Aquatic Habitat Institute MON TORING OF TOXIC CONTAMINANTS IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY-DELTA: A CRITICAL REVIEW, EMPHASIZING SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL TREND MONITORING DAVID J.H. PHILLIPS Aquatic Habitat Institute, 180 Richmond Field Station, 1301 South 46th. Street, Richmond, CA 94804, USA. December 980 Son Francisco Bay - Delta CONTENTS Acknowledgements (i1 Preface (ii) I. Introduction 1 A. Contaminants in the Estuary: Historical and Existing Concerns 1 9. Management Issues Related to Contaminants 5 C. Goals and Contents of This Report 13 II. Available Methods for Monitoring Toxic Contaminants in Estuaries 16 A. Alternative Approaches: Water, Sediment, Biota 16 9. Bio-monitoring Techniques: Early Development 23 C. Improvements and Important Concepts 24 D. Review of Bio-monitoring Organisms 28 E. Conclusions on Bio-monitoring Techniques 46 111. Toxic Contaminants of Greatest Concern in the Estuary 47 IV. Regional Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in the Estuary 53 A. Introduction 53 9. Regional Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in Ambient Waters 56 C. Regional Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in Sediments 75 D. Regional Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in Biota 84 V. Local Monitoring of Toxic Contaminants in the Estuary 13 A. Introduction 13 8. Monitoring of Contaminant Concentrations in Effluents 16 C. Bioassays of Effluents 24 D. Studies Close to Effluent Outfalls 28 E. The Case for Local Bio-accumulation Studies 39 VI. The Monitoring of Toxicants in Target Species and Food Chains 44 VII. The Proposed Monitoring Program 48 A. General Description of the Proposed Program 148 6. Selection of Study Sites 158 C. Species to be Employed in Bio-monitoring Studies 168 D. Sampling Details 172 E. Contaminants to be Analyzed 177 F. Sample Collection; Compositing; Archival; QNQC 178 G. Approximate Program Costs 180 H. Research Needs in Addition to the Proposed Program 183 I. Monitoring to Satisfy Management Needs 186 Vlll. Literature Cited 188 Appendix 1. Scope of Work for State Board Contract Appendix 2. Contaminants of Concern in the San Francisco Estuary Disclosure Statement This report was prepared through contracts with the California State Water Resources Control Board and the Bay Area Dischargers Association. Contract number 5-290-120-0, as amended by contracts 5-290-120-1 and 5-290-120-2, between the State Water Resources Control Board and the Aquatic Habitat Institute provided a total of US$32,500 for the preparation of this report. An unnumbered contract dated 26 February 1988 between the Bay Area Dischargers Association and the Aquatic Habitat Institute provided a further US$12,500 for this task. Acknowledgements My colleagues at the Aquatic Habitat Institute contributed significantly to this report, both in terms of time and talent. Margaret Johnston kept the Institute funded and running tolerably smoothly; provided a working environment appropriate to the completion of the report; and also contributed her insight and experience to drafts of the document. Andy Gunther contributed valuable suggestions on drafts, and time and talent in the production of figures. Jay Davis provided data on point source discharges, employed in the section on local monitoring. Kathy Kramer contributed general support and also aided in the preparation of data and figures. Todd Featherston was a font of knowledge on computer-related problems. Liz Hartman assisted with general administrative requirements. Dr. Susan Anderson of the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board acted as Project Officer for work related to this report on behalf of the State Water Resources Control Board. The considerable input, hard work and dedication of Br. Anderson are acknowledged. Technical discussions with Bob Spies of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Mike Martin and Mark Stephenson of the California Department of Fish 8 Game, Sam Luoma of the US Geological Survey, Brian Melzian of EPA Region IX, and Phil Rainbow of Queen Mary College (University of London, UK) contributed measurably to the final product. Bob Spies also contributed to the development of the list of “contaminants of greatest concern” in the estuary, discussed in section Ill of the report. Ed Long and Donald MacDonald of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, Washington, provided valuable assistance with the preparation of figures. These scientists are owed my gratitude for their unselfish provision of their valuable time and talent. I am grateful also to several authors (Jim Kuwabara, Don Smith, and others) who agreed to my use of as yet unpublished data in the preparation of this report. I also wish to thank my wife Lee for her continued and continual support and her contributions to proof-reading in particular. Several reviewers external to AH1 contributed valuable suggestions on the initial draft of this report. These included Susan Anderson, Tom Mumley, Mike Carlin, Chris Foe, Jerry Bruns, Val Connor, staff and consultants of the Bay Area Dischargers Association, several staff associated with the Bay Area League of Industrial Association, Pete Chadwick, Bill Davoren, Joel Hedgpeth, Perry Herrgesell, Diane Knudsen, Dennis Lemley, Ed Long, Sam Luoma, Mike Martin, Brian Melzian, Harry Ohlendorf, Pete Phillips, Mike Rugg, Bob Spies, and Mark Stephenson. I am grateful for their time and effort. Apple Computer Inc. provided a grant of their excellent equipment to the Institute; this has permitted the incorporation of high-quality graphics in the report and has also immeasurably streamlined its production, in addition to summarily dragging the author into the 20th. century, The preparation of this report was made possible through the provision of funds by the California State Water Resources Control Board under agreement 5-290-120-0 with the Aquatic Habitat Institute, and by the provision of additional funds by the Bay Area Dischargers Association (BADA). The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the individuals acknowledged above or those of the funding agencies. Preface This report is produced in specific response to an agreement between the Aquatic Habitat Institute and the State Water Resources Control Board, with funding from the latter and the Bay Area Dischargers Association. It concerns principally one specific aspect of monitoring in the San Francisco Bay and Delta: the monitoring of the abundances, distributions and bio-availabilities of toxic contaminants. The report should be read within the context of the broader issues facing the estuary and its protection. The State Hearing process presently underway will provide recommendations on the control of pollutants in the Bay and Delta, and perhaps on the control of any impacts of Delta inflows on pollutants. The San Francisco Estuary Project of the EPA National Estuary Program is also underway, and is in the process of reviewing the state of the estuary and its resources through the production of Status and Trends Reports and other documents. AH1 staff have been intimately involved in these projects. Every attempt has been made to reduce overlap between work undertaken by Institute staff for the various projects, and to build upon previous work. In this fashion, it is to be hoped that a cohesive program for the monitoring of contaminants and their effects can be implemented in the Bay and Delta (and its upstream catchment), and that this program can become part of a broader effort to protect the resources of the estuary. The monitoring program proposed here is not therefore a stand-alone product, but relates to these broader needs to protect the estuary. While it is hoped that the program proposed here will become the mainstay of studies of the abundance, distributions and bio- availabilities of toxic contaminants in the estuary, much remains to be done through the State Hearing process, the San Francisco Estuary Project, and other forums of this kind if the estuary is to be adequately protected in future. (ii) 1. INTRODUCTION A. Contaminants in the Estuary: Historical and Existing Concerns It is widely recognised that the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary has been radically altered by human activities (Nichols et a/., 1986; Wright and Phillips, 1988). The great majority of these impacts occurred subsequent to the arrival of the Spanish in 1769. Thus, for example, the increasing catchment population and industrialization of the margins of the Bay have caused problems with waste disposal, which began to impact resources in the estuary as early as the 1930s (Phillips, 1987). Large areas of historic marshland have been lost to agricultural, industrial and urban development, and the margins of the estuary have been extensively altered. Hydraulic mining in the Gold Rush period deposited huge quantities of sediment in the Bay, and also introduced trace metals such as mercury (Wright and Phillips, 1988). Exotic species have been introduced and have altered the ecological balance of the Estuary. Water diversions from the Delta for irrigation and potable use in central and southern California have affected estuarine hydrodynamics (Nichols et a/., 1986). Several of these effects are relevant to concerns over pollution of the Bay and Delta. Early impacts due to the wash-down of sediments from the gold mining activities were accompanied by increases in mercury deposition in the estuary. The loss of wetlands and modifications of estuarine channels and margins have changed the hydrodynamics of the system, and may have exacerbated the impacts of introduced pollutants.