Environmental Protection
                        Office of Water
          Number 7    *"~O"
          December 1992
                         Sediments  News
                 Tiered Testing Issues for
            Freshwater and Marine Sediments
A workshop cosponsored by the Office of Water and the Office of Research and
Development was held September 16-18 in Washington, DC.  The workshop
provided a forum for experts in sediment toxicology and staff from EPA's Regional
and Headquarters program offices to discuss the development of standard freshwa-
ter and marine sediment bioassay procedures. The results of discussions held at the
workshop were used to focus ongoing research and to develop technical guidance
for conducting acute and chronic sediment bioassays and bioaccumulation tests.
The guidance documents are expected to be available next Fall for use by all of the
Agency's program offices. For more information contact Tom Armitage at (202)
   Sediment Activities
   Around the Country

   EPA Headquarters
National Inventory of
Contaminated Sediment Sites

For the past several years, EPA's Office of
Science and Technology (OST) has been
working toward the development of a na-
tional inventory of contaminated sediment
sites for both freshwater and marine envi-
ronments. The initial call for the develop-
ment of this inventory originated from EPA's
Draft Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy. More recently, Congress passed
the Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA) of 1992, which requires EPA,
with assistance from NOAA and the COE,
to develop a National Inventory of Con-
taminated Sediment Sites by 1994.

Based on experiences gained from pilot
contaminated sediment inventories in Re-
gions 4 and 5 and the Gulf of Mexico
Program, OST is currently nearing comple-
tion of the proposed Framework for the
Design of an Inventory of Contaminated
Sediment Sites, which will fulfill both the
objectives of the National Strategy and the
mandates of WRDA. The Framework re-
port includes a discussion of the overall
purpose of the Inventory with specifics on
how each EPA Program Office plans to use
the Inventory.  The report begins with a
review of background studies and pilot in-
ventories, as well as alternative design op-
tions.  Next, the chosen approach is de-
scribed in detail, including categories of
monitoring data to be collected (e.g., data
included must be in electronic format), and
proposed data  collection and data entry
processes. Approaches to be used in evalu-
ating the data in order to determine national
areas of concern are currently under consid-
eration. It is anticipated that the Detailed
Monitoring Database will be housed on
EPA's mainframe, with the results of the
evaluation of the detailed monitoring data
available in a PC-compatible format. Ap-
proaches for data evaluation are currently
under consideration and will be developed
further as data gathering proceeds.
(continued on p. 2)
                                   Contaminated Sediment
                                      Activities Timeline
April 12-16,1993. ARCS Technology
Transfer Course. Madison, WI. The
course will provide instruction in the
application of the sediment assessment
methods identified and demonstrated
during the ARCS Program, as well as
early results from the treatment technol-
ogy demonstrations. Contact Rick Fox,
GLNPO, at (312) 353-7979.

April 27-29,1993. Meeting of ASTM
Subcommittee on Sediment Toxicology
(E47.03). Atlanta, GA.  Contact Chris
Ingersoll at (314) 875-5399.

June 6-10,1993. International  Asso-
ciation for Great Lakes Research An-
nual Meeting.  DePere, WI.  Contact
John Kennedy, Green Bay Metropoli-
tan Sewerage District,  at (414) 432-

June 14-16,1993. International Asso-
ciation on Water Quality. Milwaukee,
WI. 1st International Specialized Con-
ference on Contaminated Aquatic Sedi-
ments:  Historical Records, Environ-
mental Impacts, and Remediation. Con-
tactErikChristensen at (414) 229-5422.
 CS News is produced by EFA-
 OST to exchange information on
 contaminated sediments and to
 increase communication among
 interested parties. To obtain cop-
 ies of this report or to contribute
 information^ contact Beverly
 Baker, EPA HQ, at
                                                                             Printed on Recycled Paper

 Compilation of the National Inventory of
 Contaminated Sediment Sites will begin
 early next year as soon as comments on the
 Framework report are received and incor-
 porated into the design. For more informa-
 tion or to receive a copy of the Framework
 report, contact Catherine Fox, OST, at (202)

 Standard Methods for Sediment
 Collection, Handling, and Spiking
 Under Development

 EPA has formed a committee of experts to
 reach consensus  on standard methods  for
 sediment collection, handling, and spiking.
 A number of guides for collecting and han-
 dling sediment have been developed. EPA's
 Environmental Research Laboratory  in
 Newport, Oregon, has developed a sedi-
 ment spiking procedure; an ASTM guide
 for sediment collection, storage, character-
 ization, and manipulation has been devel-
 oped; and Environment Canada will soon
 be releasing a guidance document on sedi-
 ment collection, handling, transport, stor-
 age, manipulation,  and spiking.   All  of
 these guides will be used by EPA's group of
 experts to develop a methods document
 describing procedures that may be adopted
 as EPA standard methods.  The methods
 document developed by the group will  be
 ready next  November for both EPA ap-
 proval and ASTM subcommittee review at
 the SET AC meeting in Houston. For more
 information contact Tom Armitage, OST,
 at (202) 260-5388.

 Science Advisory Board
 Completes Review of Sediment

 The  Science Advisory Board (SAB) has
 completed the second and most recent re-
 view of the Equilibrium Partitioning (EqP)
 approach for generating sediment criteria.
 The SAB Sediment Quality Subcommittee
 of the Ecological Process and Effects Com-
 mittee reaffirmed that "the EqP is scientifi-
 cally sound" and concluded that "EPA
 should proceed according to the following
 sequence of events: (1) establish criteria on
 the basis  of present knowledge within the
bounds of uncertainty discussed in this re-
port; (2) improve the present knowledge so
as to improve the procedures for establish-
ing criteria; and (3) periodically revisit the
criteria to make them more consistent with
conditions in the natural environment."
 In May 1992, the Office of Water asked the
 SAB to evaluate the Agency's progress in
 reducing the uncertainties associated with
 the EqP approach in light of how the Agency
 intends to use  sediment quality criteria.
 The review was conducted on June 10-11,
 1992, and was attended by scientists from
 academia, industry, public interest groups,
 and other government agencies.  Presenta-
 tions by EPA focused on intended uses of
 sediment criteria, technical aspects of the
 methodology, and what was done to re-
 spond to specific recommendations identi-
 fied  by the SAB in the first review of the
 criteria.  In addition, a methodology was
 presented for modifying sediment criteria
 based on site-specific conditions (e.g., spe-
 cies sensitivity, partitioning, or both). Pre-
 sentations followed from industry, public
 interest groups, and other federal agencies
 both supporting and challenging aspects of
 the criteria.

 The S AB's review of the criteria was very
 positive. The SAB found that the scientific
 basis for the EqP approach was valid and
 "supports the EqP concept to develop sedi-
 ment criteria where the conditions of equi-
 librium among the various phases of sedi-
 ments are likely." It commended EPA for
 addressing the recommendations of the SAB
 from earlier reviews. They concluded that
 the methodology is sufficiently valid to be
 used in a regulatory context, provided that
 the uncertainties associated with the meth-
 odology are clearly stated and considered
 in the process. The SAB did state that they
 would like to see the continued collection
of field data and that users of the criteria
will have to determine the appropriate use
of the criteria within their programs.  EPA
agrees with both of these points.
 Next Steps

 The five draft sediment criteria documents
 provided to the SAB for review will be
 updated and will undergo both a formal
 internal Agency red border review and for-
 mal public review and comment via the
 Federal Register. To increase the scope of
 these reviews, four supplemental documents
 will accompany the criteria documents as
 part of the review:

 •  a proposed methodology for conducting
   site-specific sediment criteria modifica-
   tions  to be used when field conditions
   suggest that modification of the criteria
   may be warranted;

 •  a technical support document that articu-
   lates the technical basis of the criteria and
   identifies minimum data requirements
   needed to derive sediment criteria;

 •  a document outlining probable intended
   uses of sediment criteria; and

 •  a copy of the recent SAB report that
   reviewed the EqP approach for generat-
   ing sediment criteria.

 In addition, a user's manual that will help
 ensure appropriate application of sediment
 criteria is being prepared.   EPA plans to
 issue two or three new sediment criteria
 each year and to periodically review crite-
 ria documents to incorporate new science.

 Calculating Sediment Criteria

 Some have had difficulty calculating sedi-
ment criteria.  To make this task a little
easier, EPA has prepared Lotus and Excel
(continued on p. 3)
      Sediment Classification Methods Compendium Available
   Limited copies of the final Sediment Classification Methods Compendium
   are now available through the OST Resource Center.  If you requested a
   copy and haven't received it by December 18, contact Maureen Lynch of
   the Resource Center at (202) 260-7786.  The document can  also  be
   obtained through NTIS (PB 93-115186).  The cost is $36.50 in print and
   $17.50 for microfiche.  The Educational  Resources Information Center
   (ERIC) will also sell the compendium (101-D) for $19.50 in print.  For
   more information call ERIC at (614) 292-6717.

spreadsheets. The user needs only to plug
in organic carbon levels (dry weight or
percent) and fresh and  marine sediment
criteria values and confidence limits will
be automatically calculated for the five
draft criteria compounds. The spreadsheets
are located on the Nonpoint Source Pro-
gram electronic bulletin board, (301) 589-
0205.  To obtain a copy of these spread-
sheets. EPA employees or persons  work-
ing with or for EPA can download the file
SQCCALC.ZIP.  Note: Final chronic val-
ues and Kows may be slightly different from
those contained  in current draft criteria
documents. When this is the case, use the
spreadsheet values because they are more
recent.  The spreadsheet values will be
updated as needed.

Sediment Criteria for Metals

In 1993 EPA is planning to present a pro-
posed methodology for deriving sediment
criteria for metal contaminants to the SAB
for review. The proposed methodology
focuses on divalent metals and anoxic sedi-
ments. For sediments contaminated with
other metals or when metals are found  in
 sediments that  are oxic,  an interim ap-
proach will be recommended. This interim
 approach is being developed to help pro-
 vide scientists and environmental program
 managers with recommendations on sedi-
 ment analysis until a criteria methodology'
 can be developed. Absolute clean concen-
 trations and sediment assessment method-
 ologies will be recommended.
    Regional Activities
 Region 2

 Regional Implementation Manual for
 Dredged Material Disposal

 Region 2 and the New York District Corps
 of Engineers have  developed a regional
 implementation manual for the evaluation
 of dredged material proposed for ocean
 disposal. This manual implements the re-
 vised national "Green Book" guidance on
 ocean disposal specifically for dredging
 projects  proposed in the New York/New
 Jersey Harbor area. For more information
 contact (212) 264-1302.
Sediment Inventory Planned for
New York/New Jersey Harbor

Region 2 sediment inventory projects are
planned for this fiscal year to assess New
York/New Jersey Harbor sediments. The
New York Harbor Estuary Program and
Environmental Services Division are coop-
erating on a R-EMAP study of sediment
quality characteristics in New York Harbor
that will look at chemistry, benthic commu-
nity structure, and amphipod (Ampelisca
abdita) toxicity.  In  addition,  NOAA  is
providing resources for a sediment bio-
effects assessment for portions of the harbor
that will include collection of sediments for
chemical analysis and A.  abdita toxicity
tests. This effort follows  a more compre-
hensive assessment performed in 1991 by
NOAA and the EPA Environmental Re-
search Laboratory at Narragansett. Contact
Joel O'Connor at (212) 264-5356  or
Darvene Adams at (908) 321-6700 regard-
ing the R-EMAP study; contact Eric Stem
at  (212) 264-5283 regarding the NOAA

Decontamination Technology Program
under WRDA

 Decontamination technologies  will be as-
 sessed for their effectiveness and suitability
 in  the development of a decontamination
 program that will be jointly recommended
 by EPA and the Corps of  Engineers for
 New York/New Jersey Harbor.  Resources
 for this program are being provided through
 section 405 of the Water Resources Devel-
 opment   Act  (WRDA)   of   1992.
 Investigations will be based on efforts ini-
 tiated by the Corps under WRDA of 1990;
 other  necessary aspects of a complete de-
 contamination program  will  also  be
 considered. These can include removal and
 pretreatment and posttreatment technolo-
 gies,  as well as siting and economic
 investigations. For more  information con-
 tact Audrey Massa at (212) 264-8118 or
 Alex Lechich at (212) 264-1302.

 Region 6

 Region 6 recently completed a report  en-
 titled  Trends  in Selected  Water Quality
 Parameters for the Houston Ship Channel.
 This report documents temporal changes in
 water column concentrations for 21 param-
 eters at five locations in the inland portion
of the Ship Channel. In addition, it evalu-
ates the more limited data set for heavy
metals and PCBs in bottom sediments and
discusses available data on ambient toxic-
ity  and the aquatic community.   The
sediment data suggest dramatic reductions
in heavy metals over time at the Turning
Basin, the  inland extent of the dredged
channel. There were no significant changes
in sediment PCB concentrations over time
at any of the stations investigated. Copies
of the report are available from the Re-
gional Office. For more information con tact
Phil Crocker, Region 6. at (214) 655-6644.

       ORD Activities

 In a cooperative effort, ERL-Duluth and
 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are de-
 veloping standardized test methods forthree
 organisms to help assess contaminated sedi-
 ments.  Researchers will develop test con-
 ditions and culture conditions for Hyallela
 azteca,  Chlronomus  tentans,   and
 Lumbriculus variegatus.  EPA hopes  to
 release the document by the end of this
 fiscal year.

 Ongoing research efforts being conducted
 to support this effort include:

 • Testing the relative sensitivity of the test
   organisms to some common sediment
   contaminants (e.g., metals, pesticides);

 • Evaluating the toxicity of ammonia at
   various pHs to the test organisms;

 • Determining the effects of abiotic factors
   on test (e.g., particle size) results;

 • Evaluating    the   kinetics    of
   bioaccumulation of contaminants by L.
   variegatus; and

 • Developing a reference sediment.

 In addition, researchers from 10 to 12 gov-
 ernment, contract, and university labs will
 perform round-robin testing using Hyalella
 azteca and Chlronomus tentans. Both short-
  term water only exposure tests and long-
  term sediment tests will be conducted.  For
  more information  contact  Gary Ankley,
  ERL-Duluth, at (218) 720-5603.

 Great Lakes  National

      Program Office

ARCS Pilot Demonstrations Completed

The final three of five pilot-scale demon-
strations of sediment treatment technologies
to be performed by the  Assessment and
Remediation of Contaminated Sediments
(ARCS) Program were initiated or com-
pleted this past summer. The bioremediation
of 2,700 cubic yards of PCB-contaminated
sediment from the Sheboygan River, Wis-
consin, was initiated in May, with sampling
continuing  through spring  1993.   This
project is being done jointly by USEPA
ERL-Athens for the ARCS Program and
Blasland, BouckandLee for the Superfund
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP),
Tecumseh Products.

A  solvent extraction demonstration was
conducted in July at the Grand Calumet
River, Indiana. The Basic Extractive S ludge
Technology (BEST) process, developed by
the Resources Conservation Company, was
set up at the US Steel Gary Works, where it
was used to treat 300 gallons of PAH- and
PCB-contaminated sediments.  This dem-
onstration was a joint effort of the ARCS
Program and  the Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program.
A final report is expected in the summer of

A thermal desorption unit developed by
Remediation Technologies was demon-
strated on 15 cubic yards of sediments from
the AshtabulaRiverin September. The unit
is being monitored to test its ability to
remove PCBs and other chlorinated organ-
ics from sediments.  A final report is
expected in the summer of 1993. For more
information  on these demonstration
projects, contact Steve Garbaciek, GLNPO.
at (312) 353-0117.

Conference on the Remediation of

A conference on the remediation of sedi-
ments was held on November 17-18,1992,
in East Brunswick, New Jersey. Rutgers
Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences
sponsored the conference in conjunction
with the Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey. This conference was a follow-
up session  to a  similar conference on
bioremediation techniques for sediments
held in May.

Staff from the Great Lakes National Pro-
gram Office's (GLNPO) ARCS program
made presentations on treatment technol-
ogy test results.   Representatives from
Holland, Belgium, Germany, and England
presented the results of similar research
programs in their countries.   Additional
presentations were made on sediment dy-
namics and the use of underwater borrow
pits for the disposal of dredged materials
from New York and New Jersey harbors.
Conference proceedings will be published
early next year.  For more information
contact Mike De Luca, Rutgers  Institute of
Marine and Coastal Sciences, at (908) 932-
             Contaminated Sediment Assessment and
                    Remediation Course Planned
   The ARCS Program and  the  Department of Engineering Professional
   Development of the University of Wisconsin are planning a technology
   transfer course to be held April 12-16,1993, in Madison, Wisconsin. The
   course will provide instruction in the application of the sediment assessment
   methods identified and demonstrated during the ARCS Program, as well as
   early results from the treatment technology demonstrations. The course will
   be geared to state agency personnel  and other supporters of Great Lakes
   Remedial Action Plans (RAPs). For more information contact Rick Fox,
   GLNPO, at (312) 353-7979.
        Army Corps of
 Development of "Second Generation"
 Sediment Toxicity Tests

 Scientists at the USAGE Waterways Ex-
 periment Station (WES) in Vicksburg, MS,
 are developing a  new generation of sedi-
 ment toxicity tests.  These new toxicity
 tests are  designed to assess the potential
 long-term or "chronic" sublethal effects of
 contaminated sediments. A primary objec-
 tive of this research effort is to develop tests
 that are technically sound yet simple enough
 for routine regulatory application.

 To date, research  has focused on develop
 ing tests to evaluate the sublethal effects of
 dredged material on growth and reproduc-
 tion in benthic infaunal test species. This
 effort has resulted in a proposed 28-day
 growth bioassay with a marine polychaete
 worm,Neanthes (Nereis) arenaceodentata.
 In addition, similar research with saltwater
 amphipods is ongoing.

 A key element in  developing these tests is
 providing technically strong interpretative
 guidance. First-generation toxicity tests
 measure acute lethality, and interpretation
* of mortality is fairly straightforward (i.e.,
 either the test organism survives or it does
 not). Results from chronic sublethal sedi-
 ment toxicity tests, however, are more enig-
 matic. Consequently, much of the research
 by the Corps has focused on (1) the devel-
 opment of  interpretative guidance for a
 growth endpoint by linking growth to sub-
 sequent reproductive success and (2) the
 use of population dynamics models to evalu-
 ate changes in individual growth and repro-
 duction at the population level.

 One use of these chronic sublethal toxicity
 tests may be in the USEPA/USACE ef-
 fects-based tiered testing approach for
 evaluating the suitability of dredged mate-
 rial for ocean disposal (i.e., the Green Book).
 For more information contact Dr. David
 Moore, WES, at (601) 634-2910.

 Bioaccumulation of Toxic Substances
 in Aquatic Organisms

 A computer database has been created to
 provide users with numerical and descrip-
 (continued on p. 5)

live information for interpreting the envi-
ronmental significance of dioxin and furan
analytical data. The database emphasizes
dioxins and furans in sediments, aquatic
biota, and fish-eating birds. Both field and
bioassay data are included. Presently, more
than 2500 entries from both the refereed
literature and less easily accessible govern-
ment reports have been entered. The data-
base is accessible to  users familiar with
dBASE IV at the USAGE Waterways Ex-
periment Station, Vicksburg, MS,  or by
request to Victor A. McFarland, at (601)

Genotoxicity of Contaminated
Dredged Material

In March 1990  a sediment genotoxicity
workshop was held at WES to develop a
strategy for testing the mutagenic, carcino-
genic,  and  teratogenic potential of con-
taminated sediments.  The approach rec-
ommended by the workshop attendees com-
bines in  vitro and in vivo biomarkers of
exposure or of effect with long-term bioas-
says in a tiered  application. The  Ames
Salmonella mutagenicity assay has now
been successfully adapted for use with sedi-
ments  as part of a first-tier screen for
genotoxicity.  Complementing screening
assays under evaluation or development
include the rat hepatoma H4IIE in vitro
assay testing CYPIA1 mixed-function oxi-
dase (MFO) induction and the single-cell
gel assay for in vivo DNA damage to se-
lected  cells.  Second-tier procedures are
intended to have greater specificity for par-
ticular compounds and include DNA-car-
cinogen adducts, bile metabolites, and cy-
togenetic indicators such as micronuclei. A
long-range objective of the research is to
determine the levels of uncertainty associ-
ated with biomarkers and short-term bioas-
says used as predictors of genotoxic poten-
tial by correlating results  with develop-
mental abnormalities and cancer in fish
models. For more information contact Vic-
tor A. McFarland, WES, at (601) 634-3721.

Relationships Between Sediment
Geochemistry and Biological Impacts

The organic carbon (OC) fraction of sedi-
ments  is commonly  used as a basis for
expressing the concentration of chemical
contaminants such as PCBs, PAHs, diox-
ins, furans, and chlorinated pesticides. OC
normalization is  useful in making predic-
tive assessments of the  potential for such
chemicals to bioaccumulate in aquatic or-
ganisms. Additionally, OC normalization
is fundamental to the equilibrium partition-
ing-based sediment quality criteria proposed
by EPA.  However, many sediments of
concern have very low OC content, and the
lower limit of applicability of OC normal-
ization is not known. Scientists at WES are
evaluating a kinetic model involving a fish-
suspended sediment system to address this
problem. The design eliminates most of the
sources of variability inherent in long-term
studies in which empirical rather than pre-
dicted steady state concentrations are used
as the endpoint.  For more information
contact Victor A. McFarland, WES, at (601)
      State of Florida
Florida Develops Preliminary Effects-
Based Sediment Quality Assessment
Guidelines for Coastal Waters

The Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation (FDER) has initiated a project
to develop  and validate preliminary ef-
fects-based sediment quality assessment
guidelines (SQAGs). These informal guide-
lines are needed to provide screening tools
for assessing the potential biological ef-
fects associated with
sediment-sorbed con-
taminants.  At present,
these SQAGs  are  in-
tended for use  in such
applications as identify-
ing priority stormwater
controls, designing wet-
lands    restoration
projects, and monitoring
trends in environmental
A number of approaches
have  been  used to de-
velop SQAGs in various jurisdictions
throughout the United States.  A review of
the major approaches used to assess sedi-
ment contamination revealed that no single
approach was likely to satisfy all the needs
for SQAGs. Of the eight approaches evalu-
ated, the weight-of-evidence  approach
(WE A) developed by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (see
NOAA Technical Memorandum  NOS
OMA 52) is considered  to respond most
directly to Florida's immediate need for
reliable and cost-effective SQAGs. Envi-
ronment Canada (EC) is also using this
approach to derive SQAGs. Critical evalu-
ation of this procedure suggests that, while
the WEA has limitations that could influ-
ence the applicability of the guidelines, it
will support the derivation of preliminary
guidelines for Florida coastal  waters that
are scientifically defensible.

Using the recommended procedure,  data
derived from a wide variety of methods,
approaches, and locations in North America
were assembled and evaluated to derive
preliminary SQAGs for 25 priority  con-
taminants in Florida coastal waters. These
numerical SQAGs are used to define three
ranges of concentrations  for each of the
contaminants, including a probable effects
range,  a possible effects range, and  a no
effects range. These ranges of contaminant
concentrations are considered to be more
effective assessment tools than single nu-
merical guideline values because they ex-
plicitly recognize the inherent uncertainty
in sediment quality assessments. In addi-
tion, the ranges are considered to provide
more flexibility in  the application of the
guidelines in various environmental pro-

A subjective assessment of the accuracy of
these management tools  indicates that a
                   high level of confi-
                   dence  should be
                   placed on the guide-
                   lines derived for 11
                   substances. A some-
                   what lower level of
                   confidence should be
                   placed on the guide-
                   lines for  the remain-
                   ing  14 substances.
                   The results of this as-
                   sessment suggest that
                   the    preliminary
                   guidelines should be
                   fully  evaluated  and
refined, as necessary, using the results of
investigations  conducted in Florida and
elsewhere. S tudies are under way in Tampa
Bay, St. Andrews Bay, and Pensacola Bay
that will provide information directly rel-
evant to the evaluation of these guidelines.
It is anticipated that re vised SQAGs will be
available in late 1993.

The numerical SQAGs and general advice
(continued on p. 11)
SQAGs will be used
 as screening  tools
to assess biological
       impacts at
   sediment  sites.

         The State of Wash-
         ington  has  ad-
         dressed sediment
         contamination in a
  comprehensive management
  program established in coop-
  eration with state and federal
  agencies.  The management
  program includes  limits on
  ongoing discharge sources of
  sediment contamination, meth-
  ods to dredge and dispose of
  contaminated sediment, and
  sediment cleanup. Much of the
  program's framework came from
  the Puget Sound Comprehensive
 Conservation and Management  Plan, a
 product of Puget Sound's designation as an
 estuary of national significance. The Plan's
 sediment strategy included the following

  1)  adopt standards that define sediment
  2)  control the sources of sediment
  3)  manage dredging and dredged
     material disposal in consideration of
     contaminant levels;
 4)  proceed with sediment cleanup
    where it is needed and can be
     accomplished; and
 5)  provide opportunities for public
     involvement and education
     throughout the process.

 Sediment Management Standards

 The cornerstone of Washington's program
 is the  Sediment Management Standards
 (SMS) (Chapter 173-204 WAC), adopted
 in March 1991. These standards include:

 • Sediment Quality Standards — estab-
 lishes  effects-based narrative standards
 statewide, as well as chemical and biologi-
 cal criteria for 47 contaminants in the ma-
 rine surface sediments of Puget Sound.

 • Source Control—provides a method to
 control the  sources of contamination by
 applying sediment quality standards to ex-
 isting  source  control  programs (e.g.,
 NPDES permits).

 • Sediment Cleanup — establishes a sedi-
ment clean-up decision process that identi-
 fies,  ranks,  and prioritizes contaminated
sediment sites, and specifies sediment
clean-up standards.
             Management  in
             Washington State
 The  SMS are the result of an extensive
 public involvement and technical develop-
 ment process that began in the early 1980s.
 The  standards also contain reserved sec-
 tions for further development of freshwater
 and human health criteria (see below). The
 SMS were approved by EPA in 1991 as part
 of the state's water quality standards under
 section 303 of the Clean Water Act.

 Technical Approach

 Sediment quality is evaluated using a tiered
 testing approach.  If there are no chemical
 criteria exceedances in the initial chemistry
 tier, then the sediment is assumed to not
 cause biological effects.   If there are
 exceedances, a second biological tier is
 available to address the  findings of the
 chemistry tier. If biological tests are done,
 the biological test interpretation will gov-
 ern the final decision on the sediment qual-
 ity. This second tier requires the use of:

 • two approved "acute effects" bioassays:
 a 10-day amphipod mortality (Rhepoxynius
 abronius) and one of four larval mortality/
 abnormality tests (Crassostrea gigas, Pa-
 cific oyster; Mytilus eduiis, blue mussel;
 Strongylocentrotus purpuratus, purple sea
 urchin;  or Dendraster excentricus, sand
 dollar) and

 • one of three approved "chronic effects"
 tests:  field benthicinfaunal abundance; 20-
 day juvenile polychaete biomass (Neanthes
 arenaceodentata); or saline-extract bacte-
 rial bioluminescence ("Microtox").

Ongoing Criteria Development

The SMS contain reserved sections for fur-
ther development and improvement of the
rule.  The  state is  currently developing
             human  health criteria and
             freshwater sediment criteria.
             Pending  budget appropria-
             tions, human health and fresh-
             water criteria are planned for
             adoption as an amendment to
             the SMS in 1994.

             Human Health Sediment Cri-
             teria Development — Work
             on human health sediment cri-
             teria development was initi-
             ated in late 1991. The criteria
             are currently envisioned as a
             two-tier process.  Tier  1  is
             intended to be a straightfor-
 ward application of chemical criteria that
 are developed using conservative (protec-
 tive) assumptions. The Tier 1 criteria will
 be designed to identify significant health
 threats.   Acceptable  sediment  chemical
 concentrations are calculated using the
 chemical's potency and predicted human
 exposure values. Tier 2 will provide a more
 thorough analysis of chemicals and expo-
 sures on a site-specific basis.

 The Washington effort to date has focused
 primarily on Tier 1 and has produced sev-
 eral draft technical and policy documents
 ranging from a literature review of seafood
 consumption rates in Puget Sound to analy-
 sis of a probability distribution model to
 derive criteria.  Continuing efforts include
 evaluation of an age-dependent food web
 model to derive bioaccumulation factors,
 and policy determinations of appropriate
 risk levels and the population to be pro-
 tected. Tier 2 development work will begin
 in June  1993 and will incorporate a meth-
 odology for site-specific sediment and hu-
 man health evaluations.

 Freshwater Sediment Criteria
 Development — Also initiated in 1991,
 Washington's freshwater sediment quality
 criteria development work has primarily
 focused on three areas to date: a literature
 search, compilation of a database for Wash-
 ington freshwater sediment chemical con-
 centrations, and limited bioassay compari-
 son studies using field projects in Washing-
 ton State with known contamination levels.
 From these study areas the following re-
ports are available to the public:

 • FSEDCRTT—a summary of freshwater
sediment chemical criteria or guidelines
issued by agencies in the U.S. and Canada;
(continued on p. 7)

• FSEDBIB — a bibliographic database
of freshwater sediment literature,  guide-
lines, and methods that serves as a founda-
tion for ongoing criteria development ac-

• FSEDLIST — a database of historic
freshwater  sediment chemical data for
Washington State sediment samples;

• Status Report — Freshwater Sediment  .-
Criteria Development Project, a summary
review of the Department of Ecology's
development work in the above studies and
site status and bioassay test conclusions
and recommendations from four freshwa-
ter contaminated sediment site projects;

 •  A Review  of Interpretation Methods
 for Freshwater Benthic Invertebrate Sur-
 vey  Data Used by Selected  State and
 Federal Agencies—a description of fresh-
 water benthic infaunal assessment method-
 ologies from  22 states.

 Finally, with the assistance of EPA Region
 10 grant monies,  Washington currently
 plans  to complete  a regional freshwater
 sediment quality database by September
 1993.  This database will be the key step
 toward the initial identification of freshwa-
 ter sediment chemical criteria.

 Regulatory Application of Sediment

 The SMS establish two levels of criteria—
 a "no-effects" level that serves as the long-
 term goal for contaminant levels in sedi-
 ments, and a "minor-effects" level that is
 the maximum allowable level for sediment

 The two levels of  criteria provide a range
 within which regulatory decisions are made.
 The regulatory selection of a level for a
 specific discharge permit or clean-up site is
 made as close  as practicable to the lower
 limit but recognizes that other factors such
 as engineering feasibility, cost, or natural
 recovery may  require allowing a higher
 level  of contamination. For those areas in
 which permitted discharges or clean-up ac-
 tivities  exceed the "no-effects" level, the
 state  can authorize  "sediment  dilution
 zones." For source control activities, these
  take the form of "sediment impact zones"
  and are available  only to dischargers that
operate the permitted facility meeting all
current technology requirements. In clean-
up actions, a "sediment recovery zone" is
established that takes into account factors
such as natural recovery and engineering/
cost feasibility considerations. In all cases,
the maximum permitted level in these zones
is the upper "minor adverse effects" level.

Dredged Material Management

Several elements of the state's comprehen-
sive sediment management program ad-
dress dredged material.

Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
(PSDDA) — the PSDDA program was
initiated in 1985 to manage the unconfmed,
open-water disposal of relatively clean ma-
terial dredged for navigation purposes in
Puget Sound. The eight PSDDA disposal
sites are jointly managed by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers,  U.S. EPA, and the
State of Washington, and were federally
              designated via the Corps/EPA advanced
              identification process pursuant to 40 CFR
              230.80. Washington's SMS rule explicitly
              recognizes the PSDDA process and reaf-
              firms the approach used in the  PSDDA
              program. The two programs use similar
              technical interpretations to assess sediment
              quality, and the PSDDA-approved dredged
              material disposal sites are being established
              as approved "sediment impact zones" un-
              der the SMS rule.

              Dredged Material Management Stan-
              dards (DMMS) — Washington is devel-
              oping a rule that will establish requirements
              for dredging, transporting, and disposing of
              contaminated sediments, and will provide
              design and monitoring  requirements  for
              disposal in water, along the shore, and on
              land.   A guidance manual summarizing
              current technical requirements for dredged
              material management is being written, and
              the rule is scheduled to be drafted in 1993.
              (continued on p. 8)
                      Reports Available

   The development and implementation of the State of Washington's sediment
   management program have resulted in a library of more than 30 documents
   related to various areas of the program. These include:

   •   Sediment Management Standards  Rule (Chapter 173-204 WAC)

   •   Sediment Management Standards  Part V: Sediment Cleanup
       Standards — Guidance Document ($9.90 — please call for ordering

   •   Multiuser Confined Disposal Sites Program Study

   For copies of these documents, or for a complete list of available documents,

   Barb Patrick, Sediment Management Unit
   Department of Ecology
   P.O. Box 7703
   Olympia, WA 98504-7703
autreui e '
                                                       :i I 'd

   Multiuser  Confined  Disposal Sites —
   Washington is working  to  establish
   multiuser confined disposal sites for Puget
   Sound  that would provide  safe disposal
   environments for contaminated sediments
   dredged from both navigation and clean-up

   Key Program Feature: Regulatory

   The SMS were designed to provide regula-
   tory consistency among  all  key govern-
   ment programs that address sediment con-
   tamination.  Each of these programs uses
   the same quality standards to determine
  regulatory decisions regarding sediments.
  The sediment contaminant levels allowed
  as a result of a permitted discharge do not
  exceed the disposal guidelines established
  for the PSDD A disposal sites.  This ensures
  that permitted discharges  do  not result in
  increased disposal costs and liabilities for
  navigation dredging projects and  state-
  owned disposal sites. Also, the  contami-
  nant levels permitted in a discharge permit
  or at a dredged material disposal site are set
  so they do not exceed "cleanup triggers."
  This ensures  that regulatory managers are
  not permitting ongoing discharges or estab-
  lishing dredged material disposal sites that
  would result in future clean-up sites.

  Continuing Challenge —
 Sediment Liability from Ongoing

 During development of the SMS rule, there
 was extensive discussion of how to manage
 ongoing discharge contamination and as-
 sociated liability in sediments located on
 private and public aquatic lands.  Though
 the contamination  is due to the discharge,
 current laws allocate the responsibility for
 any needed contamination cleanup jointly
 and severally to both the discharger and the

 To address this concern, the state consid-
 ered requiring landowner approval of dis-
 charge impacts on aquatic lands. However,
 there would be no effective way to prevent
 a landowner from asking  a  discharger for
 unreasonable compensation or from unrea-
 sonably withholding approval. There were
 also legal concerns regarding  delegating
 regulatory decisions to private parties.

 As a partial response to this issue, the SMS


Controlling Managing Determining Establishina
Sources Dredged Need for Deg7eeof9
Material Cleanup Cleanup Required


degree of


-no SIZ


^ no SIZ

f diSDOeal nnnrlnri
Iunconflned cleanup _
disposal OK not


Source Dredging Cleanup
Control Programs Programs

- range of
CSL: Cleanup
Screening Level
MCUL: Minimum
: Cleanup Level
SIZ: Sediment
Impact Zone
SOS: Sediment
Quality Standards

heguiaiory integration for Sediment Programs
  • recognizes proprietary interests by stat-
    ing that regulatory actions   (e.g., dis-
    charge permitting) do not address any
    proprietary requirements;

  • aligns the sediment standards so dis-
    charges do not create new clean-up sites;

  •  assigns accountability to the dischargers
    for sediment effects.

  In addition, during ongoing  implementa-
  tion of the SMS, state agencies are working
  together to coordinate regulatory actions
  (e.g., NPDES permits) and proprietary ac-
 tions (e.g., outfall leases on aquatic lands)
 for upcoming discharge authorizations.

 Though the above responses may be ad-
 equate to address discharges that are under
 individual permits and accountable scru-
 tiny,  they may not be  adequate  for
 stormwater discharges with many outfalls
 and limited control systems. In recognition
 of the difficulty for stormwater discharges
 to achieve immediate compliance with sedi-
 ment standards,  the SMS rule allows the
 state to authorize extended compliance time
 frames for certain stormwater discharges.
 Though the rule notes that the discharger
 may be accountable for future cleanup of
 the discharge, the  current  legal require-
 ments also ascribe this liability to the owner
 of aquatic lands affected by the discharge.

The advent of NPDES permits  that address
municipal stormwater discharges further
underscores the  potential liabilities for
 aquatic landowners and may be the basis
 for legal challenges that seek relief from the
 discharger or from the permitting agency.
 Concern regarding clean-up liability may
 result in additional legal challenges associ-
 ated with the discharge being out of com-
 pliance with Clean Water Act standards
 (which include sediment standards in this

 To address stormwater and sediment liabil-
 ity concerns, Washington is currently con-
 ducting a study to better define the liability
 issues and to document potential adminis-
 trative and legislative solutions, as recom-
 mended by various agencies, business in-
 terests, and environmental groups. The study
 is scheduled for completion in January  1993.
FormoreinformationcontactKeith Phillips,
DOE, at (206) 459-6143, or John Malek,
Region 10, at (206) 553-1286.
  Other Contacts for Region 10
  Sediment Activities:

  Human Health Sediment Criteria De-
  velopment: RachelFriedman-Thomas,
  (206) 493-9356.

  Freshwater Sediment Criteria Devel-
  opment: Brett Belts, (206) 459-6824.

  Dredged Material Management Stan-
  dards:  Tom Elwell, (206) 459-6053.

As part of its National Status and Trends
Program, NOAA is conducting a series of
regional surveys of sediment toxicity in
selected bays and estuaries. These surveys
are accompanied by measures of biomarkers
and bioaccumulation  in resident bivalve
molluscs and demersal fish. Collectively,
the results are used to identify the spatial
extent and severity of biological effects
associated with toxicants.

In the sediment toxicity surveys, samples
are collected throughout each study area to
provide a representation of conditions in all
major components of each area.  A battery
of toxicity  tests  are performed  on  the
samples, usually accompanied by chemical
analyses of the samples.  Sediment toxicity
tests were first used as a bioeffects assess-
ment tool in a 1 990 survey of San Francisco
Bay. The results were published in NOAA
Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 64.
Since then, a number of other surveys have
been initiated.

Hudson-Raritan Estuary (NY/NJ) -
 In Phase I of this survey, sediments from
 117 locations were tested for toxicity  with
 solid-phase amphipod survival tests, liq-
 uid-phase clam larvae survival and devel-
 opment tests, and organic extract Microtox
 bioluminescence tests. These tests demon-
 strated that toxicity was widespread in this
 area. High toxicity was apparent in the East
 River, Newark Bay,  Arthur Kill, western
 Raritan Bay, and Sandy Hook Bay. Chemi-
 cal analyses of many of the samples are
 under way. In Phase II, scheduled to begin
 in January 1993, 60  samples will be col-
 lected from Newark Bay, the lower Passaic
 River, the lower Hackensack River, and the
 northern part of  Arthur Kill. Amphipod
 survival tests, dioxin potency bioassays
 with rat hepatoma cells, and chemical analy-
 ses of sediment samples will be conducted.

 Bays of Long Island Sound (NY/CT) •
 Sediments from  60  locations in the  bays
 and harbors adjoining Long Island sound
 were tested with the  same tests used in the
 Hudson-Raritan  Estuary survey.  Also,
 chemical analyses of all samples were per-
 formed. Nearly all the samples were  toxic
 to the amphipods. The results  are being
Tampa Bay (PL) -
Sediments from 90 locations throughout
the Tampa Bay Estuary were collected in
Phase I.  They were tested with a solid-
phase amphipod survival test, a pore water
sea urchin  egg  fertilization  test, and an
organic extract Microtox bioluminescence
test.  Chemical analyses of most of the
samples were performed.  In Phase II an
additional 78 samples were collected in
four regions in which toxicity  had been
detected in the first phase:   Northern
Hillsborough Bay, western OldTampaBay,
Bear Creek/lower Boca Ciega  Bay,  and
along the St. Petersburg municipal shore-
line. These samples were collected in Au-
gust 1992 and the analyses are under way.

Southern California (CA) -
This study area stretches from Los Angeles
south to the United States/Mexico border
and  focuses on the coastal bays and har-
bors.  In Phase I of this survey, samples
from 99 locations  were collected in Los
Angeles/Long Beach Harbor, San Pedro
Bay, Anaheim Bay,  Alamitos Bay, and
Huntington Harbor. They were tested with
a solid-phase amphipod survival test and a
pore water abalone larvae development test.
The pore water will also be tested later with
 the  sea urchin egg fertilization test.   In
Phase II of this survey, samples will be
 collected in San Diego Bay, Tijuana Slough
 Estuary, San Diego  River, and Mission
 Bay. In Phase III, additional samples from
 Oceanside Harbor, Newport Bay, and nu-
 merous coastal lagoons will be tested.

 The results of all surveys will be published
 in NOAA technical memoranda and made
 available.  These reports will include sum-
 maries of historical sediment toxicity data
 and the results of the NOAA-supported
 surveys. For more information contact Ed
 Long, NOAA, at (206) 526-6317.
    ASTM  Update

The ASTM Subcommittee on Sediment
Toxicology (E47.03) met Saturday, No-
vember 7, 1992, before the 13th Annual
SET AC meeting in Cincinnati, OH.

During the meeting, the scope of the Sub-
committee was expanded to include devel-
oping Test Methods in  addition to Guides
for sediment testing. A Guide is defined by
ASTM as a series of options with no recom-
mended course of action, while a Test
Method is defined as a definitive procedure
for measuring characteristics of a material.
EP A's Office of Science and Technology is
interested in balloting the proposed USEP A
sediment methods listed below as ASTM
Test Methods. The documents would need
to be written in ASTM format, and any
negatives during balloting would be ad-
dressed following ASTM procedures.

 1.  Freshwater tests: (a) Hyalella azteca:
    10-d survival; (b) Chironomus tentans
    and Chironomus riparius:   10-d sur-
    vival and growth; and (c) Lumbriculus
    variegatus: 28-d bioaccumulation.

 2.  Saltwater tests:   (a) Rhepoxynius,
    10-d survival;  (b) Ampelisca:   20-d
    growth;  (c) Leptocheirus:   28-d (or
    longer) survival, growth, reproduction,
    intrinsic rate of natural increase; and (d)
    Macoma: 28-d bioaccumulation.

 3. Sediment spiking.

 4. Sediment collection.

 5. Experimental design and statistics.

 For  more information contact Chris
 Ingersoll, ASTM, at (314) 875-5399.
                              Thank You!

      Thank you to everyone who takes the time to write articles for each issue
      of CS News.  The feedback we have received from this publication has
      been tremendous and it is because of you. We would like to have many
      more contributors for the next issue, targeted for April, so if you have any
      news please call Bev Baker at (202) 260-7037.

     Environment Canada
 Canada's Great Lakes Cleanup Fund

 The Great Lakes Cleanup Fund, one of
 three components of the Government of
 Canada's Great Lakes Action Plan, will
 provide $55  million over the next several
 years to help develop and demonstrate in-
 novative clean-up technologies and reme-
 dial programs  in the 17 Canadian Great
 Lakes Areas of Concern  (AOCs). One of
 the priorities of the Cleanup Fund is the
 remediation  of contaminated sediments.
 Through the Cleanup Fund, Environment
 Canada is demonstrating techniques for the
 assessment, removal, and in-place and off-
 site treatment of contaminated sediments.

 Projects supported by the Cleanup Fund
 contribute  to the restoration of beneficial
 uses in the AOCs in support of the Canada/
 Ontario Remedial Action Plan process. In
 each AOC, a joint federal/provincial team
 is developing and implementing a Reme-
 dial Action Plan.


 Samples of sediment from all demonstra-
 tion sites, collected both  before and after
 remediation,  are submitted for biological
 assessment. Following the establishment
 of cultures of the candidate  invertebrate
 species, and protocols for the tests,  four
 standard bioassays have been developed.
 The four organisms include Hyallela aaeca,
 Hexagenia limbata, Chironomus riparius,
 and Tubifex tubifex.


 All of the  sediment removal techniques
 being demonstrated are designed to remove
 sediment with minimal resuspension of
 sediments and disturbance of the water
 column. Most recently, the Cleanup Fund
 demonstrated the use of a cable-arm bucket,
 which removed 250 cubic meters  of con-
 taminated sediment from a boat slip in
Toronto's inner harbor.   The cable-arm
bucket  is a  precision, sealed clamshell
bucket that removes only the layer of con-
 taminated material without digging a hole
as a conventional bucket does. The bucket
uses cables  instead of the  fixed arms and
opening counterweights of a conventional
 bucket. This reduces the overall weight by
 40 percent and provides an extremely low


 Another technique being investigated is in-
 place treatment of contaminated sediments.
 Scientists at EC's National Water Research
 Institute have developed a system to inject
 an oxidant, either ferric chloride or calcium
 nitrate, into sediments.  The oxidants re-
 duce the levels of hydrogen  sulfide and
 acute toxicity in anaerobic sediments, al-
 lowing bacteria to break down organic con-
 taminants. The technique has proven quite
 promising in the St. Mary's River AOC,
 where about 30,000 square meters of river
 bottom have been treated at depths up to 5
 meters. In-place treatment using calcium
 nitrate was also carried out this summer in
 deeper water (approximately 20 meters) in
 Hamilton Harbor.

 Under the off-site sediment treatment pro-
 gram,  a pilot-scale  demonstration of
 EcoLogic's high-temperature thermal de-
 struction process was conducted using sedi-
 ments from Hamilton Harbor.  This tech-
 nology is based on the theory that at el-
 evated temperatures hydrogen in the gas
 phase reacts with organic molecules to pro-
 duce smaller, lighter, and less toxic mol-
 ecules. Except for incinerators,  there are
 currently no other commercially available
 viable  technologies worldwide  that  can
achieve as significant a destruction of toxic
organic substances.  (Other technologies
 simply transfer the toxins to another phase,
 bind them in a structural matrix, or destroy
 them to a limited extent.) Sediments from
 the Toronto Harbor cable-arm bucket dem-
 onstration are undergoing treatment at the
 Toronto Harbor Commissioner's Soil Re-
 cycling  Facility.  The  sediment will be
 washed under high water pressure and size
 separated. Then- inorganic materials, pri-
 marily metals, will be  removed using a
 leaching process. Finally, the organic con-
 taminants  will  be treated  using  a
 bioremediation process.

 At the bench-scale level, 11 innovative
 technologies have been tested on sediment
 samples from the Welland River, Thunder
 Bay, and Hamilton Harbor.  Results are
 being assessed to determine whether pilot-
 scale testing is feasible.

 Field demonstrations in  support of clean-
 up activities are also under way in areas of
 combined sewer  overflow control,
 stormwatermanagement, and fish and wild-
 life habitat rehabilitation. In its first 2
 years, theCleanupFundhasallocatedabout
 $ 12 million to 34 projects in AOCs through-
 out the Great Lakes system.  Approxi-
 mately one-third of these resources were
 allocated in support of demonstrations in
 sediment assessment, removal, and treat-
 ment.  Cleanup  Fund resources  are en-
 hanced by contributions from other federal
departments,  provincial  and municipal
agencies, the  private sector, and public
interest groups. Formore information con-
tact John  Shaw, EC, at (416) 336-6231.
                                                   PLANT LAYOUT
                                                   PARLIAMENT STREET SLIP

                      Relevant Literature

Casas, A.M: 1992. The relationship between acid volatile sulfide and the
toxicity of zinc, lead, and copper in marine sediments. Master's thesis.
School of Fisheries, University of Washington.  Seattle, WA.

USEPA.  1992. Proceedings of the EPA's Contaminated Sediment Man-
agement Strategy Forums.  EPA 823-R-92-007. Contact OST Resource
Center at (202) 260-7786.

USEPA.  1992. Sediment Classisfication Methods Compendium.  EPA
823-R-92-006. Contact OST Resource Center at (202) 260-7786.

Sediment Criteria Documents

Sediment criteria documents can now be obtained through the Office of
Water Resource Center.  To obtain copies of any of the documents listed
below, simply contact the Resource Center at (202) 260-7786.

 1)  Technical Basis for Establishing Sediment Quality Criteria for Non-
    ionic Chemicals Using Equilibrium Partitioning (Environ. Toxicol. &
    andChem. 10.  1991).

 2)  Sediment Quality Criteria for the Protection of Benthic Organisms:
    Acenaphthene (draft)

 3)  Sediment Quality Criteria for the Protection of Benthic Organisms:
    Dieldrin (draft)

 4)  Sediment Quality Criteria for the Protection of Benthic Organisms:
    Endrin (draft)

 5)  Sediment Quality Criteria for the Protection of Benthic Organisms:
    Fluoranthene (draft)

 6) Sediment Quality Criteria for the Protection of Benthic Organisms:
    Phenanthrene (draft)

 7)  Briefing Report to the EPA Science Advisory Board on the Equilib-
     rium Partitioning Approach to  Generating Sediment Quality Criteria

 8)  Analytical Method for Determination of Acid Volatile Sulfide in
     Sediment (final draft)

 9)  An  SAB Report: Review of Sediment Criteria Development Methodol-
     ogy for Non-ionic Organic Contaminants - September 1992

 For additional information on sediment criteria or related topics, contact
 Mary Reiley at (202) 260-9456 or Chris Zarba at (202) 260-1326.
(continued from p. 5)
on their use are  reported in a guidance
document that has been prepared for FDER.
This report indicates that SQ AGs should be
used primarily as screening tools for estab-
lishing priorities with respect to sediment
quality management. However, they should
not be used in lieu of water quality criteria
or sediment quality criteria, but in conjunc-
tion with other tools to conduct comprehen-
sive and reliable assessments. To assist
potential users, a simple framework for
assessing sediment quality on a site-spe-
cific basis is presented in  the guidance
document.  This framework illustrates the
roles of the metals interpretive tool (de-
scribed in Issue 4 of Contaminated Sedi-
ments News) and various  bioassessment
tools (e.g., toxicity and bioaccumulation
tests) in assessing the quality of Florida's
coastal sediments. For more information
on the Honda SQ AGs, contact Fred Calder
or Gail Sloane, FDER, at (904) 488-0784.
    Creature Feature
        Who lives in the
      sediment anyway?
                40 Mm
                                                                            Answer on p. 7

 United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency (WH-585)
 Washington, DC  20460

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use