New York/ New Jersey Harbor: Alternative Methods for Ex ... - CLU-IN

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Harbor along with New Jersey and New York contaminant standards are shown in Figure 2. Figure 2: Contaminant Concentrations for Select Locations in the NY/NJ Harbor and Applicable Standards (Modified from Fast Track Dredged Material Decontamination Demonstration for the Port of New York and New Jersey 1999.) Contaminant Newark Arthur Newtown NJ Non- NJ NY Bay Kill Creek Residential Residential Residential 2,3,7,8 TCDD (ppt) 130 39 9.9 --- --- --- OCDD (ppt) 5494 3016 15369 --- --- --- TCDD/TCDF TEQ (ppt) 197 61 224 --- --- --- Total PCBs (ppm) .92 1.16 2.86 2000 480 1000 Anthracene (ppb) 1400 880 5820 10,000,000 a 10,000,000 a 50,000 a Benzo(a)anthracene (ppb) 3070 1460 6190 4,000 a 900 a 224,000 Chrysene (ppb) 3100 1630 6050 40000 a 9000 a 50,000 Total PAHs (ppb) 32550 19120 59380 4000 900 224 Total Herbicides and DDT (ppb) 145 1219 420 40,000 9000 400 Arsenic (ppm) 9-17 17-25 5-33 20 a 20 a 396,500 Cadmium (ppm) 1-2 1.5-3 1-20 100 a 39 a N/A Chromium (ppm) 175 161 305 N/A N/A 7.5 Copper (ppm) 105-131 178-304 61-770 600 a 600 a 1 Lead (ppm) 109-136 111-261 68-554 600 a 400 a 10 Mercury (ppm) total 2-3 2-5 2-3 270 a 14 a 25 Nickel (ppm) 33-40 20-60 12-140 2400 a 250 a SB Silver (ppm) 2-4 2-5 2-3 4100 a 110 a 0.1 Zinc (ppm) 188-244 230-403 104-1260 1500 a 1500 a 20 a NJDEP 1996 standards from Biogenesis report N/A not available SB Site Background Increasing costs have also caused ocean dumping to be almost completely eliminated as a possibility for sediment disposal. A 2.2 square mile area off of the coast of Sandy Hook, New Jersey, commonly known as the —Mud Dump“ was a site that was conventionally used for sediment disposal. In the early 1990s, the cost of disposing of a cubic yard of sediment escalated from $5-10 to over $100 over the course of a few months (Stern, Inteview). This cost upsurge paired with more stringent regulations on ocean disposal forced those involved in the dredging of the NY/NJ Harbor to develop alternatives for contaminated sediment disposal. 4
The Search for Alternatives to Ocean Disposal of Dredged Sediment Several groups including the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ), the State of New Jersey, EPA, the Harbor Estuary Program (Douglas), and the New Jersey Office of Maritime Resources (NJMR) of the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) took an interest in investigating alternative methods for contaminated sediment remediation (Jones, 127). In response to the growing concern over the status of the harbor, Congress began to take action through the Water Resources Development Acts (WRDA) and assigned the task of solving the NY/NJ Harbor problem to the Region 2 office of the U.S. EPA and the New York District of the USACE (Stern, interview) Congress passed the first of the WRDA acts, Phase 1: Study of Alternative Methods for Disposal of Dredged Material, in 1990. This act fostered a demonstration project to find alternatives to disposing of the dredged sediment in the ocean. Some of the proposed alternatives included using the sediment for capping of more contaminated materials, storing it on a containment island, and cleaning it with new decontamination technologies (EPA, 2). The second phase, Bench- and Pilot-Scale Demonstrations, was passed in 1992. The purpose of this phase was to demonstrate the effectiveness and applicability of the variety of decontamination technologies. Issues that were to be considered in the bench and pilot studies were cost, possible manufacturing of a beneficial end-use product, decontamination efficiency, and feasibility of expanding the technology to a full-scale facility. In 1996 the last phase of WRDA, Full-Scale Dredged-Material Decontamination Demonstration, one or more decontamination technologies were to be selected for application in a full-scale facility that would process a minimum of 500,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment each year. In 1999, Congress passed section 218, an amendment section to WRDA which provided for the manufacturing of —practical end- use products“ from the decontaminated sediment. (Stern, interview). 5
Page 1 and 2: New York/ New Jersey Harbor: Altern
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract………
Page 5 and 6: FIGURES Figure 1: Map of the New Yo
Page 7 and 8: Abstract The natural accumulation o
Page 9: The NY/NJ Harbor is a valuable reso
Page 13 and 14: The state-funded program run by the
Page 15 and 16: products produced by the various st
Page 17 and 18: facilities are still completing cos
Page 19 and 20: Biogenesis The Process The BioGenes
Page 21 and 22: and wash water and other cleaning f
Page 23 and 24: End-Use Product After the contamina
Page 25 and 26: hazardous landfill while the larger
Page 27 and 28: can be plasma vitrified to produce
Page 29 and 30: supply, the demand now excedes the
Page 31 and 32: GTI The Process The four main steps
Page 33 and 34: exceptions, SO2 and NOx, are releas
Page 35 and 36: Economic Analysis The United States
Page 37 and 38: After sediment decontamination, the
Page 39 and 40: Economic Analysis The cost of the N
Page 41 and 42: make it through the screen are set
Page 43 and 44: this section, the SOLFIX process wa
Page 45 and 46: to be 7.29 ppt, which is below the
Page 47 and 48: combination of processes is worth a
Page 49 and 50: Contaminated Sediment + Oversized M
Page 51 and 52: Appendix C: GTI Cement-Lock Technol
Page 53 and 54: Oversized Materials Contaminated Se
Page 55 and 56: Appendix G: Metal Decontamination A
Page 57 and 58: Appendix I: Semi-Volatile Organic C

New York/ New Jersey Harbor: Alternative Methods for Ex ... - CLU-IN

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?