environmental evaluation and management of … · introduction, background, and historical context...

217217217

200200200

255255255

000

163163163

131132122

2396553

110135120

1129256

62102130

1025648

130120111

237237237

8011927

252174.59

“The views, opinions and findings contained in this report are those of the authors(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation.”

“Regional Beneficial Use Manual”Prepared for the Great Lakes Dredging Team Technical CommitteeNovember 18, 201610 AM EST / 9 AM CST

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF DREDGED MATERIAL FOR BENEFICIAL USE: A DRAFT REGIONAL MANUAL FOR THE GREAT LAKES

1

Webinar LogisticsThe webinar and teleconference will be heldFriday, November 18, 2016 10 AM EST (9 AM CST) – 11 AM EST (10 AM CST)

To join the webinar, please go to https://www.teleconference.att.com/servlet/AWMloginEnter meeting number 8886848852And code 1456016

The audio will be available separately via teleconference. Please dial 888-684-8852And use access code 1456016 And security code 1234

Please leave your phone on mute until time for questions

2

https://www.teleconference.att.com/servlet/AWMlogin

Webinar Agenda

Roll call (via agency/affiliation)

Manual purpose and approach

Manual organization

Section and Appendix-specific overviews and questions► Explanation of the contents of each Section and Appendix► Will pause for questions after each Section / Appendix specific slide

Schedule for obtaining feedback and comments, making revisions, and finalizing manual

Logistics for communicating with manual reviewers

Release and repository for final manual

3

Roll call via Agency / Affiliation

Federal Agencies

State Agencies

Great Lakes Port Authorities

Universities

Architect / Engineering Firms

Shipping Agencies

Great Lakes Remedial Action Plan team members

Other

4

Manual purpose and approach Purpose: To provide technical guidance for evaluating the suitability of

dredged material for beneficial use in both aquatic and terrestrial environments in the Great Lakes Region.

Companion document:

The Draft Regional Beneficial Use Manual incorporates previous testing guidance and applies a consistent approach► Inland, Great Lakes, and Upland Testing Manuals, GLC Upland Beneficial Framework

5

Manual purpose and approach, continued

Uses a risk-based approach

Provides options for managing risks and uncertainties

Attempts to compile State frameworks for upland placement

The October 2016 draft needs State and stakeholder input in order to be comprehensive and fully relevant and implementable with regional regulatory agencies and stakeholders.

The goal is to make this a regional framework

6

Regional Beneficial Use Manual OrganizationExecutive Summary

1. Introduction

2. Statutory and Regulatory Overview

3. Beneficial Use Categories

4. Principles for Beneficial Use Dredged Material Evaluations

5. Aquatic Beneficial Use Placement Evaluation Methods

6. Upland Beneficial Use Evaluation Methods

7. Risk Management

8. References

7

Regional Beneficial Use Manual Organization

Appendices

A. Sources of Background (Reference) Concentrations in the Region

B. State-Specific Environmental Regulations and Guidance

C. Ecological Biota Screening Levels for Upland Placement – Plant Pathway

D. Treatment Options for Impaired Sediments

E. Practical Considerations for Dredged Material Management

8

Section 1. Introduction Introduction, background, and historical context

► Beneficial uses of dredged material have a long and productive history

Existing USACE or joint USACE / U.S.EPA guidance manuals► The 1st of 8 previous beneficial use guidances published in 1987

Purpose and scope► To provide a comprehensive regional guidance for evaluating the

environmental suitability of dredged material for a range of placement options

This manual covers unconfined aquatic and upland placements

This manual does not address all the considerations required under NEPA for new project development.

This manual does not cover invasive species, microbiological impacts of dredged material placement, mechanisms to rank beneficial use options, nor legal implications of beneficial use projects.

9

Section 2. Statutory and Regulatory Overview Brief explanations of the six federal acts that establish statutory

authority over decisions about placement, management, and beneficial use of dredged material in the Great Lakes.► Clean Water Act (CWA)► National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)► Endangered Species Act (ESA)► Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)► Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)► Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)

Does not interpret or validate regulatory authority granted the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or Great Lakes State resource agencies

Does not alter the statutory and regulatory framework for permitting decisions under applicable laws or regulations.

10

Section 3. Beneficial Use Categories12 dredged material management categories have been proposed in order to track beneficial use (USACE – ERDC, 2015)

8 of these categories apply to beneficial use in the Great Lakes►Beach or nearshore placement for shoreline protection or beach

nourishment►Shallow water placement for wetland or marsh development►Unconfined in-water placement (river, lake, and estuary)►Confined in-water placement for beneficial purpose►Upland placement for land development►Upland placement for ecological habitat development►Upland placement for soil reuse

• Includes use in processed products or construction materials

► Island placement

11

Section 4. Principles for Beneficial Use Dredged Material Evaluations

Uses U.S.EPA risk assessment frameworks as overall approach Recommends developing project goal for beneficial use of dredged

material► Akin to U.S. EPA’s 1st step in framing an ecological risk assessment with

management goals

Uses conceptual site models to establish potentially complete exposure pathways► Generalized CSMs are proposed for aquatic, upland, and wetland

placement scenarios

Recommends the initial evaluation be documented and reported Suggests chemical, physical, and biological tests

► Specific sampling and analysis requirements are not stipulated

Recommends use of reference and control materials in the testing procedures

12

Section 5. Aquatic Beneficial Use Placement Evaluation Methods

This Section is consistent with Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines and formal USACE / U.S.EPA guidance manuals (ITM, GLTM)

Includes some tools developed through proposed revisions to national guidance in order to add rigor to existing formal guidance► Some of these tools recently used in dredged material evaluations in the

Great Lakes (i.e., Duluth-Superior harbor)

Initial Evaluation

Further Testing and Evaluation► Water column evaluation► Reference / placement site sediment and identifying constituents of potential

concern in sediment► Benthic evaluation► Bioaccumulation evaluation

13

Upland placement without discharge to waters of the US eliminates need for CWA Section 404 evaluation and Section 401 Certification if there is no direct return water.

The dredged material must meet state regulations for upland beneficial use of dredged material (listed in Appendix B).

The Corps is responsible under NEPA for ensuring risks associated with dredged material placement are evaluated and communicated to stakeholders

This Section follows a tiered approach to evaluate risks to receptors via specific exposure pathways as outlined in the USACE 2003 Upland Testing Manual

Proposes regional risk-based approach for evaluating human health exposures following the U.S.EPA’s risk assessment paradigm, & incorporating regional-specific modifications to U.S.EPA’s generic exposure assumptions used in some states (e.g., Minnesota, Pennsylvania).

14Section 6. Upland Beneficial Use Placement Evaluation Methods

Section 7. Risk Management

Risk versus uncertainty

► Complex systems cannot be completely understood / characterized

► Conditions may be unpredictable during project implementation

► Projects may involve interdependent systems

Controls for aquatic placement

Controls for upland placement

Treatment

Adaptive management

15

Section 8. References

17 fun-filled pages of references!

Please check to see that your state guidance documents and regulations are adequately cited in this section.

16

Appendices




D. Treatment Options for Impaired Sediments


17


Soil surveys have been conducted in New York Ohio (Lucas and Toledo counties) Michigan Illinois (metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas) Wisconsin Minnesota

Sediment surveys have been conducted in Ohio (statewide) Nationwide (US Geological Survey)

18


Appendix B-1 focuses on human health

Reflects state responses to questionnaires sent out in 2015

Table B.1-1 compares basis of state brownfield risk-based soil concentrations

Table B.1-2 compares state-specific residential (non-industrial) risk-based soil concentrations with proposed regional approach following regionally-modified U.S.EPA risk-based screening levels

Table B.1-3 compares state-specific industrial (non-residential) risk-based soil concentrations with proposed regional approach following regionally-modified U.S.EPA risk-based screening levels

19


Appendix B-2 focuses on environmental health

Minnesota guidance regarding aquatic placement of dredged sediments for ecosystem restoration ► St. Louis River Area of Concern, Duluth-Superior Harbor

20


Focuses on soil-to-plant pathway exposures for ecological receptors

U.S.EPA Ecological Soil Screening Levels (eco-SSLs) were not developed for the unique chemical/physical attributes associated with upland placement of dredged material

Plant uptake of metals from 3 Lake Erie CDFs in Ohio (and reference locations) were measured to calculate bioaccumulation factors

Biota screening levels for herbivores were developed using the site specific plant bioaccumulation factors combined with toxicity reference values (U.S.EPA eco-SSL based)

21

D. Treatment Options for Impaired Sediments 22

Impaired sediments may not be suitable for beneficial use without treatment, but, treatment may be cost prohibitive.

This Appendix provides

Synopsis of available sediment treatment technology alternatives

History of development of treatment alternatives

Key operational characteristics of alternatives

Many examples in the Great Lakes and around the nation where treatment is being or has been used


Water management for upland placement of dredged material

Upland placement of dredged material can involve direct, indirect, or no discharge of water.

This appendix offers water management approaches for the different water discharge configurations, and considers Clean Water Act requirements

Timeframes for water discharges

Water quality conditions

Dredging operation options (hydraulic vs. mechanical)

Land requirements

23

Proposed schedule for completing the manual

Your input is needed!

Request comments on the manual by 11 January 2017

Would like to provide a revised version of manual in April

Allows time to review revisions prior to GLDT annual meeting

Can discuss at GLDT annual meeting in May 2017

Final review/revisions during summer 2017

24

Logistics for draft manual review

Request written comments submitted via [email protected]

Feel free to email or call anytime with questions (716.879.4227)

Will bring in other USACE authors/experts depending on topic.

Prefer to discuss issues in order to address them directly and more efficiently.

Can hold webinars/teleconferences during the review period.

Request each state / stakeholder agency provide a point of contact for comment discussion and resolution

25

mailto:[email protected]

Future publication of final manualhttps://dots.el.erdc.dren.mil/

26

https://dots.el.erdc.dren.mil/

GLDT Technical Committee Regional Beneficial Use Manual 1st Webinar Notes

Regional Beneficial Use Manual: 1st Webinar Notes

Webinar participants involved personnel from the following agencies or affiliations:

• US Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo and Detroit offices; Engineer Research and Development Center • US EPA Region 2 and Region 5 • Great Lakes Commission • State of Illinois, Department of Natural Resources • State of Indiana, Department of Environmental Management • State of Michigan, Department of Environmental Quality • State of New York, Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Health • State of Ohio, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Natural Resources • State of Wisconsin, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Transportation • Port Authorities of Duluth; Milwaukee • Great Lakes Dredge and Docks • Kurtz Brothers

Questions/Answers and Comments:

1) Is this manual meant to replace the existing Inland Testing Manual and the Great Lakes Testing Manual, and if so, will US EPA be a co-author of this manual? Answer: No, this manual is not meant to replace those manuals that are focused on aquatic placement of dredged material. The Inland Testing Manual has been under revision for some time; the US Army Corps of Engineers is currently working with US EPA on those draft revisions. 2) Before this manual is finalized, will a formal public notice and comment period be held? Answer: Karen will look into this and let folks know if a formal public notice and comment period will be followed for this manual. 3) Do the categories in Section 3 (Beneficial Use Categories) include mine land reclamation? Is this a separate category? Answer: It was confirmed after the webinar that Section 3.3.3, Upland Placement for Soil Reuse does include use of dredged material for mine reclamation, so it is not a separate category unto itself. 4) Would the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act need to be added to Section 2 Statutory and Regulatory Overview, if mine land reclamation is added as a separate category? Answer: We will evaluate whether or not that regulation needs to be added to Section 2. 5) If dredged material is placed from one Great Lakes basin or watershed to another, it may involve jurisdictional differences between respective watershed pacts.

Movement of dredged material within harbors that straddle 2 Great Lakes States also can be complicated.

This is one of the driving forces and considerations for developing this regional approach to beneficial use of dredged material.

environmental evaluation and management of … · introduction, background, and historical context...

Documents