February 23, 2001
1:00 p.m-3:00 p.m.
On Friday, February 23, 2001, the following members of the Remediation Technologies Development Forum's (RTDF's) Sediments Remediation Action Team, Assessment Subgroup, met in a conference call:
Ralph Stahl, DuPont Corporate Remediation (Subgroup Co-chair)
John Davis, The Dow Chemical Company
Kenneth Finkelstein, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Ash Jain, EPRI
Richard Jensen, DuPont
Joseph Jersak, Hull & Associates, Inc.
David Moore, MEC Analytical Systems, Inc.
Dan Reible, Louisiana State University
Brett Thomas, Chevron
Dennis Timberlake, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Christine Hartnett of Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), was also present.
DISCUSSION ON THE ANACOSTIA PILOT SITE
Sediments Remediation Action Team members have prepared two proposals asking for funds to support demonstration projects at the Anacostia River site. Dan Reible said that one of the proposals, which will be submitted to the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP), requests funds for a capping pilot study. (Reible has prepared a brief summary that lists the highlights of the proposed capping pilot; he agreed to send it to ERG so that it can be distributed to the entire Assessment Subgroup.) The other proposal, which has been submitted to EPA's Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) program, asks for funds to support monitoring efforts. The Subgroup will find out whether this proposal has been accepted by late March 2000.
Richard Jensen said that specific parts of the river have been identified as potential locations for the capping pilot study. These sites were chosen because they are contaminated, are open-water sites, and are easily navigable. Two sites are emerging as the top candidates, Jensen said. Both are contaminated with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). One is owned by the Navy and the other is near an old gas plant. Jensen agreed to e-mail photographs of the sites to the Assessment Subgroup.
Reible and Jensen asked call participants for input on the kinds of assessment that should be performed on the river. The Anacostia Watershed Toxics Alliance (AWTA) has already collected some site characterization data, they said, but more data must be obtained before remedies are selected for the river. So far, Jensen said, data have only been collected from a few places in the river. Thus, AWTA does not have a thorough understanding of the spatial distribution of contaminants.
Call participants brainstormed about what should be assessed at the Anacostia River site. They made the following key points about sampling activities:
Samples should be collected to determine: (1) whether team members were successful in implementing an innovative technology, and (2) whether the technology can achieve its goals (e.g., serving as a barrier, controlling permeability). To determine the former, Reible said, investigators must collect samples during placement to evaluate resuspension and loss of cap material.
Researchers need to decide what level of analysis is necessary. Reible noted that there are different levels of assessment. While scientific researchers may only require a few analytes to be evaluated in order to determine how a treatment technology is operating, regulators will require more extensive analyte lists and more detailed quality assurance/quality control measures. Reible said that he hopes a hybrid approach can be used at this site--an approach in which some samples are subjected to a rigorous analytical scheme, while others are not subjected to as detailed an analysis.
It is important to collect samples before, during, and after cap placement.
It would be useful to model the site and use data collected during assessment activities to verify the model. (Ash Jain said that he has a modeling system that might be of interest to the Assessment Subgroup.)
Call participants also brainstormed about the parameters that should be assessed at the Anacostia River site. They suggested collecting information on:
Vertical concentration profiles. Reible said that high precision coring should be performed to evaluate the vertical migration of contaminants before and after cap installation. He said that this information is essential to the capping project.
The spatial distribution of PAHs and the total mass of contaminant that is present across the site. Jain and Joseph Jersak agreed that collecting this information is important.
The benthic community. Call participants suggested assessing the dispersal of benthic organisms in different locations within capped areas. They said that it is important to evaluate variability in these communities. (Call participants acknowledged that some researchers evaluate fish populations to determine what impact treatment technologies have on ecosystems. At this site, however, where the proposed capping pilot is only expected to cover a small portion of the source area, fish would not be appropriate to study.) Jersak offered a cautionary note about benthic community studies: deposition can confound results. When a cap is placed in an open system, some contaminated sediment will be deposited on top of the cap.
Bioavailability and bioconcentration. One call participant suggested using semipermeable membrane devices to obtain relative information on bioavailability and bioconcentration.
Ground-water flux. Jersak said that information should be obtained about this parameter.
Advective components. Jersak said that this information will be needed to validate models.
Sediment-water interface. David Moore suggested performing this benthic bioassay test.
Pore water levels. Call participants said that data on pore water levels are needed. Reible asked which method should be used to assess this parameter. Jain said that EPA's draft Sediment Sampling Manipulation for Chemical and Toxicological Uses might provide useful suggestions. He agreed to send this document to Reible.
Call participants agreed to think more about the technologies and assessment tools that would be useful to employ at the Anacostia River. They will e-mail their "wish lists" to Reible by April 2, 2001. Reible will consolidate the lists and redistribute a master list before the next Subgroup conference call. Call participants will also think about ways to fund the RTDF's proposed activities. As noted above, members are already exploring the possibility of obtaining funds from SITE and ESTCP. Conference call participants agreed to think of other sources and to share their suggestions with the group.
THE SUBGROUP'S TECHNICAL PAPERS
The Subgroup plans to release several papers in the near future. These papers, which address a variety of sediments assessment topics, are being written by different Subgroup members. Ralph Stahl said that the papers can be divided into two categories:
Papers that are almost done. Stahl said that most of the Subgroup's papers are near completion. They do need to be put in a final format, however, and shortened to three to five pages. Stahl said that Kelly Madalinski will distribute the format that all of the authors should follow. Once the authors receive this, they will have four weeks to finalize their papers.
Papers that require more extensive modification. Four of the Subgroup's
papers address natural attenuation. Dennis Timberlake said that this topic
requires sensitive handling. He agreed to talk with the papers' authors
during a separate conference call about how to proceed. One possibility
would be to combine the papers into one, and simply state what is known
and what is not, also listing research needs. John Davis agreed to set up
the call.
PRESENTATIONS
The call participants expressed interest in presenting information about the Sediments Remediation Action Team at two different conferences:
The May 2001 EPA Forum on Managing Contaminated Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites meeting. Call participants agreed that it would be useful to present a poster at this EPA conference. The poster will include information about the Action Team's mini-workshop sessions, the Subgroup's papers, and the activities that are proposed for the Anacostia River site. The poster will be designed to appeal to a diverse audience, and will give viewers an idea of what the RTDF team has done and where it is heading in the future. To reserve space for the poster, the Subgroup must submit an abstract by February 28, 2001. Stahl said that he prepared an abstract recently; if it is tweaked, it might be appropriate to use for the EPA conference. Call participants agreed that Ken Finkelstein should submit the abstract. Therefore, Stahl will forward his draft abstract to Finkelstein. Timberlake will review the draft and provide comments to Finkelstein by February 26, 2001.
The November 2001 Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
(SETAC) meeting. Call participants talked about holding an interactive
poster session at this conference. After much discussion, however, they
decided against using this format. Instead, the Subgroup will request space
for an open house. This open house will be well advertised, Stahl said,
and will be centered around specific themes.
ACTION ITEMS
Call participants agreed to make lists of the technologies and assessment tools that would be useful to test at the Anacostia River. These "wish lists" should be sent to Reible by April 2, 2001. Reible will consolidate the suggestions and distribute a master list.
Call participants agreed to brainstorm about potential funding sources for the Anacostia demonstration projects.
Reible said that he has prepared a brief summary that lists the highlights of the proposed Anacostia demonstration project. He agreed to send it to ERG. ERG will distribute the text to the entire Assessment Subgroup.
Jain agreed to send Reible a copy of a draft EPA document. This document summarizes a variety of sampling technologies.
Call participants agreed to continue working on the Subgroup's technical
papers. Four of the papers will need significant revision, because they
address politically sensitive topics. Davis agreed to work with ERG to set
up a conference call with Timberlake and the authors of these four papers.
The rest of the papers are close to completion. Stahl said that the authors
of these papers will receive a format guide from Madalinski very soon. Once
they receive this, the authors will have four weeks to complete their papers
and submit final versions.
Call participants agreed that the Assessment Subgroup should present a poster at the May 2001 EPA Forum on Managing Contaminated Sediments at Hazardous Waste Sites. A draft abstract has already been written. Timberlake agreed to review it and to provide comments to Finkelstein by February 26, 2001. Finkelstein will submit the abstract to fisk.joan@epa.gov.
Call participants also agreed to research the possibility of holding an open house at the upcoming SETAC meeting.
ERG agreed to set up the next Assessment Subgroup conference call for April 11, 2001, between 1:00 and 3:00 Eastern Standard Time.