JohnR
02-05-2001, 01:47 PM
Possible moving away from dumping at Conimicut Point. From The Warwick Beacon. http://www.warwickonline.com
01/23/2001
Conimicut in-water disposal site on hold pending new study
By JOHN HOWELL
There won’t be any further consideration of an offshore Conimicut site for the disposal of dredge material until an additional “characterization” study of the area has been completed, said Coastal Resources Management Council Director Grover Fugate yesterday.
Also, Fugate disclosed that CRMC, the Department of Environmental Management and the Army Corps of Engineers would conduct an informational workshop in late February to outline the process for selecting in-water disposal sites.
“Everybody is in a holding pattern,” Fugate said when asked how much longer it might be before CRMC conducts hearings on the applications of Brewer Yacht Yards in Barrington and Cowesett to dispose of dredge materials in a 62-acre in-water site north of Conimicut Point. A third marina, Bay Marina of Warwick Cove, as well as Brewer Yards in Portsmouth and Wickford are also seeking to use the site, although, at this point, CRMC has not formally accepted applications.
Meanwhile, at a meeting Thursday night attended by more than 100 Conimicut residents, Mayor Scott Avedisian voiced his opposition to use of the in-water site, adding that CRMC should remove any consideration of its use until it is further tested.
“We’re here to stay,” Avedisian said toward the close of the two-hour meeting at the American Legion William Shields Post. “We’re like the uninvited dinner guest.” He said that legislation directing CRMC to identify dredge material disposal sites does not provide for the input of municipalities.
Avedisian called on CRMC to take the Conimicut site “off the table until you have a test,” as well as for the agency to include Warwick in the selection process.
Fugate said the mayor asked him to “shelve” the Conimicut site, adding that CRMC is “willing to discuss” matters with the administration. However, the director also noted that of all municipalities, Warwick has the largest concentration of marinas and boats, and there are few locations that can even be considered for in-water disposal of dredge material.
Fugate takes issue with those who claim the Conimicut site “was sprung” on the city or preservation agencies. He said the 1996 statute to designate disposal sites included the creation of a coastal resources management committee with representation from Save the Bay.
“They were well aware of the Conimicut site in those meetings,” he said. In addition, municipalities were notified of several public hearings that involved discussion of the Conimicut site. Nonetheless, Warwick officials say they were not aware of the Conimicut site until the Brewer applications were advertised last fall.
“It wasn’t like we were trying to hide this,” said Fugate. “If we’re going to deal with the problem, we have to deal with the problem. We can’t keep putting it off.”
Rep. Eileen Naughton, a member of the CRMC board, urged people yesterday to “have confidence” in CRMC and other state and federal agencies regulating the process.
“They are trying to do the right thing here. They know people of the state care very much about the bay,” she said.
She released letters from DEM director Jan Reitsma and Fugate and Jeannie Brochi of the EPA Water Quality Unit expressing reservations about material from the two Brewer Yards. In the Dec. 19, 2000, letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, Reitsma and Fugate wrote that the material from the Brewer Yards “indicates concentrations of several contaminants that may be present.” They say the applicant has not conducted appropriate reference site sampling and that they are in disagreement with the Corps’ assessment that the marina material is suitable for dumping.
Brochi, in a letter dated Nov. 21 to the two marinas, likewise disagrees with the suitability of the material for dumping off Conimicut.
“Therefore, we recommend that this material be disposed of at an alternative location,” she concludes.
Fugate said the “characterization study” requested by the Army Corps of Engineers is a bulk sediment analysis of the proposed site. The study would be used to determine whether material is suitable for disposal at the location and as a measure to a “reference site.” The reference site is the area, also off Conimicut, where the Army Corps of Engineers dumped 10,000 cubic yards of material dredged from the Bullock’s Cove Channel in 1995.
Fugate said the reference site would not be used for additional dumping, but as a control to monitor conditions at the nearby in-water site.
The characterization study does not include an examination of whether currents might redeposit the material elsewhere. Fugate says studies of the 1995 dumping show “that once it is placed there it shouldn’t move.” Rather, the characterization study is to be used as a means of judging the suitability of material for disposal.
Fugate estimates the study could take a month to complete, but at this time the CRMC has not budgeted the $15,000-$30,000 to perform the work. Assuming the study is funded and completed, Fugate says the marina applications to use the Conimicut site could be reviewed this year.
In a press release issued following Thursday’s Conimicut meeting, the Conimicut Neighborhood Association’s Committee on Disposal of Dredge Spoils urged CRMC to work more diligently toward creation of a statewide comprehensive plan for dredging and disposal of dredge spoils that considers alternative dumping sites and methods. The group also asked that CRMC serve as a catalyst to pull together groups with a common interest in the bay.
“Our concern is that the various groups with opposing views on how to solve the dredging and dumping problem, such as coastal residents, sports and commercial fishing organizations, recreational users, marine shipping organizations, marina owners, environmental groups, politicians, etc., are all working at cross purposes,” reads the statement.
The group, according to the release, is in agreement that the Providence River Channel must be dredged and that “marina owners should be able to dredge their marinas in a manner that makes economic sense.”
Fugate said a Rhode Island Sound in-water site (69B), which has been identified for the disposal of dredge spoils from the shipping channel, might have the capacity for marina material. He said, however, transportation costs may make the site economically unfeasible for marina owners. Also, approval of that site is expected to be several years away.
On-land disposal of the material, as has been suggested by Council President Joseph Solomon, poses problems as well. Fugate said if materials contain contaminants they could affect ground water. In addition, the material contains salt and would need to be de-watered before being trucked to a location.
Solomon, who has been instrumental in pulling together the Conimicut group, was pleased with Thursday’s meeting.
He said, “Things are beginning to gel…we all realize that dredging is necessary. It’s not the dredging, it’s the disposal. We feel there are better disposal sites.”
01/23/2001
Conimicut in-water disposal site on hold pending new study
By JOHN HOWELL
There won’t be any further consideration of an offshore Conimicut site for the disposal of dredge material until an additional “characterization” study of the area has been completed, said Coastal Resources Management Council Director Grover Fugate yesterday.
Also, Fugate disclosed that CRMC, the Department of Environmental Management and the Army Corps of Engineers would conduct an informational workshop in late February to outline the process for selecting in-water disposal sites.
“Everybody is in a holding pattern,” Fugate said when asked how much longer it might be before CRMC conducts hearings on the applications of Brewer Yacht Yards in Barrington and Cowesett to dispose of dredge materials in a 62-acre in-water site north of Conimicut Point. A third marina, Bay Marina of Warwick Cove, as well as Brewer Yards in Portsmouth and Wickford are also seeking to use the site, although, at this point, CRMC has not formally accepted applications.
Meanwhile, at a meeting Thursday night attended by more than 100 Conimicut residents, Mayor Scott Avedisian voiced his opposition to use of the in-water site, adding that CRMC should remove any consideration of its use until it is further tested.
“We’re here to stay,” Avedisian said toward the close of the two-hour meeting at the American Legion William Shields Post. “We’re like the uninvited dinner guest.” He said that legislation directing CRMC to identify dredge material disposal sites does not provide for the input of municipalities.
Avedisian called on CRMC to take the Conimicut site “off the table until you have a test,” as well as for the agency to include Warwick in the selection process.
Fugate said the mayor asked him to “shelve” the Conimicut site, adding that CRMC is “willing to discuss” matters with the administration. However, the director also noted that of all municipalities, Warwick has the largest concentration of marinas and boats, and there are few locations that can even be considered for in-water disposal of dredge material.
Fugate takes issue with those who claim the Conimicut site “was sprung” on the city or preservation agencies. He said the 1996 statute to designate disposal sites included the creation of a coastal resources management committee with representation from Save the Bay.
“They were well aware of the Conimicut site in those meetings,” he said. In addition, municipalities were notified of several public hearings that involved discussion of the Conimicut site. Nonetheless, Warwick officials say they were not aware of the Conimicut site until the Brewer applications were advertised last fall.
“It wasn’t like we were trying to hide this,” said Fugate. “If we’re going to deal with the problem, we have to deal with the problem. We can’t keep putting it off.”
Rep. Eileen Naughton, a member of the CRMC board, urged people yesterday to “have confidence” in CRMC and other state and federal agencies regulating the process.
“They are trying to do the right thing here. They know people of the state care very much about the bay,” she said.
She released letters from DEM director Jan Reitsma and Fugate and Jeannie Brochi of the EPA Water Quality Unit expressing reservations about material from the two Brewer Yards. In the Dec. 19, 2000, letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, Reitsma and Fugate wrote that the material from the Brewer Yards “indicates concentrations of several contaminants that may be present.” They say the applicant has not conducted appropriate reference site sampling and that they are in disagreement with the Corps’ assessment that the marina material is suitable for dumping.
Brochi, in a letter dated Nov. 21 to the two marinas, likewise disagrees with the suitability of the material for dumping off Conimicut.
“Therefore, we recommend that this material be disposed of at an alternative location,” she concludes.
Fugate said the “characterization study” requested by the Army Corps of Engineers is a bulk sediment analysis of the proposed site. The study would be used to determine whether material is suitable for disposal at the location and as a measure to a “reference site.” The reference site is the area, also off Conimicut, where the Army Corps of Engineers dumped 10,000 cubic yards of material dredged from the Bullock’s Cove Channel in 1995.
Fugate said the reference site would not be used for additional dumping, but as a control to monitor conditions at the nearby in-water site.
The characterization study does not include an examination of whether currents might redeposit the material elsewhere. Fugate says studies of the 1995 dumping show “that once it is placed there it shouldn’t move.” Rather, the characterization study is to be used as a means of judging the suitability of material for disposal.
Fugate estimates the study could take a month to complete, but at this time the CRMC has not budgeted the $15,000-$30,000 to perform the work. Assuming the study is funded and completed, Fugate says the marina applications to use the Conimicut site could be reviewed this year.
In a press release issued following Thursday’s Conimicut meeting, the Conimicut Neighborhood Association’s Committee on Disposal of Dredge Spoils urged CRMC to work more diligently toward creation of a statewide comprehensive plan for dredging and disposal of dredge spoils that considers alternative dumping sites and methods. The group also asked that CRMC serve as a catalyst to pull together groups with a common interest in the bay.
“Our concern is that the various groups with opposing views on how to solve the dredging and dumping problem, such as coastal residents, sports and commercial fishing organizations, recreational users, marine shipping organizations, marina owners, environmental groups, politicians, etc., are all working at cross purposes,” reads the statement.
The group, according to the release, is in agreement that the Providence River Channel must be dredged and that “marina owners should be able to dredge their marinas in a manner that makes economic sense.”
Fugate said a Rhode Island Sound in-water site (69B), which has been identified for the disposal of dredge spoils from the shipping channel, might have the capacity for marina material. He said, however, transportation costs may make the site economically unfeasible for marina owners. Also, approval of that site is expected to be several years away.
On-land disposal of the material, as has been suggested by Council President Joseph Solomon, poses problems as well. Fugate said if materials contain contaminants they could affect ground water. In addition, the material contains salt and would need to be de-watered before being trucked to a location.
Solomon, who has been instrumental in pulling together the Conimicut group, was pleased with Thursday’s meeting.
He said, “Things are beginning to gel…we all realize that dredging is necessary. It’s not the dredging, it’s the disposal. We feel there are better disposal sites.”