TECHNICAL REPORT DATA

(lease read Instructions on the reverse before conipleting)

1 REPORT NO 2 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIONNO.

5. REPORT DATE

FUTURE DREDGING QUANTITIES IN THE GREAT LAKES December 1974

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE

17, AUTHOAIS) js. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
C. N. Raphael, E. Jaworski, C.F. Ojala

and D.S, Turner

9. PERFORMING ORG ANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS: 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Department of Geography and Geology li7, CONTAACT/GRANT NO. SSSOSOSCTM~CS*TM
Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, Michigan 48197 R-801062

12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS 13, LYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED

Final Report
EPA, National Environmental Research Center

14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Corvallis, Ore. 97330

75. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16. ABSTRACT

Based on historical records, an overview and projection of U.S. and Canadian dredging
quantities in the Great Lakes are presented. Using current pollution criteria, future
quantities of polluted maintenance dredging are estimated for each lake. Recent en-
vironmental policies have influenced dredging and particularly disposal practices,

These policies, as well as sedimentation, lake levels, and economic factors are dis-
cussed in relation to dredging.

During the next decade, maintenance and private dredging volumes will not change
significantly, whereas new work will decrease. As in the past, most maintenance
dredging will occur in U.S. projects, particularly in Lake Erie.

A factor which will determine future U.S. maintenance dredging is the availability
of confined disposal sites. If the 62 sites are completed for commercial harbors as
planned, 300,000 of the 6.45 million cubic yards of annual projected polluted spoil
will not have disposal facilities. Where pollution elimination systems are in use,
shoaling in some industrial harbors may be decreasing. Although longterm lake

levels are not predictable, an inverse relationship between maintenance dredging and
lake levels is evident,

hz. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS D.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS {c. COSATI Ficld/Group
Great Lakes Disposal Sites
Dredging volumes Navigation
Disposal
Lake Levels
Policy
Sedimentation
13. DISTAIWUTION STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO.OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (This pages 22. PRICE

EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
3 U.S, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1975-697.997/95 REGION 10



Table 23, FUTURE NEW WORK DREDGING IN LAKE ERIE SCHEDULED BY THE C.E.

AS OF 1973 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

Project Volume
Huron 840,000
Fairport 1,100,000
Lorain 70,000
Sterling State Park 186,000
Cattaraugus Creek 140,000
Kelley's Island 2,400
East Harbor (Ohio) 478,000
Ottawa River 1,281,000
West Harbor (Ohio) 299,000
Total 4,396,400

never develop beyond the planning stage. Future new work dredging is
particularly difficult to determine due to economic and environmental
factors. Money allocations and environmental impacts must be appraised
before any future new work projects are actually accomplished. Projects
considered important may be delayed and even cancelled in the future
because they lose significance during processes of approval by various

governmental agencies and other local interest groups.

One aspect of future dredging may provide a unique situation in Lake
Erie. There is a possibility that a new offshore airport complex will
be constructed adjacent to Cleveland, in Lake Erie. Such an undertak-~
ing would obviously involve development of an offshore land surface. If
this project expands beyond planning the stages and construction begins
in the next decade, tremendous volumes of material would be needed. At
least part of the construction would probably involve great quantities
of dredged material from Cleveland Harbor.

50


waa

Table 49, CANADIAN DREDGING IN LAKE SUPERIOR: HISTORIC TOTALS BY HARBOR, TEN-YEAR TOTALS,

AND AVERAGE VOLUME PREDICTIONS (48, 54)
(annual cubic yasdage)

a

Historic Totals Total
1951-1970 this from Annual Pollution Disposal
Harbor per D.P.W. study 1961-1970 projection z Class Vol./Yr. area
Kam River 6,290,900 1,640,541 1,294,747 220, 000° 100 Pp 129,747 LF
129,747
Maimainse 4,040 -- — — 0) u — —_
Michipicoten ~ 6,500 = 1,400° o vu —~ R
Mission (see 1,016,278 697,540 69,754 _ U ~~ OL
Channel Kam R.)
Montreal R. -- 3,000 1,500 130° -- U 0 OL
Nipigon 34,360 34,353 12,783 1,000 —100 P 1,278 LF
(Red Rock) 1, 278°
Peninsula -- i) i) i) oy) U 0 _-
Port Arthur 3,660,680 1,188,068 1,163,538 80,000? o u 0 OL
116,353° LF
Port Arthur- 357,000 -- — d —_— P -- LFD
Keefer Term.
Sault Ste. Marie 108,200 0 0 6,800° ) U -- ou

Nipigon R. 56,560 -_- -- -— -- U -- oc


Table 3. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1951-1972 (47)
(cubic yards)

Year ~ Total volume
1972 439,803
1971 182,019
1970 364,488
1969 256,050
1968 214,610
1967 567,766
1966 253,800
1965 188,273
1964 353,912
1963 376,429
1962 515,741
1961 548,480
1960 390,660
1959 366,636
1958 333,309
1957 343,114
1956 444,870
1955 186,885
1954 324,927
1953 245,879
1952 274,522
1951 314,763
Total 7,486,936

16


a 14 percent increase of polluted dredged spoil over the 1961-1970
decade may be anticipated.

As mentioned in the previous section, the C.E. projection of future main-
tenance dredging represents a maximum projected figure. Based on dredg-
ing frequencies in the recent past, projects such as Port Austin,
although classified as polluted, have not been dredged in several years.
Thus, the percent of polluted dredged spoil associated with the C.E.
dredging projection (Table 58) may indeed be high.

Table 60 illustrates new work and maintenance dredging totals of the C.E.
in 1972 and 1973. If it is assumed that dredgings disposed on land are
polluted and dredgings disposed in open water are not polluted, it may
be concluded that in 1972 about 43 percent of the dredging volume is not
suitable for open-lake disposal. In 1973, approximately 53 percent of
the spoil did not qualify for open-lake disposal. Based on actual field
data over the past 2 years less than one half of the spoils removed from
C.E. projects were polluted.

Perhaps the greatest concern of polluted dredged spoil is in projects

which have the highest maintenance dredging volumes. Approximately 88

Table 60. DISPOSAL OF SPOIL IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR PROJECTS,
1972 AND 1973 (50)
(cubic yards)

1972 1973
Project On land Open lake On land Open lake

Au Sable 0 41,625 0 7,420
Harrisville 0 25,950 i) it)

Inland Route 76,259 0 0 O
Saginaw 86,994 0 87,943 21,263

St. Clair R. ) 26,337 0 8,800

St. Marys R. 0 122,099 0 40,123
Totals 163,253(43%) 216,011(57%) 87, 943(53%) 77, 606 (47%)

145


Figure 15. POLLUTION STATUS OF HARBORS
SMO. nee ® IN LAKES HURON AND ST. CLAIR
Ooge.
ST. NARYS RIVER

E.P.Ay
yy

BLIND RIVER
_\

-_—n.
Vee \
®D MACKINAL) / ay)
ie) N
N“,
NS cesoven aN

s ‘SOUTH BAY MOUTH
HAMMOND BAY

“
INLAND ROUTE “Y
5)
\ Cy TOBERNORY
\
\s
\
\ fA
HARRISVILLE }
\z
fo)
\Z COLLINGWOOD
AU SABLE \
\
\
\
POINT LOOKOUT PORT AUSTIN ONTARIO
CASEVILLE \
O \
EY HARBOR BEACH
BAYPORT \
SAGINAW ‘SEBEWAING © GODERICH
(BAYFIELD
MICHIGAN
F) GRAND BEND
PORT SANTLAC @ Poiwreo
wextuorow A / © PARTLY POLLUTED
© NOT POLLUTED
BLACK RIVER YW
ST. CLAIR RIVER V NOT SANPLED
ST, CLAIR CUT-OFF
CLINT (IN MILES)
ON MITCHELL BAY gee —
LAKE ST. CLAIR @& 10 0 50
=
7 ~Q@BELLE river

140


RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, have been grouped into
five series. These five broad categories were established to
facilitate further development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in
related fields. The five series are:

1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research

4, Environmental Monitoring

5. Socioeconcmic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned to the ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH STUDIES
series. This series describes research on the effects of pollution

on humans, plant and animal species, and materials. Problems

are assessed for their long- and short-term influences. Investigations
include formation, transport, and pathway studies to determine

the fate of pollutants and their effects. This work provides

the technical basis for setting standards to minimize undesirable
changes in living organisms in the aquatic, terrestrial and atmospheric
environments.

This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and
Development, EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.


$25,000,000 (9). Plans call for the filling of existing slips west of
the Burlington Northern grain elevators. Although no comment has been
made regarding the source of fill material, it is presumed that some
will be dredge spoil. As of February 1974, no application for a Section
10 permit had been filed with the E.P.A. in Chicago or the C.E. in St.
Paul.

United States Permit Work--

The paucity of records on permit dredging limits interpretation of
patterns of activity during the 36-year term. More complete records
for the later part of the 10-year sample, suggest that at least one
permit is issued per year with 1968 showing the issuance of 4 permits.
These were granted for Baraga, Duluth-Superior, Keweenaw Waterway, and
Presque Isle. In 1972, private interests received permits to dredge in
Duluth-Superior, Oman's Creek, Presque Isle and Two Harbors. Volumetric
averages and totals have been determined using those years of record

available in the C.E. St. Paul District files.

During the historic period of 1937 to the present, private operators
moved a minimum of 2,842,555 CY. Considerably more than this may have
been dredged. From 1940 to 1960, no private dredging is recorded, which
appears to be an unlikely operational fact. The 2.8 million cubic yards
of record is 3 percent of the total volume of dredge spoils handled
during the historic period.

The 10-year sample period (1961-1970) probably reveals a more complete
record of activity, volume and frequency for projection purposes. The
volume of spoil moved by private interests between 1961 and 1970 totaled
2,313,410 CY or 22 percent of the dredging in this period (10,375,263 CY)
(Table 47).

An annual average projection for the next 10 years, amounting to 231,000
CY appears to be unrealistic, inasmuch as this figure includes a 1.6 mil-

lion CY year averaged with 3 years of no activity. A selected-year

110


Table 28. ANNUAL DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE HURON/ST, CLAIR, 1930-1972 (48, 49, 50)

T (cubic yards)
Fiscal year Maintenance New work Private
Michigan
1972 215,815 197,662 1,250
1971 355,205 305,951 309,000
1970 361,750 559,108 60,293
1969 833,370 5,491,599 109,438
1968 1,903,985 444,057 133,050
1967 407,765 1,159,580 134,260
1966 1,153,184 127,520 696,319
1965 923,356 752,735 536,655
1964 1,156,097 199,572 308,359
1963 128,900 2,297,624 369,125
1962 212,975 6,056,132 264,160
1961 206,379 17,115,099 75,500
1960 31,239 1,502,466 26,025
1959 282,453 2,018,647
1958 214,751 0
1957 161,089 2,675
1956 390,197 0
1955 245,607 0
1954 91,910 0
1953 72,460 0
1952 107,835 i)
1951 671,919 0
1950 556,243 0
1949 277,857 0
1948 164,855 0
1947 162,278 0
1946 107,712 0
1945 207,487 0
1944 399,449 0
1943 408,838 0
1942 393,442 1,093,204
1941 354,681 451,762
1940 1,439,037 556,683
1939 1,137,374 41,667
1938 477,981 539,996
1937 133,801 925,574
1936 241,860 3,881,839
1935 358,606 5,276,934
1934 61,620 8,098,716
1933 711,160 9,281,574

59


Table 58. C.E. PROJECTED MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND POLLUTED VOLUMES,
LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR (50)
(cubic yards)

Ann. ave.
C.E. Percent polluted 10-year site
Project projection polluted spoil class completed
Alpena 8,000 90 7,200 P/U June, 1976
Au Sable® 30,000 0 0 u --
Bay Port 6,000 0 0 U June, 1976
Black River® 3,000 Not sampled —
Caseville 12,000 40 4,800 P/U October, 1976
Ch. Lake St. 200,000 100 200,000 P June, 1975
Clair
Cheboygan 10,000 0 0 u --
Clinton River 21,000 85 17,850 P/U June, 1976
Hammond* 10,000 0 0 U -
Harbor Beach 5,000 100 5,000 P December, 1976
Harrisville® 12,000 100 12,000 P ~~
Inland Route 10,000 50 5,000 P/U December, 1976
Les Cheneaux 10,000 100 10,000 Pp December, 1976
Mackinaw City* 4,000 0 0 vu _
Port Austin® 4,000 100 4,000 P -
Port Sanilac 7,200 100 7,200 Pp June, 1976
Saginaw 700,000 85 595,000 P June, 1976
Sebewaing 20,000 33 6,600 P/U October, 1976
St. Clair R.2 75,000 0 0 U --
St. Marys R.2 65,000 0 0 P/U --
Totals 1,212,200 874,650 (72%)

@Not on the 10-year confined disposal program (PL 91-611).

143


years. In such projects maintenance dredging occurred fairly consist-
ently for several years in the recent past (Table 31). At Alpena, for
example, maintenance dredging occurred 6 times from 1963 to 1972. These
data were tabulated and a future average calculated. Table 35 is the
result of that calculation. The projections by harbor reveal that the 5
principal projects (Au Sable, St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, Saginaw,
and the St. Marys River) represent 85 percent of the total quantity to
be removed. This compares favorably with the 86 to 90 percent figure
indicated on Table 34. Also, the total annual maintenance dredging vol-
ume (967,758 cubic yards) is comparable to the 925,000 cubic yards
derived from clustering the 5 principal projects. Although, in some
instances, compared with the C.E. projection, differences occur (e.g.,
Saginaw) based upon maintenance dredging histories over the past few
years the projection reflects modern harbor conditions in Lakes Huron

and St. Clair.

With the recent introduction and enforcement of environmental con-
straints (PL 91-611) maintenance dredging activities in the past few
years have decreased. This pattern is reflected in all the Great Lakes
including Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair. Corps of Engineers dredging
activity in FY 1972 and FY 1973 was 379,314 and 165,549 cubic yards
respectively. These figures include new work as well as maintenance
dredging. Assuming that: (1) 10-year disposed sites in areas of pol-
luted sediments are not constructed; (2) E.P.A. upholds the present pol-
lution criteria and that local interests at Saginaw cannot meet the cost
of a containment area as specified in PL 91-611 Sec. 123 (C) (2) or the
request for a waiver is not recommended by the E.P.A.; and (3) no econom
ic stress occurs, the average maintenance dredging volume will remain at
about 250,000 cubic yards per year. Thus, the figure of 250,000 cubic
yards represents a minimum annual average for Lake Huron based principal-

ly on events over the last 3 or 4 years.

70


the E.P.A. In return, on the basis of their analyses, the M.O.E. and
the E.P.A. should subdivide dredging projects into polluted and unpol-
luted sections. The M.0.E. should sample all public harbors which
require maintenance dredging.

9. Practical uses of dredged spoil and of filled disposal sites should
be emphasized in the U.S. as in Canada.

10. To facilitate the confinement of polluted spoil in the United

States, disposal on private land should be further encouraged.

11. The filling of coastal wetlands with industrial wastes, and to some
extent by dredged spoil, appears to be significant. These Great Lakes
wetlands should be identified, mapped, and zoned to better facilitate
future confined disposal site selection.

12. Because the cost of dredging operations in the Great Lakes'
projects has increased considerably over the past decade, the C.E.
should continue to perform public maintenance dredging so that competi-
tive bidding with private dredgers may continue.


disposal site range from 4 to 12 million dollars, the cost per cubic

yard may be relatively low for a large site. The C.E. has determined
that confinement of polluted dredged spoil from the 35 federal harbors
having the highest annual maintenance dredging requirements may increase
the cost by 3.5 times (1). Vacant land in harbor areas is extremely
limited, particularly in industrialized projects where maintenance dredg~
ing volumes are high. In Canada, this problem has not reached a critical
stage partly because maintenance dredging volumes in major projects such
as Toronto and Hamilton are smaller. In the U.S. the policy for the con-~
finement of polluted dredged spoil is ambitious; however, implementation

is physically difficult and economically very costly.

Another new development which may affect spoil disposal in the near
future in the United States is the new guidelines for dredged materials
currently being drafted by the E.P.A. and reviewed by the C.E. (22). As
discussed elsewhere, the E.P.A. pollution criteria have received construc-
tive criticism (21). Based on the 5th draft of these new guidelines,
which are to be finalized in 1975, the list of pollution parameters which
determine the eligibility of dredged spoil for disposal in open waters of
the Great Lakes will be expanded beyond the 7 mandatory parameters.

These will include a wide range of pollutants such as insecticides, bac-
terial quality and toxic substances. A 'shake' or standard Elutriate
Test will also be introduced to distinguish between contaminants in the
dredged spoil and background pollutants occurring naturally in the lake
waters. The draft guidelines specify that each harbor is to be consid-
ered individually and more completely. Sampling schedules have been pre-
pared through 1976. All sampling analyses will be more complete in that

subjective as well as chemical testing will be done on all samples taken.

The draft guidelines also indicate that less stress will be placed on
the pollution capability of the dredged sediments per se and more empha-

sis on the potential impact of the spoil on the disposal area. The

188


Ontario. New work scheduled for Toronto Harbor comprises 40 percent of
all scheduled new work dredging. As compared to the 1961-1970 period,
when an annual average of 9.79 million CY of dredging was performed,
future new work dredging will decline sharply. Moreover, most of the
projects scheduled involve the construction of new recreational harbors,

or the deepening and/or expansion of existing commercial harbors.

4. The 5 harbors and connecting channels with the largest maintenance
dredging requirements, in descending order, are: Toledo, Cleveland,
Detroit River, Buffalo, and Saginaw. These commercial waterways are
characterized by industrial-urban complexes and have 27-foot Seaway

channels.

5. If water levels in the Great Lakes drop considerably during the next
few years, annual maintenance dredging volumes may somewhat exceed our
projections. Conversely, if disposal sites are not available for those
public projects which are classified as polluted, maintenance dredging
may have to be temporarily postponed until acceptable methods of dispos-

al are found.

119


Table 52. SAMPLING OF PROJECTS ON LAKE ONTARIO (54, 55)

Number exceeded

Year No. of Kjel. Oil &
Harbor sampled samples P sol. COD N grease Fe Hg Pb Zn
U.S. samples
Great 1968 5 5 3 0 nt mt nt nt nt nt
Sodus
Little 1969 4 4 1 2 2 1 ont nt nt ot
Sodus
Oswego 1969 9 9 4 4 5 6 nt nt nt nt
Rochester 1969 5 5 0 (0) 1 5 O nt nt nt
Wilson 1970 4 2 2 3 3 i) QO nt nt nt
Olcott No data
Totals 7 2 w 8 n mw oF e
Canadian samples
Cobourg "71,'72 8 7 1 3 6 3 nt nt nt 5
Hamilton *70,'72 24 19 «14 24 21 177) ont 64 9 (1
Oshawa *70,'72 34 17 5 6 15 16 nt nt 1 19
Port Hope 1972 4 4 ie) 4 4 1 ont nt 1 1
Toronto "72,173 181 90 2 65 90 20 nt 2 49 50
Whitby 1971 ll nt 10 121 nt nt nt nt nt ll
Totals 262 «=137 32 113° «136 ‘37 _ 6 © 7

nt Not tested.

125


(NEPA) of 1969 (Public Law 91-190), effects on environmental quality
have been given more attention. Section 102 of the NEPA act directs all
federal agencies to prepare statements of environmental impact on all
major actions, such as confined disposal sites, which may have a signifi-
cant impact on the quality of the human environment. The act also speci-
fied, as national policy, additional guidelines of environmental quality
and established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the Execu-
tive Office of the President.

Perhaps the most comprehensive policy for improving the quality of the
nation's waters is the Federal Water Pollution Control (FWPC) Act Amend-
ments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500). This new law mandates a federal-
state campaign to prevent, reduce, and eliminate water pollution by
restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integ-
rity of the nation's waters. The primary goals of the law are: (1) by
July 1, 1983, to have, wherever possible, water clean enough for swim-
ming and other recreational uses, and clean enough for the protection
and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife; and (2) by 1985, to
have no discharge of pollutants into the nation's waters. Whether "zero
discharge" can become a reality by 1985 has been seriously questioned by
the National Water Commission (19). However, the C.E. and local munici-
palities in the Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland areas are presently
assessing the problem of wastewater management (20). In southeastern
Michigan, for example, a survey is being made to identify and evaluate:
(1) different ways to collect and treat wastewater to help clean up the
streams in an eight-county study area and hence reduce the amount of
pollution entering Lakes Erie and St. Clair (Figure 5); and (2) differ-
ent uses for treated wastewater and the material removed from this waste-
water. The objectives are consistent with the goals and objectives of

the FWPC Act Amendments of 1972.

180


DREDGING VOLUME (IN 1000'S Cy 1
OQ 0-10

O 11-25 cus NIPIGON

O 26-50 (RED ROCK)

cy KAH RIVER

FTreaiphe
ER Bay L
° Uy
EPCENT org SV Ahe
b PoLLuren .
P GRAND WARALS_ curren =~ SSP MICHTPICOTEH

Cc
_~ oO
. ~
ses © MONTREAL RIVER
~
~
_ Crean
SA Ss ~
CHITEFISH POINT
: ISLE < NN
“8 ONTONAGON i GRAND HARATS
BLACK RIVER
\5 ve eneek Y uISINe SAULT SAINT MARTE
| “jt ' . MARQUETTE
WISCONSIN A MICHICAN !
(IN MILES)
ESS
10 0 50

Figure 18, PROJECTED ANNUAL DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE SUPERIOR AND PERCENT POLLUTED (HARBORS WITHOUT
VOLUMETRIC CIRCLES INDICATE NO PROJECTED DREDGING IN THE NEXT DECADE)


s9

Table 31. MAINTENANCE DREDGING FREQUENCIES OF C.E. PROJECTS

IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR (50)
1961-1973

Project 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973

Alpena x x

Au Sable x x x x x ¥ x x x x x
Bay Port

Black River

Ch. of Lake x x x x x x x x
St. Clair

Caseville

Cheboygan x x x x

Clinton River x

Hammond

Harbor Beach x x

Harrisville x

Inland Route x x x x
Les Cheneaux x

Point Lookout x x

Port Sanilac x x

Saginaw x x x x x x x x

*
*

St. Clair R. x x x x x
St. Marys R.
Sebewaing x

x MOK



sites become available, then dredging volumes may increase in the next
decade. However, difficulty is being experienced in some areas for find-
ing and developing suitable sites which are mutually agreeable to all
concerned groups. In some cases, the cost to local parties is considered
too great. Unless waivers of costs to local groups are obtained, site
agreements are reached, and/or the E.P.A. modifies its pollution criteria,
dredging at many harbors in the future may decline to some extent. In
the interest of the regional and national economy, most major harbors and
waterways will probably be dredged at any environmental cost, even if at
a reduced scale. However, the smaller and more marginal commercial
projects and all recreational and harbors of refuge would probably be
downgraded. Thus, under these considerations, a lower figure for the
C.E.'s dredging volume in Lake Ontario in the next decade is about 2.2
million cubic yards. This figure represents a decline in dredging vol-
umes of approximately one standard deviation from the norm in the past

decade.

Based primarily on the dredging history of Lake Ontario, a median esti-
mate of the volume of material to be removed in the next decade is possi-
ble. The decade of the 1960's, i.e., 1960 to 1970, has been chosen as
typical for the purposes of this project. The St. Lawrence Seaway was
completed in 1959, and only in recent years higher than average lake
levels and the E.P.A. constraints have had effects on dredging. In
estimating future volumes then, the frequency at which individual
projects were dredged during the 1960's has been utilized. Some harbors
and waterways are dredged annually while others are maintained relatively
infrequently (Table 9).

Between 1961 and 1970 the C.E. dredged only one of 5 projects every year
in Lake Erie: the average per year was 3. During that decade the vol-
ume of material removed each year ranged from 188,000 cubic yards to

568,000 cubic yards: the average was 364,000 cubic yards per year. No

significant correlation exists between number of jobs completed per year

23


9.

10.

ll.

12.

SECTION VII

REFERENCES

U.S. Army C.E., Dredging and Water Quality Problems in the Great
Lakes, Buffalo District, Buffalo, Vol. 1 (1969).

U.S. Army C.E., Cost/Benefit Ratios of Great Lakes Projects, Chicago,
undated. (Mimeographed).

U.S. Army C.E., Dredging and Water Quality Problems in the Great
Lakes, Buffalo District, Vol. 10 (1968).

U.S. Army C.E., Dredging and Water Quality Problems in the Great
Lakes, Buffalo District, Vol. 11 (1968).

U.S. Army C.E., Waterborne Commerce of the United States, U.S. Army
Engineer District, Chicago, (1973).

Seip, D. W., ed., 1973 Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory, Southam
Business Publications, Ltd., Don Mills (1973).

Great Lakes Basin Commission, Great Lakes Basin Framework Study,
Appendix 11, Ann Arbor, (1972).

Phillips, D. W. and McCulloch, J. A. W., The Climate of the Great
Lakes Basin, Climatological Studies, No. 20, Toronto (1973).

Superior Evening Telegram, p. 1, November 2, 1973.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Great Lakes Pilot, Lake Survey Center
(N.O.A.A.), Detroit, p. 590 (1973).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Criteria for Determining
Acceptability of Dredged Spoil Disposal to the Nation's Waters,
E.P.A., Chicago (1971).

Ministry of the Environment, Water Quality Guidelines for the

Review of Proposed Dredging and Spoils Disposal Operations, Toronto
undated. (Mimeographed).

215


Harbors with over 100,000 cubic yards of average annual maintenance
dredging include Calumet, Grand Haven, Green Bay, and Indiana. The
average annual maintenance dredging quantities listed in this study are
19 percent lower than averages calculated by the C.E. Part of this dif-
ference is accounted for in the conversion of all dredging volume data
in this report to place measure. The remainder may be explained by a
safety margin allowed for by the C.E. in their data.

Average annual new work dredging quantities are not useful statistics
except to indicate the quantity of new work that took place during the
base period. Moreover, future new work dredging quantities cannot be

predicted on the basis of previous new work dredging.

Future Dredging Quantities

Future private and maintenance dredging quantities have been projected
by harbor in each Corps of Engineers’ district as indicated in Table 45.
Future annual private dredging volumes are based on averages of the 1963
through 1973 dredging records for each harbor. In the Chicago District,
only Calumet and Indiana Harbors should require relatively high average
annual private dredging, while moderate permit dredging will probably
take place in Manitowoc, Milwaukee, and Racine Harbors. In the Detroit
District, little permit dredging, except for miscellaneous areas, is
anticipated. Miscellaneous permit dredging sites include private recrea-
tional harbors and coastal areas where municipalities, power generating

companies, and others may have dredging performed.

Future average annual maintenance dredging projections were determined
by averaging the maintenance dredging quantities of the past several
years, then modified by consideration of special circumstances. For
example, in Indiana Harbor the project depth was extended to 27 feet in
1963, therefore the projection of future average annual maintenance
dredging was based on the period 1964 to the present. Some harbors,
such as Sheboygan, did not undergo new work dredging during the past

94


Ontario to 1983 is estimated to be almost 1.0 million cubic yards per
year (Table 13). About 60 percent will occur on the Canadian side and
40 percent on the American side. Since most confined disposal sites
planned for American projects in Lake Ontario will not be completed
until 1975, 1976, or 1977, American volumes in the next few years will
remain relatively low. However, after confined sites are ready to
receive polluted spoil, all dredging activities may increase. By 1983
the average volumes being removed from Lake Ontario should be similar to
those which were removed during the decade of the 1960's.

Table 13. ESTIMATES OF FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL DREDGING VOLUMES
IN LAKE ONTARIO
(cubic yards)

U.S. projects Canadian projects
Maintenance 360,000 500,000
Permit 30,000 100,000
Annual total 390,000 600,000
Total for Lake Ontario 990,000
Future new work 61,000 8,100,000

DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKE ERIE

More dredging occurs in Lake Erie (including the Detroit and Rouge
Rivers) than in any other part of the Great Lakes. High dredging volumes
here are generated primarily at large commercial projects such as Buffalo,
Cleveland, Toledo, and the Detroit River. In addition to maintaining
these and other smaller commercial harbors, a few recreational and
harbors of refuge on the lake are dredged. Twenty-one U.S. projects and
15 Canadian harbors in Lake Erie require dredging, at least periodically

(Figur 4).

30


Pollution classifications for each harbor are presented in Table 65.

Of the 42 public harbors in Lake Michigan, 15 are classified as unpol-
luted, 10 are polluted, while the remaining 17 have been designated as
partially polluted (P/U). In addition, New Buffalo, a project which is
to be expanded soon into a new public recreational harbor, has already
been sampled and is classified herein as partially polluted. Arcadia,
Grays Reef, Petoskey, and St. James have not been sampled, but these

harbors are not regarded as polluted.

The P/U classification is employed when the inner harbor contains pol-
luted sediments while the outer harbor area is ‘clean.’ In some harbors
such as Frankfurt and South Haven, the boundary between the polluted and
unpolluted portions is located well inside the inner harbor. Other par-
tially polluted harbors, for example, Sheboygan, Kenosha, and Waukegan,
are polluted throughout except near the jetty and/or breakwater. Stur-
geon Bay Harbor, which has an unusual design due to the ship canal, is
polluted only in the vicinity of the city.

The most seriously polluted harbors are located in the Chicago District
and include Calumet, Chicago Harbor and River, Green Bay, Indiana,
Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Milwaukee, and Racine. Pollution of these harbors
(Figure 17) is promoted by the large industrial and urban complexes adja-
cent to the navigation facilities. Conversely, most of the recreational
harbors, as in the Detroit District, are not polluted. Based on the
data available, parameters that most frequently exceeded the criteria
limits included volatile solids and COD. In Kenosha, Michigan City,
Racine, and Waukegan Harbors mercury was found in excess of its limits.
Prior to 1970-1971, mercury was not considered to pose a problem, hence

it was not routinely tested until after that time.

As indicated in Table 64, analyses of the harbor sediments are not com-
plete, especially for the Detroit District. In this district many sam-
ples were not analyzed for mercury, lead or zinc concentrations. Sauga-

tuck was classified on the basis of one sample from which only one

155


St. Clair River (105.3 million short tons), and Lake St. Clair (106.4
million short tons). All remaining C.E. projects have benefit/cost
ratios between 1.1 to 1 and 8.13 to 1. Many harbors, such as Port
Austin and Port Sanilac, have recreational benefits or are harbors of
refuge, and are difficult to justify in terms of commerce. Thus,
projects of greatest concern to the C.E. and commercial marine interests

are Saginaw and the connecting waterways.

Except for southeastern Michigan, the Lake Huron shoreline is not
heavily industrialized and most navigation projects do not require chan-
nels at Seaway depth. The most significant dredging activities in the
past have occurred at the commercial projects of Alpena, Lake St. Clair
and the St. Clair River, Cheyboygan, Black River, and the St. Marys
River at Sault Ste. Marie (Table 27). Most harbors on the Canadian
shore are infrequently dredged, which accounts for the low volume
reflected on many tables of the lake. In Ontario, 50 projects are main-

tained by the D.P.W. Based on the 1973 Canadian Ports and Seaway Direc-

tory, 16 of these harbors and waterways have commercial status (6), How-
ever, only 3 (Sarnia, St. Clair Cut-off, and Killarney) are maintained to
the 27-foot Seaway depth. The distribution of the principal projects in
Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair are illustrated on Figure 7.

Maintenance and new work dredging data of the C.E. are sufficiently com-
plete and accurate to reconstruct past dredging activities in Lake Huron,

principally from the Annual Reports of the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army

on Civil Works. In Canada, the D.P.W. furnished maintenance dredging
volumes from 1951-72 and capital dredging data from 1951-72. Private
dredging, volumes, which were obtained from the Navigable Waters Protec-
tion Act (NWPA) files of the M.O.T., date back to 1960.

55


Table 72. A COMPARISON OF RIVER SEDIMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING
IN SELECTED PROJECTS (7, 50)

C.E. maintenance

Stream load dredging Conversion
Project (tons/yr) (cubic yards) 1 CY=0.675 tons

Lake Superior
Ashland 10,240 2,000 1,350
Duluth/Superior 14,410 120,000 81,000
Ontonagon 5,130 30,000 20,250
Lake Michigan
Manistee 26,800 50,000 33,750
Manistique 3,250 10,000 6,750
Manitowoc 44,000 40,000 27,000
Menominee 26,000 8,000 5,400
Oconto 33,000 4,000 2,700
Racine 34,969 30,000 20,250
St. Joseph 255,000 87,000 58,725
Lake Huron
Alpena 9,540 10,000 6,750
Au Sable 7,800 30,000 20,250
Clinton R. 48,000 30,000 20,250
Saginaw 135,800 500,000 337,500
Lake Erie
Buffalo 23,000 600,000 405,000
Cleveland 200,456 1,220,000 823,500
Fairport 22,500 400,000 270,000
Lorain 67,100 300,000 202,500
Monroe 118,800 200,000 135,000
Port Clinton 89,000 10,000 6,750
Toledo 1,179,000 1,250,000 843,750
Lake Ontario
Oswego 136,500 80,000 54,000
Rochester 76,100 360,000 243,000

2,566,395 5,371,000 3,625,425

194


and Huron (with 100,000 to 300,000 cubic yards of material removed
annually) are classified as partially polluted.

7. Twenty Lake Erie projects are in the C.E. diked disposal program.
Confined facilities for these projects are expected to be available by
1977.

8. About one-half million cubic yards of material are scheduled to be
removed from Canadian projects on Lake Erie by 1977. An estimated 70
percent of this material will be polluted.

9. Most Canadian harbors on Lake Erie have not been sampled by the
M.O.E. Only when they are sampled are accurate estimates of future
polluted spoil volumes possible.

QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL

IN LAKE HURON AND LAKE ST. CLAIR

In Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair a project design cannot always be asso-
ciated with polluted or unpolluted dredged spoil. Generally, where long
approach channels serve river harbors such as Saginaw, the channel sedi-
ments are unpolluted whereas the river sediments are polluted. Polluted
spoil, however, is not entirely confined to such harbors. Many lake-
front harbors, deriving their sediments from the nearshore environment,
such as Harrisville and Harbor Beach, have polluted sediments. Figure 15
reveals that in Lake Huron only 10 out of the 30 harbors and waterways
sampled do not exceed the principal E.P.A. or the M.O.E. criteria. As
mentioned in the introduction of this section, sampling by the M.O.E. is
confined to few localities. However, D.P.W. projects have been sampled
more thoroughly than C.E. projects. Waterways such as the St. Clair
River present significant problems. According to the E.P.A., the St.
Clair River sediments are not polluted whereas samples retrieved by

the M.O.E. at Sarnia and the St. Clair Cut-off exceed their criteria.

Similar problems arise at Sault Ste. Marie. In many instances,

139


removed is 61,000 cubic yards. However, actual completion of the
project may be considered to be only reasonably certain. In fact, the
possibility exists that any project presently scheduled may never develop
beyond the planning stage. Completion of new work dredging is particu-
larly difficult to determine due to economic and environmental feasibil-
ity factors. Money allocations and environmental impact must be
appraised before any future new work projects are actually accomplished.
Projects considered important at present may be delayed and even can-
celled because they lose significance during processes of approval by

various governmental agencies and other interest groups.

Projections of Canadian Dredging Volumes

Maintenance--

In the decade 1961 to 1970, a range of 2 to 7 maintenance dredging
projects occurred annually in Canadian waters of Lake Ontario. The
average annual number of jobs per year was 5. The total volume of
material removed ranged from about 51,000 cubic yards to 1.5 million
cubic yards: the average annual volume removed in that decade was
536,000 cubic yards (Table 11).

In terms of future spoil removal on the Canadian side of Lake Ontario,
projections of maintenance dredging volumes from 1973 to 1977 were made
available by the D.P.W. A total of approximately 435,000 cubic yards of
spoil are scheduled to be dredged in maintaining Canadian harbors on
Lake Ontario in the next 3 to 4 years (Table 12). Approximately half of
the total in this time is expected to be removed from the harbor at
Toronto.

Obviously, Canadian projections for maintenance dredging in the near
future are lower than the average dredging volumes which occurred during
the 1960's. However, expansion in the Toronto Harbor, involving about 8
million cubic yards of new work dredging, is expected to be completed

26


Past Dredging Activity in Lake Huron
and Lake St. Clair

Annual dredging data from 1930 to the present of the C.E. activities in
Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair are illustrated in Table 28. Also
included are private dredging quantities from 1960 through 1972 and
volumes obtained from the D.P.W, and the M.O.T. Over a 42-year period,
the C.E. dredging totaled 115,253,275 cubic yards which averages to
approximately 2.7 million cubic yards per year. Annual maintenance
dredging during this period was approximately 546, 000 cubic yards. As
noted in Figure 8 maintenance dredging follows no predictable pattern
and great extremes can occur over short intervals. In 1960, for example,
dredging volumes were the lowest since 1930 (31,239 CY) and 8 years
later, 1969, was a record high dredging year (1.9 million CY). If dredg-
ing totals and averages are determined over 4 decades (Table 29), the
great range of maintenance dredging is evident. Furthermore, this table
reveals that an increase in maintenance dredging over time, as one may
expect with an increase in the number of projects and an increase in

economic development, is not evident.

A comparison of Canadian and American data from 1961-70 reveals that in
these two lakes, 94 percent of all maintenance, new work, and dredging
activities by private interests occurred in Michigan. Most of the main-
tenance dredging (6 million CY) was at Saginaw and the connecting chan-
nels of St. Marys and St. Clair Rivers, and Lake St. Clair. A correla-
tion (-0.52) between lake levels and maintenance dredging may account in
part for the increased maintenance dredging during the 1960's. However,
the high volumes projects may have also been influenced by the high new
work projects between 1959 and 1963 which totaled over 29 million cubic
yards and have required maintenance. In Ontario, the general dredging
pattern is similar to that in Michigan. In the early 1960's, mainte-
nance dredging by the D.P.W. was the highest in a 21-year period

(Table 28). New work dredging quantities from 1961-70 by the C.E. was
the highest of any Great Lake (3.4 million CY). The ratio between

58


Section 404 (a) and (b) of the FWPC Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500)
authorize the C.E. to issue permits, after public notice and opportunity
for public hearings, for discharge of spoil into navigable waters at
specified disposal sites. Section 404 (c) gives the Administrator of
the E.P.A. the authority to approve such disposal sites in accordance
with new guidelines regarding disposal of dredged materials in inland
waters. These are presently being developed by the E.P.A. in conjunc-
tion with the C.E. However, if economic stress is to be avoided, the
C.E., acting through the Chief of Engineers, may issue permits for dis-
posal in any case where the new guidelines alone would prohibit the
specification of a disposal site. This policy is reinforced by the
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (Public Law
92-532). The latter authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to designate
those areas of the Great Lakes which have conservation, recreational,

ecological or esthetic values as marine sanctuaries.

In 1969, the C.E. recommended legislation for the construction of diked
disposal facilities for confinement of polluted spoil. This legisla-
tion, Public Law 91-611 of the River and Harbor Act, was enacted in 1970.
Section 123 of this law is unique, as it is specifically designed for
confinement of polluted spoil in a specific region, i.e., the Great
Lakes. At that time, the Great Lakes region was the only area of the
country where specific legislation had been enacted in the interest of
pollution abatement in terms of confining spoil (21). At present, 62
federal harbors and waterways are in the confined disposal program of
the C.E. Before a confined disposal site can be constructed, the C.E.
is required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to submit
an Environmental Impact Statement to the E.P.A. This policy has caused
some delays in the selection and construction of many confined disposal

sites.

181


‘marina policy' developed in 1965 to assist in non-federal marina
development (27). Under this policy the D.P.W. will dredge and provide
sea walls and jetties for a private marina. Such marine work, however,
is limited to the value of new construction being undertaken by the
developer to serve the boating public. Therefore, in a sense the
federal government will subsidize industries directly related to marine
activity. Although the pollution guidelines in Canada are as stringent
as those of the E.P.A., dredging and disposal policies in general reveal
some degree of flexibility and encourage most dredging activity to be
resourceful. Spoil may be deposited on private land with few restric-—
tions. In many harbor areas, particularly along the lower Great Lakes,
land reclamation projects, parks, and civic centers are constructed with
dredged spoil. In Toronto Harbor, for example, locally derived spoil is
being utilized for the construction of beaches, berms, and an aquatic
park (28). Moreover, unpolluted materials in Toronto Harbor are used to
form dikes into which polluted dredgings are placed.

In the United States such flexibility is less evident. Private dredging
is not subsidized nor is disposal by federal plants allowed on private
land unless the owner provides retaining dikes and pump-out facilities.
Based on Public Law 91-611 the confined disposal sites are to be con-
structed on public land or land purchased by the government. Normally
25 percent of the construction costs of the confined site is to be paid
by the local political entities. However, if the local municipalities
and industries are developing or using pollutant elimination systems in
accordance with Public Law 92-500, then they are considered in com-

pliance with current water quality standards and a waiver may be

obtained.

Perhaps the most pressing problem with the confined disposal program in
the United States is the high capital costs of the construction and land

availability for these sites. Although construction costs of a confined

187


Table 45. FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL PRIVATE AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING
VOLUMES IN LAKE MICHIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT (1, 50, 52)
(cubic yards)

— a == = a
Base period C.E.
Private Maintenance for maintenance
Chicago District dredging dredging maintenance dredging
Public harbor
Algoma 0 1,400 1945-1964 3,000
Big Suamico 0 2,700 1959-1966 5,000
Burns Waterway 0 30,000 By C.E. 30,000
Calumet H. & R. 193,800 113,800 1967-1973 200,000
Chicago Harbor 400 6,900 1951-1961 59,000
Chicago River 5,100 77,500 1958-1967 49,000
Gladstone-Kipling 0 3,000 By C.E. 3,000
Green Bay 7,000 156,100 1967-1973 137,000
Indiana 187,500 97,200 1964-1973 151,000
Kenosha 0 20,000 1966-1970 29,000
Kewaunee 2,800 38,000 1965-1970 28,000
Manitowoc 8,200 36,900 1963-1970 35,000
Menominee 500 7,900 1956-1966 15,000
Michigan City te) 36,100 1964-1973 48,000
Milwaukee 19,600 53,200 1965-1969 70,000
New Buffalo® 600 10,000 By C.E. 10,000
Oconto 0 2,200 1949-1964 3,000
Pensaukee (0) 1,400 1952-1966 2,100
Port Washington 5,400 5,900 1962-1972 15,000
Racine 12,100 21,900 1961-1968 30,000
Sheboygan 0 33,100 1961-1970 23,000
Sturgeon Bay/Ship Canal 6,800 42,200 1961-1970 50,000
Two Rivers 0 40,100 1964-1973 51,000
Waukegan 6,800 25,000 1961-1969 32,000
Washington Island* 1,300 0 - 1)
Totals 447,900 862,500 1,078,100
Private harbor
Buffington 1,500
Escanaba 0
Gary 3,500
Oak Creek 5,000
Miscellaneous sites 76,200
Total 86,200
District totals 534,100 862,500 1,078,100

95


Table 65. FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL QUANTITY OF POLLUTED MAINTENANCE
DREDGING BY HARBOR BY C.E. DISTRICT IN LAKE MICHIGAN
(cubic yards)

: Percent of Future Future

maintenance annual annual
Pollution spoil maintenance polluted

Harbor class polluted dredging spoil

Chicago District
Algoma P/U 50 1,400 700
Big Suamico P/U 50 2,700 1,400
Burns Waterway P 100 30,000 30,000
Calumet H. & R. P 100 113,800 113,800
Chicago Hbr. & R. P 100 84,400 84,400
Gladstone-Kipling U (0) 3,000 i)
Green Bay P 100 156,100 156,100
Indiana P 100 97,200 97,200
Kenosha P/U 75 20,000 15,000
Kewaunee P 100 38,000 38,000
Manitowoc P 100 36,900 36,900
Menominee P/U 60 7,900 4,700
Michigan City P/U 25 36,100 9,000
Milwaukee P 100 53,200 53,200
New Buffalo® P/U 20 10,000 2,000
Oconto U 0 2,200 0
Pensaukee P/U 50 1,400 700
Port Washington P/U 75 5,900 4,400
Racine Pp 100 21,900 21,900
Sheboygan P/U 75 33,100 24,800
Sturgeon Bay/ P/U 50 42,200 21,100
Ship Canal

Two Rivers P/U 25 40,100 10,000
Waukegan P/U 40 25,000 10,000
Totals 862,500 716,300

158


SUMMARY OF FUTURE DREDGING VOLUMES IN THE

IN THE GREAT LAKES

An average of 15.56 million CY of sediment will be dredged annually from
the harbors and connecting channels of the Great Lakes during the next
decade. Approximately 78 percent of this total will be removed from the
American harbors and waterways. Of the future annual volume to be
removed from United States' dredging projects, 64 percent involves main-
tenance dredging, 19 percent consists of new work, and 17 percent
involves private dredging. In Canada, these percentages are 31, 54, and
15, respectively. Estimates of future dredging volumes are summarized

by lake as follows:

1. With regard to maintenance dredging, an annual average of 8.85
million CY of spoil will be dredged from public harbors and connecting
channels by the C.E. and the D.P.W. combined (Table 50). About 88 per-
cent of this volume will be dredged from American projects and 12 per-
cent from Canadian projects. As in the past, Lake Erie will be the
center of the maintenance dredging activity. About 56 percent of the
total volume will be removed from projects on this lake, including the
Detroit River. Compared to the past decade, future maintenance dredging
in the Great Lakes is expected to exhibit little change.

2. It is projected that private interests will dredge an average of
2.59 million CY annually during the next decade. Approximately 80 per-
cent of this quantity will be removed in dredging American projects,
while 20 percent will involve Canadian projects. Nearly 40 percent is
anticipated from Lake Erie, while 27 percent will be derived from Lake
Michigan. The number of private dredging permits is expected to increase
in the future, and the quantity dredged from Canadian harbors may
increase to about 0.5 million CY.

3. An annual average of 4.1 million CY of new work dredging is antici-
pated during the next 10 years. If all scheduled new work projects are
completed, then much of this new work will be accomplished in Lake

117


Table 15. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING IN LAKE ERIE, 1951-1972 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

Year — Buffalo District ~ Detroit District rota
1972 2,112,555 1,366,336 3,478,891
1971 2,321,135 1,080,472 3,401,607
1970 2,478,930 1,804,690 4,283,620
1969 2,996,703 2,396,727 5,393,430
1968 2,869,449 3,278,175 6,147,624
1967 3,892,150 2,636,984 6,529,134
1966 2,784,952 1,693,665 4,478,617
1965 2,141,659 1,636,712 3,778,371
1964 2,739,205 707,539 3,446,744
1963 2,799,863 874,275 3,674,138
1962 2,636,714 943,132 3,579,846
1961 3,053,721 2,126,050 5,179,771
1960 2,911,955 2,586,735 5,498,890
1959 3,097,801 1,648,815 4,746,616
1958 2,942,716 1,675,957 4,618,673
1957 2,880,035 1,437,262 4,317,297
1956 2,178,527 1,129,870 3,308,397
1955 2,195,340 1,424,229 3,619,569
1954 1,980,695 1,596,869 3,577,564
1953 2,082,365 1,062,251 3,144,616
1952 2,938,146 874,808 3,812,954
1951 2,296,959 1,318,687 3,615,646
Totals 58,331,575 35,300, 240 93,631,815

36


PORT WLAND
}
a OAS REEFS

ST. sans

MANTSTIOUE

GLADSTONE & KIPLING
(LITTLE BAY DE NOC)

& ESCANABA
2 PETOSKEY
a TOSKEY PENN DIXIE
CHARLEV
MENOMINEE: LELAND m
Oconto Lh ; )
STURG
PENSAUKEE 7 BAY RAVERSE CITY
F) FRANKFORT
BIG SUAMTCO QALGOMA [= Pescara
GREEN BAY Cykewaunce / XG porrace Lake
/ —
& DHANISTEE
WISCONSIN whurroweQ PS Quon
| O PENTWATER
SHEBOYGAN Q} _ I MICHIGAN
M4 | i=]
PORT WASHINGTON OC) & | g J WHITE LAKE
int Lae’
ara
@ MUSKEGON
MILWAUKEE ©) whut
oe O\GRAND HAVEN
OAK cREEK AN 3 | &
RACINE C) 3 lz O HOLLAND
=
KENOSHA Q) 5|s 1 sauGATUCK HARBOR SYMBOLS

(>) SOUTH HAVEN © PUBLIC RECREATIONAL
© PUBLIC COMMERCIAL

A PRIVATE COMMERCIAL
© 27 FOOT CHANNELS

K ST. JOSEPH

—\
OQ NECHIOAN CTY ay wees)

INDTANARIK7E® curs WATERWAY ——
50

1 Os
1 Wp tee 10 0

Up
ILLINOIS oy MIDTANA

Figure 9. PRIVATE COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC HARBORS AND C.E. DISTRICTS
IN LAKE MICHIGAN

78


No.

65

66

67

68

69

70
71
72

73
74
75
76
77

78

Future Average Annual Quantity of Polluted Maintenance
Dredging by Harbor, by C.E. District in Lake Michigan .

Planning of Confined Disposal Sites for Polluted Public
Harbors by C.E. District in Lake Michigan ...+-+-+-

U.S. Dredging in Lake Superior: Ten Year Average Annual
Polluted Spoil and Average Volume Predictions, 1961-

Confined Disposal Sites for Public Harbors in Lake
Superior . 6 6 ee ee ee ee eh

Future Average Annual Quantity of Polluted Dredged Spoil
in the Great Lakes... . es

Land Use in the Great Lakes Basin ..........2..
Estimated Sediment Sources for the Great Lakes Basin. . .

A Comparison of River Sedimentation and Maintenance Dredg-
ing in Selected Projects... 1... ee ee eee ene

Comparison of Littoral Drift and Maintenance Dredging . .
Total and Suspended Solids in Selected Projects .....
Sedimentation in Racine Harbor, 1968-1973 ........
Datums for the Great Lakes... ee + ee ee ee ee

Correlations between Lake Levels and Maintenance/Private
Dredging Volumes, 1940-1970 in the Great Lakes .....

Dredging Trends in the Great Lakes, 1951-1983 ......

Page

159

161

171

175

177
192

193

194
197
198
203
205

206

209


CONTENTS

Abstract . 6 6 ee ee ee ee ee

List of Figures ... 2... ee wee

List of Tables... ......2..

Great Lakes

from the Great Lakes

Dredging and Disposal Policies .......

Acknowledgments .......-4.6.
Sections
I Conclusions .......
IL Recommendations .....
IIl Dredging Quantities in the
Iv Pollution of Spoil Dredged
v
VI Factors Related to Dredging ......-.
VII References ........
VIII List of Abbreviations ..

iii

Page
ii
iv
vi

xi

120
179
191
215

219


therefore, it is not possible to classify a harbor or waterway in Lake
Huron as completely polluted or unpolluted. There are areas of a dredg-
ing project which may be unpolluted whereas other areas are polluted.

In Lake Huron, harbors such as Alpena, Caseville, and Sebewaing are

therefore categorized as partially polluted (P/U).

In many sediment samples, several parameters have been exceeded and are
noted in Table 57. Of the 7 mandatory parameters tabulated for the C.E.
projects, COD is the most commonly occurring pollutant followed by vola-
tile solids, and oil and grease. In the D.P.W. projects, Kjeldahl nitro-
gen and COD are the most common pollution parameters which exceed the
M.O.E. criteria. Both environmental agencies confirm the high occur-
rence of mercury in Lake St. Clair. In Michigan, most C.E. projects
have been sampled since 1967 whereas in Ontario only 10 projects have
been assessed through 1973. Therefore, based on the number of projects
sampled, a more accurate estimate of future polluted dredging volumes
may be determined for the C.E. dredging projects.

Projects where sediments were classified as polluted and unpolluted by
the E.P.A. were mapped on the Project Maps of the C.E. and the ratio of
polluted sediment volume to the unpolluted sediment volume determined.
When possible this ratio was confirmed by the C.E. Detroit District.
Table 58 represents, by project, future annual maintenance dredging that
the C.E. feels necessary to maintain all projects in Lake Huron and Lake
St. Clair at project depth and the percent of polluted sediment within
each project. Based on these data, 874,650 of the 1.2 million cubic
yards or 72 percent of the spoil would not be suitable for open-lake
disposal. Table 59 represents a decade (1961-70) of C.E. maintenance
dredging in the 2 lakes by project. During the 1960's, 728,776 cubic
yards were removed annually from C.E. projects. Assuming that the sedi-
ment quality did not change in the past decade, 426,186 cubic yards or
58 percent of these dredgings would have exceeded E.P.A.'s criteria.
Therefore, if the C.E. were to meet their projection in the next decade,

141


ee

TOYEAR DREDGING VOLUME 1961-1970 (IN 1,000'S CY )

oO 0-24 Ped
OQ 25-99 AS
RS
100-199 \ oF
| vs
200-399 oF
) oS
J fase
400 + ve
MICHIGAN -() BuFFALo
ao
ca
PORT STANLEY ((_) ( ) PORT BURWELL Prat
LAKE ST, CLAIP “7
CANADA “7
DETROIT RIVER Ue 0) DUNKIRK
a -—
at OJRONDEAU -
Yy eae WE os eo CO) BARCELONA
ROUGE RIVER RG nS ’ a
A “7 eR alas
\ S 7 pet . NEV! YORK
wovrde ( Yy \ v7 iL
\ - CD CONNEAUT
BOLLES G NS oa i PENNSYLVANIA
a ~~ U7 C ) ASHTABULA
SL ° |
TOLEDO FAIRPORT
sg .
a8 _ 40) “a CLEVELAND (IN MILES)
‘2, SSS
& WO. % & @ 10 0 50
OHIO . BR ao FB
&  @ %

Figure 5. AVERAGE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ERIE, 1961-1970


7. Based on an annual projection of 0.9 million cubic yards, approxi-

mately 52 percent of the spoil would be polluted.

8. Although future annual maintenance dredging is anticipated to
increase by about 200,000 cubic yards over the past decade, the quantity
of polluted sediments will increase by only 85,000 cubic yards.

9. High maintenance dredging projects, such as the St. Clair River, Au
Sable and St. Marys River, are not necessarily equated with high volumes

of polluted spoil.

10. The largest volume of polluted spoil (90%) in the next decade will
be dredged from Lake St. Clair and from Saginaw.

11. Saginaw, where dredging of polluted spoil has been delayed, faces

the most serious problem in terms of confined disposal. A site for Lake
St. Clair's polluted spoil is firm at this time. Confined sites for al1

polluted projects under PL 91-611, with the exception of Port Austin, are
also firm.

12. Based on available data, 85 percent of the future dredging volumes
in Ontario will be polluted. Most of this quantity (1.2 million cubic
yards) will be removed from the St. Clair Cut-off.

QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL
IN LAKE MICHIGAN

Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's 7 mandatory pollution
parameters, the current pollution analyses of public harbor sediments in
the dredging areas are indicated in Table 64. Sediments of private har-
bors have not been routinely sampled, therefore private harbors are not
treated herein. The E.P.A. usually samples the public harbors prior to
the scheduling of maintenance dredging. A total of 327 bottom samples
were taken, for an average of 7.4 samples per public harbor. Though
Milwaukee Harbor was re-sampled in 1973 and St. Joseph in 1974, the

analyses data were not available.

152


1973. In Canada, total dredging volumes in the past 2 years have also
decreased.

Future Dredging in Lake Huron and
Lake St. Clair--Michigan

Although future dredging is difficult to predict accurately, estimates
can be made based on past and present dredging activities. Basically,
the volume of spoil to be removed is the sum of projected maintenance
dredging, projected new work, and private dredging. How policies, such
as PL 91-611, will affect dredging in the next decade cannot be totally
or accurately assessed at this point. In the past 2 years maintenance
and permit dredging volumes in Michigan have declined, indicating that
federal and state policy does play a role in dredging activity. There-
fore, a maximum and minimum dredging figure is determined for Lake Huron
and Lake St. Clair. Also, based on the historical data, a probable

dredging estimate is presented for the next decade.

Future maintenance dredging in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair is basically
related to the projected dredging frequency and volume of spoil removed.
Table 31 illustrates the maintenance dredging frequencies of the C.E.
projects over the past 13 years. This table reveals that the more com
mercially significant waterways and harbors, such as Saginaw and the St.
Clair River are dredged consistently. Other projects which are economi-
cally less important, such as Cheboygan and Alpena are not dredged as
often. Most remaining harbors, such as Port Sanilac and Harbor Beach

have recreational status and the dredging frequency is low.

In Lake Huron, the dredging period 1961 to 1970 may be selected to obtain
a dredging frequency. During the early part of that decade the st. Law-
rence Seaway was completed and 27-foot project depths now occur at
Saginaw and all Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair connecting channels except
Inland Route. Smaller projects, such as Inland Route and Clinton River
were actively dredged during the late 1960's and into the 1970's.

64


private expansion is expected, permit dredging will remain between
200,000 and 268,000 cubic yards or about 235,000 yards annually.

Scheduled New Work Dredging in Lake Huron
and Lake St. Clair

Table 36 illustrates new work or capital dredging in Lake Huron and Lake
St. Clair over the next decade. New work must be justified and it
normally takes several years before a project is authorized and com-
pleted. Quite possibly some projects may be curtailed or delayed
because of environmental, economic, and/or feasibility factors. A capi-
tal dredging project at Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario was proposed in the

Table 36. FUTURE NEW WORK IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR,

1973-1983 (48, 50)
(cubic yards)

Project Volume Date of completion

Sault Ste. Marie

a) Angle Courses 893,500 1976
b) Point Iroquois 3,995,000 1973
c) Ontario 1,150,000 1975
De Tour 4,000 1979
Black River, Alcona Co. 110,000 1980
Forestville 73,400 1979
Middle Island Harbor 40,000 1983
Grindstone City 75,000 1979
Lexington 4,700 1976
Black River, Port Huron 140,000 1974
Middle Channel St. Clair 60,000 1976
River, Michigan
Lake St. Clair, Ontario 60,000 1974
Total 6,605,000

73


EPA-660/3-74-029
DECEMBER 1974

Ecological Research Series



of the dredging volumes from bin measure to place measure probably
accounts for some of the difference. At Muskegon Harbor the breakwater
is relatively new; thus, sediments from littoral transport may not accu-
mulate in the outer harbor for a couple of years. Therefore, future
annual maintenance dredging at Muskegon may exceed the average of the

past decade.

Conversely, recent dredging histories of Charlevoix, Manistique, and
Portage Lake do not substantiate the Corps of Engineers' projection for
these harbors. Moreover, due to a long-term decline in commerce and
increasing recreational activities, some small harbors such as Pentwater,
Portage Lake, Saugatuck and White Lake may, in the future, be dredged
only to a depth of 12 to 14 feet instead of being maintained at their
present project depth of 18 to 24 feet.

New work dredging projects currently planned by the C.E. for Lake Michi-
gan are listed in Table 46. Because all 9 of these federal projects may
not receive final authorization and funding, the list should be regarded
as a maximum new work projection. Construction of the New Buffalo
Harbor was scheduled to begin September, 1973 with completion in 1974-75.
No data were collected regarding construction of new private harbors,

however there is a trend away from private harbors.

All of the new public harbors scheduled for construction will be recrea-
tional harbors and as such should generate small volumes of additional
future maintenance dredging. New work projects in Green Bay, Ludington
and Milwaukee harbors are expected to cause a small increase in annual
maintenance dredging. Usually, this increase in maintenance dredging
occurs during the first few years following channel deepening or widen-
ing as the walls of these new channels slough in due to vessel traffic

and effect of bow thrusters.

Summary

In summary, a historical total of 118.7 million cubic yards have been

99


One of the reasons for the probable reclassification rests in the curi-
ous discovery that the dumping of organic wastes (pulp, bark, etc.) in
the open lake, consistently improves the fishing, both commercial and
recreational, in the dump area. This is probably a reflection of the

increase in plankton and microbenthonic food supplies in the dump areas.

Table 49 shows an additional volume projected for Leigh Harbor, if pro-
posed construction is consummated. This volume of sediment is not
included in projections at this time since the project is still pending.

Statements of the D.P.W. in 1970, regarding the pollution of Canadian
harbors, are quoted from the Dredging Inventory.

“THUNDER BAY (KAM RIVER):

At present, the 0.W.R.C. has stated that all dredged material
removed from that portion of the Kam River between the Westfort
Turning Basin and Saskatchewan Pool Elevator #11, is unacceptable
for open lake disposal because of high organic content and mercury
contamination. A recent local newspaper report states that the
lower extremity of the Kam is low in oxygen content and on the
verge of being polluted. On the strength of this information, it
is therefore necessary that for any future dredging in the Kam

River, that all dredged material be deposited on a suitable land
site.

SAULT STE. MARIE:

The 1,150,000 cu. yd. of sand and silt from the proposed deep
water harbour at Leigh's Bay will be contained in an enclosed berm.
The dredging will be done by hydraulic means which will cause some
turbidity but proper engineered controls will be implemented.
MICHIPICOTEN RIVER:

In front of the public wharf is a silt island which if not suffi-
ciently cleared out by the spring freshets will require dredging
to maintain access to the wharf. The properties of this silt is
not known, but it would cause considerable turbidity if dumped."

These quotations emphasize the nature of concerns of the Canadian dredg-

ing interests. Oxygen demand and turbidity (an aesthetic interest) are
the principal deficiencies in most Canadian harbors.

173


Total organic carbon
Immediate oxygen demand
Settleability

Sulfides

Trace metals including cadmium, copper, chromium, arsenic and nickel

Although sediment quality is a primary determinant of the eligibility of
dredged spoil for open-lake disposal, other factors may influence the
selection of a disposal method in Canada and the United States including:

Volume of dredged material

Existing and potential quality and the use of the water in the
disposal area

Other lake conditions at the disposal site such as depth and
currents

Time of the year disposal
Method of disposal

Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the
dredged spoil

Duration of disposal operations

In Section III, projections of future annual maintenance dredging
volumes were presented. In this section, where data are available, the
public harbors in the United States are classified as unpolluted, par-
tially polluted, and polluted. The classification was based on the dis-
tribution of polluted bottom samples, as analyzed by the E.P.A., taken
from each of the dredging projects. A dredging project is considered
polluted if the analyses reveal that at least one pollution parameter
exceeds the acceptable limits in all of the samples taken. In some
harbors, only a portion of the total dredging area was deemed polluted
by the bottom sediment analyses. Such harbors are considered partially
polluted. In Canada, projects have not been formally classified in this
manner. However, for the purpose of arriving at an overview of the pol-
luted and unpolluted volumes of maintenance dredgings, harbors which
exceed the M.0.E. pollution criteria are considered polluted, while

those that do not exceed the criteria are classified as unpolluted.

122


Table 63. FUTURE DREDGING BY D.P.W. IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR
AND PROJECTED VOLUME OF POLLUTED SPOIL (48, 54)
1973-1977
(cubic yards)

Project Total volume Sediment quality
Belle River 26,000 ns.
Byng Inlet 48,874 ns.
Cedar Beach 7,000 nes.
Collingwood 70,000 n.s.
Goderich 70,000 Polluted
Grand Bend 40,000 Polluted
Kincardine 15,000 nes.
Midland 5,000 ns,
Oliphant 10,000 nes,
Pike Creek 16,000 nes.
St. Clair Cut-off 1,200,000 Polluted
Sault Ste. Marie 26,000 Polluted
Sarnia 26,000 Polluted
Sydenham 28,000 nes,
Total 1,587,874 of which 1,362,000 (85%)

exceed M.0.E. criteria

an.s. not sampled.

Huron and the sediment quality of sampled areas. If the projects which
are not sampled do not exceed the M.0.E. criteria, it may be concluded
that 85 percent of the dredgings in Canadian projects are polluted.
Approximately 1.2 million cubic yards of polluted sediment is located at
Sault Ste. Marie and in the St. Clair Waterway. The D.P.W. is presently
constructing and testing a diked disposal area at Mitchell Bay in Lake
St. Clair. It is therefore anticipated that a confined site will be

150


ABSTRACT

Based on historical records, an overview and projection of U.S. and
Canadian dredging quantities in the Great Lakes are presented. Using
current pollution criteria, future quantities of polluted maintenance
dredging are estimated for each lake. Recent environmental policies
have influenced dredging and particularly disposal practices. These
policies, as well as sedimentation, lake levels, and economics are dis-

cussed in relation to dredging.

During the next decade, maintenance and private dredging volumes will
not change significantly, whereas new work will decrease. As in the
past, most maintenance dredging will occur in U.S. projects, particu-
larly in Lake Erie.

A factor which will determine future U.S. maintenance dredging is the
availability of confined disposal sites. If the 62 sites are completed
for commercial harbors as planned, 300,000 of the 6.45 million cubic
yards of annual projected polluted spoil will not have disposal facili-
ties. Where pollution elimination systems are in use, shoaling in some
industrial harbors may be decreasing. Although long-term lake levels
are not predictable, an inverse relationship between maintenance dredg-
ing and lake levels is evident.

This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number R-801062 and
Grant Number R-801062 by Eastern Michigan University under the sponsor-
ship of the Environmental Protection Agency. Work was completed as of

July 1974.

ii


Although Section 123 (C) of Public Law 91-611 provides for the construc-
tion and financing of 10-year containment sites for disposing of pol-
luted dredged materials, it also specifies that non-federal interests;
(1) furnish all lands, easements, and rights-of-way necessary for the
construction, operation and maintenance of the facility; and (2) contrib-
ute 25 percent of the construction costs. The 25 percent shared cost
may be waived by the C.E. if the E.P.A. determines that the municipali-
ties and industries in the drainage basin are making satisfactory prog-
ress toward improving their waste treatment facilities. At present only
11 waivers of the shared construction costs have been granted while 8
others are pending by the C.E. Cost sharing has caused delays in the
diked disposal program. Local interests, such as port commissions, are
reluctant to provide land to the C.E. for diked disposal sites if
waivers are not first granted. The Great Lakes Commission recommended to
Congress in August, 1973, that waiver requirements be deleted because of

possible economic stress in harbors such as Saginaw and Calumet (13).

Basically, Public Law 91-611 is a temporary solution to the problem of
the disposal of polluted dredged spoil. Whether open-lake disposal can
take place is determined, in part, on the state level. The governors of
the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan have
objected to open-lake disposal of polluted spoil dredged by the C.E. and
by private dredging firms (22). However, the governors of Ohio, Pennsyl-
vania and New York did not request that open-lake disposal of polluted
spoil be discontinued in the Great Lakes. In the Buffalo District, open-
lake dumping of polluted spoil is continuing at harbors where confined
disposal sites are not yet available.

During the past three years the C.E. has expanded its role in the environ-
mental field. The C.E. has recognized that coastal marshes and wetlands
constitute productive and valuable public resources. Thus, no permit

will be granted for work in wetlands unless the District Engineer, in the

182


FEET

702

FEET

ROJECT LIMIT.

FEET

CROSS SECTION A 22 4

CROSS SECTION B

CROSS SECTION C

NN FEET

aw

CROSS SECTION D
CROSS SECTION E

O SHOALING

EROSION

Figure 20. SELECTED CROSS SECTIONS OF THE ROOT RIVER AT RACINE, WISCONSIN

SSS
(i) 100 200 300
IN FEET


Table 46. FUTURE NEW WORK DREDGING PROJECTS IN PUBLIC HARBORS
OF LAKE MICHIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT (50, 52)

(cubic yards)

Volume to be

Completion date

Project dredged of project

Chicago District

Cedar River® 50,600 1976

Green Bay 603,000 1976-77

Illinois Beach 100,000 1976-77
State Park

Milwaukee 1,535,000 1977

New Buffalo* 67,000 1974-75

Northport® 1,310,000 1977-79

Port Washington 20,000 1975-76

Total 3,685,600

Detroit District

Cross Village® 42,200 1979

Ludington 695,000 1977

Total 737,200

Total for lake 4,422,800

3New public harbor to be constructed.

100


Table 7. HISTORICAL DREDGING: CANADIAN PROJECTS IN LAKE ONTARIO,

1961-1970 (48)
(cubic yards)

Project Total maintenance Total new work
Toronto 2,521,940 549,000
Oshawa 475,391 63,925
Port Credit 347,000 1,048 ,000
Cobourg 238,146 0
Hamilton 1,524,0797 200,000
Port Hope 195,332 0
Cataraqui Bay 56,256 4,088
Total 5,358,144 1,865,013

4Includes 155,615 cubic yards for Burlington.

determined:

(1) a figure based on C.E. estimates made in 1968 (3),

(2) a figure based on relatively recent environmental effects

on dredging in the Great Lakes, and

(3) a median figure projected in this report.
The latter will be based primarily on the dredging histories of the
various projects in Lake Ontario and on developments anticipated in the
near future, i.e., a drop in the present high lake levels, completion of
confined disposal sites, and easing of present environmental constraints.
Changes in shipping needs in the next decade and the potential of year-
round navigation are not expected to affect dredging in Lake Ontario in

the next 10 years.

In 1968, the C.E. projected dredging volumes in the major harbors and
waterways of Lake Ontario, i.e., Rochester and Oswego (3). Where projec-

tions were not provided in 1968, data on annual average maintenance

21


Using Racine Harbor, Wisconsin, as an example, it has been demonstrated
that there are three main areas of sediment deposition. Sedimentation
occurs in the upstream section of the harbor at the head of navigation
where sediments transported as river bedload accumulate in the dredged
channels. Like a tongue extending downstream toward the lake front,
sediments are also deposited throughout the inner harbor, including the
turning basin. Because deposition is most conspicuous on the outside of
meander bends in the river, the source of these sediments is probably
from suspended river load. Finally, the third area of sedimentation is
in the outer harbor and approach channels where littoral drift results
in continual sediment bypassing of the breakwater and/or jetty system.
As the entire harbor is polluted, industrial and municipal sedimentation
probably occurs throughout the project.

In many of the commercial public harbors of the Great Lakes, particu-
larly where there are industrial-urban complexes adjacent to the harbor,
man-induced sedimentation by industrial and municipal wastes may signifi-
cantly increase maintenance dredging. Although the sediments in the
Great Lakes have a certain level of 'background' pollution and some
‘natural’ pollution is caused by tree leaves and marsh drainage, pollu-~
tion of inner harbor areas by industrial and municipal discharges
appears to be much more important. As along the east coast of Lake
Michigan, sediment transport by beach drift and longshore currents cause
considerable deposition in the outer harbor areas. Because these sandy
sediments are relatively clean, the C.E. has utilized some of this spoil
for nourishing eroding beaches at Holland, Muskegon, Michigan City, and
Ontonagon. Using the pre-dredging and post-dredging sounding charts, it
is possible to document the areas of sedimentation for each harbor. In
addition, if sediment abatement programs are to be successfully imple-
mented to reduce the volume of future maintenance dredging, then the
various sources of dredged sediments must first be determined. Sediment

abatement programs directed toward the reduction of natural stream

204


Table 39.

ECONOMIC STATUS AND 1972 COMMERCE OF HARBORS

BY C.E. DISTRICT, LAKE MICHIGAN (5)

Public Harbors

Economic status

Tons of commerce

Chicago District
Algoma

Big Suamico
Burns Waterway”
Calumet H. & R.*
Chicago H. & Rr?
Gladstone-Kipling
Green Bay
Indiana®
Kenosha
Kewaunee
Manitowoc
Menominee
Michigan City
Milwaukee”
Oconto
Pensaukee

Port Washington
Racine

Recreational/Fishing
Recreational/Fishing
Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial

Commercial
Commercial/Recreational
Commercial
Recreational/Fishing
Recreational/Fishing
Commercial/Recreational

Commercial/Recreational

Sheboygan Commercial/Recreational
Sturgeon Bay/Ship Canal Commercial

Two Rivers Commercial

Waukegan Commercial

Total

Private harbors

Buffington Commercial

Escanaba Commercial

Gary Commercial

Oak Creek Commercial

District total

80

826

0
4,759,827
25,431,158
4,516,892
292,031
2,823,604
17,610,662
103,648
1,205,791
1,818,313
152,568
371
5,373,630
1,041
2,943
717,312
100,192
221,128
216,650
99,447
436,710

65,884,744

1,731,519
10,954, 237
8,751,620

920,766

88, 242,886


decrease in dredging may result as waste treatment facilities reduce

municipal and industrial deposition.

The C.E., in their pilot study of dredging, reported that the effects of
open-lake disposal of dredged material had not been researched (1). At
present the effect of open-lake disposal of dredged spoil on water qual-
ity is still in a research phase (29). Moreover, the C.E. concluded
that in the future, at some of the harbors with low maintenance dredging
requirements, small quantities of moderately polluted spoil may be dis-
posed in the open lake (1), Although few confined disposal sites are
available, most large volume projects such as Toledo and Buffalo do have
confined facilities. If economic stress is to be avoided while permit-
ting maintenance dredging, then open-lake disposal of small volumes of
lightly polluted spoil could be a temporary solution to the problem of
confining polluted dredged spoil. In emergency situations small volumes
could be trucked to nearly landfill areas or confined behind earthen
dikes.

190


Table 37. FUTURE DREDGING IN CANADIAN PROJECTS IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR,

1973-1977 (48, 49)
(cubic yards)

eel

Project Volume
Belle River 26,000
Byng Inlet 48,874
Cedar Beach 7,000
Collingwood 70,000
Goderich 70,000
Grand Bend 40,000
Kincardine 15,000
Midland 5,000
Oliphant 10,000
Pike Creek 16,000
St. Clair Cut-off 1,200,000
Sault Ste. Marie 12,500 (1973) and
13,500 (1976)
Sarnia 26,000
Sydenham 28,000
Total 1,587,874

separate from Canadian maintenance dredging. This being the case,

317,575 cubic yards represents a maximum annual figure.

Permit dredging in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair is presented in Table
28. Permit dredging, administered by the M.O.T., averages about 2,000
cubic yards annually. Most projects on Lake Huron are for small private
boat slips which may require the removal of 300 to500 CY per project. The
M.O.T. expects private dredging to level off to 8 to 10 projects on Lake
Superior and Lake Huron over the next few years. The future permit

75


has site selection been accomplished for the 10-year program. However,
the polluted volume of these projects totals only about 300,000 CY
annually, which is 5 percent of the total polluted volume (6.45 million
CY). Recent high lake levels have reduced the problem of groundings at
those harbors where maintenance dredging has been temporarily postponed
while confined facilities are being designed.

11. Even though there is a trend toward larger lake carriers and exten-
sion of the navigation season, future maintenance dredging volumes are

projected to increase only slightly, while new work volumes will decline.

12. Since the enactment of PL 91-611, disposal of polluted spoil in
open-water sites has generally been discontinued in Lakes Superior,
Michigan, Huron, and St. Clair. In the Buffalo District of the C.E.,
small quantities of polluted spoil are being open-lake disposed from har-
bors requiring maintenance dredging for which confined disposal sites

have not yet been constructed.

13. At present, there is no specific legislation in the U.S. which pro-
hibits the open-lake disposal of polluted spoil during times of economic
stress. The governors of the states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York
have indicated to the C.E. that they will not object to open-lake dump-
ing of polluted dredgings when suspension of maintenance dredging opera-

tions would jeopardize commercial navigation.

14. Dredging policies of Ontario, Canada, do not restrict the use of
private land for confined disposal sites. In many instances, as in

Toronto Harbor, the confined polluted spoil is utilized as a resource.

15. Where pollution elimination systems (under PL 92-500) have reduced
artificial sedimentation, as in Calumet and Chicago Harbors, future main-
tenance and private dredging volumes may be lower than that of the past

decade.

16. Although a very small increase in future average annual maintenance

dredging is projected over the past decade, the proportion of polluted


instances the sediment is composed of sand-size particles. In some
instances the sediment is not polluted and can be used for beach nourish-
ment. In harbors on the east coast of Lake Michigan, littoral drift
accounts for most of the maintenance dredging volumes which are extracted
from these projects. Normally, sand bars will form adjacent to the jet-

ties as the current velocities decrease in these areas.

As indicated in Table 73, the annual quantity of littoral drift gener-
ally exceeds the average annual maintenance dredging volume in the
harbors. Differences between the littoral transport rate and the main-
tenance dredging may occur for a number of reasons. For example, at
Muskegon Harbor the breakwater is relatively new, therefore sediment is
being trapped in the lee of the structure and little material is bypass-
ing the breakwater. Research is required to quantitatively relate the
observed alongshore sediment transport to the theoretical energy condi-
tions offshore. However, on exposed coasts where lake front harbors are
located, the volume of sediments accumulating in the outer harbors is

probably a function of the magnitude and direction of littoral drift.

A significant source of dredged material is industrial and municipal
wastes discharged and settling in navigable waterways. Table 74 repre-
sents total and suspended solids from selected harbors in Lake Erie and
Lake Ontario. Some of the suspended solids are adsorbed onto the sus-
pended load in the rivers and are then deposited as fluvial sediments
which must eventually be dredged. At Cleveland, during dredging opera-
tions in 1966 and 1967, 660,000 tons of dry solids were removed which
included 17,600 tons of oil and grease (24), The suspended sediment
load of the Cuyahoga River south of Cleveland is about 200,000 tons
annually, however annual maintenance dredging volumes therein exceed
800,000 CY. Materials such as flue dust and fly ash can contribute sig-
nificantly to the dredging volumes in highly industrialized harbors. At
Thunder Bay, Ontario, it has been estimated that 85 percent of the

196


Table 20. C.E. PROJECTIONS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES,
LAKE ERIE (3, 47, 50, 51)
(cubic yards)

——

Average annual dredging 1969
Project 1960-1968 projection
Ashtabula 104,000 176,000
Black Rock Channel and 105,776 80,000
Tonawanda Harbor
Buffalo 464,800 420,000
Cleveland 976,000 976,000
Conneaut 60,000 80,000
Dunkirk 15,448 16,000
Erie 145,600 240,000
Fairport 296,000 320,000
Huron 150,000 160,000
Lorain 150,000 240,000
Rocky River 1,062 12,000°
Sandusky 316,000 480,000
Bolles 10,921 20,0007
Detroit River 640,000 640,000
Monroe 192,000 192,000
Port Clinton 4,043 8, 000°
Rouge River 240,000 240,000
Toledo 1,120,000 1,120,000
Total 5,420,000

Reported as average annual dredging by the C.E. in 1970; used as pro-
jJections for these harbors.

45


samples taken from the harbor is polluted. Big Suamico should be
deleted from the table because it will not be maintenance dredged in the
future by the C.E. Burns Waterway may not undergo maintenance dredging
yet for another 3 to 4 years. Pensaukee and Manistique are small,

recreational harbors with little dredging.

Seventeen of the 27 harbor projects listed in Table 66 have at least
temporary solutions for the confinement of polluted dredged spoil.
Calumet, Grand Haven, Green Bay, Big Suamico, Holland, Indiana, and
Menominee all have confined land sites which have been or are presently
in use. However, at Calumet Harbor and River, the site currently in use
has been partially filled and only a year or so of capacity remains. A
single 10-year confined site has been designed for Milwaukee and Port
Washington, Kenosha and Racine, and for Manitowoc and Two Rivers. Small
10-year sites have already been built at Grand Haven and Holland. Con-
struction of other facilities is currently underway at Grand Haven,

Holland, Kenosha-Racine, and Milwaukee-Port Washington.

For a number of harbors with polluted sediments, only the preliminary
stages of planning for 10-year confined sites has been completed. Some
delays in the program appear to be the result of the reluctance of
local interests to provide land to the C.E. for disposal sites. Local
interest groups generally are not anxious to provide such land until
waivers of the shared construction costs of the confined sites are
granted. In most instances, site selection focuses on the immediate
vicinity of the outer harbor areas. If land disposal sites are avail-
able and in operation, waivers and 10-year confined sites may not be

required.

In the Chicago District, little progress has been made with regard to
Algoma, Burns Waterway, Chicago Harbor and River, Pensaukee, and
Sturgeon Bay Harbors. In the Detroit District, solutions have not been
found for Frankfurt, Manistique, South Haven, St. Joseph, and Traverse

City. Most of the confined disposal facilities are scheduled to be

162


The volume of annual maintenance dredging in the Chicago District has
been more variable than that of the Detroit District. Years with above
average maintenance dredging are characterized by the coincidence of 2
or more very large dredging projects within the same fiscal year. Much
of the dredged spoil from the Chicago District is derived from indus-
trial sediments and municipal sewage as well as from littoral and
fluvial (stream) transport processes. In the Detroit District, the
source of harbor sediments is primarily the result of littoral drift

which apparently is fairly constant from year to year.

Shoaling within the harbors, lake levels below mean low datum, and avail-
ability of federal funds appear to be positively correlated with the
scheduling of maintenance dredging projects. Based on the period 1935-
1973, an annual average of 22 harbors underwent maintenance dredging in
Lake Michigan. In the Chicago District, fewer harbors than usual were
scheduled for maintenance dredging during the period 1970 through 1973
as the open-lake disposal of dredged spoil was being re-evaluated.
During the low lake level years of 1963 to 1965, the C.E. maintained
harbors at maximum project depths to avoid groundings. The Korean War
effort in the early 1950's was accompanied by a reduction in the funding
of federal projects. During this period, the C.E. dredged fewer proj-
ects, and very few projects were contracted to private dredgers.

Unlike maintenance dredging, most of the new work dredging was performed
in 3 time periods. First, stimulated by shipping needs of the lumber
industry as well as by demands for ferry and excursion boats, a number
of public harbors were constructed in the late 1800's. The second
period, the 1930's, was characterized by the deepening and widening of
many harbors. During this time harbor depths commonly ranged from 18 to
25 feet. Finally, the period with the largest volume of new work dredg-
ing was the 1960's and early 1970's when many industrial harbors were
deepened to meet the 27-foot draft requirement of the St. Lawrence Sea-

way system. New work was carried out in Burns Waterway, Calumet Harbor

87


SUMMARY OF POLLUTED DREDGED QUANTITIES

As of July, 1974, there were 62 public harbors and waterways in the
C.E.'s 10-year confined disposal program (Tables 56, 58, 66 and 68).

In Lake Ontario, Oswego and Rochester are also in the confined program,
Site selection has been completed for 34 of these harbors and waterways.
Although 16 harbors are utilizing existing disposal facilities, most are
also going through site selection for the 10-year program. For 20 of
the 62 projects, site selection has not been completed, nor are there
existing disposal facilities. Among these harbors are Chicago Harbor &
River, Clinton River, Oswego, St. Joseph, and Sturgeon Bay. However,
the polluted quantity for these harbors totals only 300,000 CY annually,
which is 5 percent of the total (6.45 CY).

Data in this report indicate that there are 80 public harbors and water-
ways on the American side of the Great Lakes with polluted bottom sedi-
ments. E.P.A. bottom sediment analyses reveal that, in addition to the
62 harbors already in the confined disposal program, the following also
have polluted sediments: Algoma, Barcelona, Burns Waterway, Great Sodus,
Harrisville, Manistique, Pensaukee, and Port Austin Harbors. In addi-
tion, the following harbors in Lake Superior as of July, 1974 have been
dropped from the C.E. program: Big Bay, Black River, Cornucopia, Grand
Marais (Minn.), Grand Traverse, Knife, Marquette, Port Wing, Saxon and
Two Harbors. The total average annual volume of polluted spoil from
these 18 additional harbors is only approximately 110,000 CY. With the
exception of Burns Waterway, Great Sodus, and Marquette Harbors, these
are small, partially polluted harbors which are infrequently dredged.
The new pollution guidelines for dredged spoil currently being drafted
by the E.P.A. will probably result in the reclassification of the

pollution status of many of these smaller harbors.

Table 69 summarizes the polluted volume of average annual maintenance
and private dredged spoil to be removed from harbors and waterways in

the Great Lakes in the future.

176


Table 66. PLANNING OF CONFINED DISPOSAL SITES FOR POLLUTED PUBLIC
HARBORS BY C.E. DISTRICT IN LAKE MICHIGAN (50, 52)

Diked Completion Confined

Waiver disposal date of site now
Harbor granted site selected diked site in use
Chicago District
Algoma* b
Big Suamico x
Burns Waterway
Calumet Harbor & R. 1975 x
Chicago Harbor & R. 1975-76
Green Bay x x
Indiana x x
Kenosha x x 1975
Kewaunee x x 1975
Manitowoc x x 1975
Menominee tentative unknown x
Michigan City x
Milwaukee x x 1974-75
Pensaukee®
Port Washington pending x 1974-75
Racine x x 1975
Sheboygan x 1975
Sturgeon Bay 1975-76
Two Rivers pending x 1975
Waukegan x x 1975
Detroit District
Frankfurt 1976
Grand Haven x x 1974-75 x
Holland a x x 1976 x
Manistique
South Haven 1976
St. Joseph pending 1976
Traverse City 1976

3Harbor not initially selected for the confined disposal program.
Harbor dropped from the confined disposal program.

161


During most of the 1960's environmental policies such as PL 91-611 and
PL 92-500 were not instituted to prohibit dumping or cause dredging to
take place in localities where confined sites were available for

polluted spoil. Therefore, the decade 1961-70 may be a representative
dredging decade since economic stability was reached and environmental

policy was less effective in controlling dredging and disposal practices.

As illustrated in Table 31, from 1961 to 1970 the average dredging fre-
quency in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair was 6 projects per year. The
total volume generated during maintenance dredging operations by the
C.E. was 7.28 million cubic yards. Therefore in an average year during
that decade, 0.73 million yards were removed by an average of 6 projects.
Assuming that the status quo is to be maintained in the 1970's and 1980s,
an annual projection of about 0.73 million cubic yards may be realistic.
However, such a projection does not consider new work projects of the
late 1960's and the early 1970's such as at Saginaw and at Sault Ste.
Marie. In addition, the more significant environmental policies
directly affecting Great Lakes' dredging, such as PL 92-500, were legis-
lated in the 1970's. Thus, a 0.73 million cubic yard projection is some~
what biased since current operational and legislative variables are not

considered.

Table 32 represents the dredging the C.E. feels is necessary to maintain
harbors and waterways at their project depths over the next decade.
Based on this projection, 1.2 million cubic yards are to be removed
annually. When compared to Table 28 a record decade is anticipated.
Since this projection is almost twice what has been dredged in any of
the past 4 decades (1960 to 1969 saw the removal of 6.9 million CY) and
most anticipated new work projects are recreational, this projection
represents a maximum volume to be removed from Lake Huron/St. Clair in

the next decade.

A more accurate estimate of future maintenance dredging is based on
projects which have high frequencies and high volumes. Traditionally,

66


Historical dredging data presented in this report reveal that mainte-
nance and private dredging volumes are slightly increasing, while the
new work dredging quantity varies greatly over the years (Table 78).
The increase in maintenance and private dredging, including the pro-
jected figure, is probably due to widening and deepening of navigation
channels to accommodate vessels with deeper drafts. During the 1960's
the major commercial harbors, connecting channels, and turning basins
were widened and deepened to meet the 27-foot maximum draft requirement
of the St. Lawrence Seaway. Although new work dredging may cause some
increase in maintenance dredging, the new work associated with the Sea-
way system was not accompanied by a sharp rise in maintenance dredging.
This is because most of the new work dredging involved deepening of
existing harbors and connecting channels as well as the construction of
locks. Apparently, then, the rate of shoaling in the artificial chan-
nels due to sedimentation is relatively constant and is not dramatically

affected by increased depths.

Table 78. DREDGING TRENDS IN THE GREAT LAKES, 1951-1983
(millions cubic yards)

—= ——— a os
Average annual Average annual
maintenance and new work
Period private dredging dredging Total
1951-1960 9.17 1.79 10.96
1961-1970 10.82 9.74 20.56
1973-1983 11.45 4.11 15.56

The decrease in the number of new work projects scheduled through 1979
suggests that a temporary economic plateau may have been reached in the
Great Lakes. Moreover, most of the scheduled new work is designed to
accommodate the boating public as several new recreational harbors with

12 to 14 foot drafts are anticipated. Conversely, a projected increase

209


Table 11. CANADIAN DREDGING FREQUENCIES, LAKE ONTARIO PROJECTS,
1961-1970 (48)

el

Project 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
Toronto x x x x x x x x x
Oshawa x x x x x x x
Port Credit x x
Burlington x
Cobourg x x x x x x x x
Hamilton x x x x x x x x x
Port Hope x x x x x x x x x
Cataraqui x
rotal 7 95 5 6 3 5 5 4 2 4
projects
per year

27


Pollution of Lake Superior Harbors
--Canadian

Canadian harbors on Lake Superior are unusually clean as compared with
U.S. harbors. Most of the pollution problem in Canada lies with the
accumulation of wood pulp and the waste products of the paper industry
in 2 harbors, namely Thunder Bay and Nipigon (Red Rock). The Public
Works Commission of Canada (now D.P.W.) finds that inorganic sediments
offer no particular pollution problem except in the aesthetics of dis-
posal areas where clay and silt remain as suspensoids and tend to cloud
the water for a short time after dumping in the open lake (18). The
concern of the public and ecological interests in Ontario is more promi~
nently directed toward the destruction of fish spawning areas and
aquatic-life foraging areas than to the deleterious chemical effect of

pollutants.

Inspection of Table 49 suggests that, of the average annual dredge vol-
ume in Canadian harbors (323,789 CY) some 40 percent or 130,752 CY will
be polluted. On a 5-year projection, the D.P.W. suggests that 302,400
CY will be removed annually. Using the estimated total volume of pol-
luted sediment from this study, per year, approximately 43 percent of
the D.P.W. spoils will require confinement; a reasonably close agreement.
Canadian port directors appear to have less of a problem with acquisi-
tion of land reclamation sites and diked disposal sites than their col-
leagues in the U.S., because of the differences between Canadian and U.S.

real estate law (18).

Of the 10 principal harbors in Canada, as listed in Table 49, 3 are
considered polluted by the M.O.E. Spoils from these are assigned to
landfill projects. Canadian authorities have not yet delineated por-
tions of harbors as polluted and unpolluted through extensive sampling
programs. It is expected, however, that a large proportion of the cur-
rent Canadian polluted sediments will be reclassified to unpolluted,

with extensive sampling and analysis projects which are currently
underway.

172


An increase in the draft of the Seaway system may be limited by cost
constraints. As estimated by the U.S. Department of Transport in 1968,
the cost of converting and deepening the entire seaway system to a 31-
foot capacity was estimated to be 3.5 billion dollars (41). Nearly one-
half of this cost involves the deepening of the Welland Canal, which cur-
rently has a draft of 27 feet plus subgrade. In the upper Great Lakes,
the Poe Lock at Sault Ste. Marie has sills at 32 feet, and it can accom-
modate vessels of 110 foot beam. To extend the draft of the upper Great
Lakes to 32 feet, St. Marys Channel, St. Clair River, and Detroit River
would have to be dredged to 32 feet. To date, deepening of these con-
necting channels has not been justified.

The economic feasibility of an extended navigation season is currently
being investigated (42). To many shippers, particularly in the U.S., an
extended season is vital to the future vitality of the Great Lakes navi-
gation system. Although an extension seems likely in the near future,
no significant effect on future maintenance and new work dredging is

anticipated.

Several economic factors may cause a levelling off of future maintenance
and new work dredging volumes. First, a few small, commercial harbors
which are no longer economically justified (such as Saugatuck and Pent-
water) may be downgraded to recreational status and maintained at 12 to
14 foot depths. In Canada, a number of small semi-commercial harbors
have been reclassified and transferred. Projects such as Grand Bend,
Killarney and Blind River have been transferred from the M.0.T. to the
Fisheries and Marine Section of the M.O.E.

Other factors which may depress future maintenance dredging volumes in-
clude rising dredging costs, competition from other modes of transport,
and sediment abatement programs. In Canada, all maintenance dredging is
contracted to public tenders. As has been pointed out in the Policy

Section, government-owned dredging plants can reduce the cost of

211


Table 16, NEW WORK DREDGING IN LAKE ERIE, 1951-1972 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

Year Buffalo District Detroit District Total
1972 0 0 0
1971 0 0 0
1970 86,836 51,449 138,285
1969 0 46,464 46,464
1968 387,466 0 387,466
1967 1,150,721 79,854 1,230,575
1966 3,186,485 399, 467 3,585,952
1965 2,441,336 1,297,268 3,738,604
1964 1,361,080 3,103,642 4,464,722
1963 3,239,048 9,494,166 12,733,214
1962 491,966 2,015,771 2,507,7377
1961 294,663 3,499,913 3,794,576
1960 1,167,686 906,416 2,074,102
1959 736,545, 1,284,498 2,021,043
1958 0 1,664,381 1,664,381
1957 395,503 0 395,503
1956 720,000 0 720,000
1955 250,000 0 250,000
1954 227,083 0 227,083
1953 193,750 0 193,750
1952 291,958 0 291,958
1951 316,527 0 316,527
Totals 16,938,653 23,843, 289 40,781,941

apius two more jobs of unreported and unknown quantity.

39


Maintenance dredging in Lake Superior by the C.E. throughout the
historic period of dredging records (1937-1972) totals 17,250,520 CY.
This represents 19.1 percent of all U.S. dredging during the period and
18.3 percent of the total dredging in Lake Superior (Canada included)

in all categories.

During the 10-year sample period (1961-1970) maintenance dredging within
U.S. harbors in Lake Superior totaled 1,594,742 CY. This represents 15
percent of the total (10,611,464 CY) in all categories. On the basis of
the 10-year representative sample, annual maintenance dredging may be
projected to be approximately 160,000 CY annually for the next 10 years.
It is recognized that dredging volumes have decreased materially in the
last 10 to 15 year period, as explained elsewhere in this report. There-
fore, an analysis of annual maintenance dredging volumes of Lake
Superior from 1940 to the present may provide a viable average annual
figure. The starting year 1940 is selected in order to eliminate the
unusually high volume year of 1939, in which 7,658,554 CY were removed
from U.S. harbors. Average annual dredging volume in the 33-year period
is 238,268 CY.

A reasonable prediction for the next 10 years would then range from
160,000 to 238,000 CY or approximately 200,000 CY annually. This figure
of course does not consider the constraints of pollution abatement, dis-

posal site problems, commerce patterns and lake levels.

United States New Work--

During the 36-year record period an average of 2.3 harbors were com-
mitted to new work development, whereas in the 10-year sample period an
average of 2.5 harbors were expanded or deepened. New work frequencies
range from 0 to 9 harbors per year over the historical sequence and from
0 to 6 during the 10-year sample period. Years showing no new work
included the World War II period of 1942 to 1944, and 1946, 1947, 1954,

108


dredging in the Great Lakes, and

(3) a median figure projected in this report.

The latter will be based primarily on the past dredging histories in
Lake Erie and on developments expected in the near future, i.e., a drop
in the present high lake levels, completion of confined disposal sites,
and easing of present environmental constraints. Changes in shipping
needs in the next decade and the potential of year-round navigation are

not expected to affect dredging significantly in Lake Erie.

In 1968 the C.E. projected dredging volumes for most of the major harbors
and waterways of Lake Erie (3,4). For a few harbors for which projec—
tions were not provided, data on annual average maintenance dredging
have been made available by the Buffalo District. Utilizing these data,
it is projected that approximately 5.4 million cubic yards of material
will be removed annually from American waters of Lake Erie in the next
decade (Table 20). This figure is a high estimate compared to other
projections in this subsection.

In the past few years, environmental policies have developed which may
cause dredging volumes in Lake Erie to decline somewhat in the next
decade. It is generally felt by most environmental interests that
polluted spoil should be confined. Approximately 95 percent of the
material removed from U.S. projects in Lake Erie is classed as polluted
by the E.P.A. Confined disposal sites have been in use at high volume
such as Buffalo, Cleveland, Toledo, and the Detroit River for some time,
but many more sites are necessary. Such sites are in various stages of
development, from selection and planning to actual construction. If a
sufficient number of confined disposal sites become available, then
dredging volumes may continue high in the next decade. However, diffi-
culty is being experienced in some areas in finding and developing suit-
able sites which are mutually agreeable to all concerned agencies. In
some cases, the cost to local interests may be considerable. In others,

actual site selection has thus far not been agreeable to all parties.

44


dredging volumes (1961-1970) are compared. If it is assumed that a dry
weight of sediment averages 50 pounds per cubic foot (32), then the vol-
ume of sediment can be converted to tons. As illustrated in Table 72,
some general compatibility between sediment yield and average annual
maintenance dredging is evident, particularly in harbors where dredging
volumes and sediment yields are low (i.e., Manistee and Racine). How-
ever discrepancies are equally obvious, especially in Lake Ontario and
Lake Erie where, as in Buffalo, Lorain, and Rochester Harbors, average
annual maintenance dredging volumes greatly exceed the annual sediment
load. An explanation, recognized by the Great Lakes Basin Commission,
is that the assumed density of the dredged material could be too high
(32). Another possibility is that sediments derived from littoral drift
accumulate in outer harbors and approach channels (i.e., Cleveland,
Oswego). Perhaps more important, in some river mouth harbors, such as
Cleveland and Buffalo, sediment sources from industrial and municipal
effluent may be considerable. Thus, in many river mouth harbors sedi-
ment sources other than or in addition to stream transport are signifi-
cant. Also, based on data in Table 72, open-lake disposal of dredged
spoil may in some areas significantly accelerate sedimentation in the
Great Lakes Basin. Prior to the turn of the century, many harbors were
located in estuaries a short distance from the lake. However, through
decades of expansion, harbor facilities have expanded upriver as well as
along the coast. A number of commercial harbors in the Great Lakes
today have this dual characteristic (e.g., Buffalo, Cleveland, and
Thunder Bay). Thus, the sediment sources may be derived from stream
deposition and littoral transport as well.

Harbors, such as Buffalo, are located on the lake front where sediments
are transported by longshore processes. Although a lake-front harbor
with its jetty and breakwater system may be well designed, sediments may
accumulate near the outer harbor structures. Since the detrital

material is derived directly from the nearshore environment, in most

195


maintenance dredging projects. However, maintenance dredging volumes
are anticipated to decline slightly in the next decade. Projections
made available by the D.P.W. indicate that only approximately 435,000
cubic yards of spoil are expected to be dredged in maintaining harbors
on Lake Ontario by 1977. About 97 percent of this volume is to be
removed from Toronto, Whitby, Oshawa, and Cobourg Harbors, all of which
have been sampled by the M.O.E. (Table 52). All harbors had some sam-
ples which exceeded at least some pollution parameters and, for the
purposes of this report, are considered polluted. Assuming that the
Canadian projects which have not been sampled are not polluted, then
approximately 420,000 cubic yards of polluted spoil will be dredged by
1977 from Canadian harbors. This represents about 97 percent of the
total volume of material scheduled for dredging in Canadian waters of
the lake in the near future.

Four of the 5 harbors scheduled for maintenance dredging in the near
future have been sampled to date. Four other harbors (Hamilton, Port
Hope, Port Credit, and Cataraqui) are dredged at least occasionally.
Thus, the percentage of polluted spoil to be removed in the future is,
at best, a rough estimate. More accuracy in estimating future polluted
volumes in Canada will only be possible when all projects are sampled

and more test results become available.

Summary

1. Of a total of 11 sampled American and Canadian harbors in Lake
Ontario, 9 are polluted or partially polluted.

2. Most commonly occurring pollutants in U.S. projects are phosphorus,
oil and grease, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and volatile solids. Phosphorus,
Kjeldahl nitrogen, zinc, and chemical oxygen demand are the most common-

ly surpassed pollution parameters in Canadian waters,

3. Approximately 92 percent of the spoil dredged from American projects
during the 1960's was polluted.

129


permit files, unreported volumes of spoil removed, and files lacking job
completion notices. Compilation of complete and comparable volume data
for permit dredging prior to 1963 is actually impossible in Lake Erie

projects for such reasons. Therefore, the private dredging volumes pre-

sented in this report represent minimum figures.

Approximately 10 percent of all U.S. dredging in Lake Erie is permit
dredging. From 1963 to 1972, such projects resulted in the removal of
more than 8 million cubic yards of spoil from the lake (Table 17). On
the average, approximately 800,000 cubic yards of material are dredged
from the lake by permittees each year. The volumes removed ranged from
a low of 156,000 cubic yards in 1968 to a high of 2.2 million cubic
yards in 1970. No apparent pattern has been established in the past
decade. Of all permit dredging, 80 percent of the volume is removed
under the jurisdiction of the Detroit District C.E. and 20 percent under
the Buffalo District.

Table 17, PRIVATE DREDGING IN LAKE ERIE, 1963-1972 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

a — en
Year Buffalo District Detroit District Total

1972 71,484 409,000 480,484
1971 141,774 393,499 535,273
1970 213,637 2,010,000 2,223,637
1969 130,858 435,067 565,925
1968 106, 660 49,800 156,460
1967 160,512 478,860 639,372
1966 163,660 868,010 1,031,670
1965 60,765 624,845 685,610
1964 277,641 795,902 1,073,543
1963 2543190 471,719 725,909
Totals 1,581,181 6,536,702 8,117,883

40


using the Pearson-Product Moment formula, was tested on the two varia-
bles. Except for Lakes Erie and Ontario, the data covered the period
1940 to 1970. Lake level stations included Oswego, Cleveland, Harbor
Beach, Calumet, and Marquette. Lake level data are by calendar year,
whereas dredging data is reported by fiscal year. The C.E. fiscal year
begins July 1st, while the Canadian fiscal year begins April lst. This
factor must be entered into any correlation analysis. Dredging may be
started in April or July and be completed and reported in May or June of

the following calendar year.

In Table 77, the simple correlation coefficients are presented by lake.
For each lake, the analysis yields an inverse relationship between
annual maintenance and private dredging volumes with mean annual lake
level. The correlation coefficient exceeds -0.5 only in Lakes Huron and
Michigan, indicating a strong relationship where the amplitude of lake
level fluctuation is high. When the dredging volumes are lagged one
year behind lake levels, then the correlations are slightly strengthened,

as compared to direct annual correlation. This reflects the fiscal year

Table 77. CORRELATION BETWEEN LAKE LEVELS AND MAINTENANCE/PRIVATE
DREDGING VOLUMES, 1940-1970, IN THE GREAT LAKES

Correlation coefficients
Direct annual One-year Maximum range
Lake correlation lag of lake level
Erie® -0.1070 -0.3659 2.97 feet
Superior -0.1134 -0.2569 0.90
Ontario® -0.3208 -0.3329 3.52
Huron -0.5192 0.6265 3.85
Michigan -0.5845 -0.6400 3.88

‘Dredging volume data only 1951-1970.

206


Great Lakes may be subdivided into two sections. The outer harbor
extends from the shoreline lakeward and is protected by breakwaters.
Landward of the shoreline is the inner portion of the harbor which may
extend several miles upriver. Racine Harbor is an example of such a
river-mouth and lake-front harbor. Here, the outer harbor is enclosed
by a permanent breakwater extending from the shoreline into Lake
Michigan. The outer harbor is maintained at project depth of 21 to 23
feet. The inner harbor extends from the shoreline upriver for approxi-

mately 1.5 miles, and has a project depth of 19 feet.

Before and after a project is dredged by the C.E., soundings are made
and corrected to the low water datum. By comparing pre-dredging and
post-dredging sounding charts, the areas of submarine deposition and
erosion may be determined. Figure 19 is such a contour map illustrating
areas of sediment accumulation and deposition in Racine Harbor. It is
based on soundings made in June, 1968, immediately after the harbor was
dredged, and in April, 1973. During this interval the harbor was not
dredged, thus the contours represent changes in sediment distribution

and sediment accumulation over a five-year period.

Figure 20 are cross sections taken along selected traverses in Racine
Harbor. Although some erosion has occurred in the outer harbor, the
prevalence of sedimentation is clearly evident. Most of the sedimenta-
tion occurs in upper and lower ends of the project. Upriver, cross sec-
tions A and B reveal that 2 to 3 feet of detritus has accumulated in 5
years. The principal sources of these deposits are erosion from the
drainage basin and municipal wastes. Additional sources of detritus for
the dredged channel are erosion and slumping of the channel walls due to
wheeling and fluvial transport processes. This is most evident in mean-
ders of the Root River. On the map, east of Cross Section C (Fig. 20)
is a tongue of sediment extending downstream. Sedimentation occurs when
the river flow joins a large body of water, causing a sudden decrease in

the velocity of the river (34, 35).

200


data lag and the delay between the time of scheduling and funding of a
project and the actual completion of the dredging. Using the one-year
lag, the improvement in correlation is most apparent in Lake Erie. In
Lake Erie, priority appears to be given to maintenance dredging of the

large commercial harbors during periods of low lake levels.

During periods of low lake levels, as in the middle 1960's, groundings
are more frequent, especially in the spring. In response to complaints
of groundings, the C.E. and the D.P.W. strictly maintain all commercial
public harbors at their project depths including subgrade. At such
times the C.E. usually engages more contract dredgers to insure that the
harbors and waterways are free of impassable shoals. Conversely, when
lake levels are above normal, as during the early 1970's, maintenance
dredging operations may be postponed temporarily. For example, Chicago
Harbor and River were last dredged in fiscal year 1967. Since then some
shoaling has occurred, but the higher than average lake level has pro-
vided sufficient draft for most vessel traffic.

An analysis of the Great Lakes hydrographs reveals that lake levels
oscillate (36). Long term oscillations are recognized by the C.E. and
G.L.B.C. (37, 7), but cannot be forecasted with sufficient accuracy to
assist with dredge planning. The C.E. and the D.P.W. program their oper-
ations on the basis of periodic sounding surveillance of all project
harbors.

Basically, the variations in lake levels can be classified as follows
(37):

1. Long term periodic cycles.

2. Seasonal fluctuations.

3. Short term oscillations.
As demonstrated by Liu (38), a persistent oscillation for all the lakes
is an 8 year cycle. Climatic variations appear to control these long
term periodic cycles (8), The effect is regional, in that the lakes
appear to oscillate in phase. This long term oscillation influences

207


To obtain mean maintenance dredging quantities for the 5 major projects
in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair, the dredging volumes since the last
new work were determined. It is felt that at least 5 years of mainte-
mance dredging would be required to obtain a representative average quan-
tity. At Saginaw, for example, the last new work project occurred in
1970, however, the average maintenance dredging volume was determined
from 1964 to 1972. The table below (Table 34) represents the average
maintenance dredging of the 5 major C.E. projects.

Table 34. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF MAJOR C.E. PROJECTS,
LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR
(cubic yards)

Project Base period Volume
Au Sable 1961-1972 20,828
Ch. Lake 1964-1972 117,677
St. Clair

Saginaw 1964-1972 334,872
St. Clair R. 1965-1972 108 ,513
Sault Ste. Marie 1968-1972 243 ,824
Total 825,714

The total of the projects in Table 34 is 825,714 cubic yards which
represents annual maintenance dredging for the next decade. An addi-
tional 12 percent, or 99,085 cubic yards is an approximate dredging quan-
tity for the remaining C.E. projects. Therefore, the anticipated mainte-
nance dredging for the C.E. projects in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair
over the next decade, will average 9,247,990 cubic yards, or approxi-
mately 925,000 cubic yards annually.

The above technique for obtaining averages may also be applied to individ-
ual projects in Michigan since in every case new work is recorded separ-
ately from maintenance dredging. In some projects, such as at Alpena,
Inland Route, and Port Sanilac, no new work was recorded for 10 to 15

69


the public commercial and recreational harbors and waterways, which are
maintained by the C.E., 22 are located in the Chicago District and 20
are part of the Detroit District.

The economic status and commerce of the private and public harbors are
presented by C.E. district in Table 39. Public harbors and waterways
which can accommodate vessels with Seaway drafts of 27 feet include
Burns Waterway, Calumet, Chicago, Grays Reef, Indiana, Milwaukee, and
Muskegon. In the Chicago District, those commercial harbors which are
declining in commerce are Kenosha, Michigan City, Racine, Sheboygan, and
Two Rivers. In the Detroit District, harbors which are declining in com-
mercial importance include Charlevoix, Manistique, Pentwater, Saugatuck,
South Haven, and White Lake.

Dredging operations by private interests probably were initiated soon
after white settlement of the territories, but records of dredging quan-
tities are available only to 1957. Many of the public harbors, such as
Holland Harbor which was constructed in 1852, have long been in exist-
ence. Though the removal of sediments from public harbors began after
the mid-1800's, records maintained by the C.E. are available only from
1918.

Private Dredging Quantities

Available data regarding volumes of spoil dredged by private interests
in the Chicago and Detroit Districts are presented in Table 40. Because
of the low priority of Section 10 permit records, these data are incom-
plete and available only from 1957. In the past, especially in northern
Wisconsin and upper Michigan, private interests, such as operators of
marinas, frequently dredged boat slips and other facilities without
applying for a Section 10 permit. In addition, the C.E. lacks the man-
power to field check permittees to ensure compliance with the permit,
including the yardage actually dredged. Private dredging is considered
to be reported in place measure.

719


those earlier years. However, complete and meaningful maintenance and
new work dredging data since 1951 were collected and are presented in
Table 14.

Since 1951, approximately 134 million cubic yards of spoil has been
removed from Lake Erie and the Detroit and Rouge Rivers by the C.E.
About 56 percent has been derived from Buffalo District projects and 44
percent from Detroit District projects. Seventy percent of the total
volume involved was removed in maintenance dredging and 30 percent in
new work projects. Of all material removed in maintenance projects
since 1951, more than three-fifths came from Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo,
and Sandusky combined. Most new work dredging quantities during the
same period were extracted from the Detroit River, Toledo, and Buffalo.

Maintenance Dredging--

In the past decade, maintenance dredging has accounted for approximately
55 percent of all dredging on the American side of Lake Erie. In terms
of volume removed over a longer period, i.e., 1951 to 1972, the Buffalo
District C.E. dredged an average of 2.64 million cubic yards of spoil
from Lake Erie projects annually in maintenance projects. Absolute
amounts for the Buffalo District ranged from a low of 1.98 million cubic
yards in 1954 to a high of 3.89 million cubic yards in 1967 (Table 15).
In the same period the Detroit District C.E. dredged an average of 1.60
million cubic yards of material annually from Lake Erie projects includ-
ing the Detroit and Rouge Rivers. Absolute amounts for the Detroit
District ranged from a low of 0.87 million cubic yards in 1963 to a high
of 3.28 million cubic yards in 1968, Thus, an average of 4.23 million
cubic yards of spoil has been removed in maintaining projects in Lake
Erie every year from 1951 to 1972. The range was from a low of 3.14
million cubic yards in 1953 to a high of 6.52 million yards in 1967
(Figure 6). A relatively consistent volume of spoil has been dredged
from Lake Erie in recent decades. Since 1951, the Buffalo District C.E.

34


SECTION IV

POLLUTION OF SPOIL DREDGED FROM THE GREAT LAKES

INTRODUCTION

In recent years national and provincial policies have been enacted which
determine the quality of spoil which can be disposed in the open waters
of the Great Lakes. In many dredging projects, particularly in heavily
industrialized harbors, these policies may determine the scheduling of
future maintenance dredging and the disposal method of the dredged spoil.
These policies, which include pollution criteria, apply to federal

dredging agencies as well as to private contractors.

In the United States, the eligibility of dredged spoil for open-lake
disposal in the waters of the Great Lakes is basically determined by the
Criteria for Determining Acceptability of Dredged Spoil Disposal to the

Nation's Waters (11). These criteria were developed by the E.P.A.
Region V, Chicago, for the Great Lakes and have since been applied
nationally. Since 1967, nearly all the federal harbors and waterways
maintained by the C.E. have been sampled by the E.P.A. Although private
harbors and private channels are not routinely sampled, the pollution
criteria are applicable. Surface grab samples of bottom sediments are
usually taken throughout the dredging area of each harbor with a Peter-

son dredge sampler. In Canada, the M.O.E. has developed Water Quality
Guidelines for the Review of Proposed Dredging and Spoil Operations (12).

The Canadian guidelines are similar to the E.P.A. criteria (Table 51).
Sampling by the M.O.E, compares to that of the E.P.A., except that

120


funded and are not the fiscal responsibility of the C.E. Inasmuch as
private dredging in the navigable waters of the Great Lakes requires the
approval of the C.E., applications to dredge are filed in the C.E.
office after approval. These are available for scrutiny, however all
types of permit work in navigable waters are filed together in accession
number order by year. In general, current policy of the St. Paul Dis-
trict indicates that the permit files may be destroyed 2 years after
date of application. Although the files of the St. Paul District are
reasonably intact since 1955, space limitations may dictate their

destruction at any time.

Dredging problems in Lake Superior are somewhat unique to the other
Great Lakes. Bottom gradients are generally steep within the nearshore
area and commonly bedrock based or composed of unsorted glacial till.
Dredging is almost universally limited to dipper or clam shell work for
boulder and bedrock removal. For this reason of bottom configuration,
longshore drift or littoral current transfer is of little consequence to

harbor maintenance.

The major dredging problem in the Lake Superior harbors is tied directly
to ice-shove and ice rafting during winter storms. Bottom profiles show
submarine benching of sands caused by storms of different intensity.
Soundings made by the C.E. show that the development of benches at var-
ious depths are directly caused by the winter storms. This is particu-
larly true of the "long fetch harbors" exposed to the prevailing NW
winter storms. The sheltered harbors show virtually no effect. These

can be roughly summarized as:

LONG FETCH--NW Protected of Lee Harbors
Port Wing Marquette All north shore harbors
Cornucopia Munising Duluth~-Superior
Saxon Grand Marais, Bayfield
Black River Michigan LaPointe
Ontonagon All Whitefish Bay Ashland
West Keweenaw (Sault entry) Lac La Belle

Entry Grand Traverse
Eagle Chippewa

104


Table 48. DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKE SUPERIOR PROJECTS®
(1000's cubic yards)

Project of more than Annual total
30,000 CY/yr. volume
Ashland, Wisconsin 60
Duluth-Superior, Minnesota-Wisconsin 796
Keweenaw Waterway, Michigan 30
Little Lake, Michigan 32
Marquette, Michigan 34
Ontonagon, Michigan 46
Kam River, Ontario 129
Mission Channel, Ontario 70
Port Arthur, Ontario 116

a.
Includes maintenance, private, and new work.

113


Tor

47 Aree of Deposition

Le -1-—" Area of Erosion
—~0~— Area of NO Change

190 0100 200 400"
——

N

PROJECT — a

Figure 19. ‘AREAS OF SEDIMENTATION IN RACINE HARBOR,

WISCONSIN


Table 50. FUTURE

AVERAGE ANNUAL DREDGING VOLUMES IN THE GREAT LAKES

(cubic yards)

United States Canada Total

Huron/St. Clair
Maintenance 925,000 318,000 1,243,000
Private 235,000 2,000 237,000
New work 539,500 242,000 781,500
Michigan
Maintenance 1,491,400 -- 1,491,400
Private 734,700 -- 734,700
New work 737,100 - 737,100
Erie
Maintenance 4,800,000 175,000 4,975,000
Private 900,000 100,000 1,000,000
New work 550,000 0 550,000
Ontario
Maintenance 360,000 500,000 860,000
Private 30,000 400,000 430,000
New work 7,625 1,620,000 1,627,625
Superior
Maintenance 200,000 86,000 286,000
Private 191,000 1,000 192,000
New work 418,000 0 418,000
Totals
Maintenance 7,776,400 1,079,000 8,855,400
Private 2,090,700 503,000 2,593,700
New work 2,252,225 1,862,000 4,114,225

12,119,325 3,444,000 15,563,325

118


effect of federal harbor structures on littoral transport of beach sedi-
ments could promote the development of abatement programs along exposed

coasts.

Perhaps the most important economic factor which may influence future
dredging volumes is the high cost of the confined disposal program for
polluted spoil. Costs of dredging and disposing spoil in diked sites,
including construction costs, are approximately $10 per cubic yard,
while disposal in the open waters of the Great Lakes averages about $1.00
per cubic yard. Even though larger sites are generally less expensive
to construct and maintain, the confined disposal program of the C.E.,
involving 35 polluted harbors, may require an expenditure of $85 million
(1). Should construction of confined disposal sites be delayed, main-
tenance dredging of some polluted harbors may have to be postponed. At
present the construction of the diked site for Cleveland Harbor is 6
months behind schedule, and although lake levels are at a record high,

groundings have been reported.

Though the cost of confining polluted dredged spoil is high, the total
cost may be lower than some preliminary projections. In this report the
future average annual quantity of polluted spoil in the Great Lakes has
been estimated to be about 7.5 million CY place measure. In their 1969
report, the C.E. projected that the future average annual quantity of
polluted spoil from only 35 harbors in the U.S. will be 8,573,000 CY
(1). Our projection of future polluted spoil includes private and main-
tenance dredging of all polluted and partially polluted harbor sediments
in the U.S. and Canada, whereas the C.E. projection includes only
polluted maintenance dredgings to be derived from 35 American harbors
and waterways. The projection of the C.E. appears high because some of
the volumes were not converted to place measure and, in partially
polluted harbors (P/U), the polluted portion was not separated from the
unpolluted portion. The new pollution guidelines, to be promulgated by
the E.P.A. in 1975, may result in the reclassification of some of the

213


Table 57. SAMPLING OF PROJECTS ON LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR (54, 55)

Number exceeded
Year No. of Vol. Kjel. O11 &

Harbor sampled samples sol. COD N grease Hg Pb Zn
Michigan

Alpena

Inner 1972 5 0 2 0 0 nt nt nt
Outer 1972 3 1 1 1 L nt nt nt
Au Sable 1967 3 0 nt (0) 0 nt nt nt
Bay Port 1972 9 0 0 Q te) nt nt nt
Caseville 1972 4 1 2 2 1 nt nt nt
Cheboygan 1967 3 Oo nt nt 0 nt nt nt
Clinton R. 1970 4 3 3 3 3 QO nt nt
Hammond Bay 1970 2 0 0 nt (0) QO nt at
Harbor Beach 1972 5 4 5 5 0 mt ont nt
Harrisville 1970 4 0 1 nt 0 O nt nt
Inland Route 1970 5 3 4 ont 3 Q one nt
L. St. Clair 1970 8 1 3 3 o 6 BE nt
Les Cheneaux 1970 3 3 2 nt ° nent
Lexington Not sampled
Mackinaw City 1970 2 0 ont Oo nt nt nt
Point Lookout Not sample
Port Austin 1972 2 0 3 ea at ont at
Port Sanilac 1972 7 0 nt nt nt
Saginaw 1972 10 8 8 2 9 mt nt nt
Outer 1972 5 2 4 4 4 nt nt nt
sebewaing 1972 4 3 4 4 30 at nt at
Straits of 1970 4 GQ 0 nt 0 O nt nt
Mackinaw

St, Clair R. 1970 7 Q 0 0 0 lo ont nt
St. Marys R. 1972 2 0 0 0 0 at nt nt
Totals 114 29 44 29 24 7-5
Ontario

Bayfield 1973 Visual inspection

Grand Bend 1973 3 Organics, COD, Zn exceed M.0O.E. criteria
Goderich 1973 1 0 0 0 nt nt 1 0
Mitchell Bay 1971 2 0 nt 0 nt 2 0 #0
Ruscom R. 1971 8 3 nt 2 nt nt nt nt
St. Clair R. 1972 38 0 30 37 0 29 0 2
Sarnia 1971 7 1 6 1 7 nt nt nt
South Bay M. 1972 None exceed M.O.E. criteria

Tobermory 1972 1 0 0 0 nt nt nt nt
Sault Ste. Marie

N. of Locks 1971 8 2 (0) nt 3 nt nt nt
Pt. aux Pins 1972 27 A 0 4 4 nt O 2
Totals 7 10. 3644 14 31 1 4

ant Not tested

142


percent of the past and future dredging has and will occur in Au Sable,
Lake St. Clair, Saginaw, the St. Clair River, and the St. Marys River
(Table 33). Assuming that past and future sediment quality is represent-
ative of the present sediment quality, 57 percent of the dredgings from
these harbors will be polluted (Table 61).

Table 61. ESTIMATED POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL IN MAJOR C.E. PROJECTS
IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR
(cubic yards)

= — SaaS
Annual maintenance Percent Polluted
Project dredging--1961-1970 polluted volume
Au Sable 9,768 0 0
Saginaw 294,735 85 250,524
Lake St. Clair 106,828 100 106,828
St. Clair River 91,915 0 0
St. Marys River 121,912 0 0
Totals 625,158 357,352 (57%)

Based on a harbor by harbor projection determined in Section III, the
percent of polluted sediment to be dredged may be estimated (Figure 16).
As noted in Table 62, the greatest volume of polluted dredged spoil will
be derived from Saginaw and Lake St. Clair. Other areas where relative-
ly high volumes of polluted sediments occur are Inland Route, Harbor
Beach, Les Cheneaux, Alpena, and Sebewaing. Of the above mentioned proj-
ects, Saginaw faces the most serious problem in terms of confined dis-
posal. Dow Chemical Company withdrew their site offer and the Michigan
Department of Natural Resources is opposed to filling bottom land near
the shoreline (13). The C.E. has estimated that there is a backlog of
2.5 million cubic yards of sediment which is increasing at a rate of
approximately 600,000 cubic yards annually. The channel depth has been
reduced from between 4 to 7 feet above project depth. To our knowledge

an Environmental Impact Statement has not been prepared for this project.

146


EPA-660/3-74-029
December 1974

FUTURE DREDGING QUANTITIES

IN THE GREAT LAKES

By

C. Nicholas Raphael
Eugene Jaworski
Carl F. Ojala

Daniel S. Turner

Grant Number R-801062
Program Element 1BA026
ROAP/Task No. 25ADX/03

Project Officer

Michael D, Mullin
Grosse Ile Laboratory
National Environmental Research Center
Grosse Ile, Michigan 48138

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CORVALLIS, OREGON 97330


9ET

PROJECTED DREDGING VOLUME {IN 1,000'S CY}
O 0-24

© 25-99
i)
O 100-199

C) 200-399

400 +

MICHICAN (f

PERCENT POLLUTED

CANADA

ROUGE RIVER
- BARCELONA

toMney ’ NEW YORK
ae

BOLLES \
PENNSYLVANIA

TOLEDO

CLINTON
POR == (IN NILES)
a) SS
SANDUSKY OHI io 2,

Figure 14. PROJECTED ANNUAL POLLUTED AND UNPOLLUTED MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ERIE



decade. Their projection was based on a 10-year period beginning with
the year of the last maintenance dredging project. Since some of the
smaller harbors, for example, Oconto Harbor, were not dredged for
several years, the base period for the projection had to be extended
back beyond the past decade. Projected volumes for Green Bay, Ludington
and Milwaukee include an additional 10 percent because of new work
projects scheduled for these harbors.

Since no historical maintenance dredging quantities were indicated in
the C.E. records for Burns Waterway, Gladstone-Kipling, New Buffalo, St.
James, and Traverse City, projections made by the C.E. were accepted for
these harbors. Some shoaling is projected to occur in New Buffalo
Harbor even though it has not yet been expanded into a new public
recreational harbor. Shoaling problems in Burns Waterway are not

expected to develop for another 3 to 4 years.

Although a correlation factor between annual maintenance dredging
volumes and mean annual lake levels of Lake Michigan was determined to
be -0.58, this relationship was not built into the projection because
lake levels are unpredictable (see Section VI). When lake levels are
low, to prevent groundings, the C.E. stringently maintains the commer-
cial harbors at project depths plus 1 to 2 feet of subgrade. Because
dredging is performed with regard to the mean low-water datum, during
high lake levels maintenance dredging in some harbors may be temporarily
postponed, even though some shoaling has occurred.

The future average annual maintenance dredging volume for Lake Michigan
has been projected to be 1,491,400 cubic yards place measure, or nearly
equal to the average of the 1961 through 1970 period (Table 43). Com-
pared to the long-term average (1935-1973), which was calculated to be
1,211,300 cubic yards, future maintenance dredging quantities should
increase by 280,000 cubic yards annually. Thus, a small future annual
increase is projected. Several new harbors, for example Burns Waterway,
will require maintenance dredging. A few harbors, such as Green Bay and

97


SAULT SAINT MARTE Figure 7.
*: MARYS RIVER.

PRINCIPAL DREDGING PROJECTS

IN LAKES HURON AND ST. CLAIR
pare BLIND RIVER
AUX
os ESS See AS KILLARNEY
Sega ! “ORE GAY
Seco NY
HAMMOND. BAY Pep
N
INLAND ROUTE CALCITE \ Soy
1
STONEPOPT i Ping, er,
ALPENA \S “iin, typ, ehry
\& ag D1 Coy
\im Wey Wy KL
|}
\2 1 20
HARRISVILLE 18 (EAFO
1 OWEN sour Oy
\ KINCARDINE COLLINGWOOD
\
POINT LOOKOUT \

PORT AUSTIN |
CASEVILLE

\

CANADA
\
HARBOR BEACH

BAY PORT
SEBEWAING

SAGINAW

MICHICAH

PORT SANILAC

LEXINGTON

BLACK RIVER

O PUBLIC COMMERCIAL

LX PRIVATE
ST, CLAIR RIVEP

CLINTON RIVER

WALLACEBURG
LAKE ST, CLAIR

(IN MILES)

fe:0:) oe —— a —— omen}
an CLAIR cuT-oFF Er
ZS

50

57


Table 19. HISTORICAL DREDGING: CANADIAN PROJECTS IN LAKE ERIE,
1961-1970 (48)
(cubic yards)

Project Total maintenance Total new work
Kingsville 258,434 ce)
Pelee Island 15,092 0
Port Dover 32,035 0
Port Maitland 51,692 0
Port Stanley 865,646 0
Amherstburg 6,365 10
Leamington 207,808 0
Port Burwell 1,827,159 0
St. Williams 3,867 0
Wheatley 69,918 0
Rondeau 135,172 0
Windsor 1,023 0
Colchester 11,974 0
Port Bruce 300 0
Port Rowan 13,573 0
Totals 3,500,058 10

43


small, recreational harbors. If pollution elimination systems regarding
municipal and industrial wastes continue to reduce artificial sedimenta-
tion, as in Calumet Harbor, then the future annual quantity of polluted

maintenance dredgings is expected to decrease slightly.

With the exception of 5 harbors, all 27 of the polluted and partially
polluted public harbors have been included in the C.E. confined disposal
program. At present, 17 of the harbors with polluted bottom sediments
have at least temporary solutions to the problem of confining polluted
dredged spoil. As scheduled by the C.E., many of the confined disposal
sites are to be built during the period 1974-1976. This schedule
appears to be optimistic. Unless polluted spoil can be open-lake dumped
or disposed in ways alternate to diked confinement, then future mainte~
nance dredging of some harbors may have to be temporarily postponed.
Because of the relatively large annual polluted maintenance dredging
volumes in Calumet, Chicago Harbor and River, South Haven, St. Joseph
and Sturgeon Bay Harbors, the lack of confined sites for these harbors
is most serious. New E.P.A. guidelines regarding the disposal of
dredged materials in inland waters (14), to be promulgated in 1975, may
result in the re-evaluation of some harbor pollution classifications and
in the resumption of open-lake disposal of small quantities of lightly
polluted dredged spoil. If so, confined disposal sites may not be
required for Algoma, Manistique, Pensaukee, and Traverse City Harbors.

QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL
IN LAKE SUPERIOR

The geological setting and the nature of the shoreline environment of
Lake Superior is unique to all of the other Great Lakes. The Lake
Superior drainage basin encompasses the "iron country" and the “copper
country" along the western and southern shores. The northern shoreline
and its contributing drainage system is heavily forested. Natural
effluent drainage from the mineralized bedrock areas contributes materi-

ally to the metallic ion concentration of river mouth harbor waters and

164


Table 44. AVERAGE ANNUAL PRIVATE, MAINTENANCE, AND NEW WORK DREDGING
IN LAKE MICHIGAN BY HARBOR 1961-1970 (50, 52)
(cubic yards)

a ae <=
Chicago District Private Maintenance New work Totals
Public harbor
Algoma 0 830 0 830
Big Suamico 0 2,130 0 2,130
Burns Waterway 0 0 428,250 428,250
Calumet H. & R. 187,880 198,680 737,280 1,123,840
Chicago Harbor 97,910 830 29,640 128,380
Chicago River 10,800 68,590 0 79,390
Gladstone-Kipling 0 0 23,880 23,880
Green Bay 620 117,150 140,220 257,990
Indiana 221,930 137,180 78,570 437,680
Kenosha 1,180 15,360 23,870 40,410
Kewaunee 1,350 39,590 13,250 54,190
Manitowoc 1,200 35,950 0 37,150
Menominee 490 8,910 1,860 11,260
Michigan City 0 40,930 2,260 43,190
Milwaukee 34,830 41,800 394,830 471,460
Oconto 0 3,530 0 3,530
Pensaukee 0 2,030 0 2,030
Port Washington 5,400 7,720 1) 13,120
Racine 0 17,510 1) 17,510
Sheboygan 0 33,090 0 33,090
Sturgeon Bay/ 3,410 42,230 0 45,640
Ship Canal
Two Rivers 0 43,490 1,070 44,560
Waukegan 6,810 21,280 3,480 51,970
Totals 573,810 878,810 1,878,460 3,351,480
Private harbor
Buffington 0 - - i}
Escanaba 10) - - 0
Gary 11,000 - - 11,000
Qak Creek 5,000 - - 5,000
Miscellaneous sites 46,400 - 46,400
Totals 62,400 62,400
District totals 636,210 878,810 1,878,460 3,413,880

92


Table 4, NEW WORK DREDGING IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1951-1972 (47)
(cubic yards)

<== = EE

Year Total volume
1972 0
1971 Q
1970 0
1969 0
1968 0)
1967 0
1966 284,860
1965 28,618
1964 278,583
1963 439,751
1962 134,166
1961 0
1960 0
1959 0
1958 35,416
1957 Q
1956 6,667
1955 0
1954 0
1953 i)
1952 0
1951 0)
Total 1,208,061

17


BNA Act
C.E.

coD

cY
D.P.W.
E.P.A.
F.Y.
G.L.B.C.
M.O.E.
M.O.T.
NEPA
N.O.A.A.
NWPA
P.W.C.

S.L.S.A.

SECTION VIII

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

British North America Act

United States Army Corps of Engineers

Chemical Oxygen Demand

cubic yards

Department of Public Works of Canada

United States Environmental Protection Agency
fiscal year

Great Lakes Basin Commission

Ministry of the Environment of Ontario
Ministry of Transport of Canada

National Environmental Policy Act of the United States
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Navigable Waters Protection Act of Canada
Public Works Commission of Canada (now D.P.W.)

St. Lawrence Seaway Authority

219


Oshawa, and Port Credit, all requiring annual removal of more than
34,000 cubic yards of material. From 1961 to 1970, Rochester was the
dredging volume leader, averaging 15,000 cubic yards more per year than
Toronto.

United States Dredging History
in Lake Ontario

Lake Ontario has been dredged for decades, but complete, meaningful, and
comparable volume data for Buffalo District C.E. projects are available
only from 1951. Prior to that time, records on actual volumes dredged
become sketchy to non-existent for some harbors, even in C.E. Annual
Reports. In many cases, dollar cost figures were reported in lieu of
volume data. Because of differences in types of material being removed,
types and cost of dredging operations, accurate conversion of cost
figures to volume figures was not possible for many of those earlier
years. However, complete and meaningful maintenance and new work dredg-

ing data since 1951 were collected and collated (Table 2).

Table 2. HISTORICAL DREDGING IN LAKE ONTARIO BY HARBOR/WATERWAY,

1951-1972 (47)
(cubic yards)

ae a
Harbor/waterway Maintenance New work Total

Great Sodus 459,910 10) 459,910
Little Sodus 262,723 0 262,723
Ogdensburg 22,151 ) 22,151
Oswego 1,113,538 355,561 1,469,099
Rochester 5,582,985 852,500 6,435,485
Wilson 16,139 0 16,139
Olcott 29,490 0 29,490
Totals 7,486,936 1,208,061 8,694,997

13


Table 45. (continued)
Base period C.E.
Private Maintenance for maintenance
Detroit District dredging dredging maintenance dredging
Public harbors
Arcadia 6,300 0 - None
required
Charlevoix 0 6,100 1963-1972 30,000
Frankfurt 0 23,100 1963-1973 32,000
Grand Haven 5,000 130,800 1964-1973 100,000
Grays Reef 0 21,900 1960-1973 16,000
Holland 0 73,700 1964-1973 105,000
Leland 0 12,600 1969-1973 15,000
Ludington 7,000 31,600 1966-1973 55,000
Manistee 0 34,800 1965-1973 55,000
Manistique 0 11,900 1965-1972 40,000
Muskegon 1,300 49,200 1966-1973 105,000
Pentwater to) 42,500 1964-1973 70,0000
Petoskey 0 0 - None
required
Portage Lake 0 16,000 1963-1973 40,000
Saugatuck 0 50,300 1964-1973 55,000
South Haven 0 40,000 1964-1973 74,000
St. James 1,000 1,500 By C.E. 1,500
St. Joseph 0 54,900 1964-1973 80,000
Traverse City 0 1,500 By C.E. 1,500
White Lake 0 26,500 1964-1973 60,000
Totals 20,600 628,900 935,000
Private harbors
Petoskey Penn Dixie 0
Port Inland 0
Miscellaneous sites 180,000
Total 180,000
District totals 200,600 628,900 935,000
Totals for lake 734,700 1,491,400 2,013,100

@New harbor to be constructed.

96


Table 64. POLLUTION OF PUBLIC HARBORS IN LAKE MICHIGAN BY PARAMETER
BY C.E. DISTRICT (55)

Criteria limits exceeded

Year No. of Vol. Kjel. Oil &

Harbor sampled samples sol. COD N grease Hg Pb Zn
Algoma 1969 8 x nt
Big Suamico 1970 5 x x x x
Burns Waterway 1970 5 x x
Calumet H. & R. 1968 4 x x x x nt x Xx
Chicago Hbr. 1971 6 x x nt x
Chicago River 1968 5 x x nt x mt nt nt
Gladstone- 1970 5

Kipling
Green Bay 1969 36 x x x x nt x
Indiana 1967 11 x nt x x nt x
Kenosha 1973 8 x x x x x x Xx
Kewaunee 1969 15 x x x x nt x
Manitowoc 1969 23 x x x x mt x «x
Menominee 1969 17 x x x x mt x x
Michigan City 1970 7 x x x x x x Xx
Milwaukee 1968 9 x x x x nt x x
New Buffalo® 1968 4 x nt
Oconto 1968 2 nt
Pensaukee 1968 4 x x x nt
Port Washington 1971 8 x x x x
Racine 1973 13 x x x x «Xx
Sheboygan 1969 18 x x mt x Xx
Sturgeon Bay/ 1969 16 x x mt x x

Ship Canal
Two Rivers 1969 15 x x mnt x x
Waukegan 1973 9 x x x x x Xx
Total samples 253
Percent of harbors 79 75 75 70 - 67 75

polluted by each

parameter

153


GLADSTONE @
KIPLING

GREEN BA
OPEN LAKE

BB DISPOSAL SITE

DREDGING VOLUME
(IN 1,000'S CY }

SHEBOYGAN fe) 0-11

OQ 25
O 26-50

PORT WASHINGTON @

UESCAHSIN

51-100

AVEN
NTLWAUKEE
e HOLLAND 101-200
lA RV
Ki .

TNOSHAG SAUCATUCK NCENT POLLUTED

ST. JOSEPH
CHICAGO HARBOR & P MICHIGAS
eo
CS HICHIGAN CITY
CALUME . (IN HILES)
. BURNS WATERUAY eee
DIANA 10 0 50
ILLINETS INDIANA

POLLUTED QUANTITY OF FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
DREDGINGS AND LOCATION OF OPEN-LAKE DISPOSAL SITES IN

LAKE MICHIGAN

Figure 17.

156


harbor. These estimations, which are preliminary, are presented in
Table 65. The percentages were derived by comparing the spatial dis-
tribution of polluted harbor bottom samples with the volumes of main-
tenance dredging that are extracted from the various areas of the harbor.
Since the Corps of Engineers' dredging records do not reflect the quanti-
ties dredged from the various harbor areas, the percentages must be

regarded as first-order approximations.

In the Chicago District the total future average annual quantity of pol-
luted maintenance dredgings has been estimated to be 716,300 cubic yards
place measure. This volume, which is 83 percent of the total projected
quantity of maintenance dredging (i.e., 862,500 CY), reflects the rela-
tively large number of polluted and partially polluted harbors in that
district. Calumet Harbor and River, Chicago Harbor and River, Green Bay,
Indiana, and Milwaukee Harbors are all projected to yield over 50,000
cubic yards annually of polluted spoil (Figure 17). Because of the rela-
tively long flow-through time of water in the Lake Michigan basin, dis-
posal of large quantities of polluted spoil in the open lake may have an
unacceptable impact on the water quality and algal growth in southern
Lake Michigan. In the Detroit District, only 21 percent of the total
projected quantity of maintenance dredging (i.e., 628,900 CY) is esti-
mated to involve polluted spoil. Grand Haven is the only harbor in that
district which is anticipated to generate over 50,000 cubic yards
annually of polluted spoil.

In accordance with Public Law 91-611, the C.E. is authorized to design
and construct confined disposal facilities for the polluted public
harbors in the Great Lakes. A summary of developments in the confined
disposal program regarding the 27 polluted harbors in Lake Michigan is
contained in Table 66. With the exception of Algoma, Big Suamico, Burns
Waterway, Pensaukee, and Manistique, all the harbors listed are included
in the Corps of Engineers’ confined disposal program. Although the
E.P.A. informed the C.E. that Algoma was unpolluted, one of the 2 bottom

160


Table 10. FREQUENCY OF DREDGING AND VOLIIME OF SPOIL REMOVED BY THE C.E.,

1961-1970 (47)
(cubic yards)

———
Frequency dredged, Maintenance
Project 1961-1970 volume
Great Sodus 8 237,630
Little Sodus 4 150,747
Oswego 7 546,830
Rochester 10 2,670,289
Wilson 1 9,484
Olcott 1 21,157
Total 3,636,137

Permit--

If permit dredging activity in the past decade can be considered typical
of Lake Ontario, and if recent dredging cutbacks are balanced by greater
volumes removed after disposal sites become available in the next few
years, then it is estimated that a total of 300,000 cubic yards of
material will be removed by permittees in the next decade. This projec-
tion, however, is based on minimal data. Dredging in some years may
show many small volume permits approved, and the total may be signifi-
cantly less than the projection. In other years, only a few permits may
be approved, but because the jobs are large, volumes may be consider-
ably greater than the projection posed herein.

Future New Work by the Corps of
Engineers in Lake Ontario

Only Oak Orchard Harbor is scheduled for new work dredging in Lake

Ontario in the next 10 years. The total amount of material to be

25


Characteristically, most of the north shore harbors were dredged the
first time as new work development to remove the accumulation of organic
debris and whatever inorganic sediments were required to reach project
depth. Most of the older and smaller harbors have not been dredged
since their initial development work was completed. Removal of paper
mill wastes, pulp and bark continues in those harbors where large mills
have developed. A few examples are: Thunder Bay, Nipigon, Peninsula,
and Michipicoten. Maintenance dredging in these harbors is sporadic.
The dredging frequency is a function of the level of industrial produc-

tion of paper products, and natural stream flushing action.

Decaying organic matter produces a high oxygen demand (COD value) and is
typical of all of the north shore harbors. Again, a high COD value is a
normal expectancy for these conditions and is one which can be little
altered by the efforts of man. Sediment pollution criteria, specifically
citing COD values should consider the norm of natural effluent in the

streams of the north shore.

Natural inorganic sedimentation (clay, sand, silt and gravel) is virtual-
ly nonexistent in the north shore harbors by virtue of the fact that the
drainage area is blanketed with a complete vegetative cover. Many north
shore harbors have insufficient sediment covering bedrock to make a sedi-~

ment sampling program possible (16).

Pollution of Sediments--Introduction

The C.E. in 1969 reported that 12 of the principal U.S. harbors of Lake
Superior were considered unpolluted (1), Two were considered polluted
on the basis of criteria then in use (Table 19, Sec. 6.9). The classifi-
cation at that time listed the following harbors:

166


current direction. Each category essentially presents a similar set of
conditions for all harbors within the Reach. In Lake Superior the
Reaches are numbered in the 9000 series. All other lakes have been like-
wise subdivided with appropriate Reach numbers. Using that map in con-
junction with the Fetch Chart of wind directions (Table 11-28) (7) for
the 9000 series Reaches, it is possible to determine the wind azimuths
which provide the significant sediment transfer effects. Deep Water
Wave Forecasting Curves (Fig. 11-39) (7) give a concept of wave inten-
sity--height values possible at harbors within each Reach. These obser-
vations combined with a wind rose analysis at stations around the Great
Lakes demonstrates the effect of prevailing and storm winds on harbor
maintenance problems. Charts #54 and 55 from the Canadian Climatologi-
cal Studies report (8) illustrate the frequency, direction and inten-
sity of winds as they may be correlated with the fetch data. January
and April are used here to illustrate winds which most effect the move-
ment of ice. January represents the early ice forming period when shore
ice is most mobile and has local effect. April wind rose charts show
the period of average ice decay when the shore effect is expected to be
the greatest. The predominance of westerlies in winter and an increase

in easterlies in spring is a notable feature.

United States Maintenance Dredging History

Based upon dredging records since 1937, a total of 30 U.S. harbors have
been dredged at least once. During the 36 years of record, an average
of 4.1 harbors are dredged each year for maintenance. In the represen-
tative sample period of 10 years (1961-1970), maintenance dredging was
performed on an average of 4.8 harbors per year. The number of projects
per year ranged from 2 to 6 during the 36-year period, and from 3 to 6
during the 10-year sample period. Peak maintenance years appeared in
1939, 1945, 1948, 1951, 1961, 1966 and 1970-1972 (Table 47).

106


In an unpublished report, John MacLatchy of Environment Canada presented

the following overview:
"It is important to note that in the above mentioned provincial
Acts there is no attempt to control the dredging itself, but
rather the removal and disposal of the dredged material as it is
related to water pollution and land use which are clearly matters
of provincial jurisdiction. None of these statutes specifically
refer to dredging, but rather refer to the disposal of any
material regardless of its origin or the removal of material from
beaches." (23),

It may be concluded that a lack of a single group of laws and regula-
tions exists concerning Canadian dredging policies per se. However,
many, if not all of the acts cited above, reveal that there are policies

to control environmental effects of dredging and disposal in harbors and
navigable waterways.

CANADIAN-AMERICAN POLICIES

In 1970 the International Joint Commission voiced concern over the grave
deterioration of water quality on both sides of the international bound-
ary (24). An attempt to establish a unified effort to prevent further
deterioration of water quality in the Great Lakes led, in 1972, to the
Agreement between the United States of American and Canada on Great
Lakes Water Quality. Annex 6, "Identification and Disposal of Polluted
Dredged Spoil," of this agreement specifically draws attention to dredg-

ing activities in the Great Lakes. A United States-Canadian Task Force
was established to review the existing dredging practices, including
laws and regulations. This group has the specific objectives of develop-
ing compatible criteria for the characterization of polluted dredged
spoil and recommending compatible programs governing the disposal of pol-
luted spoil in open water. One of the significant principles upon which

185


13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Minutes of the Seaway Navigation and Commerce Committee, Great
Lakes Commission, August 27, 1973, p. 6 (meeting at Mackinac Island,
Mich.).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Disposal of Dredged and Fill
Materials in Inland Waters, Draft of Section 404 (b), Public Law
92-500.

U.S. Army C.E., St. Paul District, personal communication (August, 1974).

National Biocentrics, Inc., St. Paul, Minnesota, personal communi-
cation (August, 1974).

Lindgren, W., Mineral Deposits, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 525
(1933).

D.P.W., District Engineer, Toronto and Thunder Bay, Ontario,
personal communication (August, 1973).

National Water Commission, New Directions in U.S. Water Policy,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. (1973).

U.S. Army C.E., Detroit District, Alternatives for Managing Waste-
water in Southeastern Michigan, Information Brochure No. 2,
Detroit, 29 pp. (1973).

Boyd, M. B., Saucier, R. T. and others, Disposal of Dredged Spoil,
Technical Report H-72-8, U.S. Army C.E. Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, (1972).

David Kraus, E.P.A., Chicago, personal communication (July, 1974).

MacLatchy, J., The Application of Existing Law for Environmental
Protection, Environmental Protection Service, Environment Canada,
Unpublished manuscript (1973).

International Lake Erie Water Pollution Board and the International
Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Water Pollution Board, Pollution of
Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and the International Section of the St.
Lawrence River, Vol. 2 and 3, G.P.O., Washington, D.C. (1969).

Agreement Between the United States of America and Canada on Great
Lakes Water Quality, Annex 6, Section 2 (c) (1972).

D.P.W., Dredging by the Department of Public Works, Marine Plant
Section of the D.P.W., Ottawa, p. 4 (1972).

216


Table 53. VOLUME OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL, C.E. PROJECTS
IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1961-1970
(cubic yards)

= — —_—— a =

Average Volume
Year annual of

E.P.A. Pollution maintenance Percent polluted
Project sampled class dredging polluted spoil
Great Sodus 68 P/U 23,763 50 11,882
Little Sodus 69 U 15,075 0 0
Oswego 69 P 54,683 100 54,683
Rochester 69 P 267,029 100 267,029
Wilson 70 U 948 0 0
Olcott no data - 2,116 -— _
Totals 363,614 333,594

have to be confined in diked sites in the Lake Ontario region during the
next 10 years.

As of July, 1974, the only Lake Ontario projects in the C.E.'s confined
disposal program were at Rochester and Oswego. At Rochester, a site
has been selected, and construction is planned for 1976. Oswego had no
site agreement as of July, 1974, but construction is scheduled for 1975.
Thus, for most dredging in the lake, confined disposal facilities are
expected to be available by 1977. Volumes of material removed in the
past few years have been slightly lower than the average removed during
the 1960's; they should increase in the latter 1970's and remain higher
than average into the early 1980's.

Canadian Projects--
From 1961 to 1970 an average of approximately 536,000 cubic yards of

spoil were removed from Canadian waters of Lake Ontario every year in

127


harbors in their jurisdiction. National Biocentrics Inc. has been work-
ing on most of the harbors in the district for 2 years. Reclassifica-
tion, based upon the E.P.A. studies and those of independent laborato-
ries, now indicates that 17 U.S. harbors show at least one parameter of
pollution in excess of the tolerable limit. Thirteen harbors are

currently classed as unpolluted (Figure 18).

It should be noted, however, that the total volume of sediment removed
from each of the "polluted" harbors is not necessarily all polluted.
Many of the Lake Superior harbor volumes are composed largely of lake
bottom sediments, sand and gravel which have been transported by lit-
toral drift, ice-shove and violent onshore wind storms. These materials
are, for the most part, clean and eligible for open-lake dumping, where-
as the classification of the harbor may be "Polluted," as determined,
from sampling of the inner harbor reaches. Expanded studies are now
underway, with more extensive sampling programs, to delineate the vol-
umes of polluted spoil from the unpolluted. Several field seasons and
several additional samples will be required to draw lines of demarcation
between polluted areas and unpolluted areas of most harbors. Once this
isolation of polluted sediment has been accomplished, then a far more

accurate determination of spoil volume and disposal area capacity can be
made.

Under present policy, open-lake dumping of polluted spoil is restricted.
Constraints may be lifted for sediments from those parts of Lake
Superior harbors which can be proven to be clean and free of deleterious
contaminants.

Assuming that restrictions are relaxed and using sediment analyses avail-
able for known sampling locations in Lake Superior harbors, this report

attempts to estimate the percentage of total dredge quantity of each

harbor which must be committed to diked or on-land disposal areas.

Based upon activities in the 10-year representative period (1961-1970)

and the average annual volume predictions derived from that history,

168


Table 22. FREQUENCY OF DREDGING AND VOLUME OF SPOTL REMOVED

BY THE C.E. LAKE ERIE, 1961-1970 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

Frequency Maintenance

Project dredged volume

Ashtabula 10 1,257,691
Black Rock Channel and 10 834,980

Tonawanda Harbor

Buffalo 10 4,488,244
Cleveland 10 8,756,299
Conneaut 8 687,035
Dunkirk 6 121,091
Erie 9 1,620,327
Fairport 10 3,026,874
Huron 10 1,519,345
Lorain 8 1,201,993
Rocky River 2 7,083
Sandusky 10 4,397,040
Bolles 1 87,371
Detroit River 7 3,245,073
Monroe 9 1,846,288
Port Clinton 2 59,605
Rouge River 10 2,021,209
Toledo 9 10,837,905
Total 46,015,453

49


CANADA

NIPIGON 21'
(RED ROCK)

PENINSULA HARBOR 19°

THUNDER '
INDER BAY 60 (MARATHON)

(PORT ARTHUR)
(KAM RIVER AND
MISSTON CHANNEL)

(LAKEHEAD HARBOR}
MICHIPICOTEN 20°

ee GRAND MARAIS 19°
~~ TACONITE 27° © j
SILVER BAY 27! LUTSEN 4 er)
EAGLE HARBOR 12! *
BEAVER BAY 16! ~
MONTRI OR 5!
% TwO HARBORS 27° go) REMEENAM WATERWAY 25: LAC LA BELLE 10h-12" SS MONTREAL REISE HARBOR 5
ane ene & os AY GRAND TRAVERSE BAY SS Pyauatuse 6"
8'-10! Mee, a onrouncon21" ; ) ~\
“i ware Bay 12 A
aa an & GRAND MARAIS 19" SAULT SAINT HARTE
o® ee ew oe at Ue 201-24!
ge ow ie Y NUNTSING 20?
s & fi t a at YT ce
1 WISCONSIN Ss, CSG ee ees K
BN WF ye _ tcute
C© COMERCIAL HARBORS WITH PROJECT DEPTHS (IN NILES)
SS
© RECREATIONAL HARBORS "0 50

J PRIVATE

Figure 10. CLASSIFICATION AND PROJECT DEPTHS OF HARBORS IN LAKE SUPERIOR


Table 32. C.E. PROJECTED FUTURE MAINTENANCE DREDGING
IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR (50)

(cubic yards)

Project C.E. annual projection
Alpena 8,000
Au Sable 30,000
Bay Port 6,000
Black River 3,000
Caseville 12,000
Channels of Lake St. Clair 200,000
Cheboygan 10,000
Clinton River 21,000
Hammond 10,000
Harbor Beach 5,000
Harrisville 12,000
Inland Route 10,000
Les Cheneaux 10,000
Mackinaw City 4,000
Port Austin 4,000
Port Sanilac 7,200
Saginaw 700,000
Sebewaing 20,000
St. Clair River 75,000
St. Marys River 65,000

Total

1,212,200 per year

67


Table 5, PRIVATE DREDGING IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1963-1972 (47)

cubic yards

<=

Year Total volume
1972 40,093
1971 268,395
1970 62,100
1969 5,750
1968 3,080
1967 13,750
1966 18,875
1965 12,600
1964 47,770
1963 8,494
Total 480,907

Table 6. DREDGING HISTORY IN CANADIAN PROJECTS IN LAKE ONTARIO,

1961-1972 (48, 49)
(cubic yards)

Oe

Year Maintenance New work Permit
1972 48,031 0 3,023,000
1971 29,032 0 1,130,500
1970 51,221 ie) 25
1969 52,251 0) 15
1968 100,100 0 2,000
1967 686,453 0 N.A.
1966 523,610 0 NA.
1965 216,505 0 NA.
1964 499,938 0 NA.
1963 1,500,819 1,612,925 N.A.
1962 667,864 248,000 N.A.
1961 1,059,383 4,088 N.A.
Total 5,435,207 1,865,013 4,155,540

N.A. Data not available.

19


Table 41. (continued)

— == ee ed
Fiscal Chicago District Detroit District

year Maintenance New work Maintenance New work Totals
1945 784,955 0 376,412 0 1,161,367
1944 1,009,934 152,360 362,951 0 1,525,245
1943 1,051,572 318,153 436,976 0 1,806,701
1942 582,444 347,400 433,912 0 1,363,756
1941 593,480 468,854 396,607 0 1,458,941
1940 675,885 523,716 550,216 189,154 1,938,971
1939 862,944 1,836,835 523,709 671,072 3,894,560
1938 428 347 343,079 540,722 54,136 1,366,284
1937 900,210 3,817,223 517,811 16,137 5,251,381
1936 648,157 4,114,580 491,037 0 5,253,774
1935 920,479 2,623,095 578,589 0 4,122,163
1934 589,964 328,448 589,307 (0) 1,507,719
1933 889,403 319,542 473,431 282,727 1,965,103
1932 374,907 1,037,174 520,757 156,320 2,089,158
1931 1,499,869 379,111 256,889 350,213 2,486,082
1930 914,778 233,214 499,284 1) 1,647,276
1929 343,903 335,837 228,847 it) 908 , 587
1928 623,858 0 305,393 0 929,251
1927 907 ,814 411,300 (0) i) 1,319,114
1926 495,986 0 0 Q 495,986
1925 418,326 366,957 (0) 0 785,283
1924 388,279 185,120 0 0 573,399
1923 396,709 0 0 1) 396,709
1922 471,070 0 0 0 471,070
1921 329,809 0 0 0 329,809
1920 166,142 201,019 147,555 0 514,716
1919 268,422 0 153,400 17,046 438,868
1918 165,267 88,610 124,997 117,514 496,388
Totals 37,398,260 41,791,067 22,386,828 3,825,191 105,401,346

85


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Data for this study were made available by numerous agencies to which
the investigators are grateful. Dredging statistics were obtained from
the Buffalo, Detroit, Chicago, and St. Paul Districts of the Corps of
Engineers, Operations and Maintenance Branch, as well as the Division
office in Chicago. In Canada, the D.P.W. and M.O.T. regional offices
furnished us with comparable data. The E.P.A. and M.O.E. made their
respective pollution information available. Other agencies deserving
our thanks include National Biocentrics Inc., St. Paul, The Great Lakes
Commission, Ann Arbor, and the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, Ottawa.
The investigators are particularly appreciative for the assistance pro-
vided by many individuals too numerous to mention specifically. But to
David Kraus, E.P.A., Chicago, and Peter Logan, D.P.W., Ottawa, we
extend special thanks for their many hours of fruitful input.

xi


the most significant projects in Lake Huron are Saginaw and the connect-
ing waterways which reflect high dredging frequencies and high volumes
because of their commercial significance. Saginaw, the St. Clair River,
Lake St. Clair and Au Sable, based on the last decade, have frequencies
of 7 or higher (Table 31). These 4 projects and Sault Ste. Marie
account for most of the maintenance dredging which occurs in Lake Huron/
St. Clair. Table 33 reveals that these projects, on a short term basis
(1961-70) and on a long time basis (1920-72), have accounted for 86 and
90 percent respectively of all C.E. maintenance dredging in these lakes.
Furthermore, the C.E. would like to maintain the same ratio in the
future. Based on the C.E, future maintenance dredging (Table 32), 88
percent of the spoil will be removed from these projects. Therefore, it
may be concluded that about 88 percent of all C.E. maintenance dredging
in the past and future was and will continue to be from the 5 most sig-
nificant projects. The volume removed from all remaining projects will

account for approximately 12 percent of the dredging volume.

Table 33. PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE MAINTENANCE DREDGING

OF MAJOR PROJECTS IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR (50)
(cubic yards)

a
1920-1972 1961-1970 1973-1983
Au Sable 273,671 97,680 30,000
Ch. Lake St. Clair 3,808,457 1,068 , 280 200,000
Saginaw 6,999,798 2,947,350 700,000
St. Clair R. 4,112,237 919,150 75,000
Totals 15,194,163 (66%) 5,032,460(69%) 1,005,000(83%)
Sault Ste. Marie 5,418 ,514(242) 1,219,120(17%) 65,000 (5%)
Percent from 90% 86% 88%

above projects

68


late 1950's and is yet to be initiated in the field. Therefore, the new
work dredging, which totals 6,605,600 cubic yards, represents a maximum

anticipated value over the next decade.

With few exceptions such as at Sault Ste. Marie, most new work does not
involve expansion of established commercial projects. These new proj-
ects are to accommodate shallow watercraft (8-12 feet) and are designed
for recreational use. Future economic and industrial expansion of
American and Canadian harbors on Lake Huron is not anticipated by the
C.E. or the Ministry of Transport (M.0.T.). Therefore, expansion to 27-
foot channels is not expected over the next decade. The new work dredg-
ing data suggest, that an economic plateau in terms of project depths
will occur, and that dredging in Lake Huron will level off with the com-
pletion of the high volume projects at Sault Ste. Marie in 1975 and 1976.

Future Dredging in Lake Huron and
Lake St. Clair, Ontario

As in the U.S., most of the 50 Canadian projects dredged by the D.P.W.
are recreational and are not dredged frequently or with any consistency.
However, based on a 10-year average, approximately 27 percent of all
Lake Huron maintenance dredging occurs in Canada. If the 924,799 future
annual average is maintained in the U.S. projects in Lake Huron/St.
Clair, it may be expected that 250,000 cubic yards will be removed during
maintenance dredging activities from Ontario ports in Lake Huron/St.
Clair. The annual average maintenance dredging in the past 22 years
(1951-1972) was 188,934 (Table 28). However, based on future plans both
figures appear to be low. The D.P.W.—scheduled maintenance dredging
activity on Table 37 includes the period from 1973 through 1977. Accord-
ing to these data, an average of 317,575 cubic yards will be removed by
1977 which is a substantial increase over the past 2 decades. Although
future new work is presented in Table 36, some new work may be incor-
porated in Table 37 since capital dredging is often difficult to

74


41.

42.

43.

44,

45.
46.

Al,
48,
49,
50.

51.

52,
53.
54,

55.

Great Lakes Basin Commission, Great Lakes Framework Study,
Appendix 9, Navigation, Vol. 1, Draft 2, (1972).

Nowacki, H. et al., Economics of Great Lakes Shipping in an
Estended Season, No. 139, Department of Naval Architecture and
Marine Engineering, University of MIchigan, Ann Arbor, 83 pp.

(1973).

U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Mesabi Range Iron
Ore Transportation: Feasibility and Estimated Cost of Pipelining,

Information Circular 8512, 46 pp. (1971).

Detroit News, p. 1A, February 1, 1972.

Detroit News, p. 9B, December 14, 1973.

U.S. Army C.E., District Office, Operations Division.
U.S. Army C.E., Buffalo District.

Department of Public Works, Ontario, Canada.
Ministry of Transport, Ontario, Canada.

U.S. Army C.E., Detroit District

U.S. Army C.E., Dredging and Water Quality Problems in the Great
Lakes, Buffalo District, Vol. 11 (1968).

U.S. Army C.E., Chicago District.
U.S. Army C.E., St. Paul District.
Ministry of the Environment, Ontario, Canada.

U.S. E.P.A., Region V, Chicago.

218


No.

14

15
16
17
18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Historical Dredging in Lake Erie by Harbor/Waterway and
C.E. District, 1951-1972... 1 ee ee ee ee ee

Annual Maintenance Dredging in Lake Erie, 1951-1972 ...
New Work Dredging in Lake Erie, 1951-1972 .......-.
Private Dredging in Lake Erie, 1963-1972 .........

Dredging History in Canadian Projects in Lake Erie,
1961-1972 6 Le ee ee ee

Historical Dredging: Canadian Projects in Lake Erie,
1961-1970 2 we ee ee ee

C.E. Projections and Annual Maintenance Dredging Volumes,
Lake Erie «1. 1 1 we ee ee ee ee eee ee eee

Frequency of Dredging by the C.E., Lake Erie Projects,
1961-1970 2. 6 1 ee ee ee ee

Frequency of Dredging and Volume of Spoil Removed by the
C.E. Lake Erie, 1961-1970 2... 1... ee ee wwe ee

Future New Work Dredging in Lake Erie Scheduled by the
C.E. as of 1973 2 ww ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee

Canadian Dredging Frequencies, Lake Erie Projects,
1961-1970 6 ww ww ee ee ee ee ee ee ee

Future Maintenance Dredging in Canada 1973-1977, Lake

Erie «2 6 ee ee ee ee eee eee ee ee wee

Estimates of Future Average Annual Dredging Volumes in
Lake Erie «6 6 ee ee ee ee eee ee we ee we

Historical Dredging Totals of C.E. Projects in Lake Huron/
St. Clair, 1920-1972 2... 2 1 we we ee ee ee ww

Annual Dredging Volumes in Lake Huron/St. Clair, 1930-1972

C.E. Maintenance Dredging by Decades in Lake Huron/St.
Clair, 1930-1970 2 2 2 wee ee ee ee ee ee

Total Dredging Volumes in Lake Huron/St. Clair, 1971-1973.

vii

Page

35
36
39

40

42

43

45

47

49

50

52

53

54

56

59

62

63


assigned to those harbors where shoaling restricted the free movement of
ships. Few detailed records were kept and dredge spoils were dumped in
the open lake. The Canadian harbors were primarily opened and developed
to serve the lumbering industry and later the paper industry. As the
steel industry placed more and more demand upon shipping, ship drafts
increased requiring deeper harbors and waterways. Ship lengths and
beams increased, which required more adequate berthing space as well as
enlarged turning basin and anchorage facilities. Parallel developments
of harbor facilities can be traced in the ports of the “copper country."
As copper mining declined and the lumbering industry closed down, the
harbors of Lake Superior have consolidated activities. Some of the
smaller ports have been relegated to recreational use and some still

maintain a small fishing trade (Figure 10).

Changes in principal use and trade patterns of the upper Great Lakes
dictated alterations in the dredging requirements and frequencies. Dur-
ing the earlier years of Lake Superior's waterborne trade and harbor
maintenance, the C.E. operated from an office in Duluth, Minnesota. In
1955, the Duluth office was closed and moved to a consolidated operation
in the St. Paul District at St. Paul. In preparation for the consolida-
tion of activities in St. Paul some of the old records of the Duluth
office were destroyed. Therefore, historic dredging records, in particu-
lar the permit files, are generally not available prior to 1955. The
history of dredging activity can be gleaned with increasing detail and
accuracy primarily from the annual reports of the C.E. Early reports
cited only the total expenditures of the district without regard to
activity. During the 1930's the annual reports began to itemize expen-
ditures for certain activities, however, dredging if listed was commonly
shown only as a lump dollar sum. During the 1940's, dredge activities
began to be reported in cubic yards and in the middle 1950 period a dis-
tinction was being made between maintenance and new work dredging
volumes. Annual reports of the C.E. Districts have never recorded the

volume of permit dredging, inasmuch as these activities are privately

102


Several factors suggest that more than the minimum yardage will be
removed from Lake Huron. Of the 4 principal harbors and waterways,
Sault Ste. Marie, Saginaw, Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River,
sediment pollution is identified as a problem at only 2 projects
(Saginaw and Lake St. Clair). Confined disposal sites are planned for
Saginaw and Lake St. Clair and are to be completed in June, 1977 and
June 1975 respectively. Saginaw has requested the E.P.A. to recommend
a waiver (PL 91~611) which, if recommended and granted,will alleviate
25 percent of the construction costs to Saginaw of a confined disposal
site. Also, constructive criticism of the E.P.A. pollution criteria for
dredged material is being evaluated and may be modified in the near
future. Lake levels in the next decade,which are of some significance,
will probably drop from their record highs of the early 1970's requiring
more maintenance dredging to alleviate the problems of economic stress

to industrial and shipping firms.

Future Permit Dredging in Michigan

Permit dredging over the next decade is difficult to predict. This is
especially the case in Lake Huron where some 25 percent of the private
dredging is from industrial areas such as Saginaw. Such private dredg-
ing is dictated by the same policy as C.E. maintenance dredging. If the
spoil is polluted it must be confined. Since a confined site is sched-
uled for Saginaw, it may be expected that permit dredging volumes in
that area will be low until the site is constructed. Permit dredging
(Table 28) in 1972 was at a record low (1,250 CY) suggesting again that
environmental policies (Section V), and perhaps high lake levels
influence private dredging volumes. The C.E., however, suggests that
200,000 cubic yards of permit dredging will occur annually in Lake
Huron and Lake St. Clair. Based on a 10-year period (1961-70), 268,000
cubic yards were removed annually. Since the C.E. does not anticipate

expanding any commercial harbors in the next decade and no significant

72


SECTION V

DREDGING AND DISPOSAL POLICIES

UNITED STATES' POLICIES

The United States Army Corps of Engineers has been delegated the respon—
sibility of maintaining the nation's federal waterways for approximately
the last 150 years. The River and Harbor Act of 1899 authorizes the C.E.
to develop, maintain, and improve the waterways and harbors of the
United States in the interest of navigation. Since navigation may be
obstructed in those waterways, no dredging or disposal of spoil may take

place without approval by the C.E.

Non-federal interests who dredge and dispose of spoil must obtain a per-
mit from the C.E. as specified in Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act.
The initial purpose of Section 10 was to prevent obstructions to naviga-
tion, including dredging and disposal of spoil as well as construction
projects like marinas, sea walls, power lines and submarine pipelines in
navigable waters. Before approving a Section 10 dredging permit, the
C.E. has the application reviewed by concerned state and federal agen-
cies, such as state pollution control agencies, and the E.P.A. In its
review of the Section 10 permits, the E.P.A. usually recommends approval
provided that the applicant will confine the dredged spoil.

The original purpose of the River and Harbor Act concerned navigation.

However, since the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act

179


Milwaukee, may have slightly larger dredging requirements due to new
work projects. This increase should be partially offset by a reduction
of dredging in some industrialized harbors, such as Indiana and Calumet

Harbors, where man-made sedimentation is decreasing.

Drawing on their experience with individual harbors, the C.E. has esti-
mated future average annual maintenance dredging volume in Lake Michigan
to be 2,013,100 cubic yards (Table 45). These projected quantities
represent maximum dredging volumes, which would be dredged provided that
no funding limitations, disposal site availability, or other constraints
are imposed. Compared to the Corps of Engineers' projection, future
average annual maintenance dredging volume calculated in this study is
525,100 cubic yards less or 26 percent lower. However, a Chi-square
analysis revealed no significant difference, at the .01 level, between

the two projections.

In the Chicago District, with the exception of Calumet, Indiana, Menom-
inee, and Port Washington Harbors, there is only general correspondence
between the two projections. Because dredging volumes are small in
Menominee and Port Washington, differences between the two projections
are insignificant. Big Suamico Harbor may not undergo maintenance
dredging in the future as this project is no longer economically justi-
fied. Due to the effect of pollution elimination systems on industrial
and municipal sedimentation (Public Law 92-500), harbors such as Calumet,
Chicago, and Indiana will probably exhibit slightly lower maintenance
dredging requirements than that projected by the C.E. As much as 75 per-
cent of the spoil volume dredged from Calumet Harbor and River may be
comprised of industrial wastes.

With regard to the Detroit District, less correspondence exists between
the projection of this study and that of the C.E. for future average
annual maintenance dredging. Specifically, large differences are noted
for Charlevoix, Manistique, Portage Lake and White Lake, with moderate
disparities for Ludington, Muskegon and South Haven Harbors. Conversion

98


Based on the period 1957 through 1973, private dredging in Lake Michigan
averaged 784,420 cubic yards annually; this quantity is approximately 18
percent of the total average annual dredging volume. Private dredging
operations include the excavation and maintenance of private harbors and
marinas as well as private boat slips and berthing facilities in public
harbors. However, most of the spoil is derived from private docking
facilities in public harbors, and not from private harbors. Volumes
derived from dredging for bulkhead construction and fill operations were
not considered herein to constitute private dredging. In addition,
inland dredging, i.e., dredging upstream from a rivermouth harbor, was
not included in the private dredging volumes.

Large volumes, i.e., over 100,000 cubic yards per permit, were frequently
dredged by Inland Steel, U.S. Steel, and Youngstown Sheet and Tube from
Indiana and Calumet Harbors. Municipalities and power companies, e.g.,
Commonwealth Edison, occasionally generate moderately large dredging
projects. Conversely, smaller industries and firms, such as yacht clubs,
make numerous permit applications, but these projects usually involve
less than 25,000 cubic yards of spoil per permit.

In most instances the sediment removed by private interests was dumped
on the permittee's property. During its review of Section 10 permit
applications, the E.P.A. generally recommends that spoil be confined and
not returned to the waters of the Great Lakes or rivers, nor disposed on
nearshore environments where it may be washed or leached into the lakes
or rivers. A few large industries and municipalities have requested per-
mission to dump spoil in federal disposal sites. At present the C.E.
must allow some capacity in their confined disposal sites for such

requests.

The C.E. does not dredge private navigational facilities. In the Chica-
go District, 3 large industries were recently assessed, pro rata, the
cost of dredging by the C.E. for causing sedimentation in federal
harbors. Sloughing of sediment from privately-maintained channels into

83


Table 67.

U.S. DREDGING IN LAKE SUPERIOR:

POLLUTED SPOIL AND AVERAGE VOLUME PREDICTIONS, 1961-1970
(cubic yards)

TEN YEAR AVERAGE ANNUAL

Date Polluted spoil predicted--U.S.
sampled % x
inclu- C.E. C.E. This Annual % Pol.
Harbor sive vol. estimate study average poll. class
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 7) (8)
Angle Inlet 0 U
Ashland "69 2,000 2,000 2,000 60,619 100 P
Baraga 500 0 U
Baudette 0) U
Bayfield "71,'72 1,000 None 100 P
Big Bay '70-'73 110 1,000 1,150 4,597 25 P/U
Black River '71-'73 1,000 3,000 1,826 2,435 75 P/U
Chippewa 0 U
Cornucopia '71-'73 2,000 800 1,498 1,997 75 P/U
Duluth- '70-'73 27,540 150,000 143,408 796,710 18 P
Superior
Eagle Harbor '68,'69 0
Grand Marais '70-'73 3,000 600 600 600 100 Pp
(Minn.)
Grand
Traverse "71 3,750 3,697 4,930 75 P/U
Keweenaw
Waterway '70-'73 13,750 2,000-2,500 7,621 30,486 25 P/U
Knife River '70-'72 500 800 151 302 50 P/U
Lac La Belle '69,'72 2,630 0 U
L'Anse 800 (0) U
La Pointe "70 0 U
Little Lake '70~'71 32,709 0 U
Marquette "71 750 25,752 34,337 75 P/U
Oman's Creek 30 0 U
Ontonagon '68-'73 72,000 25,000 41,197 45,775 90 P/U
Port Wing '69~'73 3,750 None 2,926 3,902 75 P/U
Presque Isle '70-'73 850 2,000 2,000 11,810 17 P/U
Saxon Harbor '71~-'73 440 700 700 6,291 11 P/U
Silver Creek 6,500 10) U
Taconite 200 0 U
Two Harbors '70-'73 20,000 200-600 767 767 100 P
Warroad 11,224 0 U
Whitefish Pt. '70,'71 6,000 6,000 1,590 1,590 100 P/U
Annual 159,430 206,100 236,883 1,964,759 5 P
totals 12 P/U
13 U

P Polluted; P/U Part

polluted; U Unpolluted Harbor

171


Summary

1. Of 30 harbors sampled in the U.S. side of Lake Superior, 17 are
classed as polluted or partially polluted and 13 are clean. In 9
Canadian harbors 3 are polluted and 6 are clean.

2. The most commonly occurring pollutants in U.S. projects are COD,
Kjeldahl nitrogen, copper and zinc. In Canadian harbors, the pollutants

are primarily COD and Kjeldahl nitrogen.

3. Approximately 10.5 percent of the total volume of dredge spoil in
the U.S. harbors is polluted, according to predictions of the C.E.
About 12 percent is polluted, as determined in this study.

4. Some 40 percent of the Canadian dredge spoils will be polluted in

the next 10 years. ‘

5. In the past decade, maintenance dredging removed 1,594,742 CY from
U.S. harbors in Lake Superior. This is 15 percent of the 10,611,464 cy
dredged from all Lake Superior harbors in all categories.

6. An adjusted average of new work volume for the 10-year period will
be about 425,000 CY, in the U.S. annually

7. Permit dredging in Lake Superior during the historic period of
record is 2.8 million CY or about 3 percent of the total for the same
period. Adjusted averages, based on the 10-year sample period indicate
about 191,000 CY will be removed annually.

8. Canadian maintenance is expected to average about 86,000 CY Per

year.

9. Canadian new work and private dredging in the next decade is

expected to be minimal, and thus insignificant to total volume figures.

10. Duluth-Superior dredging is predicted to be about 796,000 CY per
year (41% of U.S. total) and the Thunder Bay area of Ontario, 315,482
CY (96% of total Canadian). These 2 projects are expected to produce
the major percentage of all Lake Superior spoil volume.

174


Projections of Canadian Dredging Volumes

Maintenance-—

The decade 1961 to 1970 may be considered typical of Canadian dredging
for purposes of this report for the same reasons considered on the
American side. In that decade, a range of 3 to 9 maintenance dredging
projects occurred annually in Canadian waters of Lake Erie. The average
annual number of projects per year was 6. The total dredged volume
ranged from about 160,000 cubic yards to 710,000 cubic yards: the
average annual volume removed in that decade was 351,000 cubic yards
(Table 24).

In terms of future spoil, projections of maintenance dredging volumes to
1977 were made available by the D.P.W. of Canada. A total of approxi-
mately one-half million cubic yards of spoil are anticipated to be
dredged in maintaining Canadian harbors on Lake Erie in the next 3 to 4
years. About one-half of the total is expected to be removed from Port
Stanley (Table 25).

Obviously, Canadian projections for the near future are lower than the
average dredging volumes which occurred during the 1960's. This is due
primarily to the loss of Port Burwell volumes, which will be much lower
in the future than they were during that decade. Thus, considering
Canadian projections, it is anticipated that approximately 150,000 to
200,000 cubic yards of material will be removed from Lake Erie annually

in maintenance dredging projects.

Permit--

Permit dredging has fluctuated widely in terms of volumes on the

Canadian side of Lake Erie in recent years. In some years very little
private dredging activity has occurred. But in others, only a few jobs
have resulted in the removal of hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of

spoil. Thus to generalize a projection on permit dredging in Canadian

51


Table 21. FREQUENCY OF DREDGING BY THE C.E., LAKE ERIE PROJECTS,
1961-1970 (47, 50)

Project 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
Ashtabula x x x x x
Black Rock x x x x x x x

Channel and

Tonawanda

Harbor
Buffalo x x x x x x x
Cleveland x x x x x
Conneaut x x x x x
Dunkirk x x x x x x
Erie x x x x x x x x x
Fairport x x x x x x x x x x
Huron x x x x x x x x x x
Lorain x x x x x x x x
Rocky River x x
Sandusky x x x x x x x x x
Bolles
Detroit River x x
Monroe x x x x x x x
Port Clinton x x
Rouge River x x x x x x x x
Toledo x x x x x x x x x
Totals 14 14 13 15 14 13 13 14 16 15

47


Table 1. CONVERSION FACTORS TO PLACE MEASURE (46)

Lake Bin measure Scow measure
Ontario 1 p.m. = 1.20 b.m. 1 p.m. = 1.20 s.m.
Erie l.p.m. = 1.20 b.m. 1 p.m. = 1.20 s.m.
Huron 1 p.m. = 1.20 b.m. 1 p.m. = 1.20 s.m.
Michigan 1 p.m. = 1.50 b.m. 1 p.m. = 1.20 s.m.
Superior 1 p.m. = 1.05 b.m 1 p.m. = 1.05 s.m.

or districts may not agree with the raw data available in the records of
the C.E.

Estimates of future new work dredging quantities represent maximum vol-
umes as all scheduled new work projects were tabulated. Projections of
private and maintenance dredging quantities were based on dredging his-
tories during the past decade. Although the effect of new work projects
on the future maintenance dredging requirements of a given harbor was
incorporated into projections of maintenance dredging volumes, other
relevant factors such as federal funding, scheduling of dredging plants,
lake levels, and availability of disposal sites were not. Because of
the uniqueness of each dredging project and the affects of unknown vari-
ables such as future lake levels and federal funding, a single projec-
tion equation could not be applied to all harbors and waterways of the
Great Lakes. Projections of future maintenance dredging by harbor has
also been estimated by the C.E. for federal harbors in the United States
(1). Both projections were compared and significant differences between
the two are discussed below in the subsections on the individual lakes.



has been responsible for removing more than 58 million cubic yards of
spoil and the Detroit District approximately 35 million cubic yards.

New Work Dredging--

In the past decade, new work has accounted for approximately 35 percent
of all dredging activity on the American side of Lake Erie. Over the
longer term, i.e., 1951 to 1972, more than 40 million cubic yards of
spoil was removed in new work projects. However, unlike average main-
tenance volumes, new work volume totals display very little regularity
from year to year. New work volumes range from a low of no new work in
1971 and 1972 to a high of more than 12 million cubic yards in 1963
(Table 16). During the late 1950's and the early 1960's new work dredg-
ing became highly important. In fact, more than 90 percent of the new
work dredging in Lake Erie waters since 1951 occurred between 1958 and
1967. For the most part, this was due to the deepening and widening of
harbors and waterways to accommodate commerce generated by the St.

Lawrence Seaway, which was completed in 1959.

The largest new work project in Lake Erie since 1951 occurred at Toledo.
In 1963 almost 7 million cubic yards of spoil were dredged in that
project. Of all new work dredging since 1951, 58 percent occurred in
Detroit District C.E. projects and 42 percent in Buffalo District

projects.

Permit Dredging--

Dredging by non-federal interests may only be undertaken when authoriza-
tion of the C.E. is obtained through permits. Permit dredging data in
Lake Erie has been traced thoroughly from 1963 to the present. Data
were gathered from C.E. in Buffalo and Detroit, from the E.P.A. in
Chicago, and from New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-
tion in Albany. This compilation of permit dredging volume data is as
complete as possible, considering certain restrictions such as missing

38


Table 18. DREDGING HISTORY IN CANADIAN PROJECTS IN LAKE ERIE,

1961~1972 (47, 50
(cubic , ty )

Year ~ Maintenance New work Permit
1972 N.A. 0 5,800
1971 119,789 0 430,000
1970 171,753 (0) 500
1969 157,233 i) 2,000
1968 710,791 0 N.As
1967 247,831 0 N.A.
1966 535, 982 10 N.A.
1965 236,877 0 N.A.
1964 287,226 0 NLA.
1963 199,825 1) N.A.
1962 512,946 i} NA.
1961 466,026 (9) NLA.
Totals 3,619,847 10 438,300

N.A. Data not available,

42


Table 35.

FUTURE ESTIMATED MAINTENANCE DREDGING BY HARBOR

OF C.E. PROJECTS (50)
(cubic yards)

Average annual

maintenance C.E.
Project Base period dredging projection
Alpena 1963-1972 9,768 8,000
Au Sable 1961-1972 20,828 30,000
Bay Port — i) 6,000
Black River - 10) 3,000
Caseville 1965-1972 3,236 12,000
Channels of Lake 1964-1972 117,677 200,000
St. Clair
Cheboygan 1962-1972 11,614 10,000
Clinton River 1968-1972 7,602 21,000
Hammond Bay - 0 10,000
Harbor Beach 1967-1972 32,083 5,000
Harrisville 1965-1972 3,453 12,000
Inland Route 1968-1972 22,611 10,000
Les Cheneaux 1968-1972 20,545 10,000
Mackinaw - 0 4,000
Point Lookout - 0 0
Port Austin - 0 4,000
Port Sanilac 1962-1972 6,973 7,200
Saginaw 1964-1972 334,871 700,000
St. Clair River 1965-1972 108 ,513 75,000
St. Marys River 1968-1972 243,824 65,000
Sebewaing 1966-1972 24,160 20,000
Totals 967,758 1,212,200

71


Table 54.

SAMPLING OF PROJECTS ON LAKE ERIZ (54, 35)

(number of samples exceeded)

Number exceeded

Dateof No. of Vol. Kjel. Oil &

Harbor samples samples P sol. COD N grease Fe Hg Pb Zn
U.S. samples
Detroit R. 70 15 12 10 5 10 10 7° 15 nt nt
Rouge River 67 26 23 25 nt 21 24 10 nt nt nt
Monroe 69 3 2 3 3 2 2 1 ont nt nt
Bolles 72 5 3 1 1 1 1 ont nt nt nt
Toledo 68 11 oll oil lll 9 11 nt nt nt
Port Clinton 68 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 nt nt nt
Sandusky 68 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 nt nt nt
Huron 68 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 nt nt nt
Vermilion 68 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 nt nt nt
Lorain 68 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 nt nt nt
Rocky River 70 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 nt nt nt
Cleveland 72 15 15 15 15 15 15 nt 15 15 15
Fairport 72 6 6 6 6 5 5 nt O08 6 6
Ashtabula 68 7 7 1 0 6 3 5 nt nt nt
Conneaut 68 10 10 10 10 610 10 10 nt nt nt
Erie 68 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 nt nt nt
Barcelona 70 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 nt nt nt
Dunkirk 68 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 nt nt nt
Buffalo Hé&R 67 17. #«17—«17 177617 17. «17:s«ont nt nt
Black Rk. Ch. 67 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 nt nt nt
Little River No data, but classed polluted by E.P.A.
Tonawanda Hbr. No data, but classed polluted by E.P.A.
Totals 165 154 147 116 147 i146 i10 30 21 21
Canadian samples
Port Stanley 70,71 21 21 0 13 21 nt nt oOo nt 19
Rondeau 71 3 3 2 nt 3 nt nt nt nt nt
Leamington 70 6 6 0 6 6 nt nt O nt 4
Kingsville 70,72 #15 15 0 12 lL 1 nt 10 nt 12
Colchester 71 3 nt 2 3 3 mt nt nt nt nt
Totals 4% 45 4 34 A “T nt 10 nt 35

a
nt Not tested

133


A total of 262 samples have been analyzed for Canadian harbors on Lake
Ontario. Canadian samples average about 44 per harbor; but this average
is skewed by 181 samples taken from Toronto Harbor. The range is from 4
at Port Hope and 8 at Cobourg to 34 at Oshawa and 181 at Toronto. All
samples were taken during the years 1970 to 1973. Phosphorus, Kjeldahl
nitrogen, zinc, and chemical oxygen demand are the most commonly sur-
passed pollution parameters in Canadian waters of Lake Ontario. Appar-
ently, zinc tests are considered more important by the M.O.E. than by the
E.P.A. Of the 6 Canadian harbors samples, all were tested for zinc.

Zinc tests were not made at any of the 5 American harbors sampled.

Future Quantity of Polluted Spoil

U.S. Projects--

Since most spoil dredged by permit is presently being confined and since
most new work dredging involves unpolluted material, the projections of
future polluted spoil in this report involve only maintenance dredging
over the next decade. From 1961 to 1970, an average of approximately
363,000 cubic yards of spoil were removed from U.S. projects annually in
maintenance dredging. Of this volume, about 334,000 cubic yards (92 per.
cent) involved polluted spoil (Table 53). The volume of polluted spoil
was calculated on the basis of the E.P.A. classification of harbors and

detailed analysis of their sediment sample maps.

Maintenance dredging in the next decade should result in the removal of
approximately the same total volume of spoil that was removed during the
1960's. Most of the material to be dredged in the future will be pol-
luted spoil from Rochester and Oswego, the major commercial harbors in
Lake Ontario (Figure 12). Thus, it is projected that unless unlimited
open-lake disposal is permitted to resume as a result of severe economic
Stress or relaxation of pollution standards, confinement of more than 90
Percent of the material to be dredged in the next decade will be neces-
sary. This means that 3.3 million cubic yards of dredged spoil will

126


spoil is expected to decrease slightly.

17. New guidelines by the E.P.A., governing the disposal of dredged
materials in inland waters, will probably broaden the criteria for deter-
mining the eligibility of spoil for open-lake disposal. Although these
guidelines may change the pollution status of several small recreational
harbors currently classified as partially polluted, the future volume of
polluted spoil which must be confined will not change significantly.

18. In partially polluted harbors, generally the inner harbor is pol-
luted, whereas the outer harbor near the jetties and/or breakwater is

unpolluted.

19. In rivermouth harbors, annual maintenance dredging volumes cannot
be predicted on the basis of the sediment load being transported by the
stream. For most harbors in the Great Lakes, the primary sources of the
dredged sediments are industrial-municipal effluents, littoral drift,
and alluvial deposition.

20. Wetlands, specifically coastal marshes, appear to be threatened
less by C.E. spoil disposal than by high lake levels, filling by utili-
ties and industries as well as by residential and recreational encroach-

ment.


ral

PROJECTED DREDGING VOLUME (IN 1,000'S c.v )
O 0-9

O 10-24
O 25-100

PERCENT rou) 100 +

(IN MILES)

—_—— EEE
0 25 50 15

Figure 12. PROJECTED ANNUAL POLLUTED AND UNPOLLUTED MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ONTARIO


Unless waivers of costs to local groups are obtained, site agreements
are reached, and/or the E.P.A. relaxes some of its pollution criteria,
maintenance dredging in the future will decline to some extent. As of
July, 1974, a waiver was granted to Toledo and additional waivers are
pending for Fairport, Conneaut, Cleveland, Lorain, and Ashtabula. How-
ever, polluted spoil is being dumped in the open lake in the Buffalo
District. Thus, in the interest of the regional and national economy,
most major harbors and waterways will probably be dredged at any environ-
mental cost, even if at a reduced scale. But the smaller and more
marginal commercial projects and many recreational and harbors of refuge
would probably be eliminated entirely. Thus, under these considerations,
a lower figure for the C.E. dredging volume in Lake Erie in the next
decade is about 35 million cubic yards. This figure represents a
decline in dredging volumes of approximately one standard deviation from

the norm in the past decade.

Based primarily on the recent dredging history of Lake Erie, a median
estimate of the volume of material to be removed in the next decade is
possible. The decade of the 1960's, i.e., 1961 to 1970, has been chosen
as typical. The St. Lawrence Seaway was completed in 1959, and in the
early 1970's higher than average lake levels and E.P.A. pollution cri-
teria have had effects on dredging. In estimating future volumes then,
the frequency at which individual projects were dredged during the 1960's
has been utilized. Some harbors and waterways are dredged annually while

others are maintained less frequently (Table 21).

Between 1961 and 1970 the C.E. dredged 13 to 16 maintenance projects

annually: the average per year was 14. During that decade, the volume
of material removed each year ranged from 3.4 million cubic yards to 6.5
million cubic yards: the average was 4.6 million cubic yards annually.
No significant correlation existed between number of jobs completed per
year and volume of spoil removed. Eighteen projects were maintained on
Lake Erie between 1961 and 1970. ‘Twelve were dredged a total of at

46


No.

10

ll

12

13

FIGURES

Principal Dredging Projects in Lake Ontario ......-..

Average Annual Maintenance Dredging Volumes in Lake Ontario,
1961-1970 6 6 we we ee ee ee we eh we we eee

Maintenance Dredging Volumes in Lake Ontario, 1951-1972 . .
Principal Dredging Projects in Lake Erie ....+..++-s

Average Annual Maintenance Dredging Volumes in Lake Erie,
1961-1972 © 6 we ee ee ee te ee ee

Maintenance Dredging Volumes in Lake Erie, 1951-1972 ...
Principal Dredging Projects in Lakes Huron and St. Clair .

Annual Maintenance Dredging Volumes in Lakes Huron and
St. Clair, 1930-1972 2... 6 1 ee ee eee ee ee

Private Commercial and Public Harbors and C.E. Districts in
Lake Michigan . 6. 6 ee ee ee ee et te we we ee

Classification and Project Depths of Harbors in Lake
Superior 2... ee eee ee te ee te ee ee

Pollution Status of Harbors in Lake Ontario ........

Projected Annual Polluted and Unpolluted Maintenance
Dredging Volumes in Lake Ontario .... 2... eee ee

Pollution Status of Harbors in Lake Erie ....... ee

iv

Page

11

12
15

31

33
37

57

61

78

103

124

128

131


sediments (15). Discharge of these ions into Lake Superior raises the
metallic ion concentration to anomalously high values as compared to the
other Great Lakes. The well known counterclockwise gyre in Lake
Superior tends to 'stream' the metalliferous constituents eastward along
the United States coastline to cause a plume of metallic solution within
the otherwise pristine waters of the lake. Although these natural con-
taminants are not quantitatively high, they are detectable in water and
sediment analysis (16). It has been noted that zinc values, as well as
copper values, in water analyses are ubiquitous and in some cases anoma-—
lously high. Zinc minerals are associated with the copper of the
Keewenaw Region (17). Therefore, both elements can be expected from
natural weathering, drainage and mine effluent. Several hundred square
miles of copper and zinc bearing rock units underlie the glacial drift
or are exposed at the surface throughout the south shore. This so
called contamination or pollution by surface waters (and from the water
table) is a natural phenomenon and should be recognized as such in set-
ting the criteria of pollution for Lake Superior. It is recognized that
a base level of metallic ion concentration in the waters of the south
shore of Lake Superior probably exists and is beyond the control of man
to alter. Pollution criteria for Lake Superior should be established
independently of the other lakes, based upon norms determined from open-

lake waters along the south shore.

The drainage systems of the north shore harbors, both United States and
Canadian, discharge quite universally from heavily forested areas, pre-
dominantly coniferous. Normal stream waters in these systems are acidic
(high pH) and often brown tinted with tannic acid and stains leached

from the forest duff. Large quantities of leaves and conifer needles
are transported to river mouth harbors where this organic matter becomes
waterlogged and settles to bottom. During the halcyon days of logging
and widespread fluming and booming of saw logs in these rivers and
harbors, considerable quantities of saw logs, bark, natural pulp and saw-

dust were deposited in the quiet waters of north shore harbors.

165


following areas are not to be selected as sites for the diked proposal
facilities:

a. Municipal water supply and intake areas

b. Shellfish beds and fishing areas, to include spawning and
breeding areas

c. Wildlife areas

d. Recreational areas

Since 1970 a decline in maintenance dredging has occurred in public and
private harbors of Lake Michigan and Lake Huron due to a lack of dis-
posal sites for the confinement of polluted spoil.

The volume of dredged spoil and industrial waste such as fly ash dis-
posed in wetlands of the Great Lakes is not known. Since wetlands are
recognized as beneficial from many points of view, an assessment of the
impact of private dredging and industrial disposal in such areas is
recommended. For example, from Toledo Harbor northward to Lake St.
Clair (Figure 5), C.E. confined disposal facilities are in use or being
planned. The C.E. has designed offshore diked disposal areas for Toledo
and for the Detroit and Rouge Rivers to accommodate dredgings from
federal projects. However, power plants and industries are continuing

to dispose industrial wastes and dredgings in limited onshore wetlands.

Spoil dredged from private harbors and adjacent to private docks in pub-
lic harbors in the United States will continue to be confined on the per-
mittee's own land or in alternate ways approved by the C.E. It is antic-
ipated that in the future the C.E. will regulate private dredging opera-
tions more closely. Proposed Change 6 of the 1899 River and Harbor Act
requires that the C.E. consider non-federal activities, including pri-
vate dredging, in the planning and maintenance of federal projects. In
addition, the permit applicant is to comply with the following: (1) the
FWPC Amendments of 1972; (2) the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctua-
ries Act of 1972; and (3) the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (Pub-
lic Law 92-583). Although future private dredging volumes in Lakes Erie,

Michigan and Ontario are expected to remain relatively high, some

189


maintenance dredging operations by about 50 percent. In addition, the
C.E. has estimated that the transport and disposal of polluted mainte-
nance dredgings in confined disposal sites could increase dredging costs
350 percent (1). Rising costs of dredging will probably result in
dredging priorities, perhaps by comparing cost-benefit ratios of the
harbors to be dredged. In Canada, the M.0.T. has recently assumed the
administration of the public harbors from the D.P.W., thus reflecting

some economic concern over navigation and dredging.

Competition from other carriers for non-bulk commodities traditionally
moved by lake carriers may result in less dredging in the future. Im-
provements in land transportation such as unit trains or pipelines may
cause lower demand for shipping on the Great Lakes. In fact, cost feas-
ibility of transporting taconite from the Lake Superior area to Chicago
by pipeline has been established (43). In addition, Canadian railroads
have been competing successfully for containerized freight which custom-
arily moved by ship along the Seaway route from Halifax to Detroit (44),
Conversely, if the energy crisis in the U.S. worsens, hampering future
rail and truck traffic, then shipping volumes on the lakes may increase
since water transport is significantly more energy efficient. Studies
by the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation conclude that 15 to
20 million gallons of fuel could be saved each year if 50 percent of the
import-export cargoes originating in or destined for states bordering
the Great Lakes were moved on the Seaway rather than overland to ports

on the East Coast (45).

If implemented, sediment abatement programs could significantly reduce
shoaling and hence reduce dredging. It has been estimated that the
stream load of the Maumee River could be significantly reduced of sedi-
ment traps on the upper river were installed (1). Along the eastern
shore of Lake Michigan, where littoral drift results in shoaling near
the breakwater and jetty systems, some reduction in sediment bypassing

may be feasible. New policies in the U.S. and Canada regarding the

212


Table 64. (continued)
= —_———
Criteria limits exceeded
Year No. of Vol. Kjel. Oil &
Harbor sampled samples sol. COD N grease Hg Pb Zn
Arcadia Not sampled
Charlevoix 1971 3 nt
Frankfurt 1972 6 mt nt nt
Grand Haven 1972 7 x nt nt nt
Grays Reef Not sampled
Holland 1972 7 x x x x mt nt nt
Leland 1971 2 nt
Ludington 1967 4 at nt ont nt
Manistee 1967 4 nt nt ont nt
Manistique 1967 3 x ont x nt nt nt
Muskegon 1967 3 nt mt nt nt
Pentwater 1967 15 nt mt nt nt
Petoskey Not sampled
Portage Lake 1971 2 nt
Saugatuck 1967 1 nt nt nt nt nt nt
South Haven 1972 7 x x x x mt nt nt
St. James Not sampled
St. Joseph 1972 6 x x nt nt nt
Traverse City 1972 2 nt x
White Lake 1967 2 nt nt nt nt
Total samples Th
Percent of harbors polluted 35 25 20 30 - ot
by each parameter
Total for lake
Percent of harbors polluted 59 52 50 52 - ofr

by each parameter

3New public harbor.

nt Not tested; x Parameter

154

exceeded limits


pattern is evident in Ontario. The total permit dredging in Michigan
from 1960 through 1972 is 3,023,434 cubic yards. In Canada, a minimum
24,200 cubic yards of spoil were removed by private interests from 1965
through 1972. As illustrated in Table 28, the average permit dredging
volume in Michigan is 232,572 cubic yards annually. Three large private
harbors with project depths of 26 feet are located in Michigan. These
are Calcite, Port Dolomite, and Stoneport. Of the 3, only Calcite
reported dredging activity since 1960. In a 2-year period, 1964 and
1965, 50,500 cubic yards were removed from that harbor. At Saginaw, the
major industrialized project on Lake Huron, private dredging averages
about 55,000 cubic yards annually.

Present dredging patterns (1972 through 1973) in terms of geographic
distribution are similar to those of the past except that volumes have
decreased. Table 30 reflects the dredging activities in the past 3
years of harbors in Michigan and Ontario.

Table 30. TOTAL DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR,

1971-1973 (48, 50)
(cubic yards

Year U.S. Canada Total
1973 175,589 not at least

available 175,589
1972 414,727 188 ,566 603,293
1971 970,156 74,803 1,044,959

The average maintenance, new work, and permit dredging in the last
decade in Michigan has averaged well over one million cubic yards
annually. However, with environmental concerns discussed in Section V
and perhaps record high lake levels since 1970, dredging volumes includ-
ing permit dredging have declined to a total of 175, 589 cubic yards in

63


part, this was due to the deepening and widening of harbors and water-
ways to accommodate new commerce generated by the 1959 completion of the

St. Lawrence Seaway.

The largest new work project since 1951 occurred at Rochester in 1963,

when more than one-half a million cubic yards of spoil were generated.

Permit Dredging--

Dredging by non-federal interests may only be undertaken when authoriza-
tion of the C.E. is obtained through permits. Data were gathered from
the C.E. District Office in Buffalo, from the E.P.A., Chicago, and from
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in Albany.
Permit dredging in Lake Ontario has been traced thoroughly to 1963. It
is felt that compilation of permit dredging volume data is as complete
as possible, considering certain restrictions such as missing permit
files, unreported volumes of spoil removed, and files lacking job com-
pletion notices. Therefore, the volumes presented in this report

represent minimum figures.

Approximately 10 percent of all dredging on the American side of Lake
Ontario is permit dredging. From 1963 to 1972, such projects resulted
in the removal of about 480,000 cubic yards of spoil from the lake
(Table 5). On the average, about 48,000 cubic yards of material are
dredged from Lake Ontario ports by permittees each year. The volumes
removed ranged from a low of only 3,000 cubic yards in 1968 to a high of
268,000 cubic yards in 1971. No apparent pattern has been established
in the past decade.

Canadian Dredging History in Lake Ontario

Dredging data for Canadian harbors on Lake Ontario have been collected
and presented in Table 6. Since 1961, almost 5.5 million cubic yards of
spoil has been removed in maintaining Canadian channels on the lake

18


19

MILLIONS OF CUBIC YARDS

°
©

°
~

°
fo

°
uw
1

°
w

i}
N

°
v
1

LL

—— MICHIGAN ONTARIO

1930

T T T T v T T
1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965

Figure 8. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKES HURON AND ST. CLAIR, 1930-1972

T
1970

1
1972


Table 56. 1974 STATUS OF LAKE ERIE DIKED DISPOSAL PROGRAM (52)

On Site being Site Construction
Project program used now selected date
Rouge River x x x 1975
Detroit River x x x 1975
Toledo x x x 1974
Port Clinton x - - --
Monroe x x - --
Bolles x - x 1974
Ashtabula x - x 1976
Buffalo x x x 1974
Black Rock/Tonawanda x x x 1974
Cleveland x x x 1974-75
Conneaut x - x 1974
Erie x - x 1975
Fairport x - x 1975
Huron x - x 1974
Lorain x - x 1975
Sandusky x - x 1975
Dunkirk x - - 1975
Vermilion x - - 1975
Little River x - - 1975
Rocky River x - - 1975

137


Summary

The total anticipated volume of maintenance and permit dredging in Lake
Erie is estimated to be almost 6 million cubic yards per year (Table 26).
About 95 percent will occur on the American side and 5 percent on the
Canadian side. Since all confined disposal sites planned for the U.S.
projects will not be completed until 1977, volumes in the next few years
will remain relatively low. However, after disposal sites are prepared,
all dredging activities are expected to increase, with volumes being
relatively low.. By 1983, the average or normal volumes being removed
from Lake Erie should be similar to those which were removed during the
decade of the 1960's.

Table 26. ESTIMATES OF FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL DREDGING VOLUMES
IN LAKE ERIE
(cubic yards)

—
U.S. projects Canadian projects

Maintenance 4,800,000 175,000

Permit 900,000 100,000

Annual totals 5,700,000 275,000

Total for Lake Erie 5,975,000

Future new work 4,400,000 None expected

DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKES HURON

AND ST. CLAIR

The principal economic function of Lakes Huron and St. Clair is intra-~
lake navigation and recreation. Based on unpublished C.E. data, Saginaw
is the only U.S. harbor on Lake Huron which is unequivocally justified
and had over 4,000,000 short tons of commerce in 1972 (5), However,
other projects which were similarly justified in 1972 are the connecting

waterways of the St. Marys River (80.2 million short tons), the

54


IT

Z\ OTHER HARBORS
© COMMERCIAL

© 27 FOOT PROJECT DEPTH

TORONTO
PORT CREDITQ

HAMILTON

Figure 1.

CANADA KINGSTON
CATARAQUT()_ ©
BELLEVILLEQ

COBOURG

A LITTLE sopus
(SGREAT soous

O ROCHESTER
NEW YORK
BUFFALO (IN MILES)
ec
0 25 50 75

PRINCIPAL DREDGING PROJECTS IN LAKE ONTARIO


Table 12. FUTURE DREDGING IN CANADA 1973-1977, LAKE ONTARIO
(cubic yards) (48)

Volume
Maintenance projects
Bronte 15,000
Cobourg 50,000
Oshawa 140,000
Whitby 10,000
Toronto 220,000
Total maintenance volume 435,000
Private projects
Port Weller (by S.L.S.A.) 85,000
Bowmanville (by Ontario Hydro) 221,000
Total private volume 306,000
New work projects
Toronto 8,010,000
Total new work volume 8,010,000

28


Table 62. ESTIMATED VOLUME OF FUTURE POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL
IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR
(cubic yards)

Project wehedging ° poltwted reolume.
Alpena 9,768 90 8,791
Au Sable 20,828 0
Bay Port 1) (0)
Black River 0 0 0
Caseville 3,236 40 1,294
Ch. Lake St. Clair 177,677 100 177,677
Cheboygan 11,614 0 0
Clinton R. 7,602 85 6,462
Hammond Bay 0 (0) 0
Harbor Beach 32,083 100 32,083
Harrisville 3,453 100 3,453
Inland Route 22,611 50 11,306
Les Cheneaux 20,545 100 20,545
Lexington - Not sampled -
Mackinaw 0 0) 0
Point Lookout ) 100 0
Port Sanilac 6,973 100 6,973
Saginaw 334,871 85 284,640
St. Clair R. 108,513 0
St. Marys R. 243,824 0
Sebewaing 24,160 33 8,053
Totals 967,758 501,277 (52%)

148


least one million cubic yards of material during that time (Table 22).
If the probable fall in lake levels actually occurs in the near future,
if pollution criteria are relaxed in consideration of economics in the
Great Lakes region, and/or if confined disposal sites planned become
available, then dredging in the next decade may be slightly higher than
normal. Volumes would be somewhat greater than normal for a few years
to allow for the removal of material which has accumulated during the
past 3 years, a period of relatively lower than normal dredging activity.
A return to average dredging volumes would probably occur within 3 or 4
years. Thus, a median projection of U.S. maintenance dredging in Lake
Erie is approximately 4.8 million cubic yards of spoil annually.

Permi t~-

If permit dredging activity in the past decade can be considered typical
of Lake Erie, and if recent decreases in dredging are balanced by
greater volumes removed after disposal sites become available in the
next few years, then it is estimated that an average of 900,000 cubic
yards of material will be removed each year by permittees in the next
decade. This projection may be quite low or quite high because permit
dredging data, as discussed previously, are not complete. Many small-
volume permits may be approved in some years, and the total may be sig-
nificantly less than the projection. In other years, only a few permits
may be approved. However, because the jobs are large, volumes may be

considerably greater than the projection posed herein.

Future New Work by the Corps of
Engineers in Lake Erie~-

Nine projects are in the schedule for new work dredging in Lake Erie at

this time. Combined, the total amount of material to be removed is more
than 4 million cubic yards (Table 23). However, actual completion of

these projects may be considered to be only reasonably certain. In fact,
the possibility exists that few of the projects scheduled at present may

48


Since 1951 approximately 8.7 million cubic yards of spoil has been
removed from Lake Ontario by the C.E. (Table 2). About 85 percent of
the total was removed in maintenance dredging and 15 percent in new work
projects. Of all material removed in maintenance projects since 1951,
about nine-tenths came from Rochester and Oswego combined. In fact,
almost three-fourths came from Rochester alone. The only new work
dredging accomplished during the same period occurred at these two

harbors.

Maintenance Dredging--

In the past decade, maintenance dredging has accounted for approximately
65 percent of all dredging on the American side of Lake Ontario. In
terms of volume removed over a longer period, i.e., 1951 to 1972, the
C.E. dredged an average of approximately 340,000 cubic yards of spoil
from Lake Ontario projects annually. Absolute amounts ranged from a low
of 182,000 cubic yards in 1971 to a high of 567,000 cubic yards in 1967
(Table 3). Thus, volumes of spoil removed from the American side of
Lake Ontario have been fairly constant in recent years (Figure 3).

Since 1951, the C.E. has been responsible for removing more than 7 mil-
lion cubic yards of spoil from the lake in maintenance dredging projects,

New Work Dredging--

In the past decade, new work dredging has accounted for approximately

25 percent of all dredging activity on the American side of Lake Ontario.
Over the longer term, i.e., 1951 to 1972, only about 1.2 million cubic
yards of spoil were removed in new work dredging projects. However,
unlike maintenance dredging, new work volumes display very little regu-
larity from year to year. They range from a low of no new work in most
years since 1951 to a high of more than 400,000 cubic yards of spoil
removed in new work projects in 1963 (Table 4). No new work has
occurred on the American side of Lake Ontario since 1966. For the most

14


As determined in Section III, maintenance dredging in the next decade
should result in the removal of approximately the same total volume of
spoil that was removed during the 1960's. Most of the material to be
dredged in the future will be polluted spoil from the large commercial
harbors in Lake Erie (Figure 14). Thus, it is projected that unless
unlimited open-lake disposal is permitted to resume as a result of
severe economic stress or relaxation of pollution standards, confinement
of more than 90 percent of the material to be dredged in the next decade
will be necessary. This means that 40 to 45 million cubic yards of
dredged spoil will have to be confined during the next 10 years.

As of July, 1974, 19 projects were in the diked disposal program for
Lake Erie. They were at various degrees of completion, from planning to
actual construction. For most dredging projects in the lake, confined
disposal facilities are expected to be available by 1977 (Table 56).
Thus, confined disposal should occur by that time. Volumes of material
removed in the past few years have been slightly lower than the average
removed during the 1960's. However, they should increase in the latter
1970's and remain higher than average into the early 1980's.

Canadian Projects--

From 1961 to 1970, an average of approximately 351,000 cubic yards of
spoil were removed from Canadian projects in Lake Erie annually in main-
tenance dredging projects. But due to the loss of Port Burwell's
volumes with a change in status as previously discussed, maintenance
dredging in the next decade is expected to decline and average between
150,000 and 200,000 cubic yards annaully.

Projections made available by the D.P.W. indicate that about 542,000
cubic yards of spoil are expected to be dredged from public harbors on
Lake Erie by 1977. About 70 percent of this volume is to be removed
from Port Stanley, Rondeau, Leamington, Kingsville, and Colchester,
harbors which have been sampled by the M.O.E. (Table 54). These

135


Table 39,

(continued)

a

Public harbors

Economic status

Tons of commerce

Detroit District
Arcadia
Charlevoix
Frankfurt
Grand Haven
Grays Reef?
Holland
Leland
Ludington
Manistee
Manistique
Muskegon®TM
Pentwater
Petoskey
Portage Lake
Saugatuck
South Haven
St. James (Beaver Island)
St. Joseph
Traverse City
White Lake

Total

Private harbors

Petoskey Penn Dixie
Port Inland

Total
District total
Totals for lake

Recreational
Commercial/Recreational
Commercial

Commercial

Commercial (Passageway)
Commercial/Recreational
Recreational

Commercial
Commercial/Recreational
Recreational/Fishing
Commercial
Recreational/Fishing
Recreational
Recreational
Commercial/Recreational
Commercial

Recreational

Commercial
Commercial/Recreational
Commercial/Recreational

Commercial
Commercial

0
185,523
1,353,101
2,977,109
6,080,391
261,738
1,134
3,368,015
522,741
135
2,835,823
0
0
0
212
45,915
2,559
475,139
446,244
3,615

18,559,394

473,074
4,199,020

4,672,094
23,231,488
111,474,374

3yarbors with project depths of 27 feet.

81


constructed by 1975 and 1976. This construction schedule suggests that
if open-lake disposal of polluted spoil is not adopted as an acceptable
alternative, then maintenance dredging may be postponed in a number of

harbors until other solutions are implemented.

Unpolluted sediments derived from maintenance dredging are currently
being used for beach nourishment by the C.E. at Holland, Manistee, Michi-
gan City, and Muskegon Harbors. Maintenance dredging of harbors receiv-
ing sediment from littoral drift may be reduced by redesigning the break-
water and/or by artificial bypassing with sand pumps.

Summary

Of the 42 public harbors in Lake Michigan, 27 are classified as polluted
or partially polluted. Only 15 public harbors do not contain polluted
bottom sediments in the dredging areas, hence are unpolluted. An
average of 7 bottom samples were taken per harbor. Of the 7 mandatory
pollution parameters, volatile solids, COD and oil and grease most fre-
quently exceeded the acceptable limits. In a small number of harbors
there is a need for resampling as the pollution analyses are several
years old. Also, in several harbors the pollution analyses were not
complete, especially with regard to the testing of mercury, lead, and

zine concentrations.

For the next decade, the total average annual volume of polluted main-
tenance dredging in Lake Michigan has been estimated to be 848,200 cubic
yards. This figure is 57 percent of the total average annual mainte-
nance dredging quantity. However, in the Chicago District, 83 percent
of the maintenance dredgings are polluted. Private dredging quantities
were not included in this projection because this spoil is usually con-
fined on the permittee's land. New work dredgings were also excluded
because new work materials usually consist of relatively clean glacial
till and bedrock. Most of the polluted spoil is derived from industrial-

ized-urbanized harbors, especially inner harbor areas, and not from

163


Table 14, HISTORICAL DREDGING IN LAKE ERIE BY HARBOR/WATERWAY

AND C.E. DISTRICT, 1951-1972 (47, 50)
(cubic yards)

=e

Harbor/Waterway Maintenance New work Total

Buffalo District

Ashtabula 2,817,792 2,584,469 5,402,261
Black Rock Channel and 1,342,475 122,511 1,464,986
Tonawanda Harbor
Buffalo 9,561,490 6,640,455 16,201,945
Cleveland 19,065,831 2,709,006 21,774,837
Conneaut 1,560,227 1,437,458 2,997,685
Dunkirk 333,320 195,166 528,486
Erie 2,990,890 656,715 3,647,605
Fairport 6,534,780 11,666 6,546,446
Huron 3,236,320 0) 3,236,320
Lorain 3,791,160 1,327,271 5,118,431
Rocky River 7,083 0 7,083
Sandusky 7,090, 207 1,253,936 8,344,143
Totals 58,331,575 16,938,653 75,270,228

Detroit District

Bolles 87,371 157,898 245,269
Detroit River 5,396,005 12,273,460 17,669,465
Monroe 4,475,423 0 4,475,423
Port Clinton 57,934 0 57,934
Rouge River 4,493,577 0 4,493,577
Toledo 20,789,930 11,411,931 32,201,861
Totals 35,300,240 23,843,289 59,143,529
Grand totals 93,631,815 40,781,942 134,413,757

35


dredging under the NWPA is anticipated to remain at about 2,000 cubic

yards per year.

In summary, future maintenance dredging on the Ontario shore of Lake
Huron and Lake St. Clair will probably range between 250,000 to 318,000
cubic yards per year. Most D.P.W. personnel believe that all scheduled
dredging will occur. Thus, the latter figure is probably more accurate
based in part on the following: (1) dredging projects are dispersed,
the volumes are generally small, and few disposal problems occurred thus
far; (2) although some projects exceed the M.0.E. pollution parameters,
few harbors have been sampled and open-lake disposal is occurring;

(3) by 1977, 1.2 million cubic yards will have been dredged from the
economically important St. Clair Cut-off channel. Although the sediment
exceeds the M.O.E. pollution criteria, confined facilities are currently
being tested at Mitchell Bay in Lake St. Clair; it appears that the
D.P.W. and the M.O.T. (as in Toronto Harbor) are anticipating a confined
disposal program for polluted spoil in the future; (4) lake levels will
probably drop in the next few years and commercial projects particularly
at Collingwood, Midland, and St. Clair Cut-off will have to be main-

tained if economic stress is to be avoided.

Summary

Future maintenance and permit dredging in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair
is estimated to be approximately 1.5 million yards per year (Table 38).
Since most of the confined disposal sites will not completed until 1976
or 1977, it can be expected that maintenance and private dredging vol-
umes will remain low for the next 2 to 3 years. By the end of the
decade, confined disposal sites are to be available for polluted dredg-
ings and with anticipated lower lake levels, maintenance and permit

dredging activity will increase.

In addition to the above, the following trends are anticipated in Lake
Huron and Lake St. Clair:

76


Lake Superior (1)

Unpolluted Polluted
Big Bay Harbor Duluth
Black River Harbor Superior

Cornucopia Harbor
Grand Traverse
Keweenaw Waterway

Lac La Belle

Little Lake

Ontonogan

Port Wing

Presque Isle

Saxon

Whitefish Point Harbor

Classification based upon E.P.A. parameters (Table 17, Sec. 6.6)

Under the heading of "Magnitude of the Problem" (page 9.19, Sec. 9.6.1)
of the C.E. report, a total annual volume of dredging is predicted to be
about 11 million cubic yards (all lakes) per year, of which approximate-
ly 84 percent (9.24 million CY) is polluted. This volume was tabulated
from 39 harbors which were considered polluted at that time. Six of
these polluted harbors accounted for one half of the total volume of
polluted spoils.

It should be noted that the 1969 C.E. study worked primarily with main-
tenance and new work dredge volumes. The report also observes that

private dredging was not compiled, but could be estimated at about 10
percent of the total.

Pollution in Lake Superior Harbors

--U.S.

With the enactment of Public Law 91-611 and the establishment of E.P.A.
criteria of pollution, harbors in all lakes have been undergoing exten-
sive sampling and reclassification. The St. Paul District, for instance,

has contracted with independent laboratories for investigations of

167


Thus, the principal source of this sediment is the Root River. The con-
tours immediately east of the jetty system indicate the influence of the
littoral current causing a southerly migration of the channel. The
shift of the channel is clearly evident in cross section D. In this
area the sediment source is principally the littoral current flowing
from north to south. In such areas sediment accumulation is a constant

problem.

Table 75 summarizes the sedimentation in Racine Harbor. As noted by the
dredging frequencies, the area which must be constantly maintained is in
the vicinity of the jetties. Although low sedimentation in the inner
harbor due to stream transport results in considerable dredging quanti-
ties, small volumes must frequently be dredged from the approach
channels.

Table 75. SEDIMENTATION IN RACINE HARBOR, 1968-1973

Dredging
Source of Accumulation frequency,
Sediment area sediment in feet 1958-73
Upriver Industrial wastes 2 to 3 4
Slumping
Geologic erosion
River mouth River detritus 2 4
natural and
municipal
Harbor Littoral zone Variable, 8
entrance Some fluvial and lto4
municipal

Summary

In summary, average annual maintenance dredging volumes from river-mouth

harbors are not a simple function of sedimentation by streams therein.

203


low erosion rates, hence low sediment yields of streams therein. The
most significant source of sediment for the basin is the cultivated
agricultural land (Table 71).

Table 71. ESTIMATED SEDIMENT SOURCES FOR THE GREAT LAKES BASIN (31)

(Percent)
Percent of Total
Sources Sediments
Agricultural land sheet erosion 37
Geologic erosion 30
Range and forest 10
Construction sites, roadsides, and 10
development sites
Streamland, flood basin erosion 8
Gully erosion 5

The lack of sediment transport into the Great Lakes by tributary streams
is reflected in the morphology of many coastal areas of the basin.
Normally where great volumes of sediment are introduced to a coastal
zone, deltas, coastal plains, and extensive marshlands characterize the
coast. With few exceptions, considering the length of the Great Lakes’
shoreline, such features are uncommon. Thus, in part, due to the low
sedimentation rates of streams tributary to the Great Lakes, dredging

volumes are relatively low.

Rivers contribute sediments to river mouth harbors. Although stream
data are available for many rivers in the Great Lakes region, it is dif-
ficult to equate stream sediment loads to maintenance dredging volumes.
In Table 72, pertaining to river mouth harbors, estimated stream loads

derived from upland sources in tons per year and mean annual maintenance

193


Table 25, FUTURE MAINTENANCE DREDGING IN CANADA 1973-1977, LAKE ERIE
(cubic yards) (48)

Project Volume
Port Burwell 26,400
Rondeau 55,000
Amherstburg, 12,000
Cedar Beach 7,000
Colchester 9,200
Kingsville 39,000
Leamington 25,000
Pelee Island 15,000
Port Bruce 4,000
Port Dover 20,000
Port Maitland 10,000
Port Rowan 30,000
Port Stanley 250,000
Wheatley 40,000
Total 542,600

projects, it is postulated that an average of 100,000 cubic yards of

material will be removed by permit annually in the next decade.

New Work-—

In the decade of the 1960's only one new work job occurred in Canadian
waters of Lake Erie, and the volume of material removed was only 10
cubic yards. No capital dredging projects are projected or anticipated

by the D.P.W. or the M.O.T. for Lake Erie.

53


Table 38. FUTURE DREDGING ESTIMATES IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR
(cubic yards)

Michigan Ontario

Maintenance 925,000 318,000

Permit 235,000 2,000

Annual totals 1,160,000 320,000
Total for Lake Huron 1,480,000
annually

New work 5,395,600 1,210,000

Maintenance dredging will increase. The C.E. projects 1.2 million
cubic yards of annual maintenance dredging in the next decade. Our
projection (0.9 million cubic yards) is about 25 percent or 300,000
cubic yards lower than the C.E. projection.

Scheduled new work dredging will remain high (0.6 million cubic
yards annually). With the completion of new work projects at Sault
Ste. Marie in 1976, most new work will occur at recreational or
shallow draft harbors.

High maintenance dredging will remain at the St. Clair River, Lake
St. Clair, Sault Ste. Marie, and Saginaw. These projects will

account for approximately 88 percent of future maintenance dredging.

DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKE MICHIGAN

For the benefit of commercial navigation, recreation, and fishing in

Lake Michigan, 6 private harbors and 42 public harbors and waterways
must be dredged (Figure 9). Although private recreational harbors have
not been mapped in Figure 9, quantities dredged from these harbors have

been incorporated into the private dredging data. Private commercial

harbors are few in number and require relatively little dredging. Of

77


Lakehead Harbour Commission" (10). Dredging areas in the Thunder Bay
area are historically listed under Kam River, Mission Channel, Port
Arthur, Fort William and Lakehead. In this study, activity is consoli-
dated under the heading of Thunder Bay. During the record period, Kam
River has been dredged almost annually, Mission Channel has been main-
tained 8 out of the 13 years, Montreal River's last 2 years of mainte-
nance occurred in 1960 and 1961. Nipigon (Red Rock) has been dredged
for maintenance purposes 4 out of the last 13 years and Thunder Bay has

been worked 9 years.

During the sample decade, maintenance dredging has been performed from
one to 4 projects per year. The years 1961, 1965 and 1966 were peak
activity years, showing 4 projects annually. Thunder Bay was the only

harbor serviced in 1969.

Five Canadian harbors are maintained with some regularity. Historic
records indicate that 3,827,872 CY have been removed during maintenance
work, representing 98 percent of all historic Canadian dredging. Vir-
tually all of the significant volume of maintenance dredging has taken
place in the Thunder Bay area. Nipigon Harbor is dredged occasionally
to relieve minor shoaling problems.

On a 10-year average basis, only 86,000 CY are moved per year.

Canadian New Work--

Most Canadian harbors were first opened during the logging days and have
required very little new work or capital dredging since the initial
development, New work was performed in 2 of the 9 harbors during the
record period. These were Michipicoten and Mission Channel which were
dredged in 1971 and 1962-1963 respectively.

Canadian historic records indicate new work volumetric data for Michi-
picoten and Mission Channel. Their total of 59,551 CY represents 1.5
percent of historic dredging in the Canadian ports. This figure is

112


the above recommendations are to be based is, "as soon as practicable,
the disposal of polluted dredged spoil in open water should be carried
out in a manner consistent with the achievement of the water quality
objectives, and should be phased out." (25), As an interim measure,
polluted spoil is to be disposed in confined areas if they are avail-
able. The U.S. Army C.E. and the D.P.W. of Canada must continue efforts
to develop additional sites for confined disposal during this interim.
In accordance with Public Law 91-611, Section 123, the C.E. has begun to

implement this action (see Section IV of this report).

This agreement is unique in that it was designed for a specified drain-
age basin (the Great Lakes) on an international boundary and specifi-
cally concentrates on the identification of polluted spoil within that

basin.

DISCUSSION

In Canada, dredging of Great Lakes' projects is contracted to private
firms (public tenders) which, in some instances, accounts for high dredg-
ing costs. It has been estimated by the D.P.W. that contract dredging
is at least 42 percent more expensive than dredging performed by depart-
mentally owned plants (26). If the C.E. were to contract all their main-
tenance dredging projects to private firms, costs could realistically
triple. Such a policy may lead to a greater selectivity and priority of

dredging.

Recently, the M.O.T. has assumed more of the dredging responsibility.
Prior to the NWPA, private dredging was regulated by the D.P.W. However,
this authority and the administration of public harbors have been trans-
ferred to the M.O.T. Also, if a harbor commission in Canada plans any
new work dredging projects, a permit must be secured from the M.0.T, and
other concerned agencies including the Ministry of Natural Resources and

the M.O.E. A unique facet of the Canadian dredging regulations is a

186


SIT

Table 49. (continued)

a

Annual volume projections: 302, 400°
323,789°

If Leigh Harbor capital project is completed,
the total D.P.W. projection is: 587,400

Polluted:

130,752

3Includes Mission Channel.
Department of Public Works (D.P.W.).

“In this study.
Seuture work to be included with Port Arthur data.

°See Leigh Harbor
R river; OL open lake; LF landfill; OC overcast; LFD diked.


dredging have been provided by the C.E. in 1973. Utilizing these data,
it is projected that approximately 3.7 million cubic yards of material
will be removed from U.S. projects in Lake Ontario in the next decade
(Table 8). Based on other projections of Lake Ontario, this figure

represents a high estimate.

In the past few years, certain environmental policies (Section V) have
occurred which may cause dredging volumes in Lake Ontario to decline in
the next decade, particularly on the American side. It is generally
felt by most environmental interests, that polluted spoil should be con-
fined. Approximately 92 percent of the dredgings removed from U.S.
projects of Lake Ontario are classed as polluted by the E.P.A. Confined
disposal sites have been in use at major harbors in the Great Lakes for
some time, but many more sites are necessary if polluted spoil is to he
confined. Such sites are in various stages of development, from planning
to actual construction. If a sufficient number of confined disposal

Table 8. C.E. PROJECTIONS AND ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES,

LAKE ONTARIO (3, 47)
(cubic yards)

Average annual dredging, Projection,

Project 1960-1968 1969

Great Sodus 35,686 8,000°
Little Sodus 18,724 8,000°
Oswego 64,000 64,000
Rochester 264,000 288,000
Wilson 1,423 1,600
Olcott 3,174 1, 6007
Total 371,000

a
Reported as average annual dredging by the C.E. in 1970; used as
projections for these smaller harbors.

22


Figure 16. PROJECTED ANNUAL POLLUTED AND

— UNPOLLUTED MAINTENANCE DREDGING
(sr, MARYS RIVER VOLUMES IN LAKES HURON AND
ST. CLAIR

LES. CHENEAUX

QWACKINAW

SO
CHEBOYGAN

HAMMOND BAY

@) INLAND ROUTE

ALPENA

HARRISVILLE

AU SABLE

DREDGING VOLUME
(IN 1,000°S Cy }

O 15

O 6-15
O 16-50

C) 51-150

151-350

POINT LOOKOUT ¢

MICHIGAN

PERCENT POLLUTED

CLINTON RIVER CLAIR CUT-OFF (IN HILES)

LAKE ST, CLAIR 10 0 50

147


Table 67 is presented as a summary of this study and for comparison with

the predictions of the C.E.

This study indicates a total annual average volume of 1,964,759 CY of
spoil will be removed from United States harbors. Estimates of the per-
cent of this volume which will be polluted and assigned to confined
disposal are presented by harbor in the summary. Using data assembled,
it appears that 236,883 CY or about 12 percent of the total spoil volume
will require confinement (column 5). On March 15, 1973, the C.E. esti-
mate of polluted spoil was reported as 206,100 CY, or approximately 1.5
percent less than this study found (column 4). The C.E. volume of
206,100 CY of polluted spoil is 10.5 percent of the total volume of
sediment to be dredged (Table 67, column 4).

Using the estimates of the percent of sediment polluted in each harbor
as determined in this study (column 7) and applying these values to the
C.E. total annual volume projections, it is found that 159,430 CY may

require confinement (column 3).

The discrepancy in polluted volumes, cited above, is apparently caused
by differences in the appraisal of the size of areas of pollution within
each harbor as identified by the C.E. and by this study, rather than in
the total volume of sediment to be removed. It is recognized that under
the present E.P.A. pollution policy, any harbor with one or more para-
meters showing an excess of contaminant, must be considered polluted.
Many such determinations have been made, which require the C.E. to clas-
sify entire harbors polluted. Analyses assembled since 1969, extensive
sampling pzzjects and more detailed sediment mapping of harbors have
made it possible to more accurately delineate polluted segments of
harbors. This study has attempted to apply the current state of knowl-
edge of polluted harbor areas, which was not available at the time of
the last report of the C.E. As the sampling and testing program conti-
nues, it is anticipated that more and more realistic pollution volumes
can be derived. These are expected to be considerably less than the

initial estimates of polluted spoil volumes, made in 1970 and 1971.

170


No.

47

48

49

50
51
52

53

54

55

56
57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

Historical Annual Maintenance and New Work Dredging in
Lake Superior, 1937-1972 . 2... 2 we wee ee eee

Dredging Quantities in Lake Superior Projects ......

Canadian Dredging in Lake Superior: Historic Totals by
Harbor, Ten-Year Totals, and Average Volume Predictions.

Future Average Annual Dredging Volumes in the Great Lakes.
Pollution Criteria of Harbor/Waterway Sediments .....
Sampling of Projects on Lake Ontario... .. +. s. ees

Volume of Polluted Dredged Spoil C.E. Projects in Lake
Ontario, 1961-1970... 2. 2 2 ew ee ee ee ee ee

Sampling of Projects on Lake Erie ........4.22.2-.

Volume of Polluted Dredged Spoil: C.E. Projects in Lake
Erie, 1961-1970 2... 1 ee eee ee ee ee we ee

1974 Status of Lake Erie Diked Disposal Program .....
Sampling of Projects on Lake Huron/st, Clair». . +++ +

C.E. Projected Maintenance Dredging and Polluted Volumes,
Lake Huron/St. Clair... 6 ee eee ee wwe we ene

Volume of Polluted Dredged Spoil: C.E. Projects in Lake
Huron/St. Clair, 1961-1970... 1. ee ee eee eee

Disposal of Spoil in Lake Huron/St. Clair Projects, 1972
and 1973 2 6 ww we ee ee eee eh ee ee ee

Estimated Polluted Dredged Spoil in Major C.E. Projects in
Lake Huron/St. Clair... 6 ee eee eee eee eee

Estimated Volume of Future Polluted Dredged Spoil in Lake
Huron/St. Clair 2. 6 ee ee et te ee eee eee

Future Dredging by D.P.W. in Lake Huron/St. Clair and
Projected Volume of Polluted Spoil, 1973-1977 .....

Pollution of Public Harbors in Lake Michigan by Parameter
by C.E. District 2... ee ee ee ee ee ee eee

ix

Page

107

113

114
118
121

125

127

133

134
137

142

143

144

145

146

148

150

153


Table 73. COMPARISON OF LITTORAL DRIFT AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING (50)
(cubic yards)

Annual quantity Average annual
of littoral maintenance dredging

Public harbor drift volume (mean 1963-1972)
1. Grand Haven 63, 000-70, 000 127,553

2. Frankfurt 60,000 23,114

3. Grand Marais, MI 60,000 —_

4. Hammond Bay 7,500 -

5. Harbor Beach 60,000 22,825

Lake Huron

6. Harrisville 10,000 600

7. Holland 100,000 80,000

8. Leland 20,000-40,000 4,448

9. Ludington 81,500 26,549
10. Manistee 75,000 32,390
11. Muskegon 100,000 45,689
12. Pentwater 90,000 43,085
13. Port Sanilac 40,000-50, 000 7,670
14. South Haven 45,000-50,000 42,438
15. St. Joseph 110,000 57,409
16. White Lake 48,000 23,482
Totals approximately 1,072,500 547,252

197


4. Approximately 3.3 million cubic yards of polluted spoil dredged from
U.S. projects in Lake Ontario are anticipated during the next decade.

5. Major maintenance dredging projects, i.e., Rochester, Toronto,
Hamilton, Oswego and Oshawa, have high volumes of polluted spoil.

6. Two Lake Ontario projects, Rochester and Oswego, are in the C.E.
diked disposal program; confined facilities are expected to be avail-
able at both by 1977.

7. Approximately 435,000 cubic yards of material are scheduled to be
removed from Canadian projects on Lake Ontario by 1977. An estimated
97 percent of this material will be polluted.

8. Because many Canadian harbors have not been sampled, future polluted

spoil volumes cannot be accurately determined.

QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL
IN LAKE ERIE

According to present operational guidelines drafted by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency and the Ontario Miaistry of Environment,
sediment dredged from Lake Erie is highly polluted. Every harbor or
waterway sampled by either agency is at least partially polluted, i.e.,
some samples in a harbor exceed established pollution criteria. In some
cases, such as Bolles, Huron, Fairport, and Ashtabula, samples from
inner portions of harbors are classed as polluted whereas those taken
from outer portions (usually outside breakwaters) are not. Of 21 U.S.
harbors sampled, 15 are classified as entirely polluted and 6 as par-
tially polluted. In Canada, of the 5 harbors sampled, all exceed the
maximum allowable concentration of some pollutant in at least a few
samples (Figure 13). Thus, all harbors and waterways sampled in Lake
Erie exceed pollution criteria established for both United States and

Canadian projects.

As of late 1973, a total of 165 samples have been taken from U.S.

projects in Lake Erie. The average number of samples analyzed per

130


harbors yielded some samples which exceeded at least some pollution para-~
meters and, for the purpose of this report, are considered polluted.
Assuming that the Canadian projects which have not been sampled are not
polluted, then approximately 380,000 cubic yards of polluted spoil will
be dredged by 1977. This represents about 70 percent of the total vol-
ume of material scheduled for dredging in Canadian waters of the lake in

the near future.

Only 5 of the 14 harbors scheduled for maintenance dredging in the
future have been sampled to date by the M.O.E. Thus, the percentage of
polluted spoil to be removed in the future, as projected above, is only
an estimate. More accuracy in estimating future polluted volumes on the
Canadian side of Lake Erie will only be possible when all projects are

sampled and more test results completed.

Summary

1. Of the 21 sampled American harbors on Lake Erie, 15 are entirely
polluted and 6 are partially polluted. All 5 Canadian harbors sampled

exceeded the maximum allowable concentration of at least one pollutant.

2. Most commonly occurring pollutants in U.S. harbors are phosphorus,
oil and grease, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and volatile solids. Phosphorus,
Kjeldahl nitrogen, zinc, and COD are the most commonly surpassed para-
meters in Canadian projects.

3. Approximately 95 percent of the spoil dredged from American projects
in Lake Erie during the 1960's was polluted.

4. Forty to 45 million cubic yards of polluted dredged spoil from

American projects are anticipated during the next decade.

5. Major maintenance dredging projects, i.e., Toledo, Cleveland,
Sandusky, Buffalo, and the Detroit River, have high volumes of polluted
spoil.

6. A few large dredging projects, such as Fairport, Ashtabula, Lorain,

138


Table 59. VOLUME OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL: C.E. PROJECTS
IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR, 1961-1970
(cubic yards)

Average
annual

Year maintenance Percent Polluted
Project sampled dredging polluted volume
Alpena 1972 9,768 90 8,791
Au Sable 1967 20,775 i) Q
Bay Port 1972 ra) i) 0
Caseville 1972 ie) 30 0
Black River Not sampled 0 0 0)
Channels of 1970 106,828 100 106,828

Lake St. Clair

Cheboygan 1967 9,123 9 0
Clinton River 1970 15,350 85 13,050
Hammond Bay 1970 0 0 0
Harbor Beach 1972 22,825 100 22,825
Harrisville 1970 600 100 600
Inland Route 1970 90 50 45
Les Cheneaux 1970 10,273 100 10,273
Lexington Not sampled 0 0 Qo
Mackinaw 1970 0 0 0
Point Lookout Not sampled 0) (0) 0)
Port Sanilac 1972 7,670 100 7,670
Saginaw 1972 294,735 85 250,524
St. Clair River 1970 91,915 Q 0
St. Marys River 1972 121,912 0 0
Sebewaing 1972 16,912 33 5,580
Totals 728,776 426,186 (58%)

Port Austin, sampled in 1972, is 100 percent polluted. However, it has
not been dredged in two decades, and no confined disposal site is
planned.

144


Le

(UNITED STATES
(CANADA _
-
-
— i a _
| _ =
7 _ 4h oo
ST 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 (59 60 Gl 62 '63 65 66 67 68 69 ‘70 71 ‘72
YEAR

Figure 6.

MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ERIE, 1951-1972

- 6

SdYWK DIAN dO SNOITIIW


material dredged from the Kam River and its turning basin is fine wood
pulp from local paper plants. At Calumet Harbor perhaps as much as 90
percent of the spoil is due to industrial sedimentation. Dredging rates
in the lower Rouge River are far greater than estimated erosion and
delivery rates would indicate (32). A more detailed study at Buffalo
illustrated that 13 percent of the 1967 dredging activity represented
solids such as oil and grease (33). A small decrease in permit dredging,
as in Calumet and Indiana Harbors, may result from a reduction of indus-
trial sedimentation by large private industries such as Youngstown Sheet

and Tube and Inland Steel Company.

In addition, a considerable amount of dredging in many harbor projects
is the result of slumping or sloughing which occurs naturally or due to
propeller wash (wheeling) of a vessel. This is particularly evident at
bends or meanders of rivers. Another locally significant source of sedi-
ments in dredged channels is ice shoving or rafting associated with
storms or onshore winds particularly on the south shore of Lake Superior.
Drifting of sand by wind waves on exposed Lake Michigan beaches into
jetty systems is, in part, responsible for the occurrence of sand bars
inside the jetty systems. Also, as a vessel increases speed, the stern
settles deeper in the water (squatting) which increases turbulence and
sediment transport in the navigation channels. This acceleration of
sedimentation due to vessel traffic is noteworthy in waterways such as
Lake St. Clair. Thus, the dredging frequency of a given harbor may be
controlled by natural and man-induced sedimentation. The sources of
sediments are numerous, and are not solely limited to natural river and

marine deposition.

Areas of Sedimentation Within a Harbor

Although each harbor is unique and the areas of sediment deposition vary,

some generalizations may be made. Most large, commercial harbors on the

199


27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

Anon., Study of Harbor Administration in Canada, St. Lawrence
Seaway Authority, Ottawa (1968).

Toronto Harbor Commissioners, Beach Building Characteristics of
Hydraulically Dredged Material from Outer Harbour Main Channels
Unpublished Report of the Engineering Department, 24 pp. (1973).

See for example, Water Quality Impacts of Sediment Dredging in
Large Lakes, in: Dredged Material Research, Misc. Paper D-73-2,
p. 1 (1973).

Geraghty, J. J., Miller, D. W., and others, Water Atlas of the
United States, Water Information Center, Port Washington, plate 56
(1973).

Combined Report by Canada and the United States, Agricultural Pollu-
tion of the Great Lakes Basin, G.P.0., Washington, D.C., (1971).

Great Lakes Basin Commission, "Erosion and Sedimentation,” Great
Lakes Basin Framework Study, Appendix 18, Ann Arbor, pp. 18-49 to 18-148
(1971).

Acres Consulting Services Ltd., Evaluation of Procedures for
Removing and Decontaminating Bottom 3ediments in the Lower Great
Lakes, Canada Centre for Inland Waters, Burlington, p. 57 (1972).

Russell, R. J., River and Delta Morphology, Louisiana State Univer-
sity, Baton Rouge, p. 46-47 (1967).

Zenkovich, V. P., Processes of Coastal Development, John Wiley,
New York, pp. 575-579 (1967).

U.S. Department of Commerce (N.0.A.A.), Hydrograph of Monthly Mean
Lake Levels of the Great Lakes, Lake Survey Center, Detroit (1973).

Graves, E., Statement of the International Great Lakes Levels
Board, U.S. Army C.E., Chicago (1973).

Lui, P. C., "Statistics of Great Lakes Levels," Proceedings, 13th
Conference, Great Lakes Research, pp. 360-368 (1970).

Sanderson, M., "A Climatic Water Balance of the Lake Erie Basin,
1958-1963," Publications in Climatology, Vol. 19, No. 1 (1966).

Aase, J. H., Transportation of Iron Ore, Limestone, and Bituminous
Coal on the Great Lakes Waterway System: with Projections to 1995,
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, p. 1 (1970).

217


No.

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

Page
Maintenance Dredging Frequencies of C.E. Projects in
Lake Huron/St. Clair, 1961-1973 ..... 2... ew eae 65
C.E. Projected Future Maintenance Dredging in Lake Huron/
St. Clair sw ee ee ee 67
Past, Present, and Future Maintenance Dredging of Major
Projects, Lake Huron/St. Clair» +». + +++ eee eee 68
Annual Maintenance Dredging of Major C.E. Projects, Lake
Huron/St. Clair 2 6 6 we ee ee ee 69
Future Estimated Maintenance Dredging by Harbor of C.E. n
Projects... ee eee ee ee ee
73

Future New Work in Lake Huron/St. Clair, 1973~1983 . ..-

dian Projects in Lake Huron/St.

Future Dredging in Cana‘ 5

Clair, 1973-1977 . - +--+ sete errs

Future Dredging Estimates in Lake Huron/St. Clair .... 77

Economic Status and 1972 Commerce of Harbors by C.E.
District, Lake Michigan . . 6 +e ee ee ee ee ee 80

Private Dredging Volumes in Lake Michigan by C.E. District,
1957-1973 ww wwe ee eh we ee hw 82

Annual Maintenance and New Work Dredging Volumes in Public
Harbors of Lake Michigan by C.E. District, 1918-1973 . . 84

Total Maintenance and New Work Dredging Volumes by Harbor
in Lake Michigan by C.E. District, 1918-1973 ...... 89

Average Annual Private, Maintenance, and New Work Dredging
in Lake Michigan by C.E. District, 1961-1970 ...... 91

Average Annual Private, Maintenance, and New Work Dredging
in Lake Michigan by Harbor, 1961-1970 ......... 92

Future Average Annual Private and Maintenance Dredging
Volumes in Lake Michigan by C.E. District ......- 95

Future New Work Dredging Projects in Public Harbors of
Lake Michigan by C.E. District... .......2048 100

viii


LQ OTHER HARBORS
© COMMERCIAL
© 27 FOOT PROJECT DEPTH

MICHIGAN

ROUGE RIVER eure
, WHEATLEY “7 NEW
Qn L - ine YORK
MONROE ara wea
BOLLES ov _7 PENNSYLVANIA
__e NC FF PELE ISLAND
oot, --7
o

Z\ROCKY RIVER (IN MILES)

“Org
ly [)- 2.2 aaen —— an —— om J
“Roy Peery) 10 0 50

Figure 4, PRINCIPAL DREDGING PROJECTS IN LAKE ERIE


grouping may be more representative of this 10-year sample. Elimination
of the 1968 high volume year (1.16 million CY) and the “no activity"
years of 1962, 1963 and 1966, an average of the remaining 6 years
volumes indicates 191,300 CY annually. It is recognized that no individ-
ual year will probably ever meet this volume, but that over a 10-year
period variations in demand and activity may well call for this magni-

tude of spoil removal.

The validity of this projection may be enhanced during the next 10 years
by demands upon higher rates of coal consumption in the current energy
crisis. It seems plausible that port cities, which only a few years ago
switched from coal to natural gas and fuel oil for electric power genera-
tion and general heating, may have to revert to coal. Harbor facilities,
which were downgraded and allowed to shoal to recreational boating
depths and fishing boat drafts, etc. may have to be reopened to project
depths for the larger coal freighters. Docking facilities, including
“alongside” draft depth, are usually the responsibility of the dock owner
and/or the other private interests who use it. Examples of downgraded
harbors in Lake Superior include Ashland, Bayfield, Big Bay, Black River,
Cornucopia, Eagle Harbor, Grand Traverse, Knife River, Lac La Belle, and
Saxon. Most of these harbors are now open to boats of 1 to 6 foot
drafts.

Canadian Maintenance Dredging History

Canadian harbors represent a relatively small percent of the dredging
activity in Lake Superior. Within the 13-year period of record examined,
5 of the 9 Canadian harbors have been serviced by maintenance dredging.
These are, Kam River, Mission Channel, Montreal River, Nipigon, and Port
Arthur (Thunder Bay). It should be noted that, "In 1970, the cities of
Fort William and Port Arthur were amalgamated into one new city called
the city of Thunder Bay. The harbor of the city of Thunder Bay is
officially known as the Lakehead Harbour, and is administered by the

lil


sedimentation, industrial-municipal discharges, and interruption of
littoral drift by public harbor structures may significantly decrease

the maintenance dredging requirements of many harbors.

LAKE LEVELS AND DREDGING VOLUMES

The historical records of annual dredging in each of the Great Lakes
indicate that the total quantity of dredged spoil varies considerably
from year to year. In an attempt to explain part of this variation, the
effect of lake levels on the historical dredging volumes was investi-
gated. It is hypothesized that an inverse relationship exists between
mean annual lake level and the total quantity of maintenance and private
spoil dredged annually in each lake. New work or capital dredging quan-
tities were excluded from the analysis. Maintenance dredging depths in
C.E. and D.P.W. projects are measured from the low water datum for each
lake referred to mean water level at Father Point, Quebec (Table 76). In
addition, the C.E. allows 1 to 2 feet of subgrade, whereas in Canada one

foot of overage is common.

Table 76, DATUMS FOR THE GREAT LAKES (7)

(feet)
Lake Elevation (low water datum)
Ontario 242.8
Erie 568.6
Huron-Michigan 576.8
Superior 600.0

To determine whether or not annual maintenance and private dredging quan~

tities are associated with varying lake levels, a correlation analysis,

205


DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKE ONTARIO

Lake Ontario is unique in its dredging requirements in that more material
is removed from Canadian projects than from American projects. From
1961 to 1970, of the total amount of spoil dredged from Lake Ontario, 58
percent came from Canadian projects and 42 percent from projects com-
pleted by the C.E. The dredging demand for Canadian projects is greater;
7 projects required removal of a total of more than 100,000 cubic yards
of spoil from 1961 to 1970. Only 4 American projects were dredged of at
least 100,000 cubic yards of material in that period. The highest vol-
umes on the Canadian side are generated primarily by the large commer-
cial projects of Toronto and Hamilton, each with an annual average of

more than 100,000 cubic yards of spoil removed. The only U.S. project

In addition to maintain-
ing these and other smaller commercial harbors, a number of recreational/

with a comparable volume of spoil is Rochester.

harbor refuge facilities on Lake Ontario are dredged. Nine projects on
the Canadian side and 6 American harbors require dredging, at least

periodically (Figure 1).

Average annual commerce at 3 American harbors on Lake Ontario is substan-
tial enough so that the cost of their maintenance is unequivocally justi-
fied by the C.E. (2) (Figure 1). However, no American harbor on the lake
is dredged to maintain the 27-foot St. Lawrence Seaway channel depth.
Three Canadian harbors are dredged to Seaway depth. Other harbors with
less commercial traffic, i.e., those with lower benefit/cost ratios,
have frequently been dredged in the past. However, reductions in money
allocations or port status changes could cause cessation of dredging
operations at more marginal harbors such as Wilson, Olcott, or Little

Sodus.
In terms of dredging volume, the most important American maintenance
dredging projects are at Rochester and Oswego, which require removal of

an average of 267,000 and 54,000 cubic yards of spoil every year respec~
tively (Figure 2). The Canadian volume leaders are Toronto, Hamilton,

10


SECTION II

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on data obtained and analyzed in this report, the following recom-

mendations are presented:

1. Because of the relatively high cost of confined disposal, open-lake
disposal of unpolluted dredged spoil should not be discontinued.

2. As in the Detroit District, other C.E. districts should distinguish,
in their dredging records, between polluted and unpolluted maintenance
dredging quantities.

3. Private dredging records, i.e., Section 10 and NWPA permit files,
could be improved through standardization and higher priority.

4. The Department of Public Works of Canada (D.P.W.) should clearly dis-
tinguish, in their records, between maintenance and capital dredging.

5. As a first step in sediment abatement, the primary sources of sedi-
ment accumulation in each dredging project should be identified.

6. To reduce the future volume of polluted maintenance dredging, abate-

ment of industrial and sewage inputs should be expanded.

7. Because pollution elimination systems have begun to reduce man-made
sedimentation in some harbors, i.e., Calumet Harbor and River, the 10-

year confined disposal program of the C.E. warrants continued support.

8. To improve the sampling of maintenance dredging projects, the D.P.W.
and the C.E. should provide harbor shoaling maps to the M.O.E. and to


Page

Projected Annual Polluted and Unpolluted Maintenance
Dredging Volumes in Lake Erie... . 1. ee ee ee eee 136
Pollution Status of Harbors in Lakes Huron and St. Clair . 140

Projected Annual Polluted and Unpolluted Maintenance
Dredging Volumes in Lakes Huron and St. Clair. ..... 147

Polluted Quantity of Future Average Annual Maintenance
Dredgings and Location of Open-lake Disposal Sites in
Lake Michigan . 6 1 6 ee ew ew ee we ee ee eee 156

Projected Annual Dredging Volumes in Lake Superior and
Percent Polluted (Harbors Without Volumetric Circles
Indicate No Projected Dredging in the Next Decade). ... 169

Areas of Sedimentation in Racine Harbor, Wisconsin. .... 201

Selected Cross Sections of the Root River at Racine,
Wisconsin 2. 6 ee ee ee ee 202


Sampling by the E.P.A. and the M.O.E. is continually occurring, usually
prior to maintenance dredging. Several high volume and economically
significant projects such as Sandusky, Toledo, Duluth, Milwaukee, and
Lake St. Clair have been sampled since the completion of this report.
As the analyses were not available before February, 1973, the data pre-
sented in this section are through mid-1973,

QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL

IN LAKE ONTARIO

Projects in Lake Ontario exhibit a high correlation between industrial/
commercial port activities and sediment pollution. Of the 5 U.S.
harbors which were sampled by the E.P.A., only Rochester and Oswego are
classed as entirely polluted. These are the major ports of commercial
activity on the lake. One other American harbor, Great Sodus, is
classed as partially polluted. Wilson and Little Sodus, both small and
with no commercial traffic, are classed as unpolluted. Of the 6
Canadian harbors on Lake Ontario which were sampled by the M.0.E., all
exceed the maximum allowable concentration of some pollutant in at least
a few samples (Figure 11). For the purposes of this report, these
harbors are classed as polluted. Thus, of 11 sampled harbors in Lake
Ontario, American and Canadian combined, 9 are at least partially
polluted.

A total of 27 sediment samples have been taken from American dredging
projects in Lake Ontario. The average number of samples analyzed per
harbor is 5 (Table 52). The range in number of samples is from 4 at
harbors such as Wilson and Little Sodus to 5 at Rochester and Great Sodus
and 9 at Oswego. All samples were taken from 1968 to 1971. The most
commonly occurring pollutants in American dredging projects are phos-
phorus, oil and grease, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and volatile solids. All of

these, particularly phosphorus, were excessive in most samples tested.

123


dredged from private and public harbors of Lake Michigan. During the
past decade (1961-1970), an annual average of 3,042,000 cubic yards were
removed from these harbors. Private dredging volumes accounted for 18
percent of this average total, while maintenance and new work dredging
amounted to 35 and 47 percent, respectively. The largest quantities of
spoil are derived from Calumet, Chicago Harbor and River, Grand Haven,
Green Bay, and Indiana Harbors. Excluding Grand Haven, these public com-
mercial harbors with high maintenance dredging requirements are charac-
terized by 27-foot seaway channels and are part of industrial-urban

complexes.

For the next decade, the future average annual dredging volume in Lake
Michigan has been estimated to be 2,963,200 cubic yards. Private dredg-
ing volumes will probably continue to be quite high, i.e., about 735,000
cubic yards, which is 25 percent of the total annual quantity. The pro-
jected volume of average annual maintenance dredging is 1.5 million
cubic yards, a quantity similar to that of the 1961-1970 period. Should
the water level of Lake Michigan drop suddenly during the next decade,
the annual maintenance dredging volume may slightly exceed this projec-
tion. Conversely, if confined disposal sites are not available for
those public harbors which are considered polluted, maintenance dredging
may have to be postponed in some harbors until acceptable methods of dis-
posal are found. Future new work dredging volumes are expected to
average 737,100 cubic yards annually, a relatively low figure when com-
pared to the 1961-1970 period or to the long-term average (1935-1973).
Six of the 9 new work projects scheduled by the C.E. concern the con-
struction of new recreational harbors while only 3 projects involve deep-

ening of existing commercial harbors.

DREDGING QUANTITIES IN LAKE SUPERIOR

Dredging activity in Lake Superior dates from the early 1900's. In the

early days harbor improvement projects were largely expediency projects,

101


Table 28. (continued)

Fiscal year Maintenance New work Private
1934 61,620 8,098,716

1933 711,160 9,281,574

1932 201,146 9,431,151

1931 1,242,867 1,054,414

1930 413,913 1,466,660

Totals 19,580,448 80,330,602 3,023,434
Ontario

1972 109,816 73,550 5,200
1971 23,303 50,500 1,000
1970 0 30,000 7,000
1969 43,911 700 (0)
1968 37,459 700 0
1967 210,797 40,453 500
1966 192,907 63,885 500
1965 771,681 26,894 10,000
1964 765,132 52,313

1963 439,548 572

1962 182,079 2,024

1961 65,667 0

1960 97,168 )

1959 215,870 142

1958 88,535

1957 82,907

1956 24,752

1955 130,233

1954 78,213

1953 159,487

1952 131,276

1951 305,855

Totals 4,156,596 341,733 24,200

60


86T

Table 74.

TOTAL AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN SELECTED PROJECTS (24, 55)

(tons)
Total Suspended Annual maintenance Conversion
Project solids solids dredging (CY) 1 CY=0.675 tons

Detroit River 30,600,000 1,600,000 800,000 540,000
Rouge River 3,560 433 300,000 202,500
Monroe 95,700 4,700 200,000 135,000
Toledo 3,400,000 2,000,000 1,250,000 135,000
Port Clinton 114,400 27,400 10,000 6,750
Sandusky 600,000 150,000 600,000 405,000
Lorain 81,000 15,000 300,000 202,500
Cleveland 509,000 89,000 1,220,000 823,000
Fairport -- -- 400,000 270,000
Buffalo/Tonawanda -- -- 600,000 405,000
Buffalo River 434,000 74,000 as above -—

Vermilion 90,000 17,000 500 338
Rochester 1,050,000 318,000 360,000 243,000
Oswego 3,540,000 334,000 80,000 54,000



CO unten states
CANADA

ST

nodoll OOM

M51 b52 53 '54 bss ‘56 ! 's9 ‘60 ‘61 'e2 ‘63

YEAR

Figure 3. MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1951-1972

kK 1,500
1,250
+ 1,020
L 750
L 500

Fr 250

SGYWA OIGND JO SANWSNOHL


Table 55. VOLUME OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL: C.E. PROJECTS
IN LAKE ERIE, 1961-1970
(cubic yards)

Year Ave. annual Volume of

E.P.A. Pollution maintenance Percent polluted
Project sampled class dredging polluted spoil
Detroit District
Bolles 1972 P/U 8,737 75 6,553
Detroit River 1970 P 324,507 100 324,507
Monroe 1969 P 184,629 100 184,629
Port Clinton 1968 P 5,961 100 5,961
Rouge River 1967 P 202,121 100 202,121
Toledo 1973 P 1,083,791 100 1,083,791
District totals 1,809,746 1,807,562
Buffalo District?
Ashtabula 1968 P/U 125,769 75 94,327
Black Rk. Ch./ 1967 P 83,498 100 83,498

Tonawanda Hbr.

Buffalo 1967 P 448 ,824 100 448 824
Cleveland 1972 P 875,629 100 875,629
Conneaut 1968 P 68,704 100 68,704
Dunkirk 1968 P 12,109 100 12,109
Erie 1968 P 162,033 100 162,033
Fairport 1972 P/U 302,687 80 242,150
Huron 1973 P/U 151,935 75 151,935
Lorain 1968 P/U 120,199 80 96,159
Rocky River 1970 P 708 100 708
Sandusky 1973 P 439,704 100 439,704
District totals 2,791,799 2,637,796
Totals for Lake Erie 4,601,545 4,445,358

4vermilion, Barcelona, and Little River are rarely dredged.

134


SECTION I

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions have been

reached:

1. Future private, maintenance, and new work dredging quantities in the
Great Lakes are projected to average 15.56 million cubic yards (CY)
annually. Of this total, 78 percent will be removed from American
harbors and connecting channels.

2. Of the future annual volume to be removed from United States‘ public
dredging projects, 64 percent involves maintenance dredging, 19 percent
consists of new work, and 17 percent involves private dredging. In
Canada, these percentages are 31, 54, and 15, respectively.

3. Based on data of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.),
80 of the 117 American harbors and connecting channels sampled are pol-
luted or partially polluted. According to the Ministry of Environment
of Ontario (M.0.E.), 21 of the 31 Canadian navigation projects sampled
contained polluted bottom sediments. Total polluted volumes for both
countries are 6.45 and 1.01 million CY, respectively.

4, In the U.S. during the next decade, private dredging of non-federal
projects is anticipated to average 2.01 million CY. Private spoil,
routinely considered polluted by the E.P.A., is usually confined on the
permitee's own land. In the future, private interests may dispose some
of their spoil in federal disposal sites.


harbor is 8 (Table 54). The range in number of samples is from 3 at
small harbors such as Rocky River, Barcelona, and Dunkirk to 17 at
Buffalo and 26 from the Rouge River. All sampling was done prior to
1972. Some sampling has occurred since then, but testing has not been
completed, The most commonly occurring pollutants in U.S. projects are
phosphorus, oil and grease, Kjeldahl nitrogen, and volatile solids. All

of these were excessive in almost every sample tested.

A total of 48 samples have been analyzed for Canadian harbors on Lake
Erie. Canadian samples average about 10 per harbor. The range is from
3 at Colchester and Rondeau to 21 at Port Stanley. Phosphorus, Kjeldahl
nitrogen, zinc, and COD are the most commonly surpassed pollution para-
meters in the Canadian projects. Apparently, testing for zinc has been
considered more important by the M.O.E. than by the E.P.A. Of the 5
Canadian harbors sampled, 3 were tested for zinc. Of the 21 American
harbors and waterways sampled, zinc tests were made at Cleveland and
Fairport. In both projects zinc surpassed the E.P.A. criteria.

Future Quantity of Polluted Spoil

United States Projects--

Basically polluted dredged spoil is a problem associated with mainte-
nance work. Most spoil dredged by permit is presently being confined
and most new work dredging involves unpolluted material. Therefore, the
projection of future polluted spoil in this report involves maintenance
dredging over the next decade. From 1961 to 1970, an average of approxi-
mately 4,6 million cubic yards of spoil were removed from the American
waters of Lake Erie every year in maintenance dredging projects. Of

this volume, approximately 4.4 million cubic yards, about 95 percent of
the total involved polluted material (Table 55). The volume of polluted
spoil was calculated on the basis of the E.P.A. latest pollution classi-

fication of harbors and detailed analysis of their sediment sample maps.

132


11. Confined disposal sites in Lake Superior include 3 in Canada and 4

in the U.S.

for their confined disposal program.

Fifteen U.S. projects were initially selected by the C.E.
However, as of July, 1974, only

Ashland, Duluth-Superior, and Keweenaw remain in that program (Table 68).

Table 68.

CONFINED DISPOSAL SITES FOR PUBLIC HARBORS IN LAKE SUPERIOR

Harbor

Disposal site
completion date

Status

Ashland
Bayfield
Big Bay
Black River
Cornucopia

Duluth-Superior

Grand Marais (Minn.)
Grand Traverse*
Keweenaw Waterway
Knife River
Marquette

Ontonagon

Port Wing

Presque Ile

Saxon

Two Harbors

Whitefish Pr.*

Kam River

Nipigon

Port Arthur (Thunder Bay)

(Keefer Terminal)

Start May 1974

Start April, 1974
new site

Fill of old slips,
225 acres. 1975(?)

Spring 1975

Trucked inland

Operating landfill
Operating landfill
Operating landfill
Landfill diked

Pending litigation

Dropped from program
Dropped from program
Dropped from program
Dropped from program

To award contract for
1,500,000 CY capacity

Possible new coal dock
facility. See dredging
section

Dropped from program
Pending

Dropped from program
Dropped from program

Disposed by local
interests

Dropped from program
Dropped from program
Dropped from program
Dropped from program
Operating
Operating
Operating
Operating

aNever selected for confined site program (PL 91-611).

175


(Figure 3). The volume removed ranged from a low of 29,000 cubic yards
in 1971 to a high of 1.5 million cubic yards in 1963. However, volumes
have significantly decreased in the 1970's.

New work (capital) dredging in Canadian projects of Lake Ontario was
most important during the early 1960's. Adjustments in harbors and
waterways were made for accommodation of deeper drafts generated by
completion of the St. Lawrence Seaway. Most new work dredging occurred
in 1963, when approximately 1.6 million cubic yards were removed. The
largest new work projects in that year were dredged at Port Credit and
Toronto, where one million cubic yards and 549,000 cubic yards were

removed respectively.

Although data on historical private dredging are particularly sketchy
for Canadian harbors, statistics for Lake Ontario were complete from
1968 to 1972. During that period, about 4 million cubic yards of
material were removed by permittees. Since the sample period is short,
no reliable pattern of permit dredging activity for Canadian Lake
Ontario is discernible,

In terms of volume, the most significant maintenance dredging projects
on the Canadian side of Lake Ontario have historically been at Toronto,
Hamilton, Oshawa, Port Credit, and Cobourg (Table 7). Each of these
harbors average at least 20,000 cubic yards of maintenance dredging
annually. The volume leader, of course, is Toronto, with an average of

approximately 250,000 cubic yards per year.

Projections of Future Dredging Volumes
on the United States Side

Maintenance--

Estimations of the volume of material to be removed from Lake Ontario in
maintenance dredging in the next decade have become possible based on

knowledge gained through this research project. Three projections are

20


parameter was analyzed. In addition, COD and total Kjeldahl nitrogen
were frequently omitted in the analyses of samples from this district.
With the exception of mercury, analyses in the Chicago District are more
complete. Pollution data for Ludington, Manistee, Muskegon, Pentwater,
Saugatuck, Sheboygan, and White Lake Harbors are several years old,

hence resampling may be in order.

At the specific request of the C.E., Waukegan Harbor was resampled in
1973. The analyses revealed that the outer harbor sediments near the
breakwater were unpolluted. The resampling of Waukegan Harbor has empha-
sized the fact that many harbors are unpolluted in the outer harbor
areas near the jetties and breakwaters where littoral currents are the
main source of sediments. It is also being recognized that pollutants
have a horizontal, vertical and seasonal distribution, and that back-

ground pollution can be produced by tree leaves and marsh drainage.

Future Quantity of Polluted Harbor
Sediments

As illustrated in Table 65, a total of 28 harbors in Lake Michigan have
been classified as.polluted or partially polluted. Although New Buffalo
Harbor has already been sampled, construction of this new recreational
facility has not been completed. In an effort to determine the future
average annual quantity of polluted dredged sediments, each partially
polluted harbor was subdivided into unpolluted and polluted sections.
This subdivision was based on the distribution of polluted samples with-
in the dredging areas analyzed by the E.P.A. If all bottom samples
taken from a given harbor, such as Indiana, exceeded one or more of the
pollution parameter limits, then all spoil (i.e., 100 percent) dredged
from that harbor was considered polluted.

Because maintenance dredging operations, as compared to new work, fre-
quently involved polluted sediments, only the percentage of the average
annual maintenance dredgings that may be polluted was estimated for each

157


Table 69. FUTURE AVERAGE ANNUAL QUANTITY OF POLLUTED DREDGED SPOIL
IN THE GREAT LAKES
(cubic yards)

Number of projects Volumes of polluted spoil

Lake Total Polluted Unpolluted United States Canada Total
Ontario 5/67 3/6 2/0 330,000 475,000 805,000
Erie 21/5 21/5 0/0 4,500,000 125,000 4,625,000
Huron/St. 20/10 13/7 7/3 532,400 276,000 808,400

Clair
Michigan 41 26 15 848,200 - 848, 200
Superior 30/10 17/3 13/7 236, 883 130,752 367,635
Totals 117/31 = 80/21 37/10 6,447,483 1,006,752 7,454,235
Percent 86% 14%

of

total

4american harbors on left side of slash, Canadian on right.

1. The E.P.A. and the M.O.E. have determined the sediment quality of
148 navigation projects in the Great Lakes. This study reveals that 101,
or 68 percent of the projects sampled are polluted or partially polluted.

2. It is estimated that future average annual maintenance dredging
will involve the removal of 7,454,000 cubic yards of polluted spoil.
Lake Erie, including the Detroit River, will account for about 62 per-
cent of this total.

3. Of the 26 public harbors in Lake Erie, all are polluted or partial-
ly polluted. When considering volumes, the problem of polluted dredged
spoil is basically an American one focused on Lake Erie, including the

Detroit River.

4. The pollutants most frequently exceeded in United States harbors
are volatile solids, COD, and oil and grease. In Canada, the principal
parameters exceeding the M.O.E. criteria are COD and Kjeldahl nitrogen.

177


Table 42. TOTAL MAINTENANCE AND NEW WORK DREDGING VOLUMES BY HARBOR
IN LAKE MICHIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT, 1918-1973 (50, 52)
(cubic yards)

— —

Public harbors Maintenance New work Totals M/NW ratio
Chicago District
Algoma 200,210 ft) 200,210 -
Big Suamico 64,525 46,905 111,430 1.4
Burns Waterway 0 4,282,503 4,282,530 -
Calumet H. & R. 7,241,529 14,113,323 21,354,852 0.5
Chicago Harbor 299,192 302,687 601,879 1.0
Chicago River 2,616,419 0 2,616,419 -
Gladstone-Kipling 0 238,782 238,782 -
Green Bay 5,361,078 9,918,981 15,280,057 0.5
Indiana 5,286,346 3,708,074 8,994,420 1.4
Kenosha 977,292 305,723 1,283,015 3.2
Kewaunee 1,514,248 419,429 1,933,677 3.6
Manitowoc 1,311,635 501,802 1,813,437 2.6
Menominee 1,197,664 246,421 1,444,085 4.9
Michigan City 1,247,349 302,673 1,550,022 4.1
Milwaukee 1,376,628 4,399,995 5,776,623 0.3
Oconto 189,818 0 189,818 +
Pensaukee 43,548 82,795 126,343 0.5
Port Washington 402,561 288,836 691,397 1.4
Racine 1,185,448 174,755 1,360,203 6.8
Sheboygan 1,636,601 810,860 2,447,461 2.0
Sturgeon Bay/ 2,071,014 1,393,348 3,464,362 1.5
Ship Canal
Two Rivers 2,176,515 149,460 2,325,975 14.6
Waukegan 1,099,636 40,274 1,139,910 27.3
District totals 37,499,254 41,727,626 79,226,880

89


TET

MICHICANH

DETROIT RIVER

LAKE ST, CLAIR

Figure 13.

© NOT POLLUTED
© PeLwured

© PARTLY POLLUTED
V NOT SAMPLED

CANADA @ PORT STANLEY

POLLUTION STATUS OF HARBORS IN LAKE ERIE

PENTISYLVANTA

(IN HILES)

SS =
10 0 50


Table 40. PRIVATE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE MI‘HIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT,

1957-1973 (51, 52)
(cubic yards)

Fiscal year Chicago District Detroit District Total

1973 193,425 80,000 273,425
1972 336,278 762,505 1,098,783
1971 400,727 72,000 472,727
1970 602,700 29,560 632,260
1969 160,237 41,000 201,237
1968 787 ,087 57,288 844,375
1967 468,245 842,500 1,310,745
1966 399,982 31,450 431,432
1965 1,053,598 41,000 1,094,598
1964 390,971 24,800 415,771
1963 279,677 0 279,677
1962 437,039 50,200 487,239
1961 1,567,196 8,345 1,575,541
1960 1,047,411 a 1,047,411
1959 1,050,156 a 1,050,156
1958 1,149,827 a 1,149,827
1957 969,982 a 969,982
Totals 11,294,538 2,040,648 13,335,186

‘Data not available.

82


in bulk traffic from 188 million tons in 1973 to 276 million tons by
1995 (40) should create some demand for new harbor facilities, i.e.,
docks, slips and berthing areas. In addition, in 1973 the first south-
bound movements of coal from the Rocky Mountain region occurred in the
Great Lakes. A few declining harbors such as Michigan City may
actually be revitalized by new coal imports or by increased activity in
bulk and general cargo movements. However, these new developments are

not yet reflected in the future new work projects.

To handle the increase in bulk shipments of iron ore, limestone, coal,
and to some extent, grain, Great Lakes vessels of longer length, greater
beam and increased draft are being constructed (41), Since 1970, two
1,000-foot bulk carriers with beams exceeding 100 feet have appeared on
the Great Lakes. Several more of these large vessels are in the plan-
ning stage. Even though they cannot be loaded to full capacity due to
the 27-foot draft limit of the Seaway, these vessels transport about
twice the cargo of conventional lake carriers. Many older ships have
also been lengthened to the 800-foot category. To achieve economies of
scale, the trend in the United States toward larger carriers will prob-
ably continue during the next decade, resulting in record bulk cargo

volumes but fewer ship transits.

With regard to the effect on future maintenance dredging, the longer
vessels with broader beams may cause increased turbulence and sloughing
in approach channels, as in Green Bay and Saginaw Harbors. Bow

thrusters will permit the vessels to turn essentially in their own
length, thus turning basins will not have to be enlarged. However, to
avoid grounding of such large carriers, especially due to squatting, con-
necting and approach channels will have to be dredged to maximum project
depth plus subgrade at all times. Therefore, as more of these large
carriers are deployed, maintenance dredging requirements in the connect-
ing channels and major commercial harbors may slightly increase, espe-

cially during low-water periods.

210


instruments of legislation do not use explicit terms such as dredged
spoil or dredgings. This implies that dredged spoil policies have not
reached, until recently, the level of concern as in the United States.
Based upon the present Canadian policies, quality of the environment and
associated ecosystems are of primary concern. Economic stress on naviga-

tion and regional commerce, or its consequences, are not emphasized.

The Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), R.S.C., 1970, is a federal
statute instituted inOctober, 1969, and parallels the function of
Section 10 of the United States' River and Harbor Act of 1899. It is
designed to protect the public right to navigation by prohibiting the
modification of navigable waters without the approval of the Ministry of
Transport (M.0.T.). Thus, the NWPA protects navigation, not the environ-
ment. When a dredging permit is secured, additional approval must be
obtained from the provincial M.O.E. and other interested provincial or
municipal agencies. Although 'dredging' is not specified as such, one
may presume that under Section 3, Part I, the term 'work,' defined as
“any dumping of fill or excavation of materials from the bed of a navi-
gable water," includes dredging. The M.O.E. does not issue permits, but
it advises applicants as to what is considered acceptable within the

terms of the Ontario Water Resources Act.

The federal government has delegated the administration of the federal
Fisheries Act (Section 91 (12) of the BNA Act) to Ontario and several
other provinces. Within this act, a general provision states that no
person shall deposit or permit the deposit of a deleterious substance of
any type in water frequented by fish. Deleterious substance, in this

case, may conceivably include polluted and unpolluted dredged spoil.

Ancillary policies to the Canadian legislation include:

The Beds of Navigable Waters Act
Public Lands Act

The Conservation Authorities Act
The Beach Protection Act

. Public Health Act

oanen

184


5. Maintenance dredging of public projects in the U.S. is projected to
amount to 7.78 million CY annually. Approximately 83 percent of this
total, i.e., 6.45 million CY, will involve polluted spoil which must be
confined. Nearly 62 percent of this polluted volume will be derived
from Lake Erie, including the Detroit River.

6. During periods of relatively low lake levels, as in the middle
1960's, annual maintenance dredging volumes are above average, particu-

larly in Lakes Huron and Michigan.

7. New work projects scheduled for public harbors and waterways in the
U.S. are expected to yield 2.25 million CY of dredging annually. Most
of these projects involve new recreational harbors, not commercial har-
bors. Compared to the past decade, future new work will decline sharply.
Because most new work dredgings consist of glacial till and/or bedrock,

these materials usually need not be disposed in confined sites,

8. As of July 1974, there are 62 public harbors and waterways in the 10-
year confined disposal program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (C.E.).
Eighteen other public harbors with polluted spoil were either dropped
from the program or were not among the 73 projects initially selected.
However, the total annual volume of polluted spoil from these 18 harbors
averages only approximately 110,000 CY. A few heavily polluted projects,
such as Toledo Harbor and Rouge River, have had confined disposal sites

in operation prior to Public Law 91-611.

9. For 34 of the 62 navigation projects in the confined disposal pro~
gram, selection of disposal sites has been completed and design of the
confined facilities is progressing. Most of these projects involve large
commercial harbors (e.g., Buffalo, Lorain, Milwaukee).

10. Some delays in the confined disposal program of the C.E. have been
caused by the reluctance of local interests to provide land for disposal
sites and by site approval difficulties. For 20 of the 62 navigation
projects, there are neither existing confined disposal facilities, nor


and River, Chicago Harbor and River, Green Bay, Indiana, and Milwaukee
Harbors. Between these 3 periods, as in the 1920's as well as in the

1940's and 1950's, few new work projects were scheduled.

As indicated by Table 42, the total quantity of spoil dredged varies
tremendously from harbor to harbor. In general, public harbors with
heavy industries and 27-foot project depths have the largest dredging
requirements. Conversely, small quantities are extracted from recrea-
tional harbors wherein project depths usually range from 12 to 14 feet.
In this study, Chicago Harbor and River are separated into 2 areas. No
dredging quantities were indicated in the Corps of Engineers' records
for Arcadia, Petoskey, St. James, and Traverse City Harbors.

The maintenance/new work ratio (M/NW) may be employed to identify those
harbors which have undergone little expansion or those which are costly
to maintain because of high maintenance dredging requirements. It is
obtained by dividing the total new work dredging quantity into the total
maintenance dredging volume for each harbor. The M/NW ratio for all
public harbors of Lake Michigan is 1.3, whereas the Chicago District
averages 0.9 and the Detroit District mean is 5.9 (Table 42). In
general, harbors in the Detroit District exhibit relatively high mainte-
nance dredging requirements and little harbor expansion or deepening has

occurred in that area.

Present Dredging Quantities

The quantity of sediment currently being dredged in Lake Michigan is
based on a 10-year average from the period 1961 through 1970. The years
1971 through 1973 were not included in the average because maintenance
dredging volumes were below normal, especially in the Chicago District,
due to the temporary ban on open-lake disposal of dredged spoil.

Table 43 shows the average annual private, maintenance, and new work

dredging quantities by C.E. district. The average annual private

88


5. Based on the parameters most frequently exceeded, the principal
sources of pollutants in the United States are from industrial and muni-
cipal effluents and agricultural fields. In Canada, pollutants are
derived from lumber and paper industries, agricultural fields, as well

as industrial and municipal effluents.

6. Where a harbor is divided into an inner and outer section, such as
at Saginaw, usually the inner section is polluted whereas the outer sec-

tion is clean.

7. In the United States, the 10-year confined site program of the C.E.
(PL 91-611) involves 62 public harbors. At present, only for 34 harbors
have disposal sites firmly selected. However, the E.P.A. analyses

reveal that there are 80 U.S. public harbors and waterways in the Great

Lakes with polluted bottom sediments.

8. Problems with the disposal of polluted dredged spoil may occur at
Calumet, Chicago River and Harbor, Cleveland, Saginaw, South Haven, St.
Joseph, and Sturgeon Bay Harbors.

9. Although sampling of bottom sediments is more thorough in Canadian
navigation projects, less than one half of the harbors there have been
sampled.

10. At present, the pollution criteria concerning dredged spoil in the
United States and Canada are similar. However, the E.P.A. is currently

drafting new pollution guidelines which may broaden the criteria for
determining the eligibility of dredged spoil for open-lake disposal.

178


Table 44. (continued)

Detroit District Private Maintenance New work Totals

Public harbors

Arcadia 6,300 0 0 6,300
Charlevoix 0 6,410 0 6,410
Frankfurt 0 18,690 15,020 33,710
Grand Haven 4,860 146,390 0 151, 250
Grays Reef 0 30,610 0 30,610
Holland 0 74,560 0 74,560
Leland 0 570 3,370 3,940
Ludington 5,550 24,210 0 29,760
Manistee 0 27,450 21,880 49,330
Manistique 0 9,950 21,130 31,080
Muskegon 2,140 38,820 48,630 89,590
Pentwater (0) 37,420 0 37,420
Petoskey 0 0 0 0
Portage Lake 0 8,920 0 8,920
Saugatuck 0) 48,220 0 48,220
South Haven 0 46,320 5,200 51,520
St. James 620 0 0 620
St. Joseph 1) 59,450 0 59,450
Traverse City 0 0 0 i)
White Lake 0 24,580 0 24,580
Totals 19,470 602,570 115, 230 737,270

Private harbors

Petoskey Penn Dixie 0 - - 0
Port Inland 0) - - 1)
Miscellaneous sites 95,080 - - 95,080
Totals 95,080 95,080
District totals 114,550 602,570 115,230 832,350
Totals for lake 750,760 1,481, 380 1,993,690 4,225,830

93


small harbors which are currently considered partially polluted. In
addition, the confined disposal sites may actually contain as much as
25 percent more spoil than anticipated. For example, at Buffalo Harbor,
the diked site was designed for a capacity of 400,000 cubic yards, but
more than 500,000 cubic yards were disposed there.

In summary, economic factors regarding future planning of new work
projects and scheduling of maintenance dredging will probably be given
more consideration. In Canada, this change is evidenced by the assump-
tion of harbor administration by the M.0.T. Rising costs of dredging
and disposal of spoil may result in the necessity for the establishment
of dredging priorities based on cost-benefit comparisons. Such priori-
ties based on cost-benefit ratios and the trend toward larger vessels
with economy of scales will probably promote the decline of the small,
commercial harbors. Maintenance dredging may actually increase slightly
in connecting channels and major industrial harbors. The projected
increase in bulk commodity movements and the pressure for an extended
navigation season should offset the competition for containerized
freight and general cargo by other modes of transport. However, future
maintenance and new work dredging volumes are not expected to be
affected by these developments. With the rising cost of dredging and
the high capital costs of confined disposal sites for polluted spoil,
dredging and disposal site priorities are foreseeable. The C.E. antici-
pated the need for priorities by designing diked disposal sites first
for the large, commercial harbors which are unequivocally justified and

heavily polluted.

214


the nearshore area and is usually comprised of sand-sized particles. A
third source of harbor sediments is from industrial and municipal efflu-

ents as noted in Buffalo and Cleveland Harbors.

Although there is a variety of glacial drift and bedrock in the Great
Lakes region, sediment transport by streams tributary to the lakes is
generally low. The surface geology of the Great Lakes region is largely
composed of unconsolidated glacial deposits. However, in much of
Ontario the glacial drift is thin or absent exposing the ancient Precam-
brian Shield. Stream concentrations of suspended sediments, in the
Great Lakes region, are usually less than 270 parts per million. A nota-
ble exception is the Maumee River basin where concentrations ranging
between 270 and 1900 parts per million have been determined (30). By
comparison, in the American southwest suspended load concentrations are
often in excess of 1900 parts per million. As a whole, the Great Lakes
basin contributes only 0.4 percent of the nation's total sediment volume
to the oceans (31).

Factors other than sediment or soil composition will influence the amount
of sediment contributed by streams to the lakes. Table 70 illustrates

land use in the Great Lakes basin. As indicated, almost one half of the

basin is characterized by forested land which, in part, accounts for the

Table 70. LAND USE IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN (31)

(percent)
Land use Percent of area
Forest 47.4
Agriculture 38.4
Urban 8.4
Other 5.8

192


public interest, concludes that the benefits of the proposed alteration
outweigh the potential damage to the wetland resources. In addition,

permits for non-federal dredging operations require the permitee to com-
ply with the same standards as federal dredging operations with respect
to turbidity, nature and location of approved spoil disposal areas, and

other factors relating to protection of the environment.

CANADIAN POLICIES

Under terms of the British North America Act (BNA), the federal govern-
ment of Canada can legislate for the enforcement of water quality stan-
dards and control of pollution. Also, under Section 108 of the BNA Act,
transfer of dredges and authority for river and lake improvements at the
time of confederation seemed to emphasize that dredging was specifically
intended to fall under federal jurisdiction. However, with the excep-
tion of the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA), dredging and dispo-
sal policies are basically legislated on the provincial level. The
Ontario Water Resources Act, ammended in 1972, is administered by the
Ministry of the Environment of Ontario (formerly the Ontario Water
Resources Commission) and prohibits the discharge of any material, which

may impair water quality, into or near any lake, stream, or other water
body.

Under the Environmental Protection Act of 1971, the discharge of any con-
taminant into the natural environment in an amount, concentration, or
level in excess of that prescribed by regulations is prohibited. These

regulations in the case of dredging are the Water Quality Guidelines for

the Review of Proposed Dredging and Spoils Disposal Operation and are

specified in Section IV. The Environmental Protection Act of 1971 also
concerns disposal of dredged spoil. The Ministry of Environment (M.0.E.)
prohibits spoil disposal on land or in water without a certificate of

approval or a provisional certificate of approval. Both of these

183


and 1966. Peak years of new work activity occurred in 1939, 1962 and
1963, and in 1971 and 1972 (Table 47).

New work dredging during the historic period (1937-1972), by the C.E.
totals 69,749,246 CY. This represents 74 percent of all historic U.S.
dredging. This figure, however, includes a "prior years" total of
53,676,746 CY, representing the early years of development of the Lake
Superior projects. The largest individual "new work year" was 1939,
when 5,236,617 CY were dredged. Eliminating the "prior years" total,
new work dredging since 1937 is indicated as 16,072,500 CY or’ an average
annual rate of 446,458 CY for 36 years.

The representative 10-year total of new work is 6,304,966 CY, which is
an annual average rate of 630,496 CY. This figure, however, includes 2
very high volume years. In 1963 and 1964, approximately 5.1 million
cubic yards were extracted in development work. A more realistic mean
value can be determined for this 10-year period by adding the 8 other
years, dividing by 8, to yield 149,301 CY/year. Averages during this
test period of 10 years are of little significance, inasmuch as the low
volume of 5,985 CY (1969), for example, averages in with 3,209,387 CY
(1963). The most realistic predictions can probably be made by compar-~
ing long term averages over 36 years of record with this erratic activ-
ity period of 10 years. The 36-year average of approximately 446,000 CY
is close to a mean value between the adjusted 10 years (150,000 CY) and
the unadjusted same average (630,000 CY). The mean of these 2 values is
390,000 CY.

A 10-year prediction for average annual new work should range between
390,000 CY and 446,000 CY, depending upon plans and budget appropria-
tions for new facilities. An average of these 2 values is 418,000 CY
per year. Such a figure is strictly a statistical average of long term
performance. No new work is scheduled for Lake Superior at this time.
A potential project in Duluth-Superior Harbor has been publicized to
develop 225 acres on St. Louis Bay as a coal loading facility, costing

109


Table 27. HISTORICAL DREDGING TOTALS OF C.E. PROJECTS
IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR, 1920-1972 (50)

(cubic yards)

Project Maintenance New work Total

Alpena 290,036 259,877 549,913
Au Sable 273,671 25,407 299,078
Bay Port 0 29,089 29,089
Black River 563,348 57,940 621,288
Ch. Lake St. Clair 3,808,457 17,940, 248 21,748,705
Clinton River 312,404 127,520 439,924
Caseville 25,889 62,929 88,818
Cheboygan 410,757 173,240 583,997
Hammond Bay 0 142,760 142,760
Harbor Beach 228,249 260,840 489,089
Harrisville 27,625 263,016 290,641
Inland Route 113,055 o 113,055
Les Cheneaux 102,270 66,990 169,260
Mackinaw 0 9,869 9,869
Point Lookout 0 334,872 334,872
Port Sanilac 80,702 ob 80,702
Saginaw River 6,999,798 12,938,358 19,938,156
st. Clair River 4,112,237 27,472,621 31, 584,858
St. Marys River 5,418,514 32,151,557 37,570,071
Sebewaing 169,120 oP 169,120
Totals 22,936,132 92,317,133 115,253,265

41924 volumes are not known.
byo new work reported.

56


Table 29. C.E. MAINTENANCE DREDGING BY DECADES IN LAKE HURON/ST. CLAIR,

1930-1970 (50)
(cubic yards)

Years Total Average/Year
1960-1969 6,957,250 695,725
1950-1959 2,794,464 279,446
1940-1949 3,915,636 391,564
1930-1939 4,980,328 498,033

maintenance and new work dredging in Michigan from 1961-70 reveals that
a year by year comparison (Table 28), with only 2 exceptions, new work
dredging exceeds maintenance. As with maintenance dredging, the great-
est dredging activity was confined to the connecting channels and
Saginaw Harbor. In these 4 projects, approximately 34 million cubic
yards of spoil were removed in the 10-year period. Capital dredging in
Ontario is difficult to determine because the D.P.W. does not always
distinguish it from maintenance dredging. However, as best as could be
determined, 217,500 cubic yards of dredgings over the 1961-70 period
were removed from 5 projects (i.e., Blind River, Collingwood, Inside
Steamer Channel, Midland, and Sault Ste. Marie). Permit dredging in
Lake Huron is generally characterized by the excavation of small boat
slips associated with recreational marine activity. This is most evi-~
dent in Lake St. Clair and the lower St. Clair River adjacent to metro-
politan Detroit and Windsor. Here projects generally average less than
5,000 cubic yards.

Compared to most other Great Lakes, the private dredging volumes are low
and are not necessarily associated with power companies or industry.
Only 25 percent of the dredging in Lake Huron is related to industry,
which reflects the recreational character of this lake. A similar

62


SECTION VI

FACTORS RELATED TO DREDGING

INTRODUCTION

Dredging and disposal of sediments from Great Lakes harbors are related
to physical and economic activities. In this section sources of dredged
material, lake levels, and future economic changes in the Great Lakes
Basin are briefly discussed and their association with Great Lakes dredg-
ing activity examined.

SOURCES OF DREDGED MATERIAL

Dredging is required to remove sediments which have accumulated in navi-
gation channels in Great Lakes’ harbors and waterways. The three main
sources of the dredged sediments are: (1) stream sedimentation; (2) lit-
toral drift; and (3) industrial and municipal discharges. The sources
of sediments vary from harbor to harbor and depend upon harbor site and
design. In most instances the sediments are unconsolidated and can be
removed with a hydraulic or mechanical dredge. Occasionally bedrock is
encountered (Class A material in Canada) such as in the Amherstburg
Channel in the Detroit River. Harbors such as Saginaw and Green Bay
receive large quantities of sediment from the drainage basin. Other
projects, such as Ashtabula and Hamilton, are located on the lake front
where sediments are transported by longshore currents which introduce

sediment into the harbors. Here the detritus is derived directly from

191


SECTION III

DREDGING QUANTITIES IN THE GREAT LAKES

INTRODUCTION

Objectives of this section are to inventory the historical and current
dredging volumes and to project future dredging quantities to be removed
from private and public waterways of the Great Lakes in the United
States and Canada. Dredging volume data were obtained from the district
offices of the C.E., to include Buffalo, Chicago, Detroit and St. Paul,
from the D.P.W. in Ottawa, Toronto, Sault Ste. Marie, Thunder Bay and
London, and from district offices of the Ministry of Transport (M.0.T.)
at Prescott and Parry Sound. In the Buffalo District, some data were
derived through a review of private dredgers' field records. Finally,
the E.P.A., Region V, Chicago, furnished some information regarding
private dredging quantities.

In the Great Lakes, dredging operations are subdivided into three cate-
gories. New work, or capital dredging as it is referred to in Canada,
involves deepening and/or widening of a pre-existing project, or the
initiation of a new harbor or waterway. Maintenance dredging involves
the removal of unconsolidated sediments which have been deposited in a
navigation project since the last dredging operation. The D.P.W. of
Canada does not always distinguish between capital dredging and mainte-
nance dredging which, in some cases, may account for high maintenance
dredging volumes in Canadian projects. Both new work and maintenance

dredging operations in federal harbors and waterways are regulated by


prepared to receive dredgings from the St. Clair Cut-off in the near

future.

As can be seen from the data above, an unbiased estimate of polluted
dredged spoil cannot be determined for Canadian projects in Lake Huron/
St. Clair. If the M.O.E. criteria are exceeded, confinement of spoil
does not necessarily follow. At Sault Ste. Marie open-lake disposal has
recently occurred at Gros Cap. Very few of the approximately 50 proj-
ects in Ontario have been sampled. Only when all the projects are
sampled can accurate assessments of polluted volumes be made. However,
based on available data, thus far, it appears that the percent polluted
spoil in Ontario is comparable to that of Michigan.

Summary
Based on data in this section and Section III the following have been
determined:

1. Of the 30 sampled harbors in Lake Huron, 10 are not polluted.

2. Pollution parameters most often exceeded in C.E. dredging projects
are COD, volatile solids, and Kjeldahl nitrogen. In D.P.W. projects,

Kjeldahl nitrogen and COD are the most commonly exceeded parameters.

3. Polluted sediments are not exclusively limited to river harbors.
Harbors on the lake front (e.g., Harrisville, Port Sanilac) are also
polluted.

4. Polluted dredged spoil in C.E. projects in 1972 and 1973 was 42 and
53 percent respectively.

5. The quantity of polluted dredged spoil in the last decade is approxi-
mately the same as the volume to be dredged in the future (57% vs. 52%).

6. If the C.E. were to dredge 1.2 million cubic yards annually, as they
have projected, 72 percent of the dredgings would be polluted.

151



Table 42. (continued)

a
Public harbors Maintenance New work Totals M/NW ratio
Detroit District

Arcadia (0) 0 0 -
Charlevoix 230,165 4,505 234,670 51.1
Frankfurt 680,400 379,529 1,059,929 1.8
Grand Haven 7,101,322 989,464 8,090,786 7.2
Grays Reef 306,060 (0) 306,060 -
Holland 2,131,571 841,492 2,973,063 2.5
Leland 68,884 33,744 102,628 2.0
Ludington 954,219 93,510 1,047,729 10.0
Manistee 1,551,017 386,293 1,937,310 4.0
Manistique 399,839 255,967 625,806 1.8
Muskegon 1,408,822 572,925 1,981,747 2.5
Pentwater 912,020 0 912,020 -
Petoskey 0 0 0 -
Portage Lake 196,374 0 196,374 -
Saugatuck 1,255,141 (0) 1,255,141 -
South Haven 1,812,306 52,025 1,864,331 34.8
St. James 0 0 0 -
St. Joseph 2,487,957 234,484 2,731,441 10.2
Traverse City 10) 0 0 -
White Lake 936,494 0 936,494 -

District totals 22,432,591 3,822,938 26,255,529
Totals for lake 59,931,845 45,550,564 105,482,409

90


ras

10 YEAR DREDGING VOLUME 1961-1970 (IN 1,000'S CY )
O 0-9

O 10-24
O 25-99

C) 100-249 CANADA CATARAQUI BAY

250 +

OSWEGO

PORT CREDIT LITTLE SopuUS

GREAT SODUS

ROCHESTER
HAMTLTON

(IN MILES)
—SS Sr
0 25 50 75

Figure 2. AVERAGE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING VOLUMES IN LAKE ONTARIO, 1961-1970


Canadian Dredging History in Lake Erie

Dredging data for Canadian harbors on Lake Erie have been collected and
collated from 1961 to the present (Figure 6). In those 11 years, more
than 3.5 million cubic yards of spoil has been removed in maintaining
several comparatively small Canadian harbors. Amounts of material
removed ranged from a low of about 120,000 cubic yards in 1971 to a high
of approximately 710,000 cubic yards in 1968 (Table 18). Essentially no
new work dredging has been done on the Canadian side of Lake Erie for

more than a decade.

Data on permit dredging are particularly sketchy for Canadian harbors.
since statistics for Lake Erie were available only from 1969 to 1972.

In that period, an approximate total of a one-half million cubic yards
of spoil were removed by permittees. Because the sample period is short,
no pattern of permit dredging activity for Canadian Lake Erie can be
determined.

In terms of volume, the most significant Canadian maintenance dredging
projects have historically been at Port Burwell, Port Stanley, Kings-
ville, and Leamington (Table 19). With the recent phasing out of Port
Burwell as a coal port, dredging there has ceased. Port Stanley has
become the volume leader with an average of only about 90,000 cubic yards
per year.

Projections of Future Dredging Quantities
on the United States Side

Maintenance--

Estimations of the quantities of material to be removed from Lake Erie
in maintenance dredging in the next decade is possible based on the
information available. Three projections will be provided, as follows:

(1) a figure based on C.E. estimates made in 1968 (3,4).

(2) a figure based on relatively recent environmental effects on

41


public channels maintained by the C.E. slightly reduces the quantity of
private dredging in the public harbors. In several harbors, especially
in Calumet, Chicago and Indiana Harbors, both public and private dredg-
ing volumes are decreasing due to reduced industrial sedimentation and
sewage deposits. The federal project limit in Calumet Harbor was
recently extended inland, resulting in a reduction of some private

dredging.

Public Dredging Quantities

Since 1918, 105 million cubic yards of sediment have been dredged from
the public harbors and waterways of Lake Michigan (Table 41). Of the
total quantity dredged, 57 percent, or 60 million cubic yards, was de-
rived from maintenance dredging operations, whereas the remainder in-
volved new work dredging. When the dredging quantities are compared by
district, the larger volumes in the Chicago District are obvious. In
the Detroit District, maintenance dredging quantities are moderate.
Relatively little new work dredging has been done. Historical dredging
records in Chicago for years prior to 1935 are incomplete. In the
Detroit District records, there is a hiatus from 1920 through 1927.

The period 1935 through 1973 may be selected as a base for the calcula-
tion of long-term dredging averages or means. In the Chicago District
the long-term mean for annual maintenance and new work dredging volumes
are 721,900 and 971,900 cubic yards, respectively. In the Detroit Dis-
trict the average annual maintenance is 489,400 cubic yards, while new
work dredging quantities average 74,400 cubic yards. With regard to all
of Lake Michigan, the mean annual maintenance dredging quantity is
1,211,300 cubic yards and the mean new work dredging volume is 1,046,300
cubic yards. Even though the project depths in most harbors have in-
creased over the years, the historical maintenance dredging does not

exhibit a steady upward trend.

86


Table 9. FREQUENCY OF DREDGING BY THE C.E., LAKE ONTARIO PROJECTS,
1961-1970 (47)

Project 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
Great Sodus x x x x x x x
Little Sodus x x x
Oswego x x x x x x
Rochester x x x x x x x
Wilson x

Olcott x

Total projects
per year 3 5 3 4 3 3 3 2 4 1

and the volume of spoil removed. Six projects were maintained on Lake
Ontario between 1961 and 1970. Only Rochester was dredged a total of at
least one million cubic yards of material during that time (Table 10).
If the probable fall in lake levels actually occurs in the near future,
if environmental constraints are relaxed in consideration of economics
in the Great Lakes region, and/or if confined disposal sites under con-
sideration at present actually become available, then dredging in the
next decade may be slightly higher than normal. Volumes would be above
average for a few years to allow for the removal of material which has
accumulated during the past 3 years, a period of relatively lower than
normal dredging activity. A return to average dredging volumes would
probably occur within 3 or 4 years thereafter. Thus, a median estimate
of the total volume of U.S. maintenance dredging in the next decade is
approximately 3.6 million cubic yards of material. This figure, only
slightly lower than the C.E. projection of 3.7 million for Lake Ontario,
should be considered the projection provided by this report.

24


Table 65. (continued)

Percent of Future Future
maintenance annual annual
Pollution spoil/ maintenance polluted
Harbor class polluted dredging spoil
Detroit District
Arcadia U 0 oO oO
Charlevoix U ie) 6,100 0
Frankfurt P/U 25 23,100 5,800
Grand Haven P/U 45 130,800 58,900
Grays Reef U i) 21,900 0
Holland P/U 45 73,700 33,200
Leland U 0 12,600 0
Ludington U 0 31,600 0
Manistee U 0 34,800 0
Manistique P/U 50 11,900 6,000
Muskegon U 0 49,200 0
Pentwater U QO 42,500 0
Petoskey U i) i) 0
Portage Lake U i) 16,000 0
Saugatuck U 0 50,300 0
South Haven P/U 25 40,000 10,000
St. James U 0 1,500 0
(Beaver Island)
St. Joseph P/U 30 54,900 16,500
Traverse City Pp 100 1,500 1,500
White Lake U 0 26,500 0
Totals for District 628,900 131,900
Totals for lake 1,491,400 848, 200

4New harbor to be constructed.

U Harbor unpolluted, P/U Harbor partially polluted, P Harbor polluted.

159


ra

© NoT PoLLuTep
@ PoLLuteo

© PARTLY POLLUTED

V NOT SAMPLED

WHITBY

TORONTO

HAMILTON

PORT HOPE

Figure 11.

=) ROCHESTER

(IN HILES)
— EE
0 25 50 75

POLLUTION STATUS OF HARBORS IN LAKE ONTARIO

VINCENT

67 SACKETS HARBOR

OSWEGO

(LITTLE sopus
(GREAT SODUS


the C.E. and the D.P.W. In Canada, all dredging in the Great Lakes is
contracted out by the D.P.W. to public tenders, whereas in the United
States the C.E. does perform some of the maintenance and new work

dredging.

A third category of dredging is private, or permit dredging, which is
done by private contractors in private harbors and in private approach
channels and docks adjacent to federally-maintained channels of public
harbors. Private dredging is regulated through the issuance of Section
10 and NWPA permits by the district offices of the C.E. and the M.O.T.,
respectively. In most districts, private dredging records are incom-
plete or were retained only for a few years before being destroyed. It
was estimated that Section 10 files in the Chicago District of the C.E.
are only 40 percent complete. In the past, high priority was not
assigned to private dredging permits, especially with regard to remote
areas of the Great Lakes. Thus, it was not possible to accurately deter-
mine the quality of spoil removed by private interests in the past.
Therefore, all private dredging volumes in this section represent mini-
mum quantities.

To present a uniform appraisal of dredging volumes for all the Great
Lakes, this study presents all dredging quantities, however originally
recorded, as place measure volumes. Because private and new work dredg-
ing volumes were generally recorded in place measure, conversion factors
apply primarily to maintenance dredging volumes. Most Canadian data
were recorded in place measure and few conversions were necessary. From
the Corps of Engineers' Districts, conversion factors were obtained as
indicated in Table 1, Based on their own specific operational function
and dredging plant type, each Corps of Engineers’ District uses a conver~
sion factor which best represents the equivalent place measure volume.
Bin measures are applicable to hydraulic and hopper dredge plants, where~
as scow measures refer to dipper and clam shell dredges. Because of con-

version to place measure, spoil volumes for individual harbors, projects


Table 24. CANADIAN DREDGING FREQUENCIES, LAKE ERIE P
1961-1970 (48) ROJECTS,

SS a
Project 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
Kingsville x x x x x x
Pelee Island x x
Port Dover x : x
Port Maitland x x
Port Stanley x x x x x x x x x x
Amherstburg x x
Leamington x x x x x x
Port Burwell x x x x x x x x x
St. Williams x
Wheatley x x x x
Rondeau x x x x x x x x
Windsor x
Colchester x
Port Bruce x
Port Rowan x
vor pects . ° > ‘ ° $ 4 6 4 3
per year

52


maintenance dredging when extreme lake levels are reached. Seasonal
precipitation produces high lake levels in the summer and low lake
levels in winter and early spring as a result of the Great Lakes water
budget (39). The small range of seasonal fluctuations in lake levels
and occasional vessel groundings in the spring do not significantly
effect dredge planning. Short term oscillations, due to local storms,
seiches, ice jams and prevailing winds bear no relationship to dredge
volumes. These factors primarily influence local sailing schedules,
docking and undocking, and piloting functions.

Future long term lake level changes are not applied, in this study, in
establishing predictions of future average annual maintenance and pri-

vate dredging volumes. At the present, the C.E. and the U.S. Lake

Survey, using water balance equations, predict lake levels for only 6
months in advance. Nevertheless, a general relationship between future
long term lake cycles and future maintenance dredging can be suggested,

I€ lake levels oscillate on an 8-year cycle, and a peak in the present
high lake level period is attained in 1974, then low levels can be antic-
ipated in 1978-1979. This low water period may result in somewhat

higher than average dredging volumes in 1979-1980, applying the lag fac-
tors. Prior to that time, maintenance and private dredging volumes may be
below the projection of this report. In some polluted harbors, mainte—
nance dredging may be postponed until confined disposal sites or other

acceptable means of disposal are developed.

ECONOMIC FACTORS AND FUTURE DREDGING VOLUMES

The purpose of this subsection is to discuss some general economic
aspects in relation to dredging volumes in the next decade. Particu-
larly important in this regard are: (1) factors which may increase or
decrease future dredging quantities; and (2) rapidly increasing dredging
costs, especially costs of dredging operations and confinement of

polluted spoil.

208


Table 51. POLLUTION CRITERIA OF HARBOR/WATERWAY SEDIMENTS (54, 55)

(percent)
es a
Parameter Canadian guidelines E.P.A. criteria

(Maximum allowable concentration,
% dry weight basis)

Volatile solids 6.0 6.0
Chemical oxygen demand 5.0 5.0
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen 0.2 0.1
Qil and grease 0.15 0.15
Mercury 0.00003 0.0001
Zinc 0.005 0.005
Lead 0.005 0.005

frequently more samples are taken and occasionally short sediment cores

are analyzed.

Both sets of pollution criteria comprise seven mandatory parameters. In
Canada, sediments having concentrations of pollutants lower than the
acceptable limits may still be deemed unsuitable for open-lake disposal
on the basis of one or more of the following tests:

Total phosphorus

Settleability measured in Jackson Turbidity Units

Sulfides

Trace metals including cadmium, copper, chromium, arsenic and nickel
Pesticides

Bioassay for toxicity

In the United States the following additional tests are recommended

where appropriate and pertinent:

Total phosphorus

121


Occasional NE storms in winter are very severe and, with a frequency of
one in 10 years, very easily upset ALL THE PLANNING OF TEN YEARS for
harbor maintenance. No dredging frequency can even be attempted in most
exposed harbors because they are at the mercy of the storms. Those
harbors most susceptible to NE severe storms are those opening to the NE,
such as: L'Anse, Marquette, Grand Marais (Michigan), Duluth-Superior,
Big Bay and Bayfield.

Dredging frequency is directly related to:

1. Storm azimuth

2. Wind velocity

3. Thickness of ice

Low mean winter temperatures

4. Bottom gradient

5. Nature of bottom sediments vs. azimuth

6. Nature of harbor basement

7. Stream mouth harbor vs. "pocket harbor"

8. Stream flow regimen in harbor

9. Storm frequency by azimuth
Alternatively, an off-azimuth storm of high intensity may clean-out 10
years of sediment accumulation in a period of a few hours in a summer
storm and completely negate all dredging plans. Bayfield and North
Coast Harbors are good examples of the effects of freak SE storms of

high intensity.

The C.E. finds that seiche patterns in the harbors are more critical in
sediment control and in shipping hazards than stream flows and normal
winds. Most of the larger harbors have seiche reporting services for
the pilots and use seiche-lights at the entries and breakwaters. They
show by colored lights the state of the 'tide' and current velocities.
Harbor pilot advisories notify skippers and pilots of dangerous ebb and
flow conditions. Normal seiches on the long fetch coastline combined
with wide barometric differences over Lake Superior cause more sediment

transfer than any other factors except severe storms.

A Reach Map of Lake Superior (7) , shows the Reaches of the shorelines

set into categories determined by fetch, storm frequencies and littoral

105


Table 47. HISTORICAL ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND NEW WORK DREDGING

IN LAKE SUPERIOR, 1937-1972 (48, 49, 53)
{cubic yards)

Fiscal No. ‘No.

year Maintenance harbors New work harbors Private
1972 97,830 5 290,548 8 63,500
1971 132,280 4 142,035 9 7,850
1970 304,115 4 20,575 3 6,000
1969 250,684 5 5,985 2 76,000
1968 196,077 3 40,000 1 1,165,610
1967 152,860 4 275,661 2 63,000
1966 164 ,688 6 12,675 1 ce)
1965 168,649 5 417,080 1 22,800
1964 77,085 5 1,902,164 3 780,000
1963 69,794 5 3,208,387 6 0)
1962 228,745 5 292,919 4 0
1961 144,190 5 129,520 3 200,000
1960 115,456 4 289,121 5 40,000
1959 225,507 4 50,300 1 0
1958 180,184 4 85,571 5 is)
1957 423,774 3 32,850 1 0
1956 250, 664 5 555,058 2 0
1955 326,345 3 480,932 1 0
1954 248,314 2 0 0 0
1953 335,498 4 32,732 1 0
1952 319,738 4 18,774 2 0
1951 450,916 5 87,281 3 Q
1950 238,155 4 150,022 2 0
1949 246,924 4 14,214 1 0)
1948 285,646 6 52,182 1 a
1947 285,112 5 0 0 0
1946 278,919 3 0 0 0
1945 452,602 5 0 0 0
1944 68,920 2 0 0 vi)
1943 111,073 3 ce) 0 0
1942 12,935 1 0 0 to)
1941 328,556 3 33,585 1 0
1940 396,372 3 1,898,825 2 Q
1939 7,658,554 6 5,236,617 8 420,795
1938 0 0 29,910 1 0
1937 1,931,122 1 285,977 1 (0)
Prior 92,237 2 53,676,746 4 _
Totals 17,250,520 69,749,246 2,842,555
U.S. grand total: 89,842,321

Canadian grand total: 3,888,718

Total for lake: 93,731,039

107


TABLES

Page
Conversion Factors to Place Measure . . ++ ++ + ee ee 9
Historical Dredging in Lake Ontario by Harbor/Waterway,

1951-1972 ww ee ee 3
Annual Maintenance Dredging in Lake Ontario, 1951-1972 . . 16
New Work Dredging in Lake Ontario, 1951-1972 ....... 7
Private Dredging in Lake Ontario, 1963-1972 ....... 19
Dredging History in Canadian Projects in Lake Ontario,

1961-1972 6 ww ee ee ee 19
Historical Dredging: Canadian Projects in Lake Ontario,

1961-1970 6 ww ee ee ee 21
C.E. Projections and Annual Maintenance Dredging Volumes,

Lake Ontario... 1. ee ee ee ee ee ee 22
Frequency of Dredging by the C.E., Lake Ontario Projects,

1961-1970 2. ee te ee 24
Frequency of Dredging and Volume of Spoil Removed by the

C.E., Lake Ontario, 1961-1970 ... 2. e+e eee eee 25
Canadian Dredging Frequencies, Lake Ontario Projects,

1961-1970 ww ee ee 27
Future Dredging in Canada 1973-1977, Lake Ontario .... 28
Estimates of Future Average Annual Dredging Volumes in

Lake Ontario... ee ee te eee te es 30

vi


Table 41. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE AND NEW WORK DREDGING VOLUMES IN PUBLIC

HARBORS OF LAKE MICHIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT, 1918-1973 (50, 52)
(cubic yards)

Fiscal Chicago District Detroit District

year Maintenance New work Maintenance New work Totals
1973 811,274 624,296 597,360 (0) 2,032,930
1972 545,018 1,410,831 391,552 44,378 2,391,779
1971 217,621 908 ,056 461,161 15,650 1,602,488
1970 495,926 1,631,174 799,890 4,524 2,931,514
1969 695,696 1,089,236 594,515 145,701 2,525,148
1968 956,687 1,865,902 613,856 61,300 3,497,745
1967 669,262 2,197,681 702,797 16,524 3,586,264
1966 319,693 6,187,987 667,606 10,571 7,185,857
1965 1,387,892 3,257,264 618,952 190,837 5,454,945
1964 1,344,556 1,698,138 800, 215 387,412 4,230,321
1963 1,195,469 958,784 436,261 72,211 2,662,725
1962 876,049 458,764 535,996 0 1,870,809
1961 810,417 94,103 226,756 263,325 1,394,601
1960 742,389 64,581 597,183 0 1,404,153
1959 909,232 0 322,048 (0) 1,231, 280
1958 658,950 87,791 459,770 47,610 1,254,121
1957 1,117,768 491,654 377,273 256,148 2,242,843
1956 618,085 91,643 365,309 0 1,075,037
1955 411,044 45,133 370,839 0 827,016
1954 279,379 0 400,509 0 679,888
1953 556,525 0 287,084 0 843,609
1952 296,630 0 320, 206 0 616,836
1951 618 , 396 0 595,548 tv) 1,213,944
1950 892,748 0 553,092 245,772 1,691,612
1949 493,557 0 642,085 208,909 1,344,551
1948 939,100 0 549,827 0 1,488,927
1947 257,096 191,184 333,118 0 781,398
1946 578,888 5,238 257,218 a 841,344

84


within two years. This will increase maintenance dredging somewhat
after 1975. Thus, considering Canadian projections primarily, it is
estimated that an average of 500,000 cubic yards of material will be
removed from the Canadian side of Lake Ontario every year for the next

decade in maintenance dredging projects.

Private--

Permit dredging has fluctuated widely in terms of volumes on the
Canadian side of Lake Ontario in recent years. More than 4 million
cubic yards were removed by permit since 1968. In some years very
little permit dredging activity has occurred. However, other projects
have resulted in the removal of hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of
spoil. Canadian data reveal that at least 306,000 cubic yards of spoil
are already scheduled to be removed by private interests in Lake Ontario
projects by 1977 (Table 12). Thus, in an attempt to generalize a projec—
tion on permit dredging in Canadian waters of Lake Ontario, it is postu-
lated that an average of 100,000 cubic yards of material will be removed
by permit every year in the next decade.

New Work--

In the decade of the 1960's about 1.9 million cubic yards of material
were dredged in Canadian new work projects in Lake Ontario. All new
work in the lake occurred in the early 1960's; none has occurred since
1963. In the research for this project, only one capital dredging
project was projected by any Canadian authorities for Lake Ontario. At
Toronto, port expansion is expected to result in the removal of approxi-
mately 8 million cubic yards of spoil by 1975. No other new work
projects are scheduled for Canadian harbors on Lake Ontario.

Summary

The total volume of maintenance and permit dredging to occur in Lake

29


The confined disposal site for dredgings from Lake St. Clair is firm and
a final Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared in April 1974.
No foreseeable problems, other than the property purchase for the con-

fined site on the St. Clair delta, are anticipated there at this time.

It may be expected that, based on an annual maintenance dredging projec-
tion of 967,768 cubic yards in Lake Huron and Lake St. Clair, 52 percent
of the volume will not meet the sediment quality criteria of the E.P.A.
Future annual maintenance dredging is anticipated to increase by 200,000
cubic yards over the 1961-1970 decade, however the volume of polluted
spoil will increase by 85,000 cubic yards. If no sediment abatement pro-
grams are initiated and the E.P.A. upholds its present sediment quality
criteria, it may be expected that between 45 and 72 percent of future
maintenance dredging will not qualify for open-lake disposal. However,
based on a projection of the principal projects (Table 61) and individ-
ual projects (Table 62) it appears that approximately 55 percent of the
spoil to be removed in the future will be polluted. In most projects
confined disposal facilities under PL 91-611 are to be constructed in
the next 2 to 3 years (Table 58), suggesting that polluted sediments
will be confined in the prepared sites by 1977 and dredging activity and
hence volumes will increase at that time.

In Ontario, investigations by the M.O.E. are not as complete in terms of
the number of harbors sampled as in Michigan. However, of the 14 sam-
pled projects in Lake Huron, 7 exceed the recommended criteria of the
M.O.E. (Figure 15). Although the M.0.E. as yet does not classify naviga-
tion projects as polluted and unpolluted, in this lake, it is assumed
that if the criteria are exceeded the project is polluted. Between 1961
and 1970 maintenance dredging averaged 278,000 cubic yards annually.
Assuming that the D.P.W. projects sampled exceeded the M.O.E, criteria,
then as now, and the remaining projects did not exceed the criteria,
approximately 135,000 cubic yards or 49 percent of the dredgings were
polluted. Table 63 represents the future maintenance dredging in Lake

149


undoubtedly not representative of Canadian activity in harbor develop-
ment and therefore cannot be used for projections.

Canadian Private Dredging~-

Although there is considerably less government surveillance of private
dredging in Canada than in the United States, Canadian records reveal
that only Mission Channel has been dredged by private interests. Pri-

vate operators have performed work in 1965-1967 and in 1970, removing

1295 CY. Three harbors, i.e., Mamainse, Peninsula and Sault Ste. Marie

show no record of dredging for navigational purposes. However, an esti-

mate of 1000 CY per year would cover usual minimal activity.

Private interests have dredged commercial sand and gravel at the rate of
about 42,000 CY per year from the St. Marys River entrance channel.
Approximately 100,000 CY of sand and gravel have been dredged in the
last 10 years from the Algoma Steel approach channels. In any event,
the impact of private operations in Canada cannot be considered signifi-
cant to dredge volume totals or disposal problems. With the figures

available it appears that private work is less than 0.5 percent of the
Canadian volume.

Summary

Tables 47 and 49 present details of U.S. and Canadian dredging activity
in Lake Superior. However, the principal dredging activity is summa-
rized in Table 48 below.

116


Table 43. AVERAGE ANNUAL PRIVATE, MAINTENANCE, AND NEW WORK DREDGING
IN LAKE MICHIGAN BY C.E. DISTRICT, 1961-1970 (50, 52)
(cubic yards)

Chicago Detroit Percent of
District District Total grand total
Private 636,200 114,600 750,800 18
Maintenance 878,800 602,600 1,481,400 35
New work 1,878,500 115,200 1,993,700 47
Totals 3,393,500 832,400 4,225,900 100

dredging volume, 18 percent of the grand total, is relatively large due
to the high permit dredging during the early 1960's in Calumet, Chicago,
and Indiana Harbors. However, the C.E. reported that Section 10 permit
dredging accounts for only 10 percent of the total annual volume in the
Great Lakes (1).

During the base period (1961-1970), maintenance dredging has averaged
1.5 million cubic yards, whereas new work dredging has average 2.0 mil-
lion cubic yards. Approximately 60 percent of the maintenance and 94
percent of the new work dredging took place in the Chicago District.

The average new work dredging volume was relatively high, reflecting the
construction of Burns Waterway Harbor and the deepening and/or expansion
of Calumet, Chicago, Green Bay, Indiana, Kenosha, and Milwaukee Harbors.

In Table 44, the average annual private, maintenance, and new work dredg-
ing quantities are listed by harbor for each C.E. district. Although
the private dredging data are not complete, the table does indicate

those harbors with high permit dredging. Dredging quantities from pri-
vate recreational harbors, such as Wilmette Harbor, Illinois, and quan-
tities removed by power generating companies, for example Consumer's
Power in the Detroit District, are included in the ‘Miscellaneous sites’

data.

91


Average annual commerce at 14 American harbors is substantial enough so
that the cost of their maintenance is classed as unequivocally justified
by the C.E. (2). In fact, 8 American harbors and waterways on Lake Erie
are dredged to maintain the 27-foot St. Lawrence Seaway channel depth
(Figure 4). Other harbors with less commercial traffic, i.e., those
with lower benefit/cost ratios, have continually been dredged in the
past. However, reductions in money allocations or port status changes
may cause cessation of dredging operations at the more marginal harbors

such as Dunkirk, Barcelona, or Rocky River.

In terms of volume, the most important American maintenance dredging
projects in Lake Erie are at Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Sandusky.
All of these require removal of more than 400,000 cubic yards of spoil
annually (Figure 5). Of the Canadian harbors, the volume leader has been
Port Burwell, which averaged approximately 180,000 cubic yards per year
until recently. However, a status change has occurred at Port Burwell,
resulting in a reduction in project depth from 22 feet to 10 feet. Port
Stanley, with an average of less than 90,000 cubic yards of spoil
removed each year, is now the most important dredging project on Lake
Erie. No Canadian harbor on the lake is dredged to the 27-foot St.

Lawrence Seaway depth.

United States Dredging History
in Lake Erie

Lake Erie has been dredged for decades, but complete, meaningful, and
comparable volume data for C.E. projects are available only from 1951.
Prior to that time, records on actual volumes dredged become sketchy to
non-existent for some harbors, even in C.E. Annual Reports. In many
cases, dollar cost figures were reported in lieu of spoil volumes.
Because of differences in types of material being removed, types of
dredging operations, and in value of the dollar over time, accurate con-

version of cost figures to volume figures was not possible for many of

32