Transportation Study for the Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Chesterfi eld County, Virginia
FINAL REPORT
PREPARED FOR US Fish and Wildlife Service
PREPARED BY Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc.
AUGUST 2012 7DEOHRI&RQWHQWV
&KDSWHU ([HFXWLYH6XPPDU\ 5HSRUW6WUXFWXUH 6XPPDU\RI7UDQSRUWDWLRQ6WXG\)LQGLQJV &KDSWHU ,QWURGXFWLRQ %DFNJURXQGDQG+LVWRU\ 3UHVTXLOH&RPSUHKHQVLYH&RQVHUYDWLRQ3ODQ ([LVWLQJ5HIXJH,QIUDVWUXFWXUH $OWHUQDWLYH7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ6WXG\DQG*RDOV 1HHGIRU7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ 6WHHULQJ&RPPLWWHH .LFNRII0HHWLQJ 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ3ODQQLQJ0HHWLQJ $JHQF\&RRUGLQDWLRQ0HHWLQJ 6XPPDU\RI3ULPDU\3URMHFW0HHWLQJV 2WKHU3URMHFW0HHWLQJV &LW\RI+RSHZHOO0DULQD %HUPXGD+XQGUHG&RPPXQLW\ 3RUW:HDQDFN 6KLUOH\3ODQWDWLRQ 3KLOLS0RUULV86$ &KDSWHU ([LVWLQJ7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ)DFLOLWLHV ([LVWLQJ7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ$VVHWV ([LVWLQJ9HVVHO2SHUDWLRQ ([LVWLQJ&DEOH2SHUDWHG)HUU\ ([LVWLQJIRRW3RQWRRQ%RDW ([LVWLQJIRRW6NLII ([LVWLQJIRRW-RQ%RDW ([LVWLQJ)HUU\7HUPLQDOVDQG)ORDWLQJ'RFN 3UHVTXLOH5HIXJH)HUU\7HUPLQDO ):60DLQODQG)HUU\7HUPLQDO
86)LVK :LOGOLIH6HUYLFH L 7$%/(2)&217(176
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±6PDOO3DVVHQJHU9HVVHOV &DWDPDUDQ9HVVHO 0RQRKXOO9HVVHO )HGHUDO$JHQF\0DULQH7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ6\VWHP([DPSOHV )RUW0DWDQ]DV)ORULGD )RUW0F+HQU\0DU\ODQG %RVWRQ+DUERU,VODQGV1DWLRQDO5HFUHDWLRQ$UHD $OFDWUD],VODQG&DOLIRUQLD &XPEHUODQG,VODQG*HRUJLD
LL 3UHVTXLOH1DWLRQDO:LOGOLIH5HIXJH 7$%/(2)&217(176
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±0DULQD6LWHV &%$(YDOXDWLRQ6XPPDU\1R 3DVVHQJHU9HVVHO2SHUDWLRQV±([LVWLQJ):6)HUU\ 7HUPLQDO6LWH &%$(YDOXDWLRQ6XPPDU\1R +HDY\(TXLSPHQW9HVVHO2SHUDWLRQ0DLQODQG6LWHV &%$(YDOXDWLRQ6XPPDU\1R +HDY\(TXLSPHQW9HVVHO2SHUDWLRQ±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±'LVWDQFHV 0RQRKXOO&DWDPDUDQ 2SWLRQ0DLQODQG7HUPLQDO 2SWLRQ5HIXJH7HUPLQDO .H\KROH%DVLQ 2SWLRQ±:HVWHUQ5HIXJH7HUPLQDO :KDUI 2SWLRQ5HIXJH7HUPLQDO $'$5DPS 2SWLRQ+\EULG7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ6\VWHP D )HUU\%DUJH7HUPLQDO&RQFHSW E )HUU\%DUJH7HUPLQDO&RQFHSW F )HUU\%DUJH7HUPLQDO&RQFHSW 2SWLRQ+\EULG5HIXJH3DVVHQJHU7HUPLQDO 2SWLRQ+\EULG5HIXJH+HDY\(TXLSPHQW7HUPLQDO ,VODQG7UDLO([WHQVLRQ2SWLRQV 86)LVK :LOGOLIH6HUYLFH YLL 1 Executive Summary The purpose of this transportation study is to generate a set of technically feasible options to improve transportation facilities for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Presquile National Wildlife Refuge (Presquile NWR or the refuge) for visitors and administration. This transportation planning study assesses the current and future transportation needs of the Presquile NWR and identifies a variety of potential transportation systems capable of meeting those needs. Report Structure Preparation of the transportation study closely followed the order of the tasks outlined in the scope of services. Appropriately, the associated report and is organized as follows: Chapter 1 – Executive Summary: presents an outline of the report format and summarizes the primary findings of the study with direction given as to the next steps in the transportation planning process. Chapter 2 – Introduction: This chapter introduces Presquile NWR background and history and states the study goals and the need for improved transportation to the refuge. In addition, the chapter also identifies the steering committee for the project. Chapter 3 – Existing Transportation Facilities: This chapter evaluates both the existing FWS transportation assets and transportation performance for Presquile NWR. Chapter 4 – Evaluation of Mainland Properties: This chapter identifies potential mainland sites for development of a vessel/marine transportation departure point. Chapter 5 – Evaluation of Watercraft: This chapter identifies potential vessel options for transporting personnel and equipment to and from Presquile NWR. It is broken down into passenger watercraft and heavy equipment watercraft. Chapter 6 – Transportation Options: This chapter outlines the range of options for the proposed transportation system, including vessel selection and mainland and island marine terminal sites. This chapter highlights feasible options for the transportation systems based on the findings of the evaluations and analysis conducted during the study. It includes documentation of the decision-making methodology (Choosing By Advantages) used during the preliminary evaluation of the transportation options. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1-1 CHAPTER 1 Chapter 7 – On-Island Transportation: This chapter documents the existing on-island transportation system at Presquile NWR and provides options and examples for future upgrades or improvements to the system. Chapter 8 – Partnership Opportunities: This chapter identifies potential partnership opportunities associated with the refuge transportation system and potential grant funding sources. Appendices – The appendices contain meeting agendas and notes, cost estimates for the various transportation options, and other relevant documents associated with the transportation study. Summary of Transportation Study Findings The conclusion of the study is that there are several feasible options that could be implemented for the PNWR transportation system. Some of these options could be initiated over time with a phased-in approach. The transportation study takes into account the capital costs that would be associated with implementing the improvements as well as the long-term life cycle costs. Due to the capital-intensive nature of marine infrastructure, vessels and maintenance, the most feasible options would take advantage of rehabbing and continuing to use existing developed areas and infrastructure to the extent possible. These options also would reduce adverse environmental and cultural resource impacts associated with new land disturbance and construction, in addition to minimizing permitting requirements. The most feasible transportation options for FWS consideration are a combination of the following transportation components: Passenger vessel mooring and passenger operations (Presquile NWR visitors and administrative staff) conducted from a commercial marina; Continued use of the existing mainland ferry terminal site located on Philip Morris USA property for Heavy Equipment operations; Minor improvement to the existing refuge floating dock for passenger operations; Minor improvement to the existing refuge ferry terminal for heavy equipment operations; Continued vessel-sharing through the ongoing partnership between FWS and the James River Association (JRA); and Establish a contract/agreement with a local marine contractor/vessel operator for providing heavy equipment transport on an as needed basis. The estimated cost of the proposed transportation options are as follows: Transportation Option Cost Summary Option Estimated Cost Minimal Required Action $27,852 Option 1: Existing Mainland Terminal and Keyhole Basin $982,240 Option 2: Marina Slip and Refuge Wharf $714,200 Option 3: Public Boat Ramp and Refuge Ferry Terminal & Floating Dock $972,436 Option 4: Hybrid Option $461,327 1-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The next steps in the transportation planning effort for the Presquile NWR greatly depend on the finalization of the Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), a management document that identifies goals and objectives proposed for the next 15 years. The CCP is anticipated to be completed in the last quarter of 2012. Depending on the alternative chosen in the CCP, potential transportation-related tasks that would likely be accomplished include: Completing National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) compliance requirements; Completing development plans and required permit applications; Preparing grant applications for transportation system components potentially eligible for funding; Establishing priorities for a phased approach to achieving long-term transportation objectives; Obtaining funding for transportation system components; and Establishing agreements with partners. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1-3 2 Introduction Background and History Presquile National Wildlife Refuge (NWR or the refuge) is one of four U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) refuges that comprise the Eastern Virginia Rivers National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The refuge is a 1329-acre island in the James River, approximately 20 miles south of Richmond, Virginia (Figure 2-1). In 1952, the island was bequeathed to the U.S. Government by Dr. A.D. Williams, and was established as a refuge in 1953 to protect habitat for wintering waterfowl and other migratory birds. Presquile NWR provides important habitat for a diverse population of waterfowl and is also home to nesting and roosting bald eagles. Originally the land within Presquile NWR was occupied by American Canada Geese Indians. By the early 1600s, English colonists had established the first settlement north of Jamestown at nearby Bermuda Hundred. William Randolph, ancestor to prominent Virginians such as Thomas Jefferson, John Marshall, and Robert E. Lee, moved to "Presque Isle" in 1660 and lived there for many years. Later, during the Civil War, union troops occupied the area at the time of the Battle of Petersburg. The island occupied by Presquile NWR was historically a peninsula, connected to the adjacent land to the south. In 1934, a more direct shipping channel (Turkey Island Cutoff) was dredged through the land as a “short-cut” saving approximately six miles of ship travel on the James River. The creation of the channel created an island, then occupied by a dairy farm, that was isolated from the mainland. Since the refuge was established in 1953, access to the island has been by a cable-operated ferry. The cable is secured at both sides of the Turkey Island Cutoff shipping channel. Due to recent increases in shipping and recreational boat traffic, high maintenance costs, and concern for passenger safety the ferry service was discontinued for public use in 2001. Currently, a 28-foot pontoon boat ferries visitors to the refuge for scheduled events. The Presquile NWR is designated by the FWS as a satellite Bald Eagle refuge and is managed from the Eastern Virginia Rivers NWR Complex Headquarters in Warsaw, Virginia. Figure 2-2, Current Public Use Facilities Map, depicts the primary features and facilities that currently exist at the refuge. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2-1 156 Richmond National Battlefield Park Henrico County Richmond National Battlefield Park Deep Bottom Park 106 5 295 PRESQUILE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE 156 J a m Charles City e s R i v County e r T Dutch Gap ur ke y Conservation Area Is la n d C Chesterfield County u t Philip Morris o 10 f f USA Property Mainland Ferry Terminal 5 Petersburg National Battlefield Park City Point Unit 106 J a Irwin m e Manor s R i v e r City of Hopewell Fort Lee 10 Prince George County 106 156 0 1 Miles Source: ESRI Streetmap Data V. 10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 2-1 FIGURE X Presquile NWR Location Map Xxxxx 2-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Old Remnant Barn Shed Old Milk Canoe/Kayak House Launch and Old Shed Blacksmith Old Tack Shop Boardwalk Shop Cemetery Menenak Discovery Center Storage Buildings LEGEND Research Station Observation Platform Boat Dock Nature Trail Canoe/Kayak Launch Refuge Boundary Marsh Boardwalk Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 2-2 Current Public Use Facilities Map U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2-3 CHAPTER 2 Presquile Comprehensive Conservation Plan The FWS is currently in the process of preparing a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) for Presquile NWR. The CCP is the plan for meeting the management objectives of the refuge which provides a long-range, 15-year strategy for resources management, visitor use, and development at a level of detail that would facilitate implementation of the proposed actions. Provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 require a CCP for all national wildlife refuges. The planning process involves public input and consideration of many elements of refuge management, including habitat and wildlife management, threatened and endangered species management, public use, refuge infrastructure, and special area designations. The CCP will provide a clear understanding of the desired conditions for the refuge and how the FWS would implement management strategies. Although the CCP has not been officially adopted to-date, the planning process and direction of this transportation study is within the guidelines and intent of the current draft CCP. The Presquile NWR was established to protect habitat for wintering waterfowl and other migratory birds and is an important component of the network of refuges on and around the Chesapeake Bay. The refuge is home to Bald eagles as well as a large number of overwintering waterfowl and other birds that inhabit the refuge, including the Prothonotary warbler and the Gray Catbird. The diverse attractions in the refuge and its proximity to multiple population centers such as Washington DC, Richmond and Hampton Roads help make it a local and regional attraction. The refuge currently hosts approximately 400 visitors per year. Existing Refuge Infrastructure There are currently seven buildings on the island: the 1600 square foot Menenak Discovery Center, a maintenance shed for equipment, four storage buildings and a small visitor contact station (currently not in service) at the existing ferry terminal. In addition, there is a floating dock and a 500-foot long elevated boardwalk that extends through forested wetlands and over three miles of wildlife observation trails. The existing infrastructure at the refuge is discussed in detail in subsequent chapters of this report. Existing Elevated Boardwalk 2-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge INTRODUCTION Alternative Transportation Study and Goals The Presquile Alternative Transportation Study will determine the feasibility of alternative marine transportation options that could be implemented to replace the existing cable-operated ferry. The transportation options focus on a single or combination of vessels for transporting visitors, educational groups, FWS and other organizations’ staff and equipment, including heavy equipment such as the FWS farm tractor and mower. The alternative transportation systems identified in this study are intended to: Provide public access to the refuge for groups that constitutes passenger service, including access for passengers for-hire such as during designated hunt days; Provide transportation to the island for FWS staff and other authorized users and partnership groups; and, Provide heavy equipment and materials transportation to and from the island. The following tasks constitute the FWS scope of work requirements for this study: Task 1: Establish a Steering Committee: This task also included conducting a project kick-off meeting, a planning workshop and an option development workshop. The steering committee, kick-off and planning meetings are discussed below with the identification and development of a range of options discussed in Chapter 7. Task 2: Define the Need for Marine Transportation and Operations Task 3: Evaluate Existing Transportation Assets Task 4: Evaluate Existing Transportation Performance Task 5: Assess Potential Mainland Property Sites Task 6: Research Personal [passenger] Watercraft Task 7: Research Heavy Equipment Watercraft Task 8: Research Potential Partners Task 9: Identify a Range of Potential Options Task 10: Perform an On-Island Transportation Evaluation Need for Transportation The need for improved transportation facilities at Presquile NWR is readily apparent. A detailed description of the current condition of the transportation assets and performance is provided in Chapter 3. The needs are based primarily on six important factors: 1. There are safety concerns related to operating the existing cable-operated ferry due to increased shipping traffic and recreational watercraft navigating the channel. Large ships operating in the channel leave very little clearance between the ship and the ferry, as is apparent from the photograph below taken at Presquile NWR ferry terminal. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2-5 CHAPTER 2 Ship Traffic In Channel with Ferry Docked at Refuge Terminal 2. Since 2001, the existing cable-operated ferry has been deemed by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to be unsuitable for carrying visitors to the refuge because it is not an inspected vessel as required by Title 46 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 175 – 187, and has many deficiencies that do not meet the code. 3. The condition of the ferry terminal facilities, including the abutment, loading ramp, A-frame and hoist equipment and piles, have many deficiencies and are in need of repairs and improvements. 4. Vessel operations are severely limited due to shallow water conditions in the vicinity of the existing ferry terminals. This limits vessel operations to when the tide is between mid-tide and high tide. 5. On the mainland, the FWS pontoon boat loads and unloads passengers from shore at the Philip Morris USA property. This is done without utilizing any dock structure or gangway ramp, thus exposing passengers and FWS staff to potential safety hazards. 6. There are currently no accessibility accommodations incorporated into the transportation system both in terms of the vessels operated and the existing landside facilities. 7. There is inadequate parking at the mainland ferry terminal and parking often occurs outside the access easement for the ferry facility. The existing parking area is not organized or planned. Annual visitation to the refuge rose steadily in the early years of its existence and then stabilized in the range of 2,500 visitors per year, then decreased to its current level of approximately 400 visitors in recent years. This decrease was due, to a great extent, to taking the cable-operated ferry out of service for passengers in 2001; however, steady visitation and use reinforces the value of the resource for local and regional populations and educational groups. Presquile NWR allows other agencies, organizations and individuals to visit and participate in approved activities on refuge land through two types of arrangements: participation in refuge-sponsored events (interpretive boat tour, environmental education program, etc.) or with a Special Use Permit (SUP). 2-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge INTRODUCTION Individual visitors or small private groups must contact the FWS Wildlife Refuge Specialist at the refuge in advance to schedule a visit and receive written approval prior to the visit. For organizations with ongoing activities at the refuge, a SUP is executed between the FWS and the organization. Steering Committee Pursuant to the scope of work for this transportation study, a steering committee was organized. The steering committee consisted of a range of stakeholders that could provide valuable information and input related to transportation elements to the consulting team and assist in providing vision and direction for the study. A steering committee was assembled shortly after the initial project kick-off meetings. The committee members were kept apprised of the status of the study via email, conference calls and meetings. Committee members were selected from the marine industry, which represented marine construction/dredging, marina operations, commercial vessel sales, environmental education, and State and Federal regulatory/permitting agencies. The committee members were in addition to the primary project team which consisted of FWS staff and VHB, Inc. and OTAK, Inc. consultants. The steering committee members and their role and interest in the study are as follows: James River Association (JRA): Mr. Gabe Silver represented the interests of JRA and its educational programs and partnership arrangement with the FWS and Presquile NWR. In addition, detailed information about the specific needs for the passenger vessel was provided to the consulting team by JRA. U. S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE): Stephen Powell provided input about jurisdictional issues associated with the USACE channel, vessel operations within the channel and potential permitting issues associated with ferry berthing options. Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC): Randy Owen and Juliette Giordano from the Habitat Management Division provided input about potential permitting issues associated with options developed for new vessel berthing facilities on the island. Harbor Dredge & Dock (HDD): Paul F. Smith is the owner of HDD and is a local marine general contractor that has provided dredging and marine construction services to the FWS at the Presquile NWR. The work previously completed by HDD includes efforts at both the island and the mainland ferry terminals. Projects include: dredging, construction of bulkhead, fixed and floating dock. HDD also provided input as to heavy equipment transportation and probable construction costs for proposed improvements. Kick-off Meeting The transportation study began with two meetings: an initial kick-off meeting to get the project started and a subsequent follow-up meeting with the complete consulting team in attendance. The two meetings are briefly described below. The initial kick-off meeting was held on June 16, 2011, at the FWS office between five FWS staff, an independent FWS consultant and four project consulting team members. The meeting commenced with an introduction of FWS staff and the consulting team and an overview of the project scope and needs by the FWS, followed by a brief history of the refuge. The 12 elements of the transportation study scope were discussed with an emphasis placed on the improvements needed to address the safety concerns of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2-7 CHAPTER 2 existing transportation system. Meeting attendees toured the James River around the Presquile NWR and landed at the floating dock for a tour of the on-island refuge facilities. The meeting concluded with a discussion of the next-steps for the study. An agenda of the initial kick-off meeting and sign-in sheet are provided in Appendix A, Project Meetings. On July 7, 2011, a follow-up meeting was held at the FWS office with FWS staff and additional consulting team in attendance (VHB, Inc. and OTAK, Inc.). The meeting focused primarily on collecting detailed information and data related to the refuge transportation system, operational requirements, ongoing activities at the refuge and programming needs of the FWS and partnering organizations. The meeting also included a second tour around the island (via the pontoon boat) and of the refuge facilities on land. The agenda and notes for this meeting are also included in Appendix A. Transportation Planning Meeting A workshop planning meeting for the transportation study was held at the VHB office in Williamsburg, Virginia, on July 27th and 28th, 2011. This was the first step in assimilating the information gathered to- date and presenting the findings leading to the development of transportation options for the Presquile NWR. A copy of the meeting agenda is included in Appendix A. Workshop/planning meeting July 27, 2011 Agency Coordination Meeting An agency coordination meeting was held on September 14, 2011 to initiate discussions with key members of the Virginia regulatory community having jurisdiction and management oversight of the lower James River at Presquile NWR. Staff members from the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) and the USACE were invited to participate as steering committee members for the ongoing transportation study. The meeting began with a brief overview of the transportation study, including the intent of the project, the role of the steering committee, and what the project’s ultimate product would be. Both agencies acknowledged their support of the study and were appreciative of being invited to participate as steering committee members. Following the initial overview, Mr. Powell (USACE) provided basic information 2-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge INTRODUCTION about the federal channel within the James River and specifically the cutoff channel. Detailed meeting notes are included in Appendix A. Summary of Primary Project Meetings Throughout the study, the consultant team conducted several meetings with the FWS, steering committee members, stakeholders, and other groups or individuals with an interest in the project. The primary meetings for the Presquile NWR alternative transportation study are listed below: DATE MEETING ATTENDEES LOCATION 06/16/11 Kick-off meeting & Tour FWS, VHB FWS Office/Refuge 07/07/11 Site visit and full team Kick-off FWS, VHB FWS Office/Refuge 07/27/11 Refuge Tour FWS, VHB, OTAK VHB Office 07/28/11 Project Workshop FWS, VHB, OTAK VHB Office 09/14/11 Agency coord. meeting VMRC, VHB, COE via tel VHB Office 11/04/11 Mainland Site inspections VHB (C. Frye, V. Desai) Field locations 11/10/11 JRA, Hopewell, Jordan Point VHB (T. Hogan) Field Locations 11/18/11 Project status meeting FWS (C. Brame) FWS Office VHB (T. Hogan) 02/03/12 Vessel Options VHB (T. Hogan) JPM Office Jordan Pt. Marina 02/08/12 Options Workshop FWS, VHB, Steering Com. VHB Office Other Project Meetings In addition to the above, other meetings and interviews with various stakeholders were conducted in conjunction with the study. These meetings are briefly summarized below, including the stakeholder’s interest in the study and information provided during the meeting. City of Hopewell Marina The City of Hopewell was represented by J. Turek, City of Hopewell Director of Recreation and Parks. Following telephone conversations with J. Turek, a meeting was held at the Hopewell Marina with the dockmaster, J. Davis, on November 10, 2011. The site was evaluated as to its suitability for the FWS marine operations and for services that the marina could provide such as berthing and boat ramp use. The dockmaster summarized the current plans to dredge and renovate the marina. Bermuda Hundred Community The Bermuda Hundred (BH) community is a historic and significant community directly south of the existing mainland ferry terminal. It was the first incorporated town in the Virginia colony (1613), just six years after the establishment of Jamestown. BH is at the southwestern edge of the confluence of the Appomattox and James Rivers, opposite City Point, and was annexed to the City of Hopewell in 1923. It originally included in what is now the Presquile NWR. In the colonial era, the term "hundreds" referred to large land developments that would support one hundred homesteads. The BH community was represented by Otis and Gloria Hewlett during a meeting held on February 3, 2012. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2-9 CHAPTER 2 The meeting consisted of providing BH with an overview of the transportation study and potential changes to the current FWS transportation system operations. Highlights of the discussions are noted below. Options could include new construction of dock and parking infrastructure at the mainland ferry terminal. These improvements would result in some temporary construction-related vehicle traffic and possible increased visitor group traffic. The visitor traffic would be related to scheduled programs and supervised by FWS and their associated partners. During such programs, the FWS and their partners would provide security by restricting access at the gate to program participants only. Other options could relocate some transportation functions to offsite locations, such as having visitors board FWS boats at a marina, rather than at the existing mainland ferry terminal, thereby reducing traffic through BH. The BH representatives voiced a concern about the potential effects that changes to the transportation system may have that could trigger the need for additional security. Specifically, they noted that recently Philip Morris agreed to remove the perimeter security fence along the road which severely restricted the view from the BH homes. They requested that any changes to the transportation system not include the need to replace a perimeter fence along the road. The consulting team assured the community that options under consideration would not include the need for a new fence to be installed. Port Weanack (Shirley Plantation) A meeting was held on November 4, 2011, with Charles Carter representing the Port Weanack. The discussion focused around an evaluation of the site and its suitability for FWS marine operations and possible services for marine transportation that could be provided. Although vessel and barge services could not be provided by the port, heavy equipment loading and large vessel mooring could easily be provided at the facility. Philip Morris USA The company was initially represented by Cathy Hanschumacher, who later identified Stephen Adams as the point of contact at the Park 500 complex. A meeting was held on March 12, 2012 between Philip Morris representatives (C. Hanschumacher and S. Adams), FWS staff (A. Hoffman and C. Brame), and VHB, Inc. (T. Hogan). At the meeting an overview of the project was provided to Philip Morris as well as a summary of the current status of the study. Philip Morris was provided with copies of the draft graphics, which depicted potential improvements to the mainland ferry terminal site. A copy of the meeting minutes is provided in Appendix A. The meetings outlined above and the information obtained during the meetings forms a basis from which the subsequent chapters of this report were developed. Chapter 3 continues with an evaluation of the existing transportation facilities at the refuge, followed by an evaluation of potential terminal sites on the mainland in Chapter 4, and research of watercraft in Chapter 5. Then in Chapter 6, a compilation of the study findings results in the development of various service scenarios for FWS marine transportation facilities and identifies a range of potential options. Chapter 7 considers on-island transportation with Chapter 8 concluding the report with a summary of potential partnering arrangements and grant funding for implementation of identified options. 2-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge 3 Existing Transportation Facilities This chapter describes the existing ferry operation and related vessel facilities in use by the FWS for transporting visitors, staff and equipment to and from the refuge. Presquile NWR serves many purposes: it provides protection of valuable wildlife and natural resources, educational programming, nature based recreational opportunities, and cultural experience. The successful operation of the refuge requires a balance among these diverse elements of the FWS mission. The refuge requires the availability of transportation for visitors to and from the island to participate in and enjoy the existing program facilities. Furthermore, FWS and educational programming staff have other unique transportation needs related to the operation and maintenance of the refuge. Equipment, supplies and staff are routinely transported to and from the island throughout the year, including the winter months when inclement weather is most likely. To develop a feasible range of alternative transportation options that could replace and/or improve existing facilities, the current condition of the transportation assets and their function must be understood. This chapter provides an overview of the transportation assets, including an inventory of the facilities and infrastructure, vessels, refuge equipment and typical operations. With this inventory as a basis, later chapters will detail proposals for meeting specific transportation needs of the FWS. Existing Transportation Assets Existing Vessel Operation Presquile NWR is only accessible by water with access provided primarily via one of four FWS vessels. FWS operates a cable-operated ferry, a 28-foot pontoon boat, 17-foot skiff and a 14-foot jon boat. To a lesser degree, access to the island is also gained by other organization or agency vessels or by private vessels, with prior approval from the FWS. Regulations restricting public visitation are included in Appendix B, NWR Refuge Regulations, and can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/presquile/documents/Presquile%20Nature%20Trail%20Regs.pdf The existing vessel transportation facilities are briefly summarized below with the service performance discussed later in the chapter. Existing Cable Operated Ferry Historically, the primary means of transportation to and from the island for staff and visitors was via the cable-operated ferry. Currently, the ferry is only used for transporting equipment and materials. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3-1 CHAPTER 3 existing ferry is a 35-foot by 20-foot steel barge powered by a truck engine, which pulls an inch thick cable via a large bull wheel. The engine and operator space consists of a wood frame, plywood and Plexiglas enclosure measuring 10 feet by 5 feet. There is a chain link fence along each side of the ferry with additional fencing that can be attached across the bow and stern to secure the ferry contents while underway. Because the ferry is essentially a steel barge without a FWS Ferry Moored at Mainland Ferry Terminal propeller or rudder, it has a relatively shallow draft of approximately 2 feet (without cargo) and easily operates at the island terminal, whereas at the shallower mainland terminal periodic maintenance dredging is required at approximately 3-year intervals to operate the ferry. The ferry is equipped with a Very High Frequency (VHF) radio, life jackets, fire extinguisher and hand operated bilge pump. The ferry is also equipped with a red flashing warning light mounted on top of the engine compartment with a “DANGER Cable Operated Ferry DO NOT PASS” sign and a standard Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTC) stop sign on the cable side of the ferry. Ferry Engine Compartment Cable-Operated Ferry Engine As with all vessels, routine maintenance is required for the ferry vessel and the cable. In addition to routine engine and hull maintenance, the cable is generally replaced yearly from a supply of surplus cable obtained by FWS. Routine replacement of the cable is done as a precaution to ensure that a cable break does not occur while the vessel is in use. The cable is secured on land on both sides of the channel to a buried deadman anchoring system. Ferry vessels of this type are regulated under 46 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Subchapter T which applies to vessels of less than 100 gross tons that carry between 7 and 150 passengers, with at least one passenger for hire. Under 46 CFR 2101 (21A), the ferry vessel is required to be certified for carrying passengers for hire. Therefore, the vessel must meet all the standard code requirements for an inspected vessel to receive a Certificate of Inspection. Based on information provided to the FWS from the USCG, it Ferry Cable Termination at Abutment 3-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES would not be feasible to overhaul the vessel and bring it up to the necessary code standards to obtain a Certificate of Inspection. Refer to Chapter 6 for a more detailed and complete discussion related to 46 CFR requirements for ferry vessels. Existing 28-foot Pontoon Boat The existing 28-foot pontoon boat is an “off-the-shelf” recreational vessel manufactured by Southern Star Manufacturing LLC in 2003. It is a fiberglass hulled vessel that can accommodate up to 16 passengers and is equipped with a 90 horsepower (hp) Mercury outboard motor, standard safety equipment, including radio, life jackets and fire extinguisher. This vessel does not meet the requirements for an inspected vessel under 46 CFR and is, therefore, limited to carrying six or fewer passengers when there are one or more passengers for hire. At a full capacity of 16 passengers, it still does not meet the projected FWS needs of up to 35 passengers and therefore, does not meet the current needs of FWS staff. FWS 28-foot Pontoon at Shore Landing FWS 28-foot Pontoon Boat Underway Existing 17-foot Skiff A FWS owned and operated skiff is occasionally used, largely during winter months, for access to, from and around the island. The boat is manufactured by Boston Whaler with a fiberglass hull and equipped with a 90 hp Honda outboard motor. This vessel does not meet the requirements for an inspected vessel under 46 CFR so it is not used for transporting visitors to the island, only FWS staff or other authorized users. As a shuttle boat, the Boston Whaler is fast and fuel efficient compared to using the pontoon boat when only one to three people are being transported. The boat is low-maintenance and easily launched at a boat ramp from a trailer. Due to its flat bottom and minimal freeboard, it is limited to use when the weather is favorable with minimal waves. However, it has the advantage of being operable at all tide ranges since is a very shallow draft boat. 17-foot Skiff (Carolina Skiff, Inc.) U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3-3 CHAPTER 3 Existing 14-foot Jon Boat The FWS also has aluminum 14-foot jon boat manufactured in 1999 by Sea Arc. The jon boat is most often used to shuttle FWS staff to and from the island. It is equipped with a 25 hp Mercury outboard motor. This vessel does not meet the requirements for an inspected vessel under 46 CFR and therefore only carries FWS staff and other authorized users. The boat is similar to the 17-foot skiff in terms of its service characteristics such as speed, draft and low maintenance. FWS 14-foot jon Boat FWS Jon Boat Shuttle To/From Refuge Existing Ferry Terminals and Floating Dock Two existing ferry terminals currently serve the operational needs of the refuge. One of these terminals is located on the south end of the island, on the Turkey Island Cutoff channel, and the other is situated across the channel, at the end of Bermuda Hundred Road and connected to the Philip Morris USA property. The terminals were first developed in the 1930s when the peninsula was severed for navigational purposes. Since that time, the terminals have been renovated/remodeled numerous times. In addition to the terminals, a floating dock and fixed pier structure is located on the west side of the island, near the Turkey Island Cutoff. This dock is used for the FWS pontoon boat, skiff and other vessels coming to the island. The ferry terminals and the floating dock briefly described below. Presquile Refuge Ferry Terminal The Presquile NWR ferry terminal has wood timber piles supporting a steel beam A-frame structure from which the ferry terminal loading ramp is raised and lowered by hand operated chain hoists. The wood piles are inserted within protective steel pipe, which extends up the pile to an approximate elevation of 8 feet at mean low water (MLW). An existing steel H-beam dolphin mooring pile is bent and not useable as a fender pile due to collision damage caused by a vessel navigating the channel. 3-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Refuge Ferry Terminal Damaged Dolphin Piles at Refuge Terminal The ferry terminal location has a fetch (distance over water in which the wind blows) of approximately 700 feet directly to the south and over two miles to the southeast. The average tide range at this location is approximately 2.5 feet. The water depths at the ferry terminal range from 5 feet at low water to approximately 8 feet at high water. The terminal has a timber deck ramp with steel edge beam “curb” on each side and a 4-foot tall chain link fence on both sides. The ramp is raised and lowered via a chain hoist system assisted by two concrete- filled 55-gallon counter weights. The ramp is connected to a cast-in-place concrete abutment. The ferry cable runs along the east side of the abutment and is connected to a buried deadman anchor system. FWS Mainland Ferry Terminal The existing ferry terminal on Philip Morris USA property is similar to the refuge terminal. It consists of the same type of steel beam A-frame structure supporting overhead manual hoists for raising/lowering the loading ramp. Existing FWS Mainland Ferry Terminal U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3-5 CHAPTER 3 At the time of the initial inspection, the hoists were in poor condition and the electric hoists were not operational. Therefore, ramp adjustments were made by hand-operated chain hoists. Electric lights mounted on the A-frame were also damaged and not operational. In addition, there is a single dolphin pile constructed of four timber piles within a 24-inch± diameter steel pipe on the east side of the ferry berth (Figure 3-1). 24-inch Diam. Pipe/Timber Pile Dolphin Ferry Terminal Ramp Hoist System The water depth is shallower at the mainland terminal, at a depth of approximately 3 feet at low water. The ferry berth requires periodic maintenance dredging every two to three years. The FWS mainland terminal dock is approximately 0.9 miles from the floating dock and is reasonably well sheltered from direct wind and wave exposure. The fetch across the channel is approximately 700 feet with a maximum fetch distance of approximately 3,000 feet (0.6 mile) to the southeast to Shirley Plantation. Wave heights of less than 3 feet are typical, however; periodically, some larger wave heights may be experienced due to ship traffic passing within approximately 200 feet of the dock. The average tide range in this portion of the James River is approximately 2.5 feet. During severe weather and storm events, the water elevation range may exceed 7 feet MLW. At the mainland terminal site, metered electric service with electric panels is used to provide site lighting. In addition, an unimproved ramp is typically used for loading and unloading pontoon boat passengers. 3-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Turkey Island Cutoff Transportation Study Transportation Ferry Cable Cable Roller (TYP.) Bollard (TYP.) 20’ FIGURE 3-1 Terminal Existing Mainland Ferry Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Wildlife National Presquile Piling Dolphin Chain Link Fence 35’ Existing Ferry Operator/Engine Compartment Winch Wheel Ferry Ramp Hoist Pile Approximate Shoreline Ferry Ramp Road Concrete Abutment U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3-7 CHAPTER 3 Ferry Terminal Electric Service Meter FWS Mainland Ferry Terminal Parking The FWS does not own any property on the mainland but does hold a perpetual easement on 0.5 mile of road leading to the ferry terminal. Visitors to the refuge have to park vehicles either on the easement road or on private property (Philip Morris USA property). Vehicle parking space is unorganized along the gravel road and turn around area and could accommodate up to 25 to 30 vehicles. At times, the number of vehicles parking at ferry terminal can significantly exceed 30 vehicles. Acquisition of the property would address the need for parking space and would provide for an efficient, organized arrangement for parking. At a minimum, it is estimated that at least two acres would be required to accommodate the FWS parking needs. Access Road To Mainland Ferry Terminal Mainland Ferry Terminal Parking Area Terminal Parking Area (view towards water) Presquile Refuge Floating Dock The Presquile refuge floating dock consists of wood piles and a fixed wood dock, wood ramp and floating dock (Figure 3-2). 3-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge James River Path to FWS Facilities Wood Curb (TYP.) 70’ 15’ 20’ x 4’ Wooden Gangway Boardwalk 30’ 20’ U.S. Fish &WildlifeService 3-9 Pile 8’ (TYP.) Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE X3-2 Existing RefugeDock Floating Dock CHAPTER 3 Presquile NWR Floating Dock Presquile NWR Floating Dock & Gangway The floating dock measures approximately 30 feet by 8 feet and is anchored by two pile guides and wood piles. The ramp is constructed of wood with 4-inch by 4-inch posts and non- code compliant railings. There is no transition tread plate from the ramp to the floating dock (there is a 5-inch± drop from the ramp deck to floating dock deck). Some of the railing boards and posts are split and warped. In addition, there is no transition plate over the ramp to the fixed dock hinge connection, which results in a 4-inch gap in the deck surface. Existing Gangway at Floating Dock Evaluate Transportation Performance In recent years, visitation to the refuge has been affected by reductions in refuge staff, budget and transportation capabilities. During the 1980s, three fulltime employees and one part-time employee administered activities and facilitated visits by ferrying approximately 2,600 people to the refuge annually. Currently, only one full-time employee administers activities and facilitates visits to Presquile NWR, in addition to two other wildlife refuges. In 2001, the transportation capabilities to the refuge were restricted when the USCG deemed the existing ferry to be unsafe for continued transportation of public visitors to Presquile NWR. Currently, refuge and partner-sponsored programs are facilitated through the use of existing vessels described in Chapter 5 of this report. 3-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Refuge visitation has recently declined to approximately 400 visitors a year; however, it is anticipated that with implementation of the CCP, visitation could increase gradually back to near the historic highs of 2,600 annually. The table below shows estimated projections of total visitation for 2010 through 2015. Visitation by groups The vast majority of visitors, students and youth groups arriving at Presquile NWR are involved with interpretive programs, limited hunting, and environmental education. Visitation by individuals Visitation by individuals is relatively limited due to the island nature of the refuge and associated need for transportation to the site. Seasonal Visitation Within any given year visitation to Presquile NWR varies. The spring and fall offer the best conditions for visiting the refuge. The popularity of the educational and interpretive programs during those times creates peak visitation in the spring and fall months. The table below is from the FWS Compatibility Determination document (Table 2 on page 13) dated October 2011. The complete document is provided as Appendix C. Estimated Presquile Visitors, 2010-2015 Number of Visitors Visitation Limit per Fiscal Year1 per Fiscal Year After 20152 Refuge Uses Number of Number of Breakdown by Use Group 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Visitors Visitor Use Days3 Environmental Education 100 620 900 1160 1560 1940 5060 Weekend Overnight 85 100 150 180 200 220 220 3-Day Camp 0 300 450 600 900 1200 3600 5-Day Camp 0 60 90 120 150 180 900 Teacher Workshops 0 40 60 80 100 100 100 Day Programs 15 120 150 180 210 240 240 Hunting4 91 100 100 100 100 100 100 Wildlife Observation, Photography, and Interpretation5 114 115 115 250 250 250 250 TOTAL 305 835 1115 1510 1910 2290 5410 1 Refuge visitation would be limited throughout the year to minimize human-caused disturbance to wildlife. The refuge would be open to visitors for up to 203 days each year. The number of visitor use days would vary by season as follows: 25 in winter, 77 in spring, 25 in summer, and 76 in fall. 2 The visitation limit per fiscal year after 2015 may be subject to change based on the findings of annual evaluations for refuge uses and associated impacts within the next five years (fiscal years 2011 through 2015). 3 Visitor Use Days equate to the number of visitors participating in activities at the refuge per day. For example, five refuge visitors on a single afternoon constitute five visitor use days while five visitors participating in a 3-day environmental education camp constitutes 15 visitor use days. 4 Deer hunting is permitted for three days during November. 5 Visitors often engage in wildlife observation, photography, and interpretive programs during a single visit. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 3-11 CHAPTER 3 The primary transportation need for the Presquile NWR is to be able to transport refuge-sponsored program participants in groups of up to 35 people. Transporting the whole group at one time is desired, therefore, the passenger vessel must be USCG certified for 35 or more people. Based on these criteria, the existing FWS vessel performance is summarized below. Summary of Existing Vessel Performance Cable-operated Ferry Passenger carrying vessels are regulated under 46 CFR Subchapter T. Under 46 CFR 2101 (21A), the ferry vessel is required to be certified for carrying passengers for hire. Vessels must meet all the standard code requirements for an inspected vessel to be eligible for a Certificate of Inspection (CFR 46 Parts 175 – 187). Based on information provided to the FWS from the USCG in March 2001, which identified over 30 deficiencies in the vessel, it would be expensive to overhaul the vessel and bring it up to code standards for a Certificate of Inspection to be issued. That option also would be unlikely due to the inherent safety concerns associated with the presence of a cable ferry system in a navigational channel. Refer to Chapter 5 of this document for a more detailed and complete discussion related to the 46 CFR requirements for ferry vessels. Although the vessel does not meet the performance requirements for a passenger vessel, it could have some reuse value as a simple open deck work barge as discussed later in Chapter 7. In its current condition, the ferry continues to be used on a very limited basis for moving equipment. Continued maintenance, including periodic cable replacement would be necessary for continued use. Apart from the ferry, the FWS does not operate any other vessels capable of transporting heavy equipment. 28-foot Pontoon Boat The existing 28-foot pontoon boat does not meet the performance requirements for a passenger vessel for FWS programs for two main reasons: 1) its passenger capacity is only16, which is less than half of the desired passenger requirement of 35, and 2) it is not a USCG certified passenger vessel (Subchapter T). However, the vessel could continue to be used for refuge administrative and maintenance purposes or for small educational groups (limited to six or fewer people). 17-foot Skiff and 14-foot Jon Boat The current use of the both the skiff and jon boats is for shuttling FWS and associated partner staff to and from the refuge from the mainland ferry terminal or other launch site. Both vessels are well suited for the type of operations they are currently used for. They have several years of operating life remaining, provided they are routinely maintained, so upgrades of these vessels is not warranted. These vessels also meet the needs of the refuge as emergency stand-by vessels for use, as needed, during educational programs or other event when visitors are present and there may be a need to quickly transport a person back to the mainland. The skiff could also be equipped with proper fenders and used to move the stripped down ferry barge (see Chapter 7 for details) for transporting equipment and materials. 3-12 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge 4 Evaluated Mainland Properties This section summarizes mainland property options that were considered and evaluated for a marine transportation facility in support of Presquile NWR operations. The site would be an alternative to the existing mainland ferry terminal. In order for the site to be operationally feasible, primary objectives for ferry operation would have to be accommodated at the site. Criteria considered during the mainland site evaluations included the following: Public or a private facility able to provide a long-term lease arrangement Safe, passenger loading and unloading with an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant accessible route from the parking lot to the dock Existing marine infrastructure and its condition, including boat ramps, fixed and floating docks, bulkhead and other loading facilities Water depth, ability to accommodate larger vessels for heavy equipment transport Land access, including condition/type of roads for hauling heavy equipment Parking, including occasional overnight parking Distance to the Presquile NWR floating dock by water and distance to the FWS office by land Existing site utilities, including electric, water, sanitary sewer Availability of fuel and other vessel maintenance services Wind/wave exposure of the site Improvements that may be required onsite for FWS operations, and the permitability of any potential improvements Compatibility of proposed FWS uses with existing uses Evaluated Mainland Sites With the above criteria in mind, a total of ten sites in the vicinity of the refuge were evaluated. The evaluated sites included: Jordan Point Marina City Point Park Hopewell Marina U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-1 CHAPTER 4 Port Weanack (Shirley Plantation) Turkey Creek Access Point Alexander Property Brown & Williamson Conservation Area Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing Harbor Dredge and Dock The distances to other potential dock locations discussed below are measured from the existing floating dock at the refuge. A summary of the distances is provided in the table below and shown on Figure 4-1, Evaluated Mainland Properties – Distances. Distances from Mainland Sites to Existing Presquile NWR Floating Dock Distance From To Dock by Water (miles) Jordan Point Marina 5.8 City Point Park 3.5 Hopewell Marina 4.2 Port Weanack (Shirley Plantation) 1.9 Turkey Creek (at Route 5) 3.9 Alexander Property (Bulkhead) 0.8 Brown & Williamson Cons. Area 1.2 Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing 5.5 Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing 6.7 Harbor Dredge and Dock 9.5 Existing Mainland Ferry Terminal 0.9 4-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Richmond National Battlefield Park Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing Harbor Dredge and Dock 613 Henrico County Turkey Creek Potential Canoe/Kayak Launch Charles City County Alexander Property Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing k ee Cr 95 Tu d 295 rkey Islan Port Weanack at 5 Shirley Plantation Chester PRESQUILE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Refuge Dock 106 Tu rk ey Is la n 10 d Brown & Williamson C u t Conservation Area o PhilipPhPhihhiliililipiMip MMoMorrisororrrrriiiss USUSASAA ff PropertyPrPProropooppeerrrtyrttyy U.S. Fish and Wildlife PortPort Weanack at Service Office SShirleyhirley PlantationPlantation Dutch Gap - 6.7 Miles Chesterfield County 5 10 Deep Bottom - 5.5 Miles Turkey Creek/James River Intersection - 2.8 Miles Turkey Creek/Route 5 Intersection - 4.6 Miles CityCity Point ParkPark Hopewell Marina - 4.2 Miles Jordan Point Marina City Point - 3.5 Miles Hopewell Marina Shirley Plantation - 1.9 Miles J a m Jordan Point Marina - 5.8 Miles e s R i v Brown & Williamson - 1.2 Miles e r Alexander Property - 2.6 Miles 295 Harbor Dredge and Dock - 9.5 Miles 95 Irwin Manor Distances Measured from Refuge Dock City of Hopewell Prince George 0 1 Miles County Source: ESRI Streetmap Data V. 10 Fort Lee Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 4-1 Evaluated Mainland Properties - Distances U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-3 CHAPTER 4 INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Jordan Point Marina Jordan Point Marina (JPM) is located on Route 106 in Prince George County, Virginia, approximately 5.7 miles from the FWS office and about 5.8 miles to the Presquile NWR by boat. The marina is situated on a small peninsula in the James River at the southern foot of the Benjamin Harrison Memorial Bridge. JPM is a full service marina with approximately 120 wet slips. The marina has two boat ramps, a dock office, a store with a snack bar, a haul-out maintenance facility, and ample parking, including parking for buses. A fuel dock with both gasoline and diesel also is available. The slips provide water and electricity and can accommodate boats up to 42 feet. The marina also has a seasonal swimming pool for guest use. The marina is centrally located and easy to get to by car. It is approximately midway between the FWS office and the Presquile NWR mainland ferry terminal. There is sufficient space for larger vehicles, such as buses for school groups, so that loading and unloading of passengers and equipment would be comfortably accommodated. Overnight parking is allowed for boat owners using the marina. Slips are rented seasonally for approximately $245.00 per month or $2940.00 annually. Overall, this facility could accommodate all the FWS needs for mooring, fueling and loading FWS vessels. Marina Store/Snack Bar and Boat Ramps SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The JPM is the closest full service marina to the refuge. As a full service marina, it could provide FWS with all its operational needs including mooring, fueling, maintenance, supplies and ample parking that is secure and available overnight. As the closest facility to the FWS office, it would be convenient for trips to the vessel from the office. The marina boat ramps could be utilized for loading and unloading of heavy equipment such as the FWS farm tractor, provided that the vessel/barge that would transport the equipment has a suitable ramp system or is a bow-loading vessel such as an LCM landing craft (“Mike Boat”). Fuel service on dock View of Benjamin Harrison Bridge U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-5 CHAPTER 4 City Point Park City Point Park is a municipal park located on the James River immediately adjacent to the National Park Service (NPS) City Point unit, which is a part of Petersburg National Battlefield. Although this site is close to the Presquile NWR at only 3.5 miles by water, it lacks some facilities and services preferred by FWS. City Point was the location of General Grant’s headquarters in 1864. The City Point Park site’s proximity to the NPS property that is open year-round makes it a historically and culturally significant site. The park itself has no direct water access. The wooden pier along the waterfront is strictly for observation and fishing and is posted with “NO DOCKING” signs indicating vessel mooring is not allowed. Vehicular access to the site also is difficult as it includes the use of residential streets that are narrow and not well maintained. City Point Park Fishing/Observation Pier NPS City Point- Grant’s Headquarters SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The site was considered and not evaluated further because it is not a viable option for any short-term or long-term operational use by the FWS. There is currently no boat access allowed within the park facility. Parking also is limited and road access to the site is non-direct through narrow, poorly maintained residential streets. Additionally, desired marine services, such as fuel, maintenance, supplies and boat ramp are not available onsite. 4-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Hopewell Marina The Hopewell Marina (HM) is a municiple marina on the Appmomattox River owned and operated by the City of Hopewell. It is located near the confluence of the Appomattox and James Rivers approximately 12 miles from the FWS office and about 4.2 miles from the Presquile NWR by boat. The marina includes approximately 44 slips consisting of 30 covered slips and 14 open slips. The marina also has a boat ramp, parking for approximately 68 cars and 25 vehicles with trailers, and a dock office in a trailer. The city is in the initial stages of planning for a future renovation and expansion of the marina. The slips are provided with water and electricity, however, there is currently no fuel available at the marina. The marina is conveniently located near the downtown business district of Hopewell and is nearly within sight of the refuge. There is parking space available for buses, so large groups can be accommodated, and overnight parking is allowed for boat owners using the marina. The loading of large heavy equipment may be limited at the marina due to the small and confined boat ramp and the lack of another bulkhead area suitable for loading heavy equipment. The daily ramp fee is $6.00, but marina staff stated that the ramp fees would be waived for FWS vessels and operations. The yearly cost for a covered slip is approximately $2,100 and $1,620 for an open slip. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The HM is the closest marina to the refuge that could accommodate mooring of a FWS passenger vessel and provide adequate accommodations for loading and unloading of passengers and their personal effects. Parking is generally adequate during the week and during off-season weekends; however, on weekends during the summer, the parking lot is filled to capacity. Fuel would be available upon completion of the planned renovations, so FWS vessels could fuel up at the marina as it is the closest facility to the refuge. In its current state, the marina is not suitable for loading/unloading heavy equipment from barges or other large vessels and this is likely not going to change significantly after marina renovations are made. There is not sufficient manuvering space at the boat ramp nor is there a heavy duty commercial bulkhead available for larger vessel operations. The operational logistics of bringing heavy equipment in and out of the marina parking lot also is not compatible with the recreational nature and heavy public use of the facility. Hopewell Marina boat ramp Hopewell Marina boat ramp Covered slips U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-7 CHAPTER 4 Port Weanack at Shirley Plantation Port Weanack (PW) is located on the James River, within Shirley Plantation in Charles City County, approximately 5 miles from the FWS office, and 1.0 and 1.8 miles to the existing ferry landing and floating docks at the Presquile NWR, respectively. PW is just downstream from Turkey Island Cutoff and is the nearest site to the refuge of all those evaluated. The main dock at Port Weanack is a heavy duty industrial wharf that is approximately 400 linear feet in length and designed for mooring bulk material barges. The wharf could potentially be used to unload heavy equipment, however, the transfer vessel would need to be appropriately sized due to the crest height of the wharf. Use of a crane to unload equipment may also be feasible if drive on/off were not possible. PW has various other potential access points within the port, including a natural gravel ramp located to the northeast that may be better suited to load/unload heavy equipment. The natural gravel ramp is approximately 20 feet wide and is sloped gradually for easy access by any vehicle. The basin water depths are maintained by the owner of Shirley Plantation, so deepwater access to the river channel and Presquile NWR would be available. Either location would be accessible during all stages of the tide. Main Wharf Facility The owner of PW, does not own any vessels that FWS could use to transfer the heavy equipment to and from the refuge; however, vessel mooring space within the basin could be arranged for any FWS vessels or contracted vessels and barges. PW is maintained by the current owner, so permitting and maintenance requirements are the responsibility of the owner. Any future improvements within the existing boat basin would not require permits from the VMRC due to the man-made nature of the facility. However, the USACE would have regulatory oversight of any such Natural Ramp/Loading Area improvements. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The Port Weanack facility is a suitable facility for heavy equipmet loading/unloading because of its industrial nature and close proximity to both the refuge by water and the FWS office by land. As a private, industrial site, it can accommodate all heavy equipment and traffic without any conflicts with the public or recreational boaters. An agreement between the FWS and the owner could be arranged to allow use of the facility by FWS or its contracted vessel operators. The site is not suitable for passenger vessel mooring or passenger loading due to its commerial and industrial use. 4-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Turkey Creek Access Point Located immediately north of the James River and adjacent to Route 5, this potential water access point would utilize Turkey Creek for access to the James River and the Presquile NWR by canoe or kayak. The Turkey Creek access point is approximately 6.5 miles from the FWS office and 4.6 miles from the Presquile NWR floating dock. Although Turkey Creek has been identified as a potential future access point for canoes and kayaks, there is currently no existing infrastructure for public access to the creek. However, in conjunction with the Virginia Capital Trail (VCT), designs, approvals, and construction of multi-use path could provide the opportunity for parking and water access for car-top boaters. There is currently a paved pullover area on the eastbound side of Route 5, approximately 300 feet west of Turkey Creek. The pullover consists of a 50-foot by 150-foot paved pullover south of Route 5. The pullover has the potential to accommodate 10 to 12 passenger cars. It is probable that the VCT will provide a connection between this pullover and a new crossing of Turkey Creek, approximately 300 feet east of the pullover. As part of these improvements, a small canoe/kayak launch could potentially be constructed in Turkey Creek, linking the VCT and the pullover/parking area. One potential issue associated with the existing pullover is the sight distance to the east on Route 5. The creek crossing is located at a severe bend in the road and when exiting the pullover onto Route 5 west bound there is limited sight distance. The construction of the VCT bike trail would require some land alternations that may improve those sight lines. Also, any improvements within Turkey Island Creek adjacent to the pullover would likely impact non-tidal, forested wetlands and require regulatory approvals from the USACE, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the VMRC. Possible construction would likely include open pile, elevated structures utilized to traverse wetlands for creek-side access. Paved pullover on Route 5 (view to east) Turkey Creek crossing and access Limited sight distance on Route 5 SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The Turkey Creek site was only evaluated as an ancillary location for launching canoes or kayaks from the mainland to cross the James River to the refuge. The site could be a suitable for launching vessels, provided approvals were obtained from land owners and regulatory agencies. Additionally, improvements would have to be made in coordination with the VCT development plans. Aside from offering options for additional public access adjacent to the refuge, this site has no direct impact or influence on the transportation options under consideration for the Presquile NWR. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-9 CHAPTER 4 Alexander Property This property is located on the north bank of the James River and off of Route 5 at 5393 Alexander Road. The potential water access point would utilize an existing bulkhead just west of Turkey Creek. The Alexander Property (AP) is approximately 6.7 miles from the FWS office and 0.8 miles from the floating dock at the refuge by water. The property is 490 acres with approximately 400 linear feet of shoreline on the James River. The AP is private property that has historically been used for commercial sand and gravel operations. The bulk materials were loaded onto barges from the bulkhead. The bulkhead is constructed of heavy-duty steel sheet piling. Just to the east of the bulkhead is an area at a lower elevation that could possibly be graded and improved for a lower elevation bulkhead/dock/ramp. Several attempts were made to contact the owner to discuss the possiblity of using the property, including attempted telephone and mail communications. There was no response from the owners. Large House at Alexander Property Small House at Alexander Property Alexander Property Bulkhead SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The AP site was evaluated for its potential feasibility as a heavy equipment loading facility. It is located on the oxbow of the James River where shallow water leading to the facility would be a factor in loading barges or larger vessels. The barge/vessel access would have to be accomplished at high tide and maintenance dredging would be required. The site is generally not favorable for the needs of the FWS for the intended purposes. 4-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Brown and Williamson Conservation Area The Brown & Williamson Conservation Area is located on the James River immediately adjacent to the west side of the Philip Morris USA property. Although this site is directly upstream from the Presquile NWR floating dock, only 1.2 miles by water, it offers only minimal accommodations for FWS marine operations. In September 2001, the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation donated 262 acres along a 1-mile stretch of the James River to Chesterfield County. In 2003, Chesterfield County entered a long-term partnership with the Friends of Chesterfield’s Riverfront (FOCR) and the Virginia Outdoors Foundation to place a conservation easement on this parcel of land restricting its management and development to passive recreation and conservation. In 2003, it was determined that a master plan was needed to protect the property in perpetuity and to facilitate site improvements and conservation management over time. As a result, FOCR initiated master planning for the Brown & Williamson Conservation Area. The master plan was developed with partners including the adjacent property owners, DuPont Teijin and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation as well as the Virginia Department of Game & Inland Fisheries, Virginia Brown & Williamson Conservation Area Department of Conservation and Recreation and Virginia Department of Forestry. The county’s Department of Planning, Economic Development and Environmental Engineering and the Chesterfield County Parks & Recreation Department were also involved in establishing conservation area management goals. The master plan for Chesterfield County’s Brown & Williamson Conservation Area is a guide for conservation and sustainable development of the property. The master plan serves as a guidance tool that accommodates the public needs and access of the site and establishes in perpetuity land use restrictions and conservation management for the site. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The site was considered and dismissed as not viable for any short- term or long-term operational use by the FWS because of its sensitivity as a conservation area with future plans for improvements for recreation. The operational needs of the FWS would not be compatible with the master planned uses of the Brown & Williamson Master Plan conservation area. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-11 CHAPTER 4 Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing The Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing (DBPBL) is a public facility in eastern Henrico County, off Deep Bottom Road, approximately 15 miles from Richmond, Virginia. DBPBL is approximately 13 miles from the FWS office and 5.5 miles to the Presquile NWR by boat. DBPBL is on the James River across from Jones Neck. This facility contains a double wide concrete boat ramp with a central fixed dock serving as a tending pier for each ramp. The waterside facilities at DBPBL also include a separate timber walkway, aluminum gangway, and a 6-foot by 60-foot floating dock on the eastern side of the boat ramp. The facility also has a paved parking lot that can accommodate up to 12 cars, graveled spaces for up to approximately 15 vehicles with trailers, as well as gravel and grass area for overflow car and trailer parking. DBPBL also offers a restroom facility and picnic shelters. Boat Ramp and Tending Pier In addition, this site includes a separate canoe/kayak launch, and a secured area where the police department store their emergency response vessel. The shoreline at DBPBL has a relatively steep bank with moderate vegetative cover along the bank. Improvements to the waterfront facilities would require authorization from the VMRC and the USACE for encroachment into/over State and Federal waters. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The DBPBL is nearly as far from the refuge as Jordan Point, however it does not provide the necessary amenities and services required for FWS operations. There is no permanent mooring for vessels or available utilities (water and electric). This facility could only be considered as a place to launch and 4-12 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES retrieve FWS vessels and for passenger loading. It is not an option as a long-term arrangement for berthing FWS vessels. In addition, fuel is not available, so FWS vessels would have to travel to other fuel facilities or fuel the vessels from containers, which is not recommended. The boat ramp is not suitable for loading/unloading heavy equipment onto barges or other larger vessels because these operations are not compatible with the recreational public use of the facility and the facility was not designed for the required heavy loading. Gangway and Floating Dock Restroom Building U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-13 CHAPTER 4 Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing (DGPBL) is a cooperative project between Chesterfield County, FWS and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. DGPBL is on the James River in Chesterfield County, one mile from Henricus Historical Park. DGPBL is approximately 20 miles from the FWS office and 5.3 miles from the Presquile NWR floating dock via boat. DGPBL features a three lane wide concrete boat ramp with two timber fixed tending piers (45 and 60 feet long). The paved parking lot is segmented and its upper portion is at an elevation of approximately 50 feet above the water level. The upper lot can accommodate apprimately 50 vehicle with trailer parking spaces. The lower portion of the lot provides ramp access. A one-way loop road connects the upper and lower portions of the parking lot. Pedestrians can use existing timber stairs to access the lower boat ramp from the parking lot. Boat Ramp and Docks Wood Stairs From Parking to Boat Ramp The shoreline at DGPBL is relatively steep with bank vegetation comprised of trees and shrubs. Any improvements that would encroach into the river would require authroization from the USACE and the VMRC. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The DGPBL is located near the DBPBL and is similar in terms of its limited use as a long-term arrangement for the FWS vessel fleet. DGPBL does not provide the necessary amenities and services required for FWS operations, which include permanent mooring for vessels, utilities (water and electric), fuel and parking. This facility could be used as an alternate facility to launch and retrieve FWS vessels and for passenger loading. As with DBPBL, this ramp also is not suitable for loading/unloading heavy equipment onto barges or other larger vessels because these operations are not compatible with the recreational public use of the facility. 4-14 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Harbor Dredge and Dock Harbor Dredge and Dock’s (HDD) main office is located in Chesterfield County, approximately 25 miles from the FWS office and about 9.5 miles to the Refuge via boat. HDD maintains various vessels and barges that could be used to assist FWS with its needs to tranfer heavy equipment to and from the refuge. HDD’s marine fleet consists of a 38- foot by 75-foot crane barge capable of handling up to 120,000 pounds of cargo, a 29-foot by 36-foot sectional barge, a 16-foot by 20-foot sectional barge, and a hopper barge. HDD also has various motor barges capable of pushing a wide range of heavy equipment loads. HDD would potentially engage in developing a scope of services for heavy equipment transportation and execute a formal aggrement with FWS to provide the required marine transportation services. An agreement outlining the required scope of services would likely be based on a per trip cost for vessel, barge and labor. SUMMARY OF SITE EVALUATION: The Harbor Dredge and Dock facility is suitalble as a Motorized Barge loading/unloading facility for heavy equipmet but not for passenger vessel mooring or passenger loading. HDD also has barges and vessels available that could be used by the FWS, under an appropriate aggreement arrangement. However, because of the long distance, both to the refuge by water and to the FWS office by land, this location is less desirable than other options. Hopper Barge and Excavator Typical Barge for Equipment Transport U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-15 CHAPTER 4 Summary of Evaluated Mainland Sites Based on the above criteria and analysis, there are a variety of mainland site options available for fulfilling the needs of the FWS. Of the ten sites evaluated, several appear to be feasible options, in at least some, capacity and should be considered further. The two types of marine services required for FWS operations are passenger service and transportation of heavy equipment. Site options with the greatest potential for FWS applications are the JPM for passenger service and the existing FWS Ferry Terminal for heavy equipment. In addition to these, other sites may provide the FWS with options for back-up locations for limited use such as passenger pick up and loading only. These sites include DBPBL and DGPBL and HM (post renovation) for passenger service. Port Weanack and the HDD may be suitable back-up locations for heavy equipment. These sites are summarized below as potentially feasible mainland site options. Passenger Service Option: Jordan Point Marina As evaluated above, the marina is easily assessable from both Route 5 and Route 10. It is currently designated as a Virginia Clean Marina and has a long history of working with various state agencies, local municipalities and universities including the JRA, Virginia Commonwealth University, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the College of William and Mary, Prince George County Fire and Police departments, the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, and the Virginia Department of Transportation. The marina owner has indicated their support of having FWS berth a passenger vessel at the marina and would support FWS operations to the extent possible. As a full-service marina facility, JPM could offer the following services to the FWS: A year-to-year slip lease would be typical, but longer terms could be negotiated at a potential cost savings to the FWS. For the type of rental agreement considered for FWS needs, a discount may be possible where the regular annual rental rate of $2,940.00 could be reduced to $2,230.00. In addition, a 10 percent discount on fuel also would be offered in the lease agreement with payment arranged in advance, or a credit card would be placed on file for fuel payment. Otherwise, if fuel purchases have to be billed to the FWS, then there would be no discount. In support of the FWS operations, JPM would include in a lease agreement at no additional cost use of the boat ramp and space within the boatyard for a 10-foot by 10-foot storage shed for FWS storage. Designated parking, with ample space available for buses, would be provided for FWS and associated partners and visiting groups. As an added benefit, JPM would provide some vessel maintenance services including Yamaha and Mercury motors, all mechanical and electrical systems, hull repairs and maintenance. The JPM also would continue to offer onsite marina management, bathroom facilities and a ship’s store with a snack bar/grill. Passenger Service Back-up Options The two locations that may be suitable for a back-up passenger loading point are DBPBL and DGPBL. Both loctions are open to the public and have sufficient parking available for educational groups. These sites would provide greater flexibility for passenger pick-up for groups traveling from the Richmond area. Use of these locations could cut down on the required travel time for visiting groups. 4-16 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED MAINLAND PROPERTIES Heavy Equipment Backup Options Port Weanack is the closest commercial waterfront facility that would be viable as a backup location for loading/unloading materials or heavy equipment, at just one mile from the existing refuge ferry terminal. The owner of Port Weanack has indicated that their facility could be made available to the FWS for loading vessels or barges when such services are negotiated and scheduled in advance. Although HDD, at 9.5 miles, is farther from the refuge ferry terminal than Port Weanack, it could also be considered as a backup location for staging the loading/unloading of vessels or barges. HDD has waterfront loading areas and crane services available if required to support FWS needs. Their services could be contracted in advance on an as-needed basis by the FWS. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4-17 5 Evaluated Watercraft Introduction This chapter provides an evaluation of the watercraft options considered to meet the operational needs of the Presquile NWR. The primary objective for the alternative transportation study is to replace the existing cable-operated ferry with an alternative system of marine transportation. Historically, the ferry provided transportation for passengers, refuge staff and visitors, and heavy equipment. The new marine transportation system must continue to provide transportation service for both passengers and equipment; however, this task does not necessarily have to be achieved using a single vessel. As discussed in this report, it appears that a combination of different types of vessels would best fulfill the needs of FWS. A variety of boats could be used for passenger service at the refuge and many of these were considered and evaluated during this study. As evidenced by the current passenger vessel operations at national parks and other facilities, there is no one standard vessel used for passenger service. Instead, vessel characteristics are directly related to the operational needs of the facility. This chapter provides several examples of vessel services currently being used by federal agencies as well as a discussion of the types of passenger vessels currently available for use at Presquile NWR. In addition, this chapter provides an overview of alternative fuels, low sulfur diesel fuel, and gasoline outboard motor options. Vessel Types Ferry vessels for passenger-only service fall under Title 46 CFR, subchapter T or subchapter K, depending on the number of passengers transported by the vessel. In general, subchapters T and K of 46 CFR implement the requirements for inspection and certification of small passenger vessels. The use of either a subchapter T or a subchapter K vessel depends largely on the anticipated ridership of the ferry service and the associated operational costs of the vessels. The specifications of each subchapter are summarized below. 46 CFR Subchapter T – Passenger Vessels 46 CFR subchapter T applies to passenger vessels of less than 100 gross tons that either carry between 7 and 150 passengers, with at least one passenger for hire, or have overnight accommodations for 49 or fewer passengers. Vessels that provide overnight accommodations or services are not needed at Presquile NWR, therefore, such vessels are not considered in this study. In general, passenger vessels that operate only during the day and evening hours (not overnight) are typically smaller and have limited capacity. In addition, a passenger vessel for Presquile NWR would operate on a sheltered inland route. The certification and inspection requirements associated with such U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-1 CHAPTER 5: vessels are less stringent and require fewer crew than would be necessary for subchapter K vessels. As such, subchapter T vessels are more desirable when other operational requirements for the service are met. Subchapter T vessels can vary significantly in size depending of the design and operational needs. Typically, these vessels range from 30 feet to 70 feet in length. 46 CFR Subchapter K – Small Passenger Vessels 46 CFR subchapter K applies to vessels of less than 100 gross tons that either carry more than 150 passengers with at least one passenger for hire, or have overnight accommodations for more than 49 passengers. As stated above, vessels that provide overnight accommodations or services are not needed at Presquile NWR, therefore, such vessels are not considered in this study. Like subchapter T vessels, subchapter K vessels vary significantly in size, but typically range from 70 feet to 110 feet or more in length. A large subchapter K vessel would far exceed the operational needs for passenger service to the refuge and is therefore not discussed further in this report. There are two main types of vessel configurations, whether Subchapter T or subchapter K, that may be suitable for water transportation service at Presquile NWR: a catamaran A Subchapter K monohull ferry in use at West or a monohull vessel. Ship Island in the Mississippi District of Gulf Islands National Seashore Catamaran Vessel A catamaran is a twin-hull vessel with several beneficial features (see Figure 5-1). These vessels have a relatively wide beam (width) in relation to their length, which provides ample deck space for passengers and/or equipment. A catamaran is stable and generally provides a more comfortable ride than a similar sized monohull. Larger catamarans are typically powered by two engines, one in each hull; although, a pontoon style vessel may be powered by a single motor mounted to the transom between the pontoons. Due to their width, catamarans are sometimes restricted in where they can berth (i.e., the vessel may to too wide for standard marina slips). Passenger loading on a catamaran is usually from the side or bow, but may be accommodated at the stern of the vessel. Because of the typical open deck configuration of these vessels, ADA compliant accessibility and accommodations are generally easily provided. In addition, storage space for passengers’ personal items is easily accommodated. Monohull Vessel Monohull vessels are most common and more readily available on the market than catamarans. They are usually powered by twin diesel engines; although, a few older single-engine vessels are still in operation. Passenger loading on a monohull is most often from the side, and generally towards the stern where there is sufficient open deck area. ADA compliant accessibility and accommodations can be provided, but are usually more restricted than a catamaran. This is due to the limited deck space and narrow walkways along the side and interior spaces of the vessel, as well as the presence of stairways or ladders to upper/lower decks. 5-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT Figure 5-1 Monohull/Catamaran Federal Agency Marine Transportation System Examples There are many examples of passenger vessels operated by federal agencies to transport both visitors for recreational purposes and staff for administrative and maintenance operations. Most of the existing passenger vessels operated by federal agencies are affiliated with the national park system and connect visitors to NPS units. Although some of these NPS units are accessible through multiple modes of transportation, many \can only be reached by boat. The dependence of visitors on boats to access these areas establishes the need for maritime transportation services. Below is a brief overview of ten example passenger service operations that demonstrate the variety of vessels in use by federal agencies. These examples provide important insight and guidance as Presquile NWR considers a new marine transportation service to and from the refuge. Fort Matanzas, Florida Fort Matanzas National Monument consists of a 1740 Spanish fort, Fort Matanzas, and about 100 acres of salt marsh and barrier islands along the Matanzas River on the northern Atlantic coast of Florida. The fort guards Matanzas Inlet, which can be used as a rear entrance to St. Augustine. The Park staff operates the boat used for only way to access this national monument is via an approximately 15- the short trip across the river to Fort minute trip on a 35-passenger catamaran ferry operated by NPS staff from Matanzas the mainland of St. Augustine. In 2007, approximately 52,000 visitors made the ferry trip to the fort. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-3 CHAPTER 5: Fort McHenry, Maryland Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine is the star-shaped fort used by Baltimore soldiers to save the Union from British invasion by the sea during the War of 1812. This battle inspired Francis Scott Key to write the Star Spangled Banner. Ferry service is one of many transportation modes available at Fort McHenry. Visitors also can drive, walk, bike, or take public transportation to the park. The fort is one of 12 regular stops for the existing ferry service, a water taxi, in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. Approximately 33,000 visitors used the water taxi to access the national monument in 2007. The water taxi service is The water taxi operates a fleet of vessels that carry between 26 and 84 specifically marketed as passengers during each trip. “recreational transportation.” The experience of the ride is valued more than a quick trip or service Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area on a precise schedule. Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area (NRA) consists of 34 islands and peninsulas in the Boston Harbor. Seventeen of the islands are managed as a state park operated by the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). The islands provide hiking trails, beaches, bird watching, historic coastal fortifications, camping areas, and a lighthouse. Two primary islands, Georges Island and Spectacle Island, provide the main attractions and are the primary destinations for visitors. Georges Island is home to the historic Fort Warren. Spectacle Island maintains a marina, visitor center, restaurant, walking trails, and a beach for swimming/sunbathing. Boston Harbor Islands are served by two mainland-to-islands routes, one The 38-foot Rio Vista docked departing from Boston and the other from Quincy, on the southern shore of the at George’s Island in the bay. Harbor Islands Express, a unit of Alternative Water Transportation, Inc., Boston Harbor Islands NRA. operates these ferries. The mainland-to-island service uses 149-passenger capacity catamarans although they typically operate at a 100-passenger limit so that only one deckhand is required to be on board, in addition to the captain. These boats provide open-air seating on the deck and climate-controlled seating in the cabin area, which is also equipped with a snack bar. Inter-island shuttles use 64-passenger canal boats with a two-person crew: a captain and a deckhand. The boats have a very shallow draft, are front loading, and have a canopy that provides shade. They have a cruising speed of 7 mph and are designed for flat water operation, so even small waves may wash over the bow The Cumberland 146- of the boat when underway. passenger monohull ferry Alcatraz Island, California Alcatraz Island is part of Golden Gate National Recreation Area. A trip to the island offers a close-up look at the site of the first lighthouse and fort on the West Coast as well as the infamous federal penitentiary. A concessionaire operates a daily passenger ferry service between Alcatraz Island and Fisherman’s Wharf in San Francisco. The ferry service is the only A 70-foot monohull ferry way to visit the island and carries over a million visitors annually. The vessels approaching Alcatraz Island. used to access Alcatraz Island have a capacity of over 400 passengers and are fully handicap accessible. The boats’ cruising speeds range from 9 knots to 11 knots and the length of the boats range from 70 feet to 125 feet. 5-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT Cumberland Island, Georgia Cumberland Island is Georgia's largest and southernmost barrier island. The island provides a unique opportunity to view the flora and fauna of a natural coastal ecosystem as well as to learn about the coastal heritage of the region. The island is only accessible by boat. Therefore, the concessionaire-operated ferry service provides the only means for accessing the island, other than by private boat. In 2007, approximately 40,000 visitors used the ferry service to access Cumberland Island. Three The 60’ Fast Cat II cruises at 65-foot 146-passenger monohull ferries, with a cruising speed of nine 27 knots and carries 100 passengers knots are operated throughout the year. to Dry Tortugas. Dry Tortugas, Florida Dry Tortugas is a cluster of seven islands 70 miles west of Key West. The area is known for its bird and marine life, its legends of pirates and sunken gold, and its military past. Dry Tortugas also is home to Fort Jefferson, an outstanding example of nineteenth century masonry fortification. Two concessionaires provide ferry service to Dry Tortugas. These ferries are the only way to access the islands, other than by private boat or seaplane. The trip to the islands takes over two hours using high-speed boats cruising at 26 knots. One of the boats is an 83-foot monohull with a certified capacity of 250 passengers. The other boat is a 60-foot catamaran certified for 100 The 83-foot Yankee Freedom II cruises at 26 knots and carries 100 passengers. passengers. Both of the services operate one tour trip per day. In 2007, approximately 46,000 people visited Dry Tortugas via ferry. Fort Sumter, South Carolina Fort Sumter National Monument is where decades of growing strife between the North and South erupted in civil war on April 12, 1861. This national monument in Charleston Harbor is only accessible by boat. A concessionaire operates a ferry tour service to Fort Sumter year round. The tour takes approximately two and a half hours, including the 30-minute travel time from downtown Charleston to the fort. The Fort Sumter Visitor Education The concessionaire operates three boats, one of which is used for harbor Center and the Spirit of Charleston tours and dinner cruises. The other two ferry boats, which provide regular ferry. transport to Fort Sumter include a 71-foot monohull with a capacity of 311 passengers and a 102-foot monohull with a capacity of over 400 passengers Both ferries have cruising speeds of approximately 10 knots. Sandy Hook, New Jersey Sandy Hook is a unit of the Gateway National Recreation Area. Attractions One of commuter ferries used for at Sandy Hook include the Sandy Hook Light, America's oldest operating service to Sandy Hook with a cruising lighthouse (1764), the historic Fort Hancock, beaches, a holly forest, and speed of 38 knots other natural and recreational resources. Sandy Hook is accessible by a variety of transportation modes, including ferry, car, and public bus and train service. The ferry provides the quickest trip to the park from New York City; reducing a trip that could take in excess of two and a half hours by car to a 1-hour. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-5 CHAPTER 5: The operator of the ferry to Sandy Hook has a fleet of four 140-foot, 400-passenger high-speed catamarans that have a cruising speed of 38 knots. The boats are primarily used for service between two commuter routes from New Jersey to Manhattan. The service is not directly contracted or arranged through the park. Rather, a nonprofit organization associated with the park has made direct arrangements with the ferry operator. Fire Island, New York Fire Island is a thin barrier island stretching 32 miles along Long Island’s south shore. Sandwiched between a state park (Robert Moses State Park) and a county park (Smith Point County Park), Fire Island National Seashore occupies 27 miles of the island. While the island is accessible by car at the state and county parks, no public roads exist within the seashore. The seashore hosts over 600,000 visitors each year, with over 50,000 overnight visitors. Most overnight visitors to the seashore stay in the marinas while others use one of two campgrounds. The marinas and campgrounds are located at Watch Hill and Sailors Haven, The Quaiapen is a 64’-long, 250-passenger which are both accessible by ferry. The campground at Watch Hill, ferry with a cruising speed of 15 knots. It marinas and related facilities are run by a ferry operator, Fire Island operates between the Long Island town of Concessions, under a concessionaire’s contract with the seashore. Patchogue and Fire Island. Approximately 75,000 visitors travel to the Seashore annually by ferry. Most residents in the 17 communities on Fire Island also commute by ferry. The 4.5 mile ride across the Great South Bay from Long Island to Fire Island takes between 20 and 30 minutes. Gulf Islands National Seashore: West Ship Island Ship Island Excursions operates a ferry service between Gulfport, Mississippi and West Ship Island, part of Gulf Islands National Seashore. West Ship Island is 11 miles south of the Mississippi coast and draws visitors to its beaches and historic Fort Massachusetts. Access to the island is only provided by ferry service or private boat. Ship Island Excursions operates tours to Ship Island under a concessionaire’s contract with NPS which is renewed at five year intervals. The concessionaire owns three passenger ferries: two 110-foot, 350- passenger ferries and one 60-foot, 150-passenger ferry. Each of these vessels meets the criteria for a subchapter K vessel. A one-way trip between Gulfport and Ship Island takes approximately one hour. Ferry service to the island is provided once a day in the spring and fall, and twice daily throughout the summer. Summary of Federal Agency Transportation Systems Within federal government agencies, there are a myriad of examples of successful alternative transportation systems at various locations. Each year, millions of people travel to and within these parks, recreational areas, nature preserves and seashores by passenger vessels. The implementation of an alternative transportation system could offer many benefits. However, the specific needs of an agency and its facilities determine the type of service that would best suit each unique situation. The overview of existing marine transportation systems above provides valuable insight to help guide FWS as it considers implementing its own alternative transportation solutions. In particular, this review has provided a variety of relevant insights about passenger service and vessel options. 5-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT General considerations for the passenger service include: Ferry service is frequently used to connect visitors to remote sites that are accessible only by water. In some cases where other access is available, such as by automobile, ferry service offers advantages such as providing a more direct and quicker route from some destinations. The ferry routes are often dependent on the types of cargo and passengers to be transported. Separate routes or vessels may be used for cargo and passengers. The cost of a marine transportation facility is typically more expensive than other transportation options due to the capital and overhead costs associated with acquiring and berthing vessels, routine maintenance and staffing requirements. Private operators that provide regular (i.e. scheduled) ferry service for a fee are often the most feasible option. These services are profitable, allowing private companies to adequately recover operating costs from fare collection. This type of service does not apply to the current passenger service to Presquile NWR, but maybe relevant to transporting equipment and providing other transportation services to the island. A wide range of passenger service parameters are employed for various ferry systems, which reflects the different needs of individual facilities, the varying number of passengers and specific site and marine conditions. Some facilities provide frequent service multiple times a day whereas others provide very few trips daily or even weekly. When facilities are served by multiple modes, the redundancy provides flexibility in maintaining or reestablishing access after natural or man-made service interruptions. Although Presquile NWR is only accessible be boat, the use of different types of vessels could be employed to accommodate the specific passenger and equipment transportation needs. There is little infrastructure required to support ferry operations on land, other than a docking facility. Fueling, maintenance and berthing for the vessels typically occur elsewhere. The ferry departure points are often used to provide educational and administrative services for the facility/agency. Ferry service provides an opportunity to offer interpretative services, when staffing allows, such as a means for providing printed educational materials or a integrating a visitor education center into the ferry departure or arrival point. General considerations for passenger vessels include: There is no standard passenger vessel used among the agencies with ferry operations considered above. Instead, a very wide range of vessels are effectively employed. There are general parameters for flat-water (sheltered inland waters such as at Presquile NWR) versus open-water use, but the boat type (monohull or catamaran) and passenger capacity is often dictated by what vessels are available on the market. Fleets of new standardized custom boats are typically only used in larger ferry operations. During the off season, ferries may be used at other locations or for other purposes. This helps minimize the costs for the facility and could provide passenger service flexibility by hiring a vessel for short-term use during the peak visitation periods to supplement the permanent FWS vessels on an as-needed basis. The use of alternative fuels in ferry vessels does not provide a large enough net benefit to the overall sustainability of the proposed service to justify FWS’s pursuit of such vessels. However, ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel would be used in diesel powered vessels and 4-stroke gasoline outboard motors would be used for passenger vessels. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-7 CHAPTER 5: As previously determined, there are two main transportation needs associated with the Presquile NWR operations: transporting visitors and heavy equipment. The following discussion evaluates specific types of vessels and manufacturers of personal watercraft for transporting passengers and heavy equipment watercraft. Within this report, personal watercraft related to vessels that are specifically used for transporting passengers, are USCG certified as a subchapter T vessel and meet the desired total capacity requirement of up to 35 passengers and crew. Alternative Fuels Overview The FWS has a longstanding commitment to environmental preservation and leadership. As a steward of the natural environment the FWS desires to integrate alternative fuels into facility operations and transportation, to the extent possible. The use of alternative fuels can support the FWS mission to protect resources by reducing the impact on the environment through reduced emissions and the use of renewable energy sources when possible. Exploring the potential for using alternative fuels in an alternative transportation system is consistent with the scope of the project set forth by FWS. As a key objective, the importance of investigating the feasibility and benefits of turning to alternative fuels to power an alternative transportation system is clear. As an example, there are numerous cases of alternative fuel use by the NPS. Many of the shuttle and bus systems operating in parks rely on alternative fuels, such as propane buses in Acadia National Park and biodiesel buses in Glacier National Park. These are just a few of the examples of the many alternative fuel uses in the NPS. This list continues to grow each year. There are many extant and emerging propulsion technologies that offer advantages over conventional gasoline and diesel fuels, such as producing lower emissions and coming from renewable resources. Many alternative fuel options are relatively rare, making them costly and more difficult to obtain. As a variety of alternative fuel technology and infrastructure is advanced, alternative fuels will likely become more affordable and more readily available. Below, a brief overview of several alternative fuel options that are available for a variety of uses. When it comes to the marine industry, unfortunately, alternative fuel options for watercraft are currently much more limited, and those that are available are very costly. Biodiesel – derived from renewable resources that are biodegradable and nontoxic; can be blended with diesel or used pure; can be used in diesel engines with few or no modifications Ethanol – derived from renewable resources that are biodegradable and nontoxic; typically blended with gasoline or diesel; comparable cost to gasoline Natural Gas (NG) – extracted from domestic underground reserves and is either compressed (to form CNG) or liquefied (to form LNG); lower cost and energy content than conventional fuels; comparable vehicle range to conventional vehicles requires carrying greater fuel supply Liquid Petroleum Gas/Propane – product of natural gas processing and crude oil refining; lower cost and energy content than conventional fuels; comparable vehicle range to conventional vehicles requires carrying greater fuel supply None of the above fuel options are particularity well suited to the relatively simple marine transportation system envisioned for FWS operations at the refuge. However, although low sulfur diesel is not typically 5-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT considered an alternative fuel, in recent years, improvements have been made to the diesel refining process resulting in lowered sulfur content in the fuel. ULSD is a term used to describe diesel fuel with substantially lowered sulfur content. As of 2006, almost all of the petroleum-based diesel fuel available in the United States is ULSD. The move to lower sulfur content allows the application of newer emissions control technologies that substantially lower emissions of particulate matter from diesel engines. This transition is currently underway in North America. New emissions standards, dependent on the cleaner ULSD fuel, have been in effect for automobiles in the United States since 2007. In the event that the FWS selected a vessel with a diesel engine, it would use the cleaner ULSD fuel. The heavy equipment vessel would most likely be powered by a diesel engine and would consume the ULSD fuel. The passenger vessel would most likely be powered by gasoline outboard motors, which are available in either 2-stroke or 4-stroke engines. Four-stroke engines are generally preferred over 2-stroke engines. The primary advantages of a 4-stroke engine over a 2-stroke engine of a comparable horsepower is that the 4- stroke engine produces less pollution, runs smoother and quieter, has good fuel economy, and there is no oil and gas to mix. Overall, the 4-stroke engines are very reliable and would likely be most suitable for a passenger vessel at Presquile NWR. Passenger Watercraft The operational and programming needs of the FWS, as discussed in previous chapters of this report, must be provided by the passenger vessel selected for service. The minimum criteria for the vessel are as follows: Subchapter T certified vessel- certified for inland operation on the James River and its tributaries. This criterion also includes the required USCG safety equipment such as life jackets (adult and child sizes), ring buoy, fire extinguisher, first aid kit, flare kit, VHF radio public address system and horn. Minimum 35 passenger capacity plus two crew Shallow draft (2 feet or less) Sun shade/canopy Economical to operate (good fuel consumption and low maintenance) Flexible use of deck space (must accommodate various educational and passenger requirements) ADA-compliant accessibility 4-stroke gasoline motors (efficient at all speeds, especially for lower cruising speeds) Vessel Manufacturers Several manufacturers of passenger watercraft were researched to determine the operational and cost feasibility of particular vessels available in the market. Below is a summary of the types of vessels and manufacturers evaluated and the primary vessel characteristics of each. The summary also provides a ballpark cost estimate for each vessel. At the end of the section is a matrix summarizing the vessels that meet the required criteria, and that appear to be potentially feasible options for Presquile NWR. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-9 CHAPTER 5: Sightseer Marine, LLC Sightseer Marine manufactures a wide variety of passenger carrying vessels for the boat excursion and tour industry from their facility in Hudson, Florida (http://www.sightseerboats.com/). The boats are USCG certified custom-built aluminum catamaran-style vessels that can be fully equipped for the specific needs of its intended use. Sightseer vessels range in size from approximately 36 feet to 48 feet, with passenger capacities of 25 to 49. They are shallow draft vessels powered by twin outboard motors and can be designed for ADA accessibility with either front or side passenger loading ramps. Additionally, these vessels are capable of performing beach landings. Sightseer Marine Custom 40-foot The Sightseer Marine, LLC vessel evaluated for this study is 40 feet long by Catamaran. 12 feet wide with 0.125 inch thick aluminum “V” hulls and a fiberglass deck. The boat is powered by a single 90 horsepower (hp) Mercury outboard motor with a 48-gallon capacity fuel tank and all associated controls, propeller, rigging, battery, etc. The bus-style extruded aluminum seating is provided for up to 38 passengers. The boat comes equipped with railings, cleats, hydraulic steering, captain’s helm and seat, engine gauges, lighting, horn, fire extinguishers and life vest storage boxes, battery charger, clear vinyl enclosure and USCG required equipment. The estimated cost for this vessel is approximately $100,000 with delivery costs of approximately $7,000. Southern Star Manufacturing, LLC Southern Star manufactures commercial pontoon vessels out of their facility in Sylacauga, Alabama (http://www.southernstarmfg.com/). The vessel evaluated for this study is 40 feet long by 12 feet wide with two fiberglass pontoons with outboard motor mounts and a certified passenger capacity of 34, plus two crew members. Southern Star Pelican Southern Star Manufacturing The boat is powered by two 115 hp Mercury outboard motors with all associated controls, propeller, rigging and battery. The deck is constructed of marine plywood coated with non-skid fiberglass. An aluminum canopy covers approximately 30 feet of deck. The seating consists of aluminum framed bench seats along the perimeter of the deck area with open storage space beneath the seats for life jackets and passenger carry-on items. The boat comes equipped with aluminum railings, gates, cleats, hydraulic steering, captain’s helm and seat, engine gauges, lighting, horn, fire extinguishers and life vest storage boxes, battery charger, clear vinyl enclosure and USCG required equipment. The vessel costs approximately $120,000 with an estimated $7,000 for delivery. 5-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT ERCOA ERCOA is a manufacturing company out of Braham, Minnesota (http://www.ercoa.com/). They build typical style pontoon boats with aluminum pontoons. Two ERCOA pontoon vessels were evaluated and are summarized below. ERCOA Boat at Lion Country Safari ERCOA Boat at Voyager’s NP The first ERCOA vessel evaluated for this study is a 40-foot long by 10-foot wide aluminum vessel powered by a single 135 hp Honda outboard motor. It has a 47-gallon capacity fuel tank with all associated controls, propeller, rigging battery, etc. The boat comes equipped with railings, vinyl flooring, cleats, hydraulic steering, captain’s helm and seat, engine gauges, lighting, horn, fire extinguishers and life vest storage boxes, battery charger, shore power, 18 36-inch bench seats, bilge pump and hoses. The vessel also comes with a canopy that covers approximately 30 feet of passenger area and an optional clear vinyl enclosure. The cost for this vessel is approximately $97,000 plus delivery costs, estimated to be approximately $7,000. The second ERCOA vessel evaluated for this study is the Jersey Girl Sister Ship, a 46-foot long by 13.5- foot wide aluminum vessel powered with dual 90 hp Honda outboard motors. The vessel has two 47- gallon capacity fuel tanks and all the features associated with the 40-foot boat. In addition, the boat has a head (restroom) equipped with a toilet, sink and fresh water and wastewater tanks. A canopy covers approximately 20 feet of passenger area which includes 20 36-inch bench seats. The cost for this vessel is approximately $160,000 plus delivery costs, estimated to be $7,000. Corinthian Catamarans, LLC Corinthian Catamarans constructs USCG certified passenger vessels from 36 feet to 72 feet at their Tarpon Springs, Florida facility (http://www.corinthiancatamarans.com/). The vessel construction is hand-laid balsa-cored fiberglass with aluminum railings, ladders, and other custom structures. The 40-foot and 45-foot models can potentially accommodate up to 49 passengers. They have a hull draft of approximately 10 inches with the outboard motors up, or approximately 2 feet with the motors in the down position. The larger vessels (longer than 50 feet) have inboard engines and a deeper draft of approximately 3 feet or more, depending on the vessel size and configuration. Bow loading/unloading is an option on these vessels and beach landings with the boats are common. Corinthian Catamarans also have options for canopy coverings or enclosed passenger compartments, including a marine head with toilet and sink. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-11 CHAPTER 5: Corinthian 45 Catamaran New Corinthian 40 for Passenger Ferry Service to Cape Lookout The 40-foot model has a beam of 12 feet, a fuel capacity of 64 gallons, and comes equipped with standard features including anti-skid treatment on the deck, hull access ladders, aluminum railings, canopy, four storage/access hatches, two stainless steel cleats and bollards, four bilge pumps, rub rail and two 32-gallon capacity fuel tanks. The steering station is equipped with a custom console, bell, hydraulic steering system, captain’s helm and seat. In addition, there is a custom electrical panel, two 12-volt batteries, navigation lights and two antennae mounting plates. The base price for the 40-foot model equipped with two 115 hp Yamaha outboard motors is approximately $190,000. The 45-foot model has all the same standard features as the 40-foot version but with the addition of hull lights and two additional heavy-duty stainless steel bollards. The base price for the 45-foot vessel equipped with two 115 hp Yamaha outboard motors is approximately $210,000. Delivery cost for either vessel is estimated to be approximately $7,000. SeaArk Marine, Inc. SeaArk Marine manufactures a variety of commercial excursion/tour boat watercraft from 26 feet to 54 feet at their plant in Monticello, Arkansas (http://www.seaark.com/site/start/marine_home.html). The SeaArk Excursion Series of boats has several models of USCG certified passenger vessels that could be suitable for passenger service to the refuge. All of the models evaluated below have similar features, such as having a symmetrical sponson hull configuration which is similar to a catamaran style hull and being USCG certified for inland routes. They also have the same standard equipment including the following: welded aluminum construction, hydraulic steering, steering console, 12-volt electrical system with batteries, horn, bilge pump and navigation lights, railings and passenger boarding gates, non-skid decks, canopy top and mooring cleats. The SeaArk Fiesta model is 26 feet in length with a 9-foot beam and a maximum potential passenger capacity of up to 40. There are various vessel options available that include ADA accessibility, restroom enclosures, and a passenger loading ramp at the bow. The vessel has a very shallow draft estimated at 1 foot and is capable of making beach landings. The vessel can accommodate a maximum outboard motor size of 50 hp. Although this vessel could be certified for up to 40 passengers, it would not provide sufficient additional deck space for the educational and operational needs of the program. The passengers would be seated on bench seats with no open deck space remaining; therefore, this is likely not a good option for a FWS passenger vessel. 5-12 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT The SeaArk Voyager model is 28 feet in length with a 10-foot beam and a maximum potential passenger capacity of up to 24. The vessel has the same options as the Fiesta but with a draft of 1 foot, 2 inches and is able to accommodate a maximum outboard motor size of 200 hp. Although this vessel is slightly larger than the Fiesta, it has a reduced passenger capacity of only 24 passengers because of its layout and configuration, so it would not meet the minimum passenger capacity of 35 as required by the project program. Therefore, the SeaArk Voyager also is not an option for the potential FWS passenger vessel. The SeaArk Odyssey is a larger boat at 35 feet in length, a beam of 12.5 feet, and a maximum potential passenger capacity of 48. This boat can accommodate an outboard motor up to 450 hp. Of the four models evaluated, it has the deepest draft estimated to be 2 feet, 4 inches. Despite its deeper draft, this vessel could potentially be a SeaArk Odyssey 35’ Catamaran viable option for accommodating the FWS operations. The largest SeaArk model evaluated was the Olympia at 40 feet in length, a 12.5-foot beam and a potential passenger capacity of 39. For its passenger capacity, this vessel has a very shallow draft, estimated to be 1 foot, 4 inches, and can accommodate an outboard motor up to 300 hp. This Olympia appears to operationally fulfill the FWS program requirements. SeaArk Olympia 40’ Catamaran SeaArk Marine, Inc. responded to the study team’s request for information with a letter stating that at the time of the study (March 2012) SeaArk is not accepting any orders for new vessel construction. Therefore, in the foreseeable future, SeaArk vessels are not a viable option for the FWS vessel. Delta Boats/Canaveral Custom Boats, Inc. Another type of passenger vessel considered for passenger service to the refuge was the commercial Delta Boats built by Canaveral Custom Boats, Inc. of Cape Canaveral, Florida (http://www.deltaboats.com/). These boats typically range from 28 feet to 38 feet with custom models up to 56 feet. They can be certified for up to approximately 50 passengers. They are monohull vessels with a deep “V” hull shape. They have a deeper draft than typical pontoon boats (approximately 3-foot draft) and can be certified for offshore ocean routes. Delta hulls are constructed of solid fiberglass, hand-laid with numerous layers of glass, hand-placed, and rolled out to give maximum lamination quality. They are powered most often by twin inboard diesel engines; however single engine boats are available. For over 30 years, Delta boats have developed a reputation as a dependable, quality vessel able to withstand heavy use in harsh sea conditions. These vessels, although durable and of good construction, are not well suited for the needs of the FWS and the proposed program because of their deep draft, limited deck space, difficulty in accommodating ADA requirements, and high operating costs Delta 38 Monohull Passenger Vessel associated with fuel consumption and maintenance. Therefore this type of vessel was considered and dismissed from further consideration. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-13 CHAPTER 5: William E. Munson Company, Inc. Munson Company is a manufacturer of high-speed landing crafts and other vessels out of Burlington, Washington (http://www.munsonboats.com/). Although this type of custom made vessel may be suitable for a passenger service due to its high-speed and shallow draft, passenger vessels are not the targeted sector of the boat industry that Munson serves. Therefore, Munson does not pursue work in this type of custom vessel design and construction. As a result, Munson boats were removed from further consideration for the Presquile NWR project. Carolina Skiff/Small Outboard Boats Consideration was also given to smaller boats such as a Carolina Skiff. Carolina Skiffs are manufactured in Waycross, Georgia by Carolina Skiff, LLC (http://www.carolinaskiff.com/). The boats have flat bottoms or “V” shaped hulls and range in length from 22 feet to 26 feet for USCG certified passenger carrying boats. Some models can accommodate up to 18 passengers and can typically be operated with one USCG licensed crew (captain only). Passenger loading and unloading is quick; however, there are limited accommodations that can be made for ADA accessibility. Due to the limited passenger capacity and inability to provide full ADA accessibility, the vessels do not meet the project requirements and Carolina Skiff Passenger Ferry, Island were, therefore, removed from further consideration. Ferry Adventures Carolina Skiff Passenger Ferry Calico Jack’s Passenger Vessel Summary The following is a summary of the passenger vessels evaluated above and considered for use at Presquile NWR. The discussion focuses primarily on approximately 40-foot long pontoon boats. Pontoon Boat Type Vessels These vessels are typically shallow draft catamarans. Most have two outboard motors, although some may be equipped with only one mounted between the pontoons. The typical passenger capacity and deck space of the pontoon boat allows them to comfortably accommodate passengers, including elderly and mobility impaired passengers. The table below lists the vessels that meet the FWS program requirements for Presquile NWR and some of the primary features that differentiate the various options. The draft and passenger capacities are only estimated since they are dependent on the final layout and outfitting of the vessel and the USCG certification for the number of passengers. 5-14 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT Passenger Vessel Summary Table Passenge VESSEL LENGTH BEAM DRAFT r Capacity EST. MANUFACTURER MODEL (feet) (feet) (feet) Power (+ Crew) COST* Sightseer Marine 4012 40 12 2** 1 x 90 hp 38 + 2 $107,000 Southern Star Commercial 40 12 2** 2 x 115 hp 34 + 2 $127,000 Pontoon ERCOA NA 40 10 2** 1 x 135 hp 35** + 2 $104,000 Jersey Girl 46 13.5 2.5** 2 x 90 hp 40 + 2 $167,000 Sister Ship Corinthian Catamarans Corinthian 40 40 12 2 2 x 115 hp 49 + 2 $197,000 Corinthian 45 45 14 2 2 x 115 hp 49 + 2 $217,000 SeaArk Marine Odyssey 35 12 2.3 2 x 115 hp 48 + 2 NA*** Olympia 40 12.5 1.3 2 x 115 hp 39 + 2 NA*** * Includes an average estimated delivery cost of $7,000. ** Estimated *** Not Available- SeaArk Marine is currently not manufacturing new vessels Small Skiff Type Vessels These vessels are fast, fuel efficient and low cost when compared to larger vessels. They are typically flat with fiberglass hulls and one or two outboard motors. The flat bottom boats have a very shallow draft but cannot accommodate the required passenger capacity or be easily outfitted for ADA accessibility. Therefore, these boats are not suitable options for the FWS passenger vessel at the refuge. Heavy Equipment Watercraft A primary need for the operation of the refuge is transporting various types of heavy equipment. The heaviest piece of equipment routinely transported and used on the island is a farm tractor (John Deere Model 6420) and mower combination, which is primarily used for seasonal mowing of fields and trails. The combined tractor and mower measure approximately 30 feet long and 16 feet wide. At times, such as for construction of other improvements on the island, excavators, dump trucks and other construction equipment may be transported to the island. Trash dumpsters are also loaded onto the ferry and taken off the island for trash disposal. The transporting of equipment and dumpsters is estimated to occur 12 times per year. A vessel or barge used for the purpose of transporting equipment would have to be capable of accommodating equipment of approximately the following size and weight. Equipment currently in use by the FWS includes a farm tractor with a front-end loader and mower. The dimensions of the equipment combination are approximately 30 feet by 15 feet with a total weight of 20,000 pounds. For construction, a payload of approximately 35,000 pounds is needed for an excavator or a loaded 10 cubic yard dump truck. Options for heavy equipment watercraft are fairly limited. This is because there are few types of vessels able to transport the necessary equipment and materials and such vessels have limited availability. Vessels considered in this study, and discussed in more detail below, include offshore supply vessels, crew boats, Landing Craft- Mechanized (LCM), and a barge and tug combination. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-15 CHAPTER 5: Offshore Supply Vessel Offshore supply vessels are larger vessels with a spacious open deck for transporting heavy equipment, containers and other supply materials. The vessels are generally greater than 120 feet in length; however, some may be smaller and in the 80-foot to 100-foot range. The vessels are usually constructed of steel and have deep-“V” shaped monohulls, which have a deep draft, usually exceeding 6 feet. They are slower vessels, typically operating at a cruising speed of 9 knots to 12 knots. The cost to operate, maintain and berth the vessel is exceedingly high in relation to the funding available for the proposed FWS project. The offshore supply vessels are suitable for transporting equipment required for the FWS; however, the limiting factor is the draft of the vessel. The refuge terminal would have to be dredged to a minimum depth of 8 feet to 10 feet in order to operate the vessel for the intended purpose. Typical Supply Vessel Typical Supply Vessel Deck Area This type of vessel is not readily available in the Presquile NWR area of the James River. If a lease arrangement were made for this type of vessel, the vessel would likely have to transit up the James River from the Newport News, Norfolk or Chesapeake areas. Crew Boat Crew boats are generally smaller than a typical offshore supply vessel and can range in size from 40 feet to over 120 feet. Crew boats, which are over approximately 60 feet to 70 feet in length with an open deck area, should be large enough to accommodate transporting the FWS John Deer tractor, mower and other equipment and supplies. These vessels are most often constructed of aluminum and have fast cruising speeds up to 35 knots. This type of vessel is not readily available in Presquile NWR area of the James River. If a lease arrangement were made for this type of vessel, the vessel would likely have to come from Newport News, Norfolk or Chesapeake. Typical Crew Boat Crew Boat Back Deck of Workboat International 5-16 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT Landing Craft- Mechanized (LCM) An LCM, often referred to as a “Mike Boat” (the term refers to the military phonetic alphabet, LCM being 'Lima Charley Mike') is a shallow draft, generally flat bottomed boat with a mechanized bow ramp which allows beach landings. The shallow draft and bow ramp are the two primary advantages of this vessel over other deep-“V” shaped monohulls. NPS LCM Vessel (Courtesy of SeaArk) The length of the LCM varies from 40 feet to well over 100 feet. A small LCM of 40 feet could have a draft as shallow as 1 foot, but typically the draft is 3 feet to 4feet for LCMs in the range of 50 feet. The boats are constructed of steel and cruise at a moderate speed of up to 15 knots. They are designed to transport heavy equipment so they would be well suited for transporting FWS equipment and materials. The LCM is not very common in the refuge area of the James River. A lease arrangement for this type of vessel would likely have to transit up the James River from the Newport News, Norfolk or Chesapeake. Barge and Tug Barges for this type of use are typically constructed of steel, with some of the smaller barges made of aluminum. Depending on its loading, barges generally have a relatively shallow draft of approximately 3 feet for a barge of approximately 40 feet. Barges could be motorized with either an outboard motor for a smaller barge or an inboard motor for larger ones. The barges most suitable for FWS equipment and material transporting would likely be a simple steel barge used as a work platform for marine construction. For non-motorized barges, a vessel, or tug would be utilized to move the barge. The tug boat could vary greatly in size, power and style from a simple small work boat with an outboard motor to a much larger tug boat. The tug would likely move the barge from alongside or by pushing the barge. Typical Small Barge Typical Motor Barge U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-17 CHAPTER 5: A tug and barge combination are readily available from marine contractors in the area of the refuge. Because of the wide range of tugs and vessels that could meet the requirements for transporting FWS equipment and materials, leasing of a barge and tug would provide the greatest flexibility and versatility for heavy equipment transport. Heavy Equipment Watercraft Summary The table below summarizes the various heavy equipment vessel options considered as part of this study and discussed above. The range of vessel lengths and drafts noted reflects what is typical for each vessel type that would meet the needs of the program, and could possibly be available for purchase or lease. Heavy Equipment Watercraft Summary Table TYP. LENGTH TYP. BEAM TYP. DRAFT PURCHASECOST LOCAL TYPE OF VESSEL (feet) (feet) (feet) (Used vessels) AVAILABILITY SUPPLY VESSEL 80 - 100 20 - 25 6 - 8 $600K - $900K LIMITED CREW BOAT 60 - 100 18 - 22 5 - 7 $300K - $600K VERY LIMITED LCM 40 - 60 11 - 25 1 - 4 $200K - $400K VERY LIMITED BARGE 40 - 60 22 -25 3 - 4 $50K - $150K READILY AVAILABLE For the limited needs of the FWS for heavy equipment transport (estimated at 12 times per year), purchasing a large vessel for transporting equipment would not likely be a feasible option for the FWS due to the high capital costs for the vessel, high maintenance and operating costs, and the high cost and limited availability of commercial vessel berthing facilities. In addition, labor costs associated with an experienced and licensed crew would be high. This determination was verified through the Choosing By Advantages (CBA) exercises conducted during the transportation study planning workshop. A summary of the workshop, including the CBA analysis and conclusions are provided in Chapter 7. During the CBA workshop, heavy equipment vessel options were considered as part of a lease/rental agreement between the FWS and a local marine contractor with suitable vessels and/or barges available for hire. The next section of this chapter discusses potential options for leasing a heavy equipment vessel. Heavy Equipment Vessel Leasing/Rental The operational needs of the FWS could be met by contracting for the needed services via a vessel lease/rental with a commercial operator or vessel owner. Vessel and Barge The lease arrangement would likely consist of a barge with an approximate size of 15 feet by 40 feet, with an average draft of 3 feet, that would be used for transporting heavy equipment and vehicles, including the FWS farm tractor and mower, a pickup truck and utility trailer, a backhoe, dump truck loaded with aggregate materials or other construction equipment. Smaller barges could be used accordingly to transport other construction equipment and tools and building supplies, such as lumber and roofing materials. The barge could be moved by a variety of vessels including a small vessel, such as a work skiff with an outboard motor (20 feet or more in length) and sufficiently powered to safely navigate the waters and deliver the designated cargo to/from the refuge. A much larger workboat/tug also could be used for these purposes. The vessel would be operated by an experienced crew that is properly trained and licensed. 5-18 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge EVALUATED WATERCRAFT Licensing Requirements For every Uninspected Towing Vessel (UTV) of 26 feet or more in length, the vessel must be under the command of a master (captain) of towing vessels, or a mariner licensed as master of inspected, self- propelled vessels greater than 200 gross register tons (GRT) and holding a license endorsed for towing vessels in accordance with 46 CFR 15.805(a). For uninspected vessels less than 26 feet in length, such as a work skiff, a licensed captain is not required. At a minimum, the crew would likely include a captain and a deckhand. Additional crew members would be added depending of the specific circumstances. Typically, a crew of three would be used for vessel operations involving moving a barge and on/off-loading materials and equipment. Contractual Agreement A contractual agreement between FWS and a vessel contractor would contain several basic items that would have to be specifically addressed and agreed to by both parties. Refer to Chapter 6, Potential Partners, for a summary of possible partnering arrangement. Estimated Vessel/Barge Cost The above contractual elements, and more, would have to be worked out and clearly established in a contract. Based on preliminary discussions with local marine contractors, a ballpark estimate of the range of probable costs for marine transportation services obtained locally is provided below. The rates would be higher for marine vessel operators coming from outside the Richmond/Hopewell area such as from Newport News, Norfolk or Chesapeake. Full Day Rate: $4,000 to $5,000/day (8-hours) Half Day Rate: $3,000 to $4,000/ half day (up to 4-hours) Overtime Rate: $500 to $900/ hour over 8 hours The above estimates could vary significantly depending of the type of vessel and barge proposed and the home-port location of the vessel and barge. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 5-19 6 Transportation Options Transportation Options In this chapter, Presquile NWR marine transportation options are formulated and evaluated to determine feasible options, or combinations of options, for the FWS to pursue in meeting their marine transportation needs. There are many reasonable options considered ranging from a minimalist/no-action option to more fully developed options that incorporate a complete transportation plan involving substantial infrastructure improvements. A minimalist/no-action option and three developed options are described and evaluated in this chapter followed by the development of a Hybrid Option. Costs estimates for the various options are provided in Appendix D, Cost Estimates, with detailed narratives describing components associated with the option and their costs. In addition, a table summarizing the potential impact areas associated with each option is provided at the end of this chapter. Minimal Required Action/No-Action Option The minimal required action/no-action option generally describes a future condition which might reasonably result from the continuation of the current Presquile NWR marine transportation practices. This option assumes no significant changes to the existing transportation system. Mainland Terminal Site The existing mainland ferry terminal site connected to the Philip Morris USA property would continue to serve in its current capacity for passenger and heavy equipment loading/unloading. The existing A-frame and hoist system would be rehabilitated as needed to meet safety requirements and ensure structural integrity for ramp operation and transporting passengers and equipment. Onsite parking would remain unimproved with vehicle parking in the grass alongside the turn-around loop at the ferry dock. Space for approximately 10 vehicles, which is considered adequate for current operations, could reasonably be accommodated at the mainland ferry terminal site. A new code compliant Existing Mainland Ferry Terminal Parking Area passenger gangway would be fabricated and used to ensure safe passenger vessel boarding. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-1 CHAPTER 6 Island Ferry Terminal The existing island ferry terminal site is on the south tip of Presquile NWR, within the shipping channel. This terminal would continue to serve in its current capacity for transporting heavy equipment and materials to the refuge. The existing A-frame and hoist system would be rehabilitated as needed to meet safety requirements and ensure structural integrity for ramp operation and transporting equipment and materials. Island Floating Boat Dock Boardwalk and Fixed Dock to Floating Dock The Presquile NWR floating dock on the western side of the island would be used as the primary access point for refuge visitors, FWS staff and associated partners. The gangway would be modified to improve ADA accessibility to the extent possible. The route from the dock to the developed upland area (Menenak Discovery Center) would remain as is (i.e. does not currently provide ADA accessibility). Passenger Vessel The FWS’s 28 foot 16-passenger pontoon boat would continue to be used for FWS operations and maintenance. The vessel which is not a USCG inspected subchapter T vessel would be operated and maintained in its current conditions. ADA accessibility accommodations for passenger would remain very limited. For Ecology School programs and groups, which are considered “passengers for hire,” the JRA USCG inspected 35-passenger pontoon boat would be used. The JRA vessel would be berthed at the existing refuge floating dock. Heavy Equipment Vessel The need for a heavy equipment vessel would be satisfied by FWS 16–Passenger Pontoon Boat keeping the existing cable-operated ferry in service. Operation of the ferry would be limited, to the extent possible, using it only when absolutely necessary. Routine maintenance of the barge and engine would continue as periodically required, including replacement of 6-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS the cable every 1 to 2 years. The minimal action/no-action option does not require any mainland or island construction or land disturbance and therefore no permitting is required. This option would satisfy the “minimal impact/minimal permit requirement option” as specifically noted in the project scope of work. Option 1 (Existing FWS Terminal and Keyhole Basin) The first transportation option evaluated consists of the following primary components: Mainland Terminal Site For this option, the mainland ferry terminal site would be improved for continued use. Figure 6-1 shows the primary mainland terminal site improvements, which are discussed below. In addition, the site would continue to be secured at the existing gate to the Philip Morris USA property (located at the end of Bermuda Hundred Road) to prevent unauthorized entry into the site or use of the docking facilities. Existing security procedures would continue to be implemented as directed by Philip Morris USA. The mainland ferry terminal would be modified or reconstructed to allow larger vessels and barges to berth for the purpose of loading and unloading heavy equipment, including the John Deere tractor and mower, construction equipment, (farm tractor and mower) and large items used in the administration of the refuge (trash dumpsters, fuel tanks, etc.).The reconstruction of the terminal would include a mechanically adjustable ramp for drive-on/drive-off capability. In the future, maintenance dredging would be scheduled every 2-3 years and paid for by the FWS, as is currently the case. A wood timber dock with gangway and floating pier would be constructed approximately 100 feet south of the ferry terminal for passenger vessel operations (Refer to Option 1A in Figure 6-1). This pier would be located in the vicinity of the existing unimproved ramp/pontoon boat loading area to keep the heavy equipment operations and the passenger operations separate. An alternative to this location would be to place a new passenger dock immediately adjacent to the east side of the ferry terminal (Refer to Option 1B in Figure 6-1). A gravel parking area would be constructed near the passenger dock and would accommodate a minimum of 12 cars plus a bus drop-off area. This would provide sufficient parking for the programs and planned events and would accommodate school buses for transporting large groups. The site design would include providing an ADA accessible route from the parking area to the passenger loading dock. In the vicinity of the parking area, a small shelter of approximately 12 Pontoon Boat similar to JRA 35-Passenger Boat feet by 12 feet, equipped with interpretive signage, also would be constructed. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-3 CHAPTER 6 Island Terminal Site The island terminal site would consist of a newly constructed keyhole basin just east of the existing ferry terminal (Figure 6-2).The basin would require dredging approximately 2,200 cubic yards (cy) of material and construction of a heavy-duty sheet pile bulkhead. An A-frame structure would also be constructed to accommodate a mechanical ramp that would provide drive-on/drive-off capability for heavy equipment loading/unloading. An ADA accessible route from the keyhole basin to the Menenak Discovery Center and facilities would be accomplished via a FWS vehicle (refer to Chapter 8, On Island Transportation, for additional information regarding ADA accessibility on the island). In addition, periodic dredging would be required to maintain the basin. The existing ferry terminal would be demolished upon completion of the keyhole basin construction. This option would require that the appropriate levels of archaeological studies be performed in the area of the proposed keyhole basin. The final determination as to whether this option would be viable would depend on the results of the required archaeological studies by state and federal regulators. The existing floating dock on the island would continue to be used as the primary access point for refuge visitors, FWS staff and associated partners. The gangway would be improved to meet current codes and ADA accessibility to the extent possible. The existing pedestrian route from the dock to the developed area (Menenak Discovery Center) would remain as is, which is currently not up to ADA accessibility standards. 6-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Existing Access Road 6 Parking Spaces Shelter and Sign HeavyHeavy Grassrass HeavyHeavy EquipmentEquipment EquipmentEquipment A-FrameA-Frame RampRamp 6 Parking Spaces Bus PulloverPul DolphinDolphin PilesPiles FixedFixed DDockock Gangway FloatingFloating FixedFixed DDockock Dock FloatingFloating GangwayGangway DockDock OOPTIONPTION 1B OPTIONOPTION 1A U.S. Fish &WildlifeService 6-5 Turkey Island Cutoff 0 50 Feet Source: VBMP/VGIN 2009 Orthophotography Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-1 OPTION 1 - Mainland Terminal 15 10 5 15 10 Proposed Bulkhead 5 20x40 Tug 20x60 Barge Demolish Existing Ferry Terminal Existing Bulkhead Turkey Island Cutoff 0 100 Feet Source: VBMP/VGIN 2009 Orthophotography Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-2 OPTION 1 - Refuge Terminal: Keyhole Basin 6-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Passenger Vessel The passenger vessel would be a 35± passenger USCG inspected (subchapter T) pontoon boat as discussed in Chapter 5. In general, the vessel would be equipped with the required safety equipment, a canopy, and outfitted for ADA accessibility. This vessel could dock at either of Presquile NWR's landings (e.g. the western floating dock or southern keyhole basin). Typical Motorized Barge Heavy Equipment Vessel The heavy equipment vessel requirement would be satisfied by through a contractual agreement for use of a vessel, motorized barge, or a tug/barge combination. The contractual agreement would include vessel, crew and equipment necessary for meeting the heavy equipment transportation needs of the FWS. Although this option assumes that the existing FWS ferry barge is taken out of service, the ferry could be retained and used accordingly by FWS operations and maintenance staff for various tasks; including heavy equipment transport (should an appropriate boat be acquired to move the barge). Option 2 (Marina Slip and Refuge Wharf) Mainland Terminal Site For this option, a marina slip would be leased to accommodate a passenger vessel for a specific period of time (i.e. 1-, 5-, 10-year lease, etc.). The marina would be required to meet the operational needs of the FWS, which would include providing secure overnight parking for up to 12 vehicles. This is the minimum number of spaces that would be required to support FWS staff, Ecology School programs and other events, which would be scheduled in advance. An onsite boat ramp would also be available for Jordan Point Marina FWS use and ADA accessibility would be provided from the Jordan Point Marina parking area to the vessel. The marina would serve as the refuge's mainland base of operation for passenger loading and unloading. For convenience, alternative passenger pick-up and drop-off could occur at other locations, including public boat ramps or other marinas. Western Refuge Terminal Site In this option, the refuge passenger and heavy equipment operations would be combined at the existing floating dock site on the western side of the island. This area would be improved to include a newly constructed bulkhead wharf, which would require a graded access road down the slope to the wharf to provide heavy equipment loading and unloading (Figure 6-3). This option would require significant tree clearing and bank grading to gain access to the waterfront. In conjunction with the access road to the wharf, an ADA vehicle drop-off area would be provided adjacent to the floating dock landing for mobility impaired visitors. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-7 CHAPTER 6 This option would also require that the appropriate levels of archaeological studies be performed in the area of the bank grading. Additional dredging within the river also would likely be required to accommodate boats, barges, or tugs. The final determination as to whether this option is viable would depend of the results of the archaeological studies by state and federal regulators. Passenger Vessel The passenger vessel would be a 35± passenger USCG inspected (subchapter T) pontoon vessel as discussed in Chapter 5. In general, the vessel would be equipped with the required safety equipment, a canopy, and outfitted for ADA accessibility (Same as Option 1). Heavy Equipment Vessel The heavy equipment vessel requirement would be satisfied by a contractual agreement for a vessel, motorized barge or tug/barge combination. The contractual agreement would include vessel and crew and equipment necessary for meeting the heavy equipment needs of FWS (Same as Option 1). 6-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge 20 15 10 5 James River Dredging Area to be Cleared 15 20 5 10 Swale Proposed Bulkhead Gravel Proposed Sidewalk Area to be Cleared ADA Pick-up and Drop-off Area Existing Dock 0 50 Feet Source: VBMP/VGIN 2009 Orthophotography Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-3 OPTION 2 - Western Refuge Terminal: Wharf U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-9 CHAPTER 6 Option 3 (Public Boat Ramp and Refuge Ferry Terminal & Floating Dock) Mainland Terminal Site For this option, a public boat ramp, or public marina with a boat ramp, would be utilized as a gathering location for refuge visitors. Passengers would use the site for loading/unloading and parking. Permission for overnight parking for up to 12 vehicles or for long term mooring would have to be obtained from the municipality that owns the facility. Permanent overnight passenger vessel mooring would be available either at the existing FWS mainland ferry terminal or at the refuge floating dock where it would have to travel from the refuge dock to the public facility Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing to pick up passengers. Two mainland boat ramp facilities, DBPBL and DGPBL were evaluated for this purpose in Chapter 4 and are discussed further below. Departing from the refuge, the boat operator could pick up passengers from DBPBL, DGPBL or any of the local marinas. This option varies from Option 2 in several ways: 1) the passenger pick up location would be public and subject to constraints associated with its public use, such as the time it takes for queuing to use the dock and the availability of parking spaces during peak use periods, 2) there would be no marine services available, such as fuel, water for wash down or a ship’s store for supplies, and 3) there would be limited hours of operations for the public facility and; therefore limited hours available for visitor access to the refuge ferry and associated parking. These differences are considered in detail in the mainland site evaluations later in this chapter. Refuge Terminal Sites In this option, the refuge terminal sites would consist of two components: 1) Reconstruction of an existing ferry terminal (new loading ramp, hoist system, A-frame, dolphin pilings, etc.) for heavy equipment loading/offloading, and 2) using the existing floating dock for passengers with a newly constructed ADA accessible boardwalk/switchback system and stairs leading to the top of the bank (Figure 6-4). This option is similar to the current operation, except there is currently no ADA accessible route to/from the dock. In addition, some improvements would be made to the existing dock such as replacing the existing gangway with a longer gangway equipped with code compliant railings and guardrail. This option varies from Option 2 in two ways: 1) it separates passenger operations from heavy equipment operations (similar to Option 1), and 2) it provides a direct ADA accessible pedestrian path from the dock to the buildings, rather than providing an ADA vehicle drop-off area at the floating dock. 6-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge 20 15 10 5 James River New ADA Ramp System Steps Existing Dock 0 50 Feet Source: VBMP/VGIN 2009 Orthophotography Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-4 OPTION 3 - Refuge Terminal: ADA Ramp U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-11 CHAPTER 6 Passenger Vessel This option would provide a subchapter T vessel with a typical deep-“V” shaped hull (monohull) and a 35± passenger capacity. This option is different from both Options 1 and 2 because instead of a proposed pontoon boat, this option proposes a monohull vessel. Heavy Equipment Vessel The heavy equipment vessel requirement would be satisfied a contractual agreement for a vessel or vessel/barge combination. Monohull Subchapter T Passenger Vessel The contractual agreement would include the vessel, crew and equipment necessary for meeting the heavy equipment needs of the FWS (Same as Options 1 and 2). Evaluation of Transportation Options The primary components of the FWS transportation system were each evaluated to identify feasible options that could move forward as recommended options in this report. Function Analysis and CBA were used as evaluation tools in determining the transportation components that best meet the needs of the FWS. The four project elements described in the transportation scenario options above (mainland terminal site, refuge terminal site, passenger vessel, and the heavy equipment vessel) were each evaluated during a workshop session with the project team, the steering committee and other stakeholders. On February, 8, 2012, the project team and steering committee convened for a one-day transportation planning and evaluation workshop. In his welcoming comments during the workshop, C. Brame of FWS stated that the project includes the need to provide “better ways” to get to and from the refuge compared to the existing cable-operated ferry system currently in use. He stated the need for safe modes of transportation that protect resources and are sustainable long-term. From this starting point, the project team began to identify transportation system functions. A brief overview of function analysis is provided in Appendix E, Transportation Options Evaluations of this report. A more detailed function analysis is provided below, beginning with the Presquile NWR transportation functions identified during the workshop. Function Analysis An overview of the Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) was presented at the workshop followed by a brainstorming session in which project functions were determined and listed in the table below. Identification of Transportation System Functions During the steering committee workshop, the study team identified the functions making up the Presquile NWR transportation system. 6-12 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Table: Presquile NWR Transportation Related Functions VERB (Active) NOUN (Measurable) Support Refuge operations Protect Resources Provide Visitor access Protect Staff/visitor Health, Safety & Welfare Meet Code Requirements Improve Operational efficiency Improve Sustainability Transport Passengers Transport Staff Transport Equipment Conduct Education Conduct Research Launch Vessels Fuel Vessels Moor Vessel Provide Accessibility Enhance Mainland access Provide Parking (including overnight) Provide Water access (docks) Provide Staging area (groups) Provide Storage (ed. equip, cleaner, tools, etc.) Move Equipment Maintain Vessels Store Vessels (on trailers) Store Canoe/kayaks, Secure Canoes (lockable racks) Provide/accommodate Emergency vessel (on island) Designate Helicopter pad location (on island) Provide Vessel captain/operator Establish Group pick up locations/hub network Support Refuge facility construction/maintenance/operations Move/place Propane tank Clean (remove) debris (junk on island) Transport Tractor, mower, backhoe, etc. (approx. 12x/year) Plant Trees Based on the list of transportation system functions provided above a FAST Diagram was developed showing the scope of the project and the associated functions. The FAST Diagram is provided in Appendix E. The goal of evaluating options for the transportation components was to clarify and refine the primary elements of the transportation system and advance them towards an option for the overall transportation system from which concept designs and cost estimates could be developed. Based on the preceding U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-13 CHAPTER 6 function analysis, the transportation component options were evaluated using the CBA decision-making system outlined below. Choosing by Advantages Evaluation CBA value-based decision making exercises were used as a tool for preliminary evaluations of four transportation system components: 1) mainland terminal sites, 2) refuge terminal sites, 3) passenger vessels, and 4) heavy equipment vessels. The components of the transportation system were evaluated by comparing the available options. Once value-based decisions were made for the most advantageous transportation components using CBA methods, a new, improved option could be further developed that incorporates the most beneficial elements of the initial options. The new “hybrid” option would then move forward for further development into a Hybrid Option. Below are the primary options to be considered and the results of the CBA exercise. The “paramount advantage”, which is defined in CBA terminology as the most important of all the advantages, is given an importance value of 100 (BOLD in the CBA tables provided in Appendix E). The value of other advantages (using a numerical system) were determined relative to the paramount advantage and summed for a total importance value which, in turn, is used to compare the two options. At this time in the evaluation, costs associated with the options were not considered; however, costs are considered in the final evaluation of the Hybrid Option. Cost estimates of each of the options are provided in Appendix D. Mainland Terminal Site Options: Preliminary Evaluation: Existing FWS Ferry Terminal Evaluated using CBA Jordan Point Marina Evaluated using CBA City Point Park Considered but not evaluated further due to no existing public water access Hopewell Marina Evaluated using CBA Port Weanack Evaluated using CBA Turkey Creek Access Point Considered but not evaluated further due to site limited to canoe/kayak access only Brown & Williamson Conservation Area Considered but not evaluated further due to site being a conservation area Deep Bottom Park and Boat Landing Considered for back-up location for passengers Dutch Gap Public Boat Landing Considered for back-up location for passengers Harbor Dredge and Dock Evaluated using CBA Alexander Property on Rt. 5 Evaluated using CBA CBA for Mainland Terminal Sites The mainland terminal sites were evaluated first in relation to the passenger vessel operations and then for the heavy equipment vessel operations. This was done to keep separate the evaluation of generally 6-14 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS incompatible operational activities. The passenger operations are concerned primarily with gathering groups, queuing passengers for boarding the vessel and pedestrian circulation, whereas the heavy equipment operations focus on heavy vehicle traffic and loading and delivering materials. The CBA table generated during the evaluation is process is provided in Appendix E and individual CBA summaries are provided below. CBA Evaluation Summary No. 1: Passenger Vessel Operations- Marina Sites The first CBA evaluation was a direct comparison between the two marina sites, Jordan Point Marina and the Hopewell Marina, which were considered for passenger vessel operations. The results of the CBA evaluation show that the Jordan Point Marina scores the higher of the two marinas with 475 total importance points, versus 105 points for the Hopewell Marina. The paramount advantage of the Jordan Point Marina was its security which received a score of 100. The next highest scoring advantages for the Jordan Point Marina were its history of relationships with other agencies and programs (85 points), ample parking (80 points), and the availability of fuel onsite (70 points). The low scoring advantages (less important advantages) were its proximity to the FWS office and a more operational boat ramp, both scoring 5 points, and the ability to accommodate an onsite storage shed, which contributed a score of 10 points. CBA Summary Evaluation No.2: Passenger Vessel Operations- Existing FWS Ferry Terminal Site The second CBA evaluation compared continuing use of the existing FWS ferry terminal with using a marina site for passenger operations. The evaluation between the FWS ferry terminal site and a marina site for passenger operations resulted in a total importance score of 230 points for the ferry terminal site and 270 points for a marina. Although the scores were relatively close, this indicates that it is preferable to have passengers and educational programs operate out of a marina. The two primary advantages of operating out of a marina are due to having the infrastructure (i.e. docks, ramps, utilities, parking, etc.) in place at the marina (90 points) and having full marina services, such as fuel, boat maintenance, and a ship’s store for supplies (80 points). It must be noted that the FWS site received the highest score of 100 for the paramount advantage of being closest to the refuge and the second highest score of 95 for having full legal rights (i.e. property easement) for continued use of the site. CBA Evaluation Summary No. 3: Heavy Equipment Vessel Operation Mainland Sites The third CBA evaluation compared three new sites for heavy equipment vessel operations: Port Weanack, the HDD facility and the Alexander Property. Of the three options evaluated, Port Weanack scored the highest with a total importance score of 320 points, followed by HDD with 220 points, and 90 points for the Alexander Property. The paramount advantage for a heavy equipment terminal is a deep water route for vessels which both Port Weanack and HDD scored 100. The next highest scoring advantage was a location close to the refuge. Under this criteria Port Weanack scored the highest with 90 points and the Alexander Property scored the second highest with 85 points. Existing infrastructure in place at the site was considered next with an importance score of 85 points for HDD and 75 for Port Weanack. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-15 CHAPTER 6 CBA Evaluation Summary No. 4: Heavy Equipment Vessel Operation- Existing FWS Ferry Terminal Site The next CBA evaluation compared the Philip Morris USA site with an offsite location for heavy equipment operations. The evaluation between the existing FWS ferry terminal site and an alternative site for the heavy equipment operations resulted in a total importance score of 230 points for the Philip Morris USA ferry terminal site and only 50 points for an alternative site. The two high scoring advantages for the Philip Morris site are due to the current use of the ferry terminal site (the paramount advantage at 100 points) and because the facility has the shortest distance to the island (80 points). The large difference in points between the options indicates that using the FWS ferry terminal site is much better than moving the operations to an alternative site. CBA Evaluation Summary No. 5: Refuge Terminal Sites Next, the existing ferry terminal and the floating dock sites at the refuge were evaluated separately for passenger and heavy equipment vessel use in a similar manner as the mainland terminal. The primary options to choose from are: Option A) constructing a keyhole basin at the existing ferry terminal site, and Option B) constructing a wharf next to the existing floating dock. In the CBA evaluation, a hybrid combination of Options A and B was considered where rather than constructing a new keyhole basin for heavy equipment operations, the existing ferry terminal would be used for heavy equipment operations and the existing floating dock used solely for passenger operations. The evaluation of Option A and B resulted in a total importance score of 285 points for Option A and 110 points for Option B. Option A had the paramount advantage with 100 points for minimizing disturbance and impacts to natural resources and archaeology. The next high scoring advantages for Option A were minimizing visual impacts, such as tree clearing which impacts the view from the historic district (65 points), and minimizing dredging (50 points). Option B has the advantage of no conflict with channel ship traffic and also the advantage of less wind/wave action/tidal flow, scoring 50 importance points for each component. The large difference in points between the options indicates that a most desirable option would be one that does not require bank grading and minimizes visual and environmental/cultural resource impacts. The option would also avoid conflicts with ship traffic in the channel and have less wind, wave and tidal exposure. Thus a combination of the high scoring advantages of the two options (i.e. hybrid option) would score significantly higher overall. The new “hybrid” option would be expected to score somewhere near 385 points. CBA Evaluation Summary No. 6: Passenger Vessels CBA was also used to evaluate the choice between two common types of passenger vessels; a monohull vessel and a pontoon boat. The evaluation resulted in a total importance score of 190 points for Option A and 260 points for Option B, making the pontoon boat the more desirable vessel type. Option B had the paramount advantage with 100 points for having a shallower draft. The pontoon boat at had the advantage of more deck space and flexibility for educational programs (60 points) and better fuel consumption (35 points). The two high scoring advantages for Option A were that it would support a longer operating season, because the monohull vessel typically can operate in more severe weather conditions (95 points), and the monohull 6-16 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS would provide a drier ride (50 points). CBA Evaluation Summary No. 7: Heavy Equipment Vessels Heavy equipment vessel arrangements were evaluated using the CBA tabular method to compare a large monohull vessel (80 feet – 100 feet in length) to a barge/tug or a motorized barge. The CBA evaluation clearly shows the most beneficial option to be Option B, the tug and barge combination, with a total importance score of 110 rather than Option A, a large monohull vessel with a total score of only 50 points. The paramount advantage, at 100 points, is the barge/tug’s flexibility for a wide range of uses and its local availability. Other advantages include shallower draft and better stability. The monohull vessel received 50 points for its advantage of being a single vessel rather than a combination of two vessels. Overall Summary of CBA Results The results of the CBA evaluations are provided in Appendix E, including a summary of their significance to help identify which options have the greatest benefits for the transportation program. The most beneficial options would maximize value and would be capable of providing the functions required to support Presquile NWR operations. For each transportation component evaluated above, the highest scoring option was identified and then combined into new “hybrid” option to achieve an option with the most overall advantages. Mainland Terminal Sites Based on the mainland site evaluations, a desirable option for the mainland terminal site would be a combination of a marina slip for the passenger vessels with passenger operations (refuge visitors and educational groups) and use of the existing FWS ferry terminal for heavy equipment operations. Heavy equipment operations would be essentially the same as under current conditions. The advantages for locating passenger operations at a marina would be that the location is secure for vessel berthing, parking, and could accommodate a storage shed. A marina also would provide space for gathering/queuing educational program groups. The dock and utility infrastructure is in place and maintained by the marina owner with ADA accessibility to/from the vessel via gangways and floating docks. The marina would provide a full range of services, including maintenance, fuel, supplies, and a boat ramp. A long-term lease agreement could be executed with the marina owner. The marina would also be located so that there would be easy land transportation access and the marina would be close to the FWS office In Option 3, the use of a public boat ramp is considered for passenger operations. Facilities at DBPBL and DGPBL were both evaluated in Chapter 4 and determined not to fulfill the Presquile NWR transportation requirements. Although using a public boat ramp as a permanent location for passenger loading and educational groups would not be viable, they may serve as a viable alternative for pick-up points for school groups traveling from various locations, or as a back-up plan for passenger loading in the event that the marina is out of service or sponsoring a special event, etc. Since the two public boat ramp locations are closer to Richmond and other school districts, it may be logistically advantageous to use these facilities as an alternative to traveling further to a marina. This could be decided on a case-by- case basis. Additionally, other locations with public boat ramps may also be considered, such as the boat ramp/dock at the Hopewell Marina. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-17 CHAPTER 6 Heavy Equipment Terminal For heavy equipment operations, the existing FWS ferry terminal is the most advantageous for three primary reasons: 1) the FWS has legal operational use of the property through a perpetual easement, 2) the infrastructure is in place for loading vessels, and 3) the location is closest to the refuge at approximately 700 feet. New construction and/or permitting would not be needed at the existing FWS ferry terminal and relatively minimal improvements/maintenance would be needed for continued use of the terminal for heavy equipment. Refuge Terminal Sites Passenger Terminal On the island, the existing floating dock would continue to serve passenger operations for educational groups and FWS staff. The floating dock, gangway, boardwalk and railings would be upgraded to improve accessibility to the extent possible. Heavy Equipment Terminal For heavy equipment operations at the refuge, the existing ferry terminal would be the most feasible option for three primary reasons: 1) the infrastructure is in place for loading vessels 2) there is an existing road leading to the building facilities so no bank grading, road construction or land disturbing activities would be necessary, and 3) the location is the closest point to the FWS ferry terminal. Only minor maintenance improvements would be needed for continued use of the terminal. New construction and or permitting would not be required. Passenger Vessel Based on the passenger vessel evaluation, a pontoon boat having a shallow draft is preferred over a deeper draft vessel option. The pontoon style boat would allow the greatest flexibility in terms of operating within the tide range since low tides can limit the operation of vessels at the dock and around certain portions of the James River. The vessel is also economical to operate, ADA accessible, and has ample deck space for educational groups. Heavy Equipment Vessel Based on the analysis above, it is evident that for the limited FWS needs to transport heavy equipment and other materials to and from the refuge, purchasing a large vessel, or the long-term lease for a vessel, is not justified. The most viable arrangement for the FWS would be to contract with a local marine contractor for tug and barge services that best suits the FWS operational needs on an as-needed basis. Option 4: Hybrid Option The Hybrid Option for the Presquile NWR transportation system was developed from the most beneficial elements of the transportation components, as summarized above, and combined them into a single comprehensive transportation program (illustrated in Figure 6-5). The features and characteristics of this hybrid option, and specific variations of some components, are discussed below. 6-18 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Richmond National Battlefield Park DEEP BOTTOM PARK AND BOAT LANDING 613 t "MUFSOBUFQBTTFOHFSQJDLVQMPDBUJPO Henrico County Charles City County k ee Cr 95 Tu d 295 rkey Islan 5 DUTCH GAP PUBLIC BOAT LANDING t "MUFSOBUFQBTTFOHFSQJDLVQMPDBUJPO PASSENGER TERMINAL PRESQUILE NATIONAL Chester AT REFUGE DOCK WILDLIFE REFUGE t 1BTTFOHFS0QFSBUJPOT t .JOPS*NQSPWFNFOUT 106 Tu rk ey Is REFUGE HEAVY EQUIPMENT TERMINAL la n 10 d t .JOPS*NQSPWFNFOUTUP&YJTUJOH5FSNJOBM C PhilipPhPhilipip MorrisMoororrirris u t o t "%"$POOFDUJPOUP'BDJMJUJFTWJB7FIJDMF ff PropertyPropProProopoppeertererrtttyy MAINLAND HEAVY EQUIPMENT TERMINAL t .JOPS*NQSPWFNFOUTUP&YJTUJOH5FSNJOBM 10 t 0QUJPOTGPS1BTTFOHFS%PDL Chesterfield County t 0QUJPOGPS'FSSZ#BSHF6TF 5 PASSENGER MAINLAND TERMINAL Hopewell Marina t 1BTTFOHFS0QFSBUJPOT t 1BTTFOHFS7FTTFM#FSUIJOH J Dutch Gap - 6.7 Miles t 7FTTFM.BJOUFOBODFa m t 'VFMJOH e s Deep Bottom - 5.5 Miles R t 7FIJDMF1BSLJOH i v e r Jordan Point Marina - 5.8 Miles 295 Hopewell Marina - 4.2 Miles 95 Irwin Distances Measured from Refuge Dock Manor City of Hopewell Prince George 0 1 Miles County Source: ESRI Streetmap Data V. 10 Fort Lee Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-5 OPTION 4 - Hybrid Transportation System U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-19 CHAPTER 6 BACK of 11x17 6-20 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Mainland Terminal Site For the passenger vessel mainland terminal, a marina slip would be rented from a local marina as in Option 2 above. Alternatively, several variations of this option could be implemented in the future to include constructing a passenger vessel dock at the mainland ferry terminal. Some of these variations could utilize the existing ferry barge as a floating dock and/or as a utility barge for transporting equipment and materials. Three possible dock concepts for the re-use of the ferry barge are provided below in Figures 6-6a, 6-6b and 6- 6c. Figure 6-6a, depicts a concept for providing the capability of loading passengers from the pontoon boat directly to the existing ferry barge via a small aluminum gangway moved into place by a crew member. In this concept and the two following concepts, the cable-operated ferry would be converted to a simple barge by removing the engine, engine enclosure and cable rollers leaving a completely open deck. Other potential reuse of the barge is discussed below in the Heavy Equipment Vessel section. Figure 6-6a – Ferry Barge Terminal Concept 1 Figure 6-6b, depicts a second concept for passenger loading/unloading from the pontoon boat to the converted ferry barge via a new floating dock with a permanently mounted ramp matching the elevation of the barge deck (approximately 18 inches above the floating dock elevation). A removable tread plate would be put in place by a crew member to bridge across from the floating dock ramp to the barge. The ramp system and railing would be ADA and code compliant. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-21 CHAPTER 6 Figure 6-6b - Ferry Barge Terminal Concept 2 Figure 6-6c, depicts a third concept for loading/unloading passengers at the existing FWS terminal. This option utilizes a new floating dock and gangway placed just to the south of the existing ferry terminal. The existing ferry barge would be converted to a barge as in Figures 6-6a and 6-6b, but would be used for heavy equipment transport only as discussed below, rather than for both heavy equipment and passenger operations. Figure 6-6c - Ferry Barge Terminal Concept 3 6-22 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Refuge Terminal Sites At the refuge, the pontoon boat would operate from the western floating dock. The gangway, boardwalk and railings would be upgraded to improve accessibility to the extent possible from the dock to the building facilities. Heavy equipment transportation operations would continue to utilize the existing ferry terminal. The ramp, railings and hoist system would be improved to bring them up to current codes and safety standards. This option is similar to Option 3 in that the passenger and heavy equipment operations are split between the floating dock and the ferry terminal, with the exception that mobility impaired visitors would arrive at the ferry terminal and be transported to the upland facilities via a FWS vehicle. The infrastructure at both locations would be improved or replaced as required to meet current codes and safety standards. The difference is that there would not be a new ADA accessible route constructed from the floating dock to the top of the bank, as there is in Option 3. ADA accessibility would be achieved as stated above by FWS vehicle transport to and from the existing ferry terminal. Figures 6-7 and 6-8 provide details of the hybrid option for the passenger terminal at the floating dock and the heavy equipment terminal at the refuge, respectively. Passenger Vessel For transporting refuge visitors, the passenger vessel would be a 35± passenger USCG inspected (subchapter T) pontoon boat as discussed in Chapter 5. The new JRA pontoon boat could be jointly used by FWS and JRA through an enhanced agreement, or a new boat purchased outright by FWS. In either case, the boat would be berthed at a nearby marina having all the required services and amenities previously discussed. Passenger loading and unloading would primarily occur at the marina with other sites, such as public boat ramps, used as back-up, or alternate pick-up sites for passengers (Same as Options 1 and 2). Pontoon Boat Similar to JRA Vessel Heavy Equipment Vessel The heavy equipment vessel requirement would be satisfied by a contractual agreement for a vessel or vessel/barge combination. The contractual agreement would include vessel and crew and equipment necessary for meeting the heavy equipment needs of the FWS (Same as Options 1, 2 and 3). A variation of this option, as noted above, would be to convert the existing cable-operated ferry to a simple barge with open deck suitable for transporting heavy equipment and materials. In this option, the barge would be used to transport the heavy equipment and only a boat and crew services of a local marine contractor would be required for moving the loaded barge to and from the refuge. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-23 6-24 Presquile National WildlifeRefuge Improved Gravel James River Path to FWS Facilities Wood Curb (TYP.) Proposed Ladder Proposed Railing along Boardwalk Boardwalk and Dock A New 30’ x 4’ Code Compliant Aluminum Gangway Existing Floating Dock 30’ Relocate Pile (TYP.) Proposed Ladder Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-7 OPTION 4 - Hybrid Refuge Passenger Terminal 15 Vehicle Route to Buildings 10 5 15 10 5 Vehicle Turn-Around and ADA Connection to Buildings IMPROVE EXISTING DOCK r New Dolphin Piles r New Hoist System r Improve Ramp and Railings Existing Bulkhead r Passenger Accessibility Accommodataion Turkey Island Cutoff 0 100 Feet Source: VBMP/VGIN 2009 Orthophotography Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 6-8 OPTION 4 - Hybrid Refuge Heavy Equipment Terminal U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-25 CHAPTER 6 Depending on the nature of the equipment/material to be transported and the work to be performed to move the barge, a small FWS vessel, such as a skiff could be used to move the barge. The vessel would need to be appropriately equipped with an adequately sized motor of sufficient power to navigate the barge and be outfitted accordingly with rub rails/fenders. Vessels less than 26 feet in length could be used to move the barge without the need for a USCG licensed operator. Option Evaluation Conclusion The above evaluation of the alternative transportation options, and associated components, led to the identification of an option that provides a complete transportation program which meets the FWS transportation needs. In summary, the hybrid option, as outlined above, achieves the FWS project goals and objectives. It eliminates the cable-operated ferry and potential hazards associated with a cable break or other system malfunctions. It also reduces vessel operations in the channel to a minimum; only heavy equipment transportation operations would be active in the channel on a very limited basis. This activity is estimated at only 12 times per year and, most often, the operations could be planned so as to avoid scheduled ship traffic in the channel. All passenger operations would be conducted out of the channel on the oxbow at the existing floating dock. The hybrid option minimizes the need for new infrastructure or significant infrastructure improvements, thereby keeping capital costs to a minimum. Existing infrastructure would be used and improved to the extent possible to bring the facilities up to required safety standards and codes. The proposed improvements generally would not require permitting. A complete cost estimate of Option 4, the Hybrid Option, as described above is provided in Appendix D. Appendix D discusses the costs associated with the transportation service options evaluated including the minimal option, three developed options, and the hybrid option. The ranking of the five options in terms of cost is as follows: Transportation Option Cost Summary Option Estimated Cost Minimal Required Action $ 27,852 Option 1: Existing FWS Terminal and Keyhole Basin $ 982,240 Option 2: Marina Slip and Refuge Wharf $ 714,200 Option 3: Public Boat Ramp and Refuge Ferry Terminal & Floating Dock $ 972,436 Option 4: Hybrid Option $ 461,327 The table below summarizes potential impacts associated with each option. The impacts are categorized as shelters (impervious area), land disturbance, impervious surface (compacted gravel surfaces), new docks, and gangways (structures over water creating potential shading impacts and dredging. 6-26 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS Summary of Impact Areas Proposed New Dock/ Proposed Land Disturbance Impervious Gangway Figure Title Shelters (SF) (SF) Surface (SF) Footprint (SF) Dredging (SF) 6-1 Mainland Terminal 144 11,930 6,030 345 - (Option 1A) 6-1 Mainland Terminal 144 12,500 6,405 630 - (Option 1B) 6-2 Island Terminal - - 12,200 - - 4,325 Keyhole Basin 6-3 Western Refuge - 33,170 9,075 - 11,750 Terminal: Wharf 6-4 Refuge Terminal: - 3,290 445 - - ADA Ramp 6-6a Ferry Barge - - - 30 - Terminal Concept 1 6-6b Ferry Barge - - - 324 - Terminal Concept 2 6-6c Ferry Barge - 350 - 415 - Terminal Concept 3 6-7 Hybrid Passenger - - 150 120 - Terminal 6-8 Hybrid Refuge - 600 400 - - Heavy Equipment Terminal U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 6-27 7 On-Island Transportation This chapter describes the existing on-island transportation and pedestrian circulation characteristics and related refuge functions and activities as well as potential options for transporting visitors, staff and equipment to/from the island. These include various vehicle options for passenger and equipment transport. In addition, a brief summary of pedestrian circulation on the island is presented. Each option is discussed with regards to service characteristics, operational requirements, and capital and costs. Trail Network The on-island transportation network is primarily focused on the movement of visitors, staff and materials within the 300-acre upland area that was historically pasture and farmed lands and is now occupied by wildlife habitat, nature trails, and limited infrastructure. This upland field also is where watercraft landing access is provided. Access by the visiting public into the wetland areas is limited to a new 500-foot boardwalk connecting the northern section of the upland fields to a tidal creek. Education groups use canoes stored at the boardwalk to explore the creeks and marshes. There are 3.5 miles of trails on the island (Refer to Figure 2-2, Current Public Use Facilities Map). For the most part, the trails follow the perimeter of the old farm fields and connections to the ferry landing. The usefulness of those historic routes continues today as they provide good wildlife observation opportunities as well as access from the boat landing areas. The trails are unimproved and are maintained by mowing. The perimeter trails provide generally level terrain, and are composed of relatively firm, compacted gravel, but can be subject to minor erosion and rutting during adverse weather conditions. The section of trail between the ferry landing and the Menenak Discovery Center rises gently about 20 feet over its half-mile length. Over the many years of use, which apparently included occasional graveling, this section of trail has become essentially a hard-packed surface capable of accommodating motor vehicles throughout the year. Most of the trail network consists of mown paths through the fields U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 7-1 CHAPTER 7 The boat dock and the Menenak Discovery Center are connected by a short trail. There is an approximate 25-foot elevation change between the boat dock and the upland fields using a wood boardwalk. The existing refuge trail system functions adequately to support the typical programs and activities compatible with the purpose of the refuge. Currently no additional trail sections are planned. However, there may be future opportunities to improve connectivity along the southwest corner of the island with a trail. Additionally, outdoor interpretive panels and a marsh observation platform The trail between the ferry landing and the farm building (along the eastern trail) are enhancements receiving area is essentially hard packed. consideration for the near future. These elements are depicted in Figure 7-1, Island Trail Extension Options. Transportation Needs The primary on-island transportation need for the FWS staff is the occasional moving of equipment and materials to support routine operations. A developing need is to provide assistance in moving supplies for overnight groups arriving and departing the refuge, as well as special assistance mobility for some of the visitors. Equipment and Materials The existing ferry system has been used to deliver equipment and materials to the island for decades. Often, trucks are carried on the ferry and driven onto the island for activities such as diesel fuel deliveries and refuse hauling. There also is a farm tractor and a pick-up truck based on the island that are sometimes used to haul materials to and from the ferry landing. Visitors The existing trail network is adequate for providing visitors with nature-related recreational activities. The trails offer access to those areas where it is appropriate for visitors to observe wildlife and engage in environmental education. Public access to the island is primarily associated with interpretation, environmental education, or a limited deer hunt program. The environmental education program will be offered to more students and for a longer duration (multi-day visits). Visitation by groups of 34 persons at a time may occur regularly during the spring and fall. With that, significant amounts of support equipment and supplies necessary for multi-day visits would be carried to and from the island on a regular basis. A means of transporting those materials would be beneficial. In addition, there is a need to provide special assistance mobility for visitors who cannot easily move along the trails, particularly the 2.5-mile loop trail connecting the Menenak Discovery Center area to the boardwalk. 7-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Old Remnant Barn Shed Old Milk Canoe/Kayak House Launch and Old Shed Blacksmith Old Tack Shop Boardwalk Shop Cemetery Menenak Discovery Center Storage Buildings Scenic Overlook Interpretive Area (Proposed) Tree Planting Area Observation Platform (Proposed) LEGEND Research Station Observation Platform Boat Dock Nature Trail Scenic Overlook Interpretive Area Canoe/Kayak Launch (Proposed) Refuge Boundary Marsh Boardwalk Proposed Trail Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Transportation Study FIGURE 7-1 Island Trail Extension Options 7-3 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge CHAPTER 7 Alternative Transportation Vehicle Options Light Cargo Vehicles Other than routine replacement of the existing tractor and truck, there does not appear to be any enhancements needed to the on- island transportation system to accommodate future needs for moving heavy equipment, mowers and materials. Given that most heavy materials would be trucked into the site, the pickup truck could be replaced by a low-speed electric work truck. The work trucks have a maximum speed of about 25 miles per hour (mph), and a range of 20 to 30 miles between charges. For Low-speed, electric-powered work trucks are expanded applications and ability to travel the sometimes steep available from several manufacturers. trails, four wheel drive or, at a minimum, tires with tread appropriate for dirt/grass trails may be required. Such vehicles use standard electrical infrastructure for charging and require little maintenance compared to a gas-powered vehicle. Costs are between $20,000 and $25,000. Passenger Vehicles The uplands area on the island is small and visitation among groups is anticipated to be less than 3,000 people a year. As such, a large passenger tram is unnecessary. The primary need for transporting passengers on the island is to provide special assistance mobility when necessary. Smaller passenger trams and utility vehicles can carry 2 to 12 passengers and some also have cargo capacity. Many are customized from golf carts and others are specialized utility trail vehicles (UTVs). However, the larger golf cart Customize golf carts are available with capacities of type vehicles may not be suitable at the Presquile NWR 6 to 12 persons. The extended wheelbase makes them since the extended wheelbase would likely become a unsuitable for use on the Presquile NWR trails. maintenance liability if the carts are operated on rugged, unimproved trails. A two or four-person vehicle, with the ability to carry some cargo, has some application for use at the refuge. Either customized electric utility vehicles or standard UTVs could be used. The UTVs are available in both gasoline and electric-powered versions. The electric powered UTVs would have a range of 15-20 miles between full charges. Costs are typically $10,000 to $15,000. This electric-powered utility vehicle can carry four passengers and cargo. 7-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge ON-ISLAND TRANSPORTATION UTVs are available in many configurations, including trailer packages. ADA Outdoor Wheel Chair As stated above, a primary need for transporting visitors on the island is to provide mobility assistance when necessary. Another means for providing mobility assistance is by providing an outdoor wheel chair for the mobility impaired. The chairs are rugged and designed to accommodate natural material paths, grass areas, sand beaches and somewhat rough terrain. This non-motorized option would only have applications for very short distances within and around the public use complex (Menenak Discovery Center, bunkhouse, and dock area). An electric powered version may offer more extended mobility. Given the length, rugged terrain and undulation of trails, the physical and mechanical demands placed on either option would likely be significant. Outdoor/Beach wheel chair for mobility impaired visitors U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 7-5 8 Potential Partners Over the years FWS staff at Presquile NWR and many local agencies, community groups and educational organizations have worked together to protect the refuge’s special habitat and to provide educational opportunities about wildlife conservation. The desire and need for those partnerships extends to transportation issues at the refuge as well. Within the scope of this transportation study, a broad range of potential partnerships and associations were considered and researched in order to provide assistance to the FWS in pursuing mutually beneficial working relationships. Potential partnerships include federal agencies for grant funding, establishing partnerships with environmental education groups, or leasing arrangements with private property owners or marina operators for using dock facilities and boat slips. James River Association The James River Association (JRA) is a member-supported nonprofit organization established in 1976 as the Lower James River Association by a group of concerned citizens living along the James River. In the 1990s the name was changed to the James River Association to reflect its involvement in conservation of the entire length of the James River. It is a leading voice in advocating for strong water quality policies at the state and local levels and through the Choose Clean Water Campaign at the federal level. JRA’s multi- level involvement in protecting the water quality of the James River extends from educating legislators to engaging Virginians in roadside and stream cleanups. The FWS has a long history of working with the James River Association since its establishment in 1976. The history, mission and work of the James River Association provide an understanding of the importance of the ongoing relationship between the FWS and the JRA. The mission of the James River Association is to be guardian of the James River and a voice for promoting conservation and responsible stewardship of its natural resources. JRA’s goals are achieved through four core programs: Watershed Restoration. JRA’s Watershed Restoration program covers habitat restoration, shoreline restoration and land conservation. These programs are advanced by active involvement of JRA volunteers and partnering organizations, as well as JRA staff working free-of-charge to provide solutions for individual landowners. Education and Outreach. JRA's Education & Outreach program provides outdoor and in-class educational experiences for youth. The goal is to relate environmental topics in a way that is meaningful as well as memorable. River Advocacy. The James River Association strives to provide a voice for the James River on important legal and policy issues. Through the Healthy Rivers Initiative, serving on legislative U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 8-1 CHAPTER 8 advisory boards, lobbying at the General Assembly, and bringing suit when necessary, JRA works to fight for the health of the James River. Riverkeeper Program. The James Riverkeeper Program employs full-time staff to maintain a constant vigil on the James River, monitor its conditions, identify problems and ensure that solutions are executed properly. In past years nearly 1,100 area students participated in classroom and on-the-river experiences led by JRA’s education manager and environmental educator. This educational outreach aligns with the FWS vision of a connected conservation constituency and Presquile NWR plays an important and growing part of the JRA education programs. In partnership with Presquile NWR, the Presquile Environmental Education Program (PEEP) is one of JRA’s leading educational programs. PEEP provides the opportunity for children and adults to experience nature through intensive overnight camping trips at Presquile NWR. Through a relationship with the Girl Scout Commonwealth Council, urban scouts have been an important constituency of those camping experiences. The FWS and JRA partnership was further strengthened in 2007 with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by the two organizations. The MOU states that through the sharing of resources, FWS and JRA would work together to create the James River Ecology School at Presquile NWR. The ecology school is an environmental education program that provides a hands-on approach to learning about nature. In addition to the diverse habitats of Presquile NWR, several facilities will help support the program. The Menenak Discovery Center serves as the staging area for groups before visiting the trails. The JRA Bunkhouse, once complete in winter 2012, will offer overnight accommodation for extended Ecology School visits. A wetland walkway and learning pavilion offers visitors unique connections with the outdoors. The ecology school represents the first program of its kind for students in the James River Watershed. Rendering of future JRA Bunkhouse Building 8-2 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge POTENTIAL PARTNERS JRA Bunkhouse Building Under Construction (July 2012) Due to the many educational programs conducted by the James River Association at the refuge, transporting school groups is of paramount importance. In order to meet the logistical needs of the Ecology School at Presquile NWR, JRA has recently placed an order to purchase a vessel to accommodate ecology school groups. The JRA Ecology School education boat is a Sightseer Marine pontoon boat which was evaluated in Chapter 5 (See photograph below). The JRA vessel meets the passenger needs of both JRA and FWS. With the acquisition of the passenger vessel by JRA, there come opportunities for JRA and FWS to expand their partnership to include the mutual use of the boat and cost-sharing strategies that are equitable and mutually beneficial to both organizations. JRA Boat-Sharing Partnership A boat-sharing partnership between the FWS and the James River Association could take several forms. Two potential partnership arrangements are considered below. FWS Boat Ownership In this partnership scenario, the FWS would own the pontoon boat and thus it would require that the JRA sell the boat to the FWS. This option could open the door for grant funding for the purchase of the boat. As discussed in more detail later in this chapter, a program (the Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks Program) that could have been used for the purchase of the boat was recently discontinued. Purchases of ferry boats providing access to a national wildlife refuge may be an eligible use for a new program, the Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP), but the program details have not yet been finalized. It is likely that any federal grant program would not provide funding for the operation and maintenance of transportation vehicles at Presquile NWR. Accordingly, in this scenario the funds obtained by the JRA from the sale of the boat to the FWS could be set aside to fund ongoing vessel operations, maintenance and berthing. FWS Use of JRA Boat In this partnership scenario, the ownership of the boat would continue to be by the JRA, but there would be an agreement executed in which the FWS would have authorization to use the boat for various programs and operational needs. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 8-3 CHAPTER 8 In exchange for using the boat, the FWS would agree to cover all expenses for each trip associated with FWS interests such as Ecology School programs and FWS sponsored interpretive programs. Total expenses would be a percentage of insurance, mooring fees, yearly maintenance, as well as per day cost for fuel and vessel operator. The total number of estimated trips for the upcoming year would calculated and funded, as available, from annual FWS station budgets. JRA Ecology School Boat Based on information provided by JRA, it is anticipated that the fixed cost per day for the vessel (based on 140 total operating days per year) would be approximately $138/day. The daily operating cost, including fuel and vessel operator, would be approximately $460/day (based on an 8-hour day). This equates to a cost to the FWS of approximately $598/day for the use of the JRA vessel. Requirement for USCG-licensed Captain The potential of sharing the use of the JRA boat has to take into account the need for having a US Coast Guard licensed captain operate the vessel when there are school groups or other “passengers for hire” onboard (as discussed in Chapter 5). When transporting “passengers for hire” a vessel captain with a “Master 100 Ton” license is required. This license is granted in increments of 50 gross tons (GT) up to 100 GT. The JRA vessel is well under 50GT and therefore would fall within this licensing category. When operating with “passengers for hire” the boat could be operated by a FWS or JRA staff member who holds a USCG license, or by a contracted licensed captain whose services are scheduled on an as- needed basis. When the boat is being operated strictly for JRA and FWS purposes and with no “passengers for hire” onboard, a licensed captain is not required. National Park Service A Memorandum of Understanding between the FWS and National Park Service (NPS) for coordination and collaboration on various efforts throughout the Chesapeake Bay was approved in October 2010. Among the efforts is advancement of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail by enhancing place-based interpretation and education, facilitating access to the river, and fostering conservation and restoration of resources in the Bay region. The FWS and NPS could explore opportunities to collaborate on mutually beneficial improvements to transportation facilities associated with the refuge, as well as interpretive media and educational programs. 8-4 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge POTENTIAL PARTNERS Marina Partners Operationally, for any FWS passenger vessel scenario, a close working relationship or partnership with a marina would be important and beneficial. Within the study area, two marinas were evaluated as potential locations for permanent passenger vessel berthing and operations. In order to secure a predictable and consistent level of service the FWS could enter into a partnership with the marina operator as outlined below. Jordan Point Marina Jordan Point Marina (JPM) was evaluated as to its location and services offered and the findings summarized briefly in Chapter 4. As a result of the marina offering a full range of marine services from slips, fuel, parking, boat ramp and onsite maintenance facility and storage space, there are several ways for the FWS to potentially establish a partnership with Jordan Point Marina. A working partnership arrangement with Jordan Point Marina could potentially take into consideration six basic components. During discussions with the JPM, they indicated some way that services offered by JPM could be combined within an agreement with other offered incentives and discounts for a package arrangement for services. The discussions regarding services offered were non-binding for planning and estimating purposes only. Below is a summary of potential agreement components. Slip Rental: A slip rental agreement could be executed on a year-by-year basis or a longer period of time such as up to 5 years. An appropriate slip would be selected based on the FWS vessel type and other operational needs. Fuel: With a slip rental agreement, JPM would offer a 10% discount for fuel. Parking: JPM would reserve parking spaces, estimated at up to 12 spaces, for JRA/FWS programs and events scheduled and coordinated in advance. Boat Ramp/Haul Out: Unlimited use of the boat ramp would be provided for JRA/FWS vessels at no cost to the FWS. Hauling out/putting in of vessels with the 25-ton travel lift would be based on a set fee negotiated as part of the agreement. Storage Shed: JPM would allow FWS to place a storage shed or storage container onsite in a secure location specified by JPM. Maintenance Services: Maintenance services needed by the FWS would have to be considered and negotiated accordingly as part of the overall agreement. Hopewell Marina The Hopewell Marina (HM) was evaluated as to its location and services offered and the findings were summarized in Chapter 4. The marina in closer to the refuge but offers relatively fewer services compared to the Jordan Point Marina. An agreement with Hopewell Marina for a boat slip could also take into consideration the following items. Slip Rental: A slip rental agreement could be executed on a year-by-year basis, or a longer period of time if desired. Parking: Reserving parking spaces would likely not be guaranteed at peak times; however requests for parking spaces could be made in advance and accommodated to the extent possible by Hopewell Marina. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 8-5 CHAPTER 8 Boat Ramp: Hopewell Marina indicated that unlimited use of the boat ramp by JRA/FWS would be provided at no cost to the FWS. Hopewell Marina cannot offer vessel haul-out, secure onsite storage or any maintenance services, but could also serve as a viable passenger pick-up location as it is the closest marine facility to the refuge. Heavy Equipment Vessel Options are described below for possible ways in which the FWS could obtain short-term vessel/barge services or vessel rental arrangements with a local marine contractor or other commercial shipping company to meet the needs for heavy equipment transportation to the Refuge. The options are discussed with regards to vessel service characteristics and operational requirements presented previously in Chapter 5. Vessel and Barge Services The FWS estimates that heavy equipment may need to be moved to and from the refuge approximately 12 times each year. An option for meeting this need could be to retain the services of a marine contractor with the vessel and crew meet the operational needs of the FWS as discussed in Chapter 5. The following are some items that would need to be addressed in the contractual agreement for the marine transportation services, but is not to be construed as a complete listing of contract elements or as legal guidance or advice. The FWS would have to consult with the agency’s contracting staff for developing and executing a legal contract with a vendor for marine transportation services. An agreement would cover a specified contract period of years in which the FWS would use the marine transportation services (vessel/barge services) of the contracted vendor on an on-call basis. The agreement would be based on an anticipated number of trips per year which is currently estimated at 12 times per year. An agreed upon day rate for the combined vessel, barge and crew would be established. In addition, there could be a prorating of partial days included. For example, a half day of service (up to 4-hours of service) could be established at a specified percentage of the full day rate (e.g., vessel operations up to 4 hours would be charged at the prorated rate and for service over four hours a full day rate would be charged). Overtime rates would also have to be determined and contractually established on, for example, an hourly rate. A full description and understanding by both parties of the process to follow for requesting service would have to be clearly stated. For example, the FWS would have to provide an advanced notice of a request for marine transport services in writing to the Contractor with the proposed date and time desired for the service to be performed. The Contractor would have to respond in writing in a certain amount of time, for example within 48 hours, with confirmation that the date and time requested by the FWS is acceptable or with an alternative date and time proposed for the service. The contract would likely also include consideration for an “emergency” or “urgent” request for service by the FWS. For example, if service is needed for something urgent such as for delivering fuel to the Refuge within a seven day period, then the compensation due to the contractor for the expedited service would be stated. 8-6 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge POTENTIAL PARTNERS The contract would have to state the required liability insurance coverage required by the contractor. Insurance coverage would have to be carefully considered in order to not unnecessarily restrict competition and the number of contractors able to bid on the service work. Consideration would also have to be considered as to what party or parties (the contractor, FWS or other) would cover insurance for the cargo being transported, whether it’s the FWS farm tractor, a dump truck loaded with aggregate, building materials or other cargo. The contract should consider the potential need for a fuel escalation clause. In the current economy of rising fuel costs, a rate adjustment for marine transportation services may be warranted due to increased fuel costs incurred by a vessel operator. Other items would also have to be specified such as the terms and conditions for billing of services, whether a minimum service fee per year would be established or whether an initial retainer would be established from which the initial services performed would be billed against. Heavy Equipment Terminal In Chapter 4, potential terminal sites with James River waterfront access were evaluated on the mainland for FWS vessels and operations. The evaluation included two sites capable of handling heavy equipment vessels and operations. These sites are the existing mainland ferry terminal and Port Weanack at Shirley Plantation. Potential partnering arrangements for this site are briefly summarized below: Mainland Ferry Terminal The existing mainland ferry terminal is connected to the property of Philip Morris USA and has been in service since the 1930s to provide transportation to the island. All required easements and agreements are in place for FWS to continue operating from this location; however for proposed improvements outside the FWS easement, such as parking, permission would have to be granted from Phillip Morris USA for construction of the improvements. Having a long-term arrangement to use the terminal property provides a vital asset for the operation of the Presquile NWR and should continue to be maintained. Port Weanack at Shirley Plantation Port Weanack provides a suitable alternative as a heavy equipment loading and unloading terminal. Use of the port by the FWS or its marine transportation contractor could be arranged on an as-needed basis or for a longer period of time with the stipulations of an agreement or contract executed in advance. Summary of Potential Grant Funding Until recently there were three federal grant programs that had been used for constructing water transportation facilities and obtaining vessels to support activities at federal land agency properties. They were the Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks Program, The Public Lands Highway Discretionary Program, and the Ferry Boat Discretionary Grant program. The new surface transportation legislation, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) has eliminated those programs and has established new ones. However, interpretation and guidance for the new programs have not yet been finalized and applicability to the project at Presquile NWR cannot yet be definitively determined. Following is a summary of the current and past grant programs. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 8-7 CHAPTER 8 Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks Program The Paul S. Sarbanes Transit in Parks Program (TRIP) has been eliminated under MAP-21.The program provided funding for alternative transportation systems, such as for ferry vessels, shuttle buses and bicycle trails. It was a popular grant program for the FWS. The program funding was limited (about $25 million annually) and highly competitive among all multimodal programs, but it was the most significant program for funding capital projects (vessels and docks) for FWS and other federal land management agencies. At the time the TRIP grant program was active, it was the most likely opportunity for potential funding for the Presquile NWR transportation improvements. Unlike many other transportation programs, TRIP was not consolidated into another MAP-21 funding program or replaced by a similar program. Public Lands Highways Discretionary (PLHD) Program The Public Lands Highways Discretionary Program has been consolidated under MAP-21 into other programs. The competitive grant program had provided funds for “any kind of transportation project eligible for assistance under Title 23, United States Code, that is within, adjacent to, or provides access to” Federal lands or facilities and for transportation planning, research, engineering, and construction of the highways, roads, and parkways, and of transit facilities within the Federal public lands. The PLHD funds were also available for operation and maintenance of transit facilities located on Federal public lands. These activities are now included as part of the new Federal Land Access Program and the Federal Lands Transportation Program and those programs may be applicable to the Presquile NWR project. The PLHD also provided funds for a list of specific projects, among them “adjacent vehicle parking areas” and “provision for pedestrians and bicycles. Those eligible projects, and others, are now included in a new Transportation Alternatives grant program, but the Transportation Alternatives program eligible activities do not specify water-based transportation such as the Presquile NWR project. Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities is a new formula program that replaces the similarly purposed Ferry Boat Discretionary (FBD) Grant Program. The likelihood of the Presquile NWR project receiving funding under the old FBD program was low and appears to be so under the new program. The legislative intent for the FBD was oriented to large, public ferry services rather than the small, restricted ferry service proposed for Presquile NWR. Nonetheless, there was a consistent history of grants to similar National Park Service ferry projects that carry visitors to island parks. Unfortunately, the grants to the NPS were made when the FBD program was almost wholly driven by congressional earmarks. The new Construction of Ferry Boats and Ferry Terminal Facilities program appears to further emphasize the priority of large, public ferry services. The old FBD legislation prioritized funding allocations to ferry service that “provide critical access to areas that are not well-served by other modes of surface transportation; carry the greatest number of passengers and vehicles; or carry the greatest number of passengers in passenger-only service." The new MAP-21 establishes a funding allocation based on the number of passengers carried, the number of vehicles carried, and route miles. Critical-access services, such as at Presquile NWR, are not specifically mentioned in the new legislation. 8-8 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge POTENTIAL PARTNERS Federal Lands Access Program and Federal Lands Transportation Program The Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) and the Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP) are new programs that provide funding for “a public highway, road, bridge, trail, or transit system that is located on, is adjacent to, or provides access to Federal lands.” The FLTP program applies to those facilities for which “title and maintenance responsibility is vested in the Federal government.” The FLAP program applies to those facilities for which “title and maintenance responsibility is vested in a State, county, town, township, tribal, municipal, or local government. Although the FLAP and FLTP legislation does not specifically mention water-based transportation, interpretations of past transportation program awards have sometimes included passenger ferry systems among eligible “transit” system activities. The FLTP program replaces several programs, including the Refuge Roads Program and parts of the Public Lands Highway Discretionary program. The FLTP provides $30 million annually to the FWS. This is a $1 million increase over the amount FWS received under the Refuge Roads Program. The FLAP program provides funds for projects that improve access to federal lands on infrastructure owned by states, counties, and local governments. The role of Federal Land Management Agencies in project and funding decisions is limited. The Federal Highway Administration, State DOT, and a local governmental representative from each State, which has yet to be determined, would make programming decisions in consultation with Federal agencies. A majority of the new program funds for access facilities will be dedicated to the 12 western states with the most federal land. Current funding levels provide $50 million to other states. The priority for awarding the limited Federal transportation funding focuses on roads or other transportation facilities that provides critical access to highly-visited Federal recreation areas and economic generators. This emphasis would likely result in a low ranking for the Presquile NWR transportation project. As the grant program is new in 2012, grant deadlines, application forms and funding processes have not been determined or created and additional information in unavailable at this time. Partnership Summary The following summarizes the above potential partnerships and agreements that could be executed in support of the Presquile NWR transportation needs. James River Association The strong partnership between FWS and JRA would continue to play an important role in meeting the transportation need of Presquile. With JRA’s recent purchase of a passenger vessel, there would be opportunities for expanding their partnership to include the mutual use of the boat and cost-sharing strategies that are equitable and mutually beneficial to both organizations. Any passenger vessel operation would have to take into account the need for a USCG licensed captain to operate the vessel when there are passengers for hire. Marina Partners In order to secure a predictable and consistent level of service for the FWS operation of a passenger vessel, a partnership with a marina operator would be beneficial. Of the two marinas evaluated in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 8-9 CHAPTER 8 vicinity of Presquile NWR, Jordan Point Marina offers more services and amenities than Hopewell Marina and the owner has indicated his interest in partnering with the FWS to meet their marine transportation needs. A working relationship with Jordan Point Marina would take into consideration, as a minimum, the six basic components discussed above. Heavy Equipment Vessel Services An option for meeting this need could be to retain the services of a marine contractor with the vessel and crew meet the operational needs of the FWS. An agreement would have to cover several contract items including a specified contract, a rate for the vessel and crew, scheduling service, including “emergency” service, required liability insurance coverage and insurance for the cargo being transported and the terms and conditions for billing. In addition, the contract should consider the potential need for a fuel escalation clause. Heavy Equipment Terminal The mainland ferry terminal site remains as a vital asset for the operation of the Presquile NWR and the relationship with Phillip Morris needs to be maintained. A suitable alternative for a heavy equipment terminal is Port Weanack which could provide a location for heavy equipment loading and unloading on an as-needed basis. Grant Funding The new MAP-21 programs, particularly the Federal Lands Access Program and the Construction of Ferry Boat and Ferry Terminal Facilities program, should be closely monitored by the FWS for the opportunity to submit a grant application for various proposed transportation improvements. The FWS is eligible for applying for funding and the types of transportation improvements needed at Presquile NWR may be eligible. Although it’s difficult to ascertain how Presquile NWR transportation projects would rank in a completive grant process, its unique setting (an island refuge) and transportation needs (need to replace a cable-operated ferry) may lead to favorable attention and potential funding. 8-10 Presquile National Wildlife Refuge $33(1',&(6 $ 352-(&70((7,1*6 WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐ͗ :ƵŶĞϭϲ͕ϮϬϭϭ • /ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶďLJLJƌƵƐƌĂŵĞ • ZĞĨƵŐĞĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŝŶϭϵϱϬƐ • DĂŝŶŝƐƐƵĞŝƐŐĞƚƚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ƐůĂŶĚ o 'ŽŽĚƚŚŝŶŐƚŽƉƌŽƚĞĐƚŚĂďŝƚĂƚ o /ƐƐƵĞŐĞƚƚŝŶŐĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵŝƐůĂŶĚ o ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĞĂǀLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚĨŽƌŝŶĨƌĂƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞŽŶŝƐůĂŶĚ o sŝƐŝƚŽƌͬĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƐŚĂǀĞŝƐƐƵĞƐŐĞƚƚŝŶŐƚŽŝƐůĂŶĚ o WƌŝǀĂƚĞďŽĂƚĞƌƐŚĂǀĞƚŽŐĞƚƉĞƌŵŝƚͬĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƚŽŐĞƚƚŽŝƐůĂŶĚ o ĂďůĞĨĞƌƌLJǁĂƐƵƐĞĚƚŽŐŽĂĐƌŽƐƐϳϬϬĨĞĞƚĂĐƌŽƐƐƚŚĞĐƵƚ;ŵĂŶŵĂĚĞĐƵƚƚŽŵĂŬĞŝƚŝŶƚŽ ŝƐůĂŶĚͿ ŽĂƐƚŐƵĂƌĚĚĞĞŵĞĚƵŶƐĂĨĞƚŽĐĂƌƌLJƉƵďůŝĐĂĐƌŽƐƐ ĂďůĞŝƐƚŚĞŵĂŝŶĐŽŶĐĞƌŶ͕ůĂLJƐŽŶďŽƚƚŽŵ ZƵŶďLJϭϵϱϬƐŚĞǀLJĞŶŐŝŶĞ • h^&t>ĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŽǁŶůĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚĞůĂƵŶĐŚŝŶŐĂƌĞĂ o WŚŝůůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐŽǁŶƐŝƚĂŶĚh^&t>ŽǁŶƐĂĐĐĞƐƐĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ • ^ŚĂůůŽǁĂƚŶŽƌƚŚĞƌŶĞŶĚŽĨƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ;ůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽϮŚŽƵƌƐďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶĚϮŚŽƵƌƐĂĨƚĞƌŚŝŐŚƚŝĚĞͿ • ϭϯϬϬĂĐƌĞŝƐůĂŶĚŝŶƐŝnjĞ • ŶĚLJ,ŽĨĨŵĂŶʹWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ĞĂĚĞƌ ĂƐƚĞƌŶ>ĂŶĚƐ o ^ƚĂƚŝŽŶĞĚŝŶtĂƌƐĂǁ͕s • DĞŐĂŶĂƌĨŝŽůŝʹEĂƚƵƌĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞWůĂŶŶĞƌ͕ĐŽŶƚĂĐƚŽƌEW^:K o >ŽĐĂůůĞĂĚĞƌĨŽƌW • ĂŵŝůůĞ o ^^ƚƵĚĞŶƚ;/ŶƚĞƌŶͿ • ĂŶŝĞů o :ƵŶŝŽƌĂƚdĞdžĂƐΘD o &ŝƐŚΘtŝůĚůŝĨĞDĂũŽƌ • &ƌĂŶnj'ŝŵŵůĞƌ o /ŶĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚ o EŽŶͲƌŽĂĚͬŶŽŶͲĐĂƌƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ o WƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŝƌĞĐƚƚĞĐŚŶŝĐĂůƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞ o ,ĞůƉĞĚLJƌƵƐǁŝƚŚ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŽĨtŽƌŬƚŽŐĞƚŚĞƌ • LJƌƵƐƌĂŵĞ o &t^WƵďůŝĐ>ĂŶĚƐDĂŶĂŐĞƌ • ^ĂĨĞŵĞĂŶƐƚŽŐĞƚƚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚŝƐƚŚĞŬĞLJ o EŽƚŚŝŶŐŝƐŽĨĨƚŚĞƚĂďůĞLJĞƚ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰƌĞƉŽƌƚƐͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŚĂƉƚͲϮWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϲ͘ϭϲ͘ϭϭ͘ĚŽĐ ϭ o ƵƌƌĞŶƚůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐŐĞƚƚŝŶŐŝŶĐƌĞĂƐŝŶŐůLJďƵƐLJǁŝƚŚďĂƌŐĞƐĂŶĚĐĂƌŐŽƐŚŝƉƐ o ZĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞƌƐĂƌĞĂůƐŽŝƐƐƵĞ o sĞƌLJŶĂƌƌŽǁĐƵƚďƵƚƚŚĞLJĂƌĞŶŽƚƐƚŽƉƉŝŶŐĂƚƚŚĞƌĞĨƵŐĞ o ŽŶĐĞƌŶŝƐƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚǁĂLJŝƐŶŽƚƚŚĞƐĂĨĞƐƚǁĂLJ o sŝƐŝŽŶŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƚŽůĂLJŽƵƚŚŽǁƚŽŵĂŶĂŐĞƚŚĞƌĞĨƵŐĞĨŽƌŶĞdžƚϭϱLJĞĂƌƐ o :ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶŝƐŐŽŝŶŐƚŽďĞŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚ;ŬĞLJƉĂƌƚŶĞƌͿ o ŚĞƐƚĞƌĨŝĞůĚŽƵŶƚLJWĂƌŬƐΘZĞĐ͘ĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ;ŬĞLJWĂƌƚŶĞƌͿ o <ĞLJŝƐƚŽŚĂǀĞǀĂƌŝŽƵƐŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŚĂƚŝƐǁŝƚŚŝŶďƵĚŐĞƚĂŶĚĚŽĂďůĞ ZĞŶƚĞĚĐƌĂĨƚǀƐ͘ďƵLJŝŶŐĐƌĂĨƚǀƐ͘ůŽĐĂůǀĞŶĚŽƌ >ĂƵŶĐŚŝŶŐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĂůƐŽĂŬĞLJ • EŽƚŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƚŽŚĂǀĞh^&t>ŽǁŶĞĚůĂƵŶĐŚ • KƚŚĞƌĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐĐŽƵůĚǁŽƌŬǁĞůů • ĂƉŝƚĂů>ĂŶĚŝŶŐdƌĂŝůĐŽƵůĚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĨƵŶĚŝŶŐĨŽƌĂůĂƵŶĐŚŽƌƐŽŵĞŽƚŚĞƌ o tŝĚĞƌĂŶŐĞŽĨŽƉƚŝŽŶƐ ŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂůůŽƉƚŝŽŶƐ;ŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞďŽdžŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚͿ ĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƉŽŝŶƚ;ŵĂŝŶůLJƚŽƉŽŝŶƚŽƵƚĨĂƚĂůĨůĂǁƐ͕ƵŶĨĞĂƐŝďůĞͿ dŚĞƌĞĂƌĞϯǁŝůĚůŝĨĞƌĞĨƵŐĞƐŝŶsŝƌŐŝŶŝĂ ZĞǀŝĞǁŽĨϭϮƉŽŝŶƚƐŝŶ^ĐŽƉĞ͗ • ϭ o WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJďƌŝŶŐŝŶŐŝŶůŽĐĂůĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐǁŚŽŚĂǀĞǁŽƌŬĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐĂƌĞĂ͕ƚŽďƌŝŶŐ͞ŶƵƚƐĂŶĚ ďŽůƚƐ͟ĂŶĚƌĞĂůŝƚLJŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ o WŚŝůůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐŝƐƵƉƚŽƐƉĞĞĚĂƚƚŚŝƐƉŽŝŶƚ͕ǁŝůůďĞǀĂůƵĂďůĞƚŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞŵŝŶƚŚĞůŽŽƉĂŶĚ ŐĞƚƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐĂƚĂůůƐƚĂŐĞƐ͕ĐŽƵůĚƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJĐŽŶƚƌŝďƵƚĞĨŽƌĨƵŶĚŝŶŐ ŽŵŝŶŝŽŶWŽǁĞƌ h^ŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚ >ŽĐĂůďŽĂƚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ;ůŽĐĂůŐƌŽƵƉŽƌĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶͿ ^ƚĂƌƚŵĂŬŝŶŐĐŽŶƚĂĐƚǁŝƚŚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ^ƚĂŬĞ,ŽůĚĞƌƐ o ϮϬƚƌŝƉƐĂLJĞĂƌĨŽƌŚĞĂǀLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚƵƐĞ;ǀĞƌLJĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞĂƚƚŚŝƐƐƚĂŐĞͿ o ,ĂƐďĞĞŶĨĂƌŵŝŶŐĐŽŵƉůĞdžĨŽƌϮϱϬLJĞĂƌƐ EĞĞĚƚŽĐůĞĂŶƵƉƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚƚŽŐĞƚĂůůŽĨĞdžĐĞƐƐĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚŽĨĨ o tŽƌŬƐŚŽƉŝƐƚŚĞŶĞdžƚďŝŐŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ;ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐηϮͿ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJĞŶĚŽĨ:ƵůLJ;ǁĞĞŬŽĨϮϱƚŚͿ o KďũĞĐƚŝǀĞΘDĞĂƐƵƌĞƐŽĨ ĨĨĞĐƚŝǀĞŶĞƐƐ;DĞĞƚŝŶŐηϯͿ ŚŽŽƐŝŶŐďLJĂĚǀĂŶƚĂŐĞƐ 'ĞƚƚŝŶŐŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŵĞĞƚƚŚĞŶĞĞĚƐŽĨƚŚĞƵƐĞƌƐ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰƌĞƉŽƌƚƐͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŚĂƉƚͲϮWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϲ͘ϭϲ͘ϭϭ͘ĚŽĐ Ϯ • ϮͲϴ;/ Ed/&z/E'd, Z Yh/Z D Ed^Ϳ o ĞĨŝŶŝŶŐƚŚĞŶĞĞĚ ^ĂĨĞƚLJ;ĞdžŝƚŝŶŐŝƐŶŽƚͿ /ŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚƐŝnjĞŽĨǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ;ĞĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚůLJĐĂƌƌLJƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽŝƐůĂŶĚͿ • ƵƌƌĞŶƚůŝŵŝƚŝƐϭϲƉĞŽƉůĞ • tŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽĚŽƵďůĞƚŚĂƚƚŽƵƉƚŽϯϱƉĞŽƉůĞĂƚĂƚŝŵĞ 'ƌĞĞŶǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚďƵƚĂďůĞƚŽŚĂŶĚůĞǁĞĂƚŚĞƌĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƚŝĚĂůĨůŽǁƐ • sŝƌŐŝŶŝĂtŝůĚůŝĨĞDĂŐĂnjŝŶĞĂƌƚŝĐůĞ • ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞĨƵĞůƐ • ^ŽůĂƌ • ϰƐƚƌŽŬĞǀƐϮƐƚƌŽŬĞ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJŚĂŶĚůĞůŽŶŐĞƌƚƌŝƉƐ͕ƚŝĞŝŶƚŽĂŵĂƌŝŶĂ DĂŝŶŐŽĂůŝƐƚŽŐŽĨƌŽŵWŽŝŶƚƚŽWŽŝŶƚ >ĂƵŶĐŚĨƌŽŵĂůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŝƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂŶĚůĂŶĚĂƚĂŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ • DĂŶƉŽǁĞƌĞĚǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚĂĐĐĞƐƐ • <ĂLJĂŬͬĐĂŶŽĞĂĐĐĞƐƐ • ĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚdƌĂŝůŝƐůŽŽŬŝŶŐŝŶƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐŝŶŐWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞƵƐŝŶŐĂŶŽĞ ;:ŽŚŶĂǀLJ͕:ŽŶĂƚŚĂŶŽƌĞƚŚLJʹ:ƵůLJϭϵŝƐƚŚĞŶĞdžƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůŝŵŝƚŽĨŚŽǁŵĂŶLJƉĞŽƉůĞĂƌĞĂůůŽǁĞĚĂƚƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ • ZĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶŽŶůLJ • WƌĞƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ • EŽŶĞĞĚƚŽŵĂŬĞŝƚĂĨƵůůƉƵďůŝĐƉĂƌŬ ŽĂƌĚǁĂůŬŚĂƐďĞĞŶĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚ • ĐĂŶŽĞͬŬĂLJĂŬůĂƵŶĐŚŚĂƐďĞĞŶŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚ /ĚĞĂůůLJŶŽŵŽƚŽƌŝnjĞĚǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐĂůůŽǁĞĚŝŶƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌƐƚƌĞĂŵƐďƵƚŝƚŝƐƐƚĂƚĞ ŽǁŶĞĚƐƚƌĞĂŵƐĂŶĚƉĂƌŬĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĐŽŶƚƌŽůŝƚ • DĂŬĞƐƵƌĞƐŝŐŶƐĚŽŶŽƚĞŶĐŽƵƌĂŐĞŵŽƚŽƌŝnjĞĚĐƌĂĨƚ o ǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐ tĂůŬŝŶŐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ůŽƚŽĨŽŶŐƌŽƵŶĚƐƚƵĚLJ o WĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ dŝĚĞƐ tŝŶĚƐ dŝŵĞŽĨLJĞĂƌʹƐƉƌŝŶŐĂŶĚĨĂůůĂƌĞƚŚĞďĞƐƚƚŝŵĞƐ͕ǁŝŶƚĞƌŝƐŶŽƚŽƉƚŝŽŶďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨ ĨĂůůŝŶŐŝŶƚŽǁĂƚĞƌ͕ƐƵŵŵĞƌŵĂLJďĞŽŬŝĨƚŚĞĐƌĂĨƚŝƐƐŚĂĚĞĚ͕ŐĞƚƐƚŽŽŚŽƚ džŝƐƚŝŶŐƉŽŶƚŽŽŶďŽĂƚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĂůůLJĐŽǀĞƌĞĚ ƵƐŝĞƐƚƚŝŵĞŝƐƐƉƌŝŶŐĂŶĚĨĂůůĨŽƌŝŶƚĞƌŶĂůƐƚĂĨĨĨŽƌƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƐ • ^ƚĂĨĨƵƐĞƐũŽŚŶďŽĂƚƚŽŐĞƚƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƐŝƚĞ • EƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚƌŝƉƐĨŽƌŚĂďŝƚĂƚ͕ŵĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůƌĞƉĂŝƌƐ͕ŚĂƵůŝŶŐĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ o ƌĂĨƚĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐĨŽƌWǁŝůůďĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞŝŶ^ƉƌŝŶŐ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰƌĞƉŽƌƚƐͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŚĂƉƚͲϮWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϲ͘ϭϲ͘ϭϭ͘ĚŽĐ ϯ ,ĞĂǀLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚĐƌĂĨƚŝƐƚŚĞŽŶůLJƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůŝƐƐƵĞ o WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůĂŶĚƐŝĚĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƉŽŝŶƚƐ dƵƌŬĞLJƌĞĞŬ͕ŶŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚĐŽƌŶĞƌŽĨƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ;ŽĨĨŽĨZŽƵƚĞϱͿʹƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJ ůĂƵŶĐŚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚdƌĂŝůʹƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĂƌĞĂŝƐĂŶŝƐƐƵĞ͕ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐ ΕϱǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐŽŶƉƌŝǀĂƚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ • WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĐŽŵďŝŶĞĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĨŽƌĂƉŝƚĂůƚŽĂƉŝƚĂůƚƌĂŝůĂŶĚĐĂŶŽĞůĂƵŶĐŚ ƌŽǁŶΘtŝůůŝĂŵƐŽŶWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŵĂŶĂŐĞĚďLJŚĞƐƚĞƌĨŝĞůĚŽƵŶƚLJ ,ŽƉĞǁĞůůDĂƌŝŶĂ :ŽƌĚĂŶWŽŝŶƚDĂƌŝŶĂ o tŽƵůĚůŝŬĞƚŽŐĞƚŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƐƚŽƚĂůŬĂďŽƵƚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐǀĞƐƐĞůƐΘƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ o &ŽƌŵƵůĂƚĞΘ ǀĂůƵĂƚĞƚŚĞůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨŶĞĞĚ ϱŽƉƚŝŽŶƐ;ůŽƚǁŝůůďĞǀĂƌŝĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨŽƚŚĞƌƐͿ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůŽĨƐŚĂƌŝŶŐĂǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚǁŝƚŚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐŽƚŚĞƌĨŽƵŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͍͍͍ • WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůƉĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉƚŽƐŚĂƌĞĐŽƐƚ • WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞƵƐĞŽĨǀĞƐƐĞůƐ • EĞĞĚƚŽůŽŽŬĂƚůĂƌŐĞƌĨŽĐĂůĂƌĞĂ;:ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌZĞĨƵŐĞƚŽƵƚĐŚ'ĂƉͿ o ^ƵƉƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂůdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ^LJƐƚĞŵ ĂƚĂůŽŐĂŶĚĂƌĐŚŝǀĞĞǀĞƌLJƚŚŝŶŐĨŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĨƵƚƵƌĞ o KŶ/ƐůĂŶĚƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ^ƚŽƌLJůŝŶĞĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚŝǀĞƉƌŽŐƌĂŵ LJƌƵƐĚŽĞƐŶŽƚƐĞĞƚŚŝƐĂƐďĞŝŶŐĂůĂƌŐĞĨŽĐƵƐŽĨƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ EŽƚŐŽŝŶŐƚŽŚĂǀĞďƵƐŽŶŝƐůĂŶĚƚŽĚƌŝǀĞƉĞŽƉůĞĂƌŽƵŶĚ ŚĂƌŐĞĂďůĞŐŽůĨĐĂƌƚ ^ŚĞůƚĞƌƐĨŽƌǁĂŝƚŝŶŐ͕ĞƚĐ͘ ƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJϴͲϭϬĐĂŶŽĞƐŽŶƐŝƚĞ ĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚŽΕϭϱĐĂŶŽĞƐ o /ŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚŝǀĞ^ƚŽƌLJ ĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚdƌĂŝů WƌŽǀŝĚĞŐƌĂƉŚŝĐƐĨŽƌďŽĂƌĚͬďƌŽĐŚƵƌĞƐ o ĞůŝǀĞƌĂďůĞ ϮĨŝŶĂůĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐ ϯͲϰĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌĞĂĐŚŽƉƚŝŽŶ • hŶĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĞŶƚƌLJƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚĞĚƚŽŝƐůĂŶĚ o ^ŽŵĞŽŶĞǁŝƚŚŽǁŶĐƌĂĨƚĐĂŶĂĐĐĞƐƐŝĨƚŚĞLJŚĂǀĞƉĞƌŵŝƚ o WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŶĞĞĚƐƚŽůŽŽŬĂƚĂǁĂLJƚŽƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚ͞ƌĂŶĚŽŵ͟ƉĞŽƉůĞƚŽĞŶƚĞƌƚŚĞƌĞĨƵŐĞ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰƌĞƉŽƌƚƐͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŚĂƉƚͲϮWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϲ͘ϭϲ͘ϭϭ͘ĚŽĐ ϰ o WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJƉůĂĐĞĂƐŝŐŶ͞ZĞƐĞƌǀĞĚĨŽƌŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚ͟ o WƌŽǀŝĚĞƐŝŐŶƚŚĂƚƚĞůůƐƚƌĂǀĞůĞƌŚŽǁƚŚĞLJĐĂŶĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚǀƐ͘ƐĂLJŝŶŐEKdĂůůŽǁĞĚ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰƌĞƉŽƌƚƐͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžͰƉƉĞŶĚŝdžŚĂƉƚͲϮWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϲ͘ϭϲ͘ϭϭ͘ĚŽĐ ϱ .,&.2))0((7,1* 6,*1,16+((7 'DWH 7KXUVGD\-XQH $0 3URMHFW 3UHVTXLOH1DWLRQDO:LOGOLIH5HIXJH 1DPH &RPSDQ\ 3KRQH1XPEHU (PDLO 7LP+RJDQ 9+% 2 7+RJDQ#YKEFRP & 1HYLOOH5H\QROGV 9+% 2 55H\QROGV#YKEFRP & &KULV)U\H 9+% 2 &)U\H#YKEFRP & 9LN'HVDL 9+% 9'HVDL#YKEFRP &\UXV%UDPH 86):6 &\UXVB%UDPH#IZVJRY 0HJKDQ&DUILROL 86):6 0HJKDQB&DUILROL#IZVJRY $QG\+RIPDQQ 86):6 $QG\B+RIPDQQ#IZVJRY )UDQ]*LPPOHU 75,37$& IUDQ]J#L[QHWFRPFRP 'DQLHO/D\ 86):6&6$ WO\VRFFHU#WDPXHGX &DPLOOH6LPV 86):6&6$ &DPLOOHVLPV#PVQFRP WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůtŝůĚůŝĨĞZĞĨƵŐĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐĂŶĚtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉ :ƵůLJϮϳĂŶĚϮϴ͕ϮϬϭϭ ' E tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ͕:ƵůLJϮϳ͕ϮϬϭϭͲdKhZK&Z &h' ϭϬ͗ϬϬ &t^KĨĨŝĐĞ ϭϭϭϭϲ<ŝŵĂŐĞƐZŽĂĚ ŚĂƌůĞƐŝƚLJŽƵŶƚLJ͕sϮϯϬϯϬͲϮϴϰϰ ;ϴϬϰͿϴϮϵͲϵϬϮϬ ;ϴϬϰͿϴϮϵͲϵϲϬϲĨĂdž • /ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨ&t^^ƚĂĨĨ;ďLJLJƌƵƐƌĂŵĞͿ LJƌƵƐƌĂŵĞ͕KŶͲƐŝƚĞDĂŶĂŐĞƌ͕ ĂƐƚĞƌŶsZŝǀĞƌƐEtZŽŵƉůĞdž DĞŐĂŶĂƌĨŝŽůŝ͕EĂƚƵƌĂůZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞWůĂŶŶĞƌ͕ ĂƐƚĞƌŶsZŝǀĞƌƐEtZŽŵƉůĞdž ŶĚLJ,ŽĨĨŵĂŶ͕WƌŽũĞĐƚ>ĞĂĚĞƌ͕ ĂƐƚĞƌŶsZŝǀĞƌƐEtZŽŵƉůĞdž ŝůů^ƚƌĞĞƚ͕ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͕:ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ 'ĂďĞ^ŝůǀĞƌ͕ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů ĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚŽƌ͕:ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ • /ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶŽĨŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐdĞĂŵ;ďLJdŝŵ,ŽŐĂŶͿ DĂŶĚŝZŽďĞƌƚƐ͕Kd<ͲWƌŝŵĞŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚŽŶƚƌĂĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌ dŝŵ,ŽŐĂŶ͕s,WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌ EĞǀŝůůĞZĞLJŶŽůĚƐ͕s, ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůdĂƐŬDĂŶĂŐĞƌ͕s,KĨĨŝĐĞDĂŶĂŐĞƌ ŚƌŝƐ&ƌLJĞ͕s, ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů^ĐŝĞŶƚŝƐƚĂŶĚWĞƌŵŝƚƚŝŶŐ^ƉĞĐŝĂůŝƐƚ ŝůůƌĂŶƐŚĂǁ͕s,dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŶĞƌ sŝŬĞƐĂŝ͕s,WƌŽũĞĐƚ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌ Z &h' <'ZKhE;ďLJ͘ƌĂŵĞͿ • ZĞĨƵŐĞĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚĞĚŝŶϭϵϱϯ͕ϭϯϮϵĂĐƌĞŝƐůĂŶĚŝŶƐŝnjĞ͘ƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJϭϯǁŝůĚůŝĨĞƌĞĨƵŐĞƐŝŶs • DĂŝŶŝƐƐƵĞŝƐŐĞƚƚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/ƐůĂŶĚƐĂĨĞůLJ ŝĨĨŝĐƵůƚĂĐĐĞƐƐŚĂƐƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚŚĂďŝƚĂƚ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞƐŚĞĂǀLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵŝƐůĂŶĚ sŝƐŝƚŽƌƐΘĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂůƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƉĂƌƚŝĐŝƉĂŶƚƐ WƌŝǀĂƚĞďŽĂƚĞƌƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞĂƉĞƌŵŝƚͬƉƌĞͲĂƉƉƌŽǀĂů ĂďůĞĨĞƌƌLJĂĐƌŽƐƐŵĂŶŵĂĚĞĐƵƚƚŽƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ ŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĨĞƌƌLJŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƵŶƐĂĨĞĨŽƌƉƵďůŝĐ ĂďůĞŝƐŵĂŝŶĐŽŶĐĞƌŶ͕;ůĂLJƐŽŶďŽƚƚŽŵ͕ďƌĞĂŬƐͿ h^&t^ĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŽǁŶĨĞƌƌLJƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůůĂŶĚ;WŚŝůůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐͲŽǁŶĞƌ͕h^&t^ŚĂƐĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚͿ • ^ŚĂůůŽǁĂƚŶŽƌƚŚĞƌŶĞŶĚŽĨƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ;ůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽϮŚŽƵƌƐďĞĨŽƌĞĂŶĚϮŚŽƵƌƐĂĨƚĞƌŚŝŐŚƚŝĚĞͿ • >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞĨĞƌƌLJƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůƐĂŶĚƌŽƵƚĞŝƐŝŶĐƌĞĂƐŝŶŐůLJďƵƐLJǁŝƚŚƚƵŐƐͬďĂƌŐĞƐ͕ĐĂƌŐŽƐŚŝƉƐĂŶĚ ƌĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶĂůǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰtKZ<^,KWϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞdĞĂŵ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭ͘ĚŽĐdž WĂŐĞͮϭ WͲ&ŝĨƚĞĞŶLJĞĂƌǀŝƐŝŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJďĞŝŶŐƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚ :ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĂŬĞLJƉĂƌƚŶĞƌŝŶƚŚĞƐƚƵĚLJƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŚĞƐƚĞƌĨŝĞůĚŽƵŶƚLJWĂƌŬƐΘZĞĐ͘ĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ͕EW^͕ĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌƐ;ƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůƉĂƌƚŶĞƌƐͿ <ĞLJŝƐƚŽŚĂǀĞǀĂƌŝŽƵƐƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŚĂƚĂƌĞĨĞĂƐŝďůĞĂŶĚǁŝƚŚŝŶďƵĚŐĞƚ ZĞŶƚĞĚĐƌĂĨƚǀƐ͘ďƵLJŝŶŐĐƌĂĨƚǀƐ͘ůŽĐĂůǀĞŶĚŽƌ >ĂƵŶĐŚŝŶŐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĂůƐŽĂŬĞLJ ϭϬ͗ϯϬ ZĞǀŝĞǁŽĨϭϮ/ƚĞŵƐŽĨƚŚĞWƌŽũĞĐƚ^ĐŽƉĞŽĨtŽƌŬ ϭ͘ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚ^ƚĞĞƌŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ Ϯ͘ ĞĨŝŶĞƚŚĞEĞĞĚ ϯ͘ ǀĂůƵĂƚĞ džŝƐƚŝŶŐdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶƐƐĞƚƐ ϰ͘ ǀĂůƵĂƚĞ džŝƐƚŝŶŐdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞ ϱ͘ ƐƐĞƐƐDĂŝŶůĂŶĚWƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐͬ^ŝƚĞƐ ϲ͘ ZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚWĞƌƐŽŶĂůtĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ ϳ͘ ZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚ,ĞĂǀLJ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚtĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ ϴ͘ ZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚWŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůWĂƌƚŶĞƌƐ ϵ͘ WƌŽƉŽƐĞϱůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶKƉƚŝŽŶƐ ϭϬ͘KŶͲ/ƐůĂŶĚdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ϭϭ͘/ŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚŝǀĞ^ƚŽƌLJ>ŝŶĞ ϭϮ͘ZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚϮ&ŝŶĂůWƌĞĨĞƌƌĞĚůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐ;&ŝŶĂůWƌĞĨĞƌƌĞĚůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐDĞĞƚŝŶŐĂŶĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶͲ ŵĂŬŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉ͕ŚŽŽƐŝŶŐLJĚǀĂŶƚĂŐĞƐ;DĞĞƚŝŶŐηϯ͕KĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϭͿ &ŝŶĂůĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶĂŶĚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐǁƌĂƉͲƵƉ͘DĞĞƚŝŶŐĂĚũŽƵƌŶĞĚ͘ ϭϭ͗ϬϬ ĞƉĂƌƚ&t^KĨĨŝĐĞ͕ŚĂǀĞůƵŶĐŚŝŶ,ŽƉĞǁĞůůŽŶƚŚĞǁĂLJƚŽ&ĞƌƌLJĚĞƉĂƌƚƵƌĞƉŽŝŶƚ;WŚŝůůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJͿ ϭϮ͗ϯϬ DĞĞƚĂƚ&ĞƌƌLJ͘^ŝƚĞĂŶĚĨĞƌƌLJǀĞƐƐĞůŝŶƐƉĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƉŚŽƚŽĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶ͘ ϭ͗ϬϬ ŽĂƌĚƉŽŶƚŽŽŶďŽĂƚĨŽƌƚŽƵƌĂƌŽƵŶĚĂŶĚŽĨƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ͘;ƌŝŶŐƐƵŶƐĐƌĞĞŶ͕ǁĂƚĞƌ͕ŚĂƚĞƚĐ͘ŝŶ ƉƌĞƉĂƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌĂĨƚĞƌŶŽŽŶŝŶƚŚĞƐƵŶͿ ϯ͗ϯϬ ZĞƚƵƌŶƚŽŵĂŝŶůĂŶĚ͕ĨŝŶĂůŐƌŽƵƉĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶͬǁƌĂƉͲƵƉ͘ ĚũŽƵƌŶĨŽƌĚĂLJ͘ dŚƵƌƐĚĂLJ͕:ƵůLJϮϴ͕ϮϬϭϭͲWƌŽũĞĐƚtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉ ϵ͗ϬϬʹϰ͗ϬϬs,tŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐKĨĨŝĐĞ ϯϱϭDĐ>ĂǁƐŝƌĐůĞ͕^ƵŝƚĞϯ tŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐ͕sϮϯϭϴϱ ;ϳϱϳͿϮϮϬͲϬϱϬϬ ϵ͗ϬϬ t >KD EWZKDWd^dZdK&tKZ<^,KW W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰtKZ<^,KWϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞdĞĂŵ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭ͘ĚŽĐdž WĂŐĞͮϮ Z s/ tĂŶĚ/^h^^/KEK&^KW E >/s Z> ^ /ƚĞŵϭ͘ ƐƚĂďůŝƐŚ^ƚĞĞƌŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJŚĂǀĞĂůŽĐĂůĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌǁŚŽŚĂƐǁŽƌŬĞĚůŽĐĂůůLJͬĂƚƚŚĞƌĞĨƵŐĞ WŚŝůůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐŝƐƵƉƚŽĚĂƚĞŽŶƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚǁŝůůďĞǀĂůƵĂďůĞƚŽŬĞĞƉƚŚĞŵŝŶƚŚĞůŽŽƉ ĂŶĚŐĞƚƚŚĞŝƌĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐĂƚĂůůƐƚĂŐĞƐ͕ ŽŵŝŶŝŽŶWŽǁĞƌ h͘^͘ŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚ >ŽĐĂůďŽĂƚŝŶŐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ;ůŽĐĂůŐƌŽƵƉŽƌĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶͿ ^ƚĂƌƚŵĂŬŝŶŐĐŽŶƚĂĐƚǁŝƚŚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ^ƚĂŬĞ,ŽůĚĞƌƐ :ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͕ŚĞƐƚĞƌĨŝĞůĚWΘZ͕ŝƚLJŽĨ,ŽƉĞǁĞůů͕EW^ /ƚĞŵƐϮͲϴ͘ / Ed/&z/E'd, Z Yh/Z D Ed^ ϵ͗ϰϬ Ϯ͘ĞĨŝŶĞƚŚĞEĞĞĚ DĂŝŶŐŽĂůŝƐƚŽŐŽƐĂĨĞůLJƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ ^ĂĨĞƚLJŝƐƐƵĞƐĂŶĚƐĂĨĞƚLJŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ /ŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƐŝnjĞŽĨǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ͕ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůŝŵŝƚŝƐϭϲƉĞŽƉůĞ͕ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƚŽĚŽƵďůĞƚŽϯϱ ͞'ƌĞĞŶ͟ǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƐ • ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞĨƵĞůƐĂŶĚƐŽůĂƌƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐŝĞƐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚ • ŝĞƐĞů͕ϰͲƐƚƌŽŬĞ͕ϮͲƐƚƌŽŬĞŵĂƌŝŶĞĞŶŐŝŶĞƐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJŚĂŶĚůĞůŽŶŐĞƌƚƌŝƉƐ͕Ğ͘Ő͘ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚƚŽĂŵĂƌŝŶĂͬůŽĐĂůĂƚƚƌĂĐƚŝŽŶƐ >ĂƵŶĐŚĨƌŽŵĂůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŝƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞĂŶĚůĂŶĚĂƚĂŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ • <ĂLJĂŬͬĐĂŶŽĞĂĐĐĞƐƐ;ŵĂŶͲƉŽǁĞƌĞĚͿ • ĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚdƌĂŝůŝƐůŽŽŬŝŶŐŝŶƚŽĂĐĐĞƐƐŝŶŐWƌĞƐƋƵŝůůĞƵƐŝŶŐĐĂŶŽĞ ;:ŽŚŶĂǀLJ͕:ŽŚŶĂƚŚĂŶŽŚƌĞƚŚLJʹ:ƵůLJϭϵŵŽƐƚƌĞĐĞŶƚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ • /ĚĞĂůůLJŶŽŵŽƚŽƌŝnjĞĚǀĞƐƐĞůƐĂůůŽǁĞĚŝŶƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌƐƚƌĞĂŵƐ;ƐƚĂƚĞ ŽǁŶĞĚƐƚƌĞĂŵƐ͕ƌĞĨƵŐĞĚŽĞƐŶŽƚŚĂǀĞĐŽŶƚƌŽůͿ͕ƐŝŐŶƐƐŚŽƵůĚŶŽƚ ĞŶĐŽƵƌĂŐĞŵŽƚŽƌŝnjĞĚĐƌĂĨƚ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůWĞƌŵŝƚƚŝŶŐZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌ/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ ϭϬ͗ϭϱZ <Ͳ^ŝĚĞďĂƌĐŽŶǀĞƌƐĂƚŝŽŶƐ ϭϬ͗ϯϬ ϯ͘ ǀĂůƵĂƚĞ džŝƐƚŝŶŐdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶƐƐĞƚƐ &ĞƌƌLJǀĞƐƐĞůĂŶĚƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůƐ ŽĐŬƐ͕ĂĐĐĞƐƐƌŽƵƚĞƐͬƉĂƚŚƐƚŽĚŽĐŬƐ KǀĞƌĂůůǁĂůŬͲƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽĨƐŝƚĞ ϭϭ͗ϬϬ ϰ͘ ǀĂůƵĂƚĞ džŝƐƚŝŶŐdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĐĞ dŝĚĞƐ͕tŝŶĚƐ dŝŵĞŽĨLJĞĂƌʹƐƉƌŝŶŐĂŶĚĨĂůůďĞƐƚ͕ƐƵŵŵĞƌŽŬƐŚĂĚĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ džŝƐƚŝŶŐƉŽŶƚŽŽŶďŽĂƚŝƐƉĂƌƚŝĂůůLJĐŽǀĞƌĞĚ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰtKZ<^,KWϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞdĞĂŵ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭ͘ĚŽĐdž WĂŐĞͮϯ ƵƐŝĞƐƚƚŝŵĞŝƐƐƉƌŝŶŐĂŶĚĨĂůůĨŽƌŝŶƚĞƌŶĂůƐƚĂĨĨĨŽƌƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƐ͕^ƚĂĨĨƵƐĞƐũŽŚŶďŽĂƚ ƚŽŐĞƚƚŽͬĨƌŽŵŝƐůĂŶĚ͕ EƵŵĞƌŽƵƐƚƌŝƉƐĨŽƌŚĂďŝƚĂƚ͕ŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞ͕ĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐ hŶĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĞŶƚƌLJƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚĞĚƚŽŝƐůĂŶĚ͕ƉƌŝǀĂƚĞĐƌĂĨƚĐĂŶĂĐĐĞƐƐŝƐůĂŶĚǁŝƚŚ ƉĞƌŵŝƚͬĂĚǀĂŶĐĞĚƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ ŽŶƐŝĚĞƌŚŽǁƚŽĚŝƐĐŽƵƌĂŐĞͬƉƌŽŚŝďŝƚƵŶĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚƉĞŽƉůĞĨƌŽŵĞŶƚĞƌŝŶŐƌĞĨƵŐĞ ŽŶƐŝĚĞƌƐŝŐŶĂŐĞĞ͘Ő͘͞ZĞƐĞƌǀĞĚĨŽƌŽĂƐƚ'ƵĂƌĚ͟ WƌŽǀŝĚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐŝŐŶƐƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐĂĐĐĞƐƐƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚǀƐ͘ƐĂLJŝŶŐEKdĂůůŽǁĞĚ ϭϭ͗ϯϬ ϱ͘ƐƐĞƐƐWŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůDĂŝŶůĂŶĚWƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐͬ^ŝƚĞƐĨŽƌĐĐĞƐƐWŽŝŶƚƐ dƵƌŬĞLJƌĞĞŬ͕ŽĨĨZŽƵƚĞϱʹƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJůĂƵŶĐŚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚďLJĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚ dƌĂŝůʹƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĂƌĞĂŝƐĂŶŝƐƐƵĞ͕ĂůůŽǁŝŶŐΕϱǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐŽŶƉƌŝǀĂƚĞƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJĐŽŵďŝŶĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĨŽƌĂƉŝƚĂůƚŽĂƉŝƚĂůƚƌĂŝůĂŶĚĐĂŶŽĞůĂƵŶĐŚ ƌŽǁŶΘtŝůůŝĂŵƐŽŶWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŵĂŶĂŐĞĚďLJŚĞƐƚĞƌĨŝĞůĚŽƵŶƚLJ ,ŽƉĞǁĞůůDĂƌŝŶĂ :ŽƌĚĂŶWŽŝŶƚDĂƌŝŶĂ ϭϮ͗ϬϬtKZhE, ϭ͗ϬϬ ϲ͘ϬZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚWĞƌƐŽŶĂůtĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ ŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨŶĞĞĚ ZĞǀŝĞǁĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐƚLJƉĞƐ͕ƐŝnjĞƐ͕ƉƌŽƉƵůƐŝŽŶ ŽĐŬĂŐĞŶĞĞĚƐĂŶĚůĂLJŽƵƚƐ h^'ĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƐĨŽƌǀĞƐƐĞůŝŶƉƵƚ ϳ͘ϬZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚ,ĞĂǀLJ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚtĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚ ŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨŶĞĞĚ ZĞǀŝĞǁĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐƚLJƉĞƐ͕ƐŝnjĞƐ͕ƉƌŽƉƵůƐŝŽŶ ŽĐŬĂŐĞŶĞĞĚƐĂŶĚůĂLJŽƵƚƐ h^'ĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƐĨŽƌǀĞƐƐĞůŝŶƉƵƚ ϴ͘ϬZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚWŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůWĂƌƚŶĞƌƐ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůŽĨƐŚĂƌŝŶŐĂǁĂƚĞƌĐƌĂĨƚǁŝƚŚǀĂƌŝŽƵƐŽƚŚĞƌ ĨŽƵŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐͬŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶƐͬĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐ • WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůƉĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉƚŽƐŚĂƌĞĐŽƐƚ • WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĂďŝůŝƚLJƚŽƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞƵƐĞŽĨǀĞƐƐĞůƐ • EĞĞĚƚŽůŽŽŬĂƚůĂƌŐĞƌĨŽĐĂůĂƌĞĂ;:ĂŵĞƐZŝǀĞƌZĞĨƵŐĞƚŽƵƚĐŚ'ĂƉͿ Ϯ͗ϬϬ Z <Ͳ^ŝĚĞďĂƌĐŽŶǀĞƌƐĂƚŝŽŶƐ Ϯ͗ϭϱ /ƚĞŵϵ͘ WZKWK^ ϱ>d ZEd/s dZE^WKZdd/KEKWd/KE^ ĞǀĞůŽƉůƚ͘dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶKƉƚŝŽŶƐ ĂƚĂůŽŐĂŶĚĂƌĐŚŝǀĞĞǀĞƌLJƚŚŝŶŐĨŽƌƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĨƵƚƵƌĞ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰtKZ<^,KWϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞdĞĂŵ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭ͘ĚŽĐdž WĂŐĞͮϰ Ϯ͗ϯϬ /ƚĞŵϭϬ͘ KEͲ/^>EdZE^WKZdd/KE ^ƚŽƌLJůŝŶĞĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚŝǀĞƉƌŽŐƌĂŵ͕ŶŽƚĂůĂƌŐĞĨŽĐƵƐŽĨƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ďƵƚŝŶƚĞŐƌĂůƚŽŝƚ EŽƚŐŽŝŶŐƚŽŚĂǀĞďƵƐŽŶŝƐůĂŶĚƚŽĚƌŝǀĞƉĞŽƉůĞĂƌŽƵŶĚ ůĞĐƚƌŝĐŐŽůĨĐĂƌƚ͕'ĂƚŽƌΡhƚŝůŝƚLJsĞŚŝĐůĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůLJĨŽƌĂŝĚŝŶŐƐƉĞĐŝĂůƉŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ^ŚĞůƚĞƌƐĨŽƌǁĂŝƚŝŶŐ͕ƉƌŽŐƌĂŵŵŝŶŐ͕ŐƌŽƵƉƐƚĂŐŝŶŐ͕ĞƚĐ͘ ĂŶŽĞͬ<ĂLJĂŬĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůLJϴͲϭϬĐĂŶŽĞƐ͕ĚĞƐŝƌĞƚŽŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞƚŽϭϱ ϯ͗ϬϬ /ƚĞŵϭϭ͘ /Ed ZWZ d/s ^dKZz>/E ĂƉƚĂŝŶ:ŽŚŶ^ŵŝƚŚdƌĂŝů WƌŽǀŝĚĞŐƌĂƉŚŝĐƐĨŽƌďŽĂƌĚͬďƌŽĐŚƵƌĞƐ /ƚĞŵϭϮ͘ Z KDD EϮ&/E>WZ & ZZ >d ZEd/s ^tͬ&/E>Z WKZd ĞůŝǀĞƌĂďůĞ ϮĨŝŶĂůĂůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐ ϯͲϰĞůĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌĞĂĐŚŽƉƚŝŽŶ ϯ͗ϯϬ &ŝŶĂůŐƌŽƵƉĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶĂŶĚƐƵŵŵĂƌLJŽĨĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƐͬĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂŶĚĂĐƚŝŽŶ/ƚĞŵƐ͘ ϰ͗ϬϬ ĚũŽƵƌŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͘ W͗ͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰtKZ<^,KWϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞdĞĂŵ<ŝĐŬŽĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐtŽƌŬƐŚŽƉϬϳͲϮϴͲϭϭ͘ĚŽĐdž WĂŐĞͮϱ 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ /DQG'HYHORSPHQW (QYLURQPHQWDO 6HUYLFHV 0F/DZV&LUFOH6XLWH :LOOLDPVEXUJ9LUJLQLD )$; 0HHWLQJ $WWHQGHHV 5DQG\2ZHQ905& 'DWH7LPH 6HSWHPEHU -XOLHWWH*LRUGDQR905& DP±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¶VXOWLPDWHSURGXFWZRXOG EH%RWKDJHQFLHVDFNQRZOHGJHWKHLUVXSSRUWRIWKHVWXG\DQGZHUHDSSUHFLDWLYHRIEHLQJLQYLWHGWR SDUWLFLSDWHDVVWHHULQJFRPPLWWHHPHPEHUV)ROORZLQJWKHLQLWLDORYHUYLHZ0U3RZHOO &2( EHJDQ ZLWKFRPPHQWVUHJDUGLQJEDVLFLQIRUPDWLRQRQWKHIHGHUDOSURMHFWFKDQQHODQGVSHFLILFDOO\WKHFXWRII FKDQQHO7KHIROORZLQJPDLQSRLQWVZHUHGLVFXVVHG • 7KHIHGHUDOFKDQQHOLVDXWKRUL]HGIRUDIRRWGHSWKZLWKRYHUGUHGJLQJDOORZHGWR¶ • $YHUDJHGHSWKVUXQEHWZHHQWRIHHWGHHS • 7KHFXWRIIDUHDKDVDPDLQWHQDQFHGUHGJLQJVFKHGXOHRIHYHU\WR\HDUVZLWKWKHODVWF\FOH RFFXUULQJLQ • 7KHFXWRIIDUHDLVVFKHGXOHGIRU)DOOGUHGJLQJ VKRXOGEHJLQZLWKLQDIHZZHHNV • 7KH&2(FDQSURYLGHWKHVWXG\WHDPZLWKFXUUHQW&$'ILOHVGHSLFWLQJWKH&2(HDVHPHQW OLPLWVFKDQQHOOLPLWVDQGFXUUHQWGHSWKPHDVXUHPHQWV • 7KHFXWRIIFKDQQHOLVDGLIILFXOWVHFWLRQRIWKHULYHUIRUVKLSVWRQDYLJDWH ODUJHSUHVVXUHZDYHV FDQEHH[SHULHQFHGDVVKLSVWUDYHUVHWKURXJKWKHFXWRII GXULQJWLPHVRIULYHUIORRGLQJWKH ODUJHVKLSVDUHNQRZQWRWUDYHORXWVLGHRIWKHQRUPDOFKDQQHOOLPLWV 3 ?27$.3UHVTXLOH?GRFV?.LFN2II0HHWLQJV?.LFNRII0HHWLQJ5HJXODWRU\6WHHULQJ&RPB GRF 'DWH 6HSWHPEHU DP DP 3URMHFW1R • 0U3RZHOOVXJJHVWHGKDYLQJGLVFXVVLRQVZLWK0U1DWKDQLDO*UHHQDVKLSSLORWIRUWKH 9LUJLQLD3LORW$VVRFLDWLRQWRREWDLQDPRUHGHWDLOHGQDYLJDWLRQDOSHUVSHFWLYHRQWKHFKDQQHO DQGFXWRIIDUHD •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¶VIRFXVZRXOGEHPRUHUHODWHGWRHQVXULQJWKDWWKH6WDWH¶VQDWXUDOUHVRXUFHVVXFKDVWKH QHDUVKRUHERWWRPYHJHWDWHGDQGQRQYHJHWDWHGZHWODQGVDQGNQRZQVSHFLDODTXDWLFVLWHVVXFKDVWKH VWXUJHRQUHHIDUHJLYHQGXHFRQVLGHUDWLRQLQWKHSURSRVHGWUDQVSRUWDWLRQDOWHUQDWLYHV0U2ZHQ GLVFXVVHGEHLQJDZDUHRIWLPHRI\HDUUHVWULFWLRQVIRUFRQVWUXFWLRQDFWLYLW\ZLWKLQWKHULYHUGXHWR DQDGUDPRXVILVKLQFOXGLQJWKHDSRWHQWLDOH[SDQGHGUHVWULFWLRQIRUWKHDWODQWLFVWXUJHRQ7KHUHDUH SRWHQWLDODGGLWLRQDOZRUNLQJUHVWULFWLRQVVXUURXQGLQJWKHDWODQWLFVWXUJHRQWKDWFRXOGEHIXUWKHU LQYHVWLJDWHGWKURXJKGLVFXVVLRQVZLWK0U'DYH2¶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ƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞEĂƚŝŽŶĂůtŝůĚůŝĨĞZĞĨƵŐĞdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ ^ƚĞĞƌŝŶŐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĞDĞĞƚŝŶŐ &ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϴ͕ϮϬϭϮ ' E ϵ͗ϬϬʹϰ͗ϬϬs,tŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐKĨĨŝĐĞ ϯϱϭDĐ>ĂǁƐŝƌĐůĞ͕^ƵŝƚĞϯ tŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐ͕sϮϯϭϴϱ ;ϳϱϳͿϮϮϬͲϬϱϬϬ ϵ͗ϬϬ tĞůĐŽŵĞ͕/ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚZĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;dŝŵ,ŽŐĂŶͿ ϵ͗ϯϬ ŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶŽĨ džŝƐƚŝŶŐ&ĂĐŝůŝƚLJΘsĞƐƐĞůƐ ϭϬ͗ϬϬ ŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶŽĨWƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƚƚŚĞ/ƐůĂŶĚ • ,ĞĂǀLJƵƚLJ ƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ>ŽĂĚŝŶŐͬhŶůŽĂĚŝŶŐKƉƚŝŽŶƐ • WĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶ>ŽĂĚŝŶŐͬhŶůŽĂĚŝŶŐKƉƚŝŽŶƐ ϭϬ͗ϰϱ Z < ϭϭ͗ϬϬ ŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶŽĨWŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůsĞƐƐĞůƐͬĂƌŐĞƐ ϭϭ͗ϯϬ ŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶŽĨWŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůKŶůĂŶĚ>ĂƵŶĐŚ^ŝƚĞƐ • :ŽƌĚĂŶWŽŝŶƚDĂƌŝŶĂ • ,ŽƉĞǁĞůůDĂƌŝŶĂ • ĞĞƉŽƚƚŽŵWĂƌŬΘŽĂƚ>ĂŶĚŝŶŐ • ƵƚĐŚ'ĂƉŽĂƚ>ĂŶĚŝŶŐ • ŝƚLJWŽŝŶƚWĂƌŬ • WŽƌƚtĞĂŶĂĐŬΛ^ŚŝƌůĞLJWůĂŶƚĂƚŝŽŶ • dƵƌŬĞLJƌĞĞŬ;ZŽƵƚĞϱͿ ϭϮ͗ϬϬtKZhE, ϭ͗ϬϬ ŚŽŽƐŝŶŐLJĚǀĂŶƚĂŐĞƐĞĐŝƐŝŽŶDĂŬŝŶŐWƌŽĐĞƐƐ;ZĞǀŝĞǁůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐĂŶĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞWƌĞĨĞƌƌĞĚ ůƚĞƌŶĂƚŝǀĞƐͿ ϯ͗ϭϱ Z < ϯ͗ϯϬ &ŝŶĂůŐƌŽƵƉĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŽŶĂŶĚƐƵŵŵĂƌLJŽĨĚĞĐŝƐŝŽŶƐͬĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶ͕ĂĐƚŝŽŶ/ƚĞŵƐΘƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞ ϰ͗ϬϬ ĚũŽƵƌŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ͰͰǀŚďͰƉƌŽũͰtŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰ^ƚĞĞƌŝŶŐŽŵŝƚƚĞĞDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϮ͘Ϭϴ͘ϭϮͰWƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞ^DĞĞƚŝŶŐŐĞŶĚĂϬϮ͘Ϭϴ͘ϭϮ͘ĚŽĐdž 35(648,/(1$7,21$/:,/'/,)(5()8*( 75$163257$7,21)($6$%,/,7<678'< 67((5,1*&200,77((0((7,1* 6,*1,16+((7 'DWH :HGQHVGD\)HEUXDU\ /RFDWLRQ 9+%:LOOLDPVEXUJ2IILFH 6WDUW7LPH $0 1DPH $IILOLDWLRQ 3KRQH1XPEHU(0DLO 7LP+RJDQ 9+% 7+RJDQ#YKEFRP 9LN'HVDL 9+% 9'HVDL#YKEFRP &KULV)U\H 9+% &)U\H#YKEFRP &\UXV%UDPH 86):6 &\UXVB%UDPH#IZVJRY $QG\+RIPDQQ 86):6 $QG\B+RIPDQQ#IZVJRY 0HJKDQ 86):6 0HJKDQB&DUILROL#IZVJRY &DUILROL -HII0DVW 86):6 -HIIHU\B0DVW#IZVJRY -RUGDQ 0LNH:LQQ 3RLQW WŚŝůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐDĞĞƚŝŶŐEŽƚĞƐ͗ /ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶƐ hƉĚĂƚĞŽŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŽŶƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ;͘ƌĂŵĞͿ • dŚĞĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐŶĞĂƌůLJĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ • EĞǁďƵŶŬŚŽƵƐĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶŝƐƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚƚŽďĞŐŝŶĂƚƚŚĞĞŶĚŽĨƉƌŝů͕ϮϬϭϮ͘ dŚĞĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌƐƚĂŐŝŶŐĂƌĞĂĂƚƚŚĞĨĞƌƌLJƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůǁŝůůƚĂŬĞƵƉƐƉĂĐĞĨŽƌĂŶϴ͛džϰϬ͛ ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞƌ͕ĚƵŵƉƐƚĞƌĂŶĚĂϯϬ͛džϯϬ͛ĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚƐƚĂŐŝŶŐĂƌĞĂ͘ dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ^ƚƵĚLJ/ŶƚƌŽĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ;͘ƌĂŵĞͿ • WƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨƐƚƵĚLJŝƐƚŽĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞǀĂƌŝŽƵƐŽƉƚŝŽŶƐƚŽŐĞƚƉĂƐƐĞŶŐĞƌƐĂŶĚĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ ƚŽͬĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŝƐůĂŶĚ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶƐŽĨǀĞƐƐĞůƚLJƉĞƐĂŶĚŵĂŝŶůĂŶĚĚĞƉĂƌƚƵƌĞƉŽŝŶƚ ůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ • ZĞƉůĂĐĞĐĂďůĞͲĨĞƌƌLJǁŝƚŚŽƚŚĞƌƚLJƉĞŽĨŶŽŶͲĐĂďůĞǀĞƐƐĞů • džŝƐƚŝŶŐŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶƵƐĞƐĂϮϴ͛ƉŽŶƚŽŽŶďŽĂƚǁŝƚŚĂĐĂƉĂĐŝƚLJŽĨϭϲƉĂƐƐĞŶŐĞƌƐ • ĐĐĞƐƐĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ • h^K ĐŚĂŶŶĞůĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚ;ϱϬϬ͛ĞĂĐŚƐŝĚĞĨƌŽŵĐĞŶƚĞƌůŝŶĞŽĨĐŚĂŶŶĞůͿ KǀĞƌǀŝĞǁŽĨƐƚƵĚLJ;d͘,ŽŐĂŶͿ • ZĞǀŝĞǁƚŚĞh^K ĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚďĂƐĞĚŽŶs,ƐŚŽƌĞĞƌŽƐŝŽŶĐŽŶƚƌŽůƉůĂŶƐ • ^ƚƵĚLJƚĂŬĞƐŝŶƚŽĂĐĐŽƵŶƚƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨƵŶĐƚŝŽŶƐƚŽďĞĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚĞĚ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐ͗ o WĂƌŬĐĂƌƐ o ŽĐŬͬďĞƌƚŚďŽĂƚƐ o >ŽĂĚĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚ o >ŽĂĚƉĂƐƐĞŶŐĞƌƐ ͰͰǀŚďͰƉƌŽũͰtŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰWDDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϯ͘Ϯϭ͘ϭϮ͘ĚŽĐdž o 'ĂƚŚĞƌŐƌŽƵƉƐ o KƌŐĂŶŝnjĞŐƌŽƵƉƐ o WƌŽŵŽƚĞĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĞƚĐ͘ • dŚĞƐƚƵĚLJŝƐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌŝŶŐϭϬŵĂŝŶůĂŶĚůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ŽĨǁŚŝĐŚWŚŝůŝƉDŽƌƌŝƐŝƐũƵƐƚŽŶĞƐŝƚĞ͘ dŚĞŐƌĂƉŚŝĐŽĨƚŚĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚƐŝƚĞƐǁĂƐƌĞǀŝĞǁĞĚĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĞĚ͘ĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞŐƌĂƉŚŝĐ ǁĂƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚŽWD͘ • KƚŚĞƌƐŝƚĞƐŵĂLJďĞƵƚŝůŝnjĞĚĨŽƌƉĂƐƐĞŶŐĞƌƉŝĐŬͲƵƉĂŶĚĚƌŽƉͲŽĨĨ͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐĞĞƉďŽƚƚŽŵ ĂŶĚƵƚĐŚ'ĂƉ͕ǁŚŝĐŚǁŽƵůĚƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨĂĐƚŝǀŝƚLJĂƚƚŚĞWDƐŝƚĞ͘ • /ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕ŽƚŚĞƌƐŝƚĞƐĂƌĞďĞŝŶŐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĨŽƌƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚŝŶŐŚĞĂǀLJĞƋƵŝƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚ ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ • ĐŽŶĐĞƉƚŐƌĂƉŚŝĐŽĨƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƚƚŚĞWDĨĞƌƌLJƚĞƌŵŝŶĂůƐŝƚĞǁĂƐ ƌĞǀŝĞǁĞĚĂŶĚĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĞĚ͘ĐŽƉLJŽĨƚŚĞŐƌĂƉŚŝĐǁĂƐƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚƚŽWD ͰͰǀŚďͰƉƌŽũͰtŝůůŝĂŵƐďƵƌŐͰϯϰϬϯϳ͘ϬϬKd<WƌĞƐƋƵŝůĞͰĚŽĐƐͰ<ŝĐŬKĨĨDĞĞƚŝŶŐƐͰWDDĞĞƚŝŶŐϬϯ͘Ϯϭ͘ϭϮ͘ĚŽĐdž % 1:55()8*( 5(*8/$7,216 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Chesterfield County, Virginia http://www.fws.gov/northeast/presquile 804-829-9020 REFUGE REGULATIONS The following are just a sample of the most common Refuge Regulations. A full account of the Refuge Regulations may be found in Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations, sections 25 - 32. Public access is only available to groups and individuals that have written approval from official staff of the Eastern Virginia Rivers National Wildlife Refuge Complex. x Partake only in nature-related recreation activities, such as wildlife observation, interpretation, photography, and environmental education. x Access to the island is to only occur from the boat dock or other Refuge designated docking area. x Hunting is prohibited, except by special permit during the Refuge’s annual deer hunt. x Fishing from the Refuge shoreline is prohibited. x Collection of plants or animals (whether alive or dead) is prohibited. x Feeding or harassing wildlife is prohibited. x Camping is prohibited. x Fires are prohibited. x Pets are prohibited. SAFETY Protect yourself from ticks and mosquitoes, they may carry disease. To avoid tick bites and mosquitoes: stay on designated trails; use repellent; wear a long sleeve shirt and long pants while exploring the area; and inspect yourself carefully. Poison Ivy is abundant on the refuge. Please stay on refuge trails to help avoid contact. Enjoy all wildlife from a distance. This image of a goose, designed by J. N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System. & &203$7,%,/,7< '(7(50,1$7,21 '2&80(17 COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION USE: Wildlife Observation, Photography, Environmental Education, and Interpretation REFUGE NAME: Presquile National Wildlife Refuge ESTABLISHING AND ACQUISITION AUTHORITY(IES): Presquile National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) was established on March 7, 1953, under the Migratory Bird Conservation Act (MBCA)(16 U.S.C. 715d) of February 18, 1929 (45 Stat. 1222) authority to “(2) acquire, by gift or devise, any area or interests therein” that the Secretary of the Interior “determines to be suitable for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” The tract was gifted from A.D. Williams for use as a wildlife refuge in 1952. REFUGE PURPOSE(S): In accordance with the MBCA, the purpose of Presquile NWR is “…for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM MISSION: The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) is “to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans” (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 [16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee], as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 [NWRSIA][Public Law 105-57]). DESCRIPTION OF USE: 1. What is the use? Is the use a priority public use? The uses are wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation. The NWRSIA identified these uses as four of the six, priority, wildlife-dependent recreational uses to be facilitated in the NWRS. 2. Where would the use be conducted? These four public uses will be concentrated on approximately 17 acres (hereafter referred to as the “public use area”) of the 1,329-acre island refuge (Figure 1). A 3-mile trail network (mowed path, gravel corridor, and boardwalk) occupies 7 acres, and high foot traffic areas adjacent to structures occupy 10 acres of upland lawn (Figure 2). Overnight accommodations are located within the public use area and, more specifically, within a 200-yard radius of the existing environmental education center (Figure 2). 3. When would the use be conducted? These four public uses may occur when there are no time-of-year restrictions. Time-of-year restrictions ensure compliance with purposes for which the refuge was established; and specifically, to protect threatened or endangered species and species of concern, and to prevent conflicts with other refuge public uses (i.e., public deer hunt) 1 or management activities (e.g., prescribed burn). Partner-sponsored environmental education will occur as outlined in an annual environmental education plan, which is approved by the Refuge Manager. Environmental education programming includes single-day and multi-day/overnight visits. Other events will be scheduled on a case-by-case basis. 4. How would the use be conducted? These four public uses will be conducted by individuals or groups, participating in self-guided or group activities. Visitation to Presquile NWR is authorized either through participation in a refuge-sponsored program or by obtaining an approved General Special Use Permit (General SUP). Refuge-sponsored programs are advertised in local publications and on the refuge website (http://www.fws.gov/northeast/presquile). Participation instructions are included in these announcements. Individuals do not need to acquire a General SUP to participate in refuge-sponsored programs. A General SUP may be issued to an individual; a group (e.g., birding club, Virginia Master Naturalists); or formally-recognized U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) partner organization or agency (e.g., Richmond Audubon Society, James River Association [JRA], National Park Service [NPS]) sponsoring a wildlife-dependent recreational use program. Program sponsors request a General SUP on behalf of program participants; individuals participating in partner-sponsored programs do not need to acquire their own General SUPs. For example, the JRA is a formally-recognized FWS partner organization that has been granted a General SUP to conduct an environmental education program for student groups at Presquile NWR on a recurring basis. The General SUP application will be mailed, emailed, or faxed to the applicant upon request. The Refuge Manager, or his designee, will evaluate the General SUP application and determine if a permit will be issued. The applicant will be sent an approved General SUP and informed that the applicant must have a copy of the permit in his/her possession while visiting the refuge. If a permit application is denied, the applicant will be informed of the basis for permit denial. The refuge is accessible by watercraft (e.g., kayak, canoe, boat, jet boats). Permit applicants are informed that a limited number of watercraft can be accommodated by the refuge’s small dock (30-ft long by 10-ft wide; Figure 2) and that the quality of the outdoor experience is improved when groups are kept to fewer than 35 individuals. Refuge use and trail information is provided to visitors in advance of their visit. Refuge staff and partners communicate directly with visitors, referring them to the trail flyer on the refuge website and to the terms and conditions detailed in their General SUP. Access to the Refuge Refuge- or partner-sponsored programs access the refuge in accordance with terms and conditions of access easements on adjacent private property. When not participating in refuge- or partner-sponsored events, permitted refuge visitors access the island by launching from a public launch site in the vicinity or from an area of their choosing for which they have approval, using privately-owned watercraft. Watercraft tie up at the refuge’s existing floating dock, which is located on the southwestern side of the island (Figure 2). A 2 limited number of visitors may be authorized to access the refuge via the small kayak launch on an unnamed tidal creek and associated boardwalk (Figure 2). These are the only two locations where unchaperoned (unaccompanied by a FWS employee or representative) refuge access is authorized for wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation. Access on the Refuge Once ashore, visitors walk on the dock, boardwalk, or maintained lawn and proceed to hike along trails, staying within the 17-acre public use area. Off-trail use is acceptable only when participating in specific, refuge-authorized activities (e.g., tree planting, invasive species control). Future Infrastructure and Programming Enhancements Future infrastructure and programming enhancements may be implemented in accordance with an approved Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP; currently in development) and Visitor Services step-down plan (to be completed within 3 years of an approved CCP) for Presquile NWR, as funding and staff become available. In the interim, a FWS Visitor Services Review (USFWS 2010) recommended that the refuge proceed with its environmental education partnership with the JRA and expand opportunities for wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation. Potential enhancements may include: installation of a permanent viewing scope at the observation platform; development and installation of interpretive panels regarding cultural and natural history of the site; and development of goals and objectives for the environmental education program in partnership with appropriate partners (e.g., JRA) which incorporate FWS messages, such as the mission of the FWS and Leave No Trace. The James River Ecology School The bulk of visitors, students, and youth groups using Presquile NWR for environmental education will be participants of the James River Ecology School (the Ecology School). In December 2007 FWS signed a 20-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the JRA to develop the Ecology School. The Ecology School programming is designed to provide meaningful outdoor experiences that connect people with nature, is focused on the Chesapeake Bay and James River watershed, and is consistent with Virginia Standards of Learning requirements. In accordance with the MOU, JRA will recruit participants and coordinate the administration of the Ecology School with general oversight by the FWS. The FWS and JRA will cooperatively develop an annual environmental education plan that lists the dates and outlines participant activities. Overnight accommodations (i.e., tent camping or indoor lodging) on the refuge will continue to be permitted for the Ecology School upon approval of an environmental education plan and human health and safety plan. On-site group leaders will ensure adherence to safety policies for each visiting group. FWS and NPS Collaboration in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed In October 2010, the FWS and NPS signed a MOU regarding cooperation and collaboration on a variety of efforts within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Among these efforts is implementation of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail (CAJO), America’s first 3 water-based national historic trail. The 3,000 mile water trail follows the routes of Captain John Smith’s exploration of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries in 1607- 1609. Through recreational experiences on water and land, knowledge about American Indian societies and cultures of the 17th century is shared and the natural history of the Chesapeake Bay and tributaries are interpreted. During 2011, the FWS actively participated in the planning process for implementing CAJO on the James River. Presquile NWR has been identified as a key site for interpretation and education. Through continued collaboration, the FWS and NPS will ensure that CAJO-related activities proposed to occur at Presquile NWR are implemented in a manner that is compatible with the purpose and intent of the refuge. 5. Why is the use being proposed? The NWRSIA identifies these four uses as priority public uses that, if compatible, are to receive enhanced consideration over other general public uses. These four uses have been allowed since Presquile NWR was established in 1953 without unacceptable impacts to the refuge. Continuing these compatible priority public uses at Presquile NWR will facilitate public enjoyment of and advocacy for the refuge, the NWRS, and the FWS mission. Partner-sponsored programs will clearly convey key FWS messages about conservation. Ecology School programs will include opportunities to conduct hands-on habitat improvement projects and various other activities on Presquile NWR to instill an ‘ownership’ or ‘stewardship’ ethic in program participants. Allowing these four public uses will also support visitor services goals developed for Presquile NWR’s CCP: Environmental Education Goal: Immerse visitors in environmental education experiences to inspire appreciation and stewardship of our natural and cultural resources, expand understanding of the significance of the James River to the Chesapeake Bay, and raise awareness of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Interpretation and Wildlife-Dependent Recreation Goal: Provide opportunities for visitors to connect with nature and enhance their appreciation, understanding, and enjoyment of the Refuge’s natural and cultural resources through a variety of quality, wildlife-dependent public uses, including interpretation, wildlife observation, nature photography, and hunting. AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES: The financial and staff resources necessary to provide and administer these uses at their current levels are now available. We expect the existing financial resources to continue in the future, subject to availability of appropriated funds. Recommendations detailed in the CCP and Visitor Services step-down plan would identify strategies for implementation. Current annual administrative costs associated with the existing refuge-supported operations for wildlife 4 observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation programming are detailed in Table 1. There will be an initial one-time cost to establish the baseline monitoring that can be funded through either refuge budget or special project monies, depending on the anticipated amount. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS OF THE USE: Background Currently, Presquile NWR operates their biological and visitor services programs under interim goals and objectives derived from the language in the 1953 refuge establishment purposes, the NWRSIA, and the refuge’s Biological Profile of 2002. Until the refuge’s CCP is completed, these interim goals and objectives provide the context for making management decisions affecting both the biological and visitor services programs. Reevaluation of goals and objectives is one of the early steps in the development of a refuge CCP. Presquile NWR embarked on its CCP development process in January 2011. Once the CCP is approved, this compatibility determination will be revised, updated, or amended, as warranted, to be consistent with the decisions made in that plan. Specific refuge objectives stated in the Biological Profile of 2002: x To improve and maintain swamp, marsh habitats capable of supporting waterfowl populations at objective levels; x To provide habitat sufficient to maintain a wintering flock of Canada geese at objective levels; x To manage refuge habitat sufficient to provide for optimum numbers of resident wildlife species; and x To provide an opportunity to view wildlife in its natural environment. Quantitative population objective levels for geese and ducks were never set for two reasons. First, information on refuge responsibility within the landscape for wintering waterfowl populations was lacking. Second, a CCP for Presquile NWR was anticipated to be completed in the short-term future. New information about the refuge’s contributions toward populations of several bird species of conservation concern has been acquired since 2002 and has influenced implementation of the public use program. During the Lower James River Important Bird Area designation process, we learned that Presquile NWR contributes significantly to several bird species of conservation concern, including breeding prothonotary warblers, nesting and roosting bald eagles (listed as state threatened), roosting purple martins, wintering rusty blackbirds, breeding black ducks, ground nesting American woodcock, wild turkey, and northern bobwhite quail (National Audubon Society 2007). Bald eagle nest productivity flights conducted by the Center for Conservation Biology (CCB) revealed a high concentration of wintering and nesting bald eagles in the area (Watts and Byrd 2010). 5 Additionally, the public use program on the refuge is affected by FWS policy to ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health (BIDEH) of the NWRS are maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans. The FWS policy on BIDEH (601 FW 3) provides for the consideration and protection of the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitat resources found on national wildlife refuges and associated ecosystems. As a result, the CCP may also include new objectives to protect non-avian wildlife and their habitats, including state listed reptiles (e.g., spotted turtle, box turtle, and hog-nosed snake), amphibians, and pollinators. All refuge-specific goals, objectives, and strategies will be developed within the context of the refuge’s establishing purpose, anticipated effects of climate change, and using the strategic habitat conservation approach. In an effort to consider and protect the broad spectrum of fish, wildlife, and habitats present at Presquile NWR, adverse impacts to the refuge’s BIDEH will be avoided or minimized when implementing public use programs by establishing stipulations that control the use context, intensity, and duration. Soils, Vegetation, and Wildlife Refuge visitors will be concentrated in the 17-acre public use area (i.e., trail network and lawn areas adjacent to buildings). As a result of their activities, visitors are likely to generate noise, trample vegetation, and occupy buildings with windows and lighting. Wildlife and habitat in the vicinity may be impacted. Visitor use in the uplands occurs in areas dominated by hardy fescue, which is able to withstand high foot-traffic. The existing dock and boardwalks serve to connect the waterways to the uplands and avoid visitor-caused impacts to sensitive areas and resources. Increased foot traffic and construction equipment are the primary sources for introduction of non-native, invasive plant species. Increased visitation is the primary factor for site damage and deterioration at many campsites, primarily through trampling of vegetation (Kuss and Hall 1991) and loss of organic soil (Cole and Marion 1988). Some salamander species will not cross openings that are too wide, dry, graveled, or bare ground (Marsh et al. 2005, Vinson 1998). Noise and motion near nesting or roosting sites may cause wildlife to flush and expend energy otherwise needed for reproductive success or overwintering survival (Burger 1981, Klein 1989). External lighting fixtures and light from internal sources can disorient birds and amphibians and fatally attract pollinators (Brown et al. 2007; Buchanan 2002; Frank 1988, 2002). Large glass windows that reflect habitat or look deceptively like open sky kill millions of birds each year in the United States, especially during night migration and near stop-over sites (Brown et al. 2007). The FWS abides by the joint Service-State Bald Eagle Protection Guidelines for Virginia (VDGIF 2008). These guidelines include time of year restrictions and distance setbacks from nests and concentration areas. At Presquile NWR, the public use area is located beyond the 660-ft maximum buffer requirement for active bald eagle nests. No impacts to Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrhynchus oxyrhynchus), a National Marine Fisheries Service Species of Concern, or the federally threatened sensitive joint-vetch (Aeschynomene virginica) will result from wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation on the refuge. 6 Public Access and Use Refuge visitation has been affected by reductions in refuge staff, budget, and transportation capabilities. During the 1980s, three full-time employees and one part-time employee administered activities and facilitated visits by ferrying approximately 2,600 people to the refuge annually. In recent years, only one full-time employee has been administering activities and facilitating visits to Presquile NWR, as well as at James River NWR and Plum Tree Island NWR. In 2001, the U.S. Coast Guard deemed the ferry unsafe for continued transportation of the public to Presquile NWR. Currently, refuge- and partner-sponsored programs are facilitated through the use of single and multi-passenger watercraft. Visitation has declined to 400 people annually. Visitation is planned to increase gradually to nearly the historic level, while avoiding unacceptable impacts to resources. Current and predicted visitation limits are detailed in Table 2. Ideally, expanded wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation activities conducted on Presquile NWR would positively contribute to appreciation and protection of migratory birds and their habitats, both on and off the refuge. There may be short-term disturbance to common plants and wildlife during some refuge-authorized, off-trail activities, but this will be monitored by staff and partners to ensure the effort does not result in long-term disturbance. The monitoring of natural resource impacts associated with visitor use patterns will be conducted by staff, volunteers, or contractors on an annual and seasonal basis. Currently, infrastructure improvements at the refuge are being supervised by the Outdoor Recreation Planner. These infrastructure improvements will be completed prior to commencing the Ecology School. The Outdoor Recreation Planner’s time will then be reallocated to developing, coordinating, and implementing a visitor impact monitoring program. Data and information generated by on-going biological surveys (i.e., eagle surveys conducted by CCB at the College of William and Mary; prothonotary warbler research conducted by Virginia Commonwealth University; and herpetological assessments conducted by Virginia Herpetology Society) will be considered in the development of a visitor impact monitoring program. Examples of new information about impacts related to trail and building use that may be desirable to monitor include: wildlife basking or nesting in the field margins (e.g., quail, woodcock, box turtle); encroachment of native plant communities by invasive plant species; bird collisions with windows; and behavior and mortality of night-flying pollinators. Protocols and thresholds for visitor impact monitoring (such as in Goff et al. 1988) will be developed by a monitoring team. PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT: A news release announcing the availability of the draft compatibility determination (CD) for a 15-day public review and comment period was issued the following media outlets on 7 September 12, 2011: Chesterfield Observer and Richmond Times Dispatch. A copy of the draft CD was made available for public review and comment at these locations: Refuge Complex Headquarters: 336 Wilna Road, Warsaw, Virginia 22572 Refuge Charles City Sub-office: 11116 Kimages Road, Charles City, Virginia 23030 Hopewell Regional Library: 245 East Cawson Street, Hopewell, Virginia 23860 Chester Library: 11800 Centre Street, Chester, Virginia 23831-1781 Internet: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/presquile The draft CD was distributed to representatives of the Richmond Audubon Society, James River Association, Virginia Council of Indians, and NPS. During the public comment period, we received two letters in support of the finding that these four priority public uses were determined to be compatible with the refuge purpose. The NPS suggested that a reference to the partnership between the NPS and FWS be included in the CD because the James River Segment Plan for CAJO includes proposed actions that would occur on Presquile NWR. We incorporated a reference to this partnership in the subsection titled “FWS and NPS Collaboration in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” (pages 3-4) of this final CD. DETERMINATION (CHECK ONE BELOW): _____ Use is Not Compatible __X__ Use is Compatible With the Following Stipulations STIPULATIONS TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY: Presquile NWR has developed a list of criteria for determining whether any given refuge location would be appropriate for wildlife observation, photography, environmental education (including overnight accommodations), or interpretation. These criteria would apply to current and future programs, trails, and facilities, and are in addition to the joint Service-State Bald Eagle Protection Guidelines for Virginia (VDGIF 2008). Criteria are as follows: Locations for wildlife-dependent public uses should: x Provide an opportunity to view a variety of habitats and wildlife; x Be safe for the access proposed at current use levels and proposed future use levels; x Require minimal annual maintenance to ensure safe access and prevent habitat degradation; x Have a low potential for fragmenting habitat or disturbing wildlife populations; x Occur where less than 50% of the trail system’s length occupies soil types rated as high or very high for compaction and/or erosiveness; and x Predominately occupy previously modified substrate (graveled, cultivated, or filled), such as old roads and former farm fields. 8 Additional stipulations to ensure compatibility include: x Presquile NWR regulations will be posted and enforced. Closed areas will be established as needed, posted, and enforced. Signs necessary for visitor information, directions, and safety will be kept current. x Walking and hiking to facilitate wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation is only compatible on designated trails. x To promote public safety, accommodate other users, and reduce wildlife disturbance, only limited, unchaperoned visitor access for individuals and groups will be authorized, provided they receive prior permission in the form of a General SUP. x Potential conflicts with other public uses and management activities will be minimized by requiring advanced permitting for all public access of unchaperoned individuals or groups. Refuge- or partner-sponsored events and programming will require preregistration. Visitor group sizes and visitation frequency will be limited during sensitive time periods for wildlife or in sensitive locations (i.e., wetlands). x The JRA will coordinate with refuge staff, well in advance, to schedule and outline activities for all day-trip and overnight environmental education programming as stated in the existing MOU. The JRA will provide a description of proposed activities, location on the refuge, time of day or night, number of participants, so that potential impacts and avoidance measures can be determined. A General SUP, detailing request procedures, reporting policy, and other required content will be provided annually for joint signature between the FWS and JRA. The General SUP will list all conditions necessary to ensure compatibility. x Increased visitation would only occur if adverse effects to refuge resources could be avoided and when a high quality visitor experience can be achieved. x No activities will be allowed that may adversely impact any federally threatened or endangered species. The known presence of a threatened or endangered species will preclude any new use of an area until the Refuge Manager determines otherwise. x Public use areas and facilities will be maintained in good, working or safe condition. Regularly used roads, trails, landings are distanced from sensitive habitats, migration corridors, and transition zones between adjacent habitats. If necessary, portions of trails may be closed or traffic rerouted away from hibernacula, wetlands, nesting sites, seeps, ravines, and coves. Where early spring migrating amphibians may be impacted by foot traffic (such as on the eastern forest/grassland interface), grass cover on trails through bottomland will keep trails moist. Gravelling tread surfaces is done only where necessary. Canopy cover is maintained to encourage cool, moist forest floor in terrestrial buffer or migration zones and to protect wetland connectivity. x We will evaluate sites and programs as needed to assess whether objectives are being met and to prevent site degradation. If evidence of unacceptable adverse impacts appears, the location(s) of activities will be rotated with secondary sites, curtailed, or discontinued. x Best management practices will be used to avoid introductions of non-native, invasive plant species. x Perimeter lighting of buildings will be reduced and incorporate cut-off shields to prevent unnecessary upward lighting. Motion sensor lighting and minimum wattage bulbs will further reduce light pollution and light attraction. A lights-out program will be developed for peak migration periods for various light-sensitive species. 9 x Bird-safe strategies will be used to reduce light trespass from interior and exterior sources during activities associated with overnight accommodations. In any new construction, smaller windows and non-reflective or screen-scrim-fitting window treatments will be used to reduce habitat reflections. Trees will be planted in front of large windows, within 3 ft. x The FWS encourages limited watercraft traffic in the eagle concentration areas, adherence to the state guidelines, and raising public awareness about eagle protection and recovery on the James River. JUSTIFICATION: Wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation are all priority public uses and are to receive enhanced consideration on refuges, according to the NWRSIA. Providing increased wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities at Presquile NWR promotes visitor appreciation and support for the refuge, NWRS, and FWS; engages communities in local habitat conservation efforts in the lower James River and the Chesapeake Bay; and instills a sense of ownership and stewardship ethic in refuge visitors. Wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation, as described above, will not detract from the purpose and intent of the refuge. Stipulations described will ensure proper control over the use and provide management flexibility should detrimental impact develop. Allowing this use furthers the mission of the NWRS and FWS by expanding opportunities for wildlife dependent uses when compatible and consistent with sound fish and wildlife management. We have determined that wildlife observation, photography, environmental education, and interpretation will not materially interfere with, or detract from, the fulfillment of the NWRS mission or the purposes for which the refuge was established. 10 Literature Cited Brown, H., S. Caputo, E. J. McAdams, M. Fowle, G. Phillips, C. Dewitt, and Y. Gelb. 2007. Bird-Safe Building Guidelines. New York Audubon Society, Inc. 59 pp. Accessed at http://www.windowcollisions.info/public/nyc-birdSafeGuidelines-2007.pdf. Buchanan, B. W. 2002. Observed and potential effects of artificial light on the behavior, ecology, and evolution of nocturnal frogs. In Proceedings of the Urban Wildlands Group, Ecological consequences of artificial night lighting, Los Angeles, California February 23-24, 2002, edited by C. Rich and T. Longcore, Burger, J. 1981. Effect of human activity on birds at a coastal bay. Biological Conservation 21:231-241. Cole, D. N., and J. L. Marion. 1988. Recreation impacts in some riparian forests of the eastern United States. Environmental Management 12(1):99-107. Frank, K. 1988. Impact of outdoor lighting on moths. Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 42:63-93. ____. 2002. Impact of artificial lighting on moths. In Proceedings of the Urban Wildlands Group, Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting, Los Angeles, California, February 23-24, 2002, edited by C. Rich and T. Longcore. Goff, G. R., D. J. Decker and G. Pomerantz, 1988. A diagnostic tool for analyzing visitor impacts on wildlife refuges: A basis for a systematic approach to visitor management. Transactions of the Northeast Section - Wildlife Society 45:82. Klein, M. L. 1989. Effects of high levels of Human Visitation on Foraging Waterbirds at J.N. “Ding” Darling NWR, Sanibel, Florida. Final Report to USFWS. 103pp. Kuss, F. R., and C. N. Hall. 1991. Ground flora trampling studies: Five years after closure. Environmental Management 15(5):715-727. Marsh, D. M., G. S. Milam, N. P. Gorham, and N. G. Beckman. 2005. Forest roads as partial barriers to terrestrial salamander movement. Conservation Biology 19(6):2004-2008. National Audubon Society. 2007. Audubon Important Bird Areas: Lower James River. Accessed at http://web4.audubon.org/bird/iba/virginia/Documents/Lower%20James%20River.pdf. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Northeast Region Connecting People with Nature Regional Work Plan 2010/2011. Hadley, Massachusetts. Unpublished. United States Public Law 105-57. 105th Congress, 1st session. October 9, 1997. National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. 11 Vinson, M. 1998. Effects of recreational activities on declining anuran species in the John Muir Wilderness, CA. MS Thesis, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana. 83 pp. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2008. Virginia Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Bald Eagles. Watts, B. D., and M. A. Byrd 2010. Virginia bald eagle nest and productivity survey: Year 2010 report. Center for Conservation Biology Technical Report Series, CCBTR-10-09. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA. 40 pp. Accessed at http://ccb-wm.org/virginiaeagles/pdf/CCBTR-10-09_2010VAEagleNestSurvey.pdf. 12 Table 1: Current Annual Administrative Costs Associated with Wildlife Observation, Photography, Environmental Education and Interpretation. Annual Activities Resource Duration Rate1 Cost Coordination, SUP processing, Refuge Manager (GS-13) 6 hours $44 / hour $264 field assistance, infrastructure Outdoor Recreation Planner (GS-11) 260 hours $31 / hour $8,060 maintenance Maintenance Staff (WG-08) 16 hours $23 / hour $368 Monitoring, recording/reporting Outdoor Recreation Planner (GS-11) 20 hours $31 / hour $620 use statistics, evaluating Wildlife Biologist (GS-11) 40 hours $31 / hour $1,240 resource impacts Use of Facilities Education Center 22 days $12 / day $500 Use of Equipment Vehicle or watercraft 22 days $20 / day $1,000 TOTAL $12,052 Note: Some actions, and resulting costs, also support other approved public uses (i.e., hunt program). 1 In 2011 dollars, base salary not including staff benefits at GS-Step 5 or WG-Step 3. Table 2: Annual Visitation Limits Number of Visitors Visitation Limit per Fiscal Year1 per Fiscal Year After 20152 Refuge Uses Number of Number of Breakdown by Use Group 2010 2012 2013 2014 2015 Visitors Visitor Use Days3 Environmental Education 100 620 900 1160 1560 1940 5060 Weekend Overnight 85 100 150 180 200 220 220 3-Day Camp 0 300 450 600 900 1200 3600 5-Day Camp 0 60 90 120 150 180 900 Teacher Workshops 0 40 60 80 100 100 100 Day Programs 15 120 150 180 210 240 240 Hunting4 91 100 100 100 100 100 100 Wildlife Observation, Photography, and Interpretation5 114 115 115 250 250 250 250 TOTAL 305 835 1115 1510 1910 2290 5410 1 Refuge visitation would be limited throughout the year to minimize human-caused disturbance to wildlife. The refuge would be open to visitors for up to 203 days each year. The number of visitor use days would vary by season as follows: 25 in winter, 77 in spring, 25 in summer, and 76 in fall. 2 The visitation limit per fiscal year after 2015 may be subject to change based on the findings of annual evaluations for refuge uses and associated impacts within the next five years (fiscal years 2011 through 2015). 3 Visitor Use Days equate to the number of visitors participating in activities at the refuge per day. For example, five refuge visitors on a single afternoon constitute five visitor use days while five visitors participating in a 3-day environmental education camp constitutes 15 visitor use days. 4 Deer hunting is permitted for three days during November. 5 Visitors often engage in wildlife observation, photography, and interpretive programs during a single visit. 13 Figure 1. Location and relation of Presquile NWR to conservation lands in the vicinity. 14 NT OF E TH TM E R I A N P T E E R D I . O S R . U Presquile National Wildlife Refuge Trail Map M A 49 R CH 3, 18 OLD REMNANT BARN SHED OLD MILK HOUSE OLD SHED OLD BLACKSMITH TACK SHOP SHOP CEMETARY STORAGE (19,521 BUILDINGS ('8&$7,21 1.6 miles &(17(5 0.3 miles 0.3 N 0.5 miles 0.5 0.3 miles Tu rk ey Visitor Is la Contact n 0.5 miles d Station LEGEND C Visitor Contact Station 0.3 miles r u e t v Observation Deck o i f R f s Boat Dock e m a Nature Trail J Refuge Boundary Marsh 0 0.5 1 Mile 0 0.5 1 Kilometer Figure 2. Presquile NWR trail map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a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µ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s the nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibilities for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering wise use of our land and water resources, protecting our ¿ sh and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historic places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The department also promotes the goals of the Take Pride in America campaign by encouraging stewardship and citizen responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration. August 2012