Plan Formulation and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments with Cultural Resources in Bergen Harbor, Norway A Path Forward

Transcription

1 Plan Formulation and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments with Cultural Resources in Bergen Harbor, Norway A Path Forward An Independent Third-Party Evaluation By: Eric A. Stern Research Leader Sediment Management Battelle Memorial Institute 1 Normal Avenue Mallory Hall 116 Montclair, New Jersey For: Bergen Kommune Battelle Project No September 2012

2 Bergen Harbor Evaluation Overview Bergen Harbor has been placed on the Norwegian Government s list of priority sites which are part of a national initiative for national sea floor remediation. Assessment studies for this area focus on: Sediment chemical characterization and assessment studies to determine the health and sediment quality of Bergen Harbor; geophysical surveys that included bathymetry and side scan sonar as well as hydrodynamic studies; ancillary physical analysis for grain size, total organic carbon and sediment thickness. Determining target contaminants (polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs], mercury [Hg], polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]) that are causing negative ecosystem effects and fish consumption advisories. o Discrete sediment management zones were developed based on physical, chemical and hydrodynamic measurements. These will be further defined during the sampling campaign. Conducting an assessment of upland sources impacting the Bergen Harbor Port region through best management practices (BMPs) to curtail continuing storm water PCB and Hg sources. Global experts in the areas of storm water management, filtering and storm water basin designs have been and are continually consulted. Advancing the integration of government agencies, multi-disciplinary research institutions, industry, and users of the Port in the Bergen Harbor project. Engaging stakeholders through sediment and community outreach efforts by applying one metric of multi-criteria decision analysis to ascertain the public s opinion and/or direction of remedial alternatives. Conducting basic and applied research efforts that involve pilot-scale capping demonstrations which will be one component of an integrated, holistic approach in the remediation and restoration of Bergen Harbor. The Kirkebukten Bay dredging and capping pilot study using multiple amendments (BioBlok tm, olivine, etc.) and a reactive core mat (RCM) was an innovative approach when used in conjunction with allowing public access to the beach front after armoring (sand/gravel) the RCM. This provides beneficial use by allowing public access as part of the remedial design function. Keeping informed of new developments and applications of innovative dredging technologies on a regional and global scale. Conducting extensive reconnaissance in determining cultural resources/artifacts on the sea floor. The integration of artifacts and how they will affect the remediation of Bergen Harbor from a cultural heritage perspective and the complexities related to remedial alternatives staging and timing of actions are all being considered. Individual artifact zones are being developed based on the quantity of targets. Developing a geographic information system (GIS) platform for data management and visualization including a project specific Web site for public access. Participating/presenting/publishing Bergen Harbor project information in national/international sediment conference proceedings.

3 In May 2012, Bergen Harbor was at the project stage of refining many of the above accomplishments to move forward to the next phase of solution formulation and remediation design within the next three to four years. However, as shown from global experience, progress towards remediation in urban, multi-complex contaminant environments with continuing sources (that have been decreasing in the Port through the years with BMPs) can take decades. There is a time when there is enough high resolution data collected that enables the project to move forward towards remedial design; system-wide recovery can take 20 to 40 years based on modeling efforts that demonstrate when fish consumption advisories will be lifted. This is the long-term investment of moving forward with the Bergen Harbor project. Bergen Harbor is a complex urban Port environment from many perspectives. Cultural resources and artifacts on the sea floor become important factors in designing and applying remedial solutions to fit the remedy. No simple, inexpensive solutions are available from a sediment management perspective as was mentioned during the opening remarks at the May 9, 2012 Klimauken Conference. Furthermore, the environmental management component of the political, social and economic drivers (separate from environmental) is equally challenging. Bergen Harbor has made significant progress in the past 10 years. The entities involved (including NGI, NIVA, University of Bergen and Sogn og Fjordane College, the Municipality of Bergen, Asplan Viak and COWI) are well diversified as subject matter experts in areas of water supply, sewage, sediment management, archeological assessments, food safety, risk assessment, etc. and have carefully assessed, managed, and respected the resources and the public. In the Bergen Harbor planning session, high resolution sediment coring, pore water/sediment toxicity and exposure testing, erosional/sedimentation studies and discussions related to long-term modeling of fish bioaccumulation end points to adjust goal setting and realization of the remedial actions will be conducted. Combined with all efforts in parallel with the on-going efforts, Bergen Harbor is on the right track for These analysis efforts will assist in pre-design and help formulate discrete remedial options for different chemical and physiographic zones of the Port. Third-Party Evaluator Experience Eric Stern has been asked by the Municipality of Bergen/COWI to provide a third-party independent evaluation of the Bergen Harbor Remediation Program. Eric toured Bergen from May 7-11, 2012, to learn the Port from a project specific perspective and participate/present in the May 9 Klimauken Conference. Eric s presentation, Technology Applications for Integrated Sediment Management, detailed the sediment management toolbox of possible integrated options that could be considered for Bergen Harbor, taking into account that this is an urban Port with many environmental management drivers. Green and sustainable approaches were stressed during his presentation. Presentation available on the Bergen Harbor Project website: Eric is employed by Battelle Memorial Institute (Battelle), a non-profit charitable research organization headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. Eric leads the sediment management practice for Battelle from his office located on the campus of Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey (MSU). Eric has 25 years of sediment management experience working for the U.S. Government, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as an oceanographer and regional contaminated sediment program manager working in the areas of dredged material and contaminated sediment assessment, innovative sediment treatment development, sediment remediation and beneficial use. He is also on faculty at MSU in the Earth and Environmental Studies Department as a Research Associate Professor in the Graduate Environmental Management Program. Besides teaching courses in oceanography, waste management, water resources, and environmental management, Eric is engaged in MS and PhD dissertation committees as well as ongoing academic research. His career spans government, academia and non-profit consulting in the integrated sediment management discipline. He has been involved in Norwegian projects since 2001 as an invited speaker at several conferences, as well as an invited keynote speaker at the Nordrocs Conference in Oslo - September He has maintained collegial relationships through the years with the Norwegian government, research and consulting disciplines.

4 The Setting Bergen Harbor is the second most active industrialized Port in Norway. As an urban and working harbor, it occupies commercial and tourist vessels, oil and gas traffic, and is a major economic driver to the surrounding industrial, commercial, and residential properties fueling a local economy that is based on human aesthetics and a deep cultural heritage. There is the development of a Municipal Plan for Bergen s inner harbor, which includes expansion of the inner harbor under the Bergen Port Authority. This is of importance as it relates to the possible application and construction of a confined disposal facility (CDF) for disposition of contaminated sediments from future dredging activities in Vagen and Puddefjorden. While no industry exists along the Vagen waterfront today, many municipal storm drains infiltrate the Port. BMPs for storm water capture and monitoring (passive sampling) are in effect and source control measures have shown a decrease of contaminants moving into the aquatic system. Actions to mitigate storm water contamination include: Frequent emptying of storm water basins Collection of paint and concrete particles in front of facades Improvement in storm water basins/filtering methods New types of storm water basins. The detection and quantitative management of storm water will continue to be a major priority in the long-term management of this region. Technical entities working on Bergen Harbor have reached out for global assistance in the area related to storm water capture and design measures. One question that typically arises regarding sediment cleanup projects (including Superfund) is, do you move forward with a remediation effort and expend financial resources until all point sources are accounted for and mitigated, or do you move forward in parallel by applying BMPs to get to your remedial goal? There is never 100% certainty in capturing all pollutants entering the system. By applying BMPs, long-term monitoring and multi-agency objectives of controlling and managing upland sources, inputs into the system will decrease in time and contribute to an overall cleaner seabed. This integrated management approach appears to be taking place in Bergen Harbor. The Challenge/Assumptions/Expectations The main challenge of the Bergen Harbor remedial effort is to meet human health and ecological objectives in relation to the future expansion of Bergen Harbor and the economic vitality as well as incorporating the cultural resource heritage of the Port. The sediment quality goal of Bergen Harbor is to have a Norwegian sediment quality guideline of at least I, II or better over time. This should be accomplished within realistic timeframes to remediation horizons (remedial design/construction in three to four years as opposed to 10 years or decades which is what is typical in the U.S. EPA Superfund Program). Solutions need to be balanced and in step with stakeholders who argue one option versus another (dredge versus cap) and politicians who typically prefer simple, inexpensive and rapid solutions. Unfortunately, in sediment management you can t have it all. Remediation in complex urban watersheds is not simple but rather very complicated, cost prohibitive and stir the passions of many. Bergen Harbor, which has been in a remedial investigation phase since 2002, is at the stage of refining data gaps which will be carried out as part of the sampling campaign. The general assumption observed is not to continue to study this system forever. The understanding is that continued sources will occur but the employment of BMPs and continued advancement and work in storm water management will decrease these loads into the system over time. Different than the 100% polluter pay model, the Bergen Municipality and other responsible parties will fund on the order of 25 to 50% of the remedial action; KLIF, the Norwegian Environmental Agency, can fund up to 75% of the remedial action. This has a significant advantage in that Bergen Harbor will not be drawn into the long

5 process of identifying principal responsible parties (PRPs) and the litigation that often follows and typically involves more assessment studies to assess contaminant load allocation of PRPs. Understanding the long-term expectations of remedial actions for organochlorines such as PCBs depends on the residence time it takes for PCBs to depurate in the aquatic/sediment system. As observed on the ongoing Hudson River (New York) PCB dredging and capping remediation project, any effect of a reduction in PCB contaminant fish levels is measured on the order of more than 20 years. With Bergen Harbor this expectation needs to be developed and conveyed to stakeholders and politicians with the realistic understanding that it does not mean to move forward if realized results are not measured in a few months or a few years. It will take many years (20+) to see the system equilibrate based on the type of removal actions coupled with source control reduction, and reduction of sediment toxicity, bioavailability and exposure. Risk consumption curves based on remedial actions and reduction in bioaccumulation in fish species should be generated. Management Approach Bergen Harbor and the subsequent sediment management of the watershed system will involve an integrated, holistic approach that could be transferrable to other impacted fjords/ports, industrial/municipal harbors and military installations. Archeological targets on the Vagen seafloor are strictly protected. Therefore, it is unrealistic to place a cap (including RCMs) and then recover artifacts years later. Once a cap is in place, it is not advisable to remove/breach the cap. Sedimentation with cleaner sediments over time will just improve the cap integrity/architecture as well as promoting recolonization of benthic species. The development of a Bergen Harbor Regional Sediment Management Plan (RSM) could be considered that will integrate the Bergen Harbor watershed from a sediment management planning horizon for the next 20+ years as it relates to environmental restoration of the watershed. This would be a dynamic plan balancing environmental management (economic, social and political mandates) of upland sources, sediment quality and quantity, erosion/engineering controls (where you want sediment and where do you not), long-term monitoring and possible mitigation of remedial actions. It also offers an approach to be flexible enough to allow for on-going progress (data evaluation) in the Bergen Harbor project design and execution. RSM can facilitate the assessment/design and execution process which builds upon the understanding and success of reducing contamination and managing cultural resources, system hydrodynamics, beneficial use of sediments and the longterm sustainable use of the harbor. Project-Related Studies Undertaken ( ) Archeological survey of Vagen Sediment and the community stakeholder outreach (NIVA) PCB in paint and sedimentation points in Kirkebukten Bay (NGU) Development of innovative cover material for contaminated sediments (Biologge) Application for permits to dredge and cover Kirkebukten Bay (Bergen Kommune) Design of principals to be used when planning further remediation activities in Vagen (COWI) Project-Related Studies Undertaken and Proposed ( ) Site remediation plan for Vagen Phase 1 identification survey of land-based sources + containment plan discharges (engineering solution) for storm water Follow-up of remediation in Kirkebukten Bay based on measurable effects and land-based mitigation Preliminary survey of Puddefjorden Sound

6 Suggested Ancillary Studies ( ) Areas of high erosion and sedimentation could be further defined. These areas have been preliminary assessed and can be seen by general bathymetry and side-scan sonar. These locations should be targeted to spatially define discrete areas of contamination/bioavailability based on subsequent sampling events conducted in This will help determine remedial dredging and/or capping strategies that may include dredging followed by quick, thin layer capping to reduce contaminant residuals on the seabed. On-going/Planned Sediment Testing Program: ( ) Bulk sediment chemistry analysis: Suggest acid volatile sulfide (AVS) and simultaneously extracted metals (SEM) analysis to measure metal bioavailability Pore water/sediment toxicity testing: Suggest 28-day bioaccumulation of sentinel species for PCBs using Bergen Harbor test sediment Develop risk analysis (triad approach) by discrete zones Food web modeling/bioaccumulation projection of remedial actions Sampling strategy to consider: Less composites and more discrete sampling around potential hot spots for delineation especially to understand on-going recent contaminant deposition. Hg and PCBs are contaminant drivers in Bergen Harbor. Based on reports, there is no reduction of PCBs over time which is related to source control. Seafood consumption advisories exist for high lipid fish, eel, cod, and crab. The contaminant distribution maps show that point sources in the fjord are a driver for hot spots which may involve better delineation of impacted areas to either increase/decrease the zone of influence and better define the remedial strategy for that area, including control of that specific storm water outfall. Klimauken Workshop One of the main objectives of this third-party review was to observe and participate in the Klimauken Workshop, sponsored by the Municipality of Bergen. It was well planned and attended with focused (15 to 20 minute each) presentations in the following subject areas: Simple solutions Bergen Harbor background and administrative perspectives on pollution perspectives Seafood consumption Sediment characterization Marine archeological investigations Land sources Capping of polluted sediments Integrated sediment management approaches Sediment and society Dredging of polluted sediments Opinion of the Institute of Marine Research Remediation in Kirkebukten Bay the view and experience of the neighbors

7 The view of the environmental NGO Seabed tm dredging tool (for non- evasive removal of sediments) A common theme throughout the workshop was that a holistic and integrated approach to Bergen Harbor should be considered. An action agenda was preferred versus continuing long-term academic studies, which is different than the long-term management of the system/monitoring to ensure progress and remedial success (goals). There are no simple answers and understanding the complexity of the Bergen Harbor system/watershed is critical in moving forward, especially how it relates to the archiving and management of cultural resources with respect to sequencing the remedial design. Suggested next step: Develop a facilitated workshop with the same Klimauken audience to develop integrated solution modules targeting specific zones (capping, dredging, stabilization, treatment, end disposal measures which includes a possible CDF in the Port, and long-term monitoring strategies). Suggestions of continuing pilots such as the innovative Seabed tm hydraulic dredging technology and enhanced capping of a larger footprint as an interim remedial measure could be considered. Before the workshop commences, the participants would have a data package as a primer for focused discussions. In the project timeline for Vagen, descriptions of alternatives and choice of remediation techniques will start being planned in July 2012 through the end of the year. Having this workshop in the Fall of 2012 may be advantageous in contributing to this process. Suggest engaging the Port Authority of Bergen into the remediation planning process since discussions regarding Port expansion and the construction of a possible CDF that can be utilized for dredged sediments may be advantageous to the material handling/back end discussions. Discrete Comments: Moving Forward ( ) Many spatially situated sampling points appear on the maps. There are discrete reasons, including deposition, erosion, artifacts, and point sources, for choosing the sampling locations. With subsequent sampling campaigns it may be worth considering the use of a grid to start filling in some areas for characterization that perhaps could then be applied for interpolation/kriging for sediment mapping and GIS functions once other query layers (sediment toxicity, bioaccumulation) are interfaced. Subsequent data layers can be overlaid to start developing zones of remedial feasibility. Based on sediment types (Wever, 1998) there seems to be less of a sampling set in areas of Vagen where there are silty/clay horizons which would be associated with more contaminants. o Sediment management zones that will prioritize areas for remediation could be further defined spatially in This would take into account what areas would be dredged, capped (type of cap including monitored natural remediation [MNR] and enhanced MNR) and how that integrates with artifact reconnaissance and subsequent burial by capping. Remedial objectives for cleanup goals during this timeframe ( ) should be developed once effects/risk data are analyzed. This will play a role in determining dredging prisms (volumes) and the spatial extent of capping and cap thickness. Questions arise such as how clean is clean, what is the dredging depth to meet the remedial objectives and what will remedial success be? Knowing these objectives will directly place boundaries on the cost and timeframe of project execution. The project schedule calls for updating the risk assessment for Vagen and Puddefjorden Sound during this time. Commence discussions on risk calculations based on fish consumption levels for the next 20 years with the ultimate goal of removing fish advisories. This would involve modeling tools based on remedial measures of dredging, capping, MNR, enhanced MNR, etc. with the understanding that source control efforts would be working in parallel. This model is important but should not be the

8 ultimate driver since engaging modeling efforts will involve years of subsequent data collection and will ultimately delay decision making in the long run. Further understanding of the erosion potential and deposition of sediments should be considered, taking into account scouring effects of ship propellers and prop wash closer to the pier heads that might be observed within Vagen Harbor with the steepest side slopes. This area also contains the largest number of artifacts and should also be a priority for consideration of an interim remedial measure (pilot) from an artifact reconnaissance perspective, and placement of a RCM (or possible ballasted filtering mattress for greater stability) to minimize erosion and cap stability from vessel movement and prop wash. Deeper areas may not need to be contained if bioavailability proves to not be a problem based on pore water/sediment toxicity and exposure efforts. Zone 2 (zonation of archeological values) appears to have the least cultural resource/artifact targets and may be the first priority for sediment management and containment since PCBs and Hg are a driver in this location (Hg is found deeper in the sediments than PCBs). This area also has very higher percentage of total organic carbon, which may reduce bioavailability. Dredging followed by a thin layer cap in this area as an interim remedial measure may be applicable. A Bergen Harbor urban regional sediment management plan (RSM) should be developed by working with KLIF, NGI, NIVA, the Bergen Municipality, and stakeholders to synthesize much of the work to date as well as future multi-media efforts that moves Bergen Harbor to its goal of removing fish advisories, and prioritizing actions for a sustainable and economically viable Port. Five major sources of contamination contribute to food advisories in the Port. Under the RSM develop a plan for improving all five source areas and their effect on the Port including decreasing the contaminant loading and erosion of land sources. Under RSM, development of a long-term monitoring and management strategy should be completed to determine the success and/or mitigation (correction) of the remedial actions. A pilot demonstration of the Seabed tm Services hydraulic dredge should be considered to minimize resuspension especially in the vicinity of artifact targets. This hydraulic remote operated vehicle (ROV) dredge may be one application of an integrated approach for remedial dredging along with an environmental closed bucket dredge. Seabed tm, which operates using electric power, can be considered a sustainable approach to green remediation. Front end materials handling/staging areas for dredging, capping and disposition of sediments should be considered even though a remedy has not been selected. This is usually the most cost intensive step in remedial design and unfortunately is sometimes left to the end. Monitoring tools for dredging and water quality assessments and capping sites (for the short- and long-term) may start being considered. This could be part of the next Klimauken Workshop. Cultural/sediment management discussions and decisions in what artifacts (target fields) will remain, will be capped, will be dredged (mechanical and/or sensitive hydraulic) and will be archived (removed before remediation) will need to continue. The notion of coming back decades later and recovering the artifacts under a cap or RCM is unlikely. Organochlorines such as PCBs undergo dechlorination at very slow rates in this environment. The environmental management perspective is to cap and provide long-term maintenance of the cap without any compromise or excursion of the cap itself.

9 Continue designing beneficial use and sustainability (human factors/interface) into the project design. An example is the Kirkebukten Bay capping pilot demonstration where capping along the beach face with a RCM and subsequent covering with coarse sand/gravel for public access and beach use was a novel approach. Public access to the Bergen waterfront (or any urban waterfront) should be kept in mind as remedial designs are developed; this includes innovative filtering systems for storm water adjacent to Bergen Harbor. An example is the Gowanus Canal, New York Sponge Park filtering design in an urban Superfund waterway ( Use of innovative sediment treatment technologies such as sediment washing with beneficial use such as production of a manufactured soil could be considered along with stabilization and solidification for geotechnical fill for construction and sub-base for roads, golf courses, etc. Summary and Conclusions The proposed remediation of Bergen Harbor is a highly visible Norwegian national project which encompasses several areas of integrated sediment management. This high priority project has stirred interest within a global sediment community because of the complex challenges that arise from human and ecological impacts to the Port and to the aquatic resources, the deep cultural heritage of Norway and archeological artifacts that are found on the seabed, balancing remediation areas and objectives, innovative technology development (capping, dredging and storm water management), stakeholder participation and future economic development of the Port of Bergen. The political, social and economic advancement of this project from an environmental management perspective is not simple, quick or inexpensive. Contaminated sediments are a complex media. Remediation efforts on a global scale are highly multi-disciplinary, challenging and time dependent. Norway has placed national emphasis on contaminated sediments dating back to 2002 with the release of a white paper Clean and Rich Oceans outlining the need Norway to invest in a national contaminated sediment management plan. The Norwegian Climate and Pollution Agency has identified 17 fjords where action plans have been developed and further studies need to be conducted. This includes 34 industrial harbors, 109 shipyards and military installations along the coast. The timeframe for implementing these remedial actions started in 2012 and is expected to continue to Bergen Harbor authorities initiated sampling and assessment campaigns in 2002 (Clean and Rich Oceans) and are expected to implement remedial designs and actions within the timeframe by conducting subsequent detailed sediment assessment. Significant project activity is underway for Vagen, Kirkebukten Bay, and Puddefjorden Sound in to meet these goals. Orchestration and synchronization of these activities will be critical to meet the proposed 2014 remediation startup goal. From what was observed, discussed and researched over the course of this third-party evaluation, as well as this reviewer s long-term experience of sediment collaboration in Norway both with the U.S. EPA and Battelle, the project direction in what was accomplished to date and what is ongoing and anticipated for is technically sound and focused. Progress made will be evaluated again by a third-party in one year (May 2013) once the subsequent 2012 sampling efforts are completed and other project components such as storm water control and artifact reconnaissance and remedial sequencing are better defined. In conclusion there seems to be a general agreement that moving forward towards a remedial action is important to the government, and the stakeholders as opposed to assessing the problem for another decade. Again, it will not be simple, quick or inexpensive but the remediation can be implemented with positive long-term results.