United'States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water (WH-585) 823N92001 Number 7 *"~O" December 1992 Contaminated 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) 260-5388. 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- 4893. 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 7037. 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) 260-1327. 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 Criteria 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 study. 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 ERL-Duluth 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 1993. 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 Sediments 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- 6555. 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 Engineers 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) 634-2489. 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) 634-3721. 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 contamination. 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- grams. 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 contaminated 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 steps: 1) adopt standards that define sediment contamination; 2) control the sources of sediment contamination; 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 Controlprovides 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. Sediment 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: FSEDCRTTa 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- tivities; 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; and A Review of Interpretation Methods for Freshwater Benthic Invertebrate Sur- vey Data Used by Selected State and Federal Agenciesa 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 Criteria 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 contamination. 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 information) Multiuser Confined Disposal Sites Program Study For copies of these documents, or for a complete list of available documents, contact: Barb Patrick, Sediment Management Unit Department of Ecology P.O. Box 7703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 (206)459-6013 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 projects. Key Program Feature: Regulatory Integration 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 Discharges 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 landowner. 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 rule: Controlling Managing Determining Establishina Sources Dredged Need for Deg7eeof9 Material Cleanup Cleanup Required incra SIZ sang degree of contamination r -no SIZ allowed -SIZ required ^ no SIZ required f diSDOeal nnnrlnri required 1 Iunconflned cleanup _ disposal OK not __ Source Dredging Cleanup Control Programs Programs Programs CSL/MCUL - range of acceptable cleanup Standards) SOS 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; and 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 state). 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. ------- NOAA 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 evaluated. 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, Ampelisca,Leptocheirus,Eohaustorius: 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. Assessment 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. Removal 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 profile. Treatment 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 10 ------- 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 11 ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency (WH-585) Washington, DC 20460 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 ------- |