DRAFT REAL ESTATE PLAN APPENDIX C GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES AND COLORADO RIVER LOCKS SYSTEMS FEASIBILITY STUDY

Transcription

1 DRAFT REAL ESTATE PLAN APPENDIX C GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES AND COLORADO RIVER LOCKS SYSTEMS FEASIBILITY STUDY

2 This Real Estate Plan has been prepared in accordance with ER dated 1 May PREPARED BY: Lisa McCracken Mairs Realty Specialist Galveston District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers RECOMMENDED BY: Timothy J. Nelson Chief, Real Estate Division Galveston District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

3 (NOTE: This page intentionally left blank.)

4 Table of Contents 1. General Background Project Type & Applicability Table REP-1: Authorization Documents under Freeport Harbor, Texas Authorization Project Location Non-Federal Sponsor Purpose Scope and Content Real Estate Requirements Brazos River Floodgates Alternatives:... 8 Alternative 2A: Major Rehab (Figure REP-4)... 8 Alternative 3A: Open Channel on Existing Alignment/ Floodgate Structure Removal (Figure REP-5)... 8 Alternative 3A with Open Channel (Figure REP-6)... 8 Alternative 9A: Realignment of the GIWW/ New Open Channel (Figure REP-7)... 8 Alternative 9C: Realignment of the GIWW/ New Channel with Floodgates (Figure REP-8).. 9 Colorado River Locks Alternative:... 9 Alternative 2B (Figure REP-9)... 9 Alternative 3B Open Channel (Figure REP-10)... 9 Alternative 4A (Figure REP-11)... 9 Estates Borrow Material Access/Staging Area Recreation Features Induced Flooding Mitigation Federally Owned Land & Existing Federal Project Navigation Servitude Public Law Relocations Assessment of Project Sponsor Land Acquisition Capabilities Baseline Cost Estimate for Real Estate Acquisition Schedule GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 2 P age

5 19. Mineral and Energy Activity Facilities/Utilities/Pipelines Relocation Table REP-2: Wells located within Project Footprint HTRW or Other Environmental Contaminants Attitudes of the Landowner Sponsor Notification of Risks Exhibits A Figure REP-1: Study Area Overview Figure REP-2: Brazos River Floodgates Figure REP-3: Colorado River Locks Region Figure REP-4: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 2A Figure REP-5: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 3A Figure REP-6: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 3A Hybrid Figure REP-7: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 9A Figure REP-8: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 9C Figure REP-9: Colorado River Locks Alternative 2B Figure REP-12: Colorado River Locks Alternative 3B Figure REP-11: Colorado River Locks Alternative 4A Figure REP-12: Colorado River Locks Alternative Open Channel Figure REP-13: USACE-SWG Real Estate Interest along BRFG Project Footprint Figure REP-14: USACE-SWG Real Estate Interest along CRL Project Footprint Figure REP-15: Identified Well Locations within BRFG Footprint Exhibits B Table REP-3: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 2A Table REP-4: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 3A Table REP-5: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 3A Hybrid Table REP-6: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 9A Table REP-7: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 9C Table REP-8: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 2B Table REP-9: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 3B Table REP-10: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 4A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 3 P age

6 (NOTE: This page intentionally left blank.) GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 4 P age

7 REAL ESTATE PLAN GULF INTRACOATAL WATER WAY BRAZOS RIVER FLOODGATES AND COLORADO RIVER LOCKS SYSTEMS FEASIBILITY STUDY BRAZORIA AND MATAGORDA COUNTIES, TEXAS 1. General Background. This Real Estate Plan (REP) is the real estate work product of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Galveston District, Real Estate Division that supports project plan formulation for the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, Brazos River Floodgates and Colorado River Locks Systems Feasibility Study (BRFG & CRL). It identifies and describes the lands, easements, and rights-of-way (LERR) required for the construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed project, including those required for relocations (i.e., P.L relocations and utility/facility relocations), borrow material, and dredged or excavated material disposal. Further, the REP describes the estimated LERR value, together with the estimated administrative and incidental costs attributable to providing LERR, and the acquisition process. 2. Project Type & Applicability. The Galveston District of the Corps is currently conducting a feasibility study of the navigation improvements at the Brazos River Diversion Channel and Colorado River Locks that are addressing both increased channel width and depth under the authority of River and Harbor Act of 1970 and Section 216 of the Flood Control Act of 1970, which authorizes investigations for modification of completed projects or their operation when found advisable due to significantly changed physical or economic conditions and for improving the quality of the environment in the overall public interest. The Table REP-1 below sets forth the multiple authorizations applicable to the Project, including dates and descriptions of authorized Project features. Table REP-1: Authorization Documents under Freeport Harbor, Texas Authorization Jun 14, 1880 Mar 03, 1899 Mar 02, 1907 Feb 27, 1911 Mar 04, 1913 Aug 08, 1917 Date Authorizing Act Project and Work Authorized for Freeport Harbor, Texas Provided for construction of jetties for controlling and improving the channel over the bar at the mouth of the Brazos River Dredging and other work necessary in judgment of Secretary of War for improving harbor; for taking over jetties and privately built works at mouth of river Examination authorized. Work later confined to maintenance of jetties Repairs to jetties and dredging Construct seagoing hopper dredge Purchase of one 15-inch pipeline dredge and equipment, its operation of 3 years, operation of seagoing dredge one-half time for 3 years, and repairs to jetties Documents Rivers and Harbors Act of 1880 River and Harbor Act of 1899, 55 th Congress, Ch. 425 H. Doc. 1087, 60 th Cong., 2 nd Sess. River and Harbor Act of 1911, P.L River and Harbor Act of 1913, P.L River and Harbor Act of 1917, P.L GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 5 P age

8 Date Authorizing Act Mar 03, July 03, 1930 July 03, 1930 May 24, 1934 P.W.A. Aug 30, 1935 Aug 30, 1935 May 17, 1950 Aug 30, 1935 Aug 26, 1937 Aug 18, 1941 Jul 03, Nov 17, 1986 Project and Work Authorized for Freeport Harbor, Texas Diversion dam, diversion channel, and necessary auxiliary works Maintenance of diversion channel at expense of local interest Jetty channel, all inside channels and turning basins, and 2 rubble mound jetties Local cooperation requirements modified to provide for the contribution of sufficient funds to cover the entire cost of the original dredging of all inside channels and turning basins. Deepening channels and basins Deepen outer bar channel to 38 feet from gulf to a point within jetties, thence 36 feet in authorized channels to and including upper turning basin. Maintenance of present project dimensions of channels and basins at Federal expense Deepening the Jetty Channel to 31 feet and all inner channels and the Brownsville and Point Isabel turning basins to 28 feet, provided no dredging will be done at public expense within 50 feet of any established pier head line, wharf, or other structure. Existing project (Eagle Lake to Matagorda, Colorado River, Tex) was authorized by the Flood Control Act approved August 18, 1941 Relocate outer bar channel on straight alignment with jetty channel and maintain Brazos Harbor entrance channel and turning basin (constructed by local interests) Authorized the State of Texas to act as a local study partner for the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in Texas and designated the State Highway and Public Transportation Commission, now the Texas Transportation Commission, of which the TXDOT is a part of, to act as agent for the state in fulfilling the responsibilities of TXDOT. Modified local cooperation requirements for the 1970 Act Documents Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 10, 68 th Cong., 2 nd Sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 18, 70 th Cong., 1 st Sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc No 16, 71 st Cong., 2 nd Sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. No 10, 72 nd Cong., 1 st sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. 15, 72 nd Cong., 1 st Sess. H. Doc. 195, 81 st Cong., 1 st Sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Docs. 15, 72nd Cong., 1 st Sess., and 29, 73 rd Cong., 2nd Sess. Rivers and Harbors Committee Doc. No. 32, 75 th Cong., 1 st sess. Flood Control Act H. Doc. No. 312, 76 th Cong., 1 st sess. Rivers & Harbor Act of 1958 (House Doc. 433, 84th Cong., 2 nd Sess.) Texas Coastal Waterway Act Sec. 101, PL GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 6 P age

9 1998 Date Authorizing Act Project and Work Authorized for Freeport Harbor, Texas The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, is authorized to review the operation of projects the construction of which has been completed and which were constructed by the Corps of Engineers in the interest of navigation, flood control, water supply, and related purposes, when found advisable due to significant changed physical or economic conditions, and to report thereon to Congress with recommendations on the advisability of modifying the structures or their operation, and for improving the quality of the environment in the overall public interest. Documents Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 1998, under the authority of Section 216 of the 1970 Flood Control Act Nov 08, 2007 Amends Sec 101 of Rivers and Harbor Act of 1970 to make all costs for removal of the sunken Sec. 3148, PL vessel COMSTOCK a Federal responsibility 2007 Water Resource Development Act (WRDA) of Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of Construction of lock in diversion dam at local expense considered inactive. 2 Extension of north jetty 1,950 feet and south jetty 1,265 feet considered inactive (1975 Deauthorization list). 3. Project Location. The study area (Figure REP-1) encompasses approximately 40 miles of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in Texas, at the intersections of the Brazos and Colorado Rivers along the Gulf Coast and covers two counties, Brazoria and Matagorda. The Brazos River Floodgates are 7 miles southwest of Freeport, Texas in Brazoria County (Figure REP-2) and accessible via Floodgate Road, 3.5 miles south of State Highway 36. Forty miles west, the Colorado River Locks are located near Matagorda, Texas in Matagorda County (Figure REP-3). The East Lock is located on Matagorda Street approximately 0.25 miles west of the FM 2031 Bridge over the GIWW. The West Lock is not accessible by road. 4. Non-Federal Sponsor. The Non-Federal Sponsor (NFS) is the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT). The TXDOT has actively participated in the development of the scope for the Feasibility Study and the Project Management Plan (PMP). Prior to the execution of the aforementioned document TXDOT developed an array of alternative alignments for the BRFG. TXDOT agreed to partner with the USACE in February 2016 to develop a systems approach for the Texas portion of the GIWW which encompass both BRFG and the CRL. These alignments have been incorporated into the feasibility study. A Memoranda of Agreement outlining TXDOT tasks and USACE expectations was signed in August Purpose. The study purpose is to develop alternatives to determine the feasibility of undertaking modifications to BRFG, CRL, river crossings. This study will identify changes that are structurally sustainable, economically justified, and environmentally acceptable. There is a need to reduce navigation impacts and costly waterborne traffic delays that are a result of aging GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 7 P age

10 infrastructure and inadequate channel dimensions for wider barge and shipping vessels that travel through these structures. 6. Scope and Content. The scope of the study is to update existing and future with/ without project conditions (FWOP) from the 2000 study focused on; hydrology, hydraulic (wind, currents, flow and stage frequency impacts to navigations at crossings), sedimentation, erosion, and dredging requirements, assessments of riverine changes and operational adequacy of the floodgates/ locks dimensions of the Brazos facilities are: 750 feet length by 75 feet width, and Colorado: 1200 feet length by 75 feet width, economic analysis (structure and shipping/ tonnage values) to estimate National Economic Development (NED) benefits, and environmental impacts. This study will also evaluate and compare alternatives developed and select a recommended plan. The study considers all reasonable measures including alternatives considered under previously initiated projects and/or studies and recommendations from other Federal and nonfederal stakeholders. 7. Real Estate Requirements. The Brazos River Floodgates and Colorado River Locks systems are federal improvements. In conjunction with the NSF, any improvements or modifications to the existing gates/ locks system will be the sole responsibility of USACE. Below are the alternatives for the two areas, BRFG and CRL. These will be screened further based on preliminary cost estimates from similar navigation studies and best professional judgment: Brazos River Floodgates Alternatives: Alternative 2A: Major Rehab (Figure REP-4) This alternative involves major rehabilitation of the existing floodgate structures combined with additional dredging the river crossing along with modification/construction of new guidewalls and channel improvement structures. Alternative 3A: Open Channel on Existing Alignment/ Floodgate Structure Removal (Figure REP-5) This alternative would involve an open channel along the existing GIWW alignment through the removal of the existing 75-ft wide floodgate structures and widen the channel. Construction of a new 125-ft wide floodgate structures further away from the Brazos River along the existing GIWW alignment. A temporary construction bypass channel would be added to prevent delays to navigation during construction of the new floodgate structures. Alternative 3A with Open Channel (Figure REP-6) This alternative would involve an open channel along the existing GIWW alignment through the removal of the existing 75-ft wide floodgate structures and widen the channel on the west side of the river. Alternative 9A: Realignment of the GIWW/ New Open Channel (Figure REP-7) This alternative would involve the realignment of the GIWW crossing north of the existing crossing through the barge mooring facility on the east side and the dead end channel on the west side, creating a 90 degree crossing at the river by excavating a new open channel with 125-ft bottom width. The new channel within the river will have a 250-ft flare GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 8 P age

11 to the north and 400-ft flare to the south. The existing floodgates would be removed and fill or flood control structures would be installed. Alternative 9C: Realignment of the GIWW/ New Channel with Floodgates (Figure REP- 8) This alternative would involve the realignment of the GIWW crossing north of the existing crossing through the barge mooring facility on the east side and the dead end channel on the west side, creating a 90 degree crossing at the river. Construct new channel north of existing channel, crossing through the barge mooring facility on the east side, with a 125- ft bottom width. Construction of new East and West 125-FT wide floodgates on new channel. The new channel within the river will have a 250-FT flare to the North and 400- FT flare to the South. Divert the existing drainage canal into new location on the GIWW and remove existing East and West gates and construct new East and West flow control structure. Colorado River Locks Alternative: Alternative 2B (Figure REP-9) Major Rehabilitation of Existing Lock Replace/update gates/machinery on existing locks. The alternative involves the major rehabilitation of the existing lock structure combined with similar small scale measures with modification/construction of new guidewalls. Alternative 3B Open Channel (Figure REP-10) Open Channel Remove gates/machinery on existing locks. Alternative 4A (Figure REP-11) Remove river side gates, dredge up to the gates remaining, and rehab remaining gates. The Brazos River Floodgates and Colorado River Locks Systems are a part of a commercial navigation project in which the Federal Government has the responsibility of operating and maintaining the project after construction. Government responsibilities include, but are not limited to, dredging of the Federal project channel, assuring placement area capacity, and protecting the Government from environmental liabilities. Maintenance dredging of the Federal Project channel is a 100% Federal responsibility and is accomplished through Federal dredging contracts. Perpetual easements conveyed to the Federal Government are needed to assure all project placement areas, which are built for the purpose of supporting the Federal navigation project, are available to the Government as often and for as long as they are needed to support the project. The Government is also responsible for managing the navigation project to assure sufficient placement area capacity exists to meet the needs of the Federal navigation project now and in the future. Perpetual easements allow the Government to better restrict/control non-federal use, maximum quantities placed by non-federal interests, and remove any potential for interference with federal dredge contractors. Finally, the Government has certain Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) liabilities already as an operator and transporter of materials put into the placement area. Perpetual easements provide the property interest necessary for the Government to issue outgrants to non-federal users that will require GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 9 P age

12 testing and approval of non-federal dredged materials prior to placement into the Federal project placement areas, thus protecting the Government from additional CERCLA liability. Based upon the above requirements to the non-standard perpetual easement estate, easement language below has been drafted for use in this project and submitted for approval in this report. Also listed is language to be used for the channel improvement easement, utility and/or pipeline easement and the flood protection levee easement. Estates Non-Standard Perpetual Dredged Material Placement Easement A perpetual and assignable right and easement on, over, and across (the land described in Schedule A) (Tracts Nos.,, and ), for the location, construction, operation, maintenance and patrol of a dredged material disposal facility, including the right to borrow and/or deposit fill, spoil and dredged material thereon, the right to move, store and remove equipment and supplies, and the right to perform any other work necessary and incident to said facility, together with the right to trim, cut, fell, and remove therefrom all trees, underbrush, obstructions, and any vegetation, structures, or obstacles within the limits of the easement; reserving, however, to the landowners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired; subject, however, to existing easements for public roads and highways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines. Channel Improvement Easement A perpetual and assignable right and easement to construct operate and maintain channel improvement works on, over and across (the land described in Schedule A) (Tract Nos., ) for the purposes as authorized by the Act of Congress approved, including the right to clear, cut, fell, remove and dispose of any and all timber, trees, underbrush, buildings, improvements and/or other obstructions therefrom; to excavate: dredge, cut away, and remove any or all of said land and to place thereon dredge or spoil material; and for such other purposes as may be required in connection with said work of improvement; reserving, however, to the owners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired; subject, however, to existing easements for public roads and highways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines. GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 10

13 Utility and/or Pipeline Easement A perpetual and assignable easement and right-of-way in, on, over and across (the land described in Schedule A) (Tracts Nos., and ), for the location, construction, operation, maintenance, alteration; repair and patrol of (overhead) (underground) (specifically name type of utility or pipeline); together with the right to trim, cut, fell and remove therefrom all trees, underbrush, obstructions and other vegetation, structures, or obstacles within the limits of the right-of-way; reserving, however, to the landowners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired; subject, however, to existing easements for public roads and highways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines. Flood Protection Levee Easement A perpetual and assignable right and easement in (the land described in Schedule A) (Tracts Nos,, and ) to construct, maintain, repair, operate, patrol and replace a flood protection (levee) (floodwall)(gate closure) (sandbag closure), including all appurtenances thereto; reserving, however, to the owners, their heirs and assigns, all such rights and privileges in the land as may be used without interfering with or abridging the rights and easement hereby acquired; subject, however, to existing easements for public roads and highways, public utilities, railroads and pipelines. 8. Borrow Material. At this stage of the project there has been preliminary discussion of needing additional placement areas for dredged material however, these lands have yet to be determined. When the alternative has been selected and quantities of dredged material has been determined this section will be updated to identify any specific placement areas needs and/or any needs for additional borrow material. 9. Access/Staging Area. There is an assumption that four (4) staging areas will be required for each of the BRFG alternatives and two (2) staging areas for CRL. Once the selected alternative is determined locations will be finalized and the REP will be updated to include this information as well as the duration for any work area easements necessary for this project. 10. Recreation Features. There are no recreations features proposed for this project. 11. Induced Flooding. There will be no induced flooding by virtue of the construction of the project. Most areas surrounding the BRFG and CRL are in the 100-year floodplain. Flooding events are primarily due to high river flows after heavy rains in the Colorado, Brazos and San Bernard River watersheds, but also occur during tropical depression, tropical storms, and hurricanes. Federal flood protection levees have been constructed near both facilities. The nearest levee to the BRFG is on East Floodgate Road about a mile north of the East Floodgate. The CRL facility ties into an existing levee. 12. Mitigation. Any potential mitigation requirements will be determined once the selected alternatives are determined. GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 11

14 13. Federally Owned Land & Existing Federal Project. With the exceptions of the Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS), The Federal Government holds an easement interest in both project footprints. USACE acquired easements for the original projects. The BRFG project footprint is within seven (7) current perpetual easements (Tracts numbered 100E, 101E, 251, 252, 253, 307, and 308) (Figure REP-12) and CRL project footprint is within seven (7) current perpetual easements (Tracts numbered 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, and 176) (Figure REP-13). Within the proposed project footprint are Coastal Barrier Resources System and Otherwise Protected Areas (Figure REP-16). The coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources Systems (CBRS), a defined set of geographic units along the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Great lakes, U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico coasts. Most new Federal expenditures and financial assistance are prohibited within the CBRS, unless those activities qualify for an exception under Section 6 of CBRA (16 U.S.C. 3505). The RHA of July 3, 1958 authorized the construction of a deep draft-navigation channel from the Gulf of Mexico across Matagorda and Lavaca Bay. While the proposed project footprint is within the CBRS it is expected to receive and exception under Section 6: A federal expenditure is allowable within the CBRS, if it meets any of the following exceptions (16 U.S.C 3505(a)(1)-(5))): The maintenance or construction of improvements of existing federal navigation channels (including the Intercostal Waterway) and related structures (such as jetties), include ng the disposal of dredge materials related to such maintenance or construction. A federal navigation channel or a related structure is an existing channel or structure, respectively, if it was authorized before the date on which the relevant System unit or portion of the System unit was included with the CBRS. 14. Navigation Servitude. Navigation Servitude emanated from the Commerce Clause of the Constitution of the United States, Article I; Section 8, Clause 3. The servitude gives the Federal Government the right to use the Navigable Waters of the United States without compensation for navigation projects. These are non-transferable rights, and are not considered interest in real property. This project may utilize ODMDS 1 for the O&M if it is deemed the least cost alternative. ODMDS 1 is located in navigable waters, therefore, there is no real estate requirements associated with this site. 15. Public Law Relocations. The project may require the relocation of a nonresidential interest (known as the Texas Barge & Boat Inc.) that lies on Tracts 101E and 307 (Figure REP-12), both of which USACE holds a perpetual easement over. In such cases the Relocation Assistance Program is designed to establish uniform procedures in relocation assistance that will assure legal entitlements and provide fair, equitable, and consistent treatment to persons and businesses displaced by projects administered by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended and referred by USACE in Public Law Alternative 9A and 9C will require relocation of company structures if either alternative is selected. Approximately seventeen (17) structures have been observed from aerial images of the Texas Barge and Boat location. GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 12

15 Relocation Assistance is provided to minimize hardships to nonresidential persons/businesses adjusting to relocation by providing counseling, information as to other sources of assistance that may be available, and such other help as may be appropriate. The Realty Specialist will provide information on the availability, purchase price, and rental costs of suitable commercial and farm properties and locations and/or refer the displaced nonresidential persons/business to real property specialists in the area. The Realty Specialist will assist a nonresidential person/business or farm operation to become established in a replacement location. It is important to understand that the law does not require an agency to find a replacement for a business operation. The agency will offer assistance but ultimately it is the business owner s responsibility to locate a suitable replacement site. Reference to Public Law will provide additional information including eligible and ineligible expenses. These relocation costs are stated in Exhibit B of the baseline cost estimate. The relocatee has a choice of professionally moved, self-move, or a combination of both. Relocation expenses are broken into four types: (1) Moving and Related Expenses, (2) Reestablishment Expenses, (3) Related Non-Residential Eligible Expenses, (4) Fixed Moving Payment. Reference to Public Law for eligible and ineligible expenses. Note: The type of real property interest acquired does not affect eligibility for payment of relocation costs; instead, it is when the real property interest acquired is enough to cause displacement that creates a relocation parcel. Similarly, terms under which a tenant lawfully occupies property do not affect the tenant s eligibility for payment of relocation costs, if the tenant is displaced by a project. 16. Assessment of Project Sponsor Land Acquisition Capabilities. The NFS will not be participating in the acquisition of real property interests in this project. The project is 100% federally funded and the NFS will only contribute to the Feasibility Study, and currently will not participate in the acquisition, relocation or construction of this future project. 17. Baseline Cost Estimate for Real Estate. The costs listed in Exhibit B of this REP reflect the estimated real estate costs for the proposed feasibility study. Since the NFS has previously conveyed the necessary lands to the Government for earlier versions of the project, it is not eligible for LERRD credit a subsequent time for the same real property interest. The baseline cost estimate is subject to change through final draft. This cost also assumes four staging areas for each BRFG alternative, and two staging areas for the CRL, yet to be determined. 18. Acquisition Schedule. At the current stage of the project there are no anticipated acquisitions necessary for the Project. USACE currently has perpetual easements over the project footprint. Should additional land requirements arise this section will be updated accordingly. 19. Mineral and Energy Activity. Mineral title was not obtained for the review of third party mineral rights at the time of this report. The government holds interest in lands where the proposed project site is located. Therefore, the Real Estate Division feels there is minimal risk to the project from third party mineral extraction. However, the Bryan Mount Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the closest major energy and mineral resource near the BRFG, located about a mile GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 13

16 north of the East Floodgate. The site stores 245 million barrels of crude oil, or one-third of the nation s oil reserves, in an underground dome. A notable resource in the CRL region is the South Texas Nuclear Project Electric Generating Station, although it is about 9 miles northwest of the CRL. The wells identified within the project footprint are either dry or plugged according to the Texas Railroad Commission website. 20. Facilities/Utilities/Pipelines Relocation. There are no known pipelines crossing the GIWW channel at CRL project location, however there is one (1) salt water line east of the Brazos River East Floodgate owned by DOE that runs from north to south. Additional research may be required to determine if there will be any impact for proposed alternatives. There are six (6) identified wells located with the BRFG project footprint (Figure REP-14). The information listed in Table REP-2 was obtained by utilizing the Texas Railroad Commission website. API No Operator Name Quintana Ped. Corp. First Energy Corp. of Miss Table REP-2: Wells located within Project Footprint Wellbore Profile Wellbore Status 039- Plugged Oil Well First Energy Corp. of Miss Quintana Ped. Corp. Date Plugged Total Depth (feet) GIS Lat (NAD27) GIS Long (NAD27) Vertical Dry 04/11/ Vertical Dry 8/11/ Vertical Canceled/ Abandoned Location 8000 Vertical Dry 2/2/ Dry Project Location West Bank near Dead End East Bank Near of Public Dock East Bank North of Texas Barge and Boat East Bank within Texas Barge and Boat area West Bank North of dead end West side of Brazos north of GIWW 21. HTRW or Other Environmental Contaminants. Both sites, the BRFG and CRL vicinities, are located within the Mid-Coast Barrier Islands and Coastal Marshes regions of the Texas Coast. The areas surrounding the facilities are low-lying at elevations generally less than 10 feet above sea level, and are largely covered with wetlands and other water resources. The Texas Commission and Environmental Quality (TCEQ) monitors water quality for waterbody segments in the BRFG and CRL vicinities. On the TCEQ s (d) list of impaired waters, San Bernard Tidal is listed as impaired for bacteria, East Matagorda bay is listed as impaired for bacteria, and the Gulf of Mexico is listed as impaired for mercury in edible tissue. Based on an initial review of the EPA s Envirofacts website, the closest hazardous materials generators to the BRFG are Texas Boat and Barge, Inc. and the Bryan Mound Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and the closest generators to the CRL are two wastewater treatment plants located 0.9 miles northwest and 2 miles south of the East Lock. Besides these sites, chemical, petrochemical, and GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 14

17 industrial facilities exist in more developed industrial areas along the GIWW near Port Freeport, and there is potential for spills from tugs, barges, and other vessel traffic in the GIWW. 22. Attitudes of the Landowner. Dependent on the alternatives chosen, the real property interests affected could impact the following ownerships: Brazos River Navigation District of Brazoria County, City of Freeport, Army Corps of Engineers, Texas Barge and Boat Inc. Of all the alternatives (listed above and referenced below), Alternatives 9 would have the most impact on the nonresidential property: Texas Barge and Boat Inc. The impact would require the relocation of said business to an undetermined location should the owner choose to continue his operation. The Real Estate Division of the Southwest Galveston District has spoken directly to the Texas Barge and Boat Inc. leadership during their request to obtain a right-of-entry for environmental studies early in the feasibility study. The leadership was not inclined to sign a right-of-entry stating safety concerns and the fact they were planning to sell their business for an undisclosed amount. Research of the area in question uncovered that tracts 101E and 307 contain a perpetual easement in the favor of the Army Corps of Engineers. Correspondence has been delivered and received by the owners of Texas Barge and Boat Inc. declaring that these perpetual easements are in place with no relinquishments being served on the real property interest. It is believed that the Texas Barge and Boat Inc. may be a difficult relocation to pursue. It is believed, however, that the ownership will work with the government, as long as they receive a location that can keep their business running, should they so choose to do so. 23. Sponsor Notification of Risks. N/A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 15

18 Exhibits A Figure REP-1: Study Area Overview GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 16

19 Figure REP-2: Brazos River Floodgates GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 17

20 Figure REP-3: Colorado River Locks Region GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 18

21 Figure REP-4: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 2A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 19

22 Figure REP-5: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 3A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 20

23 Figure REP-6: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 3A Hybrid GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 21

24 Figure REP-7: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 9A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 22

25 Figure REP-8: Brazos River Floodgates Alternative 9C GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 23

26 Figure REP-9: Colorado River Locks Alternative 2B GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 24

27 Figure REP-12: Colorado River Locks Alternative 3B GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 25

28 Figure REP-11: Colorado River Locks Alternative 4A GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 26

29 Figure REP-12: Colorado River Locks Alternative Open Channel GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 27

30 Figure REP-13: USACE-SWG Real Estate Interest along BRFG Project Footprint GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 28

31 Figure REP-14: USACE-SWG Real Estate Interest along CRL Project Footprint GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 29

32 Figure REP-15: Identified Well Locations within BRFG Footprint GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 30

33 Figure REP-16: CBRS System Unit and Otherwise Protected Area GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 31

34 Exhibits B Table REP-3: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 2A Brazos River Floodgates Alternative Alternative 2A Federal Cost Federal Total Amount Contingency Staging Area (assuming) 4 $3000 per location $12, $2, Project Related Administration $15, $3, Subtotal $27, $5, $32, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 32

35 Table REP-4: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 3A Federal Cost Brazos River Floodgates Alternative Alternative 3A Amount Contingency Staging Area (assuming) 4 $3000 per location $12, $2, Project Related Administration $15, $3, Subtotal $27, $5, Federal Total $32, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 33

36 Table REP-5: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 3A Hybrid Brazos River Floodgates Alternative Alternative 3A Hybrid Federal Cost Amount Contingency Staging Area (assuming) 4 $3000 per location $12, $2, Project Related Administration $15, $3, Subtotal $27, $5, Federal Total $32, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 34

37 Table REP-6: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 9A Federal Cost Brazos River Floodgates Alternative Alternative 9A Amount Contingency Appraisals $34, $6, Staging Area (assuming) 4 $3000 per location $12, $2, Project Related Administration $15, $3, Pipeline Removal Administration $1, $ Pipeline (Attorney s Opinion of compensability) $4, $1, PL Assistance/Commercial/ Industrial of 17 Structures $1,700, $425, Subtotal $1,766, $438, Federal Total $2,205, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 35

38 Table REP-7: Baseline Cost Estimate for BRFG Alt 9C Federal Cost Brazos River Floodgates Alternative Alternative 9C Amount Contingency Appraisals $34, $6, Staging Area (assuming) 4 locations at $3, per location $12, $2, Project Related Administration $15, $3, Pipeline Removal Administration $1, $ Pipeline (Attorneys opinion of compensability) $4, $1, PL Assistance/Commercial/Industrial of 17 Structures $1,700, $425, Subtotal $1,769, $438, Federal Total $2,205, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 36

39 Table REP-8: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 2B Federal Cost Colorado River Locks Alternative Alternative 2B Federal Total Staging Area $6, $1, Project Related Administration $10, $2, Subtotal $16, $3, $19, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 37

40 Table REP-9: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 3B Federal Cost Colorado River Locks Alternative Alternative 3B Federal Total Staging Area $6, $1, Project Related Administration $10, $2, Subtotal $16, $3, $19, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 38

41 Table REP-10: Baseline Cost Estimate for CRL Alt 4A Federal Cost Colorado River Locks Alternative Alternative 4A Federal Total Staging Area $6, $1, Project Related Administration $10, $2, Subtotal $16, $3, $19, GIWW BRFG & CRL System Feasibility Study 39