131 
sponsibility includes consideration of approximately 130 ocean sites 
which have historically been used for the ocean disposal of dredge 
materials. Each of these sites has received at least interim designa- 
tion by EPA. On an average, about 50 to 60 of these sites are used 
each year. 
We are continuing to place a high priority on the timely comple- 
tion of this ocean site designation program in conjunction with the 
EPA since we consider the program vital to carrying out our navi- 
gational responsibilities. 
In addition, we are also working closely with EPA in assessing 
requirements for remaining historically used sites. 
The corps recently completed a detailed, 5-year study of the ef- 
fects of dredging, authorized and funded by the Congress, called the 
Dredge Material Research program or DMRP. This $34 million 
effort led to two fundamental management conclusions which have 
been quite instrumental in guiding our subsequent research on 
dredged material disposal and in formulating our approach to regu- 
lating our own as well as permitted, dredged material disposal ac- 
tivities. 
The first of these is that there is no single dredged material dis- 
posal alternative that presumptively is most suitable for a region 
for types of dredged material or for groups of projects. Correspond- 
ingly, there is no inherent effect or characteristic of a dredge mate- 
rial disposal alternative that rules it out of consideration, from an 
environmental standpoint, prior to specific onsite evaluations. 
The second basic conclusion is that environmental considerations 
are acting more strongly than possibly any other force to necessi- 
tate long-range disposal planning as a lasting, effective solution to 
dredged material disposal problems. No longer can disposal alter- 
natives be planned independently for each dredging operation for 
multiple projects in a given area. While each project may require 
different specific solutions, the interrelationships must be evaluat- 
ed from a holistic perspective and thought must be given to replac- 
ing particular disposal alternatives as conditions change. 
This comprehensive research program provided the first defini- 
tive information on the consequences of dredged material disposal 
in marsh, estuarine, fresh water, ocean and upland areas, including 
disposal alternatives for contaminated sediments. This research 
has resolved technical issues related to short term or acute effects 
of disposal and has dispelled many public fears expressed at the 
time. 
Foremost among the technical conclusions of the DMRP was the 
fact that the major, and usually the only effect found at aquatic 
dredged material disposal sites was the physical mounding of mate- 
rial with a resulting short-term and reversible impact on bottom 
dwelling organisms. In regard to toxicity and biological uptake of 
heavy metals, petroleum and clorinated hydrocarbons from dredged 
material, minimal impact or no impact was found on organisms 
within the dump site and measureable effects were limited strictly 
to the dump site proper. 
Land-based alternatives for dredged material were found to be 
more environmentally and sociologically complex than water-based 
alternatives. Further, in regard to the disposal of contaminated 
sediments, land-based alternatives appear to offer limited, addition- 
