Environment The Corps...of Engineers. We have a good story to tell, and The Corps Environment is one...

EnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentThe CorpsIIIIINSIDENSIDENSIDENSIDENSIDE

October - December 2000 Vol. 1, No. 1

®

US Army Corpsof Engineers

New publication embraces allCorps environmental missionsBy LT. GEN. ROBERT B. FLOWERSChief of EngineersNo matter what the mission, the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers strives to make a positive impact.

Nowhere is that more apparent than in the areaof environmental stewardship. Safeguarding ournation’s environment is an inherent part of everyCorps program. It’s something we do each andevery day at sites across the nation and aroundthe world.

We have environmental engineers, hydrolo-gists, geologists, biologists, oceanographers,atmospheric scientists, researchers, chemists, parkrangers, all of whom are dedicated to protecting,preserving and restoring our environment. Morethan 80 percent of America’s citizens viewthemselves as environmentalists, a sentiment thatalso is reflected within the Corps. Environmentalstewardship is not just a job to us. Like allAmericans, we have a vested interest in the nationthat we leave for the next generation.

Thus, it’s appropriate that two separate Corpsof Engineers’ publications, The RestorationReporter and the Ordnance & ExplosivesEnvironment, are combined into a new quarterlyjournal, The Corps Environment, to tell the Corps’environmental story.

As you can see from this first issue of TheCorps Environment, this new publication em-braces all elements of the Corps environmentalmission.

Our environmental mission is broad; frombrownfields work for more livable cities to theEverglades restoration; from the work on innova-tive technologies in our laboratories to cleaningup Superfund sites, formerly used Department ofDefense sites, and formerly utilized Department ofEnergy remedial action sites; and from protectingand balancing resources through the UpperMississippi River System Environmental Manage-ment Program to detecting and addressingunexploded ordnance.

Everything the Corps does has a direct impacton the environment.

We want to tellthese stories – notonly to our customers,but to our regulators,our friends, the Armyand the Department ofDefense, the folks onCapitol Hill, thegeneral public, andmost importantly, thepeople who work forthe U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers.

We have a good story to tell, and The CorpsEnvironment is one way of telling it. This is aquarterly publication, available in print, e-mail and onthe World Wide Web. The articles will focus on oursuccesses, our challenges, our people, and ourpartners.

Protecting our nation’s environment is theresponsibility of every American. All of us must worktogether to take on the environmental challenges ofthe new millennium. The U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers has been called upon to embrace thesechallenges. The work we do today will reach far intothe future. Through The Corps Environment, we willshare our work with you, and together we willembrace the future.

22222Pat Rivers’ message

33333Japan District helps

preserve habitat

44444Cleaning up Lauderick

Creek’s past

55555WRDA 2000

66666BRAC holds first OE/UXO

in-progress review

77777IWR developing environ-

mental Web site

88888RSE helps reduce

cleanup project costs

99999CSM tool assists with

cleanup project planning

1010101010ORC used for Marine

Corps Air Station

1111111111RACER takes projects to

cost efficient finish line

1212121212Environmentally friendly

solution for river bend

1313131313Regulatory plays major

role in Alaska wetlands

1414141414Innovative technologyimproves project work

Environmental steward-ship is not just a job tous. Like all Americans,we have a vested inter-est in the nation that weleave for the next genera-tion. Lt. Gen. Robert B. Flowers, Chief of Engineers

EnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentThe CorpsThe CorpsThe CorpsThe CorpsThe Corps

EnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironmentEnvironment

2

US Army Corpsof Engineers

®

Distributed quarterly bythe U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, The CorpsEnvironment is anunofficial newsletterpublished under theauthority of AR 25-30.The purpose of thisnewsletter is to provideinformation about Corpsenvironmental actions,issues, policies andtechnologies. Inquiriescan be addressed toU.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, Attn:CEHNC-PA, P.O. Box1600, Huntsville, AL35807-4301. Phone:DSN 760-1692,c o m m e r c i a l256.895.1692 or fax256.895.1689.

Lt. Gen. Robert B.Flowers

Chief of Engineers

William M. VogelEnvironmental Division

Publisher

Kim C. GillespieEditor

The CorpsThe CorpsThe CorpsThe CorpsThe Corps

Pat Rivers,Chief, Environmental

Division

Submissions to newsletter encouragedA message from PAT RIVERSChief, Environmental DivisionAs Chief of the Environmental Division, I encourage you to share yourstories about environmental successes, challenges, people and partners.

The Corps Environment will be published at the end of each quarter, andyour comments and suggestions are welcome.

Information (articles, events, etc.) must be received no later than mid-quarter (or Feb. 15, May 15, Aug. 15, and Nov. 15) for publication at the endof that quarter. Submissions should be made via e-mail to Kim Gillespie [email protected].

As the Chief of Engineers stated, “All of us must work together to take onthe environmental challenges of the new millennium.”

Help us to tell the story of how the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and itspartners are doing just that.

Pat Rivers assumed her current position in the Corps in April 1998. She previ-ously held the position of Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environmen-tal Security) for Cleanup. As Chief of the Corps’ Environmental Division, hermanagement responsibilities cover a number of strategic programs and activities toinclude: Army Installation Restoration, Army Base Realignment and Closure,Environmental Restoration, the Formerly Used Defense Sites Program, and theFormerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program. She also works at the executivelevel to plan and oversees environmental support for a number of other non-defenseagencies including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Ohio River Ecosystem Program moves forwardCINCINNATI - The proposed Ohio River Ecosys-tem Restoration Program could be one of thelargest ecosystem restoration programs in theUnited States, second only to the Florida Ever-glades restoration.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers submitted afinal study report for the proposed Ohio RiverEcosystem Restoration Program to the Corps ofEngineers Headquarters on Oct. 13, 2000. TheCorps completed this study with valuable inputfrom the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environ-mental Protection Agency, Ohio River Valley WaterSanitation Commission, natural resources agenciesfrom six states, American Rivers and other regionalenvironmental interest groups.

Human activities have influenced the ecologicalresources of the Ohio River and its floodplain formore than 200 years. Although in recent yearsmuch has been accomplished to improve waterquality and lessen the impact of human activities,this program is designed to restore and protect thehabitats, species diversity and wildlife abundanceof the river and its adjacent floodplains.

This study identifies more than 250 potentialsite-specific projects along the 981 miles of OhioRiver corridor stretching from Pittsburgh, Pa., toCairo, Ill., within the states of Pennsylvania, WestVirginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois.

These restoration projects would contribute tothe restoration of 25,000 acres of bottomland

hardwood forests; 1,250 acres of aquatic habitatembayments; 25,000 acres of wetland and protectionof 40 islands, and a hundred miles of shorelinehabitat.

The recommendation authorizes a $307 millionlong-term program, with maximum federal funding of$10 million annually for each of the first five years,and $15 million annually for the remainder of theprogram. Nonfederal sponsors would fund 35percent of site-specific projects and all operations,maintenance, repair, rehabilitation and replacement.After final approvals and funding, the corridor-wideecosystem will start by refining ecosystem goals andprioritizing restoration efforts with a partnership ofrepresentatives from government resource agencies,universities, and other environmental concerns.

The public comment period for the report endedin November. The Army’s Chief of Engineers andthe Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works,with federal and state agencies, are reviewing allinformation before the report is finalized. The Chiefof Engineer’s finalized report is expected by the endof 2000.

An initial copy of the report is available in CD-ROM disk or paper copy format at no charge.Multiple copies are available at the reproductioncosts of $5 each for CD-ROMs and $15 each forpaper copies.

For more information, visit the Web site atwww.lrd.usace.army.mil.

Submissions

The Corps Environmentwelcomes submissions.Please send yourinformation (article, photos,events, letters to the editor,etc.) or questions via e-mailto:[email protected] publication issubject to these deadlines:Feb. 15 (JAN - MAR issue)May 15 (APR - JUN issue)Aug. 15 (JUL - SEP issue)Nov. 15 (OCT -DEC issue)All submissions are subjectto editing when necessary.

October - December 2000

3

By MICHAEL D. NOAHJapan DistrictIn 1997, the 35th Civil Engineer-ing Squadron’s EnvironmentalQuality Flight at Misawa AirBase, Japan asked the JapanDistrict to conduct a biodiversitystudy and assessment of thenatural resources on the baseand Ripsaw Range in support ofthe development of theinstallation’s Natural ResourceManagement Plan. In 1999,Japan District received a similartasking from the 374th CivilEngineering Squadron’s Environ-mental Flight at Yokota Air Base.

Biodiversity refers to the vastvariety of living things in an area:the different plants, animals,insects and microorganisms, etc.,plus the ecosystems they form.The Misawa biodiversity studyincludes more than just aninventory of the flora andwildlife, it also includes theclassification of vegetation andlandscape analyses.

In the 55 years since the endof World War II, Japan hasemerged from being a mostlyagrarian society to become oneof the most industrialized nationson earth. However, this metamor-phosis has come at the expenseof its natural resources, withmost of the historical habitatsthat existed at the turn of thecentury now either significantlyaltered or lost entirely. Withurban development alreadyseverely limited by the nation’srugged terrain, the naturalresources that once thrived ondevelopable lands have now allbut vanished.

In many cases, some of thelast vestiges of these habitats areunder U.S. stewardship. Forexample, one can quickly identifyCamp Zama, Sagamihara, SagamiDepot, Ikego, and other U.S.installations on the Kanto Plain(Tokyo) in aerial photographs,since they comprise the few

“green” areas in a “sea ofdevelopment.”

In other areas, such as MisawaAir Base, some of the largestcontiguous expanses of uniquenatural habitat are found on U.S.installations.

The goal of the biodiversitystudy is to provide the installa-tion with a baseline about notonly its own natural resources,but also those in the larger regionin which they exist. Since mostwildlife ignore geopoliticalboundaries, the study for theMisawa area encompassed mostof Aomori Prefecture, whichcomprises the entire northern tipof the main island of Honshu fromthe Sea of Japan to the PacificOcean. The study’s final reportwill also provide recommenda-tions for natural resource manage-ment that conserves and/orenhances the biodiversity of theregion. Similarly, the study areafor the Yokota biodiversity projectfocused on the Kanto Plainregion.

The District team’s first taskwas to identify the naturalresources present on the installa-tion and develop a better under-standing of the landscape inwhich they function.

Ecosystems acquire uniquepatterns over time due to changesin space, for instance, the loss ofhabitat or the fragmentation ofwhat were originally largeexpanses of natural habitat.These spatial patterns usuallyoccur through a gradual conver-sion to urban, residential oragricultural land use. Landscapeecology is the study of howspatial patterning develops andchanges through time, as well asits implications for the ecosystem.

With cooperation from otherU.S. and Japanese naturalresource agencies, the District’steam of Yoshimi Shibata andMichael Noah has incorporatedthe principles of landscape

ecology into the project.Extensive field surveys of the

various habitats present inAomori Prefecture were bothcostly and impractical. So,through cooperative arrange-ments with several U.S. andJapanese agencies, the District’steam had developed an innova-tive sampling program usingstate-of-the-science remotesensing technology, thematicmaps, and digital elevation data.This sampling allowed the teamto classify the vegetation on theair base and throughout AomoriPrefecture.

The team also surveyed theinstallation for such parametersas the percentage of groundcover and dominant vegetation.Further spatial statisticalanalysis of the data assisted theteam in spotting patterns ofhabitat loss or change within theregion.

The team’s end result willenable Misawa Air Base todevelop and implement theactions necessary to conservethe natural resources under itsstewardship.

For more information,contact the Japan DistrictPublic Affairs Office at DSN325.263.3575.

Japan District helps preserve unique habitat

Mike Noah and Yoshimi Shibata retrieve a “virtual fish” (asemi-permeable membrane device or SPMD) at Misawa AirBase. The SPMD had been integratively “sampling” organiccontaminates for 30 days in surface waters on the base.


4

Cleaning up Lauderick Creek’s pastBy DOUG GARMANBaltimore DistrictSince June, Aberdeen ProvingGround officials, the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers and itscontractors have been search-ing a 452-acre site in a northernportion of Aberdeen ProvingGround , Md., for potentiallyexplosive items. The area wasonce used for testing andtraining with chemical-filledmunitions.

From 1920 to 1951, the U.S.Army Chemical School usedthis site to train soldiers in theuse and firing of chemicalmunitions at target areas,handling and maintenance ofchemical warfare equipment,and training in decontaminationof chemically contaminatedmaterials and personnel.

Today, the ongoing ord-nance search is known as theLauderick Creek ChemicalWarfare Materiel RemovalProject. The site is a mixture ofwoodlands and waist-highgrassy fields that is boundedon the north by the APGproperty line, on the west byMaryland Route 755, and onthe east by the Bush River.

Priority project“Because of the history of

this site, many believeunexploded munitions contain-ing chemical warfare materielare likely to still exist here.Given this and the site’s closeproximity to homes andschools, Congress and theDepartment of Defenseidentified the Lauderick CreekProject as a priority project,”said Bruce Ware, residentengineer of the project for theCorps’ EnvironmentalRemediation Resident Office.

With safety plans andcommunity outreach efforts inplace, the Corps conducted ageophysical survey of the

A transportable blast containment struc-ture, air monitoring devices and a water-spray system mounted on an Army per-sonnel carrier are part of the set up at thedig site.

Lauderick Creek site from 1996to early 1997 and identified20,000 magnetic anomalieswithin the project area. Overthe years, experts haveremoved both conventionaland chemical-filled ordnanceitems from the site. Expertsadd that if chemical-filledmunitions are found duringthis search, the World War Ichemical agents of phosgeneand mustard are the mostlikely warfare materiel to becontained in munitions.

“Working closely with ourmany installation, state andlocal partners, we haveprepared and are followingplans that are specificallytargeted to meet the risksassociated with this type ofcleanup effort,” said Ware.“So far, our field activities areworking as we had planned.”

Careful plansAccording to Roger

Walton, a Corps projectengineer with the cleanup, theactual removal work involvesa number of carefully plannedsteps and specially designedpieces of equipment.

Each dig is closelymonitored from a remotelocation using video and airdetection equipment. Beforeeach dig, a small, three-sidedmetal structure designed tostop metal fragments should amunition accidentallydetonate is placed over thespot of the dig. Ordnanceexperts with the contractingfirm of Human FactorsApplications of Waldorf, Md.,working inside the structure,carefully dig with non-sparking hand shovels to amaximum depth of three feetto identify the suspectanomaly.

As an added measure ofprotection, three tracked

Army personnel carriersequipped with waterspraying apparatus circlethe spot of the dig.Should an accidentalrelease of chemical agentoccur, water would beused to dissipate aplume of agent. Warningsirens are used inconjunction with thissystem, which wouldalert the surroundingcommunities to apotential chemicalrelease and the need to“shelter-in-place.”

If an anomaly is identified asa munition, the Army’s Techni-cal Escort Unit, headquarteredat APG, will be called to the siteto complete the assessment ofthe round. They will decide thebest procedure for removing theordnance item.

“The stability, direction andspeed of the wind is an impor-tant factor in whether or not wewill dig in a particular area on aparticular day,” said Walton. “Itis important that we maintain asafety buffer between the spotof the dig and nearby resi-dences, just in case a problemshould occur.”

Community outreachDue to public concerns

about the project, the Corps andits contractors launched anintensive community outreachcampaign during the earlyplanning stages for the project.

This campaign involvededucating businesses andneighborhoods surrounding thesite about the potential risks ofthe cleanup. Through door-to-door visits, block fairs andvarious presentations inschools, the Corps and itscontractors trained the localcommunity on what to do ifemergency sirens stationedaround the project area should

sound, signaling an accidentalrelease of chemical materiel at thework site.

If such an event should occur,local residents have beeninstructed on how to “shelter-in-place.” This protective measureinvolves three simple steps.They are: go inside quickly andstay off the phone, close allwindows and doors and turn offair conditioning or heatingsystems, and listen quietly forinstructions on the radio. Toremind the public of the “shelter-in-place” measure, brochures,posters and bookmarks weredistributed to residents, busi-nesses and area schools.

Daily updatesDuring the remainder of the

project, the public will beprovided daily updates onactivities through the Internet,telephone information line and amobile community office, whichis dispatched daily to keylocations within the community.

To date, workers haverecovered two liquid-filled 4.2-inch mortar rounds, 125 poundsof ordnance-related scrap and400 pounds of miscellaneousscrap and construction debris.

For more information, con-tact Doug Garman at410.962.2626.


5

Department of the Army News ReleaseThe Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000) wasenacted by Congress on Nov. 3, 2000, and signed by President BillClinton on Dec. 11, 2000. The centerpiece of this historic Act is acomprehensive plan developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineersto restore the Everglades. In addition, the Act authorizes several important policy initiatives,including a new tribal partnership program, changes in cost sharingto help low income communities, a program to restore Puget Sound,and an expanded authority to address problems with the nation’swatersheds. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan legislation wasprepared by the Army and included in the final version of the WaterResources Development Act. The Act authorizes the first phase ofthe $7.8 billion Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. It is thelargest environmental restoration plan ever proposed. “I am proud of the Army’s leadership in developing the restorationplan,” said Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil WorksDr. Joseph Westphal. “The professionalism and technical competence of the ArmyCorps of Engineers were keys to the success of this important effort.The enactment of this piece of legislation is important if we are tobegin the restoration of a national treasure—America’s Everglades—and to make needed changes to water resources programs. “On behalf of the Army Corps of Engineers, we welcome the waterresources challenges and opportunities presented in WRDA 2000,”Westphal said. “We look forward to helping communities throughoutthe Nation improve their quality of life through economically justifiedand environmentally sound water resources solutions.”

For more information, contact the Corps Headquarters PublicAffairs Office at 202.761.1807.

In addition to Everglades and Puget Sound envi-ronmental programs, WRDA 2000 includes a num-ber of small environmental restoration projects thatmay be carried out under section 1135(A) of theWater Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C.2309a(a)), if deemed appropriate. They include:

ooooo BAYOU SAUVAGE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, LOUISIANAooooo GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, BAYOU PLAQUEMINE, LOUISIANAooooo GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, MILES 220 TO 222.5, LOUISIANAooooo GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, WEEKS BAY, LOUISIANAooooo LAKE FAUSSE POINT, LOUISIANAooooo LAKE PROVIDENCE, LOUISIANAooooo NEW RIVER, LOUISIANAooooo ERIE COUNTY, OHIOooooo MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO

The Secretary may carry out the follow-ing projects under section 204 of theWater Resources Development Act of1992 (33 U.S.C. 2326), which involve thebeneficial use of dredge material:

ooooo HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LOUISIANAooooo MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET, MILE -3 TO MILE -9, LOUISIANAooooo MISSISSIPPI RIVER GULF OUTLET, MILE 11 TO MILE 4, LOUISIANAooooo PLAQUEMINES PARISH, LOUISIANAooooo OTTAWA COUNTY, OHIO

A number of small aquatic ecosystem resto-ration projects may be carried out undersection 206 of the Water Resources Devel-opment Act of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330). Theyinclude:

ooooo BRAUD BAYOU, LOUISIANAooooo BURAS MARINA, LOUISIANAooooo COMITE RIVER, LOUISIANAooooo DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 21-INCH PIPELINE CANAL, LOUISIANAooooo LAKE BORGNE, LOUISIANAooooo LAKE MARTIN, LOUISIANAooooo LULING, LOUISIANAooooo MANDEVILLE, LOUISIANAooooo ST. JAMES, LOUISIANAooooo MINES FALLS PARK, NEW HAMPSHIREooooo NORTH HAMPTON, NEW HAMPSHIREooooo HIGHLAND COUNTY, OHIOooooo HOCKING COUNTY, OHIOooooo TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, OHIOooooo CENTRAL AMAZON CREEK, OREGONooooo EUGENE MILLRACE, OREGONooooo MEDFORD, OREGONooooo ROSLYN LAKE, OREGON

President authorizes Water Resources Development Act 2000


6

By CAROL YOUKEYHuntsville Center OE CXThe Army’s Base Realignment and Closure Officeheld its first annual Ordnance and Explosives/Unexploded Ordnance in-progress review inHuntsville, Ala., on Oct. 17-18, 2000. Unexplodedordnance is a challenge for all services sincepolicies are still under development. It is anespecially difficult challenge for the Army BRACprogram because it delays the transfer of approxi-mately one-third of the remaining excess BRACproperties.

Al-thoughOE/UXOwork hasbeenaddressedin combi-nation withotherBRACwork indifferentforumsover thepastseveralyears, thiswas thefirst timeOE/UXOresponseissues have been addressed in an exclusive forum.

The U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center,Huntsville, hosted the OE/UXO in-progress review,which had more than 70 attendees. In addition toDepartment of the Army BRAC Office personnel,attendees included representatives from Headquar-ters and district level Corps of Engineers, the ArmyEnvironmental Center, several Army major com-mand representatives and 12 BRAC environmentalcoordinators from installations with UXO.

According to Mark Bellis, of the Army’s BRACOffice, the focus of the OE/UXO in-progress reviewwas to move the BRAC UXO program forward byaddressing some of the tough issues hamperingthe UXO program. These issues included selectingappropriate UXO/OE response strategies anddeveloping accurate cost estimates necessary toprogram necessary financial resources.

During the event, participants exchangedproject specific information and shared lessons

BRAC holds first OE/UXO in-progress review

Ordnance and explosives work at BRAC site Fort McClellan, Ala., was amongthe topics at the first BRAC OE/UXO in-progress review.

learned to reinforce successful practices through-out BRAC installations. Installation and Corpsrepresentatives briefed status related to projects atFort McClellan, Ala., Pueblo Chemical Depot,Colo., Camp Bonneville, Wash., Seneca ArmyDepot, N.Y., Fort Ritchie, Md., and JeffersonProving Ground, Ind.

A secondary purpose of the in-progress reviewwas to generate discussions and open dialoguebetween the field representatives and subjectmatter experts on relevant ordnance topics. Tothis end, speakers and participants were invited

from theCorps’HTRW andOE Centersof Expertise,U.S. ArmyEnviron-mentalCenter,DefenseAmmunitionCenter,Office of theDirector ofEnviron-mentalPrograms,and theArmyEnviron-mental

Policy Institute. Topics covered both presenta-tions and discussion of OE/UXO technologies andprocesses, DoD/EPA UXO Management Prin-ciples, UXO risk issues, use of statistics duringsite characterizations, review of EngineeringEvaluation/Cost Analyses and decision docu-ments, Range Rule Survey/Inventory, and calcula-tion of OE/UXO project costs-to-complete.

The Army BRAC office will continue todevelop their UXO/OE program during FY01through a series of installation-specific reviewsconducted with the assistance of the ArmyEnvironmental Center, the U.S. Army Engineeringand Support Center, Huntsville, appropriate Armymajor commands and installation BRAC Environ-mental Coordinators. The Army BRAC office willcontinue to explore UXO policy issues, methodsand development of innovative technologicalsolutions for clearing UXO from BRAC properties.

For more information, contact Carol Youkeyat 256.895.1563.

Property transfers, technology, policy issues discussed among partners


7

LOS ANGELES - A small environmental restorationproject recently drew some high-powered visitors.From Washington, D.C., San Francisco and LosAngeles, Calif., they came to Tucson, Ariz. ArizonaCongressman Ed Pastor, Assistant Secretary of theArmy for Civil Works Dr. Joseph Westphal, and theCorps of Engineers’ South Pacific Division Com-mander Brig. Gen. Peter T. Madsen and Los AngelesDistrict Engineer Col. John P. Carroll, along with PimaCounty officials, were on hand Oct. 20, 2000 for thegroundbreaking of the environmental restorationproject.

Officially named the Tucson (Ajo) Detention BasinWetlands Development/Wildlife Habitat EnhancementProject, a title almost as long as the 50-acre site to berestored, it will see the construction of wetlands in thebasin to restore portions of the ecosystem. This inturn will enhance wildlife resources.

About 12 of the approximately 50 acres will be awildlife-and-marsh pond area and other wetlands withfreshwater marsh, riparian habitat and open-water

Tucson restoration project groundbreaking draws visitorsareas, which are important to a variety of waterfowl.The remaining 38 acres will also have freshwatermarsh and riparian habitat, along with mesquitebosque and ephemeral grassland. Upland habitatalso will be created to provide diversity and bufferzones, offering additional habitat for reptiles,amphibians, small mammals, fish and invertebrates.

The modifications will not affect the degree offlood-control protection provided by the basin,according to the Army Corps of Engineers and PimaCounty, the project’s local sponsor. The work isalso consistent with an existing pedestrian andbicycle trail system.

The restoration effort is supported by theArizona Department of Game and Fish and theAudubon Society, and the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService concurs with the project’s potential forincreased habitat values.

For more information about the project, contactthe Los Angeles District Public Affairs Office at213.452.3921.

By BILL WERICKInstitute for Water ResourcesThe Corps’ Institute for WaterResources (IWR) is developinga Web site that will help monitorthe Corps’ environmentalperformance, track trends inenvironmental quality, and helpdo environmental studies fasterand better.

The site address is www.pmcl.com/iwred, which providesaccess to the two main ele-ments, the Atlas and theEncyclopedia. Both are worksin progress, but the Encyclope-dia is already usable and canhelp anyone doing environmen-tal studies.

AtlasHow much has the Corps

invested in wetlands creation inthe Midwest, and how manyacres were produced? How dothe costs per acre of wetlandcreated in Nebraska compare tothe costs in New York or NorthDakota? Do the locations ofprojects built in support of theNorth American WaterfowlManagement Plan fall along

known migratory paths?The Atlas is designed to

answer these sorts of questionsabout the results the Corps isgetting from its environmentalinvestments. The user can usethe online interactive map tospecify the geographic or politicalboundaries for the analysis, andpull downmenus to pickthe resourceoutput typeand programsto include inthe question.The proto-type versionof the Atlas ispasswordprotected.

EncyclopediaThe Encyclopedia will be

useful in and outside the Corps.It is similar in design to environ-mental gateway sites thatorganize hyperlinks to a variety ofinformation, but with two impor-tant differences. First of all,Encyclopedia links are made todata sites, not to the home pages

of organizations that house thedata. These “deep” links makeit easier and faster to findinformation. Second, theresearchers who designed theEncyclopedia reviewed thedeep linked sites and ratedthem on the quality of the dataand the convenience of the

Web site. Asearch fromthe Encyclo-pedia returnsa list ofhyperlinks tothe siteaddresses, asummary ofeach refer-enced site,and a rating of

the data and ease of use of thesite.

The encyclopedia containsmore than just data sites,though. It also providesinformed access to:

· ten environmentaljournals;

· Web sites withinformation about measur-

ing environmentalperformance;

· environmentalgateways;

· environmental lawsand policy; and

· maps, statistics anddocuments.

There is a thumb-nailsketch describing each peerreviewed journal, access toarticles or abstracts from thejournals, and a tableshowing a measure of eachjournal’s relevance andinfluence in the profession.

In the future, the Atlasmap interface may be usedfor things such as lettingEncyclopedia users pick theregion for which they wantenvironmental data. TheEncyclopedia may also beused to track environmentaltrends using technologythat automatically andregularly samples otherdatabases.

For more information onthe Atlas or Encyclopedia,contact Bill Werick [email protected].

Institute for Water Resources developing environmental Web site

Atlas and Encyclopedia are availableat www.pmcl.com/iwred .


8

Remediation system evaluation process reducesoperating costs for cleanupsBy DAVE BECKER and LINDSEY LIENHTRW CXThe remediation system evaluation process devel-oped by the Corps of Engineers recommends cost-saving changes in system operations or technolo-gies applied at a cleanup site, verifies a reasonableclosure strategy, and assesses maintenance ofgovernment-owned equipment.

By identifying potential cost savings, theprocess can help substantially reduce operatingcosts for long-term cleanups, help identify perfor-mance problems, and serve as an extension of theComprehensive Environmental Response Compli-ance, and Liability Act five-year review process.

Remedial system evaluation addresses protec-tiveness issues such as system performance relativeto remedial action objectives, monitoring or opera-tional deficiencies that may jeopardize a remedy’sprotectiveness, and changes in surrounding landuse or risk-based/regulatory cleanup standards.

The Corps’ Hazardous, Toxic, and RadioactiveWaste Center of Expertise (HTRW-CX), withassistance from Corps district staff and otheragency personnel, have applied the remedial systemevaluation process at six sites. The process identi-fied potential protectiveness issues; applicable,relevant, appropriate requirements conflicts, and theneed for added studies; as well as potential costsavings of $80,000 to more than $300,000 per year inoperations and maintenance at each site. Onaverage, each evaluation costs approximately$20,000 to conduct, including associated travel for asite visit and final report generation. Costs that maybe incurred in addressing protectiveness issues ornew studies are not reflected in the described costsavings.

In FY 2000, the Environmental Protection AgencyTechnology Innovation Office enlisted the HTRW-CX and one of TIO’s contractors, GeoTrans, todemonstrate the remedial system evaluation processat four Superfund pump and treat sites; two in EPARegion 4 and two in EPA Region 5. Based on thesuccess of this pilot program, the TIO has expandedthe study in FY 2001 to include two sites from eachof the remaining eight Regions.

The HTRW-CX has changed its focus for this FY2001 pilot to a quality assurance role and acting as asubstitute technical evaluator. The primary Corpsevaluation duties will be accomplished by a seniorchemical engineer from the Kansas City District andthe current TIO contractor GeoTrans.

In order to assist Corps district personnel andcontractors in performing the FY 2001 evaluations, a

suite of checklists has been developed. Thechecklists are intended for use by experiencedtechnical staff when conducting the process on avariety of long-term remedies, including pump andtreat, soil vapor extraction, bioventing, and airsparging. Twenty-two remedial system evaluationchecklists are available. The checklists addressoverall system goals and assist in assessment ofsubsurface system performance, above groundtreatment plant effectiveness, monitoring pro-grams, and alternatives for treatment waterdischarge.

Remedial system evaluation checklists canevaluate specific equipment such as air strippers,carbon adsorption systems, metals precipitationunits, piping, pumps, blowers, control systems,solids handling systems, thermal treatment units,advanced oxidation processes, chemical feedsystems, oil/water separators, and extraction/injection wells.

During site visits, the checklists are useful asmental prompts and a means to record observa-tions.

The remedial system evaluation checklists, asample report, a sample scope of work, and aninstruction guide are available on the Internet atwww.environmental.usace.army.mil/library/guide/rsechk/rsechk.html, or at www.frtr.gov/optimiza-tion/general.

A sample contract clause for operations andmaintenance contracts for pump and treat systemsthat identifies data to be collected and docu-mented to support a remedial system evaluation isalso available on the web.

For more information, contact Dave Becker at402.697.2655, or [email protected],or contact Lindsey K. Lien at 402.697.2580 [email protected].

In FY 2000, the Environmental Pro-In FY 2000, the Environmental Pro-In FY 2000, the Environmental Pro-In FY 2000, the Environmental Pro-In FY 2000, the Environmental Pro-tection Agency Technology Innova-tection Agency Technology Innova-tection Agency Technology Innova-tection Agency Technology Innova-tection Agency Technology Innova-tion Office enlisted its contractortion Office enlisted its contractortion Office enlisted its contractortion Office enlisted its contractortion Office enlisted its contractorGeoTrans and the Corps� HTRW-GeoTrans and the Corps� HTRW-GeoTrans and the Corps� HTRW-GeoTrans and the Corps� HTRW-GeoTrans and the Corps� HTRW-CX to demonstrate the remedialCX to demonstrate the remedialCX to demonstrate the remedialCX to demonstrate the remedialCX to demonstrate the remedialsystem evaluation process at foursystem evaluation process at foursystem evaluation process at foursystem evaluation process at foursystem evaluation process at fourSuperfund pump and treat sites.Superfund pump and treat sites.Superfund pump and treat sites.Superfund pump and treat sites.Superfund pump and treat sites.


9

• An iterative planninginstrument• A modeling and datainterpretation tool• A communication de-vice among the team, thedecision-makers, thestakeholders and fieldpersonnel

Conceptual site model tool assists with cleanupproject planningBy JOHNETTE SHOCKLEYHTRW CXThe conceptual site model is a valuable tool toassist project teams in the integration ofinformation and decisions. Conceptual sitemodels serve as a planning instrument, amodeling and data interpretation tool, and acommunication device among the team, thedecision-makers, the stakeholders, and fieldpersonnel. Developing a conceptual model is animportant step in a project. Initially, the projectteam integrates all available information todevelop the conceptual site model.

The model represents a current understand-ing of the site, its function, the interaction of itscomponents, and the potential effects of man’sinputs to the system (e.g., spills, effluents,excavation) or outputs from the system (e.g.,land use, public recreation). The project teamuses the conceptual site model to interpret howthey think the system operates using pure logic,experience and available data. Very often, aconceptual site model is depicted by a diagram-matic model such as those shown in the figurebelow and can vary greatly in the amount ofdetail.

Used appropriately, the conceptual site modelis an iterative tool that evolves as site workprogresses and data gaps are filled. The modelcrystallizes the information known about the siteand identifies the additional information thatmust be gathered in order to achieve theproject’s goals. This process encouragesproject team members to evaluate the need tocollect data and eliminate data collection effortsnot necessary to support specific site decisions.(Although this sounds elementary, the one-size-fits-all approach used by many practitionersroutinely collects costly data that are ultimately

irrelevant to the project’s outcome).Detailed descriptions of site-specific

models differ because conditions can varygreatly from one site to another. Forexample, on projects that have unexplodedordnance, or UXO, the primary focus of themodel is to identify locations where themilitary has used conventional ordnance,explosives, chemical warfare agents,radioactive materials, or other hazardousitems.

Through intensive and extensiveresearch, a detailed history of ordnanceand training activity at the site, as well asan up-to-date account of the site’s use,geology, soil conditions and land use areevaluated to develop the model. Toaccomplish this, the project team reviewsboth installation records and documentsand aerial photographs and maps stored atnational, regional, state, and local archivesand record holding facilities.

Additionally, personal interviews withretired military, employees and othersassociated with the sites are conducted togather information that may not be

contained in the official written sources.On unexploded ordnance sites whereroutes of exposure are subject to humanintervention, the model does nottypically show transport or migrationpathways of ordnance items; butincludes ballistic information, firinglocations and target areas. The endresult is a comprehensive conceptualsite model used to guide projectpersonnel in their evaluation of the site.

On environmental sites the modelfocuses on contaminants, sources, andpathways through environmental media

and receptors, background conditions, anddetermination of limits for areas of studies.Many conventional site characterizationefforts use the model to effectively guideinvestigations. Efforts are often overshad-owed by the significant amount of timethat may lapse between fieldwork andreceipt of validated data, and betweeninterpretation of the data and planning foradditional work. Many new innovativefield-based technologies reduce theamount of time between data collectionand data evaluation by providing real-time

Characteristics of aconceptual site

model

or near real-time data to allow forexpedited interpretation and planning.Days or weeks separate phases ofconventional site characterizationsthat were traditionally separated bymonths. With effective planning, newdata can be quickly incorporated into aconceptual site model within onlyhours or days. Site decisions aresupported by systematic planningsuch as the technical project planningprocess used by the Corps andavailable on the web at: www.usace.army.mil/inet/usace-docs/eng-manuals/em200-1-2/toc. htm; EPA’s data qualityobjective, or DQO, process at www.epa.gov/quality/qa_docs.html; andDOE’s Streamline Approach forEnvironmental Restoration (SAFER)process at http://dqo.pnl.gov.

Coupled with accelerated ap-proaches to sampling and analysisthese new field-based technologiescreate an environment favorable forthe formation of the conceptual sitemodel to manage data effectively.

All conceptual models are simplifi-cations and idealizations; yet weaccept these models as useful becausethey adequately express the mostimportant aspects of the system withregard to the objectives of ourcharacterization, monitoring andremediation plans and the questionsbeing asked and answered.

For more information, contactJohnette Shockley at 402.697.2558.


Savannah District uses ORC method for cleanup ofMarine Corps Air Station

10

By ALICIA GREGORYSavannah DistrictIn 1986 the Marine Corps AirStation, Beaufort, S.C., discov-ered a 1,500 gallon gasoline leakfrom an underground storagetank at the base gas station.Although the contamination isconfined below the servicestation to an area that is 150 feetlong by 100 feet wide, basepersonnel decided, afterapproximately 10 years ofstudies and proposals, that theywould move forward withchoosing a cleanup method.

Installation personnelconsidered several options.Vapor extraction turned out tobe prohibitively expensive andnatural degradation prohibi-tively slow.

Enter Savannah District inMarch 1999 with anotheroption— a cleanup method thatuses a substance called OxygenRelease Compound (ORC),which eliminates gasoline-related contamination ofgroundwater.

Regenesis BioremediationProducts manufactures theproduct, which is a magnesiumhydroxide compound stored inpowder form that reacts whenmixed with water. The com-pound is injected into theground to generate a chemicalreaction and eventual bio-degration of Benzene. (Benzeneis a carcinogenic compound thatis found in gasoline.)

“This is an inert material,much like milk of magnesia, witha special coating,” explainedTom Whitacre, district geologistfor the project. “We mix thepowder in water and make aslurry, then we inject it into the

subsurface. It slowly gives offoxygen over a six month periodas it reacts with the contami-nates and breaks them downinto harmless byproducts.”

Although this is the first timethe district or any in-houseCorps personnel have usedORC, it has been used onhundreds of petroleum sitescommercially. “ORC is saferthan other injection products onthe market,” said Whitacre.“The other products can bemuch more chemically reactiveand dangerous to use.”

“The base opted to use theORC method, got a costestimate, and sent SavannahDistrict the funds,” said FrankAraico, Installation RestorationProgram manager.

The initial remedial designcost estimate for the soil vaporextraction system was between$150,000 and $250,000, but thedistrict was able to offer theORC alternative to the customerat a cost of $80,000. Since theORC option is a more cost-effective treatment technology,the base was able to save asubstantial amount of money.

The actual work— theinjection process— took about aweek. District personnelinjected the ORC slurry 1-10 feetbelow the surface at 110locations throughout thecontamination site using theGeoprobe. [Geoprobe uses asmall diameter tube with a high-pressure pump to inject thecompound into the ground.]The most recent ORC injectionswere performed this pastsummer.

The district conducts tworounds of performance monitor-

ing— at two months and again atsix months after the injectionprocess is completed; then theSouth Carolina Department ofHealth and Environmental Controlrequires periodic monitoring for thenext year or so to verify that thecontamination levels havedropped.

“We have the original levels ofthe contamination to use forcomparison during the monitoringprocess,” said Whitacre.

“We don’t have the in-housecapabilities to do this type of work,and the district made it easy for usto use their assets,” said AliceHoward, Natural Resources andEnvironmental officer at MCAS,Beaufort.

Being able to execute someprojects in house, such as theBeaufort one, helps Corps person-nel maintaintheir technicalcapabilities,Whitacre said.

“Theproject hasgone quitewell,” saidAraicio.“They evenfinished uptwo daysearly. Thedistrict hasdone excep-tional work.”

For moreinformation,contactVerdelleLambert,SavannahDistrictPublic AffairsOffice, at912.652.5758.

Pho

to b

y Jo

nas

Jord

an

The geoprobe is aligned on the injection site.


By JIM PETERSON and KATE PETERSONHTRW CXDeveloping accurate and consistent cost estimates for projects andtheir associated phases is a critical process for any organizationresponsible for budget submissions, contract negotiations, and/orfinancial decision-making. One of the tools available to developestimates is the Remedial Action CostEngineering Requirements, or RACERsystem.

RACER is a parametric, integratedcost estimating software systemspecifically developed for estimatingcosts associated with environmentalremediation projects. RACER providesa range of cost estimating detail froman order-of-magnitude in a project’spreliminary stages to a refined, detailedand definitive estimate at the time ofproject execution.

With the recent and high visibilityof ordnance projects, the U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers has developed newRACER Ordnance and Explosives (OE)cost models to enable project andprogram teams to develop morereasonable and defendable cost estimates for OE projects. Each ofthese OE models can be coupled with other existing RACER models todevelop an estimate for the total project cost. It is very important tonote that these models are not static and are frequently updated, asnew information becomes available. The RACER OE models include:ooooo Archive Search Report Model - The Archive Search Report model

in RACER is used for development of costs in the site inspectionphase of many projects. The primary purpose of the ArchiveSearch Report is to provide an overall evaluation at a site todifferentiate sites that pose a potential threat to public health,welfare, or the environment. Typically, the Archive Search Reportis qualitative in nature and includes information derived fromhistorical research, site inspection, evaluation, and documenta-tion, rather than definition of the nature and extent of explosiveordnance through intensive site investigation. The major costdriver for this model is the complexity of the site, which is basedupon the size of the site, the types of ordnance used and theanticipated land use.

ooooo OE Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Model - The OEEngineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis model is used to estimatethe cost to characterize the nature, location, and concentration ofOE by providing:• a description of the OE related problems affecting human use

of the site;• identification and analysis of reasonable risk management

alternatives;• recommendations for a proposed alternative;• a means to seek public comments and participation; and

OO EE PP rr oo jj ee cc tt CC TT CC EE ss tt ii mm aa tt ee PPP AAA ,,, SSSIII ,,, EEE EEE /// CCC AAA ,,, ooo rrr RRR III /// FFF SSS PPP hhh aaa ssseee CCC ooo sssttt sss can be deve loped w ith th e fo llow in g m odels: -A SR M odel -O E E E /C A M odel -S ite In vestigation -R em ed ia l Investiga tion -F easib ility S tudy RRR DDD PPP hhh aaa ssseee CCC ooo sssttt sss can be deve loped w ith th ese m odels: -R em ed ia l D esign (P ercen tage M ethod) -R em ed ia l D esign (P aram etr ic M odel w ith deta ils) RRR AAA --- CCC PPP hhh aaa ssseee CCC ooo sssttt sss can be deve loped w ith over 100 m odels to choose f rom . Som e typ ica l m odels a re listed be low : -O E R em oval A ction -O E In stitu tiona l C on tro ls -C lean up an d L an dscap ing -E xcava tion

O ff i T i d L d fil l D i lRACER integrates all models in a project, such asmodels for an OE project as shown above.

RACER takes ordnance projects to cost efficient finish lineRemedial Action Cost Engineering Requirements system provides cost estimating software tool

• documentation of the process for use in finaldecision making and judicial review.

This model may be used to develop costs for theEngineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis or RemedialInvestigation/Feasibility Study project phases. Themajor cost driver in this model is the area of the site that

will be sampled.ooooo Ordnance and Explosive RemovalAction Model - This quantitative modelis designed to estimate the costs ofsearching for, marking, and removingunexploded ordnance from munitionscontaminated property. The major costdrivers are the area to be cleared andthe depth of OE clearance. Otherfactors include site conditions andconcentration of munitions to becleared.ooooo Ordnance and Explosive Institu-tional Controls Model - This modelcombines estimates for options of legalcontrols on land use and passivecontrols and engineered solutions tolimit potential exposure to OE. Ex-amples of elements in this model

include programs to educate individuals about potentialexposure risks, response actions, emergency plans, etc.;the legal options available: including controls related toownership of the land, easements, zoning and sitingrestrictions, etc.; and engineering controls that limit thepublic’s access to a site. Engineering controls and sitecomplexity are the major cost drivers in this model.

ooooo Ordnance and Explosive Monitoring Model - Thismodel addresses the cost of site monitoring followingthe implementation of an OE Removal Action project toassess the effectiveness of the removal. Monitoring isnecessary to ensure that public health, safety, and theenvironment are being protected by the response actionthat was implemented. Monitoring is performed overperiodic intervals. The major cost drivers in this modelare number of years and events of monitoring, and sitecomplexity.

The Huntsville Design Center and the Hazardous, Toxic,and Radioactive Waste Center of Expertise (HTRW CX)developed the RACER OE models and will continue to verifythe models using historical data and to incorporate usercomments. Additionally, research into recently developedinnovative technologies and applied engineering solutionsmay be used to update the models in 2001. These effortsenhance the Corps’ ability to continue to prepare defensiblebudget estimates for OE projects.

For more information, contact Jim Peterson at402.697.2612, or Kate Peterson at 402.697.2610.


12

By TERRIE HATFIELDSt. Louis DistrictAfter 14 years of trial and error, as well as numerous experi-ments, a tree-screen/riparian corridor developed by the Corps’St. Louis District is proving to be an environmentally beneficialsolution to stop erosion along a stretch of the MississippiRiver. In fact, U.S. Senator Kit Bond (Mo.) publicly praised theThompson Bend Riparian Corridor Project and the unprec-edented 14-year cooperative effort between the ThompsonBend Landowners Association and the Corps at a tree-plantingceremony.

This buffer strip of trees is planted between the riverbankand the floodplain at Dry Bayou Thompson Bend.

The Dry Bayou-Thompson Bend is a broad sweeping curvein the Mississippi River south of Cape Girardeau, Mo. Overtime, the river had begun to scour and cut a new channelacross the peninsula. If left alone and allowed to continue thiscut-off formation, navigation would have become impossiblealong this 17-mile reach of river.

An immediate solution was needed to avoid a potentiallycatastrophic navigation crisis, and serious agricultural andflood control concerns. If this midpoint 17-mile reach weredestroyed, it would cause a break in the continuous 2,300 milenavigation channel on the inland waterway system’s busiesthighway.

Channel development would be extremely costly. Themagnitude of the scour would threaten the integrity of themainline levee system that protects hundreds of thousands ofsquare miles of property.

A new channel, cut across the neck of the peninsula, couldnot support even a small tow, and the existing channel would betoo shallow for navigation most of the time. Velocities wouldincrease many-fold, as the Mighty Mississippi would attempt toregain an equilibrium state.

The district was asked to develop a non-structural, environ-mentally beneficial project. The result was to use nature tocounter nature.

The tree screen erosion control method has been success-fully used for a range of overbank and bankline erosionproblems throughout the Corps, and adapted by severalenvironmental agencies and foreign countries. Designs areunprecedented, have no established guidelines, and are basedsolely on engineering expertise and innovative experimentation.

This project uses cottonwood clones and other hardwoodsbred for their fast growth and water resistant attributes, andstrategic placement of other forms of vegetation. The trees willbe selectively harvested, so they don’t shade out and preventundergrowth. (Tree harvesting also provides timber as a cashcrop for landowners.) Consistent and continuing application ofthis technology, including ongoing tree planting, has main-tained the river in its natural, original channel, and navigationhas been sustained around Thompson Bend.

Work is ongoing and more tree screens are being estab-lished. The concept is considered to be structurally sound,

St. Louis District provides environmentally friendly solutionfor Mississippi River bend

Top photo shows Lester Goodwin, Thompson Bend Land-owners Association, and St. Louis District CommanderCol. Michael R. Morrow standing in what could have beenthe new Mississippi River channel. Below, map showshow the Mississippi River tried to cut a new channel acrossthe neck of the peninsula.

environmentally proactive, and economically viable. Theproject has been described by the president of the locallevee district as “an innovative concept, to solve a perennialproblem, severely tested by the Great Flood of ’93…the newtechnology works well...very cost effective, and an environ-mentally friendly solution to an age-old problem.”

Although 40 percent of the trees were killed in the GreatFlood of 1993, they remained anchored in place throughthat flood and a flood in 1995. These floods causedsetbacks, but provided valuable opportunities to collectdata and evaluate the work.

No one expected that a 100-foot treescreen would cut flood velocities inhalf, but using an acoustic dopplerprofiler, flows were measured at 8-81/2feet per second going into the screens,and 4-4 ½ feet per second coming out.This 50 percent reduction in velocity

led to far less erosion and scour, increased deposition, andeventually, healing. Tim Searchinger, Senior Attorney forthe Environmental Defense Fund, stated that this is a“wonderful project, an ideal project, a credit to everyoneinvolved.”

The Corps’ Mississippi Valley Division considers thework to be a prototype demonstration for the entire Corpsand is changing the way the Corps deals with severeerosion problems along the nation’s waterways, whileproviding benefits to the environment.

The technical paper, “Preventing a Cut-Off of a Missis-sippi River Bendway with Tree Screens,” by Jerry Rapp,was published by PIANC in 1989 and explains how theconcept was developed.

For more information about this project or Jerry Rapp’stechnical paper, contact St. Louis District (Jerry Rapp) at314.331.8371.


13

ANCHORAGE - The U. S. Army Corps ofEngineers has been responsible forregulating the use of the nation’s wetlandsfor almost three decades. In Alaska, theCorps’ regulatory mission often places theagency in a critical role.

Although most proposals to alterwetlands are approved, a majority of themare modified during the technical andpublic review process. Replacement ofaffected wetlands by preserving orcreating other wetlands, called mitigation,also is a frequent tool to allow develop-ment while protecting the environment.

Approximately 55 percent of the landarea of Alaska is classified as wetlandscompared to roughly 5 percent of theland in the lower 48 states. “Wetlands”are those areas that are inundated orsaturated by surface or ground water at afrequency and duration sufficient tosupport (and that under normal circum-stances do support) a prevalence ofvegetation typically adapted for life insaturated soil conditions. Wetlandsgenerally include swamps, marshes,bogs, and similar areas.

Because Alaska is sparsely populated,proposals to disturb natural wetlandsusually occur in relatively small urban ordeveloped areas of the state.

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act’sprogram requires approval, or permitting,of wetlands use by the Corps. The Corps’Alaska Engineer District processeshundreds of requests for these wetlandspermits each year.

Congress gave the Corps the responsi-bility to allow, modify, or decline thedischarge of fill material into waters of theUnited States, including wetlands.

Wetland determinations are made usingthree parameters — types of plants, soilconditions, and hydrology of the affectedland. Wetlands use applications areevaluated according to highly technicalstandards of the Clean Water Act.

The Corps mitigates wetland impactswhenever possible. Most mitigation inAlaska is achieved by avoiding or minimiz-ing impacts, but on occasion compensa-tory mitigation is required. Compensatorymitigation, which requires applicants toreplace affected wetlands as a condition of

a permit, is required only when the mostfragile wetland acres are disturbed. Lastyear, the Alaska District received requestsfor using 2,212 acres of wetlands andgranted permits for 2,059, of which 638 acresrequired wetland mitigation.

The Corps issues four different types ofpermits – Individual, Letter, NationwideGeneral, and Regional General Permits.Though almost all permit requests areeventually granted, a very large majority aremodified, amended, or given conditionsbased on the Corps’ technical analysis andpublic input.

“I think this fact is very importantbecause our goal is to promptly andcompletely process applications,” said DonKohler, acting Chief of the Alaska Districtregulatory branch.

“If changes were not made to applica-tions as originally submitted, a substantialportion would be dismissed,” he said. “Butbecause we are here to serve the nationalneed we attempt to assist applicants inpreparing a permit application that iscomplete and addresses all the legalrequirements of the wetlands program.

“A lot of our permits are issued under‘Nationwide Permit’ regulations. Thesegeneral permits cover activities that occur inall states. Nationwide Permits allow specificwetlands actions such as maintenance ofroadways, utilities, very small tracts forresidential uses, survey activities, minordischarges and excavations, and otherrecurring uses,” Kohler said.

“We try to streamline the process wherewe can, but the facts are that wetlandresources are a national resource that needsto be preserved for the environment and thegreater public good. Thus, the modifica-

tions, and mitigation requirements thatsometimes extend the process have to bemaintained,” Kohler said.

The Alaska District also has about 20Regional General Permits, used by othergovernment agencies working understrict agreements with the Corps to helpregulate use of wetlands.

The Alaska District authorized 469Nationwide General Permits and 440Regional General Permits in fiscal year1999.

In that same fiscal year, the Districtreceived 451 applications for individualpermits – issuing 218 as individualpermits, 40 as Letters of Permission, anddenying three. However, 232 of thesepermits were modified while in process,or modified by conditions inserted bythe Corps into the final permit offered tothe applicant. The remaining actionswere either accomplished by in-housemodifications, were modified to fitRegional or National General Permits, orwere closed or withdrawn.

The District also offers a free jurisdic-tional determination of land status to seeif proposed activities at the site require aCorps permit. In the last fiscal year theDistrict provided 1,814 determinations.

Permit applications also are coordi-nated routinely with other federal andstate natural resource agencies seekingtheir comments prior to completing theinternal review process by the AlaskaDistrict. In high-profile cases, it may benecessary to conduct public informationmeetings, or hearings. Last year theAlaska District conducted 32 publicinformation meetings and one PublicHearing.

The Corps’ expanding outreachprogram, which included the establish-ment of regional field offices, hasreduced the number of violations from289 in 1992 to only 75 in 1999.

The regulatory program helps theCorps accomplish its mission of preserv-ing the environment while maintainingthe needs of the citizens.

Additional details about the totalAlaska District regulatory program areavailable at www.poa.usace.army.mil/reg.

Regulatory program plays major role in use of Alaska wetlands

Approximately 55 percent ofApproximately 55 percent ofApproximately 55 percent ofApproximately 55 percent ofApproximately 55 percent ofthe land area of Alaska isthe land area of Alaska isthe land area of Alaska isthe land area of Alaska isthe land area of Alaska isconsidered wetlands, com-considered wetlands, com-considered wetlands, com-considered wetlands, com-considered wetlands, com-pared to roughly 5 percentpared to roughly 5 percentpared to roughly 5 percentpared to roughly 5 percentpared to roughly 5 percentof the land in the lower 48of the land in the lower 48of the land in the lower 48of the land in the lower 48of the land in the lower 48states.states.states.states.states.


By KIM GILLESPIEHuntsville CenterThe use of two innovative ordnance and explosivestechnologies, geophysical surveys and a portableblast shelter, at the former Camp Croft’s Wedgewoodsubdivision made the project safer, quicker and lessexpensive, according to Huntsville Center projectmanager Karl Blankinship.

“We (Charleston District and Huntsville Center)estimate the savings achievedby using these technologies atmore than $1 million,” saidBlankinship.

The removal of ordnance fromthe 50-acre Wedgewoodsubdivision in Spartanburg wassuccessfully conducted in lessthan six months. “If we hadn’tused these innovative technolo-gies, the project could haveextended well over a year andincreased costs significantly,”said Blankinship. Investigationswere performed on 36 acres, with50 practice grenades, 1,700pounds of scrap, and 3,000pieces of ordnance and explo-sives scrap removed during thesix-month project.

The formerly used defensesite is located in Spartanburg, S.C., and occupiedapproximately 19,000 acres during its primary years ofoperation between 1941-1945. The Department ofDefense began returning property to private andpublic use in 1947, and the land became the 7,000-acreCroft State Park and a mix of residential, farming andbusiness developments. “The Wedgewood area is asubdivision of about 50 homes, which makes ord-nance investigations and removals extremely difficultbecause of safety requirements for work exclusionzones,” explained Blankinship.

The first innovative technology used was digitalgeophysical surveys. Geophysical mapping andanalysis were used to identify potential ordnanceitems, reducing the number of digs (excavations toidentify suspect metallic objects) by it providing moreaccurate discrimination capabilities. The use of thistechnology reduced the number of digs from 1,000 toapproximately 150 per grid or area and thus, reducedremoval time from about three days per area to oneday per area.

“When compared to the time and number ofexcavations required with the old “mag and flag’technology, we saved close to a million dollars rightthere,” said Blankinship. The term “mag and flag”technology refers the use of hand-held magnetom-

eters, or metal detectors configured for ordnancedetection.

“Digital geophysical surveys offer a better way ofrecording data, but they also require the right typesof soil and geography. We based our decision to usethe digital geophysical survey on our knowledge andexperience with various ordnance projects, and thepositive results at Croft reinforce our decision andgive us additional data to help evaluate its use at

other sites,” explained Blankinship.The second innovative technol-

ogy used in the Wedgewoodsubdivision removals was aportable blast containment shelternicknamed the “Bud Lite.” Devel-oped by the Corps, and nicknamedafter its designer, Huntsville Centerengineer Cecil “Bud” Morgan, it isa blast containment shelter(engineering control) that is lightenough to be moved by a two-mancrew from excavation to excavationsite.

Using the “Bud Lite” in theWedgewood area reduced theexclusion (work) zones from almost900 feet to 200 feet. This smallerwork zone reduced the dailyevacuations from as many as 10 perday to typically one per day. The

result meant fewer disruptions to homeowners’ lives,and increased protection for the community from anypotential blast. “The best thing about the Bud Liteis that it truly does increase safety for members ofthe public by providing an additional means ofprotection,” said Blankinship.

“Coordination for evacuations was performedthrough extensive public involvement, and duringthe project closeout meeting with the residents, nocomplaints were voiced by the 29 homeownersaffected,” added Blankinship.

The Corps safely concluded the six-month projectat a cost of $1 million. Using geophysical mappingrather than “mag and flag” reduced the number ofexcavations needed by up to 75 percent and reducedthe project duration by as much as one year.

Using the Bud Lite also reduced the number ofevacuations and the inconvenience to propertyowners. “Most importantly, the large number ofordnance related items removed significantly loweredpotential risks at the site,” concluded Blankinship.

For more information about the former CampCroft project, contact Karl Blankinship at256.895.1548. For more information about the useof innovative technology for ordnance projects,contact Roger Young at 265.895.1629.

Innovative technology improves project efficiency

One of the innovative technologiesused at the former Camp Croft projectis a transportable, lighter-weight blastcontainment shelter nicknamed the“Bud Lite.” The structure provides anadded measure of protection for thepublic during excavations for sus-pected ordnance.

14


TTTTTech updateech updateech updateech updateech update

From ROD DOLTONHTRW CXThe Environmental Safety and Health Branch of the Corps’ Hazardous,Toxic, and Radioactive Waste Center of Expertise (HTRW CX) is a partici-pating member of the Army Asbestos and Lead Hazard Management team.Branch industrial hygienists have developed a number of asbestos andlead technical guidance and contract documents, including guide specifica-tions and standard scopes of work.

This guidance serves as “tools” for the Corps and for installationDirectorates of Public Works (DPWs) to execute the Commander-ledasbestos and lead hazard management programs under AR 420-70, Buildingand Structures requirements; Public Works Technical Bulletin (PWTB) 420-70-8, Installation Asbestos Management Program; and PWTB 420-70-2,Installation Lead Hazard Management.Asbestos: The Corps of Engineers Guide Specification (CEGS) 13280“Asbestos Abatement”, and two Engineering Pamphlets (EP)containing standard SOWs for asbestos surveys and air monitoringactivities make up the newly published asbestos guidance.Lead: The Corps of Engineers Guide Specification (CEGS) 13281, “Lead

Hazard Control Activities,” and four Engineering Pamphlets(EP) containing standard scopes of work for lead activities comprisethe newly published lead guidance.

Asbestos and lead guidance can be downloaded in .pdf file format (also inMS-Word, for the EPs) from the Corps’ Huntsville Center Web siteunder TECHINFO, www.hnd.usace.army.mil. Each publication can belinked directly through www.environmental.usace.army.mil/.

For additional information or questions, please contact the HTRW CXtechnical POCs: 1) For asbestos SOWs/CEGS: Terry Tomasek402.697.2590; 2) For lead SOWs: Rod Dolton 402.697.2586; and 3) Forlead CEGS: Mark Fisher 402.697.2587.

Asbestos and lead management guidelinesserve as tools for building and structuresrequirements

RA

ND

OM

NO

TE

S

District receives national environmental awardBy MARY BETH THOMPSONBaltimore DistrictThe Corps’ Baltimore District received theCoast America Partnership Award at aBaltimore, Md., ceremony on Nov. 9, 2000.The award recognized a team of federal,state and local governments, and privateorganizations for efforts to restore andenhance the tidal wetland near FortMcHenry, Md.

Tom Filip, the District’s representativeto the team, helped develop the conceptfor the project, which is officially calledthe Tidal Wetland Restoration and FieldStation at Fort McHenry.

The Fort McHenry project involves 19federal, state, local , corporate, academicand non-governmental organizations in apartnership for conducting regularcleaning and studying of the marsh.

Coastal America is a multi-agencyorganization established in 1992 torestore and protect the coastal environ-ment. The projects of its members can benominated for special awards thatrecognize outstanding partnershipefforts, multi-agency projects and teamendeavors that demonstrate the success-ful collaborative nature of CoastalAmerica.

The Conference ofFederal Environmen-tal Engineers (CFEE)is accepting nomi-nations for its Fed-eral EnvironmentalEngineer of the Year.

Nominations areopen to federal civil-ian and military envi-ronmental engi-neers, and recentretirees.

Additional infor-mation and the nomi-nation form are avail-able at www.aec.a r m y. m i l / p r o d /usaec/eq/programs/awards.htm.

FederalEnvironmentalEngineer of the

Yearnominations

15


Professional Development Opportunities

Training spaces available for FY01Environmental Restoration and Compliance courses

The following FY01 Environmental Restoration and Compliance Trainingsessions currently have spaces available. If you are interested in more infor-mation on these sessions you should contact Joy Rodriguez of the Profes-sional Development Support Center at 256.895.7448, or visit the Web site athttp://pdsc.usace.army.mil for course descriptions.

#228 TERC January 9-12, 2001 Huntsville, AL#443 Clean Air Act March 6-8, 2001 Seattle, WA#427 Env Req on Const Projects March 7-8, 2001 Omaha, NE#351 Safety & Health for HWS March 19-23, 2001 Huntsville, AL#141 HTRW Const Inspection April 30 -May 4, 2001 Philadelphia, PA#225 Env Sampling May 8-11, 2001 Omaha, NE#222 HTRW Risk Assessment June 11-15, 2001 Omaha, NE#255 CWM Workshop June 12-14, 2001 Huntsville, AL#223 HW Manifesting July 16-20, 2001 Norfolk, VA#399 Exp Ord Res & Safety August 6-10, 2001 Huntsville, AL

UXO/Countermine ForumApril 9-12, 2001New Orleans, La.POC: Charlotte Gaylon,Phone: 1.888.808.5303E-mail: [email protected]

CLO

SIN

G NO

TE

S

Tri-Service EnvironmentalTechnology SymposiumJune 18-20, 2001San Diego, Calif.Web Site: www.ets-2001.comPOC: Jean ThomasPhone: 756.357.4011FAX: 757.357.5108E-mail: [email protected]

16

Environmental Remediationand Ecosystem RestorationConferenceApril 16-20, 2001Portland, Ore.POC: Mike KlostermanPhone: 703.428.7337E-mail: Michael.J.Klosterman@ HQ02.usace.army.mil

Hard copydistributionprinted on

recycled paper

Environment The Corps...of Engineers. We have a good story to tell, and The Corps Environment is one...

Documents

Transcript of Environment The Corps...of Engineers. We have a good story to tell, and The Corps Environment is one...