Restore America s Estuaries October 24, 2012

Transcription

1 Coordinating Dredged Material Management in the Pacific Coast s Largest Estuary with Construction of the Pacific Coast s Largest Tidal Wetland Restoration Project. Restore America s Estuaries October 24, 2012

2 Overview South Bay Salt Ponds Restoration Project Background Challenges Dredged Material Management in SF Bay Background Challenges DMMP-based solutions Mutual Resolutions

3 South Bay Salt Ponds Project Background Largest tidal wetland project on West Coast 15,000 acres of industrial salt ponds Three pond complexes acquired by USFWS and CDF&G in 2003 Oversight provided by California Coasal Conservancy Adaptive management plan adopted in 2008 Preliminary restoration efforts began in 2009

4

5 03M

6 South Bay Salt Ponds Project Background Adaptive Management 90/10 50/50 Phase I complete 2,500 acres marsh 1,000 acres ponds 7 miles of trails

7 South Bay Salt Ponds Project Background Managed Pond Emphasis Tidal Marsh Emphasis

8 South Bay Salt Ponds Project Challenges Habitat trade-off concerns Concerns over cost-sharing with Corps Contaminants, especially mercury Need for fill Subsidence = need for large volumes Cost Availability Source contaminants

9 Dredged Material Management in SF Bay - Dredgers Corps of Engineers 11 Projects 2.2 MCY annually Mostly fine-grained sediment 4 In-Bay aquatic disposal sites Ocean Disposal: 60 miles offshore

10 Dredged Material Management in SF Bay - Dredgers Ports: 1.3 MCY annually Oakland San Francisco Richmond Redwood City Benicia 4 MCY Total Annual Dredge Volume Private Facilities & Municipal Marinas: 0.5 MCY annually

11 Dredged Material Management in SF Bay - Challenges Long-Term Management Strategy (LTMS) Environmental Work Windows Plan Cost Reduce in-bay disposal to 1.25 MCY annually Maximize beneficial use Flat-line Corps of Engineers O&M budget Impacts of LTMS

12 Future Beneficial Use Shortfall Annual Need* vs. Placement 12 Today Annual Disposal to Ocean 12 Volume (CY) Millions Annual Beneficial Use Capacity Annual LTMS In-Bay Volume (CY) Millions San Francisco Bay Regional DMMP * Need = Federal + Permitted Dredging

13 SUMMARY $25-32/c.yd. $20-25/c.yd. Approved for Unconfined In-Bay Disposal Ocean Disposal 03M

14 SF Bay Regional DMMP Federal requirement to address insufficient capacity Integrated planning document with EIS that ensures dredging remains environmentally acceptable & economically justifiable Assesses a full range of placement/disposal options, ensuring capacity for the next 25 years Justifies follow-on site-specific Feasibility Studies Federally funded in 2008 and 2009 under the LTMS Congressional earmark

15 Benefits of a DMMP Predictability Schedule Budget Budget Optimization Regulatory buy-in EIS process allows agency co-ownership Mutual environmental goals

16 DMMP Study Flow Chart Preliminary Assessment NEPA Notice of Intent Public Meetings Public Input Primary Screening Alternatives Identification Geographic Areas Identification Initial Alternatives List Suite of Alternatives Alternatives Development Trade-Off Analysis Public Input Public Input Screening Criteria Development Alternatives Evaluation EIS & Implementation Plan Draft DMMP Final DMMP Record of Decision

17 DMMP Study Flow Chart Preliminary Assessment NEPA Notice of Intent Public Meetings Public Input Primary Screening Alternatives Identification Geographic Areas Identification Initial Alternatives List Suite of Alternatives EIS & Implementation Plan Alternatives Development Trade-Off Analysis Draft DMMP Public Input Public Input Screening Criteria Development Alternatives Evaluation Final DMMP Earmark Moratorium Eliminates Record LTMS of Decision Funding

18 DMMP Progress Quantification of capacity deficit 25-year dredge volume: 114 MCY 25-year capacity without ocean: 69 MCY Economic justification for all federal projects Identification and screening of 184 potential beneficial use options Policy criteria Gross feasibility criteria

19 Beneficial Use Type Count Beneficial Use Type Count SUMMARY In-Bay Disposal 12 Landfill Capping 14 Ocean Disposal 4 Levee Rehabilitation 7 Mine Reclamation/Restoration 4 Mudflat Creation 1 Agricultural Placement 7 Mudflat Restoration 1 Brownfields Capping 10 Manufactured Goods 3 Beach Nourishment 18 Public Access 9 Construction Fill 5 Port Expansion 4 Flood Control 7 Rehandling Basin 10 Habitat Creation 9 Shoreline/Bank Stabilization 1 Habitat Restoration 54 Island Creation 4 TOTAL 184

20 DMMP Progress Preliminary screening results in 42 potential beneficial use sites among 4 Bay regions Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 1. Technical advisory group assembled 2. Toggle scoring of (+1, 0 or -1) of 80 specific environmental benefit parameters 3. Parameter weighting 4. Final ranking of beneficial use sites for all four regions

21 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Contracted w/portion of single-project O&M funds Interim recommendation of RDMMP sites Reconnaissance Level Investigation of the 5 sites Preliminary Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study

22 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan DMMIP Reconnaissance Study FOCUS ON South Bay Salt Ponds Fine-tuned capacity evaluation of SBSP Project Analysis of LIDAR data to determine fill necessary to bring ponds to tidal marsh elevation Average elevation for adjacent wetlands & 90/10 plan Capacity estimate =

23 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Additional volume for strategically located transition zones = 5 MCY

24 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan SBSP Project Deep Water Transfer Points

25 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Evaluation of alternative dredged material delivery measures Aquatic Transfer Facility

26 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Evaluation of alternative dredged material delivery measures Aquatic Transfer Facility Submersible pump

27 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Evaluation of alternative dredged material delivery measures Aquatic Transfer Facility Submersible pump Dedicated off-loader

28 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Potential innovative funding solutions for the SBSP Project Self financing involving tipping fee to recoup infrastructure costs Narrower scope cost-sharing between Corps and State Conservancy, i.e. Offloader only Programmatic dredge contracts

29 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Cost Analysis Two Corps dredging projects (Oakland and Richmond Harbors) Hauling distances to all ponds Three off-loader scenarios Pumping costs based on distance to each pond Total cost compared to Ocean Disposal

30 South Bay Dredged Material Management Implementation Plan Eden Landing Complex Total Costs per Cubic Yard from Oakland Harbor SF DODS Disposal Cost per CY = $25.31 Pond Offloader 1 Offloader 2 ATF NCM $ $ $ E14 $ $ $ E6A $ $ $ E6B $ $ $ E8 $ $ $ E6 $ $ $ E1 $ $ $ E7 $ $ $ E5 $ $ $ E2 $ $ $ E6C $ $ $ E4 $ $ $ E4C $ $ $ 22.22

31 SUMMARY Quantification of the South Bay Salt Ponds fill capacity to meet high-end marsh goal Roadmap for Corps and SBSP Project culminated in Letter of Intent from Conservancy Tool box to navigate the roadmap Available dredge material delivery methods Haul and pump distances to and from SBSP deep water access channels Potential contracting mechanisms

32 QUESTIONS?? Scott Bodensteiner GO GIANTS!!!