2024 Pearl River Flood Risk Management Project
2024 USACE Draft Environmental Impact Statement
|
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) published a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Pearl River Flood Risk Management Project on June 7, 2024.
Click here for the Main Report Click here for the Main Report Executive Summary Click for the Final Commander's Report The DEIS and appendices can also be downloaded here: https://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Programs-and-Project-Management/Project-Management/Pearl-River/ |
USACE Public Meetings
View the USACE public meeting recordings and transcripts here: https://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Programs-and-Project-Management/Project-Management/Pearl-River/
View the USACE public meeting recordings and transcripts here: https://www.mvk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Programs-and-Project-Management/Project-Management/Pearl-River/
USACE Pearl River Flood Risk Management Alternatives (click photos for Alternative details)
Click to view Alt C ("One Lake") details
|
Click to view Alts D and E (CTO) details
|
Click to view Alt A1 (non-structural) details
|
Alternatives Cost Comparison
Costs* |
Alt C ("One Lake") |
Alt D (CTO w/weir) |
Alt E (CTO no weir) |
A1-NonStructural |
A1 w/Canton Levee |
Projected First Cost |
$1-$2.1 billion |
$487-$655 million** |
$399-$508 million** |
$50 million |
$60 million |
Annual Operation and Maintenance |
$940,000 |
$729,936-$891,122 |
$196,976-$421,372 |
$0 |
$20,340 |
Net Benefits |
-$25- -$66 million |
$8.2-$1.6 million |
$6.8-$2.2 million |
$2.1 million |
$2.6 million |
Benefit/Cost Ratio |
0.4-0.2 |
1.4-1.1 |
1.4-1.1 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
Local Cost Share*** |
$350-$700 million, plus $950k in annual costs |
$170-$229 million, plus $729-$891k in annual costs |
$140-$178 million, plus $196-$421k in annual costs |
$17.5 million |
$21 million, plus $20k in annual costs |
*reference: 2024 USACE DEIS Main Report
**U.S. Congress Water Resources Development Act "Maximum Project Cost" limit is $440 million. Alternatives D and E are above the "Maximum" limit and would require Congressional approval for a project cost increase.
****Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District, the local project sponsor, must contribute 35% of total project costs.
**U.S. Congress Water Resources Development Act "Maximum Project Cost" limit is $440 million. Alternatives D and E are above the "Maximum" limit and would require Congressional approval for a project cost increase.
****Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District, the local project sponsor, must contribute 35% of total project costs.
Alternatives Flood Risk Management Comparison
*Structures |
Alt C ("One Lake") |
Alt D (CTO w/weir) |
Alt E (CTO no weir) |
A1 |
A1 w/Canton Club Levee |
Flood Risk Management Benefitting Structures |
709 structures (out of 773 in 100- year floodplain) benefit, 30% could still see flooding in house but less (PDF p 239) |
548 structures in 100-year floodplain benefit, 316 are no longer flooding, 232 structures would continue to flood but less (PDF p 243) |
548 structures in 100-year floodplain benefit, 316 are no longer flooding, 232 structures would continue to flood but less (PDF p 243) |
143 structures benefit (81 residential, 62 nonresidential) |
393 structures benefit (143 benefit from A1)+ (250 structures benefit from Canton Club Levee) |
Structures w/Flooding Induced by the Alternative |
220+ structures |
at least 52 structures will experience first floor flooding of 5" or greater caused by the CTO Alternative (PDF p 243) |
at least 52 structures will experience first floor flooding of 5" or greater caused by the CTO Alternative (PDF p 243) |
None |
None |
*reference: 2024 USACE DEIS Main Report, page number indicates PDF page
Alternatives Project Features
*Features |
Alt C ("One Lake") |
Alt D (CTO w/weir) |
Alt E (CTO no weir) |
Lake Surface Area |
2562.25 acres |
1706 acres |
N/A |
Channel Excavation |
1443.25 acres |
1016 acres |
1016 acres |
Channel River Miles |
RM 284-RM 294 |
RM 285-RM 294 |
RM 285-RM 294 |
Channel Excavation Width |
400-2,000 feet |
500-2,600 feet |
500-2,600 feet |
Channel Excavation Depth |
5-20 feet |
0-15 feet |
0-15 feet |
Weir and new gate |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
Weir Location |
RM 284.3 |
RM 286.5 |
N/A |
Weir Elevation |
258 feet (current weir 250') |
256 feet |
N/A |
Weir Flood Control Benefits |
None |
None |
N/A |
Bridge Stabilization |
7 bridges |
7 bridges |
7 bridges |
Hard Point in Tributaries |
850 feet |
750 feet |
750 feet |
New drainage pumps |
2 |
1 |
N/A |
Canton Club Levee |
N/A |
1.4 miles |
1.4 miles |
Terrestrial Habitat Mitigation |
24,760 acres |
10,762 acres |
10,762 acres |
*reference: 2024 USACE DEIS Main Report
2024 DEIS "Planning Constraints and Considerations": (source: 2024 DEIS, Main Report, PDF page 6)
"A planning constraint identified was to avoid promoting development within the floodplain. Planning considerations in the plan formulation process included:
Avoid or minimize adverse impacts to:
Maintain consistency with local floodplain management plans by not inducing flooding in other areas.
Closely coordinate with operators of Ross Barnett Reservoir on operations and maintenance of minimum flows."
2024 DEIS "Opportunities": (source: 2024 DEIS, Main Report, PDF pages 112-113):"Public testimony and comment from across the Pearl River watershed and within the study area reveal a multitude of concerns that may be addressed through other authorities or by other entities. These items are not considered to be part of the subject project, but are opportunities noted that could be undertaken separately from this effort" (PDF pages 112-113):
"A planning constraint identified was to avoid promoting development within the floodplain. Planning considerations in the plan formulation process included:
Avoid or minimize adverse impacts to:
- Threatened or endangered (T&E) and protected species.
- T&E designated critical habitat.
- Water quality.
- Cultural, historic, and Tribal trust resources.
- Areas of Environmental Justice Concerns
Maintain consistency with local floodplain management plans by not inducing flooding in other areas.
Closely coordinate with operators of Ross Barnett Reservoir on operations and maintenance of minimum flows."
2024 DEIS "Opportunities": (source: 2024 DEIS, Main Report, PDF pages 112-113):"Public testimony and comment from across the Pearl River watershed and within the study area reveal a multitude of concerns that may be addressed through other authorities or by other entities. These items are not considered to be part of the subject project, but are opportunities noted that could be undertaken separately from this effort" (PDF pages 112-113):
- Reconnecting the Community to the River: "Multiple testimonies, comments from interests within the study area, and presented conceptual plans speak to improving the connection of communities to the river. Within the study area, there are few immediate access points to the river and few green spaces for the public."
- Operation of the Ross Barnett Reservoir: "Public comments across the watershed highlighted concerns with reservoir operations. State and local entities may consider operational changes at the Ross Barnett Reservoir and revising the Ross Barnett Water Control Manual to formalize continued flood reduction capacity inform future discharge operations."
- Water Supply and Water Quality: "The EPA and USACE are currently working with the City of Jackson to address local water and wastewater infrastructure under existing federal authorities. This work addresses the immediate and to some extent long standing problems with aging local environmental infrastructure."
- Downstream Concerns on the Pearl River: "Public testimony and comments from communities south of the project area demonstrated current problems on the lower Pearl River. Public testimony included observations of extended periods of flooding and extended periods of low water, sand bars forming in the river threatening tributary access, low water flows impacting the Louisiana Wildlife Management Areas, and low water flows enabling saltwater intrusion into fishing grounds and oyster beds. Concerns included the impacts of legacy federal projects (weirs, locks, and dams) on public safety, downstream water quantity and quality, and the loss of wildlife habitat."
- Comprehensive Watershed Study: "A comprehensive watershed study of the Pearl River is necessary to fully understand the basin’s hydrology, hydrodynamics, and ecosystem. The scope of the study should be from the headwaters to the terminus at the Gulf of Mexico." Authorization via a Water Resources Development Act is required.
- Water Control Agreement and Improved Monitoring: "Since the Pearl River is not an authorized federal project, the states of Louisiana and Mississippi should consider entering into a water control agreement that sets conveyance requirements through the lower Pearl River. The agreement may set flowrate requirements at specific river miles during specified times of the year."
Incomplete Information
2024 USACE DEIS, Appendix E
|
Many critical studies and analyses are missing or incomplete in the 2024 USACE DEIS. The USACE states in the document that many of the studies required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process will not be conducted until the Pre-Construction, Engineering, and Design (PED) Phase, which occurs after the USACE Assistant Secretary of Civil Works makes his Record of Decision about the project. It will be difficult for agencies and the public to fully assess and understand the project Alternatives without this information.
|
Mitigation: Environmental mitigation is a process that aims to prevent or reduce the negative effects of a project or action on the environment. It can also help to compensate for any adverse impacts that do occur. The 2024 USACE DEIS states that "a project specific mitigation plan would be developed during PED and included in a subsequent NEPA document(s)." (PDF page 252) Suitable mitigation properties to compensate for environmental losses in the project area have not yet been identified. The USFWS Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report released as Appendix J in the 2024 DEIS states, "Preliminary analysis shows total mitigation costs (based on bank credit purchase) for forest types and palustrine habitat could exceed $1 billion, which excludes riverine mitigation costs." (PDF page 44)
Bridge Counter Measures: The Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) published a public comment in 2018 that detailed concerns about the "One Lake" Channel Improvement plan, writing: "If the predicted scour depths occur, there will be catastrophic failure of all seven of the main channel bridges mentioned above and the capacity of the relief bridges on SR 25 will be severely reduced. For this reason, all nine bridges will need to be replaced and the cost to replace the nine bridges should be reflected in the cost of the Pearl River Federal Flood Risk Management Project." The bridges of concern include two main bridges and two relief bridges on Lakeland Dr, two main channel bridges on I-55, one main channel on I-80, and two main channel bridges on I-20, as well as MDOT's wetlands/water mitigation bank (Fannye Cook Natural Area).
Since 2018, no bridge counter measures plan has been developed. In fact, the only bridge countermeasures planning with MDOT cited in the 2024 DEIS is one letter from MDOT to Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District President, Gary Rhoads, dated February 26, 2024, establishing that "MDOT agrees to collaborate with the Flood Control District in 'the advancement of this project and to ensure countermeasures are included, if determined necessary during the future design process'" and that "...major evaluation will be a Pre-construction Engineering and Design (PED) effort and not part of the EIS assessment." (PDF page 115)
Hazardous, Toxic, Radiological Waste (HTRW) Sites: "The CTO includes the excavation of material near the Gulf States Creosoting Company contaminated slough HTRW site. During PED, avoidance measures will be further evaluated to avoid potential impacts to the contaminated area as is feasible. Comparatively, Alternative C proposes excavation and placement of material on two HTRW sites within the project footprint (i.e., the Gulf States Creosoting Company contaminated slough site and the unpermitted Gallatin Street Landfill)." (PDF page 210)
Cost Analysis: There is no cost analysis or Economic Appendix including in the 2024 USACE DEIS, making it difficult to fully compare the Alternatives.
Bridge Counter Measures: The Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) published a public comment in 2018 that detailed concerns about the "One Lake" Channel Improvement plan, writing: "If the predicted scour depths occur, there will be catastrophic failure of all seven of the main channel bridges mentioned above and the capacity of the relief bridges on SR 25 will be severely reduced. For this reason, all nine bridges will need to be replaced and the cost to replace the nine bridges should be reflected in the cost of the Pearl River Federal Flood Risk Management Project." The bridges of concern include two main bridges and two relief bridges on Lakeland Dr, two main channel bridges on I-55, one main channel on I-80, and two main channel bridges on I-20, as well as MDOT's wetlands/water mitigation bank (Fannye Cook Natural Area).
Since 2018, no bridge counter measures plan has been developed. In fact, the only bridge countermeasures planning with MDOT cited in the 2024 DEIS is one letter from MDOT to Rankin Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District President, Gary Rhoads, dated February 26, 2024, establishing that "MDOT agrees to collaborate with the Flood Control District in 'the advancement of this project and to ensure countermeasures are included, if determined necessary during the future design process'" and that "...major evaluation will be a Pre-construction Engineering and Design (PED) effort and not part of the EIS assessment." (PDF page 115)
Hazardous, Toxic, Radiological Waste (HTRW) Sites: "The CTO includes the excavation of material near the Gulf States Creosoting Company contaminated slough HTRW site. During PED, avoidance measures will be further evaluated to avoid potential impacts to the contaminated area as is feasible. Comparatively, Alternative C proposes excavation and placement of material on two HTRW sites within the project footprint (i.e., the Gulf States Creosoting Company contaminated slough site and the unpermitted Gallatin Street Landfill)." (PDF page 210)
Cost Analysis: There is no cost analysis or Economic Appendix including in the 2024 USACE DEIS, making it difficult to fully compare the Alternatives.
Pearl Riverkeeper asks that everyone make his or her own decision regarding the Pearl River Flood Risk Management project using sound science and engineering. We encourage the review and thorough analysis of all available information. We welcome comments and feedback. Please email Pearl Riverkeeper or visit our Facebook for comment space. Our publishing, or re-publishing, of anyone else's research or opinions is not an endorsement on our part of those conclusions.
