v>EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Off ice of Water
Regulations and Standards
Washington DC 20460
January 1981 - December 1983
Water
Report to Congress
January 1981-December 1983
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
-------
-------
UN1TED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D,C. 20460
JUN 12 1984
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.
Speaker of the House
of Representatives :
Washington, B.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 became effective on April 23,
1973i 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 19B1 - 1983.
The dumping into ocean waters of all material, except dredged
material, is regulated by EPA permits. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COB) 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
-------
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
JUN 12 1984
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Honorable George Bush
President of the Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mr, Presidents
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 Pumping 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
-------
-------
TABLE OP CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION 1
MARINE PKJTECTION, RESEARCH, AND
SANCTUARIES ACT, AS AMENDED (P.L. 92-532} 2
THE PERMIT PROGRAM 4
Table I Waste Generators on Implementation 6
Plans 1981 - 1983
Table II Permits Issued and Quantities of Waste 7
Material Dumped 1981- 1983
Figure I Quantities of Waste Material Dumped 8
1981 - 1983
Table III Types and Amounts of ocean Disposal 9
by Geographic/Coastal Areas 1973 - 1983
Figure II Types and Amounts of Ocean Disposal 10
Nationwide 1973 - 1983
Table IV summary of Permits Denied, Withdrawn, 11
Phased Out 1973 - 1983
Figure III Summary of Ocean Dumping Permittees/ 12
Applicants Denied or Phased Out in
Region II 1973 - 1983
Table V Ocean Dumping Permits "phased Out 13
1981 - 1983
LONDON DUMPING CONVENTION 14
Table VI Contracting Parties 16
OCEAN DUMPING SITE DESIGNATIONS 17
Table VII Consent Agreement Ocean Disposal Sites 18
Table VIII Non-Consent Agreement Ocean Disposal Sites 19
Figure IV U.S. Atlantic ocean Disposal Sites 21
Figure V U.S. Gulf of Mexico Disposal Sites 22
Figure VI U.S. Pacific Ocean Disposal Sites 23
OSV ANTELOPE 24
-------
(can't) TABIJE OF CONTENTS
TAMPA HARBOR PROJECT 26
Figure VII Tampa Harbor ODMDS and Alternate Disposal 28
Sites
ITINERATION AT SEA 29
RADIOACTIVE WASTES 31
ENFORCEMENT 34
Table IX Enfcroement Actions 35
-------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) presents its tenth
report to the Congress on the administration of Title I of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended. The
report covers the Agency's authority and its responsibility under the Act
in implementing 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 (QOE), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG),
and the National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NCftA) also have
responsibilities under the Act. The COB and NCftA submit separate reports
on 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 PRDTBCTIUM, RESEARCH, AND SANCTUARIES ALT
OF 1972, AS AMENDED (P.L. 92-532)
PURPOSE
The purpose of Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), is to regulate the transportation for
ocean dumping, and to prevent the dumping of any material in ocean waters
which would unreasonably degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or
amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems, cr economic
potentialities. To implement this purpose and to control dumping in
ocean waters, Title I of the Act establishes a permit system and assigns
its adminstration to the EPA and COS.
Also under Title I, the USCG is given the responsibility to conduct
surveillance and other appropriate enforcement activities to prevent
unlawful ocean dumping, ensuring that the dumping occurs under a valid
permit, at the designated location, and in the manner specified within
the permit.
Title II requires NOAA to conduct a comprehensive program of
research and monitoring regarding the effects of the dumping of material
into ocean waters. Title III gives NOAA the authority to establish
marine sanctuaries.
The MPRSA is also the domestic legislation for implementing the
provisions of the Convention on the Prevention of I4arine Pollution by
Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (London Dumping Convention), a global
agreement for regulating ocean dumping, which is described later in this
report.
Transportation from the United States of any radiological, chemical,
cr biological warfare agent or high-level radioactive wastes for the
purpose of dumping in ocean waters,-the territorial seas, or the
contiguous zone is prohibited. Transportation of other materials (except
dredged materials) for the purpose of dumping is prohibited except when
authorized under a permit issued by tiie Administrator of SPA.
Based upon considerations outlined 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 so
without relaxing the requirements of Section 102, the Administrator shall
aPPly the standards and criteria binding upon the U.S. under the
Convention, Permits may be issued after detertnininy 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. Dumping of dredged material is
regulated under permits issued by the COB in accordance with the EPA
criteria.
-------
The Achdnistrator is also authorized to designate areas y-iere ooean
dunping may be permitted and any critical areas where dumping may be
prohibited. EPA has authority to revoke or modify permits or to assess
civil penalties for violation ef permit conditions. The Attorney General
may initiate criminal action against persons htio knowingly violate the
Act.
IXiring 1980, the Agency began considering the desirability of making
the ocean dumping regulations more flexible based on new scientific
knowledge and experience. As a result of Judge Sofaer's dscision in the
City of ttew York vs. SPA, 543 F. Supp. 1084 (1981), EPA is obliged to
revise its ooean dumping regulations to remove the conclusive presumption
that materials which do not pass the Agency's environmental criteria (40
CFR 227(B)) will "unreasonably degrade11 the marine environment. The
court ruled that EPA mist consider all relevant statutory factors listed
in Sec. 102{a) of the MPHSA, including the need to ocean dump and the
availability of acceptable alternatives, before reaching a determination
on whether a permit should be issued.
On January 6, 1983, the President signed PL 97-424 (Surface
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) containing an amendment to the
MPRSA, which states that during the two-year period from date of
enactment no permit may be issued under Title I that authorizes the
dunping of any low-level radioactive waste unless fiPA determines that;
1) the proposed dumping is necessary to conduct research;
2) the scale of proposed dumping is limited to the smallest amount
of material and the shortest duration of time necessary to
fulfill the purposes c£ the researchf
3) the potential benefits of such research will outweigh any
adverse impact; and .
4) the proposed dumping will be preceded by appropriate baseline
monitoring studies of the proposed duropsite and its surrounding
environment.
-------
THE PERMIT PKUGRAM
The Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria {40 Ct'R Parts 220-229)
published January 11, 1977, authorize the issuance of general permits for
dumping small quantities of material having a minimal adverse
environmental impact when dumped under prescribed conditions. Examples
are burial at sea of human 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 for a maximum 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,
driftwood, derelict vessels, etc., resulting from 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 for those materials that did not conply with the
ocean dumping criteria but for 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 court or administrative orders in 1982, and 9 continued
dumping under these conditions in 1983.
Emergency permits may be issued for the disposal of materials that
pose adverse effects to human health and for which no immediate alternate
disposal method is available. Wo emergency permits were issued during
1981. One permit was issued in 1982 for dumping of corroded chlorine gas
cylinders off the coast of Puerto Kico. In 1983, one permit was issued
for the emergency 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 outweighs the
potential environmental damage that may result from 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.
However, a special permit can te issued in specific circumstances where
studies on the waste, the incineration method, the vessel, and ocean site
have already been conducted and the site has been designated for
incineration at sea. One research permit 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.
-------
Tabte I lists permittees on implementation plans to phase oat ocean
dumping during 1981, 1982, and 1983. Table II and Figure I list and
illustrate, respectively, by 1PA permitting authority (Region or
Headquarters) the permits issued or in effect from January 1, 1981 to
December 31, 1983, and the materials and amounts dungped. Table III
summarizes, by coastal and ocean areas, the total amount of dumping
during the subject three years and presents a conparison 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 during the past ten years, and
Table V lists the ocean dumping permits phased out from January 1981 to
December 1983.
-------
TABLE I
WASTE GENERATORS ON
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS TO PHASE CUT OCfiAN DUMPIN3
(Status as of December 1983)
MUNICIPAL SITE
Bergen Co. Otil. SS
Authority
Joint Mtg.-Essex & SS
Union Co.
Linden-Roselle Sewerage SS
Authority
Rahway Valley Sewerage SS
Authority
Middlesex Co. Util. SS
Authority
Passaic Valley Sewerage Conn, SS
Nassau Co. Dept. Public Works SS
Bay Park STP Long Beach STP
Bel Grave STP Roslyn STP
Cedar Creek STP W, Long Beach
Inwood STP
Westchester Co. Dept. SS
Envir. Facility
New York City Dept. Envir. Prot. SS
Bowery Bay STP
Coney Island STP
Hunts Point STP
Jamaica STP
Owls Head STP
Port Richmond STP
Tallman Island STP
26th Ward STP
Newtown Creek STP Ward's Island STP
Oakwocd Beach STP Rcckaway STP
INDUSTRIAL
Dupont-Edge Moor 106
ML Industries AC
SS - Sewage Sludge Site
106 - Industrial Wastes Site
AC - Acid Waste Site
PHASB OUT DATE
Dec. 31, 1983*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Apr. 30, 1984*
Dec. 31, 1981*
Dec. 31, 1983
Dec. 31, 1983
* Continued under Court or administrative consent agreement
-------
TABLE II
PERMITS ISSUED WO
QUANTITIES OP WtoTK MKTEKIALS OUMfBD
Of 1981, 1982, 1983
Thousand Wet Tons
. 1981 1982 1983
Sewage Sludge Site:*
Bergen Co. Utility Auth. 271 289 221
Glen Cove City 23 22 10
Joint Mtg. Essex & Union Co. 467 421 351
Linden Roselle/Rahway Valley 278 269 426
Middlesex Co. 931 820 940
Middletown T*«p. 21 9
Nassau Co. CMP 503 413 S71
NJ small municipalities 53 56 35
New Xork City DBP 3320 3206 3114
Passaic Valley 589 1694 2163
Westchester Co. ^26 433 ^481^
8312
Acid Waste Site:
Allied Chemical Co. 36 30 38
NL Industries, Inc. TOO 803
TJSS a35
106 Indust. wastes Site;
American Cyarwtiid 25
Digestor Cleanout sludge 20 38 7
OuPont-Wge Moor 22 0 102
EuPont-Grasselli 200 192 136
267 230 245
Cellar Dirt sites
Moran Towing Corp. const, debris*1' 000
Wood Incineration Site:(1>
Corps of Engineers 9.7 12.0 13.0
New York City 0.4 0.6 11.0
Ocean Burning * 0.3 1.5 1.0
Weeks 5.7 OU) 6.2
i?rr '30
PCI International, BR indust. wastes 248 -
Lament Dcherty research: explosives .003
U.S. Navy HI emergency: corroded cyl. .001 .001
Crowly T s T Co. emergency* galley waste .100
derelict vessel general permit .425
Region IV
Mobil Oil** research Grilling muds
Key ion VI
Chan. Waste Mgmt** research! incin. PCBs 700 800
uil; Texaco; Exxon drilling muds 0 .0 0
Van Cainp;Starkist fish wastes 18.8 21.5
(toerican Samoa)
(1} Quantities in thousand
-------
oo
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1X00
tWI 1982 1983
Acid
1981 1982 1983
108 Indutt.
1981 1982 1983
Swwdl
SJudg* SIM
Quantities in thousand gallons (prior to Incinaratlon)
1981 1982 1983
Indiwmtion Sit*
1961 1982 1983
Industrial
Puerto Rico
SIM
1981 1982 1983
Chero. Incin.*
QultSh*
1981 1982 1983
Industrial .
Am. Samoa
Sit*
Quantttias In Thousand dry torn
Figure I. Quantities of Waste Materials Dumped During CY 1981-1983
(Quantities in Thousand Wet Tons)
-------
KTLftKTIC (A)
III
TXPBS MID AMOUNTS OF OCEAN DISPOSAL BY GHJGRAmiCAXMSXAL
(In Approc. ttpusatia T
1973 - 1983
Industrial
Haste
Sewage Sludge
Ccnst. Debris
Solid waste
Explosives
tlocd Incin.
Incin. Chemical
GULF OF MEXICO (6)
Industrial
Waste
sewage Sludge
Ccnst. Debris
Solid waste
Explosives
Wood Incin.
Incin, Chemicals
' EftCIPIC (C)
Industrial
Waste
Sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid Haste
Explosives
Hoed Incin.
Incin. Chemicals
Industrial
Waste
Sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid Haste
Explosives
Wool Incin.
Incin. Chemicals
1973
3643
4898
974
0 .
0
11
0
1408
0
0
0
0
0
0
1973
0
a
0
-240
0
0
0
(C)
5051
4890
974
240
0
11
0
1974
3642
5010
i
770
0'
0
16
0
938
0
0
0
0
0
12.
1974
0
0
0
200
0
0
0
4580
5010
770
200
0
16
12.3
1975
3322
5040.
396
0
0
6
0
120
0
0
0
0
0
3 4.1
1975
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3452
5040
396
0
0
6
4.1
1976
2633
5271
315
0
0
9
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
1976
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2733
5271
315
0
0
9
0
"II77
1784
5134
379
0
0
15
0
60
0
0
0
0
0
17.6
1977
0
0
0
0
0
12.1
0
1844
5134
379
0
0
15
17.6
1976 "
2548
5535
241
0
0
18
0
0.17
0
0
0
0
0
0
1978
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2548.17
5535
241
0
0
18
0
1979
2577
6442
107
0
0
48
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1979
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
2S77
6442
107
0
0
45
0
1980
2928
7309
89
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1980
.26
0
0
0
0
0
0
2928.26
7309
89
' 0
0
11
0
1981 1982
2271 1063
6703 7670
0 0
0 U
.0003 0
15 13
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
700* 800*
1981 1982
23.3 18.8
0 0
0 U
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
2294.3 1081.8
6703 7670
0 0
0 0
.0003 0
15 13
700* 800*
1983"
283
8312
0
0
0
31
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,
1983
21.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
304.5
8312
O
O
o
31
O
* thousand gallons (prior to incineration)
-------
1,000-
7,000-
A
/\
V
e.ooo-
f,000-
4,600-
3,000-
2,000-
1.WO -
\
IntfutlrM VMMtt ...
\
\
Conn. Oibflt
Wood Incin. .._._.,
Qwmfctli Incln. *******
Figure !!. Types and Amounts of Ocean Disposal Nationwide
(In Approximate Thousand Tons) 1973-1983
10
-------
TftBLE IV
OP OCEAN DUMPING PEBMItTEES/APPLICANTS
DSrtED OR PHASED OUT FROM 1973 tD 1983
REGICCJ
II III IV VI IX X totals
Action prior to April
1973 phased out
Durinq the remainder
ot 1973
withdraw
phased out
denied
During 1974
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1975
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1916
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1977
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1978
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1979
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1980
withdcw '
' phased out
denied
During 1981
withdrew
phased out
denied
During 1982
withdrew
phasvd out
denied
During 1983
withdrew
phdtfud Out
denied
TOIALS
44
4 ' ~
1
__ __ _ _
m^ 2 ^^ ^ .
, 21
1 1
1 10 1
130
9
1 16
,31 -
«
s
_ j_ ,
,
_ _n ~
1 81
__ 2
9
^M y ~** «»^
__ 3 _
_ j_
^^ 0 jv **
_ A _i , m**
3 337 3
44
1 2
1 , 1
l , 3
1 22
11 4
6
2 14
2
17
1 131 .
2
1 18
1 -_ 32
i
_ _ 4
' 1 -- 2
_ _
1 11
1 __ 3
%
9
7
_ 3.
^ ^ «
_ ~. _- 0
«_ _ _ 0
~ 1.
9 S 357
11
-------
130-
35-
30-
Withdrew A
Phased Out O
Denied
1973
1S74
1975
1976
1ST?
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
Figure ill. Summary of Region II Ocean Dumping Permittees/Applicants Denied or
Phased Out in Region I11973-1983
-------
v
Permittee
OCEAN DUMPING PERMITS PHASED OUT
Jan.1981-Dec.1983
Location
Date
Wsst New York
American Cyanimid
Bristol Alpha
CAPRI
Merck, Sharpe & Dchme
Pfizer Pharmaceuticals
Sharing
Upjchn Mfg.
Poll, Control Ind.
Middletowi Twp.
Glen Cove City
Northeast Monmonth
NL Industries
New Jersey
New Jersey
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
Puerto Rico
New Jersey
New jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
March
April
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Dec.
Sept.
Dec,
Dec.
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1981
1982
1983
1983
1983
13
-------
LONDON DUMPING OJNVEMTIQN
The Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of
Wastes and Otter Matter (London Dumping Convention) is an international
agreement requiring the Contracting Parties (member nations) to establish
national systems to control all substances leaving their snores for the
purpose of being dumped at sea. The Convention was negotiated in London
in November 1972 and came into force on August 30, 1975, following
receipt of the required fifteen ratifications or accessions. Table VI
lists the countries which are Contracting Parties to date.
As the U.S. authority for implementing international requirements
for the control of ocean dumping, the MPRSA was amended in 1974 and also
in 1980 to bring the Act into conformance with the Convention.
Technical aspects of the Convention regarding types of materials and
other factors are contained in three annexes. Annex I establishes a
"black list" of substances whose dumping is prohibited unless they are
present only as "trace contaminants" or would be "rapidly rendered
harmless." The substances on this list are mercury and cadmium and their
compounds, organohalogen compounds such as DDT and PCB's, persistent
plastics, and oil. Dumping of high-level radioactive wastes, and
chemical and biological warfare agents is completely prohibited. Annex
II contains a category of substances requiring "special permits" as well
as special care in each dumping. These substances include heavy metals,
cyanides and fluorides, waste containers which could present a serious
obstacle to fishing or navigation, and medium and low-level radioactive
wastes. Dumping substances not listed in Annexes I and II requires a
"general permit". Annex III sets forth factors to be considered
regarding characteristics.and composition of the material, method of
disposal, and characteristics of the dumping site before a permit may be
issued.
The Convention provides that each Contracting Party will take
appropriate 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. Pull continuous use is to be made of the
best available technical knowledge in its implementation which, together
with periodic meetings and planned participation by appropriate
international technical bodies, is designed to keep the contents of the
Annexes up to date and realistic in meeting the needs for controlling
ocean pollution stemming fron ocean dumping.
Consultative Meetings of the Contracting Parties have generally
convened on an annual basis since 1976. Ad hoc advisory groups are
established to work on particular subjects when necessary, the most
significant being the ad hoc Scientific Group on Dumping, the ad hoc
Working Group on Incineration at Sea, and the ad hoc Group of Legal
Experts. The Scientific Group (AHSG) met intersessionally on an annual
basis since 1977 as the Scientific technical advisory body of the
Consultative Meetings. In 1983, the Seventh Consultative Meeting
established the AHSG as the permanent Scientific Group on Dumping. The
working process used by Consultative Meetings, namely to establish ad
14
-------
hoc working groups of experts and, after noting their advice, to proceed
with a view to reaching consensus on critical questions, has proved to be
effective.
The work of the Consultative Meetings has been very effective in
developing and adopting amendments, regulations, consultation-, test-,
and notification procedures, and recommendations 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; IAEA provisional definition and recommendation
for dumping radioactive wastes at sea; interim guidelines for
implementation of paragraphs 8 and 9 of Annex 1.
During the Seventh Consultative Meeting the Contracting Parties
considered proposed amendments to Annexes I and II regarding a
prohibition on ooean dumping of all radioactive waste materials.
The Meeting reached consensus agreement that a two-year scientific review
of relevant studies on ocean dumping of radioactive wastes will be
conducted by a group of experts from the Contracting Parties and
knowledgeable international organizations. Their final report will te
presented to the Ninth Consultative Meeting. By voice vote, the Parties
adopted a Resolution calling for the suspension of all radioactive waste
dumping at sea pending presentation of the final report on the two-year
study. This subject is further discussed in the section entitled
Radioactive Waste.
Attention was also drawn to the research activities being conducted
by the Nuclear Energy Agency in the field of seabed disposal of
high-level radioactive wastes. Questions were raised over whether
"seabed disposal" should come under the definition of "dumping" within
Article III of the Convention. By Resolution of the Parties, an ad hoc
Group of Legal Experts was established to convene intersessionally for
the purpose of clarifying the interpretation of Article III in relation
to disposal of high-level radioactive wastes into the seabed. The group
wet 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's accomplishments to date and, for the purposes for long-term
strategies and objectives, to consider and offer recommendations on the
following: 1) whether the ultimate goal of the Convention is for the
best possible control of the disposal of wastes and other matter at sea
or for the elimination of this activity; 2) what will be the future role
of the LDC in the broader problems relating to all sources of marine
pollution,* 3) what will be the role of the LDC in the context of any
developing strategy for total waste management- 4) what will be the
relationship between the IXC and other regional and global agreements
dealing with marine pollution in general and disposal of wastes at sea in
particular; 5) are there any foreseeable changes to be contemplated in
the structure or operation of the LDC as it now exists; and 6). are there
any other matters that will impinge directly or indirectly on the
continuing evaluation of the Convention.
15
-------
TABLE VI
CCW1SACTINS PARTIES TO THE LONDON DUMPIN3 CONVENTION
as Of DECEMBER 31, 1983
Afghanistan
Argentina
Brazil
Byelorussian SSR
Canada
Cape Verde
Chile
Cuba
Denmark
Dominican Republic
Finland
Prance
Gabon
German Democratic Repuolic
German Federal Republic
Greece
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Japan
Jordan
Kenya
Kiribati
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Mexico
Monaco
Morocco
Nauru
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nigeria
Norway
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
South Africa
Spain
Surinam
Sweden
Switzerland
Tunisia
Ukrainian SSR
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
USSR
Yugoslavia
Zaire
16
-------
OCEAN DUMPING SITE DESIGNATIONS
Section 102(c) of the Act authorizes the Administrator to designate
areas where ocean dumping may be permitted and any critical areas where
dumping may be prohibited. This authority includes designating sites
for ocean dumping of dredged material as well as sewage sludge,
industrial wastes, and other matter.
If EPA designates an ocean site for dumping, such a site
designation does not constitute or imply EPA's approval of actual
disposal of materials at sea. Before ocean dumping of any material at
any site may commence, a permit application must be evaluated according
to the established ocean dumping criteria (40 CFR Fart 227). EPA has
the right to deny issuance of a permit for dumping of sewage sludge,
industrial wastes and other matter, and, in the case of dredged
material, EPA has the right to disapprove the dumping to be conducted
under a COE issued permit or under Federal authorization if it is
determined that environmental concerns under the Act have not been net.
A large number of ooean dump sites existed at the time of passage
of the Act. Based on their historical use, EPA designated 13
non-dredged material dump sites (N-EWDS) and 127 dredged material dump
sites (DMDS) on an interim basis. In 1977, a three year program was
initiated for permanently designating or dedesignating the sites
pending completion of environmental assessuents or site designation
studies.
In February 1980, the National Wildlife Federation (me) filed suit
against the Agency challenging the interim designations. The court
upheld the interim designations until settlement was reached. The suit
resulted in a Consent Agreement wherein EPA agreed to prepare and issue
22 environmental impact statements (BIS) on 46 sites. Three of the EISs
were for N-EMDS and 19 for DMDS. Therefore, the permanent designation
of a number of sites, primarily high priority ones (Consent Agreement
Sites), has been addressed through the preparation of EISs. A large
number of sites, principally low priority ones (Non-Consent Agreement
Sites), remain to be addressed. New ocean disposal sites will be
addressed on a case by case basis.
The following two Tables VII and VIII show the EIS and rulemaking
activities that have taken place in the designation process of Consent
Agreement and Non-Consent Agreement Sites. Figures IV, V, and VI show
the general distribution of existing designated sites in U.S. waters.
17
-------
CD
TABLE VII
CONSENT AGREEMENT
OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
SIS Status
Site Designation Status
Dredged Material Sites
Hawaii
San Francisco
Channel Bar
New York Mud Dump
Jacksonville f Ft,
Galveston
San Juan, P.R.
Sabine-Neches
Wilmington/Charleston/
Savannah**
Columbia River
Portland, ME.
Pensacola/Mobi le
Gulfport
Tampa, FL
New Jersey/Long
Island Inlets
Coos Bay*
Long Beach*
San Diego*
Hmnboldt Bay*
San Francisco
100 Fathom
Other Sites
106-Mile
Acid Waste
Cellar Dirt
No. of
Interim
Sites
3
1
1
1
1
1
4
3
5
1
4
2
8
2
1
2
1
Draft Final
Issued Issued
10/20/79 9/30/80
2/26/82 9/10/82
2/19/82 9/03/83
5/14/82 1/14/83
1/30/82 11/26/82
8/13/82 2/04/83
8/20/82 4/01/83
10/08/82 10/28/«3
10/15/82 4/29/83
10/15/82 3/25/83
1/21/82 (11/83)
10/29/82 9/09/83
11/18/83 (3/84)
(05/84) (8/84)
(06/84) (9/84)
(05/84) (8/84)
(08/84) (11/84)
Dedesignation Proposed
1
1
1
6/25/79 2/27/80
11/27/19 12/01/80
3/26/82 9/24/82
Interim
Designation
Extended to
1/31/84
1/31/84
1/31/84
1/31/84
7/31/84
7/31/84
«
7/31/14
7/3 1/84
7/31/84
1/31/85
1/31/85
1/31/85
1/31/85
1/31/85
1/31/85
Proposed Final
11/14/80 6/16/81
8/03/83
10/07/83
11/08/82 11/02/83
12/20/82
5/29/80 6/16/83
9/20/82 4/06/83
*Being prepared by COE
**Qriginally 2 EISs in Consent
()s Project Date
No. Sites
Desig-
nated
5
1
1
Agreement
-------
TABLE VIII
NON-CONSENT
QCEftN DISPOSAL SITES
EIS Status
S ite Des ignation Status
Dredged Material Sites
Note
Atchafalaya
Barataria, Houraa,
Empire and Bayou
LaFourche, IA
Calcasieu Bar, LA
Moorehead City, NC*
Georgetown Harbor,
SC*
Pascagoula, MS*
Yabucoa, P.R.
Port St. Joe and
Panama City, FL
Southwest Pass,
Gulf Outlet,
South Pass and
Tiger Pass
Cape Arundel, ME
Fresh Water Bayou
and Merraentau
River, LA
Other Sites
Gulf Incineration
North Atlantic
Incineration
Starkist (Samoa)
No. of
Interim
Sites
2
4
7
1
1
1
1
3
4
1
2
I
I
I
Craft
Issued
11/25/83
11/25/83
(04/84)
(04/84)
(04/84)
(06/84)
(07/84)
(08/84)
(10/84)
(12/84)
(06/84)
(06/85)
4/28/76
12/29/80
(10/83)
Final
Issued
(05/84)
(04/84)
(08/84)
(08/84)
(07/84)
(09/84)
(10/84)
(02/85)
(02/85)
(06/85)
(01/86)
(12/85)
7/14/76
12/18/81
Interim No. Sites
Designation Desig-
Extended to Projxsed Final nated
1/31/85
1/31/85 "
1/31/85
10/16/81 4/26/82
11/17/82 11/24/80
2/84) | 8/25/80
-------
Con't TABLE VIII
BIS Status
Site Designation status
Other Sites
Starkist (Long Beach)
Tanner Banks
Thuros Long Beach
Platform Jacket
12/60 Sewage
Sludge
No. of
Interim
Sites
1
1
1
1
2
Draft
Issued
{10/83}
12/16/83
3/12/76
Final
Issued
(2/84)
(2/84)
10/16/78
Interim
Designation
Extended to Proposed
3/03/78
12/08/83
8/05/83
11/30/78
-
No.
Final
12/02/80
5/18/79
*Being Prepared by
( } = Project Date
Sites
Desig-
nated
2
ODE
-------
FXGQSK IV
U.S. AflAHTIC OCEAH DISPOSAL SITES
* - Dredge Material Sites
A - Other Sites
0e««B
21
-------
ro
U.S. GULF OF MEXICO DISPOSAL SITES
FIGURE V
Dredge Material Sites
*
Other Sites
-------
O
R IX
Oewns
R IX
S«no*
FIGURE VI
U.S. FAttFIC OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
23
« - Dredge Material Sites
-------
CSV ANTELOPE
The OSV Antelope is EPA's survey vessel foe ocean monitoeing and
site designation field studies. Fully equipped with three laboratoriesr _
a wet lab for initial sample processing, a chemistry laboratory, and a
microbiology laboratory, the ship also has a computerized survey center,
from which survey operations are conducted. Onboard survey equipment
includes over-the~side sampling gear, laboratory analytical equipment, an
underwater television system with taping capabilities, and a sidescan
sonar unit.
In 1981, six dredged material durapsites (DMDS) were surveyed off the
coast of Louisiana to collect data to be used in the development of ElS's
on these sites. Later that year, EPA divers and scientists performed a
reconnaissance survey of three alternate EMDS off Tampa, Florida. EPA
conducted this survey as part of its site designation program mentioned
in greater detail in another section of this report.
In 1982, EPA conducted additional surveys of sites off the coast
of Tampa. Detailed surveys were done on two existing and three potential
alternative DMDS.
During this same year, monitoring operations were conducted at the
former Philadelphia sewage sludge dumpsite to assess recovery of the old
dunpsite and in the New York Bight Apex bo obtain current data for
comparison with past results on the levels of contaminants in this
region. A survey of the historically used Massachusetts Bay radioactive
waste dumpsite was also done during 1982. Later that year, baseline
surveys of the Gulf Incineration Site were conducted prior to th^ August
1982 research burn at sea of FCB wastes. In this survey, EPA conducted
monitoring operations of ambient conditions in and out of the plume area
during incineration. No detectable short term impact was found as a
result of the burn at sea.
In 1983, 15 separate surveys were conducted off the coast of the
U.S. as far north as Portland, ME and as far south as Brownsville, TX
in the Gulf of Mexico.
The sites surveyed during CY 1983 are given below:
Tampa Harbor DMDS - two surveys
Boston Foul Grounds DMDS
Cape Cod Bay DMDS
Portland, ME DMDS
Philadelphia Sewage Sludge Dunpsite (currently not in use)
Norfolk, m EMDS
North Atlantic Incineration Site (NAIS)
New York Bight (from Cape May, NJ to Sandy Hook,to to Montauk Light»L.I.)
Gulf Incineration Site (CIS)
Brownsville, TX DMDS
Corpus Christi, TX DMDS
Matagorda, TX DMDS
Pensacola, PL DMDS
Panama City, PL DMDS
Port St. Joe, FL DMDS
24
-------
During the two 1983 Tampa surveys, the Agency surveyed the new
proposed Site 4, and alternative sites XfY and Z. The survey team
collected supplemental seasonal baseline data for Site 4 and conducted a
continuing investigation of the three alternative sites.
The two incineration sites surveyed, MIS and GIS, included baseline
and trend assessment monitoring of the air as well as the upper water
column and water column biota. At the NAIS summer survey, baseline
conditions were studied between Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay and the
site approximately 100 miles offshore. The GIS fall survey encompassed
the whole of the western part of the Gulf of Mexico between Mobile Bay,
AL and Brownsville, TX. The Gulf survey sampled the same kinds of
parameters as had been done earlier at the NAIS. Both these monitoring
surveys, completed when no active use was being made 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 be a supplement to stack gas monitoring and permittee
monitoring en the incinerator vessel itself.
The Cape Cod, Norfolk, and Brownsville sites are all new sites at
which disposal has not occurred. These surveys of baseline conditions
will enable the Agency to make site management decisions in the future
when permits are issued for new dredging projects.
The remainder of CMIB surveyed are those sites at which disposal has
taken place in the past and is continuing. These surveys were trend
assessment monitoring surveys, planned to assess the impacts of past
disposal operations and to define the current environmental state of the
site.
25
-------
TAMPA HARBOR PROJECT
The site designation fcr ocean disposal of material dredged from the
Corps of Engineers' (COE) Tampa Harbor deepening project has been of
considerable interest to conmunities in the Tampa area as well as to EPA.
Extensive studies have been made regarding the designation o£ 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 111 19771 EPA designated two interim sites, A and B, in
the Tampa Bay area for the disposal of dredged material. Site A is
located approximately 13 miles west of Egmont Key at the mouth c£ Tampa
Bay, Site B is located approximately 9 miles from Egmont Key as seen in
Figure VII. Dredged material was disposed of at Site B from 1969-1973 j
no dredged material has been disposed there since 1973. The COE disposed
of dredged material from a construction dredging project at Site A frcra
June 1980, until December 24, 1982.
The sites were designated for a three-year period, or until final
site designation studies could be completed. On December 9, 1980, the
interim designations ware renewed until February 1983, pending completion
of final site designation studies.
In April 1981, a study to evaluate the effects of offshore disposal
of sediments in Site A was conducted. The study concluded that partially
buried hard bottom habitats were present at the boundaries of the
disposal site. Living hard bottom catmunities, including hard corals,
soft corals, and sponges were observed beyond the limit of the disposal
site.
In search of an acceptable disposal site, EPA performed
reconnaissance surveys of potential alternative sites in Tampa Bay area
in October 1981 and again in April -1982. Using side-scan sonar and
fathometer tracings providing by IEC during the 1981 survey, EPA divers
observed and photographed the bottom at Alternative Shallow-Water Sites
1, 2, and 3. Sites 1 and 2 were regarded as unacceptable due to the
presence of hard bottom outcrops and numerous animal and plant
communities and only Site 3 appeared initially to be sandy bottomed.
Spurred by the Manatee County suit filed against EPA and COE for the
continued use of Site A, the Agency conducted a more in-depth survey of
the Tampa Alternative Sites 2Af 3, and 4 in April 1982. Examination cf
survey videotapes filmed frcra the sites' bottom areas revealed hard
bottom outcrops in all but Alternative Site 4. This site was the only
one considered, because it lacked existing hard botton areas or coralline
growth.
Due in part to the public Garments received in response to the Tampa
Bay draft BIS, EPA planned and implemsnted surveys to occur in February,
March, and April 1983. These surveys examined in detail Alternative Site
4 and its Control Site approximately five miles southeast, and examined
in lesser detail Sites A and B and State Sites X, Y, and 2.
26
-------
The final EIS for Tampa Harbor was published in September 1983.
This FEIS analyzes all pertinent information gathered by EPA froti all of
its surveys as well as other pertinent information relating to these
sites. Based on the information available to the Agency, Site 4 was
found to be an acceptable site from an environmental viewpoint because
of its paucity o£ significant hard bottom areas. On November 1, 1983,
Site 4 was designated as the disposal site for dredged material from the
Tampa Harbor Project for a period of three years. The Agency fully
intends to monitor carefully the effects of disposal operations at Site
4 to assure that no significant adverse effects of dumping occur beyond
the boundaries of the site* Should the Agency, through its monitoring
operations at Site 4, find adverse effects of dumping, it will rapidly
move to halt disposal operations until methods can be used to assure
that the material remains within the site.
The Agency initiated further survey operations during Fall 1983 to
locate another ocean dredged material disposal site approximately 30
miles wast of Egmont ley. It is the Agency's intention that conplete
site-specific studies, the. BIS* and conpleticn of rulemaking on a final
site designation for this alternative 30-Hiile site be completed prior to
the end of the three-year designation period for Site 4.
27
-------
I
ti
iN
1
3
3
28
-------
INCINERATION AT SEA
IXiring 1981, KB wastes were incinerated at sea at the Gulf of
Mexico Incineration Site under a research permit issued to Chemical Waste
Management, Inc. The permit allowed destruction of up to 3.5 million
gallons of PCB wastesequivalent to approximately four shiploads. Test
results from each shipload were required to be evaluated and approved by
EPA before permitting the next load to be incinerated.
The first burn began in December 1981 and was completed on January
4, 1982; final test results indicated the combustion efficiency (CE) was
99.8 percent and the destruction efficiency (CE) was greater than 99.9
percent. The second burn was conducted August 15-31, 1982 j final
results indicate the CE was in excess of 99.95 percent and the DE was
greater than 99.99 percent. Environmental measurements in the vicinity
of the ship and on shore showed no environmental impact.
During 1982, EPA received applications fron Chemical Waste
Management, Inc. for incineration of additional PCBs, for DOT, and for
mixed organohalogen wastes. These applications are currently under
review.
In December 1981, EPA issued the "Final Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for North Atlantic Incineration Site Designation.11 The
preferred site, located 140 nautical miles east of Delaware Bay, was
proposed for designation by Federal Register notice on November 17, 1982.
Final rulemaking en the proposed site is pending.
Several companies have announced plans to build new U.S. flag
incinerator vessels. These ships must meet the International Maritime
Organization (IMO) requirements for transport of dangerous cargo and the
incinerator system must be certified as meeting the qperational
regulations for incineration at sea under the London Dumping Convention.
All incinerator vessels cperating out of U.S. ports must also be
certified by the U.S. Coast Guard for transport of hazardous materials
and by EPA for incinerator performance. Certification of the incinerator
system is done in accordance with the Convention regulations. Test burns
are required for 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 times.
On October 21, 1983, the Assistant Administrator for Water made a
tentative determination to issue two special and one research permit to
Chemical Waste Management and Ocean Combustion Service for incineration
of chemical wastes onboard the Vulcanus I and Vulcanus II at the Gulf of
Mexico incineration site. Public hearings were scheduled for
29
-------
Brownsville, Texas, on November 21, 1983, and Mobile, Alabama, November
22-23, 1983. Hie States of Texas and Louisiana along with several
environmental and citizens groups sued to enjoin EPA from holding the
hearings. On November 18, 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 people, including Governor Mark White
and Attorney General Jim Mattox, attended the hearing in Brownsville.
Over 500 people attended the hearing in Mobile. During these hearings,
the Assistant Administrator for Water extended the public ecnraent 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. Committee members pressed the
Assistant Administrator for Water on the need for EPA to issue specific
regulations for incineration of chemical wastes at sea before EPA would
issue special (operating) permits. The AA for Plater committed to issuing
regulations by December 19,84, but took no position on the timing of
special permit issuance while these regulations were being developed.
At the Brownsville public hearing, the AA for Water agreed to
sponsor a scientific forum in Brownsville on January 10, 1984.
Scientific experts from groups opposed to the tentative determination and
EPA experts would focus discussions on the scientific issues in dispute.
An edited TV tape of the forum will be prepared and made available to the
general public.
30
-------
RADIOACTIVE
During 1981, with assistance from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NCftA), EPA initiated a survey of the former
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.S.
disposal at sea of radioactive waste during this period. To determine
possible public health significance of Massachusetts Bay disposals, fiPA
pursued three sources of data: 1) review of disposal records and
interviews with people involved with the disposals, 2) side-scan sonar
surveys to locate objects on the ocean bottom in the dumpsite, and 3) a
radiological monitoring survey to collect samples of marine biota,
sediments, and water for radioactivity measurements. The records and
interviews indicated most disposals occurred in the area designated as a
foul site, although two adjacent areas were authorized and may have
received sane disposals. During 1981, NQAA surveyed all three areas with
side-scan sonar to provide data on locations of groups of bottom objects
to indicate where samples should be collected in the subsequent
radiological survey. NCRA also collected a large number of sediment and
fish samples which were sent for analysis to EPA's Eastern Environmental
Radiation Facility in Montgomery, Alabama.
EPA returned to Massachusetts Bay in September 1982 with the EPA
ocean survey vessel Antelope to collect radiological samples, to measure
radioactivity directly on the ocean bottom, and to observe containers
with underwater television. The crew on this survey included scientists
from several Federal and State agencies as well as private research
laboratories and contractors. Preliminary radioactivity measurements
show no significant levels and EPA concludes. that previous disposals in
the Bay are not resulting in harm to either human health or the marine
environment. EPA will publish a comprehensive report on the overall
survey of Massachusetts Bay.
In 1981 EPA initiated a program to monitor marketplace seafoods as a
means of determining possible public health effects from the major U.S.
ocean durapsites where radioactive wastes were dumped in the past. Since
seafoods are the only significant pathway by which radioactive materials
could move from an ocean dumpsite back to man, EPA in conjunction with
the Pood & Drug Administration (FDA) is periodically analyzing conmerical
seafoods from cities nearest these major dumpsites. These include San
Francisco, CA (Farallon Islands dumpsite), Newark, NJ (Atlantic 2800
meter and 3800 meter dumpsites), and Boston, MA (Massachusetts Bay
dumpsite). These dumpsites received more than 97 percent of all
radioactive wastes disposed in the ocean by the 0.S. from 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 from fishermen
who have fished in the area of the dumpsites and are taking their catch
to market. The samples are split for radionuclide analyses both by the
FDA and by EPA's Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility. Measurements
01 all samples collected in 1981 and 1982 indicate only normal background
levels of radioactivity. The results of these analyses will be
suninarized in a report in 19B4.
31
-------
The Department of Navy has notified EPA that the ocean is being
evaluated as an option for disposal of decommissioned, defueled,
submarine reactor plants. Tne Navy published a draft Environmental
Impact Statement in December 1982 wnich presents data on three options
for disposal of these nuclear reactor plants. The options include
Icng-tera floating storage, sinking of the entire submarine in the deep
ocean, or removal of the reactor compartment for burial on land. If the
Navy determines that sea disposal is the best option, they will have to
request an ocean dumping permit from EPA according to requirements of the
Ocean Dumping Act of 1972 and the Amendments of 1983, as described
below.
In May 1981, under the terms of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) Multilateral Consultation and
Surveillance Mechanism for Sea Dumping of Radioactive Waste, the
international Nuclear Energy Agency (NBA) adopted a coordinated research
and environmental surveillance program plan for gathering comprehensive
scientific data related to radioactive waste disposal in the Northeast
Atlantic Dunpsite, which is located north of the Azores. All radioactive
waste sea dumping operations undertaken by OECD participating countries
have been carried out at this site since 1974. This program is run under
the direction of an Executive Group made up of representatives from 13
countries who are pooling resources and expertise to implement the plan.
EPA is providing the U.S. representative to the Executive Group, and
extensive radiochemical laboratory facilities. The U.S. is also
providing technical experts t:o each of the five Task Groups which are
performing research studies under the plan in physical oceanography,
geochemistry, biology, modelling, and radiological surveillance. The
results of these studies will be used in 1984 .to determine the
suitability of the Northeast Atlantic Durapsite for continued use for
radioactive waste disposal.
The future use of the oceans for disposal 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 merits of proposals to amend the Annexes of the Convention in
order to ban the ocean disposal of radioactive materials. This review
was initiated at a meeting of several international organizations in
September 1983, that convened to assemble a bibliography of relevant
scientific literature. This literature will be provided to a meeting 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 suspension of any further ocean disposal of
radioactive materials pending presentation of the experts' report to the
Contracting Parties.
In January 1983, the President signed P.L. 97-424, "The Surface
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982." This Act contained amendments to
the Ocean Dumping Act of 1972 that specifically addressed the ocean
disposal of radioactive materials. In particular, the amendments remove
32
-------
EPA's authority to issue ocean dumping permits for sudi materials Cor a
period of two years, except for research purposes. Mter two years, a
permit applicant must prepare a site specific radioactive material
disposal impact assessment that includes 11 retirements specified by the
amendments. If EPA determines a permit is warranted, then EPA must
request authority from Congress to issue the permit. This request must
then be approved by a joint resolution of Congress acting within 90 days
of receipt of EPA's recommendation.
Congressional concerns for ocean disposal of radioactive materials
were also addressed in a hearing on November 2, 1983, by the Subcommittee
on Oceanography of the Connittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of the
House of Representatives, EPA's testimony at this hearing reviewed the
steps taken in cur domestic and international programs to assure careful
scientific evaluation of all matters related to protection of the marine
environment and public health. Although EPA has not received any permit
requests fcr ocean disposal of radioactive materials, we are continuing
to develop a scientific basis for evaluating any such requests. In
particular, EPA is supporting studies at several national laboratories
and universities to evaluate biological monitoring techniques, criteria
for packaging radioactive materials, and the behavior of such
materials when released to ocean waters. In addition, U*A is actively
involved in research and criteria -development programs of the
International Atonic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the NBA.
33
-------
The U.S. Coast Guard has responsibility for surveillance activities
to prevent unlawful dumping cr 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 methods 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 duirping 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, photos, samples, message traffic, and log excerpts.
In 1981, 3956 notifications of dumping ware reported to the Coast
Guard. A total of 245 surveillance missions were conductedt 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 were 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 were 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 were 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 one was for burning outside the wood
incineration site.
34
-------
RESPONEMEOT'S
NAME
REFERRAL
FROM
TJTPE OF
VIOLATION
TABLE IX
BNBtmCEMENT ACTION
COMPLAINT
ISSUED
DISPOSITION
DISPOSAL
SITE
Ol
Vfeeks Stevedoring OSCG
Glen Owe EPA
Middletown 1WP. EPA
NL Industries EPA
Middletown TWP EEA
Northeast Monmouth EPA
County Regional
Sewerage Authority
City of Glen Cove EPA
NL Industries EPA
Burning outside of 2/27/81
wood incineration site
Permit condition, Waived
Compliance schedule
Permit condition, . Waived
Compliance schedule
Permit condition, Waived
Cemplianoe schedule
Consent agreement. Waived
Compliance schedule
Permit condition
6/6/83
Permit .condition. Waived
Compliance schedule
Permit condition, 2/1/82
Compliance schedule
Final order - 3/29/82
establish wetdown site
Final Order - 1/12/82
revision of schedule;
oease dumping by Mar. 1983
Final Order - 1/7/82
revision of schedule?
cease dumping by Sept 1982
Final Order - 2/1/82
$82,000 penalty assessed}
revision of schedule
Final Order - 11/18/82
revision of schedule?
oease dumping by Dec. 1982
Final Order - 8/24/83
phased cut 12/31/83
Amended Final
Order 6/23/83
oaase diwping 9/1/83
Final Order - 8/17/83
$30i000 penalty paynent;
cease dumping of gangue
solids by 4/1/82
Wood Incin.
Sewage Sludge
Sewage Sludge
Acid Wastes
Sewage Sludge
Sewage sludge
Sewage Sludge
Acid. Wastes
-------
-------
TABUS in
TYPES AND AMOlMK OF OCEAN DISPOSAL BY CMJGRAPHIC/OUASTAL AKEA
(In Approx. thousand Tons)
1973 - 1983
ATIANTIC (A)
Industrial
Waste
Sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid Waste
Explosives
Wood Incin.
Incin. Chemical
GULF OF MEXICO (B)
Industrial
Waste
Sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid waste
Explosives
Wood Incin.
Incin, Chemicals
1973
" 3643
4898
974
0
0
11
0
1408
0
U
0
U
0
0
1974 1975
3642 3322
5010 5040
770 396
0 0
0 0
16 6
0 0
938 120
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
12.3 4,1
1976
2633
5271
315
tfc
Q
9
Q
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
1977
1784
S1.34
SJa
%
Qj
15
0
60
0
0
0
0
0
17.6
1978
2S48
5535
241
0
*. '
0
m
0
0,17
0
0
0
0
0
U
1979
2577
6442
W7
0
o
45
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1980
2928
7309
$»
0
0
11
" 0
0
CJ
0
0
0
0
0
1981 1982
2271 1063
6703 7670
0 0
tt 0
.0003 0
15 13
0 0
0 0
0 Oi
0 Q
0 0
0 0
0 0
700* 800*
1983
2«
8312
0
0
0
31
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
PACIFIC (C)
Industrial
Waste
Sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid Waste
Explosives
Wood Incin.
Incin. Chemicals
TUTALS Of (A), (8),
Industrial
Waste
sewage Sludge
Const. Debris
Solid waste
Explosives
Wood Incin.
Incin. Chemicals
1973
0
y
U
24y
0
0
0
(C)
5051
4890
974
240
y
11
0
1974
0
U
y
200
y
0
y
4580
5010
770
200
0
16
12.3
1975 1976
0 0
u y
o y
o y
y y
o y
U 0
3452 2733
5040 5271
396 315
0 0
U U
6 9
4.1 0
1977
U
y
0
y
y
12.1
y
1844
5134
379
U
y
15
17.6
1978 1979
y u
0 U
0 U
y o
0 U
0 0
o y
2548.17 2577
5535 6442
241 iy?
y y
0 0
18 45
o y
1980 1981 1982 1983
.26 23.3 18.8 21.5
o y u u
00 U 0
0 000
0000
0 U 0 0
o o y o
2928.26 2294.3 1081.8 304.5
7309 6703 7670 * 8312
ay o o o
0 000
y . .000,3 o u
11 15 13 31
U 7uO* tiUU* 0
* thousand gallons (prior to incineration)
-------
-------
------- |