ATTACHMENT 1.5 NEPA EA.pdf

FINAL

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Proposed National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory

Prepared for:

ADG Engineering

3909 W. Congress Street, Suite 201

Lafayette, LA 70506

Prepared by:

AECOM Technical Services, Inc.

April 2018

[Page intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing]

Executive Summary Final Environmental Assessment

NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research 2018

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric

Research (OAR), Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL), operates the Lake

Michigan Field Station (LMFS) in western Michigan. The purpose of GLERL is to conduct scientific research on the Great Lakes and coastal ecosystems essential for understanding and developing future ecological practices and decision-making. GLERL is comprised of 12 NOAA employees including research professionals, a vessel crew, a marine superintendent and administrative personnel.

NOAA is proposing to demolish, remove and rebuild Building #3 at the LMFS due to structural deformities and inadequate space for its current and continuing use as a marine laboratory and repository for marine specimen storage. The proposed action would remedy serious structural deformities and other challenges caused by foundation subsidence, and consolidate space for laboratory work and specimen storage at LMFS to better meet its administration, office, maintenance and other storage functions.

Three action alternatives are being evaluated by NOAA per Section 102 of the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) under 42 U.S. Code (USC) §4332, and Council on Environmental Quality

Regulations for Implementing Procedural Provisions of NEPA at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

1500-1508.

Action Alternative 1 would provide a new 5,000 SF wood-frame, two-story structure that would set on the existing building exterior foundation footprint. Action Alternative 2 would provide a new pre-engineered metal 2-story structure placed on the existing building foundation footprint. Action

Alternative 3 would provide a new wood-frame, single-story structure placed on the existing building foundation and cantilever out to provide square footage needed to meet a minimum space requirement of

4,500 SF. All Action Alternatives would provide for architectural consistency with nearby structures, including Building #1. The No-Action Alternative is a condition in which LMFS Building #3 is not replaced or removed.

NOAA has prepared this environmental assessment (EA) analyzing the potential environmental consequences of implementing any one of three action alternatives, as well as effects of the No-Action

Alternative. In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, Environmental Review

Procedures for Implementing the NEPA, as amended April 2016 and the Companion Manual for NOAA

Administrative Order 216-6A, NOAA has analyzed and considered the potential environmental consequences of its preferred action, the two viable action alternatives, and the No-Action Alternative, before committing to a specific course of action. Should NOAA conclude that the EA supports a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be required.

This EA identifies anticipated environmental consequences and, if applicable, presents mitigation measures that could be expected to reduce environmental effects.

No significant effects to the resources analyzed in the environmental assessment would result. A summary of anticipated impacts and recommended mitigation measures are presented in Table ES-1.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory ii

Table ES-1: Summary of Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Suggested Mitigation

Resources Anticipated Impact Suggested Mitigation

Land Use

Water Resources

Recreational Resources

Flora and Fauna

Wetlands

Floodplains

Coastal Zone Management

Farmlands

Noise

Transportation

Utilities and Solid Waste

Hazardous Materials

Environmental Justice

Cumulative

Action Alternative 1:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 2:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 3:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 1:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 2:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 3:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Air Quality Action Alternative 1:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 2:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 3:

No adverse effect

Action Alternative 1:

Standard and customary BMPs during construction should be applied to minimize construction-related emissions.

Action Alternative 2:

Standard and customary BMPs during construction should be applied to minimize construction-related emissions.

Action Alternative 3:

Standard and customary BMPs during construction should be applied to minimize construction-related emissions.

Visual Impacts Action Alternative 1:

Minor effect

Action Alternative 2:

Minor effect

Action Alternative 3:

Minor effect

Action Alternative 1:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 2:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 3:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Geological Resources Action Alternative 1:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 2:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 3:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 1:

Best management practices would be utilized for soil erosion control.

Action Alternative 2:

Best management practices would be utilized for soil erosion control.

Action Alternative 3:

Best management practices would be utilized for soil erosion control.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory iii

Table ES-1: Summary of Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Suggested Mitigation

Resources Anticipated Impact Suggested Mitigation

Cultural Resources Action Alternative 1:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 2:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 3:

Less than Significant

Action Alternative 1:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 2:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

Action Alternative 3:

No mitigation measures are recommended.

More details on mitigation measures are included in Section 4, Affected Resources and Environmental

Consequences and Section 6, Summary of Anticipated Impacts and Suggested Mitigation. Local and

State permits are also required prior to construction and include:

Sand Dunes Protection and Management (Critical Dune Areas) permit for soil excavation per

Part 353, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, from Michigan Department of

Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to discharge storm water from the MDEQ Water Resource Division.

Soil Erosion and Sediment Control permit for construction within 500 feet from Lake Michigan per Part 91 Rules from the state or township.

The Draft EA was made available, Wednesday, February 28 through Friday, March 30, 2018. An announcement in the Public Notices section of the Muskegon Chronicle was issued in printed and e-editions for seven days notifying the public of the availability of the Draft EA on a NOAA website, with instructions provided for receiving a printed copy for review and comment prior to the end of the comment period.

After the 30-day comment period, no public comments were received in response to the public notice in the Muskegon Chronicle. However, comments were received from public agencies and are provided in

Appendix E.

Comments received prior to the end of the 30-day comment period were reviewed and considered by

NOAA. Where appropriate, these comments are further addressed in this Final EA and have been considered in advance of any determination by NOAA to issue a FONSI or prepare an EIS.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory iv

Table of Contents Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... I

TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................ V

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED ........................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................................... 1-4

1.3 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................................... 1-7

2.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Action Alternative 1 ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Action Alternative 2 ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.3 Action Alternative 3 ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.4 No-Action Alternative .................................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................ 3-1

4.0 AFFECTED RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ................................... 4-1

4.1 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Geological Resources ................................................................................................................... 4-4

4.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................................................... 4-6

4.4 Water Resources ......................................................................................................................... 4-10

4.5 Recreational Resources .............................................................................................................. 4-12

4.6 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................................... 4-14

4.7 Flora and Fauna .......................................................................................................................... 4-27

4.8 Wetlands ..................................................................................................................................... 4-32

4.9 Floodplains ................................................................................................................................. 4-34

4.10 Coastal Zone Management ......................................................................................................... 4-38

4.11 Farmlands ................................................................................................................................... 4-43

4.12 Noise ........................................................................................................................................... 4-45

4.13 Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................................ 4-50

4.14 Utilities and Solid Waste ............................................................................................................ 4-52

4.15 Visual Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 4-54

4.16 Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................................... 4-57

4.17 Environmental Justice ................................................................................................................ 4-61

4.18 Cumulative Effects ..................................................................................................................... 4-64

5.0 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ......................................................................................................... 5-1

6.0 SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS AND SUGGESTED MITIGATION ......................... 6-1

7.0 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................... 7-1

8.0 PREPARERS ........................................................................................................................................... 8-1

9.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 9-1

Table of Contents Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1-1 Project Location …………………………………………………………………….......1-2

Figure 1.1-2 Project Vicinity………………………………………………………………………….1-3

Figure 1.1-3 Project Detail…………………………………………………………………………....1-6

Figure 4.6-1 Muskegon Life-Saving Station, circa 1950…………………………………………....4-18

Figure 4.6-2 Muskegon Life-Saving Station, circa 1905…………………………………………....4-18

Figure 4.6-3 Area of Potential Effect………………………………………………………………..4-19

Figure 4.6-4 Building #1 (left), Building #2 (center), and Building #3 (right)……………………...4-20

Figure 4.6-5 Building #1, Southside………………………………………………………………...4-21

Figure 4.6-6 Building #1, North (left) and West (right) sides……………………………………….4-21

Figure 4.9-1 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map……………………………………………………..4-36

LIST OF TABLES

Table ES-1 Summary of Anticipated Environmental Impacts and Suggested Mitigation…………….ii

Table 4.6-1 Resources Surveyed in Study Area……………………………………………………4-17

Table 4.12-1 Anticipated Aggregate Construction Activity Noise…………………………………..4-47

Table 4.17-1 Population Change by Geographic Area………………………………………………4-61

Table 4.17-2 Racial Profile by Geographic Area…………………………………………………….4-62

Table 4.17-3 Socioeconomic Factors by Geographic Area………………………………………….4-62

Table 6.0-1 Summary of Anticipated Impacts and Suggested Mitigation…………………………...6-1

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: List of Tribal Consultations Initiated and template of letter sent to tribes

Appendix B: Biological Site Inspection Photographs

Appendix C: Michigan Natural Feature Inventory Information

Appendix D: Reference Materials

Appendix E: Agency Comments

List of Acronyms Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory vii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation

APE Area of Potential Effects

ANT Aids to Navigation

BGS Below Ground Surface

BLM Bureau of Land Management

BMPs Best Management Practices

CAA Clean Air Act

CDA Critical Dune Areas

CESQG Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity

Generator

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

CWA Clean Water Act

CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act

CZMP Coastal Zone Management Program

DARD Department of Agricultural and Rural

Development dB Decibel dBA A-Weighted Decibel

DLARA Department of Licensing and

Regulatory Affairs

DNL Day-Night Average Sound Level

DPW Department of Public Works

EA Environmental Assessment

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EO Executive Order

ESA Endangered Species Act

FEMA Federal Emergency Management

Agency

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FIRMs Flood Insurance Rate Maps

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

FPPA Farmland Protection Policy Act

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GCR General Conformity Rule

GLERL Great Lakes Environmental Research

Laboratory

GSF Gross Square Feet

HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air

Conditioning

IGLD International Great Lakes Datum

Ldn Day-night sound level

LEED Leadership in Energy and

Environmental Design

LMFS Lake Michigan Field Station

LOS Level of Service

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental

Quality

MDNR Michigan Department of Natural

Resources

MIOSHA Michigan Occupational Safety and

Health Administration

MSA Metropolitan Statistical Areas

MSP Michigan State Police

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality

Standards

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation

Service

NREPA National Resources and Environmental

Protection Act

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

NSA Noise-sensitive Area

NWI Natural Wetland Inventory

O3 Ozone

List of Acronyms Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory viii

OAR Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric

Research

OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark

OSR Open Space Recreation District

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

Pb Lead

PM Particulate Matter

RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act

RECs Recognized Environmental Conditions

RMS Root-Mean-Square

SARDET Search and Rescue Detachment

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer

SIP State Implementation Plans

SO2 Sulfur Dioxide

SPL Sound Pressure Level

SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan

TES Threatened and Endangered Species

U.S. United States

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USDA United States Department of

Agriculture

USC United States Code

USCG United States Coast Guard

USDEA United States Drug Enforcement

Administration

USDOT United States Department of

Transportation

USEPA United States Environmental Protection

Agency

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USNRC United States Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

UST Underground Storage Tank

VdB Decibels of root-mean-square vibration velocity

WRD Water Resources Division

1 Purpose and Need Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 1-1

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.1.1 Background

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric

Research (OAR), Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL), operates the Lake

Michigan Field Station (LMFS) in western Michigan (see Figure 1.1-1). The LMFS is located at the channel entry between Lake Michigan and Muskegon Lake in Muskegon, Michigan (see Figure 1.1-2).

The NOAA LMFS address is 1431 Beach Street, Muskegon, MI 49441-1098. The mission of this

GLERL field station is to promote and conduct long-term observations, field work, and freshwater process studies essential for understanding and developing future ecological practices and decision-making.

There are currently 12 NOAA employees assigned to the LMFS facility, which includes research professionals, vessel crew, a marine superintendent and administrative personnel. Science at LMFS is primarily focused on field-based long-term observations and field-based shorter-term process studies in

Lake Michigan. The LMFS facilities can also provide a base and accommodations for visiting researchers from GLERL and partner agencies. There are three main structures, Buildings #1, #2 and #3, plus two garage structures and vessel berths, at LMFS (see Figure 1.1-3). These assets support GLERL's

Ecosystem Dynamics theme with on-site offices, laboratory, and storage facilities, and direct access to ship resources.

Assets at the LMFS provide a platform for long-term observations and research programs on Lake

Michigan and a home port for NOAA Great Lakes research vessels operating throughout the Great

Lakes. The proximity of the field station to Lake Michigan and its historic and recreational amenities provides a unique opportunity for engagement with visitors, non-profit organizations, recreational users, and members of the community. The LMFS also provides support to the local and regional community by further developing NOAA’s role in freshwater ecology, ecosystems management, coastal management, and water-based commerce.

Due to foundation subsidence, structural deformation and laboratory space inefficiencies, NOAA

GLERL is proposing to replace Building #3 at LMFS, used primarily for laboratory functions and marine specimen storage. Building #3 presently supports to following functions:

Filtration Laboratory for water filtration, bottle preparation, and short-term sample storage

Dark Room for light-sensitive work and currently accommodates water maker and hood

Ancillary Office Space/Instrument Room available to technicians for data entry, instrumentation set-up and uploading instrument data

Storage space for chemicals and archiving preserved samples

Field staging area to temporarily store field gear and prepare for vessel cruises

Auxiliary benchtop space for visiting scientists

90 294

Project Location

AE

CO

M O ak la nd C

A

/1 8/

U

SE

R el i.p op uc h

PA

TH

L

Pr oj ec ts

\G

IS

\P ro je ct s\ N

OA

A_

G re at La ke s_

ER

L\

_M ap s\

_M ap _P ro du ct io n_ an d_ R ep or ts \P re lim

St ud y\ Fi g1 _P ro je ct Lo ca tio n.

m xd

0 50

Miles

Source: ESRI World Topographic Map, 2016.

1 Purpose and Need Final

Figure

Project Location

AE

CO

M O ak la nd C

A

/1 8/

U

SE

R el i.p op uc h

PA

TH

L

Pr oj ec ts

\G

IS

\P ro je ct s\ N

OA

A_

G re at La ke s_

ER

L\

_M ap s\

_M ap _P ro du ct io n_ an d_ R ep or ts \P re lim

St ud y\ Fi g2 _P ro je ct Vi ci ni ty .m xd

0 0.5

Miles

Source: ESRI World Topographic Map, 2016.

1 Purpose and Need Final

Figure

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 1-4

1.2 PROPOSED ACTION

NOAA is proposing to demolish and rebuild Building #3 at the LMFS. A recent facility condition assessment of that structure has determined that it is undergoing gradual internal deformation, creating a tripping hazard and uneven flooring. The occupied and storage spaces within the current facility are also undersized and inefficient given its current and continuing use as a marine laboratory and repository for marine specimen storage. The Proposed Action is to demolish and remove the 2,500 square-foot (SF) building and its interior foundation slabs, replace soils beneath the interior foundation with engineering-grade fill, install a replacement slab foundation inside the existing perimeter foundation and construct a

5,000 SF laboratory building within the existing footprint.

Extracted soils from under the existing building slabs would be tested by a soils engineer upon removal and considered for reuse, blending or other treatments. Soil testing would examine contamination, and load-bearing capacity, among other characteristics. Replacement soils would meet allowable soil bearing values and geotechnical requirements. All materials removed from the site would be directed to an approved, legal fill site location or as required by a Part 353 permit under the Natural Resources and

Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, administered by the Michigan Department of

Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

For the design of Building #3, NOAA will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards for

Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67) and have an SOI-qualified architectural historian conduct a review at 30%

Design, confirm design changes at the 60% Design, and approve the 90% Design drawings, particularly for exterior elements. This process would be recorded in a memo to the project file. In general, to substantively meet the SOI Standards, the proposed design of Building #3 would be compatible, but not confused with, Building #1 (a structure eligible to the National Register of Historic Places). The proposed design would neither closely imitate Building #1 to the point that an observer would believe it was built in the same historic period, nor overwhelm Building #1’s setting with an obtrusive or incompatible design. This action would avoid adverse effects under the National Historic Preservation

Act and NEPA relative to effects to historic structures.

Three action alternatives were identified that are expected to accomplish this Proposed Action.

Construction Activities and Schedule

The design and construction of the proposed replacement laboratory building would include demolition, foundation removal, utility relocation, and the repurposing or recycling of materials followed by testing and preparation of sandy soils within the foundation envelope. Following established design codes and other engineering parameters, replacement of foundation slabs and construction of a wood or metal framed structure would occur. This includes interior ceiling, flooring, doors, windows, partitions, insulation, cabinetry, hardware, interior finishes, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), exhaust, electrical, plumbing, fixtures, appliances and exterior improvements, including site drainage, landscaping, parking, lighting and security systems. The proposed building’s design goal is to achieve

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification.

A crane, backhoe, front loader, bobcat loader, and haul trucks would be mobilized for demolition and/or construction, and any remnant or unnecessary underground utility infrastructure removed, over an estimated construction period beginning July 18, 2018, through April 18, 2019. High-bay door

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 1-5 installation and utility/fire protection measures would be installed and connected, followed by completion of interior framing, drywall, flooring and painting. During the construction work, NOAA employees that work in Building #3 would be temporarily relocated to Building #1.

Existing parking areas, adjacent to Buildings #3 and Building # 2, would be used for material staging during construction. The northern portion of the parking lot, adjacent to Building #1 and Building #2, would remain open for NOAA employees to use. Additionally, NOAA employees could utilize street parking and the public parking lot just east of the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) station. Roughly10 feet of driveway, between the staging area and fence located at the edge of the NOAA station, would be maintained throughout the construction period to provide vehicular and pedestrian access to the northern portion of the parking lot and the Muskegon South Pierhead Lighthouse and jetty (see Figure 1.1-3).

Operation and Maintenance

Upon completion of construction activities, NOAA would move laboratory equipment, furniture and storage containers into ready spaces and allow occupation by assigned personnel. A net increase of one full-time equivalent staff would result from the proposed laboratory replacement. Operations at the proposed facility would include laboratory analysis, specimen storage, and administrative/report preparation tasks in support of freshwater marine fisheries and aquatic resource studies.

Periodic delivery of supplies would occur periodically (approximately quarterly) during operations and to support laboratory functions and archival practices.

LAKE MICHIGAN

580'-0" 582'-0"

584'-0" 586'-0"

BUILDING 1

BUILDING 2

BUILDING 3

Project

Location

Staging Area

AE

CO

M Oa kla nd

CA

2/

/2

8 U

SE

R e li.p op uc h P

AT

H L

:\P roj ec ts\

GIS

\P roj ec ts\

NO

AA

_G rea tLa ke s_

ER

L\

_M ap s\

_M ap _P rod uc tio n_ an d_

Re po rts \P rel im

Stu dy

\F ig3

_P roj ec tD eta il.m xd

Project Location Staging Area Existing Fence

0 100 Feet

Elevation Survey Source: Gibbens Drake Scott Engineering, 2017.

Imagery Source: ESRI, June 2016.

NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmostpheric Research Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory

U.S. COAST

GUARD STATION

NOAA GLERL:

LAKE MICHIGAN FIELD STATION

Pere Marquette Park

Margaret Drake Elliot Park

VEHICULAR/PEDESTRIAN

ACCESS (10-FT WIDE)

1-6

Figure 1.1-3 Project Detail

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 1-7

1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED

1.3.1 Purpose

The purpose of the proposed action is to remedy serious structural deformities and other challenges caused by foundation subsidence, and to consolidate space for laboratory work and specimen storage at

LMFS to better meet its administration, office, maintenance and other storage functions. A replacement for Building #3 would provide an efficient, hazard-free work space that would complement the surrounding GLERL campus of buildings, garages, storage areas and grounds.

1.3.2 Need

Building #3 is a 2,600 square foot pre-engineered steel building constructed circa 1970 (actual date is unknown) and is used for storage and laboratory space. Based on a facility condition assessment report prepared by Cardno Government Services Division in January 2017, and a foundational subsidence analysis conducted in April 2016, it has been determined that Building #3 is in need of replacement due to structural deterioration from subsidence below its interior foundation and is subject to further degradation of its structural integrity. Subsidence and cracking of the interior floor foundation, consisting of four independent concrete slabs within to a perimeter foundation, has created trip hazards at the exterior doors and caused damage to interior walls. An assessment of the Building #3 foundation, conducted by a Structural Engineer and Geotechnical Consultant found the following:

The subsidence appears to be due to the existing soils below the slab being improperly prepared during construction of the building. The structure shows no signs of stress in the framing or siding, and visible connections of columns and beams were observed to be properly aligned, and the perimeter foundation appears to have remained at its original elevation while the interior slabs have subsided.

GLERL personnel have indicated that the layout of the existing building is not optimum for its current use and existing building services. When evaluated against the laboratory programs and facilities needed for existing fisheries research efforts at LMFS, the laboratory and storage functions currently at Building

#3 are both undersized and inefficient. In addition, electrical and HVAC systems have little or no capacity for future expansion of laboratory work.

Given these limitations, a complete replacement of Building #3 is proposed. The OAR and PPMD have determined that, with proper design and layout, an approximately 5,000 SF structure will meet the

LMRL research and storage needs for a Building #3 replacement.

NEPA Analysis

Per Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) under 42 U.S. Code [USC]

§4332, and Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing Procedural Provisions of

NEPA at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1500-1508, NOAA has prepared this Environmental

Assessment (EA) analyzing the potential environmental consequences of implementing any one of two

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 1-8 action alternatives, as well as effects of the No-Action Alternative. In accordance with NOAA

Administrative Order 216-6A, Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, and the associated Companion Manual, and Executive Orders 11988, Floodplain Management, and 11990, Protection of Wetlands, NOAA has analyzed and considered the potential environmental consequences of its proposed action under three viable action alternatives, and the No-Action Alternative, before making a commitment to a specific course of action. A No-Action Alternative is presumed to be a condition in which the operations continue until occupancy is no longer considered appropriate due to impending structure instability or failure.

This EA identifies anticipated environmental consequences and, if applicable, presents mitigation measures that could be expected to reduce environmental effects. Should NOAA conclude that the EA supports a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be required.

2 Action Alternatives Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 2-1

2.0 ACTION ALTERNATIVES

To achieve its Proposed Action and meet the design criteria and space requirements for GLERL, three action alternatives, a preferred action and two viable action alternatives are being evaluated by NOAA in addition to a no-action alternative, as required under NEPA.

2.1 ACTION ALTERNATIVE 1

Provide a new 5,000 SF wood-frame, two-story structure that would be set on the existing building exterior foundation footprint. Provide for architectural consistency with nearby structures, including

Building #1, as appropriate.

2.2 ACTION ALTERNATIVE 2

Provide a new pre-engineered metal two-story structure that would be set on the existing building foundation footprint. Provide for architectural consistency with nearby structures, including Building #1, as appropriate.

2.3 ACTION ALTERNATIVE 3

Provide a new wood-frame, single-story structure that would be set on the existing building foundation and cantilevers out to provide square footage needed to meet a minimum space requirement of 4,500 SF.

Provide for architectural consistency with nearby structures, including Building #1, as appropriate.

2.4 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No-Action Alternative is a condition in which LMFS Building #3 is not replaced or removed. The existing operations at this structure would continue indefinitely until a change is required in response to eventual degradation of the structure and its habitability.

2 Action Alternatives Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 2-2

3 Existing Environment Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 3-1

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

The GLERL LMFS is a NOAA research facility located in Muskegon, MI. The LMFS property was originally developed in 1905 by the U.S. Life Saving Service. The facility was transferred to the USCG in 1915 and then to NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR) branch in 1990. The

LMFS currently has three main occupied buildings.

Building #1, which houses administrative offices and some laboratory space, is a two-story wood-framed structure at the north end of the site. It was constructed prior to 1905, then renovated in 2003, restoring the historic exterior appearance of the structure.

Building #2, which provides storage and shop space for vessel maintenance, is located in the center portion of the site. The original building is a 2 story concrete block structure, constructed in the mid-1970s, then renovated in 2013. A high-bay pre-engineered steel building addition was also constructed in 2013.

Building #3 is a typical pre-engineered steel building, measuring 40 feet (north-south) by

65 feet (east-west). There is a perimeter footing, with eight integral spread footings supporting the columns (one at each corner and two at equal spaces along each of the long sides). The roof of the building is framed with steel beams and purlins supporting a steel panel roof with batt insulation. The exterior walls are framed with steel wind girts spanning between the columns, with steel panel siding and batt insulation. The interior walls are predominantly wood stud-framed with a variety of finishes including gypsum wallboard, plywood and metal panels.

According to an April 2016 Draft Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation report by ESC Midwest, LCC, the Sand “FILL” soils encountered immediately below the Building #3 floor slabs and to depths ranging from about 5½ to 6½ feet below the floor slab, where groundwater was encountered, and did not exhibit any odors or other obvious evidence of having been impacted by contaminants, leaking sewer or water lines.

A parking area and driveway are located immediate to the east of the site, with the USCG Station

Muskegon further east beyond the property fence. The west side contains large rock rip-rap and the Lake

Michigan shoreline. To the north are the remaining structures within LMFS campus and the waterway between Lake Michigan and Muskegon Lake. Refer to Figure 1.1-3 for an aerial view of the area at and near Building #3.

3 Existing Environment Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 3-2

4 Affected Resources and Environmental Consequences Final Environmental Assessment

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-1

4.0 AFFECTED RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This section describes the existing conditions for key resource topics, the anticipated environmental consequences from implementation of the Proposed Action (at each alternative) and the No-Action

Alternative, and any mitigation measures that would avoid, reduce, or minimize any adverse effects of the Proposed Action.

4.1 LAND USE

4.1.1 Regulatory Setting

The City of Muskegon Master Land Use Plan, adopted April 1997, is a tool used by local land use planners to guide the process of administering zoning and other land ordinances; developing, coordinating and preparing specialized plans; addressing issues such as neighborhoods, natural resources and land development proposals; analyzing future use; and augmenting current land development regulations.

The project site area has been designated by the City of Muskegon’s Zoning Ordinance as an Open

Space Recreation Districts (OSR), which is intended to provide permanent spaces in the City for recreational activities including: hiking, biking, jogging or ski trails; fishing docks and piers; parks, playgrounds and playfields and wildlife preserves. Special land uses must be permitted by the City. The intent of the Recreation Districts zoning is to allow mixed land uses which are compatible to each other, while prohibiting uses which would not be compatible or harmonious with permitted uses (City of

Muskegon, 2012).

The Public Buildings Amendments of 1988 (40 USC 601), Public Law 100-678, requires a federal agency to comply with a nationally recognized model building code and other applicable nationally recognized codes, such as electrical, life safety, and plumbing codes. Federal agencies shall consider state or local zoning and similar laws and consult with appropriate officials and make plans available upon request. State and local government may make recommendations and the federal agency should give due consideration to those recommendations and local conditions. However, no action, fine or penalty may be brought against the federal government for failure to meet the requirements of this

Public Law, or for failure to carry out any State or local government recommendation.

Executive Order (EO) 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Program, directs federal agencies to provide opportunities for consultation to elected officials of state and local governments and to provide state and local officials the opportunity to comment on actions that could affect their jurisdictions. The

EO was issued with the intent to foster intergovernmental partnership and to increase the reliance of state and local processes coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct federal development (OMB, 2015).

4.1.2 Affected Resources

The project site is located at 1431 Beach Street, Muskegon, Michigan. The site is located adjacent to the eastern shore of Lake Michigan. Immediately north of the project area at Building #3 are NOAA’s other

LMFS facilities and buildings, including Building #1, Building #2, a garage structure and a storage shelter.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-2

To the east of the LMFS is USCG Station Muskegon, one of only six stations in the Coast Guard with both aids to navigation and Search and Rescue capabilities. To the north of LMFS is a public walkway to the Muskegon South Pierhead Lighthouse and the Muskegon Ship Channel. To the south is undeveloped recreational areas and lake beachfront. To the west is Lake Michigan. The surrounding community is mainly comprised of dune and beachfront properties, City parks, and residential developments. The City of Muskegon’s Zoning Ordinance has designated the general area as OSR

District. The project site within LMFS is currently occupied by Building #3, used as a laboratory and marine specimen storage facility.

4.1.3 Environmental Consequences

Action Alternative 1 (Preferred Alternative)

The Preferred Alternative would be consistent with the City of Muskegon’s allowable land use and associated restrictions. The area is zoned for recreational oriented facilities. However, special land uses are permitted under the purview of Section 2332 after review and approval of the use. The LMFS facilities have been an allowable use by the City as NOAA’s LMFS since 1990 and as a USCG station at this location since 1905 (US Coast Guard, no date). The proposed replacement building at Building #3 would meet City building height, setback and site coverage requirements per its OSR zoning. In addition, NOAA intends to seek review and input from local building officials regarding the design and architecture of the proposed construction project and adhere to local recommendations to the extent practicable. There would be no change in land use and no adverse effect to existing city, state or federal land uses under the Preferred Alternative.

The proposed action at this alternative would result in no adverse effect to land use.

Action Alternative 2

Similar to the Preferred Alternative, Action Alternative 2 would be consistent with the City of

Muskegon’s Master Land Use Plan and zoning requirements, since the current use of the site would remain unchanged.

The Action Alternative 2 would result in no adverse effect to land use.

Action Alternative 3

Except for the potential for articulated structural elements extending beyond existing lot boundaries under NOAA control, Action Alternative 3 would be consistent with the City of Muskegon’s Master

Land Use Plan and zoning requirements, since the current use of the site would remain unchanged.

The Action Alternative 3 would result in no adverse effect to land use.

No-Action Alternative

Under No-Action Alternative, the demolition and rebuilding of Building # 3 would not occur. No adverse effects to existing land use would result.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-3

4.1.4 Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required for each of the Action Alternatives or for the No-Action

Alternative in relation to land use management.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-4

4.2 GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.2.1 Regulatory Setting

The GLERL facility is situated on the shore of Lake Michigan in a designated Critical Dune Area

(CDA), but not located within a designated high risk erosion area. It is surrounded by critical dune, high risk erosion, and local recreational areas. The facility is Public Act 451 of 1994 includes provisions in

Part 323 for the protection and management of shorelands within the State of Michigan, in particular, those located in environmental sensitive or areas subject to erosion. A Part 353, Sand Dunes Protection and Management permit under the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, is required for the removal and construction of new structures in CDA (MDEQ, 2003). A MDEQ/ U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Joint Permit Application would be used to describe and quantify proposed activities regulated by the MDEQ and/or the USACE. A Soil Erosion and Sediment Control permit is also required.

4.2.2 Affected Resources

The GLERL facility is located south of the Muskegon Ship Channel on the shore of Lake Michigan.

Quaternary geology in this area is predominantly dune sand underlain by the Marshall Formation

(bedrock). Major geologic units found in Muskegon County consist of the Marshall Sandstone, Michigan Formation, Coldwater Shale, and Bayport Limestone, all Mississippian in age. The Marshall

Formation overlies the Coldwater Shale (conformably) and underlies the Michigan Formation

(conformably) and is primarily comprised of gray to tan fine to coarse grained sandstone with minor amounts of siltstone. Maximum thickness of the Marshall formation is found within the center of the

Michigan basin decreasing towards the rim. Outcrops of the Marshall Formation are typically found within the southern rim of the basin. Quaternary geology is comprised of dune sand. Geotechnical reports prepared for recent renovations to the adjacent Building #2 at LMFS indicate loose to very loose sands to a depth of at least 15 feet below ground surface (bgs). General Quaternary geology of

Michigan is comprised of glacial till, which likely exists beneath the dune sand.

The GLERL facility at LMFS is located within the Central Stable Tectonic Region, an area of low seismic activity. Therefore, the probability of liquefaction of the soils at the site due to seismic activity is low.

Nancy Cuncannan and Matthew Occhipinti at the Michigan DEQ were contacted regarding the project and their comments are provided in Appendix E. Ms. Cuncannan stated that a permit would be required from DEQ Water Resources Division (WRD) under Part 353, Sand Dunes Protection and Management, for the removal and reconstruction of the building. Mr. Occhipinti stated that a Soil Erosion and

Sediment Control Soil Erosion permit is required before a Part 353 permit can be issued.

4.2.3 Environmental Consequences

No adverse impacts to geological resources or high risk erosional areas are anticipated for the reconstruction of Building #3 under Action Alternative 1. As described under Section 1.2, Proposed

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-5

Action, extracted soils from under the existing building slabs would be tested for removal and/or reuse, blending or other treatments, by a soils engineer. Soils would have to meet allowable soil bearing values and design recommendations and would be tested to examine contamination, strength, load-bearing capacity among other characteristics. All materials removed from the site would have to go to an approved, legal fill site location or as required under a Part 353, Sand Dunes Protection and

Management permit from MDEQ. A Soil Erosion and Sediment Control permit and Part 353 permit will be required before the removal and construction of Building #3 commences to ensure proper management and protection of environmental sensitive areas. Additionally, a submittal of draft and final design specifications to the Water Resources Division is recommended to confirm this finding remains accurate prior to project implementation.

The project would comply with Part 353, Sand Dune Protection and Management and best management practices (BMPs) would be utilized for soil erosion control. Therefore, impacts to geological resources would be less than significant.

The project would comply with Part 353, Sand Dune Protection and Management and BMPs would be utilized for soil erosion control. Similar to the Preferred Alternative, impacts to geological resources or high risk erosional areas from the reconstruction of Building #3 under Action Alternative 2 would be less than significant.

The project would comply with Part 353, Sand Dune Protection and Management and BMPs would be utilized for soil erosion control. Similar to the Preferred Alternative, impacts to geological resources or high risk erosional areas from the reconstruction of Building #3 under Action Alternative 3 would be less than significant.

Under No-Action Alternative, the demolition and rebuilding of Building #3 would not occur. No adverse effects to geological resources would result.

4.2.4 Mitigation Measures

BMPs would be utilized for soil erosion and sediment control.

Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory 4-6

4.3 AIR QUALITY

4.3.1 Regulatory Setting

Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and its amendments, the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA) identifies air pollutants that cause or contribute to the endangerment of human health and or environmental welfare, and establishes air quality “criteria” that guide the establishment of air quality standards to regulate these pollutants (42 U.S.C. §7408 - §7409). To date, USEPA has established such criteria for six air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide

(NO2), ozone (O3), fine and respirable particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and sulfur dioxide (SO2), and has subsequently promulgated National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) meant to safeguard public health (i.e., primary NAAQS) and environmental welfare (i.e., secondary NAAQS).

For the purposes of appraising compliance with the NAAQS, and conjunction with the MDEQ, USEPA collects and evaluates ambient (i.e., “outdoor”) monitoring data on a geographic basis, delineated by

Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA) or Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) established by the U.S.

Office of Management and Budget and U.S. Census Bureau. From each ambient monitor within a

CBSA/MSA, USEPA derives criteria pollutant design values, which are statistics that describe the air quality status of a given location relative to the level of the NAAQS. Areas where monitored ambient air concentrations (i.e., design values) are within an applicable NAAQS are considered in attainment of that

NAAQS. If sufficient data are not available to make a determination, the area is instead deemed attainment/unclassifiable. Areas where monitored ambient air concentrations exceed the NAAQS are designated by USEPA as nonattainment areas. Lastly, areas that have historically violated the NAAQS, but have since instituted controls and programs that have successfully remedied these violations are known as maintenance areas.

States with nonattainment areas within their jurisdiction are charged with developing air quality control plans, called State Implementation Plans (SIP), which include strategies and measures to bring the area back into compliance with the NAAQS by an USEPA-prescribed regulatory deadline, or maintain compliance once attainment is achieved.

The USEPA promulgated a General Conformity Rule (GCR) (Section 110 of the CAA and Title 40 CFR

Part 51.853) that requires responsible federal agencies to make a determination of conformity with the

SIP for a major undertaking. Each federal action within a non-attainment or maintenance area must be reviewed to determine whether it (1) qualifies for an exemption…