Tony Risko/Terri Ely/Russ Kaiser/Mo Chang/Doland Cheung/Dan Pomerantz, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Catherine Tyrrell/Michael Lyons, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
Lauma Jurkevics, California Coastal Commission
Steven John, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Tom Johnson, Port of Long Beach
Ralph Appy, Port of Los Angeles
Mitzy Taggart, Heal the Bay
Bill Paznokas, California Department of Fish and Game
James Fawcett, Los Angeles County Beaches and Harbors
Dennis Eschen, City of Long Beach
John Hanlon, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Endangered Species Issues

The meeting focused on upcoming dredging of Marina Del Rey Entrance Channel and Los Angeles River Estuary and potential disposal of contaminated sediments at Port of Long Beach’s Pier E Slip 2 constructed fill site; we discussed timing issues and endangered species concerns. John Hanlon, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), attended the meeting to provide his agency’s input.

The Corps dredged areas A and B for Marina del Rey in 1998; 56,000 cubic meters were used for beach replenishment and 40,000 cubic meters were taken to LA-2. Surveys were conducted in March, April and November 1998; the shoaled material moves around quite a bit. Current conditions (1999): area A is probably clean, but the Corps is conducting additional testing to verify (results available mid-January 1999); area B probably is contaminated. The Corps is considering three different dredging scenarios, depending on the funding available: dredge to -20 feet (project design depth) and remove 220,000 cubic meters + 40,000 cubic meters from a small area; dredge to -25 feet and remove 344,000 cubic meters; dredge to -30 feet and remove 476,000 meters; in all cases the contaminated material would be taken to Pier E Slip 2.

To protect endangered species (particularly least tern), dredging and disposal activities normally are prohibited from May 1st through December 1st. The Corps proposes to dispose of clean material into the nearshore zone around Dockweiler Beach; USFWS did not believe that this would pose a problem for least tern; however, nearshore disposal could create additional turbidity in a local area, which would not be desirable during foraging season. There may be a need for beach replenishment further south (Redondo Beach), which would remove the disposal activity from the least tern area (two-mile radius for least tern foraging from nests at Venice Beach). Least terns forage primarily (75%) in the ocean, but also use Venice Canals and Ballona Lagoon; don’t normally use the main channel. The disposal site at Pier E Slip 2 would not affect least terns in the harbor.

The actual dredging operations at Marina del Rey could have an adverse impact due to noise, turbidity, visual intrusion; also, there is a concern that the dredge cranes create roosts for raptors, which can increase predation on least terns (this can be solved by lowering the cranes when dredging operations stop). Sound walls near the jetty could mitigate for noise problems; these would need to be installed some distance from the colony before the terns arrive at their nesting sites. USFWS will work on acceptable noise levels (decibel increase at certain distance from nests). USFWS would want some monitoring of noise levels during dredging; frequency of monitoring could be reduced if data shows that noise from dredging is below ambient levels. Might not allow 24-hour dredging operations, since ambient noise levels are lower at night. The Corps needs to determine if night-time operations will be needed or desirable and if so, try to work out conditions with USFWS.

Turbidity could be reduced by use of silt curtains; normally these only go down a few feet and might have limited effectiveness; curtains that go down 10-20 feet have been employed on the East Coast, but not here. Environmental bucket (sealed clamshell dredge), which can reduce turbidity, won’t work for Marina del Rey, since the bucket won’t penetrate coarse sand. Regulators will develop an acceptable turbidity level (e.g., 20% increase over ambient at some distance, such as 100 feet, 200 feet or 300 feet, from dredging).

The Corps will prepare a letter to USFWS with details of the proposed dredging operation activities and mitigation measures and conduct informal consultation.

Heal the Bay asked questions about some of the conditions developed by USFWS for the 1998 dredging of Marina del Rey. USFWS had recommended against dredging after April 1st; however, this condition was meant to prevent an emergency project from extending later into the year, rather than representing an absolute prohibition. USFWS restricted dredging to daylight hours to avoid disturbing pelicans at night on the breakwater; this can be reevaluated if necessary for the current dredging. USFWS approved a single point discharge of sand, because that was what was proposed; this does not mean that nearshore disposal would be unacceptable.

Environmental documents for Marina Del Rey dredging should be out around late February 1999; Los Angeles River Estuary dredging draft is out now for review.

Los Angeles River Sediment Testing

Heal the Bay pointed out that the bottom area of Area I (approximately 180,000 cubic meters) had failed the bioassay test criteria (suggesting that it would be too contaminated for ocean disposal), but the Coastal Commission approved disposal at LA-2; Heal the Bay contends that the material should be classified as contaminated. EPA pointed out that Area I results fell slightly outside of the guidelines for amphipod survival, while the bottom areas of Areas II and III passed. There is no reason to expect Area I to have different sources of contamination than Areas II and III, so EPA felt that the marginal failure of Area I did not preclude approving this material for ocean disposal (i.e., this was a judgment call).