United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Science Policy Council
                    ES

-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
   CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS
          SCIENCE PRIORITIES
                     December 2004
         Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 by members of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Workgroup,
        a workgroup under U.S. EPA's Science Policy Council
                    Principal Authors

      Elizabeth Lee Hofinann (Chair),    Thomas Armitage, OW
      OSWER

      Edward Bender, ORD          Bonnie L. Eleder, U.S. EPA Region
                              5

      Steve Ells, OSWER           Patricia Erickson, ORD


      Sharon Frey, OSWER          Dale Matey, OSWER


      James Rowe, ORD            Marc Tuchman, GLNPO


      Randall Wentsel, ORD


                 Science Policy Council
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                Washington, DC 20460

-------
Page ii	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

                                    DISCLAIMER

This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.
EPA) policy and approved for publication and distribution.  Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

This document identifies scientific information and activities that are needed to assess and manage
the risks of contaminated sediments by U.S. EPA programs and regions.  U.S. EPA staff have
recommended research approaches and other science activities to address gaps and reduce
uncertainty for risk management decision-making. This document is intended to improve
coordination, avoid duplication, and inform decision-makers within U.S. EPA.  While this
document does refer to some collaborations with organizations outside U.S. EPA, this document is
not intended to describe the science and research activities of those collaborators or other parties
outside U.S. EPA.

The science priorities do not necessarily reflect management priorities nor do they represent
commitments to fund these science activities. Rather, these science needs will be reconsidered
from time to time as resources and collaboration opportunities may arise in the future. U.S. EPA
and other decision-makers retain the discretion to address these or any other science needs for
contaminated sediments on a case-by-case basis and in a manner that may differ from the
approaches discussed in this document.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page iii

                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS	Page vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	Page viii

1.   GOALS AND OBJECTIVES	Page 1
    1.1  Introduction	Page 1
    1.2  Goals of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document  	Page 2
    1.3  Development of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document .... Page 4
    1.4  Linkage of the CSSP Document to Agency Planning Processes  	Page 5
    1.5  Relationship of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document to EPA's
        National Strategic Plan Goals	Page 6
    1.6  Document Organization	Page 8

2.   OVERVIEW OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT SCIENCE ISSUES ACROSS THE
    AGENCY'S REGULATORY PROGRAMS  	Page 9
    2.1  Introduction	Page 9
    2.2  Scope, Magnitude, and Impacts of Contaminated Sediments	Page 9
    2.3  Overview of Major Sediment Issues and Needs Across the Agency  	Page 12
    2.4  Recent U.S. EPA Contaminated Sediment Science Activities and Products .... Page 16
    2.5  Overview of Communication and Collaboration Activities  	Page 20
        2.5.1       Collaborative Efforts Within U.S. EPA	Page 20
        2.5.2       External Collaborative Efforts	Page 22
    2.6  National Research Council Report on PCB-Contaminated Sediments	Page 23
    2.7  National Research Council Report on Contaminated Marine Sediments  	Page 24
    2.8  Long-term Trends Affecting Contaminated Sediments  	Page 26

3.   ASSESSING THE SCIENCE ON CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS	Page 27
    3.1  Introduction	Page 28
    3.2  Sediment Site Characterization	Page 32
        3.2.1       Sampling Strategies (Temporal and Spatial) 	Page 32
        3.2.2       Physical Parameters 	Page 34
        3.2.3       Chemical Parameters	Page 35
        3.2.4       Emerging Potential Sediment Contaminants 	Page 38
        3.2.5       Key Recommendations for Sediment Site Characterization  	Page 39
    3.3  Exposure Assessment	Page 40
        3.3.1       Bioavailability	Page 41
        3.3.2       Bioaccumulation Potential	Page 42
        3.3.3       Fate and Transport Modeling 	Page 44
        3.3.4       Key Recommendations for Exposure Assessment 	Page 45
    3.4  Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization  	Page 47

-------
Page iv	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

         3.4.1       Science Needs	Page 48
         3.4.2       Key Recommendations for Human Health Toxicity and Risk
         Characterization	Page 49
    3.5  Ecological Effects and Risk Assessment	Page 50
         3.5.1       Ecological Screening Levels 	Page 50
         3.5.2       Ecological Indicators 	Page 53
         3.5.3       Direct Toxicity to Aquatic Biota	Page 57
         3.5.4       Ecological Significance and Population Models	Page 58
         3.5.5       Selection of Ecologically Protective Remedial Options  	Page 59
         3.5.6       Key Recommendations for Selection of Ecologically Protective Remedial
                    Options	Page 59
    3.6  Sediment Remediation	Page 61
         3.6.1       Natural Recovery/Bioremediation	Page 62
         3.6.2       In situ Capping	Page 63
         3.6.3       In situ Treatment  	Page 64
         3.6.4       Dredging/Removal  	Page 65
         3.6.5       Ex situ Treatment Technologies  	Page 66
         3.6.6       Beneficial Use Technologies	Page 67
         3.6.7       Disposal Options	Page 68
         3.6.8       Key Recommendations for Sediment Remediation	Page 69
    3.7  Baseline, Remediation, and Post-Remediation Monitoring  	Page 71
         3.7.1       Key Recommendations for Baseline, Remediation, and Post-Remediation
                    Monitoring	Page 74
    3.8  Risk Communication and Community Involvement	Page 75
         3.8.1       Key Recommendations for Risk Communication and Community
                    Involvement  	Page 77
    3.9  Information Management and Exchange Activities	Page 78
         3.9.1       Key Recommendations for Information Management and Exchange
                    Activities 	Page 79

4.   MEETING SCIENCE NEEDS  	Page 83
    4.1  Introduction	Page 83
    4.2  Recommended Approaches to Implement Strategy	Page 83

REFERENCES   	Page 89

APPENDIX A:  Contaminated Sediment Science Activities Database 	Page A-l

APPENDIX B:  Example of Summary Sheet	 Page B-l

APPENDIX C:  List of Acronyms	 Page C-l

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page v





                      ACKNOWLEDGMENTS







                              Contributors





 Elizabeth Beiring, OW                          David Bennett, OSWER




 Scott Cieniawski, GLNPO                       Kevin Garrahan, ORD




 Marc Greenberg, OSWER                       Scott Ireland, OW




 Lorelei Kowalski, ORD                         Jennifer Lenz, OSWER

-------
Page vi	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                   THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page vii

                             EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2000, the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Science Policy Council (SPC)
initiated the development of a Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities (C S SP) document (formerly
titled "Draft Contaminated Sediments Science Plan" because  contamination of sediments is a multi-
faceted, cross-Agency issue which can benefit from a more comprehensive and higher level of
coordination across EPA program and regional offices. Extensive resources to address contaminated
sediment problems are spent by a number of Agency program offices, including the  Superfund
Program, Office of Water (OW), Office of Solid Waste (OSW), Great Lakes National Program Office
(GLNPO), Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPPTS), Office of Research and
Development (ORD), and EPA regional offices. As a complement to  EPA's Science Inventory, the
CSSP Document intended to analyze and summarize the Agency's contaminated sediment science
activities and thus serves as both an informational and planning tool to EPA's programs and regions.
The CSSP Document provides an analysis of the Agency's contaminated sediment scientific activities,
identifies and evaluates science needs, and provides key recommendations for filling those needs

The CSSP Document has four goals to promote the vision of providing a strong scientific basis for
addressing contaminated sediments:

1. Identify the science necessary to  address the assessment  and management of contaminated
   sediments.

2. Identify the science gaps and tools that are important in  reducing uncertainty in contaminated
   sediment risk management  decision-making.

3. Recommend approaches to promote necessary scientific activities and research.

4. Enhance the level of coordination and communication of contaminated sediment science activities
   across Agency program and regional offices.

The CSSP Document is organized into four chapters. Chapter One discusses the goals, objectives,
and how the CSSP Document  relates to the Agency's mandate.  The process used to develop the
CSSP Document is also included. Chapter Two provides an overview of the contaminated sediment
problems and issues across the Agency. The brief description of issues in Chapter Two is meant to
provide an  introduction to the discussion of contaminated sediment issues, as well as the overall
context for the more  detailed discussion of specific science  needs and recommendations  given in
Chapter Three.

Chapter Three, along with U.S. EPA's Contaminated Sediment  Science Activities' Database
(Appendix A),  is the data collection and analysis section of the CSSP Document.  It documents the
current contaminated sediment science activities ongoing within the Agency, and places these activities
within  the  context  of  Agency  goals.    Significant  data  gaps  and   uncertainties  in

-------
Page viii	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

methodology/assessment procedures are identified. Finally, it discusses science needs and provides
the key recommendations for future Agency science activities.

Chapter Four provides guidance on how to meet the science needs identified in Chapter Three. Critical
U.S. EPA partners and the immediate or long-term nature of the science activity are proposed.  The
Contaminated  Sediments  Science  Priorities Workgroup (Workgroup)  did  not  constrain the
recommendations to fit within available resources. Instead, the recommendations are a comprehensive
list that U. S. EPA organizations can consider when balancing resource allocations across competing
high-priority needs.

Key scientific questions, which are given below, were developed for each maj or topic in order to focus
discussions on scientific needs and to  identify recommended science activities to address these
questions.

Key Scientific Questions:

Sediment Site Characterization: What physical, chemical and biological methods best characterize
sediments and assess sediment quality?

Exposure Assessment:  What are the primary exposure pathways to humans and wildlife from
contaminants in sediments and how can we reduce uncertainty in quantifying and modeling the degree
of exposure?

Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization: What are the risks associated with exposure
to contaminants in sediments through direct and indirect pathways?

Ecological  Effects and  Risk Assessment:  What  are  the  risks associated with exposure to
contaminants in sediments to wildlife species and aquatic communities?

Sediment Remediation: What  sediment remedial technology or  combination of technologies is
available to effectively remediate sites?

Baseline, Remediation, and Post-Remediation Monitoring: What types of monitoring are needed
to ensure that the implemented  remedy  meets remedial  performance  goals and does  not cause
unacceptable short-term effects?

Risk Communication and Community Involvement: How can we provide communities with more
meaningful involvement in the contaminated sediments cleanup process?

Information Management and Exchange Activities:  How do we improve information management
and exchange activities on contaminated sediments across the Agency?

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page ix

Table E-l summarizes the key recommendations, the critical U.S. EPA partners, and the immediate
or long-term nature of the science needs.

Table E-l.  Summary of Key Recommendations, Time Frame for Implementation, and
Suggested Critical Partners	
                                 Recommendations
 A. Sediment Site Characterization

 Immediate Time Frame
 A. 1   Conduct a workshop to develop a consistent approach to collecting sediment physical
       property data for use in evaluating sediment stability. (OSRTI, ORD, U.S. EPA Regions)

 Longer Time Frame
 A.2   Develop more sensitive, low-cost laboratory methods for detecting sediment
       contaminants, and real-time or near real-time chemical sensors for use in the field. (ORD,
       OSRTI, GLNPO)
 A.3   Develop U.S. EPA-approved methods with lower detection limits for analysis of
       bioaccumulative contaminants of concern in fish tissue. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA
       Regions)
 A.4   Develop methods for analyzing emerging endocrine disrupters, including alkylphenol
       ethoxylates (APEs) and their metabolites. (ORD)
 B. Exposure Assessment

 Immediate Time Frame
 B. 1  Develop a tiered framework for assessing food web exposures. (ORD, OW, OSRTI, U.S.
      EPA Regions)
 B.2  Develop guidance and identify pilots for improving coordination between TMDL and
      remedial programs in waterways with contaminated sediments. (OW, OSWER, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
 B.3  Develop and advise on the use of a suite of most valid contaminant fate and transport
      models that allow prediction of exposures in the future. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
 B.4  Develop a consistent approach to applying sediment stability data in transport modeling.
      (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)

-------
Page x	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	


 C. Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization

 Immediate Time Frame
 C. 1   Develop guidance for characterizing human health risks on a PCB congener basis. (ORD,
       OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 C.2   Develop sediment guidelines for bioaccumulative contaminants that are protective of
       human health via the fish ingestion pathway. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)

 Longer Time Frame
 C.3   Refine methods for estimating dermal exposures and risk. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA
       Regions)
 C.4   Evaluate the toxicity and reproductive effects of newly recognized contaminants, such as
       APEs and other endocrine disrupters and their metabolites on human health. (ORD,
       OPPT)

 D. Ecological Effects and Risk Assessment

 Immediate Time Frame
 D. 1   Develop sediment guidelines to protect wildlife  from food chain effects. (ORD, OSRTI,
       OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.3   Develop guidance on how to interpret ecological sediment toxicity studies (lab or in situ
       caged studies) and how to interpret the significance of the results in relation to site
       populations and communities. (OW, ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.4   Acquire data and develop criteria to use in balancing the long-term benefits from remedial
       dredging vs. the shorter term adverse effects on ecological receptors and their habitats.
       (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.6   Continue developing and refining both chronic and sub-chronic sediment toxicity testing
       methods. (ORD, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.7   Develop whole sediment toxicity identification evaluation procedures for a wide range of
       chemicals. (ORD, OW)

 Longer Time Frame
 D.2   Develop additional tools  for characterizing ecological risks. (ORD, U.S. EPA Regions,
       OPPTS,  OW)
 D.5   Conduct field and laboratory studies to further validate and improve chemical-specific
       sediment quality guidelines. (OW, ORD)

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page xi


 E. Sediment Remediation

 Immediate Time Frame
 E. 1  Collect the necessary data and develop guidance for determining the conditions under
      which natural recovery can be considered a suitable remedial option.  Such guidance
      would include: measurement protocols to assess the relative contribution of the various
      mechanisms for chemical releases from bed sediments (e.g., advection, bioturbation,
      diffusion, and resuspension), including mass transport of contaminants by large storm
      events; approaches to assess the vertical extent of the bioavailable zone in different
      environmental settings; methodologies to quantify the uncertainties associated with
      natural recovery; and development of accepted measuring protocols to determine in situ
      chemical fluxes from sediments. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)
 E.2  Develop performance evaluations of various cap designs and cap placement methods and
      conduct cap placement and post-cap monitoring to document performance.  Continue to
      monitor ongoing capping projects to monitor performance (e.g., Boston Harbor, Eagle
      Harbor, Grasse  River). (ORD, U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)
 E.4  Using the data provided in  recommendation E. 1, develop a white paper evaluating the
      short-term and long-term impacts from dredging relative to natural processes and human
      activities (e.g., resuspension from storm events, boat scour, wave action, and anchor
      drag). (OSRTI,  U.S. EPA Regions)

 Longer Time Frame
 E.3  Encourage and promote the development and demonstration of in situ technologies.
      (ORD, GLNPO)
 E. 5  Support the demonstration  of cost-effective ex situ treatment technologies and
      identification of potential beneficial uses  of treatment products. (ORD, GLNPO, U.S.
      EPA Regions)

 F. Baseline, Remediation, and  Post-remediation Monitoring

 Immediate Time Frame
 F. 1  Develop monitoring guidance fact sheets for baseline, remediation, and post-remediation
      monitoring, and monitoring during remedy implementation. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA
      Regions, OW)
 F.2  Conduct training and hold workshops for project managers regarding monitoring of
      contaminated sediment sites. (OSRTI, ORD, U.S. EPA Regions)

-------
Page xii	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
 G. Risk Communication and Community Involvement

 Immediate Time Frame
 G. 1  Establish a research program on risk communication and community involvement focusing
      on developing better methods, models, and tools. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)
 H. Information Management and Exchange Activities

 Immediate Time Frame
 H. 1  Establish regional sediment data management systems which can link the regions and
      program offices with each other and with the National Sediment Inventory. (U.S. EPA
      Regions, OW, OSWER, GLNPO)
 H.3  Develop national and regional contaminated sediment sites web sites for sharing
      information. (U.S. EPA Regions, OW, OSWER, GLNPO)
 H.4  Re-establish and expand the Office of Water-sponsored Sediment Network by including
      more regional representation. (OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 H.5  Promote communication and coordination of science and research among Federal
      agencies. (ORD, OSWER, OW, U.S. EPA Regions, NOAA, U.S. Navy, U.S. ACE,
      USGS, U.S. FWS)
 H.6  Promote the exchange of scientific information via scientific fora (i.e., workshops,
      journals, and meetings). (CSMC, OW, OSWER, U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)

 Longer Time Frame
 H.2  Standardize the sediment site data collection/reporting format. Establish minimum
      protocols for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) using the Agency's Quality
      System for Environmental Data and Technology. (OEI, OW, OSWER, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
Table E-2 is a list of the Acronyms used in the Executive Summary.

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page xiii
Table E-2. List of Acronyms in Executive Summary
APE
CSMC
CSSP
GLNPO
NOAA
OEI
OSRTI
OPPT
OPPTS
ORD
OSW
OSWER
OW
PCB
QA/QC
SPC
TMDL
U.S. ACE
U.S. EPA
U.S. FWS
USGS
Alkylphenol Ethoxylate
Contaminated Sediment Management Committee
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Great Lakes National Program Office
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Office of Environmental Information
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Water
Polychlorinated biphenyl
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Science Policy Council
Total Maximum Daily Load
United States Army Corps of Engineers
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
United States Geological Survey

-------
Page xiv	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Suggested Uses of This Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document

  This CSSP Document is designed to satisfy a number of different perspectives and needs.
  Here are three suggested approaches for its use:

  1. For those within or outside the Agency seeking a general understanding of the purposes
  and goals of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document (what is it and why is it
  needed?) and some understanding of its history and Agency activities and products, the reader
  is referred to Chapters One and Two, Goals and Objectives and Overview of Contaminated
  Sediment Science Issues Across the Agency's Regulatory Programs, respectively.

  2. Those who understand the contaminated sediments issues in general, but desire to analyze
  and assess the validity of the scientific basis for the science recommendations, should refer to
  Chapter Three, Assessing the Science on Contaminated Sediments and the Key
  Recommendations therein.

  3. Knowledgeable risk assessors, risk managers, and program managers who desire to see
  how the science priorities directly impact their programs will find a quick overview, the key
  recommendations, and the recommended approach for implementation of the science priorities
  in Chapter Four, Meeting Science Needs.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 1

                          1.  GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

1.1   Introduction

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) mission is to protect human health and to safeguard
the natural environment - air, water, and land - upon which life depends. Sediments are an integral
component of aquatic ecosystems providing habitats for many aquatic organisms.  Many sediment-
dwelling organisms at the base of the food chain are eaten by organisms at higher trophic levels.
Contaminants in sediments1 pose a threat to human health, aquatic life, and the  environment.
Chemicals released to surface waters from industrial and municipal discharges, atmospheric deposition,
and polluted runoff from urban and agricultural areas can accumulate to environmentally harmful levels
in sediment. Humans, aquatic organisms, and other wildlife are at risk through direct exposure to
pollutants or through consumption of contaminated fish and wildlife. Exposure to these contaminants
is linked to cancer, birth defects, neurological defects, immune dysfunction, and liver and kidney
ailments. Contaminated sediments may also cause economic impacts, at both the local and regional
level,  on the transportation, fishing, tourism, and development industries.

Sediment contamination is an issue that cuts across offices and jurisdictions throughout the Agency,
other Federal  agencies (e.g., National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (U.S. FWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (U.S. ACE)), state agencies, and
tribes. U.S. EPA programs with the authority to address sediment contamination operate under the
mandate of  many  statutory  provisions including the Comprehensive  Emergency  Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Oil Pollution Act (OP A), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSC A),
and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA).  Other Federal agencies having
authorities that may be used to address contaminated sediments include: U.S. ACE, through  the
statutory provisions of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), CWA, and MPRSA; and
U.S. FWS and NOAA, through Natural Resources Damages (NRD) authority.

In 2000, U.S. EPA's Science Policy Council (SPC) initiated the development of a Contaminated
Sediments Science Priorities (CSSP) Document  (formerly titled "Draft Contaminated Sediments
Science Plan") because effective management of contaminated sediments is a multi-faceted, high
profile issue that requires comprehensive and a heightened level of coordination across the Agency.
Extensive resources are spent by a number of Agency program offices to address contaminated
sediment problems. Program offices  addressing this problem include: the Superfund Program, Office
of Water (OW),  Office of Solid Waste (OSW), Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO),
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPPTS), Office of Research and Development
(ORD), and U.S. EPA regional Offices.
'Contaminated sediments are defined as soils, sand, and organic matter, or minerals that accumulate on the bottom
of a water body and contain toxic or hazardous materials that may adversely affect human health or the environment
(U.S. EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy, EPA-823-R-98-001).	

-------
Page 2
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
The CSSP Document is a mechanism
for the  U.S. EPA to  develop  and
coordinate Agency office- and region-
wide   science  activities  that  affect
contaminated sediments.  Along with
U.S.  EPA's Contaminated  Sediment
Science Activities' Database (Appendix
A),  the  CSSP  Document  analyzes
current Agency  science activities  that
concern  contaminated   sediments,
identifies  and  evaluates  the science
gaps, and makes recommendations to
fill those gaps.

The CSSP  Document follows in the
footsteps   of  previous  U.S.  EPA
initiatives, such as the Mercury Action
Plan  (U.S.  EPA, 200Ic), the Action
Plan  for Beaches and Recreational
Waters (Beach Action Plan) (U. S. EPA,
1999a), and A Multimedia Strategy for
Priority Persistent,  Bioaccumulative,
and Toxic (PBT) Pollutants (U. S. EPA,
1998a).   These  plans  and  strategies
contain elements of both science plans
and management action plans.

1.2   Goals of  the  Contaminated
      Sediments  Science  Priorities
      Document
               Figure 1-1. Goals and Expected Results of CSSP Document
               CSSP Document: Goals

                   Identify the science necessary to address the assessment
                   and management of contaminated sediments.

                   Identify the science gaps and tools that are important in
                   reducing uncertainty in contaminated sediment risk
                   management decision-making.

                   Recommend approaches to promote necessary scientific
                   activities and research.

               •   Enhance the level of coordination and communication of
                   contaminated sediment science activities across Agency
                   program and regional offices.

               CSSP Document: Expected Results for EPA

                   More focused, better directed contaminated sediment
                   research.

                   Improved coordination of contaminated sediment
                   activities within EPA.

                   Better informed contaminated sediment decision-making
                   based on sound science.

                   Efficient and appropriate expenditure of resources.
The CSSP Document has four goals which are highlighted in Figure 1-1.  The first goal is the
identification of the science necessary to address the assessment and management of contaminated
sediments. The second goal is to identify the science gaps and tools that are important in reducing
uncertainty in contaminated  sediment risk management decision-making.   The third goal is to
recommend approaches to promote necessary scientific activities and research to fill  the gaps,
including development and dissemination of contaminated sediment management tools.  The last goal
is  to enhance the level  of coordination  and  communication  of science activities  dealing with
contaminated sediments across Agency program and regional offices.  Taken together, these goals
promote the vision of providing a strong and scientifically sound basis for addressing contaminated
sediments. The result will be a better informed decision-making process which conserves both human
and financial resources.

-------
                       Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
               Page 3
The goals of the CSSP Document are based upon the strategic guidance proposed in the Strategic
Framework for U.S. EPA Science (U.S. EPA, 2000e) to unify science activities across the Agency.
First,  the CSSP Document uses the  Science Inventory to assemble and evaluate the current
contaminated sediment science activities and research across the Agency.  Second, it uses effective
planning ("doing the right science") to insure that the most appropriate science activities are being
conducted. Third, it uses sound scientific practices and approaches ("doing the science right"), such
as Agency and public consultation and external peer review, in its  development (see Figure 1-2).

Figure 1-2. Peer Consultation in Development of the CSSP Document
        Sediment
      Management
       Workgroup
     South/Soythwest
        Hazardous
        Substance
     Research Center
                                   Contaminated
                                 Aquatic Sediment
                                   Remediation
                               Guidance Workgroup
                                       CSSP
                                    Workgroup
   Remedial
 Technologies
 Development
Forum Sediment
 Action Team
                                     Corps of
                                     Engineers

-------
Page 4	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

1.3   Development of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document

The Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Workgroup (Workgroup) has been responsible for the
development of the CSSP Document, although it has also received wide input from staff from U.S.
EPA's regional and program offices. The development process is described below.

A cross-Agency workgroup of  key staff working in  the contaminated  sediments  area, the
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Workgroup, was charged by the U. S. EPA Science Policy
Council with developing a Contaminated Sediments Science Plan (now renamed the Contaminated
Sediments Science Priorities Document).  The Workgroup went through the following action steps
to develop the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document:

        Collected information on contaminated sediments research and science activities across the
        Agency.

     •   Incorporated the identified science activities into U.S. EPA Science Inventory.

     •   Identified key contaminated sediments issues and data gaps.

     •   Identified areas for better coordination of contaminated  sediments  research and  science
        activities.

     •   Developed a strategy for future contaminated sediments research and science activities.

     •   Provided for a broad consultative review of the CSSP Document both internal and external
        to the Agency, and a Science Advisory Board (SAB) peer review.

     •   Developed a strategy to implement the CSSP Document and evaluate its performance (see
        Section 4.2 for details).

To manage this process, the Workgroup held weekly conference calls and a two-day meeting in June
2001. These efforts  resulted in the Workgroup preparing a draft of the Contaminated Sediments
Science Priorities Document which was first circulated for internal review, to ensure both accuracy
and completeness of the document. The CSSP Document was subsequently reviewed externally by
the Agency's Science Advisory Board, relevant Federal agencies, states, tribes, and others.2
2 An expert panel (Panel) under the Executive Committee of EPA's Science Advisory Board, met on October 30-31,
2002, to review the June 13, 2002, draft document, Contaminated Sediments Science Plan (Science Plan). The
review was conducted at the request of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response in Washington, D.C. at a
public meeting. The Panel was charged with reviewing the adequacy of the Science Plan in addressing a range of
contaminated sediments issues, as well as considering the methods exemplified by the Science Plan for cross-
Agency science planning.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 5

Other important inputs to the development of the CSSP Document were recommendations contained
in the Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy (U.S. EPA,  1998b), A Risk Management
Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments (NRC, 2001 a), and Contaminated Sediments in Ports and
Waterways (NRC, 1997).

1.4   Linkage of the CSSP Document to Agency Planning Processes

Organizations within U. S. EPA use various planning processes to ensure that they meet the Agency's
National Strategic Plan goals.  For planning cross-program work, three tools are available. Two of
these tools are management strategies and action plans, which describe commitments by all  of the
relevant organizations within U. S. EPA to meet specified goals. Examples of these documents are the
Mercury Management Strategy (U. S. EPA, 2001 c) and the Beaches Action Plan (U. S. EPA, 1999a).
These types of documents usually focus on statutory authorities and implementation by the program
offices and regions; research needs are usually considered.  The third and newest tool is the  CSSP
Document, which promotes the vision of providing a strong and scientifically  sound basis for
addressing contaminated sediments.

The CSSP Document is an important tool that will be used by U. S. EPA regional and program offices
in annual budget formulation and work planning processes.  Implementation of CSSP Document
recommendations will help identify the  highest  priority contaminated sediment needs,  coordinate
ongoing work across the Agency, avoid duplication of effort, and promote complementary endeavors.
Workload requirements to implement CSSP Document  recommendations need to be evaluated to
determine if new budget initiatives will be needed. The CSSP Document will receive the same analysis
and accountability reviews as any other Agency science/technical assessment priority. Agency annual
planning cycles and annual performance measures may be examined by lead offices and regions to see
how U.S.  EPA is addressing CSSP Document recommendations (please refer to  Section 4.2 on
recommended approaches for strategy implementation).

The CSSP Document encompasses more than research, but where research needs are identified, it will
inform ORD of the most important contaminated sediment needs to consider during the ORD annual
planning cycle. ORD plans its research through Multi-Year Plans (MYPs) to provide a long-term view
of the research direction. Research Coordination Teams (RCTs), comprising of representatives from
ORD and U.S. EPA regions and program offices, participate in developing MYPs and determining
research priorities. The National Regional Science Council (NRSC), formed in 1997, helps the regions
to focus their research needs for ORD's consideration.  The multi-year plans and annual resource
planning describe how ORD will address recommendations in the CSSP Document.

Figure 1-3 is a schematic  illustration of the relationship of the CSSP Document to U.S. EPA
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) Goals and program and regional office plans and
ORD's multi-year plans. The CSSP Document reflects the Agency's integrated efforts to achieve the
GPRA goals and objectives, e.g., Goal  2 - Clean and Safe Water, Objective 2.1 - Protect Human
Health, for contaminated sediments. This effort is accomplished through cooperation among the

-------
Page 6
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
critical partners, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), OW, ORD and the
regional offices, within U.S. EPA.

Figure 1-3. Relationship of the CSSP Document to GPRA Goals and Other Plans
                                      U.S. EPA
                                    GPRA Goals
                                   Contaminated
                                     Sediments
                                 Science Priorities
                                     Document
      OSWER
   Program
       OW
 Program Plans
   Regional
Program Plans
      ORD
Multi-Year
1.5  Relationship of the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document to EPA's
     National Strategic Plan Goals

The relevance of addressing the problem of contaminated sediments to the Agency's mission is
reflected in the linkages with U.S. EPA's National Strategic Plan goals, as discussed below. The
GPRA requires all Federal agencies to develop a five-year strategic plan that establishes clear goals,
objectives, and annual performance measures.  The strategic plan is updated every three years, and
agencies must report back to Congress annually on the results achieved.  U.S. EPA's 2003 Strategic
Plan (U.S. EPA, 2003c) establishes five goals that identify the environmental results that U.S. EPA
is working to attain. Contaminated sediments is a significant multi-media issue related to the desired
results for many of the goals (Table 1-1).  Addressing contaminated sediment problems significantly
helps the Agency achieve identified environmental outcomes.

The CSSP Document includes the first few steps in developing a science plan. It does not include
management endorsement of the priorities or the implementation steps and schedules that are part of
a complete science priority setting and implementation plan.

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page?
Table 1-1.  Relationship of National Strategic Plan Goals and the Contaminated Sediments
           Science Priorities Document
Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water
Objective 2.1- Protect Human Health
Objective 2.2 - Protect Water Quality
Objective 2.3 - Enhance Science and Research
Contaminated sediments affect human health by both
direct and indirect exposure pathways (e.g., direct
contact, ingestion, uptake into the aquatic food chain).
Contaminants in sediments can enter the aquatic food
chain, thus contaminating aquatic organisms and
ultimately placing humans at risk of adverse health
effects from consumption of these organisms. U.S.
EPA is addressing contaminants in sediments in order
to prevent contaminant movement through the food
chain.
Contaminated sediments affect water quality and
threaten healthy aquatic communities.
A sound scientific understanding of contaminated
sediments is necessary for EPA to meets its goal of
clean and safe water.
Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration
Objective 3.3 - Enhance Science and Research
The protecting and restoration of land (including
contaminated sediments) requires the best available
science and research.
Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Objective 4.1 - Chemical, Organism, and Pesticide
Risks
Objective 4.4 - Enhance Science and Research
Toxic substances in sediments, such as polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury, can enter the aquatic
food chain, contaminate fish, and place wildlife and
humans at risk through their consumption. U.S. EPA
is working to clean up contaminated sediment sites to
prevent harm to human health and the environment.
Contaminated sediments may cause unwanted, adverse
consequences to human life, health, and the
environment, and U.S. EPA is committed to using the
best available science to reduce these risks.

-------
Page 8	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

1.6     Document Organization

The CSSP Document is organized into four chapters.  Chapter One discusses the goals, objectives,
and how the CSSP Document relates to the Agency's mandate. Chapter Two provides an overview
of the contaminated sediment issues across the Agency.  The brief description of issues in Chapter
Two is intended to provide an introduction to the discussion of contaminated sediment issues, as well
as providing the overall context for the more detailed discussion of specific research and science needs
given in Chapter Three.

Chapter Three, along with U.S. EPA's contaminated sediment science activities database (Appendix
A), is the data collection and analysis section of the CSSP Document.  It documents the current
contaminated sediment science activities ongoing within the Agency, and places these activities within
the context of Agency goals. Significant data gaps and uncertainties in methodology/assessment
procedures are identified.  It proposes research and science activities to fill those data gaps and resolve
related issues. Finally, it provides  the key recommendations  for future Agency science activities,
including research.

Chapter Four discusses approaches to implement the contaminated sediments science priorities. For
each recommendation, critical U. S. EPA partners and the immediate or long-term nature of the science
activity are proposed (see Table 4-1).

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 9
 2. OVERVIEW OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT SCIENCE ISSUES ACROSS THE
                       AGENCY'S REGULATORY PROGRAMS

2.1     Introduction

Chapter Two provides an overview of the contaminated sediment problems and issues across U.S.
EPA.   The brief description of issues in this chapter is meant to provide an introduction to the
discussion of contaminated sediment issues, as well as providing the overall  context for the more
detailed discussion of specific research and science needs given in Chapter Three of this document.

2.2     Scope, Magnitude, and Impacts of Contaminated Sediments

U.S. EPA  defines contaminated sediments as soils, sand, and organic matter or minerals that
accumulate on the bottom of a water body and contain toxic or hazardous materials that may adversely
affect human health or the environment (U.S. EPA, 1998d).  In 1997, U.S. EPA published its first
National Sediment Quality  Survey Report to Congress, The Incidence and Severity of Sediment
Contamination in Surf ace Waters of the United States (U.S. EPA, 1997a). This report describes areas
where  sediment may be contaminated at levels that may adversely affect aquatic life, wildlife, and
human health.  To evaluate sediment quality nationwide, U.S. EPA developed the National Sediment
Inventory (NSI) database, which is a compilation of existing sediment quality data and protocols used
to evaluate the data. The NSI was used to produce the first biennial Report to Congress on sediment
quality in the United States as required under the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (U.S.
EPA,  1997a). Data in the NSI were generated from studies conducted between 1980 and 1993, and
represent information collected in 1,363 of the 2,111 watersheds in the United States.  U.S. EPA's
evaluation of the  data shows that sediment contamination exists in every region and state of the
country  and that  various  waters  throughout the United  States  contain  sediment  sufficiently
contaminated with toxic pollutants to pose potential risks to sediment-dwelling organisms, fish, and
humans and wildlife that eat fish.

U.S. EPA published the first update to The Incidence and Severity of Sediment Contamination in
Surface  Waters of the  United States,  National Sediment Quality Survey:  Second  Edition
("Update";U.S. EPA, 2004b) in 2004.  The initial report presented a national baseline screening-level
assessment of contaminated sediments from sediment quality data collected from 1980 through 1993.
The Update identifies locations where data collected from 1990 to 1999 indicate that direct or indirect
exposure to the sediment could be associated with adverse effects to aquatic life and/or human health.
Of the 19,398 sampling stations evaluated in the Update, 8,348 stations (43 percent) were classified
as Tier 1 (associated adverse effects on aquatic life or human health are probable), 5,846 (30 percent)
were classified as Tier 2 (associated adverse effects on aquatic life or human health are possible), and
5,209 (27 percent) were classified as Tier 3 (no indication of associated adverse effects).3 The Update
 3  It is important to note that the percentage of all NSI sampling stations where associated effects are "probable" or
 "possible" (i.e., 43 percent in Tier 1 and 30 percent in Tier 2) does not represent the overall condition of sediment

-------
Page 10	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

does not provide an assessment of the "national condition" of sediments. However, it does provide
an assessment of changes in the extent and severity of sediment contamination over time for specific
areas in the United States where sufficient data exist.4

The NSI sampling stations were located in 5,695 individual river reaches (or water body segments)
across the contiguous United States, or approximately 8.8 percent of all river reaches in the country
(based on EPA's River Reach File I).5  Approximately 3.6 percent of all river reaches in the contiguous
United States contained at least one  station categorized as Tier 1, approximately  2.9 percent of
reaches contained at least one station categorized as  Tier 2 (but none as Tier  1), and in about 2.3
percent of river reaches all of the sampling stations were classified as Tier 3.

Watersheds containing areas of probable concern for sediment contamination (APCs) are those with
at least 10 Tier  1 sampling stations and in where at least 75 percent of all  sampling stations were
classified as either Tier 1 or Tier 2. The NSI data evaluation found that 96 watersheds throughout the
United States contained APCs (Figure 2-1). These watersheds represent about 4.2 percent of all
watersheds in the United States (96 of 2,264) and APC designation could result from  extensive
sampling throughout a watershed, or from intensive sampling at a single contaminated location or a
few contaminated locations.

Sediments act as both a repository and a source of pollutants. Many of these pollutants adsorb onto
sediment particles which eventually settle to the bottom of water bodies.  Over time these pollutants
may be  buried  under layers  of cleaner  sediments.  But  sediments are subject to  erosion and
resuspension, which may result in the pollutants being released and dispersed through the water
column for transport downstream, uptake through the food chain, or release to the atmosphere via
volatilization, for transport through the air and re-deposition into lakes and other waterways.
 across the country; most of the NSI data were obtained from monitoring programs targeted toward areas of known
 or suspected contamination (i.e., sampling stations were not randomly selected).

 4 Two general types of limitations are associated with the Update: limitations of the compiled data, and;
 limitations of the evaluation approach. Limitations of the compiled data include the mixture of data sets derived
 from different sampling strategies, incomplete sampling coverage, the age and quality of data, and the lack of
 measurements of important assessment parameters. Limitations of the evaluation approach include uncertainties in
 the interpretive tools to assess sediment quality, use of assumed exposure potential in screening-level quantitative
 risk assessment (e.g., fish consumption rates for human health risk), and the subsequent difficulties in interpreting
 assessment results.

 5 A river reach can be part of a coastal shoreline, a lake, or a length of stream between two major tributaries
 ranging from approximately 1 to 10 miles long.	

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page 11
f	'	

-------
Page 12	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

The bioaccumulative, persistent, and toxic forms of contaminants in sediment affect aquatic life and
wildlife through direct contact, ingestion, food chain effects, and habitat modification. These impacts
include reproductive effects, developmental effects, birth defects, cancer, tumors, other deformities,
and even death. Humans are also at risk through direct exposure to pollutants or through consumption
of contaminated fish and wildlife.  Exposure to these  contaminants is linked to cancer, birth defects,
neurological defects (e.g., in infants and children), immune dysfunction, and liver and kidney ailments.
Research is currently underway  studying the potential for endocrine disruption effects  due to
contaminants in sediments.

In addition,  contaminated  sediments  can  impose   costs  on society through lost recreational
opportunities and revenues.  For example, fish consumption advisories can have a significant impact
on the use of our natural resources. Approximately twenty-three percent of the nation's lake acreage
and nine percent of the nation's river miles are under advisory for fish consumption, in many cases due
to contaminated sediments. Contaminated sediments may also cause severe economic impacts on local
and regional transportation, fishing, tourism, and development industries. In one Great Lakes harbor,
the Indiana Harbor  Ship Canal, contaminated sediments are imposing  an annual cost of eleven to
seventeen million dollars (Peck et al., 1994).

2.3     Overview of Major Sediment Issues and Needs Across  the Agency

The management of contaminated sediments is a multi-faceted challenge for the Agency.  As a multi-
media issue, aspects of contaminated sediment management fall under different parts of U.S. EPA.
This section provides an overview of the maj or contaminated sediment issues across the Agency. This
discussion is meant to  provide the overall context for the discussion of the specific research and
science needs that follow in Chapter Three.

Water Quality Standards

The  Clean Water Act was established to restore and maintain the quality of waters in the United
States. Sediment underlying surface water is recognized as a significant source of, and sink for, toxic
pollutants in the aquatic environment. Therefore, addressing sediment quality is an integral component
of water quality standards programs.  It is necessary to incorporate appropriate sediment quality
protection policies and procedures to protect and maintain designated water uses. The Clean Water
Act establishes as a national goal  "...that wherever attainable, an interim goal of water quality which
provides for the protection and propagation offish, shellfish, and wildlife, and provides for recreation
in and on the water," be achieved by July 1983 (CWA Section 101(a)).  Sediment quality can affect
the attainment of designated uses. It is appropriate to assess and protect sediment quality as an
essential component of the total aquatic environment in order to achieve and maintain designated uses.
The  relationship between sediment quality, biological effects, and  attainment of designated uses is
uncertain.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 13

Development of Total Maximum Daily Loads

Section 303(d) of the CWA and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 130.7) require states and
authorized tribes to establish Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) of pollutant discharge at levels
necessary to achieve applicable water quality standards. TMDLs identify the loading capacity of the
water body, wasteload allocations for point sources, and  load allocations for nonpoint sources and
natural background. About 40,000 TMDLs are required  for about 20,000 impaired water bodies in
U.S., based on U.S. EPA's 1998 list of impaired waters. The 2000 305(b) report has been published
and is available at http ://www. epa. gov/3 05b/.  About twenty-four percent of the TMDLs (based on
1998 data from the TMDL tracking system) are for pollutants that are also found in contaminated
sediments.  These TMDLs require analysis of the contribution of pollutants from contaminated
sediments.

Fish Advisories

The states, U. S. territories, and Native American tribes have primary responsibility for protecting their
residents from the health risks of consuming contaminated, non-commercially caught fish and wildlife.
They do this by issuing consumption advisories for chemicals such as mercury or PCBs for the general
population as well as for sensitive subpopulations (e.g., pregnant women,  nursing mothers, and
children). These advisories inform the public when high concentrations of chemical contaminants have
been found in local fish and wildlife and include recommendations to limit or avoid consumption of
certain fish and wildlife species from specific water bodies  or water body types. Approximately
twenty-three percent of the nation's lake acreage  and over nine percent (9.3%) of the nation's river
miles are under advisory for fish consumption. Many of these advisories can be linked to contaminated
sediments. One hundred percent of the Great Lakes and their connecting waters and seventy-one
percent of coastal waters of the contiguous forty-eight states were under advisories in 2000.  It is
expected that improving  sediment  quality will reduce the need for many consumption  advisories.
Bioavailability, accumulation, tissue distribution, and depuration are major issues for fish advisories.

Management of Dredged Material from Navigational Dredging

Several hundred million cubic yards of sediment are dredged  from United States ports, harbors, and
waterways each year to maintain and improve the nation's navigation system for commercial, national
defense,  and recreational  purposes. Of the total sediment volume dredged, approximately  one-fifth
is disposed of in the ocean (i.e., waters outside the baseline) at designated  sites in accordance with
Section 103 of MPRSA. Most of the remaining dredged material is discharged into inland waters of
the United States (i.e., waters inside the baseline), placed  in confined disposal facilities with a return
flow to waters of the U. S. (/'. e., inland waters and waters out to three miles from the baseline), or used
for beneficial purposes (including as fill) in waters of the U. S., all of which are regulated under Section
404 of the CWA.

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Federal agency designated to maintain navigable waters, conducts
a majority of this dredging and disposal under its Congressionally authorized civil works program.

-------
Page 14	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

The balance of the dredging and disposal is conducted by a number of local public and private entities.
In either case, the disposal is subj ect to a regulatory program administered by U. S. ACE and U.S. EPA
under the above statutes. U. S. EPA shares the responsibility of managing dredged material, principally
in the development of the environmental criteria by which proposed discharges are evaluated and
disposal sites are selected, and in the exercise of its environmental oversight authority. Estimates by
U.S. ACE indicate that only a small percentage of the total annual volume  of dredged material
disposed (approximately three million to twelve million cubic yards) is contaminated such that special
handling and/or treatment is required. The major issues here are uncertainties about the biological
effects of risk management options and environmental effects of disposal practices.

Superfund Sites

Superfund is the Federal government's program to clean up the nation's uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites under CERCLA.  The National Priorities List  (NPL) is a published list of priority hazardous
waste sites in the country that are being addressed  by the Superfund program.  The regions have
identified about four hundred NPL sites potentially having contaminated sediments.  These include a
number of very large contaminated sediment sites where remedies may cost up to several hundreds
of millions of dollars.  The maj or issues associated with contaminated sediments include risks to human
health and the environment, limited disposal space, high costs, and the uncertainties related to risk
management options.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Sites

Like the Superfund program, RCRA sites/facilities are remediated to support current and reasonably
anticipated uses. RCRA authority for Corrective Action is to clean up releases from a specific facility;
therefore it is less amenable to an area-wide approach than Superfund. The number of RCRA sites
with contaminated sediment issues is smaller than the number of CERCLA contaminated sediment
sites. In March 1999, the regions and states identified seventeen RCRA Corrective Action sites with
sediment contamination problems. The major issues associated with contaminated sediments related
to RCRA sites include uncertainties regarding risks to  human health and the environment and
uncertainties related to risk management options.

Deposition of Contaminants via Short- and Long-Range Air Transport

Over the past thirty years, scientists have collected a large amount of data indicating that air pollutants
can be redeposited on land and water, sometimes at great distances from their original sources.  These
data demonstrate that air transport of contaminants (both near- and far-field)  can be an important
contributor to  declining water quality.  These air pollutants  can  have  undesirable health and
environmental impacts:  contributing to  fish body burdens of toxic chemicals, causing harmful algal
blooms through deposition of nutrients, and impacting water quality, resulting in unsafe drinking
water.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 15

In response to mounting evidence indicating that air pollution contributes significantly to water
pollution, Congress added the Great Waters Program (Section 112(m)) when it amended the Clean
Air Act in 1990. The Great Waters Program, a joint program including U.S. EPA and NOAA, is
designed to study and address the effects of air pollution on the water quality and ecosystems of the
Great Lakes, Lake Champlain, the Chesapeake Bay, and estuaries that are part of the National Estuary
Program or the National Estuarine Research Reserve System.

Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Pollutants

Persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic chemicals (PBTs) often accumulate in sediments.  The
Agency has three  major efforts related to PBTs:  a PBT Initiative; the Great Lakes
Binational Toxics  Strategy; and Testing Requirements for Pesticides and Toxic Substances Use
under the Federal Insecticide,  Fungicide,  and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and TSCA.

PBT Initiative

U.S. EPA has developed and is implementing a national multi-media strategy for the reduction of
persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic chemicals (PBTs), entitled the PBT Initiative.6  The goal of this
strategy is to reduce risks to human health and the environment from existing and future exposure to
priority pollutants.  The four main elements of the PBT Initiative are:

       1.      Develop and  implement  national  action plans to reduce priority PBT pollutants,
              utilizing the full range of U.S. EPA tools.

       2.      Continue to screen and select more priority pollutants for action.

       3.      Prevent new PBTs from entering the marketplace.

       4.      Measure progress of these actions against U.S. EPA's Government Performance
              Results Act (GPRA) goals and national commitments.

U.S. EPA's challenge in reducing risks from PBTs stems from the pollutants' ability to travel long
distances, to transfer rather easily among air, water, and land, and to linger for generations in people
and the environment.  Although much work has been done over the years to reduce the risk associated
with these chemicals, they frequently occur at levels of concern in fish tissue.  All of the substances
that are causing the fish consumption advisories are PBTs and metals.
 6 Priority PBTs currently being addressed under the PBT initiative include: aldrin/dieldrin; benzo(a)pyrene;
 chlordane; DDT/DDD/DDE; hexachlorobenzene; alkyl-lead compounds; mercury and its compounds; mirex;
 octachlorostyrene; PCBs; dioxins and furans; toxaphene.	

-------
Page 16	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy

The Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy provides a framework for actions to reduce or eliminate
persistent, toxic substances from the Great Lakes Basin, especially those that bioaccumulate. The
Strategy was developed jointly by Canada and the United States in 1996 and 1997 and was signed
April 7, 1997.  The Strategy establishes reduction challenges for an initial list of persistent, toxic
substances targeted for virtual elimination ('Level One' substances) which are synonymous with the
first twelve priority pollutants identified through the PBT Initiative.  These substances have been
associated with widespread long-term adverse effects on wildlife in the Great Lakes, and, through their
bioaccumulation, are of concern for human health. The Strategy provides a framework for action to
achieve specific quantifiable reduction "challenges" in the 1997 to 2006 time frame for specific toxic
substances.

Testing Pesticides and Toxic Substances for Registration and Use

FIFRA and TSCA provide U.S.  EPA the authority to ban or restrict the use  of pesticides and toxic
chemicals that have the potential to  contaminate sediment.   These actions  can be  taken  if
environmental or human health risks are determined to be unacceptable. Sediment toxicity testing can
be required to assess the risks of sediment contamination posed by pesticides and other chemicals.
These tests must be applied under the authority of FIFRA and TSCA in a strategy to systematically
evaluate the risks of sediment contamination.

2.4    Recent U.S. EPA Contaminated Sediment Science Activities and Products

To address the contaminated sediment issues discussed above, U. S. EPA produces scientific products
such as guidance documents and risk assessments. Various scientific activities, internal and external
to U.S. EPA, support the development of these scientific products.   Figures  2-2 through  2-4
summarize the maj or recent science products and activities in contaminated sediments by OW, OSRTI,
ORE),  and U.S. EPA regions.  The information has been separated into effects and assessment,
sediment  characterization and  fate and transport,  and remediation  monitoring and managing
contaminated sediments. Cross-Agency relationships have resulted in focused scientific activities to
more directly support science products and program office or regional decisions.  A detailed listing
of U.S. EPA's Contaminated Sediment Science Activities Database, including program and regional
office activities, is contained in Appendix A. It presents recent projects that include scientific areas
on program implementation, human health  and ecological effects and assessment,  exposure  and
modeling, and remediation and  risk management. Collaboration among U.S. EPA  scientists  and
engineers enhances the  use of quality scientific information in risk management decision-making.

-------
                         Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                           Page 17
                  Figure 2-2. Current Agency Science Activities And Products Regarding
                          Contaminated Sediment Effects And Risk Assessment
                                         SCIENCE PRODUCTS
  Draft Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guideline Documents
  Integrated Water Quality Criteria for Ambient Waters.
  Use of Sediment Benchmarks to Predict Toxicity in Great Lakes Sediments.
  Site HumanHealh and Ecological Risk Assessment
  Site Assessment FrameworkDocument
  Improved Site Assessment
            t
                                                t
 OKD SCIENCE ACTIVinES

Toxicity Identification Evaluation
Sediments.

Sediment Toxicity Test Methods
(acute, chronic, toxicity correlation
with field data, criteria development
issues).

Sediment Toxicity Assessment
MetodswithOWattlUSGS.

STAR Grants Basic Research
(ecological system assessment effects
of contaminated sediments onbiota).
 OW SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

Field Valuation Sediment Toxicity
Tests (ORDarriUSGS).

Development of Methods to Test
Chronic Toxicity of Marine
Sediments.

Sediment Toxicity Test Methods.
REGIONAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

 Miniaturized Sediment Toxicity Tests on
 Marine and Freshwater Amphipods and
 Fish (U.S. EPARegbn2 and U.S. EPA
 Region 6).

 Sediment Quality Assessment

 In situ Real-time System to Assess PAH
 Contaminated Sediments (GLNPO and
 OSRTJ).
 Human Health and Ecological Risk
 Assessment

-------
Page 18
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                   Figure 2-3. Current Agency Science Activities And Products Regarding
               Contaminated Sediment Characterization And Environmental Fate And Transport
SCIENCE PRODUCTS
• Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks Documents.
• Integrated Water Quality Criteria for Ambient Waters.
• Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines to Predict Toxicity in Qeat Lakes Sediments.
• Site Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment
• Site Assessment Framework Document
• National Sediment Inventory.
• Summary of Available Fate and Transport Models.
t t t t
ORD SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

• STAR Grants Basic Research (fate,
transport, and bioaccumulation of
contaminated sediments; physical and
chemical sediment parameter impacts;
watershed and ecological system studies
and trophic transfer, bioavailability of
contaminants; mechanisms of
contaminated release from re-suspended
sediments during dredging).
• Fate and Transport Methods (e.g,
bioaccumulation, distribution of
contaminants, uptake into biota).
• Indicators of Ecosystem Sustainability.











OW SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

• Sediment Bioavailability.
• Bioaccumulation Testing
and Interpretation for the
Purpose of Sediment
Quality Assessment: Status
and Needs.
• Sediment Fate Transport
Model.
• Tiering Classification for
the National Sediment
Inventory.
• Methods for Collection,
Storage, and Manipulation









OSWER
SCIENCE
ACTIVITIES
• Site
Characterization
• Risk Assessment
Guidance
Development
• Co-sponsoring a
conference on
Using Chemical
Fate and Transport
Models at
Contaminated
Sediment Sites.









REGIONAL SCIENCE
ACTIVITIES

• Site Characterization
• Risk Assessment
• R/VMudpuppy
Sediment Assessments
in the Great Lakes
Basin (GLNPO).
• Fully Integrated
"Pro /iTrvnTTipntfil
J_jl 1 V li(Ji 11 1 1C1 ILcli
Location Decision
Support (FIELDS)
Software Package.



-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page 19
              Figure 2-4. Current Agency Science Activities And Products Regarding
                Remediation, Monitoring, And Managing Contaminated Sediments
                                     SCIENCE PRODUCTS
Sediment Cleanups.
Development of Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites.
Development of Biological, Physical, and Chemical Monitoring Fact Sheets.
ORD SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

• Remediation Technology
Performance (dredging and
capping).
• Site Specific Technical
Support.
• Monitored Natural Recovery
• Research
• Ex situ Management and
Treatment Technologies.

• Site Demonstrations of
Innovative Technologies.
• Innovative In situ Treatment
Technologies.









OW SCIENCE
ACTIVITIES

• Ocean-
Dredged
Material
Disposal.















OSWER SCIENCE
ACTIVITIES

• Rule-making Applicable
to Contaminated
Sediments (OSW).
• Contaminated Sediment
Technical Advisory
Group review of large and
complex Superfimd Sites
(OSRTI and Regions).
• Evaluation of Remedial
Effectiveness at
Superfimd Sites (OSRTI).
















REGIONAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

• Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Program
(U.S. EPARegions 2, 3, 5, and GLNPO).
• Demonstration of Sediment
Decontamination Technology
Development with Beneficial Use
Applications (U.S. EPA Region 2 and
GLNPO).
• Sediment Capping and Natural Recovery
Project (U.S. EPARegion 3).
• Multi-Media Initiative for Calcasieu

Estuary (U. S. EPA Region 6).
• Sediment Environmental Priority
Initiatives (US. EPA Region 5).
• Great Lakes Contaminated Sediments
Initiative (U.S. EPARegion 5).

-------
Page 20
                Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
2.5
Overview of Communication and Collaboration Activities
Management of contaminated sediments requires a coordinated effort which surpasses any single
legislative authority  or  media.   Comprehensive,  multi-media responses that combine multiple
programs, agencies, and resources with public and private support can result in resolution of the
contaminated sediments problem. This section provides an overview of how such coordinated multi-
media efforts occur within and outside of U.S. EPA.

2.5.1    Collaborative Efforts Within U.S. EPA
Several key collaborative efforts within the Agency are relevant to the CSSP Document and include
the Contaminated Sediment Management Committee (CSMC),  publication of the Contaminated
Sediment Management Strategy (CSMS) (U.S. EPA, 1998b), development of the National Sediment
Inventory, the Agency-wide Science Inventory, and cross-media teams such as the U.S. EPA Region
5 Sediment Team that focus their efforts on the contaminated sediments issue.  In addition, there has
been enhanced Headquarters collaboration with the regions and coordination across media programs
in the regions.  These efforts are briefly discussed
below.                                          	
        U.S.  EPA published the Contaminated
        Sediment Management Strategy in April
        1998.    The  CSMS summarizes U.S.
        EPA's understanding of the extent and
        severity   of  sediment  contamination;
        describes  the  cross-program  policy
        framework in which U.S. EPA intends to
        promote consideration and reduction of
        ecological and human health risks posed
        by sediment contamination; and identifies
        actions U.S. EPA believes are needed to
        bring about consideration and reduction of
        risks  posed by contaminated  sediments
        (see Figure 2-5 for goals).
                                         Figure 2-5. The Goals of the Contaminated
                                                    Sediment Management Strategy

                                             Prevent the volume of contaminated
                                             sediment from increasing.

                                             Reduce the volume of existing contaminated
                                             sediment.

                                             Ensure that sediment dredging and dredged
                                             material disposal are managed in an
                                             environmentally sound manner.

                                             Develop scientifically sound sediment
                                             management tools for use in pollution
                                             prevention, source control, remediation, and
                                             dredged material management.
         The CSMC was established to coordinate
         all the appropriate programs and their associated regulatory authorities involved in the
         management of contaminated sediments.  CSMC includes representation from OSWER,
         OW, ORD, Office of Enforcement and Compliance (OECA), and many of the regions.

         The National Sediment Inventory is a national database and repository of data regarding
         sediment quality in the United States.  In accordance with the requirements of Title V of the
         Water Resources Development  Act, U.S.  EPA's Office of Water developed the first
         comprehensive national survey of data regarding sediment quality and compiled all available

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 21

 information in a national database. The database includes information regarding quantity,
 chemical and physical composition, and geographic location of pollutants in sediments. This
 information was summarized in a report to  Congress entitled, The Incidence and Severity
 of Sediment Contamination in Surface Waters of the United States (U.S. EPA, 1997'a).  The
 National Sediment Inventory is being updated on a regular basis and will be used to assess
 trends in sediment quality.

 U.S. EPA's Science Inventory is a database of Agency research and science activities for a
 number of different topics, one of which is contaminated sediments.  The Office of Science
 Policy coordinated development of the Science Inventory for the Agency.  The portion on
 contaminated sediments identifies the current scientific activities and research efforts in the
 contaminated sediments area from across the Agency.

 Contaminated sediments were designated as an U.S. EPA Region 5 Environmental Priority
 in 1995 due to both the extent and severity of the problem across the region.  Because a
 coordinated, multi-media effort would be required to address the problem, a Regional Team
 was formed with members representing regional programs and the Great Lakes National
 Program Office. The Team helped develop a strategy to implement a coordinated approach
 to program and office efforts to address contaminated sediments sites and provide technical
 expertise to the region, state agencies, and others.

 In  2000, the Agency established five Estuarine Indicator Research Programs.  These
 Programs were designed to identify, evaluate, recommend and potentially develop a suite of
 new, integrative indicators of ecological condition, integrity, and/or sustainability that can
 be incorporated into long-term monitoring programs and which will complement the
 Agency's  intramural coastal monitoring program.  Moreover,  the  Agency,  the U.S.
 Department of Agriculture (USDA), and seven other Federal agencies have developed a
 Clean Water Action Plan to protect public health and restore the nation's waterways through
 111 key actions.

 The Agency's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) is a long-term
 research effort to enable status and  trend assessments of aquatic and other ecological
 resources across the U.S. with a known statistical confidence. Initiated in the late  1980's
 within ORD, EMAP addresses monitoring the conditions of estuaries, streams and lakes in
 selected geographic regions, as well as examining the surrounding landscapes in which these
 resources occur. EMAP is now progressing towards national demonstrations of monitoring
 science in these and other aquatic resources. This strategy forms the basis for the research
 needed to establish the condition of the nation's aquatic and other resources. Future plans
 for EMAP involve research and technology transfer to enable periodic national assessments
 of all aquatic ecosystems. Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
 (REMAP) was initiated to test the applicability of the EMAP approach to answer questions
 about ecological conditions at regional and local scales. Using EMAP's statistical design and

-------
Page 22
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
         indicator concepts, REMAP conducts projects at smaller geographic scales and in shorter
         time frames than the national EMAP program.

    •    A framework and guidance for assessing the hazards and risks associated with metals and
         metalloids is being developed through the Risk Assessment Forum.  The work was initiated
         in 2001 to identify the special properties of metals in soils, sediments, water, and air. The
         final products will provide tools and advice for sampling, analysis, and assessment  of the
         hazards and risks from metals, including environmental chemistry and fate, bioavailability,
         and health and ecological effects.

2.5.2     External Collaborative Efforts
The Agency recognizes the importance of an
open  dialogue  and active  collaboration with
Federal  and   state   agencies  and  other
stakeholders  who  are concerned  with  the
contaminated sediment issue.   U.S.  EPA is
participating in, is sponsoring, or has sponsored
a number of multi-stakeholder collaborations
concerned with the various aspects of this issue.
These efforts have been diverse. For example,
the National and Regional Dredging Teams, co-
chaired by U.S.  EPA and U.S. ACE, were
formed in response to the  final report of the
Interagency Working Group on the Dredging
Process in order  to provide a mechanism for
timely resolution of conflicts over navigational
dredging  by   involving   all  agencies   and
maximizing interagency coordination.

OSWER' s Technology Innovation Office (TIO)
and   ORD's  National  Risk  Management
Research   Laboratory  (NRMRL)  are  co-
sponsors   of   the   Remedial   Technologies
Development Forum (RTDF) Sediment Action
Team, a public- and private-sector partnership
created to undertake the research, development,
demonstration, and evaluation efforts needed to
achieve common  cleanup goals (see Figure 2-
6).  It is anticipated that these collaborations
will   continue   and   expand   through  the
implementation of the CSSP Document.
                      Figure 2-6. Examples of External Collaborative Efforts

                      •  Contaminated Aquatic Sediment Remedial Guidance
                         Workgroup: developing Superfund Contaminated
                         Sediments Remediation Guidance; involves ORD, OW,
                         and the regions, as well as inter-agency participation
                         from NOAA, USGS, U.S. FWS, and U.S. ACE.

                      •  National Dredging Team (NDT): includes members
                         from U.S. EPA, U.S. ACE, NOAA (Ocean and Coastal
                         Resource Management (OCRM) and National Marine
                         Fisheries Service (NMFS)), U.S. Coast Guard (USCG),
                         USGS, and U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD).

                      •  RaDiUS database of Federally-funded research.

                      •  Great Lakes Dredging Team:  Comprised of Great
                         Lakes states, Great Lakes Commission and six Federal
                         agencies, including U.S. EPA.

                      •  Inter-state Technology and Regulatory Cooperation
                         (ITRC) Sediment Remediation Team.

                      •  U.S. EPA Region 5/State Superfund Conference Calls.

                      •  Ashtabula River Partnership.

                      •  Remedial Technologies Development Forum (RTDF).
                         Sediment Action Team.

                      •  Superfund Forum on Managing Contaminated
                                Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites (May 30 -

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 23

In addition to these direct collaborative efforts with other agencies, the RAND Corporation, in
cooperation with the National Science Foundation (NSF), was funded by the Federal government to
develop a database called RaDiUS (Research and Development in the United States).  This database
tracks government resources and research and development activities.  RaDiUS helps the research
community understand the research being conducted by the Federal government in order to eliminate
duplication of effort and promote collaboration. The database was searched using the term "sediment"
and identified more than 650 projects in eight agencies: USD A, Department of Commerce (DOC),
Department of Defense (DoD), Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Interior (DOI), U.S.
EPA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and NSF.  The results of this search
were considered in the development of this document and will be revisited as the document develops
and is implemented.

2.6    National Research Council Report on PCB-Contaminated Sediments

In an effort to address the controversial issues related to the management of PCB-contaminated
sediments, the U.S. Congress  directed U.S. EPA to "enter into an arrangement with the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) to conduct a review which evaluates the availability, effectiveness, costs,
and  effects of technologies for the remediation of sediments contaminated with polychlorinated
biphenyls, including dredging and disposal." In response to this Congressional request, the National
Research Council (NRC) published^ Risk-Management Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments,
which was released in March 2001 (NRC, 200la).  Among the eleven major  conclusions and
recommendations made by the committee, one was directed at the research areas shown in Figure 2-7.
  Figure 2-7. Recommendations for Further Research on PCB-Contaminated Sediments (NRC, 2001a)

  •   A better assessment of human health and ecological risks associated with mixtures of individual
     chlorobiphenyls present in specific environmental compartments.

  •   The impact of co-contaminants on PCB risk assessments and risk management strategies.

  •   Processes governing the fate of PCBs in sediments, including erosion, suspension, transport of fine
     cohesive sediments, pore water diffusion, biodegradation, and bioavailability.

  •   Improvement of ex situ and in situ technologies associated with removal or containment of PCB-
     contaminated sediments, treatment of PCB-contaminated material, and disposal of such sediments.

  •   Pilot scale testing of innovative technologies, such as biodegradation and in situ active treatment caps, to
     assess their effectiveness and applicability to various sites.

  •   The impact of continuing PCBs releases and global environmental cycling on site-specific risk
     assessments.

-------
Page 24	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

2.7    National Research Council Report on Contaminated Marine Sediments

The National Research Council established the Committee on Contaminated Marine Sediments to
"assess the nation's ability  for remediating contaminated sediments and to chart a course for the
development of management strategies."  The Committee published the results of their findings in
Contaminated Sediments in Ports and Waterways (NRC, 1997). In general, the report concluded that
there is no need to delay sediment remediation projects in anticipation  of a ground-breaking
remediation technology, since no such technology is on the horizon.  The recommendations are
organized into three areas:  decision-making, remediation technologies, and project implementation.
A summary of the recommendations is given in Figure 2-8.

-------
                             Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 25
Figure 2-8.  National Research Council Recommendations on Contaminated Marine Sediments (NRC,
             1997)

DECISION-MAKING

•   U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE should continue to develop uniform/parallel procedures for environmental/human health
    risks associated with freshwater, marine, and land-based disposal, containment, or beneficial reuse of contaminated
    sediments.

    Because consensus building is essential for project success, Federal, state, and local agencies should work together
    with appropriate private-sector stakeholders to interpret statutes, policies, and regulations in a constructive manner so
    that negotiations can move forward and sound solutions are not blocked or obstructed.

    To facilitate the application of decision-making tools, U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE should:  (1) develop and disseminate
    information to stakeholders concerning the available tools; (2) use appropriate risk analysis techniques  throughout the
    management process, including the selection and evaluation of remediation strategies; and (3) demonstrate the
    appropriate use of decision analysis in an actual contaminated sediments case.

    U.S. ACE should modify the cost-benefit analysis guidelines and practices it uses to ensure the comprehensive,
    uniform treatment of issues involved in the management of contaminated sediments.

•   U.S. ACE should revise its policies to allow for the implementation of placement strategies that involve the beneficial
    use of contaminated sediments even if they are not lowest cost alternatives. In addition, regulatory agencies involved
    in contaminated sediments disposal should develop incentives for and encourage implementation of beneficial use
    alternatives.

•   Federal and state regulators, as well as ports, should investigate the use of appropriate legal and enforcement tools to
    require upstream contributors to sediment contamination to bear a fair share of cleanup costs.

TECHNOLOGIES

    U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE should develop a program to support research and development and to demonstrate
    innovative technologies specifically focused on the placement, treatment, and dredging  of contaminated marine
    sediments. Innovative technologies should be demonstrated side-by-side with the current state-of-the-art technologies
    to ensure direct comparisons.  The results of this program should be published in peer-reviewed publications so the
    effectiveness, feasibility, practicality, and cost of various technologies can be evaluated independently.  The program
    should span the full range of research and development, from the concept  stage to field implementation.

•   U.S. ACE and U.S. EPA should develop guidelines for calculating the costs of remediation systems, including
    technologies and management methods, and should maintain data on the costs of systems that have actually been
    used. The objective should be to collect and maintain data for making fair comparisons of remediation  technologies
    and management methods based on relative costs, as well as their effectiveness in reducing risks to human health and
    ecosystems.

    U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE should support research and development to reduce contaminant losses from confined
    disposal facilities and confined aquatic disposal, to promote the reuse of existing confined disposal facilities, and to
    improve tools for the design of confined disposal facilities and confined aquatic disposal systems and for the
    evaluation of long-term stability and effectiveness.

-------
Page 26
                         Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
2.8    Long-term Trends Affecting Contaminated Sediments

The purpose of this CSSP Document is to capture not only immediate and intermediate scientific needs
for contaminated sediment management, but also longer term trends or impacts which may be "outside
the box of regulatory focus," yet are of critical environmental concern.  In many cases, these scientific
concerns encompass more than the area of contaminated sediments. A listing of some of these
concerns is given in Figure 2-9.
                                                        Figure 2-9.
The  sources  and  activities  that lead  to  sediment
contamination are likely to increase with the growth in
world   population   and   economic   development.
Atmospheric loadings are likely to  increase as well.
Under most current projections of future conditions here
and  abroad, societal  and  governmental pressure will
increase to maintain navigation channels, protect food and
water  supplies,  and  develop housing,  business, and
recreation along waterways and coastlines.  While it is
extremely important to develop the capability to detect
and manage contaminated sediments, that strategy alone
is unlikely to achieve the desired levels of environmental
protection.

An important area for future research is the collection and
analysis of  contaminated  sediment data to understand
environmental   loadings,   develop   measures  and
management strategies to prevent additional loadings to
sediments   and  develop   alternative uses,  promote
recycling, and minimize the generation of waste to reduce
future  loadings.   Such  approaches  (e.g.,  conceptual
models  of  the  sources  and pathways that lead  to
contaminated sediments and global budgets of metals and
persistent  and  bioaccumulative  organics)  could be
integrated with other U.S. EPA programs, Federal agencies and states,  industrial trade groups,
stakeholders, and foreign countries. Consideration of these broader scientific/societal issues in this
kind of strategy will require national and international collaboration.
Environmental
Trends Relevant to
Contaminated
Sediments
                                                           Expanding urban centers in coastal
                                                           areas and increased waterfront
                                                           development.

                                                           Increase of impervious roof and
                                                           pavement surfaces.

                                                           Long-range transport of contaminants.

                                                           Total Maximum Daily Load challenge.

                                                           Nonpoint source controls.

                                                           Large/complex sites ("mega" sites),
                                                           including sites that span multiple
                                                           communities.

                                                           Limited disposal capacity.

                                                           High costs of remediation vs.

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 27
    3.  ASSESSING THE SCIENCE ON CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS

Chapter Three presents the state of the science for assessing and managing contaminated sediments
and specific science needs.  Science needs were developed to provide guidance on the scientific tasks
required to address the key scientific questions within each topic. Science needs were evaluated for
their ability to address high priority, critical data gaps, to reduce uncertainty in risk assessment/risk
management  decision-making, and to provide  state-of-the-science  guidance or  tools.   Key
recommendations for each major topic were agreed to by the Workgroup members using a group
consensus process that included the evaluation criteria, professional judgment, and comment or input
from both internal and external review.  The Workgroup however, purposely did not constrain the
recommendations to fit within available resources. Instead, the recommendations are a comprehensive
list that U.S. EPA organizations can consider when balancing resource allocations across competing
high priority needs.

The thirty-three (33)  key  recommendations  described in this section  address  the contaminated
sediment issues and data gaps, as  well as areas for better coordination of contaminated sediment
science activities, including research, across the Agency that are identified as highest priority by the
Workgroup and have undergone both internal and external Agency review. The recommendations
follow each science topic: sediment site characterization; exposure assessment research; health effects
research;  ecological  effects  research;  sediment  remediation;  baseline,  remediation,  and  post-
remediation monitoring;  risk communication and  community  involvement;  and  information
management and exchange activities.

It  is important to understand that the recommendations presented in this document are closely
interrelated, reflecting the relationships among the  underlying science areas.  Therefore, each
recommendation may be viewed as a single aspect of the larger universe of science needs in the area
of contaminated sediments, generating insights for use in other areas and relying on insights gathered
from the implementation of other recommendations.  For example, the information gathered from
Recommendation A. 1 (a workshop  on sediment stability) is intended to provide information to be used
in  Recommendations B.3  (fate and transport modeling), B.4 (use of sediment stability data), D.4
(ecological benefits and adverse effects of dredging), E. 1-E.4 (remediation alternatives), and F. 1-F.2
(monitoring).  Similarly, Recommendations E.I (collecting the data necessary and developing the
guidance for determining the conditions under which natural recovery is a viable option) and E.4
(evaluating the short- and long-term impacts of dredging relative to natural processes and human
activities) are strongly linked to Recommendation D.4 (acquiring data and developing criteria to use
in balancing long-term benefits from dredging versus shorter term effects on ecological receptors and
their habitats). Users of this document are encouraged to identify and explore these links.

-------
Page 28	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

3.1    Introduction

Contaminated sediments threaten ecosystems, aquatic  resources, and human health.   Sediment
contamination primarily occurs because many pollutants adsorb to organic and inorganic particles that
eventually settle to the  bottom of streams, rivers,  reservoirs, lakes, estuaries, or marine waters.
Sediments also serve as  a habitat for the benthic community. However, when contamination of the
sediments occurs, the entire system becomes a contaminant reservoir for bioaccumulation and trophic
transfer.  Substantial and complicated impacts on the ecosystem are well documented, ranging from
direct effects on benthic communities to substantial contributions to contaminant loads and effects on
upper trophic levels (e.g., humans and other fish eaters) through food web contamination.

The assessment and management of contaminated sediments in ports and harbors, rivers, lakes, and
at hazardous waste sites do not easily lend themselves to simple solutions.  Contaminated sediments
in aquatic environments are best characterized as systems problems, with multiple causes and effects.
Aquatic environments are a complex assemblage of interacting physical, chemical, and biological
processes, many of which are inherently nonlinear, with considerable uncertainty about both their
nature and their interconnections, and that are strongly linked to terrestrial ecosystems. Further
difficulties arise from the great variability in the physical and biogeochemical characteristics of aquatic
environments; human and ecological receptors;  and the  cultural,  social,  and economic values
associated with  different freshwater,  estuarine, and  marine environments.   Fundamental to the
assessment and effective management of contaminated sediments is a sound understanding of the
science affecting contaminated sediment systems.  This chapter weighs science needs against the
backdrop of current contaminated sediment science activities within the Agency.

To illustrate how complex sediment processes can be, Figure 3-1 presents one example of a conceptual
model for a generalized contaminated sediment site. The model depicts the pathways from the source
of contamination through the various environmental media to exposure of ecosystems and human
populations. Table 3-1 lists key processes that underlie contaminated sediment systems.

Broadly defined, science needs for contaminated sediments may be separated into several areas:

    •    Characterizing  water body/sediment systems (including  physical and  biogeochemical
         characteristics, human and ecological receptors).

         Understanding the physical/chemical processes that operate in water body/sediment systems.

         Understanding the biological effects of contaminants found in sediments, particularly with
         regard to the complex mixtures of contaminants typically found at contaminated sediment
         sites.

         Modeling water body/sediment systems— including accounting for the spatially variable and
         dynamic nature (i.e., seasonal flow variations and episodic storm events) of real systems.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 29

         Clarifying  the processes  that  are  the basis of technological  systems designed  to
         mitigate/remediate environmental degradation.

    •    Understanding the interactions and feedback among physical and biological processes.

Table 3-1. Key Processes Underlying Contaminated Sediment Systems	
 Physical/Chemical Systems
     Transport and cycling of contaminants in sediments, water column, and atmosphere
     Chemical and phase transformations
     Energy flow and transformation	
 Biological Systems
     Biological production
     Origins, functions, and maintenance of biological diversity
     Reproduction and development
     Metabolism, growth, and death
     Cellular differentiation and proliferation
     Immune function
     Neurobiological function
     Incidence and mechanisms of pathology
     Growth and regulation of populations
     Interactions of biological processes with physical/chemical and social processes
    Source: Adapted from Building a Foundation for Sound Environmental Decisions, National Research Council, National
    Academy Press, Washington, B.C., p!9

-------
Page 30
      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Figure 3-1.  Conceptual Model of a Generalized Contaminated Sediment Site
         INITIAL
        RELEASE
         MEDIA
  PRIMARY
  RELEASE/
TRANSPORT
MECHANISMS
 PRIMARY
RECEIVING
  MEDIA
SECONDARY
 RELEASE'
'TRANSPORT
MECHANISMS
 PRIMARY    SECONDARY" EXPOSURE
EXPOSURE    EXPOSURE    ROUTES
  MEDIA       MEDIA
                                                 downst'sarn
                                                 Flooding and runoff
                                                 5es»mert re-suspension
                                                    downstream "rarapon

-------
                         Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                      Page 31
This chapter  discusses  current contaminated
sediment science activities and identifies science
needs within eight maj or topic areas.  The maj or
topics are:

     •    sediment site characterization
         exposure assessment
     •    human  health  toxicity   and   risk
         characterization
     •    ecological effects and risk assessment
         sediment remediation
     •    baseline,  remediation,  and  post-
         remediation monitoring
     •    risk  communication and community
         involvement
     •    information   management    and
         exchange activities.

Key scientific  questions  were developed for
each major topic in order to focus discussions
on scientific needs and to identify recommended
science activities to address these questions (see
Figure   3-2).     Future   updates   to  the
Contaminated  Sediments  Science  Priorities
Document will re-evaluate the  current state of
the science and identify any new and emerging
science issues and needs.

Appendix  A,  the  Contaminated  Sediment
Science   Activities   Database,  provides  a
summary of recent and current proj ects (as of
June 2000) on  various scientific  topics of
concern in the assessment and  management of
contaminated  sediments.    The  database is
divided into major  science areas.   Program
implementation projects include remediation,
monitoring,   pilot   studies,  and   initiatives.
Human  health and  ecological effects  and
assessment projects  include productive  cross-
Agency efforts on equilibrium partitioning of
contaminants,   ecotoxicological    method
development,   risk   assessments,    and
characterization  studies.      Exposure   and
Figure 3-2. Key Scientific Questions

Sediment Site Characterization:

    What physical, chemical and biological methods best
    characterize sediments and assess sediment quality?

Exposure Assessment:

    What are the primary exposure pathways to humans and
    wildlife from contaminants in sediments and how can
    we reduce uncertainty in quantifying and modeling the
    degree of exposure?

Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization:

    What are the risks associated with exposure to
    contaminants in sediments through direct and indirect
    pathways?

Ecological Effects and Risk Assessment:

    What are the risks associated with exposure to
    contaminants in sediments to wildlife species and
    aquatic communities?

Sediment Remediation:

    What sediment remedial technology or combination of
    technologies is available to effectively remediate sites?

Baseline, Remediation, and Post-remediation
Monitoring:

    What types of monitoring are needed to ensure that the
    implemented remedy meets remedial performance goals
    and does not cause unacceptable short-term effects?

Risk Communication and Community Involvement:

    How can we provide communities with more
    meaningful involvement in the contaminated sediments
    cleanup process?

Information Management and Exchange Activities:

    How do we improve information management and

-------
Page 32	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

modeling tasks include work on topics such as TMDLs, bioavailability, and environmental fate.
Remediation and risk management projects include guidance development, technology development
and evaluation, site specific efforts, field demonstration of technologies, and information management
systems.

More recently, the Agency has prepared an online Science Inventory,  a searchable, Agency-wide
catalog of more than 4,000 science activities such as research, technical assistance and assessments,
along with more than 750 peer-reviewed products (http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/). The database contains
more than 19,000 records in the archives including project descriptions, products produced, types of
peer review, links to related work and contacts for additional information. Users can conduct keyword
searches or search within nine cross-cutting science topics, one ofwhichis 'Contaminated Sediments'.
3.2    Sediment Site Characterization

U.S. EPA has evaluated sediment quality data collected from more than 21,000 sampling stations
nationwide (U.S. EPA, 1997a). This evaluation has indicated that contaminated sediment sites occur
in different types of water bodies in every state.  The water bodies affected include streams, lakes,
harbors, near shore areas, and oceans.  U.S. EPA has recognized that in different water body types,
many factors can affect the kinds and magnitude of impacts that contaminated sediments have on the
environment (U.S.  EPA,  1992b).   These factors  include  hydrology,  physical  and  chemical
characteristics of the sediment, types of contaminants present and their associated human health or
ecological effects, and synergistic or antagonistic effects of contaminants.  Sediment characterization
and assessment tools vary in their suitability and sensitivity for detecting different endpoints and
effects.  For example, the most appropriate method for conducting screening level assessments may
not provide adequate information for definitive risk assessments.   Similarly, methods providing
information about food chain exposure may not answer questions about direct toxicity.  It is, therefore,
necessary to match the assessment method used with the site or program-specific obj ectives of a study
being conducted.  For this reason, multiple complementary characterization or assessment methods
are used to assess sediment quality. Assessments of sediment quality have commonly involved: use
of various  spatial and temporal sampling strategies, analyses of physical parameters, analyses of
chemical parameters, biological testing (both  laboratory  and in situ testing for toxicity and
bioaccumulation of contaminants), and evaluation of ecological indicators such as benthic community
structure.

3.2.1   Sampling Strategies (Temporal and Spatial)

Selection of an appropriate  sampling design is  one of the most critical steps  in assessment and
characterization studies. The sampling design chosen will depend upon  the study objectives. U.S.
EPA (U.S. EPA, 2001b) describes the factors  to consider in  designing a sampling study.  It is
important that the study design control extraneous sources of variability and error so that data are
representative for the obj ectives being addressed. Sampling designs for spatially distributed  variables
fall into two major categories: 1) random or probabilistic, and 2) targeted  designs. Probability-based

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 33

designs avoid bias in the results of sampling by randomly assigning and selecting sampling locations.
In targeted, judgmental, or model-based designs, sampling locations are selected on the basis of prior
knowledge or variables such as estimated loading, depth, salinity, and substrate type.  Because
targeted sampling designs can often be quickly implemented at a relatively low cost,  this type of
sampling is often used to meet schedule and budgetary restraints that cannot be met by implementing
a statistical design. A comprehensive review of site-specific factors that may influence the location
of sampling stations, particularly for large-scale monitoring studies,  is provided by Mudroch and
MacKnight(1994).

U. S. EPA has also developed a computerized sampling design program called the Field Environmental
Decision Support (FIELDS) system. This system is a set of software modules designed to simplify
sophisticated site and contamination analysis.  Each module is a self contained unit that can be applied
to a variety of scenarios. When used together, either working through the FIELDS process, or being
applied according to  a  different  schedule, the modules offer power and  efficiency in the
characterization, analysis, and  discrete  sampling data  points to be interpolated into a surface.
Important uses of these  interpolated surfaces include delineating hot spots, calculating average
concentrations, estimating  contamination mass and volumes,  and  developing post-remediation
scenarios.   An updated 2003 version of the FIELDS software can be downloaded from the site
http://www.epa.gov/region5fields/.

Regardless of the appropriateness of a sampling plan, its ultimate effectiveness will be dependent upon
the ability to retrieve the samples.  Recovering a complete sediment core representing the desired
vertical interval can prove to be infeasible. Representativeness of a sample may be affected by such
problems as:  core shortening or compression, sample loss during retrieval,  sample washout, and
inability to determine the sediment surface. The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program has conducted studies to evaluate the capability of samplers to collect representative sediment
samples (U.S.  EPA, 2000d).

Science Needs

The National Research Council (1997) discusses the complex factors necessary to  develop a sediment
sampling plan.  The distribution of sediment contaminants is determined by complex interactions
among meteorological, hydrodynamic, biological, geological, and geochemical factors.  Interactions
among these factors result in a transport system with wide variations, both spatial and temporal.  For
example, it is particularly important to consider sediment transport time scales, which typically range
from hours to  months but are sometimes disturbed by high-energy storms which can displace large
amounts  of sediment  and  significantly  alter the distribution  and availability of  contaminants.
Understanding these interactions is critical to specifying comprehensive sampling designs.  As NRC
(1997) notes, designs of sediment sampling strategies increasingly rely on computer-based numerical
models. These models fall  into four categories:  hydrodynamic, sediment and chemical transport,
biological toxicity, and ecosystem response.  Improved numerical models will facilitate the design of
optimal sediment sampling  strategies. However,  accurate simulations of sediment and chemical
transport will also require the development of site-specific formulations.

-------
Page 34	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
3.2.2   Physical Parameters

Analysis of physical characteristics of sediment provides information that can be used to assess the
effects of contaminants on the benthic environment and the water column. Physical analysis of the
sediment is generally the first step in the characterization and  assessment  process.   Information
describing physical parameters of the sediment is required to understand bioavailability, fate, and
transport of sediment contaminants at any site.  Physical analysis often includes measurement of
parameters such as particle size distribution, total solids, and specific gravity. Methods for measuring
sediment physical characteristics have been published and widely used for a number of years. Many
of these methods are based on analytical techniques originally developed for soils.

Particle size distribution analysis defines the frequency distribution  of size  ranges of the  mineral
particles that make up the sediment (Plumb, 1981; Folk, 1980).  Sediment particle size influences both
chemical and biological characteristics of the sediment. It is used to normalize chemical concentrations
and account for some of the variability  found in biological assemblages (U.S. EPA, 1998c) or in
laboratory toxicity testing (U.S. EPA, 2000d; Hoss et al., 1999). Particle size  is frequently described
in percentages of gravel, sand, silt, and clay. Each of these size fractions, however, can be subdivided
further so that a more complete  characterization of particle sizes can be  determined (Puget Sound
Estuary Program,  1986). Commonly used sediment particle size methods include:  wet sieving (U.S.
EPA,  1979; Plumb,  1981; Puget Sound Estuary Program, 1986; Singer  et al., 1988), hydrometer
method (Day, 1965;Patrick, 1958), pipette method (Guy, 1969; Rukavina and Duncan, 1970), settling
techniques (Sandford and Swift,  1971), and X-ray absorption (Duncan and Lattaie,  1979; Rukavina
andDunkan,  1970).

Total solids is a gravimetric determination of the organic and inorganic material remaining in a sample
after it has been  dried at a specific temperature.  The total solids values are used to  convert
concentrations of contaminants from a wet weight to a dry weight basis. Water content of sediment
provides useful information for assessments of sediment quality.  Methods  for determining water
content of a sediment are described by Plumb (1981) and Vecchi (1999).

Specific gravity of a sediment sample is the ratio of the mass of a given volume of material to an equal
volume of distilled water at the same temperature (Plumb, 1981). The specific gravity of a sediment
sample can be used to predict the behavior (i.e., dispersal and settling characteristics) of sediments.
Methods for determining specific gravity are described by Plumb (1981) and Blake and Hartge (1986).

Science Needs

As noted above, reliable methods are available for measuring the physical parameters of a sediment.
It is necessary,  however, to collect  sediment samples to measure these parameters. The National
Research Council (1997) describes a variety of mechanical  methods available to collect  vertical
sediment column samples for evaluation of physical parameters.  Depending on the objectives of a
study, sediment samples can be mixed to provide composite samples.  This provides an indication of

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 35

average physical parameter measurements at a site. However, high-resolution spatial data are often
needed to fully characterize physical sediment parameters at heterogeneous sites. Obtaining such data
requires conducting detailed site surveys with dense sampling. This is  a very slow and expensive
process that, even with dense sampling, can provide limited spatial resolution.

Sampling is currently conducted using two main types of devices:  grab samplers and core samplers.
Various grab and core samplers have limitations that can affect cost and  time required for sampling.
Grab  sampler limitations can include:  boats, winches, and lines required for operation; limited
sampling depth  and volume;  loss  of  sample due  to  incomplete device closure;  and sample
contamination from metal frame.  Core  sampler limitations  can  include:   equipment required for
operation and lifting, difficulty of deployment and handling, repetitive and time consuming operation
and removal of liners, and risk of metal contamination.  Improved sampling and data collection
techniques could reduce cost and provide improved spatial resolution.

The National Research Council (1997) notes  that sediment  physical parameters and contaminant
concentrations are often interpolated horizontally, resulting in an overestimation of the mass or volume
of a contaminated sediment.  However, interpolation could also result in an underestimation of the
mass or volume of a sediment.  Thus, it is important to develop and implement more cost effective
assessment technologies to replace coring.  The National Research Council further notes that  a
promising technique for measurement of physical sediment parameters is  acoustic sub-bottom
profiling.  Development of acoustic sub-bottom profiling technology could permit high resolution
mapping of acoustic reflectivity, and determination of physical sediment parameters such as porosity,
bulk density, and grain size.  This technology has the potential to reduce overall sediment assessment
costs and increase the spatial resolution of field surveys.  In addition to improved field methods for
measuring physical  sediment parameters, research is needed in two other important areas.   An
important area for future research is the effect of geomorphological  and physical sediment parameters,
such as sediment texture, on the response of benthic organisms exposed to  contaminants. Work is also
needed to better understand the relationships between bioturbation and physical sediment parameters
(such as surface roughness, internal porosity, and physical strength), and the resultant modification
of sediment erodability and contaminant transport pathways.

It is recommended that U.S. EPA hold a workshop to identify work necessary to develop methods that
could reduce the cost and increase the efficiency and accuracy with which physical parameters can be
evaluated at contaminated sediment sites.

3.2.3   Chemical Parameters

Chemical analysis of sediment provides information about chemicals that, if bioavailable, can cause
toxicity or bioaccumulate to levels of concern.  In  addition, chemical parameters such as pH, total
organic carbon, and redox potential furnish information to assess bioavailability and contaminant
exposure.

-------
Page 36	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

U. S. EPA and other agencies have developed analytical methods capable of identifying and quantifying
these chemical parameters.  However, techniques for analysis of chemical constituents in sediment
have some inherent limitations. Interferences encountered as part of the sediment matrix, particularly
in samples from heavily contaminated areas, may limit the ability of a method to detect or quantify
some analytes. The most selective methods using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS)
techniques are often used for nonchlorinated organic compounds because such analysis can avoid
problems due to matrix interferences. Gas chromatography/electron capture detection (GC/ECD)
methods  are frequently used as  the analytical tool for PCB  and pesticide analyses because these
methods result in lower detection limits. GC/ECD is effective at detecting and measuring all PCB
congeners in media including sediments.  Methods for collection of sediment and interstitial water
samples and for analysis of chemical parameters are described in a number of publications (U.S. EPA,
1998c, 1995b, and 200Ib).

Many chemical contaminants can persist for relatively long periods of time in sediments where bottom-
dwelling animals can accumulate and pass them up the food chain to fish. Therefore, methods are
needed for analysis of chemical contaminants  in  fish tissue.  U.S.  EPA  has published  interim
procedures for sampling and analysis of priority pollutants in fish tissue (U.S. EPA, 1981); however,
official U.S. EPA-approved methods are  available only for the analysis of low parts-per-billion
concentrations of some metals in fish and shellfish tissues (U.S. EPA, 1991b). Although the U.S.
EPA-approved methods for many analyses have not been published, states and regions have developed
specific analytical methods for various target analytes (U.S. EPA, 2000d).

In addition to  conventional laboratory methods  of  analyses,  rapid sediment characterization
technologies are starting to be used at some sites.  These are field transportable analytical tools which
provide measurements of chemical, physical, or biological parameters on a real-time or near real-time
basis. Some such typical screening level ex situ analytical tools recommended by the Assessment and
Remediation of Contaminated Sediment (ARCS) Program for freshwater sediments include X-ray
fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) for metals, ultraviolet fluorescence spectroscopy (UVF) for PAHs,
and immunoassays for pesticides, PCBs, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The XRF
technique for metals measures the fluorescence spectrum of x-rays emitted when atoms are excited
by an x-ray source. The energy of emitted x-rays reveal the identity of the metals  in the sample and
their intensity is related to their concentrations.  An XRF spectrometer can analyze a wide range of
elements from ppm to percent levels, encompassing typical element levels found in soils and sediments.
Field portable XRF units provide near real-time measurements with minimal sample handling, allowing
for extensive, semi-quantitative analysis on site.  UVF is based on the measurement of fluorescence
observed following UV excitation of organic solvent extracts of sediments. Typically used for PAHs
in sediments,  this  technique gives near real-time measurements as solvent extraction  adds to the
analysis time. Immunoassays are used for field screening of target contaminants through the use of an
antibody than binds only to that substance. Quantitation is generally performed by monitoring solution
color changes with a spectrophotometer.  This technique has a sample turnaround of the order of
minutes, providing near real-time measurements  (US Navy, 2002).

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 37

The Federal Remediation Technologies  Roundtable (FRTR),  a collaboration of multiple Federal
agencies including EPA, DOD, DOE, DOT, and NASA, has developed a matrix that provides a general
understanding of state-of-the-art technologies for site characterization and the applicability of various
technologies  to specific problems.   The  matrix can  be  accessed  through the  internet at
http ://www. frtr. gov/site.  In addition, EPA's Technology Innovation Office provides  a source of
innovative   remediation  and   characterization   technologies  that   can  be   accessed  at
http://www.epareachit.org.   Not all  of  these technologies  are  EPA-verified; verification of the
performance of site characterization and field analytical technologies is conducted through EPA's
Environmental Technology Verification Program (ETV) and the Consortium for Site Characterization
and Technology (CSCT), along with certification statements from California EPA's (CalEPA)
California Environmental Technology Certification Program.

Science Needs

Although published methods for sampling sediment and quantifying chemical parameters are available,
the National Research Council (NRC, 1997) notes that there is growing interest in the use of real-time
or near real-time chemical sensors for use in the  field. NRC (1997) remarks that these  sensors can
provide both point measurements and long-term, time-series observations.  Development of these
technologies is needed for more cost-effective site assessment.  Although sensors that measure pH,
Eh, oxygen, carbon dioxide,  and  ammonia are currently available, these  sensors are not capable of
measuring contaminants of concern in sediments.  NRC (1997) identifies fiber-optic sensors as a
technology that holds promise for assessment of sediment chemistry.  These sensors make use of
optical measurements down a fiber,  or  immobilized membranes or reagents at the fiber tip that
reversibly or irreversibly bind with specific analytes, producing a response that can be sensed optically.
NRC identifies development of these kinds of technologies as a scientific advancement that would
contribute significantly to the development of improved management protocols for contaminated
sediment sites.

In addition to the development  of field methods  for real-time detection  of sediment chemical
parameters, work is needed to develop more sensitive, low-cost laboratory methods to detect sediment
contaminants and chemical parameters that control bioavailability of contaminants.  Interferences
encountered as part of the sediment matrix, particularly in samples from heavily contaminated areas,
may limit the ability of available methods  to detect or quantify some analytes. In other instances, the
impetus to develop still more  sensitive methods are often risk-based criteria that arise to meet specific
project or site needs.  An important area for future research is the development and validation of
methods that minimize the use of hazardous solvents and reagents thereby reducing the  exposure of
laboratory workers to these chemicals and minimizing the  waste which must be  disposed of in
accordance with RCRA regulations.  Work  is also needed to develop  faster and  less expensive
methods for analysis of interstitial water.  Interstitial water analysis is particularly useful for assessing
sediment contaminant levels and associated toxicity.  Isolated interstitial water can provide a matrix
for both toxicity testing and an indication of partitioning of contaminants within the sediment matrix.
In addition to improved laboratory methods for detection of sediment contaminants, improved

-------
Page 38	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

methods for analysis of chemical contaminants, especially bioaccumulative compounds, in fish tissue
are also needed.

An important area for future research is the development and validation of methods to assess sediment
contaminants of emerging concern, such as endocrine disrupters, including alkylphenol ethoxylates
(APEs) and their metabolites. Many of the suspect endocrine disrupter compounds (EDCs) identified
to-date are low-solubility, neutral organic compounds that are highly sorbed to organic carbon phases
of sediments, suspended particles in the water column, airborne particulate matter, and soil. Sediment-
associated contaminants not only serve as a source of toxicity to benthic organisms living in contact
with these sediments, but also can reintroduce contaminants into the water column or aquatic food
chain. Alkylphenol ethoxylates can biodegrade to alkylphenols, such as nonylphenols, which can persist
in the environment and be highly toxic to aquatic organisms. Exposure to alkylphenol ethoxylates,
specially their  metabolites, may affect endocrine and other important human and  animal system
functions (U.S. EPA, 2001).

In order to address these science needs, it is recommended that U. S. EPA: 1) develop more sensitive,
low-cost laboratory methods for detecting sediment contaminants and real-time or near real-time
chemical sensors for use in the field, 2) develop U.S. EPA-approved methods with lower detection
limits for analysis of bioaccumulative contaminants of concern in fish tissue, and 3) develop methods
for analyzing emerging endocrine disrupters, including APEs and their metabolites.

3.2.4  Emerging Potential Sediment Contaminants

In response to  requirements set forth in the Water Resources Development Act of 1992, the Agency
developed the National Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS) report and initiated the NSI (designed to
compile sediment quality information from available  electronic databases into one centralized, easily
accessible location). U.S. EPA published the first update to the NSQS in 2004.  The objective of the
initial NSQS, and subsequent updates, is to depict  and characterize the incidence and severity of
sediment  contamination based on the probability  of adverse effects to human health and the
environment. Severity of contamination was evaluated using multiple lines of evidence, using sediment
chemistry  data, chemical residue levels in edible tissue of aquatic organisms, and sediment toxicity
data.   Of the  sampling  stations evaluated in the 2004 update, 8,348 stations (43 percent) were
classified as Tier 1 (adverse effects are probable), 5,846 (30 percent) were classified as Tier 2 (adverse
effects are possible), and 5,204 (27 percent) were classified as Tier 3 (no indication of adverse effects).
It is important to realize that these percentages do not represent the overall condition of sediment
across the country as NSI data were obtained from monitoring programs that generally target areas
of known  or suspected contamination.

Science Needs

Although the NSI includes approximately 4.6 million records of sediment chemistry, tissue residue,
and toxicity data, for more than 50,000 monitoring stations across the country, for approximately 150
compounds  (including isomers),  there is  no  single, comprehensive list of potential  sediment

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 39

contaminants that could be used to guide monitoring efforts. Such contaminants include commercial
compounds - for example, alkylphenol ethoxylates, and pharmaceuticals - produced in high volume
that are both likely to be found in sediments and have adverse biological effects.

3.2.5  Key Recommendations for Sediment Site Characterization

Accurate sediment site characterization is of great importance to scientists, risk managers, and others
involved in the decision-making process. Because of the complexity of chemical fate and transport
processes in sediment, water, and biota, many factors can affect the kinds and magnitude of impacts
that contaminated sediment has on the environment. These factors include hydrology, the physical and
chemical characteristics of the sediment, the types of contaminants present and their associated human
health or ecological effects, and synergistic or antagonistic effects of contaminants. Better tools and
methods for analysis of physical and chemical parameters, biological testing, evaluation of ecological
effects, and sediment sampling will result in sound science to support decision-making.

Physical Parameters

A.I    Conduct a workshop to develop a consistent approach to collecting sediment physical
       property data for use in evaluating sediment stability.

A workshop is needed to identify research necessary to develop better, faster, and more cost-effective
methods for high resolution determination of physical sediment parameters. Such methods are needed
for evaluating remedial options (e.g., natural attenuation,  capping, or dredging).  When evaluating
remedial options, it is important that risk managers obtain information on key physical sediment
parameters including the erosional and depositional properties of sites to  be remediated.  High
resolution  spatial data  are  needed to characterize  freshwater sites where  sediment is  often
heterogeneous.    Improved spatial resolution  of field survey data will  enable more accurate
determination of the volume or mass of contaminated sediment.  It is recommended that U.S. EPA
consult with USGS, U. S. ACE, and U. S. Navy on their progress in developing these techniques. An
improved  understanding of the relationships between geomorphological  and physical sediment
parameters and contaminant transport, fate, and effects will enable decision-makers to more effectively
evaluate site management alternatives.

Chemical Parameters

A.2    Develop  more   sensitive,  low-cost  laboratory  methods  for  detecting sediment
       contaminants, and real-time or near real-time chemical sensors for use in the field.

Interferences  encountered as part of the sediment matrix, particularly in  samples from heavily
contaminated areas, may limit the ability of available methods to detect or quantify some analytes.
More sensitive, low-cost methods are needed to detect sediment contaminants  and the chemical
parameters that control  bioavailability of contaminants such as PCBs, dioxin, PAHs, metals, and
pesticides.  Real-time or near real-time sensors are also needed to provide both point measurements

-------
Page 40	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

and long-term, time-series observations of sediment contaminants of concern.  Real-time chemical
sensors will enable better, faster, and more cost-effective site assessment and the immediate targeting
of hot spots for potential remediation.

A.3    Develop U.S.  EPA approved methods with  lower detection limits  for analysis of
       bioaccumulative contaminants of concern in fish tissue.

Many chemical contaminants can persist for relatively long periods of time in sediments where bottom-
dwelling animals can accumulate and pass them up the food chain to fish and wildlife.  Therefore,
improved methods are needed for analysis of chemical contaminants such  as dioxin, metals and
pesticides in fish tissue. U.S. EPA has published interim procedures for sampling and analysis of
priority pollutants in fish tissue (U.S. EPA, 1981).  However, official U.S. EPA-approved methods
are available only for the analysis of low parts-per-billion concentrations of some metals in fish and
shellfish tissues (U.S. EPA, 1991b).  Although U.S. EPA-approved methods for many analytes have
not been published, states and regions have developed specific analytical methods for various target
analytes (U.S. EPA, 2000d).

A.4    Develop methods for analyzing emerging endocrine disrupters, including alkylphenol
       ethoxylates (APEs) and their metabolites.

Present methods for analyzing emerging endocrine disrupting chemicals are inadequate.  An important
area for future research is the development and validation of methods to analyze endocrine disrupters,
including APEs and their metabolites, to support regulatory decision-making.

3.3     Exposure Assessment

The major human health exposure pathways for contaminated sediments are through the food chain.
Body burdens in humans can be measured directly for past exposures from all sources. However, it
is more common to measure contaminant concentrations in food fish and shellfish to estimate the
human exposure from the dietary pathway. Areas of uncertainty in exposure estimates from this
pathway include:

        Fish and shellfish consumption by sub-populations, such as subsistence, recreational fishers,
        women of child-bearing age, pregnant women, Native American tribes, immigrants from
        fishing cultures and young children (U.S. EPA 1997c, U.S. EPA 2002b, U.S.  EPA 2000c).

        Fish and shellfish preparation, such as whole fish versus fillet, and cooking methods (e.g. pan
        frying, grilling, etc.).

    •    Effects of contaminant mixtures, such as weathered Aroclor mixtures  rather than mixtures
        of commercial Aroclors (U.S. EPA, 2000f).

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 41

    •   Predictions of the rate and extent of reductions in contaminant concentrations in fish in
        response to metabolism and depuration and natural processes or remedial actions affecting
        contaminant release and environmental loadings.

        Contamination transformations  in a biological system encompassing such issues such as
        consuming different types offish and the metabolic effects of different types of organs and
        tissues on transformation, storage, and depuration in the consumer.

        Degree and duration of exposure to evaluate short- and long-term human health impacts
        (U.S. EPA, 1989).

Other potential pathways of human  exposure include dermal contact, incidental ingestion, and
inhalation exposures from in-place sediments, historical dredge spoils, floodplains, and contact with
sediments during removal and ex situ management.  These pathways have not received as much
attention as the food ingestion pathway.

OSWER has issued the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund(RAGS), Volume I: Human Health
Evaluation Manual (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment) (U.S. EPA, 2004a)
http ://www.epa. gov/oerrpage/superfund/programs/risk/ragse/  to address  human health  dermal
assessments. However, scientific information needs to include the development of better estimates of
dermal exposures to types of soils (e.g., beach, river, intermittent stream, etc.),  biologically available
fractions of sediment contaminants (e.g, contaminant may be slow to desorb due to strong adsorption
by the sediment matrix), and contaminant interactions in sediments.

OSWER's Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels at Superfund Sites (U.S.
EPA, 2002c) and the  Soil Screening Guidance (U.S. EPA, 1996d) describe a process by which to
evaluate exposure to contaminated soils via volatilization and dermal pathways. There is a need to
include  better guidance during the  formulation of the sediment exposure  assessment  of when
contaminant volatilization and fugitive dust emissions need to be considered as a direct contact threat
to human health.

3.3.1    Unavailability

The bioavailability of  a  contaminant relates total concentration in  the sediment, overlying water
column, or  ambient  air to the concentration that affects the ecological  or  human  receptor.
Bioavailability depends on the exact chemical speciation of the toxic constituent; the contaminant
binding phases in the  sediment (e.g., organic carbon for nonionic  organic contaminants and acid
volatile sulfides for metals); the degree to which the receptor is in contact with the sediment; and the
degree to which the contaminant is absorbed by the receptor.

Several tools are available to assess bioavailability.  Acute and chronic toxicity  testing  are direct
measures of whether or not a contaminated sediment contains enough of the toxicant in an available
form to exert a toxic effect. Research by ORD, in cooperation with OW, has led to development of

-------
Page 42
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
a range of toxicity tests.  Such tests are used in assessing contaminated sediments and in managing
dredged material disposal under MPRSA and CWA.  Bioassays have become an effective assessment
tool providing direct, quantifiable evidence of biological consequences of sediment contamination and
are used to determine the relationship between toxic effects and bioavailability.  These tests can be
used to determine whether sediment is toxic, but they do not provide an indication of the chemicals
causing the effect.

When unacceptable exposures to toxicants are determined from sediment concentrations, the simplest
assumption used is that 100% of the contaminant is available to receptors. This is a conservative
assumption appropriate for screening levels.

More realistic and site-specific estimates of bioavailability can be developed using field-measured biota
sediment accumulation factors, which relate contaminant concentrations to tissue concentrations to
determine what residual sediment concentrations will not pose a threat of acute or chronic toxicity
(Burkhard, 2003; Burkhard et al, 2003).

An alternative, indirect approach is the use of Equilibrium Partitioning  Sediment Guidelines (ESGs)
(DiToro et al, 1991; Ankley et al, 1996). This approach uses contaminant concentrations in sediment
and other sediment properties to estimate the pore water concentration of contaminants at chemical
equilibrium.  The pore water concentration is then correlated with the concentration available to the
aquatic organism and can be compared to various reference values for acute or chronic toxicity.  ESGs
can be used to  determine  which  contaminants in sediment  might be  exerting a  toxic  effect
demonstrated in whole sediment toxicity tests.  They can also be used to help establish unacceptable
levels of toxic contaminants in sediment.
                                              Figure 3-3.
                                  Methods for Estimating
                                  Bioaccumulation
3.3.2    Bioaccumulation Potential

Some sediment contaminants exert toxic effects
by being  accumulated to greater degrees in
successively  higher trophic levels.  Thus,  a
sediment contaminant concentration that poses
no direct  acute or chronic toxicity to aquatic
biota or humans via direct exposure may be
magnified through the  food chain  so  that
species eating fish,  birds,  or wildlife  are
exposed to an unacceptable toxicant dose. If
the contaminant is metabolized and stored by
the predator, it may exert toxic effects to the    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^m
predator under stress, such as during migratory
journeys or during reproduction (e.g., during embryonic development or lactation).
The most direct measure of bioaccumulation is measurement of the toxicant in the tissues of the
receptor (see Figure 3-3). Direct measurement is ideal because it includes all sources of exposure and
                                                  Field-measured bioaccumulation factor - direct
                                                  measurement of the relationship between water
                                                  concentrations and tissue concentrations of the
                                                  toxicant.

                                                  Field-measured biota-sediment accumulation
                                                 factor - direct measurement of the relationship
                                                  between sediment concentrations and tissue
                                                  concentrations of the toxicant.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 43

accounts for elimination and metabolism.  Bioaccumulation  test method protocols  have been
developed for freshwater oligochaetes and marine polychaetes and bivalves (U.S. EPA, 2000d; Lee
et al., 1989).  The National Research Council (2001a) recommends this method for PCBs: An
assessment of present exposure to PCBs is best addressed through direct measurement in specific
organisms or in their diet.

The direct measurement method is referred to as a field-measured bioaccumulation factor (BAF) for
water/organism interactions and a field-measured biota-sediment accumulation factor (BSAF) for
sediment/organism interactions.  The BAF is appropriate for all chemical stressors, while the BSAF
is appropriate for nonionic organic compounds and ionic organics that partition to lipids and organic
carbon in similar ways. Although direct measurement can be expensive and difficult, it is commonly
used in assessments of contaminated sediment sites.  There are uncertainties if bioaccumulation is
measured in food  sources because consumption rates by higher trophic levels are not always well-
known for ecological predators and humans, particularly human sub-populations from fishing cultures.
In addition, the mobility  of predator populations means food/prey may have been ingested in areas
beyond the contaminated sediment site of concern.  Therefore, OW and ORD have collaborated on
extensive research to provide alternative estimates that relate contaminant concentrations in sediments
and water to the concentrations that would consequently occur in various species.

Laboratory tests can be used to assess bioaccumulation by freshwater and marine benthic invertebrates.
Methods are available for freshwaterDiporeia spp.,Lumbriculus variegatus, and mollusks and marine
species.  OW has published  a compendium of methods for measuring bioaccumulation of sediment-
borne toxicants in freshwater (U.S. EPA, 2000d).

Deployed organisms also can be used to measure current exposures  to sediment-borne toxicants.
These measures are very useful in determining baseline exposures and responses to remedial actions
and to estimate variabilities.  However, the linkage between caged organism uptake and dietary
exposure of higher trophic levels is uncertain.  A further confounding factor exists for persistent and
bioaccumulative toxicants such as PCBs and PAHs.  These complex mixtures  change over time
through weathering and are found in different mixtures in source sediments and receptor tissues.

The current state-of-the-practice is to use direct testing and models to estimate the direct dose
delivered to the lowest trophic level in a food web and the food-delivered dose to successively higher
tropic levels. Models range  from simple to complex. Empirical models use partitioning coefficients
(BAFs or BSAFs) to link sediment concentrations with tissue levels in organisms.  More  complex
models use mechanistic models of uptake, metabolism, and excretion, along with feeding patterns to
estimate the tissue burdens for fish, birds, and mammals.

The approaches described above provide several different ways to assess exposure of ecological and
human receptors to sediment-borne contaminants.   Each of the estimation approaches can cause
disagreements  among affected  parties,  ranging  from  the theoretical  soundness  of alternative
approaches to the values selected for exposure duration and dietary composition. Even with the direct
measurement of contaminants in receptor  tissues, arguments  can be made about  the relative

-------
Page 44	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

importance of sediment contamination relative to other sources. Validation of models is hindered by
a paucity of data sets that overcome the natural variability of ecological receptors.  Research on
monitoring may provide additional tools to measure bioaccumulation in receptors.

3.3.3   Fate and Transport Modeling

Aquatic sediments are a sink for contaminants from a wide range of point and nonpoint sources. But
the "sink"  is connected to ecological  and human receptors  through a variety of mechanisms:
partitioning to the overlying water column and air; uptake by organisms and accumulation or
magnification in the food chain;  chemical and biological alteration; dilution and dispersion; bulk
sediment transport; and burial by fresh sediments. For non-degradative processes, it may be necessary
to evaluate the transport and fate of the contaminant in the short- term and the long-term.  Over the
short-term for a persistent and bioaccumulative toxicant, the focus may be on dilution and dispersal
in a river; over the longer-term, the biogeochemical cycle may be evaluated and monitored over  a
much larger region.

The National Research Council (NRC, 200la)  made two recommendations for research specifically
related to PCB-contaminated sediments:

       •    A better understanding of the contribution of PCB-contaminated sediments to the total
           global burden is needed.

       •    The role of global cycling of PCBs in assessing the PCB problem at a specific site
           should be considered.

Although the NRC report specifically addressed PCBs, these recommendations are also applicable to
other persistent and bioaccumulative toxicants  such as mercury and some  pesticides.

The current state-of-the-practice is to apply one or more of a suite of mathematical models to simulate
the important processes. Fate and transport modeling can be highly controversial because various
models, assumptions used in the models, and selection of input parameters can lead to very different
conclusions about present risk and how protective various remedial alternatives will be.

The fate of organic contaminants in sediments may include degradation via  chemical and biologically-
mediated pathways. The mechanisms, rates, and endpoints of degradation processes need to be better
understood to assess both natural recovery  and  active remedies  that  are intended to enhance
contaminant degradation.  NRC (200la) noted that anaerobic dechlorination may have a threshold
value.  This implies that degradation may proceed from higher concentrations toward the threshold
value and then become negligible; models need to account for such non-linear behavior. Such models
are chemical and sediment-matrix specific.

Contaminant transport in sediments and overlying waters is critical to assessing both present risk and
the performance of all remedies. Contaminants can be transported by diffusion and dispersion within

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 45

bed sediments, advection from upward groundwater movement, bulk sediment movement, movement
of suspended sediments, and dissolution into the overlying water. Contaminants can enter and leave
the  system through landscape erosion, atmospheric  deposition, and volatilization.  Many of these
processes are active in different contaminated sediment systems and determine how biotic exposure
changes over time.   The wide range of transport mechanisms contributes to  uncertainty in the
characterization of sediment sites as well as estimates of present risk. Active capping and the natural
process of burial by cleaner sediments can only be effective over the long-term if contaminant transport
by diffusion, advection, and bioturbation are  slow enough that sediments and the overlying water
column remain at safe levels. These remedies also depend on the long-term stability of the system with
respect to bulk sediment movement by natural hydrodynamics, catastrophic events, and human
intervention, such as dam removal, navigation dredging, and boat traffic.

The role  of uncertainty in fate and transport modeling needs to be addressed so that stakeholders
understand how sure we are of existing risks and the risk reduction achievable by remediation.  It is
critical that the contaminant transport models link smoothly with biological uptake and trophic transfer
models to  obtain an accurate assessment of present risks and risk reductions achievable by
management alternatives.

Science Needs

The science needs associated with exposure assessment relate to refining our understanding of the
important pathways of exposure, including the exposure of aquatic organisms to contaminants of
concern,  and improving the tools used to measure and model how contaminants  cycle within the
system. It is important that the complexity of the tools applied to specific sites be commensurate with
the risks and costs of proposed decision-making and consistent with the National Research Council
recommendation (NRC, 200la).  It is important that the use of different tools at different sites or
under different authorities be integrated so that consistent decisions can be made to protect the
environment and potential ecological or human receptors. Because contaminated sediment is a mobile
medium and contaminants within sediment can migrate into other  media, understanding all the
important fate  and transport processes is a key step in assessing the risk and estimating the potential
effectiveness of various remedial actions.

3.3.4     Key Recommendations for Exposure Assessment

B.I Develop a tiered framework for assessing food web exposures.

The National Research Council (200la) recommended a tiered approach to risk assessment for PCB-
contaminated sediment sites that would work well for any sediment contaminated by bioaccumulative
compounds. The screening tier would apply conservative assumptions and rely on existing data in the
literature to easily distinguish sediments that do not pose an unacceptable risk from those that may.
The middle tier would use a combination of some site-specific data and interpretive tools to produce
a more refined assessment of the level of risk.  At many sites, this approach would be sufficient to
determine whether or not remediation was warranted and would provide some insight into the

-------
Page 46	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

potential benefits of alternative remedies. The highest tier of exposure assessment would rely heavily
on site-specific data and would include model tailoring and model calibration to site conditions. This
most sophisticated assessment would be applied only at selected sites where the combination of site
complexity,  resource  values, affected party interests,  and potential costs warrant a  detailed
investigation of existing and potential future exposures.

ORD's research and program applications are presently focused at the middle tier; funding is being
sought to  expand the research to the lower and higher tiers.  This recommendation is to provide
program guidance for implementing the screening tier and to conduct research and model validation
for the highest tier.

B.2  Develop guidance and identify pilots for improving coordination between TMDL and
     remedial programs in waterways with contaminated sediments.

In many of the country's water bodies, there are multiple legal authorities to address both existing
contaminated sediments and continued contaminant loading.  Different legal authorities vest power
in various  Agency programs and guidance is needed concerning coordination of scientific activities
(e.g., improvements in fate and transport models) between programs.  Integrated management models
need to be improved and communicated within U.S. EPA and to partners in state programs. Pilot
projects need to be developed  to  identify the most  effective ways  to  integrate and coordinate
environmental management to control sources and achieve water quality goals. Results of the TMDL
pilot projects in waterways with contaminated sediments could be made  available to the  states as
potential models for the development of complex TMDLs involving multiple toxic pollutants and
media (i.e., water, sediment, and fish tissue).

B.3  Develop and  advise on the use of a suite of most valid contaminant fate and transport
     models  that allow prediction  of exposures in the future.

Numerous models exist for contaminant fate and  transport, including  both public domain and
proprietary codes. Some models have not been peer-reviewed in the open literature and there are very
few long-term data sets that can be  used to judge predictive capability. The existing public domain
and  commercial  models need to be evaluated  to determine their  mechanistic and mathematical
foundations and robustness, and to determine the extent to which they are  accepted by the scientific
community.  One or more models need to be further developed to improve any weaknesses determined
from the evaluation; the ORD has begun this work. The models need to be validated with high quality
data sets, which will be developed via other recommendations in this document. Refer to the Council
on   Regulatory   Environmental  Models   (CREM)  and  its  models  knowledge   database
(http://cfpub.epa. gov/crem/knowledge_base/knowbase.cfm) for information on models validation.

The  fate and transport models also need to be compatible (i.e. able to be easily linked) with models
that  predict  direct and food web  exposures for the  purpose  of assessing risks and comparing
remediation alternatives. The bioavailability of the contaminants within portions of the system has to
be considered to provide input from the transport models to the exposure/effects models.

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 47
B.4 Develop a consistent approach to applying sediment stability data in transport modeling.

Current approaches to evaluating sediment stability in transport modeling vary across the Agency and
the larger stakeholder community. While a single model is probably not appropriate for all sites, a
consistent approach is needed to ensure that important factors are being considered.  Data sets
developed by the regions and other organizations can help identify the key factors that the transport
models need to include for realistic predictions. In addition, a workshop was held in January 2002 to
conduct a comparative evaluation of the models for hydrogeological conditions in terms of the
reliability of predictions.

3.4     Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization

Contaminants in sediments can present  risks  to humans  through direct contact (inhalation  of
particulates or gases, ingestion,  dermal contact) or indirect exposure pathways (ingestion of fish,
wildlife, or plants that have accumulated contaminants).  Health effects may occur at the point  of
contact, e.g.., skin or lung, but will most often occur in response to contaminants or their metabolites
circulating  internally (the internal dose). The scientific base for  human health toxicity  and risk
characterization crosses  environmental media and is shared among EPA program offices. ORD's
research on this issue (e.g., exposure factors handbook; Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS),
Supplementary Guidance for Conducting Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Mixtures (U.S. EPA,
2000f), etc.) is so central to multiple programs that the relevant work is being assembled into a new
human health risk assessment plan to provide a complete, coherent view of the program, informed by
the needs across EPA programs. Detailed information on these human health toxicity issues can be
found in many other Agency documents.  Similarly, research on newly-identified compounds that
potentially interfere with human endocrine systems, relevant to multiple media and multiple programs,
is assembled in the multi-year plan for endocrine disrupter research. It would be redundant to do a
complete assessment of high priority needs solely for contaminated sediments in this document.
Therefore, this section focuses on human health toxicity issues that occur at contaminated sediment
sites, but are not addressed in other Agency documents.

EPA has published guidance for conducting  risk assessments at Superfund sites (Risk Assessment
Guidance  for Superfund,  http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/risk/tooltrad.htm).  Although
exposure parameters are not explicitly given for all sediment exposure pathways, the guidance can be
used to select parameters suitable for a particular site. In addition, EPA's FIELDS software tools
contain a human health module for analyzing the human health impact of contaminated sediments via
dermal, ingestion, and inhalation pathways. Further, improvements underway on this module include
refinements of existing exposure pathway models.

There are several risk assessment issues that are particularly common or problematic for contaminated
sediment sites. Using the existing science base, the programs and regions will need to develop  or
update guidance on possible ways to address these issues.

-------
Page 48	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Sediments contaminated with PCBs are common at many Superfund sites as well as navigational
dredging sites. The National Academy of Sciences made a point that baseline and post-remedy risk
assessments should not rely on toxicity of technical grade Aroclor mixtures, because the aged and
weathered  residues found  in the environment have significantly different compositions.  Their
recommended alternative approach  is to use  congener-specific analysis and toxicity assessment,
including multiple toxicity endpoints (e.g., cancer and Ah receptor activation). Currently, there is a
lack of guidance and policy on the quantification of risks from the co-planar PCB congeners in a
human health risk assessment and whether the weathering and biological uptake of the congeners lead
to significant increases in toxicological potency.

Dermal  exposure to contaminated  sediments also presents  a risk to  human health as  many
contaminated sediment sites are considered attractive for recreational purposes such as wading or
participating in sports on contaminated floodplains. Intermittent streams, staged dredge spoils, and
floodplains are examples of areas where direct contact may occur. These exposure scenarios provide
unique but direct dermal contact with contaminated sediment and surface water. The Risk Assessment
Guidance for Superfund (RAGS),   Volume  I:  Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part  E,
Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment) (U.S. EPA, 2004a) proposes a methodology
for assessing the exposures from the  dermal pathway for contaminated soils, sediments, and water.

Many of the contaminants  commonly located in sediments are environmentally and biologically
persistent and exert their effects by disrupting sensitive physiological systems such as the endocrine
system (i.e., endocrine disrupters). Some of the noted health effects are trans-generational and thus
do not exhibit their toxicity until later generations. Further guidance on the methodology and policy
for quantifying human health risks from endocrine disrupters is necessary.

3.4.1    Science Needs

Advances in almost any aspect of human health toxicity and exposure would result in an improved
understanding of the health effects of exposure to contaminated sediments. Several of these areas are
extremely important for assessing other environmental problems as well. Needs particularly important
to sediments include:

         Characterizing individual contaminants in sediment or biological samples to evaluate mode
         of action and individual chemical contributions to risk. Examples include dioxins, furans, and
         dioxin-like PCBs; PAHs; and mercury species.

     •    Determining interactions among multiple contaminants found in sediments and the resulting
         impacts on site-specific risk assessment (NRC, 200la).

     •    Studying of mode- and mechanism-of-action for species and mixtures most often found in
         sediments, particularly focusing on chronic or sub-chronic systemic effects.

         Developing biomarkers of effect (toxicity) and relating these to measurable toxic endpoints.

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 49
    •   Evaluating the reproductive toxicity of endocrine disrupters and other newly emerging
        contaminants of concern such as APEs.

    •   Revising methods for estimating dermal exposures and risk from sediments.

3.4.2   Key Recommendations for Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization

C.I    Develop guidance for characterizing human health risks on a PCB congener basis.

Improved methods are needed to assess the risks associated with exposure to aged PCBs in sediment.
For example,  although it  is recognized that measurement of PCB Aroclors  in sediment can
underestimate  exposure to PCBs, this method of chemical analysis  continues to be used in risk
assessments because a toxicity equivalence approach for evaluating PCB congeners has not been fully
developed.

C.2    Develop sediment guidelines for bioaccumulative contaminants that  are protective of
       human health via the fish ingestion pathway.

Contaminant-specific sediment guidelines to protect recreational and subsistence  anglers should be
developed. This will conserve resources by efficiently eliminating sites or parts of sites and chemicals
from further study, and will help focus site investigations on the most important areas.  Fish tissue
contaminant guidelines have been developed for a range of chemicals (U.S. EPA, 2000a), but
corresponding levels of contaminants in sediments are still needed. Guidelines for bioaccumulative
contaminants such as DDT and metabolites, PCBs, methyl mercury,  dieldrin, and  high molecular
weight PAHs should be developed.

C.3    Refine methods for estimating dermal exposures and risk.

Although the greatest human health risk is generally from ingestion of contaminated fish, there is a
need to develop better methods,  models, and exposure factors that will  enable risk assessors to
estimate the exposure from direct  skin contact with contaminated sediments. Research is needed to
determine the amount of sediment  that might come into contact with the skin from various activities.
Research is also needed to develop a model that accurately predicts how much of the  sediment-borne
contaminants actually crosses the dermal barrier and is  available to  cause a toxicological effect.
Current dermal absorption models are either water or soil-based and it is not clear which might be
more applicable for sediments.

C.4    Evaluate the toxicity and reproductive effects of newly recognized contaminants, such
       as APEs and other endocrine disruptors and their metabolites  on human health.

Additional long-term toxicity data are needed on APEs and other  similar chemicals to further
understand their long-term effects on reproductive and other systems.  EPA programs will need to

-------
Page 50	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

monitor advances in toxicity data and incorporate new information into guidance and policy on
managing contaminated sediment sites.

3.5     Ecological Effects and Risk Assessment

Aquatic ecosystems are a complex assemblage of interacting physical, chemical, and biological
processes. Many of these processes are inherently nonlinear and there is considerable uncertainty about
both their nature and their interconnections.  The ability to predict site specific ecological effects or
risks is maximized with knowledge of these processes and  interactions present at the particular site.
Since  contaminant availability and ecological food webs  differ from  site to site, it is critical to
understand exposure-effect dynamics.7

The primary focus of sediment assessments is determining the potential  for (i.e.., the risk of) adverse
impacts to biota. The simplest of all assessments might include the use of single lines-of-evidence such
as a set of toxicity tests, a benthic community  survey, or the use of Sediment Quality Guidelines
(SQGs) to make a decision regarding adverse effects. However, the initial screening of contaminated
sediments may be insufficient for making decisions due to uncertainty.  In such cases, it is useful to
gather additional lines of evidence that improve certainty. This may involve  utilizing a weight-of-
evidence approach or conducting an ecological risk assessment. Elements of these approaches include
developing a conceptual site model, understanding organism linkages, selecting measurement and
assessment endpoints, characterizing exposure, and performing a risk characterization.  Section 3.5
focuses on the narrower issue of understanding the science needs for assessing contaminated sediment
systems. These include ecological screening levels, ecological indicators, direct toxicity to aquatic
biota, ecological significance and population models, and the selection of remedial alternatives that are
protective of ecological receptors.

3.5.1    Ecological Screening Levels

Numerical screening levels or SQGs based upon concentrations of contaminants in sediment that are
associated with potential adverse  effects  have been proposed by a number of investigators and
jurisdictions around the world using both mechanistic and empirical approaches (Chapman, 1989;
Long and Morgan, 1991; Long, 1992; MacDonald et al., 1996; U.S. EPA 1992b, 1996b, and 1997a;
MacDonald et al., 2000; Field et al., 1999, 2002).8  Screening values are needed by U.S. EPA, states
 7 Fundamental research regarding the assessment and management of aquatic environments (including
 contaminated sediments) is defined in the Agency's Ecological Research Multi-Year Plan and Water Quality
 Research Program Multi-Year Plan (U.S. EPA 2003d; U.S. EPA 2003e).
 8 More generally these approaches include the equilibrium partioning (EqP) approach (Di Toro et al. 1991a; Di
 Toro et al. 1991b; Ankley et al. 1996; NYSDEC 1998; Di Toro and McGrath 2000), screening-level concentration
 approach (Persaud et al. 1993; Von Stackelberg and Menzie 2002), effects range-low (ERL) and effects
 range-median (ERM) approaches (Long et al. 1995; USEPA 1996e), threshold-effects level (TEL) and probable-
 effects level (PEL) approaches (MacDonald et al. 1996; Smith et al. 1996; USEPA 1996e), the apparent-effects
 threshold (AET) approach (Barrick et al. 1988; Ginn and Pastorok 1992; Cubbage et al.. 1997), and, most recently,
 the "consensus-based" evaluation approach (Swartz 1999; MacDonald et al. 2000b; MacDonald et al. 2000a) and

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 51

and tribes, and other Federal agencies to: 1) help prioritize sites for further investigation, and 2) help
identify causative contaminants when toxicity is indicated by bioassays or other tools.

The empirical or correlative approach to the derivation of SQG values has focused on evaluation of
the available toxicity data to establish associations between individual chemical concentrations
in sediments and adverse biological effects. This approach was originally developed by NOAA using
sediment chemistry data collected under the National Status and Trends Program (Long and Morgan,
1991; Long, 1992). The empirical guidelines approach was adopted, with some modifications, by the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (MacDonald, 1994; MacDonald et al., 1996) and the
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) (1995; Smith et al., 1996) to support the
development of guidelines in the State  of Florida and in Canada. Additional data  available in the
published literature and collected through U. S. EPA's ARC S program have been used to further refine
the empirically derived guidelines  (Ingersoll et al., 1996). Although empirically derived SQGs have
in many cases accurately predicted sediment toxicity, a number of limitations have been associated
with this approach (MacDonald et al., 1996; NRC, 2001 a). The correlative approach does not require
the quantitative evaluation of cause and effects relationships between contaminant concentrations and
biological responses. Because the approach is based on empirical associations between contaminant
concentrations  and biological responses,  various  factors other than the concentrations of the
contaminant  under consideration could  have influenced the  actual  response observed in any
investigation.

In addition, the guidelines  developed using this  approach do not address either the potential for
bioaccumulation or the associated adverse effects of bioaccumulation on higher trophic levels.

Another method developed by U.S. EPA (and others) is the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) approach
to develop Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks  (ESBs).   This approach  focuses on
predicting  the chemical  interaction among sediments,  interstitial  water,  and the contaminants.
Numerous studies have supported an assumption that interstitial water concentrations of contaminants
appear to be better predictors of biological effects than bulk sediment concentrations. U.S. EPAbased
the ESBs on EqP theory, which is a conceptual approach for predicting the bioavailability of sediment-
associated chemicals and their toxicity.  The theory assumes that sediment-associated contaminants
achieve a steady-state between chemical activity  in three phases: the interstitial (pore) water, the
binding phases in sediment which limit bioavailability {i.e..,  organic carbon for nonionic organic
chemicals and acid volatile  sulfides for divalent metals), and the biota.  Under this assumption, the
pathway of chemical exposure (i.e., respiration of interstitial water or ingestion of sediment) is not
important as activities are equal in equilibrated phases; that is, if the chemical concentration in any one
phase is known, then the concentration in the others can be predicted.  Thus, EqP theory, enabling
prediction of interstitial water concentration from the total sediment concentration, chemical properties
(e.g., partition coefficients) and the relevant sediment properties (e.g., organic carbon in its various
forms), can be used to estimate the exposure concentration for an organism. U. S. EPA also notes that
 the logistic regression modeling (LRM) approach (Field et al. 1999, 2002).

-------
Page 52	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

equilibrium partitioning theory does not  address potential  food chain effects of bioaccumulative
sediment pollutants9 and EqP does not apply to most inorganic and metal contaminants in sediments.

It is important to note that the above  discussion of ESBs and the other screening tools does not
address nor is it meant to imply any EPA policy concerning the use of screening  levels in EPA
programs.  The information is provided only as a review of some work that has been undertaken to
derive screening levels. This review was used to assist in the identification of science needs for further
development of these approaches.

Many additional issues regarding ecological screening levels and risk assessment are addressed by the
FIELDS Team.10 The FIELDS software tools contain an ecological risk module, peer reviewed by
U.S. EPA Ecological Risk Assessors Forum, which includes screening values and can be used for
analyzing the impact of contaminated sediments on ecological receptors. Further refinements on this
module include the addition of wildlife exposure models and the ability to evaluate risks based on
tissue concentrations.

Science Needs

U.S. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) and others have identified a number of science needs to
further support regulatory use of the Agency's ESBs and other chemical-specific screening values and
sediment quality guidelines (SAB, 1992 and 1996).  These science needs include:

         Field and laboratory studies to evaluate the accuracy of chemical-specific sediment quality
         guidelines. These could include new studies and the use of existing data from contaminated
         sites where both contaminants and benthic community data are available. Sublethal sediment
         toxicity tests (in situ studies,  laboratory studies of field-collected sediment, and spiked-
         sediment laboratory studies) using a range of species including benthic fish and algae, long-
         term studies of population dynamics, and colonization studies are examples of sensitive tests
         that could be used to further  validate sediment quality  guidelines. An important area for
         future research is the evaluation of the range of sediment types  to which sediment guidelines
         can be applied.  Field validation of these guidelines in different sediment types would help
         define the appropriate conditions for applying the guidelines.
 9 Details on the ESG methodologies and chemical-specific ESGs can be found in the following documents:  Eco
 Update. Intermittent Bulletin Volume 3, Number 2 - Ecotox Thresholds. U.S. EPA 540/F-95/038 (U.S. EPA,
 1996b); Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection
 of Benthic Organisms: Endrin.  (U.S. EPA, 2003f); Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning
 Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Dieldrin. (U.S. EPA, 2003g); Procedures
 for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic
 Organisms: PAH Mixtures.  (U.S. EPA, 2003h)
 10  The mission of the U.S. EPA Region 5 FIELDS Team is to combine field expertise with technical innovation to
 provide rapid, cost-effective, and high-quality decision support to contaminated site characterization and
 remediation.

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 53
    •    Studies of chemical concentrations in interstitial water from natural sediment samples are
         needed.  These values can be compared to predicted ESG values for the same sediments.

         Another area for future research is evaluation of bioaccumulation from food and kinetic
         limitations on contaminant bioaccumulation to determine their relevance for both equilibrium
         and non-equilibrium conditions.  It is important to conduct additional work to  determine
         whether metals guidelines can be used to define conditions where sediment sorbed metals can
         be bioaccumulated by benthic organisms. These investigations can provide additional insight
         into the contributions of adsorbed or digested material to total exposure.

    •    In addition to diet, habitat requirements of benthic infaunal  and other sediment-dwelling
         organisms may cause them to be exposed to higher concentrations of contaminants than
         those measured in bulk sediments.  Yet another area for future research is the investigation
         of the importance of contaminant exposure routes that are not now explicitly considered.
         For example, preferential sorting of particulates during tube building may be  a route of
         exposure to contaminants that could be considered in applying sediment  quality guidelines.

         There has been considerable discussion regarding whether sediment quality guidelines are
         most usefully expressed as a  range of values reflecting uncertainty,  or the current point
         estimates (current practice). Recent modeling work has attempted to address this by using
         the probability of effects to define sediment quality guidelines. The use of a range of values,
         e.g.., using one specific value for a particular organic carbon content, or the development of
         improved estimates of uncertainty could be considered.

    •    Although U.S. EPA has conducted research to develop mixtures guidelines for  PAHs and
         metals, understanding how mixtures of contaminants in sediments are best evaluated is an
         important area for future research.

3.5.2     Ecological Indicators

Ecological indicators may be defined as  measurable  characteristics  related  to the  structure,
composition, or functioning of ecological  systems.  The inherent complexity of ecological systems,
however, makes both the assessment of ecological integrity and the  creation of a coherent system of
ecological indicators challenging tasks (U.S. EPA, 2002d). Biological indicators measure condition
more directly, integrate the effects of periodic exposures to multiple pollutants, and provide a more
accessible and understandable tool.  The Agency's research in this area  focuses  on  measures of
community structure and genetic markers to determine and diagnose the  cause  of poor condition in
aquatic systems. Table 3-2 lists essential ecological attributes (EEA) and reporting categories as they
relate to contaminated sediments.  It is important to note that multiple indicators may be  associated
with each subcategory in the EEA hierarchy.

-------
Page 54
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Table 3-2.  Essential Ecological Attributes  and Reporting Categories as They Relate  to
Contaminated Sediments
Biotic Condition
Ecosystems and Communities
Species and Populations
Organism Condition
Community Extent
Community Composition
Trophic Structure
Community Dynamics
Physical Structure
Population Size
Genetic Diversity
Population Structure
Population Dynamics
Habitat Suitability
Physiological Status
Symptoms of Disease or Trauma
Signs of Disease
Chemical and Physical Characteristics (Water, Air, Soil, and Sediment)
Nutrient Concentrations
Trace Inorganic and Organic Chemicals
Other Chemical Parameters
Physical Parameters
• Nitrogen
Phosphorus
• Other Nutrients
Metals
Other Trace Elements
Organic Compounds
• pH
Dissolved Oxygen
Salinity
Organic Matter
Other
Sediment Particle Size
Depth of Black Layer
Redox Potential

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page 55
Ecological Processes
Energy Flow
Material Flow
Primary Production
Net Ecosystem Production
• Growth Efficiency
Organic Carbon Cycling
Nitrogen and Phosphorus Cycling
Other Nutrient Cycling
Hydrology and Geomorphology
Surface and Groundwater Flows
Dynamic Structural Characteristics
Sediment and Material Transport
Pattern of Surface Flows
Hydrodynamics
Pattern of Groundwater Flows
Salinity Patterns
Water Storage
Channel/Shoreline Morphology, Complexity
Extent/Distribution of Connected Floodplain
Aquatic Physical Habitat Complexity
Sediment Supply/Movement
Particle Size Distribution Patterns
Other Material Flux
Adapted from: A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condition: An SAB Report United States
Environmental Protection Agency-EPA Science Advisory Board, Washington, D.C., EPA-SAV-EPEC-02-009.

Historically, sediment monitoring programs have used benthic community studies as indicators of the
effects of sediment contaminants on aquatic ecosystems.  An assessment of benthic community
structure typically involves field measurements that include the sorting and identification of organisms,
and analysis of the numbers of taxa, individuals, and biomass in each sample.  At many sites, the
objective of the benthic community survey is to determine  if there are unacceptable risks to the
communities of organisms that inhabit those sediments. Many different benthic community measures
have been used as ecological indicators such as:  species diversity indices; biotic indices; indicator
organisms; species richness measures; enumeration of specific abundances of taxa present; indices
measuring similarity between benthic communities at reference and study sites; community function
measurements based on habitat; trophic  structure and  other ecological measures;  and  statistical
approaches applied to determine whether the benthic community at a study  site varies from reference
or other sites.  The major  limitation associated with the use of these indicators is difficulty relating
them to the presence of individual chemicals or other stressors.

Thus, in order to gain better insight into the ecological state of sediments, integrated approaches are
required. First proposed by Chapman et al. (1986), a common integrated methodology is the Sediment
Quality Triad (SQT), a weight-of-evidence approach for assessing sediment quality using measures
of: (1) sediment chemistry, (2) sediment toxicity, and (3) benthic community composition.  One
advantage of the triad  approach is the use of both chemical and biological data in evaluating the
ecological relevance of the results of bioassays and chemical analyses for sites.  Although the SQT

-------
Page 56	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

cannot provide a causal link between a specific contaminant and adverse effects on the benthic
community (i.e., it is the ecological relevance of the mixture of contaminants that is being evaluated),
the approach provides an indication of the degree of pollution-induced degradation in aquatic
communities.  Thus,  the ecological relevance of the mixture of contaminants in a system may be
addressed using the SQT.

Science Needs

The  development of new indicator methods for measuring risks from sediment contaminants will
improve our ability to assess and characterize contaminated sites, and lead to more effective decisions
for managing sites. An important area for future research is to develop new, cost-effective indicator
methods  at all levels of biological organization (molecular, cellular, organismal, population, and
community). It is important that these biological responses can be linked to known chemical stressors.
Cellular and biochemical measurements can be used  to indicate the bioavailability  of sediment
contaminants to establish levels of exposure, and to facilitate fate and transport modeling of the
contaminants. A number of specific science needs have been identified to link sediment contaminants
and other stressors with biological impairment.  These include:

   •   Develop and assess statistical techniques to associate sediment contaminants with community-
       level responses.

   •   Develop methods to  characterize exposure to individual stressors and predict  exposure to
       contaminant mixtures.

   •   Develop whole  sediment toxicity identification methods.

   •   Develop tools to determine genetic impairment caused by contaminants in sediment.

   •   Develop diagnostic indicators for emerging chemicals such as  endocrine disrupters.

   •   Develop mechanistic ecosystem models  and a better understanding of benthic community
       structure and function.

   •   Develop methods to measure spatial and temporal variation in structural and functional
       properties  of benthic communities, and an  understanding of  how  this variation affects
       prediction and detection of impacts.

   •   Determine the cause-effect connection between sediment contamination, behavioral responses,
       and the relevance of behavioral responses.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 57

3.5.3  Direct Toxicity to Aquatic Biota

Studies at contaminated sediment sites have demonstrated that high concentrations of contaminants
have resulted in  direct toxicity to benthic invertebrates and to reductions in fish and wildlife
populations.  At some sites that are heavily contaminated from past mining operations, heavy rain
events have resulted in acute lethality of salmonids due to short-term pH-induced increases in metal
solubility in the water column.

Biological sediment testing has become an effective assessment tool that provides direct, quantifiable
evidence of the impacts of sediment contamination.  Sediment tests, with other site information can
be used to:   1) determine the relationship between toxic effects  and bioavailability, 2) investigate
interactions among chemicals, 3) compare the sensitivities of different organisms, 4) determine spatial
and temporal distribution of contamination, 5) evaluate dredged material, 6) rank areas for cleanup,
and 7) set cleanup goals.

A variety of standard biological test methods have been developed for assessing the short- and long-
term toxicity of contaminants associated with freshwater and marine sediments using amphipods,
midges, polychaetes, oligochaetes, mayflies, and cladocerans. These toxicity tests provide measures
of several different  acute  and  chronic endpoints  including  survival,  growth,  behavior, and
reproduction.  Sediment toxicity identification evaluation (TIE) procedures have also been used to
identify toxic compounds in sediment samples containing mixtures of chemicals.

Science Needs

Although a number of sediment toxicity test methods have been standardized, protocols using new test
species to provide tests of greater sensitivity are an important area for future research. It will also be
necessary to standardize test methods using species that inhabit different geographic ranges and habitat
types.  Additional work will be necessary to:

    •   Develop a better understanding of how sediment can be manipulated before, during, and after
        tests without inappropriately affecting test results.

        Establish appropriate  physical test conditions, feeding regimes, test duration,  and test
        initiation or termination procedures.

    •   Develop a better understanding of how geophysical properties of sediment affect test results.

    •   Complete additional work to understand the sensitivity  of test species to major classes of
        contaminants.  This information can aid in species selection and test interpretation.

        Conduct additional verification and validation studies of toxicity test methods. Validation
         studies could be conducted by evaluating bioassay response to sediments collected along a

-------
Page 58	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

         natural pollution gradient and comparing results to benthic community studies and in situ test
         results.

     •    Identify and standardize formulated sediment and sediment spiking techniques.

     •    Develop tests with amphibians, reptiles, algae, and rooted aquatic plants.

     •    Develop and standardize higher level tests (e.g., microcosms and mesocosms).

     •    Develop better understanding of exposure-time relationships  in chronic whole sediment
         toxicity tests.

         Develop field-based methods to assess biological effects of contaminated sediments.

3.5.4  Ecological Significance and Population Models

In an ecological risk assessment, it is important to clearly define and describe ecological significance
and to determine what levels of population and community effects are generally acceptable; e.g., will
a twenty percent reduction in a specific endpoint still sustain a functioning, healthy ecosystem? U.S.
EPA needs to further develop techniques that will improve our ability to determine if: 1) the observed
or predicted adverse effects on a structural or functional component of the site's ecosystem is of
sufficient type, magnitude, areal extent, and duration that irreversible effects have occurred or are
likely to occur, and 2) these effects appear to exceed the normal changes in the structural or functional
components typical of similar unaffected ecosystems.

Science Needs

     •    Develop predictive models for determining the potential population level effects; e.g., how
         much sediment toxicity is needed before one can predict that there will be significant effects
         on the population of concern. How many bass or mink or kingfishers can be affected before
         there will be an impact on the ability of the population of biota to sustain itself at a healthy
         level in the  area impacted by the site?

     •    Develop a method for estimating depth  of bioturbation for benthic macro-invertebrates.
         Certain benthic macro-invertebrates that colonize on caps build or live in burrows or tunnels
         in the sand/sediment cap environment.  In order to evaluate the potential impact on these
         aquatic food chain organisms, the depth and extent of benthic bioturbation impacts in a cap
         need to be identified.

     •    Potential benthic macro-invertebrate cap attraction.  Caps often are of a non-indigenous fill
         material or sand or are anchored  with stone.  Will use of different materials reduce
         colonization times?   Will it  attract  other,  less  desirable  organisms and non-native
         communities?

-------
                        Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 59
3.5.5    Selection of Ecologically Protective Remedial Options

Dredging and capping  remedies can result in short-term increases in the water column levels of
suspended or dissolved contaminants and can cause severe disruption to benthic habitats.  However,
criteria are not readily available to help evaluate those situations in which the short-term impacts of
intrusive remedial technologies are likely to outweigh the benefits of contaminant removal or
sequestration.

Science Needs

     •    Develop better tools to help evaluate and compare the short-term and long-term impacts and
         long-term benefits of dredging, capping,  monitored natural recovery, and other remedial
         alternatives, in terms of direct toxicity, habitat loss and recovery, and other ecological
         effects.

3.5.6    Key Recommendations for Selection of Ecologically Protective Remedial Options

D.I  Develop sediment guidelines to protect wildlife from food chain effects.

Sediment quality  guidelines are needed to protect piscivorous birds and wildlife from food chain
effects.  A critical aspect of developing such SQGs is the need to develop appropriate conceptual
ecological site models.   Food chains  differ from  site to site and  food chain  effects (e.g.,
bioaccumulation)  are not only a function of the chemical concentration in sediment, but reflect how
the chemical is transferred from sediment to biota, and how it travels from smaller to larger organisms.
This effort would include a consistent  method for estimating the site-specific bioavailability of
contaminants (see also recommendation B. 1). Contaminants of primary concern are bioaccumulative
chemicals such as PCBs, DDT, and methyl mercury.

D.2  Develop additional tools for characterizing ecological risks.

Benthic community studies and single-species sediment toxicity tests are often used to evaluate the
baseline risks to ecological receptors and the risks after remediation. An important area for future
research is the development and validation of additional methods to assess long-term risks, especially
for persistent bioaccumulating compounds.  This includes the use of smaller, short-lived fish to predict
the long-term food chain effects on game fish, and the use of molecular or genetic indicators to predict
endocrine disrupter impacts.  In addition,  SQGs used in conjunction with other tools such as sediment
toxicity tests, bioaccumulation, and benthic community surveys, provide additional lines of evidences
- and ultimately a weight of evidence approach - that can be used to assess the risks associated with
contaminated sediments.

Improvement of uncertainty analysis is also a critical need in ecological risk assessments.  Uncertainties
result principally from lack of knowledge  and  from uncertainties in data.  Knowledge-based

-------
Page 60	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

uncertainties hamper each step of a risk assessment or management alternatives evaluation. These arise
from incomplete or inadequate characterization of physical, chemical, and biological processes, of the
processes that generate stressors, of fate and transport processes (air, water, soil, biota), of exposure
pathways to human and ecological receptors, and of their resulting effects and health implications.
Uncertainties associated with data arise from inadequate measurement or data summary techniques,
from an inappropriate characterization of heterogeneity at the site or ecosystem scale, and from the
variability of geological, hydrological, and climatological conditions.  The Agency in its Ecological
Research Multi-Year Plan recommends additional research to improve risk assessment models and
better characterize uncertainties (U.S. EPA, 2003d).

D.3  Develop guidance on how to interpret ecological  sediment toxicity studies (lab or in situ
     caged studies) and how to interpret the significance  of the  results in relation to  site
     populations and communities.

A more consistent process is needed to allow risk managers to determine:   1) if the observed or
predicted adverse effects on a structural or functional  component of the  site's ecosystem is of
sufficient type, magnitude, areal extent, and duration that irreversible effects have occurred or are
likely to occur; and 2) if these effects appear to exceed the normal changes in the structural or
functional components typical of unimpacted ecosystems.   Interpretive  guidance  for  ecological
sediment toxicity studies, and the significance of the results to site populations and communities needs
to be developed to better evaluate the need to protect an ecological resource. An important area for
future research is the development and validation of population models that include typical bioassay
endpoints such as survival, growth, and reproduction, to provide further insight into interpretation of
test results.

D.4  Acquire data and develop criteria to use in balancing the long-term benefits from remedial
     dredging vs. the shorter term adverse effects on ecological receptors and their habitats.

The  Workgroup recommends that U.S. EPA collaborate with appropriate Federal agencies to study
the short- and long-term impacts/benefits from  environmental dredging.   It is important that such
evaluations include the  impacts on habitat  and  aquatic  plants  and animals potentially  caused by
capping, dredging, and/or other remedial methods that alter the physical environmental conditions.
It is  desirable to monitor thoroughly at least two locations in order to quantitatively determine all
contaminant losses (in particular the effectiveness of sediment resuspension controls) during remedial
dredging. At these projects, it will be important to employ all currently  accepted management
practices (e.g., silt curtains,  covered clamshell buckets,  state-of-the-art cutter heads for hydraulic
dredging) to ensure minimal resuspension.  All  losses quantified as  part of the remedial dredging
operation would then have to be measured against overall  benefits to the site by evaluating ecological
benefits for at least a ten-year horizon. Such a study could go far towards resolving the argument that
short-term negative impacts from remedial dredging outweigh long-term ecological benefits.  Similar
studies  could usefully be conducted as part of performance evaluations of capping and in  situ
treatment remedial alternatives.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 61

D.5 Conduct field and laboratory studies to further validate and improve chemical-specific
    sediment quality guidelines.

Chemical-specific sediment quality  guidelines have been developed by U.S. EPA for  use in
contaminated sediment assessment, prevention, and remediation programs.  Field validation  studies
have been conducted on some of these guidelines for these uses. However, an important area of future
work is to conduct additional field validation studies and laboratory tests using a range of species to
further validate the guidelines and understand contaminant exposure routes. Work is also needed to
develop mixtures guidelines for sediment contaminants.

D.6 Continue developing and refining both chronic and sub-chronic sediment toxicity testing
    methods.

Although a number of sediment toxicity test methods have been standardized, an important area for
future research is the development and validation of protocols using new freshwater, marine,  and
estuarine test species to provide sensitive tests representing a greater range of species and  habitat
types.  The currently available Leptocheirusplumulosus chronic test protocol uses an Atlantic Coast
species, which may not adequately represent the sensitivity of species from Pacific Ocean systems.
Chronic, sublethal test protocols are needed for marine species present in the Pacific,  such as the
amphipod Grandidierellajaponica.  Additional freshwater test protocols are needed for burrowing
species. Field-based test methods (e.g., in situ test methods) are needed to assess the biological effects
of contaminated sediments.  Some of the currently available test protocols are expensive and difficult
to run.  It is important to develop both simplified test  protocols to reduce costs, and interpretive
guidance for sublethal test methods.  A number of marine and estuarine test protocols for amphipod
species have been developed. It is important to give consideration to developing additional methods
for species other than amphipods.

D.7 Develop whole sediment toxicity identification evaluation procedures for a wide range of
    chemicals.

Sediment contaminants often occur in mixtures.  Whole sediment toxicity identification evaluation
methods are needed in order to determine which contaminants cause observed toxicity. Currently
available toxicity  identification evaluation methods  are capable of characterizing the toxicity of a
sediment only by identifying classes of toxic  contaminants  (e.g.,  metals or organic toxicants).
Additional work is needed to improve the method so that individual chemical contaminants  can be
identified.  In addition, work is needed to conduct field  validation studies supporting the method.

3.6       Sediment Remediation

A sediment remedial alternative is  a technology or combination of technologies used to reduce the
impact of contaminated sediments on human health and the environment. Alternatives can span a wide
range of complexity and technological ingenuity.  The simplest alternatives might employ only a single
component (i.e.., in situ capping). However, more complex alternatives may involve several different

-------
Page 62	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

technologies and various project components (U.S. EPA, 1994). For the more complex alternatives,
it is important to match complementary components in order to obtain an efficient remedial design
(e.g., hydraulic dredging may not be the best choice for sediments that will be disposed of in a landfill
due to the "no water in landfills" rule).

Due to all the confounding factors involved in sediment remediation, it is difficult to capture all the
complexities of the state of the science in sediment remediation in only a few short pages. However,
the subsections below provide a summary of the current state of sediment remediation technology,
identification of problems, and a discussion of key research gaps.

3.6.1    Natural Recovery/Bioremediation

Natural recovery involves leaving contaminated sediments in place and allowing ongoing  chemical,
physical, and biological aquatic processes to contain, destroy, or otherwise reduce the bioavailability
of contaminants. No actions are required to initiate or continue the natural recovery process (NRC,
1997).   Although natural recovery has  been  the  strategy of choice at only a few contaminated
sediments sites, the absence of timely remedial activities at many sites has made natural recovery the
de facto remediation of choice at these sites.  Case studies are identified in the National Research
Council (1997) document.

There are a plethora of resources available that  provide more information on the natural recovery and
bioremediation of contaminated sediments. However, there is still an ongoing debate regarding the
viability of using natural processes or engineered  biological processes to remediate contaminated
sediments,  especially  those contaminated  with  heavy metals  and chlorinated organics:  "Using
bioremediation to treat in-place [contaminated] sediments, although theoretically possible, requires
further research and development because it raises a number of significant microbial, geochemical, and
hydrological issues [including transport by large-scale  storm events] that have yet to be resolved"
(NRC, 1997).

Additionally, while the "natural capping"  and resulting sequestration of sediment contaminants from
natural deposition may occur at a faster "average" rate than the ongoing biological breakdown, large
scale storm events may result in hot-spot contamination being dispersed over a large area where it
would be difficult to remove or remediate.

The NRC (1997) document offers the following science needs for further research.

Science Needs

         Develop scientific principles to  describe the process of natural recovery.

         Perform a literature survey to determine the level of effectiveness at natural recovery sites.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 63

    •   Develop accepted measuring protocols to  determine in situ chemical fluxes from bed
        sediments into the overlying water column.

    •   Develop protocols for assessing the relative contribution of the five or more mechanisms for
        chemical  releases from  bed sediments  (including mass  transport of sediments  and
        contaminants by large-scale storm events).

    •   Determine the mechanisms for measuring the bioavailability of sorbed contaminants and the
        effect of sediment aging.

        Determine the rate and/or presence of anaerobic degradation processes in near-shore, mostly
        anoxic sediments.

    •   Conduct additional laboratory, pilot-scale, and field-scale demonstrations of the effectiveness
        of biological treatments.

    •   Explore the possibility of combining in situ bioremediation with in situ capping.

3.6.2   In situ Capping

"In situ capping is the controlled, accurate placement of a clean, isolating material cover, or cap, over
contaminated sediments without relocating the sediments or causing a maj or disruption of the original
bed" (NRC,  1997). U.S. EPA's GLNPO and U.S. EPA Region 5 have coordinated with U.S. ACE
and USGS in the production of two guidance documents on in situ capping (U.S.  EPA, 1998d, and
in preparation). Capping attempts to limit the adverse impacts of sediment contamination by providing
a barrier to prevent contact between aquatic organisms and the contaminated sediments. Capping may
also prevent downstream transport of sediments and their associated contaminants.

The  design  and  installation  of conventional  sediment  caps is fairly straight-forward  and well
understood, including the numerous cap placement technologies (tremie tube, submerged diffuses, and
others) described by U.S. EPA (1998d). However, the long-term effectiveness of this alternative has
not been well researched, although the National Research Council (NRC, 200la) documents in situ
capping case studies that have been completed in Hamilton Harbor, Canada and the St. Paul Waterway
in Tacoma, Washington. Reports documenting results of these operations can be found in Zeman and
Patterson (1997) and Parametrix (1999), respectively.  Additionally, many entities are now beginning
to discuss more complex  sediment cap designs, including the use of zero-valent iron or biological
treatment mechanisms in the cap
design.

Science Needs

    •   Analyze  data from  historical and  ongoing  field applications to  determine  capping
        effectiveness (NRC, 1997).

-------
Page 64	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
    •    Research and/or develop technologies to control contaminant releases during cap placement
         (NRC, 1997).

         Testing to  simulate  and evaluate  the  consequences  of episodic mixing  (e.g.,  anchor
         penetration and major flood/storm events) (NRC, 1997).

    •    Determine the impacts of advective transport (i.e., groundwater flow) on the transport of
         contaminants through the cap.

         Develop and evaluate the use of innovative cap designs that incorporate chemical and/or
         biological treatment technologies.

    •    Assess the uncertainties associated with cap performance predictions.

3.6.3   In situ Treatment

In situ treatment involves the active manipulation of in-place sediments to enhance the breakdown or
prevent the transport (e.g., immobilization) of contaminants. Potential technologies include: in situ
immobilization,  in situ  chemical  treatment,  in situ freezing, in  situ  geo-oxidation, and  in situ
vitrification (NRC, 1997).

Immobilization technologies are likely to be based on the concepts of solidification and immobilization.
The applicability of these processes to fine-grained sediments with high water content has yet to be
demonstrated. Potential problems include: inaccuracies of in situ placement, erosion, temperature
increases during curing, and increases in sediment volume (NRC, 1997).

Researchers at the Canadian National Water Research Institute  have developed and  demonstrated
equipment capable of injecting chemical solutions into sediments  at a controlled rate (U.S. EPA,
1994). However, the applicability of in situ  chemical treatment appears to be limited because of
interference between various classes of contaminants and the possibility of mobilizing metals in the
process of oxidizing organics (NRC, 1997). The National Research Council (NRC, 200 la) states that
"no effective in situ delivery  system has yet been developed for [delivering required nutrients,
substrates, or reagents to] contaminated sediments."

The use of in situ freezing and in situ vitrification can be quickly dismissed based on high cost and
limited effectiveness.  Freezing by injection  of  molten sulfur has the same limitation as  in situ
solidification.  In situ vitrification has been demonstrated on soils, but the high water  content of
sediments would require local site dewatering and the construction of a vapor recovery system (NRC,
1997). The NRC (200la) documents the difficulties encountered on an in situ treatment project in
Manitowoc Harbor, Wisconsin. There are many difficulties associated with the application of in situ
technologies  to  contaminated  sediment deposits.  Many  of these problems  are based upon the
application of known processes to the high volumes of low-concentration sediment generally found

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 65

in the field. In addition, many sediment deposits are both heterogeneous and fine-grained, making the
uniform application of treatment amendments difficult.

Science Needs

    •   Additional extensive research of most in situ treatment would be required and is probably
        not justified based on the limited applicability and  effectiveness of current technologies
        (NRC, 1997).

    •   It is important that U.S. EPA critically evaluate the three in situ and ex situ Electrochemical
        GeoOxidation (ECGOx) pilot-scale demonstrations that occurred in 2001  and 2002 to
        determine if additional studies are justified (GLNPO,  U.S. ACE, several private companies,
        U.S. EPA's SITE Program, U.S. EPA Region 2,  and U.S. EPA Region 10 are involved in
        the evaluation and demonstrations currently being discussed).

    •   Continue an open dialogue with international agencies and technology vendors and perform
        literature reviews to keep abreast of any advances in in situ treatment technologies.

3.6.4    Dredging/Removal

"Efficient hydraulic and mechanical methods are [readily] available for the removal and transport of
sediments for ex situ remediation or confinement" (NRC, 1997). Additionally, promising technologies
for precision control include electronically positioned dredge-heads and bottom-crawling hydraulic
dredges.  The latter may offer the capability of dredging in depths beyond  the standard maximum
operating capacity of conventional dredges (NRC, 1997).  Finally, many innovative mechanical (e.g.,
environmental clamshell) and hydraulic pumps (e.g., Eddy pump, PNEUMApump) are available that
advertise reduced sediment resuspension, increased solids content of dredged material, and/or other
performance enhancements.  Adequate research and data  are not available  to evaluate all of these
claims. Hayes (1989) noted that the operation of the dredge and the experience of the dredge operator
have a profound effect on the rate of sediment re-suspension.  Furthermore, recent monitoring at
dredging sites has focused on the short-term impacts and contaminant losses associated with dredging
operations. U.S. EPA (1996a) presents a good general framework for estimating contaminant losses
from all components of the dredging and disposal process. Additionally,  the USGS (Steuer, 2000)
presents a case study for monitoring short-term impacts for a dredging project on the Fox River in
Wisconsin.

Science Needs

        Performance  evaluation for innovative dredging equipment.

        Performance evaluation of low resuspension dredges  capable of removing sediments at near
        in situ densities (NRC, 1997).

-------
Page 66	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

        Enhanced capabilities for precision removal of sediments (NRC, 1997).

        Increased monitoring before, during, and after dredging to determine short-term impacts,
        long-term impacts, and long-term improvements due to dredging projects.

3.6.5   Ex situ Treatment Technologies

Numerous ex situ treatment technologies have undergone bench- and pilot-scale demonstrations. The
results of these studies are documented in numerous reports including U.S. EPA's ARCS program
reports (http ://www. epa. gov/glnpo/arcs/X International Navigation Association (PIANC) proceedings,
SITE programs  (http://www.epa.gov/ORD/SITE/X and other documents.   Ex situ treatment is
generally more promising than using the same technology in situ, because conditions can be more
tightly controlled in contained facilities.  Chemical separation, thermal desorption, and immobilization
technologies have been employed successfully but are expensive, complicated, and limited to treating
certain types of sediments and/or contaminants.  Because of the high unit costs, thermal and chemical
destruction techniques do not appear to be cost-effective, near-term approaches for remediating large
volumes of contaminated dredged material (NRC, 1997).

Following up on the work conducted under the ARCS Program, U.S. EPA Region 2 coordinated a
five-year study on sediment treatment technologies, the goal of which was to examine alternative
methods to  address and manage contaminated sediments  in New York/New Jersey Harbor.  A
particular  focus of U.S.  EPA Region 2 work was to evaluate treatment technologies that both
decontaminate sediments and produce a marketable final product.   This study has  resulted in a
completed pilot-scale demonstration: a sediment washing process whereby a manufactured topsoil
and bricks are produced as marketable end-products. An additional thermal treatment demonstration
is planned  for 2004: a process that produces  a blended cement product (Stern et al., 1998; Jones et
al., 2001).

Utilizing the information generated by U.S.  EPA Region 2 in its New York/New Jersey Harbor
decontamination program and in an effort to identify treatment technologies with a unit cost (dollars
per cubic yard) of less than one hundred dollars ($100), GLNPO has teamed with the Michigan
Department  of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) for bench-scale testing and evaluation of sediment
treatment technologies with beneficial end products (SEG, 1999).  Additionally, GLNPO, U.S. EPA-
SITE, the  Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Minergy Corporation are coordinating
the pilot-scale demonstration and evaluation  of Minergy's  technology which destroys organic
contaminants and encapsulates inorganic contaminants while producing a glass aggregate by-product
that can be used for construction fill.  Additional demonstrations are planned.

Science Needs

        Research  and development of ex situ treatment  technologies to  search for reasonable
        possibilities for cost effective treatment of large volumes of sediments (NRC, 1997).

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 67

         Additional full-scale demonstrations of promising treatment options to determine the
         effectiveness of technologies on a larger scale; to identify the pathways for contaminant
         losses; and, to determine the risks associated with contaminant losses during treatment.

         Significant coordination between U. S. EPA, U. S. ACE, and technology vendors to identify
         cost-effective treatment options and potential end uses of treatment products to offset the
         cost of treatment.

3.6.6    Beneficial Use Technologies

"Dredged sediments traditionally have been viewed as waste [material]. However, dredged material
is often used for beneficial purposes [such as], fill for urban development (such as the construction of
National Airport in Washington, DC), beach nourishment, the creation of wetlands and wildlife habitat,
for improving farmland [as a soil amendment], as fill for general construction, and for establishing
coastal islands where many species of birds nest" (NRC, 1997). The statutory underpinning for the
beneficial use of dredged material is provided by the WRDA,  which contains provisions for using
dredged material for such things as the protection, restoration, and creation of aquatic habitat (NRC,
1997). In addition, both the MPRSA and CWA dredged material disposal regulatory programs help
foster beneficial uses by requiring consideration  of alternatives (such as beneficial use) to dredged
material disposal.

Most beneficial use projects completed to date have used "clean" dredged material, but the National
Research Council (1997) contains an extensive list of completed beneficial use projects that used both
"clean" and "contaminated" dredged materials.  The NRC document also contains references to
numerous scientific studies to assess the effectiveness of these beneficial use projects and to determine
if there were any environmental impacts from the contaminants associated with the dredged sediments.
U.S. ACE, GLNPO,  and associated state  and  local organizations have coordinated on several
beneficial use pilot projects  within the  Great Lakes  watershed (mined land  reclamation  and
construction fill  projects in Duluth, Minnesota, top  soil creation at Toledo, Ohio; Milwaukee,
Wisconsin; and Green Bay, Wisconsin).

Additionally, MDEQ realized significant cost savings on a sediment remediation project for Newburgh
Lake when the dredged sediments were used as daily cover at a nearby landfill (GLNPO, 2000).

Although there is significant information on research studies and pilot- and full-scale demonstrations
of beneficial use, most of the reuse projects are isolated, one-time studies and are not consistently
incorporated  into long-term management strategies  on  dredge  material management.  This is
unfortunate since increases in beneficial use could conserve valuable disposal space at Confined
Disposal Facilities (CDFs) and landfills.

-------
Page 68	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Science Needs

        Development of technical guidelines for the beneficial use of dredged material, similar to the
        guidelines for the use of biosolids.

     •   Literature review and  analysis of beneficial  use projects and studies to determine the
        associated environmental impacts.

3.6.7   Disposal Options

The  National Research Council (1997) contains an excellent discussion  of disposal options for
contaminated sediments and a figure for visualizing each alternative.  The three major options for
contaminated sediment disposal include:

        Landfilling - the placement of sediments into a licensed solid waste facility.

        Confined disposal facilities - placement of sediments into a diked  in-water, near-shore, or
        land-based facility specifically designed for containing sediments.

     •   Contained aquatic disposal (CAD) - controlled,  open-water placement of contaminated
        material followed by covering (capping) with clean material. (NRC, 1997).

Both CDFs and landfills have a long history of use, and the state of research and study of these
facilities is fairly well advanced.  In contrast, fewer actual case studies exist for CAD projects, and
therefore, there exists only a limited amount of research on this disposal option. Sumeri (1984) and
Truitt (1986) document the results of a CAD project in the Duwamish Waterway in Seattle,
Washington (NRC, 1997). In 1992, U.S. EPA and U.S. ACE  published a document describing
techniques for evaluating releases resulting from various disposal options (U.S. EPA/U.S. ACE,
1992).

Science Needs

        Improved methods for evaluation of potential release pathways for each disposal option.

        Literature review and evaluation of releases for current disposal facilities, particularly CDFs.

        Improved design  criteria for designing and building CADs.

        Investigation of long-term effectiveness and releases for each disposal alternative.

        Better models to predict loss of contaminants via volatilization.

3.6.8   Key Recommendations for Sediment Remediation

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 69

E.I Collect the necessary data and develop guidance for determining the conditions under
    which natural recovery can be considered a suitable remedial option. Such guidance would
    include:  measurement protocols to  assess the relative  contribution of the various
    mechanisms  for chemical releases from bed  sediments (e.g., advection,  bioturbation,
    diffusion, and resuspension), including mass transport of contaminants by large storm
    events; approaches to assess the vertical extent of the bioavailable zone in different
    environmental settings; methodologies to quantify the uncertainties associated with natural
    recovery; and development of accepted measuring protocols to determine in situ chemical
    fluxes from sediments.

The Workgroup recommends that research be continued and increased for examining the relative
contributions of the various mechanisms for contaminant release from sediments.

When selecting a remedial option for a particular site, it is critical to determine the methods by which
contaminants are lost or transported, and which mechanisms play significant roles. In many situations
large storm events will be the largest mechanism to  move contaminants from a particular hot spot.
In other  more quiescent settings, such processes  as advection, diffusion and bioturbation may
predominate. The method of contaminant loss varies seasonally in many systems, with resuspension
by storm events typically predominating in spring; other mechanisms are more important over the rest
of the year. The flux of contaminants via processes such as advection, diffusion, and bioturbation can
also show seasonal variation. Knowing the  relative  contributions of these mechanisms is critical in
determining whether natural recovery or capping are  the most appropriate remedial options for a site.
Also, being able to better quantify the uncertainties inherent in evaluation of natural recovery and other
remedial options will enable more effective remedy selection.

Under certain circumstances, natural recovery through burial of contaminated sediments may be a
viable remedial option. In such cases, the depositional history of sediments can be understood through
the analysis of sediment physical data in conjunction with age dating techniques using 137Cs, 210Pb,
lignin, and other compounds in sediments. Even where physical data are seemingly sufficient to allow
construction of a mathematical model of deposition, empirical data are critical for calibration and
validation of such models.

E.2 Develop performance evaluations of various  cap designs and cap placement methods and
    conduct cap placement and post-cap  monitoring to document performance. Continue to
    monitor ongoing capping projects to monitor performance (e.g., Boston Harbor, Eagle
    Harbor, Grasse River).

The design and installation of conventional sediment caps is well understood; however, the long-term
effectiveness of this remedial alternative has  not been well researched. In addition, many entities are
now beginning to discuss more complex cap designs, including the use of biological treatment.

With capping becoming a management option being recommended at more sites, it is critical that
evaluations be conducted to document its effectiveness. It is  important that U.S.  EPA promote

-------
Page 70	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

capping demonstration projects that include both short- and long-term monitoring to document cap
placement methods and cap performance. All mechanisms of loss must be quantified during such a
study including sediment resuspension (during placement), diffusion, advection, bioturbation, and
storm events.

E.3 Encourage and promote the development and demonstration of in-situ technologies.

In situ technologies, if proven effective,  would be the most efficient means for remediating
contaminated sediment sites. Such a technology would avoid the problems and make moot arguments
of whether or not removing sediments via dredging does more harm than good. It would also obviate
the difficulties associated with finding a disposal site.

It is important that U.S. EPA actively identify and work with vendors who have a viable technology
for treating contaminants in situ, conduct demonstration projects examining in situ technologies, and
evaluate such projects to determine their efficacy.

E.4 Using the data provided  in recommendation E.I, develop a white  paper evaluating the
    short-term and long-term impacts from dredging relative to natural processes and human
    activities (e.g., resuspension from storm events, boat scour, wave action and anchor drag).

Large storm events are known to move large volumes of sediment and their associated
contaminants. It is critical that any study examining the impacts from dredging also be examined in
relation to all mechanisms of contaminant loss ongoing at a particular site. It is essential that all
contaminant losses that would naturally occur  at a site including resuspension from storm events,
advection, diffusion, and bioturbation, be taken into account when evaluating dredging impacts. Only
when the net losses from these processes are known can the impacts associated with dredging be
adequately evaluated.

E.5 Support  the  demonstration  of cost-effective   ex situ treatment technologies  and
    identification of potential beneficial uses of treatment products.

Much work on ex situ treatment has been conducted by both U.S. EPA Region 2 and GLNPO.  A
number of demonstrations have been successfully completed to date, and others are planned.  The
Workgroup is now confident that tools do exist to decontaminate sediments.  It is apparent, however,
that to make treatment viable, it is necessary that a marketable end use product (i.e., a cost effective
option) either be extant or be developed, particularly at sites that have large volumes of contaminated
sediments.

Partnerships need to be developed with industry to conduct joint demonstrations and examine all
options for making treatment cost effective and a viable alternative to landfilling.

3.7  Baseline, Remediation, and Post-Remediation Monitoring

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 71

To ensure that all sediment risk and exposure pathways at a site are being (or have been) adequately
managed by the remedy, it is necessary to implement a sediment monitoring program for all types of
sediment remedies, both during remedy implementation and over  the  long-term.   Long-term
monitoring should continue until all remedial action objectives have been met. In some instances, this
may take many decades.   A  sediment monitoring program  encompasses baseline monitoring,
monitoring during remedial action implementation, and post-remediation, or long-term monitoring.

Baseline monitoring encompasses the monitoring of those indicators of environmental change (i.e.,
fish or other biota, sediment chemistry, pore water chemistry, toxicity testing, and benthic community
structure) and is conducted prior to the initiation of the remedial action.  It is typically conducted
duringthe remedial investigation or site characterization stage.  Itis important that baseline monitoring
be consistent with the planned long-term or post-remediation monitoring, and to provide a valid basis
for  comparison with the post-remediation  monitoring data  in order to detect  and  evaluate
environmental trends and to evaluate the effectiveness of the remedial  action.

In contrast, post-remediation,  or long-term,  monitoring is  initiated  once the remedial action is
completed. It involves multiple measurements made  over time to assess the success of the remedy in
meeting remedial performance goals.  The data are used to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of the
selected remedial action in protecting human health and the environment, engineering/construction
performance and structural integrity of any containment or stabilization structures, the recovery of
areas impacted by the remedial action, and  the success of  mitigation  projects  built to offset
environmental impacts caused by the remedial action;  the data can also be used to evaluate restoration
of the ecosystem. Post-remediation monitoring typically consists of monitoring fish or other biota
populations and residues, toxicity testing, and benthic community structure evaluations. Monitoring
may continue after the remedial performance goals are achieved to assure that the remedy is sound and
continues to be effective.

Monitoring during implementation of the remedial action is used to evaluate the short-term effects of
the remedial action, whether the remedial action project meets design requirements, whether clean-up
levels are met, and whether other remedial action objectives are met.  In some cases where  the
implementation of the  remedial action  spans  a significant length of time, the length of time of
monitoring during implementation may span several years, if not decades. Natural recovery sites and
large dredging projects encompassing millions of cubic yards of sediment are examples  of sites where
such monitoring may run for decades. Monitoring during dredging is conducted to measure dredging
effectiveness and identify short-term upsets whereas monitoring after dredging is completed (i.e, post-
remedial  monitoring) is conducted to determine whether the pre-dredging baseline conditions have
been negatively affected. Monitoring during remedial action implementation may contain some of the
same indicators, but will  likely include  monitoring of others such as  turbidity, dissolved oxygen,
sediment chemistry, water chemistry, and air monitoring. Further, the  monitoring of environmental
effects could include tracking other parameters such as  the concentration of contaminants  (either
dissolved or suspended) in the water column, the amount of contaminants lost downstream, and the
concentration of residual contaminants left behind in the bottom sediments.

-------
Page 72	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Monitoring is a standard component at a contaminated sediment project, beginning prior to the site
investigation when project managers are trying to determine whether there is a problem, and running
through post-remediation monitoring.   These various types of monitoring programs are  being
implemented at a number of contaminated sediment sites, and plans are in place to initiate monitoring
at others.

A few examples of sites where post-remediation monitoring is underway or planned to be initiated are:

        •   Cannelton Industries Superfund site on the St. Mary's River, Michigan.
        •   Black River, Ohio.
        •   River Raisin (Ford Outfalls Superfund removal action site), Michigan.
        •   Manistique River and Harbor, Michigan (Superfund removal action site).
        •   LCP Superfund site in Brunswick, Georgia.
        •   Tennessee River Site in Decatur, Alabama. (Consent Decree with  stream diversion,
           capping, and in-place stabilization).

Monitoring  during  remedy implementation is underway on the Pine River,  Michigan (Velsicol
Superfund site).  The Sediment Inventory may be referred to for additional information.  See Figure
3-4 for examples of other science activities related to monitoring.
   Figure 3-4. Examples of Other Science Activities Related to Monitoring

   •  FIELDS software tools have been developed to support the monitoring of remedy implementation and
      remediation effectiveness (U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund).
   •  Development of monitoring guidance and fact sheets (OSWER and Regions).
   •  Development of tools to be used in monitoring (ORD/OW).
Questions arise regarding the short-term impacts and long-term effectiveness of dredging, capping and
other in situ remedies.  A look at sediment sites across the nation shows inconsistencies in the kinds
of monitoring performed. Impediments to the implementation of monitoring may be due to limited
knowledge on how to develop and implement monitoring plans.

There is an ongoing debate regarding the short-term impacts and long-term effectiveness of dredging
and capping remedies, with some claiming that dredging (and possibly capping) cause greater harm
through destruction of habitat and release of contaminants. Others argue  that while there are short-
term impacts, they can be minimized through technology and operational and other controls,  and that
these remedies will prove to be more protective over the long-term because of the permanent  removal
of the contaminants or through limitations on bioavailability. Other questions include: Will dredging
or capping result in newly created or increased direct toxicity to biota from increases in dissolved or
suspended contaminant concentrations in the water column?  Will they result in an increase in the
bioavailability of contaminants and increased tissue concentrations in fish and other biota?  How long

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 73

does it take for the habitat of a dredged or capped area to become suitable for aquatic life and for re-
colonization to take place? Will caps provide attractive habitat for desirable biota, or will they attract
less desirable organisms and non-native communities?  Information from the monitoring of both
remedy implementation and post-remediation is necessary in order to address and resolve these issues.

In addition, monitoring information can be used to inform decision-making at contaminated sediment
sites.

Science Needs

The  NRC  Report (2001a)  recommends that  "[l]ong-term monitoring and  evaluation  of [...]
contaminated sediment sites should be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the management
approach and to ensure adequate, continuous protection of humans  and the environment."  This is
consistent with the issues discussed above - more and better monitoring data are needed.  To ensure
that such data are collected, guidance and information with regard to available protocols and tests are
needed for the remediation project manager's reference.  In addition,  to ensure that such monitoring
is implemented, a cross-program policy may also be needed. For Superfund sites, such a policy may
direct the agency to ensure that monitoring is included as a component of remedial alternatives in the
Feasibility Study and Record of Decision, and included in settlements with potentially responsible
parties (PRPs).  For cleanups funded with Federal dollars, sufficient funds would need to be included
to cover the cost of the monitoring, or agreements made with state or Federal partners to conduct such
monitoring.

Some specific areas that need to be addressed include:  an evaluation of the existing protocols and
tests performed to identify those which are appropriate for monitoring and any additional needs. For
example, U.S. EPA's Office of Water has published  protocols for sampling and analysis  offish and
shellfish in order to determine  human health risks associated with tissue contaminants (U.S. EPA,
2000c).  U.S. EPA has also published guidance on collection, storage, and manipulation of sediments
(U.S. EPA, 2001b), and existing Agency protocols are available for dredged material testing and
assessment (U.S.  EPA, 1998c and  199la). These  protocols are available for use in monitoring
contaminated sediment sites.  However, monitoring guidance needs to be developed to provide
remediation project managers with a consistent approach to  developing monitoring  plans and
implementing such monitoring.  It is important that monitoring guidance also address how monitoring
plans are developed, what protocols and tests are available for use (with recommendations for the use
for each), how to develop indicators and measures, how to evaluate monitoring data, minimum quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) protocols, and specifics regarding which biota and which media
should be used  for specific situations (i.e.., number of, species, and age offish for bioaccumulative
chemicals of concern).

It is important to make monitoring data available to provide information for decision-making at other
sediment sites.  Please refer to Section 3.9  for  additional details with  regard to monitoring data
management and exchange.

-------
Page 74	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

3.7.1   Key Recommendations for Baseline, Remediation, and Post-Remediation Monitoring

A review of sediment sites across the nation show a lack of or limited monitoring data with which to
answer these questions and resolve the debate. In addition, monitoring data needs to be made available
to inform decision-making at contaminated sediment sites.

The  impediments to monitoring include: limited knowledge on how to develop  monitoring plans,
including the type, frequency, and temporal extent of measurements and limited knowledge on their
implementation. Additional issues include the cost of conducting monitoring, providing oversight when
conducted by the PRP, and implications of the monitoring results and final compliance of remedial
action.

The following key recommendations are made to address these issues.

F.I  Develop monitoring guidance fact sheets for baseline, remediation, and post-remediation
     monitoring, and monitoring during remedy implementation.

An important area for future study is evaluation of existing protocols and tests in order to identify
those which are appropriate for monitoring and what  additional needs there may be. Monitoring
guidance needs to be developed to provide project managers with a consistent approach to developing
monitoring plans and implementing such monitoring (e.g., monitoring of sediment resuspension during
remedy implementation). Such guidance would also address how monitoring plans are developed, what
protocols and tests are available for use (with recommendations for the use of each), how to develop
indicators and measures, how to evaluate monitoring data, minimum QA/QC protocols, and specifics
regarding which biota and which media should be used for specific situations  (/'. e., number of, species,
and age offish for bioaccumulative chemicals of concern). This information would be compiled into
a compendium and be available as a reference document for the guidance and fact sheets.

To meet this need, the Workgroup recommends that the OSRTI, with support from the other program
offices and regions, initiate the development of monitoring guidance fact sheets. It is suggested that
a workgroup be established with representation across  program offices and regions to take on this
task. It is recommended that this workgroup coordinate with natural resource trustees to ensure that
monitoring guidance addresses their values and priorities.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 75

F.2 Conduct training and hold workshops for project managers regarding monitoring of
    contaminated sediment sites.

Training is needed to teach project managers how to develop and implement monitoring plans, and
evaluate the resulting data with regard to remedy implementation and performance. Workshops or
other fora are needed to share monitoring information and remedy performance.

To begin to meet these needs, it is recommended that a two-day Monitoring Workshop be held under
the suggested lead of ORD and OSRTI. The target audience would be U. S. EPA scientists and project
managers of contaminated sediment sites. It is further recommended that an advisory group be formed
with participation from the various program  and regional offices to plan the workshop.

The CSSP Document also recommends that additional sessions be held periodically (whether they be
training workshops or brown bags for the purpose of teaching how to conduct monitoring or prepare
monitoring plans, or fora for the purpose of sharing experiences and results), and at various levels (/'. e.,
regional, national, U.S. EPA only, or U.S. EPA plus external parties). The leads for planning such
sessions may be at the national or regional level. Use of existing fora is encouraged, such as the annual
National  Association of Remedial Project  Managers  meeting, or the National Superfund  Site
Assessment Conference. At the regional level, a program office may take the lead to sponsor a brown
bag on monitoring.  The timing of such regional sessions will be left to the discretion of the regions.
It is also recommended that a national workshop be held in conjunction with the completion of the
draft monitoring guidance, under the sponsorship of OSRTI, ORD, and OW.

3.8  Risk Communication and Community Involvement

The National Research Council's report, A Risk-Management Strategy for PCB'-Contaminated
Sediments (NRC, 200la) highlighted the many benefits of involving communities in the cleanup
process. "Participation makes the process more democratic, lends legitimacy to the process, educates
and empowers the affected communities, and generally leads to  decisions that are more accepted by
the community (Fiorino, 1990; Folk, 1991;  NRC, 1997).  The affected community members can
contribute essential community-based knowledge, information, and insight that is often lacking in
expert-driven risk processes (Ashford and Rest, 1999). Community involvement can also assist in
dealing with perceptions of risk and helping  community members to understand the differences
between types and degrees of risk." Although the benefits of early, active, and continuous community
involvement have been widely recognized by U.S. EPA and others, the NRC found that there still
remains much progress that needs to be made to more effectively involve communities.

U.S. EPA's two major programs/offices  with responsibilities for  protecting  and cleaning-up
contaminated sediments, Superfund and the Office of Water, have both expanded efforts to more
greatly involve communities in their programs. For example, the  Superfund program published a
report identifying useful lessons that were learned on how to provide communities greater involvement
(U.S. EPA, 1999b).  Superfund has developed a number of general guidance documents and tools for
use at Superfund sites. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS): Volume 1 -Human Health

-------
Page 76	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Evaluation Manual. Supplement to Part A: Community Involvement in Superfund Risk Assessments
(U.S. EPA,  1999c) explains how Superfund  staff and community members can work together
especially during the risk assessment. A video, Superfund Risk Assessment - What It's All About and
How You Can Help,  describes (in lay terms) the  Superfund  risk assessment process  and how
communities can help (U. S. EPA, 1999d). Other fact sheets and Community Advisory Group Toolkits
have been developed (U.S. EPA, 1998a, 1995b, 1999b, and 1996b).  Additionally, the  Office of
Water's National Fish and Wildlife Contamination Program is developing an updated (second) edition
of its Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories, Volume IV:
Risk Communication (U.S. EPA, 1995a). This new edition will provide greater emphasis on ensuring
that risk communication is culturally appropriate for diverse communities and that all communities be
involved early and throughout the program.

Risk communication provides the means for communities to have a greater role in the evaluation and
decision-making process. Risk communication research develops the methods, models, and tools for
U.S. EPA to more effectively reach out to communities, earn their trust, and build an effective working
partnership.  This partnership will allow communities to become more fully engaged in  the entire
cleanup process - not just as passive listeners, but as important decision-makers.  The NRC (200 Ib)
report recognized that U.S. EPA's community involvement  program has been advocating greater
involvement of affected communities into the cleanup process.

An  important component of risk communication and community involvement is ensuring that all the
technical information provided to the communities  is understandable. Too often communities are
either inundated with too  much extraneous information that cannot be understood, or they are
presented with summaries that contain too little data. Research is needed on both how to effectively
extract the  appropriate  amount of information and determine the best vehicles  (e.g., formal
presentations, newsletters, informal meetings, videos, infomercials, web sites) for presenting the data
to communities. In addition to developing more effective tools for the sender of messages, research
is needed to develop better listening skills for all the receivers of messages.

Communities have first-hand knowledge of the site and their own activities (such as  catching and
consuming fish) that would be very helpful to U.S. EPA's evaluation of the site and its possible
impacts on nearby communities.  The development of site-specific  exposure factors  based on the
measurements of the habits of the local community could reduce reliance on the use of national default
assumptions that may not reflect local habits or conditions.

Communities at contaminated sediment sites are diverse and often have conflicting interests that are
hard to articulate and quantify. Measurement methods that might be suitable include public opinion
survey instruments, randomly selected focus groups, and computer-based methods such as "virtual"
town meetings.  This is particularly important for sediment sites  because they  can cover large
geographic areas.

Because the effectiveness of risk communication and community involvement are rarely measured in
application, there is considerable disagreement about the effectiveness of current public participation

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 77

activities.  Measuring the performance of existing tools and newly developed tools would focus
improvements in necessary areas.

Science Needs

    •   Develop better methods and tools to measure the preferences of individuals, sub-populations,
        and communities throughout the entire sediment cleanup process.

        Develop more effective methods and tools to describe, summarize, and present complex
        technical data to communities.

    •   Develop better methods and tools to extract and utilize community-based knowledge.

    •   Develop ways to determine how various societal and cultural values  and practices are
        impacted by contaminated sediments or cleanup activities. For example, the inability of
        native tribes to harvest fish and then barter them for other valuables is a cultural impact that
        is not often considered.

        Develop community outreach methods and tools that can be applied to large geographic sites
        with multiple diverse communities. Because some contaminated sediment sites,  especially
        river sites,  can span tens or even hundreds of miles, they present difficult challenges to
        community involvement staff.

    •   Develop and apply methods and tools that measure the effectiveness of environmental public
        participation programs.

3.8.1    Key Recommendations for Risk Communication and Community Involvement

Advances  in the science of risk communication would result in much more meaningful community
involvement in the contaminated sediments cleanup process.  The methods, models,  and tools
produced by this research would allow U.S. EPA to more effectively reach out to communities, earn
their trust, and build effective working  partnerships- partnerships that empower communities to
become more fully engaged in the entire  cleanup decision-making process.  To accomplish this, the
following recommendation is made:

G.I Establish a research program on risk communication and community involvement focusing
    on developing better methods, models, and tools.

There are many potential benefits to be gained by conducting research in this area. ORD could take
the lead in  developing a solicitation package to conduct research in one or more of these project areas.

-------
Page 78	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities

3.9    Information Management and Exchange Activities

Information, or data, management is a key component
of the characterization, assessment, and  monitoring
activities conducted at contaminated sediment sites. A
Figure 3-5. Types of Information/Data
          Management Activities
                                       .                         Currently Underway
data management system provides one point or access
for  all  data  and  simplifies  assessment,  QA/QC   •   GLNPO's sediment database.
evaluation,  modeling,  mapping,   querying,  trends   •   OW's Sediment Inventory.
analysis and other activities that may be  conducted   *   OSRTTs Superfund sediment sites
using  the  data.   Information  communication  and
exchange are critical components  of a  contaminated
sediment  project  and would be  simplified by the
establishment of a quality data management system. Outreach and information-sharing with the public
is key to not only their understanding of the ecological and health risks associated with a site, but also
of the possible solutions to address those risks.  An informed public would be better able to contribute
to the decision-making  process in a  knowledgeable  manner.  To manage  the quality of  its
environmental data collection, generation, and use, EPA uses a Quality System that ensures that its
environmental data are of sufficient quantity and quality to support the data's intended use.  Some
examples of the types of information/data management activities that are underway are shown in
Figure 3-5. Other information communication and exchange activities are identified in Figure 3-6.
 Figure 3-6.     Information Communication and Exchange Activities

     Sediment Network (OW).
     Superfund Sediment Forum (OSRTI).
     Participation on external fora such as the National Sediment Dialogue and Great Lakes and other regional
     Dredging Teams.
     Great Lakes sediment web page (GLNPO).
     Public Outreach Tools: Sediment pamphlet and poster (OW) and a dredging video (OSRTI).
     U.S. EPA Region 5 Superfund's FIELDS system.
     Contaminated Sediment Technical Advisory Committee (CSTAG).
     U.S. EPA Region 5/States Sediment Forum.
Science Needs

Environmental data need to be appropriately housed in data management systems. It is important that
such data management systems be consistent  and able to link across the regions and offices.
Environmental information regarding contaminated sediment sites needs to be placed onto regional
contaminated sediment web sites which are updated on a regular basis, and be linked across the
regions so that information on sites in other regions is available to the viewer. It is also important that
networks  be formed so that information about contaminated sediment  sites and issues can  be
exchanged and discussed.  Workshops and other fora  that are held periodically  for a range of

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 79

audiences are an important additional means of communicating and exchanging information,  and
increasing the science knowledge of stakeholders and others.

There is a need for more timely information exchange, improved access to environmental information
and data, both internally across the Agency and with external stakeholders and other interested parties.
One of the recommendations in the National Research Council Report (200 Ib) is that there be "early,
active, and continuous involvement of all affected parties and communities as partners." One of the
many keys to the  success of  such involvement is the availability of, and access to, environmental
information and data about the site(s) of concern.  In addition, stakeholders may also need some basic
science knowledge (or someone to explain it) so as to be able to  comprehend what the data  and
information means and be better able to contribute to the decision-making process in an informative
manner.

3.9.1   Key Recommendations for Information Management and Exchange Activities

To meet these needs, the following recommendations are made.

H.I    Establish regional sediment  data management systems which can link the regions and
       program offices with each other and with the National Sediment Inventory.

There is a need for more timely information exchange regarding contaminated sediment sites,  and
improved access to environmental information and data. This will allow for improved decision-making
in addition to being able to learn from the experiences of others. The two key impediments or issues,
in addition to the lack of sediment data management systems in general, are the lack of consistent
formats among such systems, and  a lack of accessibility between regional systems and the national
program offices.

To address these issues, it is recommended that the regional information management programs take
the lead for ensuring regional  sediment data management systems are established, and to provide the
technical  support that may be needed. The regional program offices will need  to work together to
establish roles and responsibilities on how the data management systems will be set up and maintained.
The Office of Environmental  Information (OEI) would also  have a key role in this activity.  It is
important to evaluate the existing data management systems such as  U.S. EPA's STORage  and
RETrieval database (STORET) to see if any are able to meet the needs identified here. It is suggested
that a workshop be held for the regions and program offices to share information on existing data
management systems and how this recommendation might best be implemented.

-------
Page 80	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

H.2   Standardize the sediment site data collection/reporting format. Establish minimum
       protocols for QA/QC using the Agency's Quality System for Environmental Data and
       Technology.

Because data are collected both by various U.S. EPA programs and offices and by other agencies,
collection and reporting formats and QA/QC protocols vary.  This leads to difficulties in sharing
information across programs/offices and between U.S. EPA and other agencies.

To address these issues, it is recommended that U.S. EPA's Environmental Information Office, with
OW and OSWER, take the lead in developing standardized formats and identifying minimum QA/QC
protocols under its Quality System for Environmental Data and Technology.n It is recommended that
the regions, state environmental agencies, and other Federal agencies be involved, as appropriate. It
is recommended that a workshop be held in the near future to address these issues, with the protocols
being developed from the workshop.

H.3   Develop national and regional  contaminated  sediment sites web sites for sharing
       information.

To also meet the need for more timely information exchange regarding contaminated sediment sites,
the CSSP Document recommends that a national sediment web site be established. It is recommended
that the proposed sediment web site under consideration in OW be considered for use as a centralized
web site to meet this need.  OW is suggested to take the lead, with support from OEI, OSRTI, and
other offices and regions as appropriate. It is recommended that web sites developed by the regions
and programs link with the national sediment web site. GLNPO,  OW, OSRTI, and some of the
regions are developing or have developed contaminated sediment web sites containing information on
sediment sites, and also provide links to guidance and other information regarding the contaminated
sediment problem.   Where they do not exist, and are found to be needed, it is recommended that
regional remedial and water programs, working with their regional information management programs,
jointly develop contaminated sediment  sites web sites.  It is recommended that these web sites be in
place as soon as practicable.

H.4   Re-establish and expand the Office of Water-sponsored Sediment Network by including
       more regional representation.

The CSSP Document recommends that the Sediment Network be re-established under the co-lead of
OW and OSRTI. Key representatives from appropriate national and regional program offices are
 11  EPA uses its Quality System to manage the quality of its environmental data collection, generation, and use.
 The primary goal of the EPA Quality System is to ensure that its environmental data are of sufficient quantity and
 quality to support the data's intended use. The EPA Quality System requires that each EPA Office, Region, and
 Research and Development Laboratory or Center develop and implement supporting Quality Systems. EPA's
 Quality System specifications may also apply to extramural agreement holders (i.e., contractors, grantees, and
 other recipients of financial assistance from EPA).	

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 81

presumptive participants.  The suggested purpose of the Network would be to resolve issues and to
share information (each representative would  then share  the  information through  their own
organizations). It is also recommended that regular teleconferences be scheduled. It is also suggested
that an OW/OSWER memorandum be prepared and sent to the program offices and regional offices
announcing the Sediment Network and inviting their participation.

A sediment  list server is also recommended as  an additional means of sharing information  and
resolving issues for a larger audience. Responsibility for maintenance of such a list server should be
jointly shared between OW and OSWER.

H.5   Promote communication and coordination of science and research among Federal
       agencies.

Many other Federal agencies and departments sponsor research on the same sediment research topics.
The Workgroup recommends that coordination and communication of science and research among
Federal agencies be promoted in order to avoid duplication of efforts, encourage partnering between
researchers working on similar projects, and facilitate the timely sharing of interim and final  results.
Agencies that might participate include U. S. EPA, NOAA, U. S. Navy, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
U.S. Geological Survey, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

H.6   Promote the exchange of scientific information via scientific fora (L&, workshops,
       journals, and meetings).

The Workgroup recommends that national and regional program offices encourage their managers and
staff to share scientific information via  workshops, conferences,  publication  in  journals,  and
presentations.  In addition, great benefit would be achieved by incorporating information  of new
technologies and approaches applicable to contaminated sediment management within existing regional
training programs. It is recommended that other options for sharing scientific information be explored
at the regional level.

-------
Page 82	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                   THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 83



                         4.  MEETING SCIENCE NEEDS

4.1    Introduction

There  are many scientific uncertainties  associated with assessing and  managing contaminated
sediments.  Multiple offices  and regions have overlapping science needs; some have individual,
program-specific requirements.  Realistically, it will take a long-term program to develop, implement,
and verify the science. Planning across all U. S. EPA organizations, with recognition and coordination
of important work being conducted by other organizations, such as Federal and State Agencies and
academic institutions, is essential to advancing the science and managing  risks from contaminated
sediments in the most cost-effective ways.

4.2    Recommended Approaches to Implement Strategy

It is the Agency's intent that  the Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Document serve as a
single,  formal assessment of contaminated sediment science activities which can be used to foster
collaboration and dialogue between EPA offices and regions. The CSSP Document may be used as
a framework for future science inventories or as the starting point for developing a more specific
science and implementation  plan.  It is  recommended  that each organization  consult the key
recommendations when planning contaminated sediment science activities.

The Workgroup recommends that a broad Agency oversight committee such as the Contaminated
Sediment Management Committee be used to review the key recommendation of the C S SP Document
in the future to ensure that science presented herein reflects the Agency's evolving  science needs.  If
such a  group is used or formed, the bullets below identify some tasks that  may be  useful for review
and collaboration.

    •   Reviewing science  activities:

    It is recommended that the lead U. S. EPA offices and regions present to the oversight committee
    the current  science  activities  they are conducting pertaining to research topics  and key
    recommendations identified in the C S SP Document, as well as identifying those additional science
    activities, based on the key recommendations in the CSSP Document, that they would implement
    should sufficient resources become available. This information sharing will serve to initiate closer
    coordination of science activities related to contaminated sediments across U.S. EPA.

    •   Implementing science activities:

    It  is recommended  that lead U.S. EPA  offices and regions who  agree to  carry  out the
    recommended  science activities ensure that these activities are considered within their annual
    planning,  budgeting, and accountability process, and are implemented when resources are
    committed.  It  is recommended that for each recommendation, a brief one-page description be

-------
Page 84	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

    developed (or updated) which includes the following information:  title, key partners, actions
    underway, actions planned over next two years, products  expected by (date), and primary
    contact(s).   Please refer to Appendix B for  an example.   The  one-page recommendation
    descriptions  and a report out on the status of the implementation of the science activities would
    be provided  at the annual meetings.  The oversight committee would then determine whether
    progress toward the goals is being made and, if necessary, recommend adjustments to science
    activities to meet the key recommendations.

    •   Identifying areas where science partnerships are needed:

    It is recommended that the oversight committee advise U.S. EPA offices and regions where
    scientific collaboration within the Agency, as well as with other Federal agencies, would be
    beneficial. These partnerships will hopefully speed the accomplishment of key recommendations.
    It is important that coordination also occur with the Science Policy Council on the use of science
    priorities for science planning; with the Council on Regulatory Environmental Modeling on the
    characteristics and  appropriate  applications for existing models; and with the Forum on
    Environmental Measurements on the development and validation of new analytical methods.

    •   Coordinating with U.S. EPA offices and regions:

    It is recommended that the oversight committee contact the lead  U.S. EPA office or region
    identified as  a  suggested critical partner  from Table 4-1  for each key recommendation to
    understand how they intend to implement science activities for the recommendations.

    •   Identifying unfunded activities:

    It is important to identify resource needs for unfunded or underfunded tasks.  It is recommended
    that the oversight committee discuss unfunded science areas and communicate these to the
    appropriate science planning staff within U.S. EPA offices and regions in order to identify the
    appropriate resources to address them.

    •   Updating the Contaminated Sediments  Science Priorities Document:

    Periodic reviews of the state of the science on contaminated sediments, a gaps analysis,  and
    updating of the  CSSP Document are recommended as needed.

Table 4-1  lists the key recommendations by topic area, the time frame for implementation,  and
suggested  critical partners. Although recommendations are roughly divided into two time frames,
immediate and longer term, some of the recommendations could be viewed as continuing needs.

-------
                       Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 85
Table 4-1.  Summary of Key  Recommendations, Time Frame for Implementation, and
Suggested Critical Partners	
                                  Recommendations
 A. Sediment Site Characterization

 Immediate Time Frame
 A. 1  Conduct a workshop to develop a consistent approach to collecting sediment physical
      property data for use in evaluating sediment stability. (OSRTI, ORD, U.S. EPA Regions)

 Longer Time Frame
 A.2  Develop more sensitive, low-cost laboratory methods for detecting sediment
      contaminants, and real-time or near real-time chemical sensors for use in the field. (ORD,
      OSRTI, GLNPO)
 A.3  Develop U.S. EPA-approved methods with lower detection limits for analysis of
      bioaccumulative contaminants of concern in fish tissue. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
 A.4  Develop methods for analyzing emerging endocrine disrupters, including alkylphenol
      ethoxylates (APEs) and their metabolites. (ORD)
 B. Exposure Assessment

 Immediate Time Frame
 B. 1  Develop a tiered framework for assessing food web exposures. (ORD, OW, OSRTI, U.S.
      EPA Regions)
 B.2  Develop guidance and identify pilots for improving coordination between TMDL and
      remedial programs in waterways with contaminated sediments. (OW, OSWER, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
 B.3  Develop and advise on the use of a suite of most valid contaminant fate and transport
      models that allow prediction of exposures in the future. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA
      Regions)
 B.4  Develop a consistent approach to applying sediment stability data in transport modeling.
      (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)

-------
Page 86	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
 C. Human Health Toxicity and Risk Characterization

 Immediate Time Frame
 C. 1   Develop guidance for characterizing human health risks on a PCB congener basis. (ORD,
       OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 C.2   Develop sediment guidelines for bioaccumulative contaminants that are protective of
       human health via the fish ingestion pathway. (ORD, OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)

 Longer Time Frame
 C.3   Refine methods for estimating dermal exposures and risk. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA
       Regions)
 C.4   Evaluate the toxicity and reproductive effects of newly recognized contaminants, such as
       alkylphenol ethoxylates (APEs) and other endocrine disrupters and their metabolites on
       human health. (ORD, OPPT)

 D. Ecological Effects and Risk Assessment

 Immediate Time Frame
 D. 1   Develop sediment guidelines to protect wildlife from food chain effects. (ORD, OSRTI,
       OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.3   Develop guidance on how to interpret ecological sediment toxicity studies (lab or in situ
       caged studies) and how to interpret the significance of the results in relation to site
       populations and communities.  (OW, ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.4   Acquire data and develop criteria to use in balancing the long-term benefits from remedial
       dredging vs. the shorter term adverse effects on ecological receptors and their habitats.
       (ORD, OSRTI,  U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.6   Continue developing and refining both chronic and sub-chronic sediment toxicity testing
       methods. (ORD, OW,  U.S. EPA Regions)
 D.7   Develop whole  sediment toxicity identification evaluation procedures for a wide range of
       chemicals. (ORD, OW)

 Longer Time Frame
 D.2   Develop additional tools for characterizing ecological risks. (ORD, U.S. EPA Regions,
       OPPTS,  OW)
 D.5   Conduct field and laboratory studies to further validate and improve chemical-specific
       sediment quality guidelines. (OW, ORD)

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 87
E. Sediment Remediation

Immediate Time Frame
E. 1   Collect the necessary data and develop guidance for determining the conditions under
      which natural recovery can be considered a suitable remedial option.  Such guidance
      would include: measurement protocols to assess the relative contribution of the various
      mechanisms for chemical releases from bed sediments (e.g., advection, bioturbation,
      diffusion, and resuspension), including mass transport of contaminants by large storm
      events; approaches to assess the vertical extent of the bioavailable zone in different
      environmental settings; methodologies to quantify the uncertainties associated with
      natural recovery; and development of accepted measuring protocols to determine in situ
      chemical fluxes from sediments. (ORD, OSRTI,  U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)
E.2   Develop performance evaluations of various cap designs and cap placement methods and
      conduct cap placement and post-cap monitoring to document performance. Continue to
      monitor ongoing capping projects to monitor performance (e.g., Boston Harbor, Eagle
      Harbor, Grasse River). (ORD, U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)
E.4   Using the data provided in recommendation E. 1, develop a white paper evaluating the
      short-term and long-term impacts from dredging relative to natural processes and human
      activities (e.g., resuspension from storm events, boat scour, wave action, and anchor
      drag). (OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)

Longer Time Frame
E.3   Encourage and promote the development and demonstration ofin-situ technologies.
      (ORD, GLNPO)
E. 5   Support the demonstration of cost-effective ex-situ treatment technologies and
      identification of potential beneficial uses of treatment products. (ORD, GLNPO, U.S.
      EPA Regions)

F. Baseline, Remediation, and Post-remediation Monitoring

Immediate Time Frame
F. 1   Develop monitoring guidance fact sheets for baseline, remediation, and post-remediation
      monitoring, and monitoring during remedy implementation. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA
      Regions, OW)
F.2   Conduct training and hold workshops for project managers regarding monitoring of
      contaminated sediment sites. (OSRTI, ORD,  U.S. EPA Regions)

-------
Page 88	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
 G. Risk Communication and Community Involvement

 Immediate Time Frame
 G. 1  Establish a research program on risk communication and community involvement focusing
      on developing better methods, models, and tools. (ORD, OSRTI, U.S. EPA Regions)

 H. Information Management and Exchange Activities

 Immediate Time Frame
 H. 1  Establish regional sediment data management systems which can link the regions and
      program offices with each  other and with the National Sediment Inventory. (U.S. EPA
      Regions, OW, OSWER, GLNPO)
 H.3  Develop national and regional contaminated sediment sites web sites for sharing
      information. (U.S. EPA Regions, OW, OSWER, GLNPO)
 H.4  Re-establish and expand the Office of Water-sponsored  Sediment Network by including
      more regional representation. (OSRTI, OW, U.S. EPA Regions)
 H.5  Promote communication and coordination of science and research among Federal
      agencies. (ORD, OSWER, OW, U.S. EPA Regions, NOAA, U.S. Navy, U.S. ACE,
      USGS, U.S. FWS)
 H.6  Promote the exchange of scientific information via scientific fora (i.e., workshops,
      journals, and meetings). (CSMC, OW, OSWER, U.S. EPA Regions, GLNPO)

 Longer Time Frame
 H.2  Standardize the sediment site data collection/reporting format. Establish minimum
      protocols for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) using the Agency's Quality
      System for Environmental  Data and Technology. (OEI,  OW OSWER, U.S. EPA
      Regions)

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 89

                                  REFERENCES

Abramowicz, D.A. and D.R. Olsen.  1995.  Accelerated Biodegradation ofPCBs.  CHEMTECH
     24:36-41.

Ankley GT, Di Toro DM, Hansen DJ, Berry WJ. 1996. Technical Basis and Proposal for Deriving
     Sediment Quality Criteria for Metals. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15:2053-2055.

Ashford, N.A. andK.M. Rest.  1999. Public Participation in Contaminated Communities. Rep. No.
     U60/CCU/100929-02.  Prepared by the Center for Technology,  Policy, and Industrial
     Development, Massachusetts  Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.  Agency for Toxic
     Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, GA.

Barrick R, Becker S, Pastorok R, Brown L, Beller H. 1988. Sediment Quality Values Refinement:
     1988 Update  and Evaluation of Puget Sound AET.  Bellevue WA, USA.: Prepared by PTI
     Environmental Services for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Bedard, D.L. and RJ. May.  1996.   Characterization of the PCBs in Sediments of Woods Pond:
     Evidence for Microbial Dechlorination of Arodors 1260 In Situ.  Environmental Science
     Technology 30:237-245.

Blake, G.R. and K.H. Hartge.  1986.  Methods of Soil Analysis. American Society of Agronomy, Inc.
     and Soil  Science  Society of America, Madison, WI.

Brown, J.F. Jr., R.E. Wagner,  H. Feng, D.L. Bedard, MJ. Brennan, J.C. Carnaham, and RJ. May.
     1987.  Environmental Dechlorination of PCBs.  Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
     6:579-593.

Burkhard, L.P.  2003.  Factors Influencing the Design of BAF and BSAF Field Studies.
     Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 22:351-360.

Burkhard, L.P., D.D.  Endicott,  P.M.  Cook, K.G. Sappington,  and E.L.  Winchester.   2003.
     Evaluation of TwoMethodsfor Prediction ofBioaccumulation Factors. Environmental Science
     and Technology 37:4626-4634.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.  1995. Protocol for the Derivation of Canadian
     Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life.  Prepared by the CCME Task
     Group on Water Quality Guidelines, Ottawa, ON.

CDM. 1986. Weiss Associates Electrochemical GeoOxidation Pilot Scale Study Work Plan: Draft
     Report.  Prepared by Camp, Dresser, & McKee for Alcoa,  Inc.

Cerniglia, C.E. 1992.  Biodegradation of PAHs.  Biodegradation 3:351-368.

-------
Page 90	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Chapman, P.M. 1989. Current Approaches to Developing Sediment Quality Criteria. Environmental
     Toxicology and Chemistry 8:589-599.

Chapman, P.M., E.A. Power, and G.A. Burton, Jr.  1982. Integrative Assessments in Aquatic
     Ecosystems, pp. 313-340. In:  Sediment Toxicity Assessment. G.A. Burton, Jr. (ed).  Lewis
     Publishers, Chelsea, MI.

Chapman, P.M. 1986. Sediment Quality Criteria from the Sediment Quality Triad: An Example.
     Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 5: 957-64.

Cubbage J, Batts D, Briedenbach S. 1997. Creation and Analysis of Freshwater Sediment Quality
     Values in Washington State. OlympiaWA, USA: Environmental Investigations and Laboratory
     Services Program, Washington Department of Ecology.

Day, P.R. 1965. Particle Fractionation and Particle-Size Analysis, pp. 562-566.  In: Hydrometer
     method of Particle Size Analysis 9.  American Society of Agronomy, Madison,  WI.

Di Toro DM, Mahony JD, Hansen DJ, Scott KJ, Carlson AR,  Ankley GT. 199la.  Acid  Volatile
     Sulfide Predicts the Acute toxicity of Cadmium and Nickel in Sediments. Environmental Science
     Technology 26:96-101.

Di Toro  DM, Zarba CS, Hansen DJ, Berry WJ, Swartz RC, Cowan  CE,  Pavlou SP, Allen HE,
     Thomas NA, PaquinPR. 1991b. Technical Basis for Establishing Sediment Quality Criteria
     for Non-ionic Organic Chemicals Using Equilibrium Partitioning. Environmental Toxicology
     and Chemistry 10:1541-1583.

Di Toro DM, McGrath JA. 2000. Technical Basis for Narcotic Chemicals and Poly cyclic Aromatic
     Hydrocarbon Criteria. II: Mixtures and sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
     19:1971-1982.

Duncan,  G.A., and  G.G. Lattaie.    1979.  Size Analysis Procedures  Used in Sedimentology
     Laboratory, NWPJ Manual.  National Water Research Institute, Canada Centre for Inland
     Waters, Canada.

Field, L.J., D. M. Macdonald, S. B. Norton, C.G. Severn, and C.G. Ingersoll.  1999. Evaluating
     Sediment Chemistry and Toxicity Data using Logistic Regression Modeling. Environmental
     Toxicology and Chemistry 18(6): 1311-1322.

Field LJ, MacDonald DD, Norton SB, Ingersoll CG, Severn CG, Smorong D, Lindskoog R. 2002.
     Predicting Amphipod Toxicity from Sediment Chemistry Uusing Logistic Regression Models.
     Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:1993-2005.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 91

Fiorino, DJ.   1990.   Citizen participation and environmental risk - a survey of institutional
     mechanisms.  Science, Technology, and Human Values 15(2):226-243.

Folk, R.L. 1980. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks. Hemphill Publishing Co., Austin, TX.

Folk, E.  1991.  Public Participation in the Superfund Cleanup Process.  Ecology Law Quarterly
     18(1):173-221.

Ginn TC, Pastorok RA. 1992. Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sediments in Puget
     Sound. In: Burton Jr GA, editor. Sediment Toxicity Assessment. Boca Raton FL, US A: Lewis.
     p 371-397.

GLNPO.  2000. Realizing Remediation II:  An Updated Summary of Contaminated Sediment
     Remediation Activities at Great Lakes Areas of Concern.  U.S.  Environmental Protection
     Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.

Guy, Harold P.  1969.  "Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the U.S.G.S." p.58. In:
     Laboratory Theory and Methods for Sediment Analysis; Book 5.  U.S. Geological Survey,
     Arlington, VA.

Hayes,  D.F.  1989.   Guide to  selecting  a dredge for minimizing resuspension  of sediment,
     environmental effects of dredging.   Technical Note EEDP-09-1.  U.S. Army Corps of
     Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Hoss, S. M., Haitzer, W. Traunspurger, and C.E.W. Steinberg.  1999.  Growth and Fertility of
     Caenorhabditis elegans (Nematoda) in Unpolluted Freshwater  Sediments:  Response to
     Particle Size Distribution and Organic Content.  Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
     18(12):2921-2925.

Ingersoll, C.G., P.S. Haverland,  E.L. Brunson, TJ. Canfield, FJ. Dwyer, C.E. Henke, and N.E.
     Kemble.  1996.  Calculation and Evaluation of Sediment Effect Concentrations.  Journal of
     Great Lakes Research 22:602-623.

Jones,  K.W., Feng, H., Stern, E.A., Lodge,  J., and N.L. Clesceri.  2001.  Dredged Material
     Decontamination Demonstration for the Port of New York/New Jersey. Journal of Hazardous
     Materials 85:127-143.

Lee, H. II, B.L.  Boese, J. Pelletier,  M. Winsor, D.T. Sprecht, and R.C. Randall.  1989.  Guidance
     Manual Bedded Sediment Bioaccumulation Tests. EPA-600/X-89/302. ERL,  Narragansett,
     RI.

-------
Page 92	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Long ER, MacDonald DD, Smith SL, Calder FD. 1995.  Incidence of Adverse Biological Effects
     within Ranges of Chemical Concentrations in Marine andEstuarine Sediments. Environmental
     Management 19:81-97.

Long, E.R.  1992. Ranges in Chemical Concentrations in Sediments Associated with Adverse
     Biological Effect. Marine Pollution Bulletin 24(l):38-45.

Long, E.R., and L.G. Morgan.  1991.  The Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Sorbed
     Contaminants Tested in the National Status and Trends Program.  NOAA Technical
     Memorandum OMA 52. National Oceanic  and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA.

MacDonald, D.D.  1994. Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality of Florida 1991 Coastal
     Waters. Volume 1 - Development and Evaluation of Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines.
     Report. Prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, FL.

MacDonald DD, Carr RS, Calder FD, Long ER, Ingersoll CG. 1996. Development and Evaluation
     of Sediment Quality Guidelines for Florida Coastal Waters. Ecotoxicology 5:253-278.

McDonald, D.D.,  Ingersoll, C.G., and  Berger, T.A.  2000a.  Development and Evaluation of
     Consensus-Based Sediment Quality Guidelines for Freshwater Ecosystems.   Archives of
     Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:20-31.

MacDonald DD, DiPinto LM, Field J, Ingersoll CG, Long ER, Swartz RC.  2000b. Development and
     Evaluation of Consensus-based Sediment Effect Concentrations for Polychlorinatedbiphenyls
     (PCBs). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry  19:1403-1413.

Mudroch, A., and S.D. MacKnight.  1994. CRC Handbook of Techniques for Aquatic Sediment
     Sampling.  Second Edition.  CRD Press, Boca Raton, FL.

National Research Council.  1997. Contaminated Sediments in  Ports and Waterways:  Cleanup
     Strategies and Technologies. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

National Research Council. 2001 a. A Risk Management Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments.
     National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

National Research Council.  2001b.   Understanding Risk, Informing Decisions in a Democratic
     Society. P.C. and H.V. Stineberg (eds). National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

New York State  Department of Environmental Conservation.  1998.  Technical Guidance for
     Screening Contaminated Sediments. Albany NY, USA: Division of Fish and Wildlife, Division
     of Marine Resources. 38 p.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 93

Parametrix. 1999. St. Paul Waterway Area Remedial Action and Habitat Restoration Project: 1998
     Monitoring Report. Unpublished report to Simpson-Tacoma Kraft Co., Tacoma, WA, and
     Champion International, Stanford, CT, for the Washington State Department of Ecology and
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.

Patrick, W.H., Jr.  1958.  "Modification of Method Particle Size Analyses."  In: Proceedings of the
     Soil Science Society of America 4:366-367.

Peck, J., Hulsey, B., and Savagian, A. 1994.  Clean Lakes, Clean Jobs A Case for Cleaning Up
     Contaminated Sediments. Sierra Club Great Lakes Ecoregion Program, Madison, WI.

Persaud D, Jaagumagi R, Hayton A. 1993. Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Aquatic
     Sediment Quality in Ontario. Toronto ON, Canada: Water Resources Branch, Ontario Ministry
     of the Environment. 27 p.

Plumb, R.H.  1981. Procedure for handling and chemical analysis of sediment and water samples.
     Tech. Rep. EPA/CE-81-1. Prepared by Great Lakes Laboratory, State University College at
     Buffalo, Buffalo, NY for Environmental Protection Agency and U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
     Technical Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material.  Published by U.S. Army
     Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Puget  Sound Estuary Program.    1986.   Recommended Guidelines for Measuring  Selected
     Environmental Variables in Puget Sound. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10,
     Office of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA, and Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Olympia, WA.

Rukavina, N.A., and G.A. Duncan. 1970.  "F.A.S.T. - Fast Analysis of Sediment Texture."  pp. 274-
     281. In: Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Great Lakes Research.

Sanford, R.B., and D.J.P. Swift.  1971.  Comparisons  of Sieving and Settling Techniques for Size
     Analysis, Using a Benthos Rapid Sediment Analyzer.  Sedimentology 17:257-264.

Seech,  A., B. OTSTeil, andL.A. Comacchio.  1993.  "Bioremediation of Sediments Contaminated with
     PAHs." In: Proceedings of the Workshop on the Removal and Treatment of Contaminated
     Sediments.  Environment Canada's  Great Lakes Cleanup  Fund.   Wastewater Technology
     Center, Burlington, Ontario.

SEG.  1999.  Trenton  Channel Marketability Study, Detroit, Michigan.  MERA  #820012. Snell
     Environmental Group, Lansing, MI.

Shuttleworth, K.L. and C.E.  Cerniglia.  1995. Environmental Aspects of PAH Biodegradation.
     Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 54:291-302.

-------
Page 94	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

Singer, J.K., J.B. Anderson, M.T. Ledbetter, IN. McCave, K.P.N. Jones, and R. Wright. 1988. An
     Assessment of Analytical Techniques for the Size Analysis of Fine-Grained Sediments. Journal
     of Sedimentary Petrology 58:534-543.

Smith, S.L., D.D. MacDonald, K.A. Kennleyside, G.G. Ingersoll, and J. Field.  1996. A Preliminary
     Evaluation of Sediment Quality Assessment Values for Freshwater Ecosystems.  Journal of
     Great Lakes Research 22:624-638.

Steuer, Jeffrey J.   2000.  A Mass-Balance Approach for Assessing PCB Movement During
     Remediation of a PCB-Contaminated Deposit on the Fox River, Wisconsin. USGS Report 00-
     4245. U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, WI.

Stern,  E.A.,  K.R.Donato, N.L.  Clesceri, and K.W. Jones.  1998.   "Integrated  Sediment
     Decontamination for the New York/New Jersey Harbor."  pp.  71-81.  In: Proceedings,
     National  Conference   on Management and Treatment  of Contaminated Sediments.
     EPA/625/R-98/001.

Sumeri, A.  1984.  "Capped in-water disposal of contaminated dredged material." pp. 644-653. In:
     Dredging '84: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference  on Dredging and Material
     Disposal. R.L. Montgomery and J.W. Leach (eds). American Society of Civil Engineers, New
     York.

Swartz RC.  1999. Consensus Sediment Quality Guidelines for PAH Mixtures. Environmental
     Toxicology and Chemistry 18:780-787.

Truitt, C.L. 1986. EngineeringConsiderationsforCapping Subaqueous Dredged MaterialDeposits
     - Design Concepts and Placement Techniques. Environmental Effects of Dredging. EEDP-01 -
     4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

U.S. EPA. 1979. Chemistry Laboratory Manual for Bottom Sediments and Elutriate Testing. EPA-
     905-4-79-014 (NTIS PB 294596). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago,
     IL.

U. S. EPA. 1981. Interim Methods for the Sampling and Analysis of Priority Pollutants in Sediment
     andFish Tissue. EPA-600/4-81-055.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
     Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.

U.S. EPA.  1988.  Guidelines for Neurotoxicity Risk Assessment.  EPA/630/R-95/001F.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington , D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1989.  Interim Final. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Vol. 1: Human Health
     Evaluation Manual (Part A). EPA/540/1-89/002.  U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,
     Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington D.C.

-------
                       Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 95
U.S. EPA. 1991a. Evaluation of dredged material proposed for ocean disposal - testing manual.
     EPA-503-8-91-001.   U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency and  U.S.  Army  Corps of
     Engineers, Washington, D.C.

U. S. EPA. 199 Ib. Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples. EPA-600-
     4-91-010.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems
     Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.

U.S. EPA. 1992a. Proceedings  of EPA's contaminated sediment management forums.  EPA 823.
     Chicago, IL, 21-22 April, and Washington, D.C., 27-28 May and 16 June.

U.S. EPA.  1992b.  Sediment Classification Methods Compendium.  EPA-823-R-92-006.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 1994. ARCS Program - Remediation Guidance Document. EPA-905-R-94-003. U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.

U.S. EPA. 1995a. Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories,
     VolumelV: Risk Communication. EPA/823/R-95/001 U.S. Environmental Protect on Agency,
     Office of Water, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 1995b. QA/QC Guidance for Sampling and Analysis of Sediments, Water, and Tissues
     for Dredged Material Evaluations. Phase I - Chemical Evaluations. EPA-823 -B-95 -001.
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.   1996a.   ARCS Program - Estimating Contaminant Losses from Components of
     Remediation  Alternatives for  Contaminated Sediments.    EPA-905-R96-001.    U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.

U.S. EPA. 1996b.  Ecotox Thresholds:  Eco Update.  EPA-540-F-95-038. U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office  of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 1996c. Guidelinesfor Reproductive Toxicity Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-96/009. U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 1996d. Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document. EPA/540/R95/128.
     U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
     Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 1996e. Calculation and Evaluation of Sediment Effect Concentrations for the Amphipod
     HyalellaAzteca and the Midge ChironomusRiparius. EPA-905/R-96/008. U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Chicago, IL.

-------
Page 96	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
U.S. EPA.  1997'a.  Incidence and Severity of Sediment Contamination in Surface Waters of the
      UnitedStates. EPA-823-R-96-006. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1997b.  EPA's Strategic Plan.  EPA/190-R-97-002.  U.S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1997c.  Exposure Factors Handbook, Vol. 1-3. EPA/600/P-25/002Ba,  EPA/600/P-
      25/002Bb, EPA/600/P-25/002Bc. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
      and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington,  D.C.

U. S. EPA.  1998a. A Multimedia Strategy for Priority Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT)
      Pollutants. Prepared by: U.S. EPA Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic Pollutants (PBT)
      Plenary Group and U.S. EPA Office Directors Multimedia and Pollution Prevention Forum.
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1998b.  EPA's Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy.  EPA-823-R-98-001.
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1998c. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Discharge in Waters of the U.S.
      — Testing Manual. EPA-823-B-98-004. U.S. Environmental Protect! on Agency, Washington,
      D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1998d. Guidance for In Situ Subaqueous Capping of Contaminated Sediments.  EPA-
      905-B96-004.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  1999a.  EPA Action Plan for Beaches and Recreational Waters.  EPA/600/R-98/079.
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development and Office of
      Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.   1999b.   Lessons Learned about Superfund  Community  Involvement, Features
      Partnerships at Waste Inc, Superfund Site. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5,
      Michigan City, IN.

U.S. EPA.  1999c. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Volume 1-Human Health Evaluation
     Manual Supplement to Part A: Community Involvement in Superfund Risk Assessments. EPA
      -540-R-98-042. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.

U.S.  EPA.   1999d.  Superfund Risk Assessment  and How  You Can Help (Videotape).
      EPA-540-V-99-002 OSWER-9285.7-29A. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
      Washington, D.C.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 97

U.S. EPA. 2000a. Draft Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESGs) for the Protection
      ofBenthic Organisms: Metal Mixtures (Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Nickel, Silver, and Zinc).
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2000b. Draft Technical Basis for the Guidelines (ESGs) for the Protection ofBenthic
      Organisms:  Nonionic Organics.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
      Washington, D.C.

U. S. EPA. 2000c.  Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use in Fish Advisories.
      ThirdEdition. EPA-823-B-00-007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.   2000d.   Methods for Measuring the Toxicity  and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-
      Associated Contaminants With Freshwater Invertebrates. Second Edition. EPA/600-R-99-
      064. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.   2000e.   Strategic Framework for EPA Science.   Office of Science Policy.  U.S.
      Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2000f  Supplementary Guidance for Conducting Health Risk Assessment of Chemical
      Mixtures. EPA/630/R-00/002.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment
      Forum, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 200 la.  Methods for Assessing the Chronic Toxicity of Marine andEstuarine Sediment-
      Associated Contaminants with the AmphipodLeptocheirusplumulosus.  First Edition.  EPA-
      823-F-01-008.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2001b. Methods for Collection, Storage, and Manipulation of Sediments for Chemical
      and Toxicological Analysis. In press. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofWater,
      Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2001c. PBT National Action Plan for Mercury.  Final Draft. Prepared by: U.S. EPA
      Mercury Task Force, Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic Pollutants (PBT) Mercury Work
      Group. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2002a.  A Review of the Reference Dose and Reference Concentration Processes.
      EPA/630/P-02/002F.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Risk  Assessment Forum,
      Washington, D.C.

U. S. EPA. 2002b. Child-Specific Exposure Factors Handbook (Interim Report). EPA-600-P-00-
      002B.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National
      Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C.

-------
Page 98	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

U.S. EPA.  2002c.  Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund
     Sites. OSWER 9355.4-24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and
     Emergency Response,  Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2002d. A Framework for Assessing and Reporting on Ecological Condition: An SAB
     Report. EPA-SAB-EPEC-02-009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Science
     Advisory Board, Washington, D.C., June 2002.

U.S. EPA. 2003a. Human Health and Toxicity Values in Superfund Risk Assessments. OSWER
     Directive 9285.7-53. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Superfund Remediation
     and Technology Innovation, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  2003b.  Guidelines for Carcinogenic Risk Assessment.  EPA/630/P-03/001A.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2003c.  U.S. EPA's Draft 2003 Strategic Plan. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Office of Chief Financial Officer, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA.  2003d.  Ecological Research Multi-Year Plan.  Final Version.  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C., May 29, 2003.

U.S. EPA.   2003e.   Water Quality Research Program Multi-Year Plan.   U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA. 2003 f Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks
     (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Endrin.  U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. EPA-600-R-02-009.

U.S. EPA. 2003g. Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks
     (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Dieldrin. U.S. Environmental Protection
     Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. EPA-600-R-02-010.

U. S. EPA. 2003h. Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks
     (ESBs) for the  Protection of Benthic  Organisms: PAH Mixtures.   U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. EPA-600-R-02-
     013.

U.S. EPA.  2004a.  Risk Assessment Guidance for  Superfund (RAGS), Volume I: Human Health
     Evaluation Manual  (Part E, Supplemental Guidance for Dermal Risk  Assessment).
     EPA/540/R/99/005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Superfund Remediation
     and Technology Innovation, Washington D.C.

-------
	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page 99

U. S. EPA. 2004b. The Incidence and Severity of Sediment Contamination in Surface Waters of the
      United States.  Second Edition. EPA-823-R-04-007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      Washington, D.C.

U.S. EPA/U.S. ACE.  1992.  Evaluating Environmental Effects of Dredged Material Management
      Alternatives - A Technical Framework. EPA-842-B-92-008. U.S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, Washington, D.C.

U. S. EPA. In prep. Appendix to the Capping Guidance Document: Impacts ofAdvective Transport
      of Contaminants through In Situ Caps (working title) .U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      Great Lakes National Program Office and Region 5.

U.S. GAO. 2000. Report to Congressional Requesters:  Superfund Information Regarding EPA's
      Decision Process on the Hudson River Superfund Site. GAO/RCED-00-193.  U.S. General
      Accounting Office, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Science Advisory Board.  1992. An SAB Report: Review of Sediment Criteria Development
      Methodology for Non-ionic Organic Contaminants. EPA-SAB-EPEC-93-002.  Prepared by
      the  Sediment  Quality Criteria  Subcommittee of the Ecological  Processes  and  Effects
      Committee. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington,
      D.C.

U.S. Science  Advisory Board.  1996.  An SAB Report:  Review of the Agency's Approach for
      Developing Sediment Criteria for Five Metals.  EPA-SAB-EPEC-95-020. Prepared by the
      Sediment Quality Criteria Subcommittee of the Ecological Processes and Effects Committee.
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board. Washington, D.C.

Vecci, M., T.B.  Reynoldson, A. Pasteris, and G.  Bonomi.  1999.  Toxicity of Copper-Spiked
      Sediments  to  Tubifex tubifex  (Oligochaeta, Tubificidae):   Comparison  of the  28-day
      Reproductive Bioassay With an Early Life Stage Bioassay. Environmental Toxicology and
      Chemistry  18(6): 1144-1148.

Von Stackelberg K, Menzie  CA. 2002. A Cautionary Note on the Use of Species Presence and
      Absence Data in Deriving Sediment Criteria. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:466-
      472.

Zeman, A.J. and T.S. Patterson. 1997.  "Results of in situ capping demonstration project in Hamilton
      Harbour, Lake Ontario."  In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering
      Geology and the Environment. Athens, Greece, 23-27 June.

-------

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	Page A-l
          APPENDIX A

    CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS
   SCIENCE ACTIVITIES DATABASE

-------
Page A-2	Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities	

This Appendix provides a summary of recent and current projects (as of June 2000) on various
scientific topics of concern in the assessment and management of contaminated sediments.  The
database is divided into maj or science areas. Program implementation proj ects include remediation,
monitoring, pilot  studies, and initiatives.  Human health and ecological effects and  assessment
projects include productive cross-Agency efforts on equilibrium partitioning of contaminants,
ecotoxicological method development, risk assessments, and characterization studies. Exposure and
modeling tasks include  work on  topics  such as Total Maximum Daily Loads  (TMDLs),
bioavailability, and modeling.  Remediation and  risk management  projects include guidance
development, technology development and evaluation, site specific efforts, field demonstration of
technologies, and  information management systems.

More recently, the Agency has prepared an online Science Inventory, a searchable, Agency-wide
catalog of more than 4,000 science activities such as research, technical assistance and assessments,
along with more than 750 peer-reviewed products (http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/).  The database contains
more than 19,000  records in the archives including project descriptions, products produced, types
of peer review, links to related work and contacts for additional information.  Users can conduct
keyword searches  or search within nine cross-cutting science topics, one of which is 'Contaminated
Sediments'.

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                          Page A-3
      Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Program
Implementation

Activities related
to implementing
regulatory and
remediation
programs.  These
activities are
applications of
existing methods
and technologies.
OW/OWOW/OCPD
Dredged Material Bioaccumulation Evaluation
Guidance. The Army Corps of Engineers and U.S.
EPA are working jointly to develop guidance for
evaluating dredged material bioaccumulation
potential.
Dredged Material
Programmatic Guidance

GPRA 2.2
OW/OWOW/OCPD
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Monitoring
Program. Program calls for the continued monitoring of
the nation's 85 dredged material disposal sites (Regional
responsibility).
Ongoing monitoring

GPRA 2.2
OW/OST/SASD
Implementation Framework for the Use of
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines.
Document provides guidance for using ESGs
appropriately and describes U.S. EPA's
recommendations in using ESGs in conjunction with
other assessment tools (bioassays and benthic community
assessments).
Draft document

GPRA 2.2
                  OW/OWOW/OCPD
                     Coastal monitoring by U.S. EPA OSV Peter W.
                     Anderson. East and Gulf coastal monitoring of dredged
                     material disposal sites, ocean discharges and sensitive
                     areas focusing on water quality, sediment contamination
                     and impacts on living resources such as coral reef
                     ecosystems.
                                                   Ongoing monitoring

                                                   GPRA 2.2
David Redford
202-566-1288
Sharon Lin
202-260-5129
Richard Healy
202-260-7812
                            Craig Vogt
                            202-260-5455

-------
Page A-4
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Program
Implementation
(continued)
Organization
Region 5/Water/
GLNPO
Region 5: TSCA
Region 5
Region 6
Region 9
Region 10
Region 10
Description
Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Program. RAP Liaisons
develop/implement Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) for all
Areas of Concern (AOCs) in the Great Lakes basin.
RAPs address impairments to any one of 14 beneficial
uses (e.g., restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption,
dredging activities).
TSCA pilot. To provide WDNR the authority to approve
disposal of TSCA regulated PCB -contaminated sediment
from in-state clean up projects at state-permitted solid
waste landfills.
Shorelands Initiative. Proposed FY02 Cross-Program,
Cross-Media Initiative: a cross-program multi-media
approach to address the impacts of contaminated
sediments in rivers, waterways, lakes, streams and
harbors by providing economic incentives and providing
opportunities for liability and regulatory relief.
Alcoa/Lavaca Bay Remediation. This site covers
approximately 60 square miles, and has sediments
contaminated with mercury. This site is currently in the
RI/FS phase.
Regional Data Evaluation/Validation Approaches for
Superfund Data Guidance (R9QA/006.1).
Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative.
Tribal Leaders Environmental Summit.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
RAP Liaisons for each AOC
Ongoing
GPRA 2.2
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
GPRA 5.1



Contact
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Judy Beck
312-353-3849
Francine Norling
312-886-0271
Liz LaPlante
312-886-0399
John Connell
312-886-6832
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Gary Baumgarten
214-665-6749
Dawn Richmond
Michael Watson
Scott Sufficool

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                            Page A-5
      Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Program
Implementation
(continued)
NHEERL/AED
NHEERL/MED
                  OW/OST/SASD
                  OW/OST/SASD
                  OW/HECD
                  ORD/NHEERL
Development of toxicity identification evaluation
methods for porewaters and whole sediments.
Methods will help further develop toxicity identification
evaluation methods for porewaters and whole sediments
in fresh and salt water.
U.S. EPA report on whole
sediment TIE methodology,
expected FY 02, APMA 77,
FY01

GPRA 2.2
Kay Ho
401-782-3196
Dave Mount
218-529-5169
                     Field Validation Studies of long-term Sediment
                     Toxicity Tests with Hyalella azteca and Chironomus
                     tentans. This analysis is designed to evaluate the
                     response of H. azteca and C. tentans in laboratory studies
                     with the natural population of benthic organisms.	
                                                   Ongoing. Project is
                                                   scheduled to be completed by
                                                   the end ofFY 01.  GPRA #2

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Scott Ireland
                             202-260-6091
                     Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guideline (ESG)
                     evaluation. This project will evaluate the Leptocheirus
                     plumulosus chronic test responses to ESGs.
                                                   Work is ongoing. Project is
                                                   scheduled to be completed by
                                                   the end of FY 01.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Scott Ireland
                             202-260-6091
                     Completion of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment
                     Guideline Documents for Nonionic Organics:
                     Technical Basis, Site-Specific, Dieldrin, Endrin, and
                     Nonionics Compendium. Provide U.S. EPA's
                     recommended concentration of nonionic organic
                     chemicals that can be present in sediments with out
                     causing acute or chronic toxicity to benthic organisms,
                     the technical basis for the guidelines, and a site-specific
                     methodology.	
                                                   Draft documents completed

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Heidi Bell:
                             202-260-5464
                             Mary Reiley:
                             202-260-9456
                             Dave Mount:
                             218-529-5169

-------
Page A-6
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Program
Implementation
(continued)







Organization
OW/HECD
ORD/NHEERL
OW/HECD
ORD/NHEERL


OW/HECD
ORD/NHEERL


NHEERL/MED



Description
Completion of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment
Guideline Document for Metals Mixtures. Provides
U.S. EPA's recommended concentration of metal
mixtures (Cu, Cd, Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn) that can be present in
sediments without causing acute or chronic toxicity to
benthic organisms.
Draft Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines
Document for PAH Mixtures. Provides U.S. EPA's
recommended concentration of PAH mixtures that can be
present in sediments without causing acute or chronic
toxicity to benthic organisms.


Integrated Water Quality Criteria for Ambient
Waters. Establish criteria that evaluate multiple routes of
exposure and types of organisms.


Development of methods for testing short-term and
chronic toxicity of freshwater sediments. Methods
have been developed and tested, and a round-robin was
conducted.


Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
Draft document completed
GPRA 2.2
Draft document has been
prepared for peer review.
GPRA 2.2


Criteria documents and
models. No anticipated date
of delivery at this time.
Project is in scoping stage.
GPRA 2.2


Final document published
GPRA 2.2


Contact
Heidi Bell:
202-260-5464
Mary Reiley:
202-260-9456
Walter Berry:
401-782-3101
Heidi Bell:
202-260-5464
Mary Reiley:
202-260-9456
Dave Mount:
218-529-5169
Bob Ozretich:
541-867-4036
Mary Reiley:
202-260-9456
Walter Berry:
401-782-3101
Bob Spehar:
218-529-5123
Dave Mount:
218-529-5169
David Mount
218-529-5169
Theresa Norberg-
King
218-529-5163
Scott Ireland
202-260-6091

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                            Page A-7
     Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Program
Implementation
(continued)
NHEERL/AED
Development of alternate measures of benthic
infaunal condition. The usefulness of new approaches
for assessing benthic condition is being examined,
including CatScan and methods for examining the effects
of porewater ammonia.
Comparative estuarine method
to discern and quantify the
ecological effects of
cumulative, multiple
anthropogenic point sources
on benthic communities,
FYOO.
Sensitivity of NH3 porewater
and tube/tunnel structures in
soft bottom sediments and
macrofaunal community
composition to detect changes
in season, habitat and
estuarine system, FY01.

GPRA 2.2
Ken Perez
401-782-3052
Kay Ho
401-782-3196

-------
Page A-8
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Effects

 Activities related
 to determining the
 effects of
 sediment
 contaminants on
 human and
 ecological
 receptors. These
 activities advance
 the state-of-the-
 art by
 development and
 verification of
 methods, models,
 protocols, and
 technologies.
NHEERL/MED
NHEERL/MED
NHEERL/MED
                    NHEERL/AED
Horizontal and vertical heavy metal contamination in
Lake Michigan.  Lake-wide sampling and analysis of
mercury in surface sediments and sediment cores is being
done in coordination with the Lake Michigan Mass
Balance Project and the Great Lakes National Program
Office. Models are being developed to assess the effects
of mercury to fish.
Data report of mercury in
Lake Michigan and
mathematical modeling
relating sources to effects on
fish,FY03.

GPRA 2.2
Ron Rossman
734-692-7612
Modeling of bioaccumulation of organic chemicals.
Models are being developed to predict bioaccumulation
of PBTs, such as dioxins, PCBs and PAHs, in fish and
wildlife, in ecosystems with varying bioavailability of
contaminants from sediment and water as well as
differences in food web structures.
Improved models and tools,
including integrated
sediment/water quality
criteria, for assessing risks
associated with contaminated
sediments on the basis of
predicted residues in fish and
wildlife, FY05.

GPRA 2.2
Lawrence
Burkhard
218-529-5164
Philip Cook
218-529-5202
Importance of dietary metals uptake in effects of
metals-contaminated sediments. Experiments are
underway to assess the effects of dietary metals
originating from contaminated sediment on fish.
Published manuscripts, FY02.

GPRA 2.2
David Mount
218-529-5169
                     Field demographic study of amphipods. This project is
                     exploring the usefulness of a field indicator of benthic
                     condition using amphipod field demographics, and looks
                     at geographic differences in sensitivity to contaminants.
                                                    Published manuscripts, FYOO-
                                                    04.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Anne Kuhn
                             401-782-3199

-------
                                             Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                              Page A-9
      Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NHEERL/AED
                  NHEERL/GED
                  NCER/
                  STAR grants and
                  HSRCs
Examine correlations between measured chemistry,
acute toxicity, and benthic community data in field
databases.  The usefulness of measured chemistry data
to predict biological effects from large field databases
(e.g., EMAP) will be examined using three approaches
(equilibrium partitioning-derived sediment guidelines to
predict acute toxicity to amphipods from measured
chemistry data; measured chemistry data will be
compared to benthic community data; a population model
will be used to predict effects on the benthic community
using acute  toxicity data).	
Manuscripts, FY02-04.

GPRA 2.2
Anne Kuhn
401-782-3199
Walter Berry
401-782-3101
Marguarite
Pelletier
401-782-3131
                     Toxicity of contaminated sediments to aquatic plants
                     and periphyton .  Methods are being developed and
                     applied for toxicity assessment using estuarine aquatic
                     plants (primarily SAV) and periphyton.
                                                    Report on the use of
                                                    periphyton as indicators of
                                                    metal contaminants in
                                                    estuaries, APM 551, FYOO.
                                                    Predictive laboratory
                                                    phytotoxicity test methods on
                                                    contaminated sediments using
                                                    seagrasses, FY01.
                                                    Report on effects of
                                                    xenobiotics and nutrients on
                                                    aquatic vegetation, FY03.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Michael Lewis
                             850-934-9382
                     Environmentally-Mediated Endocrine Disruption in
                     Estuarine Crustaceans: A 3-Taxon Multi-Generational
                     Study of Sediment-Associated EDC Effects from the
                     Genetic to Population Levels	
                                                                                 G. Thomas
                                                                                 Chandler, Ph.D.

-------
Page A-10
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Site-specific Validation of a Chronic Toxicity Test with
the Amphipod Hyalella azteca : An Integrated Study of
Heavy Metal Contaminated Sediments in Peak Creek,
Virginia.
Phylogenetic Analysis of Microbial Communities in
Contaminated Nearshore Marine Sediments.
Foraminifera as Ecosystem Indicators: Phase 1. A
Marine Benthic Perturbation Index; Phase 2. Bioassay
Protocols.
Sediment Contaminant Effects on Genetic Diversity New
Approach using DNA Analyses of Meiobenthos.
Digestive Solubilization of Sediment-Sorbed
Contaminants A Comparison of In Vitro and In Vivo
Processes.
Transport of Fob/chlorinated Biphenyls from Adult
Oyster Crassostrea virginica to Embryos and Larvae and
Potential for Reproductive and Developmental
Impairments.
Uptake of Sediment- Associated Contaminants by the
Deposit-Feeding Amphipod Leptocheirus Plumulosus
(Shoemaker): Effects of Natural Sediment Qualities.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs







Contact
John Cairns, Jr.,
B.R.
Niederlehner,
Reese Voshell,
and Eric P. Smith
Russell P. Herwig
Pamela Hallock
Muller
Bruce C. Coull,
G. Thomas
Chandler and
Joseph M.
Quattro
Donald P.
Weston, Larry M.
Mayer, and
Deborah L. Penry
Fu-Lin E. Chu,
Aswani K.
Volety, and
Robert C. Hale
Christian Schlekat

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                            Page A-11
      Area
   Organization
                   Description
Product/Estimated Date
  GPRAAPGs/APMs
Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
                  NERL/EERD
                  OAQPS
                  OW
                  OAR
                  Regions
                  OW/HECD
                  ORD/NHEERL
Biochemical Indicator Patterns and their Linkages to
Adverse Effects on Benthic Invertebrate Patterns.
                     Development of Indicators as Measures of Ecosystem
                     Sustainability.  Indicator methods can be used to
                     measure PAH exposure, to determine exposure exceeding
                     natural background, and to evaluate changes in exposure
                     to petroleum and combustion by-product (PAH) waste in
                     dredged streams.	
                                                    Draft report on national
                                                    background and exposure
                                                    criteria for indicators of
                                                    exposure to PAHs - FY02.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                     Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Pilot Projects in
                     Florida and Wisconsin. The pilot projects are
                     evaluating techniques for (1) determining the amount of
                     mercury reductions needed to meet water quality
                     standards; (2) determining the relative contributions of
                     mercury from various sources; (3) the geographic extent
                     of sources contributing mercury; and (4) analyzing
                     Federal and State programs for reducing mercury
                     emissions.
                                                    Both projects should be
                                                    completed in early 2001.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                           Teresa Fan,
                           Richard Higashi
                           Susan Cormier
                           513-569-7995
                     Improvements in sediment bioavailability theory.
                     Investigate issues such as: non-equilibrium conditions,
                     aerobic sediments, seasonal fluxes, sediment ingestion.
                                                    Research reports that can be
                                                    incorporated into existing
                                                    ESGs to improve accuracy
                                                    and precision. No date.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                           Heidi Bell:
                           202-260-5464
                           Mary Reiley:
                           202-260-9456
                           Walter Berry:
                           401-782-3101
                           Dave Mount:
                           218-529-5169

-------
Page A-12
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Effects
 (continued)
NHEERL/MED
NHEERL/AED
                    NHEERL/MED
                    NHEERL/AED
Unavailability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in sediments. A series of studies are underway
to quantify the acute and sublethal toxic effects of PAHs
to benthic freshwater and marine species.  Specific
studies include (1) evaluation of the effects of ultraviolet
radiation on the toxicity of PAHs, (2) determination of
the contribution of highly insoluble PAHs to toxicity,
and (3) assessment of the effects of pyrogenic PAH
geochemistry on PAH bioavailability
Report on predicting metal
toxicity in sediments,
APM152, FY99

Peer-reviewed publications
and technical guidance to
support derivation of Agency
sediment guidelines.

GPRA 2.2
Dave Mount
218-529-5169
(freshwater)
Rob Burgess
401-782-3106
(marine)
                     Bioavailability of metals in sediments. A series of
                     studies are underway to quantify the acute and sublethal
                     toxic effects of metals to benthic freshwater and marine
                     species. Specific studies  include (1) analysis of the
                     toxicity of chromium when associated with anoxic
                     sediments, (2) evaluation of the effects of resuspension
                     on the fate and bioavailability of anoxic metal-
                     contaminated sediments, and (3) performance assessment
                     of in situ interstitial water sampling methods.
                                                    Report on predictively metal
                                                    toxicity in sediments, APM
                                                    152, FY99.

                                                    Peer-reviewed publications
                                                    and technical guidance to
                                                    support derivation of Agency
                                                    sediment guidelines.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Dave Mount
                             218-529-5169
                             (freshwater)
                             Walter Berry
                             401-782-3101
                             Rob Burgess
                             401-782-3106
                             (marine)

-------
                                             Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                            Page A-13
      Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NERL/ERD
Develop Computer Models for Science Integration
and Parameterization of Multimedia Models for
Watershed Scale Analysis and General Multimedia
Exposure Assessments. Elucidate and model the
underlying processes (physical, chemical, enzymatic,
biological) that describe the transport and fate of organic
pollutants and other stressors in environmental systems.
Configure SPARC (SPARC
Performs Automated
Reasoning in Chemistry) as a
prototype processes constants
generator of pollutant fate for
organic pollutants; and
incorporate  planned products
on mathematical techniques to
quantify coupled chemical
speciation processes, and
kinetic models describing
reductive transformations
processes (APM, 9/01).

Configure SPARC as a
prototype processes constants
generator of pollutant fate for
organic pollutants; and
implement completed
speciation models for
ionization and
tautomerization, and prototype
models for hydrate formation,
solution phase hydrolysis, and
abiotic reduction in sediment
suspensions (APM, 9/02).

GPRA 2.2
Samuel W.
Karickhoff
706-355-8321

-------
Page A-14
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Effects
 (continued)
NERL
                    NERL/EERD
                    NERL/EERD
Characterize the Sorption of Organic Pollutants in
Soils and Sediments for SPARC. Measure the
magnitude and kinetics of organic contaminant sorption
and transport in soils and sediments; apply and compare
the utility of bicontinuum and distributed parameter
models for describing contaminant release from soils and
sediments, and use the measured and estimated
sorption/desorption kinetic descriptors developed for
assessing long-term contaminant release from soils and
sediments.
Report on solute release
kinetics from contaminated
soils and sediments (APM,
9/02).

GPRA 2.2
Dermont
Bouchard
706-355-8333
                     Develop Stressor Signatures of Habitat Degradation
                     Among Metrics from Fish, Benthic
                     Macroinvertebrate, and Periphyton Assemblages.
                     Develop and evaluate biological indicators and prepare
                     OW-ORD Stressor Identification Evaluation Guidelines
                     that help to identify stressors and sources, including
                     sediments.
                                                    Method for developing
                                                    diagnostic signatures;
                                                    compendium of Regional
                                                    case-studies that describe how
                                                    causes of biological
                                                    impairment were determined,
                                                    FY01-FY02.

                                                    Compendium of case studies
                                                    illustrating the application of
                                                    SIEguidelines, A75, FY01.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Susan Cormier
                             513-569-7995
                     Real-Time Aquatic Biomonitoring Using Bivalves in
                     Two Watersheds.  The water quality of two watersheds
                     was monitored (Ohio and Texas). Both biological and
                     physical/chemical metrics were recorded. The gape
                     behavior of the bivalve Corbicula fluminea was used as a
                     monitor of overall water quality.	
                                                    GPRA 2.:
                             Jim Lazorchak
                             513-569-7076

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                            Page A-15
      Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NERL/ERD
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule (HWIR).  This
multimedia, multi-receptor, multi-stressor, open
architectural modeling system is designed for
establishing safe exit levels for some waste streams that
may now require disposal in Subtitle C facilities.
Specific to sediments in the HWIR application, ExamsIO
presently simulates suspended solids as a conservative
substance.  Plans are to add simple routines to ExamsIO
to handle net deposition, bed load in streams, and burial
in ponds/lakes/wetlands^ays for more realistic estimates
of TSS which would be passed to Exams.
HWIR Human Health and
Ecosystems Site (Generic)
Exposure - Risk Assessment
Screening Model Peer
Reviewed and Applied to
HWIR Listed Chemical Exit
Levels - APM 187, 1999.

Update the HWIR99
Modeling Methodology for
Delisting Hazardous Wastes,
in response to public
comments on 1999 Federal
Register Notice, and
incorporating enhanced
uncertainty analysis
techniques into the revised
methodology - APM BBS,
FY01.

Critical Review of
Documented Aquatic and
Terrestrial Plant Phyto
Processes and Data Complete
with Formulation of Kinetic
Algorithms for Organic and
Inorganic Pollutants of
Concern-FY01.

GPRA 5.2
Dave Brown
706-355-8300
Gerry Laniak
706-355-8316
Steve
McCutcheon
706-355-8235

-------
Page A-16
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Effects
 (continued)
NERL/ESD
                   NERL/ESD
                   NERL/HEASD
                   Region I
SITE Demonstration of Sediment Sampling
Technologies. Tested a split core sampler for submerged
sediments and a Russian peat borer.
Demonstration Plan for
Sediment Sampling -1999
Verification Reports for
Sediment Sampling - 2000.

GPRA5.1
Steve Billets
702-798-2232
Brian
Schumacher
702-798-2242
                     Mercury Cycling in the New England Estuaries: A
                     Collaborative Study in Great Bay, NH (RARE
                     Project). Research will examine cycling, bioavailability,
                     and potential enhanced methylation of mercury in salt
                     marshes in the Great Bay Estuary, NH.  Mercury inputs
                     from air and precipitation will be collected to calculate
                     annual and seasonal deposition rates of Hg.
                                                   Speciation of Hg Uptake by
                                                   Spartina Alterniflora - 2000.
                                                   Methylation and Hg
                                                   Production in a Spartina
                                                   Alterniflora Salt Marsh -
                                                   2000.
                                                   Influx of Hg to the Great Bay
                                                   Estuary via Fog - 2000.
                                                   Volatile Hg Fluctuation in the
                                                   Great Bay Estuary - 2000.
                                                   Mercury Cycling in the Great
                                                   Bay Estuary ; U.S. EPA
                                                   Report-2001.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                                                   GPRA 2.3
                            Brian
                            Schumacher
                            702-798-2242
                            Jeanette van
                            Emon
                            702-798-2154

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                           Page A-17
     Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NERL/ESD
Environmental Analytical Chemistry. This work is to
provide state-of-the-science sampling, analysis,
separation, and detection methods to allow rapid,
accurate field and laboratory analyses of various media
(e.g., surface or ground water, fish, sediments, soil).
Vacuum Distillation -
hardware evaluation,
operations manual, method
development and testing, tech
transfer to Regions - ongoing.
Mercury in Fish from National
Parks, PRIMENet data base -
2001.
Reagent-free Determination of
Mercury in Whole-Fish
Homogenates Using a
Combustion Furnace-Atomic
Absorption Analyzer - 2001.
Anthropogenic Chemical
Loading in Fish from National
Park Index Sites, journal
article and data base - 2001.
Fractionation of Toxic PCB
Isomers Using Porous
Graphitic Carbon HPLC and
Determination by GC/HRMS
-2001.
Christian
Daughton
702-798-2207

-------
Page A-18
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Effects
 (continued)
NERL/HEASD
Biosensors. Addressing real-time and in situ monitoring
devices which can be used cost-effectively at Superfund
sites and RCRA facilities, as well as for ground-water
monitoring. Biosensors are being evaluated for detection
of contaminants such as phenols and pesticides.
Biosensors for Field
Analytical Monitoring, Field
Anal. Chem. Technol. 2, 317-
331-1999.
Determination of Phenols in
Environmentally Relevant
Matrices Using a Liquid
Chromatographic System with
an Enzyme-Based Biosensor.
Field Anal. Chem. Technol. 3,
161-169-1999.
Organophosphorus Hydrolase-
Based Assay for
Organophosphate Pesticides.
Biotechnol Progress 15, 517-
521 -1999.
Biosensors for Environmental
Monitoring: An Update.
Environ. Sci. Technol. Dec. 1,
500-506, 1999.
Field Method/Biosensor for
Detection of Phenols in Soil
Leachate from Contaminated
Superfund Sites-2001.
Microchip-Based CE System
with Biosensor Detector for
Measurement of Phenols -
2002.
Kim Rogers
702-798-2299
Jerry Blancato
702-798-2456

-------
                                           Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                         Page A-19
     Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
NERL/HEASD
Immunochemistry. Methods and applications are being
developed for analytes such as PCBs, pesticides and
heavy metals that are found at Superfund and RCRA
sites.
Immunoassay Test Kits in
Environmental Monitoring -
to be published in Current
Issues in Regulatory
Chemistry, Publisher: Assoc.
of Official Analytical
Chemists (AOAC) -1999.
Comparison of Quantitative
PCB ELISA with Gas
Chromatography
Determinative Versus Whole
Method Effects - 2000.
Monoclonal Antibodies for
the Toxic Co-Planar PCBs and
their Application to ELISA -
2001.
PCB Detection Using a Doped
Sol-Gel Modified
Electrochemical
Immunosensor - 2001.

Antibody Coated
Sampling/Introduction Probe
for Ion Trap Determination of
CoplanarPCBs - APM 561,
FY01.
Jeanette van
Emon
702-798-2154
Jerry Blancato
702-798-2456

-------
Page A-20
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area

Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)






















Organization

NERL-EERD
Region 2
Region 6







NERL-EERD







NCEA
NCEA


Region 1
Region 1
Region 1
Region 1
Description

Miniaturized sediment procedures for assessing
toxicity using marine and freshwater amphipods and
embryo/larval fish. Existing U.S. EPA methods were
modified and two alternative methods developed.
Freshwater methods include a 7-day amphipod, Hyalella
azteca method and 7-day fathead minnow (Pimephales
promelas) embryo/larval hatching method and two
marine methods, a 10-day amphipod,Ampelisca abdita,
and a 7-day sheepshead minnow (Cyprinodon
variegatus) embryo/larval method.
A sediment toxicity method using Lemna minor
(duckweed). Developed a Lemna minor sediment
toxicity test method to assess sediment contaminants
which may affect plants. Sediments were also tested
using a miniaturized freshwater amphipod method and a
fathead minnow embryo/larval (FHM) survival test. A
sediment reference toxicant method has been developed
for KC1 and Atrazine.
Dermal Exposure Research Program.
Development of a wildlife contaminants exposure model
(WCEM) as a tool for completing wildlife risk
assessments.
Charles River Fish Contaminant Survey.
Model Calibration Report for the Housatonic River.
Model Validation Report for the Housatonic River.
Model Frame Work Report for the Housatonic River.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
GPRA 2.2









GPRA 2.2















Contact

Jim Lazorchak
513-569-7076
Jim Ferretti
732 321 6728
Terry Hollister
281 983 2163




Jim Lazorchak
513-569-7076






Michael Dellarco
Susan Norton


Peter Nolan
Susan Svirsky
Susan Svirsky
Susan Svirsky

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-21
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
Organization
Region 1
Region 4
Region 9
Region 9
Region 9
Region 10
Region 10
Region 10
Region 10
Region 10
Description
Monitoring the Success of Sediment Remediation at a
Site Contaminated with Chlorinated Pesticides,
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Arsenic.
Everglades Pilot Study on Linking Air and Water
Models.
Analysis of San Francisco Bay Fish for Dioxin.
Analysis of San Francisco Bay Sediments for Dioxin.
Evaluation of Dioxin-Like Emissions from Residential
Wood Combustion.
Arsenic Determination in Saline Waters by Hydride
Generation - Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass
Spectrometry.
Compilation of report and data supporting the U.S. EPA
study, "Asian and Pacific Islander Seafood Consumption
Study in King County, Washington".
Database of chemical analytical results for fish, shellfish,
and plant tissues collected during June-July 1997 in areas
of Cook Inlet.
Development of a low-level analytical method for co-
planar PCB congeners in soil/sediment matrices using
GC/ECD.
Native American Arsenic Exposure Study in Washington
State.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs










Contact
Cornell Rosiu
John Ackerman
Joel Pedersen
Joel Pedersen
Barbara Gross
Katie Adama
Roseanne
Lorenzana
Roseanne
Lorenzana
Bob Rieck
Rebecca Calderon

-------
Page A-22
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Developing Effective Ecological Indicators for
Watershed Analysis.
The Particle Size Distribution of Toxicity in Metal-
Contaminated Sediments.
A Modeling and Experimental Investigation of Metal
Release from Contaminated Sediments The Effects of
Metal Sulfide Oxidation and Resuspension.
Processes Influencing the Mobility of Arsenic and
Chromium in Reduced Soils and Sediments.
Trace Metal Dynamics in Reducing Aquatic Sediments
Determination of Adsorption and Coprecipitation on
Undisturbed Sediment Core Sections Using a Plug-
Through Reactor.
Formation and Propagation of Large-scale Sediment
Waves in Periodically Disturbed Mountain Watersheds.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRA APGs/APMs






Contact
DT. Duncan
Patten,
Dr. Robert
Crabtree,
Dr. Wayne
Minshall, Dr.
Rick Lawrence
James Ranville,
Donald
Macalady,
Phillipe Rossi,
William Clements
G. Thomas
Chandler
Thimothy J. Shaw
Scott Fendorf
Philippe Van
Cappell
Gary Parker

-------
                                     Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-23
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
(continued)
Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Trophic Transfer of Atmospheric and Sedimentary
Contaminants Into the Great Lakes Fisheries Controls on
the Ecosystem Scale Response Times.
Biogeochemical Control of Heavy Metal Speciation and
Bioavailability in Contaminated Marine Sediments.
Distribution of Cs-137 in the Lena River Estuary -Laptev
Sea System As Evidenced by Marine, Estuarine and
Lacustrine Sediments.
Effects of Interactions Between Sediment Components
on Copper Sorption in Estuaries.
The Effect of Sulfate and Sulfide on Mercury
Methylation in Florida Everglades.
Metal Speciation and Sequestering in Wetland Systems.
Determination of Sediment Contribution from Unpaved
Roads Within a Tropical Watershed.
Effect of Natural Dynamic Changes on Pollutant-
Sediment Interaction.
Controls on Metal Partitioning in Contaminated
Sediments.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRA APGs/APMs









Contact
Joel E. Baker;
Nathaniel E.
Ostrom
James Shine
Ashanti Johnson
Pyrtle
Kea Duckenfield
Janina Benoit
Edward Peltier
Alan Ziegler
Tomson, Kan
F. M. Saunders;
H. L. Windom, R.
A. Jahnke
(continued)

-------
Page A-24
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area

Human Health
and Ecological
Effects
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Source Identification, Transformation, and Transport
Processes of N-, O-, and S- Containing Organic
Chemicals in Wetland and Upland Sediments.
Sediment Resuspension and Contaminant Transport in an
Estuary.
Pollutant Fluxes to Aquatic Systems via Coupled
Biological and Physicochemical Bed-Sediment
Processes.
The Role of Competitive Adsorption on Suspended
Sediments in Determining Partitioning and Colloidal
Stability.
Particle Transport and Deposit Morphology at the
Sediment/Water Interface.
Mobilization and Fate of Inorganic Contaminants Due to
Resuspension of Cohesive Sediment.
Desorption of Nonpolar Organic Pollutants from
Historically Contaminated Sediments and Dredged
Materials.
Freshwater Bioturbators in Riverine Sediments as
Enhancers of Contaminant Release.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRA APGs/APMs








Contact
W. James Catallo
C. E. Adams, Jr.,
R. E. Ferrell, Jr.
Reible,
Thibodeaux,
Valsaraj, Fleeger
H. G.
McWhinney
Mark R. Wiesner
T. W. Sturm, A.
Amirtharajah, and
C. L. Tiller
Mason B.
Tomson, Amy T.
Kan, Gongmin
Fu, Wei Chen,
and Margaret A.
Hunter
A. D. W.
Acholonu
 (continued)

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-25
Area

Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NHEERL/GED
Description
Modelling Air Emissions of Organic Compounds from
Contaminated Sediments and Dredged Materials.
Characterization of Laguna Madre Contaminated
Sediments.
Mobility and Transport of Radium in Sediment and
Waste Pits.
Pollutant Fluxes to Aquatic Systems via Coupled
Biological and Physicochemical Bed-Sediment
Processes.
Improved protocols to determine hazards of
contaminated sediments in the Gulf of Mexico.
Development of existing field and laboratory data
collected over the past 10 years in Gulf of Mexico
estuaries to assess improvements in protocols for hazard
assessments
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs




Improved protocols to
determine hazards of
contaminated sediments in the
Gulf of Mexico - FY03.
GPRA 2.2
Contact
K. T. Valsaraj, L.
J. Thibodeaux, D.
D. Reible; J. M.
Brannon, T. E.
Myers, C. B.
Price; J. S.
Gulliver
A. N. S. Ernest
DeLaune, Pardue,
Patrick, Lindau
Reible,
Thibodeaux,
Valsaraj, Fleeger
Michael Lewis
850-934-9382

-------
Page A-26
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure

 Activities related
 to determining
 exposure of
 human and
 biological
 receptors to
 contaminated
 sediments. These
 activities advance
 the  state-of-the-
 art by
 development and
 verification of
 methods, models,
 protocols, and
 technologies.
OW/OST/SASD
NHEERL/ORD
OW/OST/SASD
OW/OST/SASD
                   OW/OST/SASD
Development of methods for testing chronic toxicity of
marine sediments. This will be a joint U.S. EPA/U.S.
ACE document that will describe methods for measuring
sublethal effects of marine sediments with Leptocheirus
plumulosus.	
Document has been published.

GPRA 2.2
Scott Ireland
202-260-6091
Ted Dewitt
541-867-4029
Revised methodology for tiering classification for the
National Sediment Inventory - Report to Congress.  A
technical advisory group has been established to
modify/update the methodology for classifying sampling
stations according to the probability of adverse effects on
aquatic life and human health from sediment
contamination.
Methodology completed.

National Sediment Inventory
Report to Congress - FY01.

GPRA 2.2
Scott Ireland
202-260-6091
National Sediment Nonpoint Source Inventory and
Assessment. This report is a supplement to the National
Sediment Inventory. It characterizes nonpoint sources of
sediment contamination and provides a national estimate
of annual source loads of selected contaminants from
identified categories of nonpoint sources.
Currently undergoing Peer
Review.

National Sediment Nonpoint
Source Inventory and
Assessment - Report to
Congress - FY01

GPRA 2.2
Scott Ireland
202-260-6091
                     Bioaccumulation Testing And Interpretation For The
                     Purpose of Sediment Quality Assessment: Status and
                     Needs. This document was prepared to serve as a status
                     and needs summary of the use of bioaccumulation data.
                                                    Published February 2000
                                                    (U.S. EPA-823-R-00-001).

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Rich Healy
                             202-260-7812

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                          Page A-27
     Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
OW/OST/SASD
Methods for Collection, Storage, and Manipulation of
Sediments for Chemical and Toxicological Analysis.
This guidance manual covers collecting, handling, and
transporting field sediments; manipulating sediments in
the laboratory for chemical analysis and lexicological
testing; and preparing formulated sediments for
toxicological testing.	
Draft document.

Methods document to be
completed FY01.

GPRA 2.2
RichHealy
202-260-7812
                  Region 5: Water and
                  Superfund
                     FIELDS (Fully Integrated Environmental Location
                     Decision Support) Team. The FIELDS System
                     combines GIS, GPS, environmental database, web site,
                     and graphics technologies with fieldwork experience.
                     Joint tech transfer pilots with ORD and Regions 5, 6, and
                     9. Also used in risk management/remediation.	
                                                                               Tim Drexler
                                                                               312-353-4367
                  GLNPO
                     Use of Sediment Quality Guidelines to Predict
                     Toxicity in Great Lakes Sediments. Joint project with
                     USGS to evaluate the predictive ability of freshwater
                     Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs).	
                                                   Final Report-FY2001
                  GLNPO
                     In-situ LIF System for the Assessment of PAH
                     Contaminated Sediments. Field demonstration of a
                     rapid, vertically discrete, in-situ technique for measuring
                     PAH contamination in sediments.
                                                   Project Report - FY2002.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                  GLNPO
                     Sediment Assessment Framework Document. Joint
                     effort with the Sustainable Fisheries Foundation to
                     develop a sediment assessment framework to provide
                     guidance on the use and evaluation of chemical, toxicity,
                     benthic community, and bioaccumulation data from
                     sediment assessments.
                                                   Framework Document
                                                   FY2001.

                                                   GPRA 2.2

-------
Page A-28
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure
 (continued)
OAR-OAQPS
OW
Regions
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Pilot Projects in
Florida and Wisconsin.  The pilot projects are
evaluating techniques for (1) determining the amount of
mercury reductions needed to meet water quality
standards; (2) determining the relative contributions of
mercury from various sources; (3) the geographic extent
of sources contributing mercury; and (4) analyzing
Federal and State programs for reducing mercury
emissions.
Both projects should be
completed by early 2001.

GPRA 2.2
Ruth Chemerys
(OW)
202-260-9038
Randy Waite
(OAQPS)
919-541-5447
                   OAR-OAQPS
                   OW
                   Regions
                     Air/Water Interface Action Plan. Coordination effort
                     between OAR and OW to address the problem of air
                     deposition.
                                                   Plan to be completed by end
                                                   of summer 2000.

                                                   GPRA 2.3
                            Barbara Driscoll
                            (OAQPS)
                            919-541-0164
                            Deb Martin (OW)
                            202-260-2729
                   GLNPO
                     GLNPO Grants Program. Annual program to provide
                     financial and technical support to state and local agencies
                     for the assessment and remediation of contaminated
                     sediments in Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs).
                                                   Ongoing

                                                   Project reports posted on the
                                                   web at www. epa. gov/glnpo.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                            Marc Tuchman
                            312-353-9184
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure
 (continued)
NCEA-W
Sediment Toxicity Assessment Methods. The method
in development combines bulk sediment toxicity testing
with chemical concentrations measured in the same
samples. A large database of paired sediment toxicity
and chemistry data has been compiled.
Final report describing the
assessment method, APM
A80, FY01.

The method is being applied
in the Office of Water's 2000
Report to Congress on
Sediment Contamination
Status and Trends.

GPRA 2.2	
Susan Norton
202-564-3246

-------
                                            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                           Page A-29
     Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
                  NCEA-W
                     Assessment of Toxicity of Dioxins and Related
                     Compounds in Aquatic Wildlife.
                                                                                Christopher
                                                                                Cubbison
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
NHEERL/GED
                  NERL/EERD
Assessment of the relationship of contaminated
sediments to estuarine biotic effects.  Statistical
analyses are used to determine the types and strengths of
relationships among contaminated sediment variables and
biotic response variables.
Report on the relationship of
toxicity of contaminated
sediments to aquatic animals
and vascular plants, FYOO.
Report on fish and
contaminant indicators of
estuarine condition, FY01.

GPRA 2.2

Correlations among water and
sediment chemistry, pollutant
loadings, and ecological
condition of coastal estuaries,
FY04.
Report on the relationship
between sediment quality and
benthic community
distribution and condition,
FY04.

GPRA 5.1
Michael Lewis
850-934-9382
Kevin Summers
850-934-9244
Virginia Engle
850-934-9354
                     Development of Indicators as Measures of Ecosystem
                     Sustainability. Indicator methods can be used to
                     measure PAH exposure, to determine exposure exceeding
                     natural background, and to evaluate changes in exposure
                     to petroleum and combustion by-product (PAH) waste in
                     dredged streams.	
                                                    Draft report on national
                                                    background and exposure
                                                    criteria for indicators of
                                                    exposure to PAHs (9/02).
                             Brian Hill
                             513-569-7077
                             Susan Cormier
                             513-569-7995

-------
Page A-30
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure
 (continued)
NHEERL/GED
                   NHEERL/GED
                   NERL/EERD
                   NERL/EERD
                   Region 1
Improved protocols to determine hazards of
contaminated sediments in the Gulf of Mexico.
Development of existing field and laboratory data
collected over the past 10 years in Gulf of Mexico
estuaries to assess improvements in protocols for hazard
assessments.
Improved protocols to
determine hazards of
contaminated sediments in the
Gulf of Mexico, FY03.

GPRA 2.2
Michael Lewis
850-934-9382
                     Assessment of reference conditions in estuaries of the
                     Gulf of Mexico. Field study.  Includes assessment of
                     references conditions for sediment contaminants and their
                     seasonal and spatial variabilities.
                                                    Identification of sensitive
                                                    benthic species, FY99.

                                                    Reference conditions for
                                                    sediments in Gulf of Mexico,
                                                    FY01.

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Michael Lewis
                             850-934-9382
                     Develop Indicators for Stressors in Environmental
                     Media and Mixtures.  Develop tests that can be used to
                     determine toxicity of site samples of sediment, water, or
                     discharge. Includes: Regional-scale toxicity assessment
                     of sediment in the Mid-Atlantic and Southern Rockies;
                     and warm water fish embryo larval test to assess potential
                     exposure/effects from sediments.	
                                                    Methods manual for sediment
                                                    toxicity sample collection
                                                    (9/00).

                                                    GPRA 2.2
                             Jim Lazorchak
                             513-569-7076
                             Susan Cormier
                             513-569-7995
                     Indicator Development and Assessment of Large
                     Rivers and Watersheds. New methods can be used to
                     detect impairment in large rivers needing sampling by
                     boat. Includes microbial metabolism of sediment.
                                                    Bioassessment protocal for
                                                    large non-wadable rivers in
                                                    the mid-Atlantic (9/01).

                                                    GPRA 2.2 and8.1
                             Florence Fulk
                             513-569-7379
                             Susan Cormier
                             513-569-7995
                     Assessment of Mercury in Hypolimnetic Lake Sediments
                     of Vermont and New Hampshire.	
                                                                                 Hilary Snook

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-31
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
Organization
Region 1
Region 1
Region 1
Region 1
Region 3
Region 3
Region 4
Region 4
Region 7
Region 9
Region 9
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Ecological Risk Assessment for the Housatonic River.
Human Health Risk Assessment for the Housatonic
River.
Regional Applied Research Effort - Mercury Flux from
Coastal Marsh.
Sediment Sampling Guidelines.
A Benthic Macroinvertebrate Survey of Non-Tidal
Tributaries of the Anacostia River Test Titles.
A Survey of Streams in the Primary Region of Mountain
Top Mining/Valley Fill Coal Mining Draft 1 .
Ecological Risk Assessment for LCP Superfund Site
(NPL).
Field and Laboratory Standard Operating Procedures and
Quality Assurance Plan for Conducting Sediment and
Nutrient Total Maximum Daily Loads.
Nebraska REMAP Report '98.
Coastal EMAP Project.
San Francisco Bay Wetlands Regional Monitoring
Program.
Response of Methylmercury Production and
Accumulation to Changes in Hg Loading: A Whole-
ecosystem Mercury Loading Study.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs












Contact
Susan Svirsky
Susan Svirsky
Alan VanArsdale
Andy Beliveau
Jim Green
Jim Green
Lynn Wellman
Bruce Pruitt
Lyle Cowles
Terrence Fleming
Paul Jones
Cynthia C.
Gilmour, Andrew
Heyes, Robert P.
Mason, and John
M. Rudd

-------
Page A-32
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Validation of Sediment Quality Criteria in Southeastern
Estuaries.
Application of Sediment Quality Criteria for Metals to a
Montane Lotic Ecosystem: Field Validation During
Reclamation of a Copper Mine Causing Acid Mine
Drainage.
Sediment Contamination Assessment Methods:
Validation of Standardized and Novel Approaches.
Meiofaunal Validation of EqP-Based Sediment Quality
Criteria for Metal Mixtures in Estuarine Sediments
Population to Community -Level Culturing Studies of
Biogeochemical Controls on Bioavailability and
Toxicity.
Developing a New Monitoring Tool for Benthic
Organisms in the Gulf of Mexico Loss of Genetic
Variability in Meiofaunal Populations.
Bioavailability of Organic Contaminants in Estuarine
Sediments to Microbes and Benthic Animals.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs






Contact
Amy Huffman
Ringwood
Joseph S. Meyer,
Jeffrey A.
Lockwood,
Richard W.
Rockwell
G. Allen Burton,
Jr., Daniel Krane,
Thomas Tiernan,
Peter Landrum,
William
Stubblefield and
William Clements
G. Thomas
Chandler and
Thimothy J. Shaw
Paul A. Montagna
Gary L. Taghon,
David S. Kosson
and Lily Y.
Young

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-33
Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/OSW
OSWER/TIO
OW/OWOW
OW/OST
ORD/NRMRL
ORD/Narraganset
Regions
Region 1
Description
Environmental Monitoring and assessment of Wetlands
Using Sedimentary Diatoms from Present and Past.
Sediment Entrainment and Stream Benthic Communities:
Implications for Freshwater Bioassessment.
Studies of the environmental fate of sediment-associated
organic contaminants in marine systems.
Investigation on the Fate and Biotransformation of
Hexachlorobutadiene and Chlorobenzenes in a Sediment-
Water Estuarine System.
Development of Contaminated Aquatic Sediment
Remediation Guidance. OSRTI has lead for cross-
Agency workgroup (Contaminated Aquatic Sediments
Remedial Guidance Workgroup - CASRGW) to develop
guidance to select remedies for sediment sites under
CERCLA.
Risk-Based Procedures Used to Support Remediation of
a Ground Water-Surface Water Transition Zone
Contaminated with Chlorobenzenes.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs




Draft guidance on remediation
-FYOO/01.
GPRA5.1

Contact
R. Jan Stevenson
Stephen
Kenworthy
P. Lee Ferguson
Pavlostathis
Bruce Means
703-603-8815
Ernie Watkins
703-603-9011
Cornell Rosiu

-------
Page A-34
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure
 (continued)
Region 2
Full/Commercial-Scale Sediment Decontamination
Technology Development with Beneficial Use
Applications. Bench- through full-scale tests are being
conducted to implement environmentally responsible and
cost-effective technologies to decontaminate dredged
material from the Port of NY/NJ.
Anticipate 1-2 systems
processing >250,000 cu yd/yr
by FY02.
Eric Stern
212-637-3806
                   OW/OST/SASD
                     Sediment Modeling Toolkit. The toolkit consists of
                     three components: Graphical User Interface (GUI) to the
                     Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC) grid
                     generator to set up physical domain; GUI interface to
                     EFDC model; and post-processor to view model output.
                     Design is flexible to allow support of other water quality
                     models.
                                                   Beta test of toolkit beginning
                                                   July 1, 2000
                                                   Version 1.0 distributed by end
                                                   ofFY02.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Russell Kinerson
                             260-1330
                   RegionS: WPTD and
                   GLNPO
                     Sediment Capping and Natural Recovery Project.  A
                     joint project between U.S. EPA, USGS, and COE WES
                     to develop a guidance document on capping and natural
                     attenuation.
                                                                                Dave Petrovski
                                                                                312-886-0997
                   GLNPO
                     GLNPO Grants Program. Annual program to provide
                     financial and technical support to state and local agencies
                     for the assessment and remediation of contaminated
                     sediments in Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
                                                   Ongoing

                                                   Project reports posted on the
                                                   web at www. epa. gov/glnpo.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Marc Tuchman
                             312-353-9184
                   GLNPO
                     Demonstration of Contaminated Sediment Treatment
                     Technologies. Joint efforts with the states of Michigan
                     and Wisconsin perform on-site, pilot-scale
                     demonstrations of sediment treatment technologies.	
                                                   Pilot projects scheduled for
                                                   FY2001.

                                                   GPRA 2.2
                             Scott Cieniawski
                             312-353-9184
                             Marc Tuchman
                             312-353-1369

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities Page A-35

Area
Human Health
and Ecological
Exposure
(continued)
Organization
Region 5/GLNPO
Region 5/GLNPO
Region 5: Water and
Superfund
Region 6
Region 10
NRMRL/LRPCD
Description
Beneficial Use Work Group. Development of
beneficial use guidelines; support to WI DNR project to
develop guidance/criteria. Cooperation with state and
federal agencies to perform pilot-scale beneficial use
demonstrations.
Sediment Information Management System. A
comprehensive, multi-program sediment site information
database and tracking system for sediment remediation
and management.
FIELDS (Fully Integrated Environmental Location
Decision Support) Team. The FIELDS System
combines GIS, GPS, environmental database, web site,
and graphics technologies with fieldwork experience. See
description under Assessment.
Calcasieu Estuary. Region 6 is conducting a multi-
media initiative, including the investigation and potential
remediation of contaminated sediment. This is a three
year pilot which will identify guidance, policy, and
regulatory gaps as well as identifying better ways to
coordinate large environmental responses.
Regional Sediment/Sand Management (RSM) Initiative
Remediation of PCB-Contaminated Sediments. This
Congressionally -mandated study by the National
Academy of Science is intended to evaluate the relative
effectiveness, effects, and costs associated with a variety
of methods for managing PCB -contaminated sediments.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
Region 5 "Position Paper" on
Criteria for the Evaluation of
Beneficial Use Projects -
FY2002.
Project reports to be available
on the web
(www.epa. gov/glnpo) -
FY2001.




MAS report due to U.S. EPA
and Congress, APMA81,
FY01. Completed 3/01.
GPRA 2.2
Contact
Scott Cieniawski
312-353-9184
Ken Klewin
312-886-4794
Tim Drexler
312-353-4367
RPM: John
Meyer
(214) 665-6742
Joan Cabreza
Dennis
Timberlake
513-569-7547

-------
Page A-36
                          Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
       Area
   Organization
                   Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
 Human Health
 and Ecological
 Exposure
 (continued)
NRMRL/LRPCD
                    NRMRL/LRPCD
Dredging Performance.  The effectiveness of dredging
is being documented by the combined evaluation of past
projects and completion of selected projects to fill data
gaps.
Report on short-term effects,
FY02.

Report on the environmental
and human health benefits of
contaminant mass removal. -
Date?

GPRA5.1
Dennis
Timberlake
513-569-7547
                     Capping Performance. Data is being collected to
                     determine performance of caps and the accuracy of
                     model predictions of their performance. Selected field
                     studies are being conducted to address specific questions
                     related to short-term disturbances created during cap
                     placement; permanence of cap performance; contaminant
                     migration through caps and the accuracy of predictive
                     models; and benthic and aquatic community responses to
                     caps. Caps are being evaluated for applications in situ
                     and in confined aquatic disposal sites.	
                                                    Comparative report on in-situ
                                                    technologies, FY04.

                                                    GPRA5.1
                             Dennis
                             Timberlake
                             513-569-7547
                             Terry Lyons
                             513-569-7589

-------
                                             Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                             Page A-37
      Area
   Organization
                    Description
  Product/Estimated Date
     GPRAAPGs/APMs
    Contact
Assessment

Activities related
to assessing the
risk associated
with human or
ecological
exposure to
contaminants in
sediments. These
activities advance
the state-of-the-
art development
and verification
of methods,
models, protocols,
and technologies.
NRMRL/LRPCD
NRMRL/LRPCD
Monitored Natural Attenuation. Research is
investigating past performance at sites where MNA was
selected intentionally and at sites where studies have
been conducted over time without remedial action. Field
studies are being conducted to fill data gaps, examine
specific attenuation mechanisms, and collect data on
long-term performance.  Selected laboratory studies are
being conducted to determine rates of contaminant
sorption/desorption, and rates and endpoints of
contaminant degradation.	
Interim report, FY01.

Sorption/desorption kinetics
model, FY03.

Technical Resource
Document, FY04.

GPRA5.1
Dennis
Timberlake
513-569-7547
Dick Brenner
513-569-7657
Fran Kremer
513-569-7346
Ex-Situ Management and Treatment Technologies.
This research involves the performance of confined
disposal facilities (CDFs) in managing risks from
contaminated sediments disposed in hydraulic contact
with the water body, treatments that can be applied to
enhance the effectiveness of CDFs, and
treatment/utilization of dredged material to recover CDF
capacity.
Peer reviewed journal article
on biotreatment of PAH -
contaminated sediments, APM
159, FY99.

Peer reviewed journal article
on treatment of chlorinated
organics in sediment, APM
160, FY99.

Report on toxicity reductions
from biological treatment of
PAH-contaminated sediments,
FY02.

GPRA5.1
Ed Earth
 513-569-7669
Dick Brenner
 513-569-7657

-------
Page A-38 Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities

Area
Assessment
(continued)
Organization
NRMRL/LRPCD
NRMRL/LRPCD
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
SITE Demonstrations of Innovative Technologies.
Under the Superfund Innovative Technology
Demonstration Program, three vendor technologies for
contaminated sediment sites have been accepted for
demonstration: Minergy's glass forming process, IGT's
Cement Block process, and AquaBlok's capping process.
Additional projects are in the selection process.
Innovative In-Situ Treatment Technologies. Ongoing
bench research is investigating the use of hydrogen and
zero-valent iron to respectively stimulate biological and
chemical dechlorination of persistent chlorinated organic
compounds such as PCBs, PCP, and DDT and the
application of a particular microorganism to re-speciate
lead into a sparingly soluble phosphate mineral.
Microbial Community Dynamics of PCB Dechlorination
in Sediments.
Importance of Reductive Dechlorination in Chesapeake
Bay Sediments Role of Sulfate Respiration.
Effectiveness of Regulatory Incentives for Sediment
Pollution Prevention Evaluation Through Policy Analysis
and Biomonitoring.
Biotic and Abiotic Reductive Transformation of
Chlorinated Solvents in Iron Reducing Sediments.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
Individual technology
evaluation reports, FY03-05.
GPRA5.1
Journal article on hydrogen
addition -FY01
Journal article on Fe(0) -
FY01.
GPRA5.1




Contact
Annette Gatchett
513-569-7697
Dennis
Timberlake
513-569-7547
Greg Sayles
513-569-7607
Wendy Davis-
Hoover
513-569-7206
G-Yull Rhee,
Roger C Ellen
Braun-Howland
Douglas G.
Capone, J Baker,
and Cynthia C.
Seth Reice and
Richard Andrews
Michael L.
McCormic

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-39
Area
Assessment
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Reduction of Herbicides in Wetland Sediments.
Nitrogen Removal in Constructed Wetlands:
Enhancement of Nitrate Mass Transfer in the
Denitrification Zone.
Investigation of the reductive transformation of
chlorinated solvents in iron reducing sediments and to
assess the relative contributions of biological and abiotic
reactions to dechlorination.
Reductive Dechlorination and Degradation of Model
Chlorophenols in Marine and Estuarine Sediments.
Enhanced Microbial Dechlorination of PCBS and
Dioxins in Contaminated Dredge Spoils.
Evaluation of Placement and Effectiveness of Sediment
Caps.
Isolating Organisms Which Dechlorinate Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs).
Development of a Model Sediment Control Ordinance
for Louisiana.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs








Contact
Theodore
Klupinski
Maia Fleming
Mike McCormick
Kimberly Warner
MaxM.
Hoggblom and
Cecilia Vargas
D. D. Reible, K.
T. Valsaraj and L.
J. Thibodeaux
Tiedje
Donald Barbe,
Ph.D.

-------
Page A-40
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Assessment
(continued)
Organization
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Description
Bioremediation of Sediments Contaminated with
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons.
The Application of Plant Biotechnology in
Bioremediation of Contaminated Sediments.
Bioremediation of Contaminated Sediments and Dredged
Material.
The Effect of Sediment Treatment on Sediment
Metabolism Rates in Marsh Mesocosms.
Characterization of PAH Degrading Bacteria in Coastal
Sediments.
Mechanisms governing the release of contaminants from
sediments resuspended during dredging operations.
Use of chemical oxidants for the degradation of
chlorinated benzenes and biphenyls in aqueous systems
and sediments.
An Investigation of Chemical Transport from
Contaminated Sediment through Porous Containment
Structures.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRA APGs/APMs








Contact
J. B. Hughes and
C. H. Ward
S.V. Sahi
Ward, Hughes
Cornwell
(Liebert)
M. G. Tadros
Davies, Voice
Masten, Davies
Reible,
Thibodeaux,
Valsarai

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-41
Area
Assessment
(continued)
Organization
OW/OST/SASD
OW/OST/SASD
OW/HECD
ORD/NHEERL
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/TIO
NRMRL/LRPCD
Description
Contaminated Sediment Pamphlet and Poster. The
Pamphlet and Poster were designed to educate the public,
including citizens groups and high school students on the
definition and extent of contaminated sediment, sources
of contamination, remediation and pollution prevention
solutions, and what citizens can do to protect sediment.
Sediment Network Individuals from Regions
(including GLNPO), HQ (OW & OSWER), and ORD
that conference on a regular basis to communicate
contaminated sediment issues.
OW/ORD Sediment Research Team. A cross-program
effort to coordinate research activities focusing on
contaminated sediment.
Superfund Sediment Forum. Regional personnel who
participate in regular conference calls about Superfund-
specific issues related to sediment cleanups.
Sediments Action Team, Remediation Technologies
Development Forum. A partnership with industry to
develop or advance innovative remediation technologies.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
Pamphlet and the Poster were
released October 1999.
Pamphlet (U.S. EPA-823-F-
99-006), Poster (U.S. EPA-
823-H-99-001).
GPRA#2


Ongoing

Contact
Scott Ireland
202-260-6091
RichHealy
202-260-7812
Rich Healy
202-260-7812
Heidi Bell:
202-260-5464
Mary Reiley:
202-260-9456
Walter Berry:
401-782-3101
Dave Mount:
218-529-5169
Sherri Clark
703-603-9043
Rich Norris
703-603-9053
Kelly Madalinski
703-603-9901
Dennis
Timberlake
513-569-7547

-------
Page A-42
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Assessment
(continued)
Remediation/
Risk
Management
Activities related
to remediating or
otherwise
managing the
risks of
contaminated
sediments. These
activities advance
the state-of-the-
art by
development and
verification of
methods, models,
protocols, and
technologies.
Organization
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/OSRTI
GLNPO
NCER/
STAR grants and
HSRCs
Region 5: Superfund
Description
Updating CERCLIS3. Refining the Superfund sites
database to adequately capture those sites which address
contaminated sediments.
OW SedNet2000. Conference calls to share information.
Sediment Technology Video. Development of an
outreach video for project managers to use at public
meetings to show citizens the different technologies that
might be considered at Superfund sites.
GLNPO Sediments Web Page. Contains Sediment
Assessment and Remediation Guidance Documents,
Evaluations of Bench- and Pilot-Scale Sediment
Treatment demonstrations, and other technical
documents. Web page address:
www.epa.gov/glnpo/sediments.html
A Short Course of Remediation of Contaminated Soils
and Sediments.
Region 5 Sediment Web Page.
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
Ongoing
Ongoing

Ongoing

Web page (under
development).
Contact
Sherri Clark
703-603-9043
Ernie Watkins
703-603-9011
Sherri Clark
703-603-9043
Ernie Watkins
703-603-9011
Marc Tuchman
312-353-9184
Kelly, Keefer,
Rohde, Woldt
Jim Rittenhouse
312-886-1438

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Page A-43
Area

Remediation/
Risk
Management
(continued)





















Organization

Region 5: GLNPO
and Superfund


Region 5 and
GLNPO

















Region 5: Water

Description

Sediment Information Management System. A
comprehensive, multi-program sediment site information
database and tracking system for sediment remediation
and management.
Great Lakes Dredging Team (GLDT). A federal-state-
private partnership with the primary objective of ensuring
that the dredging of the Great Lakes harbors and channels
is conducted in a timely and cost effective manner while
meeting environmental protection, restoration and
enhancement goals. Provides an interactive forum;
works with local advocates.












Mississippi River Dredging Team. Similar objectives
as GLDT
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs
EndofFY2000.



Great Lakes Dredging Team
web site.

GLDT outreach documents:
Dredging and the Great Lakes
booklet; dredging case
studies; developing a dredging
video; "Decision Making
Process for Dredged Material
Management" white paper;
draft TSCA/RCRA white
paper; Beneficial Use Task
Force; development of a
beneficial use brochure;
beneficial use project to
facilitate state input into
development of guidelines;
Beneficial Use Workshop held
Sept. 15-16, 1998.


Contact

Ken Klewin
312-886-4794
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Marc Tuchman
312-353-1369















Bill Franz
312-886-7500

-------
Page A-44
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
Area
Remediation/
Risk
Management
(continued)




Organization
Region 5
Region 5




Region 5
Region 5
Region 5
Description
Beneficial Use Work Group. Develop beneficial use
guidelines; support WI DNR project to develop
guidance/criteria.
Technology transfer and communication products




Great Lakes Regional Sediment Highlights
Duluth Superior Technical Advisory Committee -and-
Duluth Superior Partnering Agreement. Partnership
to address maintenance of the federal navigation channel
and long-term management of the dredged material.
WI Sediment Advisory Committee (participant on).
Product/Estimated Date
GPRAAPGs/APMs

Sediment remediation video -
in preparation - Superfund and
Office of Public Affairs.
"Environmental Results of
Dredging Projects"
paper/presentation
Sediment Fact Sheet

Quarterly regional sediment
news


Contact
Scott Cieniawski
312-353-9184
Brianna Bill
312-353-6646
Jim Hahnenberg
312-353-3567
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Teresa Jones
312-886-0725
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Steve Hopkins
218-720-5738
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885
Bonnie Eleder
312-886-4885

-------
                                             Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                                                                      Page A-45
ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT KEY
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/OSW
OSWER/TIO
OW
GLNPO
OW/OST/SASD
OW/HECD
OAR
OAQPS
ORD
NHEERL
AED
GED
MED
WED
NERL
EBRD
ERD
CEAM
BSD
MSCTSC
NCEA
WO
NRMRL
LRPCD
ETSC
NCER
STAR grants
HSRCs
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Technology Innovation Office
Office of Water
Great Lakes National Program Office, Office of Water, Chicago, IL.
Office of Water/Office of Science and Technology/Standards and Applied Science Division
Office of Water/Health and Ecological Criteria Division
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Research and Development
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
Atlantic Ecology Division
Gulf Ecology Division
Mid-Continent Ecology Division
Western Ecology Division
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Ecological Exposure Research Division
Ecosystems Research Division
Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling
Environmental Sciences Division
Monitoring and Site Characterization Technical Support Center
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Washington Office
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division
Engineering Technical Support Center
National Center for Environmental Research
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants
Hazardous Substance Research Centers

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities            Page B-l
           APPENDIX B




  EXAMPLE OF A SUMMARY SHEET

-------
Page B-2            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities               Page B-3

E.5    Support the demonstration of cost-effective ex situ treatment technologies and
identification of potential beneficial uses of treatment products.

Key Partners:
GLNPO, U.S. EPA Region 2, ORD

Actions Underway:
The demonstration of decontamination technologies along with the development of marketable
end-products is being actively promoted by Region 2 and GLNPO. Region 2, working in New
York/ New Jersey Harbor in cooperation with New Jersey DOT, is investigating a sediment
washing process whereby a manufactured top soil and bricks are produced, and two thermal
treatment processes in which a blended cement and lightweight aggregate are potential
marketable final products.  The sediment washing project has been completed and the blended
cement and lightweight aggregate demonstrations are scheduled for FY 2002 and 2003. GLNPO
is currently supporting two technologies: a glass vitrification technology which produces
construction fill (with the potential for roofing shingles and floor tiles); and a thermal process
examining blended  cement as an end product. The vitrification project has been completed as
part of a joint effort with Wisconsin DNR on the Fox River.  The blended cement project, a
cooperative project with Michigan DEQ, is scheduled for the summer of 2002.  Through the
SITE Program, ORD is providing analytical support to provide independent verification of the
results of the treatment technology processes.

Actions Planned Over Next 2 Years:
Region 2 plans to complete two demonstration and report on the Cement-Lock and lightweight
aggregate technologies.  GLNPO will conduct the Cement-Lock process on the Detroit River
sediments. Reports describing the environmental as well  as economic effectiveness of all
demonstrations will be completed and distributed.

Products Expected by 2006:
1.     Demonstrations and final reports for above projects completed and published.
2.      Complete economic evaluations of marketable final products along with development of
       cost estimates for running full scale operations of each technology tested.
3.     Begin commercial application of decontamination technology in New York Harbor,
      including marketing of end-product.
4.     Demonstrate applicability of treatment technology to Superfund program.

Primary Contacts:
Marc Tuchman-GLNPO
Eric Stern-Region 2

-------
Page B-4            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

-------
Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities            Page C-l
           APPENDIX C




        LIST OF ACRONYMS

-------
Page C-2            Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                       Page C-3
AED
AET
APCs
APE
ARCS
BAF
BSAF
CAD
CASRGW
CCME
CDF
CEAM
CERCLA
CFR
CREM
CSCT
CSMC
CSMS
CSTAG
CWA
ODD
DDE
DDT
DOC
DoD
DOE
DOT
DOT
ECGOx
EDCs
EEA
EBRD
EFDC
EMAP
EqP
ERL
ERM
ESBs
ESD
ESG
Atlantic Ecology Division
apparent-effects threshold
areas of probable concern
alkylphenol ethoxylate
Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments
bioaccumulation factor
biota-sediment accumulation factor
contained aquatic disposal
Contaminated Aquatic Sediment Remedial Guidance Workgroup
Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment
confined disposal facilities
Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling
Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Code of Federal Regulations
Council on Regulatory Environmental Models
Consortium for Site Characterization and Technology
Contaminated Sediment Management Committee
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
Contaminated Sediment Technical Advisory Committee
Clean Water Act
di chl orodipheny 1 di chl oroethane
di chl orodipheny 1 di chl oroethy 1 ene
di chl orodipheny ltd chl oroethane
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of the Interior
Department of Transportation
Electrochemical GeoOxidation
endocrine disrupter compounds
essential ecological attributes
Ecological Exposure Research Division
Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
equilibrium partitioning
effects range-low
effects range-median
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks
Environmental Sciences Division
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines

-------
Page C-4
  Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
ETV
FIELDS
FIFRA
FRTR
GC/MS
GC/ECD
GED
GLNPO
GPRA
HECD
IRIS
ITRC
LIF
LOE
LRM
LRPCD
MARAD
MDEQ
MED
MPRSA
MYP
NAS
NASA
NCEA
NOT
NERL
NHEERL
NMFS
NOAA
NPL
NRC
NRD
NRMRL
NRSC
NSF
NSI
NSQS
NYSDEC
OAQPS
OAR
Environmental Technology Verification
Field Environmental Decision Support
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
gas chromatography/mass spectrometer
gas chromatography/electron capture detection
Gulf Ecology Division
Great Lakes National Program Office
Government Performance Results Act
Health and Ecological Criteria Division
Integrated Risk Information System
Inter-State Technology and Regulatory Cooperation
Laser Induced Fluorescence
line-of-evidence
logistic regression modeling
Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division
Maritime Administration (US Department of Transportation)
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Mid-Continent Ecology Division
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
Multi-Year Plans
National Academy of Sciences
National Aeronautics and  Space Administration
National Center for Environmental Assessment
National Dredging Team
National Exposure Research Laboratory
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Priorities List
National Research Council
Natural Resources Damages
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
National Regional Science Council
National Science Foundation
National Sediment Inventory
National Sediment Quality Survey
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Air and Radiation

-------
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
                                                       Page C-5
OCRM
OECA
OEI
OPA
OPPT
OPPTS
ORD
OSRTI
OST
OSW
OSWER
OW
PAH
PBT
PCB
PEL
PIANC
PRPs
QA/QC
RaDiUS
RAP
RCRA
RCT
REMAP
RTDF
SAB
SASD
SITE
SPC
SQGs
SQT
STAR
STORET
TEL
TIE
TIO
TMDL
TSCA
U.S. ACE
U.S. EPA
Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (NOAA)
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Office of Environmental Information
Oil Pollution Act
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Office of Research and Development
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
Office of Science and Technology (OW)
Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Water
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic
polychlorinated biphenyls
probable-effects level
International Navigation Association
potentially responsible parties
quality assurance/quality control
Research and Development in the United States
Remedial Action Plan
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Research Coordination Team
Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
Remedial Technologies Development Forum
Science Advisory Board
Standards and Applied Science Division
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
Science Policy Council
Sediment Quality Guidelines
Sediment Quality Triad
Science To Achieve Results
Storage and Retrieval
threshold-effects level
toxicity identification evaluation
Technology Innovation Office
Total Maximum Daily Loads
Toxic Substance Control Act
United States Army Corps of Engineers
United States Environmental Protection Agency

-------
Page C-6              Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
U. S. FWS           U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USDA              United States Department of Agriculture
USGS               United States Geological Survey
UVF                ultraviolet fluorescence spectroscopy
WOE               weight-of-evidence
WRDA             Water Resources Development Act
XRF                x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy

-------

-------
Page A-46
                      Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities
ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT KEY
OSWER/OSRTI
OSWER/OSW
OSWER/TIO
OW
GLNPO
OW/OST/SASD
OW/HECD
OAR
OAQPS
ORD
NHEERL
AED
GED
MED
WED
NERL
EBRD
ERD
CEAM
BSD
MSCTSC
NCEA
WO
NRMRL
LRPCD
ETSC
NCER
STAR grants
HSRCs
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innc
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response/Technology Innovation Office
Office of Water
Great Lakes National Program Office, Office of Water, Chicago, IL.
Office of Water/Office of Science and Technology/Standards and Applied Science Division
Office of Water/Health and Ecological Criteria Division
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Research and Development
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
Atlantic Ecology Division
Gulf Ecology Division
Mid-Continent Ecology Division
Western Ecology Division
National Exposure Research Laboratory
Ecological Exposure Research Division
Ecosystems Research Division
Center for Exposure Assessment Modeling
Environmental Sciences Division
Monitoring and Site Characterization Technical Support Center
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Washington Office
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Land Remediation and Pollution Control Division
Engineering Technical Support Center
National Center for Environmental Research
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants
Hazardous Substance Research Centers

-------