[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 48 (Friday, March 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12974-12976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-5839]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers


Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the 
Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction 
Study, Port Monmouth, New Jersey

AGENCY: U.S Army Amry Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of Availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The New York District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has 
prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DESI) for the Raritan 
Bay and Sandy Hook Bay, Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Study, 
Port Monmouth, New Jersey. The purpose of the study is to identify a 
plan that would protect the Port Monmouth community from damages caused 
by hurricanes and storm. The DEIS was prepared to evaluate those 
alternative identified in the Feasibility Report. Additional 
information on the study is provided the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section as indicated below.

DATES: The DEIS will be available for public review on or about March 
10, 2000. The review period of the document will be for forty five days 
from the publication date of the DEIS. To request a copy of the DEIS 
please call (212) 264-4663.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding the 
DEIS, please contact Mark Burlas, Project Wildlife Biologist, telephone 
(212) 264-4663, Planning Division, ATTN: CENAN-PL-EA, Corps of 
Engineers, New York District, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 
10278-0090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    1. The Raritan Bay and Sandy Hook Bay (RBSHB), Hurricane and Storm 
Damage Reduction Study, Port Monmouth, New Jersey was authorized by the 
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Public Works and 
Transportation, adopted August 1, 1990, which states ``Resolved by the 
Committee on Public Works and Transportation of the United States House 
of Representatives, that the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors 
is requested to review the report of Chief of Engineers on RBSHB, New 
Jersey, published as House Document 464, Eighty-seventh Congress, 
Second Session, and other pertinent reports, to determine the 
advisability of modifications to the recommendations contained therein 
to provide erosion control and storm damage prevention for the RBSHB.''
    2. The 1.8-square-mile Project area is located in Port Monmouth, 
Middletown Township, Monmouth County, New Jersey, along the RBSHB, 
bounded by Compton Creek to the east, Pews Creek to the west, and New 
Jersey State Highway 36 to the south. The Project was divided into 
three study area for plan formulation and impact assessment purposes: 
the Bay Shoreline Study Area (BSSA), the Pews Creek Study Area (PCSA), 
and the Compton Creek Study Area (CCSA). The BSSA is located along the 
RBSHB, and comprises the shorefront, beach, and dune complex that has 
historically experienced significant erosion, and consequently provides 
limited tidal surge and flood protection to the adjacent Port Monmounth 
community. The PCSA is located in the western portion of the Project 
area, and is situated in a highly developed, residential portion of 
Middletown Township. The PCSA includes the Pews Creek channel, a tidal 
creek that drains to the north into the RBSHB, and is mostly tidal 
wetlands. The CCSA is located in the eastern portion of the Project 
area, and is associated with a high developed, residential portion of 
Middletown Township. The CCSA includes the Compton Creek channel, a 
tidal creek that drains to the north into RBSHB, and is mostly tidal 
wetlands.
    3. The selected plan is comprised of levees, floodwalls, a storm 
gate, road closure gates, fortification of an existing dune, pump 
stations, stormwater retention basins, beach nourishment, periodic 
beach renourishment, environmental mitigation, and an offshore borrow 
area. The selected plan, which is the environmentally preferred plan, 
was determined to be the National Economic Development (NED) Plan. A 
NED Plan is one that is consistent with the objectives of contributing 
to NED through the reduction of flood hazards and associated flood 
damages while protecting the Nation's natural, cultural, biological, 
historic, and social resources.
    a. The District determined that interior drainage facilities were 
required to safely store and discharge storm water runoff that would 
collect on the protected side of the CCSA levee. Specifically, these 
facilities were planned and evaluated separately from the line of 
protection (levees and floodwalls) and would provide adequate drainage 
at least equal to that of the existing infrastructure.
    b. Throughout the planning process, the District formulated 
alternative plans to meet general and specific planning objectives 
while considering the preferences of various interested parties with 
regard to plan selection and

[[Page 12975]]

design. The District has consulted and coordinated its planning efforts 
with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (JNDEP), the 
non-Federal sponsor, and representatives of the Middletown Township and 
various Monmouth County agencies. The plan formulation process 
emphasized the avoidance and minimization of environmental impacts, 
especially to wetlands, and then mitigation was included to compensate 
for unavoidable habitat loss.
    c. The selected plan consists of approximately: 7,000 linear feet 
(ft) of earthen levees average +14 ft National Geodetic Vertical Datum 
(NGVD); 3,600 ft of concrete floodwalls averaging about +8 ft NGVD; a 
40-ft wide storm gate across Pews Creek with a flood water pump house; 
initial beach nourishment of about 378,500 cubic yards of sand, with 
periodic renourishment of approximately 125,000 cubic yards of sand at 
10-year intervals; and , three interior drainage ponding areas each 
with primary and secondary drainage outlets.
    2. The selected plan without mitigation would directly and 
indirectly impact approximately 14.89 acres (ac) of wetland and upland 
areas. The majority of these impacts would involve the conversion of 
native habitat types to maintained (grass-covered) levees, permanent 
floodwalls, and storm gate. Specifically, the selected plan would 
permanently impact several vegetation cover types. Finally, the 
selected plan would temporarily impact herbaceous, scrub/shrub, 
Phragmites wetlands, and high salt marsh habitats due to clearing and 
equipment operation in temporary work areas.
    a. Less mobile aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species within the 
footprint of the selected plan would experience mortality due to 
construction. Furthermore, a short-term decrease in reproductive 
success of these species could occur due to construction activities. In 
the long-term, following habitat conversion, wildlife species would 
lose or gain habitat resources based on their habitat requirements. No 
rare, threatened, or endangered species or their critical habitats 
would be adversely affected by the implementation of the selected plan.
    b. The District conducted a Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HEP) 
analysis to assess the impacts of the selected plan. This HEP analysis 
concluded that impacts associated with the construction of the selected 
plan (without mitigation) will result in the loss of 2.04 black duck 
(Anas rubripes) and 3.14 marsh ren (Cistothorus palustris) habitat 
units (HUs) at the year of construction (Year 2002). At the year of 
2052, black duck and marsh wren habitat quality would be reduced by 
49.94 and 136.71 cumulative habitat units (CHUs). Similarly, the AAHU 
of the black duck and marsh wren decrease by 1.00 and 2.73 over the 50-
year design life of the Project. In addition, the HEP analysis 
determined that 2.13 acres of upland habitat would be impacted, 7.13 
acres of wetlands would be converted to upland, and additional 5.63 
acres of wetland habitat would be indirectly impacted by the selected 
plan. Indirect impacts to wetlands involve the conversion, not the loss 
of non-Phragmites wetlands to Phragmites-dominated wetlands.
    c. The selected plan is expected to have a direct, short-term 
impact on benthic resources. Beach nourishment is expected to smother 
benthic organisms causing their mortality. However, once buried, some 
mobile shellfish species and polycheate worms have the ability to 
burrow upwards and survive. The recovery of benthic resources to 
preconstruction conditions should occur shortly after construction. A 
benthic-monitoring plan will be conducted to quantify benthic recovery 
rates and the composition of the recolonized benthic community.
    d. The District developed a tidal hydrodynamic model to compare the 
effects of a storm gate in Pews Creek to the existing conditions. The 
model projected that the selected 40-ft storm gate in the open position 
would lower the mean spring high tide by only 0.72 inches and all other 
normal tidal events would be unaffected. Accordingly, the effects to 
the daily tidal exchange are expected to be minute. A monitoring plan 
is proposed to support the prediction of the model. In addition, the 
storm gate is anticipated to increase peak ebb tidal velocities 
potentially allowing more suspended sediments to be transported out of 
the salt marsh into the RBSHB. As a result, the sedimentation rate of 
the salt marsh may be reduced.
    e. In addition, the implementation of the selected plan can provide 
benefits to horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus), migratory birds, and 
the federally threatened piping plover (Charadrius melodus). A wider 
sandy beach and improved intertidal habitat conditions may provide more 
suitable spawning habitat for the horseshoe crab, thus potentially 
increasing prey resources available for consumption by migratory birds. 
It is well documented that the timing of the spring migration for many 
species is linked to the spawning activity of the horseshoe crab. 
Furthermore, a much larger and wider sandy beach created by the 
construction of the selected plan should provide more roosting space 
for wintering waterfowl and increase the amount of potential nesting 
habitat for shorebirds, such as the piping plover.
    f. No areas were identified as containing potential environmental 
contamination, or were considered to pose a great risk to human health. 
Subsurface testing was performed and evidence of Native American 
occupation was found in the vicinity of the selected plan's footprint. 
Further evaluation will be conducted and coordinated with the New 
Jersey Historic Preservation Office, as part of Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act compliance. Short-term negligible 
impacts to air quality and traffic are expected only during 
construction.
    3. The District, in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and NJDEP, developed an 
array of mitigation plans using HEP protocols. The selected mitigation 
plan proposes to restore approximately 12.80 acres of wetland 
Phragmites-dominated habitat to salt marsh habitat. As compared to the 
No-Action alternative, implementation of the selected plan and selected 
mitigation plan would increase black duck habitat quality by 0.78 HUs 
and marsh wren habitat quality by 0.96 HUs at the year of construction. 
At the year of 2052, black duck and marsh wren habitat quality would 
increase by 157.83 and 106.55 CHUs. In addition, the AAHU of the black 
duck and marsh wren would increase by 3.16 and 2.13 over the Project's 
50-year design life when compared to the No-Action alternative.
    a. Based upon a Phragmites Encroachment Model (PEM) developed by 
the District specifically for the assessment of future conditions and 
impacts, the construction of the selected plan and selected mitigation 
plan would prevent the loss of about 15.27 acres of salt marsh habitat 
when compared to the No-Action alternative for the 50-year design-life 
of the Project. In summary, the comparison of the selected plan to the 
No-Action alternative suggests that implementation of the selected plan 
will provide long-term benefits to wildlife resources of the intertidal 
zone and the coastal marsh ecosystem at Port Monmouth.
    b. Mitigation measures for cultural resources will be developed in 
conjunction with the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office, the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and interested 
parties.

[[Page 12976]]

    4. Based on coordination with other federal and state agencies, an 
unresolved issue has been identified. A consensus to determine the 
appropriate level of compensatory mitigation to offset environmental 
impacts has not been reached. The District plans to continue its 
ongoing coordination effort with other federal and state agencies to 
secure an agreement concerning the amount of mitigation that is needed 
to appropriately compensate for environmental impacts. No other 
unresolved issues are known at this time, pending review of this DEIS.

Frank Santomauro,
Chief, Planning Division.
[FR Doc. 00-5839 Filed 3-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-06-M