Impact/Purpose:

The objective of this project is to develop a New England regional inventory of sediment quality information. Sediment quality data will be stored in a database management system linked to a geographic information system (GIS), and compatible with EPA=s National Sediment Inventory (NSI). The primary source of this information will be 1980s and 1990s-era Superfund (CERCLA), RCRA Corrective Action and New England Regional Laboratory-supported investigations (NERL). This database will enable EPA Region 1 to evaluate, manage and assess sediment quality, document spatial and temporal environmental trends, identify environmental priorities and measure improvements and/or declines in sediment quality.

This database project will link to the EPA Headquarters National Sediment Inventory and other sediment quality databases, to project management databases (e.g. OSRR=s AWastelan@). This project is consistent with the goals of the Region 1 Environmental Data Workgroup and the State of the Environment workgroups, which promote the compilation, analysis and visualization of regional environmental information.

Description:

Contaminated aquatic sediments are integrators of historical and recently deposited contaminants, are useful indicators of environmental degradation, and have direct and indirect effects to biota and human health. In 1997, EPA released the first ever comprehensive Report to Congress that identified areas in the continental United States where levels of sediment contaminants may be harmful to the environment (the National Sediment Inventory, or NSI). The purpose of the NSI is to Adepict and characterize the incidence and severity of sediment contamination based on the probability of adverse effects to aquatic life and to human health.@ EPA headquarters, with considerable assistance from regional staff, ORD laboratories and other federal agencies, compiled sediment quality information from available electronic databases and published reports. There were several limitations in the 1997 NSI, which continue in the 2001 NSI report. Specifically, data in the 1997 NSI for New England is notably lacking for freshwater sites. Data from only 5% of New England=s 2,648 river reaches and 57% of New England=s 61 watersheds is included in the 1997 NSI. Environmental data from Superfund and RCRA Corrective Action studies -- most of which are freshwater sites -- have not been integrated into the 1997 and 2001 National Sediment Inventories. Although the studies have been valuable for characterizing ecological and human health risks, and for selecting remedies, the data haven=t been synthesized from a regional perspective; in this sense, the data Asits on a shelf.@ We will compile sediment concentration, biological tissue concentration and toxicity testing results from CERCLA-, RCRA- and NERL-generated studies into an integrated relational database management system. Many of these site-specific ecological risk assessments supported the collection of matched sediment contamination concentration, biological tissue (e.g. fish) concentration data and sediment toxicity from both Acontaminated@ and reference sites or watersheds. We will evaluate the data for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). We will apply recently developed computer technologies (hardware and software) and analytical techniques (e.g. spatial statistics) to perform a screening-level evaluation of risk, similar to the 2001 NSI. The 2001 NSI approach to evaluation of risk is based on the current scientific consensus among experts that uses multiple lines of evidence to categorize sediments into three tiers of probable adverse effects. The NSI compares chemical data to EPA=s equilibrium sediment guidelines (ESGs), to empirical guidelines using NOAA=s logistic regression approach, site-specific fish tissue data, and lethal and sublethal sediment toxicity measurements. The database system will be designed to help answer frequently asked questions such as: C What contaminants are most often detected in New England sediments? C How do contaminated sites compare to background conditions, and to established sediment quality guidelines? C What is the background sediment quality in particular land use categories of New England (e.g. urbanized vs. agricultural rivers)? or C How do results from Superfund sites compare to results from regional efforts, such as USGS

Record Details: