The North Carolina State Ports Authority (SPA) has asked the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to suspend consideration of a US$1.35 billion proposal to deepen Wilmington Harbor’s main navigation channel from 42 to 47 feet (13 to 14 metres), citing unresolved environmental questions, including possible contamination of dredged sediment.
SPA Executive Director Brian E. Clark made the request in a September 18 letter, as reported by WilmingtonBiz. He asked the USACE to suspend the project’s Section 403 Letter Report activities and consideration of the pending record of decision.
“While we are certain the economic benefits from such a project could have lasting positive impacts on the entire state, what has become clear during this process is a need to pause and give adequate study and reflection to the potential environmental impacts of a project of this magnitude, including the potential impacts of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly referred to as PFAS,” Clark said in the letter.
USACE public affairs specialist Jed Cayton told WilmingtonBiz by email that the request had been forwarded to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. That office and Congress will determine any future decisions or next steps, he said.
The Wilmington Harbor Navigation Expansion Project would also widen parts of the channel, remove approximately 35 million cubic yards (28 milliion cubic metres) of material through dredging and extend the offshore entrance channel by roughly nine miles (14 kilometres). It is intended to accommodate larger commercial vessels and improve the Port of Wilmington’s competitiveness.
The USACE’s final environmental review identified known PFAS contamination upstream, while the presence of contamination in sediment proposed for dredging remained unresolved. The review said federal and state standards for PFAS concentrations in sediment were not available.
The USACE said the project was not expected to increase PFAS contamination or affect contaminant levels in drinking water. Sediment will be tested before construction, with the results guiding use and disposal. SPA, as non-federal sponsor, will bear costs associated with managing contaminated sediment.
USACE published its final letter report and final environmental impact statement on July 2, beginning a 30-day waiting period before submission for a record of decision. The publication did not open a further public comment period. The ports authority’s request came after that period and seeks a pause rather than cancellation.
North Carolina’s Division of Coastal Management objected to the USACE’s federal consistency determination on February 24. The agency said information on PFAS, flooding, and dredged material placement was insufficient to assess compliance with state coastal laws and policies.
The division also raised concerns about effects on fisheries, erosion-prone communities, and state and historic properties. Its review followed a Wilmington hearing attended by 72 people, all opposed, and 132 written submissions, of which 125 opposed the project.
The USACE and SPA had requested an earlier pause in the state coastal consistency review in January while discussing outstanding concerns. The USACE asked to resume that review in February, before the division issued its objection.
Clark said SPA will continue working with the USACE’s Wilmington District and seek to utilise the existing channel to the fullest extent possible.