United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
(4305)
EPA 823-R-94-001
August 1994
vvEPA
EPA's Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy
-------
-------
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington! D.C. 20460
August 1994
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed w«h,Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
contains at loast 50% recycled fiber
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
WATER
Dear Reader:
Based on your expressed irterest in the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy, I am sending you a co'py of the document. The Strategy
describes specific actions that EPA will take to reduce environ-
mental and human health risks associated with contaminated
sediment. The Strategy does no|t propose new regulations. EPA is
acting under existing statutory and regulatory authority to
implement policies developed to assess, prevent, and remediate
contaminated sediment.
The Strategy describes the cross-program policy framework in
which EPA intends to promote consideration and reduction of
ecological and human health risks posed by sediment contamina-
tion. The goals of the Strategy are: 1) to develop consistent
methodologies for assessing contaminated sediments; 2) to prevent
ongoing contamination of sediments that may cause unacceptable
ecological or human health risk's; 3) to clean-up existing
sediment contamination that causes significant effects on human
health or the environment; and 4) to ensure that sediment
dredging and the disposal of dredged material continue to be
managed in an environmentally sound manner.
EPA will accept written comments on the Strategy for 60
days after publication of an Executive Summary and a notice of
availability in the Federal Register. Comments may be mailed or
delivered to: Contaminated Sediment Strategy Clerk, Water Docket
MC-4101, Room L102, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
to submit any references cited
20460. Commenters are requested
in their comments. Commenters are
also requested to submit an original and 3 copies of their
written comments and enclosures. Commenters who want receipt of
their comments acknowledged should include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope.
-------
Thank you for your interest in this important effort, if
you have any questions, please feel free to contact Tudor T.
Davies, Director, Office of Science and Technology, at
(202) 260-5400."
Sincerely,
Robert Perciasepe
Assistant Administrator
Enclosure
-------
Acknowledgements
This document was prepared by the U.S.(Environmental Protection Agency's Sediment
Steering Committee and its staff workgroups. The Steering Committee was chaired by the Deputy
Assistant Administrator for Water, Martha G. Prothro.
I
The cover art is an adaptation of an illustration from Life in the Chesapeake Bay, a book by
Alice Jane and Robert Lippson, published by Johns Hopkins University Press, 701 West 40th Street,
Baltimore, MD 21211.
-------
-------
Executive Summary
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strat
Decision-making
- Reinventing Government to Streamline
Contaminated sediment poses ecological and human health risks in many watersheds
throughout the United States. In these watersheds, sediment serves as a contaminant reservoir from
which fish and bottom dwelling organisms can accumulate toxic compounds and pass them up the
food chain. Sediment contaminants can be passed
accumulate to levels that may be toxic to humans.
to larger fish, birds, and mammals until they
Toxic chemicals in sediment come from discharges
of industrial waste and sewage; stormwater runoffjfrom waste dumps, city streets and farms, and air
pollutants contained in rainwater. The magnitude of the sediment contamination problem in the
United States is evidenced in more than 1,200 State advisories that have been issued against
consuming fish that have accumulated toxic bioaccumulative sediment contaminants.
More than ten Federal statutes provide authority to many EPA program offices to address the
problem of contaminated sediment. This has resulted in fragmented, and in some cases duplicative,
efforts to complete the necessary research, technology development, and pollution control activities
required to effectively manage contaminated sediment. Often it has been difficult for EPA programs
to agree even upon the fundamental question of whether sediment at a particular site poses ecological
or human health risks. EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy was developed to
streamline decision-making within and among the
Agency's program offices by promoting and
ensuring: the use of consistent sediment assessment practices, consistent consideration of risks posed
bv contaminated sediment, the use of consistent approaches to management of contaminated sediment
J I
risks, and the wise use of scarce resources for research and technology development.
Goals of the Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy describes actions that the Agency will
take to accomplish the following four strategic gcals: 1) Prevent further sediment contamination that
may cause unacceptable ecological or human health risks; 2) When practical, clean up existing
sediment contamination that adversely affects the Nation's waterbodies or their uses, or that causes
-------
other significant effects on human health or the environment; 3) Ensure that sediment dredging and
dredged material disposal continue to be managed in an environmentally sound manner; 4) Develop
and consistently apply methodologies for analyzing contaminated sediments.
What the Strategy Does
The Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy is comprised of six component sections:
assessment, prevention, remediation, dredged material management, research, and outreach. In each
section, EPA describes actions that the Agency will take to accomplish the four broad strategic goals.
In the assessment section of the Strategy EPA proposes that Agency program offices all use
standard sediment toxicity test methods and chemical-specific sediment quality criteria to determine
whether sediments are contaminated. Actions that EPA will take to develop a national inventory of
sites and sources of sediment contamination (the National Sediment Inventory) are described in the
assessment section of the Strategy. The National Sediment Inventory will be used by EPA to target
sites for contaminated sediment assessment, prevention, and remediation. These assessment actions
will enable EPA to focus on cleaning up the most contaminated waterbodies, and ensuring that further
sediment contamination is prevented.
EPA's plan to stop sediment contaminants from reaching the environment is described in the
prevention section of the Strategy. In order to regulate the use of pesticides and toxic substances that
accumulate in sediment, EPA proposes the use of acute sediment toxicity tests to support registration
of chemicals under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the Toxic Substances
Control Act. In the prevention section of the Strategy EPA also proposes: developing effluent
guidelines for industries that discharge sediment contaminants; using pollution prevention policies to
reduce or eliminate sediment contamination resulting from noncompliance with permits; the
development of guidelines for design of new chemicals to reduce bioavailability and partitioning of
toxic chemicals to sediment; and implementation of point and nonpoint source controls that will
protect sediment quality. EPA's prevention actions will stop further contamination of sediment and
reduce ecological and human health risks.
11
-------
In the remediation section of the Strateg^ EPA proposes using multiple statutes to require
contaminated sediment remediation by parties responsible for pollution. These statutes include the
Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA), the Rivers and Harbors Act, and the Oil Pollution Act. EPA states in the Strategy,
however, that the Agency will not proceed with a clean-up if a combination of pollution prevention
and source controls will allow the sediments to recover naturally in an acceptable period of time.
EPA's remediation actions will clean up existing
Nation's waterbodies.
sediment contamination that adversely affects the
In the dredged material management section of the Strategy, EPA discusses the development
of technical guidance regarding dredged material
testing, dredged material disposal site selection, and
disposal alternatives. EPA actions described in ttie Strategy will ensure continued disposal of dredged
material in an environmentally sound manner.
In the research section of the Strategy, EPA proposes a program of investigative research
that is needed to: develop and validate new chemical-specific sediment criteria and other sediment
assessment methods; improve EPA's understanding of the transfer of sediment contaminants through
the food chain; and develop and evaluate a range of technologies for remediating contaminated
sediments. EPA's proposed research program will support improved assessment, prevention, and
remediation of contaminated sediment.
The outreach section of the Strategy describes actions that EPA will take to demonstrate,
through public involvement, the Agency's commitment to, and accountability for, sediment
management efforts. EPA will produce, and make available to the public, regular status reports on
sediment management activities.
Next Steps Toward Implementation of a Federal Agency Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy
EPA will begin to track activities of the Agency's program offices as they implement the
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy. However, EPA envisions that this internal strategy
ui
-------
will also be the keystone of a much larger Federal government strategy for the management of
contaminated sediment. The Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (WRDA 92) establishes a
National Contaminated Sediment Task Force to advise the Federal government on the extent and
severity of sediment contamination; sediment restoration methods and technologies; prevention and
source control measures; and long-term disposal sites for contaminated dredged material. EPA and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will convene the Task Force and submit the Agency's Strategy to
the Task Force for use hi developing a Federal agency contaminated sediment management strategy.
The Task Force can build upon EPA's coordinated research program and the research of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, and other Federal agencies to improve methodologies for measuring ecological and
human health risks from contaminated sediment.
EPA's National Sediment Inventory is a repository of sediment monitoring data generated by
Federal agencies to identify contaminated sediment sites. This data base can be used by Federal,
State, and local agencies to focus their pollution prevention and remediation efforts on the worst sites
of sediment contamination.
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy will promote EPA and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers research to develop technologies for remediation of contaminated sediment under
authority of the CWA, CERCLA and WRDA. In addition, the Strategy will provide guidance for
coordinating EPA Regional and Headquarters roles in the management of dredged material, and set
forth ongoing EPA and Headquarters regulatory development activities related to dredged material
management.
Guidance provided in the Strategy will facilitate the coordination of dredged material
management activities among Federal agencies and nongovernmental organizations. Coordination of
dredged material management activities has been called for in the May 1994 options paper drafted by
the Federal Interagency Working Group on the Dredging Process. The Working Group was
convened by the Secretary of Transportation in the Fall of 1993. The Group has held a series of
outreach sessions throughout the country to solicit ideas on improving the dredging process. The
Working Group identified important activities needed to improve the dredging process. These
activities include: enhanced research and monitoring to improve dredged material disposal decision
IV
-------
describes a plan for research on interpretation of
making, identification of opportunities to control s ources of sediment contaminants, and effective
education and communication with the public on t le risks and impacts associated with dredged
material disposal. The Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy addresses all of these issues. It
loaccumulation and chronic toxicity tests and
dredged material disposal site assessment. It provides a plan for identification and control of sources
of sediment contaminants. It also proposes effect ve ways of interacting with the public.
Listing of Actions Identified in EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy proposes that Agency program offices
take the following actions.
Assessment
All EPA program offices will use standard sediment testing methods to determine whether
sediments are contaminated. The Office of Water will use standard sediment toxicity and
bioaccumulation test methods for monitoring, inte pretation of narrative water quality standards, and
dredged material disposal testing. The Office of Pesticide Programs and the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics will use standard sediment
toxicity tests to assess the toxicity of pesticides and
chemicals when registering or reregistering these chemicals for manufacture and use. The Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response will use standard sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation test
methods for Superfund Remedial Investigation/Feasibility studies. The Office of Solid Waste will use
biological sediment toxicity test methods for assessing and monitoring hazardous waste facilities.
EPA program offices will use sediment qv ality criteria, when they are promulgated, to assess
contaminated sediment sites. All EPA programs
mducting sediment monitoring will use the criteria
to interpret sediment chemistry data. Upon promulgation, the criteria may be adopted as State wateir
quality standards and used to set National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
limits. The criteria will also be used with other information to make site-specific decisions
concerning corrective action at hazardous waste facilities, and to assess Superfund sites. EPA has not
yet determined how sediment quality criteria will be used in dredged material testing. In FY95, the
Agency will develop a more detailed Sediment Quality Criteria User's Manual describing how the
Agency's programs will use these criteria.
-------
The National Sediment Inventory will be used by EPA program offices as an assessment tool.
The inventory will be used to: identify contaminated sediment sites for consideration for remedial
action; target facilities for possible injunctive relief or supplemental enforcement projects; identify
problem pesticides and toxic substances that may require further regulation or be targeted for
enforcement action; identify impaired waters for National Water Quality Inventory reports or
development of Total Maximum Daily Loads; target watersheds for nonpoint source management
practices; and to help select industries for effluent guidelines development.
Prevention
In order to regulate the use of pesticides that may accumulate to toxic levels in sediment, EPA
intends to propose that acute sediment toxicity tests be included in procedures required to support
registration, jreregistration, and special review of pesticides likely to sorb to sediment. In fiscal year
1995, EPA will propose incorporating acute toxicity bioassays and spiking protocols into the
Agency's pesticide assessment guidelines (40 CFR Part 158). To prevent other toxic substances from
accumulating in sediment, EPA will also propose incorporating acute sediment toxicity tests and
sediment bioaccumulation tests into routine chemical review processes required under the Toxic
Substances Control Act. In addition, EPA intends to call for the development of EPA guidelines for
design of new chemicals to reduce bioavailability and partitioning of toxic chemicals to sediment.
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance will take action to prevent sediment
contamination by negotiating, in cases of noncompliance with permits, enforceable settlement
agreements to require source recycling and source reduction activities. The Office of Enforcement
will also monitor the progress of Federal facilities toward the goal of halving toxic emissions by the
year 1999, and will monitor the reporting of toxic releases to the public.
EPA's Office of Water, and other EPA program offices, will work with nongovernmental.
organizations and the States to prevent point and nonpoint source contaminants from accumulating in
sediments. EPA will: 1) promulgate new and revised best available technology effluent guidelines for
industries that discharge sediment contaminants; 2) encourage the States to use biological sediment
test methods to interpret water quality standards, and to adopt sediment quality criteria as water
quality standards; 3) encourage the States to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads for impaired
watersheds specifying point and nonpoint source load reductions necessary to protect sediment quality;
VI
-------
4) use the National Sediment Inventory to target
active point sources of sediment contaminants for
permit compliance tracking, 5) ensure that discharges from CERCLA sites and RCRA facilities
subject to NPDES permits comply with permit requirements that protect sediment quality; 6) use the
National Sediment Inventory to target watersheds where technical assistance and grants would
effectively be used to reduce nonpoint source loads of sediment contaminants.
Remediation
The National Sediment Inventory will be
of Soli
used by EPA's Office of Water, Office of
Emergency and Remedial Response, Office of Solid Waste, and Office of Enforcement to help target
Sites for enforcement action requiring contaminated sediment remediation. EPA's standard sediment
toxicity and bioaccumulation tests will be used tc identify sites for remediation, assist in determining
clean-up goals for contaminated sites, and to monitor the effectiveness of remedial actions.
Dredged Material Management
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates that a small percentage of the total volume of
sediment dredged for navigational channel maintenance requires special handling due to the presence
of toxics. The National Sediment Inventory will
be used to identify sites where dredged material may
be contaminated. EPA standard sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation tests are now used in dredged
material testing.
Research
EPA's Office Of Research and Developm
:nt, through its Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program, will continue to collect new chemical and biological data on sediment quality.
These data will be included in the Agency's National Sediment Inventory. EPA's Office of Research
and Development will also develop: new biological methods to assess the ecological and human health
effects of sediment contaminants, chemical-specific sediment quality criteria, methods to conduct
sediment toxicity identification evaluations, dredged material disposal fate and transport models,
sediment wasteload allocation models, and technc logics for remediation of contaminated sediment.
Outreach
EPA will undertake a program of outreach
about contaminated sediment risk management.
and technology transfer to educate target audiences
'arget audiences will include: other Federal
vii
-------
agencies, State and Local agencies, the regulated community, the scientific community, environmental
advocacy groups, the news media, and the general public. Technical and nontechnical information
will be provided to these audiences by developing a range of outreach products. The National
Contaminated Sediment Task Force will monitor implementation of EPA's Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy and development of a federal Strategy.
Vlll
-------
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Table of Contents .
Table of Acronyms
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction
1.1 Purpose of the Strategy . . .
1.2 Definition of Contaminated Sediments
1.3 Background
1.3.1 Statement of the Problem
1.3.2 Extent and Severity of the Problem
1.4 Goals and Principles of the Stra :egy
Coordination of Strategy Implementation
3.1 Interagency Coordination ..
3.2 Agency Coordination
3.3 States' Role
Policy Framework for Strategy
4.1 ' Background
4.2 Forums
4.3 Written Comments . .
Strategy for Assessing Sediment Contamination
5.1 Consistent Sediment Testing Methods . ,
Page
Why EPA Needs an Agency-Wide Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments
2.1 Cross-Program Coordination
2.2 Client Demand
2.3 Congressional Interest ....
I.'
5.1.1 Agency-wide Use of Consistent Test Methods
5.1.2 Establishment of an Agency-wide Sediment Tiered Testing Committee
. . i
. ix
xiv
. 1
. 1
. 1
. 3
. 2
. 4
. 6
. 11
. 11
. 12
. 12
. 16
. 16
. 17
. 17
. 18
. 18
. 19
. 21
. 22
. 22
. 22
. 23
ix
-------
5.1.3 Selection of Sediment Toxicity Tests for Agency-wide Use Within the Tiered
Testing Framework 23
5.1.4 Supplemental Specific Assessment Methods ; 25
5.2 Sediment Quality Criteria ; 25
5.3 National Inventory of Sites with Sediment Contamination 30
5.3.1 Purpose of the Site Inventory ,30
5.3.2 Scope of the Site Inventory 30
5.3.3 EPA Program Office Uses of the Site Inventory 31
5.3.4 Evaluation of Data Included in the Site Inventory ;. 35
5.4 National Inventory of Sources of Sediment Contamination ', 36
5.4.1 Approach to Developing the Source Inventory > 37
5.4.2 Uses of the Source Inventory . 38
5.5 Increase hi Sediment Monitoring in Water Quality Monitoring Programs . ;. 42
5.6 Assessment of Atmospheric Deposition of Sediment Contaminants 43
5.7 Coordination of Assessment Activities with Other Federal Agencies 44
6. Strategy for Preventing Sediment Contamination . 45
6.1 Office of Pesticide Programs Actions » 45
6.1.1 Control of Sediment Contaminants Regulated Under FIFRA 45
6.1.2 OPP Use of the Site Inventory , ..... 45
6.1.3 Memorandum of Agreement with USGS 46
6.1.4 Pesticide Incident Reports : 46
6.1.5 Development of Technical Guidance Documents for Evaluation of Pesticide
Risks 47
6.1.6 Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group Recommendations I. 47
6.2 Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Actions 49
6.3 Office of Enforcement Actions 53
7. Strategy for Abating and Controlling Sources of Sediment Contamination \ 55
7.1 Technology-Based Controls for Point Sources 55
7.2 Water Quality-Based Controls for Point Sources 57
7.3 Controls for Nonpoint Sources ; 61
-------
8.
7.4 Coordination with Other Agencies 65
Strategy for Remediation and Enforcement .66
8.1 CERCLA Remediation and Enforcement 69
8.2 RCRA Remediation and Enforcement 73
8.3 CWA Remediation and Enforcement 75
8.4 TSCA Enforcement 77
8.5 Rivers and Harbors Act Enforcement 78
8.6 Oil Pollution Act Enforcement . 78
j
8.7 Related Legislation 79
8.8 Coordination with Other Agencies 80
9. Strategy for Dredged Material Management 82
9.1 Dredged Material Assessment Un er MPRSA 83
9.2 Dredged Material Assessment Under CWA 85
9.3 Dredged Material Management Alternatives Document 86
9.4 Ocean Disposal Site Management and Monitoring Guidance 87
9.5 Relationship of CERCLA, TSCA, and RCRA 88
9.6 Coordination with Other Agencies and States . . 90
10. Research Strategy 92
10.1 Collection of Chemical and Biological Data on Sediment Quality in the EMAP
Program 92
10.2 Development and Validation of Sediment Quality Criteria 93
10.2.1 Development of Freshwater and Marine Sediment Quality Criteria 93
10.2.2 Chemical Data for Development of Sediment Quality Criteria 93
10.2.3 Field Validation Studies for Sediment Quality Criteria 94
10.3 Contaminated Sediment Assessment Methods 94
10.3.1 Biogeochemical and Transport Processes Influencing Metals
Bioavailability 94
10.3.2 Exposure Assessment Modeling for Aquatic Disposal of Dredged
Materials 95
XI
-------
10.3.3 Contaminated Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation ' 95
10.3.4 TMDL/Wasteload Allocation Modeling to Evaluate Contaminated Sediments
and Source Control Options . 96
10.3.5 Chemical Analytical Methods Development 96
10.3.6 Development and Validation of Acute and Chronic Test Protocols 97
10.3.7 Development and Field Validation of Bioaccumulation Test Methods 97
10.3.8 Unavailability and Trophic Transfer of Sediment-Associated
Contaminants 98
10.3.9 Development of Tissue Residue Thresholds 99
10.3.10 Routes of Biological Exposure 99
10.4 Remediation Methods 100
10.4.1 Remediation Methods for Contaminated Sediments 100
10.4.2 Resiliency and Natural Recovery of Aquatic Benthic Ecosystems 101
10.5 Completion of Research and Technology Transfer 101
10.5.1 ORD Clients , 101
10.5.2 Technology Transfer 102
11. Outreach Strategy 103
11.1 Communication Themes . 103
11.2 Interagency Coordination and Alliances with Other Agencies, Industry, and the
Public : 104
11.3 Target Audiences .••••! 105
11.4 Outreach Activities 106
11.4.1 Regulatory Actions and Guidance Documents 106
11.4.2 Outreach Publications 109
11.4.3 Advisory Groups, Databases, Clearinghouses, and Other Activities 109
11.5 Outreach Principles 110
12. Case Studies 113
12.1 Case Studies of Human Health Risks 113
12.1.1 Quincy Bay and New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts 114
12.1.2 Puget Sound, Washington 116
XII
-------
12.2
12.1.3 Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor, California
12.1.4 Lake Michigan .....!
12.1.5 New York
12.1.6 Pago Pago, American Samoa
Case Studies of Ecological Effects/Risks
12.2.1 Elizabeth River, Virginia
12.2.2 Commencement Bay, Washington
12.2.3 Great Lakes
13. References
116
117
118
118
119
119
120
121
122
xiii
-------
TABLE OF ACRONYMS
AEDG Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group
ARCS Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments
AVS Acid Volatile Siulfides
AWPD Assessment and Watershed Protection Division
BAT Best Available Technology
BCT Best Conventional Technology
BIOS Bio-STORET; the portion of STORET containing biological data
BLM United States Bureau of Land Management
CAA Clean Air Act (1970)1
CCMP Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CDF Confined Disposal Facility
CERCLA Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (1980)1
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COE United States Army Corps of Engineers
CWA : . Clean Water Act (1977)1
CZARA Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
|
CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act (1972)1
DAIS Dredged Analysis Information System
DMATS Dredged Material Tracking System
DOD United States Department of Defense
DOE United States Department of Energy
'Date of original enactment
xiv I
-------
DOJ .
DOT .
OWE.
EAB .
EBR .
EMAP
EPA .
EqP .
United States Department of Justice
United States Department of Transportation
Division of Water Enforcement
Exposure Assessment Branch
Exposure Based Review
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
. . United States Environmental Protection Agency
Equilibrium Partitioning
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (1972)1
GLCPA .
GLNPO ,
GLWQA
HRS . . ,
HWIR . .
IRIS . .
ITFM Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality
Concx ntration of contaminant (lethal dose) which will result
hi mortality of 50% of exposed organisms
MMS
MOU
NAWQA
NCAPS
'Date of original enactment
. . Great Lakes Critical Programs Act
. Great Lakes National Program Office
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Hazard Ranking System
. Hazardous Waste Identification Rule
. . Integrated Risk Information System
United States Minerals Management Service
Memorandum of Understanding
MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (1972)1
National Water Quality Assessment
National Corrective Action Prioritization System
xv
-------
NEP National Estuary Program
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act (1969)1
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL National Priorities List
NRC National Research Council
NS&T ...-.,.. National Status and Trends
OCPD Oceans and Coastal Protection Division
ODES Ocean Data Evaluation S5'stem
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OEER Office of Emergency and Remedial Response
OFA Office of Federal Activities
OPP Office of Pesticide Programs
OPPE Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
OPPT Office of Pollution Prevention ;and Toxics
OPPTS Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
ORD Office of Research and Development
OST Office of Science and Technology
OSW Office of $olid Waste
OW -. Office of Water
OWPE Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
OWM Office of Wastewater Management
OWOW Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
'Date of original enactment
xvi
-------
PAHs .
PCBs..
ppm . .
POTW .
PRP . .
QA/QC
RAGS .
RCRA .
RFA .
RFI
ROD ........
SAB . ...-'.
SARA . . . . Sup
SCS
SITE
STORET . . . . . ; . . i . .
TCLP . , . .
TIE
TMDL
TQC
TSCA
TVA . < . .
USCG
'Date of original enactment
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
, , Polychlorinated Biphenyls
parts per million
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
Potentially Responsible Party
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund
. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (1976)1
RCRA Facility Assessment
RCRA Facility Investigation
Record of Decision
Science Advisory Board
rfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Soil Conservation Service
.... Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
EPA Office of Water's Storage and Retrieval System
.... Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
Toxicity Identification Evaluation
Total Maximum Daily Load
Total Organic Carbon
Toxic Substances Control Act (1976)1
Tennessee Valley Authority
United States Coast Guard
xvu
-------
USDA .
USFDA
USFS .
USFWS
USGS .
WRDA
. . United States Department of Agriculture
United States Food and Drug Administration
United States Forest Service
. . United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey
Water Resources Development Act of 1992
XVlll
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE STRATEGY
The purpose of the Environmental Protec tion Agency's (EPA's) Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy is: to describe EPA's understanding of the extent and severity of sediment
contamination, including uncertainties about the dimension of the problem; to describe the cross-
program policy framework hi which EPA intend! to promote consideration and reduction of
ecological and human health risks posed by sediment contamination; and to describe actions EPA
believes are needed to bring about consideration and reduction of risks posed by contaminated
sediments.
This Strategy is being issued hi support
Agency guidance only. This document does not
not establish a binding norm and is not finally
decisions in any particular case will be made by
specific facts.
of
dete:
EPA's regulatory and policy initiatives, and is
sstablish or affect legal rights or obligations. It does
irminative of the issues addressed. Agency
applying the law and regulations on the basis of the
1.2 DEFINITION OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS
Contaminated sediments are soils, sand,
accumulate on the bottom of a water body, and contain
adversely affect human health or the environment
organic matter, or minerals that wash from land and
in toxic or hazardous materials that may
(U.S. EPA, 1993a). For the purposes of this
-------
Strategy, EPA defines contaminated sediments as those which contain chemical substances at
concentrations that pose a known or suspected threat to aquatic life, wildlife, or human health.
1.3 BACKGROUND
1.3.1 Statement of the Problem
The contamination of sediments in waterbodies of the United States has emerged in recent
years as an ecological and human health issue of national proportions. Contaminated sediments can
have an impact on aquatic life by making areas uninhabitable for benthic organisms, and they can
affect fish and wildlife by contributing to the bioaccumulation of contaminants in the food chain.
Documented adverse ecological effects from contaminated sediments include fin rot, increased tunaor
frequency, and reproductive toxicity in fish as well as decreased biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems.
Contaminated sediments can also pose a threat to human health when pollutants in sediments
bioaccumulate in edible fish tissue. There are numerous examples of cases where fish consumption
advisories or bans have been issued for pollutants such as polychlorinated biphenyls, mercury,
dioxins, and kepone because of the transfer of the pollutants into the food chain (U.S. EPA, no date).
The presence of contaminated sediments also introduces significant ecological and human
health considerations into the decision of whether and how to dredge and dispose of sediments to
maintain navigational channels. Where contaminated sediments exist, dredging can result in
resuspension of contaminated material which may then become more available to aquatic organisms.
Special control techniques may be necessary to prevent this. Contamination can also limit the
disposal options available for dredged sediments. Disposal of contaminated dredged material requires
-------
locating a secure site, either on land or offshore,
be safely contained. Sediment contamination can
cost of dredging navigational channels to levels
commercial/private shipping interests.
where large amounts of contaminated material can
also affect commerce, most notably by raising the
cannot be borne by local sponsors or
that
While sediment contamination has been recognized as a serious problem for some time,
limited success has been demonstrated in niitigatir g the problem. One reason is the general lack of
various pollutants in sediments cause adverse
iblems have been defined primarily on the basis of
national guidelines for determining what levels of
ecological and human health effects. To date, pn
observed effects oh aquatic life hi the field, such as the presence of pollution-tolerant species or
diseased fish or the absence of certain benthic organisms. Since 1977, EPA and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, however, have been using a wide range of biological and chemical assessment
techniques in the dredged material program for the evaluation of both water-column and benthic
impacts of potentially contaminated sediment. In some instances EPA Regional or State guidelines,
including sediment standards and regionally appropriate bioassays, have also been used effectively for
problem definition. ,
The expense associated with the remediation of contaminated sediments also contributes to the
extent of the problem. Not only are specialized dredging techniques and disposal sites sometimes
needed, but the sediments often must be dewatere 1 or otherwise treated before disposal can occur.
Other complicating factors are the high concentrations of contaminants that sometimes underlie
surface sediments, and the difficulty in identifying a responsible party to pay for the clean-up,
particularly when old sediments or multiple sourc ;s are involved. Frequently, sediment contamination
-------
is the result of historical discharges of pollutants before the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System regulatory program was established.
1.3.2 Extent and Severity of the Problem
In surveys conducted in 1985 and 1987 (U.S. EPA, 1985 and 1988a), the Office of Water
(OW) of EPA first began to document the extent and severity of sediment contamination. Most of the
information hi the surveys described areas in the Northeast, along the Coast of the Atlantic Ocean and
Gulf of Mexico, and hi the Great Lakes region. The surveys found that heavy rnetals and metalloids
(e.g., arsenic), polychlorinated biphenyls, pesticides, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are the
most frequently reported contaminants in sediments. Significant ecological impacts were often
I
reported at contaminated sediment sites, including impairment of reproductive capacity, and impacts
to the structure and health of benthic and other aquatic communities. Potential human health impacts
were noted at a number of sites where fish consumption advisories or bans were issued (U.S. EPA,
1988). In 1989, a study by the National Academy of Sciences entitled Contaminated Marine
Sediments - Assessment and Remediation (National Academy of Sciences, 1989), also identified the
potential for far-reaching health and ecological effects from contaminated sediments. |
Many potential sources of contaminants to sediments are identified in the reports cited above.
These sources include: municipal sewage treatment plants; combined sewer overflows; stormwater
discharges from municipal and industrial facilities; direct industrial discharges of process waste;
runoff and leachate from hazardous and solid waste sites; agricultural runoff; runoff from rnining
operations; runoff from industrial manufacturing and storage sites; and atmospheric deposition of
contaminants.
-------
Many of the sediment data used in the E ?A studies were collected prior to regular analysis for
such parameters as grain size, total organic carbon, or acid volatile sulfides. Such data are needed to
s. Rarely is such information available for historical
determine bioavailability of sediment co
sediment data. EPA believes that better data on
chemical concentrations in edible fish tissue, are
sediment quality, as well as direct measurements of
needed. Large quantities of both published and
unpublished data on sediment quality have not been placed in accessible or usable form, and many
locations in the country have not been adequately sampled. Several recent national and regional
sediment monitoring programs, including EPA's
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agem
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
:y's National Status and Trends Program, are
currently collecting data on physical and chemical characteristics of sediments, parameters describing
bioavailability of contaminants, contaminant residues hi aquatic organism tissues, and biological
community structures.
It is evident from the best data currently ivailable that sediments in many waterbodies across
the country are contaminated to levels that harm jenthic and aquatic communities and that may
contribute to increased cancer and noncancer diseases for consumers of contaminated fish and
iiseas
shellfish. EPA believes that the effects of sediment contamination have been documented sufficiently
ioi
to confirm their significance as a widespread national problem. To further define the extent of
contamination, EPA, under the authority of Section 503 of the Water Resources Development Act of
1992, is developing the first biennial national inv ;ntory of contaminated sediment sites for submission
to Congress in late 1994.
-------
1.4 GOALS AND PRINCIPLES OF THE STRATEGY
The goals of EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy are: 1) to prevent further
contamination of sediments that may cause unacceptable ecological or human health risks; 2) when
practical, to clean up existing sediment contamination that adversely affects the Nation's waterbodies
or their uses, or that causes other significant effects on human health or the environment; 3) to ensure
that sediment dredging and the disposal of dredged material continue to be managed in an
environmentally sound manner; and 4) to develop methodologies for analyzing contaminated
sediments. ;
The Strategy is designed around the following principles:
1. EPA programs with authority to address sediment contamination operate under the
mandate of many statutory provisions. Therefore, regulatory decisions must be based
on requirements that are not always consistent among EPA programs. EPA programs
should respond to the risks of sediment contamination as consistently as possible,
taking into account statutory requirements and the need for programs to address other
problems that pose similar or higher risks.
2. In assessing and managing contaminated sediments, EPA will continue to improve
coordination of research and regulatory activities among other Federal agencies, State
agencies, international organizations, and private parties.
-------
3.
4.
5.
7.
EPA will continue to develop and
sediments. These methods include
biological testing methods.
Assessment of sediment contamination
to reduce risks should be based oh
unavailable, the Agency will utilize
improve methods for identifying contaminated
numerical sediment quality criteria and unproved
and any subsequent steps taken by the Agency
sound science. Where scientific information is
conservative scientific assumptions.
To better assess the extent and severity of sediment contamination, the Agency will
conduct a national inventory of se diment quality and improve its monitoring of
sediment contamination. The-Agency will identify a list of chemicals of concern
based on their toxicity, persistence, and propensity to bind to sediment particles, and
will identify sources of these chemicals.
6. To ensure that data gathered by EPA programs are comparable, EPA will develop
standard sampling, analytical, anc
numerical sediment quality criteria, to assess sediment contamination and its effects.
Where sediment quality is sufficient
uses of a waterbody, the Agency
pollution prevention measures anc
appropriate level of sediment qua
statistical methods, including the application of
to support, or could support, the full designated
will use appropriate means to ensure that existing
source controls will maintain, or achieve, the
ity.
-------
8. Where sediments are contaminated, the Agency will implement pollution prevention
measures and source controls to limit/control further contamination. This is a critical
step: 1) to ensure the long-term success of any remedial activity for the site; 2) to
rninimize the long-term costs of navigational dredging; and 3) to increase
opportunities for beneficial reuse of dredged material.
9. Where short-term risks and effects can be tolerated, and statutes or international
agreements do not require remediation or establish other preferences (e.g., preference
for treatment under the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986), the
preferred treatment of a contaminated sediment site is to implement pollution
prevention measures and source controls, and to allow natural processes such as
biodegradation, chemical degradation, and the deposition of clean sediments to
diminish risks associated with the site. Selection of the appropriate remedial option
should, however, be undertaken on a case-by-case basis after careful consideration of
the risks posed by the contaminants, the benefits of remediation, and the costs of
remediation. In cases where EPA has chosen to allow natural processes to diminish
risks, the Agency may still seek restitution for damages to natural resources in
coordination with other Federal and State agencies.
10. Remediation of contaminated sediment sites will be undertaken first to limit serious
risks to human health and the environment, and then to restore sites to a degree
sufficient to support existing and designated uses of the waterbody, including potential
uses of the sediment, whenever such restorations are practicable, attainable and cost
effective.
8
-------
11. EPA will not proceed with a clean-up of a contaminated sediment site when
implementing the remedial alternative would cause more environmental harm than
leaving the contaminants in place.
12.
13.
14.
At sites where pollution preventio i, source control, and natural processes will not
reduce risks and adverse effects ir an acceptable time frame, EPA will assign highest
priority to remediating contaminated sediment: 1) that is contributing to the most
tial risks to aquatic life, wildlife, and human health; 2)
t in the spread of contaminants into other areas that
severe effects and substantial
where continued delay would resu
were previously unaffected; and 3) where remediation is cost effective.
The cost of sediment remediation
State, and local governments. Appropriate
encourage voluntary clean-ups or
contaminated by their activities and
resources.
cannot be borne solely or substantially by Federal,,
statutory authority will be used to
o compel responsible parties to clean up sediments
to seek restitution for damages of natural
the
EPA will continue to work with
that dredged materials continue to
Physical, chemical, and biologica
disposal and management decisions
published by EPA, and EPA has
*,
uncertainties will be interpreted, t
methods, to guide disposal and
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) to ensure
be managed in an environmentally sound manner.
test methods will continue to be used to guide
. After sediment quality criteria have been
i ssued guidance describing how criteria values and
criteria will be used, along with biological test
management decisions. Interpretation of results to
-------
meet program-specific goals will be maintained, and management alternatives will
remain consistent with the requirements of the applicable statutes.
10
-------
2. WHY EPA NEEDS AN AGENCY-WIDE STRATEGY FOR MANAGING
CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS
EPA needs an Agency-wide strategy for
ensure consistent consideration of risks posed by
2.1 CROSS PROGRAM COORDINATION
n anaging contaminated sediments to promote and
contaminated sediments.
EPA has the authority under numerous statutes to address contaminated sediments. These
statutes include: the National Environmental Policy Act; the Clean Air Act; the Coastal Zone
Management Act; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act; the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Toxic Substances
Control Act; the Clean Water Act; the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978, as amended by
protocol signed on November 18, 1987; the Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act; and the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of 1990. A complete summary of EPA
authorities for addressing sediment contamination
Statutes and EPA Program Activities (U.S. EPA,
is provided in Contaminated Sediments - Relevant
1990a).
Many EPA offices implement these statutory authorities or coordinate implementation in
specific geographic areas, such as through the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Great Lakes National
Program, and the Gulf of Mexico Program. Depending on statute and program structure, EPA's
Regional offices and the States may also exercise
quality and impacts.
wide latitude in their determination of sediment
11
-------
Implementation of these programs by different EPA program offices under a wide range of
statutory authorities has created inconsistencies in procedures for assessing the relative risks posed by
contaminated sediments and has increased the potential for duplication in the areas of research,
technology development, and field activities. EPA must strive to coordinate activities among the
Agency's program offices to promote and ensure consistent sediment assessment practices, consistent
consideration of risks posed by contaminated sediments, consistent decision-making in managing these
risks, and wise use of scarce resources for research, technology development, and field activities.
2.2 CLIENT DEMAND
In March 1990, a formal request, in the form of proposed legislation, was made to EPA
Administrator William Reilly to create a national program to address contaminated sediments. The
request was made by the National Contaminated Sediments Working Group, a coalition of 13
environmental advocacy groups, and was endorsed by 235 Federal, State, and local public interest
groups, including labor unions, health organizations, and fishing, sporting, citizen, and environmental
groups. Several EPA Regional offices and States have also identified as a high priority the need for
technical guidance on assessing sediment quality. i
2.3 CONGRESSIONAL INTEREST
Congressional interest in issues related to contaminated sediments has been expressed
repeatedly over the past 5 to 10 years. In Section 118(c)(3) of the 1987 Clean Water Act (CWA)
amendments, EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) was authorized to coordinate
and conduct a 5-year study and demonstration project relating to the control and removal of toxic
12
-------
pollutants in the Great Lakes, with emphasis on the
sediments. To fulfill the requirements of the Act,
of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) program. The
1990 extended the ARCS program by one year and
Since 1990, EPA has presented testimony
removal of toxic pollutants from bottom
GLNPO initiated the Assessment and Remediation
Great Lakes Critical Programs Act (GLCPA) of
specified completion dates for interim activities.
concerning contaminated sediments at dozens of
Congressional hearings before the House Commit ee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, the House
Committee on Public Works and Transportation, and the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Members of Congress have also expressed interest in addressing sediment contamination in CWA
reauthorization.
The most recent legislation addressing contaminated sediments is the Water Resources
Development Act of 1992 (WRDA). Title V of WRDA, the "National Contaminated Sediment
Assessment and Management Act," calls for the establishment of a National Contaminated Sediment
Task Force to be co-chaired by the EPA Administrator and the Secretary of the Army. Members of
this WRDA Task Force will include representatives from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
U.S. Department of Agriculture, States, ports, a
Service (USFWS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
ricultural and manufacturing interests, and public
interest organizations. Under WRDA Section 502, the WRDA Task Force is charged with advising
the Administrator and the Secretary in the implementation of Title V by: 1) reviewing and
commenting on reports concerning sediment qual ty and the extent and severity of sediment
contamination throughout the Nation; 2) reviewing and commenting on programs for the research and
development of sediment restoration methods, practices, and technologies; 3) reviewing and
commenting on the selection of pollutants for development of sediment criteria and the schedule for
13
-------
the development of such criteria; 4) advising appropriate officials in the development of guidelines for
restoration of contaminated sediments; 5) making recommendations to appropriate officials concerning
practices and measures to prevent the contamination of sediments and to control sources of sediment
contamination; and 6) reviewing and assessing the means and methods for locating and constructing
permanent and cost-effective disposal sites for the long-term disposal of dredged material that is not
suitable for ocean dumping, as determined under the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act.
WRDA Section 503 requires the EPA Administrator, in consultation with the Administrator of
NOAA and the Secretary of the Army, to conduct a comprehensive national survey of data regarding
sediment quality in the United States. EPA is required to compile all existing information on the
quantity, chemical and physical composition, and geographic location of pollutants hi sediments,
including the probable sources of such pollutants. A report to Congress is due in November, 1994.
WRDA Section 503 further requires that EPA conduct, in consultation with NOAA and the
COE, a comprehensive and continuing program to assess sediment quality which shall at a minimum:
1) identify the location of pollutants hi sediments; 2) identify the extent of pollutants in sediments
determined to be contaminated; 3) establish methods and protocols for monitoring the effects of
contaminated sediments and the pollutants therein; 4) develop a system for the management, storage,
and dissemination of data concerning sediment quality; 5) provide an assessment of sediment quality
trends over tune; 6) identify locations where pollutants in sediments may pose a threat to the quality
of drinking water supplies, fisheries resources, and marine habitats; and 7) establish a clearinghouse
for information on technology, methods, and practices available for the remediation, decontamination,
14
-------
and control of sediment contamination. The results will be reported to Congress biennially, starting
four years from the date of enactment.
15
-------
3. COORDINATION OF STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION
3.1 INTERAGENCY COORDINATION
Interagency coordination is paramount to successful implementation of the Contaminated
Sediment Management Strategy. There are numerous recent examples of successful coordination
among agencies, including: 1) the Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality which
is composed of members from EPA, USGS, eight other Federal agencies, and ten State agencies and
whose mission is to more effectively collect and present water quality data by formulating national
monitoring protocols, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, and data collection and
sharing systems; 2) the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Project, which includes representatives
from the USGS, the COE, the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the United States
Forest Service (USFS), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and whose mission is to study physical properties of sediments to determines
both the degree to which sediments trap contaminants and the timeframe for biodegradation, chemical
degradation, or burial of contaminants; 3) the National Water Quality Assessment Program formed by
members of the USGS, USDA, EPA, and USFWS to measure baseline conditions at 60 sites
nationwide and monitor conditions over time to define trends; and 4) the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) Environmental Restoration Program, through which DOE has entered into agreements with
several States and EPA to coordinate implementation of remedial actions at DOE facilities.
There are also a number of ongoing staff-level activities which have been successfully
coordinated. As an example, EPA and the COE regularly hold jointly administered Ocean Dumping
Coordinators and CWA Section 404 Coordinators meetings. At these meetings, issues related to
16
-------
implementation of the dredged material management
the State of Florida and NOAA have collaborated
along Florida's shoreline at over 700 sites (MacDonald
The EPA's Contaminated Sediment
build on established cooperative activities among
addressing contaminated sediment issues, as
Through the WRDA Task Force, EPA will also
strategy for contaminated sediment management.
3.2 AGENCY COORDINATION
The Office of Science and Technology within OW has coordinated development of the
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy anc
programs are discussed. As another example,
on a survey of sediment and biological conditions
, 1993).
Management Strategy and the WRDA Task Force will
igencies to promote and maintain consistency hi
described in subsequent Sections of this document.
propose the development of a national Federal
will continue to coordinate implementation of the
Strategy with the relevant program and regional offices. Oversight for coordination of Strategy
implementation will be provided by the Agency-wide Sediment Steering Committee.
3.3 STATES' ROLE
States will play a central role in Strategy
implementation. States may, for example,
promulgate sediment quality standards that are pr rtective of sediment quality. Insofar as possible, the
Strategy will be consistent with regional and State policies and will not impede State and local
management and prevention measures. Strategy implementation will include State training and
information dissemination as described in Section
11, Outreach Strategy.
17
-------
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGY
4.1 BACKGROUND
In 1989, EPA Administrator Lee Thomas formed an Agency-wide Sediment Steering
Committee to address the problem of contaminated sediments on a national scale. The committee,
chaired by the OW's Assistant Administrator, is composed of senior managers from all program
offices with the authority to address contaminated sediments, and a representative from each of EPA's
ten Regional offices. A Sediment Technical Committee composed of staff members from each
program and EPA Regional office was also established in 1989. The Sediment Technical Committee
provides technical input to the Sediment Steering Committee. The regular meetings of the Sediment
Technical Committee provide an EPA forum for exchanging information on research, progfam, and
field activities.
In January 1990, the Sediment Steering Committee decided to prepare an Agency-wide
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy to coordinate and focus the Agency's resources on
contaminated sediment problems. Four workgroups were established to prepare option papers on how
to improve the Agency's efforts to assess, prevent, remediate, and manage the disposal of
contaminated sediments. The option papers were distributed to other Federal agencies including the
COE, USGS, the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA), NOAA, the USFWS, U.S.
Minerals Management Service (MMS), U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), U.S.
Navy, U.S. Army, and representatives of 11 State governments with active contaminated sediment
management programs. The views of these Federal and State officials were presented to the Sediment
18
-------
Steering Committee in May 1991, when preliminary options were selected to form the basis of a draft
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy.
In September 1991, EPA's Deputy Administrator Hank Habicht was briefed on the options
selected for developing the Strategy. He suggested that EPA distribute the document in outline form
as a proposal for discussion to solicit public comments. Since March 5, 1992, EPA has distributed
over 2000 copies of the draft outline to Federal, State, and local environmental and public health
agencies, industry and industry coalition groups, national, State, and local environmental advocacy
groups, law firms, consulting firms, academia, and other interested parties. To further the outreach
effort, OW's Risk Assessment and Management E ranch, at the Deputy Administrator's request,
sponsored a series of three public forums to solicit feedback on the draft outline.
4.2 FORUMS
The forums were designed to include participants representing all parties responsible for
addressing contaminated sediments at the Federal
Extent and Severity of Contaminated Sediments,"
(U.S. EPA, 1992a). The forum consisted of panel discussions on three topics of concern: 1) the
extent of sediment contamination; 2) the severity
effects; and 3) the severity of contamination with
of contamination with respect to human health
respect to ecological effects. Forum participants
State, and locaLlevels, The first forum, "The
was held April 21 and 22, 1992, in Chicago, IL
concluded that contaminated sediments are a natk nal problem, and that both human health effects and
ecological effects have been documented at a nunber of sites.
19
-------
The second forum, "Building Alliances Among Federal, State, and Local Agencies to Address
the National Problem of Contaminated Sediments," was held May 27 and 28, 1992, in Washington,
DC (U.S. EPA, 1992a). The forum was conducted in three parts corresponding to the assessment,
prevention, and remediation elements of the draft Strategy. Forum participants concluded that: 1)
EPA should expedite development and implementation of the Strategy; 2) development of a national
inventory of contaminated sediment sites was a high priority; 3) all represented agencies would
provide data for the national inventory; 4) more attention should be devoted to nonpoint sources of
contaminants in the Strategy; 5) the addition of sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation tests to
requirements for chemical registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act was a high priority to prevent point and nonpoint
source contamination of sediments; and 6) consideration should be given to developing an integrated
Federal agency strategy for managing contaminated sediments. ,
i
The third forum, "Outreach and Public Awareness," was held June 16, 1992, in Washington,
DC (U.S. EPA, 1992a). The forum provided recommendations for effective public outreach from
four perspectives: 1) State government, 2) the regulated community, 3) environmental advocacy
groups, and 4) a public awareness group. Forum participants agreed that EPA should engage in
active dialogue with the public and be responsive to public concerns.
Proceedings of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy Forums (U.S. EPA,
1992a) was published in September 1992. The document includes summaries of all presentations and
discussions held at the three forums as well as appendices containing the draft outline of the
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy; a plan entitled "Proposed Outreach Activities to
Support Implementation of EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy"; agendas from the
20
-------
three forums; and address lists for forum participants and speakers. Over 1000 copies of the
document have been distributed.
4.3 WRITTEN COMMENTS
In the March 1992 transmittal letter releasing the draft Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy outline and announcing the three forums, EPA solicited written comments on the Strategy to
be submitted by July 15, 1992. The Agency actually received comments until August 31, 1992.
Comments were submitted by 11 Federal agencies, 17 State agencies, 4 municipal agencies, 13
business, trade, and industry organizations, 2 em ironmental consulting companies, 1 environmental
coalition representing 12 organizations, 1 govern nent coalition, and 1 law firm. The areas that
received the most comments were implementation of sediment quality criteria, consistent minimum
testing, and point versus nonpoint source control.
21
-------
5. STRATEGY FOR ASSESSING SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
i
To implement effective pollution abatement and control programs for contaminants that are
accumulating in sediments, and to take appropriate remedial action at sites with identified sediment
contamination, EPA has developed a strategy for assessing the extent and severity of sediment
contamination. The assessment strategy outlines actions that EPA will take to generate and interpret
the environmental data needed to: 1) consistently assess the ecological and human health risks of
sediment contaminants and take appropriate regulatory action under the Agency's existing statutory
authorities; and 2) identify sites where contaminated sediment remediation is needed, and rank those
sites according to the extent and severity of contamination as well as associated ecological and human
health risks. •• -—"-'•'
5.1 CONSISTENT SEDIMENT TESTING METHODS
5.1.1 Agency-wide Use of Consistent Test Methods
All EPA program offices have committed to using consistent chemical and biological test
methods to determine whether sediments are contaminated. Standard test methods will be developed
and used to provide high quality data in support of regulatory and enforcement actions for pollution
prevention, contaminated sediment remediation, and the management of dredged material disposal.
Test methods will be available to address a variety of situations ranging from screening to relatively
definitive tests of the effects of contaminated sediments on biological organisms. Test methods will
be tiered in order to promote efficient use of resources and screening of sites. EPA's Office of
22
-------
Science and Technology (OST) within OW will
of sediment monitoring, from sample collection
develop a methods manual that will cover all aspects
analytical methods to assessment techniques.
to
program offices. These methods will also includ
Sediment Tiered Testing Committee will also
5.1.2 Establishment of an Agency-wide Sediment Tiered Testing Committee
An Agency-wide Sediment Tiered Testing Committee, chaired by OST, has been established
to select chemical and biological sediment test methods to be standardized and used by all Agency
; guidance on statistical analysis of test results. The
lCA
elop a tiered testing framework; this framework will
identify a consistent set of tests that provides a complete assessment of sediment contamination within
each tier. The EPA Science Advisory Board wit
methods will be proposed by the Sediment Tierec
wide use within the testing framework.
Each EPA program office will develop guidance
tiered framework. Although the standard sedime it
each office may not always need to perform all o
review the tiered testing framework, and test
Testing Committee to be standardized for
:e for interpreting the tests conducted within the
test methods will be used by all program offices,
the tests included in a particular tier.
5.1.3 Selection of Sediment Toxicity Tests for Agency-wide Use Within the Tiered Testing
Framework
The following solid phase acute sediment
selected by the Sediment Tiered Testing Committee
toxicity tests and bioaccumulation tests have been
for Agency-wide use within the tiered testing
23
-------
framework. These test methods will be published as EPA standard methods for adoption and use by
all Agency program offices in conducting contaminated sediment assessments:
1. Ten day freshwater acute toxicity tests using Hyalella azteca (amphipod or scud) and
Chironomus tentans (midge).
2. Twenty-eight day freshwater bioaccumulation tests using Lumbriculus variegatus
(freshwater oligochaete worm).
i
3. Ten day marine and estuarine acute toxicity tests using the amphipods Ampelisca
abdita. Rhepoxvnius abronius. Hyalella azteca. Eohaustorius estuarius. and
Leptocheirus plumulosus.
4. Twenty-eight day marine bioaccumulation tests using Macoma nasuta (clam) and
Neries spp (polychaete worm).
These test species and methods were selected for standardization on the basis of consensus
reached at an Agency-wide workshop on tiered testing issues for freshwater and marine sediments
held September 16 to 18, 1992 (U.S. EPA, 1992b). Test method protocols for Agency-wide use,
including QA/QC requirements, have been published for these species (U.S. EPA, 1994a; U.S. EPA,
1994b). Protocols for sediment spiking, collection, handling, and manipulation will also be published
in fiscal year 1994. The final protocols will be reviewed by the Agency's Environmental Monitoring
Management Council before publication by the Office of Research and Development as EPA Manuals.
All OW programs will use the sediment test protocols immediately. The Office of Prevention,
24
-------
Pesticides and Toxic Substances will develop test
rules using these methods, and the Office of
Pesticide Programs will incorporate these tests into the Agency's test guidelines for pesticide
registration and reregistration. The Superfund Contract Lab Program will not use the protocols at this
tune, although the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response will consider whether to include the
standardized sediment bioassays in the Contract L ab Program in the future. The Regional
Environmental Services Division laboratories, however, which perform much of the testing for the
Superfund program, plan to use these methods as
During fiscal years 1994-1996, EPA will
protocols and toxicity identification evaluation
soon as they are available hi fiscal year 1994. As
additional test methods are developed, they may be considered by the Tiered Testing Committee for
Agency-wide use.
develop standard chronic sediment toxicity test
methods for sediment assessment.
5.1.4 Supplemental Specific Assessment Methods
In addition to the consistent set of standard sediment assessment methods included in the
Tiered Testing Framework, each EPA program office may select and use supplemental program
specific assessment methods. Each program will
develop its own guidance describing specific
regulatory actions to be taken on the basis of resi Us derived from the consistent set of standard tests,
and any supplemental methods used in tiered testing.
5.2 SEDIMENT QUALITY CRITERIA
25
-------
Pursuant to Sections 304(a)(l) and 118(c)(7)(C) of CWA, EPA is developing sediment quality
criteria for the protection of benthic organisms. These criteria are designed to be applied |where total
organic carbon (TOC) equals or exceeds 0.2% of the sediment dry weight, the primary route of
exposure is direct contact with the sediment, and the sediments are continually submerged; or there is
information indicating that equilibrium has been established between water and sediments.,
Documents presenting proposed criteria for five chemicals have been made available for public
review; EPA will publish the documents in final form after considering public comments.; The
documents present sediment quality criteria for the nonionic organic compounds acenaphthene,
dieldrin, endrin, fluoranthene, and phenanthrene. EPA will develop sediment quality criteria for
additional nonionic organic compounds using a methodology called the Equilibrium Partitioning
Approach (EqP). EPA selected this method after considering a variety of approaches that could be
used to assess sediment contamination. A technical review of the criteria and supporting science was
conducted by the Science Advisory Board (SAB) (U.S. EPA, 1992c). EPA will be presenting a
methodology for developing sediment quality criteria for metals to SAB in fiscal year 1995. EPA
will prepare sediment quality criteria for metals once the SAB review comments on the methodology
have been addressed. .
The SAB has concluded that sediment quality criteria can be used to support regulatory
decisions when the uncertainty associated with the EqP methodology is addressed. The SAB
subcommittee reviewing the sediment criteria recommended that "these criteria not be used as a stand-
alone, pass-fail value for all applications" (U.S.EPA, 1992c). Therefore, the Agency expects that
remediation programs will not use the criteria as mandatory clean-up levels, but rather as a means to/,
identify potential contamination problems and to provide focus and continuity to remediatipn efforts.
To clarify the role of sediment criteria hi a regulatory context, OST and the program offices will
26
-------
develop a users manual that fully describes how
interpreted within the context of each regulatory
use the criteria as described below. Public comment
management will be requested in the Preamble of
Rule is being revised to address requirements in
Federation v. Costle, 629 F 2nd 118 (D.C. Cir., :
fiscal year 1994 under the authority of the Marine
(MPRSA, 33 USC Sec. 1401 et seq.). In addition
criteria users manual, which will describe how sec
program, will be requested as the appendices are completed.
Great Lakes Program. The Great Lakes
sediment criteria values and uncertainty will be
p ogram. Generally,' however, program offices will-
on the uses of criteria in dredged material
he Ocean Dumping Rule. The Ocean Dumping
response to a 1980 lawsuit, National Wildlife
980); The rule will be proposed by EPA in late
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act '
, public comment on the appendices of the sediment
iment quality criteria will be applied within each
States and EPA Regions will use the sediment
criteria to assist in the ranking of contaminated se liment sites needing further assessment, to target
hot spots within an area for remediation, and to serve as a partial basis for the development of State
sediment quality standards. The Great Lakes program will also use the criteria to assist in selecting
methods for contaminated sediment remediation and determining whether a contaminated sediment site
should be added or removed from its list of designated Areas of Concern.
EPA Monitoring Programs. All EPA
will use sediment quality criteria to evaluate
toxicity bioassays and bioaccumulation tests will
risks.
programs conducting sediment monitoring activities
sediment contamination at sites. Acute and chronic
be used to evaluate ecological and human health
also
27
-------
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). State and Federal:permit
writers currently have the authority to establish water quality-based effluent limits in NPDES permits
for the protection of aquatic resources. NPDES permit limits are currently derived from State water
quality standards, which in turn are derived from EPA's water quality criteria. With the availability
of sediment quality criteria, State water quality standards and the resulting permit limits can be
derived taking into consideration either sediment or ambient water quality criteria. Site and chemical-
specific variables will be factored into the calculation of permit limits along with applicable criteria.
As State sediment quality criteria are promulgated as standards, the Office of Wastewater
Enforcement and Compliance will continue to work closely with OST to develop models that can be
used to calculate NPDES permit limits from State water quality standards.
Dredged Material Regulatory Programs. Sediment quality criteria can be integrated into
existing regulatory programs administered under MPRSA and CWA. The criteria can be Used in the
tiered testing framework established for these programs. The testing guidelines are developed by
EPA in consultation with the COE. Both agencies have agreed that EPA's sediment quality criteria,
when published, can be included in the second tier (Tier n) of required tests, when chemical analyses
are performed on dredged material. Both agencies have also agreed that any dredged material that
exhibits contaminant concentrations less than or equal to EPA's sediment quality criteria will be
required to undergo additional applicable chemical, biological, and other evaluation procedures before
a decision on disposal can be made. Additional testing of this material will be required to determine
the possible synergistic effects of contaminants present. EPA and the COE are presently developing
an approach to managing sediments that exceed EPA's sediment quality criteria. Such cases will
generally result in a more detailed assessment and may include additional sampling. As part of the
ongoing Ocean Dumping regulation revision, OW's Ocean Dumping Program plans to solicit
28
-------
comments on options for use of sediment quality criteria in the dredged material regulatory program.
A second, draft regulation revision, which will propose a specific option, will be published at a later
date. EPA has suggested that the equilibrium partitioning methodology could be used to calculate the
bioavailable fraction of contaminant in sediment al a reference site and in the dredged material itself.
Under this approach, if the bioavailable fraction o F contaminant in the dredged material is less than or
equal to the reference area concentration, the mate rial will pass the sediment quality criteria portion of
the evaluation. If the bioavailable fraction exceeds the reference area concentration, the material will
not be disposed of without special management pnctices such as capping.
OST, the Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation (OPPE), and the COE are conducting a
study of the benefits and costs associated with the
the COE's navigation dredging program. A goal
use of EPA's sediment quality criteria guidance in
of the study is to provide the best estimate of the
benefits and costs of applying sediment quality criteria to dredged material decision-making in a tiered
testing framework, both as strict pass/fail numbers and as decision criteria to be used within
established statistical confidence limits.
Act
Resource Conservation and Recovery
RCRA Corrective Action Program will use the
specific decisions about remediation at hazardous
proposed Corrective Action regulation which lists
trigger a study of remedial alternatives. In sel
standards. At some facilities, technical feasibilitj
alternatives could result in clean-up levels that di
lectmg
(RCRA) Corrective Action Program. The
sediment criteria as one of the factors in making site-
waste facilities. The Office of Solid Waste has a
action levels of contaminants that may be used to
remedies, the action levels may become clean-up
and long- and short- term effectiveness of
from the action levels. If the final corrective
differ
29
-------
action regulations define specific action levels, sediment criteria will be one of the factors used in
setting action levels for remediation projects.
Superfund (CERCLA) Program. The Superfund program intends to use sediment quality
criteria as one of the factors to assess CERCLA sites that have contaminated sediments if there is
reason to suspect potentially significant contamination of sediments at the Remedial Investigation stage
of analysis. The assessment is used to set clean-up targets for remediation pursued under the
authority of CERCLA and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).
5.3 NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SITES WITH SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
i
In accordance with the requirements of Title V of WRDA, OST will conduct a comprehensive
i
national survey of data regarding sediment quality in the United States, hereafter referred to as the
i
Site Inventory. OST will compile all available information currently contained in national and
regional computer databases on the quantity, chemical and physical composition, and geographic
location of pollutants in sediment. OST will complete a report to Congress on the Site Inventory in
1995. The Site Inventory will be maintained and updated on a regular basis by OST so that it can be
used to assess trends hi both sediment quality and the effectiveness of existing regulatory programs at
the Federal, State, and local levels. The design of the Site Inventory is described in Framework for
the Development of the National Sediment Inventory (U.S. EPA, 1994).
5.3.1 Purpose of the Site Inventory
30
-------
obtain the best possible current assessment of the
sediments nationwide; 2) distinguish those areas
from those that are not contaminated; and 3)
effects to human health or the environment. Once
ill target them for appropriate action.
EPA is developing the Site Inventory to: 1
extent and severity of the problem of contaminated
that may be contaminated and need further assessment
identify areas that are causing high risks or severe
hese areas are identified, Agency program offices
5.3.2 Scope of the Site Inventory
The Site Inventory developed by EPA wil contain detailed sediment quality data from both
freshwater and marine ecosystems nationwide. Tl e Site Inventory will be developed in two phases.
During the first two year phase, EPA will compile and evaluate a database that will include as much
data as possible from existing national and regional computer-readable databases. The inventory will
include available data on contaminant concentrations in all types of sediments, including those from
rivers, lakes, and estuaries, and from all geographical areas. During the second phase of inventory
die, and
development, EPA will actively solicit, compile
contaminated sediment sites.
1 evaluate detailed State data describing
5.3.3 EPA Program Office Uses of the Site Inventory
The following EPA program offices intend to use data contained in the Site Inventory for the
assessment, pollution prevention, remediation, and dredged material management activities identified
below.
31
-------
Office of Air and Radiation (OAR). Atmospheric deposition may be an important source of
sediment contamination. OAR intends to use the Site Inventory to evaluate the contribution of
i
atmospheric deposition to sediment quality problems. The Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of
1990 include specific sections to increase protection of aquatic systems from the impacts of
atmospheric deposition. Section 112(c)(6) requires EPA to list source categories accounting for 90%
I
of the aggregate emissions of each of seven critical pollutants by 1995. The seven pollutants are
alkylated lead compounds, polycyclic organic matter, hexachlorobenzene, mercury, polychlorinated
biphenyls, 2,3,7,8-TCDD, and 2,3,7,8-TCDF. Emissions standards are to be promulgated^for the
listed categories by the year 2000, assuring regulation of these sources of atmospheric contamination
of waterbodies.
Section 112(m) requires EPA, hi cooperation with NOAA, to conduct extensive monitoring
and research to identify and assess the extent of atmospheric deposition of hazardous air pollutants for
the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, Lake Champlain, and coastal waters. A report to Congress was
required by November 1993 and biennially thereafter to include, for those waters, an assessment of
the relative atmospheric contribution to total loadings, an assessment of the environmental and human
health effects attributable to atmospheric deposition, and a description of any regulatory revisions
necessary to assure adequate protection. Additional regulations found to be necessary are to be
promulgated by November 1995. •
Once atmospheric pollutants have been identified as sources of sediment contaminants present
in the Site Inventory, these data will be referred to the Great Waters Core Project Management
Group, which was formed to develop the implementation plan for Section 112(m). The Core Group
will review the existing CAA regulations to evaluate their adequacy for control of atmospherically
32
-------
deposited sediment contaminants. Further emissions standards or control measures will be
promulgated as necessary and appropriate.
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (OERR). OERR intends to identify sites with
contaminated sediments so that they can be added
contamination sites identified in the inventory can
:o the Site Inventory. In turn, high priority
become candidates for assessment under CERGLA.
This assessment may include evaluation with the I [azard Ranking System, which is used to identify
sites that may warrant long-term (and often high cost) clean-up under the Superfund program.
Office of Enforcement (OE). OE intends to use the Site Inventory to target areas and
industries for inspection, development of injunctive relief, and supplemental enforcement projects.
The Site Inventory can also be used to target sites
where known sources of sediment contamination
can be linked with ecological and human health effects. Where possible, enforcement actions will be
initiated to remediate severely contaminated sites.
remediation of contaminated sediments is described in detail in Section 8.
other
Office of Federal Activities (OFA). OFA
Source Inventory (discussed in Section 5.4), and
target issues addressed during environmental reviews
Policy Act (NEPA) process. OFA will use the Si
quality and potential environmental issues associated
areas requiring programmatic, long-term and/or
Available statutory authority for enforcement and
Site
multi
, within OE, intends to use the Site Inventory,
available data on sediment contamination to
conducted as part of the National Environmental
Inventory to evaluate the status of sediment
with current Federal projects, and to identify
i-agency NEPA analysis.
33
-------
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP). OPP intends to use the Site Inventory to identify
currently registered pesticides that are present in high concentrations at sites nationwide. OPP will
evaluate whether special review of these pesticides should be undertaken, whether sediment toxicity
testing must be required to support registration of additional uses or formulations of these chemicals,
and whether special labeling or use restrictions should be required. i
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). OPPT intends to use the Site! Inventory
to identify existing chemicals regulated under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that occur in
areas of sediment contamination. OPPT will evaluate these chemicals for further testing. OPPT will
i
also use the Site Inventory to identify possible violations of TSCA regulations. OPPT will investigate
the sources of contaminants occurring at inventory sites and determine whether enforcement actions
should be initiated.
i
Office of Science and Technology (OST). OST intends to use the Site Inventory to target
chemicals of concern for sediment criteria development and to evaluate the effectiveness of i
i
technology-based effluent guidelines, water quality-based permit limits, and total maximum daily
loads.
i
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE). OWPE intends to use the Site Inventory
to identify sites where hazardous waste facilities may be contributing contaminants to sediment. The
information in the inventory will be used to augment current approaches for identifying sites for
investigation and possible remediation.
34
-------
Office of Wastewater Management (O
>WM).
OWM intends to use the Site Inventory to
assess the extent and severity of sediment contamination caused by point source discharges and to
identify the pollutants causing sediment toxicity. This analysis will contribute to the identification of
watersheds where permitting and enforcement efforts to protect sediment quality will be focused. In
some cases, the Site Inventory and modelling may
limits are causing an impact on the sediment or th it there is a need to develop additional permit limits
specifically for the purpose of protecting sediment
show that violations of water quality-based permit
quality.
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds (OWOW). OWOW intends to use the Site
Inventory data to help support its programs in nor point source control, estuarine management, and
dredged material management. OWOW's Assessment and Watershed Protection Division (AWPD)
intends to use the Site Inventory to help identify impaired waters for the National Water Quality
Inventory 305(b) reports. States intend to use the
for development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), and for evaluation of TMDL
effectiveness. AWPD also intends to use the Site
Inventory to assist State nonpoint source control
programs in updating their lists of waterbodies in iced of NFS management practices, including
control of sediment contaminants entering surface
Site Inventory to assist in developing a list of sites
waters from nonpoint sources.
The Oceans and Goastal Protection Division (OCPD) intends to use the Site Inventory in
evaluating the extent and severity of sediment contamination in the Nation's estuaries. If the Site
Inventory includes contaminated sites located in estuaries that are part of the National Estuary
Program (NEP), during review of NEP deliverables, OCPD will recommend that Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs) for those estuaries include action plans for addressing
contaminated sediment.
35
-------
The Site Inventory may also be used by OCPD, the Wetlands Division, and the EPA Regions
i
to implement the disposal program for dredged material hi association with the COE. The Site
Inventory may be used to supplement information gathered for Tier I dredged material evaluations to
determine whether additional chemical, physical, and biological testing is necessary. The Site
Inventory may also be used to help identify possible chemicals of concern in dredged material and to
provide data for the development of disposal site monitoring plans. The Site Inventory could be used
i
to generate information on the impact of sediment contamination on wetlands functions as well.
4 ;
5.3.4 Evaluation of Data Included in the Site Inventory
EPA intends to develop a "weight-of-evidence" approach based on sediment chemistry and
biological effects data for evaluating sites described hi the inventory. OST will use this approach to
rank all sites in the inventory as having known or suspected contamination problems. To be
identified as a site of known contamination, biological effects of contaminants at the site must be
documented. Depending on the availability of data, the weight-of-evidence approach will employ one
or a combination of the following assessment methods to determine whether identified threshold
chemical concentration levels or biological effects levels are exceeded at a site: sediment quality
criteria using equilibrium partitioning, sediment quality triad, apparent effects threshold, effects
ranges derived by Long and Morgan (1990), or Threshold Effects Level or Probable Effects Level
(MacDonald, 1993).
5.4 NATIONAL INVENTORY OF SOURCES OF SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
36
-------
In fiscal year 1994, OST will develop an
where sediment contamination may occur at leve
undertake sediment monitoring at those sites; 2)
inventory of sources of sediment contamination,
hereafter referred to as the Source Inventory. T. le Source Inventory will be useful to: 1) identify sites
s adverse to human health and the environment and
arget pollution prevention and source control
activities by identifying industrial categories contributing sediment contaminants to surface waters; 3)
select industries for the development of effluent guidelines on the basis of quantities of toxic sediment
contaminants discharged; and 4) target NPDES permitting and enforcement actions to protect
sediment quality. The Source Inventory, used in conjunction with the Site Inventory and in some
cases additional monitoring data, should allow determinations to be made about whether sites are
problematic due to past environmental abuses or
update the Source Inventory every two years.
as the result of ongoing contamination. OST will
5.4.1 Approach to Developing the Source Inventory
EPA intends to undertake the following t isks to develop the Source Inventory:
1. Search databases containing the results of sediment monitoring studies to develop a list
of contaminants found in sedimei t. The following databases will be used to compile
the initial list of sediment contaminants: 1) 1987 EPA Sediment Quality Study (Lyman
et al., 1987); 2) EPA Region IV/VI Coastal Contaminated Sediment Site Inventory
(U.S. EPA, 1992d and 1993c); 3p NOAA National Status and Trends (NS&T)
monitoring data; 4) Puget Sound
Study data; 5) STORET (OW's Storage and
Retrieval system) sediment observations; 6) Ocean Data Evaluation System (ODES)
37
-------
sediment observations; 7) EPA. Region IX Dredged Material Tracking System
(DMATS); and 8) EPA Region X Dredged Analysis Information System (DAIS).
I
2. Identify databases containing information on the sources of the contaminants and
amounts discharged. The following databases will be used to compile the initial list of
sources of sediment contaminants: 1) EPA Effluent Guidelines Industry Status Sheets
database; 2) NPDES Permit Compliance System; 3) Toxics Release Inventory; 4)
National Urban Runoff data in STORET; 5) atmospheric deposition data; and 6)
pesticides data.
3. Identify those contaminants that can be linked to sources and that are likely to be
found in sediments.
4. Determine loadings of identified sediment contaminants according to standard
industrial classification codes (Office of Management and Budget, 1987).
5. Evaluate potential contaminants of concern using a fate/toxicity index. The index will
be calculated on the basis of: 1) contaminant propensity to bind to sediment; 2)
contaminant persistence in the environment; 3) aquatic life toxicity assessed using
NOAA effects ranges, apparent effects thresholds, or aquatic life sediment;criteria
i
derived using the equilibrium partitioning method; and 4) human health toxicity
(systemic toxicity and carcinogenicity) assessed using current Integrated Risk
Information System (IRIS) reference doses, IRIS cancer potency slopes, orj
38
-------
mammalian LD^ (lethal dose) data
normalized using the fate/toxicity
6.
identify waterbodies potentially ai
:. Quantities of contaminants released will be
index.
Identify point and nonpoint sourc ;s of the contaminants (where data are available) and
evaluate to determine chemicals, geographic areas, and industrial categories of
concern based on the potential for sediment contamination. EPA also intends to
risk from sediment contamination by calculating the
sum of normalized quantities of contaminants released into each waterbody.
5.4.1. EPA anticipates the likelihood that signifi
5.4.2 Uses of the Source Inventory
Monitoring. The methodology used to develop the Source Inventory is described in Section
;ant sediment contaminant sources will be located
where no ambient sediment quality data exist. The Source Inventory can be used to provide
information to target sites for sediment monitoring. Knowledge of existing sources of sediment
contamination can help distinguish between sites that have been contaminated by historical sources
and sites that are currently being contaminated by
when identifying sources of impairment to rivers,
reports. This information can also assist EPA an 1 the States in determining appropriate remediation
activities. The presence of contaminated sediments at sites without current or historical sources
nearby may indicate potential illegal dumping activities.
active sources. This information is useful to States
lakes, and estuaries for their CWA Section 305(b)
39
-------
Pollution Prevention. OPPT intends to use the Source Inventory to identify reductions in
sediment contaminant discharge that can be achieved through the voluntary 33/50 Program, which
encourages industries to reduce the generation of toxic wastes.
Effluent Guidelines Development. Under Sections 301, 304, 306, and 307 of the CWA,
OST promulgates technology-based national effluent limitations guidelines that control the discharge
of toxic chemicals and other pollutants by categories of industrial dischargers. OST selects industries
for promulgation of new and revised effluent limitations guidelines based on environmental factors
i
and utility to states and POTWs. OST will include the Source Inventory among the environmental
data sources it will use in the selection process. Accordingly, degradation of the sediment
environment may be considered in the selection of industries for the development of new or revised
i
effluent limitations guidelines. The effluent limitations guidelines process involves developing and
evaluating treatment options reflecting the Best Available Technology Economically Achievable
(BAT), Best Conventional Technology (BCT), and New Source Performance Standards and
Pretreatment Standards for indirect dischargers. The Source Inventory can be used in technology
option development and selection by providing information on chemicals causing the greatest risk to
aquatic life and human health. In addition, the Source Inventory data can be used in the
environmental assessment of regulatory options.
Total Maximum Daily Loads. Section 303(d) of CWA establishes the TMDL program to
allow for water quality-based controls to be implemented when technology-based controls are
inadequate to meet water quality standards. State and EPA authorities begin the TMDL process by
i
selecting waterbodies which are water quality limited, targeting high priority waterbodies for TMDL
development, and assessing pollutant sources. The Source Inventory can provide EPA and States with
40 !
-------
a screening tool to identify contaminant sources and possibly distinguish between point source and
nonpoint source loadings. Additionally, when set
standards, the Source Inventory, in conjunction with the Site Inventory, can be used to identify
waterbodies which may not attain these standards
guidance can be used hi TMDL studies to derive
iment quality standards exist in State water quality
State authorities could then target these
waterbodies for further assessment and possible 1MDL development. Sediment quality criteria and
oading targets for nonpoint sources that are
protective of sediment quality. In some waterbodies, sediment contamination has been caused by
contaminated sediment washing into the waterbody. EPA will encourage, but cannot require, States
to modify or develop their own erosion and sediment control legislation to include consideration of
toxics.
Permitting. Through the NPDES permit ing program, administered by OWM, EPA and
State regulatory authorities establish water quality-based pollutant concentration limits on the effluent
of individual discharge facilities and monitor to ensure compliance with those limits. The Source
Inventory will be used, in conjunction with the Site Inventory, as a screening tool to identify current
point and nonpoint sources of contaminants nearby or upstream from sediment with elevated pollutant
levels. Permit issuing authorities can then target
assessment and possibly for development of watei
EPA headquarters may also use the Source and S
watersheds and specific facilities for further
quality-based permit limits to protect the sediment.
ite Inventories to identify facilities where procedures
for developing water quality-based permit limits for sediment quality could be demonstrated, to
identify pollutants contributing to sediment quality problems nationwide, and to evaluate whether
current point source permit limits are sufficiently protective of human health and the environment.
41
-------
Enforcement. The Division of Water Enforcement (DWE) within OE is currently planning a
water quality initiative to identify sources contributing pollutants to waterbodies for which a State has
issued water quality advisories against fish consumption or swimming because of excess loadings of
the pollutants. Frequently, the advisories are a result of sediment contamination. The Source
Inventory can assist DWE by providing information on nearby or upstream dischargers of potential
sediment contaminants. The Source Inventory could be used to develop the initial list of likely
(
pollutant sources for a given watershed. Further, the inventory can provide data on specific
chemicals most likely to cause adverse environmental impact. This could provide DWE with
l
information necessary to identify the discharges or industrial activities that are contributing to the
water quality advisory. This information in turn could support enforcement actions that wpuld
compel a facility to cease its damaging activities.
Other Potential Uses. Additional program offices within OW may use the Source Inventory
to support their activities. For example, OWOW identifies priority watersheds for nonpoiht source
control strategies and manages the NEP. OCPD, within OWOW, can target waterbodies where
sediment is contaminated for management under its program. Knowledge of current sources of
sediment contaminants could help both the States and EPA to determine point source and nonpoint
source pollutant contributions to waterbodies and to identify potentially significant contaminant
sources. The Source Inventory could help OST identify chemicals that are potentially most toxic and
are discharged in the greatest amounts, and thus guide the development of sediment quality criteria.
42
-------
assess aquatic sediment quality. EPA will comply
5.5 INCREASE IN SEDIMENT MONITORING IN WATER QUALITY MONITORING
PROGRAMS
Section 503 of WRDA requires EPA to establish a comprehensive and continuing program to
with this requirement by increasing sediment
monitoring in the Agency's water quality monitoring programs. EPA intends to takethe following
actions to establish the Agency's sediment monitoring program.
1. The Office of Research and Develbpment
Program (EMAP) intends to gathei
quality at EMAP sampling stations
2. OW intends to develop a sediment
's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
chemical and biological data describing sediment
monitoring program to be implemented as part of
its overall monitoring program framework. The monitoring framework describes how
'monitoring programs conducted by
Agencies will be coordinated.
3.
OW intends to include provisions
framework which will be
Monitoring Water Quality (ITFM)
reached with other Federal, State,
sediment monitoring protocols,
appropriate information system liri
EPA Headquarters*, EPA Regions, and State
or sediment monitoring in the national monitoring
develope i by the Intergovernmental Task Force on
Through this framework agreements should be
and local agencies concerning incorporation of
sediment monitoring QA/QC procedures, and
cages into monitoring programs.
43
-------
4. OW and the Office of Information Resources Management shall assure that the
capability to store and use sediment data is enhanced as part of the ongoing
modernization of the Agency's water quality data systems (STORET, BIOS, and
ODES). OW intends to work with the EPA Regions to ensure that Regional databases
developed for the purpose of archiving and analyzing sediment information are
compatible with the Agency's national databases.
5. EPA intends to allocate additional resources for the purpose of sediment monitoring if
funds are appropriated for monitoring activities authorized under WRDA ;of CWA.
5.6 ASSESSMENT OF ATMOSPHERIC DEPOSITION OF SEDIMENT
CONTAMINANTS i
As described above in this strategy document, under Section 112(m) of the CAA, EPA is
undertaking a program to assess the effects of hazardous air pollutants on the Great Lakes, Lake
Champlain, the Chesapeake Bay, and near-coastal waters. This program is referred to as the "Great
Water Bodies Study." As part of this study, EPA will monitor the air deposition of toxics, monitor
tissue levels of airborne toxics in aquatic organisms, and develop models of contaminant transport.
An initial report to Congress on this program was completed hi May 1994. Subsequent reports to
Congress on the Great Water Bodies Program are required every two years thereafter. The reports
will address contribution of air pollutants to water pollution, sources of pollutants, and whether they
contribute to violations of water quality standards. OST will incorporate these results into the Source
and Site Inventories.
44
-------
5.7 COORDINATION OF ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES WITH OTHER FEDERAL
AGENCIES
EPA will coordinate its sediment assessment activities with the USGS and other Federal and
State agencies through the ITFM. EPA will also coordinate its sediment assessment activities with the
USGS, COB, BLM, USFS, TVA, USDA, and other agencies participating in the Federal Interagency
Sedimentation Project through the National Contaminated Sediment Task Force required under
WRDA.
45
-------
6. STRATEGY FOR PREVENTING SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION
Implementation of an effective program to prevent sediment contamination from occurring is
the most environmentally protective and, in most cases, cost-effective way to address the problem.
EPA's current statutory and regulatory authority is adequate to prevent many sediment contaminants
from being released to the environment. The strategy for preventing sediment contamination
describes the actions that EPA program offices will take under a number of different statutes,
including EDFRA, TSCA, RCRA, CAA, and CWA to prevent sediment contamination.
I
6.1 OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS ACTIONS
6.1.1 Control of Sediment Contaminants Regulated Under FIFRA
FIFRA gives EPA the authority to ban or restrict the use of pesticides that have the potential
i
to contaminate sediments, if the risks to nontarget organisms are judged to be unreasonably. In
making decisions on pesticides, FIFRA requires EPA to consider economic, social, and environmental
costs and benefits. Sediment toxicity is not currently addressed in routine test procedures and risk
assessments for pesticide registration, reregistration, and special review. ;
6.1.2 OPP Use of the Site Inventory
OPP intends to use the Site Inventory developed by OW to develop a list of pesticides that are
posing risks or causing harmful effects on a national scale. OPP intends to evaluate these pesticides
to determine whether appropriate regulatory action should be taken. •
46
-------
6.1.3 Memorandum of Agreement with USGS
;ement between OPP and the USGS's National
The NAWQA program is integrating with other
river basins and aquifer systems. Information will
.t the start of this program, data collection is
OPP has played an active part in the USGS
had technical input, and is currently working on
requires information from registrants on adverse
of finalizing a rule concerning collection of these
of FIFRA). OPP has set up a special process foi
There is currently a Memorandum of Agn
Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program.
programs the results from monitoring most major
be provided at the regional and national scales. /
focusing on pesticides and nutrients in sediment.
NAWQA Program Federal Advisory Council, has
several joint USGS/OPP publications.
6.1.4 Pesticide Incident Reports
OPP uses voluntary pesticide incident reports made by citizens, farmers, and pesticide
registrants to obtain information on use, misuse, md problems associated with pesticides. OPP also
rffects of pesticides. OPP is currently in the process
adverse effect data (required under Section 6(a)(2)
cataloging, sorting, processing, and using both the
voluntary reports and the required registrant adverse effects reports hi the regulatory program. OPP
will continue to investigate information concerning sediment contamination in these incident reports
on a case-by-case basis. If convincing cause-effect
ecological or human health effects are available,
then special review of the chemicals causing the
adverse effects, or other appropriate regulatory action, may be undertaken by OPP.
: data on pesticides in sediment and adverse
47
-------
6.1.5 Development of Technical Guidance Documents for Evaluation of Pesticide Risks
OPP intends to continue work to develop technical guidance documents on the evaluation of
pesticide risks, and evaluation of pesticides to determine their potential to run off into surface waiters,
leach into surface waters, or accumulate in sediment.
6.1.6 Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group Recommendations !
In 1990, the Conservation Foundation's program on Environmental Dispute Resolution made
recommendations on aquatic issues for the Agency's consideration. One topic of the discussions of
the Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group (AEDG) was the evaluation of sediment toxicity. AEDG
recommended that tests of sediment toxicity to aquatic organisms be considered for pesticides that are
likely to sorb to sediment. The following scheme, proposed for EPA consideration, integrated
sediment testing with FIFRA testing tiers (World Wildlife Fund, 1992):
Tier I: Equilibrium partitioning calculations to estimate chemical concentrations in porewater
and sediment.
Tier It: Acute porewater and whole sediment toxicity tests with spiked sediment.
Tier HI: Chronic whole sediment toxicity tests with spiked sediment.
Tier IV: Benthic community structure, colonization rate, laboratory toxicity tests with field
collected sediment, and in-situ sediment toxicity testing within a mesocosm.
Although sediment toxicity testing can be required as a special test pesticides do not routinely
address potential ecological and human health effects of sediment contamination. OPP therefore
48
-------
intends to develop a strategy to systematically eva uate
the registration and use of pesticides. OPP intends
strategy for evaluating the potential for pesticide
the risk of sediment contamination posed by
s to propose the following actions as part of its
contamination of sediments.
2.
1. OPP intends to revise both the regulatory requirements for registration of pesticides at
40 CFR Part 158 and Subdivision
incorporate the EPA standard acui
E of the Pesticide Assessment Guidelines to
ite wh
whole sediment bioassay methods and spiking
protocols developed by the Agency-wide Sediment Tiered Testing Committee. OPP
intends to develop Standard Evalu ition Procedures for the sediment toxicity tests and
submit them for Science Advisory
Panel review. OW will provide OPP with
supporting information regarding sensitivity of species and appropriateness of life
stages used.
When chronic sediment toxicity tests are developed by the Agency-wide Sediment
Tiered Testing Committee, OPP intends to revise both 40 CFR Part 158 and
Subdivision E of the Pesticide Assessment Guidelines to incorporate these methods
and protocols. OPP intends to de
and submit them to the Science Advisory Panel for review.
3. OPP intends to routinely require aquatic fate tests to support many terrestrial uses of
pesticides that persist or bioaccumulate.
4. OPP is evaluating the feasibility 01
Guidelines a new test requirement
elop Standard Evaluation Procedures for these tests
integrating into the Pesticide Assessment
that combines protocols for two existing tests, the
49
-------
water column monitoring test ("Aquatic Field Dissipation Test") and the aquatic life
tissue monitoring study ("Accumulation in Aquatic Non-Target Organisms").
Regulatory requirements for routinely conducting this new test will be proposed.
5. OPP intends to develop better information for distribution to the public on brop
management practices and Integrated Pest Management practices that will most
effectively reduce the levels of toxic pesticide contaminants in sediment. OPP will
work with OW's nonpoint source program to reduce the levels of toxic peslicides in
sediment by providing information on best management practices and integrated pest
management to fanners.
6. OPP intends to develop criteria for pesticide residues in sediments to be usjed as one
of several screening tools for the determination of "Reduced Risks" (i.e., ''Safer")
pesticides. This would allow for expedited registration of chemicals that fit into die
category and possibly displace use of pesticides that are more harmful to human and
ecological health.
7. OPP intends to investigate the feasibility of using the OPPT screening method that
uses parameters such as chemical properties, environmental fate, hazard, and exposure
for identifying those chemicals which pose a greater risk.
6.2 OFFICE OF POLLUTION PREVENTION AND TOXICS SUBSTANCES
50
-------
EPA has authority under TSCA to regula e new and existing chemicals that have the potential
to contaminate sediments, if the resulting ecological or human health risks are judged to be
unreasonable. The Office of Prevention, Pesticid
5 of TSCA, assessment of environmental fate and
is and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) is committed to a
program that will incorporate into routine chemic il review processes, performed under Sections 4 and
effects of toxic chemicals that could potentially
contribute to sediment contamination. EPA believes that OPPT can contribute most significantly to
the management of contaminated sediment through its pollution prevention efforts. OPPT therefore
intends to take the following actions to prevent sediment contamination:
1.
OPPT intends to incorporate the «
sediment bioaccumulation test methods
into the OPPTS test guidelines.
developed by the Tiered Testing
OPPTS test guidelines as well.
2.
acute whole sediment toxicity test methods and
developed by the Tiered Testing Committee
When chronic whole sediment test methods are
Committee, OPPT will incorporate them into the
OPPT intends to use the Site Inventory and the Source Inventory to select chemicals
for review. OPPT intends to devslop, and update on a regular basis, a list of
sediment contaminants to be evaluated for review. This list will include all chemicals
regulated under TSCA that have been identified to exceed toxic threshold
concentration levels at locations included in the Site Inventory. As additional sites are
included in the inventory, the list
of chemicals for review will be updated. OPPT
intends to use the Source Inventory database (compilations of the Toxic Releases
Inventory database, the Office of
Water Effluent Guidelines database, and the Office
51
-------
of Water Permit Compliance System database) to evaluate the sources of contaminants
on the list of chemicals for review.
3. Through the New Chemicals Program, OPPT can ban or otherwise regulate !the
production of chemicals that could contribute to sediment contamination and!result in
unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. OPPT can and has prevented
pollution from occurring. OPPT intends to use the New Chemicals Program to
!
engage the chemical industry in dialogues on the redesign of chemicals to reduce both
bioavailability and partitioning of toxic chemicals to sediment. OPPT intends to draft
guidelines and implement a policy encouraging the design of new chemicals |having
the following characteristics: molecular weight greater than 1000 grams per imole to
prevent adsorption through biological membranes; large cross-sectional diameters to
prevent movement through cell membranes; functional groups embedded within the
molecule to enhance rapid transformation to low toxicity products; and log ^w
(octanol-water partition coefficient) values greater than 8 to prevent effects at
saturation or less than 3.5 to avoid partitioning to sediment.
4. OPPT is working on an assessment of a cluster of chemicals that may be persistent
bioaccumulators. Chemicals that are persistent bioaccumulators are also likely to
accumulate in sediments. To the extent that this cluster, or elements thereof, appear
to pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment, OPPT intends to
i
engage industry hi discussions to mitigate this risk through voluntary pollution
prevention measures.
52
-------
5.
6.
Under the New Chemicals Program, OPPT has developed an exposure based review
!
(EBR) policy. In this program environmental fate and effects tests (e.g., sediment
toxicity tests) may be triggered i
certain criteria are met in OPPT's initial review.
Data gathered in this way will ir iprove the OPPT risk evaluation and management
processes. OPPT intends to revise this policy to include criteria triggering
requirements for sediment toxici y testing.
Staff in OPPT's Exposure Asses iment Branch (EAB) have worked with EPA's Region
V office to develop a testing strategy to assess the environmental risks associated with
biocides used to prevent zebra Brussels from fouling water pipes. While the final
report of this project is not available, it has been determined that some biocides do not
degrade well and therefore can
:rsist in sediment. Region V plans to severely
restrict the use of this group of chemical biocides. Some other chemicals used as
surfactants or wetting agents in biocides have been identified as potential risk
concerns. Region V intends to propose language for paper mill permits limiting the
amount of these chemicals used.
plans for the use of different surfactants that will degrade in the environment.
7. OPPT is working with a number
IE addition, permitees may be required to submit
of industry trade associations to provide product
toxicity testing information and guidance to their member companies. OPPT and
other program offices are assisting members of the Ecological and Toxicological
Association of the Dyestuffs Manufacturing Industry in developing a pollution
prevention program to record po
lution prevention achievements, further reduce waste
generation, and continue to realize the benefits of pollution prevention in the dye
53
-------
industry. As part of this pollution prevention program, OPPT intends to specifically
document the actions that the dye industry can take to reduce the generation of waste
products that concentrate in sediment. The Site and Source Inventories may be used
!
to produce an initial list of toxic waste products that may be present in sediment.
8. Li evaluating new chemical registrations, OPPT intends to use the Site and Source
Inventories to assist in identifying geographical areas where additional chemical
discharges may lead to unacceptable levels of sediment contamination.
i
6.3 OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE ACTIONS
OECA has issued two policies related to the use of pollution prevention conditions in EPA
enforcement settlements. These two policies are: 1) the Policy on the Use of Supplemental
Enforcement Projects hi EPA Settlements (issued February 12, 1991); and 2) the Policy on the
Inclusion of Pollution Prevention Conditions in Enforcement Settlements (issued February 25, 1991).
These policies are designed to help reduce or eliminate root causes of noncompliance with permits by
commuting penalties, through enforceable agreements, if appropriate source recycling and source
reduction activities are undertaken. OECA will aggressively apply both of these policies to negotiate
settlements that will reduce sediment contamination. All settlements will emphasize reductions over
and above what is required to return to compliance with the requirements of law. Settlements will
also emphasize actions which will enhance the prospects for long-term or continuous compliance.
OECA intends to take the following actions to implement programs to reduce sources of sediment
contamination:
54
-------
1.-..-, OE intends to continue to implement pollution prevent*
Office of Air Quality Planning and
programs
2. Under these initiatives the OE intends
teams to identify and evaluate the
to reduce sediment contamination,
3. OE intends to also monitor respondent
assure compliance with all settlement
contamination.
4. OE intends to evaluate and report
conditions related to sediment contaminants
5. ; OE intends tQ develop technical
the EPA Regions in enforcement
contamination.
ion initiatives with the OPPTS,
Standards, NPDES, and RCRA compliance
to provide technical support to EPA negotiation
feasibility of specific pollution prevention conditions
or defendant activities in cases pursued and
conditions related to prevention of sediment
on the effectiveness of the pollution prevention
that are obtained in the settlements.
pollution prevention guidance that can be used to train
actions that can be taken to reduce sediment
6. An executive order signed on Aujust 3, 1993 requires Federal facilities to halve their
toxic emissions by 1999 and to begin reporting to the public any release of toxic
pollutants. EPA will monitor compliance with the executive order.
55
-------
7. STRATEGY FOR ABATING AND CONTROLLING SOURCES OF SEDIMENT
CONTAMINATION \
The goal of CWA is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of
the Nation's waters. NPDES permits are the primary means for preventing the discharge of
pollutants into water from point sources. Under Sections 301, 304, 306, and 307 of CWA, EPA has
set minimum, technology-based requirements for municipal dischargers (e.g., primary and secondary
treatment standards) and sets similar requirements for industrial dischargers (e.g., best available
technology economically achievable and pretreatment standards for existing sources). Under Section
301 of CWA, NPDES permits must also include additional limits as necessary to achieve applicable
water quality standards.
7.1 TECHNOLOGY-BASED CONTROLS FOR POINT SOURCES '.
To date EPA has promulgated best available technology (BAT) effluent guidelines for 40
industrial categories. Over one billion pounds of the 126 priority pollutants are removed Annually as
a result of these requirements. EPA has not directly considered sediment contamination in developing
these guidelines; however, the program has reduced loadings of toxicants to both water arid sediment.
i
In addition to developing these nationally applicable effluent limitations, EPA sets technology-based
limitations in permits on a site-specific basis using Best Professional Judgment. Effluent guidelines
are also the basis for local pretreatment programs, which require toxics controls on industries
discharging into municipal sewage treatment plants. In 1986, it was estimated that 37 percent of the
toxic industrial compounds that entered surface waters had passed through sewage treatment plants.
As a result of this finding, EPA identified the 1500 municipal sewage treatment plants that handle the
56
-------
these
plants to develop and enforce appropriate
system. An estimated 12,000 significant industrial
or more of the effluent guideline categorical
one
majority of industrial wastewater. EPA required
effluent limits for industries discharging into then-
users in pretreatment cities are required to meet
standards.
Under Section 304(m) of CWA, EPA is required to publish a biennial Plan that establishes a
schedule for the annual review and revision of pro nulgated effluent guidelines and identifies
categories of sources discharging toxic and nonconventional pollutants for which guidelines have not
yet been published. Following publication of the first such Effluent Guidelines Plan in 1990, the
Natural Resources Defense Council and Public Citizen Inc. filed suit, claiming that the Plan did not
fulfill the requirements of Section 304(m). In a Consent Decree dated January 31, 1992, EPA agreed
to promulgate 19 new and revised effluent limitati
T
ms guidelines over an 11 year period. Twelve of
the industries for rulemaking have been selected based on need and potential for risk reduction. The
remaining 9 must be selected beginning in 1995. The Agency agreed to study these industries in the
intervening tune and to evaluate the need and risks involved before making the selections.
EPA's effluent guidelines program has evaluated risk as one criterion used to select industrial
categories for guidelines development. In the next
Effluent Guidelines Plan, the Agency intends to
propose adding sediment contamination as a specific factor in the selection of these industrial
categories. The Source Inventory would be used for this purpose. The inclusion of sediment
contamination as a specific evaluation factor would increase the potential for industries discharging
sediment contaminants to be the subject of new or
revised effluent limitations guidelines. This would
ensure that the Agency will consider sediment con aminants in establishing guidelines in the future.
Once an industry has been selected for development or revision of guidelines, it will take a minimum
57
-------
of 5 years to promulgate the rule. Guidelines are not self-implementing, but only become binding
when implemented hi permits, so 5 to 10 years is the minimum tune period to be expected for
implementation of new technology-based NPDES permit limitations. ;
7.2 WATER QUALITY-BASED CONTROLS FOR POINT SOURCES
Although in many cases past discharges are partly responsible for today's contaminated
sediment problem, sediment quality problems are not solely the legacy of past discharges.i Monitoring
and assessment data compiled by Federal, State, local, and private sources indicate that currently
discharging sources do contribute to sediment contamination. On the States' CWA Section 304(1) lists
of waterbodies that will not meet water quality standards for toxics because of point source
discharges, 11 waterbodies were listed because an active point source was entirely or substantially
contributing to or causing sediment contamination and hence impairing uses of the waters. The point
sources of sediment contaminants identified by States under Section 304(1) included Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTWs), power plant Outfalls, and industrial discharges. EPA studies shave
documented additional cases of sediment contamination from stormwater discharges, combined sewer
overflows, metal finishing industries, pulp and paper mills, and oil storage terminals. Furthermore,
preliminary data from the Source Inventory indicate that active point source discharges are
contributing to sediment contamination.
EPA has published water quality criteria identifying the concentrations of specific :chemicals in
the water column that should not be exceeded in order to protect aquatic life and human health. -;
These criteria are often used by the States as the basis for adoption of legally enforceable water
quality standards for waterbodies. Every 3 years, States are required under CWA to review their
58 [
-------
water quality standards to determine if they meet the requirements of the Act, and standards are to be
revised as necessary. In 1987, Congress amended
States had met this requirement. EPA initiated ac
toxic pollutants applicable to those States that had
CWA to require States to adopt numeric toxics
criteria in their water quality standards as necessary to support designated uses. By early 1990 only 6
ion to promulgate Federal water quality criteria for
failed to comply fully with the Act. On December
22, 1992, EPA promulgated criteria for toxic poll itants for the jurisdictions that had not yet complied
with the Act. Because numeric water quality crite ria for toxics are now in place in all 57 States and
territories, numeric water quality-based NPDES p ;rmit effluent limits for toxics will eventually be
developed in all States. Due to the lack of chemical-specific sediment quality criteria and sediment
bioassay methods, however, most NPDES permits do not contain limits specifically developed to
protect sediment quality. Once EPA has developed a standard set of chemical and biological sediment
test methods, EPA and the States will be able to use these methods in the process of developing water
quality-based permit limits to protect sediment quility for targeted discharges. Toxicity bioassays
may be used to confirm whether point source con lamination of sediments causes or contributes to
aquatic life toxicity. Sediment toxicity identificat
chemicals causing the toxicity. For human health
;on evaluations can be performed to identify the
and wildlife protection, bioaccumulation bioassays
can be used to confirm that the chemicals discharged are bioconcentrating in the food chain.
CWA also includes requirements in Section
Under recently revised regulations, every two years
meet water quality standards (including designated
rank the waters in priority order; and 3) develop
specify the particular source reductions necessary
source reductions are implemented through NPDES
303(d) for comprehensive water quality planning.
States must: 1) identify all waters that do not
uses and sediment criteria) or are threatened; 2)
TMDLs according to the priority ranking. TMDLs
to attain and maintain water quality standards. The
permit limits and through State nonpoint source
59
-------
programs, TMDLs are especially valuable when there are multiple sources or when loadings to
threatened waters that may not yet exceed water quality criteria need to be allocated to point source
discharges. If chemical-specific sediment quality criteria and standards are available, TMDL
modeling can be used to establish effluent limits that meet those criteria. If sediment criteria are not
available for problem pollutants, a permit writer may develop sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation
limits in NPDES permits, based on a State's narrative water quality standards, in order to .protect
sediment quality.
OW's Permits Division is field-testing an EPA model that predicts water and sediment
concentrations based on receiving water conditions and effluent loadings. The model can be used to
calculate wasteload allocations based on compliance with sediment quality criteria. If the model is
satisfactory, the Permits Division intends to prepare a users manual on how to use the model to derive
wasteload allocations and permit limits to protect sediment quality. The Office of Research and
Development (ORD) is investigating methods to link contaminated sediments to point sources. These
methods include toxicity identification evaluations to identify the chemicals causing toxicity;
contaminated sediment gradient assessment, in which contaminant concentrations are measured as &
function of proximity to a pipe; and fingerprinting, which examines the correlation betweeh the
specific chemicals produced by a company and the chemicals found in nearby sediments. These
methods may be incorporated into the OW guidance as they become available.
i
Once EPA publishes sediment quality criteria and the accompanying users manual, the States
can adopt criteria as necessary to protect sediment quality during their triennial review propess. (Note
that States are required under CWA Section 303 to promulgate criteria to protect designated uses; if a
specific pollutant is not likely to be present in waterbodies at levels sufficient to impair those uses,
60 :
-------
then a State is not required to adopt criteria for that pollutant.) States can also develop criteria less
protective than EPA's criteria guidance, provided
uses nevertheless will be protected. NPDES pern its generally are written for a 5-year term so as
many as 8 years may pass after EPA promulgation of sediment quality criteria guidance before
permits are issued with water quality-based limits
that the State can show that the relevant designated
specifically to protect sediment quality. Additional
time may be allowed for compliance with these lii lits, if the inclusion of compliance schedules in
permits is explicitly allowed by State water quality standards or implementation procedures.
The 1987 amendments to CWA also require EPA and the States to develop permits for
discharges from all municipal separate storm sewer
100,000, and to issue permits for stormwater disc
systems that serve populations of more than
tiarges associated with industrial activity as well.
The stormwater rule promulgated in October 1990 provides wide-reaching authority that can be used
;as, and some authority to control stormwater
contaminants from point sources. OW intends to
geographic areas that have the greatest likelihood
to prevent contamination of sediments in urban ar
discharges from silvicultural and mining sources.
The Source Inventory is the first comprehensive evaluation of ongoing discharges of sediment
use the Source and Site Inventories to screen for
of experiencing adverse aquatic life and human
health risks due to sediment contaminants. In ad( ition, OW intends to use the inventories to help
identify the active point sources and pollutants most responsible for causing such risks. OW also
intends to use the inventories to target industrial stormwater discharges, discharges from municipal
separate storm sewer systems, and combined sewer overflows that are known to contribute to
contaminated sediment. These dischargers will b 5 required to prepare a pollution prevention plan
which includes measures to prevent the discharge
of sediment contaminants and the occurrence of
61
-------
sediment toxicity. EPA will develop guidance on how to identify and control sources of sediment
contamination that discharge to these sewers. Because these sewer systems receive a large volume of
nonpoint source runoff, compliance with end-of-pipe limitations may result in local implementation of
nonpoint source runoff controls and practices.
Point source discharges are also addressed through CERCLA and RCRA. Discharges from
CERCLA sites and RCRA facilities subject to NPDES permits must comply with requirements in the
permit that are protective of sediment quality. As with other NPDES permits, these permits do not
currently contain limitations specifically developed to achieve sediment quality. Both on-site and off-
site direct discharges from CERCLA sites are required to meet the substantive requirements of
NPDES permits. (On-site actions are exempt from actually acquiring the permit.) Under RCRA.,
hazardous waste facilities that have point source discharges are not exempt from NPDES permit
requirements. Run-on and run-off controls are also required at active facilities to control nonpoint
source contributions to surface waters. EPA is currently evaluating the need to control nonpoint
source contributions from "interim status" facilities that have been shut down, but are still
contaminating sediments through stormwater runoff or leaching. • . , .
7.3 CONTROLS FOR NONPOINT SOURCES
Section 319 of CWA provides an overall framework for States to prevent and manage all
nonpoint sources of water pollution. Under Section 319, States are required to complete a
comprehensive assessment of their navigable waters and evaluate the effects of all categories and
sources of nonpoint pollutants. In its Nonpoint Source Guidance (U.S. EPA, 1987a), EPA
encouraged States to provide information regarding those waters not meeting beneficial uses,
62
-------
funds totaled $38 million in fiscal year 1990, $51
including those not meeting designated uses due tc contaminated sediments. The guidance classified
contaminated sediments as a nonpoint source polli tion category. EPA's Section 319 grant guidance
makes contaminated sediment prevention and, in some limited instances, remediation efforts eligible '
for funding. Section 319 gives EPA authority to iward grant funds to States as an incentive for
nonpoint source control, including control of sour :es of sediment contamination. Section 319 grant
million hi fiscal year 1991, $52.5 million in fiscal
year 1992, and $50 million in fiscal year 1993. Section 319 does not provide any Federal authority
to regulate nonpoint sources, however. State nonpoint source management programs are to include
plans for preventing and managing nonpoint sources of pollution by encouraging, assisting, or
requiring the implementation of best management
practices (BMPs). At their own discretion, States
can enact legislation or regulations for control of nonpoint sources. The development of TMDLs
under Section 303 of CWA is a regulatory tool fcr addressing nonpoint sources as well as point
sources; States are increasingly including nonpoii t sources in their TMDLs.
In 1992, EPA set aside $800,000 to fund
demonstration of urban and agricultural BMPs
specifically designed to remove sediment contaminants in stormwater runoff. Once the results of
these demonstration projects are available, EPA will publicize their effectiveness. When EPA
develops the Site Inventory, the nonpoint source jrogram can work with the States to target sites for
grants and technical assistance to prevent further
sediment contamination.
Other EPA programs contribute signi
Section 314 of CWA, the Clean Lakes Program
assessment, study and restoration of lakes. EPA
Agreements with participating States. Many
ignificahtly to the control of nonpoint sources. Under
>rovides grants to States for the classification,
has entered into over 400 Clean Lakes Cooperative
agreements have funded nonpoint source
of these
63
-------
controls to prevent pollutants originating in the watershed from entering lakes. Several projects have
used storm water retrofitting to control urban runoff, and others have used wetlands to buffer and
filter pollutants from agricultural and silvicultural areas. The Implementation Memorandum for the
fiscal year 1990 Clean Lakes Program encourages States to integrate their Clean Lakes projects with
Section 319 nonpoint source programs for targeted watershed demonstration projects. This guidance
memorandum also mentions that USDA PL 83-566 projects may offer assistance in watersheds
significantly affected by agricultural nonpoint source pollution. As in the case of the Section 319
program, EPA's Site Inventory will be used to target watersheds for Clean Lakes grants to prevent
further sediment contamination. Funding for BMPs effective in removing sediment contaminants can
be provided to these Clean Lakes sites.
EPA's NEP, authorized under CWA Section 320, is a national demonstration program that
uses a comprehensive watershed management approach to address water quality and habitat problems
in designated estuaries on the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts and in the Caribbean. Under the Act,
management conferences, consisting of Federal, State, and local agencies, scientists, citizens,
industry, and environmental groups, develop Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans
(CCMPs) within five years of NEP designation. These plans address toxic and pathogen
contamination, nutrient overenrichment, habitat loss or alteration, impacts to living resources, and
other problems from point and nonpoint source pollution and physical alterations (e.g., dredging and
construction). A number of the NEP watersheds have identified contaminated sediments as a problem
and are developing action plans to reduce or eliminate the problem through point and nonpoint source
controls.
64
-------
EPA expects States to use the Site Invent >ry to assist in identifying both estuaries that should
be nominated for NEP designation and controls for nonpoint sources of contamination to sediments.
The inventory may also provide information to determine whether already designated estuaries should
have more attention focused on nonpoint or point source controls for contaminated sediments. If EPA
determines that additional NEP management conferences are to be convened, OW's OCPD intends to
advise States that nomination packages for new p
•ograms should include identification of sites that are
included in the Site Inventory. EPA will also advise States that the Agency intends to use this
information in evaluating the nominations.
Another important nonpoint source control program is the coastal nonpoint source control
program established by the Coastal Zone Act Rez uthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA).
Under CZARA, States must implement programs in conformity with EPA guidance. EPA's guidance
specifies management measures for nonpoint sou 'ce categories located within the coastal area. These
management measures are considered best available technology for agricultural, silvicultural, urban,
hydromodification, and marina nonpoint sources.
In addition, CZARA requires States to adopt
legally enforceable policies and mechanisms for controlling nonpoint sources in those coastal areas.
Failure by the States to adopt approvable prograiis by the 1995 statutory deadline will result in
reductions in Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and CWA grants to violating States, beginning
in 1996. As data become available, OW will pu )licize the measures that are found to be most
effective for controlling sediment contaminants a id will try to ensure that these measures are
incorporated into States' coastal nonpoint source programs as part of EPA's and NOAA's approval
decisions.
65
-------
7.4 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
States play a key role in controlling point and nonpoint source pollution. In order for controls
to be focused on sediment quality, the States can, as necessary, adopt sediment quality criteria as part
of their water quality standards or use EPA's sediment bioassays to interpret their narrative standards
of "no toxics in toxic amounts." Most States are authorized to issue NPDES permits to control point
sources, so EPA will work closely with the States to ensure implementation of water quality-based
limits to protect sediment quality. Guidance will be developed and workshops will be held! to train
States how to use EPA-consistent sediment testing methods, how to develop permit limits to protect
sediment quality, and how to monitor for compliance with these limits.
In the nonpoint source area, EPA will encourage the States to modify the Model St^te Act for
erosion and sediment control to include consideration of toxics. This Act, developed for the Council
of State Governments, is currently directed only at "clean sediment" problems. EPA will also
encourage the States to develop their own legislation, based on the Model State Act, for preventing
sediment contamination. EPA's nonpoint source program will continue to coordinate with USDA,
USFS, and Bureau of Reclamation as in the past, and will include consideration of contaminated
sediment as well as clean sediment issues. EPA will also seek to ensure that coordination With
Mexico and Canada to control point and nonpoint sources of pollution will address prevention of
contaminated sediment. An important means of coordinating with Canada will be through revising
the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA).
66
-------
the Rivers and Harbors Act, TSGA, and the Oil I
contaminated to levels that cause ecological harm
8. REMEDIATION AND ENFORCEMENT STRATEGY
EPA may take actions directed at remedu tion of contaminated sediments under the
Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensa ion and Liability Act (CERCLA), RCRA, CWA,
'ollution Act of 1990. Where sediments are
or pose a risk to human health, EPA will strive to
implement whatever remediation strategy will mo 5t effectively reduce the risk. In certain
circumstances, the best strategy will be to implen exit pollution prevention measures as well as point
and nonpoint source controls to allow natural recovery processes such as biodegradation, chemical
degradation, and the deposition of clean sediment; to diminish risks associated with the sites. In other
cases, active remediation may be necessary. EP/ L will not proceed with an active clean-up, however,
when implementation of the remedial alternative would cause more environmental harm than leaving
the contaminants in place.
EPA will develop criteria for deciding wl ether natural recovery is the preferred remedial
alternative on a site-specific basis, using such factors as: the specific contaminants present and their
associated risks; the designated uses unpaired during recovery; the size of the affected area; the
feasibility of remediation; site hydrodynamics, including the extent of downstream transport; the time
required for natural recovery; and the liability ass ociated with active remediation. The specific
contaminants present in sediment affect the type (ecological versus human health) and severity (acute
versus chronic toxicity) of the impact. Natural recovery is not acceptable where contamination poses
severe and substantial risks to aquatic life, wildlife, and human health. In addition, natural recovery
may not be the method of choice for contaminants that biodegrade or transform into more persistent,
toxic compounds.
67
-------
Identification of the designated uses impaired by sediment contamination will allow the risk.
manager to evaluate the tradeoffs involved with short-term, active remediation compared to long-term,
natural recovery. The size of the contaminated area is a key parameter to be considered.
Widespread, low levels of contaminants favor natural recovery while geographically limited areas
containing high levels of contaminants favor active remediation. Technology also plays a part in the
use of natural recovery. If it is technically impractical to remediate a site, then natural recovery is
the only option. Site hydrodynamics affect the decision because sediments must be stable for clean
: I
sediment burial to be effective. If contaminated sediments are continually being transported into more
critical habitats or being spread over a wider area where remediation is no longer technically or
economically feasible, active remediation should be performed. In some situations, combinations of
active remediation and natural recovery may be possible. For example, if fairly discrete areas of
contamination are removed, the rest of a site may be left alone for natural recoveiy. Alternatively,
limited capping of contaminated sediment with clean material may be done in anticipation of further
natural deposition of clean sediment. Before initiating any remediation, active or natural, it is
important that point and nonpoint sources of contamination be controlled. ;
i
The amount of time needed for natural recovery will vary from site to site, but will generally
be on the order of one or more decades if clean sediment burial, biodegradation, and chemical
degradation proceed at average rates. Natural recovery times will obviously be shortened if the area
of contamination is small in size, sediment burial rates are high, and all the major sources of
contamination are controlled. However, natural resource damage provisions in various environmental
statutes may discourage the use of strategies employing natural recovery. The lengthier processes of
natural recovery increase the number of years over which damage to natural resources can occur,
68
-------
thereby making immediate clean-up a more attrac tive alternative. Responsible parties may wish to
:
solve the problem immediately rather than be liable for additional years of resource damages.
The goal of all natural recovery and actrve remediation projects is to achieve sediments that
pose no acute or chronic toxicity to aquatic life a id no significant risk to wildlife and human
consumers of fish. It should be noted, however,
standards for remediation projects. The decision
must incorporate a number of site-specific factors
waterbody, the ecology, geology, and hydrology
that the Strategy does not mandate specific clean-up
on an appropriate clean-up level for any project
These include the beneficial uses of the
methodology for listing sites in priority order for
of the site, technical feasibility, risks that may be
posed by the various treatment or disposal options, the benefits of remediation, and economic
constraints.
The ranking system being developed for the Site Inventory will provide an analytical
remediation and pollution prevention, and will play
a significant role in targeting sites for source com rols to protect sediment quality. Each remediation
program will then set its own priorities for the sites in the Site Inventory based on statutory and
regulatory constraints. A program decision to se
site will require the detailed data gathered during
ect natural recovery or active remediation for any
a remedial investigation/feasibility study of the
environmental impacts, cost-effectiveness, and technical achievability of remedial alternatives.
EPA is committed to using all potential enforcement authorities to obtain sediment
remediation. CERCLA, RCRA, CWA, the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, TSCA, and the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990 contain provisions that, unc er the appropriate circumstances, can compel
responsible parties to contribute to the clean-up o
: contaminated sediments. Depending on the
69
-------
particular statute, EPA can use these authorities to: (1) compel parties to clean up the sites jthey have
contaminated; (2) recover costs from responsible parties for EPA-performed clean-ups; and (3)
coordinate with natural resource trustees to seek restitution from responsible parties for natural
resource damages. The Agency's ability to obtain sediment remediation within a reasonable time
frame may be enhanced through the coordinated use of contractor listing (40 CFR Part 15);
debarment and suspension (40 CFR Part 32), State or local laws and regulations, and the Agency's
criminal enforcement authority.
To date EPA has successfully used only Section 309(b) of CWA and Section 106 of CERCLA
in conjunction with its violating facility listing authority to require clean-ups at contaminated sediment
sites. In addition, settlements of CWA unauthorized discharge enforcement cases have incorporated
sediment clean-up as part of the injunctive relief. Under this Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy, EPA intends to use these statutes and the other authorities described in this section to
require sediment remediation by responsible parties. Once EPA develops the Site and Source
Inventories, this information will assist in the targeting -of enforcement actions for sediment
remediation. The Agency-wide consistent tests will be used to identify areas needing remediation and
to help provide clean-up goals for enforcement-based remediation. The following sections describe
the EPA remedial and enforcement programs that will be used for contaminated sediment clean-up.
8.1 CERCLA REMEDIATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Under CERCLA, OERR has established a comprehensive program for identifying,
investigating, and remediating hazardous waste sites. Unless focused clean-up activities that require
immediate attention take place under CERCLA's removal program, sites must be placed on the
70 !
-------
National Priorities List (NPL) to be eligible for remedial funding. The CERCLA process for
assessing sites involves a tiered system for evaluation that is used to screen out sites that do not
warrant placement on the NPL. Before a site is Jdded to the NPL, it is evaluated using the Hazard
at least 28.5 is
Ranking System (HRS); a resultant score of
range between 0 and 100).
Local governments, States, and EPA Reg
evaluated for threats to public health and the environment
sediments will be added to the Site Inventory. Si
and that are not currently under the jurisdiction ol
for evaluation under CERCLA. ;
site to human health and the environment, and th<
is needed to support listing (HRS scores
onal offices typically identify sites that should be
. Superfund sites with contaminated
es that are already identified in the Site Inventory
" another program (e.g., RCRA) may be appropriate
Under CERCLA, EPA carries out a detal ed analysis of risks posed by contaminants at the
feasibility of various response action alternatives to
reduce risk. The Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS), (U.S. EPA, 1989a) provides a
framework for the assessment of human health and environmental impacts. Various EPA
publications, including guidance in RAGS, Ecological Updates, and fact sheets, are used to develop
assessments that are presented as a part of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of a CERCLA
site. The process is not designed specifically for sediments, but rather for the purpose of assessing all
exposure routes from contamination at CERCLA sites.
The CERCLA program intends to use the
Tiered Testing Framework in the Remedial Invest
intends to provide guidance on the use of the testing
EPA-consistent sediment testing methods of the
:gation/Feasibility Study stage of analysis. OERR
methods to promote consistency of these methods
71
-------
within the CERCLA process. Within one year after the EPA standard protocols for acute sediment
toxicity testing are completed, the CERCLA program will develop guidance describing the iuse of the
EPA sediment testing methods. CERCLA program guidance on the use of sediment quality criteria
will be issued following completion of the users manual for the criteria.
An evaluation of all CERCLA Record of Decisions (RODs) from 1982 through 1992
identified 335 sites where contaminated sediments were reported. Of these sites, less than half were
addressed through remediation. Given that there are approximately 1300 sites for which R0Ds have
been written, this finding indicates that sediment contamination might be reported, even if it is minor,
for approximately 30% of the sites evaluated.
CERCLA provides one of the most comprehensive authorities available to EPA to obtain
sediment clean-up, reimbursement of EPA clean-up costs, and compensation to natural resource
trustees for damages to natural resources affected by contaminated sediments. Once EPA determines
that there is a release, or substantial threat of a release, of hazardous substances to the environment,
EPA may undertake response action necessary to protect public health and the environment and, if
there is imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare or the environment,
compel the potentially responsible parties (PRPs) to undertake the clean-up. Liability under CERCLA
is "strict," meaning the responsible parties are liable without fault, often "joint and several," meaning
that they are collectively responsible for the entire cost of the clean-up, and "retroactive," meaning
that liability exists for disposal that occurred prior to CERCLA's enactment. If the contamination
resulted from a Federally permitted release, cost recovery is not available. CERCLA defines
"hazardous substances" and lists those substances covered by the statute. Removal actions and
enforcement actions can be brought at both National Priority List (NPL) and non-NPL sites.
i
i
|
72 ;
-------
Section 106 of CERCLA authorizes the U.S. Attorney General to secure such relief as is
necessary to abate an imminent and substantial th -eat to the public health or welfare, or the
environment, because of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous substance. A judicial action
or issuance of an order under Section 106 to compel responsible parties to perform clean-ups may be
appropriate. Failure or refusal to comply with the Section 106 order, without sufficient cause,
subjects responsible parties to treble damages and
penalties up to $25,000 a day.
Section 107 of CERCLA provides that the U.S. may recover all costs of CERCLA response
actions, when not inconsistent with the National Contingency Plan, as well as damages for injury to
natural resources and costs of health assessments.
facilities from which there is a release or threatened release, or who were involved with disposal,
treatment, or transport of hazardous substances.
Liable parties are persons who owned or operated
Section 107(j) provides that EPA cannot recover
response costs or damages resulting from a Fedeially permitted release under Section 107. CERCLA
Federally permitted releases include three types of releases from point sources with NPDES permits,
as set out in Section 101(10)(A)-(C). Natural resource damages resulting from sediment
contamination may be recovered only by the U.Sl, State, local and foreign governments, and Indian
tribes and their members, as provided hi CERCIJA Section 101(16). Natural resource trustees are
routinely notified of any CERCLA clean-up activity, pursuant to Section 122(j) of CERCLA, and are
encouraged to participate in negotiations where natural resources under their trust may be affected.
The natural resources trustees' participation in setlement negotiations is important to PRPs seeking
release from liability. The natural resource trustees can grant a "covenant not to sue" if the PRP
agrees to undertake appropriate actions to protect
and restore the damaged natural resources.
73
-------
Section 122 of CERCLA authorizes EPA to enter into settlements with responsible parties to
perform response actions. Settlements negotiated under this authority generally will reflect the
strength of evidence of liability, the strength of responsible party defenses, and public interest and
considerations. Settlements may include compensation for, or remediation of, natural resources
damages if the Department of Interior, the State, or another designated natural resources trustee is a
party to the settlement.
8.2 RCRA REMEDIATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle C of RCRA provides EPA with the authority to assess whether releases from a
hazardous waste treatment, storage, or .disposal facility have contaminated sediments and to require
corrective action, including possible remediation, if contamination is discovered. RCRA corrective
action authorities apply to all releases of hazardous waste or constituents from any solid waste
management unit, regardless of when the waste was placed in the unit (Section 3004(u)). EPA
assesses hazardous waste facilities that have RCRA permits. These assessments are called "RCRA
facility assessments" (RFAs). If an RFA suggests that a release has occurred, hazardous waste permit
writers can prepare permit conditions or enforcement orders requiring facility operators or owners to
conduct extensive RCRA facility investigations (RFIs) to determine the extent of any contamination.
If the RFI indicates that solid waste management units at the facility caused contamination, the permit
can be modified to require sediment remediation. EPA also has enforcement authority to, order
owners and operators of "interim status" facilities to conduct corrective action, including sediment
remediation. "Interim status" facilities are those that qualified to handle hazardous waste'prior to the
issuance of a final permit.
74
-------
Section 3004(v) of RCRA authorizes EPA
to establish standards requiring corrective action
for releases from a facility that have migrated beyond the boundaries of a facility (e.g., offsite
sediments), where necessary, to protect human health or the environment, unless the facility's owner
or operator demonstrates that he was unable to obtain access to the contaminated areas.
Section 3008(h) of RCRA authorizes EPA
take corrective action, or such other response measures
the environment from a release of hazardous wast
To date several facilities have been
to consent orders entered into under 3008(h) and
Section 7003 of RCRA authorizes EPA to
to issue orders requiring interim status facilities to
that are necessary, to protect human health or
required to investigate contaminated sediments, pursuant
)ermit conditions issued under 3004(u) and 3004(v).
bring suit against persons who contributed to past
or present handling, storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous waste
that may present an imminent and substantial threat to human health or the environment. EPA may
further order such persons to take other actions as; may be necessary to mitigate the threat; This
authority has already been used to enter into consent orders whereby the facility has agreed to
investigate contaminated sediments.
The Office of Solid Waste (OSW) and OWPE currently use the RCRA National Corrective
Action Prioritization System (NCAPS) to prioritise facilities for corrective action. They will use the
information in the Site Inventory to supplement the information used for prioritization. For facilities
which have not yet been ranked with NCAPS, and where it is clear that releases from a RCRA
facility have caused the sediment contamination identified in the Site Inventory, such contamination
75
-------
will be scored as an "observed release" for the surface water route under the NCAPS. An observed
release score will often lead to the classification of a facility as high priority for corrective action.
For facilities that have already received an NCAPS score, the information from the Site Inventory can
be used to elevate their overall priority.
In fiscal year 1994, when the sediment bioassays and chemical criteria for Agency-wide use
become available, OSW has also agreed to include them as an addendum to the RFI guidance. At
present, the RFI guidance warns about potential sediment quality problems but does not recommend
specific tests to evaluate the ecological and human health risks posed by contaminated sediments.
As a benchmark for the scope and magnitude of the above-described action items| RCRA
remediation applies to several thousand sites across the country.
8.3 CWA REMEDIATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Section 115 of CWA directs EPA to identify the location of in-place pollutants with an
emphasis on toxic pollutants in harbors and navigable waterways. EPA is authorized, acting through
the COE, to make arrangements for the removal and disposal of such materials from critical port and
harbor areas. The $15 million authorized by this Section has only been appropriated once, and all the
funds were spent in the 1970s.
If new appropriations are made for Section 115, EPA will target the top priority harbors in
the Site Inventory for Section 115 remediation. The Agency-wide consistent sediment tests will be
used to select clean-up goals and monitor the effectiveness of remedial actions. Section il5 funds
76
-------
will be effectively used by "piggybacking" the
maintenance projects. "Piggybacking" projects wi
and demobilization and possibly with some sediment
between EPA and the COE will be required to
remediation project onto the COE's navigation
1 save the costs associated with dredge mobilization
testing. A formalized system of coordination
fac litate Section 115 and "piggybacking" projects.
of a
Section 309 of CWA authorizes EPA to
including permanent or temporary injunction, for
violation of permit limits. Given establishment
contaminated sediment, both Administrative orders
of the removal of illegally discharged pollutants.
undertake sediment pollution removal as an envi
penalty. Environmentally beneficial expenditures
economic benefit penalties. Even if the sediment
the facility may be willing to clean up in mitigatiojn
possible liability under the other statutes
Wastewater discharges are typically regulated by
wastewater discharges and nonpoint source runoff that
however, are regulated under Section 311, except
CWA authorizes the President to act to remove, or
discharge of oil or hazardous substances into navigable
contiguous zone, or that may affect natural resources
address many of the pollutants which have accumulated
commence civil action for appropriate relief,
e]numerated violations, including any discharges in
link between the unpermitted discharge and the
and civil suits can require remediation in the form
iiforcement actions can also encourage polluters to
environmentally beneficial expenditure in lieu of a civil
nay be used in conjunction with, but not hi lieu of,
xmtamination is the result of permitted discharges,
of a portion of the civil penalties or to limit
Section 402 of CWA. Pollutants found in
have been designated as hazardous substances;,
for Federally permitted discharges. Section 311 of
arrange for the removal of, an actual or threatened
jable waters, adjoining shorelines or waters of the
of the U.S. Section 311 can be utilized to
in sediments.
77
-------
Section 504 provides a possibility for injunctive relief if it can be shown that polluted
sediments present an imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of persons, or the
livelihoods of persons, whose employment might be affected by contaminated sediments.
Enforcement actions under Section 504 can compel responsible parties to clean up contaminated
sediment even if the contamination resulted from permitted discharges.
OW has developed guidance on how to use CWA enforcement authorities to obtain sediment
remediation. Training workshops are also being held in the Regional EPA offices to teach
enforcement staffs how to pursue cases of their own. ,
8.4 TSCA ENFORCEMENT
Unlike CERCLA and RCRA, which require clean-up of hazardous releases no matter when
they occurred, TSCA does not explicitly require clean-up of regulated substances other than
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) if they were discharged before the effective date of the TSCA.
regulations requiring such clean-up. Regardless of the date of contamination, any party that removes
or handles sediments containing TSCA-regulated substances must follow the regulations promulgated
under TSCA for the handling of these substances.
PCB spills that occurred before the effective date of TSCA are subject to regulation under
TSCA. The current draft Agency position would allow EPA Regional Administrators discretion on a
case-by-case basis to assert TSCA authority over such sites. EPA Regional Administrators can
78
-------
approve alternatives to incineration or disposal in
contaminated with PCBs if the disposal is adequately
8.5 RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT ENFOI
The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 i
Department of Justice (DOJ), may use to bring
contamination. First, the Act provides for criminal
responsible for obstructing the navigable capacity
condition of the channel of such waterway. Second
relief in response to discharges of "refuse matter
water. Courts have broadly interpreted this Act
with a permit under CWA. The injunctive relief
the removal of the obstruction or the refuse.
to
8.6 ENFORCEMENT UNDER CWA SECTION 311
Under CWA Section 311, as amended by
'SCA-approved facilities for sediments
protective of human health and the environment.
CEMENT
includes two provisions which the U.S., through the
enforcement actions to address sediment
and injunctive relief against anyone who is
of any water of the U.S. and for altering the
, the Act provides for criminal and injunctive
into any navigable water or tributary of a navigable
prohibit discharges other than those hi compliance
ivailable under the Act includes the ability to order
the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, EPA may require
responsible parties to clean up contaminated sedir lents resulting from oil spills and discharges. EPA
may use this authority to obtain sediment remediation whenever appropriate circumstances exist.
79
-------
8.7 RELATED LEGISLATION
As part of the 1987 amendments to CWA, Section 118(c) established the ARCS prpgram to
assess the extent of sediment contamination hi the Great Lakes and to demonstrate bench- and pilot-
scale treatment technologies for contaminated sediment. The Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of
1990 extended the ARCS program from 5 to 6 years, requiring a report to Congress in December
1993. The ARCS program is the only EPA effort specifically directed at developing innovative
treatment technologies for contaminated sediment. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
(SITE) program does some investigations into sediment remedial techniques, but its resources must be
used to evaluate clean-up techniques for all contaminated media.
WRDA requires EPA and the Department of the Army to establish a National Contaminated
Sediment Task Force with Federal, State, and private and public interest groups represented. This
WRDA Task Force is charged with a number of responsibilities, including: (1) developing guidelines
for the restoration of contaminated sediment; and (2) evaluating the research and development of
sediment restoration methods, practices, and technologies. This WRDA Task Force will provide an
excellent mechanism for promoting the use of innovative technologies in all Federal, State and private
remediation projects. Through the WRDA Task Force, EPA can share the results of the ARCS and
SITE programs with other interested parties and can learn about the remedial technology research
performed by the other groups.
The WRDA Task Force also can assist remediation programs by reviewing and assessing the
means and methods for locating and constructing permanent, cost-effective, long-term disposal sites
for contaminated dredged material, as required by the statute. At the present time, one of the most
80
-------
economical ways to remediate contaminated sediment is to dredge it and dispose of it in confined
disposal facilities (CDFs). As current CDFs are tjeing filled to capacity, new, long- term disposal
sites are needed by both remediation programs and navigational channel maintenance programs.
8.8 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
Facilities of the Department of Defense (DOD) and DOE have on-site sediments contaminated
with radionuclides, PCBs, metals, and other toxics. As part of this Strategy, EPA will work with
these agencies on assessing their sediment quality problems and remediating the sites to appropriate
clean-up levels. DOE has already entered into "Federal facility agreements" with several States and
EPA to coordinate implementation of remedial act ons at their facilities.
EPA will also coordinate with the Federal
Interagency Sedimentation Project. Under this
project, USGS, the COE, BLM, USFS, TVA, and USDA have initiated a joint effort to investigate
the physical properties of sediments. These agencies are conducting research to determine the degree
to which sediments trap contaminants and the tuiKiframe for natural recovery.
EPA will continue to coordinate closely with the COE on remediation. Prior to passage of
the Water Resources Development Act of 1990, the COE did not have authority to remediate
contaminated sediments on its own initiative. Thioughout the 1980's, however, the COE was
involved in many clean-up efforts under interagenW agreements with EPA (New Bedford Harbor,
Commencement Bay, Waukegan Harbor, Sheboygan Harbor, Marathon Battery Site, Upper Hudson
River, and others). WRDA authorized the COE to initiate "clean-up" dredging adjacent to and
outside authorized Federal navigation channels as
long as the projects are cost-shared with a non-
81
-------
Federal sponsor. The Federal Facilities Compliance Act requires government agencies, including the
COE, to meet the same standards for their hazardous waste management as nongovernmental
owners/operators. The COE is therefore concerned about implementing this new authority because of
questions of liability. The COE does not want to dredge contaminated sediments outside of
navigational boundaries without having identified responsible parties for cost recovery. EPA and the
WRDA Contaminated Sediment Task Force intend to examine liability issues in sediment remediation
and try to identify ways that the COE can implement remedial actions without assuming total liability
for the clean-up.
82
-------
Approximately 400 million cubic yards of
and waterways each year (Lee, 1992). Of this
material is disposed in the ocean at sites regulated
dredged material is discharged in open water sites,
uses regulated under CWA, as well as upland (Lee
9. STRATEGY FOR DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT
sediment are dredged from the Nation's harbors
ampunt, some 60 million cubic yards of dredged
under MPRSA (Lee, 1992). The remaining
at confined disposal facilities, and for beneficial
, 1992).
The COE, as the Federal agency designated to maintain navigable waters, conducts a majority
of this dredging and disposal under its Congressionally authorized civil works program (Moore and
Wilson, 1992). The balance of the dredging and disposal is conducted by a number of local public
and private entities. In either case, the disposal is
subject to a regulatory program administered by
the COE under the above statutes. EPA shares the responsibility of managing dredged material,
principally in the development of the environmental criteria by which disposal sites are selected and
proposed discharges are evaluated, and in the exercise of its environmental oversight authority.
Dredged material management activities are also subject to NEPA, as well as a number of other laws,
executive orders, and State and local regulations.
Estimates by the COE indicate that a sma 1
material disposed, approximately three to 12 mi
handling and/or treatment is required (Lee, 1992)
EPA and COE efforts affect the assessment and
otherwise. The dredged material management portion
percentage of the total annual volume of dredged
million cubic yards, is contaminated such that special
. A number of ongoing and recently completed
management of dredged material, contaminated and
of this Strategy outlines the actions of OW, in
83
-------
cooperation with the COB, to continue consistent implementation of the various statutes and
regulations governing dredged material management in an environmentally sound manner.
I
9.1 DREDGED MATERIAL ASSESSMENT UNDER MPRSA
MPRSA is the primary Federal statute governing the transportation of dredged material to the
ocean for the purpose of disposal. Section 102 of MPRSA requires EPA, in consultation with the
COE, to develop environmental criteria that must be met before any proposed ocean disposal activity
is allowed to proceed (40 CFR 227). In 1991, EPA and the COE published a revised guidzince
document entitled Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal - Testing Manual
(U.S. EPA and COE, 1991), known as the Green Book or the Ocean Testing Manual, which
describes the technical procedures for determining the potential ecological impacts of dredged material
disposal in the ocean. The 1991 publication, which revises and replaces the 1977 edition, describes
sample collection, handling and storage, physical and chemical characterization methodologies for
sediment and water, and acute bioassay and bioaccumulation test procedures. Tests are conducted in
a tiered-testing framework: each successive tier provides increasing investigative intensity until a
determination of environmental suitability of material proposed for disposal can be made.
I
The Ocean Testing Manual and associated regional implementation manuals reflect the
significant improvements hi the state-of-the-practice of toxicology and environmental assessment since
publication of the 1977 version. The manual calls for the use of more appropriate and sensitive
organisms for toxicity and bioaccumulation testing to assess effects resulting from the complex
mixture of chemicals present in most dredged material. An unproved numerical mixing model for
predicting water quality compliance at the disposal site is also included in the manual.
84 :
-------
A recent review of the 1991 Ocean Testing Manual by SAB indicated that a number of further
stm]
improvements should be incorporated into the manual (U.S. EPA, 1992e). Among these were the
recommendations that EPA should: 1) revise the
tiered testing approach to further emphasize reducing
uncertainty as the level of tiered testing increases; 2) provide improved guidance on the interpretation
of the bioaccumulation test results; 3) clarify how sediment quality criteria will be incorporated into
the tiered-testing approach; 4) require testing of ippropriately sensitive species; and 5) include
appropriately sensitive test species measures of chronic sublethal effects.
EPA and the COE continue to conduct intensive research and development programs to
further improve the assessment capability and address concerns of the SAB. The EPA consistent
sediment testing methods are already being used
in the dredged material testing programs. Additional
guidance is also being developed on the translation of tissue residue information into ecological and
human health risks. As described in the Assessment Section, the approach for using sediment quality
criteria in Tier II will also be decided upon and included in revisions of the Ocean Dumping Rule and
will be included as appropriate hi future revisions of the Ocean Testing Manual. Likewise, improved
QA/QC guidance for sample collection, storage,
and manipulation of sediments for chemical analyses
and bioassays is being developed and will accompany the dredged material testing manuals for bom
ocean and inland waters.
EPA will also improve a number of aspects
process. EPA, in consultation with the COE, is
regarding the transportation and disposal of dredged
technical and procedural aspects to reflect program
the Site and Source Inventories, under development
of the dredged material disposal decision-making
currently in the process of revising regulations
material in the ocean in order to update its
experience since the last revisions. In addition,
as a part of this Strategy, may be useful in Tier I
85
-------
(evaluation of existing information) of the Ocean Testing Manual to help identify potential areas of
contamination and chemicals of concern to evaluate. EPA is also developing guidance regarding the
use of sediment quality criteria in dredged material evaluations conducted under MPRSA.
9.2 DREDGED MATERIAL ASSESSMENT UNDER CWA
Section 404 of CWA is the primary statute governing the discharge of dredged material into
waters of the United States. The Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines (40 CFR 230) are the substantive
environmental criteria by which these proposed discharges are evaluated. EPA and the COE are
currently developing a document entitled Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Discharge in
Inland and Near Coastal Waters - Testing Manual (known as the Inland Testing Manual), (U.S. EPA
and the COE, 1993). The document will provide national guidance on evaluating potential
contaminant-related environmental impacts of proposed discharges of dredged material into waters of
the United States. The Inland Testing Manual will utilize a tiered testing approach similar;to that
employed in the Ocean Testing Manual and will incorporate both the SAB recommendations for
improvements to the Ocean Testing Manual and additional comments provided by SAB after its
review of the draft Inland Testing Manual. The Inland Testing Manual describes the procedures for
evaluating dredged material required by the Guidelines, the tests to implement them, collection and
preservation procedures, statistical procedures, interpretive guidance, and supporting references.
To the extent practicable, OW and the COE will maintain consistency between the testing
procedures and manuals used under CWA and MPRSA to facilitate the evaluation of dredged material
disposal alternatives. The draft Inland Testing Manual revises and updates with a number of technical
improvements the COE's 1976 interim testing manual for inland waters. As with ocean dumping
86
-------
activities under MPRSA, the Site and Source Inventories may also be useful in Tier I (evaluation of
existing information) of the Inland Testing Mamu 1 to help identify potential areas of contamination
and chemicals of concern to evaluate. OW will a
so develop guidance regarding the use of sediment
quality criteria in dredged material evaluations conducted under CWA. EPA expects to publish both
the Inland Testing Manual and the guidance on the use of sediment quality criteria in dredged material
evaluations in 1994.
OW is also developing a proposed rule to
revise the testing provisions of the Guidelines by
providing for comparisons between dredged material proposed for discharge and reference sediment
(U.S. EPA, 1993d). Through these revisions, EPA hopes to make a technical improvement in the
testing provisions and to make dredged material testing more consistent with that conducted under
MPRSA, which currently employs a reference sediment approach.
9.3 DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES DOCUMENT
In 1992, OW, OFA, and the COE published a guidance document entitled Evaluating
Environmental Effects of Dredged Material Management Alternatives - A Technical Framework (U.S.
ides euic
EPA and the COE, 1992). The document provides guidance for all appropriate testing, evaluation,
and management activities. It is a framework for evaluating the potential environmental effects of
proposed discharges of dredged material in open water and in confined disposal sites, as well as the
possibility of using dredged material for beneficial purposes, such as beach enrichment. The
document is designed to facilitate environmental evaluations that meet the substantive and procedural
requirements of NEPA, MPRSA, and CWA, and
to enhance interagency coordination and consistency
87
-------
in evaluating management alternatives. The document incorporates the concepts of, and makes
references to the details in, the dredged material assessment manuals discussed above.
Specifically, this Framework Document discusses the regulatory requirements of applicable
statutes, the equipment and techniques employed in dredging and disposal, the general framework in
which alternatives are evaluated, and the more detailed assessments for evaluating open water and
confined disposal site options and beneficial use alternatives. The analysis of each of these major
alternatives includes a discussion of site characteristics, physical effects or suitability of dredged
material, site capacity, contaminant pathways of concern or site suitability, and management actions
and contaminant control measures. The Framework Document also contains a brief section on the
selection of dredged material management alternatives, which both agencies plan to expand in a
future, Phase n, guidance document. EPA and the COE expect the Phase II guidance document to
discuss approaches for comparing economic and environmental cost and benefits among
environmentally acceptable alternatives, and to present a number of different authorities that could be
used to fund more costly, environmentally preferable alternatives.
9.4 OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE MANAGEMENT AND MONITORING GUIDANCE
OW and the COE are developing a comprehensive ocean disposal site designation,
management, and monitoring guidance document. Although there are a number of reference
documents on the three topics, the joint EPA and COE guidance will integrate and update all aspects
of site selection and management. WRDA directs that all ocean disposal sites designated [prior to
January 1, 1995 shall have site management plans in place by 1997, and that no site shall be
designated after January 1, 1995 without such management plans.
88
-------
9.5 RELATIONSHIP OF CERCLA, TSCA, AND RCRA
CERCLA, TSCA, and RCRA may all affect the management of dredged material, as
discussed below.
CERCLA's program of identifying and
dredged material management if contaminated sediments
Contaminated sediment remedial actions conducted
of the U.S. within the CERCLA site do not requi
but must nonetheless meet the substantive environmental
Starfield, 1990; Edgar, 1985).
remediating hazardous substance sites may affect
are present at the site (40 CFR 302.4).
under CERCLA that involve discharges to waters
re CWA Section 404 or any other Federal permit,
standards of the applicable laws (Winer and
TSCA includes special management provisions for handling material containing PCBs (40
incineratic
CFR 721). TSCA prescribes disposal by
placement in an approved chemical waste landfill.
Regional Administrator if contaminated sediments
ion that complies with 40 CFR §761.70 and
or by an alternate method that is approved by a
containing PCB concentrations of 50 ppm or
greater were to be dredged. Sediments containing PCBs hi these concentrations are typically not
dredged for navigational purposes (Engler, 1992),
Some concern has been raised with regarc
to the potential regulation of dredged sediments as
hazardous waste. Hazardous waste management requirements under RCRA Subtitle C apply to "solid
wastes" (i.e., materials that are, or intended to be, discarded) that are listed as hazardous in EPA
regulations or exhibit any of the four hazardous waste characteristics identified in EPA regulations
was'
(RCRA Section 10004(27); 40 CFR § 261.3). The person who generates a solid waste is responsible
89
-------
for determining whether it is listed as a hazardous waste, and for determining whether it exhibits a
characteristic, either by using knowledge of the waste or by testing (40 CFR § 262.22). The
knowledge requirement involves applying knowledge of the waste in light of the materials or the
processes used. The Agency has specified, by regulation, test methods for the four characteristics.
The test for the toxicity characteristic is the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) (§
261.24).
The COE took the position in an April, 1988 Federal Register notice that dredged material
was not a solid waste and therefore not subject to RCRA authorities. The COE also contended that
the TCLP is technically inappropriate for use on dredged material. Furthermore, the COE believes
that MPRSA and CWA provide the appropriate regulatory regimes for dredged material.
EPA has historically taken the position that contaminated sediments are not exempt from the
definition of solid waste (or from the need to determine if the sediments must be managed as
hazardous waste). The most common concern has been whether sediments exhibit the toxicity
characteristic as determined by the TCLP. Although current regulations specify the TCLP to be used
as the test for the toxicity characteristic, EPA agrees that the Agency should investigate other test
methods. OSW is reviewing alternative testing procedures for evaluating sediments. The Agency
believes that it is important to recognize that sediments which were found to be toxic under CWA or
MPRSA testing, have not failed the TCLP in most cases. Regions should be aware of this when
deciding whether dredged materials need TCLP testing.
The Agency is also working on a Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR) which will
address management standards for contaminated media, including sediments. In this rulemaking the
90
-------
Agency will evaluate, as one proposal, whether adequate Federal oversight of dredged material exists
under CWA and MPRSA such that further management under RCRA is unnecessary to be protective
of human health and the environment.
9.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND STATES
EPA and the COE have jointly administer :d the dredged material disposal provisions of CWA
and MPRSA for over 20 years. During that period the two agencies have developed and revised
numerous dredged material management measures, including many of the assessment procedures EPA
is considering for consistent Agency-wide use as a part of this Strategy. EPA is committed to
maintaining this coordination on issues such as dredged material testing and assessment, evaluation of
sediment management alternatives, monitoring of disposal sites, training of field staff, and research
and development activities, in order to continue to ensure that dredged material is managed in an
environmentally sound manner.
EPA also has a number of Memoranda oi
define each agency's respective roles and respo
I responsi
Understanding (MOU) with the'COE: These MOU
ibilities in administering the dredged material
management programs and outline coordination procedures. Topics covered by these MOU include
ocean disposal site management and procedures for handling elevations and enforcement cases under
CWA. EPA will work with the COE to update existing or develop additional MOU as necessary.
Likewise, EPA is committed to a dredged material management process, through established
regulatory mechanisms, that coordinates effectively with other Federal agencies, including USFWS,
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as
National Marine Fisheries Service, and National
91
-------
States. Consultation requirements, State certification requirements, and public notice procedures are a
few of the dredged material management mechanisms that are available.
92
-------
prevention strategies. The contaminated sediment
10. RESEARCH STRATEGY
ORD is committed to a comprehensive, ccordinated program of research that will identify
relationships between sediment contaminants and the viability and sustainability of benthic ecosystems,
and ultimately will clarify how such information cm be used to direct source control and pollution
research strategy describes how ORD intends to
support the EPA program offices by undertaking lesearch to develop: 1) methods to assess the
ecological and human health effects of sediment contaminants; 2) chemical-specific sediment quality
criteria; 3) sediment pollution source allocation methods; and 4) sediment clean-up methods for sites
where natural recovery is not appropriate. To complete this research, ORD intends to conduct the
projects discussed below as part of sediment quali y research initiatives in the budgets for fiscal years
1994 and beyond.
10.1 COLLECTION OF CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DATA ON SEDIMENT
QUALITY IN THE EMAP
daa
and
EMAP gathers chemical and biological
EMAP sampling design is based on probability
estimates of resource conditions. EMAP will con
to report national and regional trends in concentrations
contaminants, sediment toxicity, and macrobenthic
on sediment quality on a regional scale. The
covers a well-defined grid to provide unbiased
inue to gather sediment data from its sites in order
of organic and inorganic sediment
community composition and abundance.
93
-------
10.2 DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF SEDIMENT QUALITY CRITERIA
10.2.1 Development of Freshwater and Marine Sediment Quality Criteria
ORD intends to develop and validate techniques for the derivation of numerical sediment
quality criteria for both marine and freshwater systems. Short-term goals include the validation of
equilibrium partitioning as an approach for developing sediment quality criteria for nonionic organic
chemicals. Longer-term goals include the development of tissue residue-based sediment quality
criteria, sediment quality criteria for metals, and sediment quality criteria based upon human health
considerations. Field and laboratory studies will be conducted with both spiked and field-collected
contaminated sediments to validate equilibrium partitioning and associated tissue residue approaches
for deriving sediment quality criteria for nonionic organic compounds. Similar types of studies will
be performed to determine physical and chemical factors in sediments which mediate the ;
bioavailability and toxicity of metals. Research will also be conducted to develop aquatic food chain
models to predict the exposure of humans to contaminants associated with sediments. :
10.2.2 Chemical Data for Development of Sediment Quality Criteria
ORD intends to determine octanol/water partition coefficients (K,jws) for hy^rophobic organic
compounds selected for development of numerical criteria. Sorption-desorption kinetics of
hydrophobic organic pollutants to and from sediments will also be investigated. This work will
permit comparisons between field and laboratory toxicological data used in the development and
assessment of sediment quality criteria. In addition, ORD intends to investigate mechanisms by which
ionic organics absorb to sediment, and develop an approach to modelling the binding of metals to
94 '.
-------
sediments. These investigations will provide the
ionic organics and metals.
)asis for developing sediment quality criteria for
10.2.3 Field Validation Studies for Sediment Quality Criteria
ORD has selected a variety of field sites i o verify sediment criteria and other sediment
assessment methods. At selected sites, contaminant concentrations, sediment toxicity,
lie communities will be ii
bioaccumulation, and alterations of benthic'
gradients. Levels of sediment contamination wil
where adverse ecological effects would be predic
investigated along sediment pollution
be compared with sediment criteria to identify sites
ed by the criteria. The actual condition of the
benthic community, degree of sediment toxicity and bioaccumulation, and partitioning of contaminants
among phases will then be compared with predici ed conditions. Efficacy of sediment criteria in the
field will also be verified through spiking experiments that simulate field observations under
controlled laboratory conditions.
10.3 CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT ASSESSMENT METHODS
10.3.1 Biogeochemical and Transport Process js Influencing Metals Bioavailability
ORD intends to develop a prototype biogeochemical transport model for assessing porewater
biological exposure to metals in sediments. This
sediment quality criteria for metals. The current
model is needed to facilitate the development of
acid volatile sulfide (AVS) approach for assessing
potential toxicity caused by sediment-associated metals is applicable to mature, quiescent sediments.
An understanding of the migration of contaminants in sedimentary porewaters, however, is necessary
95
-------
to decrease the uncertainty associated with use of the AVS procedure. This research will identify
those situations where application of the existing AVS procedure is appropriate.
10.3.2 Exposure Assessment Modeling for Aquatic Disposal of Dredged Materials
ORD intends to conduct research to improve, verify, and expand the scope of existing models
which are used for ocean disposal scenarios. ORD intends to also develop far-field models which
define the movement of dredged material participates and their associated contaminants. The models
developed would provide information on water circulation, particulate movement, and contaminant
transport and transformation under a variety of conditions. This information will enhance the
technical basis for ocean disposal site selection and improve permitting and monitoring decisions
based on site-specific physical processes.
10.3.3 Contaminated Sediment Toxicity Identification Evaluation
ORD intends to develop Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) procedures for sediment
contaminants. Through these procedures, interstitial water will be used as a test fraction for direct
identification of chemicals responsible for acute toxicity to aquatic organisms. TIE would help guide
the selection of appropriate contaminated sediment remediation strategies and augment post1
remediation monitoring.
96
-------
10.3.4 TMDL/Wasteload AUocation Modeling 1
Control Options
o Evaluate Contaminated Sediments and Source
ORD intends to conduct research to develop TMDL and wasteload allocation models capable
of predicting the partitioning of metals, ionic organic chemicals, and hydrophobic organic chemicals
to sediments. A series of models ranging from simplified spreadsheets to complex mass balance
models will be designed to relate contaminant con :entrations among sediment, the water column, fish,
wildlife, and humans. This should allow a better interpretation and comparison of various criteria,
including water quality criteria, U.S. Food and Dug Administration fish tissue action levels, region-
specific fish tissue action levels, Superfund site-specific sediment clean-up levels, and sediment
criteria derived by using various methods. As previously mentioned, OW has also undertaken
projects to identify TMDL/wasteload allocation models to protect sediment quality.
10.3.5 Chemical Analytical Methods Development
ORD intends to develop sensitive, low cost, analytical methods to detect sediment
contaminants at concentrations compatible with F« deral and State water quality criteria. ORD intends
to develop methods for measurement of sediment
chemicals in sediments. Methods would also be i
characteristics that control biological availability of
eveloped to minimize or eliminate the use of
hazardous solvents and reagents, thereby both reducing the exposure of laboratory workers to these
chemicals and minimizing waste which must be disposed of in accordance with RCRA regulations.
Research will also be completed to develop sensitive chemical methods for analyzing metals and
organics in suspended sediments. Such research may be of particular use in the NPDES permitting
program.
97
-------
10.3.6 Development and Validation of Acute and Chronic Test Protocols
t.
In consultation with EPA's Tiered Testing Committee, ORD intends to develop state-of-tlhe-
science standardized protocols for assessing potential impacts of contaminated sediments on aquatic
l
ecosystems. As noted above, the development of these tests is essential to the success of the tiered
testing approach adopted by EPA as part of this Strategy. ORD will work with the EPA program
offices to develop standard test protocols which can be used in a hierarchical tiered testing approach
which proceeds from simple acute toxicity assessments to chronic and sublethal test endpoints.
Standard culture, acute toxicity, and chronic toxicity protocols will be developed and validated for a
variety of appropriately sensitive freshwater and marine benthic species. The initial group lof acute
whole sediment toxicity tests that are to be standardized for Agency-wide use are described in Section
5. Methods should be validated by comparing laboratory test results to in-situ impacts. Freshwater
species selected for testing include benthic amphipods, chironomids, and oligochaetes, and water
column cladocerans and fish species. Marine species include at least six species of marine!and
estuarine amphipods. Representative bivalves and polychaetes will also be considered for test method
development.
10.3.7 Development and Field Validation of Bioaccumulation Test Methods
Demersal (bottom-dwelling) fishes and some benthic taxa, typically molluscs and pblychaetes,
have a relatively high tolerance to sediment contaminants and are able to survive in very polluted
habitats. Unfortunately, such species often accumulate a high body burden of various toxic chemicals
in their tissues. In consultation with the Sediment Tiered Testing Committee, ORD intends to
develop standard laboratory procedures for determining the bioaccumulation potential for sediment
98
-------
contaminants, and validate these methods through
the use of field studies. The initial bioaccumulation
tests to be developed and validated are described in Section 5.
Existing solid phase bioaccumulation protocols
test species expanded to be more representative o
validated by comparing tissue residues measured in
residue concentrations measured in transplanted on
same sediments in controlled laboratory exposure;
analytical laboratories will be compared.
must be rigorously validated and the array of
r local species at risk. Test protocols should be field
organisms collected from selected sites with
•ganisms as well as in organisms exposed to the
. To evaluate precision, results from a variety of
10.3.8 Unavailability and Trophic Transfer of Sediment- Associated Contaminants
Sediment-associated contaminants may pose a direct risk to wildlife and human health through
the direct consumption of contaminated benthic organisms such as clams and lobsters, or an indirect
risk through the trophic transfer of contaminants
conduct research on the bioavailability and trophi
emphasis on residue levels in shellfish and highei
relationships between contaminant concentrations
ip the food chain into edible fish. ORD intends to
: transfer of contaminants in sediments with special
trophic level aquatic species. Information on
in sediments and higher trophic level and .
commercially important aquatic species will be developed. This information will help determine the
classes of compounds and the conditions which warrant the generation of sediment criteria protective
of human health.
99
-------
10.3.9 Development of Tissue Residue Thresholds
One of the major uncertainties in assessing the effects of sediment-associated contaminants is
the ecological significance of bioaccumulated compounds. ORD intends to undertake research to
determine the tissue residue levels of contaminants in fish and invertebrates which result in both death
and sublethal effects such as reproductive impairment. Because they rely on internal doses;rather than
external pollutant concentrations, tissue residue thresholds avoid the errors inherent in predicting the
bioavailable fractions of sediment contaminants. Tissue residue threshold levels would be used to
identify the toxic agents in sediments with multiple contaminants, derive wasteload allocations based
on existing tissue residues, and generate insight into pollutant interactions.
10.3.10
Routes of Biological Exposure
All methods of generating sediment quality criteria require assumptions about the routes of
biological exposure and their relative importance in relation to equilibrium conditions. ORD intends
to undertake research to evaluate the importance of different routes of exposure in relation to
biological variables such as feeding and burrowing behavior of organisms, chemical partitioning
behavior, and sediment characteristics. It is expected that this research will produce techniques for
incorporating various routes of sediment contaminant uptake by benthic organisms into the derivation
of sediment quality criteria.
100
-------
10.4 REMEDIATION METHODS
10.4.1 Remediation Methods for Contaminated Sediments
ORD intends to develop and evaluate a r inge of methods for the remediation of contaminated
sediments. Methods developed should provide c >st-effective solutions to the problem of sediment
contamination. ORD intends to evaluate the following remediation approaches: in-situ containment,
biological treatment, and metals treatment. Research into in-situ containment will focus on the
capping or armoring of sediments. The mobility
of contaminants through caps of differing materials
will be measured in the laboratory, and hydrodynamic situations where capping or armoring is
applicable will be identified. ORD also intends
disposal facilities as large bioreactors to degrade
directed toward the development of technologies
o investigate the modification and use of confined
contaminants. Research into in-situ treatment will be
for the removal of metals from sediments. Particular
emphasis will be given to processes that allow recovery and eventual reuse of metals.
The National Research Council's (NRC)
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems
has convened a Committee on Contaminated Maiine Sediments. The committee will assess the
Nation's capability for cleaning up and remediati ig or managing contaminated marine sediments. A
public NRC report on this subject will be prepand by May 31, 1995. It is expected that the NRC
report will: 1) provide additional information to define and describe the nature of problems associated
with contaminated sediments; 2) establish categoiies of contaminated sites for remedial investigation;
3) discuss relevant regulatory frameworks for contaminated sediments; 4) review state of the art of
identifying and assessing sites; 5) review remediation technologies currently in use, or likely to be
available in the near future; and 6) develop a decision model for one category of remediation problem
101
-------
sites. EPA will carefully consider the findings of the NRC report as the Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy is implemented.
10.4.2 Resiliency and Natural Recovery of Aquatic Benthic Ecosystems
As stated in this strategy document, the preferred remediation technique for many
contaminated sediment sites is implementation of source controls allowing natural recovery to occur.
To assist the EPA program offices hi developing criteria for determining when natural recovery is the
appropriate remedial alternative, ORD intends to conduct research to determine the rates of recovery
of benthic communities under different environmental conditions and stresses. Factors which control
recovery rates would be identified (e.g., community type, physical factors, and types of stress).
Intact benthic communities would be studied in microcosms receiving uncontaminated water; research
would also include monitoring rates of recovery at selected field sites.
10.5 COMPLETION OF RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
10.5.1 ORD Clients
In completing the research described in this Strategy, ORD will work closely with; its clients
to ensure that the methods, tests, and models it develops are useful to EPA program offices and other
identified users of research products. ORD will draw upon the technical expertise available in other
government agencies, academia, and industry. Major clients who will use ORD research products
include: the EPA program offices, EPA Regional offices, the Great Lakes National Program Office,
the Gulf of Mexico Program Office, National Estuary Program Management Conferences,; the
102 l
-------
Chesapeake Bay Program, and State and local regulatory agencies. In addition, other Federal
agencies including the COE, NOAA, USFWS, U 5GS, and the United States Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) will use ORD research results. OIJD will coordinate its research programs with the
ongoing activities of these clients.
10.5.2 Technology Transfer
ORD intends to take the following actions
sediment research programs are available to users
to ensure that the results of its contaminated
1. ORD intends to sponsor, and cost onsor with the EPA program offices, workshops
spo
and training sessions on such topics as remediating contaminated sediments, use of
' various sediment contaminant transport and
2.
sediment bioassays, and the use o:
partitioning models.
ORD intends to publish research results in peer reviewed scientific, technical, and
engineering journals.
3. ORD scientists and engineers intend to present research results at platform and poster
sessions at major national and international conferences and at workshops.
4. ORD intends to work with OST tc provide regulatory agencies and the regulated
community with methods and protocols for assessing and remediating contaminated
sediments.
03
-------
11. OUTREACH STRATEGY ;
Outreach is a critical component of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy.
Public understanding of the ecological and human health risks associated with sediment
contamination, and of solutions to the problem, is key to successful implementation of this Strategy.
OST therefore intends to initiate an outreach program in support of Strategy objectives. In
implementing the outreach program, EPA will draw upon the experiences of successful outreach
efforts in the Chesapeake Bay Program, the Great Lakes Program, the Gulf of Mexico Program, the
NEP, EPA public-private partnership programs, and the RCRA public outreach program.
The primary goal of EPA's outreach program for this Strategy is to educate key audiences
about the risks, extent, and severity of contaminated sediments, the role of the Strategy in solving
contaminated sediment problems and the way in which stakeholders will be involved in Strategy
implementation. The outreach program described below has four key elements: 1) defining key
Strategy themes or messages; 2) identifying target audiences and needs; 3) developing appropriate
materials such as guidance documents, brochures, and videos; and 4) providing channels to facilitate
two-way communication on Strategy issues.
11.1 COMMUNICATION THEMES
Four themes of the Strategy, closely linked to the Strategy's goals, will be conveyed by EPA
to target audiences through outreach activities described below. The first theme is that sediment
contamination comes from many sources, which must be identified, and that source control options
must be evaluated according to risk reduction potential and effectiveness. The second theme is that
104
-------
sediment contamination poses threats to human health and the environment. The risks must be
identified and effectively communicated to the public. Third, sediment contamination can be
effectively managed through assessment, prevention, and remediation. And fourth, EPA's strategy
for managing contaminated sediment relies on interagency coordination and building alliances with
other agencies, industry, and the public.
11.2 INTERAGENCY COORDINATION AND ALLIANCES WITH OTHER AGENCIES,
INDUSTRY, AND THE PUBLIC
Communication with other Federal, State,
important part of EPA's outreach program. EPA
all agencies effectively characterize the risks
sediment testing methods are applied; consistent
levels; and optimal use of financial and technical
and local agencies and industry will be an
s outreach program will be designed to ensure that:
of sediment contaminants; consistent assessment and
decisions are made at the Federal, State, and local
resources occurs.
In accordance with the requirements of WRDA 1992, EPA will convene and co-chair, with
the Department of the Army, the National Contaminated Sediment Task Force. Through this Task
Force, EPA will coordinate its assessment activities with the following agencies: NOAA, USGS,
COE, USFWS, and the States. Through the Task Force, EPA will also propose the development of a
linated sediment
national Federal strategy for contaminate
management.
EPA will also work with other Federal agencies to promote remediation and prevention
practices consistent with the Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy. These agencies will
include USDA, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), DOD, and DOE. EPA will develop
105
-------
memoranda of understanding and agreement with these and other agencies to promote these practices.
11.3 TARGET AUDIENCES FOR OUTREACH
i
To effectively implement the outreach plan, EPA will seek to communicate with large and
highly diverse audiences, educate and involve the general public in EPA's decision-making processes,
and target information to both broad audiences as well as subgroups within those audiences. In
designing and targeting its outreach messages, EPA will determine the information needs of each
audience by assessing the extent of its knowledge about the topic. The positions and concerns of the
audience about the topic will be determined as well as the audience's level of interest, and methods to
increase interest and attention will be developed. It will be necessary to determine whether the
primary purpose of EPA's message is to inform the audience, change its attitude, or to encourage the
audience to take action.
The audiences that EPA will target to receive its outreach materials and messages are be
categorized as follows:
1. The general public.
2. Environmental and public interest groups.
3. The scientific community, including academia, laboratories, and professional societies.
106
-------
4. Congressional representatives and government groups.
5. Federal agencies, including the COE
whose policies and operations direc
, DOE, DOD, DOT, USDA, and other agencies
ly contribute to the Strategy or affect its goals.
6. State and local agencies.
7. EPA Regional and Headquarters personnel.
8. The regulated community, including businesses and industrial trade associations.
9. News media, including printed med a, television, radio, trade and industry journals,
and environmental magazines.
11.4 OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
Outreach activities to support implementation
will include actions taken by a number of different
11.4.1 Regulatory Actions and Guidance Documents
EPA intends to prepare guidance document!
and Eionregulatory requirements for contaminated si
of the Strategy will be coordinated by OST, but
'. iPA program offices.
and reports in support of the Agency's regulatory
liment assessment, prevention, and remediation.
Guidance documents and reports will focus on issues such as sediment quality assessment
107
-------
methodologies, sediment toxicity testing methods, use of sediment quality criteria, and assessment of
human health and ecological risks of sediment contamination. EPA's initial outreach efforts will
focus on preparation of the following guidance documents and reports:
1. OST and ORD intend to prepare guidance documents on methods to be used by all
EPA program offices in conducting standardized sediment toxicity tests. Such
guidance will address acute and chronic bioassays and bioaccumulation tests.
2. OST will prepare guidance documents on evaluating and selecting techniques for
remediation of contaminated sediment. ORD and other EPA offices intend to develop
guidance documents on technologies for contaminated sediment remediation.
3. OWM intends to develop guidance for deriving NPDES permits that protect sediment
quality.
4. OST intends to prepare guidance for development of mixing zones for NPDES point
sources to protect sediment quality.
5. EPA intends to develop guidance for nonpoint source controls to help prevent
sediment contamination from nonpoint sources of pollution.
6, OW, in conjunction with the COE, intends to develop national guidance on testing of
dredged materials for disposal in inland waters, and will revise existing guidance on
testing of dredged materials for ocean disposal.
108
-------
7. EPA intends to develop guidance
address contaminated sediment
on regulatory and associated enforcement actions to
control and remediation.
source
8. OST intends to develop guidance on designing and implementing monitoring programs
for sediment contaminants.
9. EPA intends to develop guidance for trade associations on pollution prevention issues,
including the contamination of sediments from point and nonpoint sources of
pollution.
10. EPA will produce a Report to Con ;ress on the Site and Source Inventories as required
by WRDA 1992.
11. EPA will produce a Report to Congress on the Great Water Bodies Study on the
effects of hazardous air pollutants.
effects of air pollutants on sedimen
This report will include information on the known
quality.
12. EPA will produce a Report to Congress on the activities of the National Contaminated
Sediment Task Force required by WRDA 1992.
109
-------
11.4.2 Outreach Publications '
EPA intends to prepare outreach publications and support other agencies in developing their
own technical and general audience publications on sediment contamination. EPA intends to develop
journal articles, pamphlets, brochures, fact sheets, slide shows, and other multimedia materials to
inform a variety of technical and nontechnical audiences about issues and problem solutions related to
sediment contamination. These materials would be distributed through advertising in bulletins such as
the Contaminated Sediments News or at public meetings, workshops, and national conferences on
pollution prevention or contaminated sediment.
11.4.3 Advisory Groups, Databases, Clearinghouses, and Other Activities
EPA intends to take the following actions to establish advisory groups, databases, clearing
houses and other programs hi support of the Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy:
1. EPA intends to maintain the Sediment Steering Committee to oversee implementation
of the Agency's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy. In this role the
Committee will track and monitor all aspects of strategy implementation. A report
will be developed to document Agency-wide activities and will be distributed to the
public on a regular basis.
2. As described hi this strategy document, EPA intends to prepare both Site and Source
Inventories for contaminated sediments. These data will be made available to the
public and reports to Congress will be prepared on a biennial basis.
110
-------
3. EPA intends to regularly sponsor
conferences on contaminated sediments.
4. EPA intends to hold a series of workshops for the public to educate them about the
risks of sediment contamination.
5. EPA intends to submit scientific J nd technical guidance and related materials to the
SAB for review. SAB reviews wjll be announced in the Federal Register as well as
other relevant EPA publications.
11.5 OUTREACH PRINCIPLES
EPA recognizes that implementation of the
must be a partnership among many organizations
implement its contaminated sediment managemen
1. EPA will involve the public, i
as early as possible in the strategy
emphasized.
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
EPA will therefore adopt a number of principles to
; outreach program.
including the private sector as well as the general public,
planning process. Community participation will be
2. EPA will clearly state its expectations for sediment clean-up efforts at the outset of
program implementation. Issues such as cost, the time frame for clean-up, and how
sediment
local situations compare to
in the initial planning stages of c
clean-up efforts nationwide will all be addressed
ean-up efforts.
Ill
-------
3. EPA will focus on "keeping the momentum" going with respect to citizen
involvement. Short term goals will be created to highlight accomplishments.
4. Wherever possible, EPA will tie the issue of sediment contamination to tangible
effects such as fish consumption advisories.
5. EPA will demonstrate the Agency's commitment and accountability to sediment
management efforts through consistent involvement of the public in reviewing major
actions under the Strategy.
6. EPA will utilize existing information networks and communication systems as
mechanisms for public involvement and information dissemination.
7. EPA will provide guidance, information, and support to the States but will, where
possible, allow the States flexibility in making decisions and adapting the outreach
information to local conditions.
8. EPA will prepare written materials and guidance on sediment contamination, but will
also use workshops and face-to-face contact hi disseminating information.
9. EPA will provide the public with a balanced risk framework that is understandable
and includes information about comparative risks.
112
-------
10. EPA will provide public information at a level of detail that allows the public to
formulate decisions.
11. EPA will work toward building consensus among all of its audiences.
12. EPA will work toward developing
be self-sustaining and will carry
a management framework of institutions that will
he work of sediment management into the future.
113
-------
12. CASE STUDIES
Well-documented cases of human health and ecological effects caused by sediment
contamination have been published in the peer-reviewed literature. This appendix contains a few case
examples that reflect both human health and ecological effects that may be expected at sites where
severe sediment contamination is evident.
12.1 CASE STUDIES OF HUMAN HEALTH RISKS
For the purposes of this Strategy, risk is defined as the probability of harm or likelihood of an
adverse consequence or effect caused by the presence of contaminants hi the environment. Various
EPA programs have different acceptable risk levels, generally ranging from 10^ to 10"6; therefore
"unacceptable risk" determinations must be made on a program specific basis.
In 1987, EPA completed a study entitled Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of
Environmental Problems (U.S. EPA, 1987b). Toxic chemicals in sediments, included as a category
of nonpoint source pollution, were ranked as the eleventh most significant environmental problem of
thirty-two identified in the report. In 1989, EPA Administrator William Reilly asked the SAB to
review "Unfinished Business." The SAB is a public advisory group that provides scientific
information and advice to EPA. In a report entitled Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies
for Environmental Protection. SAB supported EPA's ranking of the human health risks posed by
contaminated sediments (U.S. EPA, 1990b). In this report, SAB indicated that cancer and non-cancer
illnesses can be caused by bioaccumulation of toxic chemicals from sediments in fish and shellfish
which are then consumed by humans. Both EPA and SAB gave contaminated sediments a medium.
114
-------
risk score as a causative agent of non-cancer illnesses
fish posed a low cancer risk, but noted that bioaccumulation
sediments was the primary route of human exposure
. SAB judged that consumption of contaminated
in fish of chemicals in contaminated
to carcinogens in surface waters.
In comparative risk analyses performed b; r EPA Regions I, n, ffl, V, and X, sediment
contamination was given a medium-high score for cancer risks to consumers of fish and shellfish
(U.S. EPA, 1989b). Since actual risks may be higher for certain ethnic groups due to fish
consumption patterns, environmental equity concerns have been raised in certain parts of the country.
In 1993, there were 1280 waterbodies with fish consumption advisories in the United States, with
sediments identified as a potential source of contamination at many sites.
12.1.1 Quincy Bay and New Bedford Harbor,
Massachusetts
In June 1988, EPA released a report, completed at the request of Congress, entitled
Assessment of Oulncv Bay: Summary Report (U.S. EPA, 1988b). The study investigated the types
and concentrations of pollutants hi Quincy Bay, Massachusetts; the incidence of abnormalities in
marine life; and the potential public health implications of consumption of seafood exposed to
contaminated sediments. Study results indicated that levels of PCBs, polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, and metals were elevated in sediments and hi the marine species studied. Whiter
flounder and soft-shelled clams were found to erf ibit an extremely high incidence of conditions
believed to be associated with environmental stress: cancerous lesions; liver, intestinal, and pancreatic
pathologies; and neoplasms.
115
-------
The human health risk assessment concluded that regular consumption of tomalley
(hepatopancreas) from Quincy Bay lobsters posed a high cancer risk comparable to risks reported in
the case studies described below for Upper New York Harbor or Lake Michigan. The maximum
upper bound estimated lifetime cancer risk for the maximally exposed individual consuming a mixed
diet of clams, flounder, lobster meat, and lobster tomalley from Quincy Bay was calculated to be 2.3
x 10"2 (U.S. EPA, 1988b). The lifetime cancer risk of a typical local consumer of the same mixed
diet was calculated to be 1.3 x 10"3 (U.S. EPA, 1988b).
At the New Bedford Harbor Superfund site in Massachusetts, PCB concentrations in
sediments range from a few parts per million (ppm) to over 100,000 ppm. PCB levels as high as 10
ppm in fish tissue have been measured in certain areas at the site; 10 ppm is five times the FDA's
action level of 2 ppm for PCBs. Thousands of acres have been closed to the harvesting of shellfish,
finfish, and lobsters since New Bedford Harbor's appearance on the National Priority List (NPL) in
1982. Many individuals regularly consumed seafood from the area before the extent of contamination
was known, however, and some residents still harvest both finfish and shellfish for personal
consumption.
A human health risk assessment was conducted for consumption of lobster, flounder, and
i
clams using an 8 ounce meal size (pers. comm. with G. Carman, 1993). PCB levels in edible lobster
tissue (including tomalley) of 2.3 ppm produced a lifetime cancer risk of 1 x 10"2 for weekly
consumption (52 meals/year) and 2.5 x 10~3 for monthly consumption (12 meals/year). PCB levels hi
flounder tissue of 0.37 ppm produced a lifetime cancer risk of 1.7 x 10~3 for weekly consumption and
3.9 x IQ4 for monthly consumption. The fish were taken from an area of intermediate contamination.
116
-------
PCB levels in clam tissue of 0.23 ppm produced
consumption and 2.4 x 10"4 for monthly consumpt
12.1.2 Puget Sound, Washington
Another comprehensive study was comple
Sound (Puget Sound Estuary Program, 1988). A
and it was determined that 25% of the individuals
during their lifetimes. The health risk assessment
be added to the 2500 cases expected per 10,000 i
(a risk level of 2 x 10"4), and 40 additional cases
10,000 individuals consuming a large quantity
carcinogens identified in this study were PCBs in
seaweed.
lifetime cancer risk of 1.1 x 10* for weekly
on.
ed on consumption of seafood taken from Puget
high background incidence of cancer was observed
in the Puget Sound region would develop cancer
predicted that two additional cases of cancer would
individuals consuming an average quantity of seafood
of cancer would be added to the 2500 expected per
of seafood (a risk level of 4 x 10'3). The principal
fish and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in
12.1.3 Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor, California
Following a risk assessment analysis
of Health Services issued a health advisory
Santa Monica Bay, Palos Verdes Peninsula, and
al., 1989). Sediments in these areas are
were discharged in the 1960s and early 1970s.
croaker was particularly contaminated, and that
croaker were significantly higher than levels
of toxic contaminants in fish, the California Department
concerning the consumption of local sport fish from the
Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor areas (Gossett et
contaminated with PCBs, DDT, and DDT metabolites which
Analysis showed that the bottom-feeding white
cancer risks to the population consuming white
generally considered to be acceptable (cancer risk levels
117
-------
on the order of 10"3 to 10"* were calculated). In the Los Angeles area, significantly higher levels of
DDT and its metabolites were found in the blood serum of local and sport fishermen who ate their
catch than in the blood serum of nonconsumers.
12.1.4 Lake Michigan
In the mid-1970s, PCB levels as high as 20 ppm were found in fish from Lake Michigan
(Swam, 1992). Human exposure to PCBs was determined using data from extensive epidemiological
studies of two matched cohorts of exposed individuals (Swain, 1988). One cohort consisted of sport
anglers and the other cohort consisted of mothers and their newborn infants. These groups were
exposed to significant quantities of PCBs from consumption of contaminated freshwater fish from
Lake Michigan.
A 1974 study of 178 adult sport anglers showed that the longer the period of time during
which anglers consumed fish from Lake Michigan, the higher their PCB body burdens (Swain, 1988).
A study of 991 adults in 1982 showed that persons consuming fish from Lake Michigan had higher
PCB body burdens than did non-fish eating individuals (Humphrey, 1987). Risk analyses were not
performed as part of these studies.
A study of mothers and their newborn infants showed that as the period of time over which
fish was consumed from the lake increased, so did the mothers' body burdens of PCBs (Swain, ,
1988). Exposed mothers were found to have increased levels of PCBs in whole blood serum and
breast milk. The higher the PCB body burdens, the more intense were the effects exhibited by the
infants (Fein et al., 1984; Jacobsen and Fein, 1985). Infants of highly exposed mothers were born at
118
-------
reduced birth rates and reduced gestational ages; had smaller head circumferences, arid exhibited
neuro-motor effects.
12.1.5 New York
The New York Department of Environmental Conservation's Clean Water Act Section 304(1)
List states that contaminated sediments cause more than 20% of all river miles in New York to fail to
meet their designated uses under CWA authority. Many of New York's major rivers are affected,
including the entire 38 mile length of the Niagara River, the entire 109 mile length of the St.
Lawrence River lying in New York, and the entire 180 mile reach of the Hudson River from Fort
Edward iii the Upper Hudson to the Battery at Manhattan. About 30,000 acres (90%) of New York's
lakes are also a problem for fish consumers, due j rimarily to PCB contamination. Other sediment
contaminants identified include DDT, chlordane, £ nd mercury. Fish consumption advisories or bans
have been issued for several or all species at each site.
12.1.6 Pago Pago, American Samoa
In 1991, the American Samoan government issued a public health directive instructing the
public not to eat any fish or shellfish caught in ira er Pago Pago Harbor. A ban on the sale of fish
from the inner harbor was also issued. The directive was based on the results of a study which
examined chemical concentrations in water, sediment, and fish (American Samoa Department of
Health, 1991). Sediments were reported to be highly contaminated with PCBs', oil and grease, and
heavy metals.
19
-------
EPA Region IX analyzed the data for health risks and identified the following risks of greatest
concern: 1) Potential brain damage. If lead contamination alone were considered, lead concentrations
in fish could reach levels that would cause 70% to 80% of children who regularly eat 3 to 4 fish
meals per week to suffer a permanent reduction in intelligence. 2) Increased cancer risk. Consuming
fish from the inner harbor at a rate of 3 to 4 fish meals per week over a lifetime would significamtly
increase the risk of cancer due to arsenic contamination. 3) Increased non-cancer health risks. Using
a hazard index hi which non-cancer health risks occur at levels greater than a value of "1", EPA
Region IX calculated the hazard index at 1-3 for adults consuming inner harbor fish and at 2-3 for
children consuming inner harbor fish (Baker, 1993).
12.2 CASE STUDIES OF ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS/RISKS
In the SAB and EPA Regional comparative risk studies, contaminated sediments received a
high score for their potential to cause adverse ecological effects on both local and regional scales.
The studies also determined that the "recovery period" for areas with sediment contamination may be
decades or longer. Several documented cases of adverse ecological effects due to contaminated
sediments are presented below.
12.2.1 Elizabeth River, Virginia
The Elizabeth River is a sub-estuary of the Chesapeake Bay and is heavily contaminated with
a variety of pollutants, particularly polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Sediment gradients of
PAHs were measured in the following studies: Hargis et al., 1984; Bieri et al., 1986; and, O'Connor
and Huggett, 1988. Examination of benthic communities in the Elizabeth River suggests that
120
-------
contaminated sediments have adverse effects. Up
ake of organic compounds in fish has been
for the observed effects (Van Veld et al., 1990).
observed by assaying bile from exposed fish. Bic accumulation of PAHs in commercially fished,
resident crabs has also been documented. In addi ion, the frequency and intensity of neoplasms,
cataracts, enzyme induction, finrot, and other lesions observed in fish populations (mainly Leiostomus
xanthurus. spot) have been correlated with the extent of sediment contamination (Van Veld et al.,
1990). Laboratory studies have been conducted t > elucidate whether the sediments were responsible
Fish maintained in the laboratory in contact with
sediments taken from the Elizabeth River exhibited several of the symptoms observed among fish
populations in the field. Additional laboratory studies have implicated contaminants from sediments
as causal agents for other effects, such as immune system dysfunction.
12.2.2 Commencement Bay, Washington
Field and laboratory studies were the basis for a comprehensive assessment of ecological risks
caused by toxic sediments in Commencement Bay (U.S. EPA, 1993e). Using amphipod and oyster
larvae bioassays, investigators determined that sediments from 24 of 52 stations caused significant
toxicity compared to a reference area. Benthic infauna measurements were also used to determine
chronic effects. This investigation was the basis
for one of the case studies reviewed by EPA's
Ecotoxicity Subcommittee charged by the Agency's Risk Assessment Council with responsibility for
the development of ecological risk assessment guidelines.
121
-------
12.2.3 Great Lakes
In the Great Lakes, PAH contamination of sediments has been linked to increased incidence of
tumors in certain fish (Baumann, 1989). Brown bullheads from the industrialized Black River in
Ohio exhibited higher levels of organic contaminants, particularly PAHs, and a higher incidence of
skin, liver> and lip tumors than bullheads taken from a nearby reference site (Bauitnann et al., 1987).
By applying criteria established for human epidemiology studies to the data from numerous reports on
the Black River, a cause and effect relationship can be determined between the presence of PAHs in
the sediment and the occurrence of liver cancer in native fish populations (Baumann et al., 1987).
Also in the Great Lakes region, organochlorine contaminants have been linked to reproductive
problems in Forster's tern and to reproductive failure and mortality in mink. The reproductive
success of Forster's terns inhabiting contaminated Green Bay on Lake Michigan was significantly
lower than that of terns inhabiting relatively uncontaminated Lake Poygan in Wisconsin (Kubiak et
al., 1989). Reproductive failures have been linked to intrinsic factors (e.g., egg viability) and
extrinsic factors (e.g., parental attentiveness), both of which are affected by sediment contaminants.
Reproductive problems in mink were first reported in the 1960s at mink farms that fed the mink Great
Lakes fish; high levels of PCBs in the fish were identified as the cause (Auerlich et al., 1973). These
two examples are indicative of the risks to fish-eating birds and mammals posed by a PCB-
contaminated food chain, and may provide clues to explain why certain fish-eating birds and
mammals may have disappeared or become rare in ranges where they were historically found.
122
-------
13. REFERENCES
American Samoa Health Bulletin: Don't Eat the Fisfa
American Samoa Department of Health. 1991.
in Inner Pago Pago Harbor! October 29.
Auerlieh, R.J., R.K. Ringer, and S. Iwamoto. 1973. Reproductive failure and mortality in mink fed
on Great Lakes fish. J. Reprod. Fertil. Su
jpl. 19:365.
Baker, B. 1993. Personal communication with EPA Region IX.
Baumann, P.C. 1989. PAHs, metabolites, and n
of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in
Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL. pp 268-289
Baumann, P.C., W.D. Smith, and W.K. Parland.
;oplasia in feral fish populations. In: Metabolism
the Aquatic Environment. U. Varansi, ed. CRC
1987. Tumor frequencies and contaminant
concentrations in brown bullheads from a i industrialized river and a recreational lake.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116:79-80.
Bieri, R. H., C.S. Hein, R.J. Huggett, P.M. Shcu, H.D. Slone, C.L. Smith, and C.-W. Su. 1986.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in surface sediment from the Elizabeth River subestuary.
Intern. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 26:97-113.
Edgar, III, C.E. 1985. Superfund Projects. U.
Letter 85-7. July 5.
S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Guidance
123
-------
Engler, R, 1992. Personal communication with Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds staff.
Fein, G.G., J.L. Jacobsen, S.W. Jacobsen, P.W. Schwartz, and J.K. Dowler. 1984. Prenatal
exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls: effects on birth size and gestational age. Pediatrics
105:315-320.
Carman, Gayle. 1993. Personal Communication. New Bedford Harbor Regional Project Manager,
EPA Region I, Boston, MA.
Gossett, R., G. Wikholm, J. Ljubenkov, and D. Steinman. 1989. Human serum DDT levels related
to consumption of fish from the coastal waters of Los Angeles. Environmental Toxicology
and Chemistry 8:951-955.
Hargis, Jr., W.J., M.H. Roberts, Jr., and D.E. Zwerner. 1984. Effects of contaminated sediments
and sediment-exposed effluent water on an estuarine fish: acute toxicity. Marine
Environmental Research 14:337-354.
Humphrey, H.E.B. 1987. The human population-an ultimate receptor for aquatic contaminants.
Hydrobiologia 149:75-80.
Jacobsen, J.L. and G.G. Fein. 1985. Clusters for the Brazelton scale: an investigation of the
dimensions of neonatal behavior. Dev. Psychology 20:339-353.
124
-------
Kubiak, T.J., HJ. Harris, L.M. Smith, T.R. Schwartz, D.L. Stalling, J.A. Trick, L. Sileo, D.E.
Docherty, and T.C. Erdman. 1989. Mic rocontaminants and reproductive impairment of the
Forster's tern on Green Bay, Lake Michigan-1983. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
18:706-727.
Lee, C.R. 1992. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer!; National Dredging Program. Presentation to the
CSMS Forum on "The Extent and Severity of Contaminated Sediments." In: Proceedings of
the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy Forums. EPA 823-R-92-007.
September 1992.
Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The
Contaminants Tested hi the National
Memorandum NOS OMA 52. National
WA.
Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Sorbed
Status and Trends Program. NOAA Technical
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Seattle,
Lyman, W.J., A.E. Glazer, J.H. Ong, and S.F. Coons. 1987. An Overview of Sediment Quality in
the United States. Prepared for the Offic; of Water Regulation and Standards.
MacDonald, D.D. MacDonald Environmental Sc iences Ltd. 1993. Development of an Approach to
the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Fbrida Coastal Waters. Prepared for the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation,
January.
Tallahassee, FL. Ladysmith, British Columbia.
125
-------
Moore, D. and Wilson, J. 1992. Presentation to the GSMS Forum on "Building Alliances Among
Federal, State, and Local Agencies to Address the National Problem of Contaminated
Sediments." In: Proceedings of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
Forums. EPA 823-R-92-007. September 1992.
National Academy of Sciences. 1989. Contaminated Marine Sediments-Assessment and
Remediation. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C.
O'Connor, J.M. and RJ. Huggett. 1988. Aquatic pollution problems, North Atlantic coast,
including Chesapeake Bay. Aquatic Toxicology 11:163-190.
Office of Management and Budget. 1987. Standard Industrial Classification Manual. PB87-100012,
Puget Sound Estuary Program. 1988. Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Contamination in Puget
Sound Seafood. PTI. Bellevue, WA.
Swain, W.R. 1988. Human health consequences of consumption of fish contaminated with
organochlorine compounds. Aquatic Toxicology 11:357-377.
Swain, W.R. 1992. The Impacts of Contaminated Sediments on Human Health: A Case Study from
the Great Lakes. Presentation to the CSMS Forum on "The Extent and Severity of
Contaminated Sediments." In: Proceedings of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy Forums. EPA 823-R-92-007. September 1992.
126
-------
U.S. EPA. No date. Fish Consumption Database
Board. Assessment and Watershed Protection
Watersheds.
U.S. EPA. 1985. National Perspective on Sedim
EPA Contract #68-01-6986 for Office of Water
Washington, D.C. July.
Nonpoint Source Program Electronic Bulletin
ion Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
:nt Quality. Report prepared by Battelle under
, Criteria and Standards Division.
U.S. EPA. 1987a. Nonpoint Source Guidance. Office of Water and Office of Water Regulations
and Standards. Washington, D.C. December.
U.S. EPA. 1987b. Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of Environmental Problems.
PB88-127-030.
U.S. EPA. 1988a. An Overview of Sediment Quality in the United States. EPA 905/9-88/002.
U.S. EPA. 1988b. U.S. Environmental Protection
summary report. Narragansett, RI: U.S.
Agency Region 1. Assessment of Quincy Bay:
3PA Research Laboratory.
U.S. EPA. 1989a, Risk Assessment Guidance fcr Superfund, Volume II - Environmental Evaluation
Manual, Interim Final. EPA 540/1-89/001. ;
U.S. EPA. 1989b. Comparing Risks and Setting
Regional Projects. EPA X9001-0028.
Environmental Priorities. Overview of Three
127
-------
U.S. EPA. 1990a. Contaminated Sediments-Relevant Statutes and EPA Program Activities. EPA
506/6-90/003.
U.S. EPA. 1990b. Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection.
EPA SAB-EC-90-021.
U.S. EPA. 1992a. Proceedings of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy Forums.
EPA 823/R-92/007.
U.S. EPA. 1992b. Tiered Testing Issues for Freshwater and Marine Sediments. Proceedings,
September 16-18, 1992, Washington, D.C. Office of Water, Office of Science and
Technology, and Office of Research and Development.
U.S. EPA. 1992c. An SAB Report: Review of Sediment Criteria Development Methodology for
Non-Ionic Organics. Sediment Quality Subcommittee of the Ecological Processes and Effects
Committee. EPA-SAB-EPEC-93-002.
U.S. EPA. 1992d. Evaluation of Region 4's Sediment Quality Inventory. Prepared for Coastal
Programs, U.S. EPA, Region 4. Atlanta, GA.
U.S. EPA. 1992e. An SAB Report: Review of a Testing Manual for Evaluation of Dredged
Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal. Prepared by the Sediment Criteria Subcommittee of
the Ecological Processes and Effects Committee. EPA-SAB-EPEC-92-01.
128
-------
U.S. EPA. 1993a. Selecting Remediation Techniques for Contaminated Sediment. EPA
823/B93/001.
U.S. EPA. 1994. Framework for the Development of the National Sediment Inventory. EPA 823-
R-94-003.
U.S. EPA. 1993c. Gulf of Mexico Toxic Substa ices and Pesticides Characterization Report.
Produced for Gulf of Mexico Program, Stennis Space Center, MS. DRAFT.
U.S. EPA. 1993d. EPA Regulatory Agenda. April.
U.S. EPA. 1993e. A review of ecological asses
perspective. In: Commencement Bay Ti
Study. EPA-630-R-92-005.
ment case studies from a risk assessment
Tidelands Assessment: Commencement Bay Case
U.S. EPA. 1994a. Methods for Measuring the
Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates
Tojxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-Associated
. EPA 600/R-94/024.
U.S. EPA. 1994b. Methods for Measuring the
Contaminants with Estuarine and Marine.
U.S. EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer!i
for Ocean Disposal: Testing Manual. EPA
Tbxicity of Sediment Toxicity of Sediment-Associated
\niphipods. EPA 600/R-94/025.
. 1991. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed
503/8-91/001.
129
-------
U.S. EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992. Evaluating Environmental Effects of
Dredged Material Management Alternatives-A Technical Framework. EPA 842/H-92/008.
U.S. EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1993. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed
for Discharge in Inland and Near Coastal Waters-Testing Manual. (DRAFT).
Van Veld, P.A., DJ. Westbrook, B.R. Woodin, R.C. Hale, C.L. Smith, R.J. Huggett, and J.J.
Stegman. 1990. Induced cytochrome P-450 in intestine and liver of spot (Leiostomus
xanthurus) from a polycyclic aromatic contaminated environment. Aquatic Toxicology 17:
119-132. ;
Winer, C. and Starfield, L. 1990. Effect of Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act on Remedial
Action under CERCLA. EPA Office of General Counsel Memorandum to Robert James.
July 20.
World Wildlife Fund. 1992. Improving Aquatic Risk Assessment under FIFRA: Report of the
Aquatic Effects Dialogue Group. Washington, D.C.
130
------- |