SAV_Mitigation_Plan_081814.pdf

SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION

MITIGATION PLAN

FOR THE

MODERNIZATION AND REPAIR

OF PIERS 2 AND 3 AT

MILITARY OCEAN TERMINAL CONCORD, CA

AUGUST 2014

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: MAY NOT BE RELEASABLE UNDER FOIA

DO NOT FORWARD TO PERSONS WITHOUT A DEMONSTRATED

OFFICIAL NEED FOR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN

(This page intentionally left blank)

SAV Mitigation Plan for the Modernization and FOUO - Not for Public Release Repair of Piers 2 and 3 at Military Ocean Terminal Concord

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1-1

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 EXISTING SAV AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Existing SAV ...................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Potential Impacts to Submerged Aquatic Vegetation ................................................... 3-5

4.0 SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION MITIGATION STRATEGY ............................................. 4-1

4.1 Pre- and Post-Construction Surveys .............................................................................. 4-1

4.2 Net Reduction in Bay Coverage....................................................................................... 4-3

4.3 Removal of Unused Waterfront Structures .................................................................... 4-3

4.4 Onsite Restoration ............................................................................................................ 4-8

5.0 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 5-1

6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 6-1

Table of Contents i August 2014

Repair of Piers 2 and 3 at Military Ocean Terminal Concord FOUO - Not for Public Release

List of Figures

Figure 1. MOTCO Property ...................................................................................................................... 1-2

Figure 2. SAV and Other Habitat Types at MOTCO .............................................................................. 3-2

Figure 3. Habitats within the Proposed Action Area ............................................................................ 3-3

Figure 4. Other Regional Locations of SAV (Boyer 2012) .................................................................... 3-6

Figure 5. Suitable Reference Sites with SAV to the East (Top) and West (Bottom) of the Project Area ........................................................................................................... 4-2

Figure 6. MOTCO Unused Waterfront Structures ................................................................................. 4-4

Figure 7. MOTCO Unused Lighter Berths 4 and 5 ................................................................................ 4-5

List of Tables

Table 1. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in the Proposed Action Area ............................................. 3-5

Table 2. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Potentially Impacted at Pier 2 ............................................ 3-5

Table 3. Unused Lighter Berths 4 and 5 Overwater Area ..................................................................... 4-6

Table 4. Unused Waterfront Structure Pile Details ............................................................................... 4-8 ii Table of Contents

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

DOD Department of Defense

EFH Essential Fish Habitat EIS Environmental Impact Statement

GPS Global Positioning System

HDPE high-density polyethylene

INRMP Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan

MOTCO Military Ocean Terminal Concord

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

PFMC Pacific Fishery Management Council ppt parts per thousand

SAV submerged aquatic vegetation

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Acronyms and Abbreviations iii

(This page intentionally left blank) iv Acronyms and Abbreviations

1.0 INTRODUCTION

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with those actions necessary to modernize and repair Piers 2 and 3 at Military Ocean Terminal Concord (MOTCO) to support current and future Department of Defense (DOD) missions in the Pacific theater of operations (Figure 1). The proposed action has five distinct components:

• Partial demolition of existing Pier 2 and reconstruction of structural elements;

• Replacement of pier-side infrastructure and supporting facilities at Pier 2;

• Upgrades to shore-side roads and electrical infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of Piers 2 and 3;

• Repair piles and selected structural elements at Pier 3; and

• Maintenance dredging to -32 feet mean lower low water plus 2 feet overdepth dredging to compensate for inaccuracies in the dredging operation.

As part of the development of the EIS, numerous natural resources surveys, including a survey of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), were conducted to characterize the existing environment in the vicinity of Piers 2 and 3. SAV consisting of pondweed (Stuckenia spp.), which is considered a sensitive and ecologically important habitat in Suisun Bay, was found in area of potential impact in shallow water at Piers 2 and 3. In the Army’s Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultations with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), as well as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation with NMFS, the Army agreed to mitigate project-related net losses of pondweed SAV at a 1 to 1 ratio. It was agreed that this mitigation would be accomplished through a combination of 1) compensation through the removal of overwater structures to create unshaded habitat suitable for pondweed SAV and 2) onsite restoration of impacted areas of SAV. While the extent of impact to SAV will not be known until after the repair of Pier 3 and modernization and repair Pier 2 are complete, this plan is intended to provide sufficient detail on compensation and restoration measures to enable the adequacy of these measures to be evaluated in the context of the Biological Opinions being prepared by USFWS and NMFS.

Chapter 1.0: Introduction 1-1

Figure 1. MOTCO Property

1-2 Chapter 1.0: Introduction

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND

Piers 2 and 3 were originally constructed in 1944 as all timber structures. In the 1960s, they were modified with the addition of 15-foot concrete apron extensions on the waterside of the piers and concrete approach trestles on the east side. Pier 3 was modified again in 1999 with the addition of concrete crane rail girders on both the waterside and the landside of the main platform to support two new container gantry cranes and shore-side electrical support structures. The fender system along the north end of the main pier structure at Pier 2 was upgraded in 2002.

Pier 3 is in need of repairs to be able to maintain its limited operational capability through 2019.

The pile protection plan calls for the protection of up to 1,753 of the most structurally significant timber piles located under the Main Platform that are currently being infested by marine borers.

The pile protection plan involves installing non-reactive high-density polyethylene (HDPE) jackets around the timber piles. As part of the installation process, water jets would be used to clean existing piles to remove rotted portions and any marine or biological growth from the pile.

The HDPE pile wrap would be installed 2 feet above the highest tide level down to 2 feet below the mudline. No dredging is required for this project. It is expected that wrapping the jackets around the pilings may result in temporary increases in turbidity in the vicinity of the project but that turbidly will be short-term and have minimal impact on water quality and surrounding natural resources.

Modernization of Pier 2 would require the replacement of the existing dual-level deck and fender system with a single-level deck, replacement of existing wooden piles with pre-stressed concrete piles, installation of new crane rails, and the addition of two 80-long-ton container cranes. The west trestle approach would be demolished and extended, and the east trestle would be extended, repaired, and upgraded. A third access trestle would be used to accommodate forklifts and provide pedestrian access to a new Operations Building / Breakroom after the existing Operations Building / Breakroom is demolished. Pier-side supporting facilities including mooring hardware, office space, removable bull-rail, potable water, sanitary sewer, fire protection, lightning protection, and high mast lighting would be repaired or replaced. Existing antiterrorism/force protection measures would be reinstalled or replaced. A drainage system and treatment device would be added to the pier to remove contaminants from surface runoff before it enters Suisun Bay.

Chapter 2.0: Project Background 2-1

(This page intentionally left blank)

2-2 Chapter 2.0: Project Background

3.0 EXISTING SAV AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS

3.1 EXISTING SAV

SAV and other habitat types (the latter from the San Francisco Estuary Institute EcoAtlas Baylands Mapping Project), as mapped in MOTCO’s Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP), are shown in Figure 2 (USACE 2011).

Suisun Bay represents a brackish tidal environment with variable salinities, ranging from oligohaline (0.5–5 parts per thousand [ppt]) to mesohaline (5–18 ppt) and polyhaline (18–30 ppt) (USACE 2011). Tides in Suisun Bay as elsewhere along the West Coast are mixed semi-diurnal, with two high and low tides of unequal amplitude occurring approximately every 24.8 hours, and tidal amplitude increasing or diminishing concurrent with lunar cycles. The vertical distance between the highest high tides and lowest low tides is approximately 8 feet at MOTCO.

Except during periods of heavy outflows from the Delta, the dominant currents of Suisun Bay are those associated with the rising or falling tides. Large freshwater inflows enter Suisun Bay from Denverton Creek and the Delta. Because of strong winds and shallow depths, mixing typically occurs throughout the water column, leading to well-oxygenated waters.

The subtidal waters and substrates of Suisun Bay help to sustain a number of commercially important fisheries and as a result have been designated as Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) under three Fishery Management Plans, including those for Pacific Coast Salmon, Pacific Coast Groundfish, and Coastal Pelagic Species. See Section 3.5.3.2 of the EIS for further descriptions of existing EFH within the proposed project area.

The majority of deepwater subtidal habitat in Suisun Bay is comprised of unconsolidated bottom sediments. Deep bay/channel habitat is associated with the John F. Baldwin Ship Channel, which is just offshore of MOTCO (between the mainland and the islands) and the seaward edge of the MOTCO piers where depths are 30–40 feet below mean lower low water.

Shallow bay habitat is found inshore of the MOTCO piers as well as in the sheltered lees of the piers and headlands. Although not reported previously at MOTCO, numerous beds of SAV originally thought to consist of eelgrass (Zostera marina) were observed in a small boat survey conducted in 2009 and documented in MOTCO’s INRMP (Figure 2) (USACE 2011).

Accordingly, for the Piers 2 and 3 projects, an SAV survey was conducted in May 2013 to determine the composition and extent of SAV in areas of potential impact. The results of that survey are shown in Figure 3. While no eelgrass was observed in the project vicinity, areas dominated by California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus) and pondweed (Photos 1 and 2) do exist. Pondweed SAV at MOTCO appears to consist of sago pondweed (Stuckenia pectinata), but fineleaf pondweed (S. filiformis), and/or Nevada pondweed (S. striata) may also be present based on research by Dr. Kathryn Boyer (San Francisco State University; 2012) and reference to taxonomic keys.

Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts 3-1

Figure 2. SAV and Other Habitat Types at MOTCO

3-2 Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts

Figure 3. Habitats within the Proposed Action Area

Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts 3-3

Photo 1. California bulrush observed in shallow waters within the interior of Pier 2

Photo 2. Pondweed observed within the interior of both Piers 2 and 3

The amount of SAV estimated to be present within the proposed action area is listed in Table 1.

As shown in Figure 2, there are other beds of SAV, assumed to be pondweed, along MOTCO’s

3-4 Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts shoreline. These occurrences of pondweed at MOTCO in the western part of Suisun Bay augment the distributional data previously assembled by Dr. Kathryn Boyer of San Francisco State University and colleagues as shown in Figure 4 (Boyer 2012).

Table 1. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation in the Proposed Action Area

Type of SAV Location Pier 2 Pier 3 Between Piers 2 and 3

Pondweed (acres) 4.39 16.53 1.91 Bulrush (acres) 1.09 0 0

Total SAV (acres) 5.48 16.53 1.91 Grand Total SAV (acres) 23.92

3.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION

Based on the proposed work at Pier 3, direct impacts to SAV are unlikely, but plants could still be affected by localized bottom disturbance and turbidity associated with the pile wrapping.

Therefore, pre- and post-construction surveys would be conducted during the growing season to determine project impacts (see Section 4). At Pier 2, areas of bulrush (low intertidal rather than subtidal) and pondweed are within the footprints of the new Pier 2 construction (Table 2). The area of potential direct impact/permanent loss is estimated at 0.05 acres. These 0.05 acres of direct impact/permanent loss would be due to the new Pier 2 footprint displacing the existing SAV. An additional 1.30 acres of SAV is considered potentially impacted within a 100-ft disturbance buffer to account for the potential uprooting or burial of plants as bottom sediments are disturbed by pile extraction and the maneuvering of equipment and worker access during demolition and construction activities. The net gain in uncovered surface at project completion, however, would make additional habitat available for SAV establishment. Specifically, under the proposed action there would be a net decrease in the overall pier facility footprint by approximately 27,222 square feet and a reduction of the west trestle by 989 square feet. In addition, rotating the pier would result in an overall reduction in the overwater footprint that covers shallower water habitat areas (depth of less than 12 feet) while the footprint covering deeper water habitat areas would increase slightly. This would provide an estimated overall net gain of 0.781 acres of unshaded subtidal area. Therefore, the net long-term impact to SAV would be largely offset unless larger areas of SAV are incidentally removed or otherwise diminished beyond the buffer area as a result of project activities. Pre- and post-construction surveys would be used to determine the extent of project impacts and additional mitigation requirements (see Section 4).

Table 2. Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Potentially Impacted at Pier 2

Type of SAV Potential Impact Within 100-foot Buffer Area Permanent Loss

Pondweed (acres) 0.60 0.01 Bulrush (acres) 0.70 0.04

Total SAV (acres) 1.30 0.05

Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts 3-5

Figure 4. Other Regional Locations of SAV (Boyer 2012)

3-6 Chapter 3.0: Existing SAV and Potential Impacts

4.0 SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION MITIGATION STRATEGY

For the purposes of this mitigation strategy, the upper limit of possible SAV mitigation is 5.48 acres. This reflects the notional catastrophic loss of the total amount of SAV within Pier 2 (see Table 1 and Figure 3), not the estimated loss of up to 1.35 acres of direct impacts plus SAV within the 100-foot buffer of the proposed Pier 2 project footprint (see Table 2). The Army is proposing a 1 to 1 mitigation ratio for any net loss (based on the results of the pre- and post-construction surveys) of SAV acreage attributable to the project. Components of the strategy are described below.

4.1 PRE- AND POST-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS

Pre- and post-construction surveys would be conducted during the growing season for pondweed, which is approximately April through October (please note aerial imagery on Google Earth from 2011 clearly shows the persistence of SAV beds in the project area from August through October); but not more than 6 months before the start of work or after the completion of work. Surveys would be conducted at the project-work site and at both up- and downstream reference sites during a single two-week period. Allowing a 6-month gap between the surveys and the start or completion of work is necessary because work may need to start prior to or very early during the growing season, and work may conclude near the end of the growing season.

In such circumstances, the best data for pre-construction SAV would be from the previous growing season, up to 6 months earlier; whereas the best data for post-construction SAV and potential project effects would be from the subsequent growing season, up to 6 months later. A separate round of surveys would be conducted for the Pier 3 and Pier 2 projects because of the time lapse in project activities. Surveys would be conducted using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit deployed from a small, shallow-draft boat, to map discrete SAV polygons to sub-meter accuracy. Post-construction surveys of reference sites and impacted areas will be conducted by the same methods as the pre-construction surveys as soon as practicable during the growing season, but in any case not more than 6 months following the completion of construction activities.

At each reference site, mapping would continue until approximately 12 acres of SAV is mapped in each, equaling the same total acreage (24 acres) that occurs in the combined project area (see Table 1). Polygons made of different species or combinations of species would be noted.

Concurrent with the pre-construction surveys, voucher specimens of the species comprising SAV would be collected and sent to a taxonomic authority for identification. Results of the pre-construction surveys would be detailed in reports provided to NMFS and USFWS prior to construction.

Since there have been no long-term studies with repeated surveys to map pondweed SAV in Suisun Bay, variability in the extent and persistence of individual beds over time is unknown. To

Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy 4-1 separate project-related impacts from natural variation requires comparisons to reference sites that are not affected by the project. Insofar the project site is located in a region of sharp environmental changes over short spatial and temporal scales, it is appropriate to have reference sites both up- and downstream of the project area. Suitable references sites with SAV visible in shallow water are shown in Figure 5. Both sites are located offshore MOTCO property;

one reference site is located west of the Port Chicago Memorial and the second reference site is located at the eastern end of Pier 3.

Figure 5. Suitable Reference Sites with SAV to the East (Top) and West (Bottom) of the Project Area

4-2 Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy

The following formula is proposed for use in estimating the project-related change in SAV cover:

Pre-Construction SAV Coverage at Project Site

Multiplied by

Post-Construction SAV Coverage at Reference Sites Combined Pre-Construction SAV Coverage at Reference Sites Combined

Minus

Post-Construction SAV Coverage at Project Site

Equals

Project-Related SAV Acreage Mitigation Requirement

The above formula is based on the reasoning that natural changes at the project site should be proportional to those observed at the reference sites combined; therefore, the difference should be attributable to the project. A negative number would imply a net benefit, and thus no mitigation requirement.

4.2 NET REDUCTION IN BAY COVERAGE

If, based on the results of the pre- and post-construction surveys, it is determined that SAV mitigation is needed, the first component of SAV mitigation will be met by the net acreage change in covered surface resulting from the reconstruction of Pier 2. As stated in Section 3.2, under the proposed action there would be a net decrease in the overall Pier 2 footprint, a reduction of Pier 2’s west trestle, and a rotation of Pier 2 which will result in an overall net gain of 0.781 acres of unshaded subtidal area. The actual net change will be calculated by the Army following the completion of Pier 2 construction. Demolition and construction at Pier 2 will be closely monitored by the Army, and any changes in design that result in changes in overwater coverage, either of the existing structures or the new structures, will be documented and reported to NMFS and USFWS. Pending final calculations, a net reduction of 0.781 acres would be applied to SAV mitigation if needed, subject to adjustment based on construction monitoring.

4.3 REMOVAL OF UNUSED WATERFRONT STRUCTURES

If, based on the results of the pre- and post-construction surveys, it is determined additional SAV mitigation is needed above and beyond that provided in the net reduction in bay coverage (i.e., approximately 0.781 acres), the Army proposes to remove unused waterfront structures.

There are five unused piling structures (unused structures 1–3 and unused lighter berths 4 and

5) adjacent to the Barge Pier at MOTCO, four to the west and one to the east toward Pier 2 (Figure 6). The piling structures have either platform piling or cluster piling. Intact platform structures are present at unused lighter berths 4 and 5 (Figure 7 and Photo 3).

Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy 4-3

Figure 6. MOTCO Unused Waterfront Structures

4-4 Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy

Figure 7. MOTCO Unused Lighter Berths 4 and 5

Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy 4-5

Photo 3. Platform Structures at Unused Lighter Berths 4 and 5

As shown in Table 3, the total estimated unshaded areas that would become available from the removal of the platform structures at lighter berths 4 and 5 equals 0.21 acres.

Table 3. Unused Lighter Berths 4 and 5 Overwater Area

Lighter Berth Number

Dimensions Calculated Overwater Area Length (feet) Width (feet) Square Feet Acres

4 802.0 5.0 4,010.0 0.09 5 1,070.0 5.0 5,350.0 0.12

Total 1,872.0 5.0 9,360 0.21

The other unused structures do not have an intact platform structure. In general, the cluster piles configuration west of the Barge Pier consists of two, 18-inch diameter center piles surrounded by 10, 12–16-inch inch outer piles (total 12 piles) (Photo 4). There are also numerous cluster piles with one or two, 16–18-inch center piles with eight, 12-inch outer piles (total of 9–10 piles) (Photo 5). A summary of pile details for each unused MOTCO structure is provided in Table 4. To be conservative, the Army assumed all 1,143 piles were 12 inches in diameter. Therefore, the total estimated amount of unoccupied bottom surface that would become available from the removal of the cluster piles equals 0.02 acres.

By removing unused structures 1–3 and unused lighter berths 4 and 5 at MOTCO, a total estimate of 0.21 acres of unshaded area and 0.02 of unoccupied bottom surface would be made available for colonization by pondweed

4-6 Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy

Photo 4. 12-Pile Cluster

Photo 5. 9-Pile Cluster and Platform Piles

Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy 4-7

Table 4. Unused Waterfront Structure Pile Details Unused

Structure Number

Total Number Clusters

Number 12-Pile

Clusters

Number 10-Pile

Clusters

Number 9- Pile

Clusters

Number 6-Pile

Clusters

Number Platform Clusters

Total Number of Piles

1 19 15 3 1 0 11 241 2 12 10 2 0 0 7 154 3 19 15 4 0 0 0 220 4 12 11 1 0 0 43 228 5 21 4 0 12 5 57 300

Total 83 55 10 13 5 118 1,143

4.4 ONSITE RESTORATION

Pondweed SAV has not been the subject of restoration in Suisun Bay, and onsite restoration should be considered an experimental mitigation method. However, if based on the results of the pre- and post-construction surveys, it is determined additional SAV mitigation is needed above and beyond that provided in the net reduction in bay coverage and removal of MOTCO’s unused waterfront structures (i.e., greater than approximately 1.011 acres), the Army will seek to incorporate regional expertise with pondweed, as well as previous success in similar restoration efforts in comparable environments. In addition, the Army may contract with a qualified firm and/or university researcher to conduct pondweed SAV restoration along the MOTCO shoreline.

Based on the calculated need for mitigation via restoration, the Army would solicit proposals via a request for proposal, selecting the best qualified/best value proposal to prepare and implement a unique MOTCO SAV Restoration Plan. The MOTCO SAV Restoration Plan would be reviewed by NMFS and USFWS and approved prior to implementation. The MOTCO SAV Restoration Plan would have a five-year timeframe for success and would be required to set monitoring protocols as well as performance and success criteria that are realistic based on the ecology of pondweed in Suisun Bay, as well as generally consistent with NMFS’s Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (NMFS 1991).

4-8 Chapter 4.0: SAV Mitigation Strategy

5.0 SUMMARY

The Army proposes to repair Pier 3 at MOTCO to maintain its operability and repair and modernize Pier 2. As part of the proposed action, the following actions would occur:

• Partial demolition of existing Pier 2 and reconstruction of structural elements;

• Replacement of pier-side infrastructure and supporting facilities at Pier 2;

• Upgrades to shore-side roads and electrical infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of Piers 2 and 3;

• Repair piles and selected structural elements at Pier 3; and

• Maintenance dredging to -32 feet mean lower low water plus 2 feet overdepth dredging to compensate for inaccuracies in the dredging operation.

Within the proposed action area, there are a total of 22.83 acres of pondweed SAV and 1.09 acres of bulrush SAV. Based on the proposed action at Pier 3 (cleaning and wrapping up to 1,753 timber piles), direct impacts to SAV are unlikely. At Pier 2, areas of bulrush (strictly speaking low intertidal rather than subtidal) and pondweed are within the footprints of the new Pier 2 construction, and it is anticipated up to 0.05 acres of SAV could be permanently lost.

These 0.05 acres of direct impact/permanent loss would be due to the new Pier 2 footprint displacing the existing SAV. Under the proposed action there would be a net decrease in the overall Pier 2 footprint, a reduction of Pier 2’s west trestle, and a rotation of Pier 2 which will result in an overall net gain of 0.781 acres of unshaded subtidal area.

The Army has agreed to mitigate for loss of pondweed SAV at a 1 to 1 ratio, dependent upon the results pre- and post-construction survey results. The Army has developed this SAV Mitigation Plan based on an upper limit of 5.48 acres (the notional catastrophic loss of the total amount of SAV present at Pier 2) and proposes the following three-pronged approach for SAV mitigation:

• First, apply the estimated net gain of 0.781 acres of unshaded subtidal area provided by the proposed changes to Pier 2.

• If additional mitigation is required, remove unused waterfront structures within Suisun Bay to provide an additional estimated 0.23 acres for colonization by pondweed.

• If more than 1.011 acres of mitigation is required, conduct onsite restoration.

Chapter 5.0: Summary 5-1

(This page intentionally blank)

5-2 Chapter 5.0: Summary

6.0 REFERENCES

Boyer, K. 2012. Pondweeds! http://online.sfsu.edu/katboyer/Boyer_Lab/Pondweeds!.html.

February.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1991. Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy. Adopted July 31. Southwest Regional Office. Revised 01/18/05.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2011. Military Ocean Terminal Concord Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan Update. 834th Transportation Battalion, Military Ocean Terminal Concord, California. Prepared for U.S. Army Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command.

Chapter 6.0: References 6-1 http://online.sfsu.edu/katboyer/Boyer_Lab/Pondweeds!.html

(This page intentionally blank)

6-2 Chapter 6.0: References