 

Rogue River, Oregon

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation Study and Environmental
Assessment

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10

April 2009

Abbreviations and Acronyms

CFR		Code of Federal Regulations

cy		cubic yard(s)

Corps		U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

DDT		dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane

DPS		Distinct Population Segment

EA		Environmental Assessment

EPA		U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ESA		Endangered Species Act

ESU		Evolutionarily Significant Unit

FR		Federal Register

mg/L		milligram(s) per liter

MDL		method detection limit

MLLW	mean lower low water

MPRSA	Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act

MRL		method reporting limit

NAD		North American Datum

NMFS		National Marine Fisheries Service

ODMDS	ocean dredged material disposal site(s)

ODEQ		Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

ODFW		Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

PAH		polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon(s)

PCB		polychlorinated biphenyl

PCE		primary constituent elements

RM		river mile(s)

SMMP		Site Management and Monitoring Plan

SONCC	Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast

TOC		total organic carbon

TBT		tributyltin and other organotins

ug/kg		micrograms per kilogram

ug/L		micrograms per liter

USGS		U.S. Geological Survey

ZSF		Zone of Siting Feasibility



Rogue River, Oregon

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation

and Environmental Assessment

Report Preparers

Wendy K. Briner	Biologist	CENWP-PM-E

Mark D. Siipola	Civil Engineer	CENWP-EC-HR

Timothy J. Sherman	Biologist	CENWP-EC-HR

Kim W. Larson	Fishery Biologist	CENWP-PM-E

Bert Rader	Archaeologist	CENWP-PM-E

Jonathan Freedman	Ocean Dumping Coordinator	EPA, Region 10

Jessica Winkler	Biologist	EPA, Region 10

Karen Bahus	Biologist/Writer	Consultant

Rogue River, Oregon

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation

and Environmental Assessment

Table of Contents

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371045"  PURPOSE AND
NEED	  PAGEREF _Toc226371045 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371046"  Need for Disposal Site Designation	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371046 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371047"  Background	  PAGEREF _Toc226371047 \h  2
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371048"  Offshore Disposal History	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371048 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371049"  AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371049 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371050"  Physical Resources	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371050 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371051"  General	  PAGEREF _Toc226371051 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371052"  Rogue River Sediments	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371052 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371053"  ODMDS Sediments	  PAGEREF _Toc226371053
\h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371054"  Oceanographic Circulation	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371054 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371055"  Geology	  PAGEREF _Toc226371055 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371056"  Water Quality	  PAGEREF _Toc226371056 \h
 7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371057"  Biological Resources	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371057 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371058"  Plankton and Fish Larvae	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371058 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371059"  Benthic Invertebrates	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371059 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371060"  Fish and Epibenthic Species	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371060 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371061"  Commercial and Recreational Fisheries	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371061 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371062"  Wildlife	  PAGEREF _Toc226371062 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371063"  Endangered Species	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371063 \h  10  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371064"  Socio-Economic Resources	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371064 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371065"  Cultural Resources	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371065 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371066"  Recreational Uses	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371066 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371067"  Commercial Uses	  PAGEREF _Toc226371067
\h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371068"  ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371068 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371069"  No Action Alternative	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371069 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371070"  Upland Disposal Alternative	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371070 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371071"  Estuarine Disposal Alternative	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371071 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371072"  Ocean Disposal Alternatives	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371072 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371073"  Disposal off of the Continental Shelf	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371073 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371074"  Continued Use of Existing ODMDS	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371074 \h  14  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371075"  Designation of New ODMDS	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371075 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371076"  ANALYSIS OF OCEAN DUMPING SITE
DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS	  PAGEREF _Toc226371076 \h
 15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371077"  Overview	  PAGEREF _Toc226371077 \h  15 


  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371078"  Defining a Zone of Siting Feasibility	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371078 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371079"  Rogue River ODMDS Zone of Siting
Feasibility	  PAGEREF _Toc226371079 \h  17  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371080"  Regulatory Criteria for Ocean Disposal
Site Selection	  PAGEREF _Toc226371080 \h  18  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371081"  General Criteria	  PAGEREF _Toc226371081
\h  18  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371082"  Specific Criteria	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371082 \h  25  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371083"  SUMMARY OF COORDINATION UNDER OTHER
APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATUTES	  PAGEREF _Toc226371083 \h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371084"  Federal Action	  PAGEREF _Toc226371084
\h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371085"  Public Involvement	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371085 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371086"  Endangered Species Act	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371086 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371087"  Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act	  PAGEREF _Toc226371087 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371088"  Marine Mammal Protection Act	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371088 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371089"  Coastal Zone Management Act	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371089 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371090"  National Historic Preservation Act	 
PAGEREF _Toc226371090 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371091"  Tribal Coordination	  PAGEREF
_Toc226371091 \h  37  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371092"  SELECTION OF OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE FOR
FORMAL DESIGNATION	  PAGEREF _Toc226371092 \h  37  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc226371093"  LITERATURE CITED	  PAGEREF _Toc226371093
\h  38  

 

List of Tables

  TOC \h \z \c "Table"    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc203876097"  Table 1.  Rogue
River Project Dredging Volumes Placed in the ODMDS	  PAGEREF
_Toc203876097 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc203876098"  Table 2.  Sediment Grain Size and Total
Volatile Solids Data, 2007	  PAGEREF _Toc203876098 \h  6  

 

List of Figures

  TOC \h \z \c "Figure"    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc203876099"  Figure 1. 
Rogue River ODMDS and Vicinity	  PAGEREF _Toc203876099 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc203876100"  Figure 2.  Overlay Evaluation of
Individual Resources of Limited Distribution	  PAGEREF _Toc203876100 \h 
23  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc203876101"  Figure 3.  Potential Navigation Hazards	
 PAGEREF _Toc203876101 \h  32  

 

Technical Appendices

Appendix A – Living Resources

Appendix B – Physical Processes and Geological Features

Appendix C – Sediment and Water Quality

Appendix D – Cultural Resources

Appendix E – Recreational Resources

Appendix F – Sediment Management and Monitoring PlanPURPOSE AND NEED

This Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) Evaluation and
Environmental Assessment (EA) has been jointly prepared by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).  The purpose of this evaluation is to provide documentation in
support of final designation by EPA of an existing Section 103 ODMDS
located offshore from the Rogue River, Oregon (Figure 1), which is
needed for long-term use by the Corps for the federally authorized Rogue
River navigation project and others for the disposal of dredged material
meeting ocean disposal criteria.  This evaluation will assess the
proposed final designation of the Rogue River ODMDS against the
statutory requirements set forth in the Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuaries Act, as amended, (MPRSA or Ocean Dumping Act), 33 U.S.C.
1401 to 1445, and the regulations found in Part 228 of Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).  These regulations were promulgated
in accordance with the criteria set out in the MPRSA sections 102 and
103.  This evaluation also outlines EPA’s coordination under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. Sections
4321 to 4370f, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA),16 U.S.C.
Sections 1531 to 1544, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1994 (MSA), 16 U.S.C. Sections 1801 to 1891d, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. Sections 1361 to
1389, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) 16 U.S.C.
Sections 470 to 470a-2, and the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
(CZMA) 16 U.S.C. Sections 1451 to 1465, all as amended.

Need for Disposal Site Designation

EPA undertook its evaluation of whether to designate any dredged
material disposal sites near the mouth of the Rogue River pursuant to
its authority under MPRSA section 102(c) in response to several factors.
These factors include the following:

The prohibition on further use of the existing Rogue Section 103
disposal site following the close of the 2008-2009 dredging season
pursuant to the Corps' site selection authority under MPRSA section
103(b), which allows the Corps, with EPA’s concurrence, to designate a
Section 103 site for a period of 5 years with a maximum 5 year
extension;

The understanding that in the absence of an EPA-designated disposal site
or sites, any necessary open-water disposal would either be precluded or
the Corps would have to undertake additional short-term site selections,
perhaps a number of them, in the future;

The clear Congressional preference expressed in MPRSA section 103(b)
that any open-water disposal of dredged material take place at
EPA-designated sites, if feasible; and

The statutory preference to concentrate any open-water disposal at sites
that have been used historically and at fewer sites, see 40 CFR
228.5(e).

EPA's evaluation considered whether there was a need for any disposal
site designations for long-term dredged material disposal, including an
assessment of whether other dredged material management methods and or
disposal options could reasonably be judged to obviate the need for such
designations. Having concluded that there was a need for open-water
disposal sites, EPA then assessed whether there were sites that would
satisfy the applicable environmental criteria to support a site
designation under MPRSA section 102(c).

Background

The MPRSA was passed by Congress in recognition of the fact that the
disposal of material into ocean waters could potentially result in
unacceptable adverse environmental effects.  Under the MPRSA, the EPA
and the Corps were assigned responsibility to regulate the dumping of
all types of material into ocean waters and to prevent or strictly limit
the dumping into ocean waters of any material that would “unreasonably
degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine
environment, ecological systems, or economic potentialities.”

The EPA administers and enforces the overall permit program for ocean
disposal of material other than dredged material and designates dredged
material disposal sites.  The Corps, with EPA’s concurrence, issues
permits for the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of
ocean disposal where the Corps determines that dumping will not
unreasonably degrade the environment or endanger human health, welfare,
or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems, or economic
potentialities.  While the Corps does not administratively issue itself
a permit, the requirements that must be met before dredged material
derived from Corps’ projects can be disposed into ocean waters are the
same as those where a permit would be issued.

EPA must consider statutory criteria and evaluate the five general
regulatory criteria at 40 C.F.R.§ 228.5 and the eleven specific
regulatory criteria at 40 C.F.R. § 228.6.  Pursuant to Section 102(c),
the EPA is responsible for designating sites for the disposal of dredged
material.  The Corps is allowed, with EPA’s concurrence, to select a
site for ocean disposal of dredged material pursuant to Section 103(b)
and (c), when a feasible disposal site has not been designated by EPA,
or the continued use of an alternative site is necessary to maintain
navigation and facilitate interstate or international commerce and EPA
has determined that the alternative site does not pose an unacceptable
risk to human health, aquatic resources, or the environment.  An
EPA-designated site requires a site management and monitoring plan
(SMMP).  Use of the designated site is subject to the restrictions
included in the SMMP and EPA’s designation regulations.  These
restrictions are based on an in-depth evaluation of the site and
potential disposal activity, as well as public review and comment. 
Designation of an ODMDS in itself does not result in disposal of dredged
material.  A separate evaluation of the suitability of dredged material
for ocean disposal must be undertaken for each proposed use of the site
by either the Corps or non-Corps permit applicant.  Typically this
involves evaluation of the specific disposal activity under the
criteria, circulation of a public notice (which can include multiple
years of use), and specific coordination with stakeholders, as well as
concurrence by the appropriate EPA region.

Figure   SEQ Figure \* ARABIC  1 .  Rogue River ODMDS and Vicinity

Offshore Disposal History

Multiple persons and/or entities may have utilized sites in the vicinity
of the Rogue River since 1962 for disposal of dredged material at
interim or Section 103 of the MPRSA selected sites.  However, the
primary user has historically been the Portland District of the Corps,
which has used the site in its current location since 1977 (see table
1).  

The volume of dredged material deposited offshore and originating from
the Corps’ Rogue River project from 1976-1985 ranged from zero to
142,260 cy with an annual average of 47,500 cy, all of which was from
the main channel.  From 1986 to 1989 maintenance activity was less (no
dredging occurred in 1988) and Corps disposal volumes were reduced to an
annual average of 35,600 cy for the 3 years dredging did occur.  From
1986 and 2006, approximately 1.1 million cy have been placed by the
Corps at the Rogue River ODMDS for a 20-year average annual loading
volume of 54,000 cy/year.  From 2000 to 2007 the average annual
placement of material at the ODMDS by the Corps was 41,000 cy. 
Persistent mounding has not occurred at the ODMDS.  Other disposal
activities may have been approved, but would represent a small
percentage of total disposal volumes at the ODMDS.  

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  1 .  Rogue River Project Dredging Volumes
Placed in the ODMDS

Fiscal Year	Dredging

Volumes (cy)

1976-1985	474,900

1986	0

1987	55,600

1988	36,400

1989	90,400

1990	70,300

1991	37,000

1992	32,200

1993	94,600

1994	120,000

1995	95,700

1996	44,100

1997	71,100

1998	55,600

1999	0

2000	44,800

2001	52,300

2002	35,100

2003	51,000

2004	31,000

2005	60,800

2006	20,100

2007	31,000

Note:  Data includes Corps and contract hopper dredging and mechanical
dredging.

The proposed Rogue River ODMDS received Interim EPA designation in 1977
(40 CFR 228.12) and has been in use since that time.  EPA proposed to
designate the site as a final ODMDS in 1991.  That proposed rule, 56
Federal Register (Fed. Reg.) 47173 (September 18, 1991), was never
finalized.  As proposed, the site was estimated to be 1.75 miles
southwest of the Rogue River entrance (see Figure 1), with approximate
dimensions of 3,600 feet by 1,400 feet with an average depth of 60 feet.
 The site occupied about 116 acres.  The disposal site, placement area,
and drop zone were identical.  This Environmental Assessment reviews the
statutory and regulatory criteria of the MPRSA to allow EPA to
re-propose the site for designation.

AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Physical Resources

General

The Rogue River estuary is surrounded by steep, rounded hills that gain
700 feet in elevation within 0.5 mile.  Along the coastline, the beach
extends inland about 200 yards before rising sharply into hilly terrain.
 Gold Beach, located on the Rogue River, acquired its name from the
placer gold found in gravels beneath the sandy beach that were exposed
by winter storm waves.  Other metallic minerals located in the beach
sands of the area include chromite, magnetite, platinum, and zircon. 
The three sources of sediment in the vicinity of the existing ODMDS are
fluvial, dredging disposal, and coastal erosion.  The primary fluvial
source is the Rogue River which has a mean annual discharge of 7,800
cubic feet per second.  Coastal erosion studies show that much of the
shoreline north of the Rogue River is unstable and contributes a
continuous amount of sediment to the littoral system.

The nearshore mean circulation is alongshore, closely paralleling the
bathymetric contours, with a lesser onshore-offshore component. 
Circulation patterns are variable with season and weather conditions. 
Monitoring of currents indicates that the predominant nearshore current
direction is to the south, with short 2- to 3-month periods each winter
of currents to the north.  At the ODMDS measured currents are generally
north with slightly more of an onshore component in July.  For the
April-May period, the strongest currents are usually north along the
bottom contours.  The currents in July are mostly onshore, across bottom
contours and northward.  No significant current southward has been
recorded.

Rogue River Sediments

On August 8, 2007, six surface grab sediment samples were collected from
the Rogue River federal navigation channel and the inner channel leading
to the Gold Beach boat basin (see Appendix C).  All six samples were
submitted for physical analyses including total volatile solids.  Select
sample samples containing higher percent of fine-grained material were
analyzed for metals 10 (inorganic), TOC, pesticides, PCBs, phenols,
phthalates, miscellaneous extractables, and PAHs.  

Physical analyses for material within the outer river channel consisted
of 82.5% sand, with shell hash (range 94.1% to 70.9%) and 17.5%
fine-grained material (range 29.1% to 5.9%); volatile solids on the one
sample analyzed from this area were 4.53%.  Material from the inner
channel, leading to the boat basin, was 64.9% sand, with shell hash
(range 79.3% to 50.2%) and 35.1% fine-grained material (range 49.8% to
20.7%) with volatile solids content ranging from 10.5% to 5.8% (mean
7.5%).  The TOC ranged from 0.73% to 2.5% in these samples.

The chemical analyses indicated only very low levels of contamination in
any of the samples and all were below the screening levels found in the
Sediment Evaluation Framework (Corps and others 2006), with the
exception of phenol, which was detected above the 420 ug/kg SEF
screening level at 1200 ug/kg, in the sample closest to the boat basin. 
It is suspected that phenol is a possible laboratory
cross-contamination, but without being able to verify that with the lab,
the dredge material represented by that sample will not be dredged until
further characterization or re-sampling, to provide a weight of
evidence, can be accomplished.

Nickel (Ni) has historically been detected at levels higher than in most
Oregon coastal rivers.  The levels of nickel detected at the Rogue
project are determined to be from natural sources and are considered
background levels; in-water disposal will not create significant
additional risk to the environment, beyond what naturally exists in the
area.  Samples where nickel exceeded 200 mg/kg have supported a diverse
population of benthic organisms (one sample was collected in 2007 to
verify the diverse benthic population).

ODMDS Sediments

Geological data collected in 2007 by Marine Taxonomic Services (2008)
showed that the sediments in the ODMDS are mostly medium-to fine-grained
marine sands with at least 99% of the material larger than 0.062
millimeters (mm) except at one station that was mostly coarse gravel
(Table 3).  Shell debris was present at most stations.  These sandy
sediments are common to the Oregon Coast with natural variations in
percent fines due to variations in current structures and riverine
input.  Byrne and Panshin (1977) found the area around the ODMDS to be a
sandy area with an area of gravel near the east end of the site and the
possibility of rock out-crops in the area.  Trawling in 2007 confirmed
that there are likely some submerged rock outcrops within the ODMDS that
may periodically covered with sand during some ocean conditions (Marine
Taxonomic Services 2008).  Total volatile solids analysis showed low
total volatile solids (1.7% to 2.5%) at all stations.

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  2 .  Sediment Grain Size and Total Volatile
Solids Data, 2007

Sample I.D.	Grain Size Percent (%)

	Gravel

(shell hash)	Sand	Silt/Clay	Volatile

Solids	Mean Grain-

size (mm)

0807RODMDS-BC-01	0	97.4	2.6	2.1	0.16

0807RODMDS-BC-02	0	96.2	3.8	2.3	0.16

0807RODMDS-BC-03	88.3	7.4	4.3	1.7	9.68

0807RODMDS-BC-04	0.1	97.7	2.2	2.5	0.16

0807RODMDS-BC-05	0	95.4	4.6	2.4	0.16

Mean Value	96.5	3.5	2.2	---

RODMDS = Rogue Ocean Dredge Material Disposal Site; BC = Box core
(surface-grab sampler).

% passing 200 sieve (0.075 mm) = silt/clay fraction.



There was no mound of disposal material apparent within the disposal
site, which indicated that most material is being dispersed by currents
and wave action.  The coarseness of the Rogue River entrance sediments,
isolation from existing or historical sources of contaminants, and the
presence of strong hydraulic regimes allows the material to be deemed
suitable for ocean disposal and exempt from further testing according to
provisions of 40 CFR 227.13(b).

Oceanographic Circulation

The nearshore mean circulation is alongshore, closely paralleling the
bathymetric contours, with a lesser onshore-offshore component. 
Circulation patterns are variable with season and weather conditions. 
Monitoring of currents over a 5-year period indicated that the
predominant nearshore current direction is to the south, with short 2-
to 3-month periods each winter of currents to the north.  At the
disposal site, measured currents were generally north with slightly more
of an onshore component in July.  For the April-May period, the
strongest currents were usually north along the bottom contours.  The
currents in July are mostly onshore, across bottom contours and
northward.  No significant current southward was recorded.  Appendix B
provides details of the sediment transport processes for the Rogue River
and the ODMDS.

Geology

The geological data collected in 2007 showed that the sediments in the
ODMDS are mostly medium-to fine-grained marine sands with at least 99%
of the material larger than 0.062 millimeters (mm) except at one station
which was mostly coarse gravel.  Shell debris was present at most
stations.  These sandy sediments are common to the Oregon Coast with
natural variations in percent fines due to variations in current
structures and riverine input.

Sediments dredged from the Rogue River entrance channel are coarser than
the offshore sediments.  Mean grain size ranges from 0.47 to 0.94 mm and
is classified as medium to coarse sand.  Samples contain as much as 10%
gravel.  The side channel leading to the boat basin consists of fine
sand (0.21 mm) while the boat basin contains silt.  The finest material
traditionally has been disposed on land by pipeline dredge.  A sample
taken at the edge of the site is identical with the other native
sediments.

Water Quality

Water quality in the vicinity of the proposed Rogue River ODMDS is
expected to be typical for seawater of the Pacific Northwest.  There is
no reason to expect significant chemical contamination in either the
water or sediments as few heavy industries are located along the
estuary.  Basic water quality parameters are taken in field sampling
during collections of sediment samples from the entrance channel.  All
of the values have been within normal ranges for the Oregon Coast.

Biological Resources

This section summarizes biological conditions in the ocean environment
offshore of the Rogue River entrance.  Additional information is
provided in Appendix A.  The existing ODMDS site is located in the
nearshore area and is typical of oceanic habitat common to the nearshore
Pacific Coast off Oregon.

Plankton and Fish Larvae

No specific data is available for zooplankton in the Rogue River
offshore area.  However, Keister and Peterson (2003) provided a
discussion of the zooplankton community found off the central Oregon
Coast (along the Newport hydrographic line).  They indicated that the
zooplankton community is influenced strongly by seasonal variations in
wind and current patterns.  During late spring and summer, northwesterly
winds set up equatorward flow and coastal upwelling.  Northwesterly
winds dominate from April/May-September; periodic relaxations or
southwesterly storms rapidly affect the hydrography of nearshore areas,
but offshore of about 30 kilometers, conditions are less variable. 
Boreal neritic copepods such as Pseudocalanus mimus, Calanus marshallae,
Centropages abdominalis, Acartia longiremis, and Acartia hudsonica
dominate the coastal plankton during summer (Peterson and Miller 1977). 
In early fall, winds reverse and upwelling ceases; during autumn and
winter, winds are predominantly southwesterly, the Davidson Current
flows poleward, and offshore surface waters are transported onshore.  In
winter, the coastal zooplankton is populated by warm-water species such
as Mesocalanus tenuicornis, Paracalanus parvus, Ctenocalanus vanus,
Clausocalanus spp., Acartia tonsa, and Corycaeus anglicus (Peterson and
Miller 1977).

Auth and Brodeur (2006) examined ichthyoplankton off the central Oregon
coast (along the Newport hydrographic line).  The dominant taxa
collected were northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), slender sole
(Lyopsetta exilis), rockfishes (Sebastes spp.), northern lampfish
(Stenobrachius leucopsarus), and blue lanternfish (Tarletonbeania
crenularis).  Total larval concentration increased from 49.3 per 1000 m3
in 2000 to 72.0 per 1000 m3 in 2002, with seasonal concentrations
highest in August 2000 (90.3 per 1000 m3) and April 2002 (151.2 per 1000
m3).  Relatively few larvae were found at depths greater than 100
meters, while highest larval concentrations generally occurred from
depths of 0 to 50 meters.  Larval diversity and concentration were
higher offshore (46-84 kilometers) than in coastal areas (9-28
kilometers).  Highest concentrations were normally found at an
intermediate station 65 kilometers off the coast.  Species designated as
either coastal or offshore species by previous studies were
predominantly found in their respective shelf regions.  Most larval
concentrations were positively correlated with temperature and
negatively correlated with salinity.

Auth and others (2007) examined the ichthyoplankton assemblages from a
single station 69 kilometers off Haceta Head on the central Oregon
Coast.  The authors noted that the species composition, assemblages, and
dominant taxa were similar to those found in other studies conducted
during the summer off the central Oregon Coast (Richardson 1973;
Richardson and Pearcy 1977; Brodeur et al., 1985; Auth and Brodeur
2006).  This similarity provided evidence to support the hypothesis of
Auth and Brodeur (2006) that past ichthyoplankton sampling along the
Newport hydrographic line during the summer is representative of
ichthyoplankton assemblages elsewhere along the Oregon Coast.

Benthic Invertebrates

Field sampling in 1984 gathered information on benthic and epibenthic
invertebrates and demersal fish at the Rogue River ODMDS (Corps 1988). 
The benthic infaunal community was dominated by gammarid amphipods and
polychaete annelids.  Gastropods and cumaceans were also common.  Snails
were the dominant epibenthic.  No significant difference in species
diversity between the sampling stations located within the ODMDS and the
reference sites were observed.  In general, benthic infauna densities
were lower as compared to other shallow-water ocean disposal sites.

Field surveys were conducted in August and November 2007 by Marine
Taxonomic Services (2008) to provide current information about the
benthic invertebrate species present at the Rogue River ODMDS.  The
benthic invertebrate fauna was found to be typical of the nearshore,
high-energy environment found along the Oregon Coast.  The benthic
community at the ODMDS was driven by the opportunistic polychaetes
Magelona sacculata, Spiophanes bombyx and Chaetozone nr. setosa and the
gammarid amphipods Mandibulophoxus gilesi and Eohaustorius spp.  The
only commercially important benthic infaunal species (Siliqua spp.) was
not very abundant at the ODMDS.  The benthos in the area is typical of
the communities found near other ocean disposal sites along the Oregon
Coast, such as Coos Bay areas E and F, Umpqua River, Siuslaw River, and
Chetco River (Hancock et al., 1981; Corps 1985, 1988a, 1988b, 1990,
1999).  This benthic community, largely dominated by very mobile
organisms, provides an important link in the marine food web.  These
organisms serve as a direct food source for other benthic organisms and
demersal fishes.  They also play an active role in the breakdown of
organic debris and the tube-building species help stabilize the marine
sediments.  Many benthic species in the area are able to survive in this
dynamic environment since they are either very mobile or are able to
react both to natural or human perturbations.  The benthic community
would be expected to re-colonize within a period of a few weeks to
months after disposal (Corps, 1993).

Fish and Epibenthic Species

The commercially and recreationally important epibenthic species in
inshore coastal areas of Oregon include shellfish and Dungeness crab. 
Razor clam beds are located along the inshore beaches in the Rogue River
area.  It is generally thought that recruitment of razor clams to the
inshore beaches comes from subtidal spawning areas.  Gaper clams,
cockles, and Pittock clams likely occur near the mouth of the Rogue
River and upriver in the estuary proper.  Dungeness crab adults occur on
sandflat habitat along the Oregon Coast.  They spawn in offshore areas
and occur in the estuary when conditions are favorable in late summer
and fall.

As discussed previously, the nearshore area off the Rogue River supports
anadromous salmonids including coho salmon, winter steelhead, and spring
and fall Chinook salmon, as well as a variety of other pelagic and
demersal fish species.

Commercial and Recreational Fisheries

Based on data from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS 2006),
landings delivered to Gold Beach in 2000 were in the following West
Coast fisheries (data shown represents landings in metric tons/monetary
value of said landings/number of vessels landing; NA = not available): 
crab (30/$133,107/5), groundfish (43/$236,173/36), salmon (NA/NA/1), and
other species (131/$173,950/17).  The ocean charter season goes
year-round offshore of the Rogue River and targets lingcod and
rockfishes.  The 2000 recreational salmonid catch in the ocean boat
fishery was 74 Chinook salmon.  The recreational non-salmonid catch was
a total of 15,416 fish.  The top species landed included black rockfish,
blue rockfish (Sebastes mystinus), canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger),
and lingcod (NMFS 2006).

Wildlife

As discussed previously, Steller sea lions, harbor seals, and California
sea lions are present most of the year in the Rogue River coastal area. 
The Rogue River nearshore area and shoreline provides important habitat
for shorebirds, waterfowl, herons, bald eagles, hawks, and many other
species of birds.  Pelagic birds likely use the Rogue ZSF and adjacent
waters for foraging.  The wildlife areas offshore of the Rogue River
entrance (Hubbard Mound, Rogue Reef, and Hunter’s Island) provide
nesting habitat for many seabird species.

Endangered Species

Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon is a federally
listed species that occurs in the vicinity of the proposed Rogue River
ODMDS.  The Rogue River and estuary were designated as critical habitat
but the ocean area off the Rogue River was not.  Coho salmon are present
in the area as both adults and juveniles.  Adults hold in the offshore
area prior to entering the estuary to migrate up river to spawn. 
Juveniles rear in the nearshore ocean area after migrating downstream
and transitioning to saltwater.  Upstream migration of adult coho salmon
in the Rogue River ranges from mid-August through November, with a
distinctive peak in September to mid-October.  Juvenile outmigration
extends from April through June and peaks in mid-May to mid-June.

The Southern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of green sturgeon
(Acipenser medirostris) is listed as a federally threatened species. 
Green sturgeon that spawn primarily in the Klamath and Rogue rivers
constitute the Northern DPS, which is not federally listed.  Southern
DPS green sturgeon may occur at or near the Rogue River ODMDS as they
migrate to northern estuaries during summer and early fall.  Critical
habitat for the Southern DPS green sturgeon proposed on September 8,
2008 (73 Federal Register 52084) included the proposed site, but
critical habitat has not yet been designated.

The federally threatened Steller sea lion inhabits the lower Rogue River
and coastal area.  Steller sea lions forage at river mouths and
nearshore areas along the Oregon Coast.  Rogue Reef is used as a rookery
and haul-out area for Steller sea lions.  More than 1,800 threatened
Steller sea lions (45% of state total) use the reef, forming the largest
pupping site for this species in the United States south of Alaska
(Hillmann 2006).  Peak sea lion attendance at the reef occurs during
May, June, and July; sea lions begin to leave the rookeries in August.

Federally listed avian species in the Rogue River offshore area include
the marbled murrelet, brown pelican, and short-tailed albatross. 
Marbled murrelets are observed in small flocks or as individuals in the
ocean throughout the year.  Brown pelicans are seasonally abundant (June
to September) along the Oregon Coast and in the lower reaches of various
estuaries, including the Rogue River.  Brown pelicans are often
associated with spits and offshore rocks in the Rogue River area.  The
short-tailed albatross may forage in open ocean areas off the Oregon
Coast.

The blue, fin, sei, sperm, humpback, and southern resident killer whales
are all federally endangered and occur as migrants off the Oregon Coast
in waters typically farther from shore than the proposed Rogue River
ODMDS.  The loggerhead, green, leatherback, and olive ridley sea turtles
have been recorded from strandings along the Oregon and Washington
coasts.  The occurrence of sea turtles off Oregon is associated with the
appearance of albacore.  Albacore occurrence is strongly associated with
the warm waters of the Japanese Current.  Because these warm waters
generally occur 30 to 60+ miles offshore, these sea turtle species do
not typically occur in the nearshore area.

Socio-Economic Resources

The Rogue River enters the Pacific Ocean at the City of Gold Beach,
Oregon, located approximately 1.5 miles from the proposed Rogue River
ODMDS.  Gold Beach, which is the Curry County seat, had a population in
the 2000 census of 1,897 while Curry County’s population in 2000 was
21,137.  The town was named for the gold that was discovered there in
the early 1850s.  Not long after its settlement, lumber manufacturing
became the primary economic activity.  Today the wood products industry
remains valuable, but the tourist and fishing industries have become
more important.

Cultural Resources

Appendix D provides detailed information concerning cultural resources
in the Rogue River ODMDS area.  Prehistoric cultural resources are
unlikely to be found within the Rogue offshore area.  It is possible
that prehistoric Native Americans may have used portions of the Rogue
offshore reefs as a fishery.  Any remaining remnants of prehistoric
fishing activity are unlikely or not retrievable.  Shipwrecks are the
most probable cultural resources expected to exist within the offshore
area.  Historical review indicates several recorded shipwrecks in the
Rogue offshore area.  A side-scan sonar survey was conducted over a
large area in and around the Rogue River ODMDS.  No shipwrecks or other
historic remnants were detected from this survey.

Recreational Uses

Recreational resources in the Rogue River ODMDS area are described in
Appendix E.  The offshore area and the Rogue River itself are popular
with recreationists because of the coastal scenery and excellent fishing
and other recreation opportunities during all seasons of the year.  The
primary activities include sightseeing, fishing, beachcombing, and
boating.  The area is increasing in popularity as a small boat harbor
and has excellent facilities for the many anglers who fish the area
annually.  Nearby beaches and entrance jetties receive a continual
influx of recreationists.  The nearshore ocean area is used by
recreational anglers and boaters.  Clamming is also a popular recreation
activity along local beaches.  Fishing in the vicinity of the ODMDS is
primarily for salmonids and bottom fish.

Commercial Uses

The Rogue River offshore area supports a moderate commercial fishery
primarily for salmon, Dungeness crabs, and bottom fish.  Clams are also
commercially harvested in the estuary.  The fishing and tourist
industries are a primary source of income to the local economy.  No
significant mineral or petroleum deposits are known to exist in the
vicinity of the ODMDS.

ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

EPA and the Corps considered several alternatives for disposal of
dredged material generated from the Rogue River navigation project or
other authorized users.  Those alternatives include no action, upland
disposal, and estuarine disposal.  The alternatives considered for ocean
disposal include disposal off the continental shelf, continued use of
the existing ODMDS, and/or designation of a new ODMDS.  Although other
users may require dredged material disposal options, the Corps’
navigation project is the largest and most regular source of dredged
material in the vicinity.  In addition, other potential users of the
site would likely face many of the same constraints as the Corps in the
disposal of dredged material.  Therefore, the discussion of alternatives
focuses primarily on the Corps’ navigational dredging.

No Action Alternative

Under the no action alternative, EPA would refrain from formal
designation of an ODMDS for the placement of dredged material by the
Corps or other authorized persons or entities.  If EPA did not designate
sites, the Corps has the authority to select alternate sites under MPRSA
Section 103.  The substantive requirements for information and
evaluation of a Section 103 site are similar to those of an EPA formal
designation under Section 102, and site designation under Section 103
requires EPA concurrence.  In addition, the use of a Section 103 site is
limited to 5 years with one possible 5-year extension.  The present site
being used at Rogue River is a Section 103 site.  It will reach its
10-year use restriction at the end of the 2008 dredging season and will
no longer be available for use.  The no-action alternative would not
meet the project purpose, which is to provide dredged material disposal
capacity for long-term use by the Corps for the federally authorized
Rogue River navigation project and disposal capacity for other potential
users. Therefore, the no action alternative was judged by both the Corps
and EPA to be unacceptable and was dropped from further consideration.  

Upland Disposal Alternative

Potential upland disposal sites are available and are used for portions
of the material currently dredged from the boat basin access channel. 
The material that is disposed of at upland locations is removed using a
clamshell dredge and stockpiled at an upland rehandling site prior to
sale or use by the Port of Gold Beach.  The location of the boat basin,
the relatively small quantities of material removed from the boat basin,
and the use of mechanical dredging equipment make upland rehandling a
feasible option for this material.  

Hopper dredges, self-propelled, seagoing vessels, are the only equipment
that can be used to dredge the navigation channel because they can move
quickly to minimize interference with navigation traffic and can adjust
to rapidly changing weather and sea conditions.  Because hopper dredges
stockpile dredged material on-board and are designed to bottom dump that
material, they are most efficiently utilized in conjunction with an
in-water disposal area.  Rehandling of material, moving it from the
hopper dredge to another location for disposal, introduces an additional
cost and logistical component to the process.  An in-water sump would
need to be dredged and material bottom-dumped into it, then pumped
ashore with a pipeline suction dredge.  In addition to increased costs,
this approach would have additional adverse environmental impacts
associated with the dredging of an in-water estuarine site to be used as
the sump.  Estuarine sites are both highly valued and limited (see below
for additional discussion).  Another adverse impact of upland disposal
is that naturally-occurring sediments would be removed from the littoral
system. Upland disposal of entrance material dredged from the Rogue
River project, is not considered feasible due to the economic and
environmental effects resulting from nearshore rehandling of dredged
material.

Estuarine Disposal Alternative

Estuarine habitat is limited and environmentally sensitive.  Placement
of dredged material in estuarine areas is generally only environmentally
acceptable for specific beneficial uses, such as in areas where
substrate is eroding and the dredged material would be suitable (fine
grained, clean, etc.) to supplement existing substrate.  In general,
disposal of dredged material in estuaries would result in greater
adverse environmental impacts than disposal in the ocean due to both the
limited abundance and high productivity of estuaries relative to
nearshore oceanic habitats.  Disposal of material into the estuary would
also increase the risk of the material eroding and reshoaling in the
channel, potentially increasing dredging frequency and/or volumes.

There are operational constraints to estuarine disposal as well.  Due to
the narrowness and shallowness of the Rogue River estuary, no suitable
estuarine disposal areas were identified that could be accessed by a
hopper dredge or accept the volume of material annually dredged from the
Rogue River entrance channel.  

The Corps has placed portions of the dredged material from the boat
basin in intertidal areas for beneficial purposes. Specifically, some of
the material dredged by clamshell and pipeline dredges has been placed
in an area adjacent to the Gold Beach airport on the beach in the South
Beach surf zone.  Beneficial use of dredged material is possible in
these instances because of the proximal location of the beneficial use
site in relation to the dredge location, the type of dredging equipment
utilized, and the relatively small quantity of material dredged. 

Ocean Disposal Alternatives

Ocean disposal alternatives include disposal of the material off the
continental shelf, continued use of the existing ODMDS, and/or
designation of a new ODMDS.

Disposal off of the Continental Shelf

The MPRSA directs EPA to utilize whenever feasible locations beyond the
edge of the Continental Shelf.  Section 102(a)(I), 33 U.S.C. §
1412(a)(I).  This same directive is found in the regulations in the
general criteria at 40 CFR § 228.5(e).   

Transporting dredged material off the continental shelf presents
potentially significant environmental concerns.  Benthic and pelagic
ecosystems near the shelf contain important fishery resources and the
effects of disposal operations on them are not well understood. 
Fine-grain sediment and rocky habitats would be directly impacted by
disposal.  These deep-water areas are stable and generally not disturbed
by wave action or sediment movement.  Consequently, the benthic
invertebrate communities in these deep, offshore environments are
adapted to very stable conditions and would likely be less able to
survive disturbance from the immediate impact of disposal and the
long-term alteration of substrate type.  Bottom gradients can be 5% to
25% on the continental slope, making accumulated unconsolidated
sediments susceptible to slumping.  Deposited sediments could be
transported long distances downslope as turbidity currents and offshore
by near-bottom currents, potentially affecting organisms outside of any
designated site. 

Further, disposal off the continental shelf would remove natural
sediments from the nearshore littoral transport system, a system that
functions with largely non-renewable quantities of sand in Oregon. 
While the loss of the present volumes of Corps’ dredged material are
unlikely to result in disruption of the mass balance of the littoral
system, the State of Oregon is already experiencing erosion/accretion
patterns that are adversely impacting beaches, spits, wetlands, and
other shoreline habitats.

The limiting factor in considering a location beyond the edge of the
continental shelf is feasibility.  At, and in the vicinity of, the Rogue
River, potential disposal areas located off the continental shelf would
be at least 15 nautical miles offshore in water depths of 600 feet or
greater.  This distance is well beyond the reasonable haul distance of
hopper dredges working the Rogue River project, which is discussed in
greater detail in the discussion of the “Zone of Siting
Feasibility”.  In addition, the feasibility of monitoring a site
located off of the continental shelf is questionable, given the
increasing safety, cost, and time constraints correlated with increased
distance from shore.

Given the currently unanswered environmental concerns coupled with the
cost/logistical issues of both disposal and monitoring, disposal off of
the continental shelf is not currently a feasible alternative. 
Substantial additional investigation would be required in order to
determine the scope of the possible environmental impacts of this
alternative.  That investigation is not currently warranted given the
suitability of the existing site as discussed below.

Continued Use of Existing ODMDS

The existing 103-selected Rogue River ODMDS has been used for disposal
of dredged material since at least 1977.  From 1986 to 2006,
approximately 1.1 million cy of dredged material suitable for ocean
disposal have been placed in the 103-selected Rogue River ODMDS for a
20-year average annual loading volume of 54,000 cy/year.  A uniform
placement strategy has been applied.  The site is relatively small which
limits disposal options.  However, regular bathymetric surveys have
shown that persistent mounding has not occurred at the site.  Continued
management and monitoring of the site would take place in accordance
with the Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) attached in appendix
F.  Over the long-term, site capacity seems to be unlimited as material
placed redistributes out of the site, feeding the littoral cell.

There is a preference towards using sites that have been used
historically as expressed in the regulations at 40 CFR § 228.5(e).  The
existing Rogue River ODMDS has been in use successfully for 30 years and
has not resulted in any mounding or associated environmental effects. 
Given the problematic nature of other disposal options discussed above,
and the proven capability of this site to accommodate dredge material,
the following analysis will be limited to an evaluation of the existing
site according to the regulatory criteria, to determine its suitability
for continued use.

Designation of New ODMDS

A new ODMDS could potentially be evaluated for designation.  However,
there is an existing site that has been historically used and based on
EPA’s general regulatory criteria at 40 CFR § 228.5(e), that site
will be evaluated for continued use before another location is
identified or evaluated.

ANALYSIS OF OCEAN DUMPING SITE DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS

Overview

Formal designation of ocean dumping sites is the responsibility of EPA
as stated in the MPRSA.  The process for site designation is found in
the ocean dumping regulations at 40 CFR Part 228.  The process followed
by EPA, Region 10, and the Corps for the proposed Rogue River ODMDS
generally follows the site designation procedures developed by a joint
task force of EPA and Corps personnel titled, General Approach to
Designation Studies for Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites (EPA and
Corps 1984).

The procedures utilize a hierarchical framework that initially
establishes the broadest economically and operationally feasible area of
consideration for site location.  A step-by-step sequence of activities
is then conducted to eliminate critical and/or unsuitable subareas. 
Further evaluation of alternative sites (candidate sites) within this
area entails various levels of assessment as suggested by the
sensitivity and value of critical resources or uses at risk, and
potential for unreasonable adverse impact presented by the dredged
material to be disposed.  The site designation criteria at 40 CFR
228.5-228.6 are applied to the information assembled through this
process, and a final site or sites are selected and proposed for formal
designation.

Defining a Zone of Siting Feasibility

The MPRSA (33 U.S.C. 1401 to 1445) tasks EPA and the Corps with the
joint obligation to ensure that ocean disposal will not "unreasonably
degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine
environment, ecological systems, or economic potentialities."  EPA's
site criteria and joint EPA/Corps guidance are intended to result in the
designation of an environmentally acceptable site, oriented toward
avoidance of unreasonable degradation or endangerment of human health,
welfare, or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological systems, or
economic potentialities, which is operationally efficient.  At the
outset, and pursuant to jointly developed guidance titled General
Approach to Designation Studies for Ocean Dredged Materials Disposal
Sites (EPA/Corps, 1984), a geographic area of consideration referred to
as a Zone of Siting Feasibility (ZSF) is a first step towards
designating a site.  According to the guidance, a reasonable distance of
haul from the dredge site to the disposal site, is the determining
factor in establishing the ZSF, and will be affected by available
dredging equipment, energy use constraints, costs, and safety
considerations.  The initial ZSF, once established, is evaluated
according to the statutory and regulatory criteria under the MPRSA. 
Each of the criteria is overlain on the preliminary ZSF in sequence to
eliminate unsuitable areas and determine the location and overall
suitability of remaining sites, if any, within the ZSF that could be
designated for the disposal of dredged material.  If, based on that
evaluation, a suitable site is not located within the initial ZSF, than
the area of consideration must be expanded in order to ensure that a
disposal site can be designated, which will not unreasonably degrade or
endanger human health, welfare, amenities, the marine environment, or
ecological systems.

On the West coast, weather and ocean conditions are major considerations
and act as significant limiting factors when assessing the reasonable
distance of haul.  Rough seas and adverse weather conditions are the
norm from October through May on the Pacific Coast.  These conditions
act to limit ocean disposal of dredged material to a narrow window where
it is generally safe to work from roughly the end of May to no later
than mid-October, with a high probability of down time due to adverse
weather at either end of that period.  

The availability of dredging equipment is also a constraint that must be
considered in the determination of a ZSF for a proposed ocean disposal
site, but particularly so for sites on the west coast of the United
States.  For most of the designated sites in Oregon, the Corps is the
primary user and must confront equipment availability issues.  For
example, the Jones Act (46 USC § 12106) precludes the Corps from
contracting with foreign-owned vessels, which limits the accessible pool
of vessels for Federal dredging and disposal projects to U.S. Government
or privately owned (contract) equipment.  The Corps evaluates the
availability of Government or contract equipment annually and allocates
the use of government dredges for the nation.  Hopper dredges are
mobile, can work in sea swell conditions up to 10 ft, and are
self-propelled.  Therefore, they are the only feasible equipment for
dredging most ocean entrance channel/bar situations.  

Hopper dredge availability on the West Coast has been limited.  Many
hopper dredges working in the U.S. are often committed to other work on
the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts and are not available to be used
elsewhere, except perhaps on an emergency basis.  As a result, there are
typically three hopper dredges working on the West Coast that can be
used safely for dredging and disposal of dredged material in ocean
disposal sites in Oregon and these dredges must also be shared along the
coast with Washington, California, and occasionally Hawaii and Alaska.  

Rogue River ODMDS Zone of Siting Feasibility

Although an ODMDS, once designated, may be used by any person or entity
who has received a permit to dispose in the site, the primary
anticipated user for the currently proposed Rogue River ODMDS is the
Corps, who is expected to utilize the site annually for disposal of
dredged material from the Rogue River Navigation Project.  Potential
users of the proposed Rogue River ODMDS include the U.S. Coast Guard and
others, but since no pending requests have been identified at this time,
the discussion of the ZSF for the Rogue River ODMDS below is based
solely on the Corps’ anticipated disposal activities.

Due to the limited work window resulting from weather/safety and
equipment constraints, time is the limiting factor in calculation of the
reasonable haul distance, and thus ZSF, for the proposed Rogue River
ODMDS.  The amount of time necessary to maintain the Rogue River
Navigation Project (exclusive of weather downtime) is a function of
dredging a hopper full of material (loading), then transporting that
material to, and placing it at, the disposal site(s).  This is called
“cycle time” and the cycle time can vary for each individual dredge.
 Loading time is essentially fixed based on the characteristics of the
sediments being dredged, the dredge itself (i.e., pumps, size of hopper,
drag arms, etc.) and the dredging site conditions.  The time to
discharge material also is basically fixed for a given dredge and the
type of material, but may vary slightly depending on the disposal
methodology outlined in the Sediment Management and Monitoring Plan
(SMMP) for the site.  The SMMP will generally direct disposal activities
in such a manner as to minimize mounding or other environmental effects
at the ODMDS.  Transport time depends primarily on the haul distance to
the disposal site as the speed of different hopper dredges when full are
similar.  Thus, a longer haul distance affects the total number of
cycles per day, resulting in an impact on the total volume of material
that can be dredged and disposed in one season.

In discerning a ZSF for the Rogue River ODMDS, certain factors are
relatively fixed.  The 7-year average (2002-2008) volume dredged from
the Rogue River Navigation Project and currently disposed at the
103-selected disposal site is 34,138 cubic yards (CY).  Under current
and foreseeable conditions at the project the estimated volume of
material to be dredged and disposed of annually is expected to remain at
the current average of 34,138 CY.  Based upon work load, available
funding and other constraints, the government-owned hopper dredge
YAQUINA is typically available 6.4 days (according to latest 7 year
average) at the Rogue River navigation project or, in its absence, a
contract dredge is available for a similar length of time.  This equates
to equipment available for dredging and disposing of, on average, 5427
CY per day.  The rated capacity for the YAQUINA is 1,042 CY per load.
However, the authorized depth for the Rogue River Navigation Project is
shallow, only 13 ft, and the YAQUINA, with a draft of 8 ft, cannot be
fully loaded without grounding.  Therefore, for the purposes of
calculating the ZSF, a partial load was assumed.  Load time is typically
around 45 minutes at the mouth of the Rogue River. Depending on
conditions set in the SMMP, environmental conditions at the disposal
site, and characteristics of the dredged material, dump time once at a
site ranges from 2 to 5 minutes.  The dredge typically operates 24 hours
per day except when crews are changed.  The ZSF, as determined by haul
distance, can be calculated as follows:

Assume 10 partial (1/2) loads per day (5427 CY ( (1042 ( 2) CY/load =
10.41 loads)

Load time (.77 hr) + Dump time (0.053 hr) = .82 hr/load X 10 loads or
8.2 hr/day

24 hr/day – 8.20 hr/day = 15.80 hr/day for transit to and from the
disposal site

15.8 hr/day ( 10 loads/day = 1.58 hr transit time for one round trip

1.58 hr ( 2 = 0.79 hr transit one way

0.79 hr X 6 kts (vessel speed) = 4.74 nm

Thus the outer limit of the ZSF for the Rogue River ODMDS, as limited by
the capacity of the available dredging plant, average annual dredging
quantity, and limited dredging time period is 4.74 nm from the Rogue
River navigation project.  This is the area within which potential sites
will initially be evaluated according to the MPRSA statutory
requirements and regulatory criteria.

Regulatory Criteria for Ocean Disposal Site Selection

EPA evaluated the five general (40 CFR 228.5) and 11 specific (40 CFR
228.6) regulatory criteria for site designation in reviewing the
currently proposed Rogue River ODMDS.  A conflict matrix format is
utilized in Table 3 to simplify and consolidate scoring for the general
and specific site criteria review process.  Each area of consideration
on the conflict matrix addresses at least one general or specific
criterion.  A legend defining the matrix categories follows the table.

General Criteria

Minimize Interference with Other Activities (a.).  The first of the five
general criteria requires that a determination be made as to whether the
proposed site or its use will minimize interference with other uses of
the marine environment.  This determination was made by overlaying
individual uses with the resources presented in the Rogue Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Evaluation (Corps 1988) and the more recent
appendices prepared for this evaluation.  The report presents the
overlays on a base map, giving bathymetry and location of the ODMDS and
ZSF.  The more interactions between various uses and limited resources
exist, the more critical the area.  The overlay process was used to
minimize interference with other uses of the ocean.  The selection of
features to use for this determination was dependent on whether the
resource was considered limited.  The following were selected to be
included in the evaluation of resources of limited distribution:

1.  Navigation Hazards Area/Other Recreation Areas

2.  Shellfish Areas

3.  Critical Aquatic Resources

4.  Commercial and Sport Fishing Areas

5.  Geological Features

6.  Cultural, Historically Significant Areas

Figure 2 is a composite of all of the above areas and indicates by
various patterns, the relative amount of total usage in the vicinity of
the proposed Rogue River ODMDS.  The Rogue River ODMDS lies south of the
most navigationally and environmentally critical area, the reefs in the
northwestern part of the ZSF.  These reefs represent valuable habitat
for fish such as black and yellow rockfish and lingcod.  They are
extensively fished.  Commercial and recreational salmon fishing occurs
in ZSF but it is not limited to that area, occurring (as it does) over a
wide nearshore area.  Disposal operations and the salmon fishing season
do overlap; however, coordination with Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife personnel indicate no observable conflicts between the two
uses.  Appendix A discusses all potential conflicts with living
resources and concludes that there have been no major conflicts in the
past, and no predictable conflicts are expected in the future.

Minimizes Changes in Water Quality (b).  The second of the five general
criteria requires changes to ambient seawater quality levels occurring
outside the disposal site to be within water quality criteria, and that
no detectable contaminants reach beaches, shoreline, sanctuaries, or
geographically limited fisheries or shellfisheries.  The primary impact
of disposal activities on water quality is expected to be the temporary
turbidity caused by the physical movement of sediment through the water
column.  Based on modeling completed by the Corps at the Umpqua River,
water column turbidity would be expected to dissipate within a few
minutes for 97% of the dredged material disposed (sandier material), and
within a half hour for finer grained sediments, which comprise about 3%
of dredged material (Corps, 2008).  

Based on an analysis of the sediment quality at both the existing ODMDS
and within the Rogue River Corps Navigation project detailed in Appendix
C, no significant contaminant or suspended solids releases are expected.
 There would be no water quality perturbations to be concerned with
moving toward any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known
geographically limited fishery or shell fishery.  Bottom movement of
deposited material generally shows a net movement to the north, at the
depth of the disposal site, but material appears to be quickly
dispersed.

Interim Sites Which Do Not Meet Criteria (c).  There are no interim
disposal sites near the final Rogue River Site.  EPA’s final rule
published at 73 FR 74983 (December 10, 2008), after the draft EA was
made available to the public, repealed obsolete regulations under the
MPRSA regarding interim ocean dumping sites and interim ocean dumping
criteria.  

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  3 .  Conflict Matrix for the Proposed
Rogue River ODMDS

AREA OF

CONSIDERATION 1/	CONFLICT 2/	POTENTIAL CONFLICT	NO CONFLICT	BENEFICIAL
USE	COMMENTS	RELEVANT SPECIFIC FACTORS

11 Specific Factors 3/

(40 CFR 228.6)	RELEVANT GENERAL

CRITERIA

5 General Criteria 4/

(40 CFR 228.5)

1.  Unusual Topography/Unique Bottom Features

	X

	1, 6, 8, 11	a

2.  Physical Sediment Compatibility

	X

	3, 4, 9	b, c, d

3.  Chemical Sediment Compatibility

	X

	3, 4, 7, 9	a, b, c, d

4.  Influence of Past Disposal

	X

	5, 7, 9, 10	a, b, d

5.  Living Resources of Limited Distribution

	X

	2, 3, 6, 8, 11	a, b, d

6.  Commercial Fisheries

X



2, 8	a, b

7.  Recreational Fisheries

X

	Salmon	2, 8	a. b

8.  Breeding/Spawning Areas

	X

Pelagic Birds, Northern Sea Lions	2, 8	a, b

9.  Nursery Areas

X

	English Sole	2, 8	a, b

10.  Feeding Areas

	X

Harbor Seals, Brown Pelicans, Pelagic Birds, Northern & California Sea
Lions	2, 8	a, b

11.  Migration Routes

X

	Juveniles & Adults for Pelagic Birds, Whales, Pinnipeds	2, 8	a, b

12.  Critical Habitat of Threatened or Endangered Species

	X

Brown Pelicans, Peregrine Falcon, Migrants, Forage in Area	2, 8	a. b

13.  Spatial Distribution of Benthos

	X

	2, 8, 10	a. b

14.  Marine Mammals

	X

Harbor Seals, Northern & California Sea Lions, Whale Migration Route	2,
8	a. b

15.  Mineral Deposits

X

	Offshore Placer Deposits	1, 8	a. b. c

16.  Navigation Hazard

	X

	1, 8	a, b, d

17.  Other Uses of Ocean

(cables, pipelines, etc)

	X

	8	a, b, d

18.  Degraded Areas

	X

	4, 6, 7	a, b, d

19.  Water Column Chemical/Physical Characteristics

	X

	4, 6, 9	a, b, d

20.  Recreational Uses

X

	Salmon/Reef Fish	2, 8, 11	a, b, c, d

21.  Cultural/Historic Sites

	X

	11	b

22.  Physical Oceanography - Waves/Circulation

	X

	1, 3, 6, 7	a, b, d

23.  Direction of Transport/Potential for Settlement

X

	To Offshore Rocks	1, 3, 6, 7	a, b, d

24.  Monitoring

	X

	5	c

25.  Shape/Size of Site

	X

	1, 4, 7	d

26.  Size of Buffer Zone

X

	Offshore Rocks Adjacent to Site	2, 3, 4, 7, 11	b, d

27.  Potential for Cumulative Effects

	X

	4, 7	c, d



Conflict Matrix Legend

1/  Definition of “Areas of Consideration”

1.  Unusual Topography/Unique Bottom Features:  Would placement of
material in this candidate site affect physical bottom feature that is
unique within the local or regional area?

2.  Physical Sediment Compatibility:  Does the candidate site have
similar sediment characteristics to anticipated dredged material?

3.  Chemical Sediment Compatibility:  Does the candidate site have
similar chemical characteristics to anticipated dredged material?

4.  Influence of Past Disposal:  Would placement of material in this
candidate site be affected by previous disposal of dredge material?

5.  Living Resources of Limited Distribution:  Would placement of
material in this candidate site affect any living resources that do not
have a coast-wide distribution?

6.  Commercial Fisheries:  Would placement of material in this candidate
site affect any commercial fishing activity (resource impacts are
covered in 8-11)?

7.  Recreational Fisheries:  Would placement of material in this
candidate site affect any recreational fishing activity (resource
impacts are covered in 8-11)?

8.  Breeding/Spawning Areas:  Would placement of material in this
candidate site affect breeding and spawning areas of any species?

9.  Nursery Areas:  Would placement of material in this candidate site
affect nursery areas of any species?

10.  Feeding Areas:  Would placement of material in this candidate site
affect feeding areas of any species?

11.  Migration Routes:  Would placement of material in this candidate
site affect migration routes of species?

12.  Critical Habitat of Threatened or Endangered Species:  Would
placement of material in this candidate site affect critical habitat of
threatened or endangered species?

13.  Spatial Distribution of Benthos:  Would placement of material in
this candidate site change the benthic invertebrate community structure
(e.g., fine-gain species to coarse-grain species, etc)?

14.  Marine Mammals:  Would placement of material in this candidate site
affect marine mammals or their habitat (e.g., gray whale feeding areas
etc)?

15.  Mineral Deposits:  Would any known mineral deposits be affected by
the placement of material?

16.  Navigation Hazard:  Would the placement of material create a
navigation hazard?

17.  Other Uses of Ocean:  Would placement of material impact other uses
of the ocean not addressed elsewhere, such as cables, pipelines, tow
boat lanes, and pilot transfer points?

18.  Degraded Areas:  Would disposal in this candidate site continue to
affect or improve the degraded area?

19.  Water Column Chemical/Physical Characteristics:  Would placement of
material in this candidate site affect water column chemical/physical
characteristics?

20.  Recreational Uses:  Would placement of material affect recreational
uses?

21.  Cultural/Historic Sites:  Would placement of material in this
candidate site impact or protect a cultural/historic site?

22.  Physical Oceanography, Waves/Circulation:  Would placement of
material affect wave/circulation patterns?

23.  Direction of Transport/Potential for Settlement:  Would placement
of material affect direction of sediment transport and/or potential for
settlement?

24.  Monitoring:  Would use of this candidate site affect either
on-going monitoring or the ability to monitor using conventional
methods?  Monitoring typically would include periodic hydrographic
surveys and could include sediment sampling or biological data
collection.

25.  Shape/Size of Candidate Site:  Is the candidate site suitable for
the operation of a dredge?

Maneuverability of the dredge?

Is it orientated so the dredge can place material while heading into the
waves?  Is the depth of water sufficient to open the hopper doors/dump
scow?  Can the dredge operate safely?

Is the size of the candidate site large enough for long-term use?

26.  Size of Buffer Zone:  Is the candidates site a sufficient distance
from important resources or features to protect them from any affect of
disposal?

27.  Potential for Cumulative Effects:  Would placement of material
contribute to cumulative affects from other activities?

Conflict Matrix Legend (continued)

2/  Definition of Degrees of Conflict

Conflict:  There will definitely be an adverse impact on the resource or
the use.

Potential Conflict:  There is a possibility of an adverse impact;
however, extent and significance are unknown.

No Conflict:  There will definitely not be an adverse impact on the
resource or the use.

Beneficial Use:  There will be a positive impact on the resource or the
use.

3/  Eleven Specific Factors for Ocean Disposal Site Selection

1.  Geographical position, depth of water, bottom topography, and
distance from coast.

2.  Location in relation to breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or
passage areas of living resources in adult or juvenile phases.

3.  Location in relation to beaches or other amenity areas.

4.  Types and quantities of waste proposed to be disposed and proposed
methods of release, including methods of packaging the waste, if any.

5.  Feasibility of surveillance and monitoring.

6.  Dispersal, horizontal transport, and vertical mixing characteristics
of the area, including prevailing current 1 velocity, if any.

7.  Existence and effects of present or previous discharges and dumping
in the area (including cumulative effects).

8.  Interference with shipping, fishing, recreation, mineral extraction,
desalination, shellfish culture, areas of special scientific importance
and other legitimate uses of the ocean.

9.  Existing water quality and ecology of the site, as determined by
available data or by trend assessment or baseline surveys.

10.  Potential for the development or recruitment of nuisance species
within the disposal site.

11.  Existence at or in close proximity to the site of any significant
natural or cultural features of historical importance.

4/  Five General Criteria for the Selection of Ocean Disposal Sites

a.  The dumping of material into the ocean will be permitted only at
sites or in areas selected to minimize the interference of disposal
activities with other activities in the marine environment, particularly
avoiding areas of existing fisheries or shell fisheries, and regions of
heavy commercial or recreational navigation.

b.  Locations and boundaries of disposal sites will be chosen so that
temporary perturbations in water quality or other environmental
conditions during initial mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere
within the site can be expected to be reduced to normal ambient seawater
levels or to undetectable contaminant concentrations or effects before
reaching any beach, shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically
limited fishery or shell fishery.

c.  If at any time during or after disposal site evaluation studies, it
is determined that existing disposal sites presently approved on an
interim basis for ocean dumping do not meet criteria for site selection
set forth in Sections 228.5-228.6, the use of such sites will be
terminated as soon as suitable alternative disposal sites can be
designated. [Note:  This criterion was eliminated after the draft EA was
made available to the public by EPA’s final rule published at 73 FR
74983 (December 10, 2008).]

d.  The sizes of ocean disposal sites will be limited in order to
localize, for identification and control, any 1 immediate adverse
impacts and to permit the implementation of effective monitoring and
surveillance programs to prevent adverse, long-range impacts.  The size,
configuration, and location of any disposal site will be determined as a
part of the disposal site evaluation or designation study.

e.  EPA will, whenever feasible, designate ocean dumping sites beyond
the edge of the continental shelf and other such sites that have been
historically used.

 

 Figure   SEQ Figure \* ARABIC  2 .  Overlay Evaluation of Individual
Resources of Limited Distribution

Size of Sites (d).  The fourth general criterion requires that the size,
configuration, and location of the site be evaluated as part of the
study and the size to be limited.  Ocean disposal sites are sized to
localize, for identification and control, any immediate adverse impact
and permit the implementation of effective monitoring and surveillance
programs.  The size, configuration, and location of the proposed Rogue
River ODMDS was evaluated as part of the 1988 evaluation (Corps 1988). 
The proposed ODMDS is 3,600-feet long by 1,400-feet wide.  The site is
dispersive and of appropriate size to handle the volumes of material it
receives annually without resulting in mounding or any associated
concerns, as evidenced by the lack of mounding during the 30 years of
disposal activities at the Existing ODMDS.  Public notices issued for
specific, proposed ocean disposal operations, as required by MPRSA, have
not generated concerns about undue impacts from the site’s use.  

Sites Off the Continental Shelf (e).  At the Rogue River, potential
disposal areas located off the continental shelf would be at least 15
nautical miles offshore in water depths of 600 feet or greater.  Benthic
and pelagic ecosystems near the shelf contain important fishery
resources and the effects of disposal operations are not well
understood.  Fine-grain sediment and rocky habitats would be directly
impacted by disposal operations.  These deep-water areas are stable and
generally not disturbed by wave action or sediment movement. 
Consequently, these areas have benthic invertebrate communities that are
adapted to very stable conditions and may not be able to survive
disturbance from disposal operations.  Little is known of the ecology of
benthic communities on the continental slope, and disposal in this area
could cause impacts of unknown severity and duration.  Bottom gradients
can be 5% to 25% on the continental slope, making accumulated
unconsolidated sediments susceptible to slumping.  Deposited sediments
could be transported long distances downslope as turbidity currents, and
offshore, by near-bottom currents, making any long term monitoring and
management challenging.

Disposal would also remove sediments from the nearshore littoral
transport system, a system that functions with largely non-renewable
quantities of sand in Oregon.  Additional disruption in the mass balance
of this system could contribute to the alteration of erosion/accretion
patterns impacting beaches, spits, wetlands, and other shoreline
habitats. 

In addition, the haul distance to a site beyond the shelf is much
greater than the 4.74 nautical mile limit of the Rogue Zone of Siting
Feasibility, making the site economically and logistically infeasible
for the Corps navigation project, which is the primary expected user of
the site.  The additional cost/time associated with the increased haul
distance, monitoring difficulties, and environmental concerns regarding
disposal in such areas makes off-shelf disposal undesirable.  

Lastly, criterion “e” provides a preference for disposal off the
continental shelf, or in “other such sites that have been historically
used.”  The existing Rogue site has been in the same location for over
30 years and has not resulted in any known long-term impacts to the
environment or other uses of the area.  Therefore, in proposing to
designate the existing site, EPA is utilizing a site that has been
historically used.

Specific Criteria

Geographical Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography, and Distance
from the Coast (1).  The Rogue River ODMDS is approximately 1.75 miles
southwest from the entrance to the Rogue River (see Figure 1).  Appendix
B contains a detailed discussion of the bottom topography of the site. 
In general, the site lies on bottom contours sloping at a rate of 8/1000
feet to the west-southwest.  The designated site would be used for
disposal of dredged material from the Rogue River navigation project and
other permitted projects.  Site coordinates (NAD 83) and dimensions of
the proposed Rogue River ODMDS are as follows:

A. 42° 24’ 15.40”, 124° 26’ 52.39”		Dimensions:

B. 42° 24’ 03.40”, 124° 26’ 39.39”		1,400-feet wide by
3,600-feet long

C. 42° 23’ 39.40”, 124° 27’ 17.40”		116 acres

D. 42° 23’ 51.40”, 124° 27’ 30.40”		Depth:  50 to 90 feet

Based upon consideration of the location, depth of water, bottom
topography, and distance from the coast, the proposed ODMDS has been
demonstrated to be suitable for the disposal of dredged material when
placed in accordance with the SMMP.

Location in Relation to Breeding, Spawning, Nursery, Feeding, or Passage
Areas of Living Resources in Adult or Juvenile Phases (2).  Aquatic
resources of the oceanic region off the mouth of the Rogue River are
described in detail in Appendix A.  In addition, EPA has evaluated
possible impacts to species and critical habitat listed under the
Endangered Species Act in the Rogue River, Oregon: Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Designation Biological Assessment (BA), dated
June 5, 2008.  The proposed ODMDS is located in the nearshore area and
many nearshore pelagic organisms occur in the water column over the
site.  These include zooplankton (copepods, euphausiids, pteropods, and
chaetognaths) and meroplankton (fish, crab, and other invertebrate
larvae).  These organisms generally display seasonal changes in
abundance.  Since they are present in the oceanic region off of most of
the Pacific Coast, those directly off the Rogue River are small compared
to the overall coastal population.

The Rogue River mouth contains several neritic reefs within it.  These
reefs are unusual features along the Pacific Coast and support a variety
of aquatic organisms, including bull kelp (Nereocystis luetkeana) and
its associated fish and invertebrate community.  The ODMDS is located
approximately 2 nautical miles southeast of the Rogue Reef as shown on
Figure 1.  Since the disposal material is clean sand that settles
quickly within the ODMDS, any movement of the disposed sand into reef
areas would occur through natural littoral transport.  Also, since the
disposal quantity is relatively small compared to the longshore
transport, disposal at the ODMDS should not adversely affect marine
aquatic communities in the reef areas.

Benthic samples are discussed in Appendix A.  Based on the analysis of
benthic samples collected in both 1984 and 2007 from the Rogue River
ODMDS area, the ocean disposal site contains benthic fauna common to
nearshore sandy, wave-influenced regions that exist along much of the
Pacific Coast in Oregon and Washington.

Sediment in and near the ODMDS consists primarily of medium-to
fine-grained marine sands typical of the Oregon coastal area.  The
infaunal community of the Rogue study area is dominated by gammarid
amphipods and polychaete worms.  The benthos in the area is typical of
the communities found near other ocean disposal sites along the Oregon
Coast, such as Coos Bay areas E and F, Umpqua River, Siuslaw River, and
Chetco River (Hancock et al., 1981; Corps 1985, 1988a, 1988b, 1990,
1999).  This benthic community, largely dominated by very mobile
organisms, provides an important link in the marine food web.  These
organisms serve as a direct food source for other benthic organisms and
demersal fishes.  They also play an active role in the breakdown of
organic debris and the tube-building species help stabilize the marine
sediments.  Many of the benthic species in the area are able to survive
in this dynamic environment since they are either very mobile or are
able to react both to natural or human perturbations.  They can readily
recolonize in disturbed areas.

The area off the mouth of the Rogue River also supports a variety of
pelagic and demersal fish species, as well as shellfish including
Dungeness crab (Cancer magister).  Many of these species have a
reproductive strategy of releasing a large quantity of eggs so that some
individuals will survive a substantial mortality during the larval and
juvenile stage.  Crabs in particular release large number of eggs into
the water column.  The larvae that hatch from the eggs are planktonic
for several months before settling to the bottom of the estuary and
nearshore ocean as young crab.  During this time, they are subjected to
a variety of environmental factors that affect their survival and have a
direct affect on population numbers of adults.

The nearshore area off the Rogue River supports anadromous salmonids
including winter steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), spring and fall
Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), and federally threatened coho
salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), as well as a variety of other pelagic and
demersal fish species.  Common pelagic species include the Pacific
herring (Clupea harengus pallasi), northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax),
and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus).  Demersal species present in the
inshore area are mostly residents and include a number of sculpins, sea
perch, and rockfish species that are associated with Rogue Reef, as well
as flatfish species occurring predominantly over open sandflats.  Common
flatfish species include English sole (Parophrys vetulus), sanddab
(Citharichthys spp.), and starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus). 
English sole and starry flounder, along with the sand sole (Psettichthys
melanostictus) spawn in the inshore coastal area in the summer and
juveniles of these, as well as other marine species, may rear in the
estuary.

Three species of seals and sea lions inhabit the lower Rogue River and
coastal area.  Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus), a federally
threatened species, and harbor seals (Pusa vitulina) are year-long
residents, while California sea lions (Zalophus californianus) are
present most of the year.  Harbor seals breed in the estuary and on
nearshore rocks.  Steller sea lions forage at river mouths and nearshore
areas along the Oregon Coast.  Rogue Reef is used as a rookery and
haul-out area for Steller sea lions and is designated as critical
habitat under ESA.  Many harbor seals and California sea lions are also
found at the reef.  More than 1,800 threatened Steller sea lions (45% of
state total) use the reef, forming the largest pupping site for this
species in the United States south of Alaska (Hillmann 2006).  Steller
sea lion population counts for Oregon have increased since 1977, when
the statewide non-pup population totaled 1,431, to 4,169 in 2002, an
annual rate of increase of about 3.7% (Brown et al. 2002).  Brown, et
al. (2002), also found that the pup counts for the Rogue Reef have
increased over time, from 492 in 1990 to 746 in 2002, although the pup
counts have not been completed annually.  Steller sea lion numbers
appear to be lower off Oregon in the winter than summer with peak
presence occurring June and July (Roffe and Mate, 1984).  

Wildlife areas offshore of the Rogue River entrance include Hubbard
Mound, Rogue Reef, and Hunter’s Island.  Hubbard Mound to the north is
a nesting area for oystercatchers, gulls, Brandt’s cormorants
(Phalacrocorax penicillatus), pelagic cormorants (Phalacrocorax
pelagicus), and common murres (Uria aalge).  Sea lions also haulout on
Hubbard Mound.  To the northwest, Rogue Reef provides nesting habitat
for many pelagic birds including about 4,000 common murres and more than
500 Brandt’s cormorants (Hillmann 2006).  Hunter’s Island to the
south provides nesting habitat for storm petrels, cormorants, and gulls.
 Other seabird species that congregate and nest on the island include
Cassin’s auklets (Ptychoramphus aleuticus), oystercatchers, pigeon
guillemots (Cepphus columba), rhinoceros auklets (Cerorhinca
monocerata), and tufted puffins (Fratercula cirrhata).  Harbor seals use
the island as a rookery.

Federally listed avian species that may be present in the Rogue River
offshore area include the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus,
threatened), brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis, endangered), and
short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria albatrus, endangered).  Marbled
murrelets are observed in small flocks or as individuals in the ocean
throughout the year.  Brown pelicans are seasonally abundant (June to
September) along the Oregon Coast and in the lower reaches of various
estuaries, including the Rogue River.  Brown pelicans are often
associated with spits and offshore rocks in the Rogue River area.  On
February 20, 2008, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to remove
the brown pelican from the federal list of endangered and threatened
wildlife due to recovery (73 Federal Register 9407).  The short-tailed
albatross may forage in open ocean areas off the Oregon Coast.

There are many whale species and sea turtles in Oregon’s offshore
coastal area that are listed under the ESA.  The blue whale
(Balaenoptera musculus), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), sei whale
(Balaenoptera borealis), sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus), humpback
whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), and southern resident killer whale
(Orcinus orca) are all federally endangered and occur as migrants off
the Oregon Coast in waters typically farther from shore than within the
proposed Rogue River ODMDS.  The loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta,
threatened), green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas, threatened), leatherback
sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea, endangered), and olive ridley sea
turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea, threatened) have been recorded from
strandings along the Oregon and Washington coasts.  The occurrence of
sea turtles off Oregon is associated with the appearance of albacore. 
Albacore occurrence is strongly associated with the warm waters of the
Japanese Current.  Because these warm waters generally occur 30 to 60+
miles offshore, these sea turtle species do not typically occur in the
nearshore area.

In general, the location of the proposed ODMDS does not provide any
unique breeding, spawning, nursery, feeding, or passage habitat.  It is
unlikely that any of the larger organisms (fish, marine mammals,
turtles, etc.) would experience physiological effects as a consequence
of disposal because the resulting turbidity plume and physical
disturbance to the water column would likely cause them to avoid the
area.  Based on modeling completed by the Corps at the Umpqua River,
water column turbidity would be expected to dissipate within a few
minutes to half hour (Corps, 2008).  Any avoidance behavior would be
limited to the duration of this physical disturbance.  Indirect impacts
could occur if disposal operations changed the value of the habitat by
burying the existing benthic community where dredged material is
deposited.  The benthic community would be expected to re-colonize
within a period of a few weeks to months after disposal, limiting any
effects to forage fish (Corps, 1993).  Lastly, evaluation of past
disposal activities have not indicated that any long-term adverse
impacts to living resources have occurred.  Therefore, EPA concluded in
the BA that the site designation was not likely to adversely affect any
listed species or critical habitat.  

Location in Relation to Beaches and other Amenity Areas (3).  The
northwest corner of the interim ODMDS is just over 2,000 yards from the
end of the South Jetty.  The inshore comer of the site lies
approximately 1,500 yards offshore.  South Beach is located immediately
west of Gold Beach and is approximately 7 miles long, spanning from the
Rogue River south to Cape Sebastian.  Bailey Beach, approximately 3
miles long, is located immediately north of Gold Beach.

Types and Quantity of Wastes Proposed to be Disposed of, and Proposed
Methods of Release, including Methods of Packing the Waste, if any (4). 
Dredged material subject to the MPRSA is not a waste.  Sites that are
designated will receive dredged materials transported by either
government or private contractor hopper dredges or dump barges.  Current
hopper dredges or dump barges available for use have hopper capacities
ranging from 800 to 6,000 cy.  This would be the likely volume range of
dredged material deposited in any one dredging placement cycle.  The
estimated volume to be removed annually from the Rogue River federal
navigation project could be placed at the sites in one dredging season
by any combination of private and government dredges.  The dredges or
barges would be under power and moving during disposal resulting in the
spreading of material.

The majority of the dredged material disposed in the ocean traditionally
comes from shoals in the Rogue River entrance channel.  They consist
primarily of marine sand transported into the entrance.  The material is
clean, with the exception of nickel contains no contaminants of concern
above screening levels, is far removed from known sources of
contaminants, and has been characterized under the Northwest Regional
Sediment Evaluation Framework (SEF) as suitable for unconfined
open-water disposal.  Sediments in the Rogue River and offshore do have
elevated levels of nickel compared to other drainage basins along the
Oregon Coast.  Because of their consistency and lack of known local
sources, these levels are believed to be background in the river system.
 Material dredged from the boat basin access channel is finer but has
been evaluated under the SEF and also found suitable for unconfined
open-water disposal.  Material dredged from the boat basin access
channel may at times be placed in either the ODMDS, an upland rehandling
area that is a beneficial use site for the Port of Gold Beach, or
adjacent to the Gold Beach airport in the South Beach surf zone.  The
ODMDS has been sized to accommodate the quantity of material to be
placed.

Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring (5).  Monitoring and
surveillance are both feasible within the ZSF and are included as
requirements in the SMMP for this site, a draft of which is Appendix F
to this document.  At a minimum, annual bathymetric surveys will be
conducted in areas that receive dredged material.  More frequent surveys
will be conducted when necessary to ensure unacceptable mounding is not
occurring that could pose a threat to navigation safety.  If actual
field monitoring of the disposal activities is required because of a
future concern for habitat changes or limited resources, several
research groups are available in the area to perform any required work. 
The ODMDS is readily accessible.  Most monitoring work can be performed
from small, surface research vessels at a reasonable cost.

Dispersal, Horizontal Transport and Vertical Mixing Characteristics of
the Area Including Prevailing Current Direction and Velocity, if Any
(6).  Appendix B provides a detailed discussion regarding this
criterion.  The material dredged from the Rogue River navigation channel
is medium to coarse sand.  The Rogue River ODMDS is exposed to normal
wave action as described in Appendix B.  For the range of depths and
grain sizes found at the Rogue River ODMDS, there is nearly constant
mobilization of bottom sediment due to wave action.  This wave-induced
motion is not responsible for net transport, but, once in motion, bottom
sediments can be affected by other forces such as gravity or directional
currents.

The nearshore circulation patterns at Rogue are unclear.  Their
complexity is perhaps due to the rocky reefs in the northern part of the
ZSF.  The prevailing currents at the depth of the disposal site seem to
be towards the north.  Figure B-6 in Appendix B illustrates the sediment
transport system assumed to be active.  Although the Rogue River must
deliver a large sediment load, the bottom contours suggest a rapid
distribution offshore.  While there is shoreline accretion 1 to 2 miles
to the north, the shoreline to the south seems to be in equilibrium,
suggesting littoral transport to the south is balanced by offshore
transport.  Disposal of dredged material at the ODMDS does not appear to
contribute significantly to coastal processes.

Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges and Dumping in
the Area including Cumulative Effects (7).  Due to coarser sediments
being deposited on finer ones at the disposal site, theoretically there
is a potential for mounding to occur.  Bathymetric surveys, however,
have shown no signs of mounding at the ODMDS from past disposal.  These
surveys actually show erosion of the seafloor in the area of the ODMDS
(see Appendix B).  Periodic monitoring will continue to evaluate
potential mounding and erosion.

Interference with Shipping, Fishing, Recreation, Mining Extraction,
Desalination, Fish and Shellfish Culture, Areas of Special Scientific
Importance, and Other Legitimate Uses of the Ocean (8).

	Commercial and Recreational Fishing.  The major commercial fishing
areas in the vicinity of the proposed Rogue River ODMDS are discussed in
Appendix A.  Based on data from the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS 2006) for commercial fishing, a total of 50 vessels, all
commercially registered, delivered landings to Gold Beach in 2000. 
Landings were in the following West Coast fisheries (data shown
represents landings in metric tons/monetary value of said
landings/number of vessels landing; NA = not available):  crab
(30/$133,107/5), groundfish (43/$236,173/36), salmon (NA/NA/1), and
other species (131/$173,950/17).  There were no fish processors
operating in Gold Beach in 2000.  Gold Beach residents owned 20 vessels
in 2000, seven of which participated in the federally managed groundfish
fishery.  On May 1, 2008, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez
declared a commercial fishery failure for the West Coast salmon
fishery because of historically low salmon returns and accordingly,
NMFS closed the 2008 salmon fishery in Oregon south of Cape Falcon.  The
primary concern prompting the declaration was the decline in the
Sacramento Chinook population.  

The major recreational fishing areas in the vicinity of the proposed
Rogue River ODMDS are discussed in Appendices A and E.  Based on data
from the NMFS (2006) for recreational fishing, Gold Beach had at least
27 outfitter guide businesses in 2003.  Ten licensed charter vessel
businesses were located in the community (two had their homeport in
Brookings).  There were about 28 sport fishing businesses in 2003.  The
ocean charter season goes year-round and targets lingcod and rockfishes.
 Gold Beach has nine licensing vendors and in 2000, the number of
licenses sold was 3,566 at a value of $60,984.  The 2000 recreational
salmonid catch in the ocean boat fishery was 74 Chinook salmon.  The
recreational non-salmonid catch totaled 15,416 fish.  The top species
landed included black rockfish, blue rockfish (Sebastes mystinus),
canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger), and lingcod.

The length of the salmon fishing season varies each year depending upon
the established quota; however, it normally extends from July to
September.  During this period, the potential exists for conflicts
between the dredge and fishing boats.  The Coast Guard and the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife indicate that they are not aware of any
instance where this has been a problem.  The Dungeness crab season is
from December 1 to August 15; however, most of the fishing is done prior
to June and usually ends early because of the increase in unmarketable
soft shell crabs in the catch.  As a result, most crab fishing is done
outside of the normal dredging season and it is unlikely that a conflict
would result.  There are no commercial fish or shellfish aquaculture
operations that would currently be impacted by final designation of the
Rogue River ODMDS.

	Mineral Extraction.  The Rogue River and its tributaries flow through
bedrock containing mineralized zones and have several reaches containing
gold placer deposits.  Beach placers at Gold Beach have been mined in
the past for gold and platinum.  Mining was done in the winter when the
sand was stripped from the beaches, exposing the mineral rich gravels. 
Some placers were also found on uplifted marine terraces (Ramp 1973,
Gray and Kulm 1985).  Historically the most prominent and extensive
zones of heavy mineral concentrations identified on the continental
shelf of the Oregon Coast were believed to occur off the mouth of the
Rogue River.  Chromite, ilmenite, and magnetite make up the bulk of the
concentration according to Kulm (1988).  The most extensive deposits
were thought to be located off the Rogue River with heavy mineral
concentrations ranging from 20% to 30%.  These deposits were identified
as approximately 37 km long extending from the nearshore zone to water
depths of 90 meters.  It has been suggested that the magnetic anomalies
found off the Rogue and Sixes rivers were caused by mineral deposits
having dimensions and mineral characteristics similar to those of
deposits located onshore in adjacent beach and terrace deposits (Kulm
1988, Peterson and Binner 1988).

The Oregon Placer Minerals Technical Task Force commissioned a
reconnaissance-level field investigation of heavy mineral placer
deposits offshore of the Rogue River in September and October 1990
(Oregon 1991).  The study did not find any heavy mineral deposits that
could be mined in the Rogue River area.  Previous reports of magnetic
anomalies were attributed to near-surface masses of bedrock.  Offshore
deposits are not currently being mined nor are any currently proposed
for mining.  While there have been several historical attempts to find
oil and gas along the Oregon Coast, test wells have not found
significant quantities of oil or gas.  As of 2007, no test wells have
been drilled south of Cape Blanco on the Oregon Coast.  The State of
Oregon currently has a moratorium on leasing for purpose of exploration,
development, or production of oil, gas, or sulfur up to 3 miles off the
Oregon Coast until January 2, 2010.

	Desalination.  There are no desalination plants in the area of the
Rogue River.

	Wave Energy.  With the increased interest in alternative energy
sources, various wave energy projects have been proposed off the coast
of Oregon.  The Governor of the State of Oregon, in a November 2007 news
release to the Oregon Fishing Industry, stated that he was asking the
Federal Energy Regulation Commission to limit the permitting of wave
energy to five to seven sites.  These projects will involve numerous
generating buoys moored offshore with transmission lines running to
shore distribution facilities.  At present all proposed projects are
north of Cape Blanco.  The closest if permitted would be located
offshore of Bandon, Oregon.  No wave energy projects are currently
proposed off the Rogue River.

	Fish and Shellfish Culture.  There are no fish or shellfish culture
operations in the area of the Rogue River ODMDS.

	Shipping and Other Legitimate Uses.  No conflicts with commercial
navigation traffic have been recorded in the more than 60-year history
of hopper dredging activity.  The likely reason for this is the light
commercial traffic at the Rogue.  Navigation hazards do exist within the
ZSF.  Figure 3 shows potential navigation hazards in the area.  Ships
cannot navigate in the northwest part of the ZSF due to the exposed
reefs.

	Marine Reserves.  The State of Oregon has initiated efforts to
establish a network of marine reserves as part of an overall strategy to
manage its marine waters and submerged lands.  The overall purpose would
be to protect, sustain, or restore the nearshore marine ecosystem, its
habitats, and species.  A marine reserve is an area within Oregon’s
state territorial sea or adjacent intertidal area that is protected from
all extractive activities including the removal or disturbance of living
and non-living marine resources.  Marine reserves are intended to
provide lasting protection.  Dredging and disposal are identified as
disturbances and would be banned from areas designated as marine
reserves.  In November 2008, Oregon’s Ocean Policy Advisory Council
(OPAC) recommended to Governor Ted Kulongoski that two sites, Otter Rock
near Depoe Bay, and Redfish Rocks near Port Orford, move forward as
pilot marine reserves and identified three areas, Cape Falcon, Cascade
Head, and Cape Perpetua, as deserving of further study and evaluation as
sites for potential marine reserves.  None of the sites identified by
the OPAC are in or near the proposed ODMDS.  

There are no intertidal or subtidal marine protected areas within the
proposed Rogue River ODMDS.  Rogue Reef is included in the Oregon
Islands National Wildlife Refuge and is listed as a priority offshore
rock/reef within Oregon’s Ocean Plan.  However, Rogue Reef is located
approximately 2 nm northwest of the proposed disposal site.

Special Scientific Importance.  There are no known transects or other
scientific study locations that would be impacted by disposal at the
Rogue River ODMDS.

General Discussion of Other Uses.  There has not been a demonstrated
conflict with any of the above listed uses of the existing Rogue River
disposal site, which has been in use at the same location under various
authorities since 1977.  There is a low potential for future conflicts
given that the area of the site is not of any unique value, is
relatively small, and there are few potential conflicting uses in the
vicinity.  Since the site has been in use at the existing location for
over 30 years, EPA’s designation of the proposed Rogue River ODMDS
would not result in any change to the existing uses of the area, by any
individuals or groups, or any associated economic benefit of those uses.

The Existing Water Quality and Ecology of the Site as Determined by
Available Data or by Trend Assessment or Baseline Survey (9).  Water and
sediment quality analyses conducted in the ODMDS area and experience
with past disposals in this region have not identified any adverse water
quality impacts from ocean disposal of dredged material.  The ecology of
the offshore area is a mobile sand community.  This determination is
based mainly on fisheries and benthic data.  Neither the pelagic or
benthic communities should sustain any long-term impacts due to their
mobility and widespread occurrence off the Oregon Coast.

Figure   SEQ Figure \* ARABIC  3 .  Potential Navigation Hazards

  

Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of Nuisance Species in
the Disposal Site (10).  Nuisance species are considered as any
undesirable organism not previously existing at the disposal site.  They
are either transported or recruited to the site because the disposal of
dredged materials created an environment where they could establish. 
Materials dredged and transported to the ODMDS historically have been
classified as uncontaminated marine sands similar to the sediment at the
site.  Potential material dredged from the boat basin access channel and
other permitted in-bay projects may include fine-grained material. 
Limited quantities of fine-grained material form the boat basin access
channel have been placed in the ocean.  Any material proposed for ocean
disposal would be subject to sediment quality evaluation.  Therefore, it
is highly unlikely that any nuisance species could be established at the
disposal site since habitat or contaminant levels are unlikely to change
over the long-term.

Existence at or in Close Proximity to the Site of any Significant
Natural or Cultural Features of Historical Importance (11).  The neritic
reefs off the Oregon Coast comprise a unique ecological feature.  They
support a wide variety of invertebrates and fish species, as well as
bull whip kelp communities.  These areas are sheltered from wave action
and receive nutrients from both the ocean and the estuaries and are
usually highly productive.  The disposal site is located about 2
nautical miles south-southeast from the Rogue Reef complex.  Since the
disposal material is clean sand that settles quickly, any movement of
the disposed sand into the reef area would occur through natural
littoral transport.  Since the disposal quantity is relatively small
compared to the longshore transport, disposal at the Rogue River ODMDS
is not expected to adversely affect the aquatic community in the reef
areas.

In spite of the heavy ship traffic supplying gold fields in the late
1800s, there do not appear to be any shipwrecks of cultural significance
that would be affected by continued use of the Rogue River ODMDS. 
Documented shipwrecks, as well as potential shipwreck areas are shown
and evaluated in Appendix D.  However, there are no observed or
documented shipwrecks within the proposed Rogue Rover ODMDS.

SUMMARY OF COORDINATION UNDER OTHER APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATUTES

Federal Action 

The federal action consists of designation of an ODMDS at the mouth of
the Rogue River.  Site designation does not create or confer rights on
any person to use a designated site upon the effective date of site
designation.  Persons or entities who seek to use a site must first
obtain a federal permit, or in the case of the Corps, meet the
substantive permit requirements, in order to actually use a designated
ocean dredged material disposal site.  This process would include
meeting the requirements of applicable statutes and regulations. EPA
recognizes, however, that site designation is intended to have a
practical result.  When sites are designated, it is expected that such
sites will be used by persons or entities meeting the statutory and
regulatory criteria for ocean disposal of dredged material.  Therefore,
actual disposal is an indirect effect of site designation and is
included in the evaluation of effects under the below listed statutes.

Public Involvement

One comment letter dated November 12, 2008, was received from the U.S.
Department of Interior.  The letter stated that the Department does not
have any comments to offer.  No other public comments were received in
response to the publication of the draft rule.  No public meetings were
held and none were requested.

Endangered Species Act

EPA’s determination that the proposed action may affect, but is not
likely to adversely affect (NLAA) listed species was documented in the
Rogue River, Oregon: Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Designation
Biological Assessment, dated June 5, 2008.  EPA initiated consultation
under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA),
16 U.S.C. Sections 1531 to 1544, based on this documentation with both
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) by letter dated June 5, 2008.  The USFWS
concurred with EPA’s determination by letter dated July 29, 2008.  The
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) did not concur on EPA’s NLAA
finding and subsequently prepared a Biological Opinion (BO), issued
March 19, 2009.  

NMFS concluded that EPA’s site designation is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of SONCC coho salmon or southern DPS green
sturgeon and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify SONCC coho
salmon designated critical habitat or proposed southern DPS green
sturgeon habitat.  However, NMFS found that the indirect effects of the
Site designation related to the exposure fish could experience from the
disposal of dredged material could have consequences for listed fish. 
Based on NMFS’ estimate of ensuing indirect effects of the Site
designation, NMFS estimated that injury and death of as many as 476
yearling SONCC coho salmon and an unquantified but small number of small
subadult southern DPS green sturgeon could occur.  For Steller sea
lions, blue whales, fin whales, humpback whales, and Southern Resident
Killer whales, NMFS concurred in the BO with EPA’s determination of
“may affect, not likely to adversely affect.”  For four species of
sea turtles, sperm whales, and sei whales, EPA made a determination of
NLAA, but NMFS found no effect because NMFS did not anticipate the
species would be present in the action area.  

NMFS acknowledged in the BO that EPA’s action, the Site designation,
does not authorize and will not itself result in disposal of dredged
material.  NMFS stated that any further analysis of the effects of
disposal of dredged material at the disposal site and issuance of an
incidental take statement with reasonable and prudent measures and
non-discretionary terms and conditions to minimize take would be
prepared when a disposal permit is requested by the action agency.  NMFS
did include one discretionary conservation recommendation in the BO
seeking a study of fish interactions with disposed material.  Such
recommendations are advisory in nature. 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

EPA’s determination that the proposed action does not have the
potential to cause substantial adverse effects on Essential Fish Habitat
was documented in the Rogue River, Oregon: Ocean Dredged Material
Disposal Site Designation Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, dated June
5, 2008.  EPA initiated consultation under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (MSA) 16 U.S.C. Section 1855(b) with
NMFS by letter dated June 5, 2008, based on this documentation.

NMFS found that disposal of dredge material, an indirect effect of
EPA’s action to designate the Rogue River ODMDS, will not alter the
habitat value of the EFH.  NMFS also concluded that impacts to forage
base would be highly localized and any potential decrease in forage
abundance is considered insignificant to the total food resources
available to EFH management species.  Finally, NMFS concluded that the
safe passage of the EFH managed species will not be functionally changed
by EPA’s Site designation and the subsequent disposal of dredged
material.  Those findings are documented in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act section of the NMFS Biological Opinion.

NMFS included, as a “conservation recommendation,” implementation of
the measure to study fish behavior included in the ESA section of the
BO.  EPA responded to this recommendation in a separate response.

Marine Mammal Protection Act

EPA determined that the proposed action to designate the Site would not
result in take or incidental take of any protected marine mammal under
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA), 16 U.S.C.
Sections 1361 to 1389.  The Biological Assessment, which evaluated the
possible effects on ESA listed marine mammals including Stellar Sea Lion
and whales, was provided to the NMFS Regional Protected Resources
Division for review on June 5, 2008.  NMFS Regional Protected Resources
Division staff responded via e-mail dated January 16, 2009, stating that
Regional Offices do not provide written confirmation of project
compliance with MMPA, but when reviewing projects under ESA, Regional
Offices do recommend coordination with the NMFS Headquarters Office of
Protected Resources in cases where they see a potential for disturbance
or injury of non-listed marine mammals.  The NMFS Regional Protected
Resources Division did review EPA’s proposed site designation under
ESA and did not recommend that we contact the NMFS Headquarters Office
of Protected Resources. NMFS found that all potential adverse effects to
ESA-listed marine mammals are discountable or insignificant.  Those
findings are documented in Appendix A. Marine Mammal Determinations of
the Biological Opinion issued by NMFS on March 19, 2009. Based on the
review and this response provided by NMFS Regional Protected Resources
Division, EPA has concluded that the requirements of the MMPA have been
met.

Coastal Zone Management Act

EPA made a consistency determination pursuant to the Coastal Zone
Management Act (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. Sections 1451 to 1465, and provided
that determination to Oregon’s Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) by letter dated November 12, 2008.  DLCD responded on
January 16, 2009, providing a conditional concurrence with EPA’s
certification of consistency to the maximum extent practicable with the
enforceable policies of the state's approved CZM program.  DLCD’s
concurrence sought assurance in the SMMP that monitoring measures for
the Rogue River Site would be reasonably likely to identify significant
unanticipated adverse effects on renewable marine resources, biological
diversity of marine life and the functional integrity of the marine
ecosystem at the Site.  In addition, DLCD sought inclusion in the SMMP
of adaptive management measures to avoid significant impairment of the
Site and significant decreases in abundance of commercial or
recreational caught species from direct or indirect effects on important
or essential habitat at the Site.

National Historic Preservation Act

National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C.
Sections 470 to 470a-2, which requires Federal agencies to take into
account the effect of their actions on districts, sites, buildings,
structures, or objects, included in, or eligible for inclusion in the
National Register.  EPA determined that no historic properties would be
affected the proposed undertaking, the designation of the Rogue River
ODMDS.  EPA provided that determination and supporting evaluation to the
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in the Oregon Parks and
Recreation Department by letter dated August 28, 2008.  The below listed
Tribal Governments were copied on the letter as consulting parties.  The
SHPO responded via letter dated September 8, 2008, stating “while not
having sufficient knowledge to predict the likelihood of cultural
resources being within your project area, extreme caution is recommended
during future ground disturbing activities.”  A follow-up e-mail with
the State Archaeologist, Dennis Griffin, dated October 13, 2008,
confirmed that the project could move forward without any further
archaeological investigations. No comments were received from any of the
Tribal Governments contacted.

Tribal Coordination

Coordination letters dated August 28, 2008, were sent to the Coquille
Indian Tribe, the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians, the Confederated
Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes
of the Siletz, and the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and
Siuslaw.  Tribal comments were also solicited during the NHPA process. 
No comments were received from any of the Tribal Governments contacted.

SELECTION OF OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE FOR FORMAL DESIGNATION

Based upon the evaluation of the criteria contained in 40 CFR Parts 220
through 228, the Corps and EPA have determined that the Rogue River
ODMDS is suitable for designation.  The ODMDS designation by EPA will be
finalized through formal rulemaking adopting this Environmental
Assessment/MPRSA Criteria Evaluation and the appendices to support this
action.

LITERATURE CITED

Auth, T.D. and R.D. Brodeur.  2006.  Distribution and community
structure of ichthyoplankton off the coast of Oregon, USA, in 2000 and
2002.  Marine Ecology Progress Series 319:199-213.

Auth, T.D., R.D. Brodeur, and K.M. Fisher.  2007.  Diel variation in
vertical distribution of an offshore ichthyoplankton community off the
Oregon Coast.  Fish Bulletin 105:313-326.

Boone, C.G., M.A. Granat, and M.P. Farrell.  1978.  Aquatic Disposal
Field Investigations, Columbia River Disposal Site, Oregon.  Evaluative
Summary.  Technical Report D-77-30, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg MS.

Brodeur, R.D., D.M. Gadomski, W.G. Pearcy, H.P. Batchelder, and C.B.
Miller.  1985.  Abundance and distribution of ichthyoplankton in the
upwelling zone off Oregon during anomalous El Niño conditions. 
Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 21:365-378.

Brown, R. F., S. D. Reimer, and B. E. Wright.  2002.  Population status
and food habits of Steller sea lions in Oregon.  Marine Mammal Research
Program, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Corvallis, OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1985.  Yaquina Bay Interim Ocean
Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation Study.  Portland District,
Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1988a.  Chetco Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Evaluation, Final Report.  Portland District,
Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1988b.  Rogue Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Evaluation, Final Report.  Portland District,
Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1990.  Yaquina Bay Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Benthic Infauna Evaluation.  Portland District,
Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1993.  Tongue Point Monitoring
Program 1989-1992 Final Report.  Prepared by U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland OR and National Marine Fisheries
Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Seattle, WA.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  1999.  Yaquina Bay Ocean Dredged
Material Disposal Site Benthic Infauna Evaluation.  A comparative study
1984-1999.  Portland District, Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  December 2002.  Rogue River
Sediment Quality Evaluation.  Portland District, Portland OR.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  September 2006.  Northwest
Regional Sediment Evaluation Framework, Interim Final.  Prepared by U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Seattle, Portland, and Walla Walla Districts
and Northwestern Division), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural
Resources, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department
of Environmental Quality, National Marine Fisheries Service, and U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.

Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).  May 2008.  Umpqua River, Oregon
Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site Evaluation Study and Environmental
Assessment Draft Report.  Appendix B: Physical Processes and Geologic
Features, Umpqua River, Oregon.  Prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District and Environmental Protection Agency, Region
10.

Durkin, J.T. and S.J. Lipovsky.  1977.  Aquatic Disposal Field
Investigations, Columbia River Disposal Site, Oregon.  Appendix E:
Demersal Fish and Decapod Shellfish Studies.  Technical Report D-77-30,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg MS.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).  August 1991.  Draft
Environmental Impact Statement, Rogue Ocean Dredged Material Disposal
Site (ODMDS) Designation.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
10, with Technical Assistance from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District.

EPA and Corps (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers).  1984.  General Approach to Designation Studies for Ocean
Dredged Material Disposal Sites.  Washington D.C.

Hancock, D.R., P.O. Nelson, C.K. Sollitt, and K.J. Williamson.  1981. 
Coos Bay Offshore Disposal Site Investigation Interim Report, Phase I,
February 1979-March 1980.  Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Portland District.  Oregon State University, Corvallis OR.

Hillmann, L.G.  July 2006.  Rocky Shore Management in Oregon:  Status
and Trends of Resources, Uses and Management.  Oregon Parks and
Recreation Department.

Hinton, S.A., R.L. Emmett, and G.T. McCabe Jr.  1992.  Benthic
Invertebrates, Demersal Fishes, and Sediment Characteristics At and
Adjacent to Ocean Dredge Material Disposal Site F, Offshore from the
Columbia River, June 1989 and 1990.  National Marine Fisheries Service,
Northwest Fisheries Center, Seattle WA.

Hinton, S.A. and R.L. Emmett.  1994.  Benthic Infauna, Sediment, and
Fish Offshore from the Columbia River, July 1992.  National Marine
Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Center, Seattle WA.

Hinton, S.A. and R.L. Emmett.  1996.  Benthic Infauna and Sediment
Characteristics Offshore from the Columbia River, August 1994.  National
Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Center, Seattle WA.

Keister, J.E. and W.T. Peterson.  2003.  Zonal and seasonal variations
in zooplankton community structure off the central Oregon Coast,
1998-2000.  Progress in Oceanography 57:341-361.

Kulm, L.D.  1988.  Potential heavy mineral and metal placers on the
southern Oregon continental shelf.  Marine Mining 7(4):361-395.

Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.  January 2008.  Benthic Infauna and
Demersal Fish Evaluation, Rogue River Dredged Material Disposal Site. 
Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Portland District.

NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service).  2006.  Draft Community
Profiles for West Coast and North Pacific Fisheries - Washington,
Oregon, California, and other U.S. States.  Socioeconomics Program,
Northwest Fisheries Science Center and Economics and Social Sciences
Research Program, Alaska Fisheries Science Center.  Available at
http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/sd/communityprofiles/index.
cfm.

Peterson, W.T. and Miller, C.B.  1977.  Seasonal cycle of zooplankton
abundance and species composition along the central Oregon coast. 
Fishery Bulletin 75:717-724.

Peterson, C.D. and S.E. Binner.  1988.  Compositional variations of
coastal placers in the Pacific Northwest, USA.  Marine Mining
7(4):397-416.

Richardson, S.L.  1973.  Abundance and distribution of larval fishes in
waters off Oregon, May-October 1969, with special emphasis on the
northern anchovy, Engraulis mordax.  Fishery Bulletin 71:697-711.

Richardson, S.L. and W.G. Pearcy.  1977.  Coastal and oceanic larvae in
an area of upwelling off Yaquina Bay, Oregon.  Fishery Bulletin
75:125-145.

Richardson, M.D., A.G. Carey Jr., and W.A. Colgate.  1977.  Aquatic
Disposal Field Investigations, Columbia River Disposal Site, Oregon. 
Appendix C: The Effects of Dredged Material Disposal on Benthic
Assemblages.  Technical Report D-77-30, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg MS.

Roffe, T.J. and B.R. Mate.  1984.  Abundances and feeding habits of
pinnipeds in the Rogue River, Oregon.  Journal of Wildlife Management
48(4):1262-1274.

Siipola, M.D., R.L. Emmett, and S.A. Hinton.  1993.  Tongue Point
Monitoring Program 1989-1992, Final Report.  U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Portland District, Portland OR.

Sullivan, B. and D. Hancock.  1977.  Zooplankton and Dredging, Research
Perspectives and Critical Review.  Water Resources Bulletin B(13).

 EPA’s Interim Designations were superseded by later statutory and
regulatory changes.  The site’s current status is as a Section 103(b)
Corps-selected site.  EPA concurred on the selection and extended its
approval of site use on April 15, 2003, allowing use of the site to
continue through 2008.  

 Upland disposal of dredged material may be necessary if the material is
characterized under the requirements of the Interim Final Northwest
Regional Sediment Evaluation Framework (SEF) and found not suitable for
open-water disposal (Corps of Engineers  2006)

Rogue River ODMDS Environmental Assessment and MPRSA Criteria Evaluation
page   PAGE  ii 

Rogue River ODMDS Environmental Assessment and MPRSA Criteria Evaluation
page   PAGE  40 

