i £5
vsffiz,5
%> ^
pR01fc&
EPA Action Plan to
Manage Contaminated
-------
<
i o \
w
PRO^°
2
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water
Washington, DC 20460
(4305T)
EPA 823-R-08-005
July 2008
-------
EPA Action Plan to
Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
-------
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Contents
1 EPA Response to IG Report Recommendations 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Recommendations from the IG Report 1
1.3 How This Action Plan Relates to the 1998 Contaminated Sediments Strategy 2
2 EPA Actions to Improve Contaminated Sediment Management 2
2.1 Continuation of Ongoing Activities 4
2.2 Actions that Should Improve Management of Contaminated Sediments 15
Appendix A: August 7, 2006, EPA Response to Final Evaluation Report, "EPA Can Better
Implement Its Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments" A-l
Appendix B: Contaminated Sediment Accomplishments Based on the 1998 Strategy B-l
Appendix C: Contaminated Sediment Accomplishments Not Foreseen in the 1998 Strategy C-l
Appendix D: Background on the National Sediment Inventory (NSI) and the National Sediment
Quality Survey (NSQS) D-l
Appendix E: Additional Resources E-l
Tables
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued 4
Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008 15
Table 2-3. Proposed Additional Actions that Should Improve Contaminated Sediment Management 17
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Acronyms
AOC Area of Concern
BMP best management practice
BUI Beneficial Use Impairment
CAA Clean Air Act
CAFO concentrated animal feeding operation
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CSRRAW Contaminated Sediment Regional Research Advisory Workgroup
CWA Clean Water Act
CZARA Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990
CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act
EMAP Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
EPA [U.S.] Environmental Protection Agency
ESB Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmark
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FISP Federal Interagency Sedimentation Project
GLLA Great Lakes Legacy Act
GLNPO Great Lakes National Program Office
HAP hazardous air pollutant
IG Inspector General
MNR monitored natural recovery
MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
MYP Multiyear Plan
NDT National Dredging Team
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSI National Sediment Inventory
NSQS National Sediment Quality Survey Report to Congress
NWQMC National Water Quality Monitoring Council
OAR Office of Air and Radiation
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
OPP Office of Pesticide Programs
OPPT Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
OPPTS Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances
ORD Office of Research and Development
OSRTI Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
OST Office of Science and Technology
OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
ii
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
OW Office of Water
OWM Office of Wastewater Management
OWOW Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
PAH polyaromatic hydrocarbon
PBT persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic
PCB poly chlorinated biphenyl
PMN Premanufacture Notification
POP persistent organic pollutant
POTW publicly owned treatment work
PPCP pharmaceutical and personal care product
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
SAR structure-activity relationship
SF Sustainable Futures [Initiative]
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USBLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
USD A U.S. Department of Agriculture
USDA-ARS U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service
USDA-FS U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
WRDA Water Resources Development Act of 1992
iii
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Intentionally left blank.
iv
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Executive Summary
On March 15, 2006, the Inspector General (IG) released the report EPA Can Better Implement Its
Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments (IG Report), which evaluated EPA's 1998 Contaminated
Sediment Management Strategy (1998 Strategy). According to the IG, the purpose of the IG Report was
"to determine the effectiveness and outcomes achieved from [EPA's] Contaminated Sediment
Management Strategy." Although the IG Report concludes that EPA has made some progress in
managing and addressing contaminated sediments, it states that EPA did not fully implement the 1998
Strategy.
The IG Report made a number of specific recommendations, to which the Agency officially responded in
an August 7, 2006, memorandum from Marcus Peacock, Deputy Administrator, to the IG. In that
response, EPA said it would complete a document that will describe specific actions to: 1) ensure that the
Agency uses the National Sediment Inventory as part of EPA's decision making; 2) ensure that
contaminated sediment issues are managed and addressed through a cross-program approach; and 3)
update the Strategy."
The EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediment (Action Plan) identifies key actions
that EPA believes should receive emphasis, focus, and national priority attention in the future. The Action
Plan does not replace the 1998 Strategy; rather, it identifies the prioritized actions that EPA can undertake
in its prevention and management of contaminated sediments for the future. The Action Plan contains
both actions from the Strategy that EPA should continue and additional actions that EPA can take to
improve the prevention and management of contaminated sediments.
Furthermore, EPA is taking actions that are included in the Action Plan but were not part of the 1998
Strategy. Under the 1998 Strategy, EPA expended considerable effort on developing sediment quality
criteria before ultimately determining that doing so was not the most appropriate approach for the full
range of priority pollutants. EPA could, however, choose to develop and issue aquatic life criteria for
particular emerging contaminants if such criteria were scientifically appropriate and beneficial to
preventing further sediment contamination and if they could be implemented.
To address contaminated sediment issues, EPA intends to focus on the following areas: Risk Assessment,
Programmatic and Technical Support, Coordination and Enforcement.
v
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Intentionally left blank.
vi
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
1 EPA Response to IG Report Recommendations
1.1 Background
On March 15, 2006, the Inspector General (IG) released the report EPA Can Better Implement Its Strateg}'
for Managing Contaminated Sediments1 (IG Report), which evaluated EPA's 1998 Contaminated
Sediment Management Strategy2 (1998 Strategy). According to the IG, the purpose of the IG Report was
"to determine the effectiveness and outcomes achieved from [EPA's] Contaminated Sediment
Management StrategyAlthough the IG Report concludes that EPA has made some progress in
managing and addressing contaminated sediments, it states that EPA did not fully implement the 1998
Strategy. In particular, the IG Report states the following:
• The National Sediment Inventory (NSI) generally was not used for decision making.
• Activities were not fully coordinated across program offices.
• National sediment quality criteria were not established.
• The Office of Research and Development (ORD) has not completely met priority research needs
and could enhance coordination on research needs.
• The performance measures for sediment management are incomplete.
On August 7, 2006, EPA responded to the IG Report (see Appendix A). The response stated that the
Intra-agency Committee on Preventing and Managing Contaminated Sediments (Intra-agency Committee)
"was established [and] has developed an initial work plan for completing [a document], which will
describe specific actions to: 1) ensure that the Agency uses the National Sediment Inventory as part of
EPA's decision making; 2) ensure that contaminated sediment issues are managed and addressed through
a cross-program approach; and 3) update the Strategy."
The Action Plan was prepared by the Intra-agency Committee on Preventing and Managing Contaminated
Sediments with the Office of Science and Technology (OST) in the Office of Water (OW) as the lead.
Representatives from Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds (OWOW), Office of Wastewater
Management (OWM), and Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) also served on the
Committee. Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA), Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances (OPPTS), ORD, Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response (OSWER), and EPA Regions 2, 4, 5, 6, and 10 were represented on the
committee as well.
1.2 Recommendations from the IG Report
The IG Report made a number of specific recommendations, to which the Agency officially responded in an
August 7, 2006, memorandum from Marcus Peacock, Deputy Administrator, to the IG. This Action Plan
lays out actions EPA can take that directly relate to the IG's recommendations 2-1, 2-2, and part of 3-2:
2-1 The Deputy Administrator establishes a committee or designates an office to
assume responsibility for the oversight and evaluation of the Agency's
Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy. The designated office or
committee should:
1 March 15, 2006; 2006-P-00016; http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2006/20060315-2006-P-00016.pdf.
2 April 1998; EPA-823-R-98-001; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/strategy.pdf.
1
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
a. Ensure program offices with responsibilities for managing and addressing
contaminated sediment issues use the National Sediment Inventory as part
of their decision making processes.
b. Ensure contaminated sediment issues are managed and addressed through
a cross-program approach, as intended by the Strategy, that places
emphasis on prevention and control of contaminated sediments.
c. Update the Strategy to reflect accomplishments made on managing and
addressing contaminated sediments and incorporate additional actions
that Agency program offices should take.
2-2 The Assistant Administrator for Water and the Assistant Administrator for
Solid Waste and Emergency Response collaborate with other program offices
with responsibilities under the Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy
to develop and implement comprehensive and coordinated performance
measures for preventing, assessing, and remediating contaminated sediment
issues.
3-2 The Assistant Administrator for Water determines a reporting frequency for the
NSOS report that is both useful for decision makers and achievable for EPA,
disclose to Congress that EPA cannot meet the current biennial reporting
requirement specified by Section 503 of the Water Resources Development Act,
and provide Congress an alternative reporting schedule for consideration.
1.3 How This Action Plan Relates to the 1998 Contaminated Sediments Strategy
This Action Plan identifies key actions that EPA believes should receive emphasis, focus, and national
priority attention in the future. The Action Plan does not replace the 1998 Strategy; rather, it identifies the
prioritized actions that EPA can undertake in its prevention and management of contaminated sediments
for the future. The Action Plan allows flexibility for the EPA regions to identify areas of focus and
alignment with regional and state priorities. The Action Plan contains both actions from the Strategy that
EPA should continue and additional actions that EPA can take to improve the prevention and
management of contaminated sediments. For example, EPA should establish two division-level
committees—one focusing on effective use of data and the other focusing on emerging contaminants—as
priority actions for 2008. Neither of these committees was mentioned in the 1998 Strategy.
Furthermore, EPA is taking actions that are included in the Action Plan but were not part of the 1998
Strategy. For example, EPA should continue its actions that relate to emerging contaminants, such as the
fish tissue study that analyzes for pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). In addition, the
Action Plan no longer emphasizes development of sediment quality criteria. Under the 1998 Strategy,
EPA expended considerable effort on developing sediment quality criteria before ultimately determining
that doing so was not the most appropriate approach for the full range of priority pollutants. EPA could,
however, choose to develop and issue aquatic life criteria for particular emerging contaminants if such
criteria were scientifically appropriate and beneficial to preventing further sediment contamination and if
they could be implemented.
2 EPA Actions to Improve Contaminated Sediment Management
Since the 1998 Strategy was published, EPA has learned more about how to assess, prevent, and manage
contaminated sediments. This knowledge has modified the Agency's thinking and resulted in changes and
adjustments to how it approaches contaminated sediments relative to the 1998 Strategy. EPA has made
significant progress in reducing sediment contamination since 1998 by implementing prevention and
remediation actions beyond those envisioned in the 1998 Strategy.
2
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
The Intra-agency Committee performed a cross-program examination of EPA" s actions and accomplishments
to manage contaminated sediments. As a result, EPA will continue to implement key activities that are
ongoing (Table 2-1). In addition, EPA can implement activities to enhance current programs and to
initiate actions that would improve contaminated sediment management (Tables 2-2 and 2-3). EPA
recognizes that resource constraints and other priorities might preclude such activities and actions.
To address contaminated sediment issues, EPA intends to focus activities in the following areas:
• Data—Recognizing the challenges in collecting and using the NSI data (see Appendix D), efforts
should result in improvements to the National Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS), technical
information on determining NSI reporting frequency, and data sharing. The establishment of the
Effective Use of Data Committee should ensure that data are shared more effectively and that
efforts are cross-programmatic in nature.3
• Emerging Contaminants—EPA intends to conduct studies to better understand emerging
contaminants, obtain information on the occurrence of emerging contaminants, and develop
assessment tools and methods. EPA intends to establish the Emerging Contaminants Committee
to ensure that data are used effectively and to lead the development of analytical and regulatory
tools and methods.
• Research—EPA plans to continue implementation of the ORD Land Multiyear Plan (MYP). The
MYP outlines the ORD efforts to conduct and apply scientific research to develop cost-effective
methods for managing wastes, assessing human health and ecological risks, and cleaning up
hazardous risk sites, including contaminated sediments.
• Pesticides and Toxics—EPA expects to continue to evaluate pesticides and toxics in the
environment, attempt to improve its ability to quantify potential aquatic exposures to pesticides,
and prevent the contamination of sediment. EPA expects to continue to improve tools and
implement practices that reduce drift and runoff to surface waterbodies.
• Risk Assessment—Risk assessments should be conducted in an effort to reduce emissions of
pollutants that might accumulate in sediment through deposition.
• Remediation—EPA expects to continue to meet the performance measures set forth in its 2006-
2011 Strategic Plan. EPA intends to use existing contaminated sediment programs to generate
information on contaminated sediment sites and work to reduce risks to human health and wildlife.
• Programmatic and Technical Support—Activities should create greater efficiencies in technical
problem-solving and communication. This should ensure that decisions are consistent and based
on sound science.
• Coordination— EPA expects to continue to improve cross-programmatic coordination within the
Agency, as well as work with other federal agencies to ensure effective contaminated sediment
management.
• Enforcement—EPA intends to leverage resources from responsible parties to reduce risks to
human health and the environment.
Tables 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 below provide details on specific ongoing and proposed additional activities and
actions and their anticipated environmental results.
3 Additional information about the NSI and NSQS can be found in Appendix D.
3
-------
2.1 Continuation of Ongoing Activities
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
Data
1. Conduct an expert workshop to solicit
comments on how to improve the National
Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS). The results of
the listening session, workshop, and additional
internal Agency comments could be used to
reshape the NSQS.
Serves as an assessment tool that programs can
use for screening-level assessments.
One listening session was held in conjunction
with the Fourth International Conference on
Remediation of Contaminated Sediments
(January 2007).
OW/OST (lead)
2009
2. Develop electronic transfer protocols for
gathering available contaminated sediment data
from other programs within EPA, states, tribes,
and other federal partners.
Provide efficiencies for accessing and using
contaminated sediment data.
OW/OST (lead)
OW/OWOW
Ongoing
3. Develop a technical memorandum on
determining the National Sediment Inventory
(NSI) reporting frequency. OW has conducted an
investigation into the technical basis for
determining the NSI reporting frequency. The
memo should discuss:
• Actual rate of change, which includes chemical
half-lives and sedimentation (burial) rates
• Limitations for detecting change based on
commonly used sampling equipment
In addition, as part of the Agency review of the
usefulness of the NSQS report, the program
offices and regions will be asked to provide the
reporting frequencies most useful to their
program objectives.
Improve NSI reporting frequency.
OW/OST (lead)
OSWER
EPA regions,
including water and
remediation
programs
2009
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
4. Enhance cross-program usability of sediment
and surface water quality data. Promote cross-
program coordination regarding data collection to
prevent duplication of effort and save limited
resources through the Effective Use of Data
Committee.
Provide efficiencies for accessing and using
contaminated sediment data.
OW/OST (lead)
OSWER
EPA regions,
including water and
remediation
programs
Ongoing
5. Boost cross-program communication between
OW, OPPTS, OSWER, EPA regions and ORD to
improve the usability of sediment and surface
water quality data through the Effective Use of
Data Committee.
Improve data-sharing activities that can help to
prevent or reduce new sediment contamination.
OW/OST (lead)
OPPTS
OSWER
ORD
EPA regions,
including water,
remediation
programs, and
toxics
Ongoing
Emerging Contaminants
6. Conduct a flowing waters study. This study
should sample major rivers and wadeable
streams for a range of parameters, including
emerging and other contaminants in fish tissue.
Increase understanding of current contaminants
in fish tissue for human and ecological health
impacts.
OW/OWOW (lead)
OW/OST
September 30,
2011
7. Obtain information on the occurrence of
emerging contaminants and validate method for
analytical detection. Activities include:
• Preparing a sampling and analysis report for
approximately 100 pharmaceuticals and
personal care products (PPCPs) in biosolids
• Conducting a fish tissue study and analyzing
for PPCPs
• Assessing the health services industry for
potential effluent guidelines under 304(m)
Incorporate additional information into the
assessment and management of emerging
contaminants.
OW/OST
• Sampling and
analysis report:
September 30,
2008
• Fish tissue
study: 2008
• Health services
industry: Report
to AA, August
2008
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
8. Obtain in situ environmental data on emerging
contaminants, in particularly PPCPs. Include pilot
study on the Chicago River in coordination with
GLNPO and Region 5 that includes U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and St. Cloud State
University, Minnesota, as additional partners.
Improves the understanding of ecological and
human health risks associated with the
occurrence of PPCP chemicals in fish tissue.
OW/OST
Field work
completed 2007;
Analysis and data
review currently in
process
9. Develop assessment tools and methods (for
example, sediment toxicity tests) for emerging
contaminants in fish tissue, sediments, and the
water column in coordination, where appropriate,
with other federal agencies, including the USGS.
Provide improved assessment tools to reduce
assessment costs and improve ability to assess
for emerging contaminants
Improve targeting of resources on certain
prevention activities and appropriate regulatory
tools (e.g., water quality standards, effluent
guidelines).
ORD, lead
OPPTS
ORD: Planned
through 2012 as
part of Multiyear
Plan (MYP)
OPPTS: 2008
10. Perform additional prevention research that
focuses on assessing land uses such as
agriculture and mining and on identifying and
assessing emerging contaminants found to
accumulate in sediments.
Note: ORD is revising its MYPs to reflect current
resource levels, priorities, and external reviews.
Revised plans will be posted on EPA's Web site.b
ORD
Planned through
2012 as part of
MYP
Research
11. Continue to implement contaminated
sediment research under the ORD land research
MYP. The focus areas are:
• Collect performance information for
conventional remedies, with a near-term
emphasis on effects of dredging and capping
performance.
• Develop alternative remedies with potential
cost or performance improvements, including
reactive caps.
Reduce costs and improve future decision by
making performance information and additional
remedial methods available.
Post research publications on program Web sites
and incorporate into documents so as to transfer
research results.
ORD
Planned through
2012 as part of
MYP
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
12. Conduct research that supports prevention of
sediment contamination, including diagnostic
tools, management of toxics, best management
practices (BMPs) for land uses, and studies of
the impacts of emerging contaminants that might
accumulate in sediments as identified in the ORD
land and pesticides/toxics MYPs.
Improve methods, tools, and practices that can
be used to prevent or reduce new sediment
contamination.
Note: ORD is revising its MYPs to reflect current
resource levels, priorities, and external reviews.
Revised plans will be posted on EPA's Web site.0
ORD
Planned through
2012 as part of
MYP
13. Continue to implement contaminated
sediment research under the ORD land research
MYP. The focus areas are:
• Modeling of bioaccumulative chemicals to
estimate the ecological response to no action
and various remedy options
• Developing tools for sampling and assessing
sediment and biota condition and response to
remediation
• Improving, reducing costs of, and developing
characterization techniques for contaminants
of concern in sediments
Improve methods and models used by program
and regional staff to make more sound
environmental decisions. Post research
publications on program Web sites and
incorporate into documents so as to transfer
research results. Increase the reliability and
performance of remedial alternatives.
ORD
Planned through
2012 as part of
multiyear plan
Pesticides and Toxics
14. Pesticide Review Program reviews will
include assessment of potential risk to aquatic
organisms and aquatic-dependent wildlife living
in or near sediments, incorporating, when
appropriate, the new guidelines for toxicity tests.
Incorporate additional mitigation measures on
pesticide product labels, as appropriate, which
should in turn reduce pesticide loading to surface
water and sediments when pesticides are used
according to label directions.
OPPTS/OPP
First cycle of
registration review
program ongoing
through 2022
15. Improve ability to quantify potential sediment
exposure to pesticides applied in urban and
agricultural settings likely to partition
preferentially to sediments.
For new chemicals:
Ongoing
For existing
(registration review)
chemicals: 2017
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
16. Continue persistent, bioaccumulative, and
toxic (PBT) reviews for premanufacture
notifications (PMNs), an integral part of an
ongoing and evolving focus on PBT chemical
substances—both new and existing.
The new chemical PBT policy ensures that
chemicals expected to have PBT characteristics
are subject to appropriate restrictions and testing
requirements.
OPPTS/OPPT
Ongoing
17. Promote the Sustainable Futures (SF)
Initiative. This includes supporting and improving
a suite of publicly available evaluation tools that
can be applied before key decisions are made to
submit a PMN. For chemical users/processors,
PMNs can be used to help make choices for
prospective product components (or component
replacements) that should have fewer impacts on
sediments.
Prevent new contamination of sediment by
increasing use of components (or component
replacements) that have fewer impacts on
sediment.
Ongoing
18. Refine evaluation tools for SF. One example
is the testing of an analog identification module
for the PBT Profiler Tool. This module is intended
to allow a company to identify specific chemical
structures similar to a current chemical that will
function as well but have a lower potential for
persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity.
Continue success in identifying and controlling
new and existing chemicals with significant PBT
properties.
OPPT
Ongoing
Risk Assessment
19. Conduct risk assessments on the residual
emissions from each of the 174 stationary source
categories to determine whether additional
standards are needed to reduce residual risks,
including those associated with contaminated
sediments.
Potentially reduce emissions of pollutants that
might accumulate in sediment through
deposition.
OAR
Ongoing
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
Remediatiorf
20. Continue to use performance measures
consistent with EPA's 2006-2011 Strategic Plan.
Specifically, Objective 4.3 of the 2011 Strategic
Plan includes strategic targets for remediating
contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes,
Puget Sound, and the Columbia River. These
targets are:
• Great Lakes—By 2011, remediate a
cumulative total of 7 million cubic yards of
contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes.
• Puget Sound Basin—By 2011, remediate 200
acres of prioritized contaminated sediments.
• Columbia River Basin—By 2011, clean up 150
acres of known highly contaminated sediments.
Any new performance measures relating to
contaminated sediments can be considered in
the next Agency Strategic Planning cycle.
Remediate sediments in high-priority watersheds
OW/GLNPO
Region 10
September 30,
2011
21. Implement the Great Lakes Legacy Act
(GLLA) and remediate as much contaminated
sediment from the Great Lakes Areas of Concern
(AOCs) as possible with the appropriated funding
and the help of EPA's non-federal partners.
Implement the other provisions in the act
(monitor and evaluate contaminated sediments
and source control).
Use existing contaminated sediment program to
help generate information on contaminated
sediment sites for possible remediation under the
GLLA.
Reduce risk to aquatic life and human health.
Delist beneficial use impairments (BUIs) and
ultimately AOCs.
GLNPO is reviewing a list of sites with
contaminated sediments and can work
cooperatively with Superfund and other EPA
programs to identify the optimal mechanism/
program to address and manage the sediments
at each site.
As of December 2007, approximately 800,000
cubic yards (nearly 1.5 million pounds of
contaminants) had been removed from the Great
Lakes AOCs. Remediation of BUIs is a
necessary step to delist the AOCs.
OW/GLNPO
Ongoing
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
22. Implement cleanup decisions at the regional
level to reduce risk to human health and the
environment caused by contaminated sediments
and restore beneficial uses of surface
waterbodies at National Priorities List and
equivalent sites through the Superfund program:
• Remedial Actions
• Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions
• Time-Critical Removal Actions
Reduce risk to human health and the health of
wildlife through ingestion of contaminated fish
and shellfish through continued cleanup of
contaminated sediment sites using dredging,
capping, monitored natural recovery (MNR), or
other innovative methods.
Reduce risk to human health through direct
contact and incidental ingestion of contaminated
sediment and surface water, and reduce risk to
ecological health through reduced toxicity of
sediment.
Existing remedy decisions at Tier 1 sites include
removal of approximately 29 million cubic yards
by dredging or excavation, in situ capping of
approximately 800 acres, and monitoring of the
natural recovery of approximately 2,800 acres.
OSWER regional
offices
Ongoing
Programmatic and Technical Support
23. Provide programmatic and technical support
through existing activities, including the following:
• Review large, complex, or controversial
Superfund sites through the Contaminated
Sediment Technical Advisory Group.
• Cochair steering committee of federal
sediment researchers (a joint activity with
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and
U.S. Navy).
• Work to clarify polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
sampling and disposal policies under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Ensure consistency in decision making.
Ensure sound science to support decision
making.
Support sound decisions for cleanups resulting in
a reduction in risk to human health and the
environment.
The planned activities are expected to result in
selection and implementation of more effective
remedies for contaminated sediment and,
therefore, increased reduction of risks to human
health and the ecosystem.
OSWER/
OSRTI
ORD
Ongoing
• Evaluate remedy performance through field
studies.
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Estimated
EPA program
calendar year of
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
office
completion a
• Develop new documents as needed, e.g.,
"Sediment Monitoring and Assessment
Sheets" and "Technical Considerations for
Environmental Dredging of Contaminated
Sediments", (working jointly with USACE as
appropriate)
• Dialogue with state partners, including the
Association of State and Territorial Solid
Waste Management Officials and the
Interstate Technology Regulatory Council.
• Dialogue with industry partners, including the
Sediment Management Work Group and the
Sediment Contaminant Bioavailability
Alliance.
• Provide advice to ORD through the
Contaminated Sediment Regional Research
Advisory Workgroup (CSRRAW).
• Provide the services of the Superfund
Sediment Resource Center.
• Promote the monitoring of remedial actions in
order to evaluate remedy effectiveness in
reducing risks.
• Continue to support the region-led Sediment
Forum for Remedial Project Managers that
was created to discuss common problems
and share lessons learned.
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
Coordination
24. Comanage with USACE dredged material
testing and assessment, evaluation of sediment
management alternatives, monitoring of disposal
sites, training of field staff, and research and
development activities.
Maintain U.S. harbors and channels in a timely
and cost-effective manner that meets
environmental protection, restoration, and
enhancement goals.
Strong coordination can improve dredged
material management and can result in more
beneficial use.
ow/owow
Ongoing
25. Cochairthe National Dredging Team (NDT)
with USACE, implement the Dredged Material
Action Agenda, and provide support to the
Regional Dredging Teams.
Ongoing
26. Support coordination, through the NDT, of
USACE's Regional Sediment Management
Program and the regions' Watershed
Management and Dredged Material Management
Programs
Ongoing
27. Boost cross-program communication
between OSWER and OW and identify areas
where information sharing can improve sediment
conditions. EPA and its state counterparts have
numerous tools and programs available to
assess and prevent ongoing sources of
contamination to sediments.
Maintain sediment quality in former Superfund
sites through more emphasis on upstream
control of ongoing sources.
Regional
Hazardous Waste
offices
OW regional offices
Ongoing
27a. For National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits, EPA and states can
consider monitoring requirements to determine
whether the discharge has impacts on nearby
contaminated sediments.
• There might be opportunities at the state level
for voluntary, cooperative efforts to address
contaminated sediment sites. These may
include such activities as monitoring that will
provide data that can inform future decisions
regarding cleanup and control strategies.
Could decrease amounts of potential
contaminants that might be impacting existing
areas of sediment contamination.
Regional
Hazardous Waste
offices
OW regional offices
Ongoing
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
• This is particularly important where there are
permitted discharges to existing areas of
known sediment contamination and/or areas
that are adjacent to existing areas of
contamination.
• The discharges can be monitored for the
contaminants that are known to exist in the
sediments, recognizing that sediment impacts
were not considered in the development of
existing water quality standards.
• These monitoring requirements could be
reduced later, depending on the contaminants
that show up in the effluent. If there is
sufficient information to link the discharge of
pollutants to ongoing sediment contamination,
NPDES permits may include effluent limits for
those pollutants in cases where state water
quality standards address sediment quality.
27b. RCRA Corrective Action Permits should
include goals to be achieved during the clean up,
including any contaminated sediments generated
by the facility's operation. Also, where
appropriate, the permit would address controlling
the possible sources of recontamination of clean
or controlled sediments so that the clean or
controlled sediments within, or in adjoining, storm
water basins, are not recontaminated.
Could improve coordination among programs so
that sediments are managed more holistically.
Regional
Hazardous Waste
offices
OW regional offices
Ongoing
-------
Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year of
completion a
27c. EPA and states can consider using annual
performance agreements between states and
EPA to acknowledge and address high-priority
areas of sediment contamination.
• Tools can help direct resources towards
prevention, assessment, and cleanup in such
areas.
• It might be possible to outline how resources
could be shared between programs.
Could create improved efficiencies to manage
resources toward prevention, assessment, and
cleanups.
Regional
Hazardous Waste
offices
OW regional offices
Ongoing
Enforcement
28. Promote the Enforcement First and Polluter
Pays principles by encouraging and assisting the
regions to put in place enforcement mechanisms
to clean up contaminated sediment sites.
OECA will maximize enforcement efforts in
conjunction with Superfund actions described in
# 22 and 27 of this table.
OECA
Ongoing
Notes:
a. This assumes that resources are available and priorities do not change.
b. http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp.htm.
c. http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp.htm.
d. EPA activities under the authority of Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 305(b) and 303(d) include oversight of state monitoring and assessment of sediment-
impaired waters and technical assistance and approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for surface water segments where the impairment is identified by
states as due to contaminated sediments. EPA activity under CWA section 319 includes developing guidance for BMPs to reduce soil erosion in watersheds.
-------
2.2 Actions that Should Improve Management of Contaminated Sediments
Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year
start date
Data
1. Establish a division-director-level committee on
the effective use of data:
• Explore more effective ways to share and use
sediment and water column data among EPA
program offices to better prevent and manage
contaminated sediments.
• Consider whether EPA should revise the
information that should be reported and
consider new analytical tools needed to improve
the report to Congress.
• Reconsider what the report to Congress will
look like and what would be a useful product for
EPA.
• Dialogue with programs about the current and
future use of NSI data.
• Establish a multiyear implementation plan to
serve as a guide for planning and establishing
expectations.
• Focus limited resources.
• Identify and develop target actions.
• Scope future work.
• Ensure that actions are implemented.
Foster increased cross-program collaboration
through the sharing of contaminated sediment
data.
Automatically share information on chemicals that
might require the development of analytical
methods and monitoring approaches.
OW/OST (lead)
OW/GLNPO
OPPT
OSWER
regional offices
September 30,
2008
-------
Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008 (continued)
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA program
office
Estimated
calendar year
start date
Emerging Contaminants
2. Establish a division-director-level committee on
emerging contaminants.
• Promote information exchange between
programs to identify chemicals and pesticides
with certain characteristics, including the
potential to adhere to sediments, that could lead
to contaminated sediments.
• Exchange information on evaluating effects,
fate, and transport so as to enhance knowledge
to avoid future contaminated sediments.
• Develop analytical and regulatory methods and
tools for assessing existing and emerging
contaminants.
• Establish a multiyear implementation plan to
serve as a guide for planning and establishing
expectations.
• Identify and develop target actions.
• Ensure that actions are implemented.
Prevent and control emerging contaminants
through efficient assessment and effective use of
data.
Ensure consistency among offices in evaluating
and preventing potential sediment contamination
by sharing advances in risk assessment and
pollution prevention.
Ensure that offices are aware of potential new
sediment contaminants.
Ensure that offices are aware of the fate and
transport effects of emerging contaminants.
OW/OST (lead)
OPPTS
ORD
OSWER
September 30,
2008
-------
Table 2-3. Proposed Additional Actions that Should Improve Contaminated Sediment Management
Action
Environmental results/ remarks
EPA
program
office
Estimated
calendar year
of completion
Research
1. ORD can conduct research on the highest priority research
needs identified by regional and OSWER scientists.
Provide additional tools to enhance the
cost-effectiveness or performance of
sediment assessment and remediation for
implementation by programs and regions.
ORD
To be
determined
Pesticides and Toxics
2. Improve tools and implement risk assessment and risk
mitigation practices that reduce drift and runoff to surface
waterbodies associated with agricultural and urban pesticide
applications. For example, EPA is sponsoring testing to assess
the drift reduction potential of different application technologies.
Reducing pesticide surface water loading
from drift and runoff would reduce
sediment contamination, especially for
pesticides that partition preferentially to
sediments.
OPPTS/OPP
ORD
To be
determined
Programmatic and Technical Support
3. Expand technical information exchange and training through
EPA-sponsored cross-program sediment conferences. Such
conferences would revolve around the themes of contaminated
sediment, dredged material, and clean sediment technical and
policy issues.
Create greater efficiencies in technical
problem-solving and communication.
OSWER
OW/OWOW
OW/GLNPO
To be
determined
4. Expand scope of OSWER's Superfund Sediments Resource
Center (SSRC) to respond to requests from other program
offices willing to contribute funding. This will enhance cross-
program coordination. The SSRC can provide site-specific
technical support and perform and coordinate research on
sediment characterization methods and tools; sediment
modeling; development and testing of remediation alternatives;
monitoring; and evaluating remedy effectiveness.
Create greater efficiencies in technical
problem-solving and communication.
OSWER
ORD
To be
determined
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Intentionally left blank.
18
-------
Appendix A—August 7, 2006, EPA Response to Final
Evaluation Report, "EPA Can Better Implement Its
Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments"
A-l
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C. 20460
AUG 7 2006
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Response to Final Evaluation Report: "EPA Can Better Implement Its
Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments"
I am responding to the final report on the subject evaluation, No. 2006-P-00016 dated
March 15, 2006. Specifically, this memorandum provides you with milestones for the
recommendations contained in the report.
Recommendation I (Report Recommendation 2-1}: The Deputy Administrator
establishes a committee or designates an office to assume responsibility for the oversight
and evaluation of the Agency's contaminated sediment management strategy. The
designated office or committee should ensure program offices with responsibilities for
managing and addressing contaminated sediment issues use the National Sediment
Inventory as part of their decision making processes and ensure contaminated sediment
issues are managed and addressed through a cross-program approach, as intended by
the Strategy, that places emphasis on prevention and control of Contaminated sediments.
In my February 10, 2005 memorandum to you. 1 discussed the Agency's intent to
establish an intra-agency committee by March 17, 2006, with the Office of Water (OW)
in the lead, to determine next steps on preventing and managing contaminated sediments,
and to develop an initial workplan within two months after establishing the committee.
Further, i agreed that it is time to revisit the 1998 Contaminated Sediment Management
Strategy.
An intra-agency Committee on Preventing and Managing Contaminated Sediments led
by OW was established on April 6, 2006. The committee is meeting regularly and has
developed an initial workplan for completing the Action Plan which will describe specific
actions to: I) ensure that the Agency uses the National Sediment Inventory as part of
Internet Address (URL) * hMpV/toww epa gov
RecycledlReeyclable « Printed wUh Vegetable Oi< Based Inks on 100% Posieonsunwr, Process Chlorine Free Reeye4e
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
EPA's decision making; 2) ensure that contaminated sediment issues arc managed and
addressed through a cross-program approach; and 3) update the Strategy (Attachment I).
Recommendation 2 (Report Recommendation 2-2): The Assistant Administrator for
Water and the Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response
collaborate with other program offices with responsibilities under the Contaminated
Sediment Management Strategy to develop and implement comprehensive and
coordinated performance measures for preventing, assessing, and remediating
contaminated sediment issues.
As part of the actions to address recommendation 2-1, OW is working with the Offices of
Research and Development (QRD), Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER),
Pollution, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances (OPPTS), and Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) to develop performance measures for implementing an updated
Strategy, and will include this activity in the Action Plan described above.
In addition, EPA has developed environmental performance measures in the draft 2011
EPA Strategic Plan for remediating contaminated sediments in selected high priority
watersheds. Objective 4.3 of the draft 2011 Strategic Plan includes strategic targets for
remediating contaminated sediments in the Great Eakes, Puget Sound, and the Columbia
River. These high priority watersheds are characterized by elevated levels of toxics in
fish tissues, with sediments identified as a primary source of the toxics. These strategic
targets provide performance measures for remediating sediments, which partially fulfill
the directives of recommendation 2-2.
Recommendation 3 (Report Recommendation 2-3); The Assistant Administrator for
Water evaluates and reports on the need to develop numerical sediment quality criteria
to assist in the ranking of sites needing further assessment, target hot spots within an
area for remediation, and serve as a partial basis for the development of State sediment
quality standards.
The Agency has a process for setting priorities for 304(a) water quality criteria
development for aquatic life, A second, similar, chemical selection process to set
priorities for criteria for human health is also in place. Specific chemicals are selected
based, in part, on the quality and quantity of data available to demonstrate their toxicity
and occurrence in ambient waters. If data are available that demonstrate a chemical has a
significant route of exposure through sediments to aquatic life or humans, then this
information is considered in the prioritization and selection process for chemical criteria
development and addressed in the criteria derivation.
Chemicals are selected on an annual basis. The process for developing and publishing
criteria (i.e., literature searches, data development, derivation, internal review, peer
review, public review, revision, and finalization) lakes a minimum of 18 months and
often requires several years, The schedule for any given chemical depends, in part, on
the uncertainties and unknowns of the science that must be resolved to address both
FPA's information quality requirements as well as those of other stakeholders.
2
A-3
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Recommendation 4 (Report Recommendation 2-4): Use the watershed approach,
including concepts from the Urban River Restoration Initiative, at contaminated sediment
National Priorities List sites in high priority watersheds,
EPA conducted a 90 minute Web cast Training on Integrating Water and Waste
Programs to Restore Watersheds on July 11,2006. Approximately 200 EPA program
staff connected to the Web cast.
Additionally, EPA will conduct a 2-day training workshop at three EPA Regions, using
information from an actual watershed selected by the Region hosting the training. The
training is designed to 1) make participants aware of the manual, integrating Water and
Waste Programs to Restore Watersheds, and its focus on bringing together resources
across programs, 2) to bring together EPA staff from multiple office programs, and 3) to
use a pilot watershed selected by, and within, each Region as an actual example so they
learn how best to use the manual to benefit their programs. Participants would develop a
Comprehensive Watershed Preliminary Assessment for each of the selected pilot
watersheds.
Date: Fall/Winter of2006/2007
Recommendation 5 (Report Recommendation 2-5): Continue working with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to expand the use of Water Resources Development
Act (WRDA) funding for additional contaminated sediments adjacent to National
Priorities List sites to provide more comprehensive evaluations and resolutions of
contaminated sediment issues.
The Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response and the Assistant
Administrator for Water will sign a continuation of the Memorandum of Understanding
on Restoration of Degraded Urban Rivers, with the USAGE committing to support of the
Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative for FY07,
Date: August 31,2006
EPA has had a series of meetings with the USAGE and the Department of Justice (DOJ)
which identified legal, policy and procedural issues that need to be addressed to expedite
the cleanup of contaminated sediment sites that involve EPA and the USAGE, We will
continue to participate in the interagency workgroup (EPA, USAGE, DOJ), which is now
being coordinated by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), and
continue to meet with staff from the USAGE until key issues are resolved. We will
coordinate environmental studies at sites where there is ongoing GERCLA and WRDA
work by promoting the early identification and exchange of information between EPA
and the USAGE at NPL sites.
Date: Meetings in Fall/Spring FY06 and FY07
A-4
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Rccoinmiendatkin 6 (Report Recommendation 2-6): 7he Assistant Administrator for
Research and Development works with the Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and
Emergency Response to develop and implement a process that ensures effective
communication between the offices on contaminated sediment research priorities and
status of research products. In addition, develop a system that provides the Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response and other potential users with easy access to all
completed contaminated sediment research projects
See Attachment 2 for Corrective Action Plan with associated milestones.
Recommendation 7 (Report Recommendation 2-7): The Assistant Administrator for
Research and Development, in coordination with other affected Federal agencies,
develops and implements a plan that ensures collaboration and coordination between
EPA and other Federal agencies on research activities. At a minimum, the plan should
ensure that research is not duplicated by the agencies and that Federal resources are
leveraged through coordinated research efforts that meet the needs of multiple agencies.
See Attachment 2 for Corrective Action Plan with associated milestones.
Recommendation 8 (Report Recommendation 3-1): The Assistant Administrator for
Water develops and implements a plan for future National Sediment Quality Survey
(NSQS) reports that, consistent with the Water Resources Development Act, provides a
comprehensive national assessment of the extent and severity of contaminated sediments.
At a minimum the design should
a. Use a statistical sampling approach as the basis for assessing the national
extent and severity of contaminated sediments. Statistical sampling may he
used in conjunction with existing data for the national assessment as a cost
savings alternative.
b. Improve the completeness and availability of sample location information
(metadata), quality assurance/quality control information, and assessment
parameters for future NSQS reports.
c. Ensure that contaminated sediment data from all major sources, including
the Great Lakes National Program Office and Superfund program, are
included in the National Sediment Inventory and usedfor future NSQS
reports. At a minimum, establish a formal coordination process for acquiring
contaminated sediment data from EPA program offices and applicable
agencies and organizations outside EPA. Also, consider cost-effective
options for acquiring ami compiling contaminated sediment data that is
maintained in paper format,
To respond to this recommendation, OW will conduct the following actions:
1, By September 30, 2006, consult with ORID statistical experts on the scope of a
statistical design for collecting contaminated sediment data. OW will work with
Dr. Tony Olsen in ORD in this consultation. Based on the consultation, OW will
A-5
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
be able to determine if a statistical design for collecting contaminated sediment
data is practical.
2. it a statistical design tor collecting contaminated sediment data is practical, by
Spring 2007, O\V will develop a statistical design for use in collecting arid
analyzing data for the next NSQS, Alternatively, if such a design is not practical,
OW will work with ORD to develop a design that provides the best national
assessment based on the available data, OW will make this design available so
that independent researchers will know of OW's data needs.
3. By December 30, 2006, EPA will develop electronic transfer protocols for
gathering available Great Lakes National Program Office and Chesapeake Bay
Office contaminated sediment data Both offices have contaminated sediment
data that to date have not been incorporated into EPA's national environmental
databases. OW will work with both offices to develop these protocols so that
these data can be used in the next NSQS.
4. By Spring 2007, EPA will develop an agreement with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NO A A) on the transfer of data to F.PA. NO A A
currently stores contaminated sediment data on several databases in separate
locations. OW will work with NOAA to develop a protocol to extract those data
for use in the next National Sediment Quality Survey.
5. By October 31, 2006, collect from OSWER all available current electronic data
on contaminated sediments associated with National Priority List sites. In
addition, by Spring 2007, develop with OSWER an approach for incorporating
other site-related data that are currently available only in paper format in the ten
EPA regional offices or contractor files. In our initial discussions with OSWER,
we found there is no current plan to amass these data at the national level. OW
will attempt to work with OSWER in developing an approach for collecting this
information in a format that OW can access electronically.
6. By Spring 2007, develop an Extensible Markup Language (XML) schema for the
transfer of state contaminated sediment data into EPA's Water Quality Exchange
data repository. EPA is moving toward an approach where states retain their
environmental data on their databases and that allows for EPA to access or reach
these data using the Central Data Exchange (CDX). OW is involved with the
Office of Environmental Information (OHI) in linding ways to accelerate the use
of CDX by states. By EPA developing a transfer protocol (XML schema) that
includes the information relevant for contaminated sediments, states will be able
to send EPA contaminated sediment data that had not been previously shared.
7. By Summer 2007, hold workshops on the design of the next NSQS, OW plans to
hold two to three workshops across the country for the purpose of gathering
feedback on the types of information and analyses that will prove useful in
A-6
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
developing the next NSQS. As part of these workshops, OW will publicize
EPA's need for this information.
Recommendation 9 (Report Recommendation 3-2): The Assistant Administrator for
Water determines a reporting frequency for the NSQS report that is both useful for
decision makers and achievable for EPA, discloses to Congress that EPA cannot meet the
current biennial reporting requirement specified by Section 503 of the Water Resources
Development Act, and provides Congress an alternative reporting schedule for
consideration.
To respond to this recommendation, OW will conduct the following activities:
1 By December 31, 2006, consult with ORD experts on sediment fate and transport
to determine how much time, in general, it takes for sediment contaminant
concentrations to change such that the difference can be measured. OW expects
that this analysis will consider the range of deposition and degradation rates in
several watersheds. This will enable OW to determine a reporting frequency
based on science.
2, As pan of the workplan being developed in response to recommendation 2-1,
determine the actual programmatic needs of other EPA programs for the NSQS
data and analysis. This will enable OW to determine a reporting frequency based
on the real needs of programs for this information. The date of this action is the
completion of the workplan lhal responds to recommendation 2-1.
3. From the two actions above, and at the date of completion of the workplan
described in the response to recommendation 2-1, OW will be able to make a
recommendation for an alternative reporting schedule.
If your staff would like to discuss these milestones, please have them contact Doreen
Vetter (202-564-1509) in the Office of the Administrator,
Attachments
6
A-7
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Attachment !
EPA Response to OIG Report
"EPA Can Better Implement Its Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments"
EPA Initial Workplan for Response to OIG Recommendation 2-1
Office of Water Lead
Actions/steps
Completion Date
Status
Early guidance from DA (Memo from
Peacock to Cooper)
Early guidance from DA A of OW
2/10/06
04/14/06
Completed
Completed
Formation of Committee (OAR, OPPTS,
OSWER, OW, ORD, OECA, Regions 2.4, 5,
6, 10)
4/6/06
Completed
Weekly Committee Meetings
4/6/06 - 9/30/08
Ongoing
Detailed draft of RPA's Action Plan (includes
assessing information from participating
offices on status of Strategy actions) ready for
Branch Chief and Division Director level
review
12/1/06
Complete Branch Chief and Division Director
level review
4/01/07
May obtain external input
7/9/07
Workgroup revises draft Action Plan
8/9/07
Complete Office Director briefings
10/10/07
Action Plan ready for DAA/AA review:
DAA/AAs provide input and direction
1/11/08
Joint briefing of DAAs/AAs: DAA'AAs
provide input and direction
1/30/08
Obtain DAAs/AAs concurrence on Action
Plan
4/30/08
Finalize Action Plan
6/30/08
Prepare Briefing for Deputy Administrator
7/30/08
Deputy Administrator Briefing
8/31/08
Deputy Administrator sends Action Plan to IG
9/30/08
A-8
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
U
© «
a- *
«
J3
3
l£
o
3 _
2 a
"8
1/5
T3
V
+-
es
.S VD
I g
irT
.si
s «
^ "O
© »-
3
C
I'
u 2 4
5 w O
e a 3
Q. —
O c s
" s *
y u t
^ ft, S
¦9 E f
s ~ &
f <-
v
«
c
CS
u
<
eu
a-
3
-a
u
i-.
u 'sO
"S, Q
a
'5
'-C
ca
£ p
£ 5
S |
U i_.
I "8
=3 C
cd
—
V3
o
Cu
JS
bp
o
»—
t: d
u W
xi -5
=tfj
c
3j
R
c
o
m
— *U-i o
.5 o t- a
S y o §
k- ic o, s
^ -S a .3
¦p
1 'S
v> -o
cj e
TO
'-J
G
;-» O
>
g a
¦* p
-3 ,c
KJ
y
O w
"ff i*
E uj
o £
K ^
0 O
R- c
C o
u
.2 1
1 §
CJ &
\J <—•
a*
4j
P5 « 5
« ,S o
* t a
2 = S
2 I«
lis
c H
o zl
Z o"
5 Q
* e
¦f I,
II
^ __
w y T3
<73 '7.
NO
r4
Jj
cx
s ^
o 5
U m
Sr
'5 vn g©
ODp O
q
O
o o
:J
C k*
£¦3 1>
C T3
o o
« •§
Q Cj
| <
— Cl,
o w
,J c
1J
o 5
2 I
1 §
1 "§
§ §
p3
5 1
w
* i v>
> I
g -o ~
«? as o
fiS
T3
t> a
tfl f3
£ .S
C "H
o o
i/i O
H> y
"G -v
S 5
^ s
2 c
-S " c
£ e
Xl 4>
np c3
^ 8
— 3
§• g
T3 O
_J _C
t: tj
— c
r i
^ y
3 C
¦¦fi Q>
C WJ
«
H .B-
11
?s t
C
¦5 °
t— (A
C 13
0 4*
3 o
G ^
J= W
&D +-
3 u
O |
1 s
T3 ^ -
^ V3 ?1
QfJ O
zr f ¦ ~4
2 t- y
§11
A-9
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
A-10
-------
Appendix B—Contaminated Sediment
Accomplishments Based on the 1998 Strategy
B-l
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Contaminated sediments are a complex environmental problem affecting the nation's waterbodies. More
than a dozen federal statutes provide authority to many EPA program offices to address problems related
to contaminated sediments.1 The 1998 Strategy was written to facilitate cooperation among EPA offices
and to streamline the Agency's activities that address multimedia sources of ongoing contamination and
the need to remediate historical contamination.
Briefly, the 1998 Strategy consists of a summary of EPA's understanding, at the time, of the extent and
severity of sediment contamination, including uncertainties about the dimension of the problem. It
includes a cross-programmatic policy framework and outlines the actions through which EPA intended to
promote considering and reducing ecological and human health risks posed by sediment contamination.
The 1998 Strategy established four goals to manage the problem of contaminated sediment, and it
described actions to be taken to accomplish those goals:
1. Prevent the volume of contaminated sediment from increasing.
2. Reduce the volume of existing contaminated sediment.
3. Ensure that sediment dredging and dredged material disposal are managed in an environmentally
sound manner.
4. Develop scientifically sound sediment management tools for use in pollution prevention, source
control, remediation, and dredged material management.
The 1998 Strategy identifies a large number of EPA actions for managing contaminated sediments. Key
accomplishments related to those actions are discussed below. They are organized into seven sections
corresponding to the organization presented in the 1998 Strategy:
B.l
Assessment
B.2
Prevention
B.3
Abatement and Control
B.4
Remediation and Enforcement
B.5
Dredged Material Management
B.6
Research
B.7
Outreach
B.1 Assessment
EPA has accomplished a great deal in managing contaminated sediments beyond the actions outlined in
the 1998 Strategy. Some actions identified in the 1998 Strategy, however, did not occur because of recent
advances in EPA's understanding of contaminated sediment assessment and remediation. For example,
the 1998 Strategy discusses a cross-office Tiered Testing Committee to develop and maintain a tiered
testing framework, as well as sediment quality criteria development. EPA selected the equilibrium
partitioning model for developing sediment effect concentrations. On the basis of recommendations from
EPA's Science Advisory Board, EPA has decided not to develop stand-alone, pass-fail criteria for all
applications but rather benchmarks that could be used to trigger the collection of additional data.
1 Federal statutes include the following: Clean Air Act (CAA); Clean Water Act (CWA); Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA); Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Food
Quality Protection Act; Great Lakes Critical Programs Act (GLCPA); Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA); Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA); National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); Oil Pollution Act of
1990; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Rivers and Flarbors Act; Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); and Water Resources Development Act of
1992 (WRDA).
B-2
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
The 1998 Strategy included an action item for EPA to "develop and use standard sediment toxicity test
methods and chemical-specific sediment quality criteria to determine whether sediments are
contaminated/' EPA has provided integral leadership at the federal, state, and local levels in developing,
promoting, and applying standardized sediment monitoring, testing, and assessment methods. The results
of these efforts are typified in the Great Lakes region, where the EPA Great Lakes National Program
Office (GLNPO) uses various sediment quality technical manuals that have been published per the 1998
Strategy. For sediment assessments in the Great Lakes, GLNPO uses the protocols outlined in Methods
for Collection, Storage, and Manipulation of Sediments for Chemical, and Toxicological Analyses.2
GLNPO also uses the sediment toxicity manuals published by OW and Office of Research and
Development (ORD). which provide methods for evaluating the short- and long-term toxicity of
contaminated sediments to aquatic organisms. These documents are being incorporated into quality
assurance project plans. In the Superfund program, standard sediment toxicity tests, bioaccumulation and
food chain studies, and site-specific bioassessment studies are used to identify potential sites for
remediation, assess baseline risks, assist in determining cleanup levels and remediation goals, and monitor
the effectiveness of remedial actions.
In addition, GLNPO, Superfund, and other Agency programs use the Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment
Benchmarks (ESBs), published by ORD, to assist in interpreting sediment chemistry data. These
benchmarks allow for the bioavailability evaluation of contaminants observed and the evaluation of
whether adverse effects would be expected. These assessments are coupled with standardized sediment
toxicity analyses to better understand the relationship between adverse effects observed in the field and
the chemical(s) that might be responsible. Section E.4 in Appendix E provides a list of documents on key
assessment methods that were developed by EPA researchers and are now widely used.
The ESBs are available on the ORD Web site.4 Specifically, procedures for the derivation of ESBs for the
protection of benthic organisms are available for nonionic organics, dieldrin, endrin, metal mixtures, and
polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) mixtures. ESBs may be useful as a complement to existing sediment
assessment tools, to help assess the extent of sediment contamination, to help identify chemicals causing
toxicity, and to serve as targets for pollutant loading control measures. Through the involvement of other
stakeholders, it became clear that a single assessment framework would not meet multiple program needs
and statutory requirements. Because the framework was not intended to be prescriptive and the 1998
Strategy acknowledged that different program offices could develop supplemental approaches and
program-specific guidance, the Agency decided not to promulgate sediment quality criteria and
determined that publishing ESBs and other methods for programs to adopt, as appropriate, would better
meet the Agency's needs. EPA has several sets of sediment guidelines5 (see Section E.2).
EPA used current assessment tools in developing the first and second editions of the National Sediment
Quality Survey Report to Congress (NSOS) in 1997 and 2004.6 Each report includes a screening-level
assessment classifying sampling stations according to the probability of adverse effects on aquatic life
and/or human health from sediment contamination. This approach focuses on protecting benthic
organisms from exposure to contaminated sediments and protecting humans from consuming fish,
shellfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and other edible aquatic organisms that bioaccumulate contaminants
2 October 2001; EPA 823-B-01-002; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/collection.html; see also Appendix E, SectionE.4.
3 March 2001; EPA 600/R-01-020; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/guidancemanual.pdf and March 2000; EPA
600/R-99-064; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/freshmanual.pdf; see also Appendix E, Section E.4.
4 http ://www. epa. gov/nheerl/publications.
5 http://www. epa. gov/waterscience/cs/guidelines.htm.
0 September 1997; EPA 823-R-97-006; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/voll/voll.exe and November 2004; EPA 823-
R-04-007; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/report/2004/nsqs2ed-complete.pdf.
B-3
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
from sediment. EPA has begun planning for the third report. A component of the planning was a listening
session (the first of many) held in conjunction with the Fourth International Conference on Remediation
of Contaminated Sediments in January 2007. In addition, under Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d),
EPA and the states may address contaminated sediments in developing total maximum daily loads
(TMDLs).
Although EPA published two NSQS reports, it did not meet the biennial reporting requirement specified
in Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) section 503. Furthermore, the data from the NSQS have
not been integrated into current programs as envisioned in the 1998 Strategy. The limited integration of
the information from the NSQS into EPA programs could be related to two issues—assessment
limitations and data limitations. With respect to assessment limitations, the methodology used to develop
the NSQS reports is based on sound and current science used to classify samples that could be associated
with adverse effects on aquatic life, human health, or both. Nevertheless, a considerable amount of
uncertainty is associated with the site-specific measures, assessment techniques, exposure scenarios, and
default parameter selections necessary to perform a national analysis.
In addition to analysis limitations, data limitations are associated with the NSQS. They include working
with readily available, electronically formatted data. Contamination problems not identified in the NSQS
exist at some locations where data were not in a readily available, electronic format. In addition, older
data might not accurately represent current sediment contamination conditions. Relying on readily
available electronic data has undoubtedly excluded information available from sources such as local and
state governments and published academic studies. In addition, some data in the National Sediment
Inventory (NSI) database were not evaluated because data quality was uncertain or no latitude and
longitude coordinates were available. Moreover, NSI data do not evenly represent all geographic regions
in the United States, nor do the data represent a consistent set of monitored chemicals. More than two-
thirds of all stations evaluated in the NSI database are from 10 states, and individual stations vary
considerably in terms of the number of chemicals monitored. Some stations have data that represent a
large number of organic and inorganic contaminants, whereas others have measured values for only a few
chemicals.
Collectively, the assessment and data limitations restrict the use of the NSQS to use as a screening-level
assessment of sediment quality that should be followed up with more intensive assessment efforts, when
appropriate. As described in EPA's August 7, 2006, response to recommendation 3-2 of the Inspector
General's (IG's) Report, EPA is determining the actual programmatic needs of other EPA programs for
the NSQS data and analysis. In addition, EPA will develop electronic transfer protocols for gathering
available contaminated sediment data for the NSQS from other programs within EPA, states, tribes, and
other federal partners. Through these efforts, together with the public listening sessions EPA is
conducting to solicit comments on how to improve the NSQS, EPA will be able to determine an
appropriate reporting frequency based on real program needs.
By participating in the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Project (FISP), EPA promotes the
development, evaluation, and use of standardized methods, sediment samplers, and assessment tools with
its federal partners. This group is responsible for approving or accepting, by a majority vote, new
equipment or methodologies recommended for federal agencies involved in sedimentation and water
quality data collection or analysis. The Technical Committee meets twice a year and includes an EPA
member. The FISP technical staff of two is supported by EPA, along with other federal agencies—U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
(USBR), U.S. Bureau of Land Management (USBLM), U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural
Research Service (USDA-ARS), and U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service (USDA-FS). These
B-4
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
activities make EPA a full agency partner in FISP support and oversight. (A description of the current
status of FISP activities is available at the FISP Web site.7)
Outside the federal government, EPA promotes the use of standardized methods and assessment tools
through the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC).8 EPA coordinates sediment
assessment activities on an ongoing basis, so that consistent and scientifically defensible methods and
strategies to improve monitoring, assessment, and reporting are promoted throughout the monitoring
community.
To provide general support for state monitoring and assessment programs, EPA's FY05 and FY06
appropriations contained new CWA section 106 state grant funds for improving state monitoring
programs. States may use these funds to enhance their monitoring activities, including contaminated
sediment monitoring. In addition, in 2001 EPA completed development of the STORET Warehouse,9
which can accommodate sediment quality monitoring data from states and other monitoring programs.
B.2 Prevention
A goal of EPA's pollution prevention programs is to prevent adverse effects from occurring. EPA's
pollution prevention programs focus on chemical evaluations and source control activities primarily
through its authority provided under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). EPA has found that it needs improved methods for the
chemical reviews performed in support of the Agency's pollution prevention programs under TSCA and
FIFRA. Along with other agencies, EPA has been developing better tools and is incorporating them into
its pollution prevention program, assessments, site investigations, feasibility studies, and remedy
decisions in a variety of ways. For example, since the 1998 Strategy, EPA and its partners have
• Updated toxicity, exposure, and effects data, resulting in more realistic and more accurate risk
assessments
• Developed better tools and protocols for evaluating the erosion potential and stability of
sediments, such as development of models, direct measures of erosivity, and advances in the use
of short-lived isotopes for radiometric dating of sediment cores
• Improved equipment and operating procedures (for example, the development of horizontal
cutting buckets and the use of global positioning systems), thereby making environmental
dredging more accurate
• Developed more sophisticated design protocols and used specialized materials for in situ capping
of contaminated sediment, which has led to improved caps
• Increased understanding of natural recovery processes, including the role of natural sedimentation
and contaminant sequestration and transformation, which has led to the development of
monitored natural recovery (MNR) as a sediment remedy option at some sites
Under FIFRA, EPA revised the regulatory requirements for the registration of pesticides under 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 158 and Subdivision E of the Pesticide Assessment Guidelines to
incorporate standard acute whole-sediment bioassay methods and spiking protocols developed by the
Agency-wide Sediment Tiered Testing Committee. The following guidelines have been added to the
Agency's Pesticide Assessment Guideline requirements. They are intended for use in testing pesticides
7 http://fisp.wes.army.mil
8 http://water.usgs.gov/wicp
9 http://www.epa.gov/storet
B-5
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
and toxic substances and in developing the test data that must be submitted to the Agency for review for
pesticides that have physical and chemical properties that would make them likely to partition
preferentially to aquatic sediments.
• 850.1735 Whole Sediment Acute Toxicity Invertebrates, Freshwater
• 850.1740 Whole Sediment Acute Toxicity Invertebrates, Marine
• 850.1790 Chironomid Sediment Toxicity Test
These guidelines were developed by blending the testing guidance with other requirements. The purpose
of this blending was to produce a single, uniform set of testing procedures that meet EPA's data
requirements under TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2601) and FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.).
As a result of the pesticide reregistration process, certain uses of pesticides are no longer registered,
including urban uses of diazinon and chlorpyrifos, and the discontinuation of these pesticides prevents
additional sediment contamination. This change, however, has led to an increase in the use of pyrethroids
in urban settings. Although pyrethroids pose lower risks to human health than diazinon and chlorpyrifos,
pyrethroid pesticides have been identified as potential contaminants of sediments in surface waterbodies.
As a partial consequence of the shift in urban pesticide use, EPA has identified the need to improve its
ability to model potential contamination of surface water and sediments from the use of pesticides in
urban settings.
Through EPA's authority under the CWA, the Agency has supported watershed-level projects that have
generated information on the water-quality benefits of integrated pest management, as well as other
practices that can contribute to reductions of toxic pesticides in sediments. Since the 1998 Strategy, EPA
has continued to update management measures and practices, and associated information, in the areas of
agriculture and other land uses to reflect the most effective methods for reducing nonpoint source
sediment contamination of water resources. EPA has an extensive outreach strategy for distributing this
information, targeting state programs that address nonpoint source sediment contamination. EPA expects
that this information and outreach strategy will ensure that the most effective measures are incorporated
into the existing state nonpoint source programs where appropriate. Information has been included in the
guidance document National Management Measures for the Control of Nonpoint Pollution from
Agriculture.10
EPA's New Chemicals Program (under TSCA) functions as a gatekeeper that can control risky new
chemicals or keep them out of the market. If necessary, EPA may impose restrictions, up to and including
a ban on production, to be placed on the manufacture, import, processing, use, and distribution of a new
chemical before it is entered into commerce. TSCA requires anyone who plans to manufacture or import a
new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose to provide EPA with a Premanufacture
Notification (PMN) before initiating the activity.
The New Chemicals Program has implemented a policy for chemicals that are expected to meet or exceed
criteria for persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity. Chemicals that meet the persistent,
bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) criteria are subject to the PBT policy 11. This policy is one of 54 PMN
review categories that are critical to streamlining the review process. It focuses resources and prevents the
10 July 2003; EPA 841-B-03-004; http://www.epa.gov/nps/agmm/index.html
11 New chemical substances that possessing or are expected to possess characteristics of persistence in the environment,
accumulation in biological organisms (bioaccumulation), and toxicity that make them potential risks to humans and
ecosystems, are considered members of the PBT category. For background information and discussion of this PBT
category, see http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems/pubs/ pbtpolcy.htm, and the proposed (October 5, 1998; 63 FR 53417)
and final (November 4, 1999; 64 FR 60194) "Category for Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemical Substances."
B-6
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
entry of new PBT substances or limits their impact on human health and the environment. The PMN
policy establishes guidance for restrictions and testing requirements for new PBT chemicals.
Limited test data on new chemical substances are submitted or otherwise available, and as a result, EPA
often relies on Structure-Activity Relationship (SAR) Predictions to evaluate potential effects associated
with these substances. The New Chemicals Program groups new chemical substances with similar
structural and toxicological properties into categories to facilitate premanufacture assessment and
regulation. These groupings enable both PMN submitters and EPA reviewers to benefit from accumulated
data and decisional precedents, and they have streamlined the process for Agency review of and
regulatory follow-up on new chemical substances.
Under the New Chemical PBT Policy, chemical substances expected to be persistent (half-life greater
than 2 months but less than 6 months) or bioaccumulators (fish bioaccumulation factor greater than or
equal to 1,000, but less than 5,000) might need to undergo testing on "P" and B' endpoints. If these
endpoints were confirmed, the testing would be followed by appropriate toxicity testing to identify "PBT
chemical substances." Control action under TSCA section 5(e) might be needed in varying degrees, based
on the level of risk concern. Agency control actions taken under TSCA section 5(e) for chemical
substances that meet these criteria are based on the level of certainty for the PBT properties of a PMN
substance (e.g., measured versus estimated values), the magnitude of Agency concern, and conditions of
expected use and release of the chemical. While the PMN submitter would be allowed to commercialize
the substance, certain controls could be stipulated, including annual Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)-type
reporting on environmental releases of the PMN substance and specific limits on exposures, releases, or
uses.
The "ban pending testing" criteria are equivalent to those that have been used internationally to identify
persistent organic pollutants (POPs). For the chemical substances that meet these criteria (half-life > 6
months and bioaccumulation > 5,000) the concern level is high, and the Agency looks carefully at any
and all environmental releases. Because of the increased concern, more stringent control actions are a
likely outcome, up to a ban on commercial production, until data that allow the Agency to determine that
the level of risk can be appropriately addressed by less restrictive measures are submitted.
Under the New Chemical PBT policy, which was established in November 1999, chemicals expected to
have high PBT characteristics are prevented from entering commerce pending testing, and chemicals
expected to exhibit PBT characteristics at a lower level are subjected to measures to limit release and
exposure pending completion of testing. EPA's policy is to not allow environmental releases for a
chemical flagged as a potential PBT unless the submitter supplies information to change the Agency's
assessment.
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) collaborates with businesses, facilities, and
other organizations in the identification of PBTs through the Sustainable Futures (SF) Initiative. The
objective of SF is to inform decision-making at early stages of development and promote the selection
and application of safer chemicals and processes. SF encourages pollution prevention in new chemical
development. SF participants can qualify for expedited review of qualifying new chemical submissions,
receive public recognition, and receive assistance if they are small businesses.
One particularly valuable tool provided through SF is the PBT Profiler.12 The PBT Profiler is a screening-
level tool that provides estimates of the persistence, bioaccumulation, and chronic fish toxicity potential
of chemical compounds. It is designed to be used when no data are available. To help interested parties
make informed decision on a chemical's PBT characteristics, the PBT Profiler automatically identifies
12 http://www.pbtprofiler.net.
B-7
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
chemicals that might persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in the food chain. These chemicals are
identified using the P, B, and T thresholds that EPA uses to characterize new PBT chemicals. By
reviewing the estimated persistence and bioaccumulation provided by the PBT Profiler, interested parties
can rapidly obtain information to make informed judgments on the PBT characteristics of the chemicals
under consideration. This screening assessment can be used early in the decision-making process to help
users better focus their resources and identify pollution prevention opportunities.
B.3 Abatement and Control
EPA has managed the control of air emissions and point and nonpoint source discharges to surface waters
through several programs. Controlling the discharge of certain pollutants that might accumulate in
sediments should reduce the incidence and severity of sediment contamination.
EPA's effluent guidelines (CWA section 304(m)) and permitting programs control point source
discharges of pollutants.13 In June 2004 EPA completed promulgation of 19 new and revised effluent
guidelines.14 EPA continues to require that states develop National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit limits based on applicable water quality standards, which include the states"
narrative criteria. EPA also ensures that discharges from Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites comply with any NPDES requirements to protect water
quality standards, including any applicable water quality standards that address sediment quality.
Under the CWA section 303(d) requirements to identify impaired waters, states have improved their
abatement and control programs by reporting waters impaired due to contaminated sediments. For the
listed waters, states have completed, and EPA has approved, TMDLs for 12 waters listed because of
contaminated sediment. These TMDLs include wasteload allocations for point sources and load
allocations for nonpoint sources of the pollutants that have led to water quality impairment due to
contaminated sediments.
EPA updates management measures and practices,15 and associated information, in the areas of
hydromodification, wetlands, forestry, agriculture, and other land uses to reflect the most effective
programs that address nonpoint source sediment contamination. Reducing erosion from these nonpoint
sources can reduce the amount of toxics entering surface waters that might accumulate in sediment. EPA
expects that this information, and an associated outreach strategy, will ensure that the most effective
measures are being incorporated into the existing state coastal nonpoint source programs.16
EPA has developed rules to reduce air emissions that might directly deposit toxics to surface waters or
onto watersheds where toxics in runoff can accumulate in sediment. EPA has completed technology-
based emission rules for 174 stationary source categories covering major atmospheric emissions of 188
listed hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), some of which can deposit from the air and result in
contamination of water and sediment. The pollutants include metals, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), and PAHs. When fully implemented, these rules should result in a reduction of 1.7 million tons
per year of all HAP emissions. EPA is conducting risk assessments on the residual emissions from each
of the 174 stationary source categories to determine whether additional standards are needed to reduce
residual risks, including those associated with contaminated sediments.
13 See http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/watewastewatereffluentguidelines.html for more information about EPA's
technology-based standards for wastewater discharges to surface waters and publicly owned treatment works (POTWs).
14 See http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide for the status of guidelines that are final, proposed, and under development.
15 http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/categories.html.
10 http: //www. epa. gov/owow/nps/czmact. html.
B-8
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
In addition, by 2020 important new controls for fuels and vehicles are expected to reduce selected motor
vehicle air toxics from 1990 levels by more than 75 percent. To the extent that these motor vehicle
emissions contain pollutants that can deposit from the air and contaminate water and sediment, future
sediment contamination will also be reduced.
B.4 Remediation and Enforcement
EPA uses multiple statutes (e.g., CERCLA, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), CWA,
Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA), and TSCA) to require assessment and/or sediment remediation. To
address PCB spills that occurred before the effective date of TSCA, the Agency promulgated the PCB
disposal amendments (40 CFR 761.50(b)(3)(i)(A) and 40 CFR 761.61(c)). EPA's remediation efforts
include requiring the assessment of the sediment quality problems of facilities belonging to the
Department of Defense and Department of Energy and the remediation of sites to appropriate cleanup
levels.
At this time, remediation activities at 63 percent of Superfund Tier 1 sediment sites (sites that include a
decision to dredge at least 10,000 cubic yards of sediment or to cap or monitor the natural recovery of at
least 5 acres) are being conducted pursuant to enforcement instruments, including Federal Facility
Agreements. Some of the more notable settlements under CERCLA, RCRA, and other statutes were
reached at the Housatonic River in Region 1, the Hudson River in Region 2, and the Grand Calumet and
Fox rivers in Region 5.
Under the GLLA, as of December 2007, five remediation projects have been largely completed; more are
scheduled to get under way in 2008. Nearly 800,000 cubic yards of sediment have been cleaned up,
removing 1.5 million pounds of contaminants. Under the CWA, 12 TMDLs that included direct
protection of sediment quality were developed.
Under the GLLA, the Ashtabula River cleanup was completed in October 2007. This $60 million
dredging project resulted in the removal of almost 500,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments and the
removal of approximately 25,000 pounds of PCBs. Sediments were hydraulically dredged from the river
and pumped 2.5 miles to a landfill, where they were dewatered in geotubes. The remaining activities
include placing a residual cover in certain areas, as well as capping the on-site landfill.
B.5 Dredged Material Management
Disposal of dredged material is a challenge, especially with respect to declining disposal capacity in
existing facilities and the challenges of siting new disposal sites. Several hundred million cubic yards of
sediment are dredged from waterways, ports, and harbors every year to maintain the nation's navigation
system. Regulation of dredged material disposal within "waters of the United States" and ocean waters is
a shared responsibility of EPA and the USACE. The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
(MPRSA, also called the Ocean Dumping Act) is the primary federal environmental statute governing the
transportation of dredged material for the purpose of disposal into ocean waters; CWA section 404
governs the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. Under MPRSA and the
CWA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the permitting authority for the proposed disposal
of dredged material. Permits for ocean dumping of dredged material are subject to EPA review and
concurrence. CWA section 404 permits are subject to EPA review and 404(c) "veto" if EPA's
environmental guidelines are not met. EPA has the lead for establishing the environmental
guidelines/criteria that must be met to receive a permit under CWA section 404 and MPRSA. Even under
these stringent environmental criteria, most dredged material from navigation projects is found suitable
for open-water disposal. EPA is also responsible for designating recommended ocean disposal sites for
dredged material.
B-9
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
As mentioned in the 1998 Strategy, EPA maintains a strong relationship with the USACE in coordinating
dredged material testing and assessment, evaluating sediment management alternatives, monitoring
disposal sites, training field staff, and conducting research and development activities, to continue to
ensure that dredged material is managed in an environmentally sound manner. For example, EPA and the
USACE published test methods for evaluating dredged material for discharge under CWA section 404 in
Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Discharge in Waters of the U.S.—Testing Manual,
otherwise known as the Inland Testing Manual.17
EPA coordinates effectively with other federal agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), as well as states and other
stakeholders. The National Dredging Team (NDT), cochaired by EPA and the USACE, is designed to
facilitate communication, coordination, and resolution of national dredging issues. Coordination of these
issues occurs with the Regional Dredging Teams and Local Planning Groups, which work at the regional
and local levels to improve dredged material management by fostering communication and planning,
providing a forum for issue resolution, and increasing public education and community involvement.
B.6 Research
EPA has made significant advances in contaminated sediment research since the publication of the 1998
Strategy. In the 1998 Strategy, EPA's major commitments were to research various aspects of the toxicity
(causes and mitigation) of contaminated sediments and further the understanding and prediction of
contaminant bioaccumulation in benthic organisms and fish. Methods have been developed for many
aspects of sediment assessment, including sampling undisturbed cores in the field, using fate and
transport models, and collecting, storing, and manipulating sediments for chemical and toxicological
analysis.
As called for in the 1998 Strategy, ESBs have been established for nonionic chemicals and several metals
(see Appendix E, Section E.2). The equilibrium partitioning model was selected for developing sediment
effect concentrations because it provides a means to estimate the concentrations of a substance that might
be present in sediment while still protecting benthic organisms from the effects of that substance. These
values are applicable to a variety of freshwater and marine sediments because they are based on the
biologically available concentrations of the substances in the sediments. The benchmarks are intended to
provide protection to benthic organisms from direct toxicity due to the substance. In some cases, the
additive toxicity for specific classes of toxicants (e.g., metals mixtures or PAH mixtures) is addressed.
These values, consistent with the recommendation of EPA's Science Advisory Board, are not stand-alone,
pass-fail criteria for all applications; rather, exceedances of these benchmarks could be used to trigger the
collection of additional assessment data.
Accurate assessment of environmental hazards posed by sediment contamination depends in large part on
the accuracy and representativeness of sediment collection and analysis. EPA's "methods" manual18
presents a set of recommendations on field sampling techniques and sediment/interstitial water sample
processing using extensive information from the peer-reviewed literature. At the same time, it is
recognized that chemical characterizations cannot always provide enough information to adequately
evaluate potential adverse effects because of chemical interactions and the varying availability of
sediment-associated contaminants to aquatic organisms. Therefore, determining the effects of
contaminated sediment on aquatic organisms might require the use of controlled toxicity and
17 February 1998; EPA 823-B-98-004; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/itm/ITM
18 Methods for Collection, Storage and Manipulation of Sediments for Chemical and Toxicological Analyses: Technical
Manual. EPA 823/B-01-002.
B-10
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
bioaccumulation tests. EPA developed two additional documents that present methods for performing
uniform sediment testing procedures for the identification and valuation of the causes of toxicity in
freshwater and marine sediments (see Appendix E, Section E.4).
In addition, EPA has conducted research and evaluation of several treatment methods for the remediation
of contaminated sediment both in situ and ex situ. Research on bioaccumulation and fate/transport
modeling and monitoring has been conducted in support of specific Superfund sediment sites, and it has
led to an increase in the scientific reliability of decisions made at those sites.
B.7 Outreach
As outlined in the 1998 Strategy, EPA conducted extensive outreach targeting federal, state, and site-
specific programs. The outreach activities fell into three categories: (1) development of guidance
documents for technical audiences inside and outside EPA; (2) development of public information
material; and (3) outreach through participation/presentations at meetings, workshops, and conferences.
A substantial portion of EPA" s outreach consisted of proactive communication between EPA programs,
other federal agencies, state agencies, and professionals. EPA produced more than 190 research
publications on contaminated sediments between 1999 and 2005. Some of these publications are posted
on program office Web sites as resources for assessing and managing contaminated sediments.19
Other guidance focuses on source control of agricultural lands by implementing best management
practices (BMPs) for controlling erosion and sediment transport and the deposition of sediments in
surface waters. EPA has produced and distributed some material for the public, such as brochures,
posters, and a newsletter. EPA published the Contaminated Sediments News, a monthly review of recent
journal articles, issues in the press, upcoming conferences, and other news through August 2003.20
In addition, EPA has participated in and sponsored joint workshops with other federal agencies on
managing risk from contaminated sediment, including sediment and contaminant stability, and on specific
remedial options such as dredging and capping. Because of the varying chemistry and bioavailability of a
contaminant at a site, EPA recommends sediment toxicity tests to assess the true threat of toxicity at a
site. EPA has produced guidance documents on the recommended uses of toxicity tests and monitoring
methods and has contributed to guidance on sediment remediation for Superfund project managers.
19 http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/pubs.htm.
20 http://www. epa. gov/waterscience/pc/csnews/index.html.
B-ll
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Intentionally left blank.
B-12
-------
Appendix C—Contaminated Sediment
Accomplishments Not Foreseen in the 1998
Strategy
C-l
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
This section describes additional accomplishments that were not foreseen in the 1998 Strategy. EPA
accomplishments related to the actions stated in the 1998 Strategy are organized into seven sections
corresponding to the organization presented in the 1998 Strategy:
C.l
Assessment
C.2
Prevention
C.3
Abatement and Control
C.4
Remediation and Enforcement
C.5
Dredged Material Management
C.6
Research
C.l
Outreach
C.1 Assessment
In 2002 Congress enacted the Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) into law. The act authorizes up to
$50 million annually for fiscal years 2004-2008 for contaminated sediment remediation projects in Great
Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs). Actual appropriations in the first three years ranged from $9.9 million
to $30 million per year. In addition to sediment remediation, the GLLA provides the authority to conduct
projects to monitor and evaluate contaminated sediments and to prevent further or renewed contamination
of sediments (i.e., source control).
The Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) has completed three projects to monitor and evaluate
contaminated sediment: (1) Ryerson Creek in the Muskegon Lake AOC (Michigan); (2) St. Louis River
AOC (Superior, Wisconsin); and (3) Detroit River AOC (Trenton, Michigan).
GLNPO has prepared a three-volume guidance manual to support the assessment of contaminated
sediments in freshwater ecosystems (see Appendix E, Section E.3). Several groups within EPA, including
GLNPO, Office of Research and Development (ORD), and the regions, have been involved with sediment
testing studies of emerging contaminants.
The Superfund program has sponsored or cosponsored workshops that focus on how to assess
contaminated sediments, including the following:
• Addressing Uncertainty and Managing Risk at Contaminated Sediment Sites—October 2004,
St. Louis, Missouri
• In Situ Contaminated Sediment Capping Workshop—May 2003, Cincinnati, Ohio
• Workshop on Environmental Stability of Chemicals in Sediments—April 2003, San Diego,
California
• Issues in Assessing and Managing Ecological Risks at Contaminated Sediment Sites—June 2002,
Chicago, Illinois
EPA has completed the National Study of Chemical Residues in Lake Fish Tissue, a national freshwater
fish contamination survey to estimate the national distribution of selected PBT chemical residues in fish
tissue from lakes and reservoirs in the lower 48 states. The goal of this study was to provide a mechanism
to continue to periodically assess fish for PBTs so changes in PBTs over time can be evaluated.
C.2 Prevention
Since 1998 EPA has completed the reassessment of all pesticide tolerances required under the Food
Quality Protection Act, including pesticides that could contaminate sediments when used as labeled.
C-2
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Based on EPA's risk assessments, mitigation measures have been implemented (through changes to
pesticide product labels) to reduce the potential for contamination of surface water and sediments.
In addition, EPA has developed more sophisticated predictive tools to estimate the impact of specific
chemicals on human health and the environment, including how a new substance might partition to the
sediment and what impacts that might have on biota. These predictive tools were developed out of
necessity for the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) New Chemicals program because measured data
are not required to be submitted in conjunction with anew chemical premanufacture notification (PMN).
Such tools allow rapid development of estimated values for assessing the persistence, bioaccumulation,
and toxicity of a chemical based on its chemical structure.
EPA's knowledge of watersheds and the complex interaction of pollutants within different types of
watersheds has also increased in recent years. Ecosystem dynamics and ecological assessments are taking
on increased importance in water quality programs. Consequently, EPA has enhanced its watershed
initiatives (begun in the 1990s) to consider ecological interactions and watershed-scale indicators as
measures of healthy waterbodies. For example, water quality standards include a water quality criterion
that considers ecosystem impacts, which include aquatic life, fish tissue, nutrients, human health, and
other factors. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits implement those
standards in their permit limits. In January 2001 EPA published a new water quality criterion for
methylmercury1 that for the first time bases the human health criterion on fish and shellfish tissue rather
than on a water column value. This fish and shellfish tissue criterion addresses an endpoint that
incorporates the indirect ecosystem response to sediments contaminated with mercury. Where fish tissue
is impaired for methylmercury, there might be the driver for sediment remediation as part of a watershed
approach.
EPA's contaminated sediment research and development has been influenced by two National Research
Council reports, Science Advisory Board reviews, and numerous meetings with stakeholders (see
Appendix E, Section E.l). Focus areas included research (as described in the 2003 Contaminated Sites
Multiyear Plan (MYP)) on predicting ecological effects under existing conditions and management
scenarios; the evaluation and further development of models for characterization and prediction; and
increased research on existing and new remediation technologies, along with supporting monitoring tools
and collection of performance data.
C.3 Abatement and Control
EPA-authorized states and tribes have been implementing effluent guidelines (Clean Water Act (CWA)
section 304(b) and section 307(b)) under the Agency's NPDES permit program since 1982, annually
preventing the discharge of millions of pounds of pollutants consisting of metals, nonconventional
pollutants, and priority pollutants, some of which are known to accumulate in sediments. In addition, the
Phase I storm water control program, implemented since 1992, and the Phase II stormwater program,
implemented beginning in 2003, are permitting 8,000 municipal separate storm sewer systems, 100,000
industrial facilities, and 400,000 construction sites, resulting in billions more pounds controlled through
the NPDES program.
C.4 Remediation and Enforcement
As more data have become available, EPA has recognized that the magnitude of the contaminated
sediment problem is greater than originally believed and that contaminated sediment sites are complex,
1 January 2001; EPA-823-R-01-001; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/methylmercury/document.html.
C-3
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
from both the technical and social standpoints. EPA's experience has led to a better understanding of the
time needed to achieve cleanup goals and related environmental results. EPA has realized that better
methods and models are needed to deal effectively with the complexities of sediment remediation,
including predicting effects and understanding how best to combine various remedial options at large
sites.
Contaminated sediment management has changed since the 1998 Strategy was written. At that time, few
large sediment sites had undergone remediation. In general, there was little long-term monitoring data
for sediment sites. By the end of 2005, a Superfund remedy decision had been made for more than
157 contaminated sediment sites in the Superfund program. Of the 157 sites, 60 are relatively large
(Tier 1) sites. The remedies at over one-half of the 60 sites have been completed, and investigations are
ongoing at approximately 45 additional large sites. Overall, existing remedy decisions at Tier 1 sites
include removal of approximately 29 million cubic yards by dredging or excavation, in situ capping of
approximately 800 acres, and monitoring of the natural recovery of approximately 2,800 acres.
In addition to the sediment remediation projects under the Superfund program, five GLLA remediation
projects have been largely completed. The Black Lagoon (Trenton, Michigan) and Hog Island Inlet
(Superior, Wisconsin) projects were completed in November 2005. The third GLLA project, at Ruddiman
Creek (Muskegon, Michigan), was completed in June 2006. Two additional projects began in 2006—the
Tannery Bay project (Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan) and the Ashtabula River project (Ashtabula, Ohio)—
and were completed in 2007. The remaining activities at Ashtabula include the placement of a residual
cover in certain areas, as well as capping of the on-site landfill. In these five projects, EPA, in cooperation
with its state partners, has cleaned up approximately 800,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments.
These projects have leveraged nearly $44 million in non-federal dollars and, more important, have
prompted major environmental improvements in the communities where the projects have been
undertaken.
Since the 1998 Strategy was published, EPA has gained substantial experience in remediation and
enforcement at contaminated sediment sites. Through the EPA directive Principles for Managing
Contaminated Sediment Risks at Hazardous Waste Sites,2 the Agency provided a set of 11 fundamental
risk management principles for use at contaminated sediment sites based on experience gained at
remediation projects to date. This 2002 directive ensures that past experience is applied in a consistent,
risk-based approach within the framework of existing statutory and regulatory requirements.
EPA established the Superfund Sediment Resource Center to assist EPA staff with technical issues related
to the cleanup of contaminated sediment sites. The Center focuses on providing timely and helpful input
on site-specific issues related to sediment site characterization, such as data collection and evaluation;
sediment stability; modeling (e.g., hydrodynamic, contaminant fate and transport, and food chain);
ecological and human health risks; and the efficacy of remedies like capping, dredging, and monitored
natural recovery (MNR) and treatment technologies. The Center has been available since April 2004 and
has been used to provide expert technical consultation, helping to resolve complicated technical issues at
over a dozen of the more complex contaminated sediment sites.
In December 2005, EPA issued the final Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous
Waste Sites f The guidance is designed to assist EPA staff in managing sediment sites by providing a
thorough overview of methods that can be used to reduce risk caused by contaminated sediment. In 2005-
2006, EPA sponsored sediment remediation training in four EPA regional offices and at the National
2 February 12, 2002; OSWER Directive 9285.6-08; http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/remedy/pdf/
92-85608-s.pdf.
3 December 2005; EPA-540-R-05-012; http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/sediment/pdfs/guidance.pdf.
C-4
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Association of Remedial Project Managers" annual meeting. The training covered environmental
dredging, in situ capping, MNR, and monitoring. In 2006 EPA sponsored a series of three public Web-
based training courses on environmental dredging, in situ capping, and MNR.
EPA has furthered internal coordination, as well as coordination with other federal agencies. For example,
EPA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (July 2002) with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) to address water quality and contaminated sediment issues, economic revitalization, and the
public use and enjoyment of urban rivers through the Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative. The two
agencies have designated eight demonstration pilot projects to coordinate the planning and
implementation of urban river cleanup and restoration using a range of federal authorities, including
WRDA and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
These pilot projects are ongoing, and fact sheets describing their current status are provided on EPA's
Web site.4
In 2007 EPA published Integrating Water & Waste Programs to Restore Watersheds: A Guide for
Federal and State Project Managers.5 The purpose of this manual is to enhance coordination across EPA,
state, and local waste and water programs to streamline requirements, satisfy multiple objectives, tap into
a variety of funding sources, and implement restoration activities more efficiently, with a goal of showing
measurable results. The manual provides a road map to conducting cross-programmatic watershed
assessments and cleanups in watersheds with both water and waste program issues, and it presents
innovative tools to enhance program integration. Finally, the manual provides guidance on integrating
assessment and cleanup activities to optimize available tools and resources and thus help restore
contaminated waters and sediments efficiently and effectively.
C.5 Dredged Material Management
To continue to ensure that dredged material is managed in an environmentally sound manner, EPA
remains committed to maintaining strong coordination with the USACE on issues such as dredged
material testing and assessment, evaluation of sediment management alternatives, monitoring of disposal
sites, training of field staff, and research and development activities. Recent efforts have included a 2004
revision of the 1992 technical framework document Evaluating Environmental Effects of Dredged
Material Management Alternatives—A Technical Framework6 and the USACE 2006 Guidance
Memorandum on Overdepth Dredging,1 developed in coordination with EPA and the National Dredging
Team (NDT), as well as the following technical meetings:
• USACE/EPA Sediment Managers Meetings—1999, Charleston, South Carolina; 2002, San
Francisco, California; 2004, New Orleans, Louisiana
• USACE/EPA Dredged Material Assessment and Management Training—2001, Baltimore,
Maryland; 2002, San Francisco, California; 2005, Boston, Massachusetts
EPA remains committed to a dredged material management process that effectively coordinates through
established mechanisms with other federal agencies, as well as states and other stakeholders. The NDT,
cochaired by EPA and the USACE, has been actively coordinating among its participating agencies, the
Regional Dredging Teams, and Local Planning Groups to further strengthen coordination on the dredged
material management process. The NDT is guided by its 2003 Dredged Material Management Action
4 http://www.epa. gov/oswer/landrevitalization/urbanrivers.
5 August 2007. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/integrating.htm; EPA 540-K-07-001.
0 May 2004; EPA 842-B-92-008; http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/regulatory/dumpdredged/evaluation.html.
7 January 17, 2006; http://aapa.files.cms plus.com/PDFs/overdepthfinal.pdf.
C-5
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Agenda for the Next Decade,8 which was developed through a stakeholder workshop. The NDT and its
participating agencies strengthen their coordination by developing documents and holding workshops.
Some of the more recent efforts are the following:
• NDT/SIMOR (Subcommittee on Integrated Management of Ocean Resources) Conference on
Managing Sediments in the Watershed: Bringing Dredged Material and Watershed Managers
Together—August 2006, Portland, Oregon9
• NDT/Regional Dredging Teams National Meeting—February 2005, Annapolis, Maryland; May
2006, Boston, Massachusetts1"
• USACE/EPA Beneficial Use Web site11
• Bene ficial Use Guidance Manual: Identifying, Planning, and Financing Beneficial Use Projects
Using Dredged Material (2007)
C.6 Research
EPA continually examines Agency-wide science needs to assess and manage contaminated sediments and
to develop priorities for research. In July 2006 EPA formed the Contaminated Sediment Regional
Research Advisory Workgroup (CSRRAW) to increase coordination and communication between ORD
and the regional offices. This workgroup includes representatives from EPA regions, ORD's Hazardous
Substance Technical Liaisons (located within the regions and at ORD facilities), and the Superfund
program. One of the key responsibilities of the CSRRAW is to provide regional input concerning priority
science/research needs to the ORD multiyear planning process.
EPA's long-term goals for contaminated sediment research applicable to Superfund and other remediation
activities contain three themes:12
1. Addressing the controversial questions in characterizing sites and deriving more certain human
and ecological risk assessments
2. Addressing specific gaps in the Agency's understanding of specific human exposure pathways
important at sediment sites
3. Expanding the number of remedial alternatives available with documented performance in
managing risk at acceptable cost
Better approaches to community involvement and risk communication are included in each theme
because sediment sites can be ""megasites" that involve multiple communities and strong, but competing,
preferences of stakeholders.
Other related projects include:
• Research on probabilistic design frameworks for assessing the biological condition of waters, a
monitoring framework for the Great Lakes, and tools to track trends and responses to
management alternatives
8 July 2003; EPA 842-B-04-002; http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt/DredgingActionPlan.pdf.
9 http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt/managingsediments.html.
10 http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt/regional.html.
11 http ://el.erdc.usace. army. mil/dot s/budm.
12 June 2003; http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp/csites.pdf (EPA's multiyear research plan for contaminated sites).
C-6
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
• Bioassessment research, management of toxics, population-level risk assessment for multiple
stressors, diagnosis of impairment, and best management for land uses (e.g., concentrated animal
feeding operations (CAFOs), biosolids) that impact water quality
• Development of methods for prioritizing and screening new compounds, predicting potential
toxicity, and extrapolating toxicity data for high-priority chemicals, including pesticides and
potential toxics such as perfluorinated chemicals
• The Endocrine Disrupting Compounds Program, which specifically addresses the potential risks
and management options for this recently recognized class of stressors on human and ecological
health
Research has been integrated into ongoing remediation projects. For example, a longstanding effort is the
collaboration with Region 1 for remediation of New Bedford Harbor sediments. EPA researchers
designed a comprehensive long-term monitoring program for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund site.
The program involves periodically collecting sediment at 72 stations throughout the site before, during,
and after remediation. EPA assesses and analyzes biological impacts through twice-yearly mussel
deployments as part of this program. Modeling assistance has been provided for several complex
contaminated sediment sites, including the Housatonic River. EPA's modeling assistance enhanced the
understanding of hydrodynamic characteristics in the river and provided additional confidence that
responsible parties were accurately assessing the sites. A multiyear study at Lake Hartwell has developed
performance data on MNR, developed new performance monitoring techniques, and provided data for
Region 4's five-year review of the remedial actions on Lake Hartwell. This study convinced the
potentially responsible party to conduct additional monitoring and source identification.
In addition, EPA coordinates with other federal agencies concerning contaminated sediment research. For
example, EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) and ORD have signed a
Memorandum of Understanding with the USACE and the U.S. Navy concerning research coordination for
contaminated sediment. Representatives of these agencies met in Narragansett in 2005 to share current
research and explore opportunities for collaboration.
In 2004 EPA published Contaminated Sediments Science Priorities,lj an effort by EPA to examine
agency-wide science needs (i.e., research, data, and methods) to assess and manage contaminated
sediments and develop priorities for research, developing tools and gathering information from a technical
staff perspective. The specific science needs, recommendations, and priorities are intended primarily for
use by EPA. However, the document also serves as an example of how to coordinate and plan cross-
agency science activities for agency program and regional needs.
C.7 Outreach
In addition to the outreach activities mentioned in the 1998 Strategy (see Section 2.1.7), EPA continues to
provide outreach for contaminated sediment issues as opportunities and needs arise. For example, the
Agency sponsored a Public Forum on Managing Contaminated Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites (May
2001, Alexandria, Virginia) to listen to a wide variety of stakeholders discuss their views on contaminated
sediment. The video Contaminated Sediments: Impacts and Solutions,14 along with a presenter's manual,
was developed by EPA to assist the public in understanding the Superfund program's approach to
cleaning up contaminated sediments. EPA cosponsors workshops with other federal agencies, academics,
13 December 2004; http://www.epa.gov/osa/spc/pdfs/cssp-final.pdf.
14 2005; EPA-540-V-05-001.
C-7
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
and industry partners. The workshops are expected to result in improved science available for application
at contaminated sediment sites and to support decision making. Recent workshops include:
• Optimizing Decision-Making and Remediation at Complex Contaminated Sediment Sites—
January 2008, New Orleans, Louisiana
• Workshop on Resuspension, Release, Residual, and Risk from Environmental Dredging—April
2006, Vicksburg
• Risk Assessment and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Framework for Managing Complex
Environmental Challenges—2004
• Workshop on Sediment Stability—January 2002, New Orleans, Louisiana
• Federal Agency Sediment Research Coordination and Development Workshop—September 21-
23, 2005, Narragansett, Rhode Island
• Addressing Uncertainty and Managing Risks at Contaminated Sediment Sites—October 26-28,
2004, St. Louis, Missouri
In October 2006 the Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) sponsored a
series of Web-based training seminars open to EPA and the public. More than 800 participants from
environmental consulting firms, states, EPA, and industry heard presentations from technical experts
concerning remediation technologies and monitoring at contaminated sediment sites. Topics included
environmental dredging, in situ capping, MNR, and performance and long-term monitoring.
C-8
-------
Appendix D—Background on the National
Sediment Inventory (NSI) and the
National Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS)
D-l
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
The National Sediment Inventory (NSI) is a compilation of data from a variety of sources, primarily
outside EPA, that are used to produce the National Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS). The NSI is a
compilation of available data, not data generated from a national survey plan. The compilation currently
includes approximately 4.6 million records of sediment chemistry, tissue residue, and toxicity data for
more than 50,000 monitoring stations across the country sampling between 1980 and 1999. To efficiently
collect usable information for inclusion in the NSI, EPA has sought data that were available in electronic
format, represented broad geographic coverage, and represented specific sampling locations identified by
latitude and longitude coordinates.
The previous versions of the NSI database have not been intended to be primary data repositories for data
generators. The NSI is a compilation of secondary, and sometimes tertiary, data. Historically, this has
meant that data quality information on analytical methods and sampling protocols have been separated
from the data. It is acknowledged that the NSI schema does not allow for the housing of much data
quality information, in part because such information is rarely provided with the data sets in the first place
and is not used in the screening-level analysis.
The NSQS is a periodic report to Congress. It presents a screening-level assessment of a subset of data in
the NSI to allow the identification of potentially contaminated sediment. The NSQS reports to Congress,
provide information on the incidence and severity of sediment contamination nationwide; this information
can be useful to the regions, states, and tribes. One objective of the NSQS is to depict and characterize the
incidence and severity of sediment contamination based on the probability of adverse effects on human
health and/or the environment. To accomplish this objective, EPA applied assessment protocols to
existing available data in a uniform fashion. As used in the NSQS, the probability or potential for adverse
effects reflects a range of situations where the analysis of a station's data might indicate adverse effects
on aquatic life and/or human health. EPA has published the NSQS twice—once in 1997 and again in
2004. The 1997 report presented a national baseline screening-level assessment of contaminated
sediments from sediment quality data collected from 1980 through 1993 using a weight-of-evidence
approach. The 2004 report presented the results of a screening-level assessment of the NSI data from
1990 through 1999.
How the NSI and NSQS might change should be based on not only the statutory mandate but also the
programmatic needs. EPA has also conducted a preliminary query to determine the use and usefulness of
the NSI/NSQS, but a considerable amount of effort remains to flesh out these needs and determine the
best ways the NSI/NSQS can meet them. In addition, the program offices will be included in an upcoming
expert workshop designed to provide input improve the data collection and analysis for the NSQS.
At a listening session conducted by EPA in Savannah, Georgia, in January 2007, participants stated that
the NSQS 2-year reporting timeframe is too frequent. It was the participants" view that sediment
contamination does not change at a rate that merits reporting on a 2-year cycle. EPA has also developed a
draft technical memorandum that examines some of the technical issues involved in recommending a
more appropriate reporting frequency (e.g., the technical ability to detect rates of change of contaminant
levels in sediment). In particular, the memorandum examines key sediment processes affecting fate and
transport in various aquatic environments; chemical characteristics related to water solubility, octanol-
water partition coefficient, and chemical half-lives in soil; sedimentation rates in various aquatic
environments; and the characteristics of the sampling devices (i.e., sample depths) commonly used. The
results of this memorandum generally confirm viewpoints of the participants at the listening session.
From a logistical/practical perspective, the time required to compile data, analyze data, and report the
results in a report to Congress exceeds the 2-year timeframe, which means that multiple reports must be in
progress simultaneously. For example, for the most recent report, a period of about 18 months was
required to develop the finalized report from the publicly available draft.
D-2
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Some data generators responsible for assessment and remediation (i.e., the Great Lakes National Program
Office (GLNPO)) use National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) Query Manager
software to analyze their data for exactly the purposes described in the above paragraph. The format of
the data in Query Manager is identical for all practical purposes to that of the NSI.
Due to a lack of data quality information in the NSI and the current objectives of the NSQS report to
Congress, the current NSI data might not be appropriate for identifying cleanup priorities by secondary
data users. However, an NSI database equivalent (i.e., NOAA's Query Manager) can be and has been
used by data generators for actively managing contaminated sediment projects. EPA is working on new
tools to improve data collection and analysis. This is certainly an issue that will be further addressed by
the Effective Use of Data Related to Contaminated Sediments Committee to see if the NSI/NSQS can be
made more useful.
In previous data compilations efforts, EPA has sought out data sets that provided the most comprehensive
and geographically thorough data available, including data from probabilistic designs. In the second
report, 6.5 percent of the stations evaluated were from the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP).
As EPA progresses with its data management and analysis tools (through, for example, the leadership of
the Effective Use of Data Related to Contaminated Sediments Committee), it will seek ways to effectively
use data from a variety of new sources While the data quality might be "known" to the data generator,
data quality information (such as analytical and sampling methods) are often found in QAPPs or other
documents and not stored directly with the results. As a result, secondary data users are often left not
knowing the data quality even though the data source is presumed to be reliable.
The task of updating the NSI and preparing the next NSQS report to Congress is a significant
undertaking, and achieving a balance between the breadth of national coverage and the depth of
individual station or site information is necessary. In previous decades, monitoring data storage has
focused on location, date, and results. Project managers chose to store, manipulate, and disseminate
sediment data in their own manner. In addition, they customized chemical names, did not report units
(because they knew what they were), or developed short-hand notes that were not formally documented.
For the data generators, these practices were not an issue; they knew their own data. Little emphasis was
placed on the typical data quality information that is now demanded. For this reason, the evaluation
methods used in the NSI focused mostly on the analysis methods and provided only rudimentary data
quality requirements. As a result, EPA now estimates that two-thirds to three-fourths of the NSI budget is
spent on compiling data into a common format so that it is ready to analyze. This challenge could be
alleviated by adopting consistent schemas (data formats) for transferring data across the Agency and to
and from non-Agency data generators.
Challenges Using the NSI and NSQS
Data compiled for the 2004 NSQS report were generated using a number of different sampling strategies.
Component sources contain data derived from different spatial sampling plans, sampling methods, and
analytical methods. Most of the NSI data were compiled from non-random monitoring programs. Such
monitoring programs focus their sampling efforts on areas where contamination is known or suspected to
occur. Reliance on these data is consistent with the stated objective of the NSQS: to identify those
sediments which are contaminated. However, one cannot accurately make inferences regarding the overall
condition of the nation's sediment, or characterize the "percent contamination," using the data in the NSI
database because the national sampling coverage is incomplete and, in EPA's view, the uncontaminated
areas are most likely substantially underrepresented.
D-3
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
Furthermore, the NSQS report to Congress is based only on readily available, electronically formatted
data. Contamination problems exist at some locations where data are lacking. Conversely, older data
might not accurately represent current sediment contamination conditions. The reliance on readily
available electronic data has undoubtedly excluded information available from sources such as local and
state governments and published academic studies. In addition, some data were not evaluated because of
questions concerning data quality or because no location information (latitude and longitude) was
available. Moreover, the data do not evenly represent all geographic regions in the United States, nor do
the data represent a consistent set of monitored chemicals. In the most recent report, more than two-thirds
of all stations evaluated in the NSI database were in Washington, Virginia, California, Illinois, Florida,
Wisconsin, New York, Texas, Oregon, and South Carolina. Individual stations might vary considerably in
terms of the number of chemicals monitored. Some stations have data that represent a large number of
organic and inorganic contaminants, whereas others have measured values for only a few chemicals.
Thus, the NSQS should not be construed as comprehensive even for locations with sampling data.
D-4
-------
Appendix E—Resources
E-l
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
E.1 Commentaries on the State of the Practice and EPA Research
NRC (National Research Council). 1997. Contaminated Sediments in Ports and Waterways: Cleanup
Strategies and Technologies. National Research Council, Washington, DC.
.
NRC (National Research Council). 2001. A Risk Management Strateg}' for PCB-Contaminated Sediments.
National Research Council, Washington, DC.
.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Monitored Natural Attenuation.
Research Program—An EPA Science Advisory Board Review. EPA-SAB-EEC-01
Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC.
.
34C42D0B0DA4F73E8525718D005B47F8/$File/eec01004.pdf.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. Advisory on the Office of Research and
Development's Contaminated Sites andRCRA Multi-Year Plans. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC. .
E.2 Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks1
Berry, W.J., R.M. Burgess, D.J. Hansen, D M. DiToro, L.D. DeRosa, H E. Bell, M.C. Reiley, F.E.
Stancil, C.S. Zarba, D.R. Mount, and R.L. Spehar. 2003a. Procedures for the Derivation of
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms:
Endrin. EPA-600-R-02-009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, DC. .
Berry, W.J., R.M. Burgess, D.J. Hansen, D M. DiToro, L.D. DeRosa, H E. Bell, M.C. Reiley, F.E.
Stancil, C.S. Zarba, D.R. Mount, and R.L. Spehar. 2003b. Procedures for the Derivation of
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms:
Dieldrin. EPA-600-R-02-010. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, DC. .
Hansen, D.J., D M. DiToro, J.A. McGrath, R.C. Swartz, D.R. Mount, R.L. Spehar, R.M. Burgess, R.J.
Ozretich, H.E. Bell, M.C. Reiley, and T.K. Linton. 2003. Procedures for the Derivation of
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms:
PAH mixtures. EPA-600-R-02-013. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, DC. .
Hansen, D.J., D.M. DiToro, W.J. Berry, W.S. Boothman, R.M. Burgess, G.T. Ankley, D.R. Mount,
J.A. McGrath, L.D. DeRosa, H.E. Bell, M.C. Reiley, and C.S. Zarba. 2005. Procedures for the
Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic
Organisms: Metal Mixtures (Cadmium, Copper, Lead, Nickel Silver and Zinc). EPA-600-R-02-
011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington,
DC. .
1 These documents can be retrieved from EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/guidelines.htm.
: USEPA
-004. U.S.
E-2
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2003a. Technical Basis for the Derivation of
Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms:
Nonionic Organics. (Draft). EPA-600-R-02-014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Washington, DC.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2003b. Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium
Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms: Nonionic
Organics. (Draft). EPA-600-R-02-012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
and Development, Washington, DC.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008. Procedures for the Derivation of Equilibrium
Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection ofBenthic Organisms: Compendium
of Tier 2 Values for Nonionic Organics. EPA-600-R-02-016. Office of Research and Development.
Washington, DC. .
E.3 GLNPO Freshwater Ecosystem Guidance Manuals
Ingersoll, C.G., and D.D. MacDonald. 2002. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of
Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Vol. Ill: Interpretation of the Results of
Sediment Quality Investigations. EPA-905-B02-001-C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.
.
MacDonald, D.D., and CG. Ingersoll. 2002a. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of
Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Vol. I, An Ecosvstem-based Framework for
Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments. EPA-905-B02-001-A. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.
.
MacDonald, D.D., and C.G. Ingersoll. 2002b. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of
Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Vol. II, Design and Implementation of
Sediment Quality Investigations. EPA-905-B02-001-B. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office, Chicago, IL.
.
E.4 Key Methods Documents
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2000. Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and
Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates. 2nd ed.
EPA 600/R-99-064. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Research
and Development, Washington, DC. .
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Methods for the Collection, Storage and
Manipulation of Sediments for Chemical and Toxicological Analyses: Technical Manual. EPA
823/B-01-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofWater, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, DC. .
E-3
-------
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) and USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2001.
Methods for Assessing the Chronic Toxicity of Marine and Estuarine Sediment-associated
Contaminants with the Amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus, 1st ed. EPA 600/R-01-020.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Research and Development, and
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
.
E-4
------- |