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
------- |