National Marine Pollution Program federal plan for ocean pollution research, development, and monitoring, fiscal years 1988-1992

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

National Marine
Pollution Program

Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution
Research, Development, and Monitoring

Fiscal Years 1988-1992

OF c041+

L ZONE

'I OV

M@
h"-
..............
............
'a,
10"
-t :4 6,6. 'Td -am,@, Jce
N At"t0fla, I - -
f f
gr
Fqr'A
06 -Polfullom Policy Boa'rd
NI

er 14
6
S
-em

--V AW
GC
1211
V38
1988
'9 8
ES

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Office of the Chief Scientist

NATIONAL OCEAN POLLUTION POLICY BOARD

Dr. Melvin Peterson, Presiding Officer William D. Bettenberg
Chief Scientist, National Oceanic Director, Minerals Management Service
and Atmospheric Administration Department of Interior
Department of Commerce
Ambassador Edward E. Wolfe
Amor L. Lane, Executive Secretary Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oceans
Director, National Ocean and Fisheries Affairs
Pollution Program Office Department of State
National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration Captain Wayne W. Becker
Department of Commerce Chief, Office of Research
and Development
Dr. Clare 1. Harris, Deputy Director, U.S. Coast Guard
Cooperative State Research Service Department of Transportation
Department of Agriculture Dr. William L. Mills
Morgan Rees Executive Office of the President
Deputy For Policy, Planning, and Council on Environmental Quality
Legislative Affairs
Office of the Assistant Secretary Dr. Courtney Riordan
of the Army (Civil Works) Director, Office of Environmental
Department of Defense Processes & Effects Research
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Commander Richard H. Rice, Jr. Dr. W. Stanley Wilson
Director, Environmental Chief, Oceanic Processes Branch
Protection, Safety, and National Aeronautics & Space Admin.
Occupational Health Division
Office of Chief of Naval Operations Dr. M. Grant Gross
Department of Defense Director, Divison of Ocean Services
Dr. Helen McCammon National Science Foundation
Director, Ecological Research Div. Dr. Janet Dorigan
Department of Energy Office of Science & Technology Policy
Executive Office of the President
Dr. Ralph R. Reed
Deputy Assistant Secretary David Tomquist
for Health Budget Examiner
Department of Health & Human Services Office of Management and Budget

INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Charles M. Smith & HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY
Robert Scheuplein Sam Williams (RD)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE James Fouts
Douglas A. Wolfe NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
James R. Chambers DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SPACE ADMINISTRATION
William F. Graham Don Aurand (MMS) James Yoder
J. Larry Ludke (F&WS)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Clifford A. Haupt (USGS)
David B. Mathis (Army-COE) NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Larry Koss (Navy) DEPARTMENT OF STATE Rodger W. Ba Iier
Robert Blumberg
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL
George Saunders DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION QUALITY
Anthony L. Rowek
(Coast Guard)

NATIONAL OCEAN POLLUTION PROGRAM OFFICE

Amor L. Lane, Director; William G. Conner, Eileen Curry, Edward J. Flynn,
Laura A. Gabanski, Ann H. Georgilas, Carolyn A. Goodfellow, Sari Kiraly,
W. Lawrence Pugh, Wendy Smith, Devorah Zeitlin

National Marine
N0AA
Pollution Program

Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution
Research, Development, and Monitoring:
Fiscal Years 1988-1992

Prepared by the
National Ocean Pollution Program Office
For the
National Ocean Pollution Policy Board

US Department of Commerce
Center Library
NOAA C oasta Services
2234 South Hobson Avenue
Charleston, SC 29405-2413
L

September 1988

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
C. William Verity, Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
William E. Evans, Under Secretary

Office of the Chief Scientist
Melvin N. A. Petersen, Chief Scientist

GC 1211 .S38 1988 c.2

UNITEO STATES OEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
The Under Secretary for
Oceans and Atmosphere
Washington, O.C. 20230

OEC 3 0 1988.

Dear Sirs:

I am pleased to submit the Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution
Research, Development, and Monitoring: Fiscal Years 1988-1992,
as required by the.National Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978,
Public Law 95-273 (as amended).

Sincerely,

liam E. v ns

Enclosure

The President
President of the Senate
Speaker of the House of Representatives

Of
75 Years Stimulating America's Progress 1913-1988 THE ADMINISTRATOR

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many people have taken part in the planning, drafting, and review of the Federal Plan
for Ocean Pollution Research, Develot)ment, and Monitoring: Fiscal Years 1988 - 1992. The
National Ocean Pollution Policy Board met five times during the year-long effort required to
produce the Plan. The members of the Board and the Task Force to the Board assisted in
determining the scope and organization of the Plan. Every department and agency represented
on the Board also made available technical experts and program managers to assist in
developing the informational content of the Plan. Finally, the National Ocean Pollution Policy
Board contributed by reviewing early discussion papers and the final draft of the Plan to
assure that both national priorities and agency interests were given proper consideration.

During the preparation of the Plan, the Board established a working group for each of
the six goals of the National Program. The members of the six working groups were chosen
from Federal and state agencies and appropriate nongovernmental sectors. The working group
members provided information on the technical aspects of the issues and proved to be a fertile
source of ideas for research recommendations. In excess of 100 people (listed in Appendix A)
invested considerable time and energy into the deliberations of the working groups. The
preparation of a quality Federal Plan depended to a large extent on the devotion of the
working group members.

Staff members of the NOAA National Ocean Pollution Program Office served as working
group leaders and directed the effort of the technical staff from Technical Resources, Inc.
(TRI) in the drafting of the Plan. NOPPO and TRI staff are listed below with the sections of
the Plan to which they contributed:

Introduction -- Ms. Wendy Smith (NOPPO) and Ms. Eulalie Sullivan (TRI)
National Program -- Ms. Wendy Smith (NOPPO) and Mr. George Townsend (TRI)
Toxics -- Mr. Larry Pugh (NOPPO) and Dr. Tom Duke (TRI)
Nutrients -- Mr. Larry Pugh (NOPPO) and Mr. Joe Greenblott (TRI)
Biological Agents -- Ms. Laura Gabanski (NOPPO) and Mr. Isaac Diwan (TRI)
Habitat Loss -- Ms. Laura Gabanski (NOPPO) and Mr. Drew Zacherle (TRI)
Ecosystem Status -- Ms. Sari Kiraly, Ms. Eileen Curry and Dr. William Conner (NOPPO),
and Dr. Tom Duke (TRI)
Human Health -- Ms. Devorah Zeitlin and Mr. Edward Flynn (NOPPO) and
Mr. Ron Brown (TRI)

Mr. Drew Zacherle also served as the project manager for TRI. Without Mr. Zacherle's
patience and tireless efforts, the Federal Plan would not have been produced on schedule.
Special recognition should be given to Dr. William Conner who played a major role in
developing the concept and approach used for the Plan and served to coordinate the efforts of
the NOPPO staff and TRI. Ms. Lizz Goodfellow and Ms. Ann Georgilas also deserve
recognition for their efficient efforts to coordinate the arrangements for working group
meetings and the publication of this document.

CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiii

1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I

II. THE NATIONAL MARINE POLLUTION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . 11

III. GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Goal 1: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects of
Toxic Materials Entering the Marine Environment as a
Result of Human Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Goal 2: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects of
Nutrients Entering the Marine Environment as a Result
of Human Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Goal 3: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects on
Marine Organisms of Biological Agents That Are Introduced
or Influenced by Human Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Goal 4: Understand the Effects of Losing or Modifying
Marine Habitats as a Result of Human Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

Goal 5: Document the Trends in the Status of Marine
Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

Goal 6: Understand the Implications of Marine
Pollution to Human Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

IV. PRIORITIES FOR ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203

APPENDIX A: WORKING GROUP MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1

APPENDIX B: THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLLUTION
PLANNING ACT (Public Law 95-273) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Pape

A. Estimated FY 1988 Federal Funding for Marine Pollution
Research, Development, and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv

1. Federal Agencies with Major Legislative Mandates for Marine and
Great Lakes Pollution Research and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. National Marine Pollution Program Funding Levels:. FY 1984-1989 . . . . . . 14

3. Toxic Chemicals of Concern in Marine Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

4. Sublethal Responses to Toxic Pollution at Various Biological Levels of
Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

5. Examples of Biological Agents, Their Sources, Human Influence, and Impact
on Living Marine Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

6. Categorization of Selected Biological Agents by Level of Knowledge . . . . . 113

7. Concentrations of Organic Chemicals in Selected Fish Species . . . . . . . . 176

8. Microorganisms Responsible for Causing Adverse Human Health Effects . . . 183

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Fip,ure PaRe

A. Total Funding for the National Marine Pollution Program,
FY 1984-FY 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvi

1. The Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7

2. Total Funding for the National Marine Pollution
Program, FY 1984-FY 198R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12

3. Trends in Funding for the Environmental Protection
Agency, FY 1984-FY 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4. Trends in Funding for the Department of Energy,
FY 1984-FY 1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

5. Trends in Funding for the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, FY 1984-FY 1989 . . . . . . . . . . 16

6. Percentage of Total FY 1988 Funding Provided by Individual
Federal Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 17

7. Concentrations of Toxic Materials in Estuarine Sediments . . . . . . . . . . 32

8. Some Possible Effects of Contaminants on Life Cycle
Stages of the Winter Flounder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

9. Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loading to Estuaries . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

10. 1985 Annual Composite Distribution of NH4+ and N03-
Atmospheric Deposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

11. Simplified Diagram of Nitrogen Cycling in an Estuary . . . . . . . . . . . 70

12. Flow Chart Illustrating Some Hypothetical Trophic
Linkages That May Be Significant in the Chesapeake Bay . . . . . . . . 74

PREFACE

The National Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-273, as amended) calls for
the establishment of a comprehensive, coordinated, and effective Federal program for ocean
pollution research, development, and monitoring. As required by the Act, the Department of
Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in consultation with
other agencies, prepares a five-year Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Develooment.
and Monitorinp, every three years. This document represents the fourth edition of the Plan
and covers Fiscal Years 1988-1992. This Plan establishes six goals for the National Marine
Pollution Program, discusses the extent to which ongoing Federal programs are meeting these
goals, and provides recommendations for improving the overall effort in marine pollution
research and monitoring.

The National Ocean Pollution Program Office (NOPPO) is assigned responsibility within
NOAA for updating the five-year Plan and coordinating the implementation of recommendations
in the Plan. These efforts are conducted in cooperation with the National Ocean Pollution
Policy Board. NOAA established the interagency Board under the authority of Section 3A of
the National Ocean Pollution Planning Act. The Board is chaired by NOAA and is composed
of senior representatives from eleven Federal departments and agencies.

This update of the Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Develol)ment, and
Monitoring has been prepared by NOPPO with assistance and review of the agencies that
participate in the National Marine Pollution Program. The Plan is submitted by NOAA to
Congress with the endorsement of the departments and agencies that are represented on the
National Ocean Pollution Policy Board.

Amor Lane
Director,
National Ocean Pollution
Program Office

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The National Marine Pollution Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv
Goals of the National Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv
Priorities for Action by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board . . . . . . . . xxv

The National Marine Pollution Program is the composite of all programs funded by the
Federal Government that conduct marine pollution research, development, or monitoring
activities. In FY 1988, the Federal Government expended an estimated $107.2 million for
marine pollution research and monitoring activities. These activities were funded by 11
Federal departments and independent agencies and included studies pertaining to pollution in
coastal areas, estuaries, open oceans, and the Great Lakes. This Plan represents the fourth
such document in the continuing interagency planning process called for in the National Ocean
Pollution Planning Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-273), as amended. As required by the Act, a
comprehensive 5-year Plan for the overall Federal effort is prepared and updated every 3
years. This Plan identifies national marine pollution needs and problems, describes the
existing Federal capability for conducting marine pollution research and monitoring, analyzes
the extent to which existing Federal programs assist in meeting these needs and problems, and
makes recommendations for improving the National Marine Pollution Program.

To assist in identifying the areas of marine pollution research, development, and
monitoring in most need of scientific information, six broad goals of the National Program
have been identified. The topics covered under the six goals incorporate issues associated
with each of the various polluting activities and pollutants of concern. The research and
monitoring recommendations presented in this plan address the information required to meet'
these goals.

The Plan is presented in four chapters. These are the Introduction, which includes a
discussion of the interagency planning process; a description of the National Marine Pollution
Program; a discussion of the goals of the National Program; and the identified "action items"
for implementation by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board.

xiii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE NATIONAL MARINE POLLUTION PROGRAM

Estimated expenditures for marine pollution research in FY 1988 by the I I Federal
agencies and departments that comprise the National Marine Pollution Program are shown in
Table A. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce, and Minerals Management Service of the
U.S. Department of the Interior funded 70% of the marine pollution research and monitoring
activities supported by the Federal Government in FY 1988.

Since FY 1984, Federal support for marine pollution research has decreased by 12% or
$13.9 million ($121.1 million in FY 1984 to $107.2 million in FY 1988) (Figure A). Under the
Presidential budget request for FY 1989, Federal marine pollution funding is proposed to
decrease by an additional $8.3 million or 8% from current FY 1988 levels to $98.9 million.
Most of this decrease reflects the Administration's efforts to eliminate unnecessary programs
and programs that have already met their legislated mission.

A more detailed discussion of Federal marine pollution funding trends is presented in
Chapter II of this Plan, as well as an overview of the marine pollution- related programs of
each of the Federal agencies conducting marine pollution research, development, and
monitoring activities.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program are discussed in Chapter III of
this Plan. For the purposes of this Plan, a goal is considered to be an endpoint relating to
our knowledge of the causes and implications of marine pollution that can be addressed or
achieved through Federal research, development, and monitoring activities. These goals are
listed below:

Goal 1: Toxic Materials. Understand the sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials
entering the marine environment as a result of human activities;

Goal 2: Nutrignts. Understand the sources, fates, and effects of nutrients entering the
marine environment as a result of human activities;

Goal 3: Biological Agents. Understand the sources, fates, and effects on marine organisms of
biological agents that are introduced or influenced by human activities;

Goal 4: Loss or Modification of Marine Habitats. Understand the effects of losing or
modifying marine habitats as a result of human activities;

Goal 5: Status of Marine Ecosystems. Document the trends in the status of marine
ecosystems; and

Goal 6: Human Health. Understand the implications of marine pollution to human health.

xiv

Goals of the National Program

Table A. Estimated FY 1988 Federal Funding for Marine Pollution Research,
Development, and Monitoring ($ in thousands)

Agency Estimated
FY 1988 Funding

Council on Environmental Quality 9

Department of Agriculture 3,167

Department of Commerce
National Institute of Standards and Technology 0
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 25,420

Department of Defense
Corps of Engineers 8,500
U.S. Navy 1,235

Department of Energy 5,767

Department of Health and Human Services
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 486
Food and Drug Administration 2,959

Department of the Interior
Minerals Management Service 18,000
Fish and Wildlife Service 4,735
U.S. Geological Survey 2,783

Department of Transportation
U.S. Coast Guard 1,744

Environmental Protection Agency 31,715

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 480

National Science Foundation 151

TOTAL 107,151

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

$160 -

$140- $133.4 $126.9
$121.1
$120-
$107.2
$100- $98.9

$so-

$60-

$40-

$20 -

FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89-

Year

*FY 1989 estimate based on the Presidential budget.

Figure A. Total Funding for the National Marine Pollution Program, FY 1984 - FY 1989.

The first four goals of the National Program address specific categories of pollutants or
physical alterations to the marine environment (i.e., toxic materials, nutrients, biological
agents, and habitat alterations). The last two goals (related to the status of marine
ecosystems and human health) integrate the first four goals and permit the Plan to take into
account all of the various contributions to marine pollution.

The marine pollution research, development, and monitoring programs funded by the
Federal agencies contribute to these six areas of endeavor. To meet these goals, the scope of
the programs undertaken would include the following: assessing the state of the environment
(e.g., basic understanding, assessing effects, implementing monitoring systems), developing the
capability to predict (e.g, impacts of human activities), and developing multipurpose program
support capabilities (e.g., quality assurance, measurement methodologies).

The six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program were developed for the purpose
of evaluating the effectiveness of the National Program in providing information for managing
the Nation's marine pollution problems. For each goal, Chapter III of this Plan includes a
discussion of the goal definition, the Federal role in addressing the goal, management
questions and information needs related to the goal, and conclusions and recommendations with
regard to the goal.

The recommendations presented in this Plan describe opportunities for the most useful
and productive research related to each goal. However, specific program and budget decisions
regarding marine pollution research, development, and monitoring activities will continue to be
made in the context of the President's overall national domestic priorities and budget policies.
It is ultimately up to the discretion of individual agencies to accept and implement the
recommendations offered in this Plan within the context of the Presidential fiscal policies and
the Federal budget processes.

xvi

Goals of the National Program

The six goals of the National Program and the opportunities for Federal research,
development, and monitoring activities related to each goal are presented below. Further
discussion of these recommendations is presented in each goal section.

Goal 1: Toxic Materials

Conclusions:

o In most coastal regions of the country, we do not know the relative contribution of
atmospheric inputs and episodic events to chemical contaminant loadings in these
areas.

o There is a lack of understanding concerning the processes that control the routes,
rates, and reservoirs of various chemical contaminants released into the marine
environment.

o For many toxic substances, very little is known concerning their physical chemistry'
and its effect on bioaccumulation.

o Further documentation and understanding of sublethal effects of toxic chemicals is
needed, especially with regard to the relationship between the effects on individuals
and the integrity of populations of living marine resources.

o There is a general lack of understanding of the interactive effects (synergism,
additivity, and antagonism) for many important classes of marine pollutants.

Recommendations:

Sources and Loading Rates

o Efforts to determine the level of atmospheric inputs of toxic materials to the Great
Lakes should continue. Similar monitoring activities in major estuaries where
atmospheric inputs are suspected to be significant would improve our understanding of
this area.

o Further research would enable the evaluation of loading rates of toxic materials
associated with storm events and the importance of the timing of these events with
respect to effects on biological activity.

Transport and Bioavailability

o Research to determine the mechanisms of resuspension and deposition of -sediments and
associated chemical contaminants and the kinetics of sorption/desorption should be
continued.
I

o To be most effective, programs to evaluate toxic materials in the marine environment
should include basic physical chemistry research on interactions with seawater and
particulate organics. New and improved techniques for sampling and measurement of

xvii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

toxic materials in selected marine microenvironments (e.g., surface microlayer) would
be useful. The use of partition coefficients to build models of the fate of toxic
materials should be expanded.

o More information on the identity, distribution, and rates of formation of
biotransformation products and how mutagenic and carcinogenic products are
transformed (activated/deactivated) and accumulated by marine organisms would
improve our understanding of chronic or latent effects of toxic material on marine
organisms.

Effects

o Research both to develop and validate sublethal toxicity tests with more chemicals and
test organisms and to develop monitoring tools to assist in recognizing the presence
and levels of toxicants and possible sublethal effects would improve our ability to
identify and manage problems associated with toxic materials.

o Studies to evaluate population changes should focus on defining the significance of
multiple responses to toxic contamination. For example, studies to determine the
relationship between contaminant concentrations in the sediment and interstitial
waters and contaminant content of tissues, activity of detoxification enzymes, seasonal
alterations in energy reserves, recruitment of juvenile stages, reproductive condition,
and incidence of disease and histopathological conditions would provide useful
information.

o It would be useful to acquire more information concerning the toxicities and sublethal
effects of additional problem contaminants in order to identify their contribution to
environmental stress and their mechanisms of impact. Tests should be conducted with
individual and combinations of toxic substances to identify synergistic, antagonistic, or
additive effects. Research should also include a determination of the influence of
environmental factors, such as salinity and pH, on synergistic, antagonistic, and
additive effects.

Goal 2: Nutrients

Conclusions:

o Although there is much information on loadings from point sources of nutrients, there
is very little information on the role of groundwater and atmospheric routes of input,
and on the role of runoff during episodic events.

o Although phosphorus appears to be the limiting nutrient in most freshwater systems,
nutrient limitations in coastal and estuarine systems are not fully understood and may
vary from place to place as well as seasonally.

o Evidence exists to suggest that excessive anthropogenic nutrient inputs have altered
the trophic structure of some coastal ecosystems.

xviii

Goals of the National Program

o The quantitative relationship between allochthonous (external)- and autochthonous
(recycled) nutrient sources to eutrophication and hypoxia and anoxia is not well
understood.

o Many current analytical methods for nutrients are inadequate, or if adequate, are not
widely used.

Recommendations:

Sources

o Additional information would allow one to determine the significance of atmospheric
and groundwater sources of nutrients in estuaries and coastal areas.

o Research to determine the 'significance of seasonal runoff and aperiodic'storms as
sources of nutrients and their role in controlling rates of production in marine
ecosystems would generate information to improve our understanding in this area.

o To determine the role of allochthonous (external) versus autochthonous (recycled)
nutrient inputs to a water body and the subsequent changes in water quality and
ecosystem response would require additional study.

System Response

o Further research would improve our ability to determine the conditions under which
either phosphorus or nitrogen limit primary productivity in coastal, estuarine, and
Great Lakes ecosystems.

o Additional research would elucidate the nature and degree of trophic structure
changes resulting from excessive nutrient'inputs.

Measurement Methodologies

o In order to adequately measure nutrients and their effects on the marine environment,
improved analytical methods with more accuracy and precision should be developed.

Goal 3: Biological Agents

Conclusions:

o For many outbreaks of disease and mass mortalities of living marine resources, the
specific biological agent responsible or the mechanism of impact is not known.

o The basic biological attributes of many biological agents, such as life history,
environmental requirements, taxonomy, and persistence in the marine environment, are
unknown.

o The importance of natural events and human activities and the environmental
conditions necessary for the occurrence of mass mortalities and disease outbreaks in
living marine resources are often not understood.

xix

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

o Very little is known concerning the survival and effects of genetically engineered
organisms in the marine environment.

Recommendations:

Identifying Causative Agents

o In those cases where there are observable events leading to disease outbreaks or mass
mortalities (e.g., dolphin beachings) and there is no understanding of the cause, the
most useful research would be directed toward identifying the agent responsible.

o If a biological agent is suspected of causing an impact on marine resources, but
evidence linking the agent to disease or mortality is lacking, the most valuable studies
would assist in determining whether a cause and effect relationship exists.

Understanding Biological Attributes of Disease-Causing Agents

o In those cases where a biological agent is known to affect marine organisms but
knowledge concerning the impact is incomplete, the most useful research would focus
on determining the connection between biological agents and natural events or human
activities causing the outbreaks, as well as on quantifying the extent of the impact on
marine organisms. Such research should address the following issues:

- Persistence and transport mechanisms;

- Host range and vectors/alternate hosts;

- Host defense mechanisms and virulence of pathogen;

- Role of environmental factors on pathogen interaction; and

- Development of rapid diagnostic techniques.

Mitigating Effects

o Once the impact of a biological agent on living marine resources is better understood,
the highest research priority should be assigned to learning how to avoid or mitigate
those impacts. Such research should include a determination of:

- Control poi nts and mechanisms of pathogenicity of the biological agents;

- Population genetics;

- Population dynamics of host and pathogen;

- Host range and response;

- Production of toxins or metabolites; and

- Complex interactions with other pathogens, hosts, or chemical pollutants.

Goals of the National Program

Goal 4: Loss or Modification of Marine-Habitats

Conclusions:

o The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wetland maps and estimation of wetland loss rates
derived from these maps are as much as 10 years out of date and do@ not provide
timely information on the status and trends of habitats in areas of most rapid change.

o Although for the most part we know which causes, both natural and anthropogenic,
result in habitat loss'and modifications, we have not adequately quantified the human
activities that are affecting wetlands, nor, in most cases, are we able to accurately
predict how natural events or human activities will impact habitats.

o Researchers do not have an adequate understanding of estuarine processes and their
importance to habitat functions.

o Without an adequate understanding of the natural processes and functions of habitats,
we cannot accurately determine the effects that human activities will have on habitat
quantity and quality, nor can we determine how well mitigation efforts actually
replace the functional values of lost habitat.

o A key issue for future habitat research will be to understand the cumulative effects
of numerous projects o 'yer time and space on the quantity and quality of marine and
estuarine habitats and the ecosystem.

o Adequate information is not available to assess the effects of persistent marine debris
on populations of living marine resources.

Recommendations:

Status of Habitat Quality

o The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps for coastal areas undergoing rapid change
should be updated as frequently as needed.

o The Federal Government should consider methodologies for the development of high-
resolution, geo-referenced digital database systems for critical coastal habitat types.

o Better inventories of selected subtidal and endangered species habitats would provide
important information for the management of fisheries, valued species, and
environmental quality.

o Ongoing and planned work at the national level to document trends in wetland loss
should be continued.

Causes of Habitat Loss

o Analyses to identify and quantify human activities causing physical alterations that
result in habitat loss and modification would provide valuable management information.

xxi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Natural Processes and Habitat Functions

o Research to understand habitat processes and functions as related to living marine
resource productivity and the effects of human activities on these processes and
functions should be continued.

Effects of Habitat Loss

o A better understanding of the long-term effects of specific projects as well as the
cumulative effects on a regional basis would improve our ability to manage resources.

o Models to assist in predicting the effects of sea-level rise on marine and estuarine
habitats and to predict changes in accretion, erosion, and sedimentation affecting
habitat that result from human activities would contribute to the Nation's ability to
manage coastal environments in the long term.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measures

o Improved approaches would allow us to better assess the effectiveness of mitigation
and restoration techniques in terms of the quality of the restored habitat.

Marine Debris

o Research to identify and quantify the effects of marine debris on populations of living
marine resources and to determine the level of land-based contributions to the marine
debris problem would improve our understanding in this area. Monitoring efforts
should be conducted to determine the rates of marine debris entanglement and
ingestion by wildlife. Techniques should be developed to reduce the impact of fishing
gear entanglement and for the handling of ship-generated waste and reduction of land
sources of marine debris.

Goal 5: Status of Marine Ecosystems

Conclusions:

o A number of stress responses at the organism and suborganism level show potential
for use in marine programs, while others need further development.

o Current indicators of pollution stress at the population, community, and ecosystem
levels often cannot adequately distinguish natural fluctuations from pollution effects
or determine when observed changes or differences are of concern.

o Results obtained from monitoring studies indicate that it is feasible and useful to
document the status and trends of contaminant levels in living and nonliving
components of marine ecosystems.

o There are gaps in our knowledge concerning the impact of hydrographic factors (such
as freshwater inflow and sediment loading) on marine ecosystems.

xxii

Goals of the National Program

Recommendations:

Changes in Biological Status

o Work should continue to develop and field test the most promising indicators of
pollution stress on individual organisms.

o Basic research and development activities designed to increase the utility of indicators
of pollution stress at the population and community level should continue.

Changes in Physical and Chemical Factors

o Meas 'urements of contaminant- level trends in water, sediment, and biota should
continue to be made. Additional summaries of historical contaminant concentrations
should be developed to compare and to interpret recent measurements.

o Information needs have been identified in the following areas concerning the
significance to marine and estuarine ecosystems of changes in hydrographical
parameters:

- Effects of changes in freshwater inflow on secondary productivity;

- Relationship between freshwater inflow and low dissolved- oxygen and pollutant
concentrations;

- Effects of land-use changes on sediment loading; and

- Effects of sediment loadings on secondary productivity.

Coordination

o The Federal Government should promote coordination of state and regional programs,
develop guidelines for use in standardizing monitoring techniques, and support useful
analyses of historical and encountered data.

Goal 6: Human Health

Conclusions:

o Existing Federal and state monitoring programs provide limited data on the
concentrations of chemical contaminants in edible tissues of commercial and
recreational fish species. In addition, it is difficult to set. "acceptable" limits for
chemical concentrations in seafood because of uncertainties in our information on
toxic response in humans, seafood consumption patterns in the United States, and
exposure through other routes. Regulatory programs could be made more effective if
these inadequacies were resolved.

xxiii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

o Governmental programs, such as the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, have been
largely effective in protecting the public from diseases such as hepatitis, cholera, and
typhoid, as well as from biotoxin poisoning associated with the consumption of
molluscan shellfish. However, sporadic outbreaks of illness, primarily associated with
free-living, opportunistic Vibrio species and gastroenteritis -causing viruses still occur.

o Traditionally used microbial water quality indicators do not predict the occurrence of
viral pathogens and naturally occurring pathogenic bacteria such as V. vulnificus.

o Current information suggests that exposure to chemical pollutants during swimming
and diving and through occupational activities related to seafood do not pose
significant risks to human health in the United States at this time.

o Current methods for the removal and inactivation of human pathogens are effective in
controlling the input of bacterial pathogens to the marine environment but not for
other important pathogens such as the Norwalk-like viruses.

o Seafood consumption adyisories, shellfish bed closures, and beach classifications are
issued by state and local governments using largely inconsistent methods. Public
responses to such advisories display wide differences in comprehension and compliance.

Recommendations

Chemical Contaminants

o More comprehensive information on concentrations of significant contaminants
occurring in the major commercial and recreational species would be useful. In
addition to increasing temporal and geographical intensity of sampling, monitoring
programs would be improved by establishing standard methods for sampling and
analysis of seafood.

o Updating information on seafood consumption patterns in the United States, especially
for high-risk geographical or cultural populations, would.improve our ability to carry
out risk assessments.

o Although progress will be difficult, research should continue in the following areas to
increase the understanding of the interactive effects of chemical mixtures on human
health:

- Concentrations of toxic substances in mixtures;

- Toxicity to humans of individual contaminants; and

- The influence of environmental processes and interactions on toxic response.

Pathogens

o Research should continue to determine which marine pollution -related pathogens are
causing human health effects. Efforts to improve our ability to monitor seafood and
water quality for human pathogens should also continue.

xxiv

Priorities for Action

o Identification of improved indicators of microbial contamination of seafood and marine
water would enhance our capability to manage human health risks. These indicators
should be validated on the basis of,statistical data on disease incidence.

o Region-specific studies may be necessary to determine the relative importance of local
sources of human pathogens to the marine environment.

Management Tools

o Studies conducted in selected regions of the country would allow us to more
accurately determine the effectiveness of health advisories in reducing human health
risks from consumption of contaminated seafood.

o Studies conducted to determine when approved shellfishing areas are safe should focus
on viruses and naturally occurring pathogens.

o Additional studies would be helpful in assessing the effectiveness of beach closures in
protecting swimmers from diseases caused by pathogens.

Hazardous Materials

o Research efforts should continue to develop comprehensive performance standards for
chemical -protective suits worn by personnel during chemical spill clean-up activities,
and to design more chemically resistant suits.

PRIORITIES FOR ACTION BY THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLLUTION POLICY BOARD

In addition to making specific research and monitoring recommendations for achieving
each of the goals of the National Program, this Plan also presents an "agenda for action" for
the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board to pursue during the interim between Federal Plans.
The items presented in the agenda are specific and implementable tasks that the Board can
initiate on its own through cooperation among member agencies.

The "agenda for action" is a new feature not found in previous 5-year Plans. It is
designed to help assure the Board's continuing involvement in implementing recommendations
found in the Plan between now and the submission of the next Plan 3 years later. The
proposed "agenda for action" includes two types of agenda items. The first category comprises
a specific task, such as a study or report. The second involves the formation of an ad h
noc
working group of Federal and outside specialists to develop and implement a strategy for
filling a specific need.

The following items constitute the Board's agenda for action:

Specific Tasks

Atmospberic Inputs of Toxic Substances. The Board will conduct and publish a state-of-the-
art review concerning the sources, routes, and environmental significance of atmospheric
inputs of selected toxic substances to the marine environment. The study will identify
societal trends and technological developments that might influence future atmospheric inputs

xxv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

and assess the implications of these changes for the next 25 years. The report will also
include a description of research needs and priorities for improved understanding of this issue.
The study will be supported jointly by a group of interested Board agencies and directed by
an ad hoe committee of Federal experts in this area.

Future of Coastal Areas. The Board will support a strategic assessment of future
environmental problems in the Nation's coastal areas. The purpose of the study is to predict
the most important environmental problems that will be faced by estuarine and coastal
ecosystems over the next 50 years. The study will be conducted under the direction of a
steering group of Federal, academic, industry, and environmental experts. The study will
consider population growth and shifts to coastal areas, changes in industrial practices, future
waste disposal requirements, economic development, technological improvements, and global
changes in environmental quality and climate.

Seafood Consumiption Patterns. The Board will support a study to update information on
seafood consumption patterns in the United States and to identify population sectors
(geographical, cultural, professional) at high risk from consumption of seafood contaminated
with toxic substances. The study will evaluate the effectiveness of existing guidelines for
limiting consumption of contaminated seafood in protecting high-risk sectors of the population.
The study will also identify high-priority research needs related to this issue. The study will
be conducted under the direction of the Board.

Indicators of the Presence of Human Patbo2ens. Estimates of the concentrations of fecal
coliform bacteria have been traditionally used to indicate the presence of human pathogens in
coastal waters. However, this indicator is not considered accurate by many experts, especially
for health risks associated with viral diseases. The Board will support the development of
improved indicators of human pathogens in the marine environment.

Ad Hoc Working Groups

Monitoring EnvirQnmental Quality of Marine Ecosystems. Better information on the status of
marine ecosystems could be collected to provide an "early warning system" to environmental
managers. The Board will establish an ad hoc committee of Federal and private scientists and
program managers to examine the avail@bifiiiy of such information to environmental managers.
The committee will:

o Establish the objectives of the Federal program in this area and determine appropriate
roles at the Federal and state levels of government.

o Propose a systematic strategy for developing a national monitoring capability to meet
these objectives. The strategy will incorporate existing national and regional
programs, use of encountered data, peer review, and information synthesis and
dissemination.

o Promote the development of improved indicators of ecosystem status.

The committee will report to the Board and recommend actions to be taken by the Board.

xxvi

Priorities for Action

Habitat Loss or Modification. Loss or modification of emergent vegetation and submerged
aquatic vegetation is a major problem threatening the marine resources of the Nation. The
Board will establish an ad hoc committee to:

o Assure that National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) habitat maps in areas of rapid habitat
loss are updated as frequently as necessary.

o Evaluate the costs, benefits, and approaches for developing a high-resolution, geo-
referenced digital database for use in planning and documenting coastal alterations.

o Assure that regional and national trends in habitat loss and modification are
adequately documented.

o Support research necessary to develop the capability to predict the effects of sea
level rise on coastal habitats.

o Support a state-of-the-art review regarding the effectiveness of mitigation and
restoration practices, particularly with regard to quality of habitat.

o Prepare a program development plan for increasing our understanding of habitat
functions and processes.

The committee will report to the Board on a regular basis regarding progress, problems, and
needs for personnel, resources, or other types.of assistance that might be required.

Bioloeical Agents. The Board will conduct an evaluation of the Nation's ability to perform
research on the effects of biological agents on marine organisms. The study will be supported
by several Board agencies and directed by an ad hoc group of Federal and outside specialists.
The purpose of the study is to:

o Identify and assign priorities to research needs in this area.

o Evalua te the adequacy of existing facilities to conduct secure (P3) biological research.

o Assess capabilities for quick scientific response to investigate episodic events.

o Evaluate the need for a common database to promote sharing of information on the
occurrence and effects of biological agents.

o Publish an annual review of the state-of-the-art and tally of the incidence of disease
in marine biota.

The committee will report to the Board and recommend actions to be taken by the Board.

xxvii

1. INTRODUCTION

Interagency Coordination . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
Goals of the National Program. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 2
The Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Purpose and Limitations of the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Organization of the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

INTERAGENCY COORDINATION

The National Ocean Pollution Planning Act (NOPPA) of 1978, P.L. 95-273 (as amended),
requires the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to prepare a
"comprehensive 5-year plan for the overall Federal effort in ocean pollution research and
development and monitoring" and to revise and update the plan every 3 years (Section 4).
The National Ocean Pollution Program Office (NOPPO) was established by NOAA to execute
the mandate of Section 4 by providing a focal point for the coordination of Federal efforts in
marine pollution. Amendments to NOPPA in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986
(P.L. 99-272) established the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board (formerly the Interagency
Committee on Ocean Pollution Research, bevelopment, and Monitoring) to promote interagency
participation in the planning process as required under Section 7 of the Act. To meet the
mandate of Section 4, NOPPO has prepared, in consultation with the Policy Board, this 5-year
Federal Plan for the National Marine Pollution Program. It is the fourth such document
produced since Congress passed NOPPA in 1978.

One of the primary purposes of NOPPA is "to develop the necessary base of information
to support, and to provide for, the rational, efficient, and equitable utilization, conservation,
and development of ocean and coastal resources" [Section 2(b)(2)]. The Act defines ocean and
coastal resources to include essentially all components and, aspects of the marine and Great
Lakes environments under Federal jurisdiction. Among the common marine resources of direct
use to man are:

INTRODUCTION

o Biological resources such as shellfish, finfish, and macroalgae;

o Mineral resources of the continental shelf such as petroleum, sand, and gravel;

o Drinking water from the Great Lakes;

o Aesthetic and recreational resources used for swimming, fishing, and boating;

o Resources related to the capacity of the marine environment to accept certain types
of disposed wastes without adverse change; and

o Maritime shipping and transportation routes.

In common usage, the term pollution has assumed a variety of meanings and applications.
Under NOPPA, ocean pollution is defined as "any short-term or long-term change in the
marine environment," where changes (usually adverse) are caused by. human activity. The basic
type of pollution effects in the marine environment that are of concern include:

o Negative effects on marine bi.pta at the individual, population, community, or
ecosystem levels;

o Effects that decrease the continued availability of marine resources for human use
(e.g., contamination of fish or drinking water resources in the Great Lakes); and

o Negative effects on human health.

A variety of human activities contribute to marine pollution and jeopardize the continued
availability of marine resources. These activities include the disposal of dredged material,
sewage, and industrial wastes; recovery of oil and gas from the continental shelf; marine
transportation; and marine mining. Pollution may also be linked to nonpoint sources and
accidental spills. Physical alterations of marine habitats by human activities are.also
considered to be marine pollution because they often result in negative effects, such as the
loss of living marine resources.

This document addresses pollution research, development, and monitoring programs in
coastal waters, estuaries, open oceans, and the Great Lakes. It identifies opportunities for
future pollution studies.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Develooment, and Monitoring: FY 1981-
1985 (NOAA, 1981) identified the following three broad policies of the Federal Government
regarding ocean use:

o Ocean Resource 'Use Policy Encourage the use of oceans, estuaries, and Great
Lakes as sources of food, water, energy, and minerals and as a maritime medium in
such a way that there is no significant adverse impact on human health, productivity,
or aesthetic quality.

Goals of the National Program

o Ocean Waste Dist)osal Policy -- Consider, along with other options, the use of the
oceans, estuaries, and Great Lakes as repositories for the disposal of waste material
and thermal energy when it is determined that no significant impact to human health,
productivity, or aesthetic quality would result.

o Ocean Conservation Policy -- Preserve and enhance the productivity and aesthetic
quality of the oceans, estuaries, and Great Lakes.

Table I lists the primary agencies that perform research and monitoring related to marine
pollution, and identifies for each agency the major pieces of legislation that assign
responsibilities for marine pollution research and monitoring. Each of these pieces of
legislation is grouped within the ocean resource, ocean waste disposal, or ocean conservation
policy categories, although several of these individual laws give mandates in more than one of
these areas.

The National Marine Pollution Program is the composite of all the marine pollution
research, development, and monitoring- programs conducted by the Federal 'Government. The
purpose of the National Program is to provide resource managers and decision-makers with
scientific information about pollution phenomena needed to implement the three national -
ocean-use policies. To provide such information about marine pollution, the National Ocean
Pollution Policy Board identifies the following broad goals for the National Marine Pollution
Program:

1) Understand the sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials entering the marine
environment as a result of human activities;

2) Understand the sources, fates, and effects of nutrients entering the'marine
environment as a result of human activities;

3) Understand the sources, fates, and effects@ on marine organisms of biological agents
that are introduced or influenced by human activities;

4) Understand the effects of losing or modifying marine habitats as a result of human
activities;

5) Document the trends in the status of marine ecosystems; and'

6) Understand the implications of marine pollution to human health.

The first four goals of the National Program address specific categories of pollutants or
physical alterations to the marine environment (i.e., toxic materials, nutrients, biological
agents, and habitat alterations). The last two goals (related'to the status of marine
ecosystems and human health) integrate the first four goals and permit the Plan to take into
account all of the various contributions to marine pollution.

Marine pollution research, development, and monitoring programs funded by Federal
agencies may be considered as contributing to these six areas of endeavor. To meet these
goals, the scope of the programs undertaken may include'the following:

INTRODUCTION

Table 1. Federal Agencies with Major Legislative Mandates for Marine and Great
Lakes Pollution Research and Monitoring

LAWS AGENCIES
EPA NOAA USDA DHHS USCG COE MMS FWS DOE

Ocean Resource Use Policy

Outer Continental Shelf x
Lands Act
Deep Seabed Mining Act x
Federal Non-Nuclear x
Energy Research &
Development Act
Atomic Energy Act x
Fishery Conservation & x
Management Act
Food, Drug & Cosmetic x
Act
Safe Drinking Water Act x

Ocean Waste Disposal Policy
Marine Protection, x x x x
Research &
Sanctuaries Act
Water Quality Act x x x x

Ocean Conservation Policy

Fish & Wildlife x x
Coordination Act
Marine Mammal x x
Protection Act
Endangered Species Act x x
National Environmental x x x x x x x x x
Policy Act

Goals of the National Program

a) Assess the state of the environment

Acquire basic understanding;

Perform long-term baseline measurements to establish points of reference (e.g.,
look for natural variability);

Identify and characterize the pollutants (e.g., in -W'ater, -in sediments);

Assess pollutant transport and fate. This includes research and development on
processes of pollutants and their interactions with the environment;

Determine effects on living resources, wetlands and habitats,"and humans; and

Implement monitoring systems to obtain temporal and spatial information
concerning effects of human activities.

b) Develop the capability to estimate or predict

- Pollutant inputs;.

- Pollutant trajectories and fate; and

- Impacts of existing and future activities.

c) Develop multipurpose program support capabilities to assist agency programs and to
promote consistency (e.g., quality assurance of chemical -measurements in the marine
environment, development of measurement methods).

Priorities within these areas will change through time as new pollution problems emerge
and as information about existing problems is accumulated and judged to be sufficient.
Evaluation of the existing and planned, Federal effort in each of the six goal areas enumerated
above is presented in Chapter III of the Plan.

The National Marine Pollution Program also adopts the following two management
objectives: (1) to maximize the effectiveness of Federal marine pollution research,
development, and monitoring programs by assuring that such programs address national needs
and problems in a manner that is consistent with the urgency of the need for information, and
(2) to maximize the efficiency of Federal marine pollution researchi. development, and
monitoring programs by eliminating or reducing unintentional duplication of effort, making
maximum use of existing capabilities, and by promoting coordination and cooperation among
Federal programs through more effective use of available funds, research, personnel, vessels,
facilities, and equipment. The National Ocean Pollution Policy Board aims to promote both
management objectives.

INTRODUCTION

THE PLANNING PROCESS

The Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Development and Monitoring is required
by Section 4 of NOPPA to provide several specific types of information:

0 Identify national needs and problems relating to ocean pollution;

o Establish priorities in addressing these needs and problems;

0 Describe the Federal programs and projects related to marine pollution; and

o Make recommendations for changes in the overall Federal effort in ocean pollution
research and monitoring to assure that priority national needs and problems are met
by Federal programs during the Plan period.

The planning process undertaken during the development of this Plan is shown in
Figure 1. In early 1987, NOPPO conducted a national marine pollution priorities study
involving 145 individuals from the Federal Executive and Legislative Branches, state and local
governments, academia, ocean industries, and environmental interest groups. The priorities
identified by this study were emphasized at a national workshop convened in Easton,
Maryland, in June 1987. The workshop was divided into five working groups:

o Habitat modification and loss;

o Pipeline disposal of municipal wastewater;

o Pipeline disposal of industrial wastes;

o Nonpoint source pollution; and

o Persistent marine debris.

The general findings stated that:

� The ability to gauge progress toward implementation of a Plan should be improved;

� Involvement of the non-Federal sector during Plan preparation should be promoted;
and

� Synthesis and dissemination of existing data and information should be emphasized.

Additional information concerning the findings and recommendations of the workshop are
presented in the workshop proceedings (NOAA, 1988).

Using the workshop findings and existing Federal ocean policies, NOPPO (with the
guidance and approval of the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board) identified the six specific
National Program goals stated above. In late 1987 and early 1988, working groups were
formed to aid in development of the sections of the Plan that deal with each goal. These
groups consisted of Federal representatives and experts from the non-Federal sectors. The
members of each of the working groups are identified in Appendix A.

The Planning Process

Goals of National Marine Pollution Program, 1987 Priorities Description of
1 ) Understand sources, fates, and effects Study Federal Programs
of toxic materials
2) Understand sources, fates, and effects
of nutrients
3) Understand sources, fates, and effects
of biological agents
4) Understand effects of losing or National Workshop
modifying marine habitats,
5) Document trends in status of marine
ecosystems
6) Understand implications of marine
pollution to human health

WORKING GROUP
ANALYSIS

Identify information needs to address program goals

Develop approach by which research and monitoring can satisfy information needs

* Evaluate relevant ongoing and planned Federal programs:
- to determine how well information needs are being met and
- to identify any duplication of-efforts

* Identify information needs that are not adequately addressed by current Federal programs

* Present recommendations for future research emphasis 'I
AGENDA FOR ACTIONN
List of specific actions to be taken by the
National Ocean Pollution Policy Board
- redirect program goals
Review of agency - promote interagency coordination
requests for funding - eliminate unintentional overlap
to support research - reduce/eliminate programs
in the outyear - create/enhance programs
- support legislative initiatives and changes.
promote quality assurance between agencies
- conduct basic research

Figure 1. The Planning Process.

INTRODUCTION

Each of the six working groups met twice to assist NOPPO in the drafting of the Plan.
The working groups were asked to provide guidance on the state-of-the-art, information needs,
and research recommendations pertaining to each of the six topics. The discussions and
findings presented in the Plan may have been altered during the official review by the
National Ocean Pollution Policy Board; therefore, it should not be assumed that this final
version of the Plan necessarily reflects the total consensus of the working groups.

PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE PLAN

Many Federal departments and agencies are required by law to conduct marine pollution
studies, and each must fulfill the requirements of its specific missions and obligations.
Programmatic decisions on areas of research emphasis within each agency are made through
competition among many priority areas, and research programs must be related to agency
missions. The Plan is not intended to override or interfere with the responsibilities and
mandates of individual agencies. However, a responsive and efficient Federal program of
marine pollution research can be achieved by ensuring that important research areas are not
overlooked if they fall between agency jurisdictions, and that related programs are carried out
cooperatively and without duplication. As a strategy document, the Plan is not intended to
provide a detailed tactical implementation scheme. Ultimately, it is up to the discretion of
individual agencies to accept and implement the general mandate of NOPPA by cooperating in
a coordinated national effort in marine pollution research and monitoring, and it is up to the
individual agencies involved in the National Marine Pollution Program to accept and execute
the recommendations offered in the Plan.

The Policy Board conducts an annual review of agency appropriation requests as
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Each agency involved in the
National Marine Pollution Program is required under Section 4 of NOPPA to prepare and
submit to the Policy Board, at the same time that its budget is submitted to OMB, information
on annual requests for appropriations to support ocean pollution research, development, and
monitoring programs. The requests for appropriations are reviewed by the Policy Board, which
subsequently submits a report to OMB as the President's agent and then to the Congress
concerning how these budget requests assist in attaining the program goals stated in this Plan.
Under NOPPA, OMB reviews the requests for appropriations as an integrated, coherent,
multiagency request and is to take into account the review of the Board.

The conclusions and recommendations of this Plan have been reviewed, discussed, and
accepted by the Policy Board. This ensures compatibility between the Plan and the individual
mandates of each agency in order to facilitate its implementation. During the interval
between editions of the Plan, the National Ocean Pollution Program Office works with the
Policy Board agencies to promote implementation of recommendations in selected priority areas.

ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN

Chapter 11 is an overview of the National Marine Pollution Program; it includes
summaries of agency activities and responsibilities and an overview of program expenditures.
This chapter also includes a discussion of marine pollution funding trends.

Organization of the Plan

The focus of the Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Develoment, and
Monitoring: FY 1988-1992 is in Chapter III. In this chapter is a discussion of the goals of the
National Marine Pollution Program as cited above. This approach is different from the last
Plan in which the discussion focused on activities that may cause pollution. The six goals
take into account the various polluting activities and pollutants of concern. The discussion of
each goal includes examination of the goal rationale, listing of relevant agency programs,
identification of research and information gaps, and recommendations for future research to
address these gaps.

Chapter IV contains an "agenda for action" by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board
during the 3-year interim between the development of 5-year plans. This agenda will help
assure that the Plan will be used and will aid in the measurement of progress toward
achieving the goals set forth in the Plan. The agenda allows for the inclusion of more
detailed program evaluation and planning and provides specific opportunities for interagency
and State/Federal coordination.

Literature Cited

NOAA. 1981. National Marine Pollution Program Plan - Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution
Research, Development, and Monitoring: Fiscal Years 1981-1985. National Marine
Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 185 pp.

NOAA. 1988. Proceedings: National Marine Pollution Problems and Needs Workshop, Easton,
Maryland. June 9-11, 1987. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 53 pp. +
Appendices.

11. THE NATIONAL MARINE POLLUTION PROGRAM

Ocean Pollution Funding Trends: FY 1984-1989 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Agency Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Council on Environmental Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
U.S. Department of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
U.S. Department of Commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
U.S. Department of Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
U.S. Department of Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 22
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
U.S. Department of the Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
U.S. Department of Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
National Aeronautics and Space Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
National Science Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

This chapter presents an overview of the federally funded programs in ocean pollution
research, development, and monitoring that comprise the. National Marine Pollution Program.
An analysis of funding trends for the entire National Marine Pollution Program from FY 1984
through FY 1988 is presented along with the funding requested for FY 1989 in the Presidential
budget. The chapter includes descriptions of the pollution programs of the 11 Federal
departments and agencies that conduct marine pollution research, development, or monitoring
activities.

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

OCEAN POLLUTION FUNDING TRENDS: FY 1984-1989

The following Federal agencies and departments support marine pollution- related research,
development, or monitoring activities:

Council on Environmental Quality
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Department of Defense
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Navy
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Food and Drug Administration
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
U.S. Department of the Interior
Minerals Management Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of Transportation
U.S. Coast Guard
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Science Foundation

Between FY 1984 and FY 1988, Federal marine pollution funding decreased by $13.9
million or 12% (Figure 2). This reflects the Administration's efforts to eliminate unnecessary
and duplicative programs and those programs that have satisfied their legislated mission.

$160-

$140- $126.9
$121.1
$120- $114.5 $107.2
$100- $98.9

C
2 $80-

2
$60-

$40-

$20-

$0-
FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89-
1 1 1 1 1 1
Year

*FY 1989 estimate based on the Presidential budget.

Figure 2. Total Funding for the National Marine Pollution Program, FY 1984 - FY 1989.

Ocean Pollution Funding Trends

During this 5-year@oeriod, 5 of the 11 Federal departments and agencies involved in marine
pollution research experienced reductions in pollution funding amounting to $33.0 million; 4
received increased funding amounting to 16.1 million; 1 (U.S. Department of Agriculture) was
level funded (although it changed its reporting procedure to include a greater portion of its
program); and I (Council on Environmental Quality) began reporting a'portion of its program
for inclusion in the National Marine Pollution Program for the first time (Table 2). Of those
agencies with increased funding, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accounted
for $15.4 million of the increases (Figure 3).

Most of the 95% increase in EPA marine pollution funding that occurred between FY'1984
and FY 1988 ($16.3 to 31.7 million) resulted from the creation and funding of the National
Estuary Program. In addition, a large portion of this increase resulted from the increased
funding of Water Quality and Great Lakes research.

Other agencies experiencing increases in marine pollution funding between FY 1984 and
FY 1988 were the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) (<$0.1 million or
2%), the U.S. Coast Guard ($0.3 million or 22%), and the National Aeronautics and Space .
Administration (NASA) ($0.3 million or 129%). The DHHS increased spending resulted from a
slight increase in funding for the Shellfish Sanitation Program. The increase in Coast Guard
spending resulted from increases in the budget of the Marine Environmental Response Program.
NASA's increased spending resulted from an increased budget for the Ocean Productivity
Program for the development and utilization of space-borne technologies. The apparent
increase of $3.0 million for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) does not reflect an
actual increase in research level. Starting in FY 1985, the USDA changed its reporting
procedure to include a greater portion of its program.

Between FY 1984 and FY 1988, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) marine pollution
funding decreased more than any other"Federal agency's ($12.7 million or 69%) (Figure 4). All
but one DOE marine pollution- related program was either reduced in funding during this period
or eliminated entirely. Funding for the Regional Marine Program increased slightly, while
funding for the Physiological Ecology Program decreased and the Ocean Thermal Energy
Conversion Program, Radioecology Program, Strategic Petroleum Reserve Program, Subseabed
Disposal Program, and Arctic and Offshore Research Program were all zero funded in FY 1988
or were eliminated between FY 1984 and FY 1988. @

Other agencies experiencing reductions in marine pollution funding between FY 1984 and
FY 1988 included the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) ($11.4 million or 31%); U.S.
Department of Commerce (DOC) ($5.6 million or 18%); U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) ($2.0
million or 17%); and National Science Foundation ($1.3 million or 89%). Within DOI, the
Minerals Management Service experienced a $10.7 million (37%j reduction in marine pollution
funding, and the U.S. Geological Survey experienced a $2.8 million (50%) reduction. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service of DOI showed an increase in funding during this period due to the
inclusion of funding for the National Wetlands Inventory beginning in FY 1985. Much of the
reduction in DOC's marine pollution funding resulted from a decrease in ship support for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Other NOAA programs experiencing
decreases in funding between FY 1984 and FY 1988 include the Coastal and Estuarine
Assessment Program, the ERL Ocean Pollution Program, and the National Fishery Ecology
Program. In spite of the overall decrease in NOAA marine pollution funding, several NOAA
programs received increased funding, including. the Strategic Assessment Program and Sea

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Table 2., National Marine Pollution Program Funding Levels: FY 1984 - 1989
(funding in thousands of dollars)

FY 1989
FY 1984 FY 1985 FY 1986 FY 1987 FY 1988 Presidential
Agency Estimates Estimates Estimates Estimates Estimates Budget

CEO* 0 19 11 9 9.- 0

USDA** 196 3,400 3,354 3,139 3,167 3,441

DOC

NIST 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOAA 31,008 39,443 35,859 32,988 25,420 15,597

DOD

COE 10,135 9,504 8,064 8,996 8,500 9,990

Navy 1,600 1,920 1,900 1,575 1,235 720
DOE 18,513 18,831 13,650 6,895 5,767 6,127

DHHS

NIEHS 923 1,277 452 470 486 503

FDA 2,470 2,421 1,941 2,491 2,959 2,990

DOI

MIVIS 28,659 23,024 20,912 19,285 18,000 18,000

FWS 2,707 5,132 5,565 5,274 4,735 4,735
USGS 5,555 4,997 6,514 2,583 2,783 2,428

DOT

1,433 1,080 1,235 975 1,744 990

EPA 16,285 20,893 26,615 28,625 31,715 32,815

NASA 210 453 483 480 480 510

NSF 1,405 970 376 690 151 50

TOTAL 121,099 133,364 126,931 114,475 107,151 98,896

*Starting in FY 1985, the CEO began reporting a portion of their program for inclusion in the National
Marine Pollution Program.

"Starting in FY 1985, the USDA changed itsreporting procedure to include a greater portion of itsprogram.
The funding increase between FY 1984 and FY 1985 results-from this change and does not necessarily
reflect an increase in research level of effort.

Ocean Pollution Funding Trends

$40
$35 - $31.7 $32.8
.$30 - $28.6
$26.6
$25 -

$20.9
C
0 $20 -
$16.3
$15 -

$10 -

$5 -
$0 1 - -
FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89*

Year

*FY 1989 estimate based on the Presidential budget.

Figure 3. Trends in Funding for the Environmental Protection Agency, FY 1984-FY 1989.

$25

$20 $18.5 $18.8

$15 $13.7

$10
$6.9 $5.8 -$6.1
$5

$0
FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89*

Year

*FY 1989 estimate based on the Presidential budget.

Figure 4. Trends in Funding for the Department of Energy, FY 1984-FY 1989.

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Grant Ocean Pollution Program. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of DOD received $1.6
million less (16% decrease) for marine pollution research in FY 1988 than in FY 1984, while
the U.S. Navy received $0.4 million less (23% decrease).

The President's FY 1989 budget request for marine pollution programs is $98.9 million,
$8.3 million less than the FY 1988 level. Reductions in NOAA's ocean pollution programs
would account for most of this decrease in funding (Figure 5). Other agencies that would
experience decreases in funding for marine pollution studies under the proposed FY 1989
budget include the U.S. Coast Guard ($0.8 million or 43%). Under the proposed FY 1989
budget, the EPA would receive the largest increase in marine pollution funding ($1.1 million or
A), and the DOD would receive an additional $1.0 million (10%).

$50

$40 - $39.4 $35.9
$33.0
$31
$30 -
C
.2 $25.4

$20 -
$15.6

$10 -

$0 - FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 FY 87 FY 88 FY 89

Year

*FY 1989 estimate based on the Presidential budget.

Figure 5. Trends in Funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
FY 1984-FY 1989.

AGENCY PROGRAMS

In FY 1988, the Federal Government expended over $107 million for marine pollution
research, development, and monitoring activities. In FY 1988, EPA was the major supporter of
marine pollution research, development and monitoring activities ($31.7 million or 30% of the
total program) followed by DOI ($25.5 million or 24%) and NOAA ($25.4 million or 24%). The
percentage of total marine pollution funding expended by each of the concerned agencies is
presented in Figure 6.

Agency Programs

U.S. Geological
Survey 2%
Minerals Management
Service 17%

U.S. Environmental Protection U.S. Navy 1%
Agency 30%

U.S. Department of Energy 5%

- - - - - - - U.S. Coast Guard 2%

U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers 8%
Other* 1%
U.S. Departm n
t
of Agriculture U.S. Fish and
Wildlife 4%
U.S. Food a ru
Administrati n

National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration 24%

Total FY 1988 Funding - $107.1 Million.
*CEQ, NSF, NIEHS, & NASA each funded
< 1% of the total. NIST was zero funded.

Figur e 6. Percentage of Total FY 1988 Funding Provided by Individual Federal Agencies.

The following discussion presents an overview of the major responsibilities and activities
of the Federal agencies involved in marine pollution research, development, and monitoring.
Included are discussions of the major marine pollution programs within each agency and
estimated FY 1988 funding levels of those programs. More detailed information will be
available in a future edition of the National Marine Pollution Program: Summary of Federal
Proparams and Proiects.

Council on Environmental Ouality

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is required by the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 to report to Congress annually on the status and condition of the
environment, the current and foreseeable trends in the quality, management, and utilization of
the environment, and the effects of environmental trends. In an effort to fulfill this
a
3

nd
0

Congressional mandate, CEQ has enjoined other Federal agencies to develop a sourcebook of
environmental statistics that are indicative of current conditions and historic trends in the

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

quality of the environment of the United States. The FY 1988 marine pollution- related
funding provided by CEQ for this effort is approximately $9,000. This amount is augmented by
funding from other Federal agencies.

U.S. Department of Aericulture

The overall science mission of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is to conduct
research, development, and education programs on problems related to agriculture production
and to the protection of the environment. A portion of the USDA research effort addresses
the effects of agricultural and resource development practices on the quality of the marine
environment. The overall goals of this research are to aid in the effective management and
use of the nation's soil, water, and air resources and on reducing pollutants in receiving
streams, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. Research projects of the Agricultural Research Service,
Cooperative State Research Service, and Forest Service are included in the National Marine
Pollution Program.

The USDA expended $3.2 million on marine pollution research, development, and
monitoring activities during FY 1988. Starting in FY 1985, the USDA changed its reporting
procedure to include a greater portion of its program. The funding increase between FY 1984
and FY 1985 results from this change and does not reflect an actual increase in research level
of effort. These funds were used to support research examining the effects of soil erosion,
agricultural runoff, agricultural waste disposal, sedimentation, nutrients, and pesticides on
marine organisms and ecosystems and the transport and transformation of pollutants. The
projects are conducted through mechanisms of direct Federal research as well as support of
cooperative efforts and grants. All relevant USDA projects have been grouped into the
following three areas, which are listed as programs:

o Nonpoint Source Contaminants Program ($2.2 million) -- Conducts research on
pollution problems caused by soil erosion, estuarine sedimentation, slope stability in
agricultural and forested watersheds, streambank and shoreline stability, organic debris
and turbidity, and on-land studies to prevent erosion from occurring.

o Habitat Modification Program ($0.9 million) -- Conducts research on improving the
ability to evaluate the effects of watershed development projects on resource
conservation, and investigations of landscape and channel modifications on ambient
concentrations of sediments and agricultural chemicals in streams.

o Point Source Contaminants Program (less than $0.1 million) -- Conducts studies t o
investigate chemicals in bottom mud originating from dump sites and chemical plants,
oil spills, and contaminants from other point sources.

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Institute of Standards and Technology

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has responsibility for the
custody, maintenance, and development of the national standards of measurement and the
provision of means and methods for making measurements consistent with those standards.
NIST cooperates with other Federal agencies for the development of standard practices and

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM Agency Programs

the establishment. of reference bases in support of national programs. Within NIST, the
Center for.Analytical Chemistry performs research in analytical methods and standard
reference materials, the provision of quality assurance services, and services to other agenc ies
of the government. Many of the Center's services are applicable to ocean pollution research
and monitoring programs. These include measurement of hazardous wastes, organic and
inorganic species in water, organic and inorganic species in marine organisms and sediments,
research in sampling, analytical design, and long-term storage of samples. Since all marine
pollution-related activities, at NIST are carried out on a reimbursable basis, no funding is
listed in the National Marine Pollution Program for NIST's related activities.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has legislative
responsibilities for conducting research on problems caused by polluting activities in the
oceans and the Great Lakes. During FY 1988, NOAA funded $25.4 million for marine pollution.-
research, development, and monitoring studies under the Office of the Chief Scientist, the
National Ocean Service,the Office. of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, the National Marine
Fisheries Services; and the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service.
The marine pollution programs of these organizations and their specific research
responsibilities are as follows:

o Office of the Chief Scientist

- National, Marine Pollution Coordination Program ($1.3 million) Coordinates
ocean pollution research, development, and monitoring programs supporied,by all
Federal departments and agencies.

- Estuarine Program Office (0.6 million) -- Facilitates coordination of estuarine
activities within NOAA.and other Federal and state agencies.

o National Ocean Service

Coastal and Estuarine Assessment Program ($5.7 million) Conducts national and
regional studies in representative coastal regions and estuaries to develop
improved methods for use by NOAA, other public agencies, and the private sector
in assessing the effects of coastal and estuarine use activities throughout the
Nation.

Strategic Assessments Program ($3.0 million) -- Conducts assessments of multiple
ocean resource uses for the Nation and,its major coastal and ocean regions to
determine marine resource development strategies, which will result in maximum
benefit to the Nation with minimum environmental damage or conflicts among
uses.

Hazardous Materials Response Program ($2.3 million) -- Develops scientific plans
and coordinates scientific input related to spills of hazardous substances occurring
in coastal waters, the 197-mile exclusive economic zone, and the Great Lakes.

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

- Deep Seabed Mining Environmental Research Program ($0.4 million) -- Provides
scientific information to predict potential adverse impacts from the mining of hard
mineral resources in the deep ocean and to enable government decisions to be'
made regarding the mining of these resources in an environmentally sound manner.

- National Marine Sanctuaries Program ($0.5 million) -- Promotes and coordinates
research to expand the scientific knowledge of marine sanctuaries and to improve
management decision-making for the purpose of preserving or restoring their
conservation, recreational, ecological, or aesthetic values.

- Ship Support ($1.9 million) -- Provides ship support for NOAA's marine pollution
research and monitoring activities.

o Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

- Environmental Research Laboratories Ocean Pollution Studies ($0.8 million)
Conducts process-oriented research to improve our understanding of natural
oceanic systems and the ecological impacts of human-induced stress on these
systems; problem- oriented research is also conducted to develop improved
assessment capabilities.

- Environmental Research Laboratories Great Lakes Pollution Studies ($2.3
million) -- Conducts process studies to improve our understanding and prediction
of the impact of pollutants on the Great Lakes and problem- oriented research to
develop improved engineering prediction models.

- Sea Grant Ocean Pollution Studies ($3.2 million) -- Provides funding to selected
colleges and universities throughout the Nation to solve pollution problems related
to state and local activities in fisheries, recreation, and overall resource
management.

o National Marine Fisheries Service

- National Fishery Ecology Program ($3.3 million) -- Conducts research directed
toward understanding the effects of man-induced and natural changes on the
abundance, distribution, and health of living marine resources of commercial and
recreational importance and their habitats.

- Microconstituents Program ($0.1 million) -- Conducts studies to determine the
kinds and levels of contaminants in the tissues of fishery products of recreational,
food, and industrial use.

o National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service

Marine Pollution Data Support Program (less than $0.1 million) -- Provides a
variety of marine pollution data management -related activities, including data
identification and acquisition, data processing and quality control, data and
information products and services, and project data management support.

Agency Programs

U.S. Dei)artment of Defense

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) has responsibility for conducting studies on the
environmental effects of water use@ water diversion, and construction projects in the marine
environment. During FY 1988, COE funded $8.5 million for marine pollution research,
development, and monitoring studies. The COE's marine pollution projects are divided into
two major programs: the Environmental Quality Research and Development Program and the
Navigation Project Environmental Operations and Maintenance Program.

o Environmental Quality Research and Development Program ($1.3 million) -- Concerned
with the development of techniques and procedures for assessing, evaluating, and
controlling the impact of COE and other coastal construction activities on the
environment and the maintenance of national water quality standards.

o Navigation Project Environmental Operations and Maintenance Program ($7.3
million) -- Composed of the Long-Term Monitoring Project and the Long-Term
Management Strategy Programs. . The Long-Term Monitoring Project involves: the
continued evaluation of nine existing habitat development field sites, low-cost
breakwater tests to determine rapid development and survival benefits in marsh
development and shoreline stabilization, and dissemination of information on beneficial
uses of dredged materials. The principal objective of the Long-Term Management
Strategy (LTMS) Program is to provide the field with protocols for developing LTMS's
for disposing of dredged materials in an economically and environmentally. sound
manner.

The COE divisions and districts do not normally run research projects, but they do
conduct all of the operation activities dealing with monitoring and data acquisition and
interpretation as well as proj ect- specific developmental research. These activities are carried
out by the following regional division and district offices:

- North Atlantic - Lower Mississippi River
- New England - Pacific Ocean
- South Atlantic - South Pacific
- North Central - Southwest

U.S. Navy

The U.S. Navy expended $1.2 million on research, development, and monitoring programs
related to marine pollution during FY 1988. The marine pollution programs of the Navy are
carried out within the Environmental Protection Technology Program. The overall goal of the
program is to develop pollution reduction, abatement, or treatment. techniques and permit the
Navy to meet present and future environmental regulations. The program involves the
development of onboard systems for pollution source reduction and control and the
investigation of environmental aspects of treatment technology. This includes establishment
and maintenance of a data base on quality and generation rates of all shipboard wastes
including expended ordnance. The.remainder of the program addresses short- and long-term

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

environmental effects of antifouling paints applied to ship hulls. This research includes
investigations of the environmental fates and effects of synthetic organic compounds released
from antifouling paints during drydock removal and routine service.

U.S. Department of Enenzy

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) plans and'manages Federal energy programs. A
major DOE objective is to carry out research and monitoring to ensure that energy programs
are consistent with environmental legislation and policies. To fulfill these DOE objectives, a
marine research program is conducted to gain an understanding of the effects of energy-
related pollutants on the marine environment.

During FY 1988, DOE funded $5.8 million in research, development, and monitoring
projects related to marine pollution. Current DOE marine pollution research is coordinated
under the following programs:

o Regional Marine Program ($5.2 million) -- Supports research on natural phys'ioc'hemical
and biological processes to help determine the pathways and fate's of energy-related
materials in marine systems and food chains.

o Physiological Ecology Program ($0.6 million) -- Supports studies on genetics and
physiology to determine limits of pollution exposure that will allow organisms and
ecosystems to exist without adverse ecological perturbations.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for the safety of the
Nation's foods, cosmetics, drugs, medical devices, biologics, and electronic radiological
products. The FDA's Shellfish Sanitation Program, a cooperative Federal- State 7 industry
activity, is the agency's only marine pollution- related program. Approximately $3.0 million was
expended under this program during FY 1988 for marine pollution research, development, and
monitoring. Under the Shellfish Sanitation Program, the agency's Bureau of Foods carries out
regulatory and research activities to as'sure that shellfish are.safe for human consumption.
Research, technical assistance, and evaluationsare performed on the effectiveness of sanitary
practices in the growing, harvesting, processing, and marketing of shellfish.

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) is responsible for the
support of research in the areas of the effects of chemical and physical environmental agents
on human health. This includes basic research as well as research on the causes of
environmentally related diseases and how they develop. While the focus of NIEHS-supported
research is primarily on human health, one of its programs supports ocean pollution -related
research:

Agency Programs

o Extramural Program ($0.5 million) -- Supports research on the distribution and
alteration of environmental compounds in the marine environment and their
accumulation and biological effects in marine biota. Emphasis is placed on
understanding known or toxic effects in the human population.

U.S. Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service

The Minerals Management Service's (MMS) marine pollution-related research program
supports one of the mandates of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Lands Act Amendments of
1978, which is to provide for the protection of the human, marine, and coastal environments
concomitant with mineral resource development on the OCS. To meet this goal and to meet
information and administrative requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
a nationwide OCS Environmental Studies Program was initiated by the Bureau of Land
Management (now MMS) in 1974 to provide environmental information and analyses on marine
and coastal ecosystems and to establish benchmark environmental conditions in all OCS areas
for future identification of alterations caused by OCS activities. The program has since
evolved from the benchmark environmental characterization approach to the monitoring of
effects on marine ecosystems as oil and gas development occurs.

The OCS Environmental Studies Program is managed in the MMS Washington Office by
the Branch of Environmental Studies located within the Offshore Environmental Assessments
Division. Four MMS Regional Offices are responsible for managing environmental 'studies
within their respective areas of jurisdiction. In FY 1988, MMS funded $18.0 million for marine
pollution research and monitoring.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has general responsibility for perpetuating and
providing public use and enjoyment of the fish and wildlife resources of the United States.
Its functions include responsibility for the fish and wildlife. resources and habitats of national
interest through research, management, and provision of technical assistance to other Federal
and nongovernment agencies and states. The FWS conducts operations in the entire coastal
zone, the contiguous lands, and the waters that flow into the zone. Through the Assistant
Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, FWS acts as the principal environmental advisor in
reviewing various departmental policy and opinion documents for energy development programs,
including those in the coastal zone. Portions of its component programs with inarine
pollution-related goals, objectives, and activities constitute important factors in the protection,
conservation, and enhancement of estuarine and coastal fish and wildlife resources and their
habitats.

The FWS funded $4.7 million for marine pollution- related research in FY 1988 under the
Research and Development Program and the National Wetlands Inventory. The marine
pollution-related research activities'of these programs are presented below.

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

o Research and Development Program ($2.9 million) -- Collects, collates, and interprets
diverse information on fish species populations and habitats to provide information,
methodology, and materials to assist fishery managers in decisions about the
protection, enhancement, and utilization of fishery resources.

o National Wetlands Inventory ($1.9 million) -- Prepares a wetland data base in map
form, conducts a trends and analysis for wetland change, maintains standardized
mapping procedures, correlates known wetland values, and upgrades and makes
available the collected information.

U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is responsible for the classification of public lands
and examination of the geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the national
domain. Over the years, the USGS's mission has expanded to include topographic mapping and
hydrologic investigations of water in streams and underground. In compliance with its broad
mission for earth science research and application, a few marine pollution- related programs are
conducted by USGS.

In FY 1988, the USGS funded $2.8 million for marine pollution- related studies under two
programs. These programs and their marine pollution- related responsibilities are presented
below.

o Water Resources Division Program ($2,0 million) -- Responsible for providing
hydrologic data on surface and groundwater, including the long-term operation of
downstream gauges on major rivers and streams (yielding both quantity and quality
data) and site-specific investigations of estuarine circulation, geochemistry, and
ecology.

o Geologic Division Program ($0.8 million) -- Conducts research on the physical and
geological processes on the seafloor.

U.S. Department of Transportation

U.S. Coast Guard

The U.S. Coast Guard funded $1.7 million for research, development, and monitoring
projects related to marine pollution during FY 1988. The Coast Guard conducts environmental
research and monitoring related to the effects of spills of polluting materials and other
transportation- related pollution in the marine environment. The major program coordinating
these activities is the Marine Environmental Response Program. The major goals and
responsibilities of this program are as follows:

o Marine Environmental Response Program ($1.7 million) -- Supports research on
predicting behavior and movements of spilled oil and hazardous substances, as well as
developing systems for more precise detection, sampling, identification, and
quantification of discharged chemicals.

Agency Programs

In addition, the Coast Guard is the United States' representative to the
Intergovernmental Maritime Organization (IMO), which promotes improved safety and pollution
prevention at sea.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agencl

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funded $31.7 million for research,
development, and monitoring programs related to marine pollution during FY 1988. The EPA
assumes lead responsibility in the Federal Government for identifying, evaluating, and
controlling environmental pollutants. The purview of EPA includes freshwater, estuarine,
coastal, and oceanic pollution. Marine pollution research activities range from specific
mission-oriented endeavors to basic research concerned with achieving a general understanding
of marine ecosystem structure and function. The major responsibilities of EPA include review
of permits, setting standards, and overall regulatory activities. The EPA mandate includes the
following areas of marine pollution research and monitoring:

o Marine Disposal Program ($6.0 million) -- Addresses the short- and long-term
environmental effects of the disposal of municipal waste, industrial waste, and low-
level radioactive waste in the marine environment.

o Energy-Related Research ($0.2 million) -- Includes environmental studies on the
impacts of waste materials produced from offshore oil and gas drilling and production
platforms.

o Wate r Quality Research ($8.3 million) -- Relates to establishing limits on substances,
such as priority pollutants, toxic substances, pesticides, and carcinogens released into
the marine environment.

o Great Lakes Research ($10.2 million) -- Addresses the pollution problems of the Great
Lakes. Objectives include research on water quality and eutrophication and
monitoring of contaminants and discharges from tributaries and point sources.

o Chesapeake Bay Program ($1.4 million) -- Coordinates pollution research in Chesapeake
Bay. These efforts include research on sources, transport, fate, and physical
properties of pollutants and on pollution control alternatives and data management.

o National Estuary Program ($5.1 million) -- Designed to develop a comprehensive master
environmental plan to protect and restore water quality and living resources in the
Nation's estuaries.

o Exploratory Research ($0.5 million) -- Involves long-term research conducted through
cooperative agreements with universities. This research provides a link between basic
and applied research on fates and effects of marine pollutants.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) does not have any direct
statutory responsibilities for ocean pollution research, development, and monitoring, but does
conduct studies indirectly related to marine pollution. Those projects indirectly related to the

THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

National Marine Pollution Program fall under two categories. The first includes the
development of space-borne techniques and the evaluation and application of these techniques
to advance our understanding of the fundamental behavior of the oceans. These elements are
conducted by the Earth Science and Applications Division of the Office of Space Science and
Applications. The second includes programs that make possible the utilization of proven
technologies and methodologies to other government agencies and industries for use in ongoing
programs. These efforts are conducted by the Division of Technology Utilization in the Office
of External Relations. The following describes the marine pollution-related activities
conducted by NASA.

o Ocean Productivity Program ($0.5 million) -- Conducts research to improve the
understanding of global oceanic primary productivity and phytoplankton distribution,
reasons for observed spatial and temporal variability, how these distributions are
influenced by ocean physics and circulation, and the impacts on living marine
resources and global carbon and nitrogen cycles.

National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) funded $0.2 million for marine pollution- related
research, development, and monitoring during FY 1988. The NSF has the mission to support
scientific research to maintain and increase the Nation's ability to advance in scientific and
technological areas. The NSF does not itself conduct research but provides funding for
scientists in the public sector, mostly in academic institutions.

The Division of Ocean Sciences is the principal administrative unit within NSF that
supports research relevant to marine pollution. Most of this research can be categorized as
basic research, since it is not narrowly focused by mandates or policy. However, many of the
findings from NSF-supported basic research make a contribution to other applied studies of
marine pollution problems.

111. GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program are discussed in this chapter.
These goals are designed to address the major polluting activities and pollutants of concern in
the marine environment. The six goals of the National Program are:

Goal 1: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects of Toxic Materials Entering the Marine
Environment as a,Result of Human Activities

Goal 2: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects of Nutrients Entering the Marine
Environment as a Result of Human Activities

Goal 3: Understand the Sources, Fates, and Effects on Marine Organisms of Biological Agents
that are Introduced or Influenced by Human Activities

Goal 4: Understand the Effects of Losing or Modifying Marine Habitats as a Result of Human
Activities

Goal 5: Document the Trends in the Status of Marine Ecosystems

Goal 6: Understand the Implications of Marine Pollution to Human Health

For each goal of the National Program, this chapter presents a discussion of the goal
definition, Federal role in addressing the goal, management questions and information needs
related to the goal, and conclusions and recommendations. Background information is
presented under the goal definition discussion explaining what the problem is, why it is a
problem, and where it is a problem. The legislation that mandates the Federal Government to
address the goal and the Federal programs designed to study the problem are discussed in the
Federal Role section. Under the management questions and information needs is a discussion
of the rationale for addressing the management questions, the past and ongoing Federal
activities that address the related information needs, and research and information gaps
related to the information needs. Recommendations for future research, development, and
monitoring activities related to each information need are. presented in italic print.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

GOAL 1: UNDERSTAND THE SOURCES, FATES, AND EFFECTS OF TOXIC
MATERIALS ENTERING THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT AS A
RESULT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES

Goal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Federal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Sources and Loading Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Transport and Bioavailability . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Sources and Loading Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Transport and Bioavailability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Nearshore and offshore areas of the marine environment in the United States have been
degraded due to the input of toxic materials associated with human activities. Such inputs
have resulted in the loss of important commercial and recreational fisheries due to mortality
and a variety of sublethal effects. Toxic contamination of fishery resources has led to the
closure of fisheries in several nearshore areas of the United States, including the closure of
the striped bass fisheries in New York and Rhode Island and the closure of New Bedford
Harbor to finfishing and shellfishing. For these reasons, understanding the sources, fates, and
effects of toxic materials entering the marine environment as a result of human activities is
one of the six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program.

Toxic Materials

Goal Definition

Discharges and nonpoint source inputs of toxic materials into marine waters have resulted
in elevated concentrations of these contaminants in the water column, sediments, and living
marine resources in all regions of the country. This has raised concern as to the potential
impacts of toxic materials to marine ecosystems and human health. Of particular concern are
coastal and estuarine areas which serve as spawning and nursery grounds for many important
commercial and recreational finfish and shellfish species. These are also the areas where the
majority of pipeline discharges of wastes occur and which eventually receive toxic materials
from nonpoint and upstream sources. For purposes of this chapter, toxics, toxicant, toxic
agent, and toxic compound are defined according to Rand and Petrocelli (1984) as "...material
capable of producing an adverse response (effect) in a biological system, seriously injuring
structure or function or producing death." Toxicity must be expressed in terms of
concentration and duration of exposure (where possible) and in relation to a specific system in
order to be meaningful to resource managers and others. Pathogens have been excluded from
this discussion, but are addressed in another section of this Plan.

A variety of groups and agencies have identified individual chemicals or groups of
compounds as potential problems when present in the marine environment. Of these
compounds, some may be highly toxic while others, perhaps not quite so toxic, may still
represent a high research priority if major information gaps exist with respect to their
sources, fates, and effects. Table 3 is a list of pollutants that are known to have an impact
on marine environments and that may require additional research. Compounds are presented
by groups in the table since there is considerable overlap within each group in aspects of the
sources, fates, and effects and, in several instances, their physical/chemical behaviors.

Toxic materials enter the marine environment directly by the intentional or unintentional
release of wastes, either through dumping or pipeline discharges, and from nonpoint sources,
such as rural and urban runoff and atmospheric deposition. Industrial and municipal plant
discharges and nonpoint runoff into rivers that subsequently empty into estuaries and coastal
waters can also contribute significantly to the pollution problems of these areas. Nationally,
the largest quantities of toxic materials enter the marine environment from municipal and
industrial pipeline discharges. Industrial discharges are the primary source of many organic
chemicals and some metals (OTA, 1987); however, many other types of toxic materials are
introduced from municipal point sources and nonpoint sources. The quantities of toxic
materials in municipal effluents and sludges depend primarily on the nature of any industrial
discharges to municipal treatment plants and the degree of treatment used. Rural and urban
runoff are important contributors of toxic pollutants to marine waters in all parts of the
country and often include large quantities of oil and grease, some metals, and pesticides
(including chlorinated hydrocarbons). The atmosphere also plays a major role in the transport
of some toxics into aquatic systems. Because of substantial reductions in PCB inputs from
point sources, it is now estimated that over 50% of the PCBs entering the Great Lakes come
from the atmosphere. PAHs, dioxins, other halogenated hydrocarbons, and metals such as lead,
cadmium, and mercury also reach aquatic environments through the atmosphere (GLWQB, 1987;
EPA, 1987; Crecelius, 1982; Yeats and Bewers, 1987).

The relative contribution of toxic materials to the environment from each of these
sources varies from one region of the country to the next. Local and regional contributions
from these sources are dependent on such factors as:

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Table 3. Toxic Chemicals of Concern in Marine Environments

A. Halogenated compounds (excluding pesticides)
1. Brominated dioxins
2. Dioxins
3. Hexach loro benzene
4. PCBs
5. Trichlorobenzene
6. Trichlorophenol

B. Polycyclic compounds
1. Nitrogen-containing heterocyclic compounds
2. PAHs (including benzofurans, benzopyrenes, phenanthrene)

C. Metals
1. Alkylated lead
2. Antimony
3. Arsenic
4. Cadmium
5. Copper
6. Mercury
7. Selenium
8. Tributyltin (and other organotins)

D. Pesticides
1. DDT and metabolites
2. Dieldrin
3. Diflubenzuron (Dimilin)
4. Methoxychlor
5. Mirex
6. Oxygen analogs of organophosphates
7.Toxaphene
8. Molting hormones

E. Others
1. Azo compounds
2. DEHP
3. Diphenyl ethers
4. Terphenyls

Toxic Materials

o Type of industrial development;

o Nature of industrial discharges to municipal sewage treatment plants;

o Relative amounts of urban and agricultural runoff,

o Extent of combined sewer overflows; and

o Climatic factors (OTA, 1987).

High concentrations of toxic material in the marine environment have been identified as
causing problems in all coastal regions of the country. Examples of the concentrations of
DDT residues, aromatic hydrocarbons, and PCBs in the sediments of selected estuaries along
the continental U.S. coast are presented in Figure 7. The nature, longevity, and severity of
the impacts resulting from inputs of toxic materials varies among water bodies and is a
reflection of the physical characteristics of the water body, the extent and types of disposal
taking place, and the types and values of marine resources present (OTA, 1987). Some
examples of severely impacted areas of the country, as evidenced by losses and changes of
biomass, compromised fish health, or elevated levels of toxic substances, include Puget Sound,
San Francisco Bay, and southern California on the west coast; portions of the Chesapeake Bay,
Boston Harbor, New York Bight, Hudson-Raritan Estuary, and Buzzards Bay on the east coast;
the Mississippi Sound and other areas in the northern Gulf of Mexico; and the Great Lakes.

Within Puget Sound, Elliott Bay has been identified as one of the most contaminated
sites. Elevated concentrations of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, PCBs, and some metals
have been found in Elliott Bay sediments. Elevated concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbon
metabolites in fish bile and PCBs in English sole livers were also found in the bay (McCain et
al., 1988). Relatively high incidences of hepatic neoplasms in English sole and fin erosion in
English sole and starry flounder have also been reported in Elliott Bay (Malins et al., 1984;
Wellings et al., 1976; Malins et al., 1982; McCain et al., 1982; 1983). In San Francisco Bay, a
variety of activities including municipal and industrial discharges@ have severely affected
conditions in the bay. Organisms in the area have been exposed to elevated concentrations of
metals, PCBs, DDT, and other toxic materials. Liver lesions (including neoplasms) have been
detected in one or more fish species from the area. Evidence of impaired reproductive success
in flatfish species related to pollutant exposure has also been obtained from studies conducted
in the bay (McCain et al., 1988). In southern California, elevated concentrations of aromatic
hydrocarbons and DDT have been detected in bottom sediments and in stomach contents and
livers (for DDT derivatives) in fish, and are suspected of being responsible for various diseases
(liver lesions and fin erosion) in fish in the area (Malins et al., 1986; 1987; 1988).

Toxic organic chemicals and metals enter the Chesapeake Bay from industrial and
municipal pipelines and agricultural and urban runoff. Contamination of sediments and
organisms by these pollutants is severe near Baltimore Harbor; other areas of the bay, such as
the Elizabeth River in Virginia, also show evidence of contamination from toxic materials
(EPA, 1983). PAHs were the most prominent organic contaminant detected in both the
Maryland and Virginia portions of the bay. Elevated concentrations of PCBs and some trace
metals have also been found in Baltimore Harbor sediments. Occurrences of lesions in fish
have been correlated with concentrations of total PAHs in sediments of the bay (CBP, 1987).
In Boston Harbor, high concentrations of environmental contaminants (aromatic hydrocarbons
and PCBs) have been found in bottom sediments and in winter flounder (Zdanowicz et al.,
1986). Murchelano and Wolke (1985) reported liver neoplasms in 8% of the winter flounder in

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Elliott Bay
Commencement Bay @4j
Columbia River Mouth.
Machias Bay
Casco Bay
Merrimack River
Salem Harbor
Boston Harbor
'Buzzard's Bay
Narrangansett Bay
West Long Island Sound
Raritan Bay
Southampton Shoall Delaware Bay
Hunter's Point Lower Chesapeake Bay
Oakland

Pamlice Sound

Santa Monica Bay
Sall Pedro Canyon 4- Charleston Harbor
SealBeach
San Diego Harborl@

St. John's River

AROMATIC CHLOROBIPHENYLS
DDT RESIDUES HYDROCARBONS (PCBs)
Casco Bay M 7315
Merrimack River
Salem Harbor 10,224 10534 17,105
Boston Harbor 210 26,4
Buzzard's Bay 308
Narragansett Bay
West Long Island Sound 8431
Raritan Bay N 31 5011 444
Delaware Bay
Lower Chesapeake Bay
Pamlico Sound
Charleston Harbor
St. John's River
Apalachicola Bay
Mobile Bay
Mississippi River Delta
San Diego Harbor =0422
SealBeach 027
San Pedro Canyon 621
Santa Monica Bay
Hunter's Point
Oakland
Southampton Shoal
Columbia River Mouth
Commencement Bay
Elliott Bay 330
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 10 1P0 1?0, 70, 1100. 0 100 200 300
00 00 00 00 0
(ng/g (ppb) - dry weight) (ng/g (ppb) - dry weight) (ng/g (ppb) - dry weight)

Figure 7. Concentrations of Toxic Materials in Estuarine Sediments (NOAA, 1984)

Toxic Materials

the area. A variety of chemical pollutants, including mercury, cadmium, PCBs, DDT and its
metabolites, and petroleum hydrocarbons, has been found in elevated concentration in
organisms, sediments, and waters of the New York Bight. High incidences of fin erosion, shell
disease, and black gill disease have also been reported in fish and shellfish from the area
(Murchelano, 1982). The Hudson-Raritan Estuary has been subject to serious industrial
pollution problems during the past 100 years that have contributed to reduced diversity and
abundance of living marine resources in the area. In addition, several commercially and
recreationally important fisheries in the estuary have been closed due to chemical
contamination of fish tissues (e.g., PCB and dioxin contamination) (Panel on Water Quality of
the Hudson-Raritan Estuary, 1987). The New Bedford area of Buzzards Bay has been
contaminated by a number of toxic chemicals, including PCBs, which has resulted in a high
incidence of disease in lobsters and the closure of more than 18,000 acres of its coastal
waters to fishing (EPA, 1986).

In the Mississippi Sound of the Gulf of Mexico, high levels of metals and organic
chemicals have been found in the Pascagoula River and Biloxi Bay. Levels of chlorinated
hydrocarbons have been identified as an especially significant problem in the area. Along
other areas of the northern Gulf of Mexico coast, chlorinated hydrocarbons and other
chemicals are introduced from the Mississippi and other rivers draining into the Gulf and from
discharges associated primarily with refineries and the petrochemical industry. Dredging and
disposal of contaminated sediments may release certain chemical constituents into the water
column under certain conditions. The impacts of these discharges are usually localized but
can be serious in highly developed areas such as Galveston Bay (Overstreet, 1987; King and
Cromartie, 1986).

In the Great Lakes, persistent -toxic substances have been identified as one of the major
environmental issues confronting the region (QLWQB, 1987). Toxic pollutants of primary
concern in one or more of the lakes include PCBs1 DDT and metabolites, mirex, other organic
chemicals, and some metals such as mercury and alkylated lead. Elevated concentrations of
these contaminants have been found in the water, sediments, fish, and waterfowl.

Determining whether a toxic contaminant causes an adverse effect on living marine
resources depends on the interaction of many chemical and biological factors, including
bioavailability, concentration, length of exposure, and stage in the organism's life cycle.
Determining the cause and effect relationships in marine biota can be difficult because
changes can result not only from exposure to toxic materials, but also from natural
perturbations, fishing, and other human-induced activities (OTA, 1987). Even when the
presence of a toxic material shows evidence of a correlation with an impact, the ultimate
source of the material may be unclear, and impacts may not be observed for years after
exposure.

Impacts resulting from exposure to toxic materials have been documented in seabirds,
marine mammals, and marine finfish and shellfish. Potential sublethal impacts of toxic
materials on birds and marine mammals include indirect effects, such as altered habitats or
food supplies, and direct effects from the ingestion of highly contaminated food, which has
been reported to cause reproductive impairment in waterfowl and sea lions (OTA, 1987). If
some toxic chemicals are present in sufficient concentrations, they can kill finfish and
shellfish. One suspected cause of mortality in these instances is the crippling of the
organism's nervous system. Sublethal impacts on finfish and shellfish include morphological,
behavioral, physiological, and biochemical changes, and diseases. Fish exposed to elevated
concentrations of some toxic materials have been shown to eat fewer or different organisms,

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

.be less active, and grow more slowly (OTA, 1987). A variety of behavioral changes, such as
modifications of feeding behavior, burrowing activity, and tail flipping, have been reported as
responses to toxics by the lobster Homarus americanus (Atema and Stein, 1974; Atema et al.,
1979). Exposure to toxic chemicals has also been correlated with physiological impairment,
immune deficiency, fin erosion, cataracts, ulcers, shell disease or erosion, tumors, internal
lesions, and skeletal abnormalities. Finfish and shellfish species may also be less resistant to
certain infections or suffer impaired reproduction. Some of these effects may eventually
result in the organism's death (OTA, 1987). A summary of possible effects in the life cycle of
a single species is shown for the winter flounder in Figure 8.

GENETIC ABNORMALITIES
AND DEATH OF EARLY EMBRYOS

ABNORMALITIES (FIN ROT,
SKELETAL ABNORMALITIES,
TUMORS) AND GROWTH
RETARDATION IN JUVENILES

ABNORMALITIES AND
REPRODUCTIVE FAILURE
IN ADULTS

DEATH OR ABNORMAL
DEVELOPMENT OF
LARVAE

Figure 8. Some Possible Effects of Contaminants on Life Cycle Stages of the Winter
Flounder (from Sindermann et al., 1980).

Probably the most important sublethal changes that result from exposure to toxicants are
those that relate to an organism's growth and survival, thus ifs potential ability to contribute
to the population gene pool (Capuzzo and Kester, 1987). These authors suggest that
particularly sensitive responses that may cause population effects include biochemical responses
that relate to energy metabolism and cell membrane function and those physiological responses
that influence energy available for growth.

Toxic Materials

Federal and state pollution control programs have resulted in reductions of some
pollutants in'industrial and municipal discharges, and in many regions of the country the
situation for some toxic contaminants 1as improved. However, due, to the rapid urban and
industrial growth that is occurring' in many coastal areas of the country, the number of
municipal and industrial dischargers is likely to increase. 'In addition, although direct
discharges of some wastes through- ]pipelines and dumping'are coming under increased control,
nonpoint sources of toxic chemicals through runoff 'and - atmospheric deposition rem' ain as
serious problems.

Federal Role

This section discusses the Federal legislation, regulations, and programs that address the
issue of sources, fates, and effects of toxic substances in the marine environment. Additional
discussions of Federal programs. related to specific information needs are presented in the
management questions section," whi ch follows this review of the Federal role. More detailed
information on the Federal programs and projects that address the issue of toxic chemicals in
the marine environment can be fou-nd.in the National Marine Pollution Program, Summary of
Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 1 987)@

Federal Legislation and Regulations

A number of Federal statutes address the problem of toxics in the marine environment.
Those that are most relevant include the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Water
Quality Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, and the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act. These laws and their ensuing regulations are primarily directed towards
prevention and control of toxics, resource management, and research and monitoring activities.
Assignment of specific responsibilities to the various agencies within the Federal Government
is expressed in each piece of legislation and is dependent upon the stated mission of the
particular agency.

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA),
establishes provisions for prevention and control of pollutants as well as for research and
monitoring of toxics in the marine: environment. The EPA is authorized to develop regulations
designating which compounds are hazardous when discharged into waters and to issue permits
for the discharge of municipal and industrial wastes when specified criteria are met. In
addition, EPA is directed to set up a monitoring program to determine harmful effects of
marine pollutants, and to establish field laboratories for the purpose of conducting research
into the prevention, reduction, and elimination, of pollution.

The Water Quality Act of 1986 amends the CWA and builds upon its established
framework of compliance controls and research and monitoring programs. It establishes special
treatment requirements for publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and discontinues the
permitting of discharges into the New York Bight Apex. The EPA is directed to set up
research and monitoring stations, including a monitoring station off the California coast,
designed to study the effects of sewage sludge on the marine environment. The CWA
amendments also allow for the continuance of the Chesapeake Bay Program in order to
determine the environmental quality of the bay, coordinate "efforts to improve water quality,
and to determine the impact of natural and manmade environmental changes on the resources

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

of the bay. An estuarine management program is to be established for the purpose of
developing comprehensive conservation and management plans which recommend priority
corrective actions and compliance schedules addressing point and nonpoint sources of pollution.

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) authorizes the Federal Government to make
grants to states for assistance in the development of a management program for water
resources, as well as for the acquisition and development of estuarine sanctuaries. The CZMA
also entrusts the Federal Government with establishing policy regarding the coastal zone.

The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act includes provisions for site
designations, permit issuance, and research and monitoring. The Act provides for the
initiation of a monitoring program to assess the effects of dumping in ocean and coastal
waters and mandates a research program investigating the long-range effects of pollution on
the ocean ecosystem.

Several other Federal statutes contain provisions relating to toxics in the marine
environment. The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act calls for investigations into the impact
of domestic sewage sludge and other wastes on wildlife, including a determination of water
quality standards for the maintenance of wildlife and an investigation into methods for
pollution abatement. The Fishery Conservation and Management Act requires a comprehensive
fishery research program, including an analysis of the impact of pollution on fish, wetlands,
and estuarine degradation.

Federal Programs

A number of Federal agencies have missions that include understanding the sources,
fates, and effects of toxic materials entering the marine environment as a result of human
activities. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under the U.S.
Department of Commerce, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) share the primary
responsibility for monitoring and controlling toxics and the marine environment. Other
Federal agencies with programs directed toward the abatement of toxic materials include the
U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department
of Agriculture, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and National Science
Foundation.

NOAA provides a focus to address the problems of the oceans and atmosphere in a
unified manner. An important part of its mission is related to marine pollution and a balanced
management of marine resources. Specifically, NOAA is charged with establishing a
comprehensive ocean pollution research, development, and monitoring program and with
ensuring that the results are disseminated in a timely manner and in a useful form to. the
Federal Government. NOAA also directs efforts toward the research of long-range effects of
pollution. Its various program functions include living marine resources management and
protection, which take into consideration the environmental impacts of resources and
development activities and existing and potential ocean pollution conditions of living resources.
NOAA also cooperates with other agencies such as EPA and FDA to achieve mission-related
goals.

Toxic Materials

The EPA conducts a number of ocean pollution and Great Lakes research activities that
include marine disposal research, energy-related research, and water quality research. Ocean
pollution research is conducted at EPA labs at four locations across the country (Narragansett,
Newport, Gulf Breeze, and Grosse Isle) and aboard two research vessels (Peter Anderson and
Roger Simons). The EPA is responsible for regulating waste disposal activities including
sewage sludge and industrial wastes, discharges through ocean outfalls, and ocean incineration.
The EPA's water quality research establishes limits on specific substances found in the marine
environment. Research is carried out on priority pollutants, toxic substances, and pesticides.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services conducts regulatory and research activities to assure that seafoods are safe for
human consumption. The FDA and NOAA conduct considerable joint research under a
Research Memorandum of Understanding, including research on metal contamination, and the
FDA was a major participant in the recent study on PCB contamination of bluefish.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, under the U.S. Department of Defense, monitors how
the construction, operation, and maintenance of water resources projects impact on the
environment and water quality standards. The Corps specifically monitors erosion rates and
the long-term effects of dredging operations, including bioaccumulation and biomagnification.

The major research activity conducted by the U.S. Department of the Navy that relates
to toxics in the marine environment centers on the environmental and health effects of hull
antifouling systems. The Navy is currently researching the development of a system to
detoxify organotin hull coatings and paint removal debris. The research includes studies of
short- and long-term environmental effects of organotin compounds.

The Effects of Agricultural Practices Program under the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) investigates pollution problems caused by soil erosion; agricultural runoff, agricultural
waste disposal; offsite and downstream effects of sediment, nutrients, and pesticides; transport
and transformation of pollutants; and effects on organisms and ecosystems. The USDA funds
research contracts and grants through cooperation with states and universities. The
Department is currently sponsoring research investigating diurnal and seasonal patterns in
streams channelized to promote drainage to improve agricultural production. The research is
specifically looking at copper, iron, lead, and other metals that may be applicable to estuarine
pollution.

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), under the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, supports marine pollution related research,
including studies of aquatic organisms from polluted waters as early indicators of pollution and
studies using aquatic organisms as experimental models for specific diseases.

Several other agencies maintain programs that are related to toxics in the marine
environment. For example, the U.S. Department of the Interior is charged with protecting
marine organisms while developing mineral resources. The U.S. Department of Transportation
through the U.S. Coast Guard focuses on reducing the potential for pollution and ensures that
effective countermeasures and cleanup operations are conducted for accidental discharges.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Management Ouestions and Information Needs

Toxicants introduced into the marine environment enter biogeochemical cycles in
operation within the environment and can adversely affect living resources. There are
linkages among sources of toxicants, their transport through the system, and their ultimate
fate to potential toxic effects within and on the system. Movement, fate, and effects of
toxicants in marine ecosystems can be complex because, as toxicants move through the
systems, they can impact the biota and adversely alter the system. Conversely, the "system"
can alter toxicants through physicochemical and biological actions and render the toxicant
more or less toxic. For example, some metals can be methylated, which results in a more
toxic form, and some organics can be dechlorinated, which results in a less toxic form.

Sources of toxic materials to marine ecosystems include rivers and streams, shoreline
erosion, point and nonpoint sources, and atmospheric deposition. We probably know the most
about materials entering from rivers and streams (through NPDES and other regulatory
mechanisms), and the least about atmospheric deposition. For this reason, atmospheric sources
are discussed in some detail under Management Question 1.

The transport and fate of toxicants in marine ecosystems are dependent upon factors
including biological, chemical, and physical characteristics of the toxicant and the ecosystem.
For example, a nonpolar organic toxicant may be readily adsorbed onto particulate and detrital
matter, and chelated or complexed metals may be more readily adsorbed than other metal
species. Toxicants adsorbed onto deep-layered sediments may become more available for
exchange and bioaccumulation when the sediment is resuspended by bioturbation or episodic
events such as storm surges that scour the bottom.

If one is to predict the impact of a toxicant on marine resources, it is necessary to
know as much as possible about the routes by which the toxicant moves through the system,
the rates at which it moves, the reservoirs and residence times in them, the transformations
of the toxicant, as well as the toxicity of the toxicant to the system or components of the
system. Thus, it is important to discuss the sources and loading rates of toxicants, the
mechanisms that control their transport and availability, and their effects on organisms and
populations.

The management questions and information needs discussed in this section focus on these
most important aspects of toxic substances in the marine environment. The three management
questions listed below represented management information needs related to the goal of
understanding the sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials entering the marine
environment as a result of human activities.

Management Question 1: What are the sources and loading rates of toxic contaminants in the
marine environment?

Management Question 2: What are the mechanisms that influence exposure patterns and
bioavailability of toxic contaminants in the marine environment?

Management Question 3: What are the effects of toxic contaminants on marine organisms and
populations?

This section will include a discussion of the rationale, current efforts, and additional work
associated with the information needs for'each management question.

Toxic Materials

Sources and Loading Rates

Manatzement Ouesiion 1: What are the sources and loading rates of toxic contaminants in the
marine environment?

Information Needs

Ia. What is thei relative contribution of toxic substances to the marine environment from
the atmosphere?

lb. What is the relative significance of seasonal activities and stormevents in toxic
substance loadings?

Ia. What is the relative contribution of toxic substances to the marine environment from the
atmosphere?

To develop mass budgets of toxicants entering the environment, we have become
increasingly aware of the role of the atmosphere in transport of contaminants to the marine
environment. An overall management program for toxic materials in the marine environment
must include an evaluation of this source because it can be a predominant transport
mechanism for some toxic material in some areas.

The atmosphere can be a significant source of PAHs, PCBs, some metals such as lead,
zinc, mercury, and cadmium, as well as other toxic substances in aquatic systems (EPA, 1987;
GLWQB, 1987; Crecelius, 1982). Atmospheric deposition of some metals has been estimated for
the Chesapeake Bay (Bieri et al., 1982) and Delaware Bay (Church et al., 1984). While
measured atmospheric loadings for these metals were not large compared to other sources,
they were significant, especially in remote areas away from industry and other concentrated
sources. In some coastal areas, such as the Southern California Bight, measurements show
that up to one-half of the PAHs and particulate metals entering the water came from direct
atmospheric deposition. In studies of the New York Bight, mussels and polychaetes appeared
to contain a hydrocarbon distribution much more indicative of spilled petroleum origin, while
the sediment contained a mixture of petroleum and pyrogenic source PAHs which may have
been transported via the atmosphere (Wakeharn and Farrington, 1980; NRC, 1985). In the
Great Lakes, it has been estimated that greater than 50% of the loading of PCBs to the lakes
occurs through the atmosphere (GLWQB, 1987). The atmosphere may also be a significant
source of other toxic materials to the. Great Lakes, such as metals (lead, mercury, cadmium,
and arsenic) and PAHs.

Atmospheric inputs of toxic chemicals are even more significant in open ocean areas that
are far away from point source discharges and runoff to coastal waters. The significance of
atmospheric inputs of lead to the surface waters of the oceans is shown in profiles for lead in
the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (Schaule and Patterson, 1983). A larger industrial lead input
via the atmosphere results in surface water lead values in the Atlantic that are two to three
times higher than in the Pacific. Crecelius (1982) estimated that 96% of the lead in the
surface 0-100 meters of the open ocean area is transported via the atmosphere, whereas only
about 10% of the chromium and nickel delivered to the oceans are carried by the atmosphere.
Yeats and Bewers (1987) estimate that one-third of dissolved cadmium delivered to the oceans
is transported via the atmosphere; the remaining two-thirds is carried by rivers. Overall,

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

these authors estimate that about 10% of the total cadmium transport to the oceans
(particulate plus dissolved) is via the atmosphere; however, they state that the "...literature is
replete with measurements of cadmium in atmospheric precipitation."

Current Federal activities addressing the issue of atmospheric deposition of toxic
substances to the marine environment are being conducted by EPA, NOAA, and the National
Science Foundation (NSF). The EPA Great Lakes Research Office developed GLAD (Great
Lakes Atmospheric Deposition Network), a program to determine the loading of metals and
nutrients from the atmosphere to the Great Lakes. Samples were also analyzed for trace
organics such as PAHs, halogenated hydrocarbons, and organophosphate pesticides. Included in
the program is the development of a sampler capable of collecting atmospheric precipitation
samples throughout the year. NOAA has supported two programs evaluating atmospheric
transport in Wisconsin to determine the volatilization of PAHs and halogenated hydrocarbons
to Green Bay. One program is an evaluation of the persistence of these toxics within an
aqueous system, while the other is the development of an overall fate assessment model which
includes volatilization. Another study supported by NOAA estimated the volatilities of
indosulfan, fenvalonite, and other pesticides commonly used in South Carolina. NOAA, under
the Marine Ecosystems Analysis New York Bight Project, also supported research investigating
major nonpoint source contributions, including atmospheric inputs, to the New York Bight.
The NSF funded research related to atmospheric deposition in remote areas of the Pacific
Ocean through the SEAREX (Sea-AiT Exchange) project.

Up to this point, Federal programs directly addressing atmospheric transport have focused
primarily on freshwater (Great Lakes) systems, and this work is far from complete. These
efforts should continue until sufficient data are collected and the models are fully developed
and verified. Similar programs for the marine environment are needed and should be initiated
in several major estuaries. There has yet to be a well -constrained study of the relative
amounts of some toxic contaminants, such as PAH, contributed to coastal and open ocean
waters of the United States by riverine inputs, sewage effluents, atmospheric inputs, and other
sources (Farrington, 1988). If one were to model the overall fate of toxicants in aquatic
systems,and develop appropriate abatement procedures, further information on the relative
contribution of toxics via the atmosphere and a better understanding of the processes involved
would be needed.

The collection of additional monitoring data will help quantify atmospheric inputs.
Sediment profiles on the continental shelf should be examined for the relative contributions of
atmospheric (combustion -derived) and petroleum- derived PAHs. In addition to differences in
the chemical fingerprints of the toxicants, carefully chosen transect stations will help to
discriminate sources. Direct measurements of PAHs, halogenated hydrocarbons, and cadmium,
mercury, and lead should be made in surface seawater and in air samples taken over the ocean
downwind from industrial and urban centers and at remote sites to help separate large-scale
(global or continental) contaminant Problems from local sources. Measurements of stable lead
isotopes in surface seawater should be made to help fingerprint sources. Measurements should
also be taken in the sea surface microlayer.

Toxic Materials

lb. What is the relative significance of seasonal activities and storm events in toxic
substance loading?

Agricultural applications of pesticides are practiced intensively during the spring and
summer months, coincident with the spawning and early life growth of many marine species.
A number of important resource species such as striped bass, shad, and salmon move up
estuaries to brackish and freshwater areas to spawn. The proximity of these smaller streams
to agricultural lands maximizes the exposure of adults and, more importantly, the more
sensitive eggs and larvae to pesticides in runoff. In addition, excessive runoff due to the
spring thaw tends to bring higher surficial sediment loads with adsorbed toxics from both
urban and nonurban sources into the marine environment at critical times.

Frequently, mass balance budgets are calculated on an annual basis and loading models
that predict the routes, rates, and reservoirs of chemicals in the marine environment do not
account for episodic events. Yet it is known that such events can cause great fluctuations in
the transport of water and suspended particulates and thereby alter salinity and turbidity,
factors directly and indirectly affecting marine organisms. For example, a resurgence in DDT
levels in the livers of sea trout from the Texas Gulf Coast was attributed to a storm event
that resuspended DDT-laden, sediment and other particulate matter and made the chemical more
available through the food web to the trout (Butler, - 1988). The transport of dissolved and
particulate trace metals from the Mississippi River to the Gulf of Mexico is greatly influenced
by seasonal events as well as by long-term practices (Trefry et al., 1985; 1986). Total
transport of lead and other potentially toxic metals by the Mississippi River is greatest during
the high suspended- sediment events of the spring melt. However, highest dissolved lead and
other trace metal levels are frequently observed during the low-flow, summer period. A study
was conducted of annual suspended- sediment discharges of three U.S. rivers (Juniata River at
Newport, Pennsylvania; Delaware River at Trenton, New Jersey; and Eel River at Scotia,
California) to determine the effects of large storm,events on suspended sediment loads (Meade
and Parker, 1985). Investigators demonstrated that nearly one-half of a year's sediment (and
associated contaminants) is usually discharged in 3.65 days, and nearly 90% usually is
discharged in 36.5 days.

Federal programs addressing the issue of seasonal activities and episodic events are being
conducted under NOAA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). NOAA supports a
program to evaluate pesticides in storm runoff to Lake Erie. The USDA is involved in studies
to model the fate of agricultural chemicals in freshwater and marine systems. These types of
programs could be expanded to include the Chesapeake Bay, Delaware Bay, the Hudson River
estuary, and other major estuaries that are known to provide spawning and nursery areas. A
coordinated program to evaluate loading rates and the timing of these with respect to
biological activity would provide the most valuable information.

Some gaps in our knowledge of seasonal and episodic events include lack of information
on life-histories of estuarine organisms for specific areas, knowledge of pesticide application
patterns, and the frequency and, severity of past episodic events for specific marine areas. Of
particular importance is the effectiveness of differing agricultural practices in reducing the
amounts of nutrients and toxics in runoff entering aquatic systems. A variety of approaches
could be beneficial, such as the use of riparian zones and chopping and burning for site
preparation instead of shearing and winnowing to minimize erosion. Streams can be marked
before spraying and avoided, or at least a strip on either side of each stream left unsprayed.
Wet weather can be avoided when chemicals are applied. Comparative data on the
effectiveness of these methods would be useful.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Pilot studies involving regional monitoring programs would improve our understanding of
seasonal phenomena and storms. For example, selected streams in the drainage system of a
major estuary could be monitored more frequently and the mass loading rates of organic
chemicals under normal and storm conditions compared. A subset of this study would be to
compare areas where different agricultural practices are used. The National Marine Fisheries
Service (NOAA) has reliable information on the timing and nature of spawning habits of most
resource species. Toxicity data on the chemicals could then be factored into an overall
assessment model to evaluate risk to marine species. The goal of the assessment is to
determine whether changes in application practices or the timing of application could make a
significant difference in protecting marine resources. More information on seasonal patterns
of particulate and dissolved trace metals as well as the chemical speciation of dissolved metals
as a function of salinity, organic matter, and suspended-sediment concentration would also
contribute to our understanding of this area.

Transport and Bioavailability

Management Ouestion 2: What are the mechanisms that influence exposure patterns and
bioavailability of toxic contaminants in the marine environment?

Inf ormation Needs

2a. What factors influence the transport and physical fate of toxic contaminants in the
marine environment?

2b. How do the physico-chemical forms of toxicants affect bioavailability?

2c. How do metabolic processes affect uptake and toxicity of contaminants?

2a. What factors influence the transport and t)hvsical fate of toxic contaminants in the
marine environment?

The transport and physical fate of toxic contaminants is a function of their physico-
chemical form and their particle- or biological -reactivity in seawater. Many contaminants of
biological concern, such as PAHs, PCBs, halogenated hydrocarbons, and some trace metals, are
very particulate- reactive and are frequently associated with particulate matter, The transport
of particulate-reactive contaminants within coastal areas usually coincides with sediment
transport processes.

Fine-grained particles, such as montmorillonite clays, provide effective surfaces for
adsorption of material from seawater. Most of the organic contaminants, such as PAHs, have
low solubilities in water and readily adsorb to particulate matter. However, dissolved organic
matter has been postulated to increase the solubility of PAHs in seawater (Boehm and Quinn,
1973). In addition, changes in pH and salinity have been shown to alter the adsorption and
availability of organic toxics. It is possible to predict the partitioning behavior of many
nonpolar compounds, including some PAHs, on a range of sorbants if either the compound's
water solubility or the sorbant's organic content is known (Karickhoff et al., 1979; Means et
al., 1979).

Toxic Materials

The physical fate of trace metals in seawater is directly related to their particle- or
biological- reactivity. Metals such as lead, iron, and thorium are rapidly removed from
seawater by particles (Salomons and Forstner, 1984). In contrast, the distribution of cadmium,
zinc, copper, and nickel are linked to nutrient cycles and are controlled by biological
processes (Bruland, 1980).

The transfer of toxic materials to marine biota and man and their effect on ecological
systems are often dependent on the availability and persistence of toxicants within sediments
and transport within benthic ecosystems (Capuzzo and McElroy, 1987). There are many
examples of the accumulation of contaminants from sediment. Recently, NOAA's Status and
Trends Program reported a statistically significant relationship between the DDT concentration
in Atlantic croaker livers and the concentration in sediment (NOAA, 1986). These data
demonstrate only evidence of a relationship and do not show that the concentrations in the
liver were a result of concentrations in the sediment.

Analytical tests can reveal the presence of contaminants, but these tests do not reveal
the kinetics of sorption1desorption rates that are necessary to model and predict movement.
Thus, it would be useful to understand and quantify the processes that control the routes,
rates, and reservoirs of various contaminants released into the marine environment.
Mechanisms of resuspension and deposition would need to be determined because these factors
influence availability and thus toxicity of contaminants. Knowledge of the kinetics of
sorption1desorption is basic to understanding the movement and effects of toxicants in the
marine environment.

Significant advances have been made during the last decade in studies of trace metals in
the marine environment (e.g., Bruland, 1980; Yeats and Bewers, 1987). However, we still do
not have adequate techniques to address the following: partitioning of trace metals between
dissolved and particulate forms, chemical speciation of selected trace metals in seawater, and
kinetics of regeneration of trace metals in bottom waters or release from sediments.

2b. How do the vhysico-chemical forms of toxicants affect bioavai I ability?

Toxic contaminants entering the marine environment can be adsorbed onto sediments and
particulate matter, remain in the water column or volatilize, or be accumulated by the biota.
Their fate depends to a great degree upon the physical/chemical state of the contaminant.
For example, Lee (1984) points out that the level to which a compound is accumulated by the
biota is related to the hydrophobic properties of the compound (octanol-water partition
coefficient). Most risk assessments of the impact of toxicants on marine organisms require
knowledge of the fate and bioavailability of the toxicant. Models can be developed to predict
the fate of certain toxicants, and a fundamental requirement in the development of fate
models is knowledge of the basic physical chemistry of the compounds in question, i.e.,
solubility in water; vapor pressure; and partitioning between air and water, soil and water, and
soil and runoff. Toxic chemicals are exposed to a wide range of environmental conditions
from their source to their eventual fate in the marine environment. In addition to changes
between phases, such as from soil to air to water to sediment, there are wide variations in
parameters such as temperature, pH, salinity, and turbidity. These factors affect both the
partition coefficient and the bioavailability of toxic material.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Numerous laboratory studies have shown that aquatic organisms can accumulate PAHs,
PCBs, and halogenated hydrocarbons from the water column, sediments, and their diets (e.g.,
Neff, 1979). However, it is also clear from these studies that the bioavailability of toxic
material from different sources is not equivalent. It is not sufficient to know the quantity of
a contaminant in the marine environment. Proper management also requires an understanding
of the form of the chemical and whether it is bioavailable.

Accumulation of dissolved PAHs has been well documented in many species, with
bioconcentration factors ranging up to 10,000. However, the relative availability of PAHs from
the various sources is not clear. It may be that PAHs sorbed to sediments are only available
to organisms after undergoing desorption into the dissolved phase (McElroy et al., 1986).
However, there will always be a dynamic exchange between PAHs in the solid and dissolved
phase. Altering the concentration in either phase (e.g., by uptake) will initiate redistribution
of the PAHs between phases. The presence of organic matter in the water often presents a
third phase, colloids, whose influence is not easily measured.

The influence of colloidal organic matter in interstitial waters of natural sediments has
only recently begun to be investigated. Results of investigations on the influence of
interstitial colloids on partitioning of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), similar in many
properties to PAHs, have shown that observed distributions of most PCBs in pore waters were
consistent with a three-phase, solution-colloid 7 solid, equilibrium partitioning model (Brownawell
and Farrington, 1985; 1986).

The equilibrium concentrations of a toxicant in any two phases, soil/air, air/water,
water/sediment, sediment/interstitial water, can be expressed in terms of partition coefficients
(Leo et al., 1971; Means et al., 1979). Only a few of these partition coefficients have been
determined. Since it is virtually impossible to monitor the constantly changing concentrations
of a toxicant in various phases, partition coefficients for the appropriate phases of problem
contaminants should be determined. It should then be possible to monitor the concentration
of the chemical in a few key phases, and thus assess potential problems with bioaccumulation.

The bioavailability of trace metals is governed primarily by their chemical form. Ray and
McLeese (1987) modeled the biological cycling of cadmium by considering three reservoirs of
available cadmium: water, suspended particles (including plankton), and sediments. However,
bioavailability is clearly not related to total metal loading in any of these reservoirs. It is
generally agreed that the ionic form of cadmium in seawater is most bioavailable (Ray and
McLeese, 1987); however, we still have inadequate direct measurements on the speciation of
potentially toxic metals in seawater.

Seasonal variation is a major factor in metals concentration data. Data from
Narragansett Bay for the period 1975 to 1978 for a single station (monthly samples) showed
2- to 4-fold differences in the metals concentrations. In a review of historical metals data
for the New England region, Capuzzo and McElroy (1987) concluded that no long-term
temporal trends were definable from the combined data because of changes in methodology,
irregular sampling on both temporal and spatial scales, and analytical differences.

Certain biological compartments such as surface microlayers, sediment-water interfaces,
pore waters, and plant root- water- sediment microenvironments (i.e., roots of Thallasia
Lestudinum) can be especially important in relation to bioavailability of pollutants because it
appears that pollutants can concentrate in these compartments. There is a need to develop
new and innovative methods to measure residues of toxic contaminants in such

Toxic Materials

microenvironments, particularly at. the parts per billion (ppb) and parts per trillion (ppt)
levels. High-resolution techniques are necessary for these areas of the water column and
sediments because of the typically high concentrations of toxicants found there and their
importance to sensitive life history stages of many organisms.

Research on the physical chemistry of toxic material with respect to bioaccumulation is
in a very early stage and. is quite incomplete.. There are many toxicants about which very
little is known in this regard, and fundamental information is lacking for some of the more
common chemicals. Programs currently established to evaluate toxic materials in the marine
environment should include basic physical chemistry, especially the interaction of toxicants
with seawater and particulate organics. The use of partition coefficients to build models of
toxicant fate should be expanded and these models should address partitioning under various
environmental conditions. Because of the large number of problem contaminants, individual
compounds that are known to be primary causes of toxicity in the marine environment should
be studied first. Overall fate models should be developed with the appropriate
physicallchemical determinations made where necessary.

2c. How do metabolic processes affect ut)take and toxicity of contaminants?

Chemical compounds introduced into marine ecosystems become part of the biogeochernical
cycles in operation within the systems and can affect the biota. Recently, emphasis has been
placed on the fact that biological activity can significantly affect the structure of the
chemical compounds. Biotransformations, biologically catalyzed conversions of one chemical to
another, can play a significant role in the bioaccumulation and toxicity of chemicals, and this
transformation should be differentiated from purely physical/chemical processes (Lech and
Vodicnik, 1984). Enzymes are the biological catalyst for biotransformations, and these
transformations can make a compound more soluble, thus possibly more readily excreted by
organisms. However, metabolism by microorganisms could alter the solubility of compounds in
the environment, affecting the associations with particles, hence availability. From an
ecosystem perspective, biotransformations profoundly affect the fate and availability of
chemicals in the system. Unfortunately, the rates and products of biotransformations are
presently defined for relatively few chemicals, primarily a limited number of aromatic
hydrocarbons.

The transformation of chemicals has been studied in tissue preparations and in intact
marine organisms. Enzymes present in the tissues of most types of organisms catalyze the
transformation of organic chemicals. This transformation is often initiated by oxidative
enzymes, termed monoxygenases, that incorporate molecular oxygen into the compound, thereby
changing its structure and its biological activity. This process is central to the accumulation
and the toxicity of organic toxicants.

Two important groups of monoxygenases are the flavoprotein monoxygenases and the
cytochrome P-450 monoxygenases. In marine systems the cytochrome P-450 system is better
known. Cytochrome P-450 is known to initiate the transformation of many aromatic
hydrocarbons, with some products that are toxic or mutagenic. Cytochrome P-450 systems
have been reviewed by James and Bend (1980), Stegeman (1981), and Stegeman and Kloepper-
Sams (1987).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Enzyme systems such as the cytochrome P-450 dependent mixed-function oxidase (MFO)
system are responsible for initiating metabolism and detoxification of many organic
contaminants including pesticides and PAHs. The system detoxifies some contaminants'
reactive toxic metabolites. The mutagenic potential of PAH is known to arise only after
metabolic activation (Sims and Grover, 1974; Jerina and Daley, 1974). Additional information
on the mechanisms of toxic action to various species is needed to evaluate the effects on
marine species and possible human health risk through consumption of contaminated species,
especially those containing mutagenic metabolites. Different groups of animals have different
capacities for metabolism of organic and metallic compounds, which can affect the
accumulation of these compounds in the organisms. Bivalves appear to have little capacity to
metabolize PAHs and, therefore, accumulate them rapidly. In one instance, when fish and
bivalves occupied the same contaminated area, concentrations of PAHs were lower in fish than
in the bivalves.

Organisms also have mechanisms for detoxifying metals. Metallothioneins are cysteine-
rich proteins that can bind metals, primarily copper, cadmium, zinc, and mercury. Exposure to
metals induces the synthesis of these proteins, which have a finite capacity for metal-binding.
When this capacity is exceeded, toxicity can result.

Pharmacokinetic models are often used as tools to study metabolic processes and how
transformed chemicals are bioaccumulated. The kinetics of uptake and release of lipophilic
organic contaminants and the relationship between body burdens and environmental
concentrations have generally been described by simple (one-compartment) pharmacokinetic
models, where partitioning between the environment and the organism is assumed to be steady
state and the organisms are considered to be a single, homogenous unit (OConnor and Pizza,
1987). The simple models generally assume that uptake is from the water only and that all
residues belong to a common pool. But residue dynamics are much more complicated than this
simple model entails, and empirical data often deviate from predicted values. Certain tissue
levels may in fact be increasing while overall body burdens are declining (O'Connor and Pizza
1987). In addition, while some studies have shown that an apparent equilibrium concentration
of a toxic material in tissues may be achieved fairly rapidly (24 to 48 hours), recent studies
show that total uptake of contaminants continues to increase over longer periods (months) of
exposure.

Bioconcentration patterns appear to be influenced by chemical properties of specific toxic
compounds. This is reflected in differing uptake potential of various tissues and varying
distributions of contaminants among different tissues (Widdows et al., 1982; Neff, 1979; Chiow,
1985; Farrington et al., 1986). These factors can result in differing rates of uptake and
depuration in various tissues within the same organism.

O'Connor and Pizza (1987) suggested that no published data support the hypothesis that
PCBs accumulated by fishes are metabolized by or eliminated from tissues with rate constants
directly comparable to values determined for the whole body compartment. Their experimental
results suggest that this is not the case. Bioconcentration in marine animals, therefore, may
best be explained through the use of multicompartment models in which distribution between
different body compartments is considered and bioconcentration is dependent on relative rates
of uptake and exchange of toxics between body compartments.

Microbial transformations can convert some toxic chemicals into even more toxic
materials or might make material that is more bioavailable less toxic. Microorganisms such as
bacteria and fungi can utilize different carbon sources and can oxidize some aromatic

Toxic Materials

hydrocarbons completely to carbon dioxide and water and utilize hydrocarbons as a source of
energy. Thus, microorganisms can transform chemical compounds found in sediment, water,
and biota. Many studies have documented this capacity to transform chemicals in the marine
environment. For example, microbial action in one of three types of sediment presumably
biotransformed 100% of added trichloroethane (TCE) to cis-1,2 dichloroethane in 24 months
(Barrio-Lange et al., 1987). Reductive dechlorination of TCE occurred in another study where
residues of polychlorinated biphenyls in sediment and fish from the Hudson River and other
locations showed changes in gas chromatographic peak distribution indicative of reductive
dechlorination (Brown et al., 1987). It appears that several different populations of anaerobic
bacteria dechlorinated with their own distinctive pattern of PCB congener selectivity. The
apparent capacity of bacterial action to dechlorinate PCBs has ecological ramifications because
PCBs in sediments normally are not exposed to solar radiation, and thus are not subject to
dechlorination by photolysis, the only previously documented transformation process. Also,
bacteria can transform metal species through methylation, which often results in a more
readily available compound such as the methylations of mercury to methyl mercury. It is this
form of the metal that is especially toxic to marine life as well as a hazard to human
consumers of seafood products.

Gaps in our knowledge about the relationships between biotransformation products,
bioaccumulation, and the models to study these processes include a need for more information
on identity, distribution, and rates of formation of biotransformation reaction products
(particularly microbial transformations) as well as the toxicity of these products. To date,
most biotransformation studies have been conducted in vitro; however, these reactions may or
may not take place to the same extent in whole or intact organisms. Yet, data on identity of
metabolites in bile suggest that in vitro metabolites are also formed in vivo. Additional
research on reactive product metabolites, particularly how potential mutagen and carcinogen
products are accumulated by marine organisms would improve our understanding in this area.
This latter need could be addressed through studies to evaluate the presence of metabolites
bound to DNA andlor protein.

Also, a lack of analysis of biolransformation products in most monitoring studies can
result in erroneous conclusions. For example, residue data from a malathion (organo-
phosphate pesticide) uptake study showed that neither malathion or its oxidative product,
malaoxon, were detected, but the hydrolysis products malathion mono- and dicarboxyhic acids
did appear (Cook and Moore, 1976). Most monitoring programs would not have detected these
transformed hydrolysis products.

The use of multicompartment models for studies of transformation and bioaccumulation is
in the early stages of development. Research efforts on other organic contaminants and a
variety of commercially important species would be useful. Most of the work to date has been
based on short-term studies in which equilibria are presumed to occur within 24 to 48 hours.
New studies should include long-term evaluation of uptake and release of problem toxic
compounds to more properly reflect actual environmental exposure. Also, to assess the full
consequences of exposure of marine organisms to toxic compounds, the multicompartment model
approach should include studies on the fate of toxicants in critical tissues (Capuzzo and
Farrington, 1988).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Effects

Manamement Ouestion 3: What are the effects of toxic contaminants on marine organisms and
populations?

Information Needs

3a. What are the sublethal effects of toxic materials on marine organisms?

3b. What are the implications of toxic effects for populations of marine organisms?

3c. How do synergism, antagonism, and additivity among chemical species affect toxic
responses?

3a. What are the sublethal effects of toxic materials on marine organisms?

Resource managers need to recognize and understand the effects of contaminants on
marine resources in order to properly manage the resources. In the past, attempts to
determine acceptable levels of toxic materials in the marine environment were based mostly on
short-term (acute) lethal toxicity tests (LC50, the concentration of a toxicant that will kill
50% of test organisms within a given time, usually 96 hours). These tests of lethality still
provide important comparative information and are useful as first-level screening tests in
hierarchical testing protocol. However, those interested in managing living resources need
information on the impact of toxicants before the plants and animals of interest are killed in
order to interdict on behalf of the environment. This requires a knowledge of sublethal
effects because organisms may be impaired long before lethality levels are reached. Sublethal
responses to toxic pollution may occur at all levels of biological organization, as indicated in
Table 4 (Capuzzo and Kester, 1987), and it is important to understand the early warning signs
of stress at each level of organization before compensating or adaptive mechanisms fail
(Capuzzo, 1981).

Table 4. Sublethal Responses to Toxic Pollution at Various Biological Levels of Organization
(Capuzzo and Kester, 1987)

Subcellular Cellular/Tissue Organismic Population Community

Cytochemical and Cellular Physiological Changes in Changes in
Biochemical and Tissue and Behavioral Population Community
Responses Responses Responses Structure and Structure and
Function Function

Lysosomal latency Gametogenic cycle Respiration Biomass Biomass
Enzyme activity Nutrient storage Feeding Productivity Species abundance
Maximum metabolic flux Deformity Excretion Age and size structure Species distribution
Energy charge Neoplasms and tumors Growth Mortality Species diversity
Amino acid labels Fecundity Trophic interactions
Blood chemistry Reproductive effort Energy flow
Chromosomal abnormalities Larval viability Spatial variability
Metallothioneins Swimming Temporal variability
Mixed function oxygenases

Toxic Materials

Various tests designed to measure sublethal effects at the different biological levels of
organization are summarized by Phelps et al. (1987) and include tests to measure the adenylate
energy charge (AEC) in mussels as an indication of the amount of energy available from the
adenylate pool; sister chromatid exchange (SCE) in polychaete worms as a measure of the
interchange of DNA replication products between the arms of a chromosome; gill respirometry
to evaluate the rate of change in the condition of fish and bivalves; "scope - for- growth," a
physiological index of the amount of energy an organism has available for growth; and various
tests for survival, growth, and fecundity.

Future biomonitoring for responses to toxic materials at the population and community
levels will require some new techniques which allow measurements of effects in several
phylogenetic groups. These new techniques should include tools to allow for unambiguous
identification of effects that cannot be the result of fluctuations in environmental variables.
Among these responses are proposed studies of the induction and fundamental biochemistry of
metal-binding proteins, including metallothioneins (Jenkins and Sanders, 1986), the use of
invertebrate bioindicator species to study these proteins, indicators and activation potential of
P-450 enzyme complexes, as well as adaptation and validations of short-term genotoxicity tests
in fish (Means, 1988).

Sublethal effects of toxicants on bottom-dwelling organisms are of special interest
because sediments often act as reservoirs for many toxicants. Recent work at EPA research
laboratories in Newport, Oregon, and Narragansett, Rhode Island, has resulted in the
development of a sediment bioassay using the benthic amphipods, Rhexopynius and Ampelisca.
These tests are 10 days in duration and are more realistic since the animals are placed in
containers with sediment -- either natural sediment or sediment from contaminated areas. The
animals burrow into the sediment as they do in the natural situation with all the normal
interactions between sediment/water/interstitial water operational. The critical value is the
LC50, but it is also possible to observe sublethal behavioral effects such as the absence of
burrowing activity. Tests such as the sediment toxicity tests are valuable since the duration
of the test is longer (10 days vs. the typical 96 hours) and the exposure scenario is more
natural. The development of even longer term tests with sublethal effects such as the EC50
(effective concentration) is needed. The EC50 is the concentration of a toxicant required to
reduce the test criteria (e.g., shell growth, photosynthesis, body length) by 50%.

Specific opportunities for productive research include development and validation of
sublethal toxicity testing procedures with more chemicals and test organisms. Additional
information on the concentrations of toxicants that managers must become concerned about
and monitoring tools to recognize these conditions would also be useful.

3b. What are the imolications of toxic effects for pormlations of marine orpanisms?

The range of responses of individual organisms to toxic materials seen in laboratory
experiments or field populations is extensive. While further documentation and understanding
of sublethal effects would be useful, the most important information gap which relates to all
assessment problems is the relationship between effects of toxic materials on individuals (in
the laboratory or natural populations) and the integrity of populations. This is because it is
often difficult to extrapolate from impacts on a few test animals to the viability of an entire
population in the field.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The determination of lethal concentrations in laboratory tests can be accomplished with
good precision. A wide variety of tests exist and many have been standardized for
management purposes. It is not unreasonable to assume that organisms exposed to equivalent
concentrations in the natural environment (to those that produced lethality in the laboratory)
will not survive, providing the overall exposure and other conditions are similar. Situations
like this may occur in the case of a spill of a toxic chemical.

Populations chronically exposed to toxicants may evolve increased tolerance to the
toxicants. This can be a subtle way of detecting contaminants that are stressing the
organisms (Luoma, 1977). The increased tolerance may be present only at certain life history
stages, and may be accompanied by reduced fitness of the organisms in other ways. For
example, mummichogs (Fundulus heteroclitus) from the highly contaminated Newark Bay estuary
have developed increased tolerance to methylmercury, but only during embryonic stages (Weis,
et al., 1981a; 1987). This adaptation of the embryo is accompanied by reduced salinity
tolerance of eggs, decreased growth, earlier sexual maturity, and decreased longevity of adults
as compared to reference populations (Toppin et al., 1987). Thus, an intensive study of the
biology of a population may be needed to learn the subtle and long-term impacts of toxicants.

Effects such as tumors and other histopathological disorders have been found in demersal
fish from a variety of estuaries including Boston Harbor, Massachusetts, the Hudson River
Estuary, New York, Southern California, and Puget Sound, Washington. In all cases, there is a
variety of pollutants in the system and identification of the cause(s) of the sublethal effects
seen is difficult. Some of these same abnormalities have been reproduced in the laboratory
with exposure to specific chemicals (e.g., PAHs) found in the contaminated areas. For
example, Collier et al. (1986) showed a potential for reproductive toxicity in benthic fish after
exposure to organic extracts of contaminated sediment. The contaminated marine sediment
contained aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbons.

Particularly sensitive responses that may show a relationship with population effects
include biochemical responses that relate either to energy metabolism and membrane function
or to detoxication (such as induction of mixed-function oxygenase activity), and physiological
responses such as scope - for- growth or hormonal changes that influence the energy available
for growth and reproduction or other aspects of reproductive and developmental processes.
These indexes can be integrated by the functional relationship of metabolic function and
energy turnover for growth and reproduction. No single index can provide the predictive
capability to evaluate population changes, and future studies should be directed at defining the
relationship of multiple responses (Capuzzo and Kester, 1987).

Recruitment problems that affect the stability of adult populations are complex and far
from resolved. Some species produce eggs and larvae in very large numbers, which are
dispersed widely (e.g., bivalves such as mussels). In some cases, recruitment to areas where
adults are living may actually come from populations in other areas; in these cases it is .
difficult to determine the effects of a loss of a percentage of the adults (or even a reduction
in the reproductive potential) on the survival of the population as a whole. A better approach
might be to monitor certain key species whose reproductive scope is more limited. Many
crustacean species such as arnphipods produce a limited number of young which are kept in
brood pouches. The dispersal process is also limited in many cases since the brooded larvae
settle fairly quickly after release. A sublethal response of some of these species is the
premature release of young when exposed to toxics chemicals. Some benthic amphipod species
are very important in the food chain; they are major components of the diet of demersal fish
such as cod and haddock.

Toxic Materials

One possible approach to this information need is the use of mesocosm experiments such
as those conducted at facilities at Narragansett, Rhode Island. Very large flow-through tanks
contain communities similar to those in the adjacent water of Narragansett Bay. These
facilities have been used to test the effects of a variety of toxicants such as petroleum
hydrocarbons and PCBs on communities (Gearing et al., 1979; Wade and Quinn, 1980). One
experiment showed that the addition of number 2 fuel oil over many months resulted in uptake
by species and major changes in the composition of the benthos. It should be possible to
combine results of contaminant exposure to individuals in the laboratory with observed effects
in mesocosm experiments and produce estimates of the types of sublethal effects (and levels of
exposure) that will affect the stability of populations in model communities.

To determine the implications of toxic effects on populations of marine organisms,
research should be conducted to relate contaminant content in sediments, interstitial waters,
and biota to changes in benthic biomass, benthic community structure, and recruitment of
benthic populations (Capuzzo and Kesler, 1987). Demersal fish and shellfish populations with
limited or no migratory behavior should be used as models. Concentrations of contaminants in
the sediments and interstitial waters should be investigated in relationship to contaminant
content of tissues, activity of detoxification enzymes, seasonal alterations in energy reserves,
recruitment of juvenile stages, reproductive condition, and the incidence of disease and
histopathological conditions (Capuzzo and Kesler, 1987).

3c. How do synergism, antagonism, and additiv ity among chemical soecies affect toxic
responses?

Because of the proximity to urban and industrial centers, contaminated estuaries almost
always contain a variety of toxic contaminants, and interactions among these compounds may
occur. Synergism occurs when the toxicity of two or more compounds in combination is
greater than the sum of their individual toxicities. Antagonism occurs when the presence of
two or more compounds together reduces their overall toxicity. Additivity occurs when a
mixture of chemicals is approximately equivalent to that expected from a summation of known
toxicities of individual chemicals (an algebraic summation of effects) (Rand and Petrocelli,
1984). There has been little research on these types of interactions for many of the
compounds of concern, but there are a few cases where each process has been demonstrated.

The presence of other organic contaminants has been found to affect bioaccumulation of
individual PAHs. Fortner and Sick (1985), in an investigation of accumulation of naphthalene,
a PCB mixture, and benzo(a)pyrene by oysters found several instances where multiple
components had antagonistic effects on accumulation. Stein et al. (1984) exposed English sole
to sediments labelled with 3H-benzo(a)pyrene and IC-Aroclor 1254, both singly and together,
and found that accumulation of benzo(a)pyrene was enhanced when the fish were exposed to
both compounds. Parrish et al. (In press) found various ingredients in drilling fluids, including
lead and a biocide, to be additive in their toxicity to mysids.

Methylmercury and cadmium both retard limb regeneration and ecdysis in fiddler crabs,
and when crabs in 30 ppt salinity seawater are exposed to a mixture of both metals, an
additive interaction occurs in that the toxic effect of both is greater than each singly. When
the crabs are subjected to reduced salinity (15 ppt), the effects of cadmium toxicity (singly)
are enhanced. However, when methylmercury is added to the cadmium solution at 15 ppt
salinity, the effects of the cadmium are somewhat reduced, indicating an antagonistic
interaction of the two metals (Weis, 1978). Thus, environmental factors such as salinity,

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

temperature, and pH must be considered with synergism, additivity, and antagonism of
chemicals of concern. Indeed, when congenital abnormalities produced in embryos of Fundulus
heteroclitus by methylmercury were investigated in relation to possible interactions with
salinity, temperature, cadmium, and zinc, it was found that certain anomalies were reduced
when cadmium and zinc were present, but reductions in salinity and temperature increased the
teratogenecity of the methylmercury (Weis et al., 1981b).

The Coastal and Estuarine Assessment Program and the National Fishery Ecology Program
(NOAA) have supported studies in estuarine areas that are contaminated with a variety of
pollutants. Included are New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts; Long Island Sound; San Francisco
Bay; and Puget Sound. Studies have involved the effects of toxic compounds on incidence of
neoplasia in clams, oysters, and muscles; reproductive success in flounder; reproduction,
growth, and survival in lobsters; and the relationship between sediment- associated chemicals
and liver neoplasms in English sole and winter flounder. Some of the recent data on
synergism and antagonism came from these studies.

In general, past studies have focused on a few compounds presumed to be the major
cause of toxicity or sublethal effects seen in their respective environments. These programs
should continue to identify the relative contribution of the major contaminants to ecological
stress. Toxicity reduction evaluation methods can be used to determine the physicallchemical
nature of causative toxicants. By repeating a battery of tests, it is possible to isolate the
problem chemicals. Confirmation tests can then be conducted with individual and combinations
of toxic substances to identify any synergistic, antagonistic, or additive effects. Resulting
data from these laboratory studies can then be related to conditions in the area under study,
and the information used to direct management practices for toxic material inputs. Some
effluents are so complex that the best approach is to study the toxicity of the whole effluent
rather than to attempt to learn the role of each of perhaps hundreds of different chemicals
and their interactions in the mixture.

It is important to identify interactive effects (i.e., synergism, additivity, and antagonism)
to be able to eventually predict these responses for important classes of marine pollutants.
But interactive effect is a complex question, considering the vast numbers of pollutants and
environmental factors to be considered. Much research needs to be accomplished before
combined toxicities can be predicted based on empirical information.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Discharges and nonpoint source inputs of toxic materials in the coastal environment have
contributed to the deterioration of some of these areas, and exposure to these materials has
resulted in adverse effects on living marine resources. Although point source discharges of
many toxic materials are coming under increased regulatory control, nonpoint sources and
atmospheric inputs remain as serious problems. The Federal Government has supported a great
deal of research and monitoring concerning the sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials
in the marine environment; however, many unanswered questions remain which will require
continued Federal support to address. The following conclusions relating to the current state
of knowledge concerning sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials in the marine
environment have been reached based on the discussion of management questions and the more
detailed information needs presented in the previous section.

Toxic Materials

o In most coastal regions of the country, we do not know the relative contribution of
atmospheric inputs and episodic events to chemical contaminant loadings in these
areas.

o There is a lack of understanding concerning the processes that control the routes,
rates, and reservoirs of various contaminants released into the marine environment.

o For many toxic substances, very little is known concerning their physical chemistry
and its effect on bioaccumulation.

o Current understanding of sublethal effects of toxic chemicals is limited, especially
with regard to the relationship between effects on individuals and the integrity of
populations of living marine resources.

o There is a general lack of understanding of the interactive effects (synergism,
addivity, and antagonism) for many important classes of marine pollutants.

Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made to improve our
understanding of the sources, fates, and effects of toxic materials in the marine environment.

Sources and Loading Rates

The following information is needed to determine the relative significance of atmospheric
inputs and episodic events to the chemical contamination of marine environments.

Atmospheric Inputs. Federal efforts directly related to determining the level of atmospheric
inputs of toxic contaminants in the aquatic environment have focused primarily on the Great
Lakes region. These efforts should continue, and similar monitoring activities should be
conducted in several major estuarine areas of the country where atmospheric inputs are
suspected to be significant.

Evisodic Events. Efforts to evaluate both the loading rates of toxic chemicals due to storm
events and the importance of timing of these events with respect to effects on biological
activity would provide useful information in this area. This effort would involve more
frequent monitoring of selected streams in the drainage system of major estuaries. In
addition, more information concerning seasonal patterns of particulate and dissolved trace
metals and the chemical speciation of dissolved metals as a function of various hydrographic
factors, such as salinity, organic matter, and suspended-sediment concentration would improve
our understanding.

Transport and Bioavailability

The following information needs have been identified in order to determine the factors
that influence the transport and physical fate of toxic materials in the marine environment
and to determine how physico -chemical forms and metabolic processes affect the
bioavailability, uptake, and toxicity of toxic contaminants.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Transport and Physical Fate. Research to determine the mechanisms of resuspension and
deposition of sediments and associated chemical contaminants and the kinetics of
sorption/desorption would be useful. Such research would be related to trace metal
partitioning between dissolved and particulate forms, chemical speciation in seawater, and the
kinetics of regeneration in bottom waters or release from sediments.

Physico-chemical forms. Our understanding of the physical chemistry of toxic material with
respect to bioaccumulation would benefit from further studies. Programs to evaluate toxic
materials in the marine environment would include basic physical chemistry research on
interactions with seawater and particulate organics. There is a need to develop and
strengthen existing sampling and measurement techniques for toxic materials in selected
microenvironments. Partition coefficients have been determined for relatively few toxic
contaminants. The use of partition coefficients to build models of the fate of toxic material
should be expanded.

Metabolic processes. Additional studies to obtain more information on the identity,
distribution, and rates of formation of biotransformation products and how mutagen and
carcinogen products are transformed (activated/inactivated) and accumulated by marine
organisms would be of value. Multicompartment models should be developed to include more
organic contaminants and commercially important species. Studies to support model
development should include long-term evaluations of uptake and release of problem toxics and
the fate of toxics in critical tissues. Monitoring studies should also be developed to include
analysis of biotransformation products.

Effects

The following information is needed to help understand the effects of toxic materials on
marine organisms and populations.

Sublethal Effects. For a better understanding of sublethal effects, research should address the
development and validation of sublethal toxicity tests with more chemicals and test organisms.
Monitoring tools to assist in recognizing the presence and levels of toxicants and possible
sublethal effects in the field would also benefit from further studies.

Population Effects. Future research studies to evaluate population changes should focus on
defining the relationship of multiple responses to toxic contamination. For example, studies
should be conducted to determine the relationship between contaminant concentrations in the
sediment and interstitial waters and contaminant content of tissues, activity of detoxification
enzymes, seasonal alterations in energy reserves, recruitment of juvenile stages, reproductive
condition, and incidence of disease and histopathological conditions (Capuzzo and Kester,
1987).

Interactive Effects. Much research would need to be conducted before the combined toxicities
of toxic materials could be predicted. The toxicities and sublethal effects of more problem
contaminants should be determined to identify their contribution to environmental stress and
their mechanisms of impact. Tests should be conducted with individual and combinations of
toxic substances to identify synergistic-, antagonistic, or additive effects. Research should
include a determination of the influence of environmental factors, such as salinity and pH, on
synergistic, antagonistic, and additive effects.

Toxic Materials

Literature Cited

Atema, J. and L. Stein. 1974. Effect of Crude Oil on the Feeding Bechauros of the Lobster
Homanes americanus. Environ. Pollut. 6:77-86.

Atema, J., E.B. Karnofsky, and S. Oleszko-Szuts. 1979. Lobster Behavior and Chemoreception:
Sublethal Effects of No. 2 Fuel Oil, pp. 122-134. In Advances in Marine Environmental
Research (F.S. Jacoff, ed.). Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI.

Barrio-Lange, G.A., F.Z. Parsons, R.S. Nassar, and P.A. Larenzo. 1987. Biotransformation of
Trichloroeihane in a Variety of Subsurface Materials. Environ. Toxicol. Chem., 6:571-
578.

Bieri, R., 0. Bricker, R. Byrne, R. Diaz, G. Helz, J. Hill, R. Huggett, R. Kerhin, M. Nichols, E.
Reinharz, L. Schaffner, D. Wilding, and C. Strobel. 1982. Toxic Substances, pp. 263-355.
In Chesat)eak6, Bay Program Technical Studies: A Synthesis (E.G. Macalaster, D.A.
Barker, and M. Kasper, eds.). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Boehm, P.D. and J.G. Quinn. 1973. Solubilization of Hydrocarbons by Dissolved Organic
Matter in Sea Water. Geochim. Cosmochim, Acta. 37:2459.

Brown, J.F., R.E. Wagner, H. Feng, D.L. Bedard, M.J. Brennan, J.E. Carnahan, and R.J. May.
1987. Environmental Dechlorination of PCBs. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 6:579-593.

Brownawell, B.J. and J.W. Farrington. 1985. Partitioning of PCBs in marine sediments. In
Marine and Eguarine Geochemistry (A.C. Siglelo and A. Gattori, eds.). Lewis Publ., Inc.,
Chelsea, MI. 97 pp.

Brownawell, B.J. and J.W. Farrington. 1986. Biogeochemistry of PCBs in Interstitial Waters of
a Coastal Marine Sediment. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta. 50:157.

Bruland, K.W. 1980. Oceanographic Distributions of Cadmium, Zinc, Nickel, and Copper in the
North Pacific. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 47:176-198.

Butler, P.A. 1988. Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Gulf Breeze, FL. Personal Communication.

Capuzzo, J.M. 1981. Predicting Pollution Effects in the Marine Environment. Oceanus.
24(l):25-33.

Capuzzo, J.M. and J.W. Farrington. 1988. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole,
MA, and University of Massachusetts at Boston, Harbor Campus, MA. Personal
Communication.

Capuzzo, J.M. and D.R. Kester. 1987. Biological Effects of Waste Disposal: Experimental
Results and Predictive Assessments, pp. 1-15. In Biological Processes and Wastes in the
Ocean (J.M. Capuzzo and D.R. Kester, eds). Krieger Publ., Malabar, FL.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Capuzzo, J.M. and A. McElroy. 1987. Fish and Shellfish Contamination in New England
Waters: An Evaluation and Review of Available Data on the Distribution of Chemical
Contaminants. Coastal Alliance, Washington D.C. 59 pp. + Appendices.

CBP. 1987. Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. Second Annual Progress Report Under the
Chesapeake Bay Agreement. Chesapeake Bay Program, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Annapolis, MD. 32 pp.

Chiow, C.T. 1985. Partition Coefficients of Organic Compounds in Lipid-Water Systems and
Correlations with Fish Bioconcentration Factors. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19:57-62.

Church, T.M., J.M. Tramontano, R.J. Scudlark, T.D. Jickells, J.J. Tokos, Jr., A.H. Knap, and J.N.
Galloway. 1984. The Wet Deposition of Trace Metals to the Western Atlantic Ocean at
the Mid-Atlantic Coast and on Bermuda. Atmos. Environ. 18:2657-2664.

Collier, T.K., J.E. Stein, R.J. Wallace, and U. Varanasi. 1986. Xenobiotic Metabolizing
Enzymes in Spawning English Sole (Parot)hrys betulus) Exposed to Organic-Solvent
Extracts of Marine Sediments from Contaminated and Reference Areas. Comp. Biochem.
Physiol. 84C(2):291-298.

Cook, G. H. and J.C. Moore. 1976. Determination of Malathion, Malaoxon, and Mono- and
Dicarboxylic Acids of Malathion in Fish, Oyster, and Shrimp Tissue. Agric. Food Chem.
24:631-634.

Crecelius, E.A. 1982. The Significance of Atmospheric Input on Metal Concentrations in
Oceanic Surface Water and Suspended Matter. Paper presented at the NATO Adv. Res.
Inst. Symp. Trace Metals in Sea Water, Erice, Italy, 1981.

EPA. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: A Profile of Environmental Change. Region 3, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Philadelphia, PA. 200 pp.

EPA. 1986. The Buzzards Bay Project Annual Report. Region 1, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Boston, MA. 16 pp.

EPA. 1987. Perspectives on the Chesapeake Bay: Recent Advances in Estuarine Sciences.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. CBP/TRS 16/87, 106 pp.

Farrington, J.W. 1988. Environmental Sciences Program, University of Massachusetts at
Boston, Harbor Campus, MA. Personal Communication.

Farrington, J.W., S.G. Wakeham, J.B. Livramento, B.W. Tripp, and J.M. Teal. 1986. Aromatic
Hydrocarbons in New York Bight Polychaetes: UV-Fluorescence Analysis and GC/GCMS
Analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 20:69.

Fortner, A.R. and LY. Sick. 1985. Simultaneous Accumulations of Naphthalene, a PCB
Mixture, and Benzo(a)pyrene, by the Oyster, Crassostrea virginica. Bull. Environ.
Contam. Toxicol. 34:256.

Toxic Materials

Gearing, J.N., P.J. Gearing, T. Wade,@J.& Quinn, M.B. McCarthy, J.W. Farrington, and R.F. Lee.
1979. The Rates of Transport and Fates of Petroleum Hydrocarbo ns in a Controlled - . .
Marine Ecosystem and a Note on Analytical Variability, pp. 555-564. In Proceeding's 1979
Oil Soill Conference (Prevention, Behavior, Control and Cleanun). American Petroleum
Institute, Washington, D.C.

GLWQB. 1987. 1987 Report on Great Lakes Water Quality. Report to the International Joint
Commission. Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Detroit, Ml, and Windsor, Ontario.
236 pp.

James, M.D. and J.R. Bend. 1980. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Indication and
Cytochromes P-450 Dependent Mixed Function Oxidases in Marine Fish. Toxicol. At)t)l.
Pharmacol. 54:117-133.

Jenkins, K.D. and B.M. Sanders. 1986. Assessing the Biological Effects of Anthropogenic
Contaminants In Situ, pp. 867-873. In Proceedings of Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine
Technology Society, Washington, D.C.

Jerina, D.M. and J.W. Daley. 1974. Arene Oxides: A New Aspect of Drug Metabolism.
Science. 185:573-575.

Karickhoff, S.W., D.S. Brown, and T.A. Scott. 1979. Sorption of Hydrophobic Pollutants on
Natural Sediments. Water Res, 13:241.

King, K.A. and E. Cromartie. 1986. Mercury,'Cadmium, Lead, and Selenium in Three
Waterbird Species Nesting in Galveston Bay, Texas, USA. Colonial Waterbirds. 9:90-94.

Lech, J.J. and M.J. Vodicnik. 1984. Biotransformations, pp. 526-557. In Fundamentals of
Aciuatic Toxicology (G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli, eds.). Hemisphere Pub. Co.
Washington, New York, and London.

Lee, R.F. 1984. Factors Affecting Bioaccurnulation of Organic Pollutants by Marine Animals,
pp. 339-353. In Conc pts in-Marine Pollution Measurements (H.H. White, ed.). Maryland
Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Leo, A., C. Hansch, and D. Elkins. 1971. Partition Coefficients and Their Uses. Chem. Rev.
71:525.

Luoma, S.N. 1977. Detection of trace contaminant effects in aquatic ecosystems. J. Fish.
Res. Bd. Can. 34:4336-439.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, H.O. Hodgins, and S.-L. Chan. 1982.
Chemical Contaminants and Abnormalities in Fish and Invertebrates from Puget Sound.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. NOAA
Tech. Mem. OMPA-19. 168 pp.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S.-L. Chan, M.S. Myers, J.T. Landahl, P.G. Prohaska,
A.J. Friedman, L.D. Rhodes, D.G. Burrows, W.D. Gronlund, and H.O. Hodgins. 1984.
Chemical Pollutants in Sediments and Diseases in Bottom-Dwelling Fish in Puget Sound,
Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18:705-713.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Malins, D.C., S.-L. Chan, W.D. Macleod, Jr., B.B. McCain, R.C. Clark, Jr., D.W. Brown, M.S.
Myers, and M.M. Krahn. 1986. Results of the 1984-85 National Benthic Surveillance
Project: West Coast, pp. 566-671. In Oceans '86 Conference Record. The Institute of
Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Piscataway, NJ.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, M.S. Myers, M.M. Krahn, and S.-L. Chan. 1987. Toxic
Chemicals, Including Aromatic and Chlorinated Hydrocarbons and Their Derivatives, and
Liver Lesions in White Croaker (Genvomemus lineatus) from the Vicinity of Los Angeles.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 21:765-770.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, J.T. Landahl, M.S. Myers, M.M. Krahn, D.W. Brown, S.-L. Chan, and
W.T. Roubal. 1988. Neoplastic and Other Diseases in Fish in Relation to Toxic
Chemicals: An Overview, pp. 43-67. In Aguatic Toxicology. Toxic Chemicals and Acluatic
Life: Research and Management (D.C. Malins and A. Jensen, eds.). Elsevier Science
Publishers, Amsterdam.

McCain, B.B., M.S. Myers, U. Varanasi, D.W. Brown, L.D. Rhodes, W.D. Gronlund, D.G. Elliot,
W.A. Palsson, H.O. Hodgins, and D.C. Malins. 1982. Pathology of Two Species of
Flatfish from Urban Estuaries in Puget Sound. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
NOAA/EPA Report EPA-60/7-82-001, 100 pp.

McCain, B.B., D.C. Malins, S.-L. Chan, and H.O. Hodgins. 1983. A Multiyear Comparison of
Disease Prevalence in English Sole (Parophrys vetulus) from Eight Selected Sites in Puget
Sound. A Final Report to Ocean Assessments Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 30 pp.

McCain, B.B., D.W. Brown, M.K. Krahn, M.S. Myers, R.C. Clark, Jr., S.-L. Chan, and D.C.
Malins. 1988. Marine Pollution Problems, North American West Coast, pp. 143-162. In
Aquatic Toxicolopv. Toxic Chemicals and Aciuatic Life: Research and Management (D.C.
Malins and A. Jensen, eds.). Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.

McElroy, A.E., J.W. Farrington, and J.M. Teal. 1986. Bioavailability of Aquatic Environment.
In Metabolism of Polvnuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the Environment
(Varanasi, U., ed.). Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA. Submitted
Manuscript, WHOI Contribution No. 6394. 66 pp.

Meade, R.H. and R.S. Parker. 1985. Sediment in Rivers of the United States, pp. 49-60. In
National Water Summary 1984. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2275. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Means, J.C. 1988. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. Personal Communication.

Means, J.C., J.J. Hassett, S.G. Woods, and W.L. Banwart. 1979. Sorption Properties of Energy-
Related Pollutants and Sediments. In Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (P.W. Jones and
P. Lever, eds.). Ann Arbor Sci. Publ., Ann Arbor, MI. 327 pp.

Murchelano, R.A. 1982. Some Pollution- Associated Diseases and Abnormalities of Marine
Fishes and Shellfishes: A Perspective for the New York Bight, pp. 327-346. In Ecological
Stress and the New York Bipht: Science and Management. (G.F. Mayer, ed.). Estuarine
Research Foundation, Columbia, SC.

Toxic Materials

Murchelano, R. and R. Wolke. 1985. Epizootic Carcinoma in the Winter Flounder,
Pseudopleuronectes americanus. Science (Wash.) 228:587-589.

Neff, J.F. 1979. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Aquatic Environment. Sources,
Fates and Biological Effects. Applied Science Publishers, London. 262 pp.

NOAA. 1984. National Status and Trends Progress Report, Benthic Surveillance Project.
Ocean Assessments Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 81 pp.

NOAA. 1986. Inventory of Chlorinated Pesticides and PCB Data for U.S. Marine and
Estuarine Fish and Invertebrates. Ocean Assessments Division, National Ocean Service,
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Seattle, WA. pp. 44.

NOAA. 1987. National Marine Pollution Program, Summary of Federal Programs and Projects,
FY 1986 Update. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.

NRC. 1985. Oil in the Sea Inputs, Fates, and Effects. National Research Council, National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 601 pp.

O'Connor, J.M. and J.C. Pizza. 1987. Dynamic Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Striped Bass from
the Hudson River. (111) Tissue Disposition and Routes for Elimination. Estuaries.
10(l):68-77.

OTA. 1987. Wastes in Marine Environments. Office of Technology Assessment, U.S.
Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. OTA-0-334, 313 pp.

Overstreet, R.M. 1987. Aquatic Pollution Problems, Southeastern U.S. Coasts:
Histopathological Indicators, pp. 213-240. In Aguatic Toxicology. Toxic Chemicals and
Aquatic Life: Research and Management (D.C. Malins and A. Jensen, eds.)." Elsevier
Science Publishers, Amsterdam.

Panel on Water Quality of the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. 1987. The Hudson-Raritan: State of
the Estuary. New Jersey Marine Science Consortium, Fort Hancock, NJ. 36 pp.

Parrish, P.R., J. McCauley, and R.M. Montgomery. In press. Acute Toxicity of Two Generic
Drilling Fluids and Six Additives, Alone and in Combination to Mysids (Mysidogsis bahia).
In Proceedings, 1988 International Conference on Drilling Wastes, Calgory, Alberta.

Phelps, D.K., C.H. Katz, K.J. Scott, and Bill Reynolds. 1987. Coastal Monitoring: Evaluation
of Monitoring Methods in Narragansett Bay, Long Island Sound, and New York Bight, and
General Monitoring Strategy, pp. 107-124. In New Approaghes to Monitoring Aguatic
Ecosystems (T.P. Boyle, ed.). American Society for Testing Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
ASTM STP 940.

Rand, G.M. and S.R. Petrocelli. 1984. Glossary, pp. 651-657. In Fundamentals of Aguatic
Toxicology (G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli, eds.). Hemisphere Publ. Co., Washington,
New York, and London.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Ray, S. and D.W. McLeese. 1987. Biological Cycling of Cadmium in Marine Environments,
pp 199-221. In Cadmium in the Aguatic Environment (S.O. Nriagu and J.B. Sprague, eds.)
Wiley, NY.

Salomons, W. and U. Forstner. 1984. Metals in the Hydrocycle. Springer- Verlag, Berlin.

Schaule, B.K. and C.C. Patterson. 1983. Perturbation of the Natural Lead Depth Profile in
the Sargasso Sea by Industrial Lead, pp. 487-503. In Trace Metals in Seawater (C.S.
Wong, E. Boyle, K.W. Bruland, J.0. Burton, and E.D. Goldberg, eds.). Plenum, New York,
NY. q

Sims, P. and P.L. Grover. 1974. Epoxides in Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Metabolism and
Carcinogenesis. Adv. Cancer Res. 20:165.

Sindermann, C.I., F.B. Bang, N.O. Christensen, B. Dethlefsen, J.C. Harshbarger, J.R. Mitchell,
and M.F. Mulcanhy. 1980. The Role and Value of Pathobiology in Pollution Effects
Monitoring Programs. In Biological Effects of Pollution and Monitoring (A.D. McIntyre
and J.B. Pearce, eds.). Rapp. P.-V. Reun. Con. Int. Explor. Mer. 179:135-151.

Stegeman, J.J. 1981. Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Their Metabolism in the Marine
Environment, pp. 1-60. In Polvcvclic Hydrocarbons and Cancer (H.V. Gelboin and P.O.P.
Ts'O, eds.). Academic Press, New York, NY.

Stegeman, J.J. and P.J. Kloepper-Sams. 1987. Cytochrome, P-450 Isozymes and Monoxygenase.
Activity in Aquatic Animals. Environ. Health Perspect. 71:87-95.

Stein, J.E., T. Hom, and U. Varanasi. 1984. Simultaneous Exposure of English Sole Paroohrys
vetulus to Sediment- Associated Xenobiotics: Part 1--Uptake and Disposition of 14C_
Polychlorinated Biphenyls and 3H-Benzo(a)pyrene. Mar. Environ. Res. 13:97.

Toppin, S.V., M. Heber, J.S. Weis, and P. Weis. 1987. Changes in Reproductive Biology and
Life History in Fundulus heteroclitus in a Polluted Environment pp. 171-184. In Pollution
Physiolopty of Estuarine Organisms (W. Vernberg, A. Calabrese, F. Thurberg and F.J.
Vernberg, eds.). University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.

Trefry, J.H., S. Metz, and R.P. Trocine. 1985. A Decline in Transport by the Mississippi
River. Science. 230(4724):439-441.

Trefry, J.H., T.A. Nelson, R.P. Trocine, S. Metz, and T.W. Vetter. 1986. Trace Metal Fluxes
Through the Mississippi River Delta System. Rapp. P.-V. Reun. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer.
186:277-288.

Wade, T.C. and J.G. Quinn. 1980. Incorporation, Distribution and Fate of Saturated Petroleum
Hydrocarbons in Sediments from a Controlled Marine Ecosystem. Mar. Environ. Res.
3:15-33.

Wakeham, S.G. and J.W. Farrington. 1980. Hydrocarbons in Contemporary Aquatic Sediments.
In Contaminants and Sediments. Volume I (Baker, R.A., ed.). Ann Arbor Sci. Publ., Ann
Arbor, MI.

Toxic Materials

Weis, J.S. 1978. Interactions of Methylmercury, Cadmium and Salinity on Regeneration in the
Fiddler Crabs, Uca ougilator, U. nugnax, and U. minax. Mar.,Biol.. 49:119-124.

Weis, J.S., P. Weis, and M. Heber and S. Vaidya. 1981a. Methylmerc.ury tolerance of killifish
(Fundulus heteroclitus) embryos from a polluted vs. non-polluted environment. Mar. Biol.
65:283-287.

Weis, J.S., P. Weis, and J.L. Ricci. 1981b., Effects of Cadmium, Zinc, Salinity and Temperature
in the Teratogenicity of Methylmercury to the Killifish (Fun-dulus heteroclitus . Rapp. P.-
V. Reun. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 178:64-70.

Weis, J.S., M. Renna, S. Vaidya, and P. Weis. 1987. Mercury Tolerance in Killifish: A Stage-
Specific Phenomenon, pp. 31-36. In Biolopical Processes and Wastes in the Ocean
(J. Capuzzo and D. Kester, eds.). Krieger Publ., Malabar, Fl.

Wellings, S.R., C.E. Alpers, B.B. McCain, and B.S. Miller. 1976. Fin Erosion Disease of Starry
Flounder (Platichthys stellatus and English Sole (Parophrys vetulus
) in the Estuary of
the Duwamish River, Seattle, Washington. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 33:2577-2586.

Widdows, J., T. Bakke, B.L. Bayne, P. Donkin, D.R. Livingstone, D.M. Lowe, M.N. Moore, S.V.
Evans, and S.L. Moore. 1982. Response of Mytilus edulis on Exposure to the Water
Accommodated Fraction of North Sea Oil. Mar. Biol. 67:15-31.

Yeats, P.A. and J.M. Bewers. 1987. Evidence for Anthropogenic Modification of Global
Transport of Cadmium, pp. 19-34. In Cadmium in the Aguatic Environment (J.O. Nriagu
and J.B. Sprague, eds.). John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.

Zdanowicz, U.S., D.F. Gadbois, and M.W. Newman. 1986. Levels of Organic and Inorganic
Contaminants in Sediments and Fish Tissues and Prevalences of Pathological Disorders in
Winter Flounder from Estuaries of the Northwest United States, 1984, pp. 1-18. In
Oceans '86 Conference Record. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
Piscataway, NJ.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

GOAL 2: UNDERSTAND THE SOURCES, FATES, AND EFFECTS OF NUTRIENTS
ENTERING THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT AS A RESULT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES

Goal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Nutrient Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Nutrient Cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Effects of Nutrients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Federal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Amounts and Rates of Nutrient Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Effect on Marine Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Causes of Hypoxia and Anoxia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Adequacy of Analytical Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Nutrient Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
System Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Measurement Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Excessive anthropogenic nutrient loading to coastal waters is a national concern. A few
important areas where nutrient pollution has been identified as a serious problem are the
coastal waters off Los Angeles and Louisiana, Boston Harbor, New York Harbor, Buzzards Bay,
Long Island Sound, Kaneohe Bay (Hawaii), the Chesapeake Bay, Lake Washington, and the
Great Lakes. Degradation of water quality and adverse effects on aquatic and marine biota
resulting from anthropogenic nutrient inputs have been well documented. Therefore,
understanding the sources, fates, and effects of nutrients entering the marine environment as
a result of human activities is one of the six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program.

Nutrients

Goal Definition

Nitrogen and phosphorus are the primary anthropogenic nutrient inputs of concern in
coastal waters. Nitrogen is considered the most important nutrient limiting primary
productivity in marine and coastal waters, while phosphorus generally limits primary
productivity in freshwater. Both nitrogen and phosphorus are important in estuarine waters,
depending on the season, total nutrient loadings, and various physical and chemical conditions
existing in the estuary. While other nutrients such as silica, carbon, and some trace elements
may also be important in specific systems and at certain times (Likens, 1972), the following
discussion only addresses nitrogen and phosphorus.

There are two fundamental differences between nutrients and other sources of pollution.
Unlike toxic and carcinogenic compounds, nutrients represent basic chemical requirements for
primary producers, i.e., photosynthetic plants and microorganisms, and cause their primary
harmful effects by stimulating growth to unnatural kinds and amounts. All organisms
ultimately depend upon primary producers for food. Thus, alterations in the natural
availability and proportions of nutrients have implications not only for green plants and
photosynthetic microorganisms, but for entire ecosystems.

Excessive nutrient loading can cause accelerated eutrophication, a condition that is
characterized by excessive primary production as a result of extremely rapid growth and large
standing crops of phytoplankton. In eutrophic water bodies, the large planktonic biomass
decreases the distance that light can penetrate through the water column. Reduced light
penetration has been shown to inhibit photosynthesis in deeper waters of some eutrophic
estuaries (Pennock, 1986; Pennock and Sharp, 1987), and to affect photosynthetic
microorganisms as well as submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), which grows attached to the
bottom. Declines in SAVs result in the loss of valuable habitats for finfish and shellfish as
well as decreased oxygen production (Heck and Orth, 1980; Boynton and Heck, 1982; Orth and
Moore, 1983; Chesapeake Bay Living Resources Task Force, 1987; Christmas and Jordan, 1987).

In addition to increased turbidity, a large phytoplankton biomass ultimately can lead to
oxygen depletion of the water column and sediment as a result of the decomposition of
organic matter by microorganisms. Degradation of organic matter is a process that consumes
oxygen. Most of this degradation occurs at the sediment surface, but water column effects
also can be significant (Kemp et al., 1987; Paerl and Carlton, 1988). Oxygen demand
associated with breaking down the enormous quantity of organic matter present in eutrophic
water bodies can be greater than the concentration of oxygen within the water or the rate of
reaeration. This is especially true for stratified water columns such as those found in many
estuaries and lakes. Stratified bottom waters have a restricted ability to replenish oxygen
because there is little benthic photosynthesis (due to light attenuation) and mixing with the
oxygenated surface waters is restricted. Oxygen concentrations in bottom waters under
stratified and eutrophic conditions may decline to extremely low values, e.g., less than 3 mg/l
(hypoxia), or in the extreme case, to zero (anoxia).

Eutrophication, hypoxia, and anoxia are not rare phenomena. Today, hypoxia is a
characteristic feature in 126 of 131 U.S. estuaries and coastal waters for which adequate data
exist (Whitledge, 1985). In the Great Lakes, of 42 identified locations of concern, 21 locations
show oxygen depletion associated with eutrophication (GLWQB, 1987). While the greatest
number of near coastal and estuarine examples of damage to ecological integrity occur in the
temperate zone, there are several severely eutrophic tropical embayments. Nutrient- stressed
bays or estuaries occur, for example, in Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

There is a vast and growing body of literature addressing sources and effects of
nutrients in coastal waters. This chapter is not intended to provide a thorough review of all
existing literature on this subject. Here, we attempt to address only those nutrient pollution
problem areas that are most important in the context of environmental management. The
following discussion of nutrient pollution is divided into three subsections: nutrient source
and loading databases; nutrient cycling; and effects of nutrient loading.

Nutrient Sources

Human activities contribute greatly to the quantity of nutrients entering the marine
environment. Publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and industrial dischargers are the main
point sources of nutrient loadings. Urban and agricultural runoff and emissions from
automobiles and industry are the major nonpoint sources of nutrient inputs to lakes, rivers,
and estuaries via surface runoff, groundwater infiltration, and atmospheric deposition.
Determination of nutrient loadings requires knowledge of the quantities and timing of nutrient
inputs from both point and nonpoint source discharges. As traditional point source inputs of
nutrients are controlled, increased attention is being focused on mechanisms of loadings and
on monitoring and controlling nonpoint sources of nutrient loadings.

Source Databases

To protect our coastal waters from excess nutrient inputs, quantitative target nutrient
loadings are being established on which discharge regulations and limitations can be based.
Accurate and timely data on all significant sources of nutrients entering marine environments
are needed to set basin-specific targets for loadings. This entails the separation of natural
from societal inputs and the establishment of reliable national and regional databases on
source types, mechanisms, quantities, and timing of nutrients entering coastal waters.

Source databases initially were used to determine relative contributions of individual
sources to overall nutrient loadings and to identify which sources offered the greatest
potential for reductions. These databases also may be used to account for total loadings and
identify areas of concern, provide input data and refine mathematical models that aid in
determining acceptable nutrient loadings, identify both short- and long-term trends in nutrient
loadings, evaluate progress toward management goals, and provide direction for management
decisions.

An example of an operative source database is the International Joint Commission (IJC)
Great Lakes Water Quality Board's (GLWQB) procedures for reporting phosphorus data as
required by the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978 between the United States and
Canada. Monthly effluent data are reported for every point source discharge in the Great
Lakes basin. Tributary loadings are quantified using flow data and estimates provided by the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Water Survey, Environment Canada, and river-mouth
sampling generally provided by individual states and the province of Ontario. Atmospheric
loading estimates are based on data obtained from stations distributed throughout the lakes
and are reported as mass flux per unit area. The EPA database (STORET) and the IJC
computer are used for the compilation, analysis, and reporting of both United States and
Canadian data. From combined data, load estimates are made, summarized, reported, and
compared with target loadings (GLWQB, 1987; Dolan, 1988).

Nutrients

Nonvoint Sources

Data representing estimates of nonpoint source nutrient inputs to some lakes and stream
channels are available. They have been derived from a number of indirect measurements such
as 1) estimates of nutrient inputs from fertilizer applications to farmland; 2) estimates of
sediment loss due to erosion calculated using the universal soil-loss equation (or modifications
thereof), which incorporates the variables of rainfall, soil erodability, slope gradient and
length, vegetative cover, and erosion control practices employed; and 3) by using nonpoint
source pollution watershed models. These estimates of nonpoint source nutrient inputs to
inland water bodies are supported by data that are collected by the USGS National Stream
Water Quality Accounting Network (NASQAN), the joint EPA and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) National Fisheries Survey, and stream monitoring data from a variety of state
and municipal sources. The Strategic Assessment Branch (SAB) of NOAA is completing a
comprehensive estimate of point and nonpoint source inputs to United States' coastal waters,
the National Coastal Discharge Inventory (Basta et al., 1985). These data are based on
monitored data and watershed models and include 92 estuaries identified in the SAB's National
Estuarine Inventory (in preparation). Figure 9 shows estimated regional and national loadings
of nitrogen and phosphorus from point, nonpoint, and upstream sources. As shown in the
figure, both point and nonpoint source nutrients contribute significantly to the total loadings,
both on national and regional scales.

Establishing accurate databases on nonpoint sources has proved to be a very difficult
task, particularly for the atmospheric, groundwater, and "unmonitored area" categories.
Estimates indicate that nonpoint source inputs contribute significantly to the total nutrient
load of a great number of water bodies. For example, 1985 loading estimates 'for Lake Erie
indicate that over 83% of total phosphorus entering the lake resulted from nonpoint sources
(GLWQB, 1987). Nonpoint sources of nitrogen in the Chesapeake Bay range from 62% in dry
years to 81% in wet years (EPA, 1983). Relative contributions of nonpoint sources of
phosphorus in the Chesapeake Bay range from 31% of total phosphorus loadings in dry years to
69% in wet years.

Atmospheric Deposition

Atmospheric deposition may be a significant nonpoint source of phosphorus to marine and
coastal waters. Preliminary data from the Great Lakes indicate that approximately 10% of the
total phosphorus loadings to Lake Erie and 30% of the total phosphorus loadings to Lake
Superior may be due to atmospheric deposition (GLWQB, 1987). In addition, atmospheric
deposition of phosphorus may represent as much as 10% of the total phosphorus contribution
of rivers to the oceans (Graham and Duce, 1979; 1981; 1982; Graham et al., 1979). Phosphorus
in the atmosphere originates from soil particles as a result of erosion by wind, from organic
matter as a result of biological activity (e.g., spores, fungi, and pollen), from sea spray, and
from industrial and agricultural emissions.

There are also data that indicate a need for concern over atmospheric deposition of
nitrogen. An Environmental Defense Fund Report estimates that 25% or more of the nitrogen
reaching coastal waters is from atmospheric deposition (Fisher et al., 1988). Since nitrogen is
commonly considered to be the nutrient that limits phytoplankton growth in coastal waters
(Ryther and Dunstan, 1971; Parsons et al., 1977; Mann, 1982), contributions from atmospheric
sources must be considered when. addressing impacts of nonpoint source loadings. Industrial
and automobile emissions of sulfates and nitrates combine with atmospheric moisture to form

GOALS OF THE NATION-4L PROGRAM

Regional Totals

Nitrogen Phosphorus
1000000 150000-
* Nonpoint 0 Nonpoint
* Point Ea Point
* Upstream
0 Upstream
8000004 ................................... .. .................. .......................... ..... ..................
C' 120000 . ..........

600000 . ............. 0
................ .. .................. 90000 . .................................... ..................

0
0 CL
400000 . ...................................
. ..................... .
60000
0
z
a.
12 V -X-:1-X-:X
. ....................
. .................
200000- 30000

X
X.:
0 0 M" .4
Z5
0
W .2 2) cc
x 0 x 0
fi
0 0 0
z z
75

Region Region

National Totals

Nitrogen Phosphorus
Nonpoint Point Nonpoint
(120 (16%) (9%) 'gillillll@

nn.
Point
(47%)

..... ..........

Upstream
Upstrea (44%)
(72%)

*Note: upstream sources include all river-borne nutrients entering rivers from sources upstream
of coastal counties, whether point or nonpoint.

Figure 9. Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus Loading to Estuaries (NOAA, In preparation).

Nutrients

dilute sulfuric and nitric acid which then may be deposi .ted as acid rain. In one study, acid
rain in North Carolina was shown to contain more than twice the concentration of nitrogen as
nitrite and nitrate found in nonacid rain. Furthermore, acid rain has been shown to stimulate
marine phytoplankton growth in the laboratory 30-70% more than phytoplankton grown in
nonacid rain controls (Paerl, 1�85). Atmospheric deposition of nitrogen is greatest along the
Mid-Atlantic coast where prevailing winds and industrial and automobile emissions interact.
Figure 10 illustrates the annual atmospheric deposition of ammonium and nitrate in the
continental United.States during 1985.

Groundwater and Unmonitored Areas

There is very little information on the role of groundwater as a nutrient source*and in
nutrient processing in the marine environment (EPA, 1994a; Swain, 1988). Research is
currently being conducted on the human health and environmental implications of nitrate in
groundwater. Some scientists and managers are concerned that some of the nutrients in
groundwater eventually are leached into tributaries and rivers and then are delivered to
coastal waters. However,the processes involved in groundwater nutrient delivery are not well
understood and quantification of this source cannot currently be done. on a basin-wide scale.

Riverine data are essential for calculating nutrient loadings of coastal waters. In the
Great Lakes and other areas, loadings from tributaries generally are estimated from daily flow
data and river-mouth sampling. However, many areas are unmonitored due to remoteness and
sparse populations, while other areas receive only intermittent monitoring for various reasons
(GLWQB, 1987; Dolan, 1988). As obvious sources of nutrient loadings are reduced, loadings
from groundwater, unmonitored areas, and other nonpoint sources will become more important
in management strategy. Although there is a need for better geographic coverage to document
total nutrient loadings, it often is impractical or too expensive to monitor all sources.
Therefore, estimates commonly are made by extrapolating data from comparable monitored
areas.

Nutrient Models

Models that attempt to simulate complex interactions of nutrient loadings and ecosystem
responses incorporate appropriate mechanisms and scales depicting natural processes and can
be useful tools to aid in our understanding of aquatic ecosystems. Model-based predictions
should be used cautiously and be verified by research and monitoring efforts in developing
management decisions. The comparison of model-based predictions with data from natural
systems is often helpful in illuminating important relationships that have not been addressed
or are incompletely understood (Pilson,. 1984). Conceptual and mathematical nutrient loading
and effects models are used to identify areas where additional research is needed and to help
understand and eventually to predict how nutrient loadings affect coastal ecosystems.

By contributing to the understanding and prediction of the consequences of nutrient
loadings and mitigation efforts, models are useful management tools. Nutrient budgets can be
estimated from basin-specific models that estimate the quantities and timing of all point and
nonpoint source nutrient loadings into receiving waters. Mathematical models of water and
ecosystem quality may use such estimates to predict the fat6 and effects of nutrient loadings
to an ecosystem. A combination of these models can be employed to develop target nutrient
loadings relative to the assimilative capacity of a basin.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

1.0

1.2

0.4
0.3 1.0

0.
0.2 0.5 - 1..4
0.2
0.1 3.0 .4.0 1-0
0.5

0.1
0.8
0.6

0.5 .1
.5
0.3 0.3 0.3
0.6 1.0
1.7
1.8 2.0 1.8
2 .1 1.3 10
1.0 1.. 0.7 1.4
1.0

O.S 2. 0.6
1.5
1985 Annual q, 1.7
-O.S
Ammonium Deposition 1.6
kg ha-1 PNL May 1987

4 7 6 -12
19
2 2 ST2 7
2
4 -10
2 2
15
20

4
3
4

8
2 2 4- 3 9 9
9 7
4

5 7
4
9
2 %
1985 Annual 7

5
5
Nitrate 1Deposition
kg ha- PNL May 1987
L

Figure 10. 1985 Annual Composite Distribution of (a) NH4+ and (b) N03-
Atmospheric Deposition (NAPAP, 1987)

Nutrients

The complexity of aquatic systems often necessitates that nutrient loading and effects
models attain high levels of sophistication. Data requirements for these models are sometimes
severe and costly. Models should be developed that require the minimum amount of data
necessary to address the questions for which the model was developed. Development of
nutrient loading and effects models requires data on timing, type, mechanisms, and quantities
of nutrient inputs to a basin. Data about physical and biological characteristics of a basin are
also essential. In coastal areas where nutrient pollution is sometimes a serious problem,
systems for regular monitoring, reporting, and synthesis of data are needed, both for nutrient
inputs and for ambient biotic and abiotic conditions. Such models have been developed for
Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron (Bierman and Dolan, 19811; Bierman et al., 1984), and for the
Chesapeake Bay (Fitzpatrick, 1987).

Loading models must assess the contribution of both allochthonous (i.e., sources
originating from outside a system) and autochthonous (i.e., sources originating from within a
system) nutrient inputs. It is largely accepted that increased allochthonous loadings of
nutrients can lead to increased primary production (Malone, 1987). However, the quantitative
relationships between changes in allochthonous inputs to a water body and subsequent changes
in water quality and ecosystem response parameters are poorly understood and difficult to
model (Bierman et al., 1984). These difficulties arise in part from the effect of autochthonous
sources that may represent significant inputs to the total nutrient loadings of a water body.
In the Chesapeake Bay, for example, recycled nitrogen and phosphorus may account for
approximately 90% of the total annual supply of these nutrients (Fisher and Doyle, 1987).
Although management has little control over autochthonous loadings and must concentrate on
control of anthropogenic sources, an accurate determination of effective target nutrient
loadings necessitates understanding the relative contribution and effects of all sources of
nutrient inputs.

One method of decreasing or at least bounding uncertainty within reasonable limits is the
use of nonmathematical models that borrow from both statistical and logical inference methods.
The outcome prediction from these computerized conceptual models is based on sequences of
rules being triggered by either a truth test or an action, which leads to an outcome dictated
by logic and summed algebraicly. By comparing different conditions in combinations, different
outcomes may be contrasted and each outcome will produce a probability score based on a
consensus of expert practitioners. These are called "expert systems" (Prager, 1988).

Nutrient Cycling

In a sense, nutrients have no ultimate fate. Nutrients are continuously -cycled and. -
recycled within the biosphere. The fate of a nutrient depends on the temporal and spatial
scale considered. When discussing nutrient sources, fates, and effects, it is essential to
understand that they are interrelated on a global scale. Although a complete discussion of
nutrient cycling is not within the scope of this chapter, a basic understanding of nitrogen and
phosphorus cycling is a prerequisite to any discussion of nutrient fates and effects.

The Nitroeen Cycle

The most important nitrogen cycle processes are illustrated in Figure 11. Various forms
of nitrogen enter aquatic systems from both anthropogenic and natural sources. The most
abundant natural source of nitrogen is molecular nitrogen (ND, which comprises approximately

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Acid ain"

Atmosphere
Atmospheric Nitrogen Atmospheric
Deposition
(N2)
N
Nitrogen Loss
Fixation to
Atmosphere

a, Nitrate,
Allochthonous (NH 3) (N03)
Inputs: Ammonia, ssimilation organic-N
(NO),)
(NI-13)
Nitrite, Nitrate,
(N02) (N03)
Organic matter Organic Matter
Sinking Decomposition
Organic
Matter

Export: Organic-N,
)nia (NO,)
Water NH3) Ammonia, Nitrate
Column (NH3)' (N03)
Nitrification
Nitrate #0
N03)

Decomposition'
Sediments
Burial Ammonia Denitrification
(loss) Production (loss)
rr "A id @Rain-

Figure 11. Simplified Diagram of Nitrogen Cycling in an Estuary.

Nutrients

78% of the Earth's atmosphere. 'Only a small number of microorganisms are able to -use this
vast pool directly for growth and metabolism. The biological process of converting N2 into
forms that can be used by most organisms is called nitrogen fixation.

Some nitrogen available for biotic growth in the marine environment is ammonia liberated
from decomposing organic matter (Painter, 1970). Depending on environmental conditions, this
ammonia may be bound to soil or sediment particles, may undergo volatilization (Idelovitch and
Michail, 1981.),.or may be assimilated directly by bacteria or algae (Painter, 1970; Parry, 1985).
In aerobic (oxygenated) environments, ammonia can be oxidized to nitrite and nitrate by
nitrifying bacteria., This process, nitrification, is also important because it consumes oxygen
and can contribute significantly to oxygen demand of water bodies and sediment (Fenchel and
Blackburn, 1979). Wezernak and Gannon (1967) found in one study that 3.22 parts oxygen are
used for the oxidation of I part'ammoriia and that 1.11 parts oxygen are required for the
oxidation of I part of nitrite to nitrate.

Nitrate, like ammonia, may be assimilated directly by some phytoplankton. In addition,
nitrate can be used by certain microorganisms under anaerobic (oxygen-free) conditions rather
than oxygen in different energy- producing metabolic pathways. This process, denitrificailon,
results in reduction of nitrate by stages to molecular nitrogen, which is lost to the
atmosphere. This reduces the nitrogen available for use by all but a relatively few nitrogen-
fixing organisms. Denitrification has been shown to occur in suspended particles, sediments,
anoxic water bodies, and anoxic "microzones" within otherwise aerobic environments
(Greenblott, 1987; Paerl and Carlton, 1988). Research indicates that denitrification can
account for losses of 30-50% of the nitrogen inputs to coastal waters, and is therefore a
major sink or loss in the nitrogen budget.

Compl exity of nitrogen cycling makes accurate, quantitative analyses and modeling of
nitrogen cycling in continuously- flowing environments difficult. Ammonia concentrations are
affected by all ammonia reactions: nitrification, ammonia uptake, oxidation of organic nitrogen,
equilibrium, and conversion -of ammonia to organic nitrogen for cell synthesis. Nitrate
concentrations are affected by nitrification, denitrification, respiratory nitrate reduction, and
assimilative nitrate reduction. All of these processes are affected by pH, dissolved oxygen,
temperature, pollution, and stream flow (Ruane and Krenkel, 1978; Remacle and DeLaval, 1978;
Cooper, 1984).

The Phosphorus Cycle

The phosphorus cycle in aquatic systems is less complicated than the nitrogen cycle
because inorganic phosphorus is found in relatively few forms. Phosphorus has no major
volatile phase and is rarely reduced or oxidized under most natural conditions (Brock, 1979).
In most unpolluted water bodies, the only significant pool of biologically available inorganic
phosphorus is orthophosphate. Most phosphorus in the water column is organic phosphorus.
More than 90% of phosphorus in lake water is found as organic phosphate in cellular
constituents of living matter, or it is adsorbed to inorganic and dead particulate organic
matter (Wetzel, 19,75). Orthophosphate is generally the preferred form of phosphorus among
marine phytoplankton. Rapid exchange of phosphorus between seawater and phytoplankton,
and zooplankton grazing and excretion allows rapid regeneration of phosphorus within
planktonic food webs. Estimates of phosphorus cycling within the water column indicate that
allochthonous phosphorus inputs are recycled from 30 to 120 times before being exported to
the ocean or buried in sediment (Fisher and Doyle, 1987).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Exchange of phosphorus between sediment and overlying waters is an important
component of phosphorus cycling. Sediment-water phosphorus exchange (i.e., phosphorus
regeneration to the water column) is related to several physical, chemical, and biological
factors associated with mineral-water equilibria, sorption processes, oxygen- dependent chemical
interactions, and activities of bacteria, fungi, plankton, and invertebrates. Oxygen content at
the sediment-water interface is the most important feature regulating phosphorus exchange.
Under anoxic conditions, phosphorus in sediment may move rapidly into overlying water where
it can be used by phytoplankton (Wetzel, 1975). In the Chesapeake Bay, the rate of
phosphorus regeneration from sediment increases dramatically when oxygen concentrations in
overlying water fall below 2 mg/l (Webb and D'Elia, 1980).

Effects of Nutrients

Although increased primary productivity resulting from intentional nutrient inputs has
been shown to increase fish stocks in some experimental systems, the possible increase of
fisheries in naturally productive systems is generally considered insignificant when compared
with deleterious effects of eutrophication (Nixon et al., 1986b). This discussion focuses on
these effects as they relate directly to health and preservation of living aquatic resources.
Hypoxia or anoxia and consequent major changes in food web dynamics are the two most
conspicuous effects of eutrophication in the marine environment.

Hypoxia and Anoxia

Hypoxia and anoxia can affect nutrient cycling, mobilization and production of toxins,
trophic structures, and can kill organisms directly. Under normal aerobic conditions, nutrients
and toxins in sediment may be trapped by an oxygenated "microzone" at the sediment-water
interface. During hypoxic or anoxic conditions this microzone deteriorates, allowing some
nutrients, such as phosphate (Webb and D'Elia, 1980), ammonia and nitrate (Cerco, 1985 as
reviewed by Garber, 1987), and sediment-bound contaminants such as Cs, Mn, Co, Zn, and Cd
(Santschi et al., 1986) to pass freely from the sediment. Hydrogen sulfide (142S) is a toxic gas
which is produced in both the sediment and the water column by bacteria under anoxic
conditions. In addition to its direct toxicity, oxidation of H2S consumes oxygen and
contributes to maintenance of hypoxic or anoxic conditions (Tuttle et al., 1987). Under
aerobic conditions, sediment acts as a nitrogen sink. Nitrate produced during nitrification in
the water column is reduced to N2 by bacteria in anoxic sediment. However, nitrification is
inhibited during low oxygen conditions and the process of nitrogen removal from the water
column in this manner ceases.

Hypoxia or anoxia also can cause stress to organisms through habitat compression (i.e., a
decrease in the spatial or temporal extent of available habitat required for normal growth and
reproduction) (Uye et al., 1979; Coutant, 1985; Price et al., 1985). Stress related to habitat
compression may result in decreased reproductive capability, increased crowding, disease,
overharvest, and direct mortality. Habitat compression affects several commercially important
species adversely, including striped bass (Morone saxatilis), American shad (Alosa sapidissima),
blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), and adult alewife (Alosa vseudoharengus) (Coutant, 1985;
Coutant and Benson, 1987).

Nutrients

Troybic Structure Alterations

Verity (1987) reviewed how eutrophication may impact an ecosystem by altering species
distribution and abundance of both primary producers and consumers. Many factors interact
to drive changes in primary producer and consumer populations. These include supply, relative
availability, and timing of toxin and nutrient inputs, and various physical characteristics of the
estuary such as temperature, turbidity, current, and water column stratification (Grassle and
Grassle, 1984; Sullivan and Ritacco, 1985). Phytoplankton community structure also may be
altered by differential grazing pressures (Oviatt et al., 1986; Verity, 1987; Paerl, 1988a).

Diatoms are thought to provide the primary energy source for traditional food webs that
support teleosts (i.e., finfish) as top predators (Greve and Parsons, 1977; Gearing et al., 1984;
Elster and Ohle, 1985). Evidence suggests that eutrophication can cause a shifting in plankton
populations from larger, "more desirable" diatom- dominated communities to smaller, "less
desirable" flagellate- and cyanobacterial- dominated communities (Smayda, 1983). Acceptability
of these smaller species as food by grazers is variable and depends on concentration,
digestibility, presence of lethal or inhibitory mechanisms, size, and nutritional value (Silver
and Alldredge, 1981; Johnson et al., 1982). By changing food supply available to herbivorous
organisms, eutrophication may alter species distribution of higher trophic-level populations
(Gearing et al., 1984; Grassle and Grassle, 1984; Grassle et al., 1985; Elster and Ohle, 1985;
Nixon et al., 1986b; Fulton and Paerl, 1987).

Alternatively, changes in type and distribution of higher trophic-level herbivores and
predators can have a cascading effect all the way down the food web to primary producers.
Predation may limit certain species and affect composition even where essential nutrients are
not limiting, as in eutrophic waters. For example, increases in abundance of planktivorous
fish species (e.g., menhaden) may contribute to dominance by nanoplankton (extremely small
species with a diameter of less than 4 um). This may be the result of selective grazing on
larger species of phytoplankton (thereby reducing grazing pressure and increasing the
competitive advantage of small phytoplankton species), and by the release of nutrients that
support growth of small cells (Verity, 1987).

Dominance of phytoplankton communities by inedible or less desirable species may divert
energy and organic matter from "higher" trophic levels typically dominated by finfish to
microbial -bacterial food webs (Verity, 1987). Bacterial metabolism probably is enhanced
indirectly by an overabundance of organic matter available as a result of a large proportion of
the primary production not being consumed or assimilated by grazers. In addition, bacteria
provide a major component of the diets of heterotrophic (nonprimary producing) nanoplankton.
Combined oxygen utilization of heterotrophic bacteria and nanoplankton appear to contribute
significantly to total oxygen demand and development of anoxia. Figure 12 summarizes the
most important trophic-level interactions described above.

There is no clear and simple answer to the question of how eutrophication affects
trophic-level structures. Man's activities increase primary productivity from below through
eutrophication. This induces changes from above like predation, disease, and anoxia. The
overall effect may be to select for small plankton which support an active microbial food web,
shunting nutrients away from "traditional" predators (i.e., away from fish as top carnivores).
This constitutes a mechanism for serious adverse impacts on commercial fisheries. Such an
ecosystem may favor gelatinous zooplankton (coelenterates and ctenophores) as top carnivores,
whose low-growth efficiencies make them a virtual trophic cul-de-sac (Verity, 1987).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Increased Increased Reduced Fishing Effort
Gelatinous Marine-Spawning Collapsed Anadrorro
Predators Piscivorous Fish Piscivorous Fish us
_01

Anoxia Increased
Planktivorous
Fish
-0-

Increased Reduced
Crustacean Crt TstuacZeda--nn-1
EW - - - - - - Zooplankton Zooplankton I
Reduced Increased E@ @3 Increased Reduced
Oysters Nanoplankton Microplankton

Note: Clear arrows define pathways that appear to be strongly influenced by "boftom-up" or source control. Bold arrows show
trophic interactions in which "top-down" or sink control appears dominant. Pathways that appear to be less significant are
not illustrated for purposes of clarity. Note that most of the changes in stock sizesto the right of the anoxia compartment have
been documented, while those to left await confirmation.

Figure 12. Flow Chart Illustrating Some Hypothetical Trophic Linkages That May Be Significant
in the Chesapeake Bay (Verity, 1987).

Federal Role

This section discusses the Federal legislation, regulations, and programs that address the
issue of sources, fates, and effects of nutrients in the marine environment. Additional
discussions of Federal programs as related to specific information needs are presented under
the management questions that follow this review of the Federal role. More detailed
information on the Federal programs and projects that address the issue of nutrients in the
marine environment can be found in the National Marine Pollution Program, Summary of
Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 1987).
in e
7--[Gela'
c

P,eda

,@incp,ea e @@e, e
s a 'uca
C'usta ean Crustacean
Z.op to
c
zo@ @n la@nn
0 Inkt,@ k

Nutrients

Federal Legislation and Regulations

The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), also known as
the Ocean Dumping Act, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA, as amended)
are the two primary environmental laws governing the input of sewage treatment and
industrial wastes to the marine environment. The FWPCA is also the only Federal legislative
authority relating to the control of nonpoint sources of pollution (including nutrient inputs).

The Ocean Dumping Act was enacted, in part, "to regulate ocean dumping of all materials
and prevent or strictly limit the dumping of any materials that would adversely affect human
health, welfare, and amenities, the marine environment, ecological systems, or economic
potentialities." A 1977 amendment to the Act mandated the cessation (after December 31,
1981) of ocean dumping of sewage sludge that unreasonably degrades the marine environment.
Under Title I of MPRSA, EPA has the authority to designate and manage dump sites, develop
criteria to evaluate ocean dumping permit applications, and review, award, and enforce ocean
dumping permits. Under EPA's ocean dumping regulation, permits are issued in accordance
with the criteria of 40 CFR Part 227, which include specific limitations on the types and
quantities of certain materials that may be dumped, an assessment of the need for ocean
dumping, the availability of alternatives to ocean dumping, and an assessment of the impact of
the proposed dumping on aesthetic, recreational, and economic values as well as other uses of
the ocean.

Title 11 of MPRSA specifically mandates research on the disposal of sewage treatment
wastes in the marine environment. The EPA is authorized to conduct research, investigations,
experiments, and studies in order to determine means of developing disposal alternatives, and
to minimize or end ocean dumping of material that may unreasonably degrade or endanger
human health or the marine environment. Also under Title II, the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration is responsible for monitoring and research activities regarding the
effects of ocean dumping.

The FWPCA and amendments (Clean Water Act of 1981 and Water Quality Act of 1987)
govern the disposal of municipal and industrial waste by pipeline discharge into surface
waters, including marine waters and the Great Lakes. Section 402 of the Clean Water Act
establishes the EPA permit program, which limits pollutants that can be discharged to surface
waters of the United States. Under Section 403(c), EPA established regulations that require
ocean discharges to meet certain criteria and standards. Discharges that meet the
requirements of EPA, or approved State -administered programs, are issued National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Under 301(h), EPA can grant waivers of
mandatory secondary treatment to publicly owned treatment plants (POTW's) requirements if
certain conditions are met, including an ongoing monitoring program of the receiving
environment that includes biota in the vicinity of an outfall and at a suitable reference
station not under the outfall's influence.

The 1987 amendments to FWPCA (the Water Quality Act) include provisions for the.
management of nonpoint sources of pollution. Section 319 of the Act establishes a national
policy requiring that controls of nonpoint sources of pollution be developed and implemented
of.... in an expeditious manner." The Act requires each State to identify waters that cannot
,maintain applicable water quality standards without additional action to control nonpoint
sources of pollution. It also requires States to identify nonpoint sources that significantly
contribute to pollution in such waters and to describe programs for controlling these sources.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Federal Programs

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are the major
supporters of nutrient research and monitoring in the marine environment. Other agencies
conducting nutrient- related activities include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

Most of EPA's marine nutrient research activities are conducted by the agency's
Environmental Research Laboratories, the National Estuary Program, and the Chesapeake Bay
Program. Related activities include research on nutrient loadings in estuaries and the
assimilative capacity of estuaries for nutrients. In the Chesapeake Bay Program, EPA
coordinates pollution research, monitoring, and management of the Bay by identifying sources,
fate, and effects of nutrient pollutants. The EPA also supports nutrient studies in the Great
Lakes Region. Activities include monitoring of nutrient loadings from the atmosphere and
nutrient transport from lake tributaries, and evaluations of the effectiveness of agricultural
conservation practices in reducing nutrient loadings.

NOAA's nutrient research and monitoring activities are conducted primarily by the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
(OAR), and the National Ocean Service (NOS). NMFS's related research is focused on the
effects of various nutrient input on marine habitats and fisheries. The agency conducts
research to determine the extent of environmental degradation caused by various contaminants,
including nutrients, in estuarine and coastal ocean environments. Included are studies to
assess the extent and severity of eutrophication and to determine the processes governing
dissolved oxygen levels in estuaries and coastal waters. NMFS also monitors the sources,
fates, and effects of nutrient inputs on living marine resources and the occurrence of hypoxic
conditions at ocean dump sites. Most of OAR's nutrient- related research is funded through
the Sea Grant Ocean Pollution Program. Related activities supported by the Sea Grant
Program include research on the transport and cycling of nutrients in estuarine, oceanic, and
Great Lakes ecosystems; the causes of oxygen depletion that lead to anoxic/hypoxic conditions
in these ecosystems; and the effects of low-dissolved oxygen on living marine resources and
their habitats. Effects studied include research into structural and functional alterations of
planktonic food chains in response to blue-green algae blooms and changes in water quality
and productivity in nitrogen- enriched coastal ecosystems. The NOS conducts research and
monitoring activities to determine the potential causes and extent of oxygen depletion in
coastal waters of the United States. The NOS monitors the levels of dissolved oxygen,
nutrients, and chlorophyll in the context of eutrophication/hypoxia in coastal waters, and
evaluates the contribution to oxygen demand from phytoplankton blooms sinking to bottom
waters and sediments. The Strategic Assessments Branch of NOS is developing a
comprehensive inventory of pollutant discharges into coastal waters of the United Statesand
is developing a set of computer programs to maintain the data and to conduct analyses.

The USDA conducts research on pollution problems caused by agricultural and forestry
practices on downstream and estuarine ecosystems. Studies include research related to the
chemical and physical transport and effects of excess nutrients on the estuarine environment.
The agency also studies the contamination of groundwater and aquifers from septic system
drain fields and monitors soil and crop application of chemicals, sludges, manure, and other
wastes.

Nutrients

The FWS conducts research to determine the pathways by which nutrients enter estuaries
and to understand high marsh nutrient cycling. The agency also studies the effects of Great
Lakes tributary inflow and resuspension of lake sediments on nutrient loading and water
quality in nearshore waters and adjacent marshlands. NASA performs research to understand
global oceanic primary productivity and phytoplankton distribution. Related studies address
the impacts of phytoplankton distribution on living marine resources and global carbon and
nitrogen cycles.

Manaeement Ouestions and Information Needs

Nutrients affect virtually every aspect of the marine environment. Human activities
contribute nutrient inputs far in excess of the environment's ability to assimilate them.
Adverse impacts on our coastal waters already have occurred. Implications for future
reduction of fish and wildlife populations and degradation of water quality must be considered
seriously. At risk are the commercial, recreational, and aesthetic values of our coastal waters.

The following is a list of management questions that highlight the most important and
least understood aspects of the nutrient problem. Additional data and information on these
issues would promote more effective management of nutrient inputs to the marine environment.

Management Question 1: What are the amounts and rates of nutrient addition to the marine
environment?

Management Question 2: How do nutrient inputs affect marine ecosystems?

Management Question 3: What causes hypoxia and anoxia in coastal environments?

Management Question 4: Are conventional analytical methodologies adequate for nutrient
research?

This section includes a discussion of the rationale, current efforts, and opportunities for
additional work associated with the information needs under each management question.

Amounts and Rates of Nutrient Inputs

Manaeement Ouestion 1: What are the amounts and rates of nutrient addition to the marine
environment?

Information Needs

Ia. How much nitrogen and phosphorus enter from the atmosphere and through
groundwater?

ib. How adequate are current models for estimating nutrient inputs?

Ic. What is the significance of seasonal and climatic events to annual nutrient budgets?

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Ia. How much nitrogen and nhosnhorus enter from the atmost)here and throupth proundwater?

Management of nutrient inputs requires accurate information on sources and magnitudes
of nutrient loadings into the nation's estuaries. Over the past two decades, considerable
Federal effort has gone into development of source databases. These databases are used in
generating nutrient loading data and for the modelling of acceptable levels of nutrient inputs
to coastal waters. Using these databases, reasonable estimates can be made for nutrients
delivered from point sources in many estuaries. Data representing nutrient loadings from
nonpoint sources are much less available and reliable, particularly atmospheric and groundwater
sources. Ten years ago, atmospheric and groundwater nutrient loadings were considered
relatively insignificant compared with point source contributions. As point source discharges
are coming under increased control and better nutrient budgets are made, atmospheric and
groundwater sources are coming under increased scrutiny.

Acid rain contains sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HN03). When nitric acid is
dissolved in water, it dissociates to yield nitrate (N03_) and the hydrogen ion (H'). Increases
in nitrate concentrations observed in the Great Lakes may result in part from atmospheric
deposition in the form of acid rain (GLWQB, 1987). There are also indications that under
certain conditions, inputs of nitrogen in the form of nitrate from acid rain may contribute
substantially to the total nitrogen of coastal waters. Studies of atmospheric inputs to the
near surface waters along the coast of North Carolina demonstrate that impacts of nitrogen
loading from atmospheric sources (i.e., acid rain) are detectable and may be important in
shaping the patterns and magnitude of phytoplankton production. Normal rainwater (nonacid
rain) in North Carolina typically contains 5 to 20 uM N03-/I. During acid rain events much
higher concentrations, as high as 300 uM N03-/I, have been observed (Paerl, 1987).
Indications are that during acid rain episodes as much as 30 to 40% of the nitrogen loading
may be attributed to atmospheric inputs (Paerl, 1988b).

Direct funding for research and monitoring of atmospheric loadings currently is provided
by EPA's Great Lakes Program. Development of sampling and monitoring technology and
quantification of atmospheric nutrient loadings are being studied for the Great Lakes only.
There is a paucity of information on atmospheric nutrient loadings to marine systems.

There is also very little information on the role of groundwater as a nutrient source and
in nutrient processing. Groundwater hydrology is a relatively new and imprecise science, and
since there is no national database on groundwater contamination, it is difficult to estimate
its relative contribution to nutrient loadings (EPA, 1984a). Groundwater models are based on
land use and do not account for nutrient processing within soil-aquifer systems. Relevant
processes include transformations that can actually reduce nutrient concentrations in
groundwater (e.g., denitrification and assimilation) and processes that contribute to nutrient
loadings (e.g., nitrogen fixation and mineral dissolution).

To develop a thorough understanding of nutrient sources to the marine environment,
basic research addressing atmospheric and groundwater inputs would need to be initiated or
expanded where it already exists. This research would focus on developing reliable
methodologies for determining atmospheric nutrient contributions and budgets to marine
systems and on assessing relative contributions (both wet and dryfall) as compared with other
nutrient sources in specific systems and regions.

Nutrients

lb. How adeciuate are current models for estimatinp, nutrient innuts?

Freshwater and marine systems are extremely complex. Nutrient loading models must
attain a high level of sophistication in order to simulate accurately what occurs in these
systems. For this reason, systems for obtaining and synthesizing data are needed--both of
nutrient inputs and of ambient environmental conditions. Source databases should be
developed to identify and quantify conditions of concern and to provide baseline data useful
for evaluating management decisions, including assessing. the effectiveness of management
actions.

Several databases developed by the Federal agencies and departments have relevance to
nutrient research, development, and monitoring. Some of these include EPA's STORET,
National Eutrophication Study Database and Large Lakes Research Laboratory, and Permit
Compliance System (PCS) developed under the auspices of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES); NOAA's Regional Coastal Information Center Network, and Earth
Resource Observation System; USGS's National Water Data System and National Water Data
Exchange; USDA's Agriculture Water Data Laboratory; and DOI's Office of Water Research and
Technology (EPA, 1984b; NOAA, 1985; Multer and Kemp, 1986). These and other relevant
databases should be reviewed to determine their applicability to nutrient research and to
identify overlap and information gaps.

Use of nutrient loading models, together with effects models, can aid in understanding
complex interactions of nutrient loadings and aquatic ecosystems. In addition, such models
can be useful in developing monitoring strategies by providing insight into which parameters
are most indicative of changes in the ecosystem. However, mathematical models alone are
insufficient to address all the complexities of coastal ecosystems. The enormous number of
variables found in natural coastal ecosystems often frustrates researchers attempting to
determine causal relationships between nutrient inputs and effects.

Because of this, physical models of ecosystems, i.e., meso- and microcosms, are built.
Physical scale models of ecosystems have- many advantages for researchers, including the
ability to integrate the uncertainty implicit in simulation over a whole process, such as
respiration, photosynthesis, or other integrative biological processes of an ecosystem. These
systems also have very defined physical boundaries and parameters and an ability to simulate
simplified natural systems at relatively low operating costs (Oviatt et al. 1984; Pilson, 1984).
An example of an operating mesocosm is the Marine Ecosystems Research Laboratory (MERL),
which is located at the University of Rhode Island and supported by EPA and others. The
MERL mesocosms have been used in a variety of research projects, including the study of
nutrient cycling and effects of eutrophication in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island (Gearing et
al., 1984; Hobbie and Cole, 1984; Oviatt et al., 1984; Berounsky and Nixon, 1985; Kelly et al.,
1985; Pilson, 1985; Oviatt et al., 1986; Rudnick and Oviatt, 1986), the effects of nutrients on
benthic and zooplankton populations (Grassle and Grassle, 1984; Grassle et al., 1985; Sullivan
and Ritacco, 1985), the fates of pollutants including nutrients (Nixon et al., 1986a), and the
effects of benthic organisms on nutrient cycling (Doering et al., 1987). This research has
been valuable in developing and improving mathematical models, testing hypotheses, and
providing insight into processes occurring in natural systems.

Direct funding for the development of models to estimate nutrient loadings into estuaries
is supported by EPA under its Division. of Groundwater Protection, National Estuary Program
(Near Coastal Waters Initiative), and Great Lakes Program (working closely with the U.S.-
Canada International Joint Commission). Also, funding for the development of predictive

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

models is provided by the USDA Nonpoint Source Contaminants Program, the USGS Water
Resources Division, the National Science Foundation Global Ocean Flux Program, and the
NOAA Strategic Assessment Branch. The EPA and COE are developing a very sophisticated
3-dimensional, time-variable eutrophication model for the Chesapeake Bay.

Although advances have been made in the development of predictive models, major
improvements in the future depend upon availability of better source data estimates in the
following areas: atmospheric and groundwater loadings, inputs from areas that are not being
monitored, and the quantities of nutrients delivered to coastal waters during episodic and
climatic events such as heavy rains and floods. Databases are of little utility if the data can
not be converted into useful management information. Better algorithms, improved computer
technology, and a better understanding of nutrient behavior in marine ecosystems would allow
these data to be used fully.

Ic. What is the sipnificance of seasonal and climatic events to annual nutrient budpets?

Much of the difference between predicted and actual tributary nutrient loadings is due to
the design of tributary monitoring programs and timing of samplings. Predictions of nutrient
inputs must account for major episodic events that affect stream flow, such as storm events
and spring runoff from snow melt. Inadequate sampling of episodic events in Michigan's
Saginaw River resulted in unsatisfactory 1985 loading estimates. "The 1985 estimate and its
95% confidence limits are very large (1,532 + 1,917 tons), while the target load for all of
Saginaw Bay is 440 tons. These very wide confidence limits stem from lack of event
sampling" (GLWQB, 1987). This observation also is supported by the extensive monitoring
program of the Potomac River conducted by the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments and the Maryland Department of the Environment (Curtis, 1987). Nutrient
loadings at the Potomac River fall line were estimated as the product of flow rate and sample
concentrations. The study, conducted between January 1983 and April 1987, consisted of 76
storm composite samples and 115 base flow discrete samples. Results indicated that 70 to 97%
of annual nutrient and sediment loads were delivered during storm events. Over 40% of the
total phosphorus load and 25% of the total nitrogen load during an 8-year period were
delivered during six flood events. Knowledge of relationships between tributary flow and the
timing of nutrient loadings is essential to the development of models that predict nutrient
loadings from tributary sources accurately.

Knowledge of the role of episodic events on deposition rates, fate, and transport of
nonpoint source nutrient loadings is incomplete. Methods for obtaining quantitative data on
rates and types of nutrient deposition during various atmospheric and climatic events would
need to be developed to improve our understanding in this area. This may necessitate
modification of traditional monitoring strategies.

Nutrients

Effect on Marine Ecosystems

Manaizement Ouestion 2: How do nutrient invuts affect marine ecosystems?

Information Needs

2a. Which nutrients limit primary productivity?

2b. How do nutrients affect productivity, function, and structure of marine ecosystems?

2a. Which nutrients limit mimary moductivity?

The question of which nutrients limit primary productivity is a central management
concern. Mitigation policy can be formulated and implemented effectively only when
environmental responses to changes in nutrient loadings can be predicted accurately. Of the
macronutrients, phosphorus is the least abundant nutrient in the hydrosphere. Phosphorus is
considered to be the limiting nutrient in many water bodies (Edmondson, 1972; Fuhs et al., ,
1972; Maloney et al., 1972; Powers et al., 1972; Schelske and Stoermer, 1972; GLWQB, 1987).
Phytoplankton require nutrients in a ratio of about 16 nitrogen atoms for each phosphorus
atom, which corresponds to their relative cellular composition of these elements. This ratio is
known as the Redfield ratio. Nutrient- limiting environments contain nitrogen and phosphorus
ratios either higher or lower than the Redfield ratio, depending on which nutrient is in
shorter supply. Water column nitrogen concentrations are usually more than an order of
magnitude greater than phosphorus concentrations in freshwater systems. Thus, biological
demand for nitrogen and phosphorus in these systems will result in depletion of phosphorus
before nitrogen. Under these conditions, phosphorus is the most effective agent both in
promoting and in limiting freshwater primary productivity (Wetzel, 1975).

Regulatory agencies have used the principle of "phosphate limitation" by restricting the
use of phosphate detergents and by limiting the allowable concentrations of phosphorus in
effluents. Trends in water quality data and phytoplankton distribution and biomass
demonstrate that management of phosphorus loadings has been successful in many freshwater
bodies, including the Great Lakes (GLWQB, 1987) and Lake Washington, Washington State
(Edmondson, 1972).

Researchers now debate whether nitrogen may be more important than phosphorus in
controlling primary production in marine and estuarine waters (Smith, 1984; D'Elia, 1987).
Nitrogen limitations in estuaries depend on factors other than relative concentrations of
alloclithonous nutrient inputs. Nutrient recycling and benthic-pelagic flux can influence
greatly the relative amounts of biologically available nutrients. Studies by D'Elia (1987),
Fisher and Doyle (1987), and Garber (1987) support the hypothesis that nitrogen is the limiting
nutrient in the Chesapeake Bay. Studies by D'Elia indicate that much of the nitrogen entering
the estuary is removed from the ecosystem by denitrification (conversion to nitrogen gas),
while phosphorus is conserved in the ecosystem in the sediment. Fisher and Doyle (1987)
found that recycling rates of nitrogen and phosphorus differed seasonally in a pattern that
would support the theory of a phosphorus- limited system during the low-salinity conditions of
spring and a nitrogen- limited system during higher-salinity summer conditions. Studies by
Garber (1987) indicate that only a small amount of nitrogen input to the Chesapeake Bay
becomes trapped in the sediment. Additionally, data on nutrient flux from sediment to

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

overlaying waters indicate that there is an apparent loss of nitrogen relative to phosphorus in
Chesapeake Bay sediments. There is also growing evidence that much of the allochthonous
nutrient inputs to an estuary are eventually exported to the ocean (Nixon et al., 1986b).

To be able to distinguish among anthropogenic effects of nutrients in the marine
environment, a better understanding of nutrient limitation and effects of nutrient inputs on
phytoplanklon populations is needed. Specifically, additional research to determine under what
conditions phosphorus or nitrogen become the limiting nutrient in coastal, estuarine, and Great
Lakes ecosystems is fundamental to this management question.

2b. How do nutrients affect vroductivity. function, and structure of marine ecosystems?

The response of an ecosystem to nutrient inputs depends on many factors, including the
timing, amounts, and kinds of nutrient loadings, and the physical, climatic, and biological
characteristics of the system. Excessive nutrient inputs accelerate eutrophication, causing
increased phytoplankton blooms and biomass. Eutrophication also results in changes in
phytoplankton species composition; in some instances, to "undesirable" or "nuisance" species
which have less nutritional value or which are toxic (Gearing et al., 1984; Oviatt et al., 1984;
Oviatt et al., 1986; Verity, 1987; Fulton and Paerl, 1987; Paerl, 1988a). High concentrations of
nutrients also may exhibit direct toxicity to some organisms (Sullivan and Ritacco, 1985).
Alterations in populations of primary producers have ramifications throughout the ecosystem by
altering food webs (Grassle and Grassle, 1984; Grassle et al, 1985; Verity, 1987). One
consequence of a large, inedible phytoplankton biomass is increased deposition of organic
carbon (Rudnick and Oviatt, 1986), which may feed increased bacterial and micro-protozoan
populations. Increased oxygen demand is another consequence (Hobbie and Cole, 1984). This
microbial food web may shunt organic matter and energy away from commercially important
species of fish and shellfish, and may contribute to development and maintenance of hypoxic
and anoxic conditions (Verity, 1987).

Most current Federal programs that sponsor nutrient research include various aspects of
research that address nutrient cycling and nutrient limitations. Research into global nutrient
cycling and impacts of nutrients on distribution of phytoplankton is being carried out under
NASA's Ocean Productivity Program and the NSF's Global Ocean Flux Program. The FWS is
studying nutrient cycling in coastal marshes in its Research and Development Program. Under
the USDA's Nonpoint Source Contaminants Program and Habitat Modification Program, the
effects of agriculture, forestry, and watershed development activities and nutrient
transformation in soils are being studied to understand nutrient dynamics, fates, and
transformation. Mesocosm studies conducted by the EPA investigate the effects of nutrient
loadings on estuaries. The EPA Great Lakes Program and Chesapeake Bay Program include
research on the effects of nutrients on food web dynamics. NOAA's National Marine
Sanctuary Program, Great Lakes Pollution Studies Program, National Fishery Ecology Program,
and Sea Grant -Ocean Pollution Program are all funding basic research into nutrient dynamics..
Both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Habitat Quality Program and the U.S. Department of
Energy's Regional Marine Program address aspects of nutrient cycling.

Evidence has lead many researchers to believe that excessive anthropogenic nutrient
inputs have harmed coastal ecosystems by altering the trophic structure. Confirmation of the
extent of this problem will require quantitative data on both nutrient inputs and conditions of
aquatic biota. The use of physical model ecosystems (e.g., mesocosms and microcosms) can
contribute to our understanding of the dynamic relationships among nutrient inputs, primary

Nutrients

producers, and consumers. Extensive field research and monitoring also would be necessary if
we are to determine the degree to which trophic structures already have changed and to
determine effective mediation and mitigation procedures for restoring ecosystem health. This
also will entail determining how reduced nutrient inputs will affect productivity of upper
trophic-level organisms.

Causes of Hypoxia and Anoxia

Manaeement Ouestion 3: What causes hvipoxia and anoxia in coastal environments?

Information Need

3a. To what extent, and by what mechanisms, do nutrient innuts contribute to develooment
and maintenance of hypoxic/anoxic conditions?

Important consequences of excessive nutrient loadings to a water body are hypoxia and
anoxia. Data from mesocosm studies and from the Chesapeake Bay indicate that "increased
primary productivity and elevated organic loadings of the water column and benthos stimulate
microbial utilization of most or all of the available oxygen." (Verity, 1987). In the Chesapeake
Bay, rapid development of hypoxia has been associated with decomposition of phytoplankton
blooms coupled with increases in temperature and stratification (Magnien, 1987). Hypoxic
conditions have been observed in a large number of U.S. coastal waters and estuaries
(Whitledge, 1985). The susceptibility of a water body to hypoxia and anoxia may depend on
physical characteristics of a basin in addition to anthropogenic nutrient loadings (Whitledge,
1985).

Considerable Federal research and monitoring is being conducted to understand and
quantify the serious implications of hypoxia and anoxia to living resources. Phere are,
however, some aspects of the problem where additional information would greatly enhance
management's ability to mitigate the "greening" of the Nation's estuaries. Although it is
accepted that allochthonous loadings of nutrients can lead to increased primary productivity,
the quantitative relationship of allochthonous versus autoch1honous inputs to eutrophication is
not well understood. More accurate, precise, and applicable information would help to
determine the role, in primary production, of external nutrient loadings and cycling of
nutrients in the water column and across the sediment-water interface. The historical basis
for whether incidences of hypoxia and anoxia have increased over time has not been resolved.
This issue should be studied and resolved.

Adequacy of Analytical Methods

Manaaement Ouestion 4: Are conventional analytical methodologies adequate for nutrient
research?

Information Need

4a. Are available analytical technioues sufficient for addressing nitropen and phosr)horus
cycling in aciuatic ecosystems?

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Analytical methods are chosen to provide good historical comparisons, characterize
baseline conditions, determine and predict trends in water quality, develop mathematical models
and nutrient budgets, and identify important processes that affect water quality. However, the
desire to maintain comparability with historical data and among various programs often
institutionalizes "traditional" methods, even when they may be inadequate for addressing
research needs. D'Elia et al. (1987) point out that "although comparability is clearly a valid
concern, it can be argued that if historical methods are inadequate, then comparability is a
moot point." Institutionalization of methodologies may have the additional effect of deterring
development and use of more precise, accurate, and economical methods (D'Elia and Sanders,
1987; D'Elia et al., 1987). For example, D'Elia et al. (1987) found that direct determination of
particulate nitrogen and phosphorus is significantly more precise, accurate, and inexpensive
than the EPA-approved method of calculating the difference between whole and filtered water
samples. Although the EPA method is sufficient for addressing problems of regulatory
compliance with "end-of-pipe" water quality standards (the purpose for which the methods
were chosen originally), it is not sufficiently accurate to analyze low concentrations of
nutrients found in coastal waters.

Many standard methods for analyzing water quality and for measuring phytoplankton
populations are inappropriate for research requirements. Often, where better methods exist,
they are not widely used. A review of existing analytical procedures for sensitivity indicates
that there is a general need for methods that are more accurate and precise. This is
particularly true for fractional analysis nutrients, such as carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and
silicon. Advances in this area would be necessary if we are to improve estimates of elemental
standing stocks and budgets. Some review of analytical methods has been sponsored by EPA's
Chesapeake Bay Program and Puget Sound Program. Recently, the Scientific and Technical
Advisory Committee of the Chesapeake Bay Program (STAC, 1988) addressed this issue by
recommending that the "evaluation and analysis of monitoring data and techniques to enable
development of cost efficient, cost effective monitoring to support proposed strategies" be
made a research priority in 1988. This and similar recommendations, as well as sponsorship of
research and development of new and improved analytical methodologies for quantifying trace-
level concentrations, would allow more effective research on nutrient cycling in aquatic
ecosystems.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Excessive anthropogenic nutrient inputs have resulted in degradation of water quality
and adverse effects on living marine resources in waters along all of the coasts of the United
States. Anthropogenic nutrient inputs can cause accelerated eutrophication, which in turn can
lead to hypoxic and anoxic conditions as well as alter food webs to favor less desirable
species at higher trophic levels. Such conditions make these waters unsuitable as habitat for
valuable living marine resources. Although much research has already been conducted on
nutrient pollution, and several point sources of nutrients have come under increased control,
many unanswered questions remain which would require a continued research effort on the
part of the Federal Government to address. The following conclusions relating to our current
state of knowledge concerning sources, fates, and effects of nutrients in aquatic environments
are based on the discussions of management questions and information needs presented in the
previous section.

Nutrients

o Although we have much information on loadings from point sources of nutrients, we
have very little information on the role of groundwater and atmospheric routes of
input, and on the role of runoff during episodic events.

o Evidence exists to suggest that excessive anthropogenic nutrient inputs have altered
the trophic structure of some coastal ecosystems.
o The quantitative relationship between allochthonous: (external) and autochthonous
(recycled) nutrient sources to eutrophication and hypoxia and anoxia is not well
understood.

o Many current analytical methods for nutrients are inadequate, or if adequate, are not
widely used.

Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made to improve our
understanding of the sources, fates, and effects of nutrients entering the marine environment
as a result of human activities.

Nutrient Sources

The following information is needed to improve our understanding of the role of various
sources in nutrient loading.

Atmosipheric and Groundwater Sources. As traditional point sources of nutrients are
controlled, determining the mechanisms of loadings and quantifying nonpoint sources of
nutrients need to be emphasized. To this end, additional research would allow us to determine
the significance of atmospheric and groundwater sources of nutrients in estuaries and coastal
areas.

Episodic Events. Research would help to determine the significance of seasonal runoff and
aperiodic storms as sources of nutrients and their role in controlling the rates of production
in marine ecosystems. Methods for gathering quantitative data on the rates of nutrient inputs
during episodic events need to be developed.

Allochthonous versus Autochthonous Sources. Additional information would allow us to
determine the role of allochthonous versus autochthonous nutrient inputs to a water body and
the subsequent changes in water quality and ecosystem response.

System Response

The following work would improve our understanding of system-level response to
excessive nutrient inputs.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Limitine Nutrients. Research is needed to determine the conditions under which either
phosphorus or nitrogen limit primary productivity in coastal, estuarine, and Great Lakes
ecosystems. Studies need to be conducted under various seasonal as well as physical and
chemical conditions.

System Response to Eu troph i cation. Quantitative data on nutrient inputs and research on
biotic response to nutrients are needed to understand the relationship between nutrient inputs,
primary producers, and consumers. Such research should be designed to determine the degree
of trophic structure changes resulting from excessive nutrient inputs.

Measurement Methodologies

The following work is needed to improve standard methods for conducting water quality
analyses and for measuring phytoplankton populations.

Analytical Methods. The Federal Government should sponsor research into new and improved
analytical methods that are both more accurate and precise for measuring nutrients and their
effects in the marine environment.

Literature Cited

Basta, D.J., B.T. Bower, C.N. Ehler, F.D. Arnold, B.P.. Chambers, and D.R.G. Farrow. 1985.
The National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory. Ocean Assessments Division, Office
of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 17 pp.

Berounsky, V.M. and S.W. Nixon. 1985. Eutrophication and the Rate of Net Nitrification in a
Coastal Marine Ecosystem. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Sci. 20:773-781.

Bierman, V.J. and D.M. Dolan. 1981. Modeling of Phytoplankton- Nutrient Dynamics in
Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron. J. Great Lakes Res. 7(4):409-439.

Bierman, V.J., D.M. Dolan, R. Kasprzyk, and J.L. Clark. 1984. Retrospective Analysis of the
Response of Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, to Reductions in Phosphorous Loadings. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 18:23-31.

Boynton, W.R. and K.L. Heck, Jr. 1982. Ecological Role and Value of Submerged Macrophyte
Communities. Chesapeake Bay Program Technical Studies: A Synthesis. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

Brock, T.D. 1979. Biology of Microorganisms. 3d Ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
802 pp.

Cerco, C.F. 1985. Effect of Temperature and Dissolved Oxygen on Sediment-Water Nutrient
Flux. Report to the Environmental Engineering Division, National Science Foundation.
Washington, D.C. Grant No. CEE-8307627.

Nutrients

Chesapeake Bay Living Resources Task 'Force. 1987. Habitat Requirements for Chesapeake Bay
Living Resources. Chesapeake Bay Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Annapolis, MD. 63 pp. + Appendices.

Christmas, J.F. and S.J. Jordon. 1987. Biological Monitoring of Selected Oyster Bars in the
Lower Choptank, pp. 125-138. In Dissolved Oxygen in the Chesapeake Bay: Process and
Effects. Proceedinpas of a Seminar on Hypoxic and Related Processes in Chesat)eake Bay
(G.B. Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College
Park, MD.

Cooper, A.B. 1984. Activities of Benthic Nitrifier.s in Streams and Their Role in Oxygen
Consumption. Microb. Ecol. 10:317-334.

Coutant, C.C. 1985. Striped Bass, Temperature, and Dissolved Oxygen: A Speculative
Hypothesis for Environmental Risk. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 114:31-61.

Coutant, C.C. and D.L. Benson. 1987. Linking Estuarine Water Quality and Impacts on Living
Resources Shrinking Striped Bass Habitat in Chesapeake Bay and Albemarle Sound.
Prepared for Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. 47 pp.

Curtis, M. 1987. Potomac River Fall-Line Loadings Dynamics, January 1983-April 1987, Based
on Chain Bridge Automated Storm Event Monitor. Draft. Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments, Department of Environmental Programs, Washington, D.C. 43 pp.
+ Appendices.

D'Elia, C.F. 1987. Phosphorous Cycling and Nutrient Limitations in the Patuxant River,
pp.,45-48. In Dissolved Oxygen in the Chesaveake Bay: -Process and Effects.-
Proceedinp-s of a Seminar on Hyt)oNic and Related Processes in Chesaveake Bay (G.B.
Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park,
MD.

D'Elia, C.F. and J.G. Sanders. 1987. Scientists Don't Make Management Decisions (and Why
We Wish That Sometimes We Did... ). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18(8):429-434.

D'Elia, C.F., R.E. Magnien, C.F. Zimmermann, P.A. Vaas, N.L. Kaumeyer, C.W. Keefe, D.V.
Shaw, and K.V. Wood. 1987. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Determinations in Estuarine
Waters: A Comparison of Methods Used in Chesapeake Bay Monitoring. Chesapeake Bay
Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Annapolis, MD. CBP/TRS 7/87, 226 pp.
+ Appendices.

Doering, P.H., J.R. Kelly, C.A. Oviatt, and T. Sowers. 1987. Effect of the Hard Clam
Mercenaria mercenaria on benthic fluxes of inorganic nutrients and gases. Mar. Biol.
94:377-383.

Dolan, D. 1988. International Joint Commission, Detroit, MI. Personal Communication.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Edmondson, W.T. 1972. Nutrients and Phytoplankton in Lake Washington, pp. 172-193. In
Nutrients and Eutrovhication: The Limitinp,-Nutrient Controversy. Special Symposia
Volume I (G.E. Likens, ed.). American Society of Limnology and Oceanography/Allen
Press, Lawrence, KS.

Elster, H.J. and W. Ohle. 1985. An Experimental Test of the Relative Significance of Food
Quality and Past Feeding History to Limitation of Egg Production of the Estuarine
Copepod Acartia tonsa. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. Ergebn. Limnol. 21:235-245.

EPA. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: A Profile of Environmental Change. Region 3, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Philadelphia, PA. 200 pp. + Appendices.

EPA. 1984a. Report to Congress: Nonpoint Source Pollution in the U.S. Office of Water
Program Operations, Water Planning Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. 98 pp. + Appendices.

EPA. 1984b. Directory of Environmental Data Bases for Region 5. Region 5, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago, IL. 74 pp. + Appendices.

Fenchel, T. and T.H. Blackburn. 1979. The Nitrogen Cycle, pp. 101-126. In Bacterial and
Mineral Cycling. Academic Press, New York, NY.

Fisher, D., J. Ceraso, T. Mathew, and M. Oppenheimer. 1988. Polluted Coastal Waters: The
Role of Acid Rain. Environmental Defense Fund, New York, NY. 102 pp.

Fisher, T.R. and R.D. Doyle. 1987. Nutrient Cycling in Chesapeake Bay, pp. 49-53. In
Dissolved OxyPen in the Chesar)eake Bay: Process and Effects. Proceedinp's of a Seminar
on Hvt)oxic and Related Processes in Chesaveake Bay (G.B. Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland
Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Fitzpatrick, J. 1987. A Steady State Coupled Hydrodynamic/Water Quality Model of the
Eutrophication and Anoxic Process in Chesapeake Bay. Prepared by HydroQual, Inc.,
Mahuah, NJ, under contract by Batell Ocean Science, Duxbury MA, for Chesapeake Bay
Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 500 pp. + Appendices.

Fuhs, G.W., S.D. Demmerle, E. Conelli, and M. Chen. 1972. Characterization of Phosphorous-
Limited Plankton Algae (with Reflection on the Limiting -Nutrient Concept), pp. 113-133.
In Nutrients and Eutroohication: The Li mitinp, -Nutrient Controversy. Special Symposia
Volume 1. (G.E. Likens, ed.). American Society of Limnology and Oceanography/Allen
Press, Lawrence, KS.

Fulton, R.S. and H.W. Paerl. 1987. Toxic and Inhibitory Effects of the Blue-Green Alga
, Microcystis aeruginos on Herbiverous Zooplankton. J. Plankton Res. 9(5):837-855.

Garber, J.H. 1987. Benthic-Pelagic Coupling in Chesapeake Bay: A Review and Synthesis, pp.
11-34. In Persnectives on the Chesneake Bay: Recent Advances in Estuarine Sciences
(M.P. Lynch and E.C. Krome, eds.). Chesapeake Bay Program and Chesapeake Research

Nutrients

Consortium, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gloucester Point, VA. - CBP/TRS
16/87. CRC Publication No. 127.

Gearing, J.N., P.J. Gearing, D.T. Rudnick, A.G. Requejo, and M.J. Hutchins. 1984.@ Isotopic
Variability of Organic Carbon in a Phytoplankton -Based, Temperate Estuary. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta. 48(5):1089-1098.

GLWQB. 1987. Report on Great Lakes Water Quality. Report to the International Joint
Commission. Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Detroit, MI, and Windsor, Ontario.
236 pp.

Graham, W.F. and R.A. Duce. 1979. Atmospheric Pathways of the Phosphorus Cycle.
Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta. 43:1195-1208.

Graham, W.F. and R.A. Duce. 1981. Atmospheric Input of Phosphorus to Remote Tropical
Islands. Pac. Sci. 35(3):241-255.

Graham, W.F. and R.A. Duce. 1982. The Atmospheric Transport of Phosphorus to the Western
North Atlantic. Atmos. Environ. 16(5):1089-1097.

Graham, W.F., S.R. Piotrowicz, and R.A. Duce. 1979. The Sea as a Source of Atmospheric
Phosphorus. Mar. Chem. 7:325-342.

Grassle, J.P. and J.F. Grassle. 1984. The Utility of Studying the Effects of Pollutants on
Single Species Population in Benthos of Mesocosms and Coastal Ecosystems, pp. 621-642.
In Concepts in Marine Pollution Measurements (H.H. White, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant
Publication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Grassle, J.F., J.P. Grassle, L.S. Brown-Leger, R.F. Petrecca, and N.J. Copley. 1985. Subtidal
Macrobenthos of Narragansett Bay, Field and Mesocosm Studies of the Effects of
Eutrophication and Organic Input on Benthic Populations, pp. 421-434. In Marine Biology
of Polar Regions and Effects of Stress on Marine Organisms (J.S. Grey and M.E.
Christiansen, eds.). John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.

Greenblott, J.M. 1987. Nitrogen Transformation in the Soil-Aquifer Treatment of the Dan
Region Wastewater Recharge Project. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Environmental Biology,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. 80 pp. +'Summary in Hebrew.

Greve, W. and T.R. Parsons. 1977. Photosynthesis and Fish Production: Hypothetical Effects
of Climatic Change and Pollution. Helgol. Wiss. Meeresunters. 30:666-672.

Heck, K.L., Jr. and R.J. Orth. 1980. Seagrass Habitats: The Roles of Habitat Complexity,
Competition and Predation in Structuring Associated Fish and Motile Macroinvertebrate
Assemblages, pp. 449-464. In Estuarine Perspectives (V.S. Kennedy, ed.). Academic
Press, New York, NY.

Hobbie, J.E. and J.J. Cole. 1984. Response of a Detrital Foodweb to Eutrophication. Bull.
Mar. Sci. 35(3):357-363.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Idelovitch, E. and M. Michail. 1981. Nitrogen Removal by Free Ammonia Stripping from High
pH Ponds. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 53:1391-1401.

Johnson, P.W., H.-S. Xu, and J.M. Sieburth. 1982. The Utilization of Chroococcoid
Cyanobacteria by Marine Protozooplankters but Not by Calanoid Copepods. Ann. Inst.
Oceanogr. 58(S):297-308.

Kelly, J.R., V.M. Berounsky, S.W. Nixon, and C.A. Oviatt. 1985. Benthic-Pelagic Coupling and
Nutrient Cycling Across an Experimental Eutrophication Gradient. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.
26:207-219.

Kemp, W.M., P. Sampous, and W.P. Boynton. 1987. Related Roles of Benthic Versus Pelagic
Oxygen-Consuming Processes in Establishing and Maintaining Anoxia in Chesapeake Bay,
pp. 103-106. In Dissolved Oxygen in the Chesat)eake Bay:* Process and Effects.
Proceedings of a Seminar on Hyt)oxic and Related Processes in Chesat)eake Bay (G.B.
Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park,
MD.

Likens, G.E. (ed.). 1972. Nutrients and Eutrophication: The Limiting- Nutrient Controversy.
Special Symposia Volume I. American Society of Limnology and Oceanography/Allen
Press, Lawrence, KS. 328 pp.

Magnien, R.W. 1987. Hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay: Results from the Maryland Office of
Environmental Programs' Water Quality Monitoring. 1984-1986, pp. 19-21. In Dissolved
Oxvp,en in the Chesapeake Bay: Process and Effects. Proceedinps of a Seminar on
Hynoxic and Related Processes in Chesaveake Bay (G.B. Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea
Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Malone, T.C. 1987. Seasonal Oxygen Depletion and Phytoplankton Production in Chesapeake
Bay: Preliminary Results of 1985-86 Field Studies, pp. 54-60. In Dissolved Oxygen in the
Chesar)eake Bay: Process and Effects. Proceedings of a Seminar on Hvvoxic and Related
Processes in Chesat)eake Bay (G.B. Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication,
University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Maloney, T.E., W.E. Miller, and T. Shiroyama. 1972. Algal Responses to Nutrient Additions in
Natural Waters. I. Laboratory Assays, pp. 134-140. In Nutrients and Eutror)hication:
The Limiting- Nutrient Controversy. Special Symposia Volume I (G.E. Likens, ed.).
American Society of Limnology and Oceanography/Allen Press, Lawrence, KS.

Mann, K.H. 1982. Ecology of Coastal Waters. University of California Press, Blackwell
Scientific Publ. 322 pp.

Multer, E.P. and H.T. Kemp. 1986. Inventory of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Automated
Data Bases. Research and Development, Office of Information Transfer, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service,Fort Collins, CO. 54 pp.

Nutrients

NAPAP. 1987. Interim Assessment.' The Causes and Effects of Acidic Deposition, pp. 45-46.
In Atmospheric Processes. Volume III. National Acid PrecipitationAssessment Program,
Washington, D.C.

Nixon, S.W., C.D. Hunt, and B.L. Nowicki. 1986a. The Retention of Nutrients (C, N, P),
Heavy Metals (Mn, Cd, Pb, Cu), and Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Narragansett Bay, pp. 99-
122. In Biogeochemical Processes at the Land-Sea Boundary (P. Lasserre and J.M. Martin,
eds.). Elsevier, New York, NY.

Nixon, S.W., C.A. Oviatt, J. Frithsen, and B. Sullivan. 1986b. Nutrients and the Productivity
of Estuarine and Coastal Marine Ecosystems. J. Limnol. Soc. South Afr. 12(1/2):43-71.

NOAA. 1985. Handbook of Federal Systems and Services for Marine Pollution Data and
Information (Revised). Central Coordination and Referral Office, Ocean Pollution Data
and Information Network, National Oceanographic Data Center, National Environmental
Satellite, Data, and Information Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC. 147 pp.

NOAA. 1987. National Marine Pollution Program Summary of Federal Programs and Projects,'
FY 1986 Update. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National -Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.

NOAA. In preparation. National Estuarine Inventory - Summaries on Sources of Nutrients to
the Nation's Estuaries. Strategic Assessments Branch, Ocean Assessments Division,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Rockville, MD.

Orth, R.J. and K.A. Moore. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: An Unprecedented Decline in Submerged
Aquatic Vegetation. Science. 222:51-53.

Oviatt, C.A., M.E.Q. Pilson, S.W. Nixon, J.B. Frithsen, D.T. Rudnick, J.R. Kelly, J.F. Grassle,
and J.P. Grassle. 1984. Recovery of a Polluted Estuarine System: A -Mesocosm
Experiment. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 16:203-217.

Oviatt, C.A., A.A. Keller, P.A. Sampou, and L.L. Beatty. 1986. Patterns of Productivity
During Eutrophication: A Mesocosm Experiment.- Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 28:69-80.

Paerl, H.W. 1985. Enhancement of Marine Primary Production, by Nitrogen- Enriched Acid
Rain. Nature. 315:747-749.

Paerl, H.W. 1987. Dynamics of Blue-Green Algal (Microcystis aeruginosa) Blooms in the
Lower Neuse River, North Carolina: Causative Factors and Potential Controls. Water
Resources Research Institute of the University of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC. 164 pp.

Paerl, H.W. 1988a. Nuisance Phytoplankton Blooms in Coastal, Estuarine, and Inland Waters.
Limnol. Oceanogr. (S.W. Nixon, ed.). Special Issue, July.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Paerl, H.W. 1988b. Institute of Marine Science, University of North Carolina, Morehead City,
NC. Personal Communication.

Paerl, H.W. and R.G. Carlton. 1988. Control of Nitrogen Fixation by Oxygen Depletion in
Surface -Associated Microzones. Nature. 332:260-262.

Painter, H.A. 1970. A Review of Literature on Inorganic Nitrogen Metabolism in
Microorganisms. Water Res. 4:393-450.

Parry, D.L. 1985. Nitrogen Assimilation in the Symbolic Marine Algae Prochloron. Mar. Biol.
87:219-222.

Parsons, T.R., M. Takahashi, and B. Hargrave. 1977. 2d Ed. Biological Oceanographic
Prostheses. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 332 pp.

Pennock, J.R. 1986. Chlorophyll Distributions in the Delaware Estuary: Regulation by Light-
Limitation. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 21:711-725.

Pennock, J.R. and J.H. Sharp. 1987. Phytoplankton Production in the Delaware Estuary:
Temporal and Spatial Variability. Mar. Ecol. 34:143-145.

Pilson, M.E.Q. 1984. Should We Know the Fates of Pollutants?, pp. 575-588. In Concepts in
Marine Pollution Measurements (H.H. White, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication,
University of Maryland,- College Park, MD.

Pilson, M.E.Q. 1985. Annual Cycles of Nutrients and Chlorophyll in Narragansett Bay, Rhode
Island. J. Mar. Res. 43:849-873.

Powers, C.F., D.W. Schultz, K.W. Malueg, R.M. Brice, and M.D. Shuldt. 1972. Algal Responses
to Nutrient Additions to Natural Waters. Il. Field Experiments, pp. 141-156. In
Nutrients and Eutrot)hication: The Lim itin R- Nutrient Controversy. Special Symposia
Volume I (G.E. Likens, ed.). American Society of Limnology and Oceanography/Allen
Press, Lawrence, KS.

Prager, J.C. 1988. U.S. EPA Research Laboratory, Narragansett, RL Personal Communication.

Price, K.S., D.A. Flemer, J.C. Taft, G.B. Mackiernan, W. Nehlsen, R.B. Briggs, W.H. Burger, and
D.A. Blaylock. 1985. Nutrient Enrichment of Chesapeake Bay and Its Impact on the
Habitat of Striped Bass: A Speculative Hypothesis. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 114:97-106.

Remacle, J. and J. DeLaval. 1978. Approaches to Nitrification in a River, pp. 292-295. In
Microbiology (D. Schlessinger, ed.). American Society Microbiology.

Ruane, R.J. and P.A. Krenkel. 1978. Nitrification and Other Factors Affecting Nitrogen in the
Holston River. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. Aug.:2016-2028.

Rudnick, D.T. and C.A. Oviatt. 1986. Seasonal Lags Between Organic Carbon Deposition and
Mineralization in Marine Sediments. J. Mar. Res. 44:815-837.

Nutrients

Ryther, J.H. and W.M. Dunstan. 1971. Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Eutrophication in the
Coastal Marine Environment. Science. 171:1008-1013.

Santschi, P.H., Y.-H. Li, P. O'Hara, and M. Amdurer. 1986. Removal'and Back Diffusion
Processes of Radiotracers in Shallow Coastal Marine Ecosystems (MERL) of Narragansett
Bay, R.I., USA. Rapp. P.-V. Reun. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 186:212-218.

Schelske, C.L. and E.F. Stoermer. 1972. Phosphorous, Silica, and Eutrophication of Lake
Michigan, pp. 157-171. In Nutrients and Eutrovhication: The Limiting -Nutrient
Controversy. Special Symposia Volume I (G.E. Likens, ed.). American Society of
Limnology and Oceanography/Allen Press, Lawrence KS.

Silver, M.W. and A.L. Alldredge. 1981. Bathypelagic Marine Snow: Deep-Sea Algal and
Detrital Community. J. Mar. Res. 39: 501-530.

Smith, S.V. 1984. Phosphorus Versus Nitrogen Limitation in the Marine Environment. Limnol.
Oceanogr. 29(6):1149-1160.

STAC. 1988. Draft Comprehensive Research Plan, Cheaspeake Bay Program, Agreement
Commitment Report. Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, Chesapeake Bay
Program, Gloucester Point, VA. 5 pp. + Appendices.

Sullivan, B.K. and P.J. Ritacco. 1985. Ammonia Toxicity to Larval Copepods in Eutrophic
Marine Ecosystems: A Comparison of Results from Bioassays and Enclosed Experimental
Ecosystems. Aquat. Toxicol. 7:205-217.

Swain, L.A. 1988. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Personal Communication.

Tuttle, J.H., E.E. Rodoz, and C.L. Divan. 1987. Contribution of Sulfur Cycling to Anoxia in
Chesapeake Bay, pp. 100-102. In Dissolved Oxygen in the Chesaneake Bay:, Process and
Effects. Proceedings of a Seminar on Hyr)oxic and Related Proce@ses in Chesapeake Bay
(G.B. Mackiernan, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College
Park, MD.

Uye, S., S. Kasahara, and T. Onbe. 1979. Calanoid Copepod Eggs in Sea-Bottom Muds. IV.
Effects of Some Environmental Factors on the Hatching of Resting Eggs. Mar. Biol.
51:151-156.

Verity, P.G. 1987. Factors Driving Changes in the Pelagic Trophic Structure of Estuaries,
with Implications for Chesapeake Bay, pp. 35-56. In Perst)ectives on the Chesaveake Bay:
Recent Advances in Estuarine Sciences (M.P. Lynch and E.C. Krome, eds.). Chesapeake
Bay Program and Chesapeake Research Consortium, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Gloucester Point, VA. CBP/TRS 16/87. CRC Publication No. 127.

Webb, K.L. and C.F. D'Elia. 1980. Nutrient and Oxygen Redistribution During a Spring Neap
Tidal Cycle in a Temperate Estuary. Science. 207:983-985.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Wetzel, R.G. 1975. Limnology. Saunders College Publishing/Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
743 pp.

Wezernak, C.T. and J.J. Gannon. 1967. Oxygen-Nitrogen Relationships in Autotrophic
Nitrification. Am. Soc. Microbiol. 15(5):1211-1215.

Whitledge, T.E. 1985. Nationwide Review of Oxygen Depletion and Eutrophication in
Estuarine and Coastal Waters. Submitted to the Ocean Assessments Division, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.
28 pp.

Biological Agents

GOAL 3: UNDERSTAND THE SOURCES, FATES, AND EFFECTS ON MARINE ORGANISMS OF
BIOLOGICAL AGENTS THAT ARE INTRODUCED OR INFLUENCED BY HUMAN ACTIVITIES

Goal Definition . . . . . .. . . . . I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Sources of Biological Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Effects of Biological Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Federal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Problems Associated With Biological Agents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Characteristics. Requirements, and Mechanisms of Pathogenicity . . . . . . . 107

Sources of Human Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Prediction, Control, and Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III

Cause Unknown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Biological Agents Suspected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 114
Knowledge of Impact Incomplete . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 114
Mitigation of Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

The presence of some biological agents in the marine environment may increase the
incidence of various diseases among marine organisms, causing decreases in the population size
or economic value of the affected species. Susceptibility of marine organisms to these
biological agents may be increased as a result of pollution, and human activities may
introduce, or induce the proliferation of, biological agents. The resources of concern include
those that the Federal Government is mandated to protect, conserve, or manage such as
marine mammals, fish and shellfish stocks, populations of endangered species, and ecologically
important species or communities. Therefore, understanding the sources, fates, and effects of
biological agents that are introduced or influenced by human activities is one of the six goals
of the National Marine Pollution Program. This discussion focuses on microbial agents whose
presence in the marine environment affects other marine organisms; human health effects are
considered elsewhere in the Plan.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Goal Definition

For the purpose of this Plan, biological agents have been categorized as pathogens of,
marine organisms, toxic plankton, and introduced organisms. Known pathogens include
bacteria, viruses, protozoans, and fungi. It is the presence and.action,of these agents within
the tissues of affected organisms that cause an adverse impact. Toxic plankton are
differentiated from pathogens by their mode of action; adverse effects may result through
exposure to some toxin that is released by the plankton. Introduced organisms are organisms
that do not occur naturally in the specific marine environment in question but have been
introduced as a result of human activities. These include nonindigenous species and
bioengineered organisms. Introduced species may be either macro- or microorganisms and may
become pathogenic or toxic, or compete with indigenous species in their new environment.
Macroorganisms may deleteriously affect the ecological balance by competing with indigenous
species for resources such as space or nutrients, or through a more direct impact such as
predation. The subject of introductions of macroorganisms is too broad to be addressed
adequately within the context of this chapter; therefore, the discussion of introduced species
will be limited primarily to microorganisms.

While the occurrence and action of some biological agents in the marine environment is
known to be pollution -related, for others the link to pollution is only suspected, and all are
clearly influenced by natural phenomena. Pollution may affect the action of a biological agent
in two ways. A pathogen may be introduced or proliferate in the marine environment as a
result of human activity. A concurrent increase in the incidence of disease among marine
organisms may result from increased exposure to those agents. For example, the numbers of
Vibrio anguillarum in the water column and sediment were shown to increase in the vicinity of
a discharge of wastewater from a sugar plant (Colwell and Grimes, 1984). Alternately,
environmental stresses caused by toxic chemicals in the water, or changes in salinity or
temperature, for example, could increase the susceptibility of organisms to endemic
opportunistic pathogens (Colwell and Grimes, 1984). Fin erosion in fish, infections caused by
opportunistic Vibrio spp., bacterial hemorrhagic septicemia caused by Aeromonas spp. and
Pseudomonas spp., and protozoan and fungal infestations (Costia necatrix and Savrolegnia spp.)
are examples of secondary fish infections that occur when fish face environmental stresses
(O'Connor et al., 1987; Sindermann, 1982; Wedermeyer et al., 1984).

Sources of Biological Agents

Biological agents can enter the marine environment directly as a result of human
activities or exist naturally in the water column, sediments, or biota. In addition, some
populations of agents may increase from a low level, which is normally sustained in the
environment, to a higher level, which may impact other marine organisms. These increases in
activity or blooms can be caused by human-induced alterations in environmental conditions.
Also, some microbes may persist in the sediment in the form of cysts, becoming active when
resuspended or ingested by the appropriate host organism.

Direct sources of biological agents resulting from land- or water-based human activities
include:

o Disposal of domestic, industrial, food preparation, and hospital wastes;

o Runoff from feedlots, agricultural, or urban areas;

Biological Agents

o Accidental or deliberate inputs from research and educational laboratories;

o Application of biological control agents;

o Translocation of species through shipping activities, water ballast, and intentional
transplanting;

o Human flora introduction through recreational activities; and

o Introductions associated with aquaculture and aquarium display.

Anthropogenic alterations to environmental conditions that may favor the redistribution
and/or enhanced proliferation of biological agents include the following:

o Environmental disturbances (dredging or shipping) resulting in resuspension and
transport of sediments and sludges;

o Changes in the physical environment, e.g., temperature (cooling water discharges),
salinity, and turbidity (dredging); and

o Changes in water chemistry through introduction of chemicals, e.g., nitrogen,
phosphorus, and micronutrients.

Effects of Biological Agents

Table 5 is a list of examples of biological agents, their sources, human influence,
resources affected, and impact. Some examples within the three groups of agents are
discussed below, as well as diseases of unknown etiology and plasmid exchange.

Pathoizens

Pathogenic organisms include but are not limited to bacteria'viruses, fungi, and protozoa.
The presence of some pathogens may facilitate the action of secondary infections in marine
organisms. Also, defense mechanisms of environmentally stressed marine organisms may be
altered to such an extent that resistance to pathogens is lowered. Such interactions are
exemplified by the increased mortality found among penaeid shrimp infected by baculovirus and
suffering from environmentally induced stresses, generalized bacterial infections, or fouling
organisms.

Leptospirosis, a disease associated with multiple hemorrhage syndrome in fur seals and
sea lions, is an example of a disease caused by bacterial agents in the marine environment
(Vedros et al., 1971; Smith et al., 1977). The causative agent of this disease, Levtosvira spp.,
is most frequently acquired through the food ch@ain by pups in their first year of pelagic
existence (Smith et al., 1977). Environmental pollution, particularly the tissue accumulation of
organochlorine and polychlorinated biphenyl compounds, is believed to increase the
susceptibility of these animals to disease (Howard, 1984).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Table 5. Examples of Biological Agents, Their Sources, Human influence, and Impact on Living
Marine Resources

Category & Agent Source Human Influence Resource Affected Impact

PATHOGENS

a) Bacteria
Edwardsella tarda unknown unknown fish, marine Hemmorrhagic disease in fish.
mammals Peritonitis. Opportunistic invader
of sick and injured mammals.
(Coles, et al., 1978)
Salmonella spp. unknown unknown marine mammals Juvenile mortality. Gulls aid in
spreading disease (Gilmartin, et
al., 1979)
Staphylococcus aureus unknown unknown dolphins, pilot Cerebral abscesses resulting in
Staphylococcus equi equine whales, and other strandings (Colgrove and Migaki,
marine mammals 1976). Brochopneumonia induced
mortalities (Higgins, et al., 1980)
Leptospira spp. indigenous unknown pinnepeds Leptospirosis, multiple hemorrhage
syndrome, strandings, mortality
(Verdos at al., 1971; Smith et al.,
1977)
Vibrio spp indigenous pollution stress fish, arthropods, Red sore disease, ulcers, skin
enhances disease mollusks lesions, hemorrhage. Vibriosis
generally affects stressed
organisms (Colwell & Grimes 1984)
Seneckea spp indigenous unknown crustaceans Shell disease, black spot disease.
Pseudomonas spp Disease enhanced by high
Leucothrix spp temperature and crowding
b) Viruses
Adenovirus unknown environmental fish Epithelial hyperplasias (Bloch et
stress enhances al., 1986)
disease
Influenza A human unknown marine mammals strandings, mortalities (Hindshaw
et al., 1986 (Geraci et al., 1982)
Baculoviridae unknown enhanced by mollusks Mortality
Herpesviridae environmental crustaceans
lridoviridae mammalian enhanced by mollusks, fish Mortality associated
Papovaviridae unknown environmental mollusks with neoplasms (Johnson 1984)
Calicivirus indigenous unknown pinnipeds Premature partultion
to Pacific fish

c) Fungi
lchthyophonus spp indigenous dredging, fish Mortality
Blastomyces spp unknown resuspension, marine mammals Dermatitis, systemic infections,
Lagenidium spp indigenous stress shrimp mortality
Fusarium spp unknown shrimp, sharks

TOXIC PLANKTON

Dinoflagellates indigenous blooms are shellfish Concentrate in shellfish cause
Raphidophytes enhanced by fish, and mortalities in shellfish, fish,
Prymnesiophytes nutrient inputs marine mammals marine mammals. Produce anoxic
Nonflagellated red algae conditions resulting in fish kills.
Cyanobacteria

INTRODUCED
ORGANISMS
Mytillecula orientalis Japan introduced with oysters & mollusks Substantial reduction in shellfish
(Copepod parasite) Japanese seed stocks, commercial exploitation
oysters of oyster grounds abandoned
Minchinia nelsoni unknown incidence spread oysters Causative agent of MSX.
(protozoan) on East coast with Destruction of many oyster
contaminated grounds.
shipments '

Biological Agents

Bacteria of the genus Vibrio are ubiquitous in the marine environment. Characteristics of
fish diseases caused by Vibrio spp. include skin lesions and ulcers. Outbreaks of Vibriosis are
generally attributable to some form of environmental stress or exposure to metal
contamination, which increases the susceptibility of the fish to the disease (Colwell and
Grimes, 1984). A high correlation between the occurrence of V. anguillarum in fish and
contamination by wastewater discharges has been observed (Larsen et al., 1978). In addition,
significantly higher concentrations of antibodies to V. anguillarum were observed in flounder
collected from the New York Bight apex than in flounder from unpolluted coastal waters
(Robohm et al., 1979).

Viruses may affect a variety of marine fish (Bloch et al., 1986) and shellfish (Couch,
1978). Type A Influenza virus is an example of a human pathogen which has been implicated
in mortalities of harbour seals and pilot whales (Murphy et al., 1983; Geraci et al., 1982; 1983;
Hinshaw et al., 1986). Influenza A viruses found in whales in one study were believed to be
dispersed in seagull feces (Geraci et al., 1983).

Human influence on the incidence of fungal diseases of marine organisms is not well
documented; however, the following are examples of fungi that have impacted living marine
resources. Blastomyces is a fungus found in dolphins and sea lions. This atypical yeast is an
opportunistic invader of compromised marine marnmals, and may cause fatal systemic or
respiratory disease. Members of the genus Ichthypyhonus are the major fungal agents that
cause dermal disorders in marine finfish. Fungi of the genera Lagenidium and Fusarium are
responsible for diseases in penaeid shrimp (Couch, 1978).

Protozoa represent a group of pathogens that have been responsible for major impacts to
economically important marine resources. Multinucleated sphere unknown (MSX) is probably
one of the most devastating epizootic diseases to affect marine resources reported in the
United States. The organism responsible for MSX outbreaks is the protozoan Hat)losr)oridium
nelsoni. This disease has devastated the oyster industry on the east coast of the United
States, causing mortalities of up to 90% of the population in some localities. Severe
mortalities of oysters were first observed in the Delaware Bay in 1957, and in the lower
Chesapeake Bay in 1960. MSX was probably spread to Massachusetts with shipments of
infected oysters from the James River in Virginia (Rosenfield and Kern, 1978). The spread
and severity of H. nelsoni is related to high salinity, mortalities being observed most often in
waters of > 15 ppt (Rosenfield and Kern, 1978). Human- influenced alterations in freshwater
movement in estuaries have contributed to the upstream spread of this disease.

Toxic Plankton Blooms

Toxic plankton cause deleterious effects by releasing toxins into the environment as well
as by depleting oxygen in waters where blooms occur. Toxic plankton belong to a few groups;
the majority are dinoflagellates, while the rest are chloromonads (Raphidophytes),
Prymnesiophytes (nonflagellated red algae), and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) (Taylor, 1985).

Toxic plankton blooms have been correlated with freshwater influxes and certain
temperature regimes (Therriault et al., 1985). Increased frequencies of blooms may be
associated with growing industrialization and associated nutrient inputs into affected waters
(MacLean and White, 1985).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The accumulation of dinoflagellate toxins in bivalves has resulted in the closure of
shellfish beds. In addition, toxic plankton blooms have been implicated in fish and marine
mammal mortalities. Recently, toxic plankton have destroyed scallop beds in North Carolina
and fish populations off the coast of Texas. Blooms of Prymnesium calathiferum have
coincided with fish and shellfish mortalities in New Zealand (Chang, 1985). Massive fish
mortalities in the Faroe Islands have been caused by Gonvaulax.excavata red tides (Mortensen,
1985).

Introduced Organisms

Introduced organisms do not exist naturally in a specific marine environment or region,
but occur as a result of human activities. These organisms include nonindigenous species and
bioengineered organisms. Introduced organisms may be pathogens, parasites, toxic plankton,
predators, or competitors and thereby exert a negative influence on indigenous populations.

The inadvertent introduction of infectious disease-causing agents carried with
intentionally introduced species exemplifies the problems caused by the movement of organisms
to new areas. The careless transfer of diseased oyster stocks into previously disease-free
areas is responsible for adverse impacts on existing biota. For example, the spread of MSX
was probably aided by the transfer of infected oysters from the Chesapeake Bay to
Massachusetts (Rosenfield and Kern, 1978). In addition, toxic plankton inoculates and other
pathogenic organisms have the potential to be introduced with cultures of marine organisms.

The introduction of bioengineered organisms has not yet been permitted in the marine
environment. However, bioengineered organisms released on land may persist and be
transported to the sea. Recent evidence suggests that genetically engineered organisms may
persist in the marine environment longer than previously believed (Colwell et al., 1985), and
eventually impact living Marine resources.

Another concern is the effect that novel, nonbioengineered organisms released in
artificially high densities for the control of one species could have on related nontarget
species. For example, the possibility exists that a bacterium or virus targeted at insect
populations could be transported to the marine environment and infect marine arthropod
species such as shrimp, crabs, and lobster (Rosenfield, 1988).

Diseases of Unknown Etiolotzy and Plasmid Exchange

There are many cases of diseases where the impact on marine resources has been severe,
but where the etiology is unknown. The recent increase in the incidence of bottlenose
dolphin and whale beachings along the east coast of the United States and the Gulf of St.
Lawrence has aroused interest in determining whether human influence is involved in this
phenomenon. Biological agents are one of the suspected causes of these beachings.

Neoplasms present a serious problem affecting the softshell clam industry. Neoplasms in
the clam Mva arenaria were first observed in England by Yevich and Barszcz (1976) and later
were found in the clams of the Chesapeake Bay (Farley, 1978). Neoplasms are now present in
50 to 60% of the clams sampled in the bay. The occurrence of neoplasms is enhanced when

100

Biological Agents

clams face natural environmental stresses such as changes in temperature and salinity
(Sindermann, 1982). A viral etiology is suspectedi but remains unproven (Sindermann, 1982).
Also, the exact influence of pollution is not known.

The coral reef environment has recently been subject to damage of unknown causes. In
1982, and again in 1987, scleratinian corals in many areas of the Caribbean, Bahamas, and
Florida were affected by a bleaching disease resulting from loss of zooxanthellae.
Zooxanthellae are algal cells that exist symbiotically and aid in the biological functions of
coral tissue. The synchronicity of bleaching events throughout the Caribbean has raised
concern that some biological agent may be involved in this disease (Roberts, 1988). In 1983,
mass mortalities of the black sea urchin resulted in the virtual disappearance of this
ecologically important species from coral reefs in the Caribbean basin. No cause has been
discovered for this phenomenon (Williams and Williams, 1987).

Plasmid exchange is also an area of concern. This process, which involves the transfer
of genes from one microorganism to another, may confer certain undesirable characteristics to
a previously benign agent. Plasmid exchange has the potential of creating virulence or
resistance to antibiotics in microorganisms (McConnell et at., 1979). Plasmid exchange could
result in the creation of novel forms in a process similar to genetic engineering. The
development of resistance to antibiotics by certain pathogenic organisms exposed to outflows
or antibiotic dumps has been demonstrated for bacteria associated with mammals (Flint et al.,
1987; Wachsmuth et al., 1983). Such novel strains may defy attempts to control their spread
and mitigate impact on marine resources.

Federal Role

The Federal legislation, regulations, and programs that address the issue of the sources,
fates, and effects of biological agents in the marine environment are discussed in this section.
Additional discussions of Federal programs as related to specific information needs are
presented under the management questions that follow this,review of the Federal role. More
detailed information on the Federal programs and projects that address the issue of biological
agents in the marine environment can be found in the National Marine Pollution Program,
Summary of Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 198.7).

Federal Legislation and Regulations

The major Federal legislative mandates relating to discharges into marine waters that
potentially affect or contain biological agents are the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (FWPCA, or Clean Water Act), and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act (MPRSA). These Acts regulate and require research and monitoring to assess impacts
from such discharges.

The FWPCA represents the most comprehensive statute regulating marine pollution.
Under the FWPCA the term contaminant includes biological substances that may be in the
material proposed for discharge. The stated goal of the FWPCA is to restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. Section 402 of the Act
establishes the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program to control
point source discharges into the nation's surface waters. Under this program dischargers are
required to disclose the nature and volume of their discharges, and to restore and maintain

101

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

the quality of these waters. The EPA is authorized to specify limitations to be imposed on
such dischargers, and requires the dischargers to monitor and report their compliance with the
limitations. In addition, under Section 403(c), EPA is required to establish ocean discharge
criteria guidelines for determining unreasonable degradation prior to the issuance of permits.
Under Section 104 of the FWPCA, EPA is to cooperate with other Federal, state, and local
agencies to conduct and promote the coordination of research "...relating to the causes,
effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution..." Section 403 of the Act
authorizes EPA to assess the impact of a discharge on both the biological community in the
area of the discharge and on surrounding biological communities.

The Water Quality Act (1987 amendments to FWPCA) establishes a national program for
the control of nonpoint sources of pollution. Under Section 316 of the Act, states are
required to identify the sources of nonpoint pollution that significantly contribute to pollution
in their waters, and describe their programs for controlling such sources.

Title I of the MPRSA provides for the regulation of ocean dumping of municipal and
industrial wastes, and dredged material in U.S. waters through the issuance of permits by ZPA
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for dredged material. Ocean dumping permit reviews
are based on several criteria including:

o The effect of dumping on human health and welfare;

o The effect of dumping on marine ecosystems, particularly with respect to the transfer,
concentration, and dispersion of material and byproducts through biological, physical,
and chemical processes; potential changes in marine ecosystem diversity, productivity
and stability; aid species and community population dynamics;

o The persistence of the effects of dumping; and

o The appropriate location and method of disposal.

Title 11 of the MPRSA establishes a comprehensive monitoring and research program on
the effects of ocean dumping and long-term effects of pollution, overfishing, and man-induced
changes to the marine environment. This program includes assessment of the environment's
capacity to receive materials, and monitoring programs to assess the health of the marine
environment.

Various legislative mandates have been implemented to manage, protect, and conserve
living marine resources and often relate to impacts from marine pollution. Living marine
resources considered under these mandates include endangered species, marine mammals, and
ecologically and economically important marine species. Biological agents are included under
definitions of waste constituents that may endanger living marine resources. The major
Federal legislative mandates governing the management, protection, and conservation of living
marine resources potentially impacted by biological agents include the Endangered Species Act,
Marine Mammal Protection Act, Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson Act), and the Whale Conservation and Protection Study Act. NOAA has been given
management and conservation responsibilities under each of these acts, while FWS is
responsible for certain species under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal
Protection Act.

102

Biological Agents

Federal Programs

The research funded by the Federal Government concerning biological agents has
generally not been directed specifically to effects on marine organisms. Most of this research
relates to human health concerns; therefore, much of it has not been very effective in
addressing problem areas associated with the effects of agents.on marine biota.

NOAA, EPA, and FDA have funded the majority of Federal research on biological agents.
Within NOAA, these activities are conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS);
the Sea Grant Program of the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR); and the
Coastal and Estuarine Assessments Branch, Strategic Assessments Branch, and National Marine
Sanctuaries Program of the National Ocean Service. These NOAA offices perform studies
related to biological agents as part of the NOAA mandates to establish a comprehensive and
continuing. program of monitoring and research with respect to the effects of pollution and to
manage and protect living marine resources. Studies include monitoring the occurrence of
pathogens and incidence of tissue lesions and other abnormalities in living marine resources,
and research into the.causes of diseases and death among marine mammals, finfish, and
shellfish. The agency develops techniques for determining the fate of sewage discharges and
for detecting, identifying, and measuring biological agents in the marine environment. NOAA
also maintains an inventory of the extent and status of shellfish areas in U.S. waters and
compiles historical health data on estuarine shellfish areas.

Much of the research conducted by EPA that is directly related to the potential impacts
of biological agents on the marine environment is performed at the agency's Environmental
Research Laboratory in Gulf Breeze, Florida. Research conducted at this facility includes the
development and laboratory testing of methods and procedures to determine the pathogenicity
or toxicity of biological control agents to nontarget organisms and the assessment of potential
ecological risk to the environment associated with the application of genetically engineered
organisms. The EPA also conducts related research at its other environmental research
laboratories, such as the Narragansett, Rhode Island laboratory, and supports studies related to
biological agents through its National Estuary Program.

The FDA conducts extensive research on pathogens and other environmental hazards
associated with fisheries products. While much of the research is oriented toward public
health concerns, a significant amount deals with the identification of pathogens and
deleterious materials, mechanisms of pathogenicity, and incidence and levels of contamination
of estuarine samples with bacterial and viral pathogens, parasites, toxic plankton, and chemical
hazards. In addition, the FDA maintains three regional laboratories dedicated solely to
fisheries research and fisheries- related activities.

Although it is not a major supporter of studies concerned with the effects of biological
agents in the marine environment, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has funded related
research. Specifically, DOE has investigated the increased susceptibility of marine organisms
to infectious diseases when stressed by pollutants. The FWS and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture also conduct some research activities related to biological agents in the marine
environment.

103

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Management Ouestions and Information Needs

Human- influenced or -introduced biological agents and their impact on living marine
resources have received relatively little attention in the past as compared to other forms of
pollution, such as toxic chemical discharges and nutrient enrichment. In many cases, diseases
in populations of marine organisms have been observed that are suspected of being caused by
biological agents, but evidence linking the agent to the disease is lacking or incomplete. Four
management questions that need to be addressed to achieve the goal of understanding the
sources, fates, and effects of biological agents that have been introduced or influenced by
human activities in the marine environment are listed below. This section includes a
discussion of the rationale, current efforts, and remaining work associated with the
information needs for each management question.

Management Question 1: What problems are known or suspected to result from human
influence on, or introduction of, biological agents in the marine environment?

Management Question 2: What are the biological characteristics, environmental requirements,
and mechanisms of pathogenicity of the most significant biological agents?

Management Question 3: What are the sources and mechanisms of human influence on
biological agents in the marine environment?

Management Question 4: How can acute and chronic problems associated with biological
agents be predicted, controlled, and mitigated?

Problems Associated with Biological Agents

Management Ouestion 1: What problems are known or suspected to result from human
influence on, or introduction of, biological atzents in the marine environment?

Information Needs

Ia. What are the major concerns associated with pathogens?

I b. To what extent does pollution cause toxic plankton blooms, and what are the
resulting economically important fishery concerns?

I c. What are the effects of the introduction of nonindigenous species or bioengineered
organisms?

Ia. What are the maior concerns associated with imthoizens?

Much evidence exists to suggest that human influences on pathogens in the marine
environment may present a significant threat to valuable living marine resources. This
information has been summarized in the Goal Definition section above.

While research efforts sponsored by Federal agencies are primarily concerned with the
human health impacts of pathogens in the marine environment, some of these studies may also
apply to the effects of pathogens on marine resources. Such studies have been conducted

104

Biological Agents

through the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of NOAA, the FWS, and the FDA. The
role of infectious disease in population dynamics of commercial and recreational marine species
is the subject of studies by NMFS and FWS. Research conducted by FDA has attempted to
determine the incidence and pathogenicity of various microbial agents in shellfish, fish, and
marine water.

The effects of some pathogens on living marine resources are known. However, while
problems caused by pathogens may be apparent, the identification of the specific pathogenic
organisms involved, the processes that increase their pathogenicity, the host ranges, and
predictions of outbreaks are not as easily determined. The research necessary to address
these areas includes the development of rapid, inexpensive, and easy-to-use systems for the
detection, isolation, characterization, and quantification of pathogens that cause disease among
marine organisms.

lb. To what extent does oollution cause toxic Mankton blooms, and what are the resultinp,
economically imt)ortant fishery concerns?

Toxic plankton blooms have been implicated in the closure and destruction of shellfish
beds, declines in fish populations, and the death of marine mammals. Freshwater influxes and
certain temperature regimes have been partially correlated with toxic plankton blooms
(Therriault et al., 1985); however, other factors, including pollution, may be involved. Many
areas that historically have had little evidence of such blooms have recently shown increasing
occurrences. This increase has been associated with growing industrialization and nutrient
inputs into the affected waters (MacLean and White, 1985).

The exact mechanisms and factors responsible for toxic plankton blooms have yet to be
determined. Human health concerns are the motivating factor for addressing problems
associated with toxic plankton bloom in research projects funded through the Sea Grant Office
of NOAA. The Florida Department of Natural Resources in cooperation with NOAA supports
research to determine the life history of Ptvchodis!@us brevis, the factors which trigger red
tides, and the development of rapid techniques for the determination of dinoflagellate toxins
in fish and shellfish.

Additional problems are the identification of organisms involved, determination of toxicity
and toxin production by microbial forms, and the range of organisms affected by such toxins.
The FDA sponsors studies that both address the.problem of toxicity of dinoflagellate toxins to
humans and attempt to determine the incidence and levels of algal toxins contained in fish
and shellfish.

Major gaps exist in our understanding of the causal mechanisms of toxic plankton blooms.
While pollution is believed to play a role in such periodic events, the exact mechanisms that
trigger blooms and the environmental requirements of toxic plankton species are not well
known. Understanding the factors that cause toxic plankton blooms is a necessary first step
in the development of measures to control or limit their impact.

105

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Ic. What are the effects of the introduction of nonindigenous svecies or bioengineered
organisms?

A large proportion of the biological agents responsible for adverse effects on marine
resources have been artificially introduced, either by accident or intentionally. Not all species
introduced to new areas are injurious or harmful to resident biota. The deliberate
introductions of some desired species have been beneficial to man. In other cases,
introductions of nonindigenous species have caused serious ecological damage. Examples of
problems resulting from the movement of species to new areas include introductions of
infectious disease-causing agents or toxic plankton organisms along with seed oysters or other
species used for aquaculture.

Environmental introductions of genetically manipulated animals and microorganisms are
commonplace (CEQ, 1985). Such organisms have historically been a major thrust of
agricultural developments designed to improve the characteristics of crops and livestock.
While there is a vast experience with environmental introductions of genetically engineered
organisms such as plants and animals, there has been less experience with the release of
genetically engineered microorganisms. Concern has been raised that novel strains of various
organisms may some day pose a threat to marine resources. Bioengineered microorganisms can
be viewed in the same light as nonindigenous naturally occurring organisms with regard to
their introduction into the marine environment. In either case, living marine resources may
lack mechanisms of resistance or defense against the effects of the introduced organisms.
Such biological agents may proliferate and cause extensive damage to indigenous populations.

The Biotechnology Science Coordinating Committee (BSCC) was established by the Federal
Government in 1985 to address the issues of research and products of biotechnology by
providing a coordinated framework of scientific policy and scientific review. The BSCC has
recommended that more intense scientific review be given to organisms that are the product
of intergenetic combinations and combinations involving genetic material from pathogenic
organisms.

Research in subjects concerned with the survival and effects of genetically engineered
organisms in the marine environment is still in its infancy. Much of this research is
sponsored by EPA's Environmental Research Laboratory in Gulf Breeze, Florida. Projects
include the determination of growth potential of bacteria that may be used in genetic
engineering, determination of the impact of genetically altered microorganisms on the
environment, development of simple laboratory procedures for predicting survival and growth
of bacteria in natural environments, and development of methods for detecting and tracking
genetically engineered microorganisms in aquatic environments.

There appears to be a lack of research associated with introductions of organisms into
the marine environment. The NMFS-sponsored studies include a description of species
introduced to the United States Pacific and Atlantic Coasts in ballast water from ocean-going
vessels, and the histological examination of foreign shellfish imports to the United States.

The potential effects of introduction s of nonindigenous species or recombinant forms
presents a concern that should be addressed more fully. To accomplish this, each
introduction, whether of an organism that is indigenous to other geographical areas or a
bioengineered microorganism, should be evaluated on an individual basis prior to its release as

106

Biological Agents

to its potential effects on existing populations. In addition, further research into the effects
on nontarget marine biota of persistent nonendemic organisms introduced as pest control
agents would improve our understanding in this area.

Characteristics, Requirements, and Mechanisms of Pathogenicity

Manapement Ouestion 2: What are the biological characteristics, environmental requirements,
and mechanisms of pathoizenicity of the most significant biological agents?

Information Needs

2a. What are the basic biological attributes of biological agents known to adversely
affect marine organisms?

2b. What are the mechanisms by which biological agents cause disease in marine
organisms?

2a. What are the basic biolopical attributes of biolojaical agents known to adversely affect
marine orpanisms?

To mitigate the effects of biological agents on valuable marine resources, researchers
must develop an understanding of the biological characteristics and environmental requirements
of the biological agents that impact these resources. There is a general lack of knowledge of
basic biology, life cycles, life history, and environmental requirements of the organisms of
concern.

Past studies that address the question of basic attributes of biological agents generally
have been concerned with those agents that may impact human health. Such studies are being
conducted by NOAA (OAR and NMFS), EPA, and FDA. The Office of Oceanic and
Atmospheric Research in NOAA sponsors studies that address the identification and
characterization of pathogens or toxins produced by biological agents. The NMFS conducts
and sponsors studies of infectious crustacean diseases and parasites in west coast species,
histopathological studies of infectious molluscan diseases and parasites, and the immunological
identification of shellfish pathogens and'life history stages in alternate and reservoir hosts.
The EPA conducts and sponsors studies that evaluate the occurrence and extent of gene
transfers, plasmid transmissibility, and mechanisms of dissemination of recombinant DNA in
aquatic environments. The FDA-sponsored studies include the development of culture systems
for algal toxin production, chemical and biological definition of dinoflagellate toxins, and
genetic characterization of Vibrio and Aeromona species.

In order to gain a better understanding of the impact of biological agents, basic
information is needed on the biological attributes of a wide range of such agents found in the
marine environment. For example, while a causative agent of disease in oysters has been
identified as H. nelsoni, it has not been successfully cultured it? the laboratory. An
intermediate Zst -is suspected in this parasite's life history, but none has yet been identified.
Some basic questions on taxonomy remain to be answered for various groups of pathogenic
organisms, including Vibrio species, marine fungi, and protozoa. In addition, the pathogenic

107

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

mechanisms, host ranges, and persistence of a wide variety of organisms that normally inhabit
the human intestinal tract or the marine environment are unknown and require further
research.

2b. What are the mechanisms by which biolopical agents cause disease in marine organisms?

Pathogens may be absorbed by marine organisms through contact, ingestion, or
transmission via intermediate hosts. A pathogen may then affect the host organism by
producing toxins, causing the growth of tumors, disrupting metabolic pathways or reproductive
processes, or by causing behavioral alterations. A thorough understanding of the biophysical
and biochemical mechanisms of pathogenicity, host specificity, immunity, and means of
transmission of the important diseases is necessary prior to attempting to mitigate the impacts
that various biological agents may have on marine resources.

The subject of pathogenic mechanisms is being addressed in studies sponsored by NMFS
and FDA. Shellfish disease resistance and defense mechanisms in marine mollusks, and disease
diagnostics and immune responses among Pacific Coast salmonid fish species are being
investigated by NMFS scientists. Studies funded by FDA are directed towards human health
aspects of the issue, and include the evaluation of the pathogenesis of Aeromonas and Vibrio
species and the evaluation of virulence of various pathogens in marine waters.

A major factor limiting studies of virulence of invertebrate viruses is the lack of
molluscan and crustacean cell and tissue culture systems. The development of in vitro and in
vivo cultivation systems for growth of microbial agents could be used for qualitative and
quantitative studies of dose response infectivity, disease transmission mechanisms, cell cycle
studies, inactivation mechanisms, and for the demonstration of cause and effect relationships.
Such systems have been developed for mammalian and insect cells and greatly facilitate this
sort of studies.

Sources of Human Influence

Manaaement Ouestion 3: What are the sources and mechanisms of human influence on
bioloeical agents in the marine environment?

Information Needs

3a. What are the sources of the most significant biological agents?

3b. What are the persistence and transport mechanisms of these agents?

3a. What are the sources of the most significant biological agents?

Biological agents are released into the marine environment from a variety of terrestrial
sources. In addition, human activities such as dredging or sewage discharges may affect
population densities of marine microorganisms. Pollution may cause the proliferation of
certain pathogenic agents that are normally present at low densities. Knowledge of the types
and locations of inputs of biological agents into the marine environment would aid in

108

Biological Agents

developm ent of an effective control or mitigation strategy. Although potential sources of
biological agents are known, it is difficult to quantitatively determine the extent to which
pathogens are being introduced from point and nonpoint sources.

Research related to sources of biological agents is being funded by NOAA and FDA.
Human health concerns have motivated NOAA to initiate a project to determine the basis for
shellfish harvesting limitations in estuaries around the Nation and to identify sources of
pollution in those estuaries where harvest limitations are due to pathogens. The NMFS of
NOAA is sponsoring studies under the Northeast Fisheries Center's Inshore Research Plan to
determine the relationship between pathogen outbreaks and other sources of organism stress,
such as contaminants, nutrient overenrichment, and habitat loss. The FDA sponsors studies
into subjects such as the occurrence of drug and antibiotic resistance in natural flora, the
potential for transferring resistance to bacterial species that are human pathogens, and the
drug resistance of human pathogens present in fish, water, and sediment.

Studies to identify the sources of biological agents and to quantify the relative and
absolute amounts of these materials coming from various sources would generate useful
information. In addition, the development of a global information network and newsletter to
notify the scientific community of biological invasions of nonindigenous microbial agents or
macroorganisms into marine ecosystems through man's activities or through natural mechanisms
would assist in addressing this information gap.

3b. What are the nersistence and transt)ort mechanisms of these agents?

Some biological agents are maintained in an inactive state in the sediment, water column,
or biological component of the marine environment for months or longer (OTA, 1987). These
agents may be activated by changes in environmental conditions such as resuspension of
sediments followed by exposure to suitable hosts or growth substrates, or nutrient inputs. In
other cases, ubiquitous, normally commensal agents may become virulent to host organisms that
face environmental stresses. Episodic events such as storms, floods, or hurricanes may
resuspend pathogen spores or germ cells along with sediment. The relative importance of such
natural events needs to be evaluated to understand the impact of human activities on the
system.

Some studies related to the persistence and transport of biological agents in the marine
environment are being conducted by EPA, NOAA, NMFS, and the Florida Department of
Natural Resources. The fate of new genotypes and the factors that influence the survival of
recombinant microorganisms are the subjects of studies sponsored by EPA. NOAA's Sea Grant
Program and Estuarine Program Office address the question of mechanisms of survival and
transport of enteric viruses and other human pathogens in estuarine environments. The NMFS
sponsors studies of the clearance of haplosporidia parasites from oysters under controlled
salinity and temperature and on disease resistance. Related studies conducted at the NMFS
Northeast Fisheries Center attempt to identify the conditions that favor pathogen productivity
and movement, intermediate hosts, ranges, and transport media for pathogens. The Florida
Department of Natural Resources is investigating the persistence and factors that reactivate
dinoflagellate spores present in water and sediment.

The implementation of control or eradication procedures, and the prediction of outbreaks
of disease among marine organisms, require an understanding of the transport mechanisms and
persistence of biological agents in the marine environment and in biological systems. It would

109

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

be useful to develop an understanding of the fate of agents in the marine environment, and
the mode of transport, persistence, and concentration of these organisms or toxins through the
food chain. This knowledge will significantly improve the capability to predict the
consequences of human activities, and enhance the ability to cope with disease outbreaks.

Prediction, Control, and Mitigation

Mangeement Ouestion 4: How can acute and chronic problems associated with biological
aaents be predicted, controlled, and mititzated?

Information Needs

4a. What contingency plans can be developed to study episodic events?

4b. What strategies can be developed for mitigation of effects of biological agents?

4a. What continpency Wans can be develot)ed to study er)isodic events?

Mass mortalities and disease outbreaks in the marine environment appear as sudden
episodic events that have the ability to impact a system before they can be controlled.
Recent episodic events have included the bottlenose dolphin beachings off the east coast of
the United States in 1987, mass mortalities of sea urchins in the Caribbean Basin in 1983, and
coral bleaching incidents in 1982-83 and 1987-88. Mass mortalities of commercially important
species such as herring, striped bass, blue crab, menhaden, and king crab have also been
reported (Rosenfield, 1988). The conditions that have resulted in such events are not well
documented and extremely unpredictable. Information associated with aperiodic events can
only be obtained if appropriate contingency plans are developed and responses can be
implemented in a timely fashion.

Long-term monitoring of problems related to biological agents may aid in the
identification of aperiodic events as they occur. An attempt at such monitoring currently
proposed by NMFS, includes a registry for marine pathology, and the development of a national
shellfish health and protection plan. Related activities conducted by NOAA include the
collection and analysis of bottom-feeding fish for diseases under the National Status and
Trends Program. In addition, the Florida Department of Natural Resources and NOAA are
using satellite imagery techniques in an attempt to predict conditions that result in blooms of
red tide.

The study of episodic outbreaks such as toxic plankton blooms and marine mammal
beachings is needed to learn about the causes of these events and possibly their eventual
control. The implementation of a computerized system for cataloging and managing data on
disease agents and pathways manifested by geographic location and other factors in fish,
shellfish, marine mammals, and other marine organisms in North American marine and estuarine
waters, which is associated with a literature search program, would assist in making such data
available to the scientific community.

A major difficulty in the study of aperiodic events is their lack of predictability.
Williams and Williams (1987) suggested the establishment of an alert and communications
center for early detection of episodic events. A network of on-call scientists could be

110

Biological Agents

established to support the functioning of such a center. While early warning, confirmation,
and expert analysis and documentation will not stop episodic events, this kind of system is
believed to be a practical step toward determining causes for each event, and providing a
baseline for the more complicated goals of managing and mitigating the adverse effects of
biological agents.

4b. What strategies can be develoved for mitipation of effects of biological apents?

The impact of biological agents on marine resources results from two factors: an
increased pathogenicity on the part of the agent, or a decreased resistance on the part of the
host. Major problems stem from the intentional or accidental introduction of biological agents
into a biologically important area. These introductions, which may be novel forms to the
region, will result in a lack of resistance by the indigenous populations. A second concern is
the effect of human activities and resulting environmental stresses faced by marine organisms
in a degraded environment where the increase in numbers of pathogenic organisms is favored
or where the resistance of existing species to the ubiquitous pathogens is decreased.

Basic research may result in the development of measures to mitigate the effects of
biological agents. While such research in the past generally addressed human health concerns,
the results of these studies may be applicable to effects of biological agents on marine
organisms. For example, FDA conducts research on methods for quantification of viruses in
shellfish, detection of parasites in scallops, and detection and quantification of algal toxins.
NOAA Sea Grant funds research into the assessment and control of hepatitis A virus
contamination of shellfish, and pathogens in mangrove oysters.

The introduction of pathogenic organisms and species detrimental to the marine
environment must ultimately be reduced at the source by controlling inputs from land-based
sources, by properly evaluating species targeted for introduction prior to release, and by
limiting unintentional inputs of detrimental organisms associated with the species targeted for
introduction. Such approaches have been implemented at the quarantine facility in Conway,
Wales, where a central laboratory has been established for the evaluation of the potential
effects of all organisms prior to their release into the marine environment. All organisms are
classified according to their potential for pathogenicity and ecological damage. Later
generations of these laboratory-bred organisms are released only after it has been determined
that they will not threaten the indigenous biota (Sindermann, 1988).

Mitigating the effects of biological agents that are already present in the marine
environment presents a difficult problem. Reduction or elimination of environmental stresses
on the biota is necessary. This can only be achieved by reductions of pollutant loadings and
other environmental stressors. The determination of which factors cause stress responses
would be a first step in researching the means of combatting this problem.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The subject of human- influenced biological agents that affect marine organisms has been
largely neglected in the past. Most research has been directed toward human health concerns.
The current base of knowledge on effects of biological agents is primarily observational,
including observations from monitoring programs and the characterization of sporadic incidents.

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The following conclusions relating to the current state of knowledge concerning sources,
fates, and effects of biological agents in the marine environment are based on the discussion
of management questions and information needs presented in the previous section.

o For many outbreaks of disease and mass mortalities of living marine resources, we do
not know the specific biological agent responsible or the mechanism of impact. In
some cases, biological agents may be introduced to the marine environment as a result
of human activities. In other cases, pollution may cause stress in marine organisms,
thereby making them more susceptible to infection by biological agents;

p The basic biological attributes of many biological agents, such as life history,
environmental requirements, taxonomy, and persistence in the marine environment are
unknown;

o, Very little is known concerning the survival and effects of genetically engineered
organisms in the marine environment.

Research approaches directed towards problems that are caused by biological agents can
be divided into four categories based on the current level of knowledge. Each category
requires a specific approach to attain most efficiently the necessary level of knowledge
concerning the diseases that are suspected or known to be caused by biological agents. These
categories of research approach are:

1. Observed events where biological agents are suspected, but for which there is no
understanding of the cause;

2. Biological agents that are suspected to affect marine organisms, but evidence of such
an effect is lacking;

3. Biological agents known to affect marine organisms, but where the knowledge of the
impact is incomplete; and

4. Biological agents that are known to affect marine organisms, and where knowledge of
the impact is adequate, but whose action cannot yet be mitigated.

A conventional procedure for determining the etiology of a bacterial disease is to prove
Koch's postulates. These postulates are:

1. The pathogen should always be found in animals suffering from the disease, and
should not be present in healthy individuals.

2. The pathogen must be cultivated in pure culture away from the animal body.

3. Such a culture, when inoculated into susceptible animals, should initiate the
characteristic disease symptoms.

112

Biological Agents

4. The pathogen should be re-isolated from these experimental animals and cultured
again in the laboratory, after which it should still be the same as the original
pathogen (Brock, 1979).

These postulates can be used in conjunction with the research approach recommended for each
of the four categories that are designed to effectively direct efforts towards problems caused
by biological agents in the marine environment. Table 6 is a presentation of examples from
each of the four categories. A discussion of the research needs related to each category is
presented below.

Table 6. Categorization of Biological Agents by Level of Knowledge

Category Incidents

1. Observable events Clam neoplasms, Coral bleaching events, Whale and dolphin beachings, Sea urchin mortalities
for which we have no
understanding of cause

Biological Agents

Bacteria Virus Fungi Protozoa Toxic Bioengineered and
Plankton Iritroduced Species

2. Agents suspected Coliform Rotavirus None Paramoeba None Pseudomonas
to impact marine bacteria Rabdovirus perniciosa putida
organisms, but Retrovirus
evidence is lacking.

3. Agents known to Salmonella spp Colicivirus Saproleg- Hematadinium Porocentrum None
affect marine animals, Microbacteria Herpes niaceae
SPA SPA
but knowledge of
impact is incomplete

4. Known to be an Vibrio spp. Influenza A Ichthyo- Minchinia Ptychodiscus Minchina
important agent aerococcus Baculovirus phonus nelsoni, brevis, nelsoni
in the marine SPA Dermocysti- Protogonvau-
environment, but dium marinus, lax spp.,
unable to mitigate Paramoeba Gambierdiscus
its impact pemiciosa toxicus

113

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Cause Unknown

In the case of events where the cause of disease or mass mortalities in marine organisms
is unknown, research could be directed to fulfill Koch's postulates to identify the causative
agent of the disease. Once the identity of the agent is determined, research could be directed
at developing more complete knowledge of the impact of the agent on marine resources.

Biological Agents Suspected

As in the case of events where the cause is unknown, if a biological agent is suspected
of causing an impact on marine resources but evidence linking disease or mortality to the
agent is lacking, research directed at fulfilling Koch's postulates would be most useful. Once
such a link is established, research should focus On gaining a better understanding of the
impact of the biological agent on living marine resources.

Knowledge of Impact Incomplete

In those cases where a biological agent is known to affect marine organisms but
knowledge concerning the impact is incomplete, research on determining the connection
between the biological agent and natural events and human activities causing the outbreak, as
well as on quantifying the extent of the impact on marine organisms would be most useful.
This would include research on the following:

o Persistence and transport mechanisms;

o Host range and vectors/alternate hosts;

o Host defense mechanisms and virulence of pathogen;
o Role of environmental factors on pathogen interactions; and

o Development of rapid diagnostic techniques.

Mitigation of Impacts

Once knowledge concerning the impact of a biological agent on living marine resources is
adequate, research should be directed toward mitigating those impacts. This would include
determination of control points and mechanisms of pathogenicity of these biological agents. In
addition, efforts should include basic research into population genetics, population dynamics of
host and pathogen, host range and response, the production of toxins or metabolites, and
complex interactions with other pathogens, hosts, or chemical pollutants.

114

Biological Agents

Literature Cited

Bloch, B., S. Mellergaard, and E. Nielsen. 1986. Adenovirus-like Particles Associated with
Epithelial Hyperplasias in Dab Limanda limanda (L.). J. Fish Dis. 9:281-285.

Brock, T.D. 1979. Biology of microorganisms. 3d Ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
802 pp.

CEQ. 1985. Environmental Qualit y. The Sixteenth Annual Report of the Council on
Environmental Quality Together with the President's Message to Congress. Council on
Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C. 446 pp.

Chang, F.H. 1985. Preliminary Toxicity Test of Prymnesiurn calathiferurn n.sp. Isolated from
New Zealand, pp. 109-112. In Toxic Dinoflagellates. Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Toxic Dinoflagellates. June 8-12. 1985, St. Andrews, N.B.,
Canada (D.M. Anderson, A.W. White, and D.G. Baden, eds.). Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co.,
New York, NY.

Coles, B.M., R.K. Troud, and S. Sheggeby. 1978. Isolation of Edwardsiella tarda from Three
Oregon Sea Mammals. J. Wildl. Dis. 14:339-341.

Colgrove G.S. and G. Migaki. 1976. Cerebral Abscess Associated with Stranding in a Dolphin.
J. Wildl. Dis. 12:271-274

Colwell R.R. and D.J. Grimes. 1984. Vibrio Diseases of Marine Fish Populations. Helgol.
Meeresunters. 37:265-287.

Colwell R.R., P.R. Brayton, D.J. Grimes, D.B. Roszak, S.A. Huq, and L.M. Palmer. 1985. Viable
but Non-culturable Vibrio cholerae and Related Pathogens in the Environment:
Implications for Release of Genetically Engineered Microorganisms. Bio/Technology.
3:817-820.

Couch, J.A. 1978. Diseases, Parasites, and Toxic Responses of Commercial Penaeid Shrimps of
the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Coasts of North America. Fish. Bull. 76:1-44.

Farley, C.A. 1978. Viruses and Viruslike Lesions in Marine Mollusks. Mar. Fish. Rev. 40:18-
20.

Flint, H.J., S.H. Duncan, and C.S. Stewart. 1987. Transmissible Antibiotic Resistance in
Strains of Escherichia coli Isolated from Bovine Rumen. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 5:47-49.

Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin, I.K. Barker, R.G. Webster, V.S. Hinshaw, W.J. Bean, H.L. Ruhneke,
J.H. Prescott, G. Early, A.S. Baker, S. Madoff, and R.T. Schooley. 1982. Mass Mortality
of Harbour Seals: Pneumonia Associated with Influenza A Virus. Science. 215:1129-1131.

115

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Geraci, J.R., D.J. St. Aubin, I.K. Barker, V.S. Hinshaw, R.G. Webster, and H.L. Ruhnke. 1983.
Susceptibility of Grey (Halochoerus grypus and Harp (Phoca groenlandica) Seals to the
Influenza Virus and Mycoplasma of Epizootic Pneumonia of Harbour Seals (Phoca
vitulina). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 41:151-156.

Gilmartin, W.G., P.M. Vainik, and V.M. Niell. 1979. Salmonellae in Feral Pinnipeds off the
Southern California Coast. J. Wildl. Dis. 15:511-514.

Higgins, R., R. Claveau, and R. Roy. 1980. Bronchopneurnonia Caused by Strewococcus egui
in a North Atlantic Pilot Whale Globicet)hala melaena. J. Wildl. Dis. 16:34-321.

Hinshaw, V.S., W.J. Bean, J. Geraci, P. Morelli, G. Early, and R.G. Webster. 1986.
Characterization of Two Influenza A Viruses from a Pilot Whale. J. Virol. 58:655-656.

Howard, E.B. 1984. Pathobiology of Marine Mammal Diseases. Volume 1. CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL. 238 pp.

Johnson, P.T. 1984. Viral Diseases of Marine Invertebrates. Helgol. Meeresunters. 37:65-98.

Larsen, J.L., N.J. Jensen, and N.D. Christensen. 1978. Water Pollution and the Ulcer
Syndrome in the Cod Gadus morhua. Vet. Sci. Commun. 2:207-216.

MacLean, J.L. and A.W. White. 1985. Toxic Dinoflagellate Blooms in Asia: A growing
Concern, pp. 517-520. In Toxic Dinoflagellates. Proceedings of the Third International
Conference on Toxic Dinoflapellates, June 8-12, 19M St. Andrews, N.B., Canada (D.M.
Anderson, A.W. White, and D.G. Baden, eds.). Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co., New York,
NY.

McConnell, M.M., G.A. Willshaw, H.R. Smith, S.M. Scotland, and B. Rowe. 1979.
Transportation and Ampicillin Resistance to an Enterotoxin Plasmid in an Escherichia coli
Strain of Human Origin. J. Bacteriol. 139:346-355.

Mortensen, A.M. 1985. Massive Fish Mortalities in the Faroe Islands Caused by Gonvaulax
excavata Red Tide, pp. 163-170. In Toxic Dinoflagellates. Proceedings of the Third
International Conference on Toxic Dinoflagellates. June 8-12, 1985, St. Andrews, N.B.,
Canada (D.M. Anderson, A.W. White, and D.G. Baden, eds.). Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co.,
New York, NY.

Murphy, B.R., J. Harper, D.L. Sly, W.T. London, N.T. Miller, and R.G. Webster. 1983.
Evaluation of the A/Seal/Mass/l/80 Virus in Squirrel Monkeys. Infect. Immun. 42:424-
426.

NOAA. 1987. National Marine Pollution Program. Summary of Federal Programs and
Projects, FY 1986 Update. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.

116

Biological Agents

O'Connor, J.S., J.T. Ziskowski, and R.A. Murchelano. 1987. Index of Pollutant-Induced Fish
and Shellfish Disease. National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 29 pp.

OTA. 1987. Water in Marine Environments. Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. OTA-0-334, 313 pp.

Roberts, L. 1988. Corals Remain Baffling. Science. 239:256

Robohm, R.A., C. Brown, and R.A. Murchelano. 1979. Comparison of Antibodies in Marine
Fish from Clean and Polluted Waters of the New York Bight: Relative Levels Against 36
Bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 38:248-257.

Rosenfield, A. 1988. Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, University of Maryland,
College Park, MD. Personal Communication.

Rosenfield, A. and F.G. Kern. 1978. Molluscan Imports and the Potential for Introduction of
Disease Organisms, pp. 165-189. In Proceedings of a Svmt)osium on Exotic Sgecies in
Mariculture. Case Histories of the iat)anese Oyster Crassostrea gigas (Thunberiz), with
lmt)lications for Other Fisheries (R. Mann, ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Sindermann, C.J. 1982. Implications of Oil Pollution in Production of Disease in Marine
Organisms. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B297:385-399.

Sindermann, C.J. 1988. Cooperative Biological Laboratory, National Marine Fisheries Service,
Oxford, MD. Personal Communication.

Smith, A.W., R.J. Brown, D.E. Skilling, H.L. Bray, and M.C. Keyes. 1977. Naturally Occurring
Leptospirosis in Northern Fur Seals (Callorhinus ursinus 13:144-148.
J. Wildl. Dis.

Taylor, F.J.R. 1985. The Taxonomy and Relationships of Red Tide Flagellates, pp. 11-26. In
Toxic Dinoflapellates. Proceedinps of the Third International Conference on Toxic
Dinoflap,ellates, June 8-12, 1985, St. Andrews. N.B. Canada (D.M. Anderson, A.W. White,
and D.G. Baden, edg.). Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co., New York, NY.

Therriault, J.C., J. Painchaud, and M. Levasseur. 1985. Factors Controlling the Occurrence of
Protoizonvaulax tamarensis and Shellfish Toxicity in the St. Lawrence Estuary.
Freshwater Runoff and the Stability of the Water Column, pp. 141-146. In Toxic
Dinoflaq,ellates. Proceedinps of the Third International Conference on Toxic
Dinoflap,ellates, June 8-12, 1985, St. Andrews, N.B., Canada (D.M. Anderson, A.W. White,
and D.G. Baden, eds.). Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co., New York, NY.

Vedros, N.A., A.W. Smith, J. Schonewald, G. Migaki, and R.C. Hubbard. 1971. Leptospirosis
Epizootic Among California Sea Lions. Science. 172:1250-1251.

Wachsmuth, K., J. DeBoy, K. Birkness, D. Sack, and J. Wells. 1983. Genetic Transfer and
Antimicrobial Resistance and Enterotoxigenicity Among Escherichia coli Strains.
Antimicrob. Agents Chernother. 23:278-283.

117

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Wedermeyer, G.A., D.J. McLeay, and C.P. Goodyear. 1984. Assessing the Tolerance of Fish
and Fish Populations to Environmental Stress. The Problems and Methods of Monitoring,
pp. 164-195. In Contaminant Effects on Fisheries (V.W. Cairns, P.V. Hodson, and J.0.
Nriagu, eds.). John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.

Williams, E.H. and L.B. Williams. 1987. A Caribbean Alert and Communication Center for
Major Marine Ecological Disturbances. Presented at the Coral Reef Bleaching Workshop.
Sponsored by the NOAA Undersea Research Program. West Indies Laboratory, Teague
Bay, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands.

Yevich, P.P. and C.A. Barszcz. 1976. Gonadal and hernatopoietic neoplasms in Mva arenaria.
Mar. Fish. Rev. 38(10): 42-43.

118

Habitat Loss or Modification

GOAL 4: UNDERSTAND THE EFFECTS OF LOSING OR MODIFYING:
MARINE HABITATS AS A RESULT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES

Goal Definition . ... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . 120
Freshwater Inflow . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Sedimentation . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

Sea Level . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Persistent Marine Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

Federal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Status of Habitat Quantity and Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Causes of Habitat Loss and Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

Short-Term Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Long-Term and Cumulative Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Effectiveness of Restoration and Mitigation Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Status of Habitat Quantity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

Causes of Habitat Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Natural Processes and Habitat Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Marine Debris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Marine and estuarine habitats are being lost at an alarming rate in many parts of the
country. These losses are due to the direct and indirect impacts of human activities, as well
as to natural phenomena. Declines in the quantity and quality of marine habitats is thought
to reduce production of living marine resources and to diminish other important values of
habitats. Continued shifts of human populations to coastal areas will increase pressures on
marine habitats in the f'uture. Therefore, understanding the effects of human activities on
marine habitats is one of the six goals of the National Marine Pollution Program.

119

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Coal Definition

Marine and estuarine habitats perform important functions for all living marine resources.
Habitats are used by these species for spawning, rearing, feeding, migration, and shelter from
predators. Populations of living marine resources are frequently limited by the quantity and
quality of habitat. Numerous studies have demonstrated the possibility of an important
relationship between yields of commercially valuable fisheries and acres of habitat available to
the harvested species (Turner, 1977; Deegan and Day, 1984; Herke, 1971; Yakupzack et al.,
1977; Knudson et al., 1977; Weinstein, 1979; Weinstein and Brooks, 1983; Mock, 1967). As
habitats continue to be lost or damaged due to human activities, there is concern that a
decrease in living marine resources will result.

Many marine and estuarine habitats, in particular vegetated wetlands (tidal marshes),
perform other valuable functions to man and the environment. These functions include erosion
and flood protection, water quality control, and waterfowl and wildlife utilization.

Marine and estuarine habitats may be organized into the following groups:

o Emergent vegetated wetlands
- marshes
- mangroves

0 Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)
- seagrasses
- other submerged plant communities

0 Hard bottoms
coral reefs and rocky bottoms
rocky shores

0 Soft (unconsolidated) bottoms
- mud flats
- sand/shell beaches
- subtidal soft bottoms

0 Shellfish beds
- oyster reefs
- clam beds

0 Water column

Although all of these habitat groups were considered in the development of this chapter, the
text will focus primarily on emergent vegetated wetlands. This is due to the recognized
ecological value of wetlands and the rapid rate of their deterioration and loss in many coastal
areas. Alteration of the water column from the presence of marine debris is also considered
important and warrants some discussion due to its adverse impacts on marine life and coastal
communities.

The human activities that contribute the most direct impacts to habitat loss and
modification are those causing physical alterations. These activities will be the focus of this
section. The effects of chemical contamination on living marine resources and -their habitats

120

Habitat Loss or Modification

are considered in other sections of this Plan. Examples of human activities that cause direct
physical alterations of marine and estuarine habitat include:

1. Drainage for crop production, timber production, and mosquito control;

2. Dredging and.strearn channelization for navigation channels, flood protection, coastal
housing development, and reservoir maintenance;

3. Filling for dredged material and other solid waste disposal, roads and
highways, and commercial, residential, and industrial development;

4. Construction of dikes, dams, levees, and seawalls for flood control, water
supply, irrigation, and storm protection;

5. Mining of wetland soils for peat, coal, sand, gravel, phosphate, and other
materials (Tiner, 1984);

6. Extraction of groundwater, oil, gas, and sulphur; and

7. Overboard garbage disposal, abandonment of fishing gear, oil rig and drilling platform
operations, discharges municipal and industrial wastes, and public littering.

Physical alterations may cause habitat loss directly by removal or indirectly by modifying
natural processes that significantly affect habitat. These natural processes include freshwater
inflow, hydrology, sedimentation, and sea-level changes. In addition, marine debris is
considered a physical alteration of the water column that poses a serious threat to the health
and safety of marine animals. A discussion of the relationship between physical alterations
and each of the processes is provided in the sections that'follow.

Freshwater Inf low

Diversion of freshwater for agricultural, industrial, and domestic ourposes can have a
detrimental impact on estuarine habitat by 'upsetting the balance of fresh- and seawater flows.
Of special concern is the relationship of freshwater flow to estuarine hydrography including
sedimentation, nutrient dynamics, biotic distributions, primary productivity, food webs, and
pollutant distribution (Thayer et al., 1985; NOAA, 1987b; Soniat and Boesch, In press).

Recruitment of many fish and shellfish species is closely linked to the hydrodynamics of
estuaries and associated coastal waters, as are the composition and well-being of estuarine
plant communities. Changes in freshwater flows affect the amount of sediment, nutrients, and
organic carbon entering the estuary from terrestrial sources. This in turn can affect the
composition and production of both plant and animal populations present in an estuary (Thayer
et al., 1985).

Alterations in natural estuarine flow patterns and salinity regimes encourage salinization
of brackish waters and/or rapid influxes of freshwater into upper estuaries. This in turn can
affect various life history stages and routes of migration as well as feeding habits of certain
invertebrate and fish species (Thayer et al., 1985; ASLO, In press). Increases in salinity, for
example, may increase the number of high-salinity predators and diseases of oysters (Soniat
and Boesch, In press).

121

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Hydrology

Flood frequency and duration, water depth, and water velocity influence the types of
vegetation, soils, and biota present in a marsh (Turner et al., 1984; Zedler and Beare, 1986).
Although wetland plants are flood-adapted, they are also sensitive to changes in the
hydrologic regime. Hydrologic changes having a major effect on habitat occur as a result of
changes in freshwater inputs, direct man-made physical alterations to habitat (such as canal
building), and relative changes in sea level.

The construction of canals and the associated deposit of dredged sediments in banks of
the canals (disposal banks) has become a major influence on hydrology in wetlands. Turner
and Cahoon (1987) attributed major changes occurring in south Louisiana wetlands to disposal
bank creation, which results in changes in the hydrology of the adjacent marsh. Disposal
banks cause increased flood duration and a decrease in the number of flooding and drying
cycles due to the impediment of water flow through a marsh. The increased elevation of
disposal banks can also result in a decrease in soil moisture and salinity, which allows
invasion of the marsh by terrestrial plant species and elimination of marsh species.
Additionally, disposal banks can increase waterlogging in an adjacent marsh, resulting in an
increase in stress on the marsh, a decrease in its productivity, and eventual deterioration
(Turner and Cahoon, 1987).

Hydrologic cycles also influence the nitrogen regime in wetland ecosystems by regulating
the input of the nutrient into, and out of, the marsh (Turner et al., 1984). Nitrogen is often
the primary limiting growth factor for rooted wetland macrophytes (Mendelssohn, 1979), and
any changes in the availability of nitrogen could affect plant productivity (Turner et al.,
1984).

Sedimentation

A continuous input of sediments to wetlands is necessary to counteract erosion, the
effects of sea-level rise, and natural compaction of deposited sediments. Without sufficient
input of new sediments, wetland areas would eventually be converted from one habitat type to
another (high marsh to low marsh) and would eventually be completely submerged.
Sedimentologic modifications are occurring in many wetland areas as a result of changes in
freshwater input (e.g., upstream reservoirs), channel deepening, cutting of navigation canals,
levee construction, and agricultural practices. With a decrease in the volume of freshwater
flowing into a marsh is an accompanying decrease in the natural inputs of suspended sediments
available for trapping by wetland vegetation and marsh accretion (Soniat and Boesch, In
press). In addition, levees, channels, and river-control structures act to trap the flow of
water and associated sediments and prevent over-bank flow of muds and fine sands during
flood conditions (NAS, 1987). As a result, suspended sediments are either deposited onto the
continental shelf and not into the marsh (Titus, 1986) or, in the case of river-control
structures, trapped upstream. Without an influx of inorganic riverborne sediments, the marsh
surface can only accrete vertically by biogenic production, which is often not adequate to
keep pace with rising sea levels, and the marsh will eventually be submerged (NAS, 1987).

Increased sediment loads can have negative impacts on marine and estuarine habitats.
Shoaling as a result of increased sediment loads can decrease the volume of an estuary and
could lead to a decrease or change in habitat (ASLO, In press). Erosion of sediments from
upland areas (e.g., agricultural lands and construction sites), discharges of dredged material,

122

Habitat Loss or Modification

sloughing of channels, canals, and bayou banks, scouring of shallow bay bottoms, and the
subsequent movement of displaced sediments can result in the eventual burial of areas
downstream. This increased sedimentation could affect the fauna and flora in hard bottom and
soft bottom areas. Oyster cultch materials could also be buried, thereby eliminating the
bottom's ability to support oyster growth. Increased suspended sediments may also affect
primary productivity due to its effect on the depth of the photic zone. Filter-feeding
consumers may also be adversely affected by increased suspended- sediment loads (ASLO, In
press).

Sea Level

Recent studies conducted by NAS and EPA suggest that the earth's temperature is
expected to increase several degrees during the next century due to the greenhouse effect.
The occurrence of such warming would cause a significant increase in the rate of sea-level
rise around the world (Revelle 1983; Hoffman et al., 1983). Many wetlands have been able to
keep pace with the relatively slow rise in sea level that has been occurring during the last
few thousand years; however, if the sea level rises more rapidly than the marsh's ability to
accrete new sediments, there will be a substantial loss of wetland area (Titus, 1986).

In addition to the increase in the volume of water in the world's oceans associated with
accelerated global warming, subsidence in coastal areas is contributing to the relative rise in
sea level along some coasts of the United States. Coastal subsidence along the Mississippi
Delta is occurring at a rate that is five times as high as the average rate of global sea-level
rise over the past century (Boesch et al., 1983). Large expanses of coastal marshes in
Louisiana are being flooded permanently by the rising sea level. This is contributing to an
estimated loss of over 40 square miles of coastal marshes in the region each year (Fruge,
1982). The causes of subsidence are 1) base downwarping (downward geologic displacement)
from sedimentary loading, 2) compaction of sediments, and 3) tectonic activities. Compaction
of sediments is a result of several factors, both natural and manmade. The anthropogenic
causes include lowering of the water table through extraction of groundwater, petroleum, salt,
or sulfur and reclamation practices that employ diking, construction of water-control
structures, and draining of lands for agricultural or urban use (Craig et al., 1979). Effects of
subsidence in some regions is more severe due to reductions in sediment input.

The relative rise in sea level, whether it results from global warming or regional
subsidence, will have three major types of physical effects on habitat: shoreline retreat,
increased flooding, and landward movement of salt water. Shorelines will retreat because the
very low land will be inundated and other land along the shore will erode. Those coastal
areas not lost to rising sea levels will experience an increase in flooding due to higher storm
surges, the movement of larger waves farther inland, and increased runoff due to a decrease
in upland areas' ability to drain as a result of a higher water table. The relative sea-level
rises will cause salt water to move farther inland, intruding into the groundwater, rivers, and
estuaries, and may alter the local availability of freshwater and alter ecosystems (Hoffman et
al., 1983). A change in the sea level itself will result in changes in the patterns of
sedimentation and marsh accretion, circulation patterns, biochemical cycles, and primary and
secondary production which, in turn, affect living marine resources (ASLO, In press).

123

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Persistent Marine Debris

An increasing awareness of the problems associated with marine debris, which includes
metal items, glass, tar balls, and plastics, has occurred during the past decade. Marine debris
comes from a number of sources including fishing vessels, oil rigs and drilling platforms,
garbage dumped overboard from ships, plastic manufacturing industries, sewer systems
combined with storm runoff, docks and marinas, and public littering. The best estimates, made
over a decade ago, indicate the amount of debris generated worldwide by ocean sources was
6.4 million metric tons per year in the early 1970's (NAS, 1975). The world's merchant
shipping fleet, the major contributor of debris, discharged an estimated 5.6 million metric tons
of4e-bris per year (NAS, 1975).

Of all types of marine debris, plastics have caused the greatest threat to marine life.
Unfortunately, the same properties that make plastics more desirable than other materials,
lightweight yet strong and durable, are also the properties that cause problems in the marine
environment. Accordingly, this section will address plastic debris. Over 6 billion pounds of
plastic resins were produced in the United States by 1960 (SPI, 1986). Plastic sales by weight
in the United States in 1984 were estimated at 55,751 million pounds (SPI, 1988). More
plastics were produced in 1985 than metal, glass, paper, and leather. The major uses of
plastics include transportation, packaging, building and construction, electrical and electronic
goods, furniture and furnishings, consumer and institutional supplies, industry, and machinery
(CEE, 1987).

The majority of plastic materials entering the ocean is fishing gear, packaging materials,
convenience items, and raw plastics (Pruter, 1987). Raw plastics, commonly called resin
pellets, are the form in which raw or "virgin" plastic is produced and transported for later
manufacture into plastic products. The major sources of resin pellets to the marine
environment have been plastic manufacturing plants and transportation systems. The
concentrations of plastic pellets in river sediments below manufacturing plant outfalls have
been found to be as high as 800 pellets per cubic centimeter (CEE, 1987).

Whether plastic products and pellets float or sink, they are significant threats to marine
mammals, sea birds, turtles, fish, and crustaceans (Laist, 1987). Because plastic products are
very durable, they have a long life expectancy in the environment, which increases the
possibility of an encounter with marine life. It has been estimated that nondegradable plastics
can exist intact up to hundreds of years in seawater (ITFPMD, 1988).

The effects of plastics on marine animals occur by ingestion or entanglement. Animals
that ingest plastic matter may suffer blocked digestive tracks, damaged stomach linings, or
lessened feeding drives (Laist, 1987). Entangled animals may drown, require more energy to
swim due to the increased drag, be less able to catch food or escape predators, and suffer
serious lacerations and infections.

Current data suggests that entanglement may be a more serious problem than ingestion
(Laist, 1987). Declining populations of northern fur seals on the Pribilof Islands of Alaska
have been associated with mortality caused by entanglement from debris and plastic packing
bands originating from the driftnet and trawl fisheries (Fowler, 1987). Approximately 0.4% of
the subadult male Pribilof Island fur seal population is currently entangled in debris (Fowler,
1988).

124

Habitat Loss or Modification

The entanglement of sea birds in net fragments, monofilament fishing line, and six-pack
rings has also been documented (Schrey and Vaulk, 1987; CEE, 1987). Sea turtles are
commonly entangled in monofilament fishing line, rope, trawl net, gill nets, and plastic sheets
or bags (CEE, 1987). Significant mortality rates of endangered green turtles off Costa Rica
have been linked to the ingestion of banana bags (Heneman and CEE, 1987).

Ghost fishing, the ability of derelict nets and traps to continue catching finfish and
shellfish indefinitely, is a major concern of the marine debris problem. In one isolated case,
99 dead sea birds and over 200 dead salmon were found entangled in a mile-long section of
derelict gillnet (DeGange and Newby, 1980).

Sea birds, turtles, and fish are the most common marine animals that ingest plastics.
Sea birds are likely to ingest raw plastic pellets that resemble their normal prey: fish eggs or
larvae (Laist, 1987; CEE, 1987; Fry et al., 1987). An accumulation of ingested pellets can
cause reduced feeding drives that may lead to malnutrition (Ryan, 1988) or fatal internal
injuries (CEE, 1987). Pellet ingestion has also been documented in bottom fish such as
flounder and perch (CEE, 1987). Possibly mistaken for jellyfish or other prey, plastic bags
and sheeting are commonly ingested by turtles (CEE, 1987; Laist, 1987) along with a variety of
other debris (CEE, 1987; Carr, 1987) that can block their digestive system and cause death
(CEE, 1987; Martin, 1987). Humpback, fin, and right whales have been observed trailing
plastic fishing gear from their mouths at sea (Connor and O'Dell, 1988).

Persistent marine debris is also an aesthetic problem in coastal areas of the country.
Beach wash-ups have not only cost thousands of dollars to clean up, they have also deterred
tourists and caused substantial economic losses to the coastal industry (CEE, 1987). Financial
losses have also been suffered by vessel owners due to fouled propellers and clogged cooling
water intake systems.

Persistent marine debris causes problems worldwide; however, the persistent marine debris
problem for most locations and species is not currently at the crisis stage according to
information now available (ITFPMD, 1988). However, near-term implementation of programs
and regulations to reduce the impacts of marine debris could readily prevent numerous and
unnecessary mortalities of marine life that may otherwise reach crisis proportions in the
future.

Feder#] Role

This section is a discussion'of the Federal legislation, regulations, and programs that
address the issue of habitat loss and modification. Additional discussions of Federal programs
as related to specific information needs are presented under the management questions that
follow this review of the Federal role. More detailed information on the Federal programs
and projects that address the issue of habitat alterations can be found in the National Marine
Pollution Program, Summary of Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 1987c).

Federal Legislation and Regulations

Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) provides the
major avenue of Federal involvement in controlling the use of wetlands and other marine
habitats by regulating discharges of dredged or fill material into the waters of the United

125

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

States. Under Section 404, persons seeking to conduct such activities must first obtain a
permit from the local district office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of the
U.S. Department of the Interior, and state agencies review these permit applications and
provide comments and recommendations on whether permits should be issued and under what
conditions. The COE then evaluates the impacts of proposed development activities on
wetlands and other marine habitats in light of its regulations and comments received from
these agencies. If expected impacts are judged to be significant, the permit application can
be denied, or the project can be modified to minimize impacts. If there are no practicable
alternatives and the project is in the public interest, mitigation can be required to compensate
for the damage caused by the permitted activity. The EPA has the authority under Section
404(c) to overrule the use of any disposal site included in a COE permit application if it
determines that the expected discharge would have an unacceptable adverse impact on
municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including spawning and brooding
areas), wildlife, or recreational areas (40 CFR Part 231).

Section 404 only regulates the discharge of dredged or fill materials. Projects involving
excavation, drainage, clearing, and flooding of wetlands are not explicitly included. Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires permits from the COE for dredging and other
activities that could obstruct the navigable waterways of the United States, defined as those
waters below the mean high-tide level, including tidal wetlands. Section 10 has served to
protect tidal wetlands from activities such as dredging that are not covered by Section 404.

The NMFS and the FWS have legislative responsibilities to manage fish and wildlife
resources and their habitats. The two agencies have common interests in some marine
resources and their habitats in coastal waters, estuarine areas, and waters occupied by
anadromous fishes. The responsibilities of NOAA's NMFS include management of marine fish
located primarily in the Exclusive Economic Zone; anadromous fish; conservation of certain
species of marine mammals (whales, dolphins, seals, and sea lions); and protection of
endangered or threatened marine species (including sea turtles when in the water). The
responsibilities of the FWS include, but are not restricted to, management of migratory
waterfowl,, anadromous fish, endangered species, and resident freshwater fish, and protection
of certain species of marine mammals (manatees, polar bears, sea otters, and walruses), and
sea turtles when they come ashore.

The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) and the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) are the major authorities under which NMFS and FWS conduct aquatic habitat
conservation activities, although significant additional environmental legislation has been
passed since 1970 that gives the two agencies further authority over marine habitats. The
FWCA requires interagency consultation to assure that fish and wildlife resources are
considered when determining the economic and social concerns of a proposed Federal or
federally authorized project that controls, modifies, or develops the Nation's waters. The
NMFS and FWS analyze a wide variety of projects under the FWCA, including COE dredge and
fill permit applications for U.S. waterways, hydroelectric power project proposals, and other
Federal water projects.

Additional FWS mandates related to habitat include Sections 401 and 402 of the
Emergency Wetland Resources Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-645). Section 401 of the Act requires the
Secretary of the Interior to produce detailed wetland maps for the contiguous United States
by September 30, 1998, and for Alaska as soon as possible after that date. The Section also

126

Habitat Loss or Modification

requires FWS to update its report on the status and trends of the Nation's wetlands by 1990
and every 10 years thereafter. Section 402 requires the Secretary of the Interior to submit
reports to Congress describing the status, condition, and trends of wetlands in the United
States. These reports are to contain an analysis of the factors responsible for wetlands
destruction, degradation, protection, and enhancement and an analysis of the direct and
indirect effects of Federal programs on wetlands.

Additional NOAA mandates related to habitat include the Magnuson Fishery Conservation
and Management Act (P.L. 94-265; Magnuson Act), which requires NMFS to conserve and
manage U.S. living marine resources, principally within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone,
although there is concern about management throughout the range of the resources. The.
Magnuson Act provides for the consideration of living marine resource habitat in the
development of fishery management plans.

The International Convention on the Prevention of Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and
Other Matter, London, 1972, also known as the London Dumping Convention (LDC), prohibits
the deliberate disposal into the sea of "persistent plastics and other persistent synthetic
materials," which include netting and ropes. The definition of dumping, however, excludes
"the disposal of synthetic debris at sea during the course of normal vessel operations."

Annex V of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL 73/78) was unanimously. ratified by the U.S. Senate on November 5, 1987 and goes
into effect on December 31, 1988. The U.S. Coast Guard is currently drafting the regulations
for implementing the pollution prevention requirements of Annex V. Annex V prohibits ships
representing the member nations from the "disposal into the sea of all plastics, including but
not limited to synthetic ropes, synthetic fishing nets and plastic garbage bags" with limited
exceptions. Under Annex V, synthetic debris, generated as a result of normal vessel
operations, cannot be discarded at sea as was previously allowed under the LDC.

The Marine Plastic Pollution- Research and Control Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-220) amends the
1980 Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS, P.L. 96-478) and provides for the
implementation of Annex V of MARPOL 73/78. It also calls for a research effort to identify
and reduce the effects of plastic debris in the marine environment and to conduct a public
outreach/education program on plastics pollution. Title IV, the Driftnet Impact Monitoring,
Assessment, and Control Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-220) has several provisions, one of which
requires the Department of Commerce to investigate the feasibility of a driftnet marking,
registry, and identification system; the use of alternative driftnet materials; a driftnet bounty
system; and a driftnet vessel tracking system.

Federal Programs

Several Federal agencies conduct research, development, and monitoring activities related
to the effects of human destruction and modification of marine habitats. The agencies with
major roles in habitat research include COE, USDA, NOAA, and FWS.

Habitat-related research and monitoring is conducted by COE at the Waterways
Experiment Station (WES) in Vicksburg, Mississippi and at its division laboratories. Most of
the COE's research activities address the effects of dredged material disposal in aquatic
systems. Such activities include assessing various disposal techniques through monitoring of
disposal sites, development of alternative disposal methods, and characterization of biological,

127

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

physical, and chemical characteristics of historical and future disposal sites. WES studies the
effects on living marine resources and their habitat of coastal engineering projects, such as
beach nourishment, channel deepening, and jetty construction. In addition, WES is developing
techniques for using dredged material for habitat creation (oyster reefs, sea grass beds, and
other wetland habitats) and for abating shoreline erosion using marsh plants and seagrasses to
stabilize sediments and reduce wave energy. WES also conducts research to identify and
delineate wetlands and to assess wetland functions and values.

NOAA's research and monitoring activities are conducted primarily by the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Sea Grant Program of the Office of Oceanic and
Atmospheric Research (OAR), and the Strategic Assessments Branch of the National Ocean
Service (NOS). Other NOAA offices and programs that address habitat issues include the Deep
Seabed Mining Environmental Research Program and the National Marine Sanctuaries Program
of NOS, and OAR's Environmental Research Laboratories. NOAA conducts studies on wetland
functions, such as the habitat utilization and requirements of commercial, recreational, and
endangered species and the relationship between plant primary productivity and living marine
resource production. The agency conducts research and monitoring to determine the direct
and long-term effects of various environmental alterations such as freshwater diversions,
dredging, and impoundments, on the spatial distribution and quality of coastal wetlands and
their resulting impacts on living marine resources. Both NMFS and OAR are developing and
evaluating various techniques for creating and restoring wetland habitats. NOAA is also
compiling a database of the areal extent and distribution of coastal wetlands in the United
States.

The USDA's habitat research is concerned with the effects of agricultural practices on
estuarine habitats. Studies include the effects of landscape changes, channelization, and
drainage, which result in potential increased sedimentation (through erosion of soils),
subsidence, and other physical alterations in habitat. The agency also investigates the
relationship between fish abundance, distribution, reproduction, health, and productivity. and
the habitat changes resulting from natural and human-induced events.

The FWS conducts research on the structure and functions of wetlands with regard to
their relationship to waterfowl, fish, and wildlife populations. The agency also evaluates
changes in wetland acreage, structure, and function caused by natural processes and human
activities and develops and evaluates methods for mitigating the loss or alteration of wetlands.
Under the National Wetlands Inventory Program, FWS has developed, and is currently updating,
a wetland database (in map form) on the characteristics and extent of the nation's wetlands
and deepwater habitats. Based on this database, FWS periodically reports on the status and
trends of the nation's wetlands.

Other Federal agencies conducting habitat-related studies include the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) and the Minerals Management Service (MMS) of the U.S. Department of the
Interior, and the EPA. The USGS is conducting research designed to understand the
geological, oceanographic, and other causes of coastal erosion by means of surveys and other
measurements, and is providing information to various Federal and state agencies about the
nature, extent, and rate of coastal retreat and land loss. The MMS funds efforts to determine
the impacts of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas development on coastal and wetland
habitats. The EPA's Environmental Research Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon is currently
conducting research on wetland mitigation, cumulative impacts, and water quality functions of
wetlands.

128

Habitat Loss or Modification

NOAA's Marine Entanglement Research Program (MERP) within NMFS is involved in a
variety of efforts to address the problems of persistent marine debris. MERP sponsors
research on the effects of pellets, fishing gear, packing straps, and six-pack rings on marine
life; funds reviews of technology and processes pertinent to plastic waste management, such as
degradable plastics and the Marine Refuse Disposal Project in Newport, Oregon; develops
methods to reduce the ocean disposal of ship-generated garbage; and promotes education/public
awareness through workshops, conferences, published materials, and educational contractors.

The MMS, National Park Service (NPS), and the FWS of the U.S. Department of Interior
conduct activities concerning persistent marine debris. Educating Gulf of Mexico users about
the problems of marine debris and strictly controlling persistent solid waste disposal from
Federal OCS oil and gas facilities are MMS's responsibilities. The NPS aids in the source
identification of marine debris washed up on beaches and conducts education/awareness
activities. The FWS researches the effects of plastic debris on wildlife and educates
fisherman of the threat posed to marine life by discarded plastics (ITFPMD, 1988).

Other Federal agencies involved in marine debris include the U.S. Navy, which is
currently researching and developing methods for the processing and storage of ship-generated
waste; the EPA, which funds various marine debris projects such as identifying the sources
and types of floatable matter on New Jersey beaches and sampling the outfall waste stream of
combined sewer overflow systems to determine their contribution to floatables in the marine
environment; and the Marine Mammal Commission, which is involved in education/awareness
programs including annual meetings, workshops, and beach clean-up efforts (ITFPMD, 1988).

Manuentent Ouestions And Information Needs

An und -erstanding of the effects of human destruction and modification of marine habitats
is needed to support effective management of these habitats and dependent living marine
resources. Listed below are five management questions that have been developed to identify
the information that environmental managers and decision makers are likely to need. These
management questions are modified versions of those presented in the 1985 Federal Plan
(NOAA, 1985a). During a recent workshop sponsored by the National Ocean Pollution Program
Office (NOPPO), the management questions presented in the 1985 Plan were reviewed and
recommendations for their revisions were made (NOAA, 1988). Following the workshop and
further review by NOPPO and experts in the field of marine habitats, the management
questions presented below were developed.

Management Question 1: What is the present status of marine habitat quality and quantity
and how is the status changing? I

Management Question 2: What are the causes, both natural and anthropogenic, of changes in
the status of marine habitat quality and quantity?

Management Question 3: What are the short-term effects, direct and indirect, of habitat
modification caused by human activities?

Management Question 4: What are the long-term and cumulative effects of habitat
modifications?

Management Question 5: How effective are restoration and mitigation?

129

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

This section will evaluate how well we can answer these questions by using existing
information., For each management question, the discussion will identify pertinent Federal
programs, evaluate the adequacy of existing information for addressing the information needs,
and present recommendations on the most important research, development, and monitoring
opportunities for improving our understanding in each area.

Status Of Habitat Quantity And Quality

Mangeement Ouestion 1: What is the present status of marine habitat guality and guantity
and how is the status chaniting?

Information Needs

Ia. What are the existing acreages of habitats? How are they changing regionally and
nationally?

lb. What are the natural functions, processes, and values of marine habitats?

Ic. What are the habitat requirements of valued living marine resources?

Resource managers must have some understanding of the functions of habitat as well as
the rates of habitat loss and change to manage living marine resources effectively by
predicting the immediate and long-term effects of human activities on habitat (NOAA, 1987a).
For most parts of the country, we have not quantified the functional value of estuarine
habitats, the quality of the habitats, or their areal extent and rate of loss well enough to
measure changes in their status. To minimize the impacts of habitat alterations,-we must first
understand the role and value of habitat types, inventory the destruction of habitats, and
monitor habitat changes (NOAA, 1987a).

Ia. What are the existing acreaptes of habitats? How are they changinp, reptionally and
nationally?

In 1986, Congress enacted the Emergency Wetland Resources Act in response to the need
for effective management of wetland resources. This Act requires the Secretary of the
Interior to produce detailed, wetland maps for the contiguous United States by September 30,
1998, and for Alaska as soon as possible after that date. The Act also requires FWS to
update its report on the status and trends of the Nation's wetlands by 1990 and every 10
years thereafter. The mapping of coastal wetlands has been an ongoing effort in the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI) program at FWS. About 93% of the wetlands in the coastal zone of
the lower 48 states has been mapped. Other habitat types including submerged aquatic
vegetation, rocky shores, reefs, and intertidal soft bottoms are also depicted in NWI maps
although they are not covered as completely as the wetlands. The FWS published a report on
habitat loss in the conterminous United States between the mid-1950's and mid-1970's (Tiner,
1984) and another report that documented habitat loss specifically in five Mid-Atlantic states
(Tiner, 1987).

Although FWS has completed maps for the majority of the coastal wetlands in the lower
48 states, some of these maps (and the wetland. loss rates derived from them) are 10 years
old. Many regions of the country are undergoing rapid change (e.g., coastal Texas, the

130

Habitat Loss or Modification

Florida Bay marshes of the Everglades, and the bay margin marshes of the Mississippi River
Delta), and these regions should be inventoried and mapped as frequently as needed to more
accurately assess wetland status and trends.

NOAA's National Ocean Service, Strategic Assessments Branch (SAB) is preparing
estimates of the areal extent and distribution of coastal habitat types in the conterminous
United States (excluding the Great Lakes). The SAB is applying a systematic grid sampling
procedure to existing NWI habitat maps to identify- 15 different habitat types using a 45-acre
grid cell size (Alexander and Field, 1986; Alexander et al., 1986). To date, over 2,550 of the
4,000 NWI maps available in coastal areas of the United States have been grid sampled. 'Grid
sampling is expected to be completed by the end of 1988.

There have been efforts by some states and the FWS to develop high-resolution
automated databases of habitat types through a process of digitizing NWI maps at a resolution
of approximately one acre. The utility of high- resolution: and geographically referenced
databases for resource managers has been evaluated by FWS (Dahl, 1987). Digitizing NWI maps
would make updating information on the status and trends of habitat types easier and more
accurate; however, the progress towards digitizing all coastal wetland maps has been hampered
by the time-consuming and costly nature of the process involved.

In addition to wetlands, attempts are being made to inventory other marine and estuarine
habitat types. For example, in 1984, EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program began to coordinate a
multiagency effort to record and map submerged aquatic vegetation in the bay. The program
was jointly funded by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the Virginia Council on
the Environment, the EPA, FWS, and COE (CBP, 1987). In addition, NOAA and FDA, with
assistance from EPA and FWS, have compiled an inventory of the status of shellfish- growing
waters in the lower 48 -states (NOAA and FDA, 1985). The National Shellfish Register
categorizes all shellfish -growing waters into one of five classifications: approved, conditionally
approved, prohibited, restricted, and nonproductive. The Register also provides data on
estimated acreage of classified shellfish waters by state.

Mapping and inventorying of habitats in those parts of the country undergoing rapid
change should be conducted as frequently as needed. Also, costs and benefits of developing
high -resolution, digitized welland databases should be evaluated. In addition to wetlands, more
complete and detailed inventories of other marine and estuarine habitat types known to be
important for the production of living marine resources would be'useful. These habitat types
include shellfish beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, endangered species' habitats, and coral
reefs (NOAA, 1988).

lb. What are the natural functions, processes. and values of marine habitats?

Several wetland functions, including flood and erosion protection, fisheries habitat, and
water quality control, have been identified. Physical alterations of wetlands can affect their
ability to perform these natural functions by reducing the areal extent or quality of these
habitats.

Methods have been developed by various Federal agencies (NOAA, COE, FWS, DOT) to
assess the relative functional values of wetlands. Of these methods, COE's Wetland Evaluation
Technique (WET) (Adamus et al., 1987), a revision of a method first developed for the Federal
Highway Administration of the Department of Transportation (Adamus and Stockwell, 1983), is

131

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

the most widely accepted. All of these methods, however, are limited by the level of
understanding of the actual processes taking place in habitats, which vary with habitat type,
region of the country, and physical, chemical, and biological conditions. Therefore, better
knowledge of these processes is required to improve our capabilities for evaluating change in
the functional value of wetlands.

A better understanding of estuarine dynarnics and its importance to selected habitat
functions would improve the Nation's ability to manage critical habitats and other valued
marine resources. Research could be conducted to understand the combination of conditions
that produce unique hydrodynamic and biological environments (NOAA, 1987a). Studies in
estuaries of different sizes, bathymetrics, climate regimes, and types that consider all major
physical and chemical processes as they relate to circulation, mixing, and internal density
changes would be useful. There is a need to understand the relative importance of each
process, judge which are the most influential for various habitat types, and determine the
water quality and biological response.

Ic. What are the habitat reQuirements of valued living marine resources?

Of all the functions of habitat, its value in supporting commercial and recreational
fisheries has received the most attention. Researchers have determined which habitat types
appear to be important to living marine resources, but the specifics of how these habitats are
used or which aspects of habitats make them valuable for the production of living marine
resources are poorly known. For example, high levels of estuarine secondary production
appear to be associated with high levels of estuarine plant productivity; however, the
relationship between primary and secondary productivity is not well understood (NOAA, 1987b).

Studies to assess the habitat requirements of, and use by, selected fisheries species have
been or are currently being conducted or funded by NOAA through the OAR and NMFS, as
well as through the FWS and COE. The OAR has funded studies to determine the habitat
requirements of commercial and recreational species in various regions of the country and to
evaluate the functions of habitat in terms of such factors as critical refuge, food resources,
and reproduction of economically and ecologically important fishes and macroinvertebrates.
The NMFS conducts life history and habitat investigations of important commercial and
recreational finfish and shellfish as part of its management of fishery resources in the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone. The FWS and COE have jointly produced a series of species
profiles, which describe the life histories and environmental requirements of many commercial
and recreational species along the coasts of the United States. Habitat requirements are
known for many economically important species such as the Gulf menhaden, shrimp, and blue
fish; however, there are considerable gaps in the technical information for most other species.

Knowledge of comparative values of regional habitats to fishery production is important
in managing the resources. Methods to quantitatively evaluate the importance of one habitat
as opposed to another would be useful. This would require determining the factors that limit
the overall success and productivity of the populations of concern and developing predictors of
the relative importance of habitats to these populations.

132

Habitat Loss or Modification

Causes of Habitat Loss and Modification

Management Question 2: What are the causes, bot.h natural and anthropoizenic, of 6anizes in
the status of marine habitat guality and guantitv?

Information Needs

2a. What are the human activities (types and number of projects, nationally and
regionally) that cause direct physical alterations and changes in freshwater input,
hydrology, sedimentologic processes, and relative sea level?

2b. What are the natural processes and anthropogenic factors that control accretion,
erosion, and sedimentation rates?

2c. What will happen to coastal wetlands as a result of sea-level rise?

2a. What are the human activities (tvves and number of vroiects. nationally and regionally)
that cause direct r)hvsical alterations and chanpes in freshwater input, hydrology,
sedimentologic grocesses. and relative sea level?

To understand the magnitude of potential short- and long-term as well as cumulative
impacts of human activities on habitat, we need to identify and quantify those human
activities that have the most serious impacts on habitat�.. Major attempts by the Federal
Government to quantify the loss or modification of.habitat and.'to address the causes of
changes resulting from human activities inclu de studies *conducted or funded by NOAA (NMFS,
National Ocean Service, and OAR), 'and the Department of the Interior (MMS and FWS). The
NMFS Southeast Region and Center are developing a system to document their efforts in
conserving habitat in COE's permitting program. The system uses information collected during
the COE permitting process, including data on project type, purpose, and location; habitat type
affected; area proposed to be affected; area NMFS recommended to be conserved -or did not
object to its being altered; and NMFS' recommended mitigation or compensation (Lindall and
Thayer, 1982). The Strategic Assessments Branch of NOAA's National Ocean Service has
compiled shoreline and dredging characteristics for 92 estuaries identified in its National
Estuarine Inventory (Orlando et at., 1987). The Sea Grant Program is supporting studies to
quantify the parameters that influence landscape structure and function and to inventory and
classify impoundments in coastal Louisiana.

The MMS has supported a study conducted by Louisiana State University to determine
how much and in what ways OCS oil and gas development has 'Contributed to wetland loss in
coastal Louisiana and parts of Texas and Mississippi (Turner and Cahoon, 1987). Finally, the
FWS has proposed a study for FY 1989 to analyze the effectiveness of the 404 program in
retarding coastal wetland loss by comparing the pre- and post-404 implementation status of
wetlands in several estuaries along the coasts of the United States (FWS, 1987). This effort
will utilize current digital databases and wetlands'maps prepared by FWS and others such as
states and NOAA, and historical mapping where available. Additional mapping (historical and
recent) and digitizing will be completed to provide status and trends data.

An inventory system for federally permitted activities that affect marine and estuarine
habitats would help us to document the human activities that are causing loss and modification
of coastal habitats in the United States. This system could record nationwide coastal habitat

133

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

changes caused by Federal projects, federally permitted projects, and other authorizations.
The accounting system of habitat loss and modification would also consider indirect changes in
habitat attributable to alterations in habitat processes caused by, human activities, such as
freshwater diversions in upland areas that impact estuarine habitats.

2b. What are the natural processes and anthropoptenic factors that control accretion, erosion..
and sedimentation rates?

Geologic processes are of major importance in shaping habitats. Identifying the factors,
both natural and manmade, that contribute to the accretion, erosion, and sedimentation rates
of coastal habitats is of particular concern. Due to the present worldwide rise in sea level
coupled with subsidence which is occurring in many coastal areas, continuous deposition of
sediments in coastal wetlands is necessary to allow accretion and to prevent permanent
flooding and erosion of coastal areas. As a result of man's activities, sediments are not being
introduced in sufficient quantity to keep pace with relative sea-level, ri'se, and some coastal
margins are rapidly being eroded. To help prevent further. loss of land, identification and
quantification of those processes that affect accretion, erosion,.and sedimentation rates are
needed as well as an evaluation of the ways in which future activities may be modified to
reduce impacts.

Several Federal agencies, including DOI (FWS, MMS, 'and USGS), COE, and USDA, are
currently addressing, or have in the past addressed, various aspects of accretion, erosion, and
sedimentation rates in coastal habitats. Within the Department of the Interior, FWS.and MMS
have sponsored research addressing the causes and consequences of coastal erosion and
subsidence in coastal Louisiana. The USGS has conducted research to understand the
geological, oceanographic, and other causes of coastal erosion and to determine the nature,
extent, and rate of coastal retreat and land loss. The USDA and cooperating state
agricultural experiment stations are conducting research to evaluate the effects of landscape
drainage and channei'modification on ambient concentrations of sediments and subsidence and'
the influence of sediments being deposited in coastal wetlands and other target areas. For
several years, COE has been investigating causes of beach erosion, methods to control erosion
through shoreline stabilization, and the physical processes contributing to erosion.

Given the current level of knowledge of geologic processes affecting habitat, the
development and testing of' conceptual models would help predict changes in accretion,, erosion,
and sedimentation that occur as a, result of human activities and natural processes. These
models would assist in identifying information gaps. Also, they would allow for comparison of
geologic processes in habitats of different parts of the country (e.g., Northeast vs. Chesapeake
Bay vs. the Gulf of Mexico) to determine why some habitats are eroding.

2c. What will havoen.to coastal wetlands as a result of sea-level rise?

Eustatic sea-le'vel rise is a major process affecting habiitat that is more predictable than
changes in the other processes. Studies conducted by the National Academy of Sciences
(Revelle, 1983) and EPA (Hoffman et al., 1983) indicate that the current rise in sea level will
continue throughout the next century. Hoffman et al. (1983) estimate that sea level could
rise by as much as 3 to 4 1/2 feet by the year 2075. This steady rise in sea level, together
with subsidence that is occurring along some coastal margins (particularly in the Mississippi
Delta), is causing land loss.of intertidal wetlands at a significant rate.

134.

Habitat Loss or Modification
Several EPA studies have predicted future sea-level rise and the effects it will ahve on
coastal area (Titus, 1986 and In press, Hoffman et al., 1983; Kana ed at., 1986). In addition
to the EPA's efforts, some academic research has been conducted with Federal funding from
NOAA (OAR), NSF, DOI, (FWS and USGS), and COE. For example, Stevenson et al. (1986)
discuss the ability of marshes to keep pace with sea level through accretion.
Models to predict impacts of sea-level rise on wetlands such as that developed by the
EPA for South Carolina (Kana et al., 1986) would help to evaluate the impact of sea-level rise
for selected coastal wetland regions that are expected tobe most severly affected by sea-
level rise. These models would be based on more refined assumptions used to predict future
sea-level rise and the resulting impacts on wetland loss. The expansion of the tidal gauge
analyses proposed in NOAA's National Climate Change initiative is one way to provide data to
refine model assumptions.
Short-Term Effects
Managemen Question 3: What are the short-term effects, direct and indirect, of habitat
modification caused by human activities?
Information Need
3a. What are the shor-term effects, direct and indirect, of anthropogenic physical alterations
on habitat quality and quantity?
3b. What are the short-term effects of debris in the marine environment?
3a. What are the short-term effects, direct and indirect, of anthropogenic physical alterations
on habitat quality and quantity?
Environmental assessment specialists and resource managers must evaluate the impacts of
human activities that may affect habitat. However, quantitative nad qualitative information is
generally lacking on the specific environmental effects of various activities themselves or the
effectiveness of various mitigation options in avoiding or reversing these effects (NOAA,
185b). When an understanding of habitat functions and characteristics that are altered as a
result of man's activities is achieved, better prediciton of the effects of habitat loss will be
possible.
The problem of determinig the short-term direct and indirect effects of human
activities on habitat has been addressed by several Federal agencies under their specific
legislative mandates. These agencies include USDA, NOAA (NMFS, OAR, and the National
Ocean Service), COE, DOI (MMS and FWS), and EPA. Much has been learned about how
human activities result in the quantitative loss or modifiacation of habitat, but additional
research would help to determine how such losses or modifications relut in changes in the
quality and function of various habitat types. However, without an understanding of the
natural processes and function fo habitats, a sufficient understanding of the effects that
human activities will have on habitat quality cannot be attained.

135

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Case studies could be conducted to improve our understanding of the indirect effects of
physical alterations on habitat quality and function. These studies would involve assessments
of changes in the processes that affect habitat (hydrology, sedimentation, relative sea-level
changes, and freshwater inflow).

3b. What are the short-term effects of debris in the marine environment?

The most significant short-term effects of debris in the marine environment concern fish
and wildlife, coastal communities, and vessels. Unfortunately, adequate information is not
presently available to accurately assess the effects in any of these areas. According to the
Interagency Task Force on Persistent Marine Debris (ITFPMD, 1988), the existing research
information concerning the effects of persistent marine debris on most species of wildlife is
inconclusive. Exceptions include the northern fur seal and the Hawaiian monk seal which are
frequently entangled (Fowler, 1988). Significantly more information is available on the effects
of certain types of persistent marine debris, including nets, six-pack rings, and plastic bags,
on individual marine animals such as fish, birds, turtles, and mammals (Fry et al., 1987; Ryan,
1988) than is available on the effects of persistent debris on other populations of @marine
species. The information available on the economic effects of plastic debris from ocean
sources on coastal communities tends to represent individual cases; regional or national cost
evaluations are not available (ITFPMD, 1988). The disablement effect of marine debris on
vessels, such as the fouling of propellers and the clogging of cooling water intake systems, is
a recognized problem; however, comprehensive data is lacking on the frequency of these
occurrences (CEE, 1987).

Under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, NOAA is responsible for protecting, conserving, and managing marine species
and their habitat (ITFPMD, 1988). The Federal agencies that play a large role in sponsoring
or conducting research on the effects of persistent marine debris are NOAA (under the Marine
Entanglement Research Program of NMFS) and FWS. Additional information concerning the
research performed under NOAA and FWS is provided in the Federal Programs section of this
chapter.

In an effort to help reduce the plastic debris problem, the plastics industry has
developed degradable, or controlled lifetime, plastics, such as photodegradable six-pack rings,
and the Stevens Institute of Technology's Polymer Processing Institute recently received a
grant to develop materials for fish traps and pots that will degrade in seawater (ITFPMD,
1988). Degradable plastics are also being considered for tampon applicators, styrofoam
containers, and balloons (ITFPMD, 1988). The concept of applying the technology of
controlled lifetime plastics to fishing &par is also being discussed; however, there is concern
over potentially dangerous premature failure. The existence of such technology may be useful
for fishing gear items with limited useful lifetimes (ITFPMD, 1988; Andrady, 1988).

Degradable plastic products cannot be reused, recycled, or have their heat content
recovered. Also, the possibility exists that making disposable items degradable will encourage
their improper disposal into the environment.

Research and monitoring efforts to identify and quantify the effects of marine debris on
populations of fish and wildlife (particularly endangered, threatened, or depleted species),
coastal communities, and vessels would improve our understanding in this area (ITFPMD, 1988).

136

Habitat Loss or Modification,

In addition, many scientists and organizations are concerned with the environmental and waste
management impacts posed by degradable plastics. There is a need to research the
environmental effects of the byproducts of degradable plastics (ITFPMD, 1988). If these
effects are determined to be environmentally ac ceptable, the technologies should be further
developed and uses of degradable plastics for items such as fishing gear should be applied.

Long-Term and Cumulative Effects

Manaimment Ouestion 4: What are the long-term and cumulative effects of habitat
modif ication?

Information Needs

4a. What are the long-term effects of individual projects resulting in habitat modification
or loss?

4b. What are the cumulative effects of several projects separated in either time or
location, together with natural changes, that result in modification or loss of
estuarine or- marine habitat?.

4c. What are the long-term effects of persistent debris in the marine environment?

The inability of re searchers to predict the long-term and cumulative impacts of habitat
alterations makes habitat management difficult, especially when there are substantial short-
term economic benefits associated with the development of these areas. Although a single
coastal development project that results in modification or loss of marine habitat may not
have serious immediate environmental repercussions beyond the point of initial impact, many
such projects in succession over time and over a broad geographic area may have far-reaching
ecological consequences (NOAA, 1988). Without reasonably accurate information on long-term
and cumulative impacts of human activities on marine and estuarine habitats, good decisions on
permitting, mitigation, or management of fisheries and wildlife will be difficult.

4a. What are the long-term effects of individual r)roiects resulting in habitat modification or
loss?

A number of projects have been initiated by COE, NOAA (NMFS and Sea Grant), and
FWS to address the long-term impacts of individual projects. These efforts should be
continued with more work on monitoring previous project sites to assess impacts.
Environmental impact statements (EIS) include estimates of impacts to habitat that are
expected to occur as a result of specific COE-permitted activities. The EISs written several
years ago should be reviewed and studies should be conducted to determine if the projected
impacts actually occurred and if mitigations used were successful. Additionally, selected
ongoing projects causing physical alterations should be monitored to assess long-term impacts.

137

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

4b. What are the cumulative effects of several proi-ects set)arated in either'time or location,
tonther with natural changes. that result in modification or loss of estuarine or marine
habitat?

Prior to 1984, the Federal Government had not conducted research specifically addressing
the cumulative effects of modifications on living marine resources and their habitats, and
relatively few studies have directly addressed the issue since that,time. An example of the
current research being conducted on cumulative impacts is an EPA-funded study by Louisiana
State University. The LSU study, designed to develop a regional approach to cumulative
impact assessment, is *specifically concerned''with bottomland hardwood forests in the lower
Mississippi Valley (Gosselink et al., In press). -This study investigates the minimum area
needed to support living resources and addresses changes in habitat distribution, species
composition change, and the effects of habitat or range fragmentation..

Research on;cumulative effects of habitat'alterations, including regional or-watershed
case studies of-. historical projects., causing physical alterations, -would improve our
understanding- of habitat loss -and modification. Additionally, a framework for identifying the
limits of acceptable habitat quantity and quality should'be developed for each watershed.

4c. What are the long-term effects of t)ersistent debris in the marine environment?

Assessment of the long-term effects of @ marine debris is very difficult, if not impossible',
at this time for,several reasons: the severity of the problems associated with persistent
marine debris have only come to light during the past decade; the changes in, the environment
which will occur following the commencement of MARPOL 73/78 Annex -V cannot be predicted;
and applicable technologies that may reduce the overall problem are only now being developed,:,
The implementation of'Annex V (which becomes effective on December 31, 1988, one year
after its ratification) should substantially reduce the amount of persistent marine debris
discharged into the world's oceans and must,be considered as a factor in the long-term
analysis along with the potential widespread future application of plastics re-use, recycling,
heat recovery, and the use of controlled lifetime plastic products. Annex V and these
improved shore-based waste 'management technologies may reduce the persistent marine debris
problem sufficiently to eliminate severe- long-term effects such as the extinction of endangered
species or continuous economic losses to coastal communities.

Research and monitoring of persistent marine debris should continue despite the
commencement of MARPOL Annex,V and the use of environmentally acceptable degradable
plastics. Studies should be used to evaluate the effectiveness of these mitigation measures in
protecting living marine resources, reducing vessel disablement, and lessening the economic
losses to coastal communities.

138

Habitat Loss or Modification

Effectiveness of Restoration and Mitigation Ef forts

Management Ouestion 5: How effective are restoration and mitigation?

Information Needs

5a. What has been the success of past mitigation, restoration, and creation projects and
other management techniques?

5b. What are the most effective methods and approaches for -mitigation,, restoration.,
creation, and other management techniques? How can they J?e improved?

Although Federal agencies often require mitigation or restoration as part of their
permitting programs, it is not known whether the new or restored habitat, which was. provided
to compensate for- the lost habitat, actually replaces the.-functional values of the lost habitat
(NOAA,- 1987a). Many researchers believe that most,current and historic efforts at,mitigation
of coastal wetlands or other marine -habitat loss have not been successful; and some have. even. -
resulted in additional environmental. damage (NOAA, 1988).. Therefore, knowledge concerning
the effectiveness, of mitigation and restoration is critical for the effective. management of
habitats through the permit- mitigation processes (NOAA, 1987a).

Past efforts to evaluate mitigation/restoration techniques have been conducted by COE9
FWS, EPA, and NOAA (NMFS and,OAR). These efforts have included studies to determine
methods for restoring. seagrasses, emergent wetlands,. beach grasses, and other vegetative
habitat types. They have attempted to evaluate the degree to, which, restored habitats
function as compared with natural habitats and to identify the necessary -construction
specifications, factors most critical to the success of projects, and required monitoring
procedures for evaluating mitigation/restoration projects. In addition to these efforts, a new
study is being funded by t 'he MMS Gulf of Mexico Region Office to investigate ways to reduce
wetland loss, better manage wetlands, and to enhance existing wetlands. ,

To evaluate the success of various mitigation techniques in duplicating the natural
functions of habitat will require additional study. For many habitats, it is possible to create
a habitat in an engineering sense. For example, adequate information is already available to
recreate SDartina alterniflora marshes and mangroves, and good progress is being made toward
understanding how to create seagrass beds. What is as yet unknown, however, is how to
measure the quality of restored habitat. -Research could be helpful -in determining the -relative
value of restored habitats, including. sediment development, plant cover, microbial and detrital
development, faunal utilization, and trophic linkages.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Marine and estuarine habitats are some of our.most valuable natural resources. These
habitats are used by living marine resources for food, spawning, rearing, protection from
predators, and other life history requirements. Habitats provide other valuable functions to
humans, including erosion and flood protection, water quality control, and wildlife and
waterfowl utilization. Rapid coastal development is threatening our valuable marine and
estuarine habitats. Although considerable research has been conducted in recent years to
understand the value of habitats and the effects of destroying or modifying them, these issues
still have not been adequately addressed.

139

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The following conclusions.c oncerning our knowledge of human impacts on marine and
estuarine habitats are made based on the discussion of management questions. and information
needs presented in the previous section. These conclusions focus on.our knowledge of
physical alterations of habitat; the effects of chemical contamination on living marine
resources and their habitats are discussed in other sections of this Plan.

o The FWS wetland maps and estimation.of wetland loss rates,derived from these maps
are as much as 10 years out of date and do not provide timely information on the
status and trends of habitats in areas of most rapid change.

o Although for the most part we know which causes, both natural and anthropogenic,
result in habitat loss and modifications, we have not adequately quantified the human
activities that are affecting wetlands, nor,-in most cases, are we able to accurately
predict how natural events or human activities will impact habitats.

o Researchers do not have an. adequate' understanding of estuarine processes and their
importance. to habitat. functions.

o A key-.is,sue1or future habitat, research will be to understand the cumulative effects
of numerous projects over, time and space on the quantity and quality of marine and
estuarine habitats and the ecosystem.

o Adequate information is, not available to assess the effects of persistent marine debris
on populations of living marine resources.

Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made to improve our
understanding of the effects of loss and modifications of marine habitats as a result of human
activities.

Status of Habitat Quantity

The following work is needed to improve inventories of habitat types and to document
changes in the status of these habitats.

Update NWI Maips. Maps in rapidly changing coastal areas should be updated as frequently as
needed.

Automated Databases. Several coastal states have digitized NWI maps using high resolution,
geo-referenced systems to develop computer-automated databases that can make map data more
flexible and accessible in evaluating, proposed projects and programs.. A study group should
consider the costs and benefits of coordinating state efforts to improve compatibility, assisting
in the development and use of such digital databases, and providing or maintaining a central
repository of, and access to, digital data of coastal habitat types.

140

Habitat Loss or Modification

Inventories of Other 'Habitat Types'. NWI maps are of limited use for some types-of habitats
other than vegetated wetlands or marshes. Better inventories' of selected subtidal habitats, ' . . .
such as shellfish beds, submerged aquatic vegetation, and hard bottoms, and endangered species
habitats should be made available.

Document Trends. Ongoing and planned work at the national level to document trends in
wetlands loss appear to be adequate and should be continued.

Causes of Habitat Loss

The following work would provide better information on: the causes of habitat'loss and
modification, primarily for emergent and submerged aquaile,vegetatio'm-

Identification of Causes. National/regional analyses of the human activities that cause habitat
loss could provide useful information-. Such analyses could be conducted toAdientify and@.'-
quantify human activities causing physical alterations that directly: or @indirectly re@ult,,in@
habitat loss and modification. Such a task would be labor intensive. "A cost/benefit
assessment of this approach would be the logical first step.

Natural Processes and Habitat Functions

The following work would improve our basic understanding of natural processes ':that
affect habitat functions and values and the *mechanisms by, which-.human activities,'alter these
functions.

Link to Livins! Marine Resources. Research to improve our understanding of the habitat
processes and functions as related to living marine resource productivity and the effedts:,bf
human activities on these processes and functions would be useful. Specifically, we need a
better, understanding of the long-term effects of specific projects as well as the cumulative
effects on a regional basis.
Effects of Sea-Le@el Rise and Geoloizical Processes. Development of models to assist in
predicting the effects of sea-level rise on marine and estuarine habitats would enhance our
ability to predict these effects. Models could also be developed to predict changes in geologic
processes (accretion, erosion, and sedimentation) affecting habitat that result from human
activities.

Mitigation

Work in the following area would improve our ability to mitigate the effects of habitat
loss.

Mititzation Assessment. Approaches should- be developed and implemented'for assessing, the
effectiveness of mitigation and restoration techniques in terms of the quality of the restored
habitat.

141

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Marine Debris

The following work would help to adequately address the problems associated with'
persistent marine debris in the marine environment.-;

Sources. Research to determine the level of land-based contributions to the marine,debris
problem would help quantify sources.

Effects. Research to identify and quantify the effects of marine debris should focus on
populations of fish and wildlife, coastal communities, and vessels. Information is also needed
concerning degradable plastics to determine their environmental effects and potential
applications.

Monitorina. Monitoring would help to determine the rates of marine debris entanglement and
ingestion by wildlife. Emphasig'should be placed on endangered or threatened species, vessel
disablement, and coastal wash-up events to determine the effectiveness of MARPOL Annex V
and degradable plastic products.

Develooment. Techniques should be developed to reduce the impact of fishing gear
entanglement through loss prevention and recovery incentives, recycling, and the use of
degradable plastics technology for fish traps and pots. Methods should also be developed for
the handling and storage of ship-generated waste and the reduction of land sources of marine@
debris.

Literature Cited*

Adamus, P.R. and L.T. Stockwell. 1983. A.Method for Wetland Functional Assessment.
Report No. FHWA-IP-82-23. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department,of
Transportation, Washington, D.C. 176 pp.

Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain, Jr., D.R. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation
Technique. Draft. Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Vicksburg, MS.

Alexander, C.E. and D.W. Field. 1986. Coastal Wetlands: Establishing a National Data Base.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. Tpp.

Alexander, C.E., M.A. Broutman, and D.W. Field. 1986. An Inventory of Coastal Wetlands of
the USA. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Washington, D.C. 14 pp.

Andrady, A. 1988. The Use of Enhanced Degradable Plastics for Control of Plastic Debris in
the Marine Environment, pp. 384-403, In Proceedings of the North Pacific Rim,
Fishermen's Conference on Marine Debris (D.L. Alverson and J.A. June, eds.) Kailua-Kong.,
HI, October 13-16, 1987.

ASLO. In Press. The Land-Sea Interface: Opportunities for Fundamental Research. American
Society of Limnology and Oceanography. Draft Workshop Report.

142

Habitat Loss or Modification

Boesch, D.F., D. Levin, D. Nummedal, and K. Bowles.. 1983. Subsidence in Coastal Louisiana:
Causes, Rates, and Effects on Wetlands. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington,
D.C. FWS/OBS-83/26, 30 pp.

Carr, A. 1987. Impact of Nondegradable Marine Debrison the Ecology and Survival Outlook
of Sea Turtles. Mar* Pollut. Bull. 18,3527356..,-

CBP. 1987. Chesapeake Bay Executive Council. Second Annual ProgressReport Under the.
Chesapeake Bay Agreement. Chesapeake Bay Program, U.S. Environmental Protection"'
Agency, Annapolis, MD. 32 pp.

CEE. 1987. Plastics in the Ocean: More-Than a Litter. Problem.-Cente.r for, E'nvironme.ntall
Education, Washin
gton, D.C., :1.28, pp.

Connor, D.K. andR.O. O'Dell. 1988. The Tightening Net of Marine Plastics Pollution.
Environment. 30:16-36.

Craig, N.J., R.E. Turner, and J.W. Day. 19.79. Land Loss of Coastal Louisiana., Environ.
Manage. 2:133-144.

Dahl, T.E. 1987. Wetlands Mapping in the Coastal Zone: Progress Towards a National Digital
Database, pp. 465-476. In Coastal Zone '87. WW Div./ASCE, Seattle, WA, May 26-29.

DeGange, A.R. and T.C. Newby. 1980. Mortality of Seabirds and Fish in a Lost Salmon
Driftnet. ,Mar. Pollut. Bull. 11:322-323.

Deegan, L.A. and J.W. Day, Jr. 1984. Estuarine Fishery Habitat Requirements. In,-Research:.
for Managing the Nation's Estuaries, pp. 315-336. UNC Sea Grant Publication 84-08,
Raleigh, NC.

Fowler, C.W. 1987. Marine Debris and Northern Fur Seals: A Case Study. Mar. Pollut. Bull..",
18:326-335.

Fowler, C.W. 1988. A Review of Seal and Sea Lion Entanglement in Marine Fishing J?ebris,
pp. 16-63. In Proceedings of the North Pacific Rim Fishermen's Conference on Marine
Debris (D.L. Alverson and J.A. June, eds.) Kailua-Kong, HI, Oct. 13-16, 1987. 460 pp.

Fruge, D.W. 1982. Effects of Wetland Deterioration. on the Fish and Wildlife Resources of..
Coastal Louisiana, pp. 99-1 07. In Proceed ings of the Conference on Coastal Erosion and.
Wetlands Modification in Louisiana: Causes. Conseciuen6es. and Ovtions (D.F. Boesch,
ed.). U.S. Fish and Wildlif Service. FWS/OBS-82/59.
i. e.

Fry, D.M., Fefer, S.I., and L. Sileo. 1981. Ingestion, of Plastic-@Debris by Lqyson Albatrosses
and Wedge-Tailed She.arwaters in the Hawaiian Islands. Mar. Pollut.@ Bull. 18:339-341.

143

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

FWS. 1987. Research Proposal: An Analysis of the Effectiveness of the Clean Water Act,
Section 404 Program on Retarding Coastal Wetland Loss. National Wetlands Research
Center, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Slidell, LA.
I I pp.

Gosselink, J.G., L. Lee, and T. Muir. In Press. Bottomland Hardwood Forest Cumulative
Impact Assessment. Prepared by Louisiana State University for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.

Heneman, B. and CEE (Center for Environmental Education). 1987. . Persistent Marine Debris
in the North Sea, Northwest Atlantic Ocean, Wider Caribbean Area, and the West Coast
of Baja California. Draft Report to the Marine Mammal Commission and NOAA's National
Ocean Pollution Program Office, Rockville, MD. Contract #MM3309598-5, 164 pp.

Herke, W.H. 197 1. Use of Natural and Semi-Impounded, Louisiana Tidal Marshes as Nurseries
for Fishes and Crustaceans. Ph.D. Dissertation, LouisianaState University, Baton Rouge,
LA. 242 pp.

Hoffman, J.W., D. Keyes, and J.G. Titus. 1983. Projecting Future Sea Level Rise:
Methodology, Estimates to the Year 2100, and Research Needs. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 121 pp.

ITFPMD. 1988. Report of the Interagency Task Force on Persistent Marine Debris.
Washington, D.C. 189 pp.

Kana, T.W., B.J. Baca, and M.L. Williams. 1986. Potential Impacts of Sea Level Rise on
Wetlands Around Charleston, South Carolina. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. EPA 230-10-85-014, 65 pp.

Knudson, E.E., W.H. Herke, and J.M. Mackler. 1977. The Growth Rate of Marked Juvenile
Brown Shrimp, Penaeus aztecus, in a Semi-Impounded Louisiana Coastal Marsh. Proc.
Gulf Caribb. Fish. Inst. 29:144-159.

Laist, D.W. 1987. Overview of the Biological Effects of Lost and Discarded Plastic Debris in
the Marine Environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18:319-326.

Lindall, W.N. and G.W. Thayer. 1982. Quantification of National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Efforts in the Southeast Region of the United States. Mar. Fish.
Rev. 44(12):18-22.

Martin, N. 1987. The Ties that Bind. Texas Shores (Texas Sea Grant Program) 20:17-20.

Mendelssohn, I.A. 1979. The Influence of Nitrogen Level, Form, and Application Method on
the Growth Response of Svartina alterniflora in North Carolina. Estuaries. 2:106-112.

Mock, C.R. 1967. Natural and Altered Estuarine Habitats of Penaeid Shrimp. Proc. Gulf
Caribb. Inst. 19:86-98.

144

Habitat Loss or Modification

NAS. 1975. Marine Letter, pp. 405-438. In Assessing Potential Ocean Pollutants (Chapter 8).
A Report of the Study Panel on Assessing Potential Ocean Pollutants to the Ocean
Affairs Board, Commission on Natural Resources, National Research Council. National
Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.

NAS. 1987. Responding to Changes in Sea Level. National Academy of Sciences, National
Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 148 pp.

NOAA. 1985a. National Marine Pollution Program Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research,
Development, and Monitoring, Fiscal Years 1985-1989. National Marine Pollution Program
Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Rockville, MD..350 pp.

NOAA. 1985b. Unpublished Report of the NOAA Marine Environmental Quality Working Group
on Habitat Modification. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.,

NOAA. 1987a. NOAA Estuarine and Coastal Ocean Science Framework. Estuarine Programs
Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. 87 pp. + Appendices.

NOAA. 1987b. NOAA Estuaries Research Program Development Plan. Estuarine Programs
Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. 20 pp.

NOAA. 1987c. National Marine Pollution Program Summary of Federal Programs and Projects,
FY 1986 Update. National Marine Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.

NOAA. 1988. Proceedings, National Marine Pollution Problems and Needs Workshop, Easton,
Maryland, June 9-11, 1987. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 53 pp. +
Appendices.

NOAA and FDA. 1985. 1985 National Shellfish. Register of Classified Estuarine Waters.,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Rockville, MD, and Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Washington, D.C. 19 pp.

Orlando, P., F. Shirzad, J. Schuerholz, P. Mathieux, and S. Strassner. 1987. Shoreline
Modification, Dredged Navigational Channels, and Dredged Material Disposal Areas in the
Nation's Estuaries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Rockville, MD.
3 pp.

Pruter, A.T. 1987. Sources-, Quantities, and Distribution of Persistent Plastics in the Marine
Environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18:305-310.

.145

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Revelle.' R. 1983. Probable Future Changes in Sea Level Resulting from Increased
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. In Changing. Climate. National Academy Press, Washington,
D.C. 496 pp.

Ryan, P.G,-;,. 1988, @Effects of Ingested Plastic..on'Seabird Feeding: Evidence from Chickens.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 19:125-128.

Schrey, E. and G,.J.M.."Vaulk. .1987. .'.-Records of Entangled Gannets (Sula,b@ssana) at.
Helgolarfd, German-Bight. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 18:350-352..

Soniat, T.M. and D.F. Boesch. In Press. The Effects of Variations of Freshwater Input on
Estuarine Condition-, and. Productivity. 63 pp. + Figures.

SPI. 1986. (Society of the Plastics Industry, Cited in Plastics in the Ocean: More Than. a
Litter Problem. Center for Environmental Education, Washington, D.C., 1987).

SPI. 1988,. Facts.arid Figures of-the U.S. Plastics Industry.. Society. of'the Plastics Industry,
Washington, D.C. 120 pp.

Stevenson, J.C., L.G. Ward, and M.S. Kearney. 1986. Vertical Accretion in Marshes with
Varying Rates of Sea Level Rise, pp. 295-306. In Estuarine Variability (D.A. Wolfe, ed.).
Academic Press, New York, NY.

Thayer, G.W., D.R. Colby, W.F. Hettler, L.F. Simoneaux, and D.S. Peters. 1985. Alteration of
Freshwater Inflow Patterns Can Impact the Fishery Function of Estuaries. Coastal Ocean
Pollut. Assessment News. 3(3):33-34.

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent Trends.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 59 pp.

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1987. Mid-Atlantic Wetlands, a Disappearing Natural Treasure. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory Project, Newton Corner, MA. 28 pp.

Titus, J.G. 1986. Greenhouse Effect, Sea Level Rise, and Coastal Zone Management. Coastal
Zone Management J. 14(3):147-170.

Titus, J.G. (ed.). In Press. Greenhouse Effect, Sea Level Rise, and Coastal Wetlands. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 130 pp. + Appendices.

Turner, R.E. 1977. Intertidal Vegetation and Commercial Yields of Penaeid Shrimp. Trans.
Am. Fish. Soc. 106:411-416.

Turner, R.E. and D.R. Cahoon (eds.) 1987. Causes of Wetland Loss in the Coastal Central
Gulf of Mexico. Volume II: Technical Narrative. Final Report Submitted to Minerals
Management Service, New Orleans, LA. Contract No. 14-12-0001-30252. OCS Study/MMS
87-0120, 400 pp.

'146

Habitat Loss or Modification

Turner, R.E., K.L. McKee, W.B. Sikora, J.P. Sikora, I.A. Mendelssohn,. E. Swenson, C. Neill, S.G.
Leibowitz, and F. Pedrazini. 1984. 'The Impact. and Mitigation of Man-Made Canals in.
Coastal Louisiana. Water Sci. Tech. 16:497-504.

Weinstein, M.P. 1979. Shallow Marsh Habitats as Primary Nurseries for Fishes and Shellfish,
Cape Fear River, North Carolina. Fish. Bull. 77:339-357.

Weinstein, M.P. and 1I.A. Brooks. 1983. - Comparative Ecology of Nekton Residing in a'Tidal
Creek and Adjacent Seagrass Meadow: - Community Composition and'Structure. Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser. 12:15-27.

Yakupzack, P.M., W.H. Herke, and W.G. Perry. 1977. Emigration of Juvenile Atlantic. Croaker,
Micropop,on undulatus, from a Semi-Impounded Marsh in South Western Louisiana,. Trans.
Am. Fish. Soc. 106:538-.544.

Zedler, J.B. and P.A. Beare. 1986. Temporal variability of salt marsh vegetation: The role of
low-salinity gaps and environmental stressi pp. 295-306. In Estuarine Variability (D.A,
Wolfe, ed.). Academic Press, New York, NY.

147

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

GOAL 5: DOCUMENT THE TRENDS IN THE
STATUS OF MARINE ECOSYSTEMS

Goal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . 149

Federal Role . . . . . . . . ... . . I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 150
Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Federal Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 152
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Changes in Biological Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 153
Changes in Physical and Chemical Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

Oceanic, coastal marine, and Great Lakes waters support a wealth of living resoures,
provide aesthetically pleasing recreational opportunities, and sustain many commercial
enterprises. These valuable waters also receive the waste products of human activities
through terrestrial run-off, waste discharges into rivers, estuaries and marine ecosystems,
and atmospheric deposition. Coastal and estuarine environments are also subject to
physical disruptions associated with human activities, which may result in the loss or
deterioration of important habitats. Competition for use of these waters will increase as
our population continues to shift to the coastal zone. Due to the increasing human
activity in coastal areas and demand for marine resources, the capacity to assess
conditions and trends in the quality of marine ecosystems and to be aware of early
warning signals of unacceptable conditions is important. Therefore, documenting the
trends in the status of marine ecosystems is an important goal of the National Marine
Pollution Program.

148

Status of Marihe Ecosystems

Goal Definition

Under conventional regulatory strategies, attempts are made to manage each use of'the
marine. environment individually so that conflicts with other valued uses are minimized or
avoided. Yet, because the cumulative effects of different human activities are difficult to
foresee, it is not possible to predict with confidence the effects of human activities on the
marine environment. However, monitoring environmental conditions and trends within marine
ecosystems can provide early -warning signals of potential pollution effects and generate
information needed to avoid or remediate unreasonable or socially unacceptable degradation.
Unfortunately, at this time there are significant gaps in our understanding of the relationships
between the condition of marine ecosystems and the parameters that can be measured in
marine environments. These, uncertainties are further complicated by natural variations in
time and space for which many components of marine ecosystems are notorious. However,
these variations do not necessarily prevent detection of pollution effects, as has been
demonstrated by studies in'many industrialized estuaries of the nation and in the Great Lakes.

It is not feasible to discuss conditions and trends in the quality of marine ecosystems
without defining "monitoring." For the purposes of this goal, "monitoring,., is defined
according to NOAA (1979): "Monitoring is the continued, systematic time-series observation of
pre-determined pollutants or pertinent components of the marine ecosystem over a period of
time sufficient to determine (1) the existing level, (2) trends, and (3) natural variations of , -
measured components." Data obtained through such observations can be used most effectively
by environmental managers if monitoring programs have specific objectives that provide,the
managers with the information necessary to make informed decisions. This would require ,
levels of environmental quality to be pre-defined as "acceptable" or "unacceptable" (Segar and
Stamm'an, 1986). Two types of monitoring programs are defined by NOAA (1985): monitoring
inputs and near-field effects of potential sources of pollution (including compliance monitoring),
and monitoring the general condition of marine resources through indicators of ecosystem or
resource status. For the purposes of this Plan, the former is considered near-field monitoring
and the latter far-field monitoring.

This goal is concerned with broad, far-field monitoring required to establish present
conditions of the ecosystem and to.follow long-term trends on a regional scale. This involves
developing and detecting early warning signs of potential pollution problems and following
trends to show how the ecosystem's status is changing. Initially, the goal is not to establish
causes and sources; these would be investigated through more comprehensive diagnostic studies
after a problem is identified. Research priorities for such diagnostic studies are discussed in
this Plan under National Marine Pollution Program Goals I through 4.

Regulatory compliance monitoring that addresses specific sources, of pollution is pertinent
to this goal when it is possible to integrate near-field and far-field activities. Monitoring
methods that are effective in identifying problem areas around marine discharge and disposal
sites in fact measure symptoms of poor marine ecosystem status. Symptoms of deterioration in
status may be more easily recognized and agreed upon within impacted marine ecosystems than
are far-field measures of ecosystem health (Phelps, 1988).

Much data and information have been published in the past regarding the status of
marine ecosystems obtained by measuring contaminants in specific ecosystem components.
Data obtained through monitoring waters receiving industrial and domestic effluents
(compliance monitoring) 'make up a large portion of the database. Some monitoring studies
document levels of PCBs, DDT, and chlorinated hydrocarbons in fish and invertebrates (NOAA,

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

1986a). Other databases record levels of metals in benthic biota and fishery organisms. Such
historical or "encountered" data are generally helpful in interpreting recent monitoring data.
Historical data also can be used to verify environmental models if assumptions and
uncertainties are carefully considered.

The scope of monitoring diverse aspects of marine ecosystems requires cooperative efforts
among Federal, state, and local scientists and managers. A consensus of marine pollution
managers from all regions of the United States suggests that the most effective monitoring
activities occur at the regional level and national monitoring programs should be the sum of
regionally planned programs coordinated at the national level (Segar, 1981). Examples where
Federal agencies and programs interface well with regional activities and facilitate the
exchange of information include the NOAA, EPA, and Coast Guard Accidental Spills Scientific
Response Programs (National Contingency Plan); the NMFS Fishery Centers' regional research
program (NOAA, 1986c); EPA's National Estuary Program; and EPA's Regional Offices'
interactions concerning discharge permits and compliance monitoring.

Selection, testing, and application of various indicators of the quality of marine
ecosystems are of the utmost importance in establishing conditions and trends in these
ecosystems. Close collaboration between scientists and managers is necessary to ensure that
monitored measures of environmental quality are truly useful for managerial decisions, and that
these interpretations are seen as informative. Numerous studies have developed indices for
specific monitoring purposes (Farrington et al. 1983; Phillips and Segar, 1986; and Dames and
Moore, 1984). The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) sponsored a workshop to
evaluate indices for measuring response of ecological systems and to emphasize indices that
could discriminate among natural factors and fishery exploitation (FAO, 1976). The necessity
of matching indices of marine environmental quality with management needs was discussed by
Wolfe and O'Connor (1986). They also suggested that environmental parameters for
establishing trends could be expressed most informatively relative to normal values accounting
for variability in measurement. O'Connor et al. (1987) constructed an index to detect above-
normal disease prevalence in fish and shellfish that warrants a warning or alarm for
management purposes.

Monitoring programs are not a panacea in that they cannot "be all things for all peoplell
(Farrington et al., 1983; Phelps, 1988). The selection of specific parameters for measurement
depends upon the purposes and goals of the particular monitoring program. To be effective in
addressing this goal of the National Program, a monitoring program may require measurements
of physical and chemical factors correlated with human activities as well as biological
responses to human influence (e.g., histopathological disorders). This section is a discussion of
the potentialities and limitations associated with the current state-of-the-art in monitoring the
status of marine ecosystems and an evaluation of how well Federal programs are addressing
this goal.

Federal Role

Presented below is a discussion of the Federal legislation and programs that address the
issue of the status and trends of marine ecosystems. Additional information concerning the
Federal programs addressing specific information needs are presented in the discussions of the
management questions. More detailed information on the Federal programs and projects that
address the issue of marine monitoring can be found in the National Marine Pollution Program,
Summary of Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 1987c).

150

Status of 'Marine Ecosystems

Federal Legislation and Regulations

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) amendments of 1987 (� 320(j)(1))
mandate that EPA shall coordinate and implement the following through NOAA for one or
more estuarine zones:

(A) A long-term program of trend assessment monitoring measuring variations in
pollutant -concentrations,.- marine ecology, and other physical or biological
environment parameters....

(B) A program of ecosystem assessment assisting in the development of (i) baseline
studies which determine the state of estuarine zones and the effects of natural and
anthropogenic changes, and (ii) predictive models....

(C) A comprehensive water quality sampling' program for the continuous monitoring of
nutrients, chlorine, acid precipitation, dissolved oxygen, and potentially toxic
pollutants....

(D) A program of research to identify the movements of nutrients, sediments - and'
pollutants through estuarine zones and the impact of nutrients, sediments, and
pollutants on water quality, the ecosystem, and designated or potential uses of. the
estuarine zones.

Prior to 1987, the most direct mandate to monitor marine pollution was contained in the
earlier version of FWPCA, which states that EPA, in cooperation with other Federal agencies
shall "establish ... and maintain a water quality surveillance system for the purpose of@
monitoring the quality of the navigable waters @ . . of the contiguous zone and the,oceans
. . . "(33 [email protected]. 1254 (a)(5)). In regulations developed pursuant to the FWPCA, EPA has
established guidelines for monitoring programs that must be conducted by dischargers releasing
point source (pipeline) effluents into surface waters. Section 1-315(b)(1) mandates that each
state prepare a report biennially that shall include a description of the State's water quality.

Section 201 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) requires
NOAA, in coordination with EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard, to "initiate a comprehensive and
continuing program of monitoring and research regarding the effects of the dumping of
material into ocean waters ... or the Great Lakes . . . " (33 U.S.C. 1441). Section 202 of
MPRSA (also known as the Ocean Dumping Act) also requires NOAA to conduct a
"comprehensive and continuing program of research with respect to the possible long-range
effects of pollution, overfishing, and man-induced changes if! ocean ecosystems" (33 U.S.C.
1442). Although this mandate callsfor "research," some of the activities required fall within
the definition of monitoring adopted in the National Ocean Pollution Planning Act, which
requires NOAA to . . . "establish ... a comprehensive, coordinated, and effective ocean
pollution research and development and monitoring program" (33 U.S.C. 1704).

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act requires the Minerals Management Service to
"monitor the human, marine, and coastal environments of such areas or regions (OCS oil and
gas leasing areas) in a manner designed to provide time-series and data trend information
which can be used for . . . the purpose of identifying any significant changes in quality and
productivity of such environments,, for establishing trends in the areas studied and monitored,
and for designing experiments to identify the causes of such changes" (43, U.S.C. 1346).

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Remaining mandates related to monitoring of pollution in the ocean and Great Lakes are
less direct. For example, the USGS has been given responsibility under several legislative
mandates for performing hydrologic investigations of water in streams and underground.

Federal Programs

Several Federal agencies conduct marine monitoring activities. Most, however, are
sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S.
Department of Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The following
discussion is a summary of the types of monitoring activities supported by these agencies.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Ocean Assessments Division (OAD)
of the National Ocean Service conduct most of the monitoring activities of NOAA. The OAD's
major monitoring effort is the National Status and Trends Program. Under this program, OAD,
annually collects bivalve molluscs, bottom-feeding fish, and surface sediments from 200 .-
sampling stations along the U.S. coast. These samples are then analyzed for contaminants, as
well as histopathological and other disorders in the fish and shellfish. The NMFS monitors
and documents the status and long-term changes in fish/shellfish health and environmental
quality to generate information for developing and testing hypotheses that relate
environmental quality to the health of living marine resources. These monitoring activities are
conducted in selected estuarine and coastal. areas as well as at ocean disposal sites. The
NMFS also supports the Microconstituents Program, which monitors contaminant levels in
marketplace fish.

The EPA's marine monitoring activities are conducted by its Environmental Research
Laboratories and through the agency's National Estuary Program. The agency develops
monitoring technologies, produces guidance documents for monitoring ocean dumpsites, and
provides technical assistance to industry for establishing field monitoring programs. The EPA.
develops and verifies chemical and biological methods to determine, the bioaccumulation
potential of contaminants in waste to be disposed of in the ocean and to determine the
biological significance of contaminant levels in tissue. The EPA also conducts site-specific.
assessments of ocean disposal sites, which include surveys of biological, water, and sediment
samples followed by assessments of environmental effects that result from use of the sites. In
the Great Lakes region, EPA supports an extensive monitoring program. Activities include
monitoring of municipal water intakes for water quality and biotic structure and function;
atmospheric loadings of metals and nutrients; and sediment, water, and biological samples in
various sites throughout the Great Lakes to assess environmental quality. Under its National
Estuary Program, the agency funds efforts to characterize current conditions and historical
trends of priority problems in specific estuaries.

Other Federal agencies that conduct marine pollutio n monitoring include the Minerals
Management Service (MMS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) of the U.S. Department of the Interior; the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) of the U.S. Department of Defense. The MMS's regional offices support monitoring
activities to assess potential changes in marine environments that are a result of Outer
Continental Shelf oil and gas development and production activities. The FWS annually
monitors trends in levels of organochloride pesticides and related compounds in wetland bird
species in sites along major North American flyways. The FWS also monitors levels of
organochlorine compounds and trace metals found in bottom-feeding and predatory freshwater

152

Status of Marine Ecosystems

fish species, some of which inhabit estuarine waters. The USGS monitors water quality
parameters including suspended solids, toxic metals, and toxic organics at selected downstream
sites located at river mouths. The FDA monitors the levels of toxics, contaminants, or
bacteria in finfish and shellfish to determine the incidence of these pollutants in seafood.
The COE conducts monitoring activities to evaluate the impacts of various coastal construction
activities, to provide baseline environmental information on dredged material disposal sites, and
to provide long-term assessments of the impact of dredged material disposal.

Manatzement Ouestions and Information Needs

The most direct measures of ecosystem conditions are biological responses to human
influence. Examples of biological responses that might be monitored in marine systems include
mortality rate, population size, reproductive success, developmental abnormalities, metabolic
activity, changes -in primary and secondary productivity, and changes in community structure.
In the following discussions, it is assumed that two types of parameters should be considered
for monitoring efforts to meet these goals: 1) measures of biological response to human'
influences, and 2) physical and chemical factors of ecol 'ogical significance that are altered as a
consequence of human activity. The management questions below have been developed to help
organize the discussion of research and monitoring needs:

Management Question 1: What is the status of marine ecosystems as indicated by biological
responses to human influences? How is the status changing?

Management Question 2: How are physical and chemical factors that affect biological
responses changing spatially and temporally?

This section includes an evaluation of how well marine ecosystem monitoring programs can
address these management questions and a discussion of the adequacy of existing information.
Recommendations are made as to the types of research, development, and monitoring work that
would most effectively improve our information on the environmental status of marine
ecosystems.

Changes in Biological Status

Manaimment Ouestion 1: What is the status of marine ecosystems as indicated by biolouic
responses to human influences? How is the status chanizing?

Information Needs

Ia. What are the physiological and biochemical indicators of anthropogenic stress in
marine organisms? How are they changing?

lb. How are populations and communities affected by anthropogenic stress?

153

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Ia. What are the i)hvsiblogical and biochemical indicators of antbrormenic stress in marine
organisms? How are they changing?

Physiological characteristics of many estuarine organisms allow them to adapt to the
rigors of dynamic environments where there are large fluctuations in temperature, salinity,@and
other parameters. Unfortunately, it is often difficult to separate physiological responses to
natural stress from effects of pollution stresses, but certain changes within organisms are
specific to a pollutant or type'of pollutant. Physiological responses to pollutants include
changes in metabolism, body fluids, and tissues. Tissue changes may be in the form of
lesions, tumors, and other histopathological manifestations. These physiological and
histopathological changes often precede mortality as an overt sign of toxicity (Mehrle and
Mayer, 1985; Meyers and Hendricks, 1985). Some promising indicators of pollution stress also
are found at the molecular and genetic levels (Dames and Moore, 1984).

Several measures of the general response to stress such as "scope-for-growth" (index of
the amount of energy an animal requires for growth) (Warren and Davis, 1967), growth
inhibition (Sanders and Jenkins, 1984), and stress, protein response, (Tanquay, 1983) have been
identified. Also, a number of stressor-specifid responses have been developed such as induced
production of certain proteins such- as metallothioneins (metal-binding proteins) and mixed-
function oxidases, and accumulation of metals in metallothioneins and very low-molecular-
weight ligand'pools (Jenkins wid Sanders, 1986). Such responses to stress show promise as
effective indicators of marine pollution. However, these measures, of biological response
require furtherAesting and development before they could be used,and integrated with
confidence.

An important emerging area for research involves work to adapt, calibrate, and validate
short-term genotoxicity tests in fish for the assessment of genetic hazards associated with
hazardous substances, and to examine the relationship between environmental exposure,
metabolism, and activation of prbmutagens, DNA-binding, and mutational events occurring in
somatic cells of 'different biomonitor species. Promising geno toxicity assays have been
demonstrated using chromosomal aberration, microniiclei, and sister chromatid exchanges as
endpoints. This work has particular ecblogical relevance when it is focused upon early
developmental stages of aquatic organisms.

Histopathological indicators of disorders in fishes have been used in monitoring studies
conducted by NOAA (1986b; 1987d). Observations on Atlantic croakers from seven benthic
surveillance sites showed a positive correlation between concentrations of aromatic
hydrocarbons in sediments and occurrences of selected histopathological disorders. In other
studies, Malins et al. (1984) discuss the relationship between chemical pollutants in sediments
and disease of bbttom-dwelling fish in Puget Sound, Washington. Patton and Couch (1984)
present hypothetical correlations of lesions and pollution. Couch suggests that kepone in the
James River contributed to fish kills by causing scoliosis, a lateral deviation of the spine. An
index of pollutant- induced fin'rot disease in winter flounder was developed by O'Connor et al.
(1987).

The EPA, in cooperation with the COE, employed a comprehensive field program to
evaluate methods for determining the effects of dredged material disposal in a marine
environment (Phelps et al., 1987). Several physiological measures of mussels Were made
including sister chromatid exchange (exchange of chromosome parts known to'increase in
frequency in stressed organisms), adenylate energy change (change in the relative energy state

154

Status of Marine Ecosystems

of the cell), metallothionein induction, and growth. Growth was significantly reduced at
disposal sites when compared to "control areas," and metallothionein levels appeared to be
elevated at disposal sites, but this difference was not statistically significant.

A number of stress responses at the organism and suborganism level have been identified
and tested as indicators of pollution, Some of these would provide useful information if
included in a monitoring programat this time; many,show great potential but need fur,ther
development. To improve our ability to@ identify and'.evaluate pollution stress.ih marine'
organisms, work should continue to develop and field test the most promising of these
indicators.

lb, How are vormlations and communities affected by anthrogogenic stress?

Marine ecosystems are complex entities composed of interacting biotic and abiotic
components. The exposure of ecosystems to stress.is complex and may affect structurat.and
functional aspects differently. The structure (inanner in which plants and animals. are
organized wit'hin an, ecosystem) of a, marine ecosystem can be changed, by an'thropogenic
influence. These changes can be measured throug@ indices such as species diversity, density,
and richness; relative abundance; and dominance.index (Swartz et al., 1985).. These and.other
indices of structural change when viewed together reflect in part the.status,of an ecosystem.
Changes may be based on comparisons with "control" or reference'areas, or determined
through time trend analysis of a specific sy@stem. Such 'comparisons, however, are limited by
our understanding of natural'variabiiity in marine ecosystems'.

Changes in community structure - have been: used in the past to indicate the status of
marine ecosystems (Pearson and Rosenberg, 1978; - Gannon et al.,, 1986; Swartz et al.,1985;.
Phelps et al., 1987). Long-term measurements of population -abundance of infaunal
invertebrates and fishes I in a mesohalihe 'portion pf the Chesapeake Bay provided valuable
base-line data on "natural" variations in population abundance (Hines et al., 1987). - A 35-year
study on the benthic infaunal invertebrate populations in Los A'ngeles-iong. Beach.Harbors
demonstrated an improvement of ecological conditions as'a result of pollution abatement
(Reish, 1986). Changes in the structure of benthic infaunal populations associated with a
seagrass community exposed to drilling fluids containing diesel oil were noted in laboratory
microcosm studies (Morton et al., 1986; Kelly et al., 1987). Drilling fluids in the micyocosins
significantly reduced richness indices based on species number and density of individuals.

Functional integrity is required for maintenance of any ecosystem. Functional aspects
include movements and transformations of chemicals and energy which in turn support
biological communities. Ecosystem productivity is a basic function that maybe used to
monitor the status of the system. Primary production can determine the amount of living
tissue an ecosystem can support (Woodwell and Botkin, 1970). Thus, in some instances, it may
be important to detect.changes in primary production. Several marine studies used primary
production as an index of the quality of an ecosystem (Smayda, 1984; Fay et al., 1986). The
rate at which estuarine organisms decomposed plant material was one indication of adverse
effects of drilling fluids on a seagrass system (Morton et al., 1986). Also, naturally occurring
bacterial communities may Provide a means for,d0ecting changes, in ecosystem status.
Singleton et al. (1984 ) found significant, changes in bacterial community composition in,
surface waters near Puerto Rico due to the introduction of pharmaceutical wastes.

155

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Other indicators can be used to evaluate the impact of stress on an ecosystem and
determine the response of the system. Harwell et al. (1987) discussed the impact of stress on
an ecosystem and its responses:

"In summary, the effect of a stress on an ecosystem is a function of the frequency,
duration, and intensity of the stress; its similarity to natural stresses to which the
ecosystem has had a history of exposure; the spatial extent of the stress; and the nature
of both the stress and the ecosystem. Simple generalities of responses of ecosystems to
stresses are not realistic; however, it may be possible to develop a complex paradigm of
ecosystem stress-response relationships, aggregated both by ecosystem type and the.
nature of the stress."

These authors explain that no single parameter will suffice as an indicator of system-level
stress responses and that every detectable change does not necessarily indicate a change in
the health of the system. However, a change in the state of a system may be more important
than the state of the system itself.

Although structural and functional measurements can provide resource managers with
helpful data, these endpoints have not-been widely.used in monitoring programs. One reason
is a lack of basic understanding of what changes in the measurements of structure and
function mean in relation to the quality of the ecosystem. There is a gap in information
concerning the relationships among specific levels of contaminants in communities, structural
effects on the community, and relationships of the changed community to the health of the
ecosystem.

In order to understand function and structure of marine ecosystems, it is necessary to
conduct long-term studies of these ecosystems, One of the difficulties in conducting long-
term ecological research is that ecological research (as well as many other research activities)
traditionally has been funded for short periods of time. The National Science Foundation's
Long-Term Ecological Research Program (LTER) was established to alleviate this situation
(Callahan, 1984). This long-term research program is oriented toward question/hypothesis
formulation and resolution. The research is not necessarily based on atrophic structural
approach but is organized around families of structural and functional attributes. The program
is designed so that I I chosen sites represent samples of the ecosystems of the United States.
Two of the sites are concerned with the coastal environment. The North Inlet Marsh-
Estuarine study in North Inlet, South Carolina examines the biological, chemical, and physical
aspects of the system including life histories, patterns of organisms, primary production rates,
and physical- chemical measurements of the water column. The Virginia Barrier Island-
Estuarine Site on the Delmarva Peninsula encompasses observations on changes in landmass of
the islands and marshes, changes in composition of the landscape, biota, and changes in such
processes as productivity, decomposition, and sediment deposition.

A wide variety of indicators of human influence at the population, community, and
ecosystem levels have been developed and tested for marine systems in the past, and the
International Joint Commission is currently using lake trout as an indicator of ecosystem
status in the Great Lakes. Difficulties associated with these techniques include partitioning
natural fluctuations from pollution effects and determining when observed changes or
differences are of concern. Despite these limitations, parameters measured at these higher
levels of biological organization should be considered for a comprehensive surveillance program
to meet this goal of the National Program. Basic research and development activities should
be continued to increase the utility of these indicators.

156

Status of Marine Ecosystems

Changes in Physical and Chemical Factors

Management Question 2: How are vhysical and chemical factors that affect biolop-ical
responses cbanizin2 snatially and temporally?

Information Needs
2a. What concentrations of chemical contaminants occur in selected marine ecosystems
components (water, sediment, and biota)? How are these levels changing?

2b. How are hydrographic factors such as freshwater inflow, dissolved -oxygen
concentration, and sediment loadings changing spatially and temporally?

2a. What concentrations of chemical contaminants. occur in selected marine ecosystems
components (water, sediment, biota)? How are these levels changing?

The capacity for this country to fully use and manage living marine resources depends to
a great extent upon resource managers' knowledge of concentrations of pollutants in the
water, sediment,-and biota of marine ecosystems; @ changes in these concentrations; and the
effects of these levels of contaminants on resources and ecosystems in which they occur.
Managers must be aware of trends in these levels in order. to assess the impact of human
activity on marine resources. and to develop options for improving the quality of marine
ecosystems. Information on %concentrations, of contaminants without corresponding information
on effects severely limits the use of monitoring data. However, for discussion purposes,
concentrations in components of ecosystems are separated from effects on the ecosystems.
Persistence, degradation rates, and biogeochernical cycling @of contaminants within the
sediments, and the flux of those contaminants between sediments, water, and biota are critical
to understanding the implications of human influences on marine systems (Capuzzo, 1988).
These topics are discussed in this Plan under National Marine Pollution Program Goal I and
are beyond the scope of the discussion in this section. For monitoring purposes,
concentrations of selected contaminants in marine and Great Lakes ecosystems are considered
as indicators or signals,of possible pollution problems.

Concentrations of pollutants in water are usually the primary focus of compliance
monitoring programs such as those associated with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permitting system. In this program, permits often are issued on the condition
of not exceeding specified concentrations of chemicals in receiving waters. Data developed in
these compliance monitoring programs are sometimes of utility to far-field monitoring
activities because regulatory limits in water quality permits are usually based on the adverse
effects of the materials being monitored to sensitive life-stages of marine organisms.
Chemicals appearing in high concentrations in the near-field can alert managers to potential
adverse impacts on resources in adjacent or far-field waters or systems. However, many
chemicals are found in much, higher @ concentrations in sediment and biota than in water-.

Contaminant concentrations in sediments are measured because sediments often serve as a-
reservoir for many pollutants and can be a conduit for transferring pollutants associated with
the sediment to bottom-feeding organisms and, @under certain circumstances, for cycling-
pollutants back into the.water column. Furthermore, benthic organisms have been found to
accumulate metals and organics to concentrations many times above levels found in the -
sediment in which they live (NOAA, 1987d;.Young et al., 1981). This is especially true in low-
energy depositional areas where sediments are accumulated and deposited over time.-The

157

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

National Status and Trends Program (NOAA, 1986b; 1987d) provides data on metal and organic
contamination of sediment in selected sites, and in some instances, scientists have related
contaminant levels in the sediment to levels in biological tissues. Radiometric and chemical
analyses can provide a time-integrated record of pollutant deposits where natural strata of
sediment deposition are preserved (Bopp et al., 1983; Koide et al., 1973).

Biota can concentrate many contaminants above levels found in water and sediment;
therefore, concentrations of contaminants in tissues are an important indicator of the
occurrence of a contaminant in the ecosystem. Organisms with high contaminant body burdens
represent a concentrated exposure medium to higher'trophic levels in the ecosystem.
Contamination levels in seafood are of particulafinterest because, should@ the levels exceed
limits established by FDA for human consumption, an entire fishery could be adversely
affected economically and human health could be threatened (see Goal 6 for a discussion of
research needs related to human health). However, the FDA limits do not necessarily address
the question of effects on the seafood organism, Unfortunately, because of the vast number
and various life-stages of marine organisms, the relationship between contamination levels and
effects on contaminated organisms may not be as clear as the seafood -to -people example.
Consequently, body-burden data are often of limited use to resource managers, and these data
can be extrapolated to effects only when appropriate research information is available.
Biological response measurements can be made in conjunction with residue analyses to indicate
exposure to contaminants. These response measurements are especially helpful in detecting
exposure of organisms to rapidly transformed chemical compounds such as organophosphate
pesticides.

As indicated in the Federal Programs part of this section, the Federal Government
supports monitoring programs to evaluate the levels of contaminants in marine ecosystems.
Since 1984, NOAA has conducted the National Status and Trends Program to develop
information on the status and trends of environmental quality in marine waters (Ehler and
Calder, 1986). The EPA continues a monitoring program to determine contaminant loading in
the Chesapeake Bay in cooperation with the states of Maryland and Virginia. In 1984, a 167-
station monitoring network was established in the bay to define trends in water and sediment
quality (Mountford and Mackiernan, 1987). The USGS also monitors water quality of coastal
waters in relation to their stream monitoring programs. Although chiefly a freshwater
monitoring program, the FWS's National Fish Monitoring Program includes some estuarine
species. The Minerals Management Service's Environmental Studies Program supports
monitoring activities to identify and establish trends in changes in the quality of OCS
environments resulting from offshore oil and gas activities. Recently, the FDA, NOAA, and
TPA cooperated in surveying levels of PCBs in bluefish from the Atlantic coast (NOAA, 1986c).
This is an example of a relatively short-term, mission- oriented monitoring program often
required of Federal agencies.

Many state and local monitoring programs are conducted and supply valuable monitoring
data for assessment purposes. For example, the State of Florida is involved in an estuarine
monitoring program that encompasses improving reliability of estuarine data, establishing and
extending the chemical database, and improving tools for assessing estuarine pollution (Calder,
1988). Other examples of local monitoring activities include studies on many bays and
estuaries such as the one conducted on variations and -long-term changes in Narragansett Bay
in relation to phytoplankton population and nutrient concentration by Smayda (1984). Because
so many monitoring programs have already been completed and others are ongoing, there is a
need to evaluate and where possible use historical or "encountered" data and to coordinate
ongoing and future monitoring activities.

158

S tatus of Marine Ecosystems

Although much historical data on residues of chemicals in marine waters, sediment, and
biota are available, few of these data were collected so that trends could be established.
NOAA's Status and Trends Program was established as an initial step to correct this short-
coming. The program is designed to answer such questions as; Are general conditions getting
better or worse? How do, conditions in different areas compare? Two major field sampling
projects were established to help obtain answers to these questions. One aspect of the
program is to acquire relevant data from other sources such as past monitoring programs and
ongoing regional ones. Data are available from the Status and.Trends Program on
concentrations of chlorinated pesticides, PAHs, PCBs, and trace metals in marine and estuarine
fish, bivalves, and sediments (NOAA, 1986a). The Status and Trends Program has two
components; the Benthic Surveillance Project and Muscle Watch Program. The Benthic
Surveillance Project provides data on fish pathology and chemical analyse 's of fish livers and
sediment from 50 sites. The Muscle Watch Program provides data on chemical.and histological
analyses of marine molluscs from 150 sites (NOAA, 1987d).

Results obtained from monitoring studies indicate that it is feasible and useful to
document status and trends of contaminant levels in living and nonliving components of marine
ecosystems. Measurements of contaminants in water, sediment, and biota should be made only
to the extent that they contribute information needed for environmental decision making.
Additional summaries of historical contaminant concentrations will generally be necessary to
interpret recent measurements. Both sets of activities would require -aggressive coordination
of significant monitoring programs sponsored by Federal, state, and local governments.

2b. How are hydropraphic factors such as freshwater inflow. dissolved oxygen concentratim.
and sediment loading changinp spatially and temt)orally?

Hydrographic factors are of fundamental importance to the functioning of estuarine and
coastal ecosystems. For example, the recruitment of many fish and shellfish stocks is closely
linked to the hydrodynamics of estuaries and associated coastal waters. Changes in
hydrographic conditions can result in changes in the production, composition, and abundance
of phytoplankton, and reduction in the abundance and extent of desirable rooted aquatic
vegetation. Thesechanges can be associated with decreased dissolved oxygen and light
penetration. Such alterations can be detrimental to the production of estuarine-dependent
organisms through shifts in food resources and changes in the availability of suitable habitat
(NOAA, 1987b).

The quality and quantity of freshwater inflow into a coastal area or estuary can greatly
impact biogeochemical cycles within the zone. Water laden with nutrients, sediments, and
toxicants can influence biological and hydrographical regimes. Decreases in flow can cause
saltwater intrusion that can result in changes in circulatory patterns and can alter circulation
to the point of shifting conditions normally found at the outlet of an estuary to positions
nearer the river input. Conversely, increases in flow can shift conditions in the opposite
direction toward the inlet. Altered salinity can affect the distribution and composition of
phytoplankton (Soniat and Boesch, In press). Increases in salinity can cause osmotic
regulation problems for those species that must prevent dilution of their cell content.
Decreases'in salinity are tolerated by only the eurylialine forms. The impact of freshwater
inflow on fish populations in Faka Union Bay was studied by the National Marine Fisheries
Service (Beaufort Laboratory, 1984). When compared with fish from similar, unimpacted marine
areas, Faka Bay fish were less abundant. Invertebrate communities, including shrimp and
crabs, showed lowered overall abundance.

159

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

In a nationwide study conducted for NOAA, hypoxic areas were identified in 126 of 131
coastal and estuarine waters for which adequate data exist (Whitledge, 1985). In the Great
Lakes, of 42 identified locations of concern, 21 showed oxygen depletion associated with
eutrophication (GLWQB, 1987). Major losses of coastal and estuarine living space during the
productive summer months by hypoxic/anoxic conditions have been implicated in losses of
major fisheries such as striped bass. Coutant (1987) suggested that anoxia in nutrient-
enriched estuaries has had detrimental consequences for the ability of striped bass to
reproduce. There is also evidence to suggest that severe hypoxic conditions result in mass
mortalities among shellfish and some bottom-dwelling finfish species, which can result in loss
of fish catch and increased ecological stress by the decay of the affected' fish population
(NOAA, . 1987a).

Changes in suspended sediment loads have occurred in many areas of the country as a
result of changes in freshwater input, dredging and other coastal construction activities, and
agricultural practices. Increased sediment loads can have negative impacts on marine and
estuarine habitats through shoaling, which can decrease the volume of an estuary and result in
a decrease or change in habitat (such as the burial of oyster cultch materials). Increased
,suspended sediments may also affect primary productivity due to its effect on light
attenuation. In a study of the Delaware Estuary, Pennock (1985) found an inverse relationship
-between suspended sediment loads and chlorophyll concentrations. The author -concluded that
the,predominant physical factor regulating phytoplankton biomass was suspended -sediment
.concentration.

,. Data on basic hydrographic factors such as freshwater inflow and sediment loadings are
generally already available for major estuarine and coastal systems; or could be collected at a
relatively low cost. Although there are gaps in our knowledge concerning the impact of
hydrographic factors on marine ecosystems, inclusion of certain hydrographic factors in a
surveillance monitoring program would provide useful information. Major changes in these
factors could signal impending threats to valued resources and indicate that further
investigation would be prudent. More basic research in the following areas would be
especially valuable in judging the significance of changes in hydrographic parameters: effects
of changes in freshwater inflow on secondary productivity, relationships between freshwater
inflow and low dissolved- oxygen and pollutant concentrations, effects of land-use changes on
sediment loadings, and effects of sediment loadings on secondary productivity.

Conclusions and Recommendations

An explicit mandate has been developed by Congress for the collection of fundamental
information on the status of marine ecosystems with respect to pollution effects. The
technological capability exists to perform such monitoring, and ongoing Federal programs have
made progress toward satisfying this mandate. A national program to fully address this
mandate should take advantage of historical data and include a coordination and
standardization component to promote the most effective use of ongoing state and local
sampling programs. Federal monitoring efforts should be designed onl@ to provide needed
information that is not available from other sources. Although a general framework or
strategy for such a program would be best developed at the national level, evaluations of
ecosystem status would need to be adapted to each region so that the special attributes and
problems of the region could be considered. In designing a program to monitor the status of

160

Status of Marine Ecosystems

marine -ecosystems, parameters from four categories should be considered. Listed below is a
synopsis of the potential and limitations of parameters in each category as well as suggestions
for research and development work that would increase the utility of these indicators.

Organism Resiponses. A number of indicators of pollution stress on individual organisms (e.g.',
"scope -for- growth," growth inhibition, stress protein response) show potential for use in
marine monitoring programs, while others need further development. Work should continue to
develop and field test the most promising of these indicators.

Population and Community Resiponses. Indicators of pollution stress at the population and
community levels have been developed for marine systems (e.g., species diversity, density, and
richness; relative abundance; and productivity). However, these techniques often cannot
adequately distinguish between natural changes and pollution effects or determine when
observed changes are significant. Basic research and development activities designed to
increase the utility of these indicators should continue.

Concentrations of Contaminants. Measurements of contaminant -level trends in water,
sediment,,and biota provide resource managers and decision makers with useful and necessary
information. Having these measurements may provide clues to the cause of any adverse
biological effect. Summaries of historical contaminant concentrations should be developed to
compare to rec@nt measurements.

Hydrographic Factors. Data on hydrographic factors are generally available for many coastal
areas and can be incorporated as part of monitoring programs. Additional research is needed
in the following areas to provide necessary information concerning the significance of changes
in hydrographical parameters:

o Effects of changes in freshwater inflow on secondary productivity;

o Relationship between freshwater inflow and low dissolved -oxygen and pollutant
concentrations;

o Effects of land-use changes on sediment loading; and

o Effects of sediment loadings on secondary productivity.

Literature Cited

Beaufort Laboratory. 1984. Golden Gate/Faka Union Bay Project Final Report. Submitted to
Jacksonville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, FL. 51 pp.

Bopp, R.F., H.J. Simpson, C.R. Olsen, R.M. Trier, and H. Kostyk. 1983. Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon and Radionuclide Chronologies in Sediments of the Hudson River and
Estuary, New York. Environ. Sci. Technol. 16:666-676.

Butler, P.A. 1973. Residues in Fish Wildlife and Estuaries. Pestic. Monitor. J. 6(4):238-362.

Calder, F. 1988. Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Tallahassee, FL. Personal
Communication.

161

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Callahan, J.T. 1984. Long-Term Ecological Research. BioScience. 34(6):363-367.

Capuzzo, J.M. 1988. Testimony Before the Hearings of the Subcommittee on Fisheries and
Wildlife Conservation and the Environment and the Subcommittee on Oceanography,
United States House of Representatives, May 25, 1988.

Coutant, C.C. 1987. Poor Reproductive Success of Striped Bass from a Reservoir with
Reduced Summer Habitat. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 116:154-160.

Dames and Moore. 1984. Evaluation of Measurement Techniques for Monitoring Marine
Pollution. A Final Report to Ocean Assessments Division, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 331 pp.

Ehler, C.N. and J.A. Calder. 1986. Monitoring Environmental Quality. Sea Technol. April:32-
37.

FAO. 1976. Indices for Measuring Responses of Aquatic Ecological Systems to Various Human
Influences. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper No. 151. FIR/T151, 66 pp.

Farrington, J.W., E.D. Goldberg, R.W. Risebrough, J.H. Martin, and V.T. Bowen. 1983. U.S.
"Mussel Watch" 1976-1978: An Overview of the Trace-Metal, DDE, PCB, Hydrocarbon
and Artificial Radionuclide Data. Environ. Sci. Technol. 17: 490-496.

Fay, R.R., N. Schnitzer, R.R. Bidigare, and D.B. Cline. 1986. Observation on the Utility of
Phytoplankton Parameters in Ocean Disposal Assessments, pp. 889-893. In Proceedinps of
Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine Technology Society, Washington, D.C.

Gannon, J.E., C.J. Edwards, T.B. Reynoldson, and J.H. Hartig. 1986. Indicator Approaches
Used in the Great Lakes International Joint Commission, Windsor, Ontario, pp. 894-900.
In Proceedinps of Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine Technology Society, Washington, D.C.

GLWQB. 1987. Report on Great Lakes Water Quality. Report to the International Joint
Commission. Great Lakes Water Quality Board, Detroit, MI, and Windsor, Ontario.
236 pp.

Harwell, M.A., C.C. Harwell, D.A. Weinstein, and J.R. Kelly. 1987. Anthropogenic Stresses on
Ecosystems: Issues and Indicators of Response and Recovery. Ecosystems Research
Center, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. ERC-153. 32 pp.

Hines, A.H., P.J. Haddon, J.J. Miklas, L.A. Wiechert, and A.M. Haddon. 1987. Estuarine
Invertebrates and Fish: Sampling Design and Constraints for Long-Term Measurements of
Population Dynamics, pp. 140-164. In New Aivroaches to Monitorinp, Aquatic Ecosystems
(T.P. Boyle, ed.). American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. ASTM
STP 940.

162

Status of Marine Ecosystems

Kelly, J.R., T.W. Duke, M.A. Harwell, and C.C. Harwell. 1987. An Ecosystem Perspective on
Potential Impacts of Drilling Fluid Discharges on Seagrasses. Environ. Management.
11(4):537-562.

Koide, M., K.W. Bruland, and E.D. Goldberg. 1973. Th-228/Th-232 and Pb-210 Geochronologies
in Marine and Lake Sediments. Geochem. Cosmochim. Acta. 37:1171-1187.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, S.L. Chan, M.S. Meyers, J.T. Landahl, P.G. Prohaska,
A.J. Friedman, L.D. Rhodes, D.G. Burrows, W.G. Growland, and H.O. Hodgins. 1984.
Chemical Pollutants in Sediments and Diseases of Bottom-Dwelling Fish in Puget Sound,
Washington. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18:705-713.

Mehrle, P.M. and F.L. Mayer. 1985. Biochemistry/Physiology, pp. 264-282. In Fundamentals
of Aciuatic Toxicology (G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli, eds.). Hemisphere Publ. Co.,
Washington, D.C.

Meyers, T.R. and J.D. Hendricks. 1985. Histopathology, pp. 283-331. In Fundamentals of
Aciuatic Toxicology (G.M. Rand and S.R. Petrocelli, eds.). Hemisphere Publ. Co.,
Washington, D.C.

Morton, R.D., T.W. Duke, J.M. Macauley, J.R. Clark, W.A. Price, S.J. Hendricks, S.L. Owsley-
Montgomery, and G.R. Plaia. 1986. Impact of Drilling Fluids on Seagrasses: An @
Experimental Community Approach, pp. 199-212. In Community Toxicity Testing (J.
Cairns, ed.). American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA. ASTM STP
920.

Mountford, K. and G.B. Mackiernan. 1987. A Multidecade Trend Monitoring Program for,
Chesapeake Bay, A Temperate East Coast Estuary, pp. 91-106. In New Aggroaches to
Monitorinp, AQuatic Ecosystems (T.P. Boyle, ed.). American Society for Testing Materials,
Philadelphia, PA. ASTM STP 940.

NOAA. 1979. Report of the Subcommittee on Ocean Pollution Monitoring, pp. 87-165. In
Rer)orts of the Subcommittee on: National Needs and Problems--Data Collection, Storape,
and Distribution: Monitoring: Research and Develoment. National Marine Pollution
Program Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Rockville, MD.

NOAA. 1985. National Marine Pollution Program - Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research,
Development and Monitoring. Fiscal Years 1985-1989. National Pollution Program Office,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville,
MD. 350 pp.

NOAA. 1986a. Inventory of Chlorinated Pesticides and PCB Data for U.S. Marine and
Estuarine Fish and Invertebrates. Ocean Assessments Division, National Ocean Service,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Seattle,
WA. 44 pp.

NOAA. 1986b. Organic Compounds and Metals in Selected Fish, Bivalve Mollusks, and
Sediments of Chesapeake Bay: Preliminary Results from the Status and Trends Program.
A Report by G. Shigenaka and J. Calder. Ocean Assessments Division, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 20 pp.

163

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

NOAA. 1986c. Report on 1984-86 Federal Survey of PCB's in Atlantic Coast Bluefish. Data
Report. National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 179 pp.

NOAA. 1987b. NOAA Estuarine Research Program Developmental Plan. Estuarine Programs
Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Washington, D.C. 20 pp.

NOAA. 1987c. National Marine Pollution Program, Summary of Federal Programs and
Projects, FY 1986 Update. National Ocean Pollution Program Office, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD.

NOAA. 1987d. National Status and Trends Program for Marine Environmental Quality.
Progress Report and Preliminary Assessment of Findings of the Benthic Surveillance
Project - 1984. Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 81 pp.

O'Connor, J.S., J.J. Ziskowski, and R.A. Murchelano. 1987. Index of Pollutant-Induced Fish
and Shellfish Disease. National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Rockville, MD. 29 pp.

Patton, J.S. and J.A. Couch. 1984. Can Tissue Anomalies That Occur in Marine Fish Implicate
Specific Pollutant Chemicals?, pp. 539-548. In Concepts in Marine Pollution
Measurements (H. White, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication. University of Maryland,
College Park, MD.

Pearson, T.H. and R. Rosenberg. 1978. Macrobenthic Succession in Relation to Organic
Enrichment and Pollution of the Marine Environment. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev.
16:229-311.

Pennock, J.R. 1985. Chlorophyll Distributions in the Delaware Estuary: Regulation by Light-
Limitation. Est., Coast and Shelf Sci. 21:711-725.

Phelps, D.K. 1988. Lessons from Mussel Watch (and Subsequent Development). In
Proceedings: 8th Life Science Symnosiurn Sponsored by Oak Ridize National Laboratory,
Knoxville, TN. At)ril 21, 1988. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.

Phelps, D.K., C.H. Katz, K.J. Scott, and B.H. Reynolds. 1987. Coastal Monitoring: Evaluation
of Monitoring Methods in Narragansett Bay, Long Island Sound and New York Bight, and
a General Monitoring Strategy, pp. 107-124. In New Approaches to Monitoring Aguatic
Ecosystems (T.P. Boyle, ed.). American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
PA. ASTM STP 940.

Phillips, D.J.H. and D.A. Segar. 1986. Use of Bioindicators in Monitoring Conservative
Contaminants: Programmed Design Imperatives. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 17(l):10-17.

164

Status of Marine Ecosystems

Reish, D.I. 1986. Benthic Invertebrates as Indicators of Marine Pollution: 35 Years of Study,
pp. 885-888. In Proceedings of Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine Technology Society,
Washington, D.C.

Sanders, B.M. and K.D. Jenkins. 1984. A Relationship Between Free Cupric Ion
Concentrations in Seawater and Copper Metabolism and Growth in Crab Larvae. Biol.
Bull. 167:704-712.

Segar, D.A. 1981. An Assessment of Great Lakes and Ocean Pollution Monitoring in the
United States. Working Paper Number 7. Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research,
Development and Monitoring. FY1981-1985. National Marine Pollution Program Office,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Rockville, MD. 53 pp. and Appendices.

Segar, D.A. and E. Stamman. 1986. Monitoring in Support of Estuaries Pollution Management
Needs, pp. 874-877. In Proceedings of Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine Technology
Society, Washington, D.C.

Singleton, F.L., D.J. Grimes, and R.R. Colwell. 1984. Autochthony of Bacterial Communities in
Ocean Surface Waters as an Indicator of Pollution, pp. 443-469. In Concepts in Marine ,
Pollution Measurements (H.H. White, ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of
Maryland, College Park, MD.

Smayda, T.J. 1984. Variations and Long-Term Changes in Narragansett Bay, A Phytoplankton
Based Coastal Marine Ecosystem: Relevance to Field Monitoring for Pollution
Assessment, pp. 663-679. In Concepts in Marine Pollution Measurements (H.H. White,
ed.). Maryland Sea Grant Publication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

Soniat, T.M. and Boesch, D.F. In Press. The Effects of Variations of Freshwater Input on
Estuarine Condition and Productivity. 63 pp. + Figures.

Swartz R.C., G.R. Ditsworth, D.W. Schults, and J.D. Lamberson. 1985. Sediment Toxicity to a
Marine Infaunal Amphipod: Cadmium and Its Interaction with Sewage Sludge. Mar.
Environ. Res. 18:133-153.

Tanguay, R.M. 1983. Genetic Regulation During Heat-Shock and Function of Heat-Shock
Proteins: A Review. Can. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 61:387-394.

Warren, C.E. and G.E. Davis. 1967. Laboratory Studies on the Feeding, Bioenergetics and
Growth of Fish, pp. 175-214. In Biological Basis of Freshwater Fish Production (S.D.
Gerking, ed.). Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.

Wolfe, D.A. and S. O'Connor. 1986. Some Limitations of Indicators and Their Place in
Monitoring Schemes, pp. 878-884. In Proceedings of Oceans '86. Volume 3. Marine
Technology Society, Washington, D.C.

165

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Woodwell, G.M. and D.B. Botkin. 1970. Metabolism of Terrestrial Ecosystems by Gas Exchange
Techniques, pp. 73-85. In Analyses of Temr)erate Forest Ecosystems (D.E. Reichle ed.).

Young, D.R., M.D. Moore, T.K. Jan, and R.P. Eganhouse. 1981. Metals in Seafood Organisms
Near a Large California Municipal Outfall. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 12:134-138.

166

Implications to Human Health

GOAL 6: UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF
MARINE POLLUTION TO HUMAN HEALTH

Goal Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Federal Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

Federal Legislation and Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Federal Programs . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Management Questions and Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174

Concerns Associated with Chemical Contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175

Concerns Associated with Pathogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Effectiveness of Management Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Concerns Associated with Spills of Hazardous Materials . . . . . . . . . . . 190

Conclusions and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Chemical Contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

Pathogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Management Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Hazardous Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

Literature Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

Human health concerns related to marine pollution center on toxic substances and
pathogenic microorganisms that are introduced into marine ecosystems as a result of human
activities. Typical routes of human exposure include consumption of seafood and swimming.
Although acute toxic responses have not been reported to result from consumption of chemical
contaminants in U.S. seafood, synthetic organic compounds and metals have been found in
marine species harvested for human consumption from some areas. In addition, seafood may
contain pathogenic microorganisms as a result of harvesting seafood from sewage -contaminated
areas, from certain human pathogens that occur naturally in the marine environment, or from
contamination that occurs during improper processing or shipping of seafood products.
Governmental programs, such as the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, have been effective
in protecting the public from major outbreaks of disease. Important public health concerns
related to marine pollution remain to be addressed, including sporadic outbreaks of
gastroenteritis caused by viruses and any latent effects that may result from chronic exposure
over long periods of time to chemical contaminants in seafood. Therefore, understanding the
implications of marine pollution to human health is one of the six goals to the National
Marine Pollution Program.

167

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Goal Definition

A number of pollutants have been identified in the marine environment that can cause
adverse human health effects. Although the presence of these agents in the marine
environment does not alone constitute a public health risk, some health risk may result if
human exposure exceeds threshold levels of these agents. Adverse health effects from these
substances arise from either the toxicity or pathogenicity of the agent and the extent to
which the population is exposed. A goal of the National Marine Pollution Program is to
understand better the relationship between exposure of humans to pollutants in the marine
environment and the risk of developing an adverse health effect. To address this goal, it
would be logical to characterize the toxicity, pathogenicity, and human exposure to marine
pollutants. The management questions in this section are structured around the information
needs related to these topics. Also addressed in this section are the current efforts to
generate the needed information and recommendations to fill the important existing data gaps.

The pollutants of concern with regard to human health effects that are discussed in this
section of the Plan can be broadly grouped into two categories: chemical contaminants and
human pathogens. Substances in these categories are of concern because they (1) are known
to be present in the marine environment, (2) have the potential to come into contact with
human populations, and (3) are known to cause various adverse effects such as birth defects,
cancer, liver disease, neurological disorders, and infectious diseases.

Not all seafood-borne illnesses result from marine pollution. For example, disease
outbreaks associated with fish include ciguatera, scombroid poisoning, and botulism (NRC,
1985). Ciguatera and scombroid poisoning were the first and second most frequently reported
diseases associated with eating fish in the United States between 1977 and 1981 (Bryan, 1980;
CDC, 1981; 1983). Ciguatoxin is a naturally occurring substance manufactured by certain
dinoflagellate species (Bagnis et al., 1980) and transferred to fish through the food chain
(Brown and Dorn, 1977). Scombroid poisoning results from eating fish which have become
toxic as a result of microbial decomposition of histidine to histamine during improper handling
and storage (NRC, 1985). Outbreaks associated with Clostridium botulinum are usually the
result of faulty processing or storage practices.

Exposure to the biotoxins released from naturally occurring dinoflagellate species other
than ciguatera represents a less frequent hazard to human health. Intensive blooms of
dinoflagellates are known as red tides. The dinoflagellate Protogonvaulux tamarensis is
responsible for producing paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) in exposed human populations
along the New England Atlantic coast. Protogonvaulux cantenella is the organism responsible
for cases of PSP on the Pacific coast (Steidinger, 1983). PSP, which has not been clearly
linked to marine pollution, is one of the most toxic forms of food poisoning. Severe and
often fatal human intoxications following ingestion of contaminated bivalve mollusks have
occurred sporadically in widely scattered areas around the world (Ray, 1971). Statistically,
PSP does not constitute a major public health concern in the United States, due in large part
to successful state monitoring programs, although infrequent incidents have been reported
along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts (CDC, 1983). Shellfish involved most frequently are
mussels, clams (hard and soft-shelled), butter clams, and scallops (NRC, 1985). The
dinoflagellate Ptychodiscus brevis is responsible for producing neurotoxic shellfish poisoning
(NSP) in consumers of shellfish taken along the seacoast of North Carolina, South Carolina,
Florida, and Texas. While it can kill fish and some invertebrates, P. brevis toxins accumulate
in oysters and clams without harming them (Steidinger, 1983). These toxins can produce acute
neurological effects in humans if sufficient quantities of shellfish meats are consumed.

168

Implications to Human Health

Several Vibrio species that pose risks to human health occur naturally in the marine
environment. Endemic Vibrio species associated with contamination of shellfish include V.
varahnemolyticus and V. vulnificus. Consumption of seafood contaminated with V.
parahaemolyticus has been associated with outbreaks of gastroenteritis, while consumption of
V. vulnif i cus -contaminated shellfish can result in primary septicemia (blood poisoning) in
patients with liver disorders and in diabetic and immunocompromised individuals (Tacket et al.,
1984; Blake, 1979; NRC, 1985).

The initial step in determining which pollutants in the marine environment are likely to
cause an adverse effect is to examine the association between disease incidence and human
exposure. The association between exposure to human pathogens, either through ingestion of
contaminated seafood or by swimming in contaminated water; and the development of human
illness has been established for someagents. This association has been perhaps best
established for exposure to enteric pathogens such as viruses and bacteria. Diseases such as
hepatitis, gastroenteritis, and cholera are known to be caused by water- and seafood-borne
pathogens. These pathogens can enter the marine environment through such practices as the
discharge of raw sewage or wastewater effluent from sewage treatment plants and the dumping
of sewage sludge. Pathogens may also enter the marine environment from nonpoint sources,
such as agricultural or stormwater runoff, or through the illegal practice of ocean disposal of
infectious wastes.

Human health effects resulting from exposure to toxic chemicals in the marine
environment are less well known than the effects resulting from exposure to pathogens.
Human health effects of toxic chemicals may be elicited as acute or sublethal responses. For
example, populations of Minamata and Niigata, Japan, developed acute neurological disorders
after consuming methylmercury- contaminated seafood (D'Itri and D'Itri, 1977). Sublethal
effects were reported by Fein et al. (1984) in newborns whose mothers consumed large
amounts of PCB -contaminated fish.

Metals other than mercury, including lead, cadmium, and arsenic, pesticides, halogenated
compounds (such as dioxins), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (such as benzopyrenes) are
also present in the marine environment and have the potential to cause adverse human health
effects. Although the effects of these compounds on different organ systems in man and/or
animals are known, it is difficult to establish with certainty the degree of hazard posed by
their presence in seafood. This is due to a lack of information on the exact levels present,
exposure duration, and, in the case of metals, the form in which they exist (e.g., inorganic vs.
organic, oxidation states).

Toxic compounds enter the marine environment from a variety of sources. For example,
a major source of cadmium is the discharge of industrial and municipal wastewater into
estuarine waters. Pesticides, in contrast, are introduced into the marine environment largely
from nonpoint sources, such as agricultural or stormwater runoff. Although mercury can enter
the aquatic environment from industrial discharges or surface runoff, natural sources of'
mercury contribute most significantly to the levels found in the open ocean (OTA, 1987).

Once an indication of the relative hazard posed by a marine pollutant has been
established, the next step is to characterize the degree to which particular populations are
exposed to that agent. This involves quantifying the levels of contaminants in seafood,
identifying the populations exposed to the toxic agent, and estimating the duration and nature
of human exposure.

169

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Existing analytical methodologies allow for the detection and quantification of chemical
contaminants in seafood at very low levels. This increased analytical sensitivity permits the
detection of some compounds in seafood or marine waters at the part per trillion (ppt) level
or lower; however, these results need to be integrated with exposure and toxicity data to
develop a meaningful characterization of the risk of consuming contaminated seafood or of
swimming in contaminated water.

Identifying the populations likely to be exposed to marine pollutants, and estimating the
duration and frequency of exposure require accurate seafood consumption data. However, the
wide range of national seafood consumption values c 'urrently available to regulatory agencies is
a recognized source of uncertainty in assessing the human health risks posed by marine
pollutants. For consumption data to be useful, they should be based on measurements from
regional surveys of high-risk subpopulations in areas where problems exist. They should also
be specific to certain seafood species, such as previously underutilized varieties. Any
characterization of the degree to which populations are exposed to contaminants through
consumption of seafood requires knowledge of the source of the contaminated seafood. This
section focuses on seafood harvested in U.S. waters. However, much of the seafood consumed
in this country is imported, and assessments of the risk to human health from consuming these
seafood species must take into account the contribution of imported products to U.S. seafood
consumption.

An important goal of this section is to review the existing seafood consumption data and
address the need for updating this information. In addition to the risks associated with
exposure to marine pollutants via consumption of contaminated seafood, other means of
exposure to marine pollutants, such as occupational handling of seafood and swimming in
contaminated water, are also considered in this section. However, since the pollutants being
discussed are not unique to the marine environment, other sources of exposure, such as
nonseafood dietary components, drinking water, and the ambient atmosphere contribute to the
total body burden of these compounds.

Several methods have recently been developed to assess the human health risks from
exposure to marine pollutants (EPA, 1987b; Brown et al., 1988; Friberg, 1988). Risk assessment
is an important tool for evaluating human health concerns. The procedure takes into account
toxicity and exposure information to provide a scientific framework for making policy
decisions and taking regulatory actions. While information on human toxic responses is
particularly valuable, typically such data either do not exist or are inadequate. Because of
these uncertainties, the risk assessment approach is based on a quantitative calculation of the
probabilities of an adverse health effect resulting from human exposure to a toxic agent.

The toxicity and exposure information gained in these risk assessment analyses can be
used to support a number of management options. These include identifying and ranking
polluted marine areas, developing environmental criteria, closing shellfish beds or bathing
beaches, and issuing public health advisories. The effectiveness of these management tools is
largely a result of the degree to which the population perceives the risk to be significant and
the ability of the regulating agencies to communicate the risks. One goal of this section is to
examine the effectiveness of these management tools in protecting human health.

Finally, recognizing the unique exposure to marine pollutants that emergency response
workers often encounter, the measures necessary to protect these workers from adverse health
effects will be examined in this section.

170

Implications to Human Health

Federal Role

This section discusses the Federal legislation, regulations, and programs that address the
implications of marine pollution to human health. Additional discussions of Federal programs
related to specific information needs are presented under the management questions that
follow this review of the Federal role. More detailed information on the Federal programs
and projects that address the issue of human health and marine pollution can be found in the
National Marine Pollution Program, Summary of Federal Programs and Projects (NOAA, 1987).

Federal Legislation and Regulations

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for the safety of the
nation's foods, including seafood. Under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the FDA assures that regulated products are safe for use by
consumers. The,FFDCA authorizes the FDA to conduct assessments of the safety of
ingredients in fdods. The key element of the FFDCA, and the source of FDA's main tools for
enforcement, is the prohibition of the "adulteration" of foods. The FDA, under Section 406 of
the FFDCA, can prescribe the level of contaminant that, under Section 402 'will render a food
adulterated and, therefore, will initiate enforcement action based on scientific data. The
establishment of action levels (informal judgments about the level of a food contaminant to
which consumers may be safely exposed) or tolerances (regulations having the force of law)
are the regulatory procedures employed by FDA (or EPA, in the case of pesticides under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) to control environmental contaminants in
food.

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act (CWA),
contains a stated goal that, where obtainable, all waters of the United States should be
returned to "fishable, swimmable" status. This is achieved through two basic goals: (1) to
reach a level of water quality that "provides for the protection and propagation of fish,
shellfish, and wildlife" and "for recreation in and on the water," and (2) to eliminate the
discharge of pollutants into U.S. waters. The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) mandated under Section 401 of the Act regulates, through a permit system, the
discharge of pollutants into waters. Section 304 of the CWA requires EPA to periodically
update water quality criteria to reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the effects of the
individual pollutants on public,health and welfare, aquatic life, and recreation. Section'303 of
the Act provides that water quality standards be developed for all surface waters. Section 311
prohibits the discharge of "harmful quantities" of oil into navigable waters. Section 403 of
the Act requires EPA to establish criteria for the discharge of hazardous pollutants into the
territorial sea, the waters of the contiguous zone, and the oceans. Approximately 300
substances have been designated by the EPA as hazardous. The EPA is responsible, under
Section 405 of the Act, for regulating the disposal of sewage sludge by pipeline, and Section
301(h) provides EPA with the authority, under certain conditions, to issue permits waiving
secondary treatment of sewage effluents from publicly owned treatment facilities discharging
into marine waters. Section 208 of the CWA calls for state agencies to develop and implement
nonpoint source pollution control and management plans, with EPA approval and limited
oversight.

171

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) provides for the
regulation of ocean dumping. Title I of the Act identifies EPA as being responsible for
issuing permits for the ocean dumping of any material (except dredged material). Ocean
dumping permit reviews are based on several criteria including the economic, aesthetic, and
recreational effects of such dumping on public health and welfare. Title II establishes a
comprehensive monitoring and research program on the effects of ocean dumping and long-
term effects of pollution, overfishing, and man-induced changes to the marine environment.
This long-term program includes monitoring programs to assess the health of the marine
environment.

The EPA specifically regulates toxic substances that may enter the marine environment,
and thus affect human health, with four mandates. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
assigns to EPA the responsibility for regulating hazardous chemical substances and mixtures in
Section 6 of the Act. Section 10 of TSCA identifies EPA as the agency responsible for
obtaining adequate data on health and environmental implications of potentially toxic
substances. Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the EPA
has the responsibility for pesticide registration and classification based on health hazards and
environmental effects. FIFRA also requires EPA to conduct research and monitoring programs
to assist in the control and use of pesticides and to expand protection of the public health
and the environment. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requires EPA to
promulgate regulations establishing standards for transportation of hazardous waste, and for
ownership and operation of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. The
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) provides
Federal funding to respond to the release of hazardous substances into the air, land, or water.
Under CERCLA, the National Contingency Plan (NCP), which provides a method for ranking
waste sites for inventory and cleanup, also contains oil spill response provisions in conjunction
with the CWA.

The Fish and Wildlife Act (FWA) contains a congressional declaration of policy to the
effect that fish and wildlife resources make a material contribution to the national economy
and food supply. Among other things, the Act transferred to the Secretary of Interior, and
subsequently to the Department of Commerce, certain functions previously assigned to the
Secretary of Agriculture pertaining to seafoods. In addition to the transfers of functions with
respect to fishery products, Section 741 of the Act identifies a need for government assistance
to industry in promoting fair trade standards and health and sanitation standards.

Federal Programs

Although this is the first Federal Plan for Ocean Pollution Research, Development, and
Monitoring to include a separate section on the human health effects of marine pollution,
previous Federal Plans have addressed research activities pertaining to human health as a high
priority. However, since this is the first Plan to review human health effects research
separately, it is difficult to provide an assessment of the Federal level of effort for research
and monitoring projects related to the human health effects of marine pollutants. This is due
to the fact that much human health effects research is conducted outside the bounds of the
National Marine Pollution Program. Nevertheless, several Federal programs have been
identified that relate generally to human health effects from marine pollution.

172

Implications to Human Health

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NbAA) of the U.S. Department of
Commerce, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are major supporters of research concerning,
the implications of marine pollution to human health. The U.S. Coast Guard also conducts
activities related to this issue.

NOAA's human health-related activities are conducted by the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), the National Ocean Service (NOS), and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research (OAR). The NMFS's related research is designed to evaluate the public health
significance of contaminants occurring in finfish and shellfish@' The agency conducts studies of
the levels of various contaminants (PCBs, pathogens, petroleum hydrocarbon residues, and
others) in fish and shellfish, develops methods for extracting and assaying contaminants in
marine tissues, evaluates the potential use of improved indicators of fecal contamination, and
evaluates the effectiveness of depuration in eliminating bacterial and viral contaminants in
shellfish. The NMFS's Model Seafood Surveillance Program was created to design a program
of certification and surveillance to improve the inspection of seafood by focusing on the
monitoring of necessary critical control points in food operations. The NMFS also transfers
new technology and information to state and Federal public health agencies. The NOS
activities include research to identify accurate indicators of disease risk to consumers of raw
shellfish and to isolate the organism responsible for causing diarrhetic shellfish poisoning in
shellfish to determine its optimum growth conditions. Through its National Status and Trends
Program's Benthic Surveillance Project, NOS collects bottom-feeding fishes in selected areas
and analyzes their livers for toxic metals, organic chemicals, and metabolites of aromatic
hydrocarbons. The National Status and Trends Program also monitors contaminants in some
molluscan shellfish. Through its Quality of Shellfish-Growing Waters Project, the NOS
conducts assessments of the trends in classification of shellfish-growing waters in selected
estuaries and identifies the pollutants affecting these waters. The NOS is also comparing the
utility of various chemical tracers of sewage. The NMFS and NOS (in cooperation with FDA,
EPA, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) have developed the National Shellfish Register,
an inventory of the status of shellfish-growing waters as classified by state shellfish
sanitation control agencies. The NOS, in conjunction with the U.S. Coast Guard, has
developed CAMEO (Computer-Aided Management of Emergency Operations), a microcomputer-
based system intended for use in accidental coastal oil spills, chemical spills, and other
emergency response activities. The Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) Response Branch has used
CAMEO to analyze spill situations, determine effective counter measures, and estimate the
scope of potential down-wind hazard zones. Within OAR, the Sea Grant Program funds studies
to determine the depuration of shellfish contaminated with environmental pollutants and the
persistence of chemical contaminant residues in fish tissue; identifies the origin of fecal
coliforms in coastal waters; and assesses the potential hazards of diving in polluted waters.
The Sea Grant Program and NMFS fund research related to the development of methods to
permit rapid identification of pathogens and to identify new representative indicators of fecal,
coliform in the marine environment.

The FDA develops methods for detecting, quantifying, and ,identifying contaminants in
shellfish and estuarine waters. The FDA also supports the National Shellfish Sanitation
Program (NSSP), a cooperative state/Federal/industry program for the sanitary control of the
shellfish industry. As part of the NSSP, FDA provides technical assistance to states in
studying specific pollution problems; provides data to establish closure levels for shellfish
harvesting; conducts applied research on various contaminants to assist in developing standards
and criteria; and evaluates the effectiveness of state shellfish sanitary control programs. The

173

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

NIEHS supports five Marine and Freshwater Biomedical Science Centers, which assess the use
of aquatic species as models for studying mechanisms of toxicity with relevance to humans.
The agency also uses aquatic species in studies of metabolic fate and distribution of
contaminants in tissues.

The EPA is funding a joint project with Great Lakes states and the FDA to determine
the potential human exposure to contaminants from Great Lakes seafood. The agency is also
conducting research in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute to study environmental
cancer through the use of aquatic species as models for identifying environmental problems
and providing better understanding of the risks associated with exposure to environmental
carcinogens. In addition, EPA is producing data and information on the relative efficacy of
fish species as carcinogen/teratogen assay subjects in comparison to present mammalian test
species.

The U.S. Coast Guard's related activities include the identification and characterization
of operational requirements for hazardous chemical response personnel/marine inspectors and
the development of hazardous chemical protective ensembles, including totally encapsulated
suits to protect against a full range of chemicals.

These Federal agency programs relate only to those activities directly involved in
investigating the human health effects of marine pollutants, or in protecting public health by
limiting exposure to these toxic agents. Since most of the marine pollutants of concern are
not unique to the marine environment, the toxic or human health effects of these substances
are broadly addressed in a number of other Federal agency programs that do not deal
specifically with marine-related activities. Therefore, Federal agencies are involved in
addressing these concerns to a greater degree than may be represented by this discussion of
programs. For example, toxicity testing and human health effects research are conducted by a
wide range of Federal agencies, institutes, and programs including the National Toxicology
Program, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the National Cancer Institute,
and others. The research programs conducted or sponsored by these groups address questions
fundamental to determining the toxicity of marine pollutants and the mechanisms by which
these agents act. Several of these research efforts will be explored in greater detail in the
discussions pertaining to each management question.

Management QueStions and Information Needs

An understanding of the adverse human health effects that may result from exposure to
contaminants in the marine environment is important for managing these problems. Listed
below are four management questions that need to be addressed to achieve this goal.

Management Question 1: What are the human health concerns associated with exposure to
chemical contaminants in the marine environment?

Management Question 2: What are the human health concerns associated with pathogenic
microorganisms in the marine environment?

Management Question 3: Have management tools been effective in protecting human health?

Management Question 4: What are the human health concerns associated with spills of
hazardous materials in the marine environment?

174

Implications to Human Health

This section will include a discussion of the rationale, current efforts, and information
needs remaining for each management question.

Concerns Associated with Chemical Contaminants

Manaeement Ouestion 1: What are the human health concerns associated with exposure to
chemical contaminants in the marine environment?

Information Needs

Ia. What concentrations of potentially toxic chemical substances are occurring in
important commercial and recreational species?

lb. What are the seafood consumption patterns in the United States?

Ic. Does the interaction of mixtures of toxic chemicals pose significant added risks to
human health?

Id. What risks result from exposure of seafood handlers to seafood raw material?

le. What risks result from direct exposure(s) to chemical contaminants in the marine
environment?

Ia. What concentrations of t)otentially toxic chemical substances are occurring in imnortant
commercial and recreational species?

Various pollutants are discharged into U.S. waters in large quantities. Among these are
metals and organic chemicals. However, only a limited number and variety of aquatic species
and chemical pollutants are routinely monitored. Coastal states monitor contaminant levels in
seafood to assist in determining when and where advisories should be issued against the
consumption by humans of certain types of seafood. State monitoring data for selected
species and contaminants are presented in Table 7. These data were selected to illustrate
possible problem situations with respect to human health for a variety of species,
contaminants, and regions, and are not intended to be representative of conditions in estuaries
around the United States. State monitoring programs do not use consistent methods for
sample collection and preparation and chemical analysis, thereby limiting the ability to make
comparisons.

It would be impractical and financially prohibitive to sample all fish and shellfish for
chemical contaminants. Therefore, one must select appropriate target species and
contaminants of concern. To provide guidance, the FDA has developed sampling designs for
the collection of seafood products from the marketplace (FDA, 1986). One approach would be
to determine the species that represented the greatest percentage of the catch of commercial
and recreational fishermen and analyze the edible tissues of those species. In the past, this
approach has been taken for the NOAA survey of marine fish in Puget Sound (Malins et al.,
1980) and the New York Bight (MacLeod et al., 1981), as well as the FDA Market Basket
survey. Alternatively, one could select an indicator species that is thought to represent a
special concern due to the ability of that species to bioaccumulate potentially toxic

175

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Table 7. Concentrations of Organic Chemicals in Selected Fish Species (from NOAA,
In Preparation)*

Chemical Fish Tissue Location Average FDA
Contaminant Type Tissue Action
Level (ppm) Level (ppm)

Chlorda4 gizzard whole fish Chesapeake Bay 0.6a 0.3
shad and Tributaries, MD

DDT white fillet Palos Verdes 7.6b 5.0
croaker Peninsula, CA

HCB sea trout edible Bayou D'Inde, 0.11C Not
composite Gulf Coast, LA established
Naphthalene bottom fish fillet Puget Sound,' WA 0.5d Not
(PAH) established

PCB striped composite Lower Hudson 4.Oe 2.0
bass River, NY
PCB striped fillet Narragansett 4. Of 2.0
bass Bay

aMaryland Department of the Environment, 1987.
bCalifornia Department of Health Services, 1988.
cLouisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 1987.
dPuget Sound Fish Catch & Consumption Survey, 1984.
"New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Fish and Wildlife Health Advice, 1987.
r Rhode Island Department of Health, 1987.

*These data were selected to illustrate the potential for human health effects and may not be representative of contaminants in other
species or sample sites or at other times.

substances, or due to a higher rate of consumption of this species by individuals in a specific
geographical area. This was the approach taken by NOAA (1986), in conjunction with the
FDA and EPA, in their extensive survey of PCBs in Atlantic coast bluefish.

NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service has an ongoing program to determine the kinds
and levels of contaminants in the tissues of fishery products of recreational, food, and
industrial use. The program focuses on the ultimate impact of chemical contaminants and
pathogens in the marine -environment on human health. Three types of information are
evaluated in an attempt to accurately determine the public health significance of contaminants
in fish. They are: (1) the identification and measurement of contaminants of public health
significance in fish and shellfish; (2) determination of the chemical form and potential for
interactions, among the contaminants; and (3) evaluation of consumption patterns for fishery
products in the United States. Information generated by the program is used by various
agencies and groups responsible for consumer safety, resource management decisions, and the
harvesting and utilization of national marine resources.

176

Implications to Human Health

Current Federal monitoring programs include the NOAA National Status and Trends
(NS&T) Program and EPA's Mussel Watch Program. Although the NS&T Program is not
concerned directly with human health, two program elements (the Benthic Surveillance Project
and the Mussel Watch Project) provide useful data regarding contaminant levels of
environmental pollutants. NOAA's Mussel Watch Project includes annual sampling of mussels
and oysters from 150 coastal and estuarine sites along the U.S. Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific
coastlines. Organisms and sediments have been analyzed for selected PAHs, synthetic
chlorinated compounds, PCB congeners, and trace metals.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has estimated the exposure of U.S. citizens to
chemical contaminants in their food through Total Diet Studies (also known as the Market
Basket Program) since the early 1960's for adults, and since 1974 for infants and toddlers
(Gartrell et al., 1986). In these studies, samples representing the annual average diet are
analyzed for selected pesticides and industrial chemicals. The Total Diet Studies include a
seafood component. Overall, however, relatively little of the fish caught and sold in this
country is screened for chemical contaminants.@ A study by Capuzzo et al.. (1987) reports that
FDA tested less than 0.001 percent of the fish consumed in-the United States in 1982 for
chemical contaminants.

Although most of our seafood is safe for human consumption, available information on
chemic -al contaminant concentrations in marine species suggests that risks to human health
could result from consumption of fish and shellfish from U.S. coastal waters. These risks
would occur at different levels for different areas, species, and contaminants. Surveillance
activity for the assessment of microconstituents in- seafood in this country is piecemeal and
unorganized at best. It occurs at Federal, state, and local levels, but the extent of activity
at each of these levels varies tremendously. At the Feder'al level, the ability of the FDA and
NMFS to conduct this type of work is limited. This is due to limitations in available
resources that can be committed to this activity. These limitations include the lack of
scientific and compliance personnel, equipment, and up-to-date surveys of seafood consumption
and microconstituent levels in seafood. Improved routine monitoring of contaminant
concentrations in commercial and recreational species will be needed before human health risks
associated with consumption of seafood can be assessed effectively.

Programs for monitoring concentrations of contaminants in seafood could be improved in
the following ways:

o Intensify monitoring. Existing Federal and state programs provide limited data on the
concentrations of chemical contaminants in edible tissues of commercial and
recreational fish species. Frequency. of sampling is too limited on both temporal and
spatial scales. Existing Federal programs such as the NS&T Program are not designed
to manage human health risks and, although they serve other important needs, do@not
provide sufficient information for protecting human health.

0 Standardize methods. Sampling and analysis protocols should be established by the
Federal Government as to critical factors such as which tissues to assay, specimen
size (or age) class, sex and reproductive condition, sampling season, number of
replicates, and methods of chemical analysis (EPA, 1987b). Standard protocols are
especially important because much of this monitoring is conducted individually by the
states.

177

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

lb. What are the seafood consummion t)atterns in the United States?

Data on seafood consumption patterns in the United States are available on an average
basis for the U.S. population. Standard values for seafood consumption rates have usually
been based on previous analyses of dietary patterns of the U.S. population (EPA, 1980; SRI,
1980). The NMFS seafood consumption study of 1973-1974 reported that the average U.S. per
capita daily consumption of seafood was 18.7 grams, which could be subdivided into 6.5 grams
of estuarine fish and shellfish, 2.0 grams of freshwater fish, 2.8 grams of marine fish, and the
remaining 7.4 grams being primarily tuna and some unclassified imported fish.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) accumulates fish consumption data
by surveying customers and by collecting market data. The USDA Nationwide Food
Consumption Surveys for individuals reported average fish consumption rates of 12 grams per
day in 1977-1978 and 5, 11, and 21 grams per day in 1985 for children, women, and men,
respectively. The USDA agricultural market survey data indicate a per capita intake of all
fish (marine and freshwater) in 1983 of 18.4 grams per day, similar to that estimated by NMFS
market data for per capita fish and shellfish consumption in 1986.

A figure of 6.5 grams per day for consumption of commercially and recreationally
harvested fish and shellfish from estuarine and fresh waters was used by EPA (1980) to
develop water quality criteria based on human health guidelines. This value is an average per
capita consumption rate for the U.S. population based on the data of SRI (1980).

The EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) has examined the various surveys and
market data available and concluded that the 1977-1978 USDA Nationwide Food Consumption
Survey is the most reliable database for this information, based on sample size and data
collection methods. Data from this survey were employed to develop the EPA Tolerance
Assessment System (TAS), which breaks down seafood consumption data by age group for the
U.S. population.

Data available on fish and shellfish consumption in the United States are neither
comprehensive nor current. The question of consumption rates in certain geographic or
cultural subpopulations is a major source of uncertainty. Average daily seafood consumption
rates do not adequately describe the dietary patterns of certain sectors of the U.S. population.
For example, Finch (1973) estimated that 0.1% of the U.S. population consumes 165 grams per
day of commercially harvested fish and shellfish. More recently, Pao et al. (1982), estimated
that 5% of the U.S. population consumes in excess of 128 grams per day of fish and shellfish.
High rates of consumption tend to be correlated with geographic and cultural patterns. Thus,
Humphrey (1976) reported that Great Lakes sport fishermen consumed an average of 31 grams
per day of fish from Lake Michigan alone; one individual was reported to consume 10 times
this amount. In another example of very high fish consumption, Marsh et al. (1974) described
a group of fishermen in American Samoa that consumed up to 250 grams of fish per day.

Current and more specific information (e.g., surveys) on the consumption of fish and
shellfish in this country, including quantitative intake, species, geographic origin, and methods
of preparation would greatly improve our ability to estimate risks to human health associated
with consumption of seafood. The consumption data presently in use were collected at least a
decade ago and their applicability to estimating the current consumption of seafood in'this
country is questionable. Methodologies for collecting data on fish consumption, as well as
approaches for using limited data to estimate intake, should be improved. The surveys should
include information on seafood consumption, not only on a national level, but also on a

178

Implications to Human Health

regional level because the consumption of seafood is determined to a great extent by regional
factors (e.g., availability and access to fishery resources). These surveys should collect
information on high-risk sectors of the population, as well as the average consumption in each
region.

Ic. Does the interaction of mixtures of toxic chemicals pose significant added risks to human
health?

Humans are rarely exposed to single chemicals in the marine environment. Direct and
indirect exposures to naturally occurring and synthetic materials are often to mixtures of
chemicals from a variety of sources. Until very recently, tests designed to detect adverse
health effects as a result of exposure to,chemical mixtures have been rudimentary in nature.
Such tests have reflected insensitive analytical methods and the inherent complexities in.
testing chemical mixtures, lack of adequate toxicity information on individual compounds and
mixtures, and difficulties in satisfactory interpretations of the results. Consequently, limited
information is now available to evaluate health effects associated with exposure to mixtures of
chemicals in the marine environment.

Environmental transport, mobility, and distribution are important processes in
understanding the toxicity of both individual pollutants and mixtures of chemicals.
Physicochernical characteristics such as water solubility, lipid solubility, partitioning behavior,
vapor pressure, and chemical stability are critical properties that can significantly influence
the behavior of a chemical in a system and impact the nature and degree of a toxic'endpoint.
Transformations of environmental pollutants may occur via chemical, biological, geological, and
physical (e.g., photolysis) reactions. Transport and circulation, adsorption to suspended-
sediment particles, degradation by soil microorganisms, and deposition in ultimate sinks such as
deep ocean sediments illustrate a complex chain of processes undergone by chemicals and
mixtures of chemicals when they are released in the environment. These environmental
processes may change parent compounds into more toxic, less toxic, or nontoxic species before
chemical interactions occur. These topics are addressed in greater detail in the toxic
materials section of this chapter.

Early studies often failed to account for potentially significant chemical interactions
taking place between individual constituents in.a chemical mixture. Although the toxicity of a
mixture has sometimes been approximated by adding the toxicities of the individual
constituents (assuming they can be identified and there are toxicity data available), significant
interactions such as synergism, additivity, or antagonism can occur. These interactions may
preclude the accurate determination of the carcinogenic potency, acute lethality, or chronic
toxicity of a mixture by simply adding the toxicities of the constituents.

Synergistic interactions between chemicals at high doses are known to produce effects
that are greater than the additive effects of the individual chemicals. Uncertainty still exists
concerning the significance of interactions at low doses of chemical mixtures, such as those
typically found in contaminated seafood. Investigators are using'new technologies to address
the problems of testing and characterizing complex mixtures of environmental pollutants (both
toxicologically and chemically) (Fouts, 1988; McKinney, 1988; Safe, 1988; Vanderslice et al.,
1988; Albert et al., 1983). Safe (1988) has focused on the development and validation of in
vitro enzyme assays in rat cells for quantifying individual toxic halogenated aryl hydrocarbons
and their mixtures. Albert et al. (1983) and Lewtas (1985) used a method known as relative
(comparative) potency to evaluate risks to human health caused by chemical mixtures. This

179

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

approach is based on the assumption that for similar but not necessarily definable complex
mixtures, a measure of relative potency based on data from in vitro tests can be correlated in
a constant fashion with.relative potency from an in vivo bioassay.

Research on chemical mixtures has been conducted by several Federal agencies. A
workshop assembled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 1984) developed early
approaches for risk assessment methods of multiple chemical exposures. Principles developed
by this group were incorporated into the EPA Guidelines for the Health Risk Assessment of
Chemical Mixtures (EPA, 1986b). The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has recently issued
a publication that addresses the toxicity and adverse health effects of complex chemical
mixtures (NAS, 1987). In addition to the NAS, the World Health Organization (WHO) has also
recently published information on adverse health effects associated with chemical mixtures.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) and the NIEHS are also actively investigating
how mixtures of compounds found in the marine environment may adversely affect human
health. The NTP has initiated an empirical study of the toxicity of well-defined chemical
mixtures to rodents (Yung and Rauckman, 1987); additional parameters to be investigated are
the frequency of synergism or antagonism, and development of mechanistic approaches for
studying chemical interactions. To gain insights into the potential for toxicity to humans of
chemical mixtures via dietary exposures, the NIEHS will sponsor a conference in the fall of
1988. Specifically, the meeting will address the question of whether the consumption of
aquatic food organisms may convey carcinogens to human consumers in amounts or forms
sufficient to increase their cancer risk.

Despite such progress, the EPA concluded that it is still very difficult to predict
synergistic or antagonistic effects of most chemical mixtures (EPA, 1987b). The approach used
most frequently for multichernical risk assessments is the additive risk model (also known as
the response- additive model) (EPA, 1987b). Numerical estimates obtained using this model have
been useful in terms of relative comparisons (e.g., among fishing areas or among fishery
species). However, current risk estimates for chemical mixtures should be regarded only as
rough measures of actual risk.

The current state of the art in mixture toxicology does not allow us to accurately
predict the interactive effects of chemical mixtures that may result from the consumption of
contaminated seafood (EPA, 1986a). Due to limitations in availability of data and in the
ethodology to assess these risks, disagreement exists as to the significance of exposure to
chemical mixtures in evaluating human health risks. To resolve these disagreements, advances
would be needed in at least the following areas:

� Improved ability to determine concentrations of toxic substances in mixtures;

� More complete understanding of the toxicity to humans of individual substances; and

� Understanding of the effects of interactions among groups of toxic substances and
how these interactions influence toxic response.

Although progress will be difficult, it is recommended that research be continued on
understanding toxicity of mixtures along with other basic toxicological questions.

180

Implications to Human Health

Id. What risks result from exr)osure of seafood handlers to seafood raw material?

Although workers in the canned and cured seafood industries are among those with the
highest incidence of occupational skin disease, these problems appear to be the result of
bacterial infections of abrasions and cuts caused by spines, fins, and bones of fish and are not
the result of handling chemically contaminated seafood. In addition, results of two
epidemiological studies of seafood handlers suggest that the development of many adverse
health effects in this population. originate from exposure to water, noise, cold, dampness, or to
ergonomic factors leading to musculoskeletal. stress and discomfort (NIOSH, 1986).

No evidence exists to indicate that occupational exposure to chemically contaminated
seafood is a health concern. Therefore, no high-priority research needs have been identified
in this area.

le. What risks result from direct exposure(s) to chemical contaniinants in the marine
environment?

Direct human exposure to toxic compounds in the marine environment could also occur
through swimming or diving in polluted waters. Little information, however, exists on the
adverse health effects that result from this route of exposure. The New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) has initiated one of the few studies concerning the public
health effects of direct discharges of pollutants into the ocean. This study focused on a
pharmaceutical firm in New Jersey that has discharged treated wastewater into the Atlantic
Ocean since 1966. As of 1987, this plant was discharging 4 to 5 million gallons of wastewater
per day into the ocean from a pipe that extends 3,500 feet out to sea from the shoreline.
From their initial studies, NJDEP concluded that the discharge from this plant did not pose a
measurable health risk to persons swimming on the nearby beaches .(EPA, 1987a).

Existing information indicates that exposure to chemical contaminants during swimming
and diving do not pose a serious or widespread threat to human health. Although little
attention has been paid to examining the risks associated with exposure to toxic chemicals at
marine bathing beaches or to the joint effects of pathogens and chemicals on swimmers, no
high-priority research needs have been identified in this area.

Concerns Associated with Pathogens

Management Ouestion 2: What are the human health concerns associated'witb patholzenic
microorizanisms in the marine en-vironment?

Information Needs

2a. What microorganisms in the marine environment are currently causing adverse human
health effects?

2b. How effective are traditional indicators at predicting actual risks associated with
exposure to microorganisms?

2c. What human activities contribute most significantly to the numbers of human
pathogens entering the marine environment?

181

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

2d. Are present disinfection techniques adequate for controlling the introduction of
pathogens into the marine environment?

2a. What microorpanisms in the marine environment are currently causing adverse human
health effects?

Human pathogens found in the marine environment include viruses, bacteria, protozoa,
and fungi. Surface runoff and sanitary wastes discharged directly or indirectly (via rivers)
into the marine environment may contain microorganisms that are capable of causing adverse
human health effects. Other microorganisms capable of causing human diseases occur naturally
in the marine environment and are not a result of polluting activities. In the United States,
viruses and bacteria are the most important human pathogens, both in terms of the number of
organisms released to the environment and in the severity of the diseases they cause (OTA,
1987). People can be exposed to pathogens either directly from ocean water or indirectly
through ingestion of contaminated seafood. Both pathways may be significant since as few as
10 to 100 bacteria are capable of inducing disease under the appropriate conditions (OTA,
1987); additionally, many pathogens can reproduce in wastes, contaminated media, and infected
organisms.

Closures of shellfishing grounds because of contamination with sewage-derived
microorganisms have largely eliminated outbreaks of serious shellfish-borne, bacterial diseases
in the United States, including epidemics of typhoid and cholera. In addition, control
technologies being used in this country have been or should be adequate for reducing the risk
of water-related, pollution-associated bacterial diseases to an acceptable level. However,
questions remain as to the effectiveness of control techniques in limiting water-borne viral
disease.

Table 8 provides examples of pathogenic organisms known to cause adverse human health
effects. In many cases, additional information regarding the ecology, epidemiology, and
pathogenicity of these species is needed to more fully confirm their association with causes of
human illness.

Viral agents, notably the Norwalk-like viruses and hepatitis A, contained in raw or
partially cooked molluscan shellfish that have been harvested or held in waters polluted with
sewage may cause illness in humans. The Norwalk-like viruses have been increasingly shown
to be the etiological agents responsible for acute gastroenteritis outbreaks that have resulted
from consumption of contaminated seafood and swimming in contaminated waters (Kaplan et
al., 1982). Since 1970, several reports have linked hepatitis A to consumption of raw or
partially cooked molluscan shellfish (Feingold, 1973; CDC, 1979b; 1982; Guidon and Pierach,
1973; Ohara et al., 1983).

Sewage-derived bacterial agents associated with contaminated molluscan shellfish can also
cause human illness. However, these agents, which include the bacteria responsible for
typhoid and cholera, are adequately controlled using existing sewage treatment and shellfish
management techniques and do not appear to be a serious human health problem at this time.

Research is being conducted by NOAA investigators to detect and quantify pathogens in
marine water and shellfish. These projects include a study by the NOAA/NMFS Charleston
Laboratory to develop and evaluate methods for extracting and assaying enteric viruses such
as hepatitis A virus and Norwalk virus from molluscan shellfish. NOAA-sponsored research is

182

Implications to Human Health

Table 8. Microorganisms Responsible for Causing Adverse Human
Health Effects*

Pathogenic Seafood
Disease Organism Source Reference

Hepatitis Hepatitis A virus Raw oysters Roos(1956)
Steamed clams Bryan and Huff
(1973)
Steamed and raw Feingold (1973)
clams
Raw clams CDC (1982)
Raw oysters Ohara et al.
(1983)
Oysters Portnoy et al.
(1975)
Cockles O'Mahony et al.
(1983)
Raw molluscan Koff et al.
Shellfish (1967)
Non-A and non-B Raw molluscan Alter et al.
hepatitis virus Shellfish (1982)
Gastroenteritis Aerornonas hyqro- Shellfish Holmberg and
philia and Plestomonas Farmer (1984)
shigelloides
Vibrio mimicus Raw oysters Shandera et al. (1983)
Vibrio parahaern- Clams and snails Roland (1979)
olyticus
Raw oysters Nolan et al.
(1984)
Crab Dadisman et al.
(1973)
Shrimp Baker et al.
(1974)
Lobster Baker(1974)
Vibrio vulnificus Raw oysters Brady and
Concannon(1984)
Pollak et al.
(1983)
Vibrio cholera Raw oysters CDC (1980)
0 group boiled shrimp,
boiled crab
Vibrio cholera Raw oysters Wilson et al.
Non-0 group 1 (1981)
Morris et al.
(1981)
CDC (109a)
Norwalk virus Raw oysters Linco and
Grohmann (1980)
Mu hy et al.
(1 99g)
Guinn et al.
(1982)
Raw clams CDC (1982)
Small round struc- Raw oysters Gill et al.
tured virus (1983)
Campylobacter jejuni Raw clams Griffin et al.
(1983)

Includes naturally occurring microorganisms as well as microorganisms associated with pollution.

183

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

being conducted at the Baylor College of Medicine to evaluate the merits of a new A-ELISA
test for detection of hepatitis A virus in the estuarine environment and to determine the
extent of hepatitis and rotavirus occurrence in polluted waters. A serological test for
identification of species of Vibrio is under development by the Louisiana Sea Grant College
Program. At the University of Maryland, an epidemiological study of the microbiological
hazards associated with diving in polluted waters is currently being conducted. These
researchers are also studying the feasibility of adapting rapid serological techniques for use in
a field hazards test kit for divers.

In addition to sponsoring research activities in this area, the Federal Government is also
involved in several inspection programs designed to protect the population from the hazards of
consuming pathogen-contaminated seafood. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
conducts inspections of fish and shellfish to check for "wholesomeness," safety, and labeling.
Participation by the seafood industry in this program is voluntary, and inspections are
provided at the request of the processor. Another voluntary inspection program, the National
Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) has been established as a joint effort between the FDA,
state agencies, and the shellfish industry to set forth guidelines for the management of state
shellfish programs. Under this program, the FDA has the primary responsibility for the
development of the NSSP Manual of Operations to be used by individual states. These
guidelines contain the criteria and standards for the sanitation of shellf ish- growing areas and
the sanitation of the harvesting and processing of shellfish. In 1982, the Interstate Shellfish
Sanitation Conference (ISSC) was formed to strengthen the NSSP. Two years later, FDA
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the ISSC and reaffirmed the voluntary
cooperative relationship with both the states and the shellfish industry. The purpose of the
ISSC is to provide a formal structure wherein regulatory authorities could establish updated
guidelines and procedures for the uniform control of shellfish sanitation guidelines.

As discussed above, some human health problems associated with the ingestion of seafood
are not linked to marine pollution. However, a number of microorganisms, particularly viruses,
that are associated with marine pollution have been shown to cause various human diseases
such as hepatitis and gastroenteritis, primarily when molluscan products are eaten raw,
partially cooked, mishandled, or misprepared. It is difficult to estimate the frequency with
which marine pollution causes human disease in the United States. Many cases go unreported.
Research in this area should be continued to improve our understanding of which pollution-
related pathogens are causing human health problems and to improve our ability to screen and
monitor seafood and water quality for human pathogens.

2b. How effective are traditional indicators at vredicting actual risks associated with exnosure
to microorganis ?

Concentrations of coliform bacteria, expressed as Most Probable Number (MPN) per 100
milliliters, have been employed for decades as a component of microbiological standards to
monitor the quality of waters for swimming and shellfish harvesting (OTA, 1987; DHEW, 1965).
Although currently used microbial indicators have been effective in protecting the U.S.
population from shellfish-mediated epidemics, existing water quality standards have been
questioned as true indicators of the overall potential for human disease. The indicators and
standards have not been related to disease through epidemiological studies, and although
indicators used reflect the presence of fecal wastes, they are not specific to humans, nor to
two common causes of disease: viral pathogens and free-living, opportunistic pathogens such as

184

Implications to Human Health

V. vulnificus (Ronk, 1988). This problem is exemplified by instances of the ingestion of
molluscan shellfish harvested from waters classified as acceptable by the traditional indicators
that have resulted in sporadic outbreaks of viral disease (Portnoy et al., 1975).

Fecal coliform bacteria are also thought to be inadequate for predicting the risks
associated with direct exposures to pathogens in the marine environment. In a study of New
York beaches, Cabelli et al. (1979) presented evidence that there are measurable health effects
associated with swimming in sewage-polluted waters, and that, in some cases, these effects
were observed even in waters that were in compliance with existing recreational water quality
guidelines and standards. Cabelli et al. (1982) expanded these studies to additional beaches in
Louisiana and Massachusetts. Of the indicators quantified, the density of enterococci was
highly correlated with the incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms (GI) among swimmers at both
locations. Additionally, they reported that swimming- associated GI symptoms were poorly
correlated with fecal coliform densities, the -indicator used most in Federal and state
standards.

Fecal coliforms generally are not pathogenic, and do not survive as well in the marine
environment compared to at least one type of bacterial pathogen (Rhodes and Kator, 1983).
Although existing standards employ bacteria as indicators of contamination, viruses are being
recognized as major etiologic agents for swimming- or seafood consumption -associated disease.
Morse et al. (.1986) reported the role of the Norwalk virus in outbreaks of shellfish- associated
gastroenteritis. Previous studies (Gerba et al., 1979; Portnoy et al., 1975) have illustrated the
failure, of bacterial indicators to demonstrate the presence of enteroviruses in marine waters.

Some bacteria (including certain human pathogens) in the marine environment may remain
in a dormant state and retain their viability for extended periods of time (e.g., months to
years). For example, Vibrio cholerae (Colwell et al., 1985), Camvvlobacter itigni (Rollins and
Colwell, 1986), and Salmonella enteritidis (Roszak et al., 1984) may exist in such a viable but
nonculturable state in the marine environment. In the dormant state, the presence of these
organisms cannot be detected using standard microbial assays. However, these pathogens may
be "reactivated" within a suitable host organism (Colwell et al., 1985). Thus, the apparent
lack of human pathogens in the open ocean and near-shore coastal waters may simply reflect
an inability.to detect these apparently viable, but nonculturable microorganisms (Grimes, 1986).
Recently developed monoclonal antibody and gene probe techniques permit the detection and
quantification of both culturable and nonculturable microorganisms. Since these methods have
the ability to detect nonculturable organisms, they may serve as more precise techniques for
monitoring microbiological water quality.

The Federal Government has addressed some of the inadequacies of current
microbiological standards for water quality, and has initiated research programs and regulatory
actions. Based largely on the work of Cabelli and others (Cabelli et al., 1979; 1982; Miescier
and Cabelli, 1982), the EPA has adopted enterococci as an indicator of microbiological water
quality for recreational marine waters. Since 1985, NOAA and EPA have collaborated on an
epidemiological investigation to study the health effects associated with shellfish consumption.
The association between gastrointestinal illness in individuals who eat raw shellfish and the
quality of shellfish- harvesting waters is being examined in this study. Also, a clinical feeding
trial is currently being conducted in which the health of volunteers is monitored after eating
raw oysters harvested from either an area that is affected by treated sewage effluent but still
meets the current standard for shellfish- harvesting waters (Dufour, 1987). Additionally, the

185

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

National Collaborative Shellfish Pollution Indicator Study has been proposed as a fouryear
effort to evaluate the current relationship between indicators of human enteric pathogens and
the incidence of shellfish-borne disease.

Traditional indicators of microbial contaminants appear to be inadequate for predicting
human health risks associated with both consuming molluscan shellfish and swimming in waters
that contain sewage- associated viruses, naturally occurring bacteria, and, occasionally, sewage-
associated bacteria. The need exists to identify microbial indicators specific for human fecal
wastes that survive wastewater treatment, disinfection, and residence in marine waters and
that are effective in predicting the presence of viral pathogens. An effective approach to
identifying appropriate indicators. may include the implementation of a battery of tests. The
feasibility of using-new methodologies such as monoclonal antibody and gene probe techniques
should be compared to existing methods such as the fecal coliform Most Probable Number
(MPN) to determine the most useful methods.

2c. What human activities contribute most significantly to the numbers of human vathoptens
enterin?, the marine environment?

Discharges of raw sewage, dumping of sewage sludge, failing septic tanks, and wastewater
effluent from sewage treatment plants represent the primary sources of some human pathogens
to the marine environment (OTA, 1987). Pathogens may also enter the environment from
nonpoint sources such as agricultural or stormwater runoff, or they may occur naturally in the
marine environment. The illegal practice of ocean dumping of infectious wastes represents an
episodic, but regionally significant, source of human pathogens in marine environments. The
risk of exposure to these pathogens may be especially important in coastal areas near sites
where hospital wastes have been illegally dumped. Efforts to classify shellfish- growing areas
may be confounded by the presence of fecal wastes from domestic and wild, warm-blooded
animals (e.g, cattle, dogs), which would be included in fecal coliform indicator measurements.
Nonhuman fecal wastes, however, would not be expected to pose risks equivalent to that of
human fecal wastes, because pathogens of concern, such as Norwalk-like and hepatitis A
viruses, are not present in lower animal wastes.

NOAA researchers have examined the relative contribution of various point and nonpoint
sources of marine pollution to the total pollution burden, and their effects on the quality of
shellfish -growing waters in the Gulf of Mexico. NOAA-sponsored research is being conducted
to determine the origin of fecal contamination found in the Mississippi Sound of the Gulf of
Mexico. This work represents an initial effort to determine which human and nonhuman
activities contribute most to the numbers of pathogens entering the marine environment.
Also, by characterizing the relative contribution of point versus nonpoint sources of marine
pollution, investigators could begin to determine if a relationship exists between manmade
sources of pollution and the numbers of naturally occurring microorganisms in the marine
environment.

The human activities that contribute most significantly to pathogens entering the marine
environment have been identified. When needed for management purposes, region-specific
studies may be necessary to determine the relative importance of local sources.

186

Implications to Human Health

2d. Are present disinfection techniques adequate for controlling the introduction of pathogens
into the marine environment?

Chlorination is the most commonly used disinfection technique in the United States (OTA,
1987). Traditionally viewed as an effective and economical mechanism to reduce the
concentrations of pathogens in municipal effluents and sewage sludge, a growing body of
evidence suggests that present methods and technologies vary in their effectiveness depending
upon the particular type of pathogen. Conventional treatment processes (e.g., chlorination,
thermal inactivation, anaerobic digestion, liming) can destroy some of the microorganisms
present in municipal wastewaters (OTA, 1987). The effectiveness of the process depends on
the techniques employed, the operating conditions, and the organism in question. Waterborne
pathogens have a wide range of susceptibility to disinfection techniques. Miescier and Cabelli
(1982) noted that viruses are relatively resistant to chlorination. Bacterial populations can be
reduced about 15-fold through primary and secondary treatment and additional dilution can be
achieved when the effluent is discharged into receiving waters. The degree of effectiveness
of these processes against bacteria is generally high but they are not particularly effective
against viruses and parasites such as protozoan cysts (Miescier and Cabelli, 1982; OTA, 1987).

Federal standards do not exist for disinfection procedures, such as disinfectant
concentration and contact times. Consequently, these practices vary widely among different
sewage treatment plants (Hoff and Akin, 1986). Although chlorination can be highly effective
against bacteria (98%-99% destruction), other microorganisms such as viruses are more resistant
and may survive treatment and eventually enter the marine environment. Higher disinfectant
concentrations and longer contact times might be recommended against potentially resistant
species. However, this practice raises the additional concern of increasing the levels of
chlorinated byproducts in the environment. Of particular concern are low- molecular- weight
halogenated hydrocarbons such as chloroform, bromodichloromethane, and
dibromochloromethane. The extent and significance of occurrence of known and suspected
carcinogens (e.g., trihalomethanes) was the principal objective of an early nationwide survey of
organic chemicals in drinking water conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA,
1975). Additional research has focused on determining the mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, and
target organ toxicity (renal, reproductive, and endocrine system) effects of disinfectants an&
disinfectant byproducts (NIEHS, 1986). However, a number of uncertainties exist with regard
to the human health risk exposure to these compounds; therefore, research is still needed to
determine the effects of disinfectants and disinfectant byproducts on human health.

A variety of disinfection treatment techniques have been proposed as alternatives to
chlorination. These include use of ozone (ozonation), ultraviolet (uv) light, and gamma
radiation treatment (OTA, 1987). Ozonation has been widely used in Europe to purify drinking
water (Engineering News Record, 1985; SAIC, 1986) although it has been -used infrequently in
the United States for drinking water or municipal wastewater treatment. These techniques are
difficult and expensive to apply, and therefore chlorination may be the only remaining
practical means of disinfection in most locations.

Septic waste systems are commonly used for domestic sewage treatment in many coastal
communities adjacent to shellfish- growing areas. These systems commonly fail, or are subject
to improper or faulty operation owing to poor soil drainage characteristics, seasonally high
water tables, or owner bypass/modifications. The degree of disinfection provided by such
marginal systems should be evaluated as potential contributors to nonpoint source pollution in
impacted shellfish -growing areas.

187

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Alternative treatment systems and methods need to be developed that are highly effective
against these pathogens where present treatment processes have a limited impact. Studies on
the effectiveness and environmental implications of alternative treatment processes would be
valuable, especially concerning the effectiveness against the release of hepatitis A and
Norwalk viruses.

Effectiveness of Management Tools

Management Ouestion 3: Have manaimment tools been effective in iprotectina human health?

Information Needs

3a. Have public health advisories reduced risks associated with consumption of
contaminated seafood?

3b. Have shellfish bed closures reduced consumption of contaminated shellfish?

3c. Have beach closures or restrictions prevented recreational exposure?

3a. Have 1)ublic health advisories reduced risks associated with consumntion of contaminated
seafood?

The FDA has the lead responsibility for establishing and enforcing allowable levels of
toxic substances in interstate commerce seafood under �408 and �409 of the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). Section 406 of the FFDCA gives FDA the authority to set
limits for chemical contaminants in fish and shellfish below which enforcement action will not
be taken. These action and tolerance levels set by FDA for seafood are based on health risks
associated with the average national seafood consumption estimates. The FDA has established
action or tolerance levels for 11 organic contaminants and one metal. State and local
environmental agencies and health departments are responsible for protecting consumers from
the risks of consuming seafood products that are harvested locally. The public health advisory
is one type of management tool available to regulators to warn the public of high levels of
toxic substances in seafood. In many cases, state and local agencies rely on Federal
guidelines concerning concentrations of contaminants that are considered unsafe for human
consumption.

In an ongoing NOAA-sponsored study, public health advisories issued by the coastal and
Great Lake states concerning the consumption of contaminated finfish have been surveyed; a
nationwide database of advisory locations, fish species, and contaminants is being compiled;
and state policies and public information regarding human health advisories are being analyzed.
This information will be useful in analyzing the effectiveness of state and Federal programs in
addressing health risks of consuming contaminated fish and identifying the fish species and
contaminants that have been most closely linked with adverse health effects (Zeitlin, 1987).

The effectiveness of health advisories in altering public behavior is a potentially
significant factor to be considered in establishing Federal action and tolerance levels. A
limited number of studies have been conducted to determine the extent to which individual
public health advisories influence fishing and seafood consumption behavior in the public.
Belton and colleagues (1986), from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection,

188

Implications to Human Health

examined the effectiveness of public health advisories issued by the State of New Jersey in
reducing the consumption of contaminated seafood. Surveys and interviews of urban fisherman
revealed that many of them were not aware of the advisories, and that some had either
misinterpreted the guidance or chosen to ignore it.

The public perception of risk and the ability of the regulatory agency to communicate
that risk plays a large role in determining the effectiveness of the public health advisory.
Jones et al. (1987) were able to characterize the comprehension of, and compliance with, a
fish- consumption advisory aimed at reducing PCI3 intake by sport fishermen in Wisconsin. An
initial survey of these fishermen conducted by questionnaire revealed that approximately three-
fourths of the survey respondents were familiar with the fish consumption advisory, yet only
57% of the original respondents had changed their fishing or fish consumption habits as a
result of the advisory.

Although the FDA has established limits for some of the important marine contaminants,
many others remain unregulated. For example, regulatory limits have not been set for
contaminants such as dioxin, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nonchlorinated pesticides,
dibenzofurans, petroleum hydrocarbons, cadmium, lead, and arsenic. Based on the relative lack
of action or tolerance levels for important seafood contaminants, it would be useful to
establish safe limits for more of the potentially toxic and carcinogenic substances found in
seafoods.

Although only a few studies have been conducted in this area, indications are that the
issuance of advisories is only partially successful in influencing human behavior. However, the
development of guidelines based on risk assessment and the issuing of health advisories is still
considered the most effective means of getting people to reduce or cease consumption of
contaminated seafood. Similar studies to those of Belton et al. (1986) and Jones et al. (1987)
should be conducted in other sites around the country to make this management tool more
effective in protecting human health.

3b. Have shellfish bed closures reduced consumt)tion of contaminated shellfish?

Since 1966, data have been compiled periodically by FDA and NOAA on classifications by
states of coastal and estuarine waters with regard to suitability,for shellfishing activities.
Individual state agencies classify shellfish -growing waters into the following categories:
-approved, conditionally approved, restricted, prohibited, or nonproductive. These designations
are based primarily on the location of industrial and municipal waste discharges and
measurements of indicators for the presence of pathogenic microorganisms in the water
column. Data on shellfish area classifications are compiled in the National Shellfish Register
of Classified Estuarine Waters (FDA and NOAA, 1985).

Public health management agencies at the state and local levels can take a direct role in
limiting human exposure to contaminants in the marine environment by closing shellfish beds
to harvesting. Enforcement of these actions is generally the responsibility of state and local
law enforcement agencies. Signs and maps may be posted in the affected areas and legal
notices can be published to alert persons harvesting shellfish or bathing in restricted areas
(FDA and NOAA, 1985).

189

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Although through the National Shellfish Sanitation Program serious enteric diseases such
as hepatitis, cholera, and typhoid have been largely eliminated, it is still unclear whether
closures are effective and efficient, especially for viral-induced types of gastroenteritis.
Enforcement efforts are limited by manpower and budget considerations at the state level.
More information would be needed.to determine whether approved areas are safe, particularly
in relation to the presence of free-living bacteria such as V. vulnificus, which may be
unassociated with fecal contamination; and whether consumption of molluscan shellfish from
restricted or prohibited areas results in a quantifiable risk to human health.

3c. Have beach closures or restrictions prevented recreational ext)osure?

One measure of the effectiveness of beach closures is the determination of disease
incidence among bathers at restricted beaches. Beach closures are issued by state and local
governments and are typically based on water quality criteria developed by the Federal
Government. As indicated earlier, Cabelli et al " (1979) observed that symptom rates among
swimmers at New York City beaches that were rated either "barely acceptable" or "relatively
unpolluted" by a graduated pollution index were higher than those of nonswimmers at the same
beaches.

It appears that classification of swimming beaches may not be totally effective in
preventing the occurrence of swimming- related disease. Additional studies would need to be
conducted at other sites to further characterize the effectiveness of beach closures based on
Federal water quality criteria.

Concerns Associated with Spills of Hazardous Materials

Manaizement Ouestion 4: What are the human health concerns associated with st)ills of
hazardous materials in the marine environment?

Information Needs

4a. What hazardous materials have been released into the marine environment as a result
of accidental release/discharge?

4b. What health hazard(s) are encountered by workers involved in emergency
response/cleanup actionO

4c. What are the health hazards to the general public as a result of exposures to toxic
substances accidentally released into the marine environment?

Spil Is of hazardous or toxic materials into the marine environment may pose an immediate
health risk to the general public as well as to workers involved in emergency response/cleanup
efforts. Several Federal agencies are mandated to respond to incidents involving chemical
discharges into the marine waters of the United States. The Coast Guard assumes primary
Federal responsibility for the cleanup of hazardous materials spilled into the marine
environment. To accomplish this mission, the Coast Guard has established a National Strike
Force to respond to oil or chemical spills (Stull, 1987a). In addition to its actual response
activities, the Coast Guard is also involved in the development and maintenance of information
systems to document which hazardous materials have been released into inland or coastal

190

Implications to Human Health

waterways as a result of accidental discharges., The Pollution Incident Reporting System
(PIRS) is a database of information on all spills of hazardous materials, oil, and other
pollutants that have been reported to the Coast Guard since 1973. It contains information on
dates, location, type, cause, source, and quantity of the spill, as well as the resources affected
by the spill, the cleanup activities taken to mitigate the spill, and any penalty action taken
against the polluter. This information is used for analysis and management purposes to allow
the Coast Guard to identify those compounds that may represent the greatest hazard to the
marine environment and to focus its response activities and R&D efforts on those compounds
that are spilled most frequently. The PIRS is a dynamic system that is updated by
approximately 1,000 records monthly.

The Coast Guard has also established the Chemical Hazard Response Information System
(CHRIS), which provides a description of the hazards associated with over 1,000 chemicals and
the appropriate response techniques for dealing with spills of these compounds. The CHRIS
has four components: Condensed Guide to Chemical Hazards containing first aid information;
Hazardous Chemical Data Manual describing the chemical, physical, and biological properties
associated with each hazardous substance and measures to be taken in an emergency; Hazard
Assessment Handbook, which is a series of formulas that simulate spill incidents; and the
Response Methods Handbook containing techniques for cleaning up spills.

In addition to the development and maintenance of information systems, the Coast Guard
has implemented an active program to develop and test chemical- protective clothing worn by
personnel during chemical spill clean-up activities (Stull, 1987a; 1987b). Swope (1987) has
prepared a summary of ongoing and planned Federal research on chemical- protective clothing
and equipment performed or sponsored by the Coast Guard and other agencies such as NIOSH,
OSHA, and EPA. Research needs in this area currently include developing comprehensive
performance standards for chemical-protective suits and designing even more chemically
resistant suits (Stull, 1987a). Current efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard to address these needs
should continue.

Although the general public may also be at risk from exposure to accidental spills of
hazardous materials in the marine environment, the risk is most often manifested through
ingestion of contaminated seafood or direct exposure through swimming. These issues have
been addressed in the previous management questions.

Conclusions and Recommendations

A number of toxic substances and human pathogens have been identified in the marine
environment that have the potential to cause adverse human health effects. Although the
presence of these agents in the marine environment does not alone constitute a public health
risk, it does suggest that some potential health risk may be present if humans are exposed to
these agents. The likelihood of developing adverse health effects from these substances is a
result of the toxicity or pathogenicity of the agent and the extent to which the population is
exposed.

The following conclusions concerning human health implications of marine pollution are
based on the discussions of the management questions and information needs presented in the
previous section.

191

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

o Existing Federal and state monitoring programs provide limited data on the
concentrations of chemical contaminants in edible tissues of commercial and
recreational fish species. In addition, it is difficult to set "acceptable" limits for
chemical concentrations in seafood because of uncertainties in our information on
toxic response in humans, seafood consumption patterns in the United States, and
exposure through other routes. Regulatory programs could be made more effective if
these inadequacies were resolved.

o Governmental programs, such as the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, have been
largely effective in protecting the public from enteric diseases such as hepatitis,
cholera, and typhoid, as well as from biotoxin poisoning associated with the
consumption of molluscan shellfish. However, sporadic outbreaks of illness, primarily
associated with free-living, opportunistic Vibrio species and gastroenteritis -causing
viruses still occur.

o Traditionally used microbial water quality indicators do not predict the occurrence of
viral pathogens and naturally occurring pathogenic bacteria such as V. vulnificus.

o Current methods for the removal and inactivation of human pathogens are effective in
controlling the input of enteric bacteria to the marine environment but not for other
important pathogens such as the Norwalk-like viruses.

o Seafood consumption advisories, shellfish bed closures, and beach classifications are
issued by state and local governments using largely inconsistent methods and
guidelines. Public responses to such advisories display wide differences in
comprehension and compliance

Based on these conclusions, the following recommendations are made to improve our
understanding of the implications of marine pollution to human health.

Chemical Contaminants

The following work would allow improved understanding of the human health concerns
associated with exposure to chemical contaminants in the marine environment.

Concentrations in Commercial and Recreational Fisheries. More comprehensive information on
concentrations of contaminants occurring in the major commercial and recreational species
would improve our ability to manage public health risks. In addition to increasing temporal
and geographical intensity of sampling, monitoring programs could be improved by establishing
standard methods for sampling and analysis of seafood.

Seafood Consumption Patterns. Existing data on seafood consumption patterns do not
adequately describe the dietary patterns of the relevant populations. Studies of seafood
consumption patterns to update information and to focus on high-risk geographical or cultural
populations would improve our ability to assess public health risks associated with consuming
seafood.

192

Implications to Human Health

Mixtures of Toxic Chemicals. It is difficult to predict the synergistic and antagonistic effects
of most chemical mixtures. Although progress will be difficult, research should be continued
in the following areas to increase the understanding of interactive effects of chemical
mixtures on human health:

o Concentrations of toxic substances in mixtures;

o Toxicity to humans of individual contaminants; and

o The influence of environmental processes and interactions on toxic response.

Pathogens

The following work is needed to address the human health concerns associated with
pathogenic microorganisms in the marine environment.

Microorganisms Causing Human Diseases. A number of sewage -associated pathogens in the
marine environment are known or suspected to cause human diseases. Some pathogens are
known to cause human disease but the link to the marine environment has not been
established. Still other disease-causing microorganisms occur naturally in the marine
environment or are introduced to seafood during improper handling, storage, or preparation.
Research should continue to determine which marine pollution- related pathogens are causing
human health effects. Efforts to improve our ability to monitor seafood and water quality for
human pathogens should also continue.

Indicators. Traditionally used microbial water quality indicators do not predict the occurrence
of viral pathogens and naturally occurring pathogenic bacteria such as V. vulnificus. Improved
indicators need to be identified and validated on the basis of health risk data.

Sources. The major human activities that contribute human pathogens to the marine
environment are known. Region-specific studies may be necessary to determine the relative
importance of local sources.

Management Tools

The following work needs to be performed to determine the effectiveness of health
advisories, shellfish bed closures, and beach closures in protecting human health.

Health Advisories. Current information indicates that health advisories are only partially
effective in reducing the human health risk from consumption of contaminated seafood.
However, this finding is based on relatively few studies. Studies similar to those of Belton et
al. (1986) and Jones et al. (1987) conducted in other regions of the country would help to
more accurately determine the effectiveness of health advisories.

Shellfish Bed Closures. Shellfish bed classification has been effective in protecting human
health when NSSP microbiological standards and criteria for shellfish- growing areas have been
used in proper context with other classification criteria (Hunt, 1979). Shellfish bed closures

193

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

also have been effective with regard to marine biotoxins such as PSP and NSP. However,
research would help to determine when approved shellfish areas are safe with respect to
viruses and naturally occurring pathogens such as V. vulnificus.

Beach Closures. Additional studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of beach closures in
protecting public health.

Hazardous Materials

The following work would help to determine the human health concerns associated with
spills of hazardous materials in the marine environment.

Chemically Resistant Suits. Research needs include the development of comprehensive
performance standards for chemical- protective suits worn by personnel during chemical spill
clean-up activities, and the design of more chemically resistant suits. Current efforts by the
U.S. Coast Guard to address these needs should continue.

Literature Cited

Albert, R.E., J. Lewtas, S. Nesnow, T.W. Thorslund, and E. Anderson. 1983. Comparative
Potency Methods for Cancer Risk Assessment Applications to Diesel Particulate Emissions.
Risk Analysis. 3:101-119.

Alter, M.J., R.J. Gerety, L.A. Smallwood, R.E. Sampliner, E. Tabor, F. Deinhardt, G. Frosner,
and G.M. Matanoski. 1982. Sporadic Non-A, Non-B Hepatitis: Frequency and
Epidemiology in an Urban U.S. Population. J. Infect. Dis. 145:886-893.

Bagnis, R., S. Chanteau, E. Chungue, J.M. Hurtel, T. Yasumoto, and A. Inoue. 1980. Origins
of Ciguatera Fish Poisoning: A New Dinoflagellate, Gambierdiscus toxicus Adachi and
Fukuyo, Definitely Involved as a Casual Agent. Toxicology. 18:199-208.

Baker, W.H., Jr. 1974. Vibrio t)arahaemolyticus Outbreaks in the United States. Lancet 1:551.

Baker, W.H., Jr., P.A. Mackowiak, M. Fishbein, G.K. Morris, J.A. D'Salfonso, G.H. Hauser, and
0. Felsenfed. 1974. Vibrio oarahaemolyticus Gastroenteritis Outbreak in Covington,
Louisiana, in August 1972. Am. J. Epidemiol. 100:316-323.

Belton, T., R. Roundy, and N. Weinstein. 1986. Urban Fisherman: Managing the Risks of
Toxic Exposures. Environment. 28:18-27.

Blake, P.A. 1979. Disease Caused by Marine Vibrio. N. Engl. J. Med. 300:1-5.

Brady, L.M. and A.J. Concannon. 1984. Vibrio vulnificus Septicemia. Med. J. Aust. 22-23.

Brown, H.S., R. Goble, and L. Tatelbaum. 1988. Methodology for Assessing Hazards of
Contaminants in Seafood. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 8:76-101.

Brown, L.D. and C.R. Dorn. 1977. Fish, Shellfish, and Human Health. J. Food Prot.
40(10):712-717.

194

Implications to Human Health

Bryan. 1980. Epidemiology of Foodborne Diseases Transmitted by Fish, Shellfish, and Marine
Crustaceans in the United States, 1970-1978. J. Food Prot. 43:859-876.

Bryan, J.A. and J.C. Huff. 1973. Hepatitis from Clams. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 225:526-527.

Cabelli, V.J., A.P. Dufour, M.A. Levin, L.J. McCabe, and P.W. Haberman. 1979. Relationship of
Microbial Indicators to Health Effects at Marine Bathing Beaches. Am. J. Public Health
69(7):690-696.

Cabelli, V.J., A.P. Dufour, L.J. McCabe, and M.A. Levin. 1982. Swimming -Associated
Gastroenteritis and Water Quality. Am. J. Epidemiol. 115(4):606-616.

Capuzzo, J.M., A. McElroy, and G. Wallace. 1987. Fish and Shellfish Contamination in New
England Waters: An Evaluation and Review of Available Data on the Distribution of
Chemical Contaminants. Coast Alliance, Washington, D.C. 59 pp. + Appendices.

CDC. 1979a. Non-01 Vibrio cholerae Infections- -Florida. Centers for Disease Control.
Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 28:571-572.

CDC. 1979b. Viral Hepatitis Outbreaks- -Georgia, Alabama. Centers for Disease Control.
Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 28:581.

CDC. 1980. Cholera- -Florida. Centers for Disease Control. Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep.
29:601.

CDC. 1981. Foodborne Disease Outbreaks. Annual Summary 1979. Centers for Disease
Control, Atlanta, GA.

CDC. 1982. Enteric Illness Associated with Raw Clam Consumption- -New York. Centers for
Disease Control. Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 31:449-451.

CDC. 1983. Foodborne Disease Outbreaks. Annual Summary 1981. Centers for Disease
Control, Atlanta, GA.

Colwell, R.R., P.R. Brayton, D.J. Grimes, D.B. Roszak, S.A. Huq, and L.M. Palmer. 1985.
Viable but Nonculturable Vibrio choterae and Related Pathogens in the Environment:
Implications for Release of Genetically Engineered Microorganisms. Bio/Technology.
3:817-820.

Dadisman, T.A., Jr., R. Nelson, J.R. Molenda, and H.J. Garber. 1973. -Vibrio parahaernolyticus
Gastroenteritis and Epidemiological Aspects. Am. J. Epiderniol. 96:414.

DHEW. 1965. National Shellfish Sanitation Program, Manual of Operations. Part 1.
Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas. U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

D'Itri, P.A. and F.M. D'It ri. 1977. Mercury Contamination: A Human Tragedy. John Wiley
and Sons, New York, NY (Cited in Jones et at., 1987).

195

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Dufour, A.P. 1987. Annual Report--Second Year Health Effects Associated with Shellfish
Consumption. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. NOAA/EPA IAG
RW13931029, 38 pp.

Engineering News Record. 1985. Second Ozone Plant Started. Engineering News Record.
215(8):15-16.

EPA. 1975. Preliminary Assessment of Suspected Carcinogens in Drinking Water. Report to
Congress, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

EPA. 1980. Water Quality Criteria Documents: Availability. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 45(231, Part V):79318-79379.

EPA. 1984. Approaches to Risk Assessment for Multiple Chemical Mixtures. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. EPA-600/9-84-008. 227 pp.

EPA. 1986a. Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C. Federal Register. 51(185):34014-34025.

EPA. 1986b. Guidance Manual for Health Risk Assessment of Chemically Contaminated
Seafood. Puget Sound Estuary Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle,
WA. Report No. TC-3991-07.

EPA. 1987a. Draft Report of the Ciba-Geigy Wastewater Discharge Permits. Permit
Comparisons- -Discharge Regulations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C. 4 pp.

EPA. 1987b. Draft Report of the Guidance Manual for Assessing Human Health Risks from
Chemically Contaminated Fish and Shellfish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. Report No. C737-01, 76 pp. + Appendices.

FDA. 1986. Pesticides and Industrial Chemicals in Domestic Foods (FY 86). Compliance
Program Guidance Manual. Programs 7304.004, 7304.004c, 7304.010. U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, Washington, D.C.

FDA and NOAA. 1985. 1985 National Shellfish Register of Classified Waters. U.S. Food and
Drug Administration and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington,
D.C. 19 pp.

Fein, G.G., J.L. Jacobson, S.W. Jacobson, P.M. Schwartz, and J.K. Dowler. 1984. Prenatal
Exposure to Polychlorinated Biphenyls: Effects on Birth Size and Gestational Age. J.
Pediatr. 105(2):315-320.

Feingold, A.0. 1973. Hepatitis from Eating Steamed Clams. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 225:526-27.

Finch, R. 1973. Effects of Regulatory Guidelines on the Intake of Mercury from Fish--the
MECCA Project. Fish. Bull. 71:615-626.

Fouts, J. 1988. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park,
NC. Personal Communication.

196

Implications to Human Health

Friberg, L. 1988. The GESAMP Evaluation of Potentially Harmful Substances in Fish and
Other Seafood with Special References to Carcinogenic Substances. Aquat. Toxicol.
11(3-4):379-393.

Gartrell, M.J., J.C.'Craun, D.S. Podrebarac, and E.L. Gunderson. 1986. Pesticides, Selected
Elements, and Other Chemicals in Adult Total Diet Samples, October 1980-March 1982. J.
Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 69:146-161.

Gerba, C.P., S.M. Goyal, R.L. LaBelle, 1. Cech, and G.F. Bodgan. 1979. Failure of Indicator
Bacteria to Reflect the Occurrence of Enteroviruses in Marine Waters. Am. J. Public
Health. 69(11):1116-1119.

Gill, O.N., W.D. Cubitt, D.A. McSwiggan, B.M. Watney, and C.L.R. Bartlett. 1983. Epidemic of
Gastroenteritis Caused by Oysters Contaminated with Small Round Structured Viruses.
Br. Med. J. 287:1532-1534.

Griffin, M.R., E. Dalley, M. Fitzpatrick, and S.H. Austin. 1983. Camr)vlobact.er Gastroenteritis
Associated with Raw Clams. J. Med. Soc. N.J. 80:607a-609.

Grimes, D.J. 1996. Human Health Impacts of Waste Constituents, Pathogens and Antibiotic-
and Heavy Metal-Resistant Bacteria. Prepared for Office of Technology Assessment, U.S.
Congress, College Park, MD.

Guidon, L. and C.A. Pierach. 1973. Infections Hepatitis After Ingestion of Raw Clams. Minn.
Med. 56:15-19.

Guinn R.A., H.T. Janowski, S. Lier, E.C. Prather, and H.B. Greenberg. 1982. Norwalk Virus
Gastroenteritis Following Raw Oyster Ingestion. Am. J. Epidemiol. 115:348-351.

Hoff, J.C. and E.W. Akin. 1986. Microbial Resistance to Disinfectants: Mechanisms and
Significance. Environ. Health Perspect. 69:7-14.

Holmberg, S.D. and J.J. Farmer 111. 1984. Aeromonas hydror)hila and Plesiomonas shigelloides
as Causes of Intestinal Infections. Rev. Infect. Dis. 6:633-639.

Humphrey, H.E.B., H.A. Price, and M.L. Budd. 1976. Evaluation of Changes of the Level of
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) in Human Tissue. Final Report of FDA Contract No.
223-73-2209. Michigan Department of Public Health, Lansing, MI.

Hunt, D.A. 1979. Microbiological Standards for Shellfish Growing Waters--Past and Future
Utilization.' Proc. Natl. Shellfisheries Assoc. 69:142-146.

Jones, V.B., H.A. Anderson, L.P. Hanrahan, and L.J. Olson. 1987. Sport Fish Consumption and
Body Burden Levels of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons: A Study of Wisconsin Anglers. Section
on Environmental Health, Wisconsin Division of Heath, Madison, WI. 17 pp.
(Unpublished).

Kaplan, J.E., R.A. Goodman, L.B. Schonberger, E.C. Lippy, and G.W. Gary. 1982.
Gastroenteritis Due to Norwalk Virus: An Outbreak Association with a Municipal Water
System. J. Infect. Dis. 146:190-197.

197

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Koff, R.S., G.F. Grady, T.C. Chalmers, J.W. Mosley, and B.L. Swartz. 1967. Viral Hepatitis in
a Group of Boston Hospitals. III. Importance of Exposure to Shellfish in a Nonepidemic
Period. N. Engl. J. Med. 276:703-710.

Lewtas, J. 1985. Development of a Comparative Potency Method for Cancer Risk Assessment
of Complex Mixtures Using Short-Term In Vivo and In Vitro Bioassays. Toxicol. Indus.
Health. 1:193-203.

Linco, S.J. and G.S. Grohmann. 1980. The Darwin Outbreak of Oyster- Associated Viral
Gastroenteritis. Med. J. Aust. 1:211-213.

MacLeod, W.D., L.S. Ramos, A.J. Friedman, D.G. Burrows, P.G. Prohaska, D.L. Fisher, and D.W.
Brown. 198 1. Analysis of Residual Chlorinated Hydrocarbons and Aromatic Hydrocarbons
and Related Compounds in Selected Sources, Sinks, and Biota of New York Bight.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Boulder,
CO. NOAA Tech. Mem. OMPA-6.

Malins, D.C., B.B. McCain, D.W. Brown, A.K. Sparks, and H.O. Hodgins. 1980. Chemical
Contaminants and Biological Abnormalities in Central and Southern Puget Sound.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Boulder, CO. NOAA Tech. Mem. OMPA-2, 186 pp + appendicies.

Marsh, D.O., M.D. Turner, J.C. Smith, J.W. Choe, and T.W. Clarkson. 1974. Methylmercury in
Human Populations Eating Large Quantities of Marine Fish. I. Northern Peru. In
Proceedings of the Ist International Mercury Congress, Barcelona (Cited in Tollefson and
Cordle, 1986).

McKinney, J. 1988. National Institutes of Health, Washington, D.C. Personal Communication.

Miescier, J.J. and V.J. Cabelli. 1982. Enterococci and Other Microbial Indicators in Municipal
Wastewater Effluents. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 54(12): 1599-1606.

Morris, J.G., Jr., R. Wilson, B.R. Davis, I.K. Washsmuth, C.F. Riddle, G. Wathen, R.A. Pollard,
and P.A. Blake. 1981. Non-O Group I Vibrio cholerae Gastroenteritis in the United
States. Ann. Intern. Med. 94:656-658.

Morse, D.I., Guzewich, J.J., et al. 1986. Widespread Outbreaks of Clam- and Oyster-
Associated Gastroenteritis. N. Engl. J. Med. 314:678-681.

Murphy, A.M., G.S. Grohmann, P.J. Christopher, W.A. Lopez, and R.H. Millsom. 1979. An
Australia-wide Outbreak of Gastroenteritis from Oysters Caused by Norwalk Virus. Med.
J. Aust. 2:329-333.

NAS. 1987. Complex Mixtures. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C. 227 pp.

NIEHS. 1986. Drinking Water Disinfectants. National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences. Environ. Health Perspect. 69:312.

198

Implications to Human Health

NIOSH. 1986. Health Hazard Evaluation Report No. HETA-83-251-1685, Point Adams Packing
Company, Hammond, OR. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
Cincinnati, OH.

NOAA. 1986. Report on 1984-1986 Federal Survey of PCBs in Atlantic Coast Bluefish.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. 179 pp.

NOAA. In preparation. Fish Consumption Advisory Project. National Ocean Pollution
Program Office. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Rockville, MD.

Nolan, C.M., J. Ballard, C.A. Kaysner, J.L. Lilja, L.P. Williams, Jr., and F.C. Tenover. 1984.
Vibrio varahaemolyticus Gastroenteritis: An Outbreak Associated with Raw Oysters in
the Pacific Northwest. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2:119-126.

NRC. 1985. An Evaluation of the Role of Microbiological Criteria for Foods and Food
Ingredients. Subcommittee on Microbiological Criteria, Committee on Food Protection,
Food and Nutrition Board. National Research Council, National Academy Press,
Washington, D.C. 436 pp.

Ohara, H., H. Naruto, W. Watanabe, and I. Ebisawa. 1983. An Outbreak of Hepatitis A Caused
by Consumption of Raw Oysters. J. Hyg. Camb. 91:163-165.

O'Mahony, M.C., C.D. Gooch, D.A. Smyth, A.J. Thrussell, C.L.R. Bartlett, and N.D. Noah. 1983.
Epidemic Hepatitis A from Cockles. Lancet i: 518-520.

OTA. 1987. Wastes in Marine Environments. Office of Technology Assessment, U.S.
Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. OTA 0-334, 313 pp.

Pao, E.M., K.H. Fleming, P.M. Guenther, and F.J. Nickle. 1982. Foods Commonly Eaten by
Individuals: Amount per Day and per Eating Occasion. Home Economics Records Report
No. 44. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

Pollak, S.J., E.F. Parrish 111, T.J. Barrett, R. Dretler, and J.G. Morris, Jr. 1983. Vibrio
vulnificus septicemia. Arch. Intern. Med. 143:837-838.

Portnoy, B.L., P.A. Mackawiak, C.T. Caraway, J.A. Walker, T.W. McKinley, and C.A. Klein, Jr.
1975. Oyster- Associated Hepatitis- -Failure of Shellfish Certification Programs to Prevent
Outbreaks. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 233(10):1065-1068.

Ray, S.M. 1971. Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning: A Status Report, pp. 171-200. In Current
Tot)ics in Comvarative Pathobiolog . Volume I (T.C. Cheng, ed.). Academic Press, New
York, NY.

Rhodes, M.W. and Kator, H.I. 1983. In Situ Survival of Enteric Bacteria in Estuarine
Environments. Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institutes
and State University, Blacksburg, VA. Bulletin 140.

199

GOALS OF THE NATIONAL PROGRAM

Roland, F.P. 1979. Isolated Cases of Vibrio 1)arahaemolyticus Gastroenteritis. J. Am. Med.
Assoc. 241:2504.

Rollins, D.M. and R.R. Colwell. 1986. Viable but Nonculturable Stage of Camnylobacter jejuni
and Its Role in Survival in the Natural Aquatic Environment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
52:531-538.

Ronk, R.J. 1988. Emerging Trends: Vibrio vulnificus. J. Assoc. Food and Drug Officials.
52:7-11.

Roos, B. 1956. Hepatitis Epidemic Transmitted by Oysters. Sven. Lak-Tidning. 53:989-1003
(Cited in Morse et al., 1986).

Roszak, D.B., D.J. Grimes, and R.R. Colwell. 1984. Viable but Non-recoverable Stage of
Salmonella enteritidis in Aquatic Systems. Can. J. Microbiol. 30:334-338.

Safe, S. 1988. Development and Validation of Ln 3LjLrg Assays for Toxic Halogenated
Aromatic Mixtures. In Proceedinps, International Svmt)osium on Chemical Mixtures: Risk
Assessment and Manapement. June 7-9, 1988, Cincinnati, Ohio.

SAIC. 1986. Overview of Sewage Sludge and Effluent Management. Prepared by Science
Application International Corporation for Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress,
Washington, DC.

Shandera, W.X., J. M. Johnston, B.R. Davis, and P.A. Blake. 1983. Disease from Infection with
Vibrio mimicus, a Newly Recognized Vibrio Species. Ann. Intern. Med. 99:169-171.

SRI. 1980. Seafood Consumption Data Analysis. Final Report. Prepared for Office of Water
Regulations and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. SRI
International, Menlo Park, CA. 44 pp. I

Steidinger, K.A. 1983. A Reevaluation of Toxic Dinoflagellate Biology and Ecology. Prog.
Phycol. Res. 2:148-188 (Cited in Pierce, 1987).

Stull, J.0. 1987a. Protective Suits for Chemical Spill Response: Chemical Response Suits
Developed by the U.S. Coast Guard Have Been Successful Meeting the Field Protection
Needs of Response Personnel. Chem. Eng. Progress. Nov.:34-39.

Stull, J.0. 1987b. Considerations for Design and Selection of Chemical- Protective Clothing.
J. Hazard. Materials. 14:165-189.

Swope, A.D. 1987. Federal Research on Chemical Protective Clothing and Equipment. A
Summary of Federal Programs. U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, D.C. Report No.
MOU-CPCE-1-87, 63 pp.

Tacket, C.O., F. Brenner, and P.A. Blake. 1984. Clinical Features and an Epidemiological
Study of Vibrio vulnificus Infections. J. Infect. Dis. 149:558-561.

200

Implications to Human Health

Vanderslice, R.R., E.V. Ohanian, J. Orme, and C. Sonich Mullin. 1988. Using Synergistic
Effects in Risk Assessment of Drinking Water Contaminants. In Proceedings,
International Symposium on Chemical Mixtures: Risk Assessment and Management, June
7-9. 1988, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Wilson, R., S. Lieb, A. Roberts, S. Stryker, H. Janowski, R. Gunn, B. Davis, C.F. Riddle, T.
Barrett, J.G. Morris, Jr., and P.A. Blake. 1981. Non-0 Group I Vibrio cholerae
Gastroenteritis Associated with Eating Raw Oysters. Am. J. Epidemiol. 114(2):293-298.

Yung, R.S.H. and E.J. Rauckman. 1987. Toxicological Studies of Chemical Mixtures of
Environmental Concern at the National Toxicology Program: Health Effects of
Groundwater Contaminants. Toxicology. 47:15-34.

Zeitlin, D. 1987. Study Starts on Fish Consumption Advisories: Public Health Risks of Toxic
Contaminants Found in Fish. Press Release. National Marine Pollution Program Office.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Rockville, MD.

201

IV. PRIORITIES FOR ACTION

The purpose of this section is to present the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board's
Agenda for Action during the interim between Plans. The action items are consistent with the
needs and priorities identified in the discussions of individual goals. The action items listed
are specific and implementable tasks so that, after some time has passed, we may determine
whether the tasks have been accomplished.

Two categories of action items are listed below. The first category comprises a specific
task, such as a study or report. The second involves the formation of an ad hoc working
group or standing committee of agency specialists to develop a strategy for filling a specific
need or to promote the startup and guide the conduct of multiple tasks. The Agenda for
Action by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board includes the following:

o Support Specific Tasks

--Atmospheric Inputs of Toxic Substances
--Future of Coastal Areas
--Seafood Consumption Patterns
--Indicators of the Presence of Human Pathogens

o Establish Ad Hoc Working Groups

--Monitoring Environmental Quality of Marine Ecosystems
--Habitat Loss and Modification
--Biological Agents

Each of these tasks is described below.

SPECIFIC TASKS

Atmospheric Inputs of Toxic Substances. The Board will conduct and publish a state-of-the-
art review concerning the sources, routes,-and environmental significance of atmospheric
inputs of selected toxic substances to the marine environment. The study will identify
societal trends and technological developments that might influence future atmospheric inputs
and assess the implications of these changes using a 25-year planning horizon. The report
will also include a description of research needs and priorities for improved understanding of
these issues. The study will be supported jointly by a group of interested Board agencies and
directed by an ad hoc committee of Federal experts in this area.

203

PRIORITIES FOR ACTION

Future of Coastal Areas. The Board will support a strategic assessment of future
environmental problems in the Nation's coastal areas. The purpose of the study is to predict
the most important environmental problems that will be faced by estuarine and coastal
ecosystems over the next 50 years. The study will be conducted under the direction of a
steering group of Federal, academic, industry, and environmental experts. The study will
consider population growth and shifts to coastal areas, changes in industrial practices, future
waste disposal requirements,.economic development, technological improvements, and global
changes in environmental quality and climate.

Seafood Consumption Patterns. The Board will support a study to update information on
seafood consumption patterns in the United States and to identify population sectors
(geographical, cultural, professional) at high risk from consumption of seafood contaminated
with toxic substances. The study will evaluate the effectiveness of existing guidelines. for
limiting consumption of contaminated seafood in protecting high-risk sectors of the population.
The study will also identify high-priority research needs related to this issue. The study will
be conducted under the direction of the Board.

Indicators of the Presence of Human Patho2ens. Estimates of the concentrations of fecal
coliform bacteria have been traditionally used to indicate the presence of human pathogens in
coastal waters. However, this indicator is not considered by many experts to be accurate,
especially for health risks associated with viral diseases. The Board will support the
development of improved indicators of human pathogens in the marine environment.

AD HOC WORKING GROUPS

Monitoriniz Environmental Ouality of Marine Ecosystems., The Board will establish an ad hoc
committee of Federal and private scientists and program managers to develop and examine the
adequacy of information on the status of marine ecosystems. The committee will:

Establish the objectives of the Federal program in this area and determine appropriate
roles at Federal and state levels of government.

Propose a systematic strategy for developing a national monitoring capability to meet
these objectives. The strategy will incorporate existing national and regional
programs, use of encountered data, peer review, and information synthesis and
dissemination.

Promote the development of improved indicators of ecosystem status.

The committee will report to the Board and recommend actions to be taken by the Board.

Habitat Loss and Modification. Loss and modification of emergent vegetation and submerged
aquatic vegetation is a major problem threatening the marine resources of the Nation. The
Board will establish an ad hoc committee to promote the following:

Assure that National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) habitat maps in areas of rapid habitat
loss are updated as frequently as necessary.

Evaluate the costs, benefits, and approaches for developing a high-resolution digital
database for use in planning and documenting coastal alterations.

204

Ad Hoe Working Groups

Assure that regional and national trends in habitat loss and modification are
adequately documented.

Support research necessary to develop the capability to predict the effects of sea-
level rise on coastal habitats.,

Support a state-of-the-art review regarding the effectiveness of mitigation and
restoration practices, particularly with regard to quality of habitat.

Prepare a program development plan for increasing our understanding of habitat
functions and processes.

The committee will report to the Board on a regular basis regarding progress, problems, and
needs for personnel, resources, or other types of assistance that might be required.

Bioloizical Aizents. The Board will conduct an evaluation of the Nation's ability to perform
research on the effects of biological agents on marine organisms. The study will be supported
by several Board agencies and directed by an ad hoc group of Federal and outside specialists.
The purpose of the study is to:

Identify and, assign priorities to research needs in this area.

Evaluate the adequacy of existing facilities to conduct secure (P3) biological research.

Assess capabilities for quick scientific response to investigate episodic events.

Evaluate the need for a common database to promote sharing of information on the
occurrence and effects of biological agents.
Publish an annual review of the state-of-the-art and tally of the incidence of disease
in marine biota.

The committee will report to the Board and recommend actions to be taken by the Board.

205

APPENDIX A: WORKING GROUP MEMBERS

During the development of this Federal Plan, six working groups were formed, and
members were asked to provide guidance and information concerning the state-of-the-art,
information needs, and research and monitoring recommendations pertaining to each of the six
goal sections. The following list includes the names and affiliations of the members of each
working group. The list also includes reviewers of the various goal sections who may not
have been working group members. It should be noted that the discussions and
recommendations presented in the goal sections may have been altered during official review
by the National Ocean Pollution Policy Board. Therefore, it should not be assumed that this
final version of the Plan necessarily reflects the consensus of the working groups. Staff
members of the National Ocean Pollution Program Office (NOPPO) served as working group
leaders and are listed with the respective groups.

Toxic Materials

Group Leader: W. Lawrence Pugh
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Joseph Bishop Jack Edmundson
NOAA, Estuarine Programs Office U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Universal Bldg., South, Rm. 415 Div. of Env. Contaminants
1825 Connecticut Ave., NW 1000 N. Glebe Rd.
Washington, DC 20235 Arlington, VA 22201

Judy Capuzzo John Farrington
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution University of Massachusetts at Boston
Challenger Drive, Rm 213 Harbor Campus
Woods Hole, MA 02543 Morrissey Blvd ',
Boston, MA 02125

A-1

APPENDIX A

Daniel Farrow C.R. Lee
NOAA, Strategic Assessments Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 666 Waterways Experiment Station
11400 Rockville Pike P.O. Box 631
Rockville, MD 20852 Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631

Nick Fendinger Mike Morrissette
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters
Agriculture Research Service Marine Technical & Hazardous Materials
Env. Chemical Lab. Div.
Beltsville, MD 20705 2 100 Second St., SW
Washington, DC 20593-0001
Mary Gessner
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service Terri Paluszkiewicz
Universal Bldg., South, Rm 810 U.S. Dept. of the Interior
1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Minerals Management Service
Washington, DC 20235 Branch of Env. Modeling
18th and C Sts., NW
Michael Harass Washington, DC 20240
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Env. Impact Section Albert Pohland
200 C St., SW U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Washington, DC 20204 Div. of Contaminants Chemistry
200 C St., SW
Wayne Hollingsworth Washington, DC 20204
U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters
Office of Marine Safety John Pritchard
2100 Second St., SW National Institute of Env. Health Sciences
Washington, DC 20593-001 Lab. of Pharmacology
Bldg. 19, Rm 1901B
George Hoskin Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
200 C St., SW David Rathke
Washington, DC 20204 Great Lakes Regional Office
International Joint Commission
Clarence Johnson 100 Ouellette Ave.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 8th Floor
Matomic Bldg., Rm 513 Windsor, Ontario N9A6T3
1717 H St., NW
Washington, DC 20240 Aaron Rosenfield
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Alex Lardis Administration
U.S. Navy University of Maryland
David Taylor Research Center Center for Env. and Estuarine Studies
Annapolis, MD 21402 P.O. Box 775
Cambridge, MD 21613
Richard Latimer
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
South Ferry Rd.
Narragansett, RI 02882

A-2

Working Group Members

George Saunders John Trefrey
U.S. Dept. of Energy Dept. of Oceanography and Ocean
Ecological Research Div. Engineering
ER-75, Rm E-239, Mail Stop E201 Florida Institute of Technology'
Washington, DC 20545 Melbourne, FL 32901

Carl Sinderman Gordon Wallace
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service University of Massachusetts at Boston
Cooperative Biological Lab Harbor Campus, Rm. 58
Oxford, MD 04270 Morrissey Boulevard
Boston, MA 02125
John Stegeman
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Judith Weiss
Challenger Drive Rutgers University
Woods Hole, MA 02543 Dept. of Biological Sciences
Newark, NJ 07102
Ben Thomas
Shell Development Company
P.O. Box 4320
Houston, TX 77210

Nutrients

Group Leader: W. Lawrence Pugh
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Charles Alexander Chris D'Elia
NOAA, Strategic Assessments Branch Div. of Ocean Sciences
Rockwall Building, Rm 615 National Science Foundation
11400 Rockville Pike 1800 G St., Rm 609
Rockville, MD 20852 Washington, DC 20550

Rodger Baier David Dolon
National Science Foundation Great Lakes Regional Office
1800 G St., NW, Rm 611 International Joint Commission
Washington, DC 20550 P.O. Box 32869
Detroit, MI 48232-2869
Stan Chanesman
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service Thomas Fisher
Universal Bldg. South, Rm 810 Horn Point Lab.
1825 Connecticut Ave. NW University of Maryland
Washington, DC 20235 Cambridge, MD 21613

A-3

APPENDIX A

Art Hurme Kent S. Price
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, CECW-D University of Delaware
20 Massachusetts Ave., NW College of Marine Studies
Washington, DC 20314-1000 700 Pilottown Rd.
Lewes, DE 19958
Gail Mackiernan
University of Maryland Sea Grant College John Pritchard
H.J. Patterson Hall, Rm 1224 National Institute of Env. Health Sciences
College Park, MD 20742 P.O. Box 12233
Lab. of Pharmacology
Kent Mountford Bldg. 19, Rm 1901B
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Chesapeake Bay Program
410 Severn Ave. Berlie L. Schmidt
Annapolis, MD 21403 U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
Cooperative State Research
Hans Paerl Service/NRFSS
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Justin Smith Morrill Bldg., Rm 121
Institute of Marine Sciences 15th St. & Independence Ave., SW
3407 Arendell St. Washington, DC 20251
Morehead City, NC 28557
I James Yoder
Jan Prager National Aeronautics & Space
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administration
South Ferry Rd. Oceanic Processes Branch (EEC)
Narragansett, RI 02882 Earth Science & Applications Div.
600 Independence Ave., SW
Rm 227B
Washington, DC 20546

Biolop.ical Ments

Group Leader: Laura Gabanski
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Jack Edmundson Shay Fout
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Div. of Microbiology
Div. of Env. Contaminants Center for Food Safety and Applied
1000 N. Glebe Rd. Nutrition
Arlington, VA 22201 U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Mail Code HFF-235
200 C St., SW
Washington, DC 20204

A-4

Working Group Menibers

Doug Gunnison Aaron Rosenfield
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Waterways Experiment Station Administration
P.O. Box 631 University of Maryland
Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631 Center for Env. and Estuarine Studies
P.O. Box 775
Sherwood Hall Cambridge, MD 21613
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
Div. of Chemical Contaminants
Carl Sindermen
Mail Code HFF-423 NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
200 C St., SW Cooperative Biological Lab.
Washington, DC '20204 Oxford, MD 04270

Fred Kern Mark Sobsey
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service University of North Carolina.
Cooperative Biological Lab., at Chapel Hill
Oxford, MD 04270 C.B. 7400, Rosenau Hall
Chapel Hill, NC 27559
Morris Levin
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Michael Stoskopf
Office of Env. Processes and Effects National Aquarium
Research Pier 3
401 M St., SW, Rm. 682 501 E. Pratt St.
Washington, DC 20460 Baltimore, MD 21202

Beth Milleman Harris White
Coastal Alliance
NOAA, Coastal and Estuarine Assessments
1536 16th St., NW Branch
Washington, DC 20036 Rockwall Bldg., Rm 645
11400 Rockville Pike
John Pritchard Rockville, MD 20852
National Institute of Env. Health Sciences
P.O. Box 12233
Lab. of Pharmacology
Bldg. 19, Rm 190 1 B
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

A-5

APPENDIX A

Habitat

Group Leader: Laura Gabanski
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Donald Boesch Mary Gessner
Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Chauvin, LA 70344 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20235
John Catena
The Oceanic Society Alex Lardis
1536 Sixteenth St., NW U.S. Navy
Washington, DC 20036 David Taylor Research Center
Annapolis, MD 21402
Charles Coutant
Env. Sciences Div. Bill Sipple
Oak Ridge National Lab. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6038 Office of Wetlands Protection
401 M St., SW
John Day Washington, DC 20460
Louisiana State University
Center for Wetland Resources Nancy Sweeney
Coastal Ecology Institute U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Div. of Endangered Species and Habitat
Conservation
Jack Edmundson 1000 N. Glebe Rd., Suite 500
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Arlington, VA 22201
Div. of Env. Contaminants
1000 N. Glebe Rd. James Thomas
Arlington, VA 22201 NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Universal Bldg., South, Rm 810
Don Field 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW
NOAA, Strategic Assessments Branch Washington, DC 20235
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 661
11400 Rockville Pike Larry Thomas
Rockville, MD 20852 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Div. of Endangered Species and Habitat
Marion Fischel Conservation
Shell Oil Company 1000 N. Glebe Rd., Suite 500
One Shell Plaza Arlington, VA 22201
P.O. Box 4320
Houston, TX 77210 Robert Tucker
Assistant Director of Env. Research
New Jersey Dept. of Env. Protection
Trenton, NJ 08625

A-6

Working Group Members

Gerald Welsh Douglas Wolfe
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture NOAA, Ocean Assessments Div.
Soil Conservation Service SES/ECS Rockwall Bldg., Rm 656
South Bldg., Rm 6142 11400 Rockville Pike
12th and Independence Ave., SW Rockville, MD 20852
Washington, DC 20013
Tom Wright
Bill Wilen U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Waterways Experiment Station
National Wetlands Inventory P.O. 631
1000 N. Glebe Rd., Rm 500 Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631
Arlington, VA 22201

Ecosystem Status

Group Leaders: Sari Kiraly
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

William G. Conner
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Neal Armstrong Jack Edmundson
Dept. of Civil Engineering U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The University of Texas Div. of Env. Contaminants
Austin, TX 78712 1000 N. Glebe Rd.
Arlington, VA 22201
Fred Calder
Coastal Zone Management Section Dave Farrell
Florida Dept. of Env. Regulation U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
2600 Blair Stone Rd. Bldg., 005, Rm 201
Tallahassee, FL 32301-8241 BARC - West
Beltsville, MD 20705
James R. Chambers
NOAA, Office of Resource Investigations Mark Harwell
Universal Bldg., Rm 810 Ecosystems Research Center
1825 Connecticut Ave., NW Hollister Hall
Washington, DC 20235 Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
Celia Chen
Marine Board Art Hurme
National Academy of Sciences U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, CECW-D
2101 Constitution Ave. 20 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20418 Washington, DC 20314-1000

A-7

APPENDIX A

Jack Kelly Don Phelps
Ecosystems Research Center U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Corson Hall South Ferry Rd
Cornell University Narragansett, RI 02882
Ithaca, NY 14853
Andy Robertson
Gerd Kleineberg NOAA, Ocean Assessments Div.
U.S. Coast Guard Rockwall Bldg., Rm 652
Chief, Chemistry Branch 11400 Rockville Pike
Research and Development Center Rockville, MD 20852
Avery Point
Croton, CT 06340-6096 George Sanders
U.S. Dept. of Energy
Jay Means ER-75, Rm. E-239
Institute for Env. Studies Mail Stop E201
42 Atkinson Hall Washington, DC 20545
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803 Doug Segar
Senior Research Scientist
Bob Middleton Tiburon Center for Env. Studies
DOI, Minerals Management Service 7609 Potrero Ave.
12203 Sunrise Valley Drive El Cerrito, CA 94530
MS 644
Reston, VA 22091 Bob Zeller
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Joel O'Conner Office of Marine & Estuarine Protection
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M St., SW
26 Federal Plaza, Rm. 805 Washington, DC 20460
New York, NY 1007-0090

Human Health

Group Leaders: Devorah Zeitlin
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

Edward Flynn
NOAA, National Ocean Pollution Program Office
Rockwall Bldg., Rm 610
11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852

A-8

Working Group Members

Victor Cabelli Betty Hackley
University of Rhode Island NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
Dept. of Microbiology Universal Bldg., Rm 814
Kingston, RI 02881 1825 Connecticut Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20235
Rita Colwell
University of Maryland Clarence Johnson
Dept. of Microbiology U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
College Park, MD 20742 Region 8 Office of Research Support
Matomic Bldg., Rm 527
Clyde Dawe 18th and C Sts., NW
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Washington, DC 20240
59 School St.
Woods Hole, MA 02543 Howard Kator
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Tom Dillon Gloucester Point, VA 23062
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Waterways Experiment Station David Kleffman
P.O. Box 631 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631 Health Research, RD-683
401 M St., SW
Fred Felleman Washington, DC 20460
Center for Env. Education
1725 DeSales St., NW Ronald Landy
Suite 500 U.S. Food and Drug Administration
Washington, DC 20036 Center for Veterinary Medicine
HFV 222, Rm 7B45
James Fouts 5600 Fishers Lane
National Institute of Env. Health Rockville, MD 20857
Sciences
Mail Drop A-203 Dorothy Leonard
P.O. Box 12233 NOAA, Strategic Assessments Branch
III Alexander Drive Rockwall Bldg., Rm 600
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 11400 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
Mary Jo Garreis
Maryland Dept. of the Env. Trent Lewis
Div. of Standards & Certification U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 13387 Div. of Toxicology and Microbiology
201 West Preston Street 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Baltimore, MD 21201 Cincinnati, OH 45268

E. Spencer Garrett Eric May
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
P.O. Drawer 1207 South Morris Street Extension
Pascagoula, MS 39568-1207 Oxford, MD 21654

A-9

APPENDIX A

James McKinney Robert Scheuplein
National Institutes of Health U.S. Food and Drug Administration
National Institute of Env. Health Sciences Office of Toxicological Sciences, HFF-101
P.O. Box 12233 Center for Food Safety for Applied
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Nutrition
200 C St., SW, Rm 5022
Malcolm Meaburn Washington, DC 20204
NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service
P.O. Box 12607 Will Stelle
Charleston, SC 29412 Counsel, House Merchant Marine &
Fisheries Committee
Bill Morgan Fish and Wildlife Subcommittee
W.F. Morgan & Sons, Inc. House Office Bldg., Annex 11, Rm 543
Box 241, Route 632 Washington, DC 20515
Weems, VA 22576
Richard Thompson
Joel O'Conner Division of Shellfish Sanitation Control
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Texas State Dept. of Health
26 Federal Plaza, Rm 805 1100 W. 49th St.
New York, NY 10007-0090 Austin, TX 78754

Vincent Olivieri Harris H. White
John Hopkins University NOAA, Ocean Assessments Div.
Dept. of Geography & Env. Engineering Rockwall Bldg., Rm 645
G.W.C. Whiting School of Engineering 11400 Rockville Pike
109 Ames Hall Rockville, MD 20852
Baltimore, MD 21218

A 10

APPENDIX B: THE. NATIONAL OCEAN POLLUTION
PLANNING ACT
(Pu'blic Law 95-273)

CHAPTER 31-OCEAN POLLUTION Sec.
1703. Comprehensive Federal Plan relating to ocean pol-
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT lution.
AND MONITORING PLANNING (3) Policy recommendations.
(4) Plan review.
(c) Plan period.
(d) Budgeting.
Sec. .1704. Comprehensive ocean pollution program in the
1701. Findings and purposes. Administration.
1702. Definitions. (a) Establishment of program.
1702a. National Ocean Pollution Program Office and Poli- (b) Content of the program.
cy Board. 1705. Financial assistance.
(a) Program Office. (a) Grants and contracts.
(b) Policy Board. (b) Applications for assistance.
1703. Comprehensive Federal Plan relating to ocean pol- (c) Existing programs.
lution. (d) Action by Administrator.
(e) Records.
(a) Lead agency for Plan. 1706. Interagency cooperation,
(b) Content of Plan. 1707. Dissemination of information on ocean and Great
(1) Assessment and ordering of national @ Lakes pollution research activities.
needs and problems. 1708. Effect on other laws.
(2) Existing Federal capability. 1709. Authorization of appropriations.

Related Provisions

See, also, Water Pollution Prevention and Control, 33 U.S. CA. � 1251 et seq., ante; Ocean Dumping,
33 US. CA. � 1401 et seq., ante; Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 33 US. CA. � 1901 et seq., post;
and Water Resources Research, 42 US.C.A. � 10301 et seq., post.
Library References (3) Man will increasingly be forced to rely on
Health and Environment (8-25.7(3). ocean and coastal resources as other resources
U.S. Health and Environment � 106. are depleted. Our ability to protect, preserve,
WESTLAW Electronic Research develop, and utilize these ocean and coastal re-
See WESTLAW guide following the Explanation pages of this sources is directly related to our understanding of
pamphlet. the effects which ocean pollution has upon such
resources.
� 1701. Findings and purposes [NOPPA (4) Numerous departments, agencies, and in-
� 21 strumentalities of the Federal Government spon-
(a) The Congress finds and declares the follow- sor, support, or fund activities relating to ocean
ing: pollution research and development and monitor-
(1) Man's activities in the marine environment ing. However, such activities are often uncoordi-
can have a profound short-term and long-term nated and can result in unnecessary duplication.
impact on such environment and greatly affect (5) Better planning and more effective use of
ocean and coastal resources therein. available funds, personnel, vessels, facilities, and
(2) There is a need to establish a comprehensive equipment is the key to effective Federal action
Federal plan for ocean pollution research and regarding ocean pollution research and develop-
development and monitoring, with particular at- ment and monitoring.
tention, being given to the inputs, fates, and ef- (6) Numerous Federal agencies have initiated and
fects of pollutants in the marine environment. supported research projects to study, enhance,

B-1

APPENDIX B

manage, preserve, protect, or restore the resources (2) The term "Administrator" means the Ad-
of the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, Puget ministrator of the Administration.
Sound, and other estuaries of national significance. (3) The term "Board" means the National
(7) Various research projects relating to the Ocean Pollution Policy Board established under
Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, section 1702a(b) of this title.
and other estuaries of national significance, includ- (4) The term "Director" means the Director of
ing those conducted at the college and university the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the
level and those conducted at the State and local Executive Office of the President.
governmental level, can be more effectively coordi-
nated in order to obtain maximum benefits. (5) The term "marine environment" means the
W It is therefore the purpose of the Congress in coastal zone (as defined in section 1453(l) of title
this chapter- 16); the seabed, subsoil, and waters of the territo-
rial sea of the United States; the waters of any
(1) to establish a comprehensive 5-year plan for zone over which the United States asserts exclu-
Federal ocean pollution research and development sive fishery management authority; the waters of
and monitoring programs in order to provide plan- the high seas; and the seabed and subsoil of and
ning for, coordination of, and dissemination of beyond the Outer Continental Shelf.
information with respect to such programs within (6) The term "ocean and coastal resource" has
the Federal Government; the same meaning as is given such term in section
(2) to develop the necessary base of informa- 1122(7) of this title.
tion to support, and to provide for, the rational, (7) The term "ocean pollution" means any
efficient, and equitable utilization, conservation, short-term or long-term change in the marine
and development of ocean and coastal resources; environment.
(3) to provide for the effective coordination of (8) The term "Office" means the National
research conducted to support the preservation Ocean Pollution Program Office established un-
and protection of the environmental quality of the der section 1702a(a) of this title.
Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, (May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95--273, � 3, 92 Stat. 228; April 7,
and other estuaries of national significance, and 1986, Pub.L. 99-272, Title VI, � 6072(l), 100 Stat. 133.)
to encourage the use of such research in determi-
nations that affect the environmental quality of � 1702a. National Ocean Pollution Pro-
the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, Puget gram Office and Policy Board
Sound, and other estuaries of national signifi- [NOPPA � 3A]
cance; and
(4) to designate the National Oceanic and At- (a) Program Office
mospheric Administration as the lead Federal (1) The Administrator shall establish within the
agency for preparing the plan referred to in para- Administration the National Ocean Pollution Pro-
graph (1) and to require the Administration to gram Office.
carry out a comprehensive program of ocean pol- (2) The Office shall-
lution research and development and monitoring (A) serve as the lead entity responsible for
under the plan. administering the program established under see-
(May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 2, 92 Stat. 228; April 7
1986, Pub.L. 99-272, Title VI, � 6071, 100 Stat. 133.) tion 1703 of this title;
Short Title (13) be headed by a director who shall-
Section 1 of Pub.L. 95-273, May 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 228, as 0) be appointed by the Administrator,
amendcd Pub.L. 96-255, � 3, May 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 420, provided:
"That this Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'National 0i) serve as the Chair of the Board, and
Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978'." (iii) be the spokesperson for the program;
� 1702. Definitions (NOPPA � 31 (C) serve as the staff for the Board and its
supporting committees and working groups; and
As used in this chapter, unless the context other- (D) review each department and agency budget
wise requires- request transmitted under section 1703(d) of this
(1) The term "Administration" means the Na- title and submit an analysis of the requests to the
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Board for its review.

B-2

The National Ocean Pollution Planning Act

The analysis described in subparagraph (D) shall (1) Assessment and ordering of national needs and
include an analysis of how each departmental or problems
agency budget request relates to the priorities and The PI .an shall-
goals of the Plan established under section 1703 of
this title. (A) identify those national needs and prob-
(b) Policy Board lems, which relate to specific aspects of ocean
(1) The Administrator, with the cooperation of pollution (including, but not limited to, the ef-
the Federal departments and agencies referred to in fects of ocean pollution on the economic, social,
section 1706 of this title, shall establish a National and environmental values of ocean and coastal
Ocean Pollution Policy Board consisting of repre- resources), which exist and will arise during the
sentatives of those departments and agencies. Plan period;
(2) The Board shall- (B) establish the priority, based upon the
value and cost of information which can be
(A) be responsible for coordinated planning obtained from specific ocean pollution research
and progress review for the program established and development and monitoring programs and
under section 1703 of this title; , projects, in which such needs should be met,
(B) review all department and agency budget and such problems should be solved, during the
requests transmitted to it under section 1703(d) of Plan period; and
this title and submit a report to the Office of (C) contain, if pursuant to the preparation of
Management and Budget and to the Congress any revision of the Plan required under subsec-
concerning those budget requests; tion (a) of this section it is determined that any
(C) establish and maintain such interagency national need or problem or priority set forth in
groups as the Board determines to be necessary the preceding version of the Plan should be
to carry out its activities; and changed, a detailed explanation of the reasons
(D) consult with and seek the advice of users for the change.
and producers of ocean pollution data, informa- (2) Existing Federal capability
tion, and services to guide the Board's efforts, The Plan shall contain-
keeping the Director and the Congress advised of
such consultations. (A) a detailed listing of all existing Federal
(Pub.L. 95-273, � 3A, as added April 7, 1986, Pub.L. programs relating to ocean pollution research
99-272, Iltle VI, � 6072(2), 100 Stat. 133.) and development and monitoring (including, but
� 1703. Comprehensive Federal Plan re- not limited to, general research on marine eco-
lating to ocean pollution [NOP- systems, including the Great Lakes, the Chesa-
PA � 41 peake Bay, Puget Sound, and other estuaries of
national significance,) which listing shall in-
(a) Lead agency for Plan clude, with respect to each such program-
The Administrator, in consultation with the Di- 0) a catalogue of the Federal personnel,
rector and other appropriate Federal officials hav- facilities, vessels and other equipment cur-
ing authority over ocean pollution research and rently assigned to, or used for, the program,
development and monitoring programs, shall pre- and
pare, in accordance with this section, a comprehen- 0i) a detailed description of the existing
sive 5-year plan (hereinafter in this chapter referred goals and costs of the program, including,
to as the "Plan") for the overall Federal effort in but not limited to,'a categorical breakdown of
ocean pollution research and development and moni- the funds currently being expended, and
toring. The Plan shall be prepared and submitted planned to be expended, to conduct the pro-
to Congress and the President on or before Febru- gram; and
ary 15, 1979, and a revision of the plan shall be (B) an analysis of the extent to which each
prepared and so submitted .by September 15 every such program, if continued on the basis and at
three years after 1979.
the funding level described pursuant to subpar-
W Content of Plan agraph (A)(ii), will assist in meeting the priori-
The Plan shall contain, but need not be limited to, ties set forth pursuant to paragraph (1)(B) dur-
the following elements: ing the Plan period.

B-3

APPENDIX B

(3) Policy recommendations (d) Budgeting
If it is determined, as aresult of the analysis Each Federal agency and department included
required to be made under paragraph (2)(B), that under the Plan shall prepare and submit to the
the priorities set forth pursuant to paragraph Office of Management and Budget, the Office, and
(1)(B) will not be adequately met during the Plan the Board on or before the date of submission of
period using the existing Federal capability de- departmental requests for appropriations to the Of-
scribed pursuant to paragraph (2)(A), the Plan fice of Management and Budget, an annual request
shall contain those recommendations for changes for appropriations to carry out the activities of that
in the overall Federal effort in ocean pollution agency or department under the Plan during the
research and development and.monitoring which subsequent fiscal year. The Office of Management
would ensure that those priorities are adequately and Budget shall review the request for appropria-
met during the Plan period. Such recommenda- tions as an integrated, coherent, and multiagency
tions may include, but need not be limited to- request, taking into account the review by the
(A) ch .anges in the goals to be achieved under Board of those requests under section 1702a(b) of
various existing Federal ocean pollution re- this title.
(May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 4, 92 Stat. 229; May 30,
search and development and monitoring pro- 1980, Pub.L. 96-255, � 2, 94 Stat. 420; Dec. 21, 1982,
grams; Pub.L. 97-375, Title 11, � 202(c), 96 Stat. 1822; April 7,
(B) suggested increases and decreases in the 1986, Pub.L. 99-272, Title V1, � 6073, 100 Stat. 134.)
funding for any such existing program consist- Cross References
ent with the extent to which such program Comprehensive ocean pollution program, content of, see section
contributes to the meeting of such priorities; 1704 of this title.
(C) specific proposals for interagency cooper- Grants and contracts for research, development, and monitoring
ation in cases in which the pooling of the re- projects or activities, see section 1705 of this title.
sources of two or more Federal departments, � 1704. Comprehensive ocean pollution
agencies, or instrumentalities under existing program in the Administration
programs could further efforts to meet such [NOPPA � 51
priorities or would eliminate duplication of ef- (a) Establishment of program
fort; and
The Administrator shall establish within the Ad-
(D) suggested legislation to establish new ministration a comprehensive, coordinated, and ef-
Federal programs considered to be necessary if fective ocean pollution research and development
such priorities are to be met. and monitoring program. The Administrator shall
(4) Plan review carry out all projects and activities under the pro-
The Plan shall contain a description of actions gram in a manner consistent with the Plan.
taken by the Administrator and the Director for (b) Content of the program
the purpose of ensuring interagency coordination
and cooperation in (A) the carrying out of Federal The program required to be established under
ocean pollution research and development and subsection (a) of this section shall include, but not
monitoring programs; and (B) eliminating unnec- be limited to-
essary duplication of effort among such pro- (1) all projects and activities relating to o cean
grams. pollution research and development and monitor-
(c) Plan period ing for which the Administrator has responsibility
under provisions of law (including, but not limited
For purposes of this section, the term "Plan peri- to, title II of the Marine Protection, Research, and
od" means- Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1441-1444))
(1) with respect to the Plan as required to be other than paragraph (2);
submitted on February 15, 1979, the period of 5 (2) such projects and activities addressed to the
fiscal years beginning on October 1, 1978; and priorities set forth in the Plan pursuant to section
(2) with respect to each revision of the Plan, 1703(b)(1)(B) of this title that can be appropriately
the period of 5 fiscal years beginning on October conducted within the Administration; and
1 of the year before the year in which the revision (3) the provision of financial assistance under
is required to be prepared under subsection (a) of section 1705 of this title.
this section. (May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95--273, � 5, 92 Stat. 230.)

B-4

The National Ocean Pollution Planning Act

� 1705. Financial assistance [NOPPA � 61 the project or activity in connection with which such
(a) Grants and contracts assistance was given or used, the amount of that
portion of the cost of the project or activity which
The Administrator may provide financial assist- was supplied by other' sources, and such other
ance in the form of grants or contracts for research records as will facilitate an effective audit. Such
and development and monitoring projects or activi- records shall be maintained for three years after the
ties which are needed to meet priorities set forth in completion of such project or activity. The Admin-
the Plan pursuant to section 1703(b)(1)(B) of this istrator and the Comptroller General of the United
title, if such priorities are not being adequately States, or an .y of their duly authorized representa-
addressed by any Federal department, agency, or tives, shall have access, for the purpose of audit and
instrumentality. examination, to any books, documents, papers, and
(b) Applications for assistance records of receipts which, in the opinion of the
Any person, including institutions of higher edu- Administrator or of the Comptroller General, may
cation and departments, agencies, and instrumental- be related or pertinent to such financial assistance.
ities of the Federal Government or of any State or (May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 6, 92 Stat. 231.)
political subdivision thereof, may apply for financial Cross References
assistance under this section for the conduct of
projects and activities described in subsection (a) of Comprehensive ocean pollution program, content of, see section
1704 of this title.
this section, and, in addition, specific proposals may
be invited. Each application for financial assistance � 1706. interagency cooperation [NOPPA
shall be made in writing in such form and manner, � 71
and contain such information, as the Administrator The head of each department, agency, or other
may require. The Administrator may enter into instrumentality of the Federal Government which is
contracts under this section without regard to sec- engaged in or concerned with, or which has authori-
tion 5 of title 41. ty over, programs relating to ocean pollution re-
(c) Existing programs search and development and monitoring-
The projects and activities supported by grants or (1). shall cooperate with the Administrator in
contracts made or entered into under this section carrying out the purposes of this chapter;
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, be admin- (2) may, upon written request,from the Admin-
istered through existing Federal programs (includ- istrator or Director, make available to the Admin-
ing, but not limited to, the National Sea Grant istrator or Director, on a reimbursable basis or
Program) concerned with ocean pollution research otherwise, such personnel (with their consent and
and development and monitoring. without prejudice to their position and rating),
(d) Action by Administrator services, or facilities as may be necessary to
The Administrator shall act upon each application assist the Administrator or the Director to
for a grant or contract under this section within six achieve the purposes of this chapter; and
months after the date on which all required infor- (3) shall, upon a written request from the Ad-
mation is received by the Administrator from the ministrator or Director, furnish such data or oth-
applicant. Each grant made or contract entered er information as the Administrator or Director
into under this section shall be subject to such deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this
terms and conditions as the Secretary deems neces- chapter.
sary in order to protect the interests of the United (May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 7, 92 Stat. 232.)
States. The total amount paid pursuant to any such
grant or contract may, in the discretion of the � 1707. Dissemination of information on
Administrator, be up to 100 percent of the total cost ocean and Great Lakes pollu-
of the project or activity involved. tion research activities [NOPPA
(e) Records � 81
Each recipient of financial assistance under this (a) The Administrator shall ensure that the re-
section shall keep such records as the Administrator sults, findings, and information regarding ocean
shall prescribe, including records which fully dis- pollution research and development and monitoring
close the amount and disposition by such recipient programs conducted or sponsored by the Federal
of the proceeds of such assistance, the total cost of Government be disseminated in a timely manner,

B-5

APPENDIX B

and in useful forms, to relevant departments, agen- under any law, to undertake research and develop-
cies, and instrumentalities of the Federal Govern- ment and monitoring relating to ocean pollution.
ment, and to other persons having an interest in (May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 9, 92 Stat. 232.)
ocean pollution research and development and moni-
toring. � 1709. Authorization of appropriations
(b) The Administrator shall ensure that the find- [NOPPA � 101
ings and information regarding ocean pollution re- There are authorized to be appropriated to the
search activities associated with the Great Lakes Administration for the purposes of carrying out this
identified pursuant to section 1703(b) of this title be chapter not to exceed $5,000,000 for the fiscal year
disseminated in a timely manner and in useful ending September 30, 1979, not to exceed $4,300,000
forms to relevant departments of the Federal for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1980, not to
Government, State governments, and other persons exceed $3,000,000 for the fiscal year ending Septem-
with an interest in such information. ber 30, 1981, not to exceed $4,000,000 for the fiscal
(May 8, 1978, Pub-L. 95-273, � 8, 92 Stat. 232; April 7, year ending September 30, 1982, and not to exceed
1986, Pub.L. 99-272, Title V1, � 6074, 100 Stat. 135.) $8,571,000 for fiscal year 1986, and not to exceed
� 1708. Effect on other laws [NOPPA �11 $3,732,000 for fiscal year 19S7.
(May 8, 1978, Pub.L. 95-273, � 10, 92 Stat. 232; June 4,
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to 1979, Pub.L. 96-17, 93 Stat. 34; May 30, 1980, Pub.L.
amend, restrict, or otherwise alter the authority of 96-255, � 1, 94 Stat. 420; April 7, 1986, Pub.L. 99-272,
any Federal department, agency, or instrumentality, Title V1, � 6075, 99 Stat. 135.)

Reprinted with permission from Federal Environmental
Laws 1988 Copyright C 1988 by West Publishing Co.

B-6

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1989- 2 4 2 - 3 1 2 0 4 0 0 6

I-
I 'I
I

t
3 6668 14102 1180 .1 ! I