NOAA's Response and Restoration Blog

An inside look at the science of cleaning up and fixing the mess of marine pollution


Leave a comment

Proposed Settlement for St. Louis River Superfund Site

River bank with plants. Image credit: NOAA.

As part of the proposed restoration non-native cattail, seen here, will be removed and replaced with native emergent wetland species such as the culturally important wild rice. Image credit: NOAA

A major Superfund site along the St. Louis River is getting $8.2 million to clean up and restore a portion of the river historically polluted by industrial waste.

The Superfund site is about 255 acres of land and river embayments located primarily in Duluth, Minnesota, and extending into the St. Louis River, including Stryker Bay. High levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and other pollutants prompted the Environmental Protection Agency to place the area on the National Priorities List in 1983.

Since 1890, the St. Louis River/Interlake/Duluth Tar site has been an active industrial area and included coking plants, tar and chemical companies, pig iron production, meatpacking, and rail-to-truck transfer stations. High levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are the primary concern.

NOAA and other federal, state, and tribal partners worked with EPA to determine the nature, extent, and effects of the contamination under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, also known as the Superfund law. The natural resource trustees also have governmental authority to seek compensation under this law for natural resources harmed by decades of industrial wastes and by-products discharged into the St. Louis River.

The proposed settlement includes $6.5 million for restoration activities consistent with a proposed Restoration Plan / Environmental Assessment. Of the possible restoration alternatives, the draft Restoration Plan recommends:

  • Kingsbury Bay: Restoration of a 70-acre shallow, sheltered embayment habitat that will add recreational access areas for fishing and a boat launch, improve habitat, and reduce invasive vegetation.
  • Kingsbury Creek Watershed: Activities to reduce sediment accumulation, improve water quality, and support the shallow sheltered bay habitat of the restored Kingsbury Bay.
  • Wild Rice Restoration: Enhancement of wild rice stands within the estuary.
  • Cultural Education Opportunities: Development of informational displays to communicate importance of the St. Louis River estuary’s cultural and natural resources.

The three polluting companies previously paid approximately $80 million to clean up the Superfund site.

 You can read more about the cleanup and restoration plans, and how to comment on the plans, at our Damage, Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program website.


Leave a comment

Portland Harbor Superfund Site Restoration Plan Announced

The St. Johns Bridge spans the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon. Image credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

The St. Johns Bridge spans the Willamette River in Portland, Oregon. Image credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

NOAA announced a plan to restore natural resources in the Portland Harbor Superfund site, an 11-mile stretch of the Willamette River with several areas of contaminated sediments from more than 100 years of industrial and urban uses.

The river has been a hub of the Oregon city’s maritime commerce since the 1900s, and is still at the center of Portland’s commercial and recreational activities. Pollution from industrial and urban uses prompted the Environmental Protection Agency to declare it a Superfund site in 2000.

NOAA and the other members of the Portland Harbor Natural Resource Trustee Council recently released the Portland Harbor Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Restoration Plan. The plan evaluates several alternatives and outlines the council’s chosen approach: Integrated Habitat Restoration. Officials believe the integrated plan will result in habitat restoration projects that benefit a wide variety of fish and wildlife that may have been harmed by contamination.

This integrated approach focuses on the habitat needs shared by many species, with a particular focus on juvenile Chinook salmon. It also establishes a geographic boundary to guide the location of restoration projects.

The Trustee Council seeks projects that will achieve the following:

  • Restore natural hydrology and floodplain function
  • Reestablish floodplain and riparian plant communities
  • Improve aquatic and riparian habitat
  • Increase habitat complexity
  • Provide connectivity to other habitats in the area
  • Restore recreation along the river while avoiding negative impacts to habitat

To read details of the plan, visit the Damage Assessment Remediation and Restoration Program website.


Leave a comment

Podcast: Restoration of Industrial Waste Sites (Episode 5)

The Raritan River as it runs through a wooded area.

The American Cyanamid Superfund Site affected the Raritan River in northern New Jersey. Image credit: U.S. Geological Survey

An unfortunate by product of some industrial activities is the release of hazardous chemicals and heavy metals into the environment. NOAA Ocean Podcast talked with Reyhan Meharn, NOAA Regional Resource Coordinator with the Assessment and Restoration Division, about moving towards restoration at hazardous industrial waste sites.

Listen to the podcast:

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/podcast/may17/nop05-restoration.html

Read the National Ocean Service podcast transcript (May 2017, 13;49)

 


Leave a comment

Assessing the Impacts from Deepwater Horizon

Beach with grass.

Beach habitat was part of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill settlement. Image Credit: NOAA

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster spread spilled oil deep into the ocean’s depths and along the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, compromising the complex ecosystem and local economies. The response and the natural resources damage assessment were the largest in the nation’s history.

Ecosystems are comprised of biological, physical, and chemical components, interconnected to form a community. What happens in one location has serious, cascading effects on organisms in other parts of the ecosystem. The Gulf’s coastal wetlands and estuaries support the entire Gulf ecosystem, providing food, shelter, and nursery grounds for a variety of animals. The open waters of the Gulf also provides habitat for fish, shrimp, shellfish, sea turtles, birds, and mammals.

Evaluating impacts from the spill

Considering these interdependencies during the assessment process was important. At the same time, it was impossible to test or examine every injured bird, every sickened dolphin, or every area contaminated with oil. That was cost prohibitive and scientifically impossible.

Instead, NOAA scientists evaluated representative samples of natural resources, habitats, ecological communities, ecosystem processes and linkages.

To do that, scientists made 20,000 trips to the field, to obtain 100,000 environmental samples that yielded 15 million records. This data collection and subsequent series of scientific studies formed the basis for the natural resources damage assessment that led to the largest civil settlement in federal history.

A short summary of the natural resource injuries:

Marshes injured

  • Plant cover and vegetation mass reduced along 350 to 720 miles of shoreline
  • Amphipods, periwinkles, shrimp, forage fish, red drum, fiddler crabs, insects killed

Harvestable oysters lost

  • 4 – 8.3 billion harvestable oysters lost

Birds, fish, shellfish, sea turtles, and dolphins killed

  • Between 51,000 to 84,000 birds killed
  • Between 56,000 to 166,000 small juvenile sea turtles killed
  • Up to 51% decrease in Barataria Bay dolphin population
  • An estimated 2 – 5 trillion newly hatched fish were killed

Rare corals and red crabs impacted

  • Throughout an area about 400 to 700 square miles around the wellhead

Recreational opportunities lost

  • About $527 – $859 million in lost recreation such as boating, fishing, and beach going
Top fish shows no oil bottom fish shows oil.

The top picture is a red drum control fish that was not exposed to oil, while the bottom red drum fish was exposed to Deepwater Horizon oil for 36 hours. The bottom fish developed excess fluid around the heart and other developmental deformities. This is an example of the many scientific studies conducted for the natural resources damage assessment. Image Credit: NOAA/Abt

What we shared

Those studies not only documented the injuries, but also helped the entire scientific community understand the effects of oil spills on nature and our communities. All of the scientific studies, including over 70 peer-reviewed journal articles, as well as all the data collected for the studies, are available to the public and the scientific community. Additionally, our environmental response management software allows anyone to download the data from a scientific study, and then see that data on a map.

We will be publishing new guidance documents regarding sea turtles and marine mammals by the end of 2017. These guides compile best practices and lessons learned and will expedite natural resources damage assessment procedures in the future.

Read more about Deepwater Horizon and the work of NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration and partners in responding to the spill, documenting the environmental damage, and holding BP accountable for restoring injured resources:

 

Tom Brosnan, Lisa DiPinto, and Kathleen Goggin of NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration contributed to this article.


Leave a comment

Deepwater Horizon: Response in the Midst of an Historic Crisis

Tractor with trailers on beach.

Cleanup crews in Pensacola Beach, Florida, try to remove oil from the sand in November 2010. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill that severely injured the environment also directly affected the seafood trade and tourism economies of five Gulf states. Image Credit: NOAA

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill began on April 20, 2010, with a blowout of BP’s Macondo drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico. In addition to the death of 11 men, the spill resulted in the largest mobilization of resources addressing an environmental emergency in the history of the United States.

The size of the spill required the Emergency Response Division to refine tracking subsurface oil, flowrate calculations, and long-term oil transport modeling. Data and information management became a paramount issue. NOAA’s web-based environmental management mapping tool proved invaluable in tracking and sharing data across the many teams and command posts.

With only 12 full time responders and about 120 NOAA staff nationally, the size and complexity of the incident taxed the spill team’s capacity to respond. NOAA recruited retired staff and contractors to provide additional emergency support, along with scientists from across the nation and internationally.

Other NOAA programs provided critical services in the field, on ships, aircraft, and in regional laboratories, weather forecast offices, and regional command posts. As the response grew, staffing the various missions required extraordinary interagency coordination.

Overall, several thousand NOAA staff worked on spill response and damage assessment activities. Seven NOAA ships—39 percent of the NOAA fleet—conducted cruises with missions as diverse as seafood safety monitoring, wellhead monitoring, and detecting subsurface oil. Five NOAA aircraft flew over 773 flight hours to track the oil spill and to measure air quality impacts.

Challenges faced with Deepwater Horizon

Forecasting the oil’s movement: How would the Loop Current effect the oil’s potential to spread to the Florida Keys and beyond? To answer that staff worked 24-7 modeling where the oil might spread in an effort to help defuse the public’s concern that oil would rapidly travel around Florida and oil shorelines along the Atlantic seaboard. After more than a month of daily mapping, overflights, and satellite analyses, our data showed no recoverable oil in the area, and the threat of oil spreading by the Loop Current diminished.

Calculating how much oil spilled and where it went:

Estimating the size of an oil spill is difficult, and determining the volume spilled from this leaking wellhead over a mile deep was even more challenging. Federal scientists and engineers worked with experts from universities on interagency teams to calculate the flow rate and total volume of oil spilled.

Another interagency team, led by the U. S. Geological Survey, NOAA, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology developed a tool called the Oil Budget Calculator to determine what happened to the oil. Working with these experts and agencies, NOAA was able to estimate the amount spilled, and how much oil was chemically dispersed, burned, and recovered by skimmers.

NOAA scientists also studied how much oil naturally evaporated and dispersed, sank to the sea floor, or trapped in shoreline sediments. Other studies determined how long it took the oil to degrade in those different environments.

While dispersant use reduced the amount of surface and shoreline oiling, and reduced marsh impacts, dispersants likely did increase impacts to some species during sensitive life stages that live in the water column and the deep ocean. The use of dispersants is under review.

Infographic about Deepwater Horizon.

Statistical information about Deepwater Horizon. Image Credit: NOAA

Quickly communicating the science of the situation including:

The public demanded answers fast, and social media rapidly took over as a primary tool to voice their concerns. We responded with continual updates through social media and on our website and blog. Still, keeping ahead of misconceptions and misinformation about the spill proved challenging. The lesson learned is that we can’t underestimate social media interest.

In addition to responding to the public’s need for accurate information, NOAA had to coordinate with universities and other academics to and quickly leverage existing research on an active oil spill. The size and multi-month aspect of the spill generated huge academic interest, but also meant that scientists were mobilizing and conducting field activities in the middle of an active response.

Lessons Learned

The list of lessons learned during the response continues to grow and those lessons are not limited to science. Organizational, administrative, policy, and outreach challenges were also significant considering the size, scope, and complexity of the response.

After nearly 30 years, the Exxon Valdez spill studies continue in an effort to understand the impacts and recovery in Prince William Sound. Given that timeline as a guide, NOAA expects Deepwater Horizon studies to continue for decades.

It will take that research and the perspective of time to understand the overall effects of the spill and response actions on the Gulf ecosystem and the communities that depend on a healthy coast.

 

Read more about Deepwater Horizon and the work of NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration and partners in responding to the spill, documenting the environmental damage, and holding BP accountable for restoring injured resources:

Doug Helton and Kathleen Goggin of NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration contributed to this article.


Leave a comment

Restoring an Urban Dump Near Baltimore

Brown reeds with creek.

Reeds cover large portions of the wetlands. These areas will be restored through proposed methods such as changing the water flow and using chemical control. (Credit: NOAA)

Baltimore can be defined as much by its waterways as its skyscrapers. It’s connected to water through the Inner Harbor, its famous crab cakes, cargo and cruise ships, and its prominent location in the Chesapeake Bay.

West of the city, well-preserved Patapsco Valley State Park extends along 32 miles of the Patapsco River, encompassing 16,043 acres and eight developed recreational areas. Now, in nearby Rosedale, there is an exciting project to reclaim hundreds of acres of a special coastal area formerly used as an urban industrial wasteland.

The 68th Street Dump Site is a 239-acre swath of land, 118 acres of which was once the site of seven landfills, where industrial solvents, paints, and automobile tires were among the polluting substances left behind. The landfills operated from the 1950s to the early 1970s before closing and leaving behind toxic waste. The Environmental Protection Agency designated the area a Superfund site in 2000.

In the summer of 2008, EPA removed contaminated surface soils, containers, gas cylinders, empty drums, and batteries from the site. The actions immediately reduced the human health and ecological risks posed by surface contamination and debris to on-site workers, trespassers, and wildlife.

Despite the contamination and degraded state of the land, federal and state governments, as well as the local community recognized the value in restoring the 118-acres because of its proximity to important local waterways.

The 68th Street Dump site is adjacent to the Back River, with several tributaries, partially tidal, that traverse the site, including Herring Run, Redhouse Run, and Moores Run. The low salinity upper reaches of the Chesapeak Bay, like the Back River, are critical areas for a healthy bay, according to Simeon Hahn, regional resource coordinator with the Office of Response and Restoration in the Damage Assessment, Remediation, and Restoration Program.

“Migratory fish like river herring, striped bass, and white and yellow perch require these habitats for spawning and juvenile development. As the name implies spawning still occurs in Herring Run,” Hahn said. “They also provide refuge for many other bay species like the important forage fish, killifish, and silversides that are eaten by striped bass, croaker, spot, weakfish and others. Even blue crabs and shrimp are there at times.”

Areas with large population centers, like Baltimore, present even bigger problems than just cleaning up and restoring contaminated sites. Blighted areas like the 68th Street Dump can lead to higher crime rates, lower property values, weakened local economies, and deny the public access to natural areas.

Aerial view of Baltimore with rivers.

68th Street Dump site was once the site of seven landfills. The blue outlined area shows the site. This aerial view was created using NOAA’s Environmental Response Management Application® (Credit NOAA).

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as its co-trustees—the Department of the Interior and the State of Maryland—have been involved in developing restoration projects to compensate for the natural resource injuries that occurred from hazardous substance releases at this site.

NOAA, along with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, and EPA coordinated with the Urban Water Federal Partnership on site cleanup, restoration, and reuse of the 68th Street area. Reforestation, tidal wetland restoration, stream restoration, and potential public recreational access were incorporated into the cleanup plan for the site.

​That will provide direct benefits to local water quality and contribute regionally to Chesapeake Bay restoration objectives. The Urban Water Federal partners work together in the same way other local organizations have invested in the 68th Street restoration. The Back River Restoration Committee  has done a tremendous job of collecting the tons of trash that would enter the Bay from Herring Run, according to Hahn.

“Without this effort, the trash would move down the Chesapeake and into the oceans and cause the numerous negative impacts plastics and other debris cause to aquatic life and even to humans,” Hahn said.

NOAA worked with co-trustees and the responsible parties to include these activities in the cleanup and restoration plan.

 

ERMA® is an online mapping tool that integrates both static and real-time data, such as Environmental Sensitivity Index maps, ship locations, weather, and ocean currents, in a centralized, easy-to-use format for environmental responders and decision makers.

 


Leave a comment

5 Ways the Coast Guard and NOAA Partner

Large ship on reef with small boat beside it.

On September 18, 2003, M/V Kent Reliant grounded at the entrance to San Juan Harbor, Puerto Rico. USCG and NOAA’s Office of Response and Restoration responded to the incident. (NOAA)

How do the Coast Guard and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration work together? There are many ways the two government organizations partner to keep the nation’s coasts and waterways safe for maritime commerce, recreational activities, and wildlife. Here are five:

1. It all began with surveyors and smugglers

Actually, it was an effort to suppress smuggling and collect tariffs that prompted President George Washington to create the Coast Guard Revenue Cutter Service in 1790, launching what would become the U.S. Coast Guard known today. It was President Jefferson’s approval of the surveying of the nation’s coasts in 1807 to promote “lives of our seamen, the interest of our merchants and the benefits to revenue,” that created the nation’s first science agency, which evolved into NOAA.

2. Coast Guard responds to spills; we supply the scientific support

The Coast Guard has the primary responsibility for managing oil and chemical spill clean-up activities. NOAA Office of Response and Restoration provides the science-based expertise and support needed to make informed decisions during emergency responses. Scientific Support Coordinators provide response information for each incident that spill’s characteristics, working closely with the Coast Guard’s federal On-Scene Coordinator. The scientific coordinator can offer models that forecast the movement and behavior of spilled oil, evaluation of the risk to resources, and suggest appropriate clean-up actions.

3. Coast Guard and NOAA Marine Debris Program keep waters clear for navigation

The Coast Guard sits on the Interagency Marine Debris Coordinating Committee, of which NOAA is the chair. The committee is a multi-agency body responsible for streamlining the federal government’s efforts to address marine debris. In some circumstances, the Coast Guard helps to locate reported marine debris or address larger items that are hazardous to navigation. For instance, in certain circumstances, the Coast Guard may destroy or sink a hazard to navigation at sea, as was the case with a Japanese vessel in the Gulf of Alaska in March 2011.

4. NOAA and Coast Guard train for oil spills in the Arctic

As Arctic ice contracts, shipping within and across the Arctic, oil and gas exploration, and tourism likely will increase, as will fishing, if fisheries continue migrating north to cooler waters. With more oil-powered activity in the Arctic and potentially out-of-date nautical charts, the region has an increased risk of oil spills. Although the Arctic may have “ice-free” summers, it will remain a difficult place to respond to spills, still facing conditions such as low visibility, mobilized icebergs, and extreme cold. The Office of Response and Restoration typically participates in oil spill response exercises with the Coast Guard.

5. It’s not just spills we partner on, sometimes it’s about birds

The Coast Guard as well as state and local agencies and organizations have been working to address potential pollution threats from a number of abandoned and derelict boats in the Florida. Vessels like these often still have oils and other hazardous materials on board, which can leak into the surrounding waters, posing a threat to public and environmental health and safety. In 2016, the Coast Guard called Scientific Support Coordinator Adam Davis with an unusual complication in their efforts: A pair of osprey had taken up residence on one of these abandoned vessels. The Coast Guard needed to know what kind of impacts might result from assessing the vessel’s pollution potential and what might be involved in potentially moving the osprey nest, or the vessel, if needed. Davis was able to assist in keeping the project moving forward and the vessel was eventually removed from the Florida Panhandle.