CATALOG DOCUMENTATION
EMAP-GREAT LAKES PROGRAM LEVEL DATABASE
1994 LAKE ONTARIO NEARSHORE AND OFFSHORE
GRAIN SIZE COMPOSITION DATA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.	DATA SET IDENTIFICATION

2.	INVESTIGATOR INFORMATION

3.	DATA SET ABSTRACT

4.	OBJECTIVES AND INTRODUCTION

5.	DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING METHODS

6.	DATA MANIPULATIONS

7.	DATA DESCRIPTION

8.	GEOGRAPHIC AND SPATIAL INFORMATION

9.	QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE

10.	DATA ACCESS

11.	REFERENCES

12.	TABLE OF ACRONYMS

13.	PERSONNEL INFORMATION

1. DATA SET IDENTIFICATION

1.1	Title of Catalog document

EMAP-Great Lakes Program Level Database
1994 Lake Ontario Nearshore and Offshore
Grain Size Composition

1.2	Author of the Catalog entry
Greg Elonen, ILS

1.3	Catalog revision date
24 April 1997

1.4	Data set name
L0PART94


-------
1.5

Task Group

Great Lakes

1.6	Data set identification code
512

1.7	Version
001

1.8	Requested Acknowledgment

These data were produced as part of the U.S. EPA's Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP). If you plan to publish
these data in any way, EPA requires a standard statement for work
it has supported:

"Although the data described in this article has been funded
wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
through its EMAP-Great Lakes Program, it has not been subjected to
Agency review, and therefore does not necessarily reflect the
views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be
i nferred."

2. INVESTIGATOR INFORMATION

2.1	Principal Investigator
Stephen Lozano

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NHEERL-MED

2.2	Investigation Participant - Sample Collection
Floyd Boetcher

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NHEERL-MED

2.3	Investigation Participant - Sample Collection
Gary Phipps

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NHEERL-MED

2.4	Investigation Participant - Sample Collection
James Gangl

SAIC

(Currently, University of Minnesota)

2.5	Investigation Participant - Sample Processing
Jill Scharold

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NHEERL-MED


-------
3. DATA SET ABSTRACT

3.1	Abstract of the Data Set

Sediment grain size analyses were conducted on each EMAP station
sediment sample homogenate. The samples were obtained from the top
2 cm of sediment grab samples, representing the most recent
depositional layer. The grain size analysis included measurements
of per cent sand, per cent silt, and per cent clay.

3.2	Keywords for the Data Set

Lake Ontario, sand, silt, clay, grain size, nearshore.

4.	OBJECTIVES AND INTRODUCTION

4.1	Program Objective

The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) was
designed to periodically estimate the status and trends of the
Nation's ecological resources on a regional basis. EMAP provides
a strategy to identify and bound the extent, magnitude and
location of environmental degradation and improvement on a
regional scale based on station sites randomly located in the
Great Lakes. Base grid and three-fold enhanced sampling sites
from nearshore and offshore regions of Lake Ontario are included
in this data set.

4.2	Data Set Objective

The objective of the sediment grain size data set is to
characterize the grain size distribution of sediments collected
from the nearshore and offshore regions of Lake Ontario. These
samples represent the top 2 cm of sediment.

4.3	Background Discussion

The structural characteristics of the sediment is used as the
primary physical habitat indicator for all resource classes
considered. Physical habitat quality characterizes the physical
conditions that may limit the biological components from reaching
their full potential expected for an ecological zone within a
lake.

4.4	Summary of Data Set Parameters

Grain size characterized as clay, silt, and sand.

5.	DATA ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING METHODS

5.1 Data Acqui si ti on

5.1.1 Sampling Objective

Collect sediment samples suitable for the analysis of
sediment constituents. One (1) or two (2) sediment samples
were expected to be collected at each station.


-------
5.1.2	Sample Collection Methods Summary

For successful box core samples, the overlying water was
allowed to settle for a few minutes before being siphoned
off. Four core tubes were then placed into the sediment. The
core tubes were then capped and removed one at a time. The
top 2 cm of sediment was extruded, composited, then
homogenized. A subsample was removed, placed into 60 mL
Whirlpak bags and refrigerated for laboratory analysis.

Ponar sediment samples were obtained by removing the top 2-3
cm, homogenizing the sample then removing a subsample. The
subsample was then placed in a 60 mL Whirlpak bag and
refrigerated for laboratory analysis.

5.1.3	Beginning Sampling Date
3 September 1994

5.1.4	Ending Sampling Date
19 September 1994

5.1.5	Platform

Sampling was conducted from the R/V Guardian.

5.1.6	Sampling Equipment

At all sediment stations within the depositional zone,
sediment collection was performed using a 15"x 15"x 20" box
core sampler. At stations located outside the depositional
zone, either a box core sampler or a standard size Ponar was
used depending on the type of bottom substrate.

5.1.7	Manufacturer of Instrument
Wildco Manufacturing Company

5.1.8	Key Variables

The number of samples collected at each station was recorded
at the time of collection.

5.1.9	Collection Method Calibration

The sampling gear did not require any calibration beyond
inspection for damage due to rough handling or rock damage.

5.1.10	Collection Quality Control

Criteria for rejection of Ponar samples: Soft bottom-
sampler must be at least 3/4 full and show minimal signs of
disturbance. Hard bottom- presence of rocks, signs of
disturbance, or sampler less than 1/4 full.

Criteria for rejection of box core sampler: sediment shows
signs of disturbance, or less than 30 cm of sediment or less
than 15 cm of overlying water present.


-------
5.1.11 Sample Collection Method Reference

Strobel, C.J. and S.C. Schimmel, 1991. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program-Near Coastal. 1991
Virginian Province, Field Operations and Safety Manual.
U.S. EPA, NHEERL-AED, Narragansett, RI. June 1991.

5.2 Data Processing and Sample Processing

5.2.1	Sample Processing Objective

Process sediment samples to characterize the grain size
composition of surface sediments.

5.2.2	Sample Processing Methods Summary

The sediment samples were homogenized with a spatula before
removing an aliquot for analysis. Approximately 10-40 g of
material was removed and placed in 60 mL polyethylene
bottles and weighed. Contents of the bottle were emptied
into a 75 um sieve. A 0.2% sodium hexametaphosphate solution
was used to rinse any remaining material onto the sieve from
the bottle. The elutriate volume was recorded, then placed
in a churn splitter and agitated vigorously. Approximately
150 mL of suspension was poured into a beaker and stirred on
a magnetic stirrer. Three 15.0 mL sub-samples were removed
and placed into three pre-weighed weigh pans. Samples were
dried at 1000 C and weighed. The procedure for the portion
> 75 um was to decant the sediment remaining in the sieve onto
a series of stainless steel sieves. The sediment was then
washed with distilled water. Washings from each sieve were
then washed into pre-weighed weigh pans, dried at 1000 C and
wei ghed.

5.2.3	Sample Processing Method Calibration
Not applicable.

5.2.4	Sample Processing Quality Control

The sum of the three fractions must be between 90% and 110%.

5.2.5	Sample Processing Method Reference

Integrated Laboratory Systems grain size analysis standard
operating procedure #ILS-PS-001.

5.2.6	Sample Processing Method Deviations
None reported.

6. DATA ANALYSIS AND MANIPULATIONS

6.1 Name of New or Modified Values

SAND%, SILT%, CLAY%


-------
6.2	Data Manipulation Description

The per cent sand fraction was determined to be the sum of the per
cent fractions greater than 60 urn. The per cent silt fraction was
determined to be the sum of the per cent fractions between 2 um
and 60 um. The per cent clay fraction was determined to be the sum
of the per cent fractions less than 2 um.

6.3	Data Manipulation Examples

6.3.1	Per Cent Sand

Sand% = (Sum of all size fractions >60 um /Total weight of
all size fractions) * 100

6.3.2	Per Cent Silt

Silt% = (Sum of all size fractions >2 um and < 60 um) /Total
weight of all size fractions) * 100

6.3.3 Per Cent Clay

Clay% = (Sum of all size fractions <2 um /Total weight of
all size fractions) * 100

7. DATA DESCRIPTION

7.1 Description of Parameters

#

Name

Type

Length

Format

Parameter Label

1

STA NAME

Char

10

10.

Station Name

2

DATE

Num

6

6.

Sampling Date (YYMMDD)

3

CLAY%

Num

4

2.2

% Clay in sediment sample

4

SI LT%

Num

4

2.2

% Silt in sediment sample

5

SAND%

Num

4

2.2

% Sand in sediment sample

6

T0TAL%

Num

8

6.2

Sum of sand, silt and clay

7.1.1	Precision to which values are reported

Per cent clay, silt, and sand are reported to 2 decimal
places.

7.1.2	Minimum Value in Data Set

SAND%	0.68

SILT%	5.31

CLAY%	0.36

7.1.3 Maximum Value in Data Set

SAND%	94.33

SILT%	85.38

CLAY%	27.74


-------
7.2 Data Record Example

7.2.1	Column Names for Example Records

STA_NAME, DATE, SAND%, SILT%, CLAY%, T0TAL%

7.2.2	Example Data Records

L094-81 940906 47.37 49.32 3.31 100.00
L094-82 940907 50.32 47.83 1.86 100.00

8.	GEOGRAPHIC AND SPATIAL INFORMATION

8.1	Minimum	Longitude
-79 deg 29' 59"

8.2	Maximum	Longitude
-76 deg 19' 22"

8.3. Minimum Latitude

42	deg 27' 29"

8.4	Maximum Latitude

43	deg 52' 57"

8.5	Name of Area or Region

Nearshore and Offshore Lake Ontario:

Stations were located within the Nearshore and Offshore resource
class of Lake Ontario. The nearshore sites were within the non-
depositional zone (13 sites) and the offshore sites were within the
depositional zone (45 sites).

9.	QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE

9.1 Measurement Quality Objectives

The maximum allowable precision goal for sediment grain
composition was 10%.

9.2. Data Quality Assurance Procedures

Data validation by Principal Investigator.

9.3	Actual Measurement Quality
None reported.

10.	DATA ACCESS

10.1 Data Access Procedures

Data can be downloaded from the EMAP Website.


-------
10.2 Data Access Restrictions

Not applicable.

10.3	Data Access Contact Persons

Stephen J. Lozano
U.S. E.P.A. NHEERL-MED
(218)529-5205
(218)529-5003 (FAX)
lozano.Stephen0epa.gov

10.4	Data Set Format

Data from the Website are in ASCII fixed format.

10.5	Information Concerning Anonymous FTP
Not accessible.

10.6	Information Concerning WWW

Data can be downloaded from the EMAP Website.

10.7	EMAP CD-ROM Containing the Data Set
Data are not available on CD-ROM.

11.	REFERENCES

Hedtke, S., A. Pilli, D. Dolan, G. McRae, B. Goodno, R. Kreis, G.
Warren, D. Swackhamer, and M. Henry. 1992. Great Lakes Monitoring and
Research Strategy: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program.
USEPA, Office of Research and Development, ERL-Duluth, Duluth,
Minnesota. EPA/602/R-92/001. 204 p.

12.	TABLE OF ACRONYMS

13.	PERSONNEL INFORMATION

Stephen J. Lozano

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NHEERL-MED

6201 Congdon Blvd

Duluth, MN 55804

(218)529-5205

(218)529-5003 (FAX)

lozano.Stephen0epa.gov

Gary L. Phipps

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NHEERL-MED

6201 Congdon Blvd

Duluth, MN 55804

(218)529-5205

(218)529-5003 (FAX)

phi pps.gary0epa.gov


-------
Jill V. Scharold

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NHEERL-MED

6201 Congdon Blvd

Duluth, MN 55804

(218)529-5205

(218)529-5003 (FAX)

scharold.jill0epa.gov

Floyd L. Boettcher

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NHEERL-MED

6201 Congdon Blvd

Duluth, MN 55804

(218)529-5205

(218)529-5003 (FAX)

boetcher.floyd0epa.gov


-------