SAJ-2017-01052 (SP-TMM)

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:  The Jacksonville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) as described below:

APPLICANT:  Flagler County

                       Attention: Faith Alkhatib

                       1769 East Moody Boulevard, Building 2

                       Bunnell, Florida 32110

WATERWAY AND LOCATION:  The project would affect waters of the United Sates associated with the Atlantic Ocean.  The project site is located along 6.3 miles of shoreline of the Atlantic Ocean in three reaches. Reach 1 northern limit runs from the southern end of the Marineland revetment south for 1.8 miles to the northern end of Washington Oaks Gardens State Park. Reach 2 runs from the southern end of Washington Oaks Gardens State Park south for 1.6 miles to the northern end of Hammock Beach. Reach 3 runs from the northern end of Varn Park south for 2.9 miles to Beverly Beach. The project is located within Sections 8, 17, 20, 21, 28, 38, Township 10 South, Range 31 East and Sections 14, 15, 23, 26, 37, Township 11, South, Range 31 East, Marineland, Flagler Beach, and Beverly Beach, Flagler County, Florida.

Directions to the site are as follows:  The proposed project consists of three reaches of Flagler County, Atlantic Ocean shoreline. The Reach 1 northern limit begins at the southern end of the Marineland revetment and spans approximately 1.8 miles southward to the northern end of Washington Oaks Gardens State Park. Driving south along Florida A1A from Marineland for 2.6 miles and turning left on Oceanside Drive, proceed straight for 0.4 miles. The northern limit of Reach 2 is at the southern end of Washington Oaks Gardens State Park and spans approximately 1.6 miles southward to the northern end of Hammock Beach. Driving south along Florida A1A from Marineland for 9 miles, the northern limit of Reach 3 is at the northern end of Varn Park and spans approximately 2.9 miles southward to Beverly Beach.

APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES:        

PROJECT PURPOSE:

Basic: The basic project purpose is shoreline stabilization.

Overall: The overall project purpose is shoreline stabilization along the Atlantic Ocean shoreline between R-2.3 and R-11.8 (Reach 1), R-15.9 and R-24.3 (Reach 2), and R47.9 and R-65 (Reach 3) in Marineland, Palm Coast, and Beverly Beach, Flagler County, Florida.  

EXISTING CONDITIONS:  The wetland system consists of the Atlantic Ocean.  The onsite vegetation primarily consists of Coastal Scrub (FWC 1214, FLUCCS 322, approximately 10.5 acres) and Sand Beach (Dry) (FWC 1670, FLUCCS 181, approximately 17.1 acres), from landward to seaward, based on the Florida Land Cover Classification System. Intermittently, other land classifications area found along the project reaches, as quantified in Table 1 (following page). The combine total footprint of the three proposed project reaches is approximately 38.2 acres, based on the April 2021 survey.

PROPOSED WORK:  The applicant seeks a 15-year authorization to discharge approximately 37,000-cubic-yards of upland sourced sand into waters of the United States (11.7-acres of 404 waters on the Atlantic Ocean shoreline waterward of the high tide line and landward of the mean high water line).  Sand would be placed along 1.8 miles in Reach 1, 1.6 miles in Reach 2, and 2.9 miles in Reach 3.

Proposed Schedule: The applicant proposes to initiate construction in Fall of 2022; the proposed work would take approximately two and three months to construct.

Upland Work: An additional 123,000-cubic-yards of fill would be placed landward of the high tide line in uplands not jurisdictional to the Corps in Reaches 1, 2, and 3. This proposed work would be evaluated as part of the NEPA, ESA, and Section 106 scope of analysis.

Proposed Maintenance Events: The applicant is requesting authorization for up to 4 maintenance events to occur over the 15-year life of the permit. The estimated volume per maintenance event is approximately 40,000-cubic-yards placed between the mean high water line and the high tide line along with 10,000-cubic-yards placed in uplands. This equates to approximately 200,000-cubic-yards of fill placed over the life of the permit (160,000-cubic-yards in waters of the United States jurisdictional to the Corps and 40,000-cubic-yards placed in uplands). Regular monitoring surveys of beach profile would be conducted over the life of the permit to determine actual sand volume requirements.

Proposed Dune Template: The proposed dune template for this project is generally consistent with the dune geometry that existed prior to the erosion caused by Hurricane Matthew (2016), Irma (2017, and Dorian (2019) and complies with the recommended template of the USFWS Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO). The project design consists of a flat, varying dune crest width at elevations approximately equal to the pre-Matthew dune profile (typically +14 to + 22 ft, NAVD88), a seaward slope of 1(vertical):1.5(horizontal) to +10 or +14 ft (depending on location), and thence slopes seaward at 1(vertical):5(horizontal) to intersect the existing beach profile grade above the MHW line. The existing grade presented herein is the April 2021 beach profile survey. The cross-shore position of the proposed dune crest seaward edge is fixed in geographic space. The project will seek to minimize impacts to mature dune vegetation where feasible.

Proposed Sand Source: Material for the dune project would be obtained from upland sand mines. The five proposed mines include: (1) Vulcan – Goldhead; (2) Vulcan – Keuka; (3) Vulcan – Grandin; (4) Cemex – Davenport; and (5) E.R. Jahna – Independent North. Sand from the upland mines would be transported to beach access points along the Flagler County shoreline by highway trucks. The material would then be temporarily stockpiled at the access points and re-handled to off-road trucks for transport to the required dune fill locations along the shoreline. Off road trucks would access the beach via temporary sand ramps/platforms, which would be subsequently regraded to pre-construction conditions (or prescribed dune template if receiving fill) after project completion. The vehicle travel corridor for the project would be below the wave runup zone during sea turtle nesting season. Once material is placed on the beach it would be graded and shaped to the required configuration, according to the prescribed construction template.

AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION INFORMATION – The applicant has provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the aquatic environment:

“The proposed dune restoration project will only place sand above (landward of) the mean high water line and therefore avoid/minimize impacts to nearby waters. The project may place sand in locations below (seaward of) the high tide line, but will be completely above (landward of) the MHW line. Based upon April 2021 conditions, the area to be filled seaward of the high tide line, but landward of MHW is approximately 11.7 acres.

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has provided the following explanation why compensatory mitigation should not be required:

“The proposed project will place sand completely above (landward of) the MHW

line that exists at the time of sand placement and will not impact any wetland or

hardbottom communities. The project seeks to reestablish the dune to pre-

Hurricane Matthew conditions, and it is determined that no compensatory

mitigation shall be required.”

CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is aware of recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the permit area and is evaluating the undertaking for effects to historic properties as required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This public notice serves to inform the public of the proposed undertaking and invites comments including those from local, State, and Federal government Agencies with respect to historic resources. Our final determination relative to historic resource impacts may be subject to additional coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer, those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area, and other interested parties.

ENDANGERED SPECIES: 

a. West Indian Manatee (Trichecus manatus): The Corps has determined the proposed project would not affect the West Idian Manatee. The project site is within a Manatee Consultation Area. Therefore, the Corps utilized The Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, and the State of Florida Effect Determination Key for the Manatee in Florida, April 2013, to determine potential effects upon this species. Use of this key resulted in the sequence A > no effect as the manatee would not have access to waters above the mean high tide line and below the high tide line. In consideration of the key sequence, additional coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is not required.

b. Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens): The project site is within a consultation area identified by the Corps and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for this species. Therefore, this species could utilize the area encompassed by the ESA scope of analysis for this project; and the Corps evaluated potential effects to this species. Information from FWS indicates that the Florida Scrub Jay has extremely specific habitat requirements. It is endemic to peninsular Florida inhabiting fire dominated, low-growing, oak scrub habitat found on well-drained sandy soils. The species may persist in areas with sparser oaks or scrub areas that are overgrown, but at much lower densities and with reduced survivorship. According to FWS, bare sand patches are essential for foraging and acorn-caching. Scrub habitat is a community composed of evergreen shrubs, with or without a canopy of pines, and is found on dry, infertile, sandy ridges. The signature scrub species, three species of shrubby oaks, Florida rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides), and sand pine (Pinus clausa), are common to scrubs throughout the state. The dominance of these species, however, is variable from site to site. The most common form is oak scrub, dominated by three species of shrubby oaks – myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia), sand live oak (Quercus geminata), and Chapman’s oak (Quercus chapmanii) -- plus rusty staggerbush (Lyonia ferruginea) and saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). Due to the proposed work being between the mean high-water line and the high tide line, scrub jay habitat is absent from the project area. Therefore, the Corps has determined the proposed project would have no effect on the avian species.

c. Rufa Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) and Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus): The Corps has determined that the proposed work may affect, but would be not likely to adversely affect the Rufa Red Knot and the Piping Plover. The project site is host to beach habitat; therefore, the Corps utilized Piping Plover Programmatic Biological Opinion May 22, 2013, to determine potential effects upon this species. The project would follow the Project Design Criteria in the P3BO for the Piping Plover and those same PDCs would be applied for the Rufa Red Knot. In consideration of the PDCs the Corps has determined that the project may affect, but not likely to adversely affect these species; therefore, the Corps will open Section 7 informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for concurrence with this determination.

d. Wood Stork (Mycteria americana): The proposed project site is

within a Wood Stork Core Foraging Area. Therefore, this species could be present within the project area. In consideration of this information, the Corps utilized The Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jacksonville Ecological Services Office and State of Florida Effect Determination Key for the Wood Stork, September 2008 (Key), to determine the potential effects on the species. Use of the Key resulted in the sequence A > B > no effect; therefore, the Corps will open Section 7 informal consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for concurrence with this determination.

e. Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate), Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta): The project site is located on beaches utilized for nesting sea turtles. Therefore, this species could be present within the project area. In consideration of this information, the Corps utilized the Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion 2015 (SPBO) to determine the potential effects on the species. Sand would be placed between the mean high tide line and the high tide line as well as in uplands landward of the high tide line. The Corps has determined that the proposed work would follow the PDCs of the SPBO; therefore, in consideration of the PDCs, the Corps has determined that the project may affect, but not likely to adversely affect these species. The Corps will open Section 7 informal consultation with the FWS for concurrence with this determination.     

f. Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi):  Eastern Indigo Snake frequents several habitat types, including pine flatwoods, scrubby flatwoods, high pine, dry prairie, tropical hardwood hammocks, edges of freshwater marshes, agricultural fields, coastal dunes, and human-altered habitats.  Therefore, this species could utilize the area encompassed by the ESA scope of analysis for this project.  Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) burrows are commonly utilized as refuge from winter cold and/or desiccating conditions in xeric habitats; and, hollowed root channels, hollow logs, or burrows of rodents, armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus), or land crabs (Cardisoma guanhumi) provide shelter in wetter habitats.  The environmental consultant indicated that there are 2 gopher tortoise burrows that have been documented on site in a staging/access area that would not be impacted by the proposed work. In consideration of this information, the Corps utilized The Eastern Indigo Snake Programmatic Effect Determination Key, August 2013.  Use of this key resulted in the sequence A > B > C > not likely to adversely affect, as the applicant would be required to implement the Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake, August 12, 2013.  The FWS has indicated that they concur with determinations of may affect, not likely to adversely affect based on the key for eastern indigo snakes; and, that no additional consultation is necessary.

g. Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate), Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), Giant manta ray (Mobula birostris), North Atlantic Right Whale (Eubalaena glacialis), Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus), Smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata), near Critical Habitat for North Atlantic Right Whale: No Effect – These species could occur in the action area; however, the proposed work is located landward of the mean high water line and waterward of the high tide line and not proposed as in water work. Therefore, the proposed work would have no route of effect to these species. The Corps has determined that the work would have no effect on these species; therefore, no consultation is required.

h. On March 22, 2022, the Corps executed a RAR report.  The RAR did not indicate that the site is utilized by, or contains habitat critical to, any federally listed threatened or endangered species, other than those mentioned above. The Corps also reviewed geospatial data and other available information. The Corps has not received or discovered any information that the project site is utilized by, or contains habitat critical to, any federally listed, threatened, or endangered species, other than those mentioned above.

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH):  This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996.  Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the South Atlantic Region.  Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

SECTION 408: The applicant would not require permission under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC 408) because the activity, in whole or in part, would not alter, occupy, or use a Corps Civil Works project.

NOTE:  This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant.  This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program.  The jurisdictional line has been verified by Corps personnel.

COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District Engineer through the Jacksonville Permits Section, 701 San Marco Boulevard, Jacksonville, Florida 32207 within 30 days from the date of this notice.

The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands.  This is based on an analysis of the applicant's avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed.

QUESTIONS concerning this application should be directed to the project manager, Terri M. Mashour, in writing at the Jacksonville Permits Section, 701 San Marco Boulevard, Jacksonville, Florida 32207; by electronic mail at Terri.M.Mashour@usace.army.mil, or by telephone at (904) 570-4512. 

IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area.

EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people.

Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act or the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.  

The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this determination, comments are used to assess impacts to endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.

WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION: This public notice serves as the notification to the EPA pursuant to section 401(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act. Water Quality Certification may be required from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY: In Florida, the State approval constitutes compliance with the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan.  In Puerto Rico, a Coastal Zone Management Consistency Concurrence is required from the Puerto Rico Planning Board.  In the Virgin Islands, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources permit constitutes compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Any person may request a public hearing. The request must be submitted in writing to the District Engineer within the designated comment period of the notice and must state the specific reasons for requesting the public hearing.

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DP

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DP\DP-B-PB

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DR\Common\Financial Management\CERP\CEPP

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DP\DP-H\00-HHD_project\11-Construction Contract Awards\Construction Contract Files

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DP\DP-B-PB\Projects

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DR\Common\Financial Management\WIK\WIK Financials

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DP\DP-B-PB\BA Resources

\\saj-netapp2.saj.ds.usace.army.mil\DR