Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
NRDA: Process, Pitfalls and Possibilities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

NRDA: Process, Pitfalls and Possibilities

538
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
538
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Natural Resource D Nt lR Damage A Assessment (NRDA) t (NRDA): Process, Process Pitfalls and Possibilities Joseph C. Steinbacher Versar, Inc. U.S U S Army Environmental Cleanup Workshop 12 March, 2009 San Antonio, Texas
  • 2. Overview • Who is this guy? • Wh is NRDA? What i • Who are the Trustees? • Why should I care about NRDA? • What can I do to mitigate NRD liability?
  • 3. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
  • 4. Office of Response & Restoration (OR&R)
  • 5. Office of Response & Restoration (OR&R) • OR&R Mission: Protect and restore coastal resources by countering and responding to environmental threats and p p g promoting sound g decision-making in the coastal zone.
  • 6. O ce of espo se Office o Response & Restoration (O & ) esto at o (OR&R) OR&R Hazardous Material H d Mt il Coastal Protection & C t l P t ti Damage Assessment Response Division Restoration Division Center (DAC) (HAZMAT) (CPRD)
  • 7. Office of Response & Restoration (OR&R) CPRD HAZMAT DAC Emergency NRDA Ecological Risk Response R Assessment A t (Oil Spills) (Waste Sites)
  • 8. O ce of espo se Office o Response & Restoration (O & ) esto at o (OR&R) OR&R Emergency Response Assessment & Restoration Division (ERD) Division (ARD)
  • 9. Damage Assessment, Remediation and Restoration Program (DARRP)
  • 10. Damage Assessment, Remediation and Restoration Program (DARRP) g ( ) DARRP Assessment & A t General Counsel for G lC lf Restoration Center Restoration Natural Resources (RC) Division (ARD) (GCNR)
  • 11. Injury Assessment Coordinator • Scientist • Facilitator • Moderator • Negotiator • Educator • Communicator • Manager • Leader
  • 12. NRDA
  • 13. NRDA • Superfund’s wicked step-sister… •R Restoration i the f i is h focus of NRDA f NRDA. • NRDAs are conducted to calculate the monetary cost of restoring natural resources that have been injured as a result of the releases of hazardous substances or discharges of oil. Not punitive… •D Damages t natural resources are evaluated by id tif i th to t l l t d b identifying the ecological functions or “services” provided by the resources, determining the baseline level of the services provided by the injured resource(s), and quantifying the reduction in service levels resource(s) as a result of the contamination. • Regulations for assessing NRD have been p g g promulgated under g both CERCLA and OPA.
  • 14. CERCLA Statutory Authority • The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ( y (CERCLA) p ) provides a comprehensive g p of p group authorities focused on one main goal: – to address any release, or threatened release, of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants that could endanger human health and/or the environment. • CERCLA's response provisions focus on the protection of human health and the environment. – The statute also provides authority for assessment and restoration of natural resources that have been injured by a hazardous substance release or response.
  • 15. OPA Statutory Authority • The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) was enacted in response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill and p p provides authority for oil p y pollution liability and compensation, as well as for the Federal government to direct and manage oil spill cleanups. • Similar to CERCLA, OPA contains authorities to allow the CERCLA assessment and restoration of natural resources that have been contaminated by the discharge, or threatened discharge, of oil.
  • 16. NRD Terminology
  • 17. Natural Resources • Both CERCLA and OPA define quot;natural resourcesquot; broadly to include quot;land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, , , , ,, ,g , drinking water supplies, and other such resources...quot; • Both statutes limit quot;natural resourcesquot; to those resources held in trust for the public termed “Trust Resources.” public, Trust Resources • Generally, both CERCLA and OPA state that a quot;natural resourcequot; is a resource quot;belonging to, managed by, held in trust by, gg g y y appertaining to, or otherwise controlled byquot; the United States, any State, an Indian Tribe, a local government, or a foreign government [CERCLA 101(16); OPA 1001(20)].
  • 18. Baseline • The condition or conditions of the natural resources and their services that would have existed at the assessment area had the release of hazardous substances not occurred [43 CFR 11.14(e)]. • Baseline data may be estimated using historical data, reference data, data control data or data on incremental changes (e g number data, (e.g., of dead animals), alone or in combination, as appropriate. • Different than remediation approach of addressing unacceptable pp g p risks; NRDA focus is ‘prerelease’ condition – conditions that would have existed in the absence of a release.
  • 19. Damages • The amount of money needed to satisfy a claim in court. The measure of damages is: g – the cost of restoring injured resources to their baseline condition – compensation for the interim loss of injured resources pending recovery – and the reasonable cost of a damage assessment [43 CFR Part 11; 15 CFR Part 990] • Damages continue to accrue until restoration and replacement projects result in the complete recovery of resources or services to baseline conditions. • “Residual damages” refers to any damages that remain after remediation is complete.
  • 20. Interim Losses • Injuries and associated service losses that accrue until injured resources and the services they provide are returned to baseline yp conditions. • The start date for calculating interim losses is either the time of release or December 1980, following enactment of CERCLA, 1980 CERCLA whichever comes later.
  • 21. Injury • A measurable adverse change, either short or long-term, in the chemical or physical q py quality, or the viability of a natural resource y, y resulting either directly or indirectly from exposure to a release of a hazardous substance [43 CFR 11.14(v)]. • Definitions of injuries to specific natural resources are provided in the NRDA regulations [43 CFR 11.62].
  • 22. Services • The physical and biological functions performed by the resource, including the human uses of those functions [ CFR 11.14(nn)]. g [43 ( )] • Habitat services include: – The provision of food and shelter for numerous and varied organisms – Nutrient cycling – Contaminant filtering – Sediment and soil erosion control – Aesthetic and recreational services for humans
  • 23. Service Flows • The services provided by a resource over time. – Restoration or remediation activities may increase the service flows y provided by natural resources over time
  • 24. Eel Grass Services and Flows
  • 25. Restoration • Actions undertaken to return injured resources and the services they provide to baseline conditions, and additional actions to yp , compensate for interim losses of natural resources and their services. • May refer to direct restoration of injured resources replacement resources, of injured resources, or acquisition of the equivalent of such resources. • Restoration actions can take place off-site, away from the assessment area, or on-site, if the restoration actions improve the condition of the injured resources above levels necessary to satisfy baseline conditions.
  • 26. The Trustees
  • 27. Trustees • No one “owns” a natural resource • H ld i trust f the public - T Held in for h bli Trustees – Federal – State – Tribal – Foreign (OPA only)
  • 28. Federal Trustees • Designated in National Contingency Plan (NCP) and Executive Order 12580 • Secretaries of: – Agriculture – Commerce – Defense – Energy – Interior • EPA is not a Trustee
  • 29. State Trustees • Governor of each State designates State Trustees •U Usually d ll departments responsible for fish, game, wildlife and ibl f fi h ildlif d environmental protection • Varies by State
  • 30. Tribal Trustees • Designated by Tribal Chairman • DOI may act at Trustee at the Tribe’s request T h T ib ’
  • 31. Trust Resources
  • 32. Trust Resources • Department of Commerce (NOAA) Trust Resources – Coastal environments, including salt marshes, tidal flats, estuaries, or , g , , , other tidal wetlands – Designated Estuarine Research Reserves or Marine Sanctuaries – Endangered marine species – Marine mammals – Rivers or tributaries to rivers which historically support or presently support anadromous fish (fish that spend a portion of their lifetime in both fresh and salt water; e.g., salmon)
  • 33. Trust Resources • Department of Interior (USFWS, BIA, BLM, USGS, NPS) Trust Resources – Certain anadromous fish – Certain endangered species – Certain marine mammals – Federally-owned minerals – Migratory birds – National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries g – National Parks and Monuments – Tribal resources, in cases where the U.S. acts on behalf of the Tribe
  • 34. Trust Resources • State Trust Resources – State forest lands – State-owned minerals – State parks and monuments – State rare, threatened, and endangered species – State wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries – Ground and surface water – The resources supporting ecosystems, that are: resources' Within the boundary of the State; or Belonging to, managed by, controlled by, or appertaining to the State
  • 35. Trust Resources • Department of Defense Trust Resources – The Secretary of Defense has trusteeship over the Natural y p Resources on all lands owned by DOD or the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Defense Logistics Agency. These lands include military bases and training facilities, research and development facilities, and munitions plants – Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Environment, Safety and Occupational Health (DASA(ESOH)) is responsible for acting as the Army Natural Resource Trustee
  • 36. Trustee Responsibilities 36
  • 37. Trustee Responsibilities • Participate in the National Response System preparedness and response activities to avoid or minimize injury to natural resources. p jy • To ensure restoration of natural resources that are injured by the discharge of oil or release of hazardous substances.
  • 38. NRDA Process
  • 39. NRDA Process • DOI and NOAA regulations provide similar standardized p procedures for p pursuing NRD claims. g • Trustees are not bound by these procedures. • Following procedures enables Trustees to obtain “rebuttable rebuttable presumption” – If the Trustees conduct the assessment in accordance with the NRDA rules, the assessment is presumed to be correct unless the PRP can p prove otherwise through a preponderance of evidence
  • 40. NRDA Process • Release •R Resources • Exposure • Pathway • Injury • Scaling • Restoration
  • 41. NRDA Process – DOI Regulations • DOI regulations provide a framework and standards for the NRDA p process under CERCLA – Type A – coastal and marine environments (model) – Type B – other environments (site-specific) – Four sequential p q phases: Pre-assessment Screen Assessment Plan Assessment Implementation p Post-assessment
  • 42. NRDA Process – DOI Regulations • Pre-assessment Screen (PAS) – Conducted to determine if additional action is warranted – Trustees must determine whether an injury has occurred and if an exposure pathway exists – Prerequisite to conducting a formal NRDA
  • 43. NRDA Process – DOI Regulations • Assessment Plan – Confirm exposure of Trust Resources p – Develop injury assessment plan – Draft assessment plans must be made publicly available for review
  • 44. NRDA Process – DOI Regulations • Assessment Implementation – Gather data necessary to q y quantify injury and determine damages yjy g Identify services provided by resources Determine baseline conditions Quantify reduction in service levels – Injury determination – Injury quantification – Damage determination
  • 45. NRDA Process – DOI Regulations • Post-assessment – Prepare an Assessment Report based on Assessment p p Implementation findings – Identify restoration options
  • 46. NRDA Process – NOAA Regulations • NOAA regulations provide a framework for conducting NRDAs that achieve restoration under OPA – Pre-assessment – Restoration Planning – Restoration Implementation p
  • 47. NRDA Process – NOAA Regulations • Pre-assessment – Determine if injury due to release is likely jy y – Determine if response actions will adequately address injuries – Determine if feasible restoration options exist
  • 48. NRDA Process – NOAA Regulations • Restoration Planning – Injury assessment jy Has release resulted in adverse change to natural resources? Quantify magnitude, and spatial and temporal extent of injury relative to baseline – Restoration selection Determine the need for and scale of restoration Develop a Draft Restoration Plan that identifies p p primary and y compensatory restoration options Draft Restoration Plan must be made publicly available for review
  • 49. NRDA Process – NOAA Regulations • Restoration Implementation – Final Restoration Plan is made available to responsible p p parties ( (RPs) ) for implementation, or to fund the Trustees’ costs for implementation
  • 50. NRDA Process – Damages • Restoration is the focus of NRDA. •C i Contingent V l i M h d ( Valuation Methods (stated value and willingness to dl d illi pay surveys) replaced by Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA) and other valuation methods that focus on using restoration costing. costing • Cooperative assessments and negotiated settlements. •S Spend th money on restoring th resources! d the t i the !
  • 51. Typical Assessment Costs vs. Representative Restoration Costs Artificial Marsh Oyster Reef Migratory Cattle Boat Ramp Reef Creation Creation Waterfowl Exclusion Construction Construction ($75k- ($154k/acre) Habitat Acq. from Salmon ($100k each) ($200k/acre) $ 126k/acre) in Midwest Habitat for 75 US years ($320/acre) ($200k/mile) Sediment 8.7-14.7 Contamination 5.5 acres 7.1 acres 3,478 acres 5.5 miles 11 ramps acres Survey ($1.1 M) Sediment Toxicity Testing 3.8 acres 6-10 acres 4.9 acres 2,344 acres 3.8 miles 7.5 ramps ($750k) Fish 15.9-26.7 Reproduction 10 acres 13 acres 6,250 acres 10 miles 20 ramps acres Testing ($2.0 M) Fish Health 4.8-8 Survey ($600k) 3 acres 3.9 acres 1,875 acres 3 miles 6 ramps acres Bird Egg 3.7-6.1 Gradient Study 2.3 acres 3 acres 1,438 acres 2.3 miles 4.6 ramps acres ($460k) Conner and Gouguet, 2004. Getting to Restoration. The Environmental Forum, Wash., DC, May/June issue.
  • 52. NRDA Process – Restoration • NRD funds from settlements must be used to restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent of injured natural resources q q j – Direct – return the injured resource to its baseline condition – Replacement – provides a substitute for an injured resource or service – Acquisition – provides for purchase, trade, or protection of resources that are similar or related to injured resource • On-site restoration is preferred unless: preferred, – Cost is grossly disproportionate – Restoration is not possible – Natural recovery will quickly return resources to baseline condition
  • 53. NRDA and DoD Coming to an installation near you??
  • 54. NRDA and DoD • 25 million acres of land • Wid variety of terrestrial and aquatic h bi Wide i f il d i habitats • Numerous species including threatened and endangered • Limited access has created incidental wildlife preserves • Potential liability may be considerable…
  • 55. NRDA and DoD • Estimates of DOE Liability – FY‘97 Defense Authorization Act required DOE to study its NRD q y liability DOE estimated its liabilities between $1.4 – $2.5 Billion – ‘96 GAO report estimated liabilities for DOE of between $1.7 - $24.9 Billion • Based on applied ratios of past damage awards to response costs at private sector sites
  • 56. NRDA and DoD • DoD as a Trustee – DoD must, with certain exceptions, comply with NRDA p , p , py provisions – DoD is responsible for identifying potential natural resource injuries (NRI) on its facilities • DoD as a PRP – DoD must address damage claims made against them – DoD may be affected by claims made against DoD contractors and facility tenants – States are becoming more familiar with NRDA process Massachusetts Military Reservation Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant Rocky Mountain Arsenal
  • 57. NRDA and Army
  • 58. NRDA and Army – NRI Policy • Army Natural Resource Injury (NRI) Policy Goals: – Army Lead Agent should be knowledgeable enough about NRI, y g g g , known or potential, at a site to notify the appropriate Trustees and coordinate their investigations and remedial plans – Army Lead Agent should consider NRI information along with all other NCP selection criteria and select a response action that results in the least amount of residual NRI, while evaluating actions that may be taken during the execution of the remedy to reduce or eliminate potential NRI
  • 59. NRDA and Army – NRI Policy • Army Natural Resource Injury (NRI) Policy Requirements: – Identify p y potential NRI at Army sites when investigating the release of y g g a CERCLA hazardous substance – Notify natural resource trustees of potential injury – Coordinate with the appropriate trustees for assessments, investigations, and planning, and help identify response actions that could, when implemented, reduce or minimize injury to natural resources – U th services of qualified natural resource professionals when Use the i f lifi d t l f i lh performing necessary assessments, investigations and response action planning activities – Whenever practicable, appropriate and consistent with the NCP, ensure response actions are evaluated and selected that limit the potential for NRI
  • 60. NRDA and Army – NRI Policy • Army Natural Resource Injury (NRI) Policy Applicability: – There must have been a release of a CERCLA hazardous substance resulting from Army operations at the site – The release of a CERCLA hazardous substance must either have injured the natural resources or have the potential to injure the natural resources – The CERCLA release at issue must pose an unacceptable risk that requires remediation to protect human health and/or the environment, as per CERLCA and NCP requirements (notification) – There must be an ongoing response action at the site that has not reached the implementation of the selected remedial action ( (retroactive notification) )
  • 61. NRDA and Army – Lead Agent • Lead Agent Responsibilities: – Identify a release of a CERCLA hazardous substance y – Identify natural resources – Identify NRI Pre response Pre-response injury (direct effect of release) Response-related injury (effect of remediation) Residual injury (effect of residual contamination) – Notify Trustees CERCLA 104(b)(2) requires Trustee notification when there has been a hazardous substance release – Coordinate with Trustees – Consider NRI during investigatory process – Lead Agent/Trustee cooperation – Coordinated development of remedial alternatives p
  • 62. NRDA and Army – Mitigating Liability There’s many a slip between the cup and the lip… Old English Proverb
  • 63. NRDA and Army – Mitigating Liability • Exclusions – Irreversible and irretrievable commitment in an EIS or comparable p environmental analysis – Release wholly occurring before enactment of CERCLA (December, 1980) – Regulated pesticide used legally under FIFRA – Federally permitted release
  • 64. NRDA and Army – Mitigating Liability • Build and maintain good working relationships with stakeholders – Community y – Trustees – Installation resources – Contractors • Identify specific sites where NRI may be an issue – Prioritize preventative actions – Develop contingency plans – Inventory natural resources – Establish baseline measurements • Incorporate NRD issues into EMS and INRMPs • Conduct NRD audits
  • 65. NRDA and Army – Mitigating Liability • PARTICIPATE!! – Pre-assessment – Injury determination – Restoration planning • Respond to Trustee Notice of Intent • Take advantage of Trustee status • Seek cooperative assessments and negotiated settlements • Incorporate NRD claims into remedial response • Covenant not to sue • Expedite the process
  • 66. Example – T/V Athos I
  • 67. Athos I Delaware River Oil Spill
  • 68. Athos I • 750 ft Panamax Tank Vessel – 1983 • D bl Sid d Si l B tt Double-Sided, Single-Bottom • Carrying 13 million gallons heavy crude oil • Citgo Asphalt Refinery – Paulsboro, NJ
  • 69. The Incident • November 26, 2004 ~ 2130 • Struck submerged object during docking procedures • Created two holes • Anchor • 264,335 gallons g
  • 70. Collision Site
  • 71. The Oil • Venezuelan heavy crude (Bachaquero) • Specific Gravity: ~ 0.975 (FW 1.000 SW 1.025) • API Gravity: 13° • Viscosity: >5,000 cSt @ 100F (cold honey) • Composition: hmw compounds (asphaltenes, resins), unresolved complex mixture (UCM) • Little evaporative loss (~3%) • Weak emulsifier • Adhesive • Primary injuries due to fouling
  • 72. Extent and Degree of Oiling • 115 river miles • 280 miles of il f shoreline Collision Site
  • 73. Resources at Risk • Birds – migratory, peregrine falcons, bald eagles • Fish – juveniles a d larvae, shortnose stu geo s ju e es and a ae, s o t ose sturgeon • Shellfish – crabs, bivalves • Wildlife – turtles, mink, otters , , • Lost use – hunting, boating, fishing • Sh li – marshes, wild rice Shoreline h ild i
  • 74. Technical Working Groups (TWGs)
  • 75. NRDA Case Team Structure
  • 76. Aquatic TWG • Subtidal habitat • Water column • Fish • Shellfish • Benthos
  • 77. Case Complexities • Trustees – Multiple States p – Multiple Agencies • RP • Submerged Oil
  • 78. Athos I Aquatic TWG Injury Assessment • Injury Assessment Plan •P Preassessment Data D • Oil Toxicity • Impacted Area Delineation • Injury Determination • Damage Estimation • Restoration
  • 79. Injury Assessment Plan
  • 80. Proposed Aquatic Injury Assessment Plan Benthic Habitat e c b Biological Resources o og c esou ces HEA Oysters Sturgeon Existing Data Striped Bass Fish Direct VSORS/Snare Shad Delineation Service Loss UDE Interim Horseshoe Crabs DE Triad Blue Benthic Sampling Submerged Oil (?) Habitat Injury Estimate Biological Injury Estimate Aquatic Injury Estimate
  • 81. Preassessment Data
  • 82. Preassessment Data • Source oil • Bird and wildlife data • Intertidal sediments • Subtidal sediments • Oyster tissue • Fish tissue • Shoreline oiling • Water • Submerged oil
  • 83. Preassessment Data • DNREC – Sediment Quality Triad • Fi h T Fish Trawl S l Surveys – 234 juvenile surveys (39 stations x 6 months) – 63 adult surveys (9 stations x 7 months) • Striped Bass YOY Surveys – 384 surveys (32 stations x 2 x 6 months) • Horseshoe Crab & Whelk Surveys – 23 trawls – 136 horseshoe crabs & 477 whelks
  • 84. Preassessment Data • Horseshoe Crab Spawning Surveys – 13 beaches in DE (130 km shoreline) – 11 beaches in NJ (80 km shoreline) – 8,700 horseshoe crabs observed • Striped Bass Survey – 15 fish – Delaware Bay, Tinicum Island, Schuylkill River – 9.7-130.6 ppb t-PAH (fillet), 11.5-291.5 ppb t-PAH (carcass) pp ( ), pp ( )
  • 85. Oil Toxicity Source Oil
  • 86. Athos I Source Oil Oil Toxicity • Athos I Source Oil – Dominated by the unresolved complex mixture (UCM) – Depleted in light hydrocarbons and alkanes Alaska North Slope Crude Oil
  • 87. Oil Toxicity • Three subclasses of chemicals of potential concern (COPCs): – Monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (MAHs) y y ( ) – Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) – Trace metals
  • 88. MAHs • Rixey (2001) – benzene content of 69 unweathered crude oils – ND (<~1ppm) – 5,900 ppm; mean = 1,340 ppm, median = 780 pp ( pp ) , pp ; , pp , ppm • Athos I benzene: – 14, 33, 50 and 128 ppm – MAH = 0.02% (mass basis)
  • 89. PAHs Athos Source Oil PAH =~0.6% ( Ath I S PAHs 0 6% (mass b i ) basis)
  • 90. Trace Metals • Vanadium – mean = 445 ppm; n=2 • Ni k l – mean = 57 ppm; n=2 Nickel 2 • Other metals (aluminum, barium, calcium, chromium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, sodium and zinc) present at low ppm levels
  • 91. Source Oil Toxicity Summary • MAHs – immediately following the spill • PAHs – potential longer term (months to years) concern • Trace Metals – low concentrations, limited bioavailability • Alkanes – straight chain alkanes in low concentrations branched straight-chain concentrations, alkanes limited bioavailability • UCM – little information available
  • 92. Oil Toxicity Sediment Quality Triad
  • 93. Sediment Quality Triad • Three sites sampled – Tinicum Island - 121504 021705 – Claymont - 112904 121504 021705 – Pea Patch Island – 112904 121504 021705 • Sediment Quality Triad – PAH and TOC – Leptocheirus plumulosus 10-d toxicity tests (mortality) – Benthic invertebrate community structure
  • 94. Sediment Quality Triad 62% 39% 10 day percent survival of Leptocheirus plumulosus
  • 95. Sediment Quality Triad Limitations • Analytical results • Li i d spatial coverage Limited il • Need to consider other COPCs
  • 96. Oil Toxicity Submerged Oil
  • 97. Submerged & Pooled Oil • Great concern • Continued fouling • Migration • Remobilization • Recurrent oiling
  • 98. Pooled Oil • Two trenches located at collision site • Created by injection under p yj pressure of release • ~ 1600 gallons recovered
  • 99. Submerged Oil
  • 100. Submerged Oil
  • 101. Oil Toxicity Summary • After review of preassessment data: – Acute toxicity y – Water column – Fish – Shellfish • Habitat/Ecological Services – Submerged oil
  • 102. Impacted Area Delineation
  • 103. Sediment Survey • Determine if Athos I oil is likely to have degraded sediment quality in the Delaware River: – Obtain PAH data from 180 sediment sampling sites using ultraviolet fluorescence (UVF) screening analysis – Verify UVF results through laboratory analysis of sample subset – Collect and archive sediment samples from each sampling station for p pg possible future toxicity studies and further chemical analysis
  • 104. Sediment Survey Sommerfield and Madsen, 2003
  • 105. Sediment Survey • Stratified random sampling plan • 162 sediment samples collected • UVF results ranged from <1 ppm to 744 ppm – Mean = 32.8 ppm – M di = 9 1 ppm Median 9.1
  • 106. Sediment Survey
  • 107. Sediment Survey • 20 samples selected for laboratory analysis – Collected from depositional zones – Collected from water depths ranging from 3 to 38 ft. – UVF PAH values ranged from 2.0 to 352.0 ppm Mean = 81.1 ppm Median = 47.7 ppm – Lab PAH values ranged from 1.5 to 32.2 ppm Mean = 13.0 ppm Median = 10.9 ppm – TOC values ranged from 1.1 to 7.3% Mean and median = 3.0%
  • 108. Impacted Area Delineation • Option 1 – based on data generated by the sediment survey • O i 2 – mirrors the shoreline TWG degree of oiling approach Option i h h li d f ili h
  • 109. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 1 • Hartwell et al. (2001) data used to estimate pre-spill average subtidal PAH concentrations (7.6 ppm) • Sampling zones with PAH concentrations exceeding 7.6 ppm are summed to generate a total area of impact • 9 samples exceeded ‘background’ concentration to produce a total l d d ‘b k d’ t ti t d ttl area estimate of 563 acres
  • 110. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 1
  • 111. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 1 • Option 1 Pros: – Largest, most comprehensive post-spill data set – Stratified random sampling design – Includes adjustment for pre-existing conditions • Option 1 Cons: – Data collected 10 months after the spill – The adjustment is simplistic – Hartwell data collected almost 7 years before the spill
  • 112. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 2 • Relies on SCAT shoreline oiling data • Assumes subtidal impacts most likely in areas adjacent to heavily oiled shoreline habitat • Injured areas are assumed to extend from lower edge of the intertidal zone to the 18’ depth contour 18 – This estimate reflects the observation that the highest sediment PAH concentrations were found at depths less than 20’ • The estimate of injured area using this approach is 412 acres
  • 113. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 2 • Supporting evidence: – Subtidal areas adjacent to heavily oiled shorelines are depositional (Sommerfield and Madsen, 2003) – Toxicity testing on sediment samples collected from subtidal habitat adjacent to heavily oiled shoreline (Tinicum Island) found statistically significant impacts
  • 114. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 2
  • 115. Impacted Area Delineation - Option 2 • Option 2 Pros: – SCAT data best captures the movement of oil immediately following the spill – Consistent with shoreline injury quantification – Double-counting with shoreline TWG is clearly avoided • Option 2 Cons: – Some subtidal areas adjacent to heavily oiled shoreline may not have been injured – Some areas adjacent to moderately or lightly oiled shoreline may have been injured ij d – Pre-existing PAH contamination is not addressed
  • 116. Injury Determination
  • 117. Service Loss • Establish ‘background’ impairment • Develop ecological effects curve • Back of the Envelope • Weight of Evidence –CComparison of sediment PAH concentrations to site-specific effects i f di i i ifi ff thresholds derived from whole sediment chemistry and toxicity data from the Delaware River – Similar comparisons to thresholds derived from national data sets p – Equilibrium partitioning sediment benchmarks – toxic units (ESB TU)
  • 118. Baseline Service Loss • EMAP and NS&T sediment PAH data (avg. 3.4 ppm) • Avg. control-adjusted survival of amphipods (Ampelisca abdita) 90.1% (10-day st d ) 90 1% (10 da study) • Simplifying assumption of a 10% reduction in benthic service levels associated with baseline conditions
  • 119. Baseline Service Loss
  • 120. Service Loss Estimates • One month post-spill: 39% control-adjusted survival = 61% service loss; minus ‘background’ (10%) = 51% service loss • Three months post-spill: 62% control adj sted s r i al = 38% ser ice post spill control-adjusted survival service loss; minus ‘background’ = 28% service loss • Ten months post-spill: 10% service loss based on sediment survey results (avg. [PAH] 2.8ppm) • Fourteen months post-spill: full recovery, i.e., no spill-associated service losses
  • 121. Recovery Curve
  • 122. Scaling
  • 123. Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA) • Resource-to-resource scaling method to determine compensation for lost resources based on the quantification of incident-related NRI • The loss of ecological services is expressed in discounted ser ice ser ices e pressed disco nted service- acre years (DSAYs) • DSAYs – the amount of ecological service provided by 1 acre of habitat over 1 year, discounted (3%) to account for the time value of the services
  • 124. Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA)
  • 125. Restoration
  • 126. Injury Summary • Shoreline – 1,729 acres oiled • T ib Tributaries – 1 899 acres oiled i 1,899 il d • Aquatic – 412 acres exposed to Athos I oil • Birds – 11,869 estimated dead (direct and indirect losses) • Recreational Services – 41,709 estimated trips on the river were affected
  • 127. Preferred Restoration Alternatives
  • 128. What can I do??
  • 129. Tips & Tricks • Be Prepared • B Proactive Be P i • Be Cooperative • Be Flexible • Be Creative
  • 130. Thank you for your attention! Any questions?