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 

 i 

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-1 

Appendix B: Contaminated Sediment Accomplishments Based on the 1998 Strategy........................... B-1 

Appendix C: Contaminated Sediment Accomplishments Not Foreseen in the 1998 Strategy................ C-1 

Appendix D: Background on the National Sediment Inventory (NSI) and the National Sediment 

Quality Survey (NSQS)......................................................................................................D-1 

Appendix E: Additional Resources ......................................................................................................... E-1 

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 

 ii 

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 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 iii 

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 polychlorinated 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 

USDA 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 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 iv 

Intentionally left blank. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 v 

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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 vi 

Intentionally left blank. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 1 

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 Strategy 

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 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. 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 2 

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 

NSQS 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 3 

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. 
 4

2.1 Continuation of Ongoing Activities Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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) 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 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 
 5 Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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 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 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 

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 
 6

Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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 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 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 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 
 7 Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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.c ORD 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 

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. 15. Improve ability to quantify potential sediment exposure to pesticides applied in urban and agricultural settings likely to partition preferentially to sediments. 

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 
 8

Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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. 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. OPPTS/OPPT 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 

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 
 9 Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

Remediationd 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 

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 
 10

Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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 

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). 

• Evaluate remedy performance through field 

studies. 

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
 11 Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

• 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. 
 12

Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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. 25. Cochair the National Dredging Team (NDT) with USACE, implement the Dredged Material Action Agenda, and provide support to the Regional Dredging Teams. 26. Support coordination, through the NDT, of USACE's Regional Sediment Management Program and the regions' Watershed Management and Dredged Material Management Programs 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 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 office

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 office
 13 Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

• 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 office
 14

Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA program office 

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 office

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 

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 assimpaired waters and technical assistance and approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for surface water segments where the im

states as due to contaminated sediments. EPA activity under CWA section 319 includes developing guidance for BMPs to reduce soil er
 15 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 progra

office 

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 (leadOW/GLNPO OPPT OSWER regional offices 
 16

Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008 (continued) Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA progra

office 

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 (leadOPPTS ORD OSWER 
 17 Table 2-3. Proposed Additional Actions that Should Improve Contaminated Sediment Management Action Environmental results/ remarks EPA progra

office 

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 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/OP

ORD 

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/GLNP

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 crossprogram 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 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

 18

Intentionally left blank. 
 A-1 

Appendix A—August 7, 2006, EPA Response to Final 

Evaluation Report, “EPA Can Better Implement Its 

Strategy for Managing Contaminated Sediments” 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-2 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-3 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-4 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-5 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-6 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-7 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-8 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-9 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 A-10 
 B-1 

Appendix B—Contaminated Sediment 

Accomplishments Based on the 1998 Strategy 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-2 

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.1 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 Harbors Act; Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); and Water Resources Development Act of 

1992 (WRDA). 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-3 

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),3

 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 (NSQS) 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, Section E.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. 

6

 September 1997; EPA 823-R-97-006; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/vol1/vol1.exe and November 2004; EPA 823-

R-04-007; http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/report/2004/nsqs2ed-complete.pdf. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-4 

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 twothirds 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 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-5 

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 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-6 

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.” 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-7 

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 screeninglevel 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-8 

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 technologybased 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. 

16 http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/czmact.html. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-9 

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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-10 

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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-11 

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 sitespecific 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 B-12 

Intentionally left blank. 
 C-1 

Appendix C—Contaminated Sediment 

Accomplishments Not Foreseen in the 1998 

Strategy 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-2 

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.1 Assessment 

C.2 Prevention 

C.3 Abatement and Control 

C.4 Remediation and Enforcement 

C.5 Dredged Material Management 

C.6 Research 

C.7 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-3 

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 a new 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.1). 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 stormwater 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-4 

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.

3

 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-5 

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 Webbased 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,

7

 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. 6

 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-6 

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, Massachusetts10

• USACE/EPA Beneficial Use Web site11

• Beneficial 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/dots/budm. 

12 June 2003; http://www.epa.gov/osp/myp/csites.pdf (EPA’s multiyear research plan for contaminated sites). 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-7 

• 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,

13 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 crossagency 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 C-8 

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. 
 D-1 

Appendix D—Background on the National 

Sediment Inventory (NSI) and the 

National Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS) 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 D-2 

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, octanolwater 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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 D-3 

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. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 D-4 

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. 
 E-1 

Appendix E—Resources 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 E-2 

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. 

<http://gulliver.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?id=2644>. 

NRC (National Research Council). 2001. A Risk Management Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments. 

National Research Council, Washington, DC. 

<http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10041>. 

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Monitored Natural Attenuation: USEPA 

Research Program––An EPA Science Advisory Board Review. EPA-SAB-EEC-01-004. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC. 

<http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf>. 

34C42D0B0DA4F73E8525718D005B47F8/$File/eec01004.pdf. 

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. Advisory on the Office of Research and 

Development’s Contaminated Sites and RCRA Multi-Year Plans. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington, DC. <http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/

0AF947B5FDA7836D852570D000782D41/$File/contaminated_sites_rcra_sab-05-009.pdf>. 

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 of Benthic Organisms: 

Endrin. EPA-600-R-02-009. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 

Development, Washington, DC. <http://www.epa.gov/NHEERL/publications/files/endrin.pdf>. 

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 of Benthic Organisms:

Dieldrin. EPA-600-R-02-010. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 

Development, Washington, DC. <http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/publications/files/dieldrin.pdf>. 

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 of Benthic Organisms:

PAH mixtures. EPA-600-R-02-013. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and 

Development, Washington, DC. <http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/publications/files/PAHESB.pdf>. 

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 of Benthic 

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. <http://epa.gov/nheerl/publications/files/metalsESB_022405.pdf>. 

 

1

 These documents can be retrieved from EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/guidelines.htm. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 E-3 

USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2003a. Technical Basis for the Derivation of 

Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks (ESBs) for the Protection of Benthic 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 of Benthic 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 of Benthic Organisms: Compendium 

of Tier 2 Values for Nonionic Organics. EPA-600-R-02-016. Office of Research and Development. 

Washington, DC. <http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/publications>. 

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. III: 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. 

<http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/pubs/sedtox/VolumeIII.pdf>. 

MacDonald, D.D., and CG. Ingersoll. 2002a. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of 

Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Vol. I, An Ecosystem-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. 

<http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/pubs/sedtox/VolumeI.pdf>. 

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. 

<http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/pubs/sedtox/VolumeII.pdf>. 

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. <http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/freshmanual.pdf>. 

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 of Water, Office of Research and 

Development, Washington, DC. <http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/collection.html>. 
EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments 

 E-4 

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. 

<http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/cs/guidancemanual.pdf>.