bioassay
test which can be performed (initiated?) in the field and
duplicated (continued?) in the lab.
C. Groups to be examined
(1) Phytoplankton. For species composition, measurement of
productivity, and community dynamics, fractionation
into net and nanoplankton is essential. Measurements
should include C, N, and ATP analyses, along with other
analyses such as total biomass and chlorophyll.
(2) Heterotrophic microplankton. Species composition and
abundance of such groups as protozoa (tintinnids, other
ciliates, amoebae, flagellates) and larvae stages of
planktonic invertebrates. A physiological measurement
such as respiration is desirable but methodology is not
perfected.
(3) Other zooplankton (pelagic crustaceans, ichthyoplankton
and others). Species composition distribution and
abundance. Respiration, ingestion, and excretion
measurements are desirable. See also Project No. 3, on
the Effects of Oil Spills on Ichthyoplankton 2.B.
(4) Particulate organic matter. Estimates of abundance and
total carbon contribution.
209
-------
(5) Bacterioplankton. Marginally understood, but should
be considered.
D. Measurements of hydrocarbons necessary in all size cate-
gories: with larger sizes, separation at trophic level
should be possible (e.g., carnivores vs. herbivores).
At smaller size levels, trophic separation is probably
not feasible. £
E. Sampling techniques - See Water Column Biology Addendum.
3. Performing Organization:
See Project No. 3 on The Effects of Oil Spills on Ichthyo-
plankton.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Habitats are all coastal areas to the limits of the continental
shelf where significant economic or aesthetic impact could
occur.
i
5.. Applicable Conditions:
Any.
6. Applicable Oil Types:
The project applies to all types of oil. The experimental
format should be flexible according to oil type.
7. Time Frame:
The time required for on-site investigations is dictated by
the duration of analysis and the finalized experimental design.
This will vary with the scope of the investigation, nature and
size of the spill, etc. In all cases a maximum flexibility in
response should be maintained.
8. Cost:
A supply of capital equipment should be maintained sufficient
to support all planned projects. A fund of readily available
money should be maintained in order to insure and promote rapid
and intensive responses to any spill. Such a fund should
include guaranteed expenses plus, in the case of state and
university commitments, overhead costs. For details see projects
entitled Effects of Oil Spills on Resident Fish Communities and
Effects of Oil Spills on Icthyoplankton.
210
-------
9. Equipment Needs;
All equipment should be standardized and readily accessible.
Samplers should be those that do not damage the organisms
sampled (e.g., large volume water samplers).
10. Facility Needs;
Depending on the size of the spill, investigations should be
coordinated at local levels (small spills) or regional levels
(large spills). For more sophisticated experiments, a
centralized laboratory should be available and designated.
Availability of vessels and aircraft should be designated, as
well as an organized local liaison center. All experiments
relating to spills should be coordinated from a central facility,
such as EPA-Narragansett or NMFS-Woods Hole.
11. Personnel Needs:
A centralized listing of personnel in the areas named in cate-
gory #2 should be maintained and widely distributed. Since many
of these projects involve considerable time and expense, a
regional or national fund guaranteeing support should be avail-
able for dispensation of seed funds at short notice.
Addenda: At this stage of organization it is premature to be
overly specific in design and analysis of experiments and
specific methodology. Each project has different requirements
and each oil spill requires a different response.
Investigators should not have preconceived expectations of
results. The complexity of marine food webs is such that
adequate answers can come only from carefully considered experi-
mentation and analysis.
12. Support Services:
- Horizontal and vertical distribution of pollutant with time
- Oil analysis support
- Communications (field) <
- Freezer space and shipping support
- Interaction with other activities and disciplines associated
with oil spill
- Medical support and facilities
i
13. Payoff: ;
'T Estimates of the degree of petroleum contamination should be
made for the first two trophic levels of the food web, the
211
-------
phytoplankton and the zooplankton, to determine the impact
of contamination on the species composition and abundance of
the phytoplankton and zooplankton.
14. Limitations;
Due to the effects of rapid recruitment, high reproductive rate
and natural patchiness of plankton, it may be difficult to
definitely attribute detectable alterations to the plankton
populations.
212
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 2
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Effects of Oil Spills on Resident Fish Communities
2. Project Description:
A. Determine petroleum hydrocarbon levels in resident species
in and near site of spill.
B. Determine impacts of the spill on the resident species.
o Short-term possible studies include:
- Stomach analyses for food chain PHC contamination
- Flesh analysis for PHC
- Blood plasma-ion imbalance
- Instant mortality
- Depuration rates (?)
- Enzyme activity
- Histopathology
- Behavior analysis
- Stamina testing and respiration rates
- Tainting
o Long-term possible studies include:
- Blood plasma-ion imbalance
- Fecundity (eggs/gm/gravid female)
- Behavior (avoidance included)
- Stamina testing
- Histopathology
- Recruitment (sex ratios)
- Condition coefficient gut analysis
- Tainting
- Respiration rates
3. Performing Organization:
See project entitled: Effects of Oil Spills on Icthyoplankton.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Pelagic and benthic resident fishes to the continental shelf.
213
-------
5. Applicable Conditions:
Major spills per lead agency definition and safe sampling
conditions.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any oil type except those of low flash points that would subject
field crew to unnecessary hazards from inhalation or fire.
7. Time Frame:
Duration of the study depends on the conditions, type of oil,
area of the spill and the monies available.
8. Cost:
For all water column species (plankton and finfish) including
cost of gear, ship time, screening analysis (3000 samples);
10 investigators ($30K) $150K; ship time (inshore $20K, 30
days) includes gear and operating expense (offshore $320K, 30
days); total estimate $200K inshore; total estimate $500K
offshore; plus 100 detailed analyses ($50,000).
9. Equipment Needs:* Estimated Value
Fisheries
A. Hook and line (D) complete $ 500.00
B. Gill nets (D) 15 @ $200 apiece 3,000.00
C. Shrimp trynets (D) including boards 3,000.00
D. Trawls (bottom and midwater) (D) 5 4,000.00
replacement nets
E. Explosives (D) 500.00
F. Vessels (minor maintenance) 1,000.00
G. Disposable sampling equipment (D) bottles, 4,000.00
plastic bags, aluminum foil, ice, ice
chests, etc.
*(D) = disposable
214
-------
10. Facility Needs:
A. Docking launching facility
B. Vessels and laboratory to perform services. If needed,
helicopter time is $200/hr. - 20 hrs. The availability of
local State and Federal military aircraft should be checked.
Lodging, etc., should be handled by the executive director.
11. Personnel Needs:
See #3 for agencies and organization.
12. Support Services:
A. Horizontal and vertical distribution of oil.
B. Oil analysis support.
C. Communications (mobile).
D. Freezer and shipping support.
E. Interaction with other activities and disciplines associated
with that oil spill.
F. Medical facilities and support.
13. Payoff:
With a well-coordinated interdisciplinary program, this project
could assess the total impact of an oil spill on resident fish
populations. Loss of resident fish populations may affect dis-
tribution and availability of migratory species. Total factors
could have adverse local economic impacts.
14. Limitations:
It is difficult to determine whether detectable alterations to
fish populations in the vicinity of an oil spill are related
directly to that event.
215
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: The Effects of Oil Spills on Ichthyoplankton:
Eggs and Larval Stages
2. Project Description:
A. Objective: To determine the effects of petroleum hydro-
carbons on developing fish embryos and larvae. Studies will
be carried out on embryos and larvae collected from an oil
spill area and additional controlled laboratory studies will
be conducted in order to estimate the impact of a spill on
this fragile and highly important component of the plankton
community.
B. Procedure:
(1) Sampling
Neuston and plankton samples will be collected at
regular areal and temporal intervals following a spill.
Details of standardized sampling procedure can be found
in Water Column Biology Panel Addendum. Samples will
be preserved in 4 percent buffered formalin. Contents
from the 0.505 mm mesh plankton net and the neuston
samples will be sorted for ichthyoplankton. The
species composition and numbers of fish eggs and larvae
will be calculated for 100 nr water filtered. From
this, estimates of species distribution and abundance
can be made and compared with data from previous years
to give an estimate of initial impact (see D. Baseline
Data).
Before preservation the sample should be observed
for the condition of eggs and larvae (i.e., oil on
eggs, dead eggs or larvae).
The zooplankton (0.333 mm mesh samples will also
be analyzed for species composition, abundance and
distribution. This information will be used as part of
Project No. 1. Although ichthyoplankton and the other
plankton,groups have been separated into two projects,
sampling for both groups is simultaneous. Standard
sampling methods are described in the Water Column
Biology Addendum.
216
-------
(2) Genetics
Preserved eggs from plankton and neuston tows should
be sorted by species and stage. They can then be
examined for genetic damage. Using the methods of
Longwess (1976) the extent (%) of damage can be esti-
mated, i.e., morbidity, moribundity, abnormal embryos
and chromosome damage for that sample (see Argo Merchant
ICES Report). The results can be compared for samples
from clean and impacted areas and for historical
data.
(3) Histopathology
Preserved larvae from oil spill and clean areas can
be examined and compared for histological differences.
(9) Bioassay Studies (in situ and laboratory)*
Bioassays can be carried out for both egg and larval
stages. Laboratory produced embryos will be brought
out to sea and exposed to water pumped from areas
beneath the slick, at the periphery of the slick and in
"clean" areas. Water samples will be collected and
analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. Samples will also
be collected for dissolved oxygen (DO) and salinity
determinations. Embryos will be exposed at different
stages of development, and subsamples will be made
including heartbeat, sinking (due to osmoregulation
difficulties), respiration and yolk utilization.
Similar studies will be conducted under laboratory
conditions using known concentrations of fuel oil types
(e.g., crude, Nos. 6, 4, 2) and the water soluble
fractions (Kuhnhold).
The same procedures, both field and laboratory (except-
ing genetics studies) can be carried out for larvae.
When larvae are used, feeding initiation, feeding,
swimming behavior, respiration, RNA/DNA ratios, protein
synthesis, growth and yolk utilization can be used to
determine the effects of hydrocarbons on the larvae.
In addition, histopathological studies can be carried
out on preserved specimens.
*These studies should be carried out at regular intervals from
beginning of the spill. Nonetheless, if weather conditions do not
permit, sampling should proceed whenever conditions are suitable.
217
-------
C. Flow Diagram: A flow diagram of field and laboratory
studies is presented in the Water Panel Biology Addendum.
D. Baseline Data: The National Marine Fisheries Service
(NOAA) has been conducting plankton (ichthyoplankton,
zooplankton) and groundfish cruises from Cape Hatteras to
Nova Scotia for the last 6 and 15 years respectively. Most
of these samples have been analyzed so that baseline data on
species composition, abundance and distribution over time is
available. This information should prove invaluable for
estimating impact on fishery resources in the event of
future oil spills.
3. Performing Organization:
• Rhode Island
State Department of Natural Resources Ocean Division
State Department of Health
University of Rhode Island
Environmental Research Laboratory, EPA, Narragansett, RI
NOAA/NMFS Laboratory, Narragansett, RI
U.S. Coast Guard, Newport
• Connecticut
State Department of Environmental Protection Division of
Conservation and Preservation
Wesleyen University
University of Connecticut
State Department of Health
NOAA/NMFS Laboratory, Milford
Essex Marine Laboratory
U.S. Coast Guard
218
-------
Massachusetts
Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
Division of Environmental Quality
Division of Marine Fisheries
Woods Hole Institute of Oceanography
NOAA/NMFS Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA '
U.S. Coast Guard
EG&G Bionomics, Waltham, MA
EG&G Env. Consultants, Waltham, MA
Northeastern University Marine Lab - Nahaut, MA
University of Masschusetts Marine Lab, Rockport, MA
New Hampshire
New Hampshire Department of Fish & Game, Concord, NH
New Hampshire Water Supply & Pollution Control Comm., Concord,
NH
University of New Hampshire, Office of Marine Research, Durham,
NH
State Department of Health
Maine
Department of Inland Fisheries, Bangorj ME
Department of Marine Fisheries, Hanlon, ME
Bigelow Marine Laboratory, Boothbay Harbor, ME
University of Maine Darling Center, Walpole, ME
State Department of Health Marine Research Laboratory
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, ME
219
-------
• Other
NOAA/NMFS Laboratory Sandy Hook, NJ
NOAA/NMFS Laboratory Oxford, Md
4. Applicable Habitats: «
All coastal and shelf waters.
5&6. Applicable Conditions and Oil Type;
A major spill of any petroleum oil type except those with
low flashpoints that would subject the field crew to unnecessary
hazards from inhalation or fire. The assumption is made that
with either a surface application or offshore rig blowout,
the pollutant will occur in the water column.
7. Time Frame:
The time required will be determined by the financial support
available and the urgency of subsequent spills.
8. Cost:
The cost is for sampling of all water column species for 30
days.
• Inshore (includes projects dealing with ichthyoplankton,
zooplankton and adult fish populations).
Investigations $ 30,000
Screening 150,000 (3000 samples)
100 detailed analyses 50,000
Inshore boat time and gear 30,000
Living Accommodations
$260,000
220
-------
• Offshore
Investigations $ 30,000 (salaries and
fringe benefits)
Screening 150,000
100 detailed analyses 50,000
Offshore ship 320,000
$550,000
9. Equipment Needs: ;
A. Ship or boat suitable for the spill area with winch 61 and
20 cm paired bongo frames.
B. 0.5 X 1.0 m frame (neuston)
C. Nets - plankton 0.333 mm, 0.505 mm, 0.253 mm, 0.165 mm,
neuston 0.505 mm mesh, clips, rope, wire depressors, jars,
formalin, sieves, buckets, labels, submersible pumps.
D. Microscopes, sorting dishes, vials, labels, jars, air stones,
droppers, chemicals, stains, histological equipment, gilson
respirometer, Niskin or Nansen bottles, glassware.
E. Centrifuge.
10. Facility Needs:
A. Vessel
B. Helicopters
C. Laboratory
11. Personnel Needs
See Item 3 for agencies and organizations.
12. Support Services:
A. Horizontal and vertical distribution of pollutant with time
B. Oil analysis support
221
-------
C. Communications (field)
D. Freezer space and shipping support
E. Interaction with other activities and disciplines associated
with that oil spill
F. Medical support and facilities
13. Payoff:
Estimate of the degree of petroleum contamination of fish eggs
and larvae would be made. An estimate of the effects on future
marine stocks may not be possible.
14. Limitations:
It is improbable that detectable changes in biota following
an oil spill could be related exclusively to the incident
under study.
222
-------
OFFSHORE OIL SPILL ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE ASSESSMENT
PLAN FOR FISHERIES
The National Marine Fisheries Service
Northeast Fisheries Center
Narragansett Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
February 6, 1978
223
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction. 228
Research Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service,
, Northeast Fisheries Center 229
1. Resource Assessment Division 233
1.1 Resource Surveys Investigation 233
1.2 Age and Growth Investigation 235
1.3 Fishery Statistics Investigation 235
1.4 Fisheries Socioeconomics Investigation 236
1.5 Sandy Hook Investigation 236
T.6 Fisheries Analysis Investigation 236
2. Marine Ecosystems Division 237
2.1 Ichthyoplankton Investigation 237
2.2 Benthic Dynamics Investigation 238
2.3 Plankton Ecology Investigation 238
2.4 Larval Physiology Investigation 239
2.5 Apex Predators Investigation 239
2,6 Oceanography Investigation 240
2.7 Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation
3. Resource Utilization Division
3.1 Shellfish Resource Development Investigation 241
3.2 Finfish Resource Development Investigation . 242
3.3 Resource Engineering Development Investigation 242
3.4 Product Standardization Investigation 242
224
-------
Page
3.5 Product Quality Investigation 243
3.6 Product Safety Investigation . . . 243
4. Environmental Assessment Division 243
4.1 Environmental Chemistry Investigation 244
4.2 Biological Oceanography of Stressed Environments
Investigation 244
4.3 Physiological Effects of Pollutant Stress Investigation. . 245
4.4 Behavior of Marine Fishes and Invertebrates Investigation. 246
4.5 Coastal Monitoring, Assessment, and Prediction
Investigation 247
4.6 Coastal Ecosystems Investigation 247
5. Aquaculture Division 248
5.1 Spawning and Rearing of Moll usks Investigation 248
5.2 Aspects of Nutritional Requirements of Mollusks
Investigation 248
5.3 Aquacultural Genetics Investigation 249
5.4 Control of Molluscan Disease Investigation 249
6. Pathobiology Division 249
6.1 Disease and Environmental Stress Investigation 249
6.2 Comparative Pathobiology Investigation 250
6.3 Health of Ocean Finfish and Shellfish Investigation. ... 251
7. Manned Undersea Research and Technology Program ........ 252
8. National Systematfcs Laboratory 252
9. Atlantic Environmental Group 15T
Proposed Projects 254
Ichthyoplankton Survey - MARMAP Survey I 255
Bottom Trawl Survey Operations - MARMAP Survey II 257
225
-------
Page
Demersal Food Chain Investigations. . 260
Physiological and Biochemical Effects of an Oil Spill
on Selected Fish and Shellfish 262
Histopathological Effects of an Oil Spill on Marine Organisms . 264
Hydrocarbon Analyses of Fish, Shellfish, Zooplankton 266
The Genetic Effects of an Oil Spill on Developing Fish Embryos. 268
Toxicity Studies: The Effects of Oil on Developing Fish
Embryos and Larvae 270
Phytoplankton and Other Microorganisms 272
Fishery Oceanography: Environmental Studies 274
Budget 276
Summary 277
Appendices
I MARMAP Survey I Operations 278
II MARMAP Survey II Operations 286
III NEFC-Task Development Plans - FY 1980 293
IV Physiology-Biochemistry, Mil ford, Conn 297
226
-------
INTRODUCTION
The success of any effort to assess the environmental impact of an oil
spill depends largely on having adequate baseline data and being able to
conduct long-term investigations. The studies initiated at the time of a
spill can answer questions regarding immediate catastrophic effects of
the spill. These are necessary. However, it is the long-term sublethal
impacts of chronic exposures of an ecosystem to petroleum hydrocarbons
that need to be evaluated. Such effects can be detected or recovery
measured only through long-term monitoring.
The Northeast Fisheries Center of the National Marine Fisheries Service
carries out marine ecosystem research off the Northeast coast including
the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank and the Mid-Atlantic Bight. In addition
to providing assessments of the status of fish stocks, information is
also obtained on the physiological condition or health of the marine
ecosystem. Population estimates are obtained largely through interviews
with fishermen and analyses of fish catches combined with fishery independ-
ent survey information. Surveys of fish and ichthyoplankton are carried
out through the MARMAP (Marine Resource, Monitoring, Assessment and
Prediction) program. There is also a growing concern about the effects
of marine pollution, not only on the yield of fisheries resources, but
also on the health of human populations. Current studies of pollutants
in. the marine environment are site specific and of short duration.
Through the Ocean Pulse program the NEFC coordinates its studies and the
studies of other groups to determine the wide, long-range effects of
marine pollution on the ecosystem and to distinguish between effects due
to contaminants and those due to natural factors.
These two programs, MARMAP and Ocean Pulse, are carried out by six prin-
cipal Divisional elements located within the NEFC. They are Resource
Assessment, Marine Ecosystems, Resource Utilization, Environmental
Assessment, Aquaculture, and Pathobiology. These activities are carried
out at six laboratories: Woods Hole, MA; Gloucester, MA; Narragansett,
RI; Milford, CT; Sandy Hook, NJ; and Oxford, MD. The Atlantic Environ-
mental Group, Manned Undersea Research and Technology program and National
Systematics Laboratory support the divisional investigations.
In addition to long term monitoring of fishery resource distribution,
abundance and health, the NEFC also has the capability of making short-
term risk analyses of an oil spill through the expertise of the Atlantic
Environmental Group and the Fishery Oceanography Investigation of the
Marine Ecosystem Division. Long-term environmental information on
currents, eddies, winds, Gulf Stream meanders and warm core eddies along
the Slope and Continental Shelf are used to make predictions on the
expected movement and fate of an oil spill. Through these predictions
it is possible to plan the appropriate short- or long-term studies to
assess the impact of a spill.
227
-------
RESEARCH PROGRAMS
National Marine Fisheries Service
Northeast Fisheries Center
Research to support fisheries management focuses on predicting changes in
the size, composition, and structure of the fisheries resources off the
Northeast coast. This research is carried out largely through the MARMAP
program. MARMAP information, when combined with data on the effects of
natural and man-made environmental factors, permits the prediction of the
production of fish stocks. Relevant social, economic, and/or ecological
factors are incorporated into these estimates.
The principal elements of MARMAP include resource surveys, analyses of
commercial and recreational fish catches, fishery oceanography, and
fishery engineering. Each is necessary, but none of them is in itself
sufficient for resource assessment. Data analysis tasks combine the
results of surveys, catch statistics, biometric data (age, growth,
fecundity, recruitment, and mortality rates) plus information on environ-
mental conditions and food chain dynamics' to produce updated stock
assessments.
Two types of MARMAP Surveys are currently being conducted. One type of
survey (S-I-Ichthyoplankton Appendix I) monitors changes in distribution
and abundance of fish eggs and larvae. These data are used to estimate
size of spawning stocks and to forecast annual recruits. Fish are
sensitive to environmental changes during their early life stages, and
the mortality for each year class can affect future harvests. These
survey operations are conducted cooperatively with the USSR, Poland,
Canada, FRG and GDR on a bimonthly basis in the Atlantic. A detailed
list of cooperative surveys for 1978 is shown in Figure 1.
A second type of survey focuses on the abundance and distribution of
fish and shellfish'species which live at or near the bottom when they
reach harvestable size, (e.g., cod, flounder, scallop, lobster, crab,
and shrimp). Bottom survey operations (S-II-Ground Fish Appendix II)
are conducted with several foreign nations in the Northwest Atlantic
from Greenland to Cape Hatteras (Figure 2), and under contract with the
State of South Carolina from Cape Hatteras to the Florida Keys. Two
NOAA fleet vessels, the Albatross IV and the Delaware II, support MARMAP
surveys. Surveys are also conducted by charter vessels from states,
universities, and private industry.
Fishery Analysis /
Assessing the condition of fisheries resources and making forecasts
requires analysis of data collected from commercial and recreational
fisheries and from resource surveys. These statistical analyses of
population dynamics and ecology make possible the measurement of fishing
228
-------
•
IsJ
VO
\
„-
A
m MARMAP SURVEYS IS 11
SPRING, SUMMER, & FALL
T_ __,- ^ x ^_
-jj^ A^ "b A° ^<
X \
Figure 2.
-------
and natural mortality rates, and of annual changes in abundance caused
by fishing or environmental changes. These analyses are used to construct
yield curves and population models, to make stock abundance forecasts,
and to produce status-of-stock reports for input to management decisions.
MARMAP reports include two nationwide summaries, one on the annual
conditions of the principal stocks off the US coasts that provides
assessment information on 31 species and groups encompassing 99% of the
volume and value of the US marine fishery resource. The other is a
summary of annual environmental changes that have actual or potential
effect on the distribution and abundance of fish stocks. Assessments
are based on a series of investigations which begin with the identification
of a resource, its distribution, and number of component stocks and
precedes through measurement of mortality rates and other parameters.
The synthesis of such data provides the basis for yield forecasts and
management recommendations. MARMAP assessments are provided to the
newly established Fishery Management Councils, international, State-
Federal and industry commissions, and associations charged witlr the
development or management of the various fisheries. Assessments are
made both on individual species and on the total biomass. In addition,
approximately 400 technical and scientific reports are produced annually
which provide assessments of fish species and the more abundant plant
and invertebrate populations that support the fish stocks of the region.
Fishery Oceanography
,a
Changes in physical and chemical properties of the ocean (currents,
temperature, nutrients, etc.) affect not only long-term yields and
annual abundances of fish stocks, but also their distribution. The
impacts of man's activities (fishing, pollution, environmental modification)
and of natural environmental processes on the annual production of fish
crops need to be accurately predicted. MARMAP oceanography activities
include the analyses of physical, chemical, and biological oceanographic
data collected during MARMAP surveys and from oceanographic research
activities of other agencies. Special MARMAP studies are conducted with
the USSR to obtain organic production and larval survival data and to
develop ecosystem models for the Northwest Atlantic.
Physiological Effects of Pollution
Research for environmental management provides information on the natural
variability and pollution caused by man's activities in the Northwest and
Middle Atlantic. This information obtained by NMFS/NEFC program called
Ocean Pulse comes from conducting baseline studies of the occurrence of
marine contaminants and their effects on commercially, recreationally, and/or
ecologically important species, and from monitoring changes in water move-
ments, temperature, and dissolved oxygen concentrations. TheSe baseline
studies and monitoring efforts often include sewage sludge dump sites,
dredge spoils, industrial chemicals, power plant thermal effluents, and
oil spills, in order to determine the effects of site-specific contamination
on the health of the marine ecosystem and its fisheries resources.
230
-------
Ocean Pulse monitors the physiological condition of marine communities in
both clean and impacted areas up to six times annually (Figure 3). This
includes physiological, biochemical, behavioral, genetic and histopathologic
studies as well as systematic monitoring of pertinant environmental
variables. .Changes in condition due to stress caused by pollution can be
detected, characterized and evaluated against the long-term monitoring by
the MARMAP program.
•j
Short-term site-specific studies carried out in the wake of an oil spill
must be integrated with and compared to long-term population monitoring
baseline data supported by physiological effects studies if the impact of
acute events on an ecosystem are to be evaluated.
The principal research activities of NEFC are conducted within a divisional
matrix. A brief description of each of the Center operational elements is
given below and a summary is presented in Appendix III.
1. RESOURCE ASSESSMENT DIVISION
The role of the Resource Assessment Division is to assess the effects
of harvesting on fisheries resources. To do this assessment, the
Division estimates the relative and absolute abundances; spatial and
temporal distributions; and harvestable numbers, sizes, and weights of
finfish, shellfish, and crustaceans in the Northwest Atlantic; and
determines the productivity of these renewable marine"resources from
an ecosystem standpoint. To accomplish these tasks, the Division
analyzes both domestic and foreign data from commercial fisheries,
recreational fisheries, and research surveys. Additional economic and
biological studies provide data for modeling the fisheries to aid in
their management for optimum sustainable yield.
l.l Resource Surveys Investigation
Each fall, spring, and summer the Resource Surveys Investigation
surveys with bottom trawls the fisheries resources of the con-
tinental shelf from Nova Scotia to North Carolina. These surveys
are part of the Marine Monitoring, Assessment, and Prediction
(MARMAP) Program's Survey-II effort to document the relative
abundance and distribution of these resources in the area. Supple-
mentary surveys of the area occur regularly, many as cooperative
efforts with other nations that fish in the Northwest Atlantic.
These supplementary surveys often gather information that is not
gathered in the semiannual surveys such as the seasonal/area!
distribution of surf clams.
The standard data that are recorded on these various surveys are the
length, weight, age, and maturity of the fish, and the temperature
and depth of the water where captured. Ichthyoplankton samples and
other hydrographic data are also often collected. Such data reveal
changes in the size, composition, or structure of the fisheries
resource. Some of the important species for which these data are
231
-------
Figure 3. Tentative Sampling locations for the Ocean Pulse Program
76° 74° 72° 70° 68° 66°
\° —
- 44'
-42°
-40'
Stressed Areas
hronic oil spill area, offing of southern terainus of
Portland to Montreal pipeline.
2. Site of 7 million gallon no. 6 oil from ftrco "a'-craRt.
December 1976.
3. Deepwater site for dumping waste chemicals, heavy
metals, nuclides, and sludge.
4. Shoal water site for dumping municipal sludges.
5. Acid dumping grounds.
6, Highly eutrophic area in offing of Chesapeake Say.
Unstressed Areas
7. Unstressed, natural area, habitat of Pandalid shrinp
and groundfish stocks.
8. Spawning area (herring), unstressed natural area.
9, Hater mass (slope water intrusion).
10. Currents, water masses (NKFS current meter array,
slope water intrusion).
11. Uater mass (labracor Coastal —> Slope water).
12. Spawning area (haddock-herring).
13. Depth (1500 m% canyon), water mass (thermal
front), fish coiiniunHics (apex predators).
14. Spawning area (haddock, cod, yellowtail flounder).
15. Currents (advcction), nutrients (upwelling),
spawning area (haddock).
16. Industrial fish community habitat.
17. Water mass (slope water interface), current
regime (UlOl Site "0" current muuresenu).
18. Nutrient load, populated area (river effluent),
bottom type (river effluent seOiirents).
19. Biological-physical parameters (0» minimum),
shellfish coi'Liunity habitat,
20. Depth (Norfolk Canyon, 1000 n), water mass
(thereat front), fish cotrunitics (apex predators).
76°
74°
I
72°
-36=
-36C
70°
68°
66"
232
-------
collected are haddock, Atlantic cod, yellowtail flounder,
silver hake, red hake, white hake, Atlantic herring, Atlantic
mackerel, spiny dogfish, long-finned squid, and American lobster.
To complement the bottom trawl surveys, the investigation works
on the development of hydroacoustical methods to survey pelagic
fishes. Such work ranges from the study of the echo strength
and pattern of a given size and species of fish, to the correla-
tion of the hydroacoustical survey of an area with the actual
net catches of fish from that area.
Finally, the investigation researches and develops systems for
improving the efficiency of such surveys. One system currently
under study will automatically log data while at sea. This
automatic data logger records data systematically from on-board,
automatic sensors, and stores them on magnetic tape in a form
that can be directly interpreted by digital computers once on
shore. Such a system permits an instantaneous correlation of
biological data with physical and chemical data.
1.2 Age and Growth Investigation
The objective of this investigation is to determine species/stock
growth rates and the age compositions of both the harvested and
total populations. Information on this aspect of the population
dynamics of various species/stocks is needed to assess produc-
tivities of species/stocks of the Northwest and Middle Atlantic.
The investigation also works on the development of systems to aid
in its research such as a computerized system for automatically
determining age and growth from scales and otoliths. Among the
species aged in this investigation are bluefish, butterfish, haddock,
yellowtail flounder, Atlantic herring, Atlantic cod, silver hake,
redfish, pollock, white hake, and Atlantic mackerel.
1.3 Fisheries Statistics Investigation
Fisheries statisticians perform both data reduction and data
analysis. These data come from catch and effort statistics of
research surveys and recreational and commercial fisheries, and
from biological statistics of fish sampled in such surveys and
fisheries. Foreign surveys and fisheries also contribute data
for the reduction and analysis processes. Itfith this information
the investigation assesses the size, composition, and structure
of the individual fish stocks and the total fish biomass of the
Northwest and Middle Atlantic.
These assessments form the basis for a finer analysis. The
investigational staff analyzes the effects of different fisheries
management regimes such as optimum sustainable yield on the stocks
and biomass. The researchers also evaluate the effects of differ-
ent levels of catch and effort on the fishing mortality of a given
233
-------
stock. Since these analyses and evaluations often require the
analysis and evaluation of the ecosystem as a whole, this investiga-
tion relies heavily upon other investigations for information on
the various aspects of the ecosystem.
1.4 Fisheries Socioeconomics Investigation
The Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 requires that
the optimum sustainable yield of a fishery be determined by
modifying the estimate of maximum sustainable yield by "relevant
economic, social, or ecological factors." The Fisheries Socio-
economics Investigation establishes and maintains a socioeconomic
data base and conducts the analyses needed to define optimum
sustainable yields, surpluses, and allocations of fisheries
resources to both commercial and recreational interests. The
investigation develops economic profiles for various fisheries,
including the economic value of the fishery, the recreational and
commercial income of the fishery, and the capacity for harvesting
and processing the catch. Econometric models are also constructed
to evaluate the economic consequences of various management options.
Sociological factors are a significant component of these models.
1.5 Sandy Hook Investigation
Several of the Resource Assessment Division's key people operate
out of the Sandy Hook Laboratory. These people serve as a critical
link to personnel and problems in the Middle Atlantic area by
performing a variety of' the duties with the Division in that area.
Currently, these individuals are analyzing data from a creel
survey of party and charter boats in New Jersey to estimate
biostatistics from that important recreational fishery and to
develop improved survey techniques. They are also monitoring
specific fisheries, such as a study of the Middle Atlantic fisheries
for the Atlantic cod and an investigation of fecundity and other
biological parameters for the Atlantic mackerel and the Atlantic
croaker. Sandy Hook individuals are also deeply involved in
developing mid-water trawling procedures for monitoring inshore
summer fish abundances.
1.6 Fisheries Analysis Investigation
This investigation focuses on modeling both the population and
ecosystem dynamics of the commercially, recreationally, and
ecologically Important fishes in the Northwest and Middle Atlantic.
Of the traditional fields of population dynamics—population size,
age-growth, mortality-yield, and stock-recruitment—the first three
undergo primary study by other investigations in the Division
(Resource Surveys, Age and Growth, and Fisheries Statistics,
respectively). The Fisheries Analysis Investigation integrates
the results of these studies and primarily or secondarily investi-
gates all four fields.
234
-------
For the ecosystem dynamics approach, the staff considers the
effects of natural and man-made environmental factors on
Interspecific competition and any resultant changes in the
size, composition, or structure of the biomass. Socioeconomic
interactions developed by the preceding investigation are also
included in these fisheries models to aid fisheries managers in
determining optimum yields.
2. MARINE ECOSYSTEMS DIVISION
Studies of the population dynamics of each species within a fishery
do not by themselves provide the necessary information to manage
effectively a multispecies fishery, especially one in which the
sought-after species occupy different trophic levels. It is important
to understand the population dynamics of individual species, but it
is also important to understand the effect that the change in the
distribution, abundance, and age structure of one species has on the
other species in the ecosystem.
The 50$ decrease in the number of finfish off the Northeast and
Middle Atlantic States during the past decade, principally due to
increased fishing effort, raises some significant questions. Does
the reduction due to fishing of major predatory species such as
Atlantic mackerel, haddock, Atlantic herring, yellowtail flounder,
and Atlantic cod release major prey species such as certain zoo-
pi ankters to be consumed by shorter-lived, faster-growing, smaller-
sized, and less desirable predatory species? And, what are the
probabilities of a return of over-exploited fish species to former.
abundance levels and former habitats?
Studies in the Marine Ecosystems Division address these questions.
The studies focus on the critical links between the principal sources
of fish food and the survival, recruitment, and productivity of the
principal fish stocks sought after by fishermen.. The availability
of fish stocks to domestic fishermen is an end product of a complex
series of events and interactions located: at the ocean bottom with
the benthic food of groundfishes; in the water column with the zoo-
planktonic food of pelagic fishes; and in the changing physics and
chemistry of moving water and weather conditions.
2.1 Ichthyoplankton Investigation.
Ichthyoplankton studies deal with the community dynamics of
larval fishes in the Continental Shelf waters from western Hova
Scotia to northern North Carolina. To understand these com-
munity dynamics, the ichthyoplankton biologists are investigating
the factors that control species dominance in larval fish
communities, including the influences of competition, predatlon,
and hydrography. The staff has the principal responsibility
for preparing annual forecasts of changes in the abundance
levels of the principal fish species 1n the area.
235
-------
Another area of responsibility of the investigation is to conduct
and coordinate the ichthyoplankton surveys of NOAA's Marine
Monitoring, Assessment, and Prediction Program (MARMAP). This
coordination involves interaction with American universities and
state agencies participating in the program, as well as several
foreign nations (Poland, Soviet Union, East Germany, and West
Germany). The investigational staff serves in a liaison capacity
and monitors the ichthyoplankton sorting in the Polish-American
Plankton Sorting Center in Szczecin, Poland.
The staff provides annual abundance indices of ichthyoplankton
and the spawning biomass of selected species. They develop
taxonomic keys for the identification of larval fishes, prepare
monography on diagnostic features of fish developmental stages
from egg through juvenile, and coordinate all NEFC taxonomic
studies with the National Systematics Laboratory.
2.2 Benthic Dynamics Investigation
The Benthic Dynamics Investigation monitors and predicts changes
in the kinds, abundances, and availability of food organisms
for such bottom-dwelling fishes as Atlantic cod, haddock, and
yellowtail flounder, and for such open-water fishes as Atlantic
herring and Atlantic mackerel. The investigation studies the
consequences of such changes in benthic food organisms on the
distribution and production of demersal and pelagic fish stocks
in the Georges Bank Gulf of Maine, and Mid-Atlantic Bight
ecosystems. Staff members identify and enumerate important
benthic food organisms, and define their environmental require-
ments and interrelationships with important fish stocks in the
area. Another area of interest is the study of the trophodynamic
relationships between pelagic and demersal species, focusing on
the role of competition as a contributor to species dominance.
2.3 Plankton Ecology Investigation
The thrust of this research is the study of the influences of
the abundance and availability of zooplanktonic prey on the
major pelagic and demersal fish populations on the Continental
Shelf, including such commercially, recreationally, and ecologically
important fish stocks as the Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic herring,
silver and red hakes, pollock, and sand launce. Specific
research activities include: (1) the preparation of bimonthly
indices of zooplanktonic abundance from western Nova Scotia to
Cape Hatteras; (2) investigation of the mesoscale and microscale
relationships between zooplanktonic production and larval fish
236
-------
survival; (3) monitoring area! and seasonal changes in zooplank-
tonic prey availability along the migration routes of Atlantic
herring and Atlantic mackerel as part of a study of the factors
controlling areal and seasonal availability and abundance of the
biomass of these stocks; (4) investigation of the impact of
changes in the composition and abundance of the zooplanktonic
biomass on the productivity of fish in the Georges Bank, Gulf
of Maine, and Mid-Atlantic Bight ecosystems; and (5) monitoring
effects of seasonal and annual changes of currents and water
masses on the distribution and abundances of zooplankton and
their predators.
In addition, staff personnel serve as the principal liaisons in
the ongoing joint studies of secondary production with the Soviet
Union, poland, and West Germany, as well as oversee the operations
of the Polish-American Plankton Sorting Center. The staff also
develops and operates an electronic data processing system for
quality-controlled data storage and analysis of zooplankton and
ichthyoplankton data collected by the NEFC and other cooperating
groups.
2.4 Larval Physiology Investigation
The Larval Physiology Investigation studies the energetics of
larval fishes. Through laboratory experimentation and field
studies the larval fish physiologists develop theories of larval
growth and survival. Laboratory experiments look at, among other
things, the effects of changes in the densities of zooplanktonic
prey on the survival rates of larval fishes under controlled
temperature conditions. Other studies focus on the linkages,
both theoretical and actual, between the survival of larvae and
the recruitment of harvestable-sized individuals into the fishery
for such popular species as haddock, Atlantic cod, yellowtail
flounder, winter flounder, and scup.
2.5 Apex Predators Investigation
This NEFC research effort looks at the effects of changes in the
biomass of large predators, including sharks, tunas, and billfishes,
on the commercially, recreationally, and ecologically important
stocks of finfishes in the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, and the
Mid-Atlantic Bight ecosystems. Species-specific studies of apex
predators deal with age-growth relationships, mortality rates,
population recruitment, migratory behavior and patterns, and
trophodynamics as they relate to requirements for growth and
reproduction. The investigational staff works closely with
fishermen by: (1) conducting extensive tagging experiments in
cooperation with recreational and commercial fishermen from
Maine to North Carolina; (2) serving as the principal liaison
between the NEFC and recreational fishermen in the same region;
and (3) monitoring the annual changes in abundances of certain
237
-------
shark populations through in-depth studies of catch data from
fishing tournaments conducted off the Northeast and Middle Atlantic
States. In addition, the staff coordinates cooperative studies
on apex predators with other governmental agencies, private
groups, and foreign countries such as Poland, Canada, West Germany,
and the Soviet Union.
2.6 Oceanography Investigation
Migrations of fish are not random, but are initiated and guided by
environmental cues. Although fisheries scientists have been
moderately successful in describing the movements of pelagic and
demersal species in response to environmental changes, they have
been less successful in forecasting the specific times and places
(patterns) of fish movements. To forecast such fish movements,
the Oceanography Investigation monitors currents, temperatures,
salinities, and movements of water masses and water types to
understand the influences of such oceanographic conditions on
movements of those species that contribute significantly to the
fish biomass (Atlantic herring, Atlantic mackerel, Atlantic cod,
etc.). Research focuses on those environmental conditons that
optimize survival and growth of the dominant finfishes in the
Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, and the Mid-Atlantic Bight ecosystems.
Observations are made on two scales, mesoscale and microscale.
The mesoscale MARMAP surveys from western Nova Scotia to Cape
Hatteras occur six times a year. Such mesoscale observations are
made at sufficient intervals to monitor the movements of such
fishes as the Atlantic herring, Atlantic mackerel, and Atlantic
cod, and their zooplanktonic prey. Microscale studies are
conducted within a given water mass to define the oceanographic
factors controlling the dispersal and survival of fish eggs and
-larvae at selected spawning sites. Even slight changes in the
transport of larval fishes by currents can influence the size
of a species' entire incoming year class. Studies are also
conducted on the effects of warm-core rings from the Gulf Stream
and fluctuations in slope water on the oceanography of the three
ecosystems mentioned above.
The investigational staff also serves as the principal liaison be-
tween NEFC fisheries oceanography studies and cooperative
investigations conducted with other governmental agencies, private
groups, and foreign nations (Soviet Union, West Germany, East
Germany, and Canada). Additionally, periodic reports of
anomalous oceanographic conditions are provided to the fishing
industry and other interested parties.
2.7 Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation
This investigation develops recruitment models for both pelagic
and demersal fish species, including haddock, Atlantic cod,
238
-------
yellowtail flounder, Atlantic herring,,and Atlantic mackerel.
Models of larval fish behavior are also developed to assess the
effects of variations of larval and juvenile growth and mortality
on these stock-recruitment relationships. The information
-generated by these studies permits the development of candidate
models of the marine ecosystem. The models are then compared
with the empirical structure, standing crop, and production of
specific finfish and benthic invertebrate communities. The
models of selected population processes and biological interactions
are used to provide practical advice to fisheries managers in the
Northwest and Middle Atlantic.
Multispecies models are developed that take into account the
energy requirements of the major fish populations under different
simulated management regimes. These studies will lead to the
development of more efficient management strategies for dealing
with the three principal marine ecosystems of interest, the Gulf
of Maine, Georges Bank, and the Mid-Atlantic Bight. Initial
emphasis is on the development of a mass energy model for Georges
Bank. Refinements of this model will be made over the next
several years.
3.' RESOURCE UTILIZATION DIVISION
This major NEFC resource component assists the American fishing industry
and consuming public in increasing the quantity and improving the
quality of finfish and shellfish products. By working closely with
representatives of the fishing industry and consuming public, the
Resource Utilization Division applies available technology towards
increasing the production of commercially processed fish and finds
ways to use the large variety of relatively unused marine species. To
improve the quality of seafoods and assure their safety, staff members
study the changes that occur during storage, and design various handling
processing, and preservation techniques that reduce adverse changes
and enhance desirable characteristics in the product. The Division
also coordinates the fisheries engineering and conservation gear
development programs within the NEFC.
3.1 Shellfish Resource Development Investigation
The primary purpose of this investigation is to develop new or
modified methods of handling, processing, and preserving shellfish
for increasing yields and improving economics. Current activities
include the development of: (1) a new technique for roller
extraction of crabmeat that covers all phases of processing and
product quality; (2) a method for identifying erabmeat to species;
(3) handling and processing methods for underutilized offshore
crab species (red crab, rock crab, and Jonah crab); (4) a test
to determine the amount of shell fragments in crabmeat; and (5) more
efficient processing methods for squid including handling at sea,
grading, skinning, eviscerating, stripping, and new product
239
-------
development. A secondary purpose of the investigation is to
provide technical advice to the blue crab and oyster industries.
3.2 Finnish Resource Development Investigation
This investigation attempts to develop or modify methods of handling,
processing, and preserving all types of finfish for increasing
yields and improving economics. The investigation contracts with
industry to evaluate the effectiveness and commercial potential of
prototype machines to handle silver hake, or whiting, that are
smaller than can now be processed economically.
Another study seeks to upgrade the value of silver hake by develop-
ing new products and new product forms. Studies of three new
silver hake products are currently underway. The investigation
guarantees some fresh New England fillets as "US Grade A" to
determine the effort needed to assure consumers of quality, how
much consumers will pay for the guarantees, and the cost of such
guarantees. Other tasks include research into the effects of
feeding animals with irradiated fish, and on the future of
irradiators in fish preservation.
3.3 Resource Engineering Development Investigation
This investigation is a mechanical engineering support of fisheries
development activities. Since there are presently no mechanized
processing lines for underutilized species like silver hake,
long-finned squid, red hake, goosefish, and ocean pout, the staff
adapts and modifies presently available machines or designs and
builds new machines to accomplish this task. Ongoing projects
include: (1) developing a device to meter additives to minced
flesh; (2) designing and building a machine for eviscerating and
skinning squid; (3) designing and building a machine for grading
any species into several size categories; and (4) designing and
building a machine for sorting a mixed bag of fish into three
selected size categories. This Investigation is also concerned
with the development of fishing gear to improve efficiency,
selectivity, and safety, and to protect the quality of the catch.
Typical developments include a quick-release branchline clip for
longlining, an improved trawl door hook-up, a trap that discon-
tinues its ability to operate when it is lost, and a removable
deck-block mounting pad.
3.4 Product Standardization Investigation
The development of standards and specifications of quality for
fisheries products is the principal goal of the Product Standardi-
zation Investigation. Current efforts involve the development of
standards for minced fish blocks, shrimp, and fillets, and fulfilling
assignments for the "Codex" international standards as designated
by NMFS.. Standards are developed according to the following
steps: (1) conduct an industry survey, (2) prepare a draft of /
/
240
-------
proposed standards and distribute to interested parties;
(3) resolve any comments and publish the proposed standards in
the "Federal Register"; (4) after amendment of the proposed
standards based on the comments, republisb them in the "Federal
Register"; and (5) upon finalization of the standards, Kiake
available instructions and other inspection aids for using
them. Another goal of the investigation is to recommend or
develop if necessary standardized analytical procedures for
evaluating the criteria of the standards.
3.5 Product Quality Investigation
This investigation tries to solve the problem of quality deteriora-
tion of fisheries products that results in resource and economic
losses. The diminishing supply of frozen Atlantic cod blocks
has stimulated industry interest in minced silver hake as a
substitute. However, minced silver hake"can become rancid and
tough during frozen storage. This task minimizes this quality
deterioration through proper packaging, storing at optimal
temperatures, using chemical additives, or combinations thereof.
Certain parameters such as fat content which vary seasonally
are studied to determine their effects on storage stability.
Because the mincing operation provides an excellent chance for
microbial contamination, surveys are made on the microbial and
organoleptic qualities of commercially minced blocks to aid in
establishing standards.
3.6 Product Safety Investigation
Within this study investigators determine the possible chemical
hazards in fisheries products that can result from processing or
environmental conditions. One class of chemicals under study is
the volatile N-nitrosamines, potent carcinogenic compounds that
have been found in many varieties of cured foodstuffs ranging from
pork products to fish. These chemicals are formed by the action
of nitrite preservatives on amines occurring naturally in food.
Marine fish can contain significant quantities of amines which
can react with nitrites encountered either during processing or
possibly from industrial contamination of their environment. In
previous N-nitrosamine studies, hot-smoked sablefish, hot-smoked
salmons, and hot-smoked whitefishes were tested to determine the
effectiveness of sodium nitrite in inhibiting the outgrowth and
toxin production of the bacterium Clostridium botulinum. types A
and E. After defining the inhibitory range of sodium nitrite,
more detailed experiments were conducted to show the minimum level
of nitrite needed to inhibit the bacterium. Samples from these
experiments are now being analyzed by a multidetection method
that identifies 14 volatile N-nitrosamines found in foods.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DIVISION
This NEFC effort concentrates on the physical, chemical, and biologi-
cal interactions which affect the estuarine, coastal, and marine
241
-------
environments of the Northwest and Middle Atlantic. Research
stresses the impact of man's activities on the productivity
and biomass of benthic, demersal, and pelagic organisms. The
Division emphasizes the effects of these activities on the
interrelations between biotic and abiotic elements of the
environment. Results of these studies document the impact of
man on commercial and recreational stocks and their forage
species. Behavioral, physiological, and biochemical studies
determine both subtle shifts in normal behavior and biological
processes which can indicate sublethal but significant damage
to resource reproduction, recruitment, feeding, migration, and
other activities.
4.1 Environmental Chemistry Investigation
This investigation studies the temporal.and spatial distributions
of toxic chemicals, their environmental life spans, their
cycles through food chains, and their effects upon the biology,
habitats, and uses of marine resources. Emphasis is currently
on heavy metals and petroleum-derived and ha!ogenated hydrocarbons
like DDT and RGBs. To monitor the presence of trace metals,
routine measurements of their concentrations are taken in
various finfish and shellfish species from intertidal and
coastal waters; in apex predators collected from Deepwater
Dumpsite 106; in water; and in sediments, organic debris, and
other solid components of the marine environment. Measurements
are also taken of trace metals in various tissues, gametes,
and other cell types from organisms exposed to known lethal
and sublethal levels of toxic metals. The hydrocarbon research
consists primarily of the measurement of petroleum-derived and
halogenated hydrocarbons in Middle Atlantic and Gulf of Maine
species in waters contaminated by urban, industrial, and
agricultural wastes and runoffs. The data gathered by this
effort are used to model the movement of these potentially
toxic materials through benthic, demersal, and pelagic food
webs.
4.2 Biological Oceanography of Stressed Environments Investigation
The objective of this study is to determine the effects of urban
areas upon adjacent estuarine, coastal, and marine ecosystems and
their species. This program began in the Lower Hudson Estuary and
New York Bight Apex and has expanded to cover the entire Con-
tinental Shelf from Cape Hatteras to Georges Bank. Studies under
various conditions of river flow, temperature, planktonic blooms,
and metabolic activity will show the extent and magnitude of the
effects of New York City and other metropolitan areas on Continen-
tal Shelf waters. The investigation studies phytoplankton pro-
ductivity and standing stocks, species ecology and diversity,
nutrient levels, hydrography, rates of water column and seabed
oxygen consumption and organic matter decomposition, bacteriology,
and contaminant identification. Surveillance and laboratory
activities stress the frequent recurrence of phytoplankton blooms.
242
-------
Emphasized in these activities are nutritional and physiological
capacities of causative organisms, and phytoplankton succession
and bloom development in response to nutrient supplies from
pollution.
The work of the investigation is broken up into four different,
but interrelated efforts. First are studies of production rates,
photoassimilated carbon cycles, and phytoplankton standing stock
variations. The investigational staff relates-the data from these
studies to man-made and natural sources of nutrients and pollutants
in the Mid-Atlantic Bight. Ultimately, this research will define
the relationships between primary productivity and the abundance
of finfish and shellfish resources on the one hand, and between
waterborne toxins and the distribution of such resources on the
other hand. Second, analyses take place on the causes and effects
of plankton- blooms. Among these analyses are studies of the
macronutrient and micronutrient" requirements of dinoflagellates
involved in red tides, fish kills, and other bloom-induced
phenomena. The investigation monitors and describes such plankton
blooms and associated physical and chemical factors to determine
the impacts upon various marine resources. Third, the staff looks
into oxygen utilization by sediments and waters polluted with such
organic materials as sewage sludge, dredging spoil, and petroleum.
The uptake rates are correlated with temporal and spatial distri-
butions and standing stocks of benthic, demersal, and pelagic
organisms. . And fourth, the investigation determines the cell
numbers and identities of significant aerobic bacteria in the ,
Mid-Atlantic Bight. Such determinations qualitatively document
the health of this ecosystem and reveal the functions of micro-
organisms in the marine environment. The metabolic rates of this
heterotrophic activity are compared, particularly on a long-term
basis, with the presence of various organic contaminants and the
occurrence of various environmental factors.
/
4.3 Physiological Effects of Pollutant Stress Investigation
This investigation determines how and to what degree pollutants,
individually and in combination, affect various marine animals
at different life stages. New laboratory rearing techniques permit
studies of pollutant effects upon embryonic, larval, and juvenile
stages, as well as upon the adult stage which has been the focus
of most past research.
The gradual reduction or elimination of a species by sublethal
levels of pollutants is no less serious than the demise caused,
by lethal levels. Possibly it is more serious, since sublethal
effects are less likely to be detected and traced to their source
before irreparable damage has occurred. The decreased productivity
of fish stocks due to sublethal pollutant exposures that impair growth,
reproduction, and survival is a principal concern of this inves-
tigation.
243
-------
These effects are slow and do not cause Immediately obvious
changes in populations, but cause subtle alterations in physio-
logical functions, and behavior that affect migration patterns,
responses to temperature change, egg viability, and/or growth
rates. The results are slow changes in reproductive rates and
population sizes. Because chemical contaminants occur in the
marine environment at higher concentrations than those that have
been shown to cause adverse effects in the laboratory, it is
probable that these pollutants are now adversely affecting the
productivity of important fish, shellfish, and crustacean
populations.
Accordingly, staff members research the physiology and biochemistry
of selected species of marine animals common to the Mid-Atlantic
Bight and other Northwest and Middle Atlantic environments, and
determine experimentally the effects of.heavy metals on their
survival, development, and normal life functions. They have
established tolerance ranges and the sublethal concentrations at
which metabolic disturbances can be detected in embryonic, larval,
juvenile, and adult stages of mollusks, crustaceans, and finfish,
particularly those of commercial, recreational, and ecological
importance. Biological models may be useful in future evaluations
of pollutant-related stresses in marine environments, and this
investigation will provide the necessary input for these models.
This investigation is also concerned with those microorganisms
capable of growing under reduced oxygen tension (anaerobic
conditions) in the fisheries environment and on living marine
resources. The major goal is to determine the presence of
pollutant and disease-producing anaerobes in the fisheries
environment, their persistence and cycling through the food
chain, and other possible interrelated toxin transfer mechanisms
and chemical conversion mechanisms which can adversely affect
fish stocks and their habitats.
4.4 Behavior of Marine Fishes and Invertebrates investigation
To define the physical, chemical, and biological requirements of
marine fishes, this investigation studies species behavior and
ecology in both the field and laboratory. Research concerns the
role of various environmental/factors in the life habits of
selected species, how man-made and natural modifications of the
environment affect those life habits, and the capabilities of
species to detect and avoid potentially lethal conditions.
Field studies focus on feeding habits, habitat requirements,
relationships with different substrates, seasonal patterns of
activity, distributions, and interspecific and intraspecific
relationships of such inshore demersal species as tautog, cunner,
and winter flounder. These studies help to define life habits and
environmental requirements of various life stages of each species.
Laboratory researchers record normal activity, feeding, and social
244
-------
behavior (aggression, territonality, and reproduction) in such
species as adult tautog, cunner, red hake, juvenile bluefish, and
other finfish, as well as physicosensory and chemosensory responses.
in such brachyuran crustaceans as blue crabs. Data from this
research define the effects of environmental conditions and
stresses on life habits, recruitment, and survival. Another task
pools previous research findings on normal behavior to gauge the
effects of selected environmental stresses on schooling, feeding,
and activity in juvenile striped mullet and bluefish, and on
territoriality, feeding, reproduction, and activity in adult
tautog and brachyuran crustaceans.
4.5 Coastal Monitoring, Assessment, and Prediction Investigation
The Coastal Monitoring, Assessment, arid Prediction (COMAP)
Investigation routinely surveys the fish, plankton, and benthos of
the inner coastal region (20-100 meters"in depth) from Block
Island Sound to the Bay of Fundy. Among other things, these
monitoring surveys assess the impact of man's activities on the
inshore environment and its organisms. Specifically, staff
^ members make these assessments by noting changes in the distribution
and relative abundance of fish and invertebrate species in response
to changes in the physical and chemical environment. These
environmental changes range from oil spills, to thermal pollution, to
disposal of dredging spoils. Investigators also collect data on
recruitment mechanisms for such commercially important species as
American lobster, Atlantic herring, Atlantic mackerel, and winter
flounder. They also assess the inshore distribution and relative
abundance of species sampled semiannually in NEFC offshore bottom
trawl surveys.
A significant and increasing portion of COMAP activities involves
serving as an NEFC liaison to individuals and groups (such as the
New England Fisheries Development Program) with diverse interests
in inshore waters. COMAP cooperates with outside scientists in
assessing fish stocks off the Northeast and .Middle Atlantic States,
and reviews research proposals by the private sector for siting and
impact studies for power plants, dredging spoil disposal areas,
and other operations that could potentially adversely affect fish
stocks and other renewable marine resources,
4.6 Coastal Ecosystems Investigation
The major objective of this investigation is to collect baseline
geological, physical, chemical, and biological data to assess
changes in benthic and demersal populations in Long Island Sound,
Gulf of Maine, and Mid-Atlantic Bight estuaries and coastal zones.
The program is integrated among state, interstate, and other
federal research organizations. In the estuarine research, the
investigation emphasizes population studies. Long Island and
245
-------
Block Island Sounds, Ran'tan and Delaware Bays, and numerous
smaller embayments of the Mid-Atlantic Bight are the primary
study areas. The invest!gational staff works on the interrela-
tionships between various benthic and demersal species that live
all or part of their lives in the estuaries. The staff also
models the pollutant pathways, from contaminated embayments to
coastal zones.
In the separate but related research on coastal zones, the
investigation studies those offshore populations in the Mid-
Atlantic Bight that are affected by ocean disposal of sewage
sludge, dredging spoils, and industrial wastes; by energy develop-
ment; and riverine runoff from the Hudson and Delaware Rivers.
This population information helps to document the causes and
effects of extensive coastal anoxic conditions. The investigation
also compiles data on contamination of Northwest and Middle
Atlantic waters by various bordering states, and'provides this
information to various international organizations involved with
the fisheries resources and water quality of the area.
5. AQUACULTURE DIVISION
The effects of nutrition, pollutants, and genetic processes upon
growth and survival of commercially important marine species are the
research responsibility of this Division. Studies concern the algal
food nutrition, genetic selection, and disease and predator control
associated with larval molluscan culture.
5.1 Spawning and Rearing of Mollusks Investigation
Oyster culture methods are adapted for the hatchery cultivation
of other commercially important bivalves. This research and
development program progresses logically from gametogenesis,
through spawning the adults, rearing the larvae and growing the
post-set stage immediately after metamorphosis, to growing the
juveniles. The bay scallop and surf clam are currently being
studied because of their potential for aquaculture.
5.2 Aspects of Nutritional Requirements of Mollusks Investigation
A priority of the research into commercial aquaculture methods is
the development of an economical and nutritional supplement to
the diets of animals in an aquacultural program. The investigation
contributes to that cause by: (1) assisting in problem solving;
(2) introducing innovative procedures; (3) studying phytoplankton
food-chain organisms; and (4) researching molluscan food utiliza-
tion. Another task is the support of all the molluscan research
N projects by providing a high quality and large quantity of algal
food.
246
-------
5.3 Aquacultural Genetics Investigation
This investigation develops genetic information to answer the
questions of industry on how to develop profitable strains of
hatchery shellfish. The investigation also advises industry on
various aspects of aquacultural breeding without specific requests.
A major goal of the program in aquacultural genetics is the
creation of special gene pools at NMFS laboratories or under NMFS
auspices. Industry and consumers would benefit from the improved
management of wild shellfish beds that would result from the
increased knowledge of the genetic potentials of wild shellfish
populations based on studies of the special gene pools.
5.4 Control of Molluscan Disease Investigation
This investigation's work is an integral part of the NEFC's
research on shellfish aquaculture. However, by the nature of the
scientific expertise needed to conduct the investigation's research
activities, the research is supervised by the Pathobiology Division.
Thus, two Divisions are directly involved in this investigation.
Molluscan disease research focuses on the prevention, diagnosis,
and control of disease, particularly in hatcheries and nurseries.
Objectives are to: (1) monitor, isolate, identify, and culture
micropathogens, and characterize their pathologic effects; (2)
determine mechanisms of micropathogen transmission, penetration,
infectivity, and host specificity; (3) study qualitatively and
quantitatively micropathogen activity and host responses; and (4)
evaluate the use of various chemicals including ozone gas to
deactivate biotoxins and control micropathogens. A primary use
of these methods is in the study of diseases of larval moll usks.
The investigation seeks to develop physical methods, including
ionization, to eliminate microbial pathogens and toxins in larval
mollusks. The investigators on this project also provide con-
sultation to industry and Sea Grant institutions involved in
aquaculture.
6. PATHQBIQLOGY DIVISION
The Division works with all aspects of diseases, infectio us and
noninfectious, biotic and nonbiotic, that affect marine resources.
Not only is there an emphasis on the impacts of diseases on marine
populations, but also on the influence of natural and man-made
environmental factors on the occurrence of those diseases.
6.1 Disease and Environmental Stress Investigation
Disease, environmental changes, and pollutant stress act syner-
gistically with those factors that induce death in marine poikilo-
therms. For this reason the investigation studies the pathologic
247
-------
effects on marine organisms caused by natural and man-made changes
to marine ecosystems. Such man-made changes include habitat modi-
fication by ocean waste disposal, dredging activities, recreational
activities, and petroleum development. Field and laboratory*
research establishes the causes of death, abnormality, and tissue
and cellular pathosis (anatomical, physiological, and biochemical)
in the affected marine organisms. The investigation concentrates
on five specific research topics to achieve these goals. First,
fin rot disease is studied in the New York Bight. Researchers
try to determine the prevalence and pathogenesis of fin rot in
winter and summer flounders in the Bight. Trawl surveys and
entrapment studies provide the diseased specimens for histopatho-
logical examination. Second, immunity in marine fishes is
researched. The two principal goals of this study are to deter-
mine whether pollution reduces the immunity of fishes to bacterial
disease, and to correlate fish diseases with raised levels of
serum antibodies for specific bacteria in the fishes. The study
operates through examination of antibody responses and cellular
defenses of fishes in both the field and the laboratory. A
variety of immunological and cytochemical tests analyze systems
of fish immunity under the combined stress of pollutants and
bacteria. Third, the microstructure of normal and physiologically
stressed crabs, fish, and mollusks is studied. Normal and patho-
logic tissues of such species as blue crabs, winter flounder,
striped bass, and Atlantic mackerel are studied by electron
microscopy. In addition to examining organisms with naturally
occurring diseases, the staff also conducts experiments on new
pathological and immunological procedures. Fourth, the investiga-
tion catalogues, maintains, and provides curatorial and custodial
services for a permanent National Registry of Marine Pathology.
This registry contains type specimens, photographs, and published
literature on pathology in marine and estuarine poikilotherms.
Additions to the registry are gathered by solicitation of the
scientific community. Materials are available for study by
qualified scientific and technical workers. And fifth, diseases
.of commercially and recreationally important fish species are
studied histologically. The first objective of this research is
to determine the causes of mortality in various fishes. The
second objective is to analyze the lethal and sublethal effects of
introduced chemical contaminants upon various species and life
stages of fish.
6.2 Comparative Pathobiology Investigation
Infectious and noninfectious diseases limit the abundance, dis-
tribution, and utilization of marine organisms. Therefore, a
knowledge of the causes and effects of these diseases is funda-
mental for successful management of fisheries resources and
habitats. In this investigation, normal and abnormal organs,
tissues, and cells are intensively observed for comparative his-
tology, cytology, and epizootiology. Light and electron microscopy
reveal pathologic conditions induced experimentally, occurring
248
-------
naturally, or found in aquacultural processes. Micropathogen
activities are defined and described quantitatively and
qualitatively and infectious agents and microparasites are
identified and characterized.
To achieve these goals one of the first steps is to study the
health status of mollusks, crustaceans, and fish. For mollusks,
the investigation studies the microstructure of tumors, describes the
morphology and cytopathology of oyster viruses with light and
electron microscopy, and describes the microparasites of domestic
and exotic species. For crustaceans, most of the effort is on
blue crabs, rock crabs, and shrimp. Research on the crabs involves:
(1) the study of the epidemiology of viral infections; (2) the
study of the transmission mechanisms of protozoan viruses, and of
such protozoa as Paramoeba; and (3) the preparation of an atlas of
blue crab histology. With respect to shrimp, other crabs, and
lobsters, the staff concentrates on the pathobiology of the
exoskeleton and gills.
Another area of study within the investigation concerns the
microfauna associated with fish, crustaceans, and mollusks. Staff
members isolate and identify the protozoa of both the water column
and-sediments of the New York Bight, identify gill-fouling organ-
isms of'New York Bight crustaceans by microscopic examination of
stained gill sections, and determine the prevalence of sporozoan
parasites in the blood tissues of Atlantic mackerel and of other
parasites in other fish. '
6.3 Health of Ocean Finfish and Shellfish Investigation
The integrity of oceanic ecosystems is directly reflected in the
health and well-being of their inhabitants. Except in the most
unusual circumstances, the presence of healthy animals signifies
a healthy encironment and vice versa. Thus, the purpose of this
investigation is to assess comparatively the health of
several selected target species of ocean fisji, crustaceans, and
moll usks from selected ocean sites.
The presence and abundance of infectious microorganisms (viruses,
bacteria, and protozoa), some of which also produce highly toxic
substances, are magnified in unbalanced ecosystems. These
organisms can cause disease and abnormalities among resident
species either directly or indirectly as secondary invaders
acting in concert with other environmental stresses. Similarly,
the health of ocean species can be profoundly affected by man-
introduced noninfectious agents, such as petroleum and its
byproducts, various agricultural and industrial pollutants, and
substances leached from dredged materials.
Approaches used to ascertain the health of target species will
include; (1) studies of fish immune systems to determine if the
249
-------
animals produce the necessary defense mechanisms to combat or
overcome disease (that iss these mechanisms operate normally and
how they are affected 'by natural and man-induced stresses);
(2) observations on the prevalence of gross and microscopic
lesions and descriptions of same on the tissue, cellular, and
subcellular levels, using light and electron microscopy; (3) cyto-
chemical and clinical chemica-1 analyses of cellular and
humoral responses to infectious and noninfectious diseases; and
(4) use of microbial and cellular systems (bacteria, fungi, and
animal cell lines) for mutagenic and carcinogenic assays and for
indicators of pollution (viruses, bacteria, and protozoa).
7. MANNED UNDERSEA RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
The Manned Undersea Research and Technology (MURT) Program functions
as both an autonomous and support research group. MURT deals with
sampling needs and ecological studies that are difficult, costly, or
impossible with conventional surface research vessels. MURT's
dive team works to: (1) develop an efficient research diving capability
to and beyond the edge of the Continental Shelf with conventional and
advanced diving technology and research submersibles; (2) survey the
macrobenthos of the outer Continental Shelf; (3) study in situ the
early life stages of Atlantic herring and the ecological factors
affecting their eggs and larvae; (4) define the sampling efficiency of
standard surface-oriented sampling hardware; and (5) monitor the
abundance and ecology of bottom-oriented fauna and flora at specific
locations on the New England Continental Shelf as an index to ocean
health.
8. NATIONAL SYSTEMATICS LABORATORY
The National Systematics Laboratory is administered by the NEFC, but
serves the entire Fisheries Service. It studies the systematics of
commercially, recreationally, and ecologically important marine
organisms. Included in these studies are projects on taxonomy to
facilitate the identification of species, on anatomy to document species
classifications, and on the characterization of biogeographic complexes.
Emphasized are epipelagic, deep pelagic, and benthic fishes; peneid
shrimps; and crabs and other decapods.
9. ATLANTIC ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP
The Atlantic Environmental Group (AEG) supports the research programs of
the NEFC and other NOAA components operating in the Atlantic Ocean by
monitoring and studying environmental conditions and by analyzing
environmental data acquired from various governmental agencies, private
and academic institutions, and archives. Analyses performed by the
AEG include portrayal and interpretation of oceanic and atmospheric
250
-------
data for environmental and fisheries forecasting. The AEG also
develops techniques, models, and indices for such forecasting.
And, it advises NMFS's Office-of Scientific and Technical Services,
NOAA's Office of Marine Environmental Protection, and the National
Ocean Survey's Ocean Dumping Research and Monitoring Office on
marine environmental studies.
251
-------
PROPOSED PROJECTS
In the event of an acute oil spill on the Continental Shelf, personnel,
facilities and equipment of the Northeast Fisheries Center will be made
available so that sampling programs and physiological analyses can be
conducted in timely fashion at regular intervals to monitor the immediate
effects of oil contamination.
The projects described in the following section will be carried out in
addition to the ongoing long-term population monitoring and physiological
studies of NEFC. Results of these projects will be compared against the
long-term baseline data collected by the Center over the past fifteen
years and an evaluation of the impact of acute oij spills on the marine
ecosystem will be made.
252
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOBY
PROJECT NO: 4
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Ichthyoplankton Survey - MARMAP Survey I
2. Project Description
Standard ichthyoplankton and neuston samples are taken during all
Bottom Trawl Surveys - MARMAP II (Figure 2). The description of
sampling methods and techniques is found in Appendix I - MARMAP
I Survey. In addition to the three survey periods, special
plankton cruises are bimonthly, often in cooperation with the
USSR, Poland, FRG, GDR, and Canada. Ichthyoplankton and zooplankton
are monitored for temporal and spatial variations in species
abundance and succession. In the event of an oil spill particular
attention will be focused on the impact of the oil to the food
web and overall productivity of the marine .ecosystem including
larval fish and their zooplankton food.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC Marine Ecosystem Division
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Georges Bank, Gulf of Maine,
and the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Studies should be limited to major oil spills.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of spilled oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling will be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Additional monthly or bimonthly sampling would be conducted to
ensure an adequate time series of samples.
8. Cost
Sorting, volumizing and identifying major taxa $200/sample
@3 samples/station (neuston, 0.505 ichthyoplankton, 0.333
zooplankton) $600/station.
Assuming a minimum of 10 stations in the vicinity of a spill
(30 samples) for each of 3 months (30 X 3 = 90 samples) $54K
Analyzing data, preparing reports ' 5K
Total 559K
Hydrocarbon analyses of zooplankton samples is an additional
$1400/sample - see Hydrocarbon Analyses project.
253
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Standard MARMAP I sampling equipment
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC, Polish Sorting Center, Szczecin, Poland
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC, Polish Sorting Center, Szczecin, Poland
12. Support Services
Several Investigations within the Marine Ecosystem Division
are involved with collecting and analyzing.ichthyoplankton data.
In addition the Ichthyoplankton Survey "piggybacks" on all groundfish
survey cruises.
13. Payoffs
The MARMAP ichthyoplankton survey serves as a baseline against
which we will measure changes in species abundance, composition
and succession that might be caused by a major oil spill.
14. Limitations
254
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Bottom Trawl Survey Operations - MARMAP Survey II
2. Project Description
Investigate variations in the abundance and species composition in
the oil spill area. Compare variations in stock abundance with the
same area for other seasons and other years. Conduct Survey Opera-
tions at least three times a year and initiate special cruises at
the time of the spill and monthly or bimonthly thereafter in order
to provide an adequate time series of samples. Collect fish and
invertebrates for genetics, physiology, biochemistry, and pathology
investigations listed in the following fishery projects.
3. Performing Organizations
NMFS-NEFC Bottom Trawl Survey Operations NEC-004. Woods Hole, Mass.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank,
and the Mid-Atlantic Bight. Figure 2 illustrates the Survey
Operations- coverage three times a year.
5. Applicab!e Conditions
Any major oil spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling will be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Thereafter a minimum of three surveys a year would be made of
groundfish in the oil spill area. Special monthly or bimonthly
cruises would be initiated to augment spatial and temporal sampling
in the vicinity of the oil spill.
8. Cost
NEFC annual support for Survey operations is $462.8K. Additional
funds would be required in the event of an oil spill. Three special
cruises at $5K/day for:
10 days would be $150K
Data analyses 50K
Total" *200K
255
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
See MARMAP II Survey Operations and Appendix II
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
Each fall, spring, and summer the Resource Surveys Investigation
surveys with bottom trawls the fisheries resources of the
Continental shelf from Nova Scotia to North Carolina (Figure 2).
These surveys are part of the marine Monitoring, Assessment, and
Prediction (MARMAP) Program's Survey II effort to document the
relative abundance and distribution of these resources in the
area. Supplementary surveys of the area occur regularly, many as
cooperative efforts with other nations that fish in the Northwest
Atlantic (Figure 1). These supplementary surveys often gather
information that is not gathered in the semiannual surveys such as
the seasonal/area! distribution of surf clams and the tagging of
fish for stock estimates and migration studies.
The standard data that are recorded on these various surveys are
the length, weight, age and maturity of the fish, and the tempera-
ture and depth of the water where captured. Ichthyoplankton
samples and other hydrographic data are also often collected.
Such data reveal changes in the size, composition or structure of
the fisheries resource.
The role of the Resource Assessment Division of which the Survey
Operations is a part, is to assess the effects 'of harvesting on
fisheries resources. To do this assessment, the Division estimates
the relative and absolute abundances, spatial and temporal dis-
tributions, and harvestable numbers, sizes, and weights of finfish,
shellfish, and crustaceans in the Northwest Atlantic; and determines
the productivity of these renewable marine resources from an
ecosystem standpoint. To accomplish these tasks, the Division
analyzes both domestic and foreign data from commercial fisheries,
recreational fisheries, and research surveys. Additional economic
and biological studies provide data for modeling the fisheries
to aid in their management for optimum sustainable yield.
13. Payoff
*
The NMFS has developed fisheries independent methods for monitoring
changes in fisheries abundance and distribution. In addition to
survey data, it uses fishermen interviews, age and growth studies,
cohort analyses, as well as commercial and recreational catch data
256
-------
to assess fish stocks. With this information multispecies yield
models are developed. By monitoring temporal and spatial variations
in fish populations over long periods of time it is possible to
separate the complex influence of naturally occurring variation
from variations caused by pollution such as oil.
14. Limitations
257
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 6
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Demersal Food Chain Investigations
2. Project Description
During Survey Operations stomachs will be excised from key predator
species. Stomachs will be labeled with date, station, cruise,
species, length, sex, and maturity, and preserved in 10% formalin.
Laboratory examination of the stomach contents will reveal volume
of food, species composition of prey items, presence or absence of
oil. If oil is present the sample will be designated for hydrocarbon
analysis.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS-NEFC Benthic Dynamics and Demersal Food Chain Studies
NEC-016. Woods Hole, Mass.
4. Habitats Applicable
Continental Shelf waters including Georges Bank, Gulf of Maine and
the Mid-At!antic Bight.
5. Conditions Applicable
Studies should be limited to major oil spills.
6. Applicable Oil Types
All types of oil spills should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling should be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Additional special sampling should continue on'a monthly or bimonthly
basis until no oil attributable to the spill is detected in the
stomach/food chain.
8. Cost
Annual NEFC support is $176.IK. Special sampling in the event of
an oil spill would cost $4.9K per 10-day sampling cruise, assuming
three such cruises, the additional cost would be $14.6K plus $2K
for data processing.
9. Equipment Needs, Equipment Available
Equipment needed for sampling stomachs is scissors, labels, gauze,
jars, formalin, ties. These are provided by the Food Chain Inves-
tigations projects. Additional equipment necessary for stomach
analyses is available within the project.
258
-------
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
The Survey Operations project collects the samples routinely and
would collect additional special samples in the event of an oil
spill. If oil is detected in the stomach, the sample would be
contracted to NMFS Analytical Laboratory, Seattle, Washington;
the Univ. of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, or some other organization
for a detailed hydrocarbon analysis.
U. Payoff
The Demersal Food Chain Investigation is continuing a systematic
examination of stomachs, to date over 30,000 have been examined.
This provides a baseline of what is expected to be present in a
demersal food web. After an oil spill this investigation can pro-
vide reports on the potential impact on fish stocks in terms of
hydrocarbons in the benthis food web.
14. Limitations
259
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 7
PRIORITY RANK-:
1. Project Title
Physiological and Biochemical Effects of an Oil Spill on Selected
Fish and Shellfish
2. Project Description
Selected tissues and blood samples will be taken and analyzed for
biochemical shifts in activity and ion balance. Oxygen consumption
rates will be determined. Initial studies will be conducted for
two purposes: (1) selection of those animals and tissues that can
be successfully prepared, packaged and stored frozen for transport
to a shore laboratory without significant change in physiological
character or biochemical activity, and (2) exploratory biochemistry
to discover metabolic "yardsticks" that are both analytically
feasible and environmentally significant. Sampling protocol is
listed in Appendix IV.
3. Performing Organizations
NMFS, NEFC Physiological Effects of Pollutant Stress NEC-037.
Mil ford, Conn.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Georges Bank, Gulf of Maine, and
the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5- Applicable Conditions
Studies should be limited to major oil spills.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil spills should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling will be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Additional monthly or bimonthly sampling would be conducted until
results indicate a return to "baseline" or control conditions.
8. Cost
NEFC annual support is $261K. In order to study the effects of
an oil spill these funds will need to be augmented by an additional
$20K, the cost of analyzing samples collected on three 10-day
cruises.
260
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Equipment for collection of samples is found on all NMFS vessels.
Laboratory equipment, chemicals, glassware is available at the
NOAA-NMFS Milford, Conn. Laboratory.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
Notification would be required so that special instructions or
personnel could be available for oil spill sampling cruises and
standard survey cruises.
13. Payoff
The purpose of this project is to monitor the physiological
condition of key populations and to determine rates of recovery to
more normal conditions following an oil spill. It will establish
metabolic norms for indicator animals and will select key parameters
for detecting stress in these animals thus providing a model for
monitoring the health of our living marine resources.
14. Limitations
261
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 8
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Histopathologic Effects of an Oil Spill on Marine Organisms
2. Project Description
Morphologic study of cells and tissues from oil exposed and
control animals will be studied via the light and electron micro-
scopes. Histochemical methods will also be utilized to determine
any chemical changes which may be taking place in the cells and
tissues. Utilization of these tools should give us some indication
as to whether or not any tissue changes are taking place in the
exposed animals. Comparison of cells and tissues of the control
animals using the same methods and baseline data will give us some
indication as to whether or not these changes are due to the oil.
The methods and techniques employed are the same as those used by
animal (experimental), and human pathologists during the past
50-100 years.
3. Performing Organizations
NMFS, NEFC Disease and Environmental Stress, Life Studies
Comparative Pathobiology NEC-038, 039. Oxford, Md.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank
and the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Studies should be limited to major oil spills which have impacted
large populations and organisms which can be identified by location.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil spills should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling will be initiated as soon as possible after an oil spill
and continued at regular intervals until no further effect which
could be attributable to oil is detected.
8. Cost
Slide preparation and histopathologic analysis of the slide runs
anywhere from $12.00 to $15.00/slide. It will cost $12K per
species for a 2-year study, $5K/species for a 6-month study.
Travel and preparation of reports - $50K.
262
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
A field model kit containing fixatives, alcohol for storage of
specimens, bags, shucking knives, etc. has been constructed by
the Histopathology Unit of ERL-N. Some improvements will be made
and it is hoped that these kits will then be made available for
histopatholbgists who respond to oil spills.
A manual for the preparation of aquatic animals for histopatho-
logic examination has been prepared by the Histopathology Unit of
ERL-N and will be distributed throughout the country to interested
people.
A histopathologic technique manual prepared by the Pathology Branch
of the NMFS, NEFC Laboratory, Oxford, Md., will soon be available to
interested people.
Necessary equipment for the preparation and analysis of microscopic
slides is available at NMFS, NEFC.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC and contractors
12. Support Services
In order for this project to function properly the histopathologist
should be informed as to the possible oil spill impact, etc. by
the on-scene coordinator. Also close coordination should be
maintained with the analytical chemists who will be doing hydrocarbon
determinations of the animals. In fact, when specimens are collected,
they should be collected from the same time, area, species, etc.
as those collected for the analytical chemists.
13. Payoff
Very little is known about the histopathologic effects of oil on
marine populations. Long-term observations of animals exposed to oil
would provide information about effects and recovery rates. Studies
1 must be correlated with laboratory toxicity experiments in order
to evaluate the impact of oil on marine populations.
14. Limitations
Histopathology would be of use only on animals which have come
into contact with the oil in some form or manner. Results of
field studies can be evaluated only if there are also controlled
laboratory studies to provide baseline information.
263
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 9
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Hydrocarbon Analyses of Fish, Shellfish, Zooplankton
2. Project Description
Selected tissue samples of fish, stomachs suspected of containing
oil, and zooplankton samples from selected stations will be
analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. Samples will be collected
by survey cruises and other special cruises. A time-series of
samples will be established starting with those collected immediately
after the cruise and thereafter at regular intervals for a year
or until no hydrocarbons attributable to a particular spill are
detected.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC will be responsible for collecting the samples on
Survey and special cruises. Samples designated for hydrocarbon
analyses will be contracted to NMFS National Analytical Laboratory,
Seattle, Washington; University of Rhode Island, Kingston, R. I.;
or some other institution.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank
and the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Any major oil spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Samples will be collected immediately following an oil spill and
thereafter monthly until analyses indicate no detectable amount of
the spilled oil in tissues or food chain components.
8. Cost
The cost of tissue analysis is $700 (NMFS, Seattle, Washington)
and the cost of analyzing plankton is $1400.
Assuming 20 tissue samples/month for
the first three months: 14,000 x 3 = $42K
Plankton 4. samples/month for
the first three months: 5,600 x 3 - $16.8K
Total $58.8K
264
-------
9. Eguipment Needs/Equipment Available
Necessary equipment for collection and storage of samples is
available on Survey and special cruises. Equipment necessary
for analyses would be the responsibility of the contractor.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC; NMFS National Analytical Laboratory, Seattle, Washington
or other
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC; NMFS National Analytical Laboratory, Seattle, Washington,
or other
12. Support Services
In order for this project to function properly, one individual
must act as coordinator to select fish and shellfish samples for
analyses as well as plankton samples. Food chain investigation
people must also be informed of the procedure to follow if oil is
found in the stomach of any fish. The coordinator should maintain
good communications with the analytical chemists doing the
hydrocarbon analyses.
13. Payoff
The results of these studies will indicate the fate of petroleum
hydrocarbon in the food chain. It will also give results con-
cerning the possible tainting of marine resources which would
affect their use for human consumption. The time series will also
provide information on the persistence of oil in the environment
after a major spill.
14. Limitations
265
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 10
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
The Genetic Effects of an Oil Spill on Developing Fish Embryos
2. Project Description
Preserved eggs from plankton and neuston tows will be sorted by
species and stage. They can then be examined for genetic damage.
Using the methods of Longwell (1976) the extent (%) of damage can
be estimated, i.e., morbidity, moribundity, abnormal embryos,
chromosome damage, for that sample. The results can be compared
for samples from clean and impacted areas and for historical data.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC Cytology, Cytogenetics, Embryology and Development of
Fish Eggs. Field and Laboratory NEC-089. Mil ford, Conn.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank and
Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Any major oil spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Samples will be collected immediately following an oil spill and
at regular intervals thereafter until water column analyses indicate
control levels of hydrocarbons in the water,
8. Cost
NEFC support annually is $195K. In order to study the effects of
an oil spill these funds will need to be augmented by an additional
$16.2K, the cost of analyzing samples collected on three 10-day
cruises.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Samples would be collected using standard MARMAP I Survey equipment.
Equipment necessary for sorting samples and analyzing them cyto-
genetically is available within the Cytology Investigation.
266
-------
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
The Survey Operations and Ichthyoplankton Investigations would be
in charge of sampling and allocating subsamples for experimental
examinations.
13. Payoff
Experimental and field studies have shown developing embryos to be
particularly susceptible to genetic damage when exposed to various
classes of toxic substances including oil. Samples taken in the
vicinity of the Argo Merchant spill showed high percentages of
moribundity, morbidity, abnormal development and chromosome damage.
Results of such genetic studies are good indicators of environmental
stress and can be used to assess the impact on the success of
ichthyoplankton in the area of an oil spill.
14. Limitations
267
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 11 ,
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Toxicity Studies: The Effects of Oil on Developing Fish Embryos
and Larvae
2. Project Description
Toxicity studies can be carried out for both egg and larval stages.
Laboratory produced embryos will be brought out to sea and exposed
to water pumped from areas beneath the slick, at the periphery
of the slick and in "clean" areas. Water samples will be collected
and analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons. Samples will also be
collected for dissolved oxygen and salinity determinations. Embryos
will be exposed at different stages of development, and subsamples
will be preserved at regular intervals for later genetic studies.
Observations of the developing embryos will be made including
heartbeat, sinking (due to osmoregulation difficulties) respiration,
yolk utilization. Similar studies will be conducted under labora-
tory conditions using known concentrations of fuel oil types (e.g.,
crude, nos. 6, 4, 2) and the water soluble fractions.
The same procedures, both field and laboratory (excepting genetics
studies) can be carried out for larvae. When larvae are used,
feeding initiation, feeding, swimming behavior, respiration,
RNA/DNA ratios, protein synthesis, growth and yolk utilization can
be used to determine the effects of hydrocarbons on the larvae. In
addition, histopathological studies can be carried out on preserved
specimens.
3- Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC Physiology: North Atlantic Larval Fish NEC-012.
Narragansett, R. I.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank,
and the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Studies should be limited to major oil spills.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Field studies should be initiated as soon after an oil spill as
possible and continued until no effect is detectable on the developing
embryos and larvae. Laboratory studies can be carried out at the
discretion of the investigators.
268
-------
8. Cost
The annual NEFC support is $154K. In the event of an oil spill
these funds would have to be augmented by an additional $16K.
This assumes that the field studies can be carried out using ship
time that has already been accounted for in the Survey Operations
project (i.e., $5K/day).
9- Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Equipment is available in the Physiology project.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
In addition to Survey Operations and special cruises arranged in
the event of a major oil spill, the Cytology (NEC-089) and Disease
and Environmental Stress (NEC-039) investigations would augment
. physiological studies carried out by this project.
13. Payoff
Results of in situ and laboratory toxicity studies would provide
information on the impact of oil on fish embryos and larvae.
Cytogenetic and histopathology studies on the exposed organisms
could give further indication on the kind of damage that occurs.
14. Limitations
These studies would be limited by the availability of laboratory
spawned eggs.
269
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 12
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Phytoplankton and Other Microorganisms
2. Project Description
Changes in species composition and abundance will be determined by
comparing them with baseline data already available. Health of the
phytoplankton communities exposed to oil will be determined using
chlorophyll-phaeophytin relationships. Successional elements will
be followed. Primary productivity of impacted populations will be
estimated and photosynthetically available radiation, nutrients and
other hydrographic factors will be measured.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC Biological Oceanography of Stressed Ecosystems NEC-036.
Sandy Hook, N.J.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Georges Bank, Gulf of Maine and
the Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Studies should be limited to major oil spills.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil spills should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Sampling will be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Additional monthly or bimonthly sampling would be conducted until
results indicate a return to "baseline" or control conditions.
8. Cost
NEFC annual support is $214.8K. In order to study the effects of
an oil spill these funds will need to be augmented by an additional
$17K, the cost of collecting and analyzing samples collected on
three 10-day cruises.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Equipment necessary to carry out this project is available at the
Sandy Hook, N.J., laboratory and is part of standard equipment on
all NMFS vessels.
270
-------
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
Sampling would be carried out during Survey Cruises. All samples
would be analyzed by the Investigation.
13. Payoff
Because the lower trophic levels produce and consume 90-95% of the
biological energy which passes through the marine ecosystem and
because they are the base of the marine food web all other marine
organisms except certain bacteria are dependent upon them. They
have short generation times (0.5-10 days) and rapid growth rates
and consequently are sensitive and responsive to alterations in
the marine ecosystem. As such they are good indicators of environ-
mental stress.
14. Limitations
271
-------
PANEL: WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 13
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title
Fishery Oceanography: Environmental Studies
2. Project Description
Hydrographic and nutrient Investigations will be carried out in
the area of an oil spill. Temperature, salinity, and dissolved
oxygen structure of the area will be determined. Current meters
will be deployed to determine surface and bottom circulation in
the area of the spill.
3. Performing Organization
NMFS, NEFC Fishery Oceanography: Environmental Studies NEC-008.
Woods Hole, Mass.
4. Applicable Habitats
Continental Shelf waters including Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank and
Mid-Atlantic Bight.
5. Applicable Conditions
Any major oil spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type
All types of oil should be studied.
7. Time Frame
Studies should be initiated as soon after an oil spill as possible.
Additional sampling will continue on a monthly basis for at least
three months.
8. Cost
Annual NEFC support is $467K. The cost of augmenting these studies
in the event of an oil spill assuming three 10-day cruises would be
$39K.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
Most of the equipment needed for sampling is available on NMFS
vessels or within the Investigation.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
NMFS, NEFC
272
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
NMFS, NEFC
12. Support Services
Fishery Oceanography sampling operations can be carried out on
Survey Cruises. Additional information will be obtained from the
National Weather Service (NWS).
13. Payoff
Knowledge of temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen regime in the
area of a spill as well as the surface and bottom currents based
both on baseline data from previous years and from the time of a
spill allows estimates of risk analyses. Predictions of impacts
on fish stocks and the anticipated movement of the surface oil can
be made.
i
14. Limitations
273
-------
BUDGET
Fund Augmentation Needed by the NEFC in the Event of a Major Oil Spill*
Bottom Trawl Survey 200K
Demersal Food Chain Studies 16.6
Physiological-biochemical Effects 20
Histopathology (4 species—2 years) 48
Report 50
Hydrocarbon Analyses 58.8
Physiology-larvae 16**
Ichthyoplankton 59
Genetics 16.2
Fishery Oceanography 39
Biological Oceanography 17
Total 540.6K
*Assuming all sampling is completed on three 10-day cruises or already
scheduled cruises.
**Estimate made assuming ship time on a scheduled special cruise; if ship
time is scheduled the additional cost would be 5K/day.
274
-------
SUMMARY
The projects proposed are those which would be conducted by NEFC in the
event of a major oil spill in Continental Shelf waters from Nova Scotia
to Cape Hatteras. They would be carried out within the background of
MARMAP Survey I and II baseline data collected in the Northwest Atlantic
over the last 15 years. Standard methods of collecting would be employed
according to standardized operations of Survey I and II (Appendices I and
II). At each collection site hydrographic conditions would be monitored
also.
The Ocean Pulse program data provides a baseline of physiological measure-
ments against which impact on the health of fish stocks can be monitored.
The projects proposed within the NEFC Fisheries Plan are those which would
be carried out in direct response to a major oil spill. However, in order
to assess the impact of an oil spill on renewable marine resources, long-
term experimental and monitoring studies must be conducted to determine
what the chronic effect of hydrocarbons on the marine ecosystem are.
Therefore, in addition to in situ sampling and monitoring several projects
are recommended which are long-term and experimental:
1. Behavior of fishes under environmental stress (NEC-033) NMFS,
NEFC, Sandy Hook, NJ.
i
2. Physiology of North Atlantic larval fish (toxicity studies, in_
situ and laboratory, selected species) (NEC-012) NMFS, NEFC,
Narragansett, RI.
3. Physiological Effects of Pollutant Stress (toxicity studies,
biochemical or physiological effects on adult fish and larval
and adult invertebrates).
4. Disease and Environmental Stress (toxicity studies, histopathology,
larval and adult fish and invertebrates) (NEC-038, 039) NMFS,
NEFC, Oxford, MD.
275
-------
APPENDIX I. MARMAP SURVEY I OPERATIONS
A high degree of uniformity and standardization in Survey I Operations
is essential to achieve MARMAP objectives. It is recognized, however,
that some latitude in details of technique or procedure is desirable or
even necessary because of regional variations in ecosystem parameters such
as biota distribution, abundance, diversity, and environment. This docu-
ment specifies procedures to be followed in the at-sea collection and
laboratory analysis of Survey I data. Its provisions will be met by all
activities and organizational elements of the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), and other organizations participating in MARMAP Survey I
under sponsorship of NMFS. It also describes the techniques for collecting
concurrent environmental data, and for the quality, controlling of all data.
It should be understood that not all of these operations may be conducted
o» every cruise and that additional MARMAP Operations (Survey II, and/or
Fishery Oceanography) may be carried out.
The MARMAP Station
A MARMAP Station is defined as a location in the ocean where data are
collected. It has, for all routine operations, one position but may involve
a number of activities. Stations are numbered consecutively beginning with
the .first station of a cruise. Following precedents set at a number of
NMFS laboratories, bathythermograph (BT) lowerings will be numbered
separately; and between-station BTs will not be assigned station numbers.
The MARMAP Master Station Record (MSR) is the only log sheet which lists
the station position. This is done deliberately to prevent the prolifera-
tion of divergent data. Following each cruise the MSRs will be used to
produce an accepted list of station positions for the voyage. This list
will be made promptly available to all who are to be involved with the
analyses of the cruise data.
Zooplankton - The Bongo Sampler
The standard sampling gear for all MARMAP Ichthyoplankton (Survey I)
Operations is the Bongo net (Posgay and Marak, In Press) (Figure 1-1). It
consists of two cylindrical mouth pieces, 61 cm in diameter, (the towing
wire passes between the cylinders and is therefore not in the sampling
path) inside of which are fastened flowmeters. To obtain flowmeter
readings representative of the entire mouth the meter must not be closer
to the wall than 6 times the wall thickness. The nets are of a cylinder-
cone configuration, 3.6 m long. The mesh aperture of one net is 0.333 mm
and of the other net 0.505 mm, and the ratios of their mouth areas to
total netting aperture areas are 1:7.3 and 1:7.9, respectively. Cod ends
are routinely folded and tied off in the manner of a fishing net cod end.
However, cod end beakers or socks may be used if desired.
276
-------
(MEASUREMENTS IN CENTIMETERS) - 3.0 KNOTS)
(9MM. OIAM.
CHAIN OR CABLE)
45 KG. DEAD WEIGHT
DEPRESSOR
( < 3.0 KNOTS)
EYE a THIMBLE
J] WIRE STOP
£X SHACKLE
9 SWIVEL
EXPLODED VIEW OF
CABLE ATTACHMENT
FOR LARGE BONGOS
Figure i-l. Arrangement of MARJW Bongo Samplers on Tow Wire,
(Fron Posgay and Marak, In Press)
277
-------
A depressing force is necessary to achieve desired results. At towing
speeds of 1.5-2.0 knots a 45-kg dead weight depressor is sufficient. At
speeds higher than 3 knots a 1.2-m V-fin depressor is necessary. Towing
wire must be at least 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) diameter and of 300 m length
plus that necessary for all rigging and a safe mount on the winch.
Although tension during towing is about 250 kgm it can reach as high as
1,000 kg under dynamic loads. A Bendix Model T-l, or equivalent, time-
depth recorder (to record tow profile) must be attached to the towing
wire just above the attachment of the net. Each instrument must be
calibrated at the beginning and end of its use.
For special studies the 20 cm mouth diameter Bongo sampler may be used
in addition, or in place of, the 61-cm Bongos. If the 20-cm Bongo is to
be substituted for the 61-cm Bongo during regular Survey I cruises,
prior approval must be obtained from the MARMAP Program Office (MPO).
The standard tow for all MARMAP Ichthyoplankton (Survey I) Operations is
the double oblique. This is a tow during which the sampler describes an
oblique path and fishes during both descent and ascent. There should
not be time spent at depth (horizontal sampling), and all depth strata
should be sampled equally (i.e., the paths of descent and ascent should
be straight lines).
The desired depth of the tow is to within 5 m of the bottom or to a
maximum of 200 m. Figure 1-2 shows the amount of wire out to achieve
desired depths. Routine checks of time-depth records must be made and
wire-outs to desired depth ratios adjusted accordingly.
Towing speed is between 1.5 and 2 knots. Higher speeds introduce variables,
particularly extrusion, and make inclusion of the data with those from
standard tows difficult. For those vessels without adequate speed
control a valid tow may be achieved by monitoring wire angles during
retrieval.
At the beginning of each tow both flowmeter readings are recorded ("Flow-
meter start") to the nearest whole revolution. Care must be taken to
prevent this reading from changing prior to the commencement of fishing,
e.g., "windmilling."
NOTE: Flowmeters are calibrated at the beginning and end of each cruise.
Calibration can be done at sea by towing the flowmeters, attached to a
suitable frame, in two directions over a known distance. At least 2
tows in each direction at several towing speeds between 1.5 and 2.0
knots must be made. A calibration factor is calculated for the length
of a column of water needed to affect one revolution of the meter (meters
per revolution) at each towing speed. The units of the factor (meters
per revolution) were chosen so that the factor would be applicable to
nets of different mouth area for obtaining volume of water filtered:
(Meter Revolutions)(Calibration Factor)(Mouth Area) = Volume Filtered.
When the ship is on course and steaming at 1.5-2.0 knots the Bongo array
is launched. Start time for the tow is the time the flowmeter begins
278
-------
Svabol
Vessel
Albatross IV
Oregon II
Delaware II
total
500 |-
400
Cruise
72-06 (DTP I)
72-39 (DTP I)
72-19 (DTP I)
MARMAP 07? I
Regression Equation
Y - -17.4 +• 0.787(X)
Y - 10.S + 0.706CX)
Y - - 4.77 + 0.782CX)
Y - - 3.7 + 0.756(X)
Oi
300
- 200
H
&
a
100
j_
100 200 300 400
WIRE OUT (METERS)
500
Figure 1—2 Amounts of wire out to achieve desired depths for
the MARMAP 61 cm bongo net.
These regressions imply a linear relationship
between wire out and desired depth. In fact,
the relationship is not linear over the entire
depth range. Nevertheless, the curves are
presented as an initial aid to workers attempting
bongo tows, wire out will no doubt have to be
adjusted based on the results of tows during any
crui=e. The curvilinear relation is under investi-
gation and will be supplied as an ar.endir.ent to this
nanual.
279
-------
turning (note any "windmilling"). The towing wire is payed-out at a
rate of 50 m/min. As soon as the necessary length is reached retrieval
begins. Retrieval rate is 20 rn/min. The ship should maintain a speed
that keeps the tow wire closed to an angle of 47°. Wire angle is measured
by an inclinometer which can be of the telemetering or non-telemetering
type. If a telemetering inclinometer is used, the angle of stray can be
controlled from the bridge. When a non-telemetering device is used an
officer of the watch or the recorder observes the wire angles during the
tow and signals the bridge if the desired angle is not being maintained.
In both cases an observer on deck records wire angles for each 10 meters
of wire during retrieval. Both the "time going out" and the "time coming
in" (to the flowmeter's exit from water) are recorded. Standard tows
result in zero "time at depth." Enter zero unless difficulties are en-
countered.
After getting the sampler aboard examine the TDR tjrace to determine its
acceptability. If the trace does not fall in the envelope appropriate for
44s depth range the tow must be repeated.
Record the readings of both flowmeters ("Flowmeter end") and note any
observed or suspected reasons for values to be in question (excess
windmill ing, damage, fouling of meter or apparent clogging of meshes of
the net).
The nets are held off the deck by hand or by tackle and their contents are
rinsed to their cod ends by a gentle spray of salt water directed from
their outsides. The samples are then quantitatively transferred to
appropriately labeled (for the 0.333 mm and 0.505 mm mesh apertures)
buckets unless a cod end sock or beaker is used.
NOTE: The buckets often contain a great deal more water than is desirable
to preserve. This may be eliminated by the use of a draining pan with
meshes smaller than those of the collecting net. Also, on some occasions
the sample may contain large quantities of jelly fish, salps, etc. They
may be too large to fit into the sample jars provided.. On such occasions
separate these organisms, rinse any small, adhering organisms into the
bucket containing the sample, log the large organism's description and
estimated volume and discard them.
Quantitatively transfer the sample from the bucket to the draining pan.
After the water has drained off, transfer the sample to a one quart
sample jar(s) using a minimum of sea water from a rinse bottle directed at
the back side (the mesh) of the pan. Use extra jars when necessary so
that no jar is more than 1/2 full of suspended plankton or 1/4 full of
drained organisms. Add sea water to about 3/4 full before Introducing the
preservative, to avoid "burning" the delicate specimens.
Add 50 ml of buffered concentrated formalin to each quart sample and top
off with sea water.
280
-------
NOTE: Preservative used for filling the original sample jars and in any
suEsequent sample container is 3-5% buffered formalin. (Formalin is a
saturated aqueous solution of formaldehyde gas, about forty percent
formaldehyde by weight.) The preferred buffer is marble chips. These are
added to the formalin supply container, not the sample container, in a
quantity to produce an excessive base. This results in sample containers
receiving a preservative which is basic but which will not remain so
indefinitely. Investigators working on samples containing delicate
calcereous specimens may wish to alter the preservative they use.
Fill out and apply outside and inside jar labels which are preprinted and
color coded for the gear and mesh used. Inside labels are written with
waterproof ink (Higgins Engrossing Ink, No. 892, which does not clog the
pen—Kohinoor Rapidograph No. 0 or 00—or equivalent). Outside labels,
due to their oily surface texture, are written with ball point pen.
Fill out appropriate parts of the MSR and MARMAP Zooplankton Sample Logs
(ZSL and ZSL-ADP).
Zooplankton - The Neuston Sampler
For neuston, near surface zooplankton, and contaminants such as tar and
plastics the standard gear is the MARMAP neuston net (Figure 1-3). It
consists of a rectangular mouth constructed of 3.2 cm (1 1/4") ID standard
wall aluminum pipe with opening dimensions of 0.5 m hijjh by 1 m wide. The
net is of conical configuration, 4.9 m long. The mesh aperture is 0.505 mm,
and the ratio of mouth area to total netting aperture area is 1:7.8.
Presently the cod end is being folded and tied-off similar to the Bongo net
cod ends. A cod end sock or beaker may be used if desired. A simple
bridle, most of which is out of the water during fishing, precedes the
net mouth. Towing wire must be at least 0.6 cm (1/4") diameter steel and
of 40 m length plus that necessary for all rigging and a safe amount on
the winch. Wire or 1.3 cm (1/2") diameter nylon line may also be used on
a warping capstan if a regular winch setup is not available. Tension
during towing is about 250 kg but may reach 1,000 kg during dynamic loads.
The standard MARMAP tow is made with the net 1/2 submerged, and with a
vessel speed of 2.0 knots for a duration of 10 minutes. In subtropical and
tropical areas or for studies of species of relatively low abundance tows
of longer duration may be made.
The vessel should be executing a slow turn in the same direction as the .
side of the ship from which the tow is being made. Tows made in the
wake of the vessel are unsatisfactory. Also, any sanitary discharges which
may contaminate the sample must be secured during the tow.
The start time for a neuston tow is taken when the net begins fishing 1/2
submerged. The end time is taken when the net exits the water.
The sample is quantitatively transferred from the net to a sample jar(s)
in a manner similar to the Bongo samples.
281
-------
INSIDI UNGTH I00«m(3».4in|
0.6em(.3Jin| OAtVANIZtO Will .
All ENDS ttt SPUCEO WITH THIMUIS 1/3
0.4tm(.33in| OAlVANIZtO SHAOCUI
0.4e«.(.«l"l FAD 111
3.2CM(I.25I*| I.O. STANDARD WAU ALUMINUM
mows
NITtX
«.j 01. NTtON Ol
OACtON COllAI
Ml
6.3.1. NTtON O«
DAC1ON COLIAI
l\.tt*(4.3l*\ 1.0
Figure 1-3. The MARMAP Ncuston Sanpler.
CIICUMrtllNCI 9IJ.01K (10.11-
12-NO.l SfUt CJOMMCtJ.
SIT IACK |3.«c»|I.Ji« 3.C.
IIOM KAOINO [3OI
282
-------
NOTE: Tar balls may be encountered. If possible preserve them with the
rest of the sample. If, however, the tar balls are too large for the
sample jars, place them in plastic bags with an inside "Biological Sample
Label" and place the bags in a freezer.
Fill out and apply outside and inside jar labels which are preprinted and
color coded for the gear and mesh used.
Fill out aporopriate parts of the MSR and ZSL. No wire angle data need
be recorded for neuston tows.
Processing of Ichthyoplankton
The processing is carried out in several steps: removal of all tar con-
taminants; measuring the volume of plankton in each sample; sorting out
and enumerating all fish eggs and larvae and plastics; identifying all
larvae; measuring certain larvae; identifying certain fish eggs and staging
(aging) some; and carating all fish eggs and larvae.
All data are standardized and subjected to automatic data processing for
final analyses and publication.
283
-------
APPENDIX II. MARMAP SURVEY II OPERATIONS
Survey coverage proposed for implementation in FY 1978 and 1979 are
described in this section. A map of the management areas to be surveyed
is presented in Figure 2. Standard Survey II biological and environmental
sampling will be performed in these areas.
Trawl Survey Sampling Design
A stratified sampling design is utilized on Survey II. The principal
operational features as applied to the groundfish survey are:
A) The Continental Shelf and Slope to a maximum depth of 500
fathoms are subdivided into sampling strata corresponding to
geographic and hydrographic subdivisions significantly related
to fish distribution.
B) Locations of trawl stations are pre-selected within each stratum.
C) When diel movements are not biased, sampling is conducted on a
24-hour basis with the entire region being covered in the minimum
time possible using a systematic cruise track that ignores stratum
boundaries and tends to minimize steaming time.
NOTE: The maximum depth limits for Survey II Operations vary according to
management areas and the types of demersal resources being investigated.
Selection of Stations
The selection of the cruise stations in each sampling stratum is made in
conjunction with the preparation of the cruise plan. The precise location
of each station is also plotted on the navigational charts to be used at
sea. The number of stations is proportional to the area of the stratum,
with a minimum of two stations in a stratum. The average for the New
England Groundfish Survey Operations, for example, is about 41/2 stations
per stratum. The range is from 2-10 stations, depending upon stratum size
and priority.
Random selection of stations in very narrow, deep strata along the edge
of the shelf is actually a two-stage process both ashore and at sea. That
is, a station is first located with respect to latitude and longitude and
then a specific trawling depth is selected. The second step is necessary
because the design specifies that trawling be done along depth contours,
and navigation alone is not sufficiently accurate to pinpoint a depth
contour along a steep edge. As an example, for a stratum in the 100-200
fathom zone, one of the depth intervals (101-125, 126-150, 151-175, 176-200
fathoms) is randomly selected for each station in the stratum. Selections
284
-------
are without replacement since no more than 3 stations are allocated to
such narrow strata. The selected trawling depth interval is recorded
beside the station on the navigation chart for convenient reference at
sea.
Acquisition of Vessel Services
NOAA vessels shall be acquired for Survey II Operations in accordance
with current version of the NOAA Fleet Operational Plan. Services of
non-NOAA vessels on a contract basis shall be acquired by the MPO through
regular contracting procedures. The Program Manager or his designee shall
ascertain the compliance of candidate vessels with MARMAP Survey II
requirements as described in this plan and by the MARMAP System Description.
The MPO shall maintain a current listing of vessef service requests and
.commitments and the pertinent ship operating schedules.
Standard Sample and Data Acquisition Procedures
Trawl samples will be processed on-board. Only secondary samples
(stomachs, gonads, scales, otoliths) and unusual specimens requiring special
study will be returned to shore. The minimum routine data obtained in
processing trawl catches is the total weight and length frequency of each
finfish species in the catch, plus scale or otolith samples for a few '
important commercial species (particularly haddock) (Table II-l).. A few
invertebrates (lobsters, shrimp, scallops, and squid) are also recorded
routinely. Depending upon the specific data requests and the availability
of personnel, other common kinds of samples or observations performed
include:
stomach contents
frozen or preserved specimens
parasites
gonads
meristic or morphological observations
Processing the trawl catch is accomplished by dumping it into a waist-
high checker. The fish are sorted into steel baskets of one and two
bushel capacity, usually according to species. The catch of each species
or sample of it is weighed to the nearest whole pound on a simple balance
(steelvard) havinq a single point of attachment. (The accuracy of this
method fsilolfS? 10 Ibs of fish. It is only ±25% for less than .about
10 Ibs of fish, however. Therefore, small catches are usually weighted
in a small plastic pail attached to a simple spring scale.
285
-------
TABLE II-l REQUIREMENTS FOR SURVEY 2 AT-SEA SAMPLE AND DATA ACQUISITION
Information Required
Upiiwjrsal fish abundance/diversity and
distribution
Cpibenthts invertebrates abundance/diversity
and distribution
Age— specific fecundity and survivorship of
demersal fish populations
Distribution and abundance of surface fish
schools, mammals, I birds
Benthic tnfauna abundance/diversity and
distribution
Special biological Information
PHYSICAL OCtANOGRAPHIC
Mater Mass Characteristics • *
* Temperature-Depth
• Salinity-Depth
Near-Bottom Hater Mass Characteristics'*
Upper-Ocean Circulation Dynamics
• Current Velocity (Ulrece Measurement)
• Surface Hind Vector
MEttOROlOCICAl
(See Reference 4)
Specific Parameters Measured
- No. individuals in tanonomic
categories
- Weight by species
- Ho. Individuals in taxonomtc
categories
- Weight by species
- length frequency*
- Scales/otoliths (collected for
subsequent analysis)*
- Stomach samples (collected for
subsequent analysis)*
- Gonad samples (collected for
subsequent analysis)*
- Direct visual observation
- No. Individuals In tanonomlc
categories
- Weight by species
- Parasites*
• Rare or unusual specimens
(collected for subsequent
analysis)
Temperature
Salinity or Conductivity
Temperature
Salinity
Current Velocity
Kind Velocity
Mind Direction
MiniBiun Ho. Samples or
Observations (Depths)
Per Primary Station
10
10
1
1
fK'pth Covered
tear Bottom
tear Bottom
-------
Measuring boards (some fitted with punch strips for large numbers of fish)
are used for obtaining length frequencies to the nearest whole centimeter.
Fork length is used except where not applicable, and then total standard
length is recorded. Carapace lengths are taken for lobsters, mantle
lengths for squid, wing-width for rays, and shell lengths for scallops,
carapace length for panda!id and carapace width for crabs; peneid shrimp
are weighed only.
Whenever practical, the entire catch of each species is weighed and
measured. When sampling is employed, the following three requirements
must be met:
A representative sample of each species must be obtained.
The sample must be large enough for a good estimate of the
total weight and length frequency of each species.
The size of the sample (weight, volume, number) relative to
the total catch must be clearly indicated.
An outline of instructions for all types of sampling should be provided to
all members of the scientific party and posted on the appropriate ship's
bulletin board, as a number of different biological samples are taken on
every survey cruise. Some of these are routine, e.g., scale and otolith
collections, but many are not routine, particularly if visiting scientists
are aboard. These instructions provide details on methods of sampling;
e.g., stratified sampling by length for scale and otolith collections,
sample sizes and preservation methods. Tally sheets should be posted
for keeping a tow-by-tow tally of the samples collected to improve the
efficiency of the sampling and particularly to help ensure that all the
required samples are obtained. An outline of sampling procedures
applicable to the basic catch data should also be posted on a bulletin
board near the area where fish processing occurs.
Trawl specifications and groundfish survey equipment list are found in
Figure II-l and Tables II-2 and 11-3, respectively.
287
-------
00
CO
Id
m
I
(-•
r— in m
fu C O
cr -j rr
o < n>
-s to 3
tu << o»
«• CO O.
JE; -j o>
O 0> £
O O) -••
O. C 3
(D
0
O in
3 n>
0> -I
o>
3
CX
Irt -fc -$
01 o< o.
o — «
a- n-
c -n -j
I/I — i. Ol
l/» £
ft- =T — •
r* n
Ut -i C
in fX
M
o
oa 3
«4*
O (O
IQ C
-•- 3
O O.
STANDARD. GROUNOFISH SURVEY TRAWL
BCF, WOODS HOLE, MASS.
*SS YANKEE TRAWL
SCHEMATIC PIOURE
Troul
-------
Table I1-2
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STANDARD 6ROUNDFISH SURVEY TRAWL CURRENTLY
IN USE BY THE NEW ENGLAND GROUNOFISH SURVEY
TRAWL PART
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
Overall length (wing enda to cod end)
Approximately 98
Material and mesh sizes (stretched mesh,
Certified)
Trawl
Cod end
Liner
154 Tan Nylon throughout, 5" mesh in wings.
square and forward section of bellies; 4-1/2"
mesh in aft section of bellies.
* 102 white Nylon, 4-1/2" mesh. 80 meshes
around, SO meshes long.
1147 Knotless White Nylon, 1/2" mesh, ia
two pieces; one piece attached 35 meshes up
from aft end of top belly which lines about SO
meshes across center of top belly, sod -which
extends about 2' into cod end; and one piece
lining entire cod end and extended about 2*
outside of cod end when open.
Headrope. (total length)
Headrope hanging
Square (Bosom)
Wings
60*'io three 20' sections, 7/8" dia. comb.
wire rope, eye at each end and joined by
7/8" patent (split) links.
14*
23«
Footrope (total length)
Footrope hanging
Lower belly
Wings
80'ia five sections: 22-1/2', 10', 15'. 10'
and 22-1/2'; 3/4" dia. 6 x 25 galv. wire.
10*
351
Rollers
Hard rubber, 5" wide by 16" diameter
separated by rubber spacers 6-7" wide by
5-1/2" diameter - center section of 15' with
9 rollers separated by two spacers - two
10' sections each with 5 rollers separated by
three spacers.
Floats
8" diameter aluminum (spherical-no collar)
deep sea type. 20 floats along center 20' sect
of headrope, and 8 floats evenly spaced on
each 20' side section.
289
-------
Table 11-3 REPRESENTATIVE GROUHOFISH SURVEY EQUIPMENT LIST
Equipment
Standard Survey Trawl
Other llets
Dredge
Instrumentation
Paper Supplies
Miscellaneous Hardware
Chemicals
Reference Books
Meterologlcal
Instrumentation
Description/Type
. Specification for standard groundfish
survey 136 Yankee trawl developed by
NEFC at Woods Hole, Massachusetts,
Is contained In Appendix D.
Bongo net adopted as standard
plankton gear for Survey 1 (Speci-
fications are available from
Survey 1 Manager
Candidate device for sampling
Infauna has not been selected
Bathythermograph
Echo sounders
Sallnlty/Depth/Temperature (Measurement
System)
Miscellaneous Instruments Including:
Thermometers
Stop watches
Counters
Meter wheels
Field logs
Data sheets
Envelopes and labels
Cardboard boxes
Assorted jars, and vials plastic and cloth
bags and cheesecloth for preserving samples
Measuring boards and punch strips. Spring
scales and steel yards with weights.
Steel baskets and plastic buckets and
garbage palls. Knives, forceps and
other dissecting Instruments
Formalin
Glycerine
Alcohol
As described In Survey ) Plan
Notes
Prior to each survey it Is mandatory
that the cruise coordinator and the
mate In charge of trawl gear compare
assembled trawls with the standard
specifications. Experience indicates
It Is too easy for undesirable
modifications to slip in as a result
of temporary repairs becoming per-
manent, or because of a lack of proper
spare net sections or other parts.
All of these instruments require
maintenance, and their condition,
including supplies of slides for BT's
and paper for echo sounders, should
be checked before each cruise.
Identification of fishes is facilitated
by references on fishes found in the
area
290
-------
Appendix III
NCFC - Task Development Plans - Ft 1980
Page 1 of 4
S3
TIM1 No.
NUC-042-80-AQ-A-S
NUC-043-80-AQ-A-5
NI-C-04S-80-AQ-A-S
NEC-089-80-EI-A-S
NUC-09S-80-BI-A-5
HEC-096-aO-Aq-A-S
NGC.084-80.FO-A-S
Task No.
88E4P1
88E4P2
88E4P4
88C2F2
Hen
8BE402
78A4Y4
88A4Y4
Task Name
Aquaculture Genetics
Aspects of Nutritional
Requirements of Molluscs
Spawning 8 Rearing of
Molluscs
Cytology, Cytogenetics,
Enbryology ( Development
of Fish Eggs - Field «
Laboratory
experimental Approach to
Environmental Pollutants
That Affect Phytoplankton
Populations in the Ocean
Training - Holluscan
Aquaculture
Ocean Climatology and
Monitoring
By Division
Leader
Longuell
Ukeles
Landers
Longwell
Ukeles
llanks, J.
Cook/Ingluui
Division
Aquaculture
Aquocul ture
Aquaculture
Aquaculture
Aquacultura
Aquaculture
Atlantic
Environmental
Group
Location
Nil ford
Mil ford
Mil ford
HI I ford
Mil ford
Nil ford
TOTAL
Narragansett
BY * 1
Target
Allowance
S/261.1
S/273.7
6/272.4
0/2S.O
0/67. S
16/899.7
S/214.2
BY * 1
Increase
6/I9S.O
2/100.0
8/295.0
3/102.8
-------
Page -' "1 4
Appendix III
TUP No.
NH.--OOI-80-EI-A-S
NEC-033-80-BI-A-S
NP.C-OJ4-80-EI-A-S
NEC-036-80-EI-A-S
NEC-037-80-RI-A-S
NEC-040-80-EI-A-5
NEC-08S-80-EI-A-S
NliC-086-BO-EI-A-S
Jg NEC-100-80-EI-A-S
ho
NEC-006-80-FO-A-S
NEC-007-SO-Si-A-S
NUC-008-80-FO-A-S
NCC-009-80-RF-A-S
NEC-OI2-80-S1-A-S
NBC-014-80-S1-A-S
NEC-OI6-80-S2-A-S
NBC-031 -BO-SI -A-S
cont.
Task No.
88C2PI
88C2P1
88C2P2
88C2P5
88C2PB
88C2Q4
New
New
New
88A4G2
88A2F2
78A2F2
B8A4G1
88F9F1
88A2FS
88A2P3
88A2F4
88A2P2
Task Kama
Coastal Monitoring Assessment
and Prediction (COMAP)
Behavior of Fishes Under
Environmental Stress
Coastal Ecosystems
Biological Oceanography
of Stressed Ecosystems
Physiological Effects of
Pollution Stress
Environmental Chemistry
Ocean Pulse Contract: At
Sea G Laboratory Experimenta-
tion 8, Vessel Support
Ocean Pulse Contract -
Benthlc Sample Processing
Environmental Statistics
Ecosystem Dynamics
Recruitment Processes
Fishery Oceanography:
Environmental Studies
Oceanic Gamefish
Physiology: North Atlantic
Larval Fish
Plankton Ecology
Benthlc Dynamic ft Demersal
Food Chain Studies
MAKMAP I: Biological
Assessment
By Division
Leader
Kelly
01 la
Reid
Thonas
Calabresa
Grelg
Chang
Grosslein
Lough
Mright
Casey
Laurence
Sherman
Mlgley
Smith, W.
Division
Environment; 1
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Environmental
Assessment
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Marine Ecosystems
Location
Hoods Hole
Sandy Hook
Sandy Hook
Sandy Hook
,
Milford
Milford
Sandy Hook
TOTAL
Moods Hole
Moods Hole
Moods Hole
Narragansett
Narragansett
Narragansett
Moods Hole
Sandy Hook
TOTAL
BY * 1
Target
Allowance
3/146.S
5/110.5
7/168.8
7/214.8
10/261.0
2/66.6
1/00.0
3S/968.2
3/122.2
4/413.3
8/467.2
3/149.0
S/1S4.6
10/531. S
5/176. J
1 2/348. S
SO/2,362.7
BY i 1
Increase
2/S7.5
3/144.4
5/139.0
6/290.2
6/4S3.S
4/424.3
0/1000.0
0/S60.0
3/160.8
29/3,229.7
1/70.3
0/60.0
2/47. S
1/49.4
3/122.1
1/176.6
1/76.0
1/31 .0
10/632.9
-------
Appendix III cont.
VO
10
TOP No.
Nf.C-OaO-80-EI-A-S
NEC-OJ8-80-E1-A-S
NEC-OJ9-80-EI-A-5
NCC-044-80-AQ>A-S
NEC-092-80-SP-A-S
NEC-102-80-RF-A-5
NEC-003-80-EI-A-5
NEC-004-8Q-S2-A-S
KDC-005-80-FI--A-5
NCC-019-80-S3-A-S
NEC-046-80-RF-A-S
NGC-OSS-80-EC-A-S
Task No.
88C2MI
88C2P9
88C2Q2 .
S8E4P3
New
New
88A3F1
8SA2F1
88A3F3
88A2F1
88F9P1
88F6F1BJ
It
Task ferae
Systematic* of Selected
Fishes ( Crustaceans
Disease and Environmental
Stress
Life Studies: Comparative
Pathoblology
Aquaculture: Control of
Holluscaa Disease
Facilities (Bldg Extension)
(Health of Oceanic Fish
and Shellfish)
Striped Bass Disease
fishery Analysis:
Multlspecies Northwest
Atlantic
Dot ton Trawl Survey
Operations
Automatic Age Reader System
Development
Pelagic Flsh'Survey Assessment
Research (llydroucoustlcs)
Biological Assessment:
Sport fish
Fishery Analysis: Economics
Division
Leader
Cohen. D.
Hurchelano
Rosenfield
Blogoslawskl
Rosenfield
Rosenfield
Brown
Azarovttx
Nlchy
Anderson
Nl!k
Brown
Division
National
Systematic!
Laboratory
Pathoblology
Pathoblology
Pathobiology
Pathoblology
Pathobiology
Resource Assessment
Resource Assessment
Resource Assessment
Resource Assessment
Resource Assessment
Resource Assessment
Location
Mushing ton, DC
Oxford
Oxford
Mil ford
Oxford
Oxford
TOTAL
Hoods llole
Hoods llole
Woods llole
Woods llole
Sandy Hook
Moods Hole
B» * 1
Target
AI lowance
9/216.2
7/12B.4
7/153.1
5/180.9
19/462.4
23/818.3
1 2/462. B
0/110.0
1/133.4
3/111.8
I1/S96.61
9 ••••* ^ ^m. T
BY » 1
Increase
0/21.6
4/285.2
4/303.9
0/690.0
4/212.2
12/1491. 3
10/711.6
7/776.0
1/100.0
4/296.6
TOTAL $0/2232.9
22/1384.2
'Currently 8/196.6 (3/400 - FY 79 increa.se)
-------
VO
4^£S£'^4«MAA ^A4
TOP No.
NEC-010-80-FE-A-S
NEC-070-80-PT-A-2
HEC-072-80-PT-A-2
NEC-D79-80-RF-A-5
NKC-013-80-S2-A-5
NEC-017.80-S2-A-5
M-C-020-80-SP-A-5
NEC-032-80-FA-A-S
NEC-050-80-FA-A-S
NEC-051-80-RF-A-5
NEC-OS3-80-00-A-0
NHC-054-80-00-A-0
NEC-056-80-FA-A-5
NCC-I01-80-EI-A-S
NEC- 103-80-00- A-O
NEC-I04-80-00-A-0
. WW1£ I* •
Task No.
88A5G2HC
88F810
88F719
New
88A2FS
88A2F7
900040
88A3P1
88A3P2
8BF9F2
New
New
88A3H
New
Hew
New
Task Name
Sampling and Harvesting
Gear Development
Product Quality, Safety S
Standards
Resource Development and
Improvement
Sportfishing Utilization
Technology
Biochemical Stock
Identification
Manned Undersea Research and
Technology
General Support
Data Management
Northeast Fisheries Data
Processing 8 Information
System Development
Aquarium
Vessel Construction
Facility Addition - Building
Construction
Fishery Analysis: Management
Council Liaison
Rehabilitation of Seawater
and Aquarium System
Construction of Vessel Pier
Acquisition of Two Inshore
Research Vessels
By Division
Leader
Corbett
Gadbols
Loarson
Learson
Ridgway
Cooper
Stern
Pacheco
lleyerdah!/
Handy
Nheeler
Smith, K.
Slndenann
Division
Resource Utilisation
Resource Utilization
Resource Utilization
Resource Utilization
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Unattached
Location
Gloucester
Gloucester
Gloucester
Gloucester
TOTAL
Noods llole
Noods Hole
Noods llole
Sandy Hook
Noods Hole
Noods Hole
, Noods Hole
Sandy Hook
TOTAL
BY * 1
Target
Allowance
4/118.3
9/267.2
14/409.9
27/795.4
0/3.1
5/132.7
72/2012.5
4/148.7
8/446.5
3/97.5
2/67.5
94/2908.5
rage 1011
BY » 1
Increase
3/200.0
3/200.0
2/100.0
3/79.0
11/579.0
2/150.0
2/41.6
5/400.0
0/27.0
0/3500.0
0/1 250.0
1/20.8
0/167.0
0/1098.0
0/1300.0
10/7954.4
GRAND TOTAfc 305/11.080.21 105/15,690.9
'Currently IO.6tO.2K (3/400 - n 79 Increase NEC-OSS)
-------
APPENDIX IV - PHYSIOLOGY-BIOCHEMISTRY, MILFORD, CONN.
Sampling Protocol
Samples of organisms will be taken from both "clean" and impacted areas.
Teleosts
A. Sampling: 10 individuals per sp at selected clean and impact
stations.
B. Treatments:
1. Excise kidney, brain, and 1-2 g gonad
2. Place each in small plastic bag, pinch and fold to get out as much
air as possible; wrap tightly with masking tape and label (use
code; sample data sheet is enclosed).
3. Freeze at as low temperature as possible.
4. Take blood samples from winter flounder and yellowtail flounder
and any other species where 10 or more individuals are available.
Centrifuge blood and save and freeze serum. Discard cells.
C. Species, in order of importance:
Flounder (yellowtail, winter), Gadoids (cod, haddock, pollock),
Clupeids (herring, alewife), and Mackerel
Crustaceans
A. Sampling: as for teleosts
B. Treatments:
1. Excise, package (as shown above), and freeze gonads (all),
digestive gland (1-2 g), and blood.
2. Return live specimens from end-of-cruise stations to the
laboratory.
C. Species, in order of importance:
Lobster, Jonah Crab
Molluscs
A. Sampling: as for teleosts
295
-------
B. Treatments:
1. Excise, package (as above), and freeze gills, adductor muscle
(1-2 g), mantle, and gonads.
*2. Return live specimens as for crustaceans.
C. Species in order of importance:
Ocean Scallop, ocean Quahog, other spp. of opportunity
D. Sampling procedure for sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus)
Adductor muscle, taken at sea:
1. Sampler per station = An optimal number would be at least 12
animals taken at each station, if possible".
2. Data needed =
a) Keep accurate log of station number (salinity, temperature,
depth) and date, and please make copy for me.
b) Please note size (cm) and sex (relative ripeness of gonad would
also be helpful) of each animal from which adductor muscle is
taken.
c) Use your own code, but samples for each station should be
numbered, to keep track of size and sex.
3. Sampling procedure proper:
a) Excise adductor muscle as cleanly as possible (so no gonad
tissue, digestive gland, or whatever, will contaminate the
muscle tissue); cut away the outside of the muscle, if necessary
or if it's easier, we only need about 2 grams.
b) Place tissue in small plastic bags (home-made from Zip-Lock
bags, supplied in box with tape and marker) and squeeze around
to eliminate as much air as possible, then
c) Wrap tightly with masking tape, number (or .whatever your system
is), and freeze-store** by station groups, as was done on the
Sept. '77 cruise.
4. When off-loading ship, the best treatment would be to store the
samples with some hunks of dry ice in a freezer, to await pick-up
and transport to the Mil ford Laboratory.
*Please bring back to the laboratory live lobsters, crabs and bivalve
molluscs caught during the last three days of the cruise.
**The lower the temperature, the better—20°C would be very good.
296
-------
Water Column Biology Panel Addendum.
I. In order to develop good baseline data standardized methods of
sampling are necessary.
A. Zooplankton - Bongo Samples
The standard sampling gear for MARMAP1 ichthyoplankton operations
is the Bongo net array consisting of two cylindrical mouth
pieces 61 cm in diameter inside of which are fastened flowmeters.
The port cylinder is fitted with a 0.505 mm mesh net and the
starboard with a 0.333 mm mesh net. A 45 kg depressor and a
TDR (time-depth recorder) is attached to the array. The
standard tow is the double oblique to within 5 m of the bottom
or a maximum of 200 m. No time is spent at depth. The towing
wire is payed-out at the rate of 50 m/min and retrieved at 20
m/min. Towing speed is 1.5 to 2.0 kn. Flowmeter readings are
recorded before and after each tow, the TDR is checked for the
maximum depth of gear after each tow.
Plankton is gently washed from the net into a bucket then
drained through a sieve having smaller meshes than the net,
Plankton is transferred to a glass jar and preserved in 4%
1Adapted from MARMAP Survey I Manual. Prepared by J. Jossi, R. Marak
and H. Peterson. 1975. NOAA/NMFS.
297
-------
buffered formalin. Each jar has an inside and outside top
label indicating vessel, cruise, station, gear type and mesh
size. Additional information is recorded on the standard
MARMAP Zooplankton and Master Station record logs.
B. Zooplankton - Neuston Samples
For neuston, near surface Zooplankton and contaminants such as
tar, oil, and plastics, the standard gear is the MARMAP1
neuston net which is a 1.0 m x 0.5 m frame made of aluminum
pipe fitted with a 4.9 m long conical net of 0.505 mm mesh.
The standard tow is made with the net 1/2 submerged for 10 min
at 2.0 kn. The sample is handled in the same manner as the
Bongo samples.
C. Special Samples - Microplankton, Phytoplankton
The standard sampling gear for microplankton including phytoplankton
is the 20 cm Bongo array which is fitted with 0.253 mm and
0.165 mm mesh nets and flowmeters. These are attached to the
towing wire just above 61 cm Bongos so that towing procedures
are the same as those described in "A.11.
II. Integrated approach for studying the effects of oil on ichthyoplankton.
A. Sampling, sorting and identification of fish eggs
298
-------
1. Observations of condition of eggs and larvae at time of
capture
2. Numbers/I00 m3
3. Distribution
4. Species and community composition
5. Comparison with data from previous years
6. Food web implications
B. Genetics - Embryos
1. Sampling
2. Identification
a. species
b. stage
3. Examination (cytogenetics - Longwell, 1976}
4. Results (%}
a. morbid
b. moribund
c. abnormal embryos
d. chromosome damage
C. Histopathology - Examination of larvae from clean and spill
areas for histologies! changes.
0. Bioassay - Effects of oil on developing embryos and larvae -
at sea and laboratory studies. See Water Column Biology (4).
Schematic approach:
299
-------
Bioassay Experiments - Laboratory produced eggs & larvae
Laboratory + In situ
(petroleum hydrocarbons) (oTT spill area)
Control (laboratory and
tooratory
In situ)
Genetics (B) Direct Observations (A)
hysiology (D) Histopathology (C)
300
-------
HISTOPATHOLOGY PANEL
Participants
P.P Yevich, Chairperson
R.S. Brown
C.A. Farley
G. Gardner
J.W. Hurst, Jr.
301
-------
HISTOPATHOLOGY PANEL
General Considerations
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A» Objective:
The objective for histopathology studies related to oil
spills is to determine whether or not the cell tissues of
animals which have been collected from the oil spill sites
show any morphological or histochemical changes which can
be attributed to the oil. However, some of the difficulties
in achieving this objective result from our lack of know-
ledge as to what constitutes a normal situation for the area
from which the animals are collected. We need physiological,
seasonal, and cyclic morphological baseline data for the
majority of marine species. Information is now becoming
available as to what is histologically normal in many of the
commercially important marine species (oysters, mussels,
blue crabs, quahogs, soft shells, and scallops). This
information is being prepared for publication in Atlas forms
by EPA & NOAA, and possibly the BLM program.
B. Recommendations:
1. Histopathologic studies must be correlated with analyt-
ical studies.
2. We will collect whatever species are available at the
spill. However, the selection of the species will be
at the discretion of the histopathologic investigator
who may not be looking for the most sensitive species
but for an indicator species.
3. Histopathology experts should be invited to all spills.
However, what animals are to be collected should be left
to the discretion of the histopathologic investigator.
4. Where and how animals are to be necropsied is left up to
the discretion of the investigator.
5. Fixation, trimming, and slide preparation is left up to
the discretion of the investigator.
6. The number of collections per oil spill site shall be
determined by the histopathologic investigator and the
302
-------
circumstances of the oil spill. Of greatest interest
are the chronic histopathologic effects of the oil
spill.
7. Close coordination should be maintained with the
Laboratory Toxicity group as to the histopathologic
findings in the field animals. For histopathology
efforts to be of any value for socioeconomic analyses,
we must show a cause-effect relationship.
8. There is a lack of funds and trained people in marine
histopathology in the U.S. and ways were discussed for
training of these people.
C. Recommended Reference:
Yevich, P.P. and C.A. Barszcz, 1977. Preparation of Aquatic
Animals for Histopathological Examination. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio. 20 pp. (Preliminary - Subject
to Revision)
303
-------
HISTOPATHOLOGY PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. To determine the histopathologic effects of an oil spill on marine
organisms.
304
-------
PANEL: HISTOPATHOLOGY
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK:
1- Project Title: To Determine the Histopathologic Effects of an
Oil Spill on Marine Organisms
2. Project Description;
Morphologic study of cells and tissues from oil exposed and
control animals will be conducted using the light and electron
microscopes. Histochemical methods will also be utilized
to determine any chemical changes which may be taking place in
the cells and tissues. This will provide insight on any tissue
changes taking place in the exposed animals. Comparison of
cells and tissues of the control animals using the same methods
and baseline data will give us some indication as to whether or
not these changes are due to the oil.
The methods and techniques employed are the same as those used
by animal, (experimental), and human pathologists during the
past 50-100 years.
3. Performing Organizations:
Paul P. Yevich
Histopathology Unit
ERL - Narragansett
Austi Forley
Pathology Br.
NMFS - NOAA
Oxford, Maryland
Dr. Robert Brown
Marine Pathology Laboratory
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, R.I.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Most of the habitats listed in the New England list would be
applicable.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Studies should be limited to major oil spills which have impacted
large populations and organisms which can be identified by location,
305
-------
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types of oil spills should be studied.
7. Time Frame:
Studies will commence with controls, become more significant-
after 2 weeks and continue until no effects are seen histopatho-
logically. Species should be selected on the basis of avail-
ability at the site and at comparable controls. Samples should
include at least 30 animals and be collected weekly for the
first month, monthly for the next 5 months, and then quarterly
for 2 years. Other sample collections should be made available
to the investigator for a period of up to 10 years. Birds,
mammals and other various organisms should be examined when
requested or when gross pathology is evident. Samples of all
species should be at least fixed and archived.
8. Cost:
Slide preparation and histopathologic analysis of the slide runs
anywhere from $12.00 to $15.00/slide. It will cost $12,000 per
species for a 2-year study, $5,000/species for a 6-month study.
Travel and preparation of reports - $50,000.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A field model kit containing fixatives, alcohol for storage of
specimens, bags, shucking knives, etc. has been constructed by
the Histopathology Unit of ERL-N. Some improvements will be
made and it is hoped that these kits will then be made available
for histopathologists who respond to oil spills.
A manual for the preparation of aquatic animals for'histopatho-
logic examination has been prepared by the Histopathology Unit
of ERL-N and will be distributed throughout the country to in-
terested people.
A histopathologic technique manual prepared by the Pathology Br.
of the NMFS. NOAA Labs, Oxford, Md. will soon be available to
interested people.
Necessary equipment for the preparation and analysis of micro-
scopic slides is available at the institutions listed in #3.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
See list in #3.
306
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
See list in #3. However, there is need of more people and organ-
izations to get involved in marine histopathology. There is a
great shortage of marine histopathologists and means should be
provided for training them.
12. Support Services;
In order for this project to function proper.ly, the histopatholo-
gist should be informed as to the possible oil spill impact, etc.
by the on-scene coordinator. Also close coordination should be
maintained with the analytical chemists who will be doing hydro-
carbon determinations of the animals. In fact, when specimens
are collected, they should be collected from the same time, area,
species, etc. as those collected for the analytical chemists.
13. Payoff;
We have little knowledge as to histopathology effects of oil on
marine life, we thus would be making contributions in this area.
Causes of death to the animals especially in cases of chronic
exposure (5 to 10 years) in which we have a slow depletion of a
population of animals once the oil spill site has been cleared.
Correlated with laboratory toxicity studies - a cause and effect
relationship.
Possible carcinogenic potentials of petro-chemicals.
14. Limitations:
Histopathology would be of use only on animals which have come
into contact with the oil in some form or manner.
307
-------
LABORATORY TOXICITY PANEL
Participants
J. Gentile, Chairperson
J. Atema
C. Deacutis
R. Eisler
D. Everich
R. Gerber
S. Jacobson
E. Jackim
E.B. Karnofsky
K. Simon
J. Kineman
P. Lefcourt
S.M. Lord
B.D. Melzian
D.C. Miller
S.R. Petrocelli
C. Ross
A.N. Sastry
308
-------
LABORATORY TOXICITY PANEL
General Information and Guidance
• Initial Considerations
• Specific Research Considerations
• Miscellaneous Information
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Research Thrusts
The Panel reviewed the action plan and focused on three factors in
guiding lab studies:
1. Studies that assist and support the on-scene coordination
functions and decision making*
2. Post-spill damage assessment and dollar impact.
3. The utilization of a spill as a research opportunity.
The Panel produced the 15 research areas enumerated below in order of
presentation.
1. Time dilution bioassay studies using field verified
dosing regimes to plankton and meroplankton.
2. Test effects of long-term exposure on normal develop-
ment and reproduction for selected commercially important
species.
3. Field exposed organisms returned to lab and a variety
of response parameters measured and recovery evaluated.
These studies potentially involve repeated field collec-
tions of infaunal benthos to assess long-term effects.
4. Effects of tainting on predator-prey relationships.
5. Effects of oil contaminated sediment upon the repro-
ductive potential of benthic fish.
6. Long-term physiological and behavioral adaptations.
309
-------
7. Comparative toxicity of petroleum and dispersant
mixtures.
8. Comparative toxicity of various types of oils.
9. Chronic oil exposure to commercial infauna.
10. Effects of seasonality on toxicity.
11. Effects of oil pollution on species distribution
and structure in microcosms: planktonic and soft
body benthic.
12. Large scale controlled lab studies on structural
assemblages.
13. Research on bioaccumulation of petroleum hydrocarbons
in commercial species and human health hazards from
consumption of these species.
14. Standardization of bioassay methods.
15. Intertidal modeling of benthos to simulate natural
exposure. Looking at tumor induction, fish disease
and parasitism.
The panel summarized this diverse list into the following categories:
• Time-Dilution Models for Plankton/Meroplankton
• Field Exposed - Laboratory Assessed Studies
• Standardization and Testing of Major Petroleum Hydrocarbon
Types Singly and in Combination with Available Dispersants
0 Microcosm Research
• Health Effects
• Large Scale Structural Assemblages.
The panel decided they could not rank these categories by impor-
tance because spill situations are variable. It was generally
concluded that the potential long-term effects were in the benthos
for near-shore spills. In terms of research that should be imple-
mented now, the third category (hydrocarbon testing) was highlighted,
These data would be invaluable to the on-scene coordinator.
310
-------
B. Recommendations to the Workshop Executive Committee
Two problem areas were highlighted for further consideration by the
Executive Committee:
1. Clarification of funding to on-going research efforts.
Is funding added to existing programs and the commit-
ments delayed?
2. The subject of dollar value for liability.
It was recommended that population models and catch data for regionally
important species be centrally available and that specialists in this
area be used to project impacts. ' Also resource economists should be
retained to calculate the possible ramifications.
C. Corporate Capabilities
The panel discussed with its corporate members their capabilities and
contributions. There appears to be substantial laboratory bioassay
expertise in this geographical area. The role of state support in
laboratory toxicity studies was not dealt with initially.
SPECIFIC RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS
A. Species and Parameters
The panel decided that to recommend a list of test species would not
be appropriate. We recommend the following criteria be used as
guidance for species selection:
• Select species representing pertinent feeding types that
reflect the major routes of pollutant entry to the biota.
• Select indigenous and/or representative species from
the following groups: fish, Crustacea, molluscs, poly-
chaetes, echinoderms, and macroalgae.
• Other factors that must be considered on a spill by spill
basis are ecological or commercial significance, suitable
life stage, appropriately sensitive species, availability of
species from field or culture.
Parameters to be included in laboratory assessments are quite numerous
and specific to the research design. Generally, short-term measures
of stress such as biochemical, physiological, behavioral, and histological
311
-------
effects should be correlated with growth and reproduction and tissue
residues whenever possible. Measures of stress for microcosms and
community assays should include both functional and structural
components whenever possible.
B. Role of Analytical Support
The role of Analytical Support was discussed with emphasis upon
realistic assessment of water, tissue, and sediment analysis for each
experimental design. We emphasize the careful deliberation on how
the data is to be used and how the application affects choice and
sophistication of analysis. Total hydrocarbon may frequently be
sufficient to establish a causal relationship.
A second order Analytical problem involves quality assurance. There
must be a coordinated Chemistry Section effort to assist the biologist
in selecting a contractor and to assure the quality of the data.
Several questions were raised regarding site coordination problems.
The panel feels that a specific hierarchy be established that includes
an on-scene coordinating biologist and chemist to direct activities
in these areas. The OSC can't cope with all the factors. The
biologist will also make a list of participating institutions and
researchers that can be mobilized rapidly.
Another useful approach that was recommended is to train state
wildlife and pollution personnel to handle many of the collection
functions.
C. Microcosm Research
The applicability of microcosms in spill assessment research was
discussed. It was concluded that microcosms are at present best
utilized to study basic research needs and have limited applicability
in frequent spill assessment.
D. Testing for Health Hazards in Seafood
In any assessment of oil spill impact, the health hazards to man must
be considered, especially when it involves closing down a fishery.
The major questions in this regard are the following:
1. How is it determined when a fishery could be closed
because of a health hazard?
2. How extensive is the area to be closed?
3. How long should an area remain off limits?
312
-------
In order to answer these questions, various tests to assess the
health impact studies should be conducted along with more research.
These studies should include organoleptic tests for tainting and
relating the results to specific hydrocarbon levels. It appears that
U.S. Food and Drug Administration may set recommendations for safe
levels of PNA's and other carcinogens in seafood in the near future.
Consequently, fish from oil spill areas should be evaluated for
specific PNA's. Furthermore, seafood extracts should be assayed for
carcinogens by tests such as the Ames test, DNA repair or cell
transformation. Chromosome breakage in field or lab exposed animals
might also be indicative of the presence of carcinogens and mutagens.
This is of practical interest because it has been shown that concen-
trates of polluted shellfish have produced cancers in test animals.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION
A. Problems Related to the Role of the On-Scene Coordinator
The following were raised as relevant problems faced by the OSC:
1. Toxicity of oil of all types to species in impact
area (e.g., shellfish, fish, etc.).
2. Identification and comparison of oil spilled
for enforcement action and damage assessment,
especially in the case of weathered oil.
3. Species collection and preservation in impact
area for short-term effect of spilled oil.
4. Health Data to establish minimum criteria for
shellfish, finfish, etc., in impacted areas.
Total Hydrocarbons should be used as criteria
or fractions thereof.
B. Massachusetts Information
The following information was provided on Massachusetts
State facilities:
1. Lawrence Laboratory
- 3 Gas chromatographs/minicomputers
- 1 UV Fluorescence Spectrophotometer
313
-------
2. Cat Cove Laboratory
- 1 Gas chromatograph
1 UV Fluorescence Spectrophotometer
During the Argo Merchant and Bouchard 65 incidents, both labs combined
forces and could run 5 GC samples/day. Cat Cove prepared samples and
Lawrence ran the samples.
C. University of Rhode Island - MERL
The URI Marine Ecosystems Research Laboratory (MERL) is funded by the
EPA and is currently operating 12 large scale microcosms (13 m ) in an
experimental program designed to assess the effects of chronic, low
level oil pollution upon temperate-coastal marine ecosystems. MERL
research currently in progress is directly applicable to Laboratory
Toxicity Panel Projects Nos. 1, 4, 6 and 8. Preliminary information '
concerning these projects may be discussed with Dr. Gabriel Vargo,
Assistant Manager, MERL.
314
-------
LABORATORY TOXICITY PANEL
Recommended Projects
1. Parallel benthic bioassay for single species or natural benthic
assemblage (box core).
2. Standardized toxicity testing of petroleum and oil-dispersant
mixture to marine biota.
3. Damage effects of oil-dispersant mixtures under simulated field
conditions: use of large assay containers.
4. In situ acute toxicity tests.
5. Time dilution bioassay on holoplankton and meroplankton.
6. Sublethal effects of chronic exposure to low levels of petro-
leum hydrocarbons in zooplankton.
7. Effects of oil tainting of prey on food selectivity and feeding
behavior of two predatory fish species.
8. Effects of oil-spill contaminated sediment on reproduction
of winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Walbum).
9. Effects of chronic exposure to oil on representative marine
animals.
315
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Parallel Benthic Bioassay for Single Species or
Natural Benthic Assemblage (Box Core)
2. Project Description:
The general philosophy of this research approach is to periodi-
cally remove either single species or a natural benthic assemblage
that was impacted by a spill, transport to a mobile or fixed
laboratory and assess physiological, behavioral, shell micro-
structure, biochemical, histological, integrative or conservative
biological parameters, and tissue and sediment residues. Deter-
mine lab recovery patterns from those occurring in the field
as well as new recruitment in the field. The critical aspect of
this study is that the dosing is natural and integrative. There
is a general feeling of inadequacy about lab dosing benthic
systems. This approach is concerned with natural dosing of
benthic communities.
Such a research design will correlate a variety of stress mea-
sures with recovery time under natural conditions giving a true
assessment of damage. This approach eliminates the problem
of projecting field results from purely lab studies since they
are being run concurrently. Sessile infaunal and epifaunal
communities are especially well suited for these types of
studies as are commercially important shell fisheries.
3. Performing Organizations;
University laboratories with sources of running seawater and
marine labs (i.e., URI, U. of Massachusetts @ Gloucester, U. of
Maine, U. of New Hampshire @ Jackson Lab). EPA/NOAA labs and
private consultants located in New England area.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Clam/mud flats; offshore bottom; oyster-mussel reef.
5. Applicable Conditions:
A. Demonstration of oil impact on community.
B. Large impacted area of similar community structure to allow
repetitive temporal sampling.
316
-------
C. Accessibility to divers and/or sampling (< 30 meters).
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any oil type would be applicable.
7. Time Frame:
Such studies should have a minimum duration of one year to cover
reproductive, growth, and recruitment parameters. Also, rates
of biological uptake and/or depuration can be seasonally assessed,
Field sampling should be once monthly at a minimum. If possible,
sampling could be as frequent as every other week during spring
and summer.
Follow-up studies with less intensive sampling (seasonally)
schedules could continue for up to three years depending on
habitat significance (liability) and data base.
8. Cost;
Such a study would require from $100K to 200K/year depending
on sampling frequency, vessel expense, analytical chemistry
needed and number of parameters measured.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Benthic samplers (Peterson Grabs). Box Core samplers, tanks
for transporting organisms. Necessary analytical chemistry
support and instrumentation (unless contracted). Lab require-
ments include flowing seawater, troughs and tanks, and depending
on measured parameters any number of things. For example,
feeding studies require algal culturing and counting equipment;
respiratory studies require D.O. measuring devices; shell micro-
structure studies require = $30K in scopes, grinding equipment
and accessories.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Cruise time, analytical lab and wet lab for any applicable
habitat. Diving capability and support.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Need benthic biologist with expertise in molluscan biology and
benthic community ecology. Support personnel needed for lab
studies include experienced technician. Divers also need sample
collection as well as analytical capability. Currently such
317
-------
assessment techniques are not routinely available. EPA-
Narragansett staff will have most capabilities by January 1978.
Having settled on design details for such studies a training
program and/or identification of other experts could be forth"
coming.
12. Support Services:
A. Total areal impact of spill on benthos.
B. Analytical support for tissue and sediments.
C. Shell microstructure contract (Yale U.).
13. Payoff:
The principal output would be a real world assessment of initial
damage, latent effects and degree of recovery with time.
Furthermore, one can correlate lab measures of stress with
actual field impact. By monitoring the indigenous populations
temporally, one obtains a meaningful measure of duration of
impact. With reliable areal information both duration and
extent can be realistically measured. The cost/liability
estimates would have a meaningful base.
14. Limitations:
The field sampling limitations involve patchiness of exposed
habitat and selection of a similar but unimpacted control popu-
lation. A direct causal relationship may be difficult to verify
and may only be inferred, since populations in exposed and
control areas may have different histories, etc.
318
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO: 2
PRIORITY RANK:
1- Project Title: Standardized Toxicity Testing of Petroleum and
Oil-Dispersant Mixtures to Marine Biota
2. Project Description:
To conduct static acute toxicity bioassays with petroleum,
chemical oil dispersants, and oil-dispersant mixtures using
selected marine indicator species. Methodology is as outlined
in Annex X of the Federal Register. Results are essential for
use of on-scene coordinator in dispersant application recommen-
dations. Methodology and some results reported in detail in La
Roche et al., 1970 JWPCFed 42:1982-1989.
3. Performing Organizations:
A. EPA ERL-Narragansett
B. RFP for industrial contract
C. Manufacturer's responsibility as outlined in Annex X—although
none have complied to date.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Salt marsh, shallow salt pdnd, rocky shore, sand shore.
5. Applicable Conditions:
As outlined in Annex X; mixtures should reflect manufacturer's
recommended application dosages.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All types of oils-preferably restricted to products transported
via VLCC in excess of 100,000 tons annually in local waters.
7. Time Frame:
Four man-years — continuous bioassay testing of 96 hour duration,
approximately 5 dispersants tested weekly vs 6 oils. This
should cover all dispersants now sold commercially.
319
-------
8. Cost:
$120k ($30k/man-year)
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
As specified in Annex X.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
As specified in Annex X.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Ron Eisler available for providing instruction at ERL-Narragansett
in oil-dispersant testing. Four GS-5 level personnel can be
trained in 2 weeks, but assays must be conducted under senior
biologist supervision.
12. Support Services:
As indicated in Annex X.
13. Payoff:
Recommendations by OSC to apply dispersants and other oil-
counteractants are dependent on a solid data base. This data
base is nonexistent at present—at least for the several
hundred chemical oil dispersants now in use.
14. Limitations:
As outlined in Annex X; especially tests of dispersant chemical
effectiveness.
320
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Damage Effects of Oil-Dispersant Mixtures Under
Simulated Field Conditions: Use of Large Assay
Containers
2. Project Description:
Current oil-dispersant toxicity evaluations are conducted under
static conditions in small jars using comparatively small
indicator species. Failure to consider known depth protective
effects in large, deep flow-through systems (Eisler, 1975 API
Proceedings, San Francisco 535-540) lowers credibility to OSC
of data derived from standardized (i.e., Annex X) toxicity
tests.
Tests proposed herein would be conducted in large, deep, flow-
through systems using adults of economically important coastal
and offshore species, and others where appropriate. Primary
emphasis would be on survival and whole body residues during
exposure and afterwards, sublethal and latent effects including
biochemical, physiological behavioral, and histological data
could also be collected. Results of these studies would be
useful in XI) assessing ecological damage effects of petroleum
and oil-dispersant mixtures (2) establishment of hydrocarbon
residues in marine products of commerce which are (a) not harmful
to human health and (b) do not significantly affect integrity of
brood populations.
3. Performing Organizations:
EPA - Edison, NJ
EPA - Narragansett, RI
US Army Corps of Engineers
RFP
4. Applicable Habitats:
All
321
-------
5. Applicable Conditions;
Mixing energy for oil-dispersant combinations must be calibrated;
sediment types and amounts should be established; distance from
surface variation should be determined; HC levels in water column
known.
6. Applicable Oil Time:
Applicable to all crude oils; and oil-dispersant combinations at
manufacturers recommended dosages (use of dispersants contra-
indicated in spills of gasoline and other highly refined products),
7. Time Frame:
First year (reevaluation afterwards): screening of the five
most promising dispersants (derived from Annex X data) together
with appropriate target oils. A typical study would last 2 to 3
months with a total of 48 to 72 separate studies planned during
this interval (see equipment section). This is a multidiscipli-
nary approach recycling heavily on aquatic toxicologists, and
analytical chemists. A minimum of 5 man-years is necessary.
This can be expanded to 10 man-years if supplemental data on
biochemical, physiological and other stress profiles are acquired
(strongly recommended).
8. Cost:
At $30K/man-year, minimum personnel costs would be $150K, maximum
300K. Construction costs would approximate $125K.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
A minimum of six large tanks are required, each of approximately
20 meters in length, 4 meters by 4 meters. Tanks should be
continually supplied with raw seawater and bottom exit drains and
equipped with cage-like compartments at discrete intervals from
surface to bottom. These tanks do not exist at present.
Conventional glassware and other equipment are available at
ERL-Narragansett for organisms.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Needs: (1) holding facilities (2) analytical capability (GC-MS9;
water chemistry analysis); histology and biochemical facilities.
These are all available at ERL-Narragansett.
322
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available;
Availability of personnel unknown. Disciplines required include
aquatic toxicology, marine biochemistry, analytical petroleum
chemistry, histology, marine behavior, and aquatic physiology.
12. Support Services:
Dispersant effectiveness must be established under these conditions.
Degradation of petroleum and levels in water column and sediments
should be monitored. Quality control of indicator species.
13. Payoff:
A. Establishment of HC residue levels for protection of aquatic
life and human health.
B. Establishes link between Annex X data and field testing of
oil counteractants.
C. Unique scientific contribution on basis of test facility
and multidisciplinary approach.
D. Provides OSC with decision making capability.
E. Provides data for predictive model capability for assessing
economic damage of large scale spills and selected oil
dispersant counteractants.
14. Limitations;
Contingency on (a) construction of test facility, (b) avail-
ability of technical expertise (some could be fixed on a one-year
temporary basis) and (c) needs validation with field testing.
323
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 4
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: In situ Acute Toxicity Tests
2. Project Description:
Mobile lab aboard work boat at spill site.
Indigenous species, representing several major groups (molluscs,
polychaetes, crustacean, fish) collected from a field control
site are exposed to (a) oil-contaminated water from spill site
in dynamic (flowing) water systems to determine toxicity under
field conditions (i.e., in the presence of physical, chemical,
microbial, etc. factors present at site), (b) Samples of water
to be collected for chemical analyses by appropriate techniques
(e.g., GC/MS, LC, etc), (c) Dispersants can be mixed with
incoming oil-contaminated seawater to determine effects of
dispersants on toxicity of oil-dispersant mixtures under field
conditions. On the basis of this test, the least harmful
dispersant could be selected for clean-up (presumably only
dispersants considered to be effective in dispersing the oil in
question would be tested as to effects on toxicology).
3. Performing Organizations:
EPA
EG&G Bionomics
4. Applicable Habitats:
Study could be performed (a) near shore with mobile lab located
on-shore and pumping systems conducting oil-seawater to lab.
(b) offshore with mobile lab on work boat.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Weather conditions would have greatest impact on ability to
perform study of this type. Tests would be difficult under
heavy weather conditions with the lab on work boat. Self-
contained mobile lab could be rapidly transported to site of
nearly any spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Study would be appropriate for any type of oil spill.
324
-------
7. Time Frame:
Standard acute toxicity test would require a 96-hour exposure
period (i.e., to estimate the 96-h LC50 for the oil and the
oil-dispersant mixtures). However, since the time will be
critical, it may be necessary to shorten exposure to 24 or 48
hours.
8. Cost:
Costs would not be related to spill size but would be determined
by number of days lab and ship are on site. Costs for lab and
personnel on site for 1 week could approach $10K exclusive of
cost of ship time and collecting operations which could be
shared with the research projects of other investigators.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Equipment needed would include: mobile lab with the appropriate
exposure aquaria, diluters, pumps, and ancillary equipment
normally required for bioassays (pH meters, dissolved oxygen
meters, etc.). Bionomics currently operate mobile laboratory
facilities which contain all the necessary equipment. Also
required is test animal collecting gear such as trawl nets and
water samplers.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Facilities include mobile lab described above and work boat of
appropriate size to transport lab.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:'
Personnel required would include investigators familiar with
the performance of on-site toxicity tests. Bionomics has
personnel available with the relevant field and lab experience.
Contact is S.R. Petrocelli 617/295-2550.
12. Support Services:
Support would include collection of test organisms and chemical
analyses of water and animal tissues.
13. Payoff:
Results of study would (a) determine acute toxicity of the oil
under field conditions to natural indigenous species; (b) give
the OSC information regarding the selection of dispersant to
\
325
-------
be used in cleanup or allow the OSC to determine that a disper-
sant should not be used; and (c) using mortality as the criter-
ion of effect, the economic loss associated with the death of a
certain percentage of the species of interest could be determined,
The study would also allow the investigator to (a) determine
impact on test animals of environmentally realistic oil concen-
trations; and (b) alter systems as required by the particular
spill. That is, test under continuous exposure to oil as occurs
during continuous release of oil from grounded tanker or test
under pulse-dosing conditions as occurs if oil spill is intermit-
tent. Also allows the study of under time-dilution conditions
which occur once the input of oil into the sea is ended and the
oil disperses with time.
14. Limitations:
Study would be difficult under conditions of heavy seas, strong
winds, heavy ice conditions. Need to locate appropriate control
areas from which to collect test animals. Test would probably
be shortened in time and scope due to need for immediate informa-
tion for the OSC to make decisions.
326
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
!• Project Title: Time Dilution Bioassay on Holoplankton and
Meroplankton
•i
2« Project Description:
Objective of this study is to utilize actual spill dispersion
information to assess the acute, latent and chronic impact upon
selected species of marine holoplankton and meroplankton.
Actual time series of chemical analysis from the spill site will
be used to develop a dispersion model for continuous flow dosing
system. Laboratory spawned or cultured organisms will be
exposed using a design that will permit assessment of acute,
latent and sublethal effects. Parameters could include embryo-
logical development, viable hatch, survival, and swimming behavior.
For chronic studies on growth, reproduction, brood size and subse-
quent Fj survival, this study will permit a realistic assessment
of impact to the water column environment. Applications should
be carefully chosen.
3. Performing Organizations:
Would include EPA-Narragansett, EG&G, Marine Research
Associates.
4. Applicable Habitats;
This assay is applicable to pelagic habitats either nearshore
or offshore.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Conditions for the success of this study include:
A. Detailed field analytical data and time dispersion model
B. Detailed lab analytical data to verify lab dosing systems
C. Application of assay in situations of known high potential
impact. Spawning areas for ichthioplankton species,
important meroplanktons, etc.
D. Deep offshore habitats where benthic impact is not expected.
327
-------
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Oil type most applicable is one with high dispersability and
potentially high WSF:No. 2, gasoline, No. 4.
7. Time Frame:
Acute and latent studies relate to temperatures and develop-
mental periods of appropriate species, generally, 10 to 30
days. Chronic studies could extend to 60 days.
8. Cost:
Cost per assay: Acute with latent 100 to $200/assay; chronic
$5 to $10K.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Dosing system ready to go with little advance notice.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Facilities include analytical laboratory and bioassay facilities
including flowing seawater, air and seawater temperature control,
model ship for dosing system fabrication.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Reputable contractors available and federal research facilities.
12. Support Services:
Support services include analytical chemistry, culture of test
species, field collection of indigenous adult spawning stock,
biogeographical and seasonal information for proper species
selection.
13. Payoff:
Produces hard scientific data based upon field observations and
predictability for acute, chronic and latent effects. Verified
(?) by field studies. Economic liability can only be assessed
if data is model with historical catch, fecundity and year class
data if available.
14. Limitations:
Limitations are that the plankton may constitute a minor problem
due to patchiness, immigration and high reproductive potential.
328
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 6
PRIORITY RANK:
*• Project Title: Sublethal Effects of Chronic Exposure to Low
Levels of Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Zooplankton
(Coastal, Offshore, etc.).' "This Work Could
Also be Extended to Fish (Herring) or Other
Crustaceans."
2. Project Description:
A. Objectives: to determine the long-term effects of realistic,
sublethal concentrations of petroleum oils on
(1) rates of uptake and retention of hydrocarbons by above
organisms.
(2) rates of biodeposition of oil residues in fecal
pellets.
(3) rates of ingestion, assimulation and respiration.
(4) energy available for growth, growth rates and fecundity.
(5) interpretation in terms of their usefulness in
predicting ecological influences of oil.
B. How carried out?
(1) populations of marine organisms will be held in 5700L
tanks into which a continuous supply of seawater,
food and oil is maintained.
(2) physiological measurements will be done using organisms
from the experimental (oiled-WSF) tanks and compared
to control (unoiled).
(3) possible results-reduction in carbon flow (Gilfillan,
1976), increased sensitivity to environmental stress,
reduced fecundity.
3. Performing Organizations:
Bowdoin College Marine Research Laboratory and Bowdoin College
Dept. of Chemistry. Personnel: Drs. Dana Mayo, Davie Page,
Edward Gilfillan, Ray Gerber, all at B.C.
329
-------
Address: Bowdoin College Marine Research Laboratory
Brunswick, Maine 04011 207/725-8731 Ext. 604
4. Applicable Habitats;
Coastal, Inshore, and Offshore waters of the Gulf of Maine.
5. Applicable Conditions:
Conditions for the study will be created and maintained using
the flow-through dosing apparatus. Once the system is set
up work can begin immediately.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
All oils can be used but should be limited to the most
detrimental types.
7. Time Frame:
This is a long term study and the period reflects the length
of the life cycle of the organisms and the seasonal cycle of
food supply. We envision at least one full year studies,
sampling once a week for nutrients, etc., bi-weekly for physio-
logical studies, etc.
8. Cost;
1st year is $126K (includes cost of apparatus)
2nd year is $80K (salary and maintenance—H-C sample analysis)
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
A. flow through apparatus - to be constructed
B. H-C equipment available at Bowdoin College
C. physiological equipment—mostly available: respirometers,
feeding apparatus, glassware, balances, etc.
D. CHN analyses—not available at Bowdoin College but from
Bigelow Laboratories, Boothbay Harbor, Maine.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
A. We have no facility needs except for the building of the
flow-through apparatus.
330
-------
B. Chemistry Dept., Marine Research Laboratory at Bowdoin
College has adequate space at the Main Campus and the marine
laboratory at Bethai Point.
C. Boats available for collecting and computer, library facilities
excellent.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
A. Chemistry group—Drs. Dana Mayo, David Page
B. Marine Research Group—Drs. Edward Gilfillan, Ray Gerber.
These personnel have had extensive experience in their
respective fields.
C. Two technicians—S. Hansen and J. Cooley; both senior
technicians.
12. Support Services:
A. Nutrient samples and particulate carbon and nitrogen samples
can be processed at the Bigelow Laboratories (they have
approved this work).
B. No other support services necessary.
13. Payoff:
A. This work will determine the Long-term effects (physio-
logical) of sublethal concentrations of petroleum H-C on
marine organisms using a flow-through in situ system.
B. We are concerned with nutritional physiology and energy
flux which ultimately effects the production of these
populations.
C. Provide insite into H-C uptake., rate of retension and
ultimately the concentration and movements of these H-Cs
up the food chain...even to man.
D. Any reduction in the production at one level (e.g., zoo-
plankton) could affect abundances by reducing consumer
populations (herring, etc.).
331
-------
E. Since these experiments will be conducted throughout the
year, valuable information on temperature and food effects
on the organisms' ability to resist oil pollution will be
obtained.
F. The flow-through apparatus will provide more realistic
conditions compared to static systems and could be used in
other similar dosing studies.
G. Economic payoff would be directly related to possible reduc-
tion in the growth and production of economically important
species.
14. Limitations;
A. The experiments have to be long-term and require consid-
erable manpower, thus would be costly and time consuming.
B. Each apparatus ($25K each) can only work with one oil
type at a time.
C. Results from these studies will not be directly comparable
to studies from "static systems."
D. The complexity of the apparatus will no doubt create
operational problems, which should be overcome after the
first year of operations.
£. The system may have to be closed down (December-February)
because of severe weather conditions in Maine.
332
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 7
PRIORITY RANK:
Project Title; Effects of Oil Tainting of Prey on Food
Selectivity and Feeding Behavior of Two
Predatory Fish Species
Project Description:
A. Objectives
(1) Determine behavior effects of an inshore oil spill
on normal feeding behavior of two predatory fish species
in terms of alteration of prey palatability.
(2) Increase knowledge in defining biologically adequate
stimuli used for optimal prey selection in fish, and
observe how these stimuli are altered by oil tainting.
(3) Determine the "rejection strength" of oil-tainted prey
in relation to feeding motivation changes due to
satiation.
B. Materials and Methods
Predator and prey species will be chosen with careful
consideration of constraints involved in a laboratory study,
i.e., predator and prey species suitability for laboratory
holding facilities; availability of normal prey in a spill
site, etc. Feeding behavior studies indicate two preliminary
predator species as plausible candidates. Olla et. al.
(1975) found juvenile Tautoga onitus to feed primarily on
Mytilus edulis. Olla et al. (1969) indicated adult winter
flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) to feed mainly on
bivalve moluscs and gastropods. Juvenile winter flounder
will be used, as Werner (1974) has predicted greater selec-
tivity in juvenile fish due to restrictions of a smaller
mouth gape. It is proposed here that these two predators,
being important sport and commercial fish species, be
utilized in behavior bioassays to determine effects of oil
tainting on feeding response to normal prey (Mytilus edulis).
Predators will be obtained from a clean site and held in the
lab. Contaminated prey (Mytilus edulis) will be obtained
from a spill area, and control prey from a "clean," uncon-
taminated area. Experiments will take place in sea water
tables 1.5m2 x 10cm deep. Predators will be presented
333
-------
with a choice situation of oil-tainted and uncontaminated
prey simultaneously. Probability of eating prey items and
response to the prey will be recorded. Data will be cate-
gorized into different motivation (satiation) levels and
analyzed for differences between tainted and "clean" prey.
This methodology has been used in behavior experiments by
Kislalioglu (1976) to analyze stimulus cue strength of prey
in fish feeding studies.
3. Performing Organizations;
EPA Environmental Research Lab In-House project.
4. Applicable Habitats:
Rocky shore and possibly offshore bottom (flounder).
5. Applicable Conditions:
Oil impact on a rocky intertidal area with adequate mussel
beds impacted.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any heavy oil which would fulfill the above requirement.
7. Time Frame:
The study requires a 2 year period, consisting of review of gut
analysis data in the literature; baseline feeding studies to
define the relationship of satiation to feeding behavior in the
species used and to define normal feeding responses; and oil
studies to observe any changes in normal feeding response.
Because of the dependence upon a spill of opportunity, baseline
studies will proceed until a spill of the specified type occurs
in the Region I coastal area, at which time emphasis will be
shifted to oil studies, with return to baseline studies necessary
for comparison of behavioral feeding responses.
8. Cost;
In-House Project $15K/man-years x 2 = $30K
1040 App't. (includes use of EPA facilities and
EPA ERL-Narragansett equipment)
9- Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
Will be supplied by EPA ERL-Narragansett.
334
-------
10, Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Supplied by EPA ERL-Narragansett.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available:
Christopher Deacutis, University of Rhode Island.
12. Support Services:
Body burden analysis of pooled oil-tainted prey.
13. Payoff:
A. Examines the effect of oil on normal predatory-prey rela-
tionships. Depending upon predatory species utilized, the
project may offer some predictive abilities as to impact
strength on generalist vs. more specialized predators. It
is expected that those fish species which rely on chemo-
sensory cues in any behavioral components of normal feeding
behavior will be most likely to alter normal feeding behavior,
and possibly result in "area avoidance searching" (Thomas,
1975). If a large area is impacted by the oil, extensive
localized migration and avoidance of the impacted area may
take place. Thus:
B. Contributes to long-term assessment of oil spill ecological
damage in terms of loss of contaminated areas as adequate
feeding grounds for commercially valuable fish species.
14. Limitations:
Prey should be obtained after cleanup if possible. A spring
or summer spill is desired since most fish species depress
feeding behavior to very low levels in winter months. If
qjussels are in offshore areas, diving services may be required.
REFERENCES
Kislalioglu, M. & R.N. Gibson, 1976. J. Exp. Marine Biol. Ecol.,
25: 159-169.
Olla, B., A.J. Bejda, & A.D. Martin, 1975. Fish. Bull. 73(4):
895-900.
335
-------
Olla, B., R. Wicklund, & S. Wilk, 1969. Trans. An. Fish. Soc.,
4: 717-720.
Thomas, G., 1974. An. Behavior, 22: 941-952.
Werner, E.E., 1974. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 31: 1531-1536.
336
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 8
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Effects of Oil-Spill Contaminated Sediment
on Reproduction of Winter Flounder,
Pseudopleuronectes americanus (Walbaum)
2. Project Description;
Objectives of the project would be:
A. To assess the impact of oil contaminated sediment on the
reproductive success of winter flounder, as measured by
larval survival after parental exposure during gonad
maturation.
B. To investigate whether a similar response occurs in the
field at an oil spill site by collecting gravid flounders
from the site, obtaining gametes, and measuring larval
survival.
3. Performing Organizations:
Environmental Research Lab. - Narragansett (EPA)
4. Applicable Habitat;
Shallow salt pond; worm-clam flat; shallow estuary or embayment.
5. Applicable Conditions;
A. Persistent incorporation of oil into the sediment
B. Existence of a suitable control site
C. Impact in an area where a spawning population of winter
flounder resides.
6. Applicable Oil Type:
Any frequently transported oil which has potential for incor-
poration into sediment (preferably No. 2 fuel oil for comparison
with previous studies).
337
-------
7. Time Frame
One to two years although follow-up studies may extend this to
five years.
8. Cost;
$20K-$30K (?)
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available;
- large tanks for adult exposure
- 10 gallon aquaria with temperature control
sediment collection equipment
- 2 otter trawls
- plankton nets or a supply of plankton for larval food
- microscope.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available:
Analytical (GC) sediment and tissue analysis boat equipped for
handling an otter trawl and willing to trawl in an oil con-
taminated area.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available;
Diane Everich - Research Aquatic Biologist, EPA-ERL,
Narragansett
One technician - part-time.
12. Support Services;
Completed sediment contamination surveys of spill area.
13. Payoff;
A. Study will indicate impact of an oil spill on winter
flounder reproductive success.
I
B. Catch statistics plus fecundity information in literature
may be combined with results from this study to produce
a rough estimate of damage cost to winter flounder
fishery.
333
-------
14. Limitations;
A. Collection of sediment from spill site for laboratory
exposures may be difficult due to patchy distribution of oil
and disturbance of oil gradient in sediment during collection,
This problem may be avoided by artificial contamination of
sediment in the lab using the same oil which was spilled.
B. It may happen that flounders avoid the spill site, in which
case the spill is not a problem — an interesting result in
itself.
339
-------
PANEL: LABORATORY TOXICITY
PROJECT NO.: 9
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Effects of Chronic Exposure to Oil on
Representative Marine Animals
2. Project Description;
Exposure of marine animals to oil even for limited periods
of time may result in significant deleterious effects on
the subsequent growth, development and reproduction of these
animals. Since it is difficult to determine the exposure
history of animals collected in the field, laboratory popula-
tions of fish, crustaceans and/or molluscs could be exposed in
the lab in a dynamic (flowing) water system to a range of con-
centrations representing different size oil spills in different
water masses representative of open ocean versus coastal embay-
ment, etc. Following exposure to the whole oils for a period of
time approximating an oil spill (days, weeks or months) the oil
source would be ended and the growth and development of the
animals measured in terms of length and weight measurements;
fecundity of animals exposed to oil at the various concentra-
tions could be compared with each other and with the controls
to determine a dose-response relationship and the subsequent
hatching of eggs and development of larvae could be determined.
During this time observations of behavior and physical anomalies
could be made; subsamples would be removed for histopathological
examination as well. This study would yield information con-
cerning the long-term effects on marine animals of exposure to
an oil spill in the field in a manner which would permit an
evaluation of the potential decrease in populations of these
species as a direct result of the exposure.
3. Performing Organizations;
EPA
Bionomics
EG&G
4. Applicable Habitats:
Any habitat could be considered.
340
-------
5. Applicable Conditions;
It is necessary (a) to work with species which can be successfully
cultured in the lab and (b) to determine prior to commencement of
the study, the duration of exposure and oil concentrations to be
representative of an actual oil spill.
6. Applicable Oil Type;
Any type of oil could be tested.
7. Time Frame:
Time frame depends on the duration of the life cycle of the animal
being tested and could range from 17-20 days for the calanoid
copepod Scartia tonsa, to weeks for the mysid shrimp Cyprinodon
vainegatus.
8. Cost:
Size of spill does not affect cost. Cost determined by duration
of life cycle (i.e., amount of time populations are to be main-
tained in lab following exposure). Costs may approach $75K
for 7 months sheepshead minnow study.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available:
Appropriate exposure aquaria, water quality measurement apparatus
(pH and dissolved oxygen meters, GC, etc.).
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available;
Facilities required would include a laboratory with flowing
good quality seawater, water tempering equipment, analytical
laboratories.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available;
Investigators with familiarity with the general biology and
culturing of the test species are preferred. Bionomics currently
employs persons with the necessary qualifications. Contact
S.R. Petrocelli 617-295-2550.
12. Support Services:
Analytical chemistry is most important ancillary service required.
341
-------
13. Payoff;
Results of study would define the long term effects of oil
spills on marine animals and perhaps permit an evaluation of the
changes in numbers of individuals surviving and reproducing in
natural populations.
14. Limitations:
By necessity, only one species could be tested in any study.
Separate studies must be conducted with each of several signi-
ficant species. It would be difficult to determine the overall
ecological effects but does give good information for the
selected species (which should be selected on the basis of
commercial, ecological and human health significance).
342
-------
SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS PANEL
Participants
J. Praeger, Chairperson
P. Fricke, Co-Chairperson
C. C. Bates W. Marhoffer
S. Carroll J. Marotta
C. Carty B. Melzian
P. Cavicchi F. C. Monastero
R. Ceurvels D. G. Neal
F. R. Disheroon S. Peterson
J. Fiske R. Rehfus
D. Forcella R. Robinson
J. Gentile L. Slaski
C. Hall W. Smith
J. W. Hurst J. Snider
J. F. Kirkland J. Valenti
S. M. Lord H. D. VanCleave
Judge T. Yost
343
-------
SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS PANEL
General Information and Guidance
• Initial Considerations
• Follow-Up Panel Activities
INITIAL CONSIDERATIONS
A« Formation of Socioeconomic Subpanel
The initial act of this panel was to recognize that the social sciences
should contribute project proposals in their own disciplines to the
Executive Committee. Consequently, a separate subpanel on assessment
of socioeconomic impacts of an oil spill was created under the Chair-
manship of Peter Fricke.
B. Legal Framework for Damage Assessment
1. Pending Legislation
The panel addressed applicable law and decided that the wisest course
of action was to offer guidance based upon anticipated passage of one of
the three laws now before Congress dealing with oil spills. This is
possible because none of the three affect the nature or amount of
scientific contribution to ecological damage assessment. All deal
with traditional concepts of damage assessment, such as oil removal
costs, losses of use, losses of profits, losses of tax revenues,
etc. Only "loss or injury to natural resources" is a new feature of
the law. This will need to be developed through the evolution of
case law — but is a major concern of this workshop.
2. The Three Questions
The basic questions that must be answered in a case in which damage
to natural resources is claimed are:
1) What was damaged?
2) How much was it damaged?
3) How was it damaged?
344
-------
Discussions of these questions elicited a recurring theme of base-
lines or controls. The panel concluded that although baseline or
control information is highly desirable, it is not always available.
Therefore, studies of damage must be prepared to proceed in the
absence of prior or control data. Scientists must be prepared to
determine what is measurable in the absence of a baseline — and how
this may be used in a forensic sense to establish answers to what was
damaged, how much it was damaged, and by what means it was damaged.
3. Scientific vs Legal Requirements
Whereas science would like to be at least 95 percent sure of its
ground before venturing an opinion, the courts are satisfied with 51
percent surety. Expert opinion is quite acceptable — and the weight
or preponderance of evidence sways the court's decision. Thus, narrative
description of observable phenomena is adequate and acceptable if
nothing more substantial can be developed as evidence.
FOLLOW-UP PANEL ACTIVITIES
A. Development of Legal Guidance for Scientists
The panel agreed that as an exercise, it would define the elements
of an ideal case, and then determine just how far from the ideal
each element could stray, before the study would be deemed useless.
An ideal case of ecological damage assessment was defined as one in
which:
1) All parties were defined.
2) A scientific baseline was available.
3) Damage was to a commercial crop.
4) Cause and effect of the spill was clearly demonstrable.
5) Economic losses were measurable.
6) Means of measurement were known, verified, and agreed
upon.
7) Predictable losses of resources and their economic
values were agreed upon. (
Clearly this set of criteria never will be fully met. What then,
can scientists contribute to the adjudication of these seven points?
345
-------
Identification of the parties is not in the scientific realm. The
parties will be determined by the courts. The remaining 6 criteria
are fair game for the scientific community. The guidance to be
developed by the panel will deal with such questions as:
- Do conditions under which samples are taken affect
stringency of proof required?
- Can index species be used to presume baseline conditions?
- Must an effect on man be proven to demonstrate damage?
- Can scientific findings be prioritized in the legal arena?
- Must cause and effect be provable in every case?
- How much money is a dead barnacle really worth? ^
B. Specific Projects
The projects recommended by the panel represent broad brush, but not
exhaustive proposals to gather information which would be useful in
assessing socioeconomic impacts of oil pollution. It should be noted
that any person or corporate entity earning more than 25 percent of
his yearly income from marine related activities is entitled to
redress if he can prove damage under proposed legislation (HR-6803).
Thus, in addition to providing the OSC with information which would
assist in the choice of cleanup methods, the socioeconomic studies
are seen as providing yard sticks against which compensation for given
incidents may be measured.
The suggested studies fall into two groups. Baseline studies are
seen as providing basic information about socioeconomic activities
which will probably be impacted by any spill. These studies would
require periodic updating. The second group of studies provide
specific information useful in impact assessment, but would not need
to be updated. The actual impact studies after a polluting event
would draw upon the two groups of research studies and would ascertain
the impact in socioeconomic terms.
346
-------
SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS PANEL
Recommended Projects*
1. Overview of the maritime socioeconomic activities of the region
by sub-region.
2. Baseline study of commercial fisheries processing industry by
sub-region.
3. Baseline study of the fish processing industry by sub-region.
4. Baseline study of the fish trucking by regions and sub-regions.
5. Baseline study of fish retailing dependent upon locally caught
fish by sub-region and region.
6. Baseline study of the recreational boating industry and of
boat ownership and use.
7. Baseline study of sports fishing by sub-region.
8. Baseline study of recreational use of the shoreline.
9. Analysis of effectiveness of baseline research as a basis for
assessing legal damage.
10. Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of oil spill cleanup operations.
11. Study of the socioeconomic factors involved in locating oil
pollution response equipment stores and the designation of areas
for beaching or off-loading damaged vessels.
12. Analysis of oil transportation patterns for the region by sub-
region.
13. Development of models for the assessment of socioeconomic damage
following spills.
*Projects 1-8 are considered baseline studies providing basic socio-
economic information which would require periodic updating* Projects
9-14 provide specific information useful in impact assessment
which would not require updating.
347
-------
14. Assignment of socioeconomic priorities for protection of areas
vulnerable to oil spills by sub-region.
15. Preliminary descriptions of additional projects.
348
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 1
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Overview of the Maritime Socioeconomic Activities
of the Region by Sub-Region (A sub-region is
defined as one bounded by natural features of the
marine environment, e.g., Narragansett Bay or
Vineyard Sound.)
2. Project Description;
Goals of the project would be:
A. Ascertain population size, demographic characteristics, and
distribution by season;
B. Provide a general description of the human use, and economic
value of the marine environment by region and sub-region;
C. Provide a full description .of the industrial uses of the
marine environment (e.g., sand and gravel extraction, shore
line industrial sites, ports and terminals);
D. Identify the fisheries and their socioeconomic values;
E. Identify other uses of the marine environment and their
socioeconomic values;
F. Identify areas and uses particularly vulnerable
to oil pollution;
G. Provide a comprehensive reference to previous experience
in coping with oil spills and cleanup.
3. Performing Organizations:
State Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Offices; University of
Massachusetts; University of Maine; University of Rhode Island
(URI); Southeastern Massachusetts University (SMU); MIT; Woods
Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), EG&G, Northeast Marine
Environmental Institution; Temple, Barker and Sloane, Inc.
4. Applicable Habitat;
5. Applicable Conditions;
349
-------
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
1 year; updated quinquennially.
8. Cost;
$80,000 initially; $20,000 for updates.
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
The study will provide an overview of socioeconomic activities
in the region and will pinpoint areas of particular impact for
later studies.
14. Limitations:
350
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 2
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Baseline Study of Commercial Fisheries by
Sub-Region
2. Project Description:
Goals of the project would be:
A. Collate catch statistics by species, by location of catch,
by value on landing at the dock.
B. Provide data on the number of vessels and fishermen using
the sub-region as
(1) a base for operations
(2) regular fishing activity
C. Examine structure of industry (e.g., company or family
ownership of vessels; part or full-time fishing activities;
whether subsistence or purely commercial fisheries).
D. Investigate capital employed in the industry (value, age
and size of vessels, gear, etc.).
3. Performing Organizations;
NOAA/NMFS; New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC);
WHOI (Dr. Peterson and Dr. Smith); URI (Drs. Poggie and Norton);
University of Maine (Dr. J. Atcheson) EG&G (Mr. Henry Cygan).
(N.B. Dr. Peterson is completing a baseline study for the NEFMC;
Drs. Poggie and Atcheson have a newly awarded contract from NSF
for a regional study.)
4. Applicable Habitat;
5. Applicable Conditions;
6. Applicable Oil Type;
7. Time Frame:
2 year initial study; 1 month annual updates.
351
-------
8. Cost:
$300,000 initially; $12,000 annually.
9. Equipment Needs/Availability;
10- Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Full assessment of probable socioeconotnic impacts on the fishing
industry.
14. Limitations:
352
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 3
PRIORITY RANK: »
1. Project Title; Baseline Study of the Fish Processing Industry
by Sub-Region
2. Project Description;
Goals of the project would be:
A. Provide fish product statistics by species, source and
value;
B. Indicate the number of plants and employees, and the size
and value of the operations;
C. Indicate the structure of the industry for each sub-region
(e.g., whether frozen or fresh fish are used; degree of
vertical integration with associated industries; company or
family plant-ownership; whether seasonal, part or full-time
operation in normal practice);
D. Capital structure of the industry (age, value, and type of
equipment, etc.);
3. Performing Organizations:
WHOI (Dr. Peterson and Dr. Smith); URI (Dr. Norton);
SMU (Dr. Giorgioni); University of Maine (Dr. Wilson); Uni-
versity of Massachusetts-Amherst (Dr. Storey) EG&G (Mr. Henry
Cygan). (N.B. Drs. Peterson and Smith are currently working on
a similar study.)
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Types:
7. Time Frame;
1 year initially; 2 weeks annual update.
8. Cost;
$40,000 initially; $6,000 annually.
353
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability;
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Indication of the probable impacts of oil pollution on the
fish processing industry.
14. Limitations:
354
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 4
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Baseline Study of Fish Trucking by Regions and
Sub-Regions
2. Project Description:
Goals of the project would be:
A. Mapping of fish distribution networks;
B. Detail the numbers of trucks and persons solely involved
in the transportation of fish;
C. Show the structure of the industry (e.g., whether company
or individually owned trucks; the degree of vertical integra-
tion, etc.);
D. An analysis of the capitalization of fish truckings
(e.g., value, age and type of trucks; whether owned or
leased, etc.).
3. Performing Organizations:
University of Massachusetts (Storey)
WHOI (Peterson and Smith)
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
Three months initially; update 1 week annually (this could
be associated with the update of fish processing).
8. Cost:
9- Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
355
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Availability;
12. Support Services;
13. Payoffs;
Provide an estimate of an industry which would be affected
if oil pollution caused a shift in fishing grounds and landing
ports.
14. Limitations:
356
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 5
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Baseline Study of Fish Retailing Dependent
Upon Locally Caught Fish by Sub-Region and
Region
2. Project Description:
Goals of the project would be:
A. Provide an analysis of the sources of fish supplied, their
quantity and value, and the local market area served;
B, A mapping of the number of markets/stores and persons
engaged in the industry by season;
\
C. An analysis of the structure of the industry (e.g*, degree of
vertical integration with other aspects of the fishing
industry; whether company or family owned, etc.);
D. Capital structure of the retail system (e.g., value, age,
and type of store, equipment, e^c.).
3. Performing Organizations:
University of Massachusetts-Amherst (Storey)
URI
WHOI (Peterson and Smith)
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
Four months initially; quinquennially update of 2 weeks.
8. Cost:
$20,000 initially; $2,500 for updates.
t
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
357
-------
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
An assessment of the structure of a local industry which would
be quickly af fectedy of local supplies if fish were tainted or
fishing grounds closed.
14. Limitations:
358
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 6
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Baseline Study of the Recreational Boating
Industry and of Boat Ownership and Use
2. Project Description:
Objectives of the project would be:
A. Description of the size, numbers and location of recreational
boating facilities—marinas, boatyards, boat ramps—both
public and private, their degree of use and spatial distribu-
tion;
B. Values, numbers and types of boats by region and sub-region;
C. Socioeconomic profiles of boat owners and patterns of
use of their craft;
D. Capital structure of marinas (e.g., ownership patterns, value
and size of facilities, equipment, etc.);
E. Capital structure of boatyards (e.g., ownership patterns, Value
and size of facilities, equipment, etc.).
3. Performing Organizations:
State CZM Offices
URI (Dr. Rorholm)
MIT (Dr. Devanney)
WHOI (Peterson and Smith)
SMU
University of Maine
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
4« Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame;
9 months.
359
-------
8. Cost:
$30,000-
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Identification of patterns of recreational boating facilities use
for OSC planning, and the impact of oil pollution in sub-regions.
14. Limitations:
360
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 7
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Baseline Study of Sports Fishing by Sub-Region
2. Project Description;
Objectives of the project would be:
A. Description of size and location of fishing areas, their
degree of use and the species sought;
B. Description of the numbers of fisherman engaged in off-shore,
near-shore and on-shore sport fishing; a demographic profile
of sports fisherman, and a socioeconomic appraisal of the
number, size and types of boats and gear used;
C. Size, location and extent of charter boat operations, bait
shops and services provided in local communities;
D. Capital structure of service sector.
3. Performing Organizations:
NOAA/NMFS
State CZM Offices
URI (Dr. Rorholm)
WHOI (Drs. Peterson and Smith)
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
(N.B. NOAA/NMFS already conducts a survey of sports fishing which
could easily be expanded to meet the needs of the baseline study=)
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame;
1 year; updated quinquennially.
8. Cost:
Initially $60,000; updates $60,000
361
-------
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability;
11. Personnel Needs/Availability;
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Provides a basis for the assessment of damage to sports fishing.
14. Limitations:
362
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 8
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Baseline Study of Recreational Use of the
Shoreline
2. Project Description:
Objective of the project would be:
A. Ascertain size and location of shoreline amenity areas
(e.g* beaches, salt water ponds, marshes, coastal trails,
town wetland areas) and size of population served;
B. Determine types of use and social profiles of users;
C. Determine types of facilities, whether public or private,
and the type and value of equipment provided.
3. Performing Organizations:
State CZM Office
University of Massachusetts-Amherst (Storey)
URI (Rorholm)
WHO I
SMU
University of Maine
University of New Hampshire
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
6 months initially; one month quinquennial update.
8. Cost:
$30,000 initially; $6,000 for updating.
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
363
-------
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff;
Assessment of value to user population.
14. Limitations:
364
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 9
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Analysis of Effectiveness of Baseline Research
,as a Basis for Assessing Legal Damage
2. Project Description:
Objectives of the project would be:
A. To compare the costs of baseline and post-spill research
with assessment of damages awarded by courts.
B. To ascertain the usefulness of information generated in
research projects in the assessment of damages.
3. Performing Organizations:
University of Massachusetts
URI
SMU
WHOI
EG&G (Cygan and Strack)
4. Applicable Habitat;
5. Applicable Conditions;
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame;
3 months duration after legal proceeding completed. (The
frequency of such studies would be determined by the RRT).
8. Cost:
$20,000
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
365
-------
12. Support Needs:
13. Payoff:
14. Limitations:
366
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 10
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Oil Spill
Cleanup Operations
2. Project Description:
Objectives of the research would be:
A. Analysis of the cost components of cleanup operations and
the effectiveness of these operations.
B. Identify the cost benefit of cleanup operations required
under the National Contingency Plan.
C. Review these costs and cost benefits in relation to socio-
economic impacts observed.
3. Performing Organizations:
USCG
EPA
State CZM Offices
University of Maine
University of Massachusetts
URI
SMU
WHOI
EG&G
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
Temple, Barker and Sloane, Inc.
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions;
6. Applicable Oil Type_;
7. Time Frame;
3 months
8. Cost;
$30,000
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
367
-------
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Input to the review of the national and regional plans.
14. Limitations:
368
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 11
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Study of the Socioeconomic Factors Involved
in Locating Oil Pollution Response Equipment
Stores and the Designation of Areas for Beaching
or Off-Loading Damaged Vessels
2. Project Description:
Objectives of the project would be:
A. Establish criteria for the designation of "refuse" areas
including public and private use, economic and social values
of the areas.
B. Assess alternative sites proposed by USCG.
3. Performing Organizations:
State CZM Offices
University of Maine
University of Massachusetts
URI
WHOI
EG&G
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
3 months.
8. Cost:
$25,000
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
4
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability;
369
-------
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff;
Avoidance of additional socioeconomic impact from spilled oil
mitigation procedures.
14. Limitations:
370
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 12
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Analysis of Oil Transportation Patterns for
the Region by Sub-Region
2. Project Description:
Objective of the project would be:
A. Review movement of oil to and from regional ports, and
through the seaways of the region, by type and quantity of
oil carried and the type and size of vessel;
B. Identify areas of greatest density of oil movements.
3. Performing Organizations:
USCG
NOAA
State CZM Offices
University of Maine
University of Massachusetts
URI
WHOI
EG&G
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
Temple, Barker and Sloane, Inc.
(N.B. A study of traffic off Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts
and Rhode Island has been sponsored by NOAA and is being completed by
WHOI.)
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame;
3 months.
8. Cost;
$25,000
9- Equipment Needs/Availability:
371
-------
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Identification of vulnerable areas and types of threat to
the environment.
14. Limitations:
372
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 13
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title; Development of Models for the Assessment of
Socioeconomic Damage Following Spills
2. Project Description;
Objectives of the project would be to:
A. From the overview and baseline studies develop criteria
to be used to assess damage;
B. Develop an assessment plan for application to specific
spills.
3. Performing Organizations:
EPA
NOAA
State CZM Offices
University of Maine
University of Massachusetts
URI
WHOI
EG&G
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
Temple, Barker and Sloane, Inc.
4. Applicable Habit;
5. Applicable Conditions;
6. Applicable Oil Type;
7. Time Frame:
3 months; update after response experience at the request of RRT.
8. Cos t;
$25,000 initially.
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11- Personnel Needs/Availability:
373
-------
12. Support Services:
13. Payoff:
Standardization of assessment procedures,
14. Limitations:
374
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
PROJECT NO: 14
PRIORITY RANK:
1. Project Title: Assignment of Socioeconomic Priorities for
Protection of Areas Vulnerable to Oil Spills
by Sub-Regions
2. Project Description:
Objective of the project would be to:
A. Develop socioeconomic criteria for protection of specific
sites;
B. Develop, in conjunction with State and local governments,
designations of priority in each sub-region.
3. Performing Organizations:
State CZM Offices
Regional University and Institutions
Northeast Marine Environmental Institution
4. Applicable Habitat:
5. Applicable Conditions:
6. Applicable Oil Type:
7. Time Frame:
3 months.
8. Cost:
$25,000
9. Equipment Needs/Availability:
10. Facility Needs/Availability:
11. Personnel Needs/Availability:
12. Support Services;
375
-------
13: Payoff:
Advice to OSC and States on protection of sites to be used in
specific sub-regions.
14. Limitations:
376
-------
PANEL: SOCIOECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS
Preliminary Descriptions of Additional Projects*
1. Analysis of the costs of Federally authorized cleanups (FWCTA
Act of 1970).
Description of research tasks:
a) Size of spill and nature of oil;
b) Size of cleanup area;
c) Duration of cleanup;
d) Extent of personal property affected;
e) Cost of cleanup of various types of property;
f) Degree of success of cleanup.
2. A study of the nature of commercial insurance adjuster's manuals
for determining injury to, destruction of, or loss of use of:
a) real property;
b) personal property;
c) natural resources;
d) income/earnings.
Research Objective: Develop a similar set of predictions for
use by assessors in oil spill cases.
3. A national compendium of insurance and legal specialists
experienced in oil spill litigation.
Description of research objective:
Establish, for the benefit of the public, the damage assessment
panels and administrative judges, a roll of those with particular
experience in oil spill litigation and the assessment of property
damage and economic loss rising therefrom.
4. A summary of the operation of the international TOVALOP and
CRISTAL funds in paying for oil spill damages.
5. A study of international practices in assessing cleanup and damage
costs for oil spills, and in providing reimbursements.
*These projects were proposed but full discussion of them was not
accomplished.
377
-------
Description of research objectives:
Develop comparative case studies of the methods used in oil
pollution cases in Japan, Norway, France and the United Kingdom
for possible use in standard setting.
Compilation of a digest or handbook on the variability in natural
resources, particularly those of commercial value, and their use
and the causes of such variability.
Description of research objectives:
Provide a guide to lawyers, panels of assessors and administrative
judges in interpreting standard regulations and assessment.
378
-------
FACILITIES AND DATA MANAGEMENT PANEL
Participants
C.L. Eidam, Chairperson
R. Boynton M. Lockwood
C. Buehrens W.J. Marhoffer
P.J. Cavicchi Lt. Cradr. J. Marotta
A.R. Ceurvels J. Ripp
J. Fiske Lt. D. Sande
J. Griffin M.D. Schuldt
G.F. Kelly L. Smith
D. Kennedy W.H.B. Smith
Cdr. J. Valenti
379
-------
FACILITIES AND DATA MANAGEMENT PANEL
• Guidelines and Criteria for
Facilities
• Data Management Aspects
• Research Vessels in EPA Region I
• EPA Region I Chain of Custody Procedures
GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR FACILITIES
A. Reporting Format for Facilities
Initial order of business centered around a review of the guidance
prepared for the panel by the Chairman and deciding on a course of
action which the panel would follow to fulfill its objectives. After
a fairly lengthy review, it was accepted by the panel as a workable
document. The panel then focused on the specific criteria which
would be used to fulfill the guidance document. The remainder of
the session was spent defining these criteria into a workable report-
ing format for inclusion in the workshop report.
In developing this reporting format, the panel considered two basic
scenarios: (1) emergency scientific support to the On-scene Coordi-
nator (OSC) and (2) longer term (or after-the-fact) environmental as-
sessment studies. The reason for this delineation centered mainly
around the availability of funding for emergency OSC support through
the Federal revolving fund, and the present lack of dedicated funds
for longer term studies. The first topic covered was fixed and
mobile laboratory facilities. The panel initially separated this
topic into two groups, but after considerable discussion, the panel
felt that mobile laboratories are essentially a support function of
fixed laboratory facilities and, therefore, decided to identify
mobile labs as a support category under fixed laboratories.
<,
The following is an outline of the reporting format which was agreed
on by the panel to describe fixed laboratories facilities in accor-
dance with the guidance document.
1. Fixed Laboratories
a. Location
380
-------
b. Operating Organization
c. Contact Person: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
Alternate: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
d. Capabilities
(1) Physical Oceanography
(2) Biological Oceanography
(3) Chemical Oceanography
(4) Geological Oceanography
(5) Current Research/Operational Activities
(6) Maximum Sample Output (1 day, 1 week, etc.) by
category of hydrocarbon analysis, oil identifi-
cation, etc.
(7) Mobile Laboratory
e. Availability
(1) Emergency Support - categorize high or low
(2) Longer Term Studies - categorize high or low
A number of issues were discussed in arriving at this reporting
format. Most notably, the issue 9f funding and analytical costs was
at question. It was the concensus of the panel, based on advise
from Coast Guard representatives, that funding of emergency support
services to the OSC was available through the Pollution Revolving
Fund, and, therefore, was not a constraint. While this is true if
the fund is activated, there will be a number of incidents in which
the responsible party will be taking proper cleanup actions, thus
not allowing use of the fund at times during which the OSC might
still need scientific support. In these cases, the considerations
pertinent to longer term studies will apply.
i
This panel recognized that the availability of laboratories for longer
term studies would be dependent on a number of factors. Federal
laboratories, for example, might be willing to undertake longer
term studies if they fell within the criteria of already funded
research activities. The availability of private laboratories,
however, would probably be based on the results of bid invitations
and the acceptance of some form of basic ordering agreements (BOA)
for the specific projects required.
381
-------
2. Command/Coordination Centers
The NOAA-SOR Team has established operating guidance which includes
criteria for command/coordination centers. This document was made
available to the panel by the SOR Team director. If possible,
identical or similar criteria will be used by the panel to ensure
maximum compatability.
3. Fixed Wing Aircraft
The following criteria were established by the panel to describe
fixed wing aircraft.
a. Aircraft Type
b. Operating Organization
c. Contact Person: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
d. Alternate: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
e. Remote Sensing Capability
f. Range
g. Load and Passenger Capacity
h. Navigation Capability
i« Operating Costs
j. Other Capabilities: e.g., over water, water
landing capability
4. Rotary Wing Aircraft
The same criteria as applied to fixed wing aircraft apply to rotary
wing aircraft.
5. Nearshore Oceanographic Vessels
These were subdivided by the panel into short endurance work platforms
(i.e., no overnight capabilities) and longer endurance nearshore craft.
The following criteria will be used to describe these vessels.
382
-------
a. Ship Type
b. Operating Organization
c. Contact Person: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
d. Alternate: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hour tel.
e. Range
f. Endurance
g. Sampling Capabilities - Including fish and
plankton travels, benthic sampling (both geo-
logical and biological) water column sampling,
instrument emplacement and meteorological
capabilities.
h. Scientific Party Capacity
i. Draft
j. Navigation Capability
6. Offshore Oceanographic Vessels
Same as a-j above. Other capabilities - include satellite support
(i.e., work boats, helicopter landing and refueling capabilities,
etc.).
7. Radio Communications
a. Operating organization
b. Location
c. Contact Person: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hr tel.
Alternate: Name, Bus. tel., 24-hr tel.
d. Frequency assignments - other frequencies available,
e. Types of Equipment: Base, mobile, hand held
f. Range
(1) Base - mobile
(2) Base - hand held
333
-------
(3) Mobile - hand held
g. Equipment Available
(1) Base
(2) Mobile
(3) Hand held
h. Availability
i. Daily Time of Operation
j. Mobile Operator Interface - yes, no
Land line communications, including telephone and TWX/TELEX capability
will also have to be inventoried for all participating organizations.
8. Submersible Criteria
The following criteria were established for submersibles:
1) Vessel Name
2) Operating organization
3) Location
4) Contact person: Name, bus. tel, 24-hr tel.
Alternate: Name, bus. tel, 24-hr tel.
5) Depth capability
6) Sensing/sampling capability
7) Speed
8) Endurance
9) Surface Support Requirements
10) Transportability
11) Scientific compliment
384
-------
12) Lock-out capabilities
13) Operating Costs
14) Availability
15) Communications
16) Navigational capability
17) Safety equipment
B. Funding for Facilities
The panel discussed various alternative mechanisms which might be
utilized to fund the use of facilities. It was recognized that the
normal contracting procedures used by the Federal Government are much
too lengthy to be effectively utilized to fund private sector response.
The panel, therefore, recommends that the following mechanism be
investigated by the executive committee as possible funding means:
* Basic ordering agreements (BOA'S)
• Letter contracts
• Procedures used by the Coast Guard for funding clean-up
contractor emergency response.
The use of interagency agreements was felt to be a viable method
of transferring funds among Federal agencies for reimbursement
of facility costs, if needed. It was recognized, however, that all
Federal agencies have statutory responsibility for oil spills, and,
therefore, should be encouraged to commit their own resources to this
problem.
C. Follow-up Work on Facilities
The panel agreed that it could go no further in its work until spe-
cific information is obtained from all participating organizations.
The Chairperson, therefore, relieved the panel of any further respon-
sibilities. The Chairperson will now begin to gather specific
information required to complete our work. To date, the following
organizations have submitted facilities data: University of Rhode
Island, EG&G, Jackson Estuarine Lab (UNH), USGS, USCG, ERGO, NOAA-SOR.
385
-------
DATA MANAGEMENT ASPECTS
A. General Considerations
The success or failure of any scientific endavor can only be as-
sessed by the quality of the data gathered and the mechanism by which
the integrity of these data is maintained throughout the time period
required for initial assessment of the problem until the data is
deposited in a national archive. Data .quality can be assured by
adapting valid procedures, utilizing proper techniques, etc. Data
integrity can only be assured through an adequate data management
system. This system can be as simple as using a set of 3 x 5 cards
to track the data from the time it is collected until it reaches its
final "resting place," or it could be a sophisticated computerized
system as is currently being used for the NOAA/BLM OCSEAP program in
Alaska.
B. Data Management and Chain of Custody
This plan shall be an integral part of the proposed organization
of the scientific response program and, as such, shall include within
its framework the necessary elements of its "chain of custody"
procedure to insure legal sufficiency of data collected.
As proposed, a data management plan at a minimum should include
the following elements:
1. A predesignated data coordinator. This could be the
EPA or NOAA scientific coordinator (be it nearshore or offshore) or
an assistant at that level. This individual will:
a. Respond immediately in support of the response
team to regional spills for the purpose of
implementing the data tracking and chain of
custody procedures.
b. Interact with all NOAA components and contrac-
tors to ensure that data tracking and necessary
chain of custody procedures are carried out.
c. Act as a sample transfer mechanism when ship
returns from cruise. This will insure consis-
tency in chain of custody procedures as well as
insuring integrity of collected data.
386
-------
d. Act as a training officer to brief staff and con-
tract personnel on the necessity of chain of
custody and data handling procedures and will
be a local source of chain of custody materials.
2. Adoption of an existing data tracking system as well as
archival formats for all oil spill environmental investigations. As
an initial proposal, the tracking system and its archive formats
developed for'the BLM/OCSEAP could be used. It appears that the data
management approach taken for OCS investigation could be satisfactory
for this purpose.
3. Designation of a national repository to store and dis-
seminate the data upon completion of its field project.
These are four main points to emphasize in this plan:
• A data/chain of custody coordination must be
identified prior to a spill.
9 Adoption of a data tracking system
• Predesignation (if available) of formats for which
data shall be reported.
• Designation of a national repository.
The Environmental Data Service (EDS) of NOAA has a field liaison
officer at Region I (Woods Hole) with extensive knowledge, contacts
and experience in data management. This individual shall act as a
focal point for data management activities as well as serve as a
consultant in data management matters to the damage assessment team
leader.
In addition, this office is prepared to supply to its scientific
support team information, the availability of necessary baseline
enviornmental information (data/literature) in the area of the
spill. Other services available through this office are access to
the Environmental Data Base Director which will identify other types
of data which has been collected in the area of the spill.
RESEARCH VESSELS IN EPA REGION I
The following pages identify research vessels available in the New
England Region categorized in three groups; offshore vessels, near-
387
-------
shore long endurance vessels (e.g., remain at sea more than one day),
and nearshore short endurance vessels. The listing is based on
a 1974 UNOLS inventory and the oceanographic vessel listing in
the 1976 Sea Technology Handbook, supplemented by information sub-
mitted at the Hartford Workshop. Some information may be outdated or
incorrect. Therefore, appropriate persons are requested to verify
and complete information on those vessels lis'ted and to identify
vessels not listed by using the blank forms at the end of each vessel
grouping.
388
-------
OFFSHORE VESSELS
389
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) ?LBAT£OS& JC
Operating Institution:
, JM-fi
U_OOl>S
LOA_\£2_
Beam
Draft
Displ. Tons |} ft 83 Cruising Speed 1 1
Machinery"!^ eSE t- _ H. P .
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations :
Crew
Day Cruise _
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days-
11 ....... "" :::::lm::
Scientists
_
1^
1 3
Miles 3 OOP
^
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Home PortUJOCteS totCtVAA
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) CHEMICAL
Electric Power:
Winches :
(.0 Volts 110/240
(a
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms /Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Nav. Equipment
Describe any special vessel capabilities eueCTEtg.
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
390
-------
D. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built )
flTLflKjTlC "HOHQ
Port STBTEM TSUFjMb ,
Operating Institution:
S. ae. \>v \J
071.4 8
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
LOA 9*7
Beam 28 Draf t
Displ. Tons 1 03 Cruising Speed IP £T-S
Machinery ~Dl£se L (z) H.P. 454
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days- 20
Scientists
JLB.
4-000
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder T^eioC/ ix lag-43
Nav. Equipment
Lab Spaces (Describe) /Q X /ff //J
- f*esn/SAL~r turrre ^ //
2O8 vce."T
Electric Powar:
K.W. 3O4O volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
E. P.
Boons/Cranes:
Cap
"A"-Frame
flPPr
ecision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
NtOuuT 6 X
3,306
Vessel available for outside use? 'jg^S. What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week -
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
391
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) fiT LftM"H &
Operating Institution:
tMOOfcS Ho 16
twootss
J-usri7U7C
LOA ^ 10
Beam 4-V Draft |.fc
Displ. Tons 2.}SOC> Cruising Speed \ "Z
Machinery .STg /» m H.P._
srget-
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight "SI
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days;
Scientists
_2«S
Miles 8 OOO
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
vul
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) 4 L»3gS
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts
Winches :
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Typ e Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
392
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Same (yr. built)~\^gLftu]ft"ge IT AftfeS\ Home Port &J.QuCKSn~£
Nfl
Operating Institution:
, /Vfi
Displ. Tons
Machinery
_Cruising Speed_
H.P. \.f
Type Hull/Material_
Acco^saodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight
..STggU
Scientists
Ext. Cruise ).g
Endurance:
Days; Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
ooa
Echo Sounder
J5av. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) ~2.SC> fff~Z
Electric Power:
K.W.JSgfl
Winches:
TI?>M/LS
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
J>P_
"A"-?rame
Precision Recorder_
jJL
/* ffc-
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
393
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) EKJbEftU0 g ()4"76, J Home Port Mftl?gft6flA}^£7T "T?T*
Operating Institution:
.IsLaud
Beam S3 Draft 17 'i'
LOA \~7~7
Displ. Tons Cruising Speed f3+S~
Machinery"!^) ffS^L H.P • t
Type Hull/Material JSTT-Tgl,
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight |"S |4
Ext. Cruise |^ j 4
Endurance:
Days__3g__ Miles_
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
- 2.
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) yg"S
Electric Power:
i feo&Voits 4-4O
JACDC
Winches: &euBtAL STD HNbCg "BT
Wire Size
Length
H. P-
Booms/Cranes:
Type Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Nav. Equipment
(L- S.f9T£LL \TS .
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
39A
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) _Ey£R6-e£gJsi 6C£0tJ fz gT*
Wire Size
Length
E. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
"A"-Fraiae
Precision Recorder
Electric Power:
K.W. _ Volts I"2O/2.4Q
Nav. Equipment
AST LOS-
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use? ________
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis? '
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
395
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL
Region I - Research
PROTECTION AGENCY
Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. buj.lt) £(JLf MAKlklgg (\QS£\ Home Port M,,,., Louden
Operating Institution:
~TV& LEftSlMfr CjOH
sTeetrr
CT.
K> Cui
LOA_i22_
Displ. Tons
Machinery
>' Draft 12'
Cruising Speed
t? L K.P. i.ooa
Type Hull/Material gB»fui
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise 3 ~
Overnight y /fl
Ext. Cruise ^J* ie
Endurance:
Says "3<3 Miles "S.QOff
Usual Areas of Operation: iiuLiMlTEt*
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
(203) 442-0&93
Tei. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power: ^o
K.W. 3O Volts
CVCL£
Winches: ' ftS
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Bcoais/Cranes:
TypeflieTieuLHTif'b Cap £•
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities £aHlpL-tTc ,^tug
-oW
Vessel available for outside use? _y >^S
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation jpfl
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
396
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory,
Vessel Name (yr. built)
(
Operating Institution:
LOA
Draft it.
Displ. Tons
Machinery
_Cruising Speed
H.P.
Type Hull/Material
Acconraodations :
Crew
Day Cruise ___
Overnight
STgg-l-
Scientists
Ext. Cruise 2.5"
Endurance:
Days; _ Miles IP OOQ
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder V
Nav. Equipment
C"Z\
Home Port |jL)of?&>.s,
Naae & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts
AC/DC
Winches:
Tg»ua\_
Wire Size
Length
H. P-
Booms /Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Fratse
Precision Recorder Nls'
S ATf
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comaents
397
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) jQCg ft _MlA$
Operating Institution:
Hoti Cceftfjo
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)tfflST
ITT
Operating Institution:
Bean
Draft Q_
_Cruising Speed
LOA
Displ. Tons
Machinery 1»es£l. fe) H.P. 44O
Type Hull/Material _^^_
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise C, fO-i'Z.
Endurance:
Days IZ Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
iC. I f-
Echo Sounder
- (,OO
Nav. Equipment /. 6t.a
^^^ ABi
Home Port go.
Name & Address of Contact:
t.
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) "22O FT*
Electric Power:
volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
_CaP_
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
I/DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
399
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)"fy{/
(}<\LU
Home Port ~&OST0M
Operating Institution:
} ftf) 02.10%
Name & Address of Contact:
C*a*t re, Tie.
742- 42 4£
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
LOA i&o ' Beam 22* Draft f2* (,"
Displ. Tons "2JZ.O Cruising Speed ^ gR
Machinery ~bnrsgL _ H . P .
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise V
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Scientists
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
f ffrfJAe/f) ^utcp-f. 1 £p#ileb*aiJ
Echo Sounder
L/.S.
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. JO Volts
AC/
Winches:
"BT
Wire Size <
Length "SK£
H. P. ^
Booms/Cranes:
S7».
"A"-Frame
Cap J.gQa lk&
ih Precision Recorder
Nav. Equipment
Describe any special vessel capabilities
i—
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments f 6+ u i
"- 20
400
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Operating Institution;
LOA
Beam
Draft
Displ, Tons_
Machinery
jCruising Speed_
H.P.
Type Hull/Material_
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Davs
Scientists
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipnent
Home Port
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts
AC/DC
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type .
Cap_
"A"—'•^•«
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
401
-------
NEARSHORE VESSELS - SHORT ENDURANCE
402
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENC?
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) t>nL-Cl M gfl ( I044\ Home Port
"£ T
Operating Institution:
?
of
LOA
Beam
I
Draft •4
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Type Hull/Material U ftyv/ trr/LrTV
Accommodations :
Crew
Day Cruise /
Over-ight —
Ext. Cruise —
Endurance:
Days; _ Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Scientists
^5"
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Cruising Speed ffl Kp
H.P.
Name & Address of Contact:
792.- £203
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type jy£sT f jgja^M Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC/DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day _ Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
403
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AQENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) F. £. UMLTSQUR.
Operating Institution:
loo
sr«rrr
LOA
Beam
Draft
Displ. Tons_
Machinery
Cruising Speed_jjgj£C5
H.P.
Type Hull/Material f// /
/ f
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise 2
Overnight "2.
Ext. Cruise —
Endurance:
Days; Miles_
Usual Areas of Operation:
>f
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
mft
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W.^ *«?
Winches:
J2.
AC /DC
Wire Size
Length
H. P-
Booms/Cranes:
Type 4- ?tp4 Cap
1 15 U
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation _
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
404
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) V-E C ( | *>?>$•J
Home Port
Operating Institution:
OF
Beam
Draft
Scientists
Displ. Tons |g> Cruising Speed
Machinery >i esg 1_ H.P. "2 |Q
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise 1
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days;
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
HMftfe
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) Kl o u I
Electric Power:
K.K. J?olts_
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
_CaP_
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC/DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
405
-------
0. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)Tfl ICM flC
Operating Institution:
Uwmetesi-ry OP /Om>u
TSecciC, /uk-u) VOJZKL 117^0
'
LOA
' /}f
Beam
Draft 4-
Displ. Tons_
Machinery ^J
_Cruising SpeedJ
H.P. IL,
Type Hull/Material Rourt
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight —
Ext. Cruise —
Endurance:
Days /S tie£ Miles_
L
Usual Areas of Operation: L. J". ScvtJl>
SeuTU
Echo Sounder l?^^THgQ*3 ~7~J
Nav. Equipment ""ffi^b ft K. (\U~Ta
Home Port
. AJ.V.
Name & Address of Contact:
/tssec.
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) jTauma/^^"
/
Space. fAj
.FT'
ft f t If
Electric Power:
K.W. 3 Volts
d It VIM.
Winches: _
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type AHJ f>*lL< Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
F7
Vessel available for outside use? Vc"O
Cost: Pet day ,_^ Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
406
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) ftu.sc, -Rgs.5, C\4I*-J\ Home Fort
Operating Institution:
C."bftfc\.iN6.
of
3-4-
Beam
Draf t
LOA
Displ. Tons | 2. Cruising Speed ^
Machinery "totes eL E.F. 1)8
Type Hull/Material_
Accommodations:
Crew
Scientists
Say Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days;
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W.__ Vplts_
Winches: "PftT >
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms /Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC/DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
407
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Operating Institution:
LOA
40 '
Beam
Draft 4
Displ. Tons
Machinery^
jCruising Speed
H.P.
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise —
Overnight ~
Ext. Cruise -
Endurance:
Ujeuib
Scientists
_£_
Days't/fttf
Usual Areas of Operation: lKC. "?
¥-
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port KffthftOl
Name & Address of Contact:
hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
'
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type dftm I Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC /DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day _ Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
*
408
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Operating Institution:
of="
LOA
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Beam
Draft
Cruising Speed
H.P.
Type Hull/Material_
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
LAUwC+4
/ UJo£t>
Scientists
Endurance:
*
Days;
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port "BaSTou
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) /£
3-
Electric Power:
K.W. 12. Volts
Winches:
O
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms /Cranes:
Type Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day _ Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
409
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Home Port fl
rx ft g-
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment ~S ^> 1> •Q S.
_Precision Recorder_
Describe any special vessel capabilities
ME.
Operating Institution:
SH0BLS rnftfSuje LftTSOCftTofcy
!?O2 flW*T -Sc/txe £iJj ^o SCX 178
LOA 32;?" Beam//'^" Draft 3" '
Displ. Tons Cruising Speed |£ |fn
Machinery i>tCSC"l_ H.P. 133
Type Hull/Material Fyi/ / LUOCX>
Accommodations :
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise 1 3f-4
Overnight I |
Ext. Cruise — —
Endurance :
Days I Miles 1 2.O
Usual Areas of Operation: fiU|fKiM 2O
Wi L*i af tK« _Lk Lc"i pC ^nc^Lx
^
s
, , ...rl „
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) IJQHI?
Electric Power:
K.W. Volts |2./.2*f AC/DC
Winches: 1 . ->
Wire Size ^8 ' "fyf"
Length \6OO \6&C
H. P.
Booms /Cranes: 1
Type SfftC •BoOM Cap /00O l-bs
"A"-Frame ^a
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
410
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (vr. built)
Operating Institution:
LOA
Beam
Draft
Displ. Tons_
Machinery
_Cruising Speed_
H.P.
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days;
Scientists
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.tf. Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC/DC
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
411
-------
NEARSHORE VESSELS - LONG ENDURANCE
412
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL
Region I - Research
Vessel Name (yr. built) ft.£. VSKKlLL
PROTECTION AGESCY
Vessel Inventory
Home Port LUC& Mae.£ M H
Operating Institution:
tOoods HoL«. W3*s. OS-SttJ*
J
LOA £S' Beam Jg1' Draft^J^ "
Displ. Tons Cruising Speed %f #73
Machinery ~35ii?S^l- H.P. 'Z 3
Cost: Per day Per week
Areal limits of operation £Q /^TTt ki c iJT
Other comments
Name & Address of Contact:
£t»i7} '£'49- 3705 X 32JT
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)//^ ^T"2 mea -
•> >
Jo^UC. 3!j~3 UJaTfA j ho/ g CaitJ
a
Electric Power:
K.W. y^T Volts J/0/22.0 /AC/DC
Winches: !bv.u T«rtvul_ "ST
Wire Size 3/f'' %
Length -*° » 3**~
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
"A"-Frame //y«eJ& &eaT
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Jfll
Operating Institution:
t>EPT. of MAKING SCIENCE i
COUTH
O4io<.
LOA
Beam
JDraft g"
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Cruising Speed
H . P .
Type Hull/Material^m g
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise *r
Overnight 7
Ext. Cruise ~7
Endurance:
Days- 4 ~z_
"7 (,
4-?
4 2.
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
Name & Address of Contact:
**f. f
(207) 7<9*e
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) flSTE B
Operating Institution:
f4el<:
LOA
4-1
Beam
Draft
Displ. Tons I £
Machinery
Cruising Speed_
H.P.
Type Hull/Material"^ptttac^ / UJOGSi
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days- 3
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
1
Home Port UlOOIXS HOLg t\A ft
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. IBus.7After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. 7.js- Volts /jg
Winches:
Wire Size
Length 2C6 '
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type Cap_
"A"-frama
Echo Sounder
T^M
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) "RifrELO IxJ ( \3fZfi J Home Port]
gST
Operating Institution:
foe.
vOesr -BOCTH
LOA
Beam
Draft 4
Displ. Tons
_Cruising Speed_
Machinery ~fc i eS g U H. P. 2.7'O
Type Hull/Material FiSHiu6- / UJOdli
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight •%.
Ext. Cruise —
Endurance:
Days- ^ Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
8 V 12. uj
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Operating Institution:
/Mrtvss. <327*7
LOA /i^
Beam
Draft
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Cruising Speed || |{13
H.P .
Type Hull/Material_
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise 2.
Overnight 2.
Ext. Cruise -g.
Endurance:
Pays' 3
Scientists
12.
2
Miles 3t.O
Usual Areas of Operation:
&&
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment / 6/t.AM
Home Port
Name & Address of Contact:
N*.
* i «
Tel. No. (Bus. After hrs.
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Poxver:
K.W. 2,>«r Volts
3 \>
?T>C
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P-
Booms /Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Frame
- "3
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day _ Per week
What Basis?
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
417
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)'K/|/ CHOU& JkJgST VI fltbZ^ Home Port TflnKsToo/A; .15 .J.
Operating Institution:
l?V\od«r Jsiaud
^ "7?jr
LOA
Beam |3 Draft
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Type Hull/Material
Accommodations:
Crew
Day Cruise /
Overnight 3
Ext. Cruise —
Endurance:
Days; 4
_Cruising Speed |2
(*Q H.P. \7g
/ U>«0t>
Scientists
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder .g)PF
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
C.
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) /)FT£K
Electric Power:
K.W. ?.y Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type Cap_
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
TAG/DC
Vessel available for outside use? y£TS What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation A)
Other comments
T~
418
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCX
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) F/l/ 601L 4*JA) (f^U^\ Home Port
Operating Institution:
U«iw*si7y or "fried
t
Cap
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Tan
Vessel available for outside use? yg".S What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
419
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL
Region I - Research
PROTECTION AGENCY
Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)"? J&gg A.
Operating Institution:
3TFiCV2»OM eSTuftftinj
1 fibftNS poitJT
LOA
Beam /3 Draft
4 '
Displ. Tons 22.
Machinery
Cruising Speed
H.P.
Type Hull/Material~nqHJULCg.
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise I |fl
Overnight "Z A
Ext. Cruise "2. 4
Endurance:
Days 1 4- Miles \6OC
Usual Areas of Operation:
Ijj
Echo Sounder ^ / — "2CO
2. -
(Ml4)
Home Pott
Name & Address of Contact
"be Burble. C
Tel. No. (Bus. /After
Lab Spaces (Describe)
L'**>
KffcK*.
Electric Power:
K.W.
Volts /2DC
)3e
Winches:
I
"
Wire Size '/?" VV
Length \OC>6 /CCa '
H. P. 4~ 0-
Booms/Cranes:
Type | -gooi^ Cap free ^|,^
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder Z>f&:#
JSUf/JCtiT^
Ilav. Equipment
HF-f~tu
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day
Wat Basis?
Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
420
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
Operating Institution:
OCEHKJ science
U M»«c*siTi'rSj
efe
tt.. Nieui
LOA
Beam
Draf t
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Cruising Speed <\ ETPS
H. P.
Type Hull/Material T\jft. /\s7fEL
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise "2
Overnight 3
Ext. Cruise ^
Endurance:
Days- (a Miles ]_
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
iMattfL t>g7/4
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
atf.
Electric Power:
K.W. 2LS Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Boops/Cranes:
aA"-Frame
ecision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use? V.T.S What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
421
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built)
J3T
Home Port
Operating Institution:
Sciewc.it
Draft 4
L°A
Displ. Tons ( "2- Cruising Speed \O
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus.'/Alter firs.
x 228
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power :<;
K.W. Volts
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P. -
Booms/Cranes:
Type_
Ae-XOrtXX
AC/DC
Cap /aeo
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Bescribe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use?
Cost: Per day _ Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
422
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL
Region I - Research
PROTECTION AGENCY
Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) &/V •£ t-uS £ / g T£ finks']
Operating Institution:
rs
360
LOA // 8'
Displ. Tons_
Machinery j$
Beam .2?' Draft /3'
6 O Cruising Speed /3-
H.P. t-r/Ot._s
Nav. Equipment
Home Port
" , IC..X".
Name & Address of Contact:
CfyfT.
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe) /^
Access
Electric Power: £-£" /t^vj (PeMfle4in>£J
K.W. >5^ Volts y/ga^o/^vo
Winches: (, "Jv^j
Wire Size
Length
H. P. /
Booms/Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder x4 V/4 i
Describe any special vessel capabilities
. P,
Vessel available for outside use? /,££ What Basis? '-M^-f,
'^le*ee-*S*4:
Per week
Cost: Per day
Areal limits of operation /Yo/y £
Other comments
Other
I~<^ /Sgfc4ic££
423
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) T"-44i
Operating Institution:
LOA
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Beam | (,' Draf t Q'
Cruising Speed
I H.P.
yg"
Type Hull/Material Pftss. uta^ft./,
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Cays- "7 Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Nav. Equipment
Home Port K)QflMK
Name & Address of Contact:
2-M
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K.W. — Volts \2e
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms /Cranes:
' Jf
/DC
4- 2a<5 Ua.
"A" -Frame K)0
Precision Recorder V£.S
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use? ^ Ic
Cost: Per day _ Per week
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
What Basis?
Other
424
-------
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name i SS £ L. H. P. | g Q
Type Hull/Material "fins*. Ogssg(..//u»oaa
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise ^" ,3"
Endurance:
Days- *S~ Miles I2.OO
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder V «?3
Nav. Equipment
Name & Address of Contact:
Tel. No. (Bus./After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
Electric Power:
K..W. Volts_
Winches: 1>'S. l>gow\
Wire Size 3/s "
Length &e>c '
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
/DC
Cap 2 poo
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Describe any special vessel capabilities
Vessel available for outside use? yg".S What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation
Other comments
LJIAS&
A r&i*fi>T>
425
-------
0. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Region I - Research Vessel Inventory
Vessel Name (yr. built) IQHfTg pQ<3T ( I^TQ J Home Port \/ltjejftKb
Operating Institution:
WrtlTEFoeT TtWuCr € S/fli/jgf, tMC.
LOA
Beam
Displ. Tons
Machinery
Cruising Speed JO /JC5
H.P.
Type Hull/Material Soppn-ToG'/^
Accommodations:
Crew Scientists
Day Cruise
Overnight
Ext. Cruise
Endurance:
Days- I "2
2.
2.
-4-
Miles
Usual Areas of Operation:
Echo Sounder
Name & Address of Contact:
-(,93-
Tel. No. (Bus. /After hrs.)
Lab Spaces (Describe)
FT
Electric Power:
K.W. "2,0 Volts //g
Winches:
Wire Size
Length
H. P.
Booms/Cranes:
Type
Cap
"A"-Frame
Precision Recorder
Nav. Equipment
J?e>9
Describe any special vessel capabilities
AC/DC
Vessel available for outside use? V£S What Basis?
Cost: Per day Per week
Other
Areal limits of operation £mri/?e e/te>TfJ
""' "
Other comments
,, To Zoo n,
-~----
426
-------
EPA REGION I CHAIN OF CUSTODY PROCEDURES
The following are the procedures developed jointly by the Sur-
veillance and Analysis and Enforcement Divisions of Region I, which
prescribe the chain of custody procedures to be followed in the
collection and analysis of water samples, during water quality and
liquid waste surveys. Such procedures must be adhered to in order to
ensure that data which has been collected can be introduced in
evidence during the trial of a case. They are presented verbatim
from a July 5, 1973 memo to the Region I EPA Administrator.
THE PROCEDURES THAT ARE DESCRIBED BELOW ARE TO BE STRICTLY ADHERED
TO IN THE CONDUCT OF ALL WATER QUALITY AND LIQUID WASTE SURVEYS
REQUESTED BY THE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION UNLESS WRITTEN PERMISSION
TO THE CONTRARY IS OBTAINED FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION:
1. Terms used herein shall have the following definitions:
a. "chief of the sampling crew" means the senior .ranking
member of the sampling crew of the person designated
a chief, by the Director of the Surveillance and
Analysis Division.
b. "composite sample" means a sample collected manually
or by automatic sampling device in increments taken
at set intervals (or continuously) over a period of
time and placed in a single sample container.
c. "Director, Enforcement Divison" means the Director
of the Enforcement Division of Region I, EPA, or
his designees.
d. "Director, Survillance & Analysis Division" means
the Director of the Surveillance & Analysis Division
of Region I, EPA, or his designees.
e. "EPA personnel" means persons employed by or assigned
to the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
f* "field data card" means the form^attached hereto and
marked "A".
g. "field log books" means the log books used in the
field by survey personnel to record data, obser-
vations, and comments regarding the collection
and custody of samples.
427
-------
h. "laboratory number" means the number assigned by the
field data card to all samples (and parts thereof)
collected at the same station, at the same depth, on
the same date(s), and at the same time (or within
a specified time frame in the case of a composite
sample).
i. "laboratory bench books" means the books used to record
the result of scientific analyses of samples.
j. "laboratory sample log books" means the log books
maintained at the field laboratories and the New
England Regional Laboratory to record the receipt
of samples for scientific analysis, the format
of which is attached hereto and marked "B".
k. "field laboratory" means any temporary or mobile
laboratory operated by the Surveillance and Analysis
Division of Region I, EPA.
1. "New England Regional Laboratory" [N.E.R.L.] means
the New England Regional Laboratory of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
m. "sample" means the whole or part of a substance
which is collected for scientific examination or
analysis.
n. "sample container" means the immediate container
used to hold a sample.
o. "sample label" means the label attached to each sample
that is collected, the format of which is attached
hereto and marked "C".
p. "sampling crew" means those persons collecting or
participating in the collection of samples at a
particular station, on a particular date(s), and
at a particular time (or within a specified time
frame in the case of a composite sample).
q. "appropriate seal" means the material placed on
a container to indicate opening of, or tampering
with, the container or its contents and includes:
(1) EPA Form 7500-2 tape on cardboard boxes,
paper or polyethylene bags;
428
-------
(2) wire or lead seals on metal containers or
wooden boxes with hinges;
(3) plastic seals on hinged and unhinged boxes.
r. "shipment sample log" means the form attached hereto
and marked "D".
s. "State personnel" means persons employed by an agency
or department of State government.
t. "station" means the location at which one or more
samples are collected.
u. "subnumber" means the number or numbers assigned to
a sample container and its contents in addition to the
laboratory number.
2. Each time a station is sampled a field data card must
be completely filled out by one or more members of the sampling
crew.
3. All members of the sampling crew must sign their full
names, as well as their initials, in the space labeled "Collector"
on the field card.
4. For each sample container that is used, a sample label
must be completely filled out by one or more members of the
sampling crew.
5. Except in the case of a composite sample, the person
actually collecting the sample must sign his full name (in-
cluding middle initial) in the space labeled "Sampling Crew"
on the sample label. All other members of the sampling crew
must sign their initials.
6. In the case of a composite sample, the chief of the sampling
crew collecting the sample must sign his full name (including middle
initial) in the space labeled "Sampling Crew." All other members of
the sampling crew must sign their initials.
7. Each sample label must be securely attached to the sample
container immediately after collection.
8. Each member of the sampling crew must check over each sample
label as soon after collection as possible to see if it is accurate.
429
-------
9. Where more than one sample label contains the same laboratory
number, a different subnumber must be added to each such label at the
time of sample collection (e.g., 10235-1, 10235-2, etc.).
10. If the contents of a sample container are to be subdivided
into several containers in the field prior to analysis, there are two
permissible courses of action:
a. Sample labels for all the containers to be used may be
filled out when the sample is first collected (using
subnumbers), attached to the original sample container,
and later attached to the containers into which the
sample is divided; or
b. One sample label may be filled out for the original
sample container. In this case, when the sample is
subdivided, sample labels must be filled out in the
same manner as the original label was filled out
and attached to each container to be used. A set of
subnumbers, or, if necessary, a second set of sub-
numbers, must be used to insure that no two labels
have the same numerical identification. A circle
must be drawn around the laboratory number on the
original sample label in order to allow future
identification of that label.
11. Whenever a photograph is taken in the field, the following
information must be recorded on the back of the picture or in a
field log book: the date and time of the photograph, the subject,
the direction of the photograph, the photographer's signature,
and the signature of a witness (if available).
12. Only members of the sampling crew that collect a par-
ticular sample should perform any of the operations related to
such collection, including: placing the sample in the sample
container, filling out the sample label, attaching the label to the
sample container, adding the preservative to the sample, placing
the top on the sample container, subdividing the sample into
several containers. If anyone other than a member of the sampling
crew that collects the sample performs any of such field operations,
he must sign his full name (including middle initial) in the space
labeled "Remarks" on the back of the sample label and note what
operation he performed and the date on which he performed it.
13. During the collection of a composite sample, the auto-
matic sampling device (if used) and the sample container must
at all times be in view of a member of the sampling crew or in
a location accessible only to the sampling crew.
430
-------
14. Unless a sample remains in the possession of the members
of the sampling crew (that is, in their sight or locked in the
motor vehicle used by them), the sample container or any shipping
container holding the sample container must be sealed with an appro-
priate seal and must remain unopened until it arrives at the labora-
tory where analysis of the sample is to be conducted.
15. At the time the sample container or other shipping con-
tainer is sealed, the following information must be recorded in a
field log book: the fact that the container was sealed; the date and
time of the sealing; the laboratory number (and, if appropriate, the
subnumber) of the sample; the name (or initals) of the person sealing
the container; and the name (or initials) of the person recording the
above information.
16. Any time a sample arrives at the laboratory where the
analysis of it is to be conducted, the following information must be
recorded in the laboratory sample log book: the date and time of
arrival of the sample; the condition of the seal (in tact, broken,
none) or acknowledgement that the sample remained in the possession
of the members of the sampling crew (that is, in their sight or
locked in the motor vehicle used by them) from its collection until
delivery to the laboratory; the laboratory number (and, if appro-
priate, the subnumber) of the sample, and the names (or initials)
of the persons delivering the sample, receiving the sample, and
recording the above information
17. The field laboratories and the N.E.R.L. must be securely
locked during non-working hours. Public access to areas where
samples are stored and analyzed must be strictly limited at all
times. While in the field laboratory or the N.E.R.L., all samples
(including portions thereof under-going analysis) must at all times
be attended by EPA personnel or stored in rooms, refrigerators,
or other receptacles that are locked and accessible only to EPA
personnel.
18. All persons collecting, handling, transporting, or attending
samples must be continually alert for evidence of contamination of
and tampering with the samples.
19. Any indication that contamination or tampering may have
occurred, must be noted on the sample label in the space labeled
"Remarks," or on a sheet securely attached to the sample shipping
container, together with the full name (including middle initial)
of the person making the notation and the date of the notation. A
description of the evidence of contamination and tampering must be
noted in a field log book or laboratory sample log book and must
431
-------
include the date and time of discovery, the laboratory numbers
(and, if appropriate, the subnumbers) of the affected samples, the
date of the notation, together with the names of the person(s)
making the discovery and the notation in the log book.
20. As few people as possible should handle a sample between
its collection and analysis. Except when samples are in the pos-
session of a common carrier, all of the persons handling them must
be EPA personnel or personnel of State governments who are desig-
nated in writing by the Director of the Surveillance and Analysis
Division as authorized to handle samples.
21. When samples are shipped by United States Mail or by
comon carrier, the immediate shipping containers must be sealed
with an appropriate seal and packaged so that the seal will not
be disturbed by handling during transit. (Mailed packages must
be registered with return receipt requested.) A shipment sample
log must be filled out by the person arranging for the shipment.
His name (or initials) must appear in the space labeled "Sent
by" on the shipment log. The destination of the shipment, the
laboratory numbers (and, if appropriate, the subnumbers) of all
samples shipped, and any identifying number found on the shipping
receipts must be noted on the shipment sample log. The log must
be filled out as soon as possible after shipment. All registry
receipts and shipping documents must be saved.
22. Unless the contrary is indicated by the Director
of the Enforcemental Division, a portion of the official sample
may be furnished to a prospective defendant if he requires
it and if this is feasible.
23. Used seals, used sample containers, and remnants of
samples may be disposed of unless there is a written or oral
request to the contrary by the Director of the Enforcement
Division.
24. Field data cards, sample labels, log books, laboratory
bench books, shipment sample logs, shipping documents, registry
receipts, and all other records relative to the collection, custody,
and analysis of samples, including any photographs that are taken,
must be saved for seven years unless the Director of the Enforcement
Division gives written approval to the contrary.
25. Every test result or observation recorded in log books,
laboratory bench books, on field data cards, on the back of sample
labels, on shipment sample logs, and in any other record that is
maintained must be identified by the signature or initals (except in
432
-------
the case of the back of sample labels where the full name is required)
of the person or persons conducting the test or making the observation
and must dated (if this information is not otherwise apparent from
the face of the record). As much as possible of the field data
cards and sample labels may be filled out before sampling. However,
in the case of the other documents listed above, they must be filled
in contemporaneously with or as soon as possible after the events they
record. All records that are maintained (including any photographs
that are taken) must at all times remain in the possession of EPA
personnel or under lock and key and accessible only to EPA personnel.
26. The results of laboratory analysis of samples must be
recorded in laboratory bench books under laboratory numbers and
subnumbers.
433
-------
u>
I
\._
3 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 1
PROJECT;
COLLECTC
WINDDIREC
N, NE. E, SE,
}R:
St.
WEATHER OBSERVATIONS:
TION
s. sw.w.
CLOUD COVER %
AIR TEMP. °C
TYPE OF SX
BACTI Q
BOD [Z3
COD ! I
TOG O
NO-- [H
^MHS n
TKN ["I
NW
WIND SPEED
m.p.h.
PRECIPITATION
Rain, Snow. Fog, None
MVIPLES !(
DO CD
A&A Q
O&G CH
TRS f~l
NFRS D
TURB Q
T-P n
TIDE
High, Ebb, Low, Flood
:heck appropri
Hg I I
MET. [""1
OIL n
PCS [H
ate)
LAB CODE
STATION NO.
DATE
COLLECTION TIME
SAMPLING DEPTH (ft.)
SAMPLE TEMP. (°C)
CONDUCTIVITY
SALINITY (0/00)
PROBE-D.O. (mg/'i)
pH-SU
C12 RESIDUAL
TOTAL WATER
DEPTH (fU
{over)
N°- 38567
Y Y M M D D
|
i
ATTACHMENT "A1
-------
Date & Time Laboratory numbers Delivered by Received by Condition of seal Acknowledgement of custody
& subnumbers: (initials of (initials of Intact (I); (initials of chief of
person deliv- person receiv- Broker (B); sampling crew):
ering sample): ing sample): None (N):
10
ui
I
5
-------
Ul
m
3
>)
Ul
^
1
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY - REGION 1 BOSTON MA.
NAME OF UNIT AND ADDRESS
Division of Surveillance & Analysis
240 Highland Avenue
Needham Heights, Massachusetts 02194
SOURCE OF SAMPLE
SAMPLINU CREW (FIRST, INITIAL. LAST NAME)
DATE: YR/MO/DAY
TIME
STATION NO.
CAMPLE NO.
1 1 1 1
SUO NO.
^=^1L_L
PHUSEHVATIVE
AMOUNT
ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT
436
-------
SHIPMENT SAMPLE LOG
Sample Source
Sent by (initials):
Destination:
Date Sent:
Shipped From:
Shipping Receipt No. :
Laboratory Numbers
& Subnumbers:
Method of Shipment:
DAir Freight
Airline & Flight:
D REA
1 1 Parcel Post
1 I U.S. Mail
I 1 Other:
Description of Shipment;
No. of shipping containers:
Shipping containers sealed by (initials):
Type of sample container:
Sample preservative:
Analyses requested:
D
Iced
D Dry
Ice
Remarks:
Attachment D
437
-------
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Overview
An Executive Committee was established for overall guidance of
Workshop and response plan activities, and to translate the results
of the Workshop into recommended action items for consideration by
the National Response Team. The specific objectives of the Executive
Committee were to:
(1) Develop an organizational mechanism for activating the
national and local components of the Regional Plan.
(2) Develop a mechanism for review, analysis, and making
decisions dealing with the degree of field/laboratory
studies on any specific spill impact assessment.
(3) Develop an organizational framework and mechanisms for
review, critique and modification of the Regional Plan.
(4) Determine the existing resources (Federal, State, local
agencies and private sector) in manpower, funds, equipment
and facilities to be applied to any specific spill situa-
tion.
(5) Develop specific proposals for obtaining required funding
of the Regional Plan.
(6) Provide mechanisms for assisting the On-Scene Coordinator.
The Executive Committee was comprised of responsible Federal and
state officials who could potentially contribute to implementation of
an ecological damage assessment response plan, and authoritatively
consider matters of policy and resources. Members of the Committee
are identified in Appendix D.
During the Hartford Workshop, the Executive Committee held five
meetings, including two joint sessions with Panel Chairpersons.
Summary Review
An initial joint meeting of the Executive Committee and Panel
Chairpersons was held on August 28th, on the eve of the Workshop.
It served as a forum for reviewing the Workshop schedule and clarify-
ing Workshop and Executive Committee objectives. Major items of
discussion included: the role of various Federal agencies and the
states in ecological assessment activities; plans for the development
438
-------
of a New England response plan; operational and scientific aspects to
proposed ecological assessment; and the present need for ad hoc
scientific assistance to the OSG.
The Executive Committee meeting of August 29th reviewed the
day's proceedings, discussed schedule and meeting room changes, and
addressed paper work and secretarial needs. Some substantive issues
were discussed including the role of university support. The next
Executive Committee meeting was scheduled to deal with specific Com-
mittee objectives.
The Executive Committee meeting of August 30th was divided into
two groups. One, chaired by Henry Van Cleave (EPA) dealt with
Executive Committee objectives (1), (2) and (3); the other, chaired
by Cmdr. Joseph Valenti (USCG), addressed objectives (4), (5) and
(6). Following the work of the two subgroups, the Committee met
jointly to discuss and summarize Executive Committee recommendations
in regard to each objective.
An Executive Committee meeting on August 31st addressed several
substantive issues. These included: anticipated time frame for
development of the New England regional response plan for ecological
damage assessment; anticipated review of the draft response plan by
the Executive Committee; establishment of a scientific advisory panel
to assistant in development of the plan; the MITRE role in plan
development; the funding scope of the plan; incorporation of ecolog-
ical damage assessment plans in the National Contingency Plan; plans
for the Alaska Workshop and the role of NOAA thereto; lead agency
responsibilities for ecological damage assessment activities; future
scope and objectives of the Workshop program; and the interface of
scientific and operational needs.
A joint meeting of the Executive Committee and Panel Chairpersons
discussed progress of the Workshop in meeting overall Workshop goals
(p. vi ) and the specific objectives of the Executive Committee (p. 443),
Progress was summarized as follows:
• Workshop Goal 1. The proposed organization outlined in the
"Report to the National Response Team on Interagency Scien-
tific Capability to Respond to Major Oil Spills" prepared by
the Task Force on Ecological Damage Assessment was accepted
as the framework for the regional plan. It was recommended
that the Immediate Response Coordinator* for scientific
support be a member of the Regional Response Team. The
proposed chain of notification of an oil spill leading to
*The term for the position of Immediate Response Coordinator has been
changed to Scientific Coordinator/Advisor (SCA) by the NRT.
439
-------
notification of the Immediate Response Coordinator for
scientific support is shown in Figure 1. The Immediate
Response Coordinator is responsible for all support to the
Coast Guard On-Scene Coordinator (OSC) and the decisions as
to the need for additional scientific support personnel
required on-scene.
Workshop Goal 2. The Workshop Panels prepared descriptions
of projects that may be undertaken to attain this goal.
These descriptions are included in the Workshop Report.
Workshop Goal 3. The project descriptions prepared by the
Workshop Panels meet this goal.
Executive Committee Objective 1. This objective has been
met as described above under Workshop Goal 1.
Executive Committee Objective 2. These decisions will be
made jointly by the Immediate Response Coordinator and the
National Scientific Support Team Leader through implementa-
tion of Regional Response Plans. A National Science Review
Panel is proposed to establish the objectives of the national
assessment program, determine needs for longer-term research
projects, and to review scientific response at specific oil
spills. This committee would meet once or twice a year, and
would assist in the development of Regional and National
Response Plans.
Executive Committee Objective 3. The regular review proce-
dure for amending the National Contingency Plan will be
applied to the regional plan for scientific support.
Executive Committee Objective 4. Some of these needs have
been identified by the Workshop Panels. The Immediate
Response Coordinator will be responsible for knowledge of
both regional and national resources available and required.
This effort will be undertaken in close cooperation with
local EPA and NOAA offices.
Executive Committee Objective 5. Projects outlined by
working panels will be reviewed to determine those that can
be funded by existing programs. In addition, for planning
purposes a more comprehensive regional assessment program
will be identified based on an assumed $1 million budget
above existing resources.
Executive Committee Objective 6. The Immediate Response
Coordinator is responsible for providing assistance to the
On-Scene Coordinator.
440
-------
OIL SPILL
OCCURS
DISCHARGER NOTIFIES
NATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER (NEC)
AT U.S. COAST GUARD HEADQUARTERS,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
NRC NOTIFIES
NOAA 24-HOUR
TELEPHONE NUMBER,
BOULDER, COLO.
U.S. COAST GUARD
REGIONAL RESPONSE
CENTER
NATIONAL COORDINATORS,
SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT TEAM
(EPA AND NOAA)
IMMEDIATE RESPONSE
COORDINATOR
FIGURE 1
PROCEDURE FOR NOTIFYING THE IMMEDIATE RESPONSE COORDINATOR
FOR SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT IN THE EVENT OF A MAJOR OIL SPILL
441
-------
It was also recommended that the Workshop Chairperson prepare
a letter report to the National Response Team on results of the
Workshop.
Recommendations to the NRT
The Workshop Coordinator reviewed results of the Region I Work-
shop with the National Response Team on September 8, 1977. Based on
Executive Committee discussions he recommended the following action
items for consideration by the NRT:
• Modification of the National Contingency Plan to incorporate
an ecological damage assessment program as specified in the
report to the NRT by the Task Force on Ecological Damage
Assessment (dated June 1977) and the recommendations of the
Executive Committee at the Hartford Workshop.
• Resolution of lead agency jurisdiction between EPA and NOAA
for ecological damage assessment activities. It is recom-
mended that EPA assume lead responsibility for all spills
originating within the baseline from which the territorial
sea is measured ("near-shore" spills) and that NOAA assume
lead responsibility for spils originating beyond this line
("off-shore" spills).
• Formalize the development and implementation of ecological
assessment activities in consideration of the Draft National
Plan and the recommendations of the Hartford Workshop.
Specifically, it is important that each primary" agency
appoint a full-time respresentative to continue development
and implementation of the ecological damage assessment
effort.
• Approval of the entire series of Regional Workshops and the
development of regional and national plans for ecological
damage assessment.
• Notification of all EPA Regions and USCG Districts of the
Draft National Plan and the Workshop program.
• Establishment of a National Scientific Advisory Panel to
assist in the development and scientific oversight of
Ecological Damage Assessment Response Plans.
• Survey of resources of agencies represented on the NRT
to support implementation of Ecological Damage Assessment
Response Plans.
442
-------
• Designation of a lead agency to seek additional funding
support for implementing the response plans.
• Seeking allocation of a portion of the proposed $200M "super-
fund" to support the ecological damage assessment effort.
• Investigation of other potential funding sources for the
ecological damage assessment program, including the National
Science Foundation, American Petroleum Institute, and the
Smithsonian Institution.
NRT Response to Workshop Recommendations
Overall, the recommendations developed at the Hartford Workshop
were well received by the NRT. A letter from the Chairman of the
NRT to the Workshop Coordinator describes the NRT position on each
recommendation, and is presented in Appendix G.
443
-------
APPENDIX A
WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
444
-------
WORKSHOP SCHEDULE
Sunday, August 28. 1977
8:00 - 11:00 p.m. Joint Meeting of Panel Chairpersons and Executive
Committee
Monday, August 29, 1977
9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Plenary Session
9:00 - 9:10 a.m. Introductions and Welcome
Paul Lefcourt, Workshop Chairman
9:10 - 9:20 Welcoming Address
Bill Adams, EPA Region I Administrator
9:20 - 9:40 Description of Federal Involvement in Oil Spills
Henry VanCleave, EPA, Washington, D.C.
9:40 - 10:00 Background on the National Response Team (NRT)
Capt. John Kirkland, USCG, Washington, D.C.
********************
BREAK
********************
10:20 - 10:40 Description, of NOAA/USCG SORT
David Kennedy, NOAA-ERL, Boulder, CO
10:40 - 11:00 Socioeconomic and Legal Considerations
Jan Praeger, EPA-ERL, Narragansett, RI
11:00 - 11:20 Plan for Workshop - Paul Lefcourt
• Charge to panels
• Organization
• Planned results of Workshop
• Future activities
11:20 - noon Open Discussion - Chaired by Paul Lefcourt
• Comments on speakers
• Questions
• Recommendations: on Workshop performance
445
-------
********************
12:00 - 1:00 p.m, LUNCH
********************
1:00 - 5:00 Panels Meet in Respective Break-out Rooms
5:00 Panels Terminate for Day
5:00 - 7:00 Panel Chairpersons Write Reports
6:00 - 8:00 Reception - Cash Bar '
7:00 Chairpersons Submit Handwritten Copy to Typists
9:00 - 11:00 Executive Committee Meets to Review
Panel Reports and Discuss Following Day's Activity
Tuesday. August 30, 1977
9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Plenary Session
Each Panel Chairperson Reports to General Session
9:00 - 9:15 a.m. Water Column Biology
9:15 - 9:30 Benthic Biology
9:30 - 9:45 Microbiology/Biodegradation
9:45 - 10:00 Histopathology
10:00 - 10:15 Birds/Marine Mammals
10:15 - 10:30 Laboratory Toxicity Studies
10:30 - 10:45 Chemical Analyses/Fate Studies
10:45 - 11:00 Physical Processes
11:00 - 11:15 Socioeconomic/Legal Considerations
11:15 - 11:30 Facilities
11:30 - noon Open Discussion
446
-------
12:00 - 1:00 p.m. LUNCH
********************
1:00 - 5:00 Panels Meet
7:00 Deadline for Panel Chairperson to Submit
Copy to Typists
1:00 - 5:00 Executive Committee Meeting
Wednesday, August 31. 1977
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. Panel Chairpersons Meet
10:00 - 12:00 Panels Meet
********************
12:00 - 1:00 LUNCH
********************
1:00 - 4:00 Panels Meet
2:00 - 4:00 Executive Committee Meeting
4:00 - 6:00 Joint Meeting of Executive Committee and Panel
Chairpersons
8:00 Chairpersons Submit Handwritten Copy to Typists
447
-------
APPENDIX B
PROJECT REPORT FORMAT
448
-------
Panel
Project #
Priority Rank
PANEL GUIDANCE FORMAT
1. Proposed Title of Project
2. Description of Project
- Be brief! Outline the objectives of the study, how it is carried out,
and anticipated results.
- Give references if possible.
3. Performing Organization
- Indicate the organization(s) the panel is certain has the capability
to perform the study. Give names if possible.
- Suggest possible performing organizations.
4. Habitats Applicable
- Identify one or more from listing of New England habitats.
5. Conditions Applicable
- Consider all possible conditions required for successful completion of
study. For example, in a study of impact on benthic fauna some con-
ditions are:
- oil is incorporated in sediment
- benthos at control site(s) is uncpntaminated
- Consider what weather/climate, geographical, ecological, economic or
other condition(s) are necessary before putting this study into effect.
6. Oil Type Applicable
- Specify what oils or groups of oils (e.g., crude, no. 6, no. 4, no. 2,
gasoline, etc.) project applies.
7. Time Frame
- Identify the total inclusive period of the study and the actual required
work periods, e.g.:
"The study requires a minimum five-year period consisting
of four one-week sampling periods at one field sampling
per season. Sample work-up and data analysis requires
an additional 8 weeks/year for a spill of size."
8. Cost
- Estimate the intensive cost of the project, i.e., give a sliding cost
based on the size of spill and area of impact, e.g.:
Area (Km2! Cost $
10 100,000
50 800,000
100 1,500,000
449-
-------
- Show how you arrived at your figures.
9. Equipment Needs/Equipment Available
- Be specificI What kind and how much?
- Available equipment means it can be used for the project with little
advance notice.
- Equipment means sampling gear, sample containers, field and labora-
tory instrumentation, glassware, communication equipment and various
kinds of hardware.
10. Facility Needs/Facilities Available
- Be specific by habitat and kind and size of spill.
- Facilities means analytical laboratories, ships, boats, aircraft, land
vehicles, living accommodations for lodging, staging and action center,
etc.
11. Personnel Needs/Personnel Available
- Identify if proper personnel are currently available. What response
time is needed? Could they respond within the stated time frame?
- Give names, addresses, tel. no. if possible.
- If personnel are not available give indication of what disciplines,
' number are necessary. Suggest possible workers I
12. Support Services (Concurrent or Associated Studies)
- Indicate the kinds of projects that must be performed to provide data
essential for the proper functioning of this project.
- For example, if project dealt with determining alterations in benthic
community diversity a study mapping the distribution of oil in sedi-
ments would likely be desirable.
- Another example might be the need for histological examination of
selected organisms.
13. Payoff
- Describe in adequate detail what the results of such a study would be
in contributing to determining the overall ecological impact.
- Consider the possible results from the perspective of: (1) scientific
interest, i.e., how much of a unique contribution does the study make
to our understanding of oil pollution impact on marine ecosystems and
(2) how does the study lend itself to determining the economic ($)
costs of damage to "natural resources"?
14. Limitations
- This is a very broad category. Considerations of feasibility, utility
and operational problems come to bear. Environmental factors, weather,
location, ongoing clean-up operations, nature of oil, habitat type,
season, etc. all play a role in determining the limitations.
- Ask if the project answers all questions dealing with assessing ecolog-
ical impact under all possible scenaries and conditions. Of course
not! O.K., then what are the major flaw?
450
-------
New England Habitats
1. Pelagic system - including inland, coastal, offshore areas, and
migratory species
2. Offshore bottom
3. Rocky shore
4. Sand shore
5. Salt marsh
6. Oyster - mussel reef
7. Worm - clam flat
8. Shallow salt pond
451
-------
APPENDIX C
PANEL CHAIRPERSONS
452
-------
BENTHIC BIOLOGY
WATER COLUMN BIOLOGY
Dr. Doug Wolfe
Deputy Director - OCSEAP
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
MICROBIOLOGY/BIODEGRADATION
Dr. Al Bourquin
EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
Sabine Island
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
BIRDS/MARINE MAMMALS
Dr. J. Lawrence Dunn
233 Woodward Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS/FATE
Dr. Bill MacLeod
NOAA/NMFS
N.W. & Alaska Fisheries Center
2725 MontLake Boulevard, East
Seattle, WA 98112
PHYSICAL PROCESSES
Dr. Jerry Gait
NOAA/ERL/PMEL
Pacific Northwest Fisheries Center
3711 15th Avenue, N.E.
Seattle, WA 98105
Dr. Frank G. Lowman
Deputy Director
Environmental Research Laboratory
EPA
So. Ferry Road
Narragansett, RI 02882
HISTOPATHOLOGY
Mr. Paul P. Yevich
EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
So. Ferry Road
Narragansett, RI 02882
LABORATORY TOXICITY
Dr. John H. Gentile
EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
So. Ferry Road
Narragansett, RI 02882
SOCIOECONOMIC/LEGAL
Dr. Jan C. Prager
EPA
Environmental Research Laboratory
So. Ferry Road
Narragansett, RI 02882
FACILITIES/DATA MANAGEMENT
Mr. Carl Eidam
EPA
Region I
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
453
-------
APPENDIX D
MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
REGION I WORKSHOP
454
-------
Dr. Norman Richards
(not in attendance)
Environmental Research Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
Sabine Island
Gulf Breeze, Florida 32561
Mr. Mark Schuldt
(for Don Baumgartner)
Environmental Research Laboratory
Environmental Protection Agency
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, Oregon 97330
Dr. John Robinson
MESA, Rx 5
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, Colorado 80302
Mr. David Kennedy
Project Manager - SOR
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, Colorado 80302
Dr. Doug Wolfe
Deputy Director - OCSEAP
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, Colorado
Dr. Charles C. Bates
Science Advisor to Commandant
U.S. Coast Guard
(G-DS/62)
Washington, D.C. 20024
Mr. Henry Van Cleave
(for Ken Biglane)
Oil & Special Materials Control
Division
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20024
Ms. Carolyn Rogers
(for Ken Sherman)
Northeast Fisheries Center Narra.
Laboratory
NOAA-NMFS
South Ferry Road
Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882
Dr. Frank Monastero
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
C Street between 18th & 19th, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
Mr. Richard Robinson
(for Nelson Kverno)
Department of the Interior
Fish & Wildlife Service
18th & C Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20240
Dr. Cal Ross
Environmental Emergency Branch
E.P. Service
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OH3
Canada
Capt. J. R. Kirkland
U.S. Coast Guard
400 7th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Lt. Cmdr. Joseph Marotta)
(for Rear Adm. Schwob)
First U.S. Coast Guard District
150 Causeway Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02114
Capt. Milton Suzich
(not in attendance)
U.S. Coast Guard R&D Center
Avery Point
Groton, Connecticut 08340
455
-------
Mr. Les Smith
(for Evelyn Murphy)
Executive Office of Environmental
Affairs
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02114
Ms. Sara Carroll
(for Evelyn Murphy)
Executive Office of Environmental
Affairs
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02114
Mr. Domenic Forcella
(for Stanley Pack)
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection
State Office Building
Hartford, Connecticut 06115
Mr. Bob Randall
(for George Gormley)
Maine Department of Environmental
Protection
State House
Augusta, Maine 04330
Mr. Carlton Maine
(not in attendance)
Rhode Island Department of Health
Davis Street
Providence, Rhode Island 02908
Dr. Jean Snider
Marine Environmental Protection
Office
NOAA
6010 Executive Blvd.
Rockville, MD 20852
Mr. Carlton Maine
(not in attendance)
Rhode Island Department of Health
Davis Street
Providence, Rhode Island 02908
Mr. Paul Caviechi
(for William Healy)
New Hampshire Supply & Pollution
Control Commission
Concord, New Hampshire 03301
Mr. Bernard Corson
(not in attendance)
New Hampshire Fish & Game Department
Concord, New Hampshire 03301
Mr. Clinton Hall
EPA (RD-621)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Dr. Paul Lefcourt, Chairman
EPA/ERL
Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882
Mr. Carl Eidam
Environmental Protection Agency
60 Westview Street
Lexington, Massachusetts 02172
Ruth Rehfus
(for William Gordon)
Regional Director
National Marine Fisheries Service
14 Elm Street
Gloucester, Massachusetts 01930
456
-------
APPENDIX E
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
457
-------
Dr. Philip U. Alkon
METREK Division
MITRE Corporation
Westgate Research Park
McLean, Va. 22101
Dr. William Andrade
Environmental Protection Agency
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02172
Dr. Charles C. Bates (G-DS/62)
U. S. Coast Guard
Washington, DC
Mr. Benjamin Baxter
Research Scientist
Science Applications, Inc.
745 Main Street
Kewington, Connecticut
Mr. Robert Beauchamp
U. S. Department of Interior
Bureau of Land Management
C. St. Between 18th & 19th, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
Mr. Bradford Blodget
State Ornithologist
Massachusetts Division of Fish & Wildlife
74 Hillcroft Avenue
Worcester, MA 01606
Mr. Paul Boehra
Energy Resource Company
185 Alewife Brook Parkway
Cambridge, MA 02138
Dr. Al Bourquin
Enviionmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Sabine Island
Gulf Breeze, FL 32561
Mr. Patrick Bowe
452 Laughlin Road
Stratford, CT 06497
Mr. Richard C. Boynton
Research Representative
Environmental Protection Agency
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
Dr. Robert S. Brown
233 Woodward Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Clifford Buehrens
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
494 Annaquatucket Road
North Kingston, Rhode Island
Dr. Frank Cantelmo
City College of New York
New York, New York
Mr. James Cardoza
Massachusetts Division of Fish & Wildlife
Westboro, MA 01581
Mr. Arnold Carr
Massachusets Dept. of Fisheries &
Wildlife
Division of Marine Fisheries
18 Heritage Professional Building, Rte. 6A R
Sandwich, MA 02553
Ms. Sara Carroll
Massachusetts Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
Dr. Chris Carty
MESA/RX5
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Mr. Paul Caviechi
New Hampshire Water Supply & Pollution
Control
Prescott Park
105 Loudon Road
Concord, NH 03301
John F. Conlon
Chief, Oil & Hazardous Materials Section
Environmental Protection Agency/NERL
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Mr. Peter Cornillon
208 Lippitt Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Mr. Russell Cuervels
Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
92 Front Avenue
Salem, Massachusetts
Dr. Wayne Davis
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narraganser.t, RI 02882
Dr. Chris Deacutis
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Mr. Fred Disheroon
Attorney. U. S. Department of Justice
10th & Penn. Avenue
Washington, DC 20530
458
-------
Dr. J. Lawrence Dunn
233 Woodward Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Carl L. Eidam
Oceanographer, Oil & Hazardous Materials
Section
Environmental Protection Agency/NERL
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Dr. Ronald Eisler
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Mr. Robert Estabrook
New Hampshire Water Supply & Pollution
Control :
Prescott Park
105 Loudon Road
Concord, NH 03301
Dr. Dianne Everich
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Austin Farley
National Oceanographic Atmospheric
Administration
Oxford, Maryland
Mr. John Fiske
Massachusetts Division of Marine
Fisheries
105 Clark Road
Sandwich Beach, Massachusetts
Mr. Domenic Forcella
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection
State Office Building
Room 161
Hartford, CT 06115
Mr. Charles Fredette
Water Compliance Unit
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection
State Office Building
Hartford, CT 06115
Dr. Peter H. Fricke
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. Jerry Gait
NOAA/ERL/PMEL
Pacific Northwest Fisheries Center
3711 15th Avenue, N.E.
Seattle, WA 98105
Dr. George Gardner
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Patrick Gearing
MERL
Narragansett Bay Campus
University of Rhode Island
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. John Gentile
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Mr. Ray Gerber
Bowdoin College
Marine Research Laboratory
Middle Bay Road
Brunswick, Maine
Dr. Cameron Gifford
Marine Biological Laboratory
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. William Grant
Assistant Scientist
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. James Griffen
Director of Technical Services
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Michael Griffin
101 Woodward Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Mr. R. A. Griffths
First U. S. Coast Guard District
150 Causeway Street
Boston, MA 02114
Dr. Clement Griscom
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Mr. Clint Hall
Environmental Protection Agency (RD-681)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Mr. George Hampson
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. Paul Hargraves
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
459
-------
Ms. Janie Harris
Energy Resource Company
185 Alewife Brook Parkway
Cambridge, MA 02138
Dr. Diane Harvey
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Edward Hatfield
Jackson Estuarine Laboratory
Durham, New Hampshire
Dr. Frank Hepner
Department of Zoology
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Robert Hiltabrand
U. S. Coast Guard R & D
Avery Point
Groton, CT 06340
Mr. Thomas Hoehh
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection
Marine Region Director
P.O. Box 248
Water ford, CT 06385
Dr. Eva Hoffman
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Mr. Jon Hurst
Maine Department of Marine Resources
West Boothbay Harbor, ME 04575
Dr. Jeffrey Hyland
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Gene Jackim
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Arnold Julin
Office of Biological Sciences
U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
One Gateway Center
Newton Corner, MA 02158
Ms. Elisa B. Karnofsky
BUMP/MBL
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. George Kelly
National Marine Fisheries Service
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Mr. David Kennedy
Project Manager-SOR
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Dr. John Kinneman
U. S. Department of Commerce
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Captain J. R. Kirkland
U. S. Coast Guard
400 7th Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20590
Dr. G. Kleineberg
U. S. Coast Guard R&D Center
Avery Point
Groton, CT 06340
Dr. Constance Knapp
Department of Ocean Engineering
Lippitt Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Giles LaRoche
Marine Science Center
McGill University
Montreal, Canada
Dr. James Lake
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Paul Lefcourt
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
CDR J. T. Leigh
G-DOE-1
U. S. Coast Guard
Washington, DC 20590
Mr. Millington Lockwood
EDS/NOAA
Pacific Northwest Fisheries Center
3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460 .
Mr. Sabin Lord
Division of Water Pollution Control
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering
110 Tremont Street
Boston, MA 02108
Dr. Frank Lowman
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Frank Manheim
U. S. Geological Survey
Woods Hole, MA 02543
460
-------
Mr. William Marhoffer
Division of Water Pollution Control
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering
P.O. Box 537
Borth Pembroke, MA 02358
LCDR Joseph Marotta
Chief (mep)
U. S. Coast Guard - First District
150 Causeway Street
Boston, MA 02114
Mr. Richard McGrath
Taxon, Inc.
50 Grove Street
Salem, Massachusetts
Mr. Guy McLeod
Southern Massachusetts University
Dartmouth, MA. 02714
Dr. William MacLeod
HOAA National Analytical Facility
8. W. & Alaska Fisheries Center
2725 Montlake Blvd., East
Seattle, WA 98112
Dr. Brian Melzian
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Harragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Donald Miller
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Harragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Frank Monastero
Department of Interior
Bureau of Land Management
Washington, DC
Mr. Jeffrey Morris
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection
Marine Region
Waterford, Connecticut
Dr. Hugh Mulligan
Manager, Biological Sciences Staff
EG 6 G Environmental Consultants
151 Bear Hill Road
Waltham, MA 02154
Mr. David G. Neal
P.O. Box 30
Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts
Mr. Peter Nolan
Environmental Protection Agency
60 Westview Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Ms. Carole O'Toole
c/o MESA/RX5
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Captain K. M. Palerey
First U. S. Coast Guard District
150 Causeway Street
Boston, MA 02114
Mr. Charles Parker
Bigelow Laboratories for Ocean Science
West Boothbay Harbor, ME 04575
Mr. Fred Passman
Energy Resource Company
185 Alewife Brook Parkway
Cambridge, ME 02138
Dr. Susan Peterson
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 07543
Dr. Samuel R. Petrocelli
EG 6 G
790 Main Street
Wareham, MA 02571
Dr. Andrew Pollack
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (48-320)
Department of Civil Engineering
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
Dr. Kevin Powers
Manomet Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 0
Manomet, MA 02345
Dr. Sheldon Pratt
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. John H. Prescott, Director
Hew England Aquarium
Central Wharf
Boston, MA 02110
Mr. Robert Randall
Environmental Services Specialist II
Maine Department of Environmental
Protection
32 Coombs Street
Bangor, Maine
Ms. Ruth Rehfus
Assistant Branch Chief
Environmental Assessment Branch
National Marine Fisheries Service
191 Main Street
Gloucester, Massachusetts
461
-------
Mr. John Rlpp
Assistant Project Engineer
The Research Corporation
125 Silas Dean Highway
Wethersfieid, CI 06109
.Dr. John Robinson
MESA, RX5
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Mr. Richard Robinson
Deputy Chief, Division of Ecological
Services
U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Interior Building 4
Washington, DC 20240
Ms. Carolyn Rogers
NOAA/NMFS
South Ferry Road
Narragansett, RI 02882
Dr. Peter Kogerson
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Mr. Cal Ross
Environmental Emergency Branch
Environmental Protection Service
Place Vincent Massey
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1C8
Canada
Mr. Dennis A. Sande
Pollution Control Officer
Quarters 12-H—6
U. S. Coast Guard
Governors Island, NY 10004
Dr. Akella Sastry
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
11 Butler Building
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Mark Schuldt
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 So. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97330
Mr. Kenneth Simon
Normandeau Associates
Hashua Road
Bedford, New Hampshire
Mr. Lawrence J. Slaski
Economist for U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service
12511 Atherton Drive
Wheaton, MD 20906
Mr. Lester B. Smith, Jr.
Massachusetts Executive Office of
Environmental Affairs
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
Dr. Wade H. B. Smith
METREK Division
MITRE Corporation
Westgate Research Park
McLean, Va. 22101
Dr. Jean Snider
Marine Environmental Protection Office
MRS - NOAA
6010 Executive Blvd.
Rockvllle, MD 20852
Dr. Malcolm Spaulding
208 Lippitt Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Thomas Spittler
Environmental Protection Agency
60 Westvlew Street
Lexington, MA 02173
Dr. John Teal
Woods Hole Oceanographlc Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. Richard Traxler
101 Woodward Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Mr. Joseph Valient!
Chief, Pollution Response Branch
Coast Guard Headquarters
Washington, DC
Mr. Henry VanCleave
Oil & Special Materials Control
Division (WR-548)
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
Dr. Gabriel Vargo
Bunker C
Graduate School of Oceanography
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. G. W. Wadley
Technical Manager
Nalco Environmental Sciences
15QO Frontage Road
Northbrook, IL 60062
462
-------
Dr. Mason Wilson, Jr.
101 Wales Hall
University of Rhode Island
Kingston, RI 02881
Dr. Douglas Wolfe
Deputy Director - OCSEAP
NOAA/ERL
Boulder, CO 80302
Dr. Red Wright
National Marine Fisheries Service
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
Woods Hole, MA 02543
Dr. Paul Yevlch
Environmental Protection Agency
•Environmental Research Laboratory
Narragansett, RI 02882
Honorable Thomas Yost
Environmental Protection Agency - Region IV
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30308
463
-------
APPENDIX F
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE OFFICES
464
-------
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Region 5 (Northeastern Stategjfo
Regional Oil Spill Coordinator
Arnold M. Julin, ECE, Newton Corner, MA FTS: 829-9217
Conm: 617-965-5100 ext. 217
Home: 603-893-9348
Alternate Regional Oil Spill Coordinator
Curtis Laffin, OBS, Newton Corner, MA FTS: 829-9217
Comm: 617-965-5100 ext. 217
Home: 603-339-4643
Area III (ME. HH. VT. MA. RI. CONN)
Area Manager, Concord, NH
Charles Maloy FTS: 8-834-471/4718
Comm: 603-224-9558/9559
Home: 603-224-5176
Field Coordinators
Maine Coast
Michael Hendrix, Hatchery Manager, Craig Brook NFH, East Orland, ME
FTS: None
Comm: 207-469-2803
Home: 207-469-7253
Maine. NH. Mass Coast to Buzzards Bay
George Gavutis, Refuse Manager, Parker River NWR, Newburyport, MA
FTS: None
Comm: 617-465-5753 (Thru FTS 223-2100)
Home: 603-394-7874
Mass. RI. Conn Coast South of Cape Cod
Refuse Manager, Ninigret NWR, Charlestown, RI
FTS: None
Comm: 401-364-3106 (Thru FTS 838-1000)
Home:
Lake Champlain, VT
John Gersmehl, FA, Montpelier, VT
FTS: 8-832-4438
Comm: 802-223-5900, 802-229-9476
Home:
Alternate for New England Area
Bob Currie, ES, Concord, NH
FTS: 8-834-4726/4762
Comm: 603-224-2585/2586
Home: 603-648-2257
465
-------
APPENDIX G
RESPONSE OF THE NRT TO
HARTFORD WORKSHOP RECOMMENDATIONS
466
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
4 NOVI977
OFFICE OF WATER AND
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Dr. Paul Lefcourt
Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
Narrangansett, Rhode Island 02882
Dear Paul:
On behalf of the National Response Team (NRT) I would like to
commend you on your effort in developing a national plan of action
for assessing the ecological damage caused by oil spills.
Since the 8 September meeting-, the NRT has 'conducted an indepth
review of your report on the Hartford Workshop. As a result, it is
agreed that the report identifies critical issues that require resolution
in order for the Task Force on Ecological Damage Assessment to
carry out its charge. The NRT also feels that it is essential that
replies to the ten action items contained in your report be provided in
sufficient time to assist in the planning of future workshops. Accord-
ingly, the following comments are provided for your guidance:
Proposal: Establishment of a National Scientific Advisory Panel
to assist in the development and scientific oversight of Ecological
Damage Assessment Response Plans.
Response: The NRT .concurs in the need for a mechanism tp
assess the need to perform new research and development in support
of the damage assessment program. We are asking the Research and
Development Committee of the NRT to set up a mechanism for
accomplishing this.
Proposal: Survey of represented agency resources to support
implementation of Ecological Damage Assessment Response Plans.
Response: The NRT concurs that the survey of available resources
should be conducted. A National Inventory of Response Equipment is
being planned to provide information on the various major resources
of the Federal agencies. When completed, the inventory willbe
distributed to all Regional Response Teams.
467
-------
Proposal; Designation of a lead agency to seek additional funding
support for implementing the response plans.
Response; The NRT concurs with the proposal to designate a lead
agency to seek funding support for conducting ecological damage assist-
ance. However, further action on this item must be deferred pending
the outcome of the "superfund" legislation at which time this matter
will be reviewed.
Proposal; Seeking allocation of a portion of the proposed $200M
"superfund" to support the ecological damage assessment effort.
Response; The NRT will forward a letter to the Council on
Environmental Quality urging the Council to advise the Administration
that the currently proposed "superfund" legislation be amended so as
to permit up to $4M of the fund to be expended annually in support of
damage assessment activities as deemed necessary by the administrator
of the fund.
Proposal; Investigation of other potential funding sources for the
ecological damage assessment program, including the National Science
Foundation, American Petroleum Institute, and the Smithsonian Institute.
Response; The NRT agrees that the concept of obtaining funds from
other than government sources for the damage assessment program is
feasible provided that the criteria established for this method of funding
are complied with. Further action on this item must await the establish-
ment of budget levels and the receipt of contributions by government
agencies to determine what additional funds are required to implement
the ecological damage assessment plan.
Proposal; Modification of the National Contingency Plan to incorporate
an ecological damage assessment program as specified in the report to
the NRT by the Task Force on Ecological Damage Assessment (dated
June 1977) and the recommendations of the Executive Committee at the
Hartford Workshop.
Response; It was agreed that the NRT at its August 12, 1977 meeting
that a comprehensive review and evaluation would be made on the results
of the workshops. Following this action, the NRT will then take appro-
priate action to incorporate the approval ecological damage assessment
program into the National Contingency Plan.
Proposal; Resolution of lead agency jurisdiction between EPA and
NOAA for ecological damage assessment activities. I have suggested
that EPA assume lead responsibility for all spills originating within
the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured ("near-shore"
spills) and the NOAA assume lead responsibility for spills originating
beyond this line ("off-shore" spills).
468
-------
Response; The NRT agrees with the concept that EPA assumes
lead responsibility for accomplishing ecological damage assessment for
all spills originating inland from the baseline from which the territorial
sea is measured and that NOAA assumes lead responsibility for accom-
plishing assessment for spills occurring seaward of this line.
Proposal; Formalize the development and implementation of ecolo-
gical assessment activities in consideration of the Draft National Plan
and the recommendations of the Hartford Workshop. Specifically, it is
important that each primary agency appoint a full-time representative
to continue development and implementation of the ecological damage
assessment effort.
Response; The NRT feels that staffing is important to the success
of the program and will urge each participating agency on the NRT to
give this matter its full attention.
Proposal; Approval of the entire series of eight remaining Regional
Workshops and the development of regional and national plans for ecolo-
gical damage assessment.
Response; The NRT feels that five workshops are sufficient to
generate the information needed to modify the National Contingency
Plan. The NRT believes that a representative crossection of research
needs can best be obtained by holding workshops on the east, gulf and
west coasts, in the area of Alaska and in the Great Lakes region. The
NRT recognizes the need for additional regional workshops to meet
unique requirements. These workshops should be conducted by the
appropriate RRTs as required without the approval of the NRT.
Proposal; Notification of all EPA Regions and XJSGG Districts of
the draft National Plan and the Workshop program.
Response; The NRT concurs that information on the workshop
program should be disseminated to all EPA regions and USCG districts.
The NRT recommends that the Regional Response Teams be invited to
participate.
In addition to the foregoing, the NRT wishes to provide you the
following additional guidance.
o The NRT deems it advisable to establish a regional response
structure to accomplish the required damage assessment. The respon-
sibility for establishing and maintaining this regional structure will be
borne by individuals from the Environmental Protection Agency and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency as designated in Attach-
ment 1. The designated individuals will function as Scientific
Coordinators/Advisor (SCAs) to the Regional Response Teams of the
469
-------
region to which they have been assigned. The anticipated duties of
the SCAs are outlined in Attachment 2.
o The NRT deems it advisable that a National Scientific Coordi-
nation Team be established for the purpose'of coordinating an
assessment effort which is determined to be beyond the ability of an
affected region. The Team will be chaired by Dr. Paul Lef court of
EPA for "near-shore" spills and by Robert E. Beck of NOAA,
Dr. Ledolph Baer, alternate for "offshore" spills. Each Regional
Scientific Coordinator/Advisor will also serve as a member of the
Team. The National Scientific Coordination Team will"serve the
National Response Team in an advisory capacity.
Copies of this letter are being forwarded to Mr. John Robinson,
NOAA, who will chair the Alaska workshop and to each RRT.
The NRT requests that the three remaining workshops be completed
as soon as possible. It would also be most helpful if you could coordi-
nate with the v/orkshop contractor to ensure that each planned workshop
is provided with the latest list of desired R&D projects and any other
pertinent information such as format for collecting scientific support
information in sufficient time to allow the results of the previous
workshops can be applied in future ones.
Sincerely yours.
leth E. Bigls
Chairman, National Response Team
Enclosures
Concur:
Captain John
UnKed States Coast Guard
Vice Chairm^tftr^National Response Team
470
-------
Note: Attachment 1 is the list of regional scientific coordinators to
be developed by EPA and NOAA
Attachment 2
Anticipated duties of Region Scientific Coordinators /Advisors
The duties of the Regional Scientific Support Coordinators /Advisors
are to:
,/
a. Perform liaison with the scientific community within the
region to determine the availability and ability of the community to
perform anticipated damage assessment requirements which may be
necessitated by an oil spill.
b. Establish, in cooperation with the scientific community within
the region, the various interests for accomplishing ongoing research
in conjunction with a spill of opportunity.
c. Establish in, cooperation with the scientific community within
the region, the kinds of research that are considered necessary to
improve the existing capability to perform work in support of damage
assessment activities.
d. Arrange for resources and coordinate as necessary On-Scene
Coordinator requests for the performance of damage assessment
activities received by the RRT.
e. Evaluate the potential for accomplishing research and develop-
ment projects at a spill of opportunity. Arrange for and coordinate
as necessary such efforts as are deemed appropriate.
f. Coordinate all other scientific efforts being performed in the
area of the spill by Federal and State agencies in conjunction with
other programs 'or authorities.
471
-------
2
g. Serve as the regional representative to the National Scientific
Support Team.
472
-------
Attachment 3
Organizational Relationship Between NRT, RRT
and Scientific Support Coordinators
National
Response
Team
I I
National
Scientific Support Coordinators
Beck
Lefcourt
On-Scene
Coordinator
I T
/ Repeated for\
V, Each Regionj
Standard
Federal
Region
Regional Response
Team
E.F.A.
RRT
Regional Scientific
Support Coordinator/
Advisor
Short Term
Environmental
Priorities
How clean is cleai
Immediate Environ
mental damage
Long Term
Research
Subtle Effects
473
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing/
REPORT NO.
MTR-7843
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION*NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Proceedings of the National Response Team Oil Spill
Scientific Response Workshop, New England
5. REPORT DATE
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
AUTHOR(S)
Edited by:
Dr. William 6. Conner
Dr. Philip U. Alkon
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Metrek Division of the MITRE Corporation
1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
McLean, Virginia 22102
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GBAMX AIO~
68-01-3188
12. SPONSOHING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
, Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry
Office of Research and Development
Washinaton, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA /600/7
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
This project is part of the EPA-planned and coordinated Federal Interagency
Energy/Environment R&D Program.
16. ABSTRACT.
This document presents the final results of a Workshop on oil spill
ecological damage' assessment held at HartfordJ Connecticut, during
28-31 August 1977. The principal aim of the Workshop was to identify
scientific needs and capabilities to be incorporated into a regional
response plan for assessing the ecological damage due to major oil
spills. Results are organized in terms of Workshop plenary sessions,
meetings of 10 scientific and technical panels, and meetings of the
Workshop executive committee. A draft of this document has been
reviewed and revised according to comments from Workshop coordinators
and attendees.
17.
(Circle One or More)
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Ecology
Environments
Other:
6F 8A
oil pollution, oil spills, petroleum
spills, damage assessment
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
19. SECURITY CLASS (Thit Report)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
472
20. SECURITY CLASS ,'Tllif page)
unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220.-1 (9-73)
*US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 620-007/3713 1-3
------- |