United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
(4305):
EPA-823-N-99-003
Number 23
Spring 1999
4vEPA Contaminated
Sediments News
3 Headquarters
Activities...
Q Regional
Activities...
EPA Region 5
EPA Region 6
EPA Region 10
"fZf. EPA Laboratories
"JQ Announcements
-|Q Contaminated
Sediment Web Pages
13 Creature Feature
1Q Activities Timeline
CS News fe produced by the
EPA Office of Science, and '•.
Technology (OSTI to . '••'.
exchange information on
contaminated sediments and
to increase communication _
among .interested parties. To
.obtain copies of this report ..
or to contribute information,
contact Jane Marshall Farris,
EPA OST, mail code 4305,'
401 M Streets. W., : '
Washington, DC 20460 at
(202) 260-8897,: . ..
To be .added to 'the mailing
list or to make changes: to .
your address, please fax your
request to Jane Marshall
Farris at (202) 260-9830....
EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
I
PCB-Contaminated Sediments Successfully
Removed from Site in Fox River
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Re-
sources (WDNR) successfully completed a
contaminated sediment remediation demon-
stration dredging project at the Fox River
Deposit "N" in Kimberly, Wisconsin.
The project was the result of a partnership
between the WDNR, the Fox River Coali-
tion (a coalition of local municipalities, in-
dustries, and environmental groups), and
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Great Lakes National Program
Office (GLNPO). The project was par-
tially funded by a $500,000 grant from
GLNPO to the WDNR. Total project costs
were approximately $5,000,000. The
project was initiated to remove polychlori-
nated biphenyl (PCB) laden sediments from
the aquatic system and to restore the health
of a portion of the Fox River. Another ma-
jor goal of the project was to demonstrate
that dredging of contaminated sediment
i could be performed on the Fox River in an
; environmentally sensitive manner.
Deposit N and the Fox
I River
•Deposit "N"is one of 34
iPCB-sediment deposits
.that have been identified
i along the Fox River and
.contained one of the high-
est average PCB concentra-
jtions found in the river—averag-
!ing approximately 45 parts per million
;(ppm) with a maximum concentration
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
of approximately 400 ppm. In total, ap-
proximately 7,000 cubic yards of con-
taminated sediments were removed from
Deposit N between November 23, 1998
and December 31, 1998 when severe
weather halted dredging operations.
Deposit N is part of the Fox
River and the Lower Green
Bay Area of Concern.
The Lower Fox River
extends 39 miles from
Lake Winnebago to
the mouth of the river
where it enters Green
Bay and Lake Michigan.
The presence of PCBs has long been a
source of concern in the Fox River since the
1950s, 1960s and 1970s when large vol-
umes of PCBs were discharged to the river
as part of the manufacturing process for
carbonless paper, paper de-inking, and paper
recycling. The Fox River delivers an esti-
mated 600 pounds of PCBs to Lake Michi-
gan each year.
Clean Up
Prior to remediation, a comprehensive as-
sessment and characterization program
delineated the boundaries of the
PCB-contaminated sediment. Total sur-
face area of the deposit was approxi-
mately three acres. The deposit was then
fully enclosed with a high density polyeth-
ylene geomembrane silt curtain to prevent
offsite migration of sediments during
dredging. The contaminated sediments
were hydraulically dredged and piped
across the river to a sediment processing
and dewatering facility where they were
treated and sampled before being trucked
off-site for final disposal. Dewatered sedi-
ments with PCB concentrations greater
than 50 ppm were shipped to a Michigan
landfill licensed under the Toxic Sub-
stances Control Act. Sediments with a fi-
nal PCB concentration of less than 50
ppm were disposed of in a local county
landfill. Suspended solids samples were
collected every 15 minutes during the
dredging operation to insure that contami-
nated sediments were not being released
from the dredging site.
Post-project monitoring is currently taking
place to determine residual sediment PCB
concentrations and to calculate the mass
of PCBs and volume of sediments removed.
Public Outreach Efforts
As part of this project the WDNR
launched an aggressive public outreach
program that included several public meet-
ings and information sessions, a viewing
platform for observing the dredging
project and a public open house that in-
cluded a tour of the dredging operations
and the sediment processing facility. This
effort has led to a more informed public
and improved public support of sediment
remediation on the Fox River.
For More Information
Additional information on this project is
available from Scott Cieniawski, Sediment
Assessment and Remediation Team, Great
Lakes National Program Office, at (312)
353-9184; E-mail:
cieniawski.scott@epamail.epa.gov.
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
Status of EPA-OST Sediment Documents
Editor's Note: EPA's Office of Science and Technology within the Office of Water and EPA Labs within the Office of
Research and Development continue to develop documents about sediment guidelines, management, implementation
guidance, assessment, and models. Some documents are in planning stages, while others are very near completion.
The status and description of these documents are provided in the following table.
Document Title
Description
Status
Implementation
Framework for Use of
Equilibruim Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines
Guidance on the use of equilibrium partitioning sediment
guidelines (ESGs) in water quality standards, TMDL
development, NPDES permitting, SUPERFUND, and RCRA
programs. Contacts: Jane Farris at 202-260-8897, or Cindy
Roberts at 202-260-2787. :
Expected Federal
Register
announcement of
availability of draft
implementation
framework, Fall 1999.
2. Bioaccumulation Testing
and Interpretation for the
Purpose of Sediment
Quality Assessment:
Status and Needs
Provides background information and reports on the status
of bioaccumulation testing and interpretation in various EPA
and other federal agency programs for the purpose of
sediment quality assessment. Contact: Tom Armitage at
202-260-5388.
Final scheduled for
Summer 1999.
3. Methods for Measuring
the Toxicity and
Bioaccumulation of
Sediment-associated
Contaminants with
Freshwater
Invertebrates
This is a second edition of the 1994 freshwater standard
sediment test methods manual that includes updates of the
two short-term standard freshwater sediment toxicity test
methods (Chironomus tentans and Hyalella azteca) and the
standard bioaccumulation method (Lumbriculusl variegatus)
published in 1994 and two new long-term sediment toxicity
test methods for Chironomus tentans and HyaleJIa azteca.
Contact: Leanne Stahl at 202-260-7055.
Final scheduled for
June 1999.
4. Public Outreach:
Contaminated Sediment
Pamphlet and Poster
Pamphlet and poster will educate the public, including
citizens groups and high school students on the; definition
and extent of contaminated sediment, sources of
contamination, remediation and pollution prevention
solutions, and what the citizen can do to protect sediment.
Contact: Jane Farris at 202-260-8897.
Final pamphlet and
poster scheduled for
publication in the fall of
1999.
5. Methods for Assessing
the Chronic Toxicity of
Marine and Estuarine
Sediment-associated
Contaminants with the
Amphipod Leptocheirus
plumulosus
This will be a joint EPA/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
publication that contains a standard 28-day marine and
estuarine sediment toxicity test method using Leptocheirus
plumulosus with endpoints for survival, growth, and
reproduction. Contact: Leanne Stahl at 202-260-7055.
Final scheduled for
September 1999.
6. Methods for Collection,
Storage, and
Manipulation of
Sediments for Chemical
and Toxicological
Analysis
This guidance manual covers the following topics: (1)
collecting, handling, and transporting field sediments; (2)
manipulating sediments in the laboratory for chemical
analysis and toxicological testing; and (3) preparing
formulated sedimemts for toxicological testing. Contact:
Leanne Stahl at 202-260-7055. :
Final scheduled for
December 1999.
7. Technical Document:
Models for Sediment
Quality-Based NPDES
Permitting
Describes the technical aspects of applying existing
hydrodynamic/water quality models for the development of
sediment quality-based NPDES permits. The document
discusses underlying theory, model classification, and
applications to different environmental settings. Contact: Bill
Tate at 202-260-7052. ;
Draft scheduled for
FY99.
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
Document Title
Description
Status
8. The Incidence and
Severity of Contami-nation
in Surface Waters of the
United States, Volumes
1-4
Volume 1: Draft National Sediment Quality Survey;
Volume 2: Data Summary for Areas of Probale Concern
(APCs); Volume 3: Sediment Contaminant Point Source
Inventory; and Volume 4: Sediment Contaminant
Nonpoint Source Inventory. Contact: Jim Keating at 202-
260-3845.
Volumes 1 -3 were
published in
September 1997.
Volume 4 is under
development.
Evaluation of Dredged
Material Proposed for
Discharge to Inland
Waters of the United
States—Testing Manual
Provides a national testing framework which comprises
one element of an overall decision-making process for
determining whether dredged material can be discharged
into CWA Section 404 waters. Joint EPA-OST and U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Document. Contact: Tom
Armitage at 202-260-5388.
Published February
1998. EPA-823-
B-98-004
10. EPA's Contaminated
Sediment Management
Strategy
Describes EPA's understanding of the extent and severity
of sediment contamination. Contact: Jane Farris at 202-
260-8897.
Published April 1998.
EPA-823-R-98-001
11. Technical Basis for
Deriving Sediment
Guidelines for Nonionic
Organic Contaminants for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms by Using
Equilibrium Partitioning
(TBD)
See article below. Contact Heidi Bell at 202-260-5464.
Publication scheduled
for Fall 1999
12. Methods for Deriving Site-
specific Equilibrium
Partitioning Sediment
Guidelines for the
Protection of Benthic
Organisms (SS)
See article below. Contact Heidi Bell at 202-260-5464.
Publication scheduled
for Fall 1999
13. Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms: Dieldrin
(Dieldrin ESG)
See article below. Contact Heidi Bell at 202-260-5464.
Publication scheduled
for Fall 1999
14. Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms: Endrin (Endrin
ESG)
See article below. Contact Heidi Bell at 202-260-5464.
Publication scheduled
for Fall 1999
15. Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms: Acenaphthene
This document will not be finalized pending publication of
a PAH Mixtures Guidance Document—refer to article
below.
Proposed in 1994.
16. Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms: Fluoranthene
This document will not be finalized pending publication of
a PAH Mixtures Guidance Document—refer to article
below.
Proposed in 1994.
17. Equilibrium Partitioning
Sediment Guidelines for
the Protection of Benthic
Organisms: Phenanthrene
This document will not be finalized pending publication of
a PAH Mixtures Guidance Document—refer to article
below.
Proposed in 1994.
-------
Headquarters Activities continued from page 3
Status on Sediment Guidelines Documents
No. 23
Spring 1999
SQGs to ESGs
EPA originally proposed chemical-spe-
cific sediment quality criteria (SQC) for
use in assessing contaminated sediments
in 1995. Since that time, EPA has made
significant progress in several areas of
sediment research and assessment guid-
ance. Most notably, negotiations over the
last two years between EPA and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) have
successfully resulted in agreement be-
tween the two agencies on the intended
application and implementation of EPA
sediment guidelines. The application and
implementation will be described in the
document Implementation Framework
for Use of Equilibrium Partitioning Sedi-
ment Guidelines. In keeping with this
agreement, as well as to provide greater
flexibility to states, tribes and the regu-
lated community, EPA will no longer be
issuing "SQC" but rather equilibrium par-
titioning sediment guidelines or ESGs. It
is anticipated that this "guidance" (i.e.,
ESGs), along with whole sediment bioas-
says, will be incorporated by states and
tribes into their narrative standards in order
to protect and assess contaminated sedi-
ments. The term "ESGs" will be applied
to all forthcoming chemical-specific sedi-
ment guidance documents issued by EPA.
Public Comment Received
The Agency requested and received pub-
lic comment in 1994 for the sediment
guidance documents listed as items 11-17
in the previous table.
EPA has responded to public comment on
these documents and intends to publish
the responses in the Federal Register
when the Implementation Framework for
Use of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment
Guidelines is finalized. At this time, we
are completing updates and revisions to
four documents described in the previous
table (Nos. 11-14). We anticipate publish-
ing these four documents as final in Fall
1999.
Guidance on Mixtures of PAHs
Additional research has been conducted
on the toxicity and bioavailability of poly-
cyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
since proposing the individual PAH guid-
ance documents for acenaphthene,
fluoranthene and phenanthiene. Since
PAHs occur most often as mixtures in
sediments, rather than as single chemi-
cals, it is more environmentally relevant
to provide guidance which addresses
mixtures of PAHs. In addition, the nar-
cosis mode of toxicity of PAHs is addi-
tive. In other words, the toxicity is due
to the sum of the individual PAH chemi-
cals (2PAH). Thus, it is most environ-
mentally relevant and ecologically protec-
tive to provide guidance which addresses
mixtures of PAHs. The 2PAH model de-
veloped by EPA's Office of Research
and Development (ORD) Corvallis labo-
ratory provides a method to accurately
address the toxicity and biqavailability of
mixtures of PAHs in sediments. The
2PAH model and proposed approach
were reviewed by the Science Advisory
Board (SAB) in May 1997 ;and received a
favorable response. EPA scientists have
performed additional research and data
analysis in order to strengthen the scien-
tific foundation and to respond to the
SAB comments. Present efforts include
making revisions to the document to in-
clude these updates and reflect the cur-
rent state of the science. It is anticipated
that a final draft of the PAH Mixtures
ESG will be available in the summer of
1999. At that time, EPA will determine
if additional research is required or if the
document is ready to go final. Updates
on the status of the PAH Mixtures ESG
will be provided in the near future.
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
Guidance on Mixtures of Metals
EPA has also developed a sediment guid-
ance document to address mixtures of
metals in sediments. This document was
reviewed by the SAB in 1995 and recom-
mendations from the review have been
addressed, responded to, and additional
research has been performed where nec-
essary. At the present time, the Metals
Mixtures ESG addresses the toxicity of
six metals (cadmium, copper, lead,
nickel, silver and zinc). EPA is currently
incorporating chromium toxicity informa-
tion and a proposed means to predict tox-
icity using the fraction organic carbon
(f^ into the document. The Metals Mix-
tures ESG was presented to the SAB
panel in April 1999 during a review of the
Integrated Approach to Assessing the
Toxicity and Bioavailability of Metals in
Surface Waters and Sediments (see An-
nouncement Section for more detail). Fol-
lowing this SAB Review, any necessary
comments, revisions, or additional work
shall be incorporated into the document.
A finalized Metals Mixtures ESG docu-
ment should be available in Fall 1999.
For More Information
Any questions or comments regarding
these sediment guidance documents
should be addressed to the U.S. EPA,
Heidi Bell (202) 260-5464.
^Hpf'TIT" TH ni-|j-|'fnii|'Tiniiiri[ qit -iiini|'F W'" "l'l'li!illiiIIIT^^"^rr^^TWJm^i&ryaf8B^y;Ng -"^—»
Regional! Acliviittes
Blp1'"^ ii T " __£_
EPA Region 5
Sediment Regional Priority
Removal Action Initiated on Pine
River to Address DDT
Contamination
A Superfund time-critical removal action
began late in the summer of 1998 to ad-
dress the l,l,l-trichloro-2,2-
bis(chlorophenyl)ethane (DDT) contami-
nation in Pine River sediments at the
Velsicol Chemical site in St. Louis,
Michigan. Pine River sediments contain
total DDT concentrations as high as
32,600 parts per million (ppm) and are
also contaminated with polybrominated
biphenyl (PBB). The state of Michigan
issued a "no consumption" advisory for
all species of fish in the Pine River be-
cause DDT concentrations exceed health
guidelines. Carp (1997 data) have DDT
concentrations up to about 90 ppm and
average approximately 35 ppm. Small-
mouth bass (1997 data) have a maximum
concentration of approximately 21 ppm
and an average concentration of approxi-
mately 11.4 ppm total DDT. This
Superfund action will address the re-
moval of approximately 21,500 cubic
yards (cy) of the most highly contami-
nated sediment, which is that exceeding
3,000 ppm total DDT. Approximately
430,400 pounds of DDT will be re-
moved.
Schedule
Construction of the infrastructure was
completed in the Fall of 1998; removal of
-------
the sediment will take place in the Spring
of 1999. Once excavation begins, it is
expected to take 120 on-site working
days to complete the cleanup. The re-
moval action includes the installation of
coffer dams, "dry" excavation of the
DDT-contaminated sediment, dewatering
and treatment of the water prior to dis-
charge to the St. Louis impoundment
(Pine River), and disposal of the sediment
in an approved off-site landfill. The cost
is estimated at $6 million, and will be paid
for out of USEPA's Removal Program.
This action begins as a Proposed Plan to
address the remainder of the DDT-con-
taminated sediment and was released for
public comment. The proposed action
would clean up the Pine River sediment
down to 5 ppm total DDT and remove an
additional 260,000 cy of sediment, and
4,600 pounds of DDT. The proposed ac-
tion involves the placement of temporary
coffer dams, "dry" excavation of the
contaminated sediment, dewatering and
treatment of the water, and off-site dis-
posal of the sediment. This USEPA-
funded action is estimated at $16.9 million.
Support for this project is being provided
by the FIELDS group in the USEPA Re-
gion 5 Water Division. Additional infor-
mation regarding sediment and fish con-
tamination, and the risk assessment is
available via the FIELDS website at:
www.epa.gov/r5water/fields. For more
information, contact Sam Borries at
(312) 353-2886 or Beth Reiner at
(312) 353-6576.
Ansul Fire Protection 8th Street
Slip—Action to Address
Arsenic Contamination in
Menominee River, Wisconsin
An Interim Measures Agreement was
signed by USEPA and Ansul Fire Protec-
tion on September 28, 1998 to remove ar-
senic-contaminated sediment from the
8th Street Slip and conduct; additional
investigations at the Menominee River
Turning Basin. The Ansul facility is lo-
cated on the Menominee River in
Marinette, Wisconsin.
Ansul completed on-site construction of
the groundwater barrier system to pre-
vent the continued migration of arsenic-
contaminated groundwater; into the
Menominee River from the Ansul facility.
The barrier system encompasses the
most highly contaminated areas on-site.
The groundwater contains:arsenic at con-
centrations up to 8,530 ppm and exceeds
the federal maximum contaminant level
for drinking water of 0.05 ppm. Ansul
will commence dredging of arsenic-con-
taminated soft sediment from the 8th
Street Slip by June 15,1999—dredging
should be completed by the end of 1999.
Sediment in the Slip are contaminated
with arsenic up to 22,000 ppm.
At the Menominee River Turning Basin,
also addressed under the Agreement, Ansul
will conduct additional investigations of the
No. 23
Spring 1999
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
extent and severity of arsenic contamination
in basin sediment. A work plan was due to
USEPA by March 15,1999. Additional
cleanup measures to address the Turning
Basin will be developed. Future updates
will provide additional information as it be-
comes available. For more information,
contact Robert Smith at (312) 886-7568 or
Lisa Capron at (312) 886-0878.
Dredging Team Sponsors
Workshop
The Great Lakes Regional Dredging Team
sponsored a Beneficial Uses of Dredged
Material Workshop on September 15-16,
1998 in Toledo, Ohio in conjunction with
the Great Lakes Dredging Team meeting.
Beneficial use is becoming the answer to
the question of what to do with dredged
material from our ports and waterways
that can no longer be disposed of due to
open water disposal restrictions or lack
of disposal space. Approximately 25 per-
cent of dredged material is currently used
for beneficial purposes in the Great
Lakes. Such uses include the restoration
of habitat, shoreline protection, and
manufacture of topsoil.
The workshop explored the various ben-
eficial uses, including those currently be-
ing implemented and those still at the pilot
study stage. Beneficial uses include habi-
tat building opportunities (e.g., Pointe
Highlights from the Great Lakes Regional Dredging Team Meeting
Members of the Great Lakes Regional Dredging
Team (GLDT) met September 16-17, 1998 in To-
ledo, Ohio. Most of the meeting focused on the
white paper, Decision Making Process for
Dredged Material Management. The paper is
completed and provides an overview of the
dredged material management planning process,
regulatory requirements, and roles and responsibili-
ties of involved agencies and other parties. The
purpose of the paper is to address the
questions, issues and uncertainties sur-
rounding the dredged material planning
process and develop recommen-
dations for improvement.
As a result, there is a bet-
ter understanding of the
process and roles and
responsibilities. A num-
ber of recommendations
were made to address
the issues and improve the
process. Three key recom-
mendations are 1) to integrate
the dredged material planning pro-
cess into local watershed planning; 2)
focus on developing partnerships with NRCS,
state conservation districts, and others to address
nonpoint source pollution and soil erosion control;
3) work with USEPA Beneficial Use Workgroup to
develop guidelines for different
Great Lakes
Dredging Team
regional beneficial use applications, and conduct
a pilot; and 4) expand public outreach and edu-
cation regarding the process. Two new
workgroups were formed for the first two recom-
mendations.
The Public Outreach Workgroup has completed a
number of fact sheets (Great Lakes Dredging
Team, Confined Disposal Facilities). In addition,
they have a draft of a dredging brochure
and are planning a dredging video which
will focus on both navigational and re-
medial dredging projects.
This information and more
may be found on the
workgroup's website at
http://www.glc.org/
projects/.
The GLDT Charter es-
tablished a 2-year run for
the co-chairs, of whom
would be comprised one each
from a federal and state agency.
The new co-chairs were an-
nounced and are Bonnie Eleder from USEPA and
Wayne Warren from Ohio Department of Natural
Resources. For more information, contact
Bonnie Eleder at (312) 886-4885 or Marc
Tuchman at (312) 353-1369.
-------
Mmtmtm
• fr V*" *»
. a j J a « *
Great Lakes
Commission
* J* J!
>aM«. «_»Hsa IT*' ^T* S * "MS-WT-* JMEBS « VWJPK-^I.-
m^^^LMUto fc"A ^^^«'*^'^^«S-»'^^^
-^aS^psj^t^npw €te8r *t — T «£i$,-i*nfs^:ft?!?!f.>&
Mouillee Confined Disposal Facility and
State Game Area); upland and commer-
cial uses (e.g., manufactured soil from
Toledo Harbor); and shoreline protection
and restoration uses (e.g., Illinois Sand
Management Task Force). The work-
shop focused on each of these uses, pro-
viding case studies and panel discussions.
The final session included regulatory is-
sues and obstacles to beneficial use. The
major obstacles identified included regu-
latory inflexibility, lack of guidance for
beneficial use applications, and lack of
public involvement. Recommendations
to overcome these obstacles included
developing guidance for beneficial uses,
public outreach and education, and incor-
porating dredged material management
into the bigger arena of watershed plan-
ning. These recommendations were
taken to the Great Lakes Dredging Team
for further consideration and action. For
more information, contact Scott
Cieniawski at (312) 353-9184 or Bonnie
Eleder at (312) 886-4885.
Great Lakes Sediment
Guidance Document on
Capping and Natural Recovery
U.S. EPA-Region 5, the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers are preparing a guid-
ance document for the capping and natu-
ral recovery of contaminated sediments.
Capping is the placement of an engineered
and artificially placed layer of material
over an in situ deposit of contaminated
sediment, while natural recovery relies
upon ongoing processes of natural sedi-
mentation for cover placement. The goal
of both capping and natural recovery is
to provide a level of physical and chemi-
cal isolation for the sediment-bound con-
taminants sufficient to protect the proxi-
mal surface-water environment and the
indigenous biota. Focusing upon the
hydrogeologic aspects of capping and
natural recovery at contaminated sedi-
ment sites, the document will specifically
address the following issues:
Site Characterization: The types of
hydrogeologic site characterization infor-
mation needed to characterize a site and
predict cover performance where cap-
ping or natural recovery is.proposed will
be defined. Methods for the collection
of this information will also be dis-
cussed.
Cover Performance Prediction: Sedi-
ment cover parameters and
hydrogeologic site characteristics will be
used to predict the effectiveness of the
cover as a barrier to the transport of the
underlying sediment-bound contami-
nants. Performance predictions are
commonly generated through the use of
a one-dimensional mass transport equa-
tion called the advection-dispersion equa-
tion. The advection-dispersion equation
addresses transport caused by concen-
tration differences (diffusion) and
ground water flow (advection). In addi-
tion, the advection-dispersion equation
can be amended to account for such fac-
tors as contaminant sorption and decay.
Performance Prediction Uncertainty:
Through the use of error analysis proce-
dures, the uncertainties associated with
the parameter values used to predict
cover performance will be'used to esti-
mate the potential uncertainty in the
cover-performance predictions.
Cover Performance Monitoring: Meth-
ods to access various aspects of cover
performance will be outlined and dis-
cussed.
The final document is scheduled to be
published by the USGS by! the end of FY
99. USGS participation in; the project is
being financed through a Great Lakes
National Program Office grant. For
more information, contact :David
Petrovski at (312) 886-0997.
No. 23
Spring 1999
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
EPA Region 6
EPA/Oklahoma Assess
Sediment Quality in Lake
Arcadia, Oklahoma
In March 1997 EPA Region 6 assisted the
Oklahoma Water Resources Board with
an assessment of sediment quality of
Arcadia Lake. This lake is located in an ur-
ban watershed north of Oklahoma City,
with two primary tributaries, Spring Creek
and Deep Fork. Available historical data in-
dicated potential sediment quality problems
in several portions of the lake. As part of
an EPA-funded Clean Lakes Diagnostic/
Feasibility Study, the state sought to deter-
mine the degree of sediment contamination
within the lake through sediment chemical
analyses and toxicity testing.
Parameters
Researchers collected and composited three
samples per site (10 sites total) using an Ek-
man grab. Additional samples were col-
lected from the reference site, Liberty Lake.
The EPA Houston Laboratory analyzed for
TOC, grain size, and priority pollutants—
including volatiles, semi-volatiles, PCBs,
pesticides and heavy metals. Sediment tox-
icity tests were also conducted for five sites
at the EPA lab and included elutriate testing
using 7-day chronic Ceriodaphnia and
fathead minnow embryo/larval tests.
Elutriates were prepared by diluting one part
sediment to four parts water, shaking for
Detail of Arcadia and
Liberty Lakes, Oklahoma
__Z>r,--
•^tVT7^JfT''t
. / ,i- H i it
OJ& 0 05 1 1.5 2 Mtea
24 hours, and siphoning off the overlying
water. These tests were used as a cost-
effective alternative to standard bulk sedi-
ment tests.
Results
Available screening levels were used to
evaluate the chemical data including
NOAA Effects Range-Low (ER-L) and
Effects Range-Median (ER-M) values,
Ontario's Lowest and Severe Effects
Levels (LEL, SEL), Apparent Effects
Thresholds Low and High (AET-L, AET-
H), EPA Equilibrium Sediment Guidelines
(ESGs). Sediment TOC ranged from
0.17 percent to 2.88 percent. ER-M and
SEL values were not exceeded for any
parameters, indicating that the sediments
were not severely contaminated. ESGs
were also not exceeded, although values
were available for only four of the con-
taminants detected. Table 1 (on the fol-
lowing page) summarizes the analytical
results. No significant chronic toxicity
was observed to Ceriodaphnia and fathead
minnows for the five stations tested.
Conclusion
The data indicated significant, but relatively
low levels of sediment contamination.
There were elevated levels of PAHs in lake
sector B. Metals were most elevated in
sector C, as was Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phtha-
late. These sectors comprise the upper and
lower Deep Fork arm of the lake, respec-
tively. Cadmium was found throughout
(except the two tributary sites), including
the Liberty Lake reference site. While addi-
tional toxicity tests would aid in determin-
ing sediment quality the existing data indi-
cate that pollutants, in combination, are not
present at toxic levels.
The project demonstrated that sediment
contaminant levels are a good indicator of
nonpoint pollution in this urban water-
shed. The data indicate that nonpoint
source controls to reduce pollutant loads
(metals, PAHs) would benefit sediment
quality and reduce risks to benthic organ-
isms. Concentrating on watershed pro-
tection efforts in the Deep Fork portion
of the watershed would be most appro-
priate to enhance and protect sediment
quality in Arcadia Lake. Contact Philip
Crocker, EPA Region 6, Watershed Man-
agement Section if you would like to re-
quest a copy of the summary report
(214-665-6644; crocker.philip@epa.gov).
-------
Table 1. Comparison of Sediment Data with Screening Values
Station
Parameter
B-2 B-6
Dieldrin
Fluoranthene
Phenanthrene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Pyrene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
a a
b
b b
a a
a
a
a a
a a
a LEL Exceeded
b ER-L Exceeded
c AET-L and AET-H Exceeded
No. 23
Spring 1999
C-6 D-3 E-6 E-8 E-9 F-9 F-13 L-1 7 8
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
ab i ab ab
ab ab ab ab a a ab ab ab ab
a
a
ab ' ab
ab
EPA Region 10
Sediment Management Training
An intermediate level sediment manage-
ment training course was provided to Re-
gion 10 on February 18 and 25. The par-
ticipants in this course came from EPA's
Aquatic Resources Unit, Office of Envi-
ronmental Cleanup, Office of Environ-
mental Assessment, Office of Water, and
Office of Waste and Chemi- ,
cals Management.
In addition, one-
third of the
trainees
were from
outside
EPA, in-
cluding
represen-
tatives from
several state and
federal agencies and one tribe. The mix
of participants shows that the issues that
relate to contaminated sediments and
sediment management are not narrowly
confined, but truly cut across programs
and agencies.
Course topics included: regulatory over-
view; sources, fate/transport, and envi-
ronmental/health effects of contaminants
of concern; basic study design for chemi-
cal and biological testing; including sam-
pling plans, sampling protocols, chemical
analyses and biological testing and quality
assurance. Other topics included bio-
accumulation, source control, natural
recovery, data needs for feasibility
studies, how to interpret chemistry data,
ecological risk assessment using bio-
assay and benthic data, human
health and ecological risk
assessment using bio-
accumulation data,
determining site
boundaries and
selecting cleanup
\ X^^VT^ standards, and
remediation
strategies.
This training provided a comprehensive
overview of the major tools and the inter-
pretive techniques which are used to
properly evaluate sediments. Participant
response to the training was unanimously
positive, with particular appreciation of
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
the use of local case studies to illustrate
course material. For more information,
contact Anne Robinson at (206) 553-
6219.
Sediment Management Annual
Review Meeting
The eleventh annual Sediment Manage-
ment Annual Review Meeting (SMARM)
was held May 5-6, 1999, at the Washing-
ton State Department of Ecology (Ecol-
ogy) in Lacey, Washington. This public
meeting has historically dealt spe-
cifically with issues in Wash-
ington, mainly related to
the Dredged Material
Management Pro-
gram (DMMP),
and the Washing-
ton State Sedi-
ment Manage-
ment Standards
(SMS). With the
release and imple-
mentation of the
Dredged Material
Evaluation Frame-
work for the Lower
Columbia River Management
Area, based on the DMMP, the in-
tent was to include Oregon representa-
tives and thus broaden the scope of the
meeting to be more regional. The frame-
work is available on the Corps of Engi-
neers, Portland District homepage at:
http://nwp71.nep.usace.mil/DME.
A number of dredged material manage-
ment program issue papers and agency
clarifications were presented to the pub-
lic at the meeting. See the Corps of En-
gineers Seattle District website: http://
www.nws.usace.mil/DMMO/
homepage.htm. Presentations included
an update on the status of the Multi-user
Disposal Site (MUDS). The draft envi-
ronmental impact statement (EIS) for
MUDS was released February 1999.
Updates on the Bellingham Bay Pilot
Project as well as on the Bioaccumulation
Workgroup were also presented. Of par-
ticular interest this year is an update by
Ecology on the EIS for the SMS draft
rule revision, which may include human
health guidelines. For more information,
contact Justine Barton at (206) 553-4974
or John Malek at (206) 553-1286.
Draft EIS for Columbia River
Channel Improvements
The draft Integrated Feasibility Report
for Channel Improvements and Environ-
mental Impact Statement (DEIS), Colum-
bia & Lower Willamette River Federal
Navigation Channel, which includes the
Columbia River deepening project, was
released to the public in October, 1998,
by the Corps of Engineers, Portland
District. The stated purposes of
this effort are to improve deep-
draft transport of goods in
the navigation channel, and
to provide ecosystem resto-
ration of fish and wildlife
habitats. One of the impor-
tant aspects of this project is
the documentation support-
ing designation of both river
and ocean disposal sites for
long term use. These sites
will be used for disposal
of dredged material from
the mouth of the Columbia
River (a separate federal
project), and construction/
maintenance of the proposed channel
improvements. An important feature of
this project is its disposal site manage-
ment orientation. Although not required
by §404 of the Clean Water Act, manage-
ment plans will be developed for each
river and upland disposal site. Manage-
ment objectives and monitoring plans will
be integral to each plan. Comments on
the draft were due by February 5. EPA is
a cooperating agency on this EIS. For
more information, contact John Malek at
(206) 553-1286.
Portland Harbor Project
The Portland Harbor Project focuses on
approximately a 6-mile stretch of the
lower Willamette River in the state of Or-
egon. Much of the upland in this area is
heavily industrialized and marine traffic
on the Willamette River is intensive. Past
and present industrial operations have
been identified as potential contamination
sources. A site assessment including
-------
sampling, conducted by Region 10
Superfund in cooperation with the Or-
egon Department of Environmental Qual-
ity (ODEQ) showed elevated levels of
compounds such as DDT, PCB, heavy
metals and PAHs.
This sampling data will be evaluated by an
EPA panel to see whether the site should
be proposed for the National Priorities
List (NPL) more commonly known as a
Superfund site. ODEQ will participate as
part of the evaluation team. The team
may choose to examine alternatives to
NPL listing, such as deferring to the state
of Oregon to conduct the investigation in-
stead of EPA. While it is likely that the
Portland Harbor Project will rank as a po-
tential NPL site, ODEQ, with the support
of the Port of Portland and other local in-
dustries, has expressed interest in taking
the lead on conducting future studies and
cleanups in lieu of formal NPL listing.
Recently, ODEQ finalized a funding
agreement with the group of industries
and others in the Portland Harbor Project
study area to create a plan for investigat-
ing and remediating area sediments. De-
velopment of that plan is already under-
way. For more information, contact
John Malek at (206) 553-1286.
Puget Sound Confined
Disposal Study
The programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the Puget Sound
Confined Disposal Study was released to
the public in February 1999. This docu-
ment provides initial environmental review
and cost analysis for seven preferred al-
ternatives for disposing of :an estimated
10 million cubic yards of contaminated
sediments which will have'to be dredged
from the Puget Sound over the next 20
years. These alternatives include leaving
the sediments in place, disposal in solid
waste landfills, and construction of dis-
posal facilities in-water, nearshore and
upland. These sediments are fouling
valuable marine habitat and negatively af-
fecting local economic development.
This document is the first step in a three-
year Puget Sound Confined Disposal
Study, aimed at finding a solution to the
contaminated sediment disposal problem.
The EIS, developed by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, and
the Washington State Department of
Ecology, is part of the process to identify
safe and cost-effective ways to manage
contaminated sediments by confining and
isolating them from the environment.
Contaminants found in sediments can ac-
cumulate in the tissues of bottom-dwell-
ing organisms, move through the food
chain to concentrate in fish and shellfish,
and eventually pose significant risks to
human health. :
A Multi-User Disposal Site (MUDS)
located in or near the Sound would
greatly increase the region's ability to
maintain harbors, clean up:contaminated
sediments, restore marine habitat and al-
low for the development of waterfront
property. After reviewing public com-
ment on the EIS, the
agencies who are
party to the study
will select one or
more preferred
alternatives for dis-
posal and will then
likely prepare a site-
specific EIS and fea-
sibility report for
each one.
This Study is a three-
year, $3.5 million
planning effort which
is being funded by
the Corps and the
State of Washington,
as part of the Coop-
erative Sediment
Management
No. 23
Spring 1999
SHELLFISHINjG
&,
POLLUTED AR
-------
No, 23
Spring 1999
Program. The Corps, the Washington
Departments of Ecology and Natural
Resources, the Puget Sound Water
Quality Action Team, USEPA and the
Washington Public Ports Association are
all part of this planning effort. For more
information, contact John Malek at
(206) 553-1286.
Gut Purging Times in
Bioaccumulation Tests
Re-Evaluated
USEPA and ASTM protocols for 28-day
bioaccumulation testing with the freshwater
oligochaete, Lumbriculus variegatus, sug-
gest holding animals in clean water prior to
analysis to allow the organisms to clear
sediment from their gut. The purpose of
this purging period is to prevent sediment-
associated chemicals from being measured
as part of the whole-body residue. Previous
USEPA guidance was for a 24-hour purging
period, though some have raised concerns
that purging for this long may allow organ-
isms to depurate chemical from their tissues,
thus reducing their apparent body burden.
Results of Re-evaluation
Researchers at the Mid-continent Ecology
Division (MED)-Duluth re-evaluated this
guidance based on measured rates of sedi-
ment elimination and modeled depuration of
chemical from tissues. Results of this
analysis indicate that >98 percent of sedi-
ment in the gut is eliminated within 6 hours
of purging. Rates of chemical depuration
are dependent on octanol/water partition co-
efficient (KOW). For chemicals with log Kow
> 5, Lumbriculus should retain >90 percent
of their tissue burden after the full 24 hours
of purging originally recommended. If the
purging period is shortened to 6 hours,
chemicals with log Kow as low as 4 should
remain at >90 percent of the original tissue
burden, with no appreciable influence of
sediment in the gut. So, for most applica-
tions, purging periods of 6 or 24 hours are
suitable if the chemicals of interest have log
Kow > 5, but the 6-hour purging period
should be used for analytes with log KQW
between 4 and 5.
For More Information
Guidance on this topic has been revised for
the new edition of the EPA freshwater sedi-
ment test guidance due out in early sum-
mer. The information will also appear in
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry ha
June 1999. For more information, contact
Dave Mount, EPA, MED-Duluth, at (218)
529-5169.
EPA Compares Toxicity Using
Hyallela and Fathead Minnows
The sediment toxicity test methods dis-
cussed in this article, 7-day Hyalella
azteca and fathead minnow toxicity tests,
are not standard EPA methods. However,
they are being developed and evaluated by
the Office of Research and Development's
National Exposure Research Laboratory
(ORD ERL) in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Summary
Since 1992, seventy-three sediment
samples have been tested side-by-side us-
ing a 7-day Hyallela azteca (HA) survival
method and a 7-day fathead minnow em-
bryo-larval (e/1) survival/terata test. In
1992 and 1993, 10 reference toxicant
tests were also conducted. Of the 73 tests
run, 28 (38 percent) of the sediments were
found to be toxic (survival < 70 percent)
using the e/1 method but not toxic using the
HA method. Eighteen of the samples
were found to be toxic using both meth-
ods; of the 18, 9 showed more toxicity in
the e/1 test than the HA test and 3 were
more toxic in the HA test than the e/1 test.
Ten tests (13%) showed toxicity in the
HA test but not the e/1 test (9 of these
were in organic contaminated sediments)
and 7 sediments were not toxic to either
the e/1 or HA methods.
-------
Additional tests are being conducted on
samples collected in the Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP), where both the 7-day and 10-day
HA methods will be run side-by-side with
the e/1 method. Samples collected in the
EMAP program will have been chosen
randomly and have different types of
contaminants in them. Previous testing
using the HA method has shown that less
than 5 percent of the samples collected
across the mid-Atlantic region are toxic to
Hyallela azteca.
Additional Tests
Additional tests will be performed in FY
1999 on EMAP sediments (acute Hyallela
tests), sediments from NRMRL Attenu-
ated/Restoration Sediments Study (acute
Hyallela and Lumbriculus tests;
bioaccumulation tests using
Lumbriculus), and other sediments from
regional offices. A whole sediment refer-
ence toxicant method will be devel-
oped in 1999 as well. A draft
manuscript will be prepared in
1999 if results continue to in-
dicate that the method is
as sensitive as the exist-
ing HA method.
Procedures for EIS
Method
Below are the steps that are in-
volved in the fathead minnow
embryo-larval toxicity testing
method.
• Sediment Preparation. The sediment
is completely homogenized by hand.
• Test Set-up—Dispensing Sediment.
The sediment is dispensed into test
cups then the overlying water is added.
• Adding Test Animals. Ten or fifteen
fathead minnow embryos are ran-
domly added to each test cup.
• Daily Monitoring of Embryos. The
embryos in the test are monitored
daily for survival, hatching, and any
teratogenetic effects.
• Overlying Water Renewal. Water is
renewed daily. Routine chemistries on
old water include pH, dissolved oxy-
gen, and temperature. ;
• Test Termination. Final records are
made on surviving larvae, malformed
larvae, or any embryos ithat are still
viable but have not yet 'hatched.
• Data Analysis. The percent survival,
percent hatching, and percent terata for
each exposure group and the control
are determined. '
For More Information
To obtain more in-depth information on
the standard operating procedures for
this method contact Dr. Jim Lazorchak at
(513) 569-7076, USEPA Facilities, 26
West MLK Dr./642, Cincinnati, OH 45268.
No. 23
Spring 1999
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
OW Requests Science
Advisory Board Review of
Integrated Approach to Metals
Toxicity Assessment
The Office of Water has requested a Sci-
ence Advisory Board (SAB) Review of its
Integrated Approach to Assessing the
Unavailability and Toxicity of Metals in
Surface Waters and Sediments at an early
April meeting. This integrated approach
represents the culmination of several
years of OW and ORD efforts to more
accurately predict metals
bioavailability and
toxicity in both
the water col-
umn and sedi-
ments.
Toxicity in the
Water Column
In the water column, the approach in-
cludes a Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) that
quantifies the capacity of metals to bind
to the gills of aquatic organisms. This
model can be used to calculate the
bioavailable portion of dissolved metals in
the water column based on site-specific
water quality parameters such as alkalin-
ity, pH and dissolved organic carbon. By
the end of 1999, OW plans to make the
BLM available to users as an alternative to
the current Water Effect Ratio (WER)
methodologies. In the longer term, OW
intends to incorporate the BLM directly
into aquatic life criteria documents.
Toxicity in Sediments
In sediments, the approach includes guid-
ance described in the document, Metals
Mixtures Equilibrium Partitioning Sedi-
ment Guidelines (ESG). This document
is currently being revised in preparation
for the SAB Review (see "Status on Sedi-
ment Guidelines Documents" on p. 5 for
more details).
For More Information
The SAB was asked to review the scien-
tific validity of the integrated approach
and determine whether it improves the
ability to assess and protect aquatic and
benthic biota from metals toxicity. More
information on the technical charge to the
SAB, as well as SAB comments on the
approach, will be included in future
newsletters.
For more information, contact Jennifer
Mitchell (202) 260-6101 (e-mail:
rnitchell.jennifer@epa.gov); Heidi Bell
(202) 260-5464 (e-mail:
bell.heidi@epa.gov); or Mary Reiley (202)
260-9456 (e-mail: reiley.mary@epa.gov).
EPA Releases New Inventory of
Watershed Training Courses
Are you interested in taking a watershed-
related training course in 1999? If so,
you will want to look at EPA's recently
published Inventory of Watershed Train-
ing Courses. This Inventory provides
one-page summaries of 180 watershed-
related training courses sponsored by
Federal and state agencies, as well as the
private sector. The course summaries
provide you with enough information to
determine your level of interest and con-
tacts for further information—much like
a college catalogue. The Inventory was
developed in response to a key action
item listed in the Clean Water Action Plan
that says "In 1998, federal agencies will
complete an inventory of watershed train-
ing programs. Relevant offerings will be
promoted through the Watershed Academy
and through other means as appropriate."
-------
^fo. 23
Spring 1999
!:®j:Sfe'iJS;'>jW:
tool.
Inventory of Watershed Training Courses
The Inventory was developed with the
assistance and support of several inter-
agency training workgroups, an EPA
training workgroup, the private sector
and others.
To Obtain a Copy
Copies of the Inventory of Watershed
Training Courses are available at no
charge from NCEPI at 800-490-9198
(please include the document number in
requests: EPA 841-D-98-001). The In-
ventory is also available on the Watershed
Academy website at: http://
www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/
wacademy/catalog.html
EPA OST Announces the
Availability of a Video
EPA has produced a video, TMDLs and
Water Quality Standards, that is now
available and provides information on To-
tal Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and
the role TMDLs play in implementing
State/Tribal water quality standards. Wa-
ter quality standards are the cornerstone
of State/Tribal water quality management
programs. TMDLs and the TMDL devel-
opment process are integral parts of
State/Tribal water quality management
programs. The relationship between
TMDLs and water quality standards cov-
ers a wide area and includes such things
as how TMDLs are authorized, their im-
portance in the water quality-based ap-
proach to pollution control and how they
are developed. The video also discusses
the important role played by States,
Tribes, EPA, and the public in the devel-
opment of TMDLs. !
The 22-minute video can be obtained on
loan for a period of 30 days from:
USEPA, Water Resource Center, 401 M
St., SW (Mail Code RC4100), Washing-
ton, DC 20460; (202) 260r7786.
As part of the public domain, the video
may be duplicated. The EPA order num-
ber is: EPA-823-V-00-001:
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
Interested in checking out some
contaminated-sediment
websites? Here are a few you
can browse:
• Region 5 site that high-
lights the Great Lakes
National Program Office and
existing Great Lakes docu-
ments. http://www.epa.gov/
glnpo/arcs/
Contaminated-Sediment Database: A
tool for research and management in
Massachusetts Waters (1994 GSA).
USGS in collaboration with other
agencies compiled a database of data
collected on contamination in the sedi-
ments of Boston Harbor, http://
woodshole.er.usgs.gov/epubs/ab-
stracts/msg00053.html
SEDTEC-Contaminated Sediment Re-
moval and Treatment Technologies
Directory (Environment Canada).
SEDTEC is a user-friendly computer
directory of technologies for removal
and treatment of contaminated sedi-
ments. http://www.cbsc.org/ontario/
bis/1997.html
• In-Situ Capping of Contaminated
Sediments. This website is an intro-
duction to in-situ capping, http://
Ieoeml.gitri.gatech.edu/home/
markh/capping/
• Los Angeles Basin Contaminated Sedi-
ments Task Force. In October 1997
legislation was passed that required
the establishment of a multi-agency
Contaminated Sediment Task Force
(Task Force). The Task Force objec-
tive is to prepare a long-term manage-
ment plan for dredging and disposal
of contaminated sediment in the Los
Angeles area, http://ceres.ca.gov/
coastalcomm/web/sediment/
sdindex.html
• Manistique River, Lake Michigan.
This site discusses the Manistique
River, its contamination, and actions
being taken to restore the river, http:/
/www.lkmichiganforum.org/
aoc_97ma.html
If you would like to share a website with
the readers of CSNews, send your website
address and description to Jane Farris,
EPA, at farris.jane@epa.gov.
I always keep the light on and especially enjoy pea crabs and gobies for guests. Local calls
are free.
•jseoo eiiuojueo ai|j. Buoys s;ey. pnui Apues
ui s/v\ojjnq uiaueuuad-i
-------
No. 23
Spring 1999
June 6-9, 1999
Keep America Growing Conference:
Balancing Working Lands and Develop-
ment, Philadelphia, PA. This conference
will feature more than 150 presentations
on issues such as land use and population
trends, the impact of unplanned growth,
successful programs that balance develop-
ment and land use, and the urban-rural
connection. Contact Cindy Delaney at
(802) 655-7769; e-mail:
delaney@together.net; web site:
www .farmland .org/K AG .html.
June 6-10, 1999
ASCE's Water Resources Planning and
Management Division Conference. The
Task Committee on Evaluation of Best
Management Practices will present a
special set of papers on BMP's. Contact
england@mindspring.com.
June 9-11, 1999
Third Annual Statewide Pollution Preven-
tion Conference, in Jacksonville, FL.
Contact: Dawn Jenkins, University of
Florida, TREEO Center, 39OO SW 63rd
Blvd., Gainesville, FL 32608-3800,
phone: 352-392-9570; fax: 352-392-
6910; e-mail: djenkin@treeo.doce.flu.edu
June 9-12, 1999
Third National Workshop on Constructed
Wetlands: BMPs For Nutrient Reduction
and Coastal Water Protection, in New
Orleans, LA. Contact: Dr. Frank Humenik,
919-515-6767;
frank humenik@ncsu.edu
July 14-17, 1999
Sixth Biennial Stormwater Research and
Watershed Management Conference,
Tampa, FL. Contact Diane Caban, Mail
Code: MAN, SWFWMD, 2379 Broad
Street, Brooksville, FL 34609-6899.
Phone: (352) 796-7211
July 24-30, 1999 ,
Coastal Zone '99, San Diego, CA.
Contact: Urban Harbors Institute, University
of Massachusetts, Boston 100 Morrissey
Blvd., Boston, MA 02125-3393.
July 26-30, 1999 :
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Water Quality Standards Academy - Basic
Course, in Arlington, VA. Contact: Water
Quality Standards Academy Coordinator
at The Cadmus Group, Inc., 703-998-
6862, ext. 190. ;
August 8-11, 1999
Walk on the Wild Side,Soil and Water
Conservation Society Annual Conference,
Biloxi, Mississippi. Contact: Pat Mulligan
515-298-2331, ext. 17; e-mail:
conf@asce.org. \
August 9-12, 1999 !
1999 Stockholm Waiter Symposium:
Urban Stability Through Integrated Water-
Related Management, Stockholm,
Sweden. Contact the Stockholm Interna-
tional Water Institute at + 46 -8-736-20-
08; e-mail: sympos@siwi.prg; web site:
www.siwi.org. '
June 16-18, 1999
Virginia's Sustainable Future, Richmond,
VA. To register, call (804) 360-1500; e-
mail: malloymsm@aol.com; web site:
www.deq.state.va.us.
July 11-14, 1999
The Sixth Symposium on Biogeochemis-
try of Wetlands, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
Contact the University of Florida, IFAS
Office of Conferences by phone 352-392-
5930 or fax 352-392-9734, or by e-
mail: mrp@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu or visit the
University of Florida's web site at
gnv.ifas.ufl.edu/ ~conferweb/#upcoming.
August 16-20, 1999
Working at a Watershed Level, Durham,
NH. Course addresses watershed ecol-
ogy, system dynamics, assessment and
analysis, planning/management approaches,
remediation strategies, public involve-
ment, and outreach/education. Contact
Barry Tonning at (606) 244-8228; e-
mail: btonning@csg.org; web site:
www.statesnews.org/ecos/working.htm.
August 31 - September 1,i 1999
EPA Regional Beach Conference, in San
Diego, CA. Contact: Rick Hoffmann, 202-
260-0642. i
-------
Subscribe to CSNews via SASD-NEWS E-mail
EPA Standards and Applied Science Division has developed a list-server (electronic mailing list service) called SASD-
NEWS. As a subscriber to the list-server, you can receive electronic copies of various Division publications including
newsletters (Water Quality Standards and Contaminated Sediment News) and other announcements and information
about upcoming meetings and programs. Subscribers must have an e-mail address.
To subscribe to SASD-NEWS, please send a special e-mail message to listserver@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov. Leave the
message's subject header blank and provide the following text in the body of the message: Subscribe SASD-NEWS
Firstname Lasfname. (e.g., Subscribe SASD-NEWS Joan Doe.).
To stop receiving CSNews electronically, type "Unsubscribe SASD-NEWS" in the body of the message. You do not
need to include your first and last name.
To change your address, you may fill out the following form and mail it to: Jane Marshall Farris, Standards and Applied
Science Division—MC 4305, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Name:
Organization:
New Address:
Note: Those who have requested CSNews as a hard copy will continue to receive it in the mail. CSNews will also
continue to be displayed on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ost/pc/csnews/.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency (4305)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
FIRST CLASS MAIL
Postage and Fees Paid
EPA
G-35
------- |