:a bibliography and summary review/Andrew S. Milliken and Virginia Lee. Milliken, Andrew S. Bryans, Virginia. Narragansett, R.I.:Rhode Island Sea Grant,[1990] Boats and boating Waste disposal Environmental aspects Bibliography. Sewage disposal in the ocean Environmental aspects Bibliography. Waste disposal in the ocean Environmental aspects Bibliography. Boats and boating Environmental aspects Bibliography. Pol 1U* tion Im acts from creationa I Boati ng: A Bibliography and Summary Review C, @71 --7 ;j 4W Andrew S. Milliken and Virginia Lee P Re GC1 085 .M55 1990 This publication is sponsored by NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S. Department of Commerce, under Grant #NA89AA-D-SG-082. The U.S. Government is authorized to produce and distribute re- prints for governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation that may appear hereon. Additional copies of this publication are available from: Rhode Island Sea Grant Publications, University of Rhode Island Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882-1197. Order PI 134. National Sea Grant Depository Publication #RIU-G-90-002. Loan copies available from the National Sea Grant Depository, Pell Library Building, University of Rhode Island Bay Campus, Narra- gansett, RI 02882-1197. Rhode Island Sea Grant. January 1990. Coverphoto: Rhode Island Department of Economic Development. A 1@@, Ire,_%ak @A, Sea Grant is a national program dedicated to promoting the wise use and development GR of marine resourcesfor the public benefit. CONTENTS ii PREFACE 1 LITERATURE REVIEW 1 Boat Sewage Biological oxygen demand Pathogens 5 Boat Engine Pollution Sources Fate Effects 6 Antifouling Paints Copper Tributyltin 7 Plastic Debris Sources Effects Regulations 9 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10 General 11 Boat Sewage 14 Boat Engine Pollution 15 Antifouling Paints 17 Plastic Debris 20 APPENDIX I Microbial, Infectious, and Biotoxigenic Diseases Transmitted by the Recreational and Shellfish-borne Routes 22 APPENDIX H Policies and Formulas for Determining Allowable Numbers of Boats fto"rty of CSC Library 1US Department of Commerce y') NOAA Coastal Serviccs center Library 2234 South 1'ob-,;o-.; Avcnue Ckkarleston, SC 29405-2413 Preface Recreational boating has increased tremendously in the last decade. Along with this growth has come the potential for an enormous increase in boating-associated pollutants. It has become essential to understand how pollution from recreational boats affects coastal-zone water quality so that responsible decisions can be made concerning the regulation of recreational boating. The following brief literature review and selected bibliography focus on four of the major pollution problems associated with the use of recrea- tional boats: (1) boat sewage, (2) boat engine pollution, (3) antifouling paints, and (4) plastic debris. We hope that this synopsis and bibliography will prove useful for stimulating discussion and for developing policy regarding recreational boating on our coastal waters. Acknowledgments Special appreciation is extended to Tom Brillat for his substantial contributions to the section on plastic debris and for reviewing the manu- script, and to Malcolm Spaulding for helpful review comments. We also wish to thank Eleanor Ely of the Rhode Island Sea Grant Information and Education Office for her extensive efforts in editing and layout. Andrew S. Milliken Graduate School of Oceanography The University of Rhode Island Virginia Lee Coastal Resources Center The University of Rhode Island LITERATURE REVIEW BOATSEWAGE exacerbated because the peak of the boating season coincides with the highest water temperatures and Although federal law (Federal Water Pollution thus the lowest solubilities of oxygen in seawater Control Act, Section 312) requires recreational and the highest rates of metabolism of marine boats to be equipped with approved marine sanita- organisms. tion devices, boats still discharge treated waste For any given water body, it is possible to legally and untreated waste illegally into coastal predict the impact of BOD loading by boats by waters (see Table 1 for a description of marine estimating the amount of BOD discharged from sanitation device specifications). The discharge of recreational boats into the water, the volume of the these sanitary wastes from boats may impact water water body, the flushing rate, and the ambient quality by (1) locally increasing biological oxygen dissolved oxygen. The estimated boat BOD loading demand and (2) introducing microbial pathogens can then be combined with sediment oxygen into the environment (U.S. EPA, 1985). demand to provide an estimate of the totaloxygen depletion in the water body. An example of an Biological oxygen demand equation used to determine an oxygen mass balance Biological oxygen demand (BOD) is a measure over one tidal cycle is provided in the EPA's of the dissolved oxygen required to decompose the Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook (U.S. EPA, organic matter in the water by aerobic processes. 1985). When the loading of organic matter increases, the BOD increases, and there is a consequent reduction Pathogens in the dissolved oxygen available for respiration by A potentially serious problem resulting from the aquatic organisms (U.S. EPA, 1985). Although the discharge of sewage from recreational boats is the volume of wastewater discharged from recreational introduction of disease-carrying microorganisms boats is small, the organics in this wastewater are from fecal matter into the coastal environment. A concentrated, and therefore the BOD (1700 - 3500 review of the public health impacts of coastal milligrams/liter [mg/11) is much higher than that of pollution is provided by Cabelli et al. (1983) and raw municipal sewage (110 - 400 mg/1) or treated summarized in Appendix 1. Humans are put at risk municipal sewage (5 - 100 mg/1) (JRB Associates, either by swimming in polluted waters or by eating 1981). Sewage discharged from recreational boats shellfish (raw or partially cooked) taken from will thus increase the BOD in the vicinity of the polluted waters. The major disease-carrying agents boats. When this occurs in poorly flushed water are bacteria and viruses, and the most common bodies, the dissolved oxygen concentrations of the serious ailment is acute gastroenteritis. Other water- water may decrease. Cardwell (198 1), for example, borne diseases that can be attributed to sewage noted significant decreases in dissolved oxygen in pollution include hepatitis, typhoid, and cholera. several northwestern U.S. marinas in the late The indicators used to detect sewage pollution summer and early fall. Nixon et al. (1973) found are not the pathogens themselves but, rather, lower dissolved oxygen levels in a developed coliform bacteria. These bacteria are always present marina area than in an adjacent undeveloped bay of in the human intestinal tract and are thus considered similar size. They attributed these low dissolved reliable indicators of the presence of human waste oxygen levels, however, to the secondary effects of (U.S. EPA, 1985). However, there is quite a bit of abundant fouling communities on marina pilings uncertainty as to how well coliform bacteria predict and docks and to sediment respiration rather than to the presence of pathogens and how safe the stan- boat discharges directly. In temperate regions, the dards for shellfishing and swimming areas are effect of boat sewage on dissolved oxygen levels is (Cabelli et al., 1983; U.S. Congress, OTA, 1987). 2 Table 1. Water Quality Specifications for Marine Sanitation Device Dischargesa MSD type Coliform count b Solids Description Ic <1000/100 ml No visible floating Flow-through solids (<10% of total device meeting suspended solids dis- stated standards charged) 11 <200/100 ml <150 ing total sus- Flow-through pended solids per device meeting liter of discharge stated standards III None None Holding tank aCoast Guard Regulations on Marine Sanitation Devices, as amended through 3 February 1983. bRepresents the arithmefic mean of the fecal coliform bacteria in 38 of 40 samples when tested in accordance with 40 CFR, Part 136. CMust have been installed prior to January 30, 1980. Adaptedfrom: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook. Region IV EPA, Atlanta, Georgia. The coliform indicators were originally developed include Ingrain (1953), Udell (1960), Lear and for use with large treated sewage discharges and Schminke (1967), Smith (1972), and Fisher et al. may not accurately predict pathogenic pollution (1987). Some studies, on the other hand, fQund no from the small quantities of fresh fecal matter correlation between boat densities and coliform discharged from recreational boats. For measuring levels (Seabloom, 1969), or found that background sewage pollution from boats, fecal coliform is fecal coliform levels, especially from overland thought to be a more accurate indicator than total stormwater runoff, exceeded that caused by the boats coliform (U.S. Dept. H.E.W., 1972). (Mack, unpubl.; Nixon et al., 1973; Faust, 1978). While there have been no studies directly linking There have been several attempts to predict the the discharge of boat sewage to disease incidence, amount of fecal coliform bacteria produced by a numerous studies have found elevated levels of given number of boats or, conversely, the volume fecal coliform bacteria where there are concentra- of water needed to accommodate a given number of tions of recreational boats (U.S. Dept. of Interior, boats without exceeding safe bacteria levels. Furfari 1967). Cassin et al. (1971) found that coliform (1968) estimated that about 1.4 x 10cubic meters levels increased in the water column and in shell- (37 million gallons) of water was needed per boat fish in direct relation to the number of boats in in order to keep fecal coliform concentrations three of four recreational areas they sampled on below the recommended level for shellfishing areas Long Island, New York. Furfari and Verber (1969) of 14 fecal coliforms/100 milliliters (ml). Faust found elevated levels of fecal coliform bacteria (1982) took into account bacterial survival times during and just after weekends when boats were (see below) and estimated that between 1.0 x 105 anchored in Potter Cove, Rhode Island. Faust (1982) and 2.2 x 105 cubic meters (26 to 58 million gal- found a positive correlation between the number of lons) of water was required per boat. The U.S. Food boats and the level of fecal coliform bacteria in an and Dnig Administration (FDA) used a value of 1.4 arm of Chesapeake Bay. Other studies that found x I W cubic meters of water per boat and con- elevated indicator bacteria levels in boating areas structed a table predicting total coliform counts 3 from surface area, depth, and number of boats (U.S. sediments, or attach to particles and then settle, Dept. H.E.W., 1972). exhibit longer survival times than those that are Once enteric (intestinal tract) microorganisms found in the overlying water. This is significant enter the water, the primary means by which they when considering the resuspension of sediment, are removed are dilution, die-off, and sedimenta- either by natural causes such as rainfall or bottom tion. The amount of dilution of microorganisms in a currents or by manmade causes such as dredging or marina or harbor depends upon the volume of water propeller wash. It is also significant when consider- (surface area and depth of the water body), the ing the filtering of sediment by shellfish. amount of flushing of the water body, and the background concentrations of bacteria or viruses. Criteria for shellfishing areas. An issue that has Tidal exchange, freshwater inflow, and wind received a great deal of attention is the potential influence the pattern and rate of flushing. In the pollution of shellfishing areas by recreational boats. absence of freshwater inflow, tidal flushing is not Each coastal state regulates its own shellfish consistent throughout a water body but is generally sanitation program under the voluntary National greatest near the tidal connection and weakest at the Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP). States use head of the water body (Collias, 1976; Kator et al., various approaches to achieve compliance with the 1982). Tidal flushing depends on tidal stage as NSSP standard of 14 fecal coliforms/100 ml of well, with greatest flushing generally at the flood water for the taking of shellfish. Some states close stage (Brandsma et al., 1973). The greater the all marinas to shellfishing and set standard buffer flushing rate, the greater the dilution and the lower zones around marinas, while others use formulas the concentration of bacteria. An example of a based on surveys and local environmental informa- dilution equation is provided in the EPA's Coastal tion to determine closure areas (U.S. Dept. H.E.W., Marinas Assessment Handbook (U.S. EPA, 1985). 1972; South Carolina Dept. of Health and Environ- The survival time of enteric microorganisms in mental Control, 1985; Maryland Dept. of the seawater has been studied extensively. Reviews of Environment, 1987). the early literature are provided by Greenberg The basic formula used for determining the (1956) and Mitchell (1968). Microorganisms, number of allowable boats in a shellfishing area as including fecal coliform bacteria, have a shorter developed by the FDA for the NSSP (U.S. Dept. survival time in seawater than can be explained by H.E.W., 1988b) is: dilution and sedimentation alone (Ketchum et al., 1952). Both biological and physical factors affect fecal coliforms (MPN*)/100 ml = (N x F x E)[V, the survival rate. Important factors include tempera- where: ture, salinity, sunlight, microbial toxins, inorganic toxins (including salts), nutrient limitation, and N number of boats predation (Carlucci and Pramer, 1959). Several F fecal coliforms/person authors also found that the survival rate of bacteria E population equivalent/boat in the water column is extended by the addition of V volume of dilution water available sewage (Metcalf and Stiles, 1965; Won and Ross, 1973) and by the addition of fine-grained sediment The underlying assumptions of this formula and (Faust et al., 1975). The die-off of bacteria in- its parameters are: a 100% boat-occupancy rate, creases proportionally with increasing temperature 100% overboard discharge of sewage, a population (Faust et al., 1975). Consequently, bacterial sur- of 2 persons per boat, complete mixing in and vival rate is shortest in warm summer temperatures. around the marina, no bacterial die-off or growth, The final means by which microorganisms are and no other sources of fecal coliforms. An analysis removed from the water is sedimentation. Several of these assumptions is provided in Table 2. The authors have shown that bacteria (Gerba and McLeod, 1976) and viruses (Gerba and Schaiberger, *Note: MPN, or most probable number, is a simple 1975; Smith et al., 1978) that sink directly into the statistical testfor estimating bacterial densities. Table 2. Analysis of Assumptions in the NSSP Formula 100% occupancy rate: Occupancy rate, which can be defined either as the percentage of total boats occupied on a particular day or as the percent of the boating season a boat is occupied, seldom approaches 50% (Eldredge, unpubl.; Maryland Dept. of Environment, 1987). Eldredge (1988) found occupancy rates (defined as percentage of occupied boats on a given day) ranging from 27% to 51% and averaging 38% in Narragansett Bay harbors on two high-use weekends. The occupancy rate for a particular area can be determined by direct survey. In the absence of any survey data, a conservative estimate of 50% is more realistic than 100%. 100% overboard discharge: This is a very difficult variable to determine or estimate. It depends on the percentage of boats that have heads on board and what type of heads they have, the degree of compliance with marine sanitation device regulations, the availability of pumpout facilities (Tanski, 1988), and the amount of use of onshore restrooms (Chmura and Ross, 1978). Surveys should be conducted to determine more accurately the percentage of overboard dis- charge. Alternatively, this percentage may be estimated by looking at the adequacy of onshore facilities and the types of boats in the marina or harbor. In the absence of survey data, an esti- matc of 50% for the failure rate of marine sanitation devices appears to be reasonable (South Carolina, 1985). Persons per boat: This variable depends upon the length and type of boat. If no specific informa- tion is available, the FDA value of 2 appears to be a reasonable estimate. Fecal coliforms per person: The generally accepted figure is 2 billion fecal coliforms per capita per day (Geldreich, 1966). Complete mixing in and around the marina: Mixing depends upon variables such as tides, river input, the shape of the basin, and the location of the marina within the basin. Hydrographic studies are needed to determine these parameters. Tidal and river flushing rate should be in- cluded in the determination of dilution capacity of a marina. No bacterial die-off or growth: As indicated above, fecal coliform survival in the water column depends on many features but appears to be strongly correlated with temperature and salinity. If possible, a decay rate of bacteria under the local conditions should be determined. If not, one could measure the average temperature and salinity in a marina or harbor area during the boating season and predict the die-off of fecal coliform bacteria using the relationship devel- oped by Faust et al. (1975) or by using the decay coefficient cited by the U.S. EPA (1978). The role of sediments as a source of surviving bacteria needs further consideration. In the absence of local data or estimates, one should assume no die-off or growth. No other sources of fecal coliform: There are likely to be background levels of fecal coliform from overland runoff and point sources in most marina and harbor areas. If this background level is greater than the standard (14 FC/100 ml), then the area would be closed to shellfishing regardless of boating use. If the background level is greater than zero but less than the standard then the background level should be incorporated into the equation. 5 marina policy adopted by the Interstate Shellfish Kuzminski, 1973a). While petroleum may disap- Sanitation Conference in 1986 (Interstate Shellfish pear rapidly from the water column, the portion that Sanitation Conference, 1986) and the revised NSSP reaches the sediment may persist for several years manual of operations (U.S. Dept. H.E.W., 1988) (Olsen et al., 1982). Lead compounds from gasoline both use this formula but recommend the use of all additives tend to sink to the bottom sediments available information to account for regional (Chmura and Ross, 1978). differences. The ISSC marina policy and the methods used by some states for determir-dng boat Effects concentrations and buffer zones are described in The most obvious effects of pollutants from Appendix 11. marine engines include odor, an off taste in fish, and toxic effects on marine organisms. Estimates vary as to the exact thresholds of these effects. BOAT ENGINE POLLUTION English et al. (1963), using engines with no scaven- ger devices, found an odor threshold at I part per Though there have been numerous studies on the million (ppm) (1 gallon fuel bumed per million fate and effect of oil spills in the marine environ- gallons water) and noticeable fish tainting at 8 ppm. ment (see, for example, National Academy of An Environmental Protection Agency/Boating Sciences, 1975), there have been relatively few Industry of America study (U.S. EPA, 1974) noted reports on the impact of boat engine pollution. an odor threshold at 3 ppm and off taste at 110 ppm. Outboard motor exhaust water in high con- Sources centrations can exhibit toxic effects on various Reports on boat engine pollution have focused species of fish and wildlife (Jackivicz and on the effect of two-cycle outboard engines. Kuzminski, 1973b). The nature and degree of these Because two-cycle engines accomplish fuel intake effects varies by species (Nixon et al., 1973). For and exhaust in the same cycle, they tend to release example, Clark et al. (1974) found that gill tissue unburned fuel along with the exhaust gases. Older damage in mussels occurred more quickly than in engines (manufactured prior to about 1972) drain oysters because the oysters were able to close their excess fuel from the crankcase directly into the shells and exclude hydrocarbons while the mussels water while newer engines have scavenger devices were not. to recycle this lost fuel. Two-cycle engines also Although normal levels of outboard motor usage have lubricant oil mixed in with the fuel, and this have not been shown to have a toxic effect on oil is released into the water along with the un- aquatic communities, toxic effects have been bumed fuel. There are over 100 hydrocarbon demonstrated from sustained low concentrations of compounds in gasoline, as well as additives such as petroleum in estuaries. In experimental mesocosms, lead, while lubricant oils contain elements such as sustained concentrations of 0.1 ppm of No. 2 fuel zinc, sulfur, and phosphorus (Jackivicz and oil in the water column caused reductions in Kuzminski, 1973b). Another important source of zooplankton, while sustained concentrations of 500 petroleum from recreational boats is the discharge ppm had severe, long-lasting effects on benthic of oily bilge water. organisms (Olsen et al., 1982). Table 3 indicates the concentrations of hydrocarbons considered toxic to Fate marine organisms. Concentrations in excess of Once discharged into the water, petroleum these toxic levels occur in the water column and hydrocarbons may remain suspended in the water sediment in many urbanized estuaries, and elevated column, concentrate at the surface, or settle to the hydrocarbon levels also occur in marina sediments bottom. Many of these hydrocarbon compounds (Voudrias, 1981). Petroleum hydrocarbon pollution will not persist for very long because of their from boats may thus contribute to already toxic immiscibility, volatility, or biodegradability, or concentrations of hydrocarbons in the water column because of the effects of weathering (Jackivicz and and sediment and increase long-term effects. 6 Table 3. Estimated Toxic Concentrations of Soluble Aromatic Fractions of Petroleum Hydrocarbons for Marine Organismsa Class of organisms Toxic concentration (ppm) Larvae (all species) 0.1-1.0 Swimming crustaceans 1-10 Bottom-dwelling crustaceans 1-10 Other bottom-dwelling organisms (worms, etc.) 1-10 Snails 1-100 Finfish 5-50 Bivalves 5-50 Flora 10-100 aUnited Nations, 1982. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook. Region IV EPA, Atlanta, Georgia. ANTIFOULING PAINTS Tributyllin Tributyltins (TBTs) are a class of organic tins Antifouling paints are used on ship hulls to pre- that have been used recently as the biocides in anti- vent fouling by marine organisms. The problem is fouling paints. There are two classes of TBT paints: that active ingredients in these paints may also have conventional (also called free association), which toxic effects on nontarget organisms. Copper and leach continuously from the painted surface, and organotin compounds are the most common active copolymer, which are released at a controlled, ingredients in antifouling paints. Other toxic com- slower rate. Due to the rapid leaching of TBT from pounds, such as mercury, arsenic, and polychlori- boat hulls into the water, elevated levels of TBT nated biphenols (PCBs), are no longer used due to and its breakdown products have been found in the their toxicity (Bellinger and Benham, 1978). water, in sediment, and in organisms where there are concentrations of recreational boats. Recrea- Copper tional boats were the main users of TBT paints until Elevated copper concentrations have been found recently. A 1987 survey found that 97% of TBT use in the environment in the vicinity of shipyards was on boats of 65 feet or less and that 93% of this where hull scraping and painting occur. Young et use was on recreational boats (Lucas and Williams, al. (1979) found high levels of copper in the water 1987). Recent regulations now limit TBT use (see and in mussels in the vicinity of shipyards in below). southern California. Bellinger and Benham (1978) found elevated levels in the sediments in the Fate. Unlike copper, TBT in seawater degrades vicinity of dry docks in England. They considered quickly. Estimates of the half-life of TBT in sea- the risk from the metals to be minimal while vessels water range from 3.5 to 15 days (Seligman et al., are at sea, due to the high dilution capacity of the 1986; Hinga et al., 1987). TBT is removed from the ocean. Nixon et al. (1973) found higher concentra- water column by adsorption to lipids and particulate tions of copper in macroalgae, fouling communi- matter, metabolism by plants and animals, and ties, and sediments in a marina than in an adjacent photolysis (Cardwell and Sheldon, 1986). Within undeveloped bay. the water column, the primary means of degrada- 7 tion in the presence of light appears to be debutyla- and Bleil, 1988). At least 13 states in the United tion by planktonic algae, especially diatoms, while States have also enacted their own legislation (e.g., in the absence of light, degradation is primarily by Rhode Island Tributlytin Antifoulant Paint Control bacteria (Champ and Bleil, 1988). Due to its Act of 1988). lipophilic properties, TBT tends to concentrate in the surface microlayer, where it has been found at up to 27 times the subsurface concentrations PLASTIC DEBRIS (Cleary and Stebbing, 1987). Once TBT adsorbs to particulates and sinks into the sediment it tends to The production and use of plastics has increased concentrate and degrade slowly (Stang and Selig- dramatically over the past few decades. Two of the man, 1987; Espourteille, 1988). qualities that make plastic so popular - its light weight and its durability - also make it a marine Effects. TBT has been reported to cause acute and pollution problem. Plastic that is discarded into the chronic toxicity to marine organisms, especially ocean tends to float, persist, and accumulate. bivalves and small crustaceans such as copepod Marine plastic debris can be found anywhere in the zooplankton. Significant declines in oyster and world oceans (Dahlberg and Day, 1985; Pruter, clam populations occurred in areas where there 1987; Wilbur, 1987) and in large quantities on the were concentrations of boats using TBT paints, and world's beaches (Merrell, 1980; Hays and Cormans, these populations recovered quickly after TBTs 1974; Pruter, 1987). were banned (Alzieu, 1986; Laughlin and Linddn, 1987). Bivalves are especially susceptible because Sources of their limited ability to metabolize the compound Although the majority of marine plastic debris is and because they are found in nearly anoxic sedi- thought to come from commercial fishing, ship- ments that lack the bacterial species necessary to ping, and industry, recreational boating also con- degrade TBT (Espourteille, 1988). Sublethal effects tributes to the problem. In some coastal areas and have been noted for a variety of fish species. A harbors, in fact, the majority of plastic debris review of the laboratory and field studies on the appears to come from recreational boaters (Cundell, toxicity of organotins is provided by Champ and 1973; Steinhauer et al., in prep.). An estimated 16 Bleil (1988). million recreational boaters use the nation's coastal High levels of bioaccumulation of TBT have areas (Cottingham, 1988), and, according to a 1975 been reported. Bacteria and phytoplankton bioaccu- study (National Academy of Sciences, 1975), mulate TBT at concentrations of 600 to 30,000 discard over 100,000 tons of garbage annually. A times the exposure concentration, while bioaccu- large part of this garbage is plastic, including mulation levels as high as 4,000 have been reported plastic bags, six-pack holders, and monofilament for bivalves (Cardwell and Sheldon, 1986). Despite fishing line. the high bioaccumulation rate by shellfish, there are no indications that consumption of contaminated Effects shellfish by humans is of concern. Since plastics float and persist, they tend to be concentrated by ocean currents along coastal areas. Regulation. Tributyltin antifouling paints are now This results in closure of beaches due to pollution restricted in the United States by the Organotin (Swanson and Zimmer, in prep.), damage to boats Antifouling Paint Control Act of 1988. This act (Takehama, in prep.) and great hann to marine life bans the use of organotin paints on all boats of less (Laist, 1987). Although difficult to quantify, entan- than 25 meters, except for those with aluminum glement in and ingestion of plastics by marine hulls, and limits the use of antifouling paints on mammals, seabirds, marine turtles, and fish may be other vessels to those paints that are certified by the quite significant. Entanglement can cause drowning, U.S. EPA as releasing less than 4 micrograms per starvation, strangulation, and increased vulnerability square centimeter per day into the water (Champ to predation. These effects may be responsible for 8 significant declines in the populations of certain species, such as northern fur seals (Fowler, 1985). Ingestion of plastic items, such as pellets and bags, by animals that mistake the debris for prey can cause starvation due to blockage of the intestine, ulceration of the stomach, and toxic effects. Of special concern are effects on endangered species of sea turtles (Balazs, 1985). In addition to affect- ing marine life at sea, plastic debris washing up on beaches may have detrimental effects on nesting seabird colonies (Gochfeld, 1973). Regulations The Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act (MPPRCA) of 1987 is a national law implementing Annex V of the International Con- vention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (known as MARPOL). The MPPRCA prohibits the dumping of plastics at sea and restricts dumping ADON'T TEACH YOUR 100 other ship-generated garbage in the navigable waters of the U.S. and the open ocean. The Annex TO SWIM! V provisions of this law apply to all watercraft in- cluding the smallest recreational vessels. The law Drawing courtesy of the Marine Refuse Disposal Project, went into effect on December 31, 1988, and is Port offewport, Oregon. enforced by the Coast Guard. In addition to limiting dumping, these regulations require all marinas to have adequate facilities for the disposal of garbage. With these regulations in force, the problem of plastic debris pollution from boats should be drastically reduced. 9 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10@ Aw .4*0 Aw 4 ago%- Aj* At V7, pro" New Harbor, Block Island, Rhode Island, July 4th weekend, 1988. Photograph by Wilkins Studio, Wakefield, RI. 10 BIBLIOGRAPHY PART1-GENERAL Chmura, G.L., and Ross, N.W. 1978. Environmental impacts of marinas and their boats. Rhode Island Boozer, A.C. 1979. A review of the impacts of coastal Sea Grant, Narragansett, RI. P675; RIU-T-78-005. marina siting, construction, and activities as related Loan copies available from National Sea Grant to water quality considerations. Prepared for the Depository, Pell Library, University of Rhode South Carolina Department of Health and Environ- Island Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882-1197. mental Control, Bureau of Field and Analytical Services, Division of Biological Services, Colum- Clark, T. 1982. Marine sanitation devices and pollu- bia, SC. 30 pp. tion from small recreational boats: An annotated bibliography. Cove Press, Severna Park, MD. 84 pp. Bowerman, F.R., and Chen, K.Y. 1971. Marina Del Rey: A study of envirom-nental variables in a semi- Clarke, B.D. 1968. Houseboat waste characteristics enclosed coastal water body. USC Sea Grant, Los and treatment. Technical Project Branch, Report Angeles, CA. USC-SG-4-71. No. PR-6. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Brandsma, M.G., Lee, J.J., and Bowerman, F.R. 1973. Marina Del Rey: Computer simulation of pollutant Collias, E.E. 1976. Physical and chemical oceanogra- transport in semi-enclosed water body. USC Sea phy: Implication for marina siting and operation. In: Grant, Los Angeles, CA. USC-SG-1-73. Goodwin, R.F., ed. Recreation '76 Conference Proceedings. University of Washington, Seattle, California, State of. The Resources Agency, Depart- WA. ment of Boating and Waterways. 1984. Layout and design guidelines for small craft berthing facilities, Comillon, P., and Behie, G. 198 1. Remote sensing, a Sacramento, CA. tool for managing the marine environment: Eight case studies. Rhode Island Sea Grant, Narragansett, Cardwell, R.D. 1980. Water quality and flushing of RI. P891; RIU-T-81-002. five Puget Sound marinas. Technical Report No. 56. Washington Department of Fisheries, Olympia, Holmes, P.E., Tarves, M.L., Tornio, R., and Jansen, R. WA. 77 pp. 1985. Fish and fish habitat impact study of seven British Columbia marinas, 1984. Canadian Manu- Cardwell, R.D. 198 1. Water quality: Biological script Report Fisheries Aquatic Science No. 1809. implications in Pacific Northwest marinas. In: Goodwin, R.F., ed. Boating and moorage in the Messman, S.A. 1976. Water quality considerations '80s: Proceedings of a workshop held 4-6 Novem- related to marina development and management. In: ber, 1981, at Seattle, WA, pp. 96-106. Washington Goodwin, R.F., ed. Recreation '76 Conference Sea Grant, Seattle, WA. WSG-WO-82-1. Proceedings. University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Carstea, D., Binder A., Stricter, R., Boberschmidt, L., Thomas, L., and Golden, J. 1975. Guidelines for Miller, L.L., and Damon, M.E. 1963. Survey of environmental impact assessment of small struc- marina and watercraft use in relation to the public tures and related activities in coastal bodies of health aspects. Michigan Department of Public water. Prepared by MITRE Corp. for the U.S. Army Health, Lansing, MI. Corps of Engineers, New York District, New York. Nece, R.E., and Knoll, C.R. 1974. Flushing and water Yousef, A.Y. 1974. Assessing effects on water quality quality characteristics of small-boat marinas. C.W. by boating activity. Environmental Protection Harris Hydraulics Laboratory, University of Wash- Technology Series. EPA-670/2-74-027. ington, Seattle, WA. New Jersey, State of. 1984. Water quality study: PART 2 - BOAT SEWAGE Impacts of marina activities. New Jersey Dept. of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Bertges, W.C. 1974. Recreational vessel waste Resources, Trenton, NJ. pollution. U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC. Report No. CG-D- 112-74. 92 pp. Nixon, S.W., Oviatt, C.A., and Northby, S.L. 1973. Ecology of small boat marinas. Rhode Island Sea Cabelli, V.J., Levin, M.A., and Dufour, A.P. 1983. Grant, Narragansett, RI. P165; RIU-T-73-004. Loan Public health consequences of coastal and estuarine copies available from National Sea Grant Deposi- pollution: Infectious diseases. In: Myers, E.P., and tory, Pell Library, University of Rhode Island Bay Harding, E.T., eds. Ocean disposal of municipal Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882-1197. wastewater: Impacts on the coastal environment. MIT Sea Grant, Cambridge, MA. MITSG 83-33. Pravdic, V., and Juracic, M. 1988. Environmental capacity approach to control of marine pollution. Carlucci, A.F., and Pramer, D. 1959. Factors affecting Chemical Ecology 3(2):105-117. survival of bacteria in seawater. Applied Micro- biology 7:388-392. Raytheon Company. 1978. Marinas task: Rhode Island areawide water quality management plan: Cassin, J., Smith, K., and Frenke, K. 197 1. Sanitary Preliminary evaluation. Prepared for Rhode Island implications of small boat pollution in an Atlantic Statewide Planning Program by Raytheon Com- estuary. Environmental Letters 2(2):59-63. pany, Portsmouth, RI. Eldredge, M.E. 1989. The contribution of recreational Roy Mann Associates, Inc. 1974. Recreational boating boats to bacterial water pollution: A model for impacts: Chesapeake and Chincoteague bays, Part 1: determining sewage loading rates. In: 1989 Marina Boating capacity planning system. Draft prepared research (Proceedings, First national marina research for the Coastal Zone Management Program, Depart- conference, Narragansett, RI, January 1989), pp. ment of Natural Resources, State of Maryland. 143-157. International Marina Institute, Wickford, 152 pp. RI. (Copies available from Rhode Island Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service, University of Rhode United Nations. 1982. Coastal area management and Island Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882-1197.) development. United Nations Department of International, Economic and Social Affairs. Ocean Eldredge, M.E. 1989. The regulation of sewage Economics and Technology Branch. Pergamon discharge by recreational boats in Rhode Island Press, Elmsford, NY. 188 pp. waters. Master's thesis. Department of Geography and Marine Affairs, University of Rhode Island, U.S. Department of Commerce. 1976. Coastal facility Kingston, RI. guidelines. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Coastal Zone Manage- Faust, M.A. 1976. Coliform bacteria from diffuse ment, Washington, DC. 96 pp. sources as a factor in estuarine pollution. Water Research 10:619-622. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1985. Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook. Region IV EPA, Faust, M.A. 1978. Sources of bacterial pollution in an Atlanta, GA. estuary. In: Proceedings of Coastal Zone '78, pp. 819-839. American Society Civil Engineers, San Francisco, CA. 12 Faust, M.A. 1982. Contribution of pleasure boats to Gerba, C.P., and Schaiberger, G.E. 1975. Effect of fecal coliforin bacteria concentrations in the Rhode particulates on virus survival in seawater. Journal River estuary, Maryland, USA. The Science of the Water Pollution Control Federation 47:93-103. Total Environment 25:255-262. Goyal, S.M. 1984. Viral pollution of the marine Faust, M.A., Aotaky, A.E., and Hardigan, M.T. 1975. environment. CRC Critical Reviews in Environ- Effect of physical parameters on the in situ survival mental Control 14(l):1-32. of Escherichia coli MC-6 in an estuarine environment. Applied Microbiology 30:800-806. Greenberg, A.E. 1956. Survival of enteric organisms in seawater: A review of the literature. Public Fisher, J.S., Perdue, R.R., Overton, M.F., Sobsey, Health Report 71(l):77-86. M.D., and Sill, B.L. 1987. A comparison of water quality at two recreational marinas during a peak- Hopkins, T.C., and Sanderson, A.E. 1965. Report no. use period. UNC Sea Grant College Program, 2 on coliform and E. coli bacteria counts at a major Raleigh, NC. UNC-WP-87-1. Chesapeake Bay boating-bathing site during the Independence Day holiday period. Mimeographed Furfari, S.A. 1968. A problem paper on boat wastes report. State of Maryland Department of Water and the National Shellfish Sanitation Program. U.S. Resources, Annapolis, MD. Department H.E.W., Public Health Service, North- east Marine Health Services Laboratory, Davisville, Ingrain, W.T. 1953. Effect of cabin cruiser waste RI. 27 pp. discharge on Eatons Neck, Long Island harbor waters. Report for the Interstate Sanitation Commis- Furfari, S.A., and Verber, J.L. 1969. Boat waste sion. New York University, College of Engineering. survey, Potter Cove, Rhode Island, summer 1968. U.S. Department H.E.W., Public Health Service, Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference. 1986. Northeast Marine Health Services Laboratory, Msrina policy. Adopted at fourth Interstate Shellfish Davisville, RI. Sanitation Conference, August 1986. Garreis, M.J., Dittman, F.A., Elmore, D.L., and JRB Associates, Inc. 1981. Analysis of wastewater Robison, R.L., H. 1979. Marina impact on water discharge from marine sanitation devices. Final quality *in Kent Island Narrows, Maryland. Mary- Report prepared for the Environmental Protection land Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Agency by JRB Associates, Inc., McLean, VA. Environmental Health Administration, Annapolis, MD. Kapuscinski, R.B., and Mitchell, R. 1980. Processes controlling virus inactivation in coastal waters. Geldreich, E.E. 1966. Sanitary significance of fecal Water Research 14:363. coliforms in the environment. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Federal Water Pollufion Control Admini- Kassebaum, C.R. 1974. The use of oysters as a stration. Publication WR-20-3. mechanism for determining amounts of fecal discharge from small boats in a marina. Master's Geldreich, E.E. 1970. Applying bacteriological thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of parameters to recreational water quality. Journal Washington, Seattle, WA. American Waterworks Association 62:113-120. Kator, H.I., Hyer, P.V., and Rhodes, M.W. 1982. A Qerba, C.P., and McLeod, J.S. 1976. Effect of sedi- combined field-numerical modelling approach for ments on the survival of Escherichia coli in marine prediction of fecal coliform. densities with respect to waters. Applied and Environmental Microbiology a representative marina "buffer zone." A paper 32:114-120. presented at the 1982 Interstate Seafood Seminar, Annapolis, MD., 23-24 September, 1982. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Gloucester Point, VA. 13 Kay, B.H. 1982. The effect of sewage discharges from Metcalf, T.C., and Stiles, W.C. 1965. Survival of anchored pleasure boats on British Columbia enteric viruses in estuary waters and shellfish. In: shellfish growing areas. Regional Program Report Berg, G., ed. Transmission of viruses by the water 82-10. Department of Environment, Environmental route. Interscience Publishers, New York. Protection Service, Pacific Region, Canada. Mitchell, R. 1968. Factors affecting the decline of Ketchum, B.H., Ayers, J.C., and Vaccaro, R.F. 1952. non-marine micro-organisms in seawater. Water Processes contributing to the decrease of coliform Research 2:535-543. bacteria in a tidal estuary. Ecology 33:247. Morel, F.M.M., and Schiff, S.L. 1983. Geochemistry Labelle, R.L., Gerba, C.P., Goyal, S.M., Melnick, J.L., of municipal waste in coastal waters. In: Myers, Cech, I., and Bogdan, G.F. 1980. Relationships E.P., and Harding, E.T., eds. Ocean disposal of between environmental factors, bacterial indicators municipal wastewater: Impacts on the coastal and the occurrence of enteric viruses in estuarine environment. MIT Sea Grant, Cambridge, MA. sediments. Applied Environmental Microbiology MITSG 83-33. 39(3):588-593. Orlob, G.T. 1956. Viability of sewage bacteria in Lear, D.W., O'Malley, M.C., and Smith, S.K. 1978. seawater. Sewage Industrial Wastes 27:1147-1167. Field studies of bacterial pollution from pleasure boats. Unpublished report. Chesapeake Technical Ross, N.W. 1985. Towards a balanced perspective ... Support Laboratory, Region 1111, Office of Water boat sewage. Rhode Island Sea Grant, Narragansett, Programs, Environmental Protection Laboratory, RI. PI 112; RIU-R-85-007. Loan copies available Annapolis, MD. from National Sea Grant Depository, Pell Library, University of Rhode Island Bay Campus, Narra- Lear, D.W., Marks, J.W., and Schminke, C.S. 1967. gansett, RI 02882-1197. Evaluation of coliform contribution by pleasure boats. CB-SRPB Technical Paper No. 10, Federal Seabloom, R.W. 1969. Bacteriological effect of small Water Pollution Control Administration, Middle boat wastes on small harbors. Completion Report, Atlantic Region. Office of Water Resources, State of Washington Water Research Center, USDA. Research Report Lear, D.W., and Schminke, C.S. 1967. Evaluation of No. 161-34- 1 OE-3996-3013. 20 pp. coliform contribution by pleasure boats at a Mary- land yacht club. Unpublished report. Chesapeake Smith, E.M., Gerba, C.P., and Melnick, J.L. 1978. Technical Support Laboratory, Region III, Office of Role of sediment in the persistence of enteroviruses Water Programs, Environmental Protection Labora- in the estuarine envirorunent. Applied and Environ- tory, Annapolis, MD. mental Microbiology 35:685-689. Mack, M.N. (unpubl.) The occurrence and possible Smith, K.P. 1972. Implication of pleasure craft in the source of the coliform bacteria on the shoreline of sanitary pollution of estuarine waters and shellfish. Lake Michigan. Institute of Water Research, Master's thesis, Adelphi University, Gardcn City, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor, MI. 16 pp. NY. 47 pp. Mack, M.N., and D'Itri, F.M. 1973. Pollution of a South Carolina Department of Health and Environ- marina area by watercraft use. Journal Water mental Control, Shellfish Division. 1985. Technical Pollution Control Federation 45(l):97-104. procedures for buffer zone determinations around boat docking facilities. Columbia, SC. Maryland Department of the Environment. 1987. Marina assessment model for predicting bacterial Tanski, J. 1988. Boater use of pumpout facilities in loading. Annapolis, MD. Suffolk County, New York. New York Sea Grant Extension Program, State University of New York, Stonybrook, NY. NY Draft Final Report. 14 Udell, H.F. 1960. Pollutional effect of marine waters Vasconcelos, G.J., and Swartz, R.G. 1976. Survival of from waste discharged by small boats. Mimeo- bacteria in seawater using diffusion chamber graphed report. New York Conservation Depart- apparatus in situ. Applied and Environmental ment, Shellfishes Laboratory. Microbiology 31:913-920. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. West, N.W., Heatwole, C., and Smith, L. 1982. 1987. Wastes in marine environments. U.S. Govern- Environmental improvement on Narragansett Bay ment Printing Office, Washington, DC. OTA-0- as a result of the Section 312 implementation of the 334. Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Coastal Zone Management Journal 10(1/2):125-140. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Food and Drug Administration. 1972. Classification Won, W.D., and Ross, H. 1973. Persistence of virus of areas subject to sanitary waste from boats. and bacteria in seawater. Journal of the Environ- Northeast Technical Services Unit, Davisville, RI. mental Engineering Division ASCE, June 1973: 205-211. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Food and Drug Administration. 1986. Recommen- Young, K. 1981. Scientists seek answer to buffer zone dations to the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Confer- dilemma. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, ence. Marina Buffer Zone, Technical Transfer, June Marine Research Bulletin 13:4-6. 17-18, 1986, Charlestown, SC. Zobell, C.E. 1946. Marine microbiology. Chronica U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Botanica Co., Waltham, MA. Food and Drug Administration. 1988. Classification around marinas. Draft Report. Northeast Technical Services Unit, Davisville, RI. PART 3 - BOAT ENGINE POLLUTION U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Anderson, J.W. 1979. An assessment of knowledge Food and Drug Administration. 1988b. National concerning the fate and effects of petroleum Shellfish Sanitation Program Manual of Operations. hydrocarbons in the marine environment. In: Washington, DC. Verburg, W.B., Calabrese, A., Thurberg, F., and Vernberg, F.J., eds. Marine pollution: Functional U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water responses, pp. 3-31. Academic Press, New York. Pollution Control Administration. 1967. Wastes from watercraft. Report to Congress in compliance Clark, R.C., Jr., Finely, J.S., and Gibson, G.C. 1974. with section 17, Public Law 89-753. U.S. Govern- Acute effects of outboard motor effluents on two ment Printing Office, Washington, DC. GPO:83- marine shellfish. Environmental Science and 680-0. Technology 8(12):1009-1014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1981. Report English, J.N., McDermott, G.N., and Henderson, C. on the existing program for regulation of marine 1963. Pollutional effects of outboard motor ex- sanitation devices under section 312 of the Clean haust - laboratory studies. Journal Water Pollution Water Act. 22 pp. plus appendices. Control Federation 35(7):923-93 1. U.S. Public Health Service. 1967. Marina, watercraft English, J.N., Surber, E.W., and McDermott, G.N. problems of sanitation studied. Public Health 1963. Pollutional effects of outboard motor ex- Reports 82(3):227-228. haust - field studies. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation 35(9):1121-1132. van Hees, W. 1977. Sewage discharges from ships transiting coastal waters. Water Resources Bulletin 13(2):215-229. 15 Environmental Control Technology Corporation and Voudrias, E.A. 198 1. Influence of marinas on hydro- Environmental Science and Engineering Inc. 1973. carbons in sediments of two estuarine creeks. Analysis of pollution from marine engines and Master's thesis. Virginia Institute of Marine Sci- effects on the environment. Summary Report to ence, College of William and Mary, Gloucester U.S. EPA. Grant No. R-801799, Program Element Point, VA. No. IBB038. Am Arbor, MI, and Gainseville, FL. Wolfe, D.A., ed. 1977. Fate and effects of petroleum Farrington, J.W., and Meyer, P.A. 1976. Petroleum hydrocarbons in the marine ecosystems and organ- hydrocarbons in Narragansett Bay. 1. Survey of isms. Pergamon Press, Oxford. hydrocarbons in sediments and clams. Estuarine Coastal Marine Science 1:71-79. PART 4 - ANTIFOULING PAINTS Hurtt, A.C., and Quinn, J.G. 1979. Distribution of hydrocarbons in Narragansett Bay sediment cores. Alzieu, C. 1986. TBT detrimental effects on oyster Environmental Science Technology 13:829-836. culture in France: Evolution since antifouling paint regulation. In: Oceans '86, Proceedings, Volume 4, Jackivicz, T.P., Jr., and Kuzminski, L.N. 1973a. The Organotin Symposium, pp. 1130-1134. Marine effects of the interaction of outboard motors with Technology Society, Washington, DC. the aquatic environment - a review. Environmental Research 6:436-454. Bellinger, E.G., and Benham, B.R. 1978. The levels of metals in dock-yard sediments with particular Jackivicz, T.P., Jr., and Kuzminski, L.N. 1973b. A reference to the contributions from ship-bottom review of outboard motors effects on the aquatic paints. Environmental Pollution 15:71-8 1. environment. Journal Water Pollution Control Federation 45(8):1759-1770. Beaumont, A.R., and Budd, M.D. 1984. High mortal- ity of the larvae of the common mussel at low Kuzminski, L.N., and Jackivicz, T.P., Jr. 1972. concentrations of tributyltin. Marine Pollution Interaction of outboard motors with the aquatic Bulletin 15:402-405. environment - causative factors and effects. Massachusetts Water Resources Commission. Rep. Blunden, S.J., and Chapman, A.H. 1982. Environ- N. EVE 29-72-2. Environmental Engineering, mental degradation of organotin compounds - a University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. 33 pp. review. Environmental Technology Letters 3:267- 272. National Academy of Sciences. 1975. Petroleum in the marine environment. Workshop on inputs, fates, Cardwell, R.D., and Sheldon, A.W. 1986. A risk and effects of petroleum in the marine environment. assessment concerning the fate and effects of National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC. tributyltins in the aquatic environment. In: Oceans '86, Proceedings, Volume 4, Organotin Symposium, Olsen, S., Pilson, M.E.Q., Oviatt, C., and Gearing, pp. 1117-1129. Marine Technology Society, J.N. 1982. Ecological consequences of low sus- Washington, DC. tained concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in temperate estuaries. Marine Ecosystems Research Champ, M.A., and Bleil, D.F. 1988. Research needs Laboratory, Graduate School of Oceanography, concerning organotin compounds used in antifoul- University of Rhode Island, Narragansett, RI. ing paints in coastal enviromnents. Report prepared for Office of the Chief Scientist, National Ocean U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Analy- Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic and sis of pollution from marine engines and effects on Atmospheric Administration, by Science Applica- environment. Boating Industry Association, tions International Corporation, Rockville, MD. 131 Chicago, IL. 62 pp. pp. plus bibliography. 16 Champ, M.A., and Lowenstein, F.L. 1987. TBT: The Lucas, R.M., and Williams, S.R. 1987. Survey of dilemma of high-technology antifouling paints. organotin and other antifouling paint use in Oceanus 30(3):69-77. boatyards and shipyards. Report to Economic Analysis Branch, EPA/OPP. Environmental Protec- Cleary, J.J., and Stebbing, A.R.D. 1987. Organotin in tion Agency, Washington, DC. Prepared by Re- the surface microlayer and subsurface waters of search Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, southwest England. Marine Pollution Bulletin NC. 44 pp. plus appendices. RTI/3756/03-02F. 16(9):350-355. Oceans '86, Proceedings. 1986. Volume 4, Organotin Espourteille, F.A. 1988. An assessment of tributyltin Symposium. Marine Technology Society, Washing- contamination in sediments and shellfish in the ton, DC. Chesapeake Bay. Master's thesis. Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary, Oceans '87, Proceedings. 1987. Volume 4, Intema- Gloucester Point, VA. tional Organotin Symposium. Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC. Grovhoug, J.G., Seligman, P.F., Vafa, G., and Fransham, R.L. 1986. Baseline measurements of Rexrode, M. 1987. Ecotoxicity of tributyltin. In: butyltin in U.S. harbors and estuaries. In: Oceans Oceans '87, Proceedings, Volume 4, International '86, Proceedings, Volume 4, Organotin Symposium, Organotin Symposium, pp. 1443-1455. Marine pp. 1283-1288. Marine Technology Society, Technology Society, Washington, DC. Washington, DC. Rhode Island, State of. 1988. General Laws of Rhode Hall, L.W., and Pinkey, A.E. 1985. Acute and suble- Island 46-17.2, "Tributyltin Antifoulant Paint thal effects of organotin compounds on aquatic Control Act." biota: An interpretive literature evaluation. CRC Critical Reviews in Toxicology 14(2):159-209. St. John, J.P., Leo, W.M., and Sheldon, A.W. 1985. Impact assessment of organotin chemicals in harbor Hinga, K.R., Adelman, D., and Pilson, M.E.Q. 1997. environments. In: Ocean Engineering and the Radiolabeled butyltin studies in the MERL enclosed Environment. The Marine Technology Society and ecosystems. In: Oceans '87, Proceedings, Volume 4, IEEE Ocean Engineering Society, San Diego, CA. International Organotin Symposium, pp. 1416-1419. Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC. Schweinfurth, H.A., and Gunzel, P. 1987. Tributyl- tins: Mammalian toxicity and risk evaluation for Laughlin, R.B., Jr., and Lind6n, 0. 1985. Fate and humans. In: Oceans '87, Proceedings, Volume 4, effects of organotin compounds. Ambio 14:88-94. International Organotin Symposium, pp.1421-1431. Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC. Laughlin R.B., Jr., and Lind6n, 0. 1987. Tributyltin - contemporary environmental issues. Ambio Seligman, P.F., Valkirs, A.O., and Lee, R.F. 1986. 26(5):252-256. Degradation of tributyltin in marine and estuarine waters. In: Oceans '86, Proceedings, Volume 4, Lee, R.F., Valkirs, A.O., and Seligman, P.F. 1987. Organotin Symposium, pp. 1189-1195. Marine Fate of tributyltin in estuarine waters. In: Oceans Technology Society, Washington, DC. '87, Proceedings, Volume 4, International Organo- tin Symposium, pp. 1411-1415. Marine Technology Stang, P.M., and Seligman, P.F. 1986. Distribution Society, Washington, DC. and the fate of butyltin compounds in sediments of San Diego Bay, CA. In: Oceans '86, Proceedings, Volume 4, Organotin Symposium, pp. 1256-126 1. Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC. 17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Brillat, T. 1989. Marine plastic pollution and Pesticide Programs. 1987. Tributyltin technical MARPOL Annex V. Rhode Island Sea Grant support document: Position document 2/3. U.S. Report. Rhode Island Sea Grant Marine Advisory EPA/OPP, Washington, DC. 156 pp. Service, Narragansett, RI. P 1125; RIU-G-89-005. Waldlock, M.J., and Miller, D. 1985. The determina- Cantin, J.L., Eyraud, J.T., and Fenton, C.G. (In prep.) tion of total and tributyltin in seawater and oysters Quantitative analysis of garbage disposal practices in areas of high pleasure craft activities. Coopera- before and after MARPOL Annex V. In: Shomura, tive Research Report - International Council for R.S., ed. Proceedings of the Second International Exploration of the Sea. CM 1983/E: 12. Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, III. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. 1952. Marine fouling and its prevention. Contribution no. 580 Carpenter, E.J., and Smith, K.L., Jr. 1972. Plastics on from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. the Sargasso Sea surface. Science 175:1240-1241. Prepared by the United States Bureau of Ships, Navy Department. United States Naval Institute, Center for Marine Conservation. 1988. A citizens Annapolis, MD. guide to plastics in the ocean: More than a litter problem. Center for Marine Conservation (formerly Young, D.R., Alexander, G.V., and McDermott- Center for Environmental Education), 1725 DeSales Ehrlich, D. 1979. Vessel-related contamination of St., NW, Washington, DC. southern California harbours by copper and other metals. Marine Pollution Bulletin 10:50-56. Conner, D.K., and O'Dell, R. 1988. The tightening net of marine plastics pollution. Environment 30(l):16- Young, D.R., Hessen, T.C., McDermott, D.J., and 20,33-36. Smokler, P.E. 1974. Marine inputs of polychlori- nated biphenyls and copper from vessel antifouling Cottingham, David. 1988. Persistent marine debris: paints. Southern California Water Research Project, Challenge and response: The federal perspective. El Segundo, CA. Report TM 212. 20 pp. Produced by Alaska Sea Grant College Program under the direction of the NOAA Office of the Chief Scientist, Washington, DC. SG-ED-89-01. PART 5 - PLASTIC DEBRIS Copies available from NOAA Office of the Chief Scientist, 14th and Constitution Ave., Room 6222, Augerot, X. 1988. Plastic in the ocean: What are we Washington, DC 20230. doing to clean it up? Washington Sea Grant Marine Advisory Service, Seattle, WA. WASHU-G-88-004. Cundell, A.M. 1973. Plastic material accumulating in Narragansett Bay. Marine Pollution Bulletin 4:187- Balazs, G.H. 1985. Impact of ocean debris on marine 188. turtles: Entanglement and ingestion. In: Shomura, R.S., and Yoshida, H.O., eds. Proceedings of the Dahlberg, M.L., and Day, R.H. 1985. Observations of workshop on the fate and impact of marine debris, man-made objects on the surface of the North 26-29 November 1984, Honolulu, HI, pp. 387-429. Pacific Ocean. In: Shomura, R.S., and Yoshida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical H.O., eds. Proceedings of the workshop on the fate Memo NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. and impact of marine debris, 26-29 November, 1984, Honolulu, HI, pp. 198-212. U.S. Department Balazs, G.H., and Choy, B.K. (In prep.) Ecological of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memo NOAA- aspects of marine turtles impacted by ocean debris: TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. A 1989 perspective. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceed- ings of the Second International Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, Hl. 18 Day, R.H., Wehle, D.H.S., and Coleman, F.C. 1985. Merrell, T.R. 1980. Accumulation of plastic litter on Ingestion of plastic pollutants by marine birds. In: beaches of Amchitka Island, Alaska. Marine Shomura, R.S., and Yoshida, H.O., eds. Proceedings Environmental Research 3:171-184. of the workshop on the fate and impact of marine debris, 26-29 November, 1984, Honolulu, HI, pp. Morris, R.J. 1980. Plastic debris in the surface waters 344-386. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA of the South Atlantic. Marine Pollution Bulletin Technical Memo NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. 11:164-166. Fowler, C.W. 1985. An evaluation of the role of National Academy of Sciences. 1975. Marine litter. entanglement in the population dynamics of north- In: Assessing potential ocean pollutants, pp. 405- ern fur seals on the Pribilof Islands. In: Shomura, 438. A report of the Study Panel on Assessing R.S., and Yoshida, H.O., eds. Proceedings of the Potential Ocean Pollutants to the Ocean Affairs workshop on the fate and impact of marine debris, Board, Commission on Natural Resources, Natural 26-29 November, 1984, Honolulu, HI, pp. 291-307. Research Council, Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memo NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. Pruter, A.T. 1987. Sources, quantities and distribu- tions of persistent plastics in the marine environ- Gochfeld, M. 1973. Effect of artifact pollution on the ment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 18(6B):305-3 10. viability of seabird colonies on Long Island, New York. Environmental Pollution 4:1-6. Recht, F. and Lasseigne, S. (In prep.) Providing refuse reception facilities and more: The port's role in the Hanson, M.B. 1989. Marine debris bibliography. Un- marine debris solution. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. published document. Center for Marine Conserva- Proceedings of the Second International Conference tion, 1725 DeSales St., NW, Washington, DC. 56 pp. on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. Hays, H., and Cormans, G. 1974. Plastic particles Report of the Interagency Task Force on Persistent found in tern pellets, on coastal beaches and at Marine Debris. 1988. NOAA, Office of the Chief factory sites. Marine Pollution Bulletin 5:44-56. Scientist, Washington, DC. Hoss, D.E., and Settle, L.R. (In prep.) Ingestion of Rhode Island Sea Grant. 1988. MARPOL Annex V: plastics by fishes. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceed- How it can affect you. Rhode Island Sea Grant ings of the Second International Conference on Report. Rhode Island Sea Grant Marine Advisory Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. Service, Narragansett, RI. P1074; RIU-G-88-004. Laist, D.W. 1987. Overview of the biological effects Ryan, P.G. 1988. Intraspecific variation in plastic of lost and discarded plastic debris in the marine ingestion by seabirds and the flux through seabird environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 18(6B):319- populations. Condor 90:446-452. 325. Ryan, P.G. (In prep.) The effects of ingesting plastic Martinez, L.A. (In prep.) Shipboard waste disposal: and other marine debris on seabirds. In: Shomura, Taking out the trash under the new rules. In: R.S., ed. Proceedings of the Second International Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceedings of the Second Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, International Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 Honolulu, HI. April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. Seebald, R.E. (In prep.) Implementation and enforce- Meade, N.F., and Drazek, K.M. (In prep.) An eco- ment of Annex V of MARPOL 73/78 in the United nomic perspective on the problem of persistent States. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceedings of the marine debris. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceedings Second International Conference on Marine Debris, of the Second International Conference on Marine 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. 19 Shomura, R.S., ed. (In prep.) Proceedings of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Coast Guard. Second International Conference on Marine Debris, 1989. 33 CFR Parts 151, 155 and 158, 46 CFR Part 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HL 25, Regulations implementing the pollution preven- tion requirements of Annex V of MARPOL 73178; Shomura, R.S., and Yoshida, H.O., eds. 1985. Pro- Interim Rule with request for comments. Federal ceedings of the workshop on the fate and impact of Register, April 28, 1989. marine debris, 26-29 November, 1984, Honolulu, HI. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Techni- Washington, State of, Department of Natural Re- cal Memo NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-54. sources. 1988. Marine plastic debris action plan for Washington State. Marine Debris Task Force, Steinhauer, M.S., Sauer, T.C., Trulli, W.R., Boehm, Department of Natural Resources, Olympia, WA. P.D., Werme, C.E., and Redford, D.P. (In prep.) 46 pp. Characterization of marine debris in selected harbors of the United States. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Wehle, D.H.S., and Coleman, F.C. 1983. Plastics at Proceedings of the Second International Conference sea. Natural History 92(2):20-26. on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HI. Wilbur, R.J. 1987. Plastics in the North Atlantic. Swanson, R.L., and Zimmer, R. (In prep.) Washups of Oceanus 30(3):61-68. floatable waste materials and their impact on New York Bight beaches. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Pro- Wong, C.S., Green, D.R., and Cretway, W.J. 1974. ceedings of the Second International Conference on Quantitative tar and plastic waste distribution in the Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, Hl. Pacific Ocean. Nature 247:30-32. Takehama, S. (In prep.) Estimation of damage of fishing vessels caused by marine debris based on statistics of the damage insurance for fishing vessels. In: Shomura, R.S., ed. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Marine Debris, 2-7 April, 1989, Honolulu, HL APPENDIX I Microbial, Infectious, and Biotoxigenic Diseases Transmitted by the Recreational and Shellfish-borne Routes Route of Source of the agenta transmission a Human Animal Agent Disease Rec. Shell. feces feces Sewage Water Bacteria Salmnella sp. Typhoid and paratyphoidb + + + + + fevers, salmonellosis Shigella sp. C Bacillary dysentery d + - + m m + n Pseudomonas aeruginosa Otitis externa, skin infections + - + M +M + + n Aeromonas hydrophilac Infected wounds e + - + + + + Vibrio vulnificus Infected wounds + - - + Vibrio parahaemolyticus Gastroententis f + +M +0 +n Vibrio cholerae (01) Cholerag + +0 +0 Non-01 V. cholerae Cholera-like disease + +M +0 + Leptospira sp.c Leptospirosis (Weil's disease) + +M,P,o +P - Campylobacter sp. Gastroenteritis +h +M + +0 Clostridium btlinwn Food poisoning (botulism)"J + + - + various species Gastroenteritis ? + +q +q +q +q Mycobacteriwn marinum Infected wounds + + Viruses Hepatitis A Infectious hepatitis + + + + Norwalk-like Acute, infectious non- + + + + 9 + + Human rotavirus bacterial gastroenteritis + Adenovirus, types 3 and 4 Pharyngo-conjunctival feverc +T - + + Coxsackievirus Picurodynia, others +S - + + Protozo Naegleria sp. (pathogenic) Primary amoebic + - 9t + + meningoencephalitis Bird shistosomes Swimmer's and clam digger's itch + - + Algae Gonyaulax sp. Paralytic shellfish poisoning u +v + Notes: aWater = multiplies in environmental waters; Rec. = recreational (swimming); Shell. shellfish consumption; Animal lower animals. All agents in human feces also assumed to be present in sewage. bRare for recreational route; none for shellfish route since 1959. CPrimarily in fresh water. dPrimarily from hot tubs and whirlpool baths. eLess frequently by V. parahaemolyticus and V. alginolyticus strains. fSpecific toxigenic strains. gOnly since 1973 by 0-1 strains. hOnly two shellfish-borne outbreaks. iToxin in food. jProblem in food processing. kPossibly caused by enteropathogenic E. coli and A. hydrophila, Yersinia enterocolitica, and the protozoan Giardia lamblia; much less frequent than viral gastroen- teritis. Inferred from prospective epidemiological bathing beach study. mOther source more important. nDensity probably influenced by nutrient loading. 0Not a significant source in U.S. PUrine not feces. qVaries with potential agent. rCharacteristically associated with use of swimming pools, not natural water bodies. sTwo questionable outbreaks in fresh water. tSW from birds suggested. UUpper respiratory symptoms from other less toxigenic dinoflagellates, Prorocentrum sp. vShellfish poisoning is also due to other dinoflagellates with different toxins. In addition, there are a number of other pollution-associated agents that could cause swimming or shellfish-associated disease, although there is no evidence that they have done so. They include the bacteria Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella, and Clostridium perfringens; most of the enteroviruses; amoebae such as Entamoeba histolytica; and a number of exotic multicellular parasites. Source: Cabelli, VJ., Levin, M.A., and Dufour, A.P. 1983. Public health consequenc6 of coastal and estuarine pollutions: Infectious diseases. In: Myers, E.P., and Harding, E.T., eds. Ocean disposal of municipal wastewater: Impacts on the coastal environment. MIT Sea Grant (MITSG 83-33), Cambridge, MA. 22 APPENDIX 11 Policies and Formulas for Determining Allowable Numbers of Boats Part 1. Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference Marina Policy In accordance with the recommendation of the National Shellfish Sanitation Program that marinas be con- sidered as potential sources of pollution in shellfish growing waters, the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Confer- ence adopts the following policy with respect to marina facilities, docking facilities, and other mooring areas. Definition: A marina is any structure (docks, ramps, floating docks, etc.) which is utilized for docking, storing or otherwise mooring vessels and usually but not necessarily providing services to vessels such as repairing, fueling, security, etc. 1 . The Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference recognizes that biological and chemical contamination associated with marine facilities may be of public health significance and may result in loss of safe shellfish growing areas. 2. The potential for contamination in the immediate vicinity of a marina will require a prohibited, restricted or conditionally approved classification of that area within the marina proper for the harvesting of shell- fish. 3. If waters adjacent to the marina are impacted, additional closed areas (Prohibited, Restricted, or Condition- ally Approved) beyond the marina proper will be required. The Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference obligates itself to the development of scientific practices for: A. Determining the need for additional closed areas beyond the marina proper; B. Developing uniform techniques for establishment of closed areas based on any or all of the follow- ing factors: Dilution, dispersion, die-off or residence time, hydrography, marina design, and marina usage. 4. The ISSC recommends the use of dilution analysis for marina closure determinations. The dilution analysis should incorporate the following assumptions: A. An occupancy rate of the marina. B. An assumed rate of boats which will discharge untreated waste. C. The rates assumed in A and 13, due to significant regional differences, will be determined by the State Shellfish Control Agency in each state. 'Me basis of the assumptions will be documented and should reflect a reliable worse case condition. D. 2 x 109 fecal coliforms per person per day. E. 2 persons per boat. F. Wastes are completely mixed in and around the marina. 0. The area to be closed is based on a theoretical calculated value of 14 fecal coliforms per 100 ml water. H. The area to be closed is based on the volume of water in the vicinity of the marina. Comments * Other places where boats are moored or docked will be considered by the State Shellfish Authority or on a case-by-case basis with respect to sanitary significance relative to actual or potential contamination. * There are significant regional differences in all factors that affect marina pollution loading. Sufficient flexibility must be allowed to account for those differences. 23 * Research is needed to improve the predicted pollution loading under different hydrographic conditions and to quantify the public health risks (from microbial and chemical contaminants) of consuming shellfish harvested in and around marinas. * Best Professional Judgement of qualified shellfish sanitarians must be applied to determining adequate restrictions on harvesting in and around marinas. * It is recommended that following marina or docking facility construction, buffer zone sizing be established using the best technology available to the State Shellfish Control Agency. Implied is that the State Shell- fish Control Agency strive to develop the best available technology. Reprintedfi,om: Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference. 1986. Marina Policy. Adopted atfourth Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference, 1986. Part 2. State of Maryland Marina Assessment Model Methodology Using the ISSC's dilution analysis, a 13% occupancy rate and a volume of dilution water based on 900 square feet of surface area per boat slip, the fecal coliform concentration within a marina proper can be calcu- lated. Once the concentration within the marina proper is known, the distance beyond the marina necessary to provide a sufficient volume of dilution water to meet a theoretical calculated value of 14 fecal coliforms per 100 ml water can be determined. Calculations predicting fecal coliforin concentrations beyond the marina are predicated on: I . An average depth of 8.5 feet in the area outside the marina. 2. The volume of available dilution water outside the marina is equivalent to (x - y) x 8.5 feet, where: x = surface area within the region formed by a semicircle extending 'Y' distance beyond the marina's outer perimeter, y = surface area of the marina proper as shown below. Z Y X 3. During the ebbing tide, the total number of fecal coliform bacteria contained in a volume of water equiva- lent to the top one foot (tidal prism) of the marina proper is evenly dispersed in the water beyond the marina proper. Discussion While simplistic in its assumptions, the methodology used in this assessment model represents a realistic approach in that the coliforin bacteria in a body of water at the marina are diluted first within the marina confines and then the total number of fecal coliform. organisms contained within the volume of water equivalent to the tidal prism (one foot) is dispersed in the area outside the marina on the subsequent tide. Not considered in this assessment are other influencing factors which individually or collectively may result in an increase or decrease of fecal coliform loading in and around a marina. These factors include: I . bacteria die-off rates 2. flushing rates/time of travel 24 3. freshwater inflow 4. wind conditions 5. turbidity 6. salinity 7. water temperature 8. background levels of bacteria 9. time of year 10. shoreline contour/bottom contour Most of these factors would contribute to additional decreases in fecal coliform concentration and sur- vival. Therefore, the model is conservative. Conclusion The presence of a marina may increase the fecal coliform concentration in water. However, increased fecal coliform levels appear significant only within the marina proper. Impact on the bacteriological quality of water immediately surrounding a marina is marginal and rapidly becomes non-detectable as the distance from the marina increases. Based on the information and the dilution calculation presented in this paper, Maryland has determined that to adequately protect the public from consumption of potentially contaminated shellfish in the vicinity of a marina, the following buffer zone sizes be established: Marina Size Buffer Zone Size slips) (feet beyond marina) 1-50 100 51-100 150 >100 200 Reprintedfrom: Maryland Department of the Environment. 1987. Marina assessment modelfor predicting bacterial loading. Annapolis, MD. Part 3. State of South Carolina Procedures for Buffer Zone Determinations Marina Boat Docking Facility The following factors affect water quality impacts of boat docking/marina facilities and the potential for contamination of shellfish from such facilities. I . Site characteristics (size, shape, topography, geography, and hydrography). 2. Number and size of boats. 3. Usage of boats. 4. Types of docking (resident, community, lease, transit, etc.). 5. Facilities and services available at each docking area (gas, oil, repairs, food, water, supplies, pumpouts, etc.). 6. Types of waste disposal equipment on boats. 7. The existing background water quality conditions. These factors will be given consideration in determining the necessity of a buffer zone around marinas and/or docking facilities in open Class SA waters. It is extremely difficult to establish specific criteria for these; 25 therefore, professional judgement must often be applied in reaching a determination as to the necessity of a buffer zone. If, after a careful review of the above factors, the Shellfish Section deems that a buffer zone is necessary, the following procedures will be applied in determining the size of the buffer zone: I . In the absence of a site specific hydrographic study, a 1000-foot buffer zone will be required around the facility. The point of measurement will be a 1000-foot radius in all directions from all points of the boat docking facility. 2. An applicant may request a reduced buffer zone if a site specific hydrographic study, which is acceptable to the agency, is presented by the applicant and this study indicates that such action is warranted. The hydrographic study must include worse case conditions for dynamic diluting flow and worse case condi- tions for static volumes for any and all tide cycles including low slack tide and high slack tide. 'Me evaluation will include all inter-relationships of hydrographic factors and coliform bacteria. The applicant must consult with the Shellfish Section on his study plans before initiation of a study. 3. When hydrographic studies are used to calculate dilutions and dispersions of fecal coliform, the following assumptions and/or criteria will be used: A. There will be 50% boat occupancy assumed at the facility. B. Two (2) people will occupy each boat. C. Marine Sanitation Device (MSD) malfunction rate: 1. If the boat docking facility allows only boats with MSD Type III heads (no discharge), the malfunction rate = 10%. 2. If the boat docking facility allows any other boats with MSD types 1, 111, and III, the malfunc- tion rate = 50%. D. Fecal bacterial loading rate per person/day = 2.0 x 10' (Geldreich, 1966) using a 12-hour tidal cycle day. E. All discharges are instantaneous and evenly dispersed. F. Background water quality data will be used in determining actual buffer zone lines. 4. In determining the size of the buffer zones, the Shellfish Section will calculate expected fecal coliforin concentrations at given distances from the docking facility. These predicted concentrations will be compared to the standard of 14/100 ml and an actual buffer zone line will then be drawn. 5. It will be necessary to protect the shoreline adjacent to the boat docking facilities to prevent contamination from floating and settleable solid matter associated with human waste. This floating matter is easily influenced by tidal currents and wind direction. To ensure this protection, buffer zones may be extended beyond the calculated distance necessary for diluting the waste. This extension will extend to the immedi- ate shoreline unless an acceptable alternative means of shoreline protection is provided to ensure that the potentially contaminating solid fecal matter does not reach the shellfish beds located near the shoreline in the vicinity of the docking site. This provides protection at low slack tide and high slack tide with prevailing wind conditions that might push waste to shore. After low and high slack tide conditions, the dynamic tidal current diluting flow then removes this waste and dilutes it according to measured flows and concentrations as established by the hydrographic study. If a complete evaluation indicates that a buffer zone smaller than 1000 feet provides adequate public health protection, the Shellfish Section will reduce the buffer zone appropriately. Similarly, if the hydrographic survey indicates that a 1000-foot buffer zone is not adequate to protect public health, the size of the buffer zone will be expanded beyond the 1000-foot radius. It will be mandatory that the following conditions are accepted, incorporated and enforced as a part of all certifications or permits. I . Pumpout facilities for boat sanitary waste are provided. 26 2. Enforcement procedures are required for those berthing facilities that allow MSD Type III pLly. 3. A monitoring program will be designed by the agency and implemented to measure conditions in and around the docking facility for parameters affecting the classification of shellfish areas. The applicant must bear sampling and laboratory costs. These include: A. Fecal and total coliforin in the water. B. Fecal and total coliform in shellfish meats. C. Temperature. D. Salinity. E. Heavy metals. The sample stations shall include but not necessarily be limited to inside the zone, outside the zone, and along the zone line. The time of sampling, the placement of sampling stations and the frequency of sampling will be estab- lished by the Department. If monitoring results reveal that the established buffer zone is inadequate, the Shellfish Section will increase the size as necessary to protect the public health. Reprintedfrom: South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Shellfish Division. 1985. Technical procedures for buffer zone determinations around boat docking facilities. Columbia, SC. @illiollilloolm 3 6668 00004 4562