League of Women Voters Great Lakes Region 2015 Annual Conference Chicago Waterways Presentation
-
Upload
kevin-lovell-pmp -
Category
Documents
-
view
125 -
download
3
Transcript of League of Women Voters Great Lakes Region 2015 Annual Conference Chicago Waterways Presentation
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) Program
Photo: K. DeGrandchampLTC Kevin Lovell
Deputy Commander Chicago DistrictDeputy Commander, Chicago District
US Army Corps of Engineers
25 September 2015
US Army Corps of EngineersBUILDING STRONG®
Agenda
Understanding the Risk The Chicago Area Waterway
System
Characterizing Risk
USACE Strategy GLMRIS
Electric Barriers
Installation of parasitic structure at Barrier IIB
Electric Barriers
Monitoring
Efficacy Study
GLMRIS Control TechnologiesANS Treatment Plant and ANS Lock
BUILDING STRONG®2
GLMRIS: Great Lakes and Mississippi Interbasin Study
Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS)
Only continuous pathway connecting the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins
Consists of 78 miles of canals and modified Consists of 78 miles of canals and modified streams
Five outlets to Lake Michigan within the CAWS
The Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal remains an important pathway for navigation and the transport of
BUILDING STRONG®3
important pathway for navigation and the transport of wastewater effluent and storm water runoff.
Characterizing Risk
4
FY11 FY13FY12FY10
USACE Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) StrategyFY15 FY16FY14 FY17
1 Volt/in, pulses 4 ms at 5 hz 2.3 Volts/in, pulses 2.5 ms at 30 hzStandby mode
1
ERA
TIO
N Barrier I Site PrepBarrier I Design
Barrier I Building & Electronics
Barrier I Testing & Commissioning
Project O&MFunded
Operation of Electric Barriers
Asian Carp Monitoring
Demonstration Barrier(2002) Barrier IIB (2011)
Perm Barrier Iconcept
LIN
ES O
F O
PE
Barrier IIA (2009)
eDNA Monitoring and Calibration
p g
Efficacy Study: Implement Solutions as Funding and Authority Permit
eDNA Monitoring by USFWS2
3
Telemetry
Des Plaines River Bypass (Int. I)
Efficacy Study: Implement Solutions as Funding and Authority Permit
Des Plaines Barrier
Modified Structural Operations (Int. III)
O’Brien Lockand Dam
3
Barrier Risk Reduction Study and EA (Int. IV)
Optimum Parameters Research (Int. II)
Additional research and reports as needed
Great Lakes and Mississippi River Interbasin Study (GLMRIS) 4
GLMRIS Report
Brandon Road Feasibility Study
5
BUILDING STRONG®
GLMRIS - Study Summary4
Authority (d) FEASIBILITY STUDY.-The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate Federal,
State, local, and nongovernmental entities, shall conduct, at Federal expense, afeasibility study of the range of options and technologies available to prevent the
Purpose
feasibility study of the range of options and technologies available to prevent thespread of aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi RiverBasins through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and other aquatic pathways.
p Identify aquatic pathways that may exist between the Great Lakes and
Mississippi River basins Focus Area I – Chicago Area Waterways F A II Oth P th Focus Area II – Other Pathways
Inventory current and future potential aquatic nuisance species (ANS)Asian Carp Dotted Duckweed Ruffe Spiny Water Flea
Analyze possible ANS controls available to prevent ANS transfer between
Sea Lamprey
BUILDING STRONG®
Analyze possible ANS controls available to prevent ANS transfer between basins, via aquatic pathways
7
GLMRIS Study Area
23
12
LEGEND:Basin Divide
Chicago Area Waterways (CAWS)
Eagle Marsh, IN
Little Killbuck Creek, OH
Ohio‐Erie Canal, OH
1
2
3
8
The GLMRIS Program GLMRIS Program
• Chicago Lead• Coordination of program elements• Budget development and defense • Stakeholder engagement, including ACRCC related activitiesrelated activities• Collaboration with ERDC and other agencies on ANS research, including control measures Focus Area I - CAWS
• Chicago Lead
Focus Area II – Other Pathways
• Buffalo LeadGLRI f d dChicago Lead
• GLMRIS Report released Jan 2014
• GLRI funded• Pathway assessments by state• Summary Report released May 2013
Brandon Road
• Rock Island Lead• One-way control point
Little Killbuck Creek, OHOhio – Erie Canal, OH
• Buffalo Lead• Control implemented by State of Ohio ith USACE
Eagle Marsh, IN• Louisville Lead• Highest risk pathway outside CAWS
• Buffalo Lead• Control implemented by St t f Ohiy p
identified in three alternatives in GLMRIS Report
State of Ohio with USACE support• Complete by Sep 2017
• Control implemented by NRCS with USACE support• Phase I complete Nov 2015
State of Ohio • Complete by Sep 2017
BUILDING STRONG®9
ANS of Concern4
BUILDING STRONG®10
CAWS - Focus Area I4
Complex multi-use waterway Complex, multi-use waterway Navigation
Cargo Commercial – Passenger and
Governmental (Fire, Police, etc) Recreational
Water Supply & Conveyance Municipal wastewater Industrial users
Recreation Flood Risk Management
Stormwater Stormwater Combined sewer overflow
Primary connection between Great Lakes & Mississippi River basinsLakes & Mississippi River basins
Collaboration Federal, State, Regional Agencies Native American Tribes Non governmental organizations
BUILDING STRONG®
Non-governmental organizations
11
GLMRIS - Next Steps…4
Strategic control of ANS transfer is a shared responsibility Success of any ANS control strategy is directly linked to effective implementation
of both structural and nonstructural measuresof both structural and nonstructural measures Multi-agency – federal, state, local – and public responsibility
GLMRIS Report Range of alternatives to prevent ANS g p
2-way transfer between the GL & MR basins, via aquatic pathways
Nonstructural measures Active management; biologic controls Active management; biologic controls Monitoring Education and outreach Laws and regulations
St t l lt ti Structural alternatives New/novel ANS control technologies Hydrologic separation “Hybrids” – combination of both
BUILDING STRONG®12
Brandon Road Study4
Study Goal: Evaluate ypotential control options and technologies at Brandon Road Lock & Dam to reduceRoad Lock & Dam to reduce the risk of upstream interbasin transfer of ANS while minimizing impacts to waterway uses and users and identify a recommended yplan.
13
Why Brandon Road?4
Effective – Control point can addressupstream transfer of Mississippi River species through all CAWS pathwaysp g p y Avoids bypass via Lower Des Plaines Provides mechanical ‘fail-safe’ for controls Most rapidly-achievable structural option
Relevant Identified in GLMRIS Relevant - Identified in GLMRIS Included in 3 of 6 structural alternatives
Valuable - Opportunity to enhance effectiveness of existing technologies, demonstrate new conceptsg g p Adaptive management phased approach toward 2-way risk reduction Serves as a control point for species of particular public & stakeholder concern: Asian carp Adds defense in depth to existing controls at Romeoville
Minimum Impacts A project at Brandon Road control point will seek to Minimum Impacts - A project at Brandon Road control point will seek to minimize adverse impacts to existing waterway uses and users
Responsive - Incorporates stakeholder input Communicated urgency for action
BUILDING STRONG®
g y Location-specific interest
14
Brandon Road StudyActivities To Be Completed
4
Activities To Be CompletedIf flushing lock or channel in
TSP, then physical model
Jun 2015 Jan 2017 Jul 2018Jan 2019
Activities and documentation to support a decision documentNEPA Scoping for BRLD, three public meetings December 2014
Nov 2017
NEPA Scoping for BRLD, three public meetings December 2014Model Certification for selected Planning Models April 2016ATR, IEPR, Policy Review, & NEPA Review May 2017Agency Decision Milestone November 2017Civil Works Review Board July 2018
15
Civil Works Review Board July 2018Chief’s Report January 2019
Brandon Road StudyAlt ti t
4
Alternative concepts
No New Federal Action – No New Federal Action –Sustained Activities AlternativeN t t l Alt ti Nonstructural Alternative Swimmer Alternative Swimmer and Floater Alternative Swimmer, Floater, and Hitch Hiker , ,Alternative (i.e., Lock Closure)
BUILDING STRONG®16
Brandon Road Study GLMRIS Report ConceptsGLMRIS Report Concepts
• One-way (upstream) control pointC t l• Controls
– Swimmers Electric Barrier Other Emerging g g
Technologies- Carbon Dioxide (CO2)- Hydroguns- Acoustics, etc.
– Floaters Flushing lock Other concepts?
- Lock treatment (Hot water, Ozone)
– Hitchhikers Not Addressed Possible opportunities
BUILDING STRONG®
- Lock Closure- Lock Treatment
17
Other Aquatic Pathways - Focus Area II4
Objectives Inventory of potential aquatic pathways Assess likelihood of ANS transfer
Results 18 Aquatic Pathway Assessment
Reports completed 8 sites rated medium or high risk 10 sites rated low risk and eliminated
from further study Highest Probability Location:
Eagle Marsh, Ft. Wayne, IN Interim measure implemented by Indiana
DNR
Temporary Fence by Indiana DNR
NRCS to implement long term measure with USACE support
Phase I to be completed by Nov 2015
BUILDING STRONG®18
GLMRISStay in Touch!
4
On the Web…l i l
y
glmris.anl.gov
Facebookfacebook.com/glmris
TwitterFollow @GLMRIS
BUILDING STRONG®19
CSSC Barriers 1
Demo Barrier
Barrier IIA Barrier IIB
BUILDING STRONG®20
CSSC Barriers 1
Barrier Date of Construction Voltage Frequency Pulse Duration Activation Cost (volts/inch) (Hz) (ms)
Demo 2002 $2M 1.0 5 4
I 2017* TBD 2.3 34 2.5
IIA 2009 $7M 2.3 34 2.5
FY 2015 Work:C & f
IIB 2011 $21M 2.3 34 2.5
Continue design & construction of Permanent Barrier I Complete the Efficacy Study Interim Report IV Continue lab and field studies of barrier effectiveness Continue operation & maintenance of electric barriers Continue maintenance of Des Plaines River barrier Continue maintenance of Des Plaines River barrier Continue Asian carp monitoring in the CAWS with ACRCC partners
FY 2016 Planned Work:FY 2016 Planned Work: Continue construction of Permanent Barrier I Continue operation & maintenance of electric barriers Continue maintenance of Des Plaines River barrier Continue Asian carp monitoring in the CAWS with ACRCC
BUILDING STRONG®
Continue Asian carp monitoring in the CAWS with ACRCC partners
21
ACRCC 2015 CAWS Monitoring Plan2
Des Plaines Bypass Barrier Monitoring Focused below barrier traditional gear monitoring Seasonal intensive sampling above barrier Gear Development (Paupier and Mamou gears) eDNA monitoring of the CAWSeDNA monitoring of the CAWS Fixed Dual - DIDSON at the Barrier Small fish monitoring in the Upper Illinois
WaterwayWaterway Fish sampling at the Barrier Expansion of the acoustic network (telemetry) SONAR monitoring of fish abundance, location
and movements in the upper pools of the Illinois Waterway
22
USACE Telemetry Network
Priority Areas: Individually coded transmitters implanted into fish; locations detected by underwater receivers
2
y1.1. At BarrierAt Barrier
2.2. Below BarrierBelow Barrier3.3. Above BarrierAbove Barrier
Objectives: Assess efficacy of barriers Examine movements of Asian carp at population leading edge and through lock and dams
VR2W Stationary Receivers (27) Above Above barrier: 39 tagsbarrier: 39 tagsCSSC (I-355 Barge slips): 15 C CarpCSSC (Barriers): 12 C Carp, 12 LMB( )
Lower Lockport Pool: 71 tags Lower Lockport Pool: 71 tags Lower Lockport pool: 46 C Carp, 1 FWD
*
Below Barrier: 117 tagsBelow Barrier: 117 tags
Between Barriers: 12 C Carp, 12 LMBBrandon Rd
Lock
BUILDING STRONG®
Brandon Rd: 20 C CarpBrandon Rd: 20 C CarpDresden Island : 25 BH Carp, 6 S Carp, 2 Hybrid, 13 SM Buffalo, 20 C Carp
Marseilles: 16 Bighead; 15 Silver23
Efficacy Study3
A study of a range of factors that could potentially reduce the effectiveness of the electric barriers
Fall 2015Final Interim IVReport to HQUSACE
Jan 2011Installation of sluice gate screens complete
Jan 2010ASA(CW) approval of Interim I report
Sep 2011Complete InterimIIA Report
Oct 2010Construction of Interim I bypass barriers Complete
Oct 2011Increase Barrier II operational parameters
Jul 2010ASA(CW) approval of Interim III and IIIA reports
Interim Report I: Measures to Eliminate Potential Barrier Bypasses Construct 13.5 miles of structures along Des Plaines River & block I&M Canal at natural flow divide
Construction contract awarded 21 April 2010; complete as of 26 October 2010
Interim Report IIA: Determine Optimal Operating Parameterste epo t ete e Opt a Ope at g a a ete s
What are the optimal operating parameters based on lab research and field testing
Settings changed to 2.3v/in, 30 Hz, 2.5 ms in October 2011
Interim Report III: Modified Structural Operations
Efficacy Rpt IIIaEfficacy Rpt I
Interim Report III: Modified Structural Operations
Screens installed on sluice gates at O’Brien Lock & Dam
Interim IIIA Report: Acoustic Bubble Barriers Recommends a demonstration acoustic-bubble-strobe (ABS) barrier near Brandon Road L&D( )
Approved by ASA(CW) in July 2010, but currently no funding or authority to implement
Interim IV Report: Risk Reduction Study and Integrated Environmental Assessment
Systematic risk assessment and discussion of risk reduction efforts
BUILDING STRONG®24
Complete NEPA cumulative effects assessment
Chicago Districtg
l ilBUILDING STRONG®
www.lrc.usace.army.mil25