Great Lakes Navigation Update Marie Strum U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Great Lakes Navigation Team Leader February 2018 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. BUILDING STRONG and Taking Care of People! ISO-9001
2 A non-linear navigation system with 60 federal commercial projects and 80 federal shallow draft/recreational projects
GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM Interdependent Ports Silver Bay Lake Superior Two Harbors Key Challenges Duluth-Superior Presque Isle Ontonagon Ashland MI Balancing System Requirements: Marquette Gladstone >10M Ton Harbor 1-10M Ton Harbor WI <1M Ton Harbor Cheboygan Menominee CANADA Charlevoix Alpena Green Bay Harbor Beach Manistee Ludington Saginaw Manitowoc Muskegon Marysville Grand Haven Milwaukee MI Buffalo Put In Bay St. Clair NY Holland Rouge River Waukegan Detroit River Chicago Harbor St. Joseph Monroe PA Calumet IL IN Dredging Dredged Material Management Harbor Infrastructure Soo Locks OH System approach is key for the Great Lakes Nav System interdependency 3
WATER RESOURCES REFORM & DEVELOPMENT ACT (WRRDA) 2014 4 The Corps must manage all the individually authorized projects in the Great Lakes Navigation System as components of a single, comprehensive system, recognizing the interdependency of ports The Corps shall not allocate funds solely on tonnage Establishes funding targets for expenditure of HMTF funds for the next 10 years including 10% of priority funds to GL Emerging harbors (less than 1M tons) receive no less than 10% of 2012 HMTF appropriated funds ($898M)
5 FY17 GL Navigation President s Budget + Work Plan Funding Great Lakes Navigation Operations & Maintenance $102.7M + $51.8M = $154.5M Key Items $38.4M + $10M in Dredging (31 projects: 3.2M + 0.73M cy) $8.86M in Dredged Material Management $9.6M in Soo Asset Renewal $30.7M in navigation structure repair (by contract)
FY18 CORPS FUNDING STATUS 6 Awaiting FY18 Appropriation; Continuing Resolution through Feb 8, 2018 Funding based on FY18 President s Budget at this time If Congress passes an Appropriations Bill, additional funds could be allocated to projects across the country. Funding amounts included in House and Senate markups: Additional Funding for Ongoing Work House Senate - Navigation Maintenance $8.4M $23M - Deep-draft harbor and channel $334.4M $287M - Small, remote, or subsistence nav $20M $51M
FY 18 GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION PRESIDENT S BUDGET 7 Great Lakes Navigation Operations & Maintenance $106.23M Key Items $37.85M in Dredging (16 projects; 2.95M cy) $10.9M in Dredged Material Management $8.9M in Soo Locks Maintenance
FY 19 GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION PRESIDENT S BUDGET 8 Great Lakes Navigation Operations & Maintenance $108.7M Key Items $39.8M in Dredging (21 projects; 2.9M cy) $10.6M in Dredged Material Management $2.0M in Soo Locks Maintenance
GL NAVIGATION FUNDING HISTORY 9 $200,000 $180,000 Executable Backlog Reduction Funding Range NAV O&M and CDF Funds (in $000's) $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 Sustainable Funding Range $80,000 $60,000 ARRA Adds and National Provisions President's Budget Fiscal Years
DREDGING 10
11
12
6.0 DREDGING FUNDING TRENDS 2007 2019 14 Quantity Dredged (millions of cubic yards) 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.3M Annual Reqm t Appropriation - Add'l Funds for Ongoing Work ARRA (Stimulus) L. Superior Regional Provisions Michigan Regional Provisions Commercial Regional Provisions Energy & Water Adds President's Budget 0.0 FY07 FY09 FY11 FY13 FY15 FY17 FY19
HISTORICAL FUNDING GREAT LAKES LOW USE PROJECTS (<1M TONS) 14 35,000,000 30,000,000 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY18 FY19 President s Budget Workplan/Appropriation
Current Dredging Updates 15 Calumet Harbor Rock Removal Phase 1 & 2 2017 Spring 2018 Phase 3 Cleveland completed fall dredging; spring dredging expected in May 2018 Dredging plans proceeding for President s Budget projects primarily moderate and high use commercial harbors/channels We are making progress on dredging backlog backlog has been reduced to below 15M cubic yards, from a high of 18M
16 DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT
CURRENT DREDGED MATERIAL PLACEMENT METHODS 18 Lake Superior Ontonagon MI St. Marys River Percentages by volume (1998-2014) 4% NEAR SHORE 14% CDF 37% OPEN WATER 45% UPLAND WI Near Shore CDF Open Water Upland Menominee Sturgeon Bay Kewaunee Green Bay Manitowoc Port Washington Milwaukee IL Kenosha Waukegan Calumet Indiana Harbor IN Frankfort Manistee Ludington Muskegon Grand Haven Holland St. Joseph Michigan City Cheboygan Saginaw MI Alpena Rouge River Detroit River OH Lake St. Clair Monroe Harbor Beach St. Clair River CANADA Buffalo Dunkirk Erie PA Rochester NY Oswego
DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES 18 Engage state agencies and other partners and stakeholders in developing innovative long-term solutions to dredged material management challenges. Foster partnership with USEPA with its Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) and Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) programs to leverage funding for projects supporting both environmental goals and navigation benefits. Maximize the use of fill management and facility adaptation, such as routine raising of perimeter dikes and reworking the material within the facility to create additional capacity. Aggressively pursue opportunities for beneficially using dredged material to preserve or create CDF capacity within limits of federal rules Collaborate with partner agencies leveraging local and federal programs to reduce the amount of material entering federal navigation channels sediment traps
Current DMM Work Updates 19 Cleveland Port Authority owned and operated management and beneficial use facility at Dike 12 Ashtabula working with OEPA on a beneficial use project Ohio harbors pursuing beneficial use opportunities with the State Channels in Lake St. Clair 2017 combined maint dredging with GLRI restoration project; placed material in shallow water near Clinton River mouth to enhance habitat; less costly placement DMM Duluth exploring new opportunities
CLINTON RIVER MOUTH RESTORATION Beneficially using dredged material from Channels of Lake St. Clair maintenance dredging - GLRI project placed large woody debris - Cobble shoreline - Plantings - Maintenance dredging material placed in near shore to provide various design depths
DREDGED MATERIAL PLACEMENT POTENTIAL BENEFICIAL USES - 21 st and 40 th Ave Restoration Sites 886K placed since 2013-505K remaining capacity to 2021 - Great potential sites: MN Point, Superior Bay Habitat, WI Piping Plover Site
MINNESOTA POINT EROSION Potential Benefits from Dredged Material Placement - Slow/stop erosion and loss of material - Prevent loss of old growth pines - Improve coastal resiliency; response to increases in lake level and frequency and magnitude of storms - Provides piping plover habitat
23 GREAT LAKES WATER LEVELS
WATER LEVELS ON GREAT LAKES 24 All of the Great Lakes are currently above average and above levels of a year ago. Lake Ontario set a new record high level in May, June, and July 2017 Lake Superior levels were a few inches below record high this fall; significant erosion due to storms in late October Erosion of coastal bluffs has increased over the past few years with the higher water levels after nearly a decade of low water and apparent stability.
26 LOCK RELIABILITY
SOO TONNAGE 2017 FINAL NUMBERS 27 Total tonnage 75.3M, an increase of 12% over 2016 Iron ore up 20% over 2016 95% of US tonnage was Poe-Restricted in 2017 Set several individual vessel draft records, helped by higher water levels
THE SOO LOCKS LYNCH PIN OF THE GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM 85% of the commercial commodities transiting the Soo Locks are limited by size to the Poe Lock Aging and deteriorating infrastructure; unscheduled outages increasing There is currently no redundancy for the Poe Lock The economic impact of a 30-day unscheduled closure of the Soo Locks = $160M Two major efforts are underway to improve reliability of the Soo Locks 1. Maintain existing infrastructure through Asset Renewal Plan 2. New lock with the same dimensions as the Poe Lock Economic reevaluation required. 28
SOO LOCKS ASSET RENEWAL PLAN 29 Asset Renewal Plan will maximize reliability and reduce risk through 2035 $86M funded to date through FY17. 2017/18 Work: MacArthur Lock Embedded Anchorages Steamplant Replacement Design Replace Stoplog Lifting Beams Poe Miter and Quoin Block Replacement West Center Pier Repair Remaining key priorities: Poe Lock Gate 1 Replacement West Center Pier Repair (final 1,500 ft) Davis/Poe Pump Wells New heavy lift crane Funding, $M 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FY08 FY10 FY12 FY14 FY16
SOO LOCKS 2017/18 WINTER WORK REPAIRS Poe Gates 1 and 3 Miter and Quoin Block Poe Gate 2 Embedded Anchorage Mac Gates 2 and 5 Embedded Anchorages 24
Poe Lock Embedded Anchorages 31 Typical Poe Lock Embedded Anchorages Poe Primary Embedded Anchorage Poe Primary Embedded Anchorage Poe Secondary Embedded Anchorage Poe Secondary Embedded Anchorage
2 ND POE-SIZED LOCK 32 Authorized for construction of a redundant Poe-size lock in WRDA 1986; WRDA 2007: Construction at 100% federal expense Inconsistent with Administration policy due to BCR of 0.73 computed in 2005 Limited Reevaluation Report (LRR) Currently working on Economic Reevaluation Report to recalculate BCR Team includes all three GL Districts, Planning Center of Expertise for Inland Navigation (Huntington) and the Civil Works Cost Engineering MCX (Walla Walla)
ECONOMIC VALIDATION REPORT 33 Reliability: Information will be leveraged from recent detailed inspections to update reliability and projected outage model Forecast: Commodity forecasts have been updated Updated Cost: The risk-based cost estimate for construction of the new lock is being updated Report expected to be complete Summer 2018
34 GROUNDED VESSEL AUGUST 2017: IMPACT TO NAVIGATION Real Life Simulation of a Lock Closure Vessel grounded downstream of locks August 8-11, 2017 All navigation halted in St. Marys River for approx. 70 hours - 19 vessels were delayed at the locks or at anchor - 15 additional vessels delayed due to the vessel queue - Once river opened, it took 43 hours to clear the queue - Tot of 35 vessels affected - 1.05M tons of cargo was held up - 895 hours of delay - $2.9M in delay costs for a 3 day river closure Vessels tied up on Piers during river closure
Great Lakes Navigation System 35 The GL system s savings over the next least costly mode of transportation More competitive American steel Essential to sustaining U.S. auto industry Lower cost energy Lower cost concrete (construction) $3.6 Billion/year More competitive grain for export Less fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions Less congested highways/rails
OUTREACH 36 Shallow Draft Stakeholder Meeting: Detroit/field offices/virtual on April 10 th, 2018 GL Nav Stakeholder Meeting: TBD after budget released Web Site: www.lre.usace.army.mil/greatlakes/navigation Harbor Fact Sheets Updated CDF Fact Sheets Presentations Mailing Lists: send information to glnavigation@usace.army.mil
Questions? 37