1

MONITORING REPORT SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION PROJECT

Chatham County, Georgia and Jasper County, South Carolina

Fiscal Year 2016 Construction Monitoring

July 2017

2

MONITORING REPORT SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION PROJECT

Table of Contents

Section Page # BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 4 MONITORING ................................................................................................................. 5

Goals ........................................................................................................................... 5

Elements ...................................................................................................................... 8

1. Establishment of a Baseline Data Bank ................................................................ 8

2. Installation of Continuous Water Quality Data Recorders .................................... 8

3. Update of the Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Models ...................................... 8

4. Bathymetric Surveys of Sediment Basin .............................................................. 9

5. D.O. Transfer Efficiency Study ........................................................................... 11

6. Monitoring of Dissolved Oxygen Levels in the Vicinity of the Hydraulic Cutterhead Dredge during Summer Months .............................................................................. 12

7. Sampling of Cadmium-Laden Sediments in the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas ................................................................................... 13

8. Monitoring of Effluent from the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas ...................................................................................................................... 14

9. Data Collection from Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Stations in Savannah Estuary System ....................................................................................................... 14

10. Intense Monitoring of Hydrologic Parameters within the Lower Estuary ........... 15

11. Bathymetry Monitoring in Unique Areas .......................................................... 15

12. Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model Assessment ...................................... 16

13. Determination of the Freshwater Interface in the Savannah Harbor ................. 16

14. Chloride Monitoring at Abercorn Creek Intake .................................................. 17

16. Monitoring of 12 Wetland Sites in the Savannah Harbor .................................. 21

17. Monitoring of Marsh Restoration at Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Area 1S. ............................................................................................ 27

18. Sturgeon Distribution Study in the Savannah River Estuary. ............................ 28

19. Use of the Fish Bypass at New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam........................ 31

20. Fish Distribution Along Marshes in the Savannah Harbor. ............................... 31

21. Impact Assessment Review. ............................................................................. 32

3

22. Wildlife Use in Dredged Material Containment Areas (Avian/Terrestrial Field Counts). .................................................................................................................. 32

23. Monitoring of Cadmium in Effluents from the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas. .................................................................................. 33

24. Bird Tissue Analysis in Dredged Material Containment Areas 14A and/or 14B.34

25. Sampling of Maintenance Sediments Overlying Exposed Miocene Soils in the Savannah Harbor Federal Navigation Channel. ..................................................... 37

Summary of FY 2016 Environmental Monitoring ........................................................... 38 Compromise and Settlement Agreement ...................................................................... 40 Cover photo: Researchers gathering data on sturgeon in the Savannah River as part of the 2016 construction monitoring for the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project. Figures Page #

Figure 1. Savannah Harbor Overview Map .................................................................... 5 Figure 2. Sediment Basin Deposition between 2005 and 2015 .................................... 10 Figure 3. Historical Sedimentation Rate within the Sediment Basin .............................. 11 Figure 3. Savannah Harbor Expansion Project - Monitoring Well Network .................. 20 Figure 4. Locations of the marsh and tidal freshwater forest monitoring areas associated with SHEP. .................................................................................................. 23 Figure 5. Average belowground salinity at marsh monitoring areas during 2016. ........ 24 Figure 6. Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination of the June 2016 Savannah River marsh monitoring samples. .................................................................................. 26 Figure 8. Vemco Receiver Locations Near the Kings Island Turning Basin. ................ 30 Tables Page #

Table 1: Construction That Began or Ended in FY 2016 ................................................. 4 Table 2. Summary of Major Monitoring Events .............................................................. 7 Table 3: Average, Maximum and Minimum Salinity at Sampling Locations .................. 25 Table 4 : Avian Blood Concentrations (µg/g wet) of Cadmium From Birds Captured on the Savannah Harbor DMCAs Relative to the Method Detection Limits in 2016-2017 .. 36 Table 5: 2017 Monitoring Elements ............................................................................... 38 Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement ...... 40

4

MONITORING REPORT SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION PROJECT

Chatham County, Georgia and Jasper County, South Carolina

FY 2016 Construction Monitoring

BACKGROUND The Savannah Harbor Expansion Project (SHEP) began deepening the Savannah Harbor from 42 feet below mean low, low water (mllw) to 47 feet mllw in 2015. The project is a complex multi-year effort and includes a robust Monitoring and Adaptive Management Plan, which is described in Appendix D of the 2012 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The plan would ensure that (1) the impacts described in the FEIS1 are not exceeded, and (2) the mitigation features function as intended. The multi-phase monitoring program (Pre-Construction, During Construction, and Post-Construction) is summarized in Table 2. Appendix D of the FEIS should be consulted for specifics of the monitoring program. Figure 1 shows the general location of Savannah Harbor.

This report covers Federal fiscal year 2016 (FY 2016), which is the second year of construction monitoring. Additional pre-construction monitoring was performed for some features in FY 2016. Table 1 shows the SHEP construction features that began or were on going in FY 2016.

Table 1: Construction ongoing in FY 2016 Feature Began Ended

Entrance Channel Dredging September 10, 2015 On Going Dissolved Oxygen October 21, 2015 On Going DMCA 14A Dike Raising 19 April 2016 On Going Raw Water Storage Impoundment 14 January 2016 On Going Savannah District will continue to prepare annual monitoring reports and provide them to the Cooperating Agencies to document the work that was performed the prior year. The target for completion for those reports is March 31st. The District will post the reports to the SHEP Monitoring Program website to make them available to the public. A link to sign up for email alerts for new reports can be found at this website.

1 This document contains hyperlinks (underlined and in blue) to pages on the following existing web sites: http://www.sas.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/SavannahHarborExpansion.aspx and http://www.shep.uga.edu/monitoring.html

5

MONITORING

Goals Monitoring is to be conducted during the project’s construction period to ensure the construction is performed within the environmental constraints described in the EIS and the approvals of the natural resource agencies. Monitoring would also be performed to ensure that levels of impacts predicted in the EIS are not exceeded and that unexpected impacts do not present themselves. The length of the construction period will depend on the timing of funds received to perform the work. At present, the estimated construction period is about 7 years. USACE will perform the monitoring described in this section for whatever length of time it takes to construct the project. If construction requires more time, monitoring during construction will be extended to

Figure 1. Savannah Harbor Overview Map

6

ensure that levels of impacts predicted in the EIS are not exceeded and that unexpected impacts do not occur. Additional funding will be obtained to accomplish this, rather than reducing the planned post-construction monitoring and adaptive management. Guideline and longitudinal plots were developed using the pre-construction monitoring data and SHEP Model update. During construction and post-construction monitoring, the PDT will compare observed data to these plots to determine if the system and the mitigation features are performing as expected for certain water quality parameters in the estuary. Before conducting the monitoring elements, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) coordinated the sampling plans for the various monitoring study components with the natural resource agencies and will coordinate any future changes to those plans with those agencies.

Thirteen monitoring elements were designed to occur during construction. Of these, 7 elements were scheduled for FY 2016. They can be found in Table 2. The start of monitoring of the remaining six elements depends on the schedule of their associated construction action.

7

Table 2. Summary of Major Monitoring Events

# Element Pre

During

Post Construction Y1

Y2

Y3

Y4

Y5

Y6

Y7

Y8

Y9

Y 10

Post Year 10

1 Establish Baseline Data Bank X

2 Installation of Continuous Water Quality Data Recorders X

3 Update Hydrodynamic and WQ Models (If Necessary) X

4 Bathymetric Surveys of Sediment Basin X X

5 D.O. Transfer Efficiency Study X

6 D.O. Levels near Dredge during Summer Months X

7 Cadmium Sediment Sampling in 14A/14B X

8 CDF (DMCA) Effluent X X X

9 Monitoring of 8 Continuous Water Quality Data Recorders X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 sites 10 2 Intensive Water Quality/Hydrologic Monitoring Events X X X

11 2 Bathymetric Surveys in Unique Areas X X X

12 Hydrodynamic/Water Quality Model Assessment X X X

13 Freshwater Interface Determination X X

14 Chloride Monitoring at Abercorn Creek Intake X X X X X X X

15 Groundwater Chloride Monitoring X X X X X X X X X X X X 8 Wells 16 Monitoring of 12 Marsh Sites (Chloride/Hydrologic/Vegetation) X X X X X X X X X X X X

17 Monitoring of Marsh Restoration Site (1S) X X X X X X X

18 Shortnose Sturgeon Distribution in Estuary X X X X X X X X

19 Shortnose Sturgeon Distribution at NSBL&D X X X X X X X

20 Fish Distribution Along Marshes X X X X X

21 Impact Assessment Review X X X X X X X X X X

22 Wildlife Use in 14A/14B (Avian/Terrestrial Field Counts) X X X X

23 14A/14B Inflow/Effluent (Georgia) X X

24 14A/14B Bird Tissue Analysis X X X X X

25 Sampling Exposed Miocene for Cadmium X X

26 Shortnose Sturgeon and Striped Bass Habitat Monitoring X X X

X – Seven Elements Monitored in FY 2016

8

Elements

1. Establishment of a Baseline Data Bank

The GIS Database and Web Portal were developed in 2013/2014. The web portal is available at the following site: http://www.shep.uga.edu/mapping.html. Completed. The GIS Database and Web Portal will continue to be maintained and updated as needed.

2. Installation of Continuous Water Quality Data Recorders

Efforts for this monitoring element was completed during the pre-construction period and can be found on the monitoring website, as well as being discussed in the 2015 Pre-Construction Monitoring Annual Report. Completed. No additional efforts are anticipated to be completed for this element during the construction and post-construction phase of the project.

3. Update of the Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Models

USACE contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc., in 2014/2015 to assess and update a three-dimensional hydrodynamic model (Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code – EFDC) and a water quality model (Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program – WASP) of the Savannah Harbor and estuary systems. USACE presented the model update to the various state and federal resource agencies at the 2015 annual SHEP monitoring meeting. As a result of that coordination, USACE adjusted the guideline plots and the longitudinal plots. USACE incorporated the revisions and the agency comments into the final version of the report. The models, referred to as the 2015 SHEP model, will be used to monitor the SHEP environmental mitigation features and navigational channel dredging in the Savannah Harbor. They will help identify how the deepening impacts salinity and dissolved oxygen (D.O.). The 2015 SHEP model was able to represent a wide range of tidal, freshwater flow, and seasonal conditions in the Savannah River and Harbor. Therefore, it will be a useful tool for predicting hydrodynamic and water quality conditions in the Savannah Harbor.

9

This monitoring element (updating the hydrodynamic and water quality models) will be repeated when construction is complete. It may also occur during the post-construction monitoring period if the outcome of a hydrodynamic and water quality model assessment (Element 12) identifies it as being warranted.

4. Bathymetric Surveys of Sediment Basin

As part of SHEP, USACE committed to perform a bathymetric survey every four months during the channel deepening so the depths in the Sediment Basin would be known and could be included in the hydrodynamic modeling. USACE has been allowing the Sediment Basin to fill through natural sedimentation and that process is expected to accelerate after the removal of the Tidegate. In preparation of design work for the Sediment Basin, bathymetric surveys were obtained in February and June 2015. Bathymetric surveys will continue after removal of the Tidegate (began in late 2016 and is scheduled to be complete in 2017) and continue through the duration of the channel deepening. USACE analyzed bathymetric survey data collected through six surveys between March 2005 and January 2015 to determine the filling rate for the Sediment Basin. The March 2005 data was obtained after the last time the Basin was dredged. It is important to note that no dredging was performed in the Sediment Basin since 2005.

A summary of the volume of sedimentation that has occurred between 2005 and January 2015 can be seen in Figure 2. The dark red areas represent about 28 feet of deposition, and the dark green areas represent about 18 feet of deposition.

The data indicates that the Sediment Basin filled at a very rapid rate immediately after dredging, and slowed dramatically as the river approaches equilibrium. During the year immediately after 2005 dredging, the Basin filled in approximately 1.78 million cubic yards (MCY), while during the time period between October 2012 and January 2015, the average filling rate was closer to 100,000 CY/year.

Natural processes over the past ten years have already deposited 70 percent of the total volume differential between the 2005 After Dredging survey and the target depth of -9.5 feet mean lower low water (MLLW). As of January 2015, there is still an estimated 2.4 MCY of shoaling needed to fill the area to -9.5 feet MLLW as required by the 2012 FEIS.

10

Figure 2. Sediment Basin Deposition between 2005 and 2015

Although 70 percent of the required volume of fill in the Sediment Basin has occurred naturally, it is difficult to quantify the benefits that has produced in limiting saltwater flows up the Back River to upriver freshwater marshes. However, the Corps can see evidence of a decreasing trend in salinity in the upper Back River over the past decade while the Sediment Basin has been filling naturally.

Figure 3 shows the last data point collected (May 2016). That data point indicates that the fill volume has reached equilibrium under the present conditions (which are expected to change when the Tidegate is removed).

11

Figure 3. Historical Sedimentation Rate within the Sediment Basin

A bathymetric survey will be conducted in the Sediment Basin every four months during the channel deepening.

5. D.O. Transfer Efficiency Study

SHEP will construct dissolved oxygen injection plants at two locations on the Savannah River. The downstream plant, to be located on Hutchinson Island, will be constructed and operational before dredging begins in the inner harbor. These D.O. plants will add the volume of oxygen identified in the GRR/EIS as being needed to maintain D.O. levels in the river at the same level as they would have been if the harbor is not deepened. A Transfer Efficiency Study will be performed once each plant is constructed and it is placed in normal use. The study will identify the amount of oxygen being absorbed by the water column for each pound of oxygen being introduced into the water. USACE will use this efficiency rate to determine how to best operate the systems to ensure that the amount of oxygen determined by the modeling needed to compensate for the harbor deepening project is being added to the water. The sampling effort is expected to occur within 60 days after construction of the dissolved oxygen plant (December 20172) is complete. This sampling effort is expected to start in January 2018.

2 All dates in this report are based on optimum funding.

12

6. Monitoring of Dissolved Oxygen Levels in the Vicinity of the Hydraulic Cutterhead Dredge during Summer Months

USACE has agreed to monitor D.O. levels in the vicinity of hydraulic pipeline dredges performing dredging for both maintenance and new work purposes in the inner harbor during the summer months (July 1st to September 30th). The Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division (GA DNR-EPD) issued a Water Quality Certification for SHEP on February 16, 2011. That certification requires monitoring of dissolved oxygen in the vicinity of maintenance dredging operations in Savannah Harbor. Once new work dredging begins in the inner harbor, USACE expects to perform both new work and maintenance dredging in various parts of the inner harbor each year until the deepening is complete. As a result, Savannah District will monitor dissolved oxygen levels in the vicinity of all USACE dredging operations (new work and maintenance) in the inner harbor. The Savannah District Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch (EN-H) will conduct the field work in coordination with Planning Division (PD). USACE will coordinate a detailed monitoring plan with Georgia DNR-EPD before conducting these events. The standard for the monitoring agreed upon with the GA DNR-EPD states:

“Dredging operations must maintain a daily average of 5.0 mg/L and an instantaneous average of 4.0 mg/L throughout the water column during those times of year when the ambient condition in the waterbody has a dissolved oxygen level above these values. If it is determined that the ambient condition in the waterbody is less than these values, the criteria will revert to the “ambient condition” and the water quality standard will allow for a 0.1 mg/L deficit from the “ambient” dissolved oxygen value. Since the available dissolved oxygen deficit has already been allocated, the USACE will only be able to conduct maintenance dredging when the dissolved oxygen, one meter from the bottom, is 3.0 mg/L or greater and the maintenance dredging does not affect the dissolved oxygen levels in the Savannah River Harbor. Exceptions for maintenance dredging when dissolved oxygen levels are less than 3.0 mg/L may be allowed if coordination occurs with NMFS and GA DNR-EPD and subsequent issuance of a waiver from GA DNR-EPD.”

The work described above will begin upon commencement of inner harbor dredging for the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project, currently scheduled to begin in October 2019, and continue throughout the duration of the construction period. As described in the paragraph above, the dredging window for low dissolved oxygen applies to maintenance dredging. In compliance with the water quality certification for the existing 42-foot channel, USACE monitored D.O. levels in the vicinity of active hydraulic pipeline dredges in the inner harbor during the summer months during 2015. No samples were taken for this element in the FY 2016 but it is anticipated that sampling will begin in October 2019. USACE performed similar monitoring in

13

2015 in compliance with the environmental clearances for the existing 42-foot Savannah Harbor Navigation Project.

7. Sampling of Cadmium-Laden Sediments in the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas

Sampling of cadmium-laden sediments discharged into dredged material containment areas (DMCAs) 14A and 14B will be conducted during construction. This monitoring is a part of efforts to minimize wildlife exposure to bioavailable cadmium. Once placement of the cadmium-laden sediments has been completed in the DMCA, grab samples will be collected to characterize the cadmium levels of the surface sediments. DMCAs that receive sediments from reaches of the river known to contain cadmium-laden soils will be maintained in a ponded condition throughout the construction period. Therefore, the sediment sampling will be conducted in a wet environment. Approximately 86 grab samples will be collected to a depth of 15 cm of the surface of the sediments in both DMCA 14A and 14B and analyzed for cadmium. After the cover has been placed, approximately 86 grab samples will be collected from each DMCA and analyzed to characterize the cadmium levels in the exposed cover sediments. After the covering sediments are placed into the DMCA, sediment sampling and analyses will be conducted to a depth of 30 cm. The samples will be evenly spaced across the DMCAs. If the concentrations of cadmium in the sediments are less than 4 mg/kg, the sampling will be complete. If the distribution of sediments with a cadmium concentration of 4 mg/kg or greater extends over a cumulative area of 25 acres or greater, sediments from operation and maintenance (O&M) dredging will be scheduled to be placed in the area at the earliest possible time to provide an additional cover. After placement of the cover of O&M material is placed into the DMCA, sediment sampling and analyses will be conducted again with the samples being collected to a depth of 30 cm. This process will be repeated until cadmium concentrations in the sediments were less than 4mg/kg. The sediment sampling field work described above will occur in at least three separate events:

• Sub-Task A: during placement of inner harbor sediments from Stations 6+375 to 45+000, 51+000 to 57+000, and 80+125 to 90+000; scheduled to begin in November 2019 and is estimated to last 25 weeks.

• Sub-Task B: upon completion of placement of inner harbor sediments from Stations 6+375 to 45+000, 51+000 to 57+000, and 80+125 to 90+000.

• Sub-Task C: upon completion of the placement of the covering sediments. No samples were taken for this element in FY 2016. This sampling is scheduled to begin in October 2019 once the cadmium-laden sediments are deposited in the DMCA(s).

14

8. Monitoring of Effluent from the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas

USACE will monitor water quality in the effluent from the DMCAs to ensure no applicable water quality standards are violated (refer to the Savannah Harbor Monitoring Plan and the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Water Quality Certification, dated February 16, 2011). This monitoring applies to all the DMCAs used for SHEP new work sediments. The Savannah District Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch (EN-H) will conduct the field work in coordination with Planning Division (PD). At the beginning of depositing new work sediments in the DMCAs, the contractor will construct a 500 mg/L Total Suspended Solids (TSS) standard and determine turbidity (in Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs) associated with the standard. The contractor will then visually compare effluent turbidity at each of the discharging weirs to the standard on a daily basis. The contractor will measure (weekly) turbidity at each outfall pipe with a discharge. Measurements will include dissolved oxygen, salinity, conductivity, temperature, and turbidity. Measurements will be made with a Hydrolab or similar instrument. A water sample will be obtained from each outfall pipe every two weeks and analyzed for NTUs; TSS in mg/L. Monitoring reports will include the results of the sampling and analyses (as well as the discharge point and dates of discharge) and be submitted to the Georgia DNR-EPD, SC DHEC, and USFWS on a monthly basis. The work described above will begin upon commencement of inner harbor dredging for the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project, currently scheduled to begin in November 2018, and continue throughout the duration of the construction period. Separate effluent monitoring (Element 23) will be performed at DMCAs that receive sediments with elevated levels of cadmium. No samples were taken for this element in FY 2016. This sampling is scheduled to begin in October 2018. USACE performed similar monitoring in 2015 in compliance with the environmental clearances for the existing 42-foot Savannah Harbor Navigation Project.

9. Data Collection from Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Stations in Savannah Estuary System

Savannah District installed and/or upgraded eight continuous water quality data monitoring stations in the estuary (Element 2) at the beginning of the pre-construction monitoring. In fulfillment of a portion of the Settlement Agreement, USACE installed two additional gages at locations identified by SC DHEC. SHEP operated the gages during the pre-construction period, will operate them during the construction period, and for ten years post-construction. SHEP will also fund the operation and maintenance of four of the gages for the 50-year life of the project. The pre-construction monitoring has

15

established a baseline set of data to assist with impact assessments during the construction and post-construction phases. The goal of monitoring during construction period and post-construction is to ensure that the project features, including flow re-routing in the estuary, are functioning as they were designed. USACE will continue to fund the USGS to collect data from these gages through the life of the project. As identified in the 2012 FEIS, the number of gages will be reduced after the ten year post-construction monitoring period is complete.

10. Intense Monitoring of Hydrologic Parameters within the Lower Estuary

Sampling for this monitoring element was performed in the pre-construction phase and the data were used to update the SHEP hydrodynamic and water quality models, as described in Element #12. The information gathered during these sampling events are discussed on the pre-construction monitoring report located on the monitoring website. Additional sampling efforts for this element are not planned during the channel deepening. However, two additional intensive sampling events are scheduled to occur during the first and fifth years of the post-construction period. Those data sets will be used during analysis compared with the outputs of the post-construction runs of the hydrodynamic and water quality models as part of Element 12.

11. Bathymetry Monitoring in Unique Areas

USACE (SAS-OP) conducted pre-construction bathymetric surveys during the pre-construction phase of the project. The results from that monitoring were used during recalibration of the harbor model and can be found on the monitoring website. While sampling efforts for this element are not planned during the channel deepening, two additional survey events will occur during the first and fifth years of the post-construction period. Those data sets will be used as part of the grid for the post-construction version of the hydrodynamic and water quality models as part of Element 12.

16

12. Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model Assessment

The 2012 SHEP GRR and Final EIS stated that USACE would consider updating the SHEP hydrodynamic and water quality models at specified intervals throughout the project’s construction and adaptive management phases. Specifically, these assessments would be made once during project construction and twice during post-construction. The goal of this work is to have the best available tool for describing water quality impacts due to SHEP in the Savannah Harbor and estuary. These tools will enable decision makers by having the best available information in determining project impacts and if necessary any adaptive management strategies. One assessment was performed in 2014/2015 and an update to the hydrodynamic and water quality models was deemed appropriate. USACE coordinated a report on the update with the natural resource agencies in 2015 and posted the final report on the project monitoring website. The updated model (SHEP 2015) is available for use by the PDT. Two additional assessments will be performed during the post-construction time period (year 2 and again in year 6).

13. Determination of the Freshwater Interface in the Savannah Harbor

The location of the freshwater interface in the Savannah (Front), Middle, and Back Rivers will be identified during the post-construction period during both high and low tides. This study will be accomplished by measuring dissolved oxygen and salinity during two intense one-week studies. The work will be accomplished by measuring salinity at the water surface along transects along the length of the river to identify the interface, which for this study is defined as the 0.5 ppt chloride contour line. Measurements will be made with a YSI 6600 EDS (Extended Deployment Sonde) with YSI 650 MDS Handheld Display unit or similar instrument. This element is intended to provide information on the hydrodynamics in the estuary between the more extensive intensive monitoring events. The study results will be compared to those locations predicted by the hydrodynamic and water quality models. As flows and other environmental factors which influence the freshwater interface are variable, the exact timing of the study will be determined in consultation with all the resource agencies. The Savannah District Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch (EN-H) will conduct the field work in coordination with Planning Division (PD). The monitoring for this element will be conducted in years 3 and 8 of the post-construction monitoring period. No work on this element was performed during the 2016 fiscal year covered by this report.

17

14. Chloride Monitoring at Abercorn Creek Intake

USACE is to monitor chloride levels at the City of Savannah’s water intake on Abercorn Creek. This work was to consist of two components. The first component was to be an automated sampler installed near the City's water intake to collect samples. The second component was the installation of two chloride meters; one at the City intake and one in Abercorn Creek near its confluence with Savannah River. USACE was also to use information obtained from those gages to develop a relationship between that information and the data collected by the City at their water treatment plant. That relationship between chloride levels in the river and what is experienced at the treatment plant would assist the City in their management of the system by providing advance notice of water they could expect to receive at the treatment plant. The City would be responsible for operating the gages after USACE completes the post-construction monitoring. During FY 2016, USGS sampled two events using an auto-sampler collecting once-hourly samples over several days at station 02198810 Abercorn Creek (intake) near Savannah, GA. The first event sample-collection at station 02198810 occurred between August 2 and August 5, 2016 and was timed in an attempt to monitor conditions which occur when flows at Savannah River at Clyo, GA (02198500) were near and below 6,000 cfs. The second sample-collection event at station 02198810 occurred between August 31 and September 4, 2016, and was timed to document the effects of Tropical Storm Hermine on chloride concentrations in Abercorn Creek. USGS also collected once-monthly point-samples and depth-integrated samples at both Abercorn Creek at the intake (02198810) and Abercorn Creek at the mouth (02198820). These once-monthly chloride samples are usually around mid-month each month, but when possible, they have been timed to coincide with a low-flow/high-tide condition. The point samples are taken at the deployment location of the continuous chloride sensor; the depth-integrated samples are taken to characterize the chloride concentration in the water-column. The USGS discontinued the continuous chloride sensors on September 30, 2016 because the sensors were not meeting the accuracy requirements of the USGS. The sensors were not temperature-compensating and were responding to changes in both ion species concentrations and water temperature. Attaining accurate sensor calibrations was difficult because of the sensor's inability to separate out their temperature-related readings. The goal of this task is to document chloride spike events resulting from the SHEP and allow assessments to be made whether the impacts have been properly predicted and appropriately mitigated.

18

The monitoring of the two gages (USGS 02198810 and 02198820) in Abercorn Creek including their relationship to each other, their pattern and shape during a tidal cycle, will provide the City of Savannah the information that they need to make decisions on how to best operate their water intake on Abercorn Creek. This monitoring element will be conducted during construction and through the 5th year post-construction.

15. Groundwater Chloride Monitoring

The objective of the monitoring (Ground Water Monitoring Report) was to determine if deepening Savannah Harbor impacts water quality in the Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA), the primary source of drinking water in the coastal area. In coordination with Georgia DNR-EPD, a groundwater monitoring plan was prepared to monitor potential changes in groundwater quality of the UFA. Sentry wells were installed in 2012 south and west of an area along the Savannah Harbor entrance channel where the confining unit is thin, the UFA is high, and numerous paleochannels exist. That location would be the first expected to show higher groundwater chloride levels from the channel deepening, should that event occur. USACE began this work in 2013 and will continue it through the construction and post-construction period. The sentry wells (Figure 3) were installed near the top of the aquifer to monitor downward migration of chloride through the confining unit and deeper in the aquifer to monitor how horizontal flow of freshwater within the aquifer mixes with and dilutes the chloride. The groundwater monitoring network consists of eight wells (four sites). Two of the wells are existing wells, and six additional new wells were installed in 2012. All well locations consist of a confining unit/UFA contact well and a companion upper permeable zone well. The Georgia DNR-EPD approved the locations and depths of the background wells. Background samples were collected quarterly from each sentry and background well. Statistical analyses are planned to establish background chloride concentrations at each well using a minimum of one year of quarterly data. Semiannual sampling for 2016 was conducted on February 1-3 and October 18-20, 2016. Results from each sampling event are shown in Table 1 of the 2016 report. Monitoring well results for the February 2016 sampling event showed negligible differences from previous sampling events. Chloride values ranged from 6.8 to 11 mg/L in the shallow wells set at the interface between the overlying Miocene confining unit and the top of the Floridan aquifer limestone. Chloride values in the deeper wells set to bracket the upper permeable zone of the Floridan aquifer ranged from 4.3 to 9.5 mg/L.

19

Monitoring well results for the October 2016 sampling event showed negligible differences from previous sampling events. Sampling results from the recently installed SHEP-MW-2R were in range with other shallow wells throughout the monitoring network. Monitoring wells SHEP-MW-5 and SHEP-MW-6 were unable to be sampled during the October event due to wash outs and bridge damage caused by Hurricane Matthew. Chloride values ranged from 6.8 to 11 mg/L in the shallow wells set at the interface between the overlying Miocene confining unit and the top of the Floridan aquifer limestone. Chloride values in the deeper wells set to bracket the upper permeable zone of the Floridan aquifer ranged from 4.4 to 9.5 mg/L.

20

Figure 4. Savannah Harbor Expansion Project - Monitoring Well Network

21

Quarterly groundwater monitoring will continue until dredging in the inner harbor has been initiated and the groundwater model trend concentrations have been established. A final background monitoring report will be prepared once these tasks are complete to present the final results of background monitoring and benchmark concentrations. This monitoring will continue through the construction and post-construction periods.

16. Monitoring of 12 Wetland Sites in the Savannah Harbor

The specific objective of this monitoring effort is to identify environmental changes to marsh sites to verify the predicted impacts associated with changes in salinity due to construction of the project. The field work will generally replicate (SOW) the procedures used by the USGS Florida Fish and Wildlife Cooperative Research Unit when they monitored these wetlands in the past. The method for pre-construction, during construction and post-construction will be identical. USACE funded Clemson University to perform this monitoring. The monthly, quarterly, and annual marsh monitoring reports for the pre-construction monitoring can be found on the SHEP Monitoring Programs website. The link to the 2016 annual report can be found here. The project installed continuous recording stations at the twelve tidal marsh locations and three tidal freshwater forests where wetland vegetation is being monitored (Figure 4). Priority was placed on retaining the seven sites previously monitored by Kitchens (1985-2005) so that comparisons to historic site-specific conditions will be more accurate. The five new marsh monitoring locations were chosen to expand monitoring in highly sensitive marshes, in areas where significant salinity changes are possible under a variety of scenarios, and to monitor community shifts both vertically (up and down river) and laterally (interior vs. exterior). All marsh monitoring areas are within the boundaries of the Savannah National Wildlife Refuge (SNWR). Two of the three tidal freshwater forest monitoring areas are on SNWR land, while the third is located on land owned by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and managed by SNWR. Monitoring stations and the associated sensors were deployed to marsh locations on April 02, 2014, while tidal forest water monitoring stations and sensors were deployed on August 01, 2014 and were continued to be monitored in 2016. Locations of water monitoring stations within marsh areas were selected to best represent the hydrologic conditions at each marsh area often coinciding with the midpoint of the middle transect. Water monitoring stations within tidal forest areas were located between the two survey plots.

22

This monitoring includes: synoptic surveys of marsh vegetation at 12 areas; annual surveys of three tidal freshwater forest areas; and hourly measurements of belowground salinity, aboveground salinity, and water level at all 15 areas

• Belowground sensors (Aquatroll 200) measure Pressure (pounds per square inch (PSI)), Temperature (°C), Depth (cm), Specific Conductivity (μs), Salinity (practical salinity units (PSU)), and Total Dissolved Solids (parts per thousand (ppt).

• Aboveground sensors (Aquatroll 100) measure Temperature (°C), Specific Conductivity (μs), Salinity (PSU), and Total Dissolved Solids (ppt).

Results: Clemson University monitored the 12 wetland sites throughout 2016. The following paragraphs summarize the results of their efforts. Their annual report can be found here. Data presented in their 2016 annual report begin in October 2015 and end in September 2016. Early growing season belowground salinity conditions within each monitoring area were calculated as the average of all hourly measurements taken 01 April – 30 June 2016. Monthly and annual salinity statistics were also calculated for each monitoring area using all available measurements taken within the appropriate time period, and include the average, maximum, and minimum aboveground and belowground conditions. Figure 5 shows the average belowground salinity at marsh monitoring areas during the 2016 early growing season (01 April – 30 June). Table 3 provides the annual average, maximum, and minimum salinity (psu) measured via sensors at above- and belowground for the various monitoring locations. A more detailed monthly breakdown of the data for each monitoring site is included in Clemson’s 2016 annual report.

23

Figure 5. Locations of the marsh and tidal freshwater forest monitoring areas associated with SHEP.

24

Figure 6. Average belowground salinity at marsh monitoring areas during 2016.

25

Table 3: Average, Maximum and Minimum Salinity at Sampling Locations

Sampling Location Above ground Salinity (psu) Belowground Salinity (psu)

Avg. (std. err) Max Min Avg. (std. err) Max Min Back 1 0.04 (0.00) 0.32 0.00 0.13 (0.00) 0.48 0.06 Back 2 0.13 (0.00) 0.48 0.06 0.18 (0.00) 0.77 0.04 Back 3 0.24 (0.01)

3.31

0.00 1.08 (0.01) 2.45 0.00

Back 3.5 0.31 (0.01) 3.99 0.00 2.06 (0.00) 3.44 0.43 Back 4 0.61 (0.02) 8.08 0.00 2.89 (0.01) 6.56 0.02 Front 1 0.06 (0.00) 0.97 0.00 0.18(0.00) 0.85 0.04 Front 2 0.31 (0.01) 6.10 0.00 0.74 (0.01) 5.97 0.05

Middle 1 0.10 (0.01) 3.13 0.00 0.35 (0.00) 1.63 0.10 Middle 2 0.10 (0.01) 3.80 0.00 0.39 (0.01) 3.03 0.04 Middle 3 0.06 (0.01) 5.90 0.00 0.70 (0.01) 5.85 0.00 Middle 4 0.39 (0.02) 7.28 0.00 2.12 (0.02) 6.39 0.20 Middle 5 0.33 (0.01) 6.20 0.00 1.01 (0.01) 5.26 0.18 Swamp 1 0.04 (0.00) 0.10 0.00 0.07 (0.00) 0.13 0.00 Swamp 2 0.12 (0.00) 1.46 0.00 0.15 (0.00) 0.32 0.06 Swamp 3 0.07 (0.00) 2.26 0.00 0.20 (0.00) 0.87 0.04

Hydrologic measurements taken via autonomous sensors were not continuous for all areas throughout FY 2016. There were above-ground and belowground salinity data losses and water level data losses at the 12 sampling sites during various times of the 2015-2016 monitoring season as a result of failing sensors. In addition to hydrologic monitoring in 2015/2016, two synoptic marsh vegetation sample events were conducted in FY16: 10-12 October 2015 and 06 June 2016. Vegetation collections typically last two to three days followed by approximately a week of sorting the samples by species. However, sampling efforts in the June 2016 sampling event were completed in one day due to the rainy conditions brought on by Tropical Storm Colin. There were seven communities present in the June 2016 sampling event including two types of fresh mix, cutgrass, cattail, two types of oligohaline mix, and fresh exotic mix (Figure 6). These communities are different than those described for the June 2014 and June 2015 datasets in that there is no cordgrass community, and a community type that hasn’t been described in the past two years has emerged – the fresh exotic community dominated by Asian spiderwort.

26

Figure 7. Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination of the June 2016 Savannah River marsh monitoring samples.

27

Tidal forest monitoring was completed between September 2015 and August 2016. The dominant vegetation in FY 2016 across all forest monitoring areas were generally baldcypress, water tupelo, and swamp tupelo; though there were differences in the species dominance between areas. Swamp 1 was dominated by baldcypress and water tupelo, and had the most swamp tupelo of the three areas. Swamp 2 was also dominated by baldcypress, but had no water tupelo and was roughly 25% swamp tupelo. Swamp 3 was also dominated by baldcypress and water tupelo, but had notably less swamp tupelo than the other two tidal forest monitoring stations. The 12 wetland sites will continue to be monitored yearly during construction when dredging occurs in the inner harbor. A report of the data collected and any findings will be provided after each year of monitoring and with a comprehensive report at the conclusion of construction. This report will also include a comparison to the pre-construction monitoring results, the predicted values, and the previous studies at these sites. Monitoring of the 12 wetland sites will continue during construction and for 10 years post construction. A report of the data collected will be prepared after each year of monitoring. A comprehensive report of the data collected and any findings will also be prepared at the conclusion of year 10. The final report will also include a comparison to the pre-construction monitoring results, the predicted values, and the previous studies at these sites.

17. Monitoring of Marsh Restoration at Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Area 1S.

USACE committed to monitor the marsh restoration site at DMCA 1S to ensure the restoration produces the mitigation acreage required for direct impacts to wetlands that will be unavoidably affected as part of SHEP construction activities. The Savannah District Planning Division (PD) and Operations Division (OP-N) will conduct the field work. Upon completion of construction activities at DMCA 1S, PD representatives will identify the location of wetlands in the vicinity of DMCA 1S that will serve as a reference site. USACE will document conditions at the reference site using written descriptions and photographs of plant species present and their relative abundance. Once the site is established, USACE will visit the reference site and document conditions a minimum of two times each year -- once in the winter and once in the summer -- to facilitate evaluation of the typical plant growth during differing times of year. Monitoring will include identification of any invasive species. The restored marsh in Disposal Area 1S will be monitored for seven years after the restoration activities are complete. If invasive species are found, a control plan will be developed and implemented. Annual reports will be prepared that summarize results of the monitoring. The report prepared for year 7 will summarize the results of the

28

monitoring in years 1-7 and provide an overall assessment of the success of the marsh restoration efforts in Disposal Area 1S and identify any additional actions that are warranted to complete the marsh restoration efforts. If the Savannah Harbor Navigation Project funds restoration of marsh acreage beyond the SHEP requirement, the credits may be released (for use only on the Savannah Harbor Federal Navigation Project) after the long-term health/productivity of the restoration site is verified by the Federal Cooperating Agencies. No monitoring was performed on this element during either the pre-construction period or during Fiscal Year 2016. Monitoring is scheduled to occur for this element in years 1-7 of the post-construction phase.

18. Sturgeon Distribution Study in the Savannah River Estuary.

This monitoring (SOW) is being performed by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SC DNR). The work includes three main components: (1) surgically implanting transmitters into juvenile Atlantic and adult shortnose sturgeon, (2) deploying receivers to monitor the movement of those fish, and (3) manually tracking to better characterize locations where Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon are found. Monitoring for this element began in December 2013. Receivers were deployed above and below the NSBL&D for the pre-construction period. In 2014, two American shad passed the dam and were detected at rkm 320. This is evidence that in at least some years, shad passed upstream via the navigation lock or during extreme high flows through the structure itself. An array of 25 fixed Vemco VR2W receivers remained deployed from the mouth of the river through the Front, Middle, and Back Rivers. Receivers were deployed in near the Kings Island Turning Basin and the entrance to the Middle River, since that area was previously identified as important habitat for sturgeon (Figure 7). GPS locations of receivers and locations of tagged fish (residency master list) are included as part of the progress reports saved on the monitoring website. All receivers were downloaded and will continue to be downloaded every few months, and the resulting telemetry data will continue to be posted to the monitoring website. A graphical representation of the number of sturgeon passing a receiver can be viewed on the website maps. The monthly progress reports for this element also cover the associated Element 19. As of August 2016 (the end of the second year of construction monitoring), 94 Atlantic sturgeon were captured and 10 (5 sub-adults and 5five juveniles) were surgically implanted with transmitters. In addition, 32 shortnose sturgeon were captured and 10 (5 adults and 5 juveniles) were surgically implanted with a transmitter in 2016.

29

Manual tracking was performed with a Vemco VR-100 receiver to better characterize sites where Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon were found in the Savannah River Estuary and to find fish that might otherwise be inhabiting areas between receiver locations. Manual tracking occurred every month from July through September and at least quarterly for the remainder of the year. During the second year of construction monitoring, 8 Atlantic and 12 shortnose sturgeon that were transmitted during this study were detected during these manual tracking events. Location and water quality data were recorded for each fish and were entered in the database. Water quality parameters are taken daily at rkm 98 by Phinizy Swamp Center for Water Sciences. In FY 2016, analysis of tagged sturgeon detections concluded that both Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon use the Middle and Front Rivers (rkm 27-35) during the winter and early spring months. Shortnose detections exhibited a similar pattern of movement in Front River (rkm 27-49) during warmer temperatures, with some fish moving to the Middle River during cooler water temperatures. Savannah River shortnose sturgeon frequented fresh and saltwater areas (amphidromous), with some fish taking residence in Middle River (0.5-6 ppt salinity) during winter months. Juvenile Atlantics used similar habitats as shortnose sturgeon, but showed more movement to downstream portions of the river (rkm <29), with some exiting the river. Adult detections differed from that of the sub-adult Atlantic sturgeon, with some individuals undertaking migrations to potential upriver spawning habitat in February-March.

30

Figure 8. Vemco Receiver Locations Near the Kings Island Turning Basin.

This work will continue to be performed each year during construction and for the first five years after harbor deepening is complete. An additional year of this monitoring will be conducted in the ninth year of the Post-Construction

31

Monitoring. The final report which will be provided in year 10 will be a comprehensive one describing the findings both prior to and after construction.

19. Use of the Fish Bypass at New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.

As part of the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project, USACE committed to monitor the use of sturgeon and anadromous fish of the off-channel rock ramp bypass that the project will construct around the New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam near Augusta, Georgia. USACE completed the pre-construction monitoring for this element in 2014. This was accomplished through the use of telemetry and sonic transmitters. The results of that work can be found on the monitoring website (here). Since construction of the fish bypass is not scheduled to occur until 2019, USACE did not continue annual monitoring of fish distribution at the Lock and Dam. USACE will resume monitoring for this element prior to completion of construction of the fish bypass. In December 2016, the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act was signed into law. Section 1319 of this law modifies this SHEP fish passage feature and requires USACE to study two in-channel options in lieu of the original bypass design around the lock and dam. Savannah District is evaluating these options and will prepare a report with its recommended course of action. The draft report will be sent out for public and agency comment. No monitoring was performed on this element during Fiscal Year 2016. SC DNR Marine Resources Division plans to monitor the distribution of the sturgeon in the same manner the first five years after construction of the fish bypass. An additional year of this monitoring will be conducted in the ninth year of the post-construction monitoring. The final report will be provided in year 10 and will be a comprehensive one describing the findings both prior to and after construction.

20. Fish Distribution Along Marshes in the Savannah Harbor.

The USGS Georgia Fish and Wildlife Cooperative Research Unit is performing this monitoring using a drop survey method that was a component of the study performed in 2000-2001 (Jennings and Weyers, 2003). This SOW outlines the work necessary to monitor fish, crab and shrimp abundance and distribution in the Savannah River estuary. The specific objective of this work effort is to reveal any changes in abundance and distribution of the target species. This includes temporal (seasonal and annual) and spatial distribution in different salinity-defined habitats. The work consists of sampling ichthyfauna along the edge of marsh that surrounds tidal creeks. The work did not include sampling ichthyoplankton or in tidal marshes. The sampling locations

32

can be found on the website maps. The pre-construction monitoring portion of this Element was completed in May 2014 and can be found on the monitoring website. Additional monitoring is scheduled to occur during years 1, 3, 5, and 9 of the post-construction monitoring period, but not during the harbor deepening construction timeframe. That construction period is presently expected to last 4-5 years, so there will likely be a 4-5 year gap between the pre-construction sampling and the subsequent events performed after construction.

21. Impact Assessment Review.

Data collected from the bathymetric surveys, intense hydrologic surveys, continuous water quality monitors, fish monitoring, and wetland monitoring will be used to assess the level of environmental impacts and evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation features. In addition, the data will be used to update the hydrodynamic and water models. The physical monitoring data will be included in the models and compared to what those models predict should have occurred under the observed conditions. If the models successfully predict salinity and dissolved oxygen levels (which will be known from field measurements) for the conditions observed during the monitoring, then they will be a reliable tool for impact assessments. This study effort will be conducted once a year for 10 years after deepening of the inner harbor is complete. Reports for this element of the monitoring will include annual reports describing the results of the individual monitoring studies conducted each year during years 1-9 of Post-Construction Monitoring. A final report will be produced describing the results of the modeling performed in year 10 as well as the overall result of all 10 modeling efforts. No assessment was made during Fiscal Year 2016.

22. Wildlife Use in Dredged Material Containment Areas (Avian/Terrestrial Field Counts).

USACE biologists will perform monthly wildlife use surveys in Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas (DMCAs) 12A, 13A, 13B, 14A, and 14B once construction begins. Monitoring will be performed during placement of SHEP new work sediments and for a minimum of three years after placement is complete. The monitoring will continue as long as other cadmium-related sampling is occurring. This SOW outlines the work necessary to monitor avian and other major vertebrate abundance and usage at the DMCAs during construction of the project and for years 1, 2, and 3 of the post-construction monitoring period. This information may be critical if other investigations indicate a problem with wildlife use of DMCAs 14A/14B where cadmium-laden sediments will be deposited.

33

A monitoring report summary will be prepared that provides a brief overview of the work performed the prior month. Upon completion of a year of fieldwork, a report will be prepared that includes a description of the work performed, results, and any findings. Upon completion of the final year of fieldwork, a comprehensive report will be prepared that describes all the work performed, the results, and the findings. The reports will be provided to the USFWS. USACE biologists perform monthly wildlife use surveys in the DMCAs as part of their normal activities to support the existing Savannah Harbor Navigation Project. Several waterfowl and shorebirds can regularly be found the DMCAs in the winter and spring, including northern shoveler, green-winged teal, blue-winged teal, ruddy duck, pied-billed grebe, hooded merganser, American coot, snowy/great egrets, lesser/greater yellowlegs, semipalmated plover, American avocet, as well as least, western and semipalmated sandpipers. Birds that use the DMCAs for nesting include black-necked Stilts, least terns, black skimmers, and gull-billed terns. Field visits to the DMCAs indicate that bird population trends have not changed significantly during recent years of monitoring. No monitoring was performed for this element during Fiscal Year 2016.

23. Monitoring of Cadmium in Effluents from the Savannah Harbor Dredged Material Containment Areas.

All cadmium-laden sediments will be placed in DMCAs 14A and/or 14B. The current project design calls for the majority of these sediments to be placed in DMCA 14A. When or if this DMCA reaches capacity, the remainder of any sediments from reaches known to contain cadmium-laden sediments will be placed in DMCA 14B. Monitoring (refer to the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Water Quality Certification dated February 16, 2011) of dredging and disposal operations in areas with cadmium-laden sediments will require sampling of the inflow and effluent from DMCAs 14A and/or 14B for cadmium. Samples will be taken from the inflow (head section of the discharge pipe) on a weekly basis. Sampling will be conducted weekly to determine the cadmium concentrations in the effluent discharged from DMCAs 14A and 14B. Should the effluent dissolved cadmium concentration be found to be higher than the state standard (8.8 ug/L for South Carolina), sampling will be repeated within two days and will include both the outfall pipe sample and a receiving water sample taken approximately 100 feet down current of the point at which the effluent enters the receiving water. Should the receiving water sample be found to violate state standards, corrective action will be undertaken to eliminate the violation. Monitoring of the effluent from DMCAs 14A and 14B for cadmium will continue as long as a discharge occurs and until all sediments have been dewatered, stabilized and covered. Following the installation of a clean cover, cadmium will be monitored in the effluent for one year. The above effluent monitoring plan will include a quarterly metals analytical scan with the inclusion of ammonia. The results of the effluent monitoring plan will be reported to the Georgia

34

DNR-EPD, SC DHEC, and USFWS on a quarterly basis. The Savannah District Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch (EN-H) will conduct the field work in coordination with Planning Division (PD). Geotechnical and HTRW Branch (EN-G) will manage the task order associated with laboratory analyses. The work described above will begin upon commencement of inner harbor dredging for the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project in reaches of the river known to contain cadmium-laden sediments (Stations 6+375 to 45+000, 51+000 to 57+000, and 80+125 to 90+000). This work is currently scheduled to begin in October 2018. Dredging in these four reaches is expected to last 25 weeks, and sampling will continue for one year after completion of placement of sediment from these reaches in the DMCAs. No monitoring for this element occurred during Fiscal Year 2016. Dredging and deposition of these sediments are presently scheduled to start in October 2018.

24. Bird Tissue Analysis in Dredged Material Containment Areas 14A and/or 14B.

USACE committed to perform avian blood/tissue monitoring of birds in the Dredged Material Containment Areas (DMCAs) designated to receive cadmium-laden sediments containing cadmium-laden sediments. The current project design calls for the majority of these sediments to be placed in DMCA 14A. When or if this DMCA reaches capacity, the remainder of any new work sediments from reaches known to contain cadmium-laden sediments will be placed in DMCA 14B. The Scope of Work (SOW) outlines the work necessary to conduct bird tissue monitoring within those DMCAs. The sentinel species collection SOW targeted collecting blood from 30 individuals (minimum of 10) of each sentinel species during each season (summer vs. winter). The quarterly and annual reports for this monitoring can be found on the reports page of the monitoring website. During the first year of monitoring there was varied success capturing the project sentinel species. As a result, potential alternative avian species were banded during each field season and had their blood collected in case capturing the sentinel species proved problematic. During the second year of monitoring, these potential “alternate” species included common ground doves and rock pigeons (for mourning doves), northern cardinals, and swamp sparrows. During the two previous sampling years that certain species (e.g., Mottled Ducks, Northern Shovelers, American Avocets, Mourning Doves) could not be live-captured effectively and as a result appropriate federal and state permits for lethal take of these species. In addition to the blood samples collected from the lethal takes, this method allows for the examination of blood concentrations relative to other tissues of interest (e.g., kidney and liver), tissues that are more indicative of long-term exposure.

35

In the third year of monitoring, the focus was to monitor all sentinel species to continue to provide a baseline for future monitoring. The goal in the third year of this project was to continue capturing sentinel avian species and collecting blood samples for chemical (primarily Cadmium (Cd)) analyses during the Summer (2016) and Winter (2016/2017) seasons. As optional monitoring, avian prey base samples including invertebrates (e.g., aquatic and terrestrial insects) and seeds/fruit from the DMCAs were collected and analyzed for Cd to provide insights into potential transmission routes of Cd into sentinel and other non-sentinel wildlife. During the third year (2016), DMCA 14B was available for sampling but DMCA 14A and portions of other DMCAs were not available due to construction activities. In addition, the impacts of heavy rainfall and large equipment used on the DMCAs occasionally rendered several of the access roads impassable for short periods, which also influenced avian sampling. Therefore, given these conditions and that this was another a “control”/pre-construction year, sampling efforts focused on DMCAs 14B and 13B, as well as captures from five DMCAs (12A, 13A, 13B, 14A, 14B) within the Savannah Harbor Navigation Project. In 2016, 88 blood samples were collected from birds in the Savannah DMCAs, including 81 (total) from the 11 sentinel species and 7 from the alternative species. The summer avian species with the highest percentage of > method detection limit (MDL) Cd blood concentrations were “terrestrial” species: Brown Thrasher (100%, but only 2 collected), and Mourning Dove (70%). Of the four “aquatic” sentinel species, Northern Shovelers and American Avocets, both winter species, had the highest percentage (50 and 40%, respectively) of > MDL blood concentrations, although sample sizes were low (< 5). The maximum blood Cd concentration observed in the third year of monitoring was 0.12 parts per million (ppm) (wet wt) in a Savannah Sparrow, far below the concentration (0.26 ppm wet wt.) associated with possible toxic effects for Cd. Cadmium concentrations in potential prey items collected on the DMCAs remained as highly variable in the third year of monitoring as they were in the first two years. Potato beetles (Family Chrysonelidae) had the highest average Cd concentration (> 11 and 2 ppm dry wt, for adults and larvae, respectively) among potential prey items. These insects typically foraged on leaves of Tropical Soda Apple (Solanum viarum), which averaged a Cd concentration of ~4 ppm Cd dry wt. Fruit of Blackberry (Rubus sp.) averaged ~1.4 ppm Cd whereas other plant seeds, foliage, and other insects all averaged < 1.0 ppm Cd dry wt. Table 4 lists the sentinel species targeted for collection. The majority of avian blood samples (~73%) collected from the Savannah Harbor DMCAs in the third year of monitoring was below the range of instrument detection levels (0.001-0.006 μg/g Cd wet wt). This finding is slightly lower but still similar to those of Years 1 and 2. No blood sample was found to be above the level of concern for potential toxic effects. The majority of the above-MDL samples were collected during the summer months, possibly due to the greater availability of certain species of insects (a food source) that bioaccumulate Cd during that season. This trend is also apparent in the cumulative

36

avian blood samples (Years 1 - 3). Cadmium found in blood, gizzard contents (from lethal collections) and on-site potential prey indicate that Cd is currently bioavailable in the DMCA system and/or that these birds forage at nearby sites with bioavailable Cd. Analyses of kidney and liver tissues from lethally-collected avifauna on the DMCAs indicate that these species are accumulating Cd and that they are also likely accumulating Cd from other locations used in their history.

Table 4 : Avian Blood Concentrations (µg/g wet) of Cadmium From Birds Captured on the Savannah Harbor DMCAs Relative to the Method Detection Limits in 2016-2017

Species Season #Collected/# Analyzed

# (%) < MDL

Max Concentration

American Avocet Summer - - - Winter 5 3 (60%) 0.004

Black-necked Stilt

Summer 8 6 (75%) 0.042 Winter - - -

Brown Thrasher Summer 2 0 (0%) - Winter - - -

Eastern Towhee Summer 2 2 (100%) - Winter - - -

Mottled Duck Summer 12 10 (83%) 0.034 Winter - - -

Mourning Dove Summer 10 3 (30%) 0.030 Winter - - -

Northern Mockingbird

Summer 3 2 (67%) 0.040 Winter 1 0 (0%) -

Northern Shoveler

Summer - - - Winter 4 2 (50%) 0.012

Red-winged Blackbird

Summer 9 9 (100%) - Winter - - -

Savannah Sparrow

Summer - - - Winter 16 14 (87%) 0.123

Song Sparrow Summer - - - Winter 9 8 (89%) 0.024

Alternate Species

Northern Cardinal Summer 7 7 (100%) 0.006 Winter - - -

Lethal collections were employed to obtain blood/tissue samples from several species that had been difficult to capture by non-lethal methods (e.g.; traps, Net Blaster, etc.). This method may need to be expanded to obtain sufficient numbers of other difficult-to-obtain avian samples. The monitoring of bird tissue for cadmium in Dredged Material Containment Areas 14A and/or 14B will continue pre-placement of cadmium-laden sediments to develop a complete pre-construction data set. This monitoring will also occur

37

during construction and for three years post-construction. Lethal collection will be used to obtain difficult-to-obtain avian samples.

25. Sampling of Maintenance Sediments Overlying Exposed Miocene Soils in the Savannah Harbor Federal Navigation Channel.

USACE committed to sampling newly-accumulated maintenance material in reaches known to have contained cadmium-laden new work sediments in the Savannah Harbor Federal Navigation Channel. In coordination with Planning Division (PD), Savannah District’s Geotechnical and HTRW Branch (EN-G) and Navigation Branch (OP-N) will conduct the field work and oversee the task orders necessary to complete the laboratory analyses. This monitoring will be performed twice -- prior to the first and second maintenance dredging cycles after the channel is deepened in the relevant reaches of the inner harbor (Stations 6+375 to 45+000, 51+000 to 57+000, and 80+125 to 90+000). No monitoring for this element occurred during the time period covered by this report.

26. Shortnose Sturgeon and Striped Bass Habitat Monitoring.

The goal of this monitoring feature is to evaluate impacts of SHEP on shortnose sturgeon and striped bass habitat. Evaluations of the impacts of the SHEP on the habitats of these species will be conducted in years 2, 4, and 9 of the Post-Construction Monitoring. The field data collected in other tasks will be used in conjunction with the updated hydrodynamic and water quality models to conduct this assessment. A report will be prepared at the end of each year the evaluations are performed. The report will be prepared that identifies the level of impacts observed to shortnose sturgeon and striped bass habitats and compares those impacts to those predicted and described in the EIS. No monitoring occurred for this element during the time period covered by this report.

38

Summary of FY 2016 Environmental Monitoring Seven of the thirteen monitoring elements scheduled to be performed during the construction monitoring period were performed in FY 2016. The reports for these elements are available at the SHEP monitoring website. Dredging within the entrance channel began on 10 September 2015 and continued throughout FY 2016. Water depths in the Sediment Basin (Element 4 Bathymetric Surveys of Sediment Basin) were obtained during a survey conducted in late 2015 and early 2016 in preparation for the Tidegate removal construction effort which began in November 2016. Data collected in May 2016 indicated that the fill volume has reach equilibrium under current conditions. In addition to Element 4, monitoring for element 9 (Monitoring of Continuous Water Quality Data Recorders) was performed in FY 2016 as well as monitoring for element 14 (Chloride Monitoring at Abercorn Creek Intake) which was performed by USGS. Elements 16 (Monitoring of 12 Marsh sites), 18 (Shortnose Sturgeon Distribution in Estuary) and 24 (Bird Tissue Analysis in Dredged Material Containment Areas 14A and/or 14B) were also performed in FY 2016. Several monitoring elements were not scheduled to be performed during the FY 2016 timeframe, as several of the prerequisites needing to be in place were not complete. Monitoring for Element 5 (D.O. Transfer Efficiency Study) would be performed after construction of the first Dissolved Oxygen System is complete. Several of the monitoring elements not performed in FY 2016 -- including Element 6 (D.O. Levels near Dredge during Summer Months) and Element 7 (Cadmium Sediment Sampling in 14A/14B) -- would begin in 2018 when the inner harbor dredging starts and monitoring is ready to begin to track the success of that component of the project. Dredging in the inner harbor is scheduled to start after the downriver dissolved oxygen system is constructed and monitoring shows it is operating as expected. Table 5 shows all the monitoring elements and which will be continued in FY 2017.

Table 5: 2017 Monitoring Elements

Monitoring Elements Elements to

Be Performed in FY 2017

Elements to Be Performed During Inner

Harbor Dredging 1. Establish/Continue Baseline Data Bank Yes Yes 2. Installation of Continuous Water Quality Data

Recorders No No

3. Update Hydrodynamic and WQ Models (If Necessary)

No No

4. Bathymetric Surveys of Sediment Basin Yes Yes 5. D.O. Transfer Efficiency Study No Yes 6. D.O. Levels near Dredge during Summer Months Normal O&M Yes 7. Cadmium Sediment Sampling in 14A/14B No Yes 8. CDF (DMCA) Effluent No Yes

39

Table 5: 2017 Monitoring Elements

Monitoring Elements Elements to

Be Performed in FY 2017

Elements to Be Performed During Inner

Harbor Dredging 9. Monitoring of 8 Continuous Water Quality Data

Recorders Yes Yes

10. 2 Intensive Water Quality/Hydrologic Monitoring Events

No No

11. 2 Bathymetric Surveys in Unique Areas No No 12. Hydrodynamic/Water Quality Model Assessment No No 13. Freshwater Interface Determination No Yes 14. Chloride Monitoring at Abercorn Creek Intake Yes Yes 15. Groundwater Chloride Monitoring Yes Yes 16. Monitoring of 12 Marsh Sites Yes Yes 17. Monitoring of Marsh Restoration Site (Area 1S) No No 18. Shortnose Sturgeon Distribution in Estuary Yes Yes 19. Shortnose Sturgeon Distribution at NSBL&D No Yes 20. Fish Distribution Along Marshes No No 21. Impact Assessment Review No Yes 22. Wildlife Use in DMCA 14A/14B (Avian/Terrestrial

Field Counts) Normal O&M Yes

23. DMCA 14A/14B Inflow/Effluent No Yes 24. DMCA 14A/14B Bird Tissue Analysis Yes Yes 25. Sampling Exposed Miocene for Cadmium No No 26. Shortnose Sturgeon and Striped Bass Habitat

Monitoring No Yes

40

Compromise and Settlement Agreement The Compromise and Settlement Agreement executed on May 17, 2013 includes a list of terms and conditions that may be included in South Carolina “State Approvals”. These terms and conditions are presented in Table 6.

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

1

The USACE shall provide a comprehensive report at: (a) the end of preconstruction; (b) the end of construction; and (c) the end of the 10-year monitoring program, as such periods are described in Appendix D of the Final EIS. Each comprehensive report shall be provided to DHEC and the Commission and made available on the Project’s public website and as provided in Appendix D to the Final EIS.

This annual report is not intended to fulfill this purpose.

2

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) may construct the Project consistent with the Final EIS dated January 2012 and revised in July 2012 and approved by the Chief of Engineers Report dated August 17, 2012.

Being implemented.

3

All hopper dredging activities will only take place from December 1 through March 31.

This Term and Condition is included in the dredging contract where hopper dredges can be used.

4 All dredging in the Inner Harbor upstream of Station 63+000 is prohibited during the striped bass spawning period of April 1 to May 15.

This Term and Condition will be included in the dredging contract for the inner harbor.

5

The USACE will allow DHEC or the Commission to make periodic inspections of the project construction and mitigation implementation sites that are reasonable in scope on no less than one week’s advance notice and subject to adherence to personal protective equipment requirements contained in the USACE Safety Manual (EM 385-1-1).

USACE will continue to coordinate with DHEC and the Commission to provide access for periodic inspections.

41

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

6

In addition to the water quality monitoring set forth in or required by the Final EIS and other governmental approvals, the USACE will provide continuous daily water quality monitoring with two additional monitors at locations to be jointly agreed-upon by the USACE, Commission, and DHEC, to be installed simultaneously with the eight continuous water quality monitoring stations proposed in Appendix D of the Final EIS. These two additional continuous water quality monitoring stations are intended to supplement the eight continuous water quality monitoring stations proposed in Appendix D of the Final EIS and will be subject to the same criteria for Pre-Construction Monitoring, Monitoring During Construction and Post Construction Monitoring as specified in Appendix D to the Final EIS . A copy of the monthly monitoring reports will be provided to the Conservation Groups, DHEC, and the Commission and will be publicly available through the project’s website within 30 days after the USACE’ receipt of the monitoring report. Should adverse conditions, such as weather or vandalism, impair operations of a water quality monitor; the USACE will undertake reasonable efforts to restore operation of the monitor as soon as possible. This provision will terminate at the end of the 10-year Post Construction Monitoring Period.

The following additional gages were agreed upon on June 06, 2013:

1. USGS 021989793 Little Back River At Hog Island, Near Savannah, GA

2. USGS 0219897993 Savannah River At Elba Island, Near Savannah, GA

These gages were installed and their location can be seen on the monitoring website map. The data from those gages can be found at their USGS website.

7

The USACE will refine and update the SHEP hydrodynamic (EFDC) and water quality (WASP) models specifically for D.O. The updated model will take advantage of previous modeling efforts, including U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s TMDL model and the most current information collected in the Savannah River harbor and estuary. The product will be complete D.O. model scenarios comparing instream D.O. concentrations with and without operation of the Oxygen Injection System. The purpose of the modeling and monitoring is to confirm that the Oxygen Injection System will mitigate for the D.O. impacts of the Project as shown by comparing actual D.O. levels in the modeled area, from Station 0+000 upstream to River Mile 27.8, to D.O. levels in the without-Project scenario (the “Success Criteria”).

The SHEP hydrodynamic (2006 SHEP EFDC) and water quality (2010 TMDL WASP) models have been updated. The June 2015 modeling report describes the updates and calibration. The updated models are now identified as the 2015 SHEP model. The D.O. model scenarios will be provided to DHEC and the Commission before the testing of the D.O. system.

8

Prior to commencement of any Inner Harbor Channel Dredging, the USACE will test and evaluate the downriver Oxygen Injection System that is to be located at the Hutchinson Island location to demonstrate its ability to mitigate dissolved oxygen impacts of the SHEP. Dredging of the Outer Harbor can occur prior to this testing.

USACE is following this condition as it sequences the actions needed to construct the project. Per DHEC’s November 4, 2014 request, USACE will notify SCDHEC, the other state and Federal resource agencies and our local sponsor at least one week in advance the Test Run and the Start-up Run.

42

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

a

The Oxygen Injection System at the downriver Hutchinson Island location must be operated and instream D.O. must be monitored continuously for a period of 59 days (2 lunar cycles). Continuous daily water quality monitoring must be conducted during this period at locations specified in and pursuant to the monitoring plan. This 59-day period of operation is referred to herein as the “Test Run.”

The “Test Run” will be scheduled to begin with the completion and the downriver D.O. injection system.

b

Following the Test Run and analysis of the modeling results and monitoring data, the USACE will provide a report to the Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC comparing the monitoring data collected during the Test Run to the modeling results.

The “Test Run” data, analysis, and report will be provided to the appropriate groups.

c

The Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC will have thirty (30) days to evaluate and review the Test Run report and to provide comments and feedback to the USACE and the Adaptive Management Team. The USACE, Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC each will independently evaluate the Test Run report and other relevant information to assess achievement of the Success Criteria.

USACE is following this condition as it sequences the actions needed to construct the project.

d

If the USACE determines that the Oxygen Injection System test meets the Success Criteria, it will commence Inner Harbor Channel Dredging no sooner than fourteen (14) days after the 30-day comment period in subsection (c) has ended. DHEC, the Commission, and the Conservation Groups each reserves the right to take any appropriate action if its independent determination is that the Success Criteria has not been met, including but not limited to suspension, rescission, and revocation of the State Approvals, initiation of an enforcement or other legal action, and/or termination of this Agreement. The USACE does not waive any objection or defense to such actions, including any objection or defense based on federal preemption, sovereign immunity, or immunity from state regulation.

USACE is following this condition as it sequences the actions needed to construct the project.

e

Copies of the data, modeling inputs, modeling results, monitoring data, and reports will be provided to all Parties by the USACE as soon as available to allow the Conservation Groups, Commission and DHEC to review the information simultaneously with the USACE and Adaptive Management Team.

USACE will continue to coordinate with the natural resource agencies, interested parties, and the public.

9

Following the installation of the entire Oxygen Injection System, the monitoring and testing procedure will be conducted as set forth below.

Term and condition noted. Per DHEC’s November 4, 2014 request, USACE will notify SCDHEC, the other state and Federal resource agencies and our local sponsor at least one week in advance the Test Run and the Start-up Run.

43

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

a

The entire Oxygen Injection System must be operated, and instream D.O. must be monitored continuously for a period of 59 days (2 lunar cycles), of which at least one 29.5 day testing (one lunar cycle) must occur in July, August, or September immediately following the installation of the Oxygen Injection System. Continuous daily water quality monitoring must be conducted during this period at locations specified in and pursuant to the monitoring plan. This 59-day period of operation is referred to herein as the “Start-up Run.”

The “Start-up Run” will be scheduled to occur during the three month window provided in this term and condition. This is presently scheduled to occur in 2018.

b

Following the Start-up Run and analysis of the modeling results and monitoring data, the USACE will provide a report comparing the monitoring data collected during the Start-up Run to the modeling results to the Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC.

USACE will provide this report to the appropriate groups.

c

The Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC will have sixty (60) days to evaluate and review the Start-up Run report and to provide comments and feedback to the USACE and the Adaptive Management Team. The USACE, Conservation Groups, Commission, and DHEC each will independently evaluate the Start-up Run report and other relevant information to assess achievement of the Success Criteria.

USACE is following this condition as it sequences the actions needed to construct the project.

d

If the USACE determines that the Oxygen Injection System test meets the Success Criteria, Inner Harbor Channel Dredging will continue. DHEC, the Commission, and the Conservation Groups each reserves the right to take any appropriate action if its independent determination is that the Success Criteria has not been met, including but not limited to suspension, rescission, and revocation of the State Approvals, initiation of an enforcement or other legal action, and/or termination of this Agreement. The USACE does not waive any objection or defense to such actions, including any objection or defense based on federal preemption, sovereign immunity, or immunity from state regulation.

USACE is following this condition as it sequences the actions needed to construct the project.

e

Copies of the data, modeling inputs, modeling results, monitoring data, and reports will be provided to all Parties by the USACE as soon as available to allow the Conservation Groups, Commission and DHEC to review the information simultaneously with the USACE and Adaptive Management Team.

USACE will continue to coordinate with the natural resource agencies and public.

10

The Savannah District of the USACE will make the dissolved oxygen system a top priority for discretionary annual operations and maintenance funds appropriated and received for the Project above normal maintenance requirements.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

11 Cadmium is naturally present in certain reaches of the Savannah River Harbor. Therefore, the USACE shall conduct the following monitoring:

Term and condition noted.

44

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

a

During the SHEP deepening activities, cadmium concentrations in the discharge shall be monitored weekly from those Confined Disposal Facilities (CDF) receiving sediments from the four known reaches within the Savannah Harbor having elevated cadmium concentration in the sediments. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency laboratory testing methodology must have a detection limit of at least 0.7 micrograms per liter (ug/l). Monitoring shall continue at these CDF discharge points as long as discharge is present and until all dredged sediments have been dewatered, stabilized and capped as per the Final EIS. Data shall be reported to DHEC and the Commission quarterly in micrograms per liter within thirty (30) days of the end of each calendar quarter.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

b

Following the installation of a stable clean cap within the CDFs that receive cadmium-bearing sediments, cadmium shall be monitored weekly for a period of one year. Data shall be reported to DHEC and the Commission quarterly in micrograms per liter within thirty (30) days of the end of each calendar quarter.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

c

Dewatering discharge from all CDFs shall be monitored by the USACE and reported to DHEC and the Commission monthly and due within thirty (30) days following the end of each reporting period. Monitoring reports shall include the location of the discharge point, sampling point, dates of discharge, total suspended solids, dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, salinity, turbidity, and conductivity. The USACE will monitor weekly when there is a discharge and provide monthly reports to DHEC and the Commission within thirty (30) days of the end of each reporting period.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

d The monitoring data will be evaluated as provided in Appendix D of the Final EIS.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

12

The USACE will coordinate with the state resource agencies, including DHEC, the Commission, Georgia Department of Natural Resources (“Georgia DNR”), and the Cooperating Agencies in the implementation of the Monitoring and Adaptive Management Plan as provided in Appendix D of the Final EIS.

USACE will continue to coordinate with the natural resource agencies, interested parties, and the public.

13 The USACE will comply with the terms and conditions of the Final Biological Opinion issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service on or about November 4, 2011.

Term and condition noted.

14 The USACE will comply with the terms and conditions of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification issued by the Georgia DNR on or about February 16, 2011.

Term and condition noted.

15

The USACE will mitigate the impacts of the Project consistent with the Final EIS and ROD. The USACE will comply with the Monitoring and Adaptive Management Plan in Appendix D of the final EIS, incorporated by reference. The Monitoring and Adaptive Management Plan will ensure the accuracy of the predicted environmental impacts, assess the effectiveness of the mitigation features, and provide for modification of the Project as needed.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

45

Table 6: Terms and Conditions from the Compromise and Settlement Agreement # Terms and Condition Status

16

The USACE will make reasonable efforts to perform the authorized work in a manner to minimize adverse impact on fish, wildlife, and water quality. The USACE must construct the Project in a manner that will not violate applicable law.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

17

Following successful completion of the Test Run and Start-up Run, the USACE will operate and maintain the Oxygen Injection System during the life of the Project in a manner that will mitigate for D.O. impacts of the Project on water quality consistent with the Final EIS. Copies of all data and reports will be provided to DHEC.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

18

The USACE will comply with the terms and conditions of the Programmatic Agreement for Cultural Resources with the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office on or about November 30, 2011, which are incorporated herein by reference.

USACE intends to implement this provision.

For more information on the SHEP monitoring efforts, contact: Mr. Nathan Dayan at Nathan.S.Dayan@usace.army.mil or 912-652-5172 or by visiting http://www.shep.uga.edu/monitoring.html Comments on this report can be sent by e-mail at the above address or to Nathan Dayan CESAS-PDE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District 100 West Oglethorpe Avenue Savannah, GA 31401 For more information on other aspects of SHEP, contact: Mr. Spencer Davis at Spencer.W.Davis@usace.army.mil or 912-652-5195 or by visiting http://www.sas.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/SavannahHarborExpansion.aspx