Stop Cumberland River harbor expansion at Nashville

Issues on the record, awaiting the decision

• PendingThe applicant has proposed no compensatory mitigation whatsoever for the permanent loss of riverbed and shoreline habitat, yet the document identifies eleven federally listed threatened or endangered

  The applicant has proposed no compensatory mitigation whatsoever for the permanent loss of riverbed and shoreline habitat, yet the document identifies eleven federally listed threatened or endangered species that may occur at this location, including the endangered Pink mucket mussel, which lives in the riverbed being dredged. The notice simply states 'The Applicant has not proposed any compensatory mitigation' with no analysis of why zero mitigation is acceptable given the species present. The Corps should require the applicant to submit and justify a compensatory mitigation plan before any permit decision is made.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe document acknowledges that the site lies within a flood hazard area as shown on FIRM panel 47037C0234H, with a 100-year flood elevation of 410.36 feet.

  The document acknowledges that the site lies within a flood hazard area as shown on FIRM panel 47037C0234H, with a 100-year flood elevation of 410.36 feet. The upland fill area is proposed to be raised to approximately 422 feet while the harbor bottom is excavated to 372 feet, yet the notice contains no hydraulic modeling, no floodplain analysis, and no discussion of how permanently enclosing 264,068 cubic yards of upland excavation and constructing a 1,105-linear-foot sheet pile wall will alter flood storage or conveyance on Cheatham Reservoir. The Corps should require and publicly disclose a hydraulic and hydrologic analysis of flood-storage impacts before making a permit decision.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe document describes a 'Future Wetland' area on the site plan that is to be excavated to elevation 390 feet and planted with native wetland species, but this area is presented only as a label on a d

  The document describes a 'Future Wetland' area on the site plan that is to be excavated to elevation 390 feet and planted with native wetland species, but this area is presented only as a label on a drawing. The notice provides no acreage, no functional assessment, no planting plan, and no legal mechanism ensuring this area will actually be created or maintained. Because no compensatory mitigation has been formally proposed, it is unclear whether this area is being counted as mitigation and, if so, on what basis. The Corps should require a complete wetland mitigation plan with acreage, functional lift analysis, performance standards, and an enforceable monitoring schedule.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe document states that the Section 408 review will evaluate whether the proposed alteration to Corps flowage easement Tract CHE_K-1100-E will affect the Cheatham Lake civil works project, and lists

  The document states that the Section 408 review will evaluate whether the proposed alteration to Corps flowage easement Tract CHE_K-1100-E will affect the Cheatham Lake civil works project, and lists geotechnical, structural, hydraulic, hydrologic, real estate, construction, and operations and maintenance analyses as required. None of these analyses are included in or attached to this public notice. The public is being asked to comment without access to any of the technical studies that will form the basis of the Corps' own Section 408 determination. The Corps should make all Section 408 technical analyses publicly available and extend the comment period accordingly.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe public notice is titled for 'Smyrna Ready Mix' and describes the applicant as Smyrna Ready Mix c/o Jeff Hollingshead of BP Construction, but the site plan sheets identify the owner and developer a

  The public notice is titled for 'Smyrna Ready Mix' and describes the applicant as Smyrna Ready Mix c/o Jeff Hollingshead of BP Construction, but the site plan sheets identify the owner and developer as Andrew Ostrowski with a contact email of nashville@pontoonsaloontn.com, and property information lists a different parcel and address. This unexplained discrepancy between the named permit applicant and the identified property owner raises questions about who holds the legal interest in the land and who will be bound by any permit conditions. The Corps should clarify and publicly document the legal relationship between Smyrna Ready Mix, BP Construction, and Andrew Ostrowski before issuing any permit or Section 408 permission.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe avoidance and minimization section claims the project footprint has been restricted to an existing active industrial facility rather than a greenfield site, and that the sheet pile wall has been '

  The avoidance and minimization section claims the project footprint has been restricted to an existing active industrial facility rather than a greenfield site, and that the sheet pile wall has been 'configured to the minimum width necessary.' No alternatives analysis is presented: no consideration of smaller fleet expansions, no evaluation of alternative sites, and no explanation of why increasing capacity from 4 to 15 barges is the minimum needed. Under the public interest review, the Corps is required to weigh all relevant factors including alternatives. The Corps should require the applicant to submit a formal alternatives analysis demonstrating that the proposed scale and location represent the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe document identifies the Phase I cultural resource survey as having been conducted and submitted by the applicant, but provides no findings, no determination of eligibility, and no Corps review con

  The document identifies the Phase I cultural resource survey as having been conducted and submitted by the applicant, but provides no findings, no determination of eligibility, and no Corps review conclusion. The notice states the Corps will evaluate substantive comments to determine potential impacts for Section 106 compliance and will conduct consultation only 'if the Corps determines that consultation is required.' Leaving the threshold determination entirely to post-comment internal review, without disclosing the Phase I results, prevents the public and tribes from meaningfully engaging on cultural resource impacts. The Corps should release the Phase I survey results and any preliminary Section 106 determination as part of the public record before the comment period closes.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe document states that all excavated material will be placed permanently in a self-contained upland disposal site and that best management practices will prevent return water from entering the river

  The document states that all excavated material will be placed permanently in a self-contained upland disposal site and that best management practices will prevent return water from entering the river, but the 264,068 cubic yards of upland excavation and the fill area raised to elevation 422 feet are on land the document acknowledges lies within a flood hazard area. No analysis is provided of whether the upland disposal site has sufficient capacity, is properly lined or bermed, or how it will function during a flood event that overtops or approaches the site. The Corps should require and disclose engineering specifications and a stormwater management plan for the upland disposal site before permit issuance.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document

• PendingThe notice projects a two- to three-fold increase in regional aggregate demand over the next 20 years as the need justifying expansion from 4 to 15 barges, but provides no supporting data, no source c

  The notice projects a two- to three-fold increase in regional aggregate demand over the next 20 years as the need justifying expansion from 4 to 15 barges, but provides no supporting data, no source citation, and no independent verification of this demand forecast. The public interest review requires that benefits be weighed against detriments, but without a disclosed and verifiable demand analysis, neither the public nor the Corps can evaluate whether the scale of environmental impact is proportionate to actual need. The Corps should require the applicant to provide the data and methodology underlying the projected demand increase and make them part of the public record.

  A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own analysis, quote verified against the document