Contents

San Leandro Bay

Bivalve Study Field Methods

Norcal SETAC

Nonpoint Sources of Pollution

Review Implementation

Around Town

Correction to Organophosphate article

Staff Profile: Gabriele Marek

Calendar

Announcements

Sediment Investigation in San Leandro Bay

By Ted Daum, SFEI

Introduction

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) has authorized SFEI to conduct a sediment chemistry investigation in San Leandro Bay. The Port of Oakland is funding this effort, with money earmarked in lieu of a fine levied by the Regional Board. 

The shallow embayment of San Leandro Bay is formed by the confluence of East Creek, Damon Creek, Elmhurst Channel, San Leandro Creek Channel, which are freshwater, and Oakland and San Leandro Bay Channels, which are tidal (see map page 3). These watersheds encompass areas of gently sloping commercial, residential and industrial land. 

Sediment contamination in San Leandro Bay by trace metals, PCBs, PAHs, and various synthetic biocides has been documented through a number of short-term and continuing studies, including the Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (BPTCP), the Regional Board, and various localized surveys and site assessments. Sources of current and historical contamination appear to include metal plating industries, auto industries, lead processing, stormwater runoff, atmospheric deposition, and pesticide discharges from residential sources. 

There are a number of possible avenues of contaminant transport into San Leandro Bay. One possibility is tidal action from Oakland Inner Harbor, as tidal flow occurs primarily through this channel as opposed to the San Leandro Bay channel. In this scenario pollutants would be expected to disperse in a homogeneous fashion in this shallow, windblown embayment. Other potential sources of contaminant transport are the canals described above which drain into San Leandro Bay. In fact, the highest concentrations measured for many trace element and organic contaminants at the BPTCP sites were at the mouths of East Creek, and San Leandro and Elmhurst Channels. This would seem to point to these channels as the main sources of many pollutants. However, there is only one control site in the open portion of San Leandro Bay for comparison. Little sediment chemistry information is available for the main shipping channels where the sediment deposition rates are the highest, and gradient sampling to discern potential sources has not been undertaken. The goal of this investigation will be to answer four important questions regarding sediment contamination in San Leandro Bay: 

1. Are sediment contamination hot spots within San Leandro Bay relatively isolated areas amenable to cleanup, or are there large regional contamination areas where cleanup is unlikely to be feasible? 

2. Can sources of sediment contamination be identified by sampling upstream using chemical signatures and concentration gradients? 

3. Are there significant sediment contamination "sinks" present for historically banned substances such as PCBs and DDT? 

4. Can sediment dating be used to define whether contamination hot spots are in erosional or depositional areas? 


 

Site History

The geomorphology and land use of this embayment has changed drastically in the last century. In 1902 the Oakland Tidal Channel was dredged to connect San Leandro Bay with the Oakland Harbor. By the mid 1970s the wetland area adjacent to San Leandro Bay had been reduced by more than 96% through landfill activities, decreasing the wetlands from about 2000 acres to 70 acres. 

Bathymetric and sedimentation studies have shown that San Leandro Bay has become progressively more shallow since the early 1900's, and that this period of increased sedimentation corresponds with the opening of the Oakland Tidal Channel. Studies have shown that the opening of this channel decreased the flushing velocity in San Leandro Bay, due to creation of opposing tidal prisms in the embayment. The resulting decrease in tidal flushing activity increased the rate of sedimentation. Another factor involved in increased sedimentation was the reduction of wetlands in San Leandro Bay. Wetlands are important in storing water in the tidal prism by receiving it during high tide and releasing it through the sloughs during low tide. It has been estimated that wetland losses have decreased the tidal prism by 25%. 

The present formation of San Leandro Bay was significantly influenced by a single event in the last century. The Chabot Dam blowout in 1874 sent more than 21,000 cubic yards of soil into San Leandro Bay, and it is likely that this event was the source of Arrowhead Marsh. An 1855 survey shows open water where the marsh now sits. An 1895 survey shows a new marsh filling the old San Leandro Creek channel and extending into San Leandro Bay. And a 1939 photograph shows the marsh much as it appears today. 

Sampling Information

Modified van Veen grab used by the RMP for sediment sampling.

More than one sampling approach is required in order to address the study questions for this investigation. The first two questions require information on the horizontal distribution of sediment contaminants while the last two questions require information on the vertical distribution of contaminants (i.e. a sediment depth profile). Grab samplers are used to collect information on surface distribution. These samplers consist of a set of jaws which shut when lowered to the surface of the sediment or contain a bucket which rotates into the bottom when reaching the sediment surface (the RMP utilizes a type of grab sampler called a Modified van Veen, see photo above). Core samplers are used to collect vertical sediment profiles. Weights or piston devices drive a hollow tube into the sediment surface, where a core of sediment is retrieved. These samplers generally consist of a removable core liner which fits into the core pipe and retains the sediment sample. In this study we will use tube corers, although box corers are also used for vertical sampling. 

Both types of sediment sampling approaches will be utilized in order to address the four study questions. Core samples will be taken in transects along channels and depositional areas in San Leandro Bay to approximately three feet in depth. Information from these samples will help to determine whether there are significant contaminant sinks buried in the sediment. Sediment dating techniques, which involve the measurement of radioisotopes such as ²¹⁰Pb and ¹³⁷Cs, will also be used to estimate sediment deposition rates and the time at which pollutants detected in the core samples were deposited. Grab samples will be taken randomly throughout the mudflats, upstream in the channels with the uppermost sites being watershed signal (i.e. freshwater), and at existing BPTCP sites in order to maintain continuity in that study. The budget for the San Leandro Bay Sediment Investigation study allows for approximately 15 core sites and 30 surface grab sites. 

Sampling for the study is scheduled for the week of September 15, 1998. Timing is critical, as most of this shallow embayment is inaccessible by boat except at high tide. The list of parameters measured will be nearly identical to those of the RMP and BPTCP, one exception being radioisotopes ²¹⁰Pb, ¹³⁷Cs, and ⁴⁰K which will be measured in core samples. The data generated by this study will be formatted so they can be integrated into the RMP database. Look for a summary of the San Leandro Bay Sediment Investigation study in an upcoming issue of RMP News. 

References Used for this Article

Brown and Caldwell. 1979. Preliminary Hydrodynamic Survey: Study Conducted for East Bay Municipal Utility District. Brown and Caldwell Consultants, Environmental Sciences Division, Walnut Creek, California. 

Luoma, S.N. 1990. Processes Affecting Metal Concentrations in Estuarine and Coastal Marine Sediments. In: Heavy Metals in the Marine Environment. R.W. Furness and P.S. Rainbow, eds. CRC Press. 

Murdoch, M., and MacKnight, S., eds. 1991. CRC Handbook of Techniques for Aquatic Sediments Sampling. CRC Press. 

Nolan, K.M. and C.C. Fuller. 1986. Sediment Accumulation in San Leandro Bay, Alameda County, California, During the 20th century A Preliminary Report. US Geological Survey Water Investigations Report 86-4057. 

Sowers, J.A. 1996. Creek and Watershed Map of Hayward and San Leandro. The Oakland Museum of California. 

US ACE. 1980. General Investigation Study, San Leandro Bay, California-Reconnaissance Report: US Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District. 

Vallette-Silver, N.J. 1993. The Use of Sediment Cores to Reconstruct Historical Trends in Contamination of Estuarine and Coastal Sediments. Estuaries. 16:3(B). 
 

back to contents

RMP Bivalve Study Field Methods (or how we do what we do)

By Jordan Gold and David Bell, Applied Marine Sciences

This article describes the field methods employed by Applied Marine Sciences (AMS) personnel conducting the RMP's bivalve bioaccumulation studies. These studies use mussels, oysters, and clams (bivalves) as biomonitors of organic contaminants and trace elements of concern in the San Francisco Estuary. Bivalves are excellent monitoring tools because they survive in contaminated environments, accumulate contaminants to higher levels than found in water, and do not metabolically alter most toxic substances. For these and other reasons, bivalves are extensively used in the United States and other countries as tools to measure bioavailable contaminants and determine the potential for foodweb transfer. 

The RMP deploys one of three species of bivalves (clams, mussels, and oysters) at fifteen sites depending upon the salinity regime. Mussels are deployed at the locations with a salinity range of approximately 20-33 ppt (parts per thousand), oysters are deployed at the locations with a salinity range of approximately 5-20 ppt, and clams are used at the locations with a salinity below 5 ppt. The bivalves are collected from locations which are typically lower in the contaminants of interest than the transplantation sites, so that bioaccumulation during the period of deployment is not obscured by high pre-deployment contaminant levels. Mussels, Mytilus californianus, are collected from Bodega Head, near Bodega Bay, California. Oysters, Crassostrea gigas, are purchased from Hog Island Oyster Company, a commercial grower in Tomales Bay. Up until the most recent deployment, clams, Corbicula fluminea, were collected from a variety of locations around the state. However, due to recent difficulty in locating a clean source of clams, they are no longer being transplanted into the historically-used sites. Instead, Corbicula are being collected from resident populations at the sampling sites. The mussel collections typically occur one to two weeks prior to the deployments, as necessitated by available low tides. The oysters are purchased from the grower during the mussel collections, and the oysters and mussels are then maintained in a tank supplied with freely flowing seawater at Bodega Marine Laboratory until they are deployed in the Estuary. 

An important consideration for the RMP bivalve studies is the choice of vessels to support field work. The vessel must have the size and speed to efficiently and safely carry the skipper and three-person crew between sites. It must also have a sufficiently shallow draft to allow operations in less than 6 feet of water. AMS currently uses two different vessels for the bivalve studies. All but one of the sites is accessible by a large vessel, and for these sites the Romberg Tiburon Center's research vessel Questuary, skippered by David Morgan, is used. The Davis Point site requires the use of a smaller vessel due to the need to work under an overhanging pier. 

Safety is also a very important consideration in performing the RMP bivalve studies. Experience has shown that personnel safety requires four people for this work; the vessel skipper, two divers, and a dive tender. Two people are necessary on the surface whenever divers are in the water so that vessel operation and assistance to the divers can both be given undivided attention. Other steps are also taken to ensure the safety of operations. AMS divers belong to the American Association of Underwater Scientists (AAUS), and all dive operations conform to the AAUS charter. During diving operations at each site the vessel is tied to the fixed structure to which the bivalve mooring is attached. The vessel backs up to the structure and the tender loops a bridle line around the structure that is fastened first to one stern cleat and then to the opposite stern cleat. A floating safety line with a large life ring attached to one end is also attached to the fixed structure, and allowed to drift in the current. This safety measure is so that if the vessel has to leave the structure while the divers are in the water, they can hang onto the life ring until they can be retrieved by the vessel. Even though operations are conducted during periods of slack currents, currents of 1 knot are not uncommon, and visibility below the surface is frequently less than one foot. For these reasons, the divers are tethered together by a short line so that they do not become separated while in the water. Underwater communications gear allows the divers and tender to communicate throughout each dive. Use of this gear significantly adds to the safety of these operations, and increases efficiency, as the divers are better able to coordinate their activities in the low-visibility conditions. 

All of the bivalve transplantation sites are associated with fixed structures such as channel markers, piers, or bridges, and are located to integrate the contaminant levels from large regions of the Estuary. Moorings are designed to be robust and unobtrusive and to allow operations during typical conditions. Figure 1 depicts a typical deployment site at which a channel marker is the fixed structure. At each site, a line runs from the bottom of the fixed structure out to the bivalve mooring, which consists of a large screw (earth anchor) that is threaded into the bottom. A large subsurface buoy is attached to the earth anchor by a 1-2 meter-long line. The bivalves (in mesh bags) are attached to the buoy line, which keeps the bivalves off the bottom so they are not smothered. The divers are able to descend along the fixed structure to the bottom, find the attached line, and swim out to the bivalve mooring and conduct all operations in zero visibility. In one hundred and fifty individual deployments, loss of a mooring has occurred on only two occasions, probably due to being ripped out by a vessel anchor. 

Figure 1. Typical bivalve mooring used for the RMP.

Separate visits are made to each site for deployment, maintenance, and retrieval of transplanted bivalves. Deployment involves attaching the bivalves to the mooring line (using nylon cable ties) at the beginning of the deployment period. Maintenance involves cleaning and maintaining the bivalves and mooring gear halfway through the deployment period because heavy fouling of the bivalves and gear by several different marine organisms sometimes occurs. Retrieving the bivalves at the end of the deployment period (approximately ninety days) involves cutting the cables ties that attach the mesh bags to the mooring and bringing the bivalves onboard the vessel to be packaged for shipment to the analytical laboratories. 

Future articles will describe other aspects of this work, including a description of the various analytical methods employed for measurement of trace elements, organic contaminants, and bivalve condition. Questions are welcome and should be addressed to Jordan Gold or David Bell at Applied Marine Sciences (925) 373-7142, or through our web site at http://www.amarine.com. 
 

back to contents

Norcal SETAC

The Northern California Regional Chapter of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (Norcal SETAC) held its 8^th Annual Meeting at the University of Nevada, Reno on June 22 and 23. RMP activities were the basis of two presentations by Dr. Jay Davis and Dr. Rainer Hoenicke. Below are abstracts from their talks. 

Spatial and Seasonal Patterns in Contaminant Concentrations in Waters of San Francisco Bay

Jay A. Davis, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA; Genine Scelfo, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA; Walter M. Jarman, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 

The Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances in the San Francisco Estuary (RMP) measures contaminant concentrations in water, sediment, bivalves, and fish and evaluates ambient toxicity with aquatic and sediment bioassays. Samples are collected two or three times a year at 22 stations throughout the Bay. With data now available from four years of RMP sampling (1993-1996), clear seasonal and spatial patterns in contaminant concentrations in waters of the Estuary are beginning to emerge. These patterns are most readily apparent in contaminant concentrations in the dissolved fraction of water samples. Spatial gradients have been consistently observed for most contaminants, with especially strong spatial gradients for lead, nickel, zinc, diazinon, and DDT. Concentrations of all contaminants are elevated in the southern reach of the Estuary. High concentrations of contaminants have also been consistently observed near the Petaluma River (many trace elements and diazinon) and in the western Delta (chromium, lead, mercury, diazinon, and DDT). For more information, contact Jay Davis (510) 231-5625 or jay@sfei.org. 

Contaminant Patterns at the San Francisco BayCoyote Creek Watershed Interface

Rainer Hoenicke, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA; Genine Scelfo, Department of Environmental Toxicology , University of California, Santa Cruz; Jordan Gold, Applied Marine Sciences, Livermore, CA. 

The San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances has accumulated a substantial database of contaminants in water, sediment, and tissue. As part of an ongoing investigation of general source categories of pollutants to the Estuary, water and sediment samples were collected at the interface of a South Bay watershed drained by Coyote Creek and compared with those collected along a north-south transect of the San Francisco Estuary. Most trace elements in water, with the exception of lead, mercury, nickel, and selenium exhibited similar concentrations at the Estuary-watershed interface, while most of the chlorinated hydrocarbons analyzed showed a distinctly elevated watershed signal. Sediment concentration levels for chlorinated hydrocarbons reflected a similar pattern at the interface station. This data set seems to indicate ongoing inputs of these long-banned synthetic organic compounds into the Estuary from a local watershed. For more information, contact Rainer Hoenicke (510) 231-5731 or jay@sfei.org. 
 

back to contents

The Importance of Nonpoint Sources of Pollution

By Ted Daum and Rainer Hoenicke, SFEI

Non-point source pollution can be defined as that which enters a receiving body of water from dispersed sources, such as surface runoff, flow from streams, illicit discharges like the dumping of oil or other materials into stormdrains, and atmospheric deposition (see box). A point source, by contrast, can be defined as any discrete conveyance of effluent, such as a pipe from a factory or sewage treatment plant. Implementation of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act of 1969 and the Clean Water Act of 1972 led to drastic decreases of biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), nutrients, trace elements, and organic pollutants discharged into the Bay from point sources, even as the population increased and the resulting municipal discharge volumes increased. For instance, loads of chromium and zinc decreased from about 4,000 pounds per day in 1961 to 25 pounds per day by the mid 1980's. 

The drastic reductions in point source, or "end-of-pipe" pollutants are due to two main factors. First, point-sources are discrete and apparent. This characteristic is conducive to reductions of pollutants at the source. Second, public commitment exists to develop the laws and the technology to come up with solutions to point-source pollution. 

Non-point sources, on the other hand, are so dispersed and are driven by factors such as rainfall, urban sprawl, and other intensive land uses, that they are much harder to control than point sources. In fact, studies by SFEI and a number of Bay Area non-point source pollution programs suggest that non-point source loading contributes a greater share of most trace elements and organic chemicals to the Bay-Delta than point-sources. These studies have shown that stormwater runoff from urban land-use types including industrial, commercial, and residential and open space land-use types including agricultural and golf courses, contribute trace element and organic pollutants to the Bay-Delta. These substances adsorb to suspended solids from stream erosion and surface runoff and enter the Bay to pollute sediments, where they can bioaccumulate in benthic organisms or become re-suspended by wind, wave, and other hydrologic forces into the water column, where they can become bioavailable to other aquatic organisms. 

The RMP and numerous other studies have shown bioaccumulation of trace element and organic pollutants in fish and bivalve tissues. Studies including those of the Santa Clara and Alameda County stormwater monitoring programs indicated toxic effects to test organisms exposed to surface runoff. Agricultural runoff, which contains organic compounds such as the pesticides diazinon and chlorpyrifos, is also frequently toxic to test organisms. Residential areas appear to contribute greater amounts of pesticide per unit area than agricultural areas, probably due to over-application by gardeners. Fossil fuel combustion, tires, and brake pads are major sources of zinc, lead, copper, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) to the Bay. The major sources of PAH loads appear to be crankcase oil drippings and fossil fuel combustion, where vehicle exhaust containing the compounds reaches the Bay either through wet (rainfall) or dry (dust and soot settling) deposition, or through stormwater runoff of PAH-laden particles. The chemical profile and distribution of PAH concentrations suggests that street runoff is a primary source of these compounds. 
 

Several efforts have been underway by a variety of organizations to determine what might be the best approaches for nonpoint-source pollution prevention and reduction. Monitoring and special studies help in defining impacts on the ecosystem and prioritizing resource allocations. For example, the City of San Jose has assembled a stakeholder group of South Bay interests that is guiding a "Total Maximum Daily Load" project for copper and nickel. The relative magnitude of inputs of these two pollutants of concern seems to have shifted from point sources to nonpoint sources. The RMP is designing a monitoring and study element that addresses sources and loadings of various pollutants of concern, among them PCBs, PAHs, mercury, copper, nickel, and pesticides. Inputs into the Estuary are no longer easily controlled with traditional tools that have worked so well for point sources. It is hoped that source information will lead to innovative pollution prevention mechanisms on a watershed and airshed basis that, almost by definition, has to include all segments of society. 

Unlike point-sources, mechanisms of non-point source input can be much more subtle. A pipe fitting plant discharging copper into the Bay is easier to see and control than a highway full of vehicles discharging copper into the Bay via stop-and-start braking. Lifestyle changes that would cumulatively result in environmental benefits are more difficult to promote, let alone regulate. How many people, for instance, are willing to give up the freedom of single-occupancy vehicles and invest in a decent public transportation infrastructure in exchange for the environmental benefits which would follow? 

There are, however, many things which can be done and are being done. Elimination at the source for non-point pollutants can be difficult but not impossible, and promising efforts are being implemented through Bay-Delta county non-point pollution prevention programs. In many cases, public education programs regarding dumping of used oil and other household toxins into stormdrains have been quite successful. Innovative facilities such as the Demonstration Urban Stormwater Treatment (DUST) Marsh in Alameda County, which utilizes the wetland to help degrade pesticides contained in stormwater runoff, offer potential for reducing stormwater toxicity, as do more conventional treatment facilities. Current products can be replaced with more environmentally friendly ones (e.g., re-formulated brake and shifts to more disease-resistant landscaping requiring fewer or no pesticides). More efficient application methods for pesticides could be utilized by commercial and especially domestic users. Construction sites and agricultural lands can be managed in ways which would reduce erosion. Reduction of impervious surfaces (e.g., concrete and asphalt) could also have some benefits, since these facilitate more direct and rapid loading of stormwater to the Bay. 

The most effective solutions to non-point source pollution will involve combinations of these strategies, and their integration into stormwater management programs, local and regional planning efforts, and public policy. These strategies appear most promising when applied on a watershed-wide basis and by involving the public in finding solutions. 
 

Further Readings on Non-point Source Pollution

ACURCWP. 1992. Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program FY 91-92. 

ACURCWP. 1995. Identification and Control of Toxicity in Stormwater Discharges to Urban Creeks. Final report 1995. Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program. 

ACCWP. 1994. Annual Monitoring Report, FY 1993?94. Alameda County Clean Water Program. 

ACURCWP. 1994. DUST Marsh Special Study FY 93?94. Alameda County Urban Runoff Clean Water Program. 

Bailey, H., T. Shed, D. Hinton, J. Miller, M. Miller, and L. Wiborg. 1996. Joint Toxicity of Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos Under the Conditions of Acute Exposure to Ceriodaphnia dubia. Presented at the sixth annual meeting of the Northern California Regional Chapter, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 

Gunther, A.J., J.A. Davis, and D.J.H. Phillips. 1987. An Assessment of the Loading of Toxic Contaminants to the San Francisco Bay Delta. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA. 330 pages. 

Lindsay Museum, The. 1995. Changing the Course of California's Water. The impact of polluted runoff on our aquatic resources and responsible actions we can take. The Lindsay Museum, Walnut Creek, CA. 30 p. 

SCVNPSCP. 1995. Parking Lot Monitoring Report. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. 

SCVNSS. 1991. Volume 1: Loads Assessment Report. Santa Clara Valley Nonpoint Source Study. Woodward Clyde Consultants, Oakland, CA. 

SFEP. 1992. State of the Estuary: A Report on Conditions and Problems in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary. San Francisco Estuary Project, Oakland, CA. 

SFEP. 1994. Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. San Francisco Estuary Project, Oakland, CA. 

SFEI. 1994. 1993 Annual Report, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA. 

SFEI. 1995. 1994 Annual Report, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA. 

SFEI, 1996. 1995 Annual Report, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA. 

SFEI, 1996. Regional Monitoring News. Vol. 2, Issue 2. Summer 1996. 

SFEI, 1997. 1996 Annual Report, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. San Francisco Estuary Institute. 
 

back to contents

Rebuilding the RMP: Implementing the Five-Year Review Recommendations

By Rainer Hoenicke

Laying the Foundation

After the five-year review of the Regional Monitoring Program had been completed in July 1997, the Steering Committee was faced with the daunting task of implementing recommendations that ranged from small administrative details to far-reaching and very fundamental issues, such as defining basic management questions that the monitoring program could help answer (for previous articles describing the objectives of the review, see RMP News Volume 3, Issues 1 and 2). The review panel recognized that the RMP has no parallel in the way it is organized. The collaboration between a regulatory agency, discharge permit holders, and an independent, non-profit organization resulted in "a unique and a trend-setting model for collective responsibility in assessing the overall condition of San Francisco Bay" in terms of pollutants (Five Year Program Review Report). 

The review recommended that the RMP reconsider its objectives and focus its efforts more carefully on management needs. It suggested that the RMP could accomplish this more effectively if it improved its decision-making processes and clarified the roles, authorities, and responsibilities of the various parties. The Steering Committee began the process of implementation by prioritizing review recommendations and developing a plan for how to proceed. 

One of the first steps the parties involved in the program took consisted of bringing into the open any disagreement about the RMP's aims and about various roles in guiding the future direction of the program. A series of facilitated meetings, conducted by Dr. Brock Bernstein, resulted in agreed-upon policy documents that specified the roles of the Program Participants, the Regional Board, and the San Francisco Estuary Institute. While discussing the selection process for Special and Pilot Studies, the Steering Committee recognized that the planning process for the RMP is exceedingly complex and that it therefore needed a more tangible structure. Discussing and coming to agreement on issues of data interpretation, study selection, and the roles of the parties involved in the RMP was an important first step toward planning the next phase of the monitoring program. Now, the parties' expectations of each other are better articulated, and coordination of their respective efforts is continuously improving. 

Within the first five years of its existence, the RMP had evolved from the characterization phase (what kinds of pollutants occur throughout the Estuary at what levels?) to a point where more specific follow-up questions were necessary to improve the program. The Regional Board was asked to prepare a written statement of the agency's management issues and the scientific assumptions on which they were based. These became the guiding rationale for the existence of the RMP and a vision for the next phase of the monitoring program. Based on these management issues, the Steering Committee revised the RMP objectives and developed a set of more specific management questions tied directly to the Regional Board's information needs. As a result, the technical and scientific questions that are the foundation of the Regional Monitoring Program now focus directly on providing information needed to address specific water quality management issues articulated by the Board. 
 

Building the structure

In spring of 1998 all the pieces necessary to improve the RMP and for implementing the scientific and technical recommendations outlined in the review report were in place, and the framework was built that ties management needs together with the investigative approaches needed to answer clearly articulated questions. The framework begins with the overall rationale for the RMP, the revised objectives, and a series of management questions. It will contain statements of the desired precision and confidence in the measurements the RMP provides to answer management questions, for example: "We would like to be 95% certain that aquatic toxicity events have been reduced by half by the year 2005." Based on statements such as these, experts in a particular field can then design the appropriate measurement and monitoring protocols. 

Refining the Details

The RMP has convened specific workgroups that consist of experts in the fields of geochemistry, environmental toxicology, pollutant transport, etc., to advise the parties involved in the RMP on how design the monitoring and special study components that can help answer the management questions. The re-design of all monitoring components of the RMP is expected to take a few years, but modifications are expected to be made incrementally, beginning in 2000. 
 

back to contents

Around Town

Bioassessment and Biocriteria Workshop

Scientists and managers have called for discourse and increased collaboration among applied and basic researchers to review methods for bioassessment and approaches to biocriteria. A workshop is being organized by the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) in conjunction with the Water Environment Federation (WEF) annual conference (October 1998, Orlando, Florida) as a mechanism of obtaining direct feedback and input from members of the regulated industry and regulatory agencies. The workshop (Saturday, October 3, 1998) is formatted for active participation by conference attendees in outlining the usefulness of bioassessment and biocriteria for assessing and monitoring our Nation's surface waters. 

For conference information, call 1 (800) 666?0206 or contact http://www.wef.org. If you are interested in attending the special workshop on biocriteria and need more information, contact Pat Haddon (WERF) at (703) 684-2470 or phaddon@wef.org, or Michael Barbour (Tetra Tech) at (410) 356-8993 or mbarbour@ccpl.carr.lib.md.us. 
 

SETAC Annual Meeting

The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is holding its 19^th Annual Meeting from November 15-19 in Charlotte, North Carolina. 

This year's meeting will focus on the connections between environmental and human health risks, with broad discussions about exposure to degraded or deleterious environmental conditions via diet, water, air, or contaminated ecosystems. The plenary sessions will provide an exciting beginning to the technical program, and special symposia throughout the meeting will further serve to illuminate this theme. For more information contact SETAC at (904) 469-1500 or setac@setac.org. 

State of the Estuary Conference

The 4^th Biennial State of the Estuary Conference: Rehabilitation of the Estuary and its Watersheds will be held on March 17, 18, and 19, 1999 at the St. Mary's Conference Center in San Francisco, California. 

The conference will provide attendees with an assessment of the ecological health of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary. The late afternoon poster sessions will offer opportunities to talk informally with those involved in current research and restoration activities. 

For more information contact the San Francisco Estuary Project at (510) 622-2465. 

Correction to Organophosphate Insecticide Use in the Bay Area from the Spring 1998 Newsletter

By Jay Davis, SFEI

In the spring newsletter (Volume 4, Issue 1) I presented data on chlorpyrifos and diazinon use in the Bay Area. These data were compiled from the Pesticide Use Reporting Program (PURP) run by the California Environmental Protection Agency's Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR). After the newsletter was distributed, I received a letter from Terri Barry, a statistician with DPR. Excerpts from the letter are presented below. An anomalously high application rate of chlorpyrifos in Santa Clara County in 1995 was investigated by DPR and found to be inaccurate, as described in the letter. Chlorpyrifos application rates for the other Bay Area counties and diazinon application rates for all Bay Area counties, as presented in the spring newsletter, were not checked in the same manner, and therefore their accuracy is questionable. Researchers and regulators wishing to use PURP data for quantitative purposes should be aware of these problems with the PURP database. 

Letter from Terri Barry, DPR--Environmental Monitoring Branch, (916) 324-4140: 
 

I was reading the RMP Newsletter and came across your article about organophosphate use in the Bay Area.

Figure 1 and your discussion point out that Santa Clara county chlorpyrifos use appears quite different from the remaining counties.

One thing you should be aware of is that the PURP [Pesticide Use Reporting Program] has some errors that can skew the results in a significant manner. These errors may include misplaced decimal points (to the right) or entering ounces active ingredient as gallons. Consequently, these errors may lead to totals for use that are significantly larger than the actual amount applied. DPR [Department of Pesticide Regulation] is making a concerted effort to reduce errors in the PUR [Pesticide Use Reporting] both by internal checks and by following up on anomalies brought to our attention by outside users.

I asked our PUR database managers to check on 1995 Santa Clara county use of chlorpyrifos. As a "ground-truth" check, the county was contacted to check on the original paperwork. It turns out that 10 records for this county had ounces entered as gallons. When this correction is made approximately 80,000 pounds of chlorpyrifos applied in Santa Clara county in 1995 drop out of the total.

I don't have the exact new totals but an estimate, based upon your figures should be about 12,400 lbs for structural pest control and about 6,700 lbs for other uses.

I didn't check the other counties or the diazinon data. However, I would suggest when you use PURP data that if anything odd appears in your totals that you check back with DPR. We have new error checking in place for new data and we are pursuing corrections on a regular basis for older data (this correction will be made). Making the PUR as accurate as possible is a priority so the Department appreciates users bringing anomalies to our attention. Anyone who either purchased a tape or CD or requested a query for 1995 Santa Clara data will be notified of these changes.

back to contents

Staff Profile: Meet Gabriele Marek˜Administrative Manager

back to contents

RMP Calendar

Steering Committee meeting at SFEI offices on the Richmond Field Station. Call (510) 430-0801 for more information. 

Monday, January 18^th, 1999
Steering Committee meeting at SFEI offices, Richmond Field Station. Call (510) 430-0801 for more information 
 

Announcements

Annual Reports on CD

RMP Annual Reports from 1993 through 1996 are now available in PDF format on compact disk. To order your copy please contact Gabriele Marek at (510) 231-5713. Cost: $25 includes shipping and handling. 

RMP Visits Estuary Newsletter

The fall issue of Regional Monitoring News will be replaced by our annual RMP insert in Estuary. Everyone on our mailing list will receive a copy of the October issue of Estuary. Regional Monitoring News will return in winter 1998/99 following the release of the 1997 RMP Annual Report. 

Call for Artwork

If you have photographs, drawings, or other artwork that we could use in the 1997 RMP Annual Report, please contact Adrienne Yang (510) 231-5714, adrienne@sfei.org. Orignial artwork will be returned and proper credit will be given. 
 

San Francisco Estuary Institute
7770 Pardee Lane
Oakland, CA 94621-1424
(510) 746-SFEI (7334)
Fax (510) 746-7300
www.sfei.org