1. MARTIN M. LARSEN & JESPER H. ANDERSEN PHD QA COORDINATOR & PHD PROJECT MANAGER CHASE VERSION 2.X MARTIN M. L., JESPER H. A. CHASE-ING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES CHASE TOOL VERSION 2.X

2. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 WHERE DID CHASE COME FROM? 2 ›CHASE 1.0 was first developed by HELCOM ›A parallel to the HELCOM Eutrophication Assessment Tool (HEAT) used to integrate the different parameters used in HELCOM when assessing eutrophication. ›CHASE 1.0 was a spreadsheet model where all numbers were manually entered! Developed

3. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 WHAT IS CHASE? ›CHASE is a tool for integrating different chemical measurements, biological effects and radionucleide measurements ›It is based on the contamination ratio (CR) between measured value and target value (e.g. EU WFD EQS target). ›The CR’s for individual components are ”averaged”, usually divided by the square root of n ›Different classes of CRs can be used (e.g. the 3 mentioned above) and aggregated into one integrated CR 3

4. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 CHEMICAL STATUS ›CHASE is based on 114 assessment units ›Nested as follows: ›Fish safe to eat (concentrations in fish < EC food limits) ›Concentrations at background levels (concentration in biota < OSPAR or other assessment criteria) ›Healthy Wildlife (Biological effects like intersex/imposex) 4

5. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 CHASE RESULTS 5 ›PCB’s highest %-high CR’s (20%) ›Followed by metals (Pb, Hg) ›Nucleudies and DDT/DDE at 9% ›Organotin (8%) ›PAH (7%) ›Cd (5%) ›And a lot of other substances/biological effects at <5%

6. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 HARMONY – CHASE 2.0 ›CHASE development ›Further developed for a subarea of the North Sea in the HARMONY project (Denmark, Norway, Germany, Sweden) ›Data from partners collected in database, and calculations automated based on the database ›Software is available from NIVA/JHA 6

7. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 CHASE (in prep.)… ›CHASE classifications for ›sediments (panel A), ›biota (panel B) and ›bio-effects (panel C). ›Combining sediments, biota and bio-effects into a final integrated classification of chemical status based on a ‘one out, all out’ principle is presented in panel D. ›Andersen, J.H., C. Murray, M.M. Larsen, N. Green, T. Høgåsen, K. Gustavson, E. Boalt, G. Garnaga, M. Haarich, J. Manio, J. Strand & S. Korpinen (in prep.): A tool for integrated assessment of chemical status. 7

8. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 CHASE IN EMODnet 2 MFS ›Matrices to include ›Seawater vs. EU WFD EQS values? ›Biota vs. EU WFD EQS/EU food/OSPAR target values? ›Sediment vs. OSPAR/US EPA target values? ›Parameters to include ›Metals ›PCB’s and organochlorine pesticides ›New EU WFD EQS in biota (PFOS, PAHs etc) 8

9. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 OPEN SEA ›Station ›80x80km grid ›62 assessment units 9

10. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 COASTAL ›Coastal stations ›20x20km grid ›189 AUs 10

11. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 COASTAL ZOOM 11

12. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 SUGGESTED FIRST STEP (2014) ›Based on data-extracts of biota and sediment ›Test region in the southern-North Sea or Kattegat ›Setup CHASE programme to read EMODnet file format ›Perform QA and check data availability for the selected area ›Test different ways to integrate/aggregate data ›Grid size and forms – lessons learned in Harmony ›Preferred reporting format: EMODnet report?, AU scientific report?, scientific paper? 12

13. CHASE MARTIN M. L, JESPER H.A. 19. JUNE 2014 SUGGESTED SECOND STEP (2015) ›Test CHASE 2.x with larger areas ›Discuss prefered parameters and target values ›Region based or general target values? ›Include local target values? ›Normalisation procedures for water, biota and sediment? ›Run CHASE 2.x for North Sea area ›Discuss how results should be disseminated ›Discuss other sea areas for CHASE 13