155 



A unique decontamination program in the Great Lakes. EPA's Assessment 

 and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) has successfully shown that 

 decontamination technologies hold promise in reducing contaminant levels. A 

 similar program, although on a smaller scale, should begin in the New York- 

 New Jersey Harbor, thanks to an amendment to the Water Resources 

 Development Act of 1992 (Section 405), which had the support of the New 

 Jersey and New York delegation. This section requires that EPA and the ACOE 

 work together to develop a sediment decontamination program in the New York- 

 New Jersey region that builds upon information generated by Section 412 (c) of 

 the WRDA of 1990. Section 412(c) required the ACOE to review alternatives to 

 ocean disposal, including decontamination technologies. Thus far, the NYD has 

 had four vendors treat sediments from Newark Bay to ascertain their technology^ 

 ability to decontaminate the sediments. By and large, these technologies were 

 found to be successful. Increasing the scale of demonstration, which Section 405 

 should accomplish, is key to understanding the feasibility of decontamination. 



Public participation in the process of developing alternatives to ocean 

 disposal have not been terribly successful. At least in the New York-New Jersey 

 region, there is immense frustration with how the public has been included in the 

 decision-making process. Although the NYD did undertake an effort to evaluate 

 alternatives to ocean disposal during the' 1980s, the end result is a choice of 

 using existing subaqueous borrow pits in the most popular recreational fishing 

 area of the New York Harbor. It is difficult to understand how any alternative 

 will ever be successfully implemented with large public opposition. The ACOE 

 needs to work effectively with the public in an open and flexible manner that 

 generates proposals that have an opportunity for some public support. Thus far. 

 the ACOE has not been able to do that. 



V. Recommendations 



1. Good science should be the prevailing factor that determines how well 

 the ocean disposal program has worked to protect coastal resources. The 

 effectiveness of the ocean disposal program on a national level should be 

 investigated more thoroughly. Other major disposal sites that have received 

 contaminated sediments should be investigated to determine their condition and 

 impact on the marine environment. A review of the uniformity with which the 

 six different EPA regions and ACOE districts implement ocean dumping criteria 

 would shed light on the degree to which the program is working cohesively. 

 Congress would benefit from learning more about EPA's revision of the ocean 

 dumping regulations and its rewriting of the "Gold Book", which is comparable to 

 the Green Book and applies to Clean Water Act waters. These issues could be 

 investigated by the Office of Technology Assessment or the General Accounting 



31 



