The Role of the Federal Standard in the
Beneficial Use of Dredged Material from
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
New and Maintenance Navigation Projects
Beneficial Uses of Dredged Materials
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC
-------
Cover Photos
Background: Aransas National Wildlife Refuge,Texas. Maintenance dredged material was used
for stabilization of eroded marsh shoreline.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Top: A sea-going hopper dredge splits its hull to drop into an underwater placement area
in the Gulf of Mexico near Galveston, Texas.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Bottom: Forster's terns inhabiting a marsh created by dredged material on Poplar Island, Maryland.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
Preface
Much of the several hundred million cubic yards of sediment dredged each year from U.S.
ports, harbors, and waterways could be used in a beneficial manner, such as for habi-
tat restoration and creation, beach nourishment, aquaculture, forestry, agriculture, mine
reclamation, and industrial and commercial development. Yet most of this dredged mate-
rial is instead disposed of in open water, confined disposal facilities, and upland disposal
facilities. The most commonly cited hurdles to using dredged material beneficially are
increased costs, the need for earlier planning and more widespread coordination, lack of
complementary federal and state regulatory frameworks for evaluating dredged material
as a resource, and a widespread misperception that dredged material is a waste instead of
a resource.
The National Dredging Team recognizes that a number of steps will need to be taken so
that dredged material is used beneficially to the greatest extent possible. The National
Dredging Team's action plan, "Dredged Material Management: Action Agenda for the Next
Decade" (NOT 2003) describes a number of recommended actions intended to enhance
and facilitate efforts to increase the beneficial use of dredged material. Among these ac-
tions is the recommendation to develop a national guidance document that explains the
role of the Federal Standard in implementing beneficial uses of dredged material from U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' new and maintenance navigation projects. This paper has been
developed as a guide for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Districts, other federal
agencies, state agencies, local governments, and private interest groups on using dredged
material as a resource to achieve environmental and economic benefits. It is intended as
a companion piece to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USAGE joint
document, "Identifying, Planning, and Financing Beneficial Use Projects Using Dredged
Material: Beneficial Use Planning Manual" (EPA/USAGE 2007).
Important Note
The discussion in this document is intended solely as guidance. The statutory provi-
sions and regulations described in this document contain legally binding requirements.
This document is not a regulation itself, nor does it change or substitute for those provi-
sions and regulations. Thus, it does not impose legally binding requirements on USAGE,
EPA, or any other entity, including the regulated community. This guidance does not
confer legal rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public.
-------
Beneficial uses of dredged material involve the
placement or use of dredged material for some
productive purpose. Examples of beneficial uses of
dredged material include habitat development (e.g.,
wetland restoration or creation, fishery enhance-
ment); development of parks and recreational facili-
ties (e.g., walking and bicycle trails, wildlife viewing
areas); agricultural,forestry,and horticultural uses;
strip-mine reclamation/solid waste management
(e.g..fill for strip mines, landfill capping); shoreline
construction (e.g., levee and dike construction);
construction/industrial development (e.g., bank
stabilization, brownfields reclamation); and beach
nourishment (e.g., restoration of eroding beaches).
Introduction
In 2003, the National Dredging Team (NOT) published a new action
plan entitled "Dredged Material Management: Action Agenda for the
Next Decade." The Action Agenda addresses a number of issues cur-
rently facing dredging and dredged material management. One of
the recommendations listed by the Action Agenda directs the NOT to
develop guidance to demonstrate how beneficial uses of dredged mate-
rial can be incorporated into new and maintenance U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USAGE) navigation projects and to explain the role of the
Federal Standard in that process. In response to that recommendation,
this paper was developed as a guide for USAGE Districts, other federal
agencies, state agencies, local governments, and private interest groups
on using dredged material as a resource to achieve environmental and
economic benefits.
The nation's marine transportation system consists of about 25,000
miles of navigable channels, of which about 12,000 miles are commer-
cially important. The system is supported by about 900 federal channel
projects, including both deep (greater than 12 feet) and shallow (12
feet or less) draft harbors (US DOT 1999). Approximately 200 to 300
million cubic yards of material are dredged annually by USAGE, as well
as other federal and private interests, to improve and maintain the har-
bors and channels in this system. The majority of this dredging is by
USAGE and other federal interests. Placement of this dredged material
provides an opportunity to generate both environmental and economic
benefits (see Box 1). USAGE estimates that 20 to 30 percent of the total
volume dredged is currently used beneficially.
Since the passage of the landmark Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, there has been
a major evolution of law and policy concerning the
beneficial use of dredged material. Environmental
restoration is now a priority mission of USAGE,
along with the traditional mission areas of flood
damage reduction and inland and coastal naviga-
tion. New laws have established the authority of
USAGE to use dredged material for environmentally
beneficial purposes, and programs have been initi-
ated to implement these laws. The remaining chal-
lenges to increasing the number of beneficial use
projects include educating those with an interest in
these new opportunities and creating partnerships
to develop and implement them.
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
What is the role of the Federal Standard in the beneficial
use of dredged material?
The Federal Standard is defined in USAGE regulations as the least
costly dredged material disposal or placement alternative (or alterna-
tives) identified by USAGE that is consistent with sound engineering
practices and meets all federal environmental requirements, including
those established under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) (see 33 CFR 335.7,
53 FR 14902). The term "base plan" is a more accurate operational
description of the Federal Standard, because it defines the disposal or
placement costs that are assigned to the "navigational purpose" of the
project. The costs assigned to the navigational purpose of the project
are shared with the non-federal sponsor of the project, with the ratio of
federal to non-federal costs depending on the nature and depth of the
project (see Box 2).
-'•
New Navigation Projects
(deepening or widening of an existing federal navigation channel or creation of a new federal navigation channel)
For the portion of the project with a depth: The non-federal share is:
Up to 20 ft 20% (10% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
Over 20 ft and up to 45 ft 35% (25% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
Over 45 ft 60% (50% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
Operation and Maintenance of Existing Navigation Projects
1. Operation and Maintenance Dredging: Federal share is 100% (exceptfor harbors greater than 45 feet,
where the non-federal share is 50% of the costs beyond those which would be incurred for a project with a
depth of 45 ft or less).
2. Constructing land-based and aquatic disposal facilities:
For the portion of the project with a depth: The non-federal share is:
Up to 20 ft 20% (10% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
Over 20 ft and up to 45 ft 35% (25% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
Over 45 ft 60% (50% during construction + 10% over 30 years)*
3. Operating and maintaining land-based and aquatic disposal facilities: Federal share is 100%.t
* The non-federal share includes 10%, 25%, or 50% to be paid during construction. It may include an additional 10% share of the total project costs to be paid over 30 years.
The value of lands, easements, rights-of- way, and relocations reguired for the project is credited to this 10%, which is to be paid over 30 years.
tin some cases, the federal cost may be determined by legislation authorizing construction and maintenance of the confined disposal facility.
-------
Establishing the Federal Standard for a particular dredging project is
not the same as selecting a disposal or placement option for that proj-
ect, nor does it limit potential federal participation in the project. Other
factors beyond cost contribute to decisions on placement or disposal
options for dredging projects. Ecosystem restoration is recognized as
one of the primary missions of USAGE under its planning guidance
(USAGE 2000), and the placement or disposal option that is selected
for a project should maximize the sum of net economic development
and national environmental restoration benefits. Therefore, a beneficial
use option may be selected for a project even if it is not the Federal
Standard for that project. Additionally, a project may have more than
one purpose, such as navigation and flood control. The placement or
disposal option preferred when two project purposes are considered
jointly may be different from those resulting from separate consider-
ations of navigation and flood control options.
If a beneficial use is selected for a project and that beneficial use hap-
pens to be (or be part of) the Federal Standard or base plan option for
the project (because it is the least costly alternative that is consistent
with sound engineering practices and meets all federal environmen-
tal requirements), the costs of that beneficial use are assigned to the
navigational purpose of the project and are shared with the non-federal
sponsor as described in Box 2.
If a beneficial use is selected for a project, and that beneficial use is not
the Federal Standard option, the costs for the beneficial use option are
divided into two categories for the purpose of determining the federal
and non-federal sharing ratios. First, the costs assigned to the navi-
gational purpose of the project (i.e., the amount it would have cost to
implement the Federal Standard option) are shared with the non-fed-
eral sponsor as described in Box 2. Second, the costs beyond the navi-
gational purpose costs (termed "incremental costs") are shared on a
different basis, depending on the type of beneficial use (see Box 3).
Beneficial use and new navigation projects
New navigation projects, which include the deepening or widening of
existing federal navigation channels and the creation of new federal
channels, provide an excellent opportunity for the beneficial use of
dredged material (see Box 4 for a description of the Oakland Harbor
Deepening new navigation project). New navigation projects require spe-
cific authorization by the Congress based upon a major planning effort
culminating in the preparation of a feasibility study, an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS), and a Report of the Chief of Engineers. This
comprehensive planning effort normally spans 3 to 4 years and includes
detailed economic, environmental, and engineering evaluations.
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
-•••_--.-
-------
The Water Resources Development Act of 1999 authorized the deepening of Oakland Harbor from 42 to 50 feet.
The plan for the Oakland Deepening provides for the beneficial use of all but a small fraction of the project's
dredged material. Approximately 6 million cubic yards of dredged material will be placed in a previously deep-
ened portion of the harbor to create the Middle Harbor Enhancement Area of shallow water habitat and eelgrass
beds. About 2.5 million cubic yards of dredged material will be placed at the Hamilton Wetland Restoration proj-
ect, which is a cooperative effort involving USAGE, the California Coastal Conservancy, and a number of other
local, state, and federal agencies to restore 990 acres of wetland and related habitat at the former Hamilton Army
Airfield. Approximately 3 million cubic yards of dredged material will be placed at the privately developed Mont-
ezuma Wetland Restoration project; of this amount 1.5 million cubic yards have been placed since 2003.
Ocean disposal at the San Francisco Deep Ocean Disposal Site (SF-DODS) is the Federal Standard or base plan
for the project. Therefore the federal share for the project is 75 percent of the ocean disposal cost for the por-
tion of the project to 45 feet, and 50 percent of the ocean disposal cost for the rest of the project. In this case,
the additional 10 percent costs for the non-federal share were offset by lands, easements, rights-of-way, and/or
relocations. Beneficial use at the Montezuma and Hamilton wetlands projects, combined, involves costs beyond
the base plan; these incremental costs will be shared on a 75 percent federal and 25 percent non-federal basis
with the Port of Oakland and the California Coastal Conservancy primarily under the authority of Section 204 of
WRDA 1992. The beneficial use plan for Oakland Harbor is the product of a cooperative interagency planning ef-
fort led by the Port of Oakland, and furthers the objectives of the interagency Long-Term Management Strategy
(LTMS) for San Francisco Bay.
This guidance provides the basis for considering beneficial uses of
dredged material in the planning effort for new navigation projects.
Federal agencies, state and local government agencies, non-government
organizations, private entities, and the general public all have oppor-
tunities to identify beneficial use options during the planning effort for
new navigation projects. These opportunities are provided through leg-
islation such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which
mandates coordination among and input from interested stakeholders.
NEPA recognizes the need for public review and provides a number of
opportunities for agency and public input, starting with NEPA scoping
at the beginning of the study process. For example, the NEPA process
fostered collaboration between federal, state, and local groups on the
1996 Houston-Galveston Navigation Channels project, which beneficial-
ly used 350 million cubic yards of dredged material to improve aquatic
habitat and received broad support from local citizens, environmental
groups, and government agencies.
Other legislation also affects new navigation projects. The Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conser-
vation and Management Act give the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National
Marine Fisheries Service a consultation and assessment role in USAGE'S
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
navigation feasibility studies. EPA has a legally mandated program-
matic role under NEPA, the Clean Water Act (CWA), and the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA). State coastal zone
management agencies have a role through the Coastal Zone Manage-
ment Act, and state water quality agencies have a role under the CWA
and the MPRSA (e.g., water quality certifications). Public input occurs
primarily through the NEPA process, but is also solicited in the course
of issuing any necessary permits or authorizations (such as under the
CWA and MPRSA) and can be supplemented with other public involve-
ment efforts depending on the size and complexity of the project.
These legislatively mandated roles are useful for soliciting input on
potential beneficial uses for dredged material from new navigation proj-
ects, but often the most effective coordination mechanisms are less
formal and more collaborative. For example, the NOT and its federal
agency members have recommended the formation of local planning
groups or beneficial uses groups in conjunction with USAGE navigation
studies to provide a mechanism for identifying and evaluating beneficial
use opportunities. Local planning groups (LPGs) are interagency federal/
state/local teams, including non-government stakeholders, that develop
dredged material management plans at the local and regional level.
These groups generally function within the context of USAGE dredged
material management planning process. A primary goal of the LPGs
is to maximize the beneficial use of dredged materials.
Beneficial use and maintenance of existing navigation
projects
The largest quantities of dredged material are generated from the main-
tenance of existing federal navigation projects. Where a beneficial use
is (or is part of) the Federal Standard or base plan option, it can be
accomplished using federal operation and maintenance funding for the
dredging (i.e., the federal share is 100 percent); the cost of constructing
any necessary facilities would be shared, with federal and non-federal
costs depending on the nature and depth of the project (see Box 2 on
page 2). This is the most common way of using dredged material from
maintenance projects beneficially. (For an example of a maintenance
project, see Box 5.)
Where a beneficial use of dredged material is not (or is not part of) the
Federal Standard option, USAGE has various legislative authorities to
share the incremental costs of the beneficial use option (see Box 3 on
page 4). The most commonly used authority for maintenance dredging
is Section 204 of WRDA 1992, as amended, which allows incremental
costs for protecting, restoring, or creating aquatic and ecologically
related habitat to be shared on a 75 percent federal and 25 percent
non-federal basis. This is a permanent authority, so projects using
-------
Breton Island is located approximately 45 miles southeast of New Orleans in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana. The
island was severely eroded during the 1998 hurricane season, with overwash breaches in a number of locations.
Dredged material from maintenance dredging of the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet was placed on Breton Island
to restore the island and to protect the island's upland shallow water habitat. Placement of dredged material at
Breton Island was performed under the authority of Section 204 of WRDA 1992, and as part of the base disposal
plan for the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet. The island provides nesting grounds for migratory birds and other
waterfowl. At one time, shallow water seagrass beds protected by the island provided essential habitat for
various species offish and shellfish. It was hoped that continued restoration would encourage redevelopment of
these beds.
The initial Section 204 project, which was completed in 1999, consisted of placement of about 1.1 million cubic
yards of dredged material on the island to restore about 29 acres of island habitat and protect 620 acres of
shallow intertidal waters. The incremental cost of this placement over the Federal Standard or base plan option
was about $1 million, which was shared on a 75 percent federal and 25 percent non-federal basis with the
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. A second Section 204 project was scheduled for spring of 2006
to involve about 2.8 million cubic yards of dredged material for restoration of an additional 30 acres of island
habitat at a proposed incremental cost of about $2.8 million to be shared on a 75 percent federal and 25 percent
non-federal basis with the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. Due to the 2005 hurricane season,
however, maintenance dredging did not occur in the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet in Fiscal Year 06.
In addition to cost sharing Section 204 projects, beneficial placement has occurred using federal operation and
maintenance funding (i.e., federal share is 100 percent). This placement qualified as part of the base plan due
to the dredged material's close proximity to the Breton Island placement site. In 1993 approximately 1.6 million
cubic yards of dredged material were placed in the shallow water adjacent to Breton Island to form a sacrificial
berm that would nourish the island through sediment redistribution via wave action at a cost of about $3 million.
In 1999 approximately 3.8 million cubic yards of dredged material were placed at the Breton Island sacrificial
berm site at a cost of about $6.5 million. A 2001 project involved the placement on the island of about 2.3 million
cubic yards of dredged material for the restoration of approximately 49 acres of the island at a cost of about
$3.89 million. In 2005 approximately 4 million cubic yards of dredged material were placed at Breton Island to
restore damage resulting from the passage of Hurricane Ivan. Actual acreage restored by this effort, as well as the
impacts of Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, have yet to be calculated.
it do not require specific Congressional authorization. Because the
annual appropriation limit for Section 204 is $15 million, it is most
applicable to smaller beneficial use projects (generally a federal share
of $5 million or less), although there is nothing in the Section 204
authorization that limits the size of the project.
Opportunities for beneficial use projects in conjunction with mainte-
nance dredging are identified through dredged material management
planning efforts, through interagency planning and management
efforts (e.g., National Estuary Program, Coastal America), through
state or local planning efforts, or through general coordination activi-
ties with federal and state resource agencies. For Section 204 projects
with a federal cost of less than $1 million, a Planning and Design
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
Analysis is prepared and approved by the USAGE Division office. For a
Section 204 project with a federal cost of greater than $1 million, addi-
tional information is required and a detailed project report is prepared
for approval by the USAGE Division office. In both cases, there is an
opportunity for public input through the NEPA process.
Section 207 of WRDA 1996, which amended Section 204 of WRDA
1992, can also be used to authorize funding of incremental costs
for beneficial use projects that achieve environmental benefits
such as wetlands creation. While smaller projects typically will be
pursued within the programmatic limits of Section 204, Section 207
primarily is used for new navigation projects or for maintenance
dredging projects with large incremental costs. Under the Section 207
authority, incremental costs are shared on a 75 percent federal and 25
percent non-federal basis. Implementation of this authority is through
specific project appropriations, which do not count toward the Section
204 programmatic limit.
Promoting the beneficial use of dredged material
The success of beneficial use projects depends on the creation of part-
nerships between federal and non-federal interests. Each of the USAGE'S
beneficial use funding authorities includes a requirement for non-federal
cost sharing of a minimum of 25 percent for incremental costs. There-
fore, beneficial use projects require local leadership and local financial
commitments to succeed. Experience to date with beneficial use proj-
ects indicates that this leadership can come from either the economic
development or environmental communities. For example, ports pro-
vided local leadership and financing for recent beneficial use projects
in the Chesapeake Bay (Poplar Island restoration) and Galveston Bay
(wetlands restoration). These ports realized that beneficial use projects
are not only important in furthering their environmental stewardship
responsibilities, but are also important in building support for new and
maintenance navigation projects. In the case of the Hamilton Wetland
Restoration project in San Francisco Bay (see Box 4 on page 5), local
leadership came from environmental interests and the state of Califor-
nia through the California Coastal Conservancy and the San Francisco
Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The Hamilton project
involved a broad array of partners, including Department of Defense
programs (Base Realignment, Closure, and Formerly-Used Defense
Sites), the USAGE Civil Works Program, the Port of Oakland, and the
California Coastal Conservancy. Port of Oakland and the California
Coastal Conservancy provided the non-federal funding.
Beneficial use projects create a win-win situation for the environ-
ment and the economy. Successful projects are developed through
collaborative and consensus-building planning processes involving
8
-------
• Initiate a collaborative effort involving USAGE, EPA, ports, federal/state/local agencies, environmental
interest groups, and other interested stakeholders.
• Identify all potential beneficial uses, including their costs and benefits, during the process of establishing
the Federal Standard or base plan option. (Note: Ideally a local planning group could identify beneficial
use projects in advance of the initiation of formal planning for a new or maintenance project.)
• If a beneficial use does not qualify as the Federal Standard option, evaluate whether the beneficial use
maximizes the sum of net economic development and national environmental restoration benefits,
identify potential project sponsors, and identify the appropriate statutory authority for federal cost
sharing of the beneficial use project's incremental costs.
• Identify non-federal funding sources (e.g., Coastal America, Coastal Wetlands Restoration Partnership).
Build support. Obtain commitments.
• Obtain USACE's approval of beneficial use project.
• Develop Project Cooperation Agreement with local sponsor.
• Design and implement project.
USAGE, EPA, the ports, federal, state, and local resource and regula-
tory agencies, and environmental interest groups (see Box 6 for a gen-
eral approach to considering beneficial use options). USACE's dredged
material management planning program can be the framework for
these efforts. National programs such as the National Estuary Program
and Coastal America also can provide the framework for the broad
partnerships needed for successful beneficial use planning. One of the
primary roles of the NOT and the Regional Dredging Teams is to pro-
mote these partnerships.
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
Additional Information
For additional sources of information on beneficial use of dredged material, see the resources
listed below:
Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material Website. http://eLerdc.usace.army.mil/dots/budm/budni.cfni
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Identifying, Planning, and Financing Beneficial Use Projects Using Dredged Material:
Beneficial Use Planning Manual. EPA842-B-07-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Case Study: Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material San Francisco Bay Region. EPA842-F-07-001A.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Case Study: Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material Jetty Island, Puget Sound. EPA842-F-07-001B.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
Case Study: Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material Poplar Island, Chesapeake Bay.
EPA842-F-07-001C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington, DC.
Fact Sheet: Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material Project Partners and Decision Makers.
EPA842-F-07-001D. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington, DC.
Fact Sheet: Beneficial Uses of Dredged Material Public Involvement and Outreach.
EPA842-F-07-001E. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington, DC.
National Dredging Team Website, http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/ndt/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
10
-------
References
EPA/USACE. 2007. Identifying, Planning, and Financing Beneficial Use Projects Using Dredged
Material: Beneficial Use Planning Manual. EPA 842-B-07-001. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC.
NOT. 2003. Dredged Material Management: Action Agenda for the Next Decade. EPA 842-B-04-002.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
USAGE. 2000. Planning Guidance Notebook. ER 1105-2-100. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington, DC.
USDOT. 1999. An Assessment of the US Transportation System: A Report to Congress. U.S. Department
of Transportation, Washington, DC.
11
-------
-------
The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New and Maintenance Navigation Projects
October 2007
EPA842-B-07-002
Oceans and Coastal Protection Division
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue [4504T]
Washington, DC 20460
------- |