Water Resources Development

US Army Corps in 1993 of Engineers Front Cover: Wilmington Harbor (Christina River Federal Navigation Project) from the , with Wilmington in backgound. At foregound is partial view of a 220 acre new federal disposal area for the port.

This publication is authorized by the Secretary of the Army as required by PL 99-662 1993 Water Resources Development in

DELAWARE North Atlantic Division, Corps of Engineers

NORTH ATLANTIC DIVISION, Philadelphia District, Corps of Engineers CORPS OF ENGINEERS Wanamaker Building 90 Church Street, 100 Penn Square East New York, New York 10007 Philadelphia, 19107

Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 1715 Baltimore, 21203 To Our Readers: During the period 1986-1992, non-federal sponsors signed The Army Corps of Engineers has a long and proud 205 project cooperative agreements with the Department of history of applying its expertise in engineering and related the Army for cost sharing of project construction. disciplines. Over the years, its activities have evolved; The Corps engineering expertise and responsiveness has however, the central focus of its civil mission has always stood the nation in good stead. In 1992, the Corps put this been the development of the nation’s water resources. With expertise to good use in Chicago, where it was called upon to an annual program of almost $4 billion for civil projects, the respond to the tunnel flood; in Florida, Louisiana, Hawaii and Corps is the federal government’s largest water resources Guam, where it played a major role in recovery efforts after development agency. The projects the Corps develops, in Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki and Typhoon Omar; in Kuwait, partnership with state and local interests, have proven to be where it played a major role in repairing that nation’s war-torn wise investments. They return to the public, benefits such as infrastructure; and in dozens of other locations. low-cost waterborne transportation and prevention of flood Whatever challenges arise in the future decades, I have no damages, that far outweigh their costs. doubt that the Army Corps of Engineers will be equal to the The Corps’ civil works activities reflect partnership. All task. Corps projects begin when non-federal interests see a water- related problem and petition Congress for a solution. Under provisions of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, once the Corps conducts a reconnaissance study to determine whether a feasible project is likely, these sponsors provide a share of the funding for the feasibility study upon which a project will be based. They also share the cost of the G. EDWARD DICKEY project’s design and construction once Congress has Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army authorized the project and provided construction funds. (Civil Works)

li US Army Corps of Engineers

To Our Readers: Partnering is yet another positive cultural shift in the The Corps of Engineers was formed some 218 years ago Corps’ business practices, particularly in civil works to be responsive to the needs of a young nation. And while construction. A local sponsorship kit walks customers through the nature of our work has changed with time, our basic the complexities of Corps projects. Under the Coastal purpose remains—to be responsive to America’s needs. America program, six federal agencies work together to solve Clearly, the nation’s concern for the environment has environmental problems along the nation’s shoreline. A permeated the Corps. Our environmental commitment has technique related to partnering, alternate dispute resolution, never been greater. Authority granted by the Water creates an atmosphere in which the clash of differing view­ Resources Development Act of 1990 puts focus on the points can grow into creative solutions and prevent costly environment as a mission and promises restoration of legal disputes. wetlands and habitats for fish and wildlife. The 1992 And of course, we still respond to the needs of American legislation calls for the improvement and protection of our families. As one of the nation’s largest providers of outdoor nation’s water resources infrastructure. recreation, the Corps operates 461 lakes and other water Responding to the recent outbreak of natural disasters has resources projects. It’s a responsibility we take seriously, provided the Corps an outstanding opportunity to serve. using the opportunity to help others appreciate our valuable From precise measures in controlling the precarious Chicago and delicate natural resources. Flood, to the massive aid provided for the victims of This booklet is one in a series detailing water resource Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki and Typhoon Omar, Corps programs in the 50 states and U.S. possessions. I hope you people showed their courage, commitment and tenacity. will find it interesting and feel some pride in ownership. We continue responding to our customers’ desires to be more involved with projects on a day-to-day basis. The Corps has achieved a major cultural shift with project management. It has resulted in greater accountability to our ARTHUR E. WIEEIAMS customers and ultimately projects which better reflect the Eieutenant General, USA needs of the community. Chief of Engineers

in

Foreword...... vi

Introduction...... viii

Chapter 1 Delaware River Basin ...... 1

Chapter 2 The and its Tributaries...... 14

Flood Emergency Operations and Disaster Assistance Activities...... 18

Index 19

Foreword

This booklet contains descriptive information on water The civil works activities of the Corps of Engineers are resources development by the Army Corps of organized by river basins, rather than state boundaries. Engineers in Delaware. The introduction explains the Corps’ Therefore, water resource projects of the Corps of Engineers role in planning and building federal water projects. in this state are undertaken by more than one district. Information is given on project status, explaining whether Additional information on projects and the responsibilities the work is completed, is under way, or has not yet been of the United States Army Corps of Engineers may be started. obtained from the offices listed on the title page.

Vll

Introduction

Contractor hydraulic dredge pumping sand and gravel from a borrow area in the Delaware River opposite Wilmington Harbor entrance. Material was used for embankment construction at new disposal area partially shown at left background. Civil Works Overview

Introduction initiated by non-federal sources, constructed by the Corps under the Civil Works Program, and operated and From 1775 to the present, the U.S. Army Corps of maintained either by the Corps or by a non-federal Engineers has served the nation in peace and war. The Corps sponsoring agency. traces its history to June, 1775, when the Continental The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 made Congress appointed Colonel Richard Gridley as Chief of numerous changes in the way potential new water resources Engineers of the Continental Army, under General George projects are studied, evaluated and funded. The major change Washington. The original Corps was the Army’s engineering is that the law now specifies greater non-federal cost sharing and construction arm until it mustered out of service at the for most Corps water resources projects. close of the Revolutionary War in 1783. When local interests feel that a need exists for improved In 1802, Congress re-established the U.S. Military navigation, flood protection or other water resources Academy at West Point, the country’s first—and for 20 years development, they may petition their representatives in its only—engineering school. With the Army having the Congress. A congressional committee resolution or an act of nation’s most readily available engineering talent, successive Congress may then authorize the Corps of Engineers to congresses and administrations established a role for the investigate the problem and submit a report. Water resources Corps as an organization to carry out both military studies, except studies of the inland waterway navigation construction and works “of a civil nature.” system, are conducted in partnership with a non-federal Throughout the nineteenth century, the Corps supervised sponsor, with the Corps and the sponsor jointly funding and the construction of coastal fortifications, lighthouses, several managing the study. early railroads, and many of the public buildings in For inland navigation and waterway projects, which are by Washington, D.C. and elsewhere. Meanwhile, the Corps of their nature not “local,” Congress, in the Water Resources Topographical Engineers, which enjoyed a separate existence Development Act of 1986, established an Inland Waterway for 25 years (1838-1863), mapped much of the American Users Board, comprised of waterway transportation companies West. Army Engineers served with distinction in war, with and shippers of major commodities. This board advises the many engineer officers rising to prominence during the Secretary of the Army and makes recommendations on Civil War. priorities for new navigation projects such as locks and dams. In its civil role, the Corps of Engineers became Such projects are funded in part from the Inland Waterway increasingly involved with river and harbor improvements Trust Fund, which in turn is funded by waterway fuel taxes. carrying out its first harbor and jetty work in the first quarter Normally, the planning process for a water resource of the nineteenth century. The Corp’s ongoing responsibility problem starts with a brief reconnaissance study to determine for federal river and harbor improvements dates from 1824, whether a project falls within the Corps’ statutory authority when Congress passed two acts authorizing the Corps to and meets national priorities. Should that be the case, the survey roads and canals and to remove obstacles on the Ohio Corps district where the project is located will carry out a full and Mississippi rivers. Over the years since, the expertise feasibility study to develop alternatives and select the best gained by the Corps in navigation projects led succeeding possible solution. This process normally includes public administrations and congresses to assign new water-related meetings to determine the views of local interests on the missions to the Corps in such areas as flood control, shore and extent and type of improvements desired. The federal, state, hurricane protection, hydropower, recreation, water supply and other agencies with interests in a project are partners in and quality, and wetland protection. the planning process. Today’s Corps of Engineers carries out missions in three In making recommendations to Congress for project broad areas: military construction and engineering support to authorization, the Corps determines that the proposed military installations; reimbursable support to other federal project’s benefits will exceed costs, its engineering design is agencies (such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s sound, the project best serves the needs of the people ‘’Superfund” program to clean up hazardous and toxic waste concerned, and that it makes the wisest possible use of the sites); and the Civil Works mission, centered around natural resources involved and adequately protects the navigation, flood control and—under the Water Resources environment. Development Acts of 1986, 1988, 1990 and 1992—a growing Once the Corps of Engineers district completes its role in environmental restoration. feasibility study, it submits a report, along with a final environmental impact statement, to a higher authority for review and recommendations. After review and coordination Authorization and Planning of with all interested federal agencies and the governors of affected states, the Chief of Engineers forwards the report and Water Resources Projects environmental statement to the Secretary of the Army, who obtains the views of the Office of Management and Budget Corps of Engineers water resources activities are normally before transmitting these documents to Congress. x If Congress includes the project in an authorization bill, embrace the entire country. The Corps turns most of the flood enactment of the bill constitutes authorization of the project. control projects it builds over to non-federal authorities for Before construction can get under way, however, both the operation and maintenance once construction is completed. federal government and the project sponsor must provide funds. The purpose of flood control work is to prevent damage A federal budget recommendation for a project is based on through regulation of the flow of water and other means. evidence of support by the state and the ability and willingness Prevention of flood-related damages can be accomplished with of a non-federal sponsor to provide its share of the project cost. structural measures, such as reservoirs, levees, channels and Appropriation of money to build a particular project is flood walls that modify the characteristics of floods; or usually included in the annual Energy and Water Development non-structural measures, such as flood plain evacuation, Appropriation Act, which must be passed by both Houses of floodproofing and floodway acquisition, that alter the way the Congress and signed by the President. people use these areas and reduce the susceptibility of human activities to flood risk. Corps flood control reservoirs are often designed and built Navigation for multiple-purpose uses, such as municipal and industrial water supply, navigation, irrigation, hydroelectric power, Corps of Engineers involvement in navigation projects dates conservation of fish and wildlife, and recreation. to the early days of the United States, when rivers and coastal The Corps fights the nation’s flood problems not only by harbors were the primary paths of commerce in the new constructing and maintaining structures, but also by providing country. detailed technical information on flood hazards. Under the Without its great rivers, the vast, thickly-forested, region Flood Plain Management Services Program, the Corps west of the Appalachians would have remained impenetrable to provides, on request, flood hazard information, technical all but the most resourceful early pioneers. Consequently, assistance and planning guidance to other federal agencies, western politicians such as Henry Clay agitated for federal states, local governments and private citizens. Once community assistance to improve rivers. At the same time, the War of 1812 officials know the flood-prone areas in their communities and showed the importance of a reliable inland navigation system to how often floods would be likely to occur, they can take national defense. necessary action to prevent or minimize damages to existing There was, however, a question as to whether and to new buildings and facilities, such as adopting and transportation was, under the Constitution, a legitimate enforcing zoning ordinances, building codes, and subdivision federal activity. This question was resolved when the regulations. The Flood Plain Management Services Program Supreme Court ruled that the Commerce Clause of the provides assistance to other federal and state agencies in the Constitution granted the federal government the authority, not same manner. only to regulate navigation and commerce, but also to make necessary navigation improvements. Shore and Hurricane Protection The system of harbors and inland waterways maintained by the Corps of Engineers remains one of the most important parts The Corps’ work in state protection began in 1930, when of the nation’s transportation system. The Corps maintains the Congress directed the Corps to study ways to reduce erosion nation’s waterways as a safe, reliable and economically along U.S. seacoasts and the Great Lakes. Hurricane protection efficient navigation system. The 12,000 miles of inland work was added to the erosion control mission in 1955, when waterways maintained by the Corps carry one-sixth of the Congress directed the Corps to conduct investigations along nation’s inter-city cargo. The importance of the Corps mission the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts to identify problem areas and in maintaining depths at more than 500 harbors, meanwhile, is determine the feasibility of protection. underscored by an estimated one job in five in the United States While each situation the Corps studies involves different being dependent, to some extent, on the commerce handled by considerations, Corps engineers always consider engineering these ports. feasibility and economic efficiency along with the environmental and social impacts. Federal participation in a shore protection project varies, depending on shore Flood Control and Flood Plain Management ownership, use and type and frequency of benefits. (If there is no public use or benefit, the Corps will not recommend Federal interest in flood control began in the alluvial valley federal participation.) Once the project is complete, non- of the Mississippi River in the mid-19th century. As the federal interests assume responsibility for its operation and relationship of flood control and navigation became apparent, maintenance. Congress called on the Corps of Engineers to use its One shore protection method popular in seaside navigational expertise to devise solutions to flooding problems communities is beach nourishment—the periodic along the river. replenishment of sand along the shoreline to replace that lost After a series of disastrous floods affecting wide areas in the to storms and erosion. Authorized nourishment projects 1920s and 30s, Congress determined, in the Flood Control Act usually have a nourishment period of 50 years. In addition, of 1936, that the federal government would participate in the Section 145 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1976 solution of flooding problems affecting the public interest that authorizes placement of beach quality sand from Corps were too large or complex to be handled by states or localities. dredging projects on nearby beaches. Under Section 933 of Corps authority for flood control work was thus extended to the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, local

xi sponsors pay the federal government 50 percent of the per year are recorded at these sites. State and local park additional costs of this placement of sand. authorities and private interests operate nearly 2,000 other areas at Corps projects. Hydropower The Corps has played a significant role in meeting the Environmental Quality nation’s electric power generation needs by building and operating hydropower plants in connection with its large The Corps carries out the Civil Works Programs in multiple-purpose dams. The Corps’ involvement in consistency with many environmental laws, executive orders hydropower generation began with the Rivers and Harbors and regulations. Perhaps primary among these is the National acts of 1890 and 1899, which required the Secretary of War Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. This law requires and the Corps of Engineers to approve the sites and plans for federal agencies to study and consider the environmental all dams and to issue permits for their construction. The Rivers impacts of their proposed actions. Consideration of the and Harbors Act of 1909 directed the Corps to consider various environmental impact of a Corps project begins in the early water uses, including water power, when submitting stages, and continues through design, construction and preliminary reports on potential projects. operation of the project. The Corps must also comply with The Corps continues to consider the potential for these environmental laws and regulations in conducting its hydroelectric power development during the planning regulatory programs. process for all water resources projects involving dams and NEPA procedures ensure that public officials and private reservoirs. In most instances today, it is non-federal interests citizens may obtain and provide environmental information who develop hydropower facilities at Corps projects without before federal agencies make decisions concerning the federal assistance. The Corps, however, can plan, build and environment. In selecting alternative project designs, the Corps operate hydropower projects when it is impractical for non- strives to choose options with minimum environmental impact. federal interests to do so. Today, the more than 20,000 The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorizes megawatts of capacity at Corps-operated power plants provide the Corps to propose modifications of its existing projects— approximately 30 percent of the nation’s hydroelectric power, many of them built before current environmental requirements or three percent of its total electric energy supply. were in effect—for environmental improvement. Proposals the Corps has made under this authority range Water Supply from use of dredged material to create nesting sites for water- fowl to modification of water control structures to improve Corps involvement in water supply dates back to 1853, downstream water quality for fish. when it began building the Washington Aqueduct, which In recent years the Corps of Engineers has planned and provides water to the nation’s capital city and some of its recommended environmental restoration actions at federal suburbs to this day. projects to restore environmental conditions. Elsewhere in the nation, the Water Supply Act of 1958 authorized the Corps to provide additional storage in its reservoirs for municipal and industrial water supply at the Regulatory Programs request of local interests, who must agree to pay the cost. The Corps also supplies water for irrigation, under terms of the The Corps of Engineers regulates construction and other Flood Control Act of 1944. This act provided that the Secretary work in navigable waterways under Section 10 of the Rivers of War, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of the and Harbors Act of 1899, and has authority over the discharge Interior, could allow use of Corps reservoirs for irrigation, of dredged or fill material into the “waters of the United provided that users agree to repay the government for the water. States” —a term which includes wetlands and all other aquatic areas—under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, the “Clean Recreation Water Act”). Under these laws, those who seek to carry out such work must first receive a permit from the Corps. The Flood Control Act of 1944, the Federal Water Project The “Section 404” program is the principal way by which the federal government protects wetlands and other aquatic Recreation Act of 1965, and language in specific project environments. The program’s goal is to ensure protection of authorization acts authorize the Corps to construct, maintain, the aquatic environment while allowing for necessary and operate public park and recreational facilities at its projects, economic development. and to permit others to build, maintain, and operate such The permit evaluation process includes a public notice and facilities. The water areas of Corps projects are open to public a public comment period. Applications for complex projects use for boating, fishing, and other recreational purposes. may also require a public hearing before the Corps makes a The Corps of Engineers today is one of the federal permit decision. In its evaluation of applications, the Corps is government’s largest providers of outdoor recreational required by law to consider all factors involving public opportunities, operating more than 2,000 sites at its lakes and interest. These may include economics, environmental other water resource projects. More than 600 million visits concerns, historical values, fish and wildlife, aesthetics, flood

X ll damage prevention, land use classifications, navigation, Management Agency (FEMA), under Public Law 92-288 recreation, water supply, water quality, energy needs, food (the Stafford Act) as amended. production and the general welfare of the public. Under PL 84-99, the Chief of Engineers, acting for the The Corps of Engineers has issued a number of nationwide Secretary of the Army, is authorized to carry out disaster general permits, mostly for minor activities which have little preparedness work; advance measures; emergency operations or no environmental impact. Individual Corps districts have such as flood fighting, rescue and emergency relief activities; also issued regional permits for certain types of minor work rehabilitation of flood control works threatened or destroyed in specific areas. Individuals who propose work that falls by flood; and protection or repair of federally authorized under one of these general or regional permits need not go shore protection works threatened or damaged by coastal through the permit process. Corps districts have also issued storms. This act also authorizes the Corps to provide State Program General Permits for work in states that have emergency supplies of clean water in cases of drought or comprehensive wetland protection programs. These permits contaminated water supply. After the immediate flooding has allow applicants to do work for which they have received a passed, the Corps provides temporary construction and repairs permit under the state program. These general permits to essential public utilities and facilities and emergency reduce delays and paperwork for applicants and allow the access for a 10-day period, at the request of the governor. Corps to devote its resources to the most significant cases Under the Stafford Act and the Federal Disaster Response while maintaining the environmental safeguards of the Clean Plan, the Corps of Engineers has a standing mission Water Act. assignment to provide public works and engineering support in response to a major disaster or catastrophic earthquake. Under this plan, the Corps will work directly with state Emergency Response and Recovery authorities in providing temporary repair and construction of roads, bridges, and utilities, temporary shelter, debris removal and demolition, water supply, etc. The Corps is one of the The Corps provides emergency response to natural federal agencies tasked by FEMA to provide engineering, disasters under Public Law 84-99, which covers flood control design, construction and contract management in support of and coastal emergencies. It also provides emergency support recovery operations. to other agencies, particularly the Federal Emergency

X lll Chapter 1

(Eastern entrance to the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal at Reedy Point, Delaware) l The Delaware River Basin

1. Appoquinimink, Waterway, Authorized 2. Broadkill, Waterway, Completed 3. Delaware Coast Protection, Shore Protection, Underway 4. Delaware River, Phil-to-the-Sea, Waterway, Underway 5. Harbor of Refuge, Waterway, Completed 6. Ice Harbor at New Castle, Breakwater, Authorized 7. Inlet and Bay, Waterway, Completed 8. Indian River Inlet-Interior North Shore, Shore Protection, Completed 9. Indian River Inlet-Interior South Shore, Shore Protection, Completed 10. Inland Waterway from Chesapeake Bay to Delaware River, Waterway, Underway 11. Inland Waterway between and , Waterway, Completed 12. Leipsic River, Waterway, Completed 13. Little River, Waterway, Completed 14. MispillionRiver, Waterway, Completed 15. MurderkillRiver, Waterway, Completed 16. St. Jones River, Waterway, Completed 17. Smyrna River, Waterway, Completed 18. Waterway from IndianRiver Inlet to RehobothBay, Waterway, Completed 19. Wilmington Harbor, Christina River, Waterway, Completed

40 40 IIJ ___ L □ MILES

2 Philadelphia District Delaware River Basin

The Delaware River rises on the western slopes of the basin support the transport of over 100 million tons of goods Catskill Mountains in southeastern New York and flows into and out of the ports of the Delaware River and Bay southwesterly as separate East and West branches to a annually. Its waters also provide extensive outdoor recreation confluence at Hancock, NY. The river then flows southeasterly opportunities from the headwaters to the Atlantic Ocean. toward Port Jervis, NY, forming the boundary between New Lack of control over these waters resulted in the loss of York and Pennsylvania. The Lackawaxen, Mongaup, and more than 90 lives and in $ 100 million in damages during the Neversink rivers are the major tributaries in this reach. From floods produced by Hurricane Connie and Diane in August Port Jervis to Trenton, NJ, the river flows in an irregular path 1955. Absence of flow regulation has also resulted in serious through mountainous and moderately rolling country to the local water shortages such as those of 1957,1961-65,1980-81, Delaware Water Gap, finally reaching the coastal plain and tidal and 1984-85. reach at Trenton. The Delaware then enters its tidal estuary The population growth rate within the basin has slowed and flows southwesterly towards Wilmington, DE, and then dramatically since 1970. If growth rate continues at the current southeast to Delaware Bay, emptying into the Atlantic Ocean at level, the total population will increase by less than 15 percent Cape May, NJ, and , DE. The river also serves over the next 50 years. By the year 2010, the basin’s water as the boundary between Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and resources will need to furnish approximately 14 billion gallons New Jersey and Delaware. The length of the river from its per day for uses other than cooling at steam electric-generating source to the head of the bay is 367 miles, with an additional 48 plants, which would require 3 8 billion gallons per day. The miles to the ocean. The two major tributaries, the Lehigh and requirements for power in the service area have increased and Schuylkill rivers, enter the Delaware at Easton, PA, and Phila­ additions to generating capacity will be required to meet future delphia, PA, respectively. The drainage area of the entire basin loads. It is estimated that the utility peak demands of the area is 12,765 square miles, which does not include the water area of will increase to a total of 50 million kilowatts by 2000. the bay. To ensure this economic growth and supply of water and The Delaware River Basin is an area of irregular outline, the power, the Delaware River Basin’s water resources must be greatest dimensions of which are approximately 250 miles north- preserved, further developed and controlled. The recom­ south and somewhat less than 100 miles east-west; it is mended plan of development for the Delaware River Basin will between the river valleys of the Hudson River to the east and meet these needs by providing 11 major water-control projects the Susquehanna on the west. The geographical center of the and 8 other projects. The latter would be developed, by local basin, near Allentown, PA, is about 100 miles due west of New interests, for recreations and later for water supply when York City. The Delaware’s waters rise at upstream elevation up to 4,000 feet above sea level and flow to tidewater at Trenton. needed. (Three of these eight were deauthorized in 1986 by RL. The entire , except for 8 square miles in the 99-662). Also included in the plan are 39 small control projects northeast corner of Maryland, lies in Delaware, New Jersey, that could be developed under prior laws. New York and Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has an important role in the basin’s develop­ The water resources of the Delaware River Basin contribute ment, as seven of the eight formerly authorized, major Federal to the economic and social well-being of approximately 22 projects (including the three that were deauthorized) were million people who live within the area. planned wholly within its boundaries, with the other projects The basin’s water resources furnish about three billion located in Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey. Of the gallons of water each day for use in homes, offices, farms, seven major projects totally within Pennsylvania, two were factories, irrigated lands and for other uses. In addition, modifications of existing projects; the other five were new approximately 3.4 billion gallons per day are used for cooling projects. purpose by steam electric-generating plants. The waters of the

Bay to the mouth of the river, and 40 feet wide at the same depth Completed Projects up the river to Milton. The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1953 authorized the abandonment of that part of the project that provides for an entrance channel from the bay into the river. The Broadkill River rises in Sussex County, flows northeast­ Traffic now navigates to and from the river through the Lewes erly 13 miles and empties into Delaware Bay about 5 miles above andRehoboth Canal. Cape Henlopen. The existing project, which was started in 1873, Maintenance dredging was last completed in 1965. provides for a channel 6 feet deep and 150 feet wide in Delaware No commerce reported in 1990.

3 Harbor of Refuge, Delaware Bay is connected with Rehoboth Bay on the north, by two short artificial waterways known as the Ditches (BigDitch and Little Ditch). Immediately after cutting the In 1822, congress authorized a project which provided for ditches, the inlet acquired a movement northward. In 1881, the a Harbor of Refuge in Delaware Bay to shelter vessels from Federal Government approved the original project under which storm winds and ice flows. The project is on the south side of the inlet was dredged to a depth of 4 feet. Difficulty was the bay entrance. experienced in keeping the inlet open. It closed completely in The Harbor of Refuge includes a breakwater, 8,000 feet 1912 and 1915, and remained closed for several months each long, extending into the bay from a point about 6,000 feet time, until the accumulation of drainage water raised to the above Cape Henlopen and 15 ice breakers. One of the surface of the bay so that it again broke through the barrier and modifications provides for a channel 15 feet deep and 300 feet reopened the inlet. wide from deepwater in Delaware Bay to the pier of Fish The existing project provides a channel from Indian River to Products Company at Lewes, DE, and a turning basin at the Millsboro, stabilization of the inlet by two parallel jetties and a inner end of the channel. This project was completed in 1951 turning basin at Old Landing. The project was completed in at a cost of $2,412,778. 1951 at a cost of$511,210. Major rehabilitations of the bulk­ Total maintenance costs are $1,169,014. heads were completed in 1964 and in 1975 at costs of $1,323,775 No commerce reported on the waterway. and $331,871, respectively. Total maintenance costs are $3,937,698. Annual trafficfor the year 1984 was approximately 10,000 Indian River Inlet and Bay passengers; no commerce reported.

Indian River Inlet, an opening through the barrier beach Inland Waterway Between Rehoboth Bay and separating Indian River Bay and the Atlantic Ocean, lies Delaware Bay midway between Cape Henlopen and the Maryland state line. The bay is a shallow lagoon 2 miles wide and 6 miles long. The waterway is a tidal canal situated in the southeastern Indian River empties into the west side of the bay after flowing part of Sussex County. It extends 12 miles southward from easterly 13 miles from its origin in Sussex County. Delaware Bay through the marshes back of Cape Henlopen to Rehoboth Bay. The entrance to the waterway is by Roosevelt Inlet, located 4 miles above Cape Henlopen. The waterway extends through Lewes River from a junction with the Broadkill River near its mouth. The existing project was adopted in 1912, and modified in 1935 and 1945. The project provides for an entrance channel from Delaware Bay, 10 feet deep and 200 feet wide, protected by two parallel jetties 500 feet apart; a channel 10 feet deep and 100 feet wide to the South Street Bridge at Lewes, and a channel 6 feet deep and 50 feet wide to Rehoboth Bay. The project also provides for two 725-foot-long parallel jetties at the Rehoboth Bay entrance, a channel 6 feet deep and 100 feet wide from the entrance channel to Delaware Bay for a distance of about 2 miles up the Broadkill River and a highway bridge at Rehoboth. The project is about 12 miles long. The extension of the jetties at the Delaware Bay entrance (Roosevelt Inlet) remains to be performed. The need for this feature depends upon the rate of shoaling beyond the ends of the existing jetties. Consequently, in June 1960 the Chief of Engineers declared this project inactive until its need has been determined. The extension of the jetties was deauthorized in 1990. The estimated cost of the existing project is $1,392,514 (July 1960 prices). This includes $816,000 for the inactive portion, INDIAN RIVER INLET-A sand bypassing system installed $561,514 for the completed work, and $60,000 non-Federal funds. at the inlet transports sand through a pipeline across the Maintenance dredging was last performed by contract in highway bridge from the south side o f the inlet onto the 1980. "feeder beach" in the foreground. View looks south along Traffic for the year 1989 was 1,564 passengers; no commerce the Delaware Coast. reported in 1990.

4 Leipsic River

The Leipsic River in Kent County, flows easterly 19 miles, and empties into Delaware Bay about 38 miles above Cape Henlopen. The existing project provides for a channel 6 feet deep and 50 feet wide from Delaware Bay to Leipsic, and 5 feet deep and 40 feet wide from Leipsic to Garrison Mill. Total maintenance costs are $32,345 for a total project cost of $69,301. No maintenance since the project was completed in 1914. No commerce reported in 1990.

Little River

Little River rises in Kent County, flows easterly 7 miles and empties into Delaware Bay about 32 miles above Cape Henlopen. A substantial party fishing boat business exists on the river. The existing project provides for a channel 5 feet deep and 60 feet wide from a like depth in Delaware Bay to the mouth and 40 feet wide at the same depth from the mouth to Little Creek Landing. Total maintenance costs are $288,310 for a total project cost MISPILLIONRIVER-Delaware Bay Entrance to Mispillion (at of $300,326. left). Breach at right from Cedar Creek is to be completed in Last contract for miscellaneous dredging was completed in 1994. 1973. No commerce reported in 1990. Total maintenance costs axe $1,573,336 for a total project Mispillion River cost of $2,212,175. The last dredging was performed in 1989; no commerce reported in 1990. The Mispillion River rises in Kent and Sussex Counties and forms their mutual boundary on its northeasterly path to Delaware Bay. The river empties into Delaware Bay about 16 miles above Cape Henlopen. The existing Federal navigation Murderkill River project on the waterway was adopted in 1919 and modified in 1937 and 1954. Rising in Kent County, the river flows northerly 19 miles The existing project provides for a channel 9 feet deep, 80 through the county, and empties into Delaware Bay about 25 feet wide in Delaware Bay to the mouth and 60 feet wide to miles above Cape Henlopen. The existing navigation project Milford, and a turning basin 9 feet deep, 120 feet wide, and 3 50 was adopted in 1892. feet long. The project also provides for seven cutoffs 9 feet The existing project provides for a channel 7 feet deep, 60 deep and two parallel stone-filled, pile-and-timber jetties at the feet wide from Delaware Bay to Frederica. This portion of the mouth spaced 210 feet apart, the north jetty being 6,496 feet long project was completed in 1911 for $37,630. and extending to a point opposite the end of the south jetty The remaining work on this project consists of widening which is 5,850 feet long. the channel in Delaware Bay from 60 feet to 150 feet, and in Remaining work to be done consists of dredging the present the river from 60 feet to 80 feet. The project is classified as 6-foot channel to the authorized depth of 9 feet, 80 feet wide completed because the uncompleted portion was placed in a from Delaware Bay to the mouth and 60 feet wide to Milford; deferred status in 1937 pending a redetermination of the three cutoffs to eliminate bends; and the turning basin at economic justification of the improvement. Milford. The estimated cost of the existing project is $124,000 The project is classified as complete because the uncom­ (1954 price level). pleted portion has been placed in an inactive status until the Dredging of miscellaneous shoals was performed in 1991. condition of local cooperation is fulfilled. The estimated cost of Annual traffic for the year 1989 was 18,988 passengers; no the new work is $720,000 (1956 price level). Costs for the commerce was reported in 1990. existingprojectwere $277,733 for new work, $253,491 for minor Total maintenance costs are $1,265,067 and total project rehabilitation, and $595,247 for maintenance. Total cost was costs are $1,302,697. $1,126,471.

5 Smyrna River The estimated cost of the existing project is $1,553,000 (1954 prices). The river rises in New Castle and Kent counties, flows Total maintenance costs to date have been $66,093. northeasterly between the two counties and empties into Dredging was last completed in FY 1937. No commerce Delaware Bay about 57 miles below Philadelphia. The reported in 1990. existing project on the waterway was adopted in 1910. No commerce reported since FY 1937. The existing project provides for a channel 7 feet deep, 100 feet wide in Delaware Bay to the mouth and 60 feet wide Waterway from Indian River Inlet to Rehoboth in the river to Smyrna Landing. This was completed in 1909 Bay for $ 198,844, including $5 5,085 for new work under previous projects. The waterway, in the southeastern part of Sussex County, The remaining work consists of dredging a channel 7 connects Rehoboth Bay with Indian River Bay, by way of Big feet deep and 60 feet wide from Smyrna Landing to the fixed Ditch. The existing project provides for a navigable channel 6 highway bridge, a distance of approximately 750 feet. The feet deep and 100 feet wide between the existing federal unconstructed portion of the project was deauthorized in navigation project for Indian River Inlet and Bay, and the November 1979. waterway between Rehoboth Bay and Delaware Bay. The estimated cost is $155,000 (1954 prices). The existing project was completed in 1956 for $90,908, Total maintenance costs are $197,328. exclusive of $20,000 contributed by local interests. Dredging of miscellaneous shoals was performed in Total maintenance costs are $274,068 and total project 1991. DredgingwaslastperformedinFY 1949; commerce costs are $364,976. consists of shellfish totalling 1,000 tons. Dredging miscellaneous shoals completed in 1980. Annual traffic for the year 1989 was 480 passengers; no St. Jones River commerce in 1990 was reported.

The St. Jones River rises in the western part of Kent Wilmington Harbor, Christina River County, flows southeasterly and empties into Delaware Bay. The existing project was adopted in 1910, and modified in 1937 and 1960. The original project extended to Dover. The Wilmington Harbor is formed by the Christina River, which rises modification in 1960 abandoned the project from Lebanon to in New Castle County, flows northeasterly and empties into the Dover. Delaware River about 29 miles below Philadelphia, PA. The The existing project provides for a channel 7 feet deep existing project was adopted in 1896, and modified over the years. and 60 feet wide in Delaware Bay to the mouth and 50 feet The existing project which is about 9 miles long, provides a wide at the same depth to Lebanon, and two jetties at the channel 3 5 feet deep from Delaware River to Newport. Also mouth. The north jetty is 5,800 feet long and parallel to the provided are jetties at the mouth of Christina and Brandywine entrance channel, and the south jetty is 4,100 feet long and Rivers, and a turning basin, in the area opposite the Wilmington parallel to the entrance channel of Murderkill River. This Marine Terminal. was completed in 1933 atacost of $152,512. The project was completed in 1962 for $ 1,552,604. Total Remaining work consists of dredging a new realigned maintenance costs have been $36,262,501 for a total project cost entrance channel and constructing protecting jetties. The of $37,815,105. project is classified as completed because the uncompleted The latest maintenance dredging was performed in 1993. portion was placed in a deferred status in 1937, pending a Commerce consists of auto imports, salt, gypsum, orange redetermination of the economic justification of the improve­ juice, iron ore, paints, machinery, lumber, chemicals, and petro­ ment. leum products. Traffic through the port in 1990 was 4,209,000 tons.

Control Act of 1968, and modified by Section 869 of PL 99-662, is Projects Under Way located in Sussex County on the Atlantic Ocean, starting immediately south of Delaware Bay and extending southerly 24.5 Flood Control miles to Fenwick Island at the Delaware-Maryland border. The originally authorized plan of improvement consists Delaware Coast Protection-Continuing generally of construction of bulkheads in developed areas, Construction periodic nourishment of the beaches, placement of sand fences, planting dune grass, and maintenance and replacement of The project, authorized under Section 203 of the Flood existing structuré. The modified plan calls for a sand-bypassing

6 system at Indian River Inlet. 40 feet, from the Philadelphia Naval Base to Deepwater in The project will provide tangible benefits by reducing Delaware Bay, was accomplished between 1940 and February damages from storms. 1942 by a fleet of hopper and pipeline dredges. These dredges In a post-authorization change, the state of Delaware, in removed 50,000,000 cubic yards of material from the river September 1983, requested that the authorized project be channel during a 20-month period. The urgent need was to pro­ scaled back to include only beach erosion control measures vide a waterway to and from the Naval Base for capital ships. at Bethany and South Bethany Beaches, and a sand­ The work remaining to be done consists of dredging the east bypassing system at Indian River Inlet. side of the channel in Philadelphia Harbor from 35 to 37 feet, The plan of improvement at Indian River Inlet consists of deepening and constructing Mantua Creek, Reedy Point, and the construction of a sand bypassing plant on the south side of Deepwater Point anchorages to project dimensions. Enlarge­ the inlet to transport sand across the inlet and nourish a ment of these anchorages to authorized dimensions is being feeder beach on the north side of the inlet to protect State deferred until the needs for anchorages have been established. Highway Route 1. The sand bypassing plant was completed The estimated cost of new work, at (October 1984 price in January 1990 at an initial construction cost of approxi­ level) is $77.8 million. mately $2,000,000. The sand bypassing plant is operated by Maintenance dredging by government and contract plant was the feeder beach (as continuing construction) with the performed during FY 1988. Federal government contributing 41% of the operation and Commerce on the river consists of coal, iron ore, petroleum maintenance costs. products, iron and steel, lumber, machinery, fertilizers, wood and wood products, chemicals, grains, sugars, molasses and a NAVIGATION wide variety of general merchandise. Commercial shipping for Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and 1990 was 125,592,000 tons. Delaware, Philadelphia to the Sea

The Delaware River forms the boundary between New Jersey to the east and Pennsylvania and Delaware to the west as it follows its southerly course to the mouth at Delaware Bay. The Delaware River has played an important role in national growth from the founding at Philadelphia. As early as 1735, the number of vessels arriving and clearing the port annually was 427. Today, the Philadelphia Port Area-Delaware River and its tributaries-comprises one of the greatest port groups in the world, and has one of the largest annual import tonnages in the United States. The total crude petroleum imports in the port area rank among the highest in the nation. The earliest improvements were construction of ice harbors and breakwaters to provide safe havens from ice and storms. Work on the Delaware breakwater at Cape Henlopen was Corps Hopper Dredge McFarland periodically works in the begun in 1828 and completed in 1869. In 1885, congress Philadelphia-to-the-Sea federal navigation project, as do con­ approved a comprehensive project for the improvement of the tractor dredges. The Philadelphia District operates the 60 per­ Delaware River to accommodate larger ships. This project pro­ son ship as part of the Corps of Engineers’ minimum fleet. The vided for a channel 26 feet deep and 600 feet wide from ship serves Corps directors on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Philadelphia to Deepwater in Delaware Bay. Congress pro­ vided for a deeper and wider channel as commerce increased and larger and faster ships were constructed. The Rivers and Inland Waterway from Chesapeake Bay to Harbors Act of 1899 adopted a project providing for a channel Delaware River, Maryland and Delaware 30 feet deep and 600 feet wide from Philadelphia to deepwater in Delaware Bay. The inland waterway connecting Chesapeake Bay and the In the interval since 1899, many additional improvements Delaware River, generally known as the Chesapeake and were authorized. Delaware Canal, is a sea-level canal capable of accommodating The project also provides for the construction of dikes and ocean-going ships. The canal saves considerable time and fuel training works for the regulations and control of tidal flow. The for ships sailing between Baltimore and European or northeast­ anchorages alongside the channel are for the safety and ern United States ports, by eliminating the long trip around the convenience of navigation, which will benefit from the elimina­ Virginia capes. The waterway cuts 286 miles of sailing distance tion of hazards to life and property. The anchorages are an between Baltimore and Philadelphia, and reduces the trip from integral part of the Delaware River waterways and are neces­ Boston to Baltimore by 150 miles. In brings ships from North sary to their continued safe use. Deepening of the channel to Atlantic European ports 115 miles closer to Baltimore.

7 The original Chesapeake and Delaware Lock Canal was guard rail installation), (4) rehabilitation of the St. Georges constructed between 1824 and 1829 by the Chesapeake and Bridge and (5) dredging of the anchorage on . The Delaware Canal Company, with funds from the purchase of Elk River anchorage dredging is deferred until its need is stock by private citizens and companies, and by the States of demonstrated. The estimated cost is $143,000,000 (October Maryland and Delaware, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 1987 price level), which includes $100,000 in non-federal costs and the Federal Government. for lands (rights-of-way) and bridges. The lock canal’s summit pool, which was about 15 feet above sea level, was supplied with lockage water by steam- powered waterwheels. The canal’s original Delaware River terminus was at Delaware City, DE, some 14 land miles from its western land terminus at Chesapeake City, MD, where it met Back Creek. The entire canal between the two cities was formed by dry land excavation to a depth of 10 feet and bottom width of 36 feet. A tide lock was built at Delaware City, with other locks-220 feet long and 24 feet wide-located at the east and west ends of the summit pool at St. Georges, DE, and Chesapeake City. The United States Government purchased all interest of the original Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Company in 1919 for $2,514,000. The purchase authorization also provided for the enlargement of the waterway to a sea-level canal 12 feet deep and from 90 to 150 feet wide, and for the construction, or dredging of a new eastern terminus at Reedy Point, 1.5 miles south of Delaware City. Subsequent modifications to the initial authorization provided for four high-level fixed highway bridges, a railroad bridge lift span, and two recreation areas. Between 1935 and 1938, the canal was deepened to 27 feet and New vehicular bridge (over the canal at St. Georges) is being widened to 250 feet, and in 1954 Congress authorized a depth completed under contract by the State o f Delaware andfunded of 35 feet and width o f450 feet. by the Federal Government. Existing St. Georges Bridge is at right. The current inland waterway begins near Poole’s Island in upper Chesapeake Bay and extends 18 miles northward in the bay, then 9 miles up the Elk River to Back Creek, and 5 miles up the latter to the canal proper at Chesapeake City. A branch channel, which was part of the original canal, extends from the Delaware River at Delaware City to the main channel 2 miles west of the Reedy Point terminus. Four high- span highway bridges, maintained by the Philadelphia District, and a vertical lift span, owned by Conrail, cross the canal. A new highway bridge across the canal just west of St. Georges is being built by the State of Delaware, with federal government funding of $ 115 million; the bridge deemed necessary due to the volume and weight of vehicular traffic. Completion is estimated by 1995. An anchorage 35 feet deep, 1,200 feet wide, and 3,700 feet long in the Elk River, is authorized but not constructed, and there is an anchorage and a turning basin 12 feet deep at Chesapeake City. Enlargement of the main channel to 35 feet deep and 450 feet wide was completed in 1975 with the exception of the anchorage at Elk River. The highway bridges were completed at St. Georges (4 lane) in 1942, at Chesapeake City (2 lane) in 1949; at Summit (4 lane) in 1960 and at Reedy Point (2 lane) in 1964. The railroad bridge lift span was completed in 1965. Dispatchers monitor commercial traffic in canal at Corps o f The following features are authorized but not constructed: Engineers Resident Engineer's Office, Chesapeake City, Md. (1) installation of bridge fenders, (2) construction of recre­ Commercial vessels (note ship passing by dispatcher station) ation facilities at Welch Point, MD, (3) miscellaneous comple­ require dispatcher's permission to transit the waterway. tion items (bank stabilization, planting, road paving and

8 The estimate does not include the $145,000 cost (1954 Contract maintenance dredging in upper Chesapeake Bay prices) for completing the Delaware City Branch Channel, and in the canal landcut was performed in F Y 1993. which has been deferred for restudy. Total maintenance cost is Commerce consists of miscellaneous products and passen­ $158,519,366. gers; annual traffic for 1990 was 12,942,000 tons and 954 passengers in 1989.

Work Under Special Continuing Authorities The project provides tangible benefits by reducing dam­ SMALL NAVIGATION-COMPLETED ages from hurricanes, providing beach erosion control mea­ sures, land enhancement and additional recreation area and the possibility of reducing the loss of life due to storms. Cedar Creek The Federal cost was $85,000; the local interests' share was the same. The existing project, adopted in December 1981, provides a channel extending 6,200 linear feet from the confluence of Cedar Lewes Beach Creek with the Mispillion River to about 1,000 feet upstream of the State Highway Route 36 bridge. The channel is 80 feet wide The project was authorized under the authority prescribed in the lower reach, extending from the river to the state launch­ for small beach erosion control projects by Section 103 of the ing facilities-a distance of 30 feet. The upper reach is 50 feet Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, as amended. wide for about 2,470 feet. Work was completed in August 1982. The plan of improvement for Lewes consists of improving Total cost was $153,936, of which $35,100 was the local inter­ the 8,000 feet of beach immediately east of Roosevelt Inlet. ests' share. Suitable material for initial fill and periodic nourishment is Maintenance dredging was last performed during 1989. No available in Roosevelt Inlet. commerce was reported for 1990. The project provides tangible benefits by reducing damages from hurricanes, providing beach erosion control measures, land enhancement and additional recreation area, and the possibility of reducing the loss of life due to storms. In accordance with the plan of improvement, the State of The project provides for a channel 6 feet deep and 60 feet Delaware has furnished the necessary assurances of local wide from Indian River Bay up Pepper Creek to Cattail Marsh, a cooperation. The Federal cost at July 1978 price level, was distance ofabout 3.9 miles. Work was completed June 30,1964. $88,602, as was the local interests' costs. The Federal cost was $ 138,094 exclusive of $ 12,774 for the study report. Cost to local interests was $38,988. SMALL NAVIGATION-COMPLETED No maintenance dredging has been performed. Annual passengers for 1989 was 60; no commerce in 1990. Wilmington Harbor

BEACH EROSION CONTROL-COMPLETED The project was authorized under the authority pre­ scribed for commercial navigation, Section 107, Rivers and Broadkill Beach Harbors Act of 1960, as amended. The project was authorized under the authority prescribed The project area is located at the confluence of the for small beach erosion control projects by Section 103 of the Delaware and Christina rivers. An existing Federal Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, as amended. navigation project is located in the study area. The project The plan of improvement for Broadkill Beach consisted of involved a portion of the Federal project for Wilmington improving 4,500 feet of beach, extending from a point 2,700 feet Harbor, extending from a point in the Wilmington Harbor north of the access road (Route 16) to a point 1,800 feet south Navigation Channel near Lobdell Canal easterly to the of that road. Approximately 110,000 cubic yards of suitable Federal Navigation Channel in the Delaware River, Philadel- sand to provide a berm 50 feet wide and the erection of 4,500 phia-to-the-Sea project. feet of sand fence was placed for preservation of the berm and The recommended plan deepened and widened portions periodic nourishment of the beach. Suitable material for initial of the existing project; the channel and turning basin from fill and periodic nourishment is available from offshore borrow 3 5 to 3 8 feet deep and the turning basin from 200 to 3 00 sources. feet wide. The plan consisted of a project following the alignment of the existing authorized project.

9 Construction was completed in March 1988. The cost of Indian River Inlet-Interior South Shore Study the project was approximately $850,000. Annual traffic in 1985 was approximately 2.4 million tons. The project is being considered, as prescribed for storm damage reduction, under provisions of Section 103 of the BEACH EROSION CONTROL-COMPLETED Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, as amended. The study area is located at the Indian River, Sussex County, on the Indian River Inlet-Interior North Shore Atlantic Ocean. The problem is erosion of the south interior inlet shoreline; The project is authorized under Section 103 of the Rivers and the erosion threatened to breach the state road (50-1) which Harbors Act of 1962, as amended. The project area is at the provides access to the south shore marina and trailer park Indian River Inlet, Sussex County, on the Atlantic Ocean. complex. From 1938 to 1968, the south shore interior shoreline The problem is erosion of the north interior inlet shoreline. eroded at an average rate of about 10 feet per year. However, From 1939 to 1987, the north interior shoreline eroded at an since 1968 the State of Delaware has periodically placed construction rubble along 1600 linear feet of the shoreline. The average rate of about 15 feet per year. Erosion threatened the rubble has not prevented the loss of sediment from portions of marine and other public facilities in Delaware Seashore State this shoreline which continue to erode, making the roadway Park and made them susceptible to storm damage. susceptible to storm damage. Erosion along these portions of The recommended plan involved construction of a stone the shoreline had continued at a rate of 5 feet per year. revetment to prevent progression of the shoreline landward The recommended plan involves construction of a stone and to reduce the risk of storm damage. Construction was revetment to prevent progression of the shoreline landward completed in September 1989. and to reduce the risk of storm damage. Construction was completed in September 1989. The cost of the project was approximately $1,000,000 (October 1986 price levels).

OTHER AUTHORIZED PROJECTS

PROJECT AND LOCALITY YEAR OF ESTIMATED YEAR OF DESCRIPTION AUTHORIZATION FEDERALESTIMATE COST Navigation (Deferred for Restudy) (Uncompleted portion only Deferred)

* Appoquinimink New Castle 1890 $39,963 1894 River County

The existing project was adopted in 1890. It provides for a channel 8 feet deep from Delaware River to Odessa. The project length is about 6.75 miles. The channel was dredged to 7 feet, and although this was not the project depth, it was considered adequate for the needs. This is an inactive project. The unconstructed portion ofthis project was deauthorized 3 October 1978, H.D. 95-351. The project is now considered complete. Total estimated project cost is $78,243.

♦Smyrna River New Castle & 1910 $156,000 1954 Kent Counties

NAVIGATION (INACTIVE)

Ice Harbor at Newcastle County 1884 $224,704 1894 New Castle

St. Jones Kent County 1910-1937 $1,514,000 1954

♦Uncompleted portions deauthorized: Appoquinimink-1978, Smyrna-1979.

10 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT In cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Hurricane Preparedness Program, the Philadelphia Section 206, Public Law 86-645 District is managing a Hurricane Evacuation Study for coastal Delaware. The study is designed to provide technical informa­ The Corps of Engineers provides a flood plain management tion concerning hurricane hazards, vulnerable areas, evacuation services program which makes available to Federal, State and networks and clearance times upon which updated or new local local governmental agencies information, guidance and advice emergency plans can be based. on flood hazards-enabling them to proceed with such planning, The Philadelphia District has prepared flood plain informa­ engineering studies, construction and other action as may be tion reports for many locations in the Delaware River Basin. necessary for prudent use of flood plains in the interest of Completed study reports are available from the Department of reducing flood losses. The program includes flood plain Highways and Transportation, State of Delaware, Dover, or from information reports, technical services and guidance, guides, the local community for which the report was prepared. Local pamphlets, related research and comprehensive planning on agencies can obtain assistance in preparing applications for flood damage prevention. flood plain information studies by contacting the Philadelphia District of the Corps.

Location

Completed Flood Plain Information Reports Date Completed

Brandywine Creek, New Castle County July 1973

Christina River (Christiana Acres to Coochs Bridge) Muddy & Belltown Runs, New Castle County October 1968

Christina River, East & West Branches, Newark, New Castle County May 1969

Christina River (Delaware River to Christiana Acres), Wilmington, New Castle County August 1970

Mill Creek, New Castle County May 1 973

Pike Creek, New Castle County December 1975

Red Clay Creek, New Castle County February 1971

White Clay Creek, New Castle County July 1972

11 Surveys Under Way

In response to the request of Congress, the Philadelphia District is conducting investigations and studies to determine whether proposed improvements are justified. Information on those surveys underway in the Delaware River Basin follows:

NAME PURPOSE APPROXIMATE DATE TOBE COMPLETED

Navigation

Delaware River The objective of this study is 1994 Comprehensive Navigation to define the federal interest in Study navigation development especially with respect to the port’s future needs for improvements in the waterways of the Delaware River.

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal- The objective of this study is to 1996 Baltimore Harbor Connecting Channels determine the Federal interest in (Deepening) Study measures to promote and encourage the efficient, logical, and economic development of the channel system saving the Port of Baltimore and Delaware River Ports.

Shore Protection

Delaware Coast from Cape This study is investigating the federal Indefinite Henlopen to Fenwick Island interest in providing shore protection along the Atlantic Ocean coastline of the State of Delaware. This study is being conducted through a series of interview studies

Delaware Bay Coastline, The objective of this study is to define the Indefinite Delaware and New Jersey federal interest in shore protection for specific locations along the Delaware Bay. This study is being conducted through a series of interim studies for the various problem areas.

12 Chapter 2

Delaware River Highway Bridge with view of the fertilizer plant at Laurel. 13 The Chesapeake Bay and its Tributaries

14 Baltimore District The Chesapeake Bay and its Tributaries

have a marked effect on marine organisms. New channels may The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary on the Atlantic drastically alter the hydraulic regime of an area. Deepening Coast of the United States and is one of the most important channels may increase salinity intrusions, affect spawning estuaries in the world. Oriented in a generally north-south opportunity, change the location of shoaling areas, and direction, roughly parallel to the Atlantic Coast, the bay possibly affect groundwater supplies. Improperly designed extends 200 miles from northeast Maryland, near Elkton, to the jetties and breakwaters may fail to provide necessary protec­ area of Norfolk-Hampton Roads, Virginia, where it enters the tion, and so disturb the littoral processes as to promote both Atlantic Ocean. The surface area of the bay is 4,600 miles, 3,400 bank and beach erosion or sedimentation at critical locations. miles of which are in Maryland, 1,200 in Virginia. The bay The current knowledge regardingthe complex interactions varies in width from 4 to 30 miles and has an average depth of within a tidal waterway is certainly incomplete, but by no means 28 feet. ineffective. There is sufficient knowledge to minimize difficul­ With its tributaries, the Chesapeake Bay constitutes one of ties, but much work remains to be done. the largest estuarine systems on earth. The bay drains a basin The most dramatic and readily apparent process occurring of64,170 square miles and has more than 50 tributary rivers. in the bay is the relentless attack on the beaches and banks The largest of these, the , drains 42 percent comprising its shoreline. Historical data, though somewhat of the basin. Other major tributaries are the Potomac, spotty, help to give some perspective to this problem and the Rappahannock, York, and James Rivers. tremendous amount of material moved in the process. It has The Chesapeake Bay system forms a vital link in the been estimated that, of the 7,325 miles of tidal shoreline along economic cycle of the Mid-Atlantic region. Waterborne the Chesapeake Bay and tributaries nearly 45,000 acres of commerce, totaling 110 million tons annually, moves over the shoreline have been lost to erosion over the past century. In waterway and contributes, in large measure, to the economy of addition, erosion contributes 4.7 million cubic yards of sedi­ an 11-state area extending into the Midwest. In recent years, ment to the Bayannva. The costs of providing protection the commercial seafood industry has exceeded 400 million against erosion and sedimentation are high, and there are pounds in annual harvest, valued yearly at more than $30 dangers in undertaking expensive works that fail to accomplish million, providing a livelihood for approximately 20,000 persons the purpose intended, while often causing results both unan­ in the bay area. ticipated and undesirable. In order to meet the needs of increasing population and an Pollution loads affecting the Chesapeake Bay are derived expanding economy, the navigation facilities of the Chesapeake from municipal, industrial, and agricultural sources. Agricul­ Bay and its tributaries will be continuously developed. There tural pollutants consist primarily of silt, fertilizer, pesticides, and are more than 100 Federally-constructed navigation projects, on animal wastes, while industrial wastes consist of sand, gravel, the bay and its tributaries, providing channels ranging in depth chemical compounds, and mine wastes. Municipal discharges from 4 to 3 5 feet and in width from 25 to 1,000 feet. With a trend contain household wastes and industrial by-products, and in navigation toward the use of larger ships, projects providing often add significant bacteria load to the bay. Of primary deep-draft channels to accommodate these larger vessels have concern are the nutrient and chemical loads introduced into the been authorized. One project planned for Baltimore, with an bay system. An excess of these nutrients fertilizes the water authorized channel depth of 50 feet; another, in the Norfolk- body into which they are injected, frequently rendering it turbid Hampton Roads Area in Virginia, provides for a channel with an and producing obnoxious odors, while smothering other forms authorized depth of 55 feet. of aquatic life by generating increased oxygen demands. A necessary consideration in the further development of Excess nutrients also may stimulate the growth of noxious Chesapeake Bay must be any alteration to the environmental weeds, crowding out other weed forms used as food by balance of the area. Astute planning and engineering will be waterfowl; trapping silt, causing shoaling; and making it required to design and construct facilities within the framework difficult to operate small boats. of ecological integrity. The unwise disposal of dredge soil can

COMPLETED PROJECTS Portsville Landing to Laurel, for straightening and widening Broad Creek River several sharp bends, and for widening the channel to provide a turning basin below the railroad bridge at Laurel. The project was completed in 1913 atacostof$14,510. Broad Creek River flows generally west through Sussex Commerce on the river consists of fertilizers. The average County and empties into about 8 miles west of annual traffic for the years 1962 through 1971 was 4,684 tons. Laurel. The project for the improvement of this waterway No traffic has been reported since 1971. provides for a channel 8 feet deep and 70 feet wide from

15 Nanticoke River (Including Northwest Fork) Delaware and Maryland.

The Nanticoke River rises in Kent and Sussex comities, flows southwesterly through Sussex County and into the State of Maryland; forms the boundary between Dorchester and Wicomico counties, Maryland, and empties into , a branch of Chesapeake Bay. The Northwest Fork is entirely in Maryland. The existing project was adopted in 1896. The project in the Nanticoke River provides for a channel 12 feet deep and 100 feet wide from the 12-foot-depth contour in Tangier Sound to the highway bridge at Seaford, DE., with a turning basin at the upper end; and a slight widening of the channel to a depth of 9 feet between the bridges in the harbor at Seaford. The length of the improved sections included in the project is about 4 miles, extending over 32 miles of the river. The lower end of the first section of the project is about 8 miles above the mouth of the river. The project in the Northwest Fork provides View o f the fertilizer plant at Laurel. The Delaware Avenue for a channel 6 feet deep and 60 feet wide for a distance of Highway Bridge can be seen in the center. about 4 miles upstream from Upper Browns Wharf, Md., with a turning basin at the upper end. The total cost of the project including $689,773 for maintenance, has been $832,907. Commerce consists of chemicals, nylon, fertilizers, and agricultural, bituminous, petroleum and seafood products. Traffic during the year 1988 was 354,414 tons.

SURVEYS UNDER WAY

Name Purpose Approximate Date Of Completion

Navigation

Elimination of water chestnuts A survey of Chesapeake Bay Indefinite and tributaries, Maryland, Delaware, and Virginia with a view of elimination of the water chestnuts (Trapa natans). Basin Development

Chesapeake Bay Shoreline To investigate shore erosion within 1990 Protection Study the tidal portion of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries and identify measures to protect the shoreline from erosion and property damage.

16 Flood Emergency Operations and Disaster Assistance Activities

Under Public Law 84-99 (Flood Fighting, Repair and Rescue experience by assigning the following types of missions: 1) Work) the Corps of Engineers is authorized to engage in flood Engineering evaluations of the disaster area consisting of fighting and rescue operations, and to repair or restore any preliminary damages assessment and preparation of detailed flood control work threatened or destroyed by flood. Under damage survey reports, 2) Direct Federal contract assistance for Section 206 of the Flood Control Act of 1962, the Corps of the debris removal and the reestablishment of utilities or other Engineers may also provide emergency protection for Federal- facilities essential for public health and safety, authorized and constructed hurricane and shore protection 3) Assist in providing housing for displaced disaster victims by works when threatened, and repair and restore such works construction of emergency mobile home sites or making temporary when damaged or destroyed by wind, wave or water action of repairs to damaged houses, 4) Providing technical assistance to other than ordinary nature. Public Law 84-99 also authorizes local governments to assist them in their repair and restoration the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engi­ efforts. neers, to construct wells and transport water for any farmer, rancher or political subdivision during drought situations. It was under these programs that the Philadelphia District has Under Public Law 92-288 (The Disaster Relief Act of 1974) responded to coastal storms affecting the State of Delaware: Federal assistance can be provided to individuals, State, or Disaster Emergency Work local governments upon determination of the President that PL 84-99 PL 92-388 damages resulting from a catastrophe are of sufficient severity (PL 875) and magnitude to warrant disaster relief assistance which would supplement existing local, State and Federal programs. Coastal Storm $2,437,355 The President has delegated the responsibility of coordinating (6-8 March 1962) the activities of all Federal agencies providing disaster assis­ tance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA Coastal Storm $332,559 is authorized to direct Federal agencies to use their available (1-2 December 1974) personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities and other resources, including managerial and technical services, in support of State and local disaster assistance efforts. Coastal Storm $161,150 While the Corps of Engineers performs disaster assistance (13-15 October 1977) under its own statutory authority, FEMA uses the Corps’ extensive construction management and Engineering Coastal Storm $ 88,000

17

Index

PROJECT OR ACTIVITY PAGE PROJECT OR ACTIVITY PAGE

Apoquinimink (Navigation)...... 10 Inland Waterway from Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, Delaware and Maryland Branydwine Creek, New Castle Co., DE (Chesapeake and Delaware Canal) (Navigation)...... 7 (Flood Plain Information)...... 11 Broad Creek River (Navigation)...... 16 Leipsic River (Navigation)...... 5 Broadkill Beach (Beach Erosion Control)...... 9 Lewes, Delaware (Beach Erosion Control)...... 9 Broadkill River (Navigation)...... 3 Little River (Navigation)...... 5

Cedar Creek...... 9 Mill Creek, New Castle Co., DE (Flood Chesapeake Bay Basin and its Tributaries...... 15 Plain Information)...... 11 Chesapeake Bay Basin (Basin Development)...... 17 Mispillion River (Navigation)...... 5 Chesapeake Bay Shoreline (Protection Study)...... 17 Murderkill River (Navigation)...... 5 Chesapeake & Delaware Canal (Deepening Study)...... 12 Nanticoke River (Including Northwest Fork), Christina River, New Castle Co., DE Delaware and Maryland (Navigation)...... 16 (Flood Plain Information)...... 11 Pepper Creek (Navigation)...... 9 Delaware Coast Protection...... 6 Pike Creek, New Castle Co., DE Delaware River Basin...... 3 (Flood Plain Information)...... 11 Delaware River Comprehensive Navigation Study...... 12 , New Castle Co., DE Delaware River, PA, NJ, andDE, (Flood Plain Information)...... 11 Philadelphia to the Sea (Navigation)...... 7 Smyrna River (Navigation)...... 6,10 Flood Emergency Operations and St. Jones River (Navigation)...... 6,10 Disaster Assistance...... 17 Water Chestnuts (Navigation)...... 16 Harbor of Refuge, Delaware Bay (Navigation)...... 4 Waterway from Indian River Inlet to Rehoboth Bay (Navigation)...... 6 Ice Harbor at New Castle (Navigation)...... 10 , New Castle Co., DE Indian River Inlet and Bay (Navigation)...... 4 (Flood Plain Information)...... 11 Indian River Inlet-Interior North Shore...... 10 Wilmington Harbor...... 9 Indian River Inlet-Interior South Shore...... 10 Wilmington Harbor, Christina River Inland Waterway Between Rehoboth Bay (Navigation)...... 6 and Delaware Bay (Navigation)...... 4

19