<strong>of</strong> appropriate reference area samples is a key component to consider in thedevelopment <strong>of</strong> a sediment study design. Comparison <strong>of</strong> site sediments tomultiple reference area sediments representative <strong>of</strong> the physical characteristics<strong>of</strong> the site sediment will facilitate interpretation <strong>of</strong> the resultant data. Furtherguidance on the use <strong>of</strong> reference area samples for sediment and sediment porewater toxicity tests are provided in Appendices D and E, respectively.To ensure meaningful comparison <strong>of</strong> sediment chemistry and toxicity testresults, it is important that physical and chemical factors at the reference areaaffecting the site chemistry and bioavailability (e.g., grain size, TOC, Eh, pH,concentrations <strong>of</strong> salts, nutrients, chemicals, and AVS) are similar to theconditions at the site. In addition, habitat conditions at reference arealocations should be as similar as possible to ensure that receptors identified asappropriate for site conditions also might be exposed to reference areas. Ifsite conditions are heterogeneous, it may be necessary to select more than onereference area for evaluation to ensure that all possible variations areaddressed.If an <strong>of</strong>f-site reference area is selected, it should be located within the samewatershed and should be <strong>of</strong> a similar habitat type. Any differences inmorphology between the reference area and the site should be documented.Contaminant levels in the reference area should also be characterized anddocumented. In addition, established regional background contaminant levels,reflecting ambient sediment or tissue concentrations based on monitoring datacollected from throughout a specified area over a given period, might beuseful in select cases if reference area locations are not able to be established.6.2.2.2 Sediment Habitat Assessments and Community SurveysBenthic macroinvertebrate surveys have been performed historically byUSEPA and state regulatory agencies to evaluate the ecological integrity <strong>of</strong>aquatic systems as mandated by the Clean Water Act. More recently, theyhave been used in conjunction with other analyses such as sediment chemistryand sediment toxicity tests to provide a measure <strong>of</strong> ecosystem health. Thistype <strong>of</strong> integrated approach, where sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity, andcommunity assessments are evaluated simultaneously, has been termed theSediment Quality Triad approach (Long and Chapman, 1985).Typically, benthic macroinvertebrate surveys are conducted to determinewhether the sediments at a given location are impaired (benthic communityshift) in comparison to a reference area. The survey consists <strong>of</strong> benthicmacroinvertebrate collection, organism identification, and data analysis. Dataanalysis <strong>of</strong>ten involves generating various metrics associated with community,population, and functional parameters such as species richness and toleranceindices (USEPA, 1990a).The benthic macroinvertebrate community is considered an important bioticcomponent <strong>of</strong> most aquatic systems and plays a significant role in thestructure and function <strong>of</strong> ecosystems, including the processing and transfer <strong>of</strong>organic material and nutrient cycling. Benthic macroinvertebrates are<strong>Ecological</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>Technical</strong> <strong>Guidance</strong> Document 57Version 1.2 8/29/12
elatively sedentary organisms that inhabit or depend upon the sedimentenvironment for their various life functions. They are sensitive to both longtermand short-term changes in sediment and water quality and are frequentlyused as environmental indicators <strong>of</strong> biological integrity because they arefound in most aquatic habitats, are <strong>of</strong> a size permitting ease <strong>of</strong> collection, canbe used to describe water-quality conditions or health <strong>of</strong> ecosystemcomponents, and can identify causes <strong>of</strong> impaired conditions (USEPA, 1990a).Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys are advantageous in that they integrate theinteractions <strong>of</strong> multiple contaminants and multiple routes <strong>of</strong> exposure, and canrespond to a broad array <strong>of</strong> potential pollutants. Some limitations are that theydo not identify the contaminant responsible for the observed toxicity,population impacts are not readily translated into contaminant remediationgoals, and results are <strong>of</strong>ten confounded by variables not related to contaminanttoxicity (predation, seasonal differences, physicochemical sedimentcharacteristics, food availability).The utility <strong>of</strong> benthic macroinvertebrate surveys may diminish whenconducted in urban streams and rivers that are known to contain diffuseanthropogenic pollutants and/or multiple industrial point discharges. Underthese conditions, survey results <strong>of</strong>ten indicate the presence <strong>of</strong> pollutiontolerant organisms with little to no difference in diversity when compared tothe results from a reference area location, and <strong>of</strong>fer limited useful informationregarding impacts that can be attributed directly to the site under investigation.Under these circumstances, the investigator may decide to rely more heavilyon other lines <strong>of</strong> evidence such as sediment toxicity tests and receptor tissueconcentrations.A full description <strong>of</strong> how to conduct a benthic macroinvertebrate survey isbeyond the scope <strong>of</strong> this document; however, some <strong>of</strong> the more commonlyused references are provided in Section 11.0 (USEPA, 1999b; USEPA, 1990a;USEPA, 1998b; and Long and Chapman, 1985).6.2.2.3 Sediment Pore Water SamplingBulk sediment chemistry data are derived from measuring only the solid phase<strong>of</strong> a sediment sample via standard analytical methods. Typically, bulksediment chemistry data are compared to conservatively based screeningcriteria to evaluate potential risk to benthic infauna. This type <strong>of</strong> comparisonis generally conducted during the screening phase <strong>of</strong> an investigation and it isacknowledged that site-specific bioavailability is not being measured at thisstage.In addition to direct exposure to contaminants associated with the sedimentsolid phase (e.g. mineral or organic phases), benthic organisms are exposed tothe sediment pore water, which is the water located in the interstitial spacebetween the sediment solid-phase particles. It is widely recognized thatcontaminant pore water concentrations more accurately predict toxicity andobserved community level effects than do whole sediment concentrations fornonionic compounds (Di Toro et al., 1991, 2005a; Di Toro, 2008; Hansen et<strong>Ecological</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>Technical</strong> <strong>Guidance</strong> Document 58Version 1.2 8/29/12
- Page 1 and 2:
Ecological EvaluationTechnical Guid
- Page 3 and 4:
6.2.1.3 Biological Sampling of Fish
- Page 5 and 6:
Acronyms and AbbreviationsADDAETAFA
- Page 7 and 8: Executive SummaryThis document prov
- Page 9 and 10: environmentally sensitive areas pur
- Page 11 and 12: Figure 3-1: Flow diagram to describ
- Page 13 and 14: assessment may also include evaluat
- Page 15 and 16: “Hazard quotient” or “HQ” m
- Page 17 and 18: “Site investigation” means the
- Page 19 and 20: parameters as specified in ERAGS (i
- Page 21 and 22: document otherwise). The investigat
- Page 23 and 24: 5.3.2.1 Potential Contaminant Migra
- Page 25 and 26: 71 0Sampling pointsSampling transec
- Page 27 and 28: 5.3.4 Background ConsiderationsIt i
- Page 29 and 30: III. GroundwaterAnalytical data fro
- Page 31 and 32: 5.5 Ecological Evaluation ReportThe
- Page 33 and 34: Step 1 - Preliminary Screening Leve
- Page 35 and 36: specific measurements of receptor h
- Page 37 and 38: Figure 6-2: Ecological Conceptual S
- Page 39 and 40: ingested, air inhaled, or material
- Page 41 and 42: Fugacity, which is described as the
- Page 43 and 44: environment. As noted in ERAGS, the
- Page 45 and 46: Sample SelectionAfter completing th
- Page 47 and 48: While there are many laboratories t
- Page 49 and 50: ioavailability, and by doing so, of
- Page 51 and 52: For the purposes of surface water,
- Page 53 and 54: higher trophic level receptors. Lip
- Page 55 and 56: Details regarding surface water tox
- Page 57: e present at intervals greater than
- Page 61 and 62: COPECs. The following references ar
- Page 63 and 64: tests (USEPA, 2002e). After collect
- Page 65 and 66: multiple reference area soils repre
- Page 67 and 68: In ERAs, tissue residue analyses ar
- Page 69 and 70: Objectives of the ERA: including a
- Page 71 and 72: evaluation might necessitate the co
- Page 73 and 74: N.J.A.C. 7:26E-4.8(c)1. The ERA may
- Page 75 and 76: sediment (i.e., that fraction that
- Page 77 and 78: Twelve dioxin-like PCB congeners ha
- Page 79 and 80: indicates burial of potential dioxi
- Page 81 and 82: of evidence for evaluating risk unt
- Page 83 and 84: 7.2.1 Apparent Effects Threshold Ap
- Page 85 and 86: when site conditions are most simil
- Page 87 and 88: destroying 10 acres of the mature f
- Page 89 and 90: ASTM (American Society for Testing
- Page 91 and 92: Establishing Sediment Quality Crite
- Page 93 and 94: N.J.A.C. (New Jersey Administrative
- Page 95 and 96: USEPA. 1989c. Risk Assessment Guida
- Page 97 and 98: http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regu
- Page 99 and 100: USEPA 2006a. Data Quality Assessmen
- Page 101 and 102: Appendix A - Habitat Survey FormsEc
- Page 103 and 104: Ecological Evaluation Technical Gui
- Page 105 and 106: Appendix B - Sampling Procedures fo
- Page 107 and 108: Appendix C - Surface Water Toxicity
- Page 109 and 110:
Short-term chronic studies, endpoin
- Page 111 and 112:
Appendix D - Sediment Toxicity Test
- Page 113 and 114:
Toxicity Test DesignSediment toxici
- Page 115 and 116:
Appendix E - Sediment Pore Water an
- Page 117 and 118:
The seven-day daphnid survival and
- Page 119 and 120:
esults are then evaluated using USE
- Page 121 and 122:
Surber or Square-foot BottomThis sa
- Page 123 and 124:
Appendix H - Soil Toxicity TestingS
- Page 125 and 126:
another sample may still have a sub
- Page 127 and 128:
conservative approach from an ecolo
- Page 129:
Data PresentationTabular presentati