Panel sessions will focus on some of the major issues within the sediment management community:
Each panel will provide an opportunity for invited experts and practitioners to discuss critical issues related to sediment assessment and management. Following the panel’s discussion, the moderator(s) will conduct an open discussion between the audience and the panel.
Considerations for Effective Remedy Evaluation (Tuesday)
Moderators:
Steven C. Nadeau, Coordinating Director, Sediment Management Work Group (Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP)
Stephen Ells (U.S. EPA)
Panelists:
Wanda L. Holmes (U.S. Navy)
Clay Patmont (Anchor Environmental, LLC)
Randy Sturgeon (U.S. EPA)
The remedy evaluation process at contaminated sediment sites encompasses a broad range of policy and technical considerations, both pre-remedy selection and post-remedy selection and implementation. The recent U.S. EPA document Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance For Hazardous Waste Sites (December 2005) provides a comprehensive risk-based management framework designed to facilitate selection of an appropriate remedy or combination of remedies. However, several issues can impact the expected effectiveness of considered remedial alternatives. These include: evaluating the potential risks associated with continuing sources, including those external to the site, and evaluating anthropogenic background contamination; understanding the risk drivers at the site; establishing realistic/achievable risk-based cleanup goals; identifying the implementation risks associated with each remedy and/or combination of remedies; using models and other data to evaluate which remedies or combination of remedies may effectively address the risk drivers and are most likely to achieve the risk-based cleanup goals; addressing uncertainty associated with the models; evaluating the feasibility and compatibility of each primary sediment remediation option (on a site-specific basis); and defining remedial endpoints and determining a process for concluding the remedial endpoints have been achieved, which includes choosing appropriate metrics, designing and applying a monitoring plan, and setting “exit criteria.” Panelists will provide federal and industry perspectives on effectively addressing these considerations and applying the national policy and technical lessons learned in a manner that optimizes the selection and evaluation of sediment remediation options.
Evidence of Risk in Sediments: The Sediment Quality Triad and Beyond (Tuesday)
Moderators:
Sabine E. Apitz (SEA Environmental Decisions, Ltd.)
Susanne Heise (Hamburg University of Applied Sciences)
Panelists:
Joseph D. Germano (Germano & Associates, Inc.)
Gary S. Lawrence (Golder Associates Ltd.)
Effective management of sediments should be informed by an understanding of how natural and anthropogenic disturbances affect this critical medium and associated communities. Increasingly, the “classic” triad approach to ecological risk assessment is being expanded or adapted to study-specific needs. It is necessary to show evidence of the presence of stressors, that these can present a hazard, and that there is impact on the community. Further lines of evidence (LOEs) can be used to confirm links between these or to better understand the links. Toxicity alone does not drive risk in sediments; a broad range of stressors can impact benthic, pelagic, and other communities, affecting ecological status. These issues become even more challenging as chronic changes (e.g., global warming, habitat loss, acidification, invasive species) cause relatively irreversible shifts in site and reference communities that overlie changes due to controllable stressors. Within both scientific and regulatory contexts, this panel will explore the strengths and weaknesses of adaptations and alternatives to the triad approach, as well as tools for integrating LOEs to inform risk and management decisions. Which aspects should remain inviolate? How do we best ensure site specificity, communicate uncertainty, ensure transparency, challenge obstacles, and adapt to changing approaches?
Strategies for Sustainable Sediment Management (Wednesday)
Moderators:
David W. Moore (Weston Solutions)
Todd S. Bridges (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
Panelists:
Gi-Hoon Hong (Korea Ocean Research & Development Institute)
Jody Kubitz (ENTRIX, Inc.)
Trina von Stackelberg (NEK Associates)
Sediments serve a critical role as a natural source of material for beach and shoreline protection and provide the necessary nutrients and physical material for creating and sustaining wetland and coastal habitat. Unfortunately, sediments also serve as a vector and sink for contaminants in the environment, and accretion of sediments can negatively affect navigation and flood control. Each year, approximately 1 billion cubic meters of sediment is removed from waterways throughout the world in support of navigation, waterborne commerce, environmental cleanup, habitat restoration, flood control, and other purposes at a cost of US$15 billion to US$30 billion. Typically, these sediments are managed on a project-by-project basis without the benefit of a more comprehensive, sustainable strategy to enable potential efficiency gains (i.e., reduced costs and improved environmental benefits). Growth and development in communities adjacent to these waterways often are constrained by available resources (i.e., availability of land) in addition to environmental and societal concerns (i.e., contamination, loss of habitat, loss of green space). Because the resources available to manage problems and opportunities associated with sediments are constrained, conflicts and tradeoffs must be resolved in an effort to satisfy regional environmental and social objectives relevant to sediments. The goal of this panel will be to identify and discuss potential challenges to and strategies for the sustainable management of sediments on a regional scale.
Evaluating Model Reliability and Utility for Decision Makers (Thursday)
Moderators:
C. Kirk Ziegler (Quantitative Environmental Analysis, LLC)
Earl J. Hayter (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
Panelists:
Victor J. Bierman (LimnoTech)
John P. Connolly (Quantitative Environmental Analysis, LLC)
Doug Endicott (Great Lakes Environmental Center)
Mary P. Logan (U.S. EPA)
At contaminated sediment sites, computer models frequently are used as management tools for evaluating the efficacy of various remedial alternatives. A concern of many regulators and stakeholders about using a computer model as a management tool is the reliability of the model developed for their site. This panel discussion will focus on methods used to evaluate model reliability. The objectives of the panel discussion are to (1) discuss strengths and weaknesses of various approaches for evaluating the reliability and utility of a computer model(s) for use as a decision-making tool at a contaminated sediment site and (2) make recommendations for improving the process of evaluating model reliability and utility. These objectives will be achieved through a discussion among the panel members of three primary questions. What are the strengths and weaknesses of modeling peer reviews that panelists have been associated with in the past? How could the peer review process be improved? Are there alternative approaches to the typical peer review process that could be used to effectively evaluate model reliability and utility?