1.1 MB pdf - Bolsa Chica Lowlands Restoration Project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3-5a Selenium (Se) Values (Including Non-Detects) in Sediments 3-5b Detected Selenium (Se) Values in Sediments 3-6a Silver (Ag) Values (Including Non-Detects) in Sediments 3-6b Detected Silver (Ag) Values in Sediments 3-7 Random Sampling Results for Metals Exceeding at Least One Screening Level 3-8 Random Sampling Results for Metals Exceeding ER-M 3-9 Random Sampling Results for Petroleum Hydrocarbons Exceeding at Least One Screening Level 3-10 Random Sampling Results for Petroleum Hydrocarbons Exceeding LC50 3-11 Random Sampling Results for Chlorinated Pesticides Exceeding at Least One Screening Level 3-12 Random Sampling Results for Chlorinated Pesticides Exceeding ER-M 3-13 Random Sampling Results for PCBs Exceeding at Least One Screening Level 3-14 Random Sampling Results for PCBs Exceeding ER-M 3-15 Random Sampling Results for Phthalate Exceeding at Least One Screening Level 3-16 Random Sampling Results for Phthalate Exceeding LC50 3-17 Arsenic in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-18 Barium in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-19 Chromium in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-20 Lead in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-21 Nickel in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-22 Aldrin in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-23 Chrysene in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-24 4,4'-DDE in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-25 Low MW PAHs in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-26 Phenanthrene in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-27 TPH Diesel in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-28 Waste Oil in Sediment vs. Amphipod Toxicity 3-29 Arsenic in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-30 Lead in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-31 Acenaphthene in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-32 BHC alpha in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-33 Chrysene in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-34 Endosulfan Sulfate in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-35 Fluorene in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-36 High MW PAHs in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 3-37 Total PAHs in Pore Water vs. Mytilus Toxicity 4-1 Selection of Chemicals of Ecological Concern SAC/143368(CONTENTS.DOC) v ERA REPORT 7/31/02
Executive Summary The Bolsa Chica Lowlands are located in Orange County, California and comprise approximately 1,200 acres of estuarine, marine and upland habitat. Since the 1920s, much of the area has been used for oil and gas exploration, production, and processing. The site and adjacent areas have also been used for agriculture, cattle grazing, as a wildlife refuge, and for recreational hunting and fishing. The historical site activity as well as urban runoff draining into the Lowlands has resulted in contamination or physical disturbance of the plants, wildlife or their habitat on the site. This Ecological Risk Assessment was conducted in anticipation of proposed clean-up and restoration of the Lowlands to a functioning estuarine system and to improve wildlife habitat. It is anticipated that once clean-up and restoration activities are complete, the site will become a state or federal wildlife refuge, as well as serving as mitigation for habitat losses elsewhere. The anticipated future use of the Lowlands served as the focus for the development of the ecological management goals for the site, which are as follows: • Sediment, surface water quality, and food source conditions capable of supporting terrestrial, aquatic, and semi-aquatic plant and wildlife populations that would typically be found in Full Tidal and Managed Tidal coastal wetland habitats, and non-tidal Seasonal Ponds • Sediment, surface water quality, and food source conditions supportive of individuals of special-status biota and migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act likely to be found in Full Tidal and Managed Tidal coastal wetland habitats, and non-tidal Seasonal Ponds As part of this restoration effort, the nature and extent of contamination on the site is being investigated and evaluated. Two important elements of the investigation include an: • Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA) (this document) to evaluate contaminants present at the site at concentrations that present a risk to fish, wildlife or their habitat. The ERA identifies exposure pathways and associated site-specific assessment endpoints. The ERA also characterizes the ecological effects of the contaminants of concern. This and other information and analysis in the ERA has been or will be used to (among other things): (a) assess the nature of the contamination at the site and identify the general areas of the site that contain contamination (b) assess the nature, characteristics, and sensitivities of the natural resources at the site (c) determine the extent to which the contamination threatens to impact natural resources at the site and (d) identify the types or routes of exposure to the contamination that pose an unacceptable risk; and • Confirmatory Sampling Program (CSP) to delineate the extent of on-site contamination and the bounds of needed clean-up efforts. (The CSP was not completed at the time of publication of this report.) SAC/143368(ES.DOC) ES-1 ERA REPORT 7/31/02
Page 1 and 2: REVISED FINAL VOLUME I Ecological R
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS 3. Analysis...............
Page 5: CONTENTS 3-21 Summary of EC 50 s an
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 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
SECTION 4: RISK CHARACTERIZATION Po
Page 105 and 106:
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 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
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 and 126:
SECTION 6: REFERENCES U.S. EPA. 199
Page 127:
SECTION 6: REFERENCES Wentsel, R. S
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?