Great Lakes Sediment Testing Manual Evaluating the Suitability of Dredged Material for Beneficial Use

Transcription

1 Great Lakes Sediment Testing Manual Evaluating the Suitability of Dredged Material for Beneficial Use Richard A Price US Army Engineer Research and Development Center Great Lakes Dredging Team Annual Meeting Dundee, MI July 16-17, 3013 US Army Corps of Engineers

2 Dredged Material is a Product of the Watershed Excess watershed erosion increases dredging volume/frequency Excess nutrients impair water quality Contaminants impair sediment quality Impairments increase dredging costs Population density can affect disposal cost Dredging in NY $32.34/yd Dredging in MVN - $2.16/yd

3 Unique Challenge to Great Lakes

4 Beneficial Use Managing sediment resources from maintenance dredging operations for productive use Regional Sediment Management A geographical systems-based approach A watershed based approach Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Effective utilization of sediment resources in littoral, wetland and upland ecosystem restoration/protection projects

5 Why Do We Need Beneficial Use? Jul 14, $16.92 trillion Confined disposal not sustainable $$ Aquatic disposal not acceptable effects Changing needs in port facilities age/use Predicted climate change effects on navigation increased sedimentation/water levels Use perceived better than disposal

6 Two Paths for BU Beneficial use is part of the dredging and placement process Aquatic Placement Confined or unconfined upland placement Beneficial use is part of the CDF recovery process Mining CDFs to reclaim capacity Design CDFs for placement & processing

7 Regulatory Authority and BU Disposal in coastal waters MPRSA Fill or discharge to coastal & inland waters CWA Upland CWA if return flow and NEPA. No discharge of DM into waters of US? State authority for soil/solid waste: GW, HH, Eco, etc????

8 The Science 40+ years of research and development for evaluating engineering alternatives and environmental impacts of dredging and DM Mgt Dredged Material Research Program: No single disposal alternative is most suited for a region or a type of project. Long-range regional planning is required for effective disposal of dredged material. Dredging Research Program: Development of equipment, instrumentation, software, and operational monitoring and management procedures to significantly enhance the Corps' dredging activities USACE/USEPA Field Verification Program : Techniques for predicting effluent and surface water quality, toxicity and bioaccumulation in plants, and aquatic toxicity, bioaccumulation and growth have good utility for predisposal evaluations. Effects of disposal predicted in the laboratory and observed in the field were less persistent in aquatic < wetland < upland disposal. Long-Term effects of Dredging Operations: Provide proven technologies for identifying, quantifying, and managing contaminated sediments in support of cost-effective, environmentally responsible navigation. Dredging Operations and Environment Research Program: Present Operations Tech, DM Mgt, Risk, Env Resource Protection

9 Testing Manuals Environmental Suitability Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal (Ocean Testing Manual) Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Discharge in Waters of the U.S. - Testing Manual (Inland Testing Manual) Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Placement in Island, Nearshore, or Upland CDFs - Testing Manual (Upland testing Manual)

10 EPA/CE Evaluation Framework BU opportunities Physical suitability Logistics & Mgt needs Environmental suitability no testing methods specified State/Fed screening criteria Physical & biological tests

11 Why More Guidance? Great Lakes Beneficial Use Task Force, 2001 Lack of adequate regulatory guidance obstacle to BU Testing and Evaluating Dredged Material for Upland Beneficial Uses: A Regional Framework for the Great Lakes Risk-based evaluation needed to define suitability for BU and assist in effective least cost determintion.

12 Goals One-Stop, Web-based Guidance Standardized risk-based testing methods Consistency in interpretation Updated regulatory guidance applicable to Great Lakes States Regional, cost-effective approach to unique sediment management needs of the Great Lakes

13 Sediment Suitability Defined Sand Quality Physical standard Sediment Quality Exposure = Acceptable Risk Suitable for aquatic use aquatic habitat, aquatic fill, beach/littoral nourishment Soil Quality Exposure = Acceptable Risk Suitable for confined or unconfined upland use habitat, green space, landscaping, crop production Unrestrictive Fill Exposure = Acceptable Risk Suitable for unrestricted fill, material use Restricted Fill Exposure = Unacceptable Risk Suitable for restricted industrial fill, landfill cover, material Impaired Unacceptable Risk without Treatment Requires treatment to render suitable Landfill or confined disposal

14 Physical Suitability

15 Environmental Suitability Freshwater amphipod

16 Contaminants - Define the Risk Contaminant pathways Soil Direct contact, ingestion Surface Water Water quality criteria (water column, effluent, surface runoff) Ground Water Drinking water standards Plant Wetland and upland toxicity and bioaccumulation Animal Water column toxicity / Benthic bioaccumulation Soil invertebrate toxicity and bioaccumulation Air Volatile emissions Dust

17 Tiered Testing Approach Tier I Existing info, material determined inert Tier II Compare DM chemistry to screening level Pass: no further contaminant evaluation Fail: Further evaluation Tier III - Physical and biological tests for bioavailability Biological exposure for bioavailability or site specific use Tier IV - Risk assessment

18 Analysis of Dredged Material Suitability Aquatic Standard elutriate Toxicity Whole sediment aquatic toxicity Benthic Bioaccumulation Submerged Aquatic Plant Bioaccumulation Ecological risk analysis

19 Analysis of Dredged Material Suitability Upland Surface runoff WQ Upland plant toxicity and bioaccumulation Wetland plant toxicity and bioaccumulation Soil invertebrate toxicity and bioaccumulation Ecological risk analysis

20 Analysis of Dredged Material Suitability Geotechnical Grain size distribution Atterberg limits and permeability Human Health Bulk chemistry comparison to state established soil standards Direct contact Groundwater protection Consumption of fish assassment Optional tests include: Bioaccumulation of by garden crops Leachate tests for groundwater Baseline Chemistry Analyte Groups 1. Metals - 23 per TAL (EPA 6000/7000) 2. Pesticides (EPA 8081A) 3. Total PCBs (Aroclors EPA 8082) 4. Ammonia Nitrogen (EPA 350) 5. Total Phosphorus (EPA 6000/7000) 6. Volatile Organics - TCL (EPA 8260B) 7. B/N/A (Semi-volatile organics) - TCL (EPA 8270C) 8. Total Organic Carbon (EPA 9060) 9. Grain Size (ASTM D421, D422; Includes Sieve and Hydrometer Baseline Testing for Large Volume DMMU and Composite Reference Samples 1. Hexavalent (VI) chromium (EPA 6000/7000) 2. Total CN - EPA 9010B/9012A), 3. Grain Size (ASTM D421, D422) 4. Atterberg Limits (ASTM 4318) 5. Proctor (ASTM d698-00a or ASTM d ) 6. Permeability (ASTM D E1) 7. Percent Moisture (ASTM D2216) 8. Percent Organic Matter (ASTM D ) 9. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN - EPA 351)

21 Application

22 End Results Risk-based beneficial use of dredged material for both aquatic and upland uses.

23 Questions??

24 State Regulatory Soil Surface Guidance Upland Beneficial Uses State regulatory authority under Title 40 for management of solid waste Guidance varies between states up to 7 orders of magnitude Cadmium varies by 3 orders of magnitude ranges from 0.5 to 550 Cd has been an ecological concern in dredged material management for upland placement

25 Sediment/Soil characteristics and plant available cadmium. Soil ph Clay, % Soil Cd 3 Plant Cd 3 BAF Location Island Toledo Reference Dike 10-B Cleveland Reference Lorain CDF Lorain Reference Detroit River Michigan City Michigan City Indiana Harbor Indiana Harbor Milwaukee Harbor Menominee River Menominee River

26 Comparison of acceptable plant concentrations to dredged material plant concentrations. CONTAMINANT FOOD INGESTION RATE (KG DW/KG BW/D) TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUE (MG DW/KG BW/D) ACCEPTABLE PLANT CONC. MG/KG LORAIN CDF DIKE 10-B CDF ISLAND 18 CDF Plant to Mammalian Plant to Mammalian Plant to Mammalian Arsenic <0.05 <0.5 Cadmium * Chromium (III) Copper Lead Nickel Silver <0.50 <0.50 <0.517 *Island 18 dredged material = 2.6 mg kg -1, Eco-SSL =73 mg kg-1.