Interim report of the HELCOM CORESET project

GES boundaries and matrix
Existing quantitative targets
In OSPAR, no revision of EACs had been made for the QSR 2010 for HCB, HCHs and DDTs, as these substances
are not part of the CEMP and have not been assessed. Therefore, the OSPAR values listed in the
following table are refl ecting the status in 2004 ( ASMO 08/6/5 Add.4-E (L).
Table 5.3. Existing quatitative targets for HCB, HCHs and DDTs.
Source Value and description
OSPAR
EAC sediment HCH (gamma): 1.1 μg kg-1 dry wt (normalised to 2.5% carbon)
DDE: 1.6 μg kg-1 dry wt (provisional)
EAC fi sh HCH (gamma): 1.1 μg kg-1 wet wt
EAC mussel HCH (gamma): 0.29 μg kg-1 wet wt
EAC water HCH (gamma): 0,002 μg/l
DDE: 0,000001 μg/l
EC
EQS water
HCB: AA: annual average = 0,01 μg/l
for “other surface water” HCB: MAC: maximum allowable concentration = 0,05 μg/l
(Directive 2008/105/EC)
HCH (combined): AA = 0,002 μg/l, MAC = 0,02 μg/l
DDT (total): AA = 0,025 MAC = not applicable
DDT (p,p’): AA = 0,01 MAC = not applicable
EQS biota HCB: 10μg/kg prey tissue (wet weight)
QS biota HCH (gamma): QS Biota, secondary poisoning(WFD datasheet):
33 μg/kg (tissue of prey, wet wt)
QS sediment HCB: QS Sediment (WFD datasheet): 3.7 μg/kg wet wt (≈16.9 μg/kg
(dry wt)
HCH: QS Sediment (WFD datasheet): 0.24 μg/kg wet wt (≈ 1.1 μg/
kg dry wt)
QS Human health HCH (gamma): 61 μg/kg fi shery product (wet wt)
Effect Range -Low
ERL sediment DDT (total): 1,6 μg/kg dry sediment
p,p’-DDE: 1,2 μg/kg dry sediment
Preferred matrix
DDTs: Herring and perch muscle, cod liver, bivalve soft tissue. (DDD sediment).
HCHs: Herring and perch muscle, cod liver, bivalve soft tissue. Water.
Herring and perch muscle, cod liver. Bivalve soft tissue.
Monitoring the compound
Status of monitoring network (geographical and temporal coverage)
The following table presents an overview of results about HCB, HCHs and DDTs as being available from
public accessible sources like reports from the HELCOM website and ICES EcoSystemData maps. Compared
with the national commitments it is obvious, that all member states are monitoring the substances at least
in biota (information from Russia is missing). However, no statement on completeness of geographical and
temporal coverage can be made on this basis, as the reports are refl ecting only a certain choice of data,
and the data extraction from the ICES Data base DOME into the maps may not visualize the same status as
possibly exist in the national data centres or at the originators.
217