Final Environmental Assessment: Maintenance Dredging, Mayagüez

MAY 2020

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAYAGÜEZ HARBOR

MAYAGÜEZ, PUERTO RICO

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ON MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAYAGÜEZ HARBOR MAYAGÜEZ, PUERTO RICO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED ...... 1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 1 1.2 PROJECT NEED OR OPPORTUNITY ...... 1 1.3 PROJECT AUTHORITY...... 5 1.3.1 AUTHORIZATION ...... 5 1.4 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS ...... 5 1.5 DECISIONS TO BE MADE...... 5 1.6 SCOPING AND ISSUES ...... 5 1.6.1 RELEVANT ISSUES ...... 5 1.6.2 ISSUES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS ...... 5 1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION...... 6 1.7.1 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION ...... 6 1.7.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT- SECTION 7 COORDINATION ...... 6 2 ALTERNATIVES...... 7 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 7 2.1.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 7 2.1.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT...... 7 2.1 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ...... 7 2.2 ALTERNATIVES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER EVALUATION ...... 7 2.2.2 ALTERNATE OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES ...... 7 2.3 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES...... 8 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT...... 10 3.1 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING...... 10 3.1.2 DREDGE AREA ...... 10 3.1.3 ODMDS...... 10 3.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES...... 11 3.2.2 SEA TURTLES ...... 11 3.2.3 ANTILLEAN MANATEE ...... 11 3.2.4 SCALLOPED HAMMERHEAD SHARK AND NASSAU GROUPER ...... 12 3.2.5 WHALES...... 12 3.2.6 HARD CORALS ...... 12 3.3 WATER QUALITY...... 14 3.4.1 WATER USE CLASSIFICATION ...... 14 3.5 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ...... 14 3.6 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES ...... 16 3.7 AIR QUALITY...... 16 3.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES...... 17 3.9 RECREATION RESOURCES ...... 18 3.10 AESTHETIC RESOURCES ...... 18 3.11 NOISE ...... 19 3.12 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ...... 19 3.13 NAVIGATION ...... 19 3.14 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES...... 19 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 21 4.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES...... 21 4.1.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 21 4.1.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 21

i 4.2 WATER QUALITY...... 24 4.2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 24 4.2.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 24 4.3 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ...... 25 4.3.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 25 4.3.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 25 4.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES ...... 25 4.4.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 25 4.4.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 25 4.5 AIR QUALITY...... 26 4.5.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 26 4.5.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 26 4.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES...... 26 4.6.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 26 4.6.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.7 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES ...... 27 4.7.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.7.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.8 AESTHETIC RESOURCES ...... 27 4.8.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.8.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.9 NOISE ...... 27 4.9.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 27 4.9.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 28 4.10 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ...... 28 4.10.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 28 4.10.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 28 4.11 NAVIGATION ...... 28 4.11.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 28 4.11.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 28 4.12 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES...... 29 4.12.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE ...... 29 4.12.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE ...... 29 4.13 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...... 29 4.14 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES ...... 33 4.14.1 IRREVERSIBLE...... 33 4.14.2 IRRETRIEVABLE ...... 33 4.15 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 33 4.16 LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES AND MAINTENANCE/ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY...... 33 4.17 INDIRECT EFFECTS...... 33 4.18 COMPATIBILITY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL OBJECTIVES...... 33 4.19 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS...... 33 4.20 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS ...... 35 4.20.1 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 ...... 35 4.20.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973 ...... 35 4.20.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT OF 1958 ...... 35 4.20.4 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966 ...... 35 4.20.5 CLEAN WATER ACT OF 1972 ...... 35 4.20.6 CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1972 ...... 36 4.20.7 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1972 ...... 36 4.20.8 FARMLAND PROTECTION POLICY ACT OF 1981 ...... 36 4.20.9 WILD AND SCENIC RIVER ACT OF 1968 ...... 36 4.20.10 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972 ...... 36 4.20.11 ESTUARY PROTECTION ACT OF 1968 ...... 36 4.20.12 FEDERAL WATER PROJECT RECREATION ACT ...... 36 4.20.13 SUBMERGED LANDS ACT OF 1953 ...... 36 4.20.14 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES ACT AND COASTAL BARRIER IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1990 ...... 37 4.20.15 RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT OF 1899 ...... 37 4.20.16 ANADROMOUS FISH CONSERVATION ACT ...... 37 4.20.17 MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT AND MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACT ...... 37 4.20.18 MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARCH AND SANCTUARIES ACT...... 37 4.20.19 MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT ...... 37 4.20.20 E.O. 11990, PROTECTION OF WETLANDS ...... 37

ii 4.20.21 E.O. 11988, FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT ...... 38 4.20.22 E.O. 12898, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ...... 38 4.20.23 E.O. 13089, CORAL REEF PROTECTION ...... 38 4.20.24 E.O. 13112, INVASIVE SPECIES ...... 38 5 LIST OF PREPARERS ...... 39 5.2 PREPARERS ...... 39 5.3 REVIEWERS...... 39 6 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ...... 40 6.2 SCOPING AND DRAFT EA...... 40 6.3 AGENCY COORDINATION...... 40 6.4 LIST OF RECIPIENTS ...... 40

REFERENCES ...... 41 APPENDIX A - PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE ...... 43 APPENDIX B - BENTHIC SURVEY REPORT ...... 79

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Project Area Map ...... 2 Figure 2. 2018 Hydrographic Survey with 103 Sample Locations ...... 3 Figure 3. Project Area Benthic Resources Map ...... 4 Figure 4. June 2019 Side-scan Mosaic and Underwater Video Location Map ...... 13 Figure 5. Composite EFH for species and life stages of the Spiny Lobster, Queen Conch, Reef Fish, and Coral ...... 16 Figure 6. Three hundred-year old anchor on Mayagez waterfront ...... 18 Figure 7. CBRS Unit PR-72 Map ...... 20

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Alternative Comparison ...... 8 Table 2. Status of Listed Species that May Occur Within the Project Area ...... 11 Table 3. Federally Managed Species of Shellfish and Finfish that are Common within the Project Area ...... 15 Table 4. Summary of Cumulative Impacts ...... 29

iii FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAYAGÜEZ HARBOR MAYAGÜEZ, PUERTO RICO

1 PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED

1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Jacksonville District, is proposing to conduct periodic maintenance dredging of Mayagez Harbor in Mayagez, Puerto Rico (Mayagez harbor project). This would include dredging of Federal channel reaches 1&2 (see Figure 1). All dredged material would be placed in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) located 6 nautical miles west of the harbor (see Figure 1). The Federal channel would be maintained to its authorized dimensions of a 2,200 foot long approach channel 30 feet deep by 1000 feet wide at the seaward limit, decreasing to 500 feet wide where it connects to the 30 feet deep by 500 feet wide by 1,250 feet long terminal. The harbor has natural depths in most areas of 30 to 70 feet and a deep, wide channel though the outlying shoals. The Federal Mayagez harbor project allows cargo access to the terminal facilities which eliminates the need for light loading ships.

1.2 PROJECT NEED OR OPPORTUNITY The maintenance requirement of the Mayagez harbor project is approximately 47,400 cubic yards every 7 years based on hopper dredge records dating back to 1951 (USACE 1981). Although the harbor has natural depths in most areas of 30 to 70 feet Mean lower low water (MLLW) and a deep, wide channel though the outlying reefs, shoals typically form near the east end of the terminal facility as can be seen in the latest hydrographic survey (Figure 2).

Year Quantity [cubic yards (cy)] 1951 123,798 1956 12,002 1969 120,481 1974 26,423 1978 30,829 1987 78,000

Sediments, primarily sand with some silt from the Quebrada del Oro and Rio Yaguez, discharge into and immediately south of the harbor forming shoaling within the Federal channel necessitating maintenance dredging. Last dredged in 1987, the most recent examination survey documented a total in situ shoaling volume of approximately 73,000 cy within the authorized channels. Minimum depths recorded from the project channel

1 is 17.1 feet MLLW causing problems for commercial vessel access to the terminal facilities. Vessels are currently being forced to light load, wait for high tides, or prop dredge through the channels. Removal of the shoal material would maintain access to terminal facilities, eliminating the need for lighterage.

Figure 1. Mayagez Harbor Project Area Map. ARMY PS OF ENGI NEERS l-

C PUERTO R ICO

,. ., " " " .. ..

" ,

MAYAGUEZ HARBOR,P. R.

u,.i..c iH rcu =_,o- ,..o===---•'•"°2:==---..• oo Lo S '"""°' [NGIS"fOI OISTR!Cf• .IAC,K$0NVILL( ~ 0, Qlli!Ntv1$, ~l.f, fl.QIIIOA l-2.C--tt

2 Figure 2. 2018 Hydrographic Survey with 103 Sample Locations.

--"'\.;; I

.~': l!

....;:~_ -.... M3 ., ---,_ D .,,_P·. I " ...... __ ...., " I -----::tJ / M'f

3 Figure 3. Project Area Benthic Resources Map. N

Hard bottom/Reef Rubble Hardbottom/Uncolonized Bedrock Macroalgae/Patchy/10-50% Macroalgae/Patchy/50-90%

Reef/Colonized Bedrock - ~,.~ -_. Reef/Colonized Pavement Reef/Colonized Pavement with Channels Reef/Linear Reef Reef/Patch Reef (Aggregated) Reef/Patch Reef (Individual) Reef/Scattered Coral-Rock Reef/Spur and Groove Reef

Seagrass/Contmuous

- Seagrass/Patchy/ 10-30% 10 5 0 Kilometers t::J Seagrass/Patchy/30-50% - Seagrass/Patchy/50-70% - Seagrass/Patchy/70-90%

4 1.3 PROJECT AUTHORITY

1.3.1 AUTHORIZATION The Mayagez harbor project was authorized by the River and Harbor Act of 1935 as published in House Document No. 215, 72d Congress, 1st Session, and the River and Harbor Committee Document No. l, 73d Congress, 1st Session. No amendments or modifications have been made to the project since that authorization.

1.4 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS Related NEPA, design, and planning documents for Mayagez Harbor project include the following:

 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Designation of Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites for the Harbors of Arecibo, Mayagez, Ponce, and Yabucoa, Puerto Rico. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II. New York, New York May 1988.

 Reconnaissance Report on the Operation and Maintenance of Mayagez Harbor, Puerto Rico. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Jacksonville, FL. 1981.

1.5 DECISIONS TO BE MADE. This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates whether to conduct periodic maintenance dredging of Mayagez Harbor, Mayagez, Puerto Rico.

1.6 SCOPING AND ISSUES

1.6.1 RELEVANT ISSUES The following issues were identified as relevant to the proposed Mayagez harbor project and appropriate for further evaluation: threatened and endangered species including sea turtles, Antillean manatee, whales, sharks, grouper and corals and Acroporid coral designated critical habitat (DCH); water quality; essential fish habitat; wildlife resources; air quality; cultural resources; aesthetics; recreation; socio economics; noise; navigation; and coastal barrier resources.

1.6.2 ISSUES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER ANALYSIS The proposed action is expected to have little or no impact on soils, housing, or population dynamics. DCH for the hawksbill sea turtle occurs in the coastal waters surrounding Mona and Monito Islands which are over 40 miles (60 km) west of the ODMDS and Mayagez harbor project. Therefore, the proposed action is expected to have no impact on hawksbill DCH which is eliminated from further analysis in this document. The effects of offshore placement are discussed in detail in the 1988 EIS and all discussions and conclusions contained therein are hereby incorporated by reference into this EA.

5 1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION

1.7.1 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION This project would be performed in compliance with Commonwealth of Puerto Rico water quality standards. On 20 February 1981, the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (EQB) issued a water quality certification (WQC). On 27 Feb 2020, the Puerto Rico Department of Environmental and Natural Resources issued a conditional waiver of the water quality certification subject to the Corps compliance with the water quality standards. On 24 April 2020, the Puerto Rico Planning Board concurred with the Corps determination that the Mayaguez Harbor maintenance dredging project is consistent with the Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program.

1.7.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT- SECTION 7 COORDINATION In accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the proposed work is being coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) by EPA during the updated 103 testing and Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) update for the ODMDS. The Corps initiated informal consultation with USFWS via letter dated 5 June 2019 and USFWS concurred with the MANLAA determination for the Antillean manatee via letter dated 14 June 2019. In addition, the Corps initiated informal consultation with NMFS under the ESA for the effects of dredging the Federal channel via letter dated 4 April 2019. However, the Corps’ South Atlantic Division worked with NMFS to revise the South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion (SARBO) to include maintenance dredging and coastal operations in Puerto Rico. The 2020 SARBO was issued 27 March 2020 and NMFS concurred this project proposed dredging and ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) placement is covered by it on 27 April 2020.

2 ALTERNATIVES

The alternatives section is perhaps the most important component of this EA. It describes the no action alternative, the proposed action, and other reasonable alternatives that were evaluated. The beneficial and adverse environmental effects of the alternatives are presented in comparative form, providing a clear basis for choice to the decisionmaker and the public. A preferred alternative, maintenance dredging of the Mayagez harbor project with ODMDS placement, was selected based on the information and analysis presented in the sections on the Affected Environment and Probable Impacts.

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

2.1.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Mayagez Harbor served as a port even before the authorization of a Federal navigation project. Until 1932 the harbor was a lighterage port with public lighterage service. Should maintenance be discontinued under the no action alternative, lightering, light loading ships, and/or using another port are all possible scenarios when shoaling reduces the harbor depths.

2.1.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT Maintenance dredging of the Mayagez harbor project would maintain access to terminal facilities, eliminate the need for lighterage, and meet the intent of the authorized project. Dredged material would be placed in the EPA designated ODMDS located 6.9 miles west of the harbor in water depths ranging between 1,151 to 1,259 feet (351 to 384 meters). Additional information on the alternatives analysis performed to designate the ODMDS, as well as an analysis of the effects of offshore disposal, is contained in the 1988 EIS (EPA 1988) and is hereby incorporated by reference into this analysis.

2.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The preferred alternative is to perform maintenance dredging of the Mayagez harbor project with ODMDS placement in order to maintain the authorized channel dimensions. Due to the character of the fine sediments to be dredged and fringing reef resources offshore from the harbor, the ODMDS is the preferred dredged material placement alternative.

2.3 ALTERNATIVES ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER EVALUATION

2.3.1 ALTERNATE OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES In Puerto Rico, shallow water environments typically are inhabited by corals. To avoid affecting coral resources, deeper water disposal sites are selected. In the 1988 EIS, four alternate sites were identified for the Mayagez harbor project using a site selection methodology developed by EPA and the Corps. As a result, two of the alternate sites

were determined to be not suitable for designation due to their location over the insular shelf area where fine sediments from dredged material disposal were likely to be transported onto coral reefs. The third alternate site was eliminated due to its greater distance from the harbor.

2.3.2 UPLAND PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVES The locations of landfills and barren areas near Mayagez Harbor were identified and evaluated in the 1988 EIS as potential dredged material placement areas. While the use of land-based placement alternatives near Mayagez may be technically feasible, no potential sites for hydraulic filling were identified. One potential marsh construction site, two possible landfills, and one possible barren area (quarry) site were identified. Prior to the use of any of these sites as dredged material placement areas, site-specific field studies would be required. In addition, site-specific evaluations of dredged material disposal and monitoring costs would be necessary to determine the economic feasibility of each potential upland location as a dredged material placement area (EPA 1988). Therefore, additional dredged material handling alternatives are not evaluated further in this EA.

2.4 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES Table 1 lists alternatives considered and summarizes the major features and consequences of the proposed action and alternatives. See section 4.0 Environmental Effects for a more detailed discussion of impacts of alternatives.

Table 1: Alternative Comparison ALTERNATIVE No Action Status Quo (No Maintenance Dredging with ODMDS Maintenance Dredging) Placement ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR WHALES No effect. May affect, but not likely to adversely affect, with implementation of standard protection measures. SEA TURTLES No effect. May affect, required implementation of protection measures.

ANTILLEAN MANATEE No effect. May affect, but not likely to adversely affect, with implementation of standard protection measures. SCALLOPED No effect. May affect, but not likely to adversely affect. HAMMERHEAD SHARK NASSAU GROUPER No effect. May affect, but not likely to adversely affect. CORALS Possible increased nearshore turbidity May affect, but not likely to adversely affect, from prop dredging through shoals. with implementation of protection measures. WATER QUALITY Possible degradation due to Short-term localized increase in turbidity at nearshore turbidity from prop dredging the dredge and placement areas. through shoals. ESSENTIAL FISH Possible degradation of estuarine and Estuarine and Marine water column with HABITAT marine water column with unconsolidated sediment would be unconsolidated sediment from prop temporarily impacted during dredging and dredging through shoals. placement activities.

ALTERNATIVE No Action Status Quo (No Maintenance Dredging with ODMDS Maintenance Dredging) Placement ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR FISH AND WILDLIFE Minor impact due nearshore turbidity Minor impact during dredging and placement. RESOURCES from prop dredging through shoals. Foraging animal species could be temporarily displaced from the dredge and placement areas. AIR QUALITY No effect. Minor and short-term impacts caused by equipment.

CULTURAL RESOURCES No effect to historic properties. No effect to historic properties.

RECREATION Navigation restrictions likely. Short-term disruption of recreation in the dredge and placement areas.

AESTHETICS No effect. Minor short-term adverse impact due to construction activities.

NOISE No effect. Minor and temporary adverse effect from presence of construction equipment.

SOCIO ECONOMICS Major long-term impact to local Major long-term benefit to local economies. economies. COASTAL BARRIER No effect. No effect. RESOURCES NAVIGATION Long-term impact from lack of channel Temporary disruption during dredging and maintenance. placement from presence of equipment.

3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The Affected Environment section succinctly describes the existing environmental resources of the areas that would be affected if any of the alternatives were implemented. This section describes only those environmental resources that are relevant to the decision to be made and does not describe the entire existing environment. This section, in conjunction with the description of the "no action" alternative forms the base line conditions for determining the environmental impacts of the proposed action and reasonable alternatives.

3.1 GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Mayagez Harbor is near the center of the west coast of Puerto Rico and faces the Mona Passage, an important sea route to and from the Panama Canal. The port of Mayagez is the third busiest port in Puerto Rico with the city of Mayagez having the island’s seventh largest urban area (http://welcome.topuertorico.org/reference/cities-by- population.shtml). Mayagez Harbor is about 93 miles (150 km) by water from San Juan Harbor which is the principal port of the island and 63 miles (101 km) by water from Ponce Harbor which is the second largest port. Mayagez Harbor is partially protected by two promontories, Algarrabo Point on the north and Algarrobito Point on the south, and by outlying shoals. Mayagez Harbor has natural depths in most areas of 30 to 70 feet MLLW and a deep, wide channel though the outlying shoals.

Mayagez Harbor is a customs port of entry owned and operated by the Puerto Rico Ports Authority (PRPA). The terminal includes 1,280 feet of bulkhead and wharf, covered transit sheds, pipelines (for water, fuel oil, and molasses), and a conveyor system to receive bulk grains. Northwest of the terminal is a 1,300-foot bulkhead and wharf with covered storage and pipelines for water and diesel fuels. Anchorage in the harbor is southwest of the terminal in depths of 30 to 50 feet. Vessels used in the harbor are commercial fishing boats, tugs, barges, and oceangoing ships.

3.1.2 DREDGE AREA The concrete terminal bulkhead and wharf border the Federal channel on the north side of the harbor. Bottom sediments in the harbor channel consist of unconsolidated substrate primarily sand, silt and clay. This material likely originates from municipal storm water discharges discussed in more detail in Sections 1.2 above and 3.4.1 below. There are no unique ecological characteristics in the harbor and it contains similar sediment type and benthic biological community as areas immediately adjacent in Mayagez bay. The benthos in the channel consist principally of deposit feeders, an ecological type well-adapted to living in the high turbidity that might be caused temporarily by dredging. In 2008 NOAA mapped a patch coral reef approximately 3,300 feet (1,000m) northwest of the dredge area (See Figure 6).

3.1.3 ODMDS This site is located approximately 6.9 miles west of the Mayagez Harbor and occupies an area of approximately one square mile in water depths ranging between 1,151 to

1,259 feet (351 to 384 meters). A detailed description of the ODMDS is included in the 1988 EIS and incorporated by reference into this analysis. Please refer to Figure 2 for the locations of sediment samples taken from the proposed dredge area for an evaluation of their suitability for ocean disposal.

3.2 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES Threatened and endangered species that may occur in the project area, and that may be affected by the proposed work, can be found in Table 2.

Table 2. Status of Listed Species that May Occur Within the Project Area. Species Scientific Name Federal Listing* Green sea turtle Chelonia mydas LT Loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta LT Leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea LE Hawksbill sea turtle Eretmochelys imbricata LE Antillean manatee Trichechus manatus LT Scalloped hammerhead shark Sphyrna lewinii LT Nassau grouper Epinephelus striatus LT Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis LE Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus LE Blue whale Balaenoptera musculus LE Finback whale Balaenoptera physalus LE Elkhorn coral Acropora palmata LT Staghorn coral Acropora cervicornis LT Pillar coral Dendrogyra cylindrus LT Rough cactus coral Mycetophyllia ferox LT Lobed star coral Orbicella annularis LT Mountainous star coral Orbicella faveolata LT Boulder star coral Orbicella franksi LT * LE=Endangered and LT=Threatened

3.2.2 SEA TURTLES The coastal waters of the project area provide developmental habitat for immature hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) and green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas). In addition, area beaches support nesting populations of hawksbill and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) sea turtles. Finally, loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles are infrequent visitors to, and nesting by this species has not been documented in, the project area. According to Dow et al. 2007, the beach identification code for Mayagez is PR15 and nest densities for hawksbill and leatherback sea turtles average 25-100 crawls per year. PR-15 nesting beach habitat occurs along the coast both north and south of Mayagez Harbor.

3.2.3 ANTILLEAN MANATEE Manatees can be found in the project channels and in the coastal waters of the Caribbean Sea. The proposed work does not overlap any DCH for this species.

According to Atkins 2011, two manatee “hot spots” (areas with statistically high concentrations of manatees) occur between 3.5 to five miles south of Mayagez Harbor along the more sparsely developed Bahia Bramadero coastline where significant seagrass foraging habitat occurs.

3.2.4 SCALLOPED HAMMERHEAD SHARK AND NASSAU GROUPER The threatened scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewinii; Northwest Atlantic Distinct Population Segment (DPS)) and Nassau grouper (Epinephelus striatus) may occur in the vicinity of the project. However, these species are highly mobile and typically considered offshore species.

3.2.5 WHALES The fin, blue, sei, and sperm whales are all federally listed as endangered under the ESA. On September 8, 2016 NMFS delisted the West Indies DPS (one of fourteen DPSs for this species worldwide) of the humpback whale but the species is still protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. None of these large, oceanic whales are expected to be present within the harbor but they could occur near the ODMDS.

3.2.6 HARD CORALS Seven (7) species of ESA-listed corals could occur on the fringing reefs along the coast approximately 1.5 miles (2.4 km) west of the harbor. Also as discussed in 3.1.2 above, in 2008 NOAA mapped a patch coral reef approximately 3,300 feet (1,000m) northwest of the dredge area (See Figure 6). The coastal waters of the project vicinity from the Mean Low Water (MLW) line to the 30m depth contour, have been designated as Acroporid coral critical habitat (DCH) by NMFS. However, as an existing (already constructed) federally authorized project, all waters identified as a part of Mayagez harbor project are not included in the DCH (FR 72236 2008). Also, none of these hard coral species are likely to occur in the harbor or project channels due to shoaling and turbid watershed discharges. In Mayagez Bay most inshore reefs (.6 – 49 %) at 6-12 m show advanced stages of degradation, while the live coral cover at distant reefs increased. In fact, Tourmaline Reef (3 miles west of Mayagez Harbor) has higher live coral cover than other reefs in Mayagez Bay (Morelock et al, 2000).

A benthic survey utilizing side-scan sonar and underwater video was conducted on 24- 25 June 2019 at Mayaguez Harbor to characterize the benthic communities within and 1,100-feet adjacent to the proposed federal navigation channel maintenance dredge areas (See Figure 4). First the side-scan data was acquired and a mosaic created, then underwater video was collected in areas of interest identified on the side-scan mosaics. A total of seven (7) underwater videos were completed which confirmed the assumptions discussed above. The harbor channel areas to be dredged contained unconsolidated substrate. No hard corals were found in the dredge area nor were any seen within 1,100-feet around the dredge area. The benthic survey report with additional information can be found in Appendix B.

Figure 4. June 2019 Side-scan Mosaic and Underwater Video Location Map.

• PUERTO RICO

Mayag uez Harbor ~ MA.YAGOEZ_CAMERADROPS Dredge Area and Buffer

Mayag uez Municipality S Army Corps Puerto Rico of Engineers ~, Jacksonville District 0 200 fli1eters

3.3 WATER QUALITY

3.4.1 WATER USE CLASSIFICATION The urban stream Quebrada del Oro flows directly into the east end of Mayagez Harbor where the majority of shoaling occurs. In addition, the Rio Yaguez, Rio Majagual and Rio Guanajibo discharge into the Caribbean Sea 0.5, 1.8, and 2.5 miles south of the harbor (respectively). Along the coast and extending offshore 10.3 nautical miles, the coastal waters are designated as Class SC surface waters. Class SC surface waters are intended for use where human contact with the water is indirect (such as fishing or boating), and for use in the propagation and preservation of desirable species.

3.5 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT The 1996 amendments to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. §1801 et seq.) set forth a new mandate for the NMFS, regional fishery management councils (FMC), and other Federal agencies to promote the protection, conservation, and enhancement of EFH. The EFH provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act support one of the nation’s overall marine resource management goals to maintain sustainable fisheries. The Magnuson- Stevens Act’s final rule, to manage fishery resources and their habitats, was released on January 17, 2002 (67 FR 2343). NMFS and its affiliate, the Caribbean Fisheries Management Council (CFMC), oversee the managed species and their habitats potentially found within the proposed project’s footprint. If a construction, permitting, funding, or other proposed action potentially affects EFH(s), then applicable Federal permitting agencies must consult with the NMFS. The EFH consultation ensures the potential action considers the effects on important habitats and supports the management of sustainable marine fisheries (NOAA, 2008).

In the Caribbean waters under the jurisdiction of the U.S., EFH is identified and described based on areas where the life stages of 17 managed species of fish and marine invertebrates occur. Fourteen of the 17 managed species, which have been documented in the study area, are listed in Table 3 below. Since all of these species occur in all habitats within the Caribbean waters under U.S. jurisdiction, EFH includes all waters and substrates, including coral habitats, submerged vegetation, and adjacent intertidal vegetation, including wetlands and mangroves that are necessary for the reproduction, growth, and feeding of marine species.

EFH within Mayagez Harbor includes estuarine and marine water column with uncolonized, unconsolidated bottom. Consolidated substrates such as coral reefs and colonized hardbottom do not occur in the Mayagez Harbor project dredge area. However, extensive areas of coral reef, colonized hardbottom and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) occur adjacent to the project area in Mayagez Bay. Therefore, fish and invertebrate species that may occur in the project vicinity are noted in Table 3.

Table 3. Federally Managed Species of Shellfish and Finfish that are Common within the Project Area. Species Common Name FMP Chaetodon striatus Banded Butterflyfish Reef Fish ‐ aquarium trade Epinephelus guttatus Red Hind Reef Fish Cephalopholis fulvus Coney Reef Fish Lutjanus analis Mutton Snapper Reef Fish Lutjanus apodus Schoolmaster Reef Fish Lutjanus griseus Gray Snapper Reef Fish Ocyurus chrysurus Yellowtail Snapper Reef Fish Haemulon plumieri White Grunt Reef Fish Balistes vetula Queen Triggerfish Reef Fish Sparisoma chrysopterum Redtail Parrotfish Reef Fish Holocentrus ascensionis Squirrelfish Reef Fish Malacanthus plumieri Sand Tile Fish Reef Fish Panulirus argus Spiny Lobster Spiny Lobster Strombus gigas Queen Conch Queen Conch

Per the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for each of the four groups below, EFH is defined as (CFMC and NOAA 2004):

Spiny Lobster FMP: EFH in the U.S. Caribbean consists of all waters from Mean High Water (MHW) to the outer boundary of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) I– habitats used by phyllosoma larvae and seagrass, benthic algae, mangrove, coral, and live/hard bottom substrates from MHW to 100 fathoms depth used by other life stages.

Queen Conch FMP: EFH in the U.S. Caribbean consists of all waters from MHW to the outer boundary of the EEZ – habitats used by eggs and larvae and seagrass, benthic algae, coral, live/hard bottom and sand/shell substrates from MHW to 100 fathoms depth used by other life stages.

Reef Fish FMP: EFH in the U.S. Caribbean consists of all waters from MHW to the outer boundary of the EEZ – habitats used by eggs and larvae and all substrates from MHW to 100 fathoms depth used by other life stages.

Coral FMP: EFH in the U.S. Caribbean consists of all waters from mean low water (MLW) to the outer boundary of the EEZ – habitats used by larvae and coral and hard bottom substrates from MLW to 100 fathoms depth – used by other life stages.

- EFH on the US Caribbean 9.ate Boundaries [:::::} Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) -Land Base

\,lrg,n Islands

011c:1:oio5c3:110-•6ic0=::::::,90"""...,12~iles

Figure 5. Composite EFH for species and life stages of the Spiny Lobster, Queen Conch, Reef Fish, and Coral.

3.6 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES Biota common to west Puerto Rico can be found within the action area. Intensive sport fishing and some commercial fishing occurs in Mayagez Bay primarily for tarpon and snook, but also ladyfish, white mullet, snappers, jacks, and land and blue crabs. The substrates of the Mayagez harbor project channels are typically dominated by polychaetes, amphipods and bivalves and these organisms serve as an important food source for shorebirds, fish, and crustaceans. Although the majority of the shorelines adjacent to Mayagez Harbor are developed, small mangrove stands at the mouths of the Quebrada del Oro and Rio Yaguez may provide nesting, roosting, and feeding sites for wading birds, kingfishers, gallinules and coots, warblers, and other birds.

3.7 AIR QUALITY Puerto Rico is a United States territory with Commonwealth status. The EPA, Region 2 and the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (EQB) regulate air quality in Puerto Rico. The Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 U.S.C. §7409) gives EPA the responsibility to establish the primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

16 that set acceptable concentration levels for six criteria pollutants: particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrous dioxide, ground level ozone, and lead. Short-term standards (1, 8, and 24-hour periods) have been established for pollutants contributing to acute health effects, while long-term standards (annual averages) have been established for pollutants contributing to chronic health effects. Each state has the authority to adopt stricter standards; Puerto Rico adopted the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) established by EPA and developed a State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act that incorporates permitting and regulatory requirements for stationary and mobile sources of air pollution. EPA regulations designate Air-Quality Control Regions (AQCRs) in violation of the NAAQS as nonattainment areas. On the basis of the severity of the pollution problem, nonattainment areas are categorized as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme. EPA regulations designate AQCRs with levels below the NAAQS as attainment areas. Maintenance AQCRs are areas previously designated nonattainment areas that have subsequently been designated attainment areas for a probationary period through implementation of maintenance plans.

Mayagez Harbor is located within the Puerto Rico AQCR which is comprised of the entire Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, including Vieques, Culebra, and surrounding islands (40 CFR § 81.77). All areas within the AQCR are in attainment or unclassifiable (due to lack of data) for NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, PM, and lead (EPA 2008). Due to its location, Mayagez Harbor experiences nearly constant on-shore trade winds and sea breezes

3.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES The island of Puerto Rico is rich in cultural and historic resources. The city of Mayagez takes its name from a Taino name, Yagez. Mayagez was officially founded by the Spanish in 1760, and by the end of the sixteenth century had grown to 1,800 inhabitants, over 50 houses, and a church. Its status as a port facilitated rapid subsequent development, its population expanding tenfold over the next six decades. By 1835 it had received official status as a Villa, or recognized town, built a town hall, and erected four armed towers along its port; although, some of its most important settlement areas were lost to a fire in 1841. Mayagez became the second city in Puerto Rico to have a press, El Imparcial de Mayagez (The Impartial of Mayagez), established in 1848. Architecturally, it was the first city in Puerto Rico to construct a functioning aqueduct in 1866.

When Puerto Rico fell to the United States in 1898, Mayagez citizens held protests for and against the change in government, and troops were called in to restore order. During this time the population grew and became more diverse. As a port city, it attracted people from around the world, becoming a major center for the export of agricultural products produced throughout the west. Agricultural producers in Mayagez grew sugar cane, rice, and fruits and, in its highlands, coffee, which they continue to produce today.

At the turn of the century Mayagez had become a municipality of over 35,000, with residents from 17 different nations. A university was established in 1909, at the same time a railroad that linked San Juan and Ponce to the city was completed. Parts of the city were destroyed in the 1918 tsunami, but the city continued to grow.

One submerged resource has been recorded approximately 600 meters south of the harbor, opposite of the Punta Algarrobito. A large ancla (anchor), which the Corporation for the Development of the West bills as a 300 year old anchor that was placed there with the aid of three fishing families (see Figure 5). No archaeological, historic, or submerged cultural resources are located within or adjacent to the Mayagez harbor project or the ODMDS.

Figure 6. Three hundred-year old anchor on Mayagez waterfront

3.9 RECREATION RESOURCES Recreational vessels are common in the coastal waters adjacent to Mayagez Harbor where there is access to fishing grounds, diving spots, and locations for other watersport activities in the Caribbean Sea. In addition, other locally available recreational activities include swimming, beach and park sports, and wildlife viewing/eco-tourism.

3.10 AESTHETIC RESOURCES The Mayagez harbor project area consists of a bulkheaded commercial port shoreline, adjacent sandy beaches and Caribbean Sea nearshore bordered by various types of natural areas and development. The Caribbean Sea in the vicinity of the project is picturesque. In addition, the tropical beaches adjacent the harbor provide a serene setting for picnics, fishing and swimming. Although highly channelized and when not in

flood stage, the urban stream Quebrada del Oro and Rio Yaguez provide a tranquil setting as they flow through the historic city of Mayagez on their way to the sea.

3.11 NOISE The ambient sound level of a region is the total noise generated, including sounds from natural and artificial sources. The magnitude and frequency of environmental noise may vary considerably over the course of a day and throughout the month because of changing weather conditions and vessel call schedules. Background noise from normal port operations including recreational and commercial vessel traffic and nearby roadways appears to be moderate.

3.12 SOCIO-ECONOMIC With a large metropolitan area, Mayagez is one of the largest western municipalities with a more diverse economic profile than many of the other, predominantly rural municipalities (Griffith et al. 2007). Although the tuna canneries closed, after nearly 40 years, in the late 1990s and early 21st century, Mayagez still has a ferry terminal to the Dominican Republic, three significant commercial fishing centers, one active recreational fishing center, and a number of locations where a handful of fishers store their small vessels and land their catch. Regional fisheries have been heavily influenced by their proximity to the University of Puerto Rico at Mayagez Sea Grant College Program (Griffith et al. 2007).

3.13 NAVIGATION Vessels used in the 30-foot deep harbor include commercial fishing boats, tugs, barges, and oceangoing cargo and cruise ships. The harbor provides support for industry and business in and around Mayagez. The port handles general cargo as well as bulk fuels, grains, and fresh fish. The grain goes primarily to the five distilleries which comprise a high percentage of the breweries in Puerto Rico. The major portion of the fuels are for electrical power generation. In addition to cargo, since March 2011, ferry service to the Dominican Republic has been offered by America Cruise Ferries. Finally, during the Winter 2010/2011 cruise season, the port was visited periodically by ships of the Holland America Line, including the MS Prinsendam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Mayag%C3%BCez).

3.14 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 (Public Law 97-348) discourages development on largely undeveloped coastal barriers along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Great Lakes coasts by prohibiting use of Federal expenditures. The Act was designed to help conserve important coastal habitats, save Federal dollars and protect human lives. Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS) Unit PR-72 Rio Guanajibo (PR-72) occurs 2.9 miles (4.7 km) S-SW of the harbor (Figure 6). Maintenance dredging is consistent with provisions of the CBRA which excepts: "maintenance of existing channel improvements... and including the disposal of dredge materials related to such improvements".

NOAA2008

- corals - seagrass pavement

CBRS_Unit_PR-72 NOAA2000 0 2 4 8 Kilometers - Coral Reef and Colonized Hardbottom - Submerged Vegetation Figure 7. Benthic Habitat and CBRS Unit PR-72 Map.

4 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

This section is the scientific and analytic basis for the comparisons of the alternatives. See table 1 in section 2.0 Alternatives, for summary of impacts. The following includes anticipated changes to the existing environment including direct, indirect, and cumulative effects.

4.1 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

4.1.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE As discussed in Section 2.1.1 above, should maintenance dredging of Mayagez Harbor be discontinued under the no action alternative, then lightering, light loading ships, and/or ships using another port are all possible scenarios when unabated shoaling negatively impacts channel depths causing restrictions to ships drafts. A ship- to-shore lightering service at Mayagez Harbor for movement of commodities from vessels anchored in deep water would increase commercial vessel (barge) traffic possibly increasing marine animal interactions. However, significant effects to listed species from the no action alternative would not be expected.

4.1.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE In accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, consultation with the USFWS and NMFS was completed by EPA Region 2 in June and September 2019, respectively, during the updated 103 concurrence process for use of the ODMDS. The effects of placing the material in the ODMDS were evaluated in the 1988 EIS and updated EPA consultations, and as discussed in Sections 2.1.2 and 3.1.3 above, are incorporated by reference into this EA.

The Corps has determined that the proposed maintenance dredging may affect swimming green and leatherback sea turtles and may affect but would be not likely to adversely affect swimming hawksbill sea turtles, Antillean manatees, whales, sharks, grouper, or listed corals or adversely modify Acroporid coral DCH. These determinations are based on the implementation of species specific protective measures, the most likely type of dredging equipment typically used to maintain the harbor (mechanical or hydraulic cutter head) and the results of the recent benthic survey discussed in 3.2.6 above. The Corps initiated informal consultation with USFWS via letter dated 5 June 2019 and USFWS concurred with the MANLAA determination for the Antillean manatee via letter dated 14 June 2019 (See Appendix A). The Corps initiated informal consultation with NMFS via letter dated 4 April 2019. Subsequently, discussions with the Corps South Atlantic Division (SAD) concluded that the update to the 1997 SARBO could apply to this project provided the draft terms and conditions are followed. This includes a pre-construction benthic survey which was conducted 24-25

June 2019 and is discussed in 3.2.6 above. No listed corals were found in the pre- construction benthic survey.

The 2020 SARBO was issued 27 March 2020 allowing the use of hopper dredges in Puerto Rico. Therefore, the Corps determined that should a hopper dredge be used, the proposed maintenance dredging may affect swimming leatherback and green sea turtles but would be not likely to adversely affect swimming hawksbill sea turtles, whales, sharks, grouper, and listed corals or DCH. NMFS concurred this project is covered under the 2020 SARBO on 27 April 2020.

Should a hopper dredge be used, the following measures from the 2020 SARBO would be implemented:

 All equipment will be operated according to the requirements in the PDCs relating to direct efforts to monitor, minimize, or avoid impacts on ESA-listed species.

 All personnel associated with projects authorized under the 2020 SARBO will be educated regarding the requirements to avoid and minimize effects to ESA-listed species and critical habitat.

 Reporting requirements necessary to document take of ESA-listed species will be met by following the reporting requirements outlined in Section 2.9 of the 2020 SARBO.

 Relocation trawling will be conducted according to the PDC requirements in Appendix B and Appendix I of the 2020 SARBO.

 A Protected Species Observer (PSO) will monitor for the presence of ESA-listed species on hopper dredges and relocation trawling vessels and will be responsible for handling, tagging, collecting genetic samples, and recording the details of the capture.

Alternatively, a hydraulic cutter suction pipeline dredge or mechanical dredge may be used for this event and therefore adverse impacts or "takings" of sea turtles would not be anticipated. Pursuant to the 2020 SARBO, these types of dredges do not pose a risk to sea turtles like large commercial hopper dredges do. Therefore, the Corps determined that the proposed maintenance dredging using a hydraulic cutter suction pipeline dredge or mechanical dredge may affect but would be not likely to adversely affect swimming sea turtles, whales, sharks, grouper, and listed corals or DCH. NMFS concurred this project is covered under the 2020 SARBO on 27 April 2020.

Finally, the following standard measures would be implemented regardless of the type of dredge equipment used:

 The contractor would instruct all personnel associated with the project of the potential presence of these species and the need to avoid collisions with sea turtles. All

22 construction personnel would be responsible for observing water-related activities for the presence of these species.

 The contractor would advise all construction personnel that there are civil and criminal penalties for harming, harassing, or killing sea turtles, which are protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

 Siltation barriers would be made of material in which a sea turtle cannot become entangled, be properly secured, and be regularly monitored to avoid protected species entrapment.

 All vessels associated with the construction project would operate at "no wake/idle" speeds at all times while in the construction area and while in water depths where the draft of the vessel provides less than a four-foot clearance from the bottom. All vessels would preferentially follow deep-water routes (e.g., marked channels) whenever possible.

 If a sea turtle is seen within 100 yards of the active daily construction/disposal operation or vessel movement, all appropriate precautions would be implemented to ensure its protection. These precautions would include cessation of operation of any moving equipment closer than 50 feet of a sea turtle. Operation of any mechanical construction equipment would cease immediately if a sea turtle is seen within a 50-foot radius of the equipment. Activities would not resume until the protected species has moved at its own volition to a distance greater than 50 feet.

 Any collision with and/or injury to a sea turtle would be reported immediately to the NMFS Protected Resources Division (727-824-5312) and the local authorized sea turtle stranding/rescue organization.

4.1.2.1 Antillean Manatee and Whales Standard protective measures would be taken during placement activities to ensure the safety of manatees and whales. To make the contractor and his personnel aware of the potential presence of these species in the project area, their endangered status, and the need for precautionary measures, the contract specifications would include the following standard manatee and whale protection clauses:

 The contractor would instruct all personnel associated with construction activities about the potential presence of manatees and whales in the area and the need to avoid collisions with them.

 If siltation barriers are used, they shall be made of material in which manatees and whales cannot become entangled, are properly secured, and are regularly monitored to avoid manatee entrapment. Barriers must not block entry to or exit from essential habitat.

23  If a manatee were sighted within 100 yards of the project area, all appropriate precautions would be implemented by the contractor to ensure protection of the manatee. These precautions would include the operation of all moving equipment no closer than 50 feet of a manatee. If a manatee were closer than 50 feet to moving equipment or the project area, the equipment would be shut down and all construction activities would cease to ensure protection of the manatee. Construction activities would not resume until the manatee has moved under its own volition to a distance greater than 50 feet.

 The vessel operators shall maintain a 500-yard buffer between the vessel and any whale.

 All vessels associated with the project would operate at 'no wake' speeds at all times while in shallow waters or channels where the draft of the boat provides less than three feet clearance from the bottom. Boats used to transport personnel would be shallow draft vessels, preferably of the light-displacement category, where navigational safety permits. Vessels transporting personnel between the landing and any workboat would follow routes of deep water to the greatest possible extent. Shore crews would use upland road access if available.

 Mooring bumpers would be placed on all large vessels wherever and whenever there is a potential for manatees to be crushed between two moored vessels. The bumpers would provide a minimum stand-off distance of four feet.

 All personnel would be advised that there are civil and criminal penalties for harming, harassing, or killing manatees and whales, which are protected under the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act.

4.2 WATER QUALITY 4.2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE No changes to water quality are expected from the no action alternative.

4.2.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE The primary anticipated change in water quality at the proposed dredging and ocean dredged material disposal site would be a temporary increase in turbidity. According to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico water quality standards for coastal waters, turbidity levels during dredging are not to exceed 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs) above background levels at the edge of normally a 150-meter mixing zone. In order to comply with these standards, turbidity will be monitored during the proposed dredging. If at any time the turbidity standards were exceeded, those activities causing the exceedance would temporarily cease.

4.3 ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT

4.3.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE No impacts to EFH are expected from the no action alternative.

4.3.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE The proposed 2019 Mayaguez Harbor maintenance dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement would affect approximately 12.6 acres of marine water column and unconsolidated substrate. This is only a portion of the 51.5 acre Federal channel and the extent of shoaling would determine the area to be dredged during each future maintenance event. Species managed by the NMFS that are common within the project area can be found in Table 3. The Corps has determined that the proposed action would not have a significant adverse impact on EFH or federally managed fisheries along the west coast of Puerto Rico. This determination was based on the fact that the substrate of the project area is naturally dynamic and unconsolidated, and measures shall be taken to protect adjacent habitat.

Turbidity could affect vision of marine life within the sediment plume as well as those marine organisms with gills, but these effects would be temporary as they would be limited to the duration of the dredging operations. Dredging activities are anticipated to take up to 30 days approximately every 10-12 years and migrating larvae and/or juvenile fish could be subject to project related elevated turbidity and suspended sediment levels during construction. However, since dredging is anticipated to occur approximately every 10-12 years, suppression of re-colonization of benthic organisms and other trophic levels up the food chain is not expected due to this long duration between events. In addition, it is important to note that the dredge area encompasses a fraction of the entire water body, and similar habitat occurs immediately adjacent. EFH coordination with the NMFS was initiated concurrently with noticing of the draft EA. NMFS completed EFH consultation by letter dated June 21, 2019 which stated that “Based on the information provided, the NMFS agrees the proposed maintenance dredging includes all practicable steps to protect EFH and, accordingly, the NMFS offers no EFH conservation recommendations for the work.” (See Appendix A).

4.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES

4.4.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE Significant effects to fish and wildlife resources from the no action alternative are not anticipated.

4.4.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE As previously stated, the proposed dredging and ocean dredged material disposal site placement would result in temporary impacts to benthos. The excavation would result in a loss of benthic organisms in the Federal channel. Those communities, principally

25 polychaetes, would reestablish quickly upon completion of work. The dredge area is expected to be re-colonized with benthic organisms from adjacent similar habitats especially since construction is anticipated to occur approximately every 10-12 years (shoaling due to storms could require more frequent events). In addition, any fish, seabirds, and other marine life temporarily displaced during dredging operations would be expected to return following completion of construction. In addition, some opportunistic foraging during dredging is expected by some fish and birds. The effects of offshore disposal are discussed in detail in the 1988 EIS and are incorporated into this analysis by reference.

4.5 AIR QUALITY

4.5.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The no action alternative could result in additional vehicle emissions due to the need to light load ships or offload cargo offshore. Barging activities would likely increase as well as trucking activities on the roads between Mayagez and other Puerto Rican ports. The result would be an overall increase in the operation of barges and trucks and therefore an increase is emissions. However, since the Mayagez area of Puerto Rico is an attainment area for the criteria pollutants, significant impacts to air quality from the no action alternative are not anticipated.

4.5.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE Construction equipment from the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement would emit exhaust fumes, but this is anticipated to be a temporary and minor degradation of local air quality. Operations are typically powered by diesel engines and depending on the size, type, age, and condition of the equipment, various emissions can be expected for the duration of the construction. It is important to note that the dredging will occur in a harbor that experiences nearly constant trade winds and sea breezes.

After dredging there could be fewer vessel calls overall, albeit more fully loaded vessels. The project area is compliant with Puerto Rico air quality standards. It has been determined that the proposed dredging would not exceed de minimis (a level of risk too small to be concerned with) levels of direct or indirect emissions of a criteria pollutant or its precursors and are exempted by 40 CFR § 93.153. For these reasons a conformity determination is not required for this project.

4.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.6.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The no action alternative poses no effect to cultural resources.

4.6.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE Based on the absence of cultural resources and the recurrent nature of the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement, the Corps has determined that periodic O&M dredging of Mayagez Harbor and placement of dredged material within the ODMDS would have no effect to historic properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Properties. Consultation with the Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) was initiated by letter on 4 April 2019. Consultation will be concluded prior to finalization of the report.

4.7 RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

4.7.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The cessation of maintenance work at Mayagez Harbor under the no action alternative could negatively impact recreational boating in the coastal waters adjacent the harbor. However, since commercial ships are the primary port users, significant effects to recreational resources from the no action alternative are not anticipated.

4.7.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE The proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement would temporarily disrupt normal vessel traffic (including recreational boating) from the presence of the dredge and equipment in the harbor for the duration of construction. However, maintenance dredging is essential for safe, economical navigation including recreational boating and would occur approximately once every 10-12 years.

4.8 AESTHETIC RESOURCES

4.8.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE There could be an aesthetic deterioration of the urban harbor and port facilities from the cessation of maintenance under the no action alternative. Shoaling could eventually result in an exposed dry beach where the channel is currently.

4.8.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE Aesthetic resources, or visual appeal, of the harbor area could be temporarily adversely impacted during construction due to the presence of the dredge and associated equipment.

4.9 NOISE

4.9.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The cessation of maintenance dredging under the no action alternative would likely result in light loading ships or offloading cargo offshore. Barging activities would likely increase as well as trucking activities on the roads between Mayagez and other Puerto

Rican ports. The result would be an overall increase in the operation of ships, barges and trucks and therefore an increase noise levels around this commercial harbor.

4.9.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE The harbor is bounded by commercial and residential development and with the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement, the noise created by construction equipment could result in a temporary adverse effect on the local community. There would be a major short-term increase in noise levels from the presence and operation of the dredge and scows/tugs used to transport material to the ODMDS. These impacts are considered short-term because they would only occur during the construction period approximately once every 10-12 years.

4.10 SOCIO-ECONOMIC

4.10.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The cessation of maintenance dredging at Mayagez Harbor could have long-term economic and social repercussions in the local area and region. Harbor shoaling would reduce existing Federal channel depths and, if not removed, cause restrictions to ships drafts. Over the long-term, the shoaling could become too great for economical ship operation resulting in the loss of ship traffic and/or higher transportation costs from lighterage or light loading, resulting in an economic burden for the local and regional area.

4.10.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE Maintenance dredging would result in some temporary disruption of normal vessel traffic in the harbor. However, upon completion of the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement, the local and regional economy would benefit from safe, economical navigation and utilization of port facilities to their optimum economy and efficiency to keep the port viable in a competitive market.

4.11 NAVIGATION

4.11.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE If Mayagez Harbor were not maintained shoaling would reduce channel depths and, if not removed, cause additional restrictions to ship access to terminal facilities. Over the long-term, the shoaling would result in higher transportation costs from lighterage or light loading, and ultimately, loss of ship traffic to other ports.

4.11.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE Some temporary disruption of normal vessel traffic in the harbor and nearshore coastal waters would occur during the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement. However, the project provides safe, economical navigation and for

28 utilization of port facilities to their optimum economy and efficiency. Therefore, maintaining the Federal channel would support safe and efficient navigation.

4.12 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES

4.12.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE There would be no effect to CBRS unit PR-72 from the no action alternative.

4.12.2 DREDGING WITH OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE The dredge area and ODMDS are sufficiently far north and northwest (respectively) of Unit PR-72 that the proposed dredging with ocean dredged material disposal site placement is not anticipated to have any effect on the CBRS unit. Coordination with the USFWS is ongoing.

4.13 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative impact is the "impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions" (40 CFR 1508.7). Table 4 summarizes the impact of such cumulative actions by identifying the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future condition of the various resources which are directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed action and its alternatives. The table also illustrates the with-project and without-project condition (the difference being the incremental impact of the project). Also illustrated is the future condition with any reasonable alternatives (or range of alternatives).

TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS (NOTE: The harbor was authorized in 1935 but maintenance records begin in 1951. Therefore, the timeline for this cumulative impacts analysis is from 1951 to the present, and is limited in space to the dredge area.)

Past (historical project impacts) Present Future without project Future with proposed dredging and (current project impacts) (No Action Alternative) ODMDS placement (Preferred Alternative) Sea turtles Construction of the terminal facilities may Use of clamshell or cutterhead Minimal effect. Temporary minor impact during construction due Green and have converted nesting beach habitat. dredge does not pose a risk to sea to presence of equipment in the project area. Leatherback turtles; large commercial hopper Hopper dredging could result in take per the 2020 dredges entrain sea turtles. SARBO. Sea turtles Construction of the terminal facilities may Use of clamshell or cutterhead Minimal effect. Temporary minor impact during construction due Hawksbill have converted nesting beach habitat. dredge does not pose a risk to sea to presence of equipment in the project area. turtles; large commercial hopper dredges entrain sea turtles. Manatees Construction of the terminal facilities Minimal effect with use of standard Minimal effect. Minimal effect with use of standard protection reduced lightering or light loading thereby protection measures. measures. reducing the number of vessel trips. Whales Construction of the terminal facilities Minimal effect with use of standard Minimal effect. Minimal effect with use of standard protection reduced lightering or light loading thereby protection measures. measures. reducing the number of vessel trips. Corals Construction of the navigation channel and Minimal effect with use of standard Minimal effect. Minimal effect. terminal facilities reduced lightering or light protection measures. loading reducing the number of vessel trips and therefore the chance of accidental groundings. Water quality Temporary increase in turbidity with past Pollution prevention measures Minimal effect. Temporary increase in turbidity during dredging. dredging. have resulted in Class SC Would be monitored and maintained within designation. Commonwealth standards. Essential Fish No significant effect on Federally managed No significant effect on Federally Minimal effect. No significant effect on Federally managed fish Habitat fish species. managed fish species with species with avoidance of resources outside the avoidance of resources outside the channels. Frequency not expected to suppress channels. benthic recovery. Fish and Wildlife Loss of terrestrial and aquatic habitat with Wildlife temporarily displaced Minimal effect. Dredging would impact benthic organisms. Wildlife Resources construction of the harbor and terminal during construction. temporarily displaced during construction. facility. Air Quality Local emissions increased with creation of Minor emissions from dredging Possible increase in Minor emissions from construction equipment. De navigation channel. Minor emissions from equipment. De minimis effect to air emissions due to increased minimis effect to air quality. dredging equipment. quality. vessel traffic.

Past (historical project impacts) Present Future without project Future with proposed dredging and (current project impacts) ODMDS placement Cultural Resources No effect to cultural resources. No effect to cultural resources. No effect to cultural No effect to cultural resources. resources. Recreation Construction of navigation channels Dredging beneficial to boating. Shoaling could affect Equipment could temporarily disrupt recreational Resources created recreational opportunities Dredging equipment temporarily recreational boating. boating. Benefit from increased channel depths. (boating). disrupts boat traffic.

Aesthetic Construction of the harbor affected local Equipment temporarily affects Shoaling could negatively Equipment would temporarily affect aesthetic Resources aesthetic resources. aesthetic resources. affect aesthetics. resources. Noise Construction of navigation channels Construction equipment noise is Possible long-term increase Construction equipment noise is temporarily increased local noise levels. temporarily impactful. in noise levels due to impactful. increased vessel traffic. Navigation Dredging of the Federal channels Benefit when maintenance occurs. Unabated shoaling Benefit from maintenance of the Federal channel. benefitted safe and efficient navigation. negatively impacts Temporary disruption during construction. navigation. Socio-Economics Construction of navigation channels Harbor continues to provide an Impact from loss of business Positive economic impact if the proposed dredging created a significant positive economic economic stimulus. due to shoaling limiting and offshore placement was performed. stimulus. access to terminal facilities.

4.14 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES

4.14.1 IRREVERSIBLE An irreversible commitment of resources is one in which the ability to use and/or enjoy the resource is lost forever. Other than the use of fuel, equipment and supplies, there would be no irreversible commitment of resources.

4.14.2 IRRETRIEVABLE An irretrievable commitment of resources is one in which, due to decisions to manage the resource for another purpose, opportunities to use or enjoy the resource as they presently exist are lost for a period of time. Other than the dredging temporarily disrupting navigation and recreational activities, there would be no irretrievable commitment of resources.

4.15 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The dredging would temporarily adversely impact benthic organisms, some fish species, and other wildlife.

4.16 LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES AND MAINTENANCE/ENHANCEMENT OF LONG- TERM PRODUCTIVITY The proposed work is typically of short duration. Adversely affected benthos would be expected to recover in less than a year, possibly longer. Most fish species and other motile organisms, like crabs, should be able to avoid the project area. Therefore, the long-term productivity of fish and other motile species should not be significantly affected. As the dredging occurs only periodically, wildlife would re-colonize and habituate the dredge site between events.

4.17 INDIRECT EFFECTS Harbor dredging should minimize shoaling and improve navigational safety which could increase cruise ship related tourism.

4.18 COMPATIBILITY WITH FEDERAL, COMMONWEALTH, AND LOCAL OBJECTIVES This project has wide support and is compatible with Federal, Commonwealth, and local objectives.

4.19 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS The Corps and its contractors commit to avoiding, minimizing or mitigating for adverse effects during construction activities by including the following commitments in the contract specifications:

1. The Corps will require the contractor to comply with the 2020 SARBO conditions if a hopper dredge is used in order to avoid and minimize effects to swimming sea turtles, such as: conducting relocation trawling, requiring PSOs to monitor for the presence of

ESA-listed species on hopper dredges and relocation trawling vessels, and incidental take reporting. In addition, for all dredge types the contractor shall inform contract personnel of the potential presence of ESA listed sea turtles, whales, fish, coral and coral DCH in the area and the need to avoid collisions/harm to them.

2. Standard protective measures for manatees and whales shall be required.

3. The Jacksonville District’s migratory bird protection measures shall be implemented.

4. The work shall be performed in compliance with Puerto Rico water quality standards.

5. Air emissions such as vehicular exhaust and dust shall be de minimis.

6. The Corps contracting officer would notify the contractor in writing of any observed noncompliance with Federal, Commonwealth, or local laws or regulations, permits and other elements of the contractor's Environmental Protection Plan. The contractor would, after receipt of such notice, inform the contracting officer of proposed corrective action and take such action as may be approved. If the contractor fails to comply promptly, the contracting officer would issue an order stopping all or part of the work until satisfactory corrective action has been taken. No time extensions would be granted or costs or damages allowed to the contractor for any such suspension.

7. The contractor would train his personnel in all phases of environmental protection. The training would include methods of detecting and avoiding pollution, familiarization with pollution standards, both statutory and contractual, and installation and care of facilities to insure adequate and continuous environmental pollution control. The contractor’s quality control and supervisory personnel would be thoroughly trained in the proper use of monitoring devices and abatement equipment, and would be thoroughly knowledgeable of Federal, Commonwealth, and local laws, regulations, and permits as listed in the Environmental Protection Plan submitted by the contractor.

8. The environmental resources within the project boundaries and those affected outside the limits of permanent work under this contract would be protected during the entire period of this contract. The contractor would confine his activities to areas defined by the drawings and specifications.

9. As stated in the standard contract specifications, the disposal of hazardous or solid wastes would be in compliance with Federal, Commonwealth, and local laws. A spill prevention plan would also be required.

4.20 COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

4.20.1 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 (42 U.S.C. § 4321 TO §4335) Environmental information on the project was compiled, the draft EA and Proposed FONSI were prepared and publicly noticed 1-22 June 2019. Comments received were incorporated into this document and are located in Appendix A. The project is in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 to §4335 (Public Law 91-90).

4.20.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973 (16 U.S.C. §1531 TO §1544) The project was coordinated under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §1531 to §1544 (Public Law 93-205). The Corps has determined that the proposed dredging with ODMDS placement may affect swimming green and leatherback sea turtles and may affect but is not likely to adversely affect swimming Hawksbill sea turtles, Antillean manatees, whales, sharks, grouper or corals or adversely modify Acroporid coral DCH. The USFWS concurred via letter dated 14 June 2019 and NMFS via electronic mail dated 27 April 2020.

4.20.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT OF 1958, AS AMENDED (16 U.S.C. §661 TO §666B) This project was coordinated with the USFWS. A Coordination Act Report is not required for the proposed maintenance dredging work. This project is in full compliance with the Act, 16 U.S.C. §661 to §666B

4.20.4 NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT OF 1966 (16 U.S.C. §461 TO §470X-6) The proposed action is in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (PL89-665). As part of the requirements and consultation process contained within the National Historic Preservation Act implementing regulations of 36 CFR 800, this project is also in compliance through ongoing consultation with the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act, as amended, Executive Order 11593, 13007, and 13175, the Presidential Memo of 1994 on Government to Government Relations and appropriate Florida Statutes. Consultation with the Puerto Rico SHPO was initiated by letter dated 4 April 2019 and is ongoing. The proposed action will be in compliance with the goals of this Act upon completion of coordination as stated above.

4.20.5 CLEAN WATER ACT OF 1972 (33 USC §1251 ET SEQ.) The Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (EQB) issued water quality certification PN-MH-86 (AG/HA/mc) on 20 February 1981 for this project. On 27 Feb 2020, the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources issued a conditional waiver of the water quality certification subject to the Corps compliance with the current water quality standards. The project shall be constructed in compliance with the Commonwealth water quality standards including all conditions of the water quality

35 certification, and updated turbidity criteria including maintaining no greater than 10 NTU above background during dredging.

4.20.6 CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1972 (42 U.S.C. §7401 TO §7671Q) Vehicular emission and airborne dust particulates resulting from construction activities shall be de minimis. This project was coordinated with EPA and is in compliance with Section 309 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §7609).

4.20.7 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1972 (16 U.S.C. §1451 TO §1466) On 24 April 2020, the Puerto Rico Planning Board concurred with the Corps determination that the Mayaguez Harbor maintenance dredging project is consistent with the Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program.

4.20.8 FARMLAND PROTECTION POLICY ACT OF 1981 (7 U.S.C. 4201, ET SEQ.) No prime or unique farmland would be impacted by the proposed project. Therefore, this Act is not applicable to the project.

4.20.9 WILD AND SCENIC RIVER ACT OF 1968 (16 U.S.C. §1271 TO §1287) No designated Wild and Scenic river reaches would be affected by project related activities. This Act is not applicable to the project.

4.20.10 MARINE MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972 (16 U.S.C. §1361 TO §1423H) Protective measures for marine mammals such as manatees, dolphins, and whales shall be implemented. This project has been coordinated with the USFWS and NMFS. The project is in full compliance with the Act.

4.20.11 ESTUARY PROTECTION ACT OF 1968 (16 U.S.C. §1221 TO §1226) The protective measures described in Section 4 would insure avoidance and minimization of impacts to Mayagez bay from the proposed dredging. This project is in compliance with this Act.

4.20.12 FEDERAL WATER PROJECT RECREATION ACT (16 U.S.C 460(L)(12)- 460(L)(21) The principles of the Federal Water Project Recreation Act, (Public Law 89-72) as amended, are not applicable to this project.

4.20.13 SUBMERGED LANDS ACT OF 1953 (43 U.S.C. §1301 TO §1356A) The project would occur on submerged lands of Puerto Rico. The project was coordinated with the Commonwealth and is in compliance with the Act.

4.20.14 COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES ACT AND COASTAL BARRIER IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1990 (16 U.S.C. §3501 TO §3510) The action area is sufficiently far north (approximately 3 miles) of Unit PR-72 that the project is not anticipated to have any effect on the CBRS unit. Coordination with the USFWS is ongoing.

4.20.15 RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT OF 1899, AS AMENDED (33 U.S.C. §400 TO §467N) The proposed work could temporarily obstruct navigable waters of the United States. The proposed action was subjected to a public notice. The project is in compliance.

4.20.16 ANADROMOUS FISH CONSERVATION ACT (16 U.S.C. §757A TO §757F) Anadromous fish species would not be affected. The project was coordinated with the NMFS and is in compliance with the Act.

4.20.17 MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT AND MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACT (16 U.S.C. §703 TO §715S) Measures shall be taken to protect migratory birds, i.e. avoiding nesting sites. The project is in compliance with these Act.

4.20.18 MARINE PROTECTION, RESEARCH AND SANCTUARIES ACT (16 U.S.C. §1361 TO §1447F) The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), also referred to as the Ocean Dumping Act, generally prohibits transportation activities by U.S. agencies or U.S.-flagged vessels for the purpose of ocean dumping and dumping of material transported from outside the United States into the U.S. territorial sea. The term "dumping" as defined in the Act, 33 U.S.C. 1402(f), does apply to the disposal of material within a designated Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site. Concurrence from EPA under Section 103 of the Act is required along with updated testing of the material for suitability for ocean dumping. Updated testing is complete and the EPA issued concurrence via letter dated 26 July 2019 (See Appendix A).

4.20.19 MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT (16 U.S.C. §1801 TO §1891D) The Corps has determined that the project would not have a significant adverse impact on EFH or federally managed fish species occurring along the west-central coast of Puerto Rico. The proposed work was coordinated with the NMFS and their concurrence was received via letter dated 21 June 2019 (See Appendix A). The project is in full compliance with the Act.

4.20.20 E.O. 11990, PROTECTION OF WETLANDS There would be no impacts to wetlands by project activities. This project is in compliance with the goals of this Executive Order.

4.20.21 E.O. 11988, FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT This project would have no adverse impacts to flood plain management. The project is in compliance with this Executive Order.

4.20.22 E.O. 12898, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE The proposed action would not result in adverse human health or substantial environmental effects. The project would not impact "subsistence consumption of fish and wildlife". The project is in compliance with this Executive Order.

4.20.23 E.O. 13089, CORAL REEF PROTECTION This project would be not impact those species, habitats, and other natural resources associated with coral reefs. The project is in compliance with this Executive Order.

4.20.24 E.O. 13112, INVASIVE SPECIES This project would not introduce any invasive species. Measures will be included in the dredging contract specifications to prevent introduction and spread of invasive species from project activities. Therefore, the project is in compliance with this Executive Order.

5 LIST OF PREPARERS

5.2 PREPARERS Preparer Discipline Role Paul DeMarco, U.S. Army Biologist Principal Author Corps of Engineers Meredith Moreno, U.S. Archaeologist Cultural Resources Army Corps of Engineers

5.3 REVIEWERS This draft Environmental Assessment was reviewed by the supervisory chain of the Environmental Branch and Planning Division, as well as the Construction-Operations Division, Project Management, and the Office of Counsel of the US Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District.

6 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

6.2 SCOPING AND DRAFT EA A Public Notice was issued for this action 1 June 2019 and the draft EA and proposed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) were made available to the public. Comments were received from the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) which indicated no objection to the maintenance dredging project but requested coordination to prevent affecting their current and future operations. Their contact information was forwarded to Corps Project Management Division.

6.3 AGENCY COORDINATION Coordination was conducted with NMFS, USFWS, EPA, SHPO and DNER as described in this report. Agency coordination letters can be found in Appendix A.

6.4 LIST OF RECIPIENTS Per the Public Notice, copies of the draft EA and proposed FONSI were made available to appropriate stakeholders. A list of stakeholders receiving notification can be found within the Public Notice in Appendix A.

REFERENCES

Atkins, 2011. Puerto Rico Synoptic Aerial Survey Results of the September 1st through 3rd, 2011 Census. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Caribbean Ecological Services Center, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Dow, Wendy, Karen Eckert, Michael Palmer and Philip Kramer, 2007. An Atlas of Sea Turtle Nesting Habitat for the Wider Caribbean Region. The Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation Network and The Nature Conservancy. WIDECAST Technical Report No. 6. Beaufort, North Carolina. 267 pages, plus electronic Appendices. Revision Date August 2008. Accessed March 2009. Available online at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/hcd/pdfs/efhdocs/sa_guide_2008.pdf

Griffith, D., M. Valdés Pizzini and C. García Quijano., 2007. Entangled Communities: Socioeconomic Profiles of Fishers, their Communities, and their Responses to Marine Protective Measures in Puerto Rico. NOAA Series on U.S. Caribbean Fishing Communities. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-556, 524 p. Agar, J. J. and B. Stoffle (editors).

Morelock, J., W.R. Ramirez, A.W. Bruckner, M. Carlo. 2000. Status of coral reefs southwest Puerto Rico. www.uprm.edu\biology\cjs\reefstatus.html

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). South Atlantic Region (SAR), 2008. National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Division; Southeast Regional Office. St. Petersburg, Florida. Essential Fish Habitat: A Marine Fish Habitat Conservation Mandate for Federal Agencies.

NOAA 2008. Habitat Mapping of the West Coast Shelf of Puerto Rico: Results of the Analysis of Existent Sonar Imagery. Hato Rey, Puerto Rico.

Wikipedia, 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Mayag%C3%BCez

INDEX

Infrastructure, 49 —A— —M— Air Quality, 52 Archeological, 49 Mitigation, 49 Artificial Reef, 49 —O— —B— Oil, 51 Benthic, 49 —P— —C— PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE, 53 Class II, 45 Petroleum, 51 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY, Preservation, 49, 50 48 —R— —D— Reef, 49 Dunes, 49 Renourishment, 52 Resources, 49, 50, 51, 52 —E— —S— Economic, 50 Effect, 49 Safety, 49 Enhance, 50 SECTION 404(B) EVALUATION, 39 ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS, 29 SHPO, 50 Erosion, 52 Solid Waste, 51 State, 49, 50, 52 —F— State Historic Preservation, 50 Federal, 49 —T— Fish, 49 Ft. Matanzas National Monument, 44 Transfer, 51

—G— —U— GTMNERR, 50 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 47 Unique, 49 —H— —W— Habitat, 50, 51 Hazardous, 51 Water Quality Certification, 52 Historic, 50 Water Resources, 51 Historic Preservation, 50 Wildlife, 49

—I— Impact, 50, 51, 52

APPENDIX A - PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT 701 SAN MARCO BOULEVARD JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32207-8915

Planning and Policy Division Environmental Branch

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Regulation (33 CFR 230.11 and 40 CFR 1501 .4(e)1 ), this letter constitutes the Notice of Availability ofthe proposed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Operations and Maintenance Dredging of the Mayaguez Harbor Federal Navigation project. This project is located in Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. Enclosed is the proposed FONSI and project map.

The FONSI (attached) is also available on the Corps, Jacksonville District website at http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/About/Divisions0ffices/Planning/Environmenta1Branch/E nvironmentalDocuments.aspx. Comments are welcome within 21 days from the date of this letter and should be addressed to the letterhead address, to the attention of the Planning Division, Environmental Branch, Coastal Section. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Mr. Paul DeMarco by telephone at 904-232-1897, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Angela E. Dunn Chief, Environmental Branch

Enclosure US Army Corps of Engineers JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT

PROPOSED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF MAYAGÜEZ HARBOR MAYAGÜEZ, PUERTO RICO

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District (Corps), has conducted an environmental assessment (EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, under the Authority of the River and Harbor Act of 1935 to assess the effects of periodic maintenance dredging of Mayagez Harbor, in Mayagez, Puerto Rico. The Federal Channel reaches 1&2 would be maintained and the dredged material would be placed in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) located 6.9 miles west of the harbor in water depths ranging between 1,151 to 1,259 feet (351 to 384 meters). Additional information on the alternatives analysis performed to designate the ODMDS, as well as an analysis of the effects of offshore disposal, is contained in the 1988 Environmental Impact Statement (EPA 1988). Therefore, per 40 CFR 1506.4 this proposed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) incorporates by reference all discussions, consultations, effects determinations, and conclusions contained in the EPA EIS.

The recommended plan consists of the following:

• Periodic maintenance dredging to remove approximately 100,000 cubic yards of sand, silt and clay every 10-12 years • Placing the material in the EPA designated ODMDS

All practicable means to avoid and minimize adverse environmental effects have been explored. Environmental commitments as detailed in the EA will be implemented to minimize impacts.

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act of 1972, 33 USC §1251 et seq., as amended, any discharge of dredged or fill material associated with the proposed placement of dredged material in the ODMDS have been found to be compliant with section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (40 CFR 230).

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico concurred that the proposed action is consistent with the enforceable policies of the Puerto Rico Coastal Management Program through issuance of water quality certification PN-MH-86 (AG/HA/mc). The referenced water quality certification, pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, includes maintenance dredging of the harbor with placement in the ODMDS. All conditions of the water quality certification will be implemented in order to comply with Commonwealth water quality standards. Pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq as amended, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for project related effect to the threatened Antillean manatee is ongoing. The Corps’ has determined that the proposed action may affect, but would be not likely to adversely affect, the manatee. In addition, the Corps initiated informal consultation with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the ESA for the effects of dredging the Federal channel via letter dated 4 April 2019 and consultation is ongoing. However, the Corps’ South Atlantic Division is working with NMFS to revise the South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion (SARBO). The current proposal consults on maintenance dredging and coastal operations in Puerto Rico. The Corps will rely on the updated SARBO for future maintenance dredging once ratified.

Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. §461 to §470x-6, as amended, consultation was initiated by letter dated 4 April 2019 with the Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act and considerations given under the NEPA. Based on the absence of cultural resources and the recurrent nature of the project, the Corps has determined that periodic operations and maintenance dredging of Mayagez Harbor with placement of dredged material within the ODMDS would have no effect to historic properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Properties. Consultation will be concluded prior to finalization of the environmental assessment.

In view of the above, and the referenced EIS, and after consideration of the public and agency comments received during the public coordination of the EA, I conclude that the recommended plan, dredging of Mayagez Harbor with placement of dredged material in the ODMDS, would not result in a significant effect on the human environment and therefore, does not require an updated Environmental Impact Statement. This Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact incorporates by reference all discussions and conclusions contained in the EA enclosed herewith.

A copy of the document will be made available to the public under the Puerto Rico tab on the following website: http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/About/DivisionsOffices/Planning/EnvironmentalBranch/Enviro nmentalDocuments.aspx. Expand the Puerto Rico tab, then open “Draft Environmental Assessment Maintenance Dredging Mayagez Harbor Mayagez, Puerto Rico”.

______Andrew D. Kelly Jr. Date Colonel, U.S. Army District Commander

ging reported 1962 oject depth 30 ft)

32 35 38

40 28 :'9 . 32 29 R "6" :15 so 31 Fl R 4s · ... 28 24 r; 33 Baja Mandan 35 30 28 so Being filled 37 33 Pun®' Algarrobito

Mayaguez Harbor II II Mayaguez Harbor Dredge Area, Harbor, and ODMDS H<<·:/1 Dredge Plan ffl Public Notice of Proposed FONSI II II Mayaguez ODMDS US Army Corps of Engineers ® Mayaguez Municipality Puerto Rico Jacksonville District 0 400 ■--==---==----■ Meters Hon. Ricardo Rosell Nevarez Tania Vázquez Rivera, Secretary Governador de Puerto Rico Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales

PO Box 9020082 PO Box 366147 San Juan, PR 00902-0082 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936

María del C. Gordillo Pérez Junta de Planificacin Carlos Contreras Aponte, Secretary Centro Gubernamental Roberto Sánchez Vilella, Departmento de Transportacin y Obras Pblicas

Apartado 41119 PO Box 41269, Minillas Station San Juan, Puerto Rico 00940-1119 San Juan, PR 00940-1269

Manuel Laboy Rivera, Secretary Carlos Rubio Cancela, Executive Director Departamento de Desarrollo Econmico y Comercio Oficina Estatal de Preservacin Histrica PO Box 362350 PO BOX 9023935 San Juan, PR 00936-2350 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00902 -3935

Dalcia Lebrn Nieves, Executive Director Carlos Ruiz Co rtés, Executive Director Administracin de Terrenos Instituto de Cultura Puertorriquea PO Box 363767 Apartado 9024184 San Juan, PR 00936-3767 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00902 -4184

Puerto Rico Ports Authority

Executive Director Mr. Mark Reiss, Dredging Sediment and Oceans Section (CWD) ATTN: Ms. Ingrid C. Colberg-Rodriguez U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Post Office Box 362829 290 Broadway, New York NY 10007-1866 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936-2829

Carlos Flores Ortega, Secretary José F. Ortíz Vázquez, Executive Director Departamento de Agricultura Autoridad de Energía Eléctrica Apartado 9745 PO Box 364267 San Juan, PR 00908-9745 San Juan, PR 00936-4267

Lieutenant Commander José Rosario Juan L. Rodríguez Reyes, Executive Director U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Juan Autoridad de Tierras de PR Chief Prevention Department Apartado 9745 #5 Calle La Puntilla Final San Juan, PR 00908-9745 San Juan, PR 00901-1819 Felix Lopez Hon. José G. Rodríguez, Mayor US Fish and Wildlife Service Municipio de Mayagez Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office Apartado 447 P.O. Box 491 Mayagez, PR 00681-447 Boquern, Puerto Rico 00622-049

Marelisa Rivera, Deputy Field Supervisor Dr. Roy Crabtree, Regional Administrator US Fish and Wildlife Service NOAA Southeast Regional Office Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office 263 13th Avenue South P.O. Box 491 St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5505 Boquern, Puerto Rico 00622-049

MR. ISMAEL TORRES Carla G. Campos Vidal, Executive Director U.S. COAST GUARD SECTOR SAN JUAN Compaía de Turismo SECURITY SPECIALIST (PORT RECOVERY) PO Box 9023960 #5 CALLE LA PUNTILLA FINAL San Juan, PR 00902-3960 SAN JUAN, PR 00901-1819

Jose A. Rivera NOAA HCD Wilmarie Rivera Annex Building, Fundacíon Angel Ramos, 2nd floor, Suite 202, Priority Ro-Ro

Franklin Delano Roosevelt Avenue # 383 P.O. Box 3251 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00917 Mayaguez, PR 00681

Rose A. Ortiz Diaz, Planning Analyst CARLOS E. DIEZ, DIRECTOR Coastal Zone Management Consistency Office PROGRAMA DE ESPECIES PROTEGIDAS-DRNA-PR

Puerto Rico Planning Board P.O. BOX 366147 P.O. Box 41119, Minillas Station SAN JUAN, PR 00936 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00940

Carmen Guerrero Pérez, Director Captain Eric King Caribbean Environmental Protection Division US Coast Guard Sector San Juan US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 #5 Calle La Puntilla Final City View Plaza II – Suite 7000 #48 Rd. 165 Km 1.2 San Juan, PR 00901-1819 Guaynabo, PR 00968-8069

Lieutenant Commander David Otani U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Juan Prevention Department #5 Calle La Puntilla Final San Juan, PR 00901-1819 U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE United States the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Caribbean Ecological Services Field Office P.O. Box 491 Boqueron, PR 00622 JUN 14 2019 In Reply Refer To: FWS/R4/CESFO/MM-l 40

Ms. Angela E. Dunn Chief, Environmental Branch US Army Corps ofEngineers Jacksonville District 701 San Marco Blvd. Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8915

Re: Maintenance Dredging, Puerto Nuevo Channel, Arecibo Harbor, Mayaguez Harbor, Puerto Rico

Dear Ms. Dunn:

This is a reply to your June 05, 2019, letter requesting comments to the proposed maintenance dredging of the three areas referenced above. Our comments are provided as technical in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.) and the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. as amended).

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is proposing the maintenance dredging of the Puerto Nuevo Channel, the Arecibo Harbors, and the Mayaguez Harbor within their authorized dimensions. All dredged material will be disposed ofat the existing Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS).

All three projects are within areas used by the Antillean manatee (Trichechus manatus manatus). The Corps will incorporate the Standard Manatee Construction Conditions for In-Water Work into the project specifications. We emphasized on the need to experienced spotters at these three sites, and the importance to identify the appropriate observation points to efficiently spot these animals. For example, manatee observers were used during the construction ofthe Puerto Nuevo Channel, and these observers were located at the hill that comprises the San Juan landfill. They were able to look down at the channel and spot manatees and other wildlife and take corrective actions with the dredge.

Based on the nature of the projects and the implementation of the proposed conservation measures, the Corps has determined that the dredging projects, may affect, but are not Ms. Dunn 2 likely to adversely affect the manatee. We concur with the Corps dete1mination regarding the effects ofthe dredging projects to the manatee. Therefore, no further consultation is required. Nevertheless, ifthe project is modified or ifinformation on impacts to listed species becomes available this office should be contacted concerning the need for the initiation of consultation under section 7 ofthe Act.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this action. Ifyou have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact Felix Lopez ofmy staff at 787 851- 7297 X 210.

Field Supervisor fhl cc: COE, San Juan DNER, San Juan EPA, San Juan NMFS, San Juan µNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Southeast Regional Office 263 13th Avenue South St. Petersburg, Florida 33701-5505 hit s://www.fisheries.noaa. ov/r ion/southeast

June 21, 2019 F/SER47:JAR/pw

(Sent via Electronic Mail)

Colonel Andrew Kelly, Commander USACE Jacksonville District 701 San Marco Boulevard Jacksonville, FL 32232-0019

Attention: Paul M. DeMarco

Dear Colonel Kelly:

NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) reviewed the notice dated June 1, 2019, from the Jacksonville District regarding the proposed maintenance of federal channels in Mayagüez Harbor by periodically dredging from reaches 1 and 2 approximately 100,000 cubic yards of sand, silt, and clay every 10 to 12 years and disposing the material in the Mayagüez Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS). The NMFS has also reviewed the corresponding draft Environmental Assessment (EA) dated June 2019, Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) dated June 1, 2019, and draft Site Management and Monitoring Plan for the Mayagüez ODMDS dated June 2019. The draft EA includes an essential fish habitat (EFH) assessment. The Jacksonville District’s initial determination is the proposed maintenance dredging would not have a significant adverse impact on EFH or federally managed fisheries along the west coast of Puerto Rico. As the nation’s federal trustee for the conservation and management of marine, estuarine, and anadromous fishery resources, the NMFS provides the following comments and recommendations pursuant to authorities of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

The proposed maintenance dredging would be limited to the authorized federal channel and performed by a hydraulic cutterhead suction dredge or mechanical dredge. The project would maintain access to terminal facilities in Mayagüez Harbor, eliminating the need for lighterage. The dredged material would be placed in the Mayagüez Harbor ODMDS located 6.9 miles west of the harbor in water depths ranging between 1,151 to 1,259 feet; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency designated and manages the Mayagüez Harbor ODMDS. The dredging and disposal operations would use industry-standard best management practices to ensure water quality parameters associated with the work do not exceed limits set by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in the water quality certification issued pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The habitats within the federal channel and within one kilometer of the channel do not include seagrass or coral reef habitats, although the data supporting this conclusion are more than ten years old. Based on the information provided, the NMFS agrees the proposed maintenance dredging includes all practicable steps to protect EFH and, accordingly, the NMFS offers no EFH conservation recommendations for the work. The NMFS notes the Jacksonville District is planning a field visit to verify the older field assessments. Based on the results of the field visit, the NMFS may amend this letter to include EFH conservation recommendations. The NMFS appreciates the invitation from the District to participate in the field visit.

Please note these comments do not satisfy consultation responsibilities under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. If an activity “may effect” listed species or critical habitat under the purview of the NMFS, please initiate consultation with the Protected Resources Division at the letterhead address.

The NMFS appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please direct related correspondence to the attention of Mr. José A. Rivera at NOAA HCD, c/o U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, Fundacíon Angel Ramos, Annex Building, #383 Franklin Delano Roosevelt Avenue,

Suite 202, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 00918. He may be reached by telephone at 787-729-6829 or by e-mail at [email protected]. Sincerely, y WILBER.THOM Digitally signed by WILBER.THOMAS.PAYSO AS.PAYSON.13 N.1365820186 Date: 2019.06.21 / for 65820186 07:18:11 -04'00' Virginia Fay Assistant Regional Administrator Habitat Conservation Division cc: CESAJ, [email protected] F/SER4, [email protected] F/SER47, [email protected]

2 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REG ION2 290BROADWAY NEWYORK, NY 10007-1866

July 26, 2019

Rebecca Lee-Duffell Chief, Environmental and HTRW Section Geosystems Branch . Jacksonville District Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 4970 Jacksonville, FL 32232-0019

Dear Ms. Lee-Duffell:

This letter provides our concurrence with your determination that sediments that are proposed to be dredged from areas of the Mayaguez Harbor Federal Navigation Project to address post-Hurricane Maria shoaling are su itable for ocean disposal at the Mayaguez Harbor, PR Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS). We will provide copies of our evaluation memoranda supporting this decision in a follow up letter.

We have reviewed the provided material and concur with your determination that the referenced materials are suitable for disposal at the Mayaguez Harbor, PR ODMDS. National policy allows dredged material testing data to be used to make suitability determinations regarding ocean placement for three years. The three-year window for the subject concurrence will expire on July 26, 2022. After three years, the Agencies are required to review available information to determine whether changed circumstances (e.g., spi ll s, discharges) might have altered the character of the sediment sufficiently to warrant the retesting of the material. The re-evaluation does not automatically trigger a requirement for new sampling or testing.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (212) 637-3799 .

Sincerely, ~~ Mark Reiss Chief, Dredging Sed iment and Oceans Section Water Division

Internet Address (URL)• http//www.epa.gov GOBIERNO DE PUERTO RICO Oficina Estatal de Conservaci6n Hist6rica State Historic Preservation Office

Tuesday, June 4, 20 I 9

Angela E. Dunn Chief, Environmental Branch Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District Department of the Army 70 I San Marco Boulevard Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8915

SHPO: 04-05-19-02 MAINTENANCE DREDGING MAYAGOEZ HARBOR, MAYAGOEZ, PUERTO RICO/ENTRANCE CHANNEL

Dear Ms. Dunn,

We acknowledge the receipt of additional information related to the above referenced project on May 6, 2019. Our records support your finding of no historic properties affected within the project's area of potential 'effects.

Please note that should the Agency discover other historic properties at any point during project implementation, you should notify the SHPO immediately. If you have any questions concerning our comments, please do not hesitate to contact our Office at (787) 721-3737.

Sincerely,

Carlos A. Rubio-Canccla State Historic Preservation Officer

CARC/GMO/MC

Cuartel de Ballaja (Tercer Pisa), OFICINA ESTAT.AL DE Calle Norzagaray, Esquina Beneficencia, Viejo San Juan, PR 00901 CONSERVACI6N HIST6RICA OFICJNADEL GOBERNADOR PO Box 9023935, San Juan, P.R. 00902-3935 STATE HISTORIC Tel: 787-721-3737 Fax: 787-721-3773 PRESERVATION OFFICE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ...;, ,- www.oech.pr.gov CN 078-04495 Rev. 11 /17

GOVERNMENT OF PUERTO RICO Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority

June 18, 2019

Ms. Angela E. Dunn, Chief Environmental Branch Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District 701 San Marco Boulevard Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8915

Dear Ms. Dunn:

RE: Request for Comments Operations and Maintenance Dredging of the Mayaguez Harbor - Federal Navigation Project Municipality of Mayaguez

On June 3, 2019, the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) received you letter requesting comments regarding to the reference project. The proposed works consist of dredging approximately 10,000 cubic yards of sand, silt and clay every 10 to 12 years as periodic maintenance to the Mayag0ez Harbour navigation Channels 1 and 2. The removed materials will be placed in EPA designated ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMS).

PREPA uses the Mayag0ez Harbour for the receipt of fuel that is used as part of the gas turbines operations at the Mayaguez Power Plant (MPP). According to the needs of the MPP, barges with a capacity of 29,000 barrels of diesel are received on this port from time to time. In addition, PREPA is ctonsidering the use of natural gas in its facilities at MPP. For this purpose, a request for information was published so that inte'rested companies can be considered to submit proposals. Among the options that are being considering is the use of a Floating Storage Units (FSU) in one of the nearby docks.

Considering the information sul:)mitted in your request, PREPA has no objection to this project. However, we request that efforts are coordinated at all times with PREPA so that our current and future operatidns will not be affected. You can contact Eng. Edwin· Barbosa, Fuel Office Administrator at (787) 521- 4005 to perform this coordination.

PO Box 364267 San Juan, P u er to Rico 00936-4267 "We are an eq ual opportunity employer and do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, gender, age, national or social origin, social status, politica l ideas or affiliation, religion; for being or perceived to be a victim of domestic violence, sexual aggression or harassment, regardless of marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or immigration status; for physical or mental disability, for veteran status or genetic information." Ms. Angela E. Dunn Page 2 June 18, 2019

If you need additional information, please contact Ms. Indira Mohip-Col6n, Environmental Projects and Licensing Department Management, at (787) 521-4968.

Cordially,

uise . a taner, Head Environmental Protections And Quality Assurance Division

Enclosure GOVERNMENT OF PUERTO RICO PUERTO RICO PLANNING BOARD

Federal Consistency Determination Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program (PRCZMP) CZ-2020-0228-040

RESOLUTION

TO NOTIFY PARTIES ABOUT THE PUERTO RICO PLANNING BOARD DETERMINATION OF CONCURRENCE ABOUT FEDERAL CONSISTENCY WITH THE PUERTO RICO COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ACCORDING TO COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT REGULATIONS AT 15 CFR PART 930

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) submitted a Federal Consistency Determination with the Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program, February 5, 2020 to perform a maintenance dredging in the navigation channel of the Mayaguez Bay. The Mayaguez Bay navigation channel has original authorized dimensions of2,200 feet long by 1000 feet descending up to 500 feet wide in the area adjacent to the port and a minimum depth of30 feet. The last maintenance dredging carried out on this canal was in 1987, where 78,000 cubic yards of material were removed. According to the most recent hydrographic study, there are areas on the east side of the canal (the part closest to the coast of the port and the mouth ofthe Quebrada del Oro), which have a depth ofonly 17. I feet. This difficult the cargo ship access to the terminal. In order to bring the canal to a minimum depth of 30 feet, a dredging and removal of approximately 73,000 cubic yards of material is required. The proposed dredging will be carried out using a hydraulic suction or mechanical dredge that will deposit the material on the barge and then dispose of it on the Ocean Dredging Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) designated by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), located 6.9 miles west of Mayaguez Bay. The USACE performed the required sampling and tests to the proposed dredged sediments. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in their letter dated July 26, 2019, concurred with the USACE determination that the proposed dredge material is suitable for disposal at the Mayaguez Harbor, PR ODMDS.

As part of the required Federal Consistency evaluation, the Puerto Rico Planning Board requested comments from the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources (ONER) and the Puerto Rican Culture Institute (PRCI). A public notice was also issued and disclosed. During the evaluation period, the ONER submitted a comment letter dated March 13, 2020. This agency expressed that the proposed dredging site is located at 1,000 meters northwest of Cafio La Boquilla Natural Reservoir and the ODMDS is located within the ocean limits of it. There are sea turtles nesting areas and other protected species close to the project site. Therefore, the ONER recommends the presence and assistance of a Biologist during the operational phase of the project. Copy of the Environmental Assessment document prepared for this project must be submitted to the ONER Coral Reef Manage1pent Conservation Program to provide recommendations for the project according to the re·cent coral reef monitoring performed by this program in the project area.

After reviewing the submitted documents and information, the Puerto Rico Planning Board (PRPB) in its meeting of April 24, 2020 determined to concur with the USACE determination that the Mayaguez Harbor Maintenance dredging is consistent with the Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program. The performance of this maintenance dredging is necessary to guarantee navigation safety in the Mayaguez Port Zone. Considering the comments and concerns expressed by the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, the PRPB recommend establishing coordination with this agency in order to apply the best coastal resource conservation practices and avoid impacts on coastal resources present within the project area.

(:...... GOB!ERNO DE PUERTO RICO E!.J JUNTA DE PLANIFICACION Federal Consistency Certificate CZ-2020-0228-040 Pag~ 12

This Federal Consistency Certification does not exempt the project to comply with other federal or state requirements.

The following parties shall be notified: Angela E. Dunn, U.S. Amy Corps of Engineers; Ernesto Diaz, Puerto Rico Coastal Zone Management Program, Joanna C. Cepeda Diaz, Department of Natural and Environmental Resources; Puerto Rico Ports Authority; Hon. Jose Guillermo Rodriguez, Major, Mayaguez Municipality.

Certify: That this Resolution is copy of the agreement adopted by Puerto Rico Planning Board (PRPB) in its meeting of April 24, 2020. I expedite and notify this copy to the parties under my sign and official stamp ofthe Puerto Rico Planning Board for general use and knowledge.

In San Juan, Puerto Rico, today 2 9 APR 2020

~~-k, Lo a E. Soto Nogueras Secretary

4-.~GOBIERNO DE PUERTO RICO E!.J JUNTA DE PLANIFICACION Federal Consistency Certificate CZ-2020-0228-040 Pa g _e I3

3:>

38 ~

2S ~,,. 19 32 29 RT j6• 20 Rt FIR4$ ' ,N·r 36 28 38 24 20 .... 15 3 tky 33 ~~ Bajo Monc:Jongo 3S 30 ,aSO 2S 31 I 20 33

N Mayagoez Harbor MayagOoz Harbor Dredge Area. Harbor. and OOMOS Dredge Plan Public Notice ofProposed FONSI MayagOez OOMOS i US Army Corps of Engf neera • MayagOez Municipally Puerto Rico Jacksonvlne District 0 4'00 ~ Mettrs

l~GOBIERNO OE PUERTO RICO 13,J JUNTA DE PLANIFICACION Federal Consistency Certificate CZ-2020-0228-040 Page 14

,:,,.. (. ~•GOBI ERNO DE PUERTO RICO ~~) JUNTA DE PLANIFICACION Federal Consistency Certificate CZ-2020-0228-040 Page \ 5

MayagOez Harbor PMYAGUEZ_CAMERA DROPS Dredge Area and Buffer

__MayagOez Harbor MayagOez Municipality US Army Corps Puerto Rico of EngjllffB ,. Dredge Plan ~tllnicl

4.."" GOBIERNO DE PUERTO RICO E!.} JUNTA DE PLANIFICACION Federal Consistency Certificate CZ-2020-0228-040 Pag~ 16

Figure 3. Project Area Benthic Resources Map. N

RtttC.,_t~Pl'W'W'II 'itltl ~ .AtttUf'ltM Rffl RNf,.O.-,. ~fW~ltd"

~-~-Atft:ft•t•!(, ,~ - Se.:,~,.,, 10 5 OKilometers ~~1•t11c1•t»~:,,... SNQ,M~,,.,,.;~1:Y\o s.;n.,1'atd'P,'1().W'r.

.:..-:1••11 (. if!:. GOB/ERNO DE PUERTO RICO ~~l JUNTA DE PLANIFlCACION GOBIERNO DE PUERTO RICO Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales

2 7 FEB 2020

Sra. Angela Dunn Jefe,Rama Ambiental Cuerpo de Ingenieros del Ejército de los Estados Unidos Distrito de Jacksonville 701 San Marco Boulevard Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8915

Estimada señora Dunn:

Re: Conditional Waiver Water Quality Certificate Mayagüez Harbor Maintenance Dredging United States Army Corps of Engineers Mayagüez, Puerto Rico

We have received your letter requesting re-issuance of the Water Quality Certificate (WQC) for the maintenance dredging of Mayagüez Harbor. In addition, you've requested a waiver to the WQC process for issuing this WQC. The reason for such petition is that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has obtained already a WQC for this action under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, which was issued by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on February 20, 1981. That certificate does not include water quality standards that presently apply and has others standards that no longer apply. Example, the used of a Secchi disc for turbidity measurements.

After evaluating the request and taking in consideration the previously issued and existing WQC for this action, ACA has resolute to waive the WQC, subject to compliance with the following conditions: 1. DNER in issuing this WQC waiver does not relieve the applicant, USACE, of its responsibility for obtaining additional permits and/or authorization from DNER or other state or federal agencies, as required by law. Issuing a WQC waiver shall not be considered an authorization to perform actions that are not specifically covered by the WQC.

2. The applicant shall:

a. Obtain an approved Consolidated General Permit or General Permit of Other Works, per the Regulation for Processing of General Permits, if applicable.

b. Take the necessary measures during the construction phase, to avoid that organic and inorganic substances, such as oils, fuel or other chemical substances, are washed away by runoff and enter a body of water.

Carr. 8838 Km 6.3 Sector El Cinco, Río Piedras, PR 00926 PO Box 366147,

)787.999.2200 �787.999.2303 �www.drna.pr.gov Sra. Angela Dunn Conditional Waiver Water Quality Certificate Mayagüez Harbor Maintenance Dredging Página 2 2 7 FEB 2020 c. For the discharge of runoff into any body of water, during the construction phase, consult with EPA to determine if the discharge requires a NPDES permit, in accordance with 40 CFR Section 122.26(b)(14)(X).

3. The waters of Puerto Rico shall be substantially free from floating non-petroleum oils and greases as well as petroleum derived oils and greases.

4. The concentration of Surfactants, such as substances reactive with methylene blue, in waters of Puerto Rico of the project area shall not exceed 500 µg/L.

5. The color of the waters of Puerto Rico in the project area shall not be altered except by

natural phenomena, as defined under Puerto Rico's Water Quality Standards Regulation. ~/~ ~/~ 6. The concentration of Dissolved Oxygen in waters of Puerto Rico of the project area shall not contain less than 5.0 mg/L, except when this value is depressed due to natural phenomena as defined under Puerto Rico's Water Quality Standards Regulation.

7. The pH of the waters of Puerto Rico in the project area shall always remain between 7.3 and 8.5, standard pH units, except when a natural phenomenon, as defined under Puerto Rico's Water Quality Standards Regulation, alters the pH value and falls outside this range.

8. Solids originated from project activity shall not cause deposition in or be deleterious to existing or designated uses of the water body where the project is taking place.

9. The waters of Puerto Rico in the project area shall not contain floating debris, scum or other floating materials attributable to discharges in amounts sufficient to be unsightly or deleterious to the existing or designated uses of the water body.

10. The waters of Puerto Rico in the project area shall not have taste or odor producing substances present in amounts that will interfere with primary contact recreation, or will render any undesirable taste or odor to edible aquatic life.

11. The turbidity of the waters of Puerto Rico in the project area shall not exceed 10 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU), except by natural phenomena, as defined under Puerto Rico's Water Quality Standards Regulation. Sra. Angela

Conditional Waiver Water Quality Certificate Mayagüez Harbor Maintenance Dredging Página 3 2 7 FEB 2020

12. The conditions on this WQC waiver are considered independent from each other. Therefore, if the applicability of any condition in this WQC would hold no longer applicable due to any circumstance, the remaining conditions would not be affected.

13. The applicant shall comply with all the special conditions mentioned before. If it does not, this WQC waiver issued by DRNA shall be immediately nullified.

If there are any questions concerning this letter, please contact Ms. Annette Feliberty Ruiz, Chief, Permits for Precise Sources Division, Water Quality Area, at (787) 767-8181 extension 3453.

� �� Cy�a l. Rivera Morales

Interim Secretary Department of Natural and Environmental Resources

BMV/dcc

G:\Oivislón de Permisos para Fuentes Preclsadas\WORO\Britzadia\COE\COE•Bahla de Arecibo.docx From: Scerno, Deborah H CIV USARMY CESAD (US) To: DeMarco, Paul M CIV USARMY CESAJ (USA) Cc: Dunn, Angela E CIV USARMY CESAJ (USA); Spinning, Jason J CIV USARMY CESAJ (USA); Mora, Millan A CIV USARMY CESAJ (USA); Davis, Richard D (Dylan) CIV USARMY CESAD (USA) Subject: FW: [Non-DoD Source] Re: SERO-2019-03111 - supercede Mayaguez 1 of 2 Date: Monday, April 27, 2020 3:09:39 PM

Please see below. Mayaguez is approved.

Debby

-----Original Message----- From: Karla Reece - NOAA Federal [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 2:25 PM To: Scerno, Deborah H CIV USARMY CESAD (US) Cc: [email protected]; Riegert, Michael W CIV USARMY CESAD (USA) Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: SERO-2019-03111 - supercede Mayaguez 1 of 2

Hello, This is approved under SARBO Supersede with referenceID number 1769.

Thank you!

Karla

I am Teleworking due to Covid-19. If you need to reach me directly please call my cell during business hours (9am- 3:30pm M-F) at 727/612-2012

/><((((º>´¯`·.¸¸.><((((º>¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>´¯`·.¸¸..><((((º> Karla Reece- Section 7 Team Lead Interagency Cooperation Branch National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Regional Office Protected Resources phone: 727/824-5348 email: [email protected] Section 7 Guidance Webpage - UPDATED URL Action Agencies, want your consultations quicker? Check out the Expedited process!

This is a U.S. government email account. Your emails to this address may be reviewed or archived. Please do not send inappropriate material. Thank you.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:51 PM Scerno, Deborah H CIV USARMY CESAD (US) > wrote:

Karla,

As discussed this morning, I am officially transmitting the request for the dredging of Mayaguez Harbor in Puerto Rico as a supercede under SARBO 2020. Attached is the write-up and a couple of the attachments. A second e-mail will follow with the figures.

Thank you, Debby

Deborah Hesse Scerno Sr. Environmental Planner South Atlantic Division Atlanta, GA

Work: 404 562 5227 Cell: 404 702 1428

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceani c end Abnosphenc Adminietret:ion NATIONAL MAAll'E ASHERIES SERVICE Silver Spring, MD 2091 0

September 13, 2019 Refer to NMFS No: OPR-2019-02436

Mr. Mark Reiss Chief, Dredging Sediment and Oceans Section Division of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 290 Broadway New York, New York 10007-1866

RE: Concurrence Letter for the Issuance and Implementation of the Site Management and Monitoring Plan for Mayagez Harbor, Puerto Rico Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site

This responds to your June 19, 2019, letter regarding the Site Management and Monitoring Plan (SMMP) for the Mayagez Harbor Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sent to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Southeast Regional Office (SERO) Protected Resources Division. SERO received your request on June 27, 2019 for a written concurrence under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) that the issuance and implementation of the SMMP for the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS is not likely to adversely affect species listed as threatened or endangered or critical habitats designated under the ESA. This response to your request was prepared by NMFS pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, implementing regulations at (50 CFR §402), and agency guidance for preparation of letters of concurrence. This letter underwent pre-dissemination review using standards for utility, integrity, and objectivity in compliance with agency guidelines issued under section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 (Data Quality Act; 44 U.S.C. 3504(d)(1) and 3516). A complete record of this informal consultation is on file at NMFS Office of Protected Resources in Silver Spring, Maryland.

Action Agency’s Effect Determinations The EPA determined that the issuance and implementation of the SMMP for the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, green (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) sea turtles; and staghorn (Acropora cervicornis), elkhorn (Acropora palmata), lobed star (Orbicella annularis), mountainous star (Orbicella faveolata), boulder star (Orbicella franksi), pillar (Dendrogyra cylindrus), and rough cactus (Mycetophyllia ferox) corals; and elkhorn and staghorn coral designated critical habitat.

ESA-listed corals, which include elkhorn (Acropora palmata), staghorn (Acropora cervicornis), lobed star (Orbicella annularis), mountainous star (Orbicella faveolata), boulder star (Orbicella

franksi), pillar (Dendrogyra cylindrus), and rough cactus (Mycetophyllia ferox) corals; and elkhorn and staghorn coral designated critical habitat are present in waters along the navigation channel and other areas on the shelf in the area of Mayagez Harbor based on information provided by the EPA. EPA did not find any shallow areas with ESA-listed corals within or on the borders of the ODMDS. Therefore, because this consultation is only for the issuance and implementation of the SMMP and the location of dredging activities that may propose the use of the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS for the disposal of dredged material is not known at this time, NMFS did not consider the ESA-listed coral species and elkhorn and staghorn coral critical habitat in our effects determination for the issuance and implementation of the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS SMMP. Future dredging projects will require a programmatic or individual ESA section 7 consultation that will include the analysis of transit routes between the dredging sites and the ODMDS where ESA-listed corals and elkhorn and staghorn coral critical habitat are likely to be present, including outside the Mayagez Harbor navigation channel.

The EPA also determined that the proposed action may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect critical habitat for green, loggerhead, and hawksbill sea turtles; loggerhead sea turtles, olive ridley sea turtles, and humpback whales. However, NMFS did not consider these designated critical habitats and species in our effects determination because: • designated critical habitat for the North Atlantic Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of green sea turtles is located around Culebra Island and its surrounding islands and cays, which are outside the action area for this consultation • designated critical habitat for the hawksbill sea turtle is located around Mona and Monito Islands, which are outside the action area for this consultation • there is no designated critical habitat for loggerhead sea turtles in Puerto Rico and the species is extremely rare around Puerto Rico with no reported nesting or stranding in the action area based on data from the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources from 1989 to 2009 • olive ridley sea turtles are not found in waters of Puerto Rico • NMFS published a final rule on September 8, 2016 (81 FR 62260) identifying 14 DPSs for humpback whales. The West Indies DPS, which includes Puerto Rico, was found not to merit listing under the ESA.

Background Section 506 of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1992, which amended the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, requires the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) prepare a SMMP for each ODMDS. For sites designated prior to January 1, 1995, which include the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS, WRDA required the development of SMMPs by January 1, 1997. Sites without SMMPs cannot be used for ocean disposal until an SMMP is prepared. SMMPs must be reviewed and revised 10 years after adoption of the plan and every 10 years thereafter.

Five ODMDS sites were designated around Puerto Rico and each was restricted to only allow disposal of dredged material from the specific harbor for which they were named. The EPA modified the designations for all five ODMDS sites in May 2015 (80 FR 29537) to remove the restriction regarding the origin of dredged materials that can be disposed of in the designated ODMDS sites for an indefinite period of time. Therefore, the disposal of dredged material from

2 sites other than Mayagez Harbor may be considered in the future. However, each of these projects would have to adhere to the SMMP requirements for the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS.

An interim ODMDS for Mayagez Harbor was approved in 1977 (42 FR 2461) and used three times to dispose of dredged material from Mayagez Harbor between 1977 and 1982. In May 1998, a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was prepared for the designated ODMDS sites off Arecibo, Mayagez, Ponce, and Yabucoa. The FEIS examined environmental aspects of the interim Mayagez Harbor ODMDS and concluded that the final disposal site was to be located 6 nautical miles (nm) west of Mayagez Harbor (Alternate Site 1 in the FEIS). This alternate site was designated in 1988 as a Final ODMDS to manage sediments dredged from Mayagez Harbor that have been demonstrated to meet ocean disposal criteria set out in 40 CFR 227. There is no record of ocean disposal at the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS since its final designation. However, due to the impacts of Hurricane Maria, including sediment transport within the harbor and navigation channel, the use of the ODMDS has been proposed, requiring that the SMMP be issued and implemented.

Proposed Action The EPA and the USACE propose the issuance and implementation of a SMMP for the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS. The SMMP identifies actions, provisions, and practices to manage operational aspects of dredge material disposal and to perform site monitoring at the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS. The implementation of the SMMP is meant to ensure that impacts to the marine environment associated with the transport of dredged material to the ODMDS and disposal of dredged material within the ODMDS will be minimized.

The SMMP includes requirements to minimize risks to ESA resources from the transport of dredged materials to the ODMDS and disposal of the material at the site. These requirements include the following: • Scows used to transport dredged material to the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS must be fitted with a surveillance system that simultaneously records the draft and position of the vessel and transmits that information to a third party for review. • Trained observers must be present on each scow as it transits to the ODMDS to maintain a watch for marine mammals and sea turtles. These observers are authorized and required to halt any operations while a listed species is present. • Compliance with the NMFS SERO Vessel Strike Avoidance Measures and Reporting for Mariners. • Only material deemed suitable for disposal can be deposited in the ODMDS based on testing/characterization of all dredged material proposed for disposal in the ODMDS consistent with the requirements in 40 CFR Part 227 (Criteria for the Evaluation of Permit Applications for Ocean Dumping of Materials), EPA/USACE Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, Testing Manual, as amended (1991, otherwise known as the “Green Book”), and EPA/USACE Guidance for Performing Tests on Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal (2016, otherwise known as the Regional Testing Manual). • A tiered monitoring approach to investigate the physical, biological, and chemical impacts of ocean disposal of dredged material. Monitoring effort is dependent on the volume and frequency of disposal with monitoring conducted proportionate to the

volume and frequency of disposal. Specific monitoring activities may also be required for individual projects but these activities would be part of the proposed action considered in ESA section 7 consultations for the individual projects.

The proposed action under consultation does not include authorization of a specific project or projects for the dredging and disposal of dredged material. Therefore, the proposed action and our effects analysis do not include impacts associated with dredging at a particular site or sites. Any dredging projects and associated disposal of dredged material in the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS will require individual Federal and Commonwealth permits and will have to comply with ESA and other consultation requirements.

For example, post-Hurricane Maria emergency funding has been made available to dredge the navigation channel in Mayagez Harbor. The USACE anticipates that approximately 100,000 cubic yards of sediment will be dredged initially and maintenance dredging will take place every 10 to 12 years. The USACE anticipates that each dredging activity would require 20 to 25 scow trips to the ODMDS, assuming the material is determined to be suitable for disposal in the ODMDS by EPA and the USACE. A programmatic ESA section 7 consultation to cover all of these dredging activities or individual ESA section 7 consultations for each dredging activity will be required.

Action Area The Mayagez Harbor ODMDS is located 6.9 nm from the entrance to Mayagez Harbor on the west coast of Puerto Rico (Figure 1). Water depths at the ODMDS range from 325 meters (m) along the eastern border of the site to approximately 400 m along the western border. There is a small ridge that protrudes into the eastern margin of the site that is composed of coarser sediment but the rest of the site is finer grained clays, silts, and sand based on surveys by the EPA. Surface currents are generally oriented north-south but are influenced by the strength and direction of the trade winds. Subsurface currents are not well defined but appear to be weaker than in other areas in the Mona Passage based on the relatively undisturbed depositional environment in the ODMS observed during surveys by the EPA.

The area is approximately 1 square nm in size and is bounded by the following coordinates (North American Datum of 1983): • 18.25833 N, -67.270283 W • 18.25833 N, -67.25305 W • 18.24167 N, -67.270283 W • 18.24167 N, -67.25305 W

280

223 129 203

135

Figure 1. Location of Mayagez Harbor ODMDS and the 200-foot Isobath where ESA-Listed Corals are Located For this consultation, the action area does not include transit routes because the proposed action is for issuance and implementation of the SMMP for the ODMDS only and because the use of the ODMDS is no longer restricted to projects in Mayagez Harbor and its associated navigation channel per the 2015 rule (80 FR 29537). Future consultations for proposed dredging projects that contemplate dredged material disposal in the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS must include transit routes between the dredging location and the ODMDS in the action area for the consultations.

Affected ESA-listed Species ESA-listed species under the purview of NMFS that occur in the action area include blue (Balaenoptera musculus), fin (Balaenoptera physalus), sei (Balaenoptera borealis), and sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) whales; hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and green (North and South Atlantic DPSs, Chelonia mydas) sea turtles; oceanic whitetip (Carcharhinus longimanus) and scalloped hammerhead (Central and Southwest Atlantic DPS, Sphyrna lewini) sharks; giant manta ray (Manta medirostris); and Nassau grouper (Epinephelus striatus).

Fin, sei, and blue whales are offshore, deepwater species. Fin and sei whales have only been observed in Puerto Rico north of Mona Island and south of Cayo Ratones, Salinas, and records indicate blue whales are not regular inhabitants of the Caribbean. A review of our consultation files, particularly those with the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority that include monitoring of offshore sewage outfalls on a regular basis, indicate that these three species are not reported in waters off Puerto Rico. Humpback whales and other non-ESA-listed species are commonly reported and sperm whales are observed infrequently. ESA-listed whales could transit

5 through the action area infrequently during their winter migration through the Caribbean, roughly from November to April. Hawksbill sea turtles are common year-round in waters of Puerto Rico. This species nests year- round, though peak nesting in Puerto Rico is roughly from June to November and Mona Island off the west coast of Puerto Rico is a very important nesting area for this species, reporting as many as 1,600 nests in a single season. Nearshore waters around Mona and Monito Islands also provide habitat for juveniles that reside in waters around these islands as they grow to sub-adult stage. Nearshore waters and deeper reefs off the west coast of the main island of Puerto Rico are also frequented by different life stages of hawksbill sea turtles. Thus, it is likely that hawksbill sea turtles transit through the action area. Leatherback sea turtles are an offshore species where they forage for prey such as jellyfish. Leatherbacks are only present in nearshore waters during nesting season, which peaks roughly in May to July in Puerto Rico. Leatherback nesting on numerous beaches along the west coast of Puerto Rico is common. Leatherback sea turtles may be present in the action area foraging for prey and may be present in greater numbers during nesting season when adult females and hatchlings transit between nesting beaches and offshore areas. Green sea turtles, like hawksbills, use waters of Mona and Monito Islands as juvenile and adult foraging habitat. Green sea turtles are also common in nearshore waters along the west coast of Puerto Rico, particularly in areas that have a combination of seagrass and coral habitats. Green sea turtles are present in waters of Puerto Rico year-round. Thus, there is the possibility that green sea turtles transit through the action area. The oceanic whitetip shark is usually found offshore in the open ocean, along the continental shelf, or around oceanic islands in waters from the surface to at least 152 m in depth. Oceanic whitetip sharks are highly mobile and prefer open ocean conditions, including for foraging. Shark tagging data show movements by juveniles of this species in the Gulf of Mexico, along the east coast of Florida, Mid-Atlantic Bight, Cuba, Lesser Antilles, central Caribbean Sea, from east to west along the equatorial Atlantic, and off Brazil, Haiti, and Bahamas. Fisheries data also indicate that, while catch of this species has declined, it has been part of fishery landings in the U.S. Caribbean meaning that the species is likely to be present in offshore waters of Puerto Rico, including transiting through the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS. Data from the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) from Puerto Rico from 2001 – 2016 show 797 scalloped hammerhead sharks were landed by recreational charter boats using vertical line gear within Puerto Rico's territorial waters, which extend to 9 nm from shore. Landings of this species were reported in 2003 (516), 2004 (44), 2006 (30), 2012 (98), and 2016 (109). Landed sharks ranged in length from 600 – 800 millimeters (mm), meaning they were likely neonates or juveniles because mature males are approximately 1,219 mm and females are 1,981 mm. At least some of the sharks may have been misidentified and were actually bonnetheads. Others were included in a general hammerhead shark category and could be species other than scalloped hammerhead, but these are the best data available from recreational fisheries landings. Adult sharks tend to be more common in offshore waters while neonates and juveniles are more common in nearshore waters, meaning that scalloped hammerhead sharks in the action area are more likely to be adults given the distance from shore and water depth.

Giant manta rays are typically found offshore in the open ocean though these animals are sometimes found around nearshore reefs and estuarine waters, which are present in the action area. Giant manta rays feed in the water column on plankton. Giant manta rays have been observed infrequently near the entrance to San Juan Bay particularly near channel marker buoys by NMFS biologists and infrequent observations of this species have also been reported in deeper waters off bays and over deep reefs around the U.S. Virgin Islands. Because the action area has similar habitat as the sites around the USVI where these animals have occasionally been sighted, it is possible that they transit through the action area periodically. Nassau grouper were common in the reef fishery in Puerto Rico and large spawning aggregations of this species occurred historically. Three of the historic grouper spawning aggregation sites are off the west coast of Puerto Rico between Mayagez and Cabo Rojo. As the fishery became more diminished, younger life stages were targeted, including juveniles in nearshore waters, leading to the prohibition of fishing for this species in Federal waters in 1990 and in Commonwealth waters in 2004. Recent fishery independent surveys during times of spawning aggregations for species including Nassau grouper indicate that adult Nassau grouper are present in increasing numbers in multi-species spawning aggregations, including in some of their historic aggregation sites. Juveniles inhabit nearshore habitats including seagrass beds and coral areas and tend to be solitary while adults occupy deeper areas and offshore reefs where they may school. Adult Nassau grouper could transit through the action area, particularly during spawning.

Consultation History The EPA and USACE completed ESA section 7 consultations with NMFS on December 6, 2010 for the San Juan Harbor ODMDS SMMP (reference number SER-2010-02658) and on May 4, 2012 for the Arecibo Harbor ODMDS SMMP (reference number SER-2011-03979). An ESA section 7 consultation has not been completed previously for the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS SMMP. However, the previous ESA section 7 consultations, as well as coordination with NMFS as part of the Port of the Americas USACE permit process that included the use of the Ponce Harbor ODMDS, informed the development of the SMMP for Mayagez Harbor. Requirements related to the use of a monitoring system to insure scows remain on course and do not drop material outside the ODMS, as well as surveys to verify that ESA-listed corals are not present within the Mayagez Harbor ODMDS were incorporated in this project based on experience with SMMP issuance and development for the other ODMDSs.

SERO received the consultation request from the EPA on June 27, 2019. SERO sent the consultation request to the NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) via email on July 2, 2019. NMFS OPR requested clarification from EPA regarding the scope of the consultation request via email on July 29, 2019, and received email responses from EPA on July 30, 2019, as well as via telephone on August 7, 2019.

Effects of the Action Under the ESA, “effects of the action” means the direct and indirect effects of an action on the ESA-listed species or designated critical habitat, together with the effects of other activities that are interrelated or interdependent with that action (50 CFR §402.02). The applicable standard to find that a proposed action is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed species or designated critical habitat is that all of the effects of the action are expected to be discountable, insignificant, or completely beneficial. Beneficial effects have an immediate positive effect without any

7 adverse effects to ESA-listed species or designated critical habitat. Insignificant effects relate to the size or severity of the impact and include those effects that are undetectable, not measurable, or so minor that they cannot be meaningfully evaluated. Discountable effects are those that are extremely unlikely to occur.

NMFS has analyzed the routes of potential effects to ESA-listed whales, sea turtles, and fish in the action area from the proposed action and determined that effects could arise from the following stressors: vessel transit, contact with dredged material during deposition, and the temporary or permanent degradation of refuge or foraging habitat or loss of prey species due to deposition of dredged material. Animals could be affected by vessel transit while scows are moving through the ODMDS to dispose of dredged material. Nassau grouper would not be present at the water surface so would not be expected to be at risk from vessel collision. The EPA and the USACE have included NMFS SERO’s Vessel Strike Avoidance Measures and Reporting for Mariners as a requirement for vessels transiting to and from the ODMDS in the SMMP. The SMMP also requires that trained observers be present on vessels to look for ESA-listed sea turtles and marine mammals. The observers have the authority to stop disposal operations if animals are observed within the area of operations during disposal activities. Based on previous consultations for the issuance and implementation of SMMPs and information in our files related to disposal operations at the San Juan and Ponce ODMDSs, there are no records of vessel strikes by vessels transporting dredged material and disposing of dredged material in an ODMDS in Puerto Rico. Given that ESA-listed whales, sea turtles, and fish are likely to be transiting through the ODMDS, which is characterized by fine-grained sediments and biota such as worms, crustaceans, snails, and bivalves and does not support habitats that would be used by most of these species for refuge and foraging, the probability of an encounter between an animal and a scow is extremely low. Therefore, NMFS believes the potential effects to ESA-listed whales, sea turtles, and fish associated with vessel operation and potential collisions will be discountable. Animals could also be affected during the deposition of dredged material in the ODMDS if they are swimming through the area or due to the release of contaminated material in the water column. The disposal of dredged material could temporarily interfere with an animal’s ability to find prey as the dredged material would decrease water clarity as it travels through the water column. However, the requirement that an observer be present to look for ESA-listed whales and sea turtles, and that the observer halt operations if animals are observed would minimize the potential for effects to animals during disposal operations. In terms of exposure to contaminants from the dredged material, the SMMP requires that materials proposed for disposal in the ODMDS be tested to determine whether the concentration of contaminants in the material would pose a risk to the environment. If the material is found to contain levels of contaminants (based on the Green Book and Regional Testing Manual described in the minimization measures above) that would pose an environmental risk, the materials cannot be disposed of in the ODMDS. Monitoring data collected for the issuance of the SMMP indicate that sediments were essentially free of chlorinated organic contaminants and had low levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Concentrations of certain trace metals, including copper, chromium, iron, nickel, and zinc, were found to be somewhat elevated in the ODMDS indicative of anthropogenic inputs, though sites at stations outside the ODMDS and closer to shore had even higher concentrations, potentially due to inputs from industrial areas in Mayagez. As discussed

8 previously, the ODMDS does not contain benthic habitats that could provide refuge and foraging resources for species such as hawksbill and green sea turtles, and Nassau grouper, or that would support concentrations of prey species for ESA-listed whales, sea turtles, and fish, these animals are likely to pass through the ODMDS while transiting to and from other areas. Therefore, NMFS believes that impacts to ESA-listed whales, sea turtles, and fish related to exposure to dredged materials and potential contaminants in these materials during disposal activities in the ODMDS will be discountable. Green and hawksbill sea turtles and ESA-listed fish could be affected by the temporary or permanent degradation of refuge and foraging habitat or loss of prey species due to deposition of dredged materials. Surveys conducted in the ODMDS demonstrated that the marine bottom is largely fine-grained material supporting populations of worms, crustaceans, and mollusks. Because of the low relief, there are not likely to be concentrations of hawksbill and green sea turtles, Nassau grouper, or sharks. However, there are areas outside the ODMDS, including historic grouper spawning aggregation sites, where there are seamounds and other hard structures that do support habitat for ESA-listed fish and sea turtles. Prey species for these animals are more likely to be present in these areas rather than within the ODMDS. During disposal activities, dredged material could move outside the ODMDS to habitats that provide refuge and foraging areas for ESA-listed sea turtles and fish. The transport of dredged material outside the ODMDS could also affect prey species such as sponges preferred by hawksbill sea turtles that could be covered with sediment. The potential for transport of dredged material outside the ODMDS depends on the grain size of the material to be dredged and the oceanographic conditions at the ODMDS. Information in the SMMP indicates that the surface currents are largely north-south, meaning material is more likely to be transported away from areas containing habitat and prey species for ESA-listed fish and green and hawksbill sea turtles. In addition, the distance between hard bottom and coral habitats and the ODMDS means that dredged material is likely to disperse into the water column and would not reach these habitats in measurable concentrations. The ODMDS is located in deep waters and there does not appear to be significant bottom currents that would move material around based on monitoring of the site conducted by EPA and summarized in the SMMP. The SMMP requires that vessels follow a strict discharge protocol that allows EPA to monitor in real-time whether dredged material is being dumped prior to reaching the ODMDS. This system was used successfully for the Ponce Harbor ODMDS where EPA was able to detect the disposal of material by some barges while in transit to the ODMDS, resulting in enforcement actions and no additional incidents of dumping. Therefore, NMFS believes the effects to green and hawksbill sea turtles and ESA-listed fish from the degradation of habitat or loss of prey species due to deposition of dredged material will be insignificant. As noted previously, transit routes to and from the ODMDS would be the subject of future ESA section 7 consultations and will consider the potential effects of the loss of material while in transit on ESA resources.

Conclusion Based on this analysis, NMFS concurs with the EPA that all effects of the proposed action are not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed hawksbill, green (North and South Atlantic DPSs), and leatherback sea turtles. NMFS also concludes that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed whales and fish in the action area.

Reinitiation of Consultation Reinitiation of consultation is required and shall be requested by the federal agency, or by NMFS, where discretionary federal involvement or control over the action has been retained or is authorized by law and (1) new information reveals effects of the action that may affect an ESA- listed species or designated critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (2) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the ESA- listed species or designated critical habitat that was not considered in this concurrence letter; or if (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action (50 CFR §402.16).

In addition, as discussed previously, a programmatic consultation or individual ESA section 7 consultations will be required for future dredging projects that propose the use of the ODMDS for disposal of dredged material. The action area for these consultations will include the transit routes for vessels to and from the ODMDS, which were not included in this consultation.

Please direct questions regarding this letter to Dr. Lisamarie Carrubba, Consulting Biologist, at (301) 427-8493, or by email at [email protected], or me at (301) 427-8495, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely, ~~ Cathryn E. Tortorici Chief, ESA Interagency Cooperation Division Office of Protected Resources cc: David Bernhart, SERO PRD Javier Cortes, USACE

APPENDIX B – JUNE 2019 BENTHIC SURVEY REPORT

Mayaguez and Arecibo Harbor O&M Projects, Puerto Rico: Side- scan Sonar and Underwater Video Survey Report of the Benthic Communities

Prepared by:

USACE, Jacksonville District Planning and

Policy Division

701 San Marco Blvd Jacksonville, Florida 32211

July 2019 Introduction

Two benthic surveys utilizing side-scan sonar and underwater video were undertaken on 24-25 June 2019 at Mayaguez Harbor and 26-27 June 2019 at Arecibo Harbor to characterize the benthic communities within and 1,100-feet adjacent to the proposed federal navigation channel maintenance dredge areas. First the side-scan data was acquired and a mosaic created, then underwater video was conducted in areas of interest identified in the side-scan mosaics.

Date: Surveys were performed 24-25 June 2019 at Mayaguez Harbor and 26-27 June 2019 at Arecibo Harbor.

Personnel: Boat Captain: Jonathan Shelhamer; System Operator: Eric Boe and Travis Smith; USACE Biologist: Paul DeMarco; NMFS Biologist: Jose Rivera.

Survey Vessel: Survey Boat 34 (SB-34) is a 26 ft Cathedral hull SeaArk with twin 115 hp 4 stroke Yamaha motors.

Datum: Horizontal coordinates are based on the state plane coordinate system PR-5200 PR & VI Zone 1, and referenced to the North American Datum of 1983.

Instruments: The following instruments were used for data collection: SB - 34 Data Collection Software HYPACK 2016a Sounder EdgeTech 4125 operating at 400 and 900 kHz Positioning Trimble R8 Receiver / TDL450H Radio Modem IMU Applanix POS WaveMaster Underwater Towed Camera GoPro HERO 4

Field Procedures: This survey was performed utilizing Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS with a base receiver established at survey monument “975 9394 A TIDAL” (PID: DK7451) for the Mayaguez Harbor survey area and at survey monument “975 7809 A” (PID: DO1529) for the Arecibo Harbor survey area. Dual frequency side-scan was collected/recorded simultaneously and written to the J-star File (*.jsf) format using an Edge Tech 4125 towed from the stern. After side-scan collection and post processing, video was collected at areas of interest with GoPro HERO 4 camera. Video file names correspond with a target file (created in Hypack) for each drop location.

Data Processing: JSF’s from the EdgeTech 4125 operating at 400/900 kHz were post processed using SonarWiz 7. Both low (400 kHz) and high (800 kHz) frequency side scan images were bottom tracked and gains were applied to produce GeoTiff image. The high frequency GeoTiff provided the highest image resolution and clarity of objects of the sea floor (See Figures 1 and 2). Google Earth *.kml files were exported out of SonarWiz 7 which encompass both projects. In addition, the underwater video was analyzed to confirm the bottom type using VLC media player 2.0.1 Twoflower.

Field Conditions: Sea conditions were moderate, 1-2 feet at both harbors.

Mayagi.iez Harbor ◊ Camera Drop Location Sonar Mosaic Dredge Plan USACE Survey II II June 2019 11 00' Buffer Army Corps II II Mayaguez Harbor of Engineers ® Mayagi.iez Municipality Jacksonville District 0 200 Puerto Rico Meters

Figure 1. Mayaguez Harbor Side-Scan Mosaic and Underwater Video Locations.

Arecibo Harbor ◊ Camera Drop Location Sonar Mosaic [I Ii Dredge Plan USACE Survey June 2019 11 00' Buffer US Army Corps [I lj Arecibo Harbor of Engineers <~ Arecibo Municipality Jacksonville District Pu erto Rico 0 200 Meters

Figure 2. Arecibo Harbor Side-Scan Mosaic and Underwater Video Locations.. Table 1. Underwater Video File Information Mayaguez Harbor 25 June 2019

Video File Name Lat Lon X Y #

1 Camera Drop-1.mp4 18 12 51.2882 N 067 09 42.3682 W 403376.50 794988.90 2 Camera Drop-2.mp4 18 12 57 N 067 09 47.4728 W 402886.73 795566.96 3 Camera Drop-3.mp4 18 13 5.7328 N 067 09 49.885 W 402657.71 796448.79 4 Camera Drop-4.mp4 18 13 8.5777 N 067 09 48.1397 W 402827.10 796735.08 5 Camera Drop-5.mp4 18 13 10.381 N 067 09 54.1275 W 402250.63 796919.28 6 Camera Drop-6.mp4 18 13 13.7708 N 067 10 3.9049 W 401309.52 797264.98 7 Camera Drop-7.mp4 18 12 53.3779 N 067 09 29.8067 W 404588.23 795194.88

Table 2. Underwater Video File Information Arecibo Harbor 27 June 2019

Video File Name Lat Lon X Y #

1 Camera Drop-1.mp4 18 28 47.1369 N 066 42 5.572 W 563228.79 890971.65 2 Camera Drop-2.mp4 18 28 44.5331 N 066 42 10.4231 W 562761.48 890709.68 3 Camera Drop-3.mp4 18 28 45.3059 N 066 42 13.43 W 562472.18 890788.06 4 Camera Drop-4.mp4 18 28 43.1258 N 066 42 16.6452 W 562162.38 890568.60 5 Camera Drop-5.mp4 18 28 40.7703 N 066 42 17.6149 W 562068.69 890331.14 6 Camera Drop-6.mp4 18 28 41.7134 N 066 42 13.2429 W 562489.65 890425.65 7 Camera Drop-7.mp4 18 28 42.0754 N 066 42 20.2179 W 561818.34 890463.16 8 Camera Drop-8.mp4 18 28 45.8481 N 066 42 17.7547 W 562056.00 890843.37 9 Camera Drop-9.mp4 18 28 34.5164 N 066 42 13.7199 W 562442.66 889699.73 10 Camera Drop-10.mp4 18 28 33.5894 N 066 42 16.0603 W 562217.25 889606.56 11 Camera Drop-11.mp4 18 28 32.5002 N 066 42 14.2421 W 562392.10 889496.43 12 Camera Drop-12.mp4 18 28 32.9311 N 066 42 10.0453 W 562796.12 889539.30 13 Camera Drop-13.mp4 18 28 32.7331 N 066 42 7.624 W 563029.15 889518.98 14 Camera Drop-14.mp4 18 28 48.8767 N 066 42 7.9119 W 563003.83 891147.48 15 Camera Drop-15.mp4 18 28 49.9773 N 066 42 16.6994 W 562158.19 891259.74 Video File Name Lat Lon X Y #

16 Camera Drop-16.mp4 18 28 54.9802 N 066 42 9.9734 W 562806.32 891763.45 17 Camera Drop-17.mp4 18 28 53.8131 N 066 42 17.7644 W 562056.25 891646.82 18 Camera Drop-18.mp4 18 28 49.2473 N 066 42 24.7132 W 561386.74 891187.25 19 Camera Drop-19.mp4 18 28 52.9639 N 066 42 12.1937 W 562592.31 891560.37 20 Camera Drop-20.mp4 18 28 51.0109 N 066 42 12.8762 W 562526.33 891363.46 21 Camera Drop-21.mp4 18 28 56.0823 N 066 42 6.4531 W 563145.31 891874.12 22 Camera Drop-22.mp4 18 28 57.9413 N 066 42 10.966 W 562711.22 892062.28

Table 3. Summary of Benthic Substrates and Species Seen at Mayaguez Harbor 25 June 2019

Video # Substrate and Depth (feet) Species present 1 Rocks with macro-algae (12-ft) Unidentified macro-algae on rocks covered with sediment, colonial tunicate, Grunt (Haemulon spp), Dusky damselfish (Stegastes adustus) 2 Rocks with macro-algae (24-ft) Unidentified macro-algae on rocks covered with sediment, colonial tunicate, feather duster worms, Porkfish (Anisotremus virginicus), grunts (Haemulon spp), damselfishes (Stegastes spp) 3 Fine sand with burrows (32-ft) None seen, invertebrate burrows 4 Fine sand with sparse seagrass, rocks Sparse Halophila decipiens, hydroids, colonial tunicate, juvenile toward bulkhead (10-20-ft) porgy and sergeant major (Abudefduf saxatilis), goby/blenny, feather duster worms, grunts (Haemulon spp), Dusky damselfish (Stegastes adustus) 5 Sunken barge and fine sand (20-ft) Filamentous green macro-algae, porkfish (Anisotremus virginicus), blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus) 6 Encrusted concrete piles and Fine sand Sergeant major (Abudefduf saxatilis), sea fan, sea rods, feather bottom (24-ft) duster worms, dog snapper (Lutjanus jocu), doctorfish (0.3-2.7m) (Acanthurus chirurgus) 7 Rocks and fine sand (5-ft) Macro-algae, colonial tunicate, orange encrusting sponge, damselfish (Stegastes sp),

Table 4. Summary of Benthic Substrates and Species Seen at Arecibo Harbor 27 June 2019 Video # Substrate and Depth Range (feet) Species present and number 1 Fine sand with burrows (25-ft) None seen, invertebrate burrows 2 Fine sand with burrows (24-ft) None seen, invertebrate burrows 3 Rocky bottom with sediment load, Surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp), arrow crab (Stenorhynchus octocorals and macro-algae covered seticornis), damselfishes (Stegastes spp), macro-algae, in sediment (26-ft) octocorals 4 Rocky bottom with sediment load, Sediment covered macro-algae, octocorals, hydroids, octocorals and macro-algae covered surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp) in sediment (26-ft) 5 Rocky bottom with sediment load, Sediment covered macro-algae, octocorals, hydroids, feather octocorals and macro-algae covered duster worms, juvenile blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus) in sediment (25-ft) 6 Rocky bottom with sediment load, Sediment covered macro-algae, Caulerpa spp, octocorals, octocorals and macro-algae covered hydroids, arrow crab (Stenorhynchus seticornis), juvenile and in sediment (23-ft) adult blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus), sergeant major (Abudefduf saxatilis), fry, very sparse Halophila decipiens or H. 7 Rocky bottom/pavement (26-ft) Octocorals and macro-algae covered in sediment, surgeonfish (Acanthurus chirurgus), blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus) 8 Sandy bottom with some rocks and Sparse macro-algae, hydroids, wrasse, surgeonfish pavement (29-ft) (Acanthurus spp) 9 Sandy bottom with sparse rocks (10- Sand ridges and sparse exposed rocks with macro-algae, fry, ft) wrasse, juvenile blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus) 10 Sandy bottom with sparse rocks (10- Sand ridges and exposed rocks with macro-algae, wrasses, ft) surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp), gray snapper (Lutjanus griseus) 11 Sandy bottom with sparse rocks (10- Sand ridges and sparse exposed rocks with macro-algae, ft) damselfishes (Stegastes spp), blue tang (Acanthurus coeruleus) 12 Sandy bottom (8-ft) Sand ridges with very sparse macro-algae 13 Rocky bottom (6-ft) Rocks with red, brown and green macro-algae, Caulerpa spp, white scroll alga (Padina jamaicensis), wrasse 14 Fine sand bottom and bulkhead (8-ft) Bulkhead and fine sand bottom with invertebrate burrows, porkfish (Anisotremus virginicus), damselfishes (Stegastes spp) 15 Colonized pavement (35-ft) Bedrock pavement with red and green macro-algae, octocorals, surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp) and porkfish (Anisotremus virginicus) 16 Colonized pavement (38-ft) Bedrock pavement with red, brown and green macro-algae, Caulerpa spp, octocorals, barrel sponges (Xestospongia muta), brain coral (Diploria spp), sea plumes (Pseudopterogorgia spp), sea rods (Psedoplexaura spp), surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp), wrasses, butterflyfish (Chaetodon striatus), coney (Cephalopholis fulva) 17 Sandy bottom with sparse rocks (40- Sand ridges and sparse exposed rocks with macro-algae ft) 18 Sandy bottom (36-ft) Detritus filled sand ridges 19 Colonized pavement (38-ft) Bedrock pavement with red, brown and green macro-algae, Caulerpa spp, sea plumes (Pseudopterogorgia spp), barrel sponges (Xestospongia muta), fire coral (Millepora alcicornis), brain coral (Diploria spp), wrasses, grouper, butterflyfish (Chaetodon striatus),surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp), sea cucumber 20 Sandy colonized pavement (33-ft) Red, brown and green macro-algae 21 Colonized pavement (38-ft) Bedrock pavement with red, brown and green macro-algae, Caulerpa spp, octocorals, sea fans (Gorgonia sp.), wrasse, surgeonfish (Acanthurus spp), barrel sponges (Xestospongia muta), sea rods (Psedoplexaura spp), brain coral (Diploria spp) 22 Sandy bottom (45-ft) Sand ridges

Results and Discussion June 2019

Seven (7) underwater videos were collected at Mayaguez Harbor and 22 at Arecibo Harbor. Side- scan SONAR mosaics and video locations are depicted in Figures 1 and 2 and the video coordinates are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. Once the videos were reviewed using VLC media player 2.0.1 Twoflower, still frame images representative of the benthic substrates at the 29 video stations were extracted. Summaries of the benthic substrates including species seen are presented in Tables 3 and 4 with still frame images located in Appendix A and B. Very sparse seagrass, Halophila decipiens, was identified in video 4 at Mayaguez and 6 at Arecibo, both of which are located outside of the areas to be dredged. Other SAV included red, brown and green macro-algae including Caulerpa sp. A few hard corals were seen in the videos conducted on the Atlantic Ocean side of the Arecibo harbor breakwater. However, no species listed as threatened under the ESA were documented. The list of the species is presented in Tables 3&4.