Local Planning Groups
&
Development of Dredged
Material Management Plans
Guidance
by the
National Dredging Team
June 1998
. U.S.
FISH & WILDLIFE
SERVICE
-------
-------
NATIONAL DREDGING TEAM
Transmittal of the National Dredging Team Guidance
Local Planning Groups and Development of Dredged Material Management Plans
This guidance was developed by the National Dredging Team (NDT) to address
two of the eighteen recommendations in the Federal Interagency December 1994 report,
"The Dredging Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement." On June
22,1995, President Clinton endorsed the report and directed the Federal agencies to
implement the 18 recommendations. The purpose of this guidance is to encourage the
formation of Local Planning Groups to assist in the development of dredged material
management plans. This guidance provides a framework to: (1) assist in the formation of
Local Planning Groups; (2) provide context regarding Local Planning Groups'
relationship to other groups having different but compatible purposes, e.g., Regional
Dredging Teams; (3) establish a planning process; and (4) develop and implement
dredged material management plans.
Although this document contains proven methods, and in some instances minimum
Federal requirements, it is intended to be a guiding framework. Because participants on a
Local Planning Group represent their organizations without giving up any of their
organization's decision-making authorities, they should work within this framework to
form and operate a group that works for them. For instance, this guide indicates that the
Local Planning Group will be chaired by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or co-chaired
with the local port authorities and/or a state representative. Dredging should be a
cooperative process which would benefit from involvement of the key government and
non-government stakeholders. In some instances, states may have an ongoing dredged
material planning effort to which the Corps and other Federal agencies could adapt. In
such a case, it may be acceptable for the state to chair the group to avoid duplication of
effort, recognizing that certain activities (e.g., see Dredged Material Management Plans:
Content) need to be addressed in order to have an implementable plan.
We believe that this guidance is a strong framework through which Local Planning
-------
Groups can maximize their potential for developing an implementable dredged material
management plan. This is not intended as a rigid, prescriptive guidance; the level of
effort involved in dredged material management planning and the structure of the local
planning group should reflect the complexity of the problem being addressed. To prevent
duplication of effort and to develop an effective and efficient planning process, this
guidance encourages that affected parties join in an examination of all relevant existing
groups prior to establishing a Local Planning Group and, once established, jointly operate
a group that will seek to develop an implementable plan. Decisions on chairship and
organizational structure should be determined at the local level.
We feel that development of dredged material management plans, looking at a
twenty year horizon, is critical to ensuring that the environment is protected while
dredging of our ports and harbors takes place in a timely and effective manner. We
encourage participation by all interested stakeholders in this important effort.
Bob Perciasepe
Co-Chair
National Dredging Team
Assistant Administrator
Office of Water
U.S. EPA
Washington, D.C.
7
Major General Russell Fuhrman
Co-Chair
National Dredging Team
Director of Civil Works
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington, D.C.
-------
Contents
1Introduction 1
Purpose 1
Policy 1
Background 1
2Planning Processes 6
The Corps Planning Process 7
New Activities 7
3Local Planning Groups 9
Purpose and Responsibilities 9
Structure of the Local Planning Group 10
Operating Principles of Local Planning Groups 10
4Dredged Material Management Plans 12
Key Concepts of Dredged Material Management Plans 12
Content of Dredged Material Management Plans 15
References 18
Appendix A: Summary Listing of Recommendations from the
December 1994 Interagency Report Al
Appendix B: National Dredging Team Fact Sheet Bl
Appendix C: National Dredging Team Member List Cl
Appendix D: Regional Dredging Teams Dl
in
-------
List of Exhibits and Figures
Exhibit 1. The National Dredging Policy 3
Exhibit 2. Problems of Inadequate Planning 5
Exhibit 3. Basic Steps hi Planning Process 13
Exhibit 4. Characteristics of Successful Partnerships for Developing
Dredged Material Management Plans 14
Figure 1. Dredged Material Management Planning Process 18
NOTE: This document is available on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/ow/owow/ocpd
IV
-------
1 Introduction
Purpose
To provide guidance on (1) formation of Local Planning Groups, and (2) de-
velopment of dredged material management plans by the Local Planning Groups.
The Plans are to include the needs of both federal projects and regulatory activi-
ties (i.e., non-federal projects) for specific harbors/ports or estuaries to meet
short- and long-term needs.
Policy
A network of ports and harbors is essential to the national economy and secu-
rity, and the nation's coastal, ocean and freshwater ecological resources are criti-
cal assets which must be protected, conserved and restored. Development of a
successful comprehensive dredged material management plan must involve the
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies, the ports, state and local economic
development agencies, environmental interest groups, and other affected stake-
holders in a coordinated examination of the key economic, environmental, and
other relevant considerations.
Background
Recognizing the important role ports play in the United States' economy,
defense, and environment, President Clinton, on August 13,1993, acknowledged
that the process existing at that time for dredging and maintaining the Nation's
ports sometimes does not work as well as it could. As a result, the Secretary of
Transportation convened the Interagency Working Group on the Dredging Pro-
cess in October 1993 to investigate and recommend actions to improve the
dredging project review process.
The Working Group had two major objectives:
Promote greater certainty and predictability hi the dredging project review
process and dredged material management
Chapter 1 Introduction
-------
Facilitate effective long-term management strategies for addressing dredg-
ing and disposal needs at both the National and local levels.
The Group delivered a report to the Secretary of Transportation, "The Dredg-
ing Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement," hi December
1994 (the Report) that contained 18 recommendations and a proposed National
Dredging Policy. The President endorsed the National Dredging Policy on June
22,1995, and directed the Federal agencies to implement the Report's 18 recom-
mendations (see Exhibit 1, The National Dredging Policy, and Appendix A,
Summary Listing of Recommendations).
One of the major areas identified hi the Report that needed improvement was
to strengthen planning mechanisms for dredging and dredged material manage-
ment (see Exhibit 2, Problems of Inadequate Planning). The Report concluded
that (1) the dredging project review process often uses an ad hoc planning pro-
cess, resulting hi a piecemeal rather than an integrated planning approach, and
(2) a planning process needs to be put in place that addresses individual port
development, regional and national economic development, and appropriate
management of the environmental effects of dredging and dredged material
disposal.
Of 18 recommendations in the Report, 8 pertained directly to planning; this
guidance explicitly addresses 2 of the 8 recommendations, which are:
a. Create and/or augment regional/local dredged material planning groups to
aid in the development of regional dredged material management plans.
b. Identify the characteristics of successful Federal/state/local partnerships
for use hi developing dredged material management planning efforts.
Chapter 1 Introduction
-------
Exhibit 1. The National Dredging Policy
The National Dredging Policy1
The following statements on findings and principles have been adopted by the President as the
National Dredging Policy.
The findings are:
A network of ports and harbors is essential to the United States' economy, affecting its
competitiveness in world trade and national security. Port facilities serve as a key link in the
intermodal transportation chain and can realize their full potential as magnets for shipping and
commerce only if dredging occurs in a timely and cost-effective manner.
The nation's coastal, ocean, and freshwater resources are critical assets which must be protected,
conserved, and restored. These resources are equally important to the United States by
providing numerous economic and environmental benefits.
Consistent and integrated application of existing environmental statutes can protect the
environment and can allow for sustainable economic growth.
Close coordination and planning at all governmental levels, and with all aspects of the private
sector, are essential to developing and maintaining the Nation's ports and harbors in a manner
that will increase economic growth and protect, conserve, and restore coastal resources.
Planning for the development and maintenance of the Nation's ports and harbors should occur in
the context of broad transportation and environmental planning efforts such as the National
Transportation System and the ecosystem/watershed management approach.
(continued)
JThe Dredging Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement by the
Interagency Working Group on the Dredging Process, Maritime Administration, December 1994.
Chapter 1 Introduction
-------
Exhibit 1. The National Dredging Policy
The National Dredging Policy
(concluded)
The principles are:
The regulatory process must be timely, efficient, and predictable, to the maximum extent
practicable.
Advance dredged material management planning must be conducted on a port or regional scale
by a partnership that includes the Federal government, the port authorities, state and local
governments, natural resource agencies, public interest groups, the maritime industry, and
private citizens. To be effective, this planning must be done prior to individual Federal or non-
Federal dredging project proponents seeking individual project approval.
Dredged material managers must become more involved in watershed planning to emphasize the
importance of point and non-point source pollution controls to reduce harbor sediment
contamination.
Dredged material is a resource, and environmentally sound beneficial use of dredged material for
such projects as wetland creation, beach nourishment, and development projects must be
encouraged.
Chapter 1 Introduction
-------
Exhibit 2. Problems of Inadequate Planning
Problems of Inadequate Planning2
Inadequate early planning for dredging and dredged material management at the local, regional, and
national levels impacts most aspects of the dredging project review process:
Federal and state regulatory agencies often do not adequately coordinate or communicate their
concerns about dredging projects early in the permitting process. This contributes to delays in
the decision-making process and the approvals required by Federal and state law.
Stakeholders frequently do not effectively participate in planning efforts. Concerns and issues
may be raised late in the review process, resulting in conflicts and project delays.
Planning decisions for dredging projects are often based on an incomplete analysis of the
comparative values and/or cumulative effects of the entire plan.
Planning decisions about dredged material management, including disposal alternatives, site
monitoring, and determining the suitability of dredged materials for beneficial use, are not
always realistically incorporated into port dredging plans. Thus, disposal alternatives may be
unavailable when they are needed and dredging projects are delayed.
Long-term port planning has not been linked to broader watershed management. Specifically,
despite increased control over upstream pollution, downstream sediment quality continues to
suffer due to historic sources and continued inputs, such as non-point sources of pollution.
Decision-making criteria for the selection and funding of Federal dredging projects have not
always maximized beneficial uses of dredged material. When resource agencies or the public
believe that opportunities for beneficial uses have not been adequately formulated, project delays
may result.
The need for port dredging and dredged material management is not always integrated with
planning for landside transportation systems.
In addition to these problems, changes over the last two decades hi the economy and in technology
have created new challenges to be addressed by the planning process. These changes include:
increased international/waterborne commerce; rapid evolution of shipping practices to include
containerization and intermodalism; increased environmental awareness and understanding,
particularly regarding the impacts of contaminated sediments, as well as the ecological value of
wetlands and coastal resources; population growth hi coastal areas; and increased cost sharing and
management responsibilities for local partners in dredging projects.
gThe Dredging Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement, by the Interagency
Working Group on the Dredging Process, Maritime Administration, December 1994.
Chapter 1 Introduction
-------
2 Planning Processes
This Guidance will be implemented through the operation of the National
Dredging Team (NDT), Regional Dredging Teams (RDTs) and Dredged Mate-
rial Planning Groups (Local Planning Groups) (Recommendation No. 1 in
Appendix A). These groups are interagency groups with distinct roles in facili-
tating dredging and dredged material management; the intent of these groups is
to ensure that dredging projects move forward hi an effective, efficient, and envi-
ronmentally sound manner.
a. The objective of the National Dredging Team is to promote national and
regional consistency on dredging issues and serve as a forum for conflict
resolution. The NDT has no direct role in developing or reviewing
dredged material management plans but will resolve national interagency
issues which may arise hi conducting dredged material management
planning.
b. The Regional Dredging Team will facilitate the resolution of local and
regional dredging issues. The RDT will also promote effective coordina-
tion and communications among the represented agencies and between the
RDTs and key stakeholders including the region's ports, state regulatory/
resource and economic development agencies, environmental interest
groups, recreational boating community, and other interested parties.
The RDTs help set priorities for dredged material management planning.
Their role is to resolve issues that may arise in the conduct of dredged
material management planning hi their region and refer issues that cannot
be resolved at the regional level to the NDT.
c. Local Planning Groups are interagency teams (including non-government
stakeholders) which develop dredged material management plans at the
local and regional level. The Local Planning Groups generally function
within the context of the Corps dredged material management planning
process as explained in the following sections.
_
Chapter 2 Planning Processes
-------
The Corps Planning Process
The Corps initiated an effort in 1994 to develop dredged material manage-
ment plans for all of the federal operating navigation projects. This effort is a
three-phase process, and is applicable to future navigation improvements as well.
a. Phase I of the process produces a preliminary management plan (i.e., the
Corps' official title for this plan is a "preliminary project assessment") that
addresses the need and economic necessity of dredging, the quantity and
quality of the material to be dredged and environmental considerations,
and the schedule and disposal strategy for all materials to be dredged,
including beneficial uses. This preliminary plan is prepared by a Corps
interdisciplinary team and considers a minimum 20-year planning horizon.
This assessment will draw upon existing information. In most cases, there
is a history of official and unofficial public and private coordination that
provides a framework for initial decision-making. The absence of suffi-
cient information will move the process to Phase n.
b. Phase II produces a comprehensive dredged material management plan
and involves interested stakeholders.
c. Phase mis implementation of the management plan.
Phase n is not initiated if the Corps, in coordination with the port authorities
and federal, state and local agencies, determines in Phase I that there are no eco-
nomic, environmental, or other pertinent issues that need resolution for dredged
material management for the project The preliminary management plan pro-
duced in Phase I is thereby determined to be sufficient to represent the final man-
agement plan.
New Activities
When the Corps determines that Phase n is necessary, a Local Planning
Group will be created to assist hi development of the management plan. In these
cases, the Corps will expand planning efforts to include non-federal projects and
will generally approach the Phase n plan on an estuary-wide or multi-port basis
for both federal and non-federal dredging projects.
a. The Local Planning Group will be chaired by the Corps in close coordina-
tion with the Port Authorities, or be co-chaired by the Corps and the Port.
The Local Planning Groups may be co-chaired with a state agency.
b. Membership on me Local Planning Group should include representatives
of those agencies on the RDT, other state and local government agencies,
navigation project sponsors, fishermen's organizations, recreational boat-
ing community, environmental interest groups, business interests, and
other interested stakeholders.
Chapter 2 Planning Processes
-------
c. Local Planning Groups will be convened for each Federal navigation pro-
ject for which Phase n is initiated. However, if the Phase I Plan addressed
individual Federal projects within an estuary or harbor area, it is recom-
mended that all navigation projects on a harbor-wide or estuary-wide basis
be consolidated into a single comprehensive management plan for Phase n
studies.
d. The scope of the Plan should include both Federal and non-Federal navi-
gation projects.
e. The Corps will fund the development of the Dredged Material Manage-
ment Plans. Expenses related to participation of members in the Local
Planning Group will be funded by their agencies or organizations. In addi-
tion, activities related to dredged material management but not required for
the construction or maintenance of Federal channels, such as control of
non-point sources of contamination, should be funded by local, state or
other Federal agencies having programmatic responsibilities for these
activities.
f. Recognizing that dredged material management planning is an ongoing
process, the Local Planning Group should continue to function at an ap-
propriate level of activity following completion of the Dredged Material
Management Plan to monitor implementation and to resolve local issues.
If the Corps determines that the Phase I preliminary plan is sufficient to repre-
sent the management plan, the Corps will present a briefing on the Phase I plan
to the RDT or its equivalent for its information. Disagreements on the need for
Phase II studies should be addressed through further communications between
the RDT and the Corps.
8
Chapter 2 Planning Processes
-------
3 Local Planning Groups
Purpose and Responsibilities
Planning Groups should be established at the local level and will have the
following purpose and responsibilities:
a. Structure the process so that decisions are reached on dredged material
management, including disposal and beneficial use. In order to ensure
timely and cost-effective dredging that is consistent with environmental
regulations, key decision makers must be involved and concur in each key
decision point in the process leading to selection of a plan.
b. Ensure that dredged material management plans incorporate environmental
considerations hi the identification of short-term and long-term disposal
alternatives, consider methods to reduce dredging, and maximize the bene-
ficial use of dredged materials. The need to evaluate short-term needs
while considering longer-term alternatives must be recognized; for exam-
ple, dredging projects that need to be considered prior to completion of the
dredged material management plan should be addressed expeditiously.
c. Promote watershed planning efforts and provide public forums to educate
the various stakeholders in conjunction with development of the compre-
hensive dredged material management plan.
d. Consider Federal and non-Federal navigation improvements (new pro-
jects), permitted dredging and disposal (regulatory issues for non-federal
projects), and maintenance dredging of Federal projects (existing projects)
hi developing their plans.
e. Encourage all concerned parties to participate early in the dredging plan-
ning process to promote proactive, rather than reactive, decision-making.
Planning will provide an open forum for the affected parties to voice their
concerns, thus providing an opportunity to resolve issues before they be-
come adversarial.
Chapter 3 Local Planning Groups
-------
f. Identify possible funding sources for developing and implementing man-
agement plans. The plans can be cost-shared by the participating agencies
both through direct funding and in-kind services.
g. Develop workplans and procedures that both assure clear communication
and foster close coordination with the RDT. A copy of workplans and
procedures should be provided to the RDT for its information.
h. Identify issues for resolution by RDT or NDT as appropriate.
Structure of the Local Planning Group
The Local Planning Group should consider an organizational structure com-
posed of a number of committees to assure that decisions can be reached in an
effective manner and that involved stakeholders provide efficient input. The
composition of the Local Planning Group and number of operating committees,
however, should reflect the complexity of the problems being addressed. Alter-
natives to a committee structure could be considered based on local needs, as
long as the goal of stakeholder involvement is achieved. A Local Planning
Group could include one or more of the following committees:
Executive Committee, composed of executive officers of the resource and
regulatory agencies, other relevant state agencies, and the ports.
Objective: Policy guidance and final decision-making.
Management Committee, composed of managers of the regulatory/
resource agencies and ports.
Objective: Management, development, coordination, and implementation
of planning efforts.
Policy Review Committee, composed of diverse interests and involved
stakeholders.
Objective: Public review and input into the planning efforts.
Other Committees or workgroups should be set up on an ad hoc basis as
necessary, such as a technical/scientific workgroup or a citizens advisory
committee.
Operating Principles of Local Planning Groups
Local Planning Groups will operate under the following broad principles:
The Local Planning Group will be chaired by the Corps or co-chaired with
the Port(s)and/or a state agency.
10
Chapter 3 Local Planning Groups
-------
Participation on the Local Planning Group will not supersede the authority
or decision-making responsibility of any participating agency.
Local Planning Groups should request issue resolution assistance from the
RDT, as needed.
Local Planning Groups should make recommendations to their RDT for
improvements in agency management and regulatory practices that could
result in program efficiency.
Chapter 3 Local Planning Groups
11
-------
4 Dredged Material
Management Plans
An effective dredged material management plan will require close coordina-
tion and planning at all governmental levels and with all pertinent aspects of the
private sector. Characteristics of successful Federal/State/local partnerships for
developing Dredged Material Management Plans are shown in Exhibit 3. The
basic steps of the planning process are shown in Exhibit 4 and Figure 1.
Key Concepts of Dredged Material
Management Plans
The following are key concepts for Local Planning Groups to consider during
the planning process for dredging projects:
a. The planning process must reflect the unique mix of environmental, politi-
cal, and economic circumstances in the individual port and the region.
b. Planning strategies must be flexible enough to consider advances in tech-
nology, new scientific data, and changes in economic circumstances, and
to efficiently integrate these new factors into the decision-making process.
c. Progressive dredged material planning also must be coordinated with
broader transportation planning efforts, such as the National Transporta-
tion System, and other regional/local planning efforts such as Coastal
Zone Management Plans, and Comprehensive Conservation and Manage-
ment Plans developed for participants hi the National Estuary Program.
12
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
-------
Exhibit 3. Basic Steps in Planning Process
Basic Steps in Planning Process
The planning process is composed of six major planning steps which provide an orderly and systematic approach by which
coordinated determinations and decisions can be made that lead to the selection of a plan. The process assures that everyone is
fully aware of the basic assumptions employed, the data and information analyzed, the areas of risk and uncertainty, the
reasons and rationales used, and the significant implications of each alternative to the selected plan, or any of its components.
Further, the process is iterative, whereby initial decisions may be revisited and modified as necessary. The recommendations
should identify all agreements and procedural requirements necessary to provide, at a minimum, 20 years of dredged material
management
STEP 1 Specify Problems and Opportunities Develop a list of statements that express the understanding and concerns of
Local Planning Group members regarding existing and future problems and opportunities related to dredged material
management for their planning area. From these statements, the members will define the shared objectives of the Local
Planning Group and clearly identify any constraints to meeting those objectives (e.g., financial, environmental, technical,
legislative, administrative, etc.). Care should be taken that these statements are not so narrowly defined that they
unnecessarily limit the scope of alternatives that are eventually considered.
STEP 2 Describe Both the Existing Conditions and Those Conditions Most Likely to Prevail Without a Plan - Clearly describe
all relevant dredged material management information for the planning area (e.g., dredging quantities and quality of
material, economics, disposal management activities, etc.). Also describe the most likely future condition (minimum
20-year planning horizon) which will develop in the absence of a Plan. The potential for solving problems and realizing
opportunities is determined during this Step. Therefore, the descriptions provided here should be related to the problems
and opportunities discussed in Step 1.
STEP 3 Formulate Alternative Plans Formulate alternative plans hi a systematic manner to ensure that all reasonable
alternatives are evaluated. Usually, a number of alternative plans are identified early hi the planning process and become
more refined through additional development and through subsequent iterations. Additional alternative plans may be
introduced at any time. One of the alternative plans identified will be the Base Plan. The alternative plans should: (1) be
different from each other; (2) not be limited to those implementable under current authorities, statutes, laws or
regulations; (3) consider all relevant measures (must consider beneficial uses); (4) include mitigation of significant
adverse effects; (5) consider plans/desires of others (e.g., state water resource plans, watershed studies, etc.);
(6) consider various implementation schedules (e.g., staged construction); and (7) estimate costs/benefits (monetary and
non-monetary).
STEP 4 Evaluate the Effects of Plans Evaluate the effects of each alternative plan by determining the difference between the
conditions that will prevail without a Plan in place and with each alternative Plan in place, for each of four categories:
(1) National Economic Development (displays changes in economic value of national output of goods and services
(expressed in monetary units); (2) Environmental (displays effects on ecological, cultural and aesthetic resources
(expressed in appropriate numeric or non-numeric terms); (3) Regional Economic Development (registers changes hi
regional economic activity (expressed hi monetary or other numeric units, or non-numeric terms); and (4) Other
(registers effects from perspectives not reflected hi categories 1-3 (measured in monetary or other numeric units, or non-
numeric terms).
STEP 5 Compare the Alternative Plans The comparison of plans, or trade-off analysis, focuses on the differences among the
alternative plans as determined hi the evaluation phase. The differences should be organized on the basis of the effects
hi the four categories.
STEP 6 Select a Plan After consideration of the various plans, their effects, and public comments, the Planning Group will
select an alternative that will be their recommended Plan.
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
13
-------
Exhibit 4. Characteristics of Successful Partnerships for Developing Dredged Material Management
Plans
CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL FEDERAL/STATE/ LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS
FOR DEVELOPING DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT PLANS
1. COMMITTED TO COMMON OBJECTIVES: Successful dredged material management planning
groups have each group member committed to common objectives.
The objectives of any dredged material management planning group must include a recognition
that ports and harbors are essential to the United States economy and that dredging and disposal to
maintain needed navigation channels must occur in a timely and cost-effective manner.
The objective of any dredged material planning group must also recognize that coastal, ocean and
freshwater resources are critical assets and that dredged material management must include
measures to protect, conserve and restore these resources.
2. COLLABORATIVE: Successful dredged material management planning is conducted by a
partnership that includes the Federal government, the port authorities, state and local governments,
natural resource agencies, public interest groups, the maritime industry, scientific/research community,
and private citizens. These partnerships must be established early in the process.
3. COMPREHENSIVE: Successful dredged material planning identifies and addresses the full range
of problems relating to dredging and dredged material disposal and all sources of dredged material
including Federal and non-Federal navigation improvements (new projects), permitted dredging and
disposal, and maintenance dredging of Federal projects (existing projects). A full range of disposal
alternatives are examined including opportunities for beneficial uses of dredged material.
4. WATERSHED/ESTUARY BASED: Successful dredged material planning follows the watershed
approach, identifying upstream sources of contamination and encompassing the primary ecosystem
impacted by dredging and dredged material disposal; dredged material plans should be integrated with
ongoing watershed or estuary planning efforts.
5. CONSENSUS BASED: Successful dredged material management efforts, to the extent possible,
produce management plans that are acceptable to all members of the planning group.
6. SOUND SCIENCE: Successful dredged material management plans are based upon sound
scientific data, tools, and techniques.
7. TIMELY: Successful dredged material management planning efforts are completed in time to guide
individual project and permit decisions.
8. IMPLEMENTABLE: Successful dredged material management plans are implementable.
Considerations of affordability, funding sources, financial capability, environmental acceptability, legal
authority, management capability and other implementation issues are fully addressed.
14
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
-------
d. Dredged material managers need to emphasize watershed protection ap-
proaches and foster management of point and non-point source pollution
controls to reduce harbor sediment loading and contamination, recognizing
that resolution of point and non-point pollution problems is a long-term
goal and dredged material disposal must continue while this goal is ad-
dressed.
e. Regional and local planning interests must develop direct mechanisms for
early coordination and advance planning for dredging activities, and selec-
tion and management of dredged material disposal alternatives and sites.
f. Participants must include representatives of all stakeholders so there is
widespread understanding of:
the role of the local port in the regional economy.
the availability of dredged material management options.
the environmental considerations of dredging and disposal.
the roles and responsibilities of the involved agencies and other
stakeholders.
g. Alternatives for the beneficial use of dredged material should be devel-
oped for all dredging projects, recognizing that additional funding would
be necessary from project (co-)sponsors for some beneficial use alterna-
tives.
h. Local dredged material planning efforts must be consistent with, or at least
must not conflict with, regional or national dredging policies; and recog-
nize state and local requirements.
/. All agencies with representatives on the Local Planning Groups must be
committed to developing and implementing the plans.
Dredged material management planning should be accomplished on a port/
harbor/estuarine-wide/watershed or regional scale. While non-federal and pri-
vate permitted dredging and disposal must be considered hi dredged material
management planning, consideration of individual dredging project permits must
continue while this planning effort is ongoing.
Content of Dredged Material Management Plans
In general, the Plan should address the process outlined in Exhibit 3; existing
and future problems and opportunities related to dredged material management
should be identified for the planning area. Other aspects of the plan include:
a. Clearly describe all relevant dredged material management information
for the planning area (i.e., dredging quantities and quality of material
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
15
-------
including any contamination, economics, environmental considerations,
disposal management activities).
b. Identify specific measures necessary to manage the volume of material
likely to be dredged over a 20-year period (and beyond if known). Both
construction and maintenance dredging of Federal harbor projects and
non-Federal permitted dredging within the related geographic area shall be
considered.
Where two or more Federal harbor projects are physically inter-related
(share a common disposal area or a common channel) or are economically
complementary, one plan should encompass that group of harbor projects.
c. Develop alternative plans for dredged material management The plan
should consider the full range of measures for dredged material manage-
ment including management of existing disposal sites to extend their life;
various combinations of new disposal sites involving different disposal
methods, disposal area locations, and periods of use; and measures to re-
duce dredging requirements, including reduced dimensions and reduced
sediment from upstream sources. In doing this, the plan will:
Establish cost-effective dredged material disposal alternatives that
account for both environmental and economic benefits.
Promote beneficial use of dredged material and include an assessment
of the potential for beneficial uses, including aquatic and related habi-
tat protection/creation/restoration, and/or hurricane and storm damage
reduction.
Identify possible cost-sharing partners for beneficial use options.
Assess the need for continued maintenance dredging of existing pro-
jects, evaluating the navigation needs hi terms of vessel traffic and
related factors.
Identify an array of acceptable disposal sites, including the disposal
plan for the least costly alternative that is consistent with sound engi-
neering practice and meeting all Federal environmental standards. The
plan should include an assessment of:
Mitigation of significant adverse effects.
The plans/desires of stakeholders (e.g., state water resource plans,
watershed studies).
Various implementation schedules (e.g., staged construction).
Costs and benefits (monetary and non-monetary).
16
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
-------
For each alternative plan, evaluate the effects of:
National economic development
Environmental: effects on human health and ecological, cultural,
and aesthetic resources.
Regional economic development
Include a discussion of risks and uncertainties. Levels of engineering,
environmental and economic risk and uncertainty associated with the
project are important scoping factors. Risk and uncertainty should be
sufficiently identified and addressed to provide the basis for appropri-
ate contingencies.
Identify all necessary agreements and procedural requirements neces-
sary to provide, at a minimum, 20-years of dredged material manage-
ment. Constraints and possible barriers to implementation of the plan
should be identified (e.g., financial, environmental, technical, legisla-
tive, administrative).
Chapter 4 Dredged Material Management Plans
17
-------
References
The Local Planning Groups are referred to the basic decision process de-
scribed by the Federal Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines
for Water and related Land Resource Implementation Studies, and the Implemen-
tation of Guidance on Dredged Material Management Plans, Engineer Circular
1165-2-200, in developing their Plan.
The Dredging Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement.
by the Interagency Working Group on the Dredging Process, Maritime Adminis-
tration, December 1994. Available on internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/ow/owow/ocpd.
Figure 1. Dredged Material Management Planning Process
Management Plan Study
Not Required
18
References
-------
Appendix A
Summary Listing of
Recommendations: The
December 1994 Report: "The
Dredging Process in the United
States: An Action Plan for
Improvement"
Appendix A Summary Listing of Recommendations
A1
-------
Appendix A. Summary Listing of Recommendations in December 1994 Interagency Report'
Rec.
No.
Recommendation
Lead
Agency
*Time
Frame
Strengthening Planning Mechanisms for Dredging and Dredged Material Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Create and/or augment regional/local dredged material
planning groups to aid in the development of regional
dredged material management plans.
Identify the characteristics of successful Federal/state/local
partnerships for use in developing dredged material
management planning efforts.
Develop public outreach and education programs to facili-
tate stakeholder involvement.
Provide guidance to relevant Agency field offices, state and
local agencies, and the general public on opportunities for
beneficial use of dredged material.
Update guidance on disposal site monitoring requirements
and procedures.
Ensure that dredged material management planners work
with pollution control agencies to identify point and
nonpoint sources of sediment and sediment pollution and to
implement watershed planning.
Review the Federal Economic and Environmental Princi-
ples and Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resource
Implementation Studies (P&G) to determine
whether changes are needed to better integrate the econom-
ic and environmental objectives of National Economic
Development (NED) and Environmental Quality (EQ).
Revise the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act of 1991 (ISTEA) to ensure that the planning process
outlined in the legislation provides for linkages with plans
which address dredging issues.
Corps
Corps,
EPA,
NOAA
MARAD
All Agen-
cies
Corps,
EPA
EPA,
Corps
EPA,
Corps
Corps
MARAD
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Long
Term
Long
Term
A2
Appendix A Summary Listing of Recommendations
-------
Rec.
No.
Recommendation
Enhancing Coordination and Communication in the Dredging Pro
9
10
11
12
13
Establish a National Dredging Issues Team and Regional
Dredging Issues Teams.
Schedule pre-application meetings among the Corps, the
applicant, the EPA, other interested Federal agencies and
relevant state agencies for dredging projects that are poten-
tially controversial or that may involve significant environ-
mental issues.
Develop and distribute a permit application checklist which
identifies the information required from the applicant.
Develop or revise the procedures for coordinating inter-
agency review at the regional level to define the process by
which various Federal parties coordinate on dredging pro-
jects.
Establish a national MOA to clarify roles and coordination
mechanisms between the EPA and the Corps.
Lead
Agency
*Time
Frame
ect Approval Process
Corps,
EPA
Corps
Corps
Corps,
EPA,
FWS,
NOAA
EPA,
Corps
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Addressing Scientific Uncertainties About Dredged Material
14
15
16
Clarify and improve the guidance used to evaluate bioac-
cumulation of contaminants from dredged materials.
Identify the practical barriers to managing contaminated
sediments and ways to overcome the barriers.
Identify means to reduce the volume of material which must
be dredged.
EPA,
Corps
Corps,
EPA
Corps,
EPA
Short
Term
Short
Term
Short
Term
Funding Dredging Projects Consistently and Efficiently
17
18
Revise WRDA to establish consistent Federal-local sponsor
cost sharing, across all dredged material disposal methods.
Study the feasibili ty of a fee for open-water disposal for
non-Federal dredging projects.
Corps
EPA
Long
Term
Long
Term
*Short Term: Immediately implementable under existing regulations.
*Long Term: Requires regulatory or legislative change.
'Dredging Process in the United States: An Action Plan for Improvement, by the Interagency Working Group on
the Dredging Process, maritime Administration, December 1994.
Appendix A Summary Listing of Recommendations
A3
-------
-------
Appendix B
National Dredging Team
Fact Sheet
Appendix B National Dredging Team Fact Sheet
B1
-------
*'
NATIONAL DREDGING TEAM
Fact Sheet
The National Dredging Team (NDT), a Federal interagency team, was formed
officially by signed charter in July 1995. Formation of the team was in re-
sponse to the December 1994 interagency report to the Secretary of Transpor-
tation, TiieJD!edgin£Jto
-------
Regional Dredging Teams (RDTs) are also being formed to address unique,
project-specific and regional concerns characteristic of local and regional
dredging issues. They are to include the same Federal agencies, but also in-
clude State regulatory agencies.
One of the first major actions of the NDT has been to develop guidance on
Local Planning Groups and Development of Dredged Material Management
Plans. The guidance will assist in the development of dredged material man-
agement plans for major ports and harbors in the United States.
- The Local Planning Groups are broader than the Regional Dredging
Teams (RDTs) in that they will include all potential stakeholders involved
hi the management of dredged material, such as ports, environmental
groups, State economic, resource or regulatory agencies, and the public.
- The Local Planning Groups are to be chaired by the Corps, or co-chaired
with the Ports and/or States.
The December 1994 report is available on the Internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt. Copies may be obtained from the
Office of Environmental Activities, MAR-820, Maritime Administration,
400-7th Street SW, Room 7209, Washington, DC 20590.
Appendix B National Dredging Team Fact Sheet
B3
-------
-------
Appendix C
National Dredging Team
Member List
Appendix C National Dredging Team Member List
C1
-------
NATIONAL DREDGING TEAM
STEERING COMMITTEE
NAME
Bob Perciasepe
Co-Chair
Major General Russell L. Fuhrman
Co-Chair
Gerry Jackson
Member
Jeff Benoit
Member
David Evans
Member
Joan M. Bondareff
Member
ORGANIZATION
U.S. EPA
Assistant Administrator
Office of Water
Washington, DC
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Director of Civil Works
Washington, DC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Assistant Director
Ecological Services
Washington, DC
NOAA
Director
Office of Oceans and Coastal
Resource Management
Silver Spring, MD
NOAA-National Marine Fisheries
Service
Deputy Assistant Administrator
Silver Spring, MD
Maritime Administration
Acting Deputy Maritime
Administrator
Washington, D.C.
C2
Appendix C National Dredging Team Member List
-------
NATIONAL DREDGING TEAM
OPERATING MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
NAME TELEPHONE # ORGANIZATION
Craig Vogt
Co-Chair
202-260-1952
Rich Worthington
Co-Chair
202-761-1184
Mark Bagdovitz
Member
703-358-2183
Neil Christerson
Member
301-713-3113x167
Michael Carter
Member
202-366-9431
Russell Bellmer
Member
301-713-0174
Deputy Director
Oceans and Coastal Protection
Division
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
401 M St., S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Senior Policy Advisor
Policy Division
CECW-AA
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
20 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington DC 20314-1000
Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of Interior
4401 North Fairfax Drive
Room 400
Arlington, VA 22203
NOAA/Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management
llth Floor N/ORM3
1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Director, Office of
Environmental Activities
Maritime Administration
U.S. Department of
Transportation
400 7th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20590
NOAA-National Marine
Fisheries Service
1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Appendix C National Dredging Team Member List
C3
-------
NAME
Charles Chem
Liaison
TELEPHONE*
703-604-1268
ORGANIZATION
U.S. Navy
Chief of Naval Operations
(CodeN457)
2211 South Clark Place,
Rm680,CP-#5
Arlington, VA 22244-5108
C4
Appendix C National Dredging Team Member List
-------
Appendix D
Regional Dredging Teams
Appendix O Regional Dredging Teams
D1
-------
REGIONAL DREDGING TEAM Co-CHAERS*
Southeast Regional Dredging Team
Tom Welborn, Co-Chair
USEPA Region IV
Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds Branch
61 Forsythe., S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
404/562-9354
FAX: 404/562-9343
Dennis Barnett, Co-Chair
Chief
Environmental Resources Branch
USAGE S. Atlantic Division
CESAD-ET-PR
77ForsythSt,S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30355-6801
404/331-4580
FAX: 404/33 1-7078
Great Lakes Regional Dredging Team
Chuck Ledin, Co-Chair
Bureau of Water Resources Management
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
608/266-1956
Bonnie Eleder, EPA Contact
USEPA Region V T-17J
312/886-4885
FAX: 312/886-2737
Steve Thorp, RDT Staff Contact
Great Lakes Commission
The Argus Building
400 Fourth St
Ann Arbor, MI 48103^816
313/665-9135
FAX: 313/665-4370
Roy Deda, Co-Chair
CELRD-GL-E-E
Water Quality/SFO Team
USACE Great Lakes Ohio River Division
12th Floor
111 North Canal St
Chicago, IL 60606-7205
312/353-6372
FAX: 312/353-8666
Marc Tuchman, EPA Contact
USEPA G-9J
Great Lakes National Program Office
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
312/353-1369
FAX: 312/353-2018
Southwestern Regional Dredging Team
William Hathaway, Co-Chair
USEPA Region VI
1445 Ross Ave, Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
214/665-7101
FAX: 214/665-7373
Monica Young, EPA Staff Contact
USEPA Region VI
214/665-7349
FAX: 214/665-6689
Jerry W. Smith, Co-Chair
CESWD-ETO
USACE Southwestern Division
Directorate of Engineering & Technical Services
11 14 Commerce St.
Dallas, TX 75242
214/767-2351
FAX: 214/767-5305
Pacific Islands Regional Dredging Team
Brian Ross, Co-Chair
USEPA Region DC
75 Hawthorne St
San Francisco, CA 94105
415/744-1979
FAX: 415/744-1078
Mike Lee, Co-Chair
USACE Pacific Ocean Division
Fort Shafter, ffl
808/438-9258 (x!5)
FAX: 808/438-4060
D2
Appendix D Regional Dredging Teams
-------
REGIONAL DREDGING TEAM Co-CHAIRS
Northern California Regional Dredging Team
Brian Ross, Co-Chair
USEPA Region DC
75 Hawthorne St.
San Francisco, CA 94105
415/744-1979
FAX: 415/744-1078
Patrick Healy, Co-Chair
Deputy District Engineer
USACE San Francisco District
333 Market St, 8th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2197
415/977-8501
FAX: 415/977-8524
Southern California Regional Dredging Team
Steve John, Co-Chair
Brian Ross (see above) Alternate Co-Chair
USEPA Region DC
c/o USACE Los Angeles District
CESPL-PD
P.O. Box 532711
911WiIshireBlvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
213/452-3806
FAX: 213/452-4204
Tony Risko, Co-Chair
Robert Joe, Alternate Co-Chair
USACE Los Angeles District
CESPL-PD
P.O. Box 532711
911WikhireBlvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
213/452-3833
North Atlantic Regional Dredging Team
Ron Manfredonia, Co-Chair
OEP
USEPA Region I
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
617/565-3530
FAX: 617/565-4940
Carl Boutilier, Co-Chair
USACE (NEDOD-N)
424TrapeloRd.
Waltham,MA 02254-9149
617/647-8330
FAX: 617/647-8815
Pacific Northwest Regional Dredging Team
John Malek, Co-Chair
USEPA Region X
1200 6th Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
206/553-1286
Jim Reese, Co-Chair
USACE Northwestem Division
P.O. Box 2870
Portland, OR 97208
503/808-3862
* List of current Regional Dredging Teams at press time.
Appendix D Regional Dredging Teams
D3
-------
------- |