City still $13 million short for dredging

Andrew Edwards

Some local environmentalists have said they favor a federal proposal

to dump dredged sediment off Newport Harbor, but the timeline for any

work in Newport Bay is uncertain. The president’s proposed budget

would not provide any funds for the project.

“We need $13 million,” Newport Beach Assistant City Manager Dave

Kiff said. “We got zero.”

The city has already secured $13 million from the California

Coastal Conservancy to dredge the upper bay and has spent $500,000 on

planning, Newport Beach Harbor Resources Manager Tom Rossmiller said.

No city funds are earmarked for dredging, but an additional $13

million from Washington would be needed for the first year of the

project and another $12 million for the second year.

Dredging is used to prevent silt carried into the bay by the San

Diego Creek from accumulating and filling the bay.

One-million federal dollars were appropriated during the last

fiscal year for the Army Corps of Engineers, the federal agency that

would be involved in dredging, Rossmiller said. The proposed budget

for fiscal year 2006, which begins in October, cuts the Corps’ budget

by 7%, to $4.3 billion.

The reductions will likely reduce funding for projects that have

already started, Rep. Chris Cox said.

The president’s budget proposal outlines George W. Bush’s

priorities, but the final budget is traditionally a mix of fiscal

compromises between the White House and members of Congress.

Rossmiller said city officials plan to work with Rep. Chris Cox in an

effort to secure dredging cash as lawmakers wrangle for federal

dollars.

“As in years past, it means we are going to have to add this money

in Congress, because it is not in the president’s budget,” Cox said.

“I’m working this year to secure a multimillion-dollar contribution

for Upper Newport Bay restoration in 2005.”

In late January, the Environmental Protection Agency announced

plans to set aside an underwater area about 4.5 nautical miles from

Newport Harbor as a permanent dumping site for dredged sediments.

Materials would be subject to biological tests to make sure they are

not hazardous before they are dumped, EPA oceanographer Alan Ota

said.

Newport Beach officials supported the idea, because a local dump

site would prevent barges from having to haul waste to a site near

San Pedro, Kiff said. A more distant site would raise costs for

dredging projects.

Environmentalists who support the EPA’s idea include Newport

activist Jack Skinner, Newport Beach Surfrider Foundation chair Nancy

Gardner and Defend the Bay founder Bob Caustin. All three cited the

need for upper bay dredging as the primary reason for their views.

“Most of the sediments that are going to [the site] are to deal

with the sediments in Upper Newport Bay,” Skinner said.

The federal permit for the dumping site used in past dredging

operations expired at the beginning of 2003, but if funding

materializes, the project won’t end up in limbo if a permanent

dumping site is not approved, Rossmiller said. Since plans to dredge

the upper bay were approved when the old disposal area -- located

slightly closer to shore than the proposed site -- was still used,

scows will still be allowed to dump there if upper-bay dredging is

ever funded.

A decision on whether the new site will be approved could be made

by the EPA as early as this fall, Ota said.

Not all local environmentalists are happy with the project. Jan

Vandersloot of the Ocean Outfall Group is skeptical of the dumping

proposal and the specifics of the dredging plan. Vandersloot said he

is still evaluating the EPA’s idea, but he is concerned that dumped

waste could be swept by ocean currents to Crystal Cove or end up

mingling with sewage discharged by the Orange County Sanitation

District.

As far as the bay project is concerned, Vandersloot said he is

worried dredgers will dig too deep.

“I don’t think it’s a good idea to dig Newport Bay to 20 feet

[deep] when it’s supposed to be a shallow estuary,” he said.

The planned project will be larger than the 1998-99 dredging,

Rossmiller said. The last upper-bay dredging removed about 900,000

cubic yards of sediment; plans call for the next project to dig out

2.1-million cubic yards. Planners anticipate the upper bay will not

need to be dredged for 20 years after the project.

If money for dredging cannot be found, Gardner said, the bay could

end up with a drastically new look.

“Maybe it’s all moot,” she said. “The money will never be there,

and we’ll have a lovely meadow.”

* ANDREW EDWARDS covers business and the environment. He can be

reached at (714) 966-4624.

Daily Pilot Staff Writer Alicia Robinson contributed to this

report.