With opposition mounting to the proposal to dredge the Providence River for the first time since 1971, legislators like Portsmouth state Rep. Charles J. Levesque find themselves in a vexing position.
The U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers proposes to dredge about 4 million cubic yards of contaminated and clean sediment from the river’s shipping channel. The channel, which has silted over the years, has been reduced from 40 to 28 feet deep in some spots. The shipping lane now supports only one-way traffic, and marinas have lost slips as a result.
Seifert Systems Invests in Energy Efficiency to Strengthen Operations
For manufacturers, energy is more than just another operating expense. It plays a critical role…
Learn More
But while few dispute the need to dredge, many dispute the corps’ choice of dump sites for the sediments: a confined underwater site off the East Providence coastline, and a deep depression off Hog Island. East Providence and East Bay officials are incensed about what they say will be a devastating impact on their economies if the sites are created.
The project, as the corps proposes it, would cost $88.8 million and would restore the channel to its federally authorized depth of 40 feet. The state must pay $7.4 million up front — 25 percent of the cost of the confined site near East Providence — and another 10 percent over 30 years. The federal government pays the rest.
But now, several communities are urging legislators to kill the project by refusing the initial payment. It puts people like Levesque, who must represent their district and the state simultaneously, in a tough position.
“I’m trying not to get sectarian about it,” said Levesque, D-Dist. 93. “There is a little bit of this project that strikes me as being a little too clever. I’m suspicious — maybe a little paranoid — but I watch these things and I think they’re trying to put people like myself in a difficult position.”
Levesque and other interested parties will have a chance to voice their opinions at public hearings scheduled for Thursday, Oct. 8 at Martin Junior High School in East Providence and Friday, Oct. 9 at the University of Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay campus.
Petition drive
But Army Corps Project Manager Edward G. O’Donnell, who will conduct the hearings, said their purpose is to record public testimony — not to answer questions. The corps has released a draft of its Environmental Impact Statement concerning the project, and will solicit comments on it until Oct. 20. Then, it will begin work on a final draft. The project is unlikely to begin before 2000, O’Donnell said.
But if 20-year Hog Island resident Denise Neri has her way it will never begin, at least not in its proposed form. She has organized a petition drive against the proposal to dump about 2.8 million cubic yards of clean sediment in an area adjacent to the channel between Prudence and Hog Islands.
The site is now a fertile lobster fishing ground, as lobsters use it to escape warm waters during the summer months. The corps estimates that the fishing industry will lose $600,000 because of it, but argues that the lobster habitat will return eventually, possibly within a year.
But Neri is less optimistic. She and other environmentalists say they doubt the area would ever recover.
East Providence officials are equally angry about the corps’ plans to dump 1.2 million cubic yards of contaminated sediment off Watchemoket Cove. Creating a dump site would only hinder efforts to develop the city waterfront, they say.
“It’s probably as poor a planning on their part as they could possibly do,” said City Manager Paul E. Lemont. “There’s a lot of people that are proud of this city that don’t want this. You’re killing off that land, and by God, not while I’m around.”
But if the state wants to dredge the channel without using the corps’ preferred sites — selected from a pool of 150 options — it has two choices: pay the additional money needed to take the dredged materials elsewhere, or convince the corps on scientific grounds that the sites are unacceptable.
Lisa Pelosi, spokeswomen for Gov. Lincoln Almond, said the state would consider appropriating the extra funds needed for a disposal site that the state prefers.
Expensive options
But the second option seems distant. While O’Donnell said the corps would consider the public testimony and could change its mind, Todd Andrews, deputy chief of staff for U.S. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said the chances of the federal government coming up with more money than the Environmental Impact Statement recommends are slim.
Other disposal options are considerably more expensive. Two sites farther out to sea that the corps has identified to replace the Hog Island site would raise the total cost to $104.1 million or $134.6 million, depending upon on the site. O’Donnell said the corps would pay for the least expensive and environmentally acceptable solution only.
Save the Bay has an alternative proposal. It argues that the project could be scaled back to make what it says are more environmentally friendly options affordable.
Save the Bay spokesman John Torgan said the corps should dredge to less than 40 feet, doing just enough to solve problems facing marinas and shipping traffic. This would give the state time to find better disposal options, he said.
Torgan added that while Save the Bay may quibble with the size and dimensions of the East Providence site, it will focus its energy on fighting the Hog Island proposal.
“
It would virtually eliminate the deep-water hole habitat, and this is an irreversible impact,” he said. “No one can predict how long it would take to recover to its previous condition, if ever.”
The scaled back option has its supporters. Levesque is one. And O’Donnell said the corps would consider doing less. But he added that the corps’ research indicates that there is a need to dredge the channel to its full depth.
Ida Walker, spokeswoman for Mobil Oil Corp. New England facilities, said Mobil’s East Providence terminal does depend on having a 40-foot channel.
Not critical yet
“Our need (for dredging) is not critical today,” Walker said, “but it could be critical in the future.”
Still, East Providence, and East Bay communities are trying to stop the project in its tracks. The Portsmouth Town Council, for example, has voted to oppose it and draft letters to the Legislature expressing its opposition.
But state officials must come to a common agreement on what Rhode Island’s dredging needs are to deal with the problem successfully, Levesque said.
“I believe that not only does the state have to be clear (about what it wants) but it has to be of one mind,” he said. “My belief is that there is room enough to compromise.”
