DOCSLIB.ORG

River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Design Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Design Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area Final River Mile 10.9 Removal Action Final Design Report, Lower Passaic River Study Area Prepared for Cooperating Parties Group, Newark, New Jersey July 31, 2013 One South Main Street Suite 1100 Dayton, OH 45402 Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. vii 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Removal Action Objectives .............................................................................................................. 1‐2 1.3 Engineering Design Packages ........................................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3.1 Dredging and Barge Transportation ................................................................................... 1‐3 1.3.2 Stabilization ........................................................................................................................ 1‐3 1.3.3 Capping ............................................................................................................................... 1‐3 1.3.4 Overland Transportation and Final Disposal ...................................................................... 1‐3 2 Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements ........................................................................ 2‐1 2.1 Chemical‐Specific ARARs ................................................................................................................. 2‐2 2.2 Action‐Specific ARARs ...................................................................................................................... 2‐2 2.3 Location‐Specific ARARs .................................................................................................................. 2‐3 3 Relevant Site Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1 Area Description .............................................................................................................................. 3‐1 3.2 Geology ............................................................................................................................................ 3‐1 3.3 Groundwater ................................................................................................................................... 3‐2 3.4 In Situ Physical and Chemical Characteristics .................................................................................. 3‐2 3.4.1 Chemical Properties ............................................................................................................ 3‐2 3.4.2 Physical Properties ............................................................................................................. 3‐3 3.5 Hydrodynamics ................................................................................................................................ 3‐3 3.6 Climate Conditions ........................................................................................................................... 3‐4 3.7 Bridges ............................................................................................................................................. 3‐5 4 Dredging .............................................................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.1 Design Criteria ................................................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.2 Estimated Volume of Dredged Material .......................................................................................... 4‐1 4.2.1 Sediment ............................................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.2.2 Debris .................................................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.2.3 Slope Stability ..................................................................................................................... 4‐2 4.2.4 Utilities ................................................................................................................................ 4‐2 4.3 Dredge Performance Criteria ........................................................................................................... 4‐2 4.3.1 Equipment Type and Size ................................................................................................... 4‐2 4.3.2 Position Accuracy and Dredge Tolerance ........................................................................... 4‐3 4.3.3 Production Rate .................................................................................................................. 4‐3 4.3.4 Dredging Operations ........................................................................................................... 4‐4 4.3.5 Material Transport .............................................................................................................. 4‐5 4.3.6 River Operations ................................................................................................................. 4‐5 4.3.7 Hours of Operation ............................................................................................................. 4‐6 4.3.8 Operability, Reliability, and Maintainability ....................................................................... 4‐6 4.4 Resuspension Management ............................................................................................................ 4‐6 4.4.1 Relevant Site Conditions and Impact on Resuspension Risks ............................................. 4‐6 4.4.2 DREDGE Model ................................................................................................................... 4‐8 4.4.3 Proposed Resuspension Control Approach ........................................................................ 4‐8 4.4.4 Silt Curtains ......................................................................................................................... 4‐9 4.4.5 Rationale for No Sheet Pile Wall ......................................................................................... 4‐9 4.5 Waterside Site Requirements ........................................................................................................ 4‐10 iii CONTENTS, CONTINUED 4.6 Environmental Constraints ............................................................................................................ 4‐10 4.6.1 Water Quality ................................................................................................................... 4‐10 4.6.2 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 4‐16 4.6.3 Noise ................................................................................................................................. 4‐16 4.7 Project and Community Health and Safety ................................................................................... 4‐17 5 Rationale for Not Conducting Sediment‐Washing Pilot Test(s) ............................................................. 5‐1 6 Sediment Treatment: Stabilization ....................................................................................................... 6‐1 6.1 Design Criteria ................................................................................................................................. 6‐1 6.2 Preliminary Design Elements ........................................................................................................... 6‐1 6.2.1 Barge Water Removal ......................................................................................................... 6‐2 6.2.2 Material Off‐Loading .......................................................................................................... 6‐2 6.2.3 Material Separation ............................................................................................................ 6‐3 6.2.4 Stabilization ........................................................................................................................ 6‐3 6.2.5 Material Storage ................................................................................................................. 6‐3 6.2.6 Water Treatment ................................................................................................................ 6‐3 6.3 Waterside Site Requirements .......................................................................................................... 6‐3 6.4 Hours of Operation .......................................................................................................................... 6‐3 6.5 Environmental Constraints .............................................................................................................. 6‐4 6.6 Sediment Stabilization Monitoring .................................................................................................. 6‐4 6.7 Operability, Reliability, and Maintainability ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • D.J. Henderson Collection (1927-1990S)
    D.J. Henderson Collection, Newark Public Library, Page 1 D.J. Henderson Collection (1927-1990s) Charles F. Cummings New Jersey Information Center The Newark Public Library 5 Washington Street, PO Box 630, Newark, New Jersey 07101-0630 Phone: (973) 733-7775; Email: [email protected] URL: http://www.npl.org/Pages/Collections/njic.html © 2014 All rights reserved. Title: D.J. Henderson Collection Dates: 1936 - 1994; bulk 1970s and 1980s Location: Charles F. Cummings New Jersey Information Center Extent: 11 Hollinger boxes and 2 Paige boxes Processed: Kathy Kauhl, 2014 Language: English Restrictions on Access Access Restrictions Open to the public. Photocopying of materials is limited and no materials may be photocopied without permission from library staff. Use Restrictions Researchers wishing to publish, reproduce, or reprint materials from this collection must obtain permission. Preferred Citation D.J. Henderson Collection, Charles F. Cummings New Jersey Information Center, Newark Public Library. Background: Born in 1898 in Indiana, Dorland J. Henderson earned a degree in electrical engineering from Purdue. From 1932 he worked for the New Jersey Department of Transportation in various capacities, overcoming discrimination to retire in 1970 as Director of Traffic Engineering. A key project was the Route 72 bridge spanning Stafford Township and Long Beach Island, named for him in 2000, which made use of low level lighting. After retiring, he consulted on movable bridges until 1978. Elizabeth (Betty) Henderson, from Michigan, was educated as a social worker and worked for some time in the East Orange schools. She was also an accomplished weaver. D.J. Henderson Collection, Newark Public Library, Page 2 In 1954, the Hendersons purchased the run-down 18th-century Sydenham farmhouse on Old Road to Bloomfield adjacent to Branch Brook Park in the North Ward of Newark and over the decades painstakingly restored it.
    [Show full text]
  • Title of Master's Thesis
    DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSPECTION CHECKLIST FOR RISK ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES IN NEW JERSEY by LAYLA ISSA A thesis submitted to the Graduate School - New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science Graduate Program in Civil and Environmental Engineering written under the direction of Dr. Hani Nassif and approved by _________________________________________ _________________________________________ _________________________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey May, 2008 ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSPECTION CHECKLIST FOR RISK ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES IN NEW JERSEY By LAYLA ISSA Thesis Director: Dr. Hani Nassif In the aftermath of the September 11th tragedies, transportation infrastructure has become one of the most visible targets since its destruction could result in substantial human casualties, economic losses, and socio-political damages. Improving bridge security is very important in helping various governmental agencies protect and design structures to better withstand extreme blast loadings. Although many bridge owners have developed their own prioritization methodologies, there is still a need for a better approach to prioritize and assess all bridges not only in New Jersey but in the whole United States. This research focuses on bridges located in New Jersey only, however the analysis and results could be applied to bridges in other states. The studies include an analysis on risk management and vulnerability assessment by developing a checklist that will provide identification of critical bridges for security hazards and guidelines for bridge security design in order to reduce their vulnerability to attacks. The analysis will first start by identifying bridges in New Jersey and the different ii types available.
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP)
    PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN COUNTY OF HUDSON / COUNTY OF ESSEX Local Concept Development Study for Clay Street Bridge over the Passaic River Borough of East Newark, Hudson County, and City of Newark, Essex County, NJ North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority Hudson County / Essex County Clay Street Bridge over the Passaic River Local Concept Development Study Borough of East Newark and City of Newark, New Jersey Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP) Prepared by: Hardesty & Hanover, LLC M.A. Culbertson, LLC March 2014 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN COUNTY OF HUDSON / COUNTY OF ESSEX Local Concept Development Study for Clay Street Bridge over the Passaic River Borough of East Newark, Hudson County, and City of Newark, Essex County, NJ TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Purpose ……………………………………………………...…………...…………… 1 B. Project Description…………………………………………………………………… 1 C. Public Involvement Process Overview………………………………....……….…… 1 D. Public Involvement Process Steps - Local Concept Development Phase…….…… 2 E. Schedule of Public Involvement Initiatives………………………...……………….. 8 F. Public Involvement Deliverables……………………………………………………. 11 Prepared by: Hardesty & Hanover, LLC M.A. Culbertson, LLC March 2014 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION PLAN COUNTY OF HUDSON / COUNTY OF ESSEX Local Concept Development Study for Clay Street Bridge over the Passaic River Borough of East Newark, Hudson County, and City of Newark, Essex County, NJ A. Purpose The purpose of the Public Involvement effort for the Hudson County/Essex County Clay Street Bridge Local Concept Development Study is to have an informed and involved public who has access to the planning approach and the decision making process. The Public Involvement Action Plan (PIAP) seeks to provide ample opportunity for public comment regarding the identification and development of proposed improvements.
    [Show full text]
  • Clay Street Bi-County Bridge NJTPA
    njtpa H U D S O N C O U N T y LOCAL CAPital PrOJECT DELiVEry PROGRAM Thomas DeGise Hudson County Executive NJTPA First Vice-Chairman udson County, in cooperation with County to Newark’s downtown business HEssex County, successfully applied for a district. The Passaic River crossing, which $478,450 grant for this project through the opened in 1908, is listed on the New Jersey NJTPA’s 2014 Local Capital Project Delivery Register of Historic Places. Program. The project will investigate options for remediating the Clay Street Bridge con- The Local Capital Project necting the City of Newark and the Borough Delivery Program Clay Street of East Newark in Essex and Hudson Counties. The NJTPA’s Local Capital Project Delivery Program awards grants to counties and cities Bi-County Bridge Project Details to investigate all aspects of a project, includ- The project will study alternatives for improv- ing environmental, right of way, access, ing the movable swing bridge, which is design and feasibility issues. Projects that Funding awarded: classified as structurally deficient and function- complete this initial investigative work, ally obsolete. The bridge has been closed called the Local Concept Development $478,450 several times in recent years for structural and Phase, may be eligible for eventual construc- mechanical repairs, and has suffered general tion with federal funds. For more informa- deterioration and scour, a condition in which tion about the program, visit NJTPA.org. flowing water erodes the soil around a structure’s supports. About the Project Area The bridge crosses the Passaic River and provides access for commuters in Hudson B er g e 501 n Main 3 505 HB LR 1 Mid town Di rect 280 139 PATH r o d 1T rri o 1 P C 501 AT E H East N River HBL R 440 Newark Liberty Int'l 78 185 Newark Bay R Hudson HBL River 440.
    [Show full text]
  • ESSEX County
    NJ DEP - Historic Preservation Office Page 1 of 30 New Jersey and National Registers of Historic Places Last Update: 9/28/2021 ESSEX County Rose Cottage (ID#3084) ESSEX County 221 Main Street SHPO Opinion: 7/11/1996 Belleville Township Silver Lake Stone Houses (ID#2836) Belleville Fire Department Station #3 (ID#2835) 288-289 and 304 Belmont Avenue, 51 and 57 Heckle Street 136 Franklin Street SHPO Opinion: 9/28/1995 SHPO Opinion: 12/4/1995 745 Washington Avenue (ID#1062) Belleville Public Library (ID#1057) 745 Washington Avenue Corner of Washington Avenue and Academy Street SHPO Opinion: 1/25/1994 SHPO Opinion: 12/3/1976 Bloomfield Township Belleville Municipal Historic District (ID#1058) Washington Avenue between Holmes Street and Bellevue Avenue Arlington Avenue Bridge (ID#254) SHPO Opinion: 4/19/1991 NJ Transit Montclair Line, Milepost 10.54 over Arlington Avenue SHPO Opinion: 2/3/1999 Belleville Park (ID#5676) 398 Mill Street Bakelite Corporation Factory Buildings (ID#2837) SHPO Opinion: 9/6/2018 230 Grove Street SHPO Opinion: 12/4/1995 Branch Brook Park [Historic District] (ID#1216) Bound by Orange Avenue, Newark City Subway (former Morris Canal), Bloomfield Cemetery (ID#5434) Second River, Branch Brook Place, Forest Parkway, and Lake Street 383 Belleville Avenue NR: 1/12/1981 (NR Reference #: 81000392) SR: 4/14/2015 SR: 6/5/1980 Also located in: SHPO Opinion: 3/30/1979 ESSEX County, Glen Ridge Borough Township See Main Entry / Filed Location: ESSEX County, Newark City Bloomfield Junior High School (ID#4250) 177 Franklin Street Essex County Isolation Hospital (ID#629) SHPO Opinion: 8/15/2002 520 Belleville Avenue (at Franklin Avenue) COE: 1/10/1995 Bloomfield Green Historic District (ID#1063) (a.ka.
    [Show full text]
  • Record of Decision
    ATTACHMENT F BRIDGE INFORMATION FOR THE LOWER PASSAIC RIVER Minimum Depth in Channel Entering From Seaward April 30, 2014 Reach RM Left Outside Quarter (ft) Middle Half (ft) Right Outside Quarter (ft) Kearny Point Reach 0-1.2 13.8 13.7 9.5 Bridge Clearance Name of Bridge River Mile Horizontal (ft) Vertical MHW1 (ft) Vertical MLW2 (ft) Central Railroad of NJ Bridge 1.2 145 NA 0696 0697 Attachment F Bridge Information for the Lower Passaic River Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Page 1 of 21 2016 0698 1. MHW = Mean High Water; 2. MLW = Mean Low Water; 3. Please refer to Figure 1 for directions and locations of photos taken on the Lower Passaic River. Attachment F Bridge Information for the Lower Passaic River Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Page 2 of 21 2016 Minimum Depth in Channel Entering From Seaward April 30, 2014 Reach RM Left Outside Quarter (ft) Middle Half (ft) Right Outside Quarter (ft) Point No Point Reach 1.2-2.5 0.9 5.5 9.9 Bridge Clearance Name of Bridge River Mile Horizontal (ft) Vertical MHW1 (ft) Vertical MLW2 (ft) Routes 1&9 Lincoln Highway Bridge 1.8 300 40 45.5 0699 0700 1. MHW = Mean High Water; 2. MLW = Mean Low Water; 3. Please refer to Figure 1 for directions and locations of photos taken on the Lower Passaic River. Attachment F Bridge Information for the Lower Passaic River Lower 8.3 Miles of the Lower Passaic River Page 3 of 21 2016 Bridge Clearance Name of Bridge River Mile Horizontal CL1 (ft) Vertical CL1 (ft) MHW2 Vertical CL1 (ft) MLW3 Pulaski Skyway 2 520 135 140.5 0702 0705 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Hudson & Manhattan Railroad Repair Shops
    HUDSON & MANHATTAN RAILROAD REPAIR SHOPS - HAER No. KJ-108 (Hoboken Shops of. the Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Track & Structures Division) \~4^\£Tv5, 55 Hudson Street Ki ^ Hoboken p Hudson County , H - HCXtbO / New Jersey I \- PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD National Park Service Philadelphia Support Office U.S. Custom House 200 Chestnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 HAW HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD q '"lu^crws HUDSON & MANHATTAN RAILROAD REPAIR SHOPS \if^^' (Hoboken Shops of the Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Track & Structures Division) HAERNo.NJ-108 Location: 55 Hudson Street, Hoboken, Hudson County, New Jersey. UTM: 18.581864.4509677 U.S.G.S. Quadrangle: Jersey City, NJ, 1:24000 Date of Construction: 1907-08 Engineer/Architect: Believed to be Charles M. Jacobs (1850-1919) Chief Engineer of the H&M Railroad Company Present Owner: NJ TRANSIT (New Jersey Transit) One Penn Plaza East Newark, New Jersey 07105 Last Use: Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Car Shops Significance: The Hudson and Manhattan Railroad (H&M) Repair Shops are significant as the first repair and maintenance facility for the H&M and for the innovative rail car elevator lift located inside the building that allowed rail cars to be hoisted from the subway tunnel up into the shops for repairs. The H&M Shops are also significant for historical associations with the Hudson and Manhattan Railroad Company which initiated rapid transit from Manhattan to New Jersey in 1908 and for association with William Gibbs McAdoo, builder of the first trans- Hudson rapid transit tunnel. Project Information: This documentation was completed in January 1997 as a mitigation measure for the demolition of the H&M Shops as stipulated in the Memorandum of Agreement for the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System.
    [Show full text]
  • D01PN01-161 Clay Street Bridge, Bridge Street Bridge and Kinsgland Ave(Avondale) Bridge Passaic River
    Commander (dpb) First Coast Guard District 1 South Street Battery Park Building New York, NY 10004-1466 March 9, 2018 PRELIMINARY PUBLIC NOTICE 1-161 The United States Coast Guard is soliciting public comments on a proposal by the New Jersey Department of Transportation/New Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJDOT/NJTPA), to replace the Clay Street Bridge movable bridge with a fixed bridge on the Passaic River at mile 6.1 as well as proposed major rehabilitations/replacements for the Bridge Street Bridge at mile 5.7, and the Kingsland Avenue (Avondale) Bridge at mile 10.7 on the Passaic River. The replacement design criteria for the Bridge Street Bridge and Kingsland Avenue Bridge have not been developed as yet. The future navigational use of the lower Passaic River is a factor in the consideration of the optimal replacement designs for each bridge project. The need for these proposals are to replace structurally deficient, functionally obsolete bridges. In addition, Consolidated Rail Corporation (CONRAIL) proposes to replace the Point-No- Point Railroad swing bridge with a single-leaf bascule bridge at mile 2.6 on the Passaic River. Coast Guard Bridge Permit applications have not yet been submitted for these bridge project proposals. WATERWAY AND LOCATION: BRIDGE MILE POINT To/From Point-No-Point 2.6 Newark/Kearny Bridge Street 5.7 Newark/ Harrison Clay Street 6.1 Newark/East Newark Kingsland Avenue 10.7 Lyndhurst/Nutley CHARACTER OF WORK: Clay Street Bridge: Replace the existing movable bridge with a fixed bridge. Due to the proposed fixed vertical clearance of 15 feet, this proposal would limit vessel access for vessels with height requirements on the Passaic River.
    [Show full text]
  • River Sections for the Lower Passaic River
    LLoowweerr PPaassssaaiicc RRiivveerr RReessttoorraattiioonn PPrroojjeecctt Work Plan August 2005 Version: 2005/08/02 PREPARED BY: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 104 Corporate Park Drive White Plains, NY 10602 FOR: US Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Contract No. DACW41-02-D-0003 WORK PLAN LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT Prepared by: Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., in conjunction with Battelle and HydroQual, Inc. August 2005 Version: 2005/08/02 LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT WORK PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Site Background and History......................................................................... 1-3 1.2.1 A Brief History ............................................................................................ 1-3 1.2.2 Federal and State Agencies’ Involvement ................................................. 1-10 1.2.3 Project Delivery Team and Workgroup Structure (PMP Task ZAB)........ 1-11 1.3 Community Involvement and Public Outreach (PMP Task JI) ................... 1-12 2.0 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Geologic Setting............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Surface Water Hydrology
    [Show full text]
  • 2008-12-29 USACE Lower Passaic River Commercial Navigation
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Revised: December 29, 2008 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..1 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...8 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….10 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…...12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………24 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..26 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………16 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..17 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................25 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6. Petroleum Products as a Segment of Freight Traffic, Lower Passaic River, 1980-2006………………………………………………………………………..13 Figure 7.
    [Show full text]