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



              a 14 1













           TD
           195
           .D72
           E63
           1990















                                          LECTURE NOTES






                                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                      COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                      2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                      CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413



                            EPA AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF
                                  DREDGED-MATERIAL DISPOSAL



                                      EPA Contract No. 68-C8-0105
                                      Work Assignment No. 2-121
                                               Task 5







                                                 to


                            U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                 Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection


                                           7 December 1990






                                       
                                         Property of CSC Library



                                             Prepared by

                                    BATTELLE OCEAN SCIENCES
                                         397 Washington Street
                                          Duxbury, MA 02332
                                            (617) 934-0571
       



























                           EPA AND TBE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECIS OF
                                 DREDGED-MATERLAL DISPOSAL


                                                for

                                      1991 Dredging Short Course
                                 Texas Engineering Experiment Station
                                        Texas A&M University
                                        College Station, Texas

























                           U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection



















             This document is provided for use and discussion in conjunction with the 1991 Dredging
             Engineering Short Course, sponsored by Texas Engineering Experiment Station, Texas A&M
             University. The information provided in the document should not be construed either as
             official guidance or policy. Much of the text is extracted from draft documents. As such, the
             full technical accuracy of the material is not yet confirmed.










                                                           TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                                                                              Page

                  List of Tables      .....................................................                                       v

                  List of Figures     .....................................................                                       V

                  Introduction      .......................................................                                     vii


                  1.0 REGULATORY BASIS FOR EPA ROLE                             ..........................                      1-1
                         1.1     LONDON DUMPING CONVENTION (1972)                           ..................                  1-1
                         1.2     MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARCH, AND
                                 SANCTUARIES ACT OF 1972                 ....................             .........             1-2
                                 1.2.1  Title I of the MPRSA, Section 103, Regulation of
                                        Transportation and Dumping Wastes in Ocean Waters                   ........            1-5
                                 1.2.2  Title H of the MPRSA, Section 201, Research
                                        within the Scope of the MTRSA            .........................                      1-5
                                 1.2.3  Title III of the MPRSA          ...............................                         1-5
                                 1.2.4  Section 102      .........................................                              1-6
                         1.3     SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT                         ..................                  1-6
                                 1.3.1 Geographic Jurisdiction         ................................                         1-6
                                 1.3.2 Compliance with CWA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines                  ..........             1-7
                                 1.3.3  Addressing Unacceptable Adverse Environmental Impacts                  ......           1-8
                                 1.3.4  Enforcement      .......................                                                1-8
                         1.4     NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT 6F,1969'                                .........            1-9
                                 1.4.1 Goals of the National Environmental Policy Act              ........      .....          1-9
                                 1.4.2  Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act                 .......           1-9
                                 1.4.3  EPA Review Authorities          ................................                      1-10
                         1.5     OCEAN DUMPING REGULATIONS AND CRITERIA                                ...........            1-10


                  2.0    EPA RESEARCH             .............................................                                 2-1


                  3.0    SITE DESIGNATION              ..........................................                               3-1
                         3.1     INTRODUCTION             ........................................                              3-1
                         3.2     REGULATORY CRITERIA AND ADMINISTRATIVE
                                 PROCEDURES            ............................................                             3-1
                         3.3     TECHNICAL GUIDANCE FOR ODMDS DESIGNATION                                   ........            3-4
                                 3.3.1  Evaluation of Need for Site Designation            ...................                  3-7
                                 3.3.2  Identification of Areas Suitable for Site Designation            ..........             3-9
                                 3.3.3  Identification of ODMDS Requirements Related to
                                        Dredged-Material Characteristics          .........................                   3-10
                                 3.3.4  Candidate Sites      ......................................                           3-13
                                 3.3.5  Determination of Fate and, Potential Effects for
                                        Each Candidate Site         ..................................                        3-18
                                 3.3.6  Evaluation of Candidate Sites         ...........................                     3-19
                                 3.3.7  Selection and Final Designation of an ODMDS                ..............             3-21


                                                                         iii









                                                        TABLE OF CONTENIS (continue                d)

                                                                                                                           Page
                       3.4. PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IM[PAC!T
                              STATEMENT            ...........................................                              3-21


                4.0    PERMTI'TING         ................................................                                  4-1
                       4.1    CWA SECTION 404 PERMITS                  ..............................                        4-1
                       4.2    MPRSA SECTION 103 PERMITS                   ............................                       4-2
                              4.2.1 Issuing Permits      .......................................                             4-3
                              4.2.2 Evaluation of Other Disposal Options             .....................                   4-6
                       4.3    EPA COORDINATION OPPORTUNITIES                        ......................                   4-7
                                      EPA/USACE Communication Mechanisms                   .................                 4-9

                5D     DREDGED-MATERIAL TESTING                       ...............................                        5-1
                              EVALUATION PROCEDURES FOR DREDGED
                              MATERIAL DISPOSAL IN OCEAN WATERS OF
                              THE UNITED STATES              .............................                Following          5-1

                6.0    MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT                          ............................                       6-1
                       6.1 MONITORING            ............................................                                6-1
                              6.1.1   Conceptual Framework of.the Monitoring Program                 ...........             6-1
                              6.1.2   Objectives of Monitoring        ...............................                        6-3
                              6.1.3   Development of Null Hypotheses           .........................                     6-4
                              6.1.4   Tiered Approach to Monitoring           ..........................                     6-4
                              6.1.5   Selection of Parameters       ................................                         6-6
                              6.1.6   Determination of Sources of Variability          ....................                  6-7
                              6.1.7   Development of Optimal Sampling and Analysis Plans                .........            6-7
                              6.1.8   Examples of Monitoring Categories and Null Hypotheses                  ......          6-8
                              6.1.9   Quality Assurance       ....................................                           6-8
                       6.2    MANAGEMENT              .........................................                              6-9
                              6.2.1 Conducting Disposal Site Evaluation and Designation Studies                   ...        6-9
                              6.2.2 Regulatinj Times, Rates, and Methods of Disposal and
                                      Quantities and Types of Materials To Be Disposed               ...........             6-10
                              6.2.3   Developing and Maintaining Effective Monitoring Programs                  ....         6-11
                              6.2.4   Recommending Changes in Site Use or Designation                  ..........            6-12

                7.0 EPA REGULATORY FEEDBACK                           ...............................                        7-1


                8.0 REFERENCES               ...............................................                                 84











                                                                       iv











                                                       LIST OF TABLES

                                                                                                               Page
                Table

                1-1 EPA and USACE Responsibilities under the Marine Protection,
                      Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972       .............................                 1-4

                1-2   Contents of Title 40 CFR Parts 220-229 - Ocean Dumping           ..............           1-11



                                                      LIST OF FIGURES



                Figure

                1-1   Geographical Jurisdictions of the MPRSA and CWA Regarding
                      Dredged Material Disposal     .......................................                     1-3

                3-1   Flow Chart and Major Components of Site Selection Process         .............           3-5

                3-2   Schematic Overlay Process for Screening. Out Sensitive and Incompatible
                      Use Areas      ...................................................                        3-11


                4-1   Summary of Decision Strategy for Identification of Environmentally
                      Acceptable Dredged-Material Disposal Option        ........................               4-8

                6-1   A Stepwise Approach to Developing Monitoring Programs Ensures That
                      Data Will Be Complete, Defensible, and Useful for Making Decisions          ......        6-2

                6-2   T'he Most Effective Strategy for Assessing Dredged Material
                      Characteristics Is To Use a Tiered Approach     ..........................                6-5
















                                                                 v












                                                  MRODUMON




              The document presents the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulatory
              responsibilities and activities concerning environmental aspects of dredged-material disposal
              in United States waters.



              The goal of the EPA is to ensure that dredged-material disposal in the United States is
              accomplished in a manner that will not endanger either human health or the marine
              environment. Operating under the authority of the Marine Protection, Research, and
              Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA, Section 404), EPA
              promulgates and participates in the implementation of regulations relative to dredged-
              material disposal in the waters of the United States.


              To accomplish the above goal, EPA Headquarters has the general responsibility for
              promulgating ocean-dumping regulations and developing EPA National ocean-dumping policy
              and technical guidance. Specific EPA activities include
                 1. Developing regulations and guidance
                        EPA is currently revising the Ocean Dumping Regulations.
                        EPA is developing several technical guidance documents to aid in the coordination
                        and consistent management of dredged-material disposal activities. These
                        documents are
                        ï¿½   Draft Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean
                            Waters - EPA/United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1990 (in
                            preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science and
                            Technology, Inc.; final document available in early 1991).
                            This document is an update of the July 1977 "Green Book" and contains
                            procedures for evaluating the potential environmental impact of dredged-
                            material disposal as mandated by the United States ocean-dumping regulations.
                        ï¿½   Draft Dredged Material Disposal Strategy Document - EPA/USACE 1990 (in
                            preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and
                            Technology, Inc.; final document available in early 1991).




                                                          vii









                             This, document presents a National dredged-material management strategy in a
                             generic decision-making framework, including all of the alternatives for
                             dredged-material disposal under the jurisdictions of the MPRSA and the CWA.
                          ï¿½  Draft EPA Guidance Manual for the Review of COE Permits and Federal Projects
                             for the Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material - EPA 1990 (in preparation by
                             Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications International Corporation;
                             final document available in mid-1991).
                             This document provides procedural and technical guidance to EPA Regional
                             staff in reviewing ocean-disposal proposals involving dredged material under
                             the jurisdiction of the MPRSA-
                          ï¿½  Working Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, and Management Guidance
                             Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material - EPA 1990 (in preparation
                             by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.; final document available in
                             mid-1991).
                             This technical-guidance document describes the requirements and technical
                             rationale for dredged-material ocean-disposal site designation, monitoring, and
                             management.
                      Note: Each of the above documents is either a draft or a working draft and is subject
                      to revision prior to publication as a Final Report.
                 2.   Designating disposal sites
                      EPA designates ocean dredged-material disposal sites (ODMDS) where dumping is
                      permitted under USACE-issued permits. 65 million cubic yards of dredged material
                      are dumped annually at the 45 interim- and 59 final-designated ODMI)Ss in U.S.
                      waters.
                      ODMDS designation is based on the following five general and 11 specific criteria
                      from the ocean dumping regulations.
                      General Disposal-Site Criteria [40 CFR 228.5 (a-e)]
                      (a) The dumping of materials into the ocean will be permitted only at sites or in
                          areas selected to minimize the interference of disposal activities with other
                          activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of existing
                          fisheries or shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or recreational
                          navigation.
                      (b) Locations and boundaries of disposal sites will be so chosen that temporary
                          perturbations in water quality or other environmental conditions during initial
                          mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere within the site can be expected to
                          be reduced to normal ambient seawater levels or to undetectable contaminant
                          concentrations or effects before reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary,
                          or known geographically limited fishery or shellfishery.
                      (c) If at any time during or after disposal site evaluation studies, it is determined that
                          existing disposal sites presently approved on an interim basis for ocean dumping
                          do not meet the criteria for site selection set forth in ï¿½ 228.5 through ï¿½ 228.6, the


                                                              viii









                           use of such sites will be terminated as soon as suitable alternate disposal sites can
                           be designated.
                      (d)  The sizes of ocean disposal sites will be limited in order to localize for
                           identification and control any immediate adverse impacts and to permit the
                           implementation of effective monitoring and surveillance programs to prevent
                           adverse long-range impacts. The size, configuration, and location of any disposal
                           site will be determinedas a part of the disposal site evaluation or designation
                           study.
                      (e)  EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites beyond the edge of
                           the continental shelf and other such sites that have been historically used.
                      Specific Disposal-Site Criteria [40 CFR 228.6(a)(1-11)] .
                      (1) Geographical position, depth of water, bottom topography, and distance from
                           coast
                      (2)  Location in relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage areas of
                           living resources in adult or juvenile phases
                      (3)  Location in relation to beaches and other amenity areas
                      (4)  Types and quantities of wastes proposed to be disposed of, and proposed methods
                           of release, including methods of packing the waste, if any
                      (5)  Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring
                      (6)  Dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing characteristics of the area,
                           including prevailing current direction and velocity, if any
                      (7)  Existence and effects of current and previous discharges and dumping in the area
                           including cumulative effects
                           Interference with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction, desalination, fish
                           and shellfish culture, areas of special scientific importance and other legitimate
                           uses of the ocean
                      (9)  The existing water quality and ecology of the site as determined by available data
                           or by trend assessment or baseline surveys
                      (10) Potentiality for the development or recruitment of nuisance species in the disposal
                           site
                      (11) Existence at or in close proximity to the site of any significant natural or cultural
                           features of historical importance.

                      Since 1986, EPA has conducted surveys of proposed, candidate, and interim ODMDSs
                      by using the EPA Ocean Survey Vessel Peter W. Anderson (OSV Anderson).
                  3.  Evaluating permits
                      Under the MPRSA, EPA is charged with developing the permit-application review
                      criteria. Section 102(a) of the MPRSA provides that, in developing these criteria, EPA
                      is to take into consideration the following statutory factors:


                                                             ix









                         ï¿½  Need for the proposed dumping
                         ï¿½  Effects of such dumping on human health and welfare, including economic,
                            esthetic, and recreational values
                         ï¿½  Effects of such dumping on fisheries resources, plankton, fish, shellfish,
                            wildlife, shorelines, and beaches
                         ï¿½  Effects of such dumping on marine ecosystems, particularly with respect to
                            ï¿½ The transfer, concentration, and dispersion of such material and its
                                byproducts through biological, physical, and chemical processes
                            ï¿½ Potential changes in marine-ecosystem diversity, productivity, and stability
                            ï¿½ Species and community population dynamics
                         ï¿½  Persistence and permanence of the effects of the dumping
                         ï¿½  Effects of dumping particular volumes and concentrations of such materials
                         ï¿½  Appropriate locations and methods of disposal or recycling, including land-
                            based alternatives and how requiring the use of such alternative locations or
                            methods could impact the public interest
                         ï¿½  Effects on alternative uses of oceans, such as scientific study, fishing, and
                            other living-resource exploitation, and nonliving-resource exploitation
                         ï¿½  In designating recommended dumping sites, utilization of locations beyond
                            the edge of the continental shelf, wherever possible, by the EPA
                            Administrator.
                     With respect to such criteria as may affect the Department of the Army's Civil Works
                     Program, MPRSA Section 102(a) directs EPA to consult with the Secretary of the
                     Army. Under Section 103 of the MPRSA, the authority to issue dredged-material
                     permits is vested in the Secretary of the Army, who implements this authority through
                     the USACE. The statute provides that the Secretary may issue such permits upon a
                     determination that the disposal will not "unreasonably degrade or endanger human
                     health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems, or
                     economic potentialities" [MPRSA H 102 (a) and 103(a)]. Section 103 further provides
                     that, in making this determination, the Secretary is to apply the EPA criteria relating
                     to the effects of the dumping, together with certain other factors set out in Section
                     .103(b) relating to the need for the dumping and alternative disposal methods. In
                     addition, the statute directs the Secretary to utilize to the extent feasible ocean-
                     dumping sites that have been designated by EPA. Prior to issuing permits, the statute
                     affords EPA an opportunity to review the decision, and if EPA finds that the proposed
                     disposal will not comply with the EPA criteria relating to the effects of the dumping,
                     the permit may not be issued unless the Secretary applies for and obtains from EPA a
                     waiver of the criteria. Under the statute, EPA is to grant the waiver of the criteria
                     unless it determines that the dumping will result in "unacceptably adverse impact" on
                         ï¿½ Municipal water supplies
                         ï¿½ Shellfish beds
                         ï¿½ Wildlife



                                                              x










                          * Fisheries
                          0 Recreational areas
                      [MPRSA ï¿½ï¿½ 103(c) and (d)]
                  4.  Conducting research and testing to evaluate dredged material for ocean disposal
                      EPA Environmental Research Laboratories in Narragansett, Rhode Island, and
                      Newport, Oregon, are presently conducting research on sediment-quality criteria,
                      amphipod bioassays, and the transport and fate of dredged material at disposal sites.
                  5.  Conducting monitoring studies at dredged-material disposal sites
                      EPA and the USACE coordinate monitoring activities at ODMDSs according to site-
                      designation monitoring plans. Frequency and intensity of site monitoring varies among
                      disposal sites due to site use and relative impact of the disposal materials.
                      Since 1986, EPA has conducted detailed surveys of dredged-material disposal sites in
                      Florida, Mississippi, New York, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, using the
                      capabilities of the OSV Anderson.
                  6.  Management of dredged-material disposal sites
                      EPA uses data collected during monitoring studies onboard the OSV Anderson to
                      evaluate
                          If dredged material is contained within the disposal sites
                          The need and location for additional disposal sites

                      and make appropriate management decisions to protect the marine environment.


               The EPA Regions are members of the Ocean Dumping Coordination Committee and assist
               Headquarters in developing policy recommendations and technical guidelines. EPA
               Headquarters also solicits public and other Federal (e.g., National Oceanic and Atmospheric
               Administration) and State agencies for advice and expertise. EPA's goal is accomplished
               through the cooperation of these agencies in the dredging program.


               Although EPA is presently involved in both dredged-material and nondredged-material
               disposal projects, the passage of the Ocean Dumping Ban Act (ODBA) in November 1988
               makes the ocean disposal of industrial and sewage sludge unlawful after December 1991.
               Therefore, this document addresses only ocean disposal of dredged material.


               This document is provided for use and discussion in conjunction with the 1991 Dredging
               Engineering Short Course, sponsored by Texas Engineering Experiment Station, Texas A&M
               University. The information provided in the document should not be construed either as


                                                             xi









             official guidance or policy. Much of the text is extracted from draft documents. As such, the
             full technical accuracy of the material is not yet confirmed. Comments on and adaptations to
             the excerpted text made by the authors of this document are indicated by bracketed italic
             type.


             Organization of this document is as follows:
                 1. Description of the relevant legislation and regulations pertinent to dredged material in
                    the United States
                2. Technical aspects of dredged-material evaluation, permitting, and disposal
                3. Description of how technical issues may be the basis for revising regulations.

































                                                           xii




  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I                        REGUIATORY BASIS FOR EPA ROLE
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  11
  I
  I
  I










                                           1.0 REGULATURY BASIS FOR EPA ROLE



                EPA and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) share responsibilities for the
                ocean-disposal program for dredged material. A number of statutes, treaties, and regulations
                affect the disposal of dredged material into the territorial waters of the United States. EPA's
                goal in administering these requirements is to ensure that management decisions regarding
                dredged-material disposal protect human health and the environment. The following are
                discussed in this Section as they relate to dredged-material disposal.
                     0   Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other
                         Matter, known as the London Dumping Convention (LDC)
                     0   Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), particularly
                         Section 103
                     *   Clean Water Act (CWA), particularly Section 404
                     0   National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
                     0   Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria




                                         1.1 LONDON DUMPING CONVENTION (1972


                         The London Dumping Convention (LDC) [Convention on the Prevention of Marine
                         Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, December 29, 1972 (26 UST
                         2403:TIAS 8165)], to which the United States is a signatory, is an international treaty
                         that deals with marine-waste disposal. The Convention entered into force for the United
                         States on August 30, 1975. The LDC prescribes a duty to "take all practicable steps" to
                         prevent pollution resulting from ocean dumping. The dumping of wastes is regulated by
                         three annexes to the LDC. Annex I (the "black list") includes [particularly] hazardous
                         substances [such as] organohalogen compounds, mercury, cadmium, oil, plastics, and
                         high-level radioactive wastes, the dumping of which is expressly prohibited. Annex II
                         (the "grey list") includes substances such as arsenic, lead, copper, zinc, organosilicon
                         compounds, cyanides, and pesticides, the dumping of which may be carried out only
                         pursuant to a "prior special permit." Any other substances [may] be dumped subsequent
                         to the issuance of a general permit by the appropriate nation after careful consideration
                         of all the factors set forth in Annex III. LDC jurisdiction includes all waters seaward of
                         the baseline of the territorial sea. . .


                         [Section 102(a) of the MPRSA directs EPA in establishing the ocean-dumping regulations to]
                         "apply the standards and criteria binding upon the United States under the Convention,
                         including its Annexes." . . .    Therefore, the LDC . . . directly affects the policy,
                         regulatory, and technical aspects of the dredged material ocean disposal program.
                         Guidance applicable to the disposal of dredged material has been. adopted by









                          Consultative Meetings [of] the I.DC, based on scientific and technical recommendations
                          by the LDC Scientific Group.

                          The LDC forbids the dumping of dredged material containing [the Annex 1] prohibited
                          materials [unless present only] as trace contaminants [or when rapidly rendered harmless
                          following disposal.    In genera4 o]cean disposal is.not an acceptable alternative for
                          contaminated dredged material ... unless special controls are in effect to isolate those
                          contaminants from the marine environment. The LDC has generaBy agreed that
                          management strategies, such as covering contaminated sediments with clean dredged
                          material (capping), may be technically and scientifically feasible in low-energy
                          environments and should continue as field research with associated monitoring programs
                          to determine the environmental acceptability of the controls.

                          The text for Section 1.1 LONDON DUMPING CONTVENT71ON (1972) was taken from EPA/USACF_ 1990.
                          Draft Dredged Material Disposal StrateV Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA
                          En&eering, Science, and Technology, Inc.



                                           12 MARINE PROTEC1710N, RESEARCH, AND
                                                       SANCTUARIES ACIP OF 1972

                          A major statute that shapes U.S. policy on marine poflution is the MPRSA (popularly
                          called the Ocean Dumping Act), enacted in 1972 (Pub.L. No. 92-532, 86 Stat. 1052, 33
                          U.S.C.A. 1401 et seq.). [The provisions of the LDC are implemented through the MPRSA.]
                          The MPRSA regulates transportation and dumping of wastes in ocean waters (Title I),
                          establishes requirements for monitoring and research (Title II), and establishes [the
                          Marine Sanctuaries Program, which is implemented by NOAA] (Title III). The intent of
                          the MPRSA is to protect the quality of U.S. coastal and open-ocean waters by
                          prohibiting indiscriminate disposal of materials at sea.

                          The MPRSA establishes the policy of the United States to "regulate the dumping of all
                          types of materials into ocean waters and to prevent or strictly limit the dumping into
                          ocean waters of any material which would adversely affect human health, welfare, or
                          amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems, or economic potentialities"
                          (MPRSA ï¿½ 2, 33 USC 1401). Ocean waters are those waters of the open seas lying
                          seaward of the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured, as provided for in the
                          Convention on the Territorial Sea and the, Contiguous Zone (15 UST 1606; TIAS 5639).
                          The jurisdiction of the MPRSA includes coastal and open-ocean waters of the territorial
                          seas of the United States (0-3 nmi), the contiguous zone (3-12 nmi), and beyond
                          [Figure 1-1] . . .

                          Under the MPRSA, the EPA and other Federal agencies are assigned responsibilities for
                          the various statutory requirements defined by the Act (Table 1-1].

                              *    EPA, in consultation with the USACE, promulgates criteria governing ocean disposal
                                   of dredged material.]

                              0    EPA and the [USACE] administer the permit programs under the MPRSA.
                                   [D]redged material [permits] issued by the [USACE are subject to EPA review and
                                   concurrence].



                                                                         1-2

















                                                                                                                  ..... .....
                                      inland and Estuarine Waters


                                         Liak"'




                                                                                                                                   @K"
                                          Non-tidal Wetlands
                                                                 Runoff
                                             CWA

                                                  . . ......                ---
                                                                 ..........




                                                Tidal Wetlands


                                                                                                                zo'
                                                     CWA


















                                                                                                                       . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                                                                       :. . . . . . ....... . . . . . . .
                                                                                                                                  W
                                                                                                                                   .... .. ..... 1-


                                                                                                                              X50 K,
                                                                                                                               'V Z@


                                   CWA
                                                                                                                   "K












                             CWA - Clean Water Act
                             MPRSA - Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.
                             Dimping beyond the boundary of the territorial sea is covered by MPRSA. CWA covers disposal of fill
                             rnateria) within the territorial sea. Estuarine and inland aquatic discharge falls under CWA.
                             Adapted from: National Advisory Committee on oosarks and Atmosphere, The Role of the,Oceaa in a Waste Management
                             Strategy (Washington. DC: U.S. Goverment Printing Office, I SS1).




                             Figure 1-1.          Geographical Jurisdictions of the MPRSA and CWA Regarding
                                                  Dredged-Material Disposal. [From EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft
                                                  Dredged Material Disposal SMeSy Document In preparation by
                                                  Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and
                                                  Technology, Inc.]

                                                                                  1-3








             Table 1-1. EPA and USACE Responsibilities under the Marine Protection, Research, and
                         Sanctuaries Act of 1972. [Provided by EPA Headquarters]


                  ï¿½  Under MPRSA, an ocean-dumping permit may be issued if the dumping will not
                     "unreasonably degrade or endanger" human health, welfare, or the marine
                     environment.

                  ï¿½  EPA is charged with developing ocean-dumping criteria to be used in evaluating
                     permit applications.

                             Statute lays out factors to be considered by EPA in developing the permit
                             review criteria:
                             ï¿½ Need for dumping
                             ï¿½ Effect of dumping on human health and welfare
                             ï¿½ Effect of dumping on fish, wildlife, shorelines
                             ï¿½ Effect of dumping on marine ecosystems
                             ï¿½ Persistence and permanence of effects
                             ï¿½ Effect of dumping particular volumes and concentrations
                             ï¿½ Effect on alternate uses of oceans (e.g., fishing)
                             ï¿½ Designate sites beyond OCS wherever feasible

                  ï¿½ Permitting authority is split between EPA and USACE:

                        ï¿½ EPA is the permitting authority for all materials other than dredged material.

                        ï¿½ USACE is the permitting authority for dredged material, subject to the EPA
                             review/concurrence role.

                  ï¿½ USACE is directed to use the EPA criteria relating to the effects of dumping in its
                     permitting decisions.

                        USACE may not issue a permit if these EPA criteria are not met, unless the
                        USACE certifies that there are no economically feasible alternatives to dumping
                        and request a waiver of criteria from EPA.

                               EPA is to a grant waiver request within 30 days of receipt unless EPA finds
                               that the dumping will result in "unacceptably adverse impacts" on municipal
                               water supplies, shellfish beds, wildlife, fisheries, or recreational areas.

                  ï¿½  EPA also is responsible for recommending sites for ocean dumping, and the USACE
                     is directed to use EPA-designated sites to the extent feasible when selecting dumping
                     locations.

                  ï¿½  Dredged material constitutes the bulk of material dumped, and will be the focus of the
                     program in the future as sewage-sludge dumping phases out.

                             Approximately 65 million cubic yards per year are ocean-dumped



                                                           1-4









                            *    The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) is] responsible for surveillance [activities] and
                                 [EPA is responsible for] the enforcement of permit conditions.

                            0    EPA is authorized to designate [dredged-materian disposal sites and [has site-
                                 monitoring responsibilities. . . J

                            9    EPA and the USACE cooperate in monitoring dredged-material disposal sites and
                                 the management of such sites.]
                         The following Sections summarize each title of the MPRSA as it relates to dredged
                         material disposal.   12.1 Title I of the NTRSA, Section 103,
                               Regulation of Transportation and Dumping         Wastes in Ocean Waters

                         Title I of the MPRSA regulates transportation and dumping of all materials in ocean
                         waters [i.e.,.marine waters seaward of the baseline (inner boundary) of the territorial
                         sea]. The waters subject to the MPRSA can be either open oceans or coastal waters.
                         Specific requirements of Title I include the review of permit applications and issuing
                         permits, [development of regulations, and designation of ocean dumping sites.]

                                               122 Title H of the NTRSA, Section 201,
                                              Research within the Scope of the UTRSA

                         Title II, Section 201, of the MPRSA establishes a comprehensive monitoring and
                         research program under the authority of the Secretary of Commerce. Studies of long-
                         term effects of ocean dumping are carried out by the NOAA, the USCG, EPA, and
                         other agencies associated with the regulation, management, and monitoring of ocean
                         ecosystems. These studies assess the impacts of disposal of dredged material and other
                         wastes into ocean and coastal waters, or into the Great Lakes and their connecting
                         waters. In effect, these studies of the ocean disposal of dredged material are not limited
                         solely to dumping from vessels. This research may also identify impacts from other
                         dredged-material disposal options, such as dredged-material containment areas or
                         islands, that may impact ocean or coastal ecosystems. . . .

                                                     123 Title M of the UTRSA


                         Title III of the MPRSA establishes the National Marine Sanctuaries Program (NMSP).
                         Section 303(a) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, after consultation, to designate
                         any discrete area of the marine environment as a national marine sanctuary and
                         promulgate regulations implementing the designation, if the Secretary determines that,
                         among other things, "the area is of special national significance due to its resource or
                         human-use values" and that the designation of the area as a national marine sanctuary
                         ,"rill facilitate the objectives of "coordinated and comprehensive conservation and
                         management of the area, including resource protection, scientific research, and public
                         education." Federal activities, including dredged material disposal, can be performed
                         only in these sanctuaries if the Secretary of Commerce certifies that they are consistent
                         with the purposes of Title III of the MPRSA and can be carried out within the
                         regulations for the sanctuary (33 CFR 209.145).




                                                                    1-5










                          Under Section 304(a)(1)(C)(viii) of the NTRSA, the Secretary of Commerce must
                          evaluate the advantages of cooperative Federal and State management "if all or part of a
                          proposed ma   rine sanctuary is within the territorial limits of any State or is superjacent to
                          the subsoil and seabed within the seaward boundary of a State, as that boundary is
                          established under the Submerged Lands Act." . . . The States have an acknowledged
                          interest - environmental, economic, and otherwise-in uses made of offshore coastal and
                          ocean environments. Section 304 of the NTRSA indicates that the Congress supports
                          Federal/State cooperation in the increasingly complex area of ocean management, and
                          applies at least to the geographical jurisdiction that the States have been given in the
                          coastal zone.                          12A Section 102

                          Section 102 of the MPRSA authorizes the EPA Administrator to designate ocean
                          disposal sites and issue permits for the dumping of all material,,, except dredged
                          materials, into the ocean waters.... [Section 102 also] directs the EPA Administrator to
                          establish and apply ocean dumping criteria....

                          The text for Section 1.2 MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARCH AND SANCTUARIES ACT (1972) was
                          taken from EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Dredged Material Disposal StrateV Document. In preparation by
                          Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., and from EPA. 1990. Draft
                          Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Revisions Ocean Dumping Regulations for Dredged Material.
                          In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications International Corporation.



                                           13 SEMON 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT

                          An overview of the CWA Section 404 [(Pub. L. No. 95-217) (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)]
                          program and its regulatory requirements [is] presented in this Section. The CWA
                          Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable waters. . . .
                          Navigable waters are defined in the CWA Section 502(7) as "the waters of the United
                          States, including territorial seas."      The waters of the United States for EPA and
                          [USACE] purposes are defined in 40 CFR Part 230.3(s) and 33 CFR Part 328,
                          respectively. The definitions are consistent with each other and extend to all waters,
                          including lakes, streams, mudflats, and wetlands, "the use, degradation of which" could
                          affect interstate or foreign commerce.

                                                          1-3.1 Geogmphic Jurisdiction

                          The ultimate responsibility for determining the scope of geographic jurisdiction of the
                          CWA, including the Section 404 program ("waters of the United States"), lies with EPA.

                               "[Maters, of the United States," includ[e]

                                   ï¿½    Waters that are currently used, were used in the past, or may be used in the
                                        future in interstate or foreign commerce

                                   ï¿½    All tidal waters

                                   ï¿½    All interstate waters and wetlands [(including seasonal wedands)]



                                                                          1-6









                                    0    All other waters (such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands), if
                                         their use, degradation, or destruction could affect interstate or foreign
                                         commerce


                                    0    Tributaries to waters or wetlands identified above


                                    9    The territorial sea and

                                    0    Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than wetlands) identified above

                            Wetlands subject to regulation under CWA Section 404 are delineated by using a three-
                            parameter approach: (1) positive indicators of wetlands vegetation, (2) hydrology, and
                            (3) hydric soils.

                                         132 Compliance with CWA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines

                            The CWA. Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines contain substantive environmental criteria used
                            in evaluating discharges of dredged or fill material. The fundamental precept ofthese
                            Guidelines is that "dredged or fill material should not be discharged into the aquatic
                            ecosystem, unless it can be demonstrated that such a discharge will not have an
                            unacceptable adverse impact either individually or in combination with known or
                            probable impacts of other activities affecting the ecosystems of concern" [40 CFR
                            230.1(c)].

                            Tlese Guidelines apply not only to CWA Section 404 permits issued by the [USACE] but
                            also to [USACE] O&M programs and Civil Works projects involving the discharge of fill
                            and dredged material. Compliance with these Guidelines has to be clearly demonstrated
                            before any CWA Section 404 permit can be issued.                    Tlere are several specific
                            restrictions on discharges listed in 40 CFR 230.10.

                            One of the primary requirements of the Guidelines is that no discharge can be permitted
                            when there is a practicable alternative with less adverse impact on the aquatic
                            environment (unless the identified alternative poses other significant environmental
                            problems)[40 CFR 230.10(a)]. Tlis identification of practicable alternatives (that is @]
                            altematives are presumed to exist) is applied more rigorously to projects that are
                            proposed to be located in special aquatic sites when the project is not water-dependent.
                            Special aquatic sites include wetlands, coral reefs, mud flats, riffle pool complexes in
                            streams, vegetated shallows, and sanctuaries and refuges.

                            In addition, the discharge may not violate other applicable laws, such as State water-
                            quality standards, toxic effluent standards, or the Endangered Species Act and Marine
                            Sanctuaries designated under the MPRSA of 1972 [40 CFR 230.10(b)].

                            The third requirement states that all appropriate and practicable steps should be taken
                            to minimize (i.e., mitigate) the adverse impacts of the discharge on the aquatic
                            ecosystem, including providing for compensation for unavoidable impacts. These apply
                            to both water- and nonwater-dependent activities.

                            A permit may also be denied if the activity will cause significant adverse effects on
                            human health. or welfare, including but not limited to effects on municipal water supplies,
                            plankton, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and special aquatic sites; life stages of aquatic life and


                                                                           1-7









                        other wildlife dependent on aquatic ecosystems; and aquatic ecosystems diversity,
                        productivity, and stability; and recreational, esthetic, and economic values [40 CFR
                        230.10(c)]. . .

                                 133 Addressing Unacoeptable Adverse Environmental Impacts
                        CWk Section 404(g)

                        EPA works with the [USACE] during the permit decision process whenever possible to
                        ensure that unacceptable adverse impacts are avoided, and that most concerns are
                        resolved through this interagency consultation. If EPA and the [USACE] are unable to
                        resolve concerns through the interagency consultation, then the two agencies may use
                        another resolution process, the Memoranda of Agreement (MOA) under CWA Section
                        404(q). Tlis MOA is designed to resolve any differences over permit decisions. If the
                        disputes are not resolved in the field, this MOA allows the EPA Assistant Administrator
                        for Water to request that the Army's Assistant Secretary for Civil Works elevate the pro-
                        posed permit decision to higher authority for review.

                        CWA Section 404(c)

                        Under this authority, EPA may prohibit, withdraw, or restrict disposal of dredged or fill
                        material into waters of the United States if the discharge would have unacceptable
                        adverse effects on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery areas (including
                        spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreational areas. The authority may be used
                        before, during, or after [USACE] action on a permit application. EPA may also exercise
                        this authority in the absence of a specified permit application or [USACE) regulatory
                        action.  The CWA 404(c) process includes requirements for notice, hearing, and
                        consultation with the Secretary of the Army.

                        CWA Section 4N(b)(2)

                        Under CWA Section 404(b)(2), if i site is disqualified by the application of the
                        environmental criteria, the [USACE] is authorized to reexamine use of the site through a
                        consideration of "the economic impact of the site on navigation and anchorage."

                                                          13.4 Enforcement

                        The enforcement authority, which is shared by the [USACE] and EPA, covers discharges
                        without a permit and discharges in violation of the conditions of a permit. Under
                        Section 309, the EPA Administrator has enforcement authority over anyone who
                        discharges without a permit or is in violation of the terms of a permit. Under CWA
                        Section 404(s), the [USACE] has enforcement authority over violators of [USACE]-issued
                        permits.

                        It would appear that EPA and the [USACE] have overlapping enforcement authority.
                        Because of the [USACE] larger field presence of the [USACE] and its role as the Federal
                        permit-issuing authority and to avoid conflicts in enforcement authority, the EPA has
                        focused its enforcement efforts on unpermitted discharges.

                        A division of responsibility was formalized in the 1989 Enforcement MOA. EPA is the
                        lead enforcement agency (i.e., they determine what, if any, enforcement actions to pursue

                                                                   1-8









                        are final) for unpern-@tted discharge cases. The [USACE] is the lead enforcement agency
                        with regard to [USACE].issued permit violations.

                        The text for Section 1.3 SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT was taken from EPAMSACE
                        1990. Draft Dredged Material Disposal Strate& Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA
                        Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.



                                 1A NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACr OF 1969



                        'ne NEPA [(Pub-L. No. 91-190) (42 U.S.C.4321 et seq.)] applies to major Federal actions
                        [significantly affecting the quality of the human environment]. Actions coordinated by the
                        [USA CE] in the areas of dredging and disposal come under the NEPA jurisdiction. It is
                        through the NEPA process that the alternatives of no action, ocean disposal, CWA
                        Section 404 disposal, and upland disposal of - dredged material are evaluated,
                        documented, and publicly disclosed.

                                       1A.1 Goals of the National Environmental Policy Act

                        The NEPA was signed by the Congress on January 1, 1970, in recognition of man's
                        profound effect on the natural environment.           The Act establishes a national
                        environmental policy with six goals:
                                 0   Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment
                                     for succeeding generations

                                 0   Ensure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and
                                     culturally pleasing surroundings

                                 0   Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without
                                     degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended
                                     consequences

                                 0   Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national
                                     heritage, and maintain, Wherever possible, an environment that supports
                                     diversity and variety of individual choice

                                 0   Achieve a balance between population and resource use that Will pe rinit high
                                     standards of living and a wide range of life's amenities

                                 .0  Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the ma)dmum
                                     attainable recycling of depletable resources


                                   1.42 Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act

                        The NEPA requires that government use all practicable means, consistent with the Act
                        and other essential considerations of national policy, to fulfill the six goals.      Tliis
                        requirement specifically applies to Federal agencies, their plans, regulations, programs,
                        and facilities. The process that has been established under the guidelines of the NEPA


                                                                   1-9









                           helps public officials to make decisions based on an understanding of their environmental
                           consequences and to take actions that protect, restore, and enhance the environment.
                           An important too] in this process is the preparation of a document that provides
                           information about.the environmental impact of a proposed action. This document is
                           either an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or an Environmental Assessment
                           (EA). . . .

                                                          1.43 EPA Review Authorities

                           Section 102(2)(A) of the NEPA requires agencies to use an interdisciplinary approach in
                           their decision-making processes to ensure that environmental concerns receive adequate
                           consideration.     [Under NEPA, EPA and other Federal agencies may comment on
                           environmental documentation with regard to] matters under which they hold jurisdiction by
                           law or by special expertise. [In addidon,] Section 309 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
                           specifically gives EPA the authority to oversee the environmental actions of other
                           Federal agencies that may affect the environment [by reviewing] environmental
                           documents prepared under the NEPA and mak[ing] the results of its Teview available to
                           the public. When EPA finds a project to be environmentally unsatisfactory or the NEPA
                           documentation inadequate, the agency can' refer the project to the CEQ [Council of
                           Environmental Quality] for a resolution....

                           The text for Section 1.4 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 was taken from
                           EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Dredged Material Disposal Strategy Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean
                           Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.


                                      1.5 OCEAN DUMPING REGLTIATIONS AND CRITERIA,


                           The MPRSA gives the EPA Administrator and the Secretary of the Army authority to
                           establish specific procedures and regulations for the issuance of permits under the ocean
                           dumping permit program (MPRSA ï¿½ 108, 33 USC 1418). In accordance with this
                           authority, the EPA published its Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria on October
                           15, 1973, in Title 40 CFR Parts 220-227. These regulations were revised in 1977 in Title
                           40 CFR Parts 220-229 [(Table 1-2). In addition to reflecting the statutory factors set forth in
                           MPRSA Section 102(a), the ocean-dumping criteria and regulations] are required to "apply
                           the standards and criteria binding upon the United States under the [London Dumping]
                           Convention, including its Annexes." Ile LDC forbids the dumping of dredged material
                           containing prohibited materials (e.g., mercury, cadmium, or organohalogen compounds)
                           other than as trace contaminants.

                           The [USA CE (in permitting) and the EPA (in its dredged-material pennit-review role)] must
                           apply the ocean dumping [regulations and] criteria developed by the EPA to determine
                           the acceptability of dredged material for ocean disposal. Materials that fail to pass these
                           criteria may not be disposed of in the ocean without instituting controls or management
                           actions to [ensure that potential impact] to the marine environment [is acceptable].
                           Proposed ocean disposal of dredged material. must also comply with permitting and
                           *dredging regulations and criteria published by the [USACE] in Title 33 CFR Parts 209,
                           320-330, and 335-338.





                                                                          1-10








           Table 1-2. Contents of Title 40 CFR Parts 220-2Z9 - Ocean Dumping. [From EPA 1990.
                      Worlang Draft Sue Designafto?k Monuoring, and Managetnent Guidance for Ocean
                      Disposal of Dredged MatMd In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and
                      Tetra Tech, Inc.]


           Part 220     GENERAL
                        Purpose and scope; definitions; categories of permits; authority to issue
                        permits

                 221-   APPLICATIONS FOR OCEAN DUMPING PERMITS UNDER SECTION
                        102 OF THE ACT
                        Applications for [EPA-issued] permits; adequacy of information; fees

                 222    OCEAN DUMPING PERMIT APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTION 102 OF
                        THE ACT
                        [EPA] Tentative determinations; notice of applications; hearings;
                        recommendations; issuance of permits; appeals

                 223    CONTENTS OF PERMITS; REVISION, REVOCATION OR LIMITATION
                        OF OCEAN DUMPING PERMITS UNDER SECT71ON 104d OF THE ACT
                        Contents of various [EPA-issued] permits; revising, revoking, or limiting
                        permits; hearings

                 224    RECORDS AND REPORTS REQUIRED OF OCEAN DUMPING
                        PERMITTEES UNDER SECTION 102 OF THE ACT
                        Records to maintain; reports to file [by EPA pennittees]

                 225    CORPS OF ENGINEERS DREDGED MATERIAL PERMITS
                        Review of dredged material permits; procedure for [waiver requests by USACE]


                 227    CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF PERMIT AP      PLICATIONS FOR
                        OCEAN DUMPING OF MATERIALS
                        Criteria for evaluating environmental impacts; criteria for evaluating the need
                        for ocean dumping and alternatives; impact on esthetics, recreational and
                        economics; impact on other ocean uses; requirement for interim permits

                 228    CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR
                        OCEAN DUMPING
                        Site management responsibilities; procedures for designating sites; criteria for
                        selection of sites; times and rates of disposal; monitoring; evaluating impacts;
                        modification of site use; delegation of authority for interim sites; baseline and
                        trend assessment surveys

                 229    GENERAL PERMITS
                        Burial at sea; transportation of vessels and disposal of vessels



                                                1-11










                        Title 40 CFR Parts 225 and 227 include criteria to be considered in the evaluation of
                        applications for dredged material disposal permits. Part 225 [speciflcally addresses the
                        permitting oA proposed ocean disposal of dredged material. [Sections oA Part 227
                        [establish] the requirements that apply to dredged material technical evaluations and
                        contains procedural requirements for the evaluation of all dredged material proposed for
                        ocean disposal. These rely heavily on biological assessments. A manual was published in
                        1977 jointly by the EPA and the [USACE] to describe the biological tests. . . . This
                        manual has been updated in the DraftEcological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of
                        Dredged Material into Ocean Waters. . . . [Those] sections of Part 227 applicable to
                        dredged material evaluation [are specifically identifted in the regulations].

                        The regulations published by the [USACE] to establish criteria for the evaluation of
                        permit applications and the issuance of permits (33 CFR 209, 320-330, and 335-338)
                        emphasize evaluation techniques such as bioassays, and bioassessments that estimate the
                        potential for environmental impact of dredged material disposal similar to the 40 CFR
                        requirements.   Dredged mat   erial evaluated under testing procedures and found to
                        comply with the regulations may be disposed, under permit, at a designated ocean
                        dredged material disposal site if it satisfies all other applicable requirements of 40 CFR
                        Parts 220-229, the terms and conditions of the site designation, and the requirements of
                        33 CFR Parts 320-330 and 335-338.

                        Ile dredged material regulations make a distinction between the criteria for
                        uncontaminated dredged material and those for contaminated dredged material (40 CFR
                        ï¿½ [2]27.13). . This distinction simplifies the evaluation procedures for dredged material
                        that could be classified as uncontaminated and limits the amount of information that
                        would have to be compiled to characterize these materials. In brief, [such] dredged
                        material is (1) composed predominantly of naturally occurring bottom material larger
                        than silt and is in areas of high current or wave energy, (2) [used] for beach nourishment
                        or restoration and is of a particle size compatible with the receiving beach, or (3)
                        [composed] of the same substrate as the receiving site and is sufficiently removed from
                        known sources of pollution so as to reasonably ensure that the material is not
                        contaminated. If these criteria are not met, [more wensive] testing is required. If a
                        potential for unacceptable adverse environmental impacts is identified, a case-by-case
                        evaluation of management options is necessary. If ocean dumping is to be pursued,
                        attention should be given to using restrictive disposal techniques to minimize or
                        eliminate potentially adverse impacts to the marine environment....
                        The text for Section 1.5 OCEAN DUMPING REGULATIONS AND CRJTERIA was taken from EPA.
                        1990. Working Draft Site Designation, Monitorin& and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of
                        Dredged MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Oceari Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.
















                                                                   1-12




   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I ,


   I .                                      EPA RESEARai

                                 A Means to Evaluate Dredged Material and
   I                               Implement Ocean Dumping Regulations
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I
   I










                                                  2.0 EPA RESEARCH



              EPA conducts research on dredged material and the environmental effects of its disposal at
              the EPA Environmental Research Laboratories in Narragansett, Rhode Island, and Newport,
              Oregon; the Office of Research and Development (ORD) Environmental Research
              Laboratory in Gulf Breeze, Florida; and at numerous university and contract laboratories.
              Current projects include
                   *  Development of chronic-test amphipod bioassays
                   0  Comparison of new "Green Book" (Draft Ecological Evaluation of P@oposed Discharge
                      of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters) and old "Green Book" tests
                   *  Development of physical transport models for fate and effects evaluation of dredged
                      material
                   0  Studies for the development of sediment-quality criteria
                   0  Evaluation of trophic transfer of contaminants from sediments
              In addition to publications in scientific journals and the documents excerpted in this paper,
              EPA sponsors the publication of documents on sediment assessment and dredged-material
              disposal. A partial list of these documents follows.


                   ï¿½  EPA/USACE Technical Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material. 1981.
                      Procedures for Handling and Chemical Analysis of Sediment and Water Samples. EPA-
                      4805572010.

                   ï¿½  EPA. 1989. Assessing Human Health Risks from Chemically Contaminated Fish and
                      Shellfish - A Guidance Manual. EPA-503/8-89-002.

                   ï¿½  EPA Environmental Research Laboratory Pacific Ecosystems Branch Bioaccumulation
                      Team. 1990. Guidance Manual. Bedded Sediment Bioaccumulation Tests. EPA/600/x-
                      89/302, ERLN-N111.

                   ï¿½  EPA Environmental Research Laboratory Pacific Ecosystems Branch Bioaccumulation
                      Team. 1990. Computerized Risk and Bioaccumulation System ERLN-137.

                   ï¿½  PTI Environmental Services. 1989. Comparison of Bioassays for Assessing     Sediment
                      Toxicity in Paget Sound. Final report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                      Puget Sound Estuary Program. EPA 910/9-89-004.

                   ï¿½  PTI Environmental Services. 1990. Effects of Sediment Holding Time on Sediment
                      Toxicity. Draft report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA.



                                                             2-1









               ï¿½   PTI Environmental Services. 1990. Development of a Neanthes Sediment Bibassay for
                   Use in Puget Sound Final report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Puget
                   Sound Estuary Program. EPA 910/9-89-005.

               ï¿½   Tetra Tech. 1985. Bioaccumulation Monitoring Guidance. 3. Recommended Analytical
                   Detection Limits. EPA Contract No. 68-01-6938, TC-3953-03. Final report for the U.S.
                   Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, Marine
                   Operation Division, WH-556M, Washington, DC.

               ï¿½   Tetra Tech., 1986. Bioaccumulation Monitoring Guidance. 4. Ana4,tical Methods for U.S.
                   EPA Priority Pollutants and 301(h) Pesticides in Estuarine and Marine Organisms. EPA
                   Contract No. 68-01-6938, TC-3953-03. Final report for the U.S. Environmental
                   Protection Agency, Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, Marine Operations
                   Division, WH-556M, Washington, DC.
               ï¿½   Tetra Tech. 1986. Analytical Methods for U.S. EPA Priority Pollutants and 301(h)
                   Pesticides in Estuarine and Marine Sediments. EPA Contract No. 68-01-6938, TC-3953-
                   03. Final report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Marine and
                   Estuarine Protection, Marine Operations Division, VVH-556M, Washington, DC.





























                                                        2-2




  I .
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I                                 SITE DESIGNATION
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I









                                                        3.0 SITE DESIGNATION



                                                           3.1 INTRODUCTION


                 T'he MTRSA authorizes the EPA Administrator to designate ocean dredged-material disposal
                 sites (ODMDS). The authority to designate such sites extends to dredged-material disposal
                 sites. Two categories of sites may be designated under the NTRSA: interim and final sites.
                 Approximately 65 million cubic yards per year of dredged material are disposed of at 104 (45
                 interim and 59 final) designated sites. Interim sites were'designated by EPA following
                 NTRSA enactment on the basis of their historical usage, and thereafter are subject to
                 environmental reviews. A       site is designated as interim until all the required environmental
                 studies and reviews have been conducted to determine if the environmental criteria, as stated
                 in the Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria, have been met. If the criteria are met, the
                 site is designated as an approved final designation site.
                          [The site designation process begins nith a request from the USA CE to designate a site for
                          disposal of dredged material The EPA and the COE work together to select and designate
                          ocean dredged material disposal sites (ODMDS) [33 CFR 320.2 (g)].] . . . Although,
                          according to MPRSA ï¿½ 103(b), the Secretary of the Army is to conduct an independent
                          assessment of appropriate disposal sites for dredged material, the Secretary is directed to
                          utilize, to the extent feasible, sites recommended by the EPA under ï¿½ 102(c).... In
                          cases where a recommended disposal site has not been designated by the Administrator,
                          the COE District Engineer may, in consultation with the EPA, select a site in accordance
                          with the requirements of 40 CFR ï¿½ 228.5 and ï¿½ 228.6(a). Concurrence by the EPA in
                          permits issued for the use of such site for the dumping of dredged material constitutes
                          EPA approval of the use of the site for dredged material disposal [40 CFR
                          ï¿½ 228.4(e)(2)]....
                          The tert for Section 3.1 INTRODUCIION was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation,
                          Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material, In preparation by
                          BatteDe Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                          32 REGUIATORY CRITERIA AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES


                          Pursuant to MPRSA ï¿½ 102, the EPA has promulgated regulations governing ocean
                          disposal site designation as part of its Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria [40 CFR
                          Part 228. Under MPRSA ï¿½ 103(b), the Secretary of the Army is to utilize EPA-designated
                          sites to the wentfeasible.] ... The criteria and procedures for the designation of ocean
                          disposal sites for use under dredged-material permits are described in detail in Part 228
                          of the Ocean Dumping Regulations. As defined in 40 CFR ï¿½ 228.2(a), "disposal site"
                          refers to an interim or finally approved and precise geographical area within which ocean
                          dumping of wastes is permitted under conditions specified in permits issued under ï¿½ 102


                                                                       3-1









                        and ï¿½ 103 of the Act. Site designation refers to the promulgation of a rule pursuant to
                        40 CFR Part 228 that specifies an ocean disposal site according to precise geographic
                        coordinates.

                        Designation of a disposal site refers only to the formal selection of a site for ocean
                        disposal under dredged material ocean disposal permits. Designation of a site does not
                        authorize the dumping of material at the site. . . . Dumping at any designated site may
                        take place only after a permit authorizing such dumping has been issued. The permit
                        identifies the dredged material and [may set] limits on the times, rates, and methods of
                        disposal and quantities of materials that may be dumped.            [In addifior4 the site
                        designation itself may contain restrictions on the 1)Pe of material or amounts that may be
                        disposed of at the site.]

                        Site designation for ocean disposal of dredged material will be made based on
                        environmental studies of the site, regions adjacent to the site, and on historical
                        knowledge of the impact of dredged material disposal on areas similar to such sites in
                        physical, chemical, and biological characteristics [40 CFR ï¿½ 228.4(e)(1)]....

                        . . .Sites designated or redesignated for dredged material ocean disposal are chosen
                        based on specific criteria designed to minimize adverse impacts on the marine
                        environment detailed at 40 CFR ï¿½ 228.5 and ï¿½ 228.6 as appropriate. T'he [five] general
                        criteria identified by ï¿½ 228.5 for the selection of sites are ...
                            (a) T'he dumping of materials into the ocean will be permitted only at sites or in
                                areas selected to minimize the interference of disposal activities with other
                                activities in the marine environment, particularly avoiding areas of existing
                                fisheries or shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or recreational
                                navigation.
                            (b) Locations and boundaries of disposal sites will be so chosen that temporary
                                perturbations in water quality or other environmental conditions during initial
                                mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere within the site can be expected to
                                be reduced to normal ambient seawater levels or to undetectable contaminant
                                concentrations or effects before reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary,
                                or known geographically limited fishery or shellfishery.
                            (c) I%] at any time during or after disposal site evaluation studies, it is determined
                                that existing disposal sites presently approved on an interim basis for ocean
                                dumping do not meet the criteria for site selection set forth in ï¿½ 228.5 through ï¿½
                                228.6, the use of such sites will be terminated as soon as suitable alternate
                                disposal sites can be designated.
                            (d) The sizes of ocean disposal sites will be limited in order to localize for
                                identification and control any immediate adverse impacts and to permit the
                                implementation of effective monitoring and surveillance programs to prevent
                                adverse long-range impacts. Tle size, configuration, and location of any disposal
                                site will be determined as a part of the disposal site evaluation or designation
                                study.
                            (e) EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites beyond the edge of
                                the continental shelf and other such sites that have been historically used....





                                                                    3-2








                          [The fl specific criteria to be considered for the selection of sites identified by ï¿½ 22& 6(a) are]
                              0   Geographical position, depth of water, bottom topography, and distance from
                                  coast
                              0   Location in relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage areas of
                                  living resources in adult or juvenile phases
                              0   Location in relation to beaches and other amenity areas
                              *   Types and quantities of wastes proposed to be disposed of, and proposed
                                  methods of release, including methods of pacldng the waste, if any
                              0   Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring
                              0   Dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing characteristics of the area,
                                  including prevailing current direction and velocity, if any
                              0   Existence and effects of current and previous discharges and dumping in the area
                                  including cumulative effects
                              0   Interference with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction, desalination,
                                  fish and shellfish culture, areas of special scientific importance and other
                                  legitimate uses of the ocean
                              0   The existing water quality and ecology of the site as determined by available
                                  data or by trend assessment or baseline surveys
                              0   Potentiality for the development or recruitment of nuisance species in the
                                  disposal site
                              0   Existence at or in close proximity to the site of any significant natural or cultural
                                  features of historical importance....

                              Other factors such as a comparison of short-term uses versus long-term productivity
                          of. the site and the extent of irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources by
                          selection of the site may be of importance in the evaluation of potential disposal sites.
                          To protect critical areas, the EPA Administrator . . . , in consultation with the COE,
                          designate sites or times within which certain materials may not be dumped [MPRSA
                            102(c), 33 USC 1412(c)].

                          ... A national Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) has been established between
                          the EPA and the COE for the purpose of facilitating implementation of the MPRSA
                          requirements that these agencies ensure that ocean dredged material disposal activities
                          will not unreasonably degrade the marine environment or endanger human health
                          (Memorandum of Understanding Between the Department of the Army and
                          Environmental Protection Agency, 27 July 1987). Locating and designating appropriate
                          ocean disposal sites and subsequent management of disposal activities at these sites are
                          essential elements in meeting this shared legislative mandate. ne national MOU
                          establishes the basis for cooperative effort and funding between the EPA and COE for
                          final designation and management of ocean dredged material disposal sites in three
                          categories. Future sites may be added by mutual consent of the agencies. . . .

                          ... The national MOU ... directs the EPA regions and the COE Coastal Divisions, or
                          their designated districts, to develop and implement individual cooperative MOUs that
                          (1) delineate regional implementation plans for ocean dredged material disposal site
                          designations and subsequent site management and (2) include monitoring as appropriate.

                                                                       3-3










                           Regional MOUs are to establish priorities for work, milestones and schedules for
                           implementation, agreements for allocation of the EPA and the COE resources, and other
                           related activities and management initiatives to carry out the requirements of the
                           national MOU. Regional MOUs are to be developed and implemented in accordance
                           with existing regulations and guidance and the procedures set forth in the national MOU
                           for site designation and site management. . . .

                           The text for Section 3.2 REGUIATORY CRITERIA AND ADMMSTRATION PROCEDURES was
                           taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation, Monitorin& and Management Guidance Document for
                           Ocean Disposal of Dredged MataiaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                                    3.3 TECEMCAL GUIDANCE FOR ODMDS DESIGNATION



                               The logical process for [site designation (Figure 3-1)], which is a series of analyses of
                           increasing complexity, is fashioned after the tiered approach of Zeller and Wastler
                           (1986). . . . The general purpose of the tiered approach is to eliminate sites at which
                           unacceptable ecological impacts are probable.             Tiering of the information and the
                           decision-making process provides an efficient, cost-effective means of conducting the site-
                           selection process.... The tiering approach is cost-effective because the tiers are ordered
                           by increasing levels of complexity, effort, and cost. For example, the locations of major
                           shellfish areas are routinely mapped (in many cases) by local resource agencies, and such
                           information typically is available at a low cost. A candidate disposal site could be
                           eliminated from consideration quickly and inexpensively in a nearfield assessment if it
                           was found to include a major shellfishing area. Alternatively, a farfield assessment of
                           whether toidc substances in a waste material have the potential to contaminate a shellfish
                           bed downcurrent from the candidate disposal site would require detailed information on
                           hydrography, contaminant loadings, and anticipated chemical reactions at the disposal
                           area; predictions of offsite transport; and predictions of the probable degree of
                           bioaccumulation. Such information is very costly to collect and analyze. Because the
                                                       ,r of increasing cost, they do not correspond to any gradient of
                           tiers are arranged in ordo
                           impact severity. The most severe impact at a given site could be within any of the three
                           tiers. . . .                                                                                                             I
                           ' ' *The information gathered at each tier must provide the answer to a question(s)
                           specific to the selection and designation of an ocean disposal site. This will enable
                           conclusions to be reached at the end of each tier, as well as a management decision on
                           whether to either accept or reject the designation of a site, or whether to continue
                           through the remainder of the selection process. The tiering concept represents a logical
                           progression in the types of both qualitative and quantitative data necessary to the
                           decision making process. . . .                                                                                            I

                           . . .The site-designation process [is] terminated early only if it can be shown that an
                           alternative disposal method is less expensive and has lower potential for adverse impacts
                           on the total environment. The site-designation process also includes a preliminary
                           judgment of the technical-feasibility factors and socioeconomic factors affecting the use of
                           a site. [T]hese factors are discussed in the Dredged Mateiial Disposal Strategy Document.


                           Areas that should be eliminated from consideration either because of conflicting uses or
                           because of the sensitivity of the receiving environment are also identified early in the

                                                                           3-4












                                                                         EVALUATION OF NEED
                                                                        FOR SITE DESIGNATION




                                                                   IDENTIFICATION OF FEASIBLE AREAS
                                                                        FOR SITE DESIGNATION





                                                                 IDENTIFICATION OF SITE REOUIREMENTS
                                                               FROM DREDGED MATERIAL CHARACTERISTICS





                                                                    SELECTION OF CANDIDATE SITES







                                                               CANDIDATE     CANDIDATE      CANDIDATE
                                                                  SITE I        SITE 2        SITE N




                                                                 DETERMINATION OF FATE AND POTeMAL
                                                                   EFFECTS FOR EACH CANDIDATE SITE





                                                              . ..........
                                                                      W-i
                                    Newfield Fate and       . . . . . . . ......... ......    . . . . . . . . . . .
                                                                           I.... ................
                                                             :Ix
                                    Short-term Effects

                               LU

                                    Ferfleld Fate and
                                    Effects
                                                                   I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
                               _J
                               <
                               >
                               UJI
                                    Long-term Effects                                               w
                                 t                        AIMM11K

                                                                      EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE
                                                                           CANDIDATE SITES





                                                                          SITE SELECTION AND
                                                                          FINAL DESIGNATION







                        Figure 3-1.       Flow Chart and Major Components of the Site Selection Process.
                                          [From EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designatiot; Monitoring,
                                          and Management Guidance for Ocean Disposal of Dredged
                                          MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra
                                          Tech, Inc.]


                                                                       3-5










                          site-designation process. . . . When one or more candidate sites can still be identified
                          within an area of the ocean as suitable for disposal, guidelines are provided on the
                          selection of appropriate candidate sites. . . .

                          It will generally be desirable to identify two or more candidate sites (including, wherever
                          feasible, at least one site off the continental shelf). Because the more detailed analyses
                          . . .  are designed to assess the relative degree of impact under different sets of
                          conditions, it is more difficult to predict the absolute magnitude of an impact at a single
                          site than it is to assess the relative impacts at two or more candidate sites. Certain
                          characteristics of the candidate sites may eliminate one or more of these sites from
                          consideration. For example, ambient water quality may already exceed criteria or
                          standards, or hydrographic characteristics of a site may be such that dilution will be
                          insufficient to allow dumping at the site. Certain characteristics of the sediments and
                          resident biological communities may also indicate that the site is a poor choice for
                          disposal of the dredged material under consideration. . . .                                                              I

                          , * ,Ile tiering [approach], as applied to site designation, is illustrated best at the level of
                          site information necessary to determine the potential effects of dredged material disposal
                          on each candidate site. . . .       At this level, each candidate site is evaluated first for
                          nearfield fate and short-term effects, then for farfield fate and effects, and finally for
                          long-term effects. The evaluation is conducted stepwise, beginning with the short-term
                          effects. If, for any one of the candidate sites, comparing dredged material characteristics
                          to site information should indicate that there will be significant deleterious effects, that
                          site may be dropped from further evaluation and consideration. . . .                                                     I
                          . . . Comparisons among existing and possible future sites for ocean disposal are one
                          method by which site selections can be made. Characteristics of candidate sites may be
                          compared with characteristics of existing disposal sites to determine whether they are
                          sufficiently similar to reasonably predict possible impacts at the candidate sites based on
                          known impacts at the existing sites. Comparisons with sites in other regions that were
                          selected for consideration but were not designated can also be instructive.                     Such
                          comparisons may reveal one or more common characteristics that resulted in elimination
                          of the previously considered site from the site-designation process. Finally, comparisons
                          among all candidate sites may help to ensure that the designated site is one of the sites
                          where the least impact is expected.

                          ...  The tiered assessment probably will be performed twice for most sites that achieve
                          final designation.     Ile first assessment should be performed by using information
                          available from published and unpublished reports, research institutions, and government
                          agencies. Ile level of detail of this initial assessment will necessarily be determined by
                          the quantity and quality of the existing data. It is probable that available information
                          will be incomplete for most candidate sites. Exceptions might include sites previously
                          used or previously considered for ocean dumping. Ile second assessment should be
                          performed after baseline data are collected at the candidate site, but before final site
                          designation . . . . Baseline information will be needed for most selected sites to ensure
                          that unacceptable impacts are not incurred because site characteristics are poorly known.
                          Examples of site characteristics that might not be known prior to selection of candidate
                          sites, but that might prohibit a candidate site from being designated, include the periodic
                          occurrence of erosional 'events (at a site targeted for materials that should not be
                          dispersed) and the intense seasonal use of a selected site by commercially important
                          species of fish or shellfish. . . .                                                                                      I
                                                                          3-6









                  The ODMDS-designation process comprises the following sequence of major components.
                  Also listed is the section in which the component is discussed.
                                1.  Determine if there is a need for an ocean disposal site [Evaluation of Need for
                                    Site Designation]
                                    Productive uses and initial characterization of dredged material are also part of
                                    determining the need for site designation.
                                2.  Identify areas of the ocean where dredged material disposal could be allowed
                                    [Identification of Areas Suitable for Site Designation]
                                3.  Determine      the general site characteristics (e.g., size, location, seasonal
                                    restrictions) [Identification of ODMDS Requirements Related to Dredged Material
                                    Characteristics] based on an evaluation of the characteristics of the dredged
                                    material proposed for ocean disposal [Dredged Material Initial Characterization,
                                    under component L]
                                4.  Select candidate sites within suitable areas for further evaluation [Candidate
                                    Sites]
                                5.  Determine the fate and potential effects of the dredged material proposed for
                                    disposal at selected candidate sites [Determination of Fate and Potential Effects for
                                    Each Candidate,Site]
                                6.  Evaluate the suitability of the alternative candidate sites, based on predicted fate
                                    and effects of dredged material proposed for ocean disposal [Evaluation of
                                    Candidate Sites]
                                7.  Select one or more candidate sites for final designation for ocean disposal [Site
                                    Selection and Final Designation of an ODMDS] - . . .
                           The text for Section 4.2 TECHNICAL GUIDANCE FOR ODMDS DESIGNATION was taken from EPA.
                           1990. Working Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, andManagementGuidance Document for Ocean Disposal of
                           Dredged Material. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.


                                                 3.3.1 Evaluation of Need for Site Designation

                           ...   Ile site-designation process is initiated after the need has been demonstrated for
                           consideration of ocean dumping as an acceptable alternative for dredged material
                           disposal. . . . The demonstration of need [typically] originatels] with the COE and [is]
                           based on expectations of future dredging operations. . .

                           As part of the evaluation of need for an ocean disposal site, the quantities of dredged
                           material proposed for ocean disposal must be estimated. T'he frequency of disposal and
                           the period over which disposal is expected must also be estimated. In some cases, these
                           values can be estimated accurately.
                           The text for Evaluation of Need for Site Designation was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site
                           Designation, Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In
                           preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.







                                                                           3-7









                                                       Productive Uses of Dredged Material

                            . . .Dredged materials that have the appropriate physical and chemical characteristics
                            can be used for a number of productive purposes in the aquatic environment. The most
                            common applications are beach nourishment and habitat enhancement.

                            Beach Nourishment


                            Beach nourishment consists of placing uncontaminated materials of appropriate grain
                            sizes on beaches to replace losses from erosion or to increase beach expanse or elevation
                            to enhance shoreline protection. This is a common practice along ocean, estuarine, and
                            lake coast lines, and it has proven very successful with uncontaminated materials of grain
                            sizes similar to those naturally occurring on the beach to be nourished. This process
                            tends to be both environmentally acceptable and cost-effective when the dredging sites
                            are relatively nearby ... and the dredged material has appropriate chemical and physical
                            characteristics.

                            Another application, which is under development, consists of placing a submerged berm
                            just off the shore of a beach. 'ne berm can be designed to reduce wave erosion of the
                            beach and to provide "feedstock material" that will be gradually moved onto the beach
                            by natural sediment-transport mechanisms. . .               . The grain sizes and physical and
                            chemical characteristics of the materials for use in a berm must be similar to those that
                            would be required of materials that are to be placed directly on the beach.

                            Habitat Creation


                            While aquatic disposal has seldom been used expressly to create habitats, it has often
                            been observed that aquatic disposal sites can be attractive to aquatic organisms. Tlis
                            attraction can be enhanced when sites are selected and managed to create relief and
                            topographic variety on an otherwise uniform bottom. . . . Such topographical variety can
                            be maintained by periodic disposal at sites in erosional areas, and can be expected to
                            endure for long periods from single disposal operations in depositional environments.
                            Uncontaminated materials of any grain size can be used for aquatic-habitat enhancement
                            under appropriate site conditions....
                            The text for Productive Uses of Dredged Material was taken from EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Dredged
                            Material Disposal StrateSy Docwnent.  In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering,
                            Science, and Technology, Inc.


                                                    Dredged Material Initial Characterization

                            . . .  The [physican characteristics of the dredged material [must be considered] in
                            evaluating . . . ocean disposal alternative, since they will affect the potential dilution,
                            dispersion, accumulation, and environmental effects of the dredged material. Dredged
                            material typically is composed of sand, silt, and clay mixtures.                          Contaminant
                            concentrations in dredged material are highly variable and are dependent on the
                            dredging-site proximity to historical and recent pollution sources and on the nature of
                            those sources. [Thus, in designating sites, the types of dredged material likely to be disposed
                            at the candidate site need to be considered.]



                                                                              3-8










                           Ile text for Dredged Material Initial Characterization was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site
                           Designation, Monitming, and Managment Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In
                           preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.


                                         332 Identification of Areas Suitable for Site Designation

                           The site-designation criteria presented in the Ocean Dumping Regulations (Part 228)
                           provide the framework for developing the graphical overlays. Ecological factors and a
                           wide range of existing uses of the ocean are mapped to identify areas for ocean dumping
                           that do not present apparent conflicts with uses of the ocean or living marine resources
                           of the general area. The following steps are required to identify suitable areas for site
                           designation...

                                0   Define the large-scale ocean region potentially suitable for ocean disposal site(s),
                                    the Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF).

                                0   Prepare base maps of the Zone of Siting Feasibility.

                                *   Compile information and prepare composite overlay maps for biological
                                    resources and areas of incompatible uses.

                                0   Identify suitable subareas for site designation.

                           The initial step in identifying suitable areas for site designation is to determine the
                           general area considered feasible for location of an ocean disposal site. The proposed
                           regulations do not provide specific guidelines for defining this general area under
                           consideration.     The EPA/COE report (1984) discusses factors to be considered in
                           selection of this general area, called a ZSF. Important factors that should be evaluated
                           include navigational restrictions, political boundaries, distance to the edge of the
                           continental shelf, the feasibility of monitoring and surveillance, and, [as necessary],
                           operational and transportation costs. In most instances where this approach has been
                           used for siting dredged material disposal sites, the ZSF has been circumscribed by a
                           radial distance from the origination point (i.e., port or dredge site) whose maximum
                           length is fixed by economic considerations. However, the shape of the ZSF does not
                           have to be that of a circumscribed area based on operational costs. It may take any
                           initial shape and size based on the other noncost factors listed above. In any case, the
                           ZSF being evaluated should extend off the continental shelf, wherever feasible, as
                           required in the ocean dumping regulations [ï¿½ 228.5(e)] [and MPRSA ï¿½ 102(a)(I)]. . . .

                           ...  By using the base maps of the area, infonnation should be compiled and mapped to
                           characterize biological resources and uses of the ocean. Information to be mapped
                           includes (1) living resources; (2) ecologically significant habita        ts (including those of
                           endangered or threatened species); (3) various commercial, recreational, and military
                           uses; and (4) areas of cultural or historical significance. . . . The approach presented
                           [herein] is to identify potential ocean disposal areas thatwould avoid sensitive biological
                           resources and areas in which ocean disposal activities would be incompatible with present
                           uses. . . .


                           ...  Information on recreational and commercial fisheries (including shellfish resources) is
                           to be compiled to characterize the spatial distribution of fishery resources, areas of
                           fishing intensity, and the relative economic importance of the fishery in the region. . .

                                                                           3-9










                            [In additioi; use conflicts must also be evaluated, especially for on the Continental Shelf
                            disposal sites.]     Many activities are concentrated on the continental shelf, including
                            shipping, commercial and recreational fishing, surface and subsurface military activities,
                            etc. 'nese require that disposal sites on the shelf be carefully selected to                       i 'Mize
                            potential conflicts. T'his can be a time-consuming and difficult task in some areas. . . .

                            * * ,  Recreational uses of coastal areas (e.g., swimming and boating) may also vary
                            seasonally. By contrast, many of the other uses of the ocean [do] not vary seasonally.
                            Navigation lanes, drilling platforms, undersea cables and pipes, and mineral extraction
                            activities represent fixed uses of the ocean that could conflict with ocean dumping. Areas
                            used for such purposes [may need] to be mapped as unsuitable for site designation. . .

                            ...  Information on biological resources and areas of incompatible uses is mapped onto a
                            series of common scale maps, based on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
                            Administration/National Ocean Survey (NOAA/NOS) nautical charts for the area. Each
                            area to be avoided is then mapped individually to produce a composite overlay map
                            [Figure 3-2]. Locations on this composite map that do not intersect areas to be avoided
                            are then identified as potentially suitable areas for site designation. . . .
                            The text for Dredged Material Initial Characterization was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site
                            Designation, Monitoring and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In
                            preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences.and Tetra Tech, Inc.; and from EPAJUSACE. 1990. Draft Dredged
                            Material Disposal Strategy Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering,
                            Science, and Technology, Inc.



                                           333 Identification of ODMDS Requirements Related to
                                                           Dredged-Material Characteristics

                            . . . Tle characteristics of the dredged material to be dumped in ocean waters are
                            important determinants of specific requirements relating to characteristics of the
                            designated disposal site. Characteristics that should be considered in determining site
                            requirements include the volume of the dredged material, physical properties, . - . [and
                            potential chemical contamination that might require specific management actions if dredged
                            material disposal is to proceed].

                            Dredged material characteristics can be obtained from the physical and environmental
                            testing necessary to evaluate proposed disposal operations. . . . Dredged material can
                            cover a wide spectrum of physical characteristics from rock and gravel through sands to
                            very fine, high-water-content silts and clays. It can range from being contaminant-free to
                            being contaminated with a variety of chemicals of environmental concern. Tle dissolved,
                            suspended particulate and solid fractions of the dredged material will encounter different
                            fates upon disposal and thus must be treated differently in the determination of site
                            requirements.

                            Tle characteristics of the dredged material will determine the most appropriate disposal
                            strategy and site management strategy, This will, in turn, determine suitable locations
                            for the disposal site. To minimize the potential for adverse environmental impacts, the
                            physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the dredged material must be carefully
                            matched to those of potential disposal sites applying sound ecological principles.



                                                                               3-10











                       ZONE OF SITING
                       FEASIBILITY AND
                       AREAS OF NAVIGATION





                       SENSITIVE SUBAREAS              OF
                       SOCIO-ECONOMIC VALUE
                                                               le





                                                               . . . . . . . . . .





                       GENERAL
                       OCEANOGRAPHIC
                       COMPATIBILITY
                                                                                            ttt
                                                                . . . . . . . . . .


                                                             .. ...........

                                                           ... ....... .
                                                                                              . . . . . . . . . . .









                                                                                                TWO-MLE BEACH BtJFFER

                                                                                                          FISHING BANK
                                                                                                        ARnFICIAL REEF

                                                                .............

                                                              ..........
                       SITE SUI
                                   TABILITY





                                                                                                          NATURAL REEF



                                        WRECK
                                                                                                   ECONOMIC UMIT
                                                                                                   FOR TRANSPORTATION
                                        SHIPPINGLANE
                                        AND BUFFER ZONE
                                                                                                      SWTAELE SITE
                                        FISHINGGROIJND                                                LOCATION AND SIZE






                         Figure 3-2.       Schematic Overlay Process for Screening Out Sensitive and
                                           Incompatible Use Areas. [From EPAIUSACE. 1984. General
                                           Approach to Designation Studies for Ocean Dredged Matefial
                                           Disposal Sites.]


                                                                       3-11









                          Dredged material disposal sites within the jurisdiction of the WRSA can range from
                          deep-ocean sites off the continental shelf to shallow coastal sites on the continental shelf.
                          Dredged material disposal sites may be selected and managed to either maximize or
                           inimize dispersion of the mat       erial placed at the site.       Selection of dispersive or
                          retentive sites depends on case-by-case evaluation of a number of factors related to the
                          physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the dredged material and of the
                          disposal site....

                          The selection of sites for the disposal of dredged material that is considered unacceptable
                          for open-ocean disposal@] because of potential to)dcity and bioaccumulation effects@]
                          [would be] approved for disposal [only] with management action [(eg., disposal
                          techniques) to render impacts of dredged-material disposal acceptable]. . . . [These sites]
                          will necessarily be selected for their ability to contain the disposed material with the aid
                          of disposal techniques that will reduce water colurrin and benthic effects.

                          Site requirements specifically related to the nature of the dredged material may include
                          the minimum site area and various oceanographic conditions such as depth, wind and
                          current regimes, and density profiles in the water column. These characteristics are
                          important for determining the dilution and dispersion that will occur after the material is
                          dumped, and thereby for determining that ocean disposal at the designated site can meet
                          applicable regulatory criteria (e.g., water-quality criteria). . .

                               [A] screening procedure . . . [can be] used to identify site requirements that are
                          related to dredged material characteristics. The first step is to determine dredged
                          material dilution requirements necessary to meet water-quality criteria and other
                          regulatory criteria. . . . [Plermitting regulations are used as general guidelines in
                          calculations for dilution requirements.          From results of the dilution requirement
                          calculations, a preliminary evaluation [can be] made to determine if the material is
                          acceptable or unacceptable for ocean durnping@] ... based on a criterion of 104 for the
                          maximum dilution achievable during initial mixing. In cases where required dilutions are
                          less than 104 for all dredged material constituents, the dilution expected during initial
                          mixing is calculated to determine if the required dilution can be achieved. If the
                          required dilution is determined to be achievable, the minimum size for potential disposal
                          sites is calculated. An estimate of flushing. requirements for potential disposal areas is
                          then made by considering the cumulative effects of multiple dumps. . . .                                                  I
                          The screening evaluations for site designation should be conductedL] to the maximum
                          extent possible, using available information on dredged material characteristics. Where
                          more detailed information is necessary to continue the site-selection process, actual
                          dredged material characteristics may have to be determined, or conservative estimates
                          . . . employed for site designation evaluations. . . .                                                                    I
                          The text for Identification of ODMDS Requirements Related to Dredged Material Characteristics was taken
                          from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designado,4 Monitoring and Management Guidance Docwnent for Ocean
                          Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.










                                                                         3-12










                                                                  33A Candidate Sites


                            Candidate sites for ocean disposal are selected based on the following criteria:

                                  0  The siting requirements resulting from calculations made in [the Identification of
                                     Dredged Material Characteristics Section]

                                  0  The appropriate dredged material disposal strategy [to minimize environmental
                                     impact]

                                  9  Application of general guidelines [(1) site, size, and location requirements, (2)
                                     expected disposal strategy, (3) consideration of other general criteria]

                            The underlying principles guiding the selection of candidate sites [would] be the general
                            criteria of [the regulations (40 CFR ï¿½ 228.5 9a-e).] Prior [to final evaluation of the]
                            general and specific criteria [40 CFR ï¿½ 228.6 (affl-,U)], however, a decision should be
                            made regarding the dredged material disposal strategy (i.e., dispersive versus
                            nondispersive) likely to be employed. This decision will affect the selection of candidate
                            sites.


                            The text for Candidate Sites was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation, Monitofing, and
                            Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean
                            Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                            Selection of Dredged Material Disposal Strateg3r.
                            Dispersive versus Nondispersive

                            Based on the results of the evaluation of dredged material characteristics discussed
                            earlier . . . , it should be possible to select a likely disposal strategy (i.e., dispersive versus
                            nondispersive).

                            For dredged materials containing low concentrations of toxic substances, the primary
                            ecological [impact] may be burial and smothering of the benthic biota. To minimize the
                            area] extent of such an impact, a nondispersive strategy might be employed. . . .

                            Past experience with the ocean disposal of dredged material [may] guide the disposal
                            strategy chosen.       Although final specification of the actual disposal strategy would
                            probably not be made until the permitting stage, [subsequent disposal-evaluation steps]
                            assume that a likely disposal strategy (dispersive versus nondispersive) can be postulated
                            following dredged material characterization.
                            The text for Selection of Dredged Material Disposal Strategy: Dispersive versus Nondispersive was taken
                            from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designatior; Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean
                            Disposal of Dredged Materlal In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                            General Guidelines for the Selection
                            of Candidate 0DMDSs


                            The selection of candidate [dredged-materian disposal sites [for more specific evaluation]
                            often is based on previous experience with ocean disposal evaluations and on a general


                                                                             3-13









                         knowledge of the characteristics of the region.                The following guidelines are
                                                                                                  gnation, based in large
                         recommended for use in selecting candidate sites for potential desi
                         part on the general and specific criteria described in [40 CFR 228] of the regulations...


                               ï¿½  At least two candidate sites should be selected so that a comparison can be
                                  made of relative impacts of dumping at each site. Wherever possible, at least
                                  one candidate site should be located beyond the edge of the continental shelf.
                                  Preference should also be given to sites that are presently in use or have been
                                  historically used [see ï¿½ 228.5(e)].
                               ï¿½  Candidate sites should be located in areas where disposal activities will not
                                  interfere with other activities in the marine environment, particularly areas of
                                  existing fisheries and shellfisheries, and regions of heavy commercial or
                                  recreational navigation [see ï¿½ 228-5(a) and discussions of the identification of
                                  feasible areas for site designation ... ].                                                                    1,
                               ï¿½  If possible, candidate sites should be located in areas where sufficient field data
                                  have been collected to evaluate site characteristics. A summary of available
                                  survey results and station locations is particularly useful in selecting candidate
                                  sites.

                               ï¿½  Candidate sites should be located such that temporary perturbations in water
                                  quality or other environmental conditions caused by disposal operations can be
                                  expected to return to normal ambient seawater levels or to undetectable
                                  contaminant concentrations or effects before reaching any beach, shoreline,
                                  marine sanctuary, or known geographically limited fishery or shellfishery [see
                                  ï¿½ 228.5(b)].
                               ï¿½  The size of the candidate site should be limited to localize and control any
                                  immediate adverse impacts and to allow for implementation of effective
                                  monitoring and surveillance programs to prevent adverse long-range impacts [see
                                  ï¿½ 228.5(d)].
                               ï¿½  The size of the candidate site should be sufficiently large to meet initial mixing
                                  requirements ... and water-quality criteria at the disposal-site boundary.
                               ï¿½  Proper management of the disposal site (including the regulation of times, rates,
                                  and methods of disposal, and the quantities and types of disposed materials)
                                  should be considered in selecting the location of the site and especially in
                                  defining the size of the site.
                               ï¿½  Physical characteristics of the site should be appropriate for the dredged material
                                  disposal strategy selected.      Where a nondispersive strategy is required, the
                                  bottom should be characterized as depositional, with slow current speeds and
                                  fine-grained sediments.      Where a dispersive strategy is required, the water
                                  column should be hydrodynamically active [andlor] deep.

                         The text for General Guidelines for the Selection of Candidate ODMDSs was taken from EPA. 1990.
                         Working Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of
                         Dredged Material. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.







                                                                        3-14










                           Characteristics of Candidate Sites


                           Following selection of the candidate sites, eodsting site-specific information on ambient
                           water quality, hydrography and physical transport, sediment geochemistry, and biological
                           communities should be compiled to evaluate suitability of the sites for disposal of the
                           dredged material under consideration....

                  The physical, biological, and chemical characteristics of the dredged material should match as
                  closely as possible the physical, biological, and chemical characteristics of the disposal site(s)

                  sediments.

                           ... Ideally, for all aquatic environments, the following [should be considered]

                                0   Grain sizes of the dredged material should be relatively similar to the grain sizes
                                    of the sediment in the vicinity of the potential site...

                                9   Nature of the material should be such that long-term alterations in background
                                    turbidity are not a result of erosion of material from the site. . .



                  Following are discussions of the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the
                  dredged material as they relate to the proposed disposal site(s) and surrounding area (e.g,
                  water). For example, Physical - Chemical refers to the physical characteristics of the
                  dredged material and the chemical characteristics of concem at the disposal site.

                           Physical - Biological

                           . . . In an aquatic [disposal site], (1) the grain size of the dredged material should be such
                           that it is readily recolonized by organisms living in the surrounding area; (2) the physical
                           characteristics of the dredged material should be such that it does not destroy unique
                           habitat.   . . . [Material with characteristics different from those of the disposal-site
                           environs or material that results in changes in bottom topography can provide an
                           attractive habitat to aquatic organisms.

                           In the case of wetland creation, the grain sizes of the dredged material should be
                           satisfactory to the dominant species expected to colonize the wetland. If the material is
                           suitable to the needs of the local biota, the proposed site can be expected to recolonize
                           relatively rapidly by natural dispersion and propagation. If the physical characteristics of
                           the sediment do not match the needs of the biota in the area, then recolonization will be
                           slower and may require management.

                           Physical - Chemical

                           . . . [71here is relatively little interaction between the physical characteristics of the
                           dredged material and the chemical characteristics of the receiving water in the vicinity of
                           the proposed disposal site as long as suspended sediment from the site does not affect
                           nearby coral reefs or submerged aquatic vegetation. . .


                                                                          3-15










                        [Physical - Physican

                        [Mounding of dredged material at the disposal site may induce alterations in current patterns,
                        creation of eddies, creation of navigational hazarA or inhibit other uses of the site (eg.,
                        fishing).]

                        Biological - Physical

                        ...  [DIredged material with potential toxicity or bioaccumulation should be placed in
                        sites such that adequate monitoring [and management] is possible. Dredged material in
                        which toxicity or bioaccumulation is of potential concern should be placed at sites from
                        which the material will not be broadcast. If toxicity or bioaccumulation is a potential
                        concern, such material should not be (1) used in such a manner as to create a potentially
                        attractive habitat [for fish or other important species] or (2) placed in sites from which
                        erosion and increased turbidity are likely.

                        Nontoxic and noribioaccumulative dredged materials should be used in wetland creation
                        [where] there are no serious concerns in matching the biological characteristics of the
                        material with the physical characteristics of the site. Dispersion of sediment or water
                        influenced by [noncontaminated] sediment will not be of concern as long as the erosion
                        does not damage the physical integrity of the site.

                        Biological - Biological

                        ne dredged material placed at aquatic disposal sites should not show a potential for
                        toxicity or bioaccumulation of contaminants in the organisms that live in the vicinity of
                        the site or are likely to recolonize the material. The material [that does have toxicity or
                        bioaccumulation potentian should be managed in such a way as to prevent those
                        organisms from having direct access to it. . . . T'he material disposed in the vicinity of
                        submerged aquatic vegetation should not be of such a nature that contaminants or
                        suspended solids from the material could affect that vegetation.

                        Since only nontoxic and noribioaccumulative dredged material should be used for
                        wetland creation, the only concern is that the ... dredged material [is] susceptible to
                        recolonization by biota common to the area. Pests associated with the dredged material
                        must not be introduced into [a wetland-creation] area. . .

                        Biological - Chemical

                        . . . [T]he toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of the material should be no greater
                        than the potential for such phenomena associated with the chemical contaminants
                        already at the vicinity of the aquatic-disposal or wetland-creation site.

                        Chemical - Physical

                        . : : [C]ontaminated material should be placed in such a way that its dispersion is
                        minimized. Contaminated material should be disposed in a manner that does not create
                        an attractive habitat for aquatic organisms. Dredged material should not be disposed in
                        a site from which resuspension will have a long-term influence on the background
                        turbidity in the area.

                                                                     3-16










                         Since only relatively uncontaminated material should be used for wetland creation,
                         dispersion of material from the site is of no major concern as long as the erosion is not
                         sufficient to threaten the physical integrity of the wetland.

                         Chemical - Biological

                              [C]ontaminated material should be disposed in such a way that access to it by
                         aquatic organisms is minimized either by the nature of the disposal operation or by
                         management activities. . Only noncontaminated material should be used to create an
                         attractive habitat for aquatic organisms.

                         Since only relatively uncontaminated material should be used forwetland creation, there
                         should be no contaminant impacts on organisms colonizing the newly created wetland.

                         Chemical - Chemical


                         . . . [71he contaminants in the material should be comparable to or lower than the
                         contaminants in the sediments in the vicinity of the aquatic-disposal or wetland-creation
                         site....

                The matching of dredged material characteristics for aquatic disposal sites and for wetland
                creation are similar. However, the following additional factors should be considered for

                wetland creation. . .

                             0   Grain sizes of the dredged material and grain sizes of the sediments in the
                                 vicinity of the potential site [should] be relatively similar to enhance rapid
                                 biological recolonization

                             0   Dredged material should be physically stable in the wave and current
                                 environment in which it is being placed

                             0   The physical shape of the wetland to be created should be such that adverse
                                 changes in circulation and sedimentation patterns in the area will be minimal

                             0   The nutrient content and other characteristics of the dredged material should be
                                 such that wetlands vegetation will become established.


                         Determination of the Potentially Acceptable Disposal Option(s)

                         ... [Determination] of potentially acceptable disposal option(s) is based on a quantitative
                         evaluation and comparison of the characteristics of the dredged material with
                         characteristics of the disposal sites being considered. . . . In addition to evaluating the
                         five general and 11 specific criteria, the options that provide the greatest number of
                         acceptable matching conditions... become the potentially acceptable options.

                         This process is likely to identify several potentially acceptable options that may differ in
                         detail but whose acceptability are appro3dmately equal. In such cases, any of the options
                         could probably be selected with equally satisfactory results. Many of these comparisons


                                                                    3-17









                           may be qualitative even though many characteristics of the dredged material at the
                           disposal site are measured quantitatively. . .

                           The text for Characteristics of Aquatic and Wetland Candidate Sites and Determination of Potentially
                           Acceptable Disposal Option(s) was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designadoy; Monitoring, and
                           Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean
                           Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.; and from EPA/USACR 1990. Draft Dredged Material Disposal Strategy
                           Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.



                                 3.3.5 Determination of Fate and Potential Effects for Each Candidate Site



                           [Determi.ning the appropriate size of a candidate site is essential for comparison of potential
                           impacts. Analyses of mLdng-zone models and deposition models will allow appropriate
                           sizing.] ... Ile primary reason for conducting detailed analyses and modeling of initial
                           dilution of the material is to demonstrate that the combination of dredged material
                           characteristics, receiving water characteristics, and disposal strategy will ensure the
                           sufficient dilution of the dredged material so that compliance with applicable regulatory
                           criteria can be predicted.        For instantaneous discharges, continuous discharges, and
                           hopper dredge discharges of dredged material, an additional justification for modeling
                           the mixing processes affecting the material is to predict the distribution of the settled
                           material . . . on the seafloor. A very important consideration in the analyses of initial
                           mixing and sedimentation is the cumulative effect of multiple dumps on the water
                           column and sediments....


                           The ecological effects of ocean dumping are difficult to assess because the underlying
                           processes are very complex.... However, application of physical oceanographic models
                           [e.g., mbing] for each of the candidate sites provides an estimate of the relative degree of
                           impact that can be expected at each site, and permit ranking of the sites by the
                           acceptability of their respective ecological impacts. Comparing predicted conditions at a
                           candidate disposal site with known conditions at an existing disposal site will assist in
                           predicting the magnitude and spatial extent of the expected ecological effects of ocean
                           disposal of the dredged material under consideration. . . .

                           ... For decision-making, the environmental fate and effects of dredged material disposal
                           a:t each site will be evaluated based on the location of the dredged material plume
                           following disposal (fate) and biological impacts (effects). Location of a dredged material
                           plume following disposal can be defined as being nearfield (within disposal site
                           boundaries) or farfield (outside site boundaries).               Biological effects include both
                           short-term (acute) and long-term (chronic) effects as well as effects on ecological
                           processes. Both short-term and long-term effects can include mortality, accumulation of
                           contaminants in tissues, and physiological or biochemical dysfunction. Long-term effects
                           also encompass growth and reproduction. Ecological processes include population and
                           community functions....

                           The text for Determination of Fate and Potential Effects for Each Candidate Site was taken from EPA.
                           1990. Working Draft Site Designatio?; Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of
                           Dredged MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech., Inc.







                                                                            3-18









                            Fate of Dredped Material

                            In assessing both nearfield and farfield fate of waste material, four regulatory
                            requirements should be assessed:

                                  0  Water-quality criteria must be met after initial mbdng (nearfield).
                                     Water-quality criteria must be met at the disposal site boundary (nearfleld).
                                     Concentrations of pollutants, both in the water column and in the bottom
                                     sediments, must be reduced to ambient levels before reaching critical areas
                                     (farfield).
                                     Dumped dredged material must not adversely impact the general ecosystem of
                                     the area, including communities in any nearby critical areas (nearfield and
                                     farfield). . . .
                            ne text  for Fate of Dredged Material was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation,
                            Monitofin& and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by
                            Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.


                            Biological-Effects Assessment

                            ... It is usually not possible to use information on ambient biological conditions to make
                            quantitative predictions of impacts that would result from specific waste disposal
                            practices, due largely to a limited understanding of cause-and-effect relationships
                            between waste materials and biological communities, and to the large amount of
                            variability inherent in biological systems. . . . However, it is often possible to minimize
                            or eliminate potential impacts by selecting sites with the use of available information on
                            ambient biological conditions and the types of wastes likely to be dumped. . . .

                                  Potential biological and ecological effects of ocean dumping may be organized into
                            ;e*ve*n major categories:
                                  0  Toidcity
                                  0  Degradation of water quality
                                  0  Degradation of sediment quality and alteration of sediment characteristics
                                  0  Contamination of the biota
                                  0  Creation of a disease epicenter
                                  0  Changes in community structure
                                  *  Disruption of ecological processes

                            These effects may result both within and beyond disposal site boundaries. . .
                            Ile text for Biological-Effects Assessment was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation,
                            MonitoHng, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Matedal. In preparation by
                            Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                                                        33.6 Evaluation of Candidate Sites


                                  T'he evaluation of alternate candidate sites comprises the following:

                                  0 Evaluation of relative impacts among the candidate ocean disposal sites
                                  9 Evaluation of ocean disposal in relation to other disposal alternatives


                                                                            3-19









                        All comparisons among candidate and existing sites should include quantitative or
                        qualitative evaluation of the perceived risks associated with alternative disposal options.
                        No general framework for comparative risk analysis at candidate open-water disposal
                        sites has been developed to date. However, a framework for disposal of dredged
                        materials in Puget Sound (State of Washington) is available .               and may serve as a
                        model for such comparisons.

                        Ideally, site assessments would be based on objective criteria for assessing the
                        acceptability and severity of impacts, as they are for water-quality assessments. However,
                        there are no accepted quantitative criteria for sediments or biota. Some criteria are now
                        being developed by scientists and regulators, but none has been approved for general use
                        by any ocean resource management program or agency. Three examples of models that
                        could possibly be used to develop criteria for sediments and biota       'are the [(I)] screening-
                        level concentration model .... [(2)] apparent effects threshold model .... and [(3)]
                        Equilibrium Partitioning Approach. . . .                                                                                 I
                        . . .  Several recently published documents provide guidance on the application of
                        quantitative models to predict specific types of impacts (eg., effects of toxic substances
                        on marine biota, bioaccumulation, human health risks). However, [no models have yet
                        been developed that can comprehensively estimate impact at disposal sites]. There are
                        major gaps in the assessment methods, some of which are now being researched. Better
                        assessment methods will undoubtedly be developed during the next decade.
                        [Biologican -level responses to certain types of disturbance or contaminant have also been
                        described in some cases. Examples are the empirically derived species, abundance,
                        biomass model developed by Pearson and Rosenberg (1978) to describe changes in
                        benthic community structure along a gradient of organic enrichment in the sediments,
                        and patterns of infaunal succession that result from the disposal of dredged materials.
                        . . . However, such community-response models are not quantitative, and cannot be
                        used for mathematically rigorous predictions. . .

                        Paul et al. (undated manuscript) propose . . . methods by which impacts to marine
                        organisms and public health risks may be assessed. They use toxicological data in the
                        scientific literature to develop water-quality criteria. These water-quality criteria are then
                        compared with plots of time-averaged contaminant concentrations in the water (and
                        possibly sediments) to determine possible impacts to the resident biota. This approach
                        may be used in place of a direct biological-effects assessment.                   To assess the
                        bioaccumulation potential of the disposed materials, body burdens of contaminants in
                        exposed organisms are assumed to be in equilibrium with their surroundings, and it is
                        assumed that the equilibrium level can be estimated by use of a bioconcentration factor.
                        Estimated body burdens are then compared with the U.S. Food and Drug
                        Administration (FDA) action levels for the contaminant under consideration to
                        determine if there is a threat to public health. Although promising, this model assumes
                        that the laboratory test organisms respond similarly to those at the selected disposal site.
                        It also does not address multiple-contaminant effects. Moreover, it incorporates major
                        assumptions regarding the transfer of contaminants from the biota to the water. Until
                        such assumptions have been tested and proven reasonable, the accuracy of predictions
                        derived from the use of this approach is unknown. . . .

               In addition to applying the above models, it would be useful to review
                    ï¿½ Bioaccumulation data
                    ï¿½ Available literature on biomagnification

                                                                       3-20








                           Results from previous assessments of impacts of disposal

                           The text for Evaluation of Candidate Sites was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designation,
                           Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. Inpreparationby
                           Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.



                                                  3-3.7 Site Selection and Final Designation
                                                                   of an ODMDS


                           . . .  [Discussion in the preceding sections have presented the process for conducting]
                           decision-making . . . in the selection and designation of an ocean disposal site. [The
                           decision-making] procedures have been organized in a series of analyses of increasing
                           complexity that is consistent with the tiered approach of Zeller and Wastler (1986).
                           Application of the technical guidance provided in this section will ensure that adequate
                           consideration is given to each of the general criteria to be applied in the selection of
                           appropriate ocean disposal sites, as well as to the 11 specific factors to be taken into
                           account in the site-designation process [40 CFR 228.6(a)(1-11)].

                           It is important to reiterate that site designation is quite distinct from the issuance of
                           permits for ocean dumping at a designated site. The evaluation of ocean dumping
                           conducted as part of the site-designation process is more general than that conducted for
                           the issuance of permits, and is intended only to identify suitable sites for consideration as
                           ocean disposal sites. Designation of a site does not authorize the dumping of waste
                           material at a site. Dumping at a designated site may take place only after a permit
                           authorizing such dumping has been issued.

                           The text for Site Selection and Final Designation of an ODMDS was taken from EPA. 1990. Working
                           Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged
                           Material. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.




                             3 4 PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL WACr STATEMENT


                  In accordance with the EPA's voluntary national policy              on the preparation of Environmental
                  Impact Statements (EIS) (39 FR 37419), all site designations will be preceded by the,
                  preparation of an EIS. The EIS addresses the
                       0 Purpose and need for the proposed ocean disposal
                       0   Evaluation of alternatives
                       0   Description of the physical, biological, and socioeconomic environments
                       *   Prediction of the environmental consequences of the proposed action.
                       0   Selection of the designated site as the preferred alternative
                       *   The environmental consequences of the proposed dredged-material disposal at the
                           designated site and at any other candidate sites considered, as well as those of any
                           land-based disposal alternatives


                                                                          3-21









             A monitoring and management strategy should also be included in the EIS to describe site

             management.


             After preparation of the EIS, a proposed rule announcing the EPA's intent to establish an
             ocean disposal site is published in the Federal Register. Based on comments received on the
             proposed rule and on the draft EISs, a final rule is then published in the Federal Register on
             the designation of the ocean disposal site.











































                                                          3-22




    I
    I
    11
    'I
    i
    1,
    I
    I
    I
    I                                                                       PERNUMNG
    I
    i
    Ill'
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I









                                                              4.0 PERNU=G


                  The USACE is given authority to issue permits for ocean dumping of dredged material when
                  the proposed dumping will not unreasonably endanger human health, amenities, or the
                                onment [Section 103(a)]. The EPA has an oversight and r
                  marine envir                                                                       eview role in the
                  permit-issuance process.
                          If ... dredged material is proposed for disposal into ocean waters, the [USACE] uses the
                          procedures contained in 33 CFR. Part 337. Where dredged material is placed in the
                          Territorial Sea (3 nmi seaward from the baseline), [for purposes such as] beach
                          replenishment, construction of underwater berms, or other related activities, the
                          procedures of [CWA] Section 404 are used. . .
                          The text for Section 4.0 PERMITTING was taken from EPA. 1990. Draft EPA Guidance Manual for the
                          Review of COE Pe7mits and Federal F@qects for the Ocean Dirposal of Dredged MateriaL In preparation by
                          Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications International Corporation.



                                                    4.1 CWA SEMON 404 PERIMM



                          The permit process under [CWA Section] 404 includes (1) processing the permit
                          application and determining which type of permit may be issued, (2) issuing a public
                          notice, (3) evaluating the project under CWA 404(b)(1) Guidelines, (4) a public interest
                          review by the [USACE], (5) deciding if the permit should be issued or denied.

                          The CWA Section 404 permit program is administered jointly by [USACE] and EPA.
                          Under CWA Section 404(a), the Secretary of the Army "may issue permits, after notice
                          and opportunity for public hearings for the discharge of dredged, or fill material into the
                          navigable waters at specified disposal sites." The discharge of dredged material into
                          navigable waters involves either direct dumping or "runoff or overflow from a contained
                          land or water disposal area" P3 CFR Part 323.2(d)].

                          The EPA is responsible for (1) development of the program's environmental standa             rds
                          [CWA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines], [(2) reviewlveto of dredging permits, (3)] determining
                          the scope of geographic jurisdiction and the applicability of permit exemptions under
                          CWA Section 404(f), [(4)] State program assumption, and [(5)] enforcement. ne
                          [USACE] is responsible for permit processing. The [USACE] issues permits for dredged
                          material disposal.

                          EPA and other Federal agencies [such as, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)               National
                          Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and State and local agencies] have statutory authority
                          and responsibility to provide recommendations concerning permit issuance.

                          Permits issued by the [USACE] under CWA Section 404 have to undergo a review for
                          consistency with State coastal zone management programs. . . . In addition, permits
                          require certifications (or waivers of same by the State) of compliance issued pursuant to
                          the CWA Section 401. Under the CWA Section 401(a), any applicant for a Federal
                          license or permit "to conduct any activity... which may result in any discharge into the


                                                                        4-1









                          navigable waters" is required to obtain a certification from the State that any such
                          discharge will comply with the CWA provisions related to effluent discharge limitations.
                          The CWA Section 401 certification or Waiver thereof and determination of consistency
                          with CZMA programs has to be obtained before a permit can be issued. A certification
                          is also required concerning compliance with applicable water-quality standards adopted
                          pursuant to the CWA Section 303. If the State denies certification, the permitting
                          authority may not grant a permit for the activity in question. The State-certification
                          process under CWA Sections 303 and 401 are tools for State review of dredged material
                          disposal activities.

                          The [USACE] evaluation of a CWA Section 404 permit application is a two-part process:
                          (1) determining if the project complies with the CWA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines and
                          (2) conducting a public-interest review.          The public-interest review is conducted
                          simultaneously with the CWA 404(b)(1) Guidelines evaluation. In the public interest
                          review, the [USACE] adopts a "balancing" approach in considering all factors that may
                          be relevant to the project proposal. The public-interest review weighs benefits against
                          reasonably foreseeable detriments. This review is supposed to address factors such as
                              ... conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands,
                              cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood plain values, land use, navigation,
                              shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water
                              quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs,
                              considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of
                              the people.

                          A permit must be denied if the project fails to comply with the CWA Section 404(b)(1)
                          Guidelines or is found to be contrary to the public interest. . . .
                          The text for Section 4.1 CWA SEMON 404 PERMITS was taken from EPA/IJSACF- 1990. Draft Dredged
                          Material Disposal Strategy Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering,
                          Science, and Technology, Inc.



                                                   4.2 MTRSA SEMON 103 PERMTrS

                          . . . MPRSA ï¿½ 103(e) provides that, in connection with Federal projects involving
                          dredged material, the Secretary may, in lieu of the permit procedure, issue regulations
                          that will require that such projects be evaluated in the same manner as non-Federal
                          projects, using the same criteria, factors, and procedures P3 USC 1413(e)]. A formal
                          permit is not necessary for Federal projects meeting these requirements.

                          ...  There are three types of general permit: programmatic, regional, and nationwide.
                          Nationwide permits are issued for 5 years. The regulations do not               stipulate permit
                          length for other permit types. Consequently, all other permits continue in effect until
                          their expiration dates, or until they are modified, suspended, or revoked. However, EPA
                          and the [USACE] are currently holding further discussions to determine the appropriate
                          duration for a permit. . . . Naturally, this is a general guideline and the need to
                          reevaluate an activity depends on the dredged material and site-specific conditions. . .

                          Programmatic permits are issued for activities that repeated regularly within an existing
                          State, local, or Federal agency program. Regional permits are issued by the District or
                          Division Engineer to allow similar activities to be conducted with a large geographic area,
                          ,without the need for separate applications or other authorization documents. Conditions


                                                                         4-2









                             may be added by the District or Division Engineer to Regional permits to require case-
                             by-case reporting and an acknowledgment system, if he believes that the conditions serve
                             the public interest.

                             Nationwide permits (NWP) are designed to allow certain activities to be conducted with
                             little, if any, delay or paperwork. Nationwide permits are issued by the Chief of
                             Engineers and only the Office of the Chief of Engineers has the authority to modify,
                             suspend, or revoke a nationwide permit in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR
                             325.7. This authority includes adding individual, regional, or nationwide conditions;
                             revoking authorities for certain authorized activities or on a case-by-case basis. If a NWP
                             is not modified or reissued within 5 years of publication in the Federal Register, the
                             permit becomes null and void.

                             According to 33 CFR 330.2(c), Division Engineers have the discretionary authority to add
                             regional conditions to NWPs, to override permit provisions of NYVTs, and to require
                             individual permit applications. Activities under a permit are valid only if the permit
                             conditions have been met. If an activity is covered under a nationwide permit, the
                             person conducting the activity is not required to complete an application (unless required
                             by the Division Engineer). Instead, the person must comply with the conditions under
                             which the permit is issued. In terms of ocean disposal, nationwide permits apply only to
                             those activities with material volumes less than 10 cu yd produced as part of a single and
                             complete project. Prenotification requirements are generally not required for discharges
                             under Section 103 of the MPRSA. However, it is important to note that detailed
                             procedures are required for discharges under Section 404 of the CWA at 33 CFR
                             330.7(a). . .

                             ...  Tle determination to issue a permit is subject to [EPA oversight and review to ensure
                             that the proposed disposal will comply with the EPA criteria relating to the effects of the
                             dumping. ]

                             The text for Section 4.2 MPRSA SECTION 103 PERMITS was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site
                             Designatio?; Monitoring, and Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by
                             Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.; EPA/1JSACE. 1990. Draft Dredged Material Disposal Strategy
                             Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.;
                             and EPA. 1990. Draft EPA Guidance Manual for the Review of COE Permits and Federal Projects for the
                             Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications
                             International Corporation.


                                                                    42.1 Issuing Permits

                             ...  [Section 103 of the MPRSA authorizes the] Secretary of the Axmy, acting through the
                             [USACE], to issue permits for the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of
                             dumping it into open ocean and coastal waters (33 USC 1413). Dumping is permitted
                             only after the Secretary determines that such disposal will not "unreasonably degrade or
                             endanger human health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological
                             systems, or economic potentialities" [MPRSA ï¿½ 103(a), 33 USC 1413(a)]. . .

                             [The typical steps for issuing permits are]





                                                                               4-3








                           I.   [Submission of requestforpermit application]
                                The [USACE coordinates] permit drafting and permit requests with the EPA
                                prior to public review. This avoids potential EPA nonconcurrence of the permit.
                           2.   [Filing of Permit Application]
                                An application is filed with the appropriate [USACE] district
                           .3.  [Determining Permit Type]
                                The [USACE] determines if an individual permit is required
                           4.   [Review of Permit Application]
                                The [USACEI determines [iA the application is complete
                           5.   [Preparing and Publishing a Public Notice]
                                Public notices@ which are] in the form of an announcement on [USACE]
                                letterhead.... are distributed to all parties on the [USA CE] mailing list. . .
                           6.   [Soliciting Comments (within a specific commentperiod)]
                                . . . [EPA] Regional Administrators have the authority to review the permit
                                [-issuance decisions] . . . for ocean dumping of dredged material at locations
                                within the respective Regional jurisdictions.... Regional jurisdiction to act on
                                permitting issues is determined ... in accordance with ï¿½ 228.4(e) of the Ocean
                                Dumping Regulations and Criteria.
                                7le [USACE] review of dredged material disposal-permit applications [must]
                                consider and apply the environmental-impact criteria developed by EPA
                                [under] MPRSA Section 102(a). [The statute directs that in developing the criteria
                                EPA is to consider the following statutory factors.]
                                    ï¿½   Need for the proposed dumping
                                    ï¿½   Effects of such dumping on human health and welfare, including
                                        economic, esthetic, and recreational values

                                    ï¿½   Effects of such dumping on fisheries resources, plankton, fish,
                                        shellfish, wildlife, shorelines, and beaches

                                    ï¿½   Effects of such dumping on marine ecosystems, particularly with
                                        respect to

                                    ï¿½   Tle transfer, concentration, and dispersion of such material and its
                                        byproducts through biological, physical, and chemical processes

                                    ï¿½   Potential changes in marine-ecosystem diversity, productivity, and
                                        stability

                                    ï¿½   Species and community population dynamics

                                    ï¿½   Persistence and permanence of the effects of the dumping
                                    ï¿½   Effects of dumping particular volumes and concentrations of such
                                        materials



                                                                   4-4









                                       0   Appropriate locations and methods of disposal or recycling, including
                                           land-based alternatives and how requiring the use of such alternative
                                           locations or methods could impact the public interest

                                       0   Effects on alternative uses of oceans, such as scientific study, fishing,
                                           and other living-resource exploitation, and nonliving resource
                                           exploitation
                                       0   In designating recommended dumping sites, utilization of locations
                                           beyond the edge of the continental shelf, wherever possible, by the
                                           EPA Administrator. . . .
                                   In designating recommended sites, the Administrator shall utilize, wherever
                                   feasible, locations beyond the edge of the continental shelf. . . . To protect
                                   critical areas [MPRSA Section 102(c)], the EPA Administrator may. . . . in
                                   consultation with the [USACE], designate sites or times within which certain
                                   materials may not be dumped.
                                   Under MPRSA ï¿½ 103(b), the Secretary of the Army is also required to make an
                                   independent determination of the need for the proposed dumping, alternative
                                   methods of disposal, and appropriate sites for disposal [33 USC 1413(b)]. This
                                   involves consideration of alternative aquatic (e.g., near-coastal waters, estuaries,
                                   rivers, lakes, and wetlands) and land-based disposal methods (e.g., upland).
                              7.   [Reviewing Comments]
                                   ...  When the public comment period is closed and all relevant data have been
                                   gathered, the [USACE] conducts a "public interest review" in which the
                                   [USACE] considers the favorable as well as detrimental impacts of the activity.
                                   The [USACE considers] all comments, suggestions, and concerns provided by the
                                   EPA and other commentors, and incorporate their comments into the
                                   administrative record of the application. . .
                               8.  [Granting or Denying the Permit]
                                   Upon completion of the EPA review of the public notice, the EPA Regional
                                   Administrator in accordance with 40 CFR 225.2(b) advises the District Engineer
                                   in writing of his finding of whether the proposed activity complies with [EPA's]
                                   environmental criteria. If the proposed dumping does not comply with EPA
                                   criteria, the District Engineer [must determine] if there is an economically feasible
                                   alternative or disposal site. . . .
                                   ... If the Secretary of the Army finds that "there is no economically feasible
                                   method or site available," other than that which would [result in] a violation of
                                   [EPA's] environmental impact criteria, the Secretary may request a waiver from
                                   the EPA Administrator. The EPA Administrator [is to] grant the waiver within
                                   30 days unless he finds that, pursuant to MPRSA ï¿½ 103(d), the dumping of the
                                   material will result in [unacceptable adverse effects] on municipal water supplies,
                                   shellfish beds, wildlife, fisheries, or recreational areas [33 USC 1413(d)]. Thus,
                                   the final determination of [whether] ocean disposal of dredged material [is
                                   allowable) remains with the EPA Administrator. If the projects [were to receive a
                                   waiver], the JUSACE] [then would] issue an ocean-dumping permit. [In the
                                   history of the ocean-dumping program, no waivers have been requested.]




                                                                        4-5











                           The text for Issuing Permits was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site Designatiam monitoring, and
                           Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged MatviaL in preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and
                           Tetra Tech, Inc.; EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Dredged Mataial Disposal SrateV Document. In preparation by
                           Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.; and EPA. 1990. Draft FpA
                           Guidance Manual for the Review of COE Permits and Federal Projects for the Ocean Disposal of Dredged
                           MateriaL In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications International Corporation.


                                                  42-2 Evaluation of Other Disposal Options

                  Other disposal options must be evaluated during step 6 of the above steps for issuing permits.
                  As discussed above, other disposal options that should be considered are estuaries, rivers,
                  lakes, creation of nearshore islands, and upland disposal. The legal constraints,
                  environmental impacts, and economic considerations of each disposal option must be
                  co.nsidered in the decision-making process.


                           [Decision-making guidelines are being developed to identify the disposal option that will be
                           environmentally acceptable for a given dredged material.] The guidelines are not intended
                           for distinguishing among specific sites. Rather they are aids for determining the relative
                           ranking of an aquatic environment over an upland environment for the disposal of a
                           given dredged material. They will also aid in differentiating among subsets of upland or
                           aquatic sites (i.e., estuarine versus deep-ocean disposal). For purposes of this discussion,
                           wetland creation is considered a subset of aquatic disposal inasmuch as the major
                           physicochemical characteristics controlling contaminant -mobility are similar in wetland
                           and aquatic sites . . .

                           The process of identifying an acceptable disposal option involves first, determining (1)
                           the characteristics of the dredged material, (2) potential disposal sites, and (3) the
                           characteristics of the potential sites. The characteristics of the dredged material are then
                           matched to the characteristics of the available disposal sites, to identify a possibly
                           acceptable disposal option. The process is illustrated in Figure [4-1].

                           The identified option is not necessarily the one that is correct for a particular disposal
                           operation because a number of other factors may influence the final choice. There may
                           also be a number of acceptable disposal options having little difference in the overall
                           environmental impact. Selecting the correct option is a qualitative process that depends
                           heavily on judgment and evaluation rather than on strict adherence to numerical
                           calculations.


                           T'he guidelines take into account the potential environmental impacts of disposing a
                           given dredged material in potential sites. If testing . . . indicates that the dredged
                           material is unacceptable for dispo    'Sal at a site without management actions, the full range
                           of guidelines must be followed. They will help to not only determine the appropriate
                           management actions that must be imposed for a particular option but also evaluate
                           those actions in relation to selecting other options. On the other hand, if biological
                           testing indicates that the dredged material is acceptable for disposal at a site, then the
                           only considerations that remain are the physical characteristics of the dredged material
                           and the ecological implications of physical, technical-feasibility, and socioeconomic factors
                           affecting the proposed site.


                                                                            4-6









                           The text for Evaluation of Other Disposal Options was taken from EPA. 1990. Working Draft Site
                           Designation, Monitoring and Managwient Guidance Docwnent for Ocean Disposal of Dredged MatenaL In
                           preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.; and fr= EPAJUSACF- 1990. Draft Dredged
                           Material Disposal Strategy Document. In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering,
                           Science, and Technology, Inc.


                                               43 EPA COORDINATION 0P1?0RTUNr=


                                 [Tlhere are  several opportunities throughout the [USACE's dredge-permit] planning
                           process when EPA may communicate [its] concerns, recommend further analysis, or
                           suggest plan modifications.

                           Points in the planning process for interacting with the [USACE] about Federal projects
                           include
                                 *  Public Notice
                                 0  Statement of Findings
                                 0  Record of Decision
                                 0  Environmental Assessment
                                 0  Finding of No Significant Impact
                                 0  Environmental Impact Statements (Draft, Final, and Supplemental)

                           If the  [USACE] staff brings up environmental concerns in the planning process, the
                           [USACE] may wish to invite EPA to take part in Issue Resolution Conferences,
                           conferences that normally include [USACE] staff members reviewing the project and, on
                           occasion, the local sponsor. If EPA finds that the ocean-disposal activity does not meet
                           the environmental criteria, EPA has three more opportunities to coordinate with
                           [USACE], including

                                 0 EPA Review of the District Engineees finding
                                 0 Coordination with the EPA Administrator and the Chief of Engineers
                                 9 Review of the waiver.

                           The [USACE] prepares many documents during in the planning process, some of which
                           contain information necessary for EPA!s evaluation of the proposed project. Depending
                           on the project, EPA Regions may 'Wish to review these documents as well as the
                           supporting data. Ile following are the major documents prepared by the [USACE].

                                 0  Draft Reconnaissance Reports

                                 *  Reconnaissance Reports

                                 0  Engineering and Design Reports, such as Reevaluation Reports (or Detailed
                                   'Project Report, in the case of projects funded under Continuing Authorities),
                                    General Design Memoranda

                                 0 Feasibility Cost-Sharing Agreements

                                 *  Scope of Studies

                                 0  Local Cost-Sharing Agreements


                                                                           4-7






                                                  1(2) Identify potential disposal sites


             (1) Determine characteristics         (3)    Determine characteristics
                   of dredged material                     of all potential sites



               Material is sand from high-              AQUATIC                UPLAND
               energy area, or for beach-              OTf`-_s_he_Tf      Upla@_dbisposal
              nourishment, or from an area               On-shelf          Island Creation
               far removed from pollution              Estuarine
                          sources                        Riverine
                                                       Lacustrine
                                                   Wetland Creation

                 Tests show material is
                  acceptable for aquatic
                          disposal
                                                    Physical      Biological      Chemical


                          Chemical
                         Biological
                          Physical




                                                 (4) Determine potential for environmentally
                                                               acceptable option(s)


                                                 1(5)Consider site management needs, if any


                                                     (6) Technical feasibility and
                                                         socioeconomic considerations


                                                       1(7) Determine acceptable option

           Figure 4-1.  Summary of Decision Strategy for Identification of Environmentally Acceptable
                        Dredged-Material Disposal Option. [From EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Dredged
                        Material Disposal Sowegy Document . In preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences
                        and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.)

                                                   4-8







                         ï¿½ Draft Feasibility Report
                         * Final Feasibility Report
                         ï¿½ Post-Authorization Report


                                        EPA/USACE Communi       cation Mechanisms


                      [EPA] Regions that have the greatest success in coordinating with the [USACE] get
                      involved as early as possible in the planning process for permits and Fed&ral projects....
                      Many routes of [informan communication are used . . . to decrease the need for
                      paperwork and to minimize processing time. Written communication [is generally)
                      reserved for documenting agreements, differences, and the need for future EPA re-
                      views....


               EPA/USACE communication for dredging permit evaluation can include
                      Regularly scheduled meetings (monthly/bimonthly/quarterly) with USACE District staff
                      to discuss future plans and progress
                      Periodic progress reports (once or twice a year) from the USACE Districts
                      Telephone discussions with USACE District staff
                      EPA/USACE conferences and Region/District meetings
                      Joint EPA/USACE efforts/studies.
                      Budget and data-needs coordination
                      ne text for EPA Coordination Opportunities was taken from EPA. 1990. Draft EPA Guidance Manual for
                      the Review of COE Pe7mits and Federal Projects for the Ocean Disposal of Dredged MateriaL In preparation by
                      Battelle Ocean Sciences and Science Applications International Corporation.






























                                                            4-9




  I
  'I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I                         DREDGED-MATERLAL TESTING
  1.
  I
  I
  1                               11
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I










                                       5.0 DREDGED-MATERLAL TESUNG


              The EPA role in evaluating dredged material for open-ocean disposal. is incorporated in the
              draft EPAIUSACE dredged-material testing manual, Draft Ecological Evaluation of Proposed
              Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters (EPA/USACE 1990. In preparation by
              Battelle Ocean Sciences and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.). This
              document, commonly referred to as the "Green Book," is an update of the 1977 testing
              manual, Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters
              (EPAJUSACE 1977. Published by the Environmental Effects Laboratory, U.S. Army
              Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi). The 1990 Green Book is a
              publicly distributed draft revision of the 1977 manual. In early 1991, EPA and the USACE
              will publish and promulgate a final testing manual, Evaluation of Dredged Material for Ocean.
              Disposal - Intetim Testing Manual, to replace the 1977 manual. This revised Green Book will
              not carry the force of law. However, it will be the official EPA and USACE guidance for
              evaluating dredged-material compliance with the ocean dumping regulations (40 CFR 222-
              228).


              The contents of the 1990 draft Green Book were summarized in the following paper that was
              presented by the EPA at the 17th Annual Aquatic Toxicity Workshop in Vancouver, British
              Columbia, Canada, November 5-7, 1990. Additional information on the EPA role in
              dredged-material testing and research programs can be obtained by contacting EPA
              Headquarters, Regional offices, and ORD laboratories.
















                                                          5-1










                            EVALUATION PROCEDURES FOR DREDGED MATERLAL DISPOSAL IN


                                                 . OCEAN WATERS OF TBE UNITED STATES


                            Barry G. Burgan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA





                                                                            ABSTRACT


                  Ile Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waten, commonly referred to as the "Green
                  Book," contains technical guidance on determining the suitability of dredged material for ocean disposal in U.S. waters. The
                  United States Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Army Corps of Engineers published the original manual
                  in 1977. The revised guidance manual, presently in draft form, is being updated to reflect dredging-program experience and to
                    corporate the improvements in evaluative testing.
                  lintegral to the revised guidance manual is a tiered testing protocol that incorporates "pass/fail" decision points. The procedure
                  comprises four levels (tiers) of increasing investigative intensity that generate information to assist in making ocean disposal
                  decisions. Tiers I and II utilim existing or easily acquired information and tests that are relatively inexpensive, and apply rapid
                  procedures to determine environmental effects. Tiers III and IV contain biological evaluations that are more intensive and
                  require field sampling, laboratory testing, and rigorous data analysis.




                                                                        DZTRODUCTION



                  The Ecological Evaluation o Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters,
                                                        f
                     mmonly referred to as the "Green Book," contains technical guidance for determining the
                  suitability of dredged material for ocean disposal through chemical, physical, and biological
                  co

                  evaluations. This guidance is used by dredging applicants, laboratory scientists, and regulators
                  to evaluate dredged-material compliance with U.S. Ocean Dumping Regulations, Title 40
                  Code of Federal Regulations Parts 220-228 (40 CFR 220-228). The basis of 40 CFR 220-228
                  is the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, which requires that ocean
                  disposal of dredged material not cause adverse impact to the marine environment.

                  The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army
                  Corps of Engineers (CE) published the original Green Book in 1977. Since then many
                  advancements have been made in the evaluation methods of dredged material and in
                  understanding the impact of ocean disposal. Also since 1977, region-specific criteria and
                  policies have evolved for dredged-material disposal in U.S. waters, resulting in a wide range
                  of sediment-testing procedures along the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico coasts. For
                  these reasons, the guidance in the Green Book is now being updated to reflect dredging-
                  program experience, to incorporate improved evaluative testing, and to achieve an
                  environmentally sound level of national regulatory consistency.

                  In January 1990, EPA and the CE published a draft of the revised 1977 Green Book and
                  distributed it to Federal, State, and local regulatory personnel, port authorities, and other


                                                                                     1









           individuals and companies involved in dredged-material evaluation. In the subsequent
           months, EPA and the CE have conducted training sessions on the new guidance and solicited
           public and Agency comments on the new manual. The manual is now undergoing minor
           revisions to address the comments received by EPA and the CE. Finalization and
           promulgation of the manual is expected in early 1991. Until this date, the guidance of the
           1977 manual is still in force.

           Concurrent with the work on the Green Book, EPA is revising the Ocean Dumping
           Regulations to improve their clarity, reflect dredging-program experience, and to incorporate
           various statutory changes. The 1990 Green Book will be modified as needed to correlate with
           the revised regulations.

           This paper introduces the technical components of the 1990 Green Book. Integral to the
           manual is a tiered-testing protocol to characterize dredged material and predict its impact on
           the water column and the benthos at ocean disposal sites. This protocol was developed out of
           consensus among EPA and CE personnel and testing-laboratory researchers, and it balances
           the requirements of the Ocean Dumping Regulations, state-of-the-art dredged-material
           evaluation techniques, and the realities of the testing and permitting process for new and
           existing projects. Local expertise is both recommended and necessary to adapt the National
           guidance in the manual to specific dredged-material projects. Three EPA Regions and CE
           Districts have begun to apply the National guidance of the 1990 manual through the
           development of regional guidance manuals. In summary, the Green Book

                  ï¿½ Provides for nation al consistency in evaluating dredged material for ocean disposal

                  ï¿½ Ensures adherence to the Ocean Dumping Regulations

                  ï¿½ Incorporates existing (and valuable) regional expertise and guidance in the
                    evaluation process


                                                  Tiered Testing

           The tiered-testing protocol in the Green Book comprises four procedural tiers, with decision
           points at each tier (Figure 1) to assist in decision-making for dredged-material disposal. Each
           successive tier provides increasing investigative intensity to generate the information for
           permitting decisions on ocean disposal.

                  ï¿½ Tier I primarily assesses existing information on the proposed dredged material'and
                    identifies the contaminants of concern.

                  ï¿½ Tier II uses calculations and numerical models to screen the chemical and physical
                    characteristics of the dredged material and the overall conditions at the disposal site.






                                                         2










                             * Tier III consists of standardized acute bioassays and bioaccumulation tests on
                                laboratory organisms.

                             * Tier IV tests specific projects for the results of long-term organism exposure to the
                                dredged material that may influence reproduction and species survival.

                   The methods and evaluative strategies in each of the tiers are recommended to achieve
                   National technical consistency and increased intersite comparability of data sets and analyses.
                   the principal purpose of the tiered-testing protocol is to determine if the limiting permissible
                   concentration (LPC)* is met as defined in Section 227.13(c) of the Ocean Dumping
                   Regulations.



                   *LPC of the water column is defined in the Green Book as the concentration of dredged material that, after allowance for initial
                   mixing, does not exceed applicable marine water-quality criteria or a toxicity threshold of 0.01 of the acutely toxic concentration.
                   The LPC of the suspended particulate and solid phases is defined as that which will not cause unreasonable toxicity or
                   bioaccumulation.







                                                                     Tier I Initial Assessment

                                                                          Historical Information
                                                                   Sufficient for decisions
                                                                   Physical characteristic assessment
                                                                   Biological assessments
                                                                   Chemical characterization 
             Water Column                                                                               Deposited Sediment                                                                                                                                                                   Tier II Physical/Chemical Evaluations
             Dispersion modeling for initial mixing                                        Theoretical bioaccumlation potential
             (WQC compliance)                                                              SQC when published
                                                           Tier III Biological Evaluations                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Toxicity tests after initial mixing                                           Toxicity tests
             Toxicity tests after initial mixing                                            Toxicity tests
             with dredged materials                                                         Bioaccumulation tests
                                                           Tier IV Advanced Biological Evaluations
             Case-specific Bioassay testing                                                  Case-specific bioassay testing



                            Figure 1. Overview of Tiered-Testing Protocol for Evaluating Dredged Material

                                                                                    3
 








           "Green-light," giyellow-light," or "red-light" LPC evaluations are reached as the dredged-
           material evaluator proceeds through the tiers.

                  ï¿½ Green Light
                     The LPC is met and the ocean disposal option is supported.

                  ï¿½  Yellow Light
                     The LPC evaluation is inconclusive; proceed to the next tier

                  ï¿½  Red Light
                     The LPC is not met and the ocean disposal option is not supported.

           The green-light for both water-column and benthic LPC evaluations must be reached for
           consideration of the ocean disposal option to proceed. A yellow-light evaluation in Tiers I-
           III requires the dredging applicant to conduct additional testing in subsequent tiers or to
           decide to not ocean-dump. However, a red-light evaluation does not necessarily exclude all
           possibilities for ocean dumping. For instance, if appropriate management actions can make
           the dredged material meet the LPC, ocean dumping could be allowed. Management-action
           procedures such as disposal-site capping, reducing the rate of disposal, treating the dredged
           material to immobilize or transform contaminants, or other alternatives, could be considered.
           Management actions for red-light evaluations are not included in the Green Book because of
           the wide range of available options and the project-specific nature of such work.

           The tiered-testing protocol is relatively flexible. As presently written, the dredged -material
           evaluator can enter and exit the dredged-material testing procedures at any tier. However, to
           begin the evaluation in Tier H, III, or IV, the existing data must satisfy the requirements of
           the earlier tier(s). To exit a tier before reaching a green light requires the dredging applicant
           to select non open-ocean disposal.

           Dredged material that cannot be definitively evaluated under Tiers I, II, and III must be
           evaluated under Tier IV. In such cases, the applicant might choose to not spend additional
           time and resources on Tier IV testing and instead select a non open-ocean disposal
           alternative. Similarly, an applicant can try to save time and money by proceeding directly to
           Tier II, III, or IV if it is believed that analysis in the earlier tiers will not lead to a definitive
           evaluation. The applicant can also choose to continue testing under later tiers to support an
           evaluation reached in an earlier tier. The only absolute requirement is that the dredged
           material must comply with the regulations if it is to be dumped in the ocean. The tiered-
           testing protocol facilitates this determination.


                                             Tier 1: Initial Assessments

           The purpose of Tier I (Figure 2) is to identify contaminants of concern and determine
           dredged-material compliance through analysis of existing chemical, physical, and biological
           information. For a green light to be reached in this tier, the information must be sufficient to
           conclude that the material is in full compliance with the LPC. For many dredging operations,
           there is a wealth of readily available information on the proposed dredged material and on
           the characteristics of the disposal site. This is especially true of areas that have historically

                                                          4








             undergone maintenance dredging or have been the subject of other studies, such as fish-stock
             assessments. The available information for a given area might not be sufficient to reach a
             final LPC evaluation, but often there are accessible high-quality data that can supplement the
             results of tests in subsequent tiers and facilitate reaching an early decision with lowered
             expenditure of resources. Table 1 lists the possible sources of information that can be used to
             partially or fully evaluate proposed dredging operations. The list is not intended to be
             comprehensive. Other sources may be considered for additional information. Whatever the
             source of information for Tier 1, the quality of the data must be evaluated and weighed
             accordingly. The references in Chapter 13 of the manual, Quality Assurance (QA)
             Considerations, can be consulted for guidance for evaluating the quality of data obtained
             from different information sources.

             If the information is sufficient to determine water-column and deposited-sediment effects in
             Tier I, either a red light or green light is reached: (1) The LPC is not met and the ocean-
             disposal option is not supported. (2) The LPC is met and the ocean-disposal option is
             supported (if all other requirements of the regulations are satisfied). An evaluation at this
             tier usually requires expert analysis of the information on the characteristics of both the
             proposed dredged material and of the environment of the disposal site. If the information is
             not sufficient to reach a decision within this tier (yellow light), the evaluative process moves
             into Tier IL




                       Evaluate E)dsting Information
                        on the Dredged Material



                                 Is                                    Is the
                             Information                            Dredged Material
                         Sufficient To Decide                     (1) Sand from High-
                        if the Dredged Material  Yes           Energy Area. (2) for Beach   yes
                       Will Comply With Section               Nourishment, or (3) Similar to
                            277.13 of the                      the Disposal Site and Far-
                            Regulations?                          Removed from Pol-
                                                                    kition Sources?



                                   No                                       No




                                                                      Does the
                                                                   Dredged Material     yes
                                        Ocean Disposal    No       Meet the Urniting         Ocean Disposal at
                                       is Not Acceptable.      Permissible Concentration     a Designated Site
                                                                     (LPC) for the             Is Acceptable
                                                                    Contaminants?





                             Go to eith
                           Tier 11, 111, o



                                   Figure 2. Tier I: Evaluation of Existing Information
                   <*No                          Ye

                                                              5











                  Table 1:    1990 Green Book Information Sources for Tier I Dredged-Material
                              Evaluation




                      ï¿½  Study reports on prior chemical, physical, or biological tests on the
                         material proposed to be dumped or on similar materials
                      ï¿½  Study reports on prior environmental monitoring on the material
                         proposed to be dumped or on similar materials
                      ï¿½  Local public and private records on potential contaminants of concern
                         entering the proposed dredged-material sediments
                      ï¿½  Selected Chemical Spill Listing records (EPA)
                      ï¿½  Pesticide Spill Reporting System records (EPA)
                      ï¿½  Pollution Incident Reporting System records
                         (United States Coast Guard)
                      ï¿½  Identification of in-place pollutants and priorities for removal (EPA)
                      ï¿½  Hazardous-wastes sites and management facilities reports (EPA)
                      ï¿½  CE studies of sediment pollution and sediments
                      ï¿½  STORET, BIOS, CETIS, and ODES databases (EPA)
                      ï¿½  Water and sediment data on major tributaries
                         [U.S. (Geological Survey)]
                      ï¿½  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
                         permit records
                      ï¿½  Section 404(b) (1) evaluations
                      ï¿½  Pertinent and applicable research reports
                      ï¿½  Section 103 evaluations

                         Port Authorities' records
                         College and university published/unpublished information
                         Records of State environmental agencies
                         Published scientific literature










                                                         6








                                                       Tier H: Physical/Chemical Evaluations

                   Under Tier II, water-column and benthic evaluations are made separately. The purpose of
                   this tier is to provide reliable, rapid, environmentally conservative screening for potential
                   impact. This is possible to achieve for water-column evaluations by using a numerical mixing
                   model. At present, there are no approved methods to comprehensively evaluate deposited
                   sediment at this tier. Only nonpolar organic compounds in sediment can be evaluated under
                   Tier H at this time. When sediment-quality criteria (SQC) are promulgated, they will be
                   incorporated into Tier 111.



                   Tier II: Water-Column Physical/Chemical Evaluations

                   Tier II water-column evaluations use information acquired in Tier I (Figure 3). If water-
                   quality criteria (WQC) are unavailable for all of the contaminants of concern in the proposed
                   dredged material or synergistic effects among the contaminants are suspect, testing must be
                 .performed in Tier III. (Synergism is usually suspected if more than one contaminant is
                   present.) However, if WQC are available for the contaminants and no synergism is
                   suspected, a red-light/green-light water-column evaluation can be reached at this tier through
                   the application of a numerical mixing model.




                                Tier I Evaluation             Use Chemical Characteristics
                                                              To Evaluate Potential Impact



                                                                                                 Applicable
                                                                                   Yes          Water Quality         No
                                                                                            Crtte (WQC) Met for
                                                                                              AN Contaminants
                                                                                                 of Concern?

                                    Model the Dissolved                    Synergistic
                                     Concentration of         No         Effects among           Yes
                                 Contaminants of Concern            Contaminants of Concern
                                    in the Water Column                    Suspected?



                                            All
                                         Modeled            No
                                        Contaminants
                                    of Concern * WOC
                                       Initial Mixing?


                                                 Yes



                                  Supports Acceptability                                                                Go to either
                                    for Ocean Disposal                                                                  Tier III or IV



                                     Figure 3. Tier H: Water-Column Physical/Chemical Evaluations
                                                                          "**@  7
                               <+>No>M
                                                 Yes









                                           Numerical Models for Initial Mix-big

            The numerical models in the Green Book evaluate dredged-material dilution during the
            initial-mixing phase of ocean disposal. Section 227.29 of the regulations defines initial mixing
            as 4 hours following a dredged-material dump. During this 4-hour period, the concentration
            of the contaminants in the water column is allowed to exceed the LPC within the boundary of
            the disposal site. However, if water currents transport the settling dredged material out of the
            disposal site before 4 hours expires, the point in time when the material crosses the site
            boundary is used in determining compliance. Exceeding the LPC outside the site at any time
            is a violation of the regulations.

            The Automated Dredging and Disposal Alternatives Management System (ADDAMS)
            models, developed by the CE, are the recommended models for evaluating initial mixing of
            dredged material at ocean disposal sites. ADDAMS models can be run on a personal
            computer with a minimum of hardware. The models account for the physical processes of
            dredged-material disposal at open-water disposal sites by calculating water-column
            concentrations of dissolved contaminants and suspended sediments and the initial deposition
            of material on the bottom. Three separate ADDAMS models address different methods of
            disposal:

                    ï¿½ DIFID Disposal from an instantaneous dump
                    ï¿½ DIEFCD Disposal from a continuous discharge
                    ï¿½ DIFHD Disposal from a hopper dredge

            To evaluate initial mixing following ocean disposal, the appropriate model is run for the
            contaminant requiring the greatest amount of dilution to meet the LPC_ The models simulate
            movement of the disposed material as it falls through the water column, as it is transported
            and diffused by the ambient current, and as it spreads over the bottom. The models have
            some limitations, e.g., the DEFID model will not work for very shallow disposal sites where the
            discharge time from the barge exceeds the descent period to the bottom. However, the
            models can simulate a wide range of disposal options. EPA and the CE are in the process of
            field-verifying these models. When the models are fully verified and approved, they will be
            able to support definitive water-column evaluations and, thereby, reduce additional tiTne and
            expense of running Tiers HI and IV evaluations.

            The models treat the descending dredged material as a dense liquid. This assumes that all of
            the constituents in the material are released into the water column and that the LPC can be
            evaluated in a conservative manner. At a typical disposal site, unless it is extremely deep
            ( > 300 in), the dredged material usually settles, with its contaminants, to the bottom in
            clumps.

            The Green Book contains an appendix on the ADDAMS models and an early 1990 version of
            the programs on computer diskettes. Since distribution of the 1990 manual, the models have
            been revised to be more user friendly and CE modelling personnel are available at the CE
            Waterways Experiment Station (WES), Vicksburg, Mississippi, to supply the latest versions of
            the models, answer questions, and assist with running the appropriate models. In general,
            model input parameters include


                                                            8









                     0   Disposal-site descriptions
                     *   Disposal-operation descriptions
                     0   Disposal-site water-current velocity descriptions
                     9   Dredged-material descriptions
                     0   Coefficients for the movement of the dredged material through the water column
                     0   Input, output@ and execution descriptions.

              Model output includes
                     * Repetition of the input data for QA considerations
                     0 History of the descent and collapse phases of the discharge in both numeric and
                         diagrammatic displays.

              In DIFID and DIFHD, the following time-dependent information can be requested.
                     0 Size of the collapsing cloud of dredged material in the water column
                     0 Cloud density
                     0 Centroid location and velocity
                     0 Contaminant and solids concentration

              ne model output can present water-column contaminant concentrations in milligrams per.
              liter. These concentrations are compared to the appropriate LPCs to determine compliance
              at the boundary of the disposal site or compliance within the site following the 4-hour initial-
              mixing period.



              Tier H: Benthic Physical/Chemical Evaluations

              As discussed above, presently only benthic effects attributed to nonpolar organic chemicals in
              the deposited sediment can be addressed in Tier II (Figure 4). Nonpolar organic chemicals
              include all organic compounds that do not dissociate or form ions. This includes chlorinated
              hydrocarbon pesticides, other halogenated hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls, most
              polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, dioxins, and furan. It does not include polar organic
              compounds, organometals, and metals. If all of the contaminants of concern in the dredged
              material are nonpolar organic compounds, the theoretical bioaccumulation potential (TBP)
              can be calculated for the dredged material and a reference sediment* to determine LPC
              bioaccumulation compliance at this tier. The TBP calculation is based on concentration of
              the nonpolar organic chemicals in the sediment, the total organic carbon concentration, and
              the percent lipid content of an organism of interest. If the TBP of the dredged material is
              not statistically greater than that of the reference material, then a green light is reached for
              bioaccumulation evaluation under Tier IL (Acute-toxicity evaluations must be performed
              under Tier Ell unless sufficient toxicity information had been obtained under.Tier L)





              *A reference sediment is defined as a sediment, substantially free of contaminants, that has grain-size characteristics as similar as
              practicable to the dredged material and to the sediment at the disposal site, and that reflects conditions at the disposal site as
              though dredged-material disposal had taken place.

                                                               9









             If any of the contaminants of concern are polar organic compounds or have suspected toxic
             components or the dredged-material TBP exceeds the reference material TBP described
             above, the evaluation for benthic impact by the dredged material must take place in Tier III
             or IV. At present, only a green-light or a yellow-light outcome for bioaccumulation
             evaluation is possible under Tier IL The need for additional tests in Tier II to screen for
             benthic impact is recognized by EPA and the CE, and new tests are under development and
             evaluation. When the scientific and regulatory community verifies one or more of these tests,
             they will be incorporated into Tier II in a future Green Book revision. In the meanwhile,
             evaluation of benthic impact that cannot be made in Tier I must be completed in Tier III
             or IV.

















                                                             Tier I Evaluations






                                                        Use Chemical Characteristics
                                                        To Evaluate Potential Impact


                         Bloaccumulation Evaluation                                   Toxicity Evaluation


                            Nonpolar        Calculate the                    TBP
                            Organics         Theoretical               D    of the
                                           Bioaccumutation               redged Material     No
                                      >   Potential (TI3P) of         Exceeds the TBP of
                                          the Contaminants               the Reference
                                             of Concern                     Material


                                                                                Yes


                    Go to either                                       Go to Mer III       Supports        Go to either
                    Tier III or IV                                                        Acceptability    Tier III or IV
                                                                                           for Ocean
                                                                                            Disposal




                                  Figure 4. Tier H: Benthic Physical/Chemical Evaluations

                                                                  10
                                                                                             No











                                                                                             u
                                                             1!@Ac :Pta
                                                                                           S
                                                                                            ce
                                                                                           or
                                                                                            Dispa









                                               Tier M: Biological Evaluations

              Tier M testing includes (1) determination of water-column toxicity according to the
              regulatorily defined suspended phase and (2) an assessment of contaminant to)dcity and
              bioaccumulation from the material to be dredged. The evaluations in this tier are based on
              the output from Tiers I and II and comprise standardized bioassays with the organisms listed
              in Table 2.



              Tier HI: Water-Column Biological Evaluations

              Tier IIII water-column tests are acute tests that evaluate the toxicity of the dissolved and
              suspended portions of the dredged material that remains in the water column after initial
              mixing (i.e.' 4 hours postdisposal) (Figure 5). The bioassays are run   if the Tier II evaluations
              are inconclusive, Le, there are not applicable WQC for all contaminants of concern or there is
              reason to suspect synergistic effects among the contaminants. (See Tier IL) Tier HI involves
              exposing fish, crustaceans, and zooplankton to a dilution series containing both dissolved- and
              suspended-sediment components of the dredged material. A typical test monitors organism
              mortality over a 96-hour period.

              The results of thebioassays are used to calculate the LC50 concentration of the dredged
              material in the water column. The LPC for this evaluation is 1% of the LC50. Following the
              determination of the LPC, a red-light or green-light evaluation is reached with the application
              of the numerical model (discussed above).







                                                                                           Tiers I and If
                                                                                           Evaluations




                                                                                         Determine Toxicity
                                                                                        of Dredged-Material
                                                                                            Suspension



                                                               Model
                                                            Concentrations
                                                           of Contaminants
                       Supports Acceptability Yes       Are 1- 1% of the Lethal  No    Ocean Disposal without
                        for Ocean Disposal             Concentration for 60% of          Management Action
                                                         the Test Organisms              Is Not Acceptable
                                                          (LC50) after Initial
                                                              Mixing?





                                 Figure 5. Tier III: Water-Column Biological Evaluations
                                           oyesoj@No









                     Table 2. Species for Water-Column and Benthic Evaluations in the 1990 Green Book


                     Water Column Species                                       Benthic Species

                     ï¿½ Crustaceans                                                 Crustaceans
                             Mysids                                                    Infaunal Amphipods
                                Mysidopsis sp'                                            Rhepoxynius sp.'
                                Neomysis sp.'                                              Ampelisca sp.'
                                Holmesimysis sp.'                                          Eohaustorius sp.'
                             Shrimp                                                    Mysids
                                Palaemonetes sp.                                           Mysidopsis sp.
                                Penaeus sp.                                                Neomysis sp.
                                Pandalus sp.                                               Hobnesimysis sp.
                             Crab                                                      Shrimp
                                Callinectes sapidus                                        Penaeus sp.
                                Cancer sp.                                                 Paloemonetes sp.
                     ï¿½ Fish                                                                Crangon sp.
                                Menidia sp.                                                Pandalus sp.
                                Cymatogaster aggregata'                                Crab
                                Lagodon rhomboides                                         Callinectes sapidus
                                Leiostomus xanthurus                                       Cancer sp.
                     ï¿½ Zooplankton                                                 Burrowing Polychaetes
                             Copepods                                                      Neanthes sp.'
                                Acartia sp.'                                               Nereis sp.'
                             Mussel larvae                                                 Nephthys sp.
                               Mytihis edulis'                                           Glycera sp.
                             Oyster larvae                                                 Arenicola sp.
                                Crassostrea virginica'                                     Abarenicola sp.
                                Ostrea sp.'                                          Molluscs
                             Crustacean larvae                                             Yoldia limatula
                                Recommended species'                                       Maconza sp.


                     *Recommended test species



                                                                   12









                Tier III: Benthic Biological Evaluations

                Benthic evaluations in Tier III consist of toxicity and bioaccumulation tests with the organisms
                that are listed in the righthand column of Table 2 (Figure 6). To conduct these test, the
                Green Book provides laboratory guidance on sediment preparation, reference- and control-
                sediment tests, treatment replicates, organism handling, test-chamber conditions, QA/QC
                considerations, and data analysis. The organisms used in the tests are surrogates for disposal
                species and are used to estimate dredged-material effects. The toxicity tests quantify lethality.
                If the mortality in the dredged-material bioassays is greater than 10%* over the mortality in
                the reference-sediment bioassays, the LPC are not met (red light). If, however, acute toxicity
                in the dredged-material tests is less than 10% above that in the reference-sediment tests, the
                LPC is met (green light).



                *Some approved tests allow for a larger percentage.








                                                                                                         Determine Toxicity of
                                                                                                          the Contaminants of
                                                                                                         Concern In the Dredged
                                                                                                                Material


                      Determine l3kxmilability of the
                        Contaminants of Concern In
                          the Dredged Materials                                                                  Toxicity
                                                                                                               of Dredged-
                                                                                                  No         Material Contarnl-
                                                                                                          nants Exceeds That In
                                                                                                              the Reference
                                                                                                                Material?
                                  Bioavail-                      Biomd-
                             ability of Dredged-  No         ability of Dredged-    No
                            Material Contaminainftts       Material Contaminants                                       Yes
                             Exceeds FDA Action             Exceeds That In the
                                   Urnits?                       Reference
                                                                  Material
                                                                                                                  oxic
                                Yes                                                                            Of redged-
                                                                       Yes                        No         Material Contami-
                                                                                                         nants Exceeds That of the
                             Ocean Disposal                         Are                                      Reference Material
                                  without                                           Yes                       by More Than
                               Management                      Case-Speclfl                                       10%?
                               Action Is Not                      Criterla
                                Acceptable                         met?
                                                                       No                    141,                      Yes

                                                              Go to Tier IV             Supports
                                                                           j          Acceptability
                                                                                       for Ocean
                                                                                        Disposal



                                            Figure 6. Tier M: Benthic Biological Evaluations


                                                                          13
                                                                                                                 D









            The bioaccumulation tests (usually run concurrently with the toxicity tests) evaluate the
            potential of benthic organisms to accumulate contaminants from the dredged material in their
            tissues. At the conclusion of the tests, the tissue of the organisms are analyzed for the
            contaminants of concern that were identified in Tier 1. Extrapolation of the bioaccumulation-
            test results is used to assess potential transfer of contaminants into the marine food web.

            Section 227.27 of the regulations requires that benthic bioassays be conducted on dredged
            material with filter-feeding, deposit-feeding, and burrowing species. Infaunal amphipods, such
            as Ampelisca sp. and Rhepoxynius sp., are strongly recommended in the Green Book as the
            preferred species for toxicity tests. They are sensitive bioindicators of impact as they both
            filter and deposit feed and they build burrowing tubes in benthic sediments. For
            bioaccumulation evaluations, the Green Book recommends using a burrowing polychaete (e.g.,
            Neanthes sp. or Nereis sp.) and'a deposit-feeding bivalve mollusc (eg., Macoina sp. or Yoldia
            limatu-1a). In summary, the manual recommends that two species be tested for acute toxicity
            and two additional species for bioaccumulation evaluation. Each set of test species should
            cover the three species types stipulated in the regulations. The ecological and economic
            relevance of the organisms and the practical aspects of using the species in the laboratory,
            such as tolerance to grain-size ranges and year-round availability, also must be considered
            when selecting the test species.

            The Tier M bioaccumulation evaluation compares the contaminant level in the tissues of the
            organisms to two criteria: (1) the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Action
            Levels for Poisonous or Deleterious Substances in Fish and Shellfish for Human Consumption
            and (2) the contaminant levels in the reference-material organisms. Regardless of the
            statistical comparison to the reference-material test organisms, if the level in the tissues of
            dredged-material organisms exceeds the FDA levels in any category, the LPC is not met. If
            the dredged-material results are lower than the FDA action levels and not statistically greater
            than the reference material, the LPC is satisfied and the ocean-disposal option is supported.
            However, if bioaccumulation of some contaminants in some species exceeds that found in the
            reference-material tests, the test results must be evaluated against case-specific criteria. EPA
            and the CE develop the evaluative criteria case by case from local technical information that
            addresses the bioaccumulation aspects of the benthic criteria of Section 227.13(c)(3) of the
            regulations. The purpose of this case7specific bioaccumulation evaluation in Tier III is to
            reach an environmentally sound red-light or green-light evaluation without having to commit
            signi ficant time and resources under Tier IV testing.

            At present, tests for chronic sublethal exposure to benthic contaminants are being developed.
            When the tests Eire approved by EPA, they will be incorporated in Tier III in future revisions
            to the Green Book.




                                       Tier IV- Advanced Biological Evaluations


            Tier IV consists of bioassay and bioaccumulation tests to evaluate the long-term benthic and
            water-column impact of dredged material (Figures 7 and 8). Tests at this level are selected to


                                                            14












                                                                             Tiers 1, 11, and III
                                                                               Evaluations



                                       Conduct Case-Specific Bioassays



                                                    Are                      Ocean Disposal
                                               Case-Specific      No       without Management
                                              Criteria Met after              Action Is Not
                                               Initial Mixing?                 Acceptable


                                                       Ye s


                                     Supports Acceptability for Ocean Disposal


                           Figure 7. Tier IV: Advanced Water-Column Biological Evaluations



               address specific issues for a specific dredging operation that could not be fully evaluated in
               the earlier tiers. Since these tests are case-specific and since they require significant time and
               money to complete, evaluative criteria must be agreed on in advance by EPA and by the CE
               to determine compliance with the regulations.

               Tier IV bioassays help to interpret the bioaccumulation results from Tier III and to measure
               indicators of long-term effects of clear ecological importance, such as survival and
               reproduction. The bioaccumulation testing measures the steady-state body burden of
               contaminants of concern in the tissues of organisms that have been subjected to long-term
               laboratory exposures or in tissues of appropriately sampled field organisms. The actual
               contaminant concentrations in the tissues of dredged-material organisms is then compared to
               the FDA Action Limits and to those of the reference-material organisms, as in Tier III. If the
               concentrations in the dredged-material organisms are less than the FDA limits but are greater
               than in the reference-material organisms, they are compared to field-collected organisms from
               the area of the proposed disposal site. Bioaccumulation levels that exceed those of the
               disposal-site organisms - but still do not exceed the FDA action levels - are then assessed
               against case-specific criteria for a final decision on LPC compliance.

               In practice, Tier IV testing will seldom be conducted for water-column evaluations because
               the potential for high water-column or benthic impact will probably become apparent early in
               the evaluation process and show that the LPC cannot be met. Tier IV benthic testing is more
               likely, but the Green Book emphasizes that this tier is not intended for routine application.
               Tier IV benthic tests consume significant resources of the dredging applicant and of the
               regulatory authority, and a noncompliance evaluation is still possible. The applicant must
               weigh the options and decide whether to perform Tier IV testing or to consider an alternative
               such as upland disposal. If the applicant elects to proceed with Tier IV testing, the role of
               the regulatory authority is to design tests that lead to a definitive LPC evaluation for the
               project.

                                                              15
                                         <+> @No
                                                       Y
                                                        es


               Tiers I,II, and III Evaluations                              Tiers I and III Evaluations
              
             Determine Empirical Steady State
             Bioaccumalation of Contaminants of
             Concern in the Dredged Material
                                                                             Conduct Case-Specific
            Bioaccumu-               No       Bioaccumu-                     Toxicity Bioassays
            lation of Dredged-                lation of Dredged-
            Material Contaminants             Material Contaminants
             Exceeds FDA Action               Exceeds That of the
              Limits?                         Reference
                     Yes                          Material    Yes
                                              Bioaccumu-
                                              lation of Dredged-
                                              Material Contaminents Exceeds  No
                                              That in the Field Organisms
                                              at the Proposed
                                              Disposal Site? 
                                                             Yes
                                             Are 
                                         Case-Specific      Yes          Yes         Are
                                          Criteric Met?                             Case-Specific
                                                                                    Criteria Met?
                                                   No
                                          Ocean Disposal         Supports          Ocean Disposal
                                           without               Acceptability       without 
                                          Management              for Ocean         Management
                                          Action is Not           Disposal         Action is Not
                                          Acceptable                                Acceptable
                             Figure 8. Tier IV: Advanced Benthic Biological Evaluations
                                OTHER INFORMATION IN THE MANUEL
 In addition to the detailed guidance provided on testing and decision-making within the tiers,
the manual also includes sections on sample collection, analytical methods, statistical methods,
QA, and a copy of the Ocean Dumping Regulations. The statistics section details the
appropriate methods for analyzing bioassay and bioaccumulation data, including sample-size
                                            16                         








              determinations, data-scale transformations, variance homogeneity tests, two-way t tests,
              analysis of variance (ANOVA), multiple comparisons among treatment means, and confidence
              interval calculations. The QA section details the importance of QA as a management tool for
              government regulators and testing laboratories to ensure that the data produced are of known
              and documented quality.




                                                       SUMMARY

              The 1990 Green Book is a national guide for dredging applicants, scientists, and regulators to
              follow in determining if a particular dredged material meets the LPC in the regulations. It is
              neither a "cookbook" or a comprehensive document. Additional assessments, such as on the
              economic necessity, related impacts, and analysis of other disposal options, are required
              before a final permitting decision is reached on ocean disposal. The guidance in the manual
              must be applied with a thorough understanding of the ocean-dumping regulations and with
              assistance from the many references cited in the text. The tiered-testing protocol is intended
              to assist in ecologically sound and efficient decision-making for ocean disposal of dredged
              material. As new methods and technologies are developed to test dredged material, they will
              be incorporated into subsequent revisions of the manual.

              As the Federal authorities finalize the Green Book, EPA Regions and CE Districts will
              continue to develop regional companion manuals. These regional manuals will supplement
              the national guidance in the Green Book and assist applicants and evaluators with permit
              application and the logistics of project-specific dredged-material evaluation. When the Ocean
              Dumping Regulations are revised, the guidance in the Green Book will be updated
              accordingly.




                                                      REFERENCES

              Environmental Protection Agency/United States Army Corps of Engineers Technical
              Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Filled Material. 1977. Ecological Evaluation of
              Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters, Implementation Manual for Section
              103 of Public Law 92-532 (Marine Protection, Researck and Sanctuaries Act of 1971). July 1977
              (second printing April 1978). Environmental Effects Laboratory, United States Army
              Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

              Environmental Protection Agency/United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1990. Ecological
              Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters. January 1990.
              United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection,
              Washington, DC 20460. EPA-503-8-90/002.






                                                             17




  I
  I
  f
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  I                       MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
  11
  I
  I
  I I
  I
  I
  I
  I
  i










                                            6.0 MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT



                                                          6.1 MONITORING



                 In general, tiered monitoring programs proceed through a series of testable null hypotheses
                 that predict the transport, fate, and impact of disposed material on the environment.
                 Experimental methods are chosen to test the null hypotheses. If the null hypothesis is
                 accepted (i.e., if the null hypothesis is true), the predictability of the ocean-dumping impact is
                 established and data collection can be minimized. To ensure an effective monitoring
                 program, the following are necessary.
                     0   Specific questions
                     0   Statistically valid studies
                     0   Baseline data
                     0   Currently available data

                         An effective monitoring program is developed by proceeding through the following steps
                         [Figure 6-1].
                             1.  Development of a conceptual framework for the program
                             2.  Statement of objectives of the program
                             3.  Development of null hypotheses
                             4.  Grouping the null hypotheses into tiers
                             5.  Selecting parameters and the associated methods to collect data on those
                                 parameters
                             6.  Describing the variability of those parameters within the natural system
                             7.  Generating a monitoring program design that will allow detection of changes in
                                 parameter values of significance to site managers .

                         If these steps are followed, data generated by the monitoring program will be complete,
                         defensible, and useful for making management decisions.

                                      6.1.1 Conceptual Framework of the Monitoring Program

                         Developing a conceptual framework for monitoring means that existing information
                         about the characteristics of the dumpsite and of the dredged material is used to make a
                         first approximation of the potential for effects from dredged material disposal.

                         The actual monitoring that may be necessary for a site is determined case by case. The
                         nature and extent of monitoring necessarily depends on the circumstances. Basically, the
                         characteristics of the dumpsite and of the dredged material to be disposed are used to
                         develop a framework for monitoring.        The particular factors to be considered in
                         developing specific monitoring programs are the


                                                                    6-1












                                   DEVELOP CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK






                                           STATE OBJECTIVES






                                     FORMULATE NULL HYPOTHESES





                                    ORGANIZE HYPOTHESES INTO TIERS'





                                        SELECT PARAMETERS AND
                                          ASSOCIATED METHODS





                                         DETERMINE VARIABILITY


                                 DEVELOP SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS P7N]





                  Figure 6-1.  A Stepwise Approach to Developing Monitoring Programs
                               Ensures That the Data WM Be Complete, Defensible, and
                               Useful for Making Decisions. [From EPA/LJSACE. 1990. Draft
                               Site Designatiom Monitorbig and Mwtagenwnt Guklance Docunwg
                               for Ocean DiTosal of Dredged Materid In preparation by
                               Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.]

                                                    6-2










                              1.  Quantity of dredged material to be dumped and its physical and chemical
                                  characteristics
                              2.  Methods for releasing the material at the disposal site
                              3.  Time, frequency, and duration of dumping operations
                              4.  Relevant site characteristics, including, without limitation, the
                                  0   Nature of marine biota and oceanographic conditions at or near the site
                                  0   Existing uses of the site for purposes other than dredged material disposal
                                  0   Proximity of the site to areas containing significant marine resources or
                                      amenities

                              5.  Existing information on the disposal site, or previous dumping operations
                              6.  Practicability of specific monitoring techniques.

                                                      6.1.2 Objectives of Monitoring

                          All dumpsite monitoring programs are designed ultimately to ensure that dumping of
                          waste materials in the ocean does not adversely affect human health or the marine
                          environment. This intent can be separated into two categories: to provide relevant
                          information needed (1) to evaluate compliance with permit conditions and (2) to
                          determine the impacts. of dumping.        The specific ends that may be addressed by
                          monitoring programs are
                              0   Verification of permit terms and conditions
                              0   Verification of physical or chemical properties of the dredged material to be
                                  dumped
                              0   Assessment of mixing, transport, or dispersion of the dredged material to be
                                  dumped
                              0   Assessment of the effects of the dumping on human health or the marine
                                  environment, resources or amenities
                              0   Assessment of whether the adverse impacts described in Part 228 ï¿½ 228.10(c)(1)
                                  are occurring.

                          All of  these issues lie in one of the two categories discussed above. Amplifying the
                          description of categories (1) and (2) above, we can state that the objective of dumpsite
                          monitoring is to ensure that Federal regulations are met by assessing whether
                              ï¿½ Ocean dumping permit conditions and dumpsite management requirements are
                                  met

                              ï¿½   Dumping adversely impacts human health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine
                                  environment, ecological systems, or economic potentialities. . .

                          Monitoring activities ... are designed to verify not only that permit conditions are met
                          during dumping activities, but also to verify the assumption that the conditions set by the
                          permit are sufficient to ensure that there will be no impact [on the environment]. . .




                                                                      6-3









                                              6.13 Development of Null Hypotheses

                       Monitoring programs can be designed most effectively if they borrow the concept of null
                       hypothesis testing from scientific experimentation.      Implicit in the concept of an
                       experiment is a question or null hypothesis that is being evaluated. A monitoring
                       program focused on answering specific questions or testing null hypotheses concerning
                       compliance with permit conditions and potential impacts of disposal of waste materials
                       at sea will be designed quite differently from one that is viewed as simple data collec-
                       tion. . . ..


                       The kinds of null hypotheses to be developed can be grouped into six categories. Null
                       hypotheses concerning dredged material characterization, disposal operations, and some
                       nearfield fate issues [e.g., compliance with limiting permissible concentrations (LPC)]
                       address permit compliance and are used in determining which null hypotheses should be
                       tested in assessing potential impacts. Null hypotheses concerning nearfield and farfield
                       fate and transport and short- and long-term effects address impact assessment. . .


                                               6.1.4 Tiered Approach to Monitoring

                       After null hypotheses have been developed, the most effective strategy for assessing the
                       impact of [dredged] material disposal is to use a tiered monitoring approach. . . . Such
                       an approach will generate only the information that is needed for decision-making.
                       Explicit monitoring objectives, endpoints, and null hypotheses are organized within a
                       hierarchy of tiers. The stated objectives in each tier focus on the regulatory or environ-
                       mental protection endpoints against which measured effects can be compared. Thus,
                       each tier has a set of null hypotheses stated in terms of regulatory or environmental
                       protection endpoints that may be tested in the field. It is important to recognize that
                       null hypotheses are merely testable statements about endpoints; the endpoints them-
                       selves are the substance.


                       An idealized representation of a tiered monitoring program is shown in Figure [6-21. It
                       organizes the categories of hypotheses into a structure of tiers. Activities involved in
                       dredged material characterization and disposal comprise the first tier.         Second-tier
                       monitoring activities test null hypotheses that deal with short-term transport, fate, and
                       biological effects of ocean dumping. The third tier tests null hypotheses that deal with
                       the long-term fate and effects of dumped materials. If long-term effects are detected,
                       additional tiers may be required.

                       These tiers would assess any impact on fisheries or other resources of commercial or
                       intrinsic value. It is important to note that both the number of tiers and the relation-
                       ships between tiers,@Nrill be program-specific, depending on the site and dredged material
                       characteristics. For the purposes of this document, the organization of the tiers can be
                       thought of as in Figure [6-2], with the tiers at the top of the figure referred to as upper
                       tiers and those at the bottom of the figure referred to as lower tiers. The conceptual
                       basis for a tiered approach to the monitoring program is that data collected in each tier
                       are needed as the basis for the monitoring activities in the next tier.





                                                                   6-4






















                                    ORGANIZE HYPOTHESES INTO TIERS









                                                    0 ed ed Material
                                                   Characteristics and
                                                   Disposal Operations



                                                    Nearlield Fate and
                                                    Short-term Effects




                                             Farlield Fate and Long-term Effects











                    Figure 6-1   The Most Eff=tiw Strategy for Assessing Dredged-Material
                                 Chuacteristics Is To Use a 1"iered Approach.             [From
                                 EPA/USACIF, 1990      Draft Site Designaftoi; Monaonn& and
                                 Managenzent Guidance Docuntent for Ocean Disposal of Dredged
                                 MateriaL in preparation by Battelle Ocean Sciences and Tetra
                                 Tech, Inc.]

                                                        6-5









                        ... T'hus, data collected in the upper tiers on the chemical composition and properties of
                        the dredged material and disposal operations are necessary to choosing the appropriate
                        chemical parameters for measurement in the nearfield. Data from middle tiers on the
                        composition, movement, and toxicity of materials in the nearfield are required to choose
                        the best locations in the farfield to make measurements and the most appropriate
                        parameters to measure in lower tier monitoring activities.

                        Another important attribute of the tiered approach to monitoring is that the outcome of
                        the monitoring activities in each tier may provide a technically sound basis for deciding
                        whether specific types of monitoring activities are needed in the next tier. For example,
                        if monitoring activities in an upper tier show that concentrations of metals in the dredged
                        material disposal plume(s) are diluted to background concentrations within the
                        boundaries of the disposal site, then the decision may be made to not look for those
                        chemicals in the farfield outside the site boundaries in lower monitoring tiers.

                        The basic design of the tiered approach dictates that the environmental and
                        program-related questions to be answered by the monitoring program become more
                        complex as the program moves from upper to lower tiers. . . . T'he lowest monitoring
                        tiers focus on long-term effects of ocean dumping on commercially or recreationally
                        important marine fishery resources; on marine reptiles, birds, and mammals; on sensitive
                        marine habitats and recreational beaches; or on other marine resources of social or
                        economic value. Because complex, lower-tier activities depend on upper tier results,
                        upper tier studies may justify a decision to not conduct the lower- tier studies. In other
                        words, a tiered monitoring strategy assumes that acceptance of the null hypotheses in
                        upper tiers will provide protection from the impacts cited in the regulations (40 CFR
                        ï¿½ 228.10). In fact, for many sites, the absence of farfield/long-term impacts will be
                        reliably predicted by nearfield/short-term activities, and thus limited or no
                        farfield/long-term activities will be required.

                        Once a null hypothesis has been demonstrated to be true within an acceptable range of
                        uncertainty, related field studies may be reduced'to a level that is sufficient to verify that
                        the null hypothesis is not violated under varied dredged material characteristics and
                        disposal conditions. Null hypotheses can also serve as decision points 'for moving from
                        upper to lower tiers. Ideally, detailed studies in a lower tier will be conducted only when
                        data show that an upper-tiered null hypothesis is false, or if the results are uncertain.

                        Hypotheses must be framed by considering the statistical and logistical constraints on
                        monitoring ocean dumping. Statistical considerations are necessary to ensure that the
                        monitoring activities yield results that are meaningful and appropriate for hypothesis
                        testing. Logistical considerations ensure that the monitoring design can actually be
                        implemented...

                                                      6.1.5 Selection of Parameters

                        Parameters chosen for monitoring should represent a direct linkage between the
                        management concern and the hypothesis. Parameters are chosen that usually have the
                        following characteristics:
                            ï¿½ Meaningful socially, economically, and environmentally
                            ï¿½    Sensitive to the impact
                                 Relatively invariant in the unimpacted, control situation
                                 Cost-effective to monitor. . .


                                                                     6-6









                               Effective monitoring programs measure parameters that provide the most accurate
                          and precise estimate of a mean value for the smallest sampling effort. That strategy will
                          maximize information return per sampling effort. Selection criteria for parameters
                          include parameters that
                               0  Are not currently present in the environment (presence/absence tests may be
                                  easier to perform statistically than quantitative evaluation)
                               0  Have inherently low variability
                                  This will provide more stable, tighter confidence limits on means, more powerful,
                                  and accurate tests of hypotheses
                               0  Are easily measured and expected to show maximum effects of dumping
                                  This might be especially true for hypotheses about biological effects, for which
                                  the focus should be on organisms known o    r expected to bioaccumulate certain
                                  kinds of chemicals.


                          A sampling program must also distinguish between natural variability in selected
                          parameters and actual effects of the dumping activities being monitored. Parameters
                          may be chosen for measurement not as detectors of the effects associated with dredged
                          material disposal, but as indicators of the oceanographic conditions that might influence
                          natural variability. These parameters may include temperature, salinity, and density. . .


                                             6.1.6 Determination of Sources of Variability

                          Monitoring the impacts of ocean dredged material disposal operations on living marine
                          resources of the ocean is made particularly difficult by the large fluctuations in these
                          parameters on many spatial and temporal scales. . . . Variability is defined here as any
                          deviation among measurements that cannot be directly associated 'With the effects of the
                          dredged material disposal. As a result of this variability, monitoring programs must be
                          designed to minimize this signal-to-noise problem. The variability must be described and
                          quantified. Baseline information should be used to achieve cost-effective sampling and
                          valid experimental designs. . . .


                                         6.1.7 Development of Optimal Sampling and Analysis Plans

                          The goal of plan optimization is to develop the most powerful hypothesis tests possible.
                          The power of the hypothesis tests depends to a great extent on the number of times
                          paired comparisons can be made between reference and surveillance locations.
                          Therefore, it is important to plan monitoring activities to (1) maximize the number of
                          paired comparisons that can be completed in a given time and (2) allocate samples to
                          minimize the error term in order to increase the power of hypothesis tests with a given
                          number of paired comparisons.

                          Optimization is achieved by balancing statistical [eg., paramettic or nonparametric
                          statistical, models], logistical e.g., weather and time necessary to deploy sampling
                          equipment, cost, and management e.g., will the chosen parameters yield useful
                          information? . . . The steps in the process of optimizing plan design are ...



                                                                     6-7









                               Determine Number of Stations and Replicates at Specified Budget
                               Determine Number of Stations and Replicates at Specified Survey Length
                               Modify Budget or Survey Length
                               Determine Minimum Detectable Change for Specified Sample Numbers
                               Compare Minimum Detectable Change to Management Need
                               Repeat Process Until AH Considerations are Optimized


                                 6.1.8 Examples of Monitoring Categories and Null Hypotheses

                               Dredged Material Characteristics and Disposal Operations
                               The quantity and physical/chemical characteristics of the dredged material are
                               within the permit limits.

                               Nearfield Fate
                               The dredged material plume(s) will follow a trajectory similar (40-200 percent of
                               predicted concentrations) to that predicted by the model used to determine the
                               waste load allocation for the specific site.

                               Short-term Effects
                               There will be no change in planktonic community structure associated with
                               oxygen depletion of the water column attributable to ocean dumping.
                               Farfield Fate
                               The dredged material concentrations in waters and sediments at specific
                               locations inside and outside the site are 40-200 percent of the concentrations
                               predicted by the model used to determine the waste load allocation for the
                               specific site.
                               Long-term Effects
                               Species of commercially, recreationally, or intrinsically valuable marine animals
                               from within and adjacent to the site boundary do not accumulate in their tissues
                               .any contaminants derived from ocean dumped dredged materials to
                               concentrations significantly higher than normal background concentrations....


                                                       6.1.9 Quality Assurance

                       Formal quality assurance (QA) programs are required by the EPA policy
                       (Administratoes memoranda, 30 May 1979, 14 June 1979; EPA Order 5360.1, "Policy
                       and Program Requirements to Implement the Quality Assurance Program," 3 April
                       1984). The goal of the EPA QA Program is to ensure that all measurements supported
                       by the EPA are of known and acceptable quality. This goal is achieved by a program
                       that sets standards for personnel qualifications; facilities, equipment, and services; data
                       generation and recordkeeping; data quality assessments; and audits and corrective
                       actions. . .

                       The text for Section 7.1 MONITORING was taken from EPA. 1990. Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, and
                       Management Guidance Document for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by BatteHe Ocean
                       Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.







                                                                   6-8










                                                           62 MANAGEMENT


                          ... Tle ocean dumping regulations (ï¿½ 228.3) define site management as
                              0   Conducting disposal site evaluation and designation studies
                              *   Regulating times, rates, and methods of disposal and quantities and types of
                                  material to be disposed of
                              0   Developing and maintaining effective ambient monitoring programs for the
                                  site
                              0   Recommending modifications in site use and/or designation

                          For dredged material disposal, site designation and permitting considerations often are
                          considered simultaneously. Designation of sites by the EPA must take into account the
                          type of material that will be disposed and the [potent4 requirements of the permits that
                          will be issued by the [USACE].

                          'ne EPA has delegated the designation of dredged material disposal sites to its Regional
                          offices. . . . Upon interim- or continuing-use designation, the sites will continue to be
                          managed by those Regional offices. Because permits [controlling the actual] use of the
                          sites are issued by the [USACE], District offices [necessarily play a role] in the
                          management scheme.        Management responsibilities and areas of coordination are
                          described in Region-specific Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). A national MOU
                          covers general areas of coordination.


                                                6.2.1 Conducting Disposal Site Evaluation
                                                          and Designation Studies

                          All site-management decisions attempt to minimize any acute and chronic (short- and
                          long-term) adverse effects on the site, the marine environment surrounding the site, and
                          public health. Careful evaluation and designation of a site is the first management
                          decision made toward ensuring that ocean dumping will not promote adverse effects.
                          Appropriate site selection can also ma)dmize the success of specific management options,
                          such as disposal in depressions or pits and capping. For this reason, the characteristics of
                          the material to be disposed at the site and the types of management options that will be
                          necessary generally are considered during the site-designation process.           A site is
                          designated before a permit is issued.

                          ... The [USACE] may contribute to the [EPA] site-designation process by conducting
                          surveys or participating in the development of the Environment Impact Statement (EIS).
                          When the EPA has not [designated] a disposal site or when the use of a designated site is
                          not feasible, the [USACE] may select a site as part of the permit process. In either case,
                          the [USACE] selection must meet the criteria of the ocean dumping regulations, subject
                          to EPA concurrence.


                          Site-designation is based on environmental evaluation of the site. A site is evaluated
                          according to the criteria in the ocean dumping regulations.              T'he EPA and the
                          [USACE] must work closely together on both the site-designation and permitting process.



                                                                      6-9










                                     622 Regulating Times, Rates, and Methods of Disposal
                                     and Quantities and Types of Materials To Be Disposed

                        Limitations to the length of time and for dumping periods allowed (including seasons),
                        and limitations on the quantities and rates of dumping may be stated as part of the ...
                        site-designation. Conditions stated [in] the permit [would reflect] the limits imposed by
                        the site-designation. Including these limits as part of the site designation allows the EPA
                        to manage the effects resulting from multiple dumpers using the site. For example, the
                        EPA can set limits on the total amount of material (mass load) that may be disposed
                        within a site.

                        Although scheduled times, rates and methods of disposal, and quantities and types of
                        materials to be disposed at a site can be specified when the site is designated, these
                        issues usually are [more specifically] addressed in the permits to use the site. Permits for
                        disposal of dredged material are issued by the [USACE, subject to an EPA review role].
                        . . . The [USACE] Districts are responsible for getting the EPA involved in the
                        permitting proces at the earliest stages in order to avoid problems when the EPA
                        [reviews] the permit. This includes sampling and analysis plans for the dredged material
                        and permit-specific requirements....

                        An important step in the permitting process is to test the material to be disposed to
                        determine its acceptability for ocean disposal under the regulations and its suitability for
                        a specific site. This process involves ensuring that all the requirements of the regulations,
                        including the physical, chemical, and toxicological issues are satisfied. 'ne process of
                        testing for and assessing toxicity of the material and bioaccumulation through the food
                        chains [are] described in Part. 227 of the ocean dumping regulations and is detailed in a
                        Battelle report . . . . The process entails evaluating the potential impacts in the water
                        column and the sediments. Dredged materials must be tested at the initiation of any
                        project to establish permit conditions and [generally should be reevaluated] every 3 years
                        for a long-term project to ensure that the material has not changed. This testing should
                        be done following the procedures outlined in the dredged material testing manual ...
                        and only Tier I testing may be necessary. Subsequent testing may also be required as a
                        permit condition .... or, for example, if environmental ... conditions at or near the
                        disposal or dredging site have changed.

                        All physical and chemical characteristics of material are not included in the testing
                        procedures presented in the [dredged material testing manuan.           However, they are
                        considered in determining the suitability of the material for ocean disposal and in
                        developing permit conditions. Ideally, to ... minimize adverse effects from dumping, the
                        physical characteristics of the [dredged materian would (1) have similar grain-size
                        distribution to the site; (2) minimize dispersion - unless the site is purposely chosen for
                        its'as dispersive character, (3) not increase turbidity in the vicinity of the site. Dredged
                        material with a grain size distribution that is similar to ambient conditions at the site can
                        ease recolonization of benthic: organisms that have been covered by the dredged material
                        and help to ensure that a unique habitat is not destroyed. The regulations specify that
                        certain chemical contaminants be present in less than trace amounts.

                        In practice, it may not be possible to find an acceptable site,%rith physical characteristics
                        that match those of the dredged material. In that case, the site manager must consider
                        the potential for environmental effects that result from the physical characteristics of the
                        waste.



                                                                    6-10









                          Regulating times for disposal may include seasonal limits to avoid ocean dumping when,
                          for example, fisheries species are spawning in the area or when recreational use is at
                          peak. Such regulation may also prohibit dumping during stormy weather or during
                          periods when bottom currents are most likely to disperse material from the site. Time
                          restrictions may be absolute or they may be linked to measurements that must be made
                          in the field.


                          Disposal rates may be regulated to ensure that all material is released quickly so that the
                          material falls through the water column in one mass. Alternatively, a maximum rate
                          may be specified. Maximum rates of disposal are most frequently regulated when water-
                          column effects are possible and limiting permissible concentrations may be reached.

                          Disposal methods may include specification that only bottom dumps are allowed or that
                          material must be discharged through a submerged pipe. Both of these options minimize
                          water-column impacts. Additionally, target areas within the dumpsite may be specified.
                          to limit the benthic impacts of dumping. Specific requirements for navigation generally
                          are specified to ensure accurate and precise disposal.

                          Limits to total amount of material dumped at a site (mass load) help to ensure that a
                          site is not used beyond its capacity. For example, appropriate water depths at the site
                          must be maintained to ensure safe navigation and to ensure that material does not leave
                          the site.


                          If a material does not meet the ocean dumping requirements detailed in the regulations,
                          then the [USACE] may request a waiver from the EPA. Material disposed under a
                          waiver [may require] monitoring and management specifications that reduce, the potential
                          for environmental damages from dumping.


                                  6.2.3 Developing and Maintaining Effective Monitoring Programs

                              A strategy for monitoring should be included in the EIS prepared in support of site
                          designation. This strategy should describe the environmental effects that may result from
                          dumping and the general procedures that will be used to determine if those effects are
                          occurring. The strategy may present a series of questions or formal null hypotheses
                          concerning the fate and effects of the material to be dumped. Prior to use of the site,
                          more detailed monitoring plan should be developed. . . . Monitoring should be specified
                          as a permit condition, particularly for monitoring activities to be carried out by the
                          permitees. Generally, such activities include continued reevaluation of the suitability of
                          material for ocean dumping. They also may include field studies conducted during and
                          following disposal to ensure that material does not leave the site, or that contaminants
                          are not released from the dredged material, and that cumulative and chronic impacts to
                          the site are determined.


                          Site managers use the results of monitoring activities to determine that conditions
                          specified in permits are being met and that no unacceptable impacts are resulting from
                          dumping activities. Monitoring activities results also are used to determine the specific
                          activities to be included in continued monitoring. For example, a decision to reduce the
                          program may be made when monitoring confirms that the criteria specified in the
                          regulations are being met, that no long-term effects have resulted from disposal of
                          material at the site. In such a case, the site monitoring might be reduced. However,


                                                                     6-11









                        periodic testing of the material to be disposed would continue, and site monitoring
                        should never be completely curtailed at an active site.            If tests indicate that the
                        characteristics of the dredged material have changed, site monitoring should be revised as
                        appropriate.

                        Results generated by the monitoring program can guide the implementation of other
                        specific monitoring activities. For example, a finding that material leached from the
                        disposal site could prompt greater attention to water-column impact than had been
                        planned initially. . . . A good monitoring program will accommodate the information
                        obtained throughout the pmgram, especially to use it to plan continued activities.


                                      62.4 Recommending Changes in Site Use or Designation

                        Periodically, the EPA reviews information gathered during use of the site and determines
                        if the site use and/or designation should be continued, amended, or revoked. These
                        decisions can be based on the results of monitoring or on other circumstances that were
                        initially considered during the permitting and site-designation procedures.

                        Modifications in site use or designation can include changes to permits,        amendment to
                        the site designation, or dedesignation of the disposal site. . .

                        Dredged material permits can be revised or revoked by              the [USACE] when it is
                        determined that
                             ï¿½   Dumping under the permit would result in violations of the ocean dumping
                                 regulations
                             ï¿½   The site designation has been amended or revoked
                             ï¿½   Ile dredging or disposal methods have changed
                             ï¿½   The permit application was incorrect or incomplete
                             ï¿½   Monitoring determined that significant adverse impacts could result or have
                                 resulted from dumping.
                             ï¿½   Adverse impacts have resulted from dumping.


               Changes in disposal-site designation or use may be instituted when

                    ï¿½   The site is no longer needed or if it cannot be effectively managed
                    ï¿½   When the EPA determines that activities at the disposal site have caused significant
                        impacts.

                        -  - The Administrator may amend the site designation to add or change restrictions on
                        sit'e use. These changes [would] then be reflected in revised permits. Decisions that
                        result from site monitoring and the management options that result from those decisions
                        are determined individually for every site. . . . Site managers must evaluate site-specific
                        information before deciding on any specific action.
                        The text for Section 7.2, MANAGEMENT was taken from EPA 1990; Draft Site Designation, Monitming, and
                        Management Guidance Documentfor Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. In preparation by Battelae Ocean
                        Sciences and Tetra Tech, Inc.


                                                                      6-12




    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I I                      EPA REGUIATURY FEEDBACK
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I
    I













                                           7.0 EPA REGULATORY FEEDBACK



                EPA has responsibility under Federal statutes and regulations to ensure that dredging and
                dredged-material disposal do not adversely effect the environment. As indicated in the
                preceding Sections, this includes sponsoring dredging research activities (Section 2.0),
                designating dTedged-material disposal sites (Section 3.0), review of decisions to issue dredged-
                material disposal permits (Section 4.0), testing dredged material (Section 5.0), and monitoring
                and management of disposal sites (Section 6.0). During the course of dredging program
                experience, Regional regulators of the EPA, the USACE, State agencies, and other authorities
                recognize needs for Federal regulatory changes. These needs may result from research that
                finds that a particular contaminant is more or less toxic than previously had been believed
                and that the regulatory criteria should be changed accordingly. Similarly, as new, more
                accurate methods are developed to evaluate dredged material, select disposal sites, and assess
                environmental impact for dredged-material disposal, the regulations might need to be revised.


                Presently, EPA is proposing revisions to update the 1977 Ocean Dumping Regulations and
                Critefia, 40 CFR 220-228. The proposed regulations would revise the ocean-dumping
                regulations applicable to dredged material and amend other parts of the regulations to codify
                statutory changes that have been made since the regulations were last revised. Revisions to
                the regulations comprise primarily three types of change:
                      *Incorporation of changes to improve clarity and to reflect dredging-program
                        experience
                        Reorganization of the regulations so that permitting of ocean dumping of dredged
                        material is covered in an essentially standalone section.
                      *Incorporation of changes required to codify statutory changes.


                To comply with Federal statutes and regulations to protect the environment, EPA dredging
                policy is interactive with ongoing dredging research and operation experience. The policy
                serves as guidance for complying with existing Federal regulations. When environmental
                problems with the regulations are identified, EPA works to affect a positive revision.




                                                               7-1




 I
 It
 I
 I
 I
 I
 t
 a I
 I
  I                              REFERENCES
  I
  I
  I


  I
  t
  I
  v
   I










                                                  8.0 REFERENCES



               EPA. 199 0. Working Draft Site Designation, Monitoring, and Management Guidance Document
                    for Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. Working draft prepared by Battelle Memorial
                    Institute Duxbury Operations with Tetra Tech, Inc. for U.S. Environmental Protection
                    Agency Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, Washington, DC. 235 pp. +
                    Appendix

               EPA. 1990. EPA Guidance Manual for the Review of COE Permits and Federal Projects for the
                    Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material. Draft report prepared by Sciience Applications
                    International Corporation under contract to Battelle Memorial Institute Duxbury
                    Operations for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Marine and Estuarine
                    Protection, Washington, DC. 108 pp. + Appendices.

               EPA/USACE. 1990. Dredged Material Disposal Strategy Document. Draft final report.
                    Prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute Duxbury Operations for U.S. Environmental
                    Protection Agency Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, Washington, DC.
                    112 pp. + Appendices.

               EPA/USACE. 1990. Draft Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material
                    into Ocean Waters. Prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute Duxbury Operations and
                    EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc. for U.S. Environmental Protection
                    Agency Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection, Washington, DC. 235 pp. +
                    Appendices.
























                                                          8-1

















































                         quuters                                  L: CM q   V----,.n + auap e
                                                                                                                -7.@V@ --c e
               .A@Ve 7-!
                                                                                               LIZ i
                                               VV-1  --n                          Spinmag                               imcs Street
                            0 1-20A.3           --0                         Ventura,               9001       T-avers'-  Gj,,Y@      icyar, ;'@968-lt
                  f );,@o4                  ite R. 0
    tl@@er, one    -1 z],  J A') 4                                          Ma!                 -0j.
                           b                                                    e!                                                94-1-2.230
                                            Iq d -one             bf-:@






                                                          3 6668 14107 8909