Proposed Determination To Prohibit, Restrict, or Deny the Specification, or the Use for Specification, of an Area as a Disposal Site; Yazoo River Basin, Issaquena County, MS, 14806-14820 [E8-5401]
Download as PDF
14806
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
vi. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns and suggest
alternatives.
vii. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
viii. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. What Action is the Agency Taking?
EPA is printing notice of the filing of
a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C.
346a, proposing the establishment or
modification of regulations in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food
commodities. EPA has determined that
the pesticide petition described in this
notice contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in
FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA
has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data supports granting of
the pesticide petition. Additional data
may be needed before EPA rules on this
pesticide petition.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a
summary of the petition included in this
notice, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created
for this rulemaking. The docket for this
petition is available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov.
New Exemption from Tolerance
PP 8F7317. Stratacor Inc., 1315 South
46th Street, Bldg. 154, Richmond, CA
94804, proposes to establish an
exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the insect
repellent, [C8–C10 n-carboxylic acids
(octanoic acid, nonanoic acid, and
decanoic acid)], in or on food
commodity beef and dairy cattle, and
horses. Because this petition is a request
for an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance without numerical
limitations, no analytical method is
required.
List of Subjects
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Environmental protection,
Agricultural commodities, Feed
additives, Food additives, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: March 7, 2008.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. E8–5555 Filed 3–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–R04–OW–2008–0179; FRL–8543–7]
Proposed Determination To Prohibit,
Restrict, or Deny the Specification, or
the Use for Specification, of an Area as
a Disposal Site; Yazoo River Basin,
Issaquena County, MS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Section 404(c) of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) authorizes the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to prohibit, restrict, or deny the
discharge of dredged or fill material at
defined sites in waters of the United
States (including wetlands) whenever it
determines, after notice and opportunity
for public hearing, that use of such sites
for disposal would have an
unacceptable adverse impact on various
resources, including fisheries, wildlife,
municipal water supplies, and
recreational areas. Pursuant to section
404(c), EPA Region 4 is today requesting
public comments on its proposal to
prohibit or restrict the use of certain
waters in the Yazoo River Basin in
Issaquena County, Mississippi as
disposal sites for dredged or fill material
in connection with the construction of
the proposed Yazoo Backwater Area
Project (the project). As the primary
component of this project, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg
District (the Corps) and the Board of
Mississippi Levee Commissioners
(project sponsor) propose to construct a
14,000 cubic feet per second (cfs)
pumping station at Steele Bayou with a
pump-on operation elevation of 87.0
feet, National Geodetic Vertical Datum
(NGVD). The construction and operation
of the proposed pumps would degrade
the critical functions and values of
approximately 67,000 acres of wetland
resources in the Yazoo River Basin. Of
this total, approximately 26,300 acres
would be hydrologically modified to the
extent that they would no longer be
defined as wetlands and would lose
CWA regulatory protection. The natural
timing, frequency, and duration of water
reaching the remaining approximately
40,700 acres of wetlands would be
impacted by the proposed pumping,
altering the wetlands’ ecological
characteristics and significantly
reducing their functions. EPA Region 4
believes that these extensive
hydrological modifications of wetlands
in the Yazoo River Basin could have an
unacceptable adverse effect on fisheries
and wildlife resources.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
EPA seeks comment on this proposed
404(c) determination to prohibit or
restrict the discharge of dredged or fill
material in wetlands and other waters in
the Yazoo River Basin in connection
with the construction of the project or
any pumping proposal in the Yazoo
Backwater Area that would involve
significant adverse impacts on waters of
the United States. See Solicitation of
Comments, at the end of the public
notice, for further details.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 5, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OW–2008–0179, by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal
(recommended method of comment
submission): https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: ow-docket@epamail.epa.gov.
Include the docket number, EPA–
R04–OW–2008–0179 in the subject
line of the message.
3. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OW–2008–0179,
Yazoo Pumps,’’ Wetlands, Coastal and
Nonpoint Source Branch; Water
Management Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW;
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Ronald
J. Mikulak, Wetlands Regulatory
Section; Wetlands, Coastal and
Nonpoint Source Branch; Water
Management Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW;
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during
the Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation, which are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.
5. Submit at Public Hearing: see PUBLIC
HEARING section below. Instructions:
Direct your comments to Docket ID
No. EPA–R04–OW–2008–0179.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Wetlands Regulatory Section;
Wetlands, Coastal and Nonpoint Source
Branch; Water Management Division;
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW;
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
Public Hearing: In accordance with
EPA regulations at 40 CFR 231.4, the
Regional Administrator may decide that
a public hearing on a proposed 404(c)
determination would be in the public
interest. Mr. Lawrence E. Starfield,
Deputy Regional Administrator for EPA
Region 6, has been appointed by the
Administrator as the Regional Decision
Officer for purposes of any EPA
Regional action on the Yazoo Backwater
Area Project pursuant to section 404(c);
since Mr. Starfield has been designated
to exercise all such authority for the
Regional Administrator for the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project, any reference to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
authority of the Regional Administrator
in this notice are the responsibility of
Mr. Starfield for the purposes of this
action. In that capacity, Mr. Starfield
has decided that a public hearing on
this proposed 404(c) determination
would be in the public interest.
EPA will hold a public hearing on
April 17, 2008, at 7 p.m. at the
Vicksburg Convention Center and
Auditorium (Exhibit Hall A), located at
1600 Mulberry Street, Vicksburg, MS
39180, seeking comments on its
Proposed Determination. See
Solicitation of Comments, at the end of
this public notice for further details.
The Regional Administrator will
designate the official who will preside
at the public hearing. Any person may
appear at the hearing and submit oral
and/or written statements or data and
may be represented by counsel or other
authorized representatives. The
Presiding Officer will establish
reasonable limits on the nature and
length of time for oral presentation.
There will be no cross examination of
any hearing participant, although the
Presiding Officer may make appropriate
inquiries of any such participant.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information regarding this notice of
proposed 404(c) determination contact
Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Wetlands
Regulatory Section; Wetlands, Coastal
and Nonpoint Source Branch; Water
Management Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street; SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is 404–562–9233. Mr.
Mikulak can also be reached via
electronic mail at
mikulak.ronald@epa.gov or Mr. William
Ainslie, Wetlands Regulatory Section, at
the same address above. The telephone
number is (404) 562–9400. Mr. Ainslie
can also be reached via electronic mail
at ainslie.william@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, references
to ‘‘EPA,’’ ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our,’’ are
intended to mean the Environmental
Protection Agency. The supplementary
information is arranged as follows:
I. Section 404(c) Procedure
II. Project Description and Background
III. Characteristics and Functions of the Site
IV. Basis of the Proposed Determination
A. Section 404(c) Standards
B. Adverse Impacts of the Proposed Project
1. Significant Degradation and Adverse
Effects
2. Underestimation of Adverse Effects
a. Underestimation of the Spatial Extent of
Adverse Effects.
b. Underestimation of the Degree and
Nature of Adverse Effects
3. Overestimation of Environmental
Benefits
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14807
C. Mitigation
D. Uncertainty of the Proposed
Reforestation
E. Project Alternatives
F. Recreation
V. Proposed Determination
VI. Other Considerations
VII. Solicitation of Comments
I. Section 404(c) Procedure
The Clean Water Act (CWA), 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., prohibits the
discharge of pollutants, including
dredged or fill material, into waters of
the United States (including wetlands)
except in compliance with, among other
provisions, section 404 of the CWA, 33
U.S.C. 1344. Section 404 authorizes the
Secretary of the Army (Secretary), acting
through the Chief of Engineers, to
authorize the discharge of dredged or
fill material at specified disposal sites.
This authorization is conducted, in part,
through the application of
environmental guidelines developed by
EPA, in conjunction with the Secretary,
under section 404(b) of the CWA, 33
U.S.C. 1344(b). Section 404(c) of the
CWA authorizes EPA to prohibit the
specification (including the withdrawal
of specification) of any defined area as
a disposal site and it is authorized to
restrict or deny the use of any defined
area for specification (including the
withdrawal of specification) as a
disposal site, whenever it determines,
after notice and opportunity for public
hearing, that the discharge of such
materials into such area will have an
unacceptable adverse effect on
municipal water supplies, shellfish beds
and fishery areas (including spawning
and breeding areas), wildlife, or
recreational areas.
The procedures for implementation of
section 404(c) are set forth in 40 CFR
part 231. Under those procedures, if the
Regional Administrator has reason to
believe that use of a site for the
discharge of dredged or fill material may
have an unacceptable adverse effect on
one or more of the aforementioned
resources, he may initiate the section
404(c) process by notifying the Corps
and the applicant (and/or project
proponent) that he intends to issue a
proposed determination. Each of those
parties then has 15 days to demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the Regional
Administrator that no unacceptable
adverse effects will occur, or that
corrective action to prevent an
unacceptable adverse effect will be
taken. If no such information is
provided to the Regional Administrator,
or if the Regional Administrator is not
satisfied that no unacceptable adverse
effect will occur, the Regional
Administrator will publish a notice in
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
14808
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
the Federal Register of his proposed
determination, soliciting public
comment and offering an opportunity
for a public hearing. Today’s notice
represents this step in the process.
Following the public hearing and the
close of the comment period, the
Regional Administrator will decide
whether to withdraw his proposed
determination or prepare a
recommended determination. A
decision to withdraw may be reviewed
at the discretion of the Assistant
Administrator for Water at EPA
Headquarters. If the Regional
Administrator prepares a recommended
determination, he then forwards it and
the complete administrative record
compiled in the Regional Office to the
Assistant Administrator for Water. The
Assistant Administrator makes the final
determination affirming, modifying, or
rescinding the recommended
determination.
II. Project Description and Background
The Yazoo River Basin’s backwater
area (Yazoo Backwater Area) is located
in west-central Mississippi, just north of
Vicksburg, Mississippi. The portion of
this area relevant to the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project is located
between the east bank mainline
Mississippi River levee and the west
bank levees of the Will M. Whittington
Auxiliary Channel, and comprises about
926,000 acres. Of particular focus are
the approximately 630,000 acres
inundated by the 100-year flood event
which lie in parts of Humphreys,
Issaquena, Sharkey, Warren,
Washington, and Yazoo Counties in
Mississippi and part of Madison Parish
in Louisiana. The Big Sunflower River,
Little Sunflower River, Deer Creek, and
Steele Bayou flow through this area. The
high ground along Deer Creek forms a
natural divide between Steele Bayou
and the Sunflower River Basins.
The Yazoo Backwater Area has
historically been subject to extensive
backwater flooding from the Mississippi
and Yazoo Rivers. When the Mississippi
River reached a certain stage, water
would back up into the Yazoo River
Basin, causing flooding, while
preventing the Yazoo River Basin from
draining. With the implementation of
the Mississippi River and Tributaries
Project, which began in 1928, the Steele
Bayou flood gate was installed to
prevent Mississippi River water from
flowing into the Yazoo Backwater Area.
The gate feature, combined with other
levees, has greatly decreased backwater
flooding in the Yazoo River Basin.
However, when the Steele Bayou flood
gate is closed, precipitation in the Yazoo
River Basin becomes trapped and backs
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
up behind the gate causing flooding.
The primary purpose of the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project is to reduce the
flood damages in the Yazoo Backwater
Area caused by this internal flooding.
As stated in the FSEIS, a principal
objective of the project is to reduce
flood damages ‘‘to urban and rural
structures, as well as agricultural
properties.’’ To achieve this objective,
the Corps and the Board of Mississippi
Levee Commissioners (project sponsor)
have proposed a flood damage reduction
project with ‘‘structural’’ and
‘‘nonstructural’’ components.
The structural component entails the
construction of a 14,000 cfs pumping
station at Steele Bayou with a pump-on
operation elevation of 87.0 feet, NGVD.
When floodwaters at the Steele Bayou
structure reach (or are anticipated to
reach) an elevation of 87.0 feet, NGVD,
the pumps will be turned on and will
move water from behind the gate into
the Mississippi River. The effects of the
pumping will be to reduce the amount
of land within the Yazoo Backwater
Area that floods, as well as to remove
water faster from those areas that still
experience flooding. The nonstructural
component includes reforestation of up
to 40,571 acres of agricultural lands
through the purchase of perpetual
conservation easements from willing
sellers and operation of the Steele
Bayou control gates to maintain water
elevations between 70.0 and 73.0 feet,
NGVD, in the Yazoo Backwater Area
waterways during low-water periods
when practical. Construction of the
proposed pumps involves the discharge
of dredged or fill material into
approximately 52.6 acres of forested
wetlands and other waters of the United
States in Issaquena County, Mississippi.
The estimated Federal cost of the
proposed action is $220.1 million, with
an annual operational cost of $15.1
million.
This project was authorized by the
Flood Control Act of 1941, which
envisioned a plan to reduce backwater
flooding in the Yazoo River Basin
through a combination of levees,
drainage structures, and pumping plants
fully funded by the Federal government.
This act also designated Yazoo
Backwater Area lands located below 90
feet in elevation to serve as a sump area
for floodwater storage.
Over the next 37 years, the Corps
planned and executed key flood control
projects in the Yazoo Backwater Area,
including: construction of the Will
Whittington Auxiliary Channel and
Levees in 1962; construction of the
Steele Bayou and Little Sunflower flood
control gates, which were completed in
1969 and 1975, respectively;
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
construction of the Yazoo Backwater
Levee completed in 1978; and
construction of the Sunflower River to
Steele Bayou Connecting Channel also
completed in 1978.
In April 1982, EPA provided
comments on the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the 1982
version of the proposed project. In our
comments on the DEIS we highlighted
our concerns regarding the proposed
project’s potentially extensive impacts
on wetlands and associated fish and
wildlife habitat and our belief that a less
environmentally damaging design
would meet the project’s objectives. We
stressed the importance of the flood
water storage and water quality
enhancement functions provided by
area wetlands and expressed our
concerns that the proposed project
would degrade these critical functions.
We also expressed concerns that the
project would stimulate agricultural
intensification in flood-prone areas,
potentially increasing suspended solids,
pesticides, and fertilizers in the water
column, and exacerbate existing water
quality problems. Additionally, we
expressed concerns that the proposed
mitigation would not adequately
minimize and offset the extensive
adverse environmental impacts
associated with the proposed project.
In our May 1983 comments on the
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS), we expressed similar concerns.
Our review of the FEIS concluded that
the project would likely ‘‘decrease water
quality in the area through increases in
suspended solids, pesticides and
fertilizers; reduce natural overbank
flooding and decrease nutrients
assimilation by wetland vegetation;
transfer flood peaks downstream; serve
as a precedent to similarly convert other
bottomland hardwood remnants in the
lower Mississippi River Valley; and
greatly diminish a fish and wildlife
resource, which, due to previous
clearing elsewhere, has become
nationally valuable.’’
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) also raised similar concerns
regarding the proposed project.
According to FWS, its first report on the
Yazoo Backwater Area Project and
related flood control projects in the
Yazoo River Basin was issued in 1956.
This report concluded that losses of fish
and wildlife resources as a result of the
construction of the Yazoo Headwater
Project and Yazoo Backwater Project
would be large, and that the proposed
pumps would promote large scale
clearing of forests and intensification of
agriculture in wetlands. In February
1978, FWS provided a Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act report to the Corps
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
which concluded that the pumping
plant was environmentally unsound,
and that the Service was opposed to the
project as planned. A subsequent Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act report
submitted in June 1982 noted continued
concerns with the proposed project and
indicated that it may consider the
project a candidate for referral to the
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ).
The Water Resources Development
Act (WRDA) of 1986 modified the
funding for the project by requiring a
local-cost share. Under this new
provision, the local project sponsor
would provide the lands, easements,
rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal
areas for the project, or 25 percent of the
construction cost, whichever was
greater. Work on the project effectively
halted. The reauthorization of WRDA
ten years later in 1996 reversed the costsharing provisions established in 1986
and restored the project to full Federal
funding and work on the project began
once again.
In 1997, EPA initiated an ecosystem
restoration prioritization analysis with
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This
work evolved into ecological and
economic model development for
nonstructural floodplain management
alternatives in the Yazoo Backwater
Area. Between 1998 and 2000, EPA
participated in a series of interagency
and stakeholder meetings with the
Corps, USGS, FWS, the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute, and
representatives of the Board of
Mississippi Levee Commissioners to
discuss concerns regarding the proposed
project and potentially less
environmentally damaging alternatives.
In 2000, EPA also participated in
multiple meetings with a group
composed of the Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality,
Mississippi Department of Wildlife,
Fisheries and Parks, the Corps, FWS,
Board of Mississippi Levee
Commissioners and Yazoo Backwater
Area landowners in which we discussed
our concerns with the proposed project.
EPA also voiced its concerns with the
proposed project in meetings with the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), CEQ and representatives from
Corps Headquarters in February and
March of 2000.
In September 2000, the Corps released
the project’s Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
(DSEIS). One of the purposes of this
reformulation of the project’s 1982 FEIS
was to respond to a 1991 directive from
OMB to evaluate a broader suite of
alternatives to the proposed project that
would provide: (1) Greater levels of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
flood protection for urban areas; (2)
reduced levels of agricultural
intensification; and (3) reduced adverse
impacts to the environment. The OMB
directive also stated that the revised
evaluation should include ‘‘full
consideration of predominantly
nonstructural and nontraditional
measures’’ to address flooding issues.
In a November 3, 2000, letter to the
Corps on the DSEIS, EPA raised
significant concerns regarding the
proposed project’s extensive impacts to
wetlands and associated fish and
wildlife resources, its potential to
exacerbate existing water quality
problems in the Yazoo Backwater Area,
the inadequacy of the proposed
compensatory mitigation, and the
uncertainty associated with the
proposed reforestation. We also
identified, for further consideration, a
number of potentially less
environmentally damaging alternatives
that emphasized nonstructural and
nontraditional measures to address
flooding issues. We concluded that the
project was environmentally
unsatisfactory and noted that it was a
candidate for referral to CEQ under
section 309(b) of the Clean Air Act and
the CEQ regulations at 40 CFR part 1504
and for further action under CWA
section 404(c).
Between 2002 and 2005, EPA worked
with the Corps to improve its evaluation
of the extent of wetlands in the Yazoo
Backwater Area, the extent of wetlands
potentially impacted by the project, and
the nature and degree of these impacts.
This work involved extensive site visits
and data collection in the Yazoo
Backwater Area, meetings, and
conference calls. In December 2005,
EPA provided detailed technical
comments on the revised draft Wetland
and Mitigation appendices for the
DSEIS outlining a number of concerns
regarding the evaluation approaches
used in these appendices. We noted that
flaws in these evaluation approaches
result in an underestimation of the
potential adverse impacts to wetlands
and fish and wildlife resources
associated with the construction and
operation of the proposed pumps and an
overestimation of the potential
environmental benefits associated with
the proposed reforestation.
In November 2007, the Corps released
the Yazoo Backwater Area
Reformulation Main Report and Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (FSEIS).1 Although the Corps
1 U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers’ Yazoo Backwater
Area Project Reformulation Main Report and FSEIS:
https://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/offices/pp/
projects/YBR_Report/.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14809
responded to many of our November
2000 comments on the DSEIS, no
substantive modifications had been
made to the structural component of the
proposed project since November 2000.
In our January 22, 2008, letter to the
Corps on the FSEIS, we concluded that
the nature and extent of anticipated
adverse environmental impacts
continue to be significant and that we
continue to have significant concerns
with the proposed project including: (1)
Magnitude of anticipated impacts to
wetlands and associated fish and
wildlife resources; (2) compliance with
the CWA’s substantive environmental
criteria (i.e., the Section 404(b)(1)
Guidelines); (3) uncertainties with the
proposed reforestation plan; (4) changes
in land use; (5) environmental justice
(EJ) considerations; (6) uncertainty with
the economic analysis; and (7) the
evaluation of potential project
alternatives. We again identified the
project as a candidate for referral to CEQ
and for further action pursuant to our
authorities under the CWA.
In its January 18, 2008, comment
letter to the Corps regarding the FSEIS,
the FWS shared similar concerns,
particularly those associated with the
proposed project’s potentially
unacceptable adverse impacts on fish
and wildlife resources. The FWS also
reiterated its determination that the
project is a candidate for referral to
CEQ.
On February 1, 2008, EPA’s Regional
Administrator informed the Corps and
the Board of Mississippi Levee
Commissioners of his intention to begin
a section 404(c) action, based on his
belief that the project may have an
unacceptable adverse effect on fish and
wildlife resources. During the 15-day
response period following the 404(c)
initiation letter (which was extended to
March 3, 2008) EPA met with
representatives from the Corps and
Board of Mississippi Levee
Commissioners. In addition, EPA had a
number of conference calls with the
Corps during this consultation period to
discuss specific technical concerns we
had with the Corps’ analysis (many of
which are discussed in this notice).
However, the Regional Administrator
was not satisfied that no unacceptable
adverse effect would occur, or that
adequate corrective action would be
taken to prevent an unacceptable
adverse effect, and has published this
Proposed Determination in order to
solicit public comment.
III. Characteristics and Functions of the
Site
The Lower Mississippi River Alluvial
Valley (LMRAV) was a 25-million acre
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
14810
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
area of forested wetlands that extended
along both sides of the Mississippi River
from Illinois south to Louisiana and the
Gulf of Mexico. The extent and duration
of seasonal flooding from the
Mississippi River fluctuated annually,
recharging the LMRAV systems and
creating a diversity of dynamic habitats
that once supported a vast array of fish
and wildlife resources. Over the past
100 years, the greatest changes to the
landscape have been land clearing for
both agriculture and flood control
projects. These habitat alterations have
had an adverse effect on biological
diversity and integrity. For example,
breeding bird surveys show continuing
declines in species richness and
population numbers. In addition to the
loss of approximately 80 percent of the
bottomland forested wetlands within
the LMRAV,2 there have been
significant alterations in the region’s
hydrology due to river channel
modification, construction of flood
control levees and reservoirs, and
deforestation. The cumulative effect of
these hydrological alterations has
reduced both the extent and duration of
the annual seasonal flooding, adversely
affecting the forested wetlands and their
associated wetland-dependent species.
These significant cumulative aquatic
resource losses across the broader
LMRAV are mirrored in the Mississippi
Delta region of the LMRAV, in which
the Yazoo Backwater Area is situated.
Mississippi’s 2005 Comprehensive
Wildlife Conservation Strategy 3 reports
that only fifteen percent of the
Mississippi Delta remains forested and
the largest segment remaining is the
complex of bottomland hardwood
forests approximately 100,000 acres in
size within and surrounding the Delta
National Forest. Much of this important
complex of remaining forests and
forested wetlands is located in the
Yazoo Backwater Area.
Extensive studies of the Yazoo
Backwater Area demonstrate that it
includes some of the richest wetland
and aquatic resources in the Nation.
These include a highly productive
floodplain fishery, a highly productive
but increasingly rare bottomland
hardwood forest ecosystem that once
dominated the LMRAV, hemispherically
important migratory bird foraging
grounds and one of only four remaining
2 Department of the Interior, The Impact of
Federal Programs on Wetlands, Volume I: The
Lower Mississippi Alluvial Plain and the Prairie
Pothole Region, A Report to Congress by the
Secretary of the Interior, October 1988 at 60.
3 Mississippi’s Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy (MCWCS) 2005–2015,
October 2005: https://www.wildlifeactionplans.org/
pdfs/action_plans/ms_action_plan.pdf.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
backwater ecosystems with a hydrologic
connection to the Mississippi River.
These wetlands provide critical habitat
for a variety of wetland-dependent
animal and plant species, including the
federally protected Louisiana black bear
and pondberry. In addition to serving as
critical fish and wildlife habitat, project
area wetlands also provide a suite of
other important ecological functions.
These wetlands protect and improve
water quality by removing and retaining
pollutants, reduce flood damage by
storing floodwaters, recharge
groundwater and maintain stream flows,
and sequester significant amounts of
elemental carbon.
Wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater
Area have been described by the Corps
as belonging to the hydrogeomorphic
(HGM) riverine backwater subclass. This
classification indicates that these
wetlands flood as a result of impeded
drainage of small streams, channels, and
drainage ditches due to high water in
larger downstream reaches. As a result
of this impeded drainage, low lying
areas associated with these small
streams fill with relatively still
‘‘backwater.’’ As stated in the Yazoo
Basin HGM Guidebook, the
characteristics of the riverine backwater
wetlands in this area are: A direct
connection to a channel during flood
stages equivalent to at least the 5-year
frequency return period; the primary
source of hydrology to the wetland is
backwater; and floodwaters largely
drain from the site back to the channel
as flood stages fall (as opposed to being
retained on the site in depressions).4
The wetlands of the riverine
backwater subclass occur on various
substrates which developed as a result
of Mississippi River meandering. This
subclass typically contains vegetative
communities dominated by green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and Nuttall
oak (Quercus nuttallii) as well as
overcup oak (Q. lyrata) and water
hickory (Carya aquatica) in more low
lying areas. However, in addition to
these dominant canopy species, willow
oak (Q. phellos), Sugarberry (Celtis
laviegata), American elm (Ulmus
americana), cedar elm (U. crassifolia),
Red maple (Acer rubrum), Cypress
(Taxodium distichum), water elm
(Planera aquatica), and Black willow
(Salix nigra) were also found
dominating many of the field sampled
4 Smith, R. D., and Klimas, C. V. 2002. A regional
guidebook for applying the hydrogeomorphic
approach to assessing wetland functions of selected
regional wetland subclasses, Yazoo Basin, Lower
Mississippi River Alluvial Valley. ERDC/EL TR–02–
04. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center, Vicksburg, MS. See: https://
el.erdc.usace.army.mil/wetlands/pdfs/trel02–4.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
plots in the area.5 The combination of
the hydrologic, soil, and vegetative
characteristics of this wetland subclass
contribute to the wetland processes, or
functions, which support the area’s
diverse and abundant flora and fauna.
However, hydrology is considered by
most to be the critical determinant of
the establishment and maintenance of
specific types of wetlands and wetland
processes.6 As thoroughly discussed in
the Yazoo Basin HGM Guidebook and
outlined below, maintenance of the
natural hydrologic regime (i.e., natural
timing, frequency, and duration of water
reaching area wetlands) is the most
important factor in ensuring that
riverine backwater wetlands in the
Yazoo Backwater Area perform
important functions such as floodwater
detention, nutrient cycling, organic
carbon export, pollutant filtering/
removal, and maintenance of
biologically diverse plant and animal
habitat.
When riverine backwater wetlands are
allowed to temporarily detain and
moderate floodwater they provide a
number of important benefits.
Floodwater interaction with wetlands
tends to dampen and broaden the flood
wave, which reduces peak discharge
downstream. Wetlands can reduce the
velocity of water currents and, as a
result, reduce erosion. Some portion of
the floodwater volume detained within
riverine backwater wetlands is likely to
be evaporated or transpired, thereby
reducing the overall volume of water
moving downstream. The portion of the
detained flow that infiltrates into the
alluvial aquifer, or which returns to the
channel very slowly via low-gradient
surface routes, may be sufficiently
delayed that it contributes significantly
to the maintenance of baseflow in some
streams long after flooding has ceased.
Retention of particulates is also an
important component of the flood
detention function because sediment
deposition directly alters the physical
characteristics of the wetland (including
hydrologic attributes) and positively
influences downstream water quality.
In riverine backwater wetlands,
nutrients are stored within, and cycled
among, four major compartments: (a)
The soil; (b) primary producers such as
vascular and nonvascular plants; (c)
consumers such as animals, fungi, and
bacteria; and (d) dead organic matter,
such as leaf litter or woody debris,
referred to as detritus. The
5 EPA, 2008. Yazoo Backwater Area Plant Species
List. Wetlands Regulatory Section, Water
Management Division, EPA Region 4, Atlanta, GA.
6 Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G. 2000. Wetlands
(3rd edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York,
NY.
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
transformation of nutrients within each
compartment and the flow of nutrients
between compartments are mediated by
a complex variety of biogeochemical
processes associated with primary
production and decomposition. These
biogeochemical processes and their
ability to support the rich array of flora
and fauna found in the Yazoo Backwater
Area are directly linked to maintenance
of the natural timing, frequency, and
duration of flooding in the area’s
riverine backwater wetlands systems.
The high productivity and close
proximity of riverine backwater
wetlands to streams make them
important sources of dissolved and
particulate organic carbon for aquatic
food webs and biogeochemical
processes in downstream aquatic
habitats. Dissolved and particulate
organic carbon is a significant source of
energy for the microbes that form the
base of the detrital food web in aquatic
ecosystems. The ability of riverine
backwater wetlands to perform this
critical function is directly linked to
factors associated with their natural
hydrologic cycle of backwater flooding,
including: (a) The large amount of
organic matter in the litter and soil
layers that comes into contact with
surface water during flooding; (b)
relatively long periods of inundation
and, consequently, contact between
surface water and organic matter, thus
allowing for significant leaching; (c) the
ability of the labile carbon fraction to be
rapidly leached from organic matter
when exposed to water; and (d) the
ability of floodwater to transport
dissolved and particulate organic carbon
from the floodplain to the stream
channel.
The area’s riverine backwater
wetlands permanently remove or
temporarily immobilize elements and
compounds that are imported to the
wetland from various sources, but
primarily via the natural cycle of
flooding. Elements include
macronutrients essential to plant growth
e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, and
potassium) as well as heavy metals
(zinc, chromium, etc.) that can be toxic
at high concentrations. Compounds
include pesticides and other imported
materials. The primary benefit of this
function is that the removal and
sequestration of elements and
compounds by wetlands reduces the
load of nutrients, heavy metals,
pesticides, and other pollutants in rivers
and streams.
This often translates into improved
water quality and aquatic habitat in
adjacent or down gradient rivers and
streams.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
Once nutrients and compounds arrive
in riverine backwater wetlands, they
may be removed and sequestered
through a variety of biogeochemical
processes including complexation,
chemical precipitation, adsorption,
denitrification, decomposition to
inactive forms, hydrolysis, uptake by
plants, and other processes. The
effective performance of many of the
most critical biogeochemical processes
depends on maintenance of the natural
hydrologic cycle of flooding in riverine
backwater wetlands and the anoxic/
reducing environment created by
periodic cycles of inundation and
saturation. For example, denitrification
will not occur unless the soil is anoxic
and the redox potential falls below a
certain level. Flooding for
approximately 14 days causes soils to
become anoxic. When this occurs and
other soil conditions are favorable (i.e.,
availability of soil carbon) the nitrogen
in nitrate (NO2) is removed by
denitrification and released as nitrogen
gas to the atmosphere. In addition,
sulfate is reduced to sulfide, which then
reacts with metal cations to form
insoluble metal sulfides such as copper
sulfide (CuS), iron sulfide (FeS), lead
sulfide (PbS), and others which then fall
out of the water column and are
retained by the wetland sediments.
The ability of riverine backwater
wetlands to maintain a characteristic
plant community is important because
of the intrinsic value of the plant
community and the many attributes and
processes of wetlands that are
influenced by the plant community. For
example, primary productivity, nutrient
cycling, and the ability to provide a
variety of habitats necessary to maintain
local and regional diversity of animals
are directly influenced by the plant
community. Due to the inundation by
nutrient rich floodwaters, a diverse
assemblage of plants grow in riverine
backwater wetlands and contribute to
the primary production of these
ecosystems. The growth of different
plant communities as a result of variable
hydrologic regimes and topography
contributes to the uptake and release of
nutrients and provides many layers of
potential habitat (i.e., litter layer to
canopy) for the hundreds of wildlife
species which utilize these wetlands. In
addition, the plant community of river
connected wetlands such as riverine
backwater wetlands in the Yazoo River
Basin influences the quality of the
physical habitat, nutrient status, and
biological diversity of downstream
systems. As noted in the Yazoo Basin
HGM Guidebook, maintaining the
natural hydrologic regime of these
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14811
wetlands is consistently cited as the
principal factor controlling plant
community attributes.
A broad array of fish and wildlife
species utilize the riverine backwater
wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area
during some part of their life cycles.
Terrestrial, semi-aquatic, and aquatic
animals use these wetlands extensively.
These wetlands provide important
habitat for a diversity of organisms, are
sites of high levels of secondary
production, and are essential in the
maintenance of complex trophic
interactions. Habitat functions span a
range of temporal and spatial scales. For
example, invertebrate communities
utilize the organic matter generated in
these wetlands as a food source and the
vertical structure of the plant
community as refugia from flooding.
Amphibian and reptile species use the
wetlands for breeding and foraging
habitats and fish utilize floodplains for
spawning, rearing, and foraging. Birds
and mammals utilize the wetlands for
food, cover, and nesting. Most wildlife
and fish species found in riverine
backwater wetlands of the Yazoo River
Basin depend on certain aspects of
wetland structure and dynamics such as
specific vegetation composition and
proximity to other habitats, but of
particular importance to the life cycles
of these species is the periodic flooding
or ponding of water associated with the
natural hydrologic regime of riverine
backwater wetlands.
The topographic and commensurate
hydrologic complexity of these riverine
backwater wetlands contribute to the
biodiversity for which they are well
known. The World Wildlife Fund
estimates that there are 372 wildlife
species occurring in the Mississippi
Lowland Forest ecoregion, which
encompasses the Yazoo River Basin and
Yazoo Backwater Area.7 Of these
species 35 are amphibian, 52 are
reptiles, 223 are birds, and 62 are
mammals. According to the Mississippi
Museum of Natural History, 40 percent
of the amphibians, 60 percent of the
reptiles, 82 percent of the birds, and 71
percent of the mammals from the World
Wildlife Fund’s Mississippi Lowland
Forest list occur in the Yazoo River
Basin.8 In addition, 2 amphibian, 4
reptile, 74 bird, and 5 mammalian
species were catalogued by the State
beyond what World Wildlife Fund
reported. Further, the FWS has listed
7 World Wildlife Fund Mississippi Lowland
Forest species list: https://worldwildlife.org/
wildfinder/searchByPlace.cfm?ecoregion=NA0409.
8 Personal Communication between William
Ainslie, EPA Region 4, and Scott Peyton,
Mississippi Museum of Natural History, February 5,
2008.
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
14812
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
258 species of birds which use its
complex of refuges located in the Yazoo
Backwater Area 9 and over 90 species of
fish have been documented as utilizing
the Yazoo River.10
According to the State’s
Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy, bottomland hardwood
wetlands such as those in the Yazoo
Backwater Area provide habitat for 33
species of greatest conservation need 11
including 20 birds, 12 mammals, and 1
reptile. Also, all of the standing and
running water systems of the
Mississippi Alluvial Plain, including
the Yazoo Backwater Area, have been
classified as critically imperiled because
of their high conservation priority rank
and the widespread degradation of
stream habitats in this region. These
waterbodies provide important habitat
for 23 species of greatest conservation
need, including 4 fish, 18 mussels, and
1 reptile. Finally, the stream habitat that
remains in the Upper Coastal Plain
Yazoo Drainage area, which receives
significant hydrologic inputs from the
Yazoo Backwater Area, is considered to
be vulnerable because of extensive
alteration caused by channelization,
agricultural use of surrounding lands
and impoundments. This portion of the
Yazoo River Basin provides critical
habitat for 17 species of greatest
conservation need including 1
amphibian, 12 fish, and 1 reptile.12
In its comments in the FSEIS, the
FWS reports that the Lower Yazoo Delta
is part of a major continental migration
corridor for birds funneling through the
midcontinent from as far north as the
Arctic Circle and as far south as South
America. The Yazoo Backwater Project
Area comprises approximately 926,000
acres located in LMRAV, through which
60 percent of all bird species in the U.S.,
over 40 percent of the Nation’s
waterfowl population, and 500,000 to
9 FWS list of bird species utilizing wildlife
refuges in the Yazoo Backwater Area: https://
www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/chekbird/r4/
yazoo.htm.
10 Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E.
Jenkins, D.E. McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980.
Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes. North
Carolina State Museum of Natural History.
Publication #1980–12 of the North Carolina
Biological Survey. 877 pgs.
11 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)
are those animals, both aquatic and terrestrial, that
are at risk or are declining in a State. They include
threatened and endangered species, as well as other
species of concern. The SGCN for Mississippi was
developed through a rigorous analysis of the
Mississippi Natural Heritage Program’s list of
‘‘Animals of Special Concern’’ (ASC). An Expert
Team of scientists evaluated the approximately
1,500 species from the ASC and narrowed this list
down to only the species most at risk—resulting in
approximately 300 Species of Greatest Conservation
Need statewide (MCWCS, 2005).
12 MCWCS, 2005.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
1,000,000 shorebirds migrate on a
biannual basis. FWS also notes that
natural springtime flooding in the area’s
riverine backwater wetlands coincides
with two major events in the LMRAV:
(1) Native bird and waterfowl migration
that requires suitable and productive
stopover and foraging habitats to meet
migratory energy needs; and (2)
breeding bird and waterfowl nesting
that requires adequate nesting and
foraging habitats to meet reproductive
and rearing needs.
IV. Basis of the Proposed Determination
A. Section 404(c) Standards
The CWA requires that exercise of the
final section 404(c) authority be based
on a determination of ‘‘unacceptable
adverse effect’’ to municipal water
supplies, shellfish beds, fisheries,
wildlife, or recreational areas. In making
this determination EPA takes into
account all information available to it,
including any written determination of
compliance with the Section 404(b)(1)
Guidelines. EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR
231.2(e) define ‘‘unacceptable adverse
effect’’ as:
Impact on an aquatic or wetland ecosystem
which is likely to result in significant
degradation of municipal water supplies or
significant loss of or damage to fisheries,
shellfishing, or wildlife habitat or recreation
areas. In evaluating the unacceptability of
such impacts, consideration should be given
to the relevant portions of the Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines (40 CFR part 230).
Those portions of the Guidelines
relating to less environmentally
damaging practicable alternatives,
significant degradation of waters of the
United States, water quality impacts,
and impact minimization are
particularly important to evaluating the
unacceptability of environmental
impacts in this case. The Guidelines
prohibit any discharge of dredged or fill
material where: (1) There is a less
environmentally damaging practicable
alternative to meet the project purpose;
(2) the proposed project would violate
other environmental standards,
including applicable water quality
standards; (3) the proposed project
would cause or contribute to significant
degradation of the Nation’s waters; or
(4) the proposed project fails to
adequately minimize and compensate
for wetland and other aquatic resource
losses (see 40 CFR 230.10(a)–(d)).
B. Adverse Impacts of the Proposed
Project
EPA believes the proposed project
will result in significant adverse
environmental impacts to extensive
areas of ecologically significant and
important forested wetlands and their
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
associated fisheries and wildlife
resources. At a minimum, the
construction and operation of the
proposed pumps would degrade the
critical functions and values of
approximately 67,000 acres of
nationally significant wetland resources
in the Yazoo River Basin. Of this total,
approximately 26,300 acres would be
hydrologically modified (i.e., reduced
flood duration) to the extent that they
would no longer be defined as wetlands
and would lose CWA regulatory
protection. The natural timing,
frequency, and duration of water
reaching the remaining approximately
40,700 acres of wetlands would be
impacted by the proposed pumping,
altering the wetlands’ ecological
characteristics and reducing their
functions. As a point of reference, the
impacts estimated by the Corps for this
single project are more extensive than
the total impacts (on an annual average
basis) associated with the 86,000
projects authorized by the Corps permit
program nationwide each year.13 We do
not believe that impacts of this
magnitude are consistent with the
requirements of the CWA. Our concerns
regarding this project are amplified
because we believe the potential adverse
impacts to wetlands and associated fish
and wildlife resources may be much
greater than the Corps has estimated.
1. Significant Degradation and Adverse
Effects
The annual hydrologic cycle of water
moving into and out of the project area
defines the ecological attributes of the
project area’s wetland and aquatic
resources and fuels the fundamental
processes essential to fish and wildlife
productivity. This annual water cycle
not only makes the project area’s diverse
habitats accessible to fish and wildlife
but also provides the primary linkages
that transfer energy and organisms
between the project area wetlands and
the rest of the lower Mississippi River
ecosystem.
The basic objective of the project is to
limit the spatial extent, frequency, and
length of time the Yazoo Backwater
Area floods. The ecological effect of this
project will be to dampen the natural
variability in flood regime (the flood
pulse) which currently contributes to
the biodiversity of the project area’s
wetlands. Operation of the proposed
pumps will dramatically alter the
hydrologic cycle of this area, and would
therefore eliminate or significantly
13 Based on data from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003.
Source: Corps Regulatory Program, Headquarters,
2008. See: https://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/
reg/2003webcharts.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
degrade many of the critical ecological
functions provided by wetlands in the
Yazoo Backwater Area, including
floodwater detention, nutrient cycling,
organic carbon export, pollutant
filtering/removal, and maintenance of
biologically diverse plant and animal
habitat.
The reduction or elimination of the
floodwater detention function of
wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area
as a result of the proposed project could
increase peak discharges and water
currents in the Mississippi River, and
exacerbate flooding problems
downstream at a time when
communities in the lower Mississippi
River Valley are still struggling to
recover from the effects of recent
catastrophic flooding. By maintaining
water levels of regular flood events at
approximately 87.0 feet, NGVD, at the
Steele Bayou gauge, water would not be
allowed to collect for significant periods
of time in the backwater wetlands.
Instead, water that would otherwise
remain in the wetlands would be drawn
off by the pump and discharged to the
Mississippi River. Reducing or
eliminating the floodwater detention
function of project area wetlands will
also decrease the amount of water
delivered to plants and allowed to
infiltrate into the alluvial aquifer in the
Yazoo Backwater Area. The effect of the
project is to increase the overall volume
of water moving downstream. Not
allowing adequate time for floodwater
infiltration in the Yazoo Backwater Area
will also reduce the amount of water
that returns to area streams as baseflow.
This is particularly critical in the Yazoo
Backwater Area as dewatering of the
alluvial plain has already resulted in
extremely low seasonal flows in area
streams. For example, the Sunflower
River flow rate often drops below the
minimum low flow rate established by
the USGS (i.e., the 7Q10 low flow
rate).14
Reducing the spatial extent,
frequency, and duration of time project
area wetlands flood will significantly
reduce the amount of dissolved and
particulate organic carbon available for
wetland and aquatic food webs as well
as biogeochemical processes in
downstream aquatic habitats. The
microbial and invertebrate
communities, which are critical to the
breakdown and recycling of organic
matter in these wetlands, are adapted to
the periodic pulsing of floodwaters
which currently occurs. Without these
periodic flood pulses, microbial and
invertebrate communities will diminish,
and this will affect the capacity of the
14 MCWCS,
2005.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
wetland to maintain the base of the food
chain. The cycling and export of
dissolved and particulate carbon
requires prolonged contact between soil
organic matter, flood waters, and the
invertebrate community and subsequent
floodwater transport downstream—
circumstances that would be
dramatically altered by the proposed
project.
Reducing the spatial extent,
frequency, and duration of time project
area wetlands flood will reduce the
capacity of area wetlands to remove
water pollutants, thus exacerbating
existing water quality problems in the
Yazoo Backwater Area. Many water
pollutants are imported to wetlands via
flood water. Hydrologic alterations
associated with the proposed project
(i.e., prevention of floodwater from
accessing wetlands) will reduce the
level of sediment deposition as well as
the levels of permanent removal and
temporary immobilization of nutrients,
metals, and other elements and
compounds in project area wetlands.
Loss or reduction of this important
water quality enhancement function is
of particular concern in light of existing
water quality concerns in the Yazoo
Backwater Area. The State reports that
overall water quality is lower in this
area than anywhere else in the State, as
evidenced by a region-wide advisory
regarding fish consumption, and
numerous consumption bans in some
area waters because of high pesticide
levels.15
Although the FSEIS concludes
otherwise, we believe there is potential
for conversion of those 26,300 acres
that, as a result of the project, would no
longer be defined as wetlands and
would lose CWA regulatory protection.
These conversions of wetlands to other
uses could result in additional adverse
environmental effects. For example,
agricultural conversion could change a
forested wetland habitat to an
agriculture use, destroying or
significantly degrading all wetland
functions. Agricultural intensification
could have water quality implications
by promoting faster and increased
surface water runoff from agricultural
fields. Given that the Yazoo Backwater
Area already contains CWA section
303(d)-listed impaired waterbodies,
additional runoff impacts would likely
exacerbate the elevated concentrations
of the pollutants of concern, potentially
causing or contributing to violations of
applicable state water quality standards
(40 CFR 230.10(b)).
Reducing the spatial extent,
frequency, and duration of time project
15 MCWCS,
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
2005.
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14813
area wetlands flood will dramatically
alter the structure and species
composition of the plant community in
the Yazoo Backwater Area. Wetland
plant communities will shift over time
to communities composed of species
adapted to drier environments. For
example, large areas currently
dominated by Nuttall oak and green ash
or overcup oak and water hickory will
eventually become drier and be replaced
by less flood tolerant species such as
sweetgum, which produces mast that
has a lower biological value to wildlife.
This shift will result in a commensurate
reduction in the habitat for other
wetland dependent plant species found
in the Yazoo Backwater Area such as
pondberry, which is listed as Federally
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act. As discussed below, this
large shift in plant communities will
also have adverse effects on area fish
and wildlife which depend on these
wetland plant species, and the
hydrologic regimes they represent, to
meet specific life history requirements.
Reducing the spatial extent,
frequency, and duration of time project
area wetlands flood will significantly
degrade their capacity to provide habitat
for an extensive list of fish and wildlife
species. Insect larvae, midges,
oligocheates (worms), scuds
(microcrustaceans), crayfish, worms,
snails and spiders make up a critical
component of the macroinvertebrate
communities that thrive in the area’s
riverine backwater wetlands due to the
presence of saturated soils, organic
material and periphyton (a layer of
microbial organisms which colonize
detrital material). These invertebrates
not only contribute to the breakdown of
organic material (shredders and grazers)
but they are also critical sources of prey
for fish, waterfowl, rodents, bats, and
birds. The draining and drying of area
wetlands associated with the proposed
project would significantly reduce the
species diversity, as well as the richness
and productivity of the area’s
macroinvertebrate community, thus
adversely impacting an extensive list of
vertebrate species which depend upon
the wetlands’ rich macroinvertebrate
community for nourishment.
Reducing the spatial extent,
frequency, and duration of time project
area wetlands flood will also adversely
impact amphibian and reptile species in
the Yazoo River Basin that depend upon
wetlands for breeding and foraging
habitat. The life cycles of amphibians
and reptiles in alluvial floodplain
ecosystems are linked to hydrology as
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
14814
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
well as soil conditions and climate.16
Abiotic factors that influence habitat
conditions within floodplains include
hydrologic regime, flood pulse intensity
and duration, topography, wetland
permanence (hydroperiod), water
quality, and connectivity to rivers or
streams. For many amphibians, the
hydrology associated with floodplain
wetlands is necessary for breeding and
egg laying. The proposed project would
desiccate these floodplain habitats
making it difficult for portions of the
amphibian population to survive. The
proposed project would also adversely
affect reptile and amphibian species by
modifying river-wetland connectivity,
reducing flood pulses and wetland
water recharge, and increasing habitat
fragmentation.
The proposed project will reduce
extensive areas of flooded wetlands
which provide critical habitat for fish
spawning, rearing, foraging, and cover.
As the FWS noted in its review of the
FSEIS, the backwater floodplain in the
project area supports a diverse fishery,
and relative fish abundance is highly
dependent upon seasonal overbank or
backwater flooding. It also noted that
reproduction by 55 of the 140 (39
percent) resident fish species in the
Mississippi River is dependent on
backwater flooded areas. According to
the FWS, the proposed action would
reduce the areal extent of wetlands
subject to flooding in the Yazoo
Backwater Area that are critical to
fishery reproduction by approximately
46 percent, or 112,600 acres, during the
critical spawning and rearing months.
Spring flooding is the major factor
responsible for fishery productivity
within the Yazoo River Basin. It
provides access to protective spawning
and nursery habitat outside the stream
channels where larger predatory fish
species live. These shallowly flooded
areas remain inundated for a duration
that allows water temperatures to rise
quickly, providing suitable spawning
habitat, and allowing for optimum larval
fish growth. Once the larval fish hatch
and their yolk sack is absorbed (7 to 10
days), these seasonally flooded
bottomland hardwood areas provide
protective shallow water areas with an
abundance of cover for protection from
predators, as well as the organic matter,
nutrients, and invertebrates needed for
larval and juvenile fish growth.
Backwater riverine wetlands such as
the ones that would be impacted by the
proposed project are used by more bird
species than most other ecosystems in
North America.17 Project area wetlands
provide migratory bird habitat of
hemispheric significance, particularly
for waterfowl, shorebirds, over-water
nesting waterbirds and wading birds, as
well as numerous migratory songbirds.
The loss of the productive shallowly
flooded wetlands, especially in the
spring months when the proposed
pumps will be in operation, will impact
migratory birds such as shorebirds and
waterfowl as they stop over and forage
in preparation for their seasonal
migration. Fewer shallowly flooded
wetlands will reduce foraging habitat,
which will equate to reduced nutritional
uptake and could result in higher
mortality or reduced reproductive
fitness as the birds travel the great
distances between their wintering and
breeding areas in the northern U.S.,
Canada, and the Arctic. Breeding for
many species could be adversely
affected during the spring-time nesting
season because foraging areas would be
reduced. As a result of the reduction in
flooding, adult birds will have to travel
longer distances to find food, which
equates to longer times away from the
nest and their chicks and may
ultimately lead to higher nest mortality
and lower recruitment.
The hydrologic regime of backwater
riverine wetlands creates seasonal
pulses of nutrient flow and food
resources. The timing of these seasonal
pulses of energy is important to many
wetland dependent birds and mammals
inhabiting the Yazoo Backwater Area.
The consequences of even modest
changes in the timing of events can
adversely affect these species. For
example, delayed or reduced flood
hydrology caused by the proposed
project in late fall or early winter could
delay and decrease detrital invertebrate
populations in late winter and spring,
which would affect, among other factors
and other species, the foraging resources
for mallards, egg-laying of night herons
and hooded mergansers, embryo
development in raccoons and storage of
16 Jones, J.C. and J.D. Taylor. 2005. Herptofauna
communities in temperate river floodplain
ecosystems of the southeastern United States. pages
235–257. in L.H. Frederickson, S.A. King, and R.M.
Kaminski, eds. Ecology and Management of
Bottomland Hardwood Systems: The State of our
Understanding. University of Missouri-Columbia,
Gaylord Memorial Laboratory Special Publication
No.10, Puxico.
17 Heitmeyer, M.E., R.J. Cooper, J.G. Dickson, and
B.D. Leopold. 2005. Ecological relationships of
warmblooded vertebrates in bottomland hardwood
ecosystems. Pages 281–306. in L.H. Frederickson,
S.A. King, and R.M. Kaminski, eds. Ecology and
Management of Bottomland Hardwood Systems:
The State of our Understanding. University of
Missouri—Columbia, Gaylord Memorial Laboratory
Special Publication No.10, Puxico.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
nutrient reserves needed by hibernating
black bears.18
The proposed project would
significantly degrade critical habitat for
many of the 258 species of birds (e.g.,
little blue herons, yellow-crowned night
herons, wood storks and prothonotary
warblers), many species of waterfowl
(e.g., wood ducks, mallards, blue and
green-winged teal) 19 and over 90
species of fish (e.g., catfish, sunfish and
crappies) 20 which have been
documented as utilizing wetlands and
other waterbodies in the Yazoo
Backwater Area and Yazoo River. The
proposed project would also degrade
critical habitat for 33 species of greatest
conservation need which depend on
bottomland hardwood wetlands in the
Yazoo Backwater Area, including the
Louisiana black bear which is listed as
Federally threatened under the
Endangered Species Act and the
American black bear, 23 species of
greatest conservation need which
depend on standing and running
waterbodies in the Yazoo Backwater
Area, and 17 species of greatest
conservation need which depend on the
Yazoo River and its major tributaries.21
The proposed project would degrade
critical ecological functions provided by
wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area
including floodwater detention, nutrient
cycling, organic carbon export, pollutant
filtering/removal, and maintenance of
biologically diverse plant and animal
habitat. We believe that impacts to these
functions at the scale associated with
this project will result in significant
degradation (40 CFR 230.10(c)) of the
Nation’s waters, particularly in light of
the extensive historic wetland losses in
the lower Mississippi Valley and
specifically the Yazoo Backwater Area.
2. Underestimation of Adverse Effects
a. Underestimation of the Spatial
Extent of Adverse Effects. EPA believes
the spatial extent of wetlands
potentially impacted by the proposed
project is much greater than that
estimated in the FSEIS. EPA’s analysis
identified 81,000 acres of jurisdictional
wetlands located outside of the wetland
impact assessment area established in
the FSEIS. EPA believes a significant
portion of these wetlands are connected
to backwater flooding and will be
adversely impacted by the project.
However, the FSEIS did not evaluate
impacts to these wetlands.
18 Heitmeyer
et al., 2005.
list of bird species utilizing wildlife
refuges in the Yazoo Backwater Area: https://
www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/chekbird/r4/
yazoo.htm.
20 Lee et al., 1980.
21 MCWCS, 2005.
19 FWS
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
In our November 2000, comment
letter on the DSEIS, we recommended
that the Corps expand its scope of
wetland impact assessment to include
jurisdictional wetlands in the 2-year
floodplain (i.e., 91.0 foot, NGVD
elevation). While the FSEIS implies that
there are more jurisdictional wetlands
in the 100-year floodplain than
previously estimated in the DSEIS, the
FSEIS concludes that only those
wetlands flooded for 5 percent of the
growing season and which occur at or
below the 88.6 foot, NGVD elevation
(i.e., the wetland impact assessment
area established in the FSEIS using the
Flood Event Assessment Tool (FEAT)/
Flood Event Simulation Model (FESM))
will be affected by this project. The
FSEIS also concludes that any wetlands
occurring outside the FEAT/FESM
modeled boundary are not connected to
the backwater ecosystem and thus
would not be impacted by the pumping
project. We disagree and, as discussed
further below, note that data included in
the FSEIS supports our position that a
significant amount of jurisdictional
wetlands outside the FEAT/FESM
modeled boundary is indeed connected
to the backwater ecosystem, and thus
will likely be adversely impacted by the
proposed project.
During the course of this project
several attempts have been made to
estimate the spatial extent of wetlands
based upon remote sources of data (i.e.,
Geographic Information Systems (GIS),
satellite images, hydrologic models).
These remote based estimates of
jurisdictional wetland extent ranged
from approximately 60,000 to over
200,000 acres. Since these landscape
level estimates were based on remote
data with un-estimated error, EPA
determined a field based, statistical
survey would provide a more precise
and scientifically defensible basis for
establishing the extent and spatial
distribution of wetlands in the study
area. Therefore, in 2003, EPA in
cooperation with the Corps, the FWS
and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) implemented a field
sampling survey designed by EPA’s
Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program (EMAP). EMAP
survey designs and methods have been
developed and tested within EPA’s
Office of Research and Development
over the past decade with published
results. Discussion of the methods and
results of the EMAP survey were
incorporated into Appendix 10 of the
FSEIS.
The spatial extent and distribution of
wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area
was determined with known confidence
using EPA’s EMAP survey design and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
analysis. Based on this design, the total
wetland extent for the 100-year
floodplain is approximately 212,000
acres. Most of the wetlands were found
in the FEAT/FESM predicted area.
However, EMAP also found
approximately 81,000 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands occurring
outside the wetland boundary predicted
by the Corps’ FEAT/FESM model. It is
the potential impacts to these wetlands
that EPA believes were not analyzed in
the FSEIS.
The stated effect of the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project is the reduction
of the areal extent and duration of
floods greater than the 1-year flood
(FSEIS, paragraph 31). Paragraphs 194–
195 in the Main Report state that the
timing, frequency and duration of
flooding will be affected by the project.
Therefore, areas typically covered/
inundated by 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and
100-year flood events will be reduced
with the proposed project (i.e., less area
will be flooded). These areas contain a
substantial acreage of wetlands.
Data included in the FSEIS indicates
that hydrologic connections exist
amongst wetlands beyond those
depicted by FEAT/FESM. Table 10–7, in
the Wetlands Appendix of the FSEIS
indicates that the March 10, 1989;
March 21, 1987; and the January 9 and
13, 1983 satellite scenes show between
18,000 and 71,000 acres flooded in the
area between 91.0 feet and 100 feet,
NGVD (i.e., 2–100 year band). Hence, it
is likely that the jurisdictional wetlands
between the 2-year and 100-year flood
elevations currently experience
flooding. This conclusion is further
supported by the statement that the
FESM model overestimates flooding
close to the channels utilized by the
model, but does ‘‘less well’’ when
flooded areas are away from the
channels (FSEIS, paragraph 43). EPA
interprets this to mean that areas away
from the FESM channels could flood,
but the model is unable to depict those
flooded areas. FSEIS Tables 10–10
(Areal extent of wetlands by composite
wetland cell value) and 10–11 (Wetland
losses by duration interval and duration
zone) in the Wetlands Appendix
(Appendix 10) and Plate 10–25 indicate
there are wetland areas beyond the
FEAT boundary that flood and would be
affected by the proposed pump by virtue
of having decreased flood durations
after the project. These items in
Appendix 10 indicate impacts to be
approximately 60,000 acres. The
Wetland Appendix also indicates that
approximately 41,000 acres outside the
Corps’ assessment area (i.e., ‘‘Tier 2’’
wetlands in Table 10–16) flood during
the 2-year return period flood.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14815
Corps’ hydrologic data also indicate
that flooded wetlands exist in the 2-year
floodplain and will be impacted through
a change in flood duration as well as a
change in flood frequency. In 2004, the
Corps provided EPA with a copy of the
Period of Record gage data for the years
1943 to 1997. These data contained
daily gage records, presumably as
outputs from the Period of Record
Routing model, for the with- and without project scenarios at Steele Bayou
and Little Sunflower gages. A frequency
analysis of this data indicates the 2-year
flood elevation (stage) is 91.0 feet,
NGVD in the Lower Ponding area and
91.6 feet, NGVD in the Upper Ponding
area (FSEIS, Appendix 6—Engineering
Summary and Appendix 10). A stage
duration analysis of these data indicates
that, over the entire period of record,
flooding sufficient for wetland
hydrology occurs in areas between 89.0
feet and 92.0 feet, NGVD at Steele Bayou
under base conditions.22 As a result of
the proposed project, durations would
be decreased, on an average annual
basis, by 4.5 percent or 15 days. Flood
frequency would be changed, at this 2year return interval elevation,
approximately 45 percent. This
corresponds to the Corps’ calculated
stage reductions of approximately 4.5
feet (92.9 feet, NGVD reduced to 88.5
feet, NGVD) at Steele Bayou.
Corps’ stage-frequency data indicates
flooding will become much less
frequent in the 2- and 5-year
floodplains, increasing from a 2-year
return interval to a 10-year return
interval and a 5-year return interval to
a 50-year return interval (FSEIS,
Appendix 6, Table 6–14 and 6–15). This
would result in significant impacts to,
among other functions, the hydrologic
functions of wetlands in the 2-year
floodplain. However, by restricting the
impact assessment area to only the
FEAT/FESM modeled areas, the Corps
is ignoring changes in flood duration
and frequency that will result in major
impacts to wetlands outside the FSEIS’s
assessment area.
Existing information regarding the
extensive hydrologic network in the
Yazoo Backwater Area offers further
support that wetlands outside the Corp’s
assessment area would be affected by
the proposed project. The National
Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a
comprehensive set of digital spatial data
that encodes information about
naturally occurring and constructed
bodies of water and paths through
which water flows. The NHD is mapped
at a 1:100,000 scale. When the NHD for
the Yazoo River Basin is overlain with
the wetland points surveyed in EMAP,
the density of stream channels at this
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
14816
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
scale strongly indicates that backwater
has a great many conduits and that
many wetlands on the 2-year floodplain
represented by EMAP data points are
connected or adjacent to channels. This
finding is consistent with the detailed
characterization of the Yazoo Backwater
Area’s hydrology found in the Yazoo
Basin HGM Guidebook, which states
that during periods of backwater
flooding the area’s extensive drainage
networks ‘‘function in reverse and
deliver water to low areas far from the
source stream.’’
For these reasons, EPA believes that a
significant portion of the 81,000 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands identified in the
EMAP analysis that exist outside of the
Corps’ wetland assessment area are
connected to backwater flooding and
will likely be adversely affected by the
project. These wetlands were not
evaluated in the FSEIS’s impact
assessment.
b. Underestimation of the Degree and
Nature of Adverse Effects. In addition to
significantly underestimating the spatial
extent of wetlands potentially impacted
by the proposed project, wetland, fish,
and wildlife functional assessments in
the FSEIS also understate the degree
and nature of adverse impacts to the
wetlands that were evaluated. EPA
encouraged the use of the HGM
assessment method and the Habitat
Evaluation Procedure (HEP) as tools to
help evaluate wetland functions, and we
still support the use of those tools;
however, we believe that certain factors
used in the application of these
assessment tools are flawed, leading to
a significant underestimation of the
proposed pumping station’s adverse
impacts on the aquatic ecosystem. Our
primary concerns include:
• The summation of assessment units
(i.e., Functional Capacity Units and
Habitat Units) in the FSEIS obscures
significant wetland, fish, and wildlife
impacts. For example, the HGM
assessment evaluated eight functions
performed by affected wetlands and
estimated how these functions would
decrease at wetlands adversely
impacted by the proposed pumping and
increase at reforestation/mitigation sites.
These functions are: detain floodwater,
detain precipitation, cycle nutrients,
export organic carbon, physical removal
of elements and compounds, biological
removal of elements and compounds,
maintain plant communities, and
provide wildlife habitat. In drawing its
conclusion that the proposed project
would result in an overall 19.5 percent
increase in wetland functions, not only
does the FSEIS factor in unsubstantiated
and improbable benefits associated with
the proposed restoration as discussed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
below, it also adds the losses and gains
for each of the eight functions. This
kind of comparison is of concern
because it allows large predicted gains
in functions such as maintaining plant
communities to obscure losses in other
critical water quality related functions.
• Impacts to key functions are
omitted. In the HGM assessment, no
effect is shown in the detain floodwater
function as a result of this project
despite the fact that this is one of the
functions which the proposed pumping
project is designed to most dramatically
impact. In its discussion of the detain
floodwater function, the Yazoo Basin
HGM Guidebook clearly states the
importance of duration of flooding on
the performance of this function.
However, despite this recognition, the
duration information which was
incorporated into several other
functions in the FSEIS’s HGM
assessment (which did indicate project
related impacts) was not incorporated
into the detain floodwater function.
• The flood frequency variable shows
no change in HGM assessment. Despite
information in the FSEIS Engineering
Appendix (Table 10–6) which indicates
that the proposed project will result in
less frequent flooding in areas above the
1-year floodplain, the frequency of
flooding variable in the HGM
assessment models reflects no change,
for any function. This seems
incongruous, since the entire stated
objective of the project is to modify the
timing, frequency and duration of
flooding (FSEIS, paragraph 194).
• Despite the pumping project, the
HGM assessment assumes that
vegetative species composition remains
approximately static over time. Over the
course of the 50-year project and
beyond, the vegetation structure of the
Yazoo Backwater Area would change as
significant areas at higher elevations
shift to drier species composition. The
FSEIS’s HGM assessment assumes that
vegetative species composition remains
static through time or that the species
shift would still be within the range of
reference standards. However, if the
hydrologic regime of the area is
significantly changed, as proposed,
there would be much larger changes in
the plant and animal community than
was accounted for in the FSEIS’s HGM
assessment.
• The HEP and HGM assessments
assume that land use will not change
over the 50-year life of the project. For
example, the assessment assumes that
mature wetland forest that is
hydrologically modified to the extent
that it is no longer defined as a wetland
would stay mature forest despite no
longer being provided CWA regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
protection. We believe this assumption
is not supported by a more careful
evaluation of land-use trends. For
example, given the rise in prices for
agricultural products in the Mississippi
Delta, and the strong increase in
domestic production of corn
nationwide, agricultural intensification
is a serious possibility.
• The HEP assessment
underestimates the amount of aquatic
spawning habitat adversely affected.
According to the HEP model used, fish
spawning habitat requires 8 days of
continuous inundation at least 1 foot in
depth, from March to May. Based on
these requirements and hydrologic data
provided by the Corps, 3300 acres of
habitat would be lost as a result of the
project. However, this amount of lost
habitat is inconsistent with values
reported in the Wetland Appendix
(Table 10–10). The Wetland Appendix
indicates that approximately 39,000
acres which currently flood for 14 days
or less (but greater than 7 days) would,
as a result of the proposed project, only
flood for less than 7 days (i.e., shift to
the <2.5 percent duration band). EPA’s
interpretation of Table 10–10 is that
there is currently at least 39,000 acres of
potentially suitable fish spawning
habitat that will become unsuitable after
project implementation. These impacts
appear far greater than the 3300 acres of
lost spawning habitat discussed in the
FSEIS’s Aquatics Appendix and would
require far more compensation than
what is proposed in the FSEIS.
• Inappropriate selection of fish
species for the HEP assessment results
in an underestimation of the proposed
project’s adverse effects on fisheries.
The nine fish species selected for the
FSEIS’s HEP assessment do not
represent fish species whose life cycles
would be affected by the proposed
project’s hydrological modifications
within riverine backwater wetlands. All
nine of the fish species evaluated in the
HEP are commonly found in larger open
water systems and do not require
floodplain habitats for their spawning or
rearing. Thus, the HEP assessment
underestimates how the proposed
project would impact the large number
of fish species which do require
floodplain connections and periodic
flooding events for key aspects of their
life cycles such as spawning and
rearing.
• HEP does not evaluate the impacts
of the proposed project on amphibians
and reptiles. The FSEIS’s HEP
assessments exclude entirely any
assessment of the proposed project’s
adverse impacts on amphibians and
reptiles. Species in both of these classes
of animals depend upon wetland habitat
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
to meet numerous life history
requirements and would experience
extensive adverse effects from the
proposed project.
The FSEIS’s exclusion from analysis
of wetlands above the 2-year, 5 percent
flood duration elevation, and in
particular wetlands above the 2-year, 5
percent duration flood elevation and
within the 5-year flood elevation, does
not acknowledge the influence and
importance of shorter duration and less
frequent flooding on establishing and
maintaining the diversity of wetlands
and the functions they provide. Nor
does it recognize the impacts of the
reduction in flooding resulting from the
project on the maintenance of that
diversity of wetlands and the
biodiversity they support. The
importance of wetland functions within
and above the 2-year, 5 percent flood
elevation is noted in the Yazoo Basin
HGM Guidebook which states ‘‘one of
the primary criteria used to identify
wetland subclasses in the Yazoo Basin
is flood return interval. A 5-year or less
flood return interval is regarded as
sufficient to support major functions
that involve periodic connection to
stream systems.’’ Shorter duration and
less frequent flooding will significantly
and adversely affect the vegetation and
aquatic animal communities within
these wetlands, nutrient and sediment
cycling, and other functions that
establish and maintain the diversity of
habitats critical for fish and wildlife
dependent upon them, including
waterfowl, shorebird, and wading bird
foraging habitats, fish spawning and
rearing habitats, and amphibian, reptile,
and mammal habitats. Reducing the
spatial extent, frequency, and duration
of time project area wetlands flood will
result in the reduction and loss of
important wetland functions, according
to the criteria outlined in the Yazoo
Basin HGM Guidebook. These
reductions and losses in wetland
functions were not adequately factored
into the FSEIS’s HGM and HEP
assessments.
3. Overestimation of Environmental
Benefits
Both the HGM and HEP analyses
assume extensive yet unsubstantiated
and improbable environmental benefits
from the project’s proposed
reforestation. These analyses assume
that the entire proposed 55,600 acres of
reforestation and mitigation will be
obtained and that every acre will be
ideally situated in the target area (i.e.,
areas currently in agricultural
production within the two-year
floodplain that will flood for a sufficient
period to yield equivalent wetland
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
functions) to produce maximum
environmental benefits for all affected
resources. However, EPA’s EMAP
assessment and the Corps’ land use
assessment (FSEIS, Table 10–9) indicate
that there are not enough acres of
cleared wetlands with the proper
hydrology and soils in the target area to
satisfy this goal. Aside from the project’s
compensatory mitigation (discussed
below), there are no commitments to
initiate any of the reforestation prior to
initiating operation of the pumps.
Further, no reforestation (or mitigation)
sites have been identified or secured
and the FSEIS indicates that these sites
may not be located in the target area or
even the greater Yazoo—Mississippi
Delta (Main Report, paragraph 316). If
sites are found, the reliance on willing
sellers would likely result in a
noncontiguous patchwork of fragmented
sites that cannot deliver the kinds of
ecological benefits predicted by the
HGM and HEP assessments.
Based on our review of available
information, EPA believes the proposed
project would result in extensive
adverse impacts to wetland functions
and fish and wildlife resources; impacts
which would be inconsistent with the
CWA. As discussed below, we do not
believe the proposed compensatory
mitigation would reduce these adverse
impacts to an acceptable level.
C. Mitigation
To offset the project’s extensive
adverse environmental impacts, the
Corps proposes 10,662 acres of
compensatory mitigation. Compensation
would consist of reforestation and
conservation of areas located in
previously cleared wetlands to restore
those areas to bottomland hardwood
forests. However, compensation sites
have not been specifically identified for
the proposed mitigation. Rather, the
FSEIS states that conservation
easements will be purchased only from
‘‘willing sellers’’ to conduct the
proposed compensatory mitigation.
EPA has significant concerns
regarding the adequacy of the proposed
compensatory mitigation. Based on our
preliminary review of the HGM and
HEP analyses, we believe that
compensation requirements for impacts
of this type and on this scale would be
much greater than that estimated in the
FSEIS. In addition, there do not appear
to be enough acres of cleared wetlands
with the proper hydrology and soils in
the target area to satisfy more accurate
projections of the mitigation needs of
the proposed project. Even if sufficient
compensation acreage were available,
we do not believe that impacts of this
scale and concentration could be
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14817
effectively compensated for to avoid
causing or contributing to significant
degradation (40 CFR 230.10(c)), given
that reliance on willing sellers would
likely result in a noncontiguous
patchwork of fragmented compensation
sites that cannot deliver the ecological
benefits predicted by the FSEIS. We also
believe that the project fails to include
all appropriate and practicable steps to
minimize and compensate for the
project’s adverse impacts on the aquatic
ecosystem as required by 40 CFR
230.10(d).
The section 404(b)(1) guidelines
prohibit discharges that would cause or
contribute to significant degradation. As
previously discussed, we believe this
project would cause or contribute to
significant degradation. If the project is
going to rely on compensatory
mitigation to reduce impacts to an
acceptable level, there must be a very
robust and detailed mitigation plan
which would inform whether in fact the
impacts could reliably be reduced to
avoid significantly degrading the
Nation’s waters. These plans should
include a number of critical details
regarding the mitigation project(s)
including: clearly articulated project
goals and objectives; project site
selection criteria; site protection
instruments (e.g., conservation
easements); detailed quantitative and
qualitative baseline information
describing both the impact and
compensation sites; a detailed
discussion of the mitigation project’s
credit determination methodology and
results; a maintenance plan; ecological
performance standards used to evaluate
the degree to which the compensation
projects are replacing lost functions and
area; detailed monitoring requirements;
a long-term management plan
describing necessary long-term
stewardship of the compensation sites
and who is responsible for performing
this stewardship; an adaptive
management plan; and financial
assurances to ensure project
construction, implementation, and longterm management.
Another critical element of these
plans is the site specific mitigation work
plans. These plans include detailed
written specifications and work
descriptions for the compensatory
mitigation project, including, but not
limited to: geographic boundaries of the
project; construction methods, timing,
and sequence; source(s) of water,
including connections to existing waters
and uplands; methods for establishing
the desired plant community; plans to
control invasive plant species; the
proposed grading plan, including
elevations and slopes of the substrate;
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
14818
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
soil management; and erosion control
measures.
Despite the extensive anticipated
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed project, no specific
compensation project sites have been
identified or secured. Thus, the
mitigation plan included in the FSEIS
lacks most of the aforementioned
details. In particular, it lacks accurate
information regarding baseline
conditions at compensation sites, as
well as substantiated information
regarding potential environmental
benefits likely to accrue at these sites if
reforestation activities are successfully
implemented. Without these details it is
not possible to determine that the
potential adverse environmental
impacts of a project would be
successfully minimized and
compensated for to avoid significantly
degrading the Nation’s waters.
What information is included in the
FSEIS describing compensatory
mitigation raises more concerns. The
Corps only promises that 10,662 acres of
compensatory mitigation will take place
prior to initiating operation of the
pumps and notes that this minimum
may not be located in the target area or
even the greater Yazoo-Mississippi
Delta, raising significant concerns that
important wetland functions will not be
replaced in the watershed. The FSEIS
indicates that no requirements will be
included to implement hydrological
modifications or to otherwise ensure
that the compensation projects will
result in fully functioning wetland
systems. This is of particular concern
since the Corps envisions mitigation
projects being located in areas whose
hydrology will be impacted by the
proposed pumping station. The
conservation easements used to provide
long-term site protection described in
the FSEIS (if such sites can be found)
will not require landowners to ensure
that sites are or will retain wetland
characteristics and will allow
potentially ecologically disruptive
silvicultural practices in these areas.
Additionally, the monitoring provisions
described in the FSEIS entail only
initial visual inspections in the early
years of project implementation
followed by remote sensing techniques
in later years. These are inadequate and
are one of many weaknesses in the
mitigation plan that make it impossible
to conclude that impacts will be
reduced permanently below the
threshold of significant degradation.
D. Uncertainty of the Proposed
Reforestation
Consistent with our comments
regarding the proposed compensatory
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
mitigation, EPA believes the Corps does
not provide effective assurances
regarding the project’s primary
nonstructural component—the proposed
reforestation of up to 40,571 acres of
cleared wetlands (i.e., up to 55,600 acres
less the 10,662 acres the Corps proposes
to use as compensation for this project
and the 4,367 acres it proposes to use as
compensation for impacts associated
with already implemented aspects of
related projects) through the purchase of
conservation easements from willing
sellers. Reforestation sites have not been
specifically identified in the FSEIS and,
as with the compensatory mitigation,
there do not appear to be enough acres
of cleared wetlands with the appropriate
hydrology and soils in the target area to
meet this goal. Even if there were
enough potential wetland reforestation
acres, reliance on willing sellers does
not provide effective assurance that the
acreage proposed (up to 40,571 acres)
will ultimately be made available for the
reforestation effort. The reforestation
component also suffers from the same
technical problems associated with the
compensatory mitigation plan in that it
would likely result in a fragmented
patchwork of reforestation sites with
limited benefits. In addition to logistical
and technical issues, the management of
the reforestation lands (e.g., ensuring
the implementation and success of
planting efforts, providing long-term
stewardship), the restoration of wetland
hydrology, the replacement of temporal
losses incurred before replanted trees
become fully functional bottomland
hardwood forested wetlands
(hardwoods typically require a
minimum of 60–70 years before they are
mature), and the continuation of
silvicultural practices in the
reforestation areas are also major
uncertainties. In light of these
uncertainties, the environmental
benefits suggested by the FSEIS to
accrue from the proposed reforestation
have not been substantiated.
E. Project Alternatives
EPA believes, based on the record to
date, that the Corps has not sufficiently
considered potential alternatives that
would avoid and minimize the
proposed project’s significant adverse
impacts to aquatic resources pursuant to
40 CFR 230.10(a). Specifically, we
believe that an alternative may be
available that would provide a less
environmentally damaging and more
sustainable approach to floodplain
management in the Yazoo Backwater
Area. Such an alternative might
incorporate, among other actions:
reforestation of farmlands in the
floodplain, relocation or flood proofing
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of flood-prone structures, conservation
easements, localized flood protection
structures including pumps, and
expansion of insurance programs to
compensate for economic losses from
flooding.
While EPA believes that the nature
and extent of the environmental impacts
associated with the structural proposal
are significant, further evaluation of
nonstructural actions could produce a
cost-effective solution with significantly
fewer adverse environmental impacts
than the proposed project, consistent
with the Guidelines. We acknowledge
that such a solution would likely
require participation by multiple federal
and state agencies, private industry, and
non-governmental organizations, and
may necessitate additional
Congressional authorization. However, a
primarily nonstructural approach could
ultimately provide a better balance of
Federal objectives for addressing the
needs of the Yazoo Backwater Area
community for flood reduction and
wetlands protection.
F. Recreation
As previously noted, a 404(c)
determination can be based on
unacceptable adverse effects on
recreational areas. Significant,
seasonally-inundated public lands are
located in the Yazoo Backwater Area
including: (a) The Delta National Forest
(61,800 acres); (b) the Yazoo National
Wildlife Refuge Complex (including the
Yazoo (13,000 acres), Holt Collier (1,400
acres), Theodore Roosevelt (4,000 acres),
and part of Panther Swamp (14,000
acres) refuges); (c) Twin Oaks Mitigation
Area (5,675 acres); (d) Mahanna
Mitigation Area (12,675 acres); and (e)
Lake George Wildlife Management Area
(8,383 acres). The FSEIS acknowledges
these lands as significant resources
(FSEIS, page 90) however it does not
evaluate how these resources and
particularly their recreational values
will be affected by the proposed project.
In its January 18, 2008, detailed
comments on the FSEIS, the FWS
indicated that the proposed project will
have unacceptable adverse effects on
recreational areas in the Yazoo
Backwater Area, including four National
Wildlife Refuges mentioned above and
other publicly-owned land in the project
area. EPA is soliciting information about
these and other recreational areas in the
Yazoo Backwater Area, the use of these
areas and how these areas would be
impacted if the proposed pumping
station is built.
V. Proposed Determination
The Regional Administrator proposes
to recommend that the discharge of
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
dredged or fill material in wetlands and
other waters in Issaquena County,
Mississippi be prohibited for the
purpose of constructing the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project’s pumping
station or any other pumping proposal
in the Yazoo Backwater Area that would
involve significant adverse impacts on
waters of the United States. Based on
current information, the Regional
Administrator has reason to believe the
Yazoo Backwater Area Project could
result in unacceptable adverse impacts.
Moreover, these impacts may be partly
or entirely avoidable.
This proposed determination is based
on unacceptable adverse impacts to
wildlife and fisheries pursuant to
section 404(c). EPA has reason to
believe the project would cause or
contribute to significant degradation of
waters of the United States and violate
the section 404(b)(1) guidelines. At a
minimum, the construction and
operation of the proposed pumps would
degrade the critical functions and values
of approximately 67,000 acres of
nationally significant wetland resources
in the Yazoo River Basin. Of this total,
approximately 26,300 acres would be
hydrologically modified to the extent
that they would no longer be defined as
wetlands and would lose CWA
regulatory protection. The natural
timing, frequency, and duration of water
reaching the remaining approximately
40,700 acres of wetlands would be
impacted by the proposed pumping,
altering the wetlands’ ecological
characteristics and reducing their
functions. EPA does not believe that
impacts of this magnitude are consistent
with the requirements of the CWA. Our
concerns regarding this project are
amplified because we believe the
potential adverse impacts on wetlands
(particularly those wetlands located
within the 2-year floodplain) and
associated fish and wildlife resources
may be much greater than is estimated
in the FSEIS. These impacts must also
be viewed in the context of the
significant cumulative losses across the
LMRAV, which has already lost over 80
percent of its bottomland forested
wetlands, and specifically in the
Mississippi Delta where the proposed
project would significantly degrade
important remnant bottomland forested
wetlands.
EPA does not believe the potential
impacts of the project, as currently
proposed, can be adequately mitigated
to reduce the impacts to an acceptable
level. Additionally, we do not believe
that the environmental benefits
suggested by the FSEIS to accrue from
the project’s nonstructural component
(e.g., the reforestation of up to 40,571
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
14819
acres) have been substantiated. EPA
supports the goal of providing improved
flood protection for the residents of the
Mississippi Delta; however, we believe
that accomplishment of this vital
objective can be fully consistent with
ensuring effective protection for the
area’s valuable natural resources. In
light of existing information, EPA
believes that there are likely to be less
environmentally damaging practicable
alternatives to building the proposed
pumping station.
Although EPA’s proposed section
404(c) determination would prohibit the
construction of the pumps as proposed,
as mentioned previously, EPA continues
to believe there are alternatives that
could provide flood protection and
other benefits to all communities within
the Yazoo Backwater Area. We support
working with the residents of the Delta
and our federal partners to propose and
evaluate alternatives that are responsive
to local conditions, needs, and
preferences.
VI. Other Considerations
VII. Solicitation of Comments
Like the Corps, EPA has met with
local community residents and listened
to their hope and belief that the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project will protect
their homes against major floods, like
the one in 1973. The community
residents we met expressed a strong
belief that by making the area less prone
to flooding, the project will bring
economic development, jobs, and a
return of residents to the area. EPA
recognizes the importance of improved
flood protection for the people living
and working in the project area, which
includes low-income and minority
populations, and we appreciate that the
Corps responded to DSEIS follow-up
discussions on environmental justice
(EJ) by preparing an EJ analysis
pursuant to Executive Order 12898.
The Corps’ EJ analysis generally
discusses the potential flood protection
and economic development that could
accrue from the project within
communities with potential EJ concerns.
However, it has not demonstrated
specifically which surrounding
communities will be protected and
which will remain subject to flooding
after the project is completed, and
whether they will be protected against
1-year, 2-year, or 100-year floods. The
FSEIS does not provide flood risk maps
that show the location of residences and
habitable structures within the
potentially affected communities.
Furthermore, EPA does not believe the
Corps has fully analyzed the impact of
this project on potential economic
development in the EJ community.
Under Executive Order 12898, the
Corps should have also considered the
project’s potential effects on subsistence
fishers and hunters who could be
disproportionately impacted by the
operation of the pumps. The FSEIS does
not address whether the project would
adversely impact populations that
depend on subsistence fishing or
hunting. We are soliciting information
about these and other potential impacts
on local communities if the proposed
pumping station is built.
EPA is today soliciting comments on
all issues discussed in this notice. In
particular, we request information on
the likely adverse impacts to fish and
wildlife values of all of the wetlands,
streams, and other waters in all areas
which would be affected by the
construction and operation of the
pumping station proposed in the Yazoo
Backwater Area Project. We also seek
information pertaining to flora, fauna,
and hydrology of the Yazoo Backwater
Area. All relevant data, studies,
knowledge of studies, or informal
observations are appropriate.
Information on species or communities
of regional or statewide importance
would be especially useful.
While the anticipated unacceptable
adverse effects on fisheries and wildlife
serves as EPA’s main basis for this
proposed 404(c) determination, EPA has
additional concerns with the proposed
project, including water quality impacts,
alternatives, mitigation, and impacts on
recreation. Therefore, EPA also solicits
comments on the following aspects of
the project and corrective actions that
could be taken to reduce the adverse
impact of the discharge:
(1) The potential for additional
violations of State Water Quality
Standards to occur in the Yazoo River
Basin if the pumping station is built;
(2) Additional information about lowincome and minority populations in the
Yazoo Backwater Area and, in the
context of Executive Order 12898, the
disproportionately high adverse human
health or environmental effects, if any,
on these populations if EPA makes a
final determination to prohibit or
restrict the use of certain waters in the
Yazoo River Basin as disposal sites for
dredged or fill material in connection
with the project;
(3) Additional information about
fisheries in the Yazoo River Basin and
the impacts to fisheries if the pumping
station is built and operated;
(4) Additional information on the
wildlife species which would be
affected by changes in the aquatic
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
14820
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 19, 2008 / Notices
ecosystem if the pumping station is
built and operated;
(5) Additional information on
municipal and other water supplies in
the Yazoo River Basin and how the
quantity and quality of those water
supplies could be affected by the
operation of the proposed pumping
station;
(6) The potential for impacts to
wetlands and their associated functions
in the Yazoo River Basin if the pumping
station is built and operated;
(7) Information about recreational
uses of the area and how they would be
impacted if the pumping station is built
and operated;
(8) Additional information on the
availability of less environmentally
damaging practicable alternatives to
satisfy flooding issues, taking into
account cost, technology, and logistics
and including other nonstructural
alternatives;
(9) Information on the potential for
mitigation to replace the functions and
services provided by the 67,000 acres of
wetlands that are, at a minimum, at risk
in the Yazoo Backwater Area;
(10) Whether the discharge should be
permanently prohibited, allowed as
proposed by the Corps, or restricted in
time, size or other manner; and
(11) Potential impacts and benefits of
alternatives, both structural and
nonstructural.
The record will remain open for
comments until May 5, 2008. All
comments will be fully considered in
reaching a decision to either withdraw
the proposed determination or forward
to EPA Headquarters a recommended
determination to prohibit or restrict the
discharge of dredged or fill material in
wetlands and other waters in the Yazoo
Backwater Area in connection with the
construction of the Yazoo Backwater
Area Project’s pumping station or any
other pumping proposal in the Yazoo
Backwater Area that would involve
significant adverse impacts on waters of
the United States.
Lawrence E. Starfield,
Regional Decision Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–5401 Filed 3–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Notice of Agreements Filed
The Commission hereby gives notice
of the filing of the following agreements
under the Shipping Act of 1984.
Interested parties may submit comments
on agreements to the Secretary, Federal
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Mar 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
20573, within ten days of the date this
notice appears in the Federal Register.
Copies of agreements are available
through the Commission’s Office of
Agreements (202–523–5793 or
tradeanalysis@fmc.gov).
Agreement No.: 010982–042.
Title: Florida-Bahamas Shipowners
and Operators Association.
Parties: Atlantic Caribbean Line, Inc.;
Crowley Liner Services, Inc.; Nina
(Bermuda) Ltd.; Pioneer Shipping Ltd.;
Seaboard Marine, Ltd.; Seafreight Line,
Ltd.; and Tropical Shipping and
Construction Co., Ltd.
Filing Party: Wayne R. Rhode, Esq.;
Sher & Blackwell; 1850 M Street, NW.;
Suite 900; Washington, DC 20036.
Synopsis: The amendment would add
Bermuth Lines, Ltd. as a party to the
agreement.
Agreement No.: 011953–003.
Title: Florida Shipowners Group
Agreement.
Parties: The member lines of the
Caribbean Shipowners Association and
the Florida-Bahamas Shipowners and
Operators Association.
Filing Party: Wayne R. Rhode, Esq.;
Sher & Blackwell; 1850 M Street, NW.;
Suite 900; Washington, DC 20036.
Synopsis: The amendment would add
Bermuth Lines, Ltd. as a party to the
agreement.
By Order of the Federal Maritime
Commission.
Dated: March 14, 2008.
Karen V. Gregory,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–5550 Filed 3–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730–01–P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
Ocean Transportation Intermediary
License Applicants
Notice is hereby given that the
following applicants have filed with the
Federal Maritime Commission an
application for license as a Non-Vessel
Operating Common Carrier and Ocean
Freight Forwarder-Ocean Transportation
Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of
the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended
(46 U.S.C. Chapter 409 and 46 CFR part
515).
Persons knowing of any reason why
the following applicants should not
receive a license are requested to
contact the Office of Transportation
Intermediaries, Federal Maritime
Commission, Washington, DC 20573.
Non-Vessel Operating Common
Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder
Transportation Intermediary Applicants:
Overseas Container Forwarding, Inc.,
6804 Perry Ave., SE., Auburn, WA
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
98092. Officers: Ben M. Bain, Vice
President (Qualifying Individual),
Peter W. Hilton, President.
HADDAD, 1 Deavon Court, Monroe
Township, NJ 08831, Nabeel A.
Elhaddad, Sole Proprietor.
Coreana Express (Sea-Tac) Inc., 930
South 336th Street, Federal Way, WA
98003. Officers: Sung-Hyun Yun,
Manager (Qualifying Individual).
Kang-Ho Lee, President.
World International Logistics, Inc., 139
NW 45th Ave., Opa Locka, FL 33054.
Officers: Bassam Mourad, President
(Qualifying Individual). Maurice
Mrad, Vice President.
Prisa International, Inc., 516 SW 147
Terrace, Pembroke Pines, FL 33027.
Officers: Prinz Echevers, President
(Qualifying Individual), Isabel C.
Sierra, Vice President.
FERM Holdings, Inc., 6510 NW 84
Avenue, Miami, FL 33166. Officers:
Norman R. Jackson, President
(Qualifying Individual). Fran D.
Jackson, Vice President.
Topp Cargo & Logistics, LLC, 2209 NW
79th Avenue, Doral, FL 33126.
Officers: Carlos F. Aidunate, Vice
President (Qualifying Individual),
Robert D. Rubin, President.
Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean
Transportation Intermediary Applicants:
Taino Express Cargo, Inc., 4406 NW
74th Avenue, Miami, FL 33168.
Officers: Jose L. Montero (Qualifying
Individual), Ivan Montero, President.
J & V International Shipping Corp., 806
Arcadia Ave., Arcadia, CA 91007.
Officer: Vivian W. Liu, President
(Qualifying Individual).
Dated: March 14, 2008.
Karen V. Gregory,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–5547 Filed 3–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730–01–P
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Formations of, Acquisitions by, and
Mergers of Bank Holding Companies
The companies listed in this notice
have applied to the Board for approval,
pursuant to the Bank Holding Company
Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.)
(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part
225), and all other applicable statutes
and regulations to become a bank
holding company and/or to acquire the
assets or the ownership of, control of, or
the power to vote shares of a bank or
bank holding company and all of the
banks and nonbanking companies
owned by the bank holding company,
including the companies listed below.
The applications listed below, as well
as other related filings required by the
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 19, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14806-14820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-5401]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-R04-OW-2008-0179; FRL-8543-7]
Proposed Determination To Prohibit, Restrict, or Deny the
Specification, or the Use for Specification, of an Area as a Disposal
Site; Yazoo River Basin, Issaquena County, MS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prohibit, restrict, or deny
the discharge of dredged or fill material at defined sites in waters of
the United States (including wetlands) whenever it determines, after
notice and opportunity for public hearing, that use of such sites for
disposal would have an unacceptable adverse impact on various
resources, including fisheries, wildlife, municipal water supplies, and
recreational areas. Pursuant to section 404(c), EPA Region 4 is today
requesting public comments on its proposal to prohibit or restrict the
use of certain waters in the Yazoo River Basin in Issaquena County,
Mississippi as disposal sites for dredged or fill material in
connection with the construction of the proposed Yazoo Backwater Area
Project (the project). As the primary component of this project, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg District (the Corps) and the
Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners (project sponsor) propose to
construct a 14,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) pumping station at
Steele Bayou with a pump-on operation elevation of 87.0 feet, National
Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). The construction and operation of the
proposed pumps would degrade the critical functions and values of
approximately 67,000 acres of wetland resources in the Yazoo River
Basin. Of this total, approximately 26,300 acres would be
hydrologically modified to the extent that they would no longer be
defined as wetlands and would lose CWA regulatory protection. The
natural timing, frequency, and duration of water reaching the remaining
approximately 40,700 acres of wetlands would be impacted by the
proposed pumping, altering the wetlands' ecological characteristics and
significantly reducing their functions. EPA Region 4 believes that
these extensive hydrological modifications of wetlands in the Yazoo
River Basin could have an unacceptable adverse effect on fisheries and
wildlife resources.
EPA seeks comment on this proposed 404(c) determination to prohibit
or restrict the discharge of dredged or fill material in wetlands and
other waters in the Yazoo River Basin in connection with the
construction of the project or any pumping proposal in the Yazoo
Backwater Area that would involve significant adverse impacts on waters
of the United States. See Solicitation of Comments, at the end of the
public notice, for further details.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 5, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OW-2008-0179, by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal (recommended method of comment
submission): https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
2. E-mail: ow-docket@epamail.epa.gov. Include the docket number, EPA-
R04-OW-2008-0179 in the subject line of the message.
3. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OW-2008-0179, Yazoo Pumps,'' Wetlands, Coastal and
Nonpoint Source Branch; Water Management Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW; Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Wetlands Regulatory
Section; Wetlands, Coastal and Nonpoint Source Branch; Water Management
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4; 61 Forsyth
Street, SW; Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation, which
are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal
holidays.
5. Submit at Public Hearing: see PUBLIC HEARING section below.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OW-2008-
0179.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http:/
/www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://www.regulations.gov
or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which
[[Page 14807]]
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Wetlands Regulatory Section;
Wetlands, Coastal and Nonpoint Source Branch; Water Management
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4; 61 Forsyth
Street, SW; Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding federal holidays.
Public Hearing: In accordance with EPA regulations at 40 CFR 231.4,
the Regional Administrator may decide that a public hearing on a
proposed 404(c) determination would be in the public interest. Mr.
Lawrence E. Starfield, Deputy Regional Administrator for EPA Region 6,
has been appointed by the Administrator as the Regional Decision
Officer for purposes of any EPA Regional action on the Yazoo Backwater
Area Project pursuant to section 404(c); since Mr. Starfield has been
designated to exercise all such authority for the Regional
Administrator for the Yazoo Backwater Area Project, any reference to
authority of the Regional Administrator in this notice are the
responsibility of Mr. Starfield for the purposes of this action. In
that capacity, Mr. Starfield has decided that a public hearing on this
proposed 404(c) determination would be in the public interest.
EPA will hold a public hearing on April 17, 2008, at 7 p.m. at the
Vicksburg Convention Center and Auditorium (Exhibit Hall A), located at
1600 Mulberry Street, Vicksburg, MS 39180, seeking comments on its
Proposed Determination. See Solicitation of Comments, at the end of
this public notice for further details.
The Regional Administrator will designate the official who will
preside at the public hearing. Any person may appear at the hearing and
submit oral and/or written statements or data and may be represented by
counsel or other authorized representatives. The Presiding Officer will
establish reasonable limits on the nature and length of time for oral
presentation. There will be no cross examination of any hearing
participant, although the Presiding Officer may make appropriate
inquiries of any such participant.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this notice
of proposed 404(c) determination contact Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak,
Wetlands Regulatory Section; Wetlands, Coastal and Nonpoint Source
Branch; Water Management Division; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street; SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
The telephone number is 404-562-9233. Mr. Mikulak can also be reached
via electronic mail at mikulak.ronald@epa.gov or Mr. William Ainslie,
Wetlands Regulatory Section, at the same address above. The telephone
number is (404) 562-9400. Mr. Ainslie can also be reached via
electronic mail at ainslie.william@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, references to
``EPA,'' ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our,'' are intended to mean the
Environmental Protection Agency. The supplementary information is
arranged as follows:
I. Section 404(c) Procedure
II. Project Description and Background
III. Characteristics and Functions of the Site
IV. Basis of the Proposed Determination
A. Section 404(c) Standards
B. Adverse Impacts of the Proposed Project
1. Significant Degradation and Adverse Effects
2. Underestimation of Adverse Effects
a. Underestimation of the Spatial Extent of Adverse Effects.
b. Underestimation of the Degree and Nature of Adverse Effects
3. Overestimation of Environmental Benefits
C. Mitigation
D. Uncertainty of the Proposed Reforestation
E. Project Alternatives
F. Recreation
V. Proposed Determination
VI. Other Considerations
VII. Solicitation of Comments
I. Section 404(c) Procedure
The Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., prohibits the
discharge of pollutants, including dredged or fill material, into
waters of the United States (including wetlands) except in compliance
with, among other provisions, section 404 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1344.
Section 404 authorizes the Secretary of the Army (Secretary), acting
through the Chief of Engineers, to authorize the discharge of dredged
or fill material at specified disposal sites. This authorization is
conducted, in part, through the application of environmental guidelines
developed by EPA, in conjunction with the Secretary, under section
404(b) of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1344(b). Section 404(c) of the CWA
authorizes EPA to prohibit the specification (including the withdrawal
of specification) of any defined area as a disposal site and it is
authorized to restrict or deny the use of any defined area for
specification (including the withdrawal of specification) as a disposal
site, whenever it determines, after notice and opportunity for public
hearing, that the discharge of such materials into such area will have
an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish
beds and fishery areas (including spawning and breeding areas),
wildlife, or recreational areas.
The procedures for implementation of section 404(c) are set forth
in 40 CFR part 231. Under those procedures, if the Regional
Administrator has reason to believe that use of a site for the
discharge of dredged or fill material may have an unacceptable adverse
effect on one or more of the aforementioned resources, he may initiate
the section 404(c) process by notifying the Corps and the applicant
(and/or project proponent) that he intends to issue a proposed
determination. Each of those parties then has 15 days to demonstrate to
the satisfaction of the Regional Administrator that no unacceptable
adverse effects will occur, or that corrective action to prevent an
unacceptable adverse effect will be taken. If no such information is
provided to the Regional Administrator, or if the Regional
Administrator is not satisfied that no unacceptable adverse effect will
occur, the Regional Administrator will publish a notice in
[[Page 14808]]
the Federal Register of his proposed determination, soliciting public
comment and offering an opportunity for a public hearing. Today's
notice represents this step in the process.
Following the public hearing and the close of the comment period,
the Regional Administrator will decide whether to withdraw his proposed
determination or prepare a recommended determination. A decision to
withdraw may be reviewed at the discretion of the Assistant
Administrator for Water at EPA Headquarters. If the Regional
Administrator prepares a recommended determination, he then forwards it
and the complete administrative record compiled in the Regional Office
to the Assistant Administrator for Water. The Assistant Administrator
makes the final determination affirming, modifying, or rescinding the
recommended determination.
II. Project Description and Background
The Yazoo River Basin's backwater area (Yazoo Backwater Area) is
located in west-central Mississippi, just north of Vicksburg,
Mississippi. The portion of this area relevant to the Yazoo Backwater
Area Project is located between the east bank mainline Mississippi
River levee and the west bank levees of the Will M. Whittington
Auxiliary Channel, and comprises about 926,000 acres. Of particular
focus are the approximately 630,000 acres inundated by the 100-year
flood event which lie in parts of Humphreys, Issaquena, Sharkey,
Warren, Washington, and Yazoo Counties in Mississippi and part of
Madison Parish in Louisiana. The Big Sunflower River, Little Sunflower
River, Deer Creek, and Steele Bayou flow through this area. The high
ground along Deer Creek forms a natural divide between Steele Bayou and
the Sunflower River Basins.
The Yazoo Backwater Area has historically been subject to extensive
backwater flooding from the Mississippi and Yazoo Rivers. When the
Mississippi River reached a certain stage, water would back up into the
Yazoo River Basin, causing flooding, while preventing the Yazoo River
Basin from draining. With the implementation of the Mississippi River
and Tributaries Project, which began in 1928, the Steele Bayou flood
gate was installed to prevent Mississippi River water from flowing into
the Yazoo Backwater Area. The gate feature, combined with other levees,
has greatly decreased backwater flooding in the Yazoo River Basin.
However, when the Steele Bayou flood gate is closed, precipitation in
the Yazoo River Basin becomes trapped and backs up behind the gate
causing flooding. The primary purpose of the Yazoo Backwater Area
Project is to reduce the flood damages in the Yazoo Backwater Area
caused by this internal flooding. As stated in the FSEIS, a principal
objective of the project is to reduce flood damages ``to urban and
rural structures, as well as agricultural properties.'' To achieve this
objective, the Corps and the Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners
(project sponsor) have proposed a flood damage reduction project with
``structural'' and ``nonstructural'' components.
The structural component entails the construction of a 14,000 cfs
pumping station at Steele Bayou with a pump-on operation elevation of
87.0 feet, NGVD. When floodwaters at the Steele Bayou structure reach
(or are anticipated to reach) an elevation of 87.0 feet, NGVD, the
pumps will be turned on and will move water from behind the gate into
the Mississippi River. The effects of the pumping will be to reduce the
amount of land within the Yazoo Backwater Area that floods, as well as
to remove water faster from those areas that still experience flooding.
The nonstructural component includes reforestation of up to 40,571
acres of agricultural lands through the purchase of perpetual
conservation easements from willing sellers and operation of the Steele
Bayou control gates to maintain water elevations between 70.0 and 73.0
feet, NGVD, in the Yazoo Backwater Area waterways during low-water
periods when practical. Construction of the proposed pumps involves the
discharge of dredged or fill material into approximately 52.6 acres of
forested wetlands and other waters of the United States in Issaquena
County, Mississippi. The estimated Federal cost of the proposed action
is $220.1 million, with an annual operational cost of $15.1 million.
This project was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1941, which
envisioned a plan to reduce backwater flooding in the Yazoo River Basin
through a combination of levees, drainage structures, and pumping
plants fully funded by the Federal government. This act also designated
Yazoo Backwater Area lands located below 90 feet in elevation to serve
as a sump area for floodwater storage.
Over the next 37 years, the Corps planned and executed key flood
control projects in the Yazoo Backwater Area, including: construction
of the Will Whittington Auxiliary Channel and Levees in 1962;
construction of the Steele Bayou and Little Sunflower flood control
gates, which were completed in 1969 and 1975, respectively;
construction of the Yazoo Backwater Levee completed in 1978; and
construction of the Sunflower River to Steele Bayou Connecting Channel
also completed in 1978.
In April 1982, EPA provided comments on the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) for the 1982 version of the proposed project.
In our comments on the DEIS we highlighted our concerns regarding the
proposed project's potentially extensive impacts on wetlands and
associated fish and wildlife habitat and our belief that a less
environmentally damaging design would meet the project's objectives. We
stressed the importance of the flood water storage and water quality
enhancement functions provided by area wetlands and expressed our
concerns that the proposed project would degrade these critical
functions. We also expressed concerns that the project would stimulate
agricultural intensification in flood-prone areas, potentially
increasing suspended solids, pesticides, and fertilizers in the water
column, and exacerbate existing water quality problems. Additionally,
we expressed concerns that the proposed mitigation would not adequately
minimize and offset the extensive adverse environmental impacts
associated with the proposed project.
In our May 1983 comments on the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS), we expressed similar concerns. Our review of the FEIS
concluded that the project would likely ``decrease water quality in the
area through increases in suspended solids, pesticides and fertilizers;
reduce natural overbank flooding and decrease nutrients assimilation by
wetland vegetation; transfer flood peaks downstream; serve as a
precedent to similarly convert other bottomland hardwood remnants in
the lower Mississippi River Valley; and greatly diminish a fish and
wildlife resource, which, due to previous clearing elsewhere, has
become nationally valuable.''
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) also raised similar
concerns regarding the proposed project. According to FWS, its first
report on the Yazoo Backwater Area Project and related flood control
projects in the Yazoo River Basin was issued in 1956. This report
concluded that losses of fish and wildlife resources as a result of the
construction of the Yazoo Headwater Project and Yazoo Backwater Project
would be large, and that the proposed pumps would promote large scale
clearing of forests and intensification of agriculture in wetlands. In
February 1978, FWS provided a Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report
to the Corps
[[Page 14809]]
which concluded that the pumping plant was environmentally unsound, and
that the Service was opposed to the project as planned. A subsequent
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report submitted in June 1982 noted
continued concerns with the proposed project and indicated that it may
consider the project a candidate for referral to the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ).
The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986 modified the
funding for the project by requiring a local-cost share. Under this new
provision, the local project sponsor would provide the lands,
easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and disposal areas for the
project, or 25 percent of the construction cost, whichever was greater.
Work on the project effectively halted. The reauthorization of WRDA ten
years later in 1996 reversed the cost-sharing provisions established in
1986 and restored the project to full Federal funding and work on the
project began once again.
In 1997, EPA initiated an ecosystem restoration prioritization
analysis with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This work evolved into
ecological and economic model development for nonstructural floodplain
management alternatives in the Yazoo Backwater Area. Between 1998 and
2000, EPA participated in a series of interagency and stakeholder
meetings with the Corps, USGS, FWS, the Virginia Polytechnic Institute,
and representatives of the Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners to
discuss concerns regarding the proposed project and potentially less
environmentally damaging alternatives.
In 2000, EPA also participated in multiple meetings with a group
composed of the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality,
Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks, the Corps,
FWS, Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners and Yazoo Backwater Area
landowners in which we discussed our concerns with the proposed
project. EPA also voiced its concerns with the proposed project in
meetings with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), CEQ and
representatives from Corps Headquarters in February and March of 2000.
In September 2000, the Corps released the project's Draft
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS). One of the
purposes of this reformulation of the project's 1982 FEIS was to
respond to a 1991 directive from OMB to evaluate a broader suite of
alternatives to the proposed project that would provide: (1) Greater
levels of flood protection for urban areas; (2) reduced levels of
agricultural intensification; and (3) reduced adverse impacts to the
environment. The OMB directive also stated that the revised evaluation
should include ``full consideration of predominantly nonstructural and
nontraditional measures'' to address flooding issues.
In a November 3, 2000, letter to the Corps on the DSEIS, EPA raised
significant concerns regarding the proposed project's extensive impacts
to wetlands and associated fish and wildlife resources, its potential
to exacerbate existing water quality problems in the Yazoo Backwater
Area, the inadequacy of the proposed compensatory mitigation, and the
uncertainty associated with the proposed reforestation. We also
identified, for further consideration, a number of potentially less
environmentally damaging alternatives that emphasized nonstructural and
nontraditional measures to address flooding issues. We concluded that
the project was environmentally unsatisfactory and noted that it was a
candidate for referral to CEQ under section 309(b) of the Clean Air Act
and the CEQ regulations at 40 CFR part 1504 and for further action
under CWA section 404(c).
Between 2002 and 2005, EPA worked with the Corps to improve its
evaluation of the extent of wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area, the
extent of wetlands potentially impacted by the project, and the nature
and degree of these impacts. This work involved extensive site visits
and data collection in the Yazoo Backwater Area, meetings, and
conference calls. In December 2005, EPA provided detailed technical
comments on the revised draft Wetland and Mitigation appendices for the
DSEIS outlining a number of concerns regarding the evaluation
approaches used in these appendices. We noted that flaws in these
evaluation approaches result in an underestimation of the potential
adverse impacts to wetlands and fish and wildlife resources associated
with the construction and operation of the proposed pumps and an
overestimation of the potential environmental benefits associated with
the proposed reforestation.
In November 2007, the Corps released the Yazoo Backwater Area
Reformulation Main Report and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (FSEIS).\1\ Although the Corps responded to many of our
November 2000 comments on the DSEIS, no substantive modifications had
been made to the structural component of the proposed project since
November 2000. In our January 22, 2008, letter to the Corps on the
FSEIS, we concluded that the nature and extent of anticipated adverse
environmental impacts continue to be significant and that we continue
to have significant concerns with the proposed project including: (1)
Magnitude of anticipated impacts to wetlands and associated fish and
wildlife resources; (2) compliance with the CWA's substantive
environmental criteria (i.e., the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines); (3)
uncertainties with the proposed reforestation plan; (4) changes in land
use; (5) environmental justice (EJ) considerations; (6) uncertainty
with the economic analysis; and (7) the evaluation of potential project
alternatives. We again identified the project as a candidate for
referral to CEQ and for further action pursuant to our authorities
under the CWA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Yazoo Backwater Area Project
Reformulation Main Report and FSEIS: https://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/
offices/pp/projects/YBR_Report/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its January 18, 2008, comment letter to the Corps regarding the
FSEIS, the FWS shared similar concerns, particularly those associated
with the proposed project's potentially unacceptable adverse impacts on
fish and wildlife resources. The FWS also reiterated its determination
that the project is a candidate for referral to CEQ.
On February 1, 2008, EPA's Regional Administrator informed the
Corps and the Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners of his intention
to begin a section 404(c) action, based on his belief that the project
may have an unacceptable adverse effect on fish and wildlife resources.
During the 15-day response period following the 404(c) initiation
letter (which was extended to March 3, 2008) EPA met with
representatives from the Corps and Board of Mississippi Levee
Commissioners. In addition, EPA had a number of conference calls with
the Corps during this consultation period to discuss specific technical
concerns we had with the Corps' analysis (many of which are discussed
in this notice). However, the Regional Administrator was not satisfied
that no unacceptable adverse effect would occur, or that adequate
corrective action would be taken to prevent an unacceptable adverse
effect, and has published this Proposed Determination in order to
solicit public comment.
III. Characteristics and Functions of the Site
The Lower Mississippi River Alluvial Valley (LMRAV) was a 25-
million acre
[[Page 14810]]
area of forested wetlands that extended along both sides of the
Mississippi River from Illinois south to Louisiana and the Gulf of
Mexico. The extent and duration of seasonal flooding from the
Mississippi River fluctuated annually, recharging the LMRAV systems and
creating a diversity of dynamic habitats that once supported a vast
array of fish and wildlife resources. Over the past 100 years, the
greatest changes to the landscape have been land clearing for both
agriculture and flood control projects. These habitat alterations have
had an adverse effect on biological diversity and integrity. For
example, breeding bird surveys show continuing declines in species
richness and population numbers. In addition to the loss of
approximately 80 percent of the bottomland forested wetlands within the
LMRAV,\2\ there have been significant alterations in the region's
hydrology due to river channel modification, construction of flood
control levees and reservoirs, and deforestation. The cumulative effect
of these hydrological alterations has reduced both the extent and
duration of the annual seasonal flooding, adversely affecting the
forested wetlands and their associated wetland-dependent species.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Department of the Interior, The Impact of Federal Programs
on Wetlands, Volume I: The Lower Mississippi Alluvial Plain and the
Prairie Pothole Region, A Report to Congress by the Secretary of the
Interior, October 1988 at 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These significant cumulative aquatic resource losses across the
broader LMRAV are mirrored in the Mississippi Delta region of the
LMRAV, in which the Yazoo Backwater Area is situated. Mississippi's
2005 Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy \3\ reports that only
fifteen percent of the Mississippi Delta remains forested and the
largest segment remaining is the complex of bottomland hardwood forests
approximately 100,000 acres in size within and surrounding the Delta
National Forest. Much of this important complex of remaining forests
and forested wetlands is located in the Yazoo Backwater Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Mississippi's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
(MCWCS) 2005-2015, October 2005: https://www.wildlifeactionplans.org/
pdfs/action_plans/ms_action_plan.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extensive studies of the Yazoo Backwater Area demonstrate that it
includes some of the richest wetland and aquatic resources in the
Nation. These include a highly productive floodplain fishery, a highly
productive but increasingly rare bottomland hardwood forest ecosystem
that once dominated the LMRAV, hemispherically important migratory bird
foraging grounds and one of only four remaining backwater ecosystems
with a hydrologic connection to the Mississippi River. These wetlands
provide critical habitat for a variety of wetland-dependent animal and
plant species, including the federally protected Louisiana black bear
and pondberry. In addition to serving as critical fish and wildlife
habitat, project area wetlands also provide a suite of other important
ecological functions. These wetlands protect and improve water quality
by removing and retaining pollutants, reduce flood damage by storing
floodwaters, recharge groundwater and maintain stream flows, and
sequester significant amounts of elemental carbon.
Wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area have been described by the
Corps as belonging to the hydrogeomorphic (HGM) riverine backwater
subclass. This classification indicates that these wetlands flood as a
result of impeded drainage of small streams, channels, and drainage
ditches due to high water in larger downstream reaches. As a result of
this impeded drainage, low lying areas associated with these small
streams fill with relatively still ``backwater.'' As stated in the
Yazoo Basin HGM Guidebook, the characteristics of the riverine
backwater wetlands in this area are: A direct connection to a channel
during flood stages equivalent to at least the 5-year frequency return
period; the primary source of hydrology to the wetland is backwater;
and floodwaters largely drain from the site back to the channel as
flood stages fall (as opposed to being retained on the site in
depressions).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Smith, R. D., and Klimas, C. V. 2002. A regional guidebook
for applying the hydrogeomorphic approach to assessing wetland
functions of selected regional wetland subclasses, Yazoo Basin,
Lower Mississippi River Alluvial Valley. ERDC/EL TR-02-04. U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. See: http:/
/el.erdc.usace.army.mil/wetlands/pdfs/trel02-4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The wetlands of the riverine backwater subclass occur on various
substrates which developed as a result of Mississippi River meandering.
This subclass typically contains vegetative communities dominated by
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and Nuttall oak (Quercus nuttallii)
as well as overcup oak (Q. lyrata) and water hickory (Carya aquatica)
in more low lying areas. However, in addition to these dominant canopy
species, willow oak (Q. phellos), Sugarberry (Celtis laviegata),
American elm (Ulmus americana), cedar elm (U. crassifolia), Red maple
(Acer rubrum), Cypress (Taxodium distichum), water elm (Planera
aquatica), and Black willow (Salix nigra) were also found dominating
many of the field sampled plots in the area.\5\ The combination of the
hydrologic, soil, and vegetative characteristics of this wetland
subclass contribute to the wetland processes, or functions, which
support the area's diverse and abundant flora and fauna. However,
hydrology is considered by most to be the critical determinant of the
establishment and maintenance of specific types of wetlands and wetland
processes.\6\ As thoroughly discussed in the Yazoo Basin HGM Guidebook
and outlined below, maintenance of the natural hydrologic regime (i.e.,
natural timing, frequency, and duration of water reaching area
wetlands) is the most important factor in ensuring that riverine
backwater wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area perform important
functions such as floodwater detention, nutrient cycling, organic
carbon export, pollutant filtering/removal, and maintenance of
biologically diverse plant and animal habitat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ EPA, 2008. Yazoo Backwater Area Plant Species List. Wetlands
Regulatory Section, Water Management Division, EPA Region 4,
Atlanta, GA.
\6\ Mitsch, W.J., and Gosselink, J.G. 2000. Wetlands (3rd
edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When riverine backwater wetlands are allowed to temporarily detain
and moderate floodwater they provide a number of important benefits.
Floodwater interaction with wetlands tends to dampen and broaden the
flood wave, which reduces peak discharge downstream. Wetlands can
reduce the velocity of water currents and, as a result, reduce erosion.
Some portion of the floodwater volume detained within riverine
backwater wetlands is likely to be evaporated or transpired, thereby
reducing the overall volume of water moving downstream. The portion of
the detained flow that infiltrates into the alluvial aquifer, or which
returns to the channel very slowly via low-gradient surface routes, may
be sufficiently delayed that it contributes significantly to the
maintenance of baseflow in some streams long after flooding has ceased.
Retention of particulates is also an important component of the flood
detention function because sediment deposition directly alters the
physical characteristics of the wetland (including hydrologic
attributes) and positively influences downstream water quality.
In riverine backwater wetlands, nutrients are stored within, and
cycled among, four major compartments: (a) The soil; (b) primary
producers such as vascular and nonvascular plants; (c) consumers such
as animals, fungi, and bacteria; and (d) dead organic matter, such as
leaf litter or woody debris, referred to as detritus. The
[[Page 14811]]
transformation of nutrients within each compartment and the flow of
nutrients between compartments are mediated by a complex variety of
biogeochemical processes associated with primary production and
decomposition. These biogeochemical processes and their ability to
support the rich array of flora and fauna found in the Yazoo Backwater
Area are directly linked to maintenance of the natural timing,
frequency, and duration of flooding in the area's riverine backwater
wetlands systems.
The high productivity and close proximity of riverine backwater
wetlands to streams make them important sources of dissolved and
particulate organic carbon for aquatic food webs and biogeochemical
processes in downstream aquatic habitats. Dissolved and particulate
organic carbon is a significant source of energy for the microbes that
form the base of the detrital food web in aquatic ecosystems. The
ability of riverine backwater wetlands to perform this critical
function is directly linked to factors associated with their natural
hydrologic cycle of backwater flooding, including: (a) The large amount
of organic matter in the litter and soil layers that comes into contact
with surface water during flooding; (b) relatively long periods of
inundation and, consequently, contact between surface water and organic
matter, thus allowing for significant leaching; (c) the ability of the
labile carbon fraction to be rapidly leached from organic matter when
exposed to water; and (d) the ability of floodwater to transport
dissolved and particulate organic carbon from the floodplain to the
stream channel.
The area's riverine backwater wetlands permanently remove or
temporarily immobilize elements and compounds that are imported to the
wetland from various sources, but primarily via the natural cycle of
flooding. Elements include macronutrients essential to plant growth
e.g., nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium) as well as heavy metals
(zinc, chromium, etc.) that can be toxic at high concentrations.
Compounds include pesticides and other imported materials. The primary
benefit of this function is that the removal and sequestration of
elements and compounds by wetlands reduces the load of nutrients, heavy
metals, pesticides, and other pollutants in rivers and streams.
This often translates into improved water quality and aquatic
habitat in adjacent or down gradient rivers and streams.
Once nutrients and compounds arrive in riverine backwater wetlands,
they may be removed and sequestered through a variety of biogeochemical
processes including complexation, chemical precipitation, adsorption,
denitrification, decomposition to inactive forms, hydrolysis, uptake by
plants, and other processes. The effective performance of many of the
most critical biogeochemical processes depends on maintenance of the
natural hydrologic cycle of flooding in riverine backwater wetlands and
the anoxic/reducing environment created by periodic cycles of
inundation and saturation. For example, denitrification will not occur
unless the soil is anoxic and the redox potential falls below a certain
level. Flooding for approximately 14 days causes soils to become
anoxic. When this occurs and other soil conditions are favorable (i.e.,
availability of soil carbon) the nitrogen in nitrate (NO2)
is removed by denitrification and released as nitrogen gas to the
atmosphere. In addition, sulfate is reduced to sulfide, which then
reacts with metal cations to form insoluble metal sulfides such as
copper sulfide (CuS), iron sulfide (FeS), lead sulfide (PbS), and
others which then fall out of the water column and are retained by the
wetland sediments.
The ability of riverine backwater wetlands to maintain a
characteristic plant community is important because of the intrinsic
value of the plant community and the many attributes and processes of
wetlands that are influenced by the plant community. For example,
primary productivity, nutrient cycling, and the ability to provide a
variety of habitats necessary to maintain local and regional diversity
of animals are directly influenced by the plant community. Due to the
inundation by nutrient rich floodwaters, a diverse assemblage of plants
grow in riverine backwater wetlands and contribute to the primary
production of these ecosystems. The growth of different plant
communities as a result of variable hydrologic regimes and topography
contributes to the uptake and release of nutrients and provides many
layers of potential habitat (i.e., litter layer to canopy) for the
hundreds of wildlife species which utilize these wetlands. In addition,
the plant community of river connected wetlands such as riverine
backwater wetlands in the Yazoo River Basin influences the quality of
the physical habitat, nutrient status, and biological diversity of
downstream systems. As noted in the Yazoo Basin HGM Guidebook,
maintaining the natural hydrologic regime of these wetlands is
consistently cited as the principal factor controlling plant community
attributes.
A broad array of fish and wildlife species utilize the riverine
backwater wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area during some part of
their life cycles. Terrestrial, semi-aquatic, and aquatic animals use
these wetlands extensively. These wetlands provide important habitat
for a diversity of organisms, are sites of high levels of secondary
production, and are essential in the maintenance of complex trophic
interactions. Habitat functions span a range of temporal and spatial
scales. For example, invertebrate communities utilize the organic
matter generated in these wetlands as a food source and the vertical
structure of the plant community as refugia from flooding. Amphibian
and reptile species use the wetlands for breeding and foraging habitats
and fish utilize floodplains for spawning, rearing, and foraging. Birds
and mammals utilize the wetlands for food, cover, and nesting. Most
wildlife and fish species found in riverine backwater wetlands of the
Yazoo River Basin depend on certain aspects of wetland structure and
dynamics such as specific vegetation composition and proximity to other
habitats, but of particular importance to the life cycles of these
species is the periodic flooding or ponding of water associated with
the natural hydrologic regime of riverine backwater wetlands.
The topographic and commensurate hydrologic complexity of these
riverine backwater wetlands contribute to the biodiversity for which
they are well known. The World Wildlife Fund estimates that there are
372 wildlife species occurring in the Mississippi Lowland Forest
ecoregion, which encompasses the Yazoo River Basin and Yazoo Backwater
Area.\7\ Of these species 35 are amphibian, 52 are reptiles, 223 are
birds, and 62 are mammals. According to the Mississippi Museum of
Natural History, 40 percent of the amphibians, 60 percent of the
reptiles, 82 percent of the birds, and 71 percent of the mammals from
the World Wildlife Fund's Mississippi Lowland Forest list occur in the
Yazoo River Basin.\8\ In addition, 2 amphibian, 4 reptile, 74 bird, and
5 mammalian species were catalogued by the State beyond what World
Wildlife Fund reported. Further, the FWS has listed
[[Page 14812]]
258 species of birds which use its complex of refuges located in the
Yazoo Backwater Area \9\ and over 90 species of fish have been
documented as utilizing the Yazoo River.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ World Wildlife Fund Mississippi Lowland Forest species list:
https://worldwildlife.org/wildfinder/
searchByPlace.cfm?ecoregion=NA0409.
\8\ Personal Communication between William Ainslie, EPA Region
4, and Scott Peyton, Mississippi Museum of Natural History, February
5, 2008.
\9\ FWS list of bird species utilizing wildlife refuges in the
Yazoo Backwater Area: https://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/
chekbird/r4/yazoo.htm.
\10\ Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E.
McAllister, and J.R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American
Freshwater Fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History.
Publication 1980-12 of the North Carolina Biological
Survey. 877 pgs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the State's Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation
Strategy, bottomland hardwood wetlands such as those in the Yazoo
Backwater Area provide habitat for 33 species of greatest conservation
need \11\ including 20 birds, 12 mammals, and 1 reptile. Also, all of
the standing and running water systems of the Mississippi Alluvial
Plain, including the Yazoo Backwater Area, have been classified as
critically imperiled because of their high conservation priority rank
and the widespread degradation of stream habitats in this region. These
waterbodies provide important habitat for 23 species of greatest
conservation need, including 4 fish, 18 mussels, and 1 reptile.
Finally, the stream habitat that remains in the Upper Coastal Plain
Yazoo Drainage area, which receives significant hydrologic inputs from
the Yazoo Backwater Area, is considered to be vulnerable because of
extensive alteration caused by channelization, agricultural use of
surrounding lands and impoundments. This portion of the Yazoo River
Basin provides critical habitat for 17 species of greatest conservation
need including 1 amphibian, 12 fish, and 1 reptile.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) are those
animals, both aquatic and terrestrial, that are at risk or are
declining in a State. They include threatened and endangered
species, as well as other species of concern. The SGCN for
Mississippi was developed through a rigorous analysis of the
Mississippi Natural Heritage Program's list of ``Animals of Special
Concern'' (ASC). An Expert Team of scientists evaluated the
approximately 1,500 species from the ASC and narrowed this list down
to only the species most at risk--resulting in approximately 300
Species of Greatest Conservation Need statewide (MCWCS, 2005).
\12\ MCWCS, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its comments in the FSEIS, the FWS reports that the Lower Yazoo
Delta is part of a major continental migration corridor for birds
funneling through the midcontinent from as far north as the Arctic
Circle and as far south as South America. The Yazoo Backwater Project
Area comprises approximately 926,000 acres located in LMRAV, through
which 60 percent of all bird species in the U.S., over 40 percent of
the Nation's waterfowl population, and 500,000 to 1,000,000 shorebirds
migrate on a biannual basis. FWS also notes that natural springtime
flooding in the area's riverine backwater wetlands coincides with two
major events in the LMRAV: (1) Native bird and waterfowl migration that
requires suitable and productive stopover and foraging habitats to meet
migratory energy needs; and (2) breeding bird and waterfowl nesting
that requires adequate nesting and foraging habitats to meet
reproductive and rearing needs.
IV. Basis of the Proposed Determination
A. Section 404(c) Standards
The CWA requires that exercise of the final section 404(c)
authority be based on a determination of ``unacceptable adverse
effect'' to municipal water supplies, shellfish beds, fisheries,
wildlife, or recreational areas. In making this determination EPA takes
into account all information available to it, including any written
determination of compliance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 231.2(e) define ``unacceptable adverse
effect'' as:
Impact on an aquatic or wetland ecosystem which is likely to result
in significant degradation of municipal water supplies or
significant loss of or damage to fisheries, shellfishing, or
wildlife habitat or recreation areas. In evaluating the
unacceptability of such impacts, consideration should be given to
the relevant portions of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (40 CFR
part 230).
Those portions of the Guidelines relating to less environmentally
damaging practicable alternatives, significant degradation of waters of
the United States, water quality impacts, and impact minimization are
particularly important to evaluating the unacceptability of
environmental impacts in this case. The Guidelines prohibit any
discharge of dredged or fill material where: (1) There is a less
environmentally damaging practicable alternative to meet the project
purpose; (2) the proposed project would violate other environmental
standards, including applicable water quality standards; (3) the
proposed project would cause or contribute to significant degradation
of the Nation's waters; or (4) the proposed project fails to adequately
minimize and compensate for wetland and other aquatic resource losses
(see 40 CFR 230.10(a)-(d)).
B. Adverse Impacts of the Proposed Project
EPA believes the proposed project will result in significant
adverse environmental impacts to extensive areas of ecologically
significant and important forested wetlands and their associated
fisheries and wildlife resources. At a minimum, the construction and
operation of the proposed pumps would degrade the critical functions
and values of approximately 67,000 acres of nationally significant
wetland resources in the Yazoo River Basin. Of this total,
approximately 26,300 acres would be hydrologically modified (i.e.,
reduced flood duration) to the extent that they would no longer be
defined as wetlands and would lose CWA regulatory protection. The
natural timing, frequency, and duration of water reaching the remaining
approximately 40,700 acres of wetlands would be impacted by the
proposed pumping, altering the wetlands' ecological characteristics and
reducing their functions. As a point of reference, the impacts
estimated by the Corps for this single project are more extensive than
the total impacts (on an annual average basis) associated with the
86,000 projects authorized by the Corps permit program nationwide each
year.\13\ We do not believe that impacts of this magnitude are
consistent with the requirements of the CWA. Our concerns regarding
this project are amplified because we believe the potential adverse
impacts to wetlands and associated fish and wildlife resources may be
much greater than the Corps has estimated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Based on data from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003. Source: Corps
Regulatory Program, Headquarters, 2008. See: https://
www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/2003webcharts.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Significant Degradation and Adverse Effects
The annual hydrologic cycle of water moving into and out of the
project area defines the ecological attributes of the project area's
wetland and aquatic resources and fuels the fundamental processes
essential to fish and wildlife productivity. This annual water cycle
not only makes the project area's diverse habitats accessible to fish
and wildlife but also provides the primary linkages that transfer
energy and organisms between the project area wetlands and the rest of
the lower Mississippi River ecosystem.
The basic objective of the project is to limit the spatial extent,
frequency, and length of time the Yazoo Backwater Area floods. The
ecological effect of this project will be to dampen the natural
variability in flood regime (the flood pulse) which currently
contributes to the biodiversity of the project area's wetlands.
Operation of the proposed pumps will dramatically alter the hydrologic
cycle of this area, and would therefore eliminate or significantly
[[Page 14813]]
degrade many of the critical ecological functions provided by wetlands
in the Yazoo Backwater Area, including floodwater detention, nutrient
cycling, organic carbon export, pollutant filtering/removal, and
maintenance of biologically diverse plant and animal habitat.
The reduction or elimination of the floodwater detention function
of wetlands in the Yazoo Backwater Area as a result of the proposed
project could increase peak discharges and water currents in the
Mississippi River, and exacerbate flooding problems downstream at a
time when communities in the lower Mississippi River Valley are still
struggling to recover from the effects of recent catastrophic flooding.
By maintaining water levels of regular flood events at approximately
87.0 feet, NGVD, at the Steele Bayou gauge, water would not be allowed
to collect for significant periods of time in the backwater wetlands.
Instead, water that would otherwise remain in the wetlands would be
drawn off by the pump and discharged to the Mississippi River. Reducing
or eliminating the floodwater detention function of project area
wetlands will also decrease the amount of water delivered to plants and
allowed to infiltrate into the alluvial aquifer in the Yazoo Backwater
Area. The effect of the project is to increase the overall volume of
water moving downstream. Not allowing adequate time for floodwater
infiltration in the Yazoo Backwater Area will also reduce the amount of
water that returns to area streams as baseflow. This is particularly
critical in the Yazoo Backwater Area as dewatering of the alluvial
plain has already resulted in extremely low seasonal flows in area
streams. For example, the Sunflower River flow rate often drops below
the minimum low flow rate established by the USGS (i.e., the 7Q10 low
flow rate).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ MCWCS, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing the spatial extent, frequency, and duration of time
project area wetlands flood will significantly reduce the amount of
dissolved and particulate organic carbon available for wetland and
aquatic food webs as well as biogeochemical processes in downstream
aquatic habitats. The microbial and invertebrate communities, which are
critical to the breakdown and recycling of organic matter in these
wetlands, are adapted to the periodic pulsing of floodwaters which
currently occurs. Without these periodic flood pulses, microbial and
invertebrate communities will diminish, and this will affect the
capacity of the wetland to maintain the base of the food chain. The
cycling and export of dissolved and particulate carbon requires
prolonged contact between soil organic matter, flood waters, and the
invertebrate community and subsequent floodwater transport downstream--
circumstances that would be dramatically altered by the proposed
project.
Reducing the spatial extent, frequency, and duration of time
project area wetlands flood will reduce the capacity of area wetlands
to remove water pollutants, thus exacerbating existing water quality
problems in the Yazoo Backwater Area. Many water pollutants are
imported to wetlands via flood water. Hydrologic alterations associated
with the proposed project (i.e., prevention of floodwater from
accessing wetlands) will reduce the level of sediment deposition as
well as the levels of permanent removal and temporary immobilization of
nutrients, metals, and other elements and compounds in project area
wetlands. Loss or reduction of this important water quality enhancement
function is of particular concern in light of existing water quality
concerns in the Yazoo Backwater Area. The State reports that overall
water quality is lower in this area than anywhere else in the State, as
evidenced by a region-wide advisory regarding fish consumption, and
numerous consumption bans in some area waters because of high pesticide
levels.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ MCWCS, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the FSEIS concludes otherwise, we believe there is
potential for conversion of those 26,300 acres that, as a result of the
project, would no longer be defined as wetlands and would lose CWA
regulatory protection. These conversions of wetlands to other uses
could result in additional adverse environmental effects. For example,
agricultural conversion could change a forested wetland habitat to an
agriculture use, destroying or significantly degrading all wetland
functions. Agricultural intensification could have water quality
implications by promoting faster and increased surface water runoff
from agricultural fields. Given that the Yazoo Backwater Area already
contains CWA section 303(d)-listed impaired waterbodies, additional
runoff impacts would likely exacerbate the elevated concentrations of
the pollutants of concern, potentially causing or contributing to
violations of applicable state water quality standards (40 CFR
230.10(b)).
Reducing the spatial extent, frequency, and duration of time
project area wetlands flood will dramatically alter the structure and
species composition of the plant community in the Yazoo Backwater Area.
Wetland plant communities will shift over time to communities composed
of species adapted to drier environments. For example, large areas
currently dominated by Nuttall oak and green ash or overcup oak and
water hickory will eventually become drier and be replaced by less
flood tolerant species such as sweetgum, which produces mast that has a
lower biological value to wildlife. This shift will result in a
commensurate reduction in the habitat for other wetland dependent plant
species found in the Yazoo Backwater Area such as pondberry, which is
listed as Federally endangered under the Endangered Species Act. As
discussed below, this large shift in plant communities will also have
adverse effects on area fish and wildlife which depend on these wetland
plant species, and the hydrologic regimes they represent, to meet
specific life history requirements.
Reducing the spatial extent, frequency, and duration of time
project area wetlands flood will significantly degrade their capacity
to provide habitat for an extensive list of fish and wildlife species.
Insect larvae, midges, oligocheates (worms), scuds (microcrustaceans),
crayfish, worms, snails and spiders make up a critical component of the
macroinvertebrate communities that thrive in the area's riverine
backwater wetlands due to the presence of saturated soils, organic
material and periphyton (a layer of microbial organisms which colonize
detrital material). These invertebrates not only contribute to the
breakdown of organic material (shredders and grazers) but they are also
critical sources of prey for fish, waterfowl, rodents, bats, and birds.
The draining and drying of area wetlands associated with the proposed
project would significantly reduce the species diversity, as well as
the richness and productivity of the area's macroinvertebrate
community, thus adversely impacting an extensive list of vertebrate
species which depend upon the wetlands' rich macroinvertebrate
community for nourishment.
Reducing the spatial extent, frequency, and duration of time
project area wetlands flood will also adversely impact amphibian and
reptile species in the Yazoo River Basin that depend upon wetlands for
breeding and foraging habitat. The life cycles of amphibians and
reptiles in alluvial floodplain ecosystems are linked to hydrology as
[[Page 14814]]
well as soil conditions and climate.\16\ Abiotic factors that influence
habitat conditions within floodplains include hydrologic regime, flood
pulse intensity and duration, topography, wetland permanence
(hydroperiod), water quality, and connectivity to rivers or streams.
For many amphibians, the hydrology associated with floodplain wetlands
is necessary for breeding and egg laying. The proposed project would
desiccate these floodplain habitats making it difficult for portions of
the amphibian population to survive. The proposed project would also
adversely affect reptile and amphibian species by modifying river-
wetland connectivity, reducing flood pulses and wetland water recharge,
and increasing habitat fragmentation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Jones, J.C. and J.D. Taylor. 2005. Herptofauna communities
in temperate river floodplain ecosystems of the southeastern United
States. pages 235-257. in L.H. Frederickson, S.A. King, and R.M.
Kaminski, eds. Ecology and Management of Bottomland Hardwood
Systems: The State of our Understanding. University of Missouri-
Columbia, Gaylord Memorial Laboratory Special Publication No.10,
Puxico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed project will reduce extensive areas of flooded
wetlands which provide critical habitat for fish spawning, rearing,
foraging, and cover. As the FWS noted in its review of the FSEIS, the
backwater floodplain in the project area supports a diverse fishery,
and relative fish abundance is highly dependent upon seasonal overbank
or backwater flooding. It also noted that reproduction by 55 of the 140
(39 percent) resident fish species in the Mississippi River is
dependent on backwater flooded areas. According to the FWS, the
proposed action would reduce the areal extent of wetlands subject to
flooding in the Yazoo Backwater Area that are critical to fishery
reproduction by approximately 46 percent, or 112,600 acres, during the
critical spawning and rearing months. Spring flooding is the major
factor responsible for fishery productivity within the Yazoo River
Basin. It provides access to protective spawning and nursery habitat
outside the stream channels where larger predatory fish species live.
These shallowly flooded areas remain inundated for a duration that
allows water temperatures to rise quickly, providing suitable spawning
habitat, and allowing for optimum larval fish growth. Once the larval
fish hatch and their yolk sack is absorbed (7 to 10 days), these
seasonally flooded bottomland hardwood areas provide protective shallow
water areas with an abundance of cover for protection from predators,
as well as the organic matter, nutrients, and invertebrates needed for
larval and juvenile fish growth.
Backwater riverine wetlands such as the ones that would be impacted
by the proposed project are used by more bird species than most other
ecosystems in North America.\17\ Project area wetlands provide
migratory bird habitat of hemispheric significance, particularly for
waterfowl, shorebirds, over-water nesting waterbirds and wading birds,
as well as numerous migratory songbirds. The loss of the productive
shallowly flooded wetlands, especially in the spring months when the
proposed pumps will be in operation, will impact migratory birds such
as shorebirds and waterfowl as they stop over and forage in preparation
for their seasonal migration. Fewer shallowly flooded wetlands will
reduce foraging habitat, which will equate to reduced nutritional
uptake and could result in higher mortality or reduced reproductive
fitness as the birds travel the great distances between their wintering
and breeding areas in the northern U.S., Canada, and the Arctic.
Breeding for many species could be adversely affected during the
spring-time nesting season because foraging areas would be reduced. As
a result of the reduction in flooding, adult birds will have to travel
longer distances to find food, which equates to longer times away from
the nest and their chicks and may ultimately lead to higher nest
mortality and lower recruitment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Heitmeyer, M.E., R.J. Cooper, J.G. Dickson, and B.D.
Leopold. 2005. Ecological relationships of warmblood