This page is intentionally left blank. DRAFT INTEGRATED GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA, NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LEAD NEPA AGENCY: Department of Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District NON‐FEDERAL SPONSOR: Port of Stockton ABSTRACT: The San Francisco Bay to Stockton Navigation Improvement Project was originally authorized by Congress in the Rivers and Harbors (R&H) Act of 1965. The originally authorized study was scoped for a 78‐mile long navigation project to include the John F. Baldwin and Stockton channels, however, it was re‐scoped in 2016 to include navigation improvements up to Avon. The study area for this draft integrated General Reevaluation Report and Environmental Impact Statement (GRR/EIS) is a 13.2 mile length of navigation channel which spans from Central San Francisco Bay to Avon (just east of the Benicia‐Martinez Bridge) and includes the Pinole Shoal Channel and the Bulls Head Reach portion of the Suisun Bay Channel. The channels in the study area primarily serve crude oil imports and refined product exports to and from several oil refineries and two non‐petroleum industries. Although the navigation channels in the study area are authorized to a depth of up to ‐45 feet mean lower low water (MLLW), the channels are currently maintained to only ‐35 feet MLLW. The Tentatively Selected Plan (TSP)/Proposed Project includes deepening the existing navigation channel to ‐38 feet MLLW (plus 2 feet of allowable overdepth), dredging a 2,600 foot sediment trap in Bulls Head Reach to ‐42 feet MLLW (plus 2 feet of allowable overdepth), leveling a rock outcrop within the Pinole Shoal channel, and using the dredged material at beneficial reuse sites to contribute to restoration within the Delta. Send your comments by: June 9th, 2019 For further information on this statement, please contact: Stacie Auvenshine U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 4970 Jacksonville, FL 32232‐0019 Telephone: 904‐314‐7614 E‐mail: [email protected] This page is intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Using this Document Report Reference Materials: To ease navigation through the report, prompts are provided, alerting the reader to reference additional sections or graphics, or to explain the purpose of an ensuing discussion. In this report, these prompts can be identified b y this blue box format. Additionally, informational foldouts Graphics Executive Summary 1 and 2 are provided in the Executive Summary to be used while reading the document as reference maps with key points and landmarks. In addition, an overall table of contents is provided, along with detailed tables of contents and an index at the end of the report. Organization of this report follows Exhibit G-7 (Feasibility Report Content) provided in Appendix G of US Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Regulation (ER) 1105-2-100 (30 June 2004), documenting the iterative U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Plan Formulation Process. The planning process consists of six major steps: (1) Specification of problems and opportunities (2) Inventory, forecast, and analysis of existing conditions within the study area (3) Formulation of alternative plans (4) Evaluation of the effects of the alternative plans (5) Comparison of the alternative plans (6) Selection of the recommended plan based upon the comparison of the alternative plans. Steps may be repeated as problems become better understood and new information becomes available. Steps 1 and 2 are discussed in Chapters 1-2, and provide the foundation for developing alternative plans and selection of a recommended plan outlined in Chapter 3. Each chapter and summary graphic, as well as the Executive Summary, describe plan development as it progresses through the four integrated environments that shape a navigation project: the built environment (Federal project, port facilities, placement areas, transportation network, advance maintenance areas, etc.); the natural environment (physical and biological resources including species of concern); the navigation environment (navigation restrictions, etc.), and the economic environment (commodity movement, vessel fleet characteristics, and transportation costs). Concerns relative to plan formulation and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review are summarized and encapsulated in the discussions of these four main environments. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance is not addressed in this document. The recommended format of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is provided in 40 CFR 1502.10 and has been integrated into the General Reevaluation Report. The basic table of contents for the report outlines how the EIS format has been integrated into the planning process to develop a recommended plan that meets the requirements of both USACE Plan Formulation Policy and NEPA. Note that sections pertinent to the NEPA analysis are denoted with an asterisk. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT DRAFT INTEGRATED GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TOC-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary*……………………………..……………………........................................................ES-1 EIS: Summary 1 Introduction*………………………………………………………....................................................1-1 EIS: Purpose of and Need for Action 2 Existing and Future Without-Project Conditions*…………...……………..……………..……….2-1 EIS: Existing and Future Without-Project Conditions 3 Plan Formulation……………...…………………………………………….......................................3-1 EIS: Alternatives Including Proposed Action 4 Comparison of Environmental Effects of Alternative Plans*……………….…...………….…..4-1 EIS: Information on the Proposed Action 5 The Tentatively Selected Plan ………………………………………………………………………..5-1 EIS: Alternatives Including Proposed Action 6 Environmental Compliance*……………………….……………………………….………………..6-1 EIS: Scoping, Public Involvement, Compliance with Environmental Regulations 7 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………..………………...7-1 8 List of Preparers*.…………………….…………………..…………………………….…………….….8-1 EIS: List of Preparers 9 References and Index*..………………………………………...…………………………………….9-1 Appendices APPENDIX A – CIVIL SITE APPENDIX B – WATER RESOURCES ATTACHMENT 1 – Salinity Modeling Report APPENDIX C – COST ENGINEERING AND RISK ANALYSIS APPENDIX D – ECONOMIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX E – GEOTECHNICAL APPENDIX F – REAL ESTATE PLAN APPENDIX G – ENVIRONMENTAL ATTACHMENT 1 – 404(b)(1) Evaluation ATTACHMENT 2 – Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency Evaluation ATTACHMENT 3 – Regulatory Setting ATTACHMENT 4 – United States Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Coordination ATTACHMENT 5 – Air Quality Report ATTACHMENT H – CULTURAL RESOURCES APPENDIX I – PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE APPENDIX J – PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT OF PROJECT DREDGED MATERIALS The Shoaling Analysis (Bulls Head Deposition HydroSurvey Tech Memo, April 2015) and Ship Simulation Study (Vessel Simulation Navigation Study of the Proposed John F. Baldwin Ship Channel – Phase III Proposed Channel Improvements, DTMA 91-88-C-80024, Final Report, August 1992) referenced in this report are available upon request. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT DRAFT INTEGRATED GENERAL REEVALUATION REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TOC-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION* ........................................................................................................................... 1-1 FEDERAL PROJECT PURPOSE* ....................................................................................................... 1-1 STUDY BACKGROUND AND LOCATION* .................................................................................... 1-1 STUDY SPONSOR ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 STUDY PURPOSE, NEED AND SIGNIFICANCE .............................................................................. 1-1 STUDY AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................................ 1-3 RELATED DOCUMENTS* ................................................................................................................. 1-4 FEDERAL PROJECTS & STUDIES NEAR THE STUDY AREA ............................................................. 1-5 OTHER CURRENT NON-FEDERAL STUDIES AND PROJECTS ADJACENT TO OR NEAR THE STUDY AREA 1-6 EXISTING AND FUTURE WITHOUT-PROJECT CONDITIONS ........................................................... 2-1 GENERAL SETTING* ........................................................................................................................ 2-1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS*..................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY ................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2.2 SEDIMENT AND SEDIMENTATION ......................................................................................... 2-4 2.2.3 WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY ................................................................................... 2-7 2.2.4 AIR QUALITY ......................................................................................................................... 2-19 2.2.5 CLIMATE CHANGE .............................................................................................................. 2-26 2.2.6 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................