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


                                                                                                 9305-03-13-00-16-00:








                                Development of an Approach to the Assessment of
                                    Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal Waters









                                                            Prepared for:


                                                Florida Coastal Management Program
                                          Florida Department of Environmental Regulation






                                                            Prepared by:


                                                          D.D. MacDonald
                                               MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd.






                                                            September 1992









                        Funds for this project are provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
                       Office of Coastal Management, using funds made available through the National Oceanic and
                       Atomspheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended.













                           Development of an Approach to the Assessment of
                              Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal Waters







                                                Prepared for:

                                    Florida Coastal Management Program
                               Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
                                           2600 Blair Stone Road
                                            Tallahassee, Florida
                                                 32399-2400







                                                Prepared by:

                                              D.D. MacDonald
                                   MacDonald Environmental Sciences Ltd.
                                       2376 Yellow Point Road, RR #3
                                        Ladysmith, British Columbia
                                                  VOR 2EO





                                             September 30, 1992



            Funds for this project are provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation,
            Office of Coastal Management, using funds made available through the National Oceanic and
            Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972@ as amended








                                                          Executive Summary


                         This report was prepared to provide the Florida Department or Environmental Regulation
                         (FDER) with guidance on the development of effects-based sediment quality guidelines (SQGs)
                         for Florida coastal waters. As such, a variety of approaches to the derivation of numerical
                         SQGs were reviewed and evaluated in light of Florida's unique requirements for sediment
                         quality assessment guidelines. The results of this evaluation indicated that the approach
                         recommended by Long and Morgan (1990; National Status and Trends Program Approach)
                         would provide a practical basis for deriving SQGs in the near-term. Using this approach,
                         preliminary SQGs for 25 priority substances in Florida coastal waters were derived and
                         evaluated. These SQGs are designed to provide practical guidance in a Dumber of sediment
                         quality assessment applications, but they are not intended to be used as sediment quality
                         criteria. While the guidelines are considered to be applicable to a variety of sediment types,
                         they should be evaluated to determine their applicability in Florida sediments and refined as
                         more information becomes available. A framework for assessing sediment quality has also
                         been recommended that describes how effects-based SQGs can be used in conjunction with
                         other assessment tools to support decisions on the management of coastal resources.



                 In Florida, conservation and protection of natural            resources has been identified as a high
                 priority environmental management goal. Realization of this goal requires protection of
                 living resources.and their habitats in estuarine, nearshore, and marine ecosystems. In the
                 last decade, there has been a significant increase in the level of scientific understanding (and
                 public recognition) of the important role sediments play in the functioning of coastal
                 ecosystems. Sediments are particularly critical in determining the fate and effects of
                 environmental contaminants.


                 Recent monitoring data indicate that concentrations of various contaminants are present at
                 elevated levels at a number of locations in Florida coastal sediments. While these chemical-
                 data provide essential information on the nature and areal extent of contaminat                     'ion, they
                 provide neither a measure of adverse biological effects nor an estimate of the potential for
                 such effects. Therefore, effects-based SQGs are required to evaluate the potential for
                 biological effects associated with sediment-sorbed contaminants and to provide assistance
                 in managing coastal resources.

                 To identify an appropriate procedure for deriving SQGs, the major approaches used in other
                 jurisdictions to derive SQGs were reviewed and evaluated in the context of Florida's unique
                 requirements for sediment quality assessment values. The results of this analysis indicated
                 that the National Status and Trends Program Approach (NSTPA; Long and Morgan 1990)
                 would respond most directly to Florida's immediate need for reliable and cost-effective
                 SQGs. Therefore, a strategy that relied on a modified version of the NSTPA was
                 recommended to derive numerical SQGs that could be used immediately to assess sediment
                 quality issues and concerns. A critical evaluation of this procedure suggested that, while this
                 approach has limitations that could influence the applicability of the guidelines, it is likely
                 to support the derivation of scientifically defensible preliminary guidelines for Florida
                 coastal waters.









               Using the recommended strategy, data derived from a wide variety of methods and
               approaches were assembled and evaluated to derive preliminary SQGs for 25 priority
               contaminants in Florida coastal waters. However, insufficient data were available to derive
               guidelines for another 29 substances that are known or are suspected to contaminate Florida
               coastal sediments. The numerical SOGs were used to define three ranges of concentrations
               for each of the 25 contaminants: a probable effects range; a possible effects range; and, a
               no effects range. These ranges of contaminant concentrations were considered to be more
               effective assessment tools than single numerical guideline values. A subjective assessment
               of the credibility of these guidelines indicated that a high level of confidence could be
               placed on the guidelines derived for 11 substances, and a moderate or low level of
               confidence could be placed on the guidelines for the remaining 14 substances. The results
               of this assessment suggest that the preliminary guidelines should be fully evaluated and
               refined, as necessary using the results of investigations conducted in Florida and elsewhere.

               The preliminary SQGs were used to conduct an initial assessment to determine the nature,
               extent and severity of contamination in Florida coastal sediments. The potential for adverse
               biological effects associated with measured levels of sediment-sorbed contaminants was used
               as an index of contamination. This assessment was conducted with the Florida Department
               of Environmental Regulation (FDER) coastal sediment chemistry database to identify
               priority areas and priority substances with respect to sediment contamination. The results
               of this investigation are considered to be preliminary due to the limitations on the available
               data. Therefore, this database should be re-evaluated when the specific limitations
               identified in Chapter 7 have been addressed.
               A total of 21 areas were considered in theinitial assessment of sediment quality in Florida
               coastal waters. However, insufficient data were available to conduct a thorough assessment
               of sediment quality conditions in many of these areas, particularly for organic contaminants.
               In spite of these limitations, the St. Johns River in the vicinity of Jacksonville, the Miami
               River in Dade County, and Tampa Bay in the vicinity of Tampa/St. Petersburg were'
               identified as the highest priority areas in terms of the extent and severity of sediment
               contamination. The contaminants of greatest concern in Florida sediment included copper,
               chromium, lead, mercury, zinc, phenanthrene, pyrene, Aroclor 1254, and total PCBs.

               The recommended SQGs were developed specifically to support the identification of
               contaminated sites and priority chemicals of concern in Florida coastal waters. As such,
               these guidelines will contribute substantially to the design, implementation, and evaluation
               of sediment quality monitoring programs in the state. In addition, the recommended
               guideliiies may also be used in a variety of environmental management applications,
               including identification of the need for further testing to support regulatory decisions and
               of identifying areas that might be considered for remedial action. Furthermore, SQGs
               provide a common basis for facilitating multi-jurisdictional agreements on sediment quality.

               The preliminary guidelines were established to provide a yardstick for evaluating sediment
                                                                                                 C@
               quality in Florida. As such, these guidelines may be used to screen sediment chemistry data
               and establish priorities with respect to sediment quality management. However, they should
               not be used in lieu of water quality criteria, nor should they be used as sediment quality









              criteria. Ambient environmental conditions may influence the applicability of these
              guidelines at specific locations and, therefore, they should be applied with care. in certain
              portions of the state.

              The preliminary SQGs developed in the presentstudy and FDER's previously developed
              guidelines for interpreting sediment metal concentrations provide a consistent basis for
              evaluating sediment quality conditions in Florida coastal ecosystems. However, no such
              tools exist for use in freshwater ecosystems. Therefore, effects-based SQGs should be
              developed to evaluate the biological significance of contaminated sediments in freshwater
              systems. In addition, a procedure to determining the probable origin of sediment-sorbed
              metals in freshwater sediments is required.

              Currently, there are a relatively large number of independent and loosely-related initiatives
              that are directed at the evaluation and management of contaminated sediments. While each
              of these programs is designed to advance our understanding of the nature, extent, and
              severity of sediment contamination, development of a regional strategy for contaminated
              sediment identification and management would accelerate this process. Therefore, a
              cooperative regional strategy should be developed by FDER, Environmental Protection
              Agency, the Army Corps of Engineers, and other affected agencies to identify priority
              sediment management and regulatory objectives, and the interagency efforts required to
              achieve them.









                                                          IV



                                                  Table of Contents




             Executive Summary      ...............................................
             Table of Contents  .................................................                      iv
             List of Appendices   ................................................                  viii
             List of Tables  .......................................................                   ix
             List of Figures  ..............    I .....................................                x
             Acknowledgements     ................................................                     xi


                                                      Chapter 1


             Introduction    .......................................................                   I
                    1.1    Purpose of the Report    .....................................              1
                    1.2    Description of the Recommended Approach to the Derivation of :
                           Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines        ..............      2
                    1.3    Applications of the Recommended Sediment Quality Assessment
                           Guidelines   ..............................................                 4


                                                      Chapter 2

             Florida's Coast: A National Treasure . . r    ................................            6
                    2.0    Introduction    ............................................                6
                    2.1    Physical Features of Florida's Coast   .............................        6
                    2.2    Biological Features of Florida's Coast   .........................          7
                    2.3    Anthropogenic Influences on Florida's Coast     ....................        8
                    2.4    Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns     .........................          9
                    2.5    Sediment Quality: An Indicator of Ecosystem Health        ............   11

                                                      Chapter 3

             An Evaluation of Existing Approaches to Developing Numerical Sediment
             Quality Guidelines   ..................................................                12
                    3.0    Introduction  .........................          ..................      12
                    3.1    Sediment Background Approach        ............................         12
                    3..2   Spiked-Sediment Bioassay Approach      .........................         14
                    3.3    Equilibrium Partitioning Approach     ..........................         15
                    3.4    Tissue Residue Approach      .................................           16
                    3.5    Screening Level Concentration Approach      ......................       17
                    3.6    Sediment Quality Triad Approach      ...........................         19
                    3.7    Apparent Effects Threshold Approach      ........................        20
                    3.8    National Status and Trends Program Approach       .................      22
                    3.9    Summary    ..............................................                23









                                                                  _v_



                                                              Chapter 4

                A Recommended Approach for Deriving and Validating Effects-Based Sediment
                Quality Assessment Guidelines in Florida          ...................                               26
                        4.0     Introduction    ...........................................                         26.
                        4.1     Considerations for Recommending a Strategy for Deriving Sediment
                                Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Coastal Waters              .........     27
                        4.2     A Recommended Strategy for the Deriving Numerical Sediment
                                Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Coastal Waters              .........     29
                        4.3     Verification and Refinement of Sediment Quality Assessment
                                Guidelines    .............................................                         30



                                                              Chapter 5

                Derivation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida
                Coastal Waters using the Weight-Of-Evidence Approach               ....................        1    33
                        5.0     Introduction    ...........................................                         33
                        5.1     Modification of the NSTPA for use in the Derivation of Sediment
                                Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida          .....................            33
                        5.1.1   Procedures and Criteria for Screening i@mdidate Data Sets                           33
                        5.1.2   Expansion of the National Status and Trends 1@atabase ... 34
                        5.2     Derivation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines                 ...  35
                        5.3     Rationale for the Recommended Guidelines Derivation Procedure                  ...  40
                        5.4     Strengths and Weaknesses ol the Recommended Approach for
                                Developing Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines               .............       42


                                                              Chapter 6

                Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Coastal Waters                    ...  46
                        6.0     Introduction    ........................                                            46
                        6.1     A Preliminary Evaluation of Priority Contaminants in
                                Florida Coastal Waters        ...................................                   46
                        6.2     Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines                ................    50
                        6.2.1   Metals    ................................................                          50
                                    Arsenic     ............................................                        50
                                    Cadmium        ..........................................                       56
                                    Chromium       ..........................................                       57
                                    Copper      ............................................                        58
                                    Lead     ..............................................                         59
                                    Mercury     ...........................................                         60
                                    Nickel    .............................................                         60
                                    Silver    .............................................                         61
                                    Tributyltin    ..........................................                       62
                                    Zinc    ...............................................                         62







                                                              vi -



                      6.2.2 Polycy',clic Aromatic Hydrocarbons       ...........................           63
                                  Acenaphthene     .......................................                 64
                                  Acenaphthylene    ......................................                 65
                                  Anthracene    .........................................                  65
                                  Fluorene    ............................................                 65-
                                  2-methylnaphthalene      ..................................              66
                                  Naphthalene    ........................................                  66
                                  Phenanthrene                                                             66
                                  Sum Low Molecular Weight PAHs           ........................         67
                                  Benz(a)anthracene     ....................................               67
                                  Benzo(a)pyrene    ......................................                 67
                                  Chrysene    ...........................................                  68
                                  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene     ................................              68
                                  Fluoranthene   ........................................                  69
                                  Pyrene  ..............................................                   69
                                  Sum High Molecular Weight PAHs          .......................          69
                                  Total PAHs    .......  I ...................................             70
                      6.2.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls       ...................................            70
                      6.2.4 Pesticides    ...............................................                  71
                                  Aldrin/Dieldrin   ......................................                 72
                                  Azinophosmethyl     .......................................              72
                                  Total Chlordane     .....................................                72
                                  Chlorthalonil  .........................................                 73
                                  Chlorpyrifos   ........    , ................................            73
                                  DDT and metabolites       .................................              73
                                   p,p'-DDD     .........................................                  73
                                   p,p'-DDE     .........................................                  73
                                   p,p'-DDT     ..........................................                 74
                                   Total DDT     ........................................                  74
                                  Disulfoton  ..........................................                   74
                                  Endosulfan    .........................................                  74
                                  Endrin  .............................................                    75
                                  Heptachlor    .... .....................................                 75
                                  H. ptachlor epoxide   ......................................             75
                                  Lindane (gamma-BHC)        ..................................            75
                                  Mirex   ..............................................                   75
                                  Phorate   ............................................                   75
                                  Toxaphene     .........................................                  75
                                  Trifluralin ..........................................                   75
                     6.2.5 Chlorinated Organic Substances        .............................             76
                                  Dioxins and Furans    ............      *'**'****'***'**''*'*'*          76
                                  Pentachlorophenol    ....................................                76
                     6.2.6 Phthalate Esters      ........................................                  77
                                  Bis (2-ethyl h exyl)ph tha late  ..............................          77
                                  Dimethyl phthalate    ...................................                77
                                  Di-n-butyl phthalate  ...................................                77









                                                                 vil -



                                                             Chapter 7

               An Initial Assessment of the Potential for Biological Effects of
               Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants in Florida Coastal Waters               .............        ......   78
                       7.0     Introduction     ...........................................                       78
                       7.1     Identification of Regional Sediment Quality Issues and Concerns              ....  78
                       7.2     Development of a Database on Sediment Chemistry in Florida                  .....  80
                       7.3     Derivation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines                 ... 80
                       7.4     Assessment of the Potential for Biological Effects of
                               Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants           .............................               81
                       7.4.1   Areas of Concern in Florida Coastal Waters           ...................           81
                       7.4.2   Contaminants of Concern in Florida Coastal Waters              .............       94
                       7.4.3   Limitations bf the Initial Assessment of Sediment Quality
                               in Florida    .............................................                        95



                                                             Chapter 8

               A Framework for Assessing Site-Specific Sediment Quality
               Conditions in Florida      ...............................................                         96
                       8.0     Introduction     ............................................                      96
                       8.:     Collect Historical Land and Water Use Information             ..............       96
                       8.17    Collect and Evaluate Existing Sediment Chemistry Data               ..........     98
                       8.3     Collect Supplemental Sediment Chemistry Data             .................         99
                       8.4     Collect Preliminary Assessment of the Potential for Biological
                               Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants           ....................            100
                       8.5     Evaluate Natural vs. Anthropogenic Sources of Sediment-Sorbed
                               Contaminants       .........................................                      101
                       8.6     Conduct Biological Assessment of Sediment Quality             .............       107
                       8.7     Implement Management of Sediment Quality             ................             109

                                                             Chapter 9

               Summary and Recommendations             .....................................                     110
                       9.1     Summary    ..........................................                             110
                       9.2     Recommendations       .......................................                     ill
                       9.2.1   Verification and Refinement of Preliminary Sediment Quality
                               Assessment Guidelines        ..................................                   111
                       9.2.2   Development of Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for
                               Freshwater Ecosystems       .......     ...........................               113
                       9.2.3   Regional Assessment of Sediment Quality            ....................           113
                       9.2.4   Site-Specific Assessment of Sediment Quality         ..................           114.
                       9.2.5   Coordination with Federal Agencies           ........................             114


               10.0 References      ................         I.................................                  115








                                                   Vill



                                            List of Appendices


            Appendix 1 Screening Criteria for Evaluating Candidate Data Sets for the
                         Sediment Toxicity (SEDTOX) Database   .....................     127.







                                                          ix -



                                                    List of Tables



             Table 1       Summary of the strengths and limitations of the various approaches to
                           the derivation of numerical sediment quality assessment guidelines    ... 24-

             Table 2       Evaluation of the approaches to the derivation of sediment
                           quality assessment guidelines   ................................         28

             Table 3       Preliminary identification of chemical concerns in the Florida
                           coastal waters   ..........................................              47


             Table 4       A summary of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable
                           to Florida coastal waters   ..................................           51


             Table 5       A preliminary evaluation of the relative degree of sediment
                           quality assessment guidelines applicable to the Florida coast  .... I ... 54

             Table 6       Number of samples that fall within the probable effects range
                           (i.e., 2! PEL) -of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic
                           coast sampling area   ........................................           82

             Table 7       Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range
                           (i.e., 2: NOEL and < PEL) 9f contaminant concentrations. for each
                           Atlantic coast sampling area    ...............................          85

             Table 8       Number of samples that fall within the probable effects range
                           (i.e., 2! PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf
                           coast sampling area   .......................................            88

             Table 9       Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range
                           (i.e., 2: NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each
                           Gulf coast sampling area    ..................................           91









                                                           x


                                                     List of Figures


              Figure 1      An overview of the recommended process for deriving numerical
                            sediment quality assessment guidelines in Florida    ................     31

              Figure 2      An overview of the modified NST?A for the derivation of
                            numerical sediment quality assessment guidelines in Florida     ........  37

              Figure 3      Conceptual example of sediment quality assessment guidelines
                            for cadmium     ...........................................               39


              Figure 4      Framework for conducting preliminary regional sediment
                            quality assessment of Florida coastal waters   ....................       79

              Figure 5      Framework for conducting site-specific assessments of sediment
                            quality conditions in Florida   ................................          97

              Figure 6      Concentrations of lead in sediments in Biscayne Bay      ............    103

              Figure 7      Aluminum normalized concentrations of lead in Biscayne
                            Bay sediments   .......................................             * ... 104

              Figure 8      Concentrations of lead in sediments in Apalachicola Bay      .........   105

              Figure 9      Aluminum normalized concentrations of lead in Apalachicola
                            Bay sediments    .........................................               106









                                                              Xj


                                                     Acknowledgement s


               It would be difficult to explicitly acknowledge all of the persons who contributed to the
               production of this document. However, the author would like to gratefully acknowledge
               those persons who made very substantial contributions to its preparation. Data and other
               pertinent information on the biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants              was
               supplied by over 140 investigators across North America, including those from research
               institutes, universities, consulting firms, and state, provincial, and federal agencies. Each of
               these people deserve a special acknowledgement and the author's most sincere thanks.
               Preparation of this report would not have been possible without the expert guidance and
               advice provided throughout the course of this study by the Science Advisory Group on
               Assessing Sediment Quality. This group was comprised of Ed Long (National Oceanic and
               Atmospheric Administration), Chris Ingersoll (US Fish and Wildlife Service), Herb Windom
               (Skidaway Institute of Oceanography), Steve Schropp (Taylor Engineering), Fred. Calder,
               Gail Sloane and Tom Seal. (Florida Department of Environmental Regulation). Sherri
               Smith, Michael Wong (Environment Canada) and Graham Lewis (North West Florida
               Water Management District) also provided useful input on the derivation and use of
               sediment quality guidelines. In addition, the author would like to thank M.L. Haines, K
               Brydges, B. Moore, M. Popadynec, and I.D. Cuthbert (MacDonald Environmental Sciences
               Limited) for their very significant contributions  to the preparation of this document.








                                                     Chapter 1

                                                    ]Introduction




              Public concerns relative to the quality of coastal waters have been aroused in recent years
              as a result of the information that has been disseminated on the quality of these systems.
              For example, Bolton et aL (1985) reported that environmental contamination in freshwater,
              estuarine, and marine ecosystems was widespread throughout North America. More recent
              data, collected under the National Status and Trends Program [NSTP; which is administered
              by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)], indicates that while
              levels of contaminants, in general, have begun to decrease in coastal waters, high and
              biologically significant concentrations of many contaminants are present in urbanized
              estuaries throughout the United States (O'Connor 1990).

              Traditionally, concerns relative to the management of aquatic resources in coastal waters
              have focused primarily on water quality. However, the importance of sediments in
              determining the fate and effects of a wide variety of contaminants has become more'
              appareni in recent years (Long and Morgan 1990). Specifically, sediment quality is
              important because many toxic contaminants found in only @race amounts in water may
              accumulate to elevated levels in sediments. As such, sediments serve both as reservoirs and
              as potential sources of contaminants to the water column. In addition, sediments tend to
              integrate contaminant concentrations over time and sediment-associated contaminants have
              the potential to affect benthic and other sediment-associated organisms directly (Chapman
              1989). Therefore, sediment quality data provide essential information for evaluating
              ambient environmental quality conditions in coastal waters.

              Over the past 10 years, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) and'
              others have collected a substantial quantity of information on the chemical composition of
              Florida sediments. Preliminary assessment of these data indicates that numerous areas in
              Florida are contaminated by metals (such as lead, silver, and mercury) and organic
              substances (such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and pesticides). However, sediment
              chemistry data alone do not provide an adequate basis for identifying or managing potential
              sediment quality problems in the state. Biologically-based sediment quality assessment
              guidelines (SQAGs) are also required to interpret the significance of sediment chemistry
              data.



              Ll    Purpose of the Report

              The purpose of this report is to recommend a scientifically defensible framework for
              assessing the biological significance of sediment-associated contaminants. Numerical
              SQAGs represent an integral component of this framework, as they provide a basis for
              assessing the potential effects of sediment-associated contaminants. As such, a variety of






                                                            -2-


              approaches to the Aerivation of sediment quality assessment values were reviewed to identify
              those that would be applicable to Florida coastal conditions. The results of this review
              indicate that each of these approaches has a number of deficiencies which limit its direct
              application in Florida. For this reason, an integrated strategy for the derivation of
              numerical SQAGs is recommended for the state of Florida. The recommended strategy is
              designed to provide relevant assessment tools in the near-term and provide a basis for
              refining these guidelines as the necessary data become available.

              Using the recommended approach, numerical SQAGs have been developed for Florida
              coastal waters. These guidelines were derived using information frornDurnerous
              investigations of sediment quality conducted throughout North America and, as such, are
              based on a weight-of-evidence that links contaminant concentrations and adverse biological
              effects. In this respect, the guidelines represent a cost-effective response to a practical need
              for assessment tools. However, these guidelines are considered to be preliminary in nature
              and are likely to be revised or refined depending on the results of field validation and other
              related studies conducted in Florida and elsewhere in North America.




              1.2    Description of the Recommended A@pproach to The Derivation of Numerical Sediment
                      QualiV Assessment Guidehhes

              The recommended approach to the derivation of numerical SQAGs is described in
              Chapter 4. This approach to the derivation of sediment quality assessment guidelines
              (SQAGs) is considered to be the most pr9ctical for use in Florida because:

                             It can be implemented in the near-term,

                             It can be implemented using existing data;

                             It will provide a weight of evidence from numerous biological effects-
                             based approaches for determining associations between chemical
                             quality and biological effects;

                             It will provide assessment tools or guidelines that define ranges.of
                             contaminant concentrations that can be used to evaluate sediment
                             quality data. Specifically these guidelines define ranges of
                             concentrations that have usually or always, frequently, and rarely or
                             never been associated with adverse biological effects. These ranges
                             are considered to be more practical than single values for assessing
                             sediment quality in the diverse conditions found along Florida's
                             extensive coast;

                             It will provide summaries of the data that were used to derive the
                             assessment guidelines. These summaries are useful for evaluating the







                                                           -3-


                             biological significance of contaminant concentrations within these
                             ranges;,and,

                             It will have long-term applicability in Florida and can be verified and
                             refined with additional data, particularly with data from the southeast.

              A detailed discussion of the strengths of this approach is provided in Section 5.3.

              Sediment quality assessment guidelines derived using the recommended approach are
              considered to be preliminary values and should be refined as new information becomes
              available. Several limitations and considerations in using this approach have been identified,
              including:

                             The approach is designe   'd to determine the potentia for sediment-
                             associated contaminants to induce biological effects. Direct cause and
                             effect relationships should not be inferred when comparing chemical
                             data to the recommended guidelines;

                             Tbe SQAGs are applicable to marine and estuarine waters only; they
                             are not applicable to freshwater systems;

                             The SQAGs are not expressed in terms of the fa:6tors that are thought
                             to control the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants [i.e.,
                             total organic carbon (TOC) for non-polar organics and acid volatile
                             sulfide (AVS) for divalent nietals];

                             The data that have been used to derive the SQAGs consist primarily
                             of the results of acute toxicity studies; few data exist on the chronic
                             responses of aquatic organisms to contaminants that are associated
                             with sediments;

                             The recommended guidelines should be used in conjunction with other
                             assessment tools and protocols, such as the metals interpretive tool
                             (Schropp and Windom 1988) and the Green Book (EPA and ACE
                             1991) to provide comprehensive evaluations of sediment quality; and,'

                             The recommended guidelines were developed using information from
                             a variety of locations in North America. It is uncertain if these data
                             are representative of the wide range of sediment types that are present
                             in Florida. For this reason, caution should be exercised in utilizing
                             these guidelines, particularly in carbonate-dominated sediments.

              A discussion of these limitations and considerations is provided in Section 5.3.








                                                            -4-


               1.3    Applications of the Recommended Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines

               ne recommended sediment quality assessment strategy is intended to provide a consistent
               basis for evaluating sediment quality in Florida. While the SQAGs represent an integral
               element of this strategy, they should be used in conjunction with other assessment tools to
               efficiently and cost-effectively evaluate ambient sediment quality conditions. In this context,
               these SQAGs may be used to:

                             Interpret the results of sediment quality monitoring data. In this
                             context, SQAGs may be used to assess the adverse biological effects
                             that could, potentially, be associated with specific concentrations of
                             sediment-associated contaminants;

                             Support the design of sediment quality monitoring programs. In this
                             context, SQAGs may be used to evaluate existing sediment chemistry
                             data, and rank areas of concern and chemicals of concern in terms of
                             their potential to be associated with adverse biological -effects. As
                             such, monitoring priorities may be more clearly and effectively
                             identified;

                             Identify the need for site-specific investigations,to support regulatory
                             decissions, including source control and other remedial measures. In
                             this context, SQAGs may be used to evaluate existing data and to
                             determine if additional testing (e.g., sediment toxicity bioassays, etc.)
                             is needed to support regulatbry decisions;

                             Evaluate the hazards associated with increased levels of contaminants
                             at specific sites. In this context, SQAGs may be used as early-warning
                             tools to identify the need for regulatory action before contaminant
                             levels become problematic;

                             Support a preliminary assessment of the applicability of the sediment
                             quality criteria currently under development by USEPA. In this
                             context, the SQAGs may be used to assess the level of protection
                             afforded to aquatic organisms by these criteria;,and,

                             Facilitate multi -ju risdi ctional agreements on sediment quality issues
                             and concerns. In this context, SQAGs may be used to establish site-
                             specific sediment quality objectives th       'at will help define the
                             responsibilities of various levels of government in preventing and
                             remediating sediment contamination.


               These guidelines were established to pr    ovide a consistent basis for evaluating sediment
               quality in Florida. However, these guidelines are preliminary and, as such, have certain
               limitations on their application. Therefore, SQAGs:







                                                            -5


                             Should not be used. in lieu of water quality criteria. However, these
                             guidelines may be used in regulatory programs to evaluate their
                             effectiveness and identify the need for more stringent regulations;

                             Should not be used to define uniform values for sediment quality on,
                             a statewide basis (i.e., they should not be used as sediment quality
                             criteria). Ambient environmental conditions may influence the
                             applicability of these guidelines at specific locations.

                             Should not be used as criteria for the disposal of dredged materials;

                             Should not be used directly as numerical clean-up levels -at severely
                             contaminated sites (e.g., Superfund sites); and,

                             Should not be used instead of biological tests in evaluating sediment
                             quality.

              There are a number of initiatives that are underway or under development in Florida and
              elsewhere in the United States that will provide relevant data for revising and refining these
              preliminary guidelines. These initiatives include spiked sediment bioassays, field surveys of
              sediment toxicity, and the development of sediment quality criteria that explicitly consider
              the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants. In the long-term, refinement of the
              guidelines will provide a means of ensuring broader applicability and utility within the state.







                                                              -6-


                                                          Chapter 2

                                        Florida's Coast: A National Treasure






               2-0     Introduction


               Of all the states and provinces in continental North America, Florida is the most intimately
               linked with the sea. The entire state lies within the coastal plain, with a maximum elevation
               of about 120 meters above sea level, and no part of the state is more than 100 km from the
               Atlantic Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico (Webb 1990). With the exception of Alaska, Florida
               has the longest coastline of any state in the United -States, with open estuaries and tidal
               wetlands that cover vast areas (Livingston 1990). These unique characteristics shape
               Florida's environmental identity and underscore the importance of employing relevant tools
               in coastal protection decision-making processes.

               Tle State of Florida relies on its coastal waters to provide a variety of economic and social
               benefits to state residents and visitors, alike. Coastal ecosystems in Florida (including
               marine, near-shore, and estuarine environments) support a variety of sport and commercial
               fisheries which contribute significantly to the state economy. Indeed, Florida ranks as one
               of the leading commercial fishing states in terms of the value of its annual fish catch, with
               shrimp, lobsters, and scallops being the most important fisheries. Marine environments
               within the state also provide essential transportation links, support a variety of water-
               dependent facilities, and offer a diverse array of unique recreational opportunities that
               attract millions of visitors to the state each year.



               21      Physical Features of Florida's Coast

               Florida has one of the most extensive coastlines in the United States. The marine coastline
               in the state spans almost 2,200 km, with a tidal shoreline that covers over .13,000 km
               (NOAA 1975). Florida's coastal systems are unique because this combination                      ' of
               climatological and physiographic features occur nowhere else in the world. Livingston
               (1990) suggested that essentially all of the inshore marine habitats in the state could be
               classifi&d as estuarine, primarily due to the prevalent influence of upland runoff in these
               areas. The Florida coastline is characterized by a variety of major embayments, marsh and
               mangrove systems that directly front the sea, and by numerous, partially enclosed, brackish
               water basins (Comp and Seaman 1985). A diversity of natural habitats are found within
               these areas, including seagrass beds, tidal flats, tidal marshes, soft sediments, hard substrates,
               shellfish beds, and a variety of transitional zones (Livingston 1990).







                                                          -7-


              The Atlantic  coast of Florida,  from the St. Mary's River to Biscayne Bay (560 km), is
              characterized by a high energy   shoreline with long stretches of continuous barrier islands
              (Comp and Seaman 1985). This region has few direct sources of freshwater inflow to the
              ocean and, as such, is marked by an extensive system of high salinity lagoons. The major
              estuaries on the Atlantic coast are the St. Johns River and Indian River estuaries and
              Biscayne Bay. Collectively, these estuaries cover a water surface area of almost 2,000 square
              kilometers.


              Excluding the Florida keys, the Gulf of Mexico coast of Florida extends some 1,350 krn from
              Florida Bay to Perdido Bay. In general, estuaries along the west coast are located behind
              low energy barrier islands or at the mouths of rivers that discharge into salt marshes or
              mangrove-fringed bays (Comp and Seaman 1985). NOAA (1990) identified a total of
              fourteen major estuaries along Florida's Gulf coast, covering an estuarine water surface area
              of more than 5,000 square kilometers.

              Coastal and estuarine sediments of Florida span a significant geocbemical range, from silica-,
              and aluminum-rich sediments of northeastern and northwestern Florida to carbonate-rich
              sediments of south Florida and the Florida Keys. The geochemistry of estuarine sediments
              in northern and central Florida reflects the siliceous, aluniftious composition of presently
              eroding uplands of the southeastern United States. In contrast, calcium carbonate-ricb
              coastal sediments of Florida Bay and the Florida Keys are formed as the remains of the
              diverse subtropical marine flora and fauna slowly accumulate in these estuarine waters. The
              remains of marine plants and animals create virtually all of the sediment volume in this part
              .of Florida, with a minor terrestrial sediment input fromriverine and salt marsh systems such
              as the Everglades.


              22    BiokSwxd Features of Florida's Coast

              The brackish water habitats that ring the Florida mainland are vital to the natural plant and
              animal communities that are present in the state. Florida's coastal environments are
              comprised of myriad salt marshes, mangrove forests, and open water communities that
              support a diverse array of aquatic and terrestrial organisms (Comp and Seaman       1985).

              The salt marshes- of Florida, which cover approximately 170,000 ha of land, -a    .re coastal
              ecosystems with communities of non-woody, salt-tolerant plants occupying intertidal zones
              that are occasionally or periodically inundated with salt water (Montague and Wiegert 1990).
              These areas provide such beneficial features as sediment stabilization, storm protection,
              aesthetic values, and wildlife habitat. The rate of primary productivity in salt marshes is
              among the highest of the world's ecosystems. This productivity forms the basis of aquatic
              and terrestrial food webs that include many unique and economically important plant and
              animal species.

              Estuaries are dominant features along the Florida coastline. Estuaries are among the most
              productive natural systems and their role in sustaining the health and abundance of marine
              fishes, shellfish, and wildlife has long been recognized (NOAA 1990). The importance of







                                                           -8-


              estuarine habitats for marine fishes and invertebrates is emphasized by the fact that up to
              97.5% of the total commercial fisheries catch in the Gulf of Mexico is comprised of species
              that are dependant on estuaries during some portion of.their life cycle (Comp and Seaman
              1985).. The Gulf of Mexico coastline supports one of the most productive fisheries in the
              world, with shrimp, oysters, lobsters, scallops, clams, and menhaden being the most
              important commercial species. While the Atlantic coast is somewhat less important than
              the Gulf coast fisheries, substantial quantities of shrimp, crab, clams, and menhaden are
              harvested on an annual basis.

              In addition to diverse and abundant fisheries, Florida's coastal areas support a wide variety
              of plant and animal species. Wetland habitats are utilized by numerous species of wading
              birds, waterfowl, raptors, and a variety of mammalian species. All of these organisms are
              dependent, to greater or-lesser extent, on the productivity of Florida's coastal waters. In
              turn, the aquatic organisms that support the impressive communities of higher organisms are
              dependent on coastal sediments to provide feeding, spawning, and rearing habitats.



              23     Anthropogenic Influences on Florida's Coast

              Environmental management and pollution control issues affectin Florida's coast are not the
                                                                               ,9
              same as those affecting coastal areas in other portions of the United States. While there
              are many common issues, land uses in the state of Florida differ significantly from those in
              .other states. In the northeastern and northwestern portions of the United States coastal
              ecosystems are influenced by a preponderahce of point sources of pollution, primarily from
              municipal and industrial sources. For example, Hudson River/Raritan Bay (New York) and
              Chesapeake Bay (Virginia/Delaware) contain more point sources of pollution that any other
              estuarine areas in the nation (NOAA 1990). Similarly, areas like Puget Sound (Washington)
              and San Francisco Bay (California) are highly industrialized, with large quantities of
              effluents discharged into receiving water systems (NOAA 1990). In addition, these systems
              are often adjacent to older, highly populated cities, which exacerbates the stresses on coastal
              waters.


              Florida ranks fourth among states in terms of population, with nearly 13 million per    'sons in
              1990 (USDC 1990). This population is expected to increase by neatly 4% by the-year 1992
              (USDC 1990). Most of the'population of the state currently resides near the coast and
              population densities in these areas are predicted to increase by over 30% in the next 20
              years (Culliton et aL 1990). If these trends continue, inputs of contaminants to coastal
              waters due to the deposition of atmospheric pollutants and stormwater runoff from urban
              and suburban areas are likely to persist. Likewise, the capacity of municipal wastewater
              treatment plants will have to increase to accommodate the needs of the burgeoning
              population. Coastal waters may be used as receiving water systems for some of these
              discharges.

              Manufacturing has traditionally played a smaller role in the Florida economy than in the
              economy of other states (Fernald 1981). For this reason, Florida's coastal waters are not







                                                              9-


              severely influenced by industrial effluents. Nonetheless, Farrow (1990) indicated that 615
              billion gallons of industrial effluent were released into Florida's coastal waters in 1982. The
              sources of these effluents included the pesticides, organic chemicals and plastics industries,
              and a variety of other discharges (Farrow 1990). Of these, the pulp and paper industry in
              Florida may be of particular importance due to its significant discharges of toxic and
              bioaccumulative substances into coastal waters (Farrow 1989).

              Florida is second (after North Carolina) among southeastern states with respect to the
              economic value of its agricultural production (Fernald 1981) and is renowned for its
              production of citrus fruits. While Florida has an excellent climate for the culture of
              agricultural products, it is dominated by sandy soils with relatively low fertility (Ewel 1990).
              As such, maintenance of high rates of productivity necessitates the application of vast
              quantities of fertilizers and pesticides. The combination of high irrigation rates, high soil
              porosity, and low organic content in the soil enhances the potential for the mobilization of
              many agricultural chemicals. Overland or subsurface transport of many of these substances
              could ultimately lead to the contamination of coastal waters.

              While municipal, industrial and agricultural sources probably represent the major inputs of
              contaminants to coastal ecosystems, other sources of contamination in Florida's coastal
              waters may include leacbates from landfill sites, dredge and fill activities, and the operation
              of ships and pleasure craft. Together, anthropogenic influences in estuarine and nearshore
              marine environments represent a potential hazard to the health and integrity of coastal
              ecosystems. Ongoing monitoring of environmental conditions provides a means of assessing
              the nature and extent of environmental contamination and a basis for managing the valuable
              resources that currently exist in Florida's coastal ecosystems.



              24     Se&ment Quahty Ruies and Concerns

              ]Protection of natural resources has been identified as one of the most important goals in
              the management of Florida's coastal waters. In Florida, the natural resources that require
              protection include wetlands, floodplains, estuaries, beaches, dunes, barrier islands, coral
              reefs, and fish and wildlife. Habitats that support the production of fish and wildlife are of
              fundamental importance and have been identified as natural resources that require special
              consideration for protection and enhancement (Comp and Seaman 1985).

              Maintenance and enhancement of the diversity and abundance of biological resources in
              natural coastal ecosystems in Florida necessarily requires an integrated approach to
              environmental management. Effective implementation of an integrated environmental
              management system is dependant on the development of a comprehensive understanding
              of the fate and effects of environmental contaminants. While many, contaminants are
              released into the aqueous component of coastal ecosystems, not all of these substances
              dissolve easily in water. For instance, hydrophobic substances tend to adhere (or adsorb)
              to particulate matter that is suspended in the water column or that has been deposited on
              the bottom. This tendency for many toxic substances to form associations with sediments








                                                            10-



               can result in elevated concentrations of certain contaminants in bed sediments. Sediment-
               associated contaminants may represent an immediate hazard to ecosystem integrity by
               affecting aquatic organisms directly, or by limiting the use of those -resources by human
               consumers.


               Sediments contaminated with toxic substances have been found in coastal areas throughout
               the world. Bolton et aL (1985) reported that metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
               (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and DDT were chemicals of major concern at
               a number of marine and estuarine sites in America. A more recent evaluation, using data
               collected in the National Status and Trends Program (NSTP), has confirmed that bed
               sediments at sites within the Hudson-Raritan estuary, Boston Harbour, Long Island Sound,
               and San Francisco Bay are extremely contaminated with toxic substances (Long and Morgan
               1990).

               While concerns relative to the contamination of coastal sediments in the United States have
               been focused primarily in the northeast and on the west coast, the results of recent studies
               are beginning to indicate that sites in the southeast have also been affected by
               anthropogenic activities. For example, Long and Morgan (1990) reported that sites in
               Choctawhatchee Bay and St. Andrews Bay were highly contaminated with pesticides, metals,
               and PAHs (i.e., levels of contaminants in sediment equalled or exceeded the concentrations
               that were frequently or always associated with toxic effects). Polychlorinated biphenyls were
               also detected at potentially toxic levels in sediments from St. Andrews Bay. These
               contaminants were also detected at levels of concern at sites in Apalachicola Bay, Charlotte
               Harbour, Naples Bay, Pensacola Bay, Roockery Bay, St. John Rivers, and Tampa Bay. A
               more recent study (Long et aL 1991) indicated that a significant potential for adverse
               biological effects exists at a number of locations in Tampa Bay, based on comparisons of
               the concentrations of several metals and total PAHs to sediment quality assessment values.

               Sediment-associated contaminants have been associated with a wide range of impacts on the
               plants and animals that live within and upon bed sediments. Acute and, in some cases,
               chronic toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants to algae, invertebrates, fish, and other
               organisms have been measured in laboratory toxicity tests. However, field surveys have
               identified the more subtle effects of environmental contaminants, such as the development
               of tumors and other abnormalities in bottom feeding fish (Goyette et aL 1988; Malins et aL
               1985). In addition, these substances have the potential to accumulate inthe tissuesof fish
               and shellfish. At elevated levels, these contaminants represent hazards to sensitive wildlife
               species that rely on these Organisms for food. Further, bioaccumulation may result in
               impairments to human uses of the coastal ecosystem. In many areas of North America,
               health departments have advised residents to limit their consumption of seafood. For
               example, the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Service and the Florida
               Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (Mercury Technical Committee 1991;
               issues a health advisory on consumption of shark meat based on mercury levels in samples
               of sharks obtained in retail markets. In addition, observations of elevated mercury levels
               in Florida freshwater fish have resulted in the issuance of health advisories that
               recommended avoidance of fish consumption in specified state waterbodies.









               25     Sediment Quality. An Indicator of Ecosystem Health

               While evaluations of sediment quality are often used to address site-specific management
               needs, sediment quality is also used as a sensitive indicator of overall environmental quality.
               Sediments influence the environmental fate of many toxic and bioaccumulative substances
               in aquatic ecosystems. As such, sediments integrate contaminant inputs over time and may
               also represent long-term sources of contamination. In addition to the physical and chemical
               relationships between sediments and contaminants, sediments are of fundamental
               importance to benthic communities in terms of providing suitable habitats for essential
               biological processes (such as, spawning, incubation, rearing, etc.). Therefore, sediments
               provide an essential link between chemical and biological processes. By examining and
               developing an understanding of this link, environmental scientists can develop assessment
               tools and conduct monitoring programs that enable them to make rapid and accurate
               evaluations of the state of the environment and the health of aquatic ecosystems.







                                                                         12-


                                                                   Chapter 3

                                                       An Evaluation of Existing
                                                Approac    'hes to Developing Numerical
                                                     Sediment Quality Guidelines




                  3.0      Introduction

                  A variety of approaches have been devised.to formulate sediment quality guidelines (SQGs).
                  These approaches have been reviewed and summarized by Chapman (1989), Persaud et-al.
                  (1989), Beak (1987 and 1988), Environmental Protection Agency (1989a and 1989b),
                  Sediment Criteria Subcommittee (1989; 1990), and MacDonald et al. (1991). The discussion
                  on the major approaches to the development of SQGs has been abstracted from these
                  documents to provide a basis for recommending an appropriate procedure for Florida. The
                  major approaches to the development of SQGs are:

                           (i)     Sediment Background Approach (SBA);
                           (ii)    Spiked Sediment Bioassay Approach (SSBA);
                           (iii)   Equilibrium Partitioning Approach, (EqPA);
                           (iv)    Tissue Residue Approach (TRA);
                           (v)     Screening Level -Concentration Approach (SLCA);
                           (vi)    Sediment Quality Triad Approach (SQTA);
                           (vii)   Apparent Effects Threshold Approach (AETA); and,
                           (viii)  National Status and Trends Program Approach (NSTPA).

                  The discussion on each of the approaches has been divided into four main sections;
                  including a brief description of the methodology, the major advantages and limitations of
                  the approach, and the current uses          -of the approach. All of the approaches identified are.
                  directly applicable to the derivation of numerical SQGs. However, there are other
                  procedures which are focused on si-.ie-specific assessment of sediment quality (e.g., the
                  International Joint Commission sediment assessment strategy, bentbic community structure
                  assessments, etc.). These latter procedures are described by Environmental, Protection
                  Agency (1989a) and MacDonald et al. (1991).



                  3.1      Sediment BacA;ground Approach (SBA)

                  In this approach, sediment contaminant concentrations at a site (or a sedimentary stratum)
                  that is being assessed are compared to the concentrations of these contaminants at sites that
                  are considered to be representative of background (natural) conditions. Alternatively,
                  historical records for a specific site or, more appropriately, data from sediment core profiles
                  may be used to define background levels of specific contaminants. Using this approach, a







                                                                13-



               site would be considered to be contaminated if the concentration of one or more
               contaminants exceeds the mean background concentration by a significant margin (e.g., one
               standard deviation or more). Application of this approach requires special care in choosing
               the location of sampling stations, in sample preparation, in sample analysis methodology,
               and in quality assurance/ quality control (QA/QC).

               The major advantage of this approach lies in its simplicity. It relies on measurements that
               can be made easily in most analytical laboratories, it provides a simple means of comparing
               monitoring program results with the guidelines (i.e., it yields chemical concentration values),
               it is specific to conditions at the site, it does not have extensive data requirements, and it
               does not require toxicity testing.

               The major limitation of this approach is that no direct biological effects or bioavailability
               data are used in the derivation of guidelines. In addition, this approach applies primarily
               to major and trace elements, for which natural background concentrations can be identified
               from sediment core samples. The background concentrations of anthropogenically-derived
               organic contaminants should be zero, although it is well established that detectable
               concentrations of many of these contaminants occur due to the long range transport of
               atmospheric pollutants. While SOGs may be established at contemporary background levels,
               it is not clear whether or not these guidelines would be protective of aquatic biota.

               This approach has been used successfully at a number of locations in the United States and
               elsewhere in the world. In the Great Lakes, this approach was used by EPA Region V to
               Aevelop a classification system for harbors (SAIC 1991) and to assess the applicability of
               SQGs for evaluating open-water disposal 4f dredged materials (Persaud and Wilkins 1976;
               Mudroch et al. 1986; 1988). Similarly, this approach has been used by the United States
               Geological Survey, EPA Region VI, Texas Water Quality Board, Virginia Water Control
               Board, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, and several other agencies to establish
               informal guidelines for determining whether sediment contaminant concentrations exceed'
               'normal' levels (SAIC 1991).

               Background levels of naturally-occurring substa     nces vary significantly between areas. For
               this reason, SQGs developed using this approach -specifically apply only to the areas that
               were considered in their development. However, the Florida Department of Environmental
               Regulation (Schropp et. al. 1990) and others (e.g., Loring 1991) have developed unique
               applications of the sediment background approach which improve its overall utility. 'These
               applications rely on normalization of metals levels to the concentration of a reference
               element, such as aluminum or lithium. Statistical analysis of data from numerous
               uncontaminated sites provides a means of establishing background levels of metals under
               a variety on conditions and, as such, a basis for identifying sites with anthropog        .enically-
               enriched levels of metals. The SBA alone is not sufficient for formulation of toxicity-based
               SQG values, but data on background concentrations of specific contaminants provides
               critical information for assessing the applicability of SQGs developed using other approaches
               and for formulating site-specific sediment quality objectives.







                                                              14 -



               3.2    Spiked-Sediment Bioassay Approach (SSBA)

               This approach to generating SQGs relies on empirically generated information on the
               responses of test organisms to specific contaminant challenges under laboratory conditions.
               In this procedure, clean sediments are spiked with known concentrations of contaminants
               to establish definitive cause and effect relationships between chemicals and biological
               responses (i.e., mortality, reductions in growth or reproduction, physiological changes, etc.).
               Chemicals can be tested alone or in combination to determine the effects of various
               concentrations of contaminants in sediment. Numerical SQGs may be derived using this
               app.roach by applying a safety factor to the lowest observed effect level (Smith and
               MacDonald 1992) or by using other appropriate means.

               The major advantage of this method is that it is suitable for all classes of chemicals and
               most types of sediments. In addition, it has the capability to produce precise dose-response
               data pertaining to toxic chemicals, and can account for factors that control the bioavailabi'lity
               of these substances, such as total organic carbon and acid volatile sulphide. Application of
               this procedure facilitates unequivocal determination of causal effects (EPA 1990). As such,
               guidelines derived using spiked-sediment bioassay data are highly defensible.

               The major disadvantage associated with the implementation of this method for deriving
               SQGs for Florida is that spiked-sediment bioassays have only been conducted on a few
               species with only a limited number of substances. (i.e., cadmium, copper, a few pesticides,
               and a number of PAHs). Therefore, the existing database would support the derivation of
               numerical SQGs for only a few contaminants. Significant expansion of this database (i.e.,
               to include the range of substances that are expected to occur in coastal sediments) will
               require substantial resources and these are not likely to be available to state agencies. In
               addition, uncertainties associated with spiking procedures, equilibration periods, and factors
               controlling the bioavailability of the substances limit the interpretation of the results of
               spiked-sediment bioassays.

               The SSBA has been used successfully with various types of sediments, generally for single
               contaminants or relatively simple mixtures of contaminants (e.g., Cairns et al. 1984; McLeese
               and Metcalfe 1980; Swartz et al. 1986, 1988, 1989). Environment Canada has recently
               developed a formal protocol for developing SQGs from the results of spiked7sediment
               bioassays (MacDonald and Smith 1991). This procedure is currently under review and is
               scheduled for implementation in 1992 (Smith and MacDonald 1992).

               In addition to its role in the derivation of numerical SQGs, data developed using this
               approach are fundamental for evaluating the applicability of guidelines that have been
               developed using other approaches. For example, EPA (1992) used spiked-sediment bioassay
               data to evaluate the applicability of the sediment quality criteria that have been developed
               for fluoranthene. Likewise, Outridge et al. (1992) evaluated the applicability of SQGs for
               cadmium derived using the weight-of-evidence approach (Smith and MacDonald 1992) with
               data from spiked-sediment bioassays.







                                                            15 -



              3.3    E qu&brium Palitioning Approach (EqPA)

              The water-sediment EqPA has been one of the most studied and evaluated approaches used
              to develop SQGs (primarily for non-polar hydrophobic organic chemicals) in the United
              States (Pavlou and Weston 1983; Bolton ef al. 1985; Kadeg et al. 1986; Pavlou 1987; Di Toro
              et al. 1991). This approach is based on the assumption that the distribution of contaminants
              among different compartments in the sediment matrix (i.e., sediment solids and interstitial
              water) is predictable based on their physical and chemical properties and assumes. that
              continuous equilibrium exchange between sediment and interstitial water occurs. This
              approach has been supported by the results of sediment toxicity tests, which indicate that
              positive correlations exist between the biological effects observed and the concentrations of
              contaminants measured in the interstitial water.

              In the EqPA, water quality criteria developed for the protection of marine orgamsms are
              used as the basis of the SQGs [termed sediment quality criteria (SQC) by the EPA]
              derivation process. As such, the water quality criteria formulated for the protection of water
              column species are assumed to be applicable to benthic organisms (Di Toro et al. 1991).
              Sediment quality guidelines are calculated using the appropriate water quality criteria
              (usually the marine final chronic values) in conjunction with the sediment/water partition
              coefficients for the specific contaminants. The calculation procedure for non-ionic organic
              contaminants is as follows:


                                    SQG           Kp - FCV

                     where:
                                    SQG           Sediment quality guideline (in Ag/kg)
                                    Kp            Partition coefficient for the chemical (in L/kg)
                                    FCV           Final Chronic Value (FCV; in tLgIL)

              Currently, this procedure is considered to be appropriate for deriving SQC for non-iomic
              organic substances, such a's  polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; polychlorinated benzenes,
              biphenyls, dioxins, and furans; and most pesticides (EPA 1991). For these substances, total
              organic carbon (TOC) normalization appears to provide a reliable basis for predicting
              toxicity to aquatic organisms (Swartz et al. 1990). In addition, the role of acid:volatile
              sulfide (AVS) in determining the bioavailability of metals is also under investigation
              (Di Toro et al. 1989), and efforts are currently under way to establish normalization
              procedures for this class of chemical as well (Di Toro et al. 1992). Di Toro et al. (1991)
              have also noted that porewater dissolved organic carbon (DOC) levels may influence the
              bioavailability of hydrophobic compounds, however, the nature of this relationship has not
              been fully established.

              One of the principal advantages of this approach is that it is applicable to a wide variety of
              aquatic systems because it considers the site-specific environmental variables that control
              the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants (i.e., TOC and AVS). In addition,
              this approach is practical for implementation with a broad suite of substances because it
              requires only existing water quality criteria and contaminant sediment/water partition







                                                               16-


               coefficients to support the derivation of SOC. Confidence in the validity of this approach
               is further enhanced because the EqP theory upon which this approach is based is. well
               developed, it has already been used in various regulatory and remedial action applications,
               and it provides a consistent basis for identifying the severity of sediment contamination
               (EPA 1989a).

               However, there are a number of limitations to this approach which may restrict its
               applicability for deriving numerical SQC. Specifically, SQC developed using the EqPA do
               not explicitly address possible synergistic, antagonistic or additive effects of contaminants.
               In addition, the technical basis for developing sediment quality criteria for metals is still
               under development. Further, the interim sediment quality criteria for non-ionic chemicals
               apply only to sediments that have significant organic carbon contents (@: 0.5 percent), yet the
               relationship between toxicity of fluoranthene and TOC levels has only been quantitatively
               established at low levels of TOC (i.e., < 0.5%; Swartz et al. 1990).

               Other disadvantages of the EqPA are related to limitations on the av          ailability of water
               quality criteria (i.e., FAVs and FCVs) for some substances and of. reliable partition
               coefficients for many priority contaminants. While water quality criteria exist for many
               contaminants, criteria for several important substances (e.g., dioxins and furans) are
               currently not available. In addition, application of the interim sediment quality criteria has
               been restricted by uncertainty in the estimates of partition coefficients for certain substances.
               For example, the 95 % confidence interval associated with tb e k. of endrin spans more than
               two orders of magnitude (EPA 1991). This variability in the estimate of the partition
               -coefficient generates considerable uncertainty in any SOC is derived using these data.
               Further, in situ sediments are seldom, if ever, at equilibrium and are likely to achieve steady
               state conditions only rarely. Several other limitations of the approach were identified by Di
               Toro et al. (1991), all of which are considered to restrict the applicaiion of SQC developed
               using the EqPA (Sediment Criteria Subcommittee 1989).

               Nonetheless the EqPA has been selected by the EPA as a primary basis for deriving
               sediment quality assessment values. As such, the EPA has expended considerable effort in
               the development of the technical basis of the approach (Di Toro et al. 1991). While the
               initial review by the Science Advisory Board (SAB) was not very positive (Sediment Criteria
               Subcommittee 1989), the EqPA is scheduled for a subsequent review sometime in 1992. It
               is anticipated that this presentation to the SAB will focus on the aggressive field. v ;a['idation
               program and the formalized framework for the application of the SOC that have been or
               are currently being developed (EPA 1991). This approach has been used primarily in the
               United States, however, the applicability of the approach for deriving SQGs has also been
               evaluated by several other jurisdictions [i.e., Canada (MacDonald et al. 1991), Ontario
               (Persaud et al. 1990) and the Netherlands (Van Der Ko&ij et al. 1991)].



               34     TLYsue Rmdue Approach (TRA)

               The TRA (which is also known as the biota-water-sediment equilibrium partitioning
               approach) involves the establishment of safe sediment concentrations for individual








                                                          - 17-



              chemicals or classes of chemicals by determining the chemical concentrations in sediments
              that are predicted to result in acceptable tissue residues. This process necessitates the
              development of relationships between concentrations of contaminants in sediments and
              contamina'nt residue levels in aquatic biota. In addition, relationships between contaminant
              residues in aquatic biota and adverse effects on consumers of these species must be
              established. Several methods are available to derive guidelines for levels of contaminants
              in the edible tissues of aquatic biota (see MacDonald 1991).

              The principal advantage of this approach lies in its simplicity. Sediment quality guidelines
              may be derived directly from tissue residue guidelines for the protection of human health
              or wildlife consumers of aquatic biota, if acceptable bioaccumulation factors (BAFs) are
              available. The other main advantage of this approach is that it explicitly considers the
              potential for bioaccumulation of persistent toxic substances.

              The chief disadvantage of this approach, apart from those cited for the EqPA, is that tissue
              residue guidelines for the protection of wildlife have not been developed and residue-based
              dose-response relationships have not been established for most contaminants (EPA 1989a).
              Therefore, SQGs must be developed from tissue residue guidelines applicable to the
              protection of human health. While guidelines, so developed, would adequately address
              human health concerns, other components of the ecosystem (e.g., marine mammals with high
              daily consumption rates of aquatic organisms) may not be adequately protected. - Recently,
              a protocol for the derivation of numerical tissue. residue guidelines for the protection of
              wildlife has been developed (MacDonald and Walker 1992) and tissue residue guidelines
              jor dioxins and furans are currently being derived (MacDonald et al. In preparation).

              This approach has been used on several occasions to develop water quality guidelines for
              the protection of human health (most notably for DDT, Hg, and PCBs). In addition,
              sediment contamination limits for 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (T4CDD) have been.
              established for Lake Ontario on the basis of fish tissue residues (Endicott et al. 1989; Cook
              et al. 1989). The applicability of this approach to the derivation of SQGs is supported by
              data which demonstrate that declines in DDT residues in fish and birds (since its use was
              banned) are strongly correlated with declining concentrations of this substance in surficial
              sediments in the Great Lakes and Southern California Bight. As such, this approach is a
              logical companion for the EqPA described previously.




              3.5    Screening Level Concen&ation Approach (SLCA)

              The SLCA (Neff et al. 1986) is a biological effects-based approach that is applicable to the
              development of SQGs for the protection of benthic organisms. This approach utilizes
              matching biological and chemistry data collected in field surveys to calculate a screening
              level concentration (SLQ. The SLC is an estimate of the highest concentration of a
              contaminant that can be tolerated by a pre-defined proportion of benthic infaunal species.







                                                            18-


              The SLC is determined     through the use   of a database that contains information on the
              concentration of specific contaminants in sediments and on the occurrence of benthic
              organisms in the same sediments. First, for each benthic organism for which adequate data
              are available a species screening level concentration (SSLC) is calculated. The SSLC is
              determined by plotting the frequency distribution of the contaminant concentrations over
              all of the sites at which the species occurs (information from at least ten sites is required
              to calculate a SSLQ. The 90th percentile of this distribution is taken as the SSLC for the
              species being investigated. The SSLCs for all of the species, for which adequate data are
              available, are compiled as a frequency distribution to determine the concentration that 95%
              of the species can tolerate (i.e., the 5th percentile of the distribution). This concentration
              is termed the screening level concentration of the contaminant.

              The advantages of the SLCA include its versatility and reliance on information which is
              generally available. It can be used to develop guidelines for virtually any contaminant for
              which analytical methods are currently available. Furthermore, SLCs are based on specific
              effects on a variety of organisms that are resident in marine environments. Therefore, SLCs
              can be adapted to local conditions by including only data on resident species.

              The SLCA relies heavily on a number of assumptions that may limit its applicability for
              SQG derivation. First, this approach assumes that the distribution of benthic organisms is
              related primarily to the levels of the contaminant measured in the sediments. The effects
              of other factors, including unmeasured contaminants, habitat composition (i.e., grain size,
              water current velocity, salinity gradient, etc.), and interspecific interactions are not
              -considered explicitly. However, some of these may be accounted for in the data analysis.
              Second, the approach assumes that adverse biological effects of a contaminant are
              manifested only by the absence of species from a particular site. Information on
              dose/response relationships, which may be assembled using data on population levels or
              sublethal effects, are largely ignored. Furthermore, the SLCA assumes that the available.
              database includ@@s concentrations of the contaminant over the full range of tolerance of the
              species.

              Another major limitation of the SLCA is that it is not possible to establish a direct
              cause/effect relationship between any one contaminant and the benthic biota. Since single
              contaminants are rarely present in field situations, observed effects (presence or absences
              of biota) are almost always dependant on the entire mixture of chemicals. Therefore, SLCs
              are based on associations between chemical concentrations and biological effects. In
              addition, sampling procedures may selectively bias the results of the analysis (e.g., dredge
              sampling may be biased towards sessile species).

              Additional limitations of the SLCA are largely related to the magnitude of its information
              requirements. Calculation of a SLC requires information on contaminant concentrations
              in sediments from at least ten sites (some scientists suggest that twenty is more appropriate;
              e.g., Chapman 1989) and on the distribution of at least twenty species, collected
              simultaneously. For many contaminants, these data may not be available. Therefore,
              development of SQGs could require the design and implementation of a potentially costly
              data collection program. The SLC calculated for a particular contaminant is highly







                                                               19-


               dependent on the quality and quantity of data available. Assessment of the database is
               difficult without a priori information on the sensitivities of affected species. Therefore, it
               is difficult to determine how much confidence can be placed on the resultant SLC.

               Neff et al. (1986) originally developed the SLCA to derive numerical SQC for non-pola            -r
               organic contaminants in freshwater and marine sediments in the United States. The values
               for marine sediments were subsequently recalculated using a database that had been further
               verified to eliminate questionable data (Neff et al. 1987). While this approach appeared
               promising during its developmental stages, it has not been utilized to any significant extent
               in recent years. However, Ontario (Persaud et al. 1990) has developed a procedure for
               deriving numerical SQGs that relies on the strengths of this approach (i.e., lowest effect and
               severe effect levels are derived). Using this procedure, Ontario has developed provincial
               SQGs for 10 metals (Jaagumagi 1990a), PCBs, and 9 organochlorine pesticides (Jaagumagi
               1990b).



               3.6    Sediment Quality Triad Approach (SQTA)

               The SQTA was originally developed as a too] to support site-specific assessments of
               sediment quality (Long and Chapman 1985; Long 1989).                However, the information
               collected in support of the SQTA has also been- used as a basis for the development of
               SQGs (Chapman 1986). The SQTA to the development of SQGs is based on
               correspondences between three measures: sediment chemistry, sediment- bioassays, and in
               situ biological effects. Data on sediment cliernistry and other (physical) characteristics are
               collected to assess the level of contamination at a particular site and to document other
               factors that could influence the distribution and abundance of benthic species. The results
               of sediment bioassays provide information that may be used to evaluate the toxicity of the.
               contaminants that are present in bed sediments. Measures of in situ biological effects, such
               as benthic infaunal community structure and histopathological abnormalities in ben'thic fish
               species, provide information on alterations of resident communities that may be related to
               sediment chemistry. Integration of these three components provides comprehensive
               information which may be used to evaluate and rank the relative priority of the areas that
               have been surveyed. Also, they can be used to formulate , site-specific sediment . quality
               objectives. A., procedure has not yet been proposed for developing SQGs that would be
               applicable on a regional or national basis.

               The major advantage of the sediment quality triad approach is that it integrates the data
               generated from the three separate measurements, and thereby, facilitates the differentiation
               of the natural variability in biotic characteristics from the variability due to the toxic effects
               of environmental contaminants. For example, variability in benthic community composition
               may be due to the presence of contaminants in sediments or it may be related to differences
               in other aspects of habitat quality (i.e., grain size). The triad approach provides a basis for
               distinguishing these effects; however, it cannot be used to establish cause and effect
               relationships. The other advantages of this approach are that it may be used for any
               measured contaminant, it may include both acute and chronic effects, and it does not








                                                               _20-



                require information on the specific mechanisms of interaction between organisms and toxic
                contaminants. The integration of the three data types provides a weight-of-evidence
                approach to guidelines development.

                The major limitations of the SQTA are as follows (Chapman 1989): statistical criteria have
                not been developed for use with the triad; rigorous criteria for determining single indices
                for each of the separate measurements have not been developed; a large database is
                required; it is generally used to develop guidelines for single chemicals, and as such the
                results can be strongly influenced by the presence of unmeasured toxic contaminants that
                may or may not co-vary with the measured chemicals; sample collection, analysis, and
                interpretation is labour-intensive and costly; and, the choice of a reference site is often made
                without adequate information on how degraded the site may be. In addition, the SQTA
                does not expliditly consider the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants. Further,
                the SQTA mainly considers data from acute toxicity bioassays and, therefore, sub-acute and
                chronic effects may not be identified.

                The SQTA was not initially intended to be a method for developing SQGs. Rather, the
                procedure was designed to be a practical tool to support specific assessments of sediment
                quality. In this context, the SQTA has been used to identify priority areas for remedial
                action, to determine the size of the areas that require remedial action, to verify the quality
                of reference sites, to determine contaminant concentrations that are always associated with
                effects on aquatic biota, and to describe ecological relationships between the characteristics
                of bottom sediments and biota that may be at risk (EPA 1989a). The sediment quality triad
                approach has been used primarily in Puget Sound, but it has been also used in the Great
                Lakes, in Vancouver Harbour, in San Fr"cisco Bay, and in the Gulf of Mexico.



                3.7 Apparent Effects Threshold Approach (AETA)

                The AETA to the development of SQGs was developed by Tetra Tech Inc. (1986) for use
                in the Puget Sound area of Washington State. The AETA is based on relationships between
                measured concentrations of a contaminant in sediments and observed biological effects,
                mainly on benthic organisms. The practical, goal of this procedure is to define the
                concentration of a contaminant in sediment above which significant (p':s 0.05) bio          'logical
                effects are always observed. These biological effects include, but are not limited to, toxicity
                to benthic and/or water column species (as measured using sediment toxicity bioassays),
                changes in the abundance of various species, and changes in benthic community structure.

                The AETA is similar in many ways to the SLCA, since both rely on matching biological
                effects and sediment chemistry data. However, the AETA may be more appropriate for the
                development of SQGs than the SLCA because it considers diverse and sensitive measures
                of biological effects. The AET values are based on dry-weight-normalized contaminant
                concentrations for metals and either dry-weight or total organic carbon normalized
                concentrations for   'organic substances (Barrick et al. 1988; Washington Department of
                Ecology 1990a).







                                                           -21 -


              One of the principle advantages of the AETA is associated with its capability to utilize a
              wide variety of observations of biological effects from field surveys and the results of
              sediment toxicity bioassays conducted in the laboratory. As such, AETs may be derived for
              each of the - areas, species, and biological effects that have been considered in an
              investigation. Like the SLCA, it can be used to develop guidelines for virtually any
              contaminant for which analytical methods are currently available. In Puget Sound, AETs
              have been demonstrated to provide relevant and precise tools for predicting the biological
              effects that are associated with elevated levels of sediment-associated contaminants..

              One of the major limitations of the AETA is its requirement for detailed site-specific
              information with which to relate concentrations of sediment-associated sediments to specific
              biological effects. This type of database is currently available only for Puget Sound, some
              areas in California, several locations along the Atlantic coast, and the Great Lakes.
              Implementation of this approach in other areas, where these data are not available, would
              require an extensive data collection program.

              Like the other approaches that rely on the analysis of matched sediment chemistry and
              biological effects data, the AETA does not provide definitive cause and effects relationships.
              Evaluation of the data is based on establishing associations between contaminant
              concentrations and biological effects. This characteristic of the approach resu,lts in some
              uncertainty in the resultant SQGs.

              Another disadvantage of the AETA is that there i    s a substantial risk of under-protection of
              biological resources if the AET is used directly as the SQG. The principle reason for this
              is that because the AET defines the conceAtration of a contaminant above which biological
              effects are always observed. Unlike the other approaches to       .the dev elopment of SQGs,
              AETs can only increase or remain the same as new information is added to the database.
              This characteristic of the AETA increases the risk of under-protecting aquatic resources.
              This limitation may be minimized by defining AETs for each species tested and endpoine
              measured.


              In addition to the potential to be under-protective, AETs may also be overly-protective of
              aquatic resources (i.e., overly restrictive) under some circumstances. This situation may
              occur when the substance under consideration consistently co-varies with other substances
              which are actually responsible for the observed effect. This situation is most likely to occur
              when AETs are generated using data from a specific geographic area in which the substance
              under consideration is present at each of the sites tested (e.g., DDT in Puget Sound).

              This approach has been used extensively in Washington State by the.Puget Sound Dredged
              Disposal Analysis Program for the evaluation of sediments that were to be dredged and
              disposed of by ocean dumping. In addition, AETs have been used to assess the effects of
              the disposal of contaminated sediments at dumps site in that area (Puget Sound Dredged
              Disposal Analysis 1989). Recently, the Washington Department of Ecology (1990)
              established marine sediment management standards using the AETA.. These legally-
              enforceable standards are designed to establish long-term goals for sediment quality, to
              manage inputs of toxic substances into coastal waters, and to provide a basis for identifying
              contaminated sites and appropriate cleanup levels.







                                                          -22-



              Following a comprehensive evaluation, the Science Advisory Board (SAB; Sediment Criteria
              Subcommittee 1989) indicated that the AETA is relevant and appropriate for the derivation
              of site-specific SQGs, such as the Puget Sound AETs. However, the SAB also
              recommended that the AETA should not be used to develop general, nationally applicable
              SQGs.




              38     National Status and TrendsPrograrn Approach (NSTPA)

              The NST?A to the derivation of SQGs (Long and Morgan 1990) was developed to provide
              informal tools to assess the potential for biological effects of sediment-associated
              contaminants tested in the National Status and Trends Program (NSTP, NOAA). Long and
              Morgan (1990) compiled a database containing information generated by the three groups
              of approaches to the establishment of effects-based SQGs: the EqPA, the spiked-sediment
              toxicity approach, and various approaches that rely on the evaluation of matching sediment
              chemistry and biological effects data [i.e., co-occurrence approaches (AET, SLC, SOT)]. All
              of the information in the database was weighted equally, regardless of the method that was
              used to develop it. The objective of this assessment was to identify informal guidelines with
              which to evaluate coastal sediment chemistry data collected nationwide under the NSTR

              Candidate data sets were screened to evaluate their applicability for incorporation into the
              database. This screening procedure was designed to evaluate the overall applicability of the
              data set (i.e., presence of matching sediment chemistry and biological effects data), the
              methods that were used, the type and magnitude of the end-point measured, and the degree
              of concordance between the chemical and biological data. Data which showed no
              concordance between chemical and biological variableswere incorporated into the database,
              but were not used in the statistical evaluation of the information.

              The data which passed the screening tests were incorporated into the database. lpdividual
              entries consisted of the concentration of the contaminant, the type of biological response
              measured (usually specifying the location of the test as well), and an indication of whether
              or not there was concordance between the observed effect and the concentrations of a
              specific chemical (i.e., no effect, no or small gradient, no concordance, or a "hit", which
              indicated that an effect was measured). Data from non-toxic or unaffected samples were
              assumed to represent background conditions. Data points were identified for which a
              biological effect was observed in association with elevated chemical concentrations. These
              latter dgLta points were sorted in ascending order of concentrations and the lower 10th and
              50th percentile concentrations for each compound were determined. The effects range-low
              (ER-L; 10th percentile value) was considered to represent a lower threshold value, above
              which adverse effects on sensitive life stages and/or species began. - The effects range-
              median (ER-M; 50th percentile value) was considered to represent a second threshold value,
              abave which adverse effects on most species were frequently or always observed. These two
              parameters, ER-L and ER-M, were then used as informal SQGs.








                                                           _23-



               One of the most important advantages of NSTTA is that it provides a weight of evidence
               approach to the assessment of sediment quality. In addition, it provides a framework for
               assessing sediment quality by providing summaries of the data that relate concentrations of
               sediment-associated contaminants to specific biological effects. The other main advantages
               of this approach are that it can be employed with existing data (no additional field work or
               laboratory investigations are required), all of the available data generated in the United
               States using the various approaches described above were compiled, and the database is
               expandable to encompass data that have been collected in other jurisdictions. Further, the
               accuracy (or degree of confidence) of each value could be identified based on an evaluation
               of the agreement among the available data. Lastly, the approach facilitates the
               identification of ranges of contaminant concentrations which provide a means of determining
               the probability of observing adverse biological effects at a given contaminant concentration.

               The main limitation of this approach is associated with the quality and compatibility of the
               available data. In many cases, the data were generated using different analytical procedures
               in numerous laboratories and considered many species, endpoints, and locations across the
               United States. For this reason, information on a wide variety of sediment types (i.e., with
               different particle sizes and concentrations of substances that influence bioavailability) were
               combined, and this may have resulted in unknown bia      ses. This amalgamation of the data
               may have resulted in the interpretation of responses as being attributable to a single
               contaminant when, in fact, synergistic and/or additive effects were actually driving the
               response. For substances for which only a moderate amount of data exists,@'* only -acute
               toxicity data are represented (as is the case for many chemicals), it is possible that
               inappropriate guidelines could be derived. Furthermore, the compilation and evaluation of
               the data was very labour-intensive andrequired sound knowledge of sediment chemistry and
               biology.

               The database evaluated in Long and Morgan (1990) consists of information generated at.
               numerous locations around the United States. The authors felt that the degree of
               confidence in the ER-L and ER-M values should be considered moderate for metals and
               PCBs, and low for pesticides and PAHs. They felt that, although the compiled database was
               fairly extensive, much more data was needed to support or refute this approach for all
               groups of chemicals, for individual analytes within the groups, and for all types of sediments.



               3.9 Summary

               A tot al of eight distinct approaches to the derivation of numerical SQGs were investigated
               to identify an appropriate procedure for implementation in Florida. The strengths and
               limitations of each of these approaches are summarized in Table 1. This summary
               evaluation indicated that no single approach is likely to support the derivation of SQGs
               under all circumstances. Therefore, each of these approaches were further evaluated to
               assess the degree to which they responded to Florida's unique requirements for SQGs. The
               results of this evaluation were u sed to develop a strategy for the derivation of numerical
               SQGs for coastal waters (Chapter 4).








           Table 1. Summary of the strengths and limitations of the                 oaches to the derivation of numerical sediment quality
                                                                       various appr
                     assessment guidelines.



           Approach                                 Strengths                                                 Limitations


           SBA                       Sufficcnt data are generally available.                       Not based on biological effects.

           SSBA                            Based on biological effects.                       Sufficient data are not generally available.,
                               Suitable for all classes of chemicals and most types                Implementation coasts are high.
                                                  of sediments.                             Spiking procedures are not yet standardized.
                                     Supports cause and effect evaluations.

           EqPA                            Based on biological effects.                 Few sediment quality criteria are currently available.
                               Suitable for all classes of chemicals and most types       Water quality criteria are not available for some
                                                  of sediments.                                               substances.
                                          Bioavailability is considered.                      In situ sediments are rarely at equilibrium.
                              EPA will support research to validate this approach'.
                                     Supports cause and effect evaluations.

           TRA                                   Simple to apply.                          Tissue residue guidelines for wildlife are not yet
                                         Bioaccumulation is considered.                                        available.
                               A protocol for the derivation of TRGs is available.            In situ sediments are rarely at equilibrium.

           SLCA                            Based on biological effects.                Not possible to establish cause and effect relationships.
                                     Sufficient data are generally available.                         Large database is required.
                               Suitable for all classes of chemicals and most types                  End point used is insensitive.
                                                  of sediments.                                    Bioavailability is not considered






          Table 1. Summary of the strengths and limitations of the various approaches to the derivation of numerical sediment quality
                   assessment guidelines (continued).


          Approach                                 Strengths                                                Limitations

          SQTA                            Based on biological effects.                         Difficult to derive numerical SQGs.
                               Chemistry, bioassay and in situ biological effects                Labour intensive and expensive.
                                                are integrated.                       Statistical criteria for evaluating TRLAD have not been
                                        Provides a weight of evidence.                                      established.
                                                                                            Extensive site-specific database is required.
                                                                                      Not possible to establish cause and effect relationships.
                                                                                                 Bioavailability is not considered.
          AETA                            Based on biological effects.                      Extensive site-specific database is required.
                                  All types of biological data are considered.        Not possible to establish cause and effect relationships.
                              Suitable for all classes of chemicals and most types        Risk of under- or over- protection of resource.
                                                 of sediments.                         Not applicable to the derivation of broadly applicable
                                                                                                               SQGS.
                                                                                                  Bioavailability is not considered.
           NSTPA                          Based on biological effects.                               Large database is required.
                                  All types of biological data are considered.        Not possible to establish cause and effect relationships.
                              Suitable for all classes of chemicals and most types      Amalgamation of data from multiple sources could
                                                  of sediments.                               result in unknown biases in the database.
                                         Provides a weight of evidence.                           Bioavailability is not considered.
                               Provides data summaries for evaluating sediment
                                                     quality.
                                    May be implemented with existing data.








                                                          _26-


                                                       Chapter 4

                                     A Recommended Approach for Deriving
                                            and Validating Effects-Based
                              Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines in Florida





              4.0    Introduction

              The results of monitoring activities conducted in estuarine and coastal marine areas (FDER
              in preparation; Delfino et aL 1991; Long and Morgan 1990; Long et al. 1991) indicate that
              concentrations of sediment-associated contaminants are elevated at a number of locations
              throughout Florida. Techniques currently exist to determine the probable origin of many
              of these substances (i.e., natural vs. anthropogenic; Schropp and Windom 1988;. Schropp
              et aL 1989; Schropp et aL 1990), however additional information is required to evaluate the
              potential biological effects of these contaminants. Therefore, effects-based sediment quality
              assessment guidelines (SQAGs) are also required to support the identification of issues and
              concerns relative to contarninated sediments in Florida.


              To date, no effects-based SQAGs have been developed which are known to apply directly
              to conditions in Florida. While effects-based SOAGs have been developed specifically for
              a few regions of the country (i.e., in Puget Sound using apparent effects threshold approach;
              AETA), the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) has cautioned against using these
              guidelines outside the areas for which they were developed (Sediment Criteria
              Subcommittee 1989). The SAB has also questioned the validity of the sediment quality.
              criteria that are currently under development by EPA (i.e., using the equilibrium partitioning
              approach; EqPA). These evaluations by the SAB suggest that the SQAGs that are under
              development in other jurisdictions are not likely to address Florida's immediate
              requirements for sediment assessment tools.

              There is a pressing need for sediment quality assessment guidelines (SOAGs) to.. support
              environmental management decisions in Florida's coastal areas. In the absence of national
              or regional guidelines that could be adopted directly or adapted for use in Florida, new
              effects-based SQAGs must be developed. ne following discussion provides an overview
              of the recommended strategy for deriving and validating numerical SQAGs for Florida
              coastal waters and the rationale behind its selection.







                                                          _27-



              4.1 . Considerations for Recommending a StrateV for Deriving Sediment Quality Assessment
                      Guidelines for Florida Coastal Water@

              A total of eight approaches to the derivation of numerical SQAGs were identified and
              reviewed in Chapter 3. However, selection of an appropriate procedure for deriving
              guidelines for Florida coastal waters necessitates further evaluation of each of the
              approaches in light of the state's specific needs. As such, a number of criteria were
              established to provide an objective basis for evaluating the candidate approaches and
              selecting a relevant strategy for deriving these guidelines (Table 2). The primary
              considerations in the selection of the recommended strategy were related to practicality,
              cost-effectiveness, scientifically defensibility, and broad applicability to the assessment of
              sediment quality. Each of these factors are discussed below.

              Practicality is one of the central considerations with respect to the development of SQAGs.
              Numerical SQAGs must be functional (i.e., easy to use) and understandable if they are to
              be useful for assessing environmental quality. In addition, the immediate need for these
              assessment tools necessitates selection of an approach that can be implemented quickly.

              In Florida, limited resources are available to support'the development and implementation
              of SQAGs. Financial and personnel limitations placed on the current initiative make
              collection of a significant quantity of additional data improbable. Therefore, the approach
              must be able to develop numerical SQAGs with the data that are currently available. In
              addition, it must be amenable to re-evaluation as new data become available.

              For SQAGs to be effective in Florida, th4 must be effects-based (i.e., consider biological
              effects) and scientifically defensible. Key evaluation criteria for assessing the various
              approaches include their potential to consider the factors that control the bioavailability of
              sediment-associated contaminants, to establish cause and effect relationships, and to apply
              to all classes of chemicals and mixtures of contaminants that are expected to occur in -
              Florida. In addition, they must be compatible with other interpretive tools, such as the
              metals interpretive tool that has already been developed by FDER. Furthermore, it is
              desirable for candidate approaches to be able to explicitly consider data from Florida and
              elsewhere in the southeastern United States and provide a means of accounting for site-
              specific environmental conditions.

              Due to the inherent uncertainty associated with each of the candidate approaches, it would
              be advantageous if the guidelines supported the identification of ranges of contaminant
              concentrations which are predicted to be associated with specific biological effects. That is,
              the gui@elines should identify ranges of contaminant concentrations that have high,
              moderate, and low probabilities of being associated with adverse biological effects. The
              guidelines should also be supported by a weight of evidence provided by the available data.

              To be applicable to Florida, SQAGs must address 'the specific needs of the agencies that
              are charged with managing environmental quality. For example, SQAGs should be relevant
              to the design, implementation, and evaluation of environmental quality monitoring programs
              by contributing to the identification of the contaminants and sites that are likely to be










                Table 2. Evaluation of the approaches to the derivation of sediment quality assessment guidelines.


                Evaluation Criteria                                    SBA           SSTA          EqPA            TRA         SLCA          SQTA         AETA        NSTPA



                   Practicality
                Supports development of numerical SQGs?                  Y             Y             Y              Y             Y             Y            Y           Y
                Feasible to implement in the near term?                  Y             N            Y/N             N           Y/N             N            N           Y 

                   Cost Effectiveness
                Expensive to implement?                                  N             Y             N              Y             Y             Y          Y          N
                Requires generation of new data?                         N             Y             N              Y             Y             Y          Y          N 

                   Scientific Defensibility
                Considers bioavailability?                               N             Y             Y              Y             N             N          Y/N        Y/N
                Provides cause and effect relationships?                 N             Y             Y              N           Y/N           Y/N          Y/N        Y/N
                Based on biological effects data?                        N             Y             Y             Y/N            Y             Y           Y          Y
                Considers data from South East?                          Y             N             N              N             N             N           N         Y/N 
                Provides weight of evidence?                             N           Y/N            Y/N             N             N             Y           Y          Y
                Support definition of ranges of concentrations
                 rather than absolute assessment values                  N             N             N              N             N             N           N          Y 
                Considers mixtures of contaminants?                      N             N             N              N             Y             Y           Y          Y
                Requires field validation?                             Y             Y             Y              Y             Y             Y             Y           Y
                Considers site-specific conditions?                    Y/N           Y/N            N              N             N            Y             Y           N
                Applicable to all classes of chemicals?                 Y             N             Y              Y             Y            Y             Y          

                   Applicability
                Supports monitoring programs?                          Y/N             Y             Y              Y             Y             Y          Y            Y  
                Supports problem identification?                       Y/N             Y             Y             Y/N            Y             Y          Y            Y
                Supports regulatory programs?                            N             Y            Y/N             N           Y/N            Y/N         Y           Y/N


                OveraLL assessment                                       *            ***           ****           **            **            ***         ***         ****


                  =poor;     =fair;        =good;         =excellent
                                             -28-







                                                           _29-


               associated with adverse biological -effects. This would help to identify the need for further
               investigations at sites with concentrations of specific contaminants that exceed the SQAGs.
               Guidelines should also support the identification of areas that are most in need of
               remediation; however, they would not necessarily be used to establish clean-up levels.
               Furthermore, guidelines should contribute to regulatory programs by helping to evaluate
               source control measures and/or the need for further biological and chemical testing to
               support regulatory decisions.



               4.2    A Recommended Strategy for Deriving Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment
                      Guidelines forHorida Coastal Waters

               Ideally, SQAGs should be developed from detailed dose-response data which describe the
               acute and chronic toxicity of individual contaminants to sensitive life stages of resident
               species of aquatic organisms. These data should be generated in controlled laboratory
               studies, in. which the influences of important environmental variables (such as TOC, AVS,
               salinity, and others) are identified and quantified and compared to the values predicted by
               appropriate models (e.g., EqP models). Finally, the results of these studies should then be
               validated in field trials to ensure that any guidelines derived from these data are applicable
               to a broad range of locations. A detailed understanding of the factors that influence toxicity
               would also support site-specific sediment quality assessments by providing a basis for
               evaluating the applicability of the preliminary guidelines and, if necessary, modifying the
               -guidelines.

               Unfortunately, insufficient data are currently available to support the derivation of
               numerical SQAGs using the ideal approach. Currently, only a limited number of controlled
               laboratory studies (i.e., spiked-sediment bioassays) have been conducted to assess the effects.
               of sediment-associated contaminants on estuarine and marine organisms (Long and Morgan
               1990). However, in spite of this obvious limitation, other types of data are routinely
               collected which contribute to our understanding of the toxic effects of these contaminants.
               Specifically, a wide variety of whole sediment toxicity tests have been conducted to assess
               the biological significance of concentrations of contaminants in sediments from specific
               geographic locations. These toxicity tests include those performed on benthic organisms
               (bivalve mollusks, shrimp, amphipods, polychaetes, nematodes, chironomi& and. other
               arthropods, etc.) and on pelagic organisms [Daphnia, oyster larvae, luminescent bacteria
               (Microtox), etc.]. Furthermore, numerous field studies have been conducted to assess the
               diversity and abundance of benthic infaunal species (bivalve mollusks, arthropods,
               amphipods, etc.) and epibenthic organisms (echinoderms, crustaceans, etc.). For many of
               these studies, matching data on the concentrations of contaminants in these sediments have
               also been collected. Studies which report matching sediment chemistry and biological
               effects data provide information which is highly relevant to the SOGs derivation process.

               In recommending a suitable strategy for the derivation of SOAGs for Florida, it is important
               to explicitly recognize the limitations of the existing database for evaluating the potential
               biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants. In addition, the strategy must








                                                             -30-



               address both the immediate requirement for defensible SQAGs and the long-term
               requirement for increased reliability and applicability of these guidelines (i.e., guidelines that
               account for the environmental characteristics that influence the bioavailability of sediment-
               associated contaminants).

               Evaluation of each of the approaches to the derivation of SQAGs in the context of the
               specific requirements for the Florida coast (as expressed in Section 4.1) indicates that no
               single approach is likely to satisfy all of the immediate and long-term requirements for
               SQAGs (Table 2). For this reason, a strategy is recommended that places a priority on the
               immediate need for defensible SQAGs, while providing a framework for the revision or
               refinement of these values as the necessary data become available (Figure 1).

               The National Status and Trends Program Approach (NSTPA; Long and Morgan 1990; Long
               1992) provides a pragmatic means of generating scientifically defensible guidelines using
               data which are currently available. As such, this approach facilitates the immediate
               generation of preliminary SQAGs. However, several modifications (which are described in
               Chapter 5) to this approach are recommended to increase the applicability of the NSTPA
               to Florida. These modifications are designed to increase the quantity and suitability of data
               used to evaluate the biological significance of sediment-associated contaminants (i.e., to
               incorporate data from Florida and other southeastern areas and recent data from elsewhere
               in North America). In addition, the arithmetic procedure for deriving the guidelines has
               been refined to consider data from relatively uncontaminated areas. A detailed description
               and evaluation of the modified NSTPA w the derivation of SQAGs (hereafter referred to
               as the Weight-Of-Evidence Approach; WEA) is provided in Chapter 5.

               The preliminary SQAGs, derived using the WEA, will address Florida's immediate need for
               effects-based tools for assessing environmental quality. In addition to these guidehnes, the
               sediment quality criteria that are currently under development by EPA may provide further.
               guidance for identifying and managing contaminated sediments. As such, the EPA criteria
               should be fully evaluated to determine how they could contribute to the assessment and
               management of coastal sediment quality in Florida. In addition, EPA should be encouraged
               to conduct field validation studies to determine if the criteria apply directly to the types of
               sediment that occur in Florida coastal waters.




               4.3    Verification and Rejinement of Se&ment QuWay Assessment Guidehnes

               Evaluation of the eight candidate approaches (see Chapter 3) suggests that guidelines
               derived using the WEA are likely to provide useful tools for assessing the quality of coastal
               sediments. However, the direct applicability of these guidelines to Florida coastal waters,
               is uncertain. Therefore, additional data will be required to evaluate the applicability of, and
               if necessary, refine the guidelines for consistent use in Florida.

               Field validation of SQAGs derived using the WEA will require several types of data, which
               may be obtained froma variety of sources. First, data from spiked-sediment bioassays are








                                               _31-


         Figure 1. An overview of the recommended process for deriving numerical sediment quality
                 assessment guidelines in Florida.



                                             Collect
                                         Toxicological and
                                           Related Data






                                              V

                                       Assemble Data on the
                                       Biological Effects of
                                 PW_ Contaminants in Sediments





                                              V

                 Conduct                     Derive
                Site-Specific             Regional SOGs
               Investigations           (modified NSTPA)

                      ----------








                                              V

                                            Evaluate                Evaluate EPA
                                            Regional               Sediment Quality
                                             SOGs                  Criteria (EqPA)





                                              V


                                             Refine
                                            Regional
                                             SQGs







                                                          -32-


              required to determine how contaminants behave in different types of sediments. Ideally,
              these data would be generated in studies that investigate the toxicity of various substances
              in several types of Florida sediment (ranging from biogenically-derived to terrigenous
              sediments). Second, data from field studies conducted in locations with strong gradients in
              the concentrations of individual contaminants or classes of contaminants in sediments are
              required. These studies would include investigations of the toxicity of bulk sediments to
              resident species and of the benthic community characteristics at these sites. Both of these
              latter investigations would benefit from toxicity identification evaluations to identify the
              contaminant(s) that are responsible for any observed effects (Ankley 1989).

              Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) recognizes the importance of
              validating the preliminary SQAGs and has initiated investigations to obtain the required
              information. For example, an initial survey of sediment toxicity in Tampa Bay was
              conducted in 1991, in cooperation with NOAA. A second survey is scheduled for
              implementation in 1992. The Department has also designed a number of companion
              investigations (e.g., spiked-sediment bioassays and benthic invertebrate community
              evaluations) which may be implemented in cooperation with NOAA and EPA.

              In addition to FDER initiatives, there are several other potential sources of data for
              validating the preliminary SQAGs. For example, EPA is currently developing national
              sediment quality criteria for priority contaminants using the EqPA_ Interim sediment quality
              criteria for numerous substances have been developed using this approach (Bolton et aL
              1985; Lyman et aL 1987; Pavlou 1987; Pavlou et aL 1987). However, due to the uncertainty
              .associated with the estimates of partitioning coefficients (K,,. and K,) and the applicability
              of interim criteria, EPA is planning to conduct an extensive research program to validate
              these criteria in field and laboratory trials. Similar research is being conducted by various
              researchers throughout the country. Together, these studies will provide much of the data
              necessary for evaluating the applicability of the preliminary SQAGs, and for modifying the.
              SQAGs if necessary.

              A variety of refinements to the preliminary SQAGs are possible, depending on the results
              of field validation studies. One of the most likely refinements will involve expression in the
              guidelines in terms of factor(s) that are demonstrated to influence the toxicity (i.e.,
              bioavailability) of the substance under consideration. For example, guidelines for non-ionic
              organic chemicals are likely to be expressed in terms of sediment TOC content,. while
              guidelines for some metals'may be expressed in terms of AVS content or some other
              normalizing factor. Verification and refinement of the preliminary SQAGs will significantly
              increase confidence in their applicability and enhance their role in the sediment quality
              assessment process.







                                                           _33-



                                                       Chapter 5

                     Derivation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines
                                       for Florida Coastal Waters Using the
                                           Weight-Of-Evidence Approach




              5.0    Introduction

              The National Status and Trends Program Approach (NSTPA; Long and Morgan 1990) has
              been identified as a central component of the immediate and long-term strategies for the
              development of sediment quality assessment guidelines (SQAGs) for Florida coastal waters.
              This approach relies on the collection, evaluation, collation and analysis of data from a wide
              variety of sources in the United States to establish relationships between concentrations of
              sediment-associated contaminants and the potential for adverse biological effects. . A
              modified version of the NSTPA (termed the weight-of-evidence approach; WEA) is
              recommended for deriving numerical sediment quality assessment guidelines (SQAGs) in
              the near-term. In the longer-term, the applicability of the preliminary guidelines to Florida
              coastal sediments should be evaluated through the implementation of a well-designed field
              validation program.



              51     Modification of the National Status and Trends Program Approach for Use in the
                     Derivation of Sediment Quality Assessment Guidefines for Florida

              The WEA was selected to derive preliminary SQAGs due to its practicality for developing -
              guidelines quickly, its limited requirement for additional resources, its overall scientific
              defensibility, and its applicability to all aspects of sediment., quality assessment. This
              approach is closely related to the NSTPA, however, a number of modifications were
              implemented to increase the relevance of the resultant guidelines to Florida coastal
              sediments. Specifically, the modifications to the NSTPA are designed to increase the level
              of internal consistency  in the database (by establishing additional screening qTiteria), to
              verify and expand the information contained in the original NSTP database, and to utilize
              all of the information in the database to derive SQAGs (in contrast, only data which had
              concordance between sediment chemistry and biological effects were used to derive the
              informil NSTP guidelines). In addition, user access to the information from individual
              studies has been improved by providing expanded data tables.


              5. LI Procedures and Criteria for Screening Candidate Data Sets

              The WEA is designed to integrate a diverse assortment of data to support the derivation
              of numerical SOAGs. As such, data from spiked-sediment bioassays, sediment toxicity







                                                          -34-



              bioassays, and assessments of benthic invertebrate community characteristics were merged,
              along with the sediment quality assessment values developed in other jurisdictions (e.g.,
              Puget Sound AETs, SQC derived using the EqPA, etc.) into a single database. These data
              were fully evaluated prior to inclusion to assure internal consistency in the database.

              The screening procedures used to support the development of this database were designed
              to ensure that only high quality data is used to derive SQAGs for Florida. The screening
              criteria used to evaluate spiked-sediment bioassay data and other matching sediment
              chemistry and biological effects data (i.e., co-occurrence data) are described in Appendix 1.
              These screening criteria were established to evaluate the acceptability of the experimental
              design, test protocols, analytical methods, and statistical procedures used in each study. To
              ensure internal consistency in the database, only those studies that met these screening
              criteria were considered appropriate for inclusion in the database. The sediment quality
              assessment values that have been derived by other jurisdictions were either incorporated
              directly into the database (if the concentrations of contaminants were originally expressed
              on a dry weight basis) or converted to concentrations expressed on a dry weight basis at 1%
              total organic carbon (TOC; if the assessment values were originally expressed on a TOC
              basis). Conversion of contaminant levels to dry weight concentrations at 1% TOC was
              considered to provide relatively conservative assessment values for entry into the database.


              5.1.2 Fxpansion of the National Status and Trends Program Database

              -One of the principal limitations of the original NSTP database on the biological effects of
              sediment-associated contaminants, with respect to the derivation of SQAGs for Florida, is
              its bias toward data derived from studies in the northeastern and western coastal areas.of
              the United States. At the time the original database was assembled, few data were included
              on the biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants from sites located in the
              southeastern United States. Therefore, collection of acceptable data from Florida and other,
              areas in the southeast was considered to be a priority in the present study.

              To addre  ss the need for additional information on the biological effects of sediment-
              associated contaminants in general, and from sites in the southeastern United States in
              particular, a major initiative was undertaken to expand the original NSTP database. The
              first stage of the database expansion process involved identification and retrieval of
              candidate data sets from sites located in the southeastern United States. To this end,
              investigators in the field of sediment quality assessment located in the Gulf coast and
              southerp Atlantic coast states were contacted and asked to identify studies they had
              conducted or participated in which contained matching sediment chemistry and biological
              effects data. Data sets were requested if the descriptions of these studies indicated that the
              data were. likely to be acceptable. In addition, these investigators were asked to provide
              additional contacts who might be able to supply additional data relevant to the expansion
              of the database. Contacts in the southeast included representatives from U.S.
              Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of
              Environmental Regulation (FDER), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine
              Fisheries Service, various academic institutions, and regionally-based consulting firms.







                                                          -35


              Significant effort was also expended to obtain additional data from other locations in the
              United States and Canada. In addition to the agencies identified above, contacts were made
              at Washington Department of Ecology, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality,
              California State Water Resources Control Board, Maryland Department of Environment,
              Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Environment Canada, Public Works Canada,
              and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

              Over the course of this study, more than 300 publications were retrieved and evaluated to
              determine their suitability for use in the derivation of SQAGs. Nearly 90 of these
              publications were used to verify and expand the original NSTP database. Roughly 25% of
              the publications that were used in the present study were from studies conducted in the
              southeastern and Gulf of Mexico regions portion of the United States (i.e., North and South
              Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas).

              Each of the data sets obtained during the course of the study were thoroughly reviewed and
              evaluated using the screening procedures outlined in Appendix 1. Acceptable data sets were
              subsequ .ently analyzed and information pertaining to the potential biological effects of
              sediment-associated contaminants was integrated into the database. 'Following input into
              the database, every data entry (including each of the original NSTP database entries) was
              examined and verified against the original data source. This quality assurance procedure
              was designed to ensure that the database would meet Florida's requirements for consistently
              high quality data. This comprehensive, high quality sediment toxicity database provides a
              basis for the derivation of preliminary SQAGs for priority substances in Florida.



              52     Derivation of Numencal Sediment Qualay Assessment Guidelines

              The expanded NSTP database consists of information from three types of studies, including
              equilibrium partitioning modelling, laboratory spiked-sediment bioassays, and field
              investigations of sediment toxicity and benthic community composition. Equilibrium
              partitioning concentrations, if expressed in units of organic carbon, were converted to units
              of dry weight assuming a total organic carbon concentration of 1.0%. Data from spiked-
              sediment bioassays were incorporated into the database directly. Field-collected data were
              treated with a variety of methods. Apparent effects thresholds (AET) and:national
              screening level concentrations (SAC), both of which were based on evaluations of large,
              merged data sets, were entered directly into the NSTP database. Raw data from other
              individual surveys were evaluated using co-occurrence analyses, using one of two procedures
              (Long 1992). If the authors of the reports identified samples that were statistically
              significantly different from the other groups of samples or were different from controls, then
              the mean chemical concentrations in the statistical groups were compared. If no such
              comparisons were reported, the frequency distributions of the biological data and the mean
              concentrations in subjectively determined groups of samples were compared (e.g., relatively
              highly toxic versus least toxic). Data entries were prepared for each endpoint measured in
              the study (e.g., survival, growth, reproduction, etc.), so that multiple entries for a single
              geographic area are common in the database.







                                                            -36-



               The expanded NSTP database is a comprehensive source of information on the potential
               effects of sediment-associated contaminants. Each record in the database contains detailed
               information on the location of the study, the species affected, the endpoint measured, the
               particle size distribution, the factors that could affect bioavailability of the contaminants
               (such as TOC and AVS), and the concentrations of the contaminants, if these data were
               available. Importantly, each entry in the database was assigned an 'effects/no effects'
               descriptor, based on the degree of concordance between the concent      'ration of the chemical
               and the endpoint measured in the investigation. Those entries in which the chemical
               concentrations were considered to be associated with the biological effect measured were
               designated with an asterisk (*; see MacDonald et al. 1992). The descriptors, 'no gradient
               (NE), small gradient (SG), no concordance (NQ, or no effect (NE)', were assigned when
               either the chemical concentrations were not strongly associated with the biological effect
               measured or no adverse effects were observed (see below). The data on each substance
               were then sorted, in ascending order of concentration, to create two separate data sets,
               which incorporated the entries associated with biological effects and the entries associated
               with no observed biological effects, respectively.

               The 'biological effects data set' (BEDS) was comprised primarily of information from co-
               occurrence analyses (COA) in which specific adverse biological effects (as indicated from
               the results of sediment toxicity bioassays or benthic invertebrate community assessments)
               were observed at some of the sites sampled. However, results of the COA             'were only
               included in the biological effects data set if concordance between the concentration of the
               chemical analyte and the observed biological response was apparent. In this respect, a
               contaminant was considered to be associated with the observed toxic response if the mean
               concentration at the sites at which significant biological effects were observed was a factor
               of two or more greater than the mean concentration at the sites at which no biological
               effects were observed (this criterion was adopted directly from Long and Morgan 1990).
               Data obtained from other types of studies (i.e., spiked-sediment bioassays) and sediment
               quality assessment values (i.e., from the SLCA, EqPA, SQTA, etc.) were also included irf
               the biological effects data set.

               A separate data set was also established, the 'no biological effects data set'(NBEDS), to
               include the balance of the data assembled over the course of the study. Several,types of
               information were included in this data set. In general, these entries consisted of data from
               bioassays in which exposure of aquatic organisms to test sediments did not 'result in
               significant biological effects (i.e., no effect; NE). In addition, the descriptors, 'no gradient
               (NG), small gradient (SG), or no concordance (NC),'were assigned when no differences in
               the concentration of a particular chemical were reported between stations, the mean
               chemical concentrations between groups of samples differed by less than a factor of two, or
               there was no concordance between the severity of the effect and the chemical concentration.
               Data from field surveys of benthic invertebrate community indices were designated in a
               similar manner. Indeterminate ABET values were reported in the data tables (MacDonald
               et aL 1992) but were not included in either data set.

               Both the biological effects and no biological effects data sets were used to derive numerical
               sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters (Figure 2). The arithmetic procedures








                                                      -37-


          Figure 2. An overview of the modified NSTPA to the derivation of numerical sediment quality
                    assessment guidelines in Florida.


                                    Expanded
                                      NST?
                                    Database








                                Assemble Effects
                                 and No Effects
                                    Data Sets






                                      V

                                    Generate
                                    Ascending
                                  Data Tables









                               Are the Miruimum                          Identify Data
                                    Data Set             No            Gaps and Expand
                              Requirements Met?                            Database


                                        Yes


                                      V


                                     Derive
                                     SQGs
                               (NOEL and PEL)







                                                           -38-


              used in the guidelines derivation process were designed to define three distinct      ranges of
              contaminant concentrations; a no effects range, a possible effects range, and a        probable
              effects range. A conceptual representation of three ranges of contaminant concentrations
              defined by the guidelines is provided in Figure 3. This figure illustrates the concept that the
              probability of observing adverse biological effects increases with increasing contaminant
              co ncentration.


              The range of sediment contaminant concentrations that are not likely to be associated.with
              adverse biological effects on aquatic organisms (i.e., the no effects range) was defined using
              a two step process. First, a threshold effects level (TEL) was calculated. The TEL is
              considered to represent the upper limit of the range on sediment contaminant
              concentrations that is dominated by no effects data entries. The TEL was calculated as
              follows:


                                            TEL             BEDS-L - NBEDS-M


                     where:
                                    TEL                   Threshold Effect Level
                                    BEDS-L                15th percentile concentration in the
                                                          biological effects data set;
                                    NBEDS-M               50th percentile concentration in the . no
                                                          biological effects data set.


              The geometric mean,of BEDS-L and NBtDS-M is calculated because these data are not,
              necessarily, normally distributed. Application of a safety factor. to lowest observed effect
              levels is commonly recommended to account for the extended exposures to toxic substances,
              contaminant mixtures, and other factors that could affect the toxicity of a substance to
              aquatic organisms in the field (e.g., EPA 1972; Kenaga 1982; CCME 1991). Therefore, a'
              safety factor was applied to the TEL to estimate a no observed effect level (NOEL) for each
              contaminant as follows:


                                    NOEL                  TEL -* SF


                     where:
                                    NOEL'                 No Observed Effect Level
                                    SF                    Safety Factor = 2

              A safety factor of two was selected    to convert the TELs to NOELs based on a previous
              analysis of the ratios of ER-L to ER-M values for various substances (Long and Morgan
              1990). Application of this safety factor was considered to provide a pragmatic means of
              compensating for the limitations on the database with respect to the dearth of chronic
              toxicity data. As such, the NOEL is considered to represent the upper limit of the no effects
              range of contaminant concentrations. Within this range, concentrations of sediment-
              associated contaminants are not, considered to represent significant hazards to aquatic
              organisms.











                                            Figure 3.       Conceptual example of sediment quality assessment guidelines for cadmium.


                              Probability of Adverse Biological Effects





                      0.8            No Effects Range                             Possible Effects Range                           Probable Effects Range




                      0.6                                                                                                       PEL
                                                           NOEL                                                                                                                                                                           W





                      0.4.






                      0.2



                          0                                                            T@L

                            0.1                                                                                            10                                            100                                            1000

                                                                                               Chemical Concentration (mg/kg dry weight)







                                                            -40-


               A probable effects level (PEL) was also calculated to define the lower limit of the r   -ange of
               contaminant concentrations that are usually or always associated with adverse biological
               effects (i.e., the lower limit of the probable effects range). The procedure utilized to
               calculate the PEL is designed to define a range of concentrations that is dominated by
               entries from the BEDS. Within the probable effects range, concentrations of sediment-
               associated contaminants are considered to represent significant and immediate hazards to
               aquatic organisms. The PEL was calculated as follows:

                                      PEL                    BEDS-M - NBEDS-H


                      where:
                                      PEL                  Probable Effects Level
                                      BEDS-M               50th percentile concentration in the
                                                           biological effects data set;
                                      NBEDS-H              8'5th percentile concentration in the no
                                                           biological effects data set.

               The range of concentrations that could, potentially, be associated with bi ological effects (i.e.,
               the possible effects range) is delineated by the NOEL (lower limit) and the PEL (upper
               limit). Within this range of concentrations, adverse biological effects are possible, however,
               it is difficult to reliably predict the occurrence, nature, and/or severity of these'effects on
               an a priori basis. Site-specific conditions at sites with contaminant concentrations within this
               range are likely to control the expression of toxic effects. When contaminant concentrations
             Jall within this range, further investigation is recommended to determine if sediment-
               associated contaminants represent significant hazards to aquatic organisms. Such
               investigations would focus first on the determination of the probable origin of the
               contaminant (i.e., through the use of the metals interpretive tool; Schropp et al 1989), and
               then on the toxicity of in situ sediments (i.e., using bioassessment techniques), as required.
               See Chapter 8 for a more complete discussion). It should be noted that guidelirws, developed
               using the recommended procedures, do not address the potential for bioaccumulation of
               per=ent taxic chemicals and potential adverse effects on higher trophic levels of the food chauL


               53     Rationale for the Recommended Guidelvies Derivation Procedure

               There are a wide variety of procedures that could be used to derive numerical SQ     AGs fro mi
               the expanded NSTP database. For example, Long and Morgan (1990) utilized the 10th
               (ER-L) and 50th (ER-M) percentile values in the biological effects data set only to establish
               informal guidelines for evaluating sediment chemistry data collected under the NSTP. This
               method was similar to the procedure used by Klapow and Lewis (1979) to establish marine
               water quality standards in Ca  'lifornia. A major advantage of the procedure used by Long
               and Morgan (1990) is that it supports the establishment of three distinct ranges of chemical
               concentrations. However, only data from the BEDS were used in the calculation. As such,
               a large quantity of relevant information was not utilized in the guidelines derivation process.








                                                            -41


               The recommended procedure for deriving numerical SQAGs described above is generally
               based on the approach used by Long and Morgan (1990). However, this procedure was
               modified to incorporate the information contained in both BEDS and NBEDS. The
               recommended procedure is designed to provide a consistent basis for estimating the
               concentrations of specific contaminants in sediment that are rarely or never, occasionally,
               and usually or always associated with adverse biological effects. As such, three ranges of
               contaminant concentrations may be defined; a no effects range, a possible effects range, and
               a probable effects range.

               The arithmetic procedures for deriving the guidelines were designed to define ranges of
               concentrations with specific ratios of effects to no effects data entries. For example, the
               PEL is designed to delineate the lower limit of , the range of concentrations which is
               dominated by data entries that are associated with adverse biological effects (i.e., a'hit rate'
               of approximately 75% was considered to fulfil this narrative objective). If there were a total
               of 100 entries in each of the data sets, then the PEL would define the lower limit of a range
               of concentrations within which there would be, on average 50 entries from the BEDS and
               15 entries from the NBEDS. This is predicted to be the case because the PEL is calculated
               as the geometric mean of the 50th percentile of the effects data set and 85th percentile of
               the NBEDS. The geometric mean is used in this calculation to account for uncertainty in
               the distributions of the data sets (Sokal and Rohlf 1991). The 'hit rate' within this range
               of concentrations would be, on average, 50165 or 77%. This predicted 'hit. rate' was
               considered to fulfil the narrative description of the probable effects range. The no effects
               range of contaminant concentrations was defined in a similar manner. However, a safety
               factor was applied to the T`EL to provide an extra margin of safety since the database used
               to calculate the guidehnes was biased tow@rds acute toxicity data.

               There is a great deal of variability in the quantity of information available for each
               chemical, ranging from less than five data entries for 2,3,7,8-T4CDD to several hundred data
               entries for cadmium. Due to the uncertainty associated with the evaluation of matchinj
               sediment chemistry and BEDS, a minimum quantity of data is required to support the
               derivation of SQAGs. Minimum data requirements were established to ensure that any
               guidelines developed are supported by the weight of evidence that links contaminant
               concentrations to biological effects. To adhere to this principle, SQAGs were derived only
               for those contaminants which had at least 20 entries in both the effects and no effects data
               sets.


               The specific number of studies required to support the derivation of preliminary SQA     Gs was
               established based on the results of sequential calculations of guidelines for a total of four
               substances (cadmium, chromium, fluoranthene, and PCBs) using data sets of various sizes.
               Using the guideline derivation procedure described above, guidelines were sequentially
               calculated using randomly selected data sets of various sizes (ranging from 2 to 30 data
               entries). This procedure was repeated 10 times for each chemical to support the calculation
               of the mean guideline value and its standard deviation for each data set size. The results
               of this investigation indicated that the estimate of the guideline value stabilized when the
               data set contained 15 to 20 entries. The variability in this estimate was not significantly







                                                           -42-



              reduced over the range of 20 to 30 entries. Therefore, it was concluded that at least 20
              entries from each data set were required to support the derivation of SQAGs.



              5.4    Strengths and Weaknesses of the Recommended Approach for Developing Sediment
                     Quality Assessmenj Guidelines

              The WEA approach is recommended for the derivation of preliminary SQAGs for sediment-
              associated contaminants. However, a critical evaluation of the approach is required to
              assess its relevance to envirorimental protection decision-making activities in Florida coastal
              waters. The following discussion provides a general critique of this approach in the context
              of Florida's requirements for numerical SQAGs.

              TI)e WEA is characterized by a number of attributes that make it an attractive choice for
              deriving SQAGs for Florida coastal waters. First, the approach is supported by a
              comprehensive database on the biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants.
              Interpretation of the information contained in the expanded NST? database provides
              relevant tools for evaluating the potential for biological effects at various contaminant
              concentrations. Such interpretations are supported by detailed summaries of a large volume
              of data linking contaminant concentrations to biological effects (MacDonald et. al. 1992).
              As such, the WEA provides a compelling rationale for placing a high degree of confidence
              on the resultant guidelines. Confidence in these data is enhanced by the rigorous screening
              procedures that were used to evaluate candidate data sets.

              Unlike other approaches to the development of SQAGs, the VVEA does not attempt to
              establish absolute sediment quality assessment values. Instead, the approach delineates
              ranges of contaminant concentrations that are probably, possibly, and not likely to be
              associated with adverse biological effects. This recognizes the uncertainty associated with'
              the prediction of biological effects from chemical concentration data and, therefore, the
              guidelines provide a defensible basis for identifying priority con6itions with respect to
              contaminated sediments.


              One of the more important attributes of the VVEA is its overall practicality. The, biological
              effects database for sediments supports the derivation of numerical SQAGs for a wide range
              of chemical substances. Many of these cbemicals are known to occur in Florida's coastal
              sediments at elevated levels. Sediment quality assessment guidelines are required to support
              assessments of the potential for biological effects in these sediments. In addition, by
              considering matching sediment chemistry and biological effects data from studies conducted
              in the field, the influence of mixtures of chemicals in sediments is incorporated in the
              resultant SQAGs. Further, the information in the expanded NSTP database is highly
              relevant to the guidelines derivation process because it applies to a wide range of biolooical
              organisms and endpoints, incorporates a large number of direct measurements on organisms
              that are normally associated with bed sediments, and includes a significant quantity of data
              from studies conducted in the southeastern United States (including Florida). These
              attributes are likely to give the SQAGs derived using the modified NSTP procedure broad







                                                             -43-


               applicability. As such, there is a high probability that these guidelines will be appropriate
               for implementation in Florida.

               In addition to the other advantages of the approach, the procedure recommended for
               calculating SQAGs considers both the BEDS and NBEDS for each chemical constituent.
               And, in contrast to the apparent effects threshold approach, this procedure does not rely
               heavily on individual data points. Therefore, outliers do not carry much weight in the
               overall guidelines derivation process.

               As indicated above, the expanded NSTP database supports the preparation of
               comprehensive data summaries that may also contribute significantly to the sediment quality
               assessment process. Integration of the effects and no effects data sets into a single data set
               facilitates the preparation of ascending data tables for each contaminant. These data tables
               provide detailed information on specific biological responses that have been observed at
               various concentrations of the contaminant. As such, these data tables provide useful tools
               for evaluating the potential biological significance of contaminant concentrations that fall
               within the three ranges described above (i.e., no effects, possible effects, and probable
               effects ranges). Many reviewers of the original NSTP document (Long and Morgan 1990)
               indicated that the data tables (with contaminant concentrations arranged in ascending order)
               were extremely useful tools for evaluating sediment quality data from specific sites (E. Long,
               NOAA, Seattle, Washington. Personal communication).

               In addition to supporting the derivation of numerical SQAGs, the expanded NSTP database
              -provides a basis for evaluating the preliminary guidelines. In this respect, it is possible to
               utilize the available data to calculate the di'stribution of effects and no effects entries within
               each range of contaminant concentrations (i.e., the no effect, possible effects, and probable
               effects ranges). These distributions describe the 'hit rate' (i.e., number of biological effects
               entries divided by the total number of entries) within each range of concentrations and, as
               such, provide an estimate of the probability of observing adverse biological effects when the
               concentration of a contaminant falls within a specific range or concentrations. For example,
               if the 'hit rate'within the probable effects range for cadmium was 68%, then there is a high
               likelihood that adverse biological effects would be observed at sites with concentrations of
               cadmium equalling or exceeding the PEL. This feature of the approach provides
               environmental managers with an additional tool for ranking the relative priority. of
               contaminated sediments.

               Lastly, the NSTPA has been extensively reviewed by experts from across North America.
               Over 1000 copies of the original publication (Long and Morgan 1990) have been distributed
               to date. In addition, it has recently been peer reviewed and published in a primary journal
               (Long 1992). Further, it has been selected for incorporation into the Sediment Classification
               Methods Compendium (EPA 1989a). Since its development in 1990, this approach has
               received positive evaluations from a wide variety of user groups and has been adopted
               directly and/or modified for implementation by both California (Lorenzato and Wilson,
               1991) and Canada (Smith and MacDonald 1992) as part of their guidelines derivation
               process. These favourable assessments emphasize the importance and utility of this
               procedure for deriving numerical SQAGs,








                                                           -44-



              In spite of the obvious benefits associated with the VYTA for deriving SQAGs, a number of
              limitations are also evident which could restrict application of these guidelines in Florida.
              The most serious of these shortcomings is associated with the limitations on the data that
              describe the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants. Ancillary data on grain
              size, levels of TOC, and concentrations of AVS were not provided in, most of the reports
              reviewed. As such, it is not currently possible to express the guidelines in terms of the
              factors that influence the bioavailability of these contaminants. The importance of
              addressing bioavailability is emphasized by the results of several spiked-sediment bioassays.
              For example, Swartz et aL (1987) demonstrated that there was a three-fold increase in the
              toxicity of fluoranthene to the amphipod, Rhepoxynius abronius, when sediment TOC levels
              decreased from 0.5% to 0.2%. While reliance on ranges of concentrations instead of
              absolute values and consideration of the no effect data set serves to minimize this limitation,
              a potential for significant under- or over- protection of aquatic resources exists if guidelines
              are implemented that do not consider the bioavailability of sediment-associated
              contaminants.


              Florida Department of Environmental Regulation recognizes the importance of accounting
              for the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants and has designed a field
              validation program to address this issue. In addition, FDER has developed a companion
              tool for use with the biological effects-based guidelines. The metals interpretive tool is
              based on normalizing metal levels to concentrations of aluminum in sediment, and provides
              a means of assessing the probable origin of sediment-associated metals (Schropp and
              Windom 1988; Schropp et aL 1989;.Schropp et aL 1990; see Chapter 8 for a description of
              -this tool). This tool emphasizes the importance of 'normalizers' in the interpretation of
              sediment chemistry data and provides a piactical tool that compliments the effects-based
              guidelines. A detailed discussion on how these tools may be used together to assess
              sediment quality is provided in Chapter 8.

              It is anticipated that the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants will be one of,
              the principal issues addressed during the refinement of the preliminary guidelines.
              Currently, there is little comprehensive information with which to reliably predict the
              bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants. When data were reported for TOC,
              AVS, grain size, and other potential normalizers, they were included in the expanded NSTP
              database. Unfortunately, only a small proportion of the investigations reported        '.data for
              these variables. However, there are a number of initiatives that are likely to be relevant to
              the refinement of the preliminary SQAGs in Florida. Specifically, EPA is currently        in the
              process of developing sediment quality criteria that explicitly consider the factors that are
              likely to affect the bioavailability of contaminants. For this reason, it is recommended that
              the EqP values (currently under development by EPA; Di Toro et aL 1991) be fully
              evaluated and considered for use in Florida. Data from other studies conducted in Florida
              and elsewhere may also contribute to the identification of factors that               influence
              bioavailability.

              Another limitation of the WEA is that it does not fully support the quantitative evaluation
              of cause and effect relationships between contaminant concentrations and              biological
              responses. Although information from spiked-sediment bioassays and EqP models is







                                                             -45 -



               included in the expanded NST? database, the recommended approach is considered to
               predict associations between contaminant concentrations and biological responses only. A
               wide variety of factors other than concentrations of the contaminant under consideration
               could have influenced the actual response observed in any given investigation. While the
               assembly of extensive information from numerous estuarine and marine sites across North
               America into a single database serves to minimize this limitation, there is still an undefined
               level of uncertainty associated with the resultant SQAGs.

               Application of the recommended approach may also be restricted by other limitations on
               the available information. Currently, only limited data exist on the chronic responses of
               marine and estuarine organisms to sediment-based contaminant challenges. In addition, the
               data from Florida and other areas in the southeast which link levels of contaminants to
               adverse biological effects are not overly abundant. Furthermore, only limited data are
               available on some potentially important sediment contaminants in Florida (including a
               variety of pesticides, dioxins and furans, etc.). T'his information shortfall impairs our ability
               to evaluate the overall applicability of the information to Florida.

               The results of this evaluation indicate that SQAGs developed using the recommended
               procedure are likely to be appropriate tools for conducting assessments of sediment quality
               in Florida. However, care should be exercised in applying these guidelines under some
               circumstances. In particular, these guidelines may not be directly applicable to sediments
               with atypical levels of the factors that influence the bioavailability of contaminants (e.g., very
               high or very low levels of TOC). Detailed discussions on the application of SQAGs in
              -regional and site-specific sediment quality assessments are provided in Chapters 7 and 8,
               respectively.







                                                          -46-


                                                       Chapter 6

                             Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines
                                            for Florida Coastal Waters




              60     Introduction


              In Florida the maintenance and enhancement of designated uses of coastal ecosystems is
              identified as a high priority environmental management goal. Realization of this
              management goal is dependent on the maintenance of acceptable environmental conditions
              for the living resources in estuarine, nearsbore, and marine ecosystems. While state water
              quality criteria provide effective tools for managing water quality, they provide little
              guidance on the management of sediment quality. Sediment quality assessment guidelines
              (SQAGs) are required to effectively address concerns relative to contamination of coastal
              ecosystems with substances that tend to associate with sediments. In particular, there is a
              need for guidelines that apply to the substances that are known or suspected to be contained
              in Florida coastal sediments.




              61     A Preh@nb,@ Evaluation of Priority Contaminana in Florida Coastal Waters

              Florida is not a highly industrialized state and, therefore, persistent and highly toxic
              contaminants are not likely to be distributed widely in its coastal zone. Nonetheless, various
              anthropogenic activities in the state do contribute significant quantities of environmental
              contaminants into coastal waters and sediments in the vicinity of major sources may be-
              severely contaminated. Concerns relative to the contamination of coastal ecosystems fall
              into four general categories (Hand et aL 1990); urban stormwater runoff, agricultural runoff,
              domestic wastewater, and industrial wastewater. Consideration of each of these potential
              sources of environmental contaminants provides a basis for developing a preliminary list of
              chemical concerns in the Florida coastal zone (Table 3).

              It would be virtually impossible to develop SQAGs for every substance that may be released
              in Florida coastal waters. For this reason, the evaluation of chemical concerns in Florida
              coastal.systems (Chapter 7) has been focused on the development of a list of priority
              substances (Table 3) known to be released in significant quantities into receiving water
              systems and to form associations with coastal sediments. These substances are considered
              to be of highest priority with respect to the development of numerical SQAGs applicable
              to Florida's coast.


              Stormwater runoff and associated contaminants are of particular concern in Florida. While
              nutrients and sediments are the most prevalent pollutants in urban stormwater, metals,
              PAHs, and other toxic substances may also be transported into receiving water systems by








                                                                        -47-


                  Table 3.     Preliminary identification of chemical concerns in Florida coastal waters.



                  Substance                                            Reference/Rationale



                           MetaLS

                  Arsenic                              Long et aL. (1991); FDER (in preparation).
                  Cadmium                              Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Chromium                             Long and Morgan (1990); Long eT al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Copper                               Used in aquatic herbicides/found in fish; Long et aL. (1991);
                                                       TefRey et aL (1983); Leslie (1990); FDER (In preparation).
                  Lead                                 Long and Morgan (1990); Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Mercury                              Long and Morgan (1990); Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Nickel                               Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Silver                               Long and Morgan (1990); FDER (In preparation).
                  Tributyltin                          Used as anantifoulant on ships.
                  Zinc                                 Long and Morgan (1990); Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).


                           POLyCYCLIC Aromatic HyDRocarbons (PAHs)
                  Acenaphthene                         Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Acenaphthylene                       Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Anthracene                           Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Benz(a)anthracene                    Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Benzo(a)pyrEne                       Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Chrysene                             Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene               Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino eT al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Fluorene                             Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Fluoranthene                         FDER (In preparation).
                  Napthalene                           Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  2-methylnapthalene                   Long and Morgan (1990).
                  Phenanthrene                         Long and Morgan (1990); DElfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Pyrene                               Long and Morgan (1990); Delfino et aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Total PAHs                           Long and Morgan (1990); Long et aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).


                           PoLYCHLOrinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
                  Total PCBs                           Long and Morgan (1990); Long eT aL (1991); Delfino et al. (1991);
                                                       FDER (in preparation).








                                                                         -48-


                  Table 3. Preliminary identification of chemical concerns in Florida coastal waters
                               (continued).


                  Substance                                              Reference/Rationale


                           Pesticides

                  AldriN/Dieldrin                       Long and Morgan (1990); Long eT aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Azinophosmethyl (guthion)             Organophosphorous insecticide (K  > 10,000?)
                  Chlordane                             Long and Morgan (1990); Long et aL (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Chlorothalonil                        Chlorophenyl fungicide (K   = 20,000)
                  Chlorpyrifos                          Organophosphorous insecticide (K   > 50,000)
                  DDT and metabolites                   Long and Morgan (1990); Long et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                                                        Delfino et aL (1991).
                  Disulfoton                            Organophosphorous insecticide (K   > 10,000)
                  Endosulfan                            Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).
                  Endrin                                Organochlorine insecticide (K   > 10,000?); FDER (In preparation).
                  Heptachlor                            Organochlorine insecticide (K   > 10,000?); FDER (In preparation).
                  Heptachlor epoXIde                    Organochlorine insecticide (K   > 10,000?); FDER (In preparation).
                  Lindane (gamma-BHC)                   Organochlorine insecticide (K   > 10,000?); FDER (In preparation).
                  Mirex                                Organochlorine INSecticide (K   > 10,000?); FDER (In preparation).
                  PhoRate                               Organophosphorous insecticide (K  > 10,000?).
                  Quintozene (PCNB)                     Chlorophenyl fungicide (K   = 10,000).
                  Toxaphene (alpha-BHC)                 Organochlorine insecticide; FDER (In preparation).
                  Trifluralin                           Dinitroanaline herbicide (K  > 200,000); FDER (In preparation).

                           Criteria for selection of pesticides: K   > 5,000, and significant historic or current use
                           (i.e., > 100,000 pounds/year in Florida; Pait et aL (1989; Worthing and Hance (1991).


                           Chlorinated Organic Compounds
                  2,3,7,8-T,CDD                         Pulp and paper industry.
                  2,3,7,8-T,CDF                         Pulp and paper industry
                  Pentachlorophenol                     Delfino et al. (1991); FDER (In preparation).


                           PhthaLaTes

                  Bis(2-ethylHexyl)phthalate            Delfino et aL (1991).
                  Dimethyl phthalate                    Delfino et aL (1991).
                  Di-n-butylphthalate                   Delfino et aL (1991).







                                                            -49-



               runoff from urban areas. Due to the substantial population growth in recent years and the
               proximity of urban developments to the coast, urban stormwater represents a major source
               of contaminants into coastal ecosystems in Florida. Florida Department of Environmental
               Regulation (FDER; in preparation), Long and Morgan (1990), Delfino et al. (1991), and
               Long et aL (1991) provided lists of metals, PAHs, and other. substances that have been
               detected in Florida coastal sediments at elevated levels (i.e., at levels that exceed the effects
               range low; ER-Ls reported by Long and Morgan 1990). These substances are reflected in
               the preliminary evaluation of chemical concerns in the Florida coastal zone.

               High yields of agricultural products in Florida require the use of substantial     quantities of
               fertilizers and pesticides. However, poorly managed runoff from agricultural areas has the
               potential to severely affect receiving water systems. The principal contaminants associated
               with agricultural runoff include nutrients, sediments, herbicides, insecticides, and other
               pesticides. While agricultural runoff is known to have significant impacts on lakes, rivers,
               and canals in the immediate vicinity of agricultural operations, contaminants may also be
               transported into coastal waters. The high-use pesticides (present or historic use) with
               significant potential to contaminate sediments in Florida's coastal areas are listed in:Table 3.
               This list was assembled by considering pesticide use patterns (Pait, et aL 1989), in
               conjunction with the physical/chemical properties of the substance (Worthing and Hance
               1991). In addition, pesticides which have been detected in coastal sediments (Long and
               Morgan 1990; Long et aL 1991; Delfino et d 1991) or in aquatic biota (Trefrey et aL 1983;
               Leslie 1990) in Florida were included in this list. -

               -As might be expected in a state characterized by rapid urban development, inputs of
               domestic wastewater represent significant sources of environmental contaminants. While
               upgrades to wastewater treatment plants (Vv'VvW) in recent years have resulted in improved
               water quality in many areas, progress towards the effective management of domestic
               wastewater treatment plant effluents is hampered by rapid population growth and severe.
               limitations on financial resources in some portions of the state (Hand et aL 1990).
               Environmental contaminants that are commonly associated with WWTP effluents include
               nutrients, metals, halogenated methanes, and various chlorinated organic substances
               (MacDonald 1989).

               While Florida is not characterized by widespread industry, substantial quantities of industrial
               wastewater are discharged into Florida waters (Farrow 1990). The major sourc es of these
               effluents are pesticides, organic chemicals and plastics, petroleum refining, and pulp and
               paper industries (Farrow 1989; 1990). In addition to pesticides, metals, and PAHs (Long
               and MoTgan 1990; Long et aL 1991; Delfino et aL 1991), industrial activities have resulted
               in the release of substantial quantities of PCBs, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (and
               related substances), and a wide variety of other organic contaminants into coastal waters
               (see MacDonald 1989 for a discussion on the nature and extent of contaminants that are
               often associated with industrial wastewaters).








                                                          _50-



              62     Numerical Sediment Qualuy Assessment Guidelines

              For each substance in Table 3, the available aquatic toxicity data was collected, evaluated,
              and included in the biological effects database for sediments, as appropriate. Using the
              procedure described in Chapter 5, SQAGs (no observed effect levels and probable effect
              levels) were calculated for each substance for which adequate data were available. These
              guidelines are listed in Table 4. In addition, a brief discussion on the sources, fate, and
              effects of each substance (or group of substances) is provided. A preliminary evaluation of
              the guidelines and the degree of confidence associated with the results for each substance
              is provided in Table 5.




              621 Metals

              Numerical SQAGs have been derived for a total of eight metals that occur in. Florida
              coastal sediments. As is the case for the other substances, the SQAGs are reported on a
              dry weight basis. While it is likely that further research will support the derivation of
              effects-based guidelines that are expressed in terms of the factors that influence
              bioavailability (e.g., AVS), such data are not yet available. Therefore, the preliminary
              guidelines should be used in conjunction with other assessment tools (such as the metals
              interpretive tool) to evaluate sediment quality conditions in Florida.


              Arsenic


              Arsenic is released naturally into the environment due to the weathering of arsenic-rich
              rocks and volcanic activity. However, in additioni to the natural sources of this substance,.
              arsenic is released into the environment as a result of human activities. For example,
              arsenic is used in pigments, for medical purposes, in glassmaking, and in alloys writh lead and
              copper. In addition, arsenic is also used in some pesticides (including herbicides), in plant
              defoliants, and in various preservatives. Any of these activities may result in contamination
              of aquatic resources with arsenic (CCREM 1987).

              The majority of arsenic in surface water occurs in a soluble form which can be
              coprecipitated with hydrated iron and aluminum oxides, or adsorbed/chelated by suspended
              organic matter in sediments or humic substances in bottom sediments. Arsenic has a strong
              affinity for sulphur, and it readily adsorbs on and coprecipitates with other metal sulfides
              (Demayo et aL 1979).

              The availability of arsenic in sediments to aquatic biota appears to be minimal under
              oxidizing conditions. Bioaccumulation of arsenic has been observed in numerous aquatic
              organisms, though there is no evidence that arsenic is biomagnified to a significant degree
              through the food chain (Jaagumagi 1990a).








          Table 4. A summary of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable to Florida coastal waters.



          Substance                             Total Number     Number of Entries Number of Entries Sediment Quality Guidelines
                                                  of Records        in the BEDS          in the NBEDS,          NOEL              PEL


            Metals (SQGs in mg1kg)
          Arsenic                                     1,40                27                    113                8              64
          Cadmium                                     258                 81                    177                1              7.5
          Chromium                                    191                 37                    154                33             240
          Copper                                      218                 74                    144                28             170
          Lead                                        210                 73                    137                21             160
          Mercury                                     169                 42                    127                0.1            1.4
          Nickel                                      161                 19                    142                ID             ID
          Silver                                      87                 -25                    62                 0.5            2.5
          Tributyl Tin                                21                  4                     17                 ID             ID
          Zinc                                        219                 70                    149                68             300


            Polyclilorinated Biphenyls (PCBs; SQGs in uglkg)
          Total PCBs                                  125                 50                    75                 24             260


            Polycyclic Aromatic Hydroca@bons (PAHs; SQGs in uglkg)
          Acenaphthene                                69                  30                    39                 22             450
          Acenaplithylene                             45                  15                    30                 ID             ID
          Anthracene                                  87                  46                    41                 85             740
          Fluorene                                    94                  48                    48                 18             460
          2-methyl naphthalene                        46                  28                    18                 ID             ID
          Naphthalene                                 91                  44                    47                 130            1100
          Phenanthrene                                98                  51                    .47                140            1200
          Sum LMW-PAHs                                66                  32                    34                 250.           2400








           Table 4. A summary of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable to Florida coastal waters (continuED).



           Substance                             Total Number      Number of Entries Number of Entries  SedimenT QUALITY GUIDELINES
                                                   of Records         in the BEDS         in the NBEDS      NOEL            PEL


              Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs; SQGs in ug/kg)
           Benz(a)anthracene                            79                 43                    36                160        1300
           Benzo(a)pyrene                               87                 44                    43                230        1700
           Chrysene                                     87                 45                    42                220        1700
           Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene                       73                 31                    42                31          320
           Fluoranthene                               116                71                    45                380        3200
           Pyrene                                       93                 50                    43                290        1900
           Sum HMW-PAHs                                60                 25                    35                870         8500

           Total PAHs                                   77                 33                    44               2900      28000


              Pesticides (SQGs in ug/kg)
           Aldrin                                       40                 5                     35                ID          ID
           Azinophosmethyl (Guthion)                   0                  0                     0                 ID           ID      
           Chlordane                                    42                 10                    32                ID          ID
           Chlorthalonil                                0                  0                     0                 ID          ID
           Chlorpyrifos                                 1                  1                     0                 ID          ID
           p,p'-DDD                                     46                 13                    33                ID          ID
           P,P'-DDE                                     64                 23                    41                1.7         130
           p,p'-DDT                                     45                 15                    30               ID           ID 
           Total DDT                                    54                 29                    25                4.5         270
           Dieldrin                                     47                 12                    35                ID          ID
           Disulfoton                                   0                  0                      0                 ID         ID
           Endosulfan                                   9                  3                     6                 ID          ID
           Endrin                                       19                 5                     14                ID          ID
                               -52-







            Table 4. A summary of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable to Florida coastal waters (continued).



            Substance                                     Total Number         Number of Entries Number of Entries Sediment Quality Guidelines
                                                            of Records             in the BEDS              in the NBEDS               NOEL                 PEL


                Pesticides (SQGs in uglkg)
            Heptachlor                                            27                      3                         24                    ID                 ID
            Heptachlor epoxide                                    7                       0                         7                     ID                 ID
            Lindane (gamma-BHC)                                   42                      10                        32                    ID                 ID
            Mirex                                                 7                       0                         7                     ID                 ID
            Phorate                                               0                       0                         0                     ID                 ID
            Quintozene (PCNB)                                     0                       0                         0                     ID                 ID
            Toxaphene (alpha-1314C)                               25                      3                         22                    ID                 ID
            Trifluralin                                           0                       0                         0                     ID                 ID


                Chlotinated Organic Substances (SQGs in uglkg)
            2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin                   0                       0                         0                     ID                 ID
            2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran                       0                       0                         0                     ID                 ID
            Pentachlorophenol                                     18                      3                         15                    ID                 ID


               Plithalates (SQGs in uglkg)
            Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate                            31                      16                        15                    ID                 ID
            Dimethyl phthalate                                    15                      8                         7                     ID                 ID
            Di-n-butyl phthalate                                  16                      7                         9                     ID                 ID


            Total Number of Records = Number of data records in the expanded NSTP database.
            BEDS = Biological effects data set.
            NBEDS = No biological effects data set.'
            Sediment Quality Guidelines were rounded to two significant figures.
            All of the sediment quality guidelines are expressed on a dry weight basis, as potential normali7crs (e.g., Al, TOC, AVS) were rarely reported.
            ID = insufficient data to derive sediment quality guidelines.







            Table 5. A preliminary evaluation of the relative degree of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable to the Florida
                      coast.




            Substance                             O/o 'Hits' in the No      %'Hits'in Possible       WHits' in Probable            Subjective Degree
                                                    Effects Range              Effects Range             Effects Range              of Confidence in:
                                                     (< =NOEL)             (>NOEL to < PEL)                (> = PEL)              NOEL              PEL


               Metals
            Arsenic                                         2.6                     12.5                       56.7                   H               M
            Cadmium                                         5.8                      26                        68.2                   H               H
            Chromium                                        1.6                     10.2                       66.7                   H               H
            Copper                                          9.5                     29.2                       67.8                   H               H
            Lead                                            0                       29.9                       75                     H               H
            Mercury                                         6.3                    -30.1                       33.3                   H               L
            Silver                                          0                       18.8                       76.2                   H
            Zinc                                            2.5                     24.8                       68.2                   H               H



               Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
            Total PCBs                                      21.4                    41.4                      .51.3                   M               M


               Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAI-1s)
            Acenaplithene                                   33                      26.7                       76.2                   L               H
            Anthracene                                      25                      36.8                       84.8                   M               H
            Fluorene                                        30                      33.3                       84.8                   L               H
            Naphthalene                                     16                      28.1                       91.2                   M               H
            Phenanthrene                                    18.2                    39.2                       80.6                   M               H
            Sum LMW-PAHs                                    0                        35                        100                    H               H.








             Table 5. A preliminary evaluation of the relative degree of sediment quality assessment guidelines applicable
                       coast (continued).



             Substance                   % Hits' in the No           %Hits' in Possible        % Hits' in Probable
                                           Effects Range              Effects Range             Effects Range
                                             (< NOEL)                  (NOEL to PEL)               ( > PEL)          NOEL    PEL


             PolycyclicAromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)
             Benz(a)anthracene                26.7                     36.4                      87.1                 L       H
             Benzo(a)pyrene                    0                       51.1                      74.1                 H       H   
             Chrysene                         20                       37.5                      84.4                 M       H 
             Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene            0                       56.4                      50                   H       M
             Fluoranthene                      7.7                     44.4                      93.9                 H       H
             Pyrene                            0                      -34.1                      89.7                 H       H
             Sum HMW-PAHS                     15.4                     26.9                      76.2                 M       H

             Total PAHs                        6.7                      27                        88                   H       H



                Pesticides
             p,p-DDE                             0                      48.1                      52.6                 H       M
             Total DDT                          52.6                    52.6                      56.3                 L       M



             %'Hits'= Number of data entries from biological effects data set/number of data entries from no biological effects data set.
             NOEL = No Observed Effect Level
             PEL = Probable Effects Level
             H = High; M = Moderate; L = Low
             Confidence in the NOEL was, considered to be H, M, and L when %'hits'was <10%, 10-25%, and >25%, respectively.
             Confidence in the PEL was considered to be H, M, and L when %'hits'was >65%,50-65%, and <50%, respectively.







                                                          -56-


             Exposure of aquatic organisms to arsenic-contaminated sediments may result in a variety of
             effects. While arsenic is known to be acutely toxic to aquatic biota, a variety of sublethal
             effects (including effects on the growth, reproduction, locomotion, behavior, and respiration)
             have also been observed in organisms exposed to arsenic (Eisler 1988). in mammals,
             exposure to arsenic has also been linked with a number of carcinogenic, mutagenic, and
             teratogenic effects.

             Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated arsenic to
             aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 8 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
             only rarely observed (2.6% of the data entries) when concentrations of arsenic were within
             the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 8 mg/kg). The recommended NOEL is similar to the chronic
             marine threshold concentration (8.25 @ 1% TOC) calculated using the EqPA (Bolton et aL
             1985) and somewhat lower than the ER-L (33 mg/kg) calculated using the NST?A (Long
             and Morgan 1990).

             The recommended PEL of arsenic is 64 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were frequently
             observed (56.7% of the data entries) when concentrations of arsenic were within the
             probable effects range (i.e., @: 64 mg/kg). This level is the same as the PSSDA screening
             level in Puget Sound (ACE 1988), the San Francisco Bay AET for R abronius (Long and
             Morgan 1990), and the AET for benthic species in California (Becker et at 1990). The ER-
             M, calculated using the NSTPA, is 85 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


             -Cadmium


             Cadmium is a trace element used in a wide variety of applications, including electroplating,
             the manufacture of pigments, storage batteries, telephone wires, photographic supplies, glass,
             ceramics, some biocides, and as a stabilizer in plastics. In addition, cadmium may be
             present in phosphate rock used for fertilizers. The main anthropogenic sources of cadmium,
             appear to be mining, metals smelting, industries involved in the manufacture of alloys,
             paints, batteries, and plastics, agricultural uses of sludge, fertilizers and pesticides that
             contain cadmium, and the burning of fossil fuels (CCREM 1987).

             In surface waters, cadmium generally occurs in the Cd(II) form as a constituent of inorganic
             (halides, sulfides, and oxides) and organic compounds. Transport of cadmium to the
             sediments occurs mainly through sorption to organic matter (and subsequent deposition) and
             through coprecipitation with iron, aluminum, and manganese oxides (Jaagumagi 1990a).

             The availability of cadmium to aquatic biota is dependent on such factors as pH, redox
             potential, water hardness, and the presence of other complexing agents. Recently, Di Toro
             et aL (1991) revealed the importance of AVS in controlling the availability of cadmium. In
             general, cadmium is considered to have an extensive residence time and accumulates to
             significant levels in biological tissues (Jaagumagi 1990a).

             Exposure of aquatic organisms to cadmium can result in a variety of adverse effects,
             including acute mortality, reduced growth, and inhibited reproduction (Eisler 1985a). In







                                                           _57-


               sediment, cadmium is toxic to marine amphipods at concentrations as low as 6.9 mg/kg
               (Swartz et aL 1985). Effects on the emergence, reburial, and avoidance behaviour of marine
               amphipods have also been observed in spiked-sediment bioassays with cadmium (Long and
               Morgan 1990).

               Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated cadmium to
               aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 1.0 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects
               were only rarely observed (5.8% of the data entries) when concentrations of cadmiumwere
               within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 1.0 mg/kg). The recommended NOEL is significantly
               lower than the ER-L (5 mg/kg) calculated using the NSTPA (Long and Morgan 1990).

               The recommended PEL of cadmium is 7.5 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
               frequently observed (68.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of cadmium were
               within the probable effects range (i.e., 2: 7.5 mg/kg). This level is similar to the 1988 Puget
               Sound AET (9.6; PTI 1986) and the AET for benthic species in California (Becker et aL
               1990). The ER-M, calculated using the NSTPA, was 9.0 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


               Chromium


               Like cadmium, chromium is a trace metallic element widely.:used in industrial processes.
               Hexavalent chromium compounds are used in the metallurgical        industry in the production
               of chrome alloy and chromium metal. In addition, these compounds are used in the
               chemical industry in chrome plating and, in the production of paints, dyes, explosives,
               ceramics, and paper. Trivalent chromium salts are used in textile dyeing, in the ceramics
               and glass industry, and in photography (CCREM 1987). The main sources of chromium to
               the environment are emissions from the ferrochromium. and metal plating industries, with
               coal and oil burning, refractory production, cement manufacturing, and the production of.
               chromium steels representing relatively less important sources (Taylor et aL 1979).

               In aquatic systems, chromium is present mainly in the Cr(III) an      d Cr(VI) forms. The
               Cr(VI) form is relatively soluble and does not tend to sorb onto particulate matter to any
               significant extent. Under anaerobic conditions, Cr(VI) may be reduced to Cr(III). In
               contrast to Cr(VI), Cr(III) readily sorbs onto organic particulates and coprecipitates with
               hydrous iron and manganese oxides. Under anoxic conditions in the sediments, Cr may also
               form insoluble sulfides (Jaagu'magi 1990a).

               Adverse biological effects associated with exposure to chromium include mortality and
               decreased growth, with plants being more sensitive than fish (CCREM 1987). While
               chromium is not accumulated to a significant degree by fish (BCF < 3), algal communities
               may concentrate this substance (BCF = 8500; CCREM 1987). Chromium(VI) is more
               readily accumulated than Cr(III) and is considered to be the more toxic form (Jaagumagi
               1990a).

               Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated chromium to
               aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 33 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were







                                                          -58-


              rarely observed (1.6% of the data entries) when concentrations of chromium were within
              the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 33 mg/kg). The ER-L, calculated using the NSTPA, was
              80 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).

              The recommended PEL of chromium is 240 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              frequently observed (66.7% of the data entries) when concentrations of chromium were
              within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 240 mg/kg). This level is similar to the 1988 Puget
              Sound AET for benthic organisms (260 mg/kg; PTI 1998) and the AET for amphipods,
              bivalves, and benthic species in California (> 240 mg/kg; Becker et aL 1990). The ER-M,
              calculated using the NSTPA, was 145 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


              Copper

              Copper is a common metallic element in crustal rocks and minerals. It's natural sources in
              aquatic environments include the weathering or the solution of copper-bearing minerals,
              copper sulfides, and native copper. Potential anthropogenic sources of copper include
              corrosion of brass and copper pipe by acidic waters, the use of copper compounds as aquatic
              algicides, sewage treatment plant effluents, runoff and groundwater contamination from
              agricultural uses of copper as fungicides and pesticides in the treatment of soils, and
              effluents and atmospheric fallout from industrial sources. Major industrial sources include
              mining, smelting and refining industries, copper wire mills, coal burning industries, and iron
              and steel producing industries (CCREM 1987).
              Copper may exist in four oxidation states 'in aquatic systems, with Cu(I) and CU(R) being
              the most common. In water, copper may form associations with organic matter and
              precipitates of hydroxides, phosphates, and sulfides. Formation of these complexes tends
              to facilitate transport to sediments. Under normal pH and redox conditions, copper tends
              to be present in sediments in the form of organic complexes, cupric carbonate complexes,
              and coprecipitates with iron and manganese oxides (Jaagumagi 1990a).

              Copper is an essential micronutrient, and, therefore, it is readily accumulated by aquatic
              organisms (particularly in plants). However, no evidence exists to suggest that this substance
              is biornagnified in aquatic ecosystems (Jaagumagi 1990a). Copper is a broad - spectrum
              biocide, which may be associated with acute and chronic toxicity, reduction in growth,
              interference with smoltification (the physiological changes that occur in preparation for the
              transition from freshwater to saltwater) in salmonids, and a wide variety of sublethal effects
              (Spear and Pierce 1979). There appears to be little difference in the sensitivity of aquatic
              organisms across taxonomic groups (CCREM 1987).

              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated copper to aquatic
              biota results in a recommended NOEL of 28 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              infrequently observed (9.5% of the data entries) when concentrations of copper were within
              the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 28 mg/kg). The ER-L,. calculated using the NSTPA, was
              70 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).








                                                            59 -



              The recommended PEL of copper is 170 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were frequently
              observed (67.8% of the data entries) when concentrations of copper were within the
              probable effects range (i.e., @: 170 mg/kg). This level may be compared to 1986 AET for
              benthic organisms in Puget Sound (310 mg/kg; Bellar et aL 1986) and the AET for benthic
              species in California (310 mg/kg; Becker et aL 1990). The ER-M, calculated using the
              NSTPA, was 390 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


              Lxad

              Lead occurs as a constituent in a variety of minerals. The single largest use of lead is in the
              production of lead-zinc batteries. The second largest use of lead is in the manufacture of
              chemical compounds, particularly alkyllead additives for gasolines. Lead and its compounds
              are also used in electroplating, metallurgy, construction materials, coatings and dyes,
              electronic equipment, plastics, veterinary medicines, fuels and radiation shielding. Other
              uses of lead are for ammunition, corrosive-li quid containers, paints, glassware, fabricating
              storage tank linings, transporting radioactive materials, solder, piping, cable sheathing,
              roofing and sound attenuators (CCREM 1987).

              While lead may be present in three oxidation states in aquatic environments, Pb(II) is the
              most stable ionic species. In sediments, lead is primarily found in association with iron and
              manganese hydroxides, however, it may also form associations with clays and organic matter.
              Lead tends to remain tightly bound to sediments under oxidizing conditions, however, it may
             'be released into the water column under reducing conditions (Jaagumagi 1990a).

              Aquatic organisms exhibit a wide range       of sensitivities to lead, with gastropods being
              particularly vulnerable to exposures to      lead. Aquatic plants appear to be relatively
              insensitive to the toxic effects of lead. Lead may be accumulated to relatively high levels.
              by aquatic biota. Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) in algae (i.e., the ratio of tissue
              concentrations to concentrations in water) may be as high as 20,000, however, BCFs on fish
              and invertebrates tend to be much lower (500 to 1700; CCREM 1987).

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated lead to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 21 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              never observed when concentrations of lead were within the no effects range' (ie., 0 -
              21 mg/kg). The NOEL is similar to the chronic marine EqP threshold of 33 mg/kg (Bolton
              et aL 1985) and the ER-L of 35 mglkg (Long and Morgan 1990).

              The recommended PEL of lead is 160 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were usually
              observed (75% of the data entries) when concentrations of lead were within the probable
              effects range (i.e., 2: 160 mg/kg). This level is similar to the California AET for benthic
              species (150 mg/kg; Becker et aL 1990). The ER-M, calculated using the NSTPA, was
              110 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).







                                                           -60-



              Memury

              Mercury is a tra  ce element that occurs most commonly in the sulfide mineral cinnabar,
              Mercury is used in the production of chlorine, caustic soda and hydrogen, in the paint
              industry, in the pulp and paper industry, for electrical equipment, in medicinal compounds,
              and in thermometers. Mercury-based pesticides were once used in agriculture, however, the
              use of such pesticides has now been restricted (CCREM 1987). Significant anthropogenic
              sources to aquatic ecosystems can include mining and smelting, coal combustion, paints,
              waste incineration, and the chlor-alkali industry (Jaagumagi 1990a).

              In aquatic systems, mercury is generally sorbed to particulate matter. In natural systems,
              mercury can exist in three oxidation states, including elemental Hg, Hg(I), and Hg(II). Both
              Hg(l) and Hg(II) can be methylated by microorganisms under anaerobic and aerobic
              conditions. In sediments, mercury tends to form associations with organic matter. Under
              anaerobic conditions, mercury may combine with sulphur to form insoluble sulfides
              (Jaagumagi 1990a).

              Mercury is highly toxic to aquatic biota, with methylmercury being the most toxic form of
              the substance. Aquatic plants, invertebrates, and fish exhibit similar sensitivities to mercury,
              however, a great deal of variability exists within each of these groups. Mercury has the
              potential to accumulate to high levels in aquatic organisms,with BCFs as high as 85,000
              observed in some fish species (CCREM 1987). Due to its high mammalian toxicity,
              bioaccumulation of mercury in fish and other aquatic species has significant implications
             .with respect to human health.

              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated mercury to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 0.1 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects
              were only infrequently observed (7% of the data entries) when concentrations of mercury
              were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 0.1 mg/kg). The ER-L, calculated using the'
              NSTPA, was also 0.15 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).

              Using the modified NSTPA, a PEL of 1.4 mg/kg was calculated. Evaluation of this SQAG
              indicates that adverse biological effects were at similar frequencies within the possible
              (0.15 - 1.4 mg/kg; 30.1% hits) and probable (2: 1.4 mg/kg; 33.3% hits) effects ranges.
              Therefore, only arnoderate amount of confidence should be placed on the recommended
              PEL. However, this value is similar to the San Francisco Bay AETs for amphipods
              (1.3 mg/kg) and bivalves (1.5 mg/kg; Long and Morgan 1990). The ER-M, calculated using
              the NSTPA, was also similar at 1.3 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


              Nickel


              Nickel ranks as the 23rd element in order of abundance in the earth's crust and occurs
              naturally, mainly, in combination with sulphur, arsenic, and antimony. In ore deposits, it
              commonly occurs with iron and copper. Nickel is used, primarily, in the manufacturing of
              stainless steel, nickel plating, and other nickel alloys. Nickel is also used as a catalyst in







                                                          -61 -


              industrial processes and in oil refining. More recently, it has been used in nuclear power
              generating plants, gas turbine engines, cryogenic containers, and pollution abatement
              equipment. The most important anthropogenic sources of nickel include fossil fuel
              combustion, nickel ore mining, smelting and refining activities, and the electroplating
              industries (CCREM 1987).

              In aquatic systems, nickel   occurs primarily in the Ni(II) form. Nickel is deposite      d in
              sediments as a result of coprecipitation with iron and manganese oxides and sorption to
              organic matter. In sediments, nickel tends to form complexes with iron and manganese
              oxides, however, it may form insoluble complexes with sulfides under anaerobic conditions
              (Jaagumagi 1990a).

              Exposure of aquatic organisms to nickel-contaminated sediments may result in a variety of
              adverse effects, including mortality, reduction in growth, and avoidance reactions. . The
              toxicity of nickel increases in the presence of copper, therefore, synergism may be a factor
              that modifies the toxicity of this substance. While bioconcentration of nickel has been
              observed in a variety of organisms (particularly in annelids), biornagnification @is not a
              significant concern in aquatic environments (CCREM 1987).

              While insufficient data were available to derive a numerical SQAG for nickel, the chronic
              marine EqP threshold for nickel was 5 mg/kg (Bolton et aL 1985) and the ER-L was
              30 mg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).

              -By comparison, the Puget Sound AETs for nickel range from 28 mg/kg (1986 Mictrotox
              AET; Bellar et al. 1986) to > 140 mg/kg t1988 amphipod and.benthic community AETs;
              PTI 1988). The ER-M reported by Long and Morgan (1990) was similar at 50 mg/kg.


              Sdver


              Silver is among the least common but most widely distributed elements in crustal rocks.
              Photographic materials represent the single largest use of silver. Other uses of this element
              include the manufacture of sterling and plated ware, jewellery, coins and medallions,
              electrical and electronic products, brazing alloys and solders, catalysts, mirrors, fungicides,
              and dental and medical supplies. Potential sources of silver to the aquatic environment
              include leachates from landfills, waste incineration, coal combustion, and effluents from the
              iron, steel and cement industries. In addition, wastewater treatment plants may also
              contribtite significant loadings of silver to aquatic ecosystems (CCREM 1987).

              In aqueous systems, silver may occur as elemental Ag, Ag(l), or Ag(II), however, ionic silver
              is primarily found in the univalent state. In water, silver may occur in colloidal form, sorbed
              to humic substances, and in various complexes with sulphur, arsenic, antimony, tellurium,
              and selenium. In sediments, silver tends to be found in association with manganese dioxide,
              sulphur, and various halides. Silver may also be adsorbed to organic material in sediments
              (CCREM 1987).







                                                           -62-


              Silver is one of the most toxic metals to aquatic life. In general, plants are somewhat less
              sensitive than fish and aquatic invertebrates, with toxicity dependent primarily on metal
              speciation. Silver nitrate and silver iodide have been identified as highly toxic species.
              Silver has a fairly low potential to accumulate in aquatic organisms, with BCFs ranging from
              less than I to 240 (CCREM 1987).

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated silver to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 0.5 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects.
              were never observed when concentrations of silver were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 -
               0.5 mg/kg). The ER-L, calculated using the NSTPA, was 1.0 mg/kg (Long and Morgan
              1990).

              The recommended PEL of silver is 2.5 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were frequently
              observed (76.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of silver were within the probable
              effects range (i.e., @: 2.5 mg/kg). In California, the AETs for bivalves and benthic species
              were 2.3 and 3.7 mg/kg, respectively (Becker et aL 1990). The recommended PEL is similar
              to the ER-M of 2.2 mg/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


              Tributyltin

              Tributyltin is a member of a family of organotin compounds that are used in the production
              of plastics and as biocidal wood preservatives. Tributyltin oxide (TBTO) and tributyltin
             Jluoride (TBTF) are the most important of the tributyltin'compounds. Tributyltin oxide is
              used as a slimicide in cooling water towers, as a wood preservative, and as an antifouling
              additive in marine paint. The major use of TBTF is also as an antifouling agent in marine
              paint, and the use of both substances in marine paints represents potentially significant
              sources of tributyltin into aquatic ecosystems (CCREM 1987).

              Tributyltin compounds are highly toxic to aquatic organisms (both plants and animals), as
              would be expected given their use as general biocides. Eisler (1985b) reported that
              tributyltins were capable of causing adverse biological effects at extremely low levels, and,
              that these substances have been implicated as a major cause of reproductive failure in
              European flat oysters at several locations in recent years. Its high toxicity and significant
              potential for release into the- aquatic environment make tributyltins a serious -concern in
              marine sediments. While insufficient data are available to develop SQAGs (NOEL and
              PEL) for tributyltin, extreme mortality (100%) has been observed in grass shrimp exposed
              (96 hour static test) to concentrations as low as 10 mg/kg (Clark et aL 1987). Since grass
              shrimp are relatively insensitive test species, adverse effects on other organisms could be
              expected at concentrations well below this level.


              zinc


              Zinc ranks as the 24th most abundant crustal element, occurring primarily as sulfide,
              carbonate, and silicate.ores. Zinc is used in coatings to protect iron and steel, in alloys for







                                                            -63 -


              die casting, in brass, in  dry batteries, in roofing and exterior fittings for buildings, and in
              some printing processes. The principal sources of zinc to aquatic systems include municipal
              wastewater effluents, zinc mining, smelting, and refining activities, wood combustion, waste
              incineration, iron and steel production, and other atmospheric emissions (CCREM 1987).

              In aquatic systems, zinc occurs primarily as Zn(II), but can also form organozinc compounds.
              At neutral pH, zinc may be deposited in sediments by sorption to hydrous iron and
              manganese oxides, clay minerals, and organic matter. However, adsorption is very low at
              pHs below 6. Iron and manganese oxides/hydroxides appear to be the most impo                 rtant
              scavengers of zinc in coarse sediments that are low in organic matter. However, sorption
              to organic matter appears to be the most important environmental fate process in fine
              grained sediments. Under reducing conditions, organically-bound zinc generally forms
              insoluble sulfides (Jaagumagi7 1990a).

              Zinc is an essential micronutrient and uptake in most aquatic organisms appears to be
              independent of environmental concentrations. It has been found to bioaccumulate in some
              organisms, though there is no evidence of biornagnification (Jaagumagi 1990a). @Aquatic
              organisms exhibit a wide range of sensitivities to zinc, however, there do not appear to be
              systematic differences in the toxicity of this substance between three major taxonomic groups
              (fish, invertebrates, and aquatic plants; CCREM 1987).

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sedim6nt-associated zinc to aquatic
              biota results in a recommended NOEL of 68 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were rarely
              observed (2.5%.of the data entries) when concentrations of zinc were within the no effects
              range (i.e., 0 - 68 mg/kg). The ER-1, calculated using the NSTTA, was 120 mg/kg (Long
              and Morgan 1990).

              The recommended PEL of zinc is 300 mg/kg. Adverse biological effects were frequently
              observed (68.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of zinc were within the probable'
              effects range (i.e., @: 300 mg/kg). In California, AET values ranged from 150 mg/kg for
              bivalves to 340 mg/kg for benthic species (Becker et aL 1990). The Puget Sound AETs were
              considerably higher (410 to 1600 mg/kg; PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986). The recommended
              PEL is similar to ER-M of 270 mg/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).



              6Z2 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

              Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) is the general term applied to a group of
              compounds comprised of several hundred organic substances with two or more benzene
              rings. They occur in the environment mainly as a result of incomplete combustion of
              organic matter (forest fires, internal combustion engines, wood stoves, coal, coke, etc.).
              They are also major constituents of petroleum and its derivatives, with oil spills and refinery
              effluents being major sources of PAH contamination to estuarine and marine environments
              (MacDonald et aL 1991). In addition, WVVTP effluents and runoff from urban areas,
              particularly from roads, are known to contain significant quantities of PAHs. Further, inputs








                                                           -64-



              of PAHs in aquatic ecosystems may occur as a result of oil spills, forest fires and agricultural
              burning, leaching from waste disposal sites, and coal gasification (Eisler 1987; Neff 1979;
              Campbell et aL 1979). PAHs are also produced by natural processes at very low rates
              (Blumer 1976).

              In marine and estuarine environments, PAHs tend to form associations with suspended and
              deposited particulate matter (Eisler 1987). This sorption of PAHs to sediments is strongly
              correlated with the total organic carbon (TOC) content of sediments (Gillarn 1991).
              Sediments contaminated with PAHs have been identified in a number of locations in the
              Florida coastal zone (Long and Morgan 1990). Substances detected most frequently in
              coastal sediments include acenaphthylene, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,
              chrysene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and pyrene (Delfino et aL 1991). In general, elevated
              levels of sediment-associated PAHs in Florida are found in the vicinity of urban areas.

              Exposure to PAHs may result in a wide range of effects on biological organisms. While
              some PAHs are known to be carcinogenic, others display little or no carcinogenic,
              mutagenic, or teratogenic activity (Neff 1979; EPA 1980, 1982a, b, c; NRCC 1983; Sims and
              Overcash 1983). Many carcinogenic PAHs also exhibit teratogenic and mutagenic effects.
              Several PAHs exhibit low levels of toxicity to terrestrial life forms, yet are highly toxic to
              aquatic organisms (Eisler 1987). The bioavailability (and hence, toxicity) of PAHs is known
              to depend on the concentration of TOC in the sediment (Bol-ton et aL 1985; Lyman et'aL
              1987).


              Acenaphthene

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated acenaphthene
              to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 22;ig/kg. However, a significant.
              number of adverse biological effects were observed (33% of the data entries) when
              concentrations of acenaphthene were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 22 Ag/kg). A
              more conservative estimate of the NOEL would be in the order 10 g g/kg. Tberefore, some
              potential for adverse biological effects exists when concentrations of acenaphthene fall
              between 10 and 22;Lg/kg. Adverse biological effects are most likely to be observed within
              this range of concentrations wben low levels of TOC (i.e., < 1%) are present in sediments.
              Long and Morgan (1990) reported an ER-L of 150 Ag/kg for this substance.

              The recommended PEL of acenaphthene is 450;ig/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              frequently observed (76.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of acenaphthene were
              within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 450 g g/kg). In California, AET values ranged from
              9 jug/kg for bivalves (in San Francisco Bay; Long and Morgan 1990) to 56,ug/kg for
              amphipods (Becker et aL 1990). The Puget Sound AETs were considerably higher (500
              to 2000 gg/kg; PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986). The recommended PEL is somewhat lower
              than the ER-M of 650,ug/kg reported by Lon- and Morgan (1990).








                                                        -65 -



              Acenaphthykne

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for acenaphthylene. However, 'adverse
              biological effects were never observed at concentrations of acenaphthylene below 35 A g/kg
              in sediments. This concentration could be used as an interim NOEL until additional data
              become available. In California, the AET for benthic species was 44 @Ig/kg (Becker et aL
              1990)

              Adverse biological effects were frequently observed (83.3% of the data entries) at
              concentrations of acenaphthylene at or above 500 jig/kg. In the absence of other numerical
              SQAGs, 500,ug/kg could be used as an interim probable effects level. The 1986 Puget
              Sound benthic community AET was 640 A g/kg (Bellar et aL 1986). No NSTPA values were
              calculated for this substance (Long and Morgan 1990).


              Anthracene


              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated anthracene to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 85 ;4g/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              occasionally observed (25% of data entries) when concentrations of anthracene fell within
              the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 85 mg/kg). Therefore, only a moderate level of confidence
              should be placed in this guideline. Several AEt values fell within the no effects range,
              including the AETS for bivalves in San Francisco Bay (24,4g/kg), for benthic species in
              northern California (60,4g/kg), and for mussels statewide (60 A g/kg; Becker et aL 1990).
              The ER-L of 85,pg/kg reported by Long 6d Morgan (1990) was the same as the NOEL
              calculated in this study.

              The recommended PEL of anthracene is 740jug/kg.' Adverse biological effects were
              frequently observed (84.8% of the data entries) when concentrations of anthracene were
              within the probable effects range (i.e., 2: 740,4g/kg). This level was lower than the Puget
              Sound AET values, which ranged from 960 (bivalve) to 13,000,u g/kg (ampbipod; M 1988).
              The recommended PEL is similar to ER-M of 960 jug/kg reported by Long and Morgan
              (1990).


              Fluorene

              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated fluorene to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 18 A g/kg. However, a significant number
              of adverse biological effects were observed (30% of the data entries) when concentrations
              of fluorene were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 18,ug/kg). A more conservative
              estimate of the NOEL would be in the order 10,ug/kg. Therefore, some potential for
              adverse biological effects exists when concentrations of fluorene fall between 10 and
              18 Ag/kg. Adverse biological effects are most likely to be observed within this range of
              concentrations when low levels of TOC (i.e., < 1%) are present in sediments. Long and
              Morgan (1990) reported an ER-L of 35,ag/kg for fluorene.







                                                        -66-



              The recommended PEL of fluorene is 460 A g/kg. Adverse biological effects were frequently
              observed (84.8% of the data entries) when concentrations of fluorene were within the
              probable effects range (i.e., 2: 450,4g/kg). This level is lower than the Puget Sound AET
              values, which ranged from 540 (bivalve) to 3,60OAg/kg (amphipod; PTI 1988). The
              recommended PEL is also somewhat lower than the ER-M of 640,ug/kg reported by Long
              and Morgan (1990).


              2-methylnaphthalene

              Insufficient data were available to calculate a numerical sediment quality assessment
              guideline for 2-methylnaphthalene. However, Long and Morgan (1990) reported an AET
              of 27 jug/kg for bivalves in San Francisco Bay. The ER-1, calculated using the NSTPA' was
              65,4g/kg (Long and Morgan 1990). In California, AET values ranged from 70 A g/kg for
              bivalves and benthic species to > 130 A g/kg for amphipods (Becker et aL 1990). The Puget
              Sound AETs were considerably higher (670 to 1900 Aglkg; PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986).
              The recommended PEL is roughly half of the ER-M of 670,4g/kg reported by Long and
              Morgan (1990).


              Naphthalene

              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated naphthalene to
              -aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 130 gg/kg. Adverse biological effects
              were occasionally observed (28.1% of the data entries) when concentrations of naphthalene
              were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 130,4 g/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar
              to the San Francisco Bay AET of 160 gg/kg for bivalves and amphipods (Long and Morgan
              1990). The recommended NOEL is significantly lower than the ER-L of 340 tk g/kg reported.
              by Long and Morgan (1990).

              The recommended PEL of naphthalene is 1100,pg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              usually observed (91.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of naphthalene were
              within the probable effects ranoe (i.e., @t 110OAg/kg). The Puget Sound AETs were
              considerably higher (2100 to 2700,4g/kg; PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986). Likewise, the ER-M
              of 2100 Ag/kg, reported by Long and Morgan (1990), was significantly higher than the
              recommended PEL.



              Phenanthrene


              Evaluation of available. information on the toxicity of sediment-associated phenanthrene to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 140 gg/kg. Adverse biological effects
              were sometimes observed (18.2% of the data entries) when concentrations of phenanthrene
              were within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 140,4 g/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar
              to the Northern California AET of 170 gg/kg for benthic species (Becker et aL 1990). The
              ER-L, calculated using the NSTPA, was 225 gg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).







                                                          -67-



             The recommended PEL of phenanthrene is 1200;ig/kg. Adverse biological effects were
             usually observed (80.6% of the data entries) when concentrations of phenanthrene were
             within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 1200,ug/kg). The Puget Sound AETs were similar
             to the recommended PEL at 1500 A glkg for Microtox and bivalves, however the AET for
             amphipods was considerable higher (5400 A g/kg; PTI 1988). T'he recommended PEL is
             similar to the ER-M of 1380 Ag/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


             Sum Low MoleculaT Weight PAHs

             The group of low molecular weight (LMW) PAHs considered in the present study includes
             acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, anthracene, fluorene,2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene, and
             phenanthrene. Due to their similar mode of toxic action, these substances are frequently
             considered together in toxicity assessments (e.g., Gillam. 1991). Evaluation of available
             information on the effects of LMW PAHs on aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL
             of 250 Ag/kg and a PEL of 2400 jug/kg. Within the no effects range and probable effects
             range, the frequency of adverse biological effects data entries were 0% and 100%,
             respectively. By comparison, AETs for LMW PAHs in California ranged from 320 A g/kg
             for bivalves to 2100 p g/kg for amphipods (Becker et aL 1990). In Puget Sound, AETs
             ranged from 5100 to 6100 gg/kg (Beller et aL 1986; PTI 1988).


             Benz(a)anthracene

             Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated benz(a)anthracene
             to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 160 jig/kg.      Adverse biological effects
             were periodically reported (26.7% of data entries) when concentrations of
             benz(a)anthracene fell within the no effects range of concentrations (i.e., 0 - 160,4g/kg).
             In California, AETs for bivalves (statewide) and benthic species (northern California;'
             150gg/kg) fell slightly below the recommended NOEL. An ER-L of 230Ag/kg was
             reported by Long and Morgan (1990).

             The recommended PEL of benz(a)anthracene is 1300 Ag/kg. Adverse biological effects
             were usually observed (87.1% of the data entries) when. concentrations of benz(a)an  'tbracene
             were within the probable effects range (i.e., 2: 1300gg/kg). This level was similar to several
             of the Puget Sound AET values, which ranged from 1300 (Microtox; Bellar et aL 1086) to
             5 100 p g/kg (amphipod; PTI 1988). Pavlou et aL (1987) reported a chronic marine sediment
             quality criterion of 1600 g g/kg for this substance at I% TOC. The ER-M, reported by Long
             and Morgan (1990), was also 1600,ug/kg.


             Benzo(a)fiyrene

             Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated benzo(a)pyrene
             to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 230 Ag/k-g. Adverse biological effects
             were never observed when concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene were within the no effects








                                                         -68-


              range (i.e., 0 - 230,ug/kg). The ER4, calculated using the NSTPA, was 400 A g/kg (Long
              and Morgan 1990).

              The recommended PEL of benzo(a)pyrene is 1700 jLg/kg. Adverse biological effects were
              frequently observed (74. 1 % of the data entries) when concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene were
              within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 1700 Ag/kg). The recommended PEL is similar
              to the San Francisco Bay AET for bivalves (1800 Ag/kg; Long and Morgan 1990). Puget
              Sound AETs for Microtox and oysters (1600 A g/kg) were also similar to the recommended
              PEL (PTI 1988). The recommended PEL is somewhat lower than the ER-M of 2500,4g/kg
              reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


              Chrysene

              Evaluation of available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated chrysene to
              aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 220 tt g/kg. Adverse biological effects
              were infrequently observed (20% of the data entries) when concentrations of chryse'ne were
              within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 220 jig/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to
              the Northern California AET of 190 gg/kg for benthic species (Becker et aL 1990). The
              ER-L of 400;;g/kg, reported by Long and Morgan (1990), was somewhat higher than the
              recommended NOEL.


              The recommended PEL of chrysene is 1700 Ag/kg. Adverse biological effects were usually
              -observed (84.4% of the data entries) when concentrations of chrysene were within the
              probable effects range (i.e., 2: 1700;Lg/Kg). The Puget Sound AET for Microtox, at
              1400 g g/kg was similar to the recommended PEL (Bellar et aL 1986; PTI 1988). . However,
              the AETs for bivalves and amphipods (2800 - 9200 Aglkg) were considerable higher (PTI
              1988). The ER-M for chrysene was 2800 A glkg (Long and Morgan 1990).


              Dibenzoft;h)anthracene

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated dibenzo-
              (a,h)anthracene to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 31 A glkg.. Adverse
              biological effects were never observed when concentrations of dibenzo(a,h)anthracene were
              within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 31 A g/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to the
              Northern California AET of 63,ug/kg for benthic species and the California AET for
              bivalves of 63 A glkg (Becker et aL 1990). The ER-L reported by Long and Morgan (1990)
              was 60,ug/kg.

              The recommended PEL of dibenzo(a,h)anthracene is 320 jLg/kg. Adverse biological effects
              were commonly observed (50% of the data entries) when concentrations of
              dibenzo(a,h)anthracene were within the probable effects range (i.e., 2: 320Ag/kg). The
              fre quency of adverse biological effects within the probable effects range was greater (65.6%
              of the data entries) when the PEL was estimated at 200 gg/kg. In Puget Sound, AETs
              ranged from 230 g g/kg (for bivalves and Microtox) to 1200,u g/kg (for benthic species;







                                                         -69-


             Bellar et aL 1986; PTI 1988). The recommended PEL is similar to the ER-M of 260p g/kg
             reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


             Fluoranthene

             Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated fluoranthene
             to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 380 A g/kg. Adverse biological effects
             were rarely observed (7.7% of data entries) when concentrations of fluoranthene were
             within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 380 jug/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to
             the Northern California AET of 390,ug/kg for benthic species (Becker et al, 1990). The
             ER-L (600 jig/kg) was somewhat higher than the recommended NOEL (Long and Morgan
             1990).

             The recommended PEL of fluoranthene is 3200;ig/kg. Adverse biological effects were
             usually observed (93.9% of the data entries) when concentrations of fluoranthene were
             within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 3200,4g/kg). The recommended PEL was similar
             to 1986 Puget Sound AET for amphipods (3900 gg/kg; Bellar et al. 1986) and similar to the
             California AET for amphipods ( > 3700,a g/kg; Becker et aL 1990). The recommended PEL
             is also similar to the ER-M of 3600,ag/k& reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


             Pffene

             Evaluation of the available information o@ the toxicity of sediment-associated pyrene to
             aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 290,ug/kg. Adverse biological effects
             were never observed when concentrations of pyrene were within the no effects range (i.e.,
             0 - 290,ug/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to the national screening level.
             concentration of 434 Ag/kg (at 1% TOC) reported by Neff et aL (1986). The ER-L,
             calculated using the NSTPA, was 350 gg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).

             The recommended PEL of pyrene is 1900;ig/kg. Adverse biological effects were usually
             observed (89.7% of the data entries) when concentrations of pyrene were within the
             probable effects range (i.e., @. 1900 A g/kg). The Puget Sound AETs were consistently above
             the recommended PEI, ranging from 2600 Ag/kg (for Microtox) to 16000 (for benthic
             community and amphipods; Bellar et aL 1986; PTI 1988). The recommended PEL is similar
             to the ER-M of 2200 jug/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


             Sum High Molecular Weight PAHs

             The group of high molecular weight (HMW) PAHs considered in the present study consists
             of benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, fluoranthene, and
             pyrene. Due to similarities in their mode of action and toxic effect levels, these substances
             -are frequently considered together in sediment quality assessments (Gillam 1991).
             Evaluation of available information on the effects of HMW PAHs on aquatic biota results







                                                         -70-



              in a recommended NOEL of 870,gg/kg and a PEL of 8500;ig/kg. Adverse biological
              effects were occasionally (15.4% of data entries) and usually (76.2% of data entries) with
              theno effects and probable effects ranges, respectively. By comparison, the California
              AETs ranged from 1700 to > 11,000 Ag/kg (Becker et.aL 1990). The Puget Sound AETs
              were much higher, ranging from 17,000 to 69,000 A g/kg (Beller et aL 1986; PTI 1988).


              Total PAHs


              Total PAHs refers to the sum of the concentrations of each of the 13 low and high
              molecular weight PAHs listed in the previous sections. While the mode of action of LMW
              and HMW PAHs is thought to differ (MacDonald et aL 1992), these substances are
              sometimes grouped in assessments of sediment qualit@ (Gillarn 1991). Evaluation of
              available information on the effects of sediment-associated PAHs (total) on aquatic biota
              results in a recommended NOEL of 2900 mg/kg and a PEL of 28,000 mg/kg. Within the
              no effects range, adverse biological effects were infrequently observed (6.7% of data
              entries). However, adverse biological effects were usually observed (88% of data entries)
              when contaminant concentrations were within the probable effects range. By comparison,
              the northern California AET for amphipods was > 15,000 Aglkg.



              623 Polychlonnated Biphenyls (PCBs)

              Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) is the generic term for a group of 209 congeners that
              contain a varying number of substituted chlorine atoms in a biphenyl ring. Commercially,
              PCBs are used in complex mixtures, based primarily on the percentage of chlorine in the
              mixture. Mixtures containing 21 - 54% chlorine by weight have been used extensively in.
              closed electric systems as dielectric fluids. Other PCBs have been used as plasticizers, heat
              transfer fluids, hydraulic fluids, fluids in vacuum pumps and compressors, lubricants, wax
              extenders, special adhesives, and surface coatings for carbonless copy paper (Moore and
              Walker 1991). However, all of these uses were curtailed in the United States in 1971.

              Contamination of aquatic ecosystems by PCBs has arisen exclusively from human activities.
              While PCBs may enter the environment from a variety of sources, the major inputs to
              aquatic systems include leachates from landfills, municipal wastewater effluents, industrial
              effluents, atmospheric deposition (due to incomplete incineration of PCB contaminated
              wastes), and disposal of industrial and municipal wastewater treatment sludges (Moore and
              Walker 1991).

              PCBs are highly persistent, stable compounds, which have high octanol/water partition
              coefficients. As such, sorption to sediments is a predominant environmental fate process
              in aquatic systems (Jaagumagi 1990a). PCBs tend to be associated with fine grained
              particles (< 0.15,am) and organic matter in sediments. As is the case with many non-polar
              organic contaminants, the bioavailability of PCBs is dependent on the TOC content of the
              sediments (Bolton et aL 1985; Lyman et aL 1987).







                                                             -71


               @Exposure to PCBs may result in a wide variety of effects on aquatic organisms, including
               acute and chronic lethality, reproductive toxicity, developmental abnormalities, and growth
               retardation (Moore and Walker 1991). While* PCBs are not highly toxic to aquatic
               organisms, these substances have considerable potential to accumulate in the tissues of
               aquatic species and, therefore, may represent significant hazards to consumers of aquatic
               species. Bioaccumulation factors for PCBs have ranged as high as 4.4 x 10         '7 in laboratory
               studies and biomagnification in higher trophic levels has been demonstrated (Moore and
               Walker 1991).

               Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated total PCBs
               to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 24 A g/kg. Adverse biological effects
               were occasionally observed (21.4% of data entries) when concentrations of total PCBs were
               within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 24,ug/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to the
               national screen level concentration of 36.6,4g/kg (at 1% TOC) reported by Neff et aL
               (1986) and the Burrard Inlet sediment quality objective (Swain and Nijman 1991). The
               ER-L, calculated using the NSTPA, was 50 A glkg (Long and Morgan 1990).

               The recommended PEL of total PCBs is 260;ig/kg. Adverse biological                   effects  were
               frequently observed (54.3% of the data entries) when concentrations of total PCBs were
               within the probable effects range (i.e., @: 260 Ag/kg). Ile frequency of adverse biological
               effects with the probable effects range was greater (73.7% of the data entries). when the
               PEL was estimated at 500 Aglkg. The recommended PEL (270 Ag/kg) was similar to the
               northern California AET for amphipods (260,ug@kg) and the California AET for benthic
               ,species (360,4g/kg; Becker et aL 1990). T@e Puget Sound AETs were generally well above
               the recommended PEI, ranging from 130gg/kg (Microtox) to 3100 (for amphipods;
               Bellar et aL 1986; PTI 1988). The recommended PEL is somewhat lower than the ER-M
               of 400,pg/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).




               624 Penicides

               A wide variety of pesticides are used in agricultural and other applications throughout
               Florida. A list of the substances of greatest concern with respect to contamination of coastal
               zone sediments is provided in Table 2. These substances were identified based on: historic
               and current use patterns. (i.e., > 100,000 pounds applied in Florida annually),
               physical/ chemical properties (i.e., log K,,,,), and existing sediment quality monitoring data
               (Long qnd Morgan 1990; Long et aL 1991; Delfino et aL 1991).

               Sufficient toxicological data exist to develop SQAGs for only a subset of the priority
               pesticides used in Florida. Additional information will be required to support the derivation
               of guidelines for the other priority pesticides in Florida coastal waters.








                                                             -72-


               AUrinlNeUrin

               Aldrin is an organochlorine pesticide that has been used as a pest control agent in a variety
               of domestic and agricultural applications (Jaagumagi 1990b). Originally, aldrin was used to
               control a broad spectrum of soil, fruit, and vegetable pests, as well as for specific control of
               grasshoppers, locusts, and termites (CCREM 1987). However, the current uses of aldrin are
               restricted to those situations where there is no effluent discharge (i.e., ground injection for
               termite control; CCREM 1987). In aquatic systems, aldrin is rapidly biotransformed
               (through epoxidation) to dieldrin, which is highly stable in aquatic environments.

               Like aldrin, dieldrin is an organochlorine pesticide. Dieldrin that has been one of the most
               widely used domestic pesticides in the United States (CCREM 1987), primarily to control
               soil, fruit, and vegetable pests. As is the case with aldrin, dieldrin use is currently restricted
               to situations where there is no effluent discharge (CCREM 1987). Sorption to sediments
               is an important environmental fate process for dieldrin. In sediments, this substancemay
               persist for extended periods. Dieldrin has been detected in coastal sediments at a number
               of locations throughout Florida (Long and Morgan 1990).

               Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for either aldrin or dieldrin.        The San
               Francisco Bay AETs for bivalves and amphipods was 1.9 A g/kg of aldrin (Long and Morgan
               1990). In California, the AET for benthic species was 6.2 g g/kg of dieldrin (Becker et aL
               1990).


               Azinophosmethyl

               Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for azinophosmethyl, which is also known
               as guthion.



               Total Chlordane


               Chlordane is a broad spectrum chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticide that occurs as a mixture
               of isomers, the most common of which are alpha-chlordane and gamma-chlordane
               (Jaagumagi 1990b). Chlordane has been used in a wide variety of agricultural and domestic
               applications in Florida. Specifically, it has been used as a wood preservative, as an
               insecticide in home and garden applications, and to control pests on livestock (Worthing and
               Hance *1991). While the use of this compound has been discontinued in recent years, its
               persistence and tendency to accumulate in sediments makes chlordane an ongoing concern
               in Florida sediments. This substance has been detected in coastal sediments in various
               locations in the state (Long and Morgan 1990).

               Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for chlordane. Long and Morgan (1990)
               reported an ER-L and ER-M of 0.5 u g/kg and 6 g g/ka, respectively. The San Francisco
                                                                       C@ C@
               Bay AET for bivalves and amphipods was 2 gg/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).







                                                            73 -



              Chlorthalond


              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for chlorthalonil.


              Chlorpyrifos

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for chlorpyrifos.



              DDT and metabolites


              DDT or 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(4-chlorophenyl)ethane is a broad spectrum organochlorine
              insecticide that has been used worldwide since the early 1940s (Jaagumagi 1990b). DDT
              has been used extensively in agricultural applications, primarily as a non-systemic ingested
              and contact insecticide to control a wide variety of pest species (Worthing and Hance 1991).
              While this substance is no longer registered for use in North America, it is highly toxic and
              persistent in the environment. Therefore, residues of DDT and its metabolites (DDE and
              DDD) may represent significant sediment quality concerns in Florida. DDT, DDE, and
              DDD have all been detected recently in Florida coastal sediments (DelFino et al 1991;
              Long and Morgan 1990).


              pp'@DDD

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for p,p'-DDD. An ER-L of 2,ug/kg was
              reported by Long and Morgan (1990). The ER-M was 20,4g/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).


              p,p @-DDE

              Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated total p,p'-
              DDE to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 1.7 /1 g/kg. Adverse biological
              effects were never observed when concentrations of total p,p'-DDE were within the no
              effects range (i.e., 0 - 1.7 jig/kg). The recommended NOEL was@ similar 'to the San
              Francisco Bay AET for bivalves and mussels (2.2,u g/kg; Long and Morgan 1990). The ER-
              L, calculated using the NSTPA, was 2,4g/kg (Long and Morgan 1990).

              The recommended PEL of total p,pl-DDE is 130 Ag/kg.. Adverse biological effects were
              commonly observed (52.6% of the data entries) when concentrations of total p,p'-DDE were
              within the probable 'effects range (i.e., @! 130 jug/kg). The recommended PEL was much
              higher than the Puget Sound AETs for benthic species (9 g g/kg) and amphipods (15 A g/kg;
              PTI 1988) and much lower than the California AET for benthic species (2800 A g/kg; Becker
              et aL 1990). The recommended PEL is much higher than the ER-M of 15,ug/kg reported
              by Long and Morgan (1990).







                                                          74-


             p,p@-DDT

             Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for p,p-DDT. The chronic marine
             sediment quality criterion, derived using the EqPA, was 1.5 (at 1% TOC; Bolton et al. 1985).
             An ER-L of 1,4g/kg was reported by Long and Morgan (1990).

             In California, AETs for p,p'-DDT ranged from 6.3 g g/kg for bentbic species to > 620 A g/kg
             for amphipods (Becker et al. 1990). The Puget Sound AET for amphipod was > 270,ug/kg
             (PTI 1988). Long and Morgan (1990) reported an ER-M of 7 A g/kg for this substance.


             Total DDT

             Evaluation of the available information on the toxicity of sediment-associated DDT (total)
             to aquatic biota results in a recommended NOEL of 4.5 Ag/kg. Adverse biological effects
             were frequently observed (52.6% of data entries) when Concentrations of total DDT were
             within the no effects range (i.e., 0 - 4.5 A g/kg). The recommended NOEL was similar to
             the chronic marine sediment quality criterion of 3.29,4g/kg recommended by JRB
             Associates (1984). The ER-1, calculated using the NSTPA,.was 3,og/kg (Long and Morgan
             1990).

             The recommended      PEL of total DDT is 270Ag/kg. Adverse biological effects were
             commonly observed    (52.6% of the data entries) when concentrations of total DDT were
             within the probable effects range (i.e., @! 270 g g/kg). The California AETs for benthic
             species (3000, jig/kg) and for amphipods (@ 9300 pig/kg) were much higher than the PEL
             (Becker et al. 1990). The recommended PEL was slightly lower than the ER-M of
             350 gg/kg reported by Long and Morgan (1990).


             Dindfoton

             Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for disulfoton.


             Endosuffan

             Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for endosulfan. McLeese et al. (1982)
             reported a 12 day LCso of 340,ug/kg for the sandworm, Nereis virens. Chandler et al. (1991)
             reported effects on colonization of polychaetes in Southern California at 50 jug/kg and
             mortality to copepods at 200 Ag/kg.







                                                        _75-



              En∈


              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for endrin. Chronic marine sediment
              quality criteria, calculated using the EqPA, ranged from 0.53 to 3.21 pg/kg (EPA 1988; JRB
              Associates 1984).


              Heptachlor

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for beptachlor. The chronic marine
              sediment quality criterion, calculated using the EqPA, was 5 Ag/kg (Bolton et aL 1985).


              Heptachlor Epoxide

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for heptachlor epoxide.


              Lhidane (gamma-MC)

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for lindane. In California, AET values
              for lindane ranged from 0.7 (for amphipods) to > 1.3 (for benthic species; Becker et aL
              1990).


              Mirer


              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for mirex.


              Phorate


              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for phorate.


              Toxaphene

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for toxaphene. Bolton et aL (1985)
              reported achronic marine sediment quality criterion of 5,4g/kg for this substance.


              TriflurWin

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for trifluralin.







                                                           -76-



              625 Chlorinated Oiganic Substances

              Dioxins and Furans

              Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) are composed of a triple-ring structure
              consisting of two benzene rings connected to each other by two oxygen atoms. Depending
              on the number and position of chlorine substitution on the benzene rings, 75 chlorinated
              dioxin congeners are  possible. The polychlorinated dibenzofuran (PCDF) molecule is        ' also
              a tripl.@,--ring structure with the two benzene rings connected to themselves by a single oxygen
              atom (Figure 1). One hundred and thirty-five (135) chlorinated dibenzofuran congeners are
              possible.

              Sources and releases - to the environment have been well documented in the literature
              (OMOE 1985; Hutzinger et al. 1985; EPS 1985; EPA 1985; NRCC 1981; NRCC 1984).
              PCDDs and PCDFs are not produced intentionally but are unavoidable by-products of
              chemical manufacturing or the result of incomplete combustion of materials containing
              chlorine atoms 'and organic compounds (OMOE 1985). PCDDs and PCDFs may. also be
              formed during the disinfection of complex effluents (e.g. pulp and paper effluents)
              containing many organic constituents.

              Dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans have the potential to enter the aquatic environment due
              to direct effluent discharges, runoff from areas in which dioxin/@uran contaminated products
              are used and stored, and deposition of materials that are transported atmospherically. The
              most significant sources of dioxins include the wood preservative pentachlorophenol,
              municipal incinerators, and pulp and pa@er mills that utilize chlorine in the bleaching
              process. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are the most significant source of furans
              (Boddington et aL 1990).

              PCDDs and PCDFs may be distributed throughout the environment via air, water, soil, and'
              sediments. PCDDs and PCDFs tend to be very insoluble in water, adsorb strongly onto
              soils, sediments, and airborne particulates, and bioaccumulate in biological tissues
              (Hutzinger et aL 1985). These substances have been associated with a wide variety of toxic
              effects in animals, including acute toxicity, enzyme activation, tissue damage, developmental
              abnormalities, and cancer.

              Insufficient toxicological data are available to derive  SQAGs for any of the 75      dioxin or
              furan congeners that could be present in Florida coastal sediments.


              Pentachlorophenol

              Insufficient data were available to develop 90AGs for pentachlorophenol. In Puget Sound,
              AETs of 360 and 690 A g/kg have been reported for amphipods and benthic species,
              respectively (PTI 1988).







                                                          _77-



              626 Phthalate Esters

              Phthalate esters represent a large group of chemicals that are used widely as plasticizers in
              polyvinyl chloride (PVC) resins, adhesives, and cellulose film coatings. They are also found
              in cosmetics, rubbing alcohol, insect repellents, insecticides, and solid rocket Propellants
              (CCREM 1987). Due to their wide use, phthalate esters have a significant, potential to be
              released into coastal ecosystems. For this reason, numerical SQAGs for these substances
              are required to assess the hazards posed to aquatic organisms.


              Bis(2-ethy1hety1)phtha1xe
              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for bis(2-ethylhexyliphthalate. Puget
              Sound AETs ranged from 1300,4g/kg (benthic community) to > 3100 Ag/kg (amphipods)
              for this substance (PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986). Becker et aL (1990) reported that the
              California AET for bentbic species was 5100,4g/kg.


              Di"Whyl phthakue

              Insufficient 'data were available to develop SQAGs for dimethyl phthalate. Puget Sound
              AETs ranged from 71 gg/kg (Microtox) to > 160 gg/kg (amphipods and bivalves) for this
              substance (PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986). Bolton     et aL (1985) reported a chronic marine
              sediment quality criterion of 490,ug/kg, using the EqPA.


              Di-n-butyl phthalate

              Insufficient data were available to develop SQAGs for di-n-butyl phthalate. Puget Sound-
              AETs ranged from 1400 A g/kg (Microtox and oysters) to > 5 100 ;L g/kg (benthic species)
              for this substance (PTI 1988; Bellar et aL 1986).







                                                           -78-



                                                       Chapter 7


                                    An Initial Assessment of the Potential for
                           Biological Effects of Sediment-Associated Contaminants
                                              in Florida Coastal Waters




              ZO     Introduction

              This Chapter describes an initial assessment of the potential for biological effects of
              sediment-associated contaminants, using Florida Department of Environmental Regulation
              (FDER) coastal sediment chemistry data and the sediment quality assessment guidelines
              (SQAGs) identified in Chapter 6. This initial assessment will help focus sediment
              management efforts by identifying priority contaminants and priority sites with respect to
              sediment contamination. Effective identification of sediment quality concerns in Florida will
              help direct limited resources to yield the greatest environmental benefits.

              This initial regional assessment of sediment quality consisted of four steps. First, regional
              sediment quality issues and concerns were identified by reviewing potential sources of
              contaminants in the state. Priority substances with respect to sediment contamination were
              subsequently identified by integrating relevant 'data from a number of sources. Next
              numerical SQAGs were then derived preferentially for those substances that were likely to
              be of greatest concern in Florida sedimetits. The third step was to compile a database
              containing sediment chemistry data for Florida coastal waters'       Finally, a comparisZon of
              sediment chemistry data with the SQAGs was done to provide a preliminary means of
              identifying priority sites and priority contaminants with respect to the potential for adverse
              biological effects (Figure 4).



              ZI     Identification of Regional Sediment Quality Imuesand Concems

              In Florida, sediment quality issues and concerns are primarily associated with -direct and
              non-point (diffuse) source inputs of contaminants from urban and suburban areas into
              coastal waters. These inputs of contaminants include effluent discharges from wastewater
              treatment plants, stormwater runoff, and a variety of related sources. In addition, industrial
              facilities have the potential to release significant quantities of contaminants into estuarine
              and marine systems with the most significant of these being the pesticides, organic
              chemicals, plastics and pulp and paper industries. Further, intensive agricultural operations
              in the state have the potential to contribute pesticides and fertilizers to aquatic ecosystems.
              Other possible sources of contaminants into Florida coastal waters include leachates from
              landfills, dredge and fill activities, and the operation of ships and pleasure craft. Each of
              these potential sources of contaminants was considered in identifying substances for this
              preliminary evaluation. (A discussion of sediment quality issues and concerns and







                                                      -79-



           Figure 4. Framework for conducting preliminary regional sediment quality assessment of
                    Florida coastal waters.



                                 Identify Sediment
                                  Quality Issues
                                  and Concerns






                                       V

                                  Develop Initial
                                 List of Chemicals
                                   of Concern






                                       V
                                   Collect and                            Identify Sites
                                 Evaluate Existing                      Where Additional
                                     SQ Data                            Data are Required
                                 (e.g. sediment chemistry)






                                       V

                                  Use SQGs to                               Generate
                                 Assess Potential                          Additional
                                  for Bioeffects                            SQ Data

                                                                                          __j




                                       V

                                     Identify
                                  Priority Areas
                                and Contaminants






                                                           -80-



              anthropogenic influences in Florida is provided in Chapter 2 and a list. of substances likely
              to be associated with sediments is- provided in Chapter 6).



              72     Development of a Database on Sediment Chemistry in Florida

              Over the past 10 years, the FDER has conducted coastal sediment contaminant surveys in
              various regions throughout the state. This information has now been assembled into a
              database (entitled the Florida Coastal Contaminants Survey) in dBase IVTM format. This
              database contains information on approximately 700 stations located in estuarine and
              nearshore marine areas throughout Florida. While most of these stations are located in the
              vicinity of urban centers; approximately 117% of the stations are located in pristine areas for
              the purpose of identifying natural background conditions.

              There are over 11,000 miles of tidal shoreline in Florida, and the database is not
              representative of the full extent of the state's coastal conditions. The Florida Coastal
              Contaminants Survey has focused on metals due to the prevalence of anthropogenic
              activities that generate metals-enriched wastes. The metals most commonly measured in the
              survey include cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, mercury, zinc, and aluminum.
              Typically, two samples are collected and analyzed at each station. Organic substances are
              also represented in the database at a limited number of stations. In general, sampling for
              organic substances was conducted when land use activities suggested that there would be a
              high probability of detecting these substances in sediments.



              Z3     Derivation of Numerical Se&ment Quality Assessment Gukieknes

              Effects-based SQAGs, provide a basis for assessing the potential for biological effects
              associated with various concentrations of contaminants. In this document, no observed
              effects levels (NOELs) and probable effects levels (PELs) have been derived (Table 4) to
              define three ranges of contaminant concentrations: the probable effects range; the possible
              effects range; and, the no effects range. This subsection provides an overview of the
              guidelines which are more fully explained in Chapter 5.

              The probable effects range is defined as the range of concentrations of a specific
              contaminant in sediment within which biological effects are usually or always observed
              (proba6le effects range @: PEL). Sediments with concentrations of contaminants within the
              probable effects range are considered to represent significant and immediate hazards to
              exposed organisms. Sites with concentrations of one or More contaminants that fall within
              the probable effects range should be considered to be the highest priority for
              implementation of specific sediment quality management options.

              The possible effects range is defined as the range of concentrations of a specific
              contaminant in sediment within which the expression of adverse biological effects is







                                                           -81


               uncertain and is likely to be dependent on such factors as bioavailability, which may
               influence the toxicity of the substance (NOEL < possible effects range < PEL). Sediment-
               associated contaminants are considered to represent potential haz   *ards to exposed organisms
               when concentrations fall within this range. Sediments with concentrations of contaminants
               within this range may require further assessment to determine the biological significance of
               the contamination. In general, further assessment would be supported by biological tests
               designed to evaluate the biological significance of sediment-associated contaminants to key
               species of aquatic biota.

               The no effects range is defined as the range of concentrations of a sediment contaminant
               within which biological effects are rarely or never observed (no effects range .5 NOEL).
               Sediments with concentrations of contaminants within the no effects range are considered
               to be of acceptable quality for those contaminants. In general, further investigations of
               sediment quality conditions would be considered to be of relatively lower priority for
               sediments in which contaminant concentrations fall within the no effects range. However,
               biological testing may be required to validate the results of the initial assessment of the
               potential for adverse biological effects.



               Z4     Assessment of the Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Associated Contam&zants

               Sediment chemistry data were used in conjunction with the recommended SQAGs to
               conduct an initial assessment of the potential for adverse effects in the Florida coastal zone.
               This assessment was conducted through a kearch of the FDER coastal sediment chemistry
               database, using the SQAGs as search criteria. In this way, data entries that exceeded the
               probable effects level and the no effects level, respectively, could be identified. The highest
               priority substances with respect to sediment contamination were identified as those that
               frequently occurred at concentrations within the probable effects ranges. The highest'
               priority area with respect to sediment contamination were identified as those with the
               greatest frequency of contaminant concentrations within the probable effects ranges. Pooled
               data for a number of sampling stations and sampling dates were used to assess         sediment
               quality within each geographic area.


               74.1 Areas of Concem in Florida Coastal Waters

               A totalof 21 areas were considered in this initial assessment of sediment quality in Florida.
               Evaluation of FDER coastal sediment chemistry database provides a great deal of insight
               into sediment quality conditions within each of these areas. However, this initial assessment
               is constrained by limitations on the available data for some areas. For example, data on
               levels of metals were available on less than ten sites in the Jupiter, Ft. Lauderdale and
               Florida Keys areas. Even more severe limitations on the data were apparent when PAHs,
               PCBs, pesticides and other organic contaminants were considered (see Tables 6-9). In spite
               of these limitations, it is apparent that sediment quality represents a significant
               environmental concern in a number of locations within the state.








 Table 6. Number of samples that fall within the probable effects range (i.e.,> PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic
 coast sampling area.


                                     Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
 Substance               JAX          STA        DAY        IRS       JPT      WPB    FTL    MIA    KEY



 Metals
 Arsenic                 0            0            0           0       0        0       0     0      0
 Cadmium                 0            0            0           0       0        0       0     1      0
 Copper                  0            0            0           0       0        0       0     9      0
 Chromium                0            0            0           0       0        0       0     1      0
 Lead                    0            0            0           0       0        0       0     20     0
 Mercury                 0            0            0           0       0        1       1     14     0
 Nickel                  NG           NG           NG         NG       NG       NG      NG    NG     NG 
 Silver                  0            0            0           0       0        0       0     2      0
 Tributyl Tin            NG           NG           NG         NG       NG       NG      NG    NG     NG
 Zinc                    0            0            0           0       0        0       0     8      0
 Number of Samples       68           37           31          86      7        27      5     110    4 

 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHS)
 Acenaphthene            7            0            0           0       0        0       0     1      0
 Acenaphthylene          NG           NG            0          NG      NG       NG      NG    NG     NG
 Anthracene              0            0            0           0       0        0       0     1      0
 Benz(a)anthracene       0            0            0           0       0        0       0     2      0
 Benzo(a)pyrene          0            0            0           0       0        0       0     0      0
 Chrysene                0            0            0           0       0        0       0     9      0
 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene  1            0            0           0       0        0       0     0      0
 Fluoranthene            1            0            1           0       0        0       0     2      0
 Fluorene                0            0            0           0       0        0       0     0      0
 2-methyl naphthalene    NG           NG           NG         NG       NG       NG      NG    NG     NG 
 Naphthalene             0            0            0           0       0        0       0     0      0
 Phenanthrcne            2            0            2           0       0        0       0     9      0  
 Pyrene                  4            0            1           0       0        0       0     7      0
 Number of Samples       34           2            6           7       0        6       4     66     0








             Table 6. Number of samples that fall within the probable effects range (i.e., > PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic coast sampling area
                        (continued).


                                                                                       Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
             Substance                                            JAX          STA          DAY           IRS          JPT          WPB           FrL          MIA           KEY




                 Chlorinated Organic Cornpounds
             2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin                  NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodil)cnzofuran                     NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Pentachlorophcnol                                    NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG


                Pesticides
             Aldrin                                               NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Azinophosmethyl (Guthion)                            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Chlordane                                            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Chlorthalonil                                        NG           NG           NG-           NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
                                                                                                                                                                                               00
             Chlorpyrifos                                         NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG,           NG           NG            NG
             p,p'-DDD                                             NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             p,p'-DDE                                             0             0            0             0            0            0             0            0             0
             p,p'-DDT                                             NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Total DDT                                            0             0            0             0            0            0             0            0             0
             Dic1drin                                             NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Disulfoton                                           NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Endosulfan                                           NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Heptachlor                                           NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Fleotachlor epoxide                                  NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Lindane (gamma-BHC)                                  NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Phorate                                              NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Quintozene (PCNB)                                    NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Toxaphene (alpha-BHC)                                NG           NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG
             Trifluralin                                          N G          NG           NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG
             Number of Samples                                    47            3             6            21           0             11           5             78           0





              Table 6. Number of samples that fall within the probable effects range (i.e.,>PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic
              coast sampling area         (continued). 

                                       Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
              Substance                            JAX       STA     DAY     IRS      JPT    WPB    FTL    MIA    KEY

              Polychlorinaed Biphenyls (PCBs)
              Aroclor 1016                          0         0       0         0      0      0      0      0      0
              Aroclor 1242                          0         0       0         0      0      0      0      0      0
              Aroclor 1248                          0         0       0         0      0      0      1      0      0
              Aroclor 1254                          0         0       0         0      0      0      1      9      0 
              Aroclor 1260                          0         0       0         0      0      0      0      3      0
              Total PCBs*                           0         0       0         0      0      0      2      9      0 
              Number of Samples                     47        3       6         21     0      11     5      78     0 

             Phthalates
             Bis(2-cthylhexyl)phthalate             NG        NG      NG        NG     NG     NG     NG     NG     NG
             Dimethyl phtalate                      NG        NG      NG        NG     NG     NG     NG     NG     NG
             Di-n-butyl phthalate                   NG        NG      NG        NG     NG     NG     NG     NG     NG

             *Sum of Aroclor
             NG = no guideline; insufficient data to derive sediment quality guidelines..
             JAX=  Jacksonville; STA = St. Augustine; DAY = Daytona Beach; IRS= Indian River;JPT=Jupiter; WPB=West Palm Beach;
             FTL = Ft. Lauderdale; MIA= Miami; KEY =  Florida Keys









Table 7. Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range (i.e.,>NOEL and <PEL)of contaminant concentrations for
 each Atlantic coast  sampling area.


                                             Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
Substance                      JAX        STA        DAY       IRS        JPT         WPB        FTL    MIA    KEY



Metals
Arsenic                        16           15        8          7           0         2          0       14     0
Cadmium                         3           0         1          6           0         0          0       24     0
Copper                         12           6         6          15          0         1          1       16     0
Chromium                       28           12        3          24          0         1          1       38     0
Lead                           30           2         5          21          0         5          2       27     0 
Mercury                        37           1         11         28          0         9          2       53     4
Nickel                         NG           NG        NG         NG         NG         NG         NG      NG     NG
Silver                         4            0         0          4           0         0          0       13     0
Ttibutyl Tin                   NG           NG        NG         NG         NG         NG         NG      NG     NG
Zinc                           27           4         1          17          0         2          0       20     0
Number of Samples              68           37        31         86          7         27         5       110    4

Polycylic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHS)
Acenaphthene                    5            0         0         0           0         0          0       0      0 
Acenaphthylene                  NG           NG        NG        NG          NG        NG         NG      NG     NG
Anthracene                      5            0         0         0           0         0          2       5      0  
Benz (a) anthracene             0            0         0         0           0         0          0       5      0 
Benzo(a)pyrene                  7            0         0         0           0         3          0       10     0
Chrysene                        6            0          0        0           0         0          0       12     0
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracc            0            0          0        0           0         1          0       0      0 
Fluoranthene                    6            2          5        0           0         3          1       20     0
Fluorene                        5            0          0        0           0         0          1       0      0
2-methyl naphthalene            NG           NG         NG       NG         NG         NG         NG      NG     NG
Naphthalene                     0            0          0        0           0         1          0       2      0
Phenanthrene                    1            2          4        0           0         0          0       5      0
Pyrene                          7            0          1        0           0         3          0       16     0
Number of Samples               34           2          6        7           0         6          4       66     0 








                 Table 7. Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range (i.e.,     > NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic coast
                            sampling area (continued).


                                                                                   Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
                 Substance                                             JAX         STA           DAY          IRS          JPT          WPB           FTL           MIA           KEY


                     Chlorinated Organic Compounds
                 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin                   NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofu ran                      NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Pentachlorophenol                                     NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG

                    .Pesticides
                 Aldrin                                                NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Azinophosmethyl (Guthion)                             NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Chlordane                                             NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Chlorthalonil                                         NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Chlorpyrifos                                          NG          NG            NG'          NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                                                                                                                                                                                                   00
                 p,p'-DDD                                              NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG               011
                 p,p'-DDE                                              0            0             0            0             0             0            3            0             0
                 p,p'-DDT                                              NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Total DDT                                             0            0             0            0             0             0            3            0             0
                 Dicldrin                                              NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Disulfoton                                            NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Endosulfan                                            NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Heptachlor                                            NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Fleptachlor cpoxide                                   NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Lindane (gamma-BHC)                                   NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Phorate                                               NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Quintozene (PCNB)                                     NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Toxaphene (alpha-BHC)                                 NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Trifluralin                                           NG          NG            NG           NG           NG            NG           NG            NG            NG
                 Number of Samples                                     47           3             6            21            0             11           5             78           0









              Table 7. Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range (i.e., > NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Atlantic coast
                        sampling area (continued).


                                                                             Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
              Substance                                          JAX          STA         DAY            IRS         JPT         WPB           FTL          MIA          KEY



                 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
              Aroclor 1016                                        0            0            0            0            0            0            0            1            0
              Aroclor 1242                                        0            0            0            0            0            0            0            0            0
              Aroclor 1248                                        0            0            0            0            0            0            1            0            0
              Aroclor 1254                                        2            0            0            0            0            0            2            5            0
              Aroclor 1260                                        0            0            0            0            0            0            0            2            0
              Total PCBs*                                         2            0            0            0            0            0            1            5            0
              Number of Samples                                   47           3            6            21           0            11           5            78           0

                 Phthatales
              Bis(2-cthylhcxyl)phthalate                          NG           NG           NG           NG          NG           NG           NG            NG           NG               00
              Dirnethyl phthalate                                 NG           NG           NG           NG          NG           NG           NG            NG           NG
              Di-n-butyl plithalate                               NG           NG           NG           NG          NG           NG           NG            NG           NG


              *Surn of Aroclor


              NG     no guideline; insufficient data to derive sediment quality guidelines.

              JAX     Jacksonville; STA = St. Augustine; DAY = Daytona Beach; IRS              Indian River; JPT      Jupiter; WPB      West Palm Beach;
              FrL     Ft. Lauderdale; MIA       Miami; KEY        Florida Keys








              Table 8. Number of samples fall within the probable effects range (i.e., > PEIL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast sampling area.



                                                                                    Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
              Substance                                      EVG       FTM         TPA      WCF         APL      APA         SJB        PCY       DES          PEN    PER



                 Metals
              Arsenic                                          0         0          3         0         0          1         0          0         0            0       0
              Cadmium                                          0         0          1         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Copper                                           0         0          1         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Chromium                                         0         0          4         0         0          0         0          0         0            3       2
              Lead                                             0         0          3         0         0          0         0          0         0            1       0
              Mercury                                          .0        0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Nickel                                           NG        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG         NG        NG           NG     NG
              Silver                                           0         0          0         0         1          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Tributyl Tin                                     NG        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG         NG        NG           NG     NG
              Zinc                                             0         0          3         0         0          0         0          0         0            4       0
                                                                                                                                                                                      00
              Number of Samples                                96        67        141        30        56         30        22         39        20           79      17             00

                 Polycyclic Aromatic Hy&ocarbons (PA11s)
              Acenaphthene                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       1
              Acenaphthylcne                                   NG        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG         NG        NG           NG     NG
              Anthracene                                       0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Bcnz(a)anthracenc                                0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Benzo(a)pyrene                                   0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            1       1
              Chryscne                                         0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene                           0         0          0         0         0'         0         0          0         0            0       0
              Fluoranthene                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            1       0
              Fluorene                                         0         0          0         0         0          0         .0         0         0            0       0
              2-methyl naphthalene                             NG        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG         NG        NG           NG     NG
              Naphthalene                                      0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            0       0
              Phenanthrene                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0          0         0            1       0
              Pyrene                                           .0        0          0         0         0          0         0          0         1            5       2
              Number of Samples                                3         12         it        0         0          0         0          0         3            29      9








               Table 8. Number of samples fall within the probable effects range (i.e., > PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast sampling area
                         (continued).


                                                                                    Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
               Substance                                     EVG       FrM          TPA     WCF        APL      APA        SJB       MY        DES       PEN        PER


                  Chlorinated Otganic Compounds
               2,3,7,8-Tetrach lorod ibenzo- p- dioxin        NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibcnzofuran                NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Pentachlorophenol                              NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG

                  Pesticides
               Aldrin                                         NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Azinophosmethyl (Guthion)                      NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Chlordane                                      NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Chlorthalonil                                  NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               ChlorpyTifos                                   NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
                                                                                                                                                                                    00
               p,p'-DDD                                       NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG              110
               p,p'-DDE                                        0         0          0         0         0         0         0         0          0         0         0
               p,p'-DDT                                       NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Total DDT                                       0         0          0         0         0         0         0         0          0         0         0
               Dieldrin                                       NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Disulfoton                                     NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Endosulfan                                     NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Heptachlor                                     NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Heptachlor cpoxide                             NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Lindane (gamma-BHC)                            NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG.       NG         NG
               Phorate                                        NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Quintozene (PCNB)                              NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Toxaphene (alpha-BHC)                          NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NO        NG        'NG       NG        NG         NG
               Trifluralin                                    NG        NG          NG      NG         NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG
               Number of Samples                               3         8          24        0         0         0         5         3          3         29        7








                Table 8. Number of samples fall within the probable effects range (i.e., > PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast sampling area
                         (continued).


                                                                                      Number of Observations Within the Probable Effects Range
                Substance                                      EVG       FTM         TPA      WCF        APL       APA        SJB       PCY        DES       PEN      PER


                   Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCHs)
                Aroclor 1016                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         01        0          0         0         0
                Aroclor 1.242                                    0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0
                Aroclor 1248                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0
                Aroclor 1254                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0
                Aroclor 1260                                     0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0
                Total PCBs*                                      0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0
                Number of Samples                                3         8          24        0         0          0         5         3          3         29        7

                    Phthalates
                Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate                      NG        NG          NG       NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
                Dime(hyl phthalate                              NG        NG          NG       NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
                Di-n-butyl phthalate                            NG        NG          NG       NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG



                *Surn of Aroclor


                NG = no guideline; insufficient data to derive sediment quality guidelines.

                EVG = Everglades; FTM = Ft. Mayers; TPA = Tampa Bay; WCF                West Central Florida; APL       Apalachee Bay; APA       Apalachichola Bay;
                STJ   St. Josephs Bay; PCY      Panama City; DES       Destin; PEN      Pensacola Bay; PER       Perido Bay.









             Table 9. Number of samples that fall within tile possible effects range (i.e., > NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast
                       sampling area.


                                                                                     Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
             Substance                                       EVG       FTM        TPA       WCF       APL       APA           SJB    PCY       DES        PEN       PER



                 Metals
             Arsenic                                             6         1         17        4         6         7          5          10        4         20         7
             Cadmium                                             0         1         42        0         1         0          0          1         0         5          0
             Copper                                              1         1         22        8         0         3          1          3         1         5          1
             Chromium                                            4         3         52        13        3         6          7          13        5         28         2
             Lead                                                0         2         42        6         1         6          8          10        4         18         2
             Mercury                                             2         8         59        to        4         2          9          9         2         20         3
             Nickel                                              NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG         NG        NG        NG         NG
             Silver                                              2         0         21        0         2         0          0          10        2         0          0
             Tributyl Tin                                        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG         NG        NG        NG         NG
             Zinc                                                0         1         39        1         0         6          8          7         2         21         4
             Total Number of Samples                             96        67        141       30        56        30         22         39        20        79         17

                Polyryclic Aromatic Hydrocwbons (PAHs)
             Acenaphthene                                        0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         1          0
             Accnaphthylene                                      NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG         NG        NG        NG         NG
             Anthracene                                          0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         5          0
             Bcnz(a)anthraccne                                   0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         1          0
             Benzo(a)pyrene                                      0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         9          2
             Chrysene                                            0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         1          4
             Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene                              0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0          0
             Fluoranthcnc                                        0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         5          0
             Fluorcne                                            0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0          0
             2-methyl naphthalene                                NG        NG        NG        NG        NG        NG         NG         NG        NG        NG         NG
             Naphthalene                                         0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         0          1
             Phenanthrene                                        0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0         0         9          2
             Pyrcne                                              .0        0         0         0         0         0.         0          0         0         8          4
             Total PAHs                                          0         0         0         0         0         0          0          0.        0         0          0
             Total Number of Samples                             3         12        11        0         0         0          0          0         3'        29         9









               Table 9. Number of sampics that fall within the possible effects range (i.e., > NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast
                         sampling area (continued),


                                                                                     Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
               Substance                                      EVG       FTM        TPA       WCF        APL      APA         SJB       PCY        DES       PEN       PER



                  alorinated Organic Gornpounds
               2,3,7,8-Tctrachlorodibcn7-o-p-dioxin            NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               2,3,7,8-Tetraclilorodibenzofuran                NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Pentachlorophenol                               NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG

                  Pesticides
               Aldrin                                          NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Azinophosmethyl (Guthion)                       NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Chlordane                                       NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Chlorthalonil                                   NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Chlorpyrifos                                    NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               p,p'-DDD                                        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG              t-j
               p,p'-DDE                                         0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0
               p,p'-DDT                                        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Total DDT                                        0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0         0          0         0
               Dieldrin                                        NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Disulfoton                                      NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Endosulfan                                      NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Hcptachlor                                      NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Heptachlor epoxide                              NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Lindane (gamma-BHC)                             NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Phorate                                         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Quintozene (PCNB)                               NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Toxaphene (alpha-BHC)                           NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Trifluralin                                     NG        NG        NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG        NG
               Total Number of Samples                          3         8          24        0         0         0          5         3         3          29        7









               Table 9. Number of samples that fall within the possible effects range (i.e., > NOEL and < PEL) of contaminant concentrations for each Gulf coast
                         sampling area (continued).


                                                                                     Number of Observations Within the Possible Effects Range
               Substance                                      EVG       FTM        TPA      WCF         APL      APA        SJB       PCY        DES       PEN       PEP,



                   Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
               Aroclor 1016                                     0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          0         0
               Aroclor 1242                                     0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          1         0
               Aroclor 1248                                     0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          0         0
               Aroclor 1254                                     0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          2         1
               Aroclor 1200                                     0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          0         0
               Total PCBs*                                      0         0         0         0          0         0         0         0         0          3         1
               Total Number of Samples                          3         8         24        0          0         0         5         3         3          29        7

                   Phthalates
               Bis(2-ethythexyl)phthalate                      NG        NG         NG       NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG
               Dimethyl plithalate                             NG        NG         NG       NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG
               Di-n-butyl phthalate                            NG        NG         NG       NG         NG        NG        NG         NG        NG         NG        NG



               *surn or Atoclor


               NG = no guideline; insufficicnt data to derive sediment quality guidelines.

               EVG = Everglades; FTM = Ft. Mayers; TPA = Tampa Bay; WCF = West Central Florida; APL                   Apalachee Bay; APA       Apalachichola Bay;
               STJ    St. Josephs Bay; PCY      Panama City; DES       Destin; PEN = Pensacola Bay; PER         Perido Bay.







                                                            94 -



              On the Atlantic coast (Table 6), coastal sediments in the vicinity of Miami had the highest
              frequency of contaminant concentrations within the probable effects ranges. Copper, lead,
              mercury, zinc, phenanthrene, chrysene, pyrene and PCBs were all present at concentrations
              that are considered to represent significant hazards to aquatic organisms. In addition,
              several PAHs were present at levels in excess of the PEL in the Jacksonville and Daytona
              Beach areas. In the Ft. Lauderdale area, the concentrations of several PCB congeners and
              the total PCBs fell within the probable effects range of concentrations.

              All of the areas, surveyed, with the exception of Jupiter, had concentrations of one or more
              contaminants that fell within the possible effects range (Table 7). While the greatest
              number of exceedances were observed in the Miami area, this reflects the total number of
              samples collected within the area. Metals represent the greatest hazard to aquatic
              organisms on the Atlantic coast of Florida, however, PAHs and PCBs have all been detected
              at levels of concern in many areas. High levels of DDT were recorded in the Ft.
              Lauderdale area.


              Coastal sediments in the Gulf of Mexico appeared to be somewhat less contaminated than
              sediments on the Atlantic coast of Florida (Table 8). The greatest frequency of exceedance
              of PELs occurred in Tampa Bay. Arsenic, cadmium, copper, chromium, lead, and zinc were
              the principal contaminants of concern in this area. However, other sampling programs have
              indicated that several PAHs and pesticides are present at levels of concern in Tampa Bay
              (Long and Morgan 1990; E. Long. NOAA. Seattle, Washington. Personal communication).
              Elevated levels of several metals (i.e., @: PEL) have also been observed in Pensacola Bay,
              Perdido Bay, Apalachee Bay, and Apalachicola Bay. Pensacola Bay also. had multiple
              exceedances of the preliminary SQAGs 'for pyrene. While concentrations of organic
              contarrunants rarely fell within the probable effects ranges along the Gulf coast, this region
              has been only infrequently sampled for these analytes.

              All of the areas along the Gulf coast had concentrations of five or more contaminants that -
              fell within the possible effects ranges (Table 9). The greatest number of observations with
              the possible effects ranges occurred in Tampa Bay, this reflects the level of sampling effort
              that has been directed at this area. The other main areas of concern in terms of metals
              contamination are Pensacola Bay and Panama City. Elevated level of PAHs and PCBs were
              also observed in Pensacola Bay and Perdido Bay. Significantly more sampling effort is
              required to fully evaluate contamination of coastal sediments by organic substances in the
              Gulf of Mexico....


              74.2 Contamiriants of Concern in Florida Coastal Waters

              Based on the results of this initial evaluation, the highest priority contaminants with respect
              to sediment contamination in Florida are copper, chromium, lead, mercury, zinc,
              phenanthrene, pyrene, Aroclor 1254, and total PCBs. The concentrations of these
              contaminants frequently fell within the probable effects range in Florida coastal sediments
              (i.e., 10 or more observations). Additional contaminants of concern included arsenic,
              cadmium, silver, acenaphthene, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene,







                                                          -95 -



             fluoranthene, fluorene, and phenanthrene. The concentrations of these contaminants fell
             within the probable effects range on more than one occasion in Florida coastal sediments.
             Insufficient data were available to assess the potential for biological effects associated with
             levels of nickel, tributyltin, acenaphthylene, 2-methylnaphthalene, dioxins and furans,
             pentachlorophenol, 11 individual pesticides, and three individual phthalates.


             Z4.3 Limitations o the Initial Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida
                                  f

             While this initial assessment of sediment quality provides an initial indication of the
             potential for biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants in Florida, these results
             should not be used, by themselves, to make management decisions regarding sediment
             quality. Several limitations of this assessment are identified to emphasize this point. The
             sediment chemistry database used in this assessment has broad coverage, however, the data
             on many analytes are limited. Much of the data on levels of organic contaminants is
             relatively old (greater than 5 years old) and therefore of questionable value with respect to
             reflecting present conditions. In addition, the data collected by Delfino et aL (1991) and by
             NOAA (NSTP) should be evaluated to provide a more comprehensive assessment of
             sediment quality.

             The results of this initial assessment of sediment quality suggest that several metals may be
             present at levels of concern in Florida coastal sediments. However, the probable origin of
             these metals was not considered as part of this assessment. As the potential exists in Florida
             for naturally-occurring metal concentrations to exceed the NOEI-s and PEU, a framework
             for assessing sediment quality on a site-sped'ific basis was developed. This framework, which
             is presented in Chapter 8, demonstrates how the SQAGs and the metals interpretive tool
             should be used together to reliably assess the significance of contaminant levels in coastal
             sediment.







                                                  -96-


                                               Chapter 8

                               A Framework for Assessing Site-Specific
                               Sediment Quality Conditions in Florida




           &0    Introduction

           The initial assessment of sediment quality in Chapter 7 was undertaken to provide a
           defensible basis for identifying regional priorities with respect to contaminants in Florida
           coastal waters. The results of this initial assessment indicate that further investigations may
           be required at a number of locations to provide the information required to support
           environmental management decisions. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide a
           framework for the future use of sediment quality assessment guidelines (SQAGs) and
           related tools.


           This framework identifies essential considerations that should be addressed in conducting
           site-specific sediment quality assessment programs. The framework (Figure 5) is comprised
           of the following elements:                                            -

                 (i)    Collect Historical I-and and Water Use Information;
                 (ii)   Collect and Evaluate Existing Sediment Chemistry Data;
                 (iii)  Collect Supplemental Sediment Chemistry Data;
                 (iv)   Conduct Preliminary Assessment of the Potential for Biological Effects
                        of Sediment-Associated Contaminants;
                 (v)    Evaluate the Origin of Sediment-Associated Contaminants;
                 (vi)   Conduct Biological Assessment of Sediment Quality; and,
                 (vii)  Implement Management of Sediment Quality.

           This framework is designed to provide a consistent approach to assessing sediment quality
           in marine and estuarine areas. However, the framework is not intended to replace accepted
           sediment testing protocols such as developed for the ocean disposal of dredged material.
           Instead, it is intended to provide general guidance to support the sedinien't: quality
           assessment process. Each component of the recommended framework is discussed in -the
           following pages.



           &.7   Collect Historical Land and Water Use Information

           The first phase of a site-specific sediment quality assessment involves the collection and
           review of any historical information that is available on the site under consideration. In
           particular, information is required on the types of industries and businesses that operate or
           have operated in the area, on the location of wastewater treatment plants, on land use








                                                       -97-


          Figure 5. Framework for conducting site-specific assessments of sediment quality conditions
                    in Florida.



                                Develop an Initial
                                List of Chemicals
                               and Sites of Concern





                                       V

                                   Collect and
                                Evaluate Existing     E@xisting Data   Generate Additional
                                     SQ Data          Insufficient            SQ Data
                                 (e.g. sediment chemistry)


                                         Existing Data
                                         Sufficient



                                       VV

                                  Use SQGs to           Effects Not Predicted
                               Assess the Potential
                                  for Bioeffects



                                         Effects
                                         Predicted


                                       V

                             Use Metals Interpretive                 May Conduct Bioassess-
                            & Other Tools to Evaluate                   ment to Verify that.
                             Origin of Contaminants                  Sediments are not Toxic



                                         Human               Natural             Toxic/
                                         Origin              Origin              Not Toxic
                                       V                                       V

                             Conduct Bioassessment                       Sediment Quality
                             to Evaluate Extent and                        Management
                               Severity of Toxicity                          Decision







                                                           -98-



              patterns in upland areas, on stormwater drainage systems, on residential developments, and
              on other historic, ongoing, and potential activities within the area. These data provide a
              basis for identifying potential sources of contaminants to aquatic ecosystems. Information
              on the chemical composition of wastewater effluent discharges on the types of contaminants
              likely to be associated with non-point sources, and on the physical/chemical properties of
              those substances provides a basis for developing an initial list of chemical concerns at the
              site.


              In addition to information on potential contaminant sources, information should be collected
              that facilitates the definition of environmental management goals at the site (if these have
              not been defined). Environmental management goals in estuarine and marine systems may
              be based on protection of the ecosystem as a whole, maintenance of viable populations of
              sportfish species, protection of human health (e.g., swimmable and fishable), or a variety of
              other considerations (e.g., marine transport, industrial development, etc.). As such,
              information on existing uses of the site provide a basis for making decisions regarding the
              nature and extent of the investigations that should be conducted at the site. Mudroch and
              McKnight (1991), Baudo and Muntau (1990) and MacDonald (1989) provide detailed
              descriptions of the information that should be collected and discuss how these data may be
              used to assess ambient environmental quality.



              &2     CoLlect and Evah4ae Eustmg Se&ment Chemwry Data
              -Collection and evaluation of existing sedim ient chemistry data is a critical component of the
              site-specific sediment quality assessment process. In Florida, sediment chemistry data are
              generated under numerous environmental programs. Relevant data should be assembled
              to support a preliminary assessment of sediment quality at the site under consideration.
              However, it is absolutely essential that these data be fully evaluated to determine their-
              applicability in the sediment quality assessment process. The characteristics of sediment
              chemistry data which should be evaluated include the overall quality of the data set and the
              degree to which the data are thought to represent current conditions at the site under
              consideration.


              Concerns regarding data quality may be resolved by evaluating the quality assurance/quality
              control measures that were implemented during collection, transport, and analysis of
              sediment samples.. A number of conventions have now been           established which provide
              guidance on the field aspects of sediment sampling programs (ASTM 1990b; EPA and ACE
              1991). * While a diversity of analytical procedures have been developed to quantify
              concentrations of contaminants in sediments, acceptable methods have been reported, for
              example by EPA and ACE (1991). More novel analytical procedures may be evaluated
              based on the reported accuracy and precision of the technique (i.e., the results of analyses
              performed on standard reference materials, and split and spiked sediment samples).
              Reported detection limits are relevant to the assessment of potential biological effects at the
              site. The suitability of the detection limits may be assessed by comparing them to the
              SQAGs (specifically, the no observed effect level) developed for that substance.







                                                            _99-



              In addition to reliable sediment chemistry data, assessment of sediment quality also requires
              information that adequately represent the contemporary environmental conditions at the site
              under consideration. Therefore, the age of the chemistry data is a central question with
              respect to determining the applicability of the data. Natural degradative processes in the
              environment can lead to reductions in the concentrations of sediment-associated organic
              contaminants over time (Mosello and Calderoni 1990). In addition, major events (such as
              storms) may result in the transport of sediments between sites. Further, industrial
              developments and/or regulatory activities may alter the sources and composition of
              contaminants released into the environment over time. Therefore, it is important that
              assessments of sediment quality be undertaken with the most recent data available.

              In addition to temporal variability, the chemistry of bed sediments is known to vary
              significantly on a spatial basis (Florida Department of ]Environmental Regulation; FDER.
              In preparation; Long et aL 1991; Mah et aL 1989). Th      'erefore, any single sample is likely to
              represent only a small proportion of the geographic area in which it was collected. For this
              reason, data from a number of stations are required to provide a representative picture of
              sediment quality conditions at the site, with the actual number of stations required
              dependent on the size of the area under consideration, the concentrations of sediment-
              associated contaminants, and the variability of contaminant concentrations.

              Another important factor to consider in evaluating the applicability of existing sedimer
              quality data is the list of variables that were analyzed. It is important that the list of
              analytes reflect potential contaminant sources from land and water use activities in the area.
              For example, in harbors, variables such as pentachlorophenol (which is used as a
              preservative for pilings), tributyltin (which is used in antifouling paints for ships), and copper
              (which is used in antifouling paints for pleasure craft) should       be measured. Similarly,
              polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and lead should be measured in the vicinity of oil
              exploration, extraction, transport, or refining operations and storm sewers that collect urban
              runoff (especially from roads). In agricultural areas, persistent pesticides and nutrients
              should be considered in sediment quality assessments.

              If the results of the data evaluation process indicate that the sediment chemistry data are
              acceptable, it is possible to proceed with the preliminary assessment of the potential for
              biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants. However, if the sediment cherruistry
              data are considered to be of unacceptable quality or are not considered to adequately
              represent the site, additional sediment chemistry data may be required to complete the
              sediment quality assessment.



              U      Collect Supplemental Sediment Chemistry Data

              The third stage in the sediment quality assessment process involves the generation of
              supplemental sediment chemistry data. Additional testing of subject sediments may be
              required when existing data are of insufficient quality or quantity to support the assessment
              of sediment quality at a specific site. The initial list of chemical concerns for the site under







                                                          100-


             consideration provides a   defensible means of identifying a list of potential analytes for
             inclusion in the sediment quality monitoring program.

             Sampling programs should be designed to delineate temporal and spatial vertical and
             horizontal variability in sediment contamination and explicitly identify quality
             assurance/quality control measures that will be implemented. Collection, handing, and
             storage of sediment samples should follow established protocols (e.g., ASTM 1990b).
             Analytical methods and detection limits should be appropriate for the substances under
             consideration. Implementation of a focused, well designed monitoring program will ensure
             that the resultant sediment chemistry data will support a defensible sediment quality
             assessment.




             &4     Conduct Preliminary Assessment of the Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-
                    Associated Contaminants


             Sediment chemistry data alone do not provide an adequate basis for assessing the hazards
             posed by sediment-associated contaminants to aquatic organisms. In addition, interpretive
             tools are required to determine if sediment-associated contaminants are present at
             concentrations which could, potentially, impair the designated uses of the aquatic
             environment. In this respect, effects-based guidelines for'assessing sediment quality
             (Chapter 6) provide a scientifically defensible basis for evaluating the potential effects of
             sediment-associated contaminants on aquatic organisms.

             In this report, SQAGs define three ranges of contaminant concentrations (as defined in
             Chapter 5 -and listed in Chapter 6). The probable effects range is defined as the range of
             concentrations of a specific contaminant in sediment within which biological effects are
             usually or always observed (probable effects range 2! PEL). Sediments with concentrations
             of contaminants within the probable effects range are considered to represent significant and
             immediate hazards to exposed organisms. Sites with concentrations of one or more
             contaminants that fall within the probable effects range should be considered to be the
             highest priority for implementation of specific sediment quality management. options.
             However, biological assessment is required at these sites to determine the nature and extent
             of effects that could be manifested at these sites.


             The possible effects range is defined as the range of concentrations of           a specific
             contami 'nant in sediment within which the expression of adverse biological effects is
             uncertain and is likely to be dependent on such factors as the bioavailability, which may
             influence the toxicity of the substance (NOEL < possible effects range < PEL). Sediment-
             associated contaminants are considered to represent potential hazards to exposed organisms
             when concentrations fall within this range. Sediments with concentrations of contaminants
             within this range require further assessment to determine the biological significance of the
             contamination. -In general, further assessment would be supported by a suite of biological
             tests designed to evaluate the biological significance of sediment-associated contaminants
             to key species of aquatic biota.







                                                           101


              The no effects range is defined as the range of concentrations of a specific contaminant in
              sediment within which biological effects are rarely or never observed (no effects range:5
              NOEL). Sediments with concentrations of contaminants within the no effects range are
              considered to be of acceptable quality. In general, further investigations of sediment quality
              conditions would be considered to be of relatively low priority for sediments in which
              contaminant concentrations fall within the no effects range. However, biological testing may
              be required to validate the results of the preliminary assessment of the potential for adverse
              biological effects (particularly in sediments with low levels of TOC, AVS, and/or Qther
              variables that could influence the bioavailability of sediment-associated contaminants).



              &5     Evaluale Natural vs. Anthropogenic Sources of Sedirnent-Associated Contarn&taws

              Interpretation of environmental metals data is made difficult by the fact that absolute metal
              concentrations in coastal sediments are influenced by a variety of factors, including sediment
              minerology, grain size, organic content, and anthropogenic enrichment (Schropp and
              Windom 1988). This combination of factors results in metals levels that can vary over
              several orders of magnitude at uncontaminated sites in Florida (Schropp et al. 1990). While
              numerical, effects-based sediment quality assessment guidelines provide essential
              information for evaluating the potential effects of sediment-as -sociated metals, they should
              not be used alone to evaluate the quality of marine and estuarine sediments. Instead, site-
              specific assessments of sediment quality should evaluate both the potential for adverse
              biological effects and the degree of anthropogenic enrichment. Using this approach, metals
              concentrations would be considered to be a'serious concern when they exceed the biological.
              effects-based guidelines and they are clearly anthropogenically enriched.

              In the past, determination of whether estuarine and coastal sediments were
              anthropogenically enriched with metals had been a difficult process that required'
              comprehensive, site-specific assessments. However, the FDER (Schropp and Windom 1988;
              Shropp et al. 1990) has developed a practical approach for assessing metals contamination
              in coastal sediments. This procedure relies on normalization of metal concentrations to a
              reference element. In the case of Florida, normalization of metal concentrations to
              concentrations of aluminum in estuarine sediments provided the most promising method of
              comparing metal levels on a regional basis.

              Briefly, data on sediment metal concentrations were collected from roughly 100 sites which
              were thought to be representative of natural estuarine areas throughout Florida. Simple
              linear regressions of each of seven metals on aluminum were performed on log-transformed
              data and 95% prediction limits were calculated. Significant correlations were obtained for
              arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. The regression lines and
              prediction limits were plotted. These plots then formed the basis for interpreting data on
              the concentrations of metals in sediments, such that anthropogenic enrichment of metal
              levels would be suspected at sites with metals concentrations exceeding the upper 95,70
              prediction limit (for one or more substances). An evaluation of this procedure using, data






                                                             102-



              from Tampa Bay (Schropp etaL 1989)            confirmed the effectiveness and utility of this
              interpretive tool.

              The importance of using the effects-based guidelines and the metals interpretive tool
              together in emphasized by evaluating existing sediment chemistry data from Florida coastal        '
              waters. In this example, data on levels of sediment-associated lead- from two geochernically
              distinct systems, Biscayne Bay and Apalachicola Bay, are examined to illustrate the
              integrated sediment quality assessment framework. A summary of the available data on the
              levels of sediment-associated lead in the vicinity of Miami is provided in Figure 6 (FDER
              In preparation). Evaluation of these data using the effects-based SQAGs (Chapter 6)
              suggest that approximately 15% of the samples fall with the probable effects range of
              concentrations (i.e., exceed the PEL of 160 mg/kg). Another 20% of the samples fall within
              the possible effects range (i.e., between the NOEL and the PEL). Therefore, comparison
              of sediment chemistry data with the numerical SQAGs suggests that there is a relatively high
              probability of observing adverse biological effects in sediments from the Miami area.
              Further evaluation of these data using the metals interpretive tool (Figure 7) demonstrates
              that sediments from this area are clearly anthropogenically-enriched with lead, with roughly
              90% of the samples exceeding the 95% prediction limits established              for 'clean' sites.
              Concordance between the effects-based tool and the. geochemically-based tool suggests that
              the Miami area should be considered to be of relatively high priority for conducting further
              investigations to evaluate sediment toxicity.

              In Apalachicola Bay, roughly 20% of the samples collected in the Florida coastal
              contaminants survey (FDER In preparation) had levels of lead that exceeded the NOEL (of
              21 mg/kg; Figure 8). Comparison of the ambient levels of lead in Apalachicola Bay with
              the SQAGs suggests that there is a possibility of observing adverse biological effects at a
              significant number of sites in this system. However, further evaluation of these data using
              the metals interpretive tool indicates that aluminum-normalized lead levels in Apalachicola
              Bay sediments are indicative of those measured in 'clean' sediments in Florida (Figure 9)..
              Therefore, while the effects-based tool predicts that adverse effects could, possibly, be
              observed at some sites due to elevated levels of lead, the metals interpretive tool clearly
              demonstrates that lead concentrations in Apalachicola Bay are naturally-occurring and, as
              such, should not be considered hazardous to aquatic organisms. Further investigations to
              evaluate the extent of sediment toxicity are, therefore, not required in this system.. These
              examples emphasize the importance of using these two assessment tools together to:conduct
              reliable evaluations of sediment quality in Florida coastal waters.

              The metals interpretive tool provides an effective means of identifying sites that are
              anthropbgenically enriched with metals. As such, this tool provides a basis for further
              refining the list of priority substances and priority sites in Florida. While no equivalent tool
              exists for evaluating the origin of many organic substances, a considerable number of organic
              contaminants are released in the environment, only as a result of human activities.
              Therefore, the development of a comparable interpretive tool may not be as critical as for
              metals.    Substances that fall into this category include chlorophenols (and related
              compounds), PCBs, pesticides, dioxins and furans, phthalates, and a host of other
              compounds. There are several methods that can be used to fingerprint the origin of PARs.










                                                       Figu're 6. Concentrations of lead in sediments in Biscayne Bay.




                                   1.200





                                   I(M                    .. ... .... ....                    ...................... ..... ............. . ....... ............................................................................................................................................................. ---




                                    800    . . . .. .. ........... .................. ....................................... . . . ................................ .....:......................................................................................... .............-................. ------ .............................




                             E      600                .. . . . . .... .. . ... .......... .. .. .................. .......................................................................................................................................................................-................. .......





                                    400                                     ..................................... ................. .............. ..................... ....... ........ ...... ......... ........ ....... .......... .......... ............ ......... ---------



                                                                                                                                                                                                                           PEL

                                    200    - - -- -- --- --- ----- ..... ...... .. . . ..... ................................................. ..........                           ............ . .....................    ...........  -* ... ....
                                                                                                                               ............... .......                    ...............


                                                                                                                                                                                                                          NOEL


                                        0
                                            0              10              26..'           30             40              50              60'             70              80              90             100             110             120
                                                                                                                                Sample Number











                                    Figure 7. Alurninurn normalized concentrations of lead in Biscayne Bay sediments.




                       1000









                                                                                              %
                                                                                           CP
                                                                                      no   mom


                                                                    % M    M
                                              El                                   M
                                                              M















                             100                                     1000                                     10000                                    100000
                                                                                 Aluminum (mg/kg)










                                                       Figuie 8. Concentrations of lead in sediments in Apalachicola Bay.



                                    200

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  PEL





                                    150    . . ........... . ....           .. .. . .. . . .. .. ............. . ........................................ .................. ................................................................................. ................ .............................. .- --------






                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           CD

                                    100    . . ............. ...                            . ........ ....................................................................... ................................................................. ....................................... . ... ...... .. .. .... . .






                                     50    . . ............. .......................... ................. ..................... ....................................... ............................... ........... ................. ......................................................................  ............... NOEL  ---------





                                       0

                                           0                       5                      10                      15                      20'                     25                      30                      35                       40

                                                                                                                                Sample Number










                                 Figure 9. Aluminum normalized concentrations of lead in Apalachicola Bay sediments.




                     1000








                      100






                 E     10
















                     0. 1

                         100                                     1000                                    10000                                    100000

                                                                             Aluminum (mglkg)







                                                            107-



              The ratios of the concentrations of some hydrocarbons or groups of hydrocarbons can be
              examined to distinguish between storm runoff, oil spills, and other sources.



              &6     Conduct BiolQgical Assessment of Sediment Quahty

              Biological testing is an essential component of the sediment quality assessment process. The
              nature and extent of available information on the effects of sediment-associated
              contaminants is such that there is some level of uncertainty associated with predictions of
              the biological significance of sediment-associated contaminants (i.e., most of the data
              utilized do not support the establishment of cause and effect relationships). Therefore,
              biological testing is required to provide definitive information regarding the toxicity of bed
              sediments (generally a suite of biological tests is required) and to confirm the results of the
              preliminary sediment quality assessment.

              Further biological testing is required to support three distinct aspects of the sediment quality
              assessment process in Florida. First, biological testing may be required to assess the toxicity
              of sediments at sites where the concentrations of one or more contaminants fall within the
              probable and possible effects range. Second, biological testing may be required to assess
              the toxicity of sediments that may contain unmeasured substances or complex mixtures of
              contaminants. Third, biological data may be required to a.@sess the applicability of the
              recommended SQAGs to Florida coastal waters. In this respect, additional biological testing
              is required to determine if there are systematic differences between the sensitivities of those
              species represented in BEDS compared to'the sensitivities of those species which reside in
              Florida coastal waters. In addition, ancillary biological testing -is required to determine if
              there are systematic differences between the toxicity (as affected by bioavailability and other
              factors) of a substance in sediments represented in BEDS compared to Florida sediments.
              In some cases, the results of biological testing will indicate a need for site-specific SQAGs-
              to assess the potential effects of sediment-associated contaminants.

              An effective biological testing program should be designed to explicitly address whole
              sedirnent toxicity, but may also consider potential effects in the water column. Evaluation
              of whole sediment toxicity is a key component of the sediment quality assessment process
              in both regulatory and management applications. Biological tests which assess potential
              water column effects are likely to be more applicable in programs which are concerned, for
              example, with the regulation of the disposal of dredged materials.
              A num@er of tests have been developed to evaluate the biological significance of sediment
              contamination. These tests may be as simple as short-term bioassays on a single
              contaminant using a single species or as complex as microcosm studies in which the long-
              term effects of mixtures of contaminants on ecosystem dynamics are investigated. In
              addition, tests may be designed to assess the toxicity of whole sediments (solid phase),
              suspended sediments, elutriates, sediment extracts, or pore water. The organisms that are
              routinely tested include microorganisms, algae, aquatic macrophytes, invertebrates, and fish.







                                                            108-



              Whole sediment bioassays are the most relevant for assessing the effects of contaminants
              sorbed to bottom sediments. The ASTM has developed and approved four tests for
              assessing the toxicity of marine and estuarine sediments. These tests (which are ten days
              in duration) are designed to assess the acute toxicity of sediment-associated contaminants
              on four species of amphipods (Rhepoxynius abronius, Eohaustorius estuarius, Ampelisca
              abdita, Grandidierella jap'onica). The marine document is being revised to include an
              additional east coast amphipod, Leptocheirus plumulosus. These bioassays may be modified
              to assess toxicity to other benthic invertebrate species that occur in estuarine and marine
              environments, including other amphipods, other crustaceans, polychaetes, and bivalves
              (ASTM 1990a). In addition, procedures for conducting sediment toxicity tests with
              polychaetes and echinoderms are currently under consideration by the ASTM (Ingersoll
              1991).

              In addition to whole sediment toxicity tests, various procedures are available for assessing
              the potential for adverse effects on aquatic organisms due to the resuspension of sediments
              or partitioning of contaminants into the water column. Perhaps the most sensitive and
              frequently used of these is the bacterial luminescence test (Microtox; Burton and Stemmer
              1988; Schiewe et aL 1985). Tests using algae, invertebrates, and fish have also been
              employed to assess the toxicity of the suspended and/or aqueous phases. While no standard
              methods have yet been approved by the ASTM, a document on the use of oyster and
              echinoderm embryos and larvae in sediment toxicity testing of marine sediments is currently
              in preparation (Ingersoll 1991). In addition, procedures f@r conducting water column
              bioassays and bioaccumulation tests have been recommended by the EPA and ACE (1991)
              and Lee et aL (1989) and document on sediment resuspension testing is under consideration
              by ASTM.

              While requirements for biological tests differ between applications, sediment toxicity tests
              should follow the general protocols established and approved by the ASTM. These
              protocols may be modified to assess toxicity to resident species, for longer time periods (i.e.,'
              to address chronic toxicity), or for different endpoints, however, the basic principles of these
              protocols should be followed. When ASTM methods do not exist or do not apply, care
              should be taken and documented to ensure that the experimental design of these tests is
              defensible.


              Other types of biological information may also be used in the sediment quality assessment
              process. For example, comparison of biological indicators (such as the diversity and
              abundance of benthic invertebrate communities) at test sites and appropriate reference sites
              (i.e., sites with similar particle size distributions, TOC, etc.) provides a means of assessing
              the relative toxicity of test sediments. Various statistical procedures may be used to help
              identify contaminants associated with observed biological effects when adequate sediment
              chemistry data are available. In addition, spik      'ed-sediment bioassays may be used to
              establish cause and effect relationships for specific substances or mixtures of contaminants.
              Further, tests to evaluate the toxicity of pore water provide information which may be used
              to identify the toxic elements of contaminated sediments. Information on levels of
              contaminants in aquatic biota and on bioaccumulation may help determine the significance







                                                             109-



              of contaminant levels in sediments relative to the protection of human health and the health
              of wildlife that consume aquatic organisms.



              &7     Implement Management of Sediment Quality

              The ultimate objective of the sediment quality assessment process is to provide information
              to support the management of environmental quality in Florida.               The management
              decisions that are ultimately made will depend on a wide variety of factors, including the
              nature and severity of the contamination, the potential for exposureof aquatic organisms,
              the management goals for the site, the availability of remediation technology, the costs
              associated with remediation, and ihe expectations of the public. Integration of information
              on each of these factors will enable managers and others to make defensible decisions
              regarding remediation and preventing contamination or simply monitoring levels of
              contamination.


              A number of sediment quality management decisions are possible, based on consideration
              of available information from the environmental assessment. At some sites, evaluation of
              the available information will indicate that no additional action is warranted. At other sites,
              monitoring for assessment of trends in sediment quality may be required. At site       's that are
              seriously contaminated, some remedial action may be necessary to achieve envirorunental
              management goals. These remedial actions could include removal and treatment of toxic
              materials, isolation (or capping) of contaminated sediments, implementation of source
              control measures, or no action at all (i.e., permit natural degradative and sedimentation
              processes to mitigate contaminant effects).






                                                               110-


                                                          Chapter 9

                                           Summary and Recommendations



              9.1     Swnmary

              This report describes and evaluates preliminary chemical sediment quality assessment
              guidelines (SQAGs) for Florida coastal waters. It also provides an initial evaluation of
              sediment quality in Florida and a framework for applying the guidelines.

              In Florida, conservation and protection of natural resources has been identified as a high
              priority environmental management goal. Realization of this goal requires protection of
              living resources and their habitats in estuarine, nearshore, and marine ecosystems. In the
              last decade, there has been a significant increase in the level of scientific understanding (and
              -public recognition) of the important role sediments play in coastal ecosystem functions.
              Sediments are particularly critical in determining the fate and effects of environmental
              contaminants.


              Recent monitoring data indicate that concentrations of various contaminants are present at
              elevated levels at a numberof locations in Florida coastal sediments. These data emphasize
              the need for sediment quality assessment guidelines (SQAGs) to evaluate the potential for
              -biological effects associated with sediment-associated contaminants and to provide assistance
              in managing coastal resources.

              To identify an appropriate procedure for deriving SQAGs, the major approaches used in
              other jurisdictions to derive numerical SQAGs were evaluated in the context of Florida's
              requirements for sediment quality assessment values. The results of this analysis indicated,
              that the National Status and Trends Program Approach (NSTPA; Long and Morgan 1990)
              would respond most directly to Florida's requirements. Therefore, a strategy that relied on
              a modified version of the NSTPA was recommended to derive numerical SQAGs that could
              be used immediately to assess sediment quality issues and concerns. A critical evaluation
              of this procedure suggested that, while this approach has limitations that could influence the
              applicability of the guidelines, it is likely to support the derivation of scientifically.06fensible
              preliminary guidelines forFlorida coastal waters.

              Preliminary SQAGs have been developed for 25            priority contaminants in Florida coastal
              waters. However, insufficient data were available to derive guidelines for another 29
              substances that are known or are suspected to contaminate Florida coastal sediments. The
              numerical SOAGs were used to define three ranges of concentrations for each of the 25
              contaminants: a probable effects range; a possible effects range; and, a no effects range.
              A subjective assessment of the credibility of these guidelines indicated that a high level of
              confidence could be placed on the guidelines derived for 11 substances, and a moderate or
              low level of confidence could be placed on the guidelines for the remaining 14 substances.








              The preliminary SQAGs were used to conduct an initial assessment of Florida sediments
              to determine the nature, extent and severity of contamination. The potential for adverse
              biological effects associated with measured levels of sediment-associated contaminants was
              used as an index of contamination. This assessment was conducted with the Florida
              Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER) coastal sediment chemistry database to
              identify priority areas and priority substances with respect to sediment contamination. The
              results of this investigation are considered to be preliminary due to the limitations on the
              available data.

              A total of 21 areas were considered in the initial assessment of sedimeftt quality in Florida
              coastal waters. However, insufficient data were available to conduct a thorough assessment
              of sediment quality conditions in many of these areas, particularly for organic contaminants.
              In spite of these limitations, the initial assessment indicated that the St. lohns River in the
              vicinity of Jacksonville, the Miami River in Dade County, and Tampa Bay in the vicinity of
              Tampa/St. Petersburg are the highest priority areas in terms of the extent and severity of
              sediment contamination. The contaminants of greatest concern in Florida included copper,
              chromium, lead, mercury, zinc, phenanthrene, pyrene, Aroclor 1254, and total PCBs. As
              PCBs are no longer used in the state, the relative priority of these substances 'could be
              considered to be somewhat lower.

              The recommended SQAGs were developed specifically to support the identification of
              contaminated sites and priority chemicals of concern in Florida coastal waters. As such,
              these guidelines will contribute substantially to the' design, implementation, and evaluation
              of sediment quality monitoring programs in the state. In addition, the recommended
              guidelines may also be used in a varie ' of environmental management applications,
                                                         ty
              including for identifying the need for further testing to support regulatory decisions and for
              identifying areas that might be considered for remedial action. Furthermore, SQAGs
              provide a common basis for facilitating multi-jurisdictional agreements on sediment quality.

              The preliminary guidelines were established to provide a yardstick for evaluating sediment
              quality in Florida. As such, these guidelines may be used to screen sediment chemistry data
              and establish priorities with respect to sediment quality management. They should not be
              used in lieu of water quality criteria, nor should they be used as sediment quality criteria.
              Ambient environmental conditions may influence -the applicability of these guidelines at
              specific locations.



              9.2   Aecommendations

              9.21 Venfication and Refinement of Prelimuuuy Sediment Quality Assessment Guidehnes

              The expanded NSTP database was used to support the derivation of numerical SQAGs for
              Florida coastal waters. This database should be updated and expanded as new information
              on the effects of sediment-associated contaminants becomes available.           The updated
              database should be used to refine the SQAGs recommended in this document and to derive







                                                            112-



              guidelines for additional priority substances (for which insufficient data are currently
              available) identified in Florida coastal sediments.

              Additional biological testing is recommended to support the sediment quality assessment
              process in Florida. In particular, data from toxicological studies conducted with Florida
              sediments are required to evaluate the applicability of the preliminary SQAGs to Florida
              coastal ecosystems. In this respect, additional biological testing is required to determine if
              there are systematic differences between the sensitivities of species represented in the
              existing database compared to the sensitivities of resident species of Florida coastal wdters.
              These data may also be used to assess the bioavailability of contaminants in Florida coastal
              sediments.

              The relative sensitivity of species that occur in Florida is a central consideration in the
              evaluation of the applicability of the preliminary SQAGs. The SQAGs recommended for
              assessing the potential for biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants in Florida
              were developed using data on a wide variety of species that occur in North America.
              However, biological effects data on aquatic organisms from the southeastern portion of the
              United States are limited. Therefore, it is difficult to determine if the recommended
              SQAGs would adequately protect aquatic organisms that occur in Florida coastal waters.
              For this reason, additional biological testing should be undertaken to determine if aquatic
              organisms that occur in Florida have sensitivity ranges similar to those of organisms
              occurring in other parts of North America.

              Bioavailability is a central issue in the evaluation of the preliminary SQAGs. Many types
              of sediments occur in Florida coastal ecosy@tems, ranging from terrig@nous sediments in the
              northern portion of the Gulf coast to carbonate sediments in some areas of south Florida.
              There is significant potential for differences in the bioavailability (and hence the toxicity)
              of contaminants in these different sediment types. Although the information used to derive
              the preliminary SQAGs includes data from a wide variety of sites in North America, it is -
              possible that these data do not adequately represent the full range of conditions that occur
              in Florida. Therefore, further biological testing should be conducted at a variety of
              locations in Florida to determine if the recommended SQAGs are appropriate for Florida
              coastal waters. These locations should be selected to encompass a wide range of sediment
              types, and should include contaminated and uncontaminated reference sites.

              The preliminary guidelines are based on dry weight-normalized contaminant concentrations.
              However, there is an increasing body of information which suggests that toxicity can be
              predicted more accurately when concentrations of various 'normalizers' (such as total
              organic carbon and acid volatile sulfide) are considered. . Therefore, there is a need to
              generate additional data to define bioavailability relationships for individual contaminants,
              and refine the guidelines appropriately when these relationships become more clearly
              established.


              Sediment quality criteria are currently under development by EPA (using the EqPA). These
              criteria are likely to be expressed in terms of the variables that influence the bioavailability
              of se d iment- associated contaminants. These criteria should be fully evaluated and used, as








                                                          113 -


             appropriate, in the SQAGs refinement process. In addition, EPA should be provided with
             the list of priority contaminants in Florida coastal sediments and encouraged to develop
             sediment quality criteria for these substances preferentially.



             9.22 Development of Sediment Quak Assessmen.1 Guidelines for Freshwater Ecosystems

             The preliminary SQAGs developed in the present study and the metals interpretive tool
             provide a consistent basis for evaluating sediment quality conditions in Florida coastal
             ecosystems. However, no such tools exist for use in freshwater ecosystems. Therefore,
             effects-based SQAGs should be developed to evaluate the biological significance of
             contaminated sediments in freshwater systems. In addition, a procedure to determining the
             probable origin of sediment-associated metals is also required.



             9.23 Regional Assessment of Sediment Quality

             The initial assessment of Florida coastal sediments provides a basis for identifying priority
             areas and contaminants for consideration in further investigations. However, 'the initial
             assessment is considered to be preliminary only because it is based on data generated in
             FDER coastal contaminants surveys, which have several limitations. First, insufficient data
             were available to conduct a reliable assessment in many areas of the state. Second, only
             limited data are available on levels of organic contaminants in most areas of Florida. Third,
             much of the available data on levels of organic contaminants are several years old and may
             not accurately reflect present conditions.

             Unmeasured contaminants are a significant concern with respect to the evaluation of the
             potential for biological effects in coastal sediments. Under certain circumstances, SQAGs
             alone are not adequate to reliably predict the expression of biological effects in
             contaminated sediments. Additional biological testing may be required to resolve
             uncertainties regarding the potential for biological effects when the available sediment
                                                              V
             chemistry data do not adequately reflect the potential sources of environmental
             contaminants.


             A list of priority contaminants in coastal sediments was developed from existing sediment
             quality'data and information on land and water use patterns in Florida. However,
             insufficient information currently exists to determine the spatial distribution of many of
             these contaminants in Florida sediments. Therefore, an expanded suite of analytes (to
             reflect contaminant inputs) should be incorporated into site-specific sediment quality
             monitoring programs.








                                                           114-



              9.24 Site-Specific Assessment of Sediment QuaLity

              The recommended approach for assessing sediment quality in Florida relies on the
              identification of three ranges of contaminant concentrations: the no effects range; the
              possible effects range; and, the probable effects range. This approach was selected to        '
              explicitly account for the uncertainties associated with the evaluation of the available data
              which link contaminant concentrations with adverse biological effects. When contaminant
              concentrations fall within the probable effects range at a particular site, there is a-high
              probability that adverse biological effects will be observed. These sites should be given
              highest priority for further investigations.

              Effects-based SQAGs should not be used alone to make contaminated sediment
              management de6sions. Ancillary tools, such as the metals interpretive tool, should be used
              to determine the probable origin of sediment-associated contaminants. In addition,
              uncertainty regarding the potential for biological effects of sediment-associated contaminants
              at specific locations may be addressed by implementing appropriate biological investigations.
              These tools, when used together, will provide an efficient and effective basis for making
              contaminated sediment management decisions.


              9. 25 Coordinmion with Federal Agencies

              Currently, there are a relatively large number of independent and loosely-related initiatives
             -that are directed at the evaluation and management of contaminated sediments. While each
              of these programs are designed to advance our understanding of the nature, extent, and
              severity of sediment contamination, development of a regional strategy for contaminated
              sediment identification and management would accelerate this process. Therefore, a
              cooperative regional strategy should be developed by FDER, EPA, the Army Corps of.
              Engineers, and other affected agencies to identify priority sediment management and
              regulatory objectives, and the interagency efforts required to achieve them.







                                                           115 -



              10.0   References



              ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials). 1990a. Standard guide for conducting
                     10-day static sediment toxicity tests with marine and estuarine amphipods. ASTM
                     Designation: E 1367-90. 24 pp.

              ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials). 1990b. Standard guide for collection,
                     storage, characterization, and manipulation of sediments for toxicological teSting.
                     ASTM Designation: E 1391-90. 15 pp.

              ACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 1988. Evaluation procedures. Technical Appendix -
                     Phase I (Central Puget'Sound). PSDDA Reports. Seattle District. Washington
                     State Department of Natural Resources. EPA Region 10. 480 pp.

              Ankley, G. 1989. Sediment toxicity assessment through evaluation of the toxicity of
                     interstitial water. Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth. United States
                     Environmental Protection Agency. Duluth, Minnesota. 27 pp.

              Barrick, R., S. Becker, R. Partorok, L. Brown, and H. Beller. 1988. Sediment quality values
                     refinement: 1988 update and evaluation of Puget Sound AET. Prepared by PTI
                     Environmental Services for Environmental Protection Agency. Bellevue, Washington.

              Baudo, R. and H. Muntau. 1990. Lesser known in-place pollutants and diffuse source
                     problems. In: R. Baudo, J. Geisy'and H. Muntau (Eds.). Sediments: Chemistry
                     and toxicity of in-place pollutants. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, Michigan.

              Beak  Consultants Ltd. 1987. Development of sediment quality objectives: Phase I -
                     Options. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Environment. Mississauga, Ontario.

              Beak  Cons,.-Atants Ltd. 1988. Development of sediment quality objectives: Phase I -
                     Guidelines Development.         Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Environment.
                     Mississauga, Ontario.

              Blumer, M. 1976. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in nature. Sci. Am. 234(l): 34:45. (As
                     cited in: Sims and Overcash 1983)

              Boddington, M.J., A.P. Gilman, R.C. Newhook, B.M. Braune, D.J. Hay, and V. Shantora.
                     1990. Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans. Priority
                     Substances List Assessment Report Number 1. Canadian Environmental Protection
                     Act. Environment Canada and Health and Welfare Canada. Ottawa, Canada. 56
                     pp-

              Bolton, S.H., R.J. Breteler, B.W. Vigon, J.A. Scanlon, and S.L. Clark, 1985. National
                     perspective on sediment quality. Prepared for the United States Environmental
                     Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia. 194 pp.







                                                            n6


              Burton, G.A. and B.L. Stemmer. 1988. Evaluation of surrogate tests in toxicant impact
                      assessments. Toxicity Assessment: An International Journal 3:255-269.

              CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). 1991. A protocol for the
                      derivation of water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life. Water
                      Quality Branch. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Canada. 24 pp.

              CCREM (Canadian Council of Resource and Environment Ministers). 1987. Canadian
                      Water Quality Guidelines. Task Force on Water Quality Guidelines. Ottawa,
                      Canada.


              Cairns, M.A-, A.V. Nebeker, J.H. Gakstater and W.L. Griffis. 1984. Toxicity of copper-
                      spiked sediments to freshwater invertebrates. Environmental Toxicology Chemistry
                      3:435-445.


              Campbell, J.H., F.T. Wang, S.W. Mead, and J.F. Busby. 1979. Groundwater quality near
                      underground coal gasification experiment. Journal of Hydrology 44: 241-266.

              Chapman, P.M. 1986. - Sediment quality criteria from the sediment quality triad: An
                      example. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 5:957-964.

              Chapman, P.M. 1989. Current approaches to developing sediment quality criteria.
                      Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 8:589-599.

              Comp, G.S. and W. Seaman. Estuarine habitat and fishery resources of Florida. In: W.
                      Seaman (Ed.). Fi, -rida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter of
                      the American Fisheries Society.

              Cook, P.M., A.R. Batterman, B.C. Butterworth, K.B. Lodge, and S.W. Kohlbry. 1989.4
                      Laboratory study of TCDD bioaccumulation by lake trout from Lake Ontario
                      sediments, food chain and water. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
                      Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth. Duluth, Minnesota. 112 pp.

              Culliton, T.J., M.A. Warren, T.R. Goodspeed, D.R. Remer, C.M. Blackwell, and J.J.
                      McDonough. 1990. 50 years of population change along the nation's coasts: 1960 -
                      2010. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Rockville, Maryland. 41
                      pp-

              Delfino, J.J., J.A. Coates, W.M. Davis, K.L. Garcia, M.W. Jacobs, K.J. Marincic, and L.L.
                      Signorella.  1991. Toxic pollutants in discharges, ambient waters, and bottom
                      sediments. Volume I and II. Submitted to Florida Department of Environmental
                      Regulation. Tallahassee, Florida. 732 pp.

              Demayo, A., M.C. Taylor, and S.W. Reeder. 1979. Arsenic. In: Guidelines for Surface
                      Water Quality. Volume 1. Inorganic Substances. Environment Canada. Ottawa,
                      Canada.







                                                            117-


              Di Toro, D.M., J.D. Mahony, D.J. Hansen, K-J. Scott, M.B. Hicks, S.M. Mayr, and M.S.
                     Redmond. 1989. Toxicity of cadmium in sediments: The role of acid volatile
                     sulfide. Draft Report. 32 pp + fig.

              Di Toro, D.M., J.D. Mahony, D.J. Hansen, K.J. Scott, M.B. Hicks, -S.M. Mayr, and M.S.
                     Redmond. 1990. Toxicity of cadmium in sediments: The role of acid volatile
                     sulfide. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9(12):1487-1502.

              Di Toro, D.M., C.S. Zarba, D.J. Hansen, W.J. Berry, R.C. Swartz, C.E. Cowan, S.P. Pavlou,
                     H.E. Allen, N.A. Thomas, and P.R. Paquin. 1991. Pre-draft technical basis for
                     establishing sediment quality criteria for non-ionic organic chemicals using
                     equilibrium partitioning. Office of Science and Technology. Environmental
                     Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia.

              Di Toro, J.D. Mahony, D.J. Hansen, K.J. Scott, A.R. Carlson, and G.T. Ankley.       1992. Acid
                     volatile sulfide predicts the acute toxicity of cadmium and nickel in         sediments.
                     Environmental Science and Technology 26(l):96-101.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1972. Water quality criteria: A report of the
                     committee on water quality criteria. National Academy of Sciences. Washington,
                     District of Columbia.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. Ambient water quality criteria for
                     polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. EPA 440/5-80-069.               NTIS PB81-117806.
                     Washington, District of Columbia. '193 pp.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1982a. An exposure and              risk assessment for
                     benzo(a)pyrene and other polycychc aromatic hydrocarbons:                  Volume 11.
                     Naphthalene. Office of Water Regulations and Standards. Washington, District of-
                     Columbia. 94 pp.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1982b. An exposure and risk assessment for
                     benzo(a)pyrene and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons:                 Volume 111.
                     Anthracene, acenaphthene, fluoranthene, fluorene, pbenanthrene, and pyrene. Office
                     of Water Regulations and Standards. Washington, District of Columbia.. :139 pp.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1982c. An exposure and risk assessment for
                     benzo(a)pyrene and other polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons:                Volume IV.
                     Benzo(a)pyrene,      acenapbthylene,     benz(a)anthracene,      benzo(b)fluoranthene,
                     benzo(k)fluorantbene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and
                     indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene. Office of Water Regulations and Standards. Washington,
                     District of Columbia. 195 pp.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).            1985.   Health assessment document for
                     polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins. EPA/600/8-84/014F. Cincinnati, Ohio.






                                                           118 -



              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1988. Interim sediment criteria values for non-
                     polar hydrophobic organic contaminants. Report SCD Number 17. Criteria and
                     Standards Division. Office of Water. Washington, District of Columbia. 22 pp.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).           1989a.   Sediment classification methods
                     compendium. Final Draft Report. Washington, District of Columbia.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), 1989b. Briefing report to the EPA Science
                     Advisory Board on the equilibrium partitioning approach to generating sediment
                     quality criteria. EPA/440/5-89-002. Washington, District of Columbia.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. Evaluation of the sediment classification
                     methods compendium: Report of the sediment criteria subcommittee 6f the
                     ecological processes and effects committee. EPA-SAB-EPEC-90-018. Science
                     Advisory Board. Washington, District of Columbia. 25 pp.

              EPA   (Environmental Protection Agency). 1991. Pre-draft technical guidance on the
                     application of sediment quality criteria for the protection of aquatic life. Office of
                     Science and Technology. Washington, District of Columbia.

              EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 1992. Proposed sediment quality criteria for the
                     protection of benthic organisms: Fluoranthene. Office. of Science and Technology.
                     Washington, District of Columbia.

              EPA and ACE (Environmental Protectioif Agency and Army Corps of Engineers). 1991.
                     Evaluation of dredged material proposed for ocean disposal: Testing manual. EPA-
                     503/8-9.1/001. Vicksburg, Mississippi.

              Eisler, R. 1985a. Cadmium hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: A synoptic review.
                     Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report No. 2. U.S. Department of the Interior. Fish
                     and Wildlife Service. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Laurel, Maryland.

              Eisler, R. 1985b. Tin hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: A synoptic review.
                     Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report No. 15. U.S. Department of the Interior. Fish
                     and Wildlife Service. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Laurel, Maryland.

              Eisler, R.    1987.    Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon hazards to fish, wildlife, and
                     invertebrates: A synoptic review. Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report No. 11.
                     U.S. Department of the Interior. Fish and Wildlife Service. Patuxent Wildlife
                     Research Center. Laurel, Maryland.

              Eisler, R. 1988. Arsenic hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: A synoptic review.
                     Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report Number 12. U.S. Department of the Interior.
                     Fish and Wildlife Service. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Laurel, Maryland.








                                                        119-


            Endicott, D., W. Richardson and D.M. Di Toro. 1989. Lake Ontario TCDD modelling
                   report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Large Lakes Research Station.
                   Environmental Research Laboratory-Duluth. Grosse Ile, Minnesota. 94 pp.

            Ewel, J.J. 1990. Introduction. In: R.L. Meyers and J.J. Ewel (Eds.). Ecosystems of
                   Florida. University of Central Florida Press. Orlando, Florida.

            FDER (Florida Department of Environmental Regulation). In preparation. Florida atlas
                   of sediment quality. Office of the Secretary. Tallahassee Florida.

            Farrow, D.R. 1989. Summary of direct discharging industrial facilities in coastal counties:
                   1980 - 1985. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Department of
                   Commerce. Rockville, Maryland.

            Farrow, D.R. 1990. National coastal pollutant discharge inventory: Summary of pollutant
                   discharges in east coast areas by state - 1982. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                   Administration. Department of Commerce. Rockville, Maryland.

            Fernald, E.A. 1981. Natural Environment. In: E.A. Fernald (Ed.). Atlas of Florida. The
                   Florida State University Foundation, Inc. Tallahassee, Florida.
            Gillarn, A. 1991. Development of Canadian marine sediment quality guidelines f@r
                   polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.       Report prepared by CBR International
                   Biotechnologies Corp. for Water Quality Branch, Environment Canada. Ottawa,
                   Canada. 149 pp.

            Goyette, D., D. Brand, and M. Thomas. 1988. Prevalence of idiopathic liver lesions in
                   English sole and epidermal abnormalities in flatfish from Vancouver Harbour, British
                   Columbia, 1986.      Regional Program Report 87-09.          Environment Canada.
                   Vancouver, British Columbia. 48 pp.

            Hand, J., V. Tauxe, M. Friedemann, and L. Smith. 1990. Water quality assessment for the
                   state of Florida.    Bureau of Surface Water Management.            Department of
                   Environmental Regulation. Tallahassee, Florida. 70 pp.

            Hutzinger, 0., M.J. Blumich, M.V.D. Berg, and K. Olie. 1985. Sources and fate of PCDDs
                   and PCDFs: An overview. Chemosphere 14(6/7):581-600.

            International Joint Commission. 1988. Procedures for the assessment of contaminated
                   sediment problems in the Great Lakes. A report prepared by the Sediment
                   Subcommittee and its Assessment Work Group for the International Joint
                   Commission. Great Lakes Regional Office.

            Ingersoll, C. 1991. Sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation testing: E47.03 develops
                   standard guides for evaluating the toxicity and bioaccumulation of contaminants in
                   sediment to aquatic organisms. Standardization News 19(4):28-33.








                                                          120-


             Jaagumagi, R. 1990a. Development of the Ontario provincial sediment quality guidelines
                     for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, and
                     zinc. Water Resources Branch. Environment Ontario. Toronto, Ontario. 10 pp. +
                     app.

             Jaagurnagi, R. 1990b. Development of the Ontario provincial sediment quality guidelines
                     for PCBs and the organochlorine pesticides. Water Resources Branch. Environment
                     Ontario. Toronto, Ontario. 16 pp. + app.

             Kadeg, R.D., S.P. Pavlou and A.S. Duxbury. 1986. Sediment criteria methodology
                     validation: Elaboration of sediment normalization theory for non-polar hydrophobic
                     organic chemicals -Final Report. Prepared for EPA. Office of Water Regulations
                     and Standards. Criteria and Standards Division.


             Kenaga, E.E. 1982. Predictability of chronic toxicity from acute toxicity of chemicals infish
                     and aquatic invertebrates. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 1:347-358.

             Klapow, L.A. and R.H. Lewis. 1979. Analysis of toxicity data for California marine water
                     quality standards. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation 51(8):2051-
                     2070.


             Lee, H., B.L. Boese, I Pelletier, M. Windsor, D.T. Specht, and R.C. Randall. 1989.
                     Guidance manual: Bedded sediment bioaccumulation tests. EPA/600/X-89/302.
                     Environmental Protection Agency. @@ewport, Oregon. 232 pp.

             Leslie, A.J. 1990. Aquatic use of copper-based herbicides in Florid& Bureau of Aquatic
                     Plant Management. Florida Department of Natural Resources. Tallahassee, Florida.
                     21 pp.

             Livingston, R.J. 1990. In: R.L. Meyers and JJ. Ewel (Eds.). Ecosystems of Florida.
                     University of Central Florida Press. Orlando, Florida.

             Long, E.R.     1989.    Use of the sediment quality triad in classification of sediment
                     contamination. In: Contaminated Marine Sediments - Assessment and Remediation.
                     Marine Board. National Research Council. Washington, District of Columbia,

             Long, E.R. 1992. Ranges of chemical concentrations in sediments associated with adverse
                     biological effects. Marine Pollution Bulletin 24(l):38-45.

             Long, E.R. and P. Chapman. 1985. A sediment quality triad: Measurements of sediment
                     contamination, toxicity, and infaunal community composition in Puget Sound Marine
                     Pollution Bulletin 16:405-415.


             Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed
                     contaminants tested in the National Status and Trends Program. NOAA Technical
                     Memorandum NOS OMA 52. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
                     Seattle, Washington. 175 pp + appendices.







                                                           121 -



              Long, E.R., D. MacDonald, and C. Cairncross. 1991. Status and trends in toxicants and the
                     potential for their biological effects in Tampa Bay, Florida. NOAA Technical
                     Memorandum NOS OMA 58. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
                     Seattle, Washington. 77 pp.

              Lorenzato, S.G. and C.J. Wilson. 1991. Workplan for the development of sediment quality
                     objectives for enclosed bays and estuaries of California. Water Resources Control
                     Board. State of California. Sacramento, California. 22 pp.

              Loring, D.H. 1991. Normalization of heavy-metal data from estuarine and coastal
                     sediments. ICES Journal of Marine Sciences 48:101-115.


              Lyman, W.J., A.E. Glazer, J.H. Ong, and S.F. Coons. 1987. An overview of sediment
                     quality in the United States: Final report. Prepared for the Environmental
                     Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia. 18 pp.

              MacDonald. 1989. An assessment of ambient water quality conditions in the Slave River
                     basin, Northwest Territories. Report prepared for Indian and Northern Affairs
                     Canada. Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. 94 pp.

              MacDonald, D.D. 1991. A discussion paper on the derivation and use of Canadian tissue
                     residue quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life and wildlife. Report
                     prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Envirorunent
                     Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

              MacDonald, D.D. and S.L. Smith. 1991. A discussion paper on the -derivation and use of
                     Canadian sediment quality guidelines for the protection of freshwater and marine
                     aquatic life.   Report prepared for the Canadian Council of Ministers of the
                     Environment. Enviromnent Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

              MacDonald, D.D. and S. Walker. 1992. A discussion paper on the derivation and use of
                     Canadian tissue residue guidelines for the protection of aquatic life and wildlife.
                     Water Quality Guidelines Division. EcoHealth Branch. Environment                 Canada.
                     Ottawa, Canada.

              MacDonald, D.D, S.L. Smith, M.P. Wong, and P. Mudroch. 1991. The development of
                     Canadian marine environmental quality guidelines.           Report prepared for the
                     Interdepartmental Working Group on Marine Environmental Quality Guidelines and
                     the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. Environment Canada.
                     Ottawa, Canada. 50 pp. + app.

              MacDonald, D.D., M.L. Haines, and K. Brydges. 1992. Development of an approach to
                     assessing sediment quality in Florida coastal waters: Supporting documentation.
                     Report prepared for Florida Department of Environmental Regulation. Tallahassee,
                     Florida.








                                                          122-



             MacDonald, D.D., I.D. Cuthbert, and M.L. Haines.               In preparation.       Canadian
                     environmental quality guidelines for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
                     polychlorinated dibenzofurans. Water Quality Guidelines Division. EcoHealtb
                     Branch. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

             Mah, F.T.S., D.D. MacDonald, S.W. Sheehan, T.M. Tuominen, and D. Valiela. 1989.
                     Dioxins and furans in sediment and fish from the vicinity of ten inland pulp mills in
                     British Columbia. Water Quality Branch. Environment Canada. Vancouver, British
                     Columbia. 77 pp.

             McLeese, D.W. and C.D. Metcalfe. 1980. Toxicities of eight organochlorine compounds
                     in sediment and seawater to Crangon septemspinosa. Bulletin of Envirorunental
                     Contamination and Toxicology 25:921-928.

             Mercury Technical Conunittee. 1991. A report to the Florida Governor's mercury in Fish
                     and wildlife task force. an the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation:
                     Interim report. Tallahassee, Florida 60 pp.

             Montague, C.L. and R.G. Wiegert. 1990. In: R.L. Meyers and J.J. Ewel (Eds.).
                     Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press. Orlando, Florida.

             Moore, D.R.J. and S.L. Walker.           1991.    Canadian water quality guidelines for
                     polychlorinated biphenyls in coastal and estuarine waters. Scientific Series Number
                     186. Environment Canada. Ottawa
                                                           Canada. 61 pp.

             Mosello, R. and A. Calderoni. 1990. Pollution and recovery of Lake Orta (Northern Italy).
                     In: R. Baudo, J. Geisy and H. Muntau (Eds.). Sediments: Chemistry and toxicity
                     of in-place pollutants. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, Michigan.

             Mudroch, A. and S.D. MacKnight. 1991. Handbook of techniques for aquatic sediments
                     sampling. CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, Florida. 210 pp.

             Mudroch, A., L. Sarazin, T. Lomas and C. deBarros. 1986. Report on the progress of the
                     revision of the MOE guidelines for dredged material open water disposal 1,984/85.
                     Environment Canada. Inland Waters Directorate. Environmental Contaminants
                     Division. Draft Report. 15 pp.

             Mudrock, A., L. Sarazin and T. Lomas. 1988. Summary of surface and background
                     concentrations of selected elements in the Great Lakes sediment. Journal of Great
                     Lakes Research 14:241-251.
             NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 1975. The coastline of the
                     United States. Department of Commerce. Washington, District of Columbia,

             NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 1984. Contamination of
                     populated estuaries and adjacent coastal oceans - A global review. NOAA Technical
                     Memorandum NOS OMA"ll. Rockville, Maryland.







                                                          123 -



             NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 1990. Estuaries of the United
                    States: Vital statistics of a national resource base., Department of Commerce.
                    Rockville, Maryland. 79 pp.

             NRCC (National Research Council of Canada). 1981. Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins:
                    Criteria for their effects on man and his environment. NRCC Report Number 18574.
                    Ottawa, Canada. 251 pp.

             NRCC (National Research Council of Canada). 1983. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
                    in the Aquatic Environment: Formation, Sources, Fate and Effects on Aquatic Biota.
                    NRCC Report Number 18981. NRC Associate Committee on Scientific Criteria for
                    Environmental Quality. Ottawa, Canada. 209 p.

             NRCC (National Research Council of Canada). 1984. Polychlorinated dibenzofurans:
                    Criteria for their effects on humans and the environment. NRCC Report No. 22846.
                    Ottawa, Ontario. 243 pp.

             Neff, J.M. 1979. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Aquatic Environment,         Sources,
                    Fates and Biological Effects. Essex, England: Applied Science Publishers Ltd. 262 p.
                    (As cited in Sloof et aL 1989).
             Neff, J.M., D.J. Bean, B.W. Cornaby, R.M. Vaga, T.C. Gulbransen, and J.A. Scanlon. 1986.
                    Sediment quality criteria methodology validation: Calculation. of screening level
                    concentrations from field data. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency
                    Region V. Washington, District of !Columbia. 225 pp.

             Neff, J.M., J.Q. Word, and T.C. Gulbransen. 1987. Recalculation of screening level
                    concentrations for nonpolar organic contaminants in marine sediments. Final report.
                    Prepared for Enviroru-nental Protection Agency Region V. Washington, District of
                    Columbia. 18 pp.

             OMOE (Ontario Ministry of the Environment). 1985. Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
                    (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs). Scientific Criteria Document
                    for Standard Development Number 4-84. Toronto, Ontario.

             Outridge, P.M., D.D. MacDonald, and I.D. Cuthbert. 1992. Cadmium and its compounds.
                    Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Priority Substances List Assessment
                    Report. Commercial Chemicals Branch. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

             Pait, A.S., D.R.G. Farrow, J.A. Lowe, and P.A. Pacheco. 1989. Agricultural pesticide use
                    in estuarine drainage areas:     A preliminary summary for selected pesticides.
                    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Department of Commerce.
                    Rockville, Maryland. 134 pp.






                                                           124-



              Pavlou, S.P. 1987. The use of the equilibrium partitioning approach in determining safe
                     levels of contaminants in marine sediments. In: KL. Dickson, A.W. Maki, and W.A.
                     Brungs (Eds.). Fate and Effects of Sediment-bound Chemicals in Aquatic Systems.
                     Proceedings of the Sixth Pellston Workshop. Pergamon Press. Toronto, Ontario.

              Pavlou, S.P. and D.P. Weston. 1983. Initial evaluation of alternatives for development of
                     sediment related criteria for toxic contaminants in marine waters (Puget Sound).
                     Phase 1: Development of conceptual framework. Final Report. JRB Associates.
                     Bellevue, Washington. 56 pp.

              Persaud, D. and W.D. Wilkins. 1976. Evaluating Construction activities impacting on water
                     resources. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Toronto, Ontario.

              Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi, and A. Hayton. 1989. Development of provincial sediment
                     quality guidelines. Water Resources Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment.
                     Toronto, Ontario. 19 pp.

              Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi, and A. Hayton. 1990. Provincial sediment quality guidelines.
                     Water Resources Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. Toronto, Ontario.
                     21 pp.

              Puget  Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis. 1989. Management plan report: Unconfined
                     open-water disposal of dredged material -Phase II (North and South Puget Sound).
                     Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Olympia, Washington.

              SAIC   (Science Applications International Corporation). 1991. Draft compilation of
                     sediment quality guidelines for EPA Region V inventory of contaminated sediment
                     sites.  Report prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency.
                     Chicago, Illinois. 48 pp.

              Schiewe, M.H., E.G. Hawk, D.I. Actor, and M.M. Krahn. 1985. Use of a bacterial
                     bioluminescence assay to assess toxicity of contaminated sediments. Canadian
                     Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 42:1244-1248.

              Schropp, S.J. and H.L. Windom.          1988    A guide to the interpretation of metal
                     concentrations in estuarine sediments. Coastal Zone Management Section. F        'lorida
                     Department of Environmental Regulation. Tallahassee, Florida. 44 pp. + app.

              Schropp@ S.J., F.D. Calder, L.C. Burney, and H.L. Windom. 1989. A practical approach for
                     assessing metals contamination in coastal sediments - An example from Tampa Bay.
                     In: Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management. July
                     11 - 14, 1989. Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Charleston,
                     North Carolina.








                                                            125-



              Schropp, S.J., F.G. Lewis, H.L. Windom, J.D. Ryan, R.D. Calder, and L.C. Burney. 1990.
                     Interpretation of metal concentrations in estuarine sediments of Florida using
                     aluminum as a reference element. Estuaries 13(3):227-235.

              Sediment Criteria Subcommittee. 1989. Review of the apparent effects threshold approach,
                     to setting sediment criteria. Report of the Science Advisory Board. United States
                     Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia. 18 pp.

              Sediment Criteria Subcommittee. 1990. Evaluation of the sediment classification methods
                     compendium. Report of the Science Advisory Board. United States Environmental
                     Protection Agency. Washington, District of Columbia. 18 pp.

              Sims, R.C., and M.R. Overcash. 1983. Fate of polynuilear aromatic compounds (PNAs) in
                     soil-plant systems. Residue Reviews 88: 1-68.

              Smith, S.L. and D.D. MacDonald. 1992. The development and use of Canadian sediment
                     quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life and their uses. Water Quality
                     Guidelines Division. EcoHealth Branch. Environment Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

              Sokal, R.R. and F.J. Roh1f. 1981. Biometry. W.H. Freeman and Company. San Francisco,
                     California. 766 pp.

              Spear, P.A. and R.C. Pierce. 1979. Copper in the aquatic environment: Chemistry,
                     distribution, and toxicology. NRCC Report Number 16454. National Research
                     Council of Canada. Ottawa. Cana6. 227 pp.

              Swartz, R.C., G.R. Ditsworth, D.W. Schults, and J.0. Lamberson. Sediment toxicity to a
                     marine infaunal amphipod: Cadmium and its interaction with sewage sludge..
                     Marine Environmental Research 18: 133-153.


              Swartz, R.C., G.R. Ditsworth, D.W. Schults and J.0. Lamberson. 1986. Sediment toxicity
                     to a marine infaunal amphipod: cadmium and its interaction with sewage            sludge.
                     Marine Environmental Research 18:133-153.


              Swartz, R.C., D.W. Schults, T.H. DeWitt, G.R. Ditsworth, and J.0. Lamberson.              .1987.
                     Toxicity of fluoranthene in sediment to marine amphipods: A test of the equilibrium
                     partitioning approach to sediment quality criteria. In: Proceedings of the 89th
                     Annual Meeting of the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry.
                     Pensacola, Florida.

              Swartz, R.C., P.F. Kemp, D.W. Schults and J.O. Lamberson. 1988. Effects of mixtures of
                     sediment contaminants on the marine infaunal amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius.
                     Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 7:1013-1020.






                                                         126-



             Swartz, R.C., P.F. Kemp, D.W. Schults and J.O. Lamberson. 1989. Toxicity of sediment
                    from Eagle Harbour, Washington to the infaunal amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius.
                    Environmental Toxicology Chemistry 8:215-222.

             Swartz, R.C., D.W. Schults, T.H. DeWitt, G.R. Ditsworth, and J.O. Lamberson. 1990.-
                    Toxicity of fluoranthene in sediment to marine amphipods: A test of the equilibrium
                    partitioning approach to sediment quality criteria. Environmental Toxicology and
                    Chemistry 9:1071-1080.

             Taylor, M.C., S.W. Reeder, and A. Demayo. 1979. Chromium. In: Guidelines for Surface
                    Water Quality. Volume 1. Inorganic Substances. Environment Canada. Ottawa,
                    Canada.


             Tetra Tech Inc. 1986. Development of sediment quality values for Puget Sound. Volume
                    1. Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis Report. 129 pp.

             Trefry, J.H., M. Sadoughi, M.D. Sullivan, J.S. Steward, and S. Barber. 1983. Trace metals
                    in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida: The copper story. Florida Academy of
                    Sciences 46:415-427.


             USDC (United States D     epartment of Commerce). 1990. 1990 census of population.
                    Bureau of Census. Data made available by Florida Department of Commerce.
                    Bureau of Marketing Research. Tallahassee, Florida.

             Van Der Kooij, L.A., D. Van De Meent, C.J. Van Leeuwen, and W.A. Bruggeman. 1991.
                    Deriving quality criteria for water and sediment from the results of aquatic toxicity
                    tests and product standards: Application of the equilibrium partitioning method.
                    Water Research 25(6):697-705.

             Ward,  D.B. 1978. Rare and endangered biota of Florida: Volume 5 - Plants. - Florida
                    Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals. University Presses of
                    Florida. Gainsville, Florida.

             Washington Department of Ecology. 1990a. Sediment management standards: Chapter
                    173-204 WAC. Olympia, Washington. 106 pp.

             Washington Department of Ecology. 1990b. Final environmental impact statement for
                    Washington State sediment management standards.            Chapter 173-204 WAC.
                    Olympia, Washington.

             Webb, S.D. 1990. In: R.L. Meyers and J.J. Ewe] (Eds.). Ecosystems of Florida.
                    University of Central Florida Press. Orlando, Florida.

             Worthing, C.R. and R.J. Hance. 1991. A world compendium: The, pesticide manual.
                    British Crop Protection Council. Farnham, United Kingdom. 1141 pp.






                                                           127 -


             Appendix 1: Screening Criteria for Evaluating Candidate Data Sets for the Sediment
                            Toxicity (SEDTOX) Database


             A       Spiked Sediment Bioassay Data

             1.      Toxicity tests which follow published protocols set by the ASTM are acceptable.
                     Other tests which employ more novel protocols should be evaluated on a case by
                     case basis (e.g., Green Book test protocols are acceptable).

             2.      Concentrations of the contaminant in sediment must be measured (with the number
                     of measurements taken dependent on the nature of the chemical and duration of the
                     test). Calculated (nominal) concentrations of the substances in sediment are not
                     acceptable.

             3.      The chemical analytical procedures must have been appropriate for determining      I the
                     total concentrations of the analytes in bulksediment samples. For example, strong
                     acid digestions are required to determine total concentrations of metals. In the
                     future, these criteria may be revised to incorporate other digestion procedures.

             4.      Test sediments should be characterized so that any factors which may affect toxicity
                     can be included in the evaluation process. In the overlying water, variabJes such as
                     temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, residual chlorine, suspended solids, and water
                     hardness (and/or alkalinity) or s,-4inity should be measured. In the sediment,
                     variables such as moisture content, organic carbon, acid volatile sulfides, and particle
                     size distribution should be reported. However, studies that' do not report these
                     variables may still be included in the database.

             5.      Acceptable biological tests should demonstrate that adequate environmental
                     conditions for the test species were maintained throughout the test.

             6.      Preferred endpoints include effects on embryonic development, early survival, growth,
                     reproduction, and adult survival.

             7.      Responses and survival of controls must be reported and within acceptable'limits.

             8.      Appropriate statistical procedures should be used and reported in detail.

             9.      The equilibrium adjustment period (i.e., time between spiking and initiation of the
                     biological test) and information relevant to the determination if equilibrium had been
                     established should be reported.








                                                            128-



              Appendix 1: Screening Criteria for Evaluating        Candidate Data Sets for the Sediment
                             Toxicity (SEDTOX) Database (continued)


              B.      Matching Sediment Chemistry    and Biological Effects Data

              1.      The data set must contain matching sediment chemistry and biological effects
                      (laboratory and benthic community) data. That is, biological and chemical data must
                      be collected from the same locations and at the same time.

              2.      The procedures used for collection, handling, and storage of saltwater and freshwater
                      sediments should be consistent with the protocols recommended by the ASTM (E
                      1391-90). For example:
                             (a)    Sediments    that have been frozen must not be used for
                                    biological tests (except for Microtox tests). However extracts
                                    (i.e., pore water) may be frozen.
                             (b)    Sediments should not be stored for greater than two weeks
                                    prior to use in toxicity tests. @

              3.      The concentrations of one or more analyte(s) must va!y by at least a factor of ten
                      at different sampling sites.

              -4.     The chemical analytical procedures must have been appropriate for determining the
                      total concentrations of the analytes,in bulk sediment samples. For example, strong
                      acid digestions are required to determine total concentrations of metals.

              5.      Test sediments should be characterized so that any factors which may affect toxicity
                      can be included in the evaluation process. In the overlying water, variables such as'
                      temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, residual chlorine, suspended solids, and water
                      hardness (and/or. alkalinity) or salinity should be measured. In the sediment,
                      variables such as moisture content, organic carbon, acid volatile sulfides, and particle
                      size distribution should be reported. However, studies that do not report these
                      variables may still be included in the database.

              6.      The procedures used to assess the toxicity of sediment-sorbed contaminants in. whole
                      sediments (and other appropriate media) should be consistent with the protocols
                      Lecommended by the ASTM (E 1367-90, E 1383-90, etc.). Other tests which employ
                      other published protocols should be evaluated on a case by case basis (e.g., Green
                      Book tests are acceptable).

              7.      Responses and survival of controls must be reported and within acceptable limits.

              8.      Appropriate statistical procedures should be used and reported in detail.








                                                                                                                                NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY


                                                                                                                           1 3 6668 14112916 5