### 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 SedimentsEPA 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 Contam inated Sediment Management..................................................... 2

2.1 Continuation of Ongoing Activities............................................................................................. .4

2.2 Actions that Should Improve Manageme nt of Contaminated Sediments................................... 15

Appendix A: August 7, 2006, EPA Response to Final Evaluation Report, “EPA Can Better Implement Its Strategy for Managi ng Contaminated Sediments”......................................A-1

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

Appendix C: Contaminated Sediment Accomplishm ents 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 Sedi ment Actions to Be Continued ........................................................... 4

Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiate d in 2008........................................................................................ 15 Table 2-3. Proposed Additional Actions that Shou ld Improve Contaminated Sediment Management...... 17EPA 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 Res ponse, 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 ResponseEPA 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 1992EPA 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) re leased 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). Ac cording to the IG, the purpose of the IG Report was

“to determine the effectiveness and outcomes ac hieved from [EPA’s] Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy.” Although the IG Report c oncludes that EPA has made some progress in managing and addressing contaminated sediments, it st ates that EPA did not fully implement the 1998 Strategy.

The IG Report made a number of specific recommenda tions, 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 w ill describe specific actions to: 1) ensure that the Agency uses the National Sediment Inventory as pa rt of EPA’s decision making; 2) ensure that contaminated sediment issues are managed and addr essed through a cross-program approach; and 3) update the Strategy.”

The EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contamin ated 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 identif ies 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 con tinue 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 c onsiderable 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 Sediments 1 (IG Report), which evaluated EPA’s 1998 Contaminated Sediment Management Strategy 2 (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 th at EPA has made some progress in managing and addressing contaminated sediments, it st ates that EPA did not fully implement the 1998 Strategy. In particular, the IG Report states the following:



### • The National Sediment Inventory (NSI) gene rally 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 Ag ency uses the National Sediment Inventory as part of EPA’s decision making; 2) ensure that contaminat ed 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 To xic 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 Ma rcus Peacock, Deputy Administrato r, 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 oversi ght 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 i ssues are managed and addressed through a cross-program approach, as intende d 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 Wa ter and the Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste and Emergency Response co llaborate with other program offices with responsibilities under the Contaminat ed 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 th e 1998 Contaminated Sediments Strategy

This Action Plan identifies key actions that EPA be lieves should receive emphasis, focus, and national priority attention in the future. The Action Plan do es not replace the 1998 Strategy; rather, it identifies the prioritized actions that EPA can undertake in its pr evention 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 Acti on Plan contains both actions from the Strategy that

EPA should continue and additiona l actions that EPA can take to improve the prevention and management of contaminated sediments. For ex ample, EPA should establish two division-level committees––one focusing on effective use of data a nd the other focusing on emerging contaminants––as priority actions for 2008. Neither of these co mmittees 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 fo r pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). In addition, the Action Plan no longer emphasizes development of se diment quality criteria. Under the 1998 Strategy, EPA expended considerable effort on developing sediment quality criteri a 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 crite ria 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 Contam inated Sediment Management

Since the 1998 Strategy was published, EPA has lear ned 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 sedim ents relative to the 1998 Strategy. EPA has made significant progress in reducing sediment contaminat ion 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 implemen t 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 prio rities might preclude such activities and actions.

To address contaminated sediment issues, EPA in tends 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 studi es to better understand emerging contaminants, obtain information on the occurre nce 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 c ontaminated sediment programs to generate

information on contaminated sedime nt 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 ensu re that decisions are consistent and based

on sound science.



### • Coordination — EPA expects to continue to improve cr oss-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 anticipat ed environmental results.

3 Additional information about the NSI and NSQS can be found in Appendix D.EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

42.1 Continuation of Ongoing ActivitiesTable 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be ContinuedActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletionaData1. Conduct an expert workshop to solicitcomments on how to improve the NationalSediment Quality Survey (NSQS). The results ofthe listening session, workshop, and additionalinternal Agency comments could be used toreshape the NSQS.Serves as an assessment tool that programs canuse for screening-level assessments.One listening session was held in conjunctionwith the Fourth International Conference onRemediation of Contaminated Sediments(January 2007).OW/OST (lead) 20092. Develop electronic transfer protocols forgathering available contaminated sediment datafrom other programs within EPA, states, tribes,and other federal partners.Provide efficiencies for accessing and usingcontaminated sediment data.OW/OST (lead)OW/OWOWOngoing3. Develop a technical memorandum ondetermining the National Sediment Inventory(NSI) reporting frequency. OW has conducted aninvestigation into the technical basis fordetermining the NSI reporting frequency. Thememo should discuss:•Actual rate of change, which includes chemicalhalf-lives and sedimentation (burial) rates•Limitations for detecting change based oncommonly used sampling equipmentIn addition, as part of the Agency review of theusefulness of the NSQS report, the programoffices and regions willbe asked to provide thereporting frequencies most useful to theirprogram objectives.Improve NSI reporting frequency.OW/OST (lead)OSWEREPA regions,including water andremediationprograms2009EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

5Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona4. Enhance cross-program usability of sedimentand surface water quality data. Promote cross-program coordination regarding data collection toprevent duplication of effort and save limitedresources through the Effective Use of DataCommittee.Provide efficiencies for accessing and usingcontaminated sediment data.OW/OST (lead)OSWEREPA regions,including water andremediationprogramsOngoing5. Boost cross-program communication betweenOW, OPPTS, OSWER, EPA regions and ORD toimprove the usability of sediment and surfacewater quality data through the Effective Use ofData Committee.Improve data-sharing activities that can help toprevent or reduce new sediment contamination.OW/OST (lead)OPPTSOSWERORDEPA regions,including water,remediationprograms, andtoxicsOngoingEmerging Contaminants6. Conduct a flowing waters study. This studyshould sample major rivers and wadeablestreams for a range of parameters, includingemerging and other contaminants in fish tissue.Increase understanding of current contaminantsin fish tissue for human and ecological healthimpacts.OW/OWOW (lead)OW/OSTSeptember 30,20117. Obtain information on the occurrence ofemerging contaminants and validate method foranalytical detection. Activities include:•Preparing a sampling and analysis report forapproximately 100 pharmaceuticals andpersonal care products (PPCPs) in biosolids•Conducting a fish tissue study and analyzingfor PPCPs•Assessing the health services industry forpotential effluent guidelines under 304(m)Incorporate additional information into theassessment and management of emergingcontaminants.OW/OST•Sampling andanalysis report:September 30,2008•Fish tissuestudy: 2008•Health servicesindustry: Reportto AA, August2008EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

6Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona8. Obtain in situ environmental data on emergingcontaminants, in particularly PPCPs. Include pilotstudy on the Chicago River in coordination withGLNPO and Region 5 that includes U.S.Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Department ofAgriculture (USDA), and St. Cloud StateUniversity, Minnesota, as additional partners.Improves the understanding of ecological andhuman health risks associated with theoccurrence of PPCP chemicals in fish tissue.OW/OST Fieldworkcompleted 2007;Analysis and datareview currently inprocess9. Develop assessment tools and methods (forexample, sediment toxicity tests) for emergingcontaminants in fish tissue, sediments, and thewater column in coordination, where appropriate,with other federal agencies, including the USGS.Provide improved assessment tools to reduceassessment costs and improve ability to assessfor emerging contaminantsImprove targeting of resources on certainprevention activities and appropriate regulatorytools (e.g., water quality standards, effluentguidelines).ORD, leadOPPTSORD: Plannedthrough 2012 aspart of MultiyearPlan (MYP)OPPTS: 200810. Perform additional prevention research thatfocuses on assessing land uses such asagriculture and mining and on identifying andassessing emerging contaminants found toaccumulate in sediments.Note: ORD is revising its MYPs to reflect currentresource levels, priorities, and external reviews.Revised plans will be posted on EPA’s Web site.bORD Planned through2012 as part ofMYPResearch11. Continue to implement contaminatedsediment research under the ORD land researchMYP. The focus areas are:•Collect performance information forconventional remedies, with a near-termemphasis on effects of dredging and cappingperformance.•Develop alternative remedies with potentialcost or performance improvements, includingreactive caps.Reduce costs and improve future decision bymaking performance information and additionalremedial methods available.Post research publications on program Web sitesand incorporate into documents so as to transferresearch results.ORD Plannedthrough2012 as part ofMYPEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

7Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona12. Conduct research thatsupports prevention ofsediment contamination, including diagnostictools, management of toxics, best managementpractices (BMPs) for land uses, and studies ofthe impacts of emerging contaminants that mightaccumulate in sediments as identified in the ORDland and pesticides/toxics MYPs.Improve methods, tools, and practices that canbe used to prevent or reduce new sedimentcontamination.Note: ORD is revising its MYPs to reflect currentresource levels, priorities, and external reviews.Revised plans will be posted on EPA’s Web site.cORD Planned through2012 as part ofMYP13. Continue to implement contaminatedsediment research under the ORD land researchMYP. The focus areas are:•Modeling of bioaccumulative chemicals toestimate the ecological response to no actionand various remedy options•Developing tools for sampling and assessingsediment and biota condition and response toremediation•Improving, reducing costs of, and developingcharacterization techniques for contaminantsof concern in sedimentsImprove methods and models used by programand regional staff to make more soundenvironmental decisions. Post researchpublications on program Web sites andincorporate into documents so as to transferresearch results. Increase the reliability andperformance of remedial alternatives.ORD Plannedthrough2012 as part ofmultiyear planPesticides and Toxics14. Pesticide Review Program reviews willinclude assessment of potential risk to aquaticorganisms and aquatic-dependent wildlife livingin or near sediments, incorporating, whenappropriate, the new guidelines for toxicity tests.First cycle ofregistration reviewprogram ongoingthrough 202215. Improve ability to quantify potential sedimentexposure to pesticides applied in urban andagricultural settings likely to partitionpreferentially to sediments.Incorporate additional mitigation measures onpesticide product labels, as appropriate, whichshould in turn reduce pesticide loading to surfacewater and sediments when pesticides are usedaccording to label directions.OPPTS/OPPFor new chemicals:OngoingFor existing(registration review)chemicals: 2017EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

8Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona16. Continue persistent, bioaccumulative, andtoxic (PBT) reviews for premanufacturenotifications (PMNs), an integral part of anongoing and evolving focus on PBT chemicalsubstances—both new and existing.The new chemical PBT policy ensures thatchemicals expected to have PBT characteristicsare subject to appropriate restrictions and testingrequirements.Ongoing17. Promote the Sustainable Futures (SF)Initiative. This includes supporting and improvinga suite of publicly available evaluation tools thatcan be applied before key decisions are made tosubmit a PMN. For chemical users/processors,PMNs can be used to help make choices forprospective product components (or componentreplacements) that should have fewer impacts onsediments.Prevent new contamination of sediment byincreasing use of components (or componentreplacements) that have fewer impacts onsediment.OPPTS/OPPTOngoing18. Refine evaluation tools for SF. One exampleis the testing of an analog identification modulefor the PBT Profiler Tool. This module is intendedto allow a company to identify specific chemicalstructures similar to a current chemical that willfunction as well but have a lower potential forpersistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity.Continue success in identifying and controllingnew and existing chemicals with significant PBTproperties.OPPT OngoingRisk Assessment19. Conduct risk assessments on the residualemissions from each of the 174 stationary sourcecategories to determine whether additionalstandards are needed to reduce residual risks,including those associated with contaminatedsediments.Potentially reduce emissions of pollutants thatmight accumulate in sediment throughdeposition.OAR OngoingEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

9Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletionaRemediationd20. Continue to use performance measuresconsistent with EPA’s2006–2011 Strategic Plan.Specifically, Objective4.3 of the 2011 StrategicPlan includes strategic targets for remediatingcontaminated sediment in the Great Lakes,Puget Sound, and the Columbia River. Thesetargets are:•Great Lakes—By 2011, remediate acumulative total of 7 million cubic yards ofcontaminated sediment in the Great Lakes.•Puget Sound Basin—By 2011, remediate 200acres of prioritized contaminated sediments.•Columbia River Basin—By 2011, clean up 150acres of known highly contaminated sediments.Any new performance measures relating tocontaminated sediments can be considered inthe next Agency Strategic Planning cycle.Remediate sediments in high-priority watersheds OW/GLNPORegion 10September 30,201121. Implement the Great Lakes Legacy Act(GLLA) and remediate as much contaminatedsediment from the Great Lakes Areas of Concern(AOCs) as possible with the appropriated fundingand the help of EPA’s non-federal partners.Implement the other provisions in the act(monitor and evaluate contaminated sedimentsand source control).Use existing contaminated sediment program tohelp generate information on contaminatedsediment sites for possible remediation under theGLLA.Reduce risk to aquatic life and human health.Delist beneficial use impairments (BUIs) andultimately AOCs.GLNPO is reviewing a list of sites withcontaminated sediments and can workcooperatively with Superfund and other EPAprograms to identify the optimal mechanism/program to address and manage the sedimentsat each site.As of December 2007, approximately 800,000cubic yards (nearly 1.5 million pounds ofcontaminants) had been removed from the GreatLakes AOCs. Remediation of BUIs is anecessary step to delist the AOCs.OW/GLNPO OngoingEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

10Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona22. Implement cleanup decisions at the regionallevel to reduce risk to human health and theenvironment caused bycontaminated sedimentsand restore beneficial uses of surfacewaterbodies at National Priorities List andequivalent sites through the Superfund program:•Remedial Actions•Non-Time-Critical Removal Actions•Time-Critical Removal ActionsReduce risk to human health and the health ofwildlife through ingestion of contaminated fishand shellfish through continued cleanup ofcontaminated sediment sites using dredging,capping, monitored natural recovery (MNR), orother innovative methods.Reduce risk to human health through directcontact and incidental ingestion of contaminatedsediment and surface water, and reduce risk toecological health through reduced toxicity ofsediment.Existing remedy decisions at Tier 1 sites includeremoval of approximately 29 million cubic yardsby dredging or excavation, in situ capping ofapproximately 800 acres, and monitoring of thenatural recovery ofapproximately 2,800 acres.OSWER regionalofficesOngoingProgrammatic and Technical Support23. Provide programmatic and technical supportthrough existing activities, including the following:•Review large, complex, or controversialSuperfund sites through the ContaminatedSediment Technical Advisory Group.•Cochair steering committee of federalsediment researchers (a joint activity withU.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) andU.S. Navy).•Work to clarify polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)sampling and disposal policies under theToxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).•Evaluate remedy performance through fieldstudies.Ensure consistency in decision making.Ensure sound science to support decisionmaking.Support sound decisions for cleanups resulting ina reduction in risk to human health and theenvironment.The planned activities are expected to result inselection and implementation of more effectiveremedies for contaminated sediment and,therefore, increased reduction of risks to humanhealth and the ecosystem.OSWER/OSRTIORDOngoingEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

11Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona•Develop new documents as needed, e.g.,“Sediment Monitoring and AssessmentSheets" and "Technical Considerations forEnvironmental Dredging of ContaminatedSediments". (working jointly with USACE asappropriate)•Dialogue with state partners, including theAssociation of State and Territorial SolidWaste Management Officials and theInterstate Technology Regulatory Council.•Dialogue with industry partners, including theSediment Management Work Group and theSediment Contaminant BioavailabilityAlliance.•Provide advice to ORD through theContaminated Sediment Regional ResearchAdvisory Workgroup (CSRRAW).•Provide the services of the SuperfundSediment Resource Center.•Promote the monitoring of remedial actions inorder to evaluate remedy effectiveness inreducing risks.•Continue to support the region-led SedimentForum for Remedial Project Managers thatwas created to discuss common problemsand share lessons learned.EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

12Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletionaCoordination24. Comanage with USACE dredged materialtesting and assessment, evaluation of sedimentmanagement alternatives, monitoring of disposalsites, training of field staff, and research anddevelopment activities.Ongoing25. Cochair the National Dredging Team (NDT)with USACE, implement the Dredged MaterialAction Agenda, and provide support to theRegional Dredging Teams.Ongoing26. Support coordination, through the NDT, ofUSACE's Regional Sediment ManagementProgram and the regions' WatershedManagement and Dredged Material ManagementProgramsMaintain U.S. harbors and channels in a timelyand cost-effective manner that meetsenvironmental protection, restoration, andenhancement goals.Strong coordination can improve dredgedmaterial management and can result in morebeneficial use.OW/OWOWOngoing27. Boost cross-program communicationbetween OSWER and OW and identify areaswhere information sharing can improve sedimentconditions. EPA and its state counterparts havenumerous tools and programs available toassess and prevent ongoing sources ofcontamination to sediments.Maintain sediment quality in former Superfundsites through more emphasis on upstreamcontrol of ongoing sources.RegionalHazardous WasteofficesOW regional officesOngoing27a. For National Pollutant Discharge EliminationSystem (NPDES) permits, EPA and states canconsider monitoring requirements to determinewhether the discharge has impacts on nearbycontaminated sediments.•There might be opportunities at the state levelfor voluntary, cooperative efforts to addresscontaminated sediment sites. These mayinclude such activities as monitoring that willprovide data that can inform future decisionsregarding cleanup and control strategies.Could decrease amounts of potentialcontaminants that might be impacting existingareas of sediment contamination.RegionalHazardous WasteofficesOW regional officesOngoingEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

13Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona•This is particularly important where there arepermitted discharges to existing areas ofknown sediment contamination and/or areasthat are adjacent to existing areas ofcontamination.•The discharges can be monitored for thecontaminants that are known to exist in thesediments, recognizing that sediment impactswere not considered in the development ofexisting water quality standards.•These monitoring requirements could bereduced later, depending on the contaminantsthat show up in the effluent. If there issufficient information to link the discharge ofpollutants to ongoing sediment contamination,NPDES permits may include effluent limits forthose pollutants in cases where state waterquality standards address sediment quality.27b. RCRA Corrective Action Permits shouldinclude goals to be achieved during the clean up,including any contaminated sediments generatedby the facility's operation. Also, whereappropriate, the permitwould address controllingthe possible sources ofrecontamination of cleanor controlled sediments so that the clean orcontrolled sediments within, or in adjoining, stormwater basins, are not recontaminated.Could improve coordination among programs sothat sediments are managed more holistically.RegionalHazardous WasteofficesOW regional officesOngoingEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

14Table 2-1. Major Contaminated Sediment Actions to Be Continued (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar year ofcompletiona27c. EPA and states can consider using annualperformance agreements between states andEPA to acknowledge and address high-priorityareas of sediment contamination.•Tools can help direct resources towardsprevention, assessment, and cleanup in suchareas.•It might be possible to outline how resourcescould be shared between programs.Could create improved efficiencies to manageresources toward prevention, assessment, andcleanups.RegionalHazardous WasteofficesOW regional officesOngoingEnforcement28. Promote the Enforcement First and PolluterPays principles by encouraging and assisting theregions to put in place enforcement mechanismsto clean up contaminated sediment sites.OECA will maximize enforcement efforts inconjunction with Superfund actions described in# 22 and 27 of this table.OECA OngoingNotes: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) includeoversight of state monitoring and assessment of sedimentimpaired waters and technical assistance and approval of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for surface water segments where theimpairment is identified bystates as due to contaminated sediments. EPA activity underCWA section 319 includes developing guidance for BMPs to reduce soil erosion in watersheds.EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

152.2 Actions that Should Improve Management of Contaminated SedimentsTable 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar yearstart dateData1. Establish a division-director-level committee onthe effective use of data:•Explore more effective ways to share and usesediment and water column data among EPAprogram offices to better prevent and managecontaminated sediments.•Consider whether EPA should revise theinformation that should be reported andconsider new analytical tools needed to improvethe report to Congress.•Reconsider what the report to Congress willlook like and what would be a useful product forEPA.•Dialogue with programs about the current andfuture use of NSI data.•Establish a multiyear implementation plan toserve as a guide for planning and establishingexpectations.•Focus limited resources.•Identify and develop target actions.•Scope future work.•Ensure that actions are implemented.Foster increased cross-program collaborationthrough the sharing of contaminated sedimentdata.Automatically share information on chemicals thatmight require the development of analyticalmethods and monitoring approaches.OW/OST (lead)OW/GLNPOOPPTOSWERregional officesSeptember 30,2008EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

16Table 2-2. Actions that Can Be Initiated in 2008 (continued)ActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPA programofficeEstimatedcalendar yearstart dateEmerging Contaminants2. Establish a division-director-level committee onemerging contaminants.•Promote information exchange betweenprograms to identify chemicals and pesticideswith certain characteristics, including thepotential to adhere to sediments, that could leadto contaminated sediments.•Exchange information on evaluating effects,fate, and transport so as to enhance knowledgeto avoid future contaminated sediments.•Develop analytical and regulatory methods andtools for assessing existing and emergingcontaminants.•Establish a multiyear implementation plan toserve as a guide for planning and establishingexpectations.•Identify and develop target actions.•Ensure that actions are implemented.Prevent and control emerging contaminantsthrough efficient assessment and effective use ofdata.Ensure consistency among offices in evaluatingand preventing potential sediment contaminationby sharing advances in risk assessment andpollution prevention.Ensure that offices are aware of potential newsediment contaminants.Ensure that offices are aware of the fate andtransport effects of emerging contaminants.OW/OST (lead)OPPTSORDOSWERSeptember 30,2008EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

17Table 2-3. Proposed Additional Actions that Should Improve Contaminated Sediment ManagementActionEnvironmental results/ remarksEPAprogramofficeEstimatedcalendar yearof completionResearch1. ORD can conduct research onthe highest priority researchneeds identified by regional and OSWER scientists.Provide additional tools to enhance thecost-effectiveness or performance ofsediment assessment and remediation forimplementation by programs and regions.ORD TobedeterminedPesticides and Toxics2. Improve tools and implement risk assessment and riskmitigation practices that reduce drift and runoff to surfacewaterbodies associated with agricultural and urban pesticideapplications. For example, EPA issponsoring testing to assessthe drift reduction potential of different application technologies.Reducing pesticide surface water loadingfrom drift and runoff would reducesediment contamination, especially forpesticides that partition preferentially tosediments.OPPTS/OPPORDTo bedeterminedProgrammatic and Technical Support3. Expand technical information exchange and training throughEPA-sponsored cross-program sediment conferences. Suchconferences would revolve around the themes of contaminatedsediment, dredged material, and clean sediment technical andpolicy issues.Create greater efficiencies in technicalproblem-solving and communication.OSWEROW/OWOWOW/GLNPOTo bedetermined4. Expand scope of OSWER’s Superfund Sediments ResourceCenter (SSRC) to respond to requests from other programoffices willing to contribute funding. This will enhance crossprogram coordination. The SSRC can provide site-specifictechnical support and perform and coordinate research onsediment characterization methods and tools; sedimentmodeling; development and testing of remediation alternatives;monitoring; and evaluating remedy effectiveness.Create greater efficiencies in technicalproblem-solving and communication.OSWERORDTo bedeterminedEPA 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-2EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A-10B-1 

# Appendix B—Contaminated Sediment Accomplishments Based on the 1998 StrategyEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

B-2 Contaminated sediments are a complex environmenta l 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 a ddress 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 huma n 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 dr edged 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 contam inated sediments beyond the actions outlined in the 1998 Strategy. Some actions identified in the 19 98 Strategy, however, did not occur because of recent advances in EPA’s understanding of contaminated sed iment assessment and remediation. For example, the 1998 Strategy discusses a cross-office Tiered Tes ting 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 c oncentrations. 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 (C AA); Clean Water Act (CWA); Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Coas tal 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 Ac t (GLCPA); Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA); Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA); Nationa l 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 Cont rol 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 mon itoring, 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 Se diments 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. Th ese documents are being incorporated into quality assurance project plans. In the Superfund program, st andard 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 determin ing 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 sedimen t contamination, to help identify chemicals causing toxicity, and to serve as targets for pollutant loadin g 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 guidelines 5 (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 contaminati on. This approach focuses on protecting benthic organisms from exposure to contaminated sedimen ts 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/waterscien ce/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/fresh manual.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 re port. 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 a ddition, under Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d), EPA and the states may address contaminated sedim ents in developing total maximum daily loads (TMDLs).

Although EPA published two NSQS reports, it did not m eet 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 envisione d 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 asse ssment 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 necessar y 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 r eadily available, electronic format. In addition, older data might not accurately represent current sedimen t contamination conditions. Relying on readily available electronic data has undoubtedly excluded in formation 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 becau se data quality was uncer tain or no latitude and longitude coordinates were available. Moreover, NS I data do not evenly represent all geographic regions in the United States, nor do the data represent a cons istent 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 m onitored. 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 restri ct 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 act ual 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, t ogether 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 Se dimentation 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 fede ral agencies involved in sedimentation and water quality data collection or analysis. The Technical Committee meets twice a y ear and includes an EPA member. The FISP technical staff of two is supporte d by EPA, along with other federal agencies—U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Army Corps of En gineers (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). TheseEPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

B-5 activities make EPA a full agency partner in FISP su pport 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 Qua lity Monitoring Council (NWQMC). 8 EPA coordinates sediment assessment activities on an ongoing basis, so that cons istent 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 th eir 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 ev aluations 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 Ag ency’s pollution prevention programs under TSCA and FIFRA. Along with other agencies, EPA has been deve loping better tools and is incorporating them into its pollution prevention program, ass essments, site investigations, feasibility studies, and remedy decisions in a variety of ways. For example, si nce the 1998 Strategy, EPA and its partners have



### • Updated toxicity, ex posure, and effects data, resulting in mo re realistic and more accurate risk

assessments



### • Developed better tools and protocols for eval uating 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 (fo r 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 transformati on, 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 require ments 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 requirement s. 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/storetEPA 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 tes ting 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 ri sks to human health than diazinon and chlorpyrifos, pyrethroid pesticides have been id entified as potential contaminants of sediments in surface waterbodies. As a partial consequence of the shift in urban pestic ide use, EPA has identified the need to improve its ability to model potential contamination of surface wa ter 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 mo st 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 st rategy 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 C ontrol 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 fo r chemicals that are exp ected to meet or exceed criteria for persistence, bioaccumulation, and to xicity. 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/ pbtpol cy.htm, and the proposed (October 5, 1998; 63 FR 53417) and final (November 4, 1999; 64 FR 60194) “Category for Persis tent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemical Substances.”EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

B-7 entry of new PBT substances or limits their imp act 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 s ubmitted or otherwise available, and as a result, EPA often relies on Structure-Activity Relationship (SAR) Pr edictions to evaluate potential effects associated with these substances. The New Chemicals Program groups new chemical substances with similar structural and toxicological properties into cate gories 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 substa nces expected to be persistent (half-life greater than 2 months but less than 6 months) or bioaccumula tors (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 secti on 5(e) might be needed in varying degrees, based on the level of risk concern. Agency control ac tions 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), th e magnitude of Agency concern, and conditions of expected use and release of the chemical. While th e 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 substa nce and specific limits on exposures, releases, or

uses.

The “ban pending testing” criteria are equivalent to th ose 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 leve l 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 addr essed by less restrictive measures are submitted.

Under the New Chemical PBT policy, which was esta blished 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 polic y is to not allow environmental releases for a chemical flagged as a potential PBT unless the submitte r 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 a ssistance if they are small businesses.

One particularly valuable tool pr ovided 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 charact eristics, 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 bioaccumulati on 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 iden tify pollution prevention opportunities.



### B.3 Abatement and Control

EPA has managed the control of air emissions and po int 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 a nd 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 promulga tion of 19 new and revised effluent guidelines. 14 EPA continues to require that states deve lop National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits based on applicable water quality standards, which include the states’

narrative criteria. EPA also ensures that dischar ges from Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites comp ly 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 identif y 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 h as approved, TMDLs for 12 waters listed because of

contaminated sediment. These TMDLs include wast eload allocations for point sources and load allocations for nonpoint sources of the pollutants th at 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, an d other land uses to reflect the most effective programs that address nonpoint source sediment cont amination. 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 out reach strategy, will ensure that the most effective measures are being incorporated into the ex isting state coastal nonpoint source programs. 16

EPA has developed rules to reduce air emissions that might directly deposit toxics to surface waters oronto watersheds where toxics in runoff can accumulate in sediment. EPA has completed technologybased emission rules for 174 stationary source cate gories 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 in clude metals, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and PAHs. When fully implemented, these rul es should result in a reduction of 1.7 million tons per year of all HAP emissions. EPA is conducting risk assessments on the resi dual emissions from each of the 174 stationary source categories to determin e whether additional standards are needed to reduce residual risks, including those associ ated with contaminated sediments.

13 See http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/watewastewatereffluent guidelines.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 fuel s 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 th e 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 requi re assessment and/or sediment remediation. To address PCB spills that occurred before the effectiv e date of TSCA, the Agency promulgated the PCB disposal amendments (40 CFR 761.50(b)(3)(i)(A) a nd 40 CFR 761.61(c)). EPA’s remediation efforts include requiring the assessment of the sediment qua lity 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 c ubic yards of sediment or to cap or monitor the natural recovery of at least 5 acres) are being conducted pursuant to enfo rcement instruments, including Federal Facility Agreements. Some of the more notable settleme nts 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 remediati on 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 w as 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. Se diments 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, especia lly with respect to declin ing disposal capacity in existing facilities and the challenges of siting new dis posal sites. Several hundred million cubic yards of sediment are dredged from waterways, ports, and harb ors every year to maintain the nation’s navigation system. Regulation of dredged material disposal with in “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 subj ect 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 dredge d 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, evaluati ng sediment management alternatives, monitoring disposal sites, training field staff, and conducting r esearch and development activities, to continue to ensure that dredged material is managed in an e nvironmentally 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 Di scharge in Waters of the U.S.—Testing Manual

, otherwise known as the Inland Testing Manual. 17

EPA coordinates effectively with other federal agen cies, 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 dre dging 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 dre dged material management by fost ering communication and planning, providing a forum for issue resolution, and increasi ng 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 a nd fish. Methods have been developed for many aspects of sediment assessment, including sampling undi sturbed cores in the field, using fate and transport models, and collecting, storing, and mani pulating 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 partiti oning 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 or ganisms 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 substan ces in the sediments. The benchmarks are intended to provide protection to benthic organisms from direct t oxicity 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, exceedanc es 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” manual 18
presents a set of recommendations on field sampli ng techniques and sediment/in terstitial 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 chemi cal interactions and the varying availability of sediment-associated contaminants to aquatic orga nisms. 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 identifi cation 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 evaluatio n 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 suppor t of specific Superfund sediment sites, and it has

led to an increase in the scientific reliab ility of decisions made at those sites.



### B.7 Outreach

As outlined in the 1998 Strategy, EPA conducted extens ive outreach targeting federal, state, and sitespecific programs. The outreach activities fell into three categories: (1) development of guidance

documents for technical audiences inside and outsi de EPA; (2) development of public information material; and (3) outreach through participation/presentations at mee tings, workshops, and conferences.

A substantial portion of EPA’s outreach consisted of proactive communication between EPA programs, other federal agencies, state agencies, and pr ofessionals. EPA produced more than 190 research publications on contaminated sediments between 199 9 and 2005. Some of th ese 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 sedimen t transport and the deposition of sediments in surface waters. EPA has produced and distributed so me 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 StrategyEPA 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 reme diation, the GLLA provides the authority to conduct projects to monitor and evaluate contaminated sedimen ts 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 Mu skegon Lake AOC (Michigan); (2) St. Louis River AOC (Superior, Wisconsin); and (3) Detroit River AOC (Trenton, Michigan).

GLNPO has prepared a three-volume guidance manua l 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 cos ponsored 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 Chemi cals 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 R esidues in Lake Fish Tissue, a national freshwater fish contamination survey to estimate the national di stribution 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 c ould contaminate sediments when used as labeled.EPA Action Plan to Prevent and Manage Contaminated Sediments

C-3 Based on EPA’s risk assessments, mitigation measure s have been implemented (through changes to pesticide product labels) to reduce the potential fo r 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, in cluding how a new substance might partition to the sediment and what impacts that might have on biot a. 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 watershe ds 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, wate r quality standards include a water quality criterion that considers ecosystem impacts, which include aqua tic life, fish tissue, nutrients, human health, and other factors. National Pollutant Discharge Elim ination System (NPDES) permits implement those standards in their permit limits. In January 2001 EPA published a new water quality criterion for methylmercury 1 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 sh ellfish tissue criterion addresses an endpoint that incorporates the indirect ecosystem response to sedimen ts contaminated with mercury. Where fish tissue is impaired for methylmercury, there might be the dr iver for sediment remediation as part of a watershed approach.

EPA’s contaminated sediment research and developmen t 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 researc h (as described in the 2003 Contaminated Sites Multiyear Plan (MYP)) on predicting ecological e ffects 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 implemen ting 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 cons truction sites, resulting in billi ons more pounds controlled through the NPDES program.



### C.4 Remediation and Enforcement

As more data have become available, EPA has r ecognized 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 e nvironmental results. EPA has realized that better

methods and models are needed to deal effectivel y 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 sin ce 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 yard s 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 unde r 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 N ovember 2005. The third GLLA project, at Ruddiman Creek (Muskegon, Michigan), was completed in J une 2006. Two additional projects began in 2006—the Tannery Bay project (Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan) a nd 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 ga ined substantial experience in remediation and

enforcement at contaminated sedimen t 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 contaminat ed sediment sites based on experience gained at remediation projects to date. This 2002 directive ensur es 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 charact erization, such as data collection and evaluation; sediment stability; modeling (e.g., hydrodynamic, cont aminant 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. Th e 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 sta ff 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’ annua l 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 dr edging, in situ capping, and MNR.

EPA has furthered internal coordination, as well as c oordination 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 se diment 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 clea nup 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 streamli ne requirements, satisfy multiple objectives, tap into a variety of funding sources, and implement restorat ion 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 availa ble 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 coordi nation 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 deve lopment activities. Recent efforts have included a 2004

revision of the 1992 technical framework document Evaluating Environmental Effects of Dredged Material Management Alternatives—A Technical Framework 6 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 a nd Management Training—2001, Baltimore, Maryland; 2002, San Francisco, Calif ornia; 2005, Boston, Massachusetts

EPA remains committed to a dredged material manage ment process that effectiv ely 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 c oordination 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/res ources/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 coordinatio n 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: Bringi ng Dredged Material a nd Watershed Managers Together—August 2006, Portland, Oregon 9



### • NDT/Regional Dredging Teams National Meeting— February 2005, Annapolis, Maryland; May 2006, Boston, Massachusetts 10



### • USACE/EPA Beneficial Use Web site 11



### • Beneficial Use Guidance Manual: Identifying, Plan ning, and Financing Be neficial Use Projects Using Dredged Material (2007)



### C.6 Research

EPA continually examines Agency-w ide 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 in crease coordination and communication between ORD and the regional offices. This workgroup incl udes representatives from EPA regions, ORD’s Hazardous Substance Technical Liaisons (located within th e 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 OR D 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 unders tanding of specific human exposure pathways important at sediment sites

3. Expanding the number of remedial alternativ es 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 invol ve 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 mana gement 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 rec ognized class of stressors on human and ecological

health

Research has been integrated into ongoing remediati on 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 pr ogram 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 Housat onic 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 acti ons 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 Emer gency Response (OSWER) and ORD have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the USACE and th e U.S. Navy concerning research coordination for contaminated sediment. Representativ es of these agencies met in Narraga nsett 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, a nd methods) to assess and manage contaminated sediments and develop priorities for research, developing tools and gathering information from a technical staff perspective. The specific sci ence 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 variet y 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 un derstanding 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 suppor t 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 Coordi nation and Development Workshop—September 21– 23, 2005, Narragansett, Rhode Island



### • Addressing Uncertainty and Managing Risks at C ontaminated Sediment Sites—October 26–28, 2004, St. Louis, Missouri

In October 2006 the Office of Superfund Remedia tion 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 Nationa l Sediment Quality Survey (NSQS). The NSI is a compilation of available data, not data generated fro m 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 geographi c coverage, and represented specific sampling locations identified by latitude and longitude coordinates.

The previous versions of the NSI da tabase 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 sch ema 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 co ntaminated 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 obj ective of the NSQS is to depict and characterize the incidence and severity of sediment contamination b ased on the probability of adverse effects on human health and/or the environment. To accomplish th is 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 analys is of a station’s data might indicate adverse effects on aquatic life and/or human health. EPA has publis hed 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 fro m 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 prelimin ary 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-liv es 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 viewpo ints of the participants at the listening session.

From a logistical/practical perspective, the time re quired to compile data, analyze data, and report the results in a report to Congress exceed s 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 purpo ses 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 appropr iate 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 cont aminated 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 sough t out data sets that provided the most comprehensive and geographically thorough data available, incl uding data from probabilistic designs. In the second report, 6.5 percent of the stations evaluated we re from the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP).

As EPA progresses with its data management and analys is 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 sa mpling 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 da ta 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 cove rage and the depth of individual station or site information is necessary. In previous d ecades, monitoring data storage has focused on location, date, and results. Project mana gers 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 sh ort-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 form ats) 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 generate d using a number of different sampling strategies. Component sources contain data derived from differe nt 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 ar eas where contamination is known or suspected to

occur. Reliance on these data is consistent with th e 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 in complete 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 c ontamination conditions. The reliance on readily available electronic data has undoubtedly excluded in formation available from sources such as local and state governments and published academic studies. In a ddition, some data were not evaluated because of questions concerning data quality or because no lo cation information (latitude and longitude) was available. Moreover, the data do not evenly represen t all geographic regions in the United States, nor do the data represent a consistent set of monitored chemical s. 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 st ations 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 compre hensive even for locations with sampling data.E-1 

# Appendix E—ResourcesEPA 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/cont aminated_sites_rcra_sab-05-009.pdf >.



### E.2 Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Benchmarks 1

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 Pr otection 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 Pr otection 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. Swar tz, 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. B oothman, 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, Offi ce of Research and Development, Washington,

DC. < http://epa.gov/nheerl/publicati ons/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 th e 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 Ecos ystem 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 Cont aminated 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 C ontaminants 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 Agen cy, 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 >.