Facility Siting Update: Facility Siting Update: Selected Sites - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
facility siting update facility siting update selected
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Facility Siting Update: Facility Siting Update: Selected Sites - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

May 13, 2023 206 likes •630 views

Facility Siting Update: Facility Siting Update: Selected Sites Selected Sites Public Forums: Fort Edward, New York, January 11, 2005 Bethlehem, New York, January 19, 2005 H udson River Overview Overview Facility Siting Process

slide-1
SLIDE 1

River H udson

Facility Siting Update: Facility Siting Update: Selected Sites Selected Sites

Public Forums:

Fort Edward, New York, January 11, 2005 Bethlehem, New York, January 19, 2005

slide-2
SLIDE 2

United States Environmental Protection Agency

  • Facility Siting Process
  • Final Evaluation Process
  • Selected / Eliminated Sites
  • What is a Dewatering Facility?
  • Minimizing Impacts
  • Community Outreach
  • Next Steps
  • Q & A

Overview Overview

slide-3
SLIDE 3

United States Environmental Protection Agency

The Facility Siting Process The Facility Siting Process

December 2002 ~ January 2005 December 2002 ~ January 2005

  • December 2002
  • Identify Study Area / 2,400 Candidate Sites
  • December 2002 to June 2003
  • Apply Engineering Criteria
  • May 2003
  • Announce 24 Sites
  • June 2003 to September 2003
  • Evaluate 24 Sites using Engineering and

Additional Considerations criteria

slide-4
SLIDE 4

United States Environmental Protection Agency

The Facility Siting Process The Facility Siting Process

December 2002 ~ January 2005 December 2002 ~ January 2005

  • September 2003
  • Announce 7 Sites
  • November 2003 to April 2004
  • Conduct Field Investigations, Identify Site-Specific

Criteria, Evaluate 7 Sites

  • April 2004
  • Announce 3 Recommended Sites and 2 Back-up

Sites

  • July 2004 to January 2005
  • Final Evaluation of 3 Sites, Select 2 Sites
slide-5
SLIDE 5

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Facility Siting Process: Facility Siting Process:

Involving Communities Involving Communities

  • 14 Public Sessions
  • 3 Major Technical Documents
  • 12 Fact Sheets
  • 2,350 comment letters on the Draft Facility Siting

Report

  • Individual response to comments
  • Summary of Public Comments and Responses
slide-6
SLIDE 6

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Final Evaluation Process Final Evaluation Process

What happened since April 2004?

  • Design Team Review and Input (GE and EPA)
  • Public Review and Input
  • Additional Information and Investigations
  • Cultural Resource / Archaeological Investigations
  • Transportation and Disposal Logistics
  • Continued Site-Specific Evaluations
  • Selection of Sites by EPA
slide-7
SLIDE 7

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Sites Selected Sites

“Energy Park” “Energy Park”

Town of Fort Edward Washington County, New York

“OG Real Estate” “OG Real Estate”

Town of Bethlehem Albany County, New York

slide-8
SLIDE 8

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – Energy Park Energy Park

  • Located close to River Section 1, where

approximately 60% of the dredging is expected to occur;

  • Sufficient usable space to construct and operate

dewatering and rail yard facilities with adequate buffer;

  • Offers direct access to an active Canadian

Pacific rail line and the existing Fort Edward Rail Yard is adjacent to the site;

slide-9
SLIDE 9

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – Energy Park Energy Park (

(Cont.) Cont.)

  • Located outside the 100-year floodplain;
  • Interested landowner owns the site; and
  • No cultural/archaeological resources found
  • n-site.
slide-10
SLIDE 10

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – OG Real Estate OG Real Estate

  • Located directly on the Hudson River with

adequate river frontage for site access;

  • Sufficient usable space to construct and operate

dewatering and rail yard facilities with adequate buffer;

  • Direct access to two active rail lines (CSX and

Canadian Pacific) providing additional transportation flexibility to and from the site;

slide-11
SLIDE 11

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – OG Real Estate OG Real Estate (

(Cont.) Cont.)

  • Located south of the Federal Dam at Troy

where the navigational channel is deeper and can accommodate deep-water barges; and

  • No cultural / archaeological resources found
  • n-site.
slide-12
SLIDE 12

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Sites Eliminated Sites

“Bruno”

Town of Schaghticoke Rensselaer County, New York

“Old Moreau”

Town of Moreau Saratoga County, New York

“Canal Corp.”

Town of Halfmoon Saratoga County, New York

slide-13
SLIDE 13

United States Environmental Protection Agency

What is a Dewatering Facility? What is a Dewatering Facility?

New Bedford Site New Bedford Site

Filter Press Water Treatment

slide-14
SLIDE 14

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Storage Areas Rail Spurs

Filter Cake Stockpile Area

slide-15
SLIDE 15

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Treatment Facility and Bulkhead

slide-16
SLIDE 16

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Facility Features: What May Be On Site Facility Features: What May Be On Site

  • Buildings/Structures
  • Offices / Trailers
  • Parking Lot
  • Rail Yard
  • Rail Cars
  • Access Roads
  • Waterfront
  • Wharf/Bulkhead Area
  • Boat Launches
  • Barge Turning Basin

(EP Site Only)

  • Barges, Boats
  • Equipment
  • Dredging Equipment
  • Filter Presses/Centrifuges
  • Holding Chambers/Tanks
  • Hydrocyclones
  • Water Treatment

Tanks/Vessels

  • Sediment/Backfill Staging Areas
  • Buffer Zones (trees, berms etc.)
  • Monitoring Stations
  • Pipelines
slide-17
SLIDE 17

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Potential Site Operations Potential Site Operations

  • Sediment Processing and Water Treatment

and/or

  • Sediment Transfer (Pipeline, Rail and/or Barge)
slide-18
SLIDE 18

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Minimizing Impacts: Minimizing Impacts:

Quality of Life Performance Standards Quality of Life Performance Standards

  • Air Quality
  • Odor
  • Noise
  • Lighting
  • Navigation
slide-19
SLIDE 19

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Minimizing Impacts: Minimizing Impacts:

Compliance with the Performance Standards Compliance with the Performance Standards

  • Monitoring
  • Responding to

Complaints

  • Taking Action as

Necessary

  • Reporting and

Notification

slide-20
SLIDE 20

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Site Monitoring Site Monitoring

Examples:

  • PCB Air Emissions
  • Noise Levels
  • Odor Control
  • Worker Protection (On-Site Health

and Safety Plan aka HASP)

  • Community Protection (Community Health and

Safety Plan aka CHASP)

slide-21
SLIDE 21

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Community Health and Safety Plan Community Health and Safety Plan

Purpose:

  • Identify potential hazards
  • Control of potential hazards
  • Protection of drinking water supplies
  • Emergency response plans
  • Community notification
  • Complaint resolution
  • Identification of project safety personnel /

emergency contacts

slide-22
SLIDE 22

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Future Community Outreach: Future Community Outreach:

Dewatering Facilities Dewatering Facilities

  • EPA will work with Fort Edward to create a

dewatering facility committee

  • The committee will be made up of residents and

town officials and will meet monthly

  • Facility design features will be reviewed with the

committee and the community

  • The community will also be asked to provide input
  • n the Community Health and Safety Plan

(CHASP)

slide-23
SLIDE 23

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Future Community Outreach: Future Community Outreach:

CHASP CHASP

  • Educational workshop on CHASP (Spring/

Summer 2005)

  • EPA and GE will seek community input during

the development of the draft CHASP

  • Public comment period on draft CHASP

with public meetings

  • CHASP scheduled for release Spring 2006
slide-24
SLIDE 24

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Potential Future Site Uses Potential Future Site Uses

  • Recreational, Industrial, and Commercial
  • Bulkhead, buildings, infrastructure, rail spurs

and utilities may be beneficial to the future use

  • f the property
slide-25
SLIDE 25

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Next Steps Next Steps

Present Present -

  • 2006

2006

  • Spring 2005 – Determine specific uses for each

selected site (dewatering, rail, transfer, etc.)

  • Spring 2005 – Dredge Area Delineation (DAD)

Report identifying Phase 1 dredging areas

  • Summer/Fall 2005 – Release of Intermediate Design

that identifies dewatering facility design, dredging methods, and transportation methods and routes to the disposal sites

  • Winter 2005/2006 – Final Design for Phase 1
slide-26
SLIDE 26

United States Environmental Protection Agency

  • Winter 2006 - Community Health & Safety Plan

(CHASP) released for public review

  • Winter/Spring 2006 - Construction of Dewatering

Facilities

  • Summer/Fall 2006 - Phase 1 Dredging

Next Steps Next Steps

Present Present -

  • 2006

2006

slide-27
SLIDE 27

United States Environmental Protection Agency

For More Information For More Information

EPA Region 2 Hudson River Field Office

421 Lower Main Street Hudson Falls, NY 12839

1-866-615-6490 hrfo@capital.net www.epa.gov/hudson David H. King, PE, Director Leo Rosales, Public Affairs Specialist

slide-28
SLIDE 28

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Facility Features: What May Be On Site Facility Features: What May Be On Site

  • Buildings/Structures
  • Offices / Trailers
  • Parking Lot
  • Rail Yard
  • Rail Cars
  • Access Roads
  • Waterfront
  • Wharf/Bulkhead Area
  • Boat Launches
  • Barge Turning Basin

(EP Site Only)

  • Barges, Boats
  • Equipment
  • Dredging Equipment
  • Filter Presses/Centrifuges
  • Holding Chambers/Tanks
  • Hydrocyclones
  • Water Treatment

Tanks/Vessels

  • Sediment/Backfill Staging Areas
  • Buffer Zones (trees, berms etc.)
  • Monitoring Stations
  • Pipelines
slide-29
SLIDE 29

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Discussion Discussion

slide-30
SLIDE 30

United States Environmental Protection Agency

slide-31
SLIDE 31

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – Energy Park Energy Park

slide-32
SLIDE 32

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Selected Site Selected Site – – OG Real Estate OG Real Estate

slide-33
SLIDE 33

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Old Moreau Old Moreau

Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Insufficient usable space to construct and operate onsite rail yard and dewatering facilities; Environmental concerns from previous dumping and disposal activities would affect site layout and usable acreage; Presence of cultural resources onsite affects site layout, usable acreage, and increases complexity of waterfront access;

slide-34
SLIDE 34

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Old Moreau Old Moreau

Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Dredge spoils and fill material present geotechnical concerns

regarding support of foundations;

Site waterfront is within depositional area and may require

periodic navigational dredging; and

Limitations due to topography along existing rail frontage

and waterfront.

slide-35
SLIDE 35

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Bruno Bruno

Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Traffic and Transportation Issues

  • Site is bisected by public road requiring operations to account

for moving up, over, or underneath the road;

  • Local congestion associated with nearby river crossing,

potential for road closures due to rail crossing;

  • Emergency vehicle access and local bus route issues;

Cultural Resource Concerns

  • Onsite archaeological discoveries;
  • Mechanicville Golf Course.
slide-36
SLIDE 36

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Bruno Bruno (cont)

(cont) Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Topography

  • Onsite terrain increases the complexity of designing rail

access, rail yard, and the transfer of materials across the site.

Rail Service

  • Evaluations by GE indicated limited track and infrastructure

for this project within project area.

slide-37
SLIDE 37

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Bruno Bruno (cont)

(cont) Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Waterfront Depth

  • Waterfront would require dredging to create river access,

and likely would also require routine dredging to maintain necessary depths for barges and tugs.

Pool Management and Clearance Under Nearby Rail Bridge

  • River depths in pool are actively managed. Rail bridge just

upstream of site has low vertical clearance over river. Water level adjustments within pool would increase complexity of design and operations.

slide-38
SLIDE 38

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Bruno Bruno (cont)

(cont) Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Lock Adjacent to Site

  • Proximity to Lock 3 could create vessel congestion.

Proximity to Dredge Material

  • Located in River Section (RS) 3 where approximately 19%
  • f material to be dredged is located; would restrict potential

use of hydraulic dredging in RS 1 and complicates transportation logistics.

slide-39
SLIDE 39

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Eliminated Site Eliminated Site – – Canal Corp. Canal Corp.

Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Potential Limitations/Additional Design Considerations Crossing US Highway 4 / NYS Route 32 presents design

considerations, possibly requiring the construction of a conveyor system

Shallow river areas close to the site may require extensive and

periodic navigational dredging

Topography may limit the waterfront area that could be used for

the processing facility

Proximity to a known wintering area for the bald eagle Presence of multiple wetland areas along rail frontage

slide-40
SLIDE 40

United States Environmental Protection Agency