Los Angeles Basin Contaminated Sediments Task Force

Summary of Aquatic Disposal and Dredge Operations
Committee
Meeting
May 10, 2000

bar4.gif (2919 bytes) 

  1. Meeting time and location: May 9, 2000 at the Port of Los Angeles, from 10 am to noon.
  2. Attendees: Dean Smith (LA County), Mark Gold (Heal the Bay), Kathryn Curtis (POLA), Tom Johnson (POLB), Gwangyu Wang (SMBRP), Howard Cumberland, Alistaire Callender (Hart Crowser), Nick Buhbe (Ogden Env.), Susie Ming, Russ Boudreau (Moffatt and Nichol Engineers), Doland Cheung, Tony Risko (USACE).
  3. The purpose of the meeting was to review and discuss elements of the 905(b) Analysis Report for the Corp’s Los Angeles Regional Dredged Material Management Plan Reconnaissance Study (DMMP).
    1. A skeltonized 905(b) Analysis Report was presented and discussions were held to "fill-in-the-blanks".
    2. Congressional districts of interest were Horn and Kuykendall.
    3. Marina Del Rey Reconnaissance and Feasibility Studies will be rolled into this effort.
    4. This study will investigate new disposal alternatives and sites, BMPs, environmental restoration, and sediment thresholds.
    5. Multiple alternatives will be investigated, both hard and soft. However, alternatives must meet federal economic development requirements.
    6. New legislation and administration policy will require an objective of Ecosystem Restoration. The Corps is still unsure as to how this will be implemented.
    7. Public concerns were identified and discussed at great length:
      1. Economic – Disposal alternative costs are a major factor for Ports, "No Dredge" option severely impacts Ports ability to operate, CSTF has never addressed what level of cost is economically feasible, "Feasibility of costs" is highly situational on business climate.
      2. Political – "NIMBY" concerns with any alternative, some public interest groups want no disposal anywhere in the ocean, current movement to declare parts of the region a National Marine Sanctuary.
      3. Environmental – Effects of leaving contaminants in-place, construction impacts, benefits of removal/reuse, bioaccumulation, benthic effects, threatened and endangered species.
      4. Agency/Management – Permit/consistency coordination, sediment thresholds, source control, unified permit applications, identifying contaminant sources, solutions can’t inhibit Port operations, study leaning towards predetermined goals, how will study interact with CSTF goals.
    8. Quantity of contaminated material to be dredged over the next five years will be revised by POLB.
    9. No preliminary plans will be eliminated from consideration at this time.
    10. Still need documentation and a thoroughly reviewed response from RWQCB on landfill disposal of ocean sediments.
    11. Current schedule doesn’t meet deadlines of strategy adoption by CSTF. USACE may recommend that the CSTF request an extension to make schedules match. CSTF may not necessarily adopt the Feasibility Study strategy.
    12. Resources agencies not in attendance will be contacted for additional input to the 905(b).
  4. The next meeting will be June 27, 2000 from 10am to noon at the Port of Los Angeles. Topic will be to discuss the Draft 905(b) Analysis Report.

bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Committee Meetings page.

bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the Contaminated Sediments Task Force home page.

bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the California Coastal Commission's home page.