United States
                          Environmental Protection
                          Agency
                          Office of Water
                          (4305)
          EPA-823-N94-002
          Number 11
          May 1994
v>EPA     Contaminated
                          Sediments  News
       National Sediment Contaminant
              Point Source Inventory
An integral component of the U.S. EPA's
Office of Water's Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy is the identification
of sources of sediment contaminants in the
United States. EPA has recently devel-
oped a national inventory of sediment
contaminant discharges from municipal,
federal, and industrial point sources and
has analyzed these releases to identify and
rank chemicals, geographic areas, and
industries of concern based on their
potential to cause sediment contamination
problems.

More than 20,000 individual records of
point source releases (from the Toxic
Release Inventory and Permit Compliance
Inside this issue...
Regional Activities 	
COE Activities 	
Focus: Great Lakes Toxics
Reduction Effort 	
ORD Activities 	
NOAA Activities 	
ASTM Update 	
Creature Feature 	

	 2
5
	 6
7
	 9
....10
11

 System) of 113 different chemicals are
 included in the analysis. Approximately
 900 individual watersheds and 45 distinct
 industrial categories are represented.

 The geographic regions receiving the
 greatest hazard-weighted point source
 releases are the Great Lakes and south
 Atlantic Gulf; California, the Mid-
 Atlantic, and New England regions also
 have high releases of sediment contami-
 nants. The industrial categories producing
 the greatest volume of hazard-weighted
 releases are also included in the report.

 The data from this study will be used in
 conjunction with sediment quality data
 from the National Sediment Inventory to
 identify the potential magnitude of
 contaminated sediment problems in the
 Nation's freshwater and estuarine
 ecosystems, identifying locations for
 further sediment testing, selecting
 chemicals and industries that may require
 additional regulation, and selecting
 facilities for possible enforcement action.
 The next phase of the overall source
 inventory project will be an evaluation of
 nonpoint sources of sediment contami-
 nants. The results of this effort will be
 described in a Report to Congress in
' 1995.

 For more information on the National
 Sediment Contaminant Point Source
 Inventory, contact Catherine Fox, EPA
 OST, at (202) 260-1327.
                                    Contaminated Sediment
                                      Activities Timeline
August 1-5. Meeting on Water Quality
Standards/Criteria and Related
Programs. Knoxville, TN. Contact
Charlie MacPherson, Tetra Tech, at
(703) 385-6000.

August 7-12. Stormwater NPDES
Related Monitoring Needs. Crested
Butte, CO. Contact Barbara Hickeraell,
Environmental Foundation, 345 E. 47th
St., New York, NY 10017,
(212) 705-7837.

September 7-9. Year of the Coast:
Innovations in Coastal Management.
Wilmington, NC. Contact Jordan
McCoU, Inc., (800) 258-6711.

September 27-29. National Forum on
Mercury in Fish.  New Orleans, LA.
Contact Charlie MacPherson, Tetra
Tech, at (703) 385-6000 to obtain a
meeting announcement which contains a
preliminary agenda and preregistration
form, or Rick Hoffmann, EPA OST, at
(202) 260-0642 for additional informa-
tion. See related announcement in
CSNews.

October 31-November 3. 1994
International Hazardous Material Spills
Conference. Buffalo, NY. Contact
Sarah Bauer at (202) 260-8247. See
related announcement in CS News.

October 30-November 3. 15th Annual
Meeting of the Society of Environmental
Toxicology and Chemistry. Denver, CO.
Contact Bill Stubblefield, Program
Chair, at (303) 493-8878.
                                                             Recycled/Recyclable
                                                             Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
                                                             contains at least 50% recycled fiber

-------
   Regional Activities
Region 1

Fate of Contaminants in Massachusetts
Bays and Effects on Laving Resources

For many years, Boston was known as much
for its polluted harbor as for its basketball
team. While the Celtics are no longer
among the NBA's best teams, levels of
contaminants such as polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in Boston Harbor
sediments are among the highest reported
for all coastal sites in the United States.
Sediment contamination by PAHs and
polychlorinatedbiphenyls (PCBs) has been
associated with a high incidence of liver
lesions in Boston Harbor whiter flounder
populations. These contaminants are listed
in the current advisory on consumption of
tomalley from lobsters. Now, through   •
improved wastewater treatment and the
planned relocation of the Massachusetts
Water Resources Authority (MWRA) outfall
to a deeper site in Massachusetts Bay,
Boston Harbor is becoming cleaner. But •
relocating the outfall will not solve all of
Boston Harbor's or Massachusetts Bay's
problems. The outfall is only one of many
potential sources of contamination to the
Bay.

This article will summarize some of the
recent research funded by the Massachusetts
Bays Program (MBP) and other agencies on
the sources, transport, fate, and effects of
PAHs in the Massachusetts Bays. Credit
should go to scientists from UMass/Lowell,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
MWRA, the United States Geological
Survey, and the Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution.

 Overall, the sources of PAHs to the Bays
 include atmospheric deposition, sewage
 treatment plants, and rivers such as the
 Charles and Merrimack. In e'mbayments
 and small estuaries such as Boston Harbor,
 stormwater is considered the major source of
 PAHs.  Preliminary estimates suggest that
 about 1000 |ig per square meter per year fall
 onto the Bays from both wet and dry
 deposition. In urban areas, most of the
         2nd National Sediment Inventory
                  Workshop a Success!
A very successful second National
Workshop on the National Sediment
Inventory (NSI) was held on April 26-
27 in Washington, DC. Sixty-three
sediment quality experts from EPA
Headquarters, Regions, and laborato-
ries; other federal agencies; states; and
private consulting firms were in
attendance.  The purpose of the 2-day
meeting was to finalize the approach to
be used in evaluating NSI data in order
to identify and group categories of
known and suspected contaminated
sediment sites of concern.

The Workshop began with opening
remarks from Betsy Southerland, Chief
of the Risk Assessment and Manage-
ment Branch of EPA's Office of Water.
She challenged the group with the
charge of identifying a method for
evaluating the chemical and biological
data contained in the NSI and deriving a
"weight-of-evidence" approach for
combining this information to identify
and rank both known and suspected
contaminated sediment sites of concern.
These sites will be used for many
purposes, including further assessment,
source control, and pollution preven-
tion, as  described in the National
Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy. The information will also be
used hi a Report to Congress in 1995.

Next, Catherine Fox of EPA presented
 an overview on  data contained in the
NSI (sediment chemistry, tissue
 residue, toxicity, benthic abundance,
 QA/QC, point source releases, location,
 sampling date, and contact). She also
 presented the results of a preliminary
 evaluation of NSI sediment chemistry
 data performed  by Drew Zacherle and
Jon Harcum of Tetra Tech. Peter
Chapman of EVS gave a presentation
on potential methodologies for use in
evaluating specific data types.  The
full session met again to reach a
consensus on categories of sites for
estimating potential risks from
contaminated sediments based on
types and quality of NSI data.  The
workshop also stimulated many
interesting discussions on future
research initatives involving the use
of NSI data. Attendees of the
workshop then broke up into
workgroups to begin discussions of
methodology selection. The three
workgroups were headed by Chris
Ingersoll (NBS) and Allen Burton
 (Wright State University); Rick
 Swartz (EPA, Corvallis) and Peter
 Chapman (EVS); and Gary Ankley
 (EPA Duluth) and John Scott (S AIC).

 The second day of the NSI Workshop
 began with an update from Betsy
 Southerland on progress made and an
 identification of issues remaining.
 Peter Chapman followed with a
 presentation on existing "weight-of-
 evidence" approaches and suggested
 his approach for evaluating the NSI
 data. Again, the workgroups met to'
 continue developing an approach for
 the NSI data. Workgroup leaders
 were instrumental in helping to derive
 the final approach for interpreting the
 NSI. Their assistance, as well as that
 of all others who participated hi the
• Workshop, is very much appreciated!

 To receive copies of the proceedings
 from the National Sediment Inven-
 tory Workshop, contact Catherine
 Fox, EPA OST, at (202) 260-1327.

-------
 T?AHs are found in dry deposition.
 Sediments are considered the long-term
 repository of most contaminants. PAHs
 from the atmosphere will likely accumulate
 in depositional areas in the Bays such as in
 Stellwagen Basin or, as recent evidence
 suggests, in the deepest part of Cape Cod
 Bay. In Boston Harbor, stormwater-
 derived PAHs may accumulate in deposi-
 tional areas such as Quincy Bay,
 Dorchester Bay, and Fort Point Channel,
 which experiences a phenomenal 6 cm/
 year.  (Average accumulation rates in
 Boston Harbor are less than 1 cm/yr.)
 Depending on the assumptions used, it is
 estimated that if no further accumulation of
 sediments occurred and discharges of    ,  .
 PAHs ceased, several hundred kilograms
 of pyrene can be expected to be released to
 the overlying water on an annual basis.
 This would make the sediments the largest
 source of contaminants to the Boston
 Harbor water column!

 But, how are important living resources
 affected by contaminants? Transfer of
 chlorinated organic compounds (e.g.,
 polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and
 DDT) through the food chain is relatively
 well understood because these compounds
 tend to bioaccumulate.  However, many
 PAHs are readily transformed to break-
 down products, called metabolites, which
 may be just as harmful as parent com-
 pounds. A comparison of the uptake and
 metabolism of certain PAHs in  three
 species of polychaetes (Scolecolepides
 viridis, Nereis diversicolor, and
 Leitoscolopolis fragllis) and the clam Mya
 arenaria demonstrated a range in meta-
 bolic abilities. (These species are impor-
 tant dietary components of winter flounder
 and other secondary consumers.) N.
 diversicolor metabolized benzo(a)pyrene
 very effectively, indicating it may not be
 useful in bioaccumulation tests. Also,
 measurements of body burdens  in animals
 capable of metabolizing PAHs,  such as
 polychaetes or fish, do not adequately
 describe the actual risk to an organism. S.
 viridis rapidly metabolized PAHs; within
 days of ingestion of contaminated sedi-
ments, metabolites accounted for more
 than 50 percent of the body burden in the
 worm. These results  have implications for
monitoring effects of contaminants on
living resources and for modeling transfer
of contaminants up food chains.
 To assess the health of living resources,
 new techniques are needed to understand
 the subtle effects of exposure to contami-
 nants.  One such approach is measurement
 of the activity of the cytochrome P4501A.
 Although originally evolved to metabolize
 steroids, this enzyme system is involved in
 the metabolism of many foreign chemicals,
 specifically the halogenated and aromatic
 compounds such as PAHs, PCBs, and
 dioxins. The presence of cytochrome
 P4501A induction in tissues of animals
 indicates exposure to these organic
 chemicals. Preliminary results for the
 killifish (Fundulus heteroclitus), an
 important small fish inhabiting salt
 marshes and other coastal habitats of
 Massachusetts Bays, show associations
 between levels of contamination in
 sediments and cytochrome induction.

The MBP recently completed an exercise
 in comparative risk assessment to deter-
mine which problems pose the most risks
to humans, habitats, and sustainable
 resources in the Bays. The results
 suggested that the highest risks included
 contaminated seafood (primarily from
 organic compounds), contamination of
 benthic habitats, alteration of wetland
 habitats, overfishing, and shellfish bed
 closures. The risk assessment confirms
 our focus to reduce contaminants (e.g.,
 PAHs), entering the Bays, accumulating in
 sediments and ultimately hi living
 resources and seafood. The MBP is using
 this information to determine the degree of
 chemical contamination, or exposure, in
 important habitats and the status of the
 health of living resources in the Massachu-
 setts Bays.  The results will assist the MBP
 in setting targets or measurable goals for
 reduction of pollutants to acceptable
 limits.

 For more information, contact Dr. Mat-
 thew Liebman, USFJA Region 1, JFK
Federal Building, WQE, Boston, MA
02203; (617)565-4866; Internet:
bays @epamail.epa.gov
          A National Forum  on Mercury in Fish

                                         EPA's Risk Assessment and
                                         Management Branch will host a
                                         national forum on mercury in fish on
                                         September 27-29,1994, in Hew
                                         Orleans, Louisiana.  This forum \s
                                         part of EPA's ongoing effort to
                                         provide relevant and timely technical
                                         assistance to state agencies and
                                         others with an Interest In fish
                                         contamination issues.  The agenda
                                         will include panel presentations on
                                         toxicity and risk, assessment, risk.
      management and risk, communication, mercury control strategies, and
      state experiences. The forum Is primarily targeted toward regulatory
      personnel who must understand and respond to concerns about possible
      human health effects resulting from mercury contamination In fish
      tissues. Managers and staff from state and federal agencies, as well as
      members from the academic community, are also encouraged to attend.
      Due to limited space, prereglstratlon Is required. Call Charlie
      Macfherson, Tetra Tech, at (703) 3S5-60OO to obtain a meeting
      announcement which contains the preliminary agenda, prereglstratlon
      form, 'and \og\stlcs Information, for more information on the forum,
      contact Rick Hoffmann, EPA OST, at (2O2) 260-0642.

-------
                                 Great Lakes Toxics Reduction Effort
                                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Water Division
                      The Great Lakes TRE
                      was formed to focus
                      on reducing nonpoint
                      source (NFS) load-
                      ings of toxics to the
                      Great Lakes
EPA Region 5 hosted a Sediment Summit on February 1-3, as
part of the Great Lakes Toxics Reduction Effort (Great Lakes
TRE). The Great Lakes TRE was formed to focus on reducing
nonpoint source (NPS) loadings of toxics to the Great Lakes,
with an emphasis on the bioaccumulative chemicals of concern
identified in the         ^^^^^•^^••I^^MI^^™^^^
proposed Great
Lakes Water Quality
Guidance. The Great
Lakes TRE uses
existing programs as
much as possible to
reduce NPS pollut-
ants, instead of
launching separate
efforts. Five major
pathways of NPS
pollutants into the       mj^mmm^^n^^^^^^a^^^^f
Great Lakes were
identified-CSOs/
urban runoff; leaking waste sites; transport, handling, and spills;
air deposition; and sediments.
The Great Lakes TRE has already made significant strides
toward reducing NPS pollutants into the Great Lakes Basin.
User-friendly fact sheets are currently being developed on the
identified bioaccumulative chemicals of concern (BCCs). These
fact sheets list the current regulatory status and uses of the
                chemical, the physical properties and any
                ecological and human health effects.
                Workgroup meetings have taken place to
                address several of the pathways such as
                spills, transport, handling, and storage;
                CSO's/urban runoff, and sediments. The
                focus of this article is on the meeting that
                was held on sediments. A meeting on air
                deposition is planned this summer.

The purpose of the Sediment Summit was to convene members
from an existing Sediment Task Force and federal and state
environmental agency staff from around the Great Lakes to
define a process of how to proceed on sediment issues (i.e.,
remediation, sediment inventories, criteria implementation) and
to develop an effective outreach process involving the regulated
communtiy, potentially responsible parties (PRPs), local
government, and the general public.
EPA Headquarters and ORD personnel presented the status of
various issues related to sediment quality criteria (SQC), such as
an update on sediment quality criteria in the Federal Register,
analysis of SQC's potential for economic impact on the COE
O&M dredging program, implementation scenarios of SQC for
USEPA programs, implementation of SQC in the NPDES
program, and an overview of SQC methodology.

The associated states and EPA Regional offices in the Great
Lakes Basin made presentations on their respective sediment
programs and highlighted any new and innovative approaches to
addressing contaminated sediments.

The second part of the Sediment Summit focused on discussion
and formation of a workgroup to develop a methodology for
determining cleanup goals. Presentations were made on cleanup
efforts at several sites such as Sheboygan River Harbor and the
Oconomowoc Site, approaches for deriving cleanup goals,
approaches for analyzing sediment data, and the derivation of
sediment quality objectives for the State of Wisconsin.

After spirited discussion, the workgroup members agreed to
follow up on specific action items:

• Establisbment of the Great Lakes Sediment Task Force
    consisting of the attendees from the Great Lakes Sediment
    Summit.

• Continuation of a workgroup to develop sediment cleanup
    goals.

• Establishment of a workgroup to meet on sediment quality
    criteria issues.

• Establishment of a workgroup to meet on data management/
    inventory/prioritization of sites.

• Establishment of a Regional/state pilot effort to pursue
    remediation of contaminated sediment sites.

The Task Force has already reconvened the subgroups and is
making progress toward developing a cohesive approach to
reducing contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes Basin. For
more information on the Sediment Task Force, contact Howard
Zar, USEPA Region 5, at (312) 886-1491. For information on
 the Great Lakes TRE, contact Barbara McLeod, Project Man-
 ager for the GreatLakes TRE, at (312) 886-3718.

-------
 Region9

 Status of the California Bay Protection
 and Toxic Cleanup Program

 The first report has been issued on the
 status of the Bay Protection and Toxic
 Cleanup Program (BPTCP), which was
 established in 1989 by the California State
 legislature to provide new focus to the
 efforts of the State Water Board and
 Regional Water Quality Boards to identify
 and remediate contaminated sediments.  .
 The program so far has identified 19
 known and 179 potential toxic hot spots in
 the seven coastal regions of California.
 The four major goals of the program are
 (1) to provide protection to existing and
 future beneficial uses of bay and estuarine
 waters; (2) to identify and characterize •
 toxic hot spots; (3) to plan for toxic hot
 spot cleanup or other remedial or mitiga-
 tive actions; and (4) to develop prevention
 and control strategies for toxic pollutants
 that will prevent creation of new hot spots
 or the perpetuation of existing hot spots.
 The BPTCP will help coordinate state and
 regional water quality efforts to develop
 standards, monitor sediment and water
 quality, plan controls, and plan site
 cleanup.

 Accomplishments of the program include
 adoption of an approach for establishing
 sediment quality objectives, installation of
 a computer system for a consolidated
 database of information being collected to
 identify toxic hot spots, implementation of
 regional monitoring programs in each
 coastal region, completion of a pilot
 regional monitoring program for San
 Francisco Bay, development of draft site
 ranking criteria to be used for priority
 ranking of toxic hot spots, and implemen-
 tation of a fee system supporting the
 program.          .

 The definition for a toxic hot spot written
 in the Water Code was too imprecise for
 the State and Regional Water Boards to
 use in prioritizing the remediation of toxic
 hot spots since most of the California
 coastline could potentially be designated as
 a toxic hot spot under the statutory
 definition. Therefore, a working definition
 for a toxic hot spot was developed that
 emphasizes the separation of natural
factors from the effects of pollutants,
sublethal effects, bioaccumulation,
quantification of the level of concern
versus concentration in sediments, taking a
tiered approach, and flexibility to change to
incorporate new scientific findings. A
weight-of-evidence approach (i.e., one that
relies on a comprehensive judgment of
chemical, physical, biological, toxicologi-
cal, and modeling information to draw
conclusions about sites) will be used to
characterize toxic hot spots and rank them
for remediation. Biological measurements
used to define toxic hot spots may include
acute lethal tests on amphipods; chronic
exposure tests using growth reduction as
the endpoint with the polychaete Neantkes;
direct measures of reproductive effects
using tests on elutriates prepared from
sediments or histopathological examina-
tions of organisms for morphological
deformities; tests that measure exposure to
contaminants by focusing on cellular or
subcellular levels, such as enzyme system
or genotoxicity tests; benthic community
structure; and biomarker tests for enzymes
in the cytochrome P450 system, stress
proteins, or enzymes associated with the
development of cancer. A distinction was
made between techniques that measure
exposure and techniques that measure
adverse effects. Reference sediments will
be used to apportion part of the response to
physical factors of the sediment.

Many data are needed to classify a site as a
known toxic hot spot, including recurrent
measurements (taken on at least two
sampling dates) that show significant
toxicity, high levels of bioaccumulation,
impairment of resident organisms, degrada-
tion of biological resources, or exceedances
of water or sediment quality objectives.
Sites having fewer data are potential toxic
hot spots and candidates for future monitor-
ing to confirm preliminary indications of
site impairment. The draft list of 19 known
toxic hot spots and 179 potential toxic hot
spots identified under the program did not
provide a ranking of sites, nor had any
become part of a cleanup program. Toxic
hot spots were assessed using rather limited
existing data available on enclosed bays
and estuaries'. Assessments were performed
on both a regional and a site-specific basis.
Regional monitoring programs have been
implemented to gather information for the
less-characterized sites. Monitoring
information will be consolidated in a
database containing information pertinent
to describing and managing toxic hot
spots. Criteria for ranking toxic hot spots
will consider (1) potential hazards to
public health; (2) toxic hazards to fish,
shellfish, and wildlife; and (3) the extent to
which the deferral of a remedial action will
result or is likely to result in a significant
increase in environmental damage, health
risks, or cleanup costs.

The Water Code required that each
Regional Water Board complete a toxic
hot spot cleanup plan by July 1993 that
was to be consolidated by the State Water
Board by January 1994. Each cleanup plan
will include information on the known
A weight-of-evidence
approach will be used to
characterize toxic hot
spots and rank them for
remediation.
toxic hot spots covered by the plan; a
description of each toxic hot spot, includ-
ing a characterization of the pollutants
present; an assessment of the most likely
source or sources of pollutants; an estimate
of the total cost to implement the cleanup
plan, including the costs likely to be
recovered from parties responsible for the
discharge; a preliminary assessment of the
actions requked to remedy or restore a
toxic hot spot; and a 2-year expenditure
schedule identifying state funds needed to
complete the plan. Funding for the BPTCP
is provided by a fee system that splits the
costs among all dischargers. FY 1993 was
the first year that the program was funded
for the preparation of Regional and
Statewide Toxic Hot Spot Cleanup Plans.
Regional Boards had made insignificant
progress in the development of their '
cleanup plans by January 1,1994, when
the fee system ended. The deadlines were
extended to January 1,1998, for the
regional cleanup plans and June 30,1999,
for the statewide cleanup plan.  The fee
program was extended to fund full
implementation of the program.

-------
Copies of the Report on the Status of the
Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup
Program can be obtained through the
Office of Legislative and Public Affairs
(Stale Water Resources Control Board,
P.O. Box 100, Sacramento, CA
95812-0100), (916)657-1247.

Region 10

Agencies Agree on Comprehensive
Sediment Program

In May 1994, EPA Region 10, Seattle
District Corps of Engineers, the Washing-
ton Departments of Ecology and Natural
Resources, and Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority agreed to establish a coordinated
and cooperative sediment management
program. The interagency/intergovenimen-
tal program will provide a forum for the
agencies to comprehensively address clean
and contaminated sediment issues across
different programs and may be amended in
the future to include new issues or actions.
In the near term the program's focus is
expected to be on development and
refinement of assessment tools, pollution
prevention, public outreach, technology
transfer, etc. Three initial actions were
identified that will be jointly pursued
during the next 12 months:

• Sediment Cleanup Strategy. The
  agencies will attempt to develop a
  Strategy involving a range of approaches
  under different authorities to achieve
  cleanup of contaminated sediments in
  the aquatic environment

• Multiuser Confined Disposal Site(s). An
  action plan will be prepared that details
  study on other requirements leading to
  development of one or more multiuser
  confined disposal sites.
   CSAtewsis produced by EPA OSTto exchange
   information on contaminated sediments and to
   increase communication among interested par-
   ties. To obtain copies of this report orto contrib-
   uteinformatfon.contactBevBaker.EPAOST.at
   (202)260-7037.

   To be added to the mailing  list or to make
   changes to your address, please fax your re-
   quest to Charlie MacPherson, Tetra Tech, at
   (703)385-6007.
 •  Beneficial Use Policies. The agencies
   will define policies to facilitate projects
   involving beneficial use of dredged
   material and recommendations for
   implementation.

 The program builds upon the existing
 Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
 (PSDDA), which managed open-water
 disposal of uncontaminated dredged
 material.

 For more information, contact John Malek,
 EPA Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.

 Development of a Contaminated Sediment
 Sites List

 The Washington Department of Ecology is
 developing a list of contaminated sediment
. sites in Puget Sound. The list is, in part, a
 prioritization exercise that will help the
 agency allocate resources for sediment
 cleanups in the future.

 The first step involves collecting and
 evaluating sediment data from Ecology's
 SEDQUAL database. SEDQUAL cur-
 rently contains .sediment chemical and
 biological information for more than
 2,200 stations in Puget
 Sound. [These data are
 included hi Region 10's
 package of information to
 the National Sediment
 Inventory—see related
 story.] Site identification
 consists of grouping
 adjacent sampling stations
 with similar types of
 chemical contamination
 into station clusters using
 a computer-generated
 algorithm. The station
 clusters are then evaluated
 to determine whether the
 level of contamination
 exceeds the chemical or
 biological cleanup
 screening levels (CSL) of
 the state's Sediment
 Management Standards
 (Chapter 173-204
 Washington Administra-
 tive Code). If the CSLs
 are not exceeded, the area
 is not considered to
 warrant cleanup at this
 time. Any area may be re-
           evaluated if additional information
           becomes available.

           Station clusters that exceed the CSLs are
           identified as stations of potential concern
           and are subjected to a hazard assessment.
           The hazard assessment considers informa-
           tion on sediment quality, physical charac-
           teristics of the immediate and surrounding
           environment, biological resources, and
           human uses of aquatic resources. The
           public and affected community are
           afforded an opportunity to provide
           additional data to confirm or refute
           Ecology's findings.

           Following hazard assessment, station
           clusters of potential concern are further
           evaluated and are ranked according to their
           relative degree of hazard to human health
           and ecological factors to determine
           whether they should be identified as
           contaminated sediment sites. Results of
           this site identification effort will be
           reported in the future.

           For more  information, contact Rachael
           Freidman-Thomas, WA Department of
           Ecology, at (206) 407-6909, or John
           Malek, EPA Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.
    PSDDA Sixth Annual Review Meeting

The sixth annual Puget Sound Dredged
Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) review meeting
was held on May 6,1994, in Seattle, Wash-
ington. The meeting was hosted this year by
EPA Region 10. A biennial report for dredg-
ing years 1992/1993 reviews sampling,
testing, and disposal for PSDDA projects
and site monitoring conducted at the Elliott
Bay and Bejlingham Bay disposal sites;
limited copies of the report are still available.
The status of a number of ongoing actions
and minor clarifications for the program were
discussed, and public comments were taken
on a variety of topics. The meeting is open
to the public and is usually well attended by
the regional dredging community.

For more information, contact John Malek,
EPA Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.

-------
  Superfund Sediment Cleanups!

  Eagle Harbor Removal Action: Through-
  out the past winter, Region 10 and the
  Seattle District cooperated to cap one of
  Puget Sound's most infamous "hot spots."
  Approximately 275,000 cubic yards of
  clean sediments dredged by the Corps
  from the Snohomish River navigation
  channel as part of the Corps's maintenance
  responsibility were placed within the East
  Harbor unit of the Eagle Harbor Superfund
  site under EPA's Superfund removal
  authority. The hot spot contained some of
 The $3 million project
 was the first use of cap-
 ping at an underwater
 Superfund site in the
 Northwest.
 Puget Sound's highest concentrations of
 carcinogenic, petroleum-derived chemical
 compounds (polynuclear aromatic
 hydrocarbons, PAHs). Construction began
 in September 1993 and was completed in
 March 1994. Two different placement
 methods were used. In the deeper central -
 harbor, material was trickled out of
 bottom-dump barges. In shallower areas,
 high-pressure hoses washed the sediment
 off barge decks, allowing it to settle more
 gently.,Even before work was finished,
 underwater videos showed sea anemones,
 sea pens, and other life beginning to
 recolonize the cap. The $3 million project
 was the first use of capping at an underwa-
 ter Superfund site in the Northwest.
 Coordination with the Corps's mainte-
 nance dredging resulted in a savings of.
-about $2 million to the Superfund project.
 Monitoring and evaluation of the cap is
 still ongoing.

 For more information, contact Ellen Hale,
 Remedial Site Manager, EPA Region 10,
 at (206) 553-1215, or John Malek, EPA
 Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.

 Sitcum Waterway Remediation: The
 dredges are temporarily quiet in Com-
 mencement Bay during the fisheries
 closure for work-in-water.  They will roar
 back to life in mid-June to complete a
 combined Superfund cleanup and Port of
 Tacoma development project. The work, is
 being performed under oversight of Region
 10's Superfund program since it involves
 cleanup of a "problem area" in the Sitcum
 Waterway that was identified in EPA's
 Record of Decision for the Commence-
 ment Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund
 site. However, the project, which involves
 dredging of an adjacent waterway (the
 Blair) and filling of a third waterway, (the
 .Milwaukee), started out as a proposed
 permit action under §404 of the Clean
 Water Act.

 Coordination between the Corps and EPA
 in 1990 suggested that the two actions   :
 could be combined, simultaneously
 achieving contaminated sediment cleanup
 as part of the Port's proposed facility
•development. EPA, the Corps, and the
 Port worked closely together in evaluating
 and designing the resulting project, which
 includes mitigation for lost aquatic habitat.
 Construction was initiated in October 1993
 and is expected to be completed in late fall
 of 1994. In March 1994, the project was
 reviewed by the Committee on Contami-
 nated Sediments of the National Research
 Council.Commission on Engineering and
 Technical Systems (Marine Advisory
 Board); their report is anticipated in the
 near future.            .     .

 For more information, contact Margaret
 Justus, Remedial Site Manager, EPA
 Region 10, at (206) 553-2138, or John
 Malek, EPA Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.
       ORD Activities
ERL Narragansett/Newport

Seasonal Distribution of AVS

Acid volatile sulfide (AVS) was measured
in sediment cores from an estuarine cove
for a year to investigate vertical and
seasonal variations. Data indicate a
characteristic variation of AVS with depth:
concentrations are lower (1-5 jomol/g) in
 surface sediments (0-1 cm), increase to a
 maximum of 25-30 (amol/g approximately
 4 cm deep, and decrease with further depth
 to relatively constant background concen-
 trations of 12-14 (imol/g below 10 cm.
 Profiles also demonstrate marked seasonal
 variation.  Concentrations in the upper
 3 cm of sediment increase rapidly during
 late spring and early summer, apparently in
 response to underlying water temperature
 increasing above 15°C, and continue to
 increase throughout summer. From late
 fall through late spring, AVS decreases in
 surface and immediately underlying
 sediments as oxygen diffuses into anoxic
 sediments, oxidizing sulfides. Subsurface
 AVS maxima are larger and occur closer to
 the surface in summer than in winter; AVS
 concentrations in the upper 3 cm of
 sediment vary 15- to 25-fold between late
May and mid-August. While even lower
 surface sediment AVS concentrations
exceed molar concentrations of divalent
metals in most coastal sediments, the
substantial cycling of AVS could be
significant in the sequestering and release
of metals in sediments with large contami-
nant loads. For more information contact,
Warren Boothman, ERL Narragansett, at
(401)782-3161.
                 itini DpMdO}llOJ  M

                   •ds siumuuivQ -b
                                -o
                                                     snuvnjsa snuojsnmfog -f
                                                                         -q
                                -9
                    SU3MA. SlSJ3tf -

                   •ds snjnjdouj(j -

-------
              It's Here!   The  1994
        International  Hazardous
     Material Spills Conference
Buffalo, New York, is hosting the
1994 International Hazardous
Material Spills Conference October
31-November3,1994. The Hyatt
Regency Hotel and the Convention
Center is the site for this bi-annual
conference. Communities, state and
local governments, industry, and
international guests will have the
opportunity to learn more about how
to prevent and respond to hazardous
materials accidents.

In the 10 years since the Bophal
tragedy, significant strides have been
made in hazardous materials safety.
These positive changes resulted from
proactive partnerships formed by all
the vested interest groups in the
private, public, and international
arenas. The theme for this year's
conference is Partnerships for
Hazardous Materials Safety.

The conference offers the opportu-
nity for groups with common, as
well as disparate, concerns to
exchange and develop ideas. In
addition, state-of-the-art training on
various aspects of hazardous
materials safety will be provided
throughout the conference. Confer-
ence attendees can influence future
directions of these issues through
their participation in both the large
presentations and small group
discussions scheduled to take place.

Considerable resources and energy
are being committed to ensure the
overall success of the meeting. The
conference sponsors include the
National Response Team, the
National Governors' Association,
the Chemical Manufacturers
Association, and the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers,
in cooperation with the Canadian
Chemical Producers Association
and the New York State Emer-
gency Response Commission.

If your work requires a knowl-
edge of hazardous materials
safety, this is one conference you
won't want to miss. Firefighters,
government officials, plant or
transportation managers, and
other interested parties are
encouraged to attend.

Registration materials will be
available in the near future. To
ensure that you are on the mailing
list, contact Angela Moody at
(703)442-9824.  If you have
questions regarding the confer-
ence, contact Sarah Bauer at
(202)260-8247.

This year's conference promises
to hold your interest, provide you
with the best training available in
the field, and update your
knowledge of hazardous materials
issues. If you attend, not only
will you gain greater knowledge
in the subject area, but equally
important, the interaction with
your colleagues will renew your
interest and commitment to
hazardous materials safety.
                                                                               U.S. Army Corps of
                                                                                      Engineers
The Contaminants Bulletin
Board

The Aquatic Contaminants Team, Fate
and Effects Branch, Environmental
Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Water-
ways Experiment Station has in place an
electronic Bulletin Board System (BBS)
for the exchange of contaminated sedi-
ment and dredged material information.
The BBS is intended to be a source of
information about sediment-associated
chemical contaminants and a forum for
discussion of contaminated sediment and'
dredged material problems. Several
databases are available for on-line use.
These database programs have been
written to provide easy data access via a
simple menu-driven interface.

• The Ocean Disposal Database (ODD)
  contains data on sediments disposed of
  in the ocean from all Corps of Engineers
  federal and permitted dredging projects.
  These data include location dredged,
 . disposal site information, dates, disposal
  volumes,.and summary chemical
  information for each project from 1976
  to 1991. Data for the last 2.years are
  currently being collected.

• The Accumulation Factor (AF) Data-
  base is a collection of data collated from
  published scientific and grey literature
  in which the concentrations of organic
  chemicals measured in sediments and in
  organisms exposed to them are reported
  and calculated into accumulation
  factors.  The AF Database is searchable
  by contaminant or by organism.
  Complete references are given for the
  entries.  Specific-contaminant AFs in
  this database offer an alternative to the
  generalized AF presently, suggested in
  Tier n theoretical bioaccumulation
  potential (TBP) calculations of the EPA/
  COE Ocean Disposal Testing Manual
  (the "Green Book").

 • The Contaminants Database reports data
  from published scientific and grey
  literature on sediment and .tissue residue

-------
  levels of dfoxifls, furans* PAHs, and
  PCBs. The data are searchable by
  contaminant, waterway, state, country,
  and organism name. Complete refer-
  ences are also provided. This database
  is a valuable aid for comparing contami-
  nants data from a specific location to
  other areas.

 The AF and Contaminants Databases are
 in their infancy but are continuously being
 enlarged and updated.

 To reach the BBS, dial (601) 634-4380
 with your computer modem set at 8 data
 bits, no parity, and 1 stop bit (N,8,l).
 Modem speeds up to 9600 baud are
 supported. You will be asked to fill out a
 short questionnaire the first time you call
 in, but access to the databases is immedi-
 ately available.

 The BBS and associated database develop-
 ment are supported by the Corps of
 Engineers Long Term Effects of Dredging
 Operations (LEDO) and Dredging
 Operations Technical Support (DOTS)
 Programs.  Contact Mr. Charlie Lutz,
 COE, at (601) 634-2489 for further
 information or for assistance in accessing
 the BBS.
             NOAA
Verification of Sediment
Quality Guidelines with
Sediment Toxicity Tests

Numerical sediment quality guidelines for
a variety of trace metals, aromatic hydro-
carbons, PCBs, and pesticides were
prepared by Long and Morgan (NOAA
Tech. Memo. NOS OMA 52,1990) for the
National Status and Trends (NS&T)
Program. These values were updated by
Long and others (Environmental Manage-
ment, in press) with an expanded database.
In addition, MacDonald (report to Florida
Dept. Envir. Prot., 1994) prepared guide-
lines for Florida, using a modified ap-
proach similar to that of Long and Morgan
(1990X
 The ERM (Effects Range-Median) values
 of Long et al. (in press) and the PEL
 (Probable Effects Level) values of
 MacDonald (1994) were intended to
 represent the concentrations above which
 effects frequently occurred in previous
 studies. The incidence of biological effects
 at chemical concentrations above the ERM
 values and the PEL values were quantified
 in the respective reports, using the data
 compiled to calculate the guidelines.

 Verification of the predictability of toxicity
 by the guidelines has begun, using
 independent data sets from regional NS&T
 Program field surveys. Results acquired
 thus far are summarized in the accompany-
 ing table. Matching chemical and toxicity
 data are available from "surveys of San
 Pedro Bay in which two toxicity tests were
 performed; the Hudson-Raritan estuary
 (four tests); and two successive surveys of
 Tampa Bay (two or three tests). Toxicity
 in any one of the tests was predicted if the
 concentrations) of one (or more) chemi-
 cals equaled or exceeded the respective
 ERM or PEL values.

 The agreement between the number of
 samples that were predicted to be toxic and
 the proportion of those samples that
 actually were toxic is shown as percent
 agreement. Agreement between predicted
 and actual toxicity ranged from 75% to
 100%. Overall, 90% and 86% of the
 samples predicted to be toxic by the ERMs
 and the PELs, respectively, actually  were
 toxic in any one test. Additional data from
Long Island Sound (not shown) indicate
 that 18 of 19 samples predicted by the
ERMs to be toxic actually were toxic
(95% agreement). For more information
contact Ed Long, NQAA/ORCA, at
 (206) 526-6338.
    Summary: Overall Agreement Between Predicted
            and Actual Toxicity in Any Test
                        >1ERM
                        Exceeded
                >1PEL
                Exceeded
 San Pedro Bay

 Hudson-Raritan estuary

 Tampa Bay I

 Tampa Bay H
37/38  (97%)

24/32  (75%) '

10/10  (100%)

15/16  (94%)
34/36   (94%)

26/34   (76%)

9/9     (100%)

31/37   (83%)
Combined Totals
85/96  (90%)     100/116(83%)

-------
                                       ASTM  UPDATE
The ASTM Subcommittee E47.03 met in Montreal Quebec April 12th, 1994 during the annual ASTM symposium.

A.  Results were discussed during the Subcommittee meeting for a:

    1.  Concurrent Subcommittee and Mam Committee ballot:

        a.  Revision to El 383-94 (freshwater invertebrate toxicity: Annex 6 on Tublfex tubifex): passed with editorial
            revision, ready for Society ballot.

        b.  Revision to E1383-94 (freshwater invertebrate toxicity: Annex 7 on Diporeia sp.): passed with editorial revision,
            ready for Society ballot.

        c.  Revision to E1525-93 (Sediment design: Annex 2 on sediment resuspension): passed with editorial revision,
            ready for Society ballot.

        d.  Luminescent bacteria testing: Negatives persuasive. The Task Group recommends additional testing before this
            proposed standard is re-balloted.

        e.  Revision to E1383-94 (freshwater invertebrate toxicity: Toxicity test methods and guidance on
            bioaccurnulation): Negatives persuasive.  The Task Group will revise the document and re-ballot concurrently
            this summer. The primary modification will be to separate toxicity and bioaccurnulation methods into individual
            standards.

        f.  Revision to E1391-90 (sediment collection, storage and manipulation): passed with editorial revision, ready for
            Society ballot

        g.  Earthworm testing: passed with editorial revision, ready for Society ballot.

    2.  Society ballot

        a.  Revision to E1383-93 (Annex A5 on mayflies): passed in January 1994.

        b.  Revision to E1525-93 (sediment design): on March 1994 ballot.

        c.  E1611 (polychaete testing): on April 1994 ballot.

B.  There were no actions since the last Subcommittee meeting on: (1) Sediment Toxicity Tests with Oysters; (2) Sediment
    Toxicity Tests with Echinoderms; (3) Bioaccumulation of Sediment-Associated Contaminants by Benthic Invertebrates; (4)
    Bioaccumulation of Sediment-Associated Contaminants by Fish (z2227z); (5) Revision to E1367-92 (marine and estuarine
    amphipod toxicity); (6) Revision to E1525-93 (sediment design): Annex 1 on Statistical Guidance; (7) Revision to E1525-93
    (sediment design): Annex 3 on Reference Toxicant Testing.

The next Subcommittee meeting will be held before the annual SETAC meeting Saturday, October 29,1994 (A.M. and P.M.) at the
Hyatt Regency in Denver, CO. Please contact Chris IngersoU (314/875-5399; FAX 314/876-1896) if you would like more infor-
mation concerning the Subcommittee meeting or if you would like more information on activities of the Subcommittee.  Please
contact the Task Group Chairs if you would like a copy of the.most recent draft of the documents or if you would like to participate
on a Task Group. Thanks for your time and anticipated input.  We hope to see you in Denver.
                                                       10

-------
CREATURE
FEATURE: We amid just DIE for you.
Test out Dave Hansen's quiz to see how well you know your tox test critters. Answers on page 7.

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (4305)
Washington, DC 20460

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

-------