1. ERDC Knowledge Core
  2. Federally Sponsored Research Programs Reports
  3. Dredging Operations and Environmental Research Program (DOER)
  4. Publication
  5. Technical Report
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11681/4630
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMoore, David W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBridges, Todd S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRuiz, Carlos E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCura, Jerome J., 1949-en_US
dc.contributor.authorVorhees, Donna J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPeddicord, Richard K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDriscoll, Susan Kaneen_US
dc.creatorMenzie-Cura and Associates, Inc.en_US
dc.creatorDredging Operations and Environmental Research Program (U.S.)en_US
dc.creatorDick Peddicord & Co., Inc.en_US
dc.creatorU.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Stationen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-16T22:15:58Zen_US
dc.date.available2016-03-16T22:15:58Zen_US
dc.date.issued1998-12en_US
dc.identifier.govdocTechnical Report DOER-2en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11681/4630en_US
dc.descriptionTechnical Reporten_US
dc.description.abstractEvaluating the potential environmental consequences associated with dredging and dredged material disposal is a difficult task. Scientific advancements have made possible the collection of large amounts of complex technical information. The dredged material manager must often rely on “best professional judgement” to weigh and balance among multiple and sometimes conflicting lines of evidence to reach a decision, and each decision involves a finite level of uncertainty. How best to utilize this complex technical information and what tools are available for developing risk-based estimates and evaluating uncertainty for the dredging program were the focus of the workshop discussions reported herein. The workshop was attended by 78 invitees representing Corps field elements, other Federal agencies, industry, and academia. Participants represented a broad range of stakeholders and included permit applicants, dredged material managers, and risk assessors. It was the general consensus of workshop participants that risk assessment should should be used to augment and improve the dredged material management decision-making process. The importance of using risk-based approaches early on in the current tiered assessment scheme was emphasized. However, it was also noted that the current dredged material evaluation scheme as outlined in the Ocean and Inland Testing Manuals was adequate for the vast majority of dredged material management decisions (estimated by some participants to be 95 percent). Participants suggested that the greatest benefit of risk-based decision-making would be found by applying risk assessment in the smaller percentage of projects where there is high uncertainty (e.g., no evidence of acute toxicity but some elevated bioaccumulation of contaminants). Recommendations generally fell into two categories: (A.) procedural recommendations (ways to improve the dredged material decision-making process via incorporation of risk-based approaches) and (B.) recommendations for improving existing assessment tools (models, tests, etc.) so that they can be used more effectively to make risk-based decisions. Specific recommendations are included in the final chapter.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipDredging Operations and Environmental Research Program (U.S.)en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipUnited States. Army. Corps of Engineersen_US
dc.description.tableofcontentsPreface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 1—Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2—Exposure Assessment Workgroup Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 When and Where should Risk Assessment be Applied? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Defining Receptors and Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Likely Exposure Pathways in Dredged Material Management . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Information Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Sources of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Available Exposure Models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Research Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Workgroup Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3—Effects Assessment Workgroup Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Determination of Toxicity and Unacceptable Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 When, Where, and How to Use Risk Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Use of Numerical Effects Values. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Sources of Uncertainty in Effects Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Research Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Workgroup Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4—Risk Characterization Workgroup Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Risk Assessment and Uncertainty Analysis in Dredged Material Management Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 General Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Research Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Workgroup Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 5—Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Appendix A: Workshop Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A1 Appendix B: Workshop Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B1 Appendix C: Discussion Items. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C1 SF 298en_US
dc.format.extent53 pages/1.94 MBen_US
dc.format.mediumPDFen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherU.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Stationen_US
dc.relationhttp://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/en_US/search/asset/1004020en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTechnical report (Dredging Operations and Environmental Research Program (U.S.)) ; no.Technical Report DOER-2en_US
dc.rightsApproved for public release; distribution is unlimiteden_US
dc.sourceThis Digital Resource was created in Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobaten_US
dc.subjectContaminantsen_US
dc.subjectRisk assessmenten_US
dc.subjectDredged materialen_US
dc.subjectSediment managementen_US
dc.subjectDredging spoilen_US
dc.subjectProceedingsen_US
dc.subjectWorkshopsen_US
dc.subjectSymposiumsen_US
dc.subjectDredging Operations and Environmental Research Program (U.S.)en_US
dc.titleEnvironmental risk assessment and dredged material management : issues and application : proceedings - workshop 18-20 February 1998, San Diego Mission Valley Hilton, San Diego, Californiaen_US
dc.typeReporten_US
Appears in Collections:Technical Report

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
6649.pdfTechnical Report DOER-21.94 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record