56 



for 500,000 cubic yards of material. On January 13, EPA objected 

 to the permit, noting that the permit was for significantly more 

 dredge material than had been previously discussed, and 

 expressing concern that the additional sediment might exceed EPA 

 criteria. In addition, the National Marine Fisheries Service 

 (NMFS) asked that consultations be undertaken under the 

 Endangered Species Act due to the possible seasonal presence of 

 endangered whales, sea turtles, and perhaps shortnosed sturgeon 

 in the area. 



On February 12, 1993, the EPA issued new guidelines, 

 approving the ocean disposal of dredged material from Reach D, 

 but requiring the COE to perform additional tests on dioxin 

 contamination in Reach B and C before reinstating the permit. By 

 letter to the Port Authority dated February 18, the COE suspended 

 the permit and ordered the Port Authority to perform additional 

 tests on all three reaches (B, C, and D) to ascertain whether 

 there had been changes in the quantity or quality of the sediment 

 since the time that the berths were originally tested. The Port 

 Authority has since conducted additional sediment testing and 

 determined that the new sediment has an even lower degree of 

 dioxin contamination. The Port Authority is also waiting for the 

 COE to begin consultation with NMFS under the Endangered Species 

 Act. If the permit is ultimately denied, the Port Authority has 

 few options for disposing of its contaminated dredge material. 



Environmental and fishing groups have been promoting the 

 option of storing the contaminated dredge material on empty 

 barges and docking them in unused berths owned by the Port 

 Authority until the sediment can be decontaminated. Critics 

 argue that the heavy sediments cannot be safety contained on a 

 floating barge for extended periods of time, that the dioxin is 

 at concentrations too small and in too large of volume of 

 sediments to be addressed by current decontamination 

 technologies, and that storing the sediments may require hazard 

 waste permitting under the Federal Resource Conservation and 

 Recovery Act. 



This problem of contaminated dredge material disposal is not 

 isolated, although this appears to be the first test case for 

 ocean dumping of dioxin-contaminated sediment. The National 

 Research Council concluded in a 1989 study that contaminated 

 sediments are widespread in coastal waters, having been 

 documented in at least 63 marine or estuarine waterways. In 

 addition, most urban marine harbors suffer polluted sediments, 

 especially in places like the Hudson-Raritan Estuary, Boston 

 Harbor, and Oakland Estuary. 



This number apparently reflects a misunderstanding of the number 

 of berths the Port Authority proposes to dredge during the 

 three-year limit of the permit, as well as possible overestimates 

 to compensate for the amount of increased sedimentation expected 

 to have occurred since the permit application was submitted three 

 years ago. 



