Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002

1
Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002

• SAME Presentation
• November 3, 2005
• Dave Cowgill, U.S. EPA GLNPO

2
Cumulative Sediment Volume Remediated In U.S.
Great Lakes
3
So, How much is left?

• The U.S. Policy Committee has recently estimated
  that 75,000,000 cubic yards, with an associated
  cost range from 1.6-4.4 Billion for remediation.
• The Legacy Act will help us make a dent in this
  number
• The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration
  AOC/Sediment Strategy chapter emphasizes the
  importance of the Legacy Act

4
(No Transcript)
5
Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002

• a new tool in the Great Lakes sediment
  remediation toolbox

6
History

• The Great Lakes Legacy Act (GLLA) five year
  authorization
• 50M per year for contaminated sediment
  remediation
• 3M per year for new technology
• 1M outreach and education
• 9.9 Million appropriated in FY2004
• 22.3 Million in FY2005
• 30 Million in FY2006

7
GLLA funding and project types

• Three types of projects must be in U.S. Areas of
  Concern (AOCs) and
• Remediation Implement a plan to remediate
  contaminated sediment (highest priority)
• Monitoring Monitor or evaluate contaminated
  sediment
• Source Control Prevent further or renewed
  sediment contamination

8
Funding Priority

• Under the Act, priority is given to the following
  projects
• Remedial action for contaminated sediment
• Projects that have been identified in a Remedial
  Action Plan and are ready to be implemented
• Projects that will use an innovative approach,
  technology, or technique that may provide greater
  environmental benefits, or equivalent
  environmental benefits at a reduced cost or
• Projects that include remediation to be commenced
  not later than 1 year after the date of receipt
  of funds.

9
Cost-Sharing
Non-Federal Cost Share Must be at Least 35 of
Total Project Costs and 100 of Operations and
Maintenance Costs, and

• May include in-kind services,
• May include monies and in-kind services under an
  administrative order on consent or judicial
  consent decree,
• May NOT include any funds pursuant to a
  unilateral administrative order or court order.

10
Project Requirements

• Remedial Alternatives Analysis
• Dredging, capping, natural recovery
• Short and long term effects of remedial
  alternatives on human health and the environment
• Site will not suffer significant, further or
  renewed contamination

11
How projects are paid for

• Non-Federal Cost Share Must be at Least 35 of
  Total Project Costs and 100 of Operations and
  Maintenance Costs
• Not a grant not a contract
• Project Agreement with a partner

12
Project Proposals Received

• Proposals for 12 AOCs from 6 States from initial
  solicitation, but the door is always open!
• Remediation
• Black Lagoon, Trenton MI
• Ruddiman Creek, Muskegon, MI
• Hog Island, Superior, WI
• Tannery Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, MI
• Assessment
• Ryerson Creek, Muskegon, MI

13
Black Lagoon Trenton, MI

• Removed 116,000 cubic yards
• Total cost 9,600,000

14
Black Lagoon Trenton, MI

• Follow up restoration and other activities
• City of Trenton has received 113K for
  restoration of site
• Funding for Detroit River International wildlife
  refuge
• Adjacent brownfields have been purchased

15
Hog Island Inlet - Superior, WI

• 50,000 cubic yards of sediment being removed
• Excavation in the dry after dewatering not
  dredging
• Fish recovery during dewatering

• Projected mass removal includes 500 pounds of
  PAHs and 7000 pounds of lead
• Total Cost 6,300,000

16
Hog Island Inlet - Superior, WI

• AOC has a habitat restoration plan in place
• Working with community, local and state partners,
  and NOAA to undertake larger scale long term
  restoration plan for site

17
Ruddiman Creek Issues

• Historic discharge of industrial wastes
  containing heavy metals, PCBs and hydrocarbons
• Extensive filling of banks with foundry sand and
  solid waste
• Sediment, soil and groundwater contamination
  present
• Residential area with unrestricted access to
  contaminated sediments

18

• Three Primary Objectives
• Reduce risks to human health, wildlife, and
  aquatic life in Ruddiman Main Branch Pond
• Restore the aquatic habitat
• Prepare for recreational, residential, and
  economic redevelopment of Main Branch and Pond
  area

19
Ruddiman Creek Watershed
20
Step 1 Evaluation of Source Control

• Identify Industrial/Municipal Discharges
• Controlled through permit process
• Identify Municipal Storm Water Discharges
• Controlled through the Phase II storm water
  permit process
• Contaminated Ground Water
• Remediation of the Drum Dump
• 2004 groundwater investigation Control of VOCs

21
Ruddiman Creek - Muskegon, MI

• 80,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment is
  being removed from Ruddiman creek and pond
• Project has several components including creek
  excavation and pond dredging
• Sediments will be disposed of in a licensed
  landfill near Muskegon

22
Contamination Removal

• 80,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment to be
  removed estimated to contain

23
Ruddiman Creek - Muskegon, MI
Water from the excavation areas is being treated
onsite, then pumped to the local wastewater
treatment plant for further treatment
24
Ruddiman Pond - Muskegon, MI

• Sediments in the pond are being dredged with an
  environmental dredging bucket
• Silt curtains are used to keep resuspended
  material contained
• All dredging is followed by confirmatory sampling

25
Characteristics of the Ruddiman Remediation
Project

• Install 58,200 sq. ft. of road
• Road construction with geotextiles and Swamp
  Mats, use of aqua dams
• Erosion control - 3 ft. fabric silt fence, straw
  bales and wood chips

26
Ruddiman Creek - Muskegon, MI

• Goal is to restore a more natural stream flow
• Braided streams
• Flow dissipation

27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
Post Remedial Monitoring/Restoration

• Monitoring within all remedial areas to insure
  sediment targets have been achieved-more dredging
  as necessary
• Monitoring one year after all remedial activities
  complete
• Complete restoration plan laid out in project
  plan
• Continue to work with community on restoration
  projects

33
438,000 sq ft restored

• Install Wing Dams, Riffle structures, Check Dams,
  
• control erosion during flood events and reduce
  sediment migration
• Cover bottom of channel with sand layer and side
  slopes with a gravel layer
• Geotextile on Main Branch and floodplain
• Grade excavated channels to 12 slopes
• Cover bottom and sidewalls with erosion control
  blanket
• Place coir log rolls along dredged stream bank
• Plant temporary annual grass seed
• 50,000 native wetland upland plants, permanent
  grass/flower seed

34
A Cooperative, Joint Effort

• USEPA, Great Lakes National Program Office
  (GLNPO)
• USEPA, Emergency and Rapid Response Services
  (ERRS) Office
• Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
  (MDEQ)
• US Army Corps Of Engineers (USACE)

35
Projected Cost of Cleanup

• Total cost approximately 10.6 million
• 6.9 million Legacy Act funds (65)
• 3.7 Clean Michigan Initiative funds (35)

The Clean Michigan Initiative is a 675 million
bond to clean up, protect and enhance Michigans
environmental quality and natural resources.
36
Ruddiman Creek - Muskegon, MI

• Project is driven by a very active community who
  are participating in all aspects of the project
  including restoration plans

37

• Great Lakes Legacy Act http//www.epa.gov/glla

Contact Marc Tuchman (tuchman.marc_at_epa.gov) U.S.
EPA Great Lakes National Program Office