Journal of Hazardous Materials 178 (2010) 906–916 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Hazardous Materials journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhazmat Screening-level ecological and human health risk assessment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in stormwater detention pond sediments of Coastal South Carolina, USA John E. Weinstein a,∗ , Kevin D. Crawford b , Thomas R. Garner c , Alan J. Flemming d a Department of Biology, The Citadel, Charleston, SC, United States b Department of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI, United States c Institute of Environmental Toxicology, Clemson University, Pendleton, SC, United States d South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Charleston, SC, United States article info Article history: Received 21 August 2009 Received in revised form 8 February 2010 Accepted 9 February 2010 Available online 16 February 2010 Keywords: PAH Risk assessment Sediment Detention ponds ERA HHRA abstract Screening-level ecological and human health assessments were performed for polycyclic aromatic hydro- carbon (PAH) contamination in the sediments of 19 stormwater detention ponds located in coastal South Carolina. For ecological screening benchmarks, we used threshold and probable effect concentrations (TEC and PEC) derived from consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for individual PAH analytes and equilibrium partitioning sediment benchmarks-toxic units (ESB-TU) derived for PAH mixtures. For human health benchmarks, we used preliminary remediation goals (PRGs). Sediments of five stormwater ponds (four commercial ponds and one residential pond with a large drainage area) exceeded PEC values for several PAH analytes and the ESB-TU safe value of 1 for PAH mixtures. These same five stormwa- ter ponds also exceeded the PRG values for five carcinogenic PAH analytes. These results suggest that the PAH levels in sediments from certain commercial and residential ponds have the potential to pose moderate to high risks for adverse, chronic effects to benthic organisms in situ and an increased risk of cancer to humans ex situ following excavation and on-site disposal. We recommend that sediment from these stormwater ponds be tested prior to excavation to determine the appropriate method of disposal. We also recommend that regulatory agencies enforce guidelines for periodic sediment removal as this should reduce both in situ and ex situ risks resulting from sediment PAH exposure. © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction An increasingly common feature of the suburban landscape is the presence of stormwater management ponds, including both detention and retention ponds. Stormwater ponds are designed and constructed to receive stormwater runoff and address water quantity and water quality concerns of natural receiving waters. Primary benefits of stormwater ponds include reducing runoff peaks and removing both sediment and chemical contaminants [1]. Another, often unintended, benefit of stormwater ponds is that they serve as wildlife habitat. Previous studies have documented a vari- ety of wildlife species utilizing these habitats, including worms, crustaceans, mussels, insects, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals [2–5]. Because these ponds are designed to retain sedi- ments and contaminants, wildlife inhabiting stormwater ponds are at risk to being exposed to elevated levels of contaminants [6,7]. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 843 953 7796; fax: +1 843 953 7264. E-mail address: john.weinstein@citadel.edu (J.E. Weinstein). Not only are wildlife at risk from exposure to contaminated stormwater pond sediments, but humans may also be at risk as a result of sediment disposal activities. As stormwater ponds age, the accumulation of sediment reduces their overall efficiency and jeopardizes the quality of nearby natural receiving waters. In order to keep ponds fully functional, periodic removal of accumulated sediment has been recommended [8]. Depending on local and state regulations, excavated pond sediments are typically treated as either solid waste or hazardous waste and transported to either landfills or hazardous waste facilities for disposal, respectively [9]. However, in at least 16 states, including South Carolina, on-site disposal of the excavated sediment is another option [9]. Because sediment removal costs can be decreased by as much as 50% if an on-site disposal area is available [8], this option could prove to be popular among property owners and homeowner associations. On-site disposal, especially in residential areas where the mate- rial could be used as fill (filling and leveling the land to improve the property for development), may result in human exposure to elevated levels of contaminants. One common approach for evaluating the risks associated with sediment contaminants is to perform a risk assessment. Ecological 0304-3894/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.02.024