Onondaga Lake Natural Resource Damage Assessment Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Onondaga Lake Natural Resource Damage Assessment Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Final Report | August 2017 prepared for: United States Fish and Wildlife Service State of New York Department of Environmental Conservation prepared by: Industrial Economics, Incorporated 2067 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02140 Table of Contents Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR RESTORATION ............................................... 1 1.2 ORGANIZATION OF THIS CHAPTER ...................................................... 1 1.3 TRUSTEESHIP AND COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER AUTHORITIES ...................... 2 1.4 COORDINATION WITH POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES ....................... 3 1.5 SUMMARY OF SITE HISTORY AND REMEDIATIO N ............................ 4 1.6 NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND RESTORATION ...... 7 1.6.1 NRDAR Activities At This Site ..................................................... 8 1.6.2 Relationship To Remedial Activities ............................................. 9 1.7 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .............................................................. 9 1.8 ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD .............................................................. 12 CHAPTER 2 | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 13 2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................... 13 2.2 NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT .......................... 16 2.2.1 Habitat Types ...................................................................... 16 2.2.2 Fish .................................................................................. 18 2.2.3 Reptiles And Amphibians......................................................... 18 2.2.4 Birds ................................................................................. 19 2.2.5 Mammals ............................................................................ 19 2.2.6 Threatened And Endangered Species .......................................... 19 2.3 SOCIOECONOMIC RESOURCES .......................................................... 20 2.4 CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES ............................................ 20 2.5 LANDSCAPE-SCALE ECOLOGICAL STRESSORS ........................................ 20 2.5.1 Invasive Species ................................................................... 21 2.5.2 Climate Change .................................................................... 22 2.6 SUMMARY ................................................................................. 22 CHAPTER 3 | NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONTAMINANT-RELATED INJURIES 23 3.1 ASSESSMENT AREA ....................................................................... 23 3.2 NATURAL RESOURCES ................................................................... 26 3.3 NATURAL RESOURCE INJURY .......................................................... 26 i 3.3.1 Ecological Losses Resulting From Injury To Natural Resources ........... 27 3.3.2 Recreational Fishing, Boating, And Other Water-Based Activity Losses . 39 CHAPTER 4 | PROPOSED RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES 43 4.1 ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION / NATURAL RECOVERY .............................. 44 4.2 ALTERNATIVE B: RESTORATION THAT SATISFIES SITE-SPECIFIC CRITERIA ..... 44 4.2.1 Habitat Creation, Restoration, And Enhancement .......................... 45 4.2.2 Habitat Preservation ............................................................. 46 4.2.3 Recreational Enhancement Projects ........................................... 47 4.2.4 Specific Proposed Projects ...................................................... 47 4.2.5 Future Project Fund .............................................................. 48 4.3 ALTERNATIVE C: RESTORATION THAT DOES NOT SATISFY SITE-SPECIFIC CRITERIA ........................................................................................... 52 CHAPTER 5 | EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 55 5.1 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ................................ 55 5.2 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE A: NO ACTION / NATURAL RECOVERY ......... 56 5.3 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE B: RESTORATION THAT BEST SATISFIES SITE- SPECIFIC CRITERIA ................................................................................ 57 5.3.1 Habitat Creation, Restoration, And Enhancement .......................... 58 5.3.2 Habitat Preservation ............................................................. 61 5.3.3 Recreational Enhancement Projects ........................................... 62 5.4 PREFERRED RESTORATION ALTERNATIVE ............................................ 63 REFERENCES 64 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Threatened and Endangered Species of Onondaga County Appendix B Conceptual Views of Proposed Restoration Projects Appendix C Copies of Restoration Proposals Submitted in Response to Request for Project Ideas in 2014/2015 Appendix D Additional Restoration Project Ideas Submitted to Trustees During the Public Comment Period for the Draft Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Appendix E Responsiveness Summary ii LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1-1 Onondaga Lake Superfund Site and Sub-Sites Exhibit 2-1 Onondaga Lake Watershed (Syracuse-Onondaga County Planning Agency 2003) Exhibit 3-1 Aquatic Geographic Scope of Onondaga Lake NRDAR Exhibit 3-2 Terrestrial Geographic Scope of Onondaga Lake NRDAR Exhibit 3-3 Representative Resources by Habitat Type Exhibit 3-4 Spatial Interpolation of Onondaga Lake Sediment PECQs Exhibit 3-4A Trustees’ Proposed Average Sediment Service Loss by Mean PECQ Range Exhibit 3-5 Summary of Dietary Mercury Concentration by Feeding Guild Exhibit 3-6 Summary of Onondaga Soil Mercury Concentration by Sample Exhibit 3-7 Assessment Area for Estimating Injury to Fish, Sediment-dwelling Invertebrates and Aquatic Birds from Mercury Exposure Exhibit 4-1 Ecological Restoration Projects under Alternative B Exhibit 4-2 Recreational Restoration Projects under Alternative B Exhibit 4-3 Restoration Project Proponents under Alternative B Exhibit 4-4 Restoration Projects under Alternative C iii LIST OF ACRONYMS BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CFR Federal Code of Regulations cm centimeter COC Contaminant of Concern DAP Damage Assessment Plan DOI United States Department of the Interior EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement EPA United States Enviromental Protection Agency FCA Fish Consumption Advisory FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact fw fresh weight Honeywell Honeywell International, Inc. mg/kg milligrams per kilogram MOA Memorandum of Agreement NEPA National Environmental Policy Act ng/g nanograms per gram NPL National Priorities List NRDAR Natural Resource Damage Assesment and Restoration NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PCB polychlorinated biphenyls PECQ Probable Effects Concentration Quotient PRP Potentially Responsible Party RP/EA Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service ug/kg micrograms per kilogram wb whole body ww wet weight iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For decades, mercury and other hazardous substances were released into Onondaga Lake in New York, its tributaries, and associated uplands. Natural resources (e.g., surface water, sediments, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) have been exposed to and adversely affected by these contaminants. As part of the natural resource damage assessment and restoration (NRDAR) process, the Trustees (the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation) developed this Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment (RP/EA) in accordance with 43 CFR § 11.82 and 11.93 to inform the public as to the types and scale of restoration that are expected to compensate for contaminant-related injuries to natural resources. The ultimate goal of NRDAR is to restore, replace, rehabilitate, or acquire the equivalent of injured natural resources and resource services lost due to the release of hazardous substances. Therefore, in accordance with relevant regulations, the Trustees identified three potential restoration alternatives, including a No Action alternative. After a review of the potential project types that would occur under each alternative, specific proposed projects compiled from Trustee- and publicly-generated suggestions, and likely environmental consequences, the Trustees identified Alternative B: Restoration that Satisfies Site-specific Criteria as their Preferred Alternative. The Trustees published a Draft RP/EA in April 2017 and solicited public input. Public comments have been considered and incorporated into the Final RP/EA, with changes made to this document and a Responsiveness Summary included. Onondaga Lake v CHAPTER 1 | INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR RESTORATION For decades, mercury and other hazardous substances were released into Onondaga Lake in New York, its tributaries, and associated uplands. Natural resources (e.g., surface water, sediments, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals) have been exposed to and adversely affected by these contaminants. Over the last few years, Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell), in cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has removed and isolated contaminated sediments in Onondaga Lake and implemented habitat