[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
GLIN==> NRC Report on Sediment Dredging Risk Reduction
- Subject: GLIN==> NRC Report on Sediment Dredging Risk Reduction
- From: "Alex J. Sagady & Associates" <ajs@sagady.com>
- Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2007 03:59:30 -0400
- Cc: emily.green@sierraclub.org
- Delivered-to: glin-announce-archive@glc.org
- Delivered-to: glin-announce@great-lakes.net
- List-name: GLIN-Announce
FROM THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Date: June 5, 2007
Contacts: Sara Frueh, Media Relations Officer
Sarah Morocco, Media Relations Assistant
Office of News and Public Information
202-334-2138; e-mail <news@nas.edu>
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sediment Dredging Has Fallen Short of Achieving Cleanup Goals At Many
Contaminated Sites; Better Monitoring Needed to Assess Suitability and
Results
WASHINGTON -- At many projects to dredge contaminated sediments from U.S.
rivers and other bodies of water, it has not been demonstrated that
dredging has reduced the long-term risks the sediments pose to people and
wildlife, says a new report from the National Research Council.
Many dredging projects have had difficulty meeting short-term goals for
reducing pollution levels. Whether dredging alone can reduce
long-term risks was difficult to determine at many sites because of
inadequate monitoring data and other limitations, the report says.
It calls on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to improve and
intensify its monitoring at dredging and other projects intended to
remediate contaminated sediments at the nation's Superfund
sites.
Dredging's ability to achieve cleanup goals depends on a site's
characteristics, the report also concludes. If a particular site
has one or more unfavorable conditions -- the presence of debris such as
boulders or cables, for example, or bedrock lying beneath the
contaminated sediment -- then dredging alone is unlikely to be
sufficient. The presence or absence of such conditions should be a
major consideration in deciding whether to dredge at a site, said the
committee that wrote the report.
Contaminated sediments can be found at the bottoms of many U.S. rivers
and other water bodies near former mining, agricultural, or industrial
sites. Tainted with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), heavy metals,
or other toxic substances, the sediments can pose risks to people, fish,
and aquatic animals. Many of these sites are slated for cleanup by
EPA under federal Superfund legislation, and a minimum of 14 of them are
sediment "megasites" -- sites where the cost of remediating
sediments is expected to reach at least $50 million, or has already done
so. Decisions about whether to dredge at these sites have proved
controversial, so Congress asked the Research Council to evaluate the
method's effectiveness. To inform its conclusions, the committee
examined 26 dredging projects, five of them at megasites, and evaluated
whether they had attained their cleanup and risk-reduction goals.
Dredging is effective at removing contaminated sediment mass permanently
from the environment, the report says. But removing mass may not be
enough to achieve desired cleanup levels or long-term goals for reducing
risks, because dredging inevitably leaves residual contamination
behind. Dredging alone achieved expected cleanup results at only a
few of the sites the committee analyzed. At many others, capping --
placing a layer of uncontaminated material over the tainted sediments --
was also necessary to contain the remaining contamination at acceptable
levels. Assessments of the sites also revealed that the dredging
process releases contaminants into the water, which in the short term can
have adverse effects on fish and other aquatic animals and could
potentially raise health risks in people who consume them.
Dredging remains one of the few approaches available for cleaning up
contaminated sediments, the report says, and EPA should continue to
consider its use among other methods. In locations where buried
contaminated sediments could be dislodged by storms, for example,
dredging the sediments to prevent them from being transported may reduce
risks. If dredging is used, planners need to recognize that
residual contamination and releases of chemicals into the water will
invariably occur; they should estimate the effects of these processes in
advance, and employ best practices to minimize them, the committee
said. Using a combination of methods should also be considered,
particularly if a site has any characteristics unfavorable to
dredging.
The typical Superfund approach, in which EPA conducts an investigation
and a feasibility study that establishes a single path to remediation, is
not the best way to choose remedies for these sites, the report
says. Given the long time frames and many unknowns involved in
cleaning up megasites, adaptive management -- which uses monitoring data
to review progress and adjust plans when needed -- should be used to
select and implement cleanup methods. In addition, dredging and
other remediation projects should be designed to meet long-term goals for
reducing risks to people and wildlife, instead of objectives not directly
related to risk, such as removing a specified amount of sediment.
The report emphasizes that without adequate monitoring before and after
dredging, it is impossible to evaluate the degree to which cleanup
objectives have been reached. EPA should invest in better and more
consistent measurement tools to monitor conditions in the field reliably
and efficiently. Monitoring data should also be made available to
the public in electronic form, so that evaluations of remedies'
effectiveness can be independently verified.
In addition, to help ensure that megasites with contaminated sediments
are cleaned up as effectively as possible, EPA should centralize
resources, responsibility, and authority for these sites at the national
level, the report recommends. Such a shift would help the agency
make sure that monitoring is adequate and that adaptive management and
best practices are followed.
The report was sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of
Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up
the National Academies. They are private, nonprofit institutions
that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a
congressional charter. The Research Council is the principal
operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering. A committee roster follows.
Copies of Sediment Dredging at Superfund Megasites: Assessing the
Effectiveness will be available from the National Academies Press; tel.
202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at
http://www.nap.edu.
Reporters may obtain a pre-publication copy from the Office of News and
Public Information (contacts listed above).
#
# #
mORE AT
http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/20070605.html
==========================================
Alex J. Sagady & Associates
http://www.sagady.com
Environmental Enforcement, Permit/Technical Review, Public Policy,
Expert Witness Review and Litigation Investigation on Air, Water and
Waste/Community Environmental and Resource Protection
Prospectus at:
http://www.sagady.com/sagady.pdf
657 Spartan Avenue, East Lansing, MI 48823
(517) 332-6971; (517) 332-8987 (fax); ajs@sagady.com
==========================================