United States
                Environmental Protection
                Agency
       Sediment  Issue
Measuring  Contaminant Resuspension
Resulting from Sediment  Capping
     Purpose

     Introduction

       Site Descriptions

      lethods

     Results and Discussion

       Boston Harbor

       Eagle Harbor

     Conclusions

     References


Purpose

The National Risk Management Research Lab-
oratory (NRMRL) of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is developing
effective, inexpensive remediation strategies for
contaminated sediments. This program theme
includes the evaluation of capping to contain/sta-
bilize contaminated sediments. Studies were con-
ducted by NRMRL to evaluate the resuspension
of surface materials contaminated with polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlori-
nated biphenyls (PCBs).  This information, along
with U.S. EPA's sediment guidance document (1),
is intended to: a) be used as a reference for site
managers and U.S. EPA decision makers who are
considering the environmental impacts of capping
contaminated sediments, and b) provide  a better
understanding of the techniques and mechanisms
that can be applied to minimize the resuspension
of contaminated material during capping.
 Monitoring the Water Column During Capping Activities at Boston Harbor
The results of two NRMRL studies undertaken to evaluate solids
resuspension before, during, and after capping of contaminated
sediments are summarized below. These two studies were both
conducted at marine sites. One study was carried out at the
Boston Harbor/Mystic River Site in cooperation with U.S. EPA
Region 1 and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). The
other study took place at the Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor Superfund Site
off Bainbridge Island, WA, in cooperation with U.S. EPA Region
10 and USAGE.

Introduction

During sediment capping activities, clean material is commonly re-
leased from a barge at the water surface and falls through the water
column to the sediment surface, providing an uncontaminated sur-
face sediment layer (2).  Information on the potential release of in-
situ contaminated sediment during and after capping operations is
sparse; therefore, NRMRL conducted studies as reported in Lyons
et ol.  (2) in order to develop a better understanding of the amount
of contaminants released into the surrounding water column
before, during, and after capping.  These studies evaluated whether
the placement of conventional sand caps results in the disturbance
of contaminated surface sediments and thus the release of contami-
nants into  the surrounding water column through resuspension.

-------
Two sites were examined where different capping methods
(see Table 1 below) were employed for dissimilar sediment
types (2).  Data associated with the sites indicated that:

• The resuspension of contaminated sediments was measur-
  able, remaining in the ng/L range (for contaminants in
  the water column), when capping was conducted over
  uncapped sediments.

• The magnitude of contaminant resuspension decreased
  with successive capping layers, suggesting the greatest
  potential for resuspension occurred when capping native
  uncapped contaminated material.

• After capping operations ceased, turbidity plumes dis-
  sipated rapidly (generally within hours) due to deposition
  and off-site  transport.

Site Descriptions
Table 1 summarizes characteristics of the study sites,
including capping techniques, source of capping materials,
and contaminants-of-concern (COCs) at the study sites.
For the Boston Harbor Site, confined aquatic disposal
(CAD) cell M8, measuring 213 m by 61 m, was exca-
vated to a depth of 27 m and had an estimated capacity
of 118,500 m3 of dredged material. CAD cell Ml 9, the

Table 1. Description of Study Sites.
larger of the two cells measuring 244 m by 91 m, was ex-
cavated to a depth of 24 m and had an estimated capacity
of 136,900 m3. The area monitored for the Eagle Harbor
study covered an area of approximately 150 m by 275 m.

Methods
An aquatic monitoring tool was towed behind a boat to
collect and integrate in-situ measurements with continuous
water collection to monitor the effects of sediment suspen-
sion during capping operations. Aquatic monitoring of
the capping events was conducted using the Battelle Ocean
Sampling System (BOSS) deployed from a survey vessel.
The BOSS  is an integrated profiling system comprised of
an underwater sensor unit, an electromechanical profiling
cable for delivery of real-time data and continuous water
samples to  the shipboard laboratory, and a customized
profiling winch and handling system, as shown in Figure 1.
The BOSS  in-situ sensor package (housed inside a towfish)
includes a conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD)
sensor; a turbidity sensor; an Acoustic Doppler Current
Profiler for vertical profiles of horizontal currents; and a
Teflon™/titanium pumping system for sample collection,
which delivered water samples to the onboard laboratory at
12 L/min through a Teflon™ line. The survey vessel towed
the BOSS at a depth of approximately  1 to 2 m above the
sediment surface to optimize detection of resuspended
sediments.
Study Site




Boston Harbor/
Mystic River
Site






Wyckoff/Eagle
Harbor
Superfund
Site





Location




Boston,
MA







Bainbridge
Island,
WA






Sediment Type


CAD cells (M8 and
Ml 9) filled with
dredged sediments,
typically 85-100%
silt/clay with in-situ
solids ranging from
30-55% (3)




Bedded (specifics
about sediment
unknown)






Capping
Technique


Pushing an open
hopper dredge with
a tugboat over the
area to be capped





High-pressure
washing of
sediments off the
surface of a barge
over the area to be
capped




Capping Material



Sand dredged from the Cape
Cod Canal having modal
grain size of 0.25 mm diam-
eter with an average of less
than 1% fines (3)

Clean quarry sand with the
following properties: 81.1%
passed through a #10 mesh
but retained on a #40 mesh
(0.43- to 2.0-mm-diameter
medium sand); 9.5% passed
through a #40 mesh but was
retained on a #200 mesh
(0.075- to 0.43-mm-diameter
fine sand); and 0.6% passed
through a #200 mesh (less
than 0.075-mm-diameter silt
or clay) (2)
COCs




PCBs
PAHs








PAHs







Contaminant Concentra-
tions in Sediment
Prior to Capping

Average total PCBs and total
PAHs were 220 ug/kg and
64,478 ug/kg,
respectively (4)


Total PAH concentrations
reported as 1,273 ± 2,116
mg/kg in the upper 10 cm
of three sediment cores
collected within 91 m of
the site; farther from the
site, total PAH concentra-
tions decreased to 18.3 ±
6.6 mg/kg in the upper 10
cm of three sediment cores
collected 305 m from the
site (5)


-------
                Winch and Handling System
                                                                                                Navigation
                                                        Analyzer     Data Act1uisition System
                                                                                                Echo-sounder
       In situ
       Sensors
   Figure 1. BOSS and On-Board Components.
A differential Global Positioning System (developed by
Northstar) was interfaced with the BOSS computer to
provide vessel positioning information during sampling
operations.

In order to evaluate the amount of contaminants released
into the surrounding water column before, during, and
after capping, water samples collected by the BOSS were
analyzed for total PCBs (i.e., sum of 18 PCB congeners
[t-PCBs]), total PAHs (i.e., sum of 16 priority PAH
analytes [t-PAHs]), and total suspended solids (TSS).
If suspended sediment was visibly present in the water sam-
ple, a quartz glass fiber filter (1.0 um) was used to remove
larger sediment particles because they were considered to
represent cap material, and because sediments greater  than
1.0-um in diameter would settle relatively quickly in the
immediate vicinity of the capping area.  Smaller particles
that passed through the filters were more likely to undergo
long-range transport from the site.
Samples were collected before, during, and after capping
activities and were generally defined as:

• Pre-Capping Survey: samples taken several days or 1 week
  before capping initiated

• Pre-Capping Event: samples taken approximately 1 hour
  before each capping event

• Capping Event: samples taken during capping (i.e., each
  time a lift of capping material applied)

• Post-Capping Event: samples taken approximately 1 hour
  after each capping event

• Post-Capping Survey: samples taken  days to months after
  capping was completed

The sampling events and sample schedule for each of the
studies are summarized in Table 2.

-------
Figures 2 and 3 show the target BOSS transects and target
sampling locations used for background surveys and active
monitoring events (i.e., during capping) at Boston Harbor
and Eagle Harbor, respectively. The top transect repre-
sents the daily Pre-Capping and Post-Capping background
monitoring events.  The bottom transect represents a
                                 typical monitoring event during capping. Actual
                                 transects differed significantly based on the barge loca-
                                 tion, capping operations, and turbidity plume migration.


*3r
» "S is
LL CL (0



Typical
Monitoring Ever
Area of Stjdy (~80 m x ~240 m)

Transect line before capping
Current

-4- /I -C ^
^ 1 .1 1 - J
L Transect line during
\^^/ x__^X capping operations
Start
• Sampling Station
Figure 2. Transect Line and Sampling Station Locations for BOSS
Surveys and Monitoring at Boston Harbor.
as
'5.
_ Q.
^ « ^
*9 &
P S 1
0- CL O3


Typical
Monitoring Even
Area of Study (~1 50 m x -275 m)
Transect line before capping
Current
S 	 "N-
n f }
L Transect line during
\^S \^ ^y capping operations
Start
• Sampling Station
                                 Figure 3. Transect Line and Sampling Station Locations for BOSS
                                 Surveys and Monitoring at Eagle Harbor.
Table 2. Survey Event and Sample Schedule. Reprinted with permission from (2). Copyright 2006, American Society of Civil Engineers.
     Type of Event
Number of
  Events
                     Total Samples
                                                  Boston Harbor Sample Schedule
 Pre-Capping Survey
 Pre-Capping Survey1

 Day 1, Capping Events 1-3
 Day 2, Capping Events 1-3
 Day 3, Capping Events 1-3

 Days 1-3, Post-Capping Events

 Post-Capping Survey
 Total
                CAD Cell M19
                      5
CAD Cell M8
     5
                 Capped Area
                      3

                    6 to9c
                    6 to9c
                    6to9c
                      15
                                                                                                          10
Pre-Capping Events 1—4
Capping Events 1—4
Post-Capping Events 1—4
Pre-Capping Events 5 — 8
Capping Events 5 — 8
Post-Capping Events 5 — 8

Post-Capping Survey
Total
4
4
4
4
4
4

1

3
9
3"
	
-
-

5





3
9
3

5
12
36
10
12
36
12

10
138
Eagle Harbor Sample Schedule
                           24
                           24
                           24
                           15
                           108
a - Sampler struck bottom immediately following sample collection for the first Post-Capping Event 3 sample, and system components fouled with mud. As a result,
   the second and third samples for Post-Capping Event 3 could not be collected.
b - Pre-capping samples were collected by divers during a separate site investigation, and the AMT was not used for the pre-capping survey.
c - Nine samples were collected daily during Transects 1 and 2, and six  samples were collected daily during Transect 3.

-------
Results and Discussion
Boston Harbor

Two-dimensional turbidity maps using levels detected
by the BOSS were generated to depict turbidity levels in
the area where capping took place, as shown in Figure 4.
Turbidity data generated by the BOSS in-situ sensors were
calibrated using TSS concentrations measured in the water
samples. Cells M8 and Ml9 produced similar turbidity
and TSS data; however, only results for CAD Cell Ml9
are depicted in Figure 4. The highest turbidity and cor-
           42.387-

           42.386-

           42.365

           42.3*4-
                                                     t = -1 hr
                               ,'CAD M ta
             Boston Harbor - PAH
             CAD M19 - Pis-Capping Evsnt 1
             aj!M2
-------
occurred when cap material was placed on previously
uncapped sediment.  Statistical comparisons among the
four capping events were conducted by omitting the data
from the Pre-Capping and Post-Capping Events and using
Tukey multiple comparisons at a fixed significance level of
0.10. For t-PAHs, Capping Event 1 concentrations were
significantly greater than those for Capping Events 2, 3,
and 4, and there were no significant differences between
Capping Events 2, 3, and 4. For t-PCBs, Capping Event
1 concentrations were significantly greater than those for
Capping Events 2  and 3-  Capping Event 4 concentrations
could not be distinguished from those for Capping Events
1, 2, and 3, and resided somewhere between these three
capping events.

Turbidity concentration plots for Capping Events 1
through 4, the Pre-Capping Survey, and the Post-Capping
Survey for Cell Ml9 and water sample locations are plotted
in Figure 4. The relationship between contaminant con-
centrations and turbidity was analyzed by plotting t-PAH
and t-PCB against TSS concentrations for water samples
collected during capping operations.  The correlation
coefficients (r2 values) for  the best-fit linear regression lines
were calculated (2).  Despite the visual observation that
higher TSS/turbidity concentrations during Capping Event
1 coincided with higher t-PAH and t-PCB concentrations,
as shown in Figures 5 and 6, a strong correlation between
high TSS concentrations and high organic contaminant
concentrations could not be determined statistically. It is
likely that the contribution of bed sediments to TSS and
turbidity was overshadowed by the TSS from the cap mate-
rial.

Eagle Harbor

TSS concentrations measured in the water samples and tur-
bidity data generated by the BOSS in-situ sensors were used
to develop two-dimensional turbidity maps, shown in Fig-
ure 7, to display turbidity levels in the area where capping
took place. Elevated turbidity levels were observed at vary-
ing distances and along different directions from the barge,
extending beyond  the boundaries of the study area based
on analysis of samples collected outside the study area. The
Post-Capping Event  map in Figure 7 shows that turbidity
levels quickly decreased to near Pre-Capping Event transect
levels within  1 to 2 hours  after capping.    As with Boston
Harbor, the contribution ofTSS from the cap material
itself may have partially overshadowed the contribution of
bed sediments to elevated turbidity and TSS levels.  None-
theless, in the vicinity of the capping operations, turbidity
and TSS levels were highest during Capping Events 1 and
2, indicating decreased turbidity with successive capping
events. These data suggest that the measured turbidity in-
cludes  a significant contribution from in-situ sediment, and
not only capping material during the initial capping events.
Average t-PAH concentrations measured for the successive
sampling events conducted over the 3-day Eagle Har-
bor monitoring period are shown in Figure 8.  Elevated
contaminant concentrations were observed during cap-
ping operations, which appeared to decrease with each
successive capping day and dissipated after capping was
completed.  Such rapid dissipation likely was the result of
the combined effects of sedimentation and off-site plume
                                     Day 3 - Capping Event 2   it
                                     11,13100
                                     Duration 15:53-17:05
                                                 Study Area
                   -122.51    -122.SOS    -122.506    -122.504
        Explanation
        «  Water Sampling Location
        TSS Concentration Based on BOSS Turbiditity Sensor Data
        Dimensions of study area, 150m x 275m

Figure 7. Turbidity and TSS Maps for Eagle Harbor Day 3. TSS
values were based on turbidity readings and correlations derived
from measured turbidity and TSS samples.  Reprinted with permission
from (2). Copyright 2006, American Society of Civil Engineers.

-------
    620
                           ngIL; se ± 467 ngtL
                                        Pre-Capping Event
                                        Capping Event 1
                                        Capping Event 2
                                        Capping Event 3
                                        Post-Capping Event
           Pre-
         Capping
          Survey
Figure 8. Average t-PAH Concentrations at Eagle Harbor. Error
bars represent standard deviations. Reprinted with permission from (2).
Copyright 2006, American Society of Civil Engineers.

migration. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted
to determine whether there were statistically significant dif-
ferences between different days or sampling events within a
single day using the raw data, log-transformed data, and a
significance level of 0.10.  Because  of high data variability,
no statistically significant differences  were found between
the four sampling events (i.e., samples collected during
Capping Events 1, 2, and 3, and the  post-capping sample)
within any single day for Days 1, 2, and 3, and no differ-
ences existed between Days 1, 2, and 3-

Scatter graphs plotting t-PAHs against TSS were generated
to determine the relationship between contaminant con-
centration and turbidity. During the first survey day,
r2 values ranged from 0.72 through 0.95, indicating a cor-
relation between turbidity and t-PAHs.  However, r2 values
decreased during subsequent capping surveys and, by the
third day, r2 values were  less than 0.54, indicating that a
correlation between turbidity and t-PAHs was lacking. As
with Boston Harbor, it is suspected that the suspended sol-
ids generated by the cap material overshadowed the solids
resulting from suspension of contaminated bed sediments
during subsequent capping events (i.e., after capping events
1 and 2).
                                    Conclusions

                                    A comparison of sampling results at Boston Harbor and
                                    Eagle Harbor is provided in Table 3-  COC levels were
                                    below detection limits or at very low levels  at both sites
                                    before capping. The highest resuspension of contaminated
                                    material was seen during the first capping event at both
                                    sites.  In general, contaminant resuspension, although
                                    substantially higher than observed during pre-capping
                                    sampling, was relatively low for all capping events during
                                    both surveys, where contaminant concentrations remained
                                    in the low ng/L range for most samples.  Resuspension of
                                    TSS and COCs occurred continuously throughout capping
                                    operations but  dissipated to background levels in a matter
                                    of hours following cessation of capping activities.

                                    Data generated during these two studies have helped to
                                    achieve a better understanding of the amounts and patterns
                                    of contaminants released into the surrounding water col-
                                    umn resulting from the capping events.  Data from Boston
                                    Harbor and Eagle Harbor indicate that the resuspension of
                                    contaminated sediments was measurable, but relatively low,
                                    when capping was conducted over uncapped sediments.

                                    Based on the results of the two studies summarized here,
                                    resuspension during capping may be reduced by plac-
                                    ing cap material in  lifts in which the first lift provides
                                    a uniform layer of clean material using techniques that
                                    minimize potential disturbance.  The data presented here
                                    suggest that subsequent lifts could be placed more a
                                    sively once the  contaminated sediment is covered.
                                          res-
                                    References
                                    (1) United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2005.  Contami-
                                       nated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites,
                                       OSWER 9355.0-85, EPA540/R05/012. December. (http://www.
                                       epa.gov/superfund/resources/sediment/pdfs/guidance/pdf).

                                    (2) Lyons, T., J A. Ickes, V.S. Magar, M. ASCE, C.S. Albro, L. Gum-
                                       ming, B. Bachman, T. Fredette, T. Myers, M. Keegan, K. Marcy,
                                       and O. Guza. 2006. Evaluation of Contaminant Resuspension
                                       Potential during Cap Placement at Two Dissimilar Sites.  /. Environ.
                                       Eng., 132(4): 505-514.

                                    (3) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1988. Navigation Improvement
                                       Study Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment. Boston Har-
                                       bor, Massachusetts.  Mystic River, Chelsea River and Reserved Channel.
                                       New England Division, Waltham, MA.
Table 3. Concentrations of Suspended Contaminated Sediments Before,
During, and After Capping.
                             Boston Harbor       Eagle Harbor
  Monitoring Event    PCB (ng/L)   PAH (ng/L)   PAH (ng/L)
  Before Capping
  During Capping
  After Capping
BDL         46 -59        46 - 73
BDL-84    65-5,242    20-3,872
0.4-1.5      41-83        38-159
(4) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1999. Chemistry
   Data Report• — Boston Harbor Navigation and Berth
   Dredging, Boston Harbor. August 5.

(5) Brenner, R.C., V.S. Magar, JA. Ickes, J.E. Abbott,
   SA. Stout, EA. Crecelius, and L.S. Bingler. 2002.
   Characterization and Fate of PAH-Contaminated
   Sediments at the Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor Superfund
   Site. Environ. Set. TechnoL, 36(12): 2605-2613.
 BDL - below detection limits

-------
vvEPA
PRESORTED STANDARD
 POSTAGE & FEES PAID
        EPA
      United States                                                         PERMIT NO. G-35
      Environmental Protection
      Agency

      Office of Research and Development
      National Risk Mangement
        Research Laboratory
      Cincinnati, OH 45268

      Official Business
      Penalty for Private Use
      $300

      EPA/600/S-08/013
      August 2008
      www.epa.gov
                                          Recycled/Recyclable
                                          Printed with vegetable-based ink on
                                          pa per that contains a minumum of
                                          50% post-consumer fiber content
                                          processed chlorine free

-------