Skip to main content
Top

2014 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

14. Monitoring Remedial Effectiveness

Authors : Karl E. Gustavson, Marc S. Greenberg

Published in: Processes, Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments

Publisher: Springer New York

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Contaminated sediment remediation is a long-term, often decadal, process from initial characterization to achieving remedial action objectives (RAOs). Monitoring remedial effectiveness is critically important in contaminated sediment management. It seeks to answer the fundamental question of “Were we successful?” As a result, it is also a topic of great sensitivity. From a pragmatic point of view, there are many disincentives to conducting remedy effectiveness monitoring. What happens if the remedy is not “successful” and hundreds of millions of private and public dollars have been spent over many years of cleanup, after years of investigation and negotiation? Do we start over again? Determine it cannot be done? While this concern is very real, it does not outweigh the statutory requirements, cost accountability, human and ecological risk implications, and the standards of good governance and environmental stewardship that mandate remedy effectiveness be tracked and verified.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Footnotes
1
In practice, there is great variety in the terminology (and nuance in meaning) associated with the contaminant concentrations that are to be achieved in various media by the remediation. Such terms include cleanup levels, cleanup goals, chemical and biological standards, remedial goals, cleanup criteria, target concentrations, performance goals, performance metrics, and performance standards. Federal Guidance (2005) does not precisely define the terms and their usage; that issue is still in flux (Ells, 2011).
 
2
The term “cleanup level” is used here and is defined simply as the contaminant concentration (in whatever media is specified) that will achieve the risk reduction targeted by the remediation. The term “remedial goal” was not used because it typically specifies a “protective” concentration (see NCP quote in text), which may not be the target of a specific remedial action (e.g., if background or an interim concentration is to be achieved).
 
3
The application of “cleanup levels” can vary: at some sites, a cleanup level may be expected immediately post-remediation; another may have one cleanup level to be achieved immediately post-remediation and another to be achieved 10 years post-remediation. Some large sites with a patchwork of contamination may have higher cleanup levels set for certain areas that, when integrated across the entire site, achieve a lower site-wide cleanup level. Those variations are site-specific, and not central to the main point: cleanup levels need to be specified that clearly define the concentration, area, and time of anticipated attainment.
 
4
See Magar et al. (2009) for a useful discussion on lines of evidence and their use to support decision making.
 
5
In some instances, biologic receptors may not be specified, as the objective of the sediment remediation may be to reduce flux of contaminants from the remediated area. In this case, contaminant flux would be the primary determinant of remedial effectiveness.
 
Literature
go back to reference Alcoa. 2006. In-Situ PCB Bioavailability Reduction in Grasse River Sediments Final Work Plan. August 2006. Alcoa. 2006. In-Situ PCB Bioavailability Reduction in Grasse River Sediments Final Work Plan. August 2006.
go back to reference Alcoa. 2010. Activated Carbon Pilot Study, Grasse River, NY. Summary of 2006 to 2009 Monitoring Results. November 1 Alcoa. 2010. Activated Carbon Pilot Study, Grasse River, NY. Summary of 2006 to 2009 Monitoring Results. November 1
go back to reference Battelle. 2003. A Compendium of Chemical, Physical and Biological Methods for Assessing and Monitoring the Remediation of Contaminated Sediment Sites. Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Contract No. 68-W-99-033. Work Assignment 4–20. February 17. Battelle. 2003. A Compendium of Chemical, Physical and Biological Methods for Assessing and Monitoring the Remediation of Contaminated Sediment Sites. Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Contract No. 68-W-99-033. Work Assignment 4–20. February 17.
go back to reference Beckingham B, Ghosh U. 2010. Comparison of field vs. laboratory exposures of L. variegatus to PCB impacted river sediments. Environ Toxicol Chem 29:2851–2858.CrossRef Beckingham B, Ghosh U. 2010. Comparison of field vs. laboratory exposures of L. variegatus to PCB impacted river sediments. Environ Toxicol Chem 29:2851–2858.CrossRef
go back to reference Beckingham B, Ghosh U. 2011. Field-scale reduction of PCB bioavailability with activated carbon amendment to river sediments. Environ Sci Technol 45:10567–10574.CrossRef Beckingham B, Ghosh U. 2011. Field-scale reduction of PCB bioavailability with activated carbon amendment to river sediments. Environ Sci Technol 45:10567–10574.CrossRef
go back to reference Bridges TS, Gustavson KE, Schroeder P, Ells SJ, Hayes D, Nadeau SC, Palermo MR, Patmont C. 2010. Dredging processes and remedy effectiveness: Relationship to the 4 Rs of environmental dredging. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:619–630.CrossRef Bridges TS, Gustavson KE, Schroeder P, Ells SJ, Hayes D, Nadeau SC, Palermo MR, Patmont C. 2010. Dredging processes and remedy effectiveness: Relationship to the 4 Rs of environmental dredging. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:619–630.CrossRef
go back to reference Burton GA, Greenberg MS, Rowland CD, Irvine CA, Lavoie DR, Brooker JA, Moore L, Raymer DFN, McWilliam RA. 2005. In-situ exposures using caged organisms: A multi-compartment approach to detect aquatic toxicity and bioaccumulation. Environ Pollut 134:133–144.CrossRef Burton GA, Greenberg MS, Rowland CD, Irvine CA, Lavoie DR, Brooker JA, Moore L, Raymer DFN, McWilliam RA. 2005. In-situ exposures using caged organisms: A multi-compartment approach to detect aquatic toxicity and bioaccumulation. Environ Pollut 134:133–144.CrossRef
go back to reference CDM. 2009. Allied Paper Inc./Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River Superfund Site. Summary of Baseline PCB Concentrations in Surface Water and Fish Tissue; Evaluation of Pre- and Post-TCRA Data from the Bryant Mill Pond; and Site-wide Trends in Fish Tissue PCB Concentrations. Submitted to Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. May 2009. CDM. 2009. Allied Paper Inc./Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River Superfund Site. Summary of Baseline PCB Concentrations in Surface Water and Fish Tissue; Evaluation of Pre- and Post-TCRA Data from the Bryant Mill Pond; and Site-wide Trends in Fish Tissue PCB Concentrations. Submitted to Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. May 2009.
go back to reference Ells S. 2011. Developing Sediment Cleanup Levels and Other Measures to Evaluate Remedial Alternatives at Superfund Sites. Sixth International Conference on Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, New Orleans, LA, USA. Ells S. 2011. Developing Sediment Cleanup Levels and Other Measures to Evaluate Remedial Alternatives at Superfund Sites. Sixth International Conference on Remediation of Contaminated Sediments, New Orleans, LA, USA.
go back to reference Fuglevand P, Webb R. 2012. Urban River Remediation Dredging Methods that Reduce Release, Residuals and Risk. Western Dredging Association, June 10–17, 2012, San Antonio, TX. Fuglevand P, Webb R. 2012. Urban River Remediation Dredging Methods that Reduce Release, Residuals and Risk. Western Dredging Association, June 10–17, 2012, San Antonio, TX.
go back to reference Gustavson KE, Burton GA, Francingues Jr NR, Reible DD, Vorhees DJ, Wolfe JR. 2008. Evaluating the effectiveness of contaminated-sediment dredging. Environ Sci Technol 42:5042–5047.CrossRef Gustavson KE, Burton GA, Francingues Jr NR, Reible DD, Vorhees DJ, Wolfe JR. 2008. Evaluating the effectiveness of contaminated-sediment dredging. Environ Sci Technol 42:5042–5047.CrossRef
go back to reference Integral Consulting. 2009. 2007 Monitoring Report for Sediment Remediation in Ward Cove, Alaska. Submitted to Ketchikan Pulp Company, Ketchikan, AK. April 2009. Integral Consulting. 2009. 2007 Monitoring Report for Sediment Remediation in Ward Cove, Alaska. Submitted to Ketchikan Pulp Company, Ketchikan, AK. April 2009.
go back to reference MacDonald DD, Ingersoll CG. 2002. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Volumes I-III. EPA-905-B02-001-C. Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office. December. MacDonald DD, Ingersoll CG. 2002. A Guidance Manual to Support the Assessment of Contaminated Sediments in Freshwater Ecosystems. Volumes I-III. EPA-905-B02-001-C. Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office. December.
go back to reference Magar VS, Chadwick DB, Bridges TS, Fuchsman PC, Conder JM, Dekker TJ, Steevens JA, Gustavson KE, Mills MA. 2009. Technical Guide. Monitored Natural Recovery at Contaminated Sediment Sites. ESTCP Project ER-0622. Department of Defense. Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, Arlington, VA, USA. Magar VS, Chadwick DB, Bridges TS, Fuchsman PC, Conder JM, Dekker TJ, Steevens JA, Gustavson KE, Mills MA. 2009. Technical Guide. Monitored Natural Recovery at Contaminated Sediment Sites. ESTCP Project ER-0622. Department of Defense. Environmental Security Technology Certification Program, Arlington, VA, USA.
go back to reference Myers J. 2007. PCB levels in Cumberland Bay drop; Advisory not lifted. Press Republican. November 4. Myers J. 2007. PCB levels in Cumberland Bay drop; Advisory not lifted. Press Republican. November 4.
go back to reference NRC (National Research Council). 2003. Environmental Cleanup at Navy Facilities. Adaptive Site Management. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA. NRC (National Research Council). 2003. Environmental Cleanup at Navy Facilities. Adaptive Site Management. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA.
go back to reference NRC. 2004. Adaptive Management for Water Resources Project Planning. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA. NRC. 2004. Adaptive Management for Water Resources Project Planning. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA.
go back to reference NRC. 2007. Sediment Dredging at Superfund Megasites. Assessing the Effectiveness. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA. NRC. 2007. Sediment Dredging at Superfund Megasites. Assessing the Effectiveness. National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA.
go back to reference NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). 2001. Cumberland Bay Sludge Bed Removal Project. April. NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). 2001. Cumberland Bay Sludge Bed Removal Project. April.
go back to reference NYSDOH (New York State Department of Health). 2010. Chemicals in Sportfish and Game 2010–2011. Health Advisories. NYSDOH (New York State Department of Health). 2010. Chemicals in Sportfish and Game 2010–2011. Health Advisories.
go back to reference Tetra Tech EC. 2009. Final Year 7 Post Remedial Biomonitoring Report for Tabbs Creek, Nasa Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia. Prepared for U.S. Navy. October 8, 2009. Tetra Tech EC. 2009. Final Year 7 Post Remedial Biomonitoring Report for Tabbs Creek, Nasa Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia. Prepared for U.S. Navy. October 8, 2009.
go back to reference Tetra Tech FW. 2005. After Action Report for North of Wood Street Remediation. New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, Operable Unit #1. New Bedford, Massachusetts. April. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA, USA. Tetra Tech FW. 2005. After Action Report for North of Wood Street Remediation. New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, Operable Unit #1. New Bedford, Massachusetts. April. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, Concord, MA, USA.
go back to reference USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998a. Record of Decision. NASA Langley Research Center Tabbs Creek OU 3. Hampton, VA USA. September 30. USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998a. Record of Decision. NASA Langley Research Center Tabbs Creek OU 3. Hampton, VA USA. September 30.
go back to reference USEPA. 1998b. Record of Decision for the Upper and Lower Harbor Operable Unit New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site New Bedford, MA, USA. September. USEPA. 1998b. Record of Decision for the Upper and Lower Harbor Operable Unit New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site New Bedford, MA, USA. September.
go back to reference USEPA. 2000. EPA Superfund Record of Decision: Ketchikan Pulp Company, Ketchikan, AK, USA. Report number EPA/ROD/R10-00/035. March 29. USEPA. 2000. EPA Superfund Record of Decision: Ketchikan Pulp Company, Ketchikan, AK, USA. Report number EPA/ROD/R10-00/035. March 29.
go back to reference USEPA. 2002b. EPA Superfund Record of Decision: Hudson River PCBs. EPA/ROD/R02-02/013. February 1. USEPA. 2002b. EPA Superfund Record of Decision: Hudson River PCBs. EPA/ROD/R02-02/013. February 1.
go back to reference USEPA. 2010. Five-Year Review Report Second Five-Year Review Report For Ketchikan Pulp Company Site Ketchikan, AK, USA. August. USEPA. 2010. Five-Year Review Report Second Five-Year Review Report For Ketchikan Pulp Company Site Ketchikan, AK, USA. August.
go back to reference USEPA. 2005. Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites. EPA-540-R-05-012. December. USEPA. 2005. Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites. EPA-540-R-05-012. December.
go back to reference USEPA. 2008. Sediment Assessment and Monitoring Sheet (SAMS) #1. Using Fish Tissue Data to Monitor Remedy Effectiveness. OSWER Directive 9200.1–77D. USEPA. 2008. Sediment Assessment and Monitoring Sheet (SAMS) #1. Using Fish Tissue Data to Monitor Remedy Effectiveness. OSWER Directive 9200.1–77D.
Metadata
Title
Monitoring Remedial Effectiveness
Authors
Karl E. Gustavson
Marc S. Greenberg
Copyright Year
2014
Publisher
Springer New York
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6726-7_14