1.1 MB pdf - Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SECTION 6: REFERENCES U.S. EPA. 1994d. Selecting and Using Reference Information in Superfund Ecological Risk Assessments. ECO Update Volume 2, Number 4. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Publication 9345.0-10I. EPA 540-F-94-050. September. U.S. EPA, 1994e. Short-term methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater organisms. EPA/600/4-91/002. July. U.S. EPA, 1994f. Short-term methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to marine and estuarine organisms. EPA/600/4-91/003. July. U.S. EPA. 1995a. Short-Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to West Coast Marine and Estuarine Organisms. EPA/600/R-95-136. U.S. EPA. 1995b. Study of federal water quality criteria for metals, water quality standards, establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants, states' compliance, revision of metals criteria, final rules. Federal Register 22,228-22,237. U.S. EPA. 1996a. Ecological Significance and Selection of Candidate Assessment Endpoints. ECO Update Volume 3, Number 1. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Publication 9345.0-11FSI. EPA 540/F-95/037. January. U.S. EPA. 1996b. Ecotox Thresholds. ECO Update Volume 3, Number 2. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Publication 9345.0-12FSI. EPA 540/F-95/038. January. U.S. EPA. 1996c. Calculation and Evaluation of Sediment Effect Concentrations for the Amphipod Hyalella azteca and the Midge Chironomus riparius, EPA-905-R96-008. Great Lakes National Program Office. Chicago, IL. U.S. EPA. 1997. Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Proposed Rule. Federal Register: 42,159-42,208. August. U.S. EPA. 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment Final. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Risk Assessment Forum. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. April. U.S. EPA. 2000. Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131, Vol. 65, No. 97. May 18. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/U.S. Naval Weapons Station-Seal Beach. 1990. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Endanged Species Management and Protection Plan. Naval Weapons Station-Seal Beach and Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. August. UTAB, 1994. UTAB database search conducted by Carole Shriner/CH2M HILL. January. Verschueren, K. 1983. Handbook of Environmental Data on Organic Chemicals, 2nd ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York, NY. 1310 pp. Wallace, A., G. V. Alexander, and F. M. Chaudhry. 1977. Phytotoxicity and Some Interactions of the Essential Trace Metals Iron, Manganese, Molybdenum, Zinc, Copper, and Boron. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 8 (9): 741-50. ERA REPORT 6-10 SAC/143368(006.DOC) 7/31/02
SECTION 6: REFERENCES Wentsel, R. S., et al. 1996. Tri-Service Procedural Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessments, Volume I. U.S. Army; The Institute of Wildlife and Environmental Toxicology, Clemson University; Geo-Centers, Inc.; EA Engineering, Science, and Technology; and EBA, Inc. June. Wheelwright, N. T. and J. D. Rising. 1993. The Savannah Sparrow. In The Birds of North America. No. 45. A. Poole and F. Gill (eds). Academy of Natural Sciences, Washington D.C. Whitworth, M. R., G. W. Pendleton, D. J. Hoffman, and M. B. Camardese. 1991. Effects of boron and arsenic on the behavior of mallard ducklings. Envir. Toxicol. Chem. 10: 911-916. World Health Organization (WHO). 1984. Chlordane. Environ. Health Criter. 34. 82 pp. Will, M. E. and G. W. Suter II, 1995. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Potential Contaminants of Concern for Effects on Terrestrial Plants. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. 123 pp. ES/ER/TM-85/R-1. Wolf, M. A., V. K. Rowe, D. D. McCollister, R. L. Hollinsworth, and F. Oyen. 1956. Toxicological studies of certain alkylated benzenes and benzene. Arch. Ind. Health 14: 387-398. Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1987. Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Bolsa Chica Development Orange County, California. Prepared for Signal Bolsa Corporation, Project No. 421000S. Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 718 pp. Zeiner, D. C, W. M. Laudenslayer, K. E. Mayer, and M. White. 1990a. California’s Wildlife, Volume II: Birds. California State Wildlife Habitats Relationships System. State of California. The Resources Agency. Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. Zeiner, D. C., W. F. Laudenslayer, K. E.Mayer, and M. White. 1990b. California’s Wildlife, Vol. III: Mammals. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. April. SAC/143368(006.DOC) 6-11 ERA REPORT 7/31/02
Page 1 and 2:
REVISED FINAL VOLUME I Ecological R
Page 3 and 4:
CONTENTS 3. Analysis...............
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS 3-21 Summary of EC 50 s an
Page 7 and 8:
Executive Summary The Bolsa Chica L
Page 9 and 10:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The ERA report ev
Page 11 and 12:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY “focused sampli
Page 13 and 14:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Exposure point co
Page 15 and 16:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY sample. However,
Page 17 and 18:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The chemicals in
Page 19 and 20:
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION • Sedimen
Page 21 and 22:
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION Assessment
Page 23 and 24:
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION Based on th
Page 25 and 26:
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.5 Organiz
Page 27 and 28:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION The L
Page 29 and 30:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION The e
Page 31 and 32:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION 2.2.1
Page 33 and 34:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION tern
Page 35 and 36:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION backg
Page 37 and 38:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION 2.4.1
Page 39 and 40:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION The f
Page 41 and 42:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION Benth
Page 43 and 44:
SECTION 2:PROBLEM FORMULATION Fish
Page 45 and 46:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS The field sampl
Page 47 and 48:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS CAR Sites A tot
Page 49 and 50:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS 3.1.2 Data Eval
Page 51 and 52:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS questionable. T
Page 53 and 54:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS Pesticides were
Page 55 and 56:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS copper were det
Page 57 and 58:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS For five of the
Page 59 and 60:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS the subsurface
Page 61 and 62:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS 3.1.4 Exposure
Page 63 and 64:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS 3.1.4.2 Exposur
Page 65 and 66:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS Model The gener
Page 67 and 68:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS 3.1.5 Exposure
Page 69 and 70:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS The toxicity bi
Page 71 and 72:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS The chronic tox
Page 73 and 74:
SECTION 3: ANALYSIS conductivity wi
Page 75 and 76: SECTION 3: ANALYSIS the regression
Page 77 and 78: SECTION 3: ANALYSIS Scatter plots a
Page 79 and 80: SECTION 3: ANALYSIS concentrations,
Page 81 and 82: SECTION 3: ANALYSIS dieldrin. These
Page 83 and 84: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Ha
Page 85 and 86: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Te
Page 87 and 88: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION to
Page 89 and 90: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION te
Page 91 and 92: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Se
Page 93 and 94: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Aq
Page 95 and 96: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION 4.
Page 97 and 98: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION pl
Page 103 and 104: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Po
Page 107 and 108: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION De
Page 109 and 110: SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION no
Page 111 and 112: CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AN
Page 117 and 118: SECTION 6 References Abbasi, S. A.
Page 119 and 120: SECTION 6: REFERENCES Dunteman, G.
Page 121 and 122: SECTION 6: REFERENCES Kauss, P. B.
Page 123 and 124: SECTION 6: REFERENCES RareFind. 199
Page 125: SECTION 6: REFERENCES U.S. EPA. 199
show all

1.1 MB pdf - Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?