CB Fed Proj_SDM_20160125.pdf

EPA-Region 10 25 January 2016

(ETPA-ERSMU)

Memorandum for: Operations Division, Channels and Harbors Project, Waterways and Maintenance Section (CENWP-OD-NW, Groth)

Subject: Portland Sediment Evaluation Team (PSET) Level 2A dredged material suitability determination for the Coos Bay federal navigation project, including the federal navigation channel (FNC) and the Charleston Channel, at Coos Bay, Coos County, Oregon.

Introduction: This suitability determination memorandum (SDM) documents the consensus of the reviewing agencies regarding the suitability of sediments in the project area for unconfined, aquatic placement, including disposal at the Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites (ODMDSs). The PSET reviewed the “Coos Bay Federal Navigation Channel and Charleston Side Channel Dredging Project, Sediment Quality Evaluation Report” (SQER), dated 23 December 2015, prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Portland District (Corps).

Sediment chemical data summarized in the SQER and laboratory analytical reports were compared to the 2009 marine benthic toxicity screening levels (SLs) published in the 2009 Sediment Evaluation Framework for the Pacific Northwest (SEF). Dioxin and furan results were compared to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality’s (ODEQ) risk-based, marine fish screening level value (SLV) for dioxins and furans published in Guidance for Assessing Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern in Sediment.

Suitability Determination:

Dredge Prism: Suitable Unsuitable New Surface Material (NSM): Suitable Unsuitable

Reviewers: The PSET agencies include the Corps, Environmental Protection Agency – Region 10 (EPA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), ODEQ, and Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). The reviewers of this SQER included:

James McMillan (Corps, Lead) Bridgette Lohrman (EPA, Co-Lead) James Holm (Corps) Pete Anderson (ODEQ) Laura Inouye (Ecology) Tom Hausmann (NMFS) Jeremy Buck (USFWS)

The PSET’s review timeline of this project is provided in Table 1.

Table 1. PSET Review Timeline, Management Area Rank, and Recency of Data Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) received

16 July 2014

SAP approval 16 July 2014

Sampling dates 23 and 24 July 2014

Draft SQER received by PSET 17 November 2015

Draft SQER comments sent 8 December 2015

Revised SQER received by PSET 6 January 2016

Final SDM submitted to Corps 25 January 2016

Management area rank

FNC, deep water to RM 11+47 ” (DMMUs CB01-CB04) – “very low”

FNC, upper ranges, RM 11+47 to 15+00 (DMMUs CB05-CB12) – “low”

Charleston Channel (DMMU CC01) – “low”

Data recency determinations*

FNC, deep water to RM 11+47 – 10 years from sampling date (resample by July 2024)

FNC, upper ranges, RM 11+47 to 15+00 – 7 years from sampling date (resample by July 2021)

Charleston Channel – 7 years from sampling date (resample by July 2021)

* If site conditions or the proposed project change, or if new information related contaminants of concerns are discovered, additional project coordination with PSET may be required to determine the validity of this SDM.

Federal Regulatory Authorities:

Congressional Authorization of a Federal Navigation Project Section 404, Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 401, CWA Section 7, Endangered Species Act Section 305 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act Section 102, Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

Project Description: Table 2 provides a summary of federal navigation project details for the Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel. Maintenance dredging is needed to maintain safe navigation conditions within the federally-authorized project. The Corps conducted bathymetric surveys of the FNC and Charleston Channel in June 2014, prior to the sampling event in July 2014 (Figures 3 through 9 of the

SQER).

Prior Testing: The Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel were previously characterized in 1980, 1989, 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2004, and 2009. Sediment grain size within the FNC varies depending upon location in the estuary: 1) the entrance channel is sand; 2) in-bay sediments from RM 1 to 12 are mixed sand; 3) sediments in the upper reaches, RM 12 to 15 are predominantly fine-grained; and 4) sediments in Charleston Channel have been sand. Historically sediments from the FNC are suitable for unconfined, aquatic placement.

The September 2009 FNC characterization event collected sediment from 19 stations. All 19 samples were tested for physical parameters. The Corps conducted chemical analysis on 8 of those 19 samples because they were fine-grained sediments. The physical results were consistent with prior characterization events. Levels of metals were consistent with historical values and did not approach the

SEF marine screening levels (SLs). All analyte concentrations were below the SLs. The FNC sediments were determined suitable for unconfined, aquatic placement in 2009.

Table 2. Project Details

Project address Coos Bay estuary and Charleston Channel, Coos County, Oregon

Waterbody/channel mile (RM) FNC: Coos R. / 0-50 (deep water) to 15+00 Charleston Channel: South Slough / 0 to 1+15

Total annual proposed dredging volume (cy)

Up to 230,000 (combined)

Channel dimensions

FNC: -47’/-37’ (MLLW) deep x 700’/300’ wide from deep water to RM 0+40 with AMD1 of 5’; -37’ deep x 300’ wide to RM 9.0 with ADM of -3’; -37’ deep x 400’ wide to RM 15.0 with AMD of -3’

Charleston Channel: -17’ (MLLW) x 150’ wide to mooring basin with AMD of -2’; mooring basin is -17’ x 500’ wide x 900’ long with AMD of -2’; South Channel Extension is

-16’ x 150’ wide to RM 1+15 with AMD of -2’

Dredge area FNC: ~690 acres Charleston Channel: ~50 acres

Max. proposed dredging depths FNC with AMD: -52 to -42 ft. MLLW @ RM 0-50 to 0+40; -40

ft. MLLW @ RM 0+40 to 15.0

Charleston Channel with AMD: -19 ft. MLLW

Dredging method Hopper, Clamshell, Mechanical, and Pipeline

Dredged material transport Dumping scow/barge

Proposed disposal location Coos Bay Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites

Proposed dredging date(s) Annually from June 15 to October 31 (to November 30 for Charleston), periodically in April/May

No. of dredged material mgmt. units (DMMUs)

13 (12 Coos River, 1 Charleston Channel)

Sampling and Analysis Description: The 2014 sampling and analytical program is summarized in Table 3.

Actual sampling locations appear in Figure 2 of the SQER.

Deviations from the SAP:

1. No samples were collected at stations CB-03 through CB-05 (DMMU CB02) due to shell fragments preventing the sampler from closing. Physical analyses were not conducted on DMMU CB02 (Empire Ranges, RM 2+00 to 5+40).

2. Several stations in the upper reaches had high volumes of woody debris which caused the Corps to collect an extra grab sample to form CB-15 (DMMU CB08).

3. Station CC-01 was relocated to avoid active dredging operations. Also, subsample CC-01 was collected from the AMD prism interval (-17 to -19’ MLLW).

1 Advanced Maintenance Dredging

Table 3. Sampling and Analysis Description Sampling Description

Sample collection method PONAR grab sampler

Proposed combined volume (CY) ~20,000 ~65,000 ~15,000 ~40,000 ~110,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000 ~109,000

DMMU ID

CC01

Charleston Channel

CB01

Entrance Channel

CB02*

FNC

CB03

FNC

CB04

FNC

CB05

FNC

CB06

FNC

CB07

FNC

CB08

FNC

CB09

FCN

CB10

FNC

CB11

FNC

CB12

FNC

Subsamples (SS) per DMMU 2 2 3* 3 3 1 1 1 2^ 1 1 1 1

D P

Depth range (ft, MLLW) -11.5 to -17.9 -45.8 -29.3 to -32.6 -35.7 to -38.2 -32.3 to -37.6 -30.4 -37.6 n/a n/a -37.0 -33.1 -29.2 -31.3

Composite (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N N N N

SS archive (Y/N) / Composite archive (Y/N)

N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N N/N

Physical / Chemical Analysis (no. analyses/decision unit)

Dredge Prism Decision Unit:

Charleston

Channel Entrance Channel

Empire Ranges

Jarvis Ranges North Bend

Turn & Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Ferndale & Marshfield

Ranges

Sample ID: CC-COMP-01 CB-COMP-01 - CB-COMP-03 CB-COMP-04 CB-PG-12 CB-PG-13 CB-PG-14 CB-PG-15^ CB-PG-16 CB-PG-17 CB-PG-18 CB-PG-19

Grain size 1 1 * 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Sulfides 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Ammonia 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Metals 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

SVOCs, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)

1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Pesticides 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (Total Aroclors)

1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Tributyltin (TBT), pore water 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) 1 - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Dioxins and Furans - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1

* No samples were collected in DMMU CB02 because shell fragments prevented retrieval of sediment, therefore no analyses were performed. ^ An additional grab sample was necessary to collect sufficient sediment for the analyses due to high volumes of woody debris. - No analysis planned.

Results: The July 2014 physical and chemical analytical results for the Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel are summarized in Table 4. Prior and current grain size analyses in DMMUs CB01 through CB04 (RM 0-15 to 11+47) indicate that sediment in this part of the FNC is coarse-grained (fines content <5%).

Chemical analysis was not required for these DMMUs (2009 SEF, Chapter 6).

DMMUs CB05 through CB12 and CC01, were analyzed for both chemical and physical parameters. With the exception of five non-detections with chromatographic interference due to the presence of non-target background components (“Ui” qualified data), all chemical concentrations and MDLs were below their respective SLs. The interference resulted in sample-specific MDLs elevated above the SLs for butyl benzyl phthalate (1 DMMU) and benzyl alcohol (4 DMMUs). The PSET does not consider these elevated MDLs to represent a SL exceedance, because:

1. The 2014 results for other phthalates were non-detections with MDLs substantially below the SLs. In the 2009 FNC characterization, the results for all phthalates were estimated concentrations or non-detections with MDLs below the SLs.

2. The results for benzyl alcohol in other DMMUs were non-detections that exhibited chromatographic interference but had sample-specific MDL below the SL (57 ug/kg). In the 2009 FNC characterization, the results for benzyl alcohol were detections or non-detections with MDLs below the SL.

Dioxins and furans concentrations from the 2014 sampling event were compared to the ODEQ risk-based, marine fish SLV (Table 4). The 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD) toxicity equivalent (TEQ) was calculated for samples CB11 and CB12 using the 2005 World Health Organization toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs) for dioxins and furans congeners. The TCDD TEQ for samples CB11 and CB12 was 3.7 and 4.1 pptr, respectively. The 2014 physical and chemical testing results for the Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel are summarized in Tables 5 through 7 of the 2015 SQER.

Suitability Determination (see Table 4):

Dredge Prism: Dredge material in the Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel is suitable for unconfined, aquatic disposal. The PSET determined dredge prism suitability by comparing sediment chemical concentrations from 2014 sampling event to the marine benthic toxicity screening levels published in the SEF and the 2014 sampling event for dioxin and furans to the ODEQ’s marine fish screening level value.

New Surface Material: Since the dredge prism material was determined to be suitable for the full suite of chemicals of concern, the PSET assumes that the new surface sediments in the Coos Bay FNC and Charleston Channel are suitable for unconfined, aquatic exposure.

Table 4. Sediment Analytical Summary

Dredge Prism Decision Unit, DMMU:

Charleston Channel

CC01

Entrance Channel

CB01

FNC

CB02*

FNC

CB03

FNC

CB04

FNC

CB05

FNC

CB06

FNC

CB07

FNC

CB08

FNC

CB09

FNC

CB10

FNC

CB11

FNC

CB12

Grain size (% sand, % fines) 95.4, 4.4 96.7, 3.2 * 97.1, 2.9 96.1, 3.6 28.9, 71.1 58.7, 41.2 80.7, 19.1 51.7, 43.3 28.4, 71.5 13.6, 86.0 8.5, 91.6 7.4, 92.6

TOC (%) 0.093 - - - - 3.07 2.62 2.08 13.8 3.17 3.62 4.26 4.92

Sulfides (mg/kg) 8.0 - - - - 55 247 434 91 69 37 154 221

Ammonia (mg/kg) 1.38 - - - - 21.5 13.2 13.1 39.9 21.6 37.2 54.9 59.8

Metals Below SLs - - - - Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs Below SLs

SVOCs and PAHs ND/ <SLs - - - - ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ Ui/

<SLs ND/ Ui/

<SLs ND/ Ui/

<SLs ND/ <SLs

ND/ Ui/ <SLs

ND/ < SLs

Pesticides ND/ <SLs - - - - ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs ND/ <SLs

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (Total Aroclors) ND/ <SL - - - - ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL

TBT, pore water ND/ <SL - - - - ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL ND/ <SL

TPH (mg/kg) 2.2(U) – 5.2(U) - - - - 4.3(U) –

63(J) 3.7(J) –

39(J) 6.4(J) –

36(J) 9.7(J) – 150(J)

4.4(U) – 68(J)

4.7(U) – 71(J)

5.7(U) – 59(J)

5.9(U) – 69(J)

2,3,7,8-TCDD TEQ (pptr) - - - - - - - - - - - 3.7, <SLV 4.1, <SLV

Dredge Prism Suitable (Y/N) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y

* No sample collected or analyzed due to shell fragments, with photo-documented confirmation of coarse grained materials. - No analysis planned. ND – Not detected above the MDL (U) and MDL is below the SL.

Ui – Non-detection with MDL elevated above the SL due to interference for Butylbenzylphthalate and/or benzyl alcohol. J – Estimated concentration between the MDL and MRL. SLV – ODEQ marine fish screening level value (5.6 pptr).

Management Area Rank and Recency of Data: Coos Bay FNC DMMUs CB01 (~RM 0) through CB04 (~RM

12) are assigned a “very low” management area rank. Based on grain size confirmation during the July 2014 sampling event, sediments must be re-characterized no later than 10 years from the sampling date, by July 2024.

The DMMUs CB05 (~RM 12) through CB12 (~RM 15), that characterize the Ferndale & Marshfield Ranges of the Coos Bay FNC are assigned a “low” management area rank. A “low” rank was assigned to these DMMUs, because they are predominantly fine-grained and chemical concentrations have not exceeded SEF SLs in the last two rounds of sampling. These sediments must be re-characterized no later than 7 years from the sampling date, by July 2021.

The Charleston Channel is assigned a “Low” site management ranking (DMMU CC01, ~RM 0 to 1).

Sediments must be re-characterized no later than 7 years from the sampling date, by July 2021.

Contact: This memorandum was prepared by Bridgette Lohrman (EPA, PSET Co-Lead) and reviewed by the participating PSET agencies, identified above. Questions regarding this memorandum should be directed to Bridgette Lohrman at (503) 326-4006 or e-mail to: lohrman.bridgette@epa.gov.

References:

ODEQ. 2007. Guidance for Assessing Bioaccumulative Chemicals of Concern in Sediment. Published

January 31, 2007; updated April 3, 2007, by the Environmental Cleanup Program, 18 pp + Appendices.

Project Review Group. 2010. Technical Memorandum for the November 2009 Coos Bay Sediment Quality

Evaluation Report. March 2, 2010. Prepared the PRG, 3 pp.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. 2009. Coos Bay Sediment Quality Evaluation Report.

November 2009. Prepared by the USACE, 19 pp.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District. 2015. Coos Bay Federal Navigation Channel and

Charleston Side Channel Sediment Quality Evaluation Report. December 23, 2015. Prepared by the USACE, 36 pp + Attachments.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington Department of

Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, National Marine Fisheries Service, and U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Sediment Evaluation Framework for the Pacific Northwest. Published May 2009, by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, 128 pp + Appendices.

Van den Berg, M., L.S.Birnbaum, M. Denison, M. DeVito, W. Farland, M. Feeley, H. Fiedler, H.

Hankansson, A. Hanberg, L. Haws, M. Rose, S. Safe, D. Schrenk, C. Tohyama, A. Tritscher, J.

Tuomisto, M. Tysklind, N. Walker, and R.E. Peterson. 2006. The 2005 World Health Organization reevaluation of human and mammalian toxic equivalency factors for dioxins and dioxin-like compounds. Toxicological Sciences, 93(2), pp. 223–241.