III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING...

262
D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS UNCLSSIIED CHARLESTON SC CHARLESTON DISTRICT APR 76 / 132 N IC III F'IIIIIII EIIIIIIIIIIIIu IIIIIIIIIIIIIu IIIIIIIIIIIIII EIIIIIIIIIIIhu EIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIhhll

Transcript of III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING...

Page 1: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3

AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

UNCLSSIIED CHARLESTON SC CHARLESTON DISTRICT APR 76 / 132 NIC III F'IIIIIII

EIIIIIIIIIIIIuIIIIIIIIIIIIIuIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEIIIIIIIIIIIhuEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIhhll

Page 2: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

1.8.

1111 2 111 .

MICRCOP RESLUTON TST HAR

NAIOA BUEA OF ___W) l,

Page 3: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

_ ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

Approvyd for rubu Rease: JhunUi

CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT

CHARLESTON HARBOR AND SHIPYARD RIVER, SOUTHI CAROLIN A

DTIC

ELCTEIIJAN 2 5 1985

.. .-- }-u.i eProduct-.{--, :'!:/ bein black a.nd

CL. S. TRO ENHINER DI TRICT

CHA RLESTON, SOUT H CAROLINA

APRIL. 1976

85 01 15 036

U. S. .aMY e WTC

Page 4: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

SUMMARY

CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT, CHARLESTON

HARBOR AND SHIPYARD RIVER, SOUTH CAROLINA

( ) Draft (x) Final Environmental Statement

Responsible Office: U. S. Army Engineer District, P.O. Box 919,Charleston, S. C. 29402 (AC 803-577-4171)

1. Name of Action: ( ) Administrative (X) Legislative

2. Description of Action: The recommended plan of improvement

consists of the deepening of the entrance channel to Charleston

Harbor from a depth of 35 feet to a depth of 42 feet and the

extension of this channel from Mile -10.4 seaward to the 42-foot

depth contour (Mile -11.2); deepening the existing harbor channels 0

from a depth of 35 feet to a depth of 40 feet from the Entrance

Channel (Mile 0.6) to Mile 15.7 at Goose Creek; deepening of the

|0Shipyard River channel from 30 feet to 38 feet; enlargement of the -

upstream and downstream turning basins in Shipyard River to provide .

a 1,000 foot diameter turning area and to widen the connector

channel between the two basins to 250 feet; enlargement of the 0

anchorage basin near the harbor mouth by deepening to a depth of

40 feet and by extending the south side by 1,400 feet; enlargement

of the turning basin at the head of the commercial channel at Goose 0

Creek; dredging a new turning basin adjacent to the Columbus Street

docks; widening the North Charleston and Filbin Creek reaches to

500 feet; easing the bend at the intersection of the channel and 0

Wando River; and the relocating of channels near terminals to provide

125-foot clearance between piers and the edge of the channel.* 0

0

Page 5: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-- ! ... .p 0,

3. a. Environmental Impacts: Water quality changes

including temporary and localized increases in turbidity and levels

, of dissolved materials; localized adverse effects on plankton and

primary productivity; minor losses of larval and juvenile fishes

near the dredge and disposal areas; detraction of the visual appear-

ance of the harbor by the presence of the dredge boats and pipelines;

minor air discharges and noise pollution from diesel powered equip-

ment; preemption of present uses of disposal areas. e

b. Adverse Environmental Impacts: Localized adverse

effects on water quality and aquatic animals; detraction of the visual

appearance of the harbor by the presence of the dredge boats and pipe-

lines; minor air discharges and noise pollution from diesel powered

equipment; preemption of present uses of disposal areas.

4. Alternatives:

4 a. Other channel depths

b. Lighterage system

c. Offshore ocean terminal

d. Terminal at Cummings Point

e. Pipeline from source 0

f. No action

g. Combinations of various dredging techniques

5. Comments received from:

Soil Conservation Service, USDA

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

Federal Power Commission

United States Department of Interior

4 United States Environmental Protection Agency _

United States Department of Commerce

United States Coast Guard

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

4 South Carolina State Ports Authority pSouth Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department

Approximately 50 other organizations and individuals

6. Draft Statement to CEQ 16 September 1974

Revised Draft Statement to CEQ 26 March 1975 O

Final Statement to CEQ 29 March 1976

ii .

* w W W W W V V V V V

Page 6: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

F I N A L

ENV IRONMENTAL STATEMENT

C LAR I. SION HARBOR DEEPEN ING PROJEClT

CHARLESTON HARBOR AND) SHIPYARD RIVER, SOUTH CAROLI[NA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Para. No. Page No.

PROJ ECT DESCR [PT ION 1.0 1

Proj ect imthiorizat ion 1.01 1

Pro0j CCt p ur posec 1.02 1

P roposed p1.m of c imp rovemnen t 1 .03 1

Proposed drtzdged material quant ities and

*plaicement p1lan 1.04 1,

Sp(oCtZ1 inI t 0(1 L' 1.05 5

Relationiship to other projects 1.068

ENV IRONMENI'Ai Sll'TTNC WITHOUT THE PROJECT 2.0 10

Gcnera 1 2.01 10

Trihlutairv %waters 2.02 10

('oope r Rite r 2.02.1 10

*Ashlcv Rivcr 2.02.2 11

Wand N vjr2.02.3 11

Shi p\%arc Rvct 2.02.4 11

ShemcC 2.02.5 11

Ext st ini prOj' 't 2.03 1

Othe.r [((I.i prc~ects, 2.04 13

Ashc'. cr2.04.1 13

Shiv~r2.04.2 13

't-, At:,ti hi~utraicoinstal Waterway 2.04.3 1

Coo)pe~ ;-r ivcrs ion Project 2.04.4 14-

Non-prjtc s-(rite facilities 2.05 16

I I d e - 2.06 17

(>'olI'w v nl 'o its 2.07 17

Lo I ~2.07.1 17

w w

Page 7: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Para. No. Page No.

Soi L.s 2.07.2 20

Mineral resources 2.07.3 20

Nature of Charleston estuarvbottom sediments 2.08 21

General 2.08.1 21

Chemical characteri1st ics of

rMbottom sediments 2.08.2 22

Pesticides in bottom, scdiments, 2.08.3 23

hlydrology, 2.09 2 3

General 2.09.1 23

Ground w.ater 2 -.09.2 24

Water qu-ility 2.10 29

Charleston Harbor 2.10.1 29

Cooper River 2.10.2 29

Wando River 2 .10 .3 39

.sivRiver 2.10.4 42

Ar, q ualit 2.11 42

Cli:m.ate 2.12 4

Biol)1og ical r es rc 2.13 44S

Plants 2.13.1 44

W4ildl ife 2.13.2 49

Birds 2.13.2.1 49

Mammals 2.13.2.2 50

Reptiles; and ,mphihiians 2.13.2.3 51

Rare and endnogcred spec ics 2.13.2.4 51

F ish;l 2.13.3 53

* Coopcr River 2.13.3.1 5

(Thiries ton Harbor .idconti~uou.; water.; 2.13.3.2 54

Ashley- River 2.13.3.3 56

and P Rivt r 2.13.3.4 56

C onme rc i ii I He r i es2.13.4 57

f nve r tebrateL 2.13.5 5

L op l)1a n ktLon 2.13.6 0

Uf f io rip i - rI 2.13.7 6)

iv

Page 8: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I I.Descr i pt ion of diked"i spo, 1 arIeII s 2.1 .8 64

Daniel Island 2.13.8.1 64 o

orris Island 2.13.8.2 64a

I)rwnl I[sand 2.13.8.3 64b 0-"~~~~ t , ,: c o i. 13. S. 4 64b)

YC 104w I;Osc' Creek 2. 1 3.0. 64c

re r ipt i,n 0f proposed disposal areas 2.13.9 64d . -,

X~monio" J~velopment 2. 14 65 z

Port of Charleston 2.14.1 65

iiono .i' :i, :ttlrs 2 14.2 66

2.14.2.1 61 p I, at ion 2.14.2.2 66 S

ncm 2. 14.2. 1 66

ovihp,, a.:,, t 2 14.2.4 7I

I1,iLl-trio l development 2. 14. 5 07

il 1 -. iir 2 . 14. 2. 6 07

rsprttt ion faciities 2.15 67

\rlhcoloi al and historical elements 2. 16 68

rc:i'x. ion 2.17 69

0rt i i, nv ironmenta I sett ing without

Us,, ir,, t 2.18 70

I:!: I l H PRIP SED A(T I'()

fA !) FS' "N'S 3.0 71

'i;A XI N4 ,CI 1F [111:1 PRiIPI)SK'I) AC II()N,' NI.... . 4.. 72

r.! I , , ierat ions 4.01 72' . : , i '. 4 €) ,7 2

-. 4

-4- . •- .

,',r .. at; .', ). i I 71{ _

i , i. r -.

II I71

4.

- . -. - . .

j!

4... 1P4

Page 9: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-7.-. .- ....

Para. No. Page No.

Phytoplankton studies 4.03.5.1 75

Laboratory studies 4.03.5.1.1 75

Field studies 4.03.5.1.2 75

Zooplankton 4.03.5.2 76

Invertebrates 4.03.6 77

Fish 4.03.7 77

Larval fish 4.03.7.7 80 6

Commercial fisheries 4.03.7.8 82

Ocean disposal site 4.03.8 82

Rare and endangered species 4.03.9 83

Archaeological and historical sites 4.04 83 S

Aesthetics 4.05 83

Air quality 4.06 84

Noise 4.07 84

Economic impact 4.08 84

Maintenance dredging 4.09 84

Existing projects 4.10 85

Mosquitoes 4.11 86

ANY PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL

EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 5.0 86a

ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 6.0 87

Alternatives meeting all project

objectives 6.01 87

Deepening alternatives 6.02 88

Alternatives that meet projectobjectives in limited fashion 6.03 89 40

No action 6.04 91

Dredging alternatives 6.05 92

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-

TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT ANDTHE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF

LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 7.0 97

vi j

Page 10: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Ali

Para. No. Page. No.

ANY IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE

COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES WHICH

WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED . -

ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED 8.0 98

COORDINATION WITH OTHERS 9.0 99

LIST OF REFERENCES 121

LIST OF FIGURES

No. Page No.

1 Index Map 125

2 Entrance channel to Shipyard River L26

3 Shipyard River to Goose Creek 127

4 Location of Charleston Harbor disposal areas 128

5 Percent silt or clay in Charleston Harbor sediments 29

6 Peterson dredge samples L30

7 Cooper River and Clouter Creek bottom sediment

sample locations 131 -

8 Lower Ashley River bottom sediment sample locations 132

9 Upper Ashley River bottom sediment sample locations 133

10 Wando River bottom sediment sample locations 134

11 Wando River bottom sediment sample locations 135

12 Stono River bottom sediment sample locations 136

13 IWW and Inlet Creek bottom sediment sample locations 137

14 Location of EPA water quality stations 138

15 Wando River water quality stations 139

16 Sampling stations - Cooper River standing crop studies 140

vii

" . 0 ... 0 -- S. . S 0 ' " -0 - . S. . 0 .. . . 0 0

L *I . " .'-* /

Page 11: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

LIST OF TABLES 0

No. Page No.

1 Estimates of annual dredging rates for average fresh-water inflows of 15,600 cfs and 3,000 cfs 141 - -, .

2 Charleston Harbor sediments data collected by theEnvironmental Protection Agency 142

3 Charleston Harbor sediments analysis, Aug. 1972 (S.C.Pollution Control Authority) 143 -

4 Pesticide analysis-bottom sediments (USGS) 146

5 Monthly and yearly mean discharge-Pinopolis Hydro-electric Plant 147

6 Charleston Harbor water quality data collected by 0the S. C. Department of Health & Environmental Control 148

7 Cooper River effluent discharges 149

8 Summary of physical, chemical and microbiological datacollected by the Environmental Protection Agencyduring October and November, 1971 150

9 Ashley River effluent discharges 151

10 Monthly occurrence of fish species-Charleston Harborarea 1970-1972 152

11 Monthly occurrence of fish species-Morris Islandarea 1970-1971 156

12 Commercial fishery landings, Charleston County, S.C. 160

13 Average monthly catch per unit of effort for zoo-plankters in experimental plankton tows, WandoRiver, 1963-1964 L61

14 :onthly abundance of zooplankters in experimentalplankton tows, Cooper River, 1963-1964 162

15 Monthly abundance of zooplankters in experimental0 plankton tows, North Santee River, 1963-1964 L63

16 Monthly abundance of zooplankters in experimental 0plankton tows, Ashley River, 1963-1964 164

17 Standing crops (catch per surface acre) of fishesand invertebrates in three Cooper River, South

0 Carolina, tidal streams in April, July, andNovember, 1971 165

18 Species composition of benthic and free-swimminginvertebratus captured in the Charleston Harbordumping, area 167

19 Species compositicn of fish captured in CharlestonHarbor dumpini, area 168 0

Viii

'° 0 0 0 0 0

Page 12: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

APPENDICES

No.

A Economic Data

B letters of Comment on Draft EIS

C Letters of Comment on Revised Draft E[S

S

Awl

D M

ixs

NrIs- CRA&I ..... 5

I

-J"

ix

* U S S 5 0 S 6 0 0 0 0 0

Page 13: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

1.0. Project description. ..

1.01. Project authorization. The Charleston Harbor __ S

Navigation Study is authorized by Section 6 of the Rivers and

Harbors Act of 1945 and Seven Congressional Resolutions; the

latest adopted 19 October 1967 by the Committee on Public Works

of the United States House of Representatives. The study is in-

tended to determine if the existing project should be modified

in any wav at this time (deepening, widening, or extending exist-

ing channels).

1.02. Project purpose. The .se Df this project

is to provide safe navigation for exis g and prospective large

vessel traffic by deepening existing char (shown on Figure

1), providing new and enlarged turning basins, and providing

minor alignment changes and easing of bends.

1.03. Proposed plan of improvement. The proposed plan

of improvement for Charleston Harbor, shown on Figures 2 and 3,

consists of the following:

a. Deepening the existing entrance channel from

a depth of 35 feet to a depth of 42 feet. The channel width will

not be changed. This reach extends from Mile 0.6- seaward to the

42-foot contour, a distance of approximately 11.8 miles. S

b. Deepening the existing harbor channels from

a depth of 35 feet to a depth of 40 feet from the Entrance Channel

(Mile 0.6) to Mile 15.7 at Goose Creek. Widths will be variable

because of minor alignment changes and easing of bends.

c. Deepening of the Shipyard River channel from

30 feet to 38 feet. In addition, the alignment of the upstream

and downstream turning basins anu connector channel will be shifted

in a northeasterly direction (see Figure 3), to provide a 125-foot

buffer zone between the channel edge and existing piers on the

S 0

S U U U U U U U U U U -

1

Page 14: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- . -- . -. =---

on the southside of the river. The realigned turning basins will

provide 1,000 feet diameter turning basins and the connector chan-

nel between them will be widened to 250 feet. The width of the

entrance channel will not be changed.

d. Enlargement of the anchorage basin at the

harbor mouth. The basin will be deepened to 40 feet and the

south side will be extended 1,400 feet.

e. Enlargement of the existing turning basin

at the head of the commercial channel (Figure 2).

f. Dredging a new turning basin adjacent to

the Columbus Street docks as shown on Figure 2 (Insert "A").

g. Widening North Charleston and Filbin reaches

to 500 feet.

4 h. Shifting of channels near the various ter-.4

minals as shown on Figures 2 and 3 to provide 125 feet between

existing piers and tht edge of the channel.

1.04. iroposed dredged material quantities and placement

plan. The initial amount of material to be dredged for the various

reaches within the harbor, including the entrance channel, are as

follows:

Federal dredging Cubic Yards

Entrance Channel (mile .6 - seaward) 12,095,000

Enlarged Anchorage Basin 2,383,000

Mount Pleasant Range to Myers Bend (mile .6 to mile8.2) 2,982,000

Custom House Reach 3,233,000

Myers Bend to Head of Commercial Project (mile 8.2to mile L5.7) 3,8 54 ,000

Shipyard River 2,530,000 •

TOTAL. .EI)E\RAI. 27, ()77,000

S U S 5 5 5 0 5 0 0

Page 15: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

D~ocks and Bert hing Areas (Non-1 cdcral Dre dging)

Union Stree~~t 40)

COI lmblu7' St rcet 4 ,00O

North Char rs ton Reuach r~*2

* E~~ihin Creek Reach T,0

Port YrinoIRuoch ,0

Shipya1rd River 1 70 ,000

I'MAL NON-FETiIPAl- )1)4,000

ot tar ,taij 2;,077 ,(H) euhi yards of raLteria I to be removed

0 re.. the Fedora I projt~'ot !JCIa , 1 2,095,000 cub ic yards from the

tt ran 11, (-I annt! I areL o;hk'JLuII oh for open wa ter ( ispes al in a

currentlv u-,rd oFfs'yr- area lora1tel approx inxte V 8 miles offshore

C at L-atitude 320 36' 1'Nand Longitude 79' 44' 39!' W in about

40O feot -)I wat,,r. Fhis cfts:horr jump site complies with EPA

recommeatosa:d.:±ss ted On the haIS is Of recommenda tions

provi ded by t he Sou t 2Caro I ma kWi I dlIi fte and Mar ine Resources De-

parme~i e!thll cubn -rin, i r2. ,~0Iob ds of material,

23'4I d 3 u Ict i ad ,a It t~rn i ng baisini scu,)ii, !e placed in

Lh., 11"'.)' - h on 'lorris sV d ad I,2),0

rcaL r~~innei hairhor would he. placed )In up land(

a , ,, jrs riii,,,I tjpl,oi jipslareal would

net. en B'ICI tet ind about 49 acrt-s (20 acres

.rcml a iar ornI 2) cres for Fdi'mIRiver) would be

*~~~~~ S S SS S

Page 16: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

needed on an anaiual basis during the 50-year economic life of the

project for disposal of the additional shoal material (approximately

1,737,000 cubic yards annually) expected to be generated as a result

of the harbor deepening. The project sponsor has indicated that it

would be desirable from his position to locate the upland disposal

areas on and northward of Daniel Island. The Daniel Island site and

area northward is of sufficient capacity to accommodate anticipatedquantities of dredged material to be removed from the harbor during.'

its 50-year economic life with and without rediversion of the Cooper

River.

A pipeline dredge would be utilized to accomplish the required

dredging in the inner harbor and a hopper dredge would be utilized

for the entrance and outer bar channels. The entrance and outer bar

channel will be dredged concurrently with the inner harbor deepening

with approximately 21 months being required for dredging the inner

harbor and 30 months for the entrance and outer bar channel.

Estimates of costs for harbor deepening are based on (a) use of

Morris Island and the offshore disposal area for the anchorage and

entrance channel, respectively; and (b) inland disposal areas above

existing marshes for the upper iarbor reaches. The inland 'isposal

areas would be located only on and northward of Daniel Island proper .. ,- -

as local interests have indicated they believe the magnitude of cost

and acquisition problems associated with lands located adjacent to the

south bank of the Wando River would be excessive. The decision to util-

ize inland diked disposal areas for cost estimates resulted from the

following considerations affecting implementation of ocean disposal:

(1) Conditional requirement of successful operation of a small

scale pilot program;

(2) Objections of EPA to disposing of shoal material located

upstream of a line from Sullivans Island to Cummings Point at sea

because of its chemical constituents; and

(3) The current congressional moratorium on plans for replace-

ment or modification of government-owned dredges.

Benefit and cost data are presented in Appendix A of this EIS.

4

W 0 .a W

Page 17: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

The benefit-cost ratio is 1.92 for Charleston Harbor and 1.44 for

Shipyard River.

1.05. Special studies. Under the aforementioned authori-

zations, the following studies were conducted:

a. Long-range disposal of dredged material:

During the conduct ot this study of long-range disposal of dredged

material, eight plans were evaluated to determine feasibility and costs

of meeting the dredging requirements of the existing project as well

as related projects for a 60-vear period, 1965 to 2024. As discussed

in the preceeding section, the recommended disposal plan for this

deepening project does not strictly follow any of these eight plans.

Cost estimates were prepared for maintaining the navigation features

located upstream of and including the anchorage basin for the current

maintenance method and nine alternate plans. An estimate of cost for

maintenance dredging utilizing the current practice (pipeline dredge

and harbor-side disposal areas) was prepared for a 100-year period of

analysis and adopted as the base to which the relative merits of the

various alternate methods were compared monetarily. The considered

dredging and disposal plans are summarized as follows:

Plan I - Removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge to a permanent

land disposal area adjacent to the harbor - that is, continuing the

present dredging and disposal method.

Plan 2 - Removal of shoal material and conveying it to a disposal

area at sea, all by hopper dredge.

Plan 3 & 3A - Removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge, placing

it in one intermediate disposal area, then conveying it to sea by pipeline,

by diesel powered booster stations (Plan 3) or electrically poweredI

booster pumps (Plan 3A).

Plan 4 & 4A - Rmovali of shoal material by pipeline dredge, placing

it in two intermediate disposal areas, then conveying it from the inter-

mediate disposal areas to sea by pipeline, by diesel powered booster

pumps (Plan 4) or electrically powered booster pumps (Plan 4A).

Plan 5 - Removal of shoal. material by pipeline dredge, placing it

in an intermediaIte di spsal area, then conveying it by barge to sea.

Plan 6 - Removal of material by pipeline dredge placing it in inter-

* • me~d ,ate di~pal arca-;, tili conveying it from these areas to remote inland

dli Sptls~Ii i :re : by pipel iic.

;_,

* 6 S S S 0 6 S * 0 0 0 S_

Page 18: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4 *0

Plan 7 -Removal of material by pipeline dredge, placing it

in an intermediate disposal area, then conveying it from this

area to remote inland disposal areas by truck.

Plan 8 - Removal of shoal I materi l] I-,- 1 scci'l dredg-e klU--

signed to utilize barges, and the use of these barges to convey "

the material directly to sea. .

b. Estuarine values study:

In order to evaluate (1) the plcns ,'onsidered in the long-range "

dredging and disposal study bvet'. a strictly monetary comparison •

of plans, and (2) the env~ronmental effects of recommended improve-

ments and/or modifications to the existing navigation project, the

Corps requested the Bureau of Sports Fisheries and Wildlife to

4 accomplish the estuarin nu vaIue-; tudv evaluating the effects of 4

the foregoing on fish and wildliffe cesources. To aid the Bureau

of Sports Fisheries and i,.ildlit in their Cvaluations, the follow-

ing special studies :cre contracted for and funded by the Corps of

Engineers: •

(1) evaluation and internrttation of botto- QpiJiment samples, (2) phy-

sical and chemical identj' i:at oton of bottom sediments, (3) bioassav

studies, and (4) inventor, and evaluation of marshlands and poten-

tial offshore disposal areas. S

Based on these S L .1 Lo otr i t , -r i ei t i 1 eag-

range disrosal study, t I; e V'.urrem of '<,ort Fisheries and W'iIdlife

* made the folio, i-:: r r,. - ' : ::;'in', r, : and ,1isitsal

practices:

1. Dismpsal V K ' ,.., the co1 lit',s o! the

harbor or its ad (a a Wiiuid

*2. The 710at ,,s i -. si , redced .- aterial

from an ecolorical > . i, crw.,, and Farce

(Plan q). Further, 1---I, i 1 1A ta the ftavorable

* findings of ai s:n l Ia. ., tin, >, drrdidi

material ran , "a , ,'r a -" .1- -pt iL at ,k 1 nd

* S S S S _ S 0.. - 0

Page 19: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

3. The most desirable alternative to sea disposal environment-

ally would be disposal in diked areas located inland above the marshes. I .

The best plan accomplishing both the economical and environmental con-

siderations would be Plan 6 of the long-range disposal study.

c. Charleston Harbor and Shipyard River Modifi- 5cations. Improved project depths of 38, 40, 42, and 45 feet were

considered for existing waterways. Each improved waterway depth

or plan considered for Charleston Harbor included construction of a

new turning basin adjacent to the Columbus Street Docks, enlargement

of the existing turning basin at the head of the commercial channel

(Goose Creek), enlargement of the anchorage and other easing of bends

and minor alignment changes.

The waterway and items of improvement are shown in detail on "ifures 0

2 and 3. In addition, 125 feet will be maintained by non-Federal

interests between existing piers and the edge of the channel for

berthing areas. 1lere necessary existing channels will be deauthor-

ized to provide the required clearance as shown in green on "igures

2 and 3. The most economical plan of improvement for the existing

waterways are channel depths of 40 feet for Charleston Harbor and

38 feet for Shipyard Uiver.

d. Channel extensions. Consideration was given

to extending the commercial navigation channel upstream on the Cooper

and Wando !ivers to serve commercial interests. Three extension "

plans were considered on the Cooper River and consisted of extending S

nav!,4ation upstream to:

(a) AP,ro: imatelv 7ii e 25 (vicinity of South Carolina Electric

S(;as Company's steam powered electric power generating facility). 0

(h) Approximately mile 23, and

(v) o Bic Island adjacent to Verona (Bay Chemical Corporation),

the lc'.a-t cost lv effort to provide deep draft navigation to Bushy

la tr k. "

7

S S S S S S S S S S- S

Page 20: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

The c wu:aal vsi- )I thec-'<i p1 ~mns '.vere At I unftivoroble.

Cons iderition wats ,iven to extendling navigat ion upst ream on

tile i'ando Nixiven Lo 4~oia 1 'It Cdi inhoV. I t was conclu tded 0

f ron theL St 11it h e hIt Ox ttnso in of nLi ctio p thle Wa ndo

River to Hi ,hwtv Il is not i eaih le it this t imi*.

The proit.-rted cotatlrcommerce exceeds the exist ing far iii-

t ies at r limbo)S St CL'et ind North Char 1 es ton. Iblis excess0

projcte tonageis cxpec ted to be han led at thle proposed

State Ports Anithor ity Wando Terminal at this time. Currently,

studie-s cent r~icted for by SPA to evaluate thle environmental

C r t (t an A x IIi o-s i b I c iaI erin,!t i yes to thle Wando TterminalI have b ee n

rom c ed l i a yi i o t ofor thie r.,?q i red Cons t ru t ion Pernmit

C. ~ ~ i S.o- n o mi ie s is bei1ng conis i dc red b y tile

Cnarie-toin i~jtrict 'W fi co. lre fore, i t hlas beenl rccommended

LI).iL ai i, Ion :0cr1i-Li ltll ,xton,,ionl bt deferred

AlitLI I i~ r. rDO tDi, i! oD rainedi and cons truct ion or other

06 .D. R1c it jIltthij' to otier projects. The relation-

sh ip of till h it r lis ton lii'i r hr Proje'ct to other Federal, St ate

or Ilkej*i oi<verr Itt ro rcts %oar i us from a lack of anv

S i Tl IF i I-m11t r, I ait e i os t I)soiie formii of enhancement. There

is tO 'I tI - li ii L.Lin o ie proposed proj ect and

I w; ft t0 h.e Im n I- heaer is cons iderabI v

i ib i -- I:,) n -or. lie saitie app I jes to

"J I ~ 11;l> t i var CV' DO1( Cha.rleston

I Lm lo - iinj toi hii- i !k' or-

V I t<4 4tlii tii W IC(Ii V11 i Onl prOjcct:

- ~ ~ ~ ~ b muo*Liit ao r' it higher.

1~~~ ~ tt IS t' -11 0. Vi C s it

K.. 0. a I -ii~i t 1, thartber has

<I> H.i,'er ,,gnrikes except

Page 21: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

r° 4, . -

for that aspect associated with the disposal of dredged material.

In this regard, there is no consideration given to the use of

such areas for disposal of dredged material. Examples of such

projects are Forts Sumter and Moultrie of the National Park Service

and Hog Island which is the site of a proposed naval museum.

Q S

II 0

o S

* 9 e ]

(4|

Page 22: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-7.

2.0. Environmental Setting Without the Project.

2.01. General. Charleston Harbor is located at about 0

the midpoint of South Carolina's Atlantic Coast, 140 statute

miles southwest of the entrance to Cape Fear River, North Carolina,

and 75 miles north of Savannah Harbor, Georgia. The lower harbor

is formed by the confluence of Ashley, Cooper and Wando Rivers. B

Vast tidal marsh areas lie on either side of the entrance to

Charleston Harbor. Those marshes to the northeast separate the

barrier islands from the mainland and are intersected bv the Intra-

coastal Waterway and numerous tidal streams. Those to the southwest back S

Morris Island, a rapidly eroding barrier island, and are found on

the southeastern side of James Island. Docking and maintenance

facilities of the harbor are concentrated along the west shore

(right descending side) of Cooper River extending from Battery 0

Point of peninsular Charleston to the mouth of Goose Creek at mile

15.7, the upstream limit of authorized Federal projects. The

locality is shown on U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Charts 470

and 1239, and on Figure 1 of this report. .

2.01.1 The harbor covers an area of approximately 14

square miles with depths ranging between 10 and 25 feet at mean

low tide except within project channels which are dredged to a

depth of 35 feet. The harbor is faced with a serious shoaling

problem that is principally due to the Santee-Cooper Project which

was constructed by the S. C. Public Service Authority in 1942.

Prior to this time, the lower harbor required little maintenance dredg-

ing and natural depths in some areas ranged up to about 75 feet.

2.02. Tributary Waters.

2.02.1 Cooper River. The Cooper River Basin comprises

720 square miles of coastal plain in South Carolina. The Cooper

River has its origin at the confluence of its East and West

Branches (locally termed "The Tee") from which it flows 32 miles

southward to its outlet in Charleston Harbor. The East and West

Branches of the Cooper River extend some 20 miles inland in a north- 0

ward direction to their origins as small ill-defined channels in a

10* S S S 0 S 0 0 S 5 5 S.

• • • • -• • • * * -

Page 23: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

low-lying area of Berkeley County known as Ferguson Swamp. Lake

Moultrie in the upper part of the Cooper River Basin was constructed

by the S. C. Public Service Authority in 1942 as part of the

Santee-Cooper Project. This lake intercepts drainage of about 300

square miles of the Cooper River Basin. Except for short interven-

ing reaches, the west bank of the Cooper River is lined with Federal,

State, and private docking facilities.

2.02.2 Ashley River. The Ashley River is a small coastal

stream having a watershed of about 350 square miles and an outlet in

the west part of Charleston Harbor. The upper portion of the Ashley S

River is flanked by woodlands interspersed with scattered residences

and farmland. Most of the lower Ashley River Basin down to the

marsh is occupied by residential or commercial development.

2.02.3 Wando River. The Wando River is a small coastal

stream having a watershed of about 120 square miles and an outlet in

the east part of Charleston Harbor. The lower Wando River is bor-

dered by a rather large expanse of salt marsh which in turn is bor-

dered by scattered residences and subdivisions. The extent of

marshes diminishes with distance upstream and the extent of woodland

increases until the uppermost part of the Wando is entirely in wood-

lands.

2.02.4 Shipyard River. Shipyard River, a small tidal

tributary about two miles in length, flows in a southeastward direc-

tion along the southwest boundary of the U. S. Naval Reservation to

Cooper River at a point opposite the southern tip of Daniel Island

at mile 8.7. I)ocking facilities are located along the west shore

of the lower Mile of channel, while the east shore is bounded b.

tidal marshland alonD its entire length.

* 2.02.5 Shem Creek. Shem Creek is a small tidal tributary S

which flows in i southwestward direction to Charleston Harbor at

mile 4. The citv of "ount Pleasant is located to the southeast and

new residential areas are being developed along the northwestern

11

* S S S S S S S S S S1

Page 24: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

,. ..,.

shore. The lower reach, that reach downstream of U. S. Highway

17, is used as a base for essentially all commercial fishing --

vessels operating out of Charleston Hiarbor.

2.03. Existing Projutc t Pic existing Charleston

Harbor project, authorized by the Kivers and Harbors Act of

June 18, 1878, and by subsequent acts, of which the latest e

were dated October 17, 1940, March 2, 1945, September 3, 1954,

and July 14, 1960, provides for the following work:

A channel for commercial purposes 35 feet

deep and 1,000 feet wide from the sea to the inner end of the

jetties, thence 600 feet wide to the U. S. Naval Shipyard, and A

thence 400 feet wide to the mouth of Goose Creek, a total dis-

tance of 21.9 miles, with a turning basin 1,100 feet wide at the

Port Terminals; and for a channel 35 feet deep and 500-700 feet wide

through Tuwn Creek; for a channel in Shem (reek 10 feet deep and

110 feet wide from a flared entrance from Hog Island Channel to

and including a turning basin 130 feet wide and 400 feet long

with the upper end 250 feet upstream from the Mount Pleasant

public wharf, thence 10 feet deep and 90 feet wide to the bridge

on U. S. Highway No. 17; and for maintenance of a channel 10 feet

deep and 90 feet wide in flog Island Channel from Shem Creek to

the Atlantic Tntracoastail Uaterwav. The ,-oject also includes

the maintenance of 2 entr'ine jetties of stone on log mattress

foundation; the northi ietv - 1 5,'43 feet long, and the south

jettv, 19,014 fect lec; t 'ane C bct 4een their axis at the

outer end is 2,900 teo. a, e ec t aisl pro%, ides for the

following work, which , ,tthorized to be prosecuted only as

found necessary in the a: er&-t of national defense: ) 40-

foot channel, 1,(0 fect wide frun the sea to the inner end of

the jetties, thence tO0 feet wide to the south pier at the Navy

Yard, and then 1,()00 f et ',,idt' to the Comiandant's wharf; and

an anchorage area 30 fret !e,..p hetwen (.-istle Pincknev and Fort

oultrie.

II

Page 25: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I 0

The project hasl been comITplcd >except for thc 40-foot, national

defense project. .

2.03.1 All Jei'ths rLf,,r to thoL :]ance of nean low water.

The mean rane-e of tide is -. 2 fect, and the extreme range of spring

tides is about 7_5 feet. As of ILIle 1971, the controlling depth

at mean lw water was 35 fcet in th I Entrance Channel and Cooper

River; and 10.0 feet in Shem Creek.

2.04. Other Federal Projects.

2.04.1. Ashley River. The existing project, authorized

by the Rivers and Harbors Act of July 25, 1912 and August 26, 1937,

provides for:

A channel 30 feet deep at mean low water and

4 300 feet wide from the mouth to the Standard Warf, a distance of

7.4 miles; suitably widened at bends and at head of the improve-

ment; and for maintenance, to a depth of 12 feet and a width of 100

feet from the approach channel to the municipal yacht basin. TheI

project was completed in 1940.

The cor:rolling depth at mean low twater in July 1970 was 15 feet

for a width of 300 feet from the mouth to the downstream highway

bridge; thence 14 feet to the head of the project. This project

is not; inactive.

2.04.2. Sqhipyard livur. The existing project, authorized

by the Rivers and Harbors Act of July 3, 1930, and by subsequent

acts, of ..hich the latest is dated March 2, 1945, provides for the

following work:

' ,hannel 30 fect deep at mean low water and

290 feet ..i ,, v idenel to 300 feet 'it t!ie ,ntrance from deep water

in oorer River tc the vicinitv of the plant of Airco Alloys and

Carbide Corpoanv, with -i t irninp basin 30 fzout (leep opposite the

(>jIf (Oil Corporation terminal, and another turning basin 30 feet deep

at the upper (nd ol th,, prc' ct oith a f l-rd entrance; total

lenoth of the pro .acL i-; 1.2 m ies. k Ti. i,rije't m.'as completed in

Jane 1951.

a " S

Page 26: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

The controlling depth at mean low water in Octob2r 1970 was 37.0

feet. TII .- S

2.04.3. The Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (AIU).

Charleston Harbor forms part of the route of the Atlantic Intra-

coastal Waterway. One section of the waterway extends southwest-

ward from Winyah, S. C., to Charleston Harbor through the

Sullivans Island Narrows, and another section extends from the

harbor by way of Wappoo Creek, a tributary of the Ashley River,

southwestward to Beaufort and Port Royal, S. C. The existing

project provides for a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water and I S

not less than 90 feet wide.

2.04.4. Cooper River Rediversion Project. This project

was authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1968 (Public Law

90-483, 90th Congress, S. 3710, 13 August 1968) and provides for

the construction of a rediversion canal from the northeast portion

of Lake Moultrie to the Santee River near Lake Mattassee and con-

struction of a powerhouse, fish lift, and fish hatchery. The re-

diversion canal will be about 11.5 miles in length and will consist

of a 2.5 mile entrance channel in Lake Moultrie,.an intake canal

about 4.0 miles long and a tailrace canal about 5.0 miles long.

Rediversion will decrease the average discharges through the

Pinopolis Dam to about 3,000 cfs and will increase average flows

in the Santee River. The purpose of the project is to "redivert"

the major portion of the waters from the Santee basin from the

Cooper River to the Santee River therebv effectin2 the reduction

of harbor shoaling and related costly dredging operations in 1

Charleston Harbor. A discussion of the Charleston Harbor shoaling

problem is presented in the following paragraphs.

2.04.4.1. Beginning in 1942, a phenomenal incre.ise occurred

in the rate of shoaling in Charleston Harbor. Deposits of black

muck material began to settle in the harbor and lirve shoalls began

to form in the project channels. Comprehensive studies conducted

by the Corps of Engineers revealed that most of this shoaling was

14

S U U U S U S S S S S 5 0

Page 27: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

directly, related to on-eration of the Santee-Cooner develonment

wh ich increasedl the average discharg-e in Ccoon)er Piver from- 72

cfs at Pinopolis to about 15,600 cfs. :lost of- the material

creatinc- these shoals ,,as found to be of :-ledmont oriain and

onlyv a small am-ount was f7ound to he attributed to hlank- erosion.

The increased .freshiwater flow has resulted in the :ormation v

3 density currents in the harbor having a nredominant un streamn

bottom flow.. w,.hich. trars sediment within the h~arbor.

2.04.4-1. The increased shoali-ng, rate hias created tw,.o

ma~or pronlems: (1) nn enormous increase in the cost of main-

taininc 7ro.ect denths b', drdging; and (2)) an increase in tae

rate --7 denletion o0: available rdisrosal sites w.ithin the harbor

area.

2.04.4.3 rior to this increased shoalinc rate, mater-

ials rem-ove, for maintenance credginz ,.,ere 7iaced In Iee- w ater

areas of taci uarnor convenient to the site of dredging. T!,15

Dractice was continued for a time after shoaling became sev,,ere

Until it became evident that much of the sediment remained in0

suspension for a time and then drifted back into thie channels. As

a result, a policy of diking land areas, mostly marshlands, for con-

tainment of dredged materials was established to reduce reshoaling and

coIst S. The heavy shoal ing rates which have prevailed over the past

several years 'have resulted in a severe depletion of areas in

which to deposi t dredged materials. Cancellation of certain dis-

nosal irea easemrents and the short-term nature of othier easements,

together wiuthe continued heavy: shoal ing- rate, combine to inten-

sc'tao, 5-riouisness : o tne dIis-osal area situation. Figure 4 shows

the lo-cation -of all dis;nosal areas which, h~ave been used to date.

.4.4 Most d isposal1 areas are used over a period of %-ears,

* in -stimaite ot thet .innuail need for disposail areas is meaningful only

ii ns ide red ocra nivnher oif years. Based on es ti mates of annu.a I

drJ.Jgif r tr rocerige' :eshWaIter ini lows; ,f 17),(00 and 3,00OO cfs

(T ;:le 1) nh'm rhoIr den"' the llltlxv< delmanIk !,)I disyposll

Page 28: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Ire 3i 's l [)e .I')out 41 7l ii:- a uall I I i tiinuLt-c r ivt i ;er :oo an d

Iaho Ic '] :r I n :l .UiI I jL I- ri- c 'rO S i On. I et I,,~r 'ro1 r, o

a se C o0n t L Io s-opIrt1 Lioi tha Ih I: Inat t to ho L) m) ac L [I I-

riteI c 1 t it- oi I i a c . LAi:- ~ I L n - . 1x I t51!

U~tIILi *ix'j~' i:'~~r ii ccuitea 1:7 icrourle I (

iTh!,e 1 Tuav not 1,e -l(,ijOVOd u-ntil a1b01Lt 10 '-ours-. 1 1-r tLt )ro-

ooct H 'rlrato. (2 ! tS ti lao is a i 11 I'd.'c~s' t I Jt'CI

entire2 :irhor 'oni n-; -li ' iL- u 1Is row'o crom

Ithe jur r iiiujn'it-; ~t i- iintoriiicc red Tinv s~ i t d e I-o.s;i t

ou.tslL tile C MIannv -11 1 fid to moeve 1,ai eallv into tlie clhanniel.

au 1'-a''nten-iat 1 '1 t-:ill inlueaCi si bti'. if the

2.0!. "7- isocilito d L L 'i e coT~ re arC '0

o''' ial foonn -iiV t' of 1ii dels, aind --iers-.

bot 'a i. u r~t 1ouodalan, CLiarleto '-,Li rior. Tho ee

£ ~instai latfoi h~ avea r.~iit 14,9765 1 irelL 'eut of berthinr I

snaCO Ciild 6~32 ,000 f'e're ct co! t ransit shod a1reaL. Ii re arc'

also 50 acres of o ern s' oraj~o aIreas -clus 305 s;tecl storai'e tanks

liavjilo a total capac it" ot I:),)rO :iriatlvw (9,600,00 hiU arrels. The

harbor is broken d a-: i rto sx ia-or tan t , ''or' a I i eas . Tii ese

are the Un ion" ~i er Tcii" ii ol iCe Iurbus rtoo~eT, ia r: s ,as i,Ii -ard

lve r T r i nal or ! 1(A II Ir s o ' rtr mu '' il 1- jljt -- c i C.

'%'a nd 0 ~ it r~ 71F iL

nimhaer or'' ' i'o '~ 'LY

1 i eba ' 'av''-,' e P ;wr th xI I I t Yard

land '11lnc i -r.0- I oaston 'Arm", -o a- 2 :eapons

i-'2 P . r a'h 9 eO "'0dI

'r1rl- 1ir ICi" I- ..i... 'c 1 ea r

4p0 0

Page 29: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

F 7-

F e.The mea,,n rangc of t ide in the hiarbor is

c' ~ .I L~ fc et vit[h s 1 )r in and neap) tidle ranges of about

ii,. . c ee, respect ivel \,. M.laximiim current veloci ties

)t iir :,i I enld i l tie tfliut 4.0 to 5.0 feet per

cc~~i -- t ottnd F 1omed ur ons t tedotoverth

1 i LrAlen:PVPti of t top currndotom srata thehalo

4 ti tue Sa ti bc aiis i' 'lo eh Curet dto etenve soals.th

'OL t': iLe Ion': r odi~ o his. The Fo in discsion ofs

* h ' leIChi ci cton Pa rho c pasrepa red by~ thle Dep,-artment

ci t oIrn F 1'og i neers as art0 oF the Charl es ton hiarbor ,

, ' ie Vl Ilies S"tudy (Refe(renc1(e I)

* I . L;co 10o' Chiarleoston aind its surrounding, suburbs

4 r~ ,c-ur~tedMo S;111 ,anon (Late 01 cistocene) landfcrns denosited S

i J'rii iii > ccvi ronnents between 147,000 to 86,000 years before

'L-sct(it',Fterence 2) . During this interval of time the sea

us ~ ac ~cc: imatcivL42 Feet above i--ean sea 1.evel and then

recrt.iJ ith Ii uses at 33 feet, 26 feet, 1.7 feet, and possibly 0

t UL , fl1oivu itL- present surface. Duri ng the init ial Late

. cc cransV ross ion, a thin harrier island chain was dleveloped

I I im, reoi lane t(2ftfl. thbrough i luger toward La dson , South

I ,rI ~ch~.ij ofthis harrier is,-land, miarsb and deltaic sedi- 0

*t nlL ci' tice VotIler tixir were laved dlown. Seaward of tliis barri er

ii i intihe !a I co'-ene sed iments (miost tv tlie Cooper Mairl in thIiis

-in coded and 1)ce ki iicc in Ie.vat ion between 0

clove non senle~i'.iter cofltinental 0

Iii U IMt1n h Iue-Wrt-1 c , i i iU,, s-i I tv manrs o f

Iu ' ine Ii 'cuci ccaiioi I I 1' 'cuir ui t o 10 Feet i n

Page 30: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4t• 7"

2.07.1.1 Pith the drop in sea level from 42 feet to

approximately 33 feet, a second barrier island chain was de- Al

posited. The shoreline of this barrier island extends along

the Charleston-Berkeley County line from the Santee River south

through Cainhov (Wando) through Charleston at approximately 6

mile hill. The wave scoured plain developed on the Cooper Marl p

under this feature lies at an elevation of from sea level to 2

to 3 feet below mean sea level. Landward of this geomorphic

feature, marsh clays in the Charleston area and deltaic sediments

in the Hell Hole Bay area were deposited above the sandy marl to p

elevations as high as 33 feet above mean sea level. Subsequent

Pleistocene erosion has altered this original geomorphic surface

in the vicinity of the Cooper and Santee iUvers, but the surface

is well preserved over larg:e areas of Berkeley County. Seaward pof the latter barrier island chain the land surface crops abruptly

Lo elevations of 17 and/or 3 feet ahove mean -ea level, reflecting

former Late Pleistocene marsh surfaces, until another harrier

i.land chain appears along the route of t!ighca' 17 hetween Awendaw pand the Cooper River. Wave scour on the CoopeLr .arl in this area,

while the shore rested against the former barrK-r island along

the Charleston-IBerkelev Count, line, depressed the elevation of

the Coooer Marl significantly further. Over 100 holes drilled

in Charleston County from the Santee River to the south end of

Folly Island have not encountered the Cooner "arl at elevations Ihigher than 20 feet below mean sea level anywhere and it is frequ-

entlv at much greater depths. The Cooper 'Iarl is overlain by blue- p

grev Late Pleistocene marls in nearly all of these holes. The

rarl is succeeded bv dark grey clays ofi Delctocene ace underlying

the former marsh surfaces or 1y Fine-crained 1,oorl, -ra(dd sands

underlving the former barrier il]ands. p

2.07.1.2 Observation of the elevation of the top of the

"alenene Cooper Marl format ion in the Chtarleston estuar,, area

a'- r e,,rted h,' hond, Chapell & :olruhjoun, 1969 ( ,-erenee 3)

S- o

S S 3 U - W W - -

Page 31: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-v r oiaus 1v dri ll o e1s a pproxima telv 200 to

I' :rds I:i rt2 cn- W- the, cooi-er ;Uver Ic idpes (Highwav 17) did

yOK l lc (oor Mairl- atL depths o' less than 30 feet below

IlnK,:,etrat an is caiused hr) scouring of

u r a: r ae a or inc, tlie Pl eis tocene. The scouring is

c 7t ' 1)", rijver im s,,ment dir ug low stands of sea level dur-

i~i 1 s K -occne!, or !'N ostuar ine scour uuring subsequent rises .

IT IL',1 t;,.,, ,roaid chann,2l indicated h- :rrevious drilling ex-

I a lIn t 1 he course of the Charleston E7stuarv and then jjsour hami cr "orr is Island and the !iort hernmos t expanse of James

Is]an a'' th- LOnt i nontal se f This entrenchment has been

ill12, %cC to noMr 11rx'Ol. .s;imd and marsh a,-nd estuarine muds denosited

ira L '; 1 ' OCCn1 anid 11o loceue Enochis

2.17.1.3 l.a ndwartl of this. area the C:oo,,er M arl generallv

c u :,ci :i~arer thes surfaice of the channel hot ton and f:resluently.....a loor oi t~iu chanmnel either tihrougih natural scouring - or

to rou-i .~ il- i :-ic i, aI d1Ccc'' ing. Never. however, either within the chan-

ic 1t;e ;s or on the land id-iacent to tile channel does, the Cooper

Marl c:: tO(l -morc thazn I or 2 feet above mean sea level for reasons

Oa~ca~ prvlaolw. n so-me localities tile Cooner Marl is either

*itinirc at o:cosvelv lou. depths (as, much as 90 feet below sea

I crc] o r n ot pn,,t ra t ed. These areas l ie within regions where

h)". lot: stands of sea level have caused nrevious river incisemlent

ban]fill mat ori Ilis found where tile Coo. er Marl would

* ~' atcC. it!es scoured channels hanve been inf illed with deposits

S ,! nn el d10 1(ebris 1.11ich ria. o)verlie either Pleistocene

l t- c Lli C-oo:,T Ja;r]

in'lvardl of the hipur17 bridge over the Cooper

o thle (sev;er 'Marl canm occur within a few, feet

-~ :c~ m:he LeXjc'u'LL to ku encountered in dredging 0

is.;t yadohe 1lilw' 17 i~id s. ,i thi n t le (:ooner estu-

I- Ic,,r occur si t hx't ions higher than 40 feet

Page 32: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

below mean sea level. Seaward of the Highway 17 bridge over the

Cooper estuary, Pleistocene blue-grey marls may commonly be ex-

pected to be encountered at elevations near sea level while poorly

graded fine- ,raincd s nds un to 30 feet thick will occur in sand

hills regions, and relativelyv loose Pleistocene Glays up to 20

feet thick w.ill occur in flatland regions. Whereas the Cooper

'larl may be encountered at lower elevations than expected due to

channel incisement, it in no case occurs at higher elevations than . -. .

those -reviouslv summarized.

2.07.2. Soils. Soils show considerable variation within 0

the project are-a. The narrow beach fronting on the Atlantic Ocean

consist- ;ainlv oi- snd and shell fragments with a smaller amount

of silt. ' ,)st of the o cean beaches in the project area are eroding

dle to the action of waves and longshore currents. Inland from the P 6

barrier beach zone to the normal upstream limit of saltwater intru-

sion (3 feet rsl) is a tidal marsh with soils comprised of dark

loams, clays and iucks or n;eat and a medium to high organic content.

If drained, these tidal marsh soils may develon into an extremely 0

acidic :ilastic clay known as "cat clay". Soils in this condition

x.,ill not su-:?ort plant life and are difficult to reclaim. Extending

inland from the marsh for about 10 miles are a group of poorly

drained soils occunwing areas that are generally below 15 feet msl. • •

These soils generally have dark grayish surface layers and dark

sandw, clay loam to sandy clay subsoils. Further inland on higher

elevations in gentlv rolling areas are dark sandy loams with clay

subsoils that are moderately well drained. On more level areas S 0

such soils may be poorly drained.

2.07.3. 'Tincral Resources. There is no significant com-

mercial -'roduiction of mineral resources in the project area. The S SCharleston area. however, .as formerly the most productive area of

pllosh:,lte in tihe staIto-. The phosphatic material, a common marine

phosphate known as (iarl)onate-fluorar'atfitc, is phosphatized Cooper

mar] r Fworked into Ithe I ,,er part of the Ladson formation. Phosphate

2 C

Page 33: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- -' ° - --"---

i it 1

.. ' ' . l, t r, ;, _ 'I' l > i l [ l t :i o ll t~_ L o J ( LiaC 1'1i<4 -

L I- L I L L

1,1i r 1 n' o es tua rv hot. ton sediment s

* 01: i 1 L) it x e, k Iit> I t' i ' c Si : V't' tt'ri

," 'o I to t o ' I s L t' I k I tt i i:V i s' t1

I itIIi- lI L ('. i l I, :ltli r' I l'il .- ' - l uC I " -""

- .' : ',] t~ o. '>t'l i O 'K ! t i sin':. I' " ,si~'ll n '. ,[i. " ore( ttt

n'i l tW II' ol lt n,-s~ * I'In c I ' [I ) toku

I i 1 I l r 0t ,V (-i i ' I] I 11 r s n

3 t

c rlt k , !tl l t i Lb tn, ,l t- i t ,m< -;L I i n< v,

* . I t. n Ill I],- tn L.-~' sL t L ap km ci

'I I I- r :,oL' I c' r t .-,'"t r i ci .- c < k11 , i rd ] 11 fL o I o1t i il

W" i t-l'i ~ ' ' I. ' r t, ! , 11 [ L ]'c ' '4 t I" ll,'I r --

I I

t a n d I I, ,I, -t I ; L 2 . t ' I " I I i I-t- - ' 3 '

" t r I I I ill - d

I l-i r I, t o 1 i t I ' - I S t , n

lit,~ ~~~ rI;i b ir t1

i o Il! r: I, u l .ttt tr,. t tr ld . <i n .L s ] i L i t ' i ioll~ n

1. -1 1 ,t d . 1~l tic l r th O wil 'Ic " 11 . 'ta , t t i : (.

,v, ~ ~ ~ .- l l .. , 'l .~id :{ c it' ii t .i~ xu c I~

Page 34: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

'it~~i viI, '.~;.).a.~arL';)C' o20f t he slIudge

iii': i 'ow It I I, apyparent, rc Ilot iitnsh ip between

It h ii ad water depth

'a i~ .a~ V :ii'~ ~.~'ueathat the sil-day ] fractions

a ''a' i v< t. o~ thait thoi r iigru,1Z1ed masses

- a..V i'tri t i's of' bottom sedimients.

.4<"' W at icic b~ flottomt sediments

.:-i 'H rc': . ' w t 1ii Protec t ion A2 .fl(v during M'larch,

a ~ ~ V . I) I' c ,' i o 11 So aa sar e e

:l we rc it I shlti ppe.I in afroze coflli -

'''0 i at ci I ~'ad or vol a t i I e so I ids , oil I nd

:i. : t k .. i til itogein , total phosph(,r-

* .a t v 'a aI '111d :aljI a t i vi tv . 'The

'I.;,\ vm i.~ i(I it( n n it Ler 1 rt'tLI L iou] of t he data

I- ilt k111 Ii -tLr i t in) let ter report

a '. ( 'I ,,nc I til1edi ha It a I I sed inment s

11 ( I o C I Ifl in I."s 1), in i t shIto t Id

* .. t ''I il 'Ii 1 - 1o At id. "Ct1W,1 -d o01

I, y41,r Ir',i:; wi 'itI lsipscm1 I ar

i ' pi it ;)' :1it I ls inL te sedimtent t rom

~p I miii 3 i (0111 1t ti C( t Cot

lit t''m- l l er-

ii .! ;tl Ii

Page 35: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

' t ik.u- i n Ikttom' svu i l'n ts. A-; "'In- 0 h

a.iI ni er ti ver biotLtom s Ld imen ts or 0 s 10SLi iCe '1 nt ellt. *~0

c .t ud' rt. 'reISenIted in IP 'I .41t

L' c)l to it ra th1e r %1 OX l: t MO St S t t t i 0 It, t

c ~e otnot cs t o 'VLahle 4) t ha t the ubiquitous

I, A"ilr i it i -h ell ( 1) Comprounds wiere cietected in h Io i 01

)7. L!'I[ions to LIteurfor e k'ji th I1( e Leer iiat ion(i

lie '1: >) una bt th r ee s anne s.

2.~~~ o vI o::

I ':(?nirail Charn eston Harbor, h istorical>: one o f

:I 1 1yto i irrs or.i the At lant i L CoastL, is :orme; 1-v the

'I C I o p C, A shl IeyV and La.;ndo 1Z ivers It ha1 s an1-

.i21~ 0) C lt 1-f -tur(. it ufs andI a depth penerally be tv-eun 10 and

I.: 10. L The e limrblor i s k'ha-irac ter ist Ic o f a s trat i-

I~ Ir d ii d ied dens it ies The t idal iorism

- , ' ) no! III(!n the averaze :re2shwa ter inflow- s

tl0 :s it( tidal ra-c- in Charlest on 'iarbc'r is about

I nor osnt r Harbo r is n ormial v' s t ra ifdb aiit

* o j OtO ii- -nuh 'rushehr tLiroup.it01it MOs-t of thle

r od-ls o 1 I i jh river il: ni t Iu ,ouo r -- I- ver S

it ini t he v ic in it, oft th c a rbo r inloilt : to 1'ecorie

I iit L 1;tt t 11 :t e r (,at o r 1- the 1hor; ir (or h ip

n* d .t I hmove , time( Ltmeuc ma or r I vo 1-: k- ( '11

I tr Ito C arbIor a re th[ 's I c-. thuc Ci(or-c and

o, o K t o l 0 ' ' a :i0 .om ai r i xTliI cb 'neai~ d he,'t t

h*r t!, o 1 I~ I, I ~ o 0,, tt IY

o ':rl ii 2 0 Ot I i:n 'it t hrw .,1 -

0P 0P4

Page 36: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

%S

water inflow. The Wando River is similar to the Ashley and drains

about 115 square miles. The Wando is also tidal for its entire

length with minor freshwater inflow. -

2.09.1.4 The Cooper River is the most important tributary

in that it provides the major source of inflow. The Cooner was

originally a relatively small coastal plains stream having a water-

shed of 720 sauare miles. Its averaqe flow at the "Tee", the con-

fluence of its East and West Branches where most of its inflow I 0

had been received, was about 72 cfs. The diversion in 1942 of

a part of the Santee River's flow into the Cooper River basin for

hydropower generation increased the average flow of the Cooper

River to 15,600 cfs. Data on discharges through the Pinopolis

power plant are presented in Table 5.

2.09.2 Ground water. A compilation of existing data

on -round water was recently Drepared by the U. S. Geological I 0

Survev in cooperation with the South Carolina Water Resources

Commission (Reference 7). Pertinent excerpts from this report

are presented in the following paragraphs.I]

"The anuifers in the study area may be divided for the purnose

of discussion into unconfined aquifers, those in which the water "

confined aquifers which are bounded. In many cases unconfined

* 0aquifers and surface drainage are parts of one system and there

is an hydrologic interchange of water between the confined and

unconfined aquifers. Most of the drv-weather flow in manv streams

may be rejected recharge of confined aquifers underlying the area.

The relation between the surface-water and ground-water parts of

the system should be kept in mind during the following discussion.

Unconfined Aquifers

Outcrops of southeastward dipning rocks of marine origin, surficial •

dune, beach sands, and possibly some old filled stream channels .

compose the material for the shallow unconfined acuifers in the

area.

24

*~~~ ~~~~~ W

Page 37: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

The princirZIl us, of uInconf ned aquifers in the study area is on

some of the coastal islands. These systems utilize a fresh-water

lens floatin, on salt water in beach and dune sands. The fresh-..

water- ,llt-witer interface is likely a zone of mixing in which the

salt content increases rapidly both vertically and laterally. Be-

cause of the relatively small difference in the specific gravity

and infreCuent fluctuation of the levels, a water svstem usinp a S

fresh-water lens floating on salt water must be carefully planned

and manac:ed. Overpumning will produce a mound of salt water under

the well in response to excessive drawdown therebv contaminating

the system. Although systems such as these have been successfully

used for years on these islands they have limited use as sources

of larce supply of fresh water. Their dependence on timely rain-

fall for recharge makes these svstems particularly vulnerable to

encroachment of salt water during extended dry periods. They are

also very vulnerable to contamination from the surface.

Confined Aquifers

Several separate hvdrologic zones that are bounded by relatively

impermeable beds occur below the unconfined aquifer in the study

area. The quality of water in these zones varies both areally

within the same aquifer as well as between aquifers.

Water Properties of the Confined Aquifers

Cooper Marl. - Shallow confined aquifers mav be present where the

Cooper Marl of 01 iocene age occurs or where the old stream channels,

as described bv Bond (1970) were bounded by relatively impermeable

sediments. However, the use of these aquifers is very limited.

Santee LIimestone. - The Santee Limestone of middle Eocene age is

widely used as an aquifer in the studv area. Wells completed in

the Santee limestone yield about 200 to 500 gpm (gallons per minute)

25

I L S S S S S S S S S S S S S S 5

Page 38: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

(12.6 to 31.5 I/s) (liters per second) and ranp e in denth from

less than 50 feet (15 m) to ab~out 500 feet (152 m) in the

vicinity of Charleston. Water levels were reported as much as 0

150 feet (46 :-.) below rmean seai level in the acui fer near

Charleston in 1963. Excessive lowering of water level could

Cause movement of water with a high chloride content to contain-

inate some wells. While the source of the poor riual itv water S

is net known, it may be old sea water (connate water) diluted

with fresh water (incoriete Flushing of the aquLifer) or salt

w\ater enterino the anuifer in coastal areas as the result of the

removal of fresh water by oump ing, or inadequate and faulty well

construct ion. Oeiiorted chloride in water taken from the anuifer

rang ,e f ro7 less than 20 to 4,500 mg /i (mill igrams per l iter)...

P Iac. ' 1i n-o Forma tion. - Produc ing wells wi thin the aci.uifers of

this formation range from about 100 feet (30 m) in the northern

pairt of the area to more than 300 Feet (152 mi) inthe Charleston

area . Yields from these wells vary from a1 few tens of gallons

'I mitte (a few liters pur second) to several hundred gallons a

minute (several hulndre.d I i ters ncr s~econd) .

lciee2 and l81aclk Creek o(rm at ions. -These format ions are late

Cretaiceotis in age ( and li holoc ical iv are similar, so much so that

iv r,, nnk.f'irfernt i:ited in m-os-t Io . ,. Charalcteristic shifts

in tlie nactiraljai l ray. to-s-hi to discern s;imilar zones and

i i, in t -:ntit i c p ieb - of tormait: ion hreak<s. The depth to the

LP the PLeedee rang-es from about 1 50 feet (46 mi) in the

err irt ()F the airea to ;ihout 700 feet (.213 m ) in the

* ~ irI es !t 1n aI r-Ca. The thiiickness of t lie Peedee Cormat ion varies

Ij i'!ItV lv hut i- O generally about 400 feet (122 m).

1P 4P V VS 0 0 0 0 0

Page 39: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

The Black Creek Formation unconformablv underlies the Peedee Forma-

tion and the depth to the top is about 550 feet (168 m) in the north-

ern part of the area to about 1,000 feet (305 m) at Charleston. •

The Black Creek Formation thickens considerably coastward, ranging

from about 550 feet (168 m) in the northern mart of the area to more

than 1,000 feet (305 m) at Charleston.

The water producing zones in the Peedee Formation have low transmis-

sivities and yield small amounts of poor quality water especially

alonq the coast. Water from wells greater than 700 feet (213 m)

in depth generallv has chlorides in excess of 500 mg/l.

The major .roducinA aouifer in the Black Creek Formation is a coarse

sand near the bottom of the formation. Other minor water nroducing

sands occur in the upper part of the formation but the water is of

cuestionable nuality.

Pssiblv the first known well drilled into this zone was in Charleston

near Oueen and leeting Streets in 1817. The exact location of the

well is nat known and the records have apparently been lost. Water

in this well was reported to have been under pressure head sufficient !

to raise it 20 to 30 feet (6 to 9 m) above land surface. In 1823, theC.=

first well drilled by the Charleston City Council... was

drilled at the fire station at Wentworth and Meeting Streets.

@1 This well was drilled to a depth of 1,260 feet (384 m) and had an

artesian head of 25 feet (8 m) above land surface. The yield was

reported to have been small. A second well was reported to have been

drilled near this site in i49, and a third in 1856, for which

0 little or no record is available. They are both reported to have 0

s1ail Vields.

A ,,ell drill ink, at 'arion Square in Charleston in 1878 to a depth

of 1,070 feet (600 m) was reported to have a static head of more

than 92 feet (2) m) aInd a vield of 465 gpm (29.4 l/s).

A well at Fort M!oultrie, (,el 16) was drilled to a depth of 1,385

feet (422 ri) in 104. This .ell was renorted to have flowed at

1()0 _'PM (6. 1 /-). S

27

L-

Page 40: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Well 64 drilled at the Charleston Water Department on George

Street to a depth of 1,435 feet (437 m) was reported to have

flowed at 300 gpm (18.9 l/s).

Several wells ranging in depth from 1,800 to 2,300 feet (549

to 701 m) have been drilled in the vicinity of Charleston and

Mount Pleasant. One of these wells was a test well drilled to

a depth of 2,292 feet (699 m) by the town of Mount Pleasant in

1969. This well (163) was reported to have a static water

level of 32 feet (9.8 m) above land surface and produced 750

"pn (47.3 1/s) with a drawdown of more than 132 feet (40 n).

The production well at this site was drilled to a depth of

1,919 feet (585 m) and produced 800 gpm (50.4 1/s). A later

production w, ell (167) constructed by the town of Mount Pleasant

-.,a-; drilled to a depth of 2,035 feet (620 m).

T1he water from these ,,ells is a sodium bicarbonate type of-

water. The chloride content is within acceptable limits ex-

cert for the well '16) at rort "loultrie on Sullivans Island.

However, tihe fluoride content is several times the recommended

level for drinking water in all these wells.

[)issolved solids determined from water samples from wells 163

and 167 .anged from 1,000 to 1,300 ng/1.

Tuscaloosa Formation. - The Tuscaloosa Formation of early Late

Cretaceous age is a reiional aquifer in much of the Coastal

Plain of South Carolina. This formation unconformablv underlies

the Black Creek Fori-it ion. The top of the Tuscaloosa ranges p

om about 1 ,000 -eet (3() 7-) in the northern part of the area

to more than 2,100 feet (640 m) in the Charleston area. The

need to d r i I w l I Is . o ,nouch to n enetrate the Tuscaloosa 9'orr' t ion in the lr,',a 5i ot !eLen necessarv because of the

ahiinlarwe 07 -.,',tCr ira thie h vaillow,,'er aruifers.

28

l W W

• D •

Page 41: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* • . . -..- '. ' - -.

47

A well 20 miles (32 kin) (kilometers) south of Charleston at

Seabrook Island was drilled into the Tuscaloosa but did not

encounter any water producing sands. Until more data can be .

obtained. the oroductivitv of the Tuscaloosa Formation along

the coasLt cannot be stated."

2.i0. .:ater Oualitv.

2.10.1 Charleston Harbor. The water nualitv of

Charl eston Iarbor is similar to that of the Ashley, Cooper,

and Wando ,ivers irom which it is formed. According to

thu latet state classifications, Charleston Harbor is not

-uit iflle for solin, or the harvesting of oysters for mar-

,t ,urosos. The water qualitv of the outer harbor is usually

ni,<hur becausc of the diluting effect of the ocean. Recently

const riictcl ,aste treatment facilities along the lower Cooper

< A>;i e': 1'ers have led to an imorovement in the water qual-

Lt\ ol Lhe iiarbor from the condition described in the Federal

'.<ater 'ollution Control Administration report of 19,66. (Reference

8). A trendl of continued improvement in water nuality is ex-

oected as ;a result of these facilities and others in the plan-

ning or construction stare. Recent water quality data collected

by the S. C. Denartment of Health and Environmental Control are

Treseoted in Tble 6.

2.1. . :Cooper R\iver. The water quality of the Cooper

:2.iv-:r i.4 -,crallv .,ood but according to the latest state classif-

ic.it ion,,, that rortion of the river from U. S. Highway 52 to a

01) jnt , pr)n,:Ki:iatulv 3) miles above the junction of the Ashlev and I ]

Cooper iv,'ers is ,Laifi jd as Class B (waters suitable for domes-

ic saprl- i t .- co7 )lete trcatment in accordance with reouirements

t, ti L, rol inn >t;ite lBoard of Ilcith, also for propagation

! Is, i:ii tla l ind acricultrli !es ,n6 other uses recuiring

t ,., r ,, < ,r al it-,) and that port ion below that point to the

i kli, 1d Cooner Rivers is classified as Class SC

29

Page 42: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

7 C

(waters suitable for crabbing, commercial fishing and any other

usages except bathing or other shellfishing for market purposes,

also for uses requiring water of lesser quality) (Reference 9). -

These restrictions are based on bacterial concentrations, the

source of which is thought to be drainage from storm sewers, septic

tanks, malfunctioning treatment plants, point sources of untreated

U human wastes, and domestic livestock wastes. S

.10.2.1. All domestic sewage discharged into the lower

Cooper River is now subjected to primary treatment and chlorina-

tion. Approximately 10 percent of the sanitary wastes from North

Charleston and practically all of such wastes from the community

of Mt. Pleasant receive secondary treatment. Sanitary wastes from

Chi~rleston are discharzed after nrimary treatment into the mouth

of the Ashley River. A list of discharge sources, their approximate

daily: discharges, and type treatment are presented in Table 7.

2.10.2.2. The West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company has by

far the largest volume of industrial discharge into the Cooper

River. These wastes are now subjected to primary treatment before

being discharged into the Cooper River about 5 miles above Charles-

ton, and will be subjected to secondary treatment by 1975. United

Piece Dye Works discharges approximately 3.0 million allons daily

of untreated wastes into Goose Creek which empties into the Cooper

River about 6 miles above Charleston. Facilities to convey this

vaste to the North Charleston Municipal sewage treo&ment plant are

now under construction. All other industrial effluents, with the

* exception of cooling water, receive at least primary treatment.

'.10.2.3. The South Carolina Public Service Authority oper-

,tes four steam generating units below the Pinopolis Dam ha-in- a

'apac itv of 412,000 kw. Cool ing, water is obtained frr. returned

to the tailrace canal. The volume of flow in the tailrace canal is 6

iff ic lent to prevent a volat ion of state standards relating to

thermal pollution.

I (I

* S 5 - . 5

Page 43: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

6 0

2.10.2.4. One of the major industrial developments along

the CoonTer River is the Bushy Park Industrial Area which consists

of land set aside for industrial development between the Back and

C.oo~er !livers. Tli& development includes a dam across Back ;'iver

which forms a reservoir and a diversion canal from the West Branch

of the Cooner River into the Back River Reservoir. Bushy Park was

originally a joint venture of Charleston and Berkeley Counties

and the City of Charleston to attract industries to the Charleston

area. The City of Charleston now owns about 80 acres and the re-

mainder (about 4,300 acres) is distributed among the following in-

dustries: S. C. Electric and Gas Company operates steam generating

tacilities, Verona Corporation operates a chemical plant, General

)vnamics operates a plant which makes liquid natural gas tanks, Du

P ont is building a "Dacron" polyester rlant, and Moore-McCormick

* has acquired land but has not begun construction. There are no

vacant sites remaining at Bushy Park.

.10.2.5. The effluent from industries at Bushy Park is

discharged into the Cooper River after treatment, which is considered

adecuate to prevent degradation of water quality in the river. •

S. C. Electric and (;as uses a 105 foot square oxidation oond for

treating sanitary wastes of ahout 50 employees. Retention time

in the nond is about 30 days and the effluent is discharged with

the cooling water into the Cooper River. The volume of cooling 0

water is abouit 463 mgdI and uinder conditions of the state permit must

not raise the ambient water temperature more thin 4 degrees fahren-

heit during the fall, winter, or spring and 1.5 degrees fahrenheit

Sduring, the summer mionthis. The Verona Corporation has a permit to

dischare on to 25 mgd, but recent actual measurement by the 7. C.

!'o]I t ion Control Author itv showed a discharge of about 2.6 to 3.5

-"02. Treaitrent facilities; Include an equalization and neutraliza-tion ha r , t'o eraLc : , and it-, , :,Yilization and settling

pOd:5. (;n.. IIivnamics has; a st;te permit to discharge up to 15,U00

'i'i LOcos T)cr =a. aste treatment includes passage throughi a mixed

at i \'ati It id akag, e treatment facility and chlorination. The

31

0

Page 44: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Du Pont plant is not completed but their sanitary permit allows

a discharge of 2,000 gallons per dav. This effluent will be

treated in an extended aeration package treatment plant and

chlorinated.

2.10.2.6. The most recent comprehensive water quality

studies on the Cooper :River were conducted bv the U. S. Environ-

mental Protection Agency during October and November, 1971.

These studies were published in April, 1974 by the S. C. Water

Resources Commission as part of the Cooper River Environmental

Study (Reference 10). The main objective of the study was to

develor some capability for predicting changes which might re-

sult from rediversion of the Cooper River. To accomplish this

objective, the EPA collected samples during periods when the

daily discharge to the Cooner River from Lake MToultrie averaged

20,550 cfs (October 1971) and about 3,000 cfs (November 1971).

A discussion of the pertinent data contained in this EPA report

is presented in the following paragraphs. The stations referred

to in the following paragraphs are shown in Figure 14. A summary

of all physical, chemical, and microbiological data collected at 6

each station during the two sampling periods is presented in

Table 8.

a. Temperatures. Average water temperature

at the sampling sites ranged from 20.8 to 22.10C during the

October study and 17.2 to 18.30C during the November study.

Extremes in temperature were 20.0 to 23.50C during ()ctober and

14.5 to 22.5°C during November.

b. pH. Average ilI values at the [PA sampling

sites ranged from 7.2 to 7.7 in October with extremes of 6.4 to

8.3 units. The extremes in November ranged fror 6.3 to 8.5 units

with average values of 7.3 to 7.7 units. 0

C. Dissolved o:ygen. )issolved oxygen (DO)

concentration extremes in the reach studied ranged from 3.4 to

8.4 mg/l during October and 5.0 to 8.9 ng,'/ in November. Average

32

Page 45: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

DC concentrations ranged from 5.9 to 7.8 mg/l in October and from

0.i to 8.3 m ,/I during November. During October, both the minimum

DO concentration and the lowest average concentrations were measured I-._ 0

at the lower stations (1, 3, and 4). In November, the lowest DO

concentration encountered (5.0 mg/i) occurred at Station 7 at the

bottom. The following text table presents average DO saturation

values at each of the river stations at high and low slack tide. 0

( I.

Average Surface and Bottom Values of PercentSaturation of Dissolved Oxygen

October November 0Station HWS" LWS"* HWS LWS

1-Surface 70.9 75.9 70.5 72.51-Bottom 70.5 67.7 77.7 73.23-Surface 81.0 86.6 71.0 75.43-Bottom 68.5 69.8 68.3 73.94-Surface 82.6 88.6' 76.7 77.5 04-Bottom 79.0 84.7 73.0 73.5

5-Surface 87.6 89.8 80.0 79.65-Bottom 86.3 88.5 80.4 79.3

6-Surface 85.7 84.5' 80.3 80.5*6-Bottom 87.5 85.61 79.6 80.5 S7-Surface 84.3 90.91 73.7 78.97-Bottom 84.3 89.8' 72.7 82.48-Surface 87.8 92.1' 89.4 91.08-Bottom 88.3 93.11 89.9 90.69-Surface 82.8 - 75.6 76.59-Bottom 82.4 - 75.2 71.0

High Slack Tide-v Slack Tide

'Single determination

33

• S S U S S S S S S U S S S • S

Page 46: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Percent DO saturation decreased downstream from Station 8 during

both sampling periods. This reduction in the lower reaches of

the river generally corresponded to an increase in dissolved

solids and chlorides. There was no significant difference in

DO saturation between surface and bottom samples in November,

however, in October, a significant difference existed between

I Stations 3 and 4 at high slack tide and Stations 1, 3, and 4 0

at low slack tide. A-ain, this difference was primarily attri-

buted to increased chloride concentrations occurring near the

bottom of the water column.

d. Biochemical oxygen demand. The five-day

biochemical oxygen demand (BO1) 5 ) levels measured in both the

October and November studies were low at each station (Table 8).

in ,rtober, average 13D 5 levels ranged from 0.8 to 1.1 mg/1 with 0

tbe hiehe:L individual value (2.6 mg/l) occurring at Station 3.

In N'ovember, i,()I)5 concentrations ranged from 0.3 to 1.0 mag/.

e. Chlorides. Chloride concentrations

ranged from 7 to 13,400 mg/l during the October study period and •

8 to 14,800 mg/l during the November study. An average chloride

concentration of 8 mg/l is considered to be the background level

entering, the Cooper River from Lake "loultrie. In October, sur-

face to bottom chloride ratios (S/B ratios) at high slack tide

indicated that a well stratified condition existed in the lower

reach of the river with ratios of 0.266, 0.193, and 0.171 at IStations 1, 3, and 4, respectively, as shown in the following table.

34

w . .

Page 47: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- .

Surface To Bottom Chloride Ratios

October November -0- Station HWS* LWS** HWS LWS

1 0.226 0.137 0.567 0.8023 0.193 0.915 0.499 0.6144 0.171 1.083 0.532 0.4015 1.250 1 000 0.827 1.2416 1.000 1.000 1.067 1.100 0

* 7 0.889 1.000 0.846 1.0008 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0009 0.889 1.000 1.090 1.083

High Slack TideLow Slack Tide S

"t l,,: ,lack tide, S/B ratios indicated that vertical stratifica-

an occurred onl.y at Station 1 with average S/B ratios changing

tror 0.317 at Station I to 0.915 at Station 3. 71aximum saltwater

ntrusion txtended as far upstream as Station 4 at high slack tide

- i, hot-seen Stat ions 3 and 4 at maximum low tide.

* . -. , ibt er, chloride concentration extremes ranged from 8 to 14,800

Ih-na/I inith average conccntration ranging from 10 to 9,030 mg/l. An

ivcr'ra,;e backt:round concentration of 10 mg/l was being discharged

roin! lake 'oultrie during the sampling period. Surface to bottom

KIrile ratios at high slack tide were indicative of vertical

,t r i! ict -iion at Stations 1, 3, and 4 where average readings were0

. 69 . , and 0.532, respectively.

titin -3, the S/B chloride ratio was 0.827 indicating a non-

t, d ition. At high slack tide during the November study,

0 1 i t, r ii trd, u '2;t reani het..en Stat ion 5 and Station 6. At 5

I. , S/ (Il oride ratios indicated a rather weak vertical

r t t ' i, !t io:i it S [;ition-, I and 3. .,n ireranve q/B chloride ratio

W W

* . V .

Page 48: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

of 1.241 at Station 5 along with an average bottom chloride concen-

tration of 29 mg/l indicated a well-mixed, essentially freshwater

condition.

f. Residue. Total nonfilterable residue (total

suspended solids) ranged from an average of 9 mg/i at Station 8 to

an average 37 mg/i at Station 1 during October. In November, total

suspended solids ranged from 6 mg/i at Station 8 to an average of

45 mg/l at Station 3. In both the October and November studies,

the higher concentrations of total suspended matter were measured

near the bottom in those areas affected by saltwater intrusion,

tidal mixing, and industrial pollution.

Volatile suspended matter followed the same general pattern as the

total susoended solids. Volatile solids ranged from an average con-

centration of 3 mg/l at Station 8 to 14 mg/i at Station 1 during

October and from 2 mg/l at Station 8 to 12 mg/i at Station 1 during

November. As with total suspended solids, the higher concentrations

of volatile solids occurred near the bottom at the lower river

stations. 0

g. Nitrogen. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)

concentrations were low throughout the study reach during both the

October and November sampling periods. Extreme values ranged from

0.23 to 0.59 mg/i in October and from 0.12 to 1.00 mg/l in November. 0

Ammonia nitrogen concentrations were low at all stations during both

sampling periods. Concentrations ranged from 0.01 to 0.12 mg/i during

october and from less than 0.01 to 0.08 mg/i during November.0

Nitrite-nitrate nitrogen concentrations ranged from less than 0.01 :to 0.12 mg/l in October and 0.01 to 0.21 in November.

h. Phosphorus. otal phosphorus (as/P) concentra-

4 tions were low at all stations during the October study period and •

ranged from 0.02 to 0.08 m-/1. Average concentrations ranged from

0.03 to 0.05 mg/i. Orthorhosnate concentrations (as/P) ranged from

less than 0.01 to 0.07 mg/l during the same period. The highest

36S

36

Page 49: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

total and orthophosphate concentrations were measured at Station

During the November study period, total and orthophosphate con-

centrations were generally low at all stations. Total phosphate

concentrations (as/P) ranged from 0.01 to 0.20 mg/l and orthophos-

phate concentrations (as/P) ranged from less than 0.01 to 0.10 mg/l.

i. Organic carbon. Total organic carbon (TOC)

was found to be consistently low at all stations during the October

sampling period. Concentration extremes ranged from 4.0 to 6.0

mg/l and average concentrations ranged from 4.2 to 5.2 mg/l. 0

During the November study, TOC extremes ranged from 3.0 to 10.0

mg/l and average concentrations ranged from 4.6 to 7.7 mg/l. In

general, average TOC concentrations measured in November were 0

slightly higher than October.

Metals. Concentrations of copper, chrominum, "

lead, zinc, manganese, iron, and mercury were measured by the EPA

at Stations 1, 6, 7, and 9 during the October and November study

periods. As might be expected, the highest concentration of metals

was found at the more saline station, Station 1. A summary of

metals data is presented in Table 8.

k. Pesticides. Pesticide concentrations were

measured bv the EPA during the October study period only. Eighteen

pesticides were analyzed from composite water samples collected

aL each stat ion. The fo.l1oing table lists the Y ' esti-

cidus and the minimum detection limit of the anna rocedure.

No T)estfclde levels ere detected above the detection limits used.

6 3

* 0 ~370

* o . - • - . . 5 ° 5. - S . S

Page 50: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

7 7. '3 . . . . . . . . .*7%7 V .

Pesticides Analyzed For and Minimum t

Dectection Limits

Ig/1 MinimumPesticide Detection Limit

Aldrin <0.005Lindane <0.002- 0Chlordane <0.05Chiorobenzilate <0.5DDD) <0.01DDE <0.01DDT <0.02Dieldrin <0.01Endrin <0.02Heptachlor Epoxide <0.01Heptachlor <0.005Methoxychlor <0.1Toxaphene <0.25Diazinon <0.2Guthion <0.5Malath ion <0.2Methyl Parathion <0.02Parathion <0.04

1. Bacteria. Station 1 had the highest fecal

coliform densities found during the Cnctoher and N ovember stud% ner-0

10(1 with counts of 830/100 T-1 and 460/100 ml, respectively. The

lowest densities were found at Station where the respective October

and Novembher counts .,ere2 26/1100 il nd 30/100 ml. There was a general

inrcrease in Jdensitics ulo-:nstrcam from Station 8 with a noticeable in-

crease occurr in4 in the vi cia it o'f Stations 6 and 7. The higher

level-; at Stat ion 7 i,'crc r-os- bl v caused by an adjacent housiT7

d deveIo -)me n t o a r-1" dem-, i ic: -;i Iso [icreased downstream of Stat ion

4 most 1 ikulv as a rt-,sul t w i>t entering the river from (loose

*Creek aind from the muni i,-al an,, industrial dJevelopmecnt downstream.

38I

*~~ ~ W 6 W

Page 51: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

During October, the mean surface coliform density at Station

1 was four times higher at high slack tide than it was at low

slack tide. A similar observance was made during November ex- P ....0

cept that densities were only about twice as high at high slack

tide. These data suggest a possible upstream movement of wastes

on an incoming tide.

I 0

2.10.3. Wando River. The quality of waters in the

Wando River system is being studied in detail by the S. C. Water

Resources Commission as part of the Wando River Environmental

Quality Study. An interim report on this study was published in

April 1973 (Reference 11). The summary and conclusions section

of the water quality portion of the above report is presented

below. Station locations are shown on Figure 15.

"I. Dissolved oxygen remained fairly high dur-

ing the sampling period (January, 1973) ranging from a low of

7.7 mg/l to a high of 11.4 mg/l with most of the readings greater

than ten. Dissolved oxygen saturation was above 85 percent most

of the time. The lowest dissolved oxygen saturation reading dur-

ing the sampling period was 60 percent and this was coincident

0with a water temperature of 40C. The highest DO saturation was

recorded as 100%. There is an apparent defect in the lower Wando

River as measured by this criterion. Readings are progressively

lower from the Cooper River (Station 1) upstream to the head of

Hobcaw Creek at Station 4 where Lhe lowest average DO saturation

was experienced above Hobcaw Creek (Stations 5-8) DO saturation

improved dramatically. Five-day Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)

readings ranged from 1.25 mg/l to 5.2 mg/l with an average of

2.68 mg/l. BOD readings were generally higher at the stations

nearer the river mouth. In this study BOD was probably about

normal considering the range of water temperatures which prevailed.

Vhile no rigid standards have been established for water quality

based upon oxygen content alone, the net indication from arbitrary

39

S S U S U U U U U U..... S

Page 52: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

critcria for oxygen regimes is that a moderately high water quality

exists in the Wando River as compared to other waters in the

Charleston harbor environs.

2. Turbidity as measured by Secchi disk read-

ings and by turbidimeter is generally low indicating a lack of sus-

pended or colloidal material. Turbidity readings are somewhat higher

at those sampling points nearer the harbor.

3. Fecal coliform bacteria were detected in such

numbers as to substantiate assignment of "SB" classification to these

waters. Some of the individual samples give rise to the belief

that standards could be greatly exceeded at certain times of the year

and under varying flo,, regimes. Station No. 4 located at the head

of liobcaw Creek 4ave consistently higher readings than did Station

No. 3 located at the mouth of the tributary. 2'tations 1-4 produced

ceneral lv higher counts than the upstream samcling points No.'s 5

through 8. The sources of human-waste pollution thus appear to be

associated with Cooper River materials which ultimately enter the 0

Wando and are transported upstream, and with materials that enter

Hobcaw Creek presumably from the adjacent residential areas.

4. Heavy metals consisting of cadmium, chromium,

copper, lead, and mercury were tested for and all except lead appeared

singly or in. combination in some of the samples. None of the sam-

ples were lead positive. No other metals were assayed.

Cad iurm was detected in water samnles on three of ]

the samrling d,(s but not at all stations simultaneously. Concentra-

tions ranwed i hi-it as 45 1-/1 wlich is within the range of some

drinki nc'.aters (.C)4 uc/ to 00 ug! ) but exceeds the U. . Public

Health crvict max ;Mvur r ilowabI t for interstate carriers (10 ug/l). 0

Toxic lev(,l o: 200 u,/i are r oorted to be lethal to fish.

(Ihroiuri -is detected on only one sampling dav

and at onl," one ol the cial'It stations. This single reading was

40

S 0 0 0 0 0U

Page 53: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-)43 u, n /1 il. . 'LL< ton t iros the m-axir.um 17. S. Public

Health Sr-. xn t i itind.,r.i or dr i n Ing water. The magnitude

o!- this ret.,lin.: iad thyi, t! W. tizat oniy ou of eighty samples I .

\.stS II,) ; ' > A' i. 101 on t h '.a ic uracV of the

tc, t or ii"- c, !id . -n* !n, . .. i 1_( no inference is drawn

fron this p..rticular assay, it is not likely that chromium

of1t I ,rs ,: te,-I th oroil . In any future quality assess- 0 5

7'11 , 1r rcin W et 0t ion oroc csses should be conducted with

CLs p ia I cI r

'ierk u : ,,rrOd i:a 7-' of the, 0 samples and ranged in con-

T:et, rat io! )ct,,,e n 0.1 ncU/i and 3.10 ug/1. These readings

a\verce I .73 n/ I which exceeds the t'. S. Public Vealth

aerv i >. standard oF 0.50 u--/1, or '. part per billion. The

nat r v I I o, c! i rri n thbndana e and distribution of mercury in

oi0 ,c otti .c on ;ts for a nortion of the detected amounts

of this elIent Lt. For examnle, a recent study of mercury in soils

over tlk. nat in (ShI ackILettt-, 1971) showed a geometric average

o -h ) rt -,r hil I iol: (vc/]) for the eastern United States.

nK 1U 11di Lnts usun Il v exhibit Ii igher background concen-

trat ions thn does water. This is the result of the affinity

ir cir !tcd s aid so il material togcther with the other-

,.", t r1 i Iib i it', of mercurial comnounds. In addition,

t I :"k : at, r IItains .3 ug/1 of rercurv. (H & 1, 1959).

i: lc , doe- not nek, essar 1iv imn lv a point

. :. -I Lt; ot a tou s -an le testing]', - '. ,, "'l ' Tet/ s occur and that no

,tr ,: ,il anta':its neastlrable •

, '. , ., ,,: .. -l as othters, but that

.t ry -,,:-,nt iI to cel1 growth

e I S

Page 54: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

in some of the plants and animals that are a part of the local

ecosvstem.

2.10.4. Ashley River. The Ashley River is somewhat

turbid and its banks are highly urbanized. According to the

latest state classifications, the Ashley River is not suitable .

for swimming or the harvesting of oysters for market purposes.

Although no recent data are known to be available concerning

quality of Ashlev River waters, it is believed that considerable

improvement in water quality has recently been achieved as a re-

sult of newly constructed waste treatment facilities. Prominent -"

among these are tne two secondary sewage treatment facilities

operated by the St. Andrews Public Service District which handle "

most of the wastes trom the urban area adjacent to the Ashley

River. In addition, al. sewage discharged into the mouth of the

Ashley River irom the City ot Charleston receives primary treat-

ment and chlorination. S. C. Electric and Gas Company's Hagood

electric generating plant discharges 67.82 mgd of cooling water into

the Ashley River. Current discharge sources along the Ashley River,

their approximate daily discharge and type of treatment are pre-

sented in Table 9.

2.11. Air Quality. The Charleston County Health Depart-

munt monitors air quality in the project area. Air quality varies

with industrial development, the volume of automobile traffic, and

local air circulation patterns. These factors interact in such a

way that the highest suspended particulate content is found over

parts ot peninsular Charleston. The average suspended particulates

measured during the period July through September 1973 at a station

on the corner of Calhoun Street and Lockwood Drive ranged from

29.48 to 37.66 ugm. Another peninsular station is located on the

Queen Street Fire Station, where the geometric mean level of sus-

pended particrilates v-.'as reported to h, 48.1 ug/m during the period

November 1972 to >Iirch 1973. These levels are ,ell within the Federal

standard which is 7-) llg/m ] 3and the State standard which is 60 ug/m 3 .

2.12. CliatI. The prevailing winds arc southerly in the

spring and sutumi r and northerIv during the fall and winter. The

42

* U S S S S S S • 5 5 5 5

-..1

Page 55: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

6P v S

I) i! t !1 0 Lcco n haIsi i-ermnr iia cf Fec t onl Char ILeston s .

i, !nct- Is I , thi :in it in c itv terlrernture mav register

FO ID !0 iO I rr Iek L- hilir LhArlt ttlI recorded at the of rnor t -

11 111; tI ci -l :ii '-1 inJIL' i I liclice iui also cause

e vs cl ul rtio to !), !IIwered several degrees.

1) 10n L 1 1 i' un )l ccemher through Fehruarv,

Ic t I rj T; it ' ih 18 :nercent of the .nnulI total;

I-r n"I ciiA i ron ~rc I throlildi Maw verages ahout 20 percent

L~iI. 1:2>1 I L i I A' r cvipcri t ure of .'0 JIe-rees or less is

-WA '<1 c . n- hil' i nr'1M _Iuirries mav occur in

T2 '*. 521 itmu~ i., carel" measured.

. e smm-cs1cc wrm alnd iiumid; hovever, the

t::calr I~ C1011 L ie c ih' Me e S. ;-cortv-one percent of

Ill<~ tc; sV~c'vL icur is miodera te and sunnyv from late

'I'!!' ' L 1 ~'o .v L 'i r The coaistal area is suhlect to

111~~ r' n. [11> lc1.1h sur-it.e r and fall, 1ci th hiurri cane visitation

cl r iu' ' 0 tn il a ,\iil1ist. The h ilzes t recorded hurricane

11 Ic L id- i .O aIlke r-can ilot, water during the '.:mUst

K i.. ),. i liioriiiat ion below' vas compiled b%'' the

iti ion' ait heCharleston Mlunicipal Airnort,

r1 i:I lI i shed !)v Lie L-iv ironmen tal Data

I :i.:! n I nd A\t::..srh er i c Adm in is tra tion, V'. S.

Page 56: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.3.,"E1,11:()DO,0 .'ji C; A, DATA F'OR ]PERt.'OD 0O" RFCCJVD

14 2

. .F . .. .e .. .. 'c; 29 . ,7 . 71. __

.? .

,,_ , 14.2

,I,25.F,, ) N C', 2

(1 .. Pi '

I2 2

q *. i .k, l .. . Cv. 75.8 St 2r:y ............ ./,? 55. 3.2 3]S

JK .:. 2, 6 429 28 .8 6 2Ye .. . .6. .. 72 . 5 4 16 2\'873' 4-9. 70 q 1 N .V 28

.1 t.1 1 ~ I 19 71, Lthe Nar ine Resou rces 1) 1v is ion

C .. .... I 'I 9 darine Resources hrartent tre-

ii, i iti~i : i> > ,it ion of vetlands to determine t!ht

I i"irnlIilands withiin thie (Aiirluston

.. .Conducted under i 'nt i .. .th

Ye r.. . is part of an .4 t9r iiir valui2s

-.- t<1. IQC, 1972, (Re ucren' Ic). ohe

,,0!, i ,r, i { '. l l :,,rd 'a i e R s u c s lv ,a t v t n e

*, .6 i,,.::,: ,U S , S n~ S o of we l n s t S determine* t

Page 57: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

..

final report is available for public review in the Charleston

District office. A discussion of the pertinent aspects of

this report is presented in the following paragraphs. 6

2.13.1.1. Charleston Harbor historically has been

recognized for its value to fish and wildlife resources. The

productive role of lands in this area has been profoundly illus-

trated and stressed by Lunz (References 13 and 14). The vegeta-

tion of the marshlands complex in Charleston Harbor is varied

and it is now recognized that the types of vegetation present

play a key role in the processes of biological productivity. 0

Research by Odum (Reference 15) has shown that salt marsh

grasses, by converting inorganic nutrients and sunlight into

plant tissue, act as energy transfer mechanisms to consumer

organisms in the estuarine system. Field observations and ex-

perimental trawling operations in the harbor system have clearly

shown that tremendous quantities of dead marsh vegetation are

transported to adjacent estuarine waters during the winter and

early spring at times of extremely high tides. Teal (Reference

16) has calculated that approximately 45 percent of the total

plant material is transported out of Geo. gia salt marshes into

the estuary. This is also true in the Charleston area where

the tidal range is large. Dead grass may become waterlogged

and sink to the bottom or may be physically as well as biologically

disintegrated into particulate organic detritus, becoming food

for various invertebrates. These organisms are in turn eaten by

small fish which are subsequently consumed by larger predators,

etc. Thus, the link between fish and marsh is evident according

to Smalley (Reference 17). It is estimated that only about 7

percent of the marsh grass is eaten by insects, with the remainder

* being consumed by detritus feeding organisms such as amphipods, •

isonods and decapod crustaceans (shrimp and crabs), and fishes.

* 0 45 0

* W U S U S U S U S S S S S

Page 58: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

2.13.1.2. The importance of marshlands to estuarine pro-

ductivity is not limited to the detritus they produce. Applying

Teal's work (Reference 16) to comparable spartina marsh in the P .. S.

harbor, we postulate that algae may account for up to one-fourth

of the organic material produced in a salt marsh. In fact, it

has been shown by Pomeroy (Reference 18) that net algae production

is constant throughout the year. I 0

2.13.1.3. Productive salt marshes of Charleston Harbor

are dominated by smooth cordgrass which occurs as tall, inter-

mediate and short forms, depending on elevation. Tall cordgrass

grows vigorously in areas below an elevation of 1.59 m. (5.2 feet)

msl in Charleston Harbor and is the most productive of the three

types. Odum (Reference 15) reported that smooth cordgrass produces

approximately 2,000 g/m2 or 10 tons per acre (dry weight) in Georgia

marshes; this figure is applied to the entire crop of this sDecies

in Georgia. While there is evidence to infer that Georgia marshes/2

do not average 10 tons per acre (actually 2,240 g/m ) as reviewed

by Wass and Wright (Reference 19), there are data indicating that2 0 0I smooth cordgrass averages more than 4.4 (985 g/m ) in North Carolina

saltmarsh (Reference 20). These data suggest that annual production

in South Carolina saltmarshes would range between 2.9 and 4.4 tons

per acre at a minimum. Charleston Harbor marshes would probably

I be so*aewhat higher in production than the State's average since the 0

cordgrass so prevalent in this area appears to be extremely vigorous

in certain areas. Nutrients from sewage pollution in years past

may have been beneficial in stimulating growth even though the water

quality was degraded. Marshall (Reference 21) showed that cordgrass

marsh receiving sewage plant effluent produced more biomass, reached

its pc k biomass sooner and was apparently not injured by fertiliza-

tion.

2.13.1.4. Black needlerush is also commonly found in

Charleston Harbor marshlands. It is generallv considered the least

important of the common marsh plants (Reference 22) and is usually

associated with higher fringe areas above the mean high water line.

46

w w w w U U U S S 5 0 0 0 5 0 5

Page 59: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

However, during this survey black needlerush was found in mixed

stands with smooth cordgrass in upstream locations of transition

from salt to brackish and fresh water. I 5

2.13.1.5. In the upper Cooper River near Goose Creek

and upstream to the "Tee", the marsh vegetation gradually

changes to a brackish and freshwater type. Brackish water marshes p 0

in the Charleston Harbor study area occupy a transitional zone

area between true salt marsh and fresh water marshes. These marshes

are prevalent in the upper Cooper from the area of its confluence

with Yellow House Creek to the vicinity of Bushy Park and Moreland I S

Landing. While many of the salt marsh species still occur in this

area, there is a trend toward greater diversity including such

species as bulrushes, cattail, giant cordgrass, etc.

2.13.1.6. Plant zonation in the lower harbor is more

subtle and difficult to define where unconsolidated stands of

smooth cordgrass are found. Generally, there are four zones that

can be delineated from the water's edge to the woodland: (1)

the "edge marsh" or tall smooth cordgrass zone; (2) the "low meadow"

or medium smooth cordgrass; (3) the "saltgrass meadow" or stunted "

smooth cordgrass - salt grass, salt meadow cordgrass zone; and

(4) the "high meadow" or salt meadow cordgrass - black needlerush - * Sglasswort - sea ox-eve zone.

2.13.1.7. The different plant zones in the Charleston

Harbor area are assigned to a single priority based on overall

value to marine resources. These priorities are as follows: •

Priority 1. To include areas of highest value to fisheries and

wildlife resources; consisting primarily of regularly flooded,

high salinity marshes. Regularly flooded, brackish marsh could

be included dependent on locaLion. Vi gorous smooth cordgrass

(medium and tall growth) as described in vegetative zones (1)

and (2) above is the dominant vegetative type.

47

* U U U S U S U U U U U U U U •

Page 60: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Priority II. To include areas of second highest value to fisheries

and wildlife resources; consisting primarily of regularly flooded

salt and brackish marsh. Regularly flooded fresh marsh could also

be included. Smooth cordgrass (medium ,rowth) a, descrLbed in vege-

tative zone (2), is the dominant vegetative type. Regularly flooded

types are included dependent on location.

Priority III. To include areas of third highest value to fisheries

and wildlife resources; consisting of irregularly flooded salt,

brackish and fresh marsh, flats and barren zones. Black needlerush,

salt meadow cordgrass, sea ox-eve, salt grass, glasswort, and stunted

smooth cordgrass are generally found in vegetative zones (3) and

(4). Areas within this priority are classified as realistic formanagement.

Priority IV. To include areas of little value to fisheries and wild-

life resources; consisting of irregularly flooded salt and bracl ish

marsh, flats, barren zones and areas significantly altered by develop-

ment. These areas are not classified since they have very little

potential for management. Outer margins of diked snoil areas, un-

diked spoil areas and areas fouled by industrial or other wastes

are characteristic of this tvpe.

2.13.1.8. The S. C. kWildlife and .arine ''esources Department

has assigned the following priorities to the marsh areas along the

river systems (V<ando, Cooper, Ashley) of Charleston Harbor. The

marsh alonc the a.ando River 0 "stem is made up of 5,471 acres of I -

Priority T marsh and 976 acres of Priority 11 marsh. There are

essentially no areas of either Priority TI or TV along this svstem.".

2.13.1.9. The Cooper River System las 9,172 acres of *Prioritv TT marsh, 30 acres of Priority T41 marsh and 1,641 acres

of Prioritv IV marsh. Therc are no Prioritv 1 marshes ',ithin this

svster.

S • o_ ._

Page 61: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

P1r iori t % I ma rsh 1 1 )27 1,. r cv- o f Pr i o)r i v I I ma r sh, 508 acres

of Prioritv I fT mirsh and no Prioritv 1 V imarsh.

S0

3. 1.. Iarl tstLon liaarrk I can t a in; 3, 14'8 ac,-res of

Pr iori tx I nrsh ',006 aocres of :rorLvIImaSi., 116 acres

0t' Pri Orit 1 t V tTIZImarsi :111d noC Pr iori tx v, fV :ia rcsh

2I..1 .112. othu-r abundant plant spcades- in the Charleston 0

ha nlor a rcai inc luu but airc no10 lil"it cd to wax m r tie, sea-mvr tie,

mairshI c Iuer , c iaba 1 p: I ut t0o, pocc 1' 2W2L, ed , e, stiff fimhristviis, -

c ra crss , rL a;ttasrn r c' ctad ir , ool l v nna, e cet gu I., southern

magnol ia , hi ack gum, red IP iv, blacuk cherrv, , water oak, I ive oak, S

sands rs , ha mud aa a :reenh riiar, soft-st em bul ru shI, southern

w,,ilId r ic e, all i ',a ILo r .e , na rrovJ-1 caved cait ta ilI, ch1iinese tal low-

tree, pennywort, svikc-roshi, smartwccd, salt-cedar, aster, coco,

4and matrsh mallow,. 0

2.13.2. V~ll~. \itlu it-, igroat natural resources and

varietv of hlab 1tat t c hi l nclude marshes , high lands, swamps,

£ ~~andi frIns d 'sl wa tor s , Chan les;ton Ha rhor and surrounding areas

abouind w'ith a wida vriety of wildl ife species. Not only are there

ai I argo iu::ha r ot r sI at eals ut thtarc are many seasonal

\.'sitrsvih a a, cirmmt n ad/or pa'ss through this section

-. 13.2 . j ns . liar, arc, a -reat nurmber of resident

anu sa, son1 ii rd i n t ni oh r I ts wia hor area . Many water-

10'1 i'a. cy .' '>~in~ sof tha~ue r including

4 r nl k,, n ,. ' .) 1i u ei~ob -winged

tat'1Il 'n-L ipm 0 cal a I r,-a~l cainvashack, ring-

du,'(: k, 'rca tur ar~ L'i acaon gOHlulcv, huffle-

a'~i~ 1 t . mIa d purple

S Jul .

Page 62: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

2.13.2.1.1. Other species associated with freshwater or brack-

ish habitats include the common egret, snow-v egret, cattle egret,

belted kingfisher, marsh hawk, double-crested cormorant, common loon, ..

pied-billed grebe, great blue heron, Louisiana heron, little blue

heron, green heron, black and yellow-crowned night herons, American

bittern, least bittern, glossy ibis, white ibis, Virginia rail, sora

rail, king rail, clapper rail, long and short-billed wren, red-winged -

blackbird, boat-tailed grackle, connon snipe, the eastern brown peli-

can, and osprey.

2.13.2.1.2. Shorebirds and gulls found in the area at various p

times of the vear include the American oystercatcher, semipalmated

plover, Wilson's plover, willet, dunlin, short-billed dowitcher,

sandpipers, black-necked stilt, herring gull, laughing gull, ring-

billed gull, royal tern, and killdeer.

2.13.2.1.3. Upland species include the turkey vulture, black

vulture, sharp-shinned hawk, red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered hawk,

osprey, sparrow hawk, turkey, bobwhite, American woodcock, rock dove,

mourning dove, ground dove, yellow and black-billed cuckoo, screech

owl, great horned owl, short-eared owl, barn owl, barred owl, chuck-

will's-widow, whip-poor-will, common nighthawk, common flicker, pil-

eated woodpecker, red-bellied woodpecker, yellow-bellied woodpecker, 0

hairy woodpecker, downy woodpecker, eastern kingbird, tree swallow,

purple martin, blue jay, common and fish crow, tufted titmouse, red-

breasted nuthatch, white-breasted nuthatcl, brown creeper, house

wren, Carolina wren, mork jnbird, ctbird, brokwn thrasher, robin,

eastern bluebird, blue-,ra :her, 1og,,erhied shrike, sta riin ,.

solitary vireo, various .a rb l ,, common vel 1 o; t ro;it , L stern meadow

lark, cardinal, rufou:5-s idOd towhiee, riinv sC:irr s * (cio1innhickadee,

and slate-colord iunco. I •

2. 13.2.2. lamma Is. l tLhouthll t e]I i ried i ate i I Varles to ai rb or

area offers on1v limite.d ha!t- tat for most mamrial : . ,Yui. :,,o K-

tensive develo:ient, s itailuibitat is ovallab ho ii tilt r

. , 4

Page 63: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

and uplands associated with the numerous tidal creeks and rivers

which enter the harbor. Mammals commonly associated with these

areas include the opossum, various shrews, eastern mole, various p_.. 0

bats, raccoon, long-tailed weasel, mink, river otter, striped

skunk, gray fox, bobcat, eastern gray and fox squirrels, southern

flying snuirrel, numerous mice and rats, eastern cottontail rab-

bit, marsh rabbit, white-tail deer, and feral Dig. The only i ]

marine mammals commonly observed in the harbor are the Atlantic

common dolphin and Atlantic bottle-nosed dolphin.

2.13.2.3. Reptiles and Anphibians. The most common

marine reptile in the area is the diamondback terrapin. Other

turtles that occur in the harbor and offshore waters include the

Atlantic loggerhead and the Atlantic green turtle.

2.13.2.3.1. Vithin the three river systems and in the harbor

itself, there are a great number and variety of reptiles and am-

phibians. Animals commonlv found in the freshwater aquatic habi-

tats are the alligator, common snapping turtle, spotted turtle,

eastern mud turtle, river cooter, chicken turtle, Florida and •

spiny softshell turtle, black swamp snake, banded water snake,

brown water snake, eastern cottonmouth, dwarf waterdog, lesser

and greater siren, leopard frog, green frog, bull frog and river

frog. S

2.13.2.3.2. In the drier upland habitats are found the

garter snake, eastern hognose snake, southern ring-necked snake,

4 black racer, eastern coachwhip, rough green snake, yellow rat snake, 0

scarlet snake, scarlet king snake, eastern king snake, southern

co )erhead, pigmy rattlesnake, canebrake rattlesnake, eastern

diamondback rattlesnake, southern toad, spring peener, green tree-

4 Frog, and cricket frog. 0 •

2.13.2.4. Rare and endangered species. There are 10

threatened species, 1 perirheral species and 3 status undetermined

0 p 1

b w -. ' w

Page 64: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

species which occur or possibly occur in the Charleston Harbor S

area (Reference 23).

a. Threatened species. Threatened species can be defined as

those "whose prospects for survival and reproduction are in imme-

diate jeopardy. Their peril may result from one or more causes--

loss of habitat or change in hebitat, overexploitation, predation,

competition or disease."

Threatened species are:

Fish

Shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum

Reptiles and amphibians

American alligator Alligator mississipiensis

Green turtle Chelonia mydas

BirdsI

Eastern brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis -

carolinensis

Southern bald eagle Haliaeetus 1. leucocephalus

Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus

Bachman's warbler Vermivora bachmanii '

Kirtland's warbler Dendroica kirtlandii

Eskimo curlew Numemius borealis

The brown pelican is commonly observed in coastal areas of South

Carolina. The green turtle is a resident of the open sea and may

occassionally be observed when it comes onto coastal beaches at night

to lay eggs. The alligator is commonly observed in freshwater lakes

and rivers. The bald eagle is a permanent resident of the state and

is usually found around lakes, rivers and coastal bays. The bald eagle

has not been sighted in the immediate harbor area in recent years. The %

peregrine falcon, Kirtland's warbler, and Eskimo curlew are transient p.]

species. According to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bachman'swarbler, one of the rarest of our small birds, has been observed in 0

'on swamp.

52 9 0

w w W W W U W U S U S S S S S S

Page 65: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* 0

b. Peripheral species. A peripheral species--"is one whose

occurrence in the United States is at the edge of its natural

range and which is threatened with extinction within the United _

States although not in its range as a whole." The only peri-

pheral species known to occur in the project area is the roseate

spoonbill (Ajaia ajaja) which is a transient.

c. Status undetermined species. A status undetermined species-

"is one that has been suggested as possibly being rare or endangered,

but about which there is not enough information to determine its

status." The following species are in this category:

American osprey Pandion haliaetus carolinensis

Wood ibis Mycteris americana

Eastern pigeon hawk Falco c. columbarius

The osnrev is locally common and the other species have been seen

in the area.

2.13.3. Fish. The vast complex of salt and freshwater

marshes, sounds, tidal creeks, and rivers in the project area,

provides excellent habitat for a diverse array of marine and fresh-

water fish species.

2.13.3.1. Cooner River. The principal freshwater sport

fishing areas are located in the Cooper River and contiguous waters.

The Cooper River is characteristic of a large river because of the

large volume of water released from Pinopolis dam for power genera-

tion. Peak discharges frequently inundate about 7,300 acres of 0

marshes and abandoned rice fields. The inundation of these low-

lying areas provides habitat for small fishes and invertebrates

which contribute a significant amount to the overall productivity

of the Cooper 'liver. This high productivity is reflected somewhat

in the large number of fish species (73) collected from the river

during a recent studv.

* 0 53 0

* U U U S U S U U U U U 9 U U U

Page 66: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

2.13.3.1.1. The Cooper River annually receives large runs

of anadromous fish with large numbers of striped bass, blueback

herring, and American and hickory shad ascending the river to spawn, i.. S

mainly in the West Branch between the "Tee" and Pinopolis Dam. Just

below the dam and adjacent to the tailrace canal, the South Carolina

Wildlife and Marine Resources Department operates a striped bass

hatchery. Fry produced at this hatchery come from eggs which are S

stripped from Cooper River striped bass captured in the tailrace

canal.

2.13.3.1.2. The transition from a marine to a freshwater 0

environment usually occurs in the general vicinity of the junction

of Goose Creek and the Cooper River. The best freshwater fishing

and the most heavily utilized areas are the East Branch of the

Cooper River and the tailrace canal. The Back River Reservoir is

also heavily fished, partly because of convenience of access. Good

fishing is also provided by the West Branch of the Cooper River be-

tween the "Tee" and the vicinity of Goose Creek.

2.13.3.1.3. Principal species appearing in the sport fish- 0

erman's catch on the freshwater portions of the Cooper River and

contiguous waters are striped bass, largemouth bass, bluegill, black

crappie, redbreast sunfish, redear sunfish, warmouth, spotted sunfish,

channel catfish, chain pickerel and bullheads. 9

2.13.3.2. Charleston Harbor and contiguous waters. Recent

studies on the value of Charleston Harbor to marine resources were

* conducted by the Marine Resources Center of the South Carolina Marine 0

Resources Department in cooperation with the U. S. Army Corps of

Engineers (Reference 12). The purpose of this study was to evaluate

the adult and juvenile fish fauna in the system and to incorporate

* these findings into an overall assessment program for the coastal 0

zone.

54

. . .. .

Page 67: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

2.13.3.2.1. Research trawling for this study was con-

ductud during 1970-1971 on a monthly basis and has provided

pertLnent data on various faunal elements which definitely .

t,-tab I ihes the Charleston Harbor area as an important nursury

aIrea. .'.s night be expected, the trophic structure of the estu-

ary v Fries from season to season with biological activity reach-

in-, a ioc point in the winter as manv species become relatively 0

inactive or mirate to offshore waters. In the spring, there

is a rai-id r ise in ecosystem metabolism and productivity in-

crcases. at :ill levels.

2.13.3.2.2. Sampling stations occupied during this studv

.wcrc located in the Ashley River and Beresford Creek and near

Seiin,;cn and flog Island. A summary of the species captured

is the Chiarleston Harbor area and :Iorris Island area during

LilA stud: ;re presented in Tables 10 and 11, respectively. A

Lotal of 70 s-ucies of fish wert captured, many of which are

valuable in the makeup of commercial and sport fisheries in the

project area. As shown in the tables, some of the species

captured are ,ear-round residents and are found in all zones of

the iharbor while others are migrant forms that utilize the harbor

1s ,inurs rv area and then move into offshore waters. The great

dicvrsity of species found during this study. tends to document

the "act that the Charleston Harbor area is a valuable asset to

Lit ;i 5 marine resources.

2.1"3. .*.* . The barbor and adj1ont inshore and offshore

i i .- rt , in intense -,,w rt fisht r, . Principal species 0

,, :'Iit i:, i i- ier' . Lter, I:. surf, :uitr, ind small boat fishermen

Ii ii ,i t .d to red :i:i , lick drum, sheepshead,

t: F l ",ed ass, ',ui.<: ish, sp, otted seatrout,

:, i . .. 4 , ,, , ir, Pier ir , n, ano, toadfish, black

: <-:L:, e,, fteps_,. c tfish, sea c,::i 5iI, lad vfish, and Spanish

* 0 0 !]

*l S S

Page 68: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

*O 0

2.13.3.2.4 In addition to the aforementioned inshore

fishing, there are many charter boats, head boats and large pri-vate boats which fish the offshore waters for king and Spanish

mackerel, bluefish, dolphin, white and blue marlin, sailfish, 0

wahoo, cobia, crevalle jack, barracuda, little tunny, skipjack

tuna, amberjack, black sea bass, groupers, red and vermillion

snapper, red porgy and triggerfish.

2.13.3.3. Ashley River. The Ashlev River contains the

common freshwater and marine forms found in other coastal streams

of this area, although studies reported on in 1964 (Reference 24)

eindicate that biological productivity in the river appears to be

lower than that of other coastal streams. This condition was attri-

buted to domestic and industrial pollution, which occasionally became

severe enough to cause fish kills. However, significant improvement

in water quality of the Ashley River has occurred since this report

was written as a result of improved waste treatment practices.

Although biological studies of the scope of those conducted in

1964 have not been conducted recently, local reports indicate that

fish kills no longer occur and fisherman use and success have been •

increasing as a result of improved water quality. The Ashley River

also serves as a nursery for blue crabs, brown and white shrimp,

and various marine finfish.

2.13.3.4. Wando River. The Wando River generally contains 0

the same fresh and saltwater fishes found in other coastal streams.

Most sport fishing is by small boat for spotted seatrout, red drum,

flounder, striped bass, and spot. Sports fishermen also take blue

crabs and castnetters take a few shrimp. 0

2.13.3.4.1. The river is classified in the SB category which

permits bathing, fishing, crabbing and other uses but prohibits the

taking of oysters and clams except for transplanting to other waters

from which they can ultimately be gathered. Recent information

indicates that sub-tidal seed oysters occupy about 390 acres in the

'.'ando River.

50-

Page 69: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I. - • - , - - - , • - . -. .v-:-': • , - , , . . ., .- . " L . - .' -' "--;- ,

Scattered concentrations of intertidal ovsters also occur in

the river. Commercial fishing is limited to a small blue crab

fishery.

2.13.3.4.2. The Wando River also serves as an important

nursery for many marine forms which later contribute to area

sport and commercial fisheries.

2.13.4. Commercial fisheries. Annual fishery landing

statistics compiled by the National Marine Fisheries Service in

cooperation with the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources

Department show that commercial fishing in the Charleston area is

a multi-million dollar industry. Principal species landed include D

shrimp, oysters, blue crabs, clams, alewives, American eels,

flounder, whiting, black sea bass, and spot. Other species marketed

include bluefish, croaker, black drum, red drum, groupers, grunts,

king mackerel, menhaden, mullet, pompano, porgy, gray seatrout, I S

spotted seatrout, shad, sharks, sheepshead, red snapper, vermillion

snapper, Spanish mackerel, sturgeon, and squid. Landing data for

the period 1964 to 1973, which may include species captured in areas

other than Charleston, are presented in Table 12. b

2. 3.4.1. U"pstream of the harbor in the tailrace canal and

in Lake Moultrie, there is a commercial fishery for herring. During

the spring of 1973, a total of 363,600 pounds or 805,000 herring

were harvested from the Cooper River between March 5 and April 18.

This represents a decline in both fishing pressure and harvest when

compared to 1972. The herring catch on Lake Moultrie totaled

63, 3-4) pounds in 1973 (Reference 25).

2.l3.5. Tnvertebrates. Macroinvertebrates commonly

a-suciated with the saltmarsh environment in the project area include

i variety of crustaceans, mollusks, and polychaetous annelids. Ben-

tLUic fauna in tilL offshore disposal area was found by the South *(arolina i,.'ildlife and Marine Resources Department to be impoverished

i little diversity and very small numbers of individuals as

c' pi'ir Cd to i iushore areas.

" 7

Page 70: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

00

2.13.5.1. Crustaceans found in the area include two

species which are commonly observed during periods of low tide,

the mud fiddler crab and sand fiddler crab. The mud fiddler -

crab lives primarily on the clayey or muddy intertidal flats

among tae roots of cord grass while the sand fiddler crab gener-

ally inhabits the sandier substrates in areas near the high tide

line. Other small crabs which are common in the marsh are the 0

mud crab, flat mud crab, and wharf crab. The mud rab is found

in areas containing heavy oyster growth or shell accumulation;

the flat mud crab occurs on the muddier substrates in the lower

portions of the marsh; and the wharf crab is found near the high

tide line where it actively crawls about on wharves and

stone jetties or rests in shallow burrows along the shores. Other

crustaceans commonlv found in and around the marsh at various

times of the year are blue crabs, hermit crabs, brown and white

shrimp, mantis shrimp, grass shrimp, isopods, amphipods, and

harnacles.

2.13.5.2. The American oyster is the most common pele- 0

cv~od mollusk found in the area's marshes and generally occurs

in clumps or large beds in the small tidal creeks. The collecting

of oysters for human consumption is prohibited in the harbor area

because of bacterial levels which exceed state standards. These 0

beds do, however, provide seed oysters and habitat for many species

of fishes and invertebrates. The Atlantic ribbed mussel and the

hard shell clam are also found in the area. The ribbed mussel is

4eerallv7 found in sandv mud or attached to oyster shells while 0

the hard shell clam is found on sandy or muddy bottoms, between

the tides and in shallow water.

-'3.5.3. Gastropod mollusks commonly observed in marshes 0

irotind the ha;rhor include the common marsh reriwinkle, eastern mud

niil, -in( the 1 t marsh snail. The periwinkle is generally found

, ,rIrls- in the hi her regions of the marsh near sandy substrates

6 S 0

58

* W W W W W W 0

Page 71: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0]

while the mud snail occurs in low areas where the substrate is

always wet and muddy. The salt marsh snail is usually found

near the high tide line under windrowed plant debris.

2.13.5.4. Polychaete worms also inhabit the salt marsh,

sometimes in large numbers, and are found on a wide variety of

substrates. 0

2.13.5.5. Although much of the salt marsh in the project

area provides suitable habitat for the numerous invertebrates

mentioned above, suitable habitat is somewhat limited in the

deeper portions of the estuary. Samples collected during

Sentember, 1965, bv the former FNPCA for the Charleston Harbor

polluLion study revealed that adverse conditions for benthic

organisms existed in many of the deeper reaches of the harbor.

As a result, population numbers were generally found to be low

with polychaete worms being the most common group of animals

collected. The lower reaches of the Ashley and Cooper Rivers

were found to be highly polluted and lacked bottom associated

or;,,anisms at mid-channel stations. Moderately polluted areas

were found in the main harbor from the mouths of the Ashley,

Cooper and Wando Rivers to near Ft. Sumter. The only benthic

organisms collected in these reaches were polychaete worms.

Seaward of Ft. Sumter, benthic environments were not found to

be nolluted to any great extent. Animals collected in this

reach included polvchaete worms, shrimp, and crabs.

S2.]3. 5.h. Economically, the most important invertebrates

-iound in the estuary are the brown and white shrimp and blue

As shown in Table 12, the 1973 commercial shrimp landings

iii tht Charleston area amounted to over 4 million pounds valued

•~it loon t 4.5 million dollars. Blue crab landings for this same

oor 0(d amounted to over 2 rill ion pounds valued at over 400,000

(1 1 nra .

59

" "' S 5 5 5 5 5 " ' " 5

Page 72: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

KT"

2.13.5.7. Aside from direct economic values, all inverte-

brates in the estuary are available as food for other marine inverte-

brates and fishes at some stage in their life cycle. For example, two

studies conducted in Florida showed that invertebrates constituted

the principal source of food for more than 94 percent of the fishes

harvested in Florida's valuable sport and commercial fis'heries

(Reterences 34 and 35). A similar condition probably exists in the

Charleston Harbor area.

2.13.6. Zooplankton.

2.13.6.1. Available information on species composition and

abundance of plankton populations in the Charleston Harbor area is

rather limited. One of the first studies of the abundance of these

organisms in the harbor area was completed by Bears Bluff Laboratories,

Inc., in 1964 under a contract with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Reference 24).

2.13.6.2. The Bears Bluff report gives the following account

pj of plankton populations in the Ashley, Cooper, Wando and Santee Rivers:

"Information from Plankton studies indicates that all of the river

systems studied are areas of abundance for many zooplankton forms,

including larvae and postlarvae of commercial species of fish and

60 shellfish. The Santee River system was found to have the greatest 0

recruitment of fish larvae nrid postlarvae, chiefly spot, croaker,

and menhaden, over the study neriod. Blue crab larvae were most

plentiful in the tando River. Penaeid shrimp postlarvae were not

plentiful in any of the rivers surveyed during 1963-1964, and this 0

was reflected in the very low commercial shrimp catch over this

period. Although the Ashley River was not found to be a region of

comparatively great abundance for the larval and postlarval forms

fl commercial species, this river nonetheless ranked high in the

abuIndance of copepods, mvsid shrimp, etc., indicating that it is an

area of high zoomlankton productivity. On the basis of total zoo-

plankton productivity it appears that of the four river systems

60

* - - S S S 0 0 0 0 0

Page 73: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

IV

'I*1 t ti

t t)

:)r I 0;

ud.

r rt wer

rk:

r Lcnn r L11 I t

II

Page 74: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-.-- ~ ~ Q W W -. -

was taken in the summer (502,523/acre) and spring (189,131/acre).

The average in the fall sample was 122,164/acre. The average

standing crop for the three surveys combined was 271,273 organisms/

acre.

2.13.6.5. Of the 45 fish species collected (luring the three

survey periods, 10 species accounted for 95 percent of the total

catch and three of these species accounted for 75 nercent of that

total. Listed in decreasing order of abundance, the 10 most abun-

dant species were Atlantic croaker, Atlantic menhaden, mummichog,

bay anchovy; spot, freshwater oobv, striped mullet, silver perch,

tidewater s;ilversides, and southern flounder.

2.13.6.6. Invertebrates collected included grass shrimp,

whit, shrimn, and blue crabs. Numerically, the invertebrates were 0

most abundant a,:counting for 89 percent of the total collections.

(;rass shrimp :.adu up 95 Percent of the invertebrate catch.

2.13.6.7. Nean biomass was also dominated by invertebrates _

as they made up 63 percent of the 249 pound/acre average. Grass

shrimp accounted for 131 pounds/acre and blue crabs 19 pounds/acre.

The dominant fish species was the American eel at 16 pounds/acre,

followed by stri pd ruillet (13.1 pounds/acre), croaker (12.9 pounds/ p

acre, and menhaden (12.6 pounds/acre).

2.13.6.8. The authors of this study concluded that "the

tmlli, st ron4-Iv Umohas izud the importance of tidal streams asI S

nuLirer ; cr r .i ;1 5 nt'rcenLt o F all organisms collected were marine

clir'}ii I oe f tk-; ie , :id mianv of the predominant Forms were repre-

'n~teU almost tnt i reyv by larval, post-larval, and juvenile stages."

li at , o st It ed that: HLiri est onaio[y, the Cooper 1iver upstream

of (oir1 sto, . . is; a dynamic system s;iprortin , diverse pomula-

r it e rarine, and inadromou; ! is;Ihes ;and invertebrates.

. I ; I . : - [ ;ire e ither esteemed is ,inc f Ii ci t's;, cor'iercia IlI

Viloil I, ,cf ;r:v'r't;in a I i-ave' soon ri '

i Ii i 11 1r i iiL i Io r t I Se(

V W W V W W W

Page 75: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

II.,n i ;,It. t 1(10I1 tr 1.-s 0Ii t It( I * ' k:011 I IN ier SySteM

r ens i -ahivmor a productivye thain tw-- ol~ a te corL RO'yal

toji ustosi n vn; terna su r VeC inl 190 A NIt hough -i .,rcatcr

d i varo i-, L vt o ne fs (f o 7 ) oc c ur r d In ti oart itavav. I t i da I

1- t1i, I 0 SI- i iM 'I 01ops 0i aciy tie r,. i1:- ~ ~ vc B I ar

I I I u~I~ r :, Sc I A~ :1 1 Vo a ri n I v

i t;< I I 1 1 i ama-vi 1 60 .7 P I I I1 1 r i rc vai, ~o -

tt I" Yli Pt talli <id a *rci-;; t heC o pOtr fi VLr t I da' I

Sr, )0 rtI 1 Ii i tiil - hiL mcioib)r ind I au r t c~ tI a t h)i o-

d1 i.7 a I. .r tt pil c . Dunr in . t ii LL I ctll

I ca :Iit r ot4 the Iirinc Rtciotrcc.s LDivisjain ot t he

F, 1 I 1:d 1: t L11 i rc k., *Jp~irtar n t n. i d v

'' 1) hl ()I iAi~rdc 11cceiv 01 o thLt; jras

I d it. -,id Mndt r a c-n t rac t ,. it t tiic S A . TP.

;i VS i, sir 1 SI o a estuirifle value,; studvN I -t ,,nc,

le IIs 4 i I Ah 1 1 Oar pub L i c re'va I n', ii t ha

aIi. Pert incot a.pects, () t il rp ofrf i r-

r 1i a- )[) r , ~ t I a~ Ia nu tt( a0Fdt 11) 1

lil 11 tI ls Iii t it l~ -~15i! i,, I it

I II > t T.. r a ~ I it r~ a a

it1.

Il ill

Page 76: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

buildup ot deposited dredged materials. "[he benthic fauna (see

Table 19) were found to be iipoverished with relatively little

diversity and very small numbers of individuals, as compared to

inshore typically estuarine areas. However, the S.C.W.M.R.D. felt

that this was a normal community for this type of bottom and con-

cluded that the direct effect of dumping on the benthic fauna

appeared to be limited. Most mollusks probably could manipulate

to the surface after shallow burial.

2.13.7.4 The open shelf habitat from the 60-toot (10 fathom)

curve to 108 feet (18 fathoms) is characterized by a rough bottom

with coral, limestone and vast invertebrate communities. Beyond108 feet (18 fathoms), broken or live bottom areas are generally

more scattered and out to 150-180 feet (25-30 fathoms), the shelf

contour is relatively smooth and has a very gradual slope. The

shelf edge habitat off Charleston is characterized by a wide variety •

ot bottom types. fhe dominant feature of this area is the remains

ol an ancient reel which runs approximately parallel to the coast-

line it depths of 150-21-0 teet (25-35 fathoms). This is a rich ]irea lor fishing with tremendous growths of invertebrates, sponges •

and corals and will be avoided during disposal of dredged material.

2.13.7.5 Generally, the bottom area to the east and southeast of

the dumping site out to the continental shelf has live bottom areas

inter.persed at various localities. These are characterized by

outcrops of rock with attachments of sessile organisms, sponges, etc.

aind are populated by a variety oi fish species. No dredged materials

wiI I he placed in these areas.

2.13.8 Description of existing diked disposal areas. *2.13.8.1 Daniel Island. The Daniel Island disposal area

is located at the junction of the Cooper and Wando Rivers and is -currently tinder easement to the South Carolina State Ports Authority

until 1980 or until such time that it is filled to an elevation of

18 feet above mlw. A total of 686 acres of the 789 acres under

easement have been d iked. Previous studies indicate that once the

material is in the disposal area it will consolidate to about 50

percent of its shoal volume. Applying this factor to the current 0

rat, of filling, it is calculated that Daniel Island is being filled

Page 77: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

)II Lt I I. .'t )L'r V('ar. At this rate, 18.0 feet MJw

I -It r ih. I ,i int int.e dredging in 1.977. It has been

F CC vol !WjdL,(l t i t t h e, I mcnt be amended to) permit filling to 22

I .Ct Mlw ii> I.xt l ,in? the liiI of this area through 1980 and

, , i . l)tu to the. additional drying time that would

h I j, Ii-l it IIt', d i kes co I(I be ra i sed , the District Engineer has

Iskk.d ttl. pl, .Let ;ponslor (the State of South Carolina) to initiate

stoy, to reicew Lih D.ini l I s land easement, extending the time and

di tt ri t -A ri't ion.t on height of fill, and begin negotiations

I Q- orn add it i, alr I d i sposa I area suitable f or Lower Charleston Harbor

I tI i i tSit i, t S, ejil re rn L s2.1 3.'. 1. 1 'Fh, a rea currently being utilized for deposition

,, *-1 i: riii>; id loc.ated on the southern end of the island.

!)hil' t i. In . < I ,rdg ing, the interior of the disposal area

I V v I". I: pitd se-diment and there is little vegetation.

j.. i i, . tL Uw irea .is limited to feeding herons,

t ni d i irs, 0dun in, willets, black-necked stilts,

' '.,'. ' 1 i, i ; othth r bird ;ptcits, and small mammals.

Sr'iris land. The Morris Island disposal areai S

. I t i , ,ut h oi the harboir west of the entrance channel.

S ; . s 'I- sudr - (d.A.ement to the South Carolina

t'. f .\uliti )it lor a period of 25 years from 21 December

I S cd ,2-1 i' Current lv being used for disposal covers

'h, iV*1 ; ,lovat ion is currently 7.0 feet miw.

.,. .. i l ed ,,Ivit ion of 2 3.0 feet and a compaction

.; .• .:,, lii,, '. ri s Islanl i -d (I poS I area wi I I hold about

... ..... s '. 1 1 oip),ictcd nii ril or 28,160,000 cubic

. .t,' i, n i i the JiisposaIl area is sparse and

I t T I i I t o that described lor Daniel Island.

.. i-!t K -ia 0.nd o t ie, island is composed of

.., , i i;,,l whitli ire, ut ili zed bv small

:';iiii~in , ilt-owl , and wading and passerine

. ,. pl.in:; olr diking this area, and using it

1P 1P.

Page 78: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

~1 11111 ii i iui d I -. h~it:ic bv Thiwn Guick ont Lilt' WLi-st Imd Lile

c~~oou] I CV t '1 ( r c -1 fTw Cotyc R i verr paJt ~ otoss'

c V t i. ct0 it hO,- !I p7< 1> ."I UI'( of igi to I O 1c ru

.I-ciI: I. , < t I I f u cih I I I AL IL Ihc C 1ti

Ct. 1 I t w; 11 Lt MIt ct i I o o) t L 1. t L 1 1Ci~l VI I I- 0

DI' AV 1 1: l) oo I ( '- .. .'i tc t7ItItI I i i No tt ~ de t h oIIc t cIl

APPCt il It [.11) Jc I7 1c 1)t ci i) ii L U d it It)ze I ()rc dChorlcitt 0~)

I 1 1,) c ir, i rl 1 tot ce , ;I Ilocal io mtenance dredging.

.17~ t i 1OiiiIj- IL-; otrc ctmd wildl1ife c'ut iiiza-

(7 i 0 1 11,1 AU 11, itt in 1 k l' DoIlI ' i I lin d i ispos-IlI a rea . A

I. '7 '. ;)cr\i J t d mit-;I (1 litd liked ret oil the

trt .' I j !t ttc.tTi I I ftitt tecil tire Ot1C(' is densely vege-

i-t'tVI (t !IoI I t Cli , i 1 berry wax myrtle, cabbage

L L, ) it) -(7 cid plo K i I Oificus . 'Illi - rookery i s

I . 7 Alt i [I Snow ugi. 5ii9 ctr'7 Loui si ana heron,

-. 7. .t.'7'7 it niptt: lirctt, glossy ibis, white

it 1. I i L It ,t tt I; 1k I i )w- 1 witl U i-cut heuco.

-. ~~~~ .i-,1 t,.:tL 11 ti I. SI)OS IIitr(eicu~ area

I 11 : ti i~t r'.:t 50 I tu IS h'c -bLwcIi M i I v- I I

I . U~rI',' t.o p 1 Ii:~t1.~rsm. iitenance

it tc t

0II I l i

*~~ 1w t I I I I

Page 79: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-. %,. j,,- -. -

r 0

2. 13.8.-4. 1 In addition to the area used by the Corps of

Engineers, tile U. S. Navy uses a 703 acre area on the southern

portion of thu island to dispose of materials removed during their - 0

ma itelii , d red, ing of docks and slips. Current elevations in

this arca Irc bout 15 feet miw. Using the same assumptions as -

Above, this arc-zi has a capacity of 8,998,400 cubic yards of corn-

p,aL tcd nmater ial or 17,996,800 rubic yards ot shoal or in situ 0

m~ite r i a

2.1 3.8..2 The perimeter of the disposal area is classed

as Priority IV wetlands. Plant species found around the perimeter

inclkl smooth cord grass, big cord grass, black needle rush, •

ca t Lii :;edges, hulrushes, silverline, tamarisk, hackberrv,

(d i'u,. t illow trce, wax myrtle, rattlebox, Russian thistle, dog

fennlc , giiot ralgweed, goldenrod, loblolly pine and various clovers.

i-; i, t ii, (I i k- , v .o tit ye cover varies from none to dense. "l'lie ]

: i,,r II 0 . t the area is covered with recently deposited dredged -

mter i, I and is sparsely vegetated. The northern portion is vege-

tated witl gras.ses, Aster spp., Solidago spp., Russian thistle,

bachiar is, tamarisk, smooth cord grass, luncus spp., and cattail. S

Wildlife ut ilization of the disposal area is limited due to the

g,-encr. ab,,nce of suitable habitat. Wildlife species most likely

ti, ,ocur in tie area are marsh hawk, clapper rail, killdeer, herons

and egrets, s:indpipers, plovers, various dickeys, marsh rabbit, 0

2. 1 1. .' 3Yellow louse Creek. The Yellow House Creek

s i: ,-l -I is located on the east side of the Cooper River at

,,it ?Ii>.' k. -111h South Carolina State Ports Authority has a total

,,I 9 1' ,; nMcr perpetual easement from 10 September 1958. A

t it r, -, has been diked and the area has been filled to

hb,, : .0 , mtw. Wi l a maximum filled elevat ion of 23 feet and a

, 7 T: , i i,, i t 2:1 , this disposal area has a, A ipacity of about 0

., i,. .'ll d t o4,mpacted material or 28,656,000 cubic yards

i I ,: It .I i .

L]A* 6 S S

Page 80: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

K r Lt tH .. t I'.rikis- bh\ tht. South

DI'oltuiI 11l' it. \"igctat ion in 1

' i 1. '11 d i i K I IJ l u f

I~~~ 0 t,1

-~~ ~ ~~~~~ I I n .~ K . 1 . * I:f r I kri .'11 1:1" rsh

q~5 11 tI i 11 - i i sFl -I I .

1) V

in 11i. IVf

IIt 01', 11c 11 I'll

jw! ii '\

II ..h

I:, ~ j on V lll I hiI d 0

Page 81: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

irtd vj I u

i r t > i iiIi ~ lr j l i n i s t r i n

4 ,: i rt LT i& .

I~ Ln~r tons)

ri 'A t ~ t i

I IW - * *.-'J At tlh"

I if 'I I- tj . 1 1i.,L c ,-v rn r .

Ic . l Ln i c i ,i oil

I t ~1L .11( tIrt'iti( L

I~~ r, rcco p

I Cc*

Ip 0 a 0 9 0 p I 0 a0 I

Page 82: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4

Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) Economic Areas Nos. 28, 29, 30,

dU(1 31 . These economic areas have been delineated by the BEA and .

the Economic Research Service ( ERS) , Department of Agriculture,

who have made national and area economic projections to 2020 for

the Water Resources Conc ii . The projections dated September

1972 have been adopted as the current appraisal of the long-range

nat ionai Lrends for p1 ann ing purposes. These projects are de-

signated as "OBERS Proje< Lions". Thirty-five of the forty-six Southn.

a ro tna count ies are inc I ud ed i n BEA Economic Areas 28, 29, 30, and

, ',-hich i at Cos ideccd as rp rCe-, entat ive of the general cargo

Lribut~irv i-ca of the P'(rt of Chiarieston. Various combinations of

t:i s,, ir -'o[d be rt.pnc.:,nrat i\e of the various petroleum products

tribi itr" ir-c:1. Yhe discsu si , presented in the following para-

:rI ,, ' cd to 'iL.\ .\ oi 28, 2 ''9, 0 and 131.

....,i1 t ion. tihe 19/0 population of the State

i't t : !r'in a '. ,-) ,-)i, in increate of 8.7 percent over

it IIitiou atd I itcrease from the 12.5 percent increase

I ,i t ll tri il t W11-I t)OP decade. BEA Economic Areas 26, 29,

:i, rIi II, with 1 )70 p,pl it ions of 805,60, 610,800, 400,739, and

7 1 -, , r ; ',. t iv t', ,i tered changes over thieir 1960 populations

Si . 1i1)..9 -. , il '. p el t, respectively. Almost all of

4L p.,pl t ni] 1i cr, io thew immediate project area can be attri-

II, ,d t , , ro.,t h t t lit,, N'orth Charles ton - Hanahan, St . Andrews,

rTi, I L[rd, and \It. I' V.sant areas. About 47.6 percent of the

I - pt(.-1 t7d ) 2g ll ti ,, n m ;i I ed in urban areas as compared with only

*,.~ ' " i- ,t 0 'w. I''1 1 ,i tL t.ti n.

S1 .2. I , . It t,,til p, onal income of residents living in

t . -t it- ,I >0,1til I ir 'oa,1 irii-ow ted to about $7,550 million in 1970

cid if., fliw ['I , <,:- 1- it,, ,"r iLoit 74 percent of the national

*.-r . I r , pr i <ut i'rk, e It about (10 p cent in real per

t )i t I i s 'v r ', -' ' r,'d with about 15 percont for the

ti I ,''' I I ' i) t:-l . * e, cii t, incoac c-; ift' 2-i, 214, R),

* U U U I UI U U UI UI U w ,w w 0

Page 83: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

A1 iL in 11W t9 L It'd I ,i36,~. wit 8 .11 percentL0o t tle a I),) r lor Lt

(iieliid I ,Vcd A .)'OIit 14o ,dt000 persons or :iboiit 2 3.8 per-cent:W wre L'LIp I eye'd

iki t~ni ~'ir j lVi L it k- Fe h() or about f- . ' percent were emplIoyed C

i iCriln t ire, t'+8,(1 or iboit 4. pc r c ,I src employve d i n

"oycra:meltl 12 -1i o r 13. pemrcentL we -re emplIoyed c in hol s~ and

r tiiI t Ml rit , L' 17rrnimoelr wer eiher Oe -miydtr in con-

ric WL CMon;t F C t i (n, trIllsp4rLt i t i, C Ormmn i c -tolitn, t a tj lie f inance,

in1 -o Iac , H i'st , nnpi i di imi I% wo rkers , or dome,,t ics.

I.. . I dtistr iii de2VL Iopmenlt. I hle t ypes- 0 1i illdnSt r,

tii Ii St C 0) 1oo ;LlLi UI-are 1 a I a re manyv anld va r L&I kl . I ndnhs try

-<indIed ctI % 1' in rcenc tt vei rs . \lanu f ac tu r inig ic cOlin ted to0 r

I.hk~liit j) r", .1) t 1 p 'In o vmcn, t i n thIie s tate inI 19 71) i n d -onsI , t re jelt l 1

I I111 LII r ih)ilnit Ci ye. pcer it . Tlie majio r ind t Is t ries r e t ex t iIes,

1i id I I eIIid p) r ()dit Ls 1 n ionIi-u l2ec t r i ca ma In ic h ineC rv food and

Iiriprodiits , e 144 rical equipment and suppi its, stonek, clay,

Ind pipe1)r mid il I etd prodlucts,. As anl indicat ion of tire indus -

r i ii I1'VC1(ts I' I Ltn inl LiW stile, te 11',vaIle added by manif acture'' has

iHi ti c ii' (or of2. inl C011st mit dm1 tars; durn-n the pe.riod

Ii I 1f VI (Ii I rk ad - ex pec(:t ed t o c on t inue .

* . '0..\ r i ii! nre I0. A_ ri i Lur P1 iY5 I t IIr )I v,; t i wt ort lnt.0

41),I 11 kii ~ ~ 'ii'' I Ic Vie I n' kt c rop p) rod tic t i on i n

1: v,. 4t r d! 1 Ii'i i4\eer*the numhe r 01 firms ha ccreised

4' ,it,)ii) ii 'li Iii 1~ ii)' 70 m l d the Iind in itiarms hs do-

r'I, t 'vI 11 ill, .1(( in 1) 0 ( t o S , I () ,ih( a 0 c res,- ill 19 7(0

* . rt Iii 1 'r t hi e iit in) the niimher 44 I a rmsi-- and totalI

Ii I I i' ~ s ti~ iv( itra4t, 5/4iz I ammi ti nrae rem 11

() ) I t o 11 1 ' ii 1 1 L

1 . 1 itin1T I1 i 1 i t it's, l t. II\ii , t' '-~n i tw rk

r t I Ioi(Lr4)i I 1 in 1 itI ' ' i Iind LIltr Il iLi' .

* 1 I I"1 Ii 4 i L 1 it Iii I I e t r p o t i I 11i I ii l 1, ' !It 11- i it t i t, 1 It i o n

Il i t ''I)4 i t i I -'t I ill Id I l~ l , Ii it 1 k t I I I L 11t 4"

Page 84: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-) t :r. Ii i t iw [iI I L t 11 11 -

I , .1 :: ilt: , I L. ,I :tI- t i ;t ,i iLiIIL,.I .rt LL Icmvt-,, jA fiK, U nc~ t Ol. ..- III' . 1 L llt-'4 I : I L t' i bll AI 11,d lr -

! Ui, ![0;<1 ' . I • t ! ' - 8I l~t.l- ' <lidii .V - L : Li t, ' I Ir c t L

it ~t i t i r,,([ upi m nv S o k I r I I 1 I1 SI F r t Stir L V 41 tI NAti 111;11i >1I I~L-ltflL

i r'i4i,. t o tt,irl0o r A-\ iothIr )ld I ort

I i ,,.1, V -t . . , i l.i t- t I t il rLi tIL ) ltL .. l te 1li

I 1 t [r on~ 1 tL I r~ b-L >0 LI 1W* Or 0 *Mi IA i tlE 9:' 1.. : i l :iL I tit' ; , i It it (Ii; L i till .1 i[ l t .rl t' or I c r i l0

* V.1, ilSI Iit~t~ii.L Vt LI Lt or: ]t- i. ~ -

, I h ilt t r tV tL I Xii Li 'L I 'll 4to 1>

iI , t t

r- . . ;1 ii , r, tI ' -4I Ii I T I I i I llt d

C. . . , , i It 1 i I I o t L I l L 0 g

.,' r 4i I i dl I l I 11 tl(h 1 1t-p ii iL(,tr I-t

ritI li d '1 4 tI t (1 1r,' 0 11L )L I II-

60:1- 1 L ~IIt-t I t - 1 1 al It ik Ceu r X I

r OLIIt'I Itt LL II 4111 L thhi I

i rci cI I*.r I

• +i ..- i

w a L ,d I I5

lop a v S U , th, ; StS U -

Page 85: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I III 11 )i

IMP S

Page 86: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

|U . . . . . . J I

r r

.. - .. . .'I i 1 -;I ._ • ' ..

v,, r"

I r I I I

rI ) I I t 1 'e

SI i f

Fi II v; tt

.. to , :, r , 1 -,. -

-,. E I it I r t

oI- 1 t! r- oi 1[ 1 ftt t

i[., "lt I:I II . I II . vi~ i" 1 t I l\

! '! .ti , x

ii I .it " '. ' { t

.l-t<...* 0

*. ' I ' it

,l!~ -

Page 87: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0; 00t )1 )

0,~ sI~ C OTV 1) '1 'I C, LOI~ td

v, that~.

-0 ido 'nd e

Page 88: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-. ). elat ionsh ip of the Proposed Action to Land t'se Plans.

'ih Bcrkt 1 cY-Chiar leston-Dorchester Pegional Planning Counc iI nrepartd

.1 pr,, ir inar, !evelopmen' plan for the three-county area to set forth

Sa]:r ) ]Ic ics relating to desirable future development. In its

rosqt erom, it is too non-specific to nermit a determination of its

rciticmshin to the Charleston Harbor Navigation Project. There aric

no other 1Iand-use plans covering any area that would he affected h-

I In'pi r~ s~ nr ic t

0 1

• W • • • • • • • • • •0

Page 89: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4.o. I'l( Ur iiha I c I t-s o f the Proposed Ac t ion on

Tli,:- luiv i runictr t.

4.01 . ;"~~ osde os r ior to the comoiet ion

o1 Lhu Ltc-ope r in lo, iChirl estori Harbor was; con-

s ide-ud one of thco. 11iavst iiat nrcfl itiors on time, Atlantic (coast

withi de pths in iaiiv cirec-is -~iIjg10 feet. After complet ion

C) thle (I ive V e e I-! , 7 LW mite~ of shoaling rapidly increased

and ilt bint rmulItin cii1 rarts of the harbor. As a

result, cnnnicmIm ielmc drclg in;n requirements increased from

1 . ss t hcin )00,0() rulb i r cires Ili to approximately 10,000,000

rub~( va rd s . olcis ii ii s sjuiitiug problem, the Charles ton

liiriher es tucir' iss 4e n sbjeco, d for many years to water qu-ility

ril~l Cin tlcndcll i ed re:iu f fect s similar to those expected

to rkesu;1lI t 70re thCpooedpoc

!~ .1)1. 1'I'll" rm icr Cic sof this dredging relate to

effects on 'cite crpnl it% in omc n the ecosvstems withiin the harbor

aind d i S posci I ci reais . 1Yicmtt Cr gum i Lv is affe-cted mainly by local ized

shot-trni :rccusinl tin iii tv cand sedimentation of adjacent

wa t or ircis 1) rcins LIO f LIt, bocLt tomL disturbance by the dredge cutter-

Sadinch t he- suspended, indi dis solved mcit er!.al in the effluent from

tu se a areasL. Fhe- effects oi l dispnal ireas include the

uo tIherilna oi 4 an:ll 'ad cmmi .ommun itl ic. iid time prevention of any

snuhst iitiiir:rv or col'n izcit ion as, lon, is the area continues

tio I', tsU i iai~'c l cr

OI i I .An vilu.mit ion of avi icible data

iitor:.d inl < i 2: _ J uf i; FliU flidi, ttc thicit time deepening

1 iI. 1i I i r i pr p- it crurite cln\ long-tern

,I f.. ! .m iv vci- ~ p )t r itt riicitml effects on the w i

- . . i rnircr r i t 1, o i nv u; iirciul it, dredging

ii~ Ii 11i vn ic \'i ait v of thec dredge will

Page 90: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

increase as a result of the mechanical action of the dredge cutter-

head. Observations of maintenance dredging in the harbor indicate

there will be a temporary increase in turbidity in tile area of dredg-

ing and, although visible at the surface only in the immediate vicinity

of the cutterhead. the subsurface plume may e:itcnd several hundred feet

ci ther ups;tream or dowinstream n , determiiined by tidal c arrents. Some il--

c ron. s il ilrbi tditi, can also 1c expected adjaWcet to the upl and disp)O ;5a

alri-a on )-mid I sland and 'lorri:; IJ;land, although construction of

dcikus and weoIrs sl: iuld greatly reduce the sediment content of the ef-

f] It . TIC, v t r turbi i tv in t ,-u off AhIOFC di s)osal area wil a] o

i I,* I-,:, 'Jlt- t ,'-to rcrv anl loeea] jzcd cffects, on resieJnt hiotia of

' ,litl - [m t i V ;11-" C (1101 L- ;. (Itrl('t ' to hC' Of ml' lli{I nC' to

f ttpio l t v i t v

LI t t o i t -

lnc! t;. .1). S cZ i C FI-' C V ,tO Id I, IAor , n(t c t ] ( in t e i m .(1.i it •

V'i ii it. tf t I I C -ti1n t , ic , .' 11 m!cc I 0 St ( C X' Ia Ii rIit'iIC] j, a t LP L.

I 'on! ti - ur . i TI hil, d i. L : F iuc' i I tI 1 C ' ' S 2( 11 t (; '.'1 1 110 t h l'Ve

a iy s ,', f i ca t aI fect oII the. I Ii,-t rr", p1od It i vi tv of t, I: hal e(r

c-ic 5;v:.; t i o ' It-c:Iit o ,f tIn- I ow n1 o I ra 1 productL v i t " of v ti t 1 -1 f ,' s - 0

iciI L

4.03. Biological Impacts. The major concern associated with

* drtd,.in,, in Char] eston Harbor relates to concern over the effect •

of the re-.oval of bottom materials and the ir subsoquent disciargu

into open water or upland disposal areas on the existing ecosystem

or man's use thercof. A discussion of the probable project effects -

• on existing flora and fauna is presented in the following paragraphs. •

4.03.1 Upland disposal areas. The Charleston Harbor estuary

conta ins thiisands of acres of productive salt marshes, none of which

* • would be affected by the proposed project since dredged materials would

73

... ....... S .. S U_. _ S S U S SS

Page 91: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

*be disposed of on upland sites or In approved offshore areas. As

- discussed previously, the project sponsor has indicatad that it would

be desirable from his position to locate these upland disposal areas on

* and northward of Daniel. Island. There are two types of upland areas

* potentially available for disposal on Daniel Island, woodlands and

agricultural lands. The impacts of utilizing eachi of these types

is disciussed below.

4.03.1.1 Woodlands. Woodlands now appear to be one of the two

most liklely are-as to he Sel eCt(Ld for disposal of dredged material-

*from the harbor doepenin;, project and maintena-nce dredging when the

(currentl1y used di.spo!7:i 1 areas. are uised to capacfty. tIsoodlands are

ona of thr apr n'rninn types in the Char]leston Halrbor area,

and tlhn' ratji osal e for pre';ervaltion oif individlual tracts of mfarsh

d(0:; 1,A apply to0thc~ wood]anods,. Vood] antl-. are also less expenisive

4 I an uban1 x a rensandi would 1(1 the f ore, be oresui1tabl1e from tie

403. 1.1 . 1 Prior t o ia of anly wooded tract- of lald , tihe ownecr

....................................... Ti. oiy ('ederse- stand

wo~uld he rnedto percii t a none eveni distribution throtighoilL the'

(I p'S Iarea ol the hydraul ical I y dredgedc, cat~enial . Any trees not

rermovcd ond al 1 under'4 cry p tswould be killed when their roots

become( covered to at ;ufficient depth. Vegetation regrow'th would

I probab 1 y coni st: of pok)',e berry and other herbs and shrubs such as 0

silver] ine aud wax myrtle, and] trees of most of the same species

growing pr-ior to dredging.

4.03.1.1.2 Practically all significant animal life except for

Isome son]]I birds would be displaced during and shortly after the

use of a wooded disposal area. Raccoons, opossum, and some small

rodents might cont-inue to forage without interruption in the dis-

posal area. As vegetative regrowth begins, foraging by the other

species that were displaced during the preparation and clearing 1 0

and subsequent use of the area will increase. Plant and animal life

will fluctuate from a low during and shortly after deposition of

73a

Page 92: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

t ii, L0 !

i 1) c

V ~ .. , -i Ii rom hi irfiylir (itiLepenriig pro-

-t at I I u g '.1~ i n t

";I ~ ~ I1)..Iil'I i

f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . 1PId II lc Ic1 it Ic

1~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1SVItc l mlI II

lo r Ii s ii, . i I ii

t I r c

he 0t I ~l Vc ct~t iVt-r r w LI ,: 11

ii I II

IM t I- 0 l 1 .: i~ ttIUT

t I- I F, I A- V L', t' t :I VC re-

Page 93: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4. 03. 2. li irds,. Birds will rnot be adversely affected

to an, ex tent bv Lit-, Proposed pro jecCt . Species which utilize

the proposed. upl1and d isposAI a reas will p robab I ' be temporarily

frightened axyhe L'onn.t rue tionl no me-, and Will temporarily, Stress

repopul at ions in Other areas anite icripete for available food

*and roostlnia spaCe. )i thu p)ositive s ide, manyv spec ies have been

* observed congre,,at i n around acti[ye disposal areas to feed on

o or an is s i n LiteI dd M; i t or at II.

4 .13. 3 . Mamma~ I s . Althbough miany spec i cs of mammal. s

'cc ur inl the Ieer 1 x*' it- itv (,I- the proposed rro ect , the only,

01nC kb i ~h inomn inl t lite harbror proper is thea bot tlenose dolphin

ird i t ,i I I riot he , r ,il af-i(ct(d bY the u rolect. Some small

mama n ayhedi n;pjic:,-d inl t lie proposed u'dand disposal area on

])lic ittI s ao. tiw ne IoPrr is Islandi diisnosal area is currently

h ce i n', i.ned( i t idud I i an' ii -a mmai I i;wo ud b e d is pla c e d.

!4 4.1 1. . i I len. ep t i es in ite mm Itpoec t area , excep)t

lour t Ii (I iamirl:ie~k Lteiri in , aire ma in) 1- oif) sn ore formis which

01 e, .-is j ona I% %.ti de r ilito 0 I iii~r Ci ir I enton Hlarbor or land forms

dAich nira v 'Irk. :nt I.nne (i;itcd withl the harbor proper. The

d aini-wihil 1 tturraipn iii In finil in the vie, initv of coastal marshes,

t idal fini , er ill 'eirmat lia l tered Unpolluted body Of Salt

Or-c tr'.n~iiu~vAo crustaceans, mollusks,

* nkw ln to, it coiii re~i ertilies, ti, terrapin will not

i, it tcd !)% ii uc u > . ul t.

H 4 .1I.i it liii't I I. InT 19/ t h lle V2 T. Bam.uch (;oa-taIl

!11>ii it 'lit, _ iitlr eliii rat to tilt. Corns of Engineers,

Lt uld i (,( ti w ~ t t t i I- Ib i l- )I) Hn h l,r si Idg onl pJotosvntIhes is,

Page 94: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

T T

r.-. rw'II:~f o If ', 1u i ri I iv'. L 1, an kt oi l-om7un~ it - un

If'.L or- iii i-1 i I ~ rII (f -nc ~ 27. li!e st u11. z :Is U v-

I~~~ 'It:>-('ti- h i~t' lUecdmtral1

* . . ]I; t~a->. i~t1Lil I I oriitor' :nIII(!

1 e11 I (Ii i-Ll- the INtmI 1' l kL 11 Stlidj S -es

ii *i - her, i Lorv x i i- r j1iieit was des i coeud

lo ;t ' t [, ' : ,I slud,,e on Jpririar- lrodu(,-

a ,I i 1I lrlI(L o~n Hairhor mud shoc-ed t hat

r,,-.I i' 1- rod tic t i on det.creas ed xw'i i C 1 s ugi-

il Lu d atI-I 1 i::Iited b-,.' .I i Lilt ini-

1 'i> -ni~is ilt o1 ' crimL- :-11t! '2IS J des Ii to-- iii-~~~~~~~ 'hd' Ii Il -~~il- uteach nut ofl resuspe,,nded

i-i ill gI1 1Iai ' II T ~l~t rol-ti. 'File cm-wiuts, sho%,ed that

WI' :J r- tI OWiced th tirolti o F (CharlIes ton HArbor )Iivto-

Ir( II'~

fALekll ind.

2..~~~~~ ~~~ o. r. i r r,>'--n e,'hax rdcinvi

* - > .. , r -~~~~~~ m tIW.I!i K 'c c Ic a -: (

I f ( i 1:1 I -j I / ) I 1 -:1

.21~~~~ p-ra-r- ' rd.c Ircse

Page 95: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

no I

I~~~~~~ rLn ttt u 1rd~

I> v.

Page 96: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

d rc(v i it, ()erit- ion. As a resul t, he(- piroposed dredging is not

................t ed to !I, Iv( 0fIlv -0ii caant long-term ef fect on plan kton

'o T)iti i t 0 .

4. 0 L* chvrtebrLote. Ili most dredging cr0 jects, one

ot tin H-os:t s1c ' - It short-term jrv.acts, is the destruction of

Ien tS h it oct cblrat c 7 t huT'oit h of the d retige cut terhead. TIs i i

'ro fec L iris bt-e-n I'e1 docuniiited inl Planv stud ies and fileld

ii i ,Ii lris coniuttti :iloni,, both thle Atlantic and Gulf coasts

relice; ) 0) ii 30() aiit1 cai bfe exo~ec ted to occur to some

4 : w it kni r i i.' I ht. rekcenf no7 of (hirl es ton 11arbor. S

l~I i tAs I isseLd ini Sec tion 2 of thils EIS, the

,i-Lt it c~iiit;it ion,; of henthic invertebrates in the Charleston

1 i), r - rr'ocr lr inl the s-;hi Ilower iorL ions in and around thle

It:ir>it. ot- ini t kde!oer-elIaiiei' ized areas. In addition,

-<i~t'ii ofi the- iiirbor colita in toxic substances khich,

i-or t(, to Li Not iniil rie lieries Service; ''essentially

4 >1~c i:iie ill htinthicinirm from the harbor bottom."' Since

0ilvtit1ker''c ions oI thle estuary k-ll be affected t)-, thle

u t ,LiW WIi onlintlhic inivertebraites w-.ill be in-

V iJiJ*1iih i Cr:i 01 ,I in i niib 1 itL ing thle offshore d is-

IiI 4it~ ill ;ioil bu sohr ed IisiTeJl r ial1s d redned f rom

Hi1. ":1 I lli 11i Ii,iii i :ir- ' i- ) e* Iii Ii li1 e -i short-term

I F i I ej t I-ow Ii e tirL' L'( re c r u itmienTt f rom

o J1

ti rr or oiiw ro r:s t - I r ive1, uirra's ofc

.1~~~~~~~~~ I. '. C. I: I i .. i 0 wi i Fr s *:l h m~I 1 1n0t be

Page 97: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* Avai 1ijhlc (I;ILi i iid ic~i L h t !_ti~stlppillat iols,

I I po I ti nr5 i t ); [ ) t 1 I ic 1 ).I k

i , ie-;'t-o;~ l's .dvsr, cc~~td c ': Irv jm oncrat ions.

r t P7 t1C Li C I'Vnj (2 s c irin ' k II l ) illh is s 4t tid' u f' ti t Lt I ii.

f it Ss ;I! I W~t k r 'I' in i~cortli l Fiutitii i Ild 1 cit ion oFF isu

1)" in i 1 t u In n I~ rdr,'c i 111.' 01s(r~lL 1ii5 In om st It icad, dredg ilg

'til '' " .:i' con", hired .u h- I'ci Cu LC (2.ui 0pce of

A dred ,,tt :iorks -i a> s] A i> om ; hane ,'11112 bhenltiC 11 a i TIaIS

it 1. 'i 11 lli)rilsiI I' he tiiriii in ii t l'Sed it' ti'it Ire dIis;lOdged

S ',, ,k');,it.' ; IU 1h c Lu 'rk'diL ion. ]'h is- suddeti avaiHa lIi ty

t !11 i I ( It k-ii i'> L.- i ; i ij t ian normal conient rat: ions

- i, it r t r, 1 11 1 L' i ni t. s t ranse cc i not2 I ain dItI t LI. . II it i I i L ilO

* I ll wi > IiI (I >tIi'(:tr tha1 t fish -;tire relatively

11- t hI I- Li, 1' 11 OT7 k nn '0ncern in Lit 14 ast

Fl, Iits o 1 tsrkil 1i t Ur i t ie and

% r,' I ;0!'' t 1'i ~ ' tuFLsIr i di t V Iu" Lie , Lte2

Ii L, 11 k on 1i ) 1r c k' I I,, oo i jn on tL t iN Ci o f

t1Kit 'r'' .( T Lii ' 1 o c 't Ir rietts aInd o the cr 'ut Lo r-s.

0 ti't I u t ilt' !!l t i- >i iwtiildd I art i c I (- ol I- i I hes w ll

e J, 1,1 t ol l il, 1 kI It 1 I t oi, ( ' l th ii s L 10 11 .

I t I' I i, t pii r cu i so , p esi

"CM I_ I ''t

o iot'i".IiI

*~~~~i~ ,"ooti i th -'i

it~~~ h ' Si i Ii L ed

00

Page 98: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

to anyI i ra1MMn[ta I Imad ( if i cat ion. No indication.- of mortal itv attni-

lIiit iIAc toa thlie d rcda i n :10(1 di spaosal 0oration with resnect to

-,I isli - is nd ki arvac in thbe projeact Iearea were oh tained, a ithbough

lDova I (in it theam rail rt ) found 1larval and juvenile s tacoes of

ire.slwatar, astuai~r job, aind marine spaiwners in that area from Anril

Liraal AL i . Ii.. thoija )t that thlis was the most critic-al 7per iod

for tho.-s( deva cla'r-:cntalstca i.e., whien they oul emot viii-

ne2raict, to ;rcJ.jn i 5:sin disposal . Al so, since hie found that. post-

I larval In voiin5_ f- I alt-,s wee rese n t in deeper areas from Novemberlirotisli :iia-,, he ix' i ed that chiannel alterations shioul d be

l1vidci dilr In i Lhai peo d.

* hi ./ . ',. Sb rk ain( C;ronin (Re(Scfere nce 32) found t hai tindcar

ax)1( ii t e ii 0 it ioS, i Sub ected to extremel- h'~'i c oncen tra-

l on at suIii s: id; jiive died from suffocat ton rue tocapin

of tlia i I s and( op ru Iai ar caiv i t ies . llowever, uinder normal ci1 ream-

staneas I di ivi (d tuirb)idl wa iiican have the ab)ilityv to clIear pl

lal !Isbrnc! w aiuuliat-ed s lit upon entering, undi sturbed water.

la:'v~i-s alintad out ry asvnot all spelcies aire ecualiv sus-t m i , t a to a tracadci :-iin; d d iF Fereiit -sils-pcnsoi ds va rv iii tielr

1 1 t

4 4. i. . I a aa~ia, iiriilc, it hias b)een Fouind tiiat F isit can 0

ti era at i '11 ta ]1rb id! i t aK extalt she t: hay aire arcompani oil byv low

I, i: I vs ai d 0s: en, i i (,,, al bal Is o )r o thecr ubsLt).;ta n ces

i - i at~ !' ,rL t It roe-, i ,L ion, in njtre t~u II Is or prevcnt t hair

ar i Ko : t I aI I, t innl-b St i cklwv I nund timev a tira hII v 5 1(1I

r-- --.*' r e - i i , t , :it sr c, an i a 1) 1i t- o I'

* I li-~- a c! I'4 tlit lirtpistd pr-t

In i 1)"Ii - r I I 1 w II 1 eu;' * Parrlntip

Page 99: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

AD-Al149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHARLESTON HARBOR 2/3AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CRROLINR(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERSCHARLESTON SC CHARLESTON DISTRICT APR 76

UNCLASSIFIED F/6 13/2 NLmo||o||o||ons

smomhhmhhhhlosom|h|hhE|hhEE

Page 100: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

11111- 11111-L5~

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION liS CHART

I

° II

Page 101: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

. D .

of these species in the channel area at any given time varies *---

so that it is not practical to attempt a precise determination

of impact on these species. Based on (1) research which has

been accomplished in other areas and (2) available information

on the effects of current dredging practices in the harbor, it -

is felt that any impacts resulting from the proposed deepening

will be of a short-term, localized nature and will not signi-

ficantly affect the fish stocks in the Charleston estuarine

svs t em. 0

4.03.7.7 Larval fish. The National Marine Fisheries Ser-

vice, under contract to the U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers, studied

the effects of dredged harbor sediments on larval estuarine fish I 0

cormmon to Charleston Harbor as part of the estuarine values study

(Reference 33). Their final report was submitted to the Corps

in April, 1973 and is summarized in the following paragraphs.

.- 0

4.03.7.7.1 For this study, the NNFS exposed the larvae of

five species of estuarine fish (Atlantic menhaden, pinfish, flounder,

spot, and Atlantic croaker) to seawater-sediment extracts for periods

of up to 14 days. Sediments for the study were collected by the I

Corps of Engineers at pertinent stations in the harbor. In the

.NFS laboratory, the sediments were added to filtered seawater,

shaken for two hours, and allowed to settle. The supernatant was

then diluted for testing at seven concentrations ranging from 0 to P •

100- ." -

4.03.7.7.2 The general conclusions reached by NMUFS are as

follows: "Despite the shortcomings imposed by limited time and I 0

money, certain general conclusions can be drawn from this research.

Though we have not determined the toxicant (or toxicants) 'nresent

in the (xtract, it is obvious that the materials are soluble in

seawater and that the leaching of these unknown compounds into S

the water column may be ,etr -- ental to larval fish populations under

80

- S . -.,

• .-, • ..."

Page 102: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

. .

ctr t-i in iccd it ions.hi was dcic ostrated in the bioassayv test-

Thee i r i iof laruval t h a quiLte low or zero at certain hi1gh

CO n1Cen 11LI-at ion O cIS 0 ec C Li en1 t CeXtra-1C t. Indicat ions ire that survival

la Ii vaIit is ii wii bek different fer different species. We also

0 oun I ILrII-t I It i d it'l c rece in Lox ici ty of the sedimentLs depending

on where the si:ICinie I rim in Ciharle ston harbor. Of the samples

%w.1 tested, these 1 rn0!7, In Sh ipyard River, and Station

we re thle Mo0st ICIutke11 toxIc.

lin add I t ionI to tL10ie UL C~ 1- rspOnIse (mortal itv) our resul ts also

I ~~~nd icite t hit u t ii chaKn isis are acting to cause phvs io-

l0o_ ical cihallnC inl t1Ie I anal Fishi. This change is observed as a

reduc tLe Lu t h,. _ coL h i-at: ofi the 1larval1 fish at certain con-

CeUntcit ions.' O i L ne icu Xtrac1t. This lack of growth would

* s~_-u-n'Ust inl over. i l-c; n. 01' the fish which in turn could affect

tit'e F ishies' ein1CL- lor ,,urv ival.

Ou r b1 iv i or ii tce it d id not prov ide enough data to d raw any in-

Q 11 Ins ifs ;c' Iue , hiowever, t it our test of behavioral responses

t o sed imeniLt :,,:t rcic t iniIc at ed t Iii t menhaden and flounder mav be

cift C ed hc(iiiv ioraLiv (wh;ichi could lead to more -ibstant ial eco-

104icil ffcts and these organism,; should be tested further using

this criteria.'"

4.u.7.7.3 fT above s Lud%- presents evidence that larval

i i rtii 0 Ii-;i -onces may be0 adversely affected by thle

*~ir cto ~: i ;i il thcit so(,me mortal it\' will no doubt occur.

r, tI4r. o' daita are not directly applicable to field

i~itni nc '''s cannot be quant itatively evaluated. Some

I i'1 ci I L r ovced e itLhIe r as a r es ulIt o f t thIe mechan icalI

* ~ ~ ~ 1 jt ion':V rL 2 en expose;(d to turbid water, or (3)

it't( in.t-n-x i c.. ii -11sLstnces in stediments. However, ts statedl

nrk.' io' ' I.in cc I> ii Kb tumn'ionrr and wil IbIe~ I imi ted to thie

1:: i~ i 1 >i~ II VV [it I reilneu or i osiI cirtuis- and1 wi I11 not

i 0ii F Iccit I' Iife; L I i.'i, 4oekn - in thle Iianleston Harbor estuarine

* w w w w w w

Page 103: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- -- - o

" 4.03.7.8. Commercial Fisheries. As discussed in Section 2.

the principal species marketed in Ch,,ileston are shrimp, blue crabs,

oysters, clams, alewives, American eels, flounder, whiting, black

sea bass, and spot. A majority of these species are captured in

offshore fisheries which will not be affected by the proposed

project. Oysters and clams are found in shallower areas of the Aharbor and will not be affected by the project. The clams and

oysters marketed in Charleston come from other areas along the coast. -"-

Shrimp and blue crabs are found throughout the estuary and there is

a definite possibility that some will be killed if they come in

contact with the dredge cutterhead. Although numbers destroyed

could be quite large, the impact will be temporary and will not

significantly affect recruitment to the offshore fishery.

4.03.7.8.1. Many of the commercial fish species spend a •

portion of their life cVcle in the estuary and could be adversely

affected by turbidities or could be picked up by the cutterhead.

As discussed in Section 4.03.7, the impact on fish is expected to

be temporary and insignificant.

4.03.8 Ocean disposal site. The proposed plan includes

the use of an existing offshore dumping area for disposal of

sediment removed from the entrance channel. Since Fiscal vear 1965, 0

from 367,460 to 1,410,000 cubic yards of material have been dumped

in this offshore area with little evidence that any buildup is occur-

ri n:1 . TFo evaluate the impacts of this type of disposal, the Corps,

is part of the estuarine valies study, contracted with the S. C.

W il dl i fe and Mar ine Resources I)epartment to study the biological

cond ition of the present off.slhore disposail rea and to determine

,prohabIc effects of continued us ,. :1 t'Igneral, they found that:

"Ibis 1Irge area has 1)t', 'ittii i for at I'ast six ears as a disposal

';itt, with no evid'ence of silt hiiidu: or adverse ecological effects."

V&1v also stated that: 'iihOwvt Cr, the possihility exists that the

h i I dop of mod (Itpos its on tIL' Ihot t T Iou ILd result in the en-

halcement ot .ld CL'rnt Ar('ils IV ri.,t ill' iahitat for valuable

speti ls such as I'i t shiin1 . li in turn, would generate

- - W V n 4U0 0 0 0 0 0

' o. . *- *

Page 104: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - ~w ~ V'r . -.- * - *~--..--,. - - .-

-.,, potential for increased or, at least, more productive commercial 0

fisheries. It is f.lt that the existing hopper dredge disposal

area is the best suited location available within reasonable dis-

tance of Charleston Harbor for the deposition of non-toxic materials.

Disposal in this area has resulted in no significant conflicts with -

coniercial or recreational fishing interests, as would probably be

the case if the siLe were located farther inshore or offshore."

4.03.8..1. Although the impacts of offshore disposal are

difficult to quantify, it would appear that the proposed plan would

be the least damaging to the marine environment and under certain

conditions might even be beneficial.

4.03.9. Rare and Endange red Species. The brown pelican is

the only endangered species which is common in the project area and

there is no reason to hclieve it would be affected by the proposed

deepening project. The project will not affect any other rare and

endangered species. 0

4.04. Archaeological and Historical Sites. Deepening of

the Charltston Harbor project channel an additional five to seven

feet would ihave no impact on archaeological or historical resources.

Cha;rleston tHarbor required significant dredging only after the com-

pletion of the San tee-Cooper Proiect in 10't2. Since most of the

ia Le, r ial to be dredged trom tile lower reaches of the harbor is sed i-

, " m.'nt deCposited :4ince 1942, there is little likelihood of disturbing

* .avthin, of historical value. Any archaeological resources which

might have been present in the other reaches were probably removed

dur i g :cxc ava Li on for the 35-foot project. The National Register of

[listIoric Phaces has bec't i consulted and it has been determined that the

proposed project will not re:uIlt in the transfer, sale, demolition,

or ;tibst ant ial ulto rat ion of potential or existing Nat lonal Register

p r pert i es. llie proposed pro eCt will have no c ffect on the preserva-

tion ind tnhance'ienLt ol ion-Fdrally owned districts, sites, building s,

-strulctures, and objcts ol historicl, irchacological, architectural,

or* clltuiral_ -sigiiticaince.

A.t. ,\ ithi t cs . .\ ide froi thle phvs ical pre seLnce (of the,

* uirod.;: ind floatinMg pi pi ne thlt wi ll be in the harbor during the

,,m true tion priod, ti, c l .pnIng of the Chann'l kill have little or

838' S S S S S '. "0

Page 105: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

no effect on atheticis. The upland disposal site may be aesthetically -displeasin' to users f adcjaont lands

4.06. Air Qual. iv. Mhere will be a very minor increase

in air pol Lut ion as at resu1lt of operat .ion of the diesel and gasoline

engines on the dredge and sutpport vessels; however, the effects will

be temporary as wel as insinificant and probably not measurable at

,xistin air quality stations.

4.07. No ise. In view of the large expanse of open water,

nois, levels from dredge operations during the construction period

si11riot 5e raised obec onhlabvprsent leves.

4, 18. E'conomic Impact. The proposed deepening of

Ch.rleston Harbor will have a very favorable economic impact on the Sa.. [transportatiol savings for vessels carrying petroleum, con-

L.Iinrized cargo and dr' bulk ,argo ar, estimated to average $5,930,000

0 p,.r year over the project titCe or (harleston Harbor. Savings in

Sh'ipyard River for vessels carrvinz: petroleum and dry bulk cargo are

est imated at SI ,3 4 ,000 tfor the life of the project. These direct

bc nefits %,'ill be oht,,a inld beCeaus, e, a reduction in hazards to navi-

at ion and Utc bv I ar.cr v.ssL IS . intangible monetary benefits which

will be derived from the proposed project will be an increase in the .

number ot johs in the a rc as a result of the improvements, an increase

i U . S . C.u, t onirs cot Ie t c i ons, res-;ulIt i ng f rom increased volumes of -

C ommere , a d increascd property taxes paid to the local government.

lit- total investment cost for the recommended plan for deepening

hri r lestIoll ilror to 40 feet p lus overdredging is t27,186,000 plus

an iii.tiiir,1 I S1,1,00 for Shipyard Niver. The annual costs are

., ,Y)r, otr firle sto, .iarhor and 494'.,O00 for Shipyard River.

l. Sen, it-,,ost ratio is 1.2 lor Charleston Harbor and 1.44 for -

;i r. ird K i ye

*.K 1.a C., hil,, e' 1) redoing. As with the existing pro-

t :,,iit,.51: lr-li t .oild he require.d each year averaging an

i,. Ii t iw it 1,7 c7,1( 'iii v -rds (including 041 ,, ,000 cubic yards to be

raw- v.1' p iu r .1 , r.. ). iii k Iater ial would be disposed of in

i v seun• ml r - ; t:!,. kiit i,-l dredging work. Abou t

-S

S1

- ,. ,. 0

Page 106: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

rrr.'r. ----- 1~-. -_-o

--- °- . .--

I •

49 acres of uplIaniid (21 ) acres for Shipyard River and 20 acres for

Charleston Harbor) would be required annually for disposal of the

shoal material. lhe impacts of maintenance dredging would be .

similar to those expected to result from harbor deepening although

they Would ,generall v hc of a lesser magnitude.

4.10. xisting Projects. The effects of the Charleston -

Harbor Project on other Federal, state and local projects varies 0

from a lack of any significant effect to some form of enhancement.

There wvill be no direct relationship between the proposed project

and the AIWN since the dimension of the latter is considerably less

than that of the existing harbor. The same applies to the Ashley

River project although it is inactive.

The Charleston Harbor deepening project has been

eva IriatCd with and without the Cooper River Rediversion Project and

ias been found to IwIVe a favorable benefit/cost ratio under either

condition although it is favorable at a lesser depth without rediver-

sion. Ilhc initial estimates of cost used to determine the economic

justification of the deepening plan assumed that the Cooper River

Rediversion would be implemented resulting in a substantial reduction

of harbor shoaling. In order to evaluate the effect possible delays

in construction of the Cooper River Rediversion Project might have

on harbor deepening and to respond to the numerous past inquiries made

regarding the economic effect of rediversion on harbor deepening,

the deepening plans were formulated without rediversion being

accomplished to see if an economical plan could still be developed.

'his effort revealed the following:

(1) The niost econo -ical plan of improvement (maximized) for

Ciharlu entin [arbor withont rediversion would be reduced from 40

to 38 feet; and (2 ) tlic most economical plan of improvement (maxi-

mized) f ir S Iipvard R iver would be reduced from 38 to 35 feet.

Ihese L, reducti oir' r.o ult lfro:i tiit large uan titiL's of shoal material

which would [i.1v, t,, i,. r,.ov1d annualliv.

1m1plheI'm t it in,11 ,I tlils interim plan of improvement ,,ould require

t t, removl a l t- irit el t 9,170,000) cubic vards of material from

tti iiiier hti r ,,r ind /7, P , ()0() cW)iii vi ards of mater ii I from Lthe outer

83

Page 107: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

• ''L - ". L . , ... .... , - - - - . . . °, -m

* Sbar and entrance channel. Disposal acreages required for this

plan would be about 759 acres for initial construction and 79 %

acres per year for the additional maintenance dredging generated

by the project. _

The impacts of initial construction would be the same as those

resulting from the recommended plan. The numbers of acres required

for disposal of maintenance dredging materials would, of course,* S

be much greater under this plan. The approximate volume of materialwhich would be removed during annual maintenance dredging under both

harbor deepening plans with and without rediversion is shown in

Table I.* •

The haroor project would benefit the naval facilities just aboveGoose Creek bv offering the potential of use by certain vessels such

as the Trident submarine which could not now use the harbor. Deepening

of the harbor has no potential of interacting with projects of other

agencies except for that aspect associated with the disposal of dredged

material. In this regard, there is no consideration given to the

use of such areas for disposal of dredged material. Examples of such

projects are Forts Sumter and Moultrie of the National Park ServiceI S

and Hog Island which is the site of a proposed naval museum.

4.11 Mosquitoes. The use of diked disposal areas

creates favorable habitat for mosquitoes, particularly the salt-

marsh mosquito, Aedes sollicitans, which is a vicious biter and 0has a long flight range. Characteristics of diked disposal areas

that make such areas productive of mosquitoes is the elimination

of regular tidal flooding and the temporary ponding of water due

to uneven settling of dredged material and poor drainage. The

cracks that normally form during the drying of disposal areas

provide very favorable oviposition sites. Natural controls such

.is the maintenance of stable water levels or the achievement of

r,ipid drainage would greatly limit the production of mosquitoes

in disposal areas, but neither method appears practical because

Of physical characteristics of the disposal areas and material

86

W W * _ _

Page 108: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

dredged from the harbor and also because of operational require-

ments of disposal areas. Although the Corps of Engineers is

funding research on mosquito production in disposal areas, mo-

squito control measures were not provided for in the Acts of

Congress authorizing the construction and maintenance of Charleston

Harbor. Mosquito control operations at disposal areas are con-

ducted by local government within the overall. mosquito control

program for Charleston County. The most commonly used insecti- "

cide is Flit 'M. L. 0., an oil larvicide which dissipates quickly

and has no effect on important forms of aquatic life. Since Flit -- .

has no residual effect, a control program utilizing oil larvi-

rides requires frequent inspection and respraying. 0

5.0 Any Probable Adverse Environmental Effects Which

Cinnot Bc Avoided.

A detailed discussion of all environmental impacts expected to result

rrov1 the project is contained in Section 4.0. Some of these impacts 0

are considered unfavorable, but cannot be avoided by any practical

means, withiln the authority and scope of the proposed project. Such

impacts are sunarized in the following paragraphs.

5.dl The principal adverse effects will be related to

Ltcnorarv changes in water quality and its effect on the harbor

<IId disposal areas ecosystems. These effects include: increased

turbiditie. Amd siltation in the vicinity of the dredge and disposal

jrca-; i te::iporairv decrease in primary productivity resulting from

Lur id ';atcr-, redling the euphotic zone; a possible loss of organisms

t irou:,h the i eaching of toxic substances from the upland disposal

, ar , id a ibhh reduction in dissolved oxygen levels as a result

te dre, t.e (hiturh i :, organic materials undergoing anaerobic

)l. O5!p i t 101 .

5.1)2 In addition, some benthic organisms may be

*'s trved by thog drd(,:, ,utterhead and others mav be covered in

the offshore dispo:saI ak rc,. Wildlife species inhabiting the up-

I mnd di qposa! ;re a will he, displaced by deposition of dredged

:% i tt.riaiLs. The cxist i % vegetation wi I be killed and regrowth

uprt,'.'~ncI until the tuset ot such areav s &*ae.

86a

- - _ - w , w W W W S S S

. '.. i- .- .'. X.3 . .. • .' -

Page 109: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

6.0 \l ternat ive-s to the Proposed Act ion.

b.01 . Al ter nat i ves meet ing aLl1 p roj ec t obj ec t ives . The-0

obje. -vsetabi ishedi for tile Charleston Harbor Navigation project

as a resl-,t Of the 1.,r ious stud iks conducted in response to various

congressional resolutions are: (a) the deepening of thle existing

ha, rbor channels and ainc ho rages to permit larg-er ships to load and

unload carzoes, (b) the development of a nractical long-range

solution to the d isposal of dredged material with particular ref-

erence to estuar ine values. The only alternatives that can mleet

these two objective,, are the ones providioc for channel deepening.

The varitous mieans considered to nrovide a -solution to thle problemi

of disnosing; oif the mnaterial dredged to construct and maintain

these channels is Jiscussed in Section 6.05, Dredging alternatives.

19Althoug h all dekepe~ning ailternatives meet to some extent these ob-0

ectives, it is obvious that depth restrictions decrease directly

as channel de:)Lh Is increased. in the studies of deepening thle

exist ing' chalnnels aInd anchorag es, several depths were evaluated.

ALl depthis considered had favorable benefit/cost ratio-,, but the

alternative that was selected had the hiOihest cxces-s of benefits -

and other cons iderat ions being approximately eqtual, it was there-

fore selected. The environmental impacts of these alternatives a r e

similar and vary maiinly- in connection with the volume of material0

to he dredged and the impacts associated with its disposal. The

Maio itL1ie Of thle disosl operation would increase withi channel

(d02 t h and the (i iso-osa I op t ions hj hrequi re thle use of upland

d isoa1s it k-s %v.on I reqou ire d re i soosa I areas. The environ-

-er,,I-J1 frl200, tsor cch i I1 ternat ivii would he similar to those

riJ or te 1, I ted i I t ur na t i ve i n Section 4, and would

tir' l' Wi~ ;o~a it 'ecteul. dIsposal options which

0 r, 1 :it i i to Ii cit ilo -,(u C 1 V01 th1'e oos it ion Of all materi a]l

1: y 1 i l i "_ (5 .i l t to de fin(,,

it ill nu1"ikl i I,2 rv,, i -nhuon d isposal operation,

I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Il n -: .: r- n. iat iv':non-

* 0

PREVIOUS PAGE

*~~~~~~I BLANK9 9 9 3 3

Page 110: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

vc - i -,I t i "T- I: 1.i'," ' . iivsl v 11c is v ,t h i i Uo i Im - i I lI i -

A 1-t t ~ -I L1 ,Iso2 ois- t 1~~t tio t-, WI I i n

>5: ix.--~~ sovws't 'iv Ti i t V A 1) t t n. ir ficn

c iriii I t i1., S ItS 0 1~ P- IT-. i I ST -S (jSS C 1 tQ( i th th

1r-ii:vs nc Tuv cr~ t !,).I 'iI. I c- - v r or , wh ii Iturrative. Snc o

lt'e r t:-n :,I irs Sr L,- vs k di r e drudgi ng var ie s

I-,> tLi L55 '> c- t -vi s c at o, %.. i tit1 L c1 redi i nig

1% u It i* ) . 0.1 0!_ t:> . -vna ST Lt c'tri!fcsurat:u :ithi thet

'wt--:! iIL-- 'lnc Ih(i n- loaIi 7ed

:1>-IS!~~ c. . ct. _ > ui on tiie 11iota incind ills.

* I c~'-nm it t. ii Lt-i t s c~u ' re eval ua ted .

ii.tti i:l iilmt 's t on 11arbor and. :h n H-so: ~ ~ ~ '01 dvr 1: ~ vih remiiv rli t, 5O\O v t a :5,454,000

. - ,ikt i I i5 t i r I r 't-stn 01 .rbor

v I .t tvt-V r h 'Itsoin (L !fWin-

IS -~& i mtq ;)_,r( no2~ irei.''.'otil(I

11SI .s t i1 1 d ' ro t~mv e 'reil

it' i

w *1

Page 111: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.\ .- ! ot i:~~tl ii i .i I -<t i Hrlbor ;ifl( a 38-

tot1o i iirv1 I'i.'r 'I i i ii Atcrnti c, u Ld require

F~ 7 0cx V *. *-4 2 OA k j - , ; I. h'a~ Cai dt C-rZ Ip)roject

n Ch r I - o1 11, Cu ,: .. C~l () r ti er iil a i n

I-trni rxi ~r. 1'ix tonr-;'JcrL1e! :i.itcrial to

t-> 110Cl Ali 9rir ai-i'i 40,0)00 c'ubic

or ti tra t' :i1,!H $51,893,000

oU 'r, S 7:c~ h 3 00

4t L' C 'L P10 ? k CL1

cm n-iT t' c Lrinicitive to c hainne I

* '' t" k- ind contatiner shi=ra w-ould

a I- .'t: L~ A~'i. I iitro xstone as con-0

-I, - C. Iilhl , o F .,rea ter dep~t h than the

r-. -,c t , )niicti.ig 'to, entrance channel and

r. h* .1c w 0 ill I~i -loouo fu I oded yes-

C - -.. .* u.xi ., oi as;(i rat Lof C'hannels to 0

ou I~ 1,, -. itt i l 1,,l loided J irec tl\ on-

tt MU' '1 11C iV -t a' c s , have

- ~ ~ ~ 1 Jtf I il tI . i t'Ic t ion, the lj~ght

o, I , v1 . I t11j J, 1 'cr:'cna.1 tacilities

r i1Il Ia 1ii i-~' revkjricd for out-

t H 'lrC't i C;I for

I iIzd emci a-

'taIlitt, r o and

1: 1 i I I Lv ' Y.1~~ 11CF ,1 i 1 i ti. 2

*~~~7 C11 I IM L? I

Page 112: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Man V t an~ker Owners I'anId c ib r t c r pa rt i es p) roli lb1 i t t lie use o f igh t e rs

:or ma~iter ials- o f lox- Iish po in t. Th is excl 1us ion is wr it ten i nto

-;a11 Ci 011 co tnlt s here, t hie l)iuve r f urn ishes thle vesselI. 1, i gh ter--

il~ l- o j ilt reOduce's problemTs of qutal i tv and quali ty control . M e r e

taInkers take-( onl cargoes of several products, the cargo co-nf igurat ions

c cOntrol 1 l.st and~ -Iraft could result Ln ser ious irmbalance inI 0

TIall iti es- o0 commod ities to he 1 1gbtered . Blecause of these operational

a ta~.anagc , 11 oter'esysemwas; deemed to be impract ical and

s net conIs de red fuLir t her . The env ironmen t a 11mpac ts of this alt er-

:Ii, y wuli be s iri Lir to those4 of the selected alternative but

,.01L I)C 0e Af a esr a'ituebcause of a smalleor construct ion

Pt lit c r~c1 eurmn

sh Iore ocean terminial . An offshore orcean terminal

I i r-:u ire the constructing of a common unloading terminal in S

i-:roe a- tcIY 4 ~5 to 50 1 'e t deep kci tli overlIand and submerged

p I I ilt- nes connect inc the existing terminals at (Charleston. An off-

s Lx.c -rr'ina l w'ou Id provide a workable solIut ion For common handl1ing

ci n- rel I ei:m and( petrol eum products; however, it would present several

* rptI :.: '>rel ems of- product hand! in,( and quality control and would be

..e'ajnllx'eL betal to n-Lt t ~Ca rate. As with the lighterage

* ~ :sem *t lx is :1 tc, svtm;ould be unacceptable for container

'Ili s.Th tremen~idous- cos t of anl of fshiore terminal, total invest-

'r ti- itedl over S70,000,000 wi,,th annual charges approaching

7,ii(() ,00 woldil. so remove this al ternativye from consideration.

iili- lIternit ivi. ul not have the environmental imnacts associated

* rdri n epe(rati(ton that would character ize the selected

11 rn~it lye. It would have other impa);cts such as the destruction

:ilrl:l ii ailt eritioii of uIplandC site(s that would bie required during

01! Lr I ~icn of the ci tel ines2 '0nn1eit inc the offshore terminal

.,<r:.jIri 11 (Inig; P,int L. Tis al;;iItcrna iti ve woulId

! I, oil. t1 cit io 0 o1 t .i ,-monn t er7 i il~ and s t o ragc tanik f arm

Page 113: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

loi

!ttid li11i1 im it ....

lw 'I m cc *l'i il' 1 '11.

CI LI I . Ii I 1. 1it l i, I ld 1 1 1t I ii h ii ; IlIIl TI

it lii i i i : : '11.1 i it 1 1 : ;ti ;ll lt I"t 'i

I llmt.iillitt lit1d

*;.i In0;o ,w ,l Ni t

IT, I (w 1.( 4,1: wm 1S Sc S'1 v

LI d I ~ ,- 1. l -)' i !

Page 114: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.- -7

similar to those of the reconmmended plan and the other channel

alternatives, differin; mainly in that the impacts of no action

are of less.er macnitude. In view of the criticallv short supply ..

of di. Sosal areas, the samie techniques of disposal of dredged

mate rial will prol,,hlv hV used in the near future for this alter-

nat i Ve as would be used for the selected alternative. In addition

to these impa'ts, this alternative would also adversely affect the mlocal and regional economv. FoLture growth and expansion will also

occur at a slower rate. Certain shipping interests have stopped

visiting Charleston Harbor and others may follow in the future

because of the inability of the harbor to accommodate the deeper

draft vessels now in vogue. This alternative was rejected to

avoid forfeiture of the economic benefits to the local area and

region which would accrue to this project at relatively small

environmental cost. p

Drekdging alternatives. Studies of the dredging

opirit ion were 'onducte2d in response to Congressional directives

to Iew-lo;, a prac t ica I long-range solution to the disposal of _ 0

material dred ed from Charleston Harbor with particular reference

to stuariuc values. Ten plans were evaluated and these are dis-

cussed in the following paragraphs. More detailed information on

th,-es dredging alternatives is contained in the Report on Long- •

R ange Disposal Study, Charleston Harbor, S. C., which is available

for review in the Charleston District Office. Since that part of

the dredging operation that is concerned only with the removal of

the -;hoal deposits is similar under all plans in that it involves p

the use of a cutterhead and pipeline, the environmental impacts

associated with this part of the overall operation will not be re-

peated here. The means and methods of disposal vary and these will

be discussed in greater detail.

Plan 1. Continuation of the presently used method which in-

volves the removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge and per-

0 P2

Page 115: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

r j

The us o r-

3r :irr rr jct ria-, ivt r -

'- C ' : r V is t e c hajn nh- I av i f tvp'. '

3, r .' . I i i n r the N v y chas ' ciii

<'53 vs ri ho c)1!, in t

''1>2th I h f .r' rca'K i se riir.I

: ftmka IrI' i a I I' It, eK th am r t rerui

'''1 itv I i. 'a v i n; v :n --at ad v'ru f tf o n t he0

C~~~~ ' .' PA' ' h a rrjfl tv- wm II i nvo Ile mach glreater

r) n I-F rI3. I MAet c0 (I 'a Imerit i n the outer harlbor,

hi r h ) urln G ir J-r'2 I I I14 (':I beca us

'() I 'h I i 1 1

0 I10

Page 116: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

,, -- 0

c-s ... ..-. - -~. - -~ . - . •.-- .. ,5- --i-%*%".-- - -

which would function as a temporary disposal area until the material .

could be transported to an offshore disposal area bv pipeline.

The initial dredging would be accomplished by rivately-owned dredges

under contract and the later transfer of the shoal material to sea

would be accomplished bv a government-owned and operated unit con- •1

sisting of a long pipeline into the ocean with electric booster -* 0

stations as required to cope with the long distances involved.

The estimated annual cost of this plan is S4,814,000. The impact

on the ocean dumping gtround would be similar to that of Plan 2 but - --

a greater accumulation of material might result under this plan -

since the dumping operation of the hopper dredge results in the

greatest possible dispersion and resuspension of shoal material.

Greater accumulations of shoal material would not be significant

because this area now consists of fine to coarse sand and shell

and its natural productivity is relatively low. There would be

no significant environmental impacts resulting from the use of

an existing disposal area on Daniels Island as a temporary disposal

area. The pipeline and booster stations will be routed through 0 •

open water areas and would not have significant impact on water

bottoms.

Plan 3A. This plan is identical to Plan 3 except that diesel

powered booster units would be used instead of electric power units. O 0

The estimated annual cost of this nlan is $4,879,000. Its environ-

mental imnacts would be similar to those of Plan 3.

Plan 4. Removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge and the -

transfer of this material to the Daniels Island disposal area and .

Area I just above Goose Creek, which areas would function as tem-

norarv disposal areas until the material could be transported to

an offshore disposal area bv ripeline. This plan is identical to * 0

Plan 3 except that apnro.:imatelv 20 percent of the shoal material

would be initially pumped into Area I instead of entirely into the

Daniels Is]and disnosil area. This "1lan was developed in an effort

94

1P 4P 0 S 0 5 S S S

Page 117: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

to reduce costs by using a term:orarv area closer to the shoalsin the upper part of the harbor project. The estimated annual

cost oF this plan is $4,759,000. [ts environmental impacts

would also be similar to that of Plan 3.

Plan 4A. This plan is identical to Plan 4 except that diesel

powered booster units would be used instead of electric power

units. The estimated annual cost of this plan is $4,821,000.

Its environmental imnacts would be similar to those of Plan 4.

Plan S. Removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge and

the transfer of this material to the Daniels Island disposal

area, which would function as a temporary disposal area until

the r-aterial could be transported to an offshore disposal area by

barge. The estimated annual cost of this plan is $5,325,000.

The environmental impacts of this plan most closely resemble

those of Plan 2 in that under both Plans, all of the dredged

material is transported to the offshore disposal area where it

would be discharged at the waters surface.

Plan 6. Removal of shoal material by pipeline dredge and

the transfer of this material to the Daniels Island disposal

area and Area I just above Goose Creek, which areas would

function as teml-orarv disposal areas until the material could

be transported to remote inland disposal areas by pipeline.

This plan is similar to Plan 4 except that the material would

be trans'norted to diked inland disosal areas instead of to

the ofIfrhre disposal ,rea. The tentative location of inland

dispos,l areas is along the ,'ando ;river. .!o'st of these areas

would bc high land !,ut some h igher marshland would be included.

.ajor t idal CrCeks ,ould be avoided. This represents a co"moro-

m i e bet''een ('cormo(mri('s (liand costs) ind marsh Preservation.

Th'lie est iinited ,mnnual cost of th is rTl an is $4.247,0010. Complete

iivoi'lan( , of ,1 mirsh I mid would increase the costs; of this

Pl;n. A II ve, tat ion in thIet,L disposal areas would be 1illed

(45

. •o .

Page 118: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

andl these a reas Wkul U lo.,, what val1ue the,, ilay, have as wildlife

hu ab i ta t FaCh LArea may,1 he used I-or some years so that this loss

represents i fiirlv, long-term commitment. 'Then f illed to capa-

c ity, these -ircais h:uib reve~zotated aind eventually, tree growth

charic terist ic Of UplAand habitat will become established. In the

upland areas, this tree growth ma'. be similar to the natural growth

nrosent before the i r use as d isposal areas. The use of high marsh- 0

areas will res-ult in their permanent conversion to upland tree

hub -ttAt aiFt-0or the' ;1a\ve been used to C anacitv. The loss of this

nQmarsh repireseunts a, loss ot some of the least productive of

estuarine arcas;. The upland habitat that would be taken out of

productivit,- :- or a relativeix, long time is a common habitat type

t 1 1r 7 U L 1 ( h O U t t h e W La.e a

1 ain 7. Tb is 7nlan is; s imilar to Plan 6 except that the dredged0

* material ,oulu1 be transported to the remote inland disnosal areas

*bv truck instead of b)y, pipeline. The estimated annual cost of this

-Plan is S 10,672,0OQ, which is considered excessive in comparison

with other plans. The environmencal impacts would also be similar

to those of Plan 6.

P1lan 8. Reumoval of- shoal rmat cr1al by a special dredge designed

to ut ilize ba ie nd the us e of these barges to convey the material

U irec tlv to t he offIshore dispos.al area, This Dlan is similar to

Plan 2 eXep hat tht: U rodpcd material would be transported to the

L't 4!Wr(,1 :sjt_ by !bur4g instro'id of b,, hopper dredge. The esti-

* ~ ~ ~ ~ i ,a ;, nua ~ ~ft I an i<- '2,7O,0OO. The environmental im-r pe(t :,11uld il~~ bte similar to tiose of Plan 2

Page 119: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

i*K)The! k Iat i oro;h i p Hoe twcori Loca I Short-Term Hses

of s E rv iornmcnt and the 'lXi i ntenanco aJnd Enhancement of-

kLon -Trrt'r( reuc t i v i I.

7.01. The pr inc i pal lonj-tform ef fect of the project

relates to its stimu lus of thte local a :nd reoionalI economy wh ich

woulId rys--ulI t f rom improved naiviqjabi I ity of the deeper channel s0

in the hajrbor These deeper ch,-innelIs woulId permit the unre-stricted-

us~e of the lhw)bor 'Ly most of the Iarfqer ships which now must either-

use )the:.r port,, or use Chajrteston Harbor I i qht- loadod.-

70?. The principal short-term effects of the project

relaite to the a)ctualI deepeningj of Charloston Harbor hy hydraul ic

!rodie a nd the disposal of the material so dredqled in remote

dinoalroaLs. Since the first feaiture represents the removal

of r,-c n Pitly kepes itIed and u nconso Ii dajted f i ne sed imen ts hayving

little itilIity to any important lif ftotrms, the actual doepeninq

won)l~ ri:ot conflIict wi th other longl-term uses;. The aict ion of the

en tterheaid drodcei woul i ha-ve temporary and l ocali Ized effects on

wa-]te"r gui Il i ty Nh i,:h are niot ionsiderqd to be of a maq(n itude- to

if ft0,t lena(-term prod'ct iv ity. I ind md IisposalI areas, are, used,-

the, of f non t from sujch irrea' won da s have a temporary and '

I ea- I i .7-d cf f~ 'a-n wa iter qua- I i ty.0

j 0 . Th( ise'.m of the ma tforia I dredged-( from the

hairbor lhas- somo pet-en Via i for Ilon-termr conseoquences - depe-nd i

on h-i moajns and -r'thol t H-,'n fir- it-. final (lis-p-sa I. Two pn' j,

* iO' m r-I(:mm-tidt "(r fv ther con,-ider ition. The plain pr( vidinq

f )r f fti rr ri~ t' I I icol w t or i Ifai1 1in tjnf!otI ryi nod

f t i I J iv rl t firn bir(Iitiil protmictivi ly in the

SI i Ir I h, at h, )h I w h ic-h ifnlv( I v, f h,

*I f ' I i ' r t f in ' I r i ind ,i ft w i I I r n I t i r

fr )n i f' t I, I5 iv I t fi oind jti fy flh- Ii huv

f Sr 'Ii I iif Iiri , rSt h r , i

Page 120: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

!r .!CI

','.,i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~r i 'n ,i "t i:L 3 !. :7 , h::, ; :r , ,.... ,1," n .

I,, 'I " t n' :3 , 3','' r r , Hj , . .... • ] > I

- I r , ' -. ! I, r r I,, t I.. ' I !. r u nm, I t'

I . II ''\ I 'II , , ,

I 0

'1 r r I 3I. ~lt

t I. it, t r , , , i ,,

SII j v '

. r n n I w JIII r t vh;'

v r r I r t j I : I I t r,

•~ ~~~~ ~~~ t t'.,r • .'r. ; r h ,:f 'r ; i I, f~., mhiv, f , :n ], , i,,] i

* 0

....................... i. fri ''with" } '

h, *ii ?r:!. . ,i ll i vuv' 3r. r tixv 1 r(rmr/it-;

• ,, ... r-I

II

0

• S

Page 121: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.01Coordination With Others.

9.O1. .\ nublic meeting was held on 29 Ma-y 1968 to obtain

the vievs of the public regarding proposed navigation improvementsin Charleston Harbor and various methods of disposing of dredged .7 ]material. All in attendance at this meeting expressed a desire

for harbor improvenents in the interest of economic development.

Some expressed concern regarding the effects of dredging on environ-

mental valueQ.

9.02. A second public meeting was held on 20 June 1974 •

to inform the public of the status of project studies and to solicit

the views and comments of public and private interests on the pre-

14minarv f indings. The maioritv of those in attendance expressed

a:rproval of the proposed develorment and a desire for pronpt imple- S

mentation of the pro ect. .\ few e:*:pressed doubts about the need

or :practicalitv of the proposed project and questioned its desira-

bilitv in view of what were seen as significant adverse environmental

inrvacts. S

9.03. In resonse to a request to the U. S. Fish and

Wildlife Service for an evaluation of the effects of dredging and

of various disposal methods on the area ecosystem, the Service

formed! an ad hoc co-mittee of experts in affected natural resource

fields to develop and coordinate a plan of stud-, and to evaluate

the results of these studies. \s a result of the recommendations

of this committee, the following reports were prepared under con-

tract to the 1'. S. Arm\, Corns of Engineers:

Ia. \ report on regional and local stratigraphy

and sedimentat ion in the Chlirlestoi , s iarhor area, Pe,)artnent of

4 ;u'; [,i 'nivers t ( of South C:irolina, ). f. Colqunoun. 0

h. 1,ioassav studies, Charleston Harbor, South

(. roli:1a,; tT' lih ef fuct.S of dred ing harbor sediments on Plankton,

llWl ",artich Cki stal ' ese.irc!i inst itute, in vers1t,. oF South S

99

* S S 0S S 5 0 S 0 5

Page 122: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

L'ffects of dredged harbor sediments on larval

estuarin 1i h iconrmion to Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, National

Marine Fisher i . Serv ice, BeotI)rt , NOrt h Ca rolin i.

d. A study oF the Charleston Harbor Estuary withs: ec jal re:-erece to deposition of dredged sediments, Olffice of

'Marine Conservation, Manaoement and Services, South Carolina ,Ti id- 0

life and 'larine iResources Dc partment.

The ad hoc coma itteu administering these studies is chaired hrv a

representat ire oCf the U. S. Fish and 1ildl ife Service and this

a..encx will Dreare and submit a report containing the conclus ions

and recomnuendattons of the Service relating to the proposed project.

I.Y

4p 0

I (Jr

* S S S S S S S S 5

Page 123: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

i ,w .m q i - - j •V 7 . u o_ n _ • _1

9.0-4 Coord in nt in oI drait t 111S.

a. Government agenc ies

C S. DOprtment of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service

Comment: Appropriate members of mv staff have revieowed the draft

environmental impact statement for the Charleston Harbor IJeepening

Project_ and we have no comments to offer.

Resaon Ls e: No response is required. S

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare

CTomment: We have reviewed the subject draft Environmental Impact

Statt.m1nt . Based upon the data contained in the draft, it is our

o'pinion that this proposed action will have only a minor impact upon

the human environment with respect to the concerns of this Department.

Re0s-pose: No response is required.

Federal Power Commission

Comment: A review of the report indicates that the proposed plan

,,,o1uldi hlive no sisnificant effect on such facilities. However, if

there ire any electrical power transmission facilities or natural

p .:i fiiilitirs cxisting in the vicinity, these should be protected

dlur ii" const rutc t ion.

OpI n .: n , I r et ri,'ll power transmiss ion facilities or natural

,. i- ij iti' ist Lu_ in the vicinity will be protected during

'nTl t rie t i on.

P. . - iL rL it I t -r -ior

. : .,t ., ir,, plt.i-,.d to note that initial steps have blt.n

t il-n t r 1 , ,it h t ii r, ,,11i ,.nIi1ts of the Advisory Con t- i I on

I!i-.tor', P'rrn ,rv:it ion',; "Proctdtirts for the Protection of Historic

11nd ('iI tu ril IPrp,.rt i .' ( i.dtrilI Registe r tct ion 80 l, .lanu:irv % ,

* 0 4 01P P.* S S S S S S S S S S S, S

Page 124: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

k. 1 :i it icn.it .I Ae4 tcrr ot iliStorie- P lace , lists- known-I

',It tr it 1 i i t 'r i I rc I w I o0, i caI, arch i t e Ctinral ) resources. t

e I', TW-; Li ti 0 t e IC ',111,t Vo t1 Li no1, tor c Ons 1ing agencyv

IetV t ~~re Ii t he i1rca of pro jeCL t ipaC t whriich

In' 0'1 lr-1O ni nit i on o r in ie 1 process of nominaI on,

I, I nIi ro;LJv I i L .i i n L he .a tiona1I Reg is ter.

j 1 It iit ni t, ri ve nt hen ui prfion iv evalujcctmat then i

t I, pn- t i A I 1 - -Lv v ol th Ieea agencer t o I thd bcsutn

I11A, i)1 i,- moIle,. iKesut tofc tile cvaluation sho-uld also be in-

!,,,IJ ill t;Ie I tu -;l ucnn .signif icant cultural resources,

* ~ ~ iii isl,-l"nfh or uinderwatcr, which are subject to

in Fil r1 10i 01- LrL~T'Iu, by thcp 1W1)1-0 csh Ion i h e Isalvaged.

* ,-.~vn>~: (I) lin prloo ,d proj~ec t as present tv def ined wil I not

* i i ill','rip rt v I i ;tc~d on thei Nat ional Regis ter of Iii s toric

,r iv p rope rt v that i-o c, I j-ib Ic for nomination to thle Regis-

I t h eW p r p r o j - e t heI

I)F ii'L tj:iir is, aUthorized by tieCongress.-, iistoricalI

-te t-~ dringpost authorization planning.

(I i,1 ;Iii; heL-n -oordin,'ted with tihe Staite Hlistoric. Pre-

iti 1t-------- .,, ro v c f t o rt w 1)(he :Tmidi( to p))ro tec t an d sl;Iva ge

t to ri I Ior en I tur. I i i Il Cane th1alt may he mni-overeni

o~nt -.e 'i't <-'I L I . -ri fiention he mnade tin di ffe-re-tuate

- i'ti I .~IIt I doi uo ind "ri-eori-ndi-I doautimori /;PI n" n

*10,

*~~ 1P 4P U 0 5P0

Page 125: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Response: The differentiation has been clarified in the Final EIS.

3. Comment: 1.0 Projecz Description: _

(a) The term "upland disposal" is defined on page 22 as "disposal

above the highwater mark." Throughout the statement the term

"upland" is used frequently, without further explanation. The term

"upland" appears to have been used only as a means to differentiate

areas that are above from areas that are below the mean high water

line. We believe such a usage is misleading and suggest it be clari-

fied.

Response: As stated on page 22, the phrase "disposal above the high-

water mark" is terminology used by the EPA in their letter dated 29

November 1972. The assumption that upland refers to areas above the

mean high water line is correct. S

4. Comment: 1.04:

The last paragraph indicates that approximately 1,110 acres of

new diked disposal areas would be needed, probably on Daniel Island S

proper. It is our understanding that these disposal areas have not

been selected. The environmental impact statement should either

provide a general description of the probable locality on Danicl Island

or state why such a description has been omitted, e.g., that a disposal 0

area has not been selected.

Response: 'The acquisition of disposal areas, which is the responsi-

Sbitytv of the State of South Carolina as the project sponsor, will not S

be accomplished until after the project is authorized by the Congress.

However, a general description of the areas used for cost estimates

nas oeen added t, Section 2.13 of the EIS.

0 3 -

0 W W V W 0 M W W V W 0

Page 126: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

5 Commnt: 2. 0 Lnvironmental Sett ing Without the Project:

2.07.3:

No mineral product ion has been recorded in recent years in - 0

Charleston County. Sand, an abundant resource in the area, has

been produced in the recent past in the county. The statement

indicates that, "The Charleston area. . . was formerly the most

productive area of phosphate in the state," (but) ". . mining 0

in the area has been insignificant since 1920 and ceased entirely

in 1938.

Investi at ions by the U. S. Geological Survey indicate the

presenCe of heavy minerals on James Island and on nearby Isle of

Palms ind Folly Beach. However, the statement does not indicate

the possible presence of heavy minerals in the project area.

Sect'icn 2.07.3 should be expanded to reflect consideration of 0

heavy minerals as potential resources. The impact of the project

,in these resources should be discussed in sections 4.0, 5.0 and 8.0.

Reaspose: Heavy mineral resources on James Island and on nearby

Isle of Palms and Folly Beach will not be affected by the proposed

proje,'L. As a result, a detailed discussion of these resources

would add little to the EIS.

6. Comment: 2.16:

We suggest the statement contain maps of sufficient scale to

clearlv depict the location of all cultural resources in the Charleston

area-,ithin the zone of pro ,ct impact.

Respnqe: Other than c, Vt ing navigation channels, the only area

to be a tfctcd hV tile pro ict is thl, upland di sposal area which will

nlt he I)'pal r,_ h th projcct sponsor until the project is authorized S

h; U, cr," -. U.lttr. l r:soirces of any potential disposal site will

1w cons idh,r,.d duri u p >s;t aitthorization studies. A map showing the

le.It ilM 0' Ili ctltr.all resources in the Charleston area would add

littl,, t t ik, 1,lq 4in,, the ,, rcsotirces will not be affected in any

i h: th p re t.

* -w W W U S 5 5 )0*

Page 127: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

•*1

Cmment 4.0 The Probahi impact of the Proposed Action

on the E"nvironment:

(a) "'ll enutire per, imeter of the Daniel Island site, as shown .

by a comparison of figures 4 and 10, is near sea level and must

be marsh unless the fo rme r marsh has already been destroyed by

spoil deposition. Such deposition on marshland has not been indi-

cated on figure 10. nor has it been mentioned in the text. Figure 0

10 also siok,'s that the former disposal area is diked and that the

spoils were clearly deposited on marshland, as the perimeter of the

;pci I area is ringed by surviving marsh. The fact that all present

-spoit areas shown on figure 4 extend to the water's edge, or beyond, 0

suogests that marsh bordering the shore will inevitably be destroyed,

or already has been during recent disposal operations. We suggest

these apparent discrepancies be clarified.

(b) It is stated that "The Charleston Harbor estuary contains

thousands of acres of productive salt marshes, none of which would

be affected by the proposed project since dredged materials would be

disposed of .n upland sites or in approved offshore areas." We 1 6

feel that thi!; statement needs to be supported by map documentation, .

as maps now provided (e.g., figure 10) suggest that the disposal

areas delineated on figlure 4 include considerable marsh. That map

is highly generalized with regard to disposal area limits, being at •

a scale of only 1:175,000 (about 2.7 miles equal 1 inch). Disposal

areas should ho delineated in sufficient detail to show the location

of ,.xistin or proposed dikes with respect to shorelines, tidal inlets,

and the limits of marshlands

RL',eSPj n5: (a) I Fi"'uret wa incuded in the EIS to give the reviewer

;I n( n ral overview of tihe loc t ions of di sposal areas used for past

and p rsent Charleston Iarb or mai nL enn eCc dredging. These disposal

areas hav,, in most cases, been used for several years for the deposi-

tion of materials generated by maiintenance dredging and are not going

to he ,ised for tie ha rbor deenpling projcct. Dredged material.s

4 ; , nerate;d by the propo-;ed projecl , ;as discussed in the ViIS, will be S

1))

* U U U U U U U I U U U U U

Page 128: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

D 0

depos ite d on (1)ipland areas on and north of Daniel Island which are not -

del in'tCd n Figure 4, in an existing disposal area on Morris Island, •.--

aiu i T an approved of fshore area. -r

Figure 10 is a reproduction of an old navigation chart of the

Wando River and was included only to show the location of sediment

sampling stations in the Wando River. The boundary shown for the -

Daniel Island disposal area is not an accurate representation of

the c orrent boundarv.

(b) As discussed in the EIS, the only areas being considered for •

disposal of dred,4ed materials generated by the harbor deepening project

(both initial construction and maintenance dredging) are upland areas Ion and northearI of Daniel island, an existing disposal area on Morris

Islad, and an approved offshore area. As a result, the statement

1),ilraphrased in p~iragraph (b) of this comment is correct since none

of the productiV, mars hes in Charleston Harbor will be affected byac decoonin- Proje ct. A detailed delineation of disposal areas in A

tlh harbor as requsted in this comment is not considered to be

neessarv sincec none of the existing areas will be utilized, however,

.L J,,-r i pti on o t Ise a reas nas bee-u aude, to Section 2.13 of the ELIS.

8. Comment: 4 .04: •

hw -tional Register lists only known cultural resources. The

constrction agency cannot take for granted that all such resources

in thC pro oct are a are known. Despite the fact that most of the

miteri.il to h,, removed by dredging has been deposited in modern times,

it in plbihle that historic shipwreck sites will be disturbed. -

Charleston Harbor and the mouth of the Cooper River were extensively -

lit I i od b1V nIva ves;Wls dut inIg the Revo utionary and Civil Wars,

;1(d mre y :llhi p; ' r / sunk in this vicinity. Although modern debris S

,.'LILd -Ike :i prepro t,t nnderwater survey impractical, arrangements

501Uld h, 71,d/' to l ,ot he )f fic, of the State Archeologist in the

,vnt evi. , (o hi ;toric shipwreck is revaled during dredging

lit h rtiI ,ttrl '.terial may sialvni ed and preserved. •

b ] w w

Page 129: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

;R2S)1'sn : eil Of t'ice at L h e St ate Arclienlog i. s will be not ified in

tiE eveLnt evi Jenc, of an historic ;h £pwrec k is revealed during

d W i o L nat 11rt i facturaI limterLa I may hie salvaged and preserved.

L. ~~8f~l . 10

1\eI Lretiee i s madc t o thei Coope.?r Ri ver Rediversion project . Th is

rreLnCee;iO sno Ii), he eanded to stress the significant relationship

oi hspre !OecI Lo the future of the C'_harleston Harbor project. It

Shou1 Iih p dOut t hat thO 1long- term planning presented in this

cayroe~ t a impat satelintis based on the assumption that the

re'd iy rs i on p ro iec t vi I I bc completed , and wi thout redivers ion, the

e: raienia I imrpaict staitement would requi re major revision.

Responde :Act a i led i isen is ,ion of the relationship between the harbor

dcepeni n pro lect and tlhe Cooper River Redivers ion project has been

aidded to the reterenk ed secti on.

0 I. C omment: 6 .0 Alternatives to the Proposed Act ion:6

Pic spclal studies co_-nducted at the request of the Corps of

111in beelrs resu 1 ted in the recommendation by the Fish and Wildlife

eriethat the miost desi raihe alternative to sea disposal environ-

menal lvt, Vwiould he (1lisposal in diked areas located inland above the

1rh . W ,1k1 ieve, the envi ronmiental statement should be expanded to

al-n the cons ide rat ion given to such an alternative.

dn- liscnsse SLd in the AS, materials, dredged f rom the entrance

nan I mI hLe;, 1e i i an ;ri aprovcod of f-heore area, materials

Jr ': - t ron; hc tira inc a>i would he, p1 aced in tLhe Morris Island

d i s iro anld mtriaI.dredvani(, frem the harbor and Shipyard River

I I 1I fcl '11 111)iiild ,iI'I- Dinjel ,Is and which are located inland

I r a. I i 1W a --- t t he ." var- onv dispesal miethods. are

1 1! 1 01io L e 11

Page 130: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

6 0-

roa:'' 1 t I' 1 t t i 00 l O~

-~~~~~~~~~ - - -. - - - - - -

I. Cr'wcnt :i Io, I.V t wwod the )ril t lnvironmental Impact

to. .'p 1 -in ') Ct ;iirlcston iLirbor and Shipyard

iver in Slutt I'x. ir.I and finl thAt exceptionally good coverage

is :,iv,i i to hE 0V r.ill cvironment. llowcver, there are several

areai0 oh concirn to whici furt her ,onsideration should be given: S

(I1 .\ 1wti r J--;cription ,I c,,icli of the upland disposal sites,

(2) A dt.tai lud AcCOMnt of the biota on these sites, and (3) the

e tct 1 1 t I I i , ,l I- il I , olt i n in saltwater on these sites.

._:pixIj : ,cq >iti ,n of di- posal ireas, which is the res-

ponsixil it\ I, th, Stit, ,-ot oxith (irol inxa as the project sponsor,

w.ill ot ! A'cop I 1 ,i -xhxd nt ii it ter the I)roject is authorized by

tiu on.-Cn r'- . tIt wx0u i tie c c, - t io0n ot spec i fic disposal areas

i a; ;pl i , t it-.lthlri tion planning, the project sponsor has

indij'itod tihit it is desi rabLe from his position that t hese disposal0 e,,0 )Q 1,, -t in 41 hr thiward (0 l),ni I Island and on Morris

LI I AIk n 0

l.0d. ,\ .:,,a' I'* , , , ,Ifl I 1 -.ist 1 disposal areas and

tI 1 ,1'. lr,., I ,I c- st istim ts s een added to Section

* 0I

* . (Cmx ci L: Irthermore, ailthough ei-lit plans for the disposal of

spoi I are disc'ussed, it does not appear that any decision has been

.. ide l >, to .l ich plan will he used. It is noted, however, that in the

hot,im .ivvi ikS , I 'p ,rts 01 the Chirleston Harbor, preference is

iv-i i to d il l of fmiteri i ls :it sea via special dredge and barge

(' 1,ix ,). It ih; al ity, td that implementation of Plan 8 is conditional

to lir,,I, I fiixin of a pilot program indicating that dredged

4 .:O1t .ir i p r1'; t r ni;portod and dis posed of at sea.

t i., ,t ltc Pi 'lLi, I' Lx;L tt, ociraxie ;ilternative to sea dis-

h,,! II ( ,colx xi ,;II I id I ,.'i r,,lt int.lIv ) otl II ,' disposal in diked

. r,.I; I, i1.11,d IOl,,'v till Fl ar:Qx ; (il'l in f) )

. - ..

Page 131: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

i -d 1 1rOM~ t. 1ie propo~sed

13m 1r. 1o W1, o f t ho d ra ft

t 1, L 17r I I), , i ih litV anld COSt Of

i k1T (AW -1 t' t 01 Ifinho r and re a d

.~ r i ) trOSe 0 01 thIis

A, r ~t I () I.o- on page 3 of the-

I it I I o,_I I t u Y a d L itreasons

t 1 1 SW t 111 01 j~g 4 othe

1 ( I :i -l t -;I~) ':; mm~ Char I e'StO T1

t up trk- iT rom the

m~i :,I I ;- i 'It It. m t. ide

I w 1 'ot I I - j rv,! ti on'045

inArrn ho

Page 132: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

3. Commenit.: We also recommend re-evaluation of Plan 8 in light of

thle Final Regulat ions and Criteria fur Ocean Dumping published in

thle Federal Reister of October 15, 1973 (Volume 38, No. 198, Part

1l1). Te'sts;' should be made of materials to be dredged (as outlined

in Chapter 227,61) to determine whether spoil is polluted, in

accordance with thle new regulations. If such materials are found

to be pol luted, specilal at tent ion should be given to Chapter 227.64

which -;tates in part: "Polluted dredged material may be disposed

of in thle ocean if it can bi- shiown that the place, time, and conditions

I

of dumping are such as not to produce an unacceptable adverse impact

o the areas of thle marine environment cited in 227.60 (c). " '[le

proposed pilot study should determine whether this is feasible.

he sFne: A similar comment is discussed in response to comment S

number 2 of this letter. As discussed in the EIS, the only materials

which will be disposed of in the offshore area are those non-polluted

sediments to he removed from tie entrance channel by hopper dredge, as

recommended by the EPA in their letter of 29 November 1972. 0

t. C onlte: Chapter 4.03.1 should give a more complete description

(if vegetatiOn on thle upland sites and of the possible effect of salt-

water on this vegetation.

pofnisc: A eeneral description of vegetation on the upland sites has

been included in Sect ion 2.13 of this eTS. Also see repose to

comment 1 of this letter. As stated in Section 4 of this LS, upland

veh tition will be d es t roved in dis posal. areas.

Comment: Chapter 3.02 should incLUde a description of the upland

vegetatin offCted on the van ies sites. Th is should inc lude an

1 10v

* 3 S ~_sy S ,nrldsrpino veettin n h upan sie a *

Page 133: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

F 0Z

A 1. LoI h' <it' i rc. itoLlir t han thle actLual d is posalI site

K i I I. ti il Ii , dr-i newa Laiing f rom thle s i te ,wi th

t s w t 1 . i '11 1 11 W -; t W ; :illd j)ro )L- rt y Val UeS in1 thle jarea. -

A j j 1 1 1 1 t i I i CU cse d ini res,,;p one t o c omme nt

Crret (iiaiptLer .0 8 shold re-e vaIua teL thle da ta outlIine-d.

I hi i ii Ics sairv becas olI-Cf t he new ocean d ump ing regu la t ions

rI~x e PA C i (1,11eeC I tis en-; t hat c er ta in sed imen ts are polIluted i s

E l i io ilid~ r:-; i(ou r le tt er of Novembe r 29 , 1972). a1,L r

._-T2 )015c A reeaIntion of the data presented in Sect ion 2.08

cI LIi i s i IlS Is not cons' 1 idered necessary since materials removed

* l h: i ine -r larhor w ill Ihe- di-- posed of in up land areas. Also

ccr,-.peoies, t.() -ommenit. 2 anid 3 of this- letter.

* (nio t K:il1( f1 i nd thuL Statement con tains discrepance s

is o tri I ttos ecardi g en th ic popul at ions , the effect of

lie preoe onl soc h popu I at ions , and recovery .

ol pi-.e 'I hiere irc no d isc repanec ies or contradicet ions regarding

I nt i ii po I)I 1 It ionMS.

lime 11 t It is; statedl (pa rag raph 4 .035. 1) that toxic sediments

I,1 V.' ci minted al II)enthlj(' organisms from the harbor

t At I ow lcve r 1) 1 ir;~ i_ h , 1) 11 t 2 sttes t ha t th11e sm othie r ing o f0

Witi aIt tie OCIanl disposal site will- he short-term as the destroyed

or 1' ll ;i i I 1w hercpl aced hiy recruli tment from surrounding areas."

a! it1 tii Hter ja is toxic, enouigh to eliinate Ieuthic

i i i. t i i arlir it t: Lo\ic i ty shoulId also prec lude repopu lat i in

d ill in the 1'.lS, materials, dredged from the harbor

* 0> viircilIc O l.warnpl 4 .0 1.(-1 (4.03. 5. I in the draft FAS)

Il IMP1

Page 134: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.: I ,.C d1 O- t 0 11 en upland areas of Daniel Island and not in

teo -,h r., dii La i rea. nly non-polluted materials removed

t,, ... n c h.nlle by hopper dredge will be placed in the _

Iit A, I> i, 1 , r . Ihere fore, the impacts presented in Section

S,.2)).n.2 et ti .IS rc correct.

W further suggest that if the channel bottoms are

Ac,,id o f cntici organisms, the discussion (paragraph 4.03.7.1)

.* rsi'sp onion of invertebrates into the water column at the dredged

,Ill disposal sites by ocean disposal operations is not relevant totI, i ; priccict. S •

, sni': .-\s ;st,ited in the response to the preceeding comment, the

In. i ,ot tomI5 that are devoid of benthic organisms are located

init ! 1,ort i of the harbor. The discussion referred to in 5 ]

, A . .7. 1 aipplies to the dredging of material from the outer

1', * .iid it,; (Icposition in the offshore disposal area.

:,.aa et: 'Pragraplh 4.03.7.4 says studies show that fish will -

HI ta. Il watcrs i possible. This, too, indicates that any

,..i : _ it the, L, posal site will be limited because of high turbidity.

iacvt ii,, it is indicated that the dredged material may increase the

, ,hii 1, n.j rnaraph 4.03.7.5 reveals that, although fish can tolerate •

,il ti rhitie,, they cannot do so when turbidity if; accomplished

f tI ili : I 1~tl .

,' lOtl -4.0)3.7.5 contains a general statement about the 0

i at r i o f- c.,rtiin water quality parameters insofar as they nor-

. I i ,. l . The EPA incorrectly states that this Section

- i t I i t i-h can not tolerate high turbidities in the presence

. :, , i -; -ect ion does not specificallv mention BOD. However,

i ': Q tih.l[ tile 11ovc comment is directed to the impacts of

i tlroihit i' in th oftshore disposal area. As discus. ed in

i l. i.1 whi h will be placed in tLhi, offshort area will be

. i .t r--i'l.c ch;ain. I ibv hopper dredge. Tlhese materials 0

I 12

S U U U U U U U 5°

Page 135: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

i r- • I . I ied and cout ;lin otI v sia I Iluanti t ics of

I i i I-i Iml :1od viit. As a rel iIt, it is not anticipated

I.l ti r! ii it Is gc! r rI itd by tt. hopper dredge will hI - suf fir ient "

' T, i ! i, lnt !' i ce t i sili poptl at ion,-;

II. , FIlt Finlly I V , i S is noted that the peninsula of Charles ton

S rt -iil at-e prob leli, of tel great 1\ exceeding nat ional primary 0

t:rLird-, Ior im ilot a ir quality. Because oi this problem, we

I,' , :le I ;I. i r t lie f i ml I clvi ronmentatI impact s tatemient give assurance

tL iL CoUt ii t i ,,i, of dust will n ot accrue from transportat iion,

t>. q,,r~c -U i rave .or p rMinnent land storage of dredged ina terial. S

1'1Wit y A i r (IaI i t on the lCha r I es ton peni nsul a becomes a problem

, t lIi r i:- t empe rait ii r inversions. These inversions persist only

ic I .. ;pe-riods ft ]),w wind speed. In view of the considerable distance 0

I. r;. t 1, :,)per River, it is extremely unlikely that a wind of

t.ii,ient vtocLtv to carry dust from a disposal area on Daniels

5.- l~h 'old K) . insufficient to break up the inversion over the

p, Thn-ni a. Mlorris lsland is further yet from peninsular Charleston.

i -ri ior, , tl,'< ctredg in operation for the deepening project will

. -zi:ilar in all respects to the dredging requirement for the existing

p~in.'t-I, and tile exist ing project has never created any dust problems.

iS li~L t i probl en is in the nature of one having little or no .0

p- .b lit v o i ever materi alizing, it is not considered necessary to

,-ir,; in the IFS.

4 I;. , ;I:>: it In addi t ion, in paragraph 4.06, the types of pollutants

,, I ;Iio id )c idint if led, and the word "temporarv" should be

ri I 4, iInC' cO t intd maintenance and dredging wi IL be required.

U * .. ... : iii, pollutivnts referred to in this paraY r ,h ould be of

: t v-'it' ITIArI i'xp.-tei in ':<haut gases from BusI lfld aso inc .-

T V. -t-,l -: l i t i on en- in c o wh i ch a re use'd to pow'r thil dredge

n..ii t i~,,rt vc . Since the nunber of eniink, involved is very

* 6 i , -iv t ' Br. pip. ,,p' r.t inn is ron i l i nnI\ ' ovia;., it is Iig il

1li

* U U U U ,- ". U U

Page 136: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

7 - ' l -l V -4-

.I

', . ' :tit P%,ill ht. mk,,i.murable at existing air quality

-tat C * <ir'.. r[' 'C i n. tot now nor will it become a permanent -.

' L.111 Ii 0. , , tl I' iiePAL - oLt air qialitV in any given lo- I - S

rI t Commrierce

* 0

-" I.I I r t klesekriipL ti

Ptoe~ 1)redged Mterial Quanti ties and Placement

- 1 :r. - Hi p irp i - not cle ar with respec t to

I.), 1t V t 1, 1 t, rtl rcqui red for diked upland disposal

t ~ 1k, t-'V l C 1,7 1 11 iv t' or- di.sposal of additional shoal

I -. J ',I, I - .I I'; I of harbor deepening. 'he

4!v Ii o i 1)Id ojo uif IV tI' location of thesLe areas.

I I 'rv:"IC't hi endiSCUSsed in response number 4

- i pjrt1icnt () ,nterfor.

i .:iv ,ut i' r t l _ t ii et i iri_ Without the P r c tc t

-i - - - - - - -+

, . Ikm -I ' i It H A ir c

Ir,1I I--,fd1 I I- the statement indicating

C p)um ,or 8 ,0)4 ,000 herring were harves-

:. 1 < A rit d these erring would be

til-V11lues be yenified.

:r i ,h irvkolt o hao been corrected in

-* .. t. , ' V., Iir 1 : 01 1!1)' l' the PripAc s ofihlsr a "th-'- - - -

: ...I, . i t ,q:' t t.% b '' iq : s e n r s o s u b r 4. .

t ' 't! 'F '" t~ ,' .> . t'~ lIt~l'l | t l- n te io r I 5

'. ,w,• U : U', U: v rU! ~~,1 .Sy ti5LVtL~ ?he Pres et

Page 137: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0o

Page 84. Tile location and description of the 49-acre upland

disposal site must be given before the impacts of maintenance

r: dredging can be predicted. We suggest that this section be .

readdressed after the disposal site has been selected.

Response: The project sponsor has indicated that the 49 acres

would be located on or northward of Daniel Island but cannot 0

make a definite committment on the exact location of these

areas until the project is authorized by Congress.

4. Comment: 4.10 Existing Projects

Page 85. Since the proposed project would have a favorable

cost-benefit ratio at a lesser depth without the Cooper River S

Rediversion Project, we recommend that this section be expanded to

consider the possibility and the consequences of not rediverting

the Cooper River. For example, if the Cooper River were not rediverted,

what depths would result in a favorable cost-benefit ratio for the S

Charleston Harbor project, and what would be the impact of the required

dredging on the quantity of dredged material and the area needed for

its disposal?

Response: If the Cooper River were not rediverted, tile deepening

project would have a favorable benefit/cost ratio at 38 feet instead

of 40 feet for Charleston Harbor and 35 feet instead of 38 feet in

Shipyard River. These major changes in depth result from the large S

quantity fo shoal material which would have to be removed annually.

In addition to the added expense of dredging, approximately twice as

many acres of disposal area would be required during the life of the

project.

Additional information on the dredging requirements of the Charleston

Harbor Deepening Project tinder a condition of no rediversion of the

Cooper River has been added to the EIS. S

113

0 _ S S S S S S S . - S

Page 138: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

L .L ° r

U. S. Coa:st Gua rd

Comment: As requested in your letter of 24 September 1974, the 0

subject 1IS has been reviewed by this office and no conflicts

wi thin Coast Guard mission areas were noted.

Resonse: No response is required. 0

Advisorv Council on Historic Preservation

Comment: I'his is in response to your request of September 24, 1974,

tor comments on the envIronncntal statement for Charleston Harbor

Deepening Project, Charleston, South Carolina. Pursuant to its

responsibil ities under Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

has determined that while you have discussed the historical, archi-

tectural, and archeological aspects related to the undertaking,

tie Advisory Council needs additional information to adequately

'valuarLe the effects on these cultural resources. Please furnish

additional data indicating:

Compliance with Executive Order 11593 of May 13, 1971.

a. 1n the case of land under the control or jurisdiction

o f the Fderal (;overnment, a statement should be made 0

as to whether or not the proposed undertaking will

rsut t in the transfer, sale, demolition, or substantial

a ItoratioI of poten(tial National Register properties.

1 , *u'h i the case, the nature of the effect should 5

e l .arliv md (-ate'd.

b. In te w e o, f I and s not under the control or jur is-

a1i i'tou Oil tel, Itd.rl Government, a statement shoul (I

, od,. ,:1 to, ,.et r or not the proposed undertaking

n ,it ri hut to the preservation and enhancement ,f

I Iw

* 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5

4 -. 4

Page 139: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

non-ode ra lIv (1.:;cd d is; trio t--, sites, buildings,

st rIc turcs , and A)t jects of historical, archeol o-

gicoii, arcitite, ttral , or cul tural signi ficance.

C. Wut are part ictl arkv concerned about the effect-,, of

dredging and d ispo i t ion of s;poilIs on archteological

resources-.

d. To i n-surc ai comp ron ivc rt-v i ow of I I istor ic a I,

cultuiral , archcoL ogirall , and o.rcittettral resource~s,

the1( Ad% i so r, C tine i I gg st t- ha t t. c ic nv i ronrie n t a I

5 ttvment conti ini cv idence 01 contact, with the appro-

priat, St Late iiLtri - Presecrvat ion Of f icer and t hat

a copy )f hi, conmnt.- concerninog the ef fects of the

Winde r- t iK It ol, poit these, resources ho( inc luded in the

eIV i ronmon t staL t ,~ iiit . [he S)taIte i Histor ic Preserva-

t ion ()liiCe r tor !SouLth Carolima is 'Ir. Charles; Lec,

Dli recLor, A rch ivs l epa r trncnt , IlL 30 Senat e S treet,

ColIumb ia, Sou t t Ca rolIi na 29211.I

C Rejr nse: a. The sug ,ges ted , ta t me nt hasL been i nc Iluded i n t h is E fS.

b. The sugges ted s t atemen t has been i nc Iluded i n th is 1 T

C. A s intl ar comment has, been discussed in response o

comments,- I and 8 in thte letter from the C. S. D~epart-

P7 mont of Interior.

d . The Draft [IS was coordinaited with the State Historic

Preservat ion Officer throught the State Clearingltousc-.

Commen ts, rceoived during this coordination will n0

4 included inl thlis [IS.

South Carol mna State Ports Authiori tv

C omme nt: The State Ports Authority expressed su~pport for the projlect

and provided in format ion on t ite importaonce of the project to the

Shippilog indus trv and on t he impact of the State Ports A\utho ri ty on

South Carolina's e conorow . ie v a Lsir god that thle project p roeed

on the has isf iioupadaes or the disposal of dredged materials-

but roecommended t i't t .''an tIirspitsa I be im,'p lemented as soon as osihc

Rpos:ThL orop;- pl r -t is; essent i-illv as, rt eommciwhdA1 tiit

S t ate P)or ts Al t nit itt-- !l i rt tier ~ rpes ~ i hir

1 V

W W W W W W W W W W 5

Page 140: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* 0

1 !ou COM.t YOU \oi) ol%~, Il( he abOVe i s fOCuIsed Oil impr1 lovemenC~ts Of

(haile 5 toil Li rhol 11and exiSt~ ill, F 41g Sifp chanllw s to aiccomimodaite Jeep-draift

W!s~ Ish i Ch Ie 10 1~r i et todaIyi w ith tile adopt ion o f con ta i niern za-

t I in. Modecrn treinis, cle art 1), i tid i cit c that the present 3-. -foot channelI

e('p t IIis- Io t IdIe.kI it e for a compet it xek port (ci ty Al t hou gh thi s

proj ec(t I!a;v he -L ust i Ci ed , thle problem of dredged mat en ai I s di-sposalI

i i tis cae iii i Io cub)ic vyards, is a; major factor to conlsider-

[h iI ev i, ti inc I I .' t c !it IN

oit ,, to 1 0 ' 0up tret' 11ICST 10l cod'te anSL Isar ne Salues studyunder ol

0 1 TL' 1t cI .c 1el f I t (d in th"Ie iI I I n ,eneialI , tile FITS pre~sen~t a-; N1

Lt~ p 1,oJ e,. dc, Icr i p t i oil a Ild tilie p roha hI c i mpact of thle proposed work

-icI I sHITIaa I- I .-ed Ill oar rexvi ew, we found several detaiils which shouild

*Coni:'i tt onl i aoat tei o t suggei os t ed( r ev is ion inii the1 f inal d raIft.

I non Nre oln s( 1 ru(1ll i red

mncv Nedo not necss riigree wi~th the recommendation on

t. :o>ictim 111 I d i :js iti t-rliit ixes. The disposal of materials at

1<~~~~~~ :~ i'otdsrbeI ! tcrilat i xe under all ci rcumstancesI

1 1!1 in !Ii 171,1 t) 1p~ 1),, i elcICted dIikhed aesWOld he far more

I ~~e tanoffsh Iore, disposal We feel relatively

* WK (11 :c l';i wonlId occur11 i f tox ic sediment s

I \ it clo K ~of the d ra ft IIS, the recommendat ion fo-

I H 4 rd' V Lt ~ rIiah1lwa 510it ted 1w thle Bulreaut of STort

K. C 12T if Scin t h , i JIcii(iII n 1 :c-tlok ecti u Th

*w w w a 0 a 4p 0 0 0 49 0

Page 141: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

3. Conicnt Onl Pac-e 3, it it; stated that approximately 1,110

acres of dliked upl and disposal areaZ WOUld. he needed for the -

deepeni ug po oct e sugcst that the impact of di sposaIi

this area be clescri bed :17d the area he speci fi ed as to the seleocted

nature of the S iteC,. Vle canl only' assume it is onl Daniel Island,

but the"re is nio inlforilati on on type of 1mnb it at di splacemnent .

-1 :- I- A rl I I ar co;unentl lhas b~ceen di Sctissed inl responise'.

iflnt I~ tO c I e c h Ii . I), p Irt meui o f I i Ie r-i o r and

VC, 1%,11"" - C tn I cl Cr ,'I m the EnFv i~,:ei AO I'w C C 1 01

:. . I r e C) hc\ r C i cort Sre I ie l i bo .;It:;j ( 1 t en-

S 1' I re . 1~ or :1 j l 1e 1) 1i (,t 1 ii I !)o; 1 i S 11' cci

t1 kII c r \e i (on "h-I IuId Ic ) -Iu Ii l ledi. A Iso,

a a . a .*.a a ~ ac--s~i11 to exp] i Cat e I l1w "i t ill

i; k1r--- Ho SCl

K-. ~ ~ ~ l [::1I m I ll Ie .i c has enait See :t imn -1 . 1 0

K C O.eit fn 1Page- 97, I~frne7.0,'i and 2).0, offshioe di spos-l

cspecc1 a 11y of poll ut ed hot toln sod ilmont s con]ld have long-turn effects

Oil Cc Ft 11in types of bottoms such a-s natural reefs, s'2:a bass banks,

c-I C . II here' effect s coulId he mlec Sen Ol'c; tban11 in an ;1Id i s I Oal o

rw.].at i ve" Iv ha ren arVa ,:efre that1 tim ;t:ItemenTts unc&e7A1

and1, '1. (31a r to I( enr i incomparingo the potenlt in] effects of Off-

shoreL %ersus1' il a iland di ,)Spos 1

Secti on7 0.3, t---hi ch con tni us spec if ic referenceo to the

di spO.;] 1 plan11 that prov j dedJ fo01 th 1COff.shore dli Sp)osa 1 of all cirotiged

mait en a I has boen rev, sod t. o i nd ic atIe thamt t h i s 1)1ain , oil d have,

adverse effects, onl the Offshore hiota. Secti on 8.0 is a di sclussioll

117h

Page 142: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

of the irreversiblc and irretrievable commitments of resources that

would be requirei of the recommended plan. The recommended plan pro-

vides for offshore disposal of only that material dredged from the

outer harbor, and this hais been clarifie-O in tills section. Mo,,re

detailed disciissioin in Section 7 and 8 would he repetitious of materialin Sections; I and S. 0

(U.>. : ;%;)p, id i 1 A cup c h n t e i V(: I si i Ii. of N is , 2 s

(etc., is prnjcc !, c W. r i vY olter (Jut ia eCNl( ic i afn] nle c

, . ,1 'lokl 1 ,he ;IJhdd d to I ho Iist. 'I h . i I'.c v( et11, I v'

I. i . ' Ic 'I: VI, l I ) 1) oa) lcm d to i ;c llk! . I lic ik c .'(

,;' r 1 , I' 0

it ,' i e '' i " :i f. .. i .%lr:I p 1l. ! l -I( cL, t I' Iic: t;!i

.V li " , , ;i di > .LVs s : a. .\pp-;;,; ix V1 aI-( no l i ic I4,cd in

'.11;' 1,-_ c k "t' , to I 1 : d , l : IS InI ('s" 0 I r0 " I'c ' I.i-,I : ' re

sU ntsccld dcrinI; cc' di" i'. of the cid l F iS. "1i e : iti - and Lor--

i ctl i N:-' cli. Led abocve ha'e hKen n)lid (, iiowevur, they 'are not cOns i der'C

to he si g in ,i cVt .nplig to w rrianl the inclusion of aI rvS ised Appendix -

P, in this revised draft k1S.

7. Conc : PN;v 93, plan P2 - Although hopper dredge material dumped

In 10] t. ol ffhoi c -icp,,,:cl& :acrc has not been found to ihave adverse effects

on the dumping a rea, it should be pointed out that most of the silt and

fine materials of tio ha ribor bottom are not retained by the hopper dredge

and go back ovcrbo: rd on site. Ile effects of this material, especially

if in areas w.here toxic sediments occur, could lie significant. The fact

that material in the uppo, larboc, as pointed out, is of a finer nature

than in the area now dredged, magnifies this problem rather than reduces

117c 0

Page 143: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

it as implied here. Our observations indicate that a signi ficant

percentage of th,. dredged materials are stirred up by the action I -. -

of the dredge and rather than being retained in the hopper, are

merely pumped hack overboard causing turbid conditions. The

resulting turbidity probably has as much effect on the marine

hiota as deposition of these materials on the dumping grounds.

The fate of resulting tuirbid masses depends on prevailing wi ids

arid currents Thus, such turbid conditions could become problema -

ticAl during seasonail runs of postlarval shrimp and fish.

Response: This part of the revised draft EAS has been revised to

shot, that the biological productivity of the offshore arej Could

be reduced if polluted sediments from the inner ha rbor are deposit (,d

there.

1 7

*1* U U U U U U U U U U U

Page 144: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-.-ii: n : i i i e - yo l, - . - - _

South C irol in l I-o'tri- - d a,;C-i ::

Comment 'ics, r'narkn add re-s t he lOrai .t i:1 i ronmIent al St itinitelt

ol the Charltstun Hlarbor Oeepening Projc issueCd Septcimb r 197.

Pag 42, paragraph 1.I).i , the .siicv Riv'r Section. 'tou ha,

t te1id on r P1a L ili'd

uhl,. 7, Page 12'), Mnad.Ir ierK lev Count%, and pararaph 2. 10.5,

ige 1, th. 0S,750,00() gal loaS per dav aOhl d b l62 931,0(1)

.I lons per day of cool in and 2,000,000 gal ins per da" ash

, L. wate'r.

, 9, Page I31 , (harleston County, P1on t Hlagood (see our

;u:Ir'. iraphu I above) :should be 67.82 mil lion gallons per day and

th. type treatment shoulm( he cooling water and plant procues water.

4 pp e ,. ['ic, suggested corrections have been made in thi s final

It liev rs ". .

A total Of )0 let ters (listed below) were received from interested

individua 1- , and various Cong res sional, business, and shipping

inter i's. All e:pressed support for the proposed project. Because

,I the ir ;i;I arit. i n di vidka I responsi's were not prepared for these

ICtt r> . All l tterS OF CO' memmnt riceived are attached as ,\ipendix B

l<tOriti L~ li'- i".. Lin Ii, ' . S. tloUs' Of Reprenicntat ives

I:t rat I elC Idc '1. 1) 1 : n ,ri-.I I d, S t itL. o f South Carolina Rep resentat i v,

to i -Ile :it,:i '. IKI.nd., t of r . L Lu th Carol I a , Senator

1o!nr,ilt IJarri> P'. S'it 5, .L itt, - South Cairolina Senator

r ) < .. ', aal r; 1,Jr, 11 ,,..> r - t. i f So th Ctolin e present t Live

ri,; iV. Or,-, . Jr., rJaIr, i , C I rortl C hii iton

.. ,PS0

o,-L . ..

Page 145: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

S. . . . . . : . . . . . . ... ""r4 "- - - -- -- - - - - -

Mr. Frank R. SaddlCr, Airco .\lloys and Carbide

Mr. S. Caruso, Amertux Steel Products Corporation

Mr. (;erald L. ZuIli, Amobelge Shipping Corporation

Mr. W. F. Wi Lson , Associated Container Corporation(USA)

'lr. L . N. Bagal , B Igna I lumber Company

Mr. Herman B. Little, BowITman11 Transportat ion, Inc.

Mr. E. S. Braswell, Braswel I Shipyards, Inc.

Nr. E. ',. Olson, Carol ina Li ,tman Company

MIr. E. Randall Swan, Jr., Charleston Branch Pilots' Association

Mr. l'homas L. Ihornhi l, Charleston Oil Company

Mr. Neil McCaskill, Jr., Coastal Forwarders 4

Mr. W. W. Williams,Jr., Coastal Steel Forwarders

Mr. John 1B. Ha rdwick, Commercial Bonded Warehouse, Inc.

Mr. R. A. :,il Icr, Crvovac

AF. Currie B. SpiVV, Jr., Dlaiel Construction Company

,'r. >ichael A. (;alasso, Del M\onte Terminal

Ar. Richard P. Coon, F. I . Du Pont De Nemours & Company

rI. \. A. llaieCock, l:%,xon Company, 1'. S. A.

.I . >1. 1ussel I, General Electric

MIr. Cl eve land S. Hairley. llarlicy Corporat ion -.79r. P. IF. ,,r.ster, Hoest Fibers Incorporated -

'I. .John A. M1cPlierson , Jr. , LBC&W Industrial

.r. H. '.I. ong, Leigh Text lie Company

Mr. F. S. Corbin, Lift li c i)oors, Inc.

-Ir. 'T A. Fridv, Jr., Lockwood Greene Engineers, Inc.

Mr. S. Fox, ihe a'lritime As.socjation of the Port of Charleston

.r. ,ick 'It irt hv, (;rceiiv i I ,I S. C

"I. trhc .r I. Rocli , L%wtot International Corporat ion-

-r. C %. 1 .\nd, r,;n, 1 ,/L'( r it , Transportgation Company

I 1. la e-; Ii. imb , PLi I:,'t t Sh i ipp i i and Ste v dor i ng Co. , ic.

lrs. Ci rl tit. r-, li Ilt C lub of Chairlcston, South Carolina, Inc.

r. >1 ic ii, I 1 o 1. ) m v ) ri 'lap -r (o rpo rat i on

i-. V, i I,.r ,t F') I Im I-r 1)1 V isi on

'I . S.. :1.. 1, n C, 1"!),I.1),r. I ( r r it i 0 1

'*t. I }. .hlt, , . :-.ml r '(:(iat Line Rn i 1 road Company

o , , ' i ;, - i I l ' a RI ma'.

II a

* U U U UU U U U U

Page 146: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* -S

Mr. Charles J. Arocha, South Atlantic Terminals, Inc.

Mr. John H. Lumpkin, South Carolina National Bank

Mr. S. Fox, Southeastern Maritime Co. .

'Mr. Timothy S. Street, Street Brothers, Inc.

Mr. William Lowndes, I[I, Tindall Concrete Products, Inc.

Mr. Calvin H. Reed, Utica Tool Company, Inc.

Mr. Robert E. Whiteside, Wilbur Smith and Associates •

Mr. E. W. Waring, White Stack Towing Corporation . -

9.05 Coordination of revised draft EIS.

U. S. Department of Commerce

Response: There are no planned activities which will disturb 5

or destroy any of the tidal bench marks located in the project

area.

U. S. Department of the Interior

No response is required.

U. S. Coast Guard, U. S. D. T.

No response is required.

Environmental Protection Agency -.

1. Response: The provision of disposal areas for the proposed - 7

project wi I be the responsibility of the project sponsor, the

State of South Carolina. The project sponsor has indicated that 0

it would be desirable from his position to locate the upland dis-

posal areas on and northward of Daniel Island. Although the exact

location of these disposal areas will not be known until the post-

;iuthoriza tion stages of pl,nning, a description of those areas

used for cost estimates is presented in Section 2.13 of this EIS

and the impacts are disc'us ed in Section 4.03.

S2 . Resf)ns . The prescnt diked disposal i areas on Daniel and Morris

I sl. hani] wil l not heI expanXdd to include new marsh areas when they

,re filled to (".I 1; itv. As discussed in several places in the EIS

(Stt ions 1 .0+, . disposal areas to be utilized for the

00

1 2) .

* 5 • 5 0

Page 147: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

iJ I Ii 1 . Lil tiC :1[)1<l itv, 11W $ tcs will i e SmI~ghllt

t r- if, rbi 51 .tr t i v, iotliir than tar sh-

1~. c n i n vi v2w, !w I, i gh prsm imLil

i de rt.,,! un L , t .t. c

4A- 1, 1- L;Lii 1 h uW 2L :f1(jIf elicmnol ex ist infg a reUa1s

iv ~ ~ ~ ~ 1V 'wv aa aba iv t beCen tested

Ift ta 2.. i ii(i m w ltt'r of :lt iiv~ () the

ii. i <rance, on ai' if)" rae. Suil ivians

;iI ii 1Lii !()r ace-.iii din;posan However,

if (' I, fto IcLI I 11 it li t

J ir

6 ii..ii rI is I vii ,hlt i i 'v ion ire

*) S

Page 148: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

m.,SP O O I k i '- i i L e s in 11 L Sp I I I-ekac is

greaItl ily In l'IICnood 1) 1o 1 L bIIV iCAI C I IarI.r toL'I-i t io C f ~ i w t11i nj

thle d is po sa Iairea .Wiin d i psaI A roan VC have LI SOe sI CC L ed, t he

Iepartmont ol 1- I it I) anmul omot Colnt.1rl w il b e COnSUlted

abhOLut meo intl F- I 'lklk t !:h'LyI i t1) P1 tOd)t iti

S .* W i LIl I if It andl Ma r itno Rc sot; ir; e Departent

R e jo n sc-: Qumnt i t at ive prod 1 i Lt ion.s on dec rcaseL- sed intent at ion rates I

With a rid W i Lthen t *r pr e) no10 td depe ingP p11, 1)rej cot- havu beeni added to

TabhIe Iot 1 1 ti s 1 S.

Page 149: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

LIST OF REFERENCES

1. Colquhoun, D. J., 1972. Charleston Harbor, South Carolina,estuarine values study. Contract DACW60-71-C-0007. Dept.of Geology, University of South Carolina, October 31, 1972.

2. Richards, H. G., D. J. Colquhoun, and R. L. Blanchard, 1971.Pleistocene mollusks from boreholes in South Carolina.Notulae Naturae of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Phila-delphia, No. 445.

3. Bond, T., D. Chapell, and D. J. Colcuhoun, 1969. The con-tinental submerged cycle of sedimentation through examinationof the Santee Sangamon submergence. Geol. Soc. Amer., Abstractswith programs, 4.

4. Malde, Harold E., 1959. Geology of the Charleston phosphatearea, South Carolina. U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin Num-ber 1079.

5. Cooke, C. Wythe, 1936. Geology of the coastal plain of South

Carolina. U. S. Geological Survey, Bulletin Number 867.

6. Gibson, Henry E., 1974. Charleston area sediment samples, Janu-ary 2, 1973. S. C. Pollution Control Authority, In: CoooerRiver Environmental Study, Report No. 117, Frank P. Nelson,Editor, April, 1974.

7. Gardner, R. A. and P. W. Johnson, 1973. Water supply evalu-ation and proposed comprehensive study of the Charleston-BushyPark industrial complex, South Carolina. U. S. GeologicalSurvey. In: Cooer River Environmental Study, Report No. 117, 0Frank P. Nelson, Editor, April, 1974.

8. Anonvmous,1966. A report on the water quality of CharlestonHarbor and the effects thereon of the proposed Cooper Riverrediversion, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration,Southeast Water Laboratory. In: Appendix F, Survey Reporton Cooper River, S. C., U. S. Army Engineer District, Charles-ton; July, 1966.

9. Anonvmous, 1972. Stream classification for the State ofSouth Carolina. South Carolina Pollution Control Authority.

10. Anonymous, 1973. Water nualitv portion of the Cooper River 0

environmental studv. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,Surveillance and Analysis Division. In: Cooper Piver Environ-mental Study, Report No. 117, Frank P. Nelson, Editor, April,1974.

121

S S S S S S S S S S S S S S 5

Page 150: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

11. Anonymous, 1973. Wando River environmental quality studies,an interim report. S. C. Water Resources Comm. April, 1973.

1 12. Anonvmous, 1972. A study of the Charleston flarbor estuary

with special reference to deposition of dredged sediments.

South Carolina Marine Resources Dept., Contract No.DACW60-71-C-0014. December, 1972.

13. Lunz, G. R., 1967. Unpublished report to S. C. Water Res.II C~omm. •

14. Lunz, G. R., 1968. Farming the salt marshes - Proceed. Marshand Estuary 'Mg't. Symp., LSIJ, Baton Rouge, La., pg. 172-177.

15. Odum, E. P. and A. A. de la Cruz, 1967. Particulate organicdetritus in a Georgia salt marsh estuarine ecosystem. In:Estuaries. Lauff (ed) AAAS Publ. No. 53. pp. 383-388.

16. Teal, J. '., 1962. Energy flow in the salt marsh ecosvstemof Georgia. Ecology 43(4): 614-624.

4 17. Smalley, A. E., 1959. The growth cycle of Spartina and its •

relation to the insect population in the marsh. Proc. Salt

Mlarsh Conf., Mar. Inst., Univ. of Ga., Sapelo Island, Ga.,pg. 96-100.

18. Pomeroy, L. R., 1959. Algae productivity in salt marshes

of Georgia. Limnol. Oceanogr. 4(4)" 386-398. S

19. Wass, M. L. and T. 1). Wright, 1969. Coastal wetlands ofVirginia. Spec. Report in Applied MIarine Science & OceanEngineering. VIMS. pg. 1-149.

20. Williams, R. B., 1969. The potential importance of

Spartina alternifLora in conveying zinc, manganese and

iron into estuarine flood chains. in: Proc. Second Symposium

on Radioecology. (D.J. Nelson and F.C. Evans, eds.) U. S.

Atomic Energv Co>mm., RID 4500.

21. Marshall, ). E., 1970. Characteristics of Spartina marsh4 which is receiving treated municipal sewage wastes. Ann.

report 1969-70 to Nat. Sci. Found., Sea Grants Proj. Div.pgs. 317-359.

22. Shaw, S. P. and L. G. Fredine, 1956. Wetlands of the UnitedStates. 1'. S. Fish Uildlife Serv. Circ. 39. pg. 1-67.

23. Anonymous. Threatened Wildlife of the United States. USDI,Bur. Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Office of Endangered

Spec es and Inteirna.t ona I Act ivities. Res. Pub. No. 114, 1973.

24. Anonvmous, 1964. iliolo.ical -;tudies of Charleston 1arbor,

,S. C., Bear. fluff [ahoratorit-,,, Isdmala , Island, S. C. •

Lt l_

* 6 6 S S S _-. ,

Page 151: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

tirt Ls I. iii 5 A., .'A i tl solr~o 'V 0 tiu h it alld

Coo0pr L, 1 r L Rvr s io * soc t.. -3--3. Annual Pro00 res -ftnfor I Ic Il 1 '172 rnch. n 30, 1973. .. ilif11"fd ' i tit

26. T irner, i II ii i ! 'id ki r t lol1 ioson, 19 7 4. S t ani lin,(,

c r o s ( , Wi 'c LtaTNS Of the lowe'r CooperiRv er ss ~tem !: ivtr Eioiironrniental Stud.x , S..r. 8ter '~'or~.17, Koo I (lsn, 12 toy-,

27. B i e Bci it .-. La' I ll n,-, L 1. itLte, 19 73. 1)io a s sas t td i esCk Ii. r to' C. t ii lr Sou th Ca roclIinzi , thIie ef f e t s o fdrodo tn,, 11, irhlo :; edi; orl &I'm. Loll. Final renoi-t submittedlto Lte Unl t todl Stojr 1' ,urns of Foineers. Charleston District.Vn i x'rs itv lf 51! ''roi ilia, (o m Co n tractL No .

)ACIk 60-7 1 _(,_o)fl5 i r 973.

28. hcspeoho il 1, ho ra Lorv , 1970. ros ss k ohs ical andbiolcgIcaI ct et of 1''ror spoil (disposal in upperClhcs 1pak i;;io 1 ,port Loe !'.. Breau of SrortFishe:rit-s :ovi i 1,: 1i uc Ititfiact 14-16-0005-2096). !,f * No. 70-3.

Smmh c tI o i IK hil n IiS co in v report in the order ofpresenta tion v.crc, at-o,1~Cron in, L.. FK. Ii5tr, concluisions, and recorrienclations. 15 p .

Pigs . B ., (Y-o lox:, aod l'roof.Projlect A. Ref. No. 69-23.'36 P). 6

I-I ml- r I P on xtoloktoll. Pro iect Bi. RZef. No. 69-15. 15 p.P1 iu~"' r i 11 V ntllos. Pro crt C,.1,' ef. No . 69-130 . 30 p

od w 1 , rn , ()(1) aoll'ktoil. 1'roecrt D. Ref. No. 69-128. 9 p.

29. slierk- J. Alh-ot 1 r . P71. Thie effec ts of suspended anddtepoc c ted Ltcclii 'rnt- on estuar inc, organicsms. Chiesapeake Biol.Lab . 00' r i 1 '143 3 3 .

3T). Ma , ',i v i, r 1 '. ,rgio a e LII f c ct., o f Ihyd(Ir a uIi cd red'i I i-di r .oru I I-ll.9 1 -85 .

31.~ ivd rau 1 , c1 d4 rf edd nil is i nus o n

t00 70 112 efects of

J1 u; r i o r - , a''ll i !;-I

1 1. I - i''-- bo I , 1973.

* 0

* 1P 1P 0

Page 152: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4- 0

34. Smith, Ronald F., Albert Ii. Sv.artz, and William iI. Massmann,1966. A swmposium on estuarine fisheries, Arier. Fi sh . Soc.Spec. Publ. 3.

35. Sykes, lamnes F. , 1)68. Co nercial values of estuarineg enerated fisheries on the Iouth Atlantic and Gulf of N e:xicocoast. In: J. 1. Newsom (Editor), Proc. Marsh and Estuary

anagement Syumposium. T. .1. Moran's Sons, Inc., Baton Rouge,

- . ".

I S!

*I 0

.0

4

4Pl6l 0 op l

* S S S S S S S S S]

Page 153: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 ~~ ~ P 0 L N A__ _ _ _ _ _ _

F k- Nn

Af**i ot PA

F Ar"N MAP

RECOMMENDJ PLA

Page 154: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

RFPRODIJ(-Ft) AT (7,(VIFFlT Fl(PrNSE

SLAND

CoopINSTRT "A"

LEGASNN

INETIAE CHANNEL EXA"IO

RECOMMENDED CHANNEL ELEPEN

-WANDO

HO0G ISLAND

\ \ RECOMMENDED ENO ASINI]

D AN I EL A" R.C '

'ISLAND

NROMMENED f

Page 155: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REPRODUC1D Ar' R;K , F!.LNT F)(P~t.3E

7S

REOMENE PLANNPla of im rv m nItrm Pa

Depe eisin pojctto40 Depe eisin pojctOz to3fee ad wde bsin ad fetan wienbasnsan

'it n s s s ho- bas cannlsstssho nbasd ini,

RECOMMENDE PLANEPlan f lmpr~esnen Intrim lon

Deepn aas,,n proest o epneitigpottfoo an wien asis n eladwdnbsn n

%Aji !RLEASAN

ANNELA rI1ENSIL

DEFENSE

A NCHORAGE

) JLAND 4

JAMES

ISLAND

L

0 A A

C H R LE S 0 NCHARLESTON HARBORCHARLESTON SOUTH CAROLINA

* "ME010 ENLARGEMENT TO PAROVIDE 120 DOO TUEN 0IME ENTRANCE CHANNEL TO

SHIPYARD RIVERCHIARLESTON DISTfICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS

*R 11 R74 FIGURE 2

Page 156: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

II

U

U

S

0

S

S

0

0

Page 157: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REPRODUCED AT GOVERNK'cNT EXPENSE

0r

NOT HALSO.TRIA

RECMME

He OfIpovmn

Depneisigpojc o4

fet..'id.bNi, -chnnl jjshwjaedoth m lme tto o h

'C o e ierRdvrio rjc

NORTH CHARLETN TERIA

REOMENEDWIENNGTO50 ET MENOnRTHapro~nn

C' ARDepn LEtngprjctto4

SE INSER -B-

RECOMMEMMEDEE WIDENIG Ta 100 FEE

Page 158: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REPRODUJCED AT MO E?7MENT IFXPENSE

RIVER

4. 40 J §

_E FEET

L L J __ INSERT "B"

RECOMMENDED PLANPlan of Imronemt interim Plan

*n o.tg prole't to 40 Deep.n, stn p-mat to 38S ted w den bastns and feet and widen basis and

-. 1el s "S.own based on citonnefI as sh-w, b a'ed an 11,-plewu.. of the delay of iwpfe..nttmon of the 0

sso s Pd---~asPsjs Cooper Ri v R.d-or, an Isoject

44

*Z.i

(LEGE-

RECOMMENDED CHANNEL DEEPENING- INVESTIGATED CHANNEL EXTENSION

~ RECOMMENDED DEAIJTHORIZATION CHARLESTON HARBOR

NAVY CHANNEL CHARLESTON. SOUTH CAROLINA

C~lthIOMRECOMMENDED CHANNEL ENLARGEMENTSHIPYARD RIVER TO GOOSE CREEK

CHARLESTOR DISTRICT. CORPS OP ENGINEERS

R~l FIGURE 3

Page 159: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

tAS.

TO[ TEE 4

AS ... ... ".

if•

All.

MA

QSPLA E E N

~t li Nowl USED~ lil

A-kI

£ ii~ ., - -

I - ti lMW US"

'- - LILACo Il W ull.I

LOC, ATE M0L NE~ F N

.CHARLESTON HARBOR

/ DISPOSAL AREAS

28

NN WE NN ME Is ME Is IN U U U V

Page 160: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0

-~ ALc<

~~V,

F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -I L .KRLTSL RCA I HRETxHRO EIE

129S

Page 161: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4 "' TERSECTO O BSS. PARK

/ -- 211 (le t.S-

StSflr~~ EAR GZ TH NE

PETRO DREDGE SAPE130 SC) IsWW

* YI>PE0w w lp lp

Page 162: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

PortTerminal

Ir

0-0

L-

CL

00

\~ X iO~> uO'VRRIViIR ANi) CLOVTLRCR1-i-h~ iiOTTONI

* * N> i.IIhNT SAMPLE LOCATIO)NS

SCALEARQS

*-q I6 II a 0 qU Il le w Il 0

Page 163: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

':~..

*.5,

~..

I

*

~.' ,...

I

iL~

F"

-':2

*

.)

~

.

*

.... .

-, i-I

--

.. .

-

C~

6.9.

.--.

~IL

S

~4a.

C

-

.v -

-

0

~

--

*

7 -

-~

iN r

*

S4.

I

.- ~7"*~

r

is

I

S'4

* S

S S

S S

S S

S S

S S

S S

U V

U

I'S

Page 164: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

k 40

I C F Tl 01C',-

7rI

-lP op La- -

-- 19'

A-18

A.A

* LI - -7

Page 165: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

,-. . \

- 0..-

0

I A. I-,---, / ,0_

*'\ 0-

-- % •

zr - -

~.. "S,.

Page 166: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

":,.:. -,-

o ... "" "- -- " - - " L'" p -

.'4, .. p. 0

" - -a - _-- sa

. -- - :--. - ...,- ~ K ~

- -- -N D

( ,'-

-2/' , . ----- V / -_ ..

(' i - "

- @ • • • • r• • •r • O •

Page 167: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-- - --- - - - --

R~r C,

100

MW'-~ uzzad-Ruo o

-:-10 - ,C3~~~~Tr a, - - -

0

M4AP S SJ 1i Hc r< -oR r:

-110-0, 'MLXE -TCAT CN

aid dpA

~40#

Page 168: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

A, 'I0

4'.i '-r At I~.

- o

C~p nrA~-

C.,~

we~ A * -- - - - ~ 4 9

N 4'~~ .~ - 13

- - - AN -.4- -F

\-O .1A1 B 20Ef

4p4 - __p

Page 169: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

......~ ~.. ... +- :

-%.h £.+'.,.

" .... C"+' +"+. + >1 I..

'C- / ; -.+ : ' ./ '< S7 ' .,.£,.( ]44-- /

I"- / " - / -.

A z 0,, ) .. - . .

/ . .

- r I '"1 "

<"" u' 6 4

'.' *< "+ ": +. * S

+_ .,. l j ~ , p / k Z . .. _

* 6" "" S S :- 1

Page 170: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I 7T.... , ,1

....2 j

II 0

SOUND

I''--Z 9 0.~o -C-"' -

top,

. ." '-.S " 0 0 S .0Y 0

' L,: , , - - ./ , :I-, /

T. Y

Page 171: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

99 5

3S

aBANK ROAD 3*73"

c N

BOAT RAMP-

* 1 MILE

00, '0

' 'ARSTUDYTAREA

f TQP1 SFA~. - 7.Pv RIVER L D.GCPSTiS

Page 172: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

'A C) C) C C C CD C) C C C D CD C c c c C4-1 C C C C CC C= ( = C) C C = C c C) C Cu C C c - '3 (N14 0 I t, 10 0 '3ID C Cc 0 o

-4u0 CD N C7 r C7 C r: C C c cc j 0 N cc C N c -Q)C) rn If) - 0 ( ) N-'nN t) z '

C) r-

Q) 0 t) C C) C C CD 0 c CD C) C C) C C C c C CC)O0

14 C C) C) C= C C C C) C CD C CD C c CD C C

(4~-4U C C C C) 0 3 *- T~ rn tO ) C 10 tn C 10 rl Ccc 00

r-CC C CO '3 C, :IC-0 N C) t C C 3-,1- (N rn to C ) c N 't C m) r, cc cc C z3 'r '3

z ~ '3 c If) VN ) - 0 c ' -4 (N4 CD (NA - -4 Ln. 1

C4 -

44 . ~ C c C CD C Cz CD c C C C C CD CD CD Lo CD C CD C LU C C CD C C C- C C CD C C c) c) c) t C C C C) ( C4

Co C) C 3 ) C CD c) -' m) C -0) CD - ~$C) C f- C N- 30 00 t cc00 -4 cc 00 M n 10 Ccc 00 cc -r- M

- '. 0 1 4( C04 N I' N ( N-i '3 En LO t

C) 0' (Nl CD CD '-D C) C - C )

C) ~ C C C C C C C C C C C C C) C) C CD C ) 0 CL"4 C C) C C Cr C C f C ) C .C 0 C 0 C 0 C0 C C0 C C C044 C C, C= t' I 0 -0 3 c c c C ' O

cc0 c C '3 C C) 3 0N CO 1 j (N 10 0 4 (N C -N 0 CLf co CO -un C C1Il T~ 00 c C 0'. GO cc 7z to In cc '3q \ 3 \C 0 0 e1 3r C

U'. C C 0 0 0 0 C C C 0 C C 0 C

-4 ti- C C C: N cc 1T X 3 0 3o -(N qT C CC C C CC Zu CC CD t0 'IT 0D C- N- cc 00 '3D N C C C C CC

CC N) C r'-N - C-- C '3 C tO '- CD C- to CD C 0CCZ- 10 10 - 10 (N) N, - 0 - (N ( 0 -4 C '

-- 4 CD .

7- 010 _x^l 0 - I 11 C 17 N-- 4 ,!- t- : C nC) r

C) u

CC

4~~~~~~ ~ -- -' -t - - - - - -c - -o c C C N C Cc

-71 cc Cl N - 3 0 - (N C N -4 N C>< 1010 -

Page 173: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

C0 C3C)0

C0 0l 0* . 00~ 00

0 C) 0: 0

0. 0000

0 00

c~ ~ ~ 000 o0

0-0000

. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - S .. 9 .:C 9 (

~C-.o'-0lC). -DC 0C

-r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CO '20 cc C-70 0 0 c 00 0C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000

C- C: =1 0 0 0 C 0 CDZ)0 C) C DC) 00 0 00 0 0 00 00oo0 00 00 00 00 0 0

OCC:,~ 5 oo o ooocoo oo ooocco oooooc '',C,** ;*oooooocoo

7' f4L

0 C) C C7 0 0' 00 00 CC ' CC 00 00 00 0 0 0

C

02 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0CD0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 C

C' 000CD0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0

CDS

C- pctI '.CC,.CICC CDNN(N U7

. . . . .. C. C.. .. C' . .-C '4 . . . . . ..J

C.:, " 01 , "

,:'.~C~ flC. CNN r.'. C' .,0 -'T

-'u u( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'A - 0 02C00000000000000000

Page 174: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I

-arbor Sediments Analysis, Aug. 1972 ( S.C. Pollution Cor.i Aut IL

Volatile Solid COD TKN GREASE PB ZN HG % Total

Station 600' Dry Dry Dry Wet Wet Dry Solids

Ashley Rivef % Dry Mg/Kg

A13C 7.2 73800 1360 3370 20.4 43.9 .48 60.0A19A 12.2 86600 1720 1130 23.8 30.6 .39 37.1A198 7.1 44000 1370 1960 39.2 77.6 .35 52.8A19L MAR. 13.4 108000 1790 3510 17.0 28.3 .33 48.4A20B 4,7 40200 730 830 47.6 11.8 .28 65.8A21A 7.2 93000 1600 1990 44.6 74.0 - 52.9A21B 18.1 23300 700 590 ND1 27.6 .16 80.0

* A3A 10.8 107900 1990 1580 28.7 2.9 .81 48.0A38 12.1 73500 1440 830 43.3 47.6 1.02 49.0 ) 0ASB 14.4 126900 4440 3900 39.6 43.5 .73 39.8A7R MAR. 12.7 129200 1440 11019 46.8 63.1 1.08 37.0A9A 13.5 103000 2048 1890 52.1 241.8 1.20 39.6A9B 2.75 40200 730 450 30.7 69.9 .24 74.2A9C 11.5 100000 2680 1220 31.9 36.1 .42 46.8AII8 10.9 111000 4030 2160 42.8 62.4 .39 51.7AlIC 13.4 108900 2090 1120 46.4 75.9 .75 41.3A13B 8.58 66100 1800 1220 31.6 38.9 .19 51.4A1BA 15.5 149400 1290 2840 42.3 46.3 .44 38.5A78C 145 14000 1740 301 19.8 18.5 .93 76.3A19 R MAR. 13,2 122000 1790 2120 25.2 6.0 13.2 42.0A20C 1.61 23000 930 4240 21.3 22.3 .14 76.3SA13A 6.6 58300 1050 820 27.5 27.0 .15 76.0A7C 7.3 32300 590 1140 13.6 17.5 .23 72.3A19C 8.8 73300 2240 900 25.6 19.8 .23 50.7101 B 17.1 140800 1070 670 31.7 25,0 .34 76.0103 B 8.5 100000 1490 540 42.5 149 .68 50.6

102A 12.6 60200 2700 490 60.4 88.1 1.12 57.3A21C 12.4 66000 590 690 18.8 17.8 .58 85.0A13 8 0.4 37000 690 1010 23.2 46.0 .38 83.1A20A 9.5 54600 1090 550 22.1 36.2 .09 69.7102 C 12.2 92000 2080 2230 35.8 47.2 -2 61.5101 A 10.2 70300 1970 3220 -- 53.8 .15 58.0103 C 8.3 83600 1630 2990 24.3 41.0 .24 55.9101 C 9.8 110300 2500 3690 91.1 39.4 .72 58.5 I 0

A 3C 2.8 46000 830 330 21.5 57.0 .33 72.9A5A 5.3 49700 1330 2870 40.5 41.3 .33 65.5A 5C 8.0 106000 1360 1930 24.3 13.6 .23 59.5A 7A 11.6 115000 3100 11700 45.9 74.1 .50 44.3

A 78 2.7 26800 609 1190 19.9 10.7 .10 77.4A 71. MAR. 5.8 70700 1820 1250 17.0 28.3 .43 60.0AlIA 10.2 109000 2460 10000 43.0 72.3 .24 49.9

Average (Ashley) 9.32 79270 1682 2288 32.7 45.8 .45 59.0

10I

143 ..

0 .-.0 0 0 0 0 0 0_

Page 175: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

\'u1'l - 'Lkj'li: .'2 ) TKN JRLASL PB ZN I3( K Total

r\r .1 Kg NM Kg Mg Kg Mg Kg Mg Kg MgKg Solids

"tatlor8 600 ° Dry Dr, Dry Wet Wet Dry

(Qmper River

c L'2 2U.7 27300 -,10 720 33.7 39.8 .54 87.9CLM3 7.1 1it,4 I3U40 602 32.2 43.1 .34 37.4

I I.I 16511188 (50 .347) 28.6 32.1 .23 57.4.37 3O (19 5810 20.9 7.' .34 68.b

(1 43000 8 2) 570 19.1 9.9 .15 65.0,7 740u 87; o60 33.7 32.7 .26 S7.6 S 0

* r., 0 H 48 390 27.0 10.4 .29 70.8(9112 7 "00 1 580 1270 58.9 44.7 .17 49.9

4 1100 1070 160 32.7 42.6 .36 72.9,, 5IHM) 7 ',) 518 16. 2

20.1 .40 73.2%,1 tt,401 3Y8 7760 19. B 11.5 .30 42.0S ." ".1 5.. )1) 930 790 24.8 13.9 .18 60.3

A", 2 33.-8( 1029 1514 28.9 25.7 .29 61.9

;n 1i. (,astai Waterway

"1 , ,h00 0 870 ND 18.1 .25 76.9C-8 8P'.0 0 1090 14.0 26.7 .24 45.2

1. 0 ,h i 21. 2'00 5 2.1 98.1 .41 59.7 I S4, 10 4B 5.3 .10 36.8

, .. H'J 8() , 2.'' 4)310 12.0 16.0 -_ 46.9-\ '." 4 V, 3221 ".07 52.A .33 45.1

,2 ,;1 122 1 808 30.0 27.0 .36 56.5.. . :;, ; .',) 4331o 13.3 17.A .09 53.3

,- 'C70 20.8 31.3 .22 52.5

.. :' d o R P, 'r ' % D r . M g !K g

H 3 1 ' 710 Q80 19.7 12.6 0.29 63.5(,0000 1 0i 1 150 33.1 32 9 0.987 58.0

* .R -, _'O 1041 1II1) 19.2 2u.3 0.5 8 53.8,v;.. . ), ) 8"10 1 "' 19,4 0.17 70.42.0 f'Hf t, 180 16.9 2r0 2 0.)0 72 9

•.1I 410 -4) 3 I27.1 43.1 , 0.68 74.62 141) 1' ) 3 , 478 (1.33 43.6

16.: 0.40 70.4. ,'II 7 1 (.2' 3 .5

6(43 1-.3

,, 12.. ,i 1 0.1 67.4.4o .04 2 1

04, 4.7

4241 (.24 34.4

03 3.132 (6.3

" ," , ' "0 .1 2- 4.

64 0I ;1 " ,:'.; - 82 -: 40.9

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0

Page 176: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

IAi'MIK 3 (cont inued)

Volatile Solid COD TKN GREASE PB ZN i(" Total

Station 600" Dry Dry Dry Wet Wet Dry Solids

% Dry Mg/Kg .... S

Mtono River % Dry MG/KG

51096 7.7 60700 1530 980 1.3.4 13,9 .14 63.0

S 1088 7.4 28500 250 780 7.1 3.4 .12 76S 104 A 17.8 75600 1480 410 24.6 10.3 .40 57.3

- S 104 B 9.3 8250 360 210 19.3 14.1 09 84.3S 104 C 2.4 19900 540 300 23.6 7.7 .31 779S 104 LM 26.6 89400 1740 780 31.8 23. .21 51.4S 105 A 5.9 47100 900 240 14.3 25.5 .19 61 8S 1056 12.2 142000 3310 620 15.9 202 .20 41.6S 106 B 1.8 13000 570 65 .42 ".7 .23 75.7S 106 C 6.0 66700 730 200 21.2 19.8 .20 5 . 5S 107A 3.4 20600 940 110 ND 19.7 .28 67.3

S108 A 4.6 38100 1240 260 23.4 13.1 29 58.0S 107C 15.9 182000 2640 5170 19.6 2.9 34.1108 C 6.5 54200 9.0 2620 30.3 26.1 0.20 53.2106 A 104.4 113700 3400 1120 17.8 35.8 .66 50.4109 A 4.4 31200 660 720 12.8 11.1 .14 r1.4109 B 3.5 38000 720 480 20.7 12.2 .25

109 L 15.9 166000 4500 870 11.6 20.1 .24 38.3|109 RM 14.6 115000 - 1500 22.3 13.4 .96 34.5110 A 2.8 26500 460 480 20.7 23.2 .33 67.9111A 5.5 51400 1100 560 3.9 14.3 .18 60.3111 B 2.0 10300 565 320 12.9 4.7 .43 75.2

111 C 1.2 64800 1660 460 4.8 18.6 .17 55.0Average (Stono R.) 8.16 61606 1372 837 16.3 17.5 .27 59.2

I 'I

* 0 S 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Page 177: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

6 TAB LE 4PFSTICIDE ANM.1YSES

F3c ttomIl Scdcle. fitsU. . ,

(ug /k1g)

I 1.7

71~ 0.

0,f)

N 1; 4

Page 178: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I S

~ 0

I I S

I .... , . *IS

I I S

C -

0

I S

I I S

U I 5

* S I

S U U U U U U U U U U U U 9 U S

Page 179: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-x m 00- ) ci 0 N

C4 c14 -0 0 o * ( (

- ~ ~ ~ ~ r mDQ V 0 ** *

Co m 0 0 0N CD 1 0 Z 0 -

0

17 r4 *- sri -4 Ic -.T r-

col C4 1-1) I - f I I 0.4-i C4 (N IT 0 - C)4 0 ~

V) (U 0 -4 04 0- c4 I O* -

Wr *; c1 1- C' N 0 r

C1

0 ba-.~~~Lr ccn a' *sr N-x (Nl C) -' m C) C) .1

Lr- -4 10 -4 r- V 14.

14 ON C) 0V) (N - ~ -4 .- o 00 N- e 0

bo I I 1 00 -4 OC (t 4rO 0 0-4 (NC) V) r 47 N Lf I Q).1m 0 * C 0 1 Ir a r. 0

-1 0 4 ( 0 N r) -- '0 (N Q4(N

=- 0 4 0 *T C I

lu N- 03 -f 0 C 4 4 L-

a to I I L) I I I -n rnaPC 4 -4 C) 0 0) Lni IN '1 N N- I IW~

10 -40 -0 0 0~ *O I 0 L0 (N C N-* -0 c; 21 c" 0 a)

L) CO w -(

z - - mCj 4 C 0. fn *r 4u 10 '0 w' -(d j W *4 - N- 0 -*v (N - n ca 0'0

(N -4 a) (N '0 (N C0 (N E4 )

> 4j-4 C 0 u

N- ( 0a-4~ CD LI r * -0 C_ '0 .A

cl~ It 0- C4 C4 00 *D w1 ct N- ->1 4.j *N () * 0 c 4t 4= -V

Cr w ~ 0r C) 0 'o I0 - r- '0l <I = 54-QW

I 1- 1 1 0 ) 1 1 'u0 10-C 0 0J) * r 0 C4 0*- .) Li) 0)10.t o G

a- C) 0 (N4 (N0 Ic Lr 4-

0a- 0 *' r c~~~~0~4 0 N 0 ' ! ' i - 4 $4

C) cl, a Q)

* 00 O C W0 0

0 -a tr aU-4 -- 4 UA-J0.- C 0.

Ca) m4 OL *j

ClCm C-4 -4 0.1 0 U00 O

1 8

Page 180: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

rU I,: 0 ,I [,

t .1

ri t

liA t

1: . , rdA .

n~ ,i1 .2 Ilti

t I" itm I' i.*fl nti

II I- i. i t cn L -l

<2 I 'tm I tM M lil

I. t . ) In

A I ~~it 1 '

It 'I I A,1. I \,t 2, s 2 I u v

wr.tn~ it 7, 1 1 -t 1.i C

I: ]. t it .l ponds

Aii *Ci±J tt It d '11 1i

t 0

U ~ ___ ;~ * 5 6t

Page 181: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

wo

Sl-rl I!-% f Phy ,Cherical and icrblolcgfcal Da t: Ccllected by the

Environrental Protect ion Agency uring k ctnber and :cvember, i971

octcber, 1971

NIr0ge. -'. Is Pb, spro,, s NonlileraOle 'c-I -

Te' p p-i C iordoe DO BOD, TOC Corl ,.p" '. s ',' I n R ,s'-.1- 1 i Metal , . g I '

s5 C rnq g g ' r 1 j mg TKN NH). N NO 2 1 4 3

Toral P OrlhI) P T(olal Vol C. Cr Pb Zn Mn Ce iij !Fo, f

g '19 77 't,30 , 1 52 042 005 0 l i) u04 10 14 45 20 170 4$- 6$ 101, -'2

I M- '10 83 '340t, 67 '4 60 , 14 $10 (10) 2.8 0 63 21 6D -20 2 40 " c. 80. 157'

M 20 0 69 1 64 ' 6 42 J. 4 u 02 002 112 2 6 3 -2 1,1 , 0 6 .

A. 71 1 2., 64 1 4 2 4 2 'A b, 3 (1 6

I M ' ;, ij 2s b3 254 016 lSb1 04 A ,4 31 9

k4 ? ,21 4 24 4 0 2i 64 1, 2 0 $) 0') 6 2

, 110 0 8 4 l .41 02 005 003 0 ") 19 5

4 85 2612 78 1' . - W 9 1 ,' 010 C 4 C03 25 8

N' 20 65 '0 34 J)4 42 123 n.; 203 002 01.1 9 2

A 1

5 9 7' S0 o45 0,15 005 004 002 17 5 h

M., 2, 78 76 90 60 059 2C6 005 005 004 24 6

W A I' I Ia 40 21 1 064 003 003 0V1 9 4

A 6 L;8 4 ' )914 004 )04 0(,I 12 3 35 20 '80 45 .b 65 'v-,4., 2'2 , 9 a0 II b0 :46 0, R 0 05 L)05 0 02 17 4 40 2J (80 ,0 303 92£,( 22.',

M 8 72 05 42 22 0.6 3 003 002 '001 7 i 30 '20 '60 30 20 790 '20 " S

A6 2 a 7 6 09 42 242 007 w 05 004 003 16 4 45 '20 '80 35 30 945 2

7 M-2 62 '1 5? (3 5,) 112 019 000 007 24 9 50 20 BO Q 4040 1192 '2

1 2k 6 1 4 40 n '6 04 (103 0 03 011 9 3 40 120 '80 10 20 00

A, . ' 4 I 1 52 '.44 : 4 $1:' 004 002 9 3 --

d4 M 9 84 10 115 108 4 01 006 003 14 5 - --- - -0

Il 210 0 7 73 50 038 003 '001 002 201 3 1----- - 20

Agq 28 72 74 18 45 CI46 004 003 001 001 9 3 25 -20 '80 20 20 740 '20 150

8 Us. 215 78 11 80 1 I 50 058 006 004 003 002 12 4 30 '20 '80 20 30 1100 20 331

M, 200 64 7 '0 08 40 033 003 002 002 001 8 2 20 '20 .80 20 10 380 '20 0

,,uvoo.,Ltr, ].'7i

NdIrog .rsou Phlosphoru NonfilIerable FecaI

T 'P PH Chlo,.a () BOD TOC Coopour.d s mg i mg I Resdue mg I Metals. 09,l C101,10

5ta 'C U'le "g I "'g I "g I mg 75TK, NI4, N N02N- , 3 Total P OlhO F' Tota VOl C,, C, Pb Zn M" Fe klg 100 rl• ,I •

I 179 17 9030 64 $14 " 9 031 002 0 '5 005 004 44 12 67 '20 232 135 58 2212 30 460

S a 22? 8 1 14 800 7 4 1 0 90 100 006 319 0 12 0 10 128 34 100 '22 480 380 100 6650 50 '70L

Mc 2sO '0 3020 53 f18 40 014 "10-)1 1101 002 002 13 2 40 '20 130 60 20 650 '20 1.11

A 61!4 b 1 "8 bJ 026 ,' 'i 006 006 1706 4b II---- 22$

3 Ma. 80 131.' l I 0 100 040 001 C1, 020 010 '46 31 '90

M 15 ''7 321 )1 5b 4,30 17 (j I 11 012 002 002 13 3 20

A4 b ,4 " .. .27 07.9 034 014 6J 8 92

4 %1- . 2 9,' F 7 0 9 8 13 48 119,.I 011 109 G007 44 19 "r -. ' IL

6 ', 6' 9 9 014 50 0 113 '001 Ot, 002 001 9 2.21

S, , , '12 '0 '7 o3 003 ,12 224 0'3 11 3 - -60

.. 8 1 ,* ,42 100 .)83 0(15 114 006 r)1' 23 ' I"

In

49 2 6 113 '02 1 1:9 0 02 3 2C

4" '4 A '6 1 :126 ,102 0 12 04 003 11 4 23 '20 80 45 50 1120 20 10,

k. 26 95 77 9, "1 7. 21' 0(17 2 05 45 10 40 '20 '80 140 100 '320 '20 49,.. 21 ' '-' '. 3 106 0 1 1 10 '20 <80 20 20 86) '.20 20

. " ' f) I. 1 o.- 1 4 27 20 1 1, 28 -8 4017 20 ',<

4 k Q, l- I " ,5 - 1 19 0 .13 46 11 60 20 1O 4110 60 !250 '2"' '1

9 2 4 4 -; -0. I'S -' 1 1 12 -5 M . 0 20 15 6(I l ;

4 4. 14 '1 0I' 6 2 - -

I I I3 ' 1 A Ill'' . . 1 2 11 7:1 1i 16 1 t 14 C, 1 001 1 1

.' ''2' 12 '3 06 69 1 41 (132 111 ( 23A 003 7 3 32 20 80 32 32 %8 '20 1',

A'.. 22 1 80 20 p4 ,8 W(70 095 003 01 037 006 l6 8 80 '20 100 40 50 1250 '20 ;4,

k4, 14 5 '3 8 56 )4 42 2 '6 2r), 0 ' 02 )02 d 1 20 '20 80 20 10 63V7 ' 20 .

4 -Alc"m

Page 182: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- -.'. -- - S

0

p-~ S

0

S

- 1: 1 4 1-

I .1.1<.

I S

5, 1 1

If I

- I~i2.1l I I 0

.~1 I''*' p1 5> IrA S

If I

KI 0

I 00

'1

S U U S U S S S S S S S S S S S S

L

Page 183: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* 1 I 0

I. .- ,- -p

I I I--I

..~ ~

U L~v___*JiL L. - .iit~jL. --- - + -

-itI

S

I. I

IC-

-~ {L t ~7~7j1 j~2 [ ~ I :1 0

* I >1

I I

I

. [ I- ~--i---~ -

- --K-I---- 4lIl~ 0*1~7~

-II ii;

- 4 --- . -

- S - . I -~ * S

- I I.i

---- I--

II CIII

------------------------------------------------------------------------~.1 j*

. . I S

-- -- -~ -

* S

* S S S S S S S S S S S S S

Page 184: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I '~ F I

I F

-J -.

~I I

2~ CD a

V -'~~-'

~p aiD (N aDD 0

--------------------------------------------------------------t-~-1 -.-~------II2~I-~ a~ ,-

aD r.- a~)N a! *1* N

i~I

I ~ aD

I ~- -.- .-- ,- 4 -4

.I CD

I a

C p ~-*-~it- 0____________F N

* I- I I.-,

6

I PaD' I

-I ,~,I777~7 0

U

I II

- ,1

* 0 '- -~j;C-,'

A4

- I

* S U S S S S S S 5 0 5 5 5 5 S 0

Page 185: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I :1 I 0

- - - ---- - - .---- , I S

* I- I

I I 0

( I.

I 0

£ IS

* I S

I S

I S

I S I S

V S S S U S S S S S S U S U S S

Page 186: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4 pC4

InIa (N Ix

(N -4

rj r

(oNr

(N 1 o

l 44

'-ar

g -. U)

15Wi r'

Page 187: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

co*

- a r - 4 10 co

-- 10r

004

14 14

Cll

d~U)

Page 188: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

C -r , C

LIl

,~ *r"

Page 189: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

[ - - -. - - - - -. . .. -. - J.

* 0

0~~ 0

>4 >4 2 -. . >4 >4 >4 >4 >4 >. >4

S 0C) ON.4) .- , Cs .2 -r 7 1)) LI) Cfl .-4 --4 C- ~CA IN 4') N ..A .4 IN .7 ,-.4.7

Cs --4 - '2 4)4

In CA AN4-,

* S

In

41 1~1 -1 4) l.A 5

~J K - CA ~' - .-~ ~ 0

-I 'I CC 1'-

C) .--4 .1

-~ I" .7 CA CO

CA '-i .7 0)

(A .1 .4 C) Cs .-4Cs

- -~ '-I -- -- - - S

* 0

b-II I. I

I I! Lj

S * 0

- ~4 I.~ ~ ~

G

I ~8

S U U U U S S S 0 S 0 0 S 0 0 0 0

Page 190: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- ---------------------------------------------------

*

~~0

lii * 0* 0

6 0

I ~ 4 -.4

I IC I - 0

-, I- -4

* '--1 0

--4 I AF 1I I A

-~ 4

-4* 0

I F4 -1 t

p. F

* 0

,

I 0 .4 - 4S

I.

* 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Page 191: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- . -&. ~.7 ' NjX N'.~ ~-v-~w---r-- . - - - <2

2~ -0 ~' 0 ~- - -4 -. 2 z 0 2 1 .j ~f~f H.I - cc - .0 -

-< - - -~ 1

I-~ .. - -~ - c-cr

- *2' -* ~2

I 0Ti ft -

~'2

- - - '- - X

*12

ft *-. - - -

* 0

C .~ S

* * .- f - -

* 0

* S

* 0

* S

* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Page 192: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

ICN 00n-

04 C"00C 1I (N

o~ .1..

~~~J00 00-5255

x r CD0 %i0 r0 0 0 C0 .t -.E.04 In-

-4

t4 0 0U C. 00-40 00 - 0

W 4t4

ca '- I ) 0 0

0. w . . I.

w ~ I 0ejo o 0- 0

0 c%Wl -4 ~4 44-

4. 4j 0. 4 ) 0 -4 0 0

0/) en

cli C" 0000 .- Q

-- 4

-4 -4

7 00 0 C D(". 0. -40 -4 0

A1 1 0 c

C1J CD Lf C3, CN

0 CC14

'.04

w '.0 >-4t

aC ) W cuwnC) 0l m >j Cli C)Q 0 C w >

m Iu O u 0 4 C O0o cl CL a >o 04 -4 -4C1 n

1) a- 2 0 0CZ) CO 0. 3 '-4 o~C O. 0 f>-= - >) 0.4 U t

Ci~ tn W-~ 0. - ~ ~J 4 0

161

Page 193: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4 Ln .- EN

Jn 0rl)~J fn(- kn 6*it

d-i 0 N C 00CD0 0 00

0~10

u) - 0~J 0N U > 0

4 4 C;0

*~~~~~0 cCr0 't ,)00 0 0

0 u

o- - -L 00 0 L

(-~C (D oi10E(D (N

0clx C 0' 10N c 0 0 N 000

0 p..) - 1)(n C 0 C)

x N~ 0

C) C_- ~ J1 V-4) n uA o

c, (( 0-1 c1 , D a c

co C- en- 0 'D0

L* CI 0 00L

Nl N

o~~ rl c 1, 0

>.- (1 *-.-4

r) LA) t.K ~ r. )uc, c: ,*

-C.

Page 194: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

C4r-( ' 0 00 CN r- rl r- r r.

CC'

N c 7, 'A C4 C) .vi (C) (N -o

.- 4 CN C'N(

-C) C) -1 .0C 0 C

4

C

C 'NC) N- (N--) r-. .

C-4 CN C1 -C4 1

I-i

ICC zNc)~~ DcN 0N 00)--~

'4) CD .

7D 1 4C

rniD ( C) 0DC CD

vi 'n 0 )C)C

0~

~~- ,4.T

* ' N N - -- (Nl- CC~f -

$.i r~ 4~ . .>~ C>

C) ~ C -, (NEC' (7

c -~ C.-) ~ C N- )(N( ~ ~ ~L--

Page 195: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

n. C-3

44 W0 40cr, C1 Le , -4c

-4

U, r0 0 00 -r-MC4C4 "Itl

~ 0 % ' o-.t C, C0 0 0)C C 'z -4

C:) en C,4. 0 i)r-

*t '.0r > C

00 en c r. Lr cn 01 nUl -r 1

0) LO 04 0, 0 C)0

a)-'-4 -4 -

(n C'4 C4.UC ,%C Li NN~

ca 0,N 0 C) C-- 0

a, V) C4 n 44-

U,~ 0L( C;~~C~' OO Ne'e

4l C14O 0000-l C4 -4400

4 UC 0 NU, DC

E0 0i -4 - 04

CN -4L 7 - ,C D 0 J 3 - ,C

- 4A 00 C -

cy- r -r. Lf c ce' r.0 0% 0r

30 0 4

00 C O r C14 c- 0LrC' U- r,"tI

C e4* C1,0 0 .- f* ,*0'C )

In Ul -

C" C1,4 U,.UU c-l40

s 00co >

73 w .1 w 1'l

C:N 0 U. C- 0- t-- Er>cm-Z 71 0C -0' V0 - Lr Gi~~' u -4h- ZL

tr C: -4 m 0 V)

*) .- - i-4 " a)C1: nL)0:L

.06

Page 196: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

TAI LE 17z p. t per o 1r e -e. f 'I.he4 rd invertebratea in three Cooper River. South Carolina, tidal atre. In April. July,

-u N,.o er jO71 NStrerm or -f.rglnius are -Lce- ded by wtht. Ipound.' 1n parentheses.

Sampling Site

(.rjni. Clouter No. I Clouter No. 2 Buhy Park Mean I

April July N-v.he r April J.ly Novher April July November April J uly No..ber

zuI.-o. on... get 2 5 1 2(5.6) (13.5) (0.1) (6.4) (,O.1)

&mlli.5e - l,.afln.

b.hal Ia I~Pln 1 01(2.6) (0.9)

*0,,', u e - trete~a r e. I.

oo tl1a rrtratt, .Oaertr.. eli 462 23 1 559 1,303 18 463 28 9 495 451 9(10.3) (2.0) (0.3) (6.5) (108.0) (1.5) (14.5) (2.5) (1.0) (10.4) (37,5) (0.9)

id..a herring.

0. ba ak~t~oaliahbuei,. herring 85 961 107 384(0.4) (5.1) (0.2) (1.9)

hr(0 6) 1 0A -_ w-.Kd_ 3, 398 15,562 9 22 464 21,421 5 2 7 8,621 12,330 5

((.11 (33.8) ((017 ( 1 1.6) ('0.1) ('- 1) ( 0.1) (2.7) (35.1) (,0.1b,- ea jelt-,.. I-,.rd shad 7 13 14 251 8 3 9 1 8 87 7

(0.4) 1 .3) (0.2) (1.1) (2.3) (0.2) (0.5) (0.7) (0.3) (0.5) (1.4)S-. ,a.. teteT, e thr-dftin .hd 2 1 I

(<0.1) ( 0.1) (0 1

e08.- a..1 C dio.- arhovle 1050o ton .1 1111. 6.y b nho, 435 107 10,508 1,305 36 4.083

(0.1) (0.3) (22.3) (0.3) (0.1) (7.6)

Ci hati T',ik.r 1 1 '1

ft. -tnaret and carp.

., :'. rtp ,

-7,p 2 <

(12.0) (7.3)

Olt-, it i. htob 379 521 1 209 82 '.59 884 1 196 497 154

C (12.8) (24. 7 (,0.1) '4.0) (6.51 (30.4) (5.0) (0.3) (5.6) (12..) (10.2,1

. .. a ..rto. . AtIantit n d!efl h 9 2 1 1 1 l 4 i.(0.1) (0.9) (.0.1) (0.4,) (.0.1) (0.3) (,0.1) (0.1) .

86 ,ctmnhg 949 21,476 4.580 3.9,,4 806 a0 3,805 2.100 9,748 26.(6.6) (30 0) (13.4) (7.79 (0.9) 11.1) (17.1) (7.0) (18.3) (0.3)

f , , 1 l qui t ji h 2 '110111 (-oi)

d.-er 1oa I er iloer.ide 80 414 b R6 1.636 1235 12 39 414 541 696

(1., ()"., ('t'I, 1"8, (B (2.0 (0.1 ] (,.) (0.1) 11.2) (0.4)p, ! ,I dr. ri Iti rot8. I 1.936 ,1 64,

('0. ) (1.81 (0.11 (0.6)

. . . . . .. . .. , ertar '1

(,oo.,

'(.]1 ,0.1)

S1)

-: " " " : t , '(1.2 ) . 3)

237 t ,. R

Page 197: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

7 RD-fl49 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHARLESTON HARBOR 3/3AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CRROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERSCHARLESTON SC CHARLESTON DISTRICT APR 76

UNCLASSIFIED F/G 13/2 NLmmhmhhhhihhhl

mIhaahIEEa//hE

Page 198: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

7711

11111N 1 1" ItQl2. QQ2.

2.2.

L .361111 '*'~ *4 ~I~2.0

11111 .25 11.4 1.

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHARTNA I ANAL kRl AU 4 -S ANPARI> I A

Page 199: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

p. 0

rABLJ, 1.7 (continued)

sampling $It* "

Clotr oI C.outer Ko. 2 Bushy Pak meso

April July No-b.T April July No0*.b- April July Novem.ber April J..1y 9we

j.LL 21cochlroe b1..1 "2'.

a alcroloph. d t1 1 '1 '1n"ishi at L , r spotedt $=afish (.0.1) ('0.1) ('0.1) (0.1)*e,~ £ t.8 *potted *u~f 1. 1 1 16 '1 '1"-

('0.1) (0.1) (0.6) ('0.1) (0.2)

* 72 r n.1ide. lsreg.w.tb bass 1 1 23 3 6 421 11 2 148 5

- -(0.1) (0.1) (3.2) (0.8) (1.3) (3.1) (3.3) (0.5) (2.1) (1.6) -

fl .'-c aol.r2.. hit* reppi. 3 18 24 47 14 5 9 14 10 9

(0.1) (1.8) (0.7) (1.3) (0.3) (0.5) (0.9) (0.4) (0.4) (0.9) .

* ,. 7 -- ..rhf: -. a4 3 2 6 14 4 3 6 2

°Ir7. flevescens yellow rb 1(0.2) (0.3) (1.0) (0.2) (0.5) (C.4) (0.1) (0.3) (0.5)

70*' -11-5 - bloefiflb.8P- *.. s ltri e blsefib 3 1

._-__~ sa1atr(0.1) ('0.1)

,'.. n,,, .8 c . , - .€ b, a d p , .1o o s

a.Si-. .. J cack. ll r..k 6 20(0.1) (0.6) ('0.1) (0.2)

-,!'a - Jerru 4 17(I0.1) (0.1) (0.1) ('0.1)

1.oI1,s chj- ra, silver pa1ch M 3 41944 1.70 1

-- (0.3) (0.1) (1.) 206 (o11,!~i( ebuloet-e spotrted aeatrout 5 •

. ... t(0.3)) (0.1)

.ea.s. chorie. spot 7 2.783 2826 29 1,341 3,058 76 12 1.375 1,987

0. 1. 1 (;.1) (1.5) (9.9) (2.5) (0.4) (0.6) (6.0) (1.0)._J d - t- , A tlan t c croa ker 1 9 548 26 5 4 25 2 44 ; l O0 32 4 73 3 9

" -(2;.3)(0 ) (8;.4) (i.6) (0.1) (3i.8) (0 .1) ( 0.11"".-

s*. - irulfet8

* .i cPhslu, striped mullet 2,053 1.228 4 1,582 35 22 830 24 2 1.488 429 9

(36.3) (9.8) (1.4) (36.8) (4.4) (4.2) (22.7) (2.2) (0.3) (31.9) (5.5) (2.0)

-,btldae - &Lcbles!-,.7.. d lyric.a. lye g.obY 2 '1

(oO.1) ('0.1)

,t r)! 1. ehastatus. shrptall goby 3 1,218 1 406

(,0.1) (0.6) ('0.1) (0.2)

-. ,0.ellus hufeldti, freshwater Roby 1 37 1,212 2,121 889 2,035 3,282 1.386 1,403 404

('0.1) (0.1) (0.2) (4.7) (3.8) (2.7) (4.7) (2.5) (2.9) (10.1)

o1- bostl, -aked goby 1,081 403 416 1 397 361 267 139

(2.4) (0.1) (0.2) (10.1) (0.1) (0.8) ('0.1) ('0.1)

:- 7..- 1ft.y. flounder2rr,2. crossotu&, fringed flounder 9 2 4

-~ (0.1) (0.1) ('0.1) p1s-ell d tst , summr flounder1 1 1

.... . . (0.1) (0.3) (0.1) (0.2)

1hI h ethotle. southsr0 7 1 2,922 9 1.220 9 1.383 6

flou.d., (0.5) (0.1) (1.5) (0.2) (0.9) (0.2) (1.0) (0.2)

-A..5 - sa1es" 'o ..mcu.lstug_ hogchoker 1 1 1 1 ,1 '1 '1

('0.1) ('0.55 (0.1) ('0.5) ('0.3) ('0.1) ('0.1)

.2 specie) 26,718 44.551 5,066 111, 33 35.538 17,983 9,138 8.938 2.802 49,003 29,676 8.617

(99.9) (118.3) (7.1) G267.0) (257.1) (74.9) (49.1) (37.7) (10.4) (102.0) (137.7) (30.9)

', ,- •: e- u,-.. hr imps g- h. iap.

[., .r.. shrimp 50,8b0 157,416 4,039 307.312 980,016 334.093 56,177 10,093 2 138,116 449.175 112,711. .(24.7) (247.7) (0.4) (122.0) (663.3) (104.8) (13.1) (2.0) (0.1) (53.3) (004.3) (35.1)

- I.7. shri.ps

lt. h611t shriep 11,759 481 50,668 20,809 160

13.5 (2.1) (61.5) (25.0) (0.7)

blue ,.b 1,635 15 ;,2i6 2,161 8,1s1 909 1.638 425 2 2,011 2.864 676

(94.6j (1.2; (I.i) (3.1) (32.4) (1.4) (30.4) (1.9) (0.7) (42.7) (11.8) (1.1)

5.brte,95 369,. 19, ,7)4 110.0)) 1,038,RI5 314.902 57.81, 10,518 4 140.127 472.848 113.547

( .* 119.3) (262.4) f 7,1.0 (12,.1) (757.2) (106.2) (43.5) (3.9) (0.77 (96.0) (341.2) (36.8)

-rgan... 79_)i .13(741 t0,902 .21,206 1.074 .371 72.89 66.953 19,456 2.806 19t.131 50-..523 122.164

'. . * .19.2) (JHC.7, 710.9) (292.1) (1.014.3) 1)91.1) (02.6) (41.6) (11.1) (201.3) (478.9) (67.7)

1, _ d . S. ... .......... - I e 166

Page 200: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~IA -, IS-- ~- ~ . -~-~~*~- ---- ~--

Species Co- 3ition of Fish Captured in Charleston Harbor Dumping Area

Family &Species N4o. of Specimens Length Range (mm)

CarcharhinidaeMustelus canis 1 641

Raj idaeRaja e~1anteria 1 477

EngraulidaeA-.choa hepsetus 12 100-119

SynodontidaeSynodus foetene 144 140-339

Ogcocephalidaeogcocephalus 1 59

GadidaeUrophycis reqius 1 188

SyngnathidaeCentropristis striata 12 71-1820IDiplectrum formosum 1 91

CaranqidaeCaran-x crysos 1 164u ec-,ctorus macarellus 10 122-144recapterus punctatus 4 133-173

Lut j nidae*Lutjanus analis 8 76-126

GerreiciseEucinostomus argenteus 1 90Fucinostomus gula 1 78

Fom-ad osy idaeOrthopristis chrysoptera 1 122

Stecnotomus caprinus is 75-120Lagoion rhorchoides 3'105-118

ScianidaeBairdiella chrysura 1 140Leicstomus xanthurus 10 135-155

TrichiuriciseTrichiurus lepturus 1 216

Str'cmateidaePeojrilus triacanthus so5 105-144

Trjc--l i-aePriomiotus evolans 3 103-118PrionAtus scitulus 9 101-121

B t hidevtATcc-:sttj uadracellata 4 146-199

Charc'1is s-p:Ilopterus 26 53-81Scc'j2hthallrus aq7uosus 1 119

Bal is t daeBaliStes capriscus 1 122 -Manocarntths hispidus 1 540

Total No. 328

7.7

Page 201: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

T A B LE 19SPECIZS COMPOSITION OF BENTHIC AND FREE-SWIMMING INVERTEBRATES CAP-TURED IN CHARLESTON HARBOR DUMPING AREA. I

UNCOMMON COMMON ABUNDANT-

Portunidae XXX

Cancridae X

P aguridae XX

Xiphosura X

squillidae XX

*Loliginidae XXX

* Holothuroidea X

*Echinoidea XX

As teroidea XX 0

ophiuroidea XX

Gastropoda xx

Pelecypoda X0

Chaetopoda X

0Arithozoa xx

Apineura X

1.68

0 04

Page 202: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

APPENDIX A

ECONOMIC DATA, EXTRACTED FROM U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SURVEY

REPORT, CHARLESTON AND SHIPYARD RIVER, SOUTH CAROLINA. COMPLETEDOCUMENT IS AVAILABLE AT U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, CHARLESTON,

SOUTH CAROLINA

Type of Benefit Charleston Harbor Shipyard River

Savings in TransportationCosts

(1) Petroleum Products $4,428,000 $716,000

(2) Containerized Cargo 1,100,000

(3) Dry Bulk Cargo

a. Ore - 648,000

b. Oil & Grains 369,000

Reduction in Hazards toNavigation 33,000

TOTALS $5,930,000 $1,364,000

Estimated First Costs and Annual Charges

Item Charleston Harbor Shipyard River

FederaL First Costs $ 23,688,000 $1,979,000 0

Non-Federal First Costs 3,498,000 1,212,000

TOTAL FIRST COSTS $ 27,186,000 $3,191,000

AnnLL1 uil aurgj

1"'ade rl S 2,766,000 $ 508,000

Not- Fde ra t 329,000 436,000

TOTAL $ 3,095,000 $ 944,000

EXCt AuI I 111 BenkI it ~ S 2,835,000 $ 420,000

Ben. Iit -C t t Rat i 1.92 1.44

• ". .- .- ,.." . . ... ..

Page 203: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

00

Page 204: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Table of Contents

Page No.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service B-1

Department of Health, Education and Welfare B-1

Federal Power Administration B-2

U. S. Department of Interior B-2

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency B-4 -

U. S. Department of Commerce B-6

U. S. Coast Guard B-7

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation B-7 .

South Carolina Wildlife & Marine Resources Dept. B-8

South Carolina State Ports Authority B-8a

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company B-9

Honorable James R. Mann B-10

Honorable Clyde M. Dangerfield B-1O

Honorable James B. Edwards B-11

Honorable Harris P. Smith B-11

Honorable L. Mendel Rivers, Jr. B-12

Honorable John E. Bourne, Jr. B-12

Airco Alloys and Carbide B-13 - "

Amerlux Steel Products Corporation B-13 - -

Amobelge Shipping Corp. B-14

Associated Container Transportation (USA) B-15-"

Bagnal Lumber Company B-15

Bowman Transportation, Inc. B-16

Braswell Shipyards, Inc. B-16

Carolina Eastman Company B-17

Charleston Branch Pilots' Association B-18

Charleston Oil Company B-19

Coastal Forwarders B-21 -

Coastal Steel Company B-21

Commercial Bonded Warehouse, Inc. B-22

Cryovac B-22

9 0 0 - ° ''

Page 205: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Page No.

Daniel Construction Company B-23

Del Monte Terminal B-23 _

E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Company B-24 .

Exxon Company, USA B-24

General Electric Company B-25

Harley Corporation B-26

Hoechst Fibers Incorporated B-27 D> eLBC&W Industrial B-28

Leigh Textile Company B-28

Lifetime Doors, Inc. B-29

Lockwood Greene Engineers, Inc. B-29 0

The Maritime Association of the Port of Charleston B-30

Jack McCarthy B-31

Newton International Corporation B-31

Overnight Transportation Company B-32 0

Palmetto Shipping and Stevedoring Co., Inc. B-32

Pilot Club of Charleston B-33

Price Paper Corporation B-34

Reeves Controllers Division B-34

Saco-Lowell Corporation B-35 -

Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company B-35

Seatrain Lines, Inc. B-36

South Atlantic Terminals, Inc. B-36 0

South Carolina National Bank B-37

Southeastern Maritime Co. B-38

Street Brothers B-39

Tindall Concrete Products, Inc. B-40

Utica Tool Company, Inc. B-40

Wilbur Smith and Associates B-41

White Stack Towing Corporation B-42

* 0

S w w V S S S S S 5 • 5 5 5 5 5- • W .

Page 206: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

. °- ..1.7

tz |

.)

'00

14 C U, "-]m 0 m CL

C) C) ,. C -

,-o). wo 0

"3 .= X

4 01 a) 0 Q.

0 0 x Si "

i ) C)a W. Si0 c

w - V ) 0.

.00 .0 Pi P 4 C, 0

en r om w p

S-- -- 0

0~~~ 0.0 ) S i C C

1Cu •

r 12 0

o3 0

40 0 0 v I

a.1

4 SE S

Z- t,

. -W

Ii , C..)..7

o., 4.- . . C." •.

Page 207: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 c

- l 01-. o24

C' 00 w.33 S. -a lo

0C% u-01 WU3' 0.V'0 W W:

o- 4 3 _ ; '40 '4 0>3 -.1CC m 43. - W- '4.0 LC . ..

.010 00 433 93

3.04

I~~ o U4C.o u OE3 W

'3~ ~~~~~~ '4LC3 3 'C 443 E 4

43> C C - 10 4-0. 0 4"4** 'C 4.3 c4~~.- C W.-X 'C43 * fl 0o i''400-C 0 CU ~ 43C>' 44-3 413

44 43 4301. t~ >. * -1.3CC -Ur

4.3 '4 3 C'00 ~ .043 434 5VU ..;43 4.CC L 0.0 OIV

-- '-1.'- 4 4333CC 3..a

C>LW m. 0 Uj u3 11

43.4CC. 3, >3.3-C -L.>C4- 90.3.3

OOL.C t c 44

'433 0 4

Page 208: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 5

4- OOC . CO

Cc~~~0 C Ro o nO ' a '.C -E

CCCC cc -0

2 CV -E mC oC -

4- 4-cc C' -C3- CO C -0

>

.i3-s-sc~CcC o 0--5.c c,---c'C s5- 0-'sC ~00.k- i - C ~-3

,~-3CO--.0 C o.-CC 0.-- Lc CCtmm

s-si~~~ m c L~- , 0 C0 Co os C C

O ~ ~ ~ - w~'0-s 3 0 L 4'C C

'-03~~~~~~~~1 WC4C 0 -COv C V CC Xs --

Oc-c~~~~~eC~ 4- 1 C c ~ C C scor~~~s-~ 1a Cd- yN C C- -C >

cac-c~~~~~c.--~~ w-Z.,.- C- VO . C o '

Coo~~~~~~~~~~I 33CCL 0cCa-'-*--C -nc-

CC 5--C ) 3 CC CL )5'y 450c CtOC

0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I t W,0 Cs0 C 1-C - C - -

Page 209: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

z. 0

zz

0jU

an

FAC

Page 210: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

S S

CCC

2-- 0. C o.C

-e 2CC C., C 4. 0.. CC xtC

2,..

4' t2..

C ~ at C C

4' C ~.- -

4--- A- -

a. a.>--- 4~~C C -

2 C CL.

4' a.~U 3- - a.

a.>- CtCC

4-

4 .t-t *~C

'S 0

4-- C3

4' -. CC

2 ' CL C* -- -. B B>- - C 2"~ -4-- BR a. - C C - S

-- -- 2;:3~Zt3

-C~~ 4-ct

or 0C-C

- -- . - a.-~ -' C2

4.

0 ~ -CC'C S/

0

SC"

-- -.- ~. ~-. C -<

- -. C - -.

* 6

* 0 - 0 * 0 0 S 0

Page 211: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

IdI

w u

1 0 -C

zz 2 2

4 2 2

17

Page 212: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- -4* 0

* 0

* S

b

* S

. I 0/

/

K

/~ zi''I,.

70 I S

* v w w_ u_ _ w S S S S S_ S

Page 213: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

140 . -

a 5

* C4) C- -C .

0 r~

U:.- I c

0 0T 444

lp lp - 4p 4p4p

Page 214: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

p .

I I S

- 4%~ *

I.

V

I 0

* S

FI I

9

4- * ..

C 1 7

--- 4.- r -

-. I - p Sa, -~ - -J-.-.9.~

4,' *-

* * * - - *-Y 0

F -47 [.jS. W mu: . +4 -

S4' *4*~p F * 9

-4.* 0 1 - -- f 4. I 0

* S S S S S S S S S 5 5 S S S 5 5__________ - -,1

- - -. '4 . . 4 - ,- - .4- - - *4~ 4 4 - . - - - . - - - -- 4 - - - - -- - - '-~--

Page 215: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0~~ 0bc .. / I

I S

a - A~~]

~1S

K C

* S

S

7'

* S

* .01;j ]

* 0

* 5 6 0 6 6 0 0 0 S S 0 0 0 0 0 S 0

Page 216: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Sj I03 m 3C

u 2 1 E

.. .0 m

o- wr04 ,a,

. I 1a 0 a0

o .0L4~ .0r

3 lw .4 l'l1r- ol .1oI0 M~ .. X04

0 r40 0wa U 04

~~~~ .10 '0~0- 00 r~0 . .0I- 0 0 -

U. a4 > c)~ 04

~~0.X0 ~ -- f11 )

AMJ Mn0 00

Z. 0 0 000 .- 1

610 0 0 0 -~~

-~ ~ wa0 0

Page 217: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

*l 0

-4 3 -eNO

14)4. ~

0 14

Iz 1.

0 ca4r0-0 .W 1

C.*o 0 *o.s 4 . l

W. 0 41 ) (D '

U-- 4)0 0 WV

0SV)W (.0. *%

W0 %. )4 $.s44))0 4.

': 000$4P.) -4

w >0(: 0

r' 0 - . 094

v 0

"WW w ow 010 0 -3

'-4 (44224) >. 0 4(

0 (dC So 0 )

04 ~ 0(P4)0( 0 u

0, 0

0 0 P 0 Q)'-4 4) f- 0 ca c CD t

DItix 3 0 0 4) 4-' V -4) 04 0 " S-. F(.-'u(m

0 ML'- 3 >ca c )- 0 0 r. 0 .w m k '04 E0'0 "04' 0

''c w 000 0

w 0. 0 C C.

Page 218: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - - - - - - - - - - -. - - ~ -. -. 71' - - -. -.

i-s

.~ 0

4

'Iv

N

I 0

'i--IN

* S

i S

0

K? 0

Ir 0

I 5

S

S w w u S S S S S S S S 5 5 5 5

- - -

Page 219: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4.'4.0

I a4 0.4 0

-~ C. I0444 C

T o ~.400 .' .

'03~q 0.4 4 4

H0.3- X 4 xPc

44 04"4440.-4O *0 440 m '0 .

_~~~~~~~~ I.0 4 0 0 4 . 0. ~ 4 .44 .. 444 .48.40 r

4~~~C I2( ii

.44.44044-- r040 -.

Page 220: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

a,01 01 0) 4 N

a 0 00 -4 3

14 0 14 ' 4

N~~~~ 000 0 . . 0 J.

0' 0

114 01 0 0> 01 N0 t o" I 0 14w.

w)1 0 1u00 m40 r11 a

W-m4 .10 - CL Z- m 04 00Un~~~~~L x .' .4 011 1

a1 w .. 40 0 0 -. N 41 N

CM v -03 WO c1,- o0 N O0m04 . 0 m W v 0-4 1 01 0)

0WW 4. 0.' m.' m- 0 wI ' .- 04 .'W WW .0 001N .1 r4 w 06

C) 0 4-4 01A Wm ) 4 0Q. aw 0. c 41 W>

4 QW01F 1 W NC

S 0 'a Q a -W N0 wN w4 0 0 m a414 3E 3 4 0 30. 0 0 07 N - ,o 1:3 a

U4 N 01 .1 NN 4 0 4: 0 0 0) 0 -rcm 0 5W W.. 0 41W-

_~~~ ~~ 4;0N C~E N N

__ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c 01 0 1 0 . 00

m -O w- V0 0 .1 a. 04 -1 1> ~ w 0. 01 '0 .1 3.

C w 0 0 urn 0 ON0 14 01 . 3.

~1411~W4 , N 0' 0 CIO1 .1N A.10 O 4.42o 0 W- 00 w1 -40 1 O

t,4 WU )b 0) 041 . 0' -0 0 0

q, r M 4.. 0 ~ W -40. 0.0 t. ti.- u) 0

M. C. 4. 444 0 010- 011--0 4 -,

a, IV4 N -0 a, 0

0. 4 4 0 N 4 )0 :50 4 40 . 4 0

It4 0, c: "0I0 0 W01.

1 040 .4"' 0 1 4414 -Is 0340-0 '00 1C. 00011l -00 O W2

0 '0, WW Q-4a w114.. 06 '0 0 0

- -40 000.41 .0 .a04.00 0 o 1.0 410

41 0 0'0 '01 ri-x414 01 0 0 .4101 6m 01 4 '-.01 01 0.0. .0

40 600 41 w004164 44 0 1 41 Do 0 401 ~ ~ ~ w 000-i , 0110 0a,-444. -44 4. 1 1

t 4 -4444 '0:05 .- 1 N00 v 4 0 1 .

01- 0N 0 16.0 t, . 10 0 1 14 0 > 0

Page 221: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

-. --- - . -' - - -.- - '--. '-, -p-- -~.- -- '-* -:%~-~ - - -

C S

V. .,.Q -t.

I -. .;:-~ K'

N

N

I 0Li

3 In ~; ~ t. -. -

- . (312, :223 -

* I S

IS

p- <. 0 p 5tfl

-4

S

* C- I S

C

C

I I S

o 5 L~J p 5

* 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Page 222: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

n 0)

ca-E

rE

r

a--

o 1-0

Page 223: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - • ""-~

*o 0

-, .--

. -.-.

z.-: :...• o -. " j

,a .

---- -.

- j o

_ o:.

,

, - ' ".. . . -- - -- .. . . .. .

- -- - . .. . =.,-..-

' ' " -.

Page 224: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - + , .

-S,.- -- 5.. 0

+ 5 5: -, .

• 5:..

0,,1 " 00.' 40 ( S o .

C. + .Os,-+--. .. ..+ . ..... . , + 5 : - -

+ ,+, + 4 5:,5:

- 0 I++.. , . . .. C + o 0.1 ,, -.' 5 : 5. . . Z

- C,, t,

'U.. .+ : .. . . . 50.0,. r 05 .0

: : ~ i+ . . . . . . .. -.2-, -+

. .. . . .. . .. . . . ., + :.... 5 . 0.. 0 -. . . . '. 0. 0

.. . " ' : . .--. J

* 0 S 0 0 0 S 00 0 0 00 0

Page 225: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4- 4- ~4 'p 04- ' .'.

6' 4-

- 4- 0 :1F 4

I S

4 .4 I S

* SI , . 4- C-

- 4- ... 4- ~ 4-

-~ <<1-1

* S

6, 4- r4- CO 444-

.~ 4- 6,C'440C 44~

4-444-S 0,444 4,44-6,4-446,4'(~40 0414- "6,*-4-C--6,r

'4- 44-4-'44'4-4-46 9

4- 4-) 4-- F' ~ ~ 4-

440' 4-44-4-4

4-4 4-4-44-44344

* "04-4-6, I S

4, 4 44-

".44 4,4'444-, 7.., *1

0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 0 9. .15 0

- . . . .

Page 226: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I ~. ~ p ___

- . - I -

* - I-

S S

C 0- C C C t 4:5 S . - *- C C *- *- 4- *- 44 -

- - 4 . 4- 4 - ~- C - - 4: C -

-............... C C

0I 0

4 ~. 4 '' *

* . . - . . C~ S

* 0

* . . .. 4 0I *- -. 1 4 * 4

---- 4

* 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 5 0 0 0

* 'C . *

- ~ - - - - -

Page 227: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* -. -- - -- -. '-:--7-----~;---~---~.-'7

* S

-S

I-

0

S

* 0

U

~ 4q~~ ~54 -.@1 ~

- ~'2

'4 ~ ;~~~44 ~ 044-".... ~ ~ -4

~ .. ~ ~ .2~,ii ~ U

5 4',. .... 4I~ 4' .4 0

~7 4, .40.44 *4

r. E ~ 0.4 44 04, '44' * -4

F? P'~ I~4'~~u ~ .4

I, -~ .4~1K * 0

'4 ~44

* S S 0 S S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 50~~

Page 228: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

' S)

Is4

a, 0 0 0 .C

D v

,.. n),. .) .

: 0_ o to " .4). 0 - . -0

o . 0=- 5. 4-

4) 0 00 4 ."

..0 . - C .-

. - . 0. .4".4 ? ,; - i)

=" . 0 0 *.Co

0o 0 4) " 4) 0' 5. 5. ... .. 0. 0 .44)C- ... 0) ... . ..

i I"4)4) 5:. , ) , o.,,

8-2I

• • • • • • • • • .O S

. .- .C . .. .. . . . ...L; - -. . -. . .. - . " :

Page 229: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Ar'-'2-, .-' 4' 02-'

.0(C) C) 0t~, 4-.

- .C r 2 0. to :1o 202

>~O Co >4 C)o 20.

C)044

'to- - C) -4-

'0 2

I 0

40

022

* S

I 0

IS

>0~4 - .2 0 C C>' C

*2jt CC 3.~ 4,4, 4,... -

CC2 2 2o 2 C4032.4 C 22 4,0 - t.'. 0

"'-C 0 0-43 C .22 - 24 >'~

44 to L.2 .20 4 2 2 2 40 40

0. - 22222C 02C 2 2..> 0 -~1.'> - 022 - VOCO .2C > 40 C-.>0-4.24'.4 2 3.4 2 - 4.00 9:o CC2 2C'-4.4 "to . 2'

020 0 .22'4240 2 ''0 4 22 0.2 to 0'4C . - 94, '-'"22 C 4, 00 C 0 >. . -.0 ~42.2'.4 .4.4.2 C2, '~.2 2 4 4,

4 2 C'.'4' 0 204.0 - 2 4C.CC "24.'00 00~-2 2.2. 0. 0.2.2o 2 toXCo 04.0 2 0004, 2.2 .20 0 -00 a

O 0OC'40 042400 CO 2 C .202 pI~

0o~ >4' .0 4,2 CO )SCC~.. 0 40 C24o -'-4

0-. to00.-~ 04> 4,2 4. IC?>- 4,0 .204,0. 402 204004$0> .. '0'..42..00 .2

24.0 .2 02442 0.-C 2 204 ye.* 0.4 -, 2C.C 2 CC 0'4.4 IC 22

00 04004"- ..- 0 4, 04' -t 22.--' 0 000'. 40to CC 2

.0 ... C4'4..40C...0 C.00 22 - .. 4, .. co '~ 4, 04, 2tootoO .400' 0Q.~ 044 22

to 4.4 - 2. 2.240 .24,22 222- 4,2 0

200 - 03.20 4.'.22'-' 0

240 0 o2 042 .2 >2 o44 2 .2Z - .. 2 04 CC4, to .44 I"'-.222 2 04>402 20 C ..' .430-' 0 20.4C.44,.42 .2 4,

4,24>0 .444 4,0. 04

3 0.4 00' '.49004 2 ...4 0 .4.2>. 2.34,042 4,4,2 4,44'.. 4,2

2 .20.22 24,24, 2...> 402 - 32 C044,.2 .4 2 0 2.20 -~4>'.-CO 0

.4 44> '2. >020>... 0 2 224. C. 2-4 >4' 4.20 .4$4, .2

:1> 1 2.2-4.0. 0-24, 2042 -2

* ~It' P 04...'-4

-.---1tI 2,

S 0 6 0 6 S 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 S S S S S

Page 230: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - - - 'r w -. "-w-r->" . .*"%'

:. W. ... 0 --

u -0 U 1

_iu :0 4) c:

M: () m , v 0 .

:. ID 0 :1 E.S

z m2 >

ii -" . . ,

E 0

0EJ- 0

. .J0.-.0,

0' 0v .o ..

-4 m 104= a ... •

,o .- 0-1"

-,O•o o

S r-.i--.. .,.14> .. :• . . 00•1 .::- . 0'

" .cW. : .. .. -: : , : , . ." : c" : ' ? : ' .> S. . . .i ' ' . . _"

Page 231: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* ,* , *~. . .- ~. ~W *.q n~pp ~ U ~ ~ ~r--- - r .p .- , ~ 'r r Y ~ -iw --r r ' '"

01

ItV. ut ct It -" 0t .2 4 . ..

HU 0

cr. .

0~ 022 1 12 . 2

a) 0

w .2 .2w

* a)

Page 232: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

c~ cc

-S - .

I, S

* C ,t c It

0. oor G--

VI-I - , t

I-0 E .G -G

w~~ oo 33I t c

to.20c a 0

ElE 003

Page 233: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

o c

0 m

uO.- 0' 0

aO 0 tL

CC L ii-oCi

o S - N

00CU

oOCO 00 0

-, 0 i .4w0 E-g

C rii 0

0r -00 L 20 .4 r -T r imw i m W i l O i

C 0 > iL a, . O ' 4

iii 1 1 Eu0L - O 0

C~~~~~~ -c0 - o ' 4 - . 0 . OC~~~~~ 04L Q 0 3- V- - LS~~~~~~ ~ 0 l 0-i- & 2 s-I~

00 0-i * Ci-0 u.- a,0 4 i i .

* ~~0 04 . - O 0 C i

w 0

r

(a8-27

Page 234: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0.0

CC~~ 01 U

>1 I f ~ 0)- 0

LC x 0.C

WIC WW. 0- -

0 L c W t W O>IC

c Z 80 ~ C.-C.- ~ .- EE

I~.A jC 0-. t, gj

Wi lf co -u ~K ~ :4-~ Cx *- 00 2 8)~ ga~ 8Ct

-"Eg J -f 9 0 -P-- E ac.

t Sg, E. -f~;

CC- - '0 _0 o ,

A >. aC; t 0 0~

* U S 5 0 _ 0 0 0 60 00 0r 0 0_

Page 235: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 0

I C'

1. Q, '

CL.C 0 0, X.

a. 0.: D E -'&-a.-- a

1 000a. - S

0 C'0-rn8C La . V $

1 > r L 'd -4

C -4 aa+' La

cd '- CC 0 0W'- 0 ln '.. Q

0 0C0 04C 0

0...~ U)4M 0 C 0'''

L ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 03- >V'C 0'4' .4 0-

.04 ~. L ,O C

0 OL , I%. C CL0.w 0CC0.0 > C- 00C

I, F 0 0 W-CC 0 .C-

0 .1 C ~ C . > ' C fs-' 0 0c -'C w42- . LT

0 a, 0af.4 x 0 w QLCu

0 00 aa--t 0K.0oS 0 C L0 C0 C a' L-.

04' - 44 L

Page 236: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

zo 4

Li 'C S 0C)(44

2-

fl. ~

E~;U S S.

- 0 4:2

0S SO

Co

- (4on S S

hi SOr

IS

* V

5 5

A)I S

S p 5

U S S S S S S S S S 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Page 237: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

K *0

.~,. .01 00, ~.0 00,~ ~

I S

0~

C *t~'~ ~

N ~ *xu ~ o.-.4 I SC

C- C0~ ~j ~C0~ 0-. C

0 ~ .0.0 .0~c0~

o 0.0 01 ~ 00. ~01~ 3000 30

- I 0

I.

4 5

I S

I 0

S I 0

S S S S S S S S S 5 5 5 5 5 S 0

Page 238: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

1~~I h1 - w --- rj - 1

u o Mt

D- - &.- Dm c

o~ o 2t 3 23 C

z 2C0 vC c

S2~~~~ >C2. W

c* 1--' 10C 1. C-.140c2~~~E-z 2u.t. 2 I'* 5 COC--'2 C CC4.-'d '

*~l C-d C3 2 ' 2 -H. i

Page 239: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I SS

033

Page 240: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I S

Ca -I0- .-- -4

wLG LLo

Co O o> 4-

0- C 04. 4 1.4

CC .C -0 - . '

w~Im

-v: I'C4 C cC I >5 0a Q4-C L ,- L C C' O C - C E

0-C O '4 - a 0 a 4 so C40 C4- O ' 0- 2 1 'rC- 0 ' 0.Cx.'4' 4

-'4-0 C -E-- - az, C

a-- -- u -,' C' 4 * 4C

u-0- C - LL U s

4-~ ~ C X-C4 Za 4' a C

Page 241: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

71f ~-

ac

94

F: E

1/77

0 0

CL X, :3

I>in l

Page 242: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4 0

VS

* - '3,-i

I 0

* = -

I' I.* I.

CaI.-C-?

U'U

E *~ * ** SCCa-

Li SC

Ui0 -

* N

* 5 2 p 0

(U. -~ - -L. 0 2 2

2

cn~>

* 0-~'1

* 9 0K

* 0 I

ISA

* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S S

Page 243: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

012

aI m

zS

Page 244: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4) w. 4 . . .

is 4 0v' 4 4 03 :5 444 m w 41 .0 Q~00 .

-- 0 IL 0 03 d4 m , 0:-.o 1 04 4 ) 44 . 4 4 44 > 1

w 0 ) .0 S4 V 44 u .

p0-'4 a a a) -0 0 0 40

0 . 4 0 00 40 0 .0 .4 .4 0 0 4 4 Cm. * 0 .

0 a, 4

o 0tp 0. 0

0' $44 0 0. 0'4 .C r 4 . 4 . . 0 U-A 0 w 4

04 44

.4 0

0 40E- 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 -4 0 0 10 n 4 w4 0' . 4 0 0 4 4 0'

04 44 44 0

U 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 t .0 44 .

04~- g 4 4 40 - 0 to)

N 0 ~ 4 - m 44 0 0) 0 .0 0 0 . V c

0 E41~~. 0.C 0

0 a 4 44 0 .0>, 44 4 0 0 0 4

r- 0 04 44 0 ) M0l0 W4 w w 00 U * 4

0 41 0 0 u ' m

O.0'. 04 0. 4 C -. 44 0 0.0 u u 0 a 4 A .0

I L

0 01Z OClCL U -4 0.

0 -4 o .

44 000 0.

IU0 -. 0 0 z -

00.. 040444

0.~L >. 0 U4

> CL 0 .0 I0

M00 I -.4 444-UV0. 004v 0 0 '4

4 ~ ~~0 C.4 ~'0 . 0 4

000 04 U, r4 4S04). 4044 '- 44 0 (A

44C0 - 4.4 w .. -' 0 -I

T0. 0 ,0 .

C00 r 4 00r

0.4- 0 44W0444 4 >.0'4

u04 -44400

-0 4, 0 00z0. Q E 1w~ u i-0 0a).) 400-4I00 0 0 440 4 4.4.r40w '00.) u - E a) w04 4 ) 4n44 4r . - - C0. 0-1~0 0 44 00 4 0

0 44 00 r 404

44- -4 00 00 0 440

44 0. 04 >044 0 .0-38.

Page 245: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- - • , • - %- -

Kz C~ 0

0. 4) o . _

a' r- v Q 0 4) t0>v0 a.0 c 0 w 4.

.: . a.$.4 4 I 4 E44.

'> C.) ol O O o. a,

c)'V - 004) 1) ., 4) W)T4

2 .) 5.s 0 3 45> :14.4 ))50 45 4),.-4om, -04 o.-4 =.0*o 4

l~~l. .00 o+. ca:O+a t-K. 0I 0.C-) .- 4) .444- .- ) 4- -

03...... 5.4 -4 )))4 .* . 0,°"' . ._

. - - 4.. . .. 4)5 E"*-5C4) 0

+ oo, 9 Cdoo +. w+ o_+ $ + ...,'

5.. r- w - 0.14 -... 54 r " u O 5E./ r0 .4). 5-* I) cV 4)54 w)~4 C), o .uc w

r~ ~ ~~~o >> crwIoa

0+ ooD- $ o oH-

7: r- a, m O5 CD 0 4> ) lQ ) -w 0 a

) b- E : M- .C. -0

o o .'. ...0 0a w

34 04445..o4V 4. 0 4,4.*44.-...-.-.. -. o i-

0 0'-j 2 5 400-3.)I4

o o -L 0 , ,

" +44 ,404) . 4 .- .4 5.. 404

L.3- 4 - •0 ..4 4)4

,L :5 ,10 wc +o w >oow °o C o o 4)1

LJ.J ~ 2 .5. . 0 -. 44) .- , 4.-- (. O20O-

.~r o+ w _c r

,-. - . . > $-. .0 4 .. . o

0,; ou

o .. a0 ) o )o

4 . 5 .. z0 > w o c5. 44

g~~c " o w++ oEgX . :- ) . .4-. . 0 4)44 *44 )),5. 4

r0,- 0 5.. .- 44- 0 4 om) 40 ) (. o o.5-t,

0< 4 -SW _4 "0.44.44) 4

I o D .

4.00~ 0544)). r)- 0 >1 u)4 4) 44 cu,

4) 4 • o 045. 4 " "-4 04 >4)0 ." .. . . .- . : . . .. .. .0- " - . . . • ) -,-.': .0 . ' . 4 , 4)4. .--. , .- .. :4. .0:- - . ..-') , , . -- -)--.-- _. •

4)~ o))544 w4 r-:w- 5.).>4 3.-44

> Id

0 o)

In 0 o0o r

4) 0 a4 0, 5. -4

0c o0 w~ o4 4) .-0 a) w ) M ) o4 on

4 4) C C- > 4) .

*4 w 4) 10 a o 0

4) 4) w 4) 0 * ) 4 . ))4d w) .4 o0 C) 0' C0 Q-. w 'a

o 4 Q0 Q0 4 )* 44

4).~ ~ 4). 0 4 0 4 * .

w4 a0 a 4 4 . o v. 4) *

4) Q . 4 . 4) ( 4 o0c)

>40 4 ) 4 4 4 ) 0'0~ ~~~~~~~ o4S 0 5 . 4 ) .4 4 4 4

o) 0 a, c40 * . . 4 ) 4 ) *4)~~~ 4) w) .0 4 . 4 4 )4)~~ 4) 4) c r0 4 . 0 0' 5 0

a4 u w- o4 M 4)c . 4

3~~~~~ ~~ 1?5 4 4) 4 4 . 4

Page 246: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

22

o 4-

d -ad0 *~ -~ 2k. 00S 0 0~ di5 w *0 0 05 - U 00) 000.0 0. d,

0'V 00) C0 4. 30)dO OEo,,

-ooo~a g-~o.0,00 0,) ON 0,0 0-0

000 0.-FOcO- 0)0 0. to,.,0 000

I 2-.~fl00o oo- N- 2 --. 0 OOES 00 0 I

4 *,0to 00 Ed,.,< .,.., 0.0 d.00 0~-0 0

.00 -. 0.0soc ~ ~ j 0

-0 00 0 00. I 0S 0 ~

00.00 0) 0 0. 0 -o000) 0.00 0.

.0000.0,-otO 00000) ~0.d.0)00 0.00

- . - 0.0-tOO -0

I S

'-.0,0 00''0.0 0, 000 000

-0 0.00

0-0 0,0 .00lId 0 0 Ocod. 5 0 0

-'0 0 .0030 .00) 00.,0.00-o o0oa-0 -0 000 E005-~0 .0 000.003 0.'-' 0) 9

S

(3

C,,

C.)

* ii -. .- -. S

o 00

*

* S

0

* S S 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 S_ 0

Page 247: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

r, E

m S

7'C

Page 248: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 t0

V 8

4. ~ ~ l Zl 1*. 0 04 )0 J44. 4

410 44 4 4 1 4.).0 4)4

-~ ~~ ~~ 0 4.)O ~ 4

so4 U- 4L~~~~ 0.4 8 N.

444o2. 4... m ). . 44) . 4

'44)

0~~~~~~ A40.'44E-I

Page 249: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

APPENDIX CLETTERS OF COMMENT

ON REVISED DRAFT EIS

w w w

Page 250: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

i- .

U. S. Department of Commerce C-I

U. S. Department of Interior C-I

U. S. Coast Guard C-2

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency c-2

U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare C-3

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service C-4

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation

Service C-4 0

Honorable James B. Edwards, Governor, State ofSouth Carolina C-5

S. C. Water Resources Commission c-5

S. C. Water Resources Commission C-6

S. C. Department of Health and Environmental Control C-6

S. C. Department of Health and Environmental Control C-7

S. C. State Ports Authority C-7

S. C. Water Resources Commission C-8 0

S. C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department C-8

S. C. Community Development C-9

D S

* 0

D S

S * S

Page 251: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

3 0

~ S

S 0

4 pe

i S

I SO

I S 0

S S

I S

S S S

S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S

Page 252: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

- .. mrr - - ~. -- - - rrrrrfl

* 0

S

* 0

e -'

*

a 0

9. 0

* S

* S

* 0 S

* 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 S 0 0 5 5 0 5 5 S S

Page 253: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I 0

rJ , -, C o

* o....,.,CL. 0

0~4 0J.--'-~-" .*O -~ I' 0 V.,0C~ U.-d ~C0C~.'1OJV V

corr>v-o- rCvilt.--.. -V.-.

U .-.. ,-.z,0 WC -..... irfl>.t,

Z VU0~'~ OC.-A~ ~K. S0 -o ~ C .,U0

OVOC I. .0C. Opi.00.0.GiV P40 .~C,0 V

z 00000 *.~ 0.0.00.00 0.0 Ca 0.00 to -rO.-' 44.t 'I .000.0,0 Os.C

o - itO C....- OCOVIO.-. 0-i.00ii .OCAtOC>.0 .0tOOLiai~ t'0a-0 0.0 Ja.-,

I- - >000 C., V ~.00,.0 .00000U CO.> ~4. -.4- ... 0 -0.0OH s0Vo~-0-.0. VOO-00....0

'C 00 Cafd.i..o P.O COCo. 000...or ~,0 U>0. 0~I.2 ~00. .0. '~ 0000 Ct PrOC P 0H ~..C

0: >0-0 - ~- Z 0'

t 00 ~ c.tC, 0 0S.

U ft 0' .. 0 aUa

o ~0 G.i-.C~ OPOl

z

E Ct U 5H o- 0 0 U 0

0: - OiH.4..

H 00 0 0-Ut ~

0.0 .$0.-'0.fl .0

" tiCOEA .. '0 COU C. C--. 0CC

C QC~,1Caa .-. :-ria000.t.

P .. 2.C0.-~0.0.-.U0 0-0-a

04 ~.0.o-..-o dooto-. OSC.r-' OoOawsC>OS0

C 0

* ~~0 00

0

S C., \j

0Li .9

00

fl -

* 0

I ~ ~ - ~L.

* 0-2 0

* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 0 0 0

Page 254: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4- Na, .

-o a,' , ,=.,-i..

a us

. 0 0 a. 0.

m o . l

5 0

g " "a. . . g 4 . . .. = 2 4 U p

0 0 , .) .

c-3340 4

0i

a3 00 L V 0

4) r 0 0

04 0) NOa a .4 o01)C

w w

sc .. ',

,44~ 0 70 O8 - w A

Z" I . ... . .4.E

. •.) .4- --a1004 N .3410 so r ,... f;'

44 0 ~ 0 .0 >0t. 3 a

0~ ~ 0 m 0 0 4C

.0)0 0 )4) -41 0 '14

.4-a- 0 .. 0U'0 N0w al 0 0 4. . 40-

u 4 7. 4))4 1114

4)4.44 OI... 0'o

* -144)4 w)00N 44 aN M4 ~1at 0)4 4O

rN 0 u4 9:

).4..'1l4 40.-~~ 00400c-3"

Page 255: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

0 o . a .

.0 0

I e o

c.40 0-

404 4). w

x~ >',. o ..

0 0 4 0

0.0 0

0 0

u o

0 w40 4

z 4 0,

... 444'

U \,k' 0 4 4 4 4

4)4J - -'. 0.. 0

0 '4 -0

* .t.(71

." -, 444 .44' 4,&

'.4440 -4 0.0.4C-4

, • 3• • ' , " .0 ) " -

044 ."4- ,4 - '0,,4._- . _ .. . . . ..'4 0 . .. . . . . . . . .43 0. .. .. .'44' "00 4 '-

Page 256: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

r - . 2 .

7, 4~

'S ~ ,

0 4- 3 44p

3 ~ ~ ~j4 L

-cc c3 ~ E~~

C C

a - L0C~ > c

c 2 5 1

4C

C~ U >C' C7: C

t2 C C,

~~LLt.F- Ln C f

Page 257: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* wrr~ -- -rj-i- ra" C C -

IL

I c.J

Z~ U I

-- ~~ 0"i" 1' 10 0 V0i

2J -7

F A-"'-" I

c-"~) t ~3 . I *0 ,

0E 16.

Page 258: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

.. .. .. ..-- - -- W, '/ : - -

- -) . . . . - " - " '" '* Li . lj f.c C .- i

--" .

r-.1 . -I

,-5 " - " -- "'

-- --.. C , ;242

• -" S.--

II

I] ., , . . L . , . -"

10cc aco.

}-- C. t. - , c

N -. -. -

L . C' " -J

: ' , ":

-- F,: , - . -.. . .

6 .. .. , . . * -, .

.. o1

Page 259: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

I S

V.. Hr rn Cc..L.'~ I

C-> 4' HS 'AU - ti- .- Q- I 0

I I

7. 1

V Li ii 7.'- I S

U Li 'NIi

- C .-' F. Cl '~1,:> .- 1>L 7.- Ccj .C-4.-C-- -

-~ H -- Li ,:~."5 ~&t~'C- >7. -,

- - - - .--.--. Cc~r-- .t-.

Li. c CC-C- s...fl--Q7..- C- - I 0

0 WC'SQC7.U 0 .0 *. 2 V

* I- --

iji

I .), I:

I ~

cz..., 'k' &. , I'I * .1C --.--- .-------- (*' I -~

I 0

I I

II

L - .

4 .,

Ii Sit

5' I S11

1 ) tED - S 9 0- .5II

* 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ S 0

Page 260: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

----- ~-~

F.

0

,~ 0

I 0

4 I 0

( ~'~I ~ I

_______ Q) jJ -.

5~ 'I

- (4, I'-'S 0

a

* 1 I S

dI - 11

~II

'-'It'*-sa a .~ c-' -~

C)

I .-. '55-C.' CF J

-- 'cc L..( rn~C. ~ a

C', H 0

'I ! , Ocna O.-t.

* 3 3 S S S S S S S S S S 5 0 0'p.

Page 261: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

* 04

0~

T, o

C-9

w Rp v0

Page 262: III F'IIIIIII CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER ... · D-R149 547 CHARLESTON HARBOR DEEPENING PROJECT CHRLESTON HARBOR i/3 AND SHIPYARD RIVER SOUTH CAROLINA(U) CORPS OF ENGINEERS

. - ' -, u v % - . - . -".= - -' , --- -- - . .-' , - -' -' -. --. ' - .-. - o . - - . :

FILMED

2-85

DTIC