management and regulation of dredging activities and dredged material in New Jersey's tidal waters

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

THE MANAGEMENT
AND
REGULATION OF
DREDGING ACTIVITIES
AND
DREDGED MATERIAL IN
NEW JERSEY'S TIDAL WATERS

DRAFT - MARCH 1996

US Department of Commerce
NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
2234 South Hobson Avenue
Charleston, SC 29405-2413

STATE OF NEW JERSEY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

r@
US Department of Commerce
NOAA C=- --.t--='IrSer-vices-@Center-L-ibrary
- .- . 2224'S@-6i4tl@ -ii@16so''-A'AV6A,6,6
.. @Charlestdni: 90 99465-2413 '"-' " --. 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMAH

This document has been prepared by the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection Dredging Task Force in order to establish
clear and comprehensive policies and procedures for reviewing
proposed dredging activities, and the management 'of the dredged
material. It has been developed in response to Governor Christine
Whitman's Dredged Material Management Team and Departmental
commitments included in the New York-New Jersey Harbor and Delaware
Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans.
This document provides Departmental staff and project applicants
with guidance and criteria for the required sampling, testing, and
permitting of proposed dredging projects and various dredged
material management alternatives.

The regulatory review of permit applications for dredging
operations and/or the management of dredged material will be
coordinated by the Department's Land Use Regulation Program.

Section III of the guidance document identifies the background
information which must be submitted in support of all permit
applications for dredging and dredged material management
activities. Testing of dredged material for contaminants will not
always be necessary. These testing exclusions are discussed in
Section III-B, and Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the required
test procedures. In general, small dredging projects along the
State's Atlantic Ocean coast, projects in which the dredged material
is greater than 90% sand, and other projects where *the Department
has determined that the potential for sediment contamination is
unlikely, will be excluded from extensive testing requirements. The
development of a sampling plan for sediments to be dredged is also
discussed.

Section IV-B discusses theDepartment's program for managing and
regulating dredging operations, including the use of Best Management
Practices. In most cases, dredging projects in New Jersey's
navigable tidal waters will require a Waterfront Development Permit
and a Water Quality Certificate (pursuant to Section 401 of the
federal Clean Water Act). Any discharge of dredged material will
also require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant
to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. Dredging activities
X
are also regulated by the federal government pursuant to Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Federally-conducted, funded,
or permitted activities which have a direct impact on New Jersey's
Coastal Zone, will also require a federal consistency determination
from the Department, pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act.

A variety of potential alternatives exist for the management
and/or beneficial use of dredged material. These include open water
(including ocean) disposal sites, upland confined disposal
facilities (CDFs), subaqueous disposal pits, and containment areas.
Table 2 identifies the potential sediment testing and permitting
requirements for these options.

Section IV-C of the document discusses Open Water disposal
alternatives. Disposal of dredged material in ocean waters is
regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. The Department will coordinate its
review of proposed ocean disposal operations'with these federal
agencies.

Section IV-D discusses the design, construction, operation,
closure, and permitting of upland confined disposal facilities
(CDFs). Regulation of upland CDFs will be administered by the
Department's Land Use Regulation Program, pursuant to the Waterfront
Development Law and the State and federal Water Pollution Control
Acts. In New Jersey's designated Coastal Zone, siting of a proposed
upland CDF will be evaluated using the Rules on Coastal Zone
Management. The Department will require the owner. and/or operator
of an upland CDF to submit an annual report to the Department,
summarizing the past year's activities at the facility. -In
addition, Final (and Interim, if needed) Closure Plans must be
developed and approved by the Department for each proposed upland
CDF.

The major potential adverse environmental impacts associated
with upland CDFs are surface and ground water contamination.
Dredged material dewatering effluent returning to the same water
body from which the material was originally dredged will require a
Water Quality Certificate. A New Jersey Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NJPDES) Discharge to Surface Water permit will
be required for discharges from upland CDFs accepting material from
single or multiple dredging sites located in a different surface
water body. The NJPDES-Discharge to Ground Water permitting process
for upland CDFs will consider the source and degree of contamination
of the dredged material, as well as the use(s) and value(s) (i.e.
classification) of the underlying aquifer. This process may include
the following components: (1) preliminary determination of leachate
quality from dredged sediments, (2) Ground Water Protection Plans,
and (3) a NJPDES-Discharge to Ground Water Permit. A NJPDES-DGW
Permit will only be required where the maximum leachate quality of
any contaminant is predicted to violate the Ground Water Quality
Criteria applicable to the underlying aquifer, thus potentially
adversely impacting the designated use(s) and value(s) of the
aquifer.

Section IV-E discusses the use of subaqueous disposal pits for
contaminated dredged material. Use of such pits will be evaluated
by the Land Use Regulation Program using the Rules on Coastal Zone
Management. Designing a pit to be properly capped, and maintaining
the integrity of the cap, is essential. Thus, long-term monitoring
of the subaqueous disposal pit, its final cap, and the surrounding
environment will be required.

Section IV-F discusses the construction and use of
in-water/aquatic containment areas for dredged material. Permitting
requirements are generally similar to those associated with upland
CDFs.

Dredged material can be considered a resource, and the
Department strongly supports its beneficial use, wherever possible,
as opposed to exclusive reliance on disposal facilities. Beneficial
use alternatives for dredged material are discussed in Section V.
These include beach nourishment, habitat' development, construction
material, landfill cover, agricultural uses, and capping open water
disposal sites. The suitability of dredged material for any of
these uses will depend on its characteristics,' particularly grain
size and degree of contamination.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .

Chapter I Purpose of Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter II Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter III Information Required of All Projects
A - Background Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
B - Testing Exclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
C - Sampling of Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 6

Chapter IV - Management of Dredging Activities and
Dredged Material
A - Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 9
B - Management of Dredging Activities . . . . . . . . 9
C - Open Water Alternatives
(1) Authority . . . * ' * * ' * * * ' ' * * * * ' 13
(2) Ocean Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
(3) Other Open Water Disposal Areas . . . . . . . 13
D Upland Confined Disposal Facilities
(1) Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
(2) Design, Construction, Operation,
and Closure . . . . . .. . . . . . . 16
(3) Surface Water D h es . . . . . . . . . . 22
i;c*arg*
(4) Ground Water Discharges . . . . . . . . . . . 25
(5) Terrestrial Ecosystem Impacts . . . . . . . 30
(6) Public Health Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
E Subaqueous Disposal Pits . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
F Containment Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Chapter V Beneficial Use Alternatives
A - Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B - Authority . . . . . . . . 39
C - Linkages with Other M;n;g;m;n@
Altematives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
D - Beach Nourishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
E - Habitat Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
F - Construction Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
G - Landfill Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
H - Agricultural Use . . 46
I - Ca@pping Open Water Di;pos;l*sit;s* 47

Chapter VI - References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Chapter VII Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Appendix A - Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures 58

List of Figures

Follows Page

Figure 1: Dredged Material Guidance
Document Testing Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 2: Schematic Diagram of Potential
Dredged Material Disposal Alternatives . . . . . . . . 9

List of Tables

Follows Page

Table 1: General Sampling Guidance for
Proposed Dredging Projects . . . . . . . . . 6

Table 2: Potential Sediment Testing and
Permitting Requirements for Various
Dredged Material Disposal Alternatives . . . . . . . . 9

Table 3: Ground Water Quality Criteria . . . . . . . . 26

Draft - March 1996

THE MANAGEMENT AND REGULATION OF DREDGING ACTIVITIES
AND DREDGED MATERIAL IN NEW JERSEY'S TIDAL WATERS

Chapter I - Purpose of Document

This document establishes the policies and procedures under which the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection will conduct regulatory reviews
of dredging activities in tidal waters of the State of New Jersey and the
management of the dredged material. This document also provides Departmental
staff and project applicants with general guidance and criteria for the
required sampling, testing, and permitting of dredged material for various
identified management alternatives, including potential beneficial use
options. These policies and procedures have been developed to ensure that
proposed dredging projects and the management of dredged material are
conducted so as to minimize the potential for' adverse impacts to the
environment and public health. This document has been developed by the
Department under the requirements of the Environmental Management
Accountability Plan (P.L. 1991, Chapter 422) with the goal of making the
permit application process more consistent and predictable.

Chapter II - Overview

A Given the shallow natural depths of many tidal waterbodies and high rates
of s edimentat ion/ shoaling, dredging is needed to provide safe navigation
conditions and to maintain vessel berthing areas. Many components of New
Jersey's economy including marine commerce, commercial and recreational
fishing, boating, and tourism are dependent on dredging for continued
operations.

In many areas of the state sediments have become contaminanted with a
variety of toxic substances, including dioxin, polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), heavy metals, pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Sediments in tidal water bodies
may be contaminated as a result of discharges from industrial, municipal,
and storm sewer sources, marina and boating operations, and atmospheric
desposition. The dredging and subsequent disposal of these sediments, if
not properly managed and regulated, could result in adverse impacts to the
envirormentand public health.

In contrast, tidal waters in some areas of New Jersey (particularly along
the Atlantic Ocean coast) have been impacted to a lesser degree by
pollutant discharges. As a result, sediments in these water bodies have a
lower potential to be contaminated at levels warranting a high degree of
regulatory concern. Likewise, coarser-grained sediments do not bind
contaminants as strongly as finer-grained and organic sediments. Finally,
all else being equal, the potential for adverse impacts from smaller
dredging and dredged material management projects can be comparatively
lower than that from larger projects.

-2-

B - The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) is
responsible for the evaluation and permitting of all dredging-related
activities that occur in the waters of the State of @New Jersey. As part
of that review the Department evaluates the proposed dredged material
management option. Existing management options include in-water disposal,
upland containment/disposal, and/or beneficial use of the dredged
material. The objectives of the Department's regulatory programs
overseeing dredged material management activities include:

(1) the identification of potential adverse impacts to the environment
and public health which could result from a proposed activity;

(2) the regulation/management of a proposed activity to ensure that any
potential adverse impacts are minimized;

(3) the development of appropriate programs to monitor for the potential
adverse impacts.

The authority to regulate proposed dredging activities and the management
of dredged material is derived from the following statutes:

Waterfront Development Law (N.J.S.A. 12:5-3 et seq.)
Rules on Coastal Zone Management (N.J.A.C. 7:7E)
Riparian Interests (N.J.S.A. 12:3-1 et seq. & 18:56-1 et seq.)
New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act (N.J.S.A. 58:10A-1 et seq.)
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act Amendments of
1977; 33 U.S.C. 1251, Section 401)
Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.)

The siting of upland confined disposal facilities may also be regulated by
the following:

Flood Hazard Area Control Act (N.J.S.A. 58:16A-50 et seq.)
Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act (N.J.S.A. 13:9B-1 et seq.)
Wetlands Act of 1970 (N.J.S.A. 13:9A-1 et seq.)
Coastal Area Facility Review Act (N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 et seq.)

C The regulatory review of permit applications for dredging operations and
the management of dredged material will be coordinated by the Department's
Land Use Regulation Program. It ' is strongly recommended that a
pre-application meeting be held with the Land Use Regulation Program,
prior to the actual submittal of a permit application, to discuss the
proposed project, required permits, sampling and testing protocols, and
other information needed to evaluate the application.

In most cases, dredging projects in New Jersey's navigable tidal waters
will require a Waterfront Development Permit and a Water' Quality
Certificate (WQC; pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
Amendments of 1977). The WQC is issued jointly with the Waterfront
Development Permit. While a WQG is not required for the actual dredging

-3-

operation, it is required for any discharge of dredged material into
waters of the United States associated with the dredging operation. Any
such discharge will also require a permit from the US Army Corps of
Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act; the
Section 404 Permit triggers the requirement for a WQC.
Federal ly-conduc t ed, funded, or permitted activities, including federal
navigation projects, which have a direct impact on New Jersey's Coastal
Zone, will require a federal consistency determination from the
Department, pursuant to the Coastal Zone Management Act. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers also has authority over dredging activities conducted
in Waters of the United States, and federal permits are also required
pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899,.

Disposal of dredged material in ocean waters is regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.
The State of New Jersey has discretionary authority to review disposal
activities at ocean disposal sites pursuant to the Federal Coastal Zone
Management Act. The review of proposed ocean disposal operations at
currently designated ocean disposal sites will be coordinated with the
USACE and USEPA.

D Solid Waste Issues

The Department has carefully reviewed the issue of whether dredged
material constitutes "solid waste" and whether dredging
activities/disposal should be regulated under the provisions of the New
Jersey Solid Waste Management Act (NJSWMA). The term "solid waste" is
defined broadly to include "garbage, refuse and other discarded materials
resulting from industrial, commercial and agricultural operations, and
from domestic and community activities...". Based upon its review, and
following consultation with other states and USEPA, it is clear that
dredged material could be considered a solid waste.

In order to address the appropriateness of regulating dredging activities
and dredged material under the solid waste regulatory program at N.J.S.A.
13:lE-1 et seg. and N.J.A.C. 7:26-1 et seq., the Department carefully
evaluated the implications of such a decision. Historically, as a result
of Adminstrative Order No. 36, issued in 1983 by former NJDEP Commissioner
Robert E. Hughey, permitting and regulatory control of dredging activities
and associated in-water and upland disposal of dredged material has been'
managed under the provisions of the New Jersey.Water Pollution Control
Act. Dredging has not been regulated under solid waste law for over 12
years and has never been a component of the NJSWMA district planning
process.

Following a careful review of solid waste regulatory issues, the
Department has concluded that the NJSWMA should not apply, and it should
continue to regulate upland containment/disposal /use of dredged material
under the provisions of the New Jersey Water Pollution Control Act,
Waterfront Development Law, and the other relevant statutory and
regulatory authorities listed in Section II-B.

-4-

Chapter III - Information Required of All Projects

A Background Information

In order for the Land Use Regulation Program to dete rmine what specific
sampling and testing is required for a proposed dredging project and the
management of the dredged material, background information must be
submitted to the Department. It is strongly encouraged that potential
applicants schedule a pre-application meeting with the Department once
this background information has been gathered. The following information
shall be submitted to the Land Use Regulation Program with the
preapplication request:

1. A USGS quadrangle or county map identifying the dredging project
area.

2. The proposed dredging method, project depth and areal extent of
project.

3. A bathymetric survey of the dredging site taken within the past
6 months. All hydrographic surveys -shall be performed by an
ACSM (American Congress of Surveying and Mapping) certified
hydrographer, a licensed land surveyor with 5 years hydrographic
experience, or a professional engineer.

4. The location of the proposed disposal area and method of
transporting material to the disposal area.

5. The estimated volume of dredged material and length of time
necessary to conduct the dredging project, including approximate
number of barge trips, if applicable.

6. An inventory of aquatic resources in the area to be dredged such
as shellfish beds, eel grass beds, migratory pathways for
finfish, and other aquatic organisms. Mapping of many resources
is available from the Land Use Regulation Program. The Program
may require surveys if-insufficient data is available.

7. The location and type ofall existing outfalls to surface waters
on site and within 500 feet of the site.

8. Where available, a ten year history and summary of past dredging
events, including grain size, Total Organic Carbon, percentage
moisture, and bulk sediment chemistry analysis data.

9. The past history of on-site and adjacent land uses, and
documented spills either on land or into surface waters.

-5-

10. An inventory of known and suspected historic upstream and
downstream spills and unauthorized discharges of pollutants.

11. The location of any potable water intakes within one mile of the
disposal site.

The above information will be utilized by the Department to determine the
potential of sediments in the dredging project area to contain
contaminants, in an effort to minimize the testing requirements for
applicants, and to develop a sampling plan. Any additional available
information related to potential contamination or non-contamination of the
sediments should also be submitted.

B Testing Exclusions

Testing of dredged material for contaminants will not always be
necessary. Based on the volume of dredged material, the potential for
contaminants to be present, and the proposed management/disposal
alternative, the Department has developed the following four cases in
which dredged material will be excluded from bulk sediment chemistry and
modified elutriate testing (see Figure 1). ' For exclusions from testing
for evaluation of ground water impacts, see Section IV-C(4).

Case 1:

No further testing will be required if: (1) the material to be
dredged is more than 90% sand (grain size >0.0625 mm) and (2) the
percent moisture, Total Organic Carbon or other background
information do not lead the Department to believe the material may be
contaminanted.

Case 2:

Projects where less than 1,000 cubic yards of dredged material will
be removed over the 5-year lift of the Waterfront Development Permit
and disposal will occur in a Subaqueous Disposal Pit approved by the
Department.

Case 3:

For dredging sites south of the Atlantic Ocean side of Sandy Hook to
the western entrance of the Cape May Canal, including the Navesink
and Shrewsbury Rivers, no testing of dredged material. will be
required if all of the following requirements are met.

a. less than 1,000 cubic yards of dredged material will be removed
over the 5-year life of the Waterfront Development permit, and

b. disposal is proposed in an area which will not be subject to
residential or recreational use.

Figure 1: Dredged Material Guidance Document Testing Schematic

ALL PROJECTS
Bathymetry
Volume
Grain Size Analysis
Total Organic Carbon
Percent Moisture

Sediments
> 90% sand & other YES
information

Volume
<.I 000 yd' & disposal'@ YES-
subaqueous disposal
pit

Dredging Location:
NO- Sandy Hook - Cape May Canal
Navesink & Shrewsbury Rivers

YES

Volume
< 000 yd3 w/ no YES
residential or recreational exposure
@ disposal site

ulk sediment chemistry Volume <
5000 yd3 w/ no industry or
& other testing varying on
disposal alternative - see NO manna use & No residential or YES+CNo additional testing
Table 2 recreational exposure @
disposal site
Volume
<10 0 yd3W /no
<residenfia]loro@e reational >exposure
@ S@sal site

*Note: Additional testing will be required for ocean disposal and may be required for
beneficial use.

-6-

Case 4:

For dredging sites south of the Atlantic Ocean side of Sandy Hook to
the western entrance of the Cape May Canal, including the Navesink
and Shrewsbury Rivers, no testing of dredged material will be
required if all of the following requirements are met.

a. less than 5,000 cubic yards of dredged material will be removed
over the 5-year life of the Waterfront Development permit, and

b. there has not been an historic or current upland industrial use
and the site is not now or previously occupied by a
marina/marine basin of 25 or more boat slips, and

C. disposal is proposed in an area which will not be subject to
residential or recreational use.

If none of the above four exclusions are met, the Department will
consider reducing the testing requirements. This decision will be
based on a review of the historical testing data (including the
detection limit and methodology used, and parameters tested for) as
well as the Department's knowledge 'of the area (including the
occurrence of spills or unauthorized discharges of pollutants, and
the location of nearby outfalls).

C Sampling of Sediments

The proposed sampling plan must be presented to the Land Use
Regulation Program for review and approval prior to samples being
taken. The sampling plan must include the following information:

(1) Sampling locations:

a. Sample locations should be chosen so as to provide
representative information on grain size, Total Organic
Carbon, and percentage moisture of the sediments to be
dredged.

b. In order to evaluate contamination of the sediments by
pollutants, the sampling locations must be biased toward
the positions of any outfalls, tributaries, other
industrial sources, historical spill areas, and
depositional (shoaling) zones. Previous test data for
maintenance dredging projects must also be taken into
account when choosing sampling locations.

For general guidance, especially for approximate number of
samples to be taken per volume of sediment to be- removed,
refer to Table 1. However, each project will be assessed
on a site-specific basis.

Table 1: General Sampling Guidance for Proposed Dredging Projects

Proiect Size (cubic Yards)

Greater than Less than or Number of Yards per
but Equal to Samples Sample

1,300 3,600 2 1,800
3,600 6,000 3 3,000
6,000 8,400 4 2,100
8,400 10,700 5 2,140
10,700 13,000 6 2,166
13,000 21,800 7
21,800 30,500 8 3,750
30,500 39,000 9 4,333
39,000 48,000 10 4,800
48,000 56,500 11 5,136
56,500 65,000 12 5,416
65,000 76,000 13 5,846
76,000 87,000 14 6,214
87,000 98,000 15 6,533
98,000 109,000 16 6,812
109,000 120,000 17 7,058
120,000 131,000 18 7,277
131,000 184,000 19 9,684
184,000 238,000 20 11,333
238,000 281,000 21 13,857
281,000 345,000 22 15,681
345,000 398,000 23 17,304
398,000 452,000 24 18,833
452,000 505,000 25 20,200
505,000 559,000 26 21,500
559,000 612,000 27 22,666
612,000 666,000 2*8 23,785
666,000 719,000 29 24,793
719,000 773,000 30 25,766
773,000 803,000 31 25,903
803,000 880,000 32 27,500
880,000 933,000 33 28,272
933,000 987,000 34 29,029
987,000 1,040,000 35 29,714

Source: "Guidance for the Collection and Preparation of Sediments
for Physico-chemical Characterization and Biological
Assessment", Environment Canada.

-7-

C. Where ocean disposal is proposed, the Department will
accept the sampling plan and analysis of results submitted
to the federal agencies in accordance with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
February 1991 Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for
Ocean Disposal - Testing Manual and the December 1992
Regional Guidance Manual for USEPA Region II entitled
"Guidance for Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed
for Ocean Disposal", and any subsequent revisions thereto.
However, the Department will coordinate with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers in the approval of sampling plans and
testing for ocean disposal projects in New Jersey waters to
address surface water quality concerns at the dredging
site.

(2)..Method of sampling

a. In order for the data to be valid, all sediment core
samples must be taken in accordance with the guidance
specified in this Section and in Appendix A. Table 1
specifies the approximate number of sediment core samples
to be taken per the volume of sediment to be dredged,
excerpted from an Environment Canada draft document
"Guidance for the Collection and Preparation of Sediments
for Physico-chemical Characterization and Biological
Assessment". This. guidance must be used for the total
number of core samples which will be necessary to fully
characterize the dredging project. In most cases,
individual core sample -s may be composited for analytical
purposes, following the guidance in 2(d).

b. Core samples are to be taken to the proposed project depth
plus allowable overdredge (2 feet).

C. Each core shall be described. Grain size analysis shall be
required, using the method of R.L. Folk, 1969 (cited in
Section VI - References). A core may be homogenized unless
there are distinct strata in grain size and composition
which are at least 2 feet in depth. The Department shall
be notified of any cores that show grain size
stratification prior to homogenizing. For cores that show-
grain size stratification, each strata with a depth of 2
feet or greater must be tested for grain size, Total
Organic Carbon and percentage moisture.

d. Samples may be composited using the following general
guidelines. The Department must be contacted prior to
compositing:

1. Separate cores may be composited only if the grain
size and likelihood of contamination is uniform based
on depositional characteristics, spill history,
location of outfalls, etc.

-8-

2. The number of cores to be composited should be kept to
a minimum and not exceed 3 cores. Minimal compositing
will serve to fully characterize the sediments
proposed for dredging and disposal.

3. At least three analytical samples must be taken per
reach. A reach is a continuous stretch of waterway
not separated by any structure and subject to similar
hydrodynamic and depositional features as well as
similar upland inputs. Reach boundaries must be
approved by the Department.

e. In those cases in which there is a potential for the
uncovering of more contaminated sediment, such as new work
dredging projects in shoaling zones and maintenance
dredging projects which,proposed a deeper depth, the -bottom
6 inches of each core will be separated from the remainder
of the core and reserved. The material shall be visually
inspected to determine if it is predominantly sand, gravel,
silt or clay. The bottom 6 inches is considered
representative of the material that will be exposed as a
result of dredging. If the 6 inches sample is less than
,90% sand, as determined by grain size analysis, bulk
sediment chemistry analysis will be required.

-9-

Chapter IV - Management of Dredging Activities and Dredged Material

A - Overview

Section IV-B discusses the Department's program for managing and
regulating dredging operations and activities, including the use of Best
Management Practices.

A variety of potential alternatives exist for the management and/or
beneficial use of dredged material. These include open water (including
ocean) disposal sites, upland confined disposal facilities (CDFs),
subaqueous disposal pits, and containment areas. Beneficial use
alternatives include beach nourishment, habitat development, construction
material, landfill cover, agricultural uses and capping open water
disposal sites.

These dredged material management alternatives and applicable regulatory
requirements and procedures are discussed in detail in this section and
Section V. Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of potential dredged material
disposal alternatives. Table 2 summarizes the potential sediment testing
and permitting requirements for these alternatives.

Permit application procedures for dredging operations and the dredged
material management alternatives, including sediment sampling and testing
protocols, were discussed in Section III.

(Note: the construction and operation of dredged material containment
islands and the use of decontamination technologies are currently under
investigation by the State of New Jersey, in cooperation with various
federal agencies. As these dredged material management alternatives are
not currently available, they are not discussed in this guidance document.)

B - Management of Dredging Activities

(1) Authority/Permitting Process: refer to Sections II-B,C for a discussion
of relevant statutes, regulations, and an overview of the permitting'
process. The Department's Land Use Regulation Program will review proposed
dredging operations under the Rules on Coastal Zone Management (N.J.A.C.
7:7E), as amended to July 19, 1994. These Rules provide the basis for the
Department's review, including an evaluation of the locational requirements
for the issuance of permits for maintenance and new dredging projects.

The riparian statutes contained within Titles 18A (N.J.S.A. 18A:56-1 et seq.)
and 12 (NJSA 12:3-1 et seq.) may also apply to a dredging project. Tidelands
conveyances are not required when dredged material is removed from tidelands
and placed in a different tidelands location. This would include ocean
disposal operations, reprofiling, or disposal into subaqueous disposal pits.
It would also include placement on upland sites which are State-owned
tidelands.

Figure 2: Schematic Diagram of Potential Dredge
Material Disposal Alternatives

CDF
open water confined disposal
disposal facility (CDF) CDF

(open water) (island) (nearshore area) (uplands)

containment

area

subaqueous
disposal pit

Table 2: Potential Sediment Testing and Permitting Requirements
for Various Dredged Material Disposal Alternatives

Management Open SAD Containment' Upland
Alternative: Water Pits Area CDF

Tests:

Physical Analysis R R R R

Bulk Sediment R* R* R* R*
Chemistry

Modified Elutriate (1) (1) R* R*

SBLT - - (2) (2)

Bioassay ?

Permits:

Waterfront Dev. R R R PR

Tidelands Instr. R R R PR

Water Quality Cert. R R R R

NJPDES-DSW - -

NJPDES-DGW - - (2) (2)

Stream Encroach. - - PR PR

CAFRA - - PR PR

Freshwater Wet. - - PR PR

Coastal Wetlands - - PR PR

Key: R - required in all cases
R* required except where sediments meet applicable
testing exclusion criteria (see Section III-B)
? - may be required depending on Bulk Sediment Chemistry data
(1) may be required when dredged material originates in a
waterbody different from that in which the disposal site is
located
(2) may be required depending upon the results of site specific
groundwater impact evaluations and/or sediment
characteristics
PR potentially required if facility is to be located in an
area regulated by the listed program

_10-

Construction of a subaqueous disposal pit by the removal of material may
require a tidelands conveyance. If the dredged material is placed in an
upland location which is not State-owned tidelands by an entity other than the
State or federal government, a tidelands conveyance or agreement, approved by
all the required officials (including the Tidelands Resource Council, the
Commissioner of the NJDEP, the Attorney General, and the Governor), is
required.

[Note: In additi-on to required State permits, permits will be required from
the USACE pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and
Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act.]

(2) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives: potential adverse environmental
impacts associated with dredging operations arise from (1) the destruction of
benthic habitat as a direct result of the operation, and (2) the dispersal of
sediments and associated contaminants away from the dredging area. The
Department's objectives in regulating dredging operations are to minimize the
potential for such impacts to occur.

In general, benthic organisms will rapidly recolonize areas that have been
dredged. However, new dredging should avoid impacting areas of ecological
importance. The Rules on Coastal Zone Management provide the basis for the
Department's review of proposed dredging projects and evaluation of the
potential impact of dredging projects. In its review of the location and need
for any dredging operation, the Land Use Regulation Program will consider
direct and indirect impacts to sensitive areas, such as shellfish beds and
finfish migratory pathways.

The dispersal of sediments away from the dredging area may result in adverse
impacts. Impacts could result from the direct physical settlement of the
dispersed sediments onto sensitive benthic areas. Dispersal of contaminants
associated with these sediments could have impacts to both benthic and water
column food webs. The Department has developed a list of Best Management
Practices which should be used to minimize the creation and dispersal of
suspended sediments during dredging operations.

The Department is also concerned about the potential long-term and cumulative
impacts of dredging operations. The potential for such impacts will be
evaluated as part of the Land Use Regulation Program's review of proposed
dredging projects.

(3) Best Management Practices (BMPs): the Department has identified a number
of BMPs which should be used to minimize the potential for, and magnitude of,
adverse environmental impacts that could result from dredging operations. The
need for any BMPs will be determined by the Department and will be included as
permit conditions. The applicability of the use of a particular BMP for a
dredging project will be evaluated by the Department in consultation with the
permit applicant.

The effectiveness of a particular BMP to minimize potential adverse impacts
will vary with the conditions present at a particular dredging operation.
Thus, the Department will consider this list of BMPs as a "menu", from which
those practices anticipated to be most effective and ' implementable for a
particular dredging project can be selected. The use of these BMPs would then
be incorporated as conditions into the permits issued by the Department for
the dredging operation.

The following BMPs have been identified by the Department. This list is not
intended to be all inclusive, and additional BMPs will be considered by the
Department.

*Hydraulic Dredging - this method can be used when the channel or berthing
area configuration, the type of sediments to be dredged, and the volume of
dredged material allows it. Hydraulic dredging is preferable when an
acceptable upland confined disposal facility (CDF) is available within pumping
distance of the dredging area. It reduces the, generation of suspended
sediments at the dredging site. However, this method results in the
production of large volumes of a high percent water content dredged material
slurry. Thus, the proposed upland CDF must be designed and operated to accept
.Such material.

*Closed Clamshell - the use of a closed, watertight clamshell reduces the
production of suspended solids at the dredging site. A closed clamshell will
be required by the Department when the sediments to be dredged are
contaminated at levels warranting concern. A closed clamshell would also be
required by the Department whenever a no-barge-overflow permit condition is in
effect.

*Dredging Practices - a number of procedures can be employed by the
dredging contractor to minimize the creation and dispersal of suspended
sediments when using a clamshell dredge. These include:

(1) maximizing the size of the "bite" taken by the clamshell. This also
results in a minimization of the number of "bites" needed to dredge a
particular volume of sediment;

(2) slowly withdrawing the clamshell through the water column;

(3) not hosing down or rinsing sediments off the sides and gunwales of the
barge.

*No-Barge-Overflow - this BMP reduces the creation and dispersal of
suspended sediments when finer-grained sediments are dredged. It will be
required by the Department when the dredged material is contaminated at levels
warranting concern. Except as noted below, this condition will always apply
to dredging operations in Newark Bay, the Passaic River and its tidal
tributaries from Newark Bay to Dundee Dam, the Hackensack River and its tidal
tributaries from Newark Bay to Oradell Dam, the Kill Van Kull, the Arthur
Kill, Elizabeth Channel, City Channel, and Upper New York Bay. This condition
will also apply when the dredged material is to be rehydrated as part of its
disposal/management.

However, in most cases, barge-overflow will be permitted when the dredged
material will be taken to a designated ocean disposal site. Use of barge
overflow in such projects will tend to produce a more consolidated dredged
material. This will result in less dispersal of dredged material at the ocean
disposal site. Thus, while impacts may be greater at the dredging site, the
impacts of disposal will be reduced.

-12-

*Shunting - this BMP involves the active pumping of free water in a barge
to the bottom of the water column at the dredging site. It may act to reduce
turbidity in -the upper water column. The discharge end of the shunting system
must include a diffuser in order to minimize the potential for additional
disruption of benthic sediments. Additionally, the pumping rate and location
of the discharge must not result in the disruption of in-place sediments.
This BMP could be used as an alternative to barge-overflow in reducing the
volume of water in the barge.

*Seasonal /Migratory Periods - depending on the location of the dredging
area, the Department may prohibit operations during certain times of the year
to minimize potential adverse impacts to anadromous or other migratory
finfish, nesting shorebirds, etc.

*In certain semi-enclosed water bodies, dredging only on the incoming tide
may provide additional time for suspended sediments to settle, thus minimizing
the dispersal of contaminated sediments out of the water body.

*Dredging contractors may be required to employ independent, on-board
dredging inspectors certified by the USACE. These inspectors will observe the
dredging and disposal operations to ensure compliance with all permit
conditions.

*Silt curtains may be practical for use in areas where the water current
is less than one (1) knot. The use of silt curtains may minimize the upper
water column dispersal of sediments from the dredging area. This BMP can
also be used to protect tidal creeks, etc. adjacent to the dredging area.

*Split-hull barges should only be used in dredging projects which will use
open water disposal methods.

(4) Testing Requirements: Section III discusses the sampling and testing
required for all proposed dredging projects. Sediments which do not qualify
for a testing exclusion, as described in Section III-B, may require additional
bulk sediment and/or modified elutriate testing. This will be determined by
the Department on a case-by-case basis. To evaluate potential impacts to
estuarine benthic communities as a result of the dispersal of contaminated
suspended sediments, the Department will compare the bulk sediment chemistry
data with the guideline values developed by Long et al. (1995), on a,
case-by-case basis.

-13-

C - Open Water Alternatives

(1) Authority: refer to Sections II-B, C for a listing of relevant
statutes and regulations.

All Open Water disposal operations in State waters require a Water Quality
Certificate (this is required in conjunction with the permit is 'sued by the
USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) . Non-federal
projects also require a Waterfront Development permit (which is a federal
consistency determination). Federal ly-conduct ed or funded projects require
only a federal consistency determination (i.e. a Waterfront Development
permit is not required). All of these permits are issued by the Land Use
Regulation Program.

(2) Ocean Disposal:

(a) Overview. There are currently 6 federally authorized ocean
disposal sites in proximity to New Jersey. They are the Mud
Dump site (approximately six miles offshore of Sea Bright),
sites at Shark River Inlet, Manasquan Inlet, Cold Spring/Cape
May Inlet, and Absecon Inlet (the Inlet sites may only be used
for the disposal of sand dredged from each inlet), and Buoy 10
in Delaware Bay (the Buoy 10 site may only be used for disposal
of dredged material from specific reaches on the Delaware
River). The expansion of any of these sites or the designation
of new sites will require a federal consistency determination
from the Land Use Regulation Program. In addition, individual
disposal operations will require a federal consistency
determination.

(b) Testing Requirements. Disposal of dredged material in ocean
waters is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) pursuant to
the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act. The State
of New Jersey has discretionary authority to review disposal
activities at ocean disposal sites pursuant to the Federal
Coastal Zone Management Act. The review of proposed ocean
disposal operations at currently designated ocean disposal sites
will be coordinated with the USACE and USEPA.' Through the
Dredged Material Management Forum of the NY-NJ Harbor Estuary
Program, the Department, USACE and USEPA are working to develop
coordinated sampling, testing and criteria for ocean disposal.

(3) Other Open Water Disposal Areas:

(a) Overview. Dredged material can be placed in nearshore waters
through sidecasting, reprofiling, interpier disposal or other
means. If the material will be contained by a bulkhead, berm,
subaqueous pit, etc., it will not be considered Open Water
disposal, but will be regulated as a Containment Area (see
Section IV-F).

-14-

The following open water disposal sites have been approved by
the Department and used repeatedly for disposal of sand dredged
from the Intracoastal Waterway. Proposals for Open Water
disposal at these sites (or new proposed sites) will be reviewed
by the Department on a case-by-case basis: North of Gull Island
in Great Sound, West of Pullen Island in Great Bay.

(b) Permitting Process. Open Water disposal is suitable only in the
designated areas and where the dredged material is at least 90%
sand. Further, practicable upland disposal alternatives must
not be available. Disposal at a designated Open Water site
requires a Waterfront Development permit (with the exception of
federal projects), a Water Quality Certificate, and a federal
consistency determination. (Note: a Clean Water Act Section 404
Permit will also be required from the USACE.)

(c) Potential Im-pacts/ReAulatory Obiectives. Disposal at an Open
Water site requires a demonstration that no practicable
alternative site exists, federal and State Water Quality
Standards will be met, and potential adverse environmental
impacts will be minimized. An. evaluation of the proposed
disposal operation will be made using the Rules on Coastal Zone
Management (N.J.A.C. 7:7E) to ensure that sensitive areas will
not be adversely affected. Sensitive areas include but are no t
limited to shellfish habitat, prime fishing areas, submerged
vegetation, shallow water habitat, and threatened and endangered
species habitat. Open Water disposal is prohibited in tidal
guts, man-made harbors, medium rivers, streams, and creeks due
to the inability of smaller waterways to assimilate many
pollutants (refer to the Rules on Coastal Zone Management for
definition/identification of these types of water bodies).
Disposal is discouraged in all other waterways, except the ocean
and bays greater than 6 feet deep.

(d) Testing Requirements, Required testing of dredged material to
be disposed of at an Open Water Site includes an analysis of
sediment cores for grain size, Total Organic Carbon and percent
moisture to demonstrate that the criterion of greater than 90%
sand is met. See Section III-C for sampling procedures.

-15-

D - Upland Confined Disposal Facilities

(1) Overview: Sediments in New Jersey's tidal waters may be impacted to
varying degrees by a number of pollutants. Not all sediments are
considered to be "contaminated". When sediments are contaminated, it is
generally believed that the degree of contamination is such that placement
of the sediments in appropriately managed upland confined disposal
facilities (CDFs) would not result in significant adverse impacts to
terrestrial ecosystems or pose risks to public health. However, the
presence of these same sediments in an aquatic environment could result in
significant adverse impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. Thus, in most
cases, it is preferable that contaminanted sediments be removed from the
aquatic environment and contained in appropriate upland facilities (or
decontaminanted when appropriate technologies are available and
practicable.)

The Department',s regulatory programs are designed to identify and minimize
potential adverse environmental impacts resulting from proposed
activities. For dredged material upland CDFs the magnitude of these
impacts are dependent upon the:

(a) location of the facility and site-specific conditions (including,
compatibility with adjacent and nearby land.uses);

(b) characteristics of the dredged material proposed for placement at the
facility;

(d) operation of the facility;

(e) final closure and use of the facility site.

These five factors will be considered collectively, as regulatory
decisions will be based on a comprehensive review of a proposed upland
CDF. With proper design and operation of the upland CDF, the potential
for adverse impacts can be reduced significantly. Upland CDFs will be
designed, permitted, and operated on a case-by-case basis.

Siting of a proposed upland CDF will be addressed by the Department's Land
Use Regulation Program. In New Jersey's designated Coastal Zone, the
Rules on Coastal Zone Management will be applied to proposed sites. These
Rules include constraints on the types of activities which can occur in
various types of coastal areas. In addition, a number of regulatory
programs, such as the Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act and the Flood
Hazard Area Control Act, may restrict the use of a particular site.

The major potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the
.upland containment of dredged material are surface and ground water
contamination. Testing of dredged material for upland containment is
driven, in large part, by the potential for contamination of surface and

-16-

groundwaters. The discharge of contaminants from upland CDFs to surface
water must be controlled to minimize potential adverse impacts to the
aquatic ecosystem. The Department's testing requirements and evaluation
protocols for surface and groundwater discharges are discussed in detail
in Sections IV-D(3) and IV-D(4), respectively.

Potential adverse impacts could result from the dispersal of contaminants
into terrestrial ecosystems and subsequent effects on receptor organisms.
The upland CDF must be designed and operated to minimize the dispersal of
contaminants. A number of management techniques are available to address
this concern. This topic is discussed in more detail in Section IV-C(5).

Potential adverse impacts to public health could result from human
exposure to dredged material contaminated at levels which have been
identified as being of concern. Potential exposure pathways with
contaminanted dredged material must be identified and controlled. This
topic is discussed in more detail in Section IV-C(6).

End-use(s) and final closure of the upland CDF site must also be addressed
in the regulatory process. Long-term impacts of the facility will be
evaluated and appropriate management actions to minimize such impacts
required. These concerns are discussed in more detail in Section IV-C(2).

(2) Design, Construction, Operation, and Closure:

(a) Authority. The Department will regulate the design, construction,
operation, and closure of upland CDFs pursuant to the Waterfront Development
statute. The New Jersey Flood Hazard Regulations and the Coastal Area
Facilities Review Act may also be applicable. The Division of Solid and
Hazardous Waste will conduct the technical/engineering review of proposed
facilities.

(b) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives). Potential adverse impacts which
could result from the operation and interim/final closure of an upland CDF
would be caused by the unintended dispersal of contaminants out of the upland
CDF into. the environment. These potential impacts are discussed in detail in
Sections IV-D(l), (3), (4), (5), and (6). Potential contaminant migration
pathways and exposure hazards can be minimized and controlled through
oversight of the design, construction, operation, and interim/final closure of
the upland CDF.

i. Design and Construction - an upland CDF is not fundamentally different
in the structural aspects of its design from any earthen berm. It must be
capable of resisting the forces exerted by the weight of the dredged material
placed within it and the hydraulic forces exerted by adjoining surface water
bodies, underlying ground water, stormwater discharges, and dewatering
effluent. The containment structure must be able to withstand the effects of
erosion, provide a stable platform for the operation of equipment, and allow
for the potential vertical expansion of the containment structure.

-17-

The USACE has considerable experience in the design of upland CDFs. The
Department will use the technical standards in the following documents as the
basis for its engineering review of the design and construction of proposed
upland CDFs:

Confined Disposal of Dredged Material - Engineer Manual (EM 1110-5027),
September 1987.

Confined Disposal Guidance for Small Hydraulic Maintenance Dredging
Projects - Design Procedures, Environmental Effects of Dredging Technical
Note EEDP-02-8, December, 1988.

Where circumstances, as described in Section IV-C(4)(c), require the use
of liners and leachate collection systems within the design of an upland CDF
to control discharges to groundwater, the Department's regulatory standards
for the design, construction, and quality control of landfill liners and
leachate collection systems (N.J.A.C. 7:26-2A.7) will be used for techni-cal
guidance. The Department does not anticipate that the multiple liner system
required for certain landfills will be needed in the design of upland CDFs.

Erosion control of all external surfaces of an upland CDF will be
necessary to prevent undermining of the containment berms and to control
sediment transport to adjoining surface waters.' Erosion may be caused by wave
activity, stormwater runoff, discharge of dewatering effluent, and
infiltration of water through the containment berm. The New Jersey Standards
for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control <N.J.A.C. 2:90) shall be applied to the
design and construction of a proposed upland CDF. If required by the
appropriate regional office of the Soil Conservation Service, a Certified Soil
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be obtained for the upland CDF.

The importance of following all aspects of the approved engineering design
for an upland CDF must be emphasized. Accordingly, the Department will
require the filing of "as built" plans, with a certification by a professional
engineer licensed to practice in New Jersey that the approved engineering
design plans have been adhered to.

ii. Operation - it will be necessary for the Department to have adequate
operational oversight of an upland CDF in order to ensure that the stability
and integrity of the containment structure is maintained, and to prevent the
uncontrolled release of dredged material, ponded water, and associated
contaminants. Additional oversight and/or monitoring may be needed to control
the rate at which the upland CDF is filled, the manner in which it is filled,
and how dewatering occurs in order to address potential requirements relating
to surface water (Section IV-D[3]) and ground water (Section IV-D[4])
discharges. Additional oversight may be needed to address potential human and
terrestrial ecosystem exposure concerns as they may arise on a case-by-case
basis (see Sections IV-D[51 and (61).

To maintain oversight, the Department will require the owner and/or
operator of an upland CDF to submit an annual report to the Department. The
report will summarize the past year's activities at the upland CDF. Projected
activities for the 'next five (5) years shall also be identified. The report
shall document the following information:

(1) Condition of containment berms, dewatering and stormwater discharge
weirs, and other engineering structures critical to the operation of the
upland CDF. Any significant changes to the upland CDF must be first
approved by the Department and revised "as built" plans documenting such
changes submitted.

(2) Summary of disposal operations at the upland CDF, including a listing
of all dredging projects and their volumes.

(3) Summary of maintenance and management activities conducted at the
upland CDF, including regrading, ditching, crust management, etc.

(4) Summary of any dredged material removed from the upland CDF and its
final use/destination.

(5) An analysis of available disposal, capacity in the upland CDF. This
will be compared with the projected disposal activities for the next five
(5) years and a running total of available capacity for the next five
years estimated.

(6) Summary of surface and ground water discharge monitoring programs for
all required parameters.

R) Any additional monitoring or certifications required pursuant to
Sections IV-D(5) and (6) of this guidance document.

The USACE Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-5027, Confined Disposal of Dredged
Material includes discussions of a variety of concerns critical to the proper
operation and maintenance of an upland CDF.

iii. Closure - it is expected that most of the dredged material placed in
upland CDFs will be contaminated by organic and inorganic pollutants at
various levels of concern. Without assuring long-term containment of the
dredged material, these contaminants may disperse into the environment.
Potential human health exposure pathways include direct contact and inhalation
(particulate transport via dust) routes (refer to Section IV-D[6]). Potential
uptake of contaminants by plants and animals which colonize or use the upland
OF is also of concern (see Section IV-D[5]). Upland CDFs may erode,
resulting in the transport of contaminants into surface waters. Infiltration
will also continue to occur, with the resulting generation of leachate and
surface water runoff, which may impact ground or surface water resources.

This section discusses the closure requirements for those upland CDFs
which accept any dredged material which does not meet the testing exclusion
criteria listed in Sections IV-D(4) and III-C. The Department will consider
exceptions to these closure requirements on a case-by-case basis.

_19-

To control or mitigate these potential adverse impacts, the Department
will require interim/final closure of the upland CDF. Final closure refers to
the implementation of practices after the cessation of dredged material
disposal operations at the upland CDF. Interim closure practices may be
needed if there will be a large (g@nerally greater than 6 months) interval
between disposal or management activities at the upland CDF.

Interim Closure

I Interim closure procedures are largely concerned with minimizing the
potential for direct human and plant/animal -exposure to contaminated dredged
material. These are discussed in Sections IV-D(5) and (6).

The need for interim closure procedures will be determined by the
Department on a case-by-case basis. The Department will require the submitt,al
and approval of a formal plan to address interim closure requirements. Such a
determination will be based on the testing data available for the dredged
material; alternatively, additional testing of the exposed dredged material
may be needed (see Section [d] below).

Interim closure procedures include the implementation of measures to
control the generation of dust. Site access controls (for example, fencing)
shall be maintained. The need for capping of exposed dredged material with
clean fill will be determined by the Department on a case-by-case basis. The
requirements of any Water Quality Certificate (WQC) or New Jersey Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) permits for discharges to surface or
ground water from the upland CDF must be maintained during the interim closure
period. Likewise, required soil erosion and sediment control measures must be
maintained.

An annual report on the status of the upland CDF, similar to that
discussed in Section ii, shall be submi'tted to the Department, during the
interim closure period. An interim closure period will not last longer than
five (5) years; implementation of final closure procedures will be required
for such situations.

Final Closure

Upland CDFs are expected to contain dredged material contaminated with
pollutants at various levels of concern. Thus, long-term containment of these'
contaminants must be assured. The owner of record of the property on which
the upland OF is constructed is ultimately responsible for the final closure
of the facility and any required post-closure monitoring.

The Department will require the submittal and approval of formal plans
that address final closure, post-closure maintenance and monitoring, and site
development or use for all upland CDFs. This requirement does not apply to
those upland CDFs permitted and used solely for the disposal of dredged
material which meets the exclusion criteria listed in Sections IV-D(4) and
III-C. A preliminary final closure plan should be submitted with the permit
application to construct and operate the upland CDF. A Final Closure Plan
shall be submitted to the Department no later than 60 days following the

_20-

issuance of Departmental approval to construct and operate the upland CDF.
The Final Closure Plan must propose all engineering controls designed to
contain the contaminated dredged material and prevent direct contact with, and
off-site transport of, contaminants of concern. The Final Closure Plan must
also include provisions for post-closure monitoring of the upland OF and a
Financial Plan. The Financial Plan shall be prepared following the general
guidance in the Department's landfill closure regulations (N.J.A.C.
7:26-2A.9), adapted to the specific design and closure features of the upland
CDF. In the event of a proposed transfer of ownership of property containing
an upland CDF, a new Final Closure Plan (including a Financial Plan), to be
implemented by the prospective purchaser, shall be submitted to the Department
for approval prior to the final change of Title.

A major component of the Final Closure Plan will relate to the cap design
for the upland CDF. The exact nature of the cap construction must be included
in the Final Closure Plan. Cap requirements will be determined on a
case-by-case basis by the Department, in consultation with the owner/operator
of the upland CDF. In general, a minimum thickness of two feet of cover,
consisting of 18 inches of clean fill overlain by 6 inches of topsoil, with a
complete vegetative cover, will be required. In situations where relatively
clean dredged material (i.e. meets the Interim State Direct Contact Soil
Cleanup Criteria) has been emplaced entirely, or used as a substantial top
cover on the upland CDF, reduced cap design criteria may be warranted.

The Final Closure Plan shall include restrictions on site access vi-a
fencing and future site use via a Declaration of Environmental Restrictions,
Deed Restrictions, or other site use restriction documentation. It is
possible that at some point following final closure of the upland CDF, reuse
.of the property may be proposed (the potential for such reuse should be
identified in the Final Closure Plan, and continually investigated during the
operational lifetime of the facility). If a final reuse (other than the
creation of habitat via natural succession processes) is proposed, the owner
of the property will be required to submit a modified Final Closure Plan to
the Department. The contents of this plan will vary with the upland OF and
the proposed final reuse, and will be determined on a case-by-case basis by
the Department, in consultation with the owner of the property. The main
objective of the Final Closure Plan is to ensure that the proposed project
design will not in any way reduce the effectiveness of the dredged material
containment provided by the upland CDF.

Additional components of the Final Closure Plan could include provisions
for the maintenance and monitoring of the following parameters:

(1) surface and/or ground water discharge monitoring required pursuant to
any WQC or NJPDES permits issued for the upland CDF;

(2) erosion, stormwater run-off, and drainage controls;

(3) stabilization and vegetation of the final cover;

(4) weir and other outlet structures;

(5) security and access restrictions;

(6) leachate collection and/or control (if required).

-21-

The submission of an annual Post-Closure Maintenance Report, summarizing
the status of the upland OF and activities associated with its final closure,
and updating the Financial Plan, may be required by the Department.

(c) Permitting Process. Applications to construct, operate, and close
upland CDFs will be reviewed by the Department's Land Use Regulation
Program pursuant to the Waterfront Development statute, the Coastal Area
Facilities Review Act, and the New Jersey Flood Hazard Regulations, as
applicable. The Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste will conduct the
t echni cal/ engineering review of proposed upland CDFs and will develop
appropriate conditions to be placed on the Waterfront Development Permit.
The review conducted by the Land Use Regulation Program will be
coordinated with other Departmental programs, as needed, to address the
concerns discussed in Sections IV-D(3), (4)j (5), and (6).

(d) Testing Requirements. Design of the upland CDF containment structures
must consider the engineering properties (for example, soil density, grain
size, percent compaction) of the material to be used. In those cases
where dredged material. is to be used to construct, or enlarge, containment
berms, the material must meet the Interim State Direct Contact Soil
Cleanup Criteria. Additional bulk sediment analyses of any dredged
material proposed for such use may be required, as determined by the
Department on a case-by-case basis.

Upon final closure of the upland CDF, the Department presumes that the
dredged material may represent an unacceptable risk. With prompt capping
of the exposed dredged material, no sampling other than that required to
ensure the use of "clean fill" or soil cover in the cap, will be
required. If a reduction in the design cap criteria are proposed by the
owner and/or operator based upon site-specific conditions, then sampling
and testing of the exposed dredged material will be required. In general,
a minimum sampling frequency of one sample per two acres will be
required. Analysis must include all the target compounds listed in
,Appendix A of this guidance document.

if final closure of the upland CDF will not be completed within two years
of the cessation of dredged material disposal operations, or should
off-site transport of dredged material or its contaminants become evident,
the sampling of the media (including surface waters, sediments, and soils)
surrounding the facility shall be required. Such sampling would require
analysis for all. of the target compounds listed in Appendix A of this'
guidance document.

-22-

(3) Surface Water Discharges:

(a) Authority. The authority to issue permits for direct point
source surface water discharges is derived from both the federal and
state Water Pollution Control Acts, also known as the Clean Water
Act(s). The New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NJPDES) regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:14A) are the operating regulations
that implement the State Clean Water Act.

Additionally, authority for the permitting of the effluent from
dewatering dredged material to surface waters of the State can be
found in Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act for the issuance
of Water Quality Certificates (WQCs).

(b) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives,. The objectives of any
regulatory oversight document (i..e. NJPDES permit or WQC) for the
point source discharge of effluent from the dewatered dredged
material is to prevent any adverse impacts of the discharge on the
receiving water body. Adverse impacts to the receiving water body
may include toxic effects or bioaccumulation of contaminants in
aquatic organisms, as well as adverse effects in humans through fish
consumption or water exposure. The best way to ensure that no adverse
impacts occur is to regulate the amount and type of potential
pollutants (as defined by N.J.S.A. 58:10A-3) that could be discharged
to the receiving water body. The two most important methods of
controlling the amount and type of potential pollutants that could be
discharged are by having either technology based discharge criteria
or water quality based discharge criteria in the form of permit
limitations in either the NJPDES permit or the WQC. Either of these
two methods of developing permit limitations will serve to protect
the water quality of the receiving water body.

i. Technology Based Discharge Limits - The rationale for
technology based numbers is that compliance with either NJPDES
permit or WQC discharge limits can be demonstrated through the
use of engineering solutions such as retention basins,
flocculents, and other innovative, methods. Any particular type
of treatment that will achieve pollutant reduction to a defined
and/or acceptable level(s) may meet this criteria. These
limits may be utilized when the source dredged material is from
a waterbody other than the discharge receiving water body. The
effluent from the dewatered dredged material must meet these
NJPDES permit or WQC limits at all times.

ii. Water Quality Based Limits - These types of limits are based
on the existing water quality of the receiving water body as
well as the ability of the receiving water body to assimilate
any additional loading(s) of pollutants without any adverse
effects. The rationale for this method of permit (limit)
development for the-effluent from the dewatered dredged material
is to set the discharge limit(s) of the effluent to ambient
levels of the receiving water. In this way no additional

-23-

loading(s) of potential pollutants will be discharged to the
receiving water body in excess of what is already presumably
present in the receiving water body. The procedures to
establish ambient conditions can be found in the following three
reference documents:

(1) Guidance for Preparation of Combined Work/Quality Assurance
Project Plans for Environmental Monitoring. (OWRS QA-1), Office
of Water Regulations and Standards, USEPA.

(2) Field Sampling Procedures Manual. NJDEPE, 1992.

(3) USEPA Handbook - Stream Sampling for Waste Load Allocation
Applications.

Additionally, this method can utilize indicator parameters such
as Total Suspended Solids (TSS) as action levels in the'permit
or WQC. Indicator parameters are indicative of groups of
individual pollutants. The limiting or regulating of an
indicator parameter should serve to limit the indicator group of
pollutants. The use of indicator parameters will allow for more
rapid data generation for compliance purposes. It is expected
that this method will be sufficiently protective of the
receiving water body.

The setting of action levels as permit limits is consistent with
the Department's direction of emphasizing compliance with permit
conditions instead of monetary penalties for numerical permit
violations. Exce'edances of action levels trigger corrective
action measures such as additional treatment of the effluent or
increased retention time prior to effluent discharge. The
permit and WQC will contain language that reflects the action
level concept so that permission to discharge is contingent upon
compliance with either action levels or cotrective action
measures. This is the method of choice when the dredged
material originates in the same water body to which the effluent
from the dewatered dredged material is being discharged..

.(c) Permitting Process. The point source discharge of the dewatered
dredged material to surface waters of the state will fall into
one of two categories:

(1) dredged material dewatering effluent returning to the same water
body from which the material was originally dredged will require a
WQC. This WQC will have discharge conditions similar, if not
identical, to those which would be found in a NJPDES/DSW permit.

(2) a NJPDES/Discharge to Surface Water (DSW) permit will be required
for discharges from facilities accepting. material from single or
multiple dredging sites located in a different surface water body, or
from "unidentified" sites.

-24-

(d) Testing Requirements. Exclusionary criteria for the testing
requirements are described in Section III-B. Any project which
does not qualify for a testing exemption as described in Section
III-B will be subject to the following requirements.

Initially, the background information submitted for a dredging
project proposing upland disposal/containment will be evaluated
to determine the testing necessary to characterize potential
adverse impacts of the dewatering discharge to the receiving
waterbody. A list of the required background information is
provided in Section III-A. The most important information used
to assess potential surface water impacts are previous and
current bulk chemical analyses of site sediments (both bulk
chemistry and aqueous fractions).

If deemed necessary, the Modified Elutriate Test will be
required to predict pollutant concentrations in the discharge,
both soluble and particulate-bound. Modified Elutriate Test
resultswill be considered valid only if:

(1) the Standard Operating Proced ure (SOP) found in the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experimental Station Environmental
Effects of Dredging Technical Note, EEDP-04-2 (June 1985) is
followed, in conjunction with the Department-approved use of a
site-specific field retention time, analysis of both dissolved and
suspended fractions, and

(2) sediment core sampling, homogenizing, and compositing follows
Section III-C, and

(3) the discharge total suspended solids value required for the final
calculation in the Modified Elutriate Test data analysis does not
exceed either ambient TSS concentrations for the rece'iving waterbody
or state Surface Water Quality Standards for TSS for the receiving
waterbody.

As described in Section IV-C(3)(b)ii, the applicant, in
pre-application consultation with the Land Use Regulation
Program, may choose to determine ambient pollutant/parameter
concentrations in the receiving waterbody for setting discharge
limits; the methods required for this determination are
referenced in this section. Ambient condition determinations
will be reviewed by the Department on a case-by-case basis.
Should existing information lead the Department to believe that
surface water discharges from an upland CDF will not result in
adverse impacts, the Modified Elutriate Test may not be required.

-25-

(4) Ground Water Discharges:

(a) Authority. The New Jersey Water Pollution Control (WPC) Act includes
"dredge spoils" in its definition of a "pollutant". Because the
upland placement of dredged material represents a potential discharge
of pollutants, the activity is subject to regulation pursuant to the
authority of the New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NJPDES) regulations (N.J.A.C. 7:14A-1) and the Ground Water Quality
Standards (GWQS; N.J.A.C. 7:9-6).

(b) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives. When dredged material is
placed at upland locations, contaminants may become soluble and be
transported into the subsurface terrestrial environment by leachate
generation and seepage. The introduction of contaminants into the
subsurface terrestrial environment may degrade ground water quality
and potentially threaten potable water supplies. The susceptibility
of ground water to contamination and the degree to which it can be
degraded is dependent upon the hydrogeologic characteristics of
ground water resource and the designated use. The impact of upland
confined disposal facilities (CDFs) on ground water resources can be
limited through an integrated approach of ground water resource
classification, engineering of upland CDFs, dredged material testing
and leachate analysis, and site-specific, geotechnical evaluation.
Through this approach, ground water resources can be protected at an
appropriate level relative to their sensitivity and use, and the
objectives of the NJPDES regulations and the GWQS can be achieved.

(c) Permitting Process. The degree to which the discharge to ground water
(DGW) emanating from the upland disposal of dredged material will be
regulated pursuant to the NJPDES regulations and the GWQS is
dependent upon the following characteristics:

0 the classification of the ground water;

0 the nature of the upland CDF;

0 the source and quality of the dredged material; and

0 the management of the dredged material.

The NJPDES-DGW permitting process involving the upland disposal of
dredged material will include any or all of the following components:

Preliminary determination of leachate quality from dredged
sediments;

Ground Water Protection Plans; and/or

NJPDES-DGW permit.

-26-

In order to determine which components of the NJPDES-DGW permitting
process apply, it must be determined whether the project involves a
Type A or Type B upland CDF as defined below:

Type A upland CDFs involve projects where the specific location(s) from
which sediments are to be dredged is known prior to preceding with the
development of a Ground Water Protection Plan and issuance of a NJPDES-DGW
permit. In these cases, leachate quality from the sediments to be dredged
can be evaluated on a preliminary basis allowing for a wider variety of
management and/or permitting alternatives.

Type B upland CDFs are constructed independent of any specific dredging
project(s). As such, the leachate quality of all sediments to be placed
within the upland OF cannot be determined prior to development of a
Ground Water Protection Plan and issuance of a NJPDES-DGW permit.
Therefore, the only regulatory options, available are those detailed below
at IV-C(4)(c)ii and iii.

i. Preliminary Determination of Leachate Quality from Dredged
Sediments - because Type A upland CDFs allow for preliminary
evaluation of the quality of the leachate from the dredged material,
the quality of the discharge emanating from the upland CDF can be
predicted prior to proceeding with the development of a Ground Water
Protection Plan and issuance of a NJPDES-D6W permit. Leachate
quality shall be evaluated according to the procedure outlined in
IV-C(4)(d).

Where the maximum leachate quality for any parameter exceeds the
Ground Water Quality Criteria in Table 3, a Ground Water Protection
Plan will have to be developed and implemented through a NJPDES-DGW
permit.

Where the maximum leachate quality for all parameters, does not
exceed the Ground Water Quality Criteria in Table 3, the project will
be exempt from both the requirement to develop a Ground Water
Protection Plan and to obtain an individual NJPDES-DGW permit.

ii. Ground Water Protection Plans - a Ground Water Protection Plan
shall be developed for:

(1) all Type B upland CDFs; and

(2) all Type A upland CDFs where the anticipated quality of the
leachate, determined as per IV-C(4)(c)i and in accordance with
IV-C(4)(d), exceeds the Ground Water Quality Criteria in Table 3
for any parameter.

Table 3: Ground Water Quality Criteria

Aquifer Classification Ground Water Quality Criteria

Class I: Ground Water of Site specific ground water
Special Ecological constituent standards
Significance determined as per NJAC 7:9-6.8_

Class II: Ground Water Worst Case IIA Ground Water
for Potable Water Constituent Standards (see
Supply Appendix A, Table XIV) or site
specific criteria based upon
ground water constituent
standards determined as per NJAC
7:9-6.8

Class III: Ground Water Worst Case IIA Ground Water
with Uses Other Than Constituent Standards (see
Potable Water Supply Appendix A, Table XIV) or site
specific criteria based upon
ground waiter constituent
standards determined as per NJAC
7:9-6.8

Note: the determination of site specific criteria per NJAC 7:9-6.8
shall be done in accordance with a ground water sampling plan
approved by the Department.

-27-

The Ground Water Protection Plan for any upland CDF must demonstrate
that the annual discharge of contaminants from the facility will not
result in a contravention of the Ground Water Quality Standards. This
report must include at a minimum:

(1) an engineering design and construction plan of the proposed
CDF;

(2) an operation and maintenance plan which details the use of
the proposed CDF;

(3) detailed evaluation of potential contaminant migration
pathways which considers at a minimum the following:

Regional physiography
Site specific geology and hydrogeology and
Regional ground water use and receptors

(4) a contaminant transport model which simulates ground water
contaminant migration pathways on site as follows:

0 For Type A -upland CDFs, each parameter analyzed from
Appendix A, Table XIV which exceeds the Ground Water
Quality Criteriain Table 3 shall be modeled. a

0 For Type B upland CDFs, the parameters listed in Appendix
A, Table XIV shall be modeled, using trial simulations in
order to assess the maximum assimilative capacity of the
aquifer and to assign maximum leachate concentrations for
all dredged material to be placed on site.

The model shall simulate annual leachate discharge and contaminant
loading into the ground water for the duration of the active use of
the facility, closure, and post-closure periods.

iii. NJPDES-DGW Permitting - A NJPDES-DGW permit will be issued for
every facility which must develop a Ground Water Protection Plan
according to IV-C(4)(c)ii. Dependent upon the results of the Ground
Water Protection Plan, a NJPDES-DGW permit may require any or all of
the following:

(1) installation and periodic sampling of ground water
monitoring wells;

(2) in-situ leachate monitoring through lysimetry;

(3) liner and/or leachate collection system monitoring;

(4) leachate quality analysis of dredged material.

-28-

iv. Exclusions - Projects which qualify and meet the criteria listed
below are exempt from the requirements outlined in IV-C(4)(c)i-iii
above. These exclusions only apply to upland CDFs which do not
discharge into Class I ground waters or wellhead protection areas as
delineated by the Department.

Projects south of the Atlantic Ocean side of Sandy Hook to the
western entrance of the Cape May Canal, including the Navesink and
Shrewsbury Rivers where:
(a) less than 5,000 cubic yards (y d3) of dredged material will
be placed in an upland CDF over the five (5) year life of the
associated Waterfront Development Permit; and

(b) the sediments are dredged from a waterway(s) where there has
not been an historic or current upland industrial use and the
site is not currently or previously occupied by a marina of 25
or more boat slips.

(2) Any project where:
(a) less than 1,000 cubic ya rds (yd3) of dredged material will
be placed within an upland CDF over the five (5) year life of
the associated Waterfront Development Permit; and

(b) the sediments are placed over impervious soils, or are
underlain by a liner that has a hydraulic conductivity less
rapid then 1OE-7 centimeters per second (cm/sec)

(3) Any project where:

(a) the dredged material to be placed in the upland CDF is >90%
sand (grain size >62.5 um); and

(b) the percent moisture content, Total Organic Carbon, or
other background information do not lead the Department to
believe the material is contaminated.

(d) Testing Requirements. Leachate quality shall be determined using the
Sequential Batch Leaching Test (SBLT) procedure developed by the'
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
or other tests as approved by the Department in advance. When used,
the SBLT shall be conducted in accordance with the procedure outlined
in Brannon et. al., April 1994 (cited in Section VI - References)
under,conditions (anaerobic or 'aerobic) which reflecthow the dredged
material is to be managed. All samples of dredged material to be
analyzed for leachate quality shall also include determinations of
hydraulic conductivity and porosity.

-29-

For Type A upland CDFs leachate quality shall be determined for a
representative number of samples for the parameters listed in
Appendix A, Table XIV in each location to be dredged prior to
proceeding with the development of a Ground*Water Protection Plan and
issuance of a NJPDES-DGW permit. For Type B upland CDFs, leachate
quality shall be determined for a representative -number of samples
for the parameters listed in Appendix A, Table XIV on all sediments
to be received as a condition of the NJPDES-DGW permit. A
representative number of samples shall be determined according to the
guidance in Section III-C.

-30-

(5) Terrestrial Ecosystem Impacts:

(a) Authority. The Department's authority to regulate terrestrial ecosystem
impacts which may occur during the operation of an upland CDF depend on the
location of the facility. The Department may have regulatory authorities
pursuant to the Flood Hazard Area Control Act, the Freshwater Wetlands
Protection Act, the Wetlands Act of 1970, the Waterfront Development Act, and
the Rules an Coastal Zone Management (N.J.A.C. 7:7E). Additional Department
authority may also be derived from both the federal and State Water Pollution
Control Acts.

(b) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives and the Management/Regulatory
Process. The regulatory objectives of the Department are to identify and
minimize the potential for contaminant mobility and transport into terrestrial
ecosystems resulting from the upland disposal of contaminated dredged
material. Potential adverse impacts will be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis, initially considering the bulk sediment chemistry analyses of the
dredged material placed in the upland CDF and the proposed schedule for future
disposal and management operations at the facility. Additional discussions of
potential impacts to the terrestrial ecosystem can be found in Section
IV-D(2).

When dredged material is allowed to dry in an upland CDF, there is
potential for dust generation. This potential is greater when the dredged
material consists of fine silt and has not revegetated. Dust generation coul:d
facilitate the dispersal of contaminants into the terrestrial ecosystem.
Management techniques will be required, as necessary, to con*trol the
generation and dispersal of dust from an upland CDF. Potential management
techniques include interim/final capping of contaminated and exposed dredged
material and the use of erosion control mats.

The potential impacts to terrestrial ecosystems associated with the upland
disposal of contaminated dredged material also include the possibility of
increased contaminant mobility through uptake by colonizing plants and
animals. This potential is enhanced by the physicochemical changes which
occur when dredged material is disposed of in an upland setting. Such
chemical changes include the oxidation associated with drying, and a decrease
in pH, both resulting in increased availability of metalcontaminants.

The Department has identified a number of possible scenarios for the
operation of upland CDFs. These scenarios, described in the following
sections, have different potentials to produce adverse impacts to' the
terrestrial ecosystem. During the operation of an upland CDF, management
techniques can be utilized to minimize potential adverse impacts. Appropriate
management techniques, summarized and briefly discussed in the following
sections, will be evaluated as part of the project-specific review and
permitting of an upland CDF. In general, potential impacts to the terrestrial
ecosystem as a result of the upland disposal of contaminated dredged material
will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

-31-

i. Upland CDFs Maintained in Continuous Operation

For most large upland CDFs, it is expected that the facility will be
operated in a continuous active mode during its operational lifetime. This
would involve the continual placement of dredged material in the upland CDF,
followed by periods of dewatering, drying, crust management, etc. - with
subsequent repetitions of this cycle. This active mode of operation, in which
the dredged material placed in an upland CDF remains in a disturbed condition,
should effectively limit the ability of plants and animals to recolonize or
use the site. For such facilities, the permittee will be required to submit
an annual report (see Section IV-D(2)(b)ii) to the Department, summarizing the
disposal and management operations at the upland CDF, and further certifying
that the site has not been recolonized or used by terrestrial plants or
animals for extended periods of, time (generally considered to be 6 months or
longer).

ii. Upland CDFs Operated Intermittently

Upland CDFs which are operated intermittently, such that the dredged
material placed on the site is allowed to dry out for a period of time
exceeding 6 months in an undisturbed condition, will be more available for use
and/or recolonization by plants and animals. Such upland CDFs therefore have
the potential to result in increased contaminant mobility and transport into
terrestrial ecosystems.

a. Maintaining an upland OF in a ponded condition would serve to
minimize the potential for increased contaminant mobility through plant and
animal colonization. This may be practicable in situations where the upland
OF will be used infrequently, with long periods of time between disposal
operations. However, there is a concern that birds may use a ponded CDF. If
this occurs, methods could be employed to discourage such use. For such
facilities, the permit@ee will be required to submit an annual report (see
Section IV-D(2)(b)ii) to the Department, summarizing the disposal and
management operations at the upland CDF, and further certifying that the site
has not been recolonized or used by terrestrial plants or animals for an
extended period of time.

b. In those cases where an upland CDF will be used only intermittently
and allowed to dry out and remain undisturbed for time periods exceeding 6
months between disposal operations, the potential e *xists for the site to be
recolonized and/or used by plants and animals. The greater the contamination
of the dredged material, and the longer the site remains undisturbed (and thus
available for recolonization and use), the greater the potential for adverse
terrestrial ecosystem impacts1to occur.

Potential adverse impacts will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis,
initially considering the bulk sediment chemistry analyses of the dredged
material placed in the upland OF and the proposed schedule for future
disposal and management operations at the facility. The permittee will be
required to submit an annual report (see Section IV-D(2)(b)ii) to the
Department, summarizing the anticipated disposal and proposed management
operations at the upland CDF. Interim management operations (between disposal
operations) may be required to minimize potential adverse terrestrial
ecosystem impacts. These could include interim capping measures to isolate
contaminated dredged material (see Section IV-D[21).

-32-

(c) Testing Requirements. Section III-B of this document identifies those
sediments which are excluded from the Department's testing or reporting
requirements; these exclusions also apply to any additional testing required
for an evaluation of potential terrestrial ecosystem impacts. Any dredged
material which does not qualify for a testing exemption as described in
Section III-B may be subject to additional testing.

Section (b)-ii discusses "Upland CDFs Operated Intermittently". if
recolonization and/or use of such CDFs by plants or animals occurs, there is
potential for increased contaminant mobility and transport into the
terrestrial ecosystem. To evaluate the potential for such impacts, predictive
animal and plant uptake bioassays may be required. The Department will
determine the need for such additional testing on a case-by-case basis.

(Note: the Department is currently further investigating the potential
impacts of contaminated dredged material disposal at upland CDFs on the
terrestrial ecosystem. Additional and more detailed guidance may be developed
and incorporated into this guidance document at some future date.]

(6) Public Health Impacts:

(a) Authority. The Department's authority to control potential public
health impacts which may be associated with the disposal of dredged
material at an upland confined disposal facility is derived from the
federal and State Water Pollution Control Acts, the New Jersey
Waterfront Development Law, and the Federal Coastal Zone Management
Act.

(b) Potential Impacts/Regulatory ObAectives. The potential impacts to
public health associated with the upland disposal of dredged material
include the potential for direct human contact with contaminated
dredged material, dust generation from drying dredged material with a
potential inhalation exposure pathway, and surface and ground water
impacts. The frameworks for regulating potential surface and ground
water impacts are described in Sections IV-C(3) and IV-C(4),
respectively.

The regulatory objectives of the Department are to identify and
control public health impacts originating from the upland disposal of
contaminated dredged material.

(c) Management/Regulatory Process. The Department will use the Rules on
Coastal Zone Management in evaluating the siting of upland confined
disposal facilities (CDFs). These rules serve to minimize potential
public health impacts. The potential impacts of human inhalation of
dust from drying dredged material. are minimal when upland CDFs are
sited in locations which are removed from areas subject to extensive
human use, such as residential and recreational properties.

-33-

During the operation of an upland CDF, management techniques can be
applied to control and minimize potential public health impacts.
Management techniques will be required, as necessary, to control the
generation and dispersal of dust. This will further serve to
minimize the inhalation pathway for human exposure. Direct human
contact will be controlled through access restrictions to the upland
CDF. Facility personnel will be required to use the appropriate
precautionary measures to avoid direct contact with contaminated
dredged material.

(d) Testing Requirements. Section III-B of this document identifies
those sediments which are excluded from the Department's testing
requirements. Any dredged material which does not qualify for a
testing exemption as described in Section III-B will be subject to
the following requirements.

Bulk chemical analysis of the sediments to be dredged will be
required as per Section III-A. Potential public health impacts will
be evaluated. by comparison to the NJDEP Residential Direct Contact 'or
Non-Residential Direct Contact Soil Clean-up Criteria, as
applicable. These analyses will be conducted to determine if the
dredged material to be disposed of requires precautions to avoid
direct human exposure pathways during and after disposal in an upland
CDF. Where access to the upland OF will not be restricted by
adequate fencing, the NJDEP Residential Direct Contact Clean-up
Criteria will be applied.

Results of the bulk sediment chemistry analyses will be considered
valid only if:

(1) the bulk sediment chemistry analysis includes all target analytes for
which Interim New Jersey Soil Clean-up Criteria exist (which is included in
the Target Compound List in Appendix A), and

(2) sediment core sampling, homogenizing, and compositing follows Section
III-C sampling procedures.

-34-

E - Subaqueous Disposal Pits

(1) Overview: Subaqueous disposal pits are submarine trenches or pits
excavated below the ocean/bay bottom for the specific purpose of
containing contaminated dredged material. Existing subaqueous borrow pits
created as a result of past sandmining activities, or natural pits and
depressions, could also be used as subaqueous disposal pits. Such sites
usually refer to nearshore pits in estuarine bays and harbors, including
those proposed by the Governor's Dredged Material Management Team in its
Final Report (February 1995) to be constructed in Newark Bay. The
effective function of a subaqueous disposal pit is predicated upon its
ability to contain the contaminated dredged material which will be placed
in it.

Subaqueous disposal pits are considered distinct from open water disposal
sites (see Section IV-C).

(2) Authority: Refer to Section II-B for a lis ting of relevant statutes
and regulations.

(3) Potential Impacts: The potential adverse environmental impacts of a
subaqueous disposal pit depend directly upon the location and existing
ecological functions of the pit site. Potential impacts which may require
evaluation include physical disruptions during construction and disposal
operations (resulting in, for example, temporary interference with
existing benthos, fisheries, or anadromous fish migrations), short-term
benthic and water column toxicity impacts as a result of the disposal of
contaminated dredged material, and water column impacts associated with
the resuspension of sediment. In addition, long-term impacts to biota and
the ecosystem may result if the contaminated dredged material placed in a
subaqueous disposal pit is not adequately contained and isolated from the
marine environment.

(4) Regulatory Objectives/Management Process: Short-term regulatory
concerns lie primarily with minimizing the potential adverse environmental
impacts associated with the construction of a subaqueous disposal pit and
dredged material disposal operations. Submarine excavation of bay/ocean
bottom or the use of existing pits/depressions to create a subaqueous
disposal pit will be evaluated using the Rules on Coastal Zone
Management. It is preferable that subaqueous disposal pits be located in'
areas impacted by similar levels of existing sediment contamination as the
dredged material proposed for disposal in the pit.

Short-term impacts can result from the dispersal of dredged material
during disposal operations. Such impacts include physical disruption of
benthos surrounding the subaqueous disposal pit, and water column and
benthic toxicity and contamination. With proper design and management of
the subaqueous disposal pit, these impacts can be limited. The use of
Best Management Practices (BMPs) during disposal operations will be
required and permit conditions will be applied to ensure these impacts are
minimized.

-35-

The filling of a subaqueous disposal pit with contaminated dredged
material will employ BMPs which reduce suspension and dispersal of the
dredged material during the disposal operation. These include adherence
to strict navigation requirements to ensure point disposal of the dredged
material. Additionally, restrictions on conducting disposal operations
during severe weather/tidal conditions may also serve to minimize the
dispersal of dredged material. The use of geotextile containers or the
direct shunting of dredged material into the pit should be considered.

Potential long-term impacts can be minimized, and mitigated upon closure
of the subaqueous disposal pit. Designing the pit to be properly capped,
and maintaining the integrity of the cap, is an essential regulatory goal
to ensure the long-term isolation of contaminants. In general, one meter
of suitable clean material (as defined'in Section V-I) will be required as
a final cap. The placement of interim caps may also be required between
dredged material disposal operations. Long-term monitoring of the
subaqueous disposal pit, its final cap, and the surrounding environment
will be required to ensure cap integrity is maintained. For additional
discussion of generally applicable capping requirements, see Section V-I.
In addition, restoration of the natural bathymetry of the subaqueous
disposal pit site using appropriate clean material as a final cap will
serve as de facto mitigation for the temporary loss of benthic habitat
resulting from the construction of the pit.

Some of the techniques and designs which should be considered when
constructing a subaqueous disposal pit are:

(a) Level Bottom Capping - involves locating a subaqueous disposal pit in
a natural bottom depression or existing subaqueous borrow pit. This
reduces the need to excavate. Dredged material is placed 'in the pit up to
a predetermined level. The site is then capped with clean material up to
the level of the surrounding bay/ocean bottom.

(b) Contained Subaqueous Disposal - involves constructing a berm opposite
an existing subaqueous ledge or wall. The cavity formed between these
features is then filled and capped with clean material.

(c) New Excavation - entails the construction of a new subaqueous
disposal pit, designed specifically for the containment of contaminated
dredged material. In theory, such a pit would provide for better
containment compared to that offered by existing borrow pits or natural
depressions.

(5) Testing Requirements: Section III-B discusses general testing
exclusions. Where the dredged material originates in the same waterbody
as the subaqueous disposal pit, required testing will consist of grain
size analysis and bulk sediment chemistry. The bulk sediment chemistry
data will be used to ensure that only contaminated dredged material is
placed in the subaqueous disposal pit. It will also be used in the
development of the monitoring and management plan for the pit.

-36-

If the dredged material originates in a waterbody different from that of
the subaqueous disposal pit, testing requirements will be determined on a
case-by-case basis. Testing may include bulk sediment chemistry and
modified elutriate testing (with retention time to be specified; ambient
water quality testing of the subaqueous disposal pit site may also be
needed), depending on the dredging site, subaqueous disposal pit site
characteristics,. and the volume of dredged material to be placed in the
pit. Section III-C includes general guidance on sampling the dredged
material.

Precision bathmetry (accuracy to 6 inches or better) of the subaqueous
disposal pit site will be.required prior to initial site disturbance/pit
construction, upon the completion of the construction of the pit, and may
be required prior to and after any dredged material disposal operation.
This will provide information on existing subaqueous disposal pit capacity
and help ensure the dredged material is contained within the pit.

F - Containment Areas

(1) Overview: Dredged material containment areas are features
artificially created in open water or wetlands and include any structure
which, upon the completion of its filling with dredged material, would
result in an extension of existing upland into open waters (i.e. t he
creation of "fastland"). They are usually created by constructing 'a
retaining structure (berm or bulkhead) in an open water area and filling
the enclosed area with dredged material.

(2) Authority: The near-shore disposal of dredged material into a
containment area is subject to the Waterfront Development Act, the Rules
on Coastal Zone Management (N.J.A.C. 7:7E), federal consistency
determinations pursuant to the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, Water
Quality Certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, and
Riparian Interests. In addition, the Coastal Area Facility Review Act
(CAFRA; N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 et seq.) may be applicable. Disposal into open
waters or wetlands is also regulated by the federal government .pursuant to
Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act.

In all cases, either a Water Quality Certificate (WQC) or NJPDES-Discharge
to Surface Water permit will be required for a containment area. A NJPDES
Discharge to Surface Water permit may be required for the effluent from
the dewatering dredged material if the dredged material is not from the
same waterbody as the containment area. A WQC will be required for the
effluent from a containment area which only accepts dredged material from
the waterbody in which it is located.

A NJPDES Discharge to Groundwater Permit may-be required pursuant to
N.J.A.C. 7:14A-1, subject to a determination by the Department's Bureau of
Operational Ground Water Permits.

(3) Potential Impacts: The potential adverse environmental impacts of a
dredged material containment area depend directly upon the location and
existing ecological functions of the site. Potential impacts which
require evaluation include the destruction and permanent loss of benthic,

-37-

open water, or wetlands habitats, and temporary physical disruptions
during construction of the containment area (resulting in, for example,
interference with existing benthos, fisheries, or anadromous fish
migrations). Potential short-term surface water quality and benthic
toxicity impacts may result from the dispersal of sediments and associated
.contaminants due to the construction of the-containment area.

Potential impacts to surface water quality during the filling of the
containment area with contaminated dredged material resulting from the
discharge of effluent from the dewatering dredged material, are similar to
those for upland confined disposal facilities [CDFs; see Section
IV-D(3)]. In addition, potential water quality impacts resulting from the
permeability of the berm/bulkhead will be considered on a case-by-case
basis.

Potential long term impacts to ground water quality are also similar to
those for upland CDFs ' and are discussed in Section IV-D(4). 'Long term
impacts to aquatic biota and the marine ecosystem may result if
contaminated dredged material placed in a containment area is not
adequately contained and isolated. In addition, filling of the
containment area ultimately results in the creation of additional upland.
Potential impacts to the terrestrial environment are essentially the same
as those associated with upland CDFs (see Sections IV-D(2), (5), and
(6)].

(4) Regulatory Objectives/Management Process: The creation of upland
areas by filling open water/wetland environments is a regulatory concern.
Based upon the Rules on Coastal Zone Management at N.J.A.C. 7:7E-4.2(j)
filling in natural water areas is discouraged and filling wetlands areas
is prohibited. Such activity requires a demonstration that there is no
practicable or feasible land alternative. In addition, minimal
interference to Special Areas enumerated at Subchapter 3 of the Rules on
Coastal Zone Management (such as Intertidal Shallows, Finfish Migratory
Pathways, and Submerged Vegetation Habitats) must be demonstrated.

Short-term regulatory concerns lie primarily with minimizing the potential
adverse environmental impacts associated with the construction of the
containment area and dredged material disposal operations. It is
preferable that containment areas be located in areas impacted by similar
levels of existing sediment contamination as the dredged material proposed.
for disposal in the area. Locating a dredged material containment area
site will be evaluated using the Rules on Coastal Zone Management.

Short-term impacts can result from the dispersal of contaminated dredged
material during disposal operations. Such impacts include physical
disruption of benthos surrounding the containment area, and water column
and benthic toxicity and contamination. With proper design and management
of the containment area, these impacts can be minimized. The use of best
management practices (BMPs) during disposal operations will be . required
and permit conditions will be applied to ensure these impacts are
minimized. Such BMPs could include controlling the rate of dredged
material placement in the containment area to allow for adequate settling
of suspended solids. The use of geotextile containers or liners, and the
pumping of free water to upland water quality basins to provide settling
of suspended solids prior to discharge, could also be used.

-38-

Potential long-term impacts could result if the containment area does not
adequately isolate contaminated dredged material from the surrounding
aquatic and terrestrial environments. The containment area berm/bulkhead
must be designed and constructed to ensure maximum isolation of
contaminants. If the containment area is filled with contaminated dredged
material, final capping of the created upland area is required to ensure
the long-term isolation of contaminants from the terrestrial environment.
Potential impacts to the terrestrial environment and . public health are
similar to those for upland CDFs, and are discussed in Sections IV-D(5)
and (6). In addition, site closure/final use considerations are discussed
for upland CDFs in Section IV-D(2). Long-term monitoring of the
containment area site and the surrounding environment may be required to
ensure that contaminated dredged material has been adequately isolated.

Construction of the containment area will result in the loss of open water
habitat and/or wetlands. In some cases, mitigation for this loss by means
of in-kind replacement will not be possible. Thus, construction and
operation of a dredged material containment area may result in the
permanent loss of aquatic habitat. Proposals for out-of-kind mitigation
may be considered by the Department during the regulatory review of
proposed containment areas.

(4) Testing Requirements: Section III-B discusses general testing
exclusions. Regulatory concerns with potential impacts to surface and
ground water quality, the terrestrial ecosystem, public health, and site
closure/final use are essentially similar to those for uplands CDFs; see
Sections IV-D(2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) for applicable guidance.

-39-

Chapter V - Beneficial Use Alternatives

A Overview

Dredged material can be considered a resource, and the Department
strongly supports its beneficial use, wherever possible, as opposed
to exclusive reliance on disposal facilities. While new dredged
material disposal facilities are needed, it is essential to test and
cultivate emerging beneficial use strategies to ensure a
multi-faceted and integrated long-term program for the management of
dredged material.

The concept of beneficial use was first applied in the'area of sludge
management, where, depending on its quality, sludge has been applied
directly to the land or mixed to create soil enhancement. products.
Many additional materials have been approved for beneficial use
applications including coal ash from power plants, contaminated
soils, wastewater treatment plant residuals, and other
industrial/commercial by-products.

Depending on its characteristics, particularly grain size and degree
of contamination, dredged material may be - suitable for use in beach
nourishment projects, as construction material or fill, as landfill
cover, in habitat development projects, to cap open water disposal
areas, or in a variety of other uses. The USACE Engineer Manual No.
1110-2-5026, Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material (30 June 1987),
provides guidance for planning, designing, developing, and managing
dredged material for beneficial uses.

In many cases, dredged material proposed for beneficial use would
first have to be dewatered. This would most likely occur at an
upland confined disposal facility (CDF). The regulatory process for
placing dredged material in an upland OF is discussed in Section
IV-D.

B Authority

Requests to beneficially use a variety of materials have been handled
on a case-by-case basis through various Departmental programs. In
many cases, beneficial use applications have been authorized as pilot
or demonstration projects or have been exempted from regulation under
the broad authority of the non-hazardous waste regulations at
N.J.A.C. 7:26-1.1, et seq. Under these authorizations, the
Department has required a series of steps to be followed in order to
demonstrate that the beneficial use option is environmentally sound
and consistent with current law in New Jersey or in the state where
the material is to be used. In addition, the applicant must
demonstrate that markets will accept the material and maintain
suitable records of the weight and/or volume of material beneficially
used. Although dredged material will not be regulated as a solid
waste, a similar process will be used by the Department to evaluate
proposed beneficial uses of dredged material.

-40-

The Department is currently in the process of finalizing "Beneficial
Use Determination Rules" to be found at N.J.A.C. 7:26-1.6. These
rules will formally establish a regulatory program to exempt
qualifying materials, including dredged material, from other NJDEP
permitting programs. The process is intended to streamline the
approval of beneficial use activities through a minimal
submission/review process.

The above noted "Beneficial Use Determination Rules" will not be
applicable to beneficial use options involving beach nourishment,
habitat development, or the capping of open water dredged material
disposal sites (see Sections V-D, E, and I). Authority to regulate
these beneficial uses of dredged material is available pursuant to
the State and federal Clean Water Acts, the Waterfront Development
Law, the Flood Hazard Area Control Act, and the federal Coastal Zone
Management Act. The Rules on Coastal Zone Management are also
applicable to these beneficial use options.

C Linkages with Other Management Alternatives

The beneficial use options discussed in Sections V-D through V-I can
be divided into three general categories. These categories reflect
the degree to which the dredged material'must be rehandled/treated
prior to its beneficial use, or the use of dredged material to
support another dredged material management alternative (discussed in
Section IV of this document):

(1) beneficial use options supporting other dredged material management
alternatives capping open water disposal sites;

(2) beneficial use options requiring minimal rehandling of the dredged
material - beach nourishment, aquatic and wetland habitat development.

(3) beneficial use options requiring substantial rehandling/treatment of
the dredged material - construction material, landfill cover, agricultural
use, terrestrial habitat development.

For uses 1 and 2, the dredged material would have to meet applicable-
testing requirements to verify its suitability for the proposed use.
Suitability criteria would include grain size and contaminant
concerns. Rehandling of this material would be limited to its
transport to the use site and its placement in accordance with the
applicable engineering design and regulatory requirements.

In almost all cases, dredged material proposed for the beneficial use
3 options would first have to be dewatered. This would most likely
occur at an upland confined disposal facility (CDF). A "beneficial
use train", involving sequential placement of dredged material in an
upland CDF, dewatering over a period of time, and then removal from

-41-

the upland CDF for beneficial use purposes, could be developed. Such
activities would not only provide a useable product, but would enable
an upland CDF to remain in operation for a longer period of time
before it reached its design capacity. Dredged material contaminated
to various degrees could be suitable for these beneficial use
options; testing requirements and evaluation criteria are discussed
in the appropriate Sections of this document.

D - Beach Nourishment

(1) Authority: the Department's authority to regulate the use of dredged
material for beach nourishment is derived from the Waterfront Development Act,
the Coastal Area Facilities Review Act, the federal Coastal Zone Management
Act, and the Water Quality Certification provisions (Section 401) of the Clean
Water Act.

(2) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives: The Department encourages, the
placement of clean sand on beaches.

Beach nourishment operations usually involve the borrowing of sand from
inshore or offshore locations and transporting it by truck or hydraulic
pipeline to an eroding beach for the purpose of restoration. This can result
in displacement of existing substrate, the destruction of non-motile benthic
communities, and changes in the topography of both the placement and borrow
areas. However, a beach nourishment operation also creates new habitat which
is usually rapidly recolonized by benthic organisms. Significant impacts to
offshore organisms can be minimized by selecting borrow areas to avoid
important benthic habitats, not creating deep/anoxic borrow pits, and
maintaining substrate quality in the borrow area.

Potential adverse impacts could also result from the placement of dredged
material with excessive organic content on beaches. This would be
aesthetically unpleasant, but temporary in duration. In addition, placement
of dredged material contaminated by chemical or biological pollutants may
affect nearby benthic and open water habitats, and may pose a public health
concern. The Department's objectives in regulating the placement of dredged
material on beaches are to prevent any adverse impacts to the beach area, be
they aesthetic (human interest), public health, or to nearby benthic and open
water communities.

(3) Permitting Process: permitting for this use of dredged material will be
conducted by the Land Use Regulation Program. The Rules on Coastal Zone
Management will govern beach nourishment and dune construction activities.

In terms of grain size, suitable material must be comprised of 75% or greater
sand (grain size larger than 0.0625mm) with a grain size compatible with that
of the receiving beach. (Note: material less than 90% sand will require bulk
sediment chemistry analyses and additional testing - see Section III.)
Material with a grain size smaller than the "compatible grain size" for the
beach, but still greater than 75% sand, could be utilized in dune
construction, provided that effective erosion controls were utilized until
vegetative cover can be established.

-42-

(4) Testing Requirements: exclusionary criteria for testing requirements are
described in Section III-B. For dredged material which does not meet these
criteria, bulk sediment chemistry analyses will be required. This data will
be compared with the NJDEP Residential Direct Contact Soil Clean-up Criteria
to evaluate potential impacts to public health. To evaluate potential impacts
to estuarine benthic communities, the Department will compare this data with
the guidelines values developed by Long et al. (1995), on a case-by-case
basis.

All dredged material proposed for beach nourishment must be characerized by
grain size analyses. In addition, grain size analyses of the sand on the
proposed receiving beach must also be completed. Sampling guidance for these
required analyses will be provided by the Department on a case-by-case basis.

E - Habitat Development

(1) Overview: A wide range of habitat types can be developed (created,
restored, or enhanced) using dredged material. The development of upland and
wetlands habitats will be discussed in this Section of the guidance document.

The construction of islands using dredged material, on which wetlands as
well as upland habitat types could develop, is considered to be a special
case. Islands will not be addressed in this guidance document, but will ;be
considered by the Department on a project-specific basis.

Aquatic habitats (including tidal flats, seagrass meadows, and other
benthic habitats) could be developed as a result of the Open Water Disposal of
dredged material (see Section IV-Q. Development of aquatic habitat in
association with such disposal operations will be considered on a case-by-case
basis. A special case of aquatic habitat development is the use of dredged
rock to create artificial reefs, jetties, etc.

The USACE Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-5026 (30 June 1987), Beneficial Uses
of Dredged Material, includes detailed discussions and a listing of references
concerning habitat development using dredged material.

(2) Authority: The Department's authority to regulate the beneficial use of
dredged material for habitat development depends on the location of the
project site. The Department may have regulatory authority pursuant to the
Flood Hazard Area Control Act, the Waterfront Development Act, the Freshwater
Wetlands Protection Act, the Wetlands Act of 1970, the Coastal Zone Management
Act.. and the Rules on Coastal Zone Management (N.J.A.C. 7:7E). Additional
Departmental authority may also be derived from both the federal and State
Water Pollution Control Acts. Dredged material could also be used in
restoration or mitigation activities required pursuant to permits issued for
other projects.

(3) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives:

(a) Upland Habitats. Habitats will develop on upland dredged material
disposal sites regardless of human intervention. - However, the use of a
variety of management techniques can improve the habitat that develops, or
foster the development of specific habitat types., Although the level of

-43-

effort needed to develop upland habitat could essentily be limited to that
necessary to provide erosion control, additional effort and. long-term
management may be needed to create specific and more productive habitats.

Some of the potential impacts and regulatory objectives associated with
habitat creation at upland Confined Disposal Facilities (CDFs) are discus *sed
in Section IV-D(5). In addition, the use of dredged material in mine
reclamation activities to create habitat is breifly discussed in Secton V-F.

Dredged material used for upland habitat development must be suitable in
terms of physical (particularly grain size) and chemical (salinity, nutrients,
contaminants) characteristics. The main concern of the Department is the
potential dispersal of contaminants from the dredged material into the
terrestrial environment and food webs. Refer to Section IV-D(2) for
information concerning the development of habitat as part of the final closure
process on upland CDFs. (In general, placement of a clean cap at least 2 feet
thick will serve to isolate the underlying contaminated dredged material and
eliminate many of the concerns with the dispersal of contaminants into the
terrestrial ecosystem.)

When placed in an upland environment, dredged material will dry, tend to
oxidize, and decrease in pH. Thus, soil amendments (including lime, manure,
sand, and limestone gravel) may be needed to provide a suitable medium for the
recolonization and growth of plants. In addition, the salt content of
material dredged from estuarine areas may inhibit -the development of upland
habitat. For additional information and guidance, refer to the USACE
Waterways Experiment Station Environmental Effects of Dredging Information
Exchange Bulletin D-92-4 (September 1992).

Section V-D of this guidance document briefly discusses the beneficial use
of dredged material to create dunes on beaches.

(b) Wetlands. As. discussed in this section, the beneficial use of
dredged material to create wetlands will be considered by the Department only
under exceptional conditions.

The Department has two major concerns with the use of dredged material to
create (non-open water, emergent) wetland habitats-@ (1) the loss of other
habitats coincident with the creation of wetlands, and (2) the potential
release of contaminants from the dredged material.

Development of emergent wetlands habitats is usually accomplished by the
placement of dredged material in open water areas to create substrate
elevations conducive to the development of such wetlands. While wetlands are
recognized as important and productive components of the aquatic ecosystem,
creation of such habitat could result in the loss of important open water and
benthic habitat. The Department will consider such wetland creation proposals
on a case-by-case basis, consistent with the Rules on Coastal Zone
Management. In general, sites proposed for wetland creation should avoid
areas of productive open water and benthic habitat.

Dispersal of contaminants from dredged material used for wetland
development can occur through two major routes: (1) resuspension of dredged

-44-

material due to waves and currents, and (2) uptake by plants and animals
colonizing or using the created wetland. In order to prevent the physical
dispersal of the placed dredged material, low wave/current energy, shallow
water sites should be used for wetland creation projects. Temporary (and
possibly permanent) protective/retaining structures may be needed to contain
the dredged material. Additional design and management factors which must be
considered to create a productive wetland, while minimizing the potential for
contaminant dispersal, include salinity, tidal range, and weir operation.

Uptake of contaminants by plants and animals will be minimized by
restricting the contaminant levels allowable in dredged material proposed for
wetland creation. To evaluate potential impacts to benthic communities, the
Department will compare bulk sediment chemistry data with the guidelines
values developed by Long et al. (1995).

(4) Permitting Process: The development of wetlands using dredged material
will be regulated by the Department's Land Use Regulation Program pursuant to
the Rules on Coastal Zone Management and other applicable authorities.

Long-term maintenance and monitoring of both upland and wetlands habitat
development projects may be required.

(5) Testing Requirements: Section III-B of this document identifies those
sediments which are excluded from the Department's testing or reporting
requirements for the purpose of disposal. These exclusions may not apply -to
the testing required for an evaluation of potential impacts resulting from the
use of the dredged material for habitat development. The testing needed to
evaluate the suitability of the dredged material for the proposed habitat
development project include considerations of salinity, nutrients, and degree
of contamination.

The use of dredged material to develop wetlands habitats may require
project-specific permits with specific conditions. Additional testing of the
dredged material may be required, irrespective of the testing and reporting
exclusions listed in Section III-B, pursuant to these permits. This could
include bulk sediment analyses, modified elutriate testing, and predictive
animal and plant bioassays. The Department will determine the need for such
additional testing on a case-by-case basis.

F Construction Material

Over the past several years, the Department has authorized the use of
contaminated soils and other residual materials in construction
related activities. Most notably, the use of nonhazardous petroleum
contaminated soil as a raw material in the asphalt, concrete or brick
production process has been formally recognized in the recylcing
regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:26A-1.3. Consistent with applicable
regulations, contaminated soils have also been washed and blended
with leaf compost to make a topsoil product. In addition, remediated
petroleum contaminated soil is marketable as a fill product. Through
contacts with asphalt manufacturers, the New Jersey Asphalt Pavement
Association and other industry representatives, it appears that the
potential exists to utilize dredged material in similiar types of
applications.

-45-

From'the manufacturer's perspective, the key to wide utilization of
such beneficial uses will be revised construction specifications to
establish the parameters under which dredged material can be used
without the need for case-by-case permits. Such a development would
be especially beneficial in terms of using dredged material as
landfill cover or as general fill. in terms of usiug dredged
material in road construction applications, it should be noted that
current New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT)
specifications do not allow for the use of contaminated soils in
asphalt pavements under NJDOT purview. While the NJDOT is presently
examining such pavements, the lack of a specification for remediated
soil asphalt pavements is a major obstacle to the use of this
material and is indicative of the obstacles that marketers of dredged
material would face.

An additional construction related activity with potential for the
use of dredged material or dredge/soil blends is in surface mine
reclamation. For example, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has a
substantial number of coal mines; existing Pennsylvania legislation
requires mine reclamation. Over the past several years, New
Jersey-generated coal ash has been authorized for beneficial use in
Pennsylvania coal mine reclamation. Some sludge derived products
have been approved historically for strip mine reclamation in
Pennsylvania and dredge/soil blends may provide similar potential.

G Landfill Cover.

(1) Author i ty/Management Process: in recent years, the Department
has received numerous requests for the utilization of residual
materials as landfill cover throughout the state. Contaminated soils,
auto shredder residue, sludge derived products and other materials
have been authorized for direct cover application or. in blends with
other soil to produce a suitable product. Since landfill operators
would otherwise have to purchase soil for cover, the acceptance of
residual materials for approved applications has been considered an
exempt activity pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26-1.1.

The Department's regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:26-2A.8-13 address
landfill cover requirements. In general, three different
classifications of cover are addressed - daily, intermediate and
final cover. All exposed surfaces of solid waste must be covered at
the close of each operating day with a minimum of 6 inches of daily
cover. Areas outside the immediate landfill working face which will
be exposed for any period exceeding 24 hours must contain at least 12
inches of intermediate cover. Finally, the federal government adopted
amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act in 1993 at
40 CFR 258.60 which address landfill closure requirements. Under
these rules, an infiltration layer of at least 18 inches of earthen
material with a permeability less than or equal to the bottom liner
and an erosion layer of at least 6 inches of earthen material capable
of sustaining plant growth must be provi.ded as part of a final
landfill cover system.

-46-

The need for landfill cover across New Jersey is substantial.
Currently, 25 landfills remain in operation in New Jersey. Fourteen
of these facilities are large county-wide or regional landfills which
utilize substantial quantities of daily and intermediate cover. The
balance consists of 9 small sole source construction and demolition
debris or company landfills, and 2 very small municipal landfills.
In addition, the Department has identified a total of 578 sites which
may require final closure and remediation.

From the sizable number of operating and closed landfills, and the
State and federal regulatory requirements for daily, intermediate and
final cover, it is clear that enormous quantites of earthen material
will be needed. Dredged material or blends of dredged material and
other soils or residual materials may be suitable for these
applications. However, such applications will have to be carefully
evaluated, particularly from a. structural perspective. The very
nature of most dredged material and its fine silty/clay properties
may greatly limit its usefulness for cover applications.

(2) Testing Requirements: The purpose of a good landfill cover is to
(1) impede rodents and vectors from entering the waste fill, (2)
control malodorous emissions, (3) provide a firebreak, (4) have
limited erosion potential, (5) not be easily windblown, and (6)
provide control of windblown litter. Given these purposes, the
physical properties of dredged material (which tend to be low
cohesion fine-grained material) must be evaluated to ascertain its
suitablity for use as cover material. For example, excessively
fine-grained material is generally prohibited due to its
susceptibility to wind blown dust, erosion, and potentially limiting
hydraulic conductivity (preventing good drainage capability which
consequently can cause leachate seeps on side slopes). The moisture
content of the material must also be evaluated to ascertain its
workability. If the moisture content is too-high, then the material
must be dewatered, which will require additional processing. The
Department will evaluate the suitability of dredged material proposed
for use as landfill cover on a case-by-case basis.

H Agricultural Use

An additional area in which dredged material may have potential for
beneficial use applications is in agricultural/hort i cultural use. As
an example of this type of a beneficial use of a material similar to
dredged material, New Jersey potable water treatment plant residuals
have been approved by the Department for several uses. These include
blending with other materials to create soil products for
rehabilitating barren sites and as soil for nursery use as potting
and field growing media. In some cases, the residuals also have
qualified for use directly as clean fill on review by the Department
on a case-by-case basis.

-47-

While the chemical and physical qualities of specific dredged
material would have to be evaluated, it is likely that cleaner
materials would also qualify for many types of similar
agricultural/ho rt i cultural beneficial uses in New Jersey, and other
states as well. For example, dredged material could be used to amend
marginal soils, thus increasing crop production. However, salinity
problems will occur with the use of dredged material from estuarine
waters.

I - Capping Open Water Disposal Sites

(1) Overview: depending upon its degree of contamination, dredged material
proposed for disposal at an Open Water Site (see Section IV-C) may only be
suitable for disposal if management techniques are used to isolate the
contaminated dredged material from the surrounding environment. The principal
method used to isolate contaminated dredged material placed at an Open Water
Disposal Site is to cap it with a layer of clean material. Capping could be
required as both an interim and final dredged material management method.

The use of suitable clean dredged material for capping purposes involves a
number of engineering and design considerations beyond those associated solely
with the open water disposal of dredged material. In addition, capping may be
required for the disposal of contaminated dredged material. Thus, the
Department considers capping to be a beneficial use of clean dredged
material.

Capping may also be required at Subaqueous Pits (Section IV-E) and
Containment Areas (Section IV-F) in which contaminated dredged material is
disposed. The following discussion of Capping Open Water Disposal Sites is
also generally applicable to these two dredged material management
alternatives.

(2) Authority: capping may be required for contaminated dredged material
placed at an Open Water Disposal Site, in a Subaqueous Pit, or in a
Containment Area. The Department's authority to regulate dredged material
disposal activities at these areas has been discussed in Sections IV-C, IV-E,
and IV-F, respectively.

Disposal of dredged material in ocean waters (and thus any required
capping of such material) is regulated by the USACE and USEPA. The State of
New Jersey has discretionary authority to review disposal activities at ocean
disposal sites pursuant to the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. The
review of proposed ocean disposal (and capping) . operations at currently
designated ocean disposal sites will be coordinated with the USACE and USEPA.

(3) Potential Impacts/Regulatory Objectives: the primary purpose of capping
an Open Water Disposal Site is to isolate contaminated dredged material placed
at the site from the surrounding environment. 'This will serve to minimize
potential adverse impacts to the benthic community as a result of exposure to
the contaminants.

-48-

It must be emphasized that the use of capping must be considered
throughout the development and implementation of i the open water dredged
material disposal alternative. This begins with the process used to select
the disposal site. The USACE Waterways Experiment Station Dredging Research
Technical Notes DRP-5-03 (February 1991) and DRP-5-04 (November 1991) provide
discussions of design, engineering, and construction considerations for the
capping of dredged material disposal sites. The USACE emphasizes that a
capping project must be considered as an -engineered structure, with specific
design and construction requirements that must be implemented, monitored, and
maintained.

Any cap placed on contaminated dredged material must be of a thickness to
ensure the long-term isolation of the contaminants from the surrounding
environment. The required thickness will be dependent on the following
factors:

(a) the physical and chemical properties -of the contaminated dredged
material and the clean material to be used for capping;

(b) the potential for bioturbation by recolonizing benthic organisms to
disturb the cap and expose the underlying contaminated dredged material;

In general, a required final cap will be 3 to 4 feet thick, plus allowances
for consolidation and erosion.

Interim capping, between disposal operations at Open Water Disposal Sites
or in Subaqueous Pits, may also be required. The need for and thickness of an
interim cap will be determined on a case-by-case basis. factors that will be
considered in making such a determination include the grain size of the
last-placed dredged material, its degree of contamination, the anticipated
schedule of future disposal operations at the site, and the physical
conditions (particularly currents) at the disposal site. In general,
contaminated dredged material should be capped (or otherwise covered by a
subsequent disposal operation) within 14 days of its disposal.

The Department notes that the use of geotextile bags/containers for the
disposal of contaminated dredged material is currently under investigation.
It is anticipated that final (but not interim) capping of such bags/containers
placed at Open Water Disposal Sites or in Subaqueous Pits will be required.
Capping requirements when geotextile bags/containers are used will be
determined on a case-by-case basis.

Only clean material of suitable grain size, which would otherwise be
acceptable for unrestricted open water disposal, can be used for capping
purposes. Both fine grain and sandy material may be suitable for capping.
However, in order to avoid mixing or displacing the contaminated dredged
material during capping operations, the cap material should generally be of a
lower density than the contaminated dredged material. In addition, the cap
material should be of a grain size which will be resistant to erosion and thus
stable over the long-term. The USACE Waterways Experiment Station Dredging
Research Technical Note DRP-5-05 (November 1991) discusses a variety of
techniques which can be used to construct a cap.

-49-

When selecting material to be used for capping purposes, its suitability
(particularly grain size) for recolonization by benthic organisms must be
considered. The cap must be thick enough to ensure that recolonizing
organisms cannot penetrate down to the underlying contaminated dredged
material and that bioturbation will not expose the contaminated material.
However, the cap may also serve to mitigate the original loss of habitat
resulting from the disposal of the contaminated dredged material.

(4) Management Process: monitoring of capped Open Water Disposal Sites will
be required to ensure that contaminated dredged material is isolated from the
environment. Refer to the USACE Waterway Experiment Station Dredging Research
Technical Note DRP-5-07 (June 1992) for general guidance on designing an
appropriate monitoring program.

A precision bathymetric survey (accuracy to 6 inches or better) of the
disposal site will be required prior 'to any interim or final capping
operation. Immediately after the capping operation is completed, additional
monitoring will be required to verify that a cap of the required thicknesss
has been placed as intended. This would include a precision bathymetric
survey and the collection of core samples. The placement of additional cap
material will be required if the specified cap design parameters have not been
met.

Long-term monitoring of the Open Water Disposal Site and its cap will 'be
required to ensure that (1) the stability and required thickness of the cap is
maintained, and (2) the cap is effective in isolating the contaminated dredged
material. This will consist of precision bathymetric surveys, the collection
of core samples and the chemical analysis of sediment and body burden analyses
of benthic organisms in the disposal area. Appropriate management actions
will be required to ensure that the contaminated dredged material is isolated
from the environment. This will usually involve the placement of additional
suitable cap material.

(5) Testing Requirements: only clean dredged. material which will ensure the
long-term isolation of the underlying contaminated dredged material is
suitable for use in capping Open Water Disposal Sites. This involves a
consideration of the physical and chemical characteristics of the capping
material in relation to both the disposal site and the underlying contaminated
dredged material. Such considerations must be evaluated as part of the,
process of selecting/siting the Open Water Disposal Site. Grain size analyses
will be required to evaluate the potential long-term stability of the cap when
subjected to the current and other erosive forces in the disposal area. The
grain size data will also be used to ensure that the contaminated dredged
material is not dispersed as a result of the capping operation. In addition,
this information will be considered as part of the evaluation of the potential
recolonization of the cap by benthic organisms.

Chemical analyses of the proposed capping material will also be required
to ensure it is acceptable for unrestrictect open water disposal. Refer to
Section IV-C-(3)(d) for applicable testing requirements (note: any dredged
material that meets the Testing Exclusion criteria listed in Section III-B
does not need to undergo bulk sediment chemistry testing). This information,

-50-

together with the chemical data for the underlying contaminated dredged
material, will be used in the development of a monitoring program for the Open
Water Disposal Site and its cap.

Given the interdependent and complex evaluations needed, the suitability
of any material for use in the capping of an Open Water Disposal Site will be
made on a case-by-case basis.

-51-

Chapter VI - References

Brandon, D.L., C.R. Lee, and J.W. Simmers 1992. "Long-term Evaluation of
Plants and Animals Colonizing Contaminated Estuarine Dredged Material
Placed in Upland and Wetland Environments," Environmental Effects of
Dredging Information Exchange Bulletin D-92-4, U.S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, September 1992.

Brannon, J.M., T.E. Meyers, and B.A. Tardy 1994. "Leachate-Testing and
Evaluation of Freshwater Sediments," Miscellaneous Paper D-94-1, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, April 1994.

Department of the Army - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987. Beneficial Uses
of Dredxed Material, Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-5026, 30 June 1987.

Department of the Army - U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers 1987.
Confined Disposal of Dredged Material, Engineer Manual EM
1110-2-5027, September 1987.

Environment Canada. "Guidance for the Collection and Preparation of Sediments
for Physico-chemical Characterization and Biological Assessment," Draft.'.

Folk, R.L. 1969. Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks, Hemphall Publishing Co.,
Austin, Texas.

Long, E.R., D.D. MacDonald, S.L. Smith, and F.D. Calder 1995. "Incidence of
Adverse Biological Effects Within Ranges of Chemical Concentrations in
Marine and Estuarine Sediments," Environmental Management 19(l):81-97.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy 1992. "Field
Sampling Procedures Manual".

New Jersey Dredged Materials Management Team 1995. "Dredging - What is the
Best Approach for New Jersey?" Final Report, February 1, 1995.

Palermo. M.R. 1985. "Interim Guidance for Predicting Quality of Effluent
Discharged from Confined Dredged Material Disposal Areas - Test
Procedures," Environmental Effects of Dredging Technical Note EEDP-04-2,
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, June
1985.

Palermo, M.R. 1991. "Design Requirements for Capping,"Dredging Research
Technical Note DRP-5-03, U.S. Amy Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS, February 1991.

Palermo, M.R. 1991. "Site Selection Considerations for Capping," Dredging
Research Technical Note DRP-5-04, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg,
MS, November 1991.

-52-

Palermo, M.R. 1991. "Equipment and Placement Techniques for Capping," Dredging
Research Technical Note DRP-5-05, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS, November 1991.

Palermo, M.R., T. Fredette, and R.E. Randall 1992. "Monitoring Considerations
for Capping," Dredging Research Technical Note DRP-5-07, U.S. Amy Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, June 1992.

Schaefer, T.E. and P.R. Schroeder 1988. "Confined Disposal Guidance for Small
Hydraulic Maintenance Dredging Projects - Design Procedures,"
Environmental Effects of Dredging Technical Note EEDP-02-8, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,.MS, December 1988.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - New York District and Environmental Protection
Agency - Region 11 1992. Guidance for-Performing Tests on Dredged Material
Proposed for Ocean Disposal," Draft - 18 December 1992.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Guidance for Preparation of Combined
Work/Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Monitoring," OWRS
QA-I, Office of Water Regulations and Standards.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Handbook - Stream Sampling for Waste
Load Allocation Applications.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Army - U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers 1991. Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for
Ocean Disposal Testing Manual, EPA-503/8-91/0001, February 1991.

-53-

Chapter VII - Glossary

ambient conditions: those physical, chemical, and biological conditions
present in the immediate vicinity of the project site.

anadromous fish: marine or estuarine species of finfish that spawn in
freshwater (CZM Rules Glossary); fish that migrate from oceanic to coastal
waters, or from salt water to fresh water.

benthic: occurring or living on or in the bottom of a water body (CZM Rules
Glossary);, the bottom of a water body, with particular reference to
sediments.

benthos: see benthic; the organisms living on the bottom of a water body.

best management practices (BMPs): methods and measures employed to reduce the
adverse environmental impacts resulting from a' dredging or dredged material
management/disposal activity.

bioaccumulation: the accumulation of contaminants in the tissues of organisms
through any route, including respiration, ingestion, or direct contact with
sediment or water; indicates the biological availability of contaminants.

bioassay (test): acute toxicity tests using organisms representative of the
water column, benthic, and terrestrial environment(s) at the dredging or
dredged material disposal site.

borrow pit: a deep hole in a bay or near-shore area remaining after borrow
material has been removed.

bulk (sediment) chemical analysis: the determination of the concentration of
target analytes present in the sediments to be dredged.

clamshell dredge: a dredging bucket comprised of two hinged jaws; a boat or
barge equipped with such a machine.

containment area: any site used for the permanent dispo sal or temporary
confinement of dredged material, and which may or 'may not have a permanent
retaining structure, located in an open water or wetland area directly
adjacent to an upland area.

dewatering: the practice of actively or passively removing water from dredged
material, usually occurring in a barge or upland confined disposal facility.

dioxin: commonly refers to polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDD) and
polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF), in particular 2,3,7,.S-TCDD
(tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin).

-54-

dredged material: . the sediments under a body of water removed during a
dredging operation and displaced or removed to a disposal location.

dredging:

maintenance dredging: the removal of accumulated
sediment from previously authorized navigation and
access channels, marinas, lagoons, canals, or boat
moorings, for the purpose of maintaining an
authorized water depth and width for safe navigation
(CZM Rules N.J.A.C. 7:7E-4.11[f]).

new dredging: the removal of sediment from the bottom
of a water body that has not been previously dredged,
for the purpose of increasing water depth, or the
widen*ing, or deepening of navigable channels to a
newly authorized depth or width (CZM Rules N.J.A.C.
7:7E-4.11[g]).

effluent: a discharge of pollutants into the environment,
whether untreated, partially treated, or completely treated
(CZM Rules Glossary); particular reference to the quality of
water coming over a weir from a dredged material upland
confined disposal facility during and after a disposal
operation.

elutriate (test): involves mixing dredged material *with dredging-site water
and allowing the mixture to settle - the potential release of dissolved
chemical constituents from the dredged material is determined by chemical
analysis of the supernatant (elutriate) remaining after undisturbed settling.

flocculents: substances which, when added to dredged material, result in the
aggregation of finer particles into larger particles, thus enhancing the
settling properties of, the suspended particles and lowering the Total
Suspended Solids in the dewatering effluent.

furans: see dioxin.

geotextile bag/container: tubes, bags, and other containers costructed of
woven and non-woven water permeable synthetic fabrics which can be filled with
dredged material.

heavy metals: metals which have proven to be hazardous to living organisms
ingesting them in sufficient quantities; generally, cadmium, nickel, lead,
zinc, copper, mercury, and chromium.

hopper dredge: self-propelled seagoing ships equipped with *sediment
containers (hoppers), dredge pumps, and other special equipment. Dredged
material is raised by dredge pumps through drag arms in contact with the
bay/ocean bottom and discharged into hoppers built in the vessel.

hydraulic conductivity: ratio of the velocity to driving force for viscous
flow under saturated conditions of a specified liquid in a porous medium.

-55-

hydraulic dredging: use of suction equipment to remove a sediment/water
slurry from the bay/ocean bottom.

hydrogeology: the study of those factors that deal with subsurface waters and
related geologic aspects of subsurface waters.

impervious: impassable, applies to strata such as clays, shales, etc., which
will not permit the penetration of water, petroleum, or natural gas.

leachate: a solution obtained by leaching, as in the downward peneration of
water through soil or solid waste, and containing soluble substances.

lysimeter: a structure containing a mass of soil and so designed as to permit
the measurement of water drainage through the soil.

@mitigation: a measure or system of measures taken to lessen the adverse
impacts of development (CZM Rules Glossary); the replacement or substitution
of a habitat in repayment for habitat that has been degraded or destroyed.

modified elutriate test: used to predict the quality of dewatering effluent
discharged from upland confined disposal facilities and similar operations;
see elutriate (test).

New Jersey Coastal Zone: the Coastal Area under the jurisdiction of ihe
Coastal Area Facility Review Act (N.J.S.A. 13:19-4), all other areas now or
formerly flowed by the tide, shorelands subject to the Waterfront Development
Law, regulated wetlands listed at N.J.A.C. 7:7-2.2. and the Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Commission District as defined by N.J.S.A. 13:17-4
(CZM Rules N.J.A.C. 7:7E-1.1[b]).

ocean: those waters of the open seas lying seaward of the baseline from which
the territorial sea is measured.

ocean disposal: the practice of dredged material* disposal via oceangoing
barge into a designated disposal site in deep, open water, often miles from
shore; particular reference to the use of the Mud Dump site located offshore
of Sandy Hook, New Jersey.

open water disposal: the practice of dredged material disposal anywhere into'
open water.

permit(s): an authorization, license, or equivalent control document issued
by-the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers, or
approved State agency to implement the requirements of an environmental
regulation.

physiography: the physical geography of the general region/area in the
vicinity of a project site; the study of the genesis and evolution of land
forms.

-56-

pollutants: any gaseous, chemical, or organic waste (natural or man-made)
that contaminates air, soil, sediment, or water, and has the potential for
harm to human health, to any -aspect. of human or natural ecosystems, or to
environmental aesthetics or vitality.

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): nonflammable liquids formerly used in heat
exchangers, electrical condensers, hydraulic and lubricating fluids, etc. with
demonstrated chronic'toxicity effects.

polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): although present in some natural
products (eg. crude oil), they are generally associated with the incomplete
combustion of organic materials; some have demonstrated carcinogenic effects.

.reprofiling: the levelling of sediments within a berth or reach, essentially
removing small mounds on the bay bottom, by redistributing the sediments
within the boundaries of the berth or reach.

sample compositing: mixing distinct samples, or sediment layers from distinct
samples, (see stratification) collected in a berth or reach proposed to be
dredged.

sample homogenizing: mixing an entire sediment core sample which is not
stratified (see stratification).

sand: loose, granular particles of worn or disintegrated rock, finer than
gravel, and coarser than dust; the fraction of dredged material whose grain
size distribution is 2.00 to 0.05 mm, generally referred to as coarse
grained.

sidecasting: the pumping of dredged material and the discharge of the
material to the side of the dredge, out of the channel or berth area.

stratification (of sediments): the formation of distinct layers of sediments
having the same general composition (grain size, quality), arranged one on top
of another.

target analyte/compound: a hazardous substance, hazardous waste, or pollutant
for which a specific analytical method is designed to detect that potential.
contaminant both qualitatively and quantitatively (N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.8).

terrestrial ecosystem.: of, pertaining to, or composed of land as distinct
from air or water.

total suspended solids (TSS): the mass per unit volume (usually expressed in
units of milligrams per liter - mg/L) of solid material obtained by filtering
a known volume of liquid.

toxic/toxicity: a condition or substance that is harmful, destructive,
poisonous, or deadly; the limit of intolerance of organisms to survive lethal
chronic or short-term (acute) subjection to certain chemical and contaminating
substances, or physical and environmental conditions.

-57-

upland confined disposal facility: a disposal site/structure located above
the mean high tide level built to hold dredged material in a totally confined
condition. Upland CDFs are usually built to permanently hold contaminated
sediments, but this term also refers to those facilities which will only
contain dredged material for dewatering purposes prior to some future
beneficial use or decontamination management alternative.

-58-

APPENDIX A - Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures

I. Required Target Analyte Lists

Required bulk sediment chemistry and modified elutriate tests must include
analysis for all target analytes listed in, Tables I-XIII, excepting the
volatiles compound list, which will be required 'on a case-by-case basis.
Required sequential batch leaching tests must include analysis for all target
analytes listed in Table XIV. Tables I-XIII also include the required
analytical methods for each analyte, and the contract required quantitation
limits (CRQLs). These required analytical methods apply to all analytes
listed in Tavle XIV as well.

II. Reporting Requirements

All bulk sediment chemistry results must be reported in both wet and dry
weight concentrations.

All polychlorinated dibenzo(p)dioxin and polychlorinated dibenzofuran
congener results, in both sediment and water matrices, must be reported in
both individual congener concentrations and summarized as
2, 3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo (p) dioxin toxic equivalents, using the International
'88 method of toxic equivalency factors. Calculations should include the use
of 1/2 the detection limit for all reported nondetects, and for those values
reported as Estimated Maximum Possible Concentrations (EMPCs), the full EMPC
value should be used.

All PCB congener results must be reported in both individual congener
concentrations and summarized using the sum of the PCB congeners multiplied by
a factor of 2, to equate the 22 individual congeners to a total PCB value (T.
O'Connor, NOS, NOAA, in a July 20, 1994 memorandum to USEPA, Region II, S.
Ausubel).

III. Grain Size Analysis and Total Organic Carbon

The grain size analysis must be conducted according to the methods
described by R.L. Folk, Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks (Hemphill Publishing
Co., Texas, 1980).

Results must be reported as percentages within the general size classes:

Sand: >0.625 mm diameter
Silt: <0.625 mm diameter and >0.0039 mm diameter
Clay: <0.0039 mm diameter

-59-

Total Organic Carbon analysis must be conducted according to the USEPA
1986 method, excerpted from the December 1992 regional manual for USEPA Region
II and the New York District Corps of Engineers, entitled "Guidance for
Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal," included as
Attachment 1.

IV. Sampling Methodology

The sampling methodology described below has been drawn from Section 8.2.6
of the "Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal '- Testing
Manual"," February 1991, US Army Corps of Engineers, and the USEPA IIQA/QC
Guidance for Sampling and Analysis of Sediments, Water, and Tissues for
Dredged Material Evaluations," Office of. Water (EPA 823-B-95-001, April
1995).

The data reports submitted to the Department for testing and analysis of
material proposed for dredging must include descriptions of the procedures
used for sample handling, preservation, and storage. These procedures must
conform to the following guidance.

(a) Sediment:

The recommended storage and preservation procedures for sediment samples
are summarized in Attachment 2. The specified holding times by analyte group
for sediment samples must be adhered to or the laboratory must contact the
Department with any proposed alterations to the specified holding times.

Sediment samples are subject to chemical, biological, and physical changes
as soon as they are collected, and therefore the handling, preservation, and
storage techniques should minimize any changes in sample composition by
retarding chemical and/or biological activity and by avoiding contamination.

A vibra corer (or piston corer for lesser depths) should be used for
sediment sample collection. To avoid cross-contamination of sediment cores,
inert plastic core liners which have been steamcleaned prior to use must be
utilized for individual sediment cores; these liners cannot then be reused.
The vibra corer barrel must be rinsed between each sampling event.
Cross-contamination of collected sediment and water samples via personnel must
also be avoided.

Generally, samples to be analyzed for metals should not come into contact
with metals, and samples to be analyzed for organics should not come into
contact with plastics. All sample containers should be appropriately
cleaned: acid-rinsed (10% nitric acid) for metal analysis, and solvent-rinsed
(methanol) for organic analysis. When equipment will be used to take samples
for both metal and organic analysis, the acid rinse must be conducted first,
and the solvent rinse second. Samples should completely fill the storage
container, leaving no headspace, except for expansion area needed for
potential freezing. Since the first few hours after collection are the most
critical for potential changes to the sediment, preservation should begin
immediately upon sediment collection onboard the collecting vessel. This
would include refrigeration or freezing with dry ice. The elapsed time
between sample collection and analyses must be as short as possible, and not
exceed the recommended holding times listed in Attachment 2.

-60-

(b) Water:

The recommended storage and preservation procedures for water samples are
slimmarized in Attachment 2. The specified holding times by analyte group for
water samples must be adhered to, or the laboratory must contact the
Department with any proposed alterations to the specified holding times.

Water samples are subject to chemical, biological, and physical changes as
soon as they are collected, and therefore the handling, preservation, and
storage techniques should minimize any changes in sample composition by
retarding chemical and/or biological activity and by avoiding contamination.

Water samples should be collected with either a noncontaminating pump
(peristaltic or magnetically coupled impeller-design pump) or a discrete water
sampler. The pump system should be flushed with 10 times the volume of the
collection tubing. The discrete water sampler should be made of stainless
steel or acrylic plastic, of the close/ open/ close type. Seals should be
Teflon-coated. All water sampling devices should be acid-rinsed (10% nitric
acid) for metal analysis, and solvent-rinsed (methanol) for organic analysis.
When equipment will be used to take samples for both- metal and organic
analysis, the acid rinse must be conducted first, and the solvent rinse
second.

V. Oualit-y Assurance/Quality Control Guidance

This guidance has been drawn from both the December 1992 regional manual
for USEPA Region II and the New York District Corps of Engineers, entitled
"Guidance for Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean
Disposal," and the USEPA "QA/QC Guidance for Sampling and Analysis of
Sediments, Water, and Tissues for Dredged Material Evaluations," Office of
Water (EPA 823-B-95-001, April 1995).

The data reports submitted to the Department for testing and analysis of
material proposed for dredging must include a description of all methods and
procedures used in the field and laboratory, referencing established protocols
or guidance, for the following:

1. Sample collection
2. Sample preparation (including homogenizing and compositing)
3. Sample preservation methods and holding times (before and after
extraction)
4. Chain-of-custody tracking documents
5. Sample transport, storage, and disposal
6. Sample analysis
7. Data entry and data reduction
8. Deviations from standard methods or prescribed procedures
9. Narrative of analytical problems, corrective actions taken, effects
on data interpretation.

-61-

The following quality control samples or procedures will be required for
both sediment and water matrices:

1. Field blanks: One with every batch of 1-20 samples
2. Method blanks: One with every batch of 1-20 samples (except for
volatile organic analysis: One with every batch of 1-20 samples or
every 12 hours, whichever is less)
3. Matrix spike and Matrix spike duplicate: One set with every batch of
1-20 samples
4. Surrogate spike recovery: each sample, organics only
5. Standard Reference Materials (SRMs): One set with every batch of
1-20 samples, if available, see the sources of SRMs listed below
6. MDL verification within last 6 months for marine sediments and salt
water matrices, to be submitted to the Department

Standard reference materials (SRMs) may be obtained from the following
organizations:

Organic Constituents

U.S. Department of Commerce
National Institute for Standards & Technology
Office of Stardard Reference Materials
Room B3111 Chemistry Building
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Telephone: (301) 975-6776

Marine Analytical Chemistry Standards Program
National Research Council of Canada
Atlantic Research Laboratory
1411 Oxford Street
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 3Z1
Telephone: (902) 426-8280

Inoraanic Constituents

U.S. Department of Commerce
National Institute for Standards & Technology
Office of Standard Reference Materials
Room B3111 Chemistry Building
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
Telephone: (301) 975-6776

Marine Analytical Chemistry Standards Program
National Research Council of Canada
Division of Chemistry
Montreal Road
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KlA OR9
Telephone: (613) 993-2359

ATEACII-M I

DETERMINATION OF TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON

1.0 APPLICATION AND SCOPE

This method, developed by the U.S. EnvironmentaL Protection Agency, Region II, EnvironmentaL Services
Division Laboratory in Edison, New Jersey, describes protocols for the determination of organic carbon
in ocean sediments. Although the detection Limit may vary with procedure or instrument, a minimum
reporting value of 100 mg/kg wilt be required for the ocean dumping/dredging program. Severe( types
of determinations, which are considered equivalent, are presented in this procedure. However, wet
combustion methods are not considered to be equivalent to the pyroLytic methods described.

In this method, inorganic carbon from carbonates and bfca.bcm tes is removed by acid treatment. The
organic compounds are decomposed by pyrolysis in the presence of oxygen or air. The carbon dioxide
that is formed is determined by direct nondispersive infrared detection, f tome ionization gas
chromatography after catalytic conversion of the carbon dioxide to methane; thermal conductivity gas
chromatography, differential thermal conductivity detection by sequential removal of water and carbon
dioxide; or thermal conductivity detection following removal of vater with magnesium perchLorate.

Water content is determined on a separate portion of sediment and data are. reported in mg/kg on a dry
weight basis.

2.0 DEFINITIONS

The following terms and acronyms are associated with this procedure:
LRB Laboratory record book
TOC Total organic carbon

3.0 PROCEDURE

3.1 Sample cotLection

Collect sediments in glass jars with lids Lined with Teflon or aluminum foil. Coot samples and
maintain at VC. Analyze samples within 14 days. If unrepresentative material is to be
removed from the sample, it should be removed in the field under the supervision of the chief
scientist and noted in the LRB on the field tog sheet.

3.2 Apparatus mid Reagents

� Drying oven maintained at 103, to 1050C.

� Analytical instrument. No specific TOC analyzer is recom.K4 ed as superior. The following
Listing is for information on instrument options only, and is not intended to restrict the
use of other unlisted instruments capable of analyzing TOC. The instrument to be used must
meet the following specifications:

- A combustion boat that is heated in a stream of oxygen or air in a resistance or
induction-type furnace to completely convert organic substances to CC 2 and water.

- A means to physically or by measurement technique to separate water and other
interferants from CC 2'
A means to quantitatively determine C02 with adequate sensitivity (100 mg/kg), and
precision (25% at the 95% confidence Level as demonstrated by repetitive measurements
of a welL-mixed ocean sediment sample).

- A strip chart or other permanent recording device to document the analysis.

0.) Perkin Elmer Model 240C Elemental Analyzer or ecuivatent. In this instrument, the
sample from Section 3.5 is pyroLyzed under pure oxygen, vater is removed by magnesium
perchtorate and the carbon dioxide Is removed by ascarfte. The decrease In signal
obtained by differential thermat conductivity detectors placed between the combustion
gas stream before and after the ascarite tube is a measure of the orgo-Ac carbon
content.
(2.) Carlo Erba Model 1106 CNN Analyzer, or Iguivatent. In this apparatus, the sample is
pyrotyzed in an induction-type furnace, and the resultant carbon dioxide is
chromatographically separated and analyzed by a differential thermat conductivity

A.2

detector.

M) LECO Models WR12, WR112. or CR-12 carbon determinators. or Models 600 or 800 CNN
anatyzgrs. In the LECO WR-12, the sample is burned in high frequency irmiuction
furnace, and the carbon dioxide is selectively absorbed at room temperature in a
molecular sieve. It is subsequently released by heating and is measured by a thermal
conductivity detector. The WR-112 is an upgraded WR-12 employing microprocessor
electronics and a printer to replace the electronic digital voltmeter.

In the LECO CR-12 carbon determinator, the sample is combusted in oxygen, moisture
and dust are removed by appropriate traps, and the carbon dioxide is measured by a
selective, solid state, infrared detector. The signal from the detector is then
processed by a microprocessor and the carbon content is displayed an a digital readout
and recorded on an integral printer.

In the LECO CHN-600 and CHN-500 eLementat analyzers, the samipLe is burned under oxygen
in a resistance furnace and the carbon dioxide is measured by a selective infrared
detector.

(4.) Dohrman Model OC85 Digital High Temperature TOC Analyzer. In this instrument, the
sample is burned in resistance furnace under oxygen, the interfering gases are removed
by a sparger/scrubber system, and the carbon dioxide is measured by a non-dispersive
infrared detector and shown on a digital display in concentration units.

Reagents

0.) DistiLted water used in preparation of standards and for dilution of samples should be
uLtrapure to reduce the carbon concentration of the blank.

(2.) Potassium hydrogen phthatate, stock solution, 1000 mg carbon/L: DissoLve 0.2128 g of
potassium hydrogen phthatate (Primary Standard Grade) in distilled water and dilute to
100.0 ML.

NOTE: Sodium oxelate and acetic acid are not recommended as stock solutions.

(3.) Potassium hydrogen phthatate, standard solutions: Prepare standard sotutions-from the
stock solution by ditutiom with distilled water.

(4.) Phosphoric acid solution, 1:1 ky volume.

3.3 interferences

3.3.1 Volatile organics in the sediments may be lost in the decarbonation step resulting in
tow bias.
3.3.2 :acteriat decomposition and volatilization of the organic compounds are minimized by
maintaining the sample at 4 *C, analyzing within the specified holding time, and
analyzing the wet sample.

3.4 Sample Preparation

3.4.1 Allow frozen samples to warm to room temperature. Homogenize each sample
mechanically, incorporating any overlying water.

3.4.2 weigh the weit-mixed sample (up to 500 mg) into the combustion boat or cup. Add 1:1
phosphoric acid dropwise until effervescence stops. Heat to 750C.

NOTE: This procedure will convert inorganic carbonates and bicarbonates to carbon
dioxide and eliminate it from the sample.

3.5 Sample Analysis

Analyze the residue according to the instrument manufactureris instructions.

3.6 Percent Residue Determination

Determine percent residue on a separate sample aliquot as follows:

3.6.1 Heat a clean 25-mL beaker at 103* to,105*C for I h. Coot in a desiccator, weigh to

A.3

the nearest mg, and store in desiccator until use.

3.6.2 Add 1 9, weighed to the nearest mg, of an aliquot of the weLL-mixed sample

3.6.3 Dry and heat in the 103* to 1054C oven for 1 h. Coot in a desiccator. Weigh to the
nearest mg.

3.7 Calibration

instrument manufacturer's instructions for calibration. Prepare a calibration curve by
plotting mg carbon vs. instrument response using four standards and a blank, covering the
analytical range of interest.

3.8 Data Recording

Record &It data and sample information in LRBs or an project-specific data forms.

ALL transfers of date to form and data reductions (e.g., concentration calculations, means,
standard deviations) should be checked by the analyst and approved by a tab manager, project
manager, or principal investigator. Hard copies of sample data and spreadsheet reports
should be kept in the testing Laborstar-/ s central files.

3.9 QA/QC Procedures

3.9.1 Precision arW Accuracy The precision and accuracy wilt differ with the various
instruments and matrices, and must be determined by the Laboratories reporting data.
A represeritative.sampLe of weLt-mixed, meshed, sediment should be analyzed in
quadruplicate for 4 days to determine the analytical precision.

3.9.2 it is critical that each sample be thoroughly homogenized in the Laboratory before a
:
ubsampte is taken for analysis. Laboratory homogenization should be cwWucted even if
Wples were homogenized in the field.

3.9.3 Dried samples should be cooled in a desiccator and held there until they are weighed.-
If a desiccator is not used, the sediment wilt accumulate ambient moisture and the
sample weight wilt be overestimated. A cotor-indicating desiccant is recommended so
that spent desiccant can be detected easily. Also, the seat on the desiccator should
be checked periodically and, if necessary, the ground glass rims should be greased or
the 'Cr rings replaced.

4.0 DATA RED=1011. DOCUMENTATION, AND REPORTING

4.1 Data Reduction

Data analysis and calculations will be performed whenever possible on computers using
commercial spreadsheet software such as Lotus 1-2-3, Quattro Pro, or Microsoft ExceL.

4.2 Documentation

Keep all laboratory records, test results, measurements, other and supporting documentation for
each sediment test in a LRB or project file dedicated to that purpose.

4.3 Reporting

Areport should be prepared including, but not Limited to, the following information:

Sources of samptes
0 Description of methods
0 Summary of sample analysis results
a summary of any deviations from the project test plan
a Copies raw data, observations, or date f rms

Total organic carbon should be reported as a percentage of the dry weight of the unacidified
sample to the nearest 0.1 unit. The Laboratory should report the results of aLL samples
(Including QC replicates, method blanks, and standard reference measurements) drd should note
any problems that may have influenced sample quality. The laboratory should also provide a
summary of the calibration Orocedure and results (e.g., range covered, regression equation,
coefficient of determination).

A.4
Sotxce: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - New York District and Enviromental
Protection Agency -Region 11, 1992, "Guidance for Perforridng Tests
on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal," Draft-18 Dec 1992.

ATTACHMENT 2

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLE
COLLECTION, PRESERVATION, AND STORAGE

collection Sample Preservation Storage
Analyses modxxr VokuneP Containee Conditions Holding Thn"'
Sediment

ChemilcalIPhysleal Anslym
metals Grab/corer 1009 Precleaned POWW- Dry iW or fteazw :9 40C H9 - 28 days
lane #Be storage for extended Others - a moned
storages. otherwise
lefri9erale
organic compounds GFab/borw 250 g Sokwd-rinsed glass Dry IW or k9ftw S 4*C*Idede 14 dayO
(e.g.. PCOs. pesticides. jar with TOW W storage for extended
p*cydic aromatic storage; Otherwise
hydrocarbons) refrigerate
Particle size Grab/corer 100 g WhM-pac bagr Reftigerate -C 41C Undetermined
Total organic carbon Grabiborer 50 g "M treated glass Dty iW or freezw 9 40CO 14 days
vlal with TOW-fined storage for extended
storages.. otherwise
refrigerate
Total sspedk Grablborer 50 g -pic beg Flefflgera!e -C 4*C Undetermined
gravity
Miscellanem Grab/corer a 50 g Whirl-pec beg Refrigerate -c 46C Undetermined
Sedirnard korn which Grab/corer Depends an tests Glass with TeW-' Completely m and 4-rddarW 14 days
elutdate Is prepared being perforrned Ined Id refrigerate

Excerpted from pp. 54-57 of the USEPA "QA/QC Guidance for Sampling
and Analysis of Sediments, Water, and Tissues for Dredged Material
Evaluations#" Office of Water (EPA 823-.B-95-001, April 1995).

Collection Sample Preservation Storage
Analyses MONIOCIP Vokmrwb Conlainee Techn" Contim" Holding Tim"d
Water OW Elublete
ChunlicallPhyalcal An*"o
Particulate analysis Discl to sampler 500-2.000 ML Plastic or glass LUPOIS solution and 4OC Undetermined
or pump reirigerate,
Metals Discrete sampler I L Add-dnsW polye". PH -c 2 with @M,; 40C Hq - 14 do"
or ptimp lene or glass jaO "*IPMGI Others - 6 monthe
Total Kjokkohlrdt.o9w Discrete Sampler 1w-M ad- Plastic or glase ",SO4 to P" -c 2. 400h 24 IP
or pump refrigerate
Chwv*M oxygen Discrete sarnpler 200 ml- Plastic or glase "&SO,, to P" < 2. 400k 7 deW
demwW or pump refrigerate
Total bWnic carbon Discrete sanow 100 ml. Plastic or glase H2SO4 to P" -c 2; 419C C48 houre
or pump refrigerate
Total Inorganic carbon Discrete sampler Iw mL Plastic or glasle Airtight met; remp. 40C 6
or ptimp
Menalic compounds Discrete sampler I L Glase 0.1-1.0 0 CUSO': 400 24 hours"
or ptxv ",SO. to p" < 2;

Soltible reactive- Discrete sampler - Plastic or glase FNW. mMgwmO 40C 24 hwrO
phosphates or ptxnp
Extract" otganic Discrete sampler 4 L Amber glass. WIN P" -c 2. 6N HCI. 400 7 days for oxtrac-
Comp"XIs (e.g.. semi- or pump Girlight sew; refrigerate tion; 40 days for
Volatile compounds) sample GO.
analysed
Volatile organic Discrete samplar 90 ml. Glass-Ad p" -c 2 with 1:1 "CL4 4V 14 days for sm"
compounds or pump rehigerate In airtight. ana". 0 pw
completely filled con.

Total P! ni-tPINN Discrete sampler Plastic or glasO ",SO4 to pH < 2; 46C 7 dRW
or pump "Iftigerate

Collection sample aft. Store"
Analpn M vok"We Contairlee Corxmk)#" Holft TIMOSO
Total solicts Discrete sarriplar 206 ml. Plastic or glase ROM"le 40C I days&
or pump
Volatile solids Discrete samipler 200 mL Plastic or glase Reft@pfflle AIG& 7 d&W
or pump
Sullides; Discrete sampler - Plastic or glase pH 2. 9 N&OH Mft). VC 24 toure
or pump

PCB - polychlorinated biphanyl

*Collection method should include appropriate liners.

*Amount of sample required by the laboratory to perform the analysis(wet weight or volume provided, as appropriate). Miscellaneous sample size for sediment should be
increased if auxillary analyses that cannot be included as part of the organic or metal analyses are added to the list. The amounts shown are not intended as firm values;
more or less tissue may be required depending on the analyses, matrices, detection limits, and particular analytical laboratory.

*All containers should be certified as clean according to U.S. EPA(1990c).

*These holding times are for sediment, water, and tissue based on guidance that is sometimes administrative rather than technical in nature. There are no promuigated,
scientifically based holding time criteria for sediments, tissues, or elutriates. References should be consulted if holding times for sample extracts are desired. Holding
times are from the time of sample collection.

*NOAA (1989).

*Tetra Tech (1986a).

*Sample may be held for up to 1 year if s-20'C.

*Polypropylane should be used if phihalate bioaccumulation is of concern.

*Two weeks is recommended; sediments must not be held for longer than 8 weeks prior to biological testing.

*U.S. EPA (1987a); 40 CFR Part 136, Table III.

*Plumb (1981).

*If samples are not preserved to pH<2, then aromatic compounds must be analyzed within 7 days.

*Tetra Tech (1986b).

The required analytes have been grouped according to type in the following
tables. Analytes in each group can be analyzed by the same preparative and
analytical methods. A choice of a GC or a GC/MS method is given where applicable. A
GUMS method is preferable to insure more positive identification of components.
However, GC/MS methods are generally somewhat less sensitive thereby causing CRQLs to
be higher. Soil CRQLs are applicable to sediments. - Listed methods are from SW-846,
Third Edition unless otherwise indicated.

Table I - Volatile Halogenated Olganics

Methods: Preparative, 5030A (purge and trap for water and soils)

Analytical, GC, 8010B
GUMS, 8260A

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GUMS

Chloromethane 1 3 5 10
Bromomethane 1 3 5 10
Vinyl chloride 1 3 5 10
Methylene chloride 1 3 5 10
1,1-Dichloroethene 1 3 5 10
1,1-Dichloroethane 3 5 10
1,2-Dichloroethene(total) 1 3 5 10
Chloroform 1 3 5 10
1,2-Dichloroethane 1 3 5 10
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1 3 5 10
'Carbon tetrachloride 1 3 5 10
Bromodichloromethane 1 3 5 10
1,2-Dichloropropane 1 3 5 10
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 3 5 10 15
Trichloroethene 3 5 10 15
Dibromochloromethane 1 3 5 10
1,1,2-Trichloroethane 1 3 5 10
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 3 5 10 15
Bromoform 1 3 5 10
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 1 3 5 10

Table II Volatile Aromatic Organics

Methods: Preparative, 5030A (purge and trap for water and soils)

Analytical, GC, 8020A
GC/MS, 8260A

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GC/MS

Benzene 1 2 5 10
Toluene 1 2 5 10
Chlorobenzene 1 2 5 10
Ethylbenzene 1 2 5 10
Styrene 1 2 5 10
Xylenes (total) 1 2 5 10
Naphthalene 1 2 5 10

Table III - Volatile Nonpurgeable Water Soluble Organics by Azeotrovic Distillation

-Methods: Preparative, 5031 (new method proposed in Update III to SW-846)

Analytical, GC, 8015B
GC/MS, 8260B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GC/MS GC GC/MS

Acetone 80 240
2-Butanone 30 90
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone 10 30

Tab.le IV Phenols

Methods: Preparative, Water-3510B
Soil-3540B

Analysis, GC, 8040A
GC/MS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GUMS

Phenol 5 10 50 330
2-Chlorophenol 5 10 50 330
2-Methylphenol 5 10 50 330
4-Methylphenol 5 10 50 330
2,4-Dimethylphenol 5 10 50 330
2,4-Dichlorophenol 5 10 5'0 330
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 5 10 50 330
2,4,6-Trichloraphenol 5 10 so 330
2,4-Dinitraphenol 10 20 100 660
Pentachlorophenol 10 20 100 660
4-Chloro-3-methyl-phenol 5 10 50 330

Table V Phthalate Esters

Methods: Preparative, Water-3510B
Soil-3540B

Analytical, GC, 8061A
GUMS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC CC/mS GC GUMS

Dimethylphthalate 5 10 50 100
Diethylphthalate 5 10 50 100
Di-n-butylphthalate 5 10 50 100
Butylbenzylphthalate 5 10 50 100
bis-(2Ethylhexyl)phthalate 10 20 100 200
Di-n-octylphthalate 10 20 100 200

Table VI N-Nitrosoamines

Methods: Preparative, Water-351OB/3520
Soil-354OB/3550A

Analytical, GC, 8070
GUMS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GUMS

N-Nitrosodinpropylamine 1 10 50 100
N-Nitrosodi.phenylamine 1 10 50 100

Table VII - Polvnuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Methods: Preparative, Water-351OB/3250
Soil-354OB/3550A

Analytical, CC, 8100
CC/MS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
CC CUMS CC GCIMS

Acenaphthene 5 10 50 100
Fluorene 5 10 50 100
Anthracene 5 10 50 100
Fluoranthene 5 10 50 100
Pyrene 5 10 50 100
Benzo(a)anthracene 5 10 50 100
Chrysene 5 10 50 100
Benzo(b)fluoranthene 5 10 50 100
Benzo(k)fluoranthene 5 10 50 100
Benzo(a)pyrene 5 10 50 100
Indeno(1,2,3,-cd)pyrene 5 10 50 100
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 5 10 50 100
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 5 10 50 100

Table VIII Haloethers

Methods: Preparative, Water/Soil, See analytical methods

Analytical, CC, 8110
CC/MS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
CC CC/MS CC GC/MS

@bis-(2-chloroethyl)ether 5 10 50 100
bis-(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 10 20 50 100

Table IX - Chlorinated HVdrocarbons

Methods: Preparative, Water/Soil, See analytical methods

Analytical, GC, 8121
GUMS, 8270B

Analyte Water CROL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS ac GUMS

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 5 10 50 100
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 5 10 50 100
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 10 20 .100 200
Hexachloroethane 1 3 20 100
Hexachlorobutadiene 1 3 20 100
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 5 10 50 100
Hexachlorobenzene 1 3 20 100
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 5 10 50 100

Table X - Nitroaromatics and Isophorone

Methods: Preparative, Water/Soil, See analytical methods

Analytical, GC, 8090
GUMS, 8270B

Analyte Water-CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GUMS

Isophorone 10 10 100 200
Nitrobenzene 10 10 100 200
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 5 10 100 200
2,6-Dinitrotoluene 5 10 100 200

Table XI Miscellaneous

Analytical Methods (See method listed with analyte)

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L Soil CRQL(ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GUMS GUMS

4-Chloroaniline (8270B) 20 500
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidene (8270B) 20 500

Seventeen (17) 2,3,7,8 substituted CDD and OF congeners (1613). The required
congeners and related isotopes used for analysis are shown in Attachment 1. CRQLs
for each congener should range from 5X the minimum level for water to 1OX the
minimum level for solids.

PCB congener and Aroclors (Sloan method, NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA-71).
.This method was selected because it provides detailed cleanup procedures and
quantitates all congeners of interest. The New York District Army Corps of
Engineers uses this method for its analysis of sediments for PCB congeners. There
is some concern about this method in that no performance statistics such as method
detection limits, percent recovery, and precision are presented. The recommended
MDLs for all individual PCB congeners are 1 ug/kg dry weight (sediment), and 0.0005
ug/L (water).

M@dw 1613

Table 2. Retention Time References, Quantitation References, Relative Retention Times, and Minimum
Levels for CON and CON
Minimum Level'
Solid Extract
Retention Tim Relad" (nm (09/914
Compound and -QuandWon Reftwence Retention Time ppa) ppQ ppb)
ConWounds ustrig"Cd-1=441=1 as Me Inpabn werrW standatc! -
Z3,7kTCOF 'OCu-2,3,7A-TCDF 0.999-1.003 10 .1 0.5
Z3,7,8-TCOD "Cu-Z3,7A-TCDD OS99-1.002 10 1 0.5
1,Z3,7,8-PeCDF OCU-1=7A-P 9MF 0-999-1.= 50 .6 2.5
Z3,4,7,8-PeCOF "CU-Z3A7.8-PeCDF 0-999-4.002 so 5 2.5
UVA-PeCOD "Cu-1@Z3,7,SPeMO 0.999-1 * OM so 5 2.5
uCe2,3,7,8-TCDF OCu-I.Z3,4-TCt)t) 0-923-1.103
"CICZ3.7,84CM "Cu-1=+TCDD W976-1.043
wCIj-Z3,7,8-TCDD 1*Cu-IZ3+TCDD 0.989-4.0m
"Ct-Ia3,7,S-PeCDF "Cu-1,Z3,4-TCDD 1.000-1.425
uCjj-Z3,4,7,8-PeCDF uCjf1,Z3,4-TCDD 1.011-1-C26
UCU-1,2A7,8-P9C[)D %@Z-1.Z3.4-TCOD 1.000-1.567
Campounds &ring "Cd- I= 7A94ixCDD as Me injecibn kft7W sW&d
1a3,4,7,8-KxCDF "Ct-1,Z3,4,7,S4WDF 0.999-1.001 so 5 Z5
1=6,7kHxCDF "Cu-1,2A6,7,04ixCDF 0.997-1.005 50 5 2.5
1,U,7,S,94ixCDF ur.,4=7,80+1413F 0.999-1.001 so 5 L5
Z3,4,6,7,S4ixCDF %u-2,3,4,G,7,8,-HxCDF 0.999-1.001 so a :2.5
I,Z3,4.7,8-Hx(= uCjeIZ3,4,?,84t=JD- W999-1.001 so 5 2-5
1,U,6,7,8-HxCDD "Cu-1=,6,7,8,-HxCDD OS96-I.Mg so S. 2.5
1@Z3,7,8,9-HxCDD 1.000-1.019 so 5 2.5
I,Z3,4,S,7,8-HpCDF UC@M-IZ3,4,S,7,PlpMF 0.999-1.001 so 5 2.5
I,Z3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF "Ct-IZ3,4,7,8,9-HpCDF 0.999-1.001 so 5 2.5
1,Z3,4,6,7,"pCDD "C-u-IZ3,4,G,7,8-HpMD 0.999-1.001 so 5 2.5
OCOF UCU-OCDO 0.999-1.008 100 10 5.0
OCOD %U-OCDO OS99-1.001 100 10 .5.0
uC,:r1a3,4,7,8-HxCDF '*C.-U17,80+14131) 0.944-0.970
'3C,,-1,2.3,6.7,8-HxCDF UC12'1,Z3,7,8,94ixCDD 0.949--O-M
'3C,r1,Zj,7,8,9-HxCDF uCt-IZ3,7,80+lxCDD 0.977-1.047
.C,:rZ3,4,G,7,S,4ixCDF ur.,-i,2A7,8$4bCD() 0.959-4.021
"C,j-1,Z3,4,7,8+bcCDD uC,2-IZ3.7,8,94ixCDD 0-977-1.000
"Cjj-1=,6,7A+bCDD "Cu-1=7.8.9+bCDD 0461-1.0m
"CjeI.Z3,4,6,7j34ipCDF "C@,-1;Z3,7,8,94ixMD 1.043-4.085
13@11A4JA94ipMF uCu-1=7AP= 1.W-I.151
"Ctf1,Z3A6,7kHp(MD "Cu-1=7,8A&= I.OWI.110
Or.,,-OCOD "Cu-1=7AS4ix=D 1.032-1.311
1. The Minimum Level for each ana" is defined as fm level at which the entire &WydcW systern must give a
recognizable signal wW acceptable calibration point. it is aqWYWM to Ihe concer&alon of 1he bNed calibration
standard, assuming tat of method-spedfied sample weOft volumes, and cleanup procedures hoe been employed.
Z The retention time mhnm for 1,2 VAS-RCOD is uC,-12A6,7,S-HxCDD, and 1.=7,8,94ixCI)O quantified
using the averaged responses for '3C,,-l a3,4,7,8-HxCOD and '3Cj2-1a3,6,7,8+bCDD.
water
09IL;

ATTACHMENT I

ATTACHMENT 2
REQUIRED PCB CONGENERS

PCB Conaener IUPAC

2,41-Dichlorobiphenyl 8
2,21,5-Trichlorobiphenyl 18
2,4,4'-Trichlorobiphenyl 28
2,2.1,3,5'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 44
2,2',5,51-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 52
2,3',4,4'-Tetrachlorobiphenyl 66
2,2',3,4',5-Pentachlorobiphenyl 49
2,2',3,4,51-Pentachlorobinphenyl 87
2,2',4,5,51-Pentachlorobiphenyl 101
2,3,3',4,4'-Pentachlorobiphenyl 105
2,3',4,4',5-Pentachlorobiphenyl 118
2,2',3,3',4,4'-Hexachlorobiphenyl 128
.2,2',3,4,41,5'-Hexachlorobiphenyl 138
2,2',4,4',5,5'-HexachlorobiphenyI 153
2,2',3,3',4,41,5-Heptachlorobiphenyl 170
2,2',3,4,41,5,51-HeptachlorobiphenyI 180
2,2',3,4,4',5',6-lieptachlorobiphenyl 183
2,2',3,4,41,6,61-HeptachlorobiphenyI 184
2,2',3,4',5,5',6-lieptachlorobiphenyl 187
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,6-Octachlorobiphenyl 195
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5',6-Nonachlorobiphenyl 206
2,2',3,3',4,4',5,5',6,61-DecachlorobiphenyI .209

The recommended MDLs for all individual PCB congeners are 1 ug/kg dry weight
@sediment), and 0.0005 ug/L (water).

Table XII - Pesticides

Methods: Preparative, Water/Soil, See analytical methods

Analytical, GC 8080
r.c;MS, 8270B

Analyte Water CRQL(ug/L) Soil CRQL[ug/Kg(wet wt.)]
GC GUMS GC GUMS

alpha-BHC 0.1 1 5 50
beta-BHC 0.1 1 5 50
delta-BHC 0.1 1 5 50
gammma-BHC 0.1 1 5 50
Heptachlor 0.1 1 5 50
Aldrin 0.1 1 5 50
Heptachlor epoxide 0.1 1 5' 50
Endosulfan 1 0.1 1 5 50
Dieldrin 0.1 1 5 50
4,41DDE 0.1 1 5 50
Endrin 0.1 1 5 50
Endosulfan 11 0.1 1 5 50
4,41DDD 0.1 1 5 .50
Endosulfan sulfate 0.1 1 5 50
4,41DDT 0.1 1 5 50
Methoxychlor 0.5 5 so 300
Endrin ketone. 0.1 1 5 50
Endrin aldehyde 0.1 1 5 50
alpha-Chlordane 0.1 1 5 50
-gamma-Chlorodane 0.1 1 5 50
Toxaphene 1 10 400 600

Table XIII - Inorganics

Methods: Preparative for Water/Soil, See analytical method for specific analyte

Analytical, See specific analyte below. The direct aspiration method
is listed first and the furnace method second. The furnance method
has lower detection limits.

CRQL
Analyte Water(ug/L) Soil(ug/Kg)wet wt.

Antimony (7040, 7041, 7062) 3 2500
Arsenic (7060A, 7062) 3 2500
Barium (7080A, 7081) 1 100
Beryllium (7090, 7091) 0.2 2500
Cadmium (7130, 7131A) 1 300
Chromium (7190, 7191) 5 2500
Copper (7210, 7211) 5 2500
Lead (7420, 7421) 5 2500
Manganese (7460, 7461) 1 2500
Mercury (7470A-water, 7471A-soil) 1 200
Nickel (7520, 7521) 5 2500
Selenium( _ , 7740) 5 2500
Silver (7760A, 7761) 2 200
Thallium (7840, 7841) 5 200
Vanadium (7910, 7911) 8 2500
Zinc (7950, 7951) 0.5 2500
Cyanide (9010) 40 2500

TABLE XIV, Worst Case 11A Ground Water Constituent Standards

Worst Case IIA
Ground Water Ground Water
Quality Constituent
Criteria PQL Standard
-Constituent Groups CASRN (uGAL) (uG/L) (uG/L)
TARGET COMPOUND LIST

VOLATILE ORGANIC CONTOUNDS
Chloromethane 74-87-3 30.06 2.00 16.00
Bromomethane 74-83-9 10.00 2.00 6.00
Vinyl Chloride 75-01-4 0.08 5.00 5.00
Methylene, Chloride 75-09-2 2.00 2.00 2.00
Acetone 67-64-1 700.00 700.00 700.00
GaFb8H DiSHWWO ;15 is 9 70000 N" t-WA
1, 1 -Dichloroethene 73-35-4 1.00 2.00 2.00
1,1 DiGhleFOWIIAAA :75-34 a . 50.00 N@A N/A
Chloroform 67-66-3 6.00 1.00 3.50
1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 0.30 2.00 2.00
2 Butanene 78 93 3 309.00 N@A @N"
1, 1, 1 -Trichloroethane 71-55-6 30.00 1.00 15.50
Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 0.40 2.00 2.00
Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 0.30 1.00 1.00
1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 0.50 1.00 1.00
Trichloroethene 79-01-6 1.00 1.00 1.00
Dibromochloromethane 124-48-1 10.00 1.00 5.50
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane 79-00-5 3.00 2.00 2.50
Benzene 7143-2 0.20 1.00 1.00
Bromoform 75-25-2 4.00 0.60 2.30
4 Methyl 2 pentanene iog ig i 40Q 00 @hwA
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 0.40 1.00 1.00
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 1.00 1.00 1.00
Toluene 108-88-3 1000.00 5.00 502.50
thlorobeniene' 108-90-7 4.00 2.00 3.00
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 700.00 5.00 352.50
Styrene 100-42-5 100.00 5.00 52.50
Xylenes (total) 1330-20-7 40.00 2.00 21.00

SEMIVOLATILE, ORGANIC CONTOUNDS
Phenol 108-95-2 4000.00 10.00 2005.00
bis-(2-Chloroethyl) ether 111-44-4 0.03 10.00 10.00
2-Chlorophenol 95-57-8 40.00 20.00 30.00
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 600.00 5.00 302.50
1,4-Dichloirobenzene 106-46-7 75.00 5.00 40.00
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 600.00 5.00. 302.50
2 methylphenel, 95 49 7 400 QQ WA WA
2,2'-oxybis (1-Chloropropane) 108-60-1 300.00 10.00 155.00
4 Methylphene4 196-44 5 350.00 N" IN"
N-Nitraso-di-n-dipropylamine 621-64-7 0.'005 20.00 20.00
Hexachloroethene 67-72-1 0.70 10.00 10.00
Nitrobenzene 3.00 10.00 10.00
Isophorone 78-95-1 100.00 10.00 55.00
2,4-Dimethylphenol 105-67-9 100.00 20.00 60.00
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 20.00 10.00 15.00
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 9.00 1.00 5.00
N 20 a 30000 N@A N14-A

Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 1.00 1.00 1.00
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 59-50-7 100.00 20.00 60.00
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 50.00 10.00 30.00
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06-2 3.00 20.00 .20.00
2,4,5-Trochlorophenol 95-95-4 700.00 10.00 355.00
Acenaphthene 83-32-9 400.00 10.00 205.00
2,4-Dinitrophenol 51-28-5 10,00 40.00 40.00
2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 .05 10.00 5.03
Diethylphthalaie 84-66-2 5000.00 10.00 2505.00
Flourene 86-73-7 30b.00 10.00 155.00
N-Nitroso-diphenylamine 86-30-6 7.00 20.00 20.00
Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 0.02 10.00 10.00
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 0.30 1.00 1.00
Phenanthrene 85-01-8 100.00 10.00 55.00
Anthracene 120-12-7 2000.00 10.00 1005.00
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 900.00 20.00 460.00
Flouranthene 20644-;0 300.00 10.00 155.00
Pyrene 129-00-0 200.00 20.00 110.00
Butylbenzylphthalate 85-68-7 100.00 20.00 60.00
3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 91-94-1 0.08 60.00 60.00
Benzo(a)anthracene 56-55-3 0.05 10.00 10.00
Chrysene 218-01-9 .0.5 20.00 20.00
Bis(2-Ethythexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 3.00 30.00 30.00
Benzo(b)flouranthene 205-99-2 0.05 10.00 10.00
Bi!nz*)flouranthene 207-08-9 0.5 2.00 2.00
Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 0.005 20.00 20.00
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 193-39-5 0.05 20.00 20.00
Dibenzo(ah)anthracene 53-70-3 0.005 20.00 20.00
Benzo(g,h,i)peryiene 191-24-2 100.00 20.00 60.00

PESTICIDES/PCBS
alpha-BHC 319-84-6 0.006 0.02 0.02
beta-BHC 319-85-7 0.20 0.04 0.12
delta 914C -310 96 9 5-.00 NIA I@UA
gamma-BHC (Lindane) 58-89-9 0.20 6.20 0.20
Heptachlor 76-44-8 0.008 0.04 .0.04
Aldrin 309-00-2 0.002 0.04 0.04
Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 0.004 0.20 0.20
Endosulfan 1 959-98-8 0.40 0.02 0.21
Dieldrin 60-57-1 0.002 0.03 0.03
4,4'-DDE 72-55-9 0.10 0.04 0.07
Endrin 72-20-8 2.00 0.04 1.02
Endosulfan 11 33213-65-9 0.40 0.04 0.22
4,4'-DDD 72-54-8 0.10 0.04 0.07
Endosulfan sulfate 1031-07-8 0.40 0.08 0.24
4,4'-DDT 50-29-3 0.10 0.06' 0.08
Methoxychlor 72-43-5 40.00 10.00 25.00
Toxaphene 8001-35-2 0.03 3.00 3.06
PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls) 1336-36-3 0.02 0.5 0.50

TARGET ANALYTE LIST

INORGANICS
Antimony 7440-36-0 2.00 20.00 20.00
Arsenic 7440-38-2 0.02 8.00 8.00
Barium 7440-39-3 2000.00 200.00 1100.00
Beryllium 744041-7 0.008 20.00 20.00'
Cadmium 7440-43-9 4.00 2.00 3.00
Chromium 7440-47-3 100.00 10.00 55.00

Copper 7440-50-8 1000.00 1000.00 1006.00
Iron 7439-89-6 300.00 100.00 200-00
Lead 7439-92-1 5.00 10.00 10.00
Manganeese 7439-96-5 50.00 6.00 28.00
Mercury 7439-97-6 2.00 0.50 1.25
Nickel 74,40-02-0 100.00 10.00 55.00
Selenium 7782-49-2 50.00 10.00 30.00
Silver 7440-22-4 40.00 2.00 21.00
Sodium 7440-23-5 50000.00 400.00 25200.00
Thalliurn 7440-28-0 0.50 10.00 10.00
Zinc 7440-66-6 5000.00 30.00 2515.00
Cyanide 57-12-5 200.00 40.00 120.00

DIOXIN
TCDD (2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin) 1746-01-6 0.0000002 0.01 0.01

US Department of CoTwin e
NOAA Coastal Services Center Library
2234 South HoLhoom Avenue
L Charleston, SC 2Z-)-' &5-01413

NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTA LIBRARY

3 6668 14111502 4