f/EFA
jPUnited States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington DC 20460
January 1981 - December 1983
Report to Congress
January 1981 - December 1
On Administration of the Marine
Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as
Amended (P.L 92-532) and
Implementing the International
London Dumping Convention
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. DC 20460 841R81001
JUN 12 1984
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable George Bush
President of the Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr. President:
Section 112 of the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, requires the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit an annual
report on the administration of the ocean dumping permit program
authorized under Title I of the Act. The tenth report for this
program is transmitted with this letter.
The ocean dumping permit program became effective on
April 23, 1973, and final regulations and criteria were
published on October 15, 1973. Revisions to those regulations
and criteria were published on January 11, 1977. This report
covers the activities carried out under the Act and those
necessary to implement the London Dumping Convention during
calendar years 1981 - 1983.
The dumping into ocean waters of all material, except
dredged material, is regulated by EPA permits. The,U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) issues permits for dredged materials.
This report does not contain a discussion of COE activities
except as they affect EPA's responsibilities. We hope that the
information provided in this report will be useful to the Senate
in assessing the status and direction of the program.
Sincerely,
William D. Ruckelshaus
-------
v-,,'EO ST-4"~.!'
,,; ...... :u
~ -. %
~S.r5
o ...
" ~
"'1- ~O
~-i( PRO,t-C,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
JUN 1 2 1984
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.
Speaker of the House
of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Mr. Speaker:
Section 112 of the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, requires the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to submit an annual
report on the administration of the ocean dumping permit program
authorized under Title I of the Act. The tenth report for this
program is transmitted with this letter.
The ocean dumping permit program ~ecame effective on April 23,
1973, and final regulations and criteria were published on
October 15, 1973. Revisions to those regulations and criteria were
published. on January 11, 1977. This report covers the activities
carried out under the Act and those necessary to implement the
London Dumping Convention during calendar years 1981 - 1983.
The dumping into ocean waters of all material, except dredged
material, is regulated by EPA permits. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) issues permits for dredged materials. This report
does not contain a discussion of COE activities except as they
affect EPA's responsibilities. We hope that the information
provided in this report will be useful to the House of
Representatives in assessing the status and direction of the
program.
Sincerely,
William D. Ruckelshaus
'.
-------
INTROroCTICN
TABLE OF CDNTENTS
MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARaI, AND
SANCTUARIES ACT~ AS AMENDED (P.L. 92-532')
THE PERMIT PROGRAM
Table I
Table I I
Figure I
Table III
Figure II
Waste Generators on Implementation
Plans 1981 - 1983
Permits Issued and Quantities of waste
Material Dumped 1981- 1983
Quantities of waste Material Dumped
1981 - 1983
Types and Amounts of Ocean Disposal
by Geographic/Coasta~ Areas 1973 - 1983
Types and Amounts of OCean Disposal
Nationwide 1973 - 1983 .
Table IV SLUTlmary of Permits Denied, Withdrawn,
Phased out 1973 - 1983
Figure III Summary of Ocean Dumping Permittees/
Applicants Denied or Phased out in
Region II 1973 - 1983
Table V
Ocean Dumping Permits phased out
1981 - 1983
LCNOON OOMPING CDNVENTICN
Table VI
Contracting Parties
OCEAN roMPING SITE IESIGNATIONS
Table VII
Consent Agreement OCean Disposal sites
Table VIII Non-Consent Agreement Ocean Disposal sites
Figure IV U.8. Atlantic ocean Disposal sites
Figure V
Figure VI
OfN ANTELOPE
u.S. Gulf of Mexico Disposal sites
u.S. Pacific ocean Disposal sites
PAGE
1
2
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17'
18
19
21
22
23
24
-------
. .
"
( con It) TIlliIE (F CDNI'ENTS
. ~ . .
TAMPA HARBOR: PIDJEcr
Figure VII Tampa Harbor OrJotIE and Alternate Dispcsal
Sites
INCINERATION AT SEA
RADIOACTIVE WASTES
ENFORCEMENT
Table IX
Enforcement Actions
26
28
29
31
34
35
-------
INTRODUCI'Ioo
The U. S. Enviroomental Protect ion Agency (EPA) presents its tenth
report to the Congress 00 the administration of Title I of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as arrended. The
report covers the Agency's authority and its responsibility under the Act
in tmplementing the ocean dumping permit program activities conducted
within EPA Headquarters and the Regions during calendar years 1981, 1982,
and 1983.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (OOE), the U.s. Coast Guard (USCG),
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also have
responsiblities under the Act. The COE and NO\A sutmit separate reports
00 their activities in implementing the Act. Consequently, this report
does not include a discussion of their activities, except as they affect
the responsibility of EPA.
-------
'-
~
.,
MARINE PROTEX:TIUN, RES&\RCH, AND SANcruARIES ACT
OF 1972, AS AMEN OED (P.L. 92-532)
PURroSE
The purpcse of Title I of the Marine Protection, Researd1, am
Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), is to regulate the transportation for
cx:Ean dumping, and to prevent the dumping of any material in cx:Ean waters
whid1 wruld unreasonably degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or
amenities, or the marine envircrunent, ecolq;jical systems, or econOTlic
potentialities. To implement this purpcse and to control dumpiOJ in
cx:Ean waters, Title I of the Act establishes a };ermit system and assigns
its adminstration to the EPAand ODE.
Also under Title I, the USCG is given the responsibility to conduct
surveillance and other appropriate enforcement activities to prevent
unlawful cx:Eandumping, ensuring that the dumping occurs under a valid
permit, at the designated location, and in the manner specified within
the };ermit.
Title II requires NGI\A to conduct a COTlprehensive pra.Jram of
researd1 and monitoring regarding the effects of the dumping of material
into cx:Ean waters. Title III gives NQ\A the authority to establish
marine sanctuaries.
The MPRSA is also the domestic legislation for ilTIplementing the
provisions of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by
Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London Dumping Convention), a gloOOl
agreement for regulating ocean dumping, whiCh is described later in this
report.
Transportation frOTl the United States of any radiological, chemical,
or biolq;jical warfare agent or high-level radioactive wastes for the
purpcse of dumping in cx:Ean wat::ers, the territorial seas, or the
contiguous zone is prdlibited. Transportation of other materials (except
dredged materials) for the purpcse of dumping is prohibited except when
authorized under a permit issued by the Administrator of EPA.
Based upon considerations Oltlined in section 102 of the Act, the
Administrator is required to establish and apply criteria for reviewing
and evaluating permit applications. To the extent that he may do 50
withrut relaxing the requirements of Section 102, the Administrator shall
apply the standards and criteria binding upon the U.S. under the
Convention. Permits may te issued after detennining that the dumping
involved will not unreasonably degrade or endanger human health or the
marine environment. Before a permit is issued, EPA must also give notice
and opportunity for a public hearing. J)lmping of dredged material is
regulated under penn its issued by the OOE in accordance with the EPA
criteria. '
, .
-::
2
-------
The Administrator is also authorized to designate areas where ocean
dumping may te permitted and any critical areas where dumping may te
prdlibited. EPA has authority to revoke or rcOOify ~rmits or to assess
civil penalties for violation of permit conditions. The Attorney General
may initiate criminal action against ~rsons who knowingly violate the
Act.
During 1980, the Agency tegan considering the desirability of making
the ocean dumping regulations more flexible based on new scientific
kno.vledge and experience. As a result of Judge Sofaer's decision in the
City of New York vs. EPA, 543 F. Supp. 1084 (1981), EPA is obliged to
revise its ocean dumping regulations to remove the conclusive presumption
that materials whidh do not pass the Agency's environmental criteria (40
CFR 227(B)) will "urireasonably degrade" the marine environment. The
court ruled that EPA must consider all relevant statutory factors listed
in Sec. 102(a) of the MPRSA, including the need to ocean dump am the
availability of acceptable alternatives, before reaching a determination
on whether a fermi t should te issued.
On January 6, 1983, the President signed PL 97-424 (Surface
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) containing an arrendrrent to the
MPRSA, whidh states that during the two-year pericx:l fran date of
enactment no fermit may te issued under Title I that authorizes the
dumping of any low-level radioactive waste unless t:PA determines that:
1)
2)
the propcsed dumping is necessary to caxiuct research;
the scale of prq>ooed dumping is limited to the smallest amount
of material and the shortest duration at time necessary to
fulfill the purpooes of the research;
3)
the potential tenefits of such research will altweigh any
adverse impact; and
4)
the proposed dumping will te preceded by appropriate baseline
monitoring studies of the propooed dumpsite am its surrounding
environment.
3
-------
TH~ PEMMIT P~RAM
The Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria (40 CPR Parts 2~O-229)
published January 11, 1977, authorize the issuance of general ~rmits for
dumping small quantities of material having a minimal adverse
environmental impact when dumped under prescribed conditions. Examples
are burial at sea of hl.ID1an remains or ashes, U.S. Navy transport of
target vessels intended for sinking during ordnance testing, and
transport and disposal of derelict vessels that pose a threat to
navigational operations.
Special permits are issued for dumping materials which satisfy the
criteria, but only fer a maxinu..nn duration of three years for each permit.
Thirteen special permits were in effect during 1981,12 during 1982, and
7 during 1983, including permits for at-sea burning of wood pilings,
driftwocxj, derelict vessels, etc., resulting fran the clean-up of port
facilities in the New York Harbor. .
Until the regulatory termination date of December 31, 1981, .interim
permits had been issued fer those materials that did not canply with the
. ocean dumping criteria but fot which there were no feasible land-based
disposal alternatives at the time. Fifteen interim permits were in
effect during 1981. Twelve of the fifteen interim permit holders were
dumping under coort er administrative orders in 1982, and 9 continued
dumping under these conditions in 1983.
Errergency permits may be issued for the disposal of materials that
pose adverse effects to human health and for which no liTImediate alternate
. disposal methai is available. No emergency permits were issued during
1981. One permit was issued in 1982 for dumping of corrcded chlorine gas
cylinders off the coast of Puerto Rico. In 1983, one permit was issued
for the arergency disposal of spoiled galley waste off the coast of
Puerto Rico. .
Research permits may be issued for dumping material into the ocean
when the determination is made that scientific merit ootweighs the
potential environmental damage that may result fran dumping. One
research permit was issued during 1981 for the dumping of drilling muds
. in the Gulf of Mexico and one was issued in 1983 for the dumping of brine
off of Johnston Atoll in the Pacific Ocean.
Under the existing ocean dumping regulations, incineration of liquid
chemical wastes at sea is generally authorized under a research permit.
HCMever, a special permit can be issued in specific circumstances where
studies on the waste, the incineration methcd, the vessel, and ocean site
have already teen conducted and the site has teen designated for
incineration at sea. One research pennit was issued in 1981 for
incinerating PCBs at the Gulf of Mexico Incineration Site. No permits to
incinerate industrial wastes at sea were issued in 1982. In 1983, the
Assistant Administrator of the Office of Water made a tentative
determination to issue two special and One research permit for
incineration at sea; the final Agency action is pending.
4
-------
Table I lists permittees on lln~lelnentation plans to phase cut ocean
dumping during 1981, 1982, and' 1983. Table II and Figure I list and
illustrate, respectively, by EPA permitting authority (Region or
Headquarters) the permits issued or rn effect fran January 1, 1981 to
~cember 31, 1983, and the materials and amounts dW11ped. Table III
swmnarizes, by coastal and ocean areas, the total amount at dumping
during the subject three years and presents a comparison to the amounts
dumped under EPA permit in preceding years. This Table is illustrated in
Figure II. Table IV shows a summary of ocean dumping
permittees/applicants denied or phased out duriry the past ten years, and
Table V lists the ocean dumping permits phased rot fran January 1981 to
~cember 1983.
5
-------
TABLE I
WN:iTE GENERATORS ON ,
IMPLEMEl\lTATION PlANS 1U PHASE OJT OCEAN DUMP![\{;
(Status as of December 1983)
Passaic Valley Sewerage Carm.
SITE PHASE OUT DATE
SS Dec. 31, 1983*
SS Dec. 31, 1981*
SS Dec. 31, 1981*
SS Dec. 31, 1981*
SS Dec. 31, 19tH *
SS Dec. 31, 1981*
SS ~c. 31, 1981*
MUNICIPAL
Bergen Co. Util.
Authority
Joint Mtg.-Essex &
Unioo Co.
Linden-Roselle Sewerage
Authority
Rahway Valley Sewerage
Authority
Middlesex Co. Uti!.
Authority
Nassau Co. Dept. Public Works
Bay Park STP Long Beach STP
Bel Grave STP Roslyn STP
Cedar Creek STP W. Long Beach
Inwood STP
Westchester Co. Dept.
Envir. Facility
SS
Apr. 30, 1984*
New York City Dept.
Bowery Bay STP
Coney Island STP
Hunts Point STP
Jamaica STP
Newtown Creek STP
Oakwood Beach STP
Envir. Prato
Owls Head STP
Port Richmond STP
Tallman Island STP
26th Ward STP
Ward's Island STP
Rockaway STP
SS
Dec. 31, 1981*
INDUSTRIAL
Dupont-Edge Moor
NL Industries
106
AC
Dec. 31, 1983
Dec. 31, 1983'
SS - Sewage Sludge Site
106 - Industrial Wastes Site
AC - Acid Waste Site
* Continued under Court or administrative consent agreement
6
-------
TAliL£ II
PI::HMI1~ ISSUED AND
QUANTITII::S OF ~TI:: W\TI::~ Ol.MPED
CY 1981, 1982, 1983
Thousard Wet Tons
Regioo II 19111 1~82 1983
sewage Sludge Site:*
Bergen C9. Utility Auth. 271 289 221
Glen Cove City 23 22 10
Joint Mtg. Essex & Union Co. 467 421 J~l
Linden RosellejRahway Valley 278 269 426
Middlesex Co. 931 82U 94U
Middletown Twp. 21 9
Nassau Co. LWP 5U3 413 571
NJ small municipalities 53 56 35
., New York City DI::P 3320 32U6 3114
passaic Valley 589 1694 2163
Westchester Co. 226 433 481
6682 7632 tmT
Acid Waste Site:
Allied Chemical Co. 36 30 38
NL Industries, Inc. 1720 803
. 17~6 833 38
-106 Indust. Wastes Site:
American Cyanamid 25
Digestor Cleanout sludge 20 38 7
lAJPoot-Edge Moor 22 0 102
D..ipoot-Grasselli 200 192 136
267 1]j 245
Cellar Dirt Site:
Mcran TCMing Corp. coos t. debris ( 1) 0 0 0
Wood Incineration Site:(l)
Ccrps of Engineers 9.7 12.0 13.U
New York City 0.4 U.6. 11.0
OCean Burning 0.3 1.5 1.0
Weeks 5.7 0.0 6.2
i6:1 IT:! 31.2
PCI Internatiooal, PR
!...arnoo t Dehert y
U. S. Navy PI~
Crawly T & T Co.
indust. wastes
research: explosives
~neryency: corroded cyl.
erergency: galley waste
248
.OU3
.001
.001
.100
derelict vessel general permit .425
RetJioo IV
Mobil oil ** research drilling muds 0 0 0
Reyioo VI resear~i
Qlem. waste Mylnt** incin. PC~ 7UO 80U U
l'C1JS
Re
-------
1.000
118'1 1982 1983
Wood --
Incineration SI18
Chem. Incln.-
Gulf She
198'1 1982 1983
Industrial.
Am. Samoa
Site
8.000
7.000
6.000
6.000
4.000
00
3.000
2.000
-Quantitle8 In thousand 98110n8 (prior to Inclneratlonl
"Quantities in Thousand dry tons
Figure I. Quantities of Waste Materials Dumped During CY 1981-1983
(Quantities in Thousand We~ Tons)
-------
WW;;In
TYPtS AND AIIJUim:; IF OCEAN DISIU>AL BY WAORAl'tfIC/C(W>'TAL AI
-------
8.000
7...
. e.
5.000
,
1
1
1
1
A 1
1\ 1
1 \ II
1 \ 1
1 \ /
1 \ 1
1 ~
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
~
,'~
,.--- ~
, , ,.,!" ',-
-------
, H ,TA8LEIV.:, . , .
sf.MoiARr oF OCEAN OOMPI~PERHImES/APPLi:CANTs
IEN.IED OR PHAsED dir fJOt 1973 to 1983
~I~
. II. III IV VI, IX X Total..
" I
Action prior to April
1973 phast!d OJt
I)JrinQ the reinainder
of 1973 .
withflrew
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1974
wittx:!rew
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1975
withdrew
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1976
wi ttx:!reW
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1977
wittx:!rew
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1978
wittx:!rew
phased out:
denied
l)Ji"ing i 979
withCIr~
pho1l1t.'d' Out
denied
I)JrillQ 1980
withdcw .
. pha$~ OI.it
denied
I)Jring 1981
withdrew
phased out
denied
I)Jring 1982
wittx:!rew
phasUl:! oUt
duniud
I)Jring 1983
wittx:!rew
ph61:1U\.1 OUt
dunidCI
TC1l'ALS
44 -
- -- 44
- -
4 ~ ~ -
1 '1--""
- - - 1 - .....
4
2
1
--
2 ~ - - ,1 - 3
21 - - 1 - .;.. 22
i 1 -- 11 4
1
6 ~ ~
io i ~
. .;.. " ;.;;. , ~ it
2 - ~ 14
-
~ - ~
-- -
2":"~----- 2
17 -- .;.. - '~ -- 17
-- 130 -- - 1 ~ ..;. 131
-
-
.2 ..;.
16
---- '~'2
. 1 ..;;. .:...;, 18
1
-
... ~ ...;.
- -
. ~.
- -
-
1---';"-.1
31 ~ ';"';'1 .:... .... 32
l' - - ;... .-;. ~ 1
-
-
-
"...;.~~~......
'8 ~ - -
1--- 1--
4
8
2
-
--
. I. I'.' .1'.
....--...---
81"";''';' i-h
2---- 1- 3
i
. .
l';';"~~~--
.'
9-----
7..';';"---~
1 .
9
7
-
3 -"- - - -
1---~~;';';'
0-------
3
1
o
--
: " ~ '.'~ ...; ~. '.
j - - '~ ~ .:,;.
1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ..;...
(j
3
i
-
3
j .:... 9
.;.. 357
337
5
"
1 1
-------
130
26
-
20
N
16
10
6
Withdrew 6.
Phased Out 0
Denie.d X
-,
.1973
1974
1976
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
Figure III. Summary of Region II Ocean Dumping Permittees/Applicants Denied or
Phased Out in Region II 1973-1983
-------
TA8~V
OCEAN OOMPIN:; P~ITS' PHASED wr
Jan.i981...Dec.1:~8~ :
Permitt~ .
. . .
West New Ycrk
Anerican Cyanimid
Bristol Alpha'
CAPRI '.
Merck, Sharpe & Dctme
Pfi~r ~~pna~uti~~
Sherirg . '.
upjd1n 'Mfg. .
Poll. <;on.trol :rnd..
Midd1et~ Twp.
Glen ~0\7~ City
Northeast Mcnnaatl1
NL mqu.$H"ies '.
",
'. .'
ibbatioo
Date
-
':1
, .
. New .Jersey
New Jersey.
'Puerto Rico
"~rt9' ~co
"~rto Rico'
Puerto Rico
~rto ~ic9
,P\:IE,rto IUco
Puerto Rico
. ~W J~r~y
. New Jersey
'~w Jersey
. New Jersey;
~c:h 1981
~ril 1981
Sept.. 1981.
Sept. 19tH
Sept. 19.81
sept. 1981
Sept. .1981
Sept. 1981
sept. 1981
Dec. 1982
Sept. 1983
Dec. . 1983 .
Dec.' 1~83
1 3
-------
WNOON OOMPI~ a..>tM:NTION
The Convention on the. preventioo of Marine pollutioo by llm1ping of
Wastes and Other Matter (London bumping Convention) :is an international
agreemant requiring the Contracting' Parties (mal'liOOr nations) to establish
national systems to cootrol all substances leaving their shOres for the
purpa;e of beiiJ9 dumped at sea. The Conventic;x1 was negotiated in London
in NCNember 1972 and cane into force 00 August 30, 1975, following'"
receipt of the required fifteen ratifications or accessions. Table VI
lists the, coontries \tbich are Contracting Parties to date.. ,
. '
As the U.S. authority fer implementiDJ internatfonal reqUir~rreri~s
for the cdntrolofocean dumping, the MPRSA was cmeooed in 1974 and also
in 1980 to bring the Act into conformance with the convent;.ioo.' ,
. .
Technical aspects of the Convention regardirYJ tYpes of materials aoo
other factors are cootained in thJ:ee annexes. Annex I establishes a "
"black list" of substances \tba;edumpirYJ is" pl:"ct1ibitedunless",they ai'e
present ooly as. "trace contaminants" er wculd be "rapidlY, rendered
harmless." The substances 00 this. list are neraJrY and cadmium aoo their
canpcunds, organcnalogen canpcund,s such as DDT and PCB's, persistent
plastics, and oil. Illnping of high-.level radioactive wastes, aoo
chemical and biological warfare agents is canpletely prctiibited'~ Annex
II cootains a aitegory of substances requiring "special permits" as well
as special care in each dumping. These substances include heavy metals,
cyanides and fluorides, waste containers \tbich cculd present a serioos
obstacle to fishirYJ cr navigation, aoo nedium ana larlevel radioactive
wastes. QJmping substances nct: listed in Annexes I and II requires a
"general permit". Annex III sets forth factors to be considered'
regarding characteristics and canpa;ition of the material, method of
dispcsal, and characteristics of the dumpiRJ site before a permit may be
issued. .
The Convention (rOlTides that each Contracting Party will take
apprcpriate steps to ensure that the terms of the Convention apply to its
flagships and aircraft and to any vessel or aircraft loading in its ports
for the purpose of dumping.. Full continua.ts use is to 00 macE of the
best available ted-mical knowledge in its implementation which, together
with periodic meetings aoo planned participation by appropriate
international technical bodies, is designed to keep the contents of the
Annexes up to date aoo realistic in neetiDJ the needs tor controlling
ocean pollution stemning fran ocean dumping.
Coosultative Meetings of the Cootracting Parties have yenerally
convened 00 an annual basis since 1976. Ad hoc advisory yroops are
established to work 00 particular subjects when necessary, the mcst
significant being the ad hoc Scientific Gra.tp on Dumping, the ad hoc
Working Gra.tp on Incineratioo at Sea, aoo the ad hoc Gra.tp of Legal
Experts. The Scientific Gra.tp (AHs(;) net intersessionally on an annual
basis since 1977 as the Scientific tedmical advisory body of the
Consultative Meetings. In 1983, the Seventh Consultative Meeting
established the AHSG as the permanent Scientific Grcup on IlJrnping. The
working process used by Consultative MeetirYJs, namely to establish ad
.1 4
-------
hoc working groups of experts and, after nocing their advice, to proceed
with a view to reachiny consensus on critical questions, has proved to be
effective.
The work of the Consultative Meetings has reen very effective in
developing and adopting amendments, reguiations, consultation-, test-,
and notification procedures, and recarirrendations in the form of technical
guidelines. Of particular significance are the procedures for settlement
of disputes; regulations and recommended technical guidelines for control
of incineration at sea; lAEA provisional definition and recommendation
for dumping radioactive wastes at $ea; interim guidelines for
implementation of paragraphs 8 and 9 of Annex 1.
During the Seventh Consultative Meeting the Contracting Parties
considered propoc;ed amendments to Annexes I and II regardiry a
prohibition on active wastes into the seabed. The gralp
rret in December 1983 and will present their report to the Eighth .
Consultative Meeting for further action.
The Eighth Meeting will also consider the Report of the Task Team
2000 on a Long-Range Strategy for the Convention. This initiative was
begun by the Sixth Consultative Meeting in order to review the
Convention I s accatlplishments to date and, for the purposes for long-term
strategies and objectives, to consider and offer recommendations on the
follONing: 1) whether the ultimate yoal of the Convention is for the
best pa;sible control of the disposal of wastes arrl ocher matter at sea
or for the elimination of this activity; 2) what will re the future role
of the LOC in the broader problems relating to all sources of marine
pollution; 3) what will be the role of the LOC in the context of any
developing strategy for total Waste management; 4) what will te the
relationship between the Lee and other regional and global a.greements
dealing with marine pollution in general and disposal of wastes at sea in
particular; 5) are there any foreseeable changes to re contemplated in
the structure or q)eration of the LOC as it nON exists; arrl 6) are there
any other matters that will impinge directly or indirectly on the
continuing evaluation of d1e Convention.
1 5
\
I
-------
TABLE VI
CONTRACTI{\(; PARTIFS 10 .THE ~J:X'.N liMPI{\(; CONVENTION
as of DECEMBER 31, 1983
Afghanistan
Argentina
Brazil
Byelorussian SSR
Canada
Cape Verde
Chile
Cuba .
~nmark
Dominican Republic
Finland
France
Gabon
German Democratic Repuolic
German Federal Republic
Greece
Guatemala
Haiti
Hooduras
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Japan
Jordan
Kenya
Kiribati
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Mexico
Mooaco
Morocco
Nauru
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Sooth Africa
Spain
Surinam
SWede n
Swi tzer land
Tunisia
Ukranian SSR .
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdon
United States
USSR
Yugoolavia
Zaire
16
-------
.q:~ lPMPI~ $IT~ ~~J~TI.ONS
Section l02(c) of the ~~ ~~~hqri~~~ ~r~ ~n~nistrator to designate
areas where ~a~ duqtping naY ~ . ~qI}i t.t.~' ~rP ~f1Y cr~ tical areas where
dumping maY ~ prohip~t:~~ This aut:hqF1~Y ipc.).uqes q~$ign~tiro sites
for ocean qJ.lffiPir.9. C# qr~ged J'!\qt~ri~l .~ ~+ 1 ~ seV?.;ige slud~,
industrial wastes, and other matter. .
, . f,' I . :! . ;. . \'. ': .. . . ~. ~ : .. ~ .
If EPA des.~gnat~~ 9r ~9.n ~it.~ tqr ~~ing! s.~~ 9 s.it~
designatim d~s"not. cqnst~t.ut:e or imply E.P~'~ approval of actual
disposal of materials at sea. Before ~al1dlJlt\Ping of any ~t.erial at
any site maY c~n~! a ~rmi~ ~pp.Hca,tiq1 m,Ys.t ~ ~v~l!Jat~ ~ccording
to the ~ t.~plis.hed op:~qii qu,mPiMi:i"i t:~r~~( 49 ~f~ ~rt: ?"l.7) ~ ~A has
the right: to df!ny ~S.~4a!1~ pf, ~ ~qnj.t fprg~i!1Y qf seYla.ge sl~dge,
industrial ~?s.t:~~ ~. ~I\~~ ~~t:~F, W~ f ~!1 P}~ ~~ pt dJ:eq~
material, EP~ h~ t-h~ r~gh~ FP q~~R1?P'~Q~ t.ro d.!lIT1Pil1;J tq 00 cOflQucted
under a CO~ isslJ(~q ~tm.~t or IJ!1q~r' f~r~l ~thor+za.J:ion if it. is
determineq ~hg,t: ~n¥~F~nt:?+ pm~rn~ hmggf" tt)~ ~ct ha,v.e nq: ~n ~t:.
A la.rge f1~F .Pt 9ffi~n. HI-IffiP ~~t:~~ ~x~~J:~ ~t: th~ t~ r:# p3$sage
of the Act~ ~~~~ q1 t:he~f h~R~8F~~! ~~, ~m~ qe~~gna.t:~ q .
non-dredged I11Clt~ri~+ Pl.D1Ip ~~J:~~ (N::,~) CiW +?7 c1r~geq I1¥1teria.). dump
sites (I1-1~) ~ ~n ~nter~ qa,sis. +n +977, .~ three war vrr::xJram was
initiated for perwan~ntly ~s.j.Q~~tiryg Pr qe.9~S~9.nating the s.ites
pending ccmp.).et+Pn ~ ~~yir~r~~ ~$.~$~rt~ qr site d~sig~ation
studies. .
In February ~~~q~ t.h~ ~9~~pq~+ W~tqt~f~ f~eFR~ior ~~~ ~i+ed s~it
against the Ag~~cy phg~+~ng~ng ~h.e int~~~ H~~t9~qt~pn~! The ppurt
. '..' '.,' . ~'1 I . - ~
upheld the ~n1:~rin,t ~~+gn~q9~ wWH ~tPe~qt ~? reqchl39. The suit
result~ i~ a c,8Ps~n~ ~f~~~n~ ~~~~+r ~fA ~~~~ tQ prepare and issue
22 envir~~t9+ ~P1: .~~~~~~nt:~ (EIS) on 4~ sites. Three ~ the ~ISs
were for N-Q\1~ anq +~ for ~~. Th~r~fop~~ th~ ~pnanent de~tgnation
o~ a number <# ~~t:~Rf pr~marHy 14t,gh N~8tity OJ:1e~ (~onsent Agreement
Sltes), has teen addre~seq th+QU~r the p~~parat:lon of ~+Ss! A large
number of sites, pr+nC~~9.).~Y lQ~ P.t~q+ity Qn~p (Nor~OO?ent Agreement
Sites), remain tQ ~ ~pd+~~P~, N~w o,ga.ar. q~~P.Q$a+ sitQ$ will. ~
addressed on a ca~e by CClse ~~~$.!
The follo~ifl9 ~wq ~9.Q+~~ VH g09 y!p ~~QW th~ e:f~ ~nq rulerna!
-------
TABLE VI I
CONSEN!' AGREEMENT
OCEAN DISrosAL SITES
EIS Status Site Desi nation Status
No. of Interim NO. Sites
Interim IXaft Final Designation Desig-
Sites Issued Issued Extended to Pr a;ed ~'inal nated
Dredged Material Sites
Hawaii 3 10/20/79 9/30/80 11/14/80 6/16/81 5
San Francisco
Channel Bar 1 2/26/82 9/10/82 1/31/84
New York Mud D.Jmp 1 2/19/82 9/03/83 1/31/84 8/03/83
Jacksonville, FL 1 . 5/14/82 1/14/83 1/31/84
Gal ves ton 1 1/30/82 11/26/82 1/31/84 10/07/83
San Juan, P.R. 1 8/13/82 2/04/83 7/31/84
Sabine-Neches 4 8/20/82 4/01/83 7/31/84
- Wilmington/Charleston/
CX) . Savannah** 3 10/08/82 10/28/83 7/31/84
Columbia River 5 10/15/82 4/29/83 7/31/84
Portland, ME. 1 10/15/82 3/25/83 7/31/84
Pensacola/Mobile
Gulfport 4 1/21/82 (11/83) 1/31/85
Tampa, r'L 2 10/29/82 9/09/83 11/08/82 11/02/83
New Jersey/Long
Island Inlets 8 11/18/83 (3/84) 1/31/85
Coa; Bay* 2 (05/84) (8/84) 1/31/85
Long Beach* 1 (06/84) (9/84) 1/31/85
San Diego* 2 (05/84) (8/84) 1/31/85
HlllTIboldt Bay* 1 (08/84) ( 11/84 ) 1/31/85
San Francisco
100 Fathan Dedesignation Proposed
Other Sites
106-Mile 1 6/25/79 2/27/80 12/20/82
Acid Waste 1 11/27/79 12/01/80 5/29/80 6/16/83 1
Ce llar Dirt 1 3/26/82 9/24/82 9/20/82 4/06/83 1
*Being prepared by ODE
**Originally 2 EISs in Consent Agreement
()= Project Pate
-------
TABLE VI II
NON--aJNSENI' AGREEMENT
OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
EIS Status Site ~si natioo Status
No. of Interim No. Sites
Interim IXaft Final ~signation J:esig-
Sites Issued Issued Extended to Pr i"inal nated
Dredged Material Sites
None 2 11/25/83 (05/84)
Atchafa laya 11/25/83 ( 04/84)
Barataria, Ha.una,
Empire and Bayou
LaFoorche, IA 4 (04/84) (08/84)
CalCasieu Bar, LA 7 (04/84') (08/H4)
Moorehead City, OC* 1 (04/84) (07/84) 1/31/85
Georgetown Harbor,
SC* 1 (06/84) (09/84) 1/31/85
--a.
'" pascagoula, r-s * 1 (07/84) (10/84) 1/31/85
Yabucoa, . P. R. 1 (08/84) (02/85)
Port St. Joe ani
Panama City, FL 3 (10/84) (OlI85)
Soothwest Pass,
Gulf OUtlet,
Sooth Pass and
Tiger Pass 4 (12/84) (06/85)
Cape Arundel, MB 1 (06/84) (01/86)
Fresh Water Bayw
and Mernentau
River, IA 2 (06/85) (12/85)
Other Sites
Gulf Incineration 1 4/28/76 7/14/76 10/16/81 4/26/82
North Atlantic
Incineration 1 12/29/80 12/18/81 11/17/82 11/24/80
Starkist (Samoa) 1 ( 10/83) 2/84) - 8/25/80
-------
N..
0.:.
EIS Status
No. of
Interim
Sites
Draft
Issued
Final
Issued
fo'inal
Other Sites
. ...
St¥"ki~t (Long Beach)
Tanner . ,Banks .
J'hUITis Long'Beach
Platform Jacket
t 27.~.0 Sew~e .
...,' ::t; i' ." . ~
~lu(jge- :.-. ".
. .' ~... . I. ',r
1 ( 10/83) . (2/84)
1
1 12/16/83 (2/84)
1
2 . 3/12/76 10/16/78
: ~ . :-11 . ,:-, :.1 '
~ \.~.' . ~
/.-'. , , .~.
- ." " ~
.~. ,,' .
.' ,
.'
, ~.' .
. ..
..
Con I t TllliIE VI II
Interim
~signation
Extended to
Site Desi nation Status
Pr osed
No. Sites
~sig-
nated
3/03/78
12/08/83
8/05/83
11/30/78
12/02/80
5/18/79
l
*Being Prepared by OJE
() = Project Date
-------
nGtm!
IV
u.s. ATLANTIC OC!AN DISPOSAL SIT!S
. - Dredge Material Sites
A - Other Sites
21
.
.
o
PU.~D IiCD
R II
" ." 0,
AcJ..QUc Oc..
o
o
-------
lOUISIf-NA
R VI
N
N
A' "
MISSISSIPPI ALA~AMA
R
IV
.,'
,
U.s. GULF OF HEXICO DISPOSAL SITES
FIGURE V
. - Dredge Material Sites
A - Other Sites
-------
s..
R X
I
,
I
I Ca8da
,
,
I
I
Ra81- ~,~.,
., ~.
-Q,
.c:::t .
~s:>
.{)
I
!
I'-
.f:.t
'4
~.~
R IX
'\
Padflc Dc..
~
'1-;/00-
M.I'~ s...
R IX
FIGUI.! VI
U.S. PACIFIC OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES'
R, X
~~~AP~
. -Dr,dge Hat.erial S:Ltes
:23 :
-------
-.: '} i" ' ~,h
, ... ".~.
,'." ~ ';" . '," 'r\ 1.:': '-...':
.. ;' ',~,~, ct;v ANTELOPE
The OSV Antelope is EPA's survey vessel for ocean monitoring and
site designation field studies. rully equipped with three laboratories,
a wet lab for initial sample processing, a chemistrJ +aboratory, and a
microbiology laboratory, the ship also has a computerized survey center,
fran which survey operations are conducted. Onboard survey equipnent
includes over-the-side sampling gear, laboratory analytical equipment, an
underwater televisioo system with tapirg capabilities, and ~ siqe~can'
sonar unit. ,..' '
In 1981, six dredged naterial dumps i tes. (I:l-US) were surveyed off ,the
coast of Louisiana to :cblle'ct "data to' re used in the develcpment ,of EIS' s
on these sites. Later that year,: EPAdi vers am scientists p3rformed a
reconnaissance survey of three aJ;tern~te [MOO off Tampa, Florida. EPA
conducted this survey as part of its ':,site ~ ;~...
r '. t...; ~.~ . ~'. '. .,
._i'
-------
During the two 1983 Tampa surveys, the Agency surveyed the new
proposed Site 4, and alternative sites X, Y and Z. The survey team
collected supplemental seasonal baseline data for Site 4 and conducted a
continuing investigation of the three,al~ernative sites.
The two incineration sites surveyed, l~IS and GIS, included baseline
and trend assessment monitorilYJ of the. air as 'Nell as the upper water
column and water collimn biota. At the NAIS S\.Ul1OOr survey, baseline
conditions 'Nere studied bet'Neen Chesapeake Bay arid ~laware Bay aoo the
site approximately 100 miles offshore. The GIS fall survey encanpassed
the whole of the western part of the Gulf. of Mexico between Mobile Bay,
AL and Brownsville, TX. '!he Gulf surveY:Samp:J.ed the sane kinds of
parameters as had been done earlier at the NAI8. Both these monitoring
surveys, canpleted when no active use was reing nade of the site, are
similar to the environmental monitoring the Agency will undertake when
burns are actually taking place at the sites~ These environmental
surveys will re a supplelOOnt to stack gas mohitorii'YJ and permittee
monitoring on the incinerator vessel itself~
The Cape Coo, Norfolk, and BrOlrlnsville sites are all new sites at
which disposal has nct. occurred. .These surveys eX baseline caxHtions
will enable the Agency to make site managelOOnt decisions in the future
when p3rmi ts are issued for new dredging projects.
The remainder of DMOS surveyed are thoSe sites at which disposal has
taken place in the past and is continuilYJ. These sLirveys 'Nere trend
assessment monitorilYJ surveys, planned to assess the impacts of past
disposal cperations and to ~fine the current environmental state of the
site.
25
-------
TAMPA HARBOR PROJOCT
The site designation far ocean disposaiaf material dredged from the
Corps of Engineers' (COE) Tampa Harbor deepening project has' been of
considerable interest to cammunitiesin the Tampa area as well as to EPA.
Extensive studies have been made' regarding the designation of these
sites. EPA had entered into a contract with Interstate Electronics
Corporation (IEC) in 1977 for the evaluation of interim designated sites
and the preparation of EISs.' '
On January 11, 1977,' EPA designated two interim sites, A and B, in .
the Tampa Bay area far the disposal of dredged material. Site A is .
located approximately 13 miles west of EgIIDnt Key 'at the mouth of Tampa
Bay; Site B is located approximately 9ritiles fran Egmont Key as seen in
{o'igure VII. Dredged materiafwas disposed of at Site Sfran 1969-1973;
no dredged material has been disposed there siore' 1973. The COE. disposed
of dredged material from a construction dredging project at Site A from .
June 1980, until Derember 24, 1982. .
The sites were designated for a three-year periOd, or until final
site designatioo studies coold be completed. On Derember 9, 1980, the
interim designations were renewed. until February 1983, pending canpletion
of final site d~signatioo studies.
In April 1981, a study to evaluate the effects of offshore'disposal
of sediments in Site A was cooducted. The study concluded that partially
buried hard bottan habitats were present at'the boondaries of the
disposal site.' Living hard bottom communities, including hard corals,
soft corals, and spooges were observed beyond the limit of the disposal
site. '. , .
In search of an acreptable disposal site, EPA perfomed
recoonaissanre surveys of potential alternative sites in Tampa Bay area
in October 1981 and a;Jain in April 1982. Using side-scan sonar and
fathameter tracings providing by IEC during the 1981 survey, EPA divers
ob5erved and photo;Jraphed the bottan at Alternative Shallow-Water Sites
1, 2, and 3. Sites 1 and 2 were regarded as unacceptable due to the
presenre of hard bot tan ootcrq:>s and numeroos animal and plant
communities and only Site 3 appeared initially to be sandy bottomed.
Spurred by the Manatee Coonty suit filed a;Jainst EPA am COE for the
cootinued use of Site A, the Agency cooducted a more in-depth survey of
the Tampa Alternative Sites 2A, 3, and 4 in April 1982. Examination of
survey videotapes filmed from the sites' bottom areas revealed hard
bottan ootcJ;"q:>s in all oot Alternative Site 4. This site was the ooly
one coosidered, because it lacked existing hard bottom areas or coralline
gro.-lth.
Q.le in part to the public canments rereived in resPOOSe to the Tampa
Bay draft EIS, EPA planned and implerrented surveys to occur in February,
March, and April 1983. These surveys examined in detail Alternative Site
4 and its Control Site approximately five miles sootheast, and examined
in lesser detail Sites A and B and State Sites X, Y, and Z.
26
-------
The final EIS far Tampa Harbor was published in September 1983.
This FEIS analyzes all pertinent information gathered by EPA from all of
its surveys as v.ell as ct.her pertinent informat~6n relating to these
sites. Based on ~e information available to the Agency, Site 4 was
found to re an acooptable site fran an environrcent'al viewpoint recause
of its paucity of significant hard bottom areas. On Novenber 1, 1983,
Site 4 was designated as the disposal site for dredged rna~eri~l from the
Tampa Harbor Project far a perioo 0+ threE! years. 'f!1e AgeI1CY fully
intends to monitor carefully the eff~cts of qispqsal 'cpeiatio~ at'Site
4 to assure that no signifiCant adverse e~fects of d~ping occ~ beyond
the boundaries of the site. Should the oo~ncy, ~hroogh its roc>nitoring
cperations at Site 4, find adverse effects pf durrtp,il'VJ' it v,.ril+ rapiqly
move to halt disposal cper:atiqI1S until ne~~6dsCan re' ~sed to C!,ssure;
that the material remaif1S v,.rithin the site. "
The Agency initiated further survey ~r~tions during Fafl 19~3 to
locate another ocean dredged material d~sp~al site approxi~tely 30
miles west of Egmont Key. It is the ooencyl~ ~nt-e'1tio!1 tl).a~ canplete
site-specific studies, the EIS, and c~+etian'of rulemakil'VJon a final
site designation for this alternative304nile site re canpleted prior to
the end of the three-year designatiCl,1 ~r~~ far Site 4.
. . ./. '
27
-------
-
.
I
.
Nlutkll MH.8
II
,
.8
I
.
I
I
.domeltrl
N
OJ
4 3,
~
y. D
1 .
x8
8)800'
11801'
U'JO'N
Tanpa Harbor aJ.tOO am Alternate Disposal Sites.
FIGURE VII
-------
IOCINERATION lIT SEA.
During 1981, PCB wastes were incinerated at sea at the Gulf of
Mexico Incineration Site under a research ~rmit issued to Chemical Waste
Management, Inc. The ~rmit allowed destrtlctim of up to 3.5 million
gallons of PCB wastes--€quivalerit to approximately four shiploads. Test
results fran each shipload were requ~re<;i to re evaluated and approved by
EPA before permitting the next load to De incinerated.
The first bum began in D3cen\ber 1981 and was Cdnpleted on January
4, 1982; final test results incHca:ted the cdnbLiStloh efficiency (CE} was
99.8 percent and the destructioo efficiemcy tOE) was greater than 99.9
percent. The secohd turn was coriducted Augiist 15-31; 1982; final
results indicate ~he CE was ih excess of 99.95 petcent aM the re was
greater than 99~ 99 perCEnt. Eiwirmm:H1tal t~asuremerits in the vicinity
of the ship and cri shore shoWed no envit~ntal impact.
During 1982, EPA received applicatidhs frein C~emical Waste
Management, Inc. for incineratioo of additioha:i PC\1s, for Dar, and for
mixed organdialCXJen wastes. These aPplications are currently under
review.
In D3ceinber 1981, EPA issued- the "Fihai EnvirOOmantal Impact
Statement (EIS) for North Atianhc Incihetahai Site Designatioo." The
preferred site, located 140 nautical miles east. of Delaware Bay, was
propcsed for designatim by Federal Register notice on November 17, 1982.
Final ru1emaking 00 the proposed site is tx:!ri:Hh;}.
Several companies have announced planS to build new U.S. flag
incinerator vessels. These ships must !teet the International Maritime
Organization (100) requirements for transport of dangerws cargo and the
incinerator sijstem must be aertified as meeting the operational
regulations for incineratioo a~ sea under the Landon Dumping Convention.
All incinerator vessels operating wt of U.S. ports must also be
certified by the U.S. Coast Guard for transport of hazardous materials
and by EPA for incinerator ~rformance. Certification of the incinerator
system is done in accordance with the Conventioo recJulations. Test burns
are required far all wastes of unproven incinerability, and extensive
monitoring of the stack emissions is required to determine CE and DE.
The Convention regulations require that CE of at least 99.95+.05 percent
be maintained at all tbnes. -
On October 21, 1983, the Assistant Administrator for Water made a
tentative determinatioo to issue two special and one research permit to
Chemical \'laste Management and Ocean Canbustion Service for incineration
of chemical wastes ooboard the Vulcanus I and Vulcanus II at the Gulf of
Mexico incineration site. Public hearings \\ere scheduled for
29
-------
BrONnSville, Texas, on November 21, 1983, and Mobile, Alabama, November
22-23, 1983. The States of Texas and Louisiana along with several
environmental. and citizens groups sued to enjoin EPA fram holding the
hearings. On November 1H, 1983, the suit was dismissed by the U.S.
District Court on the grounds that .it was premature.
EPA conducted public hearings on the tentative determinations
originally scheduled. Over 6,000 pecple, including Governor Mark W1ite
and Attorney General Jim Mattox, attended the hearing in Brownsville.
Over 500 pecple attended the hearing in Mobile. [)Jring these hearings,
the Assistant Administrator for Water extended the public ccmment period
on the tentative determination to January 31, 1984.
On December 7, 1983, the House of Representatives Committee on
Merchant Marine and Fisheries conducted an Oversight Hearing on
incineration of hazardous wastes at sea. Carmittee memoors pressed the
Assistant Administrator for Water on the need for EPA to issue specific
regulations for incineratioo of chemical wastes at sea before EPA would
issue special (cperating) permits. The AA for Water committed to issuing
regulations by December 1984, but tack no position 00 the timing of .
special permit ~ssuance while these regulations were ooing cevelcped. .
At the Brownsville public hearing, the AA for Water agreed to
sponsor a scientific forum in BrONnSville on January 10, 1984.
Scientific experts fram groups cpposed to the tentative determinatioo and
EPA experts would focus discussions on the scientific issues in dispute.
An edited 'IV tape of the forum will be prepared and made available to the
general public.
30
-------
RADIOA.crrVE V\D\STES
During 1981, with assistance fram the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), EPA initiated a survey of the fonner
radioactive waste disposal site in Massachusetts Bay. This site received
about 4000 containers with a total of about 2400 curies of radioactive
waste between 1946 and 1958, which is about 2 percent of all U.8.
disposal at sea of radioactive waste during this ~riod. To datennine
possible public health significance of Massachusetts Bay disposals, EPA
pursued three sources of data: 1) review of disposal records and
interviews with peq:>le involved with the disposals, 2) side-scan sonar
surveys to locate objects m the ocean bottan in the dumpsite, and 3) a
radiological monitoring survey to collect samples of marine biota,
sediments, am water for radioactivity measurements. The records and
interviews indicated most disposals occurred in the area designated as a
foul site, although two adjacent areasv.ere authorized and nay have
received same disposals. During 1981, NOAA surveyed all three areas with
side-scan . sonar to prcwide data on locations of groops of bOCtan objects
to indicate where samples shoold be collected in the subsequent
radiological survey. NOAA also collected a large number of sediment and
fish samples which were sent for analysis to EPA's Eastern Environmental
Radiation Facility in Montgarery, Alabama.
EPA returned to Massachusetts Bay in September 1982 with the EPA
ocean survey vessel Antelope to collect radiological samples, to rreasure
radioactivity directly m the ocean bottan, and to observe containers
with underwater television. The crew on this survey included scientists
fran several Federal and State agencies as well as private research
laboratories and contractors. Preliminary radioactivity measurements
show no significant levels and EPA concludes that ~revioos disposals in
the Bay are not resulting in harm to either human health or the narine
envirmment. EPA will publish a comprehensive re~ort on the overall
survey of Massachusetts Bay. -
In 1981 EPA initiated a program to IfOnitor narketplaceseafoods as a
means of determining possible public health effects fram the major U.8.
ocean dumpsites \\here radioactive wastes were dum];ed in the past. Since
seafoods are the mly significant pathway by which radioactive materials
could IfOVe fran an ocean dumpsite reck to man, EPA in conjunction with
the Food & Drug Administration (F~) is periodically analyzing cammerical
seafoods fran cities nearest these najor dumpsites. These include San
Francisco, CA (Farallon Islands dumpsite), Newark, NJ (Atlantic 2800
rreter and 3800 meter dumpsites), and Boston, MP. (Massachusetts Bay
dumpsite). These dumpsites received more than 97 percent of all
radioactive wastes disposed in the ocean by the U.8. fran 1946 until
ocean disposal of radioactive waste ceased in 1970 because of the
availability of acceptable land disposal techniques.
The FDA collects six different samples of seafoods every six months
in each of the cities. The samples are obtained directly fran fisherrren
who have fished in the area of the dumpsites and are taking their catch
to market. The samples are spli t for radionuclide analyses both by the
FDA and by EPA's Eastern Environmental Radiatim Facility. Measurements
on all samples collected in 1981 and 1982 indicate only normal reckground
levels of radioactivity. The results of these analyses will be
surrmarized in a report in 1984.
31
-------
The Department of Navy has notified EPA that the OCX:1an is teing
evaluated as an optioo f<.r dispooal of decamnissioned, defueled,
submarine reactor plants. The Navy published a draft Environmental
Impact Statement in ~cemrer 1982 Which presents data 00 three options
for dispooal of these nuclear reactor plants. The cptions include
loog-term floatiad storage, sinking of the entire submarine in the deep
ocean, or removal of the reactor canpartment for turial 00 land. If the
Navy determines that sea dispooal is the rest optioo, they will have to
request an ocean dumping {:ermit fran EPA according to requirements of the
Ocean Dumping Act of 1972 and the Amendments of 1983, as described
relow.
In May 1981, under the terms of the Organization for Ecooanic
Cooperatioo and Developrent (OECD) Multilateral Consultatioo and
Surveillance Mechanism for Sea Dumping of Radioactive Waste, the
international Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) adopted a coordinated research
and environmental surveillance program plan for gathering canprehensive
scientific data related to radioactive waste dispooal in the Northeast
Atlantic Lompsite, \\hich is located n<.rth of the Azores. All radioactive
waste sea dumping operations undertaken by OECD participatiruJ countries
have teen carried rut at this site since 1974. This prQJram is run under
the directioo of an Executive Group made up of representatives fran 13
countries who are pooling resources and expertise to linplement the plan.
EPA is providif)J the U.S. representative to the Executive Grrup, and
extensive radiochemical laboratory facilities. The U.S. is also
providing technical experts to each of the five Task Grrups which are
performing research studies under the plan in physical oceanography,
geochemistry, biolcgy, modelling, and radiolcgical surveillance. The
results of these studies will te used in 1984 to determine the
suitability of the Northeast Atlantic Dumpsite f<.r continued use for
radioactive waste disposal.
The future use of the oceans for disPC6al of radioactive wastes was
a major issue addressed by two resolutions at the February 1983 meeting
of Contracting Parties to the London Dumping Convention. A resolution
was adopted by concensus which calls for a review of the scientific and
technical rrerits of propooals to amend the Annexes of the Convention in
order to ban the ocean dispooal of radioactive materials. This review
was initiated at a meeting of several international organizations in
Septemrer 1983, that coovened to assemble a biblicgraphy of relevant
scientific literature. This literature will te prOlTided to a rreeting of
experts in 1984 for scientific review and preparation of a report to the
Consultative Meeting in February 1985. A second resolution was adopted
by vote that calls for a suspensi01 of any further ocean dispooal of
radioactive materials pending presentation of the experts I report to the
Contracting Parties.
In January 1983, the President signed P.L. 97-424, "The Surface
Transportatioo Assistance Act of 1982." This Act contained amendments to
the Ocean Dumping Act of 1972 that specifically addressed the ocean
dispooal of radioactive materials. In particular, the amendments remove
32
-------
EPA'S authority to issue ocean dumpil'kJ permits for sudl materials for a
period of two years, except for research purposes. After two years, a
permit applicant must prepare a site ~pecific radioactive material
disposal impact assessment that includes 11 requirements specified by the
amendments. If EPA determines a permit is warranted, then EPA must
request authority fran Congress to issue the permit. This request must
then be apprOlled by a joint. resolutioo of Coogress actio;J within 90 days
of receipt of EPA's recamrerrlation.
Congressional coocerns for ocean disposal of radioactive materials
were also addressed in a hearing on NOIlember 2, 1983, by the Subcanmittee
00 OceanOJraphy of the Camnittee al i\1erdlant Marine am Fisheries of the
House of Representatives. EPA's testimony at this hearing reviewed the
steps taken in cur domestic arrl international programs to assure careful
scientific evaluatioo of all matters related to protectioo of the marine
environment and public health. Although EPA has not received any permit
requests for ocean disposal of radioactive materials, we are continuing
to develop a scientific resis for evaluating any such requests. In
particular, EPA is supporting studies at several national laboratories
and universities to evaluate biolOJical rronitoring techniques, criteria
for packaging radioactive materials, and the behavior of such
materials when released to ~an waters. In addition, EPA is actively
involved in researdl and criteria.develc.pmant programs of the
International Atcrnic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the NEA.
.-,
33
-------
ENFORCEMENT
The U.S. Coast Guard has responsibility for surveillance activities
to prevent unlawful dumping or unlawful transportation of materials for
dumping and to assure authorized ocean dumping is performed in compliance
with permit conditions.
Vessels and aircraft patrols;~shipriders on board dumping vessels,
in-port boardings and inspections, and Vessel Traffic Services (VTS)
radar are several rrethods used by the Coast Guard for surveillance of
ocean dumping operations. The scheduling of surveillance resources is
aided by a permit condition which requires permittees to give authorities
advance, notification prior to commencing any dumping operations.
Pursuant to Section 107{c) of the MPRSA and the regulations
thereunder (40 CFR 223) information concerning violations of the Act and
of ocean dumping permit conditions is forwarded to EPA Regional
Administrators for appropriate action when civil actions are indicated or
to the Attorney General for criminal cases. Suspected violations are
documented by the Coast Guard to the maximum extent practicable and
referred to EPA for investigation and determination of possible
enforcement actions. Evidentiary material may include witness
statements, photoo, samples,' mess~ge traffic, and lOJ excerpts.'
In 1981, 3956 notifications of dumping were reported to the Coast
Guard. A total of 245 surveillance missions \\ere conducted: 10 by use of
radar, 140 performed by shiprider, 2 by vessels and 93 by observations
from aircraft during routine flying missions.
The Coast Guard received 3379 notifications in 1982. A total of 50
missions \\ere conducted, 7 by use of radar and 43 performed by shiprider
In 1983, 4143 notifications of dumping were reported to the Coast
Guard. A total of 189 surveillance missions \\ere conducted, 129 by use
of radar, 28 by shiprider, 28 by boarding inspector, and 4 by vessels.
Surveillance was also conducted by radio/telephone.
The surveillance missiOns resulted in one case being referred to the
EPA in 1981 for alleged violations. None was referred in 1982 and 1983.
No cases were referred to the Attorney General by the Coast Guard or EPA
in 1981, 1982, or 1983.
Four enforcement actions \\ere taken by EPA during 1981, one in 1982,
and two during 1983 (Table IX). six actions were for lack of compliance
with permit schedules, and me was for turning outside the wood
incineration site.
34
-------
TABLE IX
ENFURCEMENf ACTION
RESroNDENT' S REl"ERRAL TYPE OF COMPIAINr DISPOSAL
NAME FRavt VIOIATION ISSUED DISPOSITION SITE
Weeks Stevedoring USCG Hurning outside of 2/27/81 Final ODder - 3/29/82 Woa::i Incin.
woa::i incineration site establish wetdown site
Glen COIle EPA Permit condition, Waived ~'inal Order - 1/12/82 Sewage ::;lud~
Canpliance . schedule revision of schedule;
<:sase dumping by Mar. 1983
i-1iddletCMn 'IWP. EPA . Permit condition, Waived £o'inal Order - 1/7/82 Sewage Sludge
Compliance schedule revision of schedule;
<:sase dumpiD,l by Sept 1982
NL Industries EPA Permit condition, Waived Final Order - 2/1/82 Acid Wastes
Ccmpliance schedule $82,000 penalty asses~d;
l.N revision of schedule
U1
MiddletCMn 'IWP EPA Consent agreerrent, Wai ved Final Order - 11/18/H2 Sewage Sludge
Ccmplian<:s schedule revision of schedule;
<:sase dumpinJ by Oat. 1982
Northeast Monmouth EPA Permit condition 6/6/83 Final Order - 8/24/83 Sewage Sludge
Cc:unty Regional phased out 12/31/83
Sewerage Authority
City of Glen COIle EPA Permit condition, Waived Ameooed Final Sewage Slud~
Canplian<:s schedule Order 6/23/83
<:sase dumping 9/1/83
NL Industries EPA Pennit condition, 2/1/82 Final Order - 8/17/83 Acid Wastes
Camplian<:s schedule $30,000 penalty payment;
cease dumping of gangue
solids by 4/1/82
------- |