&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
EPA 542-F-15-009 April 2015
Climate Change Adaptation Technical Fact Sheet:
Contaminated Sediment Remedies
In June 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the final U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate
Change Adaptation Plan.1 The plan examines how EPA programs may be vulnerable to a changing climate and how the Agency
can accordingly adapt in order to continue meeting its mission of protecting human health and the environment. Under the
Agency's Superfund Program, existing processes for planning and implementing contaminated site cleanup provide a robust
structure that allows consideration of climate change impacts. Climate change vulnerability analyses and adaptation planning
leading to increased remedy resilience may be integrated throughout the Superfund process, including feasibility studies,
remedial designs and remedy performance reviews or the equivalent in other cleanup programs. Due to wide variation in the
location and hydrogeologic characteristics of contaminated sites, the nature of remedial actions at those sites, and local or
regional climate and weather regimes, considering climate change impacts and potential adaptation measures is most
effective through use of a site-specific strategy.
This fact sheet addresses remedies for
contaminated sediment. It is intended to
serve as an adaptation planning tool by (1)
providing an overview of potential climate
change vulnerabilities and (2) presentini
possible adaptation measures that may be
considered to increase a remedy's resilience
to climate change impacts. This tool was
developed in context of the Superfund
Program but its concepts may apply to site
cleanups conducted under other regulatory
programs or through voluntary efforts, [a]
The adaptation strategies for sediment
remedies build on concepts detailed in EPA's
previously issued Climate Change
Adaptation Technical Fact Sheet:
Groundwater Remediation Systems (EPA
542-F-13-004)2 and Climate Change
Adaptation Technical Fact Sheet: Landfills
and Containment as an Element of Site
Remediation (EPA 542-F-14-001).3
Supplemental information available online
includes:
Additional background information
Definitions of key terms such as
"vulnerability" and "resilience"
Links to key sources of information.
Cleanup at many sites involves remediation of contaminated aquatic
sediment - the clay, silt, sand and organic matter along the bottom of
rivers, lakes, ponds, estuaries and marine bays or harbors. Common
sediment remediation technologies are dredging or excavation with off-
site disposal, capping to isolate the contaminated sediment, and
application of amendments that bind or destroy the contaminants.
Dredging techniques frequently move the contaminated sediment
directly to an onshore treatment or disposal area. Excavation is similar
to dredging but includes partial dewatering of the sediment, by diverting
surface water from the natural channel or by constructing a coffer dam
around the sediment; the dewatering process allows target sediment to
be removed through use of conventional construction equipment.
Capping (in situ capping) involves placing clean material on top of the
contaminated material. A cap often consists of several layers of various
materials, such as an isolation layer of sand and/or soil and an armor
layer of gravel, cobbles, and/or large boulders. In some cases it includes
a habitat layer designed to mimic the native sediment and promote
recovery of benthic communities. In a reactive cap, the isolation layer
includes an amendment (such as organoclay or activated carbon mats)
that binds or sequesters contaminants exiting the sediment pore water,
thereby preventing contaminant release to surface water.4
www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange
Other sediment remedies involve monitored natural recovery (MNR) or
enhanced monitored natural recovery (EMNR), which entail burial of
contaminated sediment with clean sediment. While MNR relies on the
site's natural processes to reduce risks, EMNR uses engineered methods
to speed the natural processes. Also, nearly two-thirds of recently selected sediment remedies include institutional
controls to protect the remediation system or prevent consumption of contaminated fish and other wildlife.5
Figure 1. Climate Change Adaptation Management
[Evaluate System Vulnerability
Assess E
xposure [ Assess Sensitivity
|
Implement Adaptation
Measures
[ Identify Options ] [ Select Measures ]
Monitor and
Climate change adaptation for a sediment
remediation system generally focuses on: (1)
evaluating the system's vulnerability to climate
change and (2) implementing adaptation
measures, when warranted, to ensure the
remedy continues to prevent human or
environmental exposure to contaminants of concern (Figure 1). An effective adaptation strategy includes monitoring
implemented measures, periodically re-evaluating the system's vulnerability, and incorporating any needed changes.
[a] In manners consistent with existing regulations, including those under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; and the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act.
-------
Evaluation of Sediment Remedy System Vulnerability
Evaluation of a sediment remediation system's vulnerability to climate change may involve:
Identifying potential hazards posed by climate change
Characterizing the system's exposure to those hazards
Characterizing the system's sensitivity to the hazards
Considering factors that may exacerbate system exposure and sensitivity, such as the size of upstream water
catchment, the size of adjacent floodplains, and land use in the floodplains.
Climate Change Impacts Potentially Affecting Remediation Vulnerability
Sea level rise
Potential climate change hazards for a
remediation system can be identified
through a climate-change exposure
assessment that reflects a range of
possible climate and weather scenarios.
A sediment remedy system may be
particularly vulnerable to problems such
as:
Potential scour of a sediment cap or
underlying sediment due to an
increase in surface water flow
velocity and/or turbulence
associated with intense storms or
sustained freeze conditions
A significant increase in urban or agricultural runoff entering the sediment containment/treatment zone due to
increased intensity, frequency and/or duration of storms
Entrance of additional waste or debris from upland or upstream sources due to flooding, intense wind or
Precipitation:
Increased heavy precipitation events
Increased flood risk
Decreased precipitation & increasing drought
Increased landslides
Temperature:
Increased occurrence of extreme temperatures
Sustained changes in average temperatures
Decreased permafrost
Wind:
Increased intensity of hurricanes
Increased intensity of tornados
Increased storm surge intensity
Wildfires:
Increased frequency & intensity
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plan,6 Appendix A (adaptation)
landslide
Increased discharge of groundwater to the associated water
body due to increased intensity, frequency and/or duration of
storms
Increased turbidity of water in a treatment zone due to high
wind in shallow surface water or arrival of floodwater or
increased discharge
Unexpected desiccation in the containment/treatment zone
due to low precipitation.
Consideration of the materials deposited in
floodplains, whether called sediment or soil, is
critical to reducing risk in aquatic environments.
Effective control of the upland sediment/soil and
other upland source materials is also critical.
Accordingly, many measures to increase resilience
of an aquatic sediment remediation system concern
the adjoining upland environment.
Sediment and surface water systems are dynamic. As a result, development of a robust conceptual site model (CSM)
during remedial investigation and frequent CSM updating during the feasibility study and remedial design are critical
in planning climate change adaptation for sediment cleanups. At
most Superfund sites involving contaminated sediment, completing
a sediment erodibility and deposition assessment (SEDA) will be an
important part of developing or refining the CSM; the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USAGE) recently published detailed technical
guidelines for conducting a SEDA.8
Information to help develop and maintain a robust
CSM is available in Environmental Cleanup Best
Management Practices: Effective Use of the Project
Life Cycle Conceptual Site Model?
The process of incorporating potential climate change scenarios and impacts into a site's CSM may involve using
predictions or other information previously compiled through one or more climate change models. The information
may consist of data that could be integrated into other tools such as groundwater models or of qualitative
information that could be used to generally inform CSM decision-making.
Dynamic information concerning climate change predictions and related impacts derived through existing climate
change models is readily available from several federal agencies to help screen potential hazards. More information
may be available from state or municipal agencies, regional or local sources such as watershed and forestry
management authorities, non-profit groups and academia. Geographic scales of available information vary, ranging
-------
from specific regions of the United States or individual states
to smaller jurisdictions such as counties or cities and in some
cases neighborhoods (based on latitude/longitude).
Projections derived through tools employing a general
circulation model may benefit from down-scaling in order to
achieve the optimal spatial resolution for a given site.9
Online Tools for Vulnerability Evaluation
Federal agencies such as EPA, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) offer
dynamic online information that is frequently updated
to help evaluate vulnerability to climate change
impacts; links for key information resources are
available at:
www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange/resources
The likelihood for potential climate change hazards to reduce
effectiveness of a sediment remedy system can be evaluated
through a climate-change sensitivity assessment. Potential
direct impacts of the hazards include interruption of power
for ongoing activities, physical or water damage to remedial components (including machinery and equipment) and
reduced access to the site or remediation system. Direct impacts also may concern relatively long-term changes in
site conditions. For example, sites subject to sustained sea level rise may experience slumping of banks and increased
sediment deposition in floodplains and littoral zones. Potential indirect impacts of the hazards may include land use
shifts and ecosystem damage.
Points of potential vulnerability may concern underwater components of the remediation system; upland
components of the remediation system; and the system's construction, monitoring and operation in context of the
site infrastructure (Table 1).
Table 1. Considerations for Sensitivity Assessment of a Sediment Remediation System
Examples of System Components
Potential Vulnerabilities
Power
Interruption
Underwater
Components
Habitat layer, armor layer, amendment,
geotextile or isolation layer in an in situ cap
Amendment for binding or degrading
contaminants
Clean sediment layer overlaying contaminated
sediment, as part of MNR or EMNR
Physical
Damage
Water
Damage
Reduced
Access
Upland
Components
Bank stabilization structures
Floodplain cap(s)
Exposed in-place vessels such as barges or tugs
and equipment used to dredge or place caps and
amendments
Monitoring equipment
Remedy
Construction,
Operation
and
Maintenance
Exposed machinery and vehicles
Sediment processing, treatment or dewatering
facilities
Fencing for access control and litter prevention
Access roads
Buildings, sheds, or housing
Electricity and natural gas lines
Liquid fuel storage and transfer
L
Water supplies
_L
Depending on the site and the implemented remedial technology, overall system failures may result in:
Loss of subaqueous cap integrity due to increased erosion associated with intense water currents and waves
Potential damage to the sorbent layer in a reactive cap due to increasing desiccation in a shallow environment.
Ineffective dewatering of excavated sediment
-------
Alteration or loss of wetland or riparian vegetation used for treatment or local buffering
Changes to the bathymetry and patterns of erosion and sediment deposition.
Remediation of contaminated sediment at Terminal 4 (T-4) in Portland Harbor, a National Priorities List site in Oregon, has included
dredging and transporting approximately 14,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment to an offsite disposal facility and isolating
contaminated sediment in a target area through installation of an organoclay-sand cap. The Port of Portland also stabilized banks
along the adjoining Williamette River by installing rock armor and planting native vegetation to minimize erosion and improve
stability during extreme weather conditions.
Techniques for compiling information on exposure and sensitivity and assessing overall vulnerability of a sediment
remediation system may include:
Collecting qualitative information, including photographs of system components and existing field conditions
Extrapolating quantitative information from data in existing resources
Conducting quantitative modeling through use of conventional software or commercially available risk
assessment software for engineered systems
Developing summary maps, tables and matrices.
Cleanup at the Pine Street Canal NPL
site in Burlington, Vermont, involves
an eight-acre sediment cap made of
a reactive core mat and sand, habitat
restoration and long-term
monitoring. This 38-acres site lays
along the eastern shore of Lake
Champlain (aerial view at left).
Output from the Storm Surge
Inundation and Hurricane Strike
Frequency Map10 illustrates the
site's position in a 100-year
floodplain (contour at right). A weir
at the onsite canal's outlet to Lake
Champlain maintains a minimum
water depth that protects the cap
from scour and erosion during
annual spring flooding, winter ice
buildup and storms.
L !-v.:side Ave i
Implementation of Adaptation Measures
Results of a vulnerability evaluation may be used to develop a strategy for increasing a sediment remediation
system's resilience to climate change. This involves:
Identifying measures that potentially apply to the vulnerabilities in a range of weather/climate scenarios
Selecting and implementing priority adaptation measures for the given sediment remediation system.
-------
Identification of potential measures involves the screening of steps that may be taken to physically secure the
system, provide additional actions or barriers to protect the system, safeguard access to the system, and alert project
personnel to system compromises (Table 2). Depending on the scenario, modifications may enable many measures to
address more than one aspect of an overall remediation system. Some measures also may be scaled up to encompass
multiple remediation systems and critical field activities. Others may provide a desired degree of redundancy or
additional safety factors incorporated into the remedial design. For the purpose of event-driven preparedness, an
independent contract may be secured for accelerated access to an outboard motor-equipped boat that may be used
to assess surface water conditions above a sediment treatment/capping area.
In early 2003, a severe ice jam formed upstream of a 7-acre cap that had been installed two years earlier on a pilot-scale basis in the
lower Grasse River in Massena, New York. Later monitoring indicated that high-velocity and turbulent water flow created underneath
the ice jam toe had scoured part of the cap and some native sediment beneath it. Although sediment transport due to severe ice jam
events was not previously known for this site, subsequent studies found that ice jam events capable of scouring and redistributing
contaminants (polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs]) buried in the river sediment have occurred about once every 10 years in the upper
1.8-mile stretch of the site. Due to these findings, mechanical ice breaking along approximately seven miles of the river was
conducted as an interim measure during the next significant ice jam, which occurred in 2007. Additionally, the full-scale cap design
and construction specifications for the upper 2-mile stretch (encompassing 59 acres) includes a six-inch layer of sand/top soil, six-inch
layer of gravel and 13-inch layer of stone that armors the subaqueous sand/topsoil cap to be placed throughout the 7-mile main
channel area where PCB concentrations equal or exceed 1 milligram/kilogram.
For a new remediation system, selecting optimal measures during the design phase may maximize the system's
resilience to climate change impacts throughout the project life and help avoid costly retrofits. Designs for
subaqueous remedial components that are vulnerable could include, for example, adding a thicker layer of sand or
clean soil in the lower isolation layer of an in situ cap in shallow water if allowed under state and local environmental
programs. The design of a sediment remediation system's armor (or buffer strip) provides another example. In some
states, such as New York, Maryland and Washington, vegetation
replenishment or other "soft" armoring methods along shorelines
are preferred over "hard" armoring methods such as riprap
emplacement.11 Measures to increase vegetation resilience may
involve designing vegetated areas that are large enough to
accommodate future changes in precipitation or sea level rise or
adding a mix of other soft materials such as logs or root wads.
For new remedial systems to be constructed,
evaluation of the vulnerability and adaptation
measures may be integrated into project designs.
For systems already operating, increases in erosion
may signal the need to closely examine components
of the sediment remediation system and re-
evaluate vulnerabilities.
EPA's Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites recommends that evaluation of
contaminated sediment sites should include assessing the potential impacts on sediment and contaminant movement
caused by a 100-year flood and other events or forces with a similar probability of occurrence (0.01 chance of
occurring in a year).4 In considering the impacts of climate change, it is important to consider whether the future 100-
year flood is expected to differ from the historical 100-year flood.
Designs for vulnerable construction-phase remedial components
such as emplaced sheet pile walls, for example, could include use
of anchoring cables mounted on underlying bedrock. Updated
floodplain maps are available online from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency12 and information on similar scenarios such
as predicted sea-level changes is available from other agencies
such as the USAGE.13
In most cases, activities such as sediment dredging
or excavation have a relatively short duration.
Scheduling of these activities during times that are
least likely to experience extreme weather events
may significantly reduce a sediment remediation
system's exposure.
-------
Climate change considerations are particularly important in designs and associated modeling for in situ capping, MNR,
and EMNR remedies anticipated to operate for 30 years or longer. If an area is predicted to experience increasingly
frequent flooding or storm surge activity or be subject to rising sea levels, disposal of contaminated sediment offsite
in an area not subject to these problems may be an option.
Table 2. Examples of Adaptation Measures
Climate Change
Impacts
imperature
£
Underwater
Components
Upland
Components
+
ecipitation
Q.
+
+
+
D
_C
§
+
01
VI
'&.
"3
1
a
+
Potential Adaptation Measures for System Components
Brief descriptions of engineered structures integral to many of the measures are available on the
Superfund Climate Change Adaptation website.
Armor enhancement for in situ cap
Additional or deeper layers of stone and/or gravel above a sand base layer to withstand
scouring forces of ice jams
Amendment settling enhancement
In situ placement of amendments through techniques such as broadcasting the material in
a pelletizedform or using a thicker layer of cover sand to accelerate material settling
Deposition controls
Engineered structures such as dams to control the flow of flood-related deposition in
settings where increased underwater deposition enhances remedy performance
Modeling expansion for MNA
Incorporation of additional subsurface parameters and sampling devices in monitoring
plans to gauge the potential for re-suspension of contaminated sediment under more
extreme weather/climate scenarios
Armor on banks and floodplains
Fixed structures placed on or along the shoreline of flowing inland water or ocean water to
mitigate effects of erosion and protect site infrastructure; "soft" armor may comprise
synthetic fabrics and/or deep-rooted vegetation while "hard" armor may consist of riprap,
gabions and segmental retaining walls
Coastal hardening
Installation of structures to stabilize a shoreline and shield it from erosion, through "soft"
techniques (such as replenishing sand and/or vegetation) or "hard" techniques (such as
building a seawall or installing riprap)
Containment fortification
Placement of riprap adjacent to a subsurface containment barrier located along moving
surface water, to minimize bank scouring that could negatively affect barrier integrity; for
soil/waste capping systems vulnerable to storm surge, installation of a protective vertical
wall or armored base to absorb energy of the surge and prevent cap erosion or destruction
Ground anchorage
One or more steel bars installed in cement-grouted boreholes (and in some cases
accompanied by cables) to secure an apparatus on a ground surface or to reinforce a
retaining wall against an earthen slope
Relocation
Moving selected system components to positions more distant or protected from potential
hazards; for flooding threats, this may involve elevations higher than specified in the
community's flood insurance study
Retaining wall
A structure (commonly of concrete, steel sheet piles or timber) built to support earth
masses having a vertical or near-vertical slope and consequently hold back loose soil, rocks
or debris
Tie down systems
Installing permanent mounts that allow rapid deployment of a cable system extending
from the top of a unit to ground surface
-------
Remedy
Construction,
Operation and
Maintenance
Climate Change
Impacts
Potential Adaptation Measures for System Components
Brief descriptions of engineered structures integral to many of the measures are available on the
Superfund Climate Change Adaptation website.
Flood controls
Building one or more earthen structures (such as vegetated berms, vegetated swales,
stormwater ponds, levees, or dams) or installing fabricated drainage structures (such as
culverts or French drains) to retain or divert floodwater spreading from adjacent surface
water or land surface depressions
Hurricane straps
Integrating or adding heavy metal brackets that reinforce physical connection between the
roof and walls of a building, shed or housing unit, including structures used for leachate
and LFG management
Plantings
Selecting native grasses, shrubs, trees and other deep-rooted plants that are resistant to
drought or increased temperatures where vegetation is used for shading, erosion control
or wind breaks or for treatment or local buffering in wetland or riparian settings
Power from off-grid sources
Constructing a permanent system or using portable equipment that provides power
generated from onsite renewable resources, as a primary or redundant power supply that
can operate independent of the utility grid when needed
Renewable energy system safeguards
Extended concrete footing for ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) systems, additional
bracing for roof-top PV or solar thermal systems, and additional masts for small wind
turbines or windmills; for utility-scale systems, safeguards to address climate change
vulnerabilities may be addressed in the site-specific renewable energy feasibility study
Utility line burial
Relocating electricity and communication lines from overhead to underground positions,
to prevent power outages during and often after extreme weather events
Weather alerts
Electronic systems that actively inform subscribers of extreme weather events or provide
Internet postings on local/regional weather and related conditions
The process of selecting optimal measures for a sediment remediation system may consider remedial aspects such
as:
S Complexity and scale of the project
S Complexity of erosion controls or adjacent drainage areas
"/ Complexity of in-place monitoring systems
S Anticipated duration of remedial system operations
S Existing infrastructure components such as roads, power and water supplies
"/ Primary and back-up means of access
S Project aspects affecting future land use or development
S Anticipated effectiveness and longevity of the potential measures
S Capital cost and operation and maintenance (O&M) cost.
Selected measures may be integrated into primary or secondary documents supporting existing remediation systems,
such as monitoring plans, optimization evaluations, five-year reviews and close-out planning materials. For new
systems to be constructed, the measures also may be integrated into the site's feasibility study and remedy design
process. Significant or fundamental changes may need formalization through a decision document (such as a record
of decision amendment) or a permit modification. In general, implementation of adaptation measures during early
rather than late stages of the cleanup process may expand the universe of feasible options, maximize integrity of
certain measures, and in some cases reduce implementation costs.
-------
To be most effective, adaptation should be an iterative and flexible
process that involves periodically re-evaluating the sediment remediation
system's vulnerability, monitoring the measures already taken, and
incorporating newly identified options or information into the adaptation
strategy. Periodic re-evaluations should include verifying key data; for
example, predictions for increased frequency of intense inland surface
water currents and tides may prompt upgrades to subaqueous capping
armor, as could the changing patterns of ice versus non-ice conditions.
A sample structure for documenting
evaluation of site-specific vulnerabilities,
prioritizing potential adaptation measures,
and monitoring implemented measures is
available in Climate Change Adaptation
Technical Fact Sheet: Groundwater
Remediation Systems (EPA 542-F-13-004).2
Effective adaptation planning also considers how climate change may affect short- and long-term availability of clean
water and ecosystem services as well as land uses that may be critical aspects of the maintenance of a sediment
remediation system.14 Information about related data and government and/or private sector partnerships is available
to the site cleanup community, local or regional planners, and the general public through the recently launched U.S.
Climate Data Initiative.15
References
[Web access date: April 2015]
U.S. EPA; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plan; EPA 100-K-14-001; June 2014;
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/EPA-climate-change-adaptation-plan.pdf
U.S. EPA; Climate Change Adaptation Technical Fact Sheet: Groundwater Remediation Systems; EPA 542-F-13-004; December 2013;
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange/cca-tech-fact-sheet-gw-remediation-systems.pdf
3 U.S. EPA; Climate Change Adaptation Technical Fact Sheet: Landfills and Containment as an Element of Site Remediation; EPA 542-F-14-001; May 2014;
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange/cca-tech-fact-sheet-lf-containment.pdf
4 U.S. EPA; Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites; EPA-540-R-05-012; OSWER 9355.0-85; December 2005;
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/sediment/pdfs/guidance.pdf
U.S. EPA; Superfund Remedy Report; Fourteenth Edition; EPA542-R-13-016; November 2013; http://www.clu-in.org/asr/
U.S. EPA; Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plan; June 2014;
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/OSWER-climate-change-adaptation-plan.pdf
U.S. EPA; Environmental Cleanup Best Management Practices: Effective Use of the Project Life Cycle Conceptual Site Model; EPA 542-F-11-011; July
2011; http://www.clu-in.org/download/remed/csm-life-cycle-fact-sheet-final.pdf
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Technical Guidelines on Performing a Sediment Erosion and Deposition Assessment (SEDA) at Superfund Sites; ERDC TR-
14-9; September 2014; http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/sediment/pdfs/SEDA%20final%20ERDC%20TR-14-9.pdf
9 U.S. Department of Agriculture/Forest Service; Climate Projections FAQ; RMRS-GTR-277WWW; April 2012;
http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/40614
U.S. EPA; Storm Surge Inundation and Hurricane Strike Frequency Map; http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/climate/stormsurge.cfm
U.S. EPA; Climate Ready Estuaries; Synthesis of Adaptation Options for Coastal Areas; EPA 430-F-08-024; January 2009;
http://www.epa.gov/climate/cre/downloads/CRE_Synthes is_1.09.pdf
U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Federal Emergency Management Agency; Flood Map Service Center; https://msc.fema.gov/portal
U.S. EPA; Superfund; Climate Change Adaptation; Information Resources; http://www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange/resources/
U.S. EPA; Climate Impacts on Water Resources; http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/water.html
5 The White House; The President's Climate Data Initiative: Empowering America's Communities to Prepare for the Effects of Climate Change; March 19,
2014; http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/19/fact-sheet-president-s-climate-data-initiative-empowering-america-s-comm
To learn more about climate change adaptation at Superfund sites and access new
information and decision-making tools as they become available, visit:
www.epa.gov/superfund/climatechange
Contacts
Questions about climate change adaptation in EPA's Superfund Program may be forwarded to:
Carlos Pachon (pachon.carlos@epa.gov), Anne Dailey (dailey.anne@epa.gov) or Jyl Lapachin (lapachin.iyl@epa.gov)
EPA is publishing this document as a means of disseminating useful information regarding approaches for adapting to climate change. This document does not impose legally
binding requirements on EPA, states, tribes or the regulated community and does not alter or supersede existing policy or guidance for contaminated site cleanup. EPA, federal,
state, tribal and local decision-makers retain discretion to implement approaches on a case-by-case basis.
------- |